Beware of the Solists! (or) It’s Not Good to Be Alone

February 8th, 2010

Beware of the Solists! (or) It’s Not Good to Be Alone

Archdiocese of Washington

“There are a lot of “Solos” sung by our Protestant brethren: Sola Fide (saved by faith alone); Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone is the rule of faith); sola gratia(grace works alone). (See the Protestant Logo to the right). Generally one ought to be suspicious and careful of claims that things work alone. It is our usual experience that things work together in harmony with other things and are interrelated. Very seldom is anyone or anything alone.

“The problem of the “solos” emerges, it seems to me, in our minds where it is possible to separate things out. But the fact is, just because we can separate out something in our mind does not mean that we can separate it in reality. Consider a candle flame for a moment. In my mind I can separate the heat of the flame from the Light of the flame. But in reality I could never take a knife and put the heat over to one side and the light off to the other. In reality the heat and light are inseparable, so together as to be one.

“I would like to respectfully argue that it is the same withthings like faith and works, grace and transformation, Scripture and the Church. We can separate all these things out in our mind but in reality they are one. Attempts to separate them from what they belong to lead to grave distortions and to the thing in question no longer being what it is claimed to be. Rather it turns into an abstraction that exists only on a blackboard or in the mind of a (geeky) theologian.

“Let’s look at the three main “solos” of Protestant theology. …”

via Beware of the Solists! (or) It’s Not Good to Be Alone | Archdiocese of Washington.

Lech Walesa: World Has ‘Lost Hope’ of America’s Moral Leadership

February 8th, 2010

By Kathleen Gilbert

Image

CHICAGO, Illinois, February 5, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Lech Walesa, a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and former president of Poland, has warned that the world has “lost that hope” with which it once turned to America as a moral leader.

Walesa was co-founder of SolidarnoϾ (Solidarity), the Soviet bloc's first independent trade union, which lead led the non-violent uprising that overthrew communist rule in Poland in the 1980s and delivered one of the major death-blows to the Iron Curtain.

The anti-communist icon gave his brief remarks on America during a Chicago rally Jan. 29 endorsing Adam Andrzejewski in the Republican primary for governor of Illinois.

“The United States is only one superpower. Today they lead the world. Nobody has doubts about it – militarily,” said Walesa via a translator. “They also lead economically, but they're getting weak.

“They don't lead morally and politically anymore. The world has no leadership,” he continued. “The United States was always the last resort and hope for all other nations.

via Lech Walesa: World Has ‘Lost Hope’ of America’s Moral Leadership.

Mary Ann Glendon

February 7th, 2010

ImageMary Ann Glendon (born October 7, 1938 Pittsfield, Massachusetts) J.D., LL.M., was the United States Ambassador to the Holy See and is the Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. She teaches and writes on bioethics, comparative constitutional law, property, and human rights in international law. She is a pro-life feminist. Quote:

“What is clearly ‘old-fashioned’ today is the old feminism of the 1970s — with its negative attitudes toward men, marriage and motherhood, and its rigid party line on abortion.”

Mary Ann Glendon. U.S. State Dep't photo

via Mary Ann Glendon – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Spirit of Vatican II Is a Demon That Must Be Exorcised

February 4th, 2010

National Catholic Register Blogs: Bishop Nickless: The Spirit of Vatican II Is a Demon That Must Be Exorcised.

By Tim Drake

“…

Quoting from Pope Benedict XVI’s address to the Roman Curia in December 2005, Bishop Nickless draws attention to the two contrary hermeneutics that arose from the council — one which caused confusion (“a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”), and the other which has borne fruit (“hermeneutic of reform”).

“The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church,” said Pope Benedict.

Bishop Nickless says that these two rival interpretations have weakened the Church’s identity and mission.

The consequence, says Bishop Nickless, has been a sort of dualism — “an either/or mentality and insistence in various areas of the Church’s life: either fidelity to doctrine or social justice work, either Latin or English, either personal conscience or the authority of the Church, either chant or contemporary music, either tradition or progress, either liturgy or popular piety, either conservative or liberal, either Mass or adoration, either the magisterium or theologians, either ecumenism or evangelization, either rubrics or personalization, either the Baltimore Catechism or ‘experience’ …”

Resp ad Dubium Ordination of Women

February 2nd, 2010

Below is the response by then Cardinal Ratzinger, prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to a general dissent from Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. It was distributed under a cover letter here.

Resp ad Dubium Ordination.

Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger, Prefect

+ Tarcisio Bertone, Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli, Secretary

National Catholic Register Blogs: Does God Have Anything to Do With Us?

