GOD BLESS YOU POPE FRANCIS

POPE FRANCIS!

 Here is an archived picture of our new pope - POPE FRANCIS.  His name is Jorge Bergoglio from Argintina.  The first non-European, the first Jesuit, the first Francis!

HABEMUS PAPAM

THE BELLS WERE RUNG

THE SIGN PUT OUT

THE BUNTING DRAPED

THE FLAGS WERE FLOWN

WE MUST HAVE A NEW POPE!

HOLY SMOKES

It is almost 9AM on Wednesday (my day away) here in Akron, OH and black smoke is still coming out of the famed chimney at the Vatican telling us that we are still without pope.  To that end here are a couple more thoughts on items that have been circulating in the news recently.

 

This pose should relate better to today’s Catholics.  I would challenge that position.  I think it wiser to say that today’s Catholic should become more in touch with today’s Church.  We look in the mirror and think, “Here is the Church.”  We are surrounded by people just like us, perhaps with similar issues and we think, “The pope should pay more attention to us!  We are the Church!  These are our issues.  If he wants to be effective and (forgive me) relevant he needs take action on these items.

 

But today’s Catholic is more than a suburban, minivan driving, smart phone owning, T.V. watching westerner.  As a matter of fact, we make up a much smaller portion of the Church than one might think. 

 

A popular topic bandied around is women’s ordination.  Many think the Church will fall apart unless the new pope addresses this issue.  It is not as big an issue in the overall Church as one might think.  One time I was privileged to travel to Zimbabwe and talk with Catholics there.  We brought up western issues and were mostly met with blank and puzzled stares.  “Women priests?  You are worried about women priests when we are worried about food, equality, safety, AIDS, freedom, sanitary conditions, oppressive governments . . .”  We were quite laughed at.

 

Now we might say the pope needs to pay more attention to first world Catholics and I would agree.  There is a lot of work to be done here.  But whenever one speaks of today’s Catholic, keep in mind the family living in a mud hut with a thatch roof, who goes to Mass on Sunday, has only one change of clothes, and who, when he sees a car, thinks it a novelty is just as much a Catholic and deserving just as much attention.

 

I am shocked to my core that there are politics involved with the election of the pope.  Well, of course there is.  Just like those pushing an agenda for “today’s Catholics,” there are those electing a pontiff who have strong beliefs concerning what type if pope is needed to run “today’s Church.”  Of course they are going to talk about it, lobby for it, ask and bargain for a vote.  I think some people imagine the cardinals sitting quietly in a room until the Holy Spirit descends upon them with the name of the guy for whom they are supposed to vote.

 

God gave us brains and bodies.  We are to use them for His glory and for our benefit.  Names arise, talents debated, factions rise and fall and not all of it altruistic but all accompanied by prayer.  In the end one name arises and one of two things we pray is the case: that this was indeed the man the Holy Spirit wished to be picked from out of all that human activity or that this is a man that God can work with.

 

In the mean time – lobby away.

TUESDAY QUOTE OF THE WEEK CCLXXXVI

FINDING TRUTH WHEREVER IT MAY BE FOUND:  "History was being made behind closed doors.  It was undemocratic, it was nontransparent and it was wonderful.  The uncertainty and the apprehension in the crowded press room added to my delight.  The crowning touch was the chimney.  There was something marvelously surreal about an institution that announced the pope's death via an Email to news agencies, and two weeks later announced the election of his successor with a smoke signal."  from John Thavis' "The Vatican Diaries"

 

QUOTE II:  "'Latin is not difficult, friends.  It's not reserved for experts.  My God, every prostitute in ancient Rome spoke Latin,' he reminded anyone within earshot."  Same source

QUOTE III:  "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that you can't always be sure of their authenticity.” Abraham Lincoln (Thanks to Nan) 

 

IN OTHER NEWS:

 

I wanted to know immediately when the pope was elected so that we could ring the bells and put up the bunting.  Fr. Pfeiffer told me about this site with a Pope Alarm!

 

Adam sent this article in:  Five Reasons to Kill Christian Music.  Excellent!  Thank you Adam.  At the top of the page you will also find a link to "The Catholic Church Young People Really Want."  That too is pretty good and reflects conversations that I have had with many young people.

