Catholics to begin "commemorating" HERESIES- God forgive us this blasphemy!

   My personal opposition to “From Conflict to Communion: Lutheran-Catholic Commemoration of the Reformation” will read like a rant to many.  Hopefully a few others out there will agree and perhaps some Catholic clergy out there can correct me if they feel I’ve gotten something wrong here.  I welcome the comments of all, whether we agree, I would still really like to hear other opinions.  

   Now I know my non-Catholic friends (yes, I do have them) are going to hate what I have to say, but I am speaking as the Catholic I am about my faith and views on how my Catholic faith is operating in today’s world.  So if you don’t like it, don’t read it. I have no intentions of shutting my mouth for fear of offending anyone with my Catholic faith.

    This “commemoration” is to take place in 2017 for the 500^th anniversary since Luther divided Christ’s Holy Catholic Church and ripped people away from the True Faith and Sacraments – AKA “The Reformation”.  (If you haven’t seen this story, read it first here:  http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/after-five-centuries-of-division-catholics-and-lutherans-consider-their-com/  - I’ll wait.)  

OK, ready for my rant?

    The Reformation is a great day of celebration (yes it is a CELEBRATION, not merely a “commemoration” in the Lutheran denomination – the Bishops can play word games all they want, they are not fooling anyone, certainly not God) for many protestant denominations- especially the Lutheran’s who view Luther as the savior of Christianity (not Christians- there is a difference) from the evils of the Catholic Church and Her popes.   Luther HATED the Catholic Church AND her teachings and the Sacraments.  This is clear from his own writings…

Martin Luther’s letter to Pope Leo X (in part)

Luther writes: “Your see, however, which is called the Court of Rome, and which neither you nor any man can deny to be more corrupt than any Babylon or Sodom, and quite, as I believe, of a lost, desperate, and hopeless impiety, this I have verily abominated, and have felt indignant that the people of Christ should be cheated under your name and the pretext of the Church of Rome; and so I have resisted, and will resist, as long as the spirit of faith shall live in me. Not that I am striving after impossibilities, or hoping that by my labours alone, against the furious opposition of so many flatterers, any good can be done in that most disordered Babylon; but that I feel myself a debtor to my brethren, and am bound to take thought for them, that fewer of them may be ruined, or that their ruin may be less complete, by the plagues of Rome. For many years now, nothing else has overflowed from Rome into the world--as you are not ignorant--than the laying waste of goods, of bodies, and of souls, and the worst examples of all the worst things. These things are clearer than the light to all men; and the Church of Rome, formerly the most holy of all Churches, has become the most lawless den of thieves, the most shameless of all brothels, the very kingdom of sin, death, and hell; so that not even antichrist, if he were to come, could devise any addition to its wickedness.” [Wittenberg, 6th September, 1520] –

Link: http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/web/cclib-1.html

How does the Lutheran denomination TODAY view the Reformation?  Let’s see…

Rev. Dr. Richard P. Bucher (from- http://www.orlutheran.com/html/whatwas.html ) explains the Lutheran view of the Reformation:  

“God's Reformation of His Church through Martin Luther began as a rediscovery of the main teaching of Christianity, that we are declared righteous (justified) by faith in the cross of Jesus Christ. It is not our righteousness (created by our works, efforts, and obeying God's laws) that saves us; Christ's righteousness saves us. And His righteousness is credited to our account when we believe that He died for us.
Put very simply, Luther's Reformation was a matter of taking this rediscovered Gospel, showing that it was Scriptural, and then reforming the Church by it. Whatever in the Church was found to contradict this Gospel of salvation by grace through faith was to be reformed. Anything else (if it edified) could be retained.Luther's Reformation was concerned with essentials, with the very heart of Christianity. It is for this reason that it swept through Europe and had such amazing results. Without this Reformation, there would have been no salvation, for the Gospel would have remained largely hidden. When we celebrate the Reformation, we are celebrating this rediscovered Gospel that we believe in; and we are celebrating our salvation through Jesus Christ.” [End quote]

(About the author Rev.Dr. Richard P. Bucher: http://www.orlutheran.com/ourpastor.html)

Really?  The Catholic Church was HIDING the Gospel and it was all up to Luther to bring salvation to the world??  That’s what Lutheran’s are taught and believe.  This is why “Reformation Day” is a HUGE celebration in this denomination.  Luther brought back salvation to them? *not!* But that is their belief. So the Catholic Bishops can play with words saying "its not a celebration", but it IS a celebration, it has been for nearly 500 years!  WAKE UP CATHOLICS!  You're being deceived!

Now how does (or did until now) the Catholic Church view the Protestant Reformation?  As a HERESY.

