Wednesday, May 24, 2017

VERY SOBER, CATHOLIC NON IDEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF POPE FRANCIS AND HOLY MOTHER CHURCH DURING THIS YEAR OF FATIMA


Pope Francis is of the "inductive" school or psychology of 🤔thinking, more feminine, circular and open. Pope Benedict and most other pope's, but especially the German pope were/are more of the deductive school which is masculine, linear, clear and logical, building upon what preceded in a methologically precise way.

Given Pope Francis novel papal approach to thinking, Fr. John Hunwicke's blog, "Mutual Enrichment"  has had a series on the question of Pope Francis being heretical or not. Fortunately the answer is NO in his 4 th installment which I copy below. It is very insightful:

So, if the present Pope appears to imply that God's final Word was not already spoken in Jesus Christ, and that the Divine Priority now is to create and consolidate a New Age, the New Bergoglian Age of Mercy, does that make him a heretic?

Most certainly not. In structural terms, the polarity of orthodox versus heterodox is very often not useful because it is on a different page from the actual language which is being put under the microscope. If one were to take the pope's words seriously in a nakedly propositional way, one might have no alternative but to condemn them as most gravely erroneous. One might even have to condemn them as analogous to other claims made to the possession of a New Understanding which supersedes or completes the Old. Obvious examples are Islam, Montanism, and Mormonism. But the necessity to be rather more linguistically nuanced than this did not cease to have validity when Wittgenstein died. The analysis of 'language games' is every bit as necessary now as ever it was. Having a sensitive nose for differences of literary genre is as important for those who examine papal documents as it is for analysts of Horace and Ovid.

Intelligent readers ... which is to say, all readers who have diligently worked their way through these pieces ... I apologise for taking so long to reach my conclusion ...  will be longing to make an angry point to me: "You began by saying that Pope Francis should not be judged by the canons of precise and logical discourse. But that is precisely what you ... with your close and lengthy syntactical analysis of one rather silly passage in his 2017 Easter Vigil Homily ... have just wasted a lot of your time and ourtime doing."

You are quite right. Bergoglian discourse is agglutinative and impressionistic rather than linear. It is much more interested in deploying rhetoric incoherently to achieve a conviction in the hearers which will drive them to action, than it is in laying out an argument in such a rational way as to satisfy even a moderately fastidious logician. This Roman Pontiff finds it much easier to dash off a painterly spectacular in the style of Edvard Munch's The Scream than to design an architectural edifice which will actually - given the laws of Physics as they apply on planet Earth - stand upright.

In order to understand the rhetorical methods of the current bishop of Rome, illumination may be gained from the speeches in Euripidean tragedy. These have sometimes been analysed in terms of "the rhetoric of the situation". Vide the most interesting account of this in pp xxiv-xxix of her 1954 edition of the Alcestisby the late Amy Dale, of Somerville College in this University, the wife of Professor T B L Webster. It is the sort of point that women can sometimes grasp more readily than men.

And, dear readers, that is precisely why Papa Bergoglio cannot be deemed a heretic. To be definable as a heretic he would need to have advanced formally, with full understanding and responsibility, propositional errors. It is perfectly clear to me that he has, quite simply, not done so. Nor has he ever come close to doing so. Nor is he ever likely to. Not in a month of Sundays. He avoids precise propositional assertion like the very plague. It would get in the way of what he really wishes to achieve.

What he does is this: he has in mind a practical result, and so he gathers together assertions which appear to him to back it up. Those assertions do not need to be be mutually coherent (or, indeed, to sit easily with established dogma). Shocking? Frankly, folks, S Paul appears to me sometimes to do something very similar. When it suits the argument, the Apostle will tell us that no man can fufill the Torah; when it suits him, his line is that Gentiles do it rather better than Jews. This is one reason why 'Pauline scholars' have some of their problems. I have some (only some) sympathy with a Finnish academic called Heikki Raisanen, who regards S Paul's teaching as so incoherent as to be pretty well beyond reconstruction or comprehension. To judge Pope Bergoglio by the canons of formal logic is quite simply to make a genre-error. It is not illuminating; it is not helpful; it is not, in the profoundest sense, accurate.