 

This is a fundraiser from Imaginesisters.  It is one minute:

 

It concerns the film located here.

Here is Jeff Foxworthy's Bible Challenge.

JP sent this pic in:

Fr. Damian has a new article on Word on Fire.  Read it here.

And this is why every Catholic in the world should have a say in who the next pope is.  (ThanksMW)

MONDAY DIARY: THE CROSS CROSS

So this past weekend was the Bishop's Seminary Brunch.   It was only the second one to which I ever went.  The first time I went as a seminarian to provide entertainment for the folks.  I remember walking out afterward and running in to our bishop for the first time (who was then Bishop Pilla) and he said, "Good afternoon John" and I was on cloud nine that he knew my name.  A minute later I realized I had my name tag on.

 

I don't know about you but when I hear "brunch" I'm thinking there will be some sausage and/or bacon and other not so good for you but just the same wonderful foods that are at least tangentially associated with that in between breakfast and lunch (hence the name) meals.  But it was chicken and pasta.  Don't get me wrong, it was very good chicken and pasta - superb - but it was probably more of an early dinner than what I think of as brunch.  But that makes for a lousy name.  "The Bishop's Seminary Early Dinner"

 

There were about 1,000 people there.  My cousins were the co-chairs this year and the when they kicked the afternoon off this incident occurred:

Well, it provided a good laugh for us well trained Catholics.  It got me thinking about some of the ways that people use to cover when they start to make the Sign of the Cross and then realize that it is not called for yet.  I put my had up to give a blessing and their hand goes automatically to their forehead before they realize I have a couple of sentences before the actual blessing comes.  Here are some of the techniques used to cover:

Anyway, as one of the seminarians reminded us - priests come from the people and they need encouragement, support, and prayer.  If you see a young man and for some reason you think that he has a vocation, say something to him.  And if you have a couple a couple of spare seconds, pray for those in formation.

FRIDAY POTPOURRI: WHO AM WE ANYWAY?

Continuing a look at Lumen Gentium

In the fifth paragraph the Church explains more clearly Her identity and Her mission.  The mystery of salvation, the Kingdom of God which has been foretold and promised through the ages is now breaking into history through the birth, life, death, resurrection, and commissioning by Jesus.  The seed had been planted and now it is springing up to life.

 

Jesus, in His death and resurrection, is now more clearly understood not only to be true man, but true God who gives His disciples and subsequently the Church His Spirit, causing the Church to evermore reach for that Kingdom of God for which we were designed and for which we yearn.  (We keep our eyes on the prize.)

 

In paragraph six the Christ is the normative way to the Father, that all are lead to heaven by Christ Who is the only true Sheep Gate without Whom we can do nothing.  While on earth the Church is in exile and so she focuses on “things above” until such time as hope is fulfilled and she appears in glory with her bridegroom.  In other words we are like American citizens trapped in Mexico with the boarders closed and we live our American customs and ideals until such time as we are able to cross over the line and be in our homeland.

 

7)  By Jesus being both God and man, He has redeemed human nature and by sending His Holy Spirit on us, we are united to Him and become one body in Christ.  This uniting comes through the Sacraments of which Jesus is the One, True Priest.  Sometimes I explain it this way:  God the Father and God the Son are one.  During His time here Jesus made Himself one with us (the Church.)  Therefor we become one with the Father and thus have healed the rift between us and our Father.  A = B, B = C, therefore, C = B.  (Perhaps equal isn’t the best sign to use, it is meant hear as representing unity.) 

 

Within this body we all have our parts to perform in some hierarchical fashion beginning with the apostles.  However, all members are necessary for the body to perform well and thus when part of the body suffers, the whole body suffers.  So I pulled a muscle this morning working out (5:30 Insanity work out – ugh) and now it isn’t just my leg that suffers, EVERYTHING (and everyone around me) suffers.

 

Christ is the head of the body and all members strive to be formed in His likeness “until Christ be formed in them.”  To do this we have been given the Holy Spirit who acts in the Church like the soul acts in the individual’s body.

