God asked the priests to repent first

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. 


.

More pro-abortion advocacy from a Development and Peace partner

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. 


.

Obama and the Nobel Peace Prize? You gotta be kidding

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.

.

McGill students humiliate themselves by denying free speech

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.

Canadian bishops being too self-flattering over Lahey scandal?

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.

Exclusive: Father Rosica approval rating under 20%

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. 

Thanks again, Archbishop Prendergast

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 ball is in your court, your Graces

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.

CCCB Declines Dialogue with LifeSite

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. 

Vatican Archbishop clarifies Catholic teachings on life-issues, politicians and witnessing to Truth

Archbishop Raymond Burke is the Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. This is a position analogous to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. After the Pope, Burke holds the highest judicial office in the Roman Catholic Church. His statements carry a lot of weight. We should pay attention.

Please read his thought provoking piece here.  Some interesting quotes (but you should read the whole article):

One of the ironies of the present situation is that the person who experiences scandal at the gravely sinful public actions of a fellow Catholic is accused of a lack of charity and of causing division within the unity of the Church.

 (...)

A unity which is not founded on the truth of the moral law is not the unity of the Church. The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth with love. The person who experiences scandal at public actions of Catholics, which are gravely contrary to the moral law, not only does not destroy unity but invites the Church to repair what is clearly a serious breach in Her life. Were he not to experience scandal at the public support of attacks on human life and the family, his conscience would be uninformed or dulled about the most sacred realities.

(...)

For Christians, the acceptance of others who are not of the Christian faith is not a matter of tolerance, but of love which adheres to the truths of the faith while respecting the beliefs of those who are not Christian, as long as those beliefs are coherent with the natural moral law, that is, coherent with the respect for the "inalienable rights" with which God has endowed every man. Christian love does not have its foundation in blind tolerance of others and of what they think and say and do, but rather in the profound knowledge of others and their beliefs, and the honest acknowledgment of differences of belief, especially in what may compromise the life of the nation.

(...)

We find self-professed Catholics, for example, who sustain and support the right of a woman to procure the death of the infant in her womb, or the right of two persons of the same sex to the recognition which the State gives to a man and a woman who have entered into marriage. It is not possible to be a practicing Catholic and to conduct oneself politically in this manner.

(...)

But there is also true scandal, that is, the leading of others, by our words, actions and failures to act, into confusion and error, and, therefore, into sin. Our Lord was unequivocal in his condemnation of those who would confuse or lead others into sin by their actions. In teaching His disciples about temptations, He declared:

Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin (Lk 17:1-2).

It is clear that Our Lord taught as a primary responsibility, with the gravest of consequences, the avoidance of scandal, namely, of any act or failure to act which could lead another into sin. Our Lord's words are nothing less than vehement.

(...)

The perennial discipline of the Church, for that reason among other reasons, has prohibited the giving of Holy Communion and the granting of a Church funeral to those who persist, after admonition, in the grave violation of the moral law (Code of Canon Law, cann. 915; and 1184, § 1, 3º). It is said that these disciplines which the Church has consistently observed down the centuries presume to pass a judgment on the eternal salvation of a soul, which belongs to God alone, and, therefore, should be abandoned. On the contrary, these disciplines are not a judgment on the eternal salvation of the soul in question. They are simply the acknowledgment of an objective truth, namely, that the public actions of the soul are in violation of the moral law, to his own grave harm and to the grave harm of all who are confused or led into error by his actions. The Church confides every soul to the mercy of God, which is great beyond all our imagining, but that does not excuse her from proclaiming the truth of the moral law, also by applying her age-old disciplines, for the sake of the salvation of all.

Antigonish bishop expected to surrender to police on child pornography charges

Some people refuse to believe that our clergy are dissenting from Church teaching.  But gradually, the truth comes out.

Read the story from the Catholic Register.

Lord, help us!  Please pray for our clergy.

The Catholic Church's Salvation: Tell it Like it Is

A great article by Suzanne Fortin highlighting the core of the problem with the Catholic Church in Canada and our bishops. Here is a key excerpt:

But the modernistic dissent doesn’t end at abortion. The weak response on the pro-life issue is symptomatic of the widespread reluctance to abide by and preach rudimentary Catholic philosophical beliefs, such as:

  • The ends do not justify the means.
  • The order of creation (e.g. men and women are complementary).
  • The hierarchy of truths.
  • The principal of non-contradiction.
  • Natural Truth can be known by reason alone.
  • The intrinsic evil of certain acts, and how they must always be rejected.

