Showing posts with label Diocese of Wollongong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Diocese of Wollongong. Show all posts

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Notes: Tuesday-Thursday, October 26-28, 2010 (Part 1 of 2)

1. Some interesting figures on S.T.I.s in Australia

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/hiv-rate-rising-but-other-infections-less-common-20101018-16qxf.html?skin=text-only

2. Mr. Foley with "Eight Reasons Why Men Only should Serve at the Altar"

http://www.insidecatholic.com/feature/eight-reasons-why-men-only-should-serve-at-mass.html

Brought to my attention by this post at Cath Pews, Mr. Foley's article doesn't quite hit the nail on the head, and there are some points on which I might disagree with him, but there are nevertheless some good point in there, with implications for why women are ineligible for Ordination.

3."Athanasius"'s transcript of an article on "The Response due to non-definitive exercises of the magisterium"

http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/2010/10/response-due-to-non-definitive.html

4. Former chief Sephardi rabbi of The State of Israel: "Non-Jews exist to serve Jews"

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2010/10/israeli-chief-rabbi-gentiles-exist-only.html
http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34388

5. "The Sybil" on the cancellation of The Diocese of Wollongong's pastoral planning process's third plenary session

http://wollongongensis.blogspot.com/2010/10/wollongong-diocese-pastoral-plan.html

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of Sts. Simon and Jude, Apostles, A.D. 2010

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Notes: Saturday-Tuesday, August 28-31, 2010

Death of H.R.H The Duke of Parma and Piacenza (a.k.a Charles Hugh I. Borbón-Parma, pretender King of Spain), wedding of T.R.H. Prince and Princess Nicholas of Greece and Denmark

http://www.smh.com.au/national/obituaries/prince-was-thorn-in-side-of-both-franco-and-the-dutch-20100827-13vte.html?skin=text-only

http://www.greekroyalfamily.org/index.cfm?get=news&show=news&ItemID=254

His late Royal Highness's brother H.R.H. Prince Sixtus Henry of Bourbon-Parma was present at the Episcopal Consecrations of the S.S.P.X. Bishops (it is mentioned here that Prince Sixtus Henry was the first to congratulate Msgr. Lefebvre after the Consecrations, and though I can find no mainstream media news source on-line to back this up, I seem to remember that there was something about it in Marcel Lefebvre: The Biography).

Mr. Thompson on Australian Labor, self-styled progressives, and the working class (meanwhile, at the Herald: Exhibit A: Mr. Carlton)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/my-party-was-trashed-by-the-middle-class/story-fn59niix-1225910722814

Long and not perfect (e.g. some of its generalisations are unsubstantiated (though they ring true), though perhaps they were documented in the book from which the article presumably draws), but a very interesting read. Of particular interest to readers of a Catholic blog is this excerpt:

A favourite tactic for driving home supposed working-class moral inferiority and for undermining its confidence is to discredit the institutions its members grew up believing in. Three examples of this tactic will suffice: sport, the church and the Anzac tradition.

[...] A recent front-page report in The Courier-Mail revealed that "[m]ore than 300 Queensland teachers are under investigation for inappropriate behaviour [and] almost all 26 teachers who had their registrations suspended or cancelled in the past year were cited for sexual misconduct."

It further revealed that a "state-employed teacher went from school to school, leaving a trail of complaints about indecent behaviour to young children, before losing his job", and it "also highlighted an issue with teachers leaving private schools under a cloud and being re-hired by Education Queensland."

There was no such coverage in the media further upmarket. But if the report had revealed that Catholic priests rather than public school teachers were the subject of investigations into alleged pedophile behaviour on such a scale, they without doubt would have given the investigation blanket coverage, at least until such time as the clergy were punished and removed, compensation paid, and apologies made to the victims, or charges laid and convictions entered, to be dragged up again at the first opportunity.

See also Mr. Muehlenberg's post on the article:

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/08/29/australia%e2%80%99s-new-class/

The article appeared in last Saturday's edition of The Weekend Australian. On the same day, Mr. Mike Carlton at the Herald unwittingly supplied himself as a splendid specimen of what Mr. Thompson was talking about:

Apparently the DLP is b-a-a-a-ck in the person of one John Madigan, a Ballarat blacksmith - whoa, there Neddy - who, if he stands true to party form, will be fish on Fridays and a fan of the Spanish Inquisition. Again, the cold, dead hand of Bartholomew Augustine Santamaria, progenitor of the DLP, rises from the crypt to give us the one-finger salute. The same bony claw can be blamed for shoving the Mad Monk into frame as a putative prime minister, of which there is more below.

[...] To the disappointment of George Cardinal Pell, no doubt, the Greens were the big winners this time, picking up a swing of 3.59 per cent for nine Senate seats and one in the Reps, only the second they have had there. By any sane reading, the country came out last Saturday for what you might call the progressive centre-left. On first preferences Labor and the Greens combined got 49.9 per cent of the vote. The Coalition chalked up just 43.3 per cent.

Abbott's failure is probably not all his own fault. The Liberal Party machine in NSW, neutered by the ongoing war between its so-called moderate wing and the Opus Dei nutters, did him no favours. Properly managed, the Libs might have picked off another three seats here, enough to have snuck them into government. That flop will be giving Barry O'Farrell a few sleepless nights as we head towards the state election in March.