 

Finally in this paragraph (thick aint it?  And we are just scratching the surface) it describes Christ as the Bridegroom loving His bride the Church.  He loves her as Himself and so seeks to purify her with divine gifts.  She is submissive to Him (read: under His mission) “so that (she) may increase and attain to all the fullness of God.”

 

Shew.

DID YOU KNOW THAT 48% OF ALL STATISTICS ARE MADE UP ON THE SPOT? (I JUST MADE THAT UP.)

Today is not so much a rant, but an observation.

 

It’s difficult to get good news out about the Church even when the news is good.  Just for example, can you imagine trying to organize and lead 1.2 billion people from every country, socioeconomic level, age, government, education level, etc, etc, etc, and making them all happy?

 

Aint going to happen.

 

I wanted to organize an outing for dinner with my sister and my cousin yesterday and the three of us couldn’t agree on a place to eat.

 

So, an accurate and documented article came out in the Plain Dealer on Wednesday, March 6^th entitled, “U.S. Catholics Mixed on Benedict, Poll Says” written by Dalia Sussman of the (wait for it) New York Times.  The poll stated that most Catholics were positive about the Church in the United States, 54% giving it a good to excellent rating, and 77% said that things were either improving or remaining the same.  Three quarters thought the next pope would be in touch with today’s Catholics.  (Which ones?  The ones in the desert?  The ones in countries in which the faith is suppressed?  The ones in the jungle?  Oh, I know, you mean the ones that drive minivans and shop at the mall and have three computers and five televisions at home. – Sarcasm there.  Sorry.  I digress.)

 

Wow.

 

Wow.

 

Wow.

 

(I’ll say it again.)

 

Wow.

 

Most presidents would KILL for numbers like this!  And they are only concerned with one country for votes!  Reurters reports that our president has a 43% approval rating according to this article.  Bet he would like to exchange his numbers for those above.  Considering that the Church and our pope have to fashion a faith that speaks to the African, the European, the Asian, the American, etc. etc. etc., and not just cater to the West, and then to have numbers like this IMHO is nothing short of the miraculous.

 

But then it is couched in the article stated above.  “Only” 50% that thought things were good.  “A mere” 4% thought things were excellent.  “But only 3 in 10” of the three quarters who thought positively about the new pope had a “great deal of confidence in that.”

 

Talk about a killjoy.

 

Then there was this totally disconnected little ditty that I absolutely loved.  “’He just seemed kind of bland,’ Dorothy Lascuola, 66, a frequent churchgoer from Butler Pa., said of Pope Benedict XVI in a follow-up interview.”  Perhaps we should elect Justin Bieber for the next pontiff.

 

Thank goodness we know what Dorothy thought.  But Fr. Pfeiffer was just saying yesterday what a masterful mind our papal emeritus has and was commenting on some of his masterful and quite exciting writing.  Of course nothing of this kind was reported so I thought I would make up for it here.

 

*sigh*

 

That did get kind of ranty after all didn’t.  Perhaps I get too much fun out of it.

 

I'VE HEARD IT SAID THAT SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT YOU ARE A PUSHOVER BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU WHO. OR HOW MANY. OR WHAT THEY SAID

Sorry there was no post yesterday.  Ironically it was because I was away hearing confessions all day at local schools.  It turned out well however!  Welcome visitors from WDTPRS.  It was great to hear from you Father!

 

One of the early lessons that you learn from Mom is, “Only speak for yourself.”  Never say something like, “Everyone hates you.”  First of all it is cruel.  Now there can be an imagined great number of anonymous persons out there.  It is also unhelpful.  It leads to questions such as, “Oh yea?  Like who?  How many?  What exactly are they saying?”  Now you have to back up your claims (or try to back out of the statement) or end up looking foolish and damaging your position. 

 

Well, perhaps not too many learned that lesson from Mom and now some are journalists.  (I know I call journalists to account often here, but it is not out of disrespect for their professions – in fact I value it highly – it’s just that I want who are writing poorly  to do a better job which includes research and homework and conveying the material well.)  Here is an example from just one article printed in the Akron Beacon Journal, Monday, March 4^th, 2003, entitled Catholics Ponder Future Pope by Bradley Brooks of the Associated Press.

