Saint Louis Catholic

Reminder: Novena to the Immaculate Conception Continues

2009-12-04T17:10:00.002-06:00

Including tonight at 6:30-- you've got time, go ahead and go!

Friday, December 4, 6:30 pm

Monsignor C. Eugene Morris, Pastor, St. Mary Magdalen, Brentwood, Lecturer of Sacramental Theology, Kenrick-Glennon Seminary

“Mary – Woman of the Eucharist”

____________________

Saturday, December 5, 8:00 am

Father Gregory Lockwood, Temporary Administrator, St. Elizabeth of Hungary-Crestwood, Lecturer of Systematic Theology, Kenrick-Glennon Seminary

“The Immaculate Heart of Mary”

____________________

Sunday, December 6, 10:00 am

Monsignor Vernon Gardin, Vicar General of Archbishop of St. Louis

"Like Mary, Our Identity is in Christ."

____________________

Monday, December 7, 6:30 pm

Father Eric Kunz, Associate Pastor, Queen of All Saints-Oakville

"Mary - Cause of Our Joy."

Oath Against Modernism

2009-12-04T13:30:00.002-06:00

I, N.N., firmly accept and embrace each and every doctrine defined by the Church's unerring teaching authority, and all that she has maintained and declared, especially those points of doctrine which directly oppose the errors of our time. In the first place I profess that God, the beginning and the end of all things, can be known with certitude and His existence demonstrated by the natural light of reason from the things that are made, that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause is known from its effects. Secondly, I acknowledge and admit the external arguments for revelation, namely, divine facts, especially miracles and prophecies, as most certain signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion, and I hold that these are perfectly suited to the intelligence of every age and of all men, including our own times. Thirdly, I also firmly believe that the Church, the guardian and teacher of God's revealed word, was directly and absolutely instituted by Christ Himself, the true Christ of history, while He lived among us; and that the same Church was founded on Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and on his successors to the end of time. Fourthly, I sincerely accept the doctrine of faith in the same sense and with always the same meaning as it has been handed down to us from the apostles through the officially approved fathers. And therefore I wholly reject the heretical notion of the evolution of dogmas, according to which doctrines pass from one sense to another sense alien to that which the Church held from the start. I likewise condemn every erroneous notion to the effect that instead of the divine deposit of faith entrusted by Christ to His spouse, the Church, and to be faithfully guarded by her, one may substitute a philosophic system or a creation of the human mind gradually refined by men's striving and capable of eventual perfection by indefinite progress. Fifthly, I hold as certain and sincerely profess that faith is not a blind religious sense evolving from the hidden recesses of subliminal consciousness, and morally formed by the influence of heart and will, but that it is a real assent of the intellect to objective truth learned by hearing, an assent wherein we believe to be true whatever has been spoken, testified, and revealed by the personal God, our Creator and Lord, on the authority of God who is the perfection of truth.

Furthermore, in all due reverence I submit to and fully uphold all the condemnations, declarations, and directions contained in the encyclical letter "Pascendi" and in the decree "Lamentabili," especially as regards what is called the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who allege that the faith proposed by the Church may conflict with history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, cannot be reconciled with the actual origins of Christianity. I condemn and reject, moreover, the opinion put forth that a more learned Christian can assume a dual personality, one as believer and another as historian, thus making it permissible for the historian to maintain what his faith as a believer contradicts, or to lay down premises from which there follows the falsity or the uncertainty of dogmas, provided only that these are not directly denied. I likewise reject that method of determining and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, setting aside the Church's tradition and the analogy of faith and the norms of the Holy See, adopts the principles of the rationalists, and with equal arbitrariness and rashness regards textual criticism as the sole supreme rule. Moreover, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a teacher of the science of historical theology or a writer on the subject must first put aside any preconceived notions about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine aid promised for the continual preservation of each revealed truth; or that the writings of individual fathers must be interpreted solely by the data of science, without any reference to sacred authority, and with the same freedom of judgment usually accorded to any profane records.

Finally, I profess that I am far removed in general from the error of the modernists, who hold that there is nothing inherently divine in sacred tradition; or who--which is far worse--admit it in a pantheistic sense. For then there would remain only a bare simple fact, like the ordinary facts of history, to the effect that the system started by Christ and His apostles still finds men to support it by their energy, shrewdness, and ability. Therefore, I most firmly retain and will retain to my last breath the faith of the fathers of the Church, which has the supernatural guarantee of truth, and which is, has been, and ever will be residing in the bishops who are the successors of the apostles (St. Irenaeus 4. c. 26). And this is not to be so understood that we may hold what seems better suited to the culture of a particular age, hut rather that we may never believe nor understand anything other than the absolute and unchangeable truth preached from the beginning by the apostles (Praeser. c. 28).

All this I promise to keep faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and to guard inviolably, and never to depart from it in any way in teaching, word, or writing. So I promise, so I swear, so help me God and His holy Gospels.

Advent Prayer

2009-12-04T13:11:00.002-06:00

CONSCIENTIAS nostras quaesumus, Domine, visitando purifica, ut veniens Dominus noster Iesus Christus Filius tuus, paratam sibi in nobis inveniat mansionem. Per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum Filium tuum, qui tecum vivit et regant in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.

______________

O LORD, we beseech Thee, visit our minds and cleanse our thoughts; that at the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, He may find in us a place prepared for Him. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, who with Thee liveth and reigneth in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, forever and ever. Amen.

Pornography in Schools and the "Safe Schools" Czar

2009-12-04T09:31:00.006-06:00

WARNING: The link below is to the Gateway Pundit site, that covers an important story about which anyone with children in the public school systems should know. The great leader's "Safe Schools" Czar, Kevin Jennings, was the founder and longtime Executive Director of the "Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network" (GLSEN). Gateway Pundit has information about this organization's stated goals, and its "educational" materials for children in schools.

The linked post at first analyzes the organization and its mission. It is only way down the post that the material they then analyze and excerpt gets disgusting and beyond offensive.

An important story, but read at your own risk.

