Cardinal of Vienna Invited to Explain Himself

The Cardinal of Vienna Christof Schönborn has been sent a letter by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, according to Der Standard, asking him to explain why he reversed the decision of Father Gerhard Swierzek, parish priest in Stützenhofen, who had stopped the appointing of a young man to a parish council who was living in a registered homosexual "union" (Rorate has two posts on the matter first and second). There was much controversy in the diocese as to why this would have been done. Maybe we will find out why. 

http://derstandard.at/1336696703070/Schwuler-Pfarrgemeinderat-Schoenborn-Aerger-im-Vatikan

Pope Benedict and SSPX (Part III)

This is excellent post it reblogged from SFC:

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the SSPX

Here's a quick look at what's going on: The SSPX is a smallish breakaway group which has, since 1988, been in a position of strained communion with the Church. The founder of the SSPX, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founded the group in 1970 within the Church (the SSPX was originally founded as an official Church-sanctioned institute) to organize opposition to many of the changes in the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council. In 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four SSPX priests as bishops, without the permission of the Holy See - an act which is viewed by canon law as "schismatic." From that point on, the society has had strained relations with the Church and, for all intensive purposes, has been in many ways separate from the Church.

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI, in a very generous gesture, lifted the automatic excommunication that was incurred by the four living bishops in the SSPX (Lefebvre died in 1991 - his excommunication was also posthumously lifted by Pope Benedict). Soon after this, the pope re-established communications with the society to work out their differences with the Holy See and he has made no secret his desire that the SSPX be "regularized" within the Church and that the society's members return to full communion with the Church. But to be regularized, the society has to agree to certain doctrinal principles. At this point, we are waiting to hear the outcome of talks that the society's leaders have had with members of the Holy See.

Unity is good and holy and, as is evident from Scripture, Christ's will. So we should all pray that unity be restored so that we can welcome the members of the society back into full communion with the Church and with the Holy See.

The Council at the core 

Most of the disagreements that the SSPX has had with the Church over the past few decades has revolved around the documents of the Second Vatican Council and how those documents are to be properly interpreted and implemented. As we've mentioned before on this blog, this year (2012) marks the 50th anniversary of the start of the Second Vatican Council, which was held, in successive sessions, between 1962 and 1965. It was started and completed before many of us were even born so it seems like "water under the bridge" and, at times, we assume that all is completely settled about Vatican II.

Second Vatican Council in session

But while it has been five decades since Pope Bl. John XXIII officially opened Vatican II, it goes without saying that the impact of this, the twenty-first ecumenical (i.e. "worldwide"), council of the Church's bishops is still unsettled.

Anyone who's been paying even the minimal amount of attention to the Catholic Church over the past few decades realizes that there has been a current of change within the Church. Some of the changes in the Church since Vatican II have been very positive and others - let's be honest here - have been, shall we say, less positive than originally intended (the key word here is intent).

A quick glance over the past fifty years would lend strong credence to the argument that in the areas where the Council's decisions were implemented hastily and (seemingly) haphazardly, confusion and disillusionment resulted. Yet where the decisions of the Council were implemented more purposefully, with a keen eye towards an organic connection to the Church's Tradition, the results have been more clear-cut and positive. I'll let you decide which of the Council's decisions were implemented more hastily and which more measured.

So while it seems clear that the fathers of the Second Vatican Council intended to enact change in some aspects of the Church (which can be very good), change for the sake of change was not their intent. The Church is, after all, in many ways, a living organism and living beings grow and change over time. But in order for change to be healthy for the organism and for it to positively affect the being's continued growth and vitality the change must have two qualities: 1) it must be slow and measured and 2) it must be organic.

This, you see, is why we still - fifty years on - live in an age where the Second Vatican Council is in many ways unsettled. The documents produced by this council (sixteen in number) are still - fifty years later - being digested, as it were, by the Church at-large. They're still being studied, considered and implemented in a myriad of ways. This slow absorption is, my friends, very healthy for the Church and can only lead her to the most level-headed and positive decisions.

