Catholic Church in Ireland may no longer perform civil marriage part of weddings if gay marriage referendum passes

See http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0414/693972-same-sex-marriage/

The 65 Errors of the Modernists Condemned by the Church

LAMENTABILI SANE EXITU

Pius X
July 3, 1907
With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.
These errors are being daily spread among the faithful. Lest they captivate the faithful’s minds and corrupt the purity of their faith, His Holiness, Pius X, by Divine Providence, Pope, has decided that the chief errors should be noted and condemned by the Office of this Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition.
Therefore, after a very diligent investigation and consultation with the Reverend Consultors, the Most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, the General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals have judged the following propositions to be condemned and proscribed. In fact, by this general decree, they are condemned and proscribed.

I. Errors 1 to 8: Attacks to the Magisterium of the Church, to its authority, and to the obedience it is owed.
1. The ecclesiastical law which prescribes that books concerning the Divine Scriptures are subject to previous examination does not apply to critical scholars and students of scientific exegesis of the Old and New Testament.
2. The Church’s interpretation of the Sacred Books is by no means to be rejected; nevertheless, it is subject to the more accurate judgment and correction of the exegetes.
3. From the ecclesiastical judgments and censures passed against free and more scientific exegesis, one can conclude that the Faith the Church proposes contradicts history and that Catholic teaching cannot really be reconciled with the true origins of the Christian religion.
4. Even by dogmatic definitions the Church’s magisterium cannot determine the genuine sense of the Sacred Scriptures.
5. Since the deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences.
6. The “Church learning” and the “Church teaching” collaborate in such a way in defining truths that it only remains for the “Church teaching” to sanction the opinions of the “Church learning.”
7. In proscribing errors, the Church cannot demand any internal assent from the faithful by which the judgments she issues are to be embraced.
8. They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations.

II. Errors 9 to 19: False exegetic propositions, opposed to the divine origin of Sacred Scripture.
9. They display excessive simplicity or ignorance who believe that God is really the author of the Sacred Scriptures.
10. The inspiration of the books of the Old Testament consists in this: The Israelite writers handed down religious doctrines under a peculiar aspect which was either little or not at all known to the Gentiles.
11. Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.
12. If he wishes to apply himself usefully to Biblical studies, the exegete must first put aside all preconceived opinions about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture and interpret it the same as any other merely human document.
13. The Evangelists themselves, as well as the Christians of the second and third generation, artificially arranged the evangelical parables. In such a way they explained the scanty fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.
14. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.
15. Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.
16. The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.
17. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word lncarnate.
18. John claims for himself the quality of witness concerning Christ. In reality, however, he is only a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of Christ in the Church at the close of the first century.
19. Heterodox exegetes have expressed the true sense of the Scriptures more faithfully than Catholic exegetes.

III. Errors 20 to 26: False exegetic propositions, which falsify the origin and the intrinsic value of Divine Revelation.
20. Revelation could be nothing else than the consciousness man acquired of his revelation to God.
21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles.
22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.
23. Opposition may, and actually does, exist between the facts narrated in Sacred Scripture and the Church’s dogmas which rest on them. Thus the critic may reject as false facts the Church holds as most certain.
24. The exegete who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or doubtful is not to be reproved as long as he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves .
25. The assent of faith ultimately rests on a mass of probabilities .
26. The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing.
27. The divinity of Jesus Christ is not proved from the Gospels. It is a dogma which the Christian conscience has derived from the notion of the Messias.

IV. Errors 27 to 38: Denials of the most important dogmas of Christianity, related to the Person of the Divine Redeemer, to his Divinity, to his supernatural knowledge, to the expiatory character of his sufferings, Passion, and Death, and to his bodily Resurrection.
28. While He was exercising His ministry, Jesus did not speak with the object of teaching He was the Messias, nor did His miracles tend to prove it.
29. It is permissible to grant that the Christ of history is far inferior to the Christ Who is the object of faith.
30 In all the evangelical texts the name “Son of God” is equivalent only to that of “Messias.” It does not in the least way signify that Christ is the true and natural Son of God.
31. The doctrine concerning Christ taught by Paul, John, and the Councils of Nicea, Ephesus and Chalcedon is not that which Jesus taught but that which the Christian conscience conceived concerning Jesus.
32. It is impossible to reconcile the natural sense of the Gospel texts with the sense taught by our theologians concerning the conscience and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.2
33 Everyone who is not led by preconceived opinions can readily see that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate Messianic coming or the greater part of His doctrine as contained in the Gospels is destitute of authenticity.
34. The critics can ascribe to Christ a knowledge without limits only on a hypothesis which cannot be historically conceived and which is repugnant to the moral sense. That hypothesis is that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of a great many things to His disciples and posterity.
35. Christ did not always possess the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.
36. The Resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.
37. In the beginning, faith in the Resurrection of Christ was not so much in the fact itself of the Resurrection as in the immortal life of Christ with God.
38. The doctrine of the expiatory death of Christ is Pauline and not evangelical.

V. Errors 39 to 51: Denials of the institution of the means of salvation by Christ through his Church, particularly the Sacraments, and of their efficacy.
39. The opinions concerning the origin of the Sacraments which the Fathers of Trent held and which certainly influenced their dogmatic canons are very different from those which now rightly exist among historians who examine Christianity.
40. The Sacraments have their origin in the fact that the Apostles and their successors, swayed and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ.
41. The Sacraments are intended merely to recall to man’s mind the ever-beneficent presence of the Creator.
42. The Christian community imposed the necessity of Baptism, adopted it as a necessary rite, and added to it the obligation of the Christian profession.
43. The practice of administering Baptism to infants was a disciplinary evolution, which became one of the causes why the Sacrament was divided into two, namely, Baptism and Penance.
44. There is nothing to prove that the rite of the Sacrament of Confirmation was employed by the Apostles. The formal distinction of the two Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation does not pertain to the history of primitive Christianity.
45. Not everything which Paul narrates concerning the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. 11:23-25) is to be taken historically.
46. In the primitive Church the concept of the Christian sinner reconciled by the authority of the Church did not exist. Only very slowly did the Church accustom herself to this concept. As a matter of fact, even after Penance was recognized as an institution of the Church, it was not called a Sacrament since it would be held as a disgraceful Sacrament.
47. The words of the Lord, “Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained” (John 20:22-23), in no way refer to the Sacrament of Penance, in spite of what it pleased the Fathers of Trent to say.
48. In his Epistle (Ch. 5:14-15) James did not intend to promulgate a Sacrament of Christ but only commend a pious custom. If in this custom he happens to distinguish a means of grace, it is not in that rigorous manner in which it was taken by the theologians who laid down the notion and number of the Sacraments.
49. When the Christian supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action those who customarily presided over the supper acquired the sacerdotal character.
50. The elders who fulfilled the office of watching over the gatherings of the faithful were instituted by the Apostles as priests or bishops to provide for the necessary ordering of the increasing communities and not properly for the perpetuation of the Apostolic mission and power.
51. It is impossible that Matrimony could have become a Sacrament of the new law until later in the Church since it was necessary that a full theological explication of the doctrine of grace and the Sacraments should first take place before Matrimony should be held as a Sacrament.

