Butyrum Et Mel Comedet

To bow before Boy-Jesus poor,

Kingly Shepherd and Shepherd-King,

Through yonder open stable-door
Herds and kings are hastening;

The God of Strength, the Lord of Might,

Emmanuel, Sweetness Infinite,

Enthroned on Mary's maiden-breast,

And lulled by her to softest rest.

One day shall pass to Nazareth

This royal and all heavenly Boy,
Of country air to breathe the breath

And taste the peasant's simple joy;
To labour hard throughout the day,
Spend happy eves in restful play,
At Mother's table take His seat,
Butter and honey to bless and eat.

Isaias VII: 15

Fr. David Bearne, S.J. 

Link (here) to The Irish Monthly

To My Creator, And To Those Who Govern In His Name

4th Superior General Everard Mercurian, S.J.

Amongst the different rules which St. Ignatius laid down for the observance of his brethren in Rome, while laboring to form the Constitutions, and from which Father Everard Mercuriane, the fourth General of the Company, has drawn a great part of those which we call general rules, as well as of such as are applied to certain particular offices;

 there was one by which the Superiors were required, in the general exhortations which it was their duty to make to us, in order to excite us to religious perfection; to take once a month, as the subject of their discourse, the virtue of obedience. 

He attached so much importance to it, that feeling his end approaching, he wished to bequeath us a public recommendation of this virtue, as his last remembrance. He therefore called for Father John Philip Viti, his Secretary's assistant, and saying to him, " Write down what I think on the subject of obedience, that I may leave it as a memorial to the Society;" dictated the following words.

First. At my very first entrance into a religious life, I must place myself entirely in the hands of God, and of him who holds the place of God by His authority.

Second. My desire must be that my Superior should oblige me to renounce my own judgment, and to subdue my own understanding.

Third. In every thing which is not sinful, I must do tho will of my Superior, and not my own.

Fourth. There are three different ways of obeying; the first is when the obedience is of precept; and then it is good; the second, when being able to choose between two actions, I prefer doing what I am advised to do; and this is better. But the most perfect of all is the third, and consists in doing a thing without having received any express order; merely from believing that such would be my Superior's will.

Fifth. I must make no difference between one Superior and another, nor examine whether it is the chief, the second, or the third who commands me; but consider them all equal before God, whose place they hold; for if I make a distinction of persons, I weaken the virtue of obedience. 

Sixth. If it seems to me that the Superior has ordered me to do something against my conscience, or in which there appears to me something sinful; if he is of a contrary opinion, and I have no certainty, I should rely upon him. If my trouble continues, I should lay aside my own judgment and confide my doubts to one, two, or three persons; and rely upon their decision. If all this should not satisfy me, I am far from the perfection which .my religious state requires. 

Seventh. I must no longer belong to myself, but to my Creator, and to those who govern in His name; and in whose hands I should be as soft wax, whatsoever he chooses to require of me; whether as to the writing or receiving of letters—speaking or not speaking to such or such a person, and other things of that nature; and I ought to employ all my zeal and fervor in executing his desires with promptitude. 

Eighth. I should regard myself as a dead body, without will or intelligence; as a little crucifix which is turned about unresistingly, at the will of him who holds it; as a staff in the hand of an old man, who uses it as he requires it, and as it suits him best. So should I be in the hands of the Order, doing whatever service is judged best. 

Ninth. I must never ask my Superior to send me to such a place, nor to employ me in such an office; I can only make my wishes known to him, deferring absolutely to my Superior, and ready to acknowledge as best whatever he orders. 

Eleventh. With regard to poverty, I must depend upon the Superior alone; consider nothing as my personal property, and myself in all that I use, as a statue, which, allows itself to be stripped, no matter what the occasion may be, and offers no resistance.

