Punditry

What do these two images have in common? Why of course they are both tabernacles or perhaps more sarcastically tackynackles. Though I guess Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament has been housed in poorer settings (my own body for example). I ran across these two separate images in my daily pilgrimage through St. Blogs. The first image is as David Morrison calls it the Tennis Ball Tabernacle in his post (by the way David is back posting more frequently). Not surprising he was looking for the Tabernacle to pray in front of and couldn’t find it until somebody told him where it was. Reminds me of the first of four times I was in Mombasa, Kenya and I walked right through the center of town looking for the center of town. The second image comes from Rantings of an obnoxious Seminarian whose post on the subject is well worth reading. I believe it was Bishop Fulton J. Sheen who when he noticed this trend towards removing the Blessed Sacrament from the center of the Church referred to the Gospel story where Mary Magdalene cries out "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.", so this problem is not anything new.

I remember once when I was doubtful that a square box that looked like bakelite was the tabernacle I realized that it had to be since their were kneelers in front of it and a large candle that must have been a sanctuary lamp. On this occasion I applied a bit of Mr. Sherlock Holmes’s logic. After all, once you have eliminated everything that is impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the tabernacle.

In a insightful post by Matthew at The Dusty Choir Loft:

It’s funny to me that as modern-"liturgists" work hard at de-ritualizing the Catholic liturgy, modern television is ritualizing itself.

Think for a second about all the rituals involved in television (especially reality based TV)…

1. When anyone from Survivor is voted off the island, their torch must be extinguished, because light represents their life on the island.
2. Before every episode of Iron Chef (the Japanese edition) they challenger is brought in and the Iron Chefs are brought up on platforms through the floor. They then must choose their opponent in this opening ritual.
3. YOU’RE FIRED!
4. Etc…Etc..Etc…

Isn’t it interesting that while these "liturgists" work at trying to make the Mass look like anything but a ritual, their counterparts who are busy stranding people on islands, locking people in houses and forcing people to do humiliating tasks for the opportunity of working for a large corporation are busy making up new rituals.

I am only too afraid of what a liturgist who likes Iron Chef could do to the liturgy. I can too easily imagine a Chairman Kaga type, clothing and all, announcing who the "presider" of today’s Mass is. Though I think I wouldn’t mind watching Iron Priest. A show where two priest compete in a homiletic showdown. At the start of the show the mystery topic is revealed and they have to then preach a powerful sermon with little preparation time. They both retire to their own Ambo where they put together their homily by choosing applicable selections from the Fathers of the Church, the Saints, and others. A panel then grades the homilies based on orthodoxy, presentation, and originality and then at the end we find out whose homily reigns supreme. If they tie they go in for an overtime homiletic battle and given a different topic to preach on.

A local ACLU director equated al-Qaida terrrorists with members of a Louisiana school board seeking to open their meetings with prayer.

Joe Cook of the ACLU of Louisiana spoke on camera with WAFB-TV, Baton Rouge, La., while staff and teachers of the Tangipahoa Parish district in New Orleans were at a seminar being informed of their free-speech rights by a member of the Alliance Defense Fund.

Referring to the school board, Cook said, "They believe that they answer to a higher power, in my opinion. Which is the kind of thinking that you had with the people who flew the airplanes into the buildings in this country, and the people who did the kind of things in London." [Source]

So I guess by that reasoning that Martin Luther King was also a terrorist for forcing the government to eventually pass the Civil Rights Act or that those who fought against slavery who were inspired by religious motives were also terrorists. I don’t expect much for the reasoning power of members of the ACLU and this is no exception. I surmise also by their comparative reasoning that the ACLU is the moral equivalent of Stalin. Stalin worked to wipe religion and religious symbols and impose a totally atheistic government, just like the ACLU. Since Stalin was responsible for untold millions of deaths I guess by the comparative equivalent the ACLU used that they are also the same as mass murderers. Now as much as I dislike much of what the ACLU does it would be stupid to make the Stalin comparison, almost as stupid as prayer in a school board meeting being the same as killing 3,000 people.

A conservative Catholic watchdog group wants 18 academics, including three professors at Boston College, purged from campus for perpetuating "a culture of death" by supporting abortion rights or siding against Terry Schiavo’s parents in their efforts to keep her feeding tube.