Quote:  “Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines. However, virtually all claim to believe in the teachings of sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone"—the idea that we must use only the Bible when forming our theology) and sola fide ("by faith alone"— the idea that we are justified by faith only). The great diversity of Protestant doctrines stems from the doctrine of private judgment, which denies the infallible authority of the Church and claims that each individual is to interpret Scripture for himself. This idea is rejected in 2 Peter 1:20, where we are told the first rule of Bible interpretation: "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation." A significant feature of this heresy is the attempt to pit the Church "against" the Bible, denying that the magisterium has any infallible authority to teach and interpret Scripture. The doctrine of private judgment has resulted in an enormous number of different denominations. According to The Christian Sourcebook, there are approximately 20-30,000 denominations, with 270 new ones being formed each year. Virtually all of these are Protestant.” [End quote]
Source:  http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-great-heresies

According to Catholic Church teaching & documents the Protestant Reformation is a HERESY! 

Martin Luther burning Pope Leo X's Papal Bull

Now WHY should ANY Catholic want to “commemorate” a HERESY?  

Do Catholics commemorate Gnosticism?  

How about Arianism? NO!  

We do not, for good reason!  Our Church council’s sorted this all out long, long ago but sadly it seems TODAY’s Catholic clergy are either IGNORANT of these facts or flat out ignoring them to the detriment of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church.

HOW can a Catholic bishop ignore what the Church says about ANYONE who denies the Sacraments or rejects any of the Teachings of the Church?

“LET HIM BE ANATHEMA!” cries the Church!

Do the bishops know what “anathema” means? Or WHO the Church calls “anathema”?

From:

THE COUNCIL OF TRENT

Session VII - Celebrated on the third day of March 1547, under Pope Paul III

(Online version: http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/trent7.htm)

Canon 1. If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, or that there are more or less than seven, namely, baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, order and matrimony,[1] or that any one of these seven is not truly and intrinsically a sacrament, let him be anathema. 

Canon 2. If anyone says that these sacraments of the New Law do not differ from the sacraments of the Old Law, except that the ceremonies are different and the external rites are different, let him be anathema. 

Canon 3. If anyone says that these seven sacraments are so equal to each other that one is not for any reason more excellent than the other, let him be anathema. 

Canon 4. If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification,[2] though all are not necessary for each one, let him be anathema. 

Canon 5. If anyone says that these sacraments have been instituted for the nourishment of faith alone, let him be anathema. 

Canon 6. If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer that grace on those who place no obstacles in its way,[3] as though they were only outward signs of grace or justice received through faith and certain marks of Christian profession, whereby among men believers are distinguished from unbelievers, let him be anathema. 

Canon 7. If anyone says that grace, so far as God's part is concerned, is not impaired through the sacraments always and to all men even if they receive them rightly, but only sometimes and to some persons, let him be anathema. 

Canon 8. If anyone says that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema. 

Canon 9. If anyone says that in three sacraments, namely, baptism, confirmation and order, there is not imprinted on the soul a character, that is, a certain spiritual and indelible mark, by reason of which they cannot be repeated,[4] let him be anathema. 

Canon 10. If anyone says that all Christians have the power to administer the word and all the sacraments,[5] let him be anathema. 

Canon 11. If anyone says that in ministers, when they effect and confer the sacraments, there is not required at least the intention of doing what the Church does,[6] let him be anathema. 

Canon 12. If anyone says that a minister who is in mortal sin, though he observes all the essentials that pertain to the effecting or conferring of a sacrament,[7] neither effects nor confers a sacrament, let him be anathema. 

Canon 13. If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the administration of the sacraments, may be despised or omitted by the ministers without sin and at their pleasure, or may be changed by any pastor of the churches to other new ones, let him be anathema.

Catholic Encyclopedia: “Anathema” (means -major excommunication) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm

HOW can a Catholic bishop ignore what the Church says about ANYONE who denies the Sacraments or rejects any of the Teachings of the Church?

I’m not a Catholic clergy, but I know what “anathema” means and what the Council of Trent says, so why don’t the Catholic Bishops and Cardinals know this too?  

My opinion is they DO know it, they just REJECT it.  Unfortunately, I see many (not all) in the Catholic Church today as more concerned with the WORLD, than with the mission Christ left His Church and the work Jesus left for His priesthood.  Preaching the Gospel message and bringing salvation to the lost with the Sacraments through Christ’s Holy Catholic Church.  THAT should be FIRST and foremost ALWAYS.

Dictionary: “Anathema”anathema [əˈnæθəmə]n pl -mas 1. a detested person or thing he is anathema to me2. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) a formal ecclesiastical curse of excommunication or a formal denunciation of a doctrine3. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) the person or thing so cursed4. a strong curse; imprecation
[via Church Latin from Greek: something accursed, dedicated (to evil), from anatithenai to dedicate, from ana- + tithenai to set]

Link: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anathema

Does the Church simply toss out what previous Council’s have to say on such matters?  How about Papal Bulls?  Do Papal Bulls expire from one generation to the next?  

Is Luther and those who follow Luther’s teachings no longer viewed as “anathema” by the Church?  Was there a new Papal Bull for this that I missed?  Was it in the fine print of Vatican II?  How about Pope Leo X’s Papal Bull against Martin Luther AND all those who followed Luther?  Is that history now too?