[http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/funny-farm-on-the-hill-loses-a-few-inmates-gains-some-more-20100827-13vx9.html?skin=text-only]

Note the contempt for Mr. Madigan's trade and for Catholic culture and history. (Note also the nonsense about the late Mr. Santamaria "shoving" Mr. Abbott "into the frame as putative prime minister", when, as is well known, Mr. Santamaria declined from the very beginning to support Mr. Abbott's career in the Liberal Party.) Then Mr. Carlton has another go at Catholics--of all the people who would have been disappointed at the Greens' successes at the recent election, why single out Cardinal Pell? And then he takes one more gratuitous swipe at Catholics, this time the albino monks who, in Mr. Carlton's simple world, are in a battle for N.S.W. Liberal supremacy (Not that I support either Opus Dei or the Liberal Party, though). So there you go: 'Progressivism', anti-Catholicism, and disdain for manual workers, all in the one neat package for Mr. Thompson to add to his research files.

Reminder: N.S.W. Parliament to debate same-sex adoption legislation later this week

Brought to my attention in an article in The Australian yesterday:

MPs return from the winter recess this week and the bill is due for debate in the lower house on Thursday.
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/christian-lobby-group-urges-mps-to-reject-adoption-bill/story-fn3dxity-1225911982342]

And here's the latest, in today's Herald:

"Churches get opt-out point on same-sex adoption bill":
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/churches-get-optout-point-on-samesex-adoption-bill-20100830-147g1.html?skin=text-only

Upcoming event for The Diocese of Wollongong:

Seen in last Sunday's Sydney Catholic Weekly:

BISHOP INGHAM'S PROGRAM
SEPTEMBER, 2010

[...] 29 Extraordinary Meeting of Council of Priests

Anyone know why the Council of Priests is meeting extraordinarily, and what such a meeting involves?

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Raymond Nonnatus, Confessor, A.D. 2010

Friday, August 6, 2010

Notes: Friday, August 6, 2010

Fr. Donovan on conscience and predestination

http://www.catholica.com.au/gc2/dd/024_dd_020810.php

The Rev. Fr. Daniel Donovan writes that

Predestination teaches that God has pre-ordained those who will be saved and those who will be condemned and the individual cannot alter his/her fate. Needless to say, Catholic teaching has always condemned any form of predestination as heresy.

In fact it is Fr. Donovan who is in error here. The correct teaching is that the Elect are indeed predestined, while the Damned are reprobated (see The Catholic Encyclopedia's article "Predestination" and Dz. 316, 320-22, and 348). It's disturbing to see this kind of doctrinal illiteracy from a priest and "former lecturer in religious education".

Fr. Donovan's understanding of conscience also leaves much to be desired. For the process of decisions of conscience he gives a convoluted and verbose eight-stage sequence, when the process is really quite simple. Judgements of conscience are acts of the intellect, so the process is the simple three-stage one by which the minor premise is referred to a major premise, from which is inferred the conclusion. In the case of moral reasoning, the major premise gives some law commanding, forbidding, or permitting certain acts, the minor premise is the fact of whether the act under consideration is one of those acts, and the conclusion is the judgement of whether the act under consideration is therefore commanded, forbidden, or permitted.

There are other problems with Fr. Donovan's article but I don't have time to go into them all here.

More from Mr. Coyne on "Home Masses"

At the Catholica forum:

I don't know if you'd call it a "house church" but we've been thinking of running an ad up here in the Blue Mountains for a while to see if we might find a few like-minded people to get together occasionally for a simple meal, a bit of prayer and reflection, and basically just seeing if we can form some sort of community to explore this further. I do know of a few established small groups around Australia that follow and pass around amongst themselves some of the commentaries from Catholica. I pick up a sense that there is a hunger for "small communities" (as opposed to the "big communities" of a parish). I have really fond memories of the Home Masses and many inter-Church get togethers I was involved with when I was active in the Hawthorn parish in Victoria in the 1970s.
[my emphasis,
http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=52936]

It amuses me how those of Mr. Coyne's ilk will berate Traditionalists for wanting to 'turn the clock back' when the 'ageing-hippie'-types themselves want to relive a bygone era. (For more on Mr. Coyne's religious opinions, see this Catholica Forum thread, where he writes that

Ultimately I think I am searching for "truth". I'm not searching for "authority figures" who provide me with some kind of emotional comfort. I sincerely want to know what the truth is — about the meaning of my life, what is the end objective of my life, is Jesus the one 'with all the answers', on what 'authority' we can have confidence in his answers.

and

There are things in that which I can agree with and other things I disagree with or I am sceptical about. For example I am not sure that Jesus founded Christianity, or was intending to found "a church", or "the church" which subsequently came to bear his name. From your own commentaries on Catholica I am more of the view today that Christianity as it came to be known was founded more by Paul and Peter and their disciples and, importantly, the "tension" between the contrasting perspectives put forward by Paul and Peter and their disciples. Certainly they and their disciples each drew their inspiration from Jesus but as you yourself have pointed out despite the common source for the inspiration they came up with ways of understanding, and implementing, the Jesus' message that were at times in complete opposition or at least deep contrast.

and

I am particularly interested in seeing what Vynette has to say from her explorations of what view Jesus had of himself concerning his divinity. My own view is that Jesus had no concept of "the Trinity" as that concept was subsequently developed or in the way many Christians think of that concept today. I don't believe though that that invalidates either Jesus or the concept of a Trinitarian God. Jesus certainly "planted the seeds" for the subsequent Trinitarian picture of the Godhead that emerged with his differentiations between himself and "my Father in heaven" and the spirit that would remain after he had gone. Was his view though as "theologically elaborate" as what was subsequently developed by the later Church Fathers?

and most strikingly:

As I argued in another post my sense is that the Jesus we are invited to worship and follow is something much greater than the mere historical figure.