Ecumenical councils take decades, nay, centuries to bear fruit in the ways Christ intends within the Church universal. And this is the very reason why we've had so few councils throughout the millennia: because the words and documents of any given Church council have been studied, considered and implemented for many, many years after the end of the council. Let's take a quick look at some of the more memorable of the Church's past ecumenical councils, and just how long it took for teachings of these councils to be completely digested by the Church:

First Council of Nicaea (325)

First Council of Nicaea, 325

This was the very first ecumenical council. There were local and regional councils before this, but in 325 the Roman Emperor Constantine called all of the world's roughly 1,800 bishops to meet together at his villa southeast of Constantinople. For various reasons, only about 300 bishops were able to attend. The council was called to address two main issues which were threatening the unity of the Church: 1) the date on which Easter should be celebrated each year and 2) the teachings of an Alexandrian priest named Arius, who taught that Jesus was less than fully divine.

Despite the decision of the council Fathers that Arius' teachings on Christ were not of the Apostolic faith, Arianism persisted for quite a while after the Council - as in for centuries. Even after the Council's decision, many bishops and priest in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire continued to promote Arianism. It wasn't until 56 years later, after a second ecumenical council, that the majority of bishops within the Empire fully embraced the teachings of Nicaea. But, in the mean time, Arian missionaries had begun work among the Germanic tribes outside the Empire and some of the tribes became thoroughly Arian. And as these tribes moved into the western provinces of the Roman Empire in the succeeding centuries, they brought their Arian beliefs with them. Arianism was not definitively stamped out in Christian Europe until the 8th century - over four hundred years after the close of Nicaea Council I.


First Council of Constantinople (381)

First Council of Constantinople, 381

By the time the Emperor Theodosius I took the throne of the Roman Empire in 380, nearly the entire Church in the eastern provinces was Arian. In 381, he called the bishops of the Church to a second ecumenical council at the new imperial capital of Constantinople, to resolve (finally, it was hoped) the Arian dispute and to definitively define the role of the Holy Spirit in Christian belief. This council produced a new version of the now-famed Nicene Creed. In the original version of the Creed, adopted at the First Council of Nicaea, it ended after the words: "...And in the Holy Spirit." This Council further defined the role of the Holy Spirit, by adding the words, after the mention of the Holy Spirit: "...the Lord and giver of life who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets," and all the remaining words of what we now know as the Nicene Creed as well.

But aside from the important theological definitions it produced, the Council of Constantinople also produced a number of other "canons," or rulings dealing with Church discipline. For this reason, the canons of the First Council of Constantinople remained under discussion and dispute for centuries after the Council's close. In fact, this Council's declarations regarding the primacy of the See of Rome is still a major bone of contention between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches - over 1,600 years after the conclusion of the Council.

Council of Ephesus (431)

Ruins of the ancient Church of St. Mary in Ephesus - site of the proceedings of the Council of Ephesus in 431.

In the year 431, a man named Nestorius was the Patriarch (i.e. bishop) of Constantinople. At his request, the Emperor Theodosius II called this, the third ecumenical council of the Churchm, to clarify the Church's stance on Nestorius' teachings on the nature of Christ: specifically, Nestorius' teaching that the divine and human natures of Christ were not united, but separate. He took umbrage with the traditional title of Mary as being Theotokos or "Mother of God." "Mary is rightly called the Mother of Christ," said Nestorius, "not the Mother of God." Even though Nestorius himself requested the council be called, in hopes that his position would be vindicated, the roughly 250 bishops who attended and comprised the Council Fathers disagreed with Nestorius. The Fathers actually repudiated his teaching as heresy and not in line with the Apostolic faith. "Mary," they said, "is rightly called the Mother of God,"for the divine and human natures of Christ are distinct but intimately united and inseparable.

Unfortunately, the eventual outcome of this Council was not complete unity within the Church, but, instead, the first widespread schism in Church history. In fact, when many of the churches which adhered to Nestorius' teachings broke away from the Catholic Church in the decades after the Council of Ephesus, they created a rift which, over 1,500 years later, has still not healed. Today, the Assyrian Church of the East (the heir of the Apostolic churches in ancient Persia and Mesopotamia) still remains separated from the Catholic Church.