VI. Errors 52 to 63: Attacks on the divine foundation of the Church, of her essential constitution, and activities.
52. It was far from the mind of Christ to found a Church as a society which would continue on earth for a long course of centuries. On the contrary, in the mind of Christ the kingdom of heaven together with the end of the world was about to come immediately.
53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution.
54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.
55. Simon Peter never even suspected that Christ entrusted the primacy in the Church to him.3
56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches, not through the ordinance of Divine Providence, but merely through political conditions.
57. The Church has shown that she is hostile to the progress of the natural and theological sciences.
58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.
59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places.
60. Christian Doctrine was originally Judaic. Through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Joannine, finally Hellenic and universal.4
61. It may be said without paradox that there is no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, which contains a doctrine absolutely identical with that which the Church teaches on the same matter. For the same reason, therefore, no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic and the theologian.
62. The chief articles of the Apostles’ Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.
63. The Church shows that she is incapable of effectively maintaining evangelical ethics since she obstinately clings to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with modern progress.

VII. Errors 64 and 65: Calls for the “reform” of the Church.
64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted.
65. Modern Catholicism can be reconciled with true science only if it is transformed into a non-dogmatic Christianity; that is to say, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.
The following Thursday, the fourth day of the same month and year, all these matters were accurately reported to our Most Holy Lord, Pope Pius X. His Holiness approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers and ordered that each and every one of the above-listed propositions be held by all as condemned and proscribed.

PETER PALOMBELLI, Notary of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition

How the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception Was Defined

From http://catholicexchange.com/dogma-immaculate-conception-defined

Divinely revealed truths do not change.

But sometimes it takes a while to figure out what those truths are.

It took the Church hundreds of years before it finally settled the question of who exactly Jesus Christ was in the most basic terms of the question—God? Man? One person or two? (The Council of Chalcedon, in 451, hashed out what has been the Church’s final answer.) It also took hundreds of years before the Church affirmed, in a dogmatic definition, the divinity of the Holy Spirit (Council of Constantinople, 381).

Then there is the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. That took nearly two millennia. Or, 1854 years after the birth of Christ to be exact.

The Church had always believed in the sinlessness of Mary. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus identified Mary as a second Eve, as one who undid Eve’s work in bringing humanity into sin. Origen, one of the earliest Church Fathers called her “immaculate of the immaculate.” St. Augustine did not even want to raise the question of sin in Mary out of honor for her Son.

The dogma was implied, but not defined in their statements. While venerating Mary, the Church had stopped short of the absolutism required by the dogma of the Immaculate Conception—which holds that Mary was spared even the stain of original sin at the moment of her conception—because it also did not want to go so far as to say that Mary was not in need of Christ her savior. That certainly seemed very wrong.

The solution eluded some of the brightest minds and greatest saints of Christendom. In the Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas affirms only that Mary was sanctified in the womb and that the inclination to sin caused by original sin was fettered in her person. St. Bernard of Clairvaux believed that Mary could have been sanctified soon after the moment of conception, but not at her conception.

Instead, it took an obscure monk, a Franciscan dunce, and a French nun to help win the Church over to acceptance of this dogma.

The turning point undoubtedly was the work of the great Franciscan scholastic theologian, John Duns Scotus, who lived and worked from the late 1200s early into the next century.

But much of the intellectual heavy lifting was done well over a century before him by an English Benedictine monk named Eadmer. Born around 1060, Eadmer became a close companion and biographer to St. Anselm of Canterbury. (Eadmer is even sometimes referred to as Pseudo-Anselm.) Eadmer would later write the lives of many other English saints, including Sts. Wilfrid, Oda, and Dunstan.

Eadmer was once offered a position as the bishop of St. Andrews. He refused, writing that “he would not in exchange for all of Scotland deny himself a monk of Canterbury.” (Besides a commitment to the monastic life, there seems to be more than a tinge of Anglo-Saxon nationalism in his decision. For more about Eadmer read his biography from the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.) It was at this time that Eadmer reached new, previously unachieved heights in the development of Marian theology.

Eadmer assembles a phalanx of arguments in favor of the Immaculate Conception. As one influential synopsis of his writings sums them up this way: “Taking Mary’s relation to other creatures: St. John the Baptist was sanctified from his birth, what then of Mary? Mary enjoys dominion over all other creatures and must not, therefore, be brought down to our level by original sin; God preserved the Angels from sin and Mary is the Queen of Angels.”

Then there is also the parallel with Eve. Mary completely undid the role of Eve and in a superior way (Eve had been mother of all humanity, Mary was Mother of God). There was also the question of how Mary could cooperate in the Incarnation had she been stained by original sin.

It was left to John Duns Scotus, however, to discover the solution to the dilemma Aquinas and others had—how to affirm the sinlessness of Mary without excluding her from the need for a Savior. He argued that Mary was pre-emptively redeemed by Christ. Or, to use his words, Scotus held that Mary was “preserved” from original sin, rather than freed from it. This formula both affirmed her absolute purity in the strongest possible sense while doing nothing to detract from her need for a Redeemer.

In fact, much of the genius of Scotus’ argument is that the Immaculate Conception further adds to Christ’s own dignity as Mediator. In a theological commentary, Scotus put it this way:

For a most perfect mediator exercises the most perfect mediation possible in regard to some person for whom he mediates. Thus Christ exercised a most perfect act of mediation in regard to some person for whom He was Mediator. In regard to no person did He have a more exalted relationship than to Mary. Such, however, would not have been true had He not preserved Her from original sin.