Recall condemned error no. 29 of Lamentabili, the anti-Modernist syllabus:

It may be conceded that the Christ whom history presents, is far inferior to the Christ who is the object of faith.
[http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma21.php]

Mr. Gooley on Scripture, liturgy, and the Traditional Latin Mass

http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=3&subclassID=75&articleID=7228&class=Features&subclass=Bite-size Vatican II

The Rev. Anthony Gooley, a deacon in The Archdiocese of Brisbane, writes that

“The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table both of God’s word and of Christ’s body” (Dei Verbum 21).

This is such a profound image of the two tables yet the truth of it has been obscured historically by the use of Latin and the narrower selection of texts used in the pre-Vatican II liturgy.

The faithful did not receive enough from the table of the word.

[my emphasis]

In other words, for Mr. Gooley, the Traditional Latin Mass deprives the Faithful of a due good. Which makes the T.L.M. ... evil, I take it? But I would contend that it is the T.L.M, not the N.O.M., which leaves the Faithful better acquainted with Scripture anyway. Towards the end of his article Mr. Gooley ask a few rhetorical questions:

To what extent are ordinary Catholics familiar with the Scriptures and use them for daily prayer?

Are Catholics immersed in the Scriptures and more able to meditate on them and read them with confidence?

Is there a repertoire of Biblical texts which Catholics know by heart as they know familiar traditional prayers or the responses at Mass?

Yet by having three readings each Sunday, with a three-year cycle for those readings, the N.O.M. guarantees that only those Catholics who go out of their way to memorise parts of the Bible will be the ones to know much, or even any, of it by heart, not to mention the N.O.M.'s suppression of the Last Gospel.

And Mr. Gooley uses an odd comparison at one point:

We can find in Scripture proclaimed in liturgy food for our spiritual nourishment just as we receive food from the Eucharist to transform us into the Body of Christ.

But hearing Scripture readings produces its effects in us in quite a different way to that in which Holy Communion produces Its effects in us.

"The APA's Biased Paper on Same-Sex Attraction and Therapy"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32988

"The Sybil" on the situation in The Diocese of Wollongong

http://wollongongensis.blogspot.com/2010/08/break-picton-and-rome.html

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord, A.D. 2010

Friday, July 16, 2010

Notes: Friday, July 16, 2010

D.I.C.I. article regarding a study by Msgr. Gherardini

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32532

"The Warden" on the situation in The Diocese of Wollongong

http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/2010/07/inghams-chickens-cry-fowl.html

Blog comment by me

At Mr. Schütz's blog, where Louise informs us that her baby's birth is imminent:

Cardinal Pole
July 16, 2010 at 5:02 am

I’ll be praying for you and your baby, Louise.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/songs-to-saints/#comment-15803]

Please pray for a safe delivery and quick recovery for mother and child.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, A.D. 2010

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Facts and figures: On mixed (religion) marriages

The latest (that is, June 2010) edition of Life, Marriage & Family News (the useful e-mail newsletter of The Archdiocese of Sydney's Life, Marriage and Family Centre) linked to a website with the following information:

Family Life Office personnel who coordinate marriage preparation in the Cincinnati archdiocese estimate that about 46 percent of new marriages are between Catholics and other Christians. National statistics are more elusive. Faithful to Each Other Forever, a 1989 handbook for marriage preparation issued by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, indicates that 40 percent of American Catholics now enter interreligious marriages (not necessarily marriages between Catholics and other Christians, but between one partner who is Catholic and one who is not).

Regional figures vary greatly, according to Father Kilcourse. In the South, where the Catholic population is small, those statistics often climb as high as 75 percent, while in areas with a high Hispanic and traditionally Catholic population, the percentage plunges.

[...] Still, the numbers represent such a surge over the past 20 to 30 years that Church leaders struggle to name and define the phenomenon.
[http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0690.asp]

The corresponding figure for The Diocese of Wollongong is similarly disturbingly high:

According to the 2006 Census, 60% of Catholics in the Diocese (aged above 25) were married, with 58% of these marriages between one Catholic and one non-Catholic.
[p. 7,
http://www.dow.org.au/journey/journey-41-part-3/download]

Presumably the high rate of mixed marriages in the post-Vatican-II period is an important factor in the loss of large numbers of young people from the practise of, or even belief of, the Faith; even were the issue from such marriages to have soldily Catholic parishes and schools the home situation would undermine the efforts of those institutions. The prospects for establishing the Social Reign of Christ, with its requirement that the populace be united in the Faith, would be bleak enough at present, even without the problem of society's basic cell, the family, not even being united in the Faith even when at least one spouse is Catholic. (And worse still, when Conciliar Catholics regard the latter disunity as something to celebrate, something 'ecumenical'.)(If I had more time I'd do a full-length critique of the first web-page, but the problems with its tone are obvious enough anyway.)