Is this a dangerous pontificate? Not nearly as much as panicky people fearfully imagine. Come off it! And cheer up! The ease with which Pope Francis and his associated ideologues, while studiously "not changing doctrine", in fact over-ride and ignore the Magisterium of his predecessors, will make it pitifully easy for his successors to dump his 'teaching' with only the most perfunctory of formalities, and then to restore the simple lucidities of the Tradition handed down through the Apostles, the Deposit of Faith. He has already pretty well sawn off the branch he is sitting on. Or imagine him as a Humpty Dumpty sitting on an increasingly wobbly wall. 

To the frightened and the fearful I add: Just hold tight whenever the roller-coaster seems to be going dangerously fast, and remember that her Immaculate Heart will prevail. This is Fatima Year!

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

POPE BENEDICT'S RECENT WRITTEN MESSAGE FROM HIS ENTOMBMENT HAS IMPLICATIONS NOT ONLY FOR BIBLICAL STUDIES BUT LITURGICAL STUDIES AND NOVELTIES


Causing great angst in high places, the once self-described entombed pope recently wrote a forward to Robert Cardinal Sarah's book that had already been published in other places without the pope's forward.

This is what His Holiness, Pope Benedict wrote about historical knowledge of the Bible:

Certainly, in order to interpret Jesus’s words, historical knowledge is necessary, which teaches us to understand the time and the language at that time. But that alone is not enough if we are really to comprehend the Lord’s message in depth. Anyone today who reads the ever-thicker commentaries on the Gospels remains disappointed in the end. He learns a lot that is useful about those days and a lot of hypotheses that ultimately contribute nothing at all to an understanding of the text. In the end you feel that in all the excess of words, something essential is lacking: entrance into Jesus’s silence, from which his word is born. If we cannot enter into this silence, we will always hear the word only on its surface and thus not really understand it. 

Take it from someone who knows first hand how easy it is to be seduced by biblical scholarship and the means by which we are to understand the bible and yet miss entirely the point of Scriptures which can only be deduced in prayerful silence before so great an Experience--the Word of God made Flesh in time and eternity. 

Shortly after I was ordained, I would use the great knowledge that was only recently allowed Catholic Biblical Scholars to debunk so much literalism and fundamentalism among Catholics. The academically inclined loved their god of academics and new academic freedoms and discoveries (although the Liberal Protestants of the Enlightenment used these methods in the 19th century--a part of the modernism heresy, not to be doctrinally rigid).  

Who really cares about the science or lack thereof the the Old Testament or if Adam and Eve actually existed or the world was created in six days with a day of rest on the 7th. Just as long as one gets the authentic message behind the words, the symbolism and even parables, that is what is important--and this had to be in continuity with Catholic Faith found in defined doctrines and solemnly defined dogmas--no if's and's or but's about it. 

The same is true with liturgical scholarship and the iconoclastic liturgists of the post Vatican II period. In an ad orientem Mass no one sees what the priest is doing, either the use of hands to call upon the Holy Spirit to change the bread and wine or the various signs of the Cross over the unconsecrated and consecrated host and chalice. All that was seen were the two major elevations--that is it. What use is it to see what the priest is doing during the Eucharistic Prayer or even to hear the Eucharistic prayer which in the EF version of the one Latin Rite is prayed silently?

Does the congregation need to see the Fraction Rite, which has become so important for some liturgists and celebrants who use extra large hosts to make the point?

But let's get back to the silent Canon. This is what Pope Benedict seems to imply in the message above:  If we cannot enter into this silence, we will always hear the word only on its surface and thus not really understand it.

Monday, May 22, 2017

AS FOR ME AND MY HOUSEHOLD, WE WILL TAKE THE REAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE MOST BLESSED SACRAMENT OVER REAL BREAD ANY DAY!

IF YOU BELIEVE IN THE REAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST AND YOU ARE OF THE EASTERN CHURCH, ORTHODOX OR EASTERN RITE, WHEN YOU USE LEAVENED BREAD FOR THE DIVINE LITURGY, YOU WILL TAKE GREAT CARE THAT THE BREAD IS CUT AND PLACED INTO THE CHALICE FOR THE LAITY PRIOR TO ITS CONSECRTION AND HOLY COMMUNION WILL BE GIVEN ONLY WTH A SPOON AND PURIFICATOR UNDER THE SPOON TO PREVENT PROFANATION OF THE ELEMENTS.