Pope Leo X’s Papal Bull against Martin Luther – in part – (please read the FULL Bull to fully understand the Church’s position AGAINST the evils of Martin Luther- link: http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/l10exdom.htm)

Quote, in part, Pope Leo X states:  

“With the advice and consent of these our venerable brothers, with mature deliberation on each and every one of the above theses, and by the authority of almighty God, the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own authority, we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth. By listing them, we decree and declare that all the faithful of both sexes must regard them as condemned, reprobated, and rejected….We restrain all in the virtue of holy obedience and under the penalty of an automatic major excommunication....
Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn, reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language, containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected. We forbid each and every one of the faithful of either sex, in virtue of holy obedience and under the above penalties to be incurred automatically, to read, assert, preach, praise, print, publish, or defend them. They will incur these penalties if they presume to uphold them in any way, personally or through another or others, directly or indirectly, tacitly or explicitly, publicly or occultly, either in their own homes or in other public or private places.
Indeed immediately after the publication of this letter these works, wherever they may be, shall be sought out carefully by the ordinaries and others [ecclesiastics and regulars], and under each and every one of the above penalties shall be burned publicly and solemnly in the presence of the clerics and people.As far as Martin himself is concerned, O good God, what have we overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we might call him back from such errors? For after we had cited him, wishing to deal more kindly with him, we urged him through various conferences with our legate and through our personal letters to abandon these errors. We have even offered him safe conduct and the money necessary for the journey urging him to come without fear or any misgivings, which perfect charity should cast out, and to talk not secretly but openly and face to face after the example of our Savior and the Apostle Paul. If he had done this, we are certain he would have changed in heart, and he would have recognized his errors. He would not have found all these errors in the Roman Curia which he attacks so viciously, ascribing to it more than he should because of the empty rumors of wicked men. We would have shown him clearer than the light of day that the Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, whom he injuriously attacks beyond all decency, never erred in their canons or constitutions which he tries to assail. For, according to the prophet, neither is healing oil nor the doctor lacking in Galaad.
But he always refused to listen and, despising the previous citation and each and every one of the above overtures, disdained to come. To the present day he has been contumacious. With a hardened spirit he has continued under censure over a year.
What is worse, adding evil to evil, and on learning of the citation, he broke forth in a rash appeal to a future council. This to be sure was contrary to the constitution of Pius II and Julius II our predecessors that all appealing in this way are to be punished with the penalties of heretics. In vain does he implore the help of a council, since he openly admits that he does not believe in a council.
Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity of each and all of the above penalties and censures.
Yet, with the advice of our brothers, imitating the mercy of almighty God who does not wish the death of a sinner but rather that he be converted and live, and forgetting all the injuries inflicted on us and the Apostolic See, we have decided to use all the compassion we are capable of. It is our hope, so far as in us lies, that he will experience a change of heart by taking the road of mildness we have proposed, return, and turn away from his errors. We will receive him kindly as the prodigal son returning to the embrace of the Church.Therefore let Martin himself and all those adhering to him, and those who shelter and support him, through the merciful heart of our God and the sprinkling of the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ by which and through whom the redemption of the human race and the upbuilding of holy mother Church was accomplished, know that from our heart we exhort and beseech that he cease to disturb the peace, unity, and truth of the Church for which the Savior prayed so earnestly to the Father. Let him abstain from his pernicious errors that he may come back to us. If they really will obey, and certify to us by legal documents that they have obeyed, they will find in us the affection of a father's love, the opening of the font of the effects of paternal charity, and opening of the font of mercy and clemency.
We enjoin, however, on Martin that in the meantime he cease from all preaching or the office of preacher..."  [end Papal Bull June 15, 1520 by Pope Leo X]

Did you see that part about “under the penalty of an automatic excommunication” for those who accept ANYTHING Luther wrote, taught or said?

Martin Luther was a heretic, who founded a heresy that divided Christ’s Holy Catholic Church and caused unknown numbers of people to be LOST and fall into damnation.

Why would ANYONE, especially a Catholic want to “commemorate” a heretic and his heresy?

Does “commemorating” heresies bring about salvation when the heresy denies Jesus Christ’s Church and Jesus Christ’s Sacraments?  NO!

Catholic Catechism: 

1400    Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, “have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.”²³⁹ It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, “when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper... profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory.”²⁴⁰ (1536)

 406      The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)²⁹⁶ and at the Council of Trent (1546).²⁹⁷

What this “commemoration” will do, is what so many ecumenical gatherings have done for decades… water’s down the True Faith (so as to not offend anyone), causes confusion (among Catholics more than anyone because they think these gathers put a “stamp” of Catholic approval on another belief system) and is a stumbling block for many who MIGHT be looking to the Church for guidance only to be led away by “commemorating” heresies as if they were something good.  

Heresy is NOT good- HERESY IS EVIL.  We should NEVER commemorate or celebrate evil.

This “From Conflict to Communion” is nothing but a holiday for the devil himself.

