Sunday, July 31, 2011
"It is to simply know that we are before God himself and that He came to us and that we are undeserving," the prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments said in an interview with CNA during his visit to Lima, Peru.
The cardinal's remarks came in response to a question on whether Catholics should receive Communion in the hand or on the tongue.
He recommended that Catholics "receive Communion on the tongue and while kneeling."
Receiving Communion in this way, the cardinal continued, "is the sign of adoration that needs to be recovered. I think the entire Church needs to receive Communion while kneeling."
"In fact," he added, "if one receives while standing, a genuflection or profound bow should be made, and this is not happening."
"If we trivialize Communion, we trivialize everything, and we cannot lose a moment as important as that of receiving Communion, of recognizing the real presence of Christ there, of the God who is the love above all loves, as we sing in a hymn in Spanish."
In response to a question about the liturgical abuses that often occur, Cardinal Canizares said they must be "corrected, especially through proper formation: formation for seminarians, for priests, for catechists, for all the Christian faithful."
Such a formation should ensure that liturgical celebrations take place "in accord with the demands and dignity of the celebration, in accord with the norms of the Church, which is the only way we can authentically celebrate the Eucharist," he added.
"Bishops have a unique responsibility" in the task of liturgical formation and the correction of abuses, the cardinal said, "and we must not fail to fulfill it, because everything we do to ensure that the Eucharist is celebrated properly will ensure proper participation in the Eucharist."
A Bishop who knows and states his role........well done, your excellency.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
This is a critical message that all Bishops and Priests need to proclaim!
According to the newspaper Correo, the archbishop said women ought to know what they should wear and when.
"They know that for a wedding or a quinceanera they should dress one way, and for a trip to the beach they should dress another."
The archbishop also said men need to dress appropriately at Mass as well. "Some men show up at church dressed in way that is undignified, wearing shorts or sandals. The place they are in requires something else," he said. [more]
Catholic News Agency and CPO.
Monday, July 25, 2011
So my middle name is James, as in Saint James - whose feast day it is today. I think I know where my all or nothing, black and white, this is the way it is attitude comes from..................
"On another occasion, James and John gave evidence that the nickname Jesus gave them—"sons of thunder"—was an apt one. The Samaritans would not welcome Jesus because he was on his way to hated Jerusalem. "When the disciples James and John saw this they asked, 'Lord, do you want us to call down fire from heaven to consume them?"
Yeah, I know Jesus then rebuked them......but hey they made sainthood........there is still hope.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Published July 20, 2011
The prospect of free, government-ordered contraceptives and even agents to induce abortion, has ignited a national debate.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is praising a recommendation from the Institute of Medicine that insurance companies be required to offer free contraceptives to all women in a report she called " historic," suggesting she may make the recommendation an official policy.
The prospect of free, government-ordered contraceptives and even agents to induce abortion, has ignited a national debate. Some are clearly pleased.
"The request for the study actually came out of the health care legislation and I am pleased that the secretary has indicated that the department will implement it quickly," said Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif.
But Sandy Rios, a vice president for Family Pac Federal, a conservative political action committee, disagrees.
"It's feminist pork. It's a, it's a wish list, it's a dream list for feminists," she said.
And other conservative groups oppose the move, in part because it would require insurance companies to offer, and employers to provide, services to which they may morally object. That includes the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).
"If accepted these recommendations would mean that virtually all private employers, private companies, organizations, such as the USCCB, would be required by law to cover in their insurance to employees, these problematic procedures, drugs and devices," said USCCB spokeswoman Deirdre McQuade.
The Catholic Bishops don't believe in contraception at all, much less handed out for free at the behest of the government. "Any employer that objects to those uh, does not currently under law have conscience protection to opt out of that coverage," McQuade said.
But some argue the recommendation advances values held dear by Catholics and others by deterring abortion.
