Punditry

From a story a reader sent me.

Fr. Geoffrey Farrow, former pastor of the St. Paul Newman Center at California State University at Fresno, was removed as pastor in October 2008 for defying church teaching on homosexuality and for condemning Catholic support for Proposition 8, the California Catholic Daily reports.

Not the first time I have seen this typo and it probably won’t be the last. Though you would think the Catholic News Agency would be a little more careful.

The actual story is rather odd about a suspended Catholic priest and homosexual activist who is going after the Knights of Columbus. Maybe he just doesn’t think heterosexuals should be able to wear hats with feathers.

American Papist reports that Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio who chaired the US Bishops committee which drafted the Catholic voting guide “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” recorded robocalls used to support a candidate with a pro-abortion and pro-homosexual marriage voting record.

In my opinion I don’t thing a Bishop should be publicly supporting any political candidate even if was someone of St. Thomas More’s stripe. Bishops should be speaking out against intrinsic evils involved in political debate, but to speak in support of individual candidates is a mistake – especially in this circumstance. Plus it looks like he did this in the past in support of pro-abortion Mike Bloomberg. The fact that he chaired the committee on the much criticized faithful citizenship is I guess not surprising.

A former cashier for The Home Depot who has been wearing a “One nation under God” button on his work apron for more than a year has been fired, he says because of the religious reference. The company claims that expressing such personal beliefs is simply not allowed.

“I’ve worn it for well over a year and I support my country and God,” Trevor Keezor said Tuesday. “I was just doing what I think every American should do, just love my country.”

The American flag button Keezer wore in the Florida store since March 2008 says “One nation under God, indivisible.” [Via Insight Scoop]

This is why I only go to Rome Depot.

When I posted on Sr. Quinn acting as an abortion escort the other day some had commented concerning excommunication. Canonist Ed Peters goes over three Canons concerning this case and for a mandatory dismissal from religious state.

As Ed Peters and other have noted Sr. Quinn probably will not actually face any consequences. Her Prioress made excuses for her. Though maybe if there is enough of an outcry something could happen.

Via Diogenes

Anglican Bishop Anthony Provenzano of Long Island has engaged the Catholic Church in respectful dialogue:
At the heart of all of this is the reality that the Roman Church is willing to welcome angry, reactionary, misogynistic, homophobic people.

Well in that case the he really should be happier that the Anglicans got rid of so many “angry, reactionary, misogynistic, homophobic people.” In fact the Catholic Church is now just like the lettering on the Statue of liberty kind of, “Give us your angry, reactionary, misogynistic, homophobic people. Your huddled masses yearning to have their liberties curtailed under a dogmatic male hierarchy.”

From Father Z.

Proselytize is a bad word these days.

A lot off people are rushing to say that the Holy Father’s Anglican Provisions is not a matter of sheep stealing or, as Card. Kaspar put it “fishing in the Anglican lake”.

Card. Kaspar was stupendously conspicuous at the press conference yesterday – by his absence.

Archbishop Nichols of Westminster said: “This is a response and not an initiative.”

I respond saying: If we open up the door, hang up the open sign, and turn on the lights, we are inviting people to come in.

No doubt there is a form of proselytizing that is unethical. I just don’t understand how proselytizing has come to have such ominous overtones. I don’t like the fact that many Protestant churches are made up of a large segment of ex-Catholics. But if you believe in Protestant theology and don’t go after Catholics than something is seriously wrong.

This seeming truce called ecumenism is often so pointless. In England it seems that the Anglican-Catholic dialog just meanders along. That it is Rome and not the local Bishops that seemed to be mostly involved with bringing the TAC to full communion with the CHurch. I am Catholic simply because I believe the faith to be true. I want all people to enjoy the fullness of truth and to be able to withdraw from the immense spiritual treasury of the Church.

Proselytizing has been a touch issue with the Orthodox churches and the Catholic Church has been pretty sensitive to this. I can at least understand this since Orthodox churches are true churches in the Catholic theological understanding. They have retained Apostolic succession and can validly celebrate all the sacraments. The Anglican church is a totally different situations since they have lost Apostolic succession and only have the two sacraments that all Protestant churches have. This idea of fishing in the Anglican lake is idiotic unless you don’t think you are bringing people to the fullness of the truth. It seems rather uncharitable to leave people alone just because they are in some Protestant denomination and you don’t want to be seen as poaching.

Though it seems that Catholics have often sucked at evangelization and reaching out. We needed the help of Our Lady of Guadalupe to get things rolling and of course it was the Holy Spirit that moved things along on Pentecost. Though this is true for all evangelization. It is this tippy-toe approach worried about everything except actual evangelizations that annoys me. We should be fishing in any pond where the fish are willing to bite if we are going to be fishers of men.

So how does Michael Sean Winters at America Magazine react to the good news of the Traditional Anglican Communion comning into full communion with the Church?

There are members of the Anglican Church who have come to question the catholicity of their communion, and like John Henry Newman before them, their questioning is leading them to turn to Rome.

It is a fair question – and one that I worry these new structures are designed to obfuscate – why now? Were they not disturbed by their communion’s indifference to papal primacy all these years? When John Paul II sought some way to establish the validity of Anglican orders, but came up empty because the apostolic succession was clearly broken, why did they not seek incorporation into the Church of Rome then? I am sure that many of those who are now motivated to seek communion with Rome do so now primarily because the fractured nature of their own communion has become so manifest.

No doubt that is indeed part of the reason since it is rather hard to maintain the three branch theory with one of the branches branching off into so many other branches. Also glad to see that he recognizes that apostolic succession was clearly broken.