This has resulted in church elites distorting Catholic moral doctrine and sanctioning things like:

  • Inductions for post-viability fetuses who are terminally ill.
  • Legal recognition for same-sex unions.
  • Leaving the issue of contraception up to “one’s own conscience.”
  • Treating issues like the environment and poverty as equally important
    to fetal rights.

Read the whole article here.

.

Canadian Bishops ask dissenter to give them inspiration

Have you heard?  The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) has invited a well-known dissenting theologian to give two talks at their annual plenary meeting in Cornwall in October. His name is Richard Gaillardetz.



You will find the details of his dissent in this excellent post by John Pacheco and additional details in this article by LifeSiteNews.com.  Here's a brief summary of his "credentials". 

• He says it's okay for couples to co-habitate before marriage and to use contraception if their  conscience doesn't complain (sounds Winnipeg-Statement-ish)
  
• The ordination of women is okay.
• He teaches a distorted version of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
  
• Public revelation by God continues today.
• His respect for life is very suspect since he's part of President Obama's "Catholic Advisory Board," which the Catholic Civil Rights League said does not have a single member that agrees with Church teaching on life issues.
  
• He wonders whether the concept of divine revelation might be extended to the Islamic or Hindu scriptures (!!!!)

Moreover, his view of the Magisterium and the infallibility of Church teaching is extremely confused:

1.  It's possible for the Magisterium to err in matters of faith and morals. 
2.  He believes that an article of Faith can become tentative if it becomes “controversial."
3.  The degree of “reception” of Church teaching by the faithful is a “sign” of its infallibility.
4.  He says that the consensus of theologians is the determining factor for the discernment of the infallibility of the Magisterium.
5.  The obstinate denial of a definitive doctrine would not necessarily place one outside the Roman Catholic communion (very self-serving, don't you think?)

Does it disturb you that the CCCB would invite this man to give two lectures at their plenary?  What kind of message does it send to the faithful?  What does it tell you about the bishops?

If the CCCB invited him, they clearly don't object to his dissenting views.  Actually, it makes a lot of sense to me.  You see, the CCCB is mostly composed of dissenters.  We've observed this for many decades.  Tragic, but true.  

Of course, not all bishops are dissenters.  We have some very good bishops in this country.  However, they are few and far between.  Unfortunately, their minority status means that the overall direction of the CCCB is decided by the majority of dissenters. 

Gaillardetz brings a sense of legitimacy to the dissenting views of the CCCB majority, like a comforting reassurance that someone else thinks like them. 

The fact that virtually all Canadian bishops dissented from Humanae Vitae in writing is entirely consistent with Gaillardetz's point #1 above, namely that the Magisterium can make mistakes and therefore that the bishops don't have to follow the Pope.  This is especially true for controversial issues such as contraception, which was the main point of the dissent of the Canadian bishops more than 40 years ago.  Abortion is also quickly becoming optional teaching, as we've learned from the Development and Peace scandal and the Fr. Rosica rampage.  So Gaillardetz's view on #2 is also consistent with the CCCB's actions. 

Point #3 is also very useful for dissenters because they are well aware that most Catholics approve of contraception. Therefore, they like Gaillardetz's theory that a rejection of Church teaching by the faithful is a sign that that teaching was not infallible. It's like giving the faithful a special veto power over the Magisterium.

Point #4 gives the bishops their own special veto power over the Magisterium, since many bishops are theologians too.  Isn't that handy?

Finally, #5 makes dissenters feel comforted that they are not excluded from communion with the Roman Catholic Church for the extreme positions they've taken in points #1 to #4.

So, you see, it all makes sense. In these difficult times, where dissenting bishops are being questioned by Catholics who want to remain faithful to Rome, they have called upon a fellow dissenter for some reassurance.

Sadly, we rarely hear the good bishops speaking up these days.  They must feel very frustrated.  We must pray for their perseverance.  I hope they will gain the courage and strength to break their silence. 

That's the tragic state of our Church today. Please pray for our bishops.

Two good moves against euthanasia by Canadian bishops

Today, I'm happy to report some pro-life leadership on the part of Canadian bishops.

On September 21, the president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), Archbishop James Weisgerber, released a letter asking MPs and Canadians to oppose the proposed legislation to legalize euthanasia (bill C-484).  

Earlier in September, the Archbishop of Edmonton, Richard Smith, launched an initiative to urge parishioners to get involved in opposing the bill.

Bravo!  These are two very praiseworthy moves on the part of our bishops.  We need to give them our support and encourage them to provide strong leadership in the future.

The Mass: a sacrifice or a celebration?