NOT SO IN THE LATIN RITE'S ICONOCLASTIC VERSION OF THE LITURY--CONSECRATED CRUMBS DON'T MATTER, NO MATTER HOW LARGE DUE TO HOMEMADE BREAD OR EVEN CRUSTY FRENCH BREAD CONSECRATED TO PROMOTE THE BELIEF IN THE REAL PRESENCE OF BREAD, TO BELEIVE THAT THE BREAD IS ACTURALLY BREAD!
cpp_BreadCrumbsFrench_Style2375


Ingredients
ENRICHED BLEACHED FLOUR (BLEACHED WHEAT FLOUR, MALTED BARLEY FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMIN MONONITRATE, RIBOFLAVIN, FOLIC ACID), CONTAINS 2% OR LESS OF THE FOLLOWING: YEAST, SALT, DEXTROSE, WHEAT FLOUR, SOYBEAN OIL.
CONTAINS WHEAT.  MAY CONTIAN EGG, SOY.
I was thoroughly indoctrinated by the theologian Bernard Cooke in the seminary in the late 1970's. His book on Sacraments and Sacramentality was a text book in our sacrament's class. He along with other "spirit of Vatican II" liturgical/sacramental scholars singlehandedly led the iconoclastic movement away from signs, which are a veil and not an end unto themselves, to signs being worshipped and redesigned and re-imagined. It is a form of idolatry which seems to be recovered by young more hip clergy who love the 70's who only recently have rediscovered this discredited book by those of us who know better. But of course the charge is led by bishops and priests my age and way, way older (octogenarians) like Cardinal Kasper who are leading us backwards to their glory days of academia and simply being young a relevant.

Cooke and his colleagues wanted the Church's liturgy to show forth bombastic signs, big signs of what we are doing at Mass--there was no noble simplicity in this regard and no sobriety which for centuries upon centuries characterized the Latin Rite of the Church.

So the priest had to have big gestures with his arms greeting people and in the oran's position. He had to have a grin on his face, establish eye contact and draw people in--the human is the biggest sign of the Mass, not just the priest but all the ministers, primary among them the congregation that became known as the assembly circled around the altar all as celebrants exercising their priesthood on one level or not. The only priesthood diminished by this was the ordained priesthood which the "recovery" of signs seem to make him purely a President, presided or animator of the big sign of all gathered and the other signs too.

For example the unleavened bread of the Latin Rite was disparaged as being harder to believe it was bread than becoming the Body of Christ. Exactly! So be it! We are receiving bread but Bread which is a symbol for Jesus and His real presence, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. If we have to convince anyone that bread is bread or the Blessed Sacrament is Jesus, as for me and my household it will be the convincing people the the Blessed Sacrament is Jesus our Risen Lord!

Don't get me wrong, the humble, sober use of unleavened bread and wine surely points to Jesus who is the Bread of Life and does for us in terms of the salivation of our body and soul what ordinary bread merely does for the human body in the digestive process. It obviously helps to keep us from starvation and death--which is what Jesus the sacrificial Lamb of God does for us in the Blessed Sacrament in terms of saving us unto life everlasting in heaven!

But we don't sacrifice a Lamb and say that the lamb is the real presence of Christ--the bread is a symbol of that but we don't make the bread look like a lamb, a large life size lamb by the mold that we use to cook the bread. We might impress a lamb symbol on the bread though in a sober way.

When I was in the seminary the bread we baked ourselves had leaven in it like salt and sugar and it tasted very sweet so much so when I received it (and today I think that "it" meaning bread is all I received since the bread was so corrupted by other ingredients, that the Mass wan't valid except through and perhaps the codicil of the "Church supplies" for those who believe it is valid) I only thought about how great it would be with a cup of coffee as a part of my breakfast--so much for devotion and Catholic spirituality.

Bernard Cooke that another blogger and a 1970's mentality blog just discovered and is enamoured with, is not someone that we should resurrect but keep buried in the bowels of the earth!

