It's ironic, really. Every time the left needs to manufacture a crisis to rally their base we invariably hear angushed cries gins about how "Republicans want to take away a woman's right to choose"! As J. F. Kerry might say, "would that it were!" In fact a significant faction of the G.O.P. leadershup has gotten a bit squeamish about abortion, to the point that the post-mortems on the 2012 election have elicited some "suggestions" that the party might consider de-emphasizing their official opposition to abortion.
Meanwhile the left has no such qualms. In 2008 their standard-bearer was a man who couldn't bring himself to vote for an Illinois law that guaranteed that infants born alive would be entitled to medical care. In a saner and better-informed America that alone would have been sufficient to disqualify him for any further office of public trust. Instead he was elected president. Pundits on both sides referred to him as the most abortion-friendly president ever, and they were right. And so, in his first term we got not only the usual fare from the left: revocation of the so-called Mexico City Policy, abortion as a litmus test for judicial appointments, etc.; but then came something new: a socialized medical insurance plan that not only covered abortion and contraception, but required heretofore exempt organizations - e.g. Catholic schools, hospitals, and other entities - to subsidize it.
To be sure there was an outcry, albeit muted... and ineffective: at this writing nothing has changed save for a fig-leaf "exemption" so narrowly crafted that Mother Teresa would have been unlikely to qualify for it!
Meanwhile, a grass-roots organization called LiveAction.org made a series of undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood's willingness to defy the few laws fettering access to abortions and even to offer assistance in circumventing child sex trafficking laws! Congress attemted to de-fund Planned Parenthood, which receives over $500,000,000 of taxpayer funds annually - half a BILLION dollars of our money - but this only served to enrage the left. "Terrorism!" they cried. Yep, the same folks who've seemingly never met a real terrorist who's nothing but a misunderstood kid do are fine with the notion that buchering babies is such a fundamental right that anyone who exposes the fact that it is insufficiently regulated or attempts to withdraw public fundig for it is... a terrorist!
It's now 2013. America has re-elected the most radical and pro-abortion president ever to a second term. With the right to a taxpayer-subsidized dead baby seemingly safeguarded for another four years the media felt free to ignore the gruesome facts of the Gosnell case. "We don't cover local crime stories", sniffed one national outlet of the MSM. Were it not for the yeoman work of several blogers and non-traditional news outlets the MSM probably wouldn't have been shamed into even the minimal coverage they finally deigned to give it.
With the trial ongoing President Obama judged the time apt to accept an invitation to address the annual convention of Planned Parenthood, conveniently held in Washington, DC; the only president ever to do so. Unlike the MSM the President had shown a prior willingness to comment on "local crime stories", but like the rest of the abortion industry, their political supporters, and media enablers he didn't bother to acknowledge this horrific story. Instead all was sweetness, light, and lies: the oft-repeated canard about mammograms (which are not performed at ANY Planned Parenthood facility) and two typical happy-ending anecdotes. He ended with perhaps the most chilling words ever uttered by an American president: "Thank you, Planned Parenthood. God bless you. God bless America. Thank you."
"God bless you" to the largest provider of abortions in America? Makes your blood run cold.
During his speech the President quoted a remark by Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, about "opponents" who “literally got up every day trying to figure out how to keep us from doing our work.” Imagine that. Might not a thinking person ask himself: "what kind of work is this they so, and what kind of people would be so single-minded in opposing it?" Alas, many in America have lost their capability for critical thinking. But not the folks at LiveAction.org who are amongst those who do in fact get up every morning and try to figure out how to put PP out of business - or at least out of the abortion business - permanently. Their latest undercover investigation has produced footage of an abortionist promising a client - the investigator - that if the late-term abortion of her baby "failed", resulting in a live infant, steps would be taken to ensure that the baby was dead by the time she left the clinic. How many more of these will it take to prove that Gosnell was not an aberration, and that so-called "partial birth abortion" is neither rare nor necessary, as it's proponents claim.
