Notes: Tuesday, June 26-Monday, July 16, 2012 (part 1 of 2)

1. Some facts and figures regarding paid parental leave

"Paid parental leave and flexible working paying dividends for employers", a media release dated June 19, 2012 from Diversity Council Australia, available for download from this web-page:

http://www.dca.org.au/News/All/Paid-parental-leave-and-flexible-working-paying-dividends-for-employers/267

(That research came to my attention via an article entitled "Parental leave boosts retention", with no byline, in a column headed "WORKOUT", p. 1, "Weekend Professional" section, "Weekend Professional" supplement, The Weekend Australian, June 23-24, 2012, First Edition, No. 14843, ISSN 1038-8761, apparently not available on-line.)

Labels: leave

2. "Australians may play it[, i.e., God Save The Queen] and sing it whenever they wish"

That quotation comes from a letter, by Sir David Smith K.C.V.O. A.O., under the heading "Our royal anthem", published at The Australian's website here:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/our-royal-anthem/story-fn558imw-1226405956092

(That letter came to my attention via its publication, under the same heading, on p. 23 ("Letters to the Editor"), "Commentary" section, "Inquirer" pages, The Weekend Australian, June 23-24, 2012, First Edition, No. 14843, ISSN 1038-8761.)

Labels: God Save The Queen

3. "The Catholic Herald’s Online Archive is ready to go!"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/the-catholic-heralds-online-archive-is-ready-to-go/

Labels: media

4. "Women working longer hours 'have smaller babies'"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/women-working-longer-hours-have-smaller-babies/story-fnb64oi6-1226411078461

Labels: pregnancy, work

5. Some facts and figures, from the 2011 Census, on "Same-sex Couple Families"

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+features852012-2013

(That came to my attention via the comment of 2.7.12 / 4pm by one Peter Baade in the comments section of this post by Mr. Muehlenberg.)

Labels: demography, G.L.B.T.

6. "Homiletic and Pastoral Review online"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/homiletic-and-pastoral-review-online/

Labels: media

7. The Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts was "created by John Paul II in 1988 to replace the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of the Decrees of the Second Vatican Council, created by Paul VI in 1967."

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2012-0615-ferrara-vatileaks.htm

(That article came to my attention via its posting at AQ here.)

Labels: Roman Curia

8. Ireland's "Minister for Justice Alan Shatter (FG) said it was possible that if a priest or a bishop was prosecuted under withholding of information legislation they might claim entitlement to some form of privilege. However, the legal basis for such a claim no longer held, as the special position of the Catholic church had been removed from the Constitution. If such a claim was based on freedom of religion, the courts might be called on to decide the issue."

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0613/1224317819220.html

(That article came to my attention via its posting at AQ here.)

See also

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2012/06/15/the-irish-government-is-going-to-make-it-a-criminal-offence-for-a-priest-not-to-tell-the-gardai-when-a-sex-offender-confesses-his-crime-i-say-bring-it-on/

(That article was highlighted here at Coo-ees and here at CathNews.)

Labels: Alan Shatter, Ireland, Sacraments

9. H.H. The Pope has appointed "Archbishop Joseph Augustine Di Noia, O.P., secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, as vice president of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei"" and has appointed "Bishop Gerhard Ludwig Muller of Regensburg, Germany, as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and as president of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", of the Pontifical Biblical Commission and of the International Theological Commission, at the same time elevating him to the dignity of archbishop."

http://www.news.va/en/news/other-pontifical-acts-189

http://www.news.va/en/news/other-pontifical-acts-192

See here for some commentary by Fr. Roberts.

Labels: Roman Curia

10. "A Californian politician is pushing legislation to allow a child to have more than two parents."

http://www.smh.com.au/world/and-baby-makes-four-20120703-21fdk.html?skin=text-only

Labels: birth certificates

11. "A survey by pollster IFOP said gays in France make up 6.5 per cent of the electorate, compared with practising Cath-olics at 6.5 per cent."

I transcribed that quotation from the article "Freedom for French gays", no byline, on p. 21 in the "WORLD" section of the Sydney Daily Telegraph, Thursday, July 5, 2012, Vol. 1, No. 2584, ISSN 1038-8745. A longer version of that article is available here:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/france-to-allow-gay-couples-to-marry-and-adopt-children/story-fn6b3v4f-1226416737223

Labels: demography, France, G.L.B.T.

12. R.I.P. Mr. Abney-Hastings (The (14th) Earl of Loudoun)

http://www.smh.com.au/national/obituaries/the-jerilderie-man-who-could-have-been-king-20120705-21jwz.html?skin=text-only

Labels: Michael Abney-Hastings

13. "In the most recent ABS report on social trends, it was noted children are financially dependent on their parents until 24 in Australia."

That quotation comes from "[s]ocial researcher Mark McCrindle", quoted in the article "Techie teens are the biggest wallet strain", by Phil Jacob and Nathan Klein, dated June 29, 2012, downloaded from here:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/techie-teens-are-the-biggest-wallet-strain/story-e6freuy9-1226411559024

(That article came to my attention via its publication under the same heading and by the same authors on p. 09 of the Sydney Daily Telegraph, Friday, June 29, 2012, Vol. 1, No. 2579 (presumably, though I could find neither volume nor number stated in the paper), ISSN 1038-8745.)

Labels: demography, economics

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, A.D. 2012

Notes: Wednesday, October 19-Monday, October 31, 2011

1. On recent Australian Government treatment of de facto marriages compared to (recent Australian Government treatment of) de ivre ones

Can anyone provide an answer to this recent comment of mine at Mr. Schütz's blog?

Labels: marriage, taxation

2. Some information regarding Catholic schools in England and Wales

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=28664

Labels: Catholic schools

3. According to Cardinal Tauran, "[r]eligious freedom necessarily includes immunity from coercion by any individual, group, community or institution"

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20111020_diwali_en.html

(That message came to my attention via VIS 20111020 (300), "CHRISTIANS AND HINDUS: PROMOTING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM", an item in a recent edition of the Vatican Information Service's daily e-mail bulletin.)

Labels: Jean-Louis Tauran, religious liberty, Roman Curia

4. Pius XII. on the death penalty

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P12PSYCH.htm
(section 33)

(That came to my attention via this comment in the combox of this recent blog post by Prof. Feser.)