"More than half of pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended. Forty percent of those end in abortion," said Dr. Cathleen London, a physician and professor at Weill-Cornell Medical College. "So if we want to talk about reducing teenage pregnancy, reducing abortion, contraception and making it easily available without the ridiculously high co-pays that insurance companies are charging, (it) is the way to go."
Religious conservatives don't buy it. The problem for many is even more profound than free birth control pills. If Sebelius embraces the recommendations in full, insurance companies would be forced to provide at no cost, such things as Plan B and a drug called Ella.
"Ella, in particular, which was approved for emergency contraception can actually disrupt what the AMA (American Medical Association) calls an established pregnancy after implantation, which by anyone's definition, is an abortion," McQuade said, adding that can take place days or even weeks into a pregnancy.
Because it is a regulation under the new health care law, Sebelius can make the decision to implement it on her own, without congressional approval. But there is an effort in Congress to pass legislation that would allow those who object to opt out.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
The state of Minnesota is now paying scientists to engage in the grisly practice of human cloning. After the state legislature failed to re-authorize a ban on state funded human cloning during the special session, it is now legal to use taxpayer dollars to create cloned human embryos.
The ban on the use of state taxpayer money had been in place since 2009 and encompassed all forms of human cloning, known also as somatic cell nuclear transfer, whether intended for reproductive or so-called therapeutic purposes. The University of Minnesota Stem Cell Institute repeatedly testified during the legislative session against a permanent ban on state funding of human cloning, saying it wanted to leave open its option to clone human life with state funds.
"In these hard economic times when so many Minnesotans are hurting, it is a tragedy that our taxpayer dollars can now be wasted to create and kill the tiniest human beings," responded Leo LaLonde, the president of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, a statewide pro-life organization.
During the regular 2011 legislative session, state legislators passed a total ban on all forms of human cloning, in addition to passing a continuation of the ban on taxpayer funding of human cloning. Governor Mark Dayton, a Democrat, vetoed the pro-life legislation. Then, in a legislative deal struck by pro-abortion Gov. Dayton, Senate Majority Leader Koch, and Speaker of the House Zellers going into the special session, no pro-life provisions were allowed to be considered, MCCL indicates.
"Many states and countries and the United Nations have called for an all-out ban on all forms of human cloning, but here in Minnesota we will now actually make state funds available to create a human clone," stated LaLonde. "This is despite the fact that polling consistently shows that the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to human cloning."
Scientists who create cloned human embryos typically dissect and kill the human clones within days after they are alive. It is not known how many human clones will be created and killed by various institutions in Minnesota, including the University of Minnesota, or which ones will be state funded, as there are no reporting requirements to disclose the number of deaths, LaLonde said.
Sen. Michelle Fischbach, R-Paynesville, and Rep. Bob Dettmer, R-Forest Lake, sponsored the legislation to ban human cloning and lawmakers ultimately included it in the Health and Human Services omnibus bill. The language of the bill banned human cloning for any purpose.
Opponents of the ban, primarily the University of Minnesota, claimed that producing a human organism by cloning and then destroying it after five to 10 days, is not cloning. However, the National Institutes of Health defines cloning as the process of combining an enucleated egg (oocyte) with a somatic (i.e. body) cell nucleus to make an embryo. Whether the cloned embryo is destroyed or allowed to live does not change the definition of cloning.
Minnesota's 1973 Human Conceptus statute (MN Statute 145.422) prohibits "the use of a living human conceptus for any type of scientific, laboratory research or other experimentation." Dr. John Wagner, director of the U of M's Stem Cell Institute, admitted in testimony on March 17 that cloning creates a human conceptus: "Once you insert a nucleus into that oocyte you get an embryo." A cloned embryo cannot be destroyed or used for experiments without violation of the statute.
The Legislature passed a similar ban in 2009 after learning that the U of M was considering conducting human cloning experiments with state funds (the 2009 ban must be reauthorized every two years). The human cloning funding ban would permanently prevent state taxpayer funds from being used to clone human beings.