To prove this claim, Scotus goes on to argue that Christ had to have been “the perfect Mediator of at least one person.” That person must have received from Christ the “greatest possible good”—complete preservation from original sin. “It is a greater good to be preserved from evil than to fall into it and afterwards be freed from it,” Scotus wrote. Therefore, it would have been fitting for Christ to preserve Mary from original sin.

The solution ingeniously shifts the Immaculate Conception from being a belief perceived as being in potential antithesis to the redemptive work of Christ to further supporting it. (Click here to read the full excerpt of Scotus’ argument.) The Church was well on its way towards widespread acceptance. As the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it, Scotus had “so solidly and dispelled the objections in a manner so satisfactory, that from that time onward the doctrine prevailed.”

Yet it would be several hundred more years before the Immaculate Conception was dogmatically defined.

Along the way, one extraordinary intervention from heaven helped nudge the Church forward.

It was July 18, 1830 and a French nun from a little village on the Seine River in what was once part of the wine-rich region of Burgundy lay awake praying to St. Vincent de Paul, asking for a vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In her hand she was grasping a relic of the saints, cloth from his surplice. On a sudden impulse, she tore it into two and swallowed one half. Gradually she dozed off only to be awoken by a little boy who called out to her three times, beckoning her to come to the chapel.

Here is how her biographer describes what happened next:

Now they were at the chapel. Catherine gasped in astonishment when the heavy door, which must be locked, swung wide at the child’s mere touch. The chapel was ablaze with light! The chandeliers, the candles on the altar, all burned brightly. Why, she thought, it is like a midnight Mass!

St. Catherine Labouré was about to have her first of several visions of Our Lady. In her second, she saw Mary on a globe with rays of light showering downward from her fingers. She was encircled by these words: “O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.” This image was an M entwined with a cross and the Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart beneath it. The image is known to us today as the Miraculous Medal.

It would be a mistake to see this vision as the source of the dogmatic definition that would come a quarter of a century later. New revelation had not been given to the faithful. Rather, the truth of a revelation of which the Church had always been conscious but never fully grasped had been confirmed in some special way. (In his introduction to Marian theology, scholar Mark Miravalle says the vision gave “positive encouragement” to Pope Pius IX.)

The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, now a firm fixture of the Church’s theology and devotion, certainly took the long road to widespread acceptance and belief. One is reminded of Christ’s words in Matthew 11:25, “I give praise to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for although you have hidden these things from the wise and the learned you have revealed them to the childlike.”

Five Unlikely Celebrity Fans of the Traditional Latin Mass

Catholic Herald reported on November 20, 2014:

At the Catholic Herald this morning we were surprised to learn that Bill Murray loves the traditional Latin Mass. The Groundhog Day star, who was raised a Catholic and even has a Sister who is a Dominican, told the Guardian: “I think we lost something by losing the Latin… there’s a vibration to those words.”

He is not the only celebrity fan of Mass in its pre-1962 form. Here are five others…

1. Neil Tennant

Tennant, one half of the synth pop duo Pet Shop Boys, though no longer a practising Catholic, told Andrew Sullivan of the Daily Dish: “The thing that I always liked about Catholicism they got rid of! I liked the Latin and the incense and the sort of music and plainsong.”

2. Simon Callow

The English actor, best known among theatre buffs for his mesmerising performance as Mozart in the stage version of Amadeus, told The Catholic Herald this year that growing up he wanted to be a priest. He was inspired, he recalls, by the rituals of the Old Mass, their “beauty and theatrical power”.

3. Jimmy Fallon

Like Simon Callow, the American TV presenter grew up wanting to be a priest but no longer goes to Mass. He told NPR that he tried going back, but “there’s a band there now, and you got to, you have to hold hands with people through the whole Mass now, and I don’t like doing that … I want the old way. I want to hang out with the, you know, with the nuns, you know, that was my favourite type of Mass, and the grotto, and just like straight up, just Mass Mass.”

4. Julian Fellowes

The Downton Abbey writer has been spotted regularly at Extraordinary Form Masses at the Brompton Oratory.

 

5. Agatha Christie

Even though not a Catholic, Christie signed a petition asking Pope Paul VI to allow the Tridentine Mass, as it was known then, to be celebrated in England and Wales, following the introduction of the Novus Ordo.

Others who signed the petition were Graham Greene, Malcolm Muggeridge, and non-Catholics Nancy Mitford, Iris Murdoch, violinist Yehudi Menuhin, and actor Ralph Richardson.

Irish Ambassador Appointed to Holy See

See http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/11/12/irish_ambassador_to_holy_see_speaks_to_vatican_radio_/1110899

Pope Paul VI Beatified On October 19th

CNA October 17, 2014:

He had the unenviable task of being Pope during a most “tumultuous” era for the Church, but  Paul VI stood “deeply rooted in Christ” through it all, a theology professor has said.

“Pope Paul VI suffered greatly from the growing apostasy of the world from Christian values and from the distortions of the teaching of Vatican II,” said theology professor Dr. Alan Schreck of the Franciscan University of Steubenville. “Through it all, he remained deeply rooted in Christ and the Holy Spirit.”

Giovanni Battista Montini – soon to be Blessed Paul VI -- will be beatified Oct. 19, at the conclusion of the Synod on the Family.

His cause for beatification moved forward after a miracle was attributed to his intercession by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints and approved by Pope Francis in May.

Benedict XVI had affirmed his “heroic virtue” in 2012, officially recognizing him as “Venerable.”

As Pope, Paul VI lived “heroic virtue” because though he “suffered” much turmoil and dissent in the Church, he directed major church reforms and supported renewal of faith amongst the laity and religious, was a prophet about the errors of the age, and was even a well-traveled “pilgrim pope.”

The reforms of Paul VI included reforms of the Roman curia and the College of Cardinals, as well as support for renewal movements within the Church.

“He was an able administrator who reformed the Roman Curia, as Vatican II had directed,” Schreck said. Paul VI also “internationalized the College of Cardinals” by “markedly increasing the membership in the college from the global South and East.”

