Follow HERE with the 1960 options.

See what she’s done this time.  HERE.

Here is the basic image for the mug and for the shirts, etc..

Here is one view of the mug.

Here is the other view.

I am revamping my various stores to make it easier to find stuff, consolidating them into one main store with various “sections” HERE.

The tee:

The Religious Liberty series is coming soon!

Technorati Tags: can. 915, coffee mugs, Holy Communion, Nancy Pelosi, Pontius Pilate

While it is true that Pres. Obama is an ideologue, it is also true that he wants to be reelected.

He’ll fold on this matter with the knowledge that he has energized his base and that, if reelected, he will be able to impose the HHS mandate and many other things as well.

So, with the understanding that “if you are not on offense you are on defense”, what’s next for the Catholic Church in the United States?  What’s next for the American bishops?

What’s the next step?

Some of you will start shouting about excommunicating everyone.  Think for a while, then answer.

Technorati Tags: HHS, POTUS, Pres. Obama, religious liberty, USCCB

First of all thank you for mentioning me in the same entry where caffè corretto alla sambuca is mentioned. It always moves me to think of the Mos Maiorum living on far away from the Septimontium!

Also GIVE ‘EM HELL RICK!

OK back to ponderous stuff. The great Hewitt is more on target than his piece would let the unattentive reader guess: Kulturkampf is a term that takes us to Otto Von Bismarck and his culture wars against the Church (Los von Rom!). Now Bismarck was also the father of  the modern European welfare state and he was instrumental in giving miltary and cultural strength to the German nationalism and in bringing to completion a process the (pseudo)Reformers had started: that of reshaping the German soul in the manner of a total, instinctive almost knee-jerk submission to the state for  the greater glory of Grossdeutschland. We all know how well it worked for the planetary common good between 1870 and 1945.

An essential point of this program was – you guessed it – socialized medicine.

His Prussia and latter the German Reich under him saw the first example of modern nationalized healthcare, education and social security (there were precedents to that but almost none so scientifically planned). To institute all that, a war on the Church was the ineludible premise. Even in Lutheran areas, Catholic hospitals,schools and charities were the backbone of all “social services” that had existed since long before our  idea of “State” was even conceived. As a good modern German Bismarck – ironically considered a “conservative” in history books – only rejected revolutionary socialism to institute it thorugh a top-down process instead of a revolutionary upheaval of society. His advisors were all socialist thinkers (Sozialpolitiker was the term but they were more commonly dubbed the Kathedersozialisten). Just like the mentors and advisors of BHO.

Where am I going with all this?

It’s good  to see such a massive reaction  - albeit only a verbal one so far –  by the US bishops. But if they think that all they have to aim to is for Obama and his Kommissars to drop the contraception mandate they’re in for bitter surprises down the road, and they would prove that they are completely missing what’s at stake here (but some bishops gave me hope with what they wrote).

What I mean is that it is inherent to the very idea of socialized medicine that the state gets to tell you what to do and what to pay for and how much.

It’s all about the delusional thought that unhindered “planning” done by “experts” who “know” is what will make the magic machine work. They may back down on secondary provisions for political/electoral reasons, but the principle they want to enshrine is  that the state is the ultimate and basically the sole provider of healthcare. What it does is bring to completion the utter distortion of the relationship between the individual, the family and all “intermediate bodies” of society and the State. In other words, the contrary of subsidiarity, which is the XX century Catholic name for the originally Catholic concept of “limited government”. Once it’s in place, you can kiss the Declaration of Independence and the whole Land of the Free business goodbye. You’ll be forever a glorified European Union.

Sooner or later, because of the invitable rationing that comes with centralized healthcare, they won’t even need to mandate that you perform abortions or give away condoms. You’ll simply lose all hospitals and schools because there is no way a large independent health provider can survive in such a system. Why do  you think so many Italian hospitals, founded centuries ago, with names of saints and popes, are nowinn the hands of the Sistema Sanitario Nazionale, directly or indirectly? Why do you think there is hardly a Catholic school that is affordable anymore and which teaches anything different from what kids would hear at the Liceo Statale A. Gramsci or what have you?

