Jeffrey Miller

Diane M. Korzeniewski on the Progressives theory about reason Archbishop Burke was sent to Rome.

“Promoted out” of the US?

Ok – let’s count ’em…

June 2008: Appointed as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura
October 19, 2009: Appointed a member of the Congregation for Bishops
July 6, 2010: Appointed a member of the Congregation for Divine Worship
Today: July 26, 2010: Appointed a member of the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints

’nuff said – LOL

ad multos annos, Excellency! [Source]

Well this doesn’t discount the Progressive’s theory – to them it would be obvious that the Holy Father is loading the Archbishop up with so many jobs he will break under the load.

Don Michele Bigi, using the iPad to say mass at a summer camp in Gramolazzo (Tuscany) [Source]

Yikes. The using of the iPad with a PDF version of the Lectionary is the least troublesome part of this. Now I can certainly understand valid instances where the local ordinary would approve a Mass held outside. But, come on – couldn’t he find a decent place inside to hold Mass? Plus the altar really makes me cringe. I guess you can use it for Mass and then mix paint on it afterwards.

Can. 932 §1. The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in a sacred place unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise; in such a case the celebration must be done in a decent place.”

We often hear about Catholics who want to have their wedding Mass held outside. The local bishop can give a dispensation for that, but I don’t know of such a case where this was done. But I have seen a lot of photo’s of priests conducting Mass outside in less than ideal circumstances – or maybe I just see the photos of the more shocking cases.

I once went to an outdoor wedding held in the Rose Gardens next to the Zoo in Portland, Ore. When the minister asked the “Do you take” question the Zoo train blew it’s whistle. It was pretty funny though.

I previously posted thoughts on the iPad at Mass here.

Toni Tortorilla [Source]
I am shocked at this picture! Doesn’t this women “priest” know that glass chalices are not allowed. Surely she has read Redemptionis Sacramentum. After all women priests are just like male priests and they only differ with the Church on the issue of women’s ordination and just want to be obedient to Jesus and his Church.

It always seems to me that the real reason these women don’t become Episcopalians instead is that they would get no attention if they did so. This way they can be “brave” in opposing that male dominant church they so hate and want to be part of. That when it comes down to it, it is not only one issue they disagree on — but a whole agenda comes along with it. Show me a women “priest” who defends the Church’s sexual teachings and has an orthodox theological view and I will show you that the bearded Spock must live in that same universe. These women would be a much closer fit with Episcopalians since their theology and antics would fit right in

As I have quipped before, where are the women who feel a call to the priesthood that want to celebrate the Extraordinary form of the Mass. Where are the traddy women priests and why is it predominately women with butch haircuts that feel this call?

From the article the picture was taken from:

Q: Is there a biblical basis for ordaining women?

A: In 1976, a report of the Pontifical Biblical Commission looked at Scripture and found no justification in the New Testament for excluding women from the priesthood.

I guess I am shocked again by this lie. I have a copy of this report and it says not such thing.

“It does not seem that the New Testament by itself alone will permit us to settle in a clear way and once and for all the problem of the possible accession of women to the presbyterate,”

This statement from the commission is nowhere close to how it is often portrayed by the women’s ordination movement. The reason I have the commissions report is because I had seen this claim before. The report goes on to say:

The masculine character of the hierarchical order which has structured the church since its beginning thus seems attested to by scripture in an undeniable way. Must we conclude that this rule must be valid forever in the church?

…In fact there is no proof that these ministries were entrusted to women at the time of the New Testament.

And of course this preistette does not mention that the Pontifical Biblical Commission did not found any evidence for ordaining women in the Bible either. It is Jesus’ example that shows this to be his will and of course the constant teaching of the Church from the beginning on this. The only women priests in the early church were heretical groups like Collyridianism. And of course as then-Cardinal Ratzinger replied in his Responsum ad Dubium “This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.”

I was looking through Florida statutes and I discovered that those who impersonate police officers, sheriffs, government officials, etc have committed a felony and the circumstances determines if it is first, second, or third degree.  Sentencing for this can be 30, 15, or 5 years with longer sentencing for a life felony.  These crimes are covered under statues 775.082, s. 775.083, here in Florida.

Looking over some other offenses I was shocked to find that unlawful sexual activity with minors while also a felony came under the exact same statues in regard to punishment!  Or the fact that aggravated assault or battery is also a felony along with child sexual abuse and rape.

I tell you I am totally shocked that Florida law equates child sexual abuse with impersonation of a government official.   Unbelievable.  How dare they equate these two crimes as both felonies.  I urge everybody who is a resident of the state of Florida to write their state senate and state congress to have this changed.  Even more disturbing is that it seems that this is not just a fluke for the State of Florida, but seems to have infected all states in that they see this impersonation a felony just like child sexual abuse.

The conclusion to think that each state considers impersonation of a government official to be equated with child sexual abuse is a reasonable conclusion if you have the same mindset of those who freaked out over the revised norms (Normae de Gravioribus Delictis) issued by the Holy See that codify seven modifications originally made by Pope John Paul II and confirmed by Pope Benedict in 2005.  The conclusion of so many bigoted and uninformed pundits is that the Holy See is deliberating equating child sexual abuse with the attempted ordination of women.  No other conclusion is possible for them.