A 2005 International Communications Research poll showed 75% of Americans strongly oppose the use of human cloning for any reason. For years, poll after poll has shown overwhelming opposition to human cloning in the United States. North and South Dakota, Michigan and Iowa are among the states that have banned human cloning.
Previous attempts to ban human cloning gained traction among lawmakers and citizens, but fell short of the votes needed to become law. The state legislature passed a ban on taxpayer funding of human cloning in 2009, which pro-life Gov. Tim Pawlenty signed into law. That ban needs to be re-authorized in 2011, unless cloning is banned outright, MCCL officials said.
Pawlenty also, in 2008, vetoed the Kahn-Cohen Cloning Bill, which would have legalized human cloning and forced taxpayers to pay for the destruction of human life. Pro-life advocates strongly opposed the legislation, SF 100, because it funds human cloning and the killing of human embryos at the University of Minnesota.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Reflecting on the recent passage of same-sex marriage in New York, Archbishop Timothy Dolan offered "thanks to those courageous millions who valiantly fought this unfortunate project of social engineering … My brother bishops of New York were particularly prophetic."
"We have been bloodied, and bruised, and, yes, for the moment, we have been defeated," he added. "But, we're used to that. So was the Founder of our Church."
Archbishop Dolan added:
We do worry indeed about this freedom of religion. Editorials already call for the removal of guarantees of religious liberty, with crusaders calling for people of faith to be coerced to acceptance of this redefinition. If the experience of those few other states and countries where this is already law is any indication, the churches, and believers, will soon be harassed, threatened, and hauled into court for their conviction that marriage is between one man, one woman, forever, bringing children into the world …
The real forces of "intolerance" were unmasked here. The caricature, of course, is that those defending traditional marriage were the right-wing bigots and bullies …As one respected columnist has observed, the problem is not homophobia but theophobia — a hatred by some of God, faith, religion, and the Church …
The Church has always stood-up for marriage — one man and one woman, united in lifelong and faithful love, leading to new life in children – whenever and wherever it was in danger. Veterans my age and over can remember sixty years ago when we fought widespread, no-fault divorce, convinced it would lead to a cheapening of the marriage bond and harm our kids (as, of course, scholarly studies now report has, indeed, happened). Recall how the Church resisted the "contraceptive mentality," fearing it would rupture the sacred bond between love and the procreation of children. Then, remember how the Church sounded the alarm over rising rates of promiscuity, adultery, pre-marital sex, and cohabitation prior to or instead of marriage. And now we ring the steeple bell again at this latest dilution of the authentic understanding of marriage, worried that the next step will be another redefinition to justify multiple partners and infidelity.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Dates seem to be September 28 to November 6, which I know is a busy time for people.
But, think about how much time you spend in front of the TV a week, - could you "sacrifice" one - two hours of that to walk for the unborn, damaged women, scared men, ignorant physicians, and just plain frightened people who are affected by abortion. Does anyone reading this go on a walk a few nights a week for recreation or exercise? Could you not walk and pray at the same time here?
I know it can be difficult to walk, pray, and hold a sign. It can make you a target. Think about this, though. You have the option to be a target - the people you would be walking for do not yet have that chance. You can materially participate in giving them that chance. Just a thought.
If you feel called to help - or just want more info - go the the Rochester home page and scroll to the contact us portion.
AND - a note to Catholics here in the Diocese of Winona - it is time to step up and make your presence known. I saw the time and energy put into the St. Johns block party, which is just a few feet away from where we walk. (that is a whole other topic) If that kind of support can be put into something like that, can we not put a few measly hours into showing support for those plagued by abortion. Now is that time. We all have obligations that pull us in different directions - bring the family, stop by on a lunch break, leave a little earlier for work, whatever you can do. THIS is living the faith.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Pornography awareness campaign exposes devastating effects on children
Dawn Hawkins, MIM's Executive Director and director of the campaign, said pornography's consequences for children and their abusers rank among "the most disturbing aspects" of material that is usually deemed harmless.