Ignatius had not waited for the approach of death, at which time he dictated these eleven maxims, to write his thoughts upon obedience; but he then did for the general instruction of the Society, what he had already done a few years before for the particular use of several colleges. He had been desirous of laying down a rule, and putting a curb to the immoderate fervor of some of our Religious in Spain and Portugal; who thought it lawful to govern themselves in spiritual things, and who conducted themselves with more courage than prudence, from whence serious evils resulted.

Some gave themselves up to austerities injurious to their strength, and others, intoxicated with the sweetness of contemplation, became hermits or Solitaries; all equally forgetful of the object of their vocation. 

Ignatius addressed letters to them, filled with wise instructions and solid reasoning, to prove to them, that in withdrawing themselves as they did from their duty of obedience, to follow their own inclinations, they deviated from the right path, and took back the better part of the holocaust which they had offered up to God, namely, their own will; so that all which they offered to Him in its place, was valueless. But above every thing that has been written upon the subject of obedience, whether coming from the pen of the Saint, or from all those who have treated of this virtue.

Link (here) to History of the life and institute of St. Ignatius de Loyola

100 Jesuits

Regis University

A hundred Jesuit experts and educators from around the world are meeting this week at Regis University in Denver, Colorado, to discuss the future of the “Jesuit Commons - Higher Education at the Margins” program. Higher Education in the Margins is a greater distance education initiative aimed at refugees that was launched two years ago by the Jesuit Refugee Service in collaboration with 13 Jesuit universities.

“The goals are really around the learning, the development of a new knowledge base, development of leaders who can think differently, solve problems on behalf of their community, wherever that community is,” said Dr. Mary McFarland, the International Director of the program.

The conference, she said, is an opportunity to plot the future for the initiative: “We’re learning together how the model needs to evolve, to insure that there is access to those at the margins for Jesuit higher education.” While she acknowledged that, as a new program, “Higher Education at the Margins” faces some challenges, she is optimistic about the outcome: “We’re in a pilot, so it’s not a utopia. We have a lot of challenges that we’re trying to understand collectively from a world-wide point of view… but the outcome is well worth it, it highlights there’s this phenomenal, growing group of people around the world committed.”

Listen to the complete Vatican Radio interview of Dr. Mary McFarland with Christopher Wells: (here) 

Pithiness

The fact that someone says “I believe that pregnancy is not a disease” means that they are also saying “other people believe that pregnancy is a disease.”  Maybe I am completely naïve, but I don’t know any of my colleagues in maternal health who would say that pregnancy is a disease in the same way cancer is a disease.  What my public health colleagues would claim is that becoming pregnant carries a change in health status; and it is a change in health status that carries significant health risks.  Saying that pregnancy carries health risks is not disparaging; it is descriptive.  Outside of the pithiness of a bumper sticker, that pregnancy is both a great gift to be cherished and that it carries health risks can stand alongside each other perfectly well.

Link (here) to the opinion piece at the Jesuit Post by  Michael Rozier, SJ

A Prayer For Protestants

May God be kind to captive fish
Who dwell in little bowls and wish
To swim, and can’t, and have no notion
Of what has happened to the ocean.
And may He bless in aviaries
Continually caged canaries,
Who wonder, when they try to fly,
What can have happened to the sky.

By one time Jesuit Father Leonard Feeney, M.I.C.M.
Link (here) to Catholicism.org

THE PRIEST LEONARD FEENEY IS DECLARED EXCOMMUNICATED

Pope Pius XII

Pius XII – Decree Excommunicating Leonard Feeney, 13 February 1953

Prior to the excommunication, Feeney received the following summons to appear before the Holy Office from Cardinal Pizzardo on November 22, 1952.

The Holy Office has been obliged repeatedly to make your teaching and conduct in the Church the object of its special care and attention, and recently, after having again carefully examined and calmly weighed all the evidence collected in your cause, it has found it necessary to bring this question to a conclusion.