Labels: death penalty, morality, Pius XII. Pacelli

5. Some recent information:

5.1 On Australian demography:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mediareleasesbyCatalogue/8668A9A0D4B0156CCA25792F0016186A?Opendocument

Labels: demography, marriage, social trends

5.2 On world demography:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/shift-of-young-population-to-cities-may-leave-elderly-without-support-they-need-un-report/story-e6frg6so-1226177302868

Labels: demography

6. "That [I.C.E.L.] translation [of John Paul II.'s 1990 revision of Paul VI.'s ordinal for priestly ordination] was so bad that in 1997 the Congregation for Divine Worship issued in response a letter of a harshness that [Fr. Zuhlsdorf] had never seen before from any dicastery of the Holy See"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/10/quaeritur-the-novus-ordo-ordinal-for-ordaining-bishops-priests-deacons/

Labels: I.C.E.L., Priesthood, Roman Curia, Sacraments

Reginaldvs Cantvar
All Hallows' Eve, A.D. 2011

Notes: Tuesday, September 6-Wednesday, September 14, 2011 (part 2 of 2)

9. Dr. Tighe on what makes a Council Ecumenical

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/09/a-pessimitic-article-about-sspx-and-talks-with-rome/#comment-294303

Labels: Church Councils, Eastern Schism, Hierarchy, Papacy, theology

10. More from Dr. Brown on the notion of "the Eucharist [as] a memorial of the Last Supper"

Point 3 of this blog comment, in which there is a link to the text of one of Paul VI.'s General Audiences:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/09/when-diocesan-priests-choose-to-use-exclusively-the-extraordinary-form-fr-z-rants-a-lot/#comment-294513

Labels: liturgy, Paul VI. Montini, Sacraments, theology

11. "it has now become a constitutional convention that [the British] Parliament does not interfere in the internal affairs of the Established Church"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/09/uk-mp-pushes-to-force-church-to-have-contrary-to-nature-marriages-or-no-marriages-at-all/#comment-294030

Labels: Anglicans, U.K.

12. A very short, but very interesting, biography of St. Robert Bellarmine

http://www.americancatholic.org/features/saints/saint.aspx?id=1141

(I first read that biography in the Sydney Catholic Weekly last Sunday.) These are the parts which were of most interest to me and for which I log that biography here:

His most famous work is his three-volume Disputations on the Controversies of the Christian Faith. Particularly noteworthy are the sections on the temporal power of the pope and the role of the laity. He incurred the anger of monarchists in England and France by showing the divine-right-of-kings theory untenable. He developed the theory of the indirect power of the pope in temporal affairs; although he was defending the pope against the Scottish philosopher Barclay, he also incurred the ire of Pope Sixtus V.

[...] ... The process for his canonization was begun in 1627 but was delayed until 1930 for political reasons, stemming from his writings. In 1930, Pope Pius XI canonized him and the next year declared him a doctor of the Church.

Labels: Papacy, political science, St. Robert Bellarmine, theology, William Barclay

13. Two recent opinions pieces from Mr. Steyn

13.1 "Using rights to gag free speech"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/using-rights-to-gag-free-speech/story-e6frg6zo-1226136138035

(Needless to say, I reject that 'freedom of speech' is a true moral freedom; I mainly log that web-page for its information on examples of anti-'hate-speech' action.)

Labels: hate speech

13.2 "FOURTH TRIMESTER ABORTION"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38913

Labels: abortion

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, A.D. 2011

Notes: Wednesday, July 20-Monday, July 25, 2011

1. "[In N.S.W. State school 'ethics classes', children] are now critically thinking about ethical concepts and moral issues within a secular framework", writes one of the "volunteer ethics teacher[s]"

http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/even-a-child-could-work-this-one-out-mr-nile-20110719-1hncd.html?skin=text-only

Labels: education, morality, secularism, St James Ethics Centre

2. A couple of recent items regarding polyamory

2.1 Research findings on Muslim polygynous and otherwise irregular marriages

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/sharia-law-at-work-in-australia/story-fn59niix-1226097889992

Labels: Islam, marriage, polyamory

2.2 Fr. Zuhlsdorf's fisking of an article on "[t]he slippery slope: from decriminalization to social acceptance"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/07/the-slippery-slope-from-decriminalization-to-social-acceptance/
(It's the article itself, rather than the fisking, for which I've logged that web-page.)

Labels: G.L.B.T., marriage, polyamory

3. "The [Russian Orthodox] Moscow Patriarchate has undertaken a real campaign of expansion at home and abroad"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38209

Labels: R.O.C.

4. On planned or desired State attacks on the Sacrament of Penance

4.1 More on Ireland's planned attack on the Sacrament of Penance

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/07/ireland-priests-will-refuse-to-break-seal-of-confession-if-proposal-becomes-law/
(In that post's combox, good points are made by the commenters markomalley, PostCatholic, and albizzi here, here, and here, respectively.)

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38221

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=27315

Labels: Ireland, Sacraments, sexual abuse

4.2 On Sen. Xenophon's desire for Australian States to attack the Sacrament of Penance

http://www.smh.com.au/national/call-to-end-confessional-confidentiality-20110721-1hr0d.html?skin=text-only

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/unforgiveable-sin-confessing-to-child-abuse/

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=27331

Labels: Nick Xenophon, Sacraments, sexual abuse

5. Mr. Skinner on the U.K.'s Office for National Statistics's findings on the size of the homosexual and bisexual proportion of the population

The comment of 20.7.11 / 5pm in the combox here:

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/07/17/pushing-agendas-ignoring-facts/

The interesting thing about those findings is that it seems that even if you count all non-answers and answers other than heterosexual/straight as 'queer' (or whatever catch-all you prefer) then that would still give a mere 5.2%.

Labels: demography, G.L.B.T.

6. "Obama's [latest] gay rights push"

http://www.smh.com.au/world/obamas-gay-rights-push-20110720-1houe.html?skin=text-only

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38225

Labels: Barack Obama, G.L.B.T., marriage, U.S.A.

Feast of St. James the Greater, Apostle, and of St. Christopher, Martyr, A.D. 2011

Notes: Wednesday, June 30-Wednesday, July 6, 2011

1. "[In the U.S., n]o state referendum or initiative to outlaw same-sex marriage has ever been defeated at the ballot box"

http://www.smh.com.au/world/new-york-decision-sparks-hope-for-gay-marriage-movement-20110627-1gnj0.html?skin=text-only

Labels: G.L.B.T., marriage, U.S.A.

2. "... an approximation [of pi] appears in the Bible ..."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/maths-mutineers-say-numbers-up-for-pi/story-e6frg6so-1226083546779

Anyone know the chapter and verse for that approximation?

Labels: Scripture

3. Mr. Timbs on the origin of the Sacraments

Here is an excerpt from a comment by one of CathNews's frequent commenters, one David Timbs:

... in fact, Jesus never ordained anyone to anything nor instituted any sacraments of any kind. That sacramental system developed over time in the Church
[http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=26981]

Labels: David Timbs, Priesthood, Sacraments, theology

4. "Many Successful Gay Marriages Share an Open Secret"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

(Brought to my attention via a comment in the combox of this CathNews post.)

Labels: G.L.B.T., marriage, polyamory

5. Talk soon. Talk often--scandalous new "sex education guide"

Available here:

http://www.public.health.wa.gov.au/2/1276/2/parentcaregiver.pm

(Brought to my attention by a short article in one of the editions of the Sydney Daily Telegraph last week, an expanded edition of which article is available here.)

That guide's title reminds of that old joke about how to vote in some kinds of corrupt electoral systems--'vote early and vote often', which is fitting, given that that guide would do to the virtue of chastity in a youngster what electoral corruption does to civic virtue in a citizen.

Labels: education, Jenny Walsh, vice, youngsters

6. A couple of recent items regarding the Russian Orthodox Church

6.1 "The Myth of Orthodox Revival in Russia"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37998

Labels: R.O.C.