Incidentally, that clinic is in Washington, DC. It is operated by Planned Parenthood. Amazingly enough, the Washington Post ran a story. Not a story about how viable babies are killed in their fair city every day, whether inside or outside of the womb; more of a 'story-about-the-story'. But they did interview the "doctor" who was caught on tape. "I really consider them terrorists” was his final word. Will Saletan of slate.com tweeted on the WaPo story: "What's more disgusting than late-term abortion? This scheme to exploit it by hiring actors & secretly taping doctors."
Sorry for the length of this post. When we regain our ability to think critically and reason logically, and our moral fiber as a nation perhaps we will ask these questions about Dr. Kermit Gosnell, Cecile Richards and Planned Parenthood, Barack Obama, Dr. Cesare Santangelo, Will Saletan, et al: Who is their god? What is their creed? Whence comes their gospel?
It is frightening to speculate on the answers. All I can say for certain is: as for me and my household, their god is not our God, their creed is not our Creed, and their gospel is not our Gospel.
God bless them indeed.
12 April 2013
What's worse?
The joyful season of Easter reminds us that no matter how bad things get we must never cease to trust in God. Despair is the ultimate sin. Spera in Deo!
But inasmuch as our current abode subsists in this vale of tears we cannot fail to take account of the realities which surround us.
One of the most horrifying stories in the news lately has been that of the Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell whose trial is ongoing... oh, wait a sec: it hasn't been in the news! Even as each day's testimony elicits new and more chilling accounts of babies born alive and decapitated, mothers gravely injured and left without medical care, untrained personnel, squalid and unsanitary conditions; the MSM's coverage is... nonexistent! So what's worse? Objectively the heinous sin and crime of abortion - and outright infanticide - is orders of magnitude worse that the MSM's dereliction of their duty, there isn't even a question there. But neither can we minimize the consequences of a partisan media practicing advocacy journalism, in this case by malign neglect. It has already done, and will continue to do, great harm to our nation.
In a similar vein, what I euphemistically call the "Boston Problem" (yes, I know about L.A. and elsewhere!) might be "old news" by now, and one cannot minimize the evil done by these sexual predators in clerical garb, but again we should not fail to consider the "collateral damage" done to the Church... and to the Faithful! How many times have you heard: "The Church has no credibility on [marriage, artificial contraception, homosexual acts, etc.] when the priests are buggering little boys!" Leaving aside the for a moment the particulars - n.b. these cases involve a very small number of clergy and are overwhelmingly instances of predatory homosexuals rather than "paedophiles" - this is the perception that has been created in the minds of the public. And so, those looking for an excuse to ignore the Church have one, and many others who might be attracted to Her recoil in disgust at the foul spectacle of these flagrant sins. Of course the actual sins of the priests are worse, but their immediate damage is limited to a specific number of souls. But the repercussions for the Church, and for those sould who may at this moment be losing the means of salvation through mistrust of the Church, continue to multiply.
What's the common thread? Aside from evil that is? I suppose it is that so many of us have lost any sense of shame, of personal sin and community standards. This is the fruit of the poisoned tree of 1960's relativism and its given our society the worst case of indigestion imaginable.
But inasmuch as our current abode subsists in this vale of tears we cannot fail to take account of the realities which surround us.
One of the most horrifying stories in the news lately has been that of the Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell whose trial is ongoing... oh, wait a sec: it hasn't been in the news! Even as each day's testimony elicits new and more chilling accounts of babies born alive and decapitated, mothers gravely injured and left without medical care, untrained personnel, squalid and unsanitary conditions; the MSM's coverage is... nonexistent! So what's worse? Objectively the heinous sin and crime of abortion - and outright infanticide - is orders of magnitude worse that the MSM's dereliction of their duty, there isn't even a question there. But neither can we minimize the consequences of a partisan media practicing advocacy journalism, in this case by malign neglect. It has already done, and will continue to do, great harm to our nation.
In a similar vein, what I euphemistically call the "Boston Problem" (yes, I know about L.A. and elsewhere!) might be "old news" by now, and one cannot minimize the evil done by these sexual predators in clerical garb, but again we should not fail to consider the "collateral damage" done to the Church... and to the Faithful! How many times have you heard: "The Church has no credibility on [marriage, artificial contraception, homosexual acts, etc.] when the priests are buggering little boys!" Leaving aside the for a moment the particulars - n.b. these cases involve a very small number of clergy and are overwhelmingly instances of predatory homosexuals rather than "paedophiles" - this is the perception that has been created in the minds of the public. And so, those looking for an excuse to ignore the Church have one, and many others who might be attracted to Her recoil in disgust at the foul spectacle of these flagrant sins. Of course the actual sins of the priests are worse, but their immediate damage is limited to a specific number of souls. But the repercussions for the Church, and for those sould who may at this moment be losing the means of salvation through mistrust of the Church, continue to multiply.