Chesterton on the Third Order

2009-12-04T08:53:00.004-06:00

This excerpt comes from G.K. Chesterton's biography of St. Francis of Assisi. Hence the specific reference is to the Franciscan Third Order, but it applies generally to all such orders:

________________

"But if the Second Order was a memorial of such an unearthly love, the Third Order was as solid a memorial of a very solid sympathy with earthly loves and earthly lives. The whole of this feature in Catholic life, the lay orders in touch with clerical orders, is very little understood in Protestant countries and very little allowed for in Protestant history. The vision which has been so faintly suggested in these pages has never been confined to monks or even to friars. It has been an inspiration to innumerable crowds of ordinary married men and women; living lives like our own only entirely different. That morning glory which Saint Francis spread over earth and sky has lingered as a secret sunshine under a multitude of roofs and in a multitude of rooms.

In societies like ours nothing is known of such a Franciscan following. Nothing is known of such obscure followers; and if possible less is known of the well-known followers. If we imagine passing us in the street a pageant of the Third Order of Saint Francis, the famous figures would surprise us more than the strange ones. For us it would be like the unmasking of some mighty secret society. There rides Saint Louis, the great king, lord of higher justice, whose scales hang crooked in favour of the poor. There is Dante, crowned with laurel, the poet who in his life of passions sang the praises of the Lady Poverty, whose grey garment is lined with purple and all glorious within. All sorts of great names from the most recent and rationalistic centuries would stand revealed; the great Galvani, for instance, the father of all electricity, the magician who has made so many modern systems of stars and sounds. So various a following would alone be enough to prove that Saint Francis had no lack of sympathy with normal men, if the whole of his own life did not prove it."

Bishop Robert Hermann to Speak This Sunday on Catholics in a Hostile Culture

2009-12-03T10:25:00.002-06:00

His Excellency, the Most Reverend Robert J. Hermann, will speak this Sunday at the Annual Christ the King Dinner sponsored jointly by Credo and the Catholic Central Union of Missouri.

Starting time is 6 p.m. at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, 7750 Carondelet Ave., Clayton, MO 63105. For tickets or more information contact Howard Brandt at 314-894-6003.

Priest Shortage, or the Necessary Outcome of Conflation of Roles?

2009-12-03T06:58:00.005-06:00

"The mass of humanity which floods the Sanctuary of the typical Parish Church today distorts the definition of sanctuary which is supposed to be a place of refuge and protection. It has become a vantage point for primping and preening of the various Lay Ministers who claim the space as their own personal venue. The truth is that there is hardly any room for the consecrated Priest which results in the denigration of the role of the Priest in offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. And so, the emasculation of the Priesthood continues on its relentless path to the ultimate destruction of the dignity of the Priesthood. We are unwittingly forcing the Priest to accept a lesser role in the liturgy rather than a higher role befitting the dignity of the Priesthood.

Are we Catholics to assume that there is a legitimate shortage of Priests in the Catholic Church today? Not likely when Christ made such spectacular promises to those who serve Him. That man who answers His call receives a hundredfold in return and shall possess life everlasting. That is an extraordinary incentive program! Are we to assume that Christ, in effect, has abandoned the Church He Himself established on such carefully structured principles? Not likely when His Church is the only path to Eternal Salvation and Christ desires that we save our souls. Those same souls He suffered and died for. Are we to assume that Christ provided no future leadership for His Church through the system of Apostolic Succession? Not likely when the Church has been One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic since its very founding."

--John W. Blewett

______________________

The only change I would make in the above quote is to strike the word "unwittingly" and replace it with "intentionally".

Somebody Tell Me Why He's Wrong. Anybody.

2009-12-02T14:13:00.000-06:00

Just for the Record

2009-12-02T14:07:00.001-06:00

New USCCB Pro-Life Head Defends Bishops' Role against Health Bill

Yes, it says USCCB's role against health bill.

Confirming the Already Known: Global Warming is a Complete Fraud

2009-12-02T10:29:00.003-06:00

Unless you have been hiding under a rock-- otherwise known as watching network news and reading mainstream newspapers, or perhaps going to a mainstream institution of education-- you will have heard about "Climategate". Climategate is the expose of the conspiracy by the scientific "community" to falsify, distort and make-up fake data to promote the idea that man-made factors cause the earth to dangerously heat up. In plain English, the agenda of this crowd is simple: convince everyone that the U.S. and Western Europe are bad, that free market economics are bad, and that people acting like free people are bad. What is really needed, say the scientists, is global government on the communist model.

The problem is that it is all a lie.

Now, the word is beginning to get out. Only the UN and the Democrats remain to cling to the lie. From the UK Telegraph:

Climategate: it's all unravelling now

By James Delingpole

So many new developments: which story do we pick? Maybe best to summarise, instead. After all, it’s not like you’re going to find much of this reported in the MSM.

1. Australia’s Senate rejects Emissions Trading Scheme for a second time. Or: so turkeys don’t vote Christmas. Expect to see a lot more of this: politicians starting to become aware their party’s position on AGW is completely out of kilter with the public mood and economic reality. Kevin Rudd’s Emissions Trading Scheme – what Andrew Bolt calls “a $114 billion green tax on everything” – would have wreaked havoc on the coal-dependent Australian economy. That’s why several opposition Liberal frontbenchers resigned rather than vote with the Government on ETS; why Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull lost his job; and why the Senate voted down the ETS.

2. Danes caught fiddling their carbon credits. (Hat tip: Philip Stott) Carbon trading is the Emperor’s New Clothes of international finance. It was invented by none other than Ken Lay, whose Enron would currently be one of the prime beneficiaries in the global alternative energy market, if it hadn’t been shown to be (nearly) as fraudulent as the current AGW scam. It is a licence to fleece, cheat and rob. Still, jolly embarrassing for the Danes to get caught red handed, what with their hosting a conference shortly in which the world’s leaders will try, straight-faced, to persuade us that carbon emissions trading is the only viable way of defeating ManBearPig.

3. Hats off to The Daily Express – the first British newspaper to make the AGW scam its front page story.

The piece was inspired by another bravura performance by Professor Ian Plimer, the Aussie geologist who argues that climate change has been going on quite naturally, oblivious of human activity, for the last 4,567 million years.

4. BBC finally gets round to reporting – sort of – that Climatic Research Unit at University of East Anglia may have been up to no good. It’s true that this report on their website is so hedged with special pleading for the temporarily suspended director Phil Jones the man might have written it himself. But on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme this morning, I did hear the newsreader reporting it as more than just a routine theft story. Which is a start.