The Cardinal Newman Society also says in a fund-raising appeal that administrators at BC, Georgetown University and elsewhere should be warned their school risks being "stripped of its Catholic identity by the bishop who has authority over that college."

The eight-page letter, written by Eugene Diamond, former president of the Catholic Medical Association, was sent to 75,000 people in two mailings split between April and last month.

"It is for us to raise our voice in defense of the truth and demand that authentic Catholic doctrine be brought back to our beloved universities and colleges," Diamond wrote. "And the most natural first response to such dishonesty and underhandedness is anger!"

Some other Catholic groups criticized Diamond’s letter, saying it would risk the personal safety of those who were named — and that it seeks to undermine the academic and philosophical freedom that traditionally exists at institutions of higher learning.

The ubiquitous "some Catholic groups" and then attributing such an outrageous statement about personal safety. I follow the news pretty closely and I just can’t remember reading about Cardinal Newman Society goon squads beating up heterodox professors or gangs of faithful Catholics threatening professors with violence. And then we always get the academic freedom dodge. An institution of higher learning should teach the highest learning that is the truth. Does academic freedom mean teaching lies with truth side by side. A very odd definition of freedom since freedom is really the ability to do what is right.

"These aren’t politicians. This is a group of educators," said Eric McFadden of Columbus, Ohio, director of Catholics for Faithful Citizenship, a group that claims 7,000 members and advocates the mainstream teachings of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

This group masquerades behinds the teachings of the Catholic Church via the bishops conference. They are connected to many groups associated with liberal Catholic groups hiding under the seamless blanket with very relativistic support against abortion. I really don’t understand the "These aren’t politicians. This is a group of educators" statement. Catholic politicians are not allowed to flaunt Catholic teaching but Catholic educators are? I guess if your children are really strong in the faith you can send them to a Protestant university and if they are so rock solid you have no doubts then you might even consider testing them by sending them to a Catholic one.

Patrick Reilly, the society’s founder and president, dismissed such concerns.

"Who came out publicly in the first place?" Reilly said. "To suggest we should not come out would be fairly hypocritical."

He said his Virginia-based group, which lobbies Catholic schools to stay faithful to church teachings, is also developing a college guide highlighting schools’ affiliation with the disputed teachers.

Among those named in the letter are the Rev. John Paris, a bioethics professor at Boston College, and Charles Baron and Milton Heifetz, professors at BC’s law school. The latter two are Jewish, while Paris has been an ordained Roman Catholic priest for 45 years.

Boston College did not have an immediate comment, but Paris dismissed the society as "a self-appointed vigilante committee." He also labeled its planned appeal to the bishops as baseless, since the schools are run independently from the Catholic church.

Too true. Many Catholics are also independent from truths of the faith.

"They neither represent the church nor the academic community," Paris said of the society’s leaders, "and yet they want to censor the academic community in the name of the church." [Source]

This is of course the same Rev. Paris who said that food and water in Terri Schiavo case was disproportionately burdensome.

Update: Frequent commenter Teresa got me thinking more about possible Catholic vigilantes. Maybe it would be somewhat cool to have gangs of faithful Catholics lassoing wayward professors with Rosaries and doing an intervention. Perhaps an academic exorcism that uses not only passages from the Bible, but the catechism also. Though you would have to have some people hold them down when actual passages from the Catechism are read to them.
"The power of the Catechisms compels you.
The power of the Catechism compels you" while at the same time they scream "Academic Freedom!" The power of the Catechism compels you." Because of the amount of spin they give the faith in class I would not be surprised to see some professors spin their head around and speak in some foreign language (except of course Latin). Holy Water and Ex Corde Ecclesia used together could also be a powerful combination, that is if was actually backed by the bishops.

Though maybe real Catholic Vigilantes would be Vigil-antes that is attend a vigil and pray for wayward professors.

Via Roman Catholic Blog comes this statement originally from the Diocese of Brooklyn’s ecumenical office.

"To embrace and learn from the differences between us, rather than reconcile them, gives each of us a new understanding of conversion. Rather than seeking to change the faith of others, we hope that through dialogue our own hearts and minds can be changed, allowing us to see new images of God, new glimpses of Truth."