DECREE

Since the priest Leonard Feeney, a resident of Boston (Saint Benedict Center), who for a long time has been suspended a divinis for grave disobedience toward church authority, has not, despite repeated warnings and threats of incurring excommunication ipso facto, come to his senses, the Most Eminent and Reverend Fathers, charged with safeguarding matters of faith and morals, have, in a Plenary Session held on Wednesday 4 February 1953, declared him excommunicated with all the effects of the law.

On Thursday, 12 February 1953, our Most Holy Lord Pius XII, by Divine Providence Pope, approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers, and ordered that it be made a matter of public law.

Given at Rome, at the headquarters of the Holy Office, 13 February 1953.

Marius Crovini, Notary

AAS (February 16, 1953) Vol. XXXXV, Page 100

Link (here) to Roman Catholicism

Cardinal Avery Dulles, S.J. On The Passing Of Fr. Leonard Feeny

I regret that I did not make notes on some of Leonard Feeney’s conversation. His table talk was brilliant and memorable. He would teach us to look on the world with fresh eyes and to delight as he did in the variety of God’s creation. 

He was particularly fascinated by the animals, as appeared in many of his poems. One of them, written for children, begins characteristically: "Moo is a cow/ When she makes a bow/ To a meadow full of hay./ Shoo is a hen/ When she’s back again/ And you want her to go away." 

As a spiritual director Father Feeney carefully trained his disciples. Although he was capable of sharp admonitions and rebukes, his general practice was to lead by positive encouragement. He was generous in praising others, both in their presence and when they were absent. When he noticed faults in the members of the group, he would correct these in a good-humored way, with playful mimicry, rhymes and puns. (For his views on the value and limits of the pun it would be worthwhile to read his little article, "How Much Do I Like a Pun?" [Am., 9/26/36].) 

Father Feeney’s light-hearted mockery extended not only to members of the Center but to the public figures of the day. Parodying their rhetoric and mannerisms, he would deliver with mock solemnity imaginary speeches such as Al Smith on the fallacies in Descartes’s philosophy ("putting Descartes before the horse"), Fulton Sheen on merits of Coca-Cola ("Ho, everyone that thirsteth for the pause that refreshes!") and Franklin Roosevelt on the decline of sacramental religion ("Some of our underprivileged are having to get along on two paltry sacraments, or even none"). 

In other imitations he presented Katherine Hepburn reporting a championship prizefight and Eleanor Roosevelt broadcasting the events of Good Friday. We listened to these imitations with our sides splitting, almost sick with laughter. Then at a crucial moment Father Feeney would be likely to remove his clerical collar, put it over his head like a wimple and begin to speak in the broken English of Mother Cabrini.

Link (here) to the 1978 obituary in America Magazine of Fr. Leonard Feeney written by Fr. Avery Dulles, S.J. 

He Will Die Within The Official Fold

Leonard Feeney, a defrocked Jesuit priest and pretty much of a legend in this city as a result of the “sermons” he preached on the Common every Sunday without fail for eight years, from 1949 to 1957, attracting sometimes as many as a thousand people to heckle and to laugh as much as to listen—Father Leonard Feeney is in the news again. 

He is being courted by the Catholic Church, the same church that silenced him 25 years ago and then excommunicated him for heresy four years later, his official sin being his dogged insistence that no one can achieve salvation outside the Church.  

Nearly two years ago the Vatican, through the quiet efforts of Cardinal Humberto Medeiros, removed its censures from Feeney and 29 of his devoted followers, allowing them to partake once again of the sacraments of Roman Catholicism.  And also allowing Feeney, once again, to perform his priestly functions with Papal approval. All of which means little, probably, since Father Feeney has been performing such tasks for his hard core devotees—dubbed “Feeneyites” by the press in the ‘50s—all these years anyway.  But to Feeney, now 76 years old and in the twilight of a bizarre lifetime of controversy, the last 17 years of which he has spent in virtual exile from all the rest of us damned non-believers, the removal of censure must be a real comfort.  It means he will die within the official fold and it also holds the promise of eventual recognition by the Holy See of his monastic little band, calling themselves “Slaves of The Immaculate Heart of Mary.” Hopefully, other Catholics will then be allowed to visit Feeney at his idyllic retreat in Harvard, Mass. “It was an act of charity, you might say,” offered Brother Gabriel, a tall, pale, and sad-eyed Feeney follower, last week.  “Since Vatican II [the Catholic Church’s effort to modernize itself in the early ‘60s], the extreme liberals in the church have been allowed to drift farther and farther to the left without censure—like the very liberal Dutch and German theologians.  There is now, finally, a movement to give the same consideration to the right.”