5. Legal actions ahoy! Over the next few weeks, one thing we can be absolutely certain of is concerted efforts by the rich, powerful and influential AGW lobby to squash the Climategate story. We’ve seen this already in the “nothing to see here” response of Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the jet-setting, troll-impersonating railway engineer who runs the IPCC and wants to stop ice being served with water in restaurants. This is why those of us who oppose his scheme to carbon-tax the global economy back to the dark ages must do everything in our power to bring the scandal to a wider audience. One way to do this is law suits.

At Ian Plimer’s lunch talk yesterday, Viscount Monckton talked of at least two in the offing – both by scientists, one British, one Canadian, who intend to pursue the CRU for criminal fraud. Their case, quite simply, is that the scientists implicated in Climategate have gained funding and career advancement by twisting data, hiding evidence, and shutting out dissenters by corrupting the peer-review process. More news on this, as I hear it.

Lord Monckton has written an indispensible summary of the Climategate revelations so far.

6. Watch out Green Dave! The Independent reports on the growing backlash within the party to Cameron’s libtard-wooing greenery. Turning to the Independent for a balanced report on environmental matters is a bit like consulting Der Sturmer for a sensible, insightful view on the Jewish question. Still, for once, the house journal of eco-loonery seems to have got it right and the point made by Tory backbencher David Davis is well made:

“The ferocious determination to impose hair-shirt policies on the public – taxes on holiday flights, or covering our beautiful countryside with wind turbines that look like props from War of the Worlds – is bound to cause a reaction in any democratic country.”

The Health Care Takeover Violates Catholic Principles in More Ways than One

2009-12-01T17:06:00.006-06:00

A good take on all the "other" reasons the Stalinist health plan should be defeated. It starts with Life, continues with economic reality, goes through subsidiarity, and ends with government control over everyone and everything in the field. From Catholic Online:

Opinion: Is Health Care Reform for Bureaucrats?

By F. K. Bartels
12/1/2009
Catholic Online

Many of these elected officials have set themselves against the sanctity of life and the Natural Law.

GLADE PARK, CO (Catholic Online) - While our society has, it seems, reached a point at which it might be possible to provide reasonable health care to every American, there is a veritable hornets-nest of ramifications let loose by the idea of "reform". One thing is certain, any changes in legislation will likely result in far-reaching and unforeseen effects; therefore there are numerous serious questions which should be thoroughly resolved prior to committing to any type of "reform".

At the foundation of these questions is the issue of whom should be handed the responsibility of re-working health care. One would think such a question would be addressed at length before any decision as to how to proceed is made. However, the federal bureaucrats currently residing in office find such a question irrelevant; for they have placed themselves as sovereign "reform" kings and queens, as dictators of whatever changes they deem appropriate.

Bear in mind many of these elected officials have set themselves against the sanctity of life and the Natural Law; they have willingly and with thoughtful purpose aligned themselves with organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT) movement. These men and women continue to insist that taxpayer dollars be used to fund elective abortions; they promise to elevate same-sex union to the status of marriage between a man and woman; and they have forced our children to be exposed to "alternative lifestyle month" in public schools; et cetera. It is clear that federal bureaucrats are not merely off-course, rather they have willfully embraced abject moral disorder.

On September 26, 2009, Archbishop Raymond Burke wrote, "The administration of our federal government openly and aggressively follows a secularist agenda. While it may employ religious language and even invoke the name of God, in fact, it proposes programs and policies for our people without respect for God and His Law. In the words of the Servant of God Pope John Paul II, it proceeds "as if God did not exist" (Reflections on the Struggle to Advance the Culture of Life).

Jeffrey A. Mirus, co-founder of Christendom College, expressed his concern over placing our nation’s health care solely under the control of the federal government. "At what point does it become too dangerous to put health care in the hands of a government which, over the past generation, has consistently allied itself with the culture of death?" (This Rock, Nov.-Dec., 2009).

Laying aside the morally bankrupt condition of our present administration, many are, nevertheless, of the mind that the federal bureaucrats in Washington are the right choice for "reform". Apparently they have ignored – or are unaware of – several facts. First, when the federal government seizes control of health care it will dictate who gets care, when they get it, and what care is received. Is this level of control ultimately advantageous for the common good? Second, the bureaucrats will fund "reform" with public taxpayer dollars, which will quickly drive private insurance companies out of business. In the end, this process is none other than socialized medicine. The world’s classroom has already quite satisfactorily shown that socialized medicine is a bad idea. Which brings us to the principle of subsidiarity.

On August 22, 2009, Archbishop Naumann and Bishop Finn issued a joint pastoral statement titled "Principles of Catholic Social Teaching and Health Care Reform". The section titled "Preamble to the Work of Reform" explains the principle of subsidiarity, and how it applies to health care reform. (diocese-kcsj.org/_docs/Joint-Pastoral-Health-Care-Reform-08-09.pdf).

"This notion that health care ought to be determined at the lowest level rather than at the higher strata of society, has been promoted by the Church as "subsidiarity." Subsidiarity is that principle by which we respect the inherent dignity and freedom of the individual by never doing for others what they can do for themselves and thus enabling individuals to have the most possible discretion in the affairs of their lives. The writings of recent Popes have warned that the neglect of subsidiarity can lead to an excessive centralization of human services, which in turn leads to excessive costs, and loss of personal responsibility and quality of care."

Archbishop Naumann and Bishop Finn cited Pope Benedict's warning that "The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person - every person -needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need." (Deus Caritas Est #28).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church warns against excessive intervention by the state and the dangers of socialization: "Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which ‘a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.’" (CCC, # 1883).

Catholic Medical Association (CMA) representative R. Steven White noted that "While health-care reform is more important than ever, existing legislation in the House and Senate—combined with President Obama’s push for hasty action—could make our current, flawed system even worse." "Sound reform must be based on sound ethics and economics; but so far, the House and Senate bills meet neither standard." (cathmed.org).

CMA also noted that there are "significant shortcomings in the economic and clinical aspects of current legislation. First, as the Congressional Budget Office points out, the legislation does nothing to reduce long-term costs. Rather, current legislation increases costs by hundreds of billions of dollars even after tax increases and creative accounting measures. Second, the bills’ attempts to control costs and increase access rely on heavy-handed government control that is antithetical to the rights of patients and physicians, and to good clinical care." Further, CMA advises that the "House bill regulations make it almost impossible for any current health insurance plan to survive in a new government-controlled regime." This would "remove the means for people to choose insurance which accords with their values and priorities." (Ibid.).

