skip to main |
skip to sidebar
You can learn so much from a good homily. But it requires that you pay attention. It also requires that Father makes an effort to open up the Scriptures to the faithful.
On Friday, the first reading at the Mass was from Joel 1:13-15; 2:1-2. It goes like this:
Put on sackcloth and lament, you priests; wail, you ministers of the altar. Come, pass the night in sackcloth, you ministers of my God! Grain-offering and drink-offering are withheld from the house of your God. Sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly. Gather the elders and all the inhabitants of the land to the house of the Lord your God, and cry out to the Lord. Alas for the day! For the day of the Lord is near, and as destruction from the Almighty it comes.
Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, for the day of the Lord is coming, it is near— a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and thick darkness! Like blackness spread upon the mountains a great and powerful army comes; their like has never been from of old, or will be again after them in ages to come.
Not exactly a very cheery passage, but the Church put it in the readings for a reason.
As it happened so many times in the Old Testament, the people had strayed far away from God and had to repent. In the homily, the priest pointed out that God asks the priests to repent first. This is interesting. Why the priests first? Because as leaders of the people, the priests have a huge influence on the morals of the people. As go the priests, so goes the people.
I thought this was very relevant to our current situation, where the clergy needs to get their act together. It shows that our calls for the repentance of the bishops are very biblical and very well founded. This growing movement is not rooted in some fanaticism. It is firmly grounded in Holy Scripture.
.
LifeSiteNews.com reports that one of Development and Peace's (D&P) Mexican partners has once again demonstrated its pro-abortion activism. The organization is providing us with yet another piece of incontrovertible evidence of how our hard-earned donations are being put to work for the cause of evil. I hope the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) is paying attention.
After reading the LifeSiteNews coverage, I decided to go directly to the source, i.e. the website of the organization in question. They call themselves "Todos los Derechos Para Todos y Todas", which means "All Rights for Everyone." On their website, they just posted a document criticizing the Mexican govenrment's record on human rights. On page 10, in the sub-section called "Fighing discrimination and the rights of specific groups - Women", they denounce the lack of abortion services in some Mexican states:
"The implementation of the Official Mexican Norm 046-SSA2-200519 regulates the provision of medical services to women who are victims of sexual violence and includes the procedures that health care institutions must follow to provide interruption of pregnancy services when this [the pregnancy] is the result of a rape. The implementation of the Norm has been impeded now that reforms in the constitutions of 12 federal entities have been produced, which protect the unborn in their local constitutions."
In other words, the implementation of reforms to protect the unborn in 12 states is a violation of women's rights. This is typical rhetoric from the pro-abortion side. The report goes on to lament some instances of women not being allowed to have abortions in Guanajuato.
This is one of the "Original Five" Mexican groups that was first exposed way back in March 2009. The CCCB "investigated" this groups and found them to not be promoting abortion. I guess the CCCB didn't look too hard, eh?. What does that tell you about the CCCB's rigour? There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Now let me re-iterate that this is not some obscure secret document that LifeSite obtained in a back-alley meeting with some anonymous informant named "Deep Throat." This report is on the Internet for the whole world to see. Please click on the link and see for yourself. So don't let anybody deceive you into thinking that the evidence is not conclusive. IT IS UNDENIABLE. If anybody tries to deny it, including your local bishop, send them the link: http://www.redtdt.org.mx/media/descargables/observacionesEPUespanol.pdf
When LifeSite contacted the CCCB to explain this new evidence, they were told that the CCCB is conducting an ongoing review of Development and Peace. This is definitely good news. The fact that this review was not announced publicly leads me to believe that it isn't simply a PR move and that it might have been prompted by some outraged bishops who really care about what's going on. Let's pray that they will actually conduct the review with their eyes open this time and that the obvious will be acknowledged.
.
How can a rookie be inducted into the Hall of Fame before his rookie season is over? Obama has been in power for only 9 months. Moreover, did you know that candidates for the prize had to be submitted to the Nobel committee by February 1st? That's right, only two weeks after Obama was inaugurated as President.
There is clearly an agenda at work here, where the lefties are publicly endorsing each other like a clique. I normally wouldn't have a problem with that, except that we're dealing with the Nobel Peace Prize here. There is a huge symbolism attached to any Nobel Prize. It's like a lifetime achievement award that humanity grants to its most distinguished members. I find it very distasteful that they are manipulating this prize for politican reasons.
Distasteful isn't strong enough. I want to spit.
What's next? Will Obama be granted an honorary Gold Medal at the 100 metre dash?
Keep in mind that John Paul II, who worked so hard for peace, including helping bring down communism, was never awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Blessed Mother Teresa won the prize 1979. If you put Obama and Blessed Mother Teresa on opposite sides of a "peace" scale, which way do you think it would tilt? Is any comparison even possible?
Of note, she is quoted as saying: "the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion." Very well said. In my book, that would rule out Obama big-time.
