Saturday, May 23, 2015

PENTECOST WEEKEND: COME, SPIRIT-CREATOR! FILL THE HEARTS OF YOUR FAITHFUL!

First of all, we're doing this part in small print for a reason. Shhh . . . over there, while Father Z is busy flying away the donations of his groupies, the Big Ol' Bitter Bag o' Onions has his latest facial hair all in a froth fomenting the latest conspiracy: the International Gaggle of Grim Grimacers are pretty sure those Successors of the Apostles, who aren't into Carnival Dress-Up and Remaining in the Tabernacle: Keeping Jesus Safe From Contaminating Contacts With Sinners by the Five Cardinal Horsemen of the Apocalypse™, are plotting ways to make welcome in the Family of the Church those very people Jesus came to seek out and save in the first place. Imagine! So as we get ready to celebrate Pentecost, let's not disturb that modern-day Sanhedrin busy figuring out new ways to keep the tomb sealed and the Spirit out of the Cenacle, so that they can dress up and play Church. Shhh . . . 

Meanwhile, back here in the real Church, still celebrating the Spirit's most recent decent on Rome (back in March of 2013), life in the Spirit goes on and life in the Spirit is good!

First a hymn: a fine remembrance of those Spirit-filled days! Here's the gang asking the Spirit to come and help them out:

Here's one of the fruits of that gathering: this gathering:

Cardinal Tagle: Church should not look to 'idealized past' with nostalgia


Washington. Philippines Cardinal Luis Tagle -- often cited as a possible successor to Pope Francis -- has called on Catholics to avoid looking to the pre-Second Vatican Council Church with a sense of nostalgia, but to embrace and live out the Council's sense of openness to the modern world.

Speaking at a landmark theological conference focused on carrying the vision of the Council forward, Tagle said Vatican II rediscovered the Church's understanding of mystery, mission and communion -- and that, from there, "the understanding of Church changed radically."

One of the key changes of the Council, he said, was the move from a Church that focused on itself to one that focused on the needs of humanity.

"Many people want to witness to Christ in some idealized past that they long for with nostalgia," said Tagle, who spoke Friday morning at Georgetown University. "No, we witness to Christ now, here, where we are in our world."

"The Church is being asked to retrieve its deepest identity as a communion, but a communion that is not focused on itself," he continued. "Not self-focused, not self-referential."

"The Church finds its true identity only in reference to Jesus and never to itself," he said. "The Church's reference to its identity is outside of itself. The Church is the pointer to Jesus, the sign of the presence of Jesus, the servant of Jesus."

Read the rest back at the link above.

That calls for another hymn . . . let's hear from the speaker himself. Who looks pretty good in white, by the way.

36 comments:

  1. am I correct in my assumption? Table will be even MORE humble and holy than Francis?! Not! Possible! Blasphemy! Francis is the bestest greatest most humble holy pope, I wanna touch myself so bad whenever I think about him!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 1:08: Cardinal Burke? Father Z? Bitter Onions? Is this one of you? Or just one of their groupies?

      Whoever you are, it's really great that you're only wanting to touch yourself. Your type are usually busy touching someone else dripping in lace Under the Toadstool right?

      It really is lots of fun imagining just how pissed off you Bitter Bags must be after investing so much pope-olatry in Ratzi the Great. But thanks for posting so we can actually read some of the ranting that must be going on inside your brains.

      Delete
    2. It could be Mundy-bore. He touches himself a little too much.

      Delete
    3. MindyBore is usually more explicit and graphic.

      Delete
    4. 1:08 PM, stop it, the Sages of the Ages teach that this will make you go blind.

      Delete
    5. That's a lie!
      Like George Carlin said, "If God didnt want us to masturbate, he would have made our arms shorter.

      Delete
  2. <<<" One of the key changes of the Council, he said, was the move from a Church that focused on itself to one that focused on the needs of humanity."

    That is nice. Only during the 1960s did the Catholic Church finally focus upon the needs of humanity. All this time I had believed that the Church, for century upon century, had distinguished Herself as a great force for humanity.

    Her great acts of mercy...Her care for the downtrodden...Her Saints who had distinguished themselves in their service for the poor...

    ...Her great contributions to science, education, the arts...

    Nah...

    None of the above was the case prior to Vatican II.

    Prior to Vatican II, She didn't understand liturgy, service to the poor...

    Saint Francis, you focused upon yourself. You must have as you were a "pre-Vatican II" Catholic.