The contraception/abortion coverage mandate is immoral, we all agree on that, but getting Catholics – and anybody who’s not in the service of the State – out of the healthcare system is PRECISELY what the goverment wants. If they can force you to accept it now, that’s good for the State, they take over indirectly.  If you go the principled way and shut down or sell facilities, that’s good for the State, they take over directly. If you manage to obtain an exemption, that’s still good, the principle of the State running the asylum will still be there and it will become unstoppable before too long and you’ll have to cave in anyway.

Either their Excellencies understand the profound immorality of statism and reject the whole notion of socialized medicine or seeking the fig-leaf of an exemption from specific provisions  will only prove to be a Phyrric victory.

And limiting the resistance to not complying with the law by getting out of schools and hospitals will only play in the hands of the comrades, in the long haul. They need to defy the government decisively, and on principle, not just provisions. I know they’re hesiitant to put the flock at risk of persecution. Who wouldn’t?. But the going is getting tough. Time to get the tough going. I’ve seen this movie before, for centuries and centuries now.

And, it is more of a TV series and I am just a few seasons ahead of you, that’s why it’s easy for me to predict how it will go on if nothing different happens in this clash between the USSCB and the Administration.

UPDATE:

I have profound admiration for what Fabrizio says, but I will toss back into his corner this observation.

It is probable that our institutions have already given up their identity and become “businesses”.  They have given themselves over to business models so completely that they are hardly Catholic anymore in any real sense.

The mission for which Catholic hospitals and colleges were founded seems to be over. Our universities and hospitals are now for the most part businesses. They are being run on a business model.

Is it time for us to get out?

Food for thought comes from the 1985 in The Ratzinger Report:

“The now dominant mentality attacks the very foundations of the morality of the Church, which, as I have already said, if she remains true to herself risks appearing like an anachronistic construct, a bothersome, alien body. Thus the moral theologians of the Western Hemisphere, in their efforts to still remain “credible” in our society, find themselves facing a difficult alternative: it seems to them that they must choose between opposing modern society and opposing the Magisterium.

The number of those who prefer the latter type of opposition is larger or smaller depending on how the question is posed: consequently they set out on a search for theories and systems that allow compromises between Catholicism and current conceptions. But this growing difference between the Magisterium and the “new” moral theologies leads to unforeseeable consequences, also precisely for the reason that the Church with her schools and her hospitals still occupies an important social role (especially in America). Thus we stand before the difficult alternative: either the Church finds an understanding, a compromise with the values propounded by society which she wants to continue to serve, or she decides to remain faithful to her own values (and in the Church’s view these are the values that protect man in his deepest needs) as the result of which she finds herself on the margin of society.” (p. 24)

Technorati Tags: Hugh Hewitt, Kurturkampf, Pres. Obama, US bishops, USCCB

Thanks for all your work with your blog and for promoting the TLM.

Thanks to your promotion, I attended a TLM workshop last summer in Nebraska with the FSSP and have since offered the TLM several times – but more on that sort of good news another day.

Can you answer the following:

When I go camping or backpacking, I offer Mass in the woods. Is it permissible (I hope it is) to offer Mass, receive the Eucharist at Mass [as the priest celebrant], then keep a consecrated host for Adoration, (I would bring a small monstrance), and afterward consume the Host after an hour of adoration?

It seems that this is not permitted, since one can only receive the Body of Christ a second time when in the context of the Mass? Could there be an exception? Should I rather go the day without adoration outside of Mass?

First, I will remind you of the great “travel altar cards” I posted about HERE.

I think it would not be proper to reserve a Host in those circumstances for adoration after Mass.  I don’t know that for sure, but it strikes me a wrong.  Among other things, you are in the boundaries of some priest’s parish and you don’t have permission to reserve the Sacrament.