This is why (in my opinion) we NEED, DESPERATLY NEED a Vatican III to put a STOP to these things once and for all!

Anyone agree or disagree with what was printed here?  Let me hear it.

In Christ,
Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner

God bless and forgive us all...

Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen Day - here anyway.

I have a great love for the Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen and have recently been reading more of his homilies and powerful quotes made by this wonderful priest as well as digging out my copies of "Life of Christ" and "This is the Mass" both by Sheen.

I (like so many others) eagerly await the day when the Church officially declares him a Saint.  I have no doubt that will happen- I just hope it's soon!
So today is "Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen Day" here at Connecticut Catholic Corner!

Here is a wonderful video of a 1941 Easter Mass (Traditional), narrated by (then) Mgr. Fulton Sheen- including Gregorian Chant.  Lovely.

Sheen quotes:

"The Church is like Noah's ark that was full of both clean and unclean animals. It must have had an unholy smell, and yet it was carrying eight persons to salvation. The world today is tearing up the photographs of a good society, a good family, a happy, individual personal life. But the Church is keeping the negatives. And when the moment comes when the world wants a reprint, we will have them."

"The Rosary is the best therapy for these distraught, unhappy, fearful, and frustrated souls, precisely because it involves the simultaneous use of three powers: the physical, the vocal, and the spiritual, and in that order."

 God bless you Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen for all you've done for the Church in teaching and reaching people with the love of God and the message of the Church.

The Priesthood, Pornography and Violence in the Media

***WARNING: This post discusses sex and violence in the media***

Television programming comes with guides to determine if a program is too

“mature” for children and to warn adults that the program will contain sex, violence, nudity and a number of other things, but who pays attention?

Do Christian adults regulate what they watch any more than they regulate what their kids watch, read or listen to?  If parents are setting the example for their children (big “if” for some I know), than shouldn’t we all turn OFF anything and everything with sex, violence and nudity? 

The mere THOUGHT of lust is a sin that MUST be confessed for ALL Catholics- so how can ANY Catholic sit down in front of a television show that offers graphic sex scenes and nudity without putting themselves in sin?

Would you want Jesus to sit down next to you while you tuned into an episode of “True Blood” or “Game of Thrones” or “Sons of Anarchy”?

The FX Channel show “Sons of Anarchy” (biker gang) depicts (very graphically) murder, rape, men castrating other men and the tossed out “remains” (shown), gun running, drug smuggling, drug using, orgies, porn stars, hired hit men, torture, burning (people), carving flesh, whipping, beatings, women being sexually assaulted, amputations of bodily parts, shootings, stabbings, cars crushing people, torching corpses, gang rapes and large quantities of male and female nudity.

Should ANYONE who calls themselves Christian watch this?  Promote this sort of television viewing?  Can you imagine any of our beloved Catholic saints thinking this was a good way to spend our time on earth?

I hope you said no.

Now, lets see what the Holy Catholic Church has to say about sex and violence in the media. 

PORNOGRAPHY AND VIOLENCE IN THE MEDIA

Pontifical Council for Social Communications

[in part]
9. Ordinary experience confirmed by studies conducted around the world has recognized the evil effects of pornography and violence in the media.[5] Pornography in the media is understood as a violation, through the use of audio-visual techniques, of the right to privacy of the human body in its male or female nature, a violation which reduces the human person and human body to an anonymous object of misuse for the purpose of gratifying concupiscence; violence in the media may be understood—especially in this context—as a presentation designed to appeal to base human instincts of actions contrary to the dignity of the person and depicting intense physical force exercised in a deeply offensive and often passionate manner.
Specialists may disagree among themselves about how and to what degree particular individuals and groups are affected by these phenomena, but the broad outlines of the problem are stark, clear and frightening.

10. While no one can consider himself or herself immune to the corrupting effects of pornography and violence or safe from injury at the hands of those acting under their influence, the young and the immature are especially vulnerable and the most likely to be victimized. Pornography and sadistic violence debase sexuality, corrode human relationships, exploit individuals—especially women and young people—undermine marriage and family life, foster anti-social behavior and weaken the moral fiber of society itself.

11. Thus, one of the clear effects of pornography is sin. Willing participation in the production or dissemination of those noxious products can only be judged a serious moral evil. Likewise, production and dissemination of these materials could not continue if there were not a market for them, so those who use such materials not only do moral harm to themselves, but contribute to the continuation of a nefarious trade.

13. It has been said that there can be a psychological link between pornography and sadistic violence, and some pornography is itself overtly violent in theme and content. Those who view or read such material run the risk of carrying over such attitudes and behavior into their own relationships and can come to lack reverence or respect for others as precious children of God and as brothers and sisters in the same human family. Such a link between pornography and sadistic violence has particular implications for those suffering from certain forms of mental illness.

14. Even so-called "soft-core" pornography can have a progressively desensitizing effect, gradually rendering individuals morally numb and personally insensitive to the rights and dignity of others.
Exposure to pornography can also be—like exposure to narcotics—habit-forming and can lead individuals to seek increasingly "hard-core" and perverse material. The likelihood of anti-social behavior can grow as this process continues.