"Many child pornographers start with an interest in soft-core adult pornography, but over time turn to harder, more deviant porn and this leads the way to child pornography and molestation," said Hawkins.
The campaign also highlights the modern parent's struggle against a more imminent threat, as children today stumble upon obscene material on the Internet at an alarming rate.
"Many children are getting addicted to pornography because U.S. pornographers are providing free, obscene, illegal porn to kids online," said President of Morality in Media Patrick Trueman.
Trueman noted that 11 years old is the average age of a child's first exposure to pornography, "and for many it is earlier." "Sadly, U. S. Attorney General Eric Holder refuses to enforce federal obscenity laws which would protect children," he said.
Each week of the campaign emphasizes a specific way pornography proves itself to be detrimental: pornography addiction, harms to children, links to sex trafficking and violence against women, respectively (click here to find out more).
Activities for this week include:
- Monday, July 18th at 4 p.m. EDT: Live Facebook/Online Event: "Adult Porn Makes Victims Of Our Children: Creates predators, leads to demand for child porn, stunts social development "
- Tuesday, July 19th at 4 p.m. EDT: Webinar: "5 Hidden Dangers Facing You And Your Family Right Now"
- Tuesday, July 19th at 4 p.m. EDT: Conference Call: "Our children in a sexualized society: how to understand their experience and how to help"
- Tuesday, July 19th at 8 p.m. EDT: Webinar: "Simple Tools to Protect Your Family"
- Wednesday, July 20th at 3:30 p.m. EDT: Live Facebook/Online Event: "Protecting Children Online: Know the pornographers' tricks!"
- Wednesday, July 20th at 9 p.m. EDT: Live Facebook/Online Event: "How to educate young people on the harmful effects of pornography"
- Thursday, July 21 and Sunday, July 24th All Day: Facebook: 500 FREE subscriptions to Net Nanny Filtering Software will be given away on www.facebook.com/pornharms.
- Sunday, July 24th at 9 p.m. EDT: Live Facebook/Online Event: "Porn and Sex Abuse In Our Public Libraries"
Additionally, Morality in Media will direct addicts and their families to free counseling and subscriptions to Web protection services.
Click here to learn more about these activities and to access free posters for print or website use.
Catholic Parents Online
Monday, July 18, 2011
Best-selling Catholic author Brian J. Gail's first two books—Fatherless and Motherless—have become something of a sensation in Catholic circles throughout the country. Fatherless is now sold in over 20 countries. The demand for the second book, Motherless, is off the charts.
Emmaus Road Publishing is the new publisher of Gail's "American Tragedy in Trilogy." Fatherless and Motherless are available at www.emmausroad.org, and Childless, the final book in the American trilogy, is scheduled for release in early fall.
Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver says that "Motherless is alive with vivid characters, wonderful dialogue and real issues. From start to finish you can't put it down." For other great reviews, see http://motherlessbook.com/
I am not into reading fiction, but these books could fall into the non-fiction category simply based on the story of most American Catholics. These are 'can't put em down' books and well worth the time to read.
Friday, July 15, 2011
After taking the microphone to loud applause and shouting, Alesi told the revelers, "that's exactly what it sounded like when I went to Mass Sunday."
"I went to Mass Sunday in my church and I was so warmly received. It doesn't matter what religion you are, but I know in my religion, when I went up to receive Communion, my priest embraced me," he said.
Alesi represents the 55th District of New York, which is in the Diocese of Rochester.
"The best story is the reverend on the right that was praying for marriage equality, and the reverend on the left that was praying against gay marriage. They were praying to the same God. That created a dilemma for God and it created a dilemma for me. He said 'Jimmy, you're on your own,'" Alesi joked, adding: "I think we did the right thing."
The Republican Senator described his decision to support homosexual "marriage" as "anguishing," alluding to his change of position from two years before, when he opposed a similar measure.
Alesi made headlines in early June when he became the first Republican state senator to publicly announce his support for same-sex "marriage." His reversal, along with that of three other senators, was crucial to the success of the legislation, which ended up passing the Senate by a narrow vote of 33 to 29.