Post-council confusion is nothing new

The years after any of the other of the Church's ecumenical councils have been no less tumultuous than these examples. History proves that, as ecumenical councils are rare in the Church's history, their settled impact is not at all immediate. In fact, there is always a period of uncertainty and restlessness that lasts for decades - or longer. But inevitably, the ancient tradition of the Church is the great settling factor serving as a kind of anchor for any new developments of thought from any given council: helping to keep each council firmly and organically moored to the Church's ancient and Apostolic roots.

So, if nothing else, I hope that these three examples richly illustrate the fact that the Church's councils do not effect their lasting impression on the Church in short order. While fifty years back may sound like a lifetime away from 2012, in the timeline of the Church's history nearly 2,000 year history, this golden jubilee marks nothing more than a date that is in very close proximity to the event itself. It will be many, many more decades (perhaps centuries) - long after we have all joined the ranks of the eternal - before the true impact of Vatican II will be known with any certitude. I hate to break it to you, but all of us are going to live our allotted time upon this earth in an age that will almost certainly be viewed as one which was in upheaval. Not unlike those who lived in the years immediately after any of the other of the Church's ecumenical councils, we will only know a Catholicism in a particular state of flux, a time of "settling" after the relative upheavals of a council.

But it won't always be this way. Tradition will win out - it always does. The dust will eventually settle and necessary steps will be taken to ensure that the beautiful and inspiring documents of this latest council find themselves implemented in a way that is harmonious to the Church's ancient patrimony. God-willing, this time will come sooner, rather than later.

Please pray for our pope, who is already being lauded as "the pope of Christian unity." Please pray for the leaders and members of the SSPX and all our separated brothers and sisters - especially those who sadly see Vatican II as a stumbling block to unity at this time.

Thank you for the excellent summary! 

UPDATED (16:14...15/05) Georgetown's Defense of Invitation to Sebelius

Georgetown finally responds to the criticism it has been receiving. Read its statement carefully...skip Cardinal Newman's intro if you want...

Georgetown Defends Sebelius Pick with Misleading Statement

Georgetown University has finally issued an official response to the controversy surrounding the Jesuit institution’s invitation to “pro-choice” HHS Kathleen Sebelius, architect of the HHS mandate the U.S. bishops oppose as a threat to religious liberty, to speak on commencement day this Friday.

But in making this case, Georgetown seems to have forgotten the timing of the HHS mandate, which was announced in August 2011.  The response also seems to forget Georgetown’s own weak response to the mandate, and that of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities (AJCU).

Here is the statement posted on the Georgetown website:   

In recent days on the Georgetown University campus and in the larger American Catholic community, concerns have been expressed by some who object to an invitation to Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to participate in a Public Policy Institute awards ceremony during the University’s commencement weekend.

Last fall, public policy students expressed preferences for potential speakers who could participate in the program. Given her role in crafting the landmark legislation that will make health care more accessible to 34 million Americans who are currently uninsured, Secretary Sebelius was identified by students as a leading policy maker in our country who could contribute to this event. Secretary Sebelius has a long and disting

Peru: The Fight Continues at PUCP

When will this end?

Lawyer Says Pontifical University Can't Control Who Represents Church

(http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=24913)

LIMA, PERU, May 14 (CNA) .- The attorney for the Archdiocese of Lima, Natale Amprimo, said Peru's Pontifical Catholic University has no right to tell the Vatican it must replace Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani as the negotiator between the Church hierarchy and university officials, as rector Marcial Rubio is requesting.

As controversy continues over the university's refusal to follow Vatican directives, Rubio sent a letter on May 9 to the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone,

In the letter, Rubio argues that the removal of Cardinal Cipriani as negotiator is 'the only way to achieve the full peace that the University and the Peruvian bishops desire.'

As one of several moves that has caused concern among Vatican officials, the university had defied a ruling by the Peruvian civil courts to give the Archdiocese of Lima a seat on its board of directors.