Reginaldvs Cantvar
16.VI.2010

Monday, May 31, 2010

Notes: Saturday-Tuesday, May 29-June 1, 2010

On this year's production of the Oberammergau Passion Play

An article posted at AQ contained the following paragraph:

Somewhat more removed from Church control is the Oberammergau Passion Play,the famous Bavarian portrayal of Christ’s Passion which is by now a huge commercial institution. This year, for the first time, the play is designed to emphasize that Jesus was a reform-minded rabbi who was unalterably opposed to institutions and hierarchy. Thus the new play demonstrates once again the dangers of interpreting Revelation without a guiding authority. Suddenly the Meaning of Life is determined by our own (or, more likely, some elitist director’s) vibes.
[http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31858
and that whole article is worth reading for its point about a teaching authority being necessary for the faithful transmission of any body of revealed truth]

There's also more on this silliness here("Jesus was against hierarchy and against institutions") and in the comments here.

Death of Mr. Geoffrey Chapman

From an obituary in Saturday's edition of The Sydney Morning Herald:

Geoffrey Chapman, 1930 - 2010

Sydney seminarians were Geoffrey Chapman's best customers in the Commonwealth when he began publishing Catholic books in the late 1950s.

Their support enabled him to build a small suburban press into the leading English language purveyor of the ideas that led to Vatican II.

When the council concluded, its documents, translated into English, aptly bore the imprint of Geoffrey Chapman. By then, he was the publisher of choice to the Vatican II generation of Catholics.

[...] At university, [Mr. Chapman and his wife] had been part of the vibrant Catholic subculture energising the Newman Society of Victoria. They had resisted B. A. Santamaria's attempts to take over the society. In London they made contact with like-minded Catholics in the church's main youth movement and offered to see through the press two collections of vanguard writings. Thus they discovered a vocation to be publishers.

On borrowed money Chapman travelled to the US, where Fides Publishers took him in and taught him the trade. ''They fed him, lodged him, encouraged and gave help, ideas, information and friendship,'' his wife later said. ...

[...] Soon, however, he and Sue were seeking authors of their own. An outstanding editor, Sue scoured the Catholic world to find writers who could explore the new territories opening up in church life. Many of her authors were French and all of them looked forward to a better church. Among these early books were essays by the Melbourne group gathered around the poet Vincent Buckley and lectures given in Sydney by an English scholar, Alexander Jones.

[...] The opening of the Second Vatican Council, in 1962, took Chapman to Rome, where he got to know and assess bishops and the experts brought to the council. Never overawed by bishops, he yet found lifelong friends in the hierarchy. One was the Archbishop of Durban, Denis Hurley, a courageous opponent of apartheid. Others were the Archbishop of Hobart, Guilford Young, star of the Australian bishops, and Cardinal Augustin Bea, the Vatican's point man on ecumenism.

When the Herald's Rome correspondent Desmond O'Grady alerted Chapman to the publication of a diary kept by the late Pope John XXIII, he rushed to Rome and sealed a deal giving him exclusive world rights to an English translation. Competitors were kept at bay, making its publication, in 1965, a coup for the Chapman firm. By request, first copies went to Buckingham Palace and to Pope Paul VI's personal library.

By then, Geoffrey Chapman publishing was well known throughout the English-reading world. Needing recapitalisation, in 1969, the firm was sold to a US conglomerate. A few years later, both Chapmans joined the William Collins firm as the nucleus of a liturgical publishing enterprise. Their task was to mass produce missals and service books in English in line with the Vatican II reforms of Catholic worship. Later they would do a broad ecumenical hymnbook for Australia and a multilingual prayerbook for South African Anglicans.

[...] His place in history is assured by the fact that no one can tell the story of Vatican II without reading the books he published.

[... Obituary by] Edmund Campion

[http://www.smh.com.au/national/obituaries/reformed-catholics-publisher-of-choice-20100528-wlb4.html?skin=text-only]

See also here and here. His enthusiastic involvement in the diffusion of the Spirit of Vatican II notwithstanding, may he rest in peace.

Prof. Ormerod on Vatican II

An article at CathNews mentioned the following about its author:

Neil Ormerod is Professor of Theology at Australian Catholic University. He contributed to the volume of essays, Vatican II: Did anything happen? He also has an article soon to appear in Theological Studies (Sept 2010), on the debate on continuity and discontinuity at Vatican II.
[http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=21520]

I would be interested to read both works.

More from Joshua on the Carthusian Rite

"The Modern Carthusian Mass":
http://psallitesapienter.blogspot.com/2010/05/modern-carthusian-mass.html

The Sybil on how The Diocese of Wollongong might report to Rome on its post-Summorum-Pontificum experiences

http://wollongongensis.blogspot.com/2010/05/time-to-get-that-report-ready-my-lord.html

The original Sodomites: The first recorded to complain about people being 'judgemental'!

Here's a comment which was posted at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog:

The first people in Scripture to cry “judgmental” were the Sodomites, who

surrounded the house; 5 and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” 6 Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them” (Gen. 19:4-9 RSV-CE).

Plus ça change...

Comment by Hieronymus Illinensis — 30 May 2010 @ 2:44 am
[bold and italics in the original,
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/05/being-judgmental-fr-finigan-hits-for-six/#comment-207277]

Vynette on Tradition

Here's a comment by Vynette, whom you might recall from her visit to Mr. Schütz's blog last year, in a thread at Catholica:

Roch,

You are assuming that the late "oral transmission" theory championed by so many biblical scholars is the correct one.

In fact, the New Testament is so full of Semitic syntax, vocabulary, idioms, and thought patterns that these intricacies and peculiarities could not possibly have survived years of oral transmission, particularly in a foreign environment and language [Greek], and then been written down in a foreign [Greek] language.

Some of the New Testament's apparently difficult passages can only be understood by studying the underlying Hebrew text.