15. Pornography can foster unhealthy preoccupations in fantasy and behavior. It can interfere with personal moral growth and the development of healthy and mature relationships, especially in marriage and family life, where mutual trust, openness and personal moral integrity in thought and in action are so important.

16. Indeed, pornography can militate against the family character of true human sexual expression. The more sexual activity is considered as a continuing frenzied search for personal gratification rather than as an expression of enduring love in marriage, the more pornography can be considered as a factor contributing to the undermining of wholesome family life.

17. In the worst cases, pornography can act as an inciting or reinforcing agent, a kind of accomplice, in the behavior of dangerous sex offenders - child molesters, rapists and killers.

18. A fundamental message of pornography and violence is disdain, the consideration of others as objects rather than as persons. Thus, pornography and violence can eat away at tenderness and compassion and can foster insensitivity and even brutality.

29. The Church And Religious Groups: For the Church, the first responsibility is the constant, clear teaching of the Faith, and therefore, of objective moral truth, including the truth about sexual morality. In an era of permissiveness and moral confusion, this requires that the Church be a prophetic voice and often a sign of contradiction.
The so-called "ethic" of immediate personal gratification is fundamentally opposed to integral human growth and fulfillment.

Education for family life and indeed for responsible life in society requires formation in chastity and self-discipline. By contrast, pornography and wanton violence can blind individuals to the divine image in the human person, can weaken marriage and family life, and can do serious harm to individuals and to society itself.

Whenever possible, the Church must join with other churches, denominations and religious groups in teaching and fostering this message. It must also make the best possible use of its own institutions and personnel to give education and formation concerning the media of social communications and their proper role in individual and social life. Special attention should be given to assisting parents in their efforts.
Thus, media education belongs in Catholic schools and other educational programs, in seminaries[8], in formation programs of religious and secular institutes, in the continuing formation of priests and in parish programs for youth and adults. Priests and Religious in pastoral and educational work should themselves be discriminating consumers of media who give good example in what they read and view.

32. This document is intended to address the widely expressed concerns of families and of the shepherds of the Church and to invite even more general reflection of an ethical and practical nature on the problem of pornography and violence in the communications media. It is also intended to encourage all to follow the injunction of St. Paul: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Romans 12:21).

Source:  Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Vatican City, May 7, 1989, 23rd World Communications Day.

Archbishop John P. Foley, President
Monsignor Pierfranco Pastore, Secretary

Link: http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pcscporn.htm

So you can imagine my surprise earlier today when a Catholic priest on Twitter gave this shout out to the FX Channel’s “Sons of Anarchy”.

Actual photo of Tweet

I actually did a double-take when I saw this priest give this endorsement for a show so full of sex and violence that I couldn’t believe what I was seeing.  I even asked a friend and she suggested it might be a “fake” priest on Twitter.  Unfortunately, he’s a real priest.

I spent hours today debating whether or not to write this.  Part of me said, don’t put the spot light on this priest, while another part of me said, ‘He put the spot light on himself when he tweeted to over 1,000 followers on Twitter’.  I asked the priest if he felt at all bothered by all the sex and violence on this particular show, he said “not so much, thankfully. God bless”.

Twitter conversation

I have to say, that was THE strangest blessing I have ever gotten from a priest.

Now I am not writing this to attempt to shame this priest, he has indicated no shame in his viewing preferences or in sharing such sex and violence programs with his 1,000 followers on Twitter.  He put it publicly out there, so I feel no wrong in sharing my views on this.  I am writing this to tell people this priest is wrong, even if he doesn’t personally FEEL he is wrong.  He is.  And I hope that others reading this, especially Catholics who wish to be in good standing with their Faith, will SEE how wrong this priest is and learn from his mistake.

We aren’t to watch, read or listen to things that can damage our souls.  And worst yet, spread that damage to OTHER SOULS.  We ARE our brother’s keepers.  What we say and do has a ripple effect on all those around us.  Especially in today’s society with social media, the ripple effect is global!  With one stroke of the keyboard a person has the ability to cause someone to stumble into sin.  How much more is the responsibility of our Catholic clergy to lead us, not only by words in a homily, but by their own personal example?

I am reminded of the words of Saint Paul… how priests ARE our Fathers through the Gospel and it is their responsibility to correct us and teach us God’s way.

1 Corinthians 4:14-15 

New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)

Fatherly Admonition

^14 “I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. ¹⁵ For though you might have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers. Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.”

So to the priest on Twitter, while I am NOT your father, you are mine and this time you are wrong and need the correction.  I do this not to shame you, but to help guide you along the Church’s teachings in the way of Saint Paul.

God bless.

Julie

Connecticut Catholic Corner

What Vatican II does and doesn't say- do you know?

What exactly is IN the Vatican II document “Sacrosanctum Concilium” (Pope Paul VI, December 4, 1963)?  To be clear, I LOVE my Holy Catholic Church...I am just not very fond of all the things that came out of Vatican II.