Amid the cultural wreckage of the age, he saw “the need for a deep and profound prayer life for every member of the Church,” Schreck said, and supported “spiritual renewal movements.”

Paul VI also was a forerunner of St. John Paul II’s stand against Communism.

“He sought religious freedom concessions from Iron Curtain countries, paving the way for the downfall of communism in Eastern Europe,” Schreck said.

Perhaps Paul VI is most well known for his encyclical Humanae vitae in which he upheld the Church’s discipline of priestly celibacy and its teaching against the use of artificial contraception. The stand was widely “controversial” then and now, yet Paul VI has been vindicated by time as a prophet of the destructive effects of contraception.

“Though this teaching sparked dissent among some Catholics, today Paul VI’s specific warnings of the negative effects of the widespread use of artificial contraception – such as increased sexual promiscuity and the decline of respect for human life – have certainly come to pass,” Schreck affirmed.

Yet as St. John Paul II was known as the well-traveled pope, Paul VI was also a “pilgrim pope,” Schreck said, citing his travels to Australia, South America, Asia, and the United States. And he promoted ministry through the end of his papacy with his “brilliant apostolic letter ‘On Evangelization in the Modern World,’” as well as his calling a synod on catechesis.

Through his faith, he guided the Church “in this most challenging period in which Western culture began to be dislodged from her Christian moorings,” Schreck concluded.

Pro-Family Catholics Reject Pro-Gay Synod Mid-Way Report, Calling It 'a Betrayal’

Voice of the Family October 13, 2014:

An international coalition of pro-family groups has rejected the mid-way report of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family, calling it “a betrayal”.

Voice of the Family http://voiceofthefamily.info responded to the report (relatio post disceptationem), published this morning and presented by Cardinal Péter Erdő (See “Synod on Family: Midterm report presented, 2015 Synod announced“, Vatican Radio, 13 October) The report has been welcomed ecstatically by liberal Catholic commentators.

John Smeaton, co-founder of Voice of the Family, said:

“Those who are controlling the Synod have betrayed Catholic parents worldwide. We believe that the Synod’s mid-way report is one of the worst official documents drafted in Church history.

“Thankfully the report is a preliminary report for discussion, rather than a definitive proposal. It is essential that the voices of those lay faithful who sincerely live out Catholic teaching are also taken into account. Catholic families are clinging to Christ’s teaching on marriage and chastity by their finger-tips.”

Patrick Buckley, Voice of the Family’s Irish representative, said:

“The Synod’s mid-way report represents an attack on marriage and the family. For example, the report in effect gives a tacit approval of adulterous relationships, thereby contradicting the Sixth Commandment and the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the indissolubility of marriage.

“The report undermines the Church’s definitive teaching against contraception, by using the coded language of ‘underlin[ing] the need to respect the dignity of the person in the moral evaluation of the methods of birth control”. This language is the code of those who wish to reduce the Church’s doctrines to a mere guide, thus leaving couples free to choose contraception in so-called ‘conscience’.

“The report accepts wrongly that there is a value in the homosexual orientation. This contradicts the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith’s 1986 Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons:

“Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

Maria Madise, Voice of the Family’s coordinator, said:

“What will Catholics parents now have to tell their children about contraception, cohabiting with partners or living homosexual lifestyles? Will those parents now have to tell their children that the Vatican teaches that there are positive and constructive aspects to these mortal sins? This approach destroys grace in souls.

“It would be a false mercy to give Holy Communion to people who do not repent of their mortal sins against Christ’s teachings on sexual purity. Real mercy consists of offering people a clean conscience via the Sacrament of Confession and thus union with God.

“Many of those who claim to speak in the name of the universal Church have failed to teach the faithful. This failure has created unprecedented difficulties for families. No responsibility is taken for this failure in this disastrous mid-way report.”

“The Synod’s mid-way report will increase the incidence of faithful Catholics being labelled as ‘pharisees’, simply for upholding Catholic teaching on sexual purity.”

John Smeaton concluded:

“We urge Catholics not to be complacent or give in to a false sense of obedience, in the face of attacks on the fundamental principles of the natural law. Catholics are morally obliged to oppose the course being taken within the Synod.”

Here is the part of the Synod Mid-Way Report titled: Welcoming Homosexual Persons.

     50.        Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

     51.        The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

     52.        Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

To see the entire Vatican Document click here: http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/13/0751/03037.html

Synod's Mid-Term Report "Lacks a Solid Foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium"

Catholic World Report October 14, 2014:

Yesterday's presentation of the mid-term report (Relatio post disceptationem) of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family was met with a remarkable level of interest among both Catholic and non-Catholic media outlets. The Vatican Radio site, in its introduction to the document, stated in part:

In the mid-term report the Synod Fathers speak of how it's the task of the Church to recognize those seeds of the Word that have spread beyond its visible and sacramental boundaries.  They appeal to the "law of graduality," as a reflection of the way God reached out to humanity and led His people forward step by step.

Reaction to the report ranged from positive declarations of "a shift in tone toward gays and divorce" (New York Times) to more pessimistic assessments. Mary Jo Anderson, reporting for Catholic World Report from Rome, remarked, "The Extraordinary Synod on the Family is at its midpoint and certain degrees of separation are clear: There is a divorce over divorce, remarriage, and Communion."

Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura and a contributor with four other cardinals (and four additional scholars) to the new book, Remaining in the Truth of Christ: Marriage and Communion in the Catholic Church (Ignatius Press), has expressed concern over several aspects of the Synod, including the push for changes in the handling of Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics and the way that information about the Synod is being, in his words, "manipulated."

Cardinal Burke responded late yesterday to questions from Carl E. Olson, editor of Catholic World Report, about his concerns, his view of the mid-term report, and why he thinks a statement from Pope Francis is "long overdue."

CWR: In what way is information about what is happening in the Synod being either manipulated or only partially reported and made public?

Cardinal Burke: The interventions of the individual Synod Fathers are not made available to the public, as has been the case in the past. All of the information regarding the Synod is controlled by the General Secretariat of the Synod which clearly has favored from the beginning the positions expressed in the Relatio post disceptationem of yesterday morning.

While the individual interventions of the Synod Fathers are not published, yesterday’s Relatio, which is merely a discussion document, was published immediately and, I am told, even broadcast live. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to see the approach at work, which is certainly not of the Church.