Link (here) to the secular newspaper The Phoenix to read the full and lengthy article.
Blogger Note: This article was authored in 1974 by a non-catholic, the author Dave O'Brien disparages many Catholic customs and traditions of the Church. The article does offer a lot technical information about the life of Fr. Feeney. The article also charges Fr. Feeney with antisemitism.

Strictly Protestant

    In the late 1940s Leonard Feeney, S. J. began to teach that there is
    no salvation outside the Church. He was correct in saying that there
    were official teachings, even definitions, on that score. But his
    tragic error came when he adopted Protestant method, thinking that in
    that way he would be one of the only true Catholics! We spoke of his
    protestant method with good reason. First, he was excommunicated for
    disobedience, refusing to go to Rome to explain his position. Then
    the Holy Office, under Pius XII, sent a letter to the Archbishop of
    Boston, condemning Feeney's error. (It is known that Pius XII
    personally checked the English text of that letter). In the very
    first paragraph pointed out what is obvious: we must avoid private
    interpretation of Scripture -- for that is strictly Protestant. But
    then the letter said we must also avoid private interpretation of the
    official texts of the Church. To insist on our own private
    interpretation, especially when the Church contradicts that, is pure
    Protestant attitude.

Fr. Daniel Berrigan, S.J "Arrested More Times Than He Can Count"

Fr. Daniel Berrigan, S.J being arrested

Many great minds have questioned the logic of retributive violence, but perhaps none as persistently and unwaveringly as Father Daniel Berrigan, S.J.. Today, the lifelong social justice activist and renegade Jesuit priest turns 90 years old. At a time when self-proclaimed Christian politicians espouse a Tea Party-inspired theology of xenophobia and vengeance, Berrigan is a rare soul that continues tirelessly opposing violence in its many forms.  Along with his late brother Phillip, he has publicly opposed aid to alleged anti-Communist forces in Southeast Asia, the use of American forces in Grenada, the installation of Pershing missiles in West Germany, aid to the Contras in Nicaragua, intervention in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion, the Cold War, and the Gulf War.  Berrigan also vocally opposed the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.[1]  For Berrigan, Christianity is a counter-cultural practice directly at odds with the prevailing national culture of retributive justice. Arrested more times than he can count -- but “fewer than I should have been,” Berrigan says -- he has spent over half a century digging mock graves on the Pentagon’s front lawn, pouring vials of his own blood on Capitol Hill, vandalizing army airplanes, hammering on nuclear nosecones, turning his back on judges during his sentencing hearings, staging hunger strikes in prisons, undergoing strip searches for educating his fellow inmates, and standing in court on charges ranging from “criminal mischief” to “destruction of government property” to, most egregiously, “failure to quit.” [2]  Berrigan fears moral suicide over physical death and regards moral autonomy as more liberating than physical freedom.

Link (here) to the communist inspired website Commondreams

Cardinal Albert Vanhoye, S.J. "You See His Delicate Love For The Lord "

Cardinal Albert Vanhoye, S.J.

It is clear that for the Christian it is necessary to begin with the Gospel, to delve into it in meditation, in prayer, to apply it to your own life. This is the first essential thing. But the Gospel itself points to the Old Testament. Jesus is the promised Messiah. So, it is helpful to read the prophetic texts, especially the messianic ones. The Psalms are useful for prayer, but it must be said that they do not always have the Gospel spirit. A distinction has to be made, then. Some Psalms are full of curses against enemies, they are very far from Jesus' precept about loving enemies and praying for them. It is clear that it is necessary for the faithful to have the assistance of aids that present the texts and place them at the intellectual level of the faithful, their capacity to understand and live.