What's the common thread? Aside from evil that is? I suppose it is that so many of us have lost any sense of shame, of personal sin and community standards. This is the fruit of the poisoned tree of 1960's relativism and its given our society the worst case of indigestion imaginable.
09 April 2013
What we are up against...
No longer do the enemies of the Church and of civil society simply ask for acceptance... now they seek to neuter, to co-opt, and to destroy.
We are up against evil. It will not abate on its own, we will have to stand up and oppose it. There will be a cost. Do we have what it takes?
Today's bit of cheer comes from our nation's capitol. Again, from the realm of "higher education":
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=7395
Read it. Believe it. We are in a war. Where will it end?
We are up against evil. It will not abate on its own, we will have to stand up and oppose it. There will be a cost. Do we have what it takes?
Today's bit of cheer comes from our nation's capitol. Again, from the realm of "higher education":
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=7395
Read it. Believe it. We are in a war. Where will it end?
05 April 2013
The America Our Children Will Inherit
Amidst the gloom of Year Five of the Obama Experiment comes some indication of how we got to this point, i.e. at which a supine and toothless Catholic Church is unable to resist the elimination of major elements of our First Amendment protections of Religious Freedom by the worst government we've ever had.
We know that - with a few shining exceptions - the realm of "Catholic" higher education has long been a hotbed of dissent from the Magisterium, but there is perhaps the tendency to feel that things had started to get better, and that some of the excesses of the Seventies were behind us. Alas not so... Two recent examples will serve to illustrate the situation.
1.) Notre Dame's recent history has been more than a little bit checkered, e.g. the Obama fiasco of 2009, but they may have reached a new low with the recent announcement that they were seeking an "LGBTQ Director" for their shiny new "LGBTQ" support organization. Does the name "Catholic" actually mean anything to these people?
2.) Gonzaga University, which might well be renamed "GoneGaga" owing to their even more radical deviations from the mission of their founders and the Church, has had a similar group for years - ho hum - but cannot abide at least one venerable Catholic group - the Knights of Columbus - because they restrict their membership to... Catholic Men only!
For far too long the majority of American bishops either tolerated or abetted this sort of lunacy, and now the bill has come due. "Catholics" brainwashed into accepting an adulterated version of the Faith by these diabolical dissidents see nothing wrong with voting for the most pro-abortion president ever, or "Catholic" phonies like his vice president and the most recent Democrat Speaker of the House (to name a few). Truly, these folks have gotten the government they deserve, but rest of us aren't so lucky. And it's only going to get worse: it came to light today that the U.S. Army Reserve has published training materials designating the Catholic Church as an "extremist" organization and specifically citing several traditionalist Catholic organizations as "hate groups". This is real, folks. It was only a couple of years ago that Cardinal George of Chicago was ridiculed by the elites for his comment that "I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square". It doesn't sound so farfetched now, does it? "Extremist", "hate group" and "bigot" - that latter gaining in popularity for those who commit the cardinal sin of "homophobia" - are just names, but who can doubt that there are sticks and stones to come...
We know that - with a few shining exceptions - the realm of "Catholic" higher education has long been a hotbed of dissent from the Magisterium, but there is perhaps the tendency to feel that things had started to get better, and that some of the excesses of the Seventies were behind us. Alas not so... Two recent examples will serve to illustrate the situation.
1.) Notre Dame's recent history has been more than a little bit checkered, e.g. the Obama fiasco of 2009, but they may have reached a new low with the recent announcement that they were seeking an "LGBTQ Director" for their shiny new "LGBTQ" support organization. Does the name "Catholic" actually mean anything to these people?