In reality, the gospels we have now were written originally in Hebrew, or compiled from Hebrew notes, before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

["by vynette, Brisbane, Australia, Friday, May 28, 2010, 08:37 (4 days ago)",
http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=48884]

But if the New Testament "can only be understood by studying the underlying Hebrew text" (which Hebrew text we don't even have), then what good is it to those who aren't experts in Classical Hebrew and its literature and culture? We can't all be expected to attain that kind of expertise, so wouldn't some kind of teaching authority be necessary? With a Divine promise of indefectibility, such a teaching authority would be secure against the pitfalls from which oral Tradition would otherwise suffer.

An index fund aimed at Catholics

Here's a story from page 2 of yesterday's Sydney Daily Telegraph's Your Money supplement:

Many of us look for divine intervention when it comes to investing, so the answer may be upon us.
The Stoxx Europe Christian Index has been launched and the index fund has been Vatican-approved.
The fund is a compilation of 533 European companies that adhere to Catholic values, which means no profits from porn, gambling, weapons, tobacco or birth control.
Faith funds have been around for a long time. In fact, back in the 18th century the Quakers refused to invest in tobacco and the slave trade.
There are kosher funds in Israel and Sharia compliant funds operate through the Muslim world.
In Australia, we have ethically and socially responsible investment funds. Returns from these types of funds have been around the average.
H.H. The Pope on freedom of religion and its relation to democracy and development

BENIN: JUSTICE ALWAYS ACCOMPANIES FRATERNITY

VATICAN CITY, 28 MAY 2010 (VIS) - ...

[...] "I also wish to express my appreciation", [His Holiness] concluded, "for the efforts being made by everyone, especially the authorities, to strengthen relations of respect and esteem among the country's religious groups. Freedom of religion helps to enrich democracy and promote development".
CD/ VIS 20100528 (540)

Disappointing to see that kind of unqualified endorsement of 'freedom of religion', which, understood as a civil liberty, is evil in itself and is only conducive to the common good when it is the lesser of the two evils of, on the one hand, offences against the Catholic religion and, on the other hand, the disruptions which would result from repression of offences against the Catholic religion when there are many such offenders.

Blog/DB comments by me

At AQ:

"We were troubled with equating a living Catholic prayer for the conversion of Jews, newly endorsed by the Pope, with several obscure references from the Talmud that have no practical role in Jewish life today."

Really, "no practical role in Jewish life today"? Not according to Prof. Shahak:

"Of particular note, however, is the fact that the daily "blessings" of Judaism contain a curse against Christians. As Professor Israel Shahak of Hebrew University tells us, "in the most important section of the weekday prayer--the 'eighteen blessings'--there is a special curse, originally directed against Christians, Jewish converts to Christianity and other Jewish heretics: 'And may the apostates have no hope, and all the Christians perish instantly.' (20)" "
[
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/03/talmudic-touch-real-story-of-offertorys.html]

Furthermore, if someone says to you 'I will give you something which you would value greatly if you give me something which you value little' then you'd accept the offer, wouldn't you? So if a Catholic prelate says to Mr. Foxman 'We will given you something which you would value greatly--namely, the removal of liturgical references to the conversion of the Jews--if you give us something which you value little--namely, "several obscure references from the Talmud that have no practical role in Jewish life today"', then he should eagerly accept the offer, shouldn't he? Or is the Talmud more valuable to him than he is letting on?

[http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31844]

At Terra's blog:

Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
[http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/05/church-and-mission-2-importance-of.html]

Cardinal Pole said...

There's a good
comment at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's post on the topic--unsurprisingly, it turns out that the Sodomites (note the capital s) are the first people recorded as complaining about people being 'judgemental'!

June 1, 2010 4:26 AM
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
[http://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/2010/05/on-judging.html]

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

Cardinal Pole
June 1, 2010 at 5:30 am

In other words, it forbids the Social Reign of Christ and imposes the Social Reign of Pilate.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/simon-shama-on-the-snares-of-history-for-the-secular-humanist/#comment-15040]

Cardinal Pole
June 1, 2010 at 5:32 am

I’ve been interested in the Australian experience of Vatican II for some time now, and so I checked out this programme’s website last week (the Compass website didn’t have a transcript). I suspected that the website’s “Talent profiles” page told me all I needed to know about its agenda: Not one of the priests interviewed could be bothered wearing conspicuously clerical attire, and the rest of the interviewees seemed pretty ‘Spirit of Vatican II’. If I understand correctly, did they not interview anyone who opposed the illicit marriage of Revelation and Revolution and the bastard rites which issued therefrom? Didn’t the producers think to visit an S.S.P.X. chapel and interview one of the older members of the congregation? They had a token Aborigine (despite the fact that, by the look of her, she wasn’t even old enough to remember the early post-Vatican-II period, though corrrect me if I’m wrong), but they couldn’t find a token Traditionalist? I suppose that that wouldn’t have ‘woven seamlessly’ into their ‘narrative’.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/challenge-change-faith-catholic-australia-and-the-second-vatican-council/#comment-15041]

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Angela of Merici, Virgin, A.D. 2010

Thursday, April 8, 2010

More Wollongong Diocese liturgical dancing: At Holy Cross, Helensburgh and at John Therry Catholic High School, Rosemeadow

From The Catholic Weekly's Parish Noticeboard of two weeks ago:
Girls will take part in a liturgical movement for the Easter Vigil on April 3 at Holy Cross parish, Helensburgh.
[http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=3&subclassID=74&articleID=6762&class=Features&subclass=Parish
noticeboard
]
From the Autumn 2010 edition of Journey, Wollongong's Diocesan magazine:
Student School Representatives joined with students from John Therry Catholic High School at the Diocesan launch of Caritas Project Compassion on February 16. ... Hosted by John Therry Catholic High School, Rosemeadow, they participated in a Liturgy which explored the theme "Blueprint for a better world," through dialogue, reflection and prayer.