Private insurance companies cannot compete with the federal government; for the federal government operates outside of a free-market system. The government can establish below-market rates for premiums, defer costs onto private companies, and increase taxes or the federal deficit to offset losses.

CMA noted that the result of these serious problems is that "sooner than later, [everyone] will be forced to become participants in the ‘public option’ plan and fully subject to the costs and regulations of government health care. When this happens, the American people will have lost the freedom to make important decisions about their life and health." (Ibid.).

One of the most disturbing effects of what many are calling a government "take-over" of the health care system is inadequate provider reimbursement. It is certain that the federal bureaucrats, when squeezed by insufficient tax dollars, will lower reimbursement amounts for patient medical services. This will result in below-standard care and a reduction in the number of available physicians. Who wants to endure the ten-plus years of medical training only to graduate into a failing, government controlled system with meager opportunities and inordinate regulatory red-tape, preventing doctors from caring for their patients as they would prefer?

Archbishop Naumann and Bishop Finn advise that the proposed "reform" may result in changes for the worse: "Despite the many flaws with our current policies, change itself does not guarantee improvement. Many of the proposals which have been promoted would diminish the protection of human life and dignity and shift our health care costs and delivery to a centralized government bureaucracy. Centralization carries the risk of a loss of personal responsibility, reduction in personalized care for the sick and an expanded bureaucracy that in the end leads to higher costs." (Ibid.).

The federal bureaucrats are proposing not legislative tweaks designed to improve our health care system, but rather sweeping changes which will substantially alter health care in America. Are these men and women qualified, in any way, to run our health care industry? Further, they have clearly shown, time and again, their disrespect for our unborn neighbors. Currently, over 3,000 precious unborn children are intentionally killed in America each and every day. Nevertheless, many of these "reform" kings and queens insist on funding such a barbaric, unspeakable evil with tax dollars. They intend to make each and every American an accomplice in the diabolical killing of the innocents.

We are indeed at a critical juncture in our nation. Call your senators and representatives now. Demand that they scrap the current proposed health care reform and start over. Demand that they protect life from conception to natural death. Demand they cease from proceeding "as if God did not exist".

-----

F. K. Bartels operates catholicpathways.com, and may be reached via email at: bartels@catholicpathways.com He is a contributing writer for Catholic Online.

Archbishop Carlson Responds to Sunday's Sparsely-Attended Demonstration

2009-12-01T16:53:00.006-06:00

This statement has been published elsewhere, too, but this is from CNA:

St. Louis Archbishop responds to gay rights protest outside cathedral

St. Louis, Mo., Nov 30, 2009 / 06:17 pm

(CNA).- In a statement Monday, Archbishop Robert J. Carlson of St. Louis responded to a demonstration held outside the city's cathedral by a gay rights group protesting the use of archdiocesan funds to defend traditional marriage in Maine. Catholics have an obligation to “carry out Christ's teachings, whether in the privacy of our own home or in the public square,” stated the prelate on the Archdiocese of St. Louis website.

[...]

[The protest] accused the Archdiocese of St. Louis of misusing the funds, saying the Church has neglected the poor, sick and homeless in the city by donating the money to a campaign against gay “marriage.” The organization plans to rally outside the cathedral every Sunday for the duration of the season of Advent.

“Following Christ's teaching on marriage does not mean we neglect the poor,” stated Archbishop Carlson in response to the accusations. “In fact, no other private institution in the world does as much for the sick and poor as the Catholic Church.”

Archbishop Carlson explained that the funds used for the “Yes on 1” campaign were discretionary, provided by private gifts and sent in response to the request of the Archdiocese of Maine. The archbishop also mentioned that “Yes on 1” succeeded despite the fact that same-sex “marriage” supporters had outraised the campaign by almost $2 million.

[...]

“Separation of church and state means that the government cannot favor a particular faith,” continued the prelate. “It does not mean that faith-filled people lose their right to speak out publicly and engage in the political process.”

When it comes to serving the poor and supporting traditional marriage, Archbishop Carlson added that “it's not an either/or choice when it comes to Christ's teachings. As Catholics, we are called to live and teach them all.”

The Priest: Image of Christ

2009-12-01T13:39:00.006-06:00

The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest has announced the release of a new book on the priesthood called "The Priest: Image of Christ". This is a beautiful book, illustrated with masterpiece artwork throughout and containing essays on diverse topics concerning the priesthood.

In addition to chapters written by Institute Canons (including Monsignors Wach and Schmitz), there are chapters written by other clerics and scholars, including His Eminence Cardinal Canizares Llovera, Prefect of the CDW, His Grace Archbishop Burke, Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, and His Grace Archbishop Ranjith, formerly Secretary of the CDW.

The book is being published in French, English and Italian. Ordering information is at the link above, which is the Institute's French website. Hit google translate for an amusing, and mostly accurate, read. There is also an excerpt from Archbishop Burke's essay at the site.

A nice gift for a Catholic family member or friend, perhaps?

Pope Celebrates Ad Orientem in Pauline Chapel

2009-12-01T10:12:00.002-06:00

NLM has a post on the Holy Father's celebration of Mass in the Ordinary Form, ad orientem, in the Pauline Chapel at the Vatican.

One More Take on 40th Anniversary of the Novus Ordo

2009-11-30T22:22:00.002-06:00

Satirically penned by Damian Thompson of the UK Telegraph:

Happy 40th birthday, Novus Ordo!

By Damian Thompson

It is 40 years ago today since the New Mass of Paul VI was introduced into our parishes, writes Margery Popinstar, editor of The Capsule. We knew at the time that this liturgy was as close to perfection as humanly possible, but little did we guess what an efflorescence of art, architecture, music and worship lay ahead!

There were fears at first that the vernacular service would damage the solemnity of the Mass. How silly! Far from leading to liturgical abuses, the New Mass nurtured a koinonia that revived Catholic culture and packed our reordered churches to the rafters.

So dramatic was the growth in family Mass observance, indeed, that a new school of Catholic architecture arose to provide places of worship for these new congregations. Throughout the Western world, churches sprang up that combined Christian heritage with the thrilling simplicity of the modern school, creating a sense of the numinous that has proved as irresistible to secular visitors as to the faithful.