    Funny though...massive...we're talking tens of millions of Catholics have bolted the Church from the 1960s to date.

    Society, at least in the West, is descending daily into a hedonistic abyss.

    The Church is in a shocking state of collapse.

    Catholicism faces virtual extinction in vast areas of the word.

    The Church is meaningless to a massive amount of "Catholics" who couldn't care less about leavening society.

    The Church in Mexico, Central and South America is collapsing rapidly.

    But Cardinal Tagle tells us that the Church...sorry, the "post-Vatican II" Church has finally figured things out.

    Okay. Sure.

    Wow! It is sad that to we have many Churchmen who remain in such monumental denial as to the state of the "post-Vatican II" Church.

    Incredible.

    Mark Thomas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right, Mark. This “anthropocentric” (man-centred) view of the Church’s mission has been a disaster for us. I woke today to learn of the overwhelming public vote in Ireland in favour of “gay marriage” (aka “we already have equality, now let’s rub the Catholics’ noses in their defeat). The Archbishop of Dublin’s clueless response? He says the Church needs to reconnect with young people. What does this mean? Agree with young people that we’ve lost the argument and then expect them to come to Mass? People nowadays aren’t terribly sophisticated in these matters but they know BS when they smell it. Instead, the Archbishop should have said that this was a tragedy for Ireland; but he would probably have been fired if he did.

      I fear the gay lobby won’t be content with this. They’ll be criminalising our worship next. Hold tight, the ride will be bumpy.

      Delete
    2. So sorry for your defeat in Ireland... Basically, you FOOLS have blood on your hands. The church FAILED for the entirety of its existence to eradicate gays.

      If there is a hell at all may you choke on the smoke your church created in its murderous rage against the gays.

      Delete
    3. Truth be told, I suspect a very significant number of clergy and religious contributed to the victory in Ireland. As a whole, we are sick of listening to these self-serving sycophants and dilettantes whose hypocrisy in these matters is intolerable. The clueless cardinal should know the sensus fidelium has trumped the hierarchical magisterium any number of times, beginning with the laity's preservation of belief in Christ's divinity over the very many Arian bishops of the 4th Century and beyond. Newman knew all this very well. So chalk one up for the Holy Spirit of Pentecost breaking through the clerical parrots who got their miters by doing all they can to snuff the Spirit who blows where She will -- including happily beyond the confines of the Vatican and its outposts.

      Delete
    4. Yes, and of course the sensus fidelium was very much in evidence in the Protestant Reformation, too, wasn't it, Anonymous 12.39?.

      I'm afraid your purple prose has rather run away with you, sweetheart.

      Delete
    5. As a matter of fact it was. Prompting the RCC to try and get its act together at the Council of Trent after more than a century of failed attempts at reform. If the church had been paying attention to the Spirit at work in the earlier reformers instead of burning them at the sake, we might well have staved off the schism of the 16th Century. As for the purple prose, bugger off, sweetheart.

      Delete
  3. Cardinal Tagle, thank you for having played the old and tired...not to mention discredited...game of pitting Holy Mother Church against Herself via the false divide of the so-called "pre-Vatican II" Church versus the so-called "post-Vatican II" Church.

    Mark Thomas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark, the oldest, tired and in fact tiresome expressions on this blog are yours in defense of clericalism and privilige clearly denounced by the current pope and disregarded by the vast throng of the faithful.

      Delete
  4. 'The Lingering Pong' continues to vent the subterranean rage, resentment and hated of Pope Francis.

    Definite traces of a Mundy-Lard Ass + Happy Jack combo, Thick as a brick!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mark

    By your fruits you shall know them. Look at Zero's blog. He is the very embodiment of the reform that St Francis and St Dominic started. Dripping in clericalism, magical thinking, violence, threats, manipulation.

    He IS the face of the pre V II church.

    We need to move forward. Cardinal Tagle is instructing the ignorant and admonishing the sinner - you know spiritual works of mercy but Zero will have none of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sam,
      Wonderful post! You're spot on as we say Down Under. But . . . Mark Thomas does not want to move forward, does not know how to move forward, and in what the Tradition called "invincible ignorance" doesn't even know that God wants us all to move forward . . . forward "into all Truth," to which Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead the Church.