2.) Gonzaga University, which might well be renamed "GoneGaga" owing to their even more radical deviations from the mission of their founders and the Church, has had a similar group for years - ho hum - but cannot abide at least one venerable Catholic group - the Knights of Columbus - because they restrict their membership to... Catholic Men only!
For far too long the majority of American bishops either tolerated or abetted this sort of lunacy, and now the bill has come due. "Catholics" brainwashed into accepting an adulterated version of the Faith by these diabolical dissidents see nothing wrong with voting for the most pro-abortion president ever, or "Catholic" phonies like his vice president and the most recent Democrat Speaker of the House (to name a few). Truly, these folks have gotten the government they deserve, but rest of us aren't so lucky. And it's only going to get worse: it came to light today that the U.S. Army Reserve has published training materials designating the Catholic Church as an "extremist" organization and specifically citing several traditionalist Catholic organizations as "hate groups". This is real, folks. It was only a couple of years ago that Cardinal George of Chicago was ridiculed by the elites for his comment that "I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square". It doesn't sound so farfetched now, does it? "Extremist", "hate group" and "bigot" - that latter gaining in popularity for those who commit the cardinal sin of "homophobia" - are just names, but who can doubt that there are sticks and stones to come...
25 March 2013
America in 2013 - Signs of the Times
Had to run over to one of the big home improvement stores on Saturday morning to rent a tool. There were a few dozen cars in the parking lot, but for a decent Saturday morning in the Springtime it was practically deserted. Inside, the folks doing various product demos were begging the few customers to stop at their displays, and the cashiers were standing aorund chatting with each other. When I left and got back on the highway, I noticed that traffic heading in the opposite direction was backed-up for over a mile. My first thought: thank Heaven, I must have just missed whatever it was that was causing the backup.
So what was the reason, and why does it matter? Well, I saw some temporary signs by the side of the highway: "Gun Show - 10-6 Saturday". The venue was accessed from the same exit as the home improvement store. That explained the unusual traffic.
When I returned my rental tool in the early afternoon the traffic had abated, but the store was nearly as deserted. Welcome to Act II Scene I of Obama's America. The great American pastime of "D.i.Y" goes neglected in the stagnant economy, meanwhile the citizenry rush to arm themselves to the teeth. Draw your own conclusions...
So what was the reason, and why does it matter? Well, I saw some temporary signs by the side of the highway: "Gun Show - 10-6 Saturday". The venue was accessed from the same exit as the home improvement store. That explained the unusual traffic.
When I returned my rental tool in the early afternoon the traffic had abated, but the store was nearly as deserted. Welcome to Act II Scene I of Obama's America. The great American pastime of "D.i.Y" goes neglected in the stagnant economy, meanwhile the citizenry rush to arm themselves to the teeth. Draw your own conclusions...
21 March 2013
EXCLUSIVE FROM THE ARCHLAIC: A Confidential Interview with Cardinal Balony
The Archlaic was at Logan Airport the other evening and stopped at one of the licensed establishments for a pint; as he looked for a table he noticed a man sitting alone, wearing a black clerical suit with a hint of a chain showing diagonally inside the jacket. The cleric, who was sipping a glass of white wine and reading a paperback novel by Andrew Greeley, looked vaguely familiar... then The Archlaic recognized him: Cardinal Balony himself!
Realizing the unique and providential opportunity presented by this chance encounter, His Magnitude sprang into action:
THE ARCHLAIC: Sure, if it isn't Cardinal Balony himself, in the flesh as it were! Eminence, what brings you to our fair city?
CDL. BALONY: That rat - I mean Archbishop Gomez, didn't want me to go, and by the time I got a reservation first class was full on all the nonstop flights, so now I'm stuck here on thie 3-hour layover. Seems like an eternity... hey. wait a minute, who are you and what do you want?
THE ARCHLAIC: Forgive me, Eminence; I'm the Archlaic of North Carver and...
CDL. BALONY: Archlaic of what? (looks suspiciously at the collar of The Archlaic's black turteneck) What are you, some kind of subdeacon or something? I thought Vatican II did away with all that...
THE ARCHLAIC: (laughs) Ah, Eminence, Archbishop Weakloins always said you had a great sense of humor! So tell me, what do you think of the new pope?