An investigation of the university was carried out Dec. 5 -11, 2011 by Cardinal Peter Erdo of Budapest, who found the Lima-based institution to be at odds with the Catholic Church in several significant areas of policy.

University officials have been refusing to comply with the Church's guidelines for Catholic universities, which were laid out the papal document 'Ex Corde Ecclesiae.' The apostolic constitution was promulgated in 1990 by Pope John Paul II to clarify what is expected of an authentically Catholic university.

The Vatican had given the school until Easter 2012 to comply with the Church's requirements for Catholic colleges, marking the first time the Holy See has set a deadline for a university to reform. However, the university has yet to fully comply, arguing that an unrelated dispute with the archdiocese over property rights is delaying the process.

In remarks to CNA, Amprimo criticized Rubio over

Types of Catholic Churches

For those who understand things well by ordering them, I thought I would repost a very useful explanation of the six different types of catholic Churches from St. Peter's List:

Listers, there are many kinds of Catholic Churches, and each kind has further subclasses which make for a rather confusing classification system. Here is a quick list comprised of highlights from the Catholic Encyclopedia pages on various kinds of Churches.

1. Cathedral: The chief church of a diocese, in which the bishop has his throne (cathedra) and close to which is his residence; it is, properly speaking, the bishop’s church, wherein he presides, teaches, and conducts worship for the whole Christian community. What properly constitutes a cathedral is its assignment by competent authority as the residence of the bishop in his hierarchical capacity, and the principal church of a diocese is naturally best adapted to this purpose. Such official designation is known as canonical erection and necessarily accompanies the formation of a new diocese. [1]

2. Basilica: A title assigned by formal concession or immemorial custom to certain more important churches, in virtue of which they enjoy privileges of an honorific character which are not always very clearly defined. Basilicas in this sense are divided into two classes, the greater or patriarchal, and the lesser, basilicas.

1. Major: To the former class belong primarily those four great churches of Rome…which among other distinctions have a special “holy door” and to which a visit is always prescribed as one of the conditions for gaining the Roman Jubilee. They are also called patriarchal basilicas, seemingly as representative of the great ecclesiastical provinces of the world thus symbolically united in the heart of Christendom. They possess a papal throne and an altar at which none may say Mass except by the pope’s permission.
2. Minor: The lesser basilicas are much more numerous, including nine or ten different churches in Rome, and a number of others, such as the Basilica of the Grotto at Lourdes, the votive Church of the Sacred Heart at Montmartre, the Church of Marienthal in Alsace, &c. There has been a pronounced tendency of late years to add to their number. Besides conferring a certain precedence before other churches (not, however, before the cathedral of any locality), include the right of the conopaeum, the bell, and the cappa magna. The conopaeum is a sort of umbrella (also called papilio, sinicchio, etc.), which together with the bell is carried processionally at the head of the clergy on state occasions. The cappa magna is worn by the canons or members of the collegiate chapter, if seculars, when assisting at Office. The form of theconopaeum, which is of red and yellow silk, is well shown in the arms of the cardinal camerlengo over the cross keys. [2]

3. Chapel: The basic definition of a Chapel is an informal Church or a room containing a small side altar. There are many different kinds of Chapels. See the NewAdvent page on Chapels for more detail.

4. Oratory: As a general term, Oratory signifies a place of prayer, but technically it means a structure other than a parish church, set aside by ecclesiastical authority for prayer and the celebration of Mass. In the Latin Church oratories are classed as:

1. Public: Canonically erected by the bishop and are perpetually dedicated to the Divine service. They must have an entrance and exit from the public road. Priests who celebrate Mass in public oratories must conform to the office proper to those oratories, whether secular or regular. If, however, the calendar of an oratory permits a votive Mass to be said, the visiting priest may celebrate in conformity with his own diocesan or regular calendar.
2. Semipublic: Those which, though erected in a private building, are destined for the use of a community. Such are the oratories of seminaries, pious congregations, colleges, hospitals, prisons, and such institutions. If, however, there be several oratories in one house, it is only the one in which the Blessed Sacrament is preserved that has the privileges of a semipublic oratory. All semipublic oratories (which class technically includes the private chapel of a bishop) are on the same footing as public oratories in regard to the celebration of Mass.
3. Private: Those erected in private houses for the convenience of some person or family by an indult of the Holy See. They can be erected only by permission of the pope. Oratories in private houses date from Apostolic times when the Sacred Mysteries could not be publicly celebrated owing to the persecutions. Private oratories are conceded by the Holy See only on account of bodily infirmity, or difficulty of access to a public church or as a reward for services done to the Holy See or to the Catholic cause. The grant of a private oratory may be temporary or for the life of the grantee, according to the nature of the cause that is adduced. [3]

5. Parish Church: A Church under the authority of a priest legitimately appointed to secure in virtue of his office for the faithful dwelling therein, the helps of religion. It must have besides the liturgical equipment necessary for Divine worship, a baptismal font (exception is occasionally made in favour of a cathedral or a mother-church; hence in the Middle Ages parish churches were often called baptismal churches), a confessional, and a cemetery. According to canon law, every church should have a stable income, especially land revenues, sufficient to insure not only the Divine service but also the support of its clergy. [4]

6. Crypt: An underground church, generally built among the dead. At first, crypts were sometimes as deepsunk as the cubicula of the catacombs themselves. Or they were but partly above ground, and were lighted by small windows windows placed in their side walls. Occasionally their floor was but little below the surface of the ground. [5]

So now you know! 

DC's Newspaper: Georgetown Is Secularized

The front cover editorial of the Catholic Standard, DC's Catholic newspaper, had the following to say about Georgetown's invitation to the architect of the HHS mandate which has been condemned by every bishop in the United States:

Late last Friday, Georgetown University announced that U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius is the featured speaker for an awards ceremony at the University’s Public Policy Institute. This news is a disappointment but not a surprise.

As is well known, Secretary Sebelius is the architect of the “HHS mandate”, now federal law, which requires all employers — including religious institutions — to provide health insurance coverage of abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization and contraceptives for its employees and redefines religious ministry to exclude Catholic social services, hospitals and universities if they serve or employ non-Catholics. Given her position, it is disappointing that she would be the person that Georgetown University would choose to honor.

Founded in 1789 by John Carroll, a Jesuit priest, Georgetown University has, historically speaking, religious roots. So, too, do Harvard, Princeton and Brown. Over time, though, as has happened with these Ivy League institutions, Georgetown has undergone a secularization, due in no small part to the fact that much of its leadership and faculty find their inspiration in sources other than the Gospel and Catholic teaching. Many are quite clear that they reflect the values of the secular culture of our age. Thus the selection of Secretary Sebelius for special recognition, while disappointing, is not surprising.

Not only has the newspaper spoken, but Monsignor Charles Pope writes in a blog post that Bishop Barry Knestout, Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Washington, has forwarded the editorial to priests of the Archdiocese, asking them to “share it in any way we deem appropriate with the people of the Archdiocese.”

Monsignor Pope coments on the editorial:

The editorial, while not using canonical language, in effect sets forth the view that Georgetown has largely become a secular University, along the line of Harvard, Yale et al. It goes even further, stating that the primary source of inspiration at Georgetown is not the Gospel or Catholic teaching, but instead, is other unnamed sources.

To be clear, there are surely some very fine teachers and students on campus. I know at least several who are striving to maintain some semblance of Catholic identity there. It remains true that Mass is still offered on campus, but that is true of Secular universities as well.

So, what is Catholic about Georgetown? Very little, it would seem by the editorial’s assessment. This assessment, I know, many of you will share, in the wake of one discouragement after another emanating from the campus of Georgetown. [It appears he shares the view as well. How can you not?]

Well that's interesting that this fact has been recognized by a bishop. So what is step two? As I said at an earlier time, if a Wendy's claimed it was loyal to the food chain and started selling McDonalds instead...how long would it take for Wendy's to disown them...or get new manage.