6.2 "Russo-Orthodox cleric in Vatican ceremony: closer ties?"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37988

Labels: Diocese of Rome, R.O.C.

7. Death of H.I.&R.H. Archduke Otto of Austria

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38012

Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord; and let perpetual light shine upon him. May he rest in peace. Amen.

Labels: Otto Habsburg-Lorraine

Reginaldvs Cantvar
6.VII.2011

Notes: Tuesday, April 5-Monday, April 11, 2011

1. A few items regarding Russia and/or the Russian Orthodox Church

1.1 Significant recent Russian space mission carried "an icon presented by the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/international-mission-marks-50-years-of-russian-space-flight/story-e6frg6so-1226033950957

Labels: R.O.C., Russia

1.2 "In Russia, the dissolution of the Soviet Union led initially to a more world-oriented curriculum in the 1990s, with an emphasis on ''common human values'', but more recently, in line with Russia's foreign policy, it has been moving back to a more national and patriotic story"

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/new-curriculum-will-ultimately-mould-our-national-identity-20110405-1d2uw.html?skin=text-only

Labels: Russia

1.3 "Russian prelate says 'godless' West doomed to collapse"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36808

Labels: R.O.C., Russia, secularism

2. A few items regarding Ireland

2.1 "Irish Minister says religion in schools is a waste of class time"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36735

Not without disagreement, though:

"Former Irish prime minister defends religious instruction"
http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36807

Labels: catechesis, education, Ireland

2.2 "Irish State to seize religious order’s property to pay victim’s comp"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36734

Labels: Ireland

2.3 "Irish report argues against hasty government takeover of Church-run schools"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36768

Labels: education, Ireland

3. "The Roman Catholic Church is the official state Church in Monaco"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36736

I did not know that that was the case.

Labels: Church and State, Monaco

4. Gay man reflects on the implications which legalising 'gay marriage' has for legalising polygamy

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/blogs/over-the-rainbow/4407748/Is-polygamy-such-a-bad-thing

Labels: G.L.B.T., marriage, morality, polyamory

5. Dr. Brown on the theology of the Blessed Sacrament

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/04/maynooth-seminary-in-ireland-fit-for-mission/#comment-264609

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/04/maynooth-seminary-in-ireland-fit-for-mission/#comment-264910

Labels: Sacraments, theology

6. "With the battle over legalised euthanasia touch and go in South Australia and Tasmania, the president of the Australian Nursing Federation, Coral Levett, has taken the extraordinary step of personally endorsing it"

This article is valuable for other nursing-and-euthanasia-related information in it, too:

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/nurses-not-neutral-on-lethal-needle/

Labels: euthanasia, nursing

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Leo I., Pope, Confessor, Doctor of the Church, A.D. 2011

Notes: Thursday, December 23, 2010

1. "Bishop Williamson appoints new lawyer"

http://www.sspx.org/bishop_williamson_lawyer_update.htm
(brought to my attention by this AQ thread)

2. A new website against 'Communion in the hand'

http://www.communion-in-the-hand.org/index.html
(brought to my attention by this AQ thread)

3. An interesting AQ comment by "Amemus Athanasium"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=391844#391844

Interesting chiefly for mention of how

dissident patriarch Bartholomew I, while being a schismatic, received his theological doctorate and primary formation in the (Uniate) Russian College 'Russicum' in Rome. It is now a sadly ecumenist and dogmatically relativist institute, but it was once a great theological institute of the united Russian Byzantine Rite Catholic Church (or 'Russian Orthodox Church in communion with Rome').

4. Mr. Donohue with the names of those who have "theorized ["pedophilia"] as something fully in conformity with man and even with children"

http://members7.boardhost.com/CathPews/msg/1293010728.html

Reginaldvs Cantvar
23.XII.2010

Notes: Saturday-Monday, October 16-25, 2010 (part 2 of 2)

7. Interesting books reviewed in the weekend papers

Just one from last weekend, but I've been meaning to blog on a number of them from earlier weekends, though it seems I won't get round to it. This review, apparently not available on-line so my transcript follows, is from the Herald's Spectrum supplement:

THE COURIER'S TALE
Peter Walker
Bloomsbury, 352 pp,
$32.99

There's a lot of dreadful historical fiction about but this is an intelligent, literate historical novel whose emphasis is on character and whose narrative voice is that of a quirky, bemused minor player in the drama. Michael Throckmorton was a real historical persaonage, as was the other main character in this story, the virtuous but indecisive Cardinal Pole.
Throckmorton finds himself travelling backwards and forwards between England and Italy for most of his adult life, the uneasy servant of two warring masters.
He belongs to that turbulent period of English history that starts with the marriage of Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn and ends with the succession of their daughter, Elizabeth I, to the throne in 1558. In sticking to historical events and characters, Walker becomes enmeshed in detail at the expense of the narrative; after its promising start, the novel loses its way.
[Review by Kerryn Goldsworthy]

8. Two recent blog comments by me:

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

8.1

Cardinal Pole
October 20, 2010 at 5:20 pm

“[You] might misleading suggest that the bread and wine are physically Jesus.”

They are. A man’s metaphysical parts are his animality and rationality, his physical parts are his body and soul, and his integral parts are his faculties and members. ‘Physis‘ means ‘nature’, and human nature is the conjunction of animal body and rational soul. By virtue of the Sacrament, the bread is converted into the Body of Christ, and by virtue of concomitance, His Blood, Soul, and Divinity are present there too, and the same goes mutatis mutandis for the wine.

These days people tend to mean something else by ‘physical’, though, and that’s presumably what you have in mind. Paul VI. dealt with this in an allocution, though I don’t have time to find the reference.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/no-knowledge-without-education/#comment-17721]

8.2

Cardinal Pole
October 21, 2010 at 5:34 pm

“… not in the way bodies normally are”

Quite right–He is present ‘as in a Sacrament’. (Unfortunately there are some, even in the Priesthood, who would like to speak only of ‘Sacramental Presence’ while remaining silent on the question of Substantial Presence. See this old Coo-ees post, and also my comment there of January 16, 2009 6:02 PM (which also contains an interesting example of a Magisterial usage of the term ‘natural’):

http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/2009/01/move-of-zwingli-luther-and-calvin-its.html

“… although not in the manner in which bodies are in a place.”

Good to see His late Holiness re-stating the doctrine of the Catechism of the Council of Trent. After publishing that earlier comment it occured to me that it might have been Mysterium Fidei of which I was thinking when I wrote of Paul VI. dealing with ‘physical’ presence.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/no-knowledge-without-education/#comment-17737]

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria, Martyrs, A.D. 2010

Notes: Thursday, June 10, 2010

"[Coptic Orthodox] Pope defies court: will not accept divorce and remarriage"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32025

Full text (very short):

Pope Shenouda II, the leader of the Coptic Orthodox Church, has confirmed that his church will refuse to abide by a decision of Egypt's highest court, which ruled that the Coptic Church must allow divorce and remarriage.