January 29th, 2010

The story below is about why God allows suffering with quotes from Augustine, Thomas and Chesterton. This is not an easy one for Catholics to answer, so we should be prepared by education.

National Catholic Register Blogs: Does God Have Anything to Do With Us?.

I’ve been a Christian since 1997 and Catholic convert for 2 years, I have never been plagued quite this way.

Some time ago an acquaintance told me that she believed in God and Jesus but did NOT believe that He has anything to do with us. She made her case based on the many unanswered prayers of believers vs. so-called “answered” prayers. “How do you explain that one child is raped and murdered and God does nothing even though the parents are praying…. and meanwhile, another child is spared because her parents were praying? Is one child more deserving and loved than another? Are the prayers of one set of parents more powerful than those of the other? She went on to say that this proves her theory that God set the whole world in motion and is just sitting back watching. She prefers to think this way than to think that God intervenes for some and not for others.

Now, I don’t consider myself an ignorant person and I’ve read my share of books and been through the gamut of searching, seeking, and faith shaking. My faith remains intact, but I wish I had an answer for her.

Ideas?

The only answer, at the end of the day, is Christ crucified. The one who served God best of all and was, above all men, most beloved of the Father is also the one who endured the greatest suffering and the most desolating abandonment, followed by the most awesome glorification.

Chesterton puts it best when he says that in this life, we are on the wrong side of the tapestry. The threads we see make sense, but they make sense somewhere else, not here. Trying to deduce why one person suffers and another is granted a miracle is not possible here because we don’t know the end of the story. That’s the lesson of Job. The neat answers don’t work and the nihlist ones don’t satisfy. But to the Christian, one person is granted a share in Christ’s suffering and another is given a share in his healing because God, who knows the whole story, is not absent and just sitting back watching, but present and making each person a sharer in the life of Christ as He sees best. The paradox here is profound and scary, because one of the people who shares in Christ’s life may well be the person who dies crying, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me.” We may account him despised and rejected of men, yet he may well be the one to whom God says, “Well done, thou good and faithful” when he opens his eyes on the Other Side of the Tapestry to discover that he very sense of forsakenness was his share in the great redemptive act of Christ for the world.

Whatever the case, the one thing the Christian story definitively puts to death is the notion that God has nothing to do with us and stands aloof. If there is anything that the story of the Incarnation of God in the person of Christ Crucified tells us, it is that he is passionately involved with us, even when we can’t for the life of us see how in our little tiny present moment. When we step back and look at the big picture, with God himself spiked to a cross for us, we can see that, whatever else may be the case, he’s not aloof.

Ultimately, your question boils down to the only one of two arguments there has ever been against the existence of God: the problem of evil. Why does God allow bad things to happen. Ultimately, the answer to that will not be fully understandable in this life. But what we are told by St. Thomas is this:

As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): “Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.” This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.

This is still mysterious, but it is no more mysterious than the Resurrection, in which God makes good on that promise first in his very own body. He allows the worst evil to be done, not to us, but to himself, and then brings the glory of the Resurrection out of it. His promise is that we shall experience the same. That’s a frightening promise, but again, whatever else it is, it’s not evidence for his aloofness. If anything, we’d like him to be more remote than that.

One book that you might find helpful is Peter Kreeft’s Making Sense out of Suffering.

Ultimately there’s no formulaic answer. Evil is a mystery, like love. But God assures us that love is stronger than death.

National Catholic Register Blogs: America, We Won t Go Away

January 23rd, 2010

via National Catholic Register Blogs: America, We Won t Go Away.

America, we won’t go away. Many people wish we would, and heaven knows we would rather be doing almost anything else. But we can’t go away, and we won’t.

I’m sure you’ve seen us. We may have made you angry, or sad, or we may have made you turn quickly away and find something else to look at.

You may have seen us two days before Christmas outside the Planned Parenthood building. The old man with the rosary, the college kids in sweats, the sad-looking woman clutching brochures and an “I Regret My Abortion” sign — that was us.

Maybe you felt offended that we stuck abortion in your face as you rushed out to do last-minute shopping, cheered by Christmas songs on the radio. Well, we felt offended that the “clinic” was open that day. We wanted to enjoy ourselves, too.

Or maybe you heard one of us at a town meeting you attended at the school or the senior center. Maybe it was a savvy young woman lawyer that you heard voice the pro-life argument. Or maybe the voice of the pro-life movement you heard was a halting, nervous voice that got a little too angry or whose words got a little too tangled. In either case, that was us, too.