For some worshippers, it is the sheer visual beauty of the New Mass that captures the heart, with its simple yet scrupulously observed rubrics – to say nothing of the elegance of the priest’s vestments, which (though commendably less fussy than pre-conciliar outfits) exhibit a standard of meticulous craftsmanship which truly gives glory to God!

The same refreshing of tradition infuses the wonderful – and toe-tapping! – modern Mass settings and hymns produced for the revised liturgy. This music, written by the most gifted composers of our era, has won over congregations so totally that it is now rare to encounter a parish where everyone is not singing their heads off! Even the secular “hit parade” has borrowed from Catholic worship songs, so deliciously memorable – yet reverent! – is the effect they create. No wonder it is standing room only at most Masses!

Did Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, who birthed this kairos, have any idea just how radically his innovations would transform the Church? We must, of course, all rejoice in his imminent beatification – but, in the meantime, I am tempted to borrow a phrase from a forgotten language that – can you believe it? – was used by the Church for services before 1969: Si monumentum requiris, circumspice.

Poll Results

2009-11-30T10:56:00.005-06:00

Thank you for voting in good numbers in the last poll.

Extraordinary Form-ers prefer Holy Ghost by a score of 57 to 27. A big margin, but not quite as big as I would have imagined.

Ordinary Form-ers prefer Holy Spirit by a score of 23 to 4. A bigger margin, but not unanimous.

And a shout-out to the 6 druids who took the poll. I won't ask where you worship...

Forty Years

2009-11-29T22:36:00.007-06:00

November 30 marks forty years since the Novus Ordo Missae was unleashed upon the Catholic Church. I have been trying to work out for some weeks how I would mark this momentous occasion, and I figured that I would offend people no matter how I approached it. In the end, I thought I would just lay it on the line.

Did any good come out of all this? Sure-- God is good and never abandons His Church. The Mass is inherently good, as it is the re-presentation of Calvary, however much is truth is obvious or hidden. But using an analogy, one could say that good came out of the protestant "reformation" because the Church was prompted to consolidate, enforce ecclesiastical discipline, promote and defend the faith, and vigorously engage in the battle for souls in a new way. Yet, the protestant revolution is not something to celebrate in and of itself.

Therefore, I will leave the silver linings for another day, and another post. Today, I just want to focus on the problems with a liturgical reform that has not borne good fruit, and which even began without accurately implementing the relatively modest changes contemplated by the Second Vatican Council.

Two Popes, two quotes

Pope Paul VI was the Pope who promulgated the New Mass. Pope Benedict XVI confirmed that the Traditional Mass had not been abrogated by the promulgation of the New. The forty year gulf separates the two. In preparing this post, I came across a passage from each that sums up what I feel on the occasion.

At Rorate Caeli, I found the following quote from Paul VI in a general audience preceding the release of the new missal:

We may notice that pious persons will be the ones most disturbed, because, having their respectable way of listening to Mass, they will feel distracted from their customary thoughts and forced to follow those of others.

...

Not Latin, but the spoken language, will be the main language of the Mass. To those who know the beauty, the power, the expressive sacrality of Latin, its replacement by the vulgar language is a great sacrifice: we lose the discourse of the Christian centuries, we become almost intruders and desecrators [intrusi e profani] in the literary space of sacred expression, and we will thus lose a great portion of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual fact that is the Gregorian Chant. We will thus have, indeed, reason for being sad, and almost for feeling lost: with what will we replace this angelic language? It is a sacrifice of inestimable price.

And, to bookend the issue from the perspective of the author of Summorum Pontificum, here is what Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger wrote of the liturgical reform:

What happened after the Council was totally different: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy.

We left the living process of growth and development to enter the realm of fabrication. There was no longer a desire to continue developing and maturing, as the centuries passed and so this was replaced - as if it were a technical production - with a construction, a banal on-the-spot product.

While one would be tempted to claim that this lament is not for the Mass as promulgated, but rather for the abuse of it, this claim flies in the face of the language he uses, and the undeniably bureaucratic way in which the New Mass was devised. It was an on-the-spot fabrication-- you can decide for yourself if it was banal, but I agree with the Pope.

The Ottaviani Intervention States the Obvious: "A striking departure"

Back when I first became familiar with the Traditional Mass, I came across one of the works dear to many traditional liturgy adherents-- the famous Ottaviani Intervention. During the drafting of the Novus Ordo, some prelates had concerns about the product. Among these prelates were Cardinal Ottaviani and Cardinal Bacci, who sent their deep concerns to the Holy Father. It is a very sobering read. Here is the preface, in and of itself it hits the nail squarely on the head:

Letter from Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to His Holiness Pope Paul VI

September 25th, 1969

Most Holy Father, Having carefully examined, and presented for the scrutiny of others, the Novus Ordo Missae prepared by the experts of the Consilium ad exequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia, and after lengthy prayer and reflection, we feel it to be our bounden duty in the sight of God and towards Your Holiness, to put before you the following considerations:

1. The accompanying critical study of the Novus Ordo Missae, the work of a group of theologians, liturgists and pastors of souls, shows quite clearly in spite of its brevity that if we consider the innovations implied or taken for granted which may of course be evaluated in different ways, the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The "canons" of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.

2. The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a grave break with tradition, even if such reasons could be regarded as holding good in the face of doctrinal considerations, do not seem to us sufficient. The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place, if it subsists at all, could well turn into a certainty the suspicions already prevalent, alas, in many circles, that truths which have always been believed by the Christian people, can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic faith is bound for ever. Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful who are already showing signs of restiveness and of an indubitable lessening of faith.

Amongst the best of the clergy the practical result is an agonising crisis of conscience of which innumerable instances come tour notice daily.

3. We are certain that these considerations, which can only reach Your Holiness by the living voice of both shepherds and flock, cannot but find an echo in Your paternal heart, always so profoundly solicitous for the spiritual needs of the children of the Church. It has always been the case that when a law meant for the good of subjects proves to be on the contrary harmful, those subjects have the right, nay the duty of asking with filial trust for the abrogation of that law.

Therefore we most earnestly beseech Your Holiness, at a time of such painful divisions and ever-increasing perils for the purity of the Faith and the unity of the church, lamented by You our common Father, not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic world.