CWR: How is that reflected in the Synod's midterm document, released yesterday, which is being criticised by many for its appeal to a so-called "law of graduality”?

Cardinal Burke: While the document in question (Relatio post disceptationem) purports to report only the discussion which took place among the Synod Fathers, it, in fact, advances positions which many Synod Fathers do not accept and, I would say, as faithful shepherds of the flock cannot accept. Clearly, the response to the document in the discussion which immediately followed its presentation manifested that a great number of the Synod Fathers found it objectionable.

The document lacks a solid foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium. In a matter on which the Church has a very rich and clear teaching, it gives the impression of inventing a totally new, what one Synod Father called “revolutionary,”teaching on marriage and the family. It invokes repeatedly and in a confused manner principles which are not defined, for example, the law of graduality.

CWR: How important is it, do you think, that Pope Francis make a statement soon in order to address the growing sense—among many in the media and in the pews—that the Church is on the cusp of changing her teaching on various essential points regarding marriage, “remarriage,” reception of Communion, and even the place of “unions” among homosexuals?

Cardinal Burke: In my judgment, such a statement is long overdue. The debate on these questions has been going forward now for almost nine months, especially in the secular media but also through the speeches and interviews of Cardinal Walter Kasper and others who support his position.

The faithful and their good shepherds are looking to the Vicar of Christ for the confirmation of the Catholic faith and practice regarding marriage which is the first cell of the life of the Church.

Mass Etiquette: 20 Things To Do And Not Do In Mass

See http://marysaggies.blogspot.ie/2012/03/20-tips-for-proper-etiquette-in-mass.html

Vatican accepts resignation of Cardinal Seán Brady, leader of Catholic Church in Ireland

See http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-29109314

10 Sins That Must Be Confessed Before Receiving the Most Holy Eucharist

Courageous Priest August 27, 2014:

You can’t receive the Eucharist if you’ve:

1) Missed a weekend or Holy Day Mass without a valid reason
2) Having sex outside of marriage, with yourself (masturbation) or someone else
3) Desecrated the Eucharist
4) Haven’t been to confession in a year
5) Use artificial birth control – condoms, pills, patches, IUD’s, etc
6) Sponsor or help in any way with an abortion or any destruction of an embryo
7) Murder
8) Hate/Anger
9) Lust after someone
10) Pride, Greed, Sloth, Envy

etc. etc. The list is not exhaustive, and any sin that we have meditated on before hand, understood its gravity and still chosen to do it can be a deadly sin.
Blogger Note:   Numbers 8 through 10 would depend mostly upon the gravity of the sin.

Baltimire Catechism

66. What is mortal sin?

A: Mortal sin is a grievous offense against the law of God.
Flee from sins as from the face of a serpent; for if thou comest near them, they will take hold of thee. (Ecclesiasticus 21:2)

67. Why is this sin called mortal?

A: This sin is called mortal, or deadly, because it deprives the sinner of sanctifying grace, the supernatural life of the soul.
Before man is life and death, good and evil; that which he shall choose shall be given him. (Ecclesiasticus 15:18)
1 Corinthians 11:27   Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.

Don’t step out of bounds…and by all means…if you do…get back in bounds through confession! Don’t desecrate the Eucharist and receive it as some sort of prize you’ve earned simply by showing up for Mass!

7 Things To Restore the Sense of the Sacred

Catholicism Pure & Simple August 13, 2014 :

When it comes to the liturgy of the Roman rite, some would have you believe that you have two choices, the progressive Novus Ordo mass at St. Banal of Boringham parish or the Traditional Latin Mass at the Parish of Quo Primum on the corner of Lunatic and Fringe.

They would also have you believe that never the twain shall meet, that until the Pope of Future Past arrives to reform the Novus Ordo, that any chance of recovering what was traditionally considered sacred and reverential in the Novus Ordo is impossible, regardless of whether you consider that a feature or a bug.

But this is simply not true. There are many things that Pastors and Priests could do tomorrow to help restore a sense of the sacred and proper reverence to the liturgy, things that are perfectly in line with Vatican II. Further, this is no theoretical exercise, there are pastors all around that have done some or even all of these things.

1.) Ad Orientem. The mass being said ad orientem means that the priest and the faithful face the same direction, (liturgical) east. Many people think that Vatican II or the Novus Ordo requires the priest to face the people. This is simply not true. In fact, the rubrics of the new mass anticipates that the mass be said ad orientem and instructs the priest when he should face the people.

I can think of no one single thing that could do more to properly orient the minds and hearts of the faithful (not to mention the priest) than restoring ad orientem worship. I commend to you the letter that Fr. Richard Heilman wrote to a priest about the fruits of this change one year after its implementation. No permission or indult is required to make this change as it is just as the mass was originally intended. All that is needed is a willing priest and time to properly educate the faithful.

2.) Restore chant and polyphony. Ditch the lame hymnal and its happy-clappy anthropocentrism and bring back chant and polyphony. Again, this is exactly for what Vatican II called, “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.” Moreover, the priest should chant the mass with the faithful providing chanted responses. A priest could even chant the propers. All this can take time and a concerted effort at education, the payoff could be immense.

3.) Latin, yes Latin!! Again, Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium “Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” What Vatican II envisioned was the use of the vernacular for the variable parts of the mass, “This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants.” But the parts of the mass that are the same every week could be in Latin, the people could be educated on this, education, translation cheat sheets, and time could restore that which was always to be preserved. At the very least, prayers like the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei should be in Latin and the Kyrie in Greek as many people are already familiar with them.

4.) Proper Reception of Communion, Kneeling and On The Tongue. In his article at New Liturgical Movement, Fr. Richard Heilman does all the heavy lifting on this topic.

Why Kneel?

Pope Benedict XVI, has noted that kneeling is “an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God.” He reminds us that “the word proskynein alone occurs fifty-nine times in the New Testament, twenty-four of which are in the Apocalypse, the book of the heavenly liturgy, which is presented to the Church as the standard for her own liturgy.”

In his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, Pope Benedict speaks of a “story that comes from the sayings of the Desert Fathers, according to which the devil was compelled by God to show himself to a certain Abba Apollo. He looked black and ugly, with frightening thin limbs, but, most strikingly, he had no knees. The inability to kneel is seen as the very essence of the diabolical.”