Then among the Gospels there is a difference between the Synoptics and John's Gospel. From the point of view of the faithful the most interesting Gospel is Mark's, which is very lively, which tells of miracles in a very detailed way, etc. The Gospel of Matthew gives a richer teaching and so it is necessary to always return to it to be filled again with the evangelical spirit. On the other hand, John's Gospel goes deeply into the faith in a marvelous way. It is necessary to really meditate on John's Gospel, to grasp it in faith and love for the Lord. Luke, too, is very interesting. It is the disciple's Gospel. 

It would also be possible to start with Luke's Gospel, which occupies itself more with the disciple's relationship to the Lord Jesus. The great discourses of Matthew are broken up in Luke's Gospel. The beatitudes, instead of being expressed in the third person are addressed directly to the disciples: "Blessed are you poor… ." This is an example. Then Luke relates himself to Jesus in a very delicate way, especially in the account of the Passion. There you see his delicate love for the Lord very well; his way of softening the most cruel, most offensive things.

Link (here) to Zenit

Priest Terminated At Boston College

American priest Father John Shea's contract at the Jesuit-run Boston College has been terminated because of his insistence that women should be allowed to enter the priesthood, said a report on ucanews.com students are protesting the decision by the college to not renew the contract of the adjunct professor in its School of Theology and Ministry, who has openly questioned why the Church won't ordain women, reports wbur.org. The Boston College mission statement on its website talks about the Jesuit foundation of the school that makes it unique. It reads: "No other institution so explicitly embodies the fundamental human desire to know." But after Fr Shea, a professor of pastoral care and counseling, asked church leaders for a theological explanation for why women are not being ordained to the priesthood of the Catholic church, he was let go, the report said. Fr Shea will leave his position at the end of this semester. He refused to comment. The school says, as a matter of policy, it does not discuss personnel decisions.

Link (here) to Cath News

Leonard Bernstein's Jesuit Friends

Apparently Justice Department official Robert Mardian -- later of Watergate fame -- circulated a memo saying that Leonard Bernstein was being assisted in creating the piece by "show business personalities in New York and Los Angeles," and that "'Jesuit friends of the composer' are serving as advisors" -- among these, war protester Father Daniel Berrigan. And this, Mardian thought, might presage a clever anti-American PR coup: "One could surmise," wrote Mardian, that "Bernstein has requested Father Berrigan compose words for the 'Mass' in Latin and it would follow an anti-war theme." Thus Bernstein was suspected of trying to get "high-ranking Government officials" who "probably are not conversant in Latin" to applaud anti-war sentiments at the gala premiere. (So far as we can tell, the Latin bits in Mass are from the Catholic liturgy.) 

Link (here) to the Village Voice.

Online Jesuit Plants

Arthur and Theresa Beem

My Protestant friends all told us to relax, all we needed to understand Scripture was the Holy Spirit. Yet, we knew there were false prophets (Ellen White!). As sincere Christians, how could we guarantee that we would not fall prey to false doctrine again? Had God abandoned us to correctly, infallibly interpret Scriptures with nothing but our average IQs? God sent a Catholic friend to introduce a revolutionary idea. He cut through our despairing cloud of confusion with a new inquiry. “Perhaps you are asking the wrong question. Maybe, just maybe, instead of finding what you think is perfect theology, try looking for the church God set up as His authority.” That haunting statement changed our lives as we took it to Christ in prayer and study.

For years, we had watched an online Catholic-Protestant discussion group, but we had dismissed the Catholics’ defense of their faith because it was too biblical. We thought it was just another plot of deception. We had been warned about online Jesuit plants—tricky papist spiders—drawing the web into their ultimate antichrist designs. We purchased a Catechism to find out if the tricky papists were lying about what Catholics believe. 