We may have made you uncomfortable that day. We’re sorry for that. But we’ll be there again at the next town meeting, too. And the next. And the next.

We won’t go away, and we won’t stop talking about abortion. We won’t stop saying, again and again, that this is wrong, and it has to stop.

America, you know more about the unborn than you ever have before. Life magazine used to sell out when they put an unborn baby on the cover. Now, we’ve seen National Geographic’s “In the Womb.” We have sonogram photos at the front of our baby books and we saw our children for the first time in utero, through a video monitor.

America, you know more than ever that abortion hurts women. Those of us who have had an abortion know the guilt at what we’ve done and the anger at those who made it seem inevitable, who refused all help except the kind that kills. Those of us who have a friend who has had an abortion know it is a topic that we must never, ever discuss. It causes too much sadness, inflicts too much pain that can’t be relieved.

America, you know what abortion is, and we know you know. We won’t stand by and pretend with you that nothing is happening.

And we won’t go away, because we can’t make abortion go away from our own consciences. Abortion stings us. The sting is there when we see an empty playground and remember that 1 in 3 children in America dies by abortion. The sting is there when we read of successful surgery saving unborn children in the womb, and remember that babies don’t survive the most common surgery in the womb.

Is abortion necessary for women’s rights? Ask the teens impregnated by older men and brought to the “clinic” by them, too. Is it a matter of choice? Ask the women who wanted to have their babies but were badgered and pressured and tricked and even forced to kill instead.

But doesn’t abortion help women? Ask the ones who died on the operating table — or the ones who say they wish they died because the depression is too much to bear.

What would America be like without abortion? We can’t even imagine. In It’s a Wonderful Life, George Bailey gets a glimpse of what Bedford Falls would be like if he hadn’t been born, but then he returns to a world where that tragedy never happened.

We won’t get to return to the world we could have had.

Did we abort a statesman who would have changed the course of this country? Did we abort the musician who would have taken that art — and our emotions with it — to new heights? What cures, stories, jokes, athletic feats or technological innovations did we abort? What great actor is missing from our movies, what great teachers will never inspire our kids at school?

No, America, we won’t go away, no matter how much you want us to or how much we want to go.

We want to think we would have told the slave-sellers, “No way. Not here. I will use every legal means to stop you.” We like to think we wouldn’t have sat still in World War II Germany as the trains rumbled by. We wish we could have sat with Rosa Parks or prayed with Ruby Bridges on the way to school.

But we can’t do any of that. What we can do is remind you, America, in season and out of season, of the words you were founded on: “All men are endowed by their Creator with the right to life.”

So you’ll see us shivering in the cold again this January for the March for Life. And you’ll see us next January, and the January after that, and the January after that, until we wear you down at last and there’s no more reason to march.

And if we die before you change, America, we’ll be able to stand before God and say, “I defended the defenseless. I stood for the weak. My brothers and sisters couldn’t cry ‘Stop,’ so I cried it for them. And I refused to go away.”

Political Asylum Ruling Expected Today for German Homeschooling Family

January 21st, 2010

This story is presented here to show what is happening in the rest of the world. This particular atrocity was instituted by Hitler’s Third Reich for the purpose of indoctrinating all children at an early age. After the defeat of the Third Reich the law was ignored until now.

Many of us feel that the direction our country is headed now is toward an increase in socialism in the way of European countries and more authoritarian control of its citizens by an ever paternalistic state, an aristocracy.

See Catechism references at end.

Pat

MEMPHIS, Tennessee, January 20, 2010 LifeSiteNews.com – A federal immigration judge in Memphis is expected to issue a ruling today on the case of a German family that applied for political asylum after suffering persecution from the German government over homeschooling their children.

 

via Political Asylum Ruling Expected Today for German Homeschooling Family.

“The persecution of homeschoolers in Germany has dramatically intensified,” said HSLDA staff attorney Michael P. Donnelly. “They are regularly fined thousands of dollars, threatened with imprisonment, or have the custody of their children taken away simply because they choose to home educate.”

Although Germany is a modern social democracy, the nation retains statist attitudes formed by the National Socialists during the Third Reich regarding the rights of families. In order to bring about the uniform educational and social formation of the youth by the state, the Jugendamt (Youth Welfare Office) was created, and Germany outlawed homeschooling through a compulsory education law.

The laws outlawing homeschooling remained on the books in Germany after the demise of Hitler’s Germany, but German officials for the most part maintained a policy of salutary neglect as late as 2002, when the Education Minister of the time stated the government would not crack down on the homeschooling minority since their children “are generally not lacking in any other respects.”