A. Card. Ottaviani

A. Card. Bacci

Obviously, whatever the concerns of Pope Paul VI, and whatever misgivings he may have had, the New Mass was issued. Forty years later, the results are not good. The pews emptied, the families became smaller, religious vocations dramatically decreased, Churches and altars were desecrated, the faith was not passed on with vigor and, frankly, souls were likely lost that may not otherwise have been lost.

Forty years later, signs of hope reemerge. The Church has persevered in a hostile world. And no one can say what would have been if the traditional Mass had not been jettisoned.

Yet, I ask readers' pardon if on this anniversary I do not celebrate.

Societies Ignore Natural Law to Their Peril

2009-11-29T22:27:00.005-06:00

In a very timely piece--in light of recent posts herein on defense of marriage in Maine-- the noted moral theologian Father Edward Richard has written a nice piece about the natural law and its neglect in recent years. From his blog, Catholic Morality:

Where Did It Go? The End of the Law

The Natural Law (NL) is a well-developed scientific theory of law and is the basis of all legal systems in Western Thought. It was a system of law and political thinking which placed the law at the service of the human person. It presupposed that the human mind was capable of knowing truth, particularly the truth about the human person and the goal of human life.

The value system in the NL was based upon a rational concept of human nature and the perfection of that nature. The goal for the law, both civil and moral, was to protect the common pursuit of authentic human happiness. This good was not individualist and subjective. It was based in the human ability to know truth, universal and objective. NL presupposes the freedom of the human person to choose means appropriate for the attainment of the authentic good of human life, the good which is actually capable of winning the desire of all human beings. The subjective experience of that good is what is known as happiness. NL was not created by the Catholic Church but was the system of law and morality that, of necessity, was acknowledged and presupposed when Christians began their dialogue with the world.

Natural law wisdom was considered to be scientific wisdom and was accepted by the US political and legal systems until the early twentieth century. The most cited law books in the decisions of the US Supreme Court in the first half of the history of this country were the volumes of Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England. Blackstone's views on Natural Law were essentially those accepted for millenia and acknowledged by Catholic thinkers. Natural Law was eventually replaced in the US legal system due to the strident efforts of certain legal thinkers who created a new system of thought. Most legal students today have no knowledge of the principles of the radical reinvention of the legal system that took place about a century ago.

NL began to be questioned by legal philosophers under the influence of the Pragamatists and political Progressivist Movement at the end of the 19th Century. Those who sought to revise the legal system believed in a theory of Social Darwinism and thought that law should be used as a means to bring about the new social eutopia. The "end" in this case were goals that the legislators and judges selected apart from any theory of human nature or other systems of valuing based upon a rational understanding of nature. The novelty of these ideas in the history of law can be seen in the inchoate state of the revised theory of law.

The new legal theory did not contain a system of valuing. The influence of the theory led to the creation of system of law that is no longer concerned with human flourishing which leads to happiness. Instead, by default, the orientation of legal theory became something akin to HLA Hart's view of freedom, the maximum expression of social freedom against every limitation. However, that has not solved the problem resulting from the lack of a theory of value. It is recognized that there must be limitations upon freedom of choice, but without a rational basis for valuing behavior, it is not clear today what the basis should be for establishing such limitations. This hiatus continues to lead to critical conflicts in political and legal processes. As the influence of the new theory continues to advance, there is an increasing tendency to equate any limitation on free choice as an impediment to happiness. But this concept is purely subjectivist. One will note that the concept of the "pursuit of happiness" as a value for law, and as stated in the Declaration of Independence, is unintelligible and seems unattainable in a diverse and pluralistic culture.

The early scholars of the transformation of the US political and legal system in the 20th were Roscoe Pound, Dean of Harvard Law School, and US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Their main objective was to use the law to achieve social ends. Pound, in particular, sought to transform the judiciary into a means for a "more effective social engineering" (Pound's own words). Those familiar with Holmes will be aware of the fact that Holmes was a eugenicist, as were many of his contemporaries. Holmes and Pound were familiar with, and apparently accepted, the instrumentalist logic of John Dewey and the similar legal views of the German legal scholar, Gerhard von Ihering who wrote, Law as a Means to an End. Holmes's eugencist views apparently became part of his way of using the law to achieve desired social ends. Holmes wrote the US Supreme Court decision upholding the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck in Virginia saying "three generations of imbeciles is enough." By the middle of the 20th Century, the revisionists' theory of law, which was pragmatic and instrumentalist, became predominant at bench and bar and in the law schools of the country. This information has been well documented in research by Roberts Summers of Cornell University School of Law and other legal historians.

Advent Begins

2009-11-28T15:33:00.003-06:00

Alma Redemptoris Mater, quae pervia caeli
Porta manes, et stella maris, succurre cadenti,
Surgere qui curat, populo: tu quae genuisti,
Natura mirante, tuum sanctum Genitorem
Virgo prius ac posterius, Gabrielis ab ore
Sumens illud Ave, peccatorum miserere.

V. Angelus Domini nuntiavit Mariae
R. Et concepit de Spiritu Sancto.

Oremus

Gratiam tuam quæsumus, Domine, mentibus nostris infunde; ut qui, angelo nuntiante, Christi Filii tui Incarnationem cognovimus, per passionem ejus et crucem, ad resurrectionis gloriam perducamur.
Per eumdem Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

Psalm XI

2009-11-27T13:32:00.001-06:00

SALVUM me fac, Dómine, quóniam defécit sanctus: quóniam diminútæ sunt veritátes a fíliis hóminum.

Vana locúti sunt unusquísque ad próximum suum: lábia dolósa, in corde et corde locúti sunt.

Dispérdat Dóminus univérsa lábia dolósa, et linguam magníloquam.

Qui dixérunt: Linguam nostram magnificábimus, lábia nostra a nobis sunt, quis noster Dóminus est?

Propter misériam ínopum, et gémitum páuperum, nunc exsúrgam, dicit Dóminus.

Ponam in salutári: fiduciáliter agam in eo.

Elóquia Dómini, elóquia casta: argéntum igne ex aminátum, probátum terræ purgátum séptuplum.

Tu, Dómine, servábis nos: et custódies nos a generatióne hac in ætérnum.