Italy's Second "March for Life" Full of Youth

On 13 May 2012 nearly 15,000 people turned out to protest the country's law no. 194 legalising abortion. The march was lead by American Cardinal Raymond Burke from the Colosseum to St. Peter's square and was composed of a core of Italians, many Americans, some French, Germans, Hungarians and Polish and even some Tibetan Buddhists.

A friend of mine from Steubenville, Garret Nelson, explained in the EWTN article that it was very similar to the march in the United States each January except with the added quality of universality.

Several Italian politicians were present including Rome's mayor, Gianni Alemanno.


According to the Register:

Among the foreign participants were 25 members of the Filipino group Couples for Christ, 13 seminarians from the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest [order dedicated to Latin Mass], as well as representatives of the Order of Malta, Human Life International, and the Italian head of the Society of St. Pius X. Two Buddhist monks also marched, carrying a placard to end abortion in Tibet.

The march, which was also dedicated to Chen Guangcheng, the recently self-liberated Chinese dissident opposed to China’s one-child policy, concluded with a holy Mass in St. Peter’s presided by the archpriest of the basilica, Cardinal Angelo Comastri. Traditional Latin Masses were also offered.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/romes-first-march-for-life-exceeds-all-expectations/#ixzz1urmsG2Ng

Does anyone else see a pattern here with Extraordinary Form/Traditional latin Masses and active Catholics (including Cardinal Burke below...)?

Pontifical Irish College Getting A Makeover

According to CNA, three of the four directors of the Pontifical Irish College in Rome are stepping down after finding that there was quote a bit of 

Rome, Italy, May 10, 2012 / 11:37 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Three of the four senior staff members at the Pontifical Irish College in Rome are stepping down from their posts after a Vatican investigation concluded Ireland’s seminaries are not doing enough to promote Catholic orthodoxy. [Surprise Surprise.] 

....
Today’s announcement comes in the wake of the March 2012 publication of a two-year investigation – officially called an apostolic visitation -- into the health of the Irish Church. The visitation of Irish seminaries was led by Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York.

While the report praised Irish seminary staff for being “dedicated formators” who were “committed to the work of priestly training,” it also called for a “greater concern for the intellectual formation of seminarians” to ensure that their education was “in full conformity with the Church’s Magisterium.”

The report also recommended that the pastoral training of seminarians be re-evaluated to ensure “it is sacramental, priestly and apostolic” and concerned with “preparing candidates to celebrate the sacraments and to preach.”

Overall, the visitation found that the renewal of the Catholic Church in Ireland was being hampered by “a certain tendency, not dominant but nevertheless fairly widespread among priests, religious and laity, to hold theological opinions at variance with the teachings of the Magisterium.”

Theological opinions at variance with the magisterium....that's another way of saying the clergy have become modernist. (Pius X called modernism the synthesis of all heresies...because there is no specific item you reject, but rather you individualise Catholicism...also known as "Cafeteria Catholicism")


Who knows how bad the 'heterodoxy' was, but at least we know Cardinal Dolan can call a spade a spade...its the only way to move forward.  

Last Weeks Roundup (04-11 May 2012)

Last week was another whopper of a week where the Church here in the U.S. took various hard hits from secularism. However there were also signs of hope, for example Fr. Robert Barron's appointment as the rector of Chicago's seminary, and a movie exemplifying the Battle for the Core in Mexico. Here follows the stories in order of their popularity:

• Angry Queers: The type of story you don't hear

• Pope Benedict XVI and SSPX

• Obama Comes out on Gay "Marriage"

• 15,000 (now 30,000) Signers Protest Sebelius' Speech at Georgetown's Commencement

• Release June 1st: "For Greater Glory"

Fr. Robert Barron Will Be Heading Up Chicago's Seminary

The producer of the "Catholicism" Series, Fr. Robert Barron will be taking the reins at the country's largest seminary building (hopefully, soon to be largest seminary):

The Archbishop of Chicago, Francis Cardinal George, announced today Father Robert Barron has been appointed Rector-President of Mundelein Seminary/University of St. Mary of the Lake. Father Barron will assume this role in July at the seminary located outside Chicago. 

