Traditional Roman Catholic Thoughts

Traditional Roman Catholic Thoughts

Reintroducing Logic and Reason to the Age of Sentimentalism

A Synopsis of the Synod of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis

This past Saturday, I had the opportunity to attend one of the Archdiocese’s Listening Sessions for their Synod. Yes, the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, like the Amazon, is having a Synod. It will last from the Fall of 2019 and conclude in the Summer of 2021. These listening sessions are hosted at parishes throughout the Archdiocese. They are supposed to help gather feedback from the laity and help guide Archbishop Bernard Hebda on what direction he should take the Archdiocese. 

Having spent the better part of a Saturday morning at one of these sessions, I thought it would be essential to discuss what I witnessed. There were many things that I saw that were alarming, as to be expected, but there were other things I observed that do give some hope.

Why A Synod?

Why is Archbishop Hebda even calling for a Synod? The primary reason, as stated in a letter that can be viewed on the website is that the Archdiocese has recently filed for bankruptcy. There is no mention as to why the Archdiocese is bankrupt, but it’s pretty apparent what the primary reason is. 

Archbishop Hebda invites all Catholics from the Archdiocese, both faithful Catholics who frequent the Sacraments and those Catholics who haven’t been to church in some time. Archbishop Hebda wants to hear from everyone. 

This is how the Synod is set-up. There will be 20 Listening Sessions that parishes throughout the Archdiocese are hosting between September 2019 through March 2020. There will be more events after these Listening Sessions, but all information is on the Synod’s website.

The listening sessions are split into three parts. The first part is comprised of speeches by both Bishop Andrew Cozzens and Archbishop Hebda, as well as some guided Lectio Divina. The second part is a series of small group discussions in which you sit at a table and discuss things that are going well in the Archdiocese and things that are not. The third and final part is being able to address Archbishop Hebda with what you feel is going well and what can be improved upon.

The Day

Speeches and Lectio Divina in the Sanctuary

If I had to guess, there were easily 200 people in attendance. The day began with several speeches from members of the Archdiocese as well as from Bishop Cozzens and Archbishop Hebda. There was also some guided Lectio Divina. Lectio Divina, if you are unaware, is a form of prayer where you slowly read scripture and contemplate what strikes out to you and reflect upon it. 

This was all done within the Sanctuary of the church. Bishop Cozzens addressed that this was intentionally done because they wanted Jesus to be present during these discussions. 

After some talking points about the need to pray in silence, a good portion of the actual prayer time was accompanied by some lovely piano with soloist song leading. There was even some “transition music” while participants were instructed to move from the Sanctuary to the gathering space.

Small-Group Discussions

After all of the piano accompanied prayer, we were instructed to break into small groups at tables that were placed in the gathering space and the basement. This is where everyone would have a different experience, so I can only speak of what happened at my table.

Our first task was to choose a facilitator. I volunteered when it became evident that no one else wanted to facilitate. The facilitator’s job was to make sure everyone got to speak if they wanted to. It was also to make sure that no debates occurred because we are there to present our viewpoints.

To be completely honest, my table ended up not being awful, and it was not as bad as I had initially feared it could be. There were supposedly 28 members from St. Joan of Arc Church in Minneapolis, infamously known in this Archdiocese as the most liberal parish present. Fortunately, none of them were at my table.

There was a common theme of sentiments at our table. Within our area of the Archdiocese, there are frequent confession times, plenty of opportunities to visit Jesus in Adoration, and we all go to parishes that have a focus on the Eucharist.

However, our table also agreed that there needed to be more done in regards to reverence, specifically with regards to reinstating the traditional Latin rites, ahem. There were a lot of older members at the table who wished that more would be done with regards to keeping young Catholics (high-school and college-aged) engaged and active within the faith.  

Overall, this was an enjoyable part of the day, seeing that like-minded Catholics are thirsting for tradition in their parishes and the Archdiocese. In fact, two of the people at my table were Lutheran converts who came into the Catholic Church because they wanted more tradition and Jesus in the Eucharist. I imagine though, had some of the liberals been at my table, it would not have been as enjoyable.

Addressing the Archbishop

The final portion of the morning was the opportunity to address Archbishop Hebda at a microphone. People were chosen randomly to address him. This was determined by the number that was given to you on your name tag at the table discussion.

This was undoubtedly the most interesting portion of the day. It was frustrating, angering, but also encouraging. 

It was frustrating because many people gave naive recommendations. These comments included the need for more Young Adult activities and tools to keep the college students within the faith. Having a strong relationship with Jesus in the Eucharist is the answer to that, especially a relationship that the Church encouraged for centuries within the traditional devotions and practices of our faith.