Why Receive on the tongue?

Despite the widespread practice of Communion in the hand, the universal discipline of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue has not changed. A bishop, for example, may forbid the practice of Communion in the hand but not the practice of Communion on the tongue. The Church strongly encourages the latter but not the former. With respect to Communion in the hand, the Church speaks only in a cautionary tone because of the many abuses that often accompany this practice.

Kneeling and receiving the Eucharist on the tongue encourages you to really think about what it is you are doing while at the same time showing proper respect for the Eucharist.  Adding or using a communion rail is the best way to encourage proper reception.

Speaking of respect for the Eucharist

5.) No More Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.  The use of of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion is supposed to be just that, extraordinary.  The use of EMHC’s for the regular distribution of communion at ordinary masses is an abuse, pure and simple.

§ 1. The canonical discipline concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion must be correctly applied so as to avoid generating confusion. The same discipline establishes that the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon.[96] Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are those instituted as acolytes and the faithful so deputed in accordance with Canon 230, § 3.[97]

§ 2. Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.[99] They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion.

The ordinary ministers are Bishops, Priests, and Deacons.  When every Tom, Dick, and Jane runs up to the sanctuary and hands out communion, the sacredness of the Eucharist is diminished.

6.) Appropriate Attire.  This is all about education, education, and more education.  Priests and pastors should repeatedly preach and educate the faithful about proper attire for mass.  Nobody would dress in flip flops and tank top to a job interview,  or to meet the President or the Pope, but meeting our Lord and Savior in the Eucharist?  Other things Priest can do is ditch the altar server’s potato sack robes and replace them with cassocks and surplices.  Priest’s could teach about the sacredness of women and encourage use of the veil.  Everybody knows that what we wear changes how we behave and how we behave changes how we think.

7.) General Reverence and Sacredness.  This is all about eliminating disruption and restoring a sense of the sacred.  Some things to consider here are:

• Eliminating the Sign of Peace by the Faithful.  It is only an option and not mandatory and often very disruptive.
• More Incense.
• Great attention to reverence and precision by the Priests and servers.
• Priestly ad libs banished!
• The priest avoid wandering around during the homily.

I don’t pretend that any of these things are easy for the priests or the faithful, but they are all doable and many priests and pastors have implemented many or all of these things. Some of these things may be particularly difficult for some older parishioners, boomers and beyond, no doubt. But to avoid restoring the sacred for the sake of these is simply to make the dying patient comfortable rather than trying to cure the disease.

In all these things, the priest must be committed to education and some may take time.  Parishes that have implemented many of these changes have seen tremendous blessings.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider: ‘We Are in the Fourth Great Crisis of the Church’

CatholicHerald June 6, 2014:

Liberals, collaborating with the “new paganism”, are driving the Catholic Church towards a split, according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider, the liturgical specialist who is carrying on a rearguard fight against “abuses” in the Church.

So serious are the problems, Bishop Schneider said in an interview last week, that this is the fourth great crisis in the history of the Church, comparable to the fourth-century Arian heresy in which a large part of the Church hierarchy was implicated.

If you have not heard of the Soviet-born bishop, you will. The sincere, scholarly clergyman is auxiliary bishop of the distant Archdiocese of St Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan. But this month he has received a rock star welcome from congregations across the country on his tour of England and he has embraced cyberspace to put over a trenchant, traditional defence of the Church. “Thanks be to God, the internet exists,” he said.

His views are not popular with everyone, especially not some of his liberal colleagues, or, he says, with the mainstream media of the secular world. But his audiences tell another story.

Bishop Schneider is best known for arguing that Holy Communion should be received on the tongue while kneeling, which he insists is the more efficient way to foster respect for the Sacrament and to prevent abuse of the Sacred Hosts. The 53-year-old bishop has called also for clarification (a new Syllabus of Errors), aimed at the clergy, to put a stop to liturgical and doctrinal freewheeling on a range of issues in the “spirit of Vatican II”.

In his interview, Bishop Schneider said the “banal” and casual treatment of the Blessed Sacrament is part of a major crisis in the Church in which some laity and clergy, including some in positions of authority, are siding with secular society. At the heart of the problems, he believes, is the creeping introduction of a man-centred agenda, while in some churches God, in the tabernacle, really is materially put in a corner, while the priest takes centre stage. Bishop Schneider argued that this situation is now coming to a head. “I would say, we are in the fourth great crisis [of the Church], in a tremendous confusion over doctrine and liturgy. We have already been in this for 50 years.”

How long will it last? “Perhaps God will be merciful to us in 20 or 30 years.”

In the autumn, the synod of bishops will meet in extraordinary session to discuss the family, in the light of the questionnaire which Pope Francis invited the faithful to complete, giving their views on marriage and sexuality. Expectations are growing that rules will be relaxed on a range of sexual matters and in terms of divorced people receiving Communion as a sign of “mercy” from the Church.

Such views, according to Bishop Schneider, reveal the depth of the problem. “I think this issue of the reception of Holy Communion by the remarried will blow up and show the real crisis in the Church. The real crisis of the Church is anthropocentrism and the forgetting of Christo-centrism…

“This is the deepest evil: man, or the clergy, putting themselves in the centre when they are celebrating liturgy and when they change the revealed truth of God, for instance, concerning the Sixth Commandment and human sexuality.”

Although he says talk of change is mainly coming from “the anti-Christian media”, he sees clergy and lay Catholics “collaborating” with what he calls the new paganism. Bishop Schneider is particularly critical of the idea that these changes should be made so as to be merciful to those currently barred from receiving the Sacraments. “[This is] a kind of sophism,” he said. “This is not mercy, this is cruel.”

He suggested this was “a false concept of mercy”, saying: “It is comparable to a doctor who gives a [diabetic] patient sugar, although he knows it will kill him.”

The bishop believes there are clear parallels with great crises of the past, when leading clergymen were complicit with heresies. In the Arian heresy, he said, naming them on his fingers, only a handful of the hierarchy resisted. “We [Christians] are a minority. We are surrounded by a very cruel pagan world. The temptation and challenge of today can be compared with the first centuries.”