"As a priest of Jesus Christ I accept this responsibility with joy," said Father Barron. "The appointment brings together many of the elements that have long been of great importance to me, namely, the priesthood, theological scholarship, pastoral care and evangelization."

Barron is currently the Director of Word on Fire Catholic Ministries, a media group he founded to advance the new evangelization. He will continue in this role and its mission, along with his new appointment at Mundelein. Last year, Word on Firereleased a 10 part documentary series, Catholicism, which Father Barron created, wrote and hosted. The series aired across the country on PBS and EWTN, and has been seen in parishes, universities and schools throughout the world. The documentary also won a Christopher Award for excellence.

“The mission of evangelization will continue to be a priority for me, and Word on Fire is essential to this mission,” said Father Barron. “I will continue to set the ethos for the Word on Fire apostolate and provide new media content to enhance the Church’s outreach to the culture. I remain focused in my commitment to help promote the Catholicism series and study programs as indispensable tools for the new evangelization.”

Father Robert Barron, ordained in 1986, is a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago. He received his Masters’ Degree in Philosophy from the Catholic University of America in 1982 and a doctorate in Sacred Theology from the Institut Catholique in 1992. Barron was appointed to the theological faculty of Mundelein Seminary in 1992 and has also served as a visiting professor at the University of Notre Dame and at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas. He was twice scholar in residence at the Pontifical North American College at the Vatican.

Father Barron was baptized at Queen of All Saints Basilica in Chicago and grew up at St. John of the Cross Parish in Western Springs, Illinois.

He is the author of many books including The Priority of Christ: Towards a Post-Liberal Catholicism, and most recently Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith. 

University of Saint Mary of the Lake, also called Mundelein Seminary, is the principal seminary for the formation of priests in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago. It is recognized as the first institution of higher education in the City of Chicago, chartered by the Illinois General Assembly in 1844, and has the longest continuous academic charter in the state. Mundelein is one of the largest seminaries in the United States.

This is good news for Chicago and the country. He strikes me as a no-nonsense type of guy.

Soon to Be Released: For Greater Glory (Cristiada)

I saw the movie "For Greater Glory" last night which will be released on 01 June 2012. I was blown away and highly recommend you all plan to see it.  Here is the trailer:



We are fighting the same battle around the world today but with less violence, but the battle is driven by the same conflict of ideas. Religious vs. Secularists, Theists and Atheists...Catholics vs. varieties of humanism. 

Another Brilliant Moment: Pelosi Chimes In

Here's the latest from the magisterium parallel to the bishops in the U.S.:

Angry Queers: The Type of Stories You Don't Hear

For those Serrans reading, a group named "Angry Queers" vandalised a Church a day before Obama's comments destroying various irreplaceable items that Blessed Serra brought to the new world:

SANTA CRUZ, CALIF., May 9 (CNA) .- The parishioners of Holy Cross Church and the Diocese of Monterey, Calif. are 'shocked and saddened' after a Sunday vandalism spree damaged irreplaceable items like a baptismal font that the famous missionary Bl. Junipero Serra brought to the area in 1791.

'The Diocese of Monterey is deeply saddened by the apparent hate crime committed against Holy Cross Church in Santa

Must See Vid on Georgetown

Take a look at Catholic News Service's newest video released today:

Sign the petition and share this post or video.
The scandal also goes unanswered by Cardinal Wuerl. 

Gays would want to be accepted, so be nice ("Golden Rule"): Obama STD

I'm surprised that everyone is acting like this is a surprise. If you haven't heard by now, Obama supports gay 'marriage'. Not only that, he supports Christianity...er...well his version of it. Here is part of his statement yesterday:

From FNC:

President Obama on Wednesday endorsed same-sex marriages, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to take that position following days of speculation about his “evolving” stance on the issue.
The president used a hastily called TV interview to make his position clear.
“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told ABC News.

Evolving stance? How has it evolved? From supporting it to supporting it? Or from not mentioning your support before your initial election to avoid controversy and then supporting it for your second to energize your political base?