 

“ . . . many parishioners said that the next pope should . . .”

 

So “many” said this.  “Many” out of how many?  “Many” out of the ten parishioners with whom you spoke?  “Many” as in a poll of a parish was done and 20 out of 300 said so?  “Many” as in three quarters?  The information becomes almost useless.  Are there other groups with “many” in them holding different opinions that are as large as the “many” that the reporter picked?  Could it be that the other groups with “many” in them could possibly be saying something that the author of the article does not agree with?  Could the “many” in other groups be actually larger?  Why does this “many” get carved out?

 

“Some south African Catholics called for . . .”

 

How many?  10?  10 is some.  So is a million.  I could say that “some” of them probably also think that the Easter Bunny is real or that “some” believe that they have been abducted by aliens.  Now, tell me that by a scientific pole 1 million practicing Catholics in South Africa think “the Catholic Church should” and you might have a story worth reading.

 

Later in the article sighting the same “some” it says, “They also suggest ending the celibacy requirement . . .”  Who does?  Is it Catholics?  Is it clergy?  Is it dissatisfied clergy? 

 

“Many expect the church to pick . . .” 

 

Who is this completely disassociated, mysterious “many”?  Is it the bunch of guys in your office?  Is this a “many” that you picked up watching TV or listening to NPR?  It may be true.  But who are you talking about?  Is this a worldwide poll or something you talked about at the bar last night?  I would have more respect for this article if the author had written, “I expect the church to pick . . .” It would then at least have some reference: a person, a number, someone who can be verified. 

 

There may be a push to get information out about the papal elections since things are happening so quickly and unexpectedly, but that is no excuse for poor reporting.  I’m afraid this article gets an “F”.

MONDAY DIARY: THE PENITENTIAL SEASON

So two weeks ago our bishop decided that every parish in the diocese would have three hours of confessions on Wednesday night.  In theory anyway, every parish would be open and you could go anywhere in the diocese and go to confession.  It sounded like a great and holy things to do.

I will admit that although I was all for it, I was a bit nervous.  We are fortunate that so many people in this parish go to confession (or that people come here for confession.)  We have confessions three days a week, the Benedictines have them here every other Sunday, and Fr. Marty has his confessions here on Wednesdays.  That confessions 5 times a week.  And many, many times we go over the allotted times for confession. 

 

Which is EXACTLY what made me apprehensive.  Would there be enough people to go to confession to fill three hour's time or would we be staring at the four corners of the confessional for most of it.

 

It's not that I haven't sat for that amount of time to hear confessions.  That happens often enough especially at large retreats.  But the difference is when those are done, you are done and you leave.  This night however we might hear 5 confessions the first half hour and then sit there in that tiny little box for the next two and a half hours without so much as a window to look out, counting the holes in the sound tiles after having said several rosaries.

 

And our confessionals were not built for people over 6'.  It is a lot like flying coach.  If I want to cross my legs I practically have to open my door to do it.  As Daffy Duck once said, "My dressing room is so small I have to go outside to change my mind."

 

Oh yes, I sound like a baby.  "Get over it," I hear some people saying.  But as Blaise Pasquale once said, "Most evil comes into the world because human beings cannot sit still in a chair for 30 minutes."  (Have you ever been in a doctor's office when he is running late?)  Along the same lines a priest once said, "To breathe 25 times without distraction: That's discipline!  That's freedom!"

 

So much for being the hero.

 

So I tool some stuff with me just in case:

Then, like a good professional - I made sure that all of the equipment was in working order:

 Then it was time to hunker down and get ready for whatever was coming.

But you know what?  It was an AWESOME night!  From the moment our "vacant" lights came on until over three hours later we had solid lines of penitents (and we were cranking them out!)  Fortunately a priest friend came the last hour and helped us out so we were able to cut down the line some.  The confessions were great and it was an absolute success.

And I got some cool texts from other priests that night.

 

Now I am all excited to do it again next year.  Who says that the sacrament of confession is dead?!