It was angering because several demonstrated their hatred for the family. One woman had the audacity to tell the Archbishop that families with young children should be encouraged to leave Mass immediately and go to the gathering space once the child starts making any noise. She also thought the “services” should be shorter, homilies shortened, and we needed to be more welcoming to homosexuals because, of course, she did. This lady was actually booed by some people within the audience, rightfully so. Children cry and should still be welcomed at Mass, but obviously, there are times when you should remove them. For example, my baby girl who is 10 months is currently in a fit of joyful shrills, which, yeah, we do remove her when she starts to near peak volume.

It was hopeful because a few brave souls did get up and asked that the Archdiocese stop making our liturgies and liturgical events Protestant (yes, they actually used that word). There was also a strong sense that we need to have a focus on Jesus, truly present in the Eucharist everywhere, as well as a need for reverence. One college-aged young man specifically said that he didn’t want more programs, but more traditional Masses, adoration, and deep faith formation.

Signs of Hope in the Archdiocese

As stated multiple times already, many people believe in Jesus Christ, truly present in the Eucharist. These people also have a desire for tradition and reverence, and likely, given time, would welcome the traditional aspects of our faith if they were exposed to them. 

There were several points made to the Archbishop by a dad about home-schooling and the general need for the diocese to understand better and accommodate home-schooling families. He emphasized specifically the concern around the education and catechesis the children are receiving to prepare them for receiving the sacraments. Many people expressed their gratitude for the availability of the sacraments, specifically confession, and Eucharistic Adoration in this area of the Archdiocese. One participant expressed a strong desire to see the Latin Rite restored in the Archdiocese, as well as allowing young children to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation so the Holy Spirit can begin working in them earlier.

Signs of Sadness in the Archdiocese

Common themes arose for where people within the Archdiocese believe we should go to improve things. 

  • Many people did not show signs of reverence. Much of this event took place within the Church sanctuary, yet very few people genuflected, blessed themselves with holy water, or composed themselves as if they were in a Church. 
  • The laity believes the Church should do all of the teaching of the faith and they should not have to do any of their own research/homework.
  • Pope Francis is the only Pope and the Second Vatican Council is the only council we’ve ever had.
  • Many of the attendees were over the age of 50. So the failed ideas that have partially gotten us into this position are the same ideas being presented…again.

The saddest part of this entire affair is that only one person brought up the elephant in the room. The biggest reason that we are in this mess is the lack of accountability of our clergy. One person mentioned the sex abuse crisis, and he was a victim of it. He read a prayer he wrote asking God for healing for the victimized, forgiveness to the predators, and protection for our clergy. It is a beautiful prayer, and he is a brave soul for going up and speaking as candidly as he did.

To reiterate, the reason for having this Synod is because the Archdiocese is bankrupt. Why is the Archdiocese bankrupt? Because of the sex abuse scandal within the Archdiocese. Yet, there is zero mention of the scandal (except for the gentleman as mentioned earlier). It is predictably glossed over as if the reason we are bankrupt is that no Catholics are giving to the Archdiocese.

Meanwhile, our Shepherds tell us to be respectful to these ideas that are different than ours (read: not Catholic) and reiterate Church teaching to these people. In short, do the job of the bishop!

Our Shepherds let the wolves into the pen to attack the sheep and tell them to defend themselves because they have other priorities. Our Shepherds do not know their role. They do not believe that they are to lay down their lives for us but to oversee the sheep as a commercial commodity.

Conclusion

Overall, there was a lack of reverence for Jesus. Many walked within the Sanctuary as if it was a stage. Those who led the Lectio Divina readings did bow, but few people genuflected. Now, I will give the benefit of the doubt that perhaps these individuals were nervous about messing up, but it does demonstrate a lack of awareness about the meaning and purpose of the Sanctuary.

Another thing that was disconcerting was the number of women that were chosen to lead the readings of the Lectio Divina scriptures. Not only were both bishops in attendance, but there were also many priests and a few deacons present. For an activity that should be prayerful, it should have been led by a member of the clergy. It confuses the role of the priest, who does have a hierarchical authority over leading the laity in prayer, as just someone who administers the sacraments and oversees a parish.

It is unclear whether or not the Archdiocese will lead the faithful to Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. It is something we should pray for. It is also too early to tell whether this Synod will bare any positive fruit. It seems unwise to ask those who don’t follow Christ for ideas on how to better follow Him. If you don’t ask misbehaved children how to parent better, then you don’t ask disengaged Catholics what the Church needs to do to cater to them.

I remain unconvinced that this Synod will address the actual needs and concerns of the Church in her current crisis. I am convinced that those of us who live within the Archdiocese should attend these sessions.