CDL. BALONY: Well since you asked, it was one of the great experiences of my life to be able to be a part of a conclave for the second time, and to elect another pope.
THE ARCHLAIC: But what do you think of him so far?
CDL. BALONY: Did you see his shoes? Plain black ones, not those red Pradas like Ratz... er, Benedict wore. Paul VI got rid of all that medieval foofery you know, but if Ratz had been there any longer he's have brought back the sedia and the ostrich plumes!
THE ARCHLAIC: But Pope Francis...
CDL. BALONY: That's what I'm talking about, we need to show we care about the poor. This pre-Conciliar high church stuff puts people off, modern men - people - can't relate to it, it's like the Queen of England, nobody pays any attention to any of that stuff.
THE ARCHLAIC: But didn't Pope Benedict believe that beauty in the liturgy brought people to God?
CDL. BALONY: Oh. you're one of those? Should have known... Archlaic, eh? Well I'll tell you, while Ratzinger was running the inquisition and writing his little books I was dealing with real problems of real people. I have the largest archdiocese in the world you know, and we don't do any of that silly stuff. My Cathedral was the first one built according to the blueprint of Vatican II, noble simplicity and so forth...
THE ARCHLAIC: I thought Los Angles was the largest in the United States, not in the world. I think Mexico City is...
CDL. BALONY: Well that's only because our undocumented workers are in the shadows, they're afraid Bush is going to deport them. If we counted them L.A. would be the biggest. We probably have more Mexicans than Mexico City anyway, and they're all Catholic. And that's another thing, Pope Francis is Hispanic, he speaks Spanish, él puede hablar con los hombres y mujeres modernos en su propio idioma just like me. And he's humble, did you see his shoes? Really low church!
THE ARCHLAIC: Eminence, I'm a bit confused about your references to "high" and "low" church. Those are protestant terms, and they don't really seem to be appropriate points of reference to the Catholic liturgical ceremonies...
CDL. BALONY: There you have it - ceremony! When we do liturgy in my church there's none of that, that, ceremonialism! Just plain, simple Catholic Christians gathered around a humble table to eat the Supper of the Lord.
THE ARCHLAIC: But Eminence, what's un-ceremonial about liturgical dancers, rock bands, and gaggles of laypeople milling around in the sanctuary? And you built a $150 million cathedral when you already had one, is that what you mean by "low church"?
CDL. BALONY: That old wreck was about to fall down, one more good earthquake and it would have fallen like the walls of Jericho; and it would have cost a lot more than $150 million to retrofit it for earthquakes and Vatican II! And incidentally it was more like $190 million, all given by the People of God in Los Angeles. I designed it myself...
THE ARCHLAIC: Yes, Eminence, but why do you think that "simple" and "noble" and even "humble" exclude "beauty"?
CDL. BALONY: Hey, did you hear that announcement? Didn't she say "Now boarding first-class passengers for American flight 007 to L.A.”? I've got to run! Nice talking to you and I'll pray for your intentions...
Realizing the unique and providential opportunity presented by this chance encounter, His Magnitude sprang into action:
THE ARCHLAIC: Sure, if it isn't Cardinal Balony himself, in the flesh as it were! Eminence, what brings you to our fair city?
CDL. BALONY: That rat - I mean Archbishop Gomez, didn't want me to go, and by the time I got a reservation first class was full on all the nonstop flights, so now I'm stuck here on thie 3-hour layover. Seems like an eternity... hey. wait a minute, who are you and what do you want?
THE ARCHLAIC: Forgive me, Eminence; I'm the Archlaic of North Carver and...
CDL. BALONY: Archlaic of what? (looks suspiciously at the collar of The Archlaic's black turteneck) What are you, some kind of subdeacon or something? I thought Vatican II did away with all that...
THE ARCHLAIC: (laughs) Ah, Eminence, Archbishop Weakloins always said you had a great sense of humor! So tell me, what do you think of the new pope?
CDL. BALONY: Well since you asked, it was one of the great experiences of my life to be able to be a part of a conclave for the second time, and to elect another pope.
THE ARCHLAIC: But what do you think of him so far?