FRIDAY POTPOURRI: A STRONG CONSTITUTION

In the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church or Lumen Gentium (they really need a marketing person to make their titles more appetizing) the Church attempts to explain to the world who she is.  (If you’ve not caught on, this is the next document we are reviewing as suggested we do during the Year of Faith by our papal emeritus.)  In the first paragraph it states, “she proposes, for the benefit of the faithful and of the whole world to set forth, as clearly as possible . . . her own nature and universal mission.”

 

In deceivingly dense writing, the second paragraph takes us on a quick trip through salvation history pointing out that our creation through the second person of the Blessed Trinity was a totally gratuitous (in the best sense) act of our God, that it was redeemed by Him, and will eventually “return” to Him through the power of the Holy Spirit.  A Christocentric Church, She is caught up in the mystery and mission that God has set forth and hence will, in some sense, always be mysterious.

 

It is God’s power that is making His kingdom grow in the world and we are brought back to that original unity for which we were made primarily through the celebration of the Eucharist through which, “the unity of believers, who form the one body in Christ, is both expressed and brought about.”  So we are also Eucharistically centered.

 

When Jesus’ mission came to completion, the Holy Spirit was sent to “continually sanctify the Church . . .”  We are constantly made new and each given gifts to aid the Church (the Body of Christ) in Her mission.  The Church is bride calling out in the spirit to Her Spouse, the Bridegroom (Jesus) and “hence the universal (read catholic) Church is seen to be ‘a people brought into unity from the unity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.’”  (Do you see where John Paul II might have begun getting his idea concerning the Theology of the Body?)  Cool stuff.

 

Gads!  And that’s just the first 4 paragraphs there is a lot more to glean out of it than what was presented here but this give you a taste.

TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE: HAPPY RETIREMENT GOOD AND FAITHFUL SERVANT & RANT/COUNTER RANT - GOOD THING YOU ARE NO LONGER IN SCHOOL

Today at 2:00PM we will no longer say, “Benedict our pope . . .” at the Mass.  I tried practicing that part of the Mass today skipping that part and blew it right away.  (One would think it would be so, so easy.)  I said, “together with Richard our pope . . .” who is our bishop.  Glad I made the goof now instead of at the weekend Masses.

 

I told the 400-some-odd children at the Mass today that this is a historic moment.  They were attending the last Mass at this parish in which Benedict’s name would be mentioned as pope (unless the next pope takes the same name of course) and that after such time, the Church will be without a pope until the next one is elected.  It has been so long since a pope retired (around 6 centuries) that nobody even remembers what to do.  This will be a remarkable thing for the history books for some time if not forever and we were alive to see it.

 

Of course the pope cannot just retire – at least not in the United States.  I spent much of yesterday driving around in the car and listening to various NPR stations.  Half of the reports I heard of Benedict’s retirement were absolutely salacious.  At some points stunning in their viciousness and outright misleading statements (from stations that claim to present the unvarnished truth for educated people by educated people) to other stories that were quite good in which the person interviewed would equally tell of Benedict’s great achievements, acknowledge that at which he was not particularly talented, and refusing to give in to the interviewer’s obvious desire for unsubstantiated dirt.

 

In any event, one interviewer stated that the media had an obligation to speculate on motivations of the pope when information is not available.  Funny how it invariably has to be negative.  The most obvious motivation – he wants to retire – is never one of them. 

 

In a way it is kind of a back handed compliment.  They are paying attention even if it is, in many cases, in a negative fashion.  Is there leader besides the president of the United States that gets this much attention in the U.S.?  (Possibly English royalty on a really good day.)

 

Today was meant to be a fond fair well post for the pope.  I am afraid I got sidetracked by paying too much attention to the news.  Actually, today there was a lot of decent and balanced coverage.  Thank you Pope (for a few more hours.)  I hope your first day after your prayers you have a good glass of wine, play the piano, and take a nice long nap.

 

IN OTHER NEWS:

 

I couldn’t let this one go though.  Yesterday in the Beacon Journal, they found it timely and necessary to run an op ed piece about priestly celibacy from the New York Times by Frank Bruni.  The crux of the article is that the next pope should rethink the whole priestly celibacy thing.  Fine.  After all it is only a discipline, not a dogmatic teaching essential to the priesthood.   I think it would be a mistake to get rid of it (I know, shock) but the Church would not end if that teaching changed.