The problem with statements like these is that they have a degree of truth in them that gets subverted by a larger falsehood. It is certainly true that all religions have some degree of truth in them and that other faiths can at times help us to see those truths that already part of our faith more clearly. But this false view of ecumenism where we will be more affected by the other than the other by us is just plain mistaken. If we truly love our neighbor as we love ourselves we want the same good for our neighbor as we do four ourselves. A relationship directed at us getting more out if it than the other is inverted. This is not the intent, but this becomes the reality of it. Our hearts should be burning with the desire that we all be one as regards to Jesus’ high priestly prayer. To have the sacraments, and especially the Eucharist, and not have an evangelical zeal that your brothers can enter into a real communion with Christ’s Church is less than charitable. This false ecumenism is more about just getting along than sharing the truth. True ecumenism requires that we share the Catholic faith as best we can and also that we truly understand the theology of others. This allows us to plainly see where there are both agreements and disagreements and allows us a foundation on which to build on. False ecumenism pretends that there are not substantial differences and in the end truth doesn’t really matter as long as we just get along. Jesus allowed some of his disciples to walk away when it came to the hard truth of the Eucharist in John 6. We must preach the truth with clarity and charity.

Here is something by the late Fr. Hardon, S.J. on ecumenism.

Since the close of the Second Vatican Council, many Catholics have sincerely initiated relationships with the churches separated from Rome without taking into full account the doctrinal foundations on which true ecumenism must be based. True ecumenism is the Christian unity that Christ Himself revealed. It is the unity which is not merely verbal but real. It is the unity which preserves all the essential elements of faith and morality prescribed by the Savior for those who are to be His followers in truth and not only in name.

True unity necessarily requires a clear and deep understanding of the premises of belief and practice required by the founder of the Church who died on the Cross because He refused to compromise with the truth. True unity is certainly animated by a deep Christian love. But this love must be founded on the truth which the Roman Catholic Church has preserved for twenty centuries and for which millions of her followers have shed their blood.

True unity is impossible without union with the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Peter on whom Christ promised to build His Church.

Via Ten Reasons is the following version of the Ten Commandments from a textbook called "Coming to Jesus, Grade 2" of which I will contrast with the Exodus 20 from the RSV version.

1. We try to put God first in our lives
     "You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."

2. We use God’s name only with love and respect.
     "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain."

3. We keep Sunday as God’s special day of prayer and rest.
     Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work; but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your manservant, or your maidservant, or your cattle, or the sojourner who is within your gates;[for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it.

4. We listen to and obey those who care for us.
     "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the LORD your God gives you."
     
5. We care for all living things.
     "You shall not kill.

6. We care for our bodies and respect others.
     "You shall not commit adultery."

7. We do not steal; we are fair to everyone.
     "You shall not steal."

8. We are truthful in what we say and do.
     "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor"

9. We are faithful to those we love.
     "You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s."

2514 St. John distinguishes three kinds of covetousness or concupiscence: lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life.301 In the Catholic catechetical tradition, the ninth commandment forbids carnal concupiscence; the tenth forbids coveting another’s goods.

10. We help people to have what they need to live.
     "You shall not covet . . . anything that is your neighbor’s. . . . You shall not desire your neighbor’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s"

2534 The tenth commandment unfolds and completes the ninth, which is concerned with concupiscence of the flesh. It forbids coveting the goods of another, as the root of theft, robbery, and fraud, which the seventh commandment forbids. "Lust of the eyes" leads to the violence and injustice forbidden by the fifth commandment.319 Avarice, like fornication, originates in the idolatry prohibited by the first three prescriptions of the Law.320 The tenth commandment concerns the intentions of the heart; with the ninth, it summarizes all the precepts of the Law.

Rich Leonardi rightly called this dumbed down version the Ten ‘Cuddly’ Commandments and while some of them are closer to the truth others are misleading and politically correct.

Update: Reader Ron Kozar sent me a scanned copy of the relevant pages in the text book in question

He had also stated in the comment box.

"The textbook in question presents these teachings as the ten commandments. They are not presented as a mere outline or something. The textbook pictures the words on two stone tablets. The first three are preceded by the statement, "The first three commandments tell us how to love God." The remaining seven arep receded by the statement, "The other commandments show us how to love ourselves and others.""

You can see the scanned image here.

It is traditional for newly elected popes to adopt a new coat of arms, displaying heraldic imagery symbolizing their heritage or their attitudes toward the church. It has been widely noted, for instance, that a bishop’s hat, or miter, sits atop Pope Benedict XVI’s new coat of arms, and not a crown. That is viewed as an expression of the new pope’s humility, that he comes not to reign over the church but to continue his work as one of God’s servants.