      I personally think (this is just the personal opinion of someone who has read all of Mark Thomas' delusional nonsense and the blogs of the Krazy Katholic Konverts who have inspired him) that the best thing for Mark Thomas and for us is for him not to move forward, but just to move on: I would suggest the SSPX or the de-facto schismatic sedevacantists at Rorate Coeli blog, Father Hunwicke, etc. Go in peace! Or, so that they get it: Ite in pace!

      Delete
    2. Thank you for your kind suggestion that I move on. But I believe that I will pass on your kind offer.

      I am Catholic. My diocese, in accord with the teachings of the Holy See, in particular with Summorum Pontificum, which His Holiness Pope Francis has praised, has a TLM-only parish.

      I was baptized, as Cardinal Tagle is wont to say via the false divide that he promotes, into the "pre-Vatican II Church" via the Traditional Latin Mass.

      Holy Mother Church teaches that I have every right to attach myself to the Extraordinary For of the Roman Rite.

      Yep...I have every right to embrace said Rite.

      The Catholic Church teaches that the...to employ Cardinal Tagle's false divide...Catholic Faith of the "pre-Vatican II Church" is the same Faith to which She holds today and for all-time.

      Therefore, I don't have to "move on" as you suggested.

      Nope.

      Holy Mother Church teaches that the Mass of humble and beloved Good Pope Saint John XXIII is alive and well within the heart of the Church.

      The Mass of humble and Good Pope Saint John XXIII...and all the vestments that he loved...and all the reverence and beauty that he loved,,,it's all available in my diocese at our TLM-only parish.

      You may "move on" if you wish.

      I plan to remain in the Holy Catholic Church...in communion with my bishop...in communion with His Holiness Pope Francis...

      ...all via the Holy Mass of humble and Good Pope Saint John XXIII and the Catholic Faith that I received via my baptism in the so-called (by Cardinal Tagle) "pre-Vatican II Church".

      I love my "pre-Vatican II" Traditional Latin Mass and "pre-Vatican II" Catholic Faith.

      Thank you, Holy Mother Church, for your "pre-Vatican II" Traditional Latin Mass and "pre-Vatican II" Catholic Faith.

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
    3. Hey Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch,

      Cardinal Tagle's "false" divide? Really!?

      Don't forget for your next Confession (probably every other day or so), "I posted disparaging remarks calling into question Cardinal Tagle's veracity."

      Delete
    4. Nah...I don't have anything to confess in regard to Cardinal. It is he who said that Vatican II altered "radically" the Church.

      Did you read Father's post?

      Here is the key part in regard to my comment on Cardinal Tagle.

      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Speaking at a landmark theological conference focused on carrying the vision of the Council forward, Tagle said Vatican II rediscovered the Church's understanding of mystery, mission and communion -- and that, from there, "the understanding of Church changed radically."

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      There you go. Now, did he say the above or not?

      If he did, please square Cardinal Tagle's interpretation of Vatican II with the Holy See's interpretation of Vatican II — a Council that Rome has declared is in 100 percent in line with Holy Tradition.

      How on earth could the Church's understanding of "Church" been altered "radically" by a Council that Rome teaches did not do any such thing?

      Sorry, but Cardinal Tagle, whom I am certain is a holy man, is misguided in his claim in question.

      Oh...and sorry, but you attempted to bully the wrong man. Please play your game with somebody else.

      I am familiar with the Holy See's teachings in regard to Vatican II.

      Rome's and Cardinal Tagle's very different understandings of Vatican II cannot possibly square with each other.

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
    5. Congrats Mark Thomas!

      Pharisee of the Year Award!

      "I give thee thanks, O Lord, that I am not like the rest of men . . . "

      Delete
    6. It is imperative that I add the following:

      Father posted this from the article that he referenced..."Washington. Philippines Cardinal Luis Tagle -- often cited as a possible successor to Pope Francis -- has called on Catholics to avoid looking to the pre-Second Vatican Council Church with a sense of nostalgia..."

      Did the Cardinal divide the Church along the lines of the Church of today versus a "pre-Second Vatican Council Church?"

      Yes, according to that which Father posted.

      From the article that Father posted: "One of the key changes of the Council, he said, was the move from a Church that focused on itself to one that focused on the needs of humanity."

      Did Cardinal Tagle claim that the so-called "pre-Vatican II" Church was not focused upon "the needs of humanity?"

      Yes, according to the article that Father posted.

      Now, tell me again as to how I "disparaged" Cardinal Tagle?

      Answer: I did not.

      That is that. Thank you.