Perhaps you could be very deliberate with your prayers of preparation before and then meditation after you consume the Host.

The rubrics after consumption of the Host include “quiescit aliquantulum in meditatione sanctissimi Sacramenti… he rests a little while in meditation about the most holy Sacrament”.  At that point, the Precious Blood is still unconsumed.  I would be concerned that there could be particles on the paten which could be lost in a strong breeze, etc.

The rubrics don’t say how long “aliquantulum” is.

Because we are Unreconstructed Ossified Manualists, we even check liturgical manuals… which don’t turn up anything other than a vague comment about it not being very long.  That of course, assumes, that there is a congregation who have lives to live, etc.  There is nothing in the rubric to permit a long pause after reception of the Precious Blood.  It is all business from then on.

So, brother, I think the key here, if you are alone, would be to draw out your preparation before Communion, especially in the recitation of the three private preparatory prayers, and then in your meditation “aliquantulum”. I have done this in time past when along, though I admit not for an hour.

I recall that St. Philip Neri would spend a couple hours in ecstasy at reception of Communion when he said Mass.

Consider the rich content of the three preparatory prayers.  I could write reams about the third, which I think is one of the most moving of the priest’s prayers at Mass:

Perceptio Corporis tui, Domine Iesu Christe, quod ego indignus sumere praesumo, non mihi proveniat in iudicium et condemnationem; sed pro tua pietate prosit mihi ad tutamentum mentis et corporis et ad medelam percipiendam: Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. Amen. … Let the receiving of Thy Body, O Lord Jesus Christ, which I – unworthy – presume to receive, turn not unto me for judgment and condemnation, but, according to Thy mercy, let it be profitable to me for the receiving of protection and healing, both of soul and body: Who livest and reignest for ever and ever. Amen.

Want to underscore the difference of “spiritualities” express in the Novus Ordo and the TLM? This prayer might be a good start. I find this prayer both consoling and harrowing.  It underscores the encounter with mystery which is both tremendum et fascinans. But I digress.

Technorati Tags: adoration, camping, Holy Communion, Perceptio Corporis

If we look at how the American episcopate has been changing in the last 10-15 years, I think we can take heart. But we still need to pray for our bishops. And pray relentlessly. Consider how at the time of the Notre Shame debacle, 80+ bishops protested that cringing bit of pandering to the most aggressively pro-abortion president we have ever seen. 5 years before, the number of bishops in protest would have been unthinkable. Today there are even more bishops reacting and the count is not complete.

In any event, at the time of this writing, 168 US Bishops have been reported to have reacted with strength against Pres. Obama’s determination to force Catholics to violate their consciences in a way that contradicts our Catholic Faith and the clear moral teachings of Holy Church. Amish and Quakers get waivers from some federal mandates. Not Catholics.

Here is Peters’ list.  I will try to update it as well:  Peters wrote “If I have missed anyone please let me know in the comments!”  So, let HIM know. It is better if one person is forming a master list, and this is even more in his bailiwick than it is in mine.

Statements from 8 bishops have not yet been located.  Perhaps they have been missed or haven’t yet been posted in a clear place on a diocesan website.

When you find their statements, let Peters know.

We bloggers must cooperate, inter-link.

These are the bishops whose statements have been located.

Province of Anchorage:

• 1. Archbishop Roger Schweitz, of Anchorage, AK
• 2. Bishop Edward Burns, of Juneau, AK
• 3. Bishop Donald Kettler of Fairbanks, AK (better link needed)

Province of Atlanta:

• 4. Archbishop Wilton Gregory , of Atlanta, GA
• 5. Bishop Robert Guglielmone, of Charleston, SC
• 6. Bishop Peter Jugis, of Charlotte, NC
• 7. Bishop Michael Burbidge, of Raleigh, NC
• 8. Bishop Gregory Hartmayer,  of Savannah, GA

Province of Baltimore:

• 9. Cardinal-designate Edwin O’Brien, of Baltimore, MD
• 10. Bishop Paul Loverde,  of Arlington, VA
• 11. Bishop Francis DiLorenzo, of Richmond VA
• 12. Bishop Michael Bransfield, of Wheeling-Charleston, WV
• 13. Bishop Francis Malooly, of  Wilmington, DE

Province of Boston:

• 14. Sean Cardinal O’Malley, of Boston, MA
• 15. Bishop Salvatore Matano,of  Burlington, VT
• 16. Bishop George Coleman, of Fall River, MA
• 17. Bishop Peter Libasci, of Manchester, NH
• 18. Bishop Richard Malone, of Portland, ME
• 19. Bishop Timothy McDonnell, of Springfield, MA
• 20. Bishop Robert McManus, of Worcester, MA

Province of Chicago:

• 21. Francis Cardinal George of Chicago, IL
• 22. Bishop Edward Braxton, of Belleville, IL (better link needed)
• 23. Bishop Daniel Conlon, of Joliet, IL
• 24. Bishop Daniel Jenky, of Peoria, IL
• 25. Bishop Thomas Doran, of Rockford, IL
• 26. Bishop Thomas Paprocki, of Springfield, IL

Province of Cincinnati:

• 27. Archbishop Dennis Schnurr, of Cincinnati, OH
• 28. Bishop Richard Lennon, of Cleveland, OH
• 29. Bishop Frederick Campbell, of  Columbus, OH
• Monsignor Kurt Kemo (apostolic administrator), of Steubenville, OH
• 30. Bishop Leonard Blair, of Toledo, OH
• 31. Bishop George Murry, of Youngstown, OH

Province of Denver:

• 32. Bishop James Conley, Apostolic Administrator of Denver, CO
• 33. Bishop Paul Etienne, of Cheyenne, WY
• 34. Bishop Michael Sheridan, of Colorado Springs, CO
• 35. Bishop Fernando Isern, of Pueblo, CO

Province of Detroit:

• 36. Archbishop Allen Vigneron, of Detroit, MI
• 37. Bishop Bernard Hebda, of Gaylord, MI
• 38. Bishop Walter Hurley, of Grand Rapids, MI
• 39. Bishop Paul Bradley, of Kalamazoo, MI
• 40. Bishop Earl Boyea, of Lansing, MI
• 41. Bishop Alexander Sample, of Marquette, MI
• 42. Bishop Joseph Cistone, of Saginaw, MI (better link needed)

Province of Dubuque:

• 43. Archbishop Jerome Hanus, of Dubuque, IA
• 44. Bishop Martin Amos, of Davenport, IA
• 45. Bishop Richard Pates, of Des Moines, IA
• 46. Bishop Walter Nickless, of Sioux City, IA

Province of Galveston-Houston:

• 47. Daniel Cardinal DiNardo, of Galveston-Houston, TX
• 48. Bishop Joe Vasquez, of Austin, TX
• 49. Bishop Curtis Guillory, of Beaumont, TX (better link needed)
• 50. Bishop Daniel Flores, of Brownsville, TX
• 51. Bishop Michael Mulvey, of Corpus Christi, TX
• 52. Bishop Alvaro Corrada (apostolic administrator) of Tyler TX
• 53. Bishop David Fellhauer of Victoria, TX (better link needed)

Province of Hartford:

• 54. Archbishop Henry Mansell, of Hartford, CT
• 55. Bishop William Lori, of Bridgeport, CT
• 56. Bishop Michael Cote, of Norwich, CT
• 57. Bishop Thomas Tobin, of Providence, RI

Province of Indianapolis:

• 58. Bishop Christopher Coyne, Apostolic Administrator of Indianapolis, IN
• 59. Bishop Charles Thompson, of Evansville, IN
• 60. Bishop Kevin Rhoades, of Fort Wayne-South Bend, IN
• 61. Bishop Dale Melczek, of Gary, IN
• 62. Bishop Timothy Doherty, of Lafayette, IN