Another prominent feature of the pope’s new crest has also attracted attention: the picture of the ”African king" facing left on the coat of arms. For one thing, the portrait is practically a caricature of an African male, with exaggerated lips painted ruby red. ”It’s not good," says Holy Cross professor of religious studies Matthew Schmalz, who has written about the crest for the Catholic magazine Commonweal.

Why am I not surprised that a professor at a Catholic school would be upset about the Pope’s crest. Definitely not surprised that the article will appear in Commonwealhine

There is little doubt why the image of the African king appears on the crest. It symbolizes the Pope’s commitment to rallying Catholic worshipers in Africa, the fastest-growing province of the church. (In June, Benedict said he would summon a special synod of African bishops, the first since 1994.) ”For me, [the African king] is an expression of the universality of the Church," the then-Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in his 1998 book ”Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977." He also wrote that he did not know where the African image, which appeared on his coat of arms when he was archbishop of Munich-Freising, came from.

First they say there is no doubt that the image was chosen by the Pope to rally worshipers in Africa and then they mention it was on his original crest as a Bishop. I guess they are saying that the Pope was a prophet when he choose it. The fuller quote from his book is actually "I do not know its meaning. For me it is it is an expression of the universality of the Church, which knows no distinctions of race or class since all are one in Christ (Galatians 3:28),"

He is not alone. No one really knows who the African king might be. ”It probably strikes people as being really odd," Schmalz says. ”They look at it and think, ‘What is going on here?’ "

Mario Valdes, a researcher for WGBH’s ”Frontline," strongly believes the black king can be one of only two people: Balthazar, one of the three kings from the ”Orient," who brings myrrh to the newborn Jesus Christ; or Prester John, the mythological king of the ”three Indias," or, alternatively, Ethiopia. Prester John, who in some versions of his legend is white, was supposed to have ruled over a land where spiritual and temporal powers coexisted in perfect harmony. Pope Alexander III is said to have written a letter to Prester John in 1177, although the Catholic Encyclopedia casts doubt on this event.

But there are two other possible identities for the unknown Moor. He could be St. Maurice, a Roman commander from Africa whose Christian soldiers refused to sacrifice to the pagan gods after an important victory, and were themselves massacred. (Valdes discounts this, noting that Maurice is usually depicted wearing a centurion’s helmet.) And there is a more grisly possibility. At the time of the Crusades, some Christian kings displayed a severed Moor’s head on their flags or crests to symbolize victories over their Islamic enemies. It is conceivable that the king, known as the ”Moor of Freising," evolved from such an image, although the figure shown on Benedict’s coat of arms is wearing a collar and has suffered no violence. ”It’s certainly one of the possibilities," Schmalz says. [Source]

Well there are also some other possibilities such as it being Saint Corbinian, founder of the Diocese of Freising, mistakenly thought to have been a Moor especially since this image is known as the Moor of Freising or the "caput ethiopicum." Since this image was mainly used for Bavarian heraldry I would think that it likely had a local connection instead of it being one of the wise men from the East.

As the Roman Catholic Church’s 20th World Youth Day in Cologne, Germany, approaches, we asked young Catholics about their expectations for their church. Past World Youth Days have drawn hundreds of thousands of people to meet and share their faith. This year’s festivities begin August 16, and Pope Benedict XVI will celebrate a Mass to close the gathering on August 21. Among those who plan to be in Cologne are Alex Paiva, 20, of Fall River, a senior at Boston University, and Joe Tierney, 18, of Wellesley, a graduate of Boston College High School headed to Le Moyne College in Syracuse, New York, this fall. The Globe Magazine invited Paiva, Tierney, and three other young Catholics – Alison Bane, 21, of Manchester-by-the-Sea, a junior at Boston College; Shatica Chinn, 16, of Mattapan, a junior at Cathedral High School; and Diana Pelaez, 15, of Dorchester, a sophomore at the Academy of the Pacific Rim – to talk about their faith and the challenges facing their church. [Source]

And not surprisingly they are rather uninformed about their faith and a reminder that those attending World Youth Day are not all exactly all orthodox in their faith. Though World Youth Day has been a starting point for a deeper conversion for many Catholic youths once attended. Of course I am also not supervised that the magazine could not fully faithful Catholic to interview since that wouldn’t fit in with agenda journalism.