He added: “Unfortunately there were … members of the clergy and even bishops who put grains of incense in front of the statue of the emperor or of a pagan idol or who delivered the books of the Holy Scripture to be burned. Such collaborationist Christians and clerics were called in those times thurificati or traditores.”

And today, he maintained, we also have those who collaborate, our “traitors of the Faith”.

Pope Francis is perceived to be at the forefront of a new liberal attitude coming from Rome. But Bishop Schneider says: “Thanks be to God, Pope Francis has not expressed himself in these ways that the mass media expect from him. He has spoken until now, in his official homilies, very beautiful Catholic doctrine. I hope he will continue to teach in a very clear manner the Catholic doctrine.”

The bishop said he hopes “the majority of the bishops still have enough Catholic spirit and faith that they will reject the proposal and not accept this”.

Nevertheless, he can foresee a split coming, leading to an eventual renewal of the Church on traditional lines. But, he believes, this will not be before the crisis has plunged the Church further into disarray. Eventually, he thinks, the “anthropocentric” [man-centred] clerical system will collapse. “This liberal clerical edifice will crash down because they have no roots and no fruits,” he said.

In the turmoil, Bishop Schneider, fears traditional Catholics may, for a time, be persecuted or discriminated against, even at the behest of those who have “power in the exterior structures of the Church”. But he believes those involved with the “heresy” will “not prevail against the Church”. And, in hope, the bishop said: “The Supreme Magisterium will surely issue an unequivocal doctrinal statement, rejecting any collaboration with the neo-pagan ideas.”

At this point, Bishop Schneider believes, the modern thurificati et traditores will leave the Church. “I can presume that such a separation will affect each level of Catholics: lay people and even not
excluding the high clergy,” he said.

Such comments are unlikely to win Bishop Schneider popularity in some circles, but he argues: “It is quite insignificant to be popular or unpopular. For every member of the clergy, their first interest should be to be popular in the eyes of God and not in the eyes of today or of the powerful. Jesus said a warning: ‘Woe to you when people speak well of you.’”

He added: “Popularity is false… Great saints of the Church, such as Thomas More and John Fisher, rejected popularity… those today who are worried about the popularity of the mass media and public opinion… will be remembered as cowards and not as heroes of the Faith.”

Bishop Schneider observes ruefully that there are many whose views coincide with those of the pagan world who “declare themselves Catholics and even faithful to the Pope”, while “those who are faithful to the Catholic faith or those who are promoting the glory of Christ in the liturgy” are labelled
extremists.

Such critics may assert that Bishop Schneider’s concern over Holy Communion is like worrying over the numbers of angels on a pinhead. But the bishop insists that treatment of the Eucharist is at the very heart of the crisis. “The Eucharist is at the heart of the Church,” he said. “When the heart is weak, the whole body is weak.”

He argued that receiving Communion in hand “contributes gradually to the loss of the Catholic faith in the Real Presence and in transubstantiation”.

Bishop Schneider also rejected the idea that concern for the liturgy is less important than, or even separate from, concern for the poor. “This is erroneous. The first commandment which Christ gave us was to adore God alone. Liturgy is not a meeting of friends. It is our first task to adore and glorify God in the liturgy and also in our manner of life. From a true adoration and love of God grows love for the poor and our neighbour. It is a consequence.”

The bishop’s views have been shaped by his early childhood, growing up as a persecuted German Catholic in the Soviet Union, where he even had to attend atheism lessons at school. His book Dominus Est discloses
how the German Catholic community kept alive their faith despite severe hardship and persecution. In his own experience, his mother and great aunt took great risks for their faith and on behalf of others in the community. So Bishop Schneider and his family were horrified at the liberal attitudes and practices in the West, especially in respect of Holy Communion, which had been so rare and so precious to the persecuted German Catholics of the Soviet Union.

Seemingly like the little boy in the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes, the bishop now feels compelled to speak out and he cannot understand why others do not do the same. “It seems that the majority of the clergy and the bishops are content with this modern use of Communion in hand… For me this is incredible. How is this possible, when Jesus is present in the little Hosts?”

He continued: “There is the grievous fact of the loss of the Eucharistic fragments. And the fragments of the consecrated Host are crushed by feet. This is horrible! Our God, in our churches, is trampled by feet!”

Bishop Schneider admitted that he is “very sad that I am feeling myself as one who is shouting in the desert”.

He said: “It is time that the bishops raise their voices for the Eucharistic Jesus who has no voice to defend himself. Here is an attack on the Most Holy, an attack on the Eucharistic faith.”

But despite his concerns, Bishop Schneider is not pessimistic and believes that there is already a groundswell of support for traditional values that will, in time, renew the Church: “Little ones in the Church have been let down and neglected,” he said. “[But] they have kept the purity of their faith and they represent the true power of the Church in the eyes of God and not those who are in administration.

“I spoke with young students in Oxford and I was so much impressed by these students. I was so glad to see their purity of faith and their convictions, and the clear Catholic mind. This will renew the Church. So I am confident and hopeful also in respect of this crisis in the Church. The Holy Ghost will win this crisis with this little army.”

He added: “I am not worried about the future. The Church is Christ’s Church and He is the real head of the Church, the Pope is only the vicar of Christ. The soul of the Church is the Holy Spirit and He is powerful.”

Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter Priest killed in shooting in USA

See http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2014/06/12/two-priests-stabbed-phoenix/10359901/

Bon Secours Sisters welcome investigation over Tuam babies

See http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0605/621718-tuam/

Holy war rocks Harvard as the Catholic Church fights back against Satanic mass

From http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/10/holy-war-rocks-harvard-catholic-church-fights-back/

Church officials say they will “combat evil” by hosting a positive worship service to counter a Harvard group’s Satanic mass planned for Monday evening.

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston will host a Eucharistic procession from MIT to a nearby church for an hour of prayer, The Boston Globe reports.

The religious procession will end up at St. Paul’s Parish in Harvard Square, just a 10-minutes walk from the Queen’s Head Pub in Memorial Hall the Harvard Extension Cultural Studies Club is set to hold a “black mass.”

A black mass is a ritual performed as a parody of the Roman Catholic Mass.

In an official statement, the Archdiocese said it fears that people who partake in the ceremony are “underestimating the power of Satan.”

Club members say that they are holding the service for educational purposes, but church officials say that the service is offensive.