Province of Kansas City:

• 63. Archbishop Joseph Naumann, of Kansas City, KS
• Father Barry Brinkman (apostolic administrator) of Salina, KS
• 64. Bishop Michael Jackels, of Wichita, KS

Province of Los Angeles:

• 65. Archbishop Jose Gomez, of Los Angeles, CA
• Roger Cardinal Mahoney (emeritus), of Los Angeles, CA
• 66. Bishop Armando Ochoa, of Fresno, CA (also apostolic administrator of El Paso)
• 67. Bishop Tod Brown, of Orange, CA
• 68. Bishop Gerald Barnes, of San Bernadino, CA
• 69. Bishop Robert Brom, of San Diego, CA
• 70. Bishop Richard Garcia of Monterey, CA

Province of Louisville:

• 71. Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, of Louisville, KY
• 72. Bishop Roger Foys, of Covington, KY
• 73. Bishop Richard Stika, of Knoxville, TN
• 74. Bishop Ronald Gainer, of Lexington, KY (better link needed)
• 75. Bishop Terry Steib, of Memphis, TN
• 76. Bishop David Choby, of Nashville, TN
• 77. Bishop WIlliam Medley, of Owensboro, KY

Province of Miami:

• 78. Archbishop Thomas Wenski, of Miami, FL (also apostolic administrator of Pensacola-Tallahassee)
• 79. Bishop John Noonan, of Orlando, FL
• 80. Bishop Gerald Barbarito, of Palm Beach, FL
• 81. Bishop Felipe Estevez, of St Augustine, FL
• 82. Bishop Robert Lynch, of St Petersburg, FL
• 83. Bishop Frank Dewane, of Venice, FL

Province of Milwaukee:

• 84. Archbishop Jerome Listecki, of Milwaukee, WI
• 85. Bishop David Ricken, of Green Bay, WI
• 86. Bishop William Callahan, of La Crosse, WI
• 87. Bishop Robert Morlino, of Madison, WI
• 88. Bishop Peter Christensen, of Superior, WI

Province of Mobile:

• 89. Archbishop Thomas Rodi of Mobile, AL
• 90. Bishop Robert Baker of Birmingham, AL
• 91. Bishop Joseph Latino of Jackson, MS (forthcoming)

Province of New Orleans:

• 92. Archbishop Gregory Aymond, of New Orleans, LA
• 93. Bishop Ronald Herzog, of Alexandria, LA
• 94. Bishop Robert Muench, of Baton Rouge, LA
• 95. Bishop Sam Jacobs, of Houma-Thibodaux, LA
• 96. Bishop Michael Jarrell, of Lafayette, LA
• 97. Bishop Glen Provost, of Lake Charles, LA
• 98. Bishop Michael Duca, of Shreveport, LA

Province of New York:

• 99. Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, of New York, NY
• Edward Cardinal Egan, of New York, NY (emeritus)
• 100. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, of Brooklyn, NY
• 101. Bishop Edward Kmiec, of Buffalo, NY
• 102. Bishop Terry LaValley, of Ogdensburg, NY
• 103. Bishop Matthew Clark, of Rochester, NY
• 104. Bishop William Murphy, of Rockville Centre, NY
• 105. Bishop Robert Cunningham, of  Syracuse, NY
• 106. Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany, NY

Province of Newark:

• 107. Archbishop John Meyers, of Newark, NJ
• 108. Bishop Joseph Galante, of Camden, NJ
• 109. Bishop Arthur Serratelli, of Paterson, NJ
• 110. Bishop David O’Connell, of Trenton, NJ
• 111. Bishop Paul Bootkoski of Metuchen, NJ

Province of Oklahoma City:

• 112. Archbishop Paul Coakley, of Oklahoma City, OK
• 113. Bishop Anthony Taylor, of Little Rock, AR
• 114. Bishop Edward Slattery, of Tulsa, OK