In May the court ruled that because "the right to family formation is a constitutional right," no religious body can deny that right. In Egypt all marriages must be endorsed by a religious body. The court said that the Coptic Church must alter its teachings to allow for the civil rights of divorced people.

Pope Shenouda said that the Coptic Church will disregard the ruling, insisting that the court has no authority to dictate religious beliefs and practices.

The latest rant from Fr. Kelly

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=21653

According to Fr. Kelly,

One of the heresies common among Catholics - I've even heard it from priests - is that the supreme significance of priesthood is that from Ordination on, the priest has the power to change bread and wine into the body and blood of the Lord. It was put that starkly by one commentator responding to my recent blog on the Real Presence of Christ in the celebration of the Eucharist.

(The comment to which Fr. Kelly refers seems to be the one by "Byzcat" here.) Let me simply quote the teaching of the Council of Trent on doctrine on the Sacrament of Orders, in its twenty-third sesssion:

From Chapter 1, on the institution of the Priesthood of the New Law:

... that to the apostles and their successors in the priesthood was handed down the power of consecrating, of offering and administering His body and blood, and also of forgiving and retaining sins, the Sacred Scriptures show and the tradition of the Catholic Church has always taught ...
[http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma10.php]

Canon 1 of the Canons on the Sacrament of Order:

If anyone says that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood, or that there is no power of consecrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord, and of forgiving and retaining sins, but only the office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel, or that those who do not preach are not priests at all: let him be anathema [cf. n.957 960].
[square-bracketed interpolation as in the source for this quotation,
ibid.]

Unsurprisingly, the commenters at the CathNews combox (which has lately, and sadly, degenerated into a cosy little mutual admiration society) failed to challenge Fr. Kelly on this, but surprisingly, neither have any bloggers. Nor did any of the commenters at CathNews challenge Fr. Kelly when he spoke of "the alcoholic cultures that have infected the clergy of many dioceses in Australia". It doesn't surprise me that CathNews published an heretical 'blog', but it does surprise me that it has published one with such a gratuitous, unsubstantiated slur against Australian clergy.

An interesting observation regarding priestesses

By Fr. Zuhlsdorf in an interpolation in a comment by someone else at his blog:

Temple prostitution was the inevitable result in the ancient world of the cult of priestesses.
[http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/06/prepare-to-be-amused-wymynprysts-protesting-vatican-blah-blah-blah/#comment-208889]

N.S.W. review of its laws on those who kill unborn children

From yesterday's Sydney Daily Telegraph, p. 18:

Laws for unborn

THE fight for "Zoe's Law" inched closer this week with the release of the terms of reference into a review of the laws involving unborn children.
Retired Supreme Court Justice Michael Campbell was appointed to head up the review after a campaign by The Daily Telegraph in support of Brodie Donegan's unborn child Zoe. The 32-week-old foetus was killed after an alleged drug-affected driver slammed into Ms Donegan on Christmas Day.
The review will consider if the century-old Crimes act 1900 -- which holds that if a child has not taken a breath, it is not human -- enables justice to be served in the criminal death of a foetus in modern society.

More on this in this earlier story from Sydney Archdiocese's Catholic Communications service.

Blog comment by me

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

Cardinal Pole
June 10, 2010 at 3:52 am

“[You] cannot imagine and did not as a Catholic know a single person who would so express that they were Catholic, let alone some construction like a member of the Archdiocese of Omaha as a church, in communion with the bishop of Rome”

So how would you imagine and/or how did Catholics when you were a Catholic express that they were Catholic?
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/revisiting-the-summit-i/#comment-15215]

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Margaret of Scotland, Queen, Widow, A.D. 2010

Notes: Monday-Tuesday, June 7-8, 2010

"Human rights by back door"

http://www.smh.com.au/national/human-rights-by-back-door-20100606-xn8a.html?skin=text-only

Full article: (it's only short)

THE man whose recommendation for a human rights act was rejected by the Rudd government believes much of what he proposed will be adopted through the back door.

Frank Brennan chaired the consultation committee that recommended an act that would allow judges to assess Commonwealth laws and practices for their compliance with human rights.

Writing in a coming Australia Institute newsletter, Father Brennan says that although the government rejected the idea in April, it accepted other recommendations that would have much the same effect.

He says that as a result: ''Parliament will legislate to ensure that each new bill is accompanied by a statement to which it is compatible with the seven UN human rights treaties.''

Ultimately, Father Brennan says, Australia will require a human rights act to set workable limits.

But here is Fr. Brennan's response:

Transparent rights

You report that I believe that much of what the National Human Rights Consultation Committee proposed "will be adopted through the back door" (''Human rights by back door'', June 7). To the contrary, I believe much of what we proposed, other than a Human Rights Act, will be achieved by the government's national human rights framework; and some of what we proposed through a Human Rights Act will be achieved by the courts rightly applying the legislation introduced to Parliament last week. Nothing back door about any of that.

These are front door measures in which the executive, Parliament and the courts will play their distinctive roles transparently in the public domain, improving the protection of human rights.

Father Frank Brennan Chairman, National Human Rights Consultation Committee, Yarralumla (ACT)
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/stop-the-waffle-and-do-whats-right-for-australia-20100607-xqjh.html?skin=text-only]

"Backlash over Church of England's move to allow divorced bishops"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/backlash-over-church-of-englands-move-to-allow-divorced-bishops/story-e6frg6so-1225876189319

Excerpt:

DIVORCED clergy could be allowed to become Church of England bishops for the first time.

Church leaders have discussed the move and are set to reveal their decision next month at the General Synod, the national assembly of the Church of England.

[...] The change was agreed to at a meeting of the House of Bishops, the newspaper said.

A Church of England spokesman said the house considered the issue last month after seeking legal advice. "The house had asked for clarification of the relevant legal background and, in the light of that, has now agreed that a statement setting out its approach to these issues should be prepared," the spokesman said.

"It is expected that the statement addressing the relevant legal and theological issues will be available in July when the General Synod meets.

"There is no legal obstacle to persons who have remarried after divorce, or are married to spouses remarried after divorce, becoming bishops. The agreed policy is to pursue a discretionary approach on a case-by-case basis.

It will be interesting to see what goes on at the forthcoming General Synod, not just for its decision on this policy, but its decisions on other matters too.

AQ thread on post-Vatican-II changes to the celebration of the Sacraments

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31985

Particularly useful is this comment (though its source is sedevacantist).

Mr. Coyne on Original Sin

http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=49310

Here's the relevant paragraph:

I think a large part of the problem with "Original Sin" comes from the name itself. I think that perhaps if we called it "the fundamental disjunction" or some different expression like that it wouldn't have ended up attracting such a negative press. My sense is that it is NOT trying to tell us about some "first sin" committed by some "first parents" and we are saddled with their transgression and have to perpetually do penance for it until we are "redeemed" by some magic act by Jesus. It's trying to convey to us (humankind) that there is a "fundamental disjunction" built into creation and we are perpetually fighting against it as it were. To my own mind the "disjunction" is a by-product of the choice, or right to participation, that was extended to sentient creation. The by-product is that in our choices we will inevitably also make wrong choices — often for the very best of intentions. Our offspring very often cannot 'undo' the consequences of those wrong choices. The Godhead, or heaven (to use another term), is the only place in the whole of Creation where we are likely to get to a place where this 'disjunction' is finally resolved, ironed flat, or ruled out of contention as a factor in our lives. In the Christian context, Jesus represents the God-head, so it is true to argue that Jesus is the one who wipes away Original Sin or this Original Disjunction that we all have to battle against like Sisyphus perpetually rolling his stone up a steep hill. But it is not some "magic act" by Jesus that wipes away "the original disjunction" — it's by our entering into "the Way" (of thinking, feeling and acting) modelled by Jesus.