John Therry students brought the theme to life in a colourful, creative style using drama, music, singing and liturgical movement. ...
[my transcription, with my ellipses,
p. 7, http://www.dow.org.au/journey/journey-41-part-2/download]
(On the same page there is a picture of the "colourful, creative" scene.) Note the popular liturgical dance euphemism of "liturgical movement" used in both sources.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Thursday in Easter Week, A.D. 2010

Friday, January 1, 2010

On Msgr. Ingham’s announcement of The Diocese of Wollongong’s Pastoral Planning process

http://www.dow.org.au/pastoralplanning/

The Lord Bishop of Wollongong has announced, in his Advent Pastoral Letter (given on the Second Sunday of Advent) 2009, the launch of a process of Pastoral Planning for The Diocese of Wollongong:

This Advent I am announcing … a significant venture for our Diocese of Wollongong. Now is the time for us to work together to make new plans for a new future … We need to pause, take stock and consider our journey ahead.

[… W]e need to develop a pastoral plan for our Diocese, for our journey ahead. The first steps of this journey will entail clarifying our vision and gathering detailed information. We will need to listen to one another’s hopes and dreams about how we can strengthen our faith communities, how we can welcome the stranger and care for the poor and the suffering, and how we can best celebrate our communion as the Body of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. We will be challenged to “change our mindset”, as Pope Benedict recently put it, and to understand that lay people and clergy are “co-responsible” for the Church now and in the future. We will need to set realistic goals and develop lines of action to achieve these goals.

[…] I am bold enough to hope that by the end of 2010 we will have an overarching plan that will take heed of existing plans that some parishes and church agencies have already developed, and that will guide future planning in our Diocese.

[…] To assist us to shape a plan that will take us into the future, I have established a Pastoral Planning Steering Committee with expertise and representation from across the Diocese.

[…] I intend to write to you again early in the New Year with an interim report on the work of the Steering Committee and I will give you further updates throughout 2010.These are exciting times. Let us pray for wisdom, right judgement and courage as we pause, take stock, and consider the road ahead. On your behalf, I entrust this important initiative for our Diocese to the Immaculate Heart of our Blessed Mother.

[http://www.dow.org.au/pastoralplanning/key-documents/dow-pastoral-planning/advent-pastoral-letter]
It must be noted, though, that Msgr. Ingham has left the Pastoral Planning process till rather late, perhaps too late; His Lordship has been the local Ordinary since mid-2001 and has only about six years left until he is due for retirement.

The motive inducing His Lordship to initiate this process is clear when he writes that

we recognise that many of our committed parishioners, our religious and our clergy are ageing. We are aware that many among us, while initiated into Catholic Christianity, have become separated from the day-to-day life and worship of the Church.
Obviously, that the abandonment by most Australian nominal Catholics of the Sacramental life of the Church is apparent in all Australian Sees, not just Wollongong, hardly needs to be pointed out, but what is particularly striking is that it is apparent even among those who have gone through supposedly Catholic schools—with the Wollongong Catholic Education Office (C.E.O.) schools no exception, and, I surmise, perhaps among the worst-affected—all the way from kindergarten to Year 12. I doubt whether average monthly Mass attendance by Wollongong C.E.O. high schools pupils would be more than once or twice, and I wouldn’t even expect a majority of Wollongong C.E.O. primary school pupils to belong to families dedicated to attending Mass each Sunday unless excused by some proportionate cause. Speaking of the primary schools, no doubt they perform impressively in the religious literacy tests, but do they retain this knowledge, or is it lost, as usually happens for exams for which one has crammed, even when one has done well in the test? Then again, that might not be such a bad thing, depending on the schools’ treatment of the subject matter involved. As for the Wollongong C.E.O. high school graduates, I would not expect the percentage of them—even the most recent graduates—attending Mass on any given Sunday to exceed the low single digits, though it’s possible (but unlikely) that there has been a significant (in the statistical sense, if in no other sense) up-tick in attendance rates for all groups of young people since World Youth Day 2008, though who knows how long that would last, if it’s even occurred at all. Of course, this low-single-digit percentage will probably drift back up to a (very-)low-double-digit percentage for those graduates who bring up their respective children as Catholics when they start families, but then the cycle will continue with the returnees’ respective children; actually, more of a downward spiral than a cycle, since the percentage will probably decrease, given current trends, with each generation. It will be interesting to see what findings on the involvement of Catholic school pupils and graduates in parish life the Pastoral Planning process produces from its research.

But even among those who do attend Sunday Mass in the Diocese with only rare exceptions, what is their spiritual life like? Why do they have so few children? And there are many other related questions which could be asked.

Let’s have a look at the Identity, Vision and Mission statements for the planning process:

Identity

The Diocese of Wollongong is the community of Christ’s faithful, under the care of their Bishop within the Catholic Church, in a region stretching from Campbelltown City and Camden Council in the North, Wollondilly Shire and Wingecarribee Shire in the west, and through Wollongong City, Shellharbour City, Kiama Municipality and Shoalhaven City in the South.