The case can be made that including women’s ordination in this document was not a prudent thing to do.  Though the only reason that it was not prudent was that people would willfully misinterpret it and approach it from an adversarial view.  It does not matter to them that the gravity of the items listed did not change at all and only restates these offenses and their application to the law.  The simple fact is that they don’t understand why women can’t be ordained and so are mad about this in the first place and will use any opportunity to rant about this regardless of the conclusions they must force to come to.  If you say that it reasonable to infer that the intent of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to directly  equate women’s ordination as being exactly equal in every way with priestly abuse of children than you in fact are not being reasonable.

Plus of course they do not understand why women attempting to be ordained constitute such a serious crime in Church law.  If somebody decides that they are called to be a doctor or a county sheriff and then have some group declare them to be of such a profession and to start doing these jobs of their own volition, pretty much anybody can see why they are not in fact a doctor or government official regardless of their desire.  Both the government and doctors have stringent procedures regarding these professions and control them.  The Catholic Church also has rules and procedures concerning the priesthood and have the faculty to determine the theology of the priesthood and who can be a priest.  But of course secularists seem to think they can dictate this to us and make no attempt to understand the theology of the priesthood and instead head straight for a false view of equality.

These women who are faux priests do serious damage to those who follow them and of course to themselves.  Where there are women “priests” there is no Eucharist, confession, sacrament of the sick, or valid marriage.  To support women priests is to rob the faithful of these sacraments and to create a spirituality anchored in disobedience.

Funny how the same people who would go postal if a white actor played Othello can think of no reasons whatsoever why women can’t image Christ In Persona Christi.  They would reduce Christ to a genderless being and his being a man meaning nothing at all.  This as always is the path of heresies that grow from see Jesus as something other than fully God and fully man (as a human person) and as a man.

Though the bigots will just not get passed that their can be a theology of the priesthood that is not just simply sexism imposed by a an all male hierarchy.

For those who seriously want to know why the Church teaches what was Christ’s will.

Catholic Priesthood and Women: A Guide To The Teaching Of The Church by Sr. Sara Butler, MSBT which I previously reviewed. In 1978, Sr. Butler headed a task force of the Catholic Theological Society of America that came out in support of female priests. Later though she realized the error of the arguments made and wrote this book that rebuts them and totally supports the Church’s teaching.

Since the atheist de-batism using a hairdryer marked reason is making the news again – here are my comments from almost a year ago today.

In a type of mock ceremony that’s now been performed in at least four states, a robed “priest” used a hairdryer marked “reason” in an apparent bid to blow away the waters of baptism once and for all. Several dozen participants then fed on a “de-sacrament” (crackers with peanut butter) and received certificates assuring they had “freely renounced a previous mistake, and accepted Reason over Superstition.”

For Gray, the lighthearted spirit of last summer’s Atheist Coming Out Party and De-Baptism Bash in suburban Westerville, Ohio, served a higher purpose than merely spoofing a Christian rite.

“It was very therapeutic,” Gray said in an interview. “It was a chance to laugh at the silly things I used to believe as a child. It helped me admit that it was OK to think the way I think and to not have any religious beliefs.”

…Atheist Gary Mueller recently mailed his de-baptism certificate to St. Bonaventure Catholic Church in Concord, Calif., and asked to be dropped from its baptismal record. The church told him, in effect, that he was all wet.

“While we do not remove a name/person from a Baptism register, we can note alongside your name that ‘you have left the Roman Catholic Church,’ ” the Rev. Richard Mangini replied in an e-mail. “I hope that God surprises you one day and lets you know that He is quite well.” [reference]

As a former atheist I would like to debunk what they are saying, but since I can only rely on superstition and not reason I am unable to. When I became Catholic I had to sign one of those documents about promising to abstain from reason and other bad habits I had picked up in a lifetime of atheism. In the last ten years I have been much happier now that religion is a crutch and life is easier now also since I don’t have to think anymore and can just blindly follow some foreign guy in a robe! I embrace my sheepleness.

Besides reason is not what it is cracked up to be. Just what had it done for St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas. Pascal, or even our present Pope? Remember that encyclical Pope John Paul II wrote “Faith and Superstition”? Oh wait.

Now if these people were serious about giving up Christianity and the fruits of Christendom, they should also denounce hospitals, universities, and even modern science, and of course acts of charity. They want to denounce Christianity while at the same time enjoying the fruits of it.

I am so glad that this man showed us how to use reason! Forming judgments by a process of logic always leads you to sticking a piece of paper with REASON on it to a hair dryer. Mocking Christians with phony rituals that have not ability to cancel out an ontological change screams reason. Though ‘Reason itself is a matter of faith,” G. K. Chesterton wrote. ”It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.”

Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth–in a word, to know himself–so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves. – Pope John Paul II Fides et Ratio.

The Catholic Key blog titled the post on this “Atheists Need Better liturgists” Actually a stunt as silly as this sounds just like something a liturgist would recommend. Rocks in baptismal fonts and blow-dryers marked reason kind of go together.