Province of Omaha:

• 115. Archbishop George Lucas, of Omaha, NE
• 116. Bishop William Dendinger, of Grand Island, NE (better link needed)
• 117. Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, of Lincoln, NE

Province of Philadelphia:

• 118. Archbishop Charles Chaput, of Philadelphia, PA
• 119. Bishop John Barres, of Allentown, PA
• 120. Bishop Mark Bartchak, of Altoona-Johnstown, PA
• 121. Bishop Lawrence Brandt, of Greensburg, PA
• 122. Bishop Joseph McFadden, of Harrisburg, PA
• 123. Bishop David Zubik, of Pittsburgh, PA (Twice!)
• 124. Bishop Joseph Bambera, of Scranton, PA
• 125. Bishop Donald Trautman of Eire, PA (better link needed)

Province of Portland:

• 126. Archbishop John Vlazny, of Portland, OR (link fixed)
• 127. Bishop William Skystad (apostolic administrator) of Baker, OR
• 128. Bishop Michael Driscoll, of Boise, ID
• 129. Bishop Michael Warfel, of Great Falls-Billings, MT
• 130. Bishop George Thomas, of Helena, MT

Province of Saint Louis:

• 131. Archbishop Robert Carlson, of Saint Louis, MO
• 132. Bishop John Gaydos, of Jefferson City, MO
• 133. Bishop Robert Finn, of Kansas City-Saint Joseph, MO
• 134. Bishop James Johnston, of Springfield-Cape Girardeau, MO

Province of Saint Paul and Minneapolis:

• 135. Archbishop John Nienstedt, of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, MN
• 136. Bishop David Kagan, of Bismarck, ND
• 137. Bishop Samuel Aquila, of Fargo, ND
• 138. Bishop John LeVoir, of New Ulm, MN
• 139. Bishop Robert Gruss, of Rapid City, SD
• 140. Bishop Paul Swain, of Sioux Falls, SD
• 141. Bishop John Quinn, of Winona, MN
• 142. Bishop Paul Sirba of Duluth, MN
• 143. Bishop Michael Hoeppner, of Crookston, MN

Province of San Antonio:

• 144. Archbishop Gustavo Garcia-Siller, of San Antonio, TX
• 145. Bishop Patrick Zurek, of Amarillo, TX
• 146. Bishop Kevin Farrell, of Dallas, TX
• 147. Bishop Kevin Vann, of Fort Worth, TX
• Bishop Armando Ochoa (apostolic administrator) of El Paso, TX
• 148. Bishop James Tamayo, of Laredo, TX
• 149. Bishop Placido Rodriguez, of Lubbock, TX
• 150. Bishop Michael Pfeifer, of San Angelo, TX

Province of San Francisco:

• 151. Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco, CA
• 152. Bishop Joseph Pepe, of Las Vegas, NV
• 153. Bishop Randolph Calvo, of Reno, NV
• 154. Bishop Jaime Soto, of Sacramento, CA
• 155. Bishop John Wester, of Salt Lake City, UT
• 156. Bishop Patrick McGrath, of San Jose, CA
• 157. Bishop Stephen Blaire, of Stockton, CA
• 158. Bishop Larry Silva of Honolulu, HI

Province of Santa Fe:

• 159. Archbishop Michael Sheehan, of Santa Fe, NM
• 160. Bishop James Wall, of Gallup, NM (better link needed)
• 161. Bishop Thomas Olmsted, of Phoenix, AZ
• 162. Bishop Gerald Kicanas, Tuscon, AZ

Province of Seattle:

• Archbishop Peter Sartain, of Seattle, WA (disputed)
• 163. Bishop Joseph Tyson, of Yakima, WA

Province of Washington:

• 164. Donald Cardinal Wuerl, of Washington, DC

Archeparchy of Philadelphia (Eastern Rite)

• 165. Bishop Richard Seminack, Eparchy of Chicago, IL

Metropolita of Pittsburgh (Eastern Rite) + Sui Iuris:

• 166. Archbishop-elect William Skurla, ArchEparchy of Pittsburgh (currently bishop of Passaic) (better link needed)
• 167. Bishop Gerald Dino, Eparchy of Phoenix, AZ
• 168. Bishop John Kudrick, Eparchy of Parma, OH

MILITARY SERVICES

• 169. Archbishop Timothy Broglio, of Military Services, USA

SPECIAL MENTION: “The Assembly of Orthodox Bishops in North America just issued a formal statement of protest against the HHS mandate in which the Assembly, representing all 53 Orthodox bishops in North America, references their complete agreement with the statements of the USCCB.”

UPDATE: Of the 183 dioceses (by my count) in the U.S. who have a bishop currently serving as its head, 169 of them have issued statements. So 92% of bishops who head dioceses have spoken out against the Obama/HHS mandate.

NOTE: If you would like a statement by an Eastern Rite bishop to be included please send me [PETERS!] the link/document or post it in the comments! Thank you. I’m trying to provide documentation for all the bishops I list and Eastern Rite bishops have been harder for me to find. Thanks for the understanding!

UPDATE:

Don’t send updates to ME, send them to Peters… as I requested.  Please read the entry, above.  Thanks!

Technorati Tags: 1st Amendment, DOMA, marriage, Pres. Obama, religious liberty, USCCB

Pre-Lent is here. That means Lent begins in less than three weeks, 22 February this year.

It is time to make your plans for Lent.

You should start thinking about one or more mortifications (and consider something other than chocolate) as well as some corporal and/or spiritual work of mercy to pursue during Lent.

Before Lent starts make a plan for your meals and for your participation at Mass and the Sacrament of Penance.

Don’t let this go until Thursday after Ash Wednesday.

Write some ideas down and stick them to your refrigerator door or on the bathroom mirror.  Talk about this with your spouses.  Revisit the ideas for the next two Sundays to see if they need some realistic tweaking or refinement.

Perhaps parents could make some suggestions for a family observance of Lent, including pointers for children, so as to make it meaningful but not overly burdensome on those who are not bound to do heavy penances.

Also, for some reading during Lent you might consider our Holy Father’s two volumes about our Lord.

Volume One focuses on our Lord from His Baptism in the Jordan to His Transfiguration, themes explored during our liturgical worship in Lent.

(UK readers click HERE.)

Volume Two focuses on Holy Week, from the Lord’s entrance into Jerusalem to His Resurrection.

(UK readers click HERE.)

They are both available on Kindle.

Technorati Tags: LENT, mortification, penance, sacrament of penance, works of mercy

COMING SOON

The mighty Canonical Defender, Prof. Ed Peters, has posted on his excellent blog In The Light Of The Law a comment about Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) statement that, as a Catholic, she will stand with the Obama Administration against the Catholic Church.

My emphases and comments.

Nancy Pelosi deserves to be taken seriously. Very seriously.

As a canon lawyer, my view is that Nancy Pelosi deserves to be deprived of holy Communion as the just consequence of her public actions; as her fellow Catholic, my view is that Nancy Pelosi deserves to be deprived of holy Communion to bring home to her and to the wider faith community the gravity of her conduct and the need to avoid such conduct altogether or, that failing, at least to repent of it. Quickly.

In March 2010, I expressed the view that Nancy Pelosi’s protracted and public anti-life conduct, which she repeatedly justifies with (twisted takes on) the Catholic faith, sufficed, in my view, to bring about her debarment from the reception of holy Communion under Canon 915.

If Pelosi’s “prolonged public conduct does not qualify as obstinate perseverance in manifest grave sin,” I wrote two years ago, “then, in all sincerity, I must admit to not knowing what would constitute obstinate perseverance in manifest grave sin.”