“The university is allowing this under the guise that it is educational,” said the Rev. Michael Drea, pastor of St. Paul’s Church. “But anything rooted in hatred is not something that should be put in the same category as academic freedom and academic expression.”

Club leaders insist that the black mass is meant to be a historical reenactment and an exploration of other cultures.

“Clearly people are insulted, and I believe that is due to them having no contact with, or understanding of Satanism,” an unidentified club representative said via email Friday.

The newspaper reported that members of the club would not identify themselves and preferred to speak over email.

The club’s representative told reporters that Satanists are often misunderstood: These people are not evil; they just don’t fit in with mainstream culture and choose to “actively embrace their outsider status.”

“Many whom I have met are vegetarians, artists, animal-rights activists, and have a strong sense of community,” the representative said.

Mr. Drea disagreed and said the practice was inherently evil.

“There is no way to misunderstand a Satanic act that degrades the Catholic liturgy,” he said. “There is no misunderstanding; it is just a fact.”

Archdiocesan spokesman Terrence Donilon said in a statement that the black mass is “contrary to charity and goodness, and it places participants dangerously close to destructive works of evil.”

Ireland appoints a woman as its new resident ambassador to the Holy See

From http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/world-news/detail/articolo/33939/

The Irish Government has appointed Ms. Emma Madigan, a career diplomat as its new resident ambassador to the Holy See. 

The decision was taken today at the Cabinet meeting in Dublin, May 6, and confirmed by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), which said the new Ambassador will have a particular mandate to ‘follow the activities of the Holy See on the development and human rights front’.  The DFA, in a statement, said that Pope Francis, since his election in March 2013, has “become a leading global advocate for action to address hunger and poverty and for the respect of human rights”.

Ms. Madigan, at the time of her appointment was assistant-chief of protocol at the Department of Foreign Affairs. She has served in the Irish diplomatic service for the past 14 years, including as Vice Consul in New York, Private Secretary to the Secretary General and Deputy Director of Europe and United Nations Coordination Section. Recently she played a key role in organizing the first ever State visit to Britain by an Irish Head of State when President Michael D. Higgins met Queen Elizabeth II.

She has a degree in History and Italian as well as a Masters in European Studies from UCD, all of which will serve her well in her new mission.  It is her first appointment as Head of Mission, and she will be the first resident Irish ambassador since November 2011 when the Government closed the Irish Embassy to the Holy See. The last resident ambassador was Noel Fahey, who retired from the post and the diplomatic service in the summer of 2011.

Ms. Madigan takes over from David Cooney, who served as non-resident ambassador in these past years, while also acting as Secretary General at the Department for Foreign Affairs.  Cooney played an important role in the reopening of the Embassy and the restoration of a resident ambassador. 

The new Ambassador’s appointment comes just over a week after the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Enda Kenny came to the Vatican for the canonization of John XXIII and John Paul II.  At the end of that ceremony on April 27, the Taoiseach met Pope Francis and invited him to visit Ireland.  

Kenny’s visit opened a new chapter in Ireland’s relations with the Holy See because as head of the Irish Government, he had harshly attacked the Vatican in the Irish parliament, July 2011, for its handling of numerous cases of abuse of children by priests and religious in the country, and for not cooperating with State investigations into these.  In November of that same year the Government closed its embassy to the Holy See as a cost-saving move, it said.

 In January of this year, however, the Government reversed that decision and announced that the Embassy would be reopened, though downsized, with a resident ambassador.  The DFA then said the re-opened Embassy will “enable Ireland to engage directly with the leadership of Pope Francis on the issues of poverty eradication, hunger and human rights”.

It has not yet been announced where the new embassy will be housed since the former Embassy to the Holy See on Rome’s Janiculum Hill now serves as Ireland’s Embassy to Italy. The Department for Foreign Affairs said the new Embassy will be a “modest”, one-person operation, and will re-open this summer.

Popes John Paul II, John XXIII officially declared saints

Vatican City, Apr 27, 2014 (CNA/EWTN News).

In a packed St. Peter's Square at the Vatican on Divine Mercy Sunday, Pope Francis officially declared former pontiffs John Paul II and John XXIII as Saints.

“For the honor of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and having sought the council of many of our brother Bishops, we declare and define Blessed John XXIII and John Paul II be Saints,” Pope Francis exclaimed April 27 as the crowds cheered.

“We enroll them among the Saints, decreeing that they are to be venerated as such by the whole Church. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

Throngs of pilgrims flooded the Vatican on Divine Mercy Sunday to celebrate the highly anticipated canonizations of now-Saints John Paul II and John XXIII.
    
Pope John XXIII was born in Sotto il Monte, a diocese and province of Bergamo, Italy, Nov. 25, 1881 as fourth of 13 children. He was elected Roman Pontiff Oct. 28, 1958.

Known as “Good Pope John,” he is most remembered for his historic encyclical “Pacem in Terris,” and for his calling of the Second Vatican Council.

He was declared Blessed by Pope John Paul II Sept. 3, 2000, during celebration of the Great Jubilee Year in 2000, and was approved for canonization by Pope Francis last July.

Saint John Paul II is perhaps one of the most well-known pontiffs in recent history, and is most remembered for his charismatic nature, his love of youth and his world travels, along with his role in the fall of communism in Europe during his 27-year papacy.

The cherished Polish Pope died in 2005, marking his 2011 beatification as one of the quickest in recent Church history, and is the first Pope to be beatified by his immediate successor.

In an April 24 message sent to both the Church in Poland and the diocese of Bergamo, Italy, Pope Francis thanked each for the great “gift” of the Saints for the Church and for the world, saying of John Paul II that he is grateful, “as all the members of the people of God, for his untiring service, his spiritual guidance, and for his extraordinary testimony of holiness.”

Speaking of Saint John XXIII’s historic calling of the Second Vatican Council in order to address a pastoral response to the presence of the Church in the modern world, the Roman Pontiff explained that “the renewal desired from the Second Vatican Council has opened the road.”

It is “a special joy that the canonization of Pope Roncalli takes place together with that of Bl. John Paul II,” he continued, adding that “this renewal has brought forward in his long pontificate.”

Seated alongside the cardinals in attendance for the canonization is retired pontiff Benedict XVI, making this the first Mass in history concelebrated by a Pope and his predecessor.