Sunday, May 21, 2017

IN THE FALL WHEN THE POPE NAMED NEW CARDINALS, I WAS AT THE MASS AND DISTRIBUTED HOLY COMMUNIONI

After Holy Communion, the Pope reached into his pocket, pulled out a folded sheet of paper and very deliberately unfolded it for all to see and named the new cardinals in a surprise announcement. From what I understand, those named had not be contacted about the naming!

In the new batch at this morning's surprise announcement is an auxiliary bishop. I wonder how his bishop feels about his auxiliary being a cardinal. Odd to say the least.   Of course priests who are not bishops have been named cardinals.

Pope calls consistory to create new Cardinals

Pope Francis announces new Cardinals during Regina Caeli - AFP
Pope Francis announces new Cardinals during Regina Caeli - AFP
21/05/2017 12:33
(Vatican Radio)  Pope Francis on Sunday announced a consistory for the creation of new Cardinals. He made the announcement at the end of the Regina Caeli in St Peter’s Square.
The new Cardinals come from Mali, Spain, Sweden, Laos and El Salvador. The Consistory will take place on June 28th.

Find below the list of new Cardinal designates:

Archbishop Jean Zerbo of Bamako, Mali.
Archbishop Juan José Omella of Barcelona, Spain.
Bishop Anders Arborelius, Bishop of Stockholm, Sweden.
Archbishop Louis-Marie Ling Mangkhanekhoun Apostolic Vicar of Paksé, Laos.
Bishop Gregorio Rosa Chávez - Auxillary Bishop in the Archdiocese of San Salvador, El Salvador.

Saturday, May 20, 2017

IT IS TRULY VERY SAD; WHERE IS THE HUMILITY?


This photo captures the haughtiness of modern Catholicism and Catholics. It is a far cry from the humble physical attitude of a penitent communicant humbly kneeling to receive Holy Communion.

Who knows, and we don't know and shouldn't know, but maybe the prime minister of Canada, my father's birth place, went to confession for publicly and manifestedly enabling mortal sin in Canada and around the world, knowing that such an evil is wrong, and knowing this, doing so with foresight and political plotting and full consent of the will.

Featured Image

THE LATE POPE BENEDICT SPEAKS FROM HIS ENTOMBMENT THUS STILL EXERCISING HIS PAPACY

In fact we have an oddity, "a heterodoxy?" of the one papacy with two living expressions. There has never been a period in The history of the papacy where an entombed pope speaks and writes about Church matters. At this juncture in a divided and divisive papacy, is there a significance hidden in the words?
Benedict XVI

158
0
Pubblicato il 19/05/2017
Ultima modifica il 19/05/2017 alle ore 16:36

Ever since I first read the Letters of Saint Ignatius of Antioch in the 1950s, one passage from his Letter to the Ephesians has particularly affected me: “It is better to keep silence and be [a Christian] than to talk and not to be. Teaching is an excellent thing, provided the speaker practices what he teaches. Now, there is one Teacher who spoke and it came to pass. And even what He did silently is worthy of the Father. He who has truly made the words of Jesus his own is able also to hear His silence, so that he may be perfect: so that he may act through his speech and be known through his silence” (15, 1f.). What does that mean: to hear Jesus’s silence and to know him through his silence? We know from the Gospels that Jesus frequently spent nights alone “on the mountain” in prayer, in conversation with his Father. We know that his speech, his word, comes from silence and could mature only there. So it stands to reason that his word can be correctly understood only if we, too, enter into his silence, if we learn to hear it from his silence. 

Certainly, in order to interpret Jesus’s words, historical knowledge is necessary, which teaches us to understand the time and the language at that time. But that alone is not enough if we are really to comprehend the Lord’s message in depth. Anyone today who reads the ever-thicker commentaries on the Gospels remains disappointed in the end. He learns a lot that is useful about those days and a lot of hypotheses that ultimately contribute nothing at all to an understanding of the text. In the end you feel that in all the excess of words, something essential is lacking: entrance into Jesus’s silence, from which his word is born. If we cannot enter into this silence, we will always hear the word only on its surface and thus not really understand it. 