There seems to be some confusion as to the nature of the Mass. Some people claim that it is a sacrifice, re-presenting the death of Christ on the Cross.  Therefore, we should be very serious at Mass and show no signs of joy.  Other say that it is a celebration of Christ's resurrection and that the Mass should have a more festive mood.  So what's the answer?  What does the Church teach?

In a nutshell:  all of the above.

The holy Mass is a sacrifice and a celebration. We commemorate the Passion and resurrection of Christ. 

The holy Mass is certainly a great mystery. Many volumes could be written about it and would never exhaust its richness. The Church and the Saints have written extensively about it over the centuries. I will not attempt to survey the entire literature of what has been said about the Mass. I will limit myself to a very short quote from paragraph 1330 of the Catechism, which provides the basic answer to the question posed in the title of this post. 

Paragraph 1330 is situated in a section of the Catechism that enumerates the various names given to this wonderful sacrament. In paragraph 1330, we read the following (italics are in the original text, additional emphasis added by me):

"[This Sacrament is called] the memorial of the Lord's Passion and Resurrection.

The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church's offering. The terms holy sacrifice of the Mass, "sacrifice of praise," spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice are also used, since it completes and surpasses all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant.

The Holy and Divine Liturgy, because the Church's whole liturgy finds its center and most intense expression in the celebration of this sacrament; in the same sense we also call its celebration the Sacred Mysteries. We speak of the Most Blessed Sacrament because it is the Sacrament of sacraments. The Eucharistic species reserved in the tabernacle are designated by this same name."

As you can see, the Church has answered our question quite succinctly in paragraph 1330.  

I encourage you to read the entire section on the mass as explained in paragraphs 1322 to 1419 of the Catechism.


.

Novena for the conversion of Fr. Rosica: Day 1

Today is the first day of our novena for the conversion of Fr. Rosica.  Please join us.

Strong witness from COLF

The Canadian Organization for Life and Family (COLF), a group co-founded by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus, has come out with a strong pro-life and pro-family document.  Read here. 

Bravo!  COLF has been a strong defender of Catholic values over the years. 

Thank you Archbishop Prendergast

We are truly blessed in Ottawa to have an Archbishop who is in unity with the Church's teachings and who is not afraid to publicly witness to his faith.  Praise God!

Yesterday, Archbishop Prendergast participated in the 40 Days for Life campaign by spending some time praying in front of the Morgentaler abortion facility in Ottawa. He also took some time to affirm and encourage the other people who were keeping vigil there. Read more here.

Finally, a bishop who is not content with simply preaching from the pulpit, but who will also go into the trenches and stand shoulder to shoulder with the faithful on the front lines.

Thank you Archbishop Prendergast! May God bless you abundantly! And may you carry this zeal to the plenary of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops in October, in order to encourage your brothers to reform Development and Peace and fix the other numerous problems within the Canadian Church.

Follow up on Fr. Rosica's claims

Something bothered me about Fr. Rosica's most recent lambasting of pro-lifers on Catholic Channel of Sirius Radio.  Let me quote from the transcript:

"I had many people wishing my death, my demise, destruction and everything else. And I said to myself “And you are talking about life.” It has been a real lesson for all of us. We were floored at the hundreds of messages that breathed hate and wished death and also people delighting that Senator Kennedy would be in hell. I think that says something about we have more education to do."

First of all, if there really were people out there threatening Fr. Rosica or his staff, you should smarten up and repent!.  That type of behaviour is despicable and totally unacceptable.  No matter how profound our disagreement with Fr. Rosica, violence is not a solution.

That being said, I question the authenticity of Fr. Rosica's claim.  You see, he didn't provide any evidence.  He said there were "hundreds of messages".  Surely he could publish a few to illustrate his point?  I would be the first to condemn any threats against him.  In fact, the police could use IP addresses to track down these people and prosecute them for death threats, which is a serious crime.  But Fr. Rosica presents no evidence.  (John Pacheco and LifeSite always present concrete evidence before they make any claims).


Also, during the same interview on the Catholic Channel, he said this about LifeSite:

"I will say very publicly to those listening - it is not credible, it does not speak for the Church, it is not ethical, it is not honest... For the 1/10 of kernel of truth that they purport to uncover (and there is truth in what they do) 9/10 is exaggeration." 

That's a very personal attack.  Yet once again, he presents no evidence.  If 90% of the LifeSite coverage is exaggeration and is not honest, surely he could find plenty of examples, right?  So where's the evidence, Father?