For more information see:

German Government Levels Crippling Fines, Threatens to Seize Custody of Son from Homeschooling Family
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09071009.html

 

German Homeschooler Melissa Busekros Home with Family after 3 Month Ordeal
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07042301.html

German Court Places Custody of Yet Another 5 Homeschooling Children with Government’s Youth Office
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/mar/07032204.html

Three More Families Appeal for Help as Germany Continues Crackdown on Homeschooling Families
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07041609.html

The Saga Continues: Previously Tolerant German State Declares War on Home-schooling
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06122201.html

References from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

1883 Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”7

1884 God has not willed to reserve to himself all exercise of power. He entrusts to every creature the functions it is capable of performing, according to the capacities of its own nature. This mode of governance ought to be followed in social life. The way God acts in governing the world, which bears witness to such great regard for human freedom, should inspire the wisdom of those who govern human communities. They should behave as ministers of divine providence.

1885 The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.

2228 Parents’ respect and affection are expressed by the care and attention they devote to bringing up their young children and providing for their physical and spiritual needs. As the children grow up, the same respect and devotion lead parents to educate them in the right use of their reason and freedom.

2229 As those first responsible for the education of their children, parents have the right to choose a school for them which corresponds to their own convictions. This right is fundamental. As far as possible parents have the duty of choosing schools that will best help them in their task as Christian educators.38 Public authorities have the duty of guaranteeing this parental right and of ensuring the concrete conditions for its exercise. [Emphasis added, Pat]

Excommunication is a declaration of acts that severs ties | Catholic Sentinel

January 19th, 2010

From an article by Bishop Robert Vasa of the Baker, Ore

Selected quotes. See full article at:

via Excommunication is a declaration of acts that severs ties | Catholic Sentinel.

BEND — During the course of this past year there have been a number of occasions when bishops have hinted to laity that being Catholic involves a bit more than claiming the title. This has been done, in particular, with regard to politicians who may, in their own way, love Jesus, who may attend Sunday Mass and who do identify themselves as “faithful” Catholics.

 

… I think there is very good reason for us to explore more thoroughly what excommunication really means and why it might be considered in certain circumstances.

I find, very frequently, when I speak a bit more boldly on matters of morality or discipline, there are a significant number of the faithful who send messages of gratitude and support. It is their gratitude which stirs my heart for it makes me realize how much there is a need to support and affirm the clear and consistent teachings of our Catholic faith for the sake of the faithful.

When that moral error is espoused publicly by a Catholic who, by the likewise public and external act of receiving Holy Communion, appears to be in “good standing” then the faithful are doubly confused and doubly discouraged. In that case, the error is certainly not refuted. Furthermore, the impression is given that the error is positively condoned by the bishop and the Church. This is very dis-couraging to the faithful. In such a case, private “dialogue” is certainly appropriate but a public statement is also needed. In extreme cases, excommunication may be deemed necessary.

It seems to me that even if a decree of excommunication would be issued, the bishop would really not excommunicate anyone. He only declares that the person is excommunicated by virtue of the person’s own actions. The actions and words, contrary to faith and morals, are what excommunicate (i.e. break communion with the Church). When matters are serious and public, the Bishop may deem it necessary to declare that lack of communion explicitly.

and his concluding statement [em added]

The Lord has called bishops to be shepherds. That shepherding entails both leading and protecting. In an era when error runs rampant and false teachings abound, the voice of the Holy Father rings clear and true. The teachings of the Church are well documented and consistent. Bishops and the pastors who serve in their Dioceses have an obligation both to lead their people to the truth and protect them from error.

National Catholic Register Blogs: Do Catholics “worship” Mary?

January 19th, 2010

I found that the original Catholic Encyclopedia states that we do worship Mary and the saints and also goes on to imply that we worship icons, statues, etc.

The basic problem is that the term “worship” has changed meaning in English. Originally, the term meant the state or condition -ship of having worth.Originally, that’s all it meant: worship = worth + -ship. It meant the same as the contemporary English word “worthiness” with its verb form meaning, “to acknowledge worth”. As such, the word could be applied in all sorts of ways, some of which survive today but are very rare.

The original Catholic Encyclopedia, which was written a hundred years ago, reflects some of the old way of using the word. In twenty-first century America, though, using the word “worship” to refer to anything other than the honor due to God would be very confusing to a normal speaker of colloquial English.

via National Catholic Register Blogs: “Hey, Your Worship. I’m Only Trying To Help.”.