As I was reading the new book by Robert Cardinal Sarah, all these thoughts went through my soul again. Sarah teaches us silence—being silent with Jesus, true inner stillness, and in just this way he helps us to grasp the word of the Lord anew. Of course he speaks hardly at all about himself, but now and then he does give us a glimpse into his interior life. In answer to Nicolas Diat’s question, “At times in your life have you thought that words were becoming too cumbersome, too heavy, too noisy?,” he answers: “In my prayer and in my interior life, I have always felt the need for a deeper, more complete silence. … The days of solitude, silence, and absolute fasting have been a great support. They have been an unprecedented grace, a slow purification, and a personal encounter with … God. … Days of solitude, silence, and fasting, nourished by the Word of God alone, allow man to base his life on what is essential.” These lines make visible the source from which the cardinal lives, which gives his word its inner depth. From this vantage point, he can then see the dangers that continually threaten the spiritual life, of priests and bishops also, and thus endanger the Church herself, too, in which it is not uncommon for the Word to be replaced by a verbosity that dilutes the greatness of the Word. I would like to quote just one sentence that can become an examination of conscience for every bishop: “It can happen that a good, pious priest, once he is raised to the episcopal dignity, quickly falls into mediocrity and a concern for worldly success. Overwhelmed by the weight of the duties that are incumbent on him, worried about his power, his authority, and the material needs of his office, he gradually runs out of steam.” 

Cardinal Sarah is a spiritual teacher, who speaks out of the depths of silence with the Lord, out of his interior union with him, and thus really has something to say to each one of us. 

We should be grateful to Pope Francis for appointing such a spiritual teacher as head of the congregation that is responsible for the celebration of the liturgy in the Church. With the liturgy, too, as with the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, it is true that specialized knowledge is necessary. But it is also true of the liturgy that specialization ultimately can talk right past the essential thing unless it is grounded in a deep, interior union with the praying Church, which over and over again learns anew from the Lord himself what adoration is. With Cardinal Sarah, a master of silence and of interior prayer, the liturgy is in good hands. 

Friday, May 19, 2017

MY TAKE ON THE POPE'S MORNING HOMILY; WHAT'S YOURS?


This is what Pope Francis said during his morning homily as it concerns the first reading from the Acts of the Apostles about a decision of the Holy Spirit and the apostles in an important matter of Church discipline:

“But there were always people who without any commission go out to disturb the Christian community with speeches that upset souls: ‘Eh, no, someone who says that is a heretic, you can’t say this, or that; this is the doctrine of the Church.’ And they are fanatics of things that are not clear, like those fanatics who go there sowing weeds in order to divide the Christian community. And this is the problem: when the doctrine of the Church, that which comes from the Gospel, that which the Holy Spirit inspires – because Jesus said, “He will teach us and remind you of all that I have taught’ – [when] that doctrine becomes an ideology. And this is the great error of those people.”

My take: 

It is certainly crystal clear to me that the "ideologues" are those who promote women priests, gay marriage, Holy Communion for those in unrepentant mortal sin, who are pro-choice, pro-artificial contraception and want the liturgy to be fabricated by each parish, diocese and culture. 

Who else or what else could the Holy Father mean? It is crystal clear to me especially at the conclusion of the homily His Holiness, Pope Francis says the following:

... to not be afraid in the face “of the opinions of the ideologues of doctrine.” The Church has “its proper Magisterium, the Magisterium of the Pope, of the Bishops, of the Councils,” and we must go along the path “that comes from the preaching of Jesus, and from the teaching and assistance of the Holy Spirit,” which is “always open, always free,” because “doctrine unites, the Councils unite the Christian community, while, on the other hand, “ideology divides.” 

Thursday, May 18, 2017

HAS A NEW ORDER OF THE LITURGY INSPIRED THE RETURN OF THE ARIAN HERSEY AND THUS MADE CATHOLICS SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE DEFORMATION OF THEIR SPIRITUAL AND MORAL LIVES BY THE DICTATORSHIP OF RELATIVISM AND INDIVIDUALISM OF OUR SOCIETY TODAY?


I had a brilliant insight as I was preparing my mini homily for today's Mass in honor of St. John I, pope and martyr.