BANE It is a difficult issue. I was the first altar girl in my church, but that was a baby step. I understand historically why ordination of women hasn’t happened yet, but women are equally capable.

Exactly why female altar servers was not a prudent idea. It only encouraged the baby step idea of advancing towards the priesthood. If your are going to go with female altar servers than it should be made abundantly clear to them from the start that this has not a training program towards women’s ordinations.

CHINN The way I see it, the church sees more in a man than a woman, and I disagree with that. If it was left up to me, and I wanted to be a priest, I would go for it.

So I guess a vocation to the priesthood would have nothing to do with it?

BANE Being in a college setting, the topic involving the church that most of my peers talk about is birth control. I know a lot of Catholics who take birth control and have trouble with the fact they are doing that, and I know a lot of Catholics who are having sex and won’t take birth control, and they are troubled by the risks they’re taking. I guess that the church does not want to condone birth control because that may be seen as endorsing sexual activity among teenagers, but it’s one of the most immediate issues facing the church.

Well I see she is getting a fine Catholic education at Boston College as a junior. To guess that the church doesn’t like birth control because it endorses sexual activity among teenagers is just to be totally ignorant about what the Church teaches and why the Church teaches that birth control is sinful. To be able to disagree with Church teaching you should at least find out what it is first.

PELAEZ Birth control should be allowed, because young people are having sex and there are diseases you don’t want them to get.

Wow! Why didn’t Pope Paul VI think of that instead of wasting his time writing Humanae Vitae.

TIERNEY On birth control, I don’t think the church should be against it. But on abortion, I take a conservative stance. I’m prolife.

But abortafacients like the pill are okay I guess. Yep that is really being pro-life.

BANE My view on abortion has evolved since high school. In situations like rape, I am prochoice. I feel every woman should be entitled to that choice. That’s something I have trouble reconciling with my faith, because I do understand the Catholic view on this and, personally, I could never have an abortion.

CHINN Birth control is needed. Nobody’s ready at a young age to be a parent. But some kids I go to school with, they do things like that. But abortion? You lay up and have a baby, you should be able to take care of it.

So people at a young age aren’t ready to become parents but they are ready for sexual relations and STDs such as HIV.

PELAEZ I get why the church doesn’t want abortion, but what if a girl gets raped? You can give the baby up for adoption, but then she’s still having to carry the child of someone she didn’t want to have sex with. That’s not right.

PAIVA I’ve been very prolife my entire life. Whether it be rape, incest, sexual abuse, or whatever, it’s still a life.

Bravo Paiva. Unfortunately too many consider the death penalty for those conceived as the result of rape.

BANE One issue I wish that the Catholic faith were a little more open is being gay. I have a lot of friends who are gay, and a lot of them are also very strong in their Catholic faith. It makes me so sad at times that the church is so much more willing for me to engage in certain activities in a Mass than they can without the sense of alienation that they now feel. Their hearts are no different, their souls are no different.

PAIVA What’s sinful is not the feeling or the tendency of the person to be homosexual. It’s the act. Whether it’s homosexual or heterosexual activity, both are against the church. Maybe I’m too conservative about it. Though it doesn’t feel wrong, it’s still sinful in the eyes of the church, and that’s the definition I’ve been taught.

CHINN [Gay] people sometimes feel left out. It shouldn’t be a sin just to feel something for someone.

TIERNEY I know people who are gay, and I’m fine with it. I’m for gay rights and things of that nature. This is one area where I don’t agree with the church 100 percent.

TIERNEY I say, "How can you judge something if you haven’t tried it and haven’t experienced it for yourself?" The church in my town doesn’t have to reach out. The offer is on the table. It’s whether people want to accept it.

It is amazing that anybody can actually say something so vapid as "How can you judge something if you haven’t tried it and haven’t experienced it for yourself?" Unfortunately this is an all too common argument. Morality by experience is not exactly wise. That you would have to murder someone first before you can judge whether murder is wrong. Serving on a jury would require you to do the same crime as the person being judged.