According to the New York Post, Alesi told reporters that his previous opposition was politically motivated. "I was supporting the conference vote that I thought at the time politically was necessary when we were in the minority. We are no longer in the minority," he said.
Watch video here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-york-senator-my-priest-embraced-me-after-voting-for-gay-marriage?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=5ff84b9f5a-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines07_12_2011&utm_medium=email
HT - Catholic Parents
The strongly-worded pledge, known as "The Marriage Vow – A Declaration of Dependence upon Marriage and Family," is being sponsored by the Iowa-based social conservative group, the Family Leader.
The Marriage Vow commits a candidate to be faithful to his of her spouse, uphold the right to life, the dignity of marriage, and oppose "all forms of pornography and prostitution."
However, controversy has dogged the document due to its wording, including a preamble that had originally observed that "a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President." However, a resulting furor over that clause led the conservative group to remove it from the pledge.
The pledge was swiftly signed by U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota (who said the slavery clause was not in it when she signed) and former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
The Associated Press reports that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has flatly rejected the pledge, although a spokeswoman has said that the candidate "strongly" supports the definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
Andrea Saul, a Romney spokeswoman, told the AP that the Marriage Vow "contained references and provisions that were undignified and inappropriate for a presidential campaign." The AP did not mention if Saul identified any particular provision.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Tim Pawlenty said Wednesday that while does "deeply respect, and share" the principles contained in the Marriage Vow, he had decided to "respectfully decline" to sign the pledge in favor of using his own words.
"Rather than sign onto the words chosen by others, I prefer to choose my own words, especially seeking to show compassion to those who are in broken families through no fault of their own," he said in a written statement.
Pawlenty said he "unequivocally" supports marriage as the union of a man and a woman, and would work "vigorously" against efforts to change that.
Herman Cain also released a statement saying that while he "firmly" supports the Family Leader and their vision, he believes his public position "encompasses their values without the need to sign the pledge."
"I am, and will continue to be, an ardent defender of traditional marriage and will work to preserve and protect the sanctity of human life, which I believe begins at conception," he said.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also declined to sign the pledge. Politico reports that the Gingrich campaign had problems with the language and according to one spokesman "offered to work with The Family Leader on a more focused message."
But declining to sign the Marriage Vow could put Gingrich in trouble with some social conservatives in Iowa. Radio Iowa reports that Gingrich was asked about his poor personal performance in marriage at a meeting with conservatives in Pella, Iowa. The Speaker has divorced two wives in his lifetime and married his third, Callista, after carrying on a near-decade long affair. Gingrich has referenced his personal conversion to Catholicism a few years ago as a turning point in his life, but he told the Pella crowd that voters should ask themselves if he is a person "who does what he believes in" based on his public record.
U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, has also declined to sign the pledge, citing problems with the language.
HT - CPO
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
You can get a copy over at Catholic Answers.
Mr. Akins website
The Harm of Same-Sex Marriage
How is this law going to hurt your marriage? That is the jeer hurled at opponents of New York's new same-sex marriage law. As the Boston Globe put it memorably some time ago, same-sex marriage will "no more undermine traditional marriage than sailing undermines swimming".
Indeed, many supporters of traditional marriage don't know how to respond. Fortunately, however, at least three answers were quickly presented in the New York Times. The Times supported the law and praised as "a powerful and principled choice" when it was passed. Since it is New York's newspaper of record and the flagship of American progressive thinking, there can be little doubt that the ideas promoted in its pages will someday emerge as real options.
The first was an op-ed piece by Katherine M. Franke, a Columbia University law professor. On the day before the bill passed, she confessed that she really didn't want to marry her long-time lesbian partner anyway. Why lose the flexibility and benefits of living as domestic partners? As far as she was concerned, "we think marriage ought to be one choice in a menu of options by which relationships can be recognized and gain security".