In endorsing unnatural sex, Obama invoked Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross.

“This is something that, you know, [Michelle and I have] talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated…”

Oh, and then, of course Christ would endorse gay 'marriage' as well. I don't mean to sound like a Protestant since, as Catholics, we believe the bible is necessary but not sufficient in communicating the deposit of faith Christ gave to us, but here are some reminder excerpts from scripture that breakfast theologian Obama conveniently overlooks, even though he is addressing an audience of mostly Protestants (They know their bible and they are not stupid...):

• 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
• Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion." (NIV)

Ok well at this point it is obvious that inerrancy of scripture for Obama is out the window. He is a perfect product of modernism: the bible is a nice text that has a good message. That's about it.

Second, his interpretation of "treat others the way you want to be treated"is the typical view of anyone, starting in the 'enlightenment' who has abandoned the notion of telos and Aristotle's notion of 'the good'. The good is that which brings fulfillment to our nature and is perfective of us: things like food, sex and truth all bring us to fulfill our nature. Unique to human beings, our minds are able to seek after truth as a good (its better to know that 2+2=4 than to not know it, because it will allow us to accomplish something perfective of our nature).

I don't plan to get into a full blown explanation here of why homosexuality is a violation of natural law, but, in summary, homosexual acts disrespect the goods of human life and union of the sexes. An anus is not for that purpose.

Now the point in the above paragraph was to get to the bottom of "treat others the way you want to be treated", a paraphrased version of Matthew 7:12 which of course, since human beings are not on the same level as God, must yield to divine law and divine revelation. The golden rule is a rule for action but cannot be separated from God as the humanists try to do with nearly all Christian teachings. If we were to make the golden rule absolute and apart from any context....which is what Obama is doing...then it would mean that I should leave drug users alone because they don't want me to condemn their behavior. But why do most people still believe we should involve ourselves in helping these people? Because most still at least recognize that drugs are not 'a good', perfective, of fulfilling for these people. Yet why don't we treat them the 'way they want to be treated'? Well I would say, deep down they do want to not be enslaved to drugs. Deep down they do want to follow natural law since it is engraved on all human hearts. And though some homosexuals may truly have a psychological or true sexual desire for the same sex, it remains that this kind of behavior is not fulfilling or perfective of their nature, rather it is actually damaging to participate in a vicarious 'union' of two friends. Despite homosexuality having a long history and it is clear that for that whole history, none of these actions have brought union between two people nor the deepest sharing which happens to involve genes to produce the next generation. I wouldn't been surprised if on the horizon some gays begin pressing for scientists to exchange their genes for them in a laboratory setting because they still recognize this as a 'good' thing, something fulfilling to who they are as human beings. However, it cannot be tolerated because the difference between the sexes remains.

I'm sure I've stirred the pot here for many on Battle for the Core today, however it is important to consider that even if the state were to officially recognize homosexuals as 'married' it would not be so since the institution of marriage antedates government itself. The natural law and the divine law trump human law so says Aquinas.  There are two issues: 1) Gay marriage is not marriage any way you look at it and 2) How is recognizing that 'union' as a partnership rather than a 'marriage' violating the 'golden rule' again? Obama needs to think that through. Speaking specifically about the golden rule and not about whether gays fall in the drug addict analogy, it is the same as saying it makes a drug addict feel bad to tell him you won't hire him. Sorry, the golden rule is off limits on this one.

Also, within hours after Obama's statement, Cardinal Dolan had the following response:

President Obama’s comments today in support of the redefinition of marriage are deeply saddening. As I stated in my public letter to the President on September 20, 2011, the Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by the President and the Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. However, we cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society. The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better. Unfortunately, President Obama’s words today are not surprising since they follow upon various actions already taken by his Administration that erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage. I pray for the President every day, and will continue to pray that he and his Administration act justly to uphold and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. May we all work to promote and protect marriage and by so doing serve the true good of all persons.

If only that sort of outspoken attitude existed in the Archdiocese of DC, the center of government itself.

For other commentary on the recent statement click here.