Lack of evidence... Hmmm... Those words sound familiar...  Ah yes, we witnessed the same chronic illness this summer with the CCCB's denials of the Development and Peace (D&P) scandal.  The bishops' report just stated that they were innocent, without addressing a single item of the mountain of evidence presented against D&P's partners. That doesn't make for a very convincing argument. Without evidence, it's just a lot of hot air.

In fact, making such bold accusations against LifeSite, without any facts to back it up, could very well constitute defamation and libel. Father Rosica is lucky that LifeSite will not engage in a lawsuit against another member of the Church, out of obedience to the wise advice of St. Paul to avoid taking Church disputes before secular authorites (see1 Cor 6: 1-11).

Lastly, Fr. Rosica accuses LifeSite of doing the work of Satan.  LifeSite has good company, because that's what the scribes and Pharisees used to say of Jesus:  

"But some of them said, 'He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of the demons.'" (Luke 11:15)

Jesus had a good comeback for the scribes:  

"If I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore will they be your judges."  (Luke 11:19)

To paraphrase:  If LifeSite is doing the work of Satan, then what is Salt and Light doing?

That settles it.  Let me pull out my cheque book and make a donation to LifeSite right away.


.

Novena for the conversion of Fr. Rosica

"As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live." (Ez 33:11)

As I explained in an earlier post, Fr. Rosica has deviated from sound Catholic teaching.  I would like to start a novena for him on Saturday, September 26, the feast of the Canadian martyrs.  The novena will run until Sunday, October 4, the feast of St. Francis of Assisi.  The Lord said to St. Francis:  "Rebuild my Church, which you see is falling into ruin."  That's exactly what we're hoping to do with this novena.

Please join me in saying one Our Father, one Hail Mary and one Glory Be for the next nine days for the conversion of Fr. Rosica.  He is a very gifted man.  We need him to be fully on the side of Truth if we are to bring about a Culture of Life in Canada. I want to see him in Heaven some day, assuming that I get in.

The Father Rosica controversy

Rather Thomas Rosica, who heads the TV network Salt and Light, has recently caused quite a stir in the pro-life community.  Here is a brief summary of what happened.

Following the funeral of Ted Kennedy, in which the former senator was portrayed as a hero and a faithful Catholic despite his pro-abortion and anti-family views, many pro-lifers felt outraged that such an ardent promoter of the culture of death would receive such a glorious public Catholic funeral.  Some people (unwisely) contacted Salt and Light asking them to provide negative coverage of the event.
Instead, they got a series of aggressive and vitriolic attacks from Fr. Rosica against the pro-life movement in general and LifeSiteNews.com in particular. Father Rosica took exception to the idea that pro-life Catholics could use strong language to criticize other Catholics. Father Rosica presented these criticisms as being uncharitable, divisive, unmerciful and non-Christian.

To illustrate, I've compiled the insults that have been hurled at pro-lifers by Father Rosica in person or through his website.  Note: these criticisms are not solely addressed to LifeSite; the vast majority are directed towards the pro-life movement in general.

• [LifeSite] is doing "the work of Satan" 
• "something is terribly wrong in the pro-life movement." 
• "Civility, charity, mercy and politeness seem to have dropped out of the pro-life lexicon."
• "Their words and actions vitiate their efforts in favor of life." 
• "not agents of life, but of division, destruction, hatred, vitriol, judgment and violence." 
• "I question whether or not they belong to the Catholic Church. Are such people Catholic?"
  
• "make the Church and our efforts for life look ridiculous and terribly anti-Christian."
• "deep-seated anger and hostility"
• "Through vicious attacks launched on blogs, a new form of self-righteousness, condemnation and gnosticism reveals authors who behave as little children bullying one another around in schoolyards- casting stones, calling names, and wreaking havoc in the Church today!"
• "Sowing seeds of hatred and division are not the work of those who wish to build a culture of life."
• "contribute to the misery and division within the world and the Church"
• "destroy and kill others along the way."
• "very strong, antagonist approach"
• "hostility towards women who would choose abortion"
• "pushing their ideals onto the rest of society"
• "judgmental instead of helpful and supportive"
• "radical" 
• "cruel and hateful individuals"
• "so shrill, so angry and judgmental"
• "ugly and threatening" 
• "this is how the devil triumphs"
• "character assassination"
• "[LifeSite] is not credible, it does not speak for the Church, it is not ethical, it is not honest"
• "wreaking division and havoc"
• [LifeSite] is not an authentic instrument at the service of unity and at the service of the Church. It is causing division. For the 1/10 of kernel of truth that they purport to uncover (and there is truth in what they do) 9/10 is exaggeration."
• "[LifeSite] is bombastic, it is derisive and it is divisive."
• "pit people against each other"
• "wanting to set up a parallel Church"
• "cast aspersions or to dismiss or discredit what the bishops are trying to do" 

I feel so despised, disdained and derided.