More from him on these matters here. This sort of thinking is nothing new at the Catholica forum, of course; see here and here for further coverage.

Two events, one recent and one upcoming:

1. The recent one:

Cardinal George Pell - Diary & Events
Thursday, June 3: 10am Chairs, NSW/ACT bishops’ meeting at St Mary’s Cathedral House, Sydney.
[http://www.sydney.catholic.org.au/people/archbishop/diary_and_events.shtml]

2. The upcoming one:

The sixth annual St Thomas More Forum lecture will be held from 6.30pm, for 7pm, on June 22 at the Canberra Southern Cross Club, 92–96 Corinna St, Phillip, ACT. The topic is St Thomas More – The Friend of Bishops. It will be presented by Archbishop Phillip Wilson, president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and Archbishop of Adelaide. The cost is $50 per person. Bookings close on June 14. For more details ring 6201 9814.
[http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=3&subclassID=74&articleID=7020&class=Features&subclass=Parish
noticeboard]

See also this advertisement for the lecture.

Blog comments by me

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

Cardinal Pole
June 8, 2010 at 12:40 am

“what “Cardinal Pole” says it flat wrong and contradictory to the Gospel and Christ’s church, but at least it is Catholic”

I have shown that the Social Reign of Christ is not “flat wrong” by natural-law reasoning. Now can you show how it is “contradictory to the Gospel and Christ’s church”?
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/simon-shama-on-the-snares-of-history-for-the-secular-humanist/#comment-15185]

Cardinal Pole
June 8, 2010 at 2:29 am

Oh, and our friends at Catholica helpfully remind us that the Roman Empire was not the first Catholic Confessional State:

“An extraordinary Christian called Gregory (known as the Enlightener or Illuminator) stepped into the breach and filled the vacuum. Like many of the saints of this period his life has been seriously obscured with fabulous legend. He is supposed to have been the son of a Parthian who had murdered King Khosrov I of Armenia. The baby Gregory was taken to Caesarea in Cappadocia where he was baptized and brought up. He married there and had two sons before returning to Armenia where he succeeded in converting King Tiridates III to Christianity at about the same time as the victory over the Persians; this after fourteen years of incarceration in a pit, presumably at the hands of the Zoroastrians, who were opposed to his mission. Having been consecrated as a bishop at Caesarea, Gregory spent the remainder of his life preaching and organizing the church in Armenia. Tiridates III helpfully destroyed the Zoroastrian sanctuary at Ashtishat that had been built on a pagan foundation, and erected a church in its place. He decreed Christianity the official religion of his country, the first ruler in the world to do so.”
[http://www.catholica.com.au/specials/first500-2/057_tl_080609.php]
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/simon-shama-on-the-snares-of-history-for-the-secular-humanist/#comment-15186]

Reginaldvs Cantvar
8.VI.2010

Notes: Thursday, May 20, 2010

On the stealing of small and large amounts of money

Here's a letter from today's Herald:

Those getting their ecclesiastical knickers in a knot about Tony Abbott's attitude to truth should realise that his views reflect his Jesuit background. They only need to get a look at Moral Theology, by a Dr Davis, a Catholic scholar, whose work carries the imprimatur to understand what is acceptable.

The gem I remember from my Moore College days is that if one of the faithful diddles the railways of a nominal weekly sum, he need not confess it. However, let him take it all in one go and it's straight to the confessional.
Donald Howard Elderslie
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/oh-what-a-tangled-web-we-weave--20100519-vf4c.html?skin=text-only]

Actually, if the thief's intention were to steal a significant amount of money, although spread over a long period of time, then he would indeed need to confess. What Mr. Howard was presumably thinking of was the case where in each instance the thief intends to steal only a trifling amount of money, and does so in many separate instances.

Sen. Xenophon on the reporting of Sacramental accusations of child abuse

[...] "I can't comment on the specific allegations against the archbishop, but what I can say is this should prompt a debate about the sanctity of the confessional and the role the church has had in relation to information raised about child sexual abuse," Senator Xenophon said yesterday.

"There are now mandatory reporting requirements but the confessional is exempt."

[... Sen. Xenophon] said the church should declare its protocols "so the public knows what the church does in the case of allegations of abuse in the confessional".

"If someone has confessed to a priest with information about the abuse of children, whether they're the perpetrator or not, then shouldn't the authorities know about that?" he said.
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/church-confessions-of-abuse-should-be-reported/story-e6frg6nf-1225868878603]

Well, the Church's "protocols" in these matters are already public knowledge. And why, Sen. Xenophon, stop at accusations of child abuse? What if, say, a serial killer accuses himself of his crimes in Confession? Why shouldn't the authorities be alerted in that case, too? How far does Sen. Xenophon want to go? Or has he not fully thought through his remarks?

"Gay couple in Malawi face heavy jail term for 'unnatural acts'"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/gay-couple-in-malawi-face-heavy-jail-term-for-unnatural-acts/story-e6frg6so-1225868487773

I was amused, but unsurprised, to see what Amnesty International had to say:

Amnesty International called for the immediate release of the two men. "Being in a relationship should not be a crime. No one should be arrested and detained solely on the basis of their real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity," Michelle Kagari, Amnesty's deputy Africa Director, said. "Their human rights, the rights to freedom from discrimination, of conscience, expression and privacy have been flagrantly violated."

So "being in a relationship should not be a crime". Even a polygamous or incestuous one? And it's one thing to be in a certain relationship, and another to try to pass off that relationship as something it's not.

And of course, the sodomite and catamite were convicted neither "on the basis of their real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity" nor for "[b]eing in a relationship", but for buggery.

And note the little list of "human rights" at the end: The "rights to freedom from [1.] discrimination, of [2.] conscience, [3.] expression and [4.] privacy".
1. There is nothing inherently wrong with discrimination. What matters is whether the discrimination is just or unjust, and in this case it is just.
2. Of course, it is sinful to disobey one's conscience, but there is a world of difference between being forced to disobey one's conscience and being restrained from, or punished for, obeying one's conscience. I'm sure that if you spoke to prisoners many of them would tell you that their respective consciences were quite unburdened.
3. If by 'freedom of expression' they mean the 'freedom' to pass off a parody of marriage as the real thing then that is not liberty but licence.
4. Ah yes, the same 'right' by which the ruling in Roe vs. Wade was justified. As though one can do evil with impunity so long as one does it in private.