After all, what they were saying wasn’t what we had been taught they believed. Yet there they were! Catholic beliefs! Just as the Catholics claimed—in the Catechism, the Catholic Encyclopedia, history books, and everything else we could get our hands on to read. So Arthur and I immersed ourselves in our new quest of discovering real Catholicism. As my husband and I began reading the early Church Fathers, we were shocked at how Catholic they were. Could it be Catholic corruption had already been trickling in before the Apostles died? But that cannot be right, can it? These early writings were not just by any convert; these were writings by bishops who had been taught by, anointed by, and chosen by the Apostles themselves to lead the churches they started. That just didn’t seem to make sense that they would have become apostate so soon. If God had abandoned His Church so quickly after its inception, then we really have a problem because we can’t trust the Trinity doctrine, the canon of Scripture, or the divinity of Christ because these were the men (and later Fathers) who defined these doctrines and who attested to which writings were by the apostles and which were forgeries.

Link (here) to the full conversion story of  Arthur and Theresa Beem at the Coming Home Network

America Magazine "Mute"

It was revealing to learn that when members of the USCCB recently met with the White House staff, they were told that the HHS Rule is set in cement. So much for dialogue. 

 Moreover, the Obama staff informed the Catholic officials that they should follow the “enlightened” voices at America magazine (the Jesuits agree with the administration). 

Dolan was pointed in his criticism: “The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers.” Catholic News Service never commented on, or posted, Cardinal Dolan’s letter in its “News Stories” section; instead, it relegated it to its blog postings, never highlighting the USCCB-America dispute. The liberal Catholic media—America, Commonweal and the dissident National Catholic Reporter—have gone mute. Dolan’s challenge deserves a response. 

See Cardinal Dolan's letter here.

Link (here) to the full story at Spero News

The Reason For Joining

Richard Sherlock

One should never leave the religion in which one was born or raised for anything but the most serious of reasons. Warm feelings, family, friends, a social ethos, should never be the reason for joining or leaving a religion. The fact that you do not like the priest, pastor or parishioners should never be a reason for staying or leaving. Anyone who knows me well knows that I have never been a person to "go with the flow" or seek popularity. I was a conscientious objector in the Vietnam War and I have a 1-0 draft card to prove it.

I have been an absolute opponent of abortion, euthanasia, and capital punishment my whole adult life. When I was a professor of moral theology at Fordham University in the mid-1980's I happily defended the view that artificial birth control is morally wrong. This was at a time when many, if not most, actually Catholic moral theologians wouldn't do so, or wouldn't do so strongly. 

I have not left religion or Christianity. But I have left Mormonism. I have become a deeper, more intellectual, more spiritual and truer Christian than I have ever been, literally. I am converting to the Roman Catholic Church. All true roads do lead to Rome.

Link (here) to Richard Sherlock Prof. of Philosophy at Utah State University and his story at Why I am Catholic

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, ".......Terribly Unfortunate Editorial In America"

"The Secretary of HHS is widely quoted as saying, 'Religious insurance companies don't really design the plans they sell based on their own religious tenets.' That doesn't bode well for their getting a truly acceptable 'accommodation.'" Cardinal Timothy Dolan also described a recent meeting at the White House between bishops' conference staff and White House staff, and said 

"our staff members asked directly whether the broader concerns of religious freedom—that is, revisiting the straight-jacketing mandates, or broadening the maligned exemption—are all off the table. They were informed that they are. So much for 'working out the wrinkles.' Instead, they advised the bishops' conference that we should listen to the 'enlightened' voices of accommodation, such as the recent, hardly surprising yet terribly unfortunate editorial in America." 