Vision

Our vision for the diocese is the vision of Jesus Christ for his followers, ‘that they may have life, and have it abundantly…that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.’ (John 10:10, 17:23 NRSV)

Mission

Our mission is grounded in the mission of Jesus and that of the Catholic Church: to be the light of all nations, to share the joys and the hopes and the griefs and the anxieties of all people, and to proclaim the good news of salvation to every creature.[1] In the Diocese of Wollongong we are therefore called to work together:

• to live and teach the way of Jesus Christ for a fully human life
• to celebrate the liturgy and provide pastoral care
• to develop new ministries in emerging areas of need
• for the unity of all Christians and understanding between all religions
• to seek reconciliation with those separated from the Church
• to share healing, shelter, dignity, hope and community with all
• for peace, justice and the integrity of creation.

We will endeavour to do this as best we can, in the love of the Father, following the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and guided by the Holy Spirit.

[1] As described at Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church §1, The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World §1, and reflecting Jesus’ command to his disciples in Mark 16:15)

[http://www.dow.org.au/pastoralplanning/key-documents/dow-pastoral-planning/identity-vision-mission]
There doesn’t seem to be anything in there which is objectionable in itself, though the overall tone does seem insipid and somewhat naturalistic. Moreover, it is obviously very much ‘in the Spirit of Vatican II’, and that’s where the big problem lies. Speaking of that Council and its ‘Spirit’, there’s another bugbear I have about the documents for the Process, and it relates to this, where we see Vatican II’s anthropocentrism starkly apparent:

Centred on the Eucharist
Where all should be welcomed, where our pain is acknowledged, where our brokenness is healed, where we are nourished by Word and Sacrament, and where our mission is renewed.
[http://www.dow.org.au/pastoralplanning/key-documents/dow-pastoral-planning/pp-theological-principles]
One might see “Centred on the Eucharist” and think ‘ah, good—centred on the Eucharist means centred on God, which is as it should be’. But notice how, as they say, ‘it’s all about us’—about “our pain”, “our brokenness” (whatever that means; more on this shortly), “where we are nourished”? How Holy Mass is considered not as a Sacrifice of adoration, thanksgiving, propitiation and impetration and therefore directed to and focused on God, but as a sort of group therapy whither we can all go for ‘affirmation’ (especially evident where it says “where our pain is acknowledged, where our brokenness is healed”, so that we indulge ourselves in our own imagined victimhood, distracting us from the true Victim on Whom our entire attention should be focused at Mass)? So ‘Centred on the Eucharist’ is, bizarrely, nothing of the sort—it is centred on us. And this sort of crass anthropocentrism is contained in one of the four key “Theological Principles and Parameters for Pastoral Planning” by which the whole Process is to be guided! With this sort of confusion, one is driven almost to despair for this venture. What good can possibly come of this? Notice also that, when the Mission Statement speaks of how we are “called to work together”, there is no distinction according to state of life, according to whether one is a cleric, a religious or a married person. Of course, Msgr. Ingham did make this distinction in his Pastoral Letter, but the context in which His Lordship did so does nothing to assuage me:

We will be challenged to “change our mindset”, as Pope Benedict recently put it, and to understand that lay people and clergy are “co-responsible” for the Church now and in the future
What I fear is that the Pastoral Plan will involve an exaggerated notion of lay-clerical ‘co-responsibility’, thus continuing the post-Vatican-II trend of ‘clericalising the laity and laicising the clergy’ and only making the situation worse, especially with respect to answering vocations to the priesthood.

(And what is it with the Conciliar Church and all this talk of ‘healing our brokenness’? It’s maudlin, effeminate, trite, self-indulgent and vague. What, precisely, is it supposed to mean? Is it a reference to actual sin? Certainly, the reception of the Holy Eucharist “remits venial sins and preserves us from mortal sin”, in the words of the Catechism of St. Pius X (see here), but Its reception doesn’t remit mortal sin—God forbid that anyone should receive It with mortal sin on his or her conscience, as I fear many do in the Diocese. Is it a reference to original sin? Certainly, the reception of the Holy Eucharist “allays in us the fires of concupiscence” (again, from the Catechism of St. Pius X). But if it is a reference either to actual or original sin, then why not just come right out and use the dreaded ‘s’-word?)

So what measures would I recommend to the Pastoral Planning committee? Well, you can probably guess what sort of things I’d advise; I’d point out that the experiment of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Missæ has failed miserably, yielding fruits which are not merely bitter, but toxic. Why not, to borrow Msgr. Lefebvre’s famous words, try the experiment of Tradition? Why not make the Traditional Latin Mass the normative rite for the Diocese? Why not require primary school pupils actually to learn a catechism, like the Catechism of St. Pius X? And that’s just for starters; for more ideas, bring in some S.S.P.X. priests as consultants. The Diocese could become the model for Australian Ecclesiastical renewal through Tradition.