Read here for the Vatican's view of how the Kennedy funeral should have been handled.  You'll see that it confirms everything that pro-lifers have been saying and contradicts what Fr. Rosica has been saying.

The oddest thing about this episode, is that Father Rosica did exactly what he was reproaching pro-lifers:  he openly criticized his fellow Catholics and he used such seething and inflammatory language as I have never seen used against pro-lifers, not even by the pro-abortion lobby.

This proves an important point:  his criticism of criticism is a hoax, a smoke-screen.  He himself realizes that constructive criticism is an integral part of Catholicism.  It's technically called "admonishing the sinner" and it is essential for the salvation of souls that have gone astray.

Unfortunately, Fr. Rosica has a distorted view of Catholicism.  But you will rarely hear him saying something overtly anti-Catholic.  He has a history of saying the right things (e.g. "I am pro-life"), but he tends to be unwilling to "take up his cross" by putting his reputation on the line in defending Church teachings.  For example, when he interviewed Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, an infamous pro-abortion "Catholic", he remained silent while McGuinty expressed his disagreement with Church teaching on same-sex marriage. All this was broadcast on Salt and Light TV.  Is that Fr. Rosica's idea of good Catholic programming?  Contrast this to the beautiful witness of John Pacheco and David MacDonald who, in the last two elections, ran against Dalton McGuinty and publicly rebuked him for his anti-family positions.  Now that's heroic virtue.

To read more about the Fr. Rosica controversy, please visit Socon or Bust here and here. 

I agree with Fr. Rosica on one important point:  the Church is indeed divided.  The fracture is between those who want to follow the Vatican and those who have invented a lovey-dovey Catholicism (such as Fr. Rosica) where the primary goal is to never contradict anybody, even if they're dead wrong and rotting in mortal sin. Passivity can lead to complacency, which is often abused by ill-willed politicians and others.

This isn't about pro-lifers being self-righteous.  Just open up the Bible or the Catechism, or listen to the Vatican's statements.  We're simply trying to obey the Truth as it was handed down over the centuries, not invent our own path.

Please pray for Fr. Rosica. 

Good witness by Québec Bishops

Bishops in Canada have recently been receiving a lot of flak for their lack of leadership. However, this time we would like to congratulate the Bishops of Québec for taking a firm stand against the Québec government's religious education program.

It is very encouraging to see bishops stand up for the truth despite the risk of public humiliation.  Keep in mind that Québec has become arguably the most anti-Catholic society in the Western world. The church has many enemies in Québec and very few allies. The faithful are lukewarm. The churches are empty. The province has become pluralistic and Montréal is a very cosmopolitan city.

Despite these challenges, the bishops of Québec have taken the bold step of publicly criticizing the government's very liberal education program.

Bravo! We need more bold witness like this from our bishops.it's one thing to preach from the pulpit to the converted. It is quite another to have the guts to stand up in public and risk ridicule. The Québec bishops have chosen the more difficult path. May the Lord bless them abundantly for it.

Read the full story here.

The Eucharist is the litmus test

The most precious thing in the Catholic Church is the Eucharist.  Why?  Because it is God Himself.  It doesn't get any bigger than that.

As John Pacheco points out, a clergyman's behaviour towards the Eucharist is a good litmus test as to whether he is following the true Faith and the true Church.  

Do not trust clergymen who won't deny communion to pro-abortion politicians.  Do not trust clergymen who don't show proper reverence for the Eucharist.  They will invoke clever excuses, such as not wanting to be judgmental or harsh.  Don't buy it.  That's a cop-out.

If they won't stand up for something so fundamental and primordial as the Eucharist, you can rest assured that there are other errors in their teachings.  Be on your guard.

Similarly, make sure to affirm and encourage those faithful clergymen who devoutly worship and venerate Jesus Christ present in the Eucharist.  They are beacons of hope in world gone mad.  Support them and love them.  You have found a precious jewel.

Archbishop Naumann understands

Thank you Archbishop Naumann for forbidding a pro-abortion "Catholic" politician from receiving communion.  It's the right thing to do.

The politician in question, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, says that being denied communion was very painful.  Well, Ms. Sebelius, the whole point of discipline is to instruct and to exhort for conversion.  If it wasn't painful, it wouldn't be effective discipline.  Now that the Archbishop has got your attention, it's time to rethink your life.

Read about it here.