 "The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers." Cardinal Dolan also said "We will continue to accept invitations to meet with and to voice our concerns to anyone of any party, for this is hardly partisan, who is willing to correct the infringements on religious freedom that we are now under. But as we do so, we cannot rely on off the record promises of fixes without deadlines and without assurances of proposals that will concretely address the concerns in a manner that does not conflict with our principles and teaching." He added that "Congress might provide more hope, since thoughtful elected officials have proposed legislation to protect what should be so obvious: religious freedom. Meanwhile, in our recent debate in the senate, our opponents sought to obscure what is really a religious freedom issue by maintaining that abortion inducing drugs and the like are a 'woman's health issue.' We will not let this deception stand. Our commitment to seeking legislative remedies remains strong. And it is about remedies to the assault on religious freedom. Period." Cardinal Dolan added that "Perhaps the courts offer the most light." Cardinal Dolan warned the bishops that 

"given this climate, we have to prepare for tough times. Some, like America magazine, want us to cave-in and stop fighting, saying this is simply a policy issue; some want us to close everything down rather than comply (in an excellent article, Cardinal Francis George wrote that the administration apparently wants us to 'give up for Lent' our schools, hospitals, and charitable ministries); some, like Bishop Robert Lynch wisely noted, wonder whether we might have to engage in civil disobedience and risk steep fines; some worry that we'll have to face a decision between two ethically repugnant choices: subsidizing immoral services or no longer offering insurance coverage, a road none of us wants to travel." 

Cardinal Dolan added that "we know so very well that religious freedom is our heritage, our legacy and our firm belief, both as loyal Catholics and Americans. There have been many threats to religious freedom over the decades and years, but these often came from without. This one sadly comes from within. As our ancestors did with previous threats, we will tirelessly defend the timeless and enduring truth of religious freedom."

Link (here) to read the full article at Bradenton.com

Good Lord, Bless The World!

Mighty God, Father of all, merciful God, the Mother of all, bless every person I met, every face that I saw, every voice that I heard, especially those dear to me; bless every town, village or road that I have ever seen, every place that I met, every sound I heard, every object which I touched. In a mysterious way, all they have shaped my life. All I got from you. Good Lord, bless the world!

John Morris, S.J. (4 July 1826 – 22 October 1893)

Link (here) to the Romanian lay Catholic blog entitled, Deus meus in te confido

Contraception, As You Know, Can Cost A Woman

A Georgetown co-ed told Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s hearing that the women in her law school program are having so much sex that they’re going broke, so you and I should pay for their birth control. Speaking at a hearing held by Pelosi to tout Pres. Obama’s mandate that virtually every health insurance plan cover the full cost of contraception and abortion-inducing products, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke said that it’s too expensive to have sex in law school without mandated insurance coverage. Apparently, four out of every ten co-eds are having so much sex that it’s hard to make ends meet if they have to pay for their own contraception, Fluke’s research shows.“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown student insurance not covering contraception), Fluke reported. It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school, according to her calculations. “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing. $3,000 for birth control in three years? That’s a thousand dollars a year of sex – and, she wants us to pay for it. Yes, us. Where do you think the insurance companies forced to cover this cost get the money to pay for these co-eds to have sex? It comes from the health care insurance premiums you and I pay.

Link (here) to watch Sandra Fluke's video testimony and the full original article. 

Rush Limbaugh on the subject (here)
President Obama on the subject (here)
Georgetown University President on the subject (here)
The teaching of the Catholic Church on contraception (here)
Fr. John Hardon, S.J. on contraception (here)
Humanae Vitae (here)
What is Antinomianism? (here)
.
The Biblical terms
What is licentiousness? (here) as found in the Bible (here) and (here)
What is adultery? (here) as found in the Bible (here), (here) and (here)
What is fornication? (here) as found in the Bible (here) and (here)


The Vagina Monologues at Georgetown (here)


  

Hippy + Jesuit = Hippuit

Fr. Richard McSorly, S.J.