CDL. BALONY: Did you see his shoes? Plain black ones, not those red Pradas like Ratz... er, Benedict wore. Paul VI got rid of all that medieval foofery you know, but if Ratz had been there any longer he's have brought back the sedia and the ostrich plumes!
THE ARCHLAIC: But Pope Francis...
CDL. BALONY: That's what I'm talking about, we need to show we care about the poor. This pre-Conciliar high church stuff puts people off, modern men - people - can't relate to it, it's like the Queen of England, nobody pays any attention to any of that stuff.
THE ARCHLAIC: But didn't Pope Benedict believe that beauty in the liturgy brought people to God?
CDL. BALONY: Oh. you're one of those? Should have known... Archlaic, eh? Well I'll tell you, while Ratzinger was running the inquisition and writing his little books I was dealing with real problems of real people. I have the largest archdiocese in the world you know, and we don't do any of that silly stuff. My Cathedral was the first one built according to the blueprint of Vatican II, noble simplicity and so forth...
THE ARCHLAIC: I thought Los Angles was the largest in the United States, not in the world. I think Mexico City is...
CDL. BALONY: Well that's only because our undocumented workers are in the shadows, they're afraid Bush is going to deport them. If we counted them L.A. would be the biggest. We probably have more Mexicans than Mexico City anyway, and they're all Catholic. And that's another thing, Pope Francis is Hispanic, he speaks Spanish, él puede hablar con los hombres y mujeres modernos en su propio idioma just like me. And he's humble, did you see his shoes? Really low church!
THE ARCHLAIC: Eminence, I'm a bit confused about your references to "high" and "low" church. Those are protestant terms, and they don't really seem to be appropriate points of reference to the Catholic liturgical ceremonies...
CDL. BALONY: There you have it - ceremony! When we do liturgy in my church there's none of that, that, ceremonialism! Just plain, simple Catholic Christians gathered around a humble table to eat the Supper of the Lord.
THE ARCHLAIC: But Eminence, what's un-ceremonial about liturgical dancers, rock bands, and gaggles of laypeople milling around in the sanctuary? And you built a $150 million cathedral when you already had one, is that what you mean by "low church"?
CDL. BALONY: That old wreck was about to fall down, one more good earthquake and it would have fallen like the walls of Jericho; and it would have cost a lot more than $150 million to retrofit it for earthquakes and Vatican II! And incidentally it was more like $190 million, all given by the People of God in Los Angeles. I designed it myself...
THE ARCHLAIC: Yes, Eminence, but why do you think that "simple" and "noble" and even "humble" exclude "beauty"?
CDL. BALONY: Hey, did you hear that announcement? Didn't she say "Now boarding first-class passengers for American flight 007 to L.A.”? I've got to run! Nice talking to you and I'll pray for your intentions...
18 March 2013
A New Beginning? Let's Chill a Bit...
I keep saying that I need to find time to tend to the blog, but entries have been few and far between for the past year or more. The abdication of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis have prompted many thoughts and I find myself feeling compelled to rejoin the fray at this time.
One concern is the nearly immediate polarization of opinion toward Pope Francis although he has yet to sit on the Throne of Peter for even a week. On one hand are many of the modernists in the Church and their counterparts amongst arbiters of the popular culture, some of whom have thus far been perfervid in their sentiments. The likes of Donna Brazile are seen on television gushing over 'The Pope of the Poor' while the disgraced but apparently shameless Cardinal Mahony breathlessly twitters away like a lovesick bobby-soxer about the color of the Pope's shoes(!) and kvells about "moving from HIGH Church to LOW and humble Church"! (No word from Cardinal Balony as to whether his $150,000,000+ cathedral or his liturgical dancers are what he means by "Low Church"... but then again I've always wondered whether the man was actually a protestant so perhaps it's only natural for him to use such language.)
At the other extreme are two unlikely bedfellows - the secular left whose fantasies about their ideal pope (who'd probably take the name "Libertine I") have been shattered by the fact that yet again the Catholic Church has elected a pope that is Catholic; and the 'traditionalists' who believe they've seen nothing but ill omens in every liturgical and quasi-liturgical action of the past 5-1/2 days.