H.H. The Pope on the message of Fatima

From the Vatican Information Service daily e-mail bulletin:

BENEDICT XVI RECALLS HIS RECENT TRIP TO PORTUGAL

VATICAN CITY, 19 MAY 2010 (VIS) - During his general audience this morning, Benedict XVI reminisced about his recent apostolic trip to Portugal, which took place from 11 to 14 May to mark the tenth anniversary of the beatification of the shepherd children Jacinta and Francisco.

The Holy Father began by explaining how throughout his journey he had felt the "spiritual support" of his predecessor John Paul II, "who visited Fatima three times, to give thanks for the 'invisible hand' that delivered him from death in the attack of 13 May here in St. Peter's Square".

During Mass in the capital city of Lisbon, "whence over the centuries so many missionaries left to carry the Gospel to other continents", the Pope had called the local Church "to vigorous evangelising activity in the various areas of society, in order to sow hope in a world often marked by mistrust". In particular he had encouraged believers "to announce the death and resurrection of Christ, the core of Christianity, fulcrum and support of our faith and the reason for our joy".

Benedict XVI then went on to refer to his meeting with representatives from the world of culture, where he had "underlined the heritage of values with which Christianity has enriched the culture, art and tradition of the Portuguese people. In that noble land, as in every country deeply marked by Christianity, it is possible to build a future of fraternal understanding and collaboration with other cultures, opening reciprocally to sincere and respectful dialogue", he said.

In Fatima, "a town marked by an atmosphere of authentic mysticism, in which the presence of the Virgin is almost palpable", the Pope had been "a pilgrim among other pilgrims", who presented Our Lady with "the joys and expectations, as well as the problems and sufferings of the whole world", said the Holy Father.

He also recalled how he had celebrated Vespers in Fatima's church of the Blessed Trinity with priests, religious and deacons of Portugal, thanking them "for their witness, often silent and not always easy, and for their faithfulness to the Gospel and to the Church", inviting them to follow, in this Year for Priests, "the shining example of the 'Cure of Ars'".

The Pope mention the Rosary he had prayed with hundreds of thousands of people on the evening of 12 May, vigil of the anniversary of the first apparition of the Virgin. "This prayer, so dear to Christian people, has found in Fatima a driving force for all the Church and the world", he said. "We could say that Fatima and the Rosary are almost synonymous".

During the Mass of 13 May, celebrated on the esplanade of Fatima in the presence of half a million people, the Pope had reaffirmed that "the demanding but consoling message the Virgin left us at Fatima is full of hope. It is a message that focuses on prayer, penance and conversion, a message projected beyond the threats, dangers and horrors of history, inviting humankind to have faith in the action of God, to cultivate great hope, and to experience the grace of the Lord in order to love Him, the source of love and peace".

In his meeting with pastoral care organisations, Benedict XVI recalled how he had "indicated the example of the Good Samaritan, in order to meet the requirements of our most needy brothers and sisters, and to serve Christ by promoting the common good".

In his celebration of the Eucharist in Porto, "the city of the Virgin", the Pope had
highlighted "the duty to bear witness to the Gospel in all environments, offering Christ to the world so that all situations of difficulty, suffering and fear may be transformed by the Holy Spirit into an opportunity for growth and life".

"'Wisdom and Mission' was the motto of my apostolic trip to Portugal", Pope Benedict concluded his reminiscences. "In Fatima the Blessed Virgin Mary invites us to walk with hope, letting ourselves be guided by the 'wisdom from on high' which was manifested in Jesus, the wisdom of love, to bring the light and joy of Christ into the world".
AG/ VIS 20100519 (700)
[bold type in the original; my italics]

I find the bit in italics a bit odd:

[The message of Our Lady at Fatima is] a message projected beyond the threats, dangers and horrors of history

Surely the message of Fatima is a prophetic one, and one the fulfillment of whose prophecies we still await (and await with increasing eagerness)? How can the message be at once intimately concerned with "the threats, dangers and horrors of history" and also be "projected beyond" them?

Cardinal Pole's Blog on Church and State featured on CathNews!

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=21310

Here's the thank-you comment which I've submitted at that web page:

Cardinal Pole
cardinal_pole@hotmail.com
Thank you for featuring my blog. (I understand if you do not wish to publish this comment, given the new comments policy.)

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Thankyou for your comments.

Blog comments from me

At Mr. Schütz's blog:

Cardinal Pole
May 20, 2010 at 4:21 am

“2. The convention long predates the internet.”

I’m still not clear on this–are you referring to the convention of an Ordinary signing his name with a cross, or the convention of others using a cross before his name rather than writing out ‘Bishop’/'Archbishop’/whatever? (It’s just that I can’t imagine there having been much occasion for the latter before the internet, at least not in correspondence; in private notes I can see it being useful.)
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/a-man-of-devastating-sanity-professor-claudio-veliz-on-cardinal-george-pell/#comment-14794]

Cardinal Pole
May 20, 2010 at 4:49 am

“[You] guess the Holy Spirit is asleep at the switch, since you have the popes you have instead of the ones of wishes and fantasy.”

The Holy Ghost gives us the Popes–and priests, and bishops–we deserve. There’s an article dealing with that in a recent (the latest? I’m not sure) issue of The Fatima Crusader.

“Or maybe it’s the whole pope thing that is the wish and fantasy, and the Holy
Spirit is doing just fine and has nothing to do with that.”

Well, He hasn’t allowed any Pope to define error or anathematise truth.
[http://scecclesia.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/pope-benedict-drives-the-point-home/#comment-14795]

At Coo-ees:

Cardinal Pole said...
"Cardinal Pole, your expressed views on sacred vestments display the same narrowness and bigotry as your opinions on most other matters."

Much appreciated, Catholic Voice. I love those angry little comments which don't actually address the substance of a comment but just attack the person for making it. They don't further the discussion, of course, but they're good for a laugh.

"Cardinal Pole, one can only have a true and proper sacrifice if the vestment stops beneath the biceps?!"

In fact, I only said that the ponchasuble would make it "difficult" and that it was not "suitable", not that it made it impossible.

"The conical form, which long pre-dates the gothic ..."

If by "conical form" you mean a chasuble of the very same shape and size as the one Msgr. Fisher is wearing, I'm going to have to ask you to prove it.

"... was considerably larger than the vestment in question"

"[C]onsiderably larger" than a chasuble which, as the photo clearly shows, comes to the celebrant's wrists?! Now that would be a circus tent!

May 20, 2010 4:37 AM
Your comment has been saved and will be visible after blog owner approval.
[http://coo-eesfromthecloister.blogspot.com/2010/05/indicative-of-mood-for-change-we-should.html]

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of St. Bernardine of Siena, Confessor, A.D. 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

“More blood pressure a risin’?” No, my dear aCatholics, but thanks for the link!

http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=36993

I was delighted to see that Catholica Australia’s ever-rumbling bowels, the Forum, are (if you’ll permit me to mix metaphors) abuzz with discussion about my recent blog post Unreconstructed Modernism at Catholica: Fr. Dresser and Dr. Elmer on (or rather, against) Original Sin and the Redemption. Unfortunately I cannot respond to the comments there at the Forum but I am happy to do so here at my own blog.