But, I worry, too, that some of these newcomers will also be nostalgists, anti-feminists, and anti-gay bigots. The ordaining of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire is not something I would have advised, but after all these centuries of schism, I am not sure why that should have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Yikes!!! Though I get the felling that is how Michael Sean Winters looks at many people who are actually faithful to the magisterium and the full range of Catholic thought. The word nostalgia has been tossed around a lot in reference to the TLM, regardless to the fact that many of us were never raised on it. Catholic truth never changes and you can never be nostalgic to what is an ever-present reality. Anti-gay bigot of course means anybody who actually think that homosexual activity is gravely immoral and anti-feminists are those who actually agree with the constant teaching of the Church that women can’t be ordained. Certainly Mr. Winters if he would have thought about it longer would find a way to see the newcomers as racist also just like he was able to discern the reason for the 9-12 Teaparty protests.

Maybe Mr. Winters can screen these converts to the Church for his brand of ideological purity. That they may be one – unless of course they actually believe in all the Church teaches. Though after he manages to worry about some of these newcomers he manages to say “It is a big church and there is room for everybody as I never tire of saying.”

The first email I received this morning was from a Jewish friend who saw this aspect of the development when he wrote: “Do you think Pope B- might set up a Jewish rite if we asked him? We could call it Judaism. He could call it unity with church. Everyone’s happy.”

What? I am not sure what this is suppose to mean?

Father Z catches this tweet from the National Catholic Reporter.

Pope okays new structures to absorb disgruntled Anglican conservatives

I guess ecumenism that actually leads to union with the Church is not the right approach. We must endlessly dialog and talk and never get anywhere. We can’t have ecumenism with an actually end to union.

Though it is rather ironic that the dissident National Catholic Reporter which is nothing but angry and dissatisfied when it comes to the Church would have this complaint of others.

Archbishop Chaput writes an excellent essay in First Things on Catholic charitable institutions and the increasing attacks from the government. He makes some excellent points as he follows the history or our country and the reason for the attacks from a strange bedfellow partnership of individuals and the government.

Though one aspect he missed out on is that Catholic charitable institutions are being attacked both from within and without. He cites the case of Catholic Charities in Massachusetts being forced out of adoptions because of laws forcing them to adopt to homosexual couples. Though the truth was that Catholic Charities was already performing such adoptions at times until their hand was forced. The same goes for Catholic Charities in San Francisco that was also forced out of the adoption business. Unfortunately many Catholic charitable institutions are staffed with people not exactly friendly to the whole gamut of Catholic teaching. Blessed Mother Teresa disliked being called a social worker because her work transcended the purely humanitarian model. Often though those working in our institutions could easily be classed just in the social worker mode.

SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) – The Rev. John I. Jenkins, who came under fire for inviting President Barack Obama to the University of Notre Dame campus, has been re-elected to a second five-year term as president of the school.[reference]

Such a smooth move after loosing millions of dollars in donations. Keep up the great work!

The trustees also approved a resolution Friday expressing their “respect and full confidence” in Jenkins, saying he has nurtured an environment where “the Catholic faith and intellectual tradition are celebrated and lived.”

Yes Fr. Jenkins is the poster boy for “Catholic faith and intellectual tradition are celebrated and lived.” Arresting pro-life protesters is the mark of living your faith. Approving pornographic plays is a great way to live your faith. Having a campus where travel expenses to homosexual pride events is another mark of an authentic Catholic university. Honoring the most radically pro-abortion President ever who even supported infanticide is evidence to the Church’s teaching. Oh wait.

I do wonder why Sarah Silverman suggestion that the Vatican sell everything to help the poor keeps getting more and more news attention? I keep seeing stories covering it via Google News. Though in a world where CNN fact checks a Saturday Night Live parody piece on the President I guess it is par for the course for the media to cover the rantings of some shock Comedienne. We of course can’t expect them to actually fact check her routine.

Though it does remind me of the story of St. Laurence and the treasure of the Church. He was captured and told to bring the treasure of the Church to his captors. The following day he brought a bunch of poor people and told them that they were the treasure of the Church. Though I have the odd feeling that this wasn’t what Sarah Silverman had it mind.

I also doubt that she thought of or even knew of the efforts in the Vatican during World War II and this notable example.

Joseph Lichten records that on September 27, 1943, one of the Nazi commanders demanded of the Jewish community in Rome payment of one hundred pounds of gold within thirty-six hours or three hundred Jews would be taken prisoner. When the Jewish Community Council was only able to gather only seventy pounds of gold, they turned to the Vatican.

“In his memoirs, the then Chief Rabbi Zolli of Rome writes that he was sent to the Vatican, where arrangements had already been made to receive him as an ‘engineer’ called to survey a construction problem so that the Gestapo on watch at the Vatican would not bar his entry. He was met by the Vatican treasurer and secretary of state, who told him that the Holy Father himself had given orders for the deficit to be filled with gold vessels taken from the Treasury.

I guess it also escaped her attention that the largest organization in the world to help the poor is the Catholic Church. That it was Catholics throughout history who via very apostolates, ministries, and personal attention have always had a preferential love for the poor. When people are in need of help they go to the door of a Catholic institution or the rectory and not the local chapter of for example the Atheist Alliance International.

No doubt she is also unaware that the operating budget for the Vatican is around $260 million compared to Harvard’s annual budget is $1.3 billion. So I guess she means we are to sell off the artistic treasures in Vatican CIty and Catholic churches throughout the world. Hey great idea. Next time France has a budget deficit they should sell off the Louvre. Yell allowing people to see these artistic treasures is a bad idea and they should be distributed around the world locked up in private collections. Well how about Vatican owned real estate – well with a total value of $1 Billion and less than Oprah’s personal fortune it won’t go very far.