Let’s take a look at a few items that might surprise you (I am not quoting the entire document, only parts).  ALL the comments (in blue), and underline text are my own, as are the OPINIONS scattered between the Vatican II text.  I would greatly welcome any clergy to correct me in my observations.  So let’s get started.

Chapter One

GENERAL PRINCIPLES FOR THE RESTORATION AND PROMOTION OF
THE SACRED LITURGY

A) General norms

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.

2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.

3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

23. That sound tradition may be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress careful investigation is always to be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised. This investigation should be theological, historical, and pastoral. Also the general laws governing the structure and meaning of the liturgy must be studied in conjunction with the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms and from the indults conceded to various places. Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.

As far as possible, notable differences between the rites used in adjacent regions must be carefully avoided.

24. Sacred scripture is of the greatest importance in the celebration of the liturgy. For it is from scripture that lessons are read and explained in the homily, and psalms are sung; the prayers, collects, and liturgical songs are scriptural in their inspiration and their force, and it is from the scriptures that actions and signs derive their meaning. Thus to achieve the restoration, progress, and adaptation of the sacred liturgy, it is essential to promote that warm and living love for scripture to which the venerable tradition of both eastern and western rites gives testimony.

Now let’s move on to the next section… (where in MY OWN OPINION as a laity- the hand holding, arms in the arm protestantish stuff comes in…  Tell me what you think.)

B) Norms drawn from the hierarchic and communal nature of the Liturgy

 30. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.

Sound like the “loophole” for all that hand waving, hand holding and clapping (*cringe*)  at Mass that we never saw before Vatican II?  It does to me.

Let’s move on…

C) Norms based upon the didactic and pastoral nature of the Liturgy

36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

3. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language.

4. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above.

Hear that giant flushing sound?  That was the Latin being lost in many parishes, especially here in the United States.

Moving on…

F) The Promotion of Pastoral-Liturgical Action

 44. It is desirable that the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, set up a liturgical commission, to be assisted by experts in liturgical science, sacred music, art and pastoral practice. So far as possible the commission should be aided by some kind of Institute for Pastoral Liturgy, consisting of persons who are eminent in these matters, and including laymen as circumstances suggest. Under the direction of the above-mentioned territorial ecclesiastical authority the commission is to regulate pastoral-liturgical action throughout the territory, and to promote studies and necessary experiments whenever there is question of adaptations to be proposed to the Apostolic See.

Does anyone really believe the “experiments” done after Vatican II benefited the Church? 

Moving on to the next chapter… hold on to your seats.

CHAPTER II

THE MOST SACRED MYSTERY OF THE EUCHARIST

48. The Church, therefore, earnestly desires that Christ's faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators; on the contrary, through a good understanding of the rites and prayers they should take part in the sacred action conscious of what they are doing, with devotion and full collaboration. They should be instructed by God's word and be nourished at the table of the Lord's body; they should give thanks to God; by offering the Immaculate Victim, not only through the hands of the priest, but also with him, they should learn also to offer themselves; through Christ the Mediator [38], they should be drawn day by day into ever more perfect union with God and with each other, so that finally God may be all in all.

49. For this reason the sacred Council, having in mind those Masses which are celebrated with the assistance of the faithful, especially on Sundays and feasts of obligation, has made the following decrees in order that the sacrifice of the Mass, even in the ritual forms of its celebration, may become pastorally efficacious to the fullest degree.

50. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved.

For this purpose the rites are to be simplified, due care being taken to preserve their substance; elements which, with the passage of time, came to be duplicated, or were added with but little advantage, are now to be discarded; other elements which have suffered injury through accidents of history are now to be restored to the vigor which they had in the days of the holy Fathers, as may seem useful or necessary.

52. By means of the homily the mysteries of the faith and the guiding principles of the Christian life are expounded from the sacred text, during the course of the liturgical year; the homily, therefore, is to be highly esteemed as part of the liturgy itself; in fact, at those Masses which are celebrated with the assistance of the people on Sundays and feasts of obligation, it should not be omitted except for a serious reason.

Just like in the protestant churches where the sermons are the focus of their entire service. Move over Jesus in the Eucharist, we’ve got a homily to share your place!  Could this next part be why so much Latin has been tossed??  Let’s look…

54. In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.

And wherever a more extended use of the mother tongue within the Mass appears desirable, the regulation laid down in Art. 40 of this Constitution is to be observed.

Time for Sacraments and Sacramentals…and the laity.

CHAPTER III

THE OTHER SACRAMENTS AND THE SACRAMENTALS

 79. The sacramentals are to undergo a revision which takes into account the primary principle of enabling the faithful to participate intelligently, actively, and easily; the circumstances of our own days must also be considered. When rituals are revised, as laid down in Art. 63, new sacramentals may also be added as the need for these becomes apparent.

Reserved blessings shall be very few; reservations shall be in favor of bishops or ordinaries.