It was the aCatholic “TonySee”—who, interestingly, thinks that the “notion of 'intrinsic' evil, independent of context, gets to the nub of what [he] see[s] as the church's biggest problem since the publication of HV” (source, and see also here in order to shed further light on his thinking on matters of morals)—was the fellow who was kind enough to post a link to this humble blog, and I thank him for it.

Now to address some of the confusion which I found among the comments there. A couple of the readers indicated that they were unfamiliar with the historical background to Modernism:

I never did see what the "heresy of Modernism" actually entailed, since most of its features, especially the subvariant "Americanism", seemed to be existing only in the Roman Curial imagination. It certainly wasn't related to any overwhelming trends or developments in ny country's history that I could recognize.
[kaythegardener, USA, Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 19:42]

I have no longer access to research "Modernism" but my recollection is that it was not modernism that was condemned by PiusX, but what he thought it might develop into.

I came across the same thing in Veritatis splendor
in which JPII condemned the "errors" of the theory of Fundamental Option. The late Josef Fuchs retorted that the views in the encyclical were not supported by any reputable moral theolgian in the world.

This modern Cardinal Pole may be doing a lot of similar "reading between the lines".
[PatrickW , Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 15:54]

But anyone with the faintest outline of late-nineteenth/early-twentieth century Church history would know that Modernism was no ‘figment of the imagination’ in the Vatican, but, in fact, a very real threat to the Faith then and, as I have shown, now. And there is no “reading between the lines” going on here on my part: I show clearly how the letter of the text of Dr. Elmer’s ravings supports my thesis. But of course, none of the commenters at the forum thread in question makes any serious attempt (or, for all but one of them, any attempt at all) to engage with any of my arguments, reminding us that the most pathetic thing about the aCatholics is that they reject what they never understood to begin with.

Turning to another commenter now:

For those who can't be bothered doing the research, there are now two (2) Cardinals Pole. The new young claimant is a local lad - geographically challenged, as he claims both the Wollongong diocese and Sydney as his home.

However, he seems to be unaware of Cardinal Pole the Elder's near run-in with the Italian Inquisition, due to his palling around with the Spirituali, in Rome, Viterbo and probably elsewhere. The Spirituali wanted (among other things) to reverse the separation between Catholics and Proddies - in fact to reverse the Reformation. Pole thought that would be a great move (and who can disagree with him), as it would require a restructuring of the entire Catholic Church. He missed being elected Pope by one miserable vote, otherwise we would probably be singing from the same hymn-sheet as the Presbyterians et al.

Either by good luck or God's blessing, he avoided the Inquisition's tender ministrations, and returned to England. There is a book available from Amazon called "Heresy and Obedience in Tridentine Italy. Cardinal Pole and the Counter-Reformation".

I think we must count Reginald Cardinal Pole (the genuine) among the Spirituali, and wanna-be Cardinal Pole, among the Intransigenti.
[gemstones , Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 13:14]

In fact it is “gemstones” who is “geographically challenged”, unaware that the Diocese of Wollongong encompasses a number of the outer south-western suburbs of Sydney, where I happily reside. He or she is also historically challenged: The real Cardinal Pole never wanted any “restructuring of the entire Catholic Church”; see his opus De Unitate, to whose vision he ever remained faithful. And the only way he would have wanted “to reverse the separation between Catholics and Proddies” would have been by the latter renouncing their heresies and returning to the bosom of the true Church of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church. The commenter “gemstones” is also wrong to write that had Pole been elevated to the Throne of St. Peter “we would probably be singing from the same hymn-sheet as the Presbyterians et al.”, since the Tridentine decree on justification was promulgated on January 13, 1547 (source), whereas the relevant conclave took place some three years later (1549-1550)(source), and given that it is well-known that Pole had renounced whatever unorthodox views he might have held on the matter even before the decree was promulgated, it is clear that, had he become Pope, there would have been no ‘Protestantisation’ of the Church under him.

And “gemstones” says that “we must count Reginald Cardinal Pole (the genuine) among the Spirituali, and wanna-be Cardinal Pole, among the Intransigenti”; intransigent means uncompromising, and since, as my blog’s tagline makes clear, I intend that quality to be a hallmark of my blog, if I am to be ‘counted among the Intransigenti’, then so be it!

We turn now to the comments of Dr. Ian Elmer: Firstly, this one:

Is This Guy a Catholic? (Main Forum)
by Ian Elmer, 'Brisbane, Australia', Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 10:45 (8 days ago) @ TonySee

Hmmm! So basically the dear old Cardinal has a problem with anything other than a literal reading of the scriptures and Church doctrine. Adam and Eve sinned; God had to sacrifice his son to pay the debt! Oh, and I noticed the reference to the falsity of Darwinianism. I suspect that the adoption of the name of a medieval prelate is appropriate; this blogger seems to have missed the boat to the modern world.

I find it interesting that he seems to have a problem with idea of a “symbolic” appreciation of our traditions. But isn’t the concept of “symbol” inherent to the entire sacramental character of Catholic theology? Is not the Church the “sign” or “sacrament” that points to the presence of God in the world? Are not our sacraments “visible signs of invisible grace”? Is this guy even a Catholic? He seems to completely misunderstand Catholic theology, not to mention fundamental human communication.

Concrete signs and symbols are necessary if we are to indicate and/or express hidden realities or complex ideas. The Scripture are not historical or scientific textbooks and the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are far more than mere historical events. Both point to realities beyond normal sense-experience. They express realities that underpin all existence, but are not available to the senses per se - they depend on faith.

P.S. (Added later) I just noticed this additional comment from the dear od Cardinal:

[quotation, taken from me]Sadly, Dr. Elmer's theology is entirely consonant with the theology of the New Mass.[/quotation]

So, does that mean that I am not a "modernist" after all, but just a good old post-Vatican II Catholic theologian? And does it also mean that Cardinal Pole sees the Church Fathers at Vatican II as "Modernists"? I guess we are all in good company People, since this site is dismissed as thoroughly "Modernist". Well done! Take a bow!

'Ian J. Elmer

Now in his second sentence he describes my “problem” as being “with anything other than a literal reading of the scriptures and Church doctrine”. But notice how he has lumped together two different genres: The books of the Holy Bible and the teaching documents of the Church. So here we have the logical fallacy of the category mistake, because not all of Scripture is to be taken literally (e.g. the Sun does not literally ‘rejoice’ in its course, as we read in, if I recall correctly, the Psalms), but how else is one to understand the post-Apostolic doctrinal pronouncements of the Magisterium if not in their literal and grammatical sense? Conventionally, whenever a Pope speaks non-literally he will show this explicitly by using the words ‘like’ or ‘as’, or adding the words ‘as it were’ afterwards. But if the Magisterium is not to be taken literally then what is the hidden ‘key’ in which to understand its statements? Is the real meaning kept hidden away in the hands of some kind of Gnostic élite?