It’s now February of 2012, and nothing in Pelosi’s conduct over the last 23 months suggests any emendation of her attitudes toward killing unborn babies, etc., etc., etc. Indeed her recent call for Catholics qua Catholics to unite behind, of all things!, President Obama’s plan to impose immoral policies on private medical insurance plans—which call provoked this moving cri de coeur from Fr. Zuhlsdorf—suggests that Pelosi’s views, like Pharaoh’s heart, have only hardened with time.

Canon 915, as I and others have explained many times, is not about impositions on individual conscience, it’s about public consequences for public behavior. [PUBLIC behavior.] It’s about taking people at their word and acknowledging the character of their actions. It’s about not pretending that people don’t really mean what they repeatedly say and what they repeatedly do.

Nancy Pelosi obviously means exactly what she says, and she regularly backs up her words with deeds. She deserves to be taken seriously. Very seriously.

His combox is closed.  You can discuss this here, but I am turning on comment moderation.  Be sure to visit Dr. Peters’ site and spike his stats!

Technorati Tags: can. 915, Catholic identity, Ed Peters, HHS, Nancy Pelosi, Pres. Obama, religious liberty

Let’s have a poll!

And please give your reasons in the combox!

Technorati Tags: Charles Dickens

Obama’s senior political adviser urges all sides in birth control fight to ‘lower our voices’  [Get that?  It's time for Catholics to shut up.]

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, February 7, 8:15 AM

WASHINGTON — A political adviser to President Barack Obama said Tuesday the administration didn’t intend to “abridge anyone’s religious freedom” [B as in B.  S as in S.] with its regulation requiring church-affiliated employers to cover birth control for their workers.

“This is an important issue. It’s important for millions of women around the country,” said Axelrod, the political adviser to Obama’s re-election campaign. “We want to resolve it in an appropriate way and we’re going to do that.” [I think their "appropriate" and mine might be widely divergent.]

Roman Catholic leaders have assailed Obama and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for the new rule, [NO AP! NO WaPo!  The Obama Administration has assailed the Catholic Church!] arguing that it tramples on their religious beliefs. Religious groups that oppose the regulation say that it forces people of faith to choose between upholding church doctrine and serving the broader society.

[Watch this weasel language...] In an interview Tuesday broadcast on MSNBC, Axelrod said, “I’m less concerned about the messaging of this than finding a resolution that makes sense.” He noted that these institutions have roughly a year and a half to comply with the new regulation, saying “I think we need to lower our voices and get together.”  [Get that?  The resolution that "makes sense" to David Axelrod, and there is surely NO DAYLIGHT between what he says on this and what Pres. Obama thinks, is that Catholics had better SHUT UP AND COMPLY.]

At the same time, Axelrod acknowledged the dispute has caused a rift between the White House and the Roman Catholic Church.

“We have great respect for the work that these institutions do, and we certainly don’t want to abridge anyone’s religious freedom,” he said. But Axelrod also said the administration was struggling to strike a balance between a stance that “guarantees women the preventive care [The language is Orwellian.] they need” and one which respects the prerogatives of religious institutions.

“There are tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of women who work in these universities who are not Catholic,” he said. “The question is whether they’re going … to have the same access to basic preventive care.”  [In every interview, press release, White House statement, the language they must have polled to be adequately deceptive is "preventive care".]

Axelrod said Sebelius had acted on a recommendation by the Institute of Medicine’s recommendation and that she exempted churches themselves from the rule. ["SHE exempted"?!?  SHE?] Asked if the White House had consulted religious leaders before acting, he replied, “The bottom line is, this was a decision made with the interest of the health of millions around this country in mind.” [In other words, if they did, it didn't matter one little bit.]

Axelrod accused Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney of seeking to “turn it into a kind of political football,” saying he considered Romney’s stance “ironic” because the former Massachusetts governor led a state that has a similar policy.  [Very clever.  He pivots away from the real problem, which is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment, to make objections in a partisan political issue.]

Technorati Tags: "preventive care", 1st Amendment, anti-catholicism, David Axelrod, HHS, Pres. Obama, religious liberty