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
  6. Sam,

    What blogger offers, magical thinking, violence, threats, and manipulation? What are some examples from the blog in question?

    Mark Thomas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark

      What blogger? John Zuhlsdorf. You should check it out. I will give you some samples and you can see for yourself.

      Magical thinking: In one blog post Z compared his priesthood to a superpower. He was talking about Marvel superheroes and said that HE can make bread and wine into Christ – take that! I don’t even know where to begin. First Z should understand that Christ is the actor in every sacrament. And as a priest he is subordinate to the Church which is Christ’s body (not the other way around which is what Z constantly misunderstands, misapplies, and contributes to his wrongheaded clericalism). And it is what the CHURCH, as Christ’s body, intends that is essential not the priest. That is where the whole concept of ecclesia supplet comes from and even what say the black do the red is intended to mean. In other words the priest needs to do what the Church intends not the other way around. So his magical thinking is that HE and HE alone zaps the bread and wine into the body of Christ. No, it is the Church (Christ’s body) acting through the priest not the other way around. Of course you actually require humility to accept this. And actually this is what Cardinal Ratzinger was driving at in the Spirit of the Liturgy when he said the liturgy forms us. He meant the priest as well because Christ is the principle actor. Z just. Does. Not. Get. It.

      Manipulation: Also known in traditional Catholicism as simony. The Catholic Encyclopeida defines it as: "a deliberate intention of buying or selling for a temporal price such things as are spiritual or annexed unto spirituals". He actually asked for donations of 3 figures for holy cards that he purchased when he was in St. Peter’s square during Pope Francis’ election.

      Violence: Z has advocated for concealed weapons to be carried into church and even for priests to carry them while saying mass. As Phylis Zagano writes “the U.S. Navy forbids chaplains from qualifying with weapons, earning warfare qualifications, or bearing arms.” And unlike Z who has falls all over himself complete with “Oooorahs” and assorted military and paramilitary paraphernalia (and who never served a day of his life in the military)– she actually has real life experience and probably has forgotten more about weapons that Z will ever know. She was actually and officer in the Navy!! He has referred to women as “tarts” and “cows” on his blog. In one post he admonished a women not to dress as a “tart”.

      But ask him in his combos...wonder if you will get a response? This is his "ministry" afteralll and not his own private affair - according to him in an interview with America. If it is his ministry, and if he is a priest, then he is doing so in the the name of the Church

      Delete
    2. Sam, I appreciate your thoughtful and civil response. I hope (Deo volente) to research that which you have reported.

      The one part of your reply that I found unconvincing is "Violence. Z has advocated for concealed weapons to be carried into church and even for priests to carry them while saying mass."

      By unconvincing, I don't mean that Father Zuhlsdorf did not say that which you reported. I mean...doesn't a priest have the right to defend himself against a dangerous aggressor?

      Do not the Faithful have that same right?

      Should priests and laity, particularly in certain parts of the world, serve, for example, as sitting ducks during Mass or anytime for Islamic terrorists?

      That said, in the United States priests have been murdered. I believe that last within the Diocese of Phoenix, Arizona, (or at least in Arizona), two priests of the FSSP were attacked violently...one of the priests in question died.

      Do not armed guards surround Pope Francis?

      Does Father Zuhlsdorf, whom, I believe, has received threatening mail and telephone calls, have the same personal security rights as Pope Francis?

      That is, at the very least, in lieu of not being surrounded by armed guards, doesn't Father Zuhlsdorf have the right to provide for his own safety?

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
    3. Historically safety for religious places has been the responsibility of the policing authorities. And it still is. We certainly don't need to arm people during mass. If there is a concern there are far more effective remedies. Such as, for example, requiring that all firearms not be allowed on premise seems - they do it at malls in concealed carry states. You can have security. Ask any police or military authority - the most dangerous thing are weekend warriors who don't have a clue but think they do. And assuming what you say is true - do you require an AR 47. Zeros New Years resolution was to build one from scratch! Look it up

      Delete
    4. Sam, policing authorities are, for all practical purposes, unable to protect people in daily life. Policing authorities react to crimes.

      Long after a crime has been committed, policing authorities arrive on the scene. That doesn't help people who have been attacked, wounded, robbed...

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
    5. Ummm....Mark....

      FACTS.

      Individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession (Branas et al, 2009).