In circúitu ímpii ámbulant: secúndum altitúdinem tuam multiplicásti fílios hóminum.

Glória Patri, et Fílio, et Spirítui Sancto.

Sicut erat in princípio, et nunc, et semper, et in sæcula sæculórum. Amen.

Thankful

2009-11-25T16:12:00.005-06:00

Heading out of the office for the Thanksgiving holiday, I wanted to thank all of you for reading here, and for the all of the prayers and words of support I get from many of you.

Of course I am thankful for the many blessings God bestows on me, first and foremost the gift of His Son, and His sacrifice for us all. His Blood was truly shed for us and for many unto the remission of sins. I am thankful for the faith, my family and the countless eternal and temporal benefits I have received.

I am thankful for the Institute, and for the timeless liturgy of the Church.

I am thankful that it is still possible in this country to host a blog that supports and promotes the teachings of the Church, and that it can be shared with others, at least for a while longer.

Have a blessed and happy Thanksgiving. Travel safely. For your enjoyment--or endurance-- I republish below one of my posts from Thanksgiving-time last year:

'Twas the Night before the Day before Black Friday

And all through the neighborhood, the Christo-seculars are ready to put up Christmas decorations.

That's right, I just made up a word: Christo-seculars. Who are they? They are Christians, well-meaning no doubt, who love Christmas so much they can't wait to celebrate it. Yet they have, like so many, traded in the Christian calendar for the secular retail calendar. And in the retail calendar, Christmas starts the day after Thanksgiving.

Sure, some retail "modernists" try to foist Christmas on us just after Halloween-- but this is St. Louis, and we are traditionalist-Christo-seculars. Old school.

So now it begins... it doesn't matter whether it's Friday, Saturday or Sunday. This is The Weekend of Christmas Decorations.

And it is also the Weekend that my family begins its annual exercise in self-flagellation and reasserts its status as Neighborhood Pariahs.

How? Because we still attempt to follow the Christian calendar, which, with regard to Christmas anyway, used to be known as "the calendar". And the more traditional we have become in our practice of the Catholic faith, the more assiduously we have striven to really follow the seasons--Advent first, Christmas after. That means we don't have our Christmas tree lit up like a beacon in our bay window until Christmas Eve, and we don't have any outdoor decorations. Moreover, the advent wreath on our dining room table is not visible to the outside, unless you get so close to the house that I will be forced to procure a restraining order.

I don't know, of course, which neighborhood you live in, but my neighborhood thinks VERY highly of itself. If the name weren't taken, or perhaps if the local schools provided anything like a classical education, it might go by the name of Narcissus Peaks. I mean, it is a lovely little neighborhood, but its denizens think it is simply the cat's meow. Or at least the dog's bark.

In our neighborhood, nearly everyone has fallen in love with the idea that quality outdoor Christmas decorations involve the most garish lights, multiple--I mean multiple-- inflatable snowmen, snow globes (complete with blowing snow), Santas, penguins, polar bears and other such items. All of these are crammed onto front yards the size of an NBA free throw lane. Every cornice, roof line, window pane, lamppost and tree are jammed, JAMMED with lights. I could almost attest in open court that for the next forty days, at dusk, I will notice a discernible dimming of my indoor lights as the greenest of Obama voters turn on the juice.

The neighborhood sturmtroopen hand out awards every year for the best "holiday" lighting and decorations. There are individual awards and block awards. Obviously, I don't mind being overlooked for the individual honors (sniff), but the much-coveted block award is the single most culpable vehicle that dooms my family to outcast status. You see, my block has never won the award. It never will win the award. It is handed out before Christmas day, and so my house is a total dud. Oh, and the Jehovah's Witnesses down the street don't help, either.

This is OK by me, too, and I get a little guilty pleasure seeing the angst on certain faces. We have one Particularly. Well. Respected. Neighbor. who always wins an individual award. In our home, he is affectionately known as uber-neighbor. He tells you how fast (slow) to drive. He signals his minions on the exact times to begin raking, or mowing, or shoveling, as the seasons demand.

He rarely returns my wave this time of year.

But the absolute best Christo-secular neighbor has no pet name in our house. This is because we hold him in absolute awe-- because his ability to assault the beautiful and tasteful in his Christmas decorations goes so far beyond tacky as to be truly sublime. It goes without saying that if you look directly at the holiday lights on his property for more than two seconds you will be left permanently blind. Welders can't handle the optics of it. And inflatable gadgets? You bet. He has an inflatable, scantily-clad in Santa's little-seen underwear Barbie that would make a streetwalker blush. Inflatable NASCAR. Inflatable hula dancer. Inflatable EVERYTHING. Plus tacky, over-stylized Christmas music blaring from speakers.

And yes, he is usually the big award winner of the entire neighborhood. Perfect, if you ask me.

Now we have approximately 37 children living in our three bedroom house. They have eyes (having been warned about the house above, mind you) and can see that everyone else has the decorations up. They ask legitimate questions. We try to give them answers that explain the faith and that satisfy their natural excitement for the season. And on some level it works, but of course every night my wife and I go to bed wondering if it is another day in which we have wrecked their lives.

We take solace, of course, in the fact that they get to look out the windows and see all the festive lights, whereas our neighbors must look out and see our home as festive as a penitentiary the night of an execution.

Ha!

So, we look forward to Christmas Eve, when we festoon the tree, put up decorations, go to Midnight Mass, and enjoy the solace and beauty of that Wonderful Night so long ago when our beloved Savior saw fit to be born into the world of men. The night of humble glory. We thank Him, and pray for the grace to be His faithful children.

And this year I will make a special effort to pray for our neighbors. After all, the day after Christmas begins the second Christo-secular season in which my family are neighborhood pariahs.

That is because on December 26, when all of the lights are down, the trees stuffed in the yard waste bins, and the neighborhood reels about in post-holiday hangover, we are just getting started. We celebrate Christmas. And Epiphany. And our Lord's Baptism. And the tree in our bay window will be up until February 2.

I can already see uber-neighbor's head shaking ruefully as he drives by.

Prayer to the Holy Family after Mass

2009-11-24T22:59:00.001-06:00

QUOS caelestibus reficis sacramentis, fac, Domine Iesu, sanctae Familiae tuae exempla iugiter imitari: ut, in hora mortis nostrae, occurrente gloriosa Virgine Matre tua cum beato Ioseph, per te in aeterna tabernacula recipi mereamur: Qui vivis et regnas cum Deo Patre in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.