Let provision be made that some sacramentals, at least in special circumstances and at the discretion of the ordinary, may be administered by qualified lay persons.

Moving along…

CHAPTER IV

THE DIVINE OFFICE

84. By tradition going back to early Christian times, the divine office is devised so that the whole course of the day and night is made holy by the praises of God. Therefore, when this wonderful song of praise is rightly performed by priests and others who are deputed for this purpose by the Church's ordinance, or by the faithful praying together with the priest in the approved form, then it is truly the voice of the bride addressed to her bridegroom; It is the very prayer which Christ Himself, together with His body, addresses to the Father.

85. Hence all who render this service are not only fulfilling a duty of the Church, but also are sharing in the greatest honor of Christ's spouse, for by offering these praises to God they are standing before God's throne in the name of the Church their Mother.

I think this part (#85 above) is beautiful and I wish more people would pray the Divine Office- myself included!

93. To whatever extent may seem desirable, the hymns are to be restored to their original form, and whatever smacks of mythology or ill accords with Christian piety is to be removed or changed. Also, as occasion may arise, let other selections from the treasury of hymns be incorporated.

100. Pastors of souls should see to it that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and the more solemn feasts. And the laity, too, are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with the priests, or among themselves, or even individually.

Now on to the next chapter…

CHAPTER V

THE LITURGICAL YEAR

107. The liturgical year is to be revised so that the traditional customs and discipline of the sacred seasons shall be preserved or restored to suit the conditions of modern times; their specific character is to be retained, so that they duly nourish the piety of the faithful who celebrate the mysteries of Christian redemption, and above all the paschal mystery. If certain adaptations are considered necessary on account of local conditions, they are to be made in accordance with the provisions of Art. 39 and 40.

108. The minds of the faithful must be directed primarily toward the feasts of the Lord whereby the mysteries of salvation are celebrated in the course of the year. Therefore, the proper of the time shall be given the preference which is its due over the feasts of the saints, so that the entire cycle of the mysteries of salvation may be suitably recalled.

109. The season of Lent has a twofold character: primarily by recalling or preparing for baptism and by penance, it disposes the faithful, who more diligently hear the word of God and devote themselves to prayer, to celebrate the paschal mystery. This twofold character is to be brought into greater prominence both in the liturgy and by liturgical catechesis. 

Hence:

a) More use is to be made of the baptismal features proper to the Lenten liturgy; some of them, which used to flourish in bygone days, are to be restored as may seem good.

b) The same is to apply to the penitential elements. As regards instruction it is important to impress on the minds of the faithful not only a social consequences of sin but also that essence of the virtue of penance which leads to the detestation of sin as an offence against God; the role of the Church in penitential practices is not to be passed over, and the people must be exhorted to pray for sinners.

My question to A) above is – which ones?  What had “flourished in bygone days” and needs to be restored??  Anyone know?

110. During Lent penance should not be only internal and individual, but also external and social. The practice of penance should be fostered in ways that are possible in our own times and in different regions, and according to the circumstances of the faithful; it should be encouraged by the authorities mentioned in Art. 22.

Nevertheless, let the paschal fast be kept sacred. Let it be celebrated everywhere on Good Friday and, where possible, prolonged throughout Holy Saturday, so that the joys of the Sunday of the resurrection may be attained with uplifted and clear mind.

Anyone else know the paschal Good Friday fast should be “prolonged throughout Holy Saturday”?  No one has ever mentioned that in my parish.  Has this been taught in your parishes?

Now we move on to Sacred Music… I have to say straight out that I HATE, absolutely HATE almost ALL the music played at my parish.  We’ve got a piano (new priest ditched the organ and our senior choir over a year ago) and drums.  It sounds like a rock concert, NOT a Holy Catholic Mass.  This is a HUGE pet peeve of mine.  My soul YEARNS to organ music and Gregorian Chant.  Unfortunatly for me, the ONLY Catholic parish in town has neither.

CHAPTER

VI SACRED MUSIC

112. The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy.

Holy Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song [42], and the same may be said of the fathers of the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by St. Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music in the service of the Lord.

Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true art having the needed qualities, and admits them into divine worship.

Accordingly, the sacred Council, keeping to the norms and precepts of ecclesiastical tradition and discipline, and having regard to the purpose of sacred music, which is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful, decrees as follows.

113. Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when the divine offices are celebrated solemnly in song, with the assistance of sacred ministers and the active participation of the people.

As regards the language to be used, the provisions of Art. 36 are to be observed; for the Mass, Art. 54; for the sacraments, Art. 63; for the divine office. Art. 101.

114. The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. Choirs must be diligently promoted, especially in cathedral churches; but bishops and other pastors of souls must be at pains to ensure that, whenever the sacred action is to be celebrated with song, the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs, as laid down in Art. 28 and 30.

115. Great importance is to be attached to the teaching and practice of music in seminaries, in the novitiates and houses of study of religious of both sexes, and also in other Catholic institutions and schools. To impart this instruction, teachers are to be carefully trained and put in charge of the teaching of sacred music.