But then who am I to say anything. After all I have been judged by Fr. O’Leary to be one of the rising Neocaths and am part of "one of the most disturbing phenomena in Roman Catholicism today". [Via Against the Grain]

While many people, many, many people, smart, educated people assume that the personal privacy protections in the Constitution are inviolatable, they will always be in existence, the Constitutional exile crowd, they, they don’t. It believes not just that privacy rights should be diminished, it’s members believe that there should be none. I repeat that. No general right of privacy whatsoever in the Constitution. So what does that mean, other than the academic debate we all engage in? Well first, the government, whether state, federal or local, could forbid couples as they had in the past, from using contraception. The government could also Constitutionally impose restrictions on the number of children you have, a bizarre notion. It exists in other countries, and God only knows what happens here in two, five, ten, twenty, thirty years. This may seem an unlikely outcome, but remember, this is the same crew that brought you Schiavo. [Via Radio Blogger]

Now what brought this rant about by Sen. Joe Biden? Why of course it is on the nomination of Judge Roberts if you couldn’t tell by the context. Don’t you just love Catholic like Joe Biden who are so scared that one day contraception might be illegal or that husbands could not use the courts to have their wives killed via the state. But what is just plain whack is tying Judge Roberts conservatism with one day limiting the size of families. I also didn’t remember the condemnation of China’s forced abortion one child policy by the Senate Democrats. The ChiComs are not exactly known for their conservatism and it is enforces policies more inline with the Democrat party than anything. I don’t think you will find that it is conservative Catholics who are currently behind the move to limit family size in the Philippines. Democrats are more likely to breath a sigh a relief over this news than to be outraged at it or the fact that women will be forced to abortion and children beyond their quota. So much for choice. It seems to me that a party that supports contraception, abortion and the rights of snail darters over children in the womb is the party more likely to limit family size. A party that continuously talks about population threats to the environment is much more likely to consider family size a threat to the environment. The nanny state ironically would eliminate the need for nannies. Not that I see the Democratic party moving towards this anytime soon, it is just that the natural extensions of their current policies make such future legislation more likely.

Why is it that the word renovation has come to strike architectural fear in the hearts of many Catholics? Now I have mentioned my own parish before where the church which was already beautiful was made even more beautiful when it was truly renovated. Of course another loaded term has come to be "worship space" when you see a "church" referred to in this manner it is almost a guarantee of what those in charge of the renovation will do. For example The Church of the Resurrection has this "OUR NEW WORSHIP SPACE" Virtual Tour.

Now if someone unfamiliar with the sacraments compared the baptismal font and the Tabernacle, which do you think they would believe to have the pride of place and the higher importance?

Where one is prominently displayed as you enter the church and the other is off to the side in a reservation chapel. I guess they had reservations that this is truly the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ and that the Eucharist should be treated as such. If the second coming were to occur now would we politely ask Jesus to go stand in a side room?

They also probably were not concerned that what they have done also violates canon law. "The tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved habitually is to be immovable,…" I don’t know about you, but my definition of mobile does not include the ability for the Tabernacle to be easily carried off by even an octogenarian. Now I don’t have a problem with large baptismal fonts. What goes on spiritual in baptism is an awesome thing to reflect upon and the design and beauty of the physical font used can help us to reflect on this. But the Eucharist as mystery is even more awesome and it is sad that in so many churches that the Sacrament of Baptism seems to have a higher emphasis than the sublime mystery of the Eucharist.

As you move toward the Altar you become aware that it occupies the place of greatest prominence in the room. The altar has been handcrafted by Martin Ratermann of solid black walnut. Although stone is a common material from which altars are constructed, our art and furnishings committee purposely chose wood so that our altar would more readily be associated with the Emmaus table of Luke’s Gospel, at which the two disciples recognized the risen Christ in the breaking of the bread.

Art and furnishing committee? I guess if you really want to screw something up appoint a committee. You know solid black walnut in an octagonal shape really reminds me of the table used at Emmaus. There are just so many reference to black walnut trees in the Bible that I have lost count.

Again it looks like canon law was not part of any consideration.

Can. 1236 §1. According to the traditional practice of the Church, the table of a fixed altar is to be of stone, and indeed of a single natural stone. Nevertheless, another worthy and solid material can also be used in the judgment of the conference of bishops. The supports or base, however, can be made of any material.

The US the Bishops conference says that the altar can be made of other materials with permission of the local ordinary. Of course the funny thing is that the document that allows this permission is called Built of Living Stones: Art, Architecture, and Worship.