O LORD Jesus, make those whom Thou dost refresh with Thy heavenly sacrament to imitate continually the example of Thy Holy Family, and that being welcomed at the hour of our death by Thy glorious Virgin-Mother and Saint Joseph, we may be found worthy to be received by Thee into Thy everlasting dwelling: Thou who livest and reignest with God the Father in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God for ever and ever. Amen.

Vespers Protest in the Rain, but without the Rain?

2009-11-24T16:16:00.003-06:00

Just as a quick follow-up to the last post, concerning an item in this week's St. Cronan bulletin:

Advent Vespers: We will be having two Advent Vespers celebrations. ...The second will be held at 7:00 Dec. 16th at Central Reform Congregation, 5020 Waterman Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63108. Rabbi Susan Talve will be the homilist.

You will recall that the Central Reform Congregation is led by Rabbi Susan Talve, who decided to host the pretend ordinations of Elsie McGrath and Rose Hudson in 2007, despite the request from Archbishop Burke to refrain from doing so.

Then Rabbi Talve was also invited by St. Cronan to lead an Advent vespers service that same year. This event was held outside the Church building after Archbishop Burke had asked the parish leadership to disinvite her, and further after Archbishop Burke had announced that the Church would no longer cooperate in joint events with Rabbi Talve due to her failure to respect the his request that she not undermine His Grace's efforts to shepherd the flock entrusted to him.

Sr. Louise Lears (subsequently placed under interdict and denied mission in the Archdiocese) participated in this service, which was covered on local television, and which was widely seen as a protest against the Archbishop. The event was also attended by pretend priests Hudson and McGrath.

In short, everything was done that could have been done--short of having the service on parish grounds--to show disrespect to the Ordinary.

Nothing really has changed in 2009, except that the participants have decided not to risk the rain.

Just as Catholic as They Ever Were, or, Catholic Action Network and Its Effort to Undermine Support for Archbishop Carlson

2009-11-24T09:43:00.004-06:00

The tears of joy at the departure of Archbishop Burke were real.

The tears of joy to welcome Archbishop Carlson, not so much.

Fellow Catholics in St. Louis, there is an organization called Catholic Action Network that has a branch of anti-Catholic Catholics operating in this Archdiocese. Their pet issues are typical fare of the post-christian, secular far-left: destruction of the institution of marriage, socialist economic policies that serve to increase the power of government, environmental whacko-ism, and, of course, destruction of the Roman Catholic priesthood.

Among their host bodies is St. Cronan parish, which used to occasionally host their "women-led liturgies" until the heat was turned up. St. Cronan still provides support for CAN on its site (stomach their "core values" here, if you dare), as does St. Stanislaus Kostka formerly Catholic parish. Why DO those names keep coming up?

In case you're wondering, you don't find a lot about Eucharistic adoration, prayers for the Holy Father, or Fatima on their site.

Well, we all heard the squeals of glee when the change of leadership was effected in the Archdiocese of Saint Louis. Now, the (gay marriage?) honeymoon is decidedly over. CAN is joining forces with the whimsically-named "Show Me No Hate" group to call for a protest against Archbishop Carlson at the Cathedral on Sunday:

_______________________

An Open Letter From Ed Reggi, Show Me No Hate

ST. LOUIS - Tim Townsend of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on November 11th broke the story how the St. Louis diocese funded an anti-gay marriage ballot measure in Maine.

The local Catholic money was used to pay for a ballot measure called, "Question 1," that asked Maine voters if they should take away the right of lesbians and gays to legally marry in their State. Unlike Proposition 8 in California, the right of marriage was already granted to same-sex couples by the Maine legislature and signed into law by Maine's (who is Catholic) Governor John Baldacci. This was a measure to take-away rights already granted.

Make no doubt, Saint Louis Archbishop Carlson, along with dozens of Catholic Bishops across the United States donated over $180,000 to the Maine campaign that erased Maine's new Marriage Equality law; furthermore, they donated the money during a time when the Catholic Church is cutting, slashing and closing down parishes.

It's time for St. Louis Catholics and non-Catholics; gay and straight community; to come together and peacefully tell the Archdiocese of Saint Louis, that there are better uses for the local $10,000 Catholic dollars.

Last November over 1400 St. Louisans stood on the steps of the Historic St. Louis Old Court House to show solidarity to all those affected in California after the passing of Proposition 8.

On Sunday November 29th from 11:30am to 1:30pm; in front of the St. Louis Cathedral Basilica steps, we are asking St. Louis again to stand for equality. We gather again in solidarity for those not only discriminated against in Maine - but we stand for religious tolerance and diversity in our community.

Sunday November 29th: there is no better date than the first day of Advent to rally for Equality. Sunday November 29th marks the first day of Advent, a time for Catholics and Christians to prepare or "make things holy," before the holiday. Advent literally translates to "coming" and we cannot think of any better time to "come-out" and "come-forward" as a community.

This rally is organized by: Catholic Action Network, Holy Families Committee and Show Me No Hate

______________________

No matter how few protesters show up, it will likely be reported as 1400. But no matter. CAN has reaffirmed its lack of Catholic identity, and its repudiation of Catholic teaching on marriage. How long can they engage in the false advertising that attempts to deceive people that they are Catholic? And how long can a Catholic parish openly support such a group, that foments contumely on their Archbishop?

Veni, Sancte Spiritus

2009-11-24T09:33:00.002-06:00

VENI, Sancte Spiritus, reple tuorum corda fidelium, et tui amoris in eis ignem accende.

V. Emitte Spiritum tuum et creabuntur;

R. Et renovabis faciem terrae.

Oremus:
DEUS, qui corda fidelium Sancti Spiritus illustratione docuisti: da nobis in eodem Spiritu recta sapere, et de eius semper consolatione gaudere. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
__________________________________

COME, Holy Ghost, fill the hearts of Thy faithful and kindle in them the fire of Thy love.

V. Send forth Thy Spirit and they shall be created;
R. And Thou shalt renew the face of the earth.

Let us pray:

O GOD, Who taught the hearts of the faithful by the light of the Holy Spirit, grant that, by the gift of the same Spirit, we may be always truly wise, and ever rejoice in His consolation. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.