I read an account of his life and this is what inspired my homily: "In the early part of the sixth century the Church was still plagued by the Arian heresy, which denied the divinity of Jesus. However, by that time the heresy was kept alive more by the support of civil government than by any attraction to the error itself."

We all know that by the 6th century, the liturgies of both the east and west had developed in content and order to what would have been codified by the Council of Trent in the 16th century. The eastern rite's liturgies were even more elaborate than our Latin Rite, but the ethos was the same, a very, very high Christology emphasizing the divinity of Christ. I suspect this organic development from the point of the Arian Heresy to the 6th century was to combat the heresy.

Thus prior to the 1965 tinkering with the Mass by "spirit of Vatican II novelists" and then the promulgation of the 1969 missal, the two liturgies of both the east and west emphasized a high Christology and thus the divinity of Christ. The East continues to do so today.

But what happened to the Latin Rite's liturgies after Vatican II? The reform in discontinuity emphasized the humanity of Jesus (although not explicitly denying the divinity of Christ).  Thus the so-called "renewal of the Mass" was informed by a low Christology which opens the Church and her members to the revival of the Arian heresy.

But back to what I wrote about St. Pope John I, by the sixth century the Arian heresy was promoted more by the civil authorities than by the faithful's attraction to this error. The high liturgies of the Church in both the east and west had helped to eradicate the heresy with rank and file Catholics.

Today, the civil authorities that we have to contend with are promoting ideologies, such as gender ideologies, as a sort of dogma of the secular religion of our day. There are many other dogmas.

Wouldn't these secular politicians and ideologues, especially in the entertainment and media worlds, want to neutralize the beliefs of Christians who believe that Jesus is God and thus He trumps what they have to offer in the areas of morality/amorality and the like?

Just how successful has the revised Mass informed by a low Christology done to keep Catholics, Catholic? We all know that today, that a significant number of Catholics have an egalitarian view of the world with all things being equal. Many have succumbed to the individualism of society that places the person and it's (I use this pronoun intentionally) desires at the center, not the common good. 

And if Jesus is not believed to be divine, that He is truly the Godhead, then all the ideologies that are available to us in this firecely individualist society are on the same par with Jesus' teachings. Take it or leave it.

What do you think? 

I LEARNED A LOT THIS MORNING FROM FOX AND FRIENDS ABOUT CATHOLIC MASS AND WHAT IS A MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN


Judge Andrew Peter Napolitano is unabashedly a traditional Catholic who attends the EF Mass (not sure where in New York). Last night (Wednesday) he was at the EF Mass, as he described this morning on Fox and Friends and his phone went off and he met someone in the vestibule.

They tell you to turn off your phone--he didn't; he answered and talked in the vestibule (might have been an interview?). The Judge said  this was a venial sin!

Then later in the program someone else was being interviewed from Las Vegas, Nevada and toward the end of the interview he said he had to correct the good judge that it wasn't a venial sin, but a mortal sin.

Then they started discussing the fact that Judge Napolitano was at Mass last night, an all Latin Mass (I presume the EF Mass) and one of the hosts asked if the judge understands Latin and the other said yes, he knows everything.

What an uplifting program Fox and Friends is! I vote for them in the morning!

IS THIS THE WAY FOR CATHOLICS TO "GROW" THEIR CHURCHES?

I received this in my mail box yesterday. I wonder if we Catholics shouldn't be doing things like this to "grow" our churches?

I ask; you answer!

 

CERTAINLY IT MUST HAVE BEEN A TYPO THAT THE REPORTER TYPED "HE HAD A HYSTERECTOMY "


SPECIAL Rowan Feldhaus (left) and friend Meg Adams took a selfie after the Georgia Court of Appeals ruled in January that Superior Court Judge David Roper abused his discretion in denying Feldhaus’ petition for a name change.

But no! It was the Augusta Chronicle's reporter, but worse, editors, that allowed the word he to be used over and over again when referring to his hysterectomy that led to complications and an unexpected death of a 25 year old man.

Apart from this tragedy, which is multi-layered, is it a tragedy that gender ideology has infected our society to the extent that few are offended but the sentence, " he had a hysterectomy?"