He then writes with apparent amusement “Adam and Eve sinned; God had to sacrifice his son to pay the debt!” So as if his opinions weren’t clear enough already, we see Dr. Elmer clearly writing off the sacrificial and satisfactory aspects of the Passion of Our Lord, leaving us with a purely symbolic Redemption—which is to say, no Redemption at all, so we are left with the Passion as nothing but a sort of example or lesson.

Dr. Elmer writes that he “suspect[s] that the adoption of the name of a medieval prelate is appropriate; this blogger seems to have missed the boat to the modern world.” This sheds further light on Dr. Elmer’s understanding of the famous Spirit of Vatican II, which he recognises (rightly, and he’s not the only one) as a spirit of conformity to the anti-Catholic tenets of Revolution and Enlightenment, a miasma in which Dr. Elmer is deeply, and apparently uncritically, immersed.

Dr. Elmer’s comment takes a bizarre turn in his second paragraph: He writes that he

find[s] it interesting that [I seem] to have a problem with idea of a “symbolic” appreciation of our traditions. But isn’t the concept of “symbol” inherent to the entire sacramental character of Catholic theology?

He goes on to illustrate this observation by reference to the Sacraments, which are, of course, efficacious and sensible signs of grace. But a Sacrament, by its very nature, has both a symbolic aspect and an efficacious aspect, and to reduce any of the seven Sacraments to only its symbolic aspect would be to err gravely. Here, then, we can see some hint of how gravely Dr. Elmer errs in reducing the Passion of Our Lord to something whose only effect worth mentioning (for Dr. Elmer) is that it offers a lesson for His disciples. Nevertheless, I describe Dr. Elmer as taking a bizarre turn here, because Original Sin is to be taken either literally or figuratively; one cannot speak of there being both literal and figurative aspects to it. For two thousand years of Catholic Tradition it was (and, truly, is) a literal, historical event, namely Adam’s sin of pride and grave disobedience, by which he forfeited Original Justice, and passed this deprivation on to his descendents. But for Dr. Elmer it is purely figurative, a mere fable, a sort of poetic explanation for the disorder in the human condition for which Adam was not the cause, but which is just a product of Darwinian evolution. So having set up his straw man—or rather, his red herring, since my objection to his ravings had nothing to do with the efficacy and symbolism of the Sacraments, but to his denigration of Original Sin and the Redemption (as the post makes pretty clear in its headline!)—he asserts, laughably, that I seem to him to have “completely misunderst[ood] Catholic theology, not to mention fundamental human communication.” But this would be the pot calling the black: It’s a bit rich for him to imply that my thinking is incompatible with Catholic Sacramental theology, when the purpose of the Sacraments is to apply the fruits of the Redemption to the successive generations, yet Dr. Elmer denies that there was a Redemption in the first place!

Predictably enough for one of his ilk, Dr. Elmer goes on to wheel out those two reliable clichés of the Modernist-as-exegete: “[1.] The Scripture are not historical or scientific textbooks and [2.] the life, death and resurrection of Jesus are far more than mere historical events.” Regarding 1., I did not say that the Bible was a science textbook, but I certainly maintain that it relates true history in both the Old and New Testaments, whereas Dr. Elmer even questions the historicity of important parts of the New Testament (source) (and of course we are already aware of what scant regard he has for the Old Testament). As for cliché/straw man 2.: The mysteries of Our Lord’s life are certainly “more than mere historical events”—that’s more than, not less than! And Dr. Elmer clearly thinks that the sin of Adam was less than a true historical event (for Dr. Elmer it was, of course, no real historical event at all), so I’m not even sure why he’s bringing this up, though it does serve to distract the reader from the matters at hand, which are the historicity of Original Sin and the Redemption.

What Dr. Elmer writes next is rather suspect: “Both [Scripture and some major events in the life of Christ] point to realities beyond normal sense-experience. They express realities that underpin all existence, but are not available to the senses per se - they depend on faith.” Are we to infer from this that Dr. Elmer thinks that St. Thomas did not truly touch and feel—that is, have “sense-experience” of—the risen Body of Christ?

Finally, Dr. Elmer asks, regarding where I say that “[s]adly, Dr. Elmer's theology is entirely consonant with the theology of the New Mass”, “does that mean that [he is] not a "modernist" after all, but just a good old post-Vatican II Catholic theologian?” No, it means that both he and the New Mass are dangers to the Faith. As to which is the greater danger: As to scale, I would say the New Mass, since it is heard by a far greater audience than Dr. Elmer could ever hope for, but as to the severity of their respective dangers considered without respect to audience size, I would say Dr. Elmer, since his ravings are explicitly heretical, whereas the New Mass contains nothing which is heretical of itself.

Now what Dr. Elmer says is interesting, but all the more interesting is what he does not say. One might have expected that if my charges of Modernism against him are baseless, then he would have made some effort to refute them, just as any faithful Catholic would want to exonerate himself from false charges against his or her Faith. (Unless, of course, those charges were so preposterous as not to be worth addressing: So for instance, when Dr. Elmer asks, regarding me, “Is This Guy a Catholic?”, all I want to do is laugh and point out that I’m not the one who thinks that the Church is just “a human institution established by the followers of Jesus as a place of communion and companionship” (source—it doesn’t come much more non-Catholic than denying the Dominical establishment of the Church. And my charges against Dr. Elmer can hardly be dismissed as preposterous when they are supported by the text, as I showed). Yet Dr. Elmer makes no attempt to refute my charges (which would be quite difficult, given that his Modernism is conveniently encapsulated in a single sentence of his: —“[t]he concept of original sin evolved out of our shared experience …”, he wrote); there is little more from him here than facetious posturing. All one can do then is apply the legal maxim of 'silence implies consent', and rest one’s case.

Let us conclude by considering Dr. Elmer’s last comment in this thread:

Vatican II Essential to Catholicismby Ian Elmer, 'Brisbane, Australia',
Thursday, November 19, 2009, 12:45 (8 days ago) @ PatrickW

Actually, Patrick, my problem was even more fundamental. Clearly, this latter-day Cardinal Pole rejects Vatican II and the reforms, especially liturgical, that flowed from it. It must be remembered that despite Benedict's overtures to the separated SSPX any of these wishing to return to the fold must accept Vatican II. The acceptance of Vatican II is essential. In many ways, Vatican II is as foundational as Nicea or Constantinople.

'Ian J. Elmer

Beginning with his last sentence, one must ask: How can a Council which, of itself, did not teach a single proposition definitively be regarded as being “as foundational as Nicea or Constantinople”? Going back a sentence, Dr. Elmer writes that the “acceptance of Vatican II is essential”. But Vatican II can be regarded as “essential” neither in the sense of at least implicit adherence to its documents being absolutely necessary for right Faith, nor in the sense that Vatican II belongs to the essence of the Church, as though without Vatican II the Church would be corrupted. So I ask of Dr. Elmer: Given that “[he] wish[es] we could quietly step away from the doctrine of [Papal] infallibility” (source), yet the doctrine of Papal Infallibility was the object of an irreformable definition of an Ecumenical Council, why is it so wrong to wish that we could “quietly step away” from Vatican II, which only produced a collection of pastoral essays?

Reginaldvs Cantvar

27.XI.2009