.
Pro-abortion students at McGill University showed the true colours of the abortion movement by trying to deny authentic free speech to a pro-life speaker. As the pro-lifer was trying to give a presentation, these students invaded the speaking area and drowned out the speaker with shouts and songs. So much for "choice". They wouldn't even let the other side speak. Watch the spectacle here. Honestly, they look like school children and not adults.
In recent years, we've seen pro-abortion students at several other Canadian universities try to silence pro-lifers through coercion, so this behaviour is not surprising.
However, there is an original twist to this incident. To their credit, McGill University authorities realized that freedom of speech is essential at a university, so they called the police. A representative of the university addressed the protesters at about 3:45 of the video and asked them to let the speaker make his presentation. The police officer then politely but firmly laid down the law at about 4:15, notably by telling them that if they didn't leave in 5 minutes they would be arrested and removed.
Some students chose not to obey and the police removed them. However, the police eventually left, even though many students kept disrupting the presentation. The cops didn't fulfill their obligations fully in this case. As for the university's own security guards, they were completely useless. They were unwilling to do anything. So what's the point of these guards?
I feel sorry for these students. Their reputations are forever tarnished. If you were an employer, would you hire a person who doesn't believe in freedom of speech and decency? Do you think they would be conducive to a respectful and constructive work environment? As a manager who has done dozens of interviews over the years, I tell you that you shouldn't touch such a person with a 10-foot pole.
As for the police, I'm disappointed (but not surprised) that they chickened out.
The pro-aborts have done us a favour by showing how intolerant they are and how unsympathetic their position is. If they held a legitimate position that could be defended with reasonable arguments, do you think they'd behave like this? They know that they just can't rival pro-life arguments. They're afraid that the truth be known because then the gravity of abortion will be exposed. Consequently, their only hope is to silence debate.
As I've said before, student associations should not be involved in politics. That's not their purpose. If students like political life, they should do it outside the university like the rest of us.
Please pray for the conversion of these students.
I read this article in the Globe and Mail today entitled "Church vocal in face of scandal". Here are some quotes that caught my attention.
This time – with the disgrace of former bishop Raymond Lahey drenching the news media – the hierarchy of Canada's Roman Catholic Church has not stayed silent.
In what one senior church official on Thursday called a light-years' shift from a generation ago, bishops have preached in their cathedrals and written open letters about their anger and disgust with Rev. Lahey and the child pornography charges he faces.
The national Catholic television station Salt and Light TV has devoted much of its blog to the story. And the Pope's representative in Canada this week told theology students in Toronto that the Canadian church had been wounded.
(...)
The Canadian bishops were the first in the world to institute protocols, Father Rosica said. It placed them far ahead of the U.S. church and fostered a climate of transparency, rigorous investigation and instant suspension for suspected wrongdoing. Except, as the papal nuncio told theology students, the destructive power of sin can't be underestimated.
First of all, I'm very happy that the Canadian bishops have been so vocal in denouncing Archbishop Lahey's actions. This is another sad episode in the history of our Church, but the truth must be known and dealt with. There would have been no point in denying it or minimizing it.
What bugs me is that the bishops have started patting themselves on the back over how awesomely they have dealt with this issue. Their tone is quite triumphalist, at a time when there is nothing to be triumphant about. We just caught an Archbishop using child porn! Not to mention that it wasn't the bishops who brought this man to justice, but rather the police who did an excellent job. I think the bishops' attitude is severely misplaced and very premature. New facts about this case are still emerging. This is a time of repentance, investigation and accountability, not a time for self-flattery.
This is particularly true in light of the new revelations that Lahey's child pornography behaviour was known by another priest and bishop 20 years ago!
Indeed, in the National Post, we read that Father Kevin Molloy learned about Lahey's behaviour in 1989. He confronted Lahey and told him to stop these sinful deeds. He also alerted Archbishop Alphonsus Penney, who was the proper ecclesiastical authority at the time. Archbishop Penney has not spoken to the media yet concerning the Lahey scandal, so we don't know exactly what measures, if any, were taken against Lahey in 1989. But one thing is certain: Lahey's child pornography habits were obviously not overcome at that time and it would have been horribly imprudent to let him continue his ministry in that condition. Archbishop Penney owes us a darn good explanation. Until then, the bishops would be advised to hold off on their self-congratulation.
The same article in the National Post says that Lahey allegedly was in the habit of bringing some boys into his home on weekends, back in the 1980s. That's where some boys found the child pornography.
This raises the obvious question: why was Lahey allowed to continue in his functions for another 20 years after being exposed?
Keep in mind that 1989 was not so long ago. Our understanding of sexual deviancy had improved a lot since the 1950s or 1960s. Disciplinary actions for sexual deviancy in the clergy should have been stronger.