IS IT POLITICALLY INCORRECT FOR ME TO PRAY: "ETERNAL REST GRANT UNTO HER O LORD, AND LET PERPETUAL LIGHT SHINE UPON HER?

I don't know her religious persuasion, but let's say she's a Catholic and the family wants a Catholic funeral and the priest to use the pronoun him rather than her--what should the priest do? I would ask my bishop. What should he tell me?

I report; you react!

Friends grieve death of transgender man who fought to change name

Supporters who celebrated with Rowan Feldhaus when he won a court battle to change his name to match his gender identity are grief-stricken by his sudden death earlier this week.

Feldhaus, 25, was one of two transgender men whose petitions to change their legal names were denied by Superior Court Judge David Roper. Roper said their name choices were misleading or offensive, but in January, the Court of Appeals of Georgia ruled against him, saying there was no evidence of improper motive.

A close friend, paralegal Meg Adams, drafted Feldhaus’ name change petition. They expected the routine resistance in the local court, but Feldhaus was prepared to fight for his rights, Adams said.

“I know it was a very tough decision for Rowan to file the appeal – it was such a huge risk, but he was willing to potentially martyr himself,” she said. “The news we got back in January that the decision was reversed was a great celebration.”

Nothing prepared friends and family for his death Adams said. Feldhaus had a hysterectomy last week at Eisenhower Army Medical Center as treatment for polycystic ovary syndrome Within a few days, he was admitted to Augusta University intensive care in septic shock that cut off oxygen to his brain.
“It was a pretty routine procedure. He had no additional reason to be concerned. He was extremely healthy – he works out every day, he’s very conscious of his diet,” Adams said.

Born in Germany to a U.S. military family, Feldhaus grew up as Rebecca Elizabeth Feldhaus and graduated from Evans High School in 2010. His parents have been by his side, and friends had an opportunity to say goodbye at the hospital Adams said.

Feldhaus graduated from basic combat training in 2011, but the Army reservist was changing course to a life of social advocacy, Adams said. He would graduate AU later this year and was “very, very active at school,” including with the Model United Nations and Student Government Association, she said.

“He was also a member of the Georgia Equality board and somehow found time to study and go to class and work out and go kayaking with me and have a part-time job,” Adams said.

Georgia Equality, the state advocacy group for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and allied communities, expressed condolences.

“Though Rowan is no longer with us, the impact of his courage will continue to be felt by transgender and other gender non-conforming individuals in our state for many years to come. We are grateful for his work, and grateful we had the chance to know him,” the group said in a statement.

Augusta Pride honored “the journey, contributions, and selfless service of Rowan Feldhaus to the lives of the members of our CSRA family and wish his family and friends peace.”
Adams said condolences have come in from around the world.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

WILL THIS FURTHER WEAKEN THE CATHOLIC FAITH OF ADULTS???????????????? WILL WE SEE LESS THAN 12% OF CATHOLICS ATTENDING MASS IN THIS DIOCESE AND OTHER NORTHEAST DIOCESES?


His Excellency Peter Libasci, Bishop of Manchester, New Hampshire, explains in his diocesan newsletter  how he is reintroducing the historical order of the Rites of Initiation, Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Communion.

The timing will be as follows:

1. Infants will be baptized as is our tradition.

 2. In the Second Grade, the child will make First Confession as a renewal of the forgiveness of Baptism

3. In the third grade, First Holy Communion and Confirmation will be celebrated together at the same Mass.

Bishop Libasci wants to develop better adult formation as well as strengthen youth ministry.

In 1962 (pre-Vatican II rite)  I received Confirmation in the 4th grade.

Today however, most catechists and priests will tell you that a significant number of parents usually bring their children for religious instruction for the sacraments. Thus we see them in the 2nd grade and then in the 8th Grade and that's it. There is a very shallow commitment to religious instruction and to Mass attendance.

Will restoring the traditional order exacerbate the number of adult Catholics who are clueless about their Catholic Faith, merely cultural Catholics, if that, and seldom if ever go to Mass or even get married or buried from the Church. I fear so given the nature of our culture and Church today.

Those who are of the Eastern Rite or Eastern Orthodoxy where  all three Sacraments are celebrated at the same time for infants--how does that work with later formation in the Faith?