Herewith a few quick thoughts:
- Liberals/modernists who are curently singing paeans to Pope Francis will find cause to come down out of the clouds before too long. Once the bloom is off the rose they will treat him the same way they treated Papa Ratzinger - with scorn and derision.
- For people who claim that their beliefs and positions are based upon 'science', 'reason', 'logic', etc. the secular left certainly engages in a lot of unscientific, unreasonable, and illogical thinking - one might even call it 'blind faith' - in expecting a pope to suddenly change the Church's teachings.
- Pope Francis is not going to undo what Pope Benedict has done juridically, and if he tries there will be one heck of a row. That is not what he needs. Even if perchance he is at heart a polyester-poncho-wearing inculturated low-church Mahonyite whose papal liturgies make JPII's look like Tridentine Masses he is not going to "repeal" Summorum Pontificum.
- Granted, the ars celebrandi of the reigning pope does have a great deal of value as an example to the Church. Funny, we complained about B16: "he doesn't decree, all he does is 'lead by example'" but surely his 'style' gave many a priest both an ideal to follow and some 'cover' against his critics: "I'm just doing what the Pope does". My one specific fear is that a reversion to a 1970's Bugnini/Piero Marini style of papal liturgies will embolden the opponents of the liturgical renewal who will then be able to claim: "now you're not doing what the pope does".
- The "inaugural" Mass of Pope Francis is tomorrow. All of us will learn more about what to expect in this pontificate. Let us wait and see, trust in God, and meanwhile use the remainder of Lent fruitfully. I know one thing for sure: the Holy Father needs our prayers!
One concern is the nearly immediate polarization of opinion toward Pope Francis although he has yet to sit on the Throne of Peter for even a week. On one hand are many of the modernists in the Church and their counterparts amongst arbiters of the popular culture, some of whom have thus far been perfervid in their sentiments. The likes of Donna Brazile are seen on television gushing over 'The Pope of the Poor' while the disgraced but apparently shameless Cardinal Mahony breathlessly twitters away like a lovesick bobby-soxer about the color of the Pope's shoes(!) and kvells about "moving from HIGH Church to LOW and humble Church"! (No word from Cardinal Balony as to whether his $150,000,000+ cathedral or his liturgical dancers are what he means by "Low Church"... but then again I've always wondered whether the man was actually a protestant so perhaps it's only natural for him to use such language.)
At the other extreme are two unlikely bedfellows - the secular left whose fantasies about their ideal pope (who'd probably take the name "Libertine I") have been shattered by the fact that yet again the Catholic Church has elected a pope that is Catholic; and the 'traditionalists' who believe they've seen nothing but ill omens in every liturgical and quasi-liturgical action of the past 5-1/2 days.
Herewith a few quick thoughts:
- Liberals/modernists who are curently singing paeans to Pope Francis will find cause to come down out of the clouds before too long. Once the bloom is off the rose they will treat him the same way they treated Papa Ratzinger - with scorn and derision.
- For people who claim that their beliefs and positions are based upon 'science', 'reason', 'logic', etc. the secular left certainly engages in a lot of unscientific, unreasonable, and illogical thinking - one might even call it 'blind faith' - in expecting a pope to suddenly change the Church's teachings.
- Pope Francis is not going to undo what Pope Benedict has done juridically, and if he tries there will be one heck of a row. That is not what he needs. Even if perchance he is at heart a polyester-poncho-wearing inculturated low-church Mahonyite whose papal liturgies make JPII's look like Tridentine Masses he is not going to "repeal" Summorum Pontificum.
- Granted, the ars celebrandi of the reigning pope does have a great deal of value as an example to the Church. Funny, we complained about B16: "he doesn't decree, all he does is 'lead by example'" but surely his 'style' gave many a priest both an ideal to follow and some 'cover' against his critics: "I'm just doing what the Pope does". My one specific fear is that a reversion to a 1970's Bugnini/Piero Marini style of papal liturgies will embolden the opponents of the liturgical renewal who will then be able to claim: "now you're not doing what the pope does".
- The "inaugural" Mass of Pope Francis is tomorrow. All of us will learn more about what to expect in this pontificate. Let us wait and see, trust in God, and meanwhile use the remainder of Lent fruitfully. I know one thing for sure: the Holy Father needs our prayers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)