But of course the thought of Msgr. Ingham and the Diocese converting to Tradition is a fantasy; His Lordship is a Vatican II/N.O.M. True Believer, with his Diocese’s annual Vatican II Seminar, his facilitation of lay Lectors and so-called Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, and his failure to overhaul—if anything it has worsened under him—the basically Protestant culture of the Diocese. (Actually, that might be a bit unfair to Protestants—at least serious Protestants aren’t known for having liturgical dancers prance around at their conventicles.) His Lordship eagerly advertises Vatican II/N.O.M.-oriented Papal/Vatican Acts, yet greeted what is perhaps the most important piece of Ecclesiastical legislation since the new C.I.C., namely, Summorum Pontificum, with silence, and has not even mentioned it in any of his official pronouncements, as far as I know*, in the two-and-a-half years since its promulgation. (After writing that in my draft, I did a Google search of the keywords "Summorum Pontificum" and "Peter Ingham" and discovered a fascinating ‘Pastoral Reflection’, circulated ad clerum and dated 14 September 2007 and published at The Sybil’s blog on 17 December 2008; you may read it here.) This simultaneous empathy for Protestantism and antipathy towards Tradition was clear in the schedule of events during the WYD08 Cross and Icon’s visit to the Diocese—all manner of ‘ecumenical services’ (and ‘interfaith’ gatherings, and Aboriginal ceremonies), but not a single Traditional Latin Mass event. But perhaps Msgr. Ingham’s clearest statement of his vision for the local (and the universal) Church is a non-verbal one—the Diocese’s most recently-constructed (as far as I know) church, that of the Parish of Mary Immaculate, Eagle Vale. This building is circular in structure (like a pagan temple, and completely alien to Catholic architectural tradition), so that the seating inside it is ‘in the round’ so that the community is, as one writer put it (I think you’ll know who), turned in on itself (‘centred on the Eucharist’ indeed), while the Tabernacle is banished from the sanctuary, with a grotesque totem-pole-like wooden carving depicting Christ crucified, risen and returning in glory, with the inscriptions ‘Christ has died’, ‘Christ is risen’ and ‘Christ will come again’ on the three parts, respectively, where the Tabernacle should be, so that the Mass is considered erroneously as ‘Paschal Mystery’ rather than as one and the same Sacrifice as on Mount Calvary (differing only in manner of offering), offered ‘for the quick and the dead’. This is the vision which the Pastoral Plan, once finalised, will seek to realise, and so one can only expect that the Plan will do nothing to rectify the situation; indeed, since it will only be a renewed and reinvigorated offering of ‘more of the same’ the decay might even accelerate.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Circumcision of Our Lord, A.D. 2010

Thursday, October 8, 2009

How they ‘do liturgy’ in the Diocese of Wollongong

http://www.ceo.woll.catholic.edu.au/resource/60_Yrs_09/index.html

The Sydney Catholic Weekly of two Sundays ago (September 27, 2009) carried the regular “Cross Currents” section on activities in the Diocese of Wollongong. Of particular interest was an item at the top of page 33; the same story is available at the Diocese’s Catholic Education Office (C.E.O.) website:

Students, staff, parents, parishioners, principals, past religious staff, Catholic Education Office representatives, Parish Administrator and Bishop Peter Ingham joined together in celebration of St John Vianney Primary School’s 60th Anniversary at Mass on Thursday August 20.

At a prayerful morning liturgy in the Fairy Meadow Church the history of the school was related by Bishop Peter who praised the Sisters of the Good Samaritan for their pioneering establishment of the school. Current staff and students participated in the mass with readings, song and dance. A generous morning tea followed.
[my emphasis]
At the C.E.O. website there’s a picture, which also appeared in The Catholic Weekly, of four wee lasses, presumably the “students [who] participated in the mass with … dance”. Perhaps their plain white albs and plain green ribands are the Wollongong liturgical intelligentsia’s idea of ‘noble simplicity’. I suppose that I should just be grateful that they managed to find dancers who would wear something less immodest than the usual leotard-and-small-skirt liturgical dance outfit.

The school’s website’s “News and Events” section had the following to say:

The 60th Anniversary of St John Vianney`s.

What a lovely day we celebrated on Thursday 20th August for our 60th Anniversary. We had Mass with the Bishop followed by a morning tea with many of the Sisters of the Good Samaritan who had made a special return visit to SJV. Everyone was very impressed with the music in Mass and our special liturgical dancers. The School Hall was filled with memorabilia which was a great delight to everyone and brought back some wonderful memories.
[my emphasis,
http://www.sjv.woll.catholic.edu.au/page11/page11.html]
Apparently the Most August Sacrifice, one and the same Sacrifice as on Mount Calvary in every respect except manner of offering, renewed and represented on the altar (before which the “liturgical dancers” appear to have done their routine; at any rate it’s clearly quite near the sanctuary), just wasn’t “special” or ‘impressive’ enough for the congregation (or perhaps that should be ‘audience’). Sacrileges like this are nothing new in the Church of Wollongong (or in the other Australian Sees, I expect), but this one’s worth mentioning because of the involvement of the local Ordinary. If any of my readers happened to be present at this disgraceful ‘liturgy’ (it can hardly be so called, since the term ‘liturgy’ implies an order of sacred proceedings without arbitrary, erratic, undue variations, an order which ‘liturgical dance’ obviously violates) could you tell me: was Msgr. Ingham the celebrant, or the presider, or did he just assist in choro (ha), or did he merely attend and “relate” his “history of the school”, or some other form of participation altogether?

(And note well: I certainly don’t mean to impute guilt for this disgrace to the children involved, nor necessarily even to the teachers who conceived of and choreographed the routine, since these teachers presumably know no other way to ‘do liturgy’ than according to the prevailing fashions. Blame lies with the liturgical vandals (and their fellow-travellers) to whom it first occurred to desecrate Holy Mass with this kind of frivolity. And blame lies especially with those fellow-travellers in Holy Orders (particularly those who have the fullness of Orders) and whose formative years occurred before the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ was in full swing.)

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Bridget of Sweden, A.D. 2009