So while normal Catholics are still in shock and seeking accountability, the bishops are congratulating themselves in one of Canada's national newspapers. How does that make you feel? I'm concerned that the Canadian bishops are more worried about their public appearance over this scandal than in addressing the substance of the issue. Dealing with the issue of sexual deviancy in the clergy is difficult and requires great sacrifice. It's a lot easier to focus on the PR. But we can't let them be content with a PR campaign. We need some answers and accountability.
Reading the quote from Fr. Rosica above, you'd almost think that the Canadian Church has it all figured out and that sexual scandals are a thing of the past. Well, no. The fact that an Archbishop can still fall through the cracks tells me that there is much work left to do. We need the bishops to tell us what concrete measures they will implement to prevent this from happening again.
Is this a sign of more things to come from the CCCB's revamped communications strategy? I sure hope not.
Please pray for our bishops.
Many of you are aware of the Father Rosica scandal that erupted over the past month. You can read about it here.
Catholic Dialogue was interested in getting a broader sense of how Internet-literate Catholics were reacting to Fr. Rosica's unexplainable outburst. To do this, we conducted extensive research on the Internet in order to see which way the wind was blowing. Today, we are presenting these exclusive results.
Clearly, Fr. Rosica is facing serious headwinds in the court of public opinion.
The research revealed that 80.5% of all the articles that expressed an opinion on the controversy were opposed to Fr. Rosica's position, while only 19.5% supported him. The methodology encompasses all online articles published on the Fr. Rosica controversy, but excludes "comments" posted on blogs, since these can easily be manipulated.
In case you're wondering, articles by LifeSiteNews represented a very small fraction of the articles published on this issue. Excluding articles from LifeSiteNews, the disapproval rating for Fr. Rosica is still 79.8%.
The disapproval of Fr. Rosica is widespread and broad-based. It includes both men and women, laity and clergy. They quote Church documents and Doctors of the Church. They refer to authoritative statements by Vatican officials. By all accounts, these are educated Catholics, well-versed in Scripture and the Catechism. They do not seek personal glory or satisfaction. They do not have any axe to grind. They are merely seeking to denounce errors and injustices so that the Church in Canada may once again submit to Rome's authority.
In theological terms, we'd say that the sensus fidelium is enabling the faithful to participate in Christ's prophetic office by denouncing error. In layman's terms, we'd say that Fr. Rosica's behaviour doesn't pass the sniff test.
This doesn't bode well for Salt and Light's ratings. But it is certainly good news in the battle for the soul of the Church, since the Internet reaches such a broader audience than a satellite cable network.
The winds of change are blowing. There is a growing sense that too many clergymen are lukewarm or outright dissenters. The discontent among the faithful will be a powerful instrument to help the Church return to authentic Magisterial teaching in union with the Vatican.
Please pray for Fr. Rosica and all clergy.
Just a quick note to thank Archbishop Prendergast of Ottawa for participating in the Life Chain this past weekend.
We admire your dedication to the cause of life and we rejoice to have you stand by our side on the front lines.
May God bless you!
The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) caused quite a stir when they invited a dissenter to give two talks at their plenary assembly from October 19 to 23. The outcry was so bad, that the CCCB asked the theologian in question, Richard Gaillardetz, to publicly explain the controversial views that he holds.
In a series of posts, starting with this one, John Pacheco convincingly exposes Gaillardetz's errors and his obscure attempts at deceiving people that he is a faithful Catholic. Gaillardetz's article was merely damage control, and Pacheco was not deceived. He called upon the expertise of two renowned theologians who confirm that Gaillardetz is indeed in defiance of Church teaching in many respects.
So, dear bishops, the ball is in your court. Why have you invited this man? Will you un-invite him in order to avoid confusing and scandalizing the faithful?
Dear readers: if you care about your Church and your bishops, you should ask your local bishop why they are inviting a dissenter to give them two lectures.
Disturbing news from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB). It goes like this:
1. In the spring of 2009, LifeSite and many other pro-life groups uncovered the names of about 40 pro-abortion groups in developing countries being funded by Development and Peace, the CCCB's official charity.
2. In June 2009, the CCCB issued a whitewash denial without addressing any evidence. They also chastized LifeSite for not engaging in "dialogue" with the bishops, even though LifeSite had sought to discuss the evidence with the bishops and Development and Peace before going public (they were brushed aside).
3. In July 2009, in response to the CCCB's request for more "dialogue", LifeSite offered to make a 15-minute presentation to the bishops at their plenary in mid-October.
4. On September 25, the CCCB denied LifeSite's request.
Now tell me, dear reader, how is one supposed to react to this apparently false overture for dialogue on the part of the CCCB?
The episcopacy is a fundamental institution of the Catholic Church. We cannot survive without it. However, many of the current incumbents aren't doing their job. We desperately need them to return to Rome's teaching. There are good bishops in this country. We need them to speak up, lest the flock be totally disoriented and lost.