"The octagon was a symbol used in the early Church for the Resurrection. Its eight sides symbolize the first seven days of the creation of the world as recorded in the Book of Genesis plus the first day of the New Creation, which is Easter."

I hadn’t heard that before, but that does seem to be a fitting symbol.

Now with all of these modification you just know that there is no way in the world that there will be a crucifix within the sanctuary and you wouldn’t be wrong.

When you stand in front of the altar platform you are standing in the center of the room. Facing the altar from this point, turn clockwise until you are facing the first grand window with its accompanying oculus window above. Here you find the bronze sculpture entitled “Christ Rising” by Fredrick Hart. It is not apparent whether the figure of Christ in this sculpture is being raised from the cross or if he is rising from the grave. In this work we simultaneously experience the anguish of Christ’s sacrifice and the power of his resurrection.

So I guess you don’t know if Christ is coming or going much like most modern theology. I am more inclined to title this statue "Diving board Jesus."

What is it with the modern aversion to the cross? All of this "We are an Easter People" as if we got a Monopoly card that said "Go strait to Easter do not pass the Crucifixion." We all have an aversion to the cross and usually increase them by ignoring our crosses. Deemphasizing Jesus’ death on the cross will also likely increase not decrease on own crosses. It is much harder for us to say "why me?" when we look up at our Lord on the crucifix.

Now I don’t really know what to make of this final picture.

Other than that I suspect one of the parishioners objected to all of these modifications and was placed in carbonite like Hans Solo.

OTTAWA (CNS) — While a keynote speaker at a conference on women’s ordination warned delegates that the aging progressive Catholic movement desperately needed an infusion of youth, some participants said the women priest movement, in particular, did not resonate with young adults.
The 460 registered delegates attending the Women’s Ordination Worldwide conference in Ottawa July 22-24 came from some 20 countries on five continents, but white women in their 50s and 60s dominated the gathering.

Fewer than a dozen conference delegates were under 30, prompting one of them to ask theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether what efforts were being made to recruit younger women.

Ruether, professor emeritus at the Pacific School of Religion at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif., and an author of more than two dozen books, said the progressive Catholic movement was mainly "gray-headed" and over 50.

She said that female doctoral students were leaving the church because they wanted to be ordained and have a job.

Many of the conference speakers acknowledged that their children were not remaining with the Catholic Church once they learned of its stance on birth control, for example.

"Young people don’t have the same way of getting inculcated into the Catholic identity," Ruether said. "They simply won’t tolerate this."

What a surprise that when you see at least on of your parents dissent from Church teaching on women’s ordination that they could also balk at other Church teachings. It is difficult enough in this culture to teach the truth of sexuality and it is made more difficult by dissenters who pick in choose what they want to believe.

While the July 25 invalid ordination of four women as priests drew a barrage of mainstream media coverage, younger Catholic women interviewed by Canadian Catholic News did not seem to share the same interest in ordination or see it as an equality issue.

Patricia Murphy, who teaches ethics at St. Augustine Seminary at the University of Toronto, said most women born after the Second Vatican Council ended in 1965 have a different experience from women in their 50s and 60s who were "typically formed by what has been called a ‘Catholic subculture.’"

"Many of the younger Catholics I know, both women and men, think they were never sufficiently educated in their own tradition," she said. "For them it is religious pluralism, not any distinctive ‘Catholic subculture’ that is a point of departure.

"They often come to theology to ‘fill in the gaps,’ to develop a mature — and truly thoughtful — understanding of their faith," stemming from a desire to "be more solidly grounded," she said.

Dorothy Cummings, who is pursuing a doctorate in theology at Boston College, said she believed most Catholics were uncomfortable with the invalid ordinations of women priests.

"The women who have been most loudly in favor of women’s ordination have not been ones respected for their orthodoxy," she said.

There is a "yawning gulf" between baby boomers and those born after Vatican II, she said. "Younger women are interested in collegiality. They want to work with priests and bishops, not complain about them. [Source]

Well I think "yawning gulf’ is a good term. Younger women are looking at this issue and yawning.

I have read the observation for years that groups like Call To Action, VOTF, and others are graying out with little infusion of young people. You know these groups aren’t going to be called for a world youth day like conference anytime soon. Or if they do they can probably book a phone booth for the conference hall. Though I do think they have some opportunities for raising cash. For example they could do a partnership with Clairol Hair Coloring and Grecian Formula – Just For Men.