For those of us who want to see tradition restored in the Latin Rite, we should attend to voice that. It may fall on deaf ears, it might not. But there may be other people attending who may be open to tradition, or entirely on board. By voicing our opinion, we inspire them, and perhaps they will encourage their friends and their priest. By being there, we might encourage other priests who are in attendance.

As of this writing, there are still 18 of these listening sessions being hosted. I highly encourage you to attend one or more of them if you are able.

Mary, Queen of the Church, pray for us.

Jeff October 2, 2019 Leave A Comment Permalink

Put Pride In Its Place With the Litany of Humility

It’s difficult not to care what other people think about us. It’s part of our fallen human nature. Too often, we find ourselves making decisions based on what we perceive other people’s reactions might be when the reality is that they probably don’t even care. Caring about other’s perceptions becomes problematic when we put their opinion over that of God’s.

This example is but one of many ways in which pride rears its ugly head. I know that for me, I’ve made a lot of decisions based on what I think friends, colleagues, relatives, etc., would think. I’ve personally found that this has been a problem within my professional career, trying to appear smarter than I am or just trying to make coworkers happy, even if it meant that it would put me in a worse position.

We generally do not make wise decisions when we are too busy trying to make those around us happy. Do not confuse this statement with that of doing good works to make those around us happy. What I mean specifically is that when we are too busy trying to make those around us, or even ourselves content in the short term, it does not necessarily set us up for success in the long term.

One way in which we can begin to stop caring about what other people think (again, in the right context), is by praying the Litany of Humility on a regular, if not daily, basis. The Litany of Humility, if you haven’t ever prayed it before, is a litany that automatically humbles even the proudest. We pray for a desire to rid ourselves of the faults and failings that attach itself to pride. One example of which is asking Jesus to deliver us from a desire of being loved.

Through this Litany, we ask Jesus to humble us completely. And it works. I have found that since adding this prayer to my morning prayers that I do not care about what others think. Granted, I am still a human and have my faults and sometimes slip, but overall, I have found that I do not bother with thoughts about what others might think of me. It is a waste of time and energy that could be spent on more productive activities.

If you are finding that you are struggling with different areas of pride, especially that of what others may think of you, I highly suggest you begin praying the Litany of Humility in your daily prayer. You will find that as time progresses, you will stop caring about what others think about you and begin to focus your energy on pleasing God.

O Jesus! meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed,
Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being loved…
From the desire of being extolled …
From the desire of being honored …
From the desire of being praised …
From the desire of being preferred to others…
From the desire of being consulted …
From the desire of being approved …
From the fear of being humiliated …
From the fear of being despised…
From the fear of suffering rebukes …
From the fear of being calumniated …
From the fear of being forgotten …
From the fear of being ridiculed …
From the fear of being wronged …
From the fear of being suspected …

 

That others may be loved more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be esteemed more than I …
That, in the opinion of the world,
others may increase and I may decrease …
That others may be chosen and I set aside …
That others may be praised and I unnoticed …
That others may be preferred to me in everything…
That others may become holier than I, provided that I may become as holy as I should…

The Vatican Has Issued a Statement On the Pennsylvania Report

Earlier this afternoon the Vatican released a statement in response to the Pennsylvania sex abuse report:

“Regarding the report made public in Pennsylvania this week, there are two words that can express the feelings faced with these horrible crimes: shame and sorrow.

 

The Holy See treats with great seriousness the work of the Investigating Grand Jury of Pennsylvania and the lengthy Interim Report it has produced. The Holy See condemns unequivocally the sexual abuse of minors.

 

The abuses described in the report are criminal and morally reprehensible. Those acts were betrayals of trust that robbed survivors of their dignity and their faith. The Church must learn hard lessons from its past, and there should be accountability for both abusers and those who permitted abuse to occur.

 

Most of the discussion in the report concerns abuses before the early 2000s. By finding almost no cases after 2002, the Grand Jury’s conclusions are consistent with previous studies showing that Catholic Church reforms in the United States drastically reduced the incidence of clergy child abuse. The Holy See encourages continued reform and vigilance at all levels of the Catholic Church, to help ensure the protection of minors and vulnerable adults from harm. The Holy See also wants to underscore the need to comply with the civil law, including mandatory child abuse reporting requirements.

 

The Holy Father understands well how much these crimes can shake the faith and the spirit of believers and reiterates the call to make every effort to create a safe environment for minors and vulnerable adults in the Church and in all of society.

 

Victims should know that the Pope is on their side. Those who have suffered are his priority, and the Church wants to listen to them to root out this tragic horror that destroys the lives of the innocent.”