It is desirable also to found higher institutes of sacred music whenever this can be done.

Composers and singers, especially boys, must also be given a genuine liturgical training.

116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.

But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.

117. The typical edition of the books of Gregorian chant is to be completed; and a more critical edition is to be prepared of those books already published since the restoration by St. Pius X.

It is desirable also that an edition be prepared containing simpler melodies, for use in small churches.

120. In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man's mind to God and to higher things.

But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.

I’m sorry to those of you out there to LIKE drums and guitars at Mass, I don’t think these are “suitable instruments” at all.  They do NOT “powerfully lift up a man’s mind to God and to higher things” as this document declares.  Instead they remind me of a protestant mega church with a televangelist screaming to the crowds “Can I get an Amen?”  Nothing HOLY or SOLEMN about it.  Gives me a headache and depresses my soul which hungers for TRUE Sacred Music at Mass.

Moving along…

CHAPTER VII

SACRED ART AND SACRED FURNISHINGS

122. Very rightly the fine arts are considered to rank among the noblest activities of man's genius, and this applies especially to religious art and to its highest achievement, which is sacred art. These arts, by their very nature, are oriented toward the infinite beauty of God which they attempt in some way to portray by the work of human hands; they achieve their purpose of redounding to God's praise and glory in proportion as they are directed the more exclusively to the single aim of turning men's minds devoutly toward God.

Holy Mother Church has therefore always been the friend of the fine arts and has ever sought their noble help, with the special aim that all things set apart for use in divine worship should be truly worthy, becoming, and beautiful, signs and symbols of the supernatural world, and for this purpose she has trained artists. In fact, the Church has, with good reason, always reserved to herself the right to pass judgment upon the arts, deciding which of the works of artists are in accordance with faith, piety, and cherished traditional laws, and thereby fitted for sacred use.

The Church has been particularly careful to see that sacred furnishings should worthily and beautifully serve the dignity of worship, and has admitted changes in materials, style, or ornamentation prompted by the progress of the technical arts with the passage of time.

Wherefore it has pleased the Fathers to issue the following decrees on these matters.

123. The Church has not adopted any particular style of art as her very own; she has admitted styles from every period according to the natural talents and circumstances of peoples, and the needs of the various rites. Thus, in the course of the centuries, she has brought into being a treasury of art which must be very carefully preserved. The art of our own days, coming from every race and region, shall also be given free scope in the Church, provided that it adorns the sacred buildings and holy rites with due reverence and honor; thereby it is enabled to contribute its own voice to that wonderful chorus of praise in honor of the Catholic faith sung by great men in times gone by.

124. Ordinaries, by the encouragement and favor they show to art which is truly sacred, should strive after noble beauty rather than mere sumptuous display. This principle is to apply also in the matter of sacred vestments and ornaments.

Let bishops carefully remove from the house of God and from other sacred places those works of artists which are repugnant to faith, morals, and Christian piety, and which offend true religious sense either by depraved forms or by lack of artistic worth, mediocrity and pretense.

And when churches are to be built, let great care be taken that they be suitable for the celebration of liturgical services and for the active participation of the faithful.

125. The practice of placing sacred images in churches so that they may be venerated by the faithful is to be maintained. Nevertheless their number should be moderate and their relative positions should reflect right order. For otherwise they may create confusion among the Christian people and foster devotion of doubtful orthodoxy.

126. When passing judgment on works of art, local ordinaries shall give a hearing to the diocesan commission on sacred art and, if needed, also to others who are especially expert, and to the commissions referred to in Art. 44, 45, and 46.

Ordinaries must be very careful to see that sacred furnishings and works of value are not disposed of or dispersed; for they are the ornaments of the house of God.

Ut-oh… here’s the part that was likely used to “stick Jesus in the corner” – that is moving the Tabernacle from the prominence of front and center to an area off to the side- out of the way.

128. Along with the revision of the liturgical books, as laid down in Art. 25, there is to be an early revision of the canons and ecclesiastical statutes which govern the provision of material things involved in sacred worship. These laws refer especially to the worthy and well planned construction of sacred buildings, the shape and construction of altars, the nobility, placing, and safety of the eucharistic tabernacle, the dignity and suitability of the baptistery, the proper ordering of sacred images, embellishments, and vestments. Laws which seem less suited to the reformed liturgy are to be brought into harmony with it, or else abolished; and any which are helpful are to be retained if already in use, or introduced where they are lacking.

According to the norm of Art. 22 of this Constitution, the territorial bodies of bishops are empowered to adapt such things to the needs and customs of their different regions; this applies especially to the materials and form of sacred furnishings and vestments.

Well that's it for now.  I'd welcome anyone else thoughts on Vatican II or anything I've commented on here.

To read the entire Vatican II document, go to: 

Source:  http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

To learn about how Vatican II came to be and just WHO was behind what, I highly recommend watching the following video’s by Michael Voris, of The Vortex.

And part 2...

God bless you all and our Holy Catholic Church!