      That is exactly what occurred in the situation you described above. A gun did not help; just the opposite. And that is more likely than not the case whenever these situations arise.

      http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html

      Delete
  7. Mark Thomas:

    Let me thank you - and more importantly thank God - that you're not in MY parish.

    I'd especially like to suggest to the Holy Spirit that He/She give us Cardinal Tagle as Pope Francis II, not just for the good of the Church but so that we can all enjoy watching Mark Thomas go into Total Meltdown Mode. Hahahahahaha!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You watch me enter Total Meltdown Mode? Really? I believe that Pope Francis is holy Catholic man. Why would he launch me into Total Meltdown Mode?

      I believe that Cardinal Tagle is a man who loves God. Why would he cause me to meltdown?

      Sorry, but your post is preposterous.

      Mark Thomas

      Delete
  8. So, let me just get this straight ... Everyone here is still gung-ho and hot for Francis, right? So, why the fuss over Tagle? I mean, doesn't Francis have a few more years? Or is this just the opposite side of those who, while Benedict was still presiding, were rallying for Burke? Doesn't ANYONE here actually simply accept what God gives us and pray for the Pope? It always seems it's one side saying to the other: "we won we won na na na na naaaahh"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh dear, another Burkite!

      Delete
    2. Not I! (And I wrote the above post to which you commented "oh dear, another Burkite!"). What I'm asking is twofold: 1. Why are we all excited over Tagle and electing him Pope while FRANCIS IS STILL ALIVE AND KICKING?! is he not good enough, now? 2. Why are there always sides? I.e. why do Katholic KKrazziesKlapp and cheer for Benedict, but scream end of the world for Francis, AND why do others here fawn and faint for Francis, and seemingly despise Benedict? I just don't get it.

      Finally, having nothing to do with the Pope, I must say that this blog at times can still be so much fun, as well as prayerful. What drew me and most of my friends and pals in the priesthood was those wonderfully funny and entertaining satire posts. Let's have more of those, shall we? Let's laugh with each other, at each other and at ourselves! That's what this blog is all about

      Delete



  9. Anonymous May 24, 2015 at 4:44 PM...<<<"So, let me just get this straight ... Everyone here is still gung-ho and hot for Francis, right? So, why the fuss over Tagle? I mean, doesn't Francis have a few more years?">>>

    I believe that the news article simply presented the who-will-become-the-next-Pope guessing game that is popular among various folks.

    In fairness to the article in question, His Holiness Pope Francis has fueled speculation in regard to the above as he has declared his belief that his reign as Pope will be brief (speaking relatively).

    <<<"Doesn't ANYONE here actually simply accept what God gives us and pray for the Pope?">>>

    I do.

    <<<"It always seems it's one side saying to the other: "we won we won na na na na naaaahh">>>

    Well, that is standard boring liberals/modernists versus conservatives/Traditionalists within the Church.

    Example: A few weeks ago Rome concluded it's review of the LCWR Sisters.

    Liberals spun said conclusion as "Ha-ha...Pope Francis just stuck it to Pope Benedict XVI and the Trads as he called off the big, bad dogs that Pope Benedict XVI and the Trads had unleashed upon the Sisters in America."

    What the liberals failed to have noted that in 2013 A.D., it was His Holiness Pope Francis who had "unleashed" the "dogs" upon the women religious. It was he who determined that the situation within the LCWR was so alarming that the investigation in question should continue.

    Liberals also failed to have noted that when Rome announced that an "agreement" with the LCWR had been reached, the LCWR statement had noted that the discussions from the very beginning between Rome and the LCWR had been cordial and charitable.

    The LCWR also noted that they had agreed to several serious reforms, including the correction of serious liturgical problems, that Pope Francis had ordered.

    Example: When Pope Francis appointed conservative and TLM-friendly Cardinal Sarah to lead the Congregation for Divine Worship, conservatives/Traditionalists performed their version of the "Ha-ha...Pope Francis just stuck it to the liberals/modernists" game.

    It is nonsense.

    Unfortunately, liberals/modernists and conservatives/Traditionalists delight in playing the petty game in question. Each side enjoys attacking the other.

    Mark Thomas

    ReplyDelete
  10. "The Pong" continues to linger on. It emanates from a rotting ecclesiastical cadaver.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ummm....Mark....

    FACTS.

    Individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession (Branas et al, 2009).

    That is exactly what occurred in the situation you described above. A gun did not help; just the opposite. And that is more likely than not the case whenever these situations arise.

    http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html

    ReplyDelete