It is appalling that it took the Vatican two full days before addressing this report. It is also sickening that the attitude is essentially “hey, there haven’t been many new cases since 2002, so let’s not dig any deeper!”

We also see from this statement that the Pope is on the side of victims. However, Pope Francis has made people like Cardinal Wuerl his go to men and has even befriended many child abusers himself. How he can say that he is on the side of victims yet be buddy-buddy with these evil men is yet another example of the hypocrisy Pope Francis continues to display.

The problem is a simple problem. We must expunge all homosexuals from the priesthood and prevent them from ever becoming priests in the first place. The vast majority of child molestation is with boys or young men. Heterosexuals do not engage in that type of behavior, only homosexuals do. We must also go a step further, and any member of the clergy who helped give cover should also be removed from the priesthood. All guilty parties should do time and as Pope St. Pius V said should be handed over to the authorities to be put to death.

Finally, this rot is core to the entirety of the Novus Ordo “religion” if you will. Novus Ordo Catholicism (henceforth Novus Ordoism) requires several mentalities that allow child abusers to prosper. First, we must always show mercy to an individual, no matter how evil they or their actions are. Second, we can never put to death any individual, no matter how guilty they are of their evil actions. Third, homosexuals are not the reason for molestation of boys.

What we are witnessing in Pennsylvania we witnessed in Massachusetts back in the early 2000s. How much more abuse was committed and covered up by the clergy across the entire country?

This is disgusting and should make every single Catholic want to flip tables (and then some).

Ultimately, if we want this to end, we must embrace the traditions of our faith and reject the novelties of Novus Ordoism. We must embrace our doctrines that say that these actions are evil and should be punished by severe fasting and in some cases death. Once we return to Jesus Christ and worship as He desires us to, only then will the rot disappear.

Jeff August 16, 2018 3 Comments Permalink

The Bishops Knew and Are Very Sad You Found Out

There is nothing more sickening, disgusting, blood-boiling, rage inducing than the news coming out of Pennsylvania this week.

More than 300 priests were found to have been involved in molesting children. Even worse? Bishops and Cardinals knew about it and did nothing. Well, that’s not entirely true because they did do something.

They covered it up.

The investigation discovered that Cardinal Wuerl, who has an “upstanding reputation for his zero tolerance take on sex abuse,” paid a priest who was going to report a list of known sex abusers within the priesthood to not report it. The report details this as well.

Another case found that a priest had raped a young girl, the girl became pregnant, and the priest took and paid for her to have an abortion. When the priest’s bishop found out, he wrote a letter of condolence…to the priest.

These are just a couple of cases found within the 800+ page document. Cardinal Wuerl is mentioned over 200 times. That’s quite the damning ratio.

The response from bishops, dioceses, and even the Vatican has been even more appalling. Very few have come out and condemned this behavior and those that have don’t come to realize the problem. There are few calls for these disgusting men to be defrocked, removed from the priesthood, and sent to prison where they can rot the rest of their miserable lives away from more potential victims. Unfortunately many mention how sad they are and ashamed…that you found out.

The Vatican Press Office has issued a “no comment” on the entire matter.

It’s undeniable that this rot is affecting the vast majority of the priesthood and hierarchy within the Church. It is time for a purge, even if that means that there won’t be that many priests left to administer the sacraments. The time for wrist-slapping is over.

Every single one of the clergy who molested or covered up molestation should be removed from ministry and thrown in prison.

Funny timing for Pope Francis to say that the death penalty is “inadmissible,” no?

UPDATE (August 16, 2018 10:42pm):

The Vatican has released a Press Statement.

Jeff August 16, 2018 2 Comments Permalink

What Do the Catechisms Have to Say About the Death Penalty?

Catechism of the Council of Trent:

The power of life and death is permitted to certain civil magistrates because theirs is the responsibility under law to punish the guilty and protect the innocent. Far from being guilty of breaking this commandment [Thy shall not kill], such an execution of justice is precisely an act of obedience to it. For the purpose of the law is to protect and foster human life. This purpose is fulfilled when the legitimate authority of the State is exercised by taking the guilty lives of those who have taken innocent lives. In the Psalms we find a vindication of this right: “Morning by morning I will destroy all the wicked in the land, cutting off all evildoers from the city of the Lord” (Ps. 101:8). (Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent, 1566, Part III, 5, n. 4)

Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992):

“Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death peantly, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which teh state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity ‘are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.'”

Pope Francis 2018:

“Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.
Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person’, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

So the Church has been wrong for 2000 years on the Death Penalty. Got it.

Jeff August 2, 2018 Leave A Comment Permalink