One choice in a menu of legally supported relationships? How long is the menu? If marriage is just the most demanding of many options, it is sure to lose its prestige and popularity.
The second comes in a background article by Ralph Richard Banks, a professor at Stanford Law School. What comes after gay marriage? Well, he puts his money on polygamy and incest. Professor Banks points out that legal prohibitions on either practice are not nearly as strong as they once were. They are forbidden because people who engage in them are regarded as morally reprehensible. Therefore society feels justified in discriminating against them. But this is bound to change:
"Over time, our moral assessments of these practices will shift, just as they have with interracial marriage and same sex marriage. We will begin to take seriously questions that now seem beyond the pale: Should a state be permitted to imprison two cousins because they have sex or attempt to marry? Should a man and two wives be permitted to live together as a family when they assert that their religious convictions lead them to do so?"In short, add polygamy and incest to the menu of options.
The third is a long profile of Dan Savage, whom the Times describes as "America's leading sex-advice columnist". Savage writes a syndicated column for more than 50 newspapers and even appears on the Times op-ed page from time to time.
Savage, who claims to be both "culturally Catholic" and gay, thinks that gay couples have a lot to teach heterosexual couples, especially about monogamy. Idealising monogamy destroys families, he contends. Men are simply not made to be monogamous. Until feminism came along, men had mistresses and visited prostitutes. But instead of extending the benefits of the sexual revolution to women, feminism imposed a chastity belt on men. "And it's been a disaster for marriage," he says. What we need, in his opinion, is relationships which are open to the occasional fling — as long as partners are open about it.
A sociologist at New York University, Judith Stacey, told the Times that monogamy is simply not meant for everyone. "One size never fits all, and it isn't just dividing between men and women and gay and straight," she said. "Monogamy is not natural, non-monogamy is not natural. Variation is what's natural."
Traditional marriage — well, actually, real marriage — is and has always been monogamous and permanent. There have been and always will be failures. But that is the ideal to which couples aspire. They marry "for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part". The expectation is exclusivity in a life-long commitment.
Marriage can be a struggle and even couples who have notched up decades of fidelity need to have their wedding vows supported by the law and the surrounding culture. By and large, same-sex marriage will not shatter their commitment.
But it can hardly fail to affect the attitudes of young couples who are thinking of marriage a decade from now.
First of all, traditional marriage will be one of a number of options. Even if they choose it, they will have different expectations and dreams than their parents. For them, marriage will include acceptance of infidelity, will not necessarily involve children, and will probably only last a few years.
Supporters of same-sex marriage say that the New York law is good for marriage. In a way they're right. Just as World War II was good for Germany because out of the ashes, corpses and rubble arose a heightened sense of human dignity and a democratic and peaceful government, same-sex marriage will heighten our esteem for real marriage. But in the meantime, the suffering will be great.
This article originally appeared on MercatorNet.com under a Creative Commons Licence. If you enjoyed this article, visit MercatorNet.com for more.
Catholic Parents Online
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Well, what can you do? I can think of no excuse for his actions, save that of the good work he did do and the devil putting massive amounts of effort into bringing Fr. Corapi down. I have noticed that about 10-12 years ago, many GREAT things happen in and to the Church. Now, it seems many Bad things are beginning to stir. Pray for a continued falling of the Holy Spirit on the Church.
And, please remember to be charitable with comments regarding Fr. Corapi. He did much good work for the Church. But for the Grace of God go us all.........................anyone of us can fall..........God save us from such a day.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Sunday, July 3, 2011
e5 Men | c/o The Gift Foundation | PO Box 95 | Carpentersville | IL | 60110
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Friday, July 1, 2011
We are having our home Enthroned tonight - please pray for us.
And, on a much less important note - today is my first official day off of probation at work. Since 2007 I have been a career firefighter at 3 - yes 3 - different departments. That means 3 different probation periods. It is nice to just be one of the guys now. Finally having found the right fit, I can look forward to regular days at work. Also, please pray for a co-worker that needs all the spiritual help he can get.