 

However, the reasoning that he used is not tenable and uses poor science and reasoning to draw his conclusions.  Take the following points:

 

“The church’s (sic) leaders preach a purity that its own clerics can’t maintain.”

 

This is partly true.  It is a bit sensational to make it sound as though every single priest in the world fails at this, but it is very true that there are dramatic failures – and even many of them.  So by his reasoning, we should stop teaching about charity (love the Lord your God with all your heart, your neighbor as yourself, and your enemies) because if we can’t live it, it must be done away with.

 

He also maintains that it keeps too many men out of the priesthood who would fill dwindling ranks.  “It renders the priesthood less attractive, contributing to the shortage of priests.”  It is similar to the possibility of getting shot by going to war.  First, we want men who are willing to sacrifice to serve.  Second, if this would really be a solution, then mainstream non-Catholic Churches that have married, male ministers/priests should have PLENTY of men willing to serve.  Such is not the case.

 

Bruni also alleges that all sexual misdeeds in the Church can be attributed to the unnatural state of a sexless existence.  I am glad he cleared this up for us!  Now all we have to do is let all priests get married and have sex and there will be no more cheating on spouses, no child abuse, no divorce, no remarriage . . . wait . . . then . . .  why doesn’t that sound true?  Maybe we should stop preaching about marriage and fidelity too.  (Touch of sarcasm there.)

 

Now what might be true is that some men go into the priesthood to get away from sexual desires that they (and society) consider impure.  Bruni may be right about this.  On the other hand, even if priests are allowed to be married it would revert to the ancient customs where by celibacy is optional, not done away with.  There would still be a celibate tradition in the Church and these men of whom Bruni is afraid would still be there.  Further, a marriage would have to take place before ordination, the man would be barred from the episcopate, and he would not be able to remarry.

 

The rest of the article is full of antidotal evidence, conjectures, and “people have told me,” type writing that if it were turned in as a paper for a high school class, it would receive an “F” for failure to make an informed opinion that could be backed up with actual evidence.  The lesson to take away here is to remember to think critically when an “expert” is being presented to you.

WHY LAITY VOTE FOR POPE

We are adults.  We know how we want to be treated.  We know by what person we wish to be "ruled."  And so it is very “in” at the moment to say that lay people should have more of role in the election of a new pope.  (Hey!  What about us priests and bishops?!)  It is a very enticing idea, but nobody is suggesting exactly how that should or even could be done.  It’s easy to say somebody should do something positive and then give not the slimmest suggesting on how even if (debatably) it is a good idea.

 

So say we want everyone to have a vote.  I think those who most push for this idea would be the least pleased with the outcome.  There are over I billion Catholics in the world and the vast majority of them are now south of the equator where sticking with traditional veins of Catholicism are much more in practice. 

 

And it is one thing to say that we in the West should get a vote, but if we do, then those living in the Sahara desert who are Catholic should get a vote too.  And exactly how would it be carried out?  Who would collect the votes in the Antarctic, China, Zimbabwe, or from persecuted Christians in Catholic-hostile countries?  How long do we wait to collect them all?  How do we make sure that they are well informed in order to make a good decision?

 

And who would be qualified to vote?  Can the C & E Catholics have a vote?  How about those with strong opinions but don’t go to Sunday Mass – do they get a vote?  How do we identify a voting Catholic?  Must they have a letter from a pastor?  (THERE’S a ton more paperwork)  How do make sure that there is one Catholic – one vote?

 

What if there is a split in the vote; the west clearly behind one candidate and the third world (in greater numbers) overwhelmingly for their candidate?  Is this not rife for division in the Church?

 

But in reality we have already voted – not directly, but we have made our desires manifest.  The reason there is so much talk about a pope coming from the third world country is (for whatever reason) they evangelize and keep adding to their numbers.  Sons are encouraged to enter the priesthood causing the powerbase of the Church to shift.  They will be providing more of the cardinals that will pick the future popes.

 

Meantime the west (generally) is less involved, our attendance at Mass is plummeting, we are more and more in conflict with 2000 years of consistent Church teaching, and we actively dissuade our young men from becoming priests.  And we want a vote. 

 

We have already cast it.