The hippie movement was led by Jesuits such as Father Richard McSorley of Georgetown University  (1914-2002). McSorley was known as a peace activist and even "Marxist priest." He was a trusted adviser and tutor to the Kennedy presidential family, and was also associated with Bill Clinton, who studied at Georgetown in the early 1960s. In an interview with Rick Martin of SPECTRUM magazine, one controversial author and talk-show host claims that "the Beatles were Jesuit-controlled" and that the drug world is controlled by Rome via the Mafia—which is Jesuit controlled. Sir George Martin, the Beatles' producer, attended a Jesuit college. This hippie movement twisted the true understanding of Christ. Instead of God and Saviour, Jesus was seen as a political activist. It was taught that Jesus fulfilled the needs of all cultures, creeds, and aspirations—Christian or not. This new culture—rife with drugs, fictional entertainment, and rock music—effectively distracted Protestants around the world from true spirituality, which was exactly what the Jesuits were striving to do. Age theology and Earth-worship also spread in this era, partially through the work of scientist James Lovelock and his Gaia hypothesis. 

Link (here) to the website entitled Amazing Discoveries

Blogger Note: The author of this article is anti-Catholic, a Protestant who blames the Protestant problems on the Jesuits

Bishop Bites America Magazine Back

Bishop William E. Lori

The March 5th America editorial takes the United States Bishops to task for entering too deeply into the finer points of health care policy as they ponder what the slightly revised Obama Administration mandate might mean for the Catholic Church in the United States. These details, we are told, do not impinge on religious liberty. We are also told that our recent forthright language borders on incivility.

What details are we talking about? For one thing, a government mandate to insure, one way or another, for an abortifacient drug called Ella. Here the “details” would seem to be fertilized ova, small defenseless human beings, who will likely suffer abortion within the purview of a church-run health insurance program.

What other details are at issue? Some may think that the government’s forcing the Church to provide insurance coverage for direct surgical sterilizations such as tubal ligations is a matter of policy. Such force, though, feels an awful lot like an infringement on religious liberty.

Still another detail is ordinary contraception. Never mind that the dire societal ills which Pope Paul predicted would ensue with the widespread practice of artificial contraception have more than come true. The government makes the rules and the rules are the rules. So, the bishops should regard providing (and paying for) contraception as, well, a policy detail. After all, it’s not like the federal government is asking bishops to deny the divinity of Christ. It’s just a detail in a moral theology—life and love, or something such as that. And why worry about other ways the government may soon require the Church to violate its teachings as a matter of policy?

More details come to mind. Many if not most church entities are self-insured. Thus, Catholic social service agencies, schools, and hospitals could end up paying for abortifacients, sterilizations, and contraception. If the editorial is to be believed, bishops should regard it not as a matter of religious liberty but merely policy that, as providers they teach one thing but as employers they are made to teach something else. In other words, we are forced to be a countersign to Church teaching and to give people plenty of reason not to follow it. The detail in question here is called “scandal”.

Then there is the detail of religious insurers and companies that are not owned by the Church but which exist solely to serve the Church’s mission. The new “accommodation” leaves them out in the cold. And if I really wanted to get into the weeds I’d mention the conscience rights of individual employers.

Have I forgotten any other details we bishops shouldn’t be attending to? Well, I guess we’re policy wonks for wondering if the government has a compelling interest in forcing the Church to insure for proscribed services when contraception is covered in 90% of healthcare plans, is free in Title X programs, and is available from Walmart (generic) for about $10 a month. Pardon me also for wondering whether the most basic of freedoms, religious liberty, isn’t being compromised, not by a right to health care, but by a claim to “services” which regard pregnancy and fertility as diseases.

And didn’t President Obama promise adequate conscience protection in the reform of healthcare? But maybe it’s inappropriate for pastors of souls to ask why the entirely adequate accommodation of religious rights in healthcare matters that has existed in federal law since 1973 is now being changed.

Oh, and as Detective Colombo used to say: “Just one more thing.” It’s the comment in the editorial about when we bishops are at our best. Evidently, it’s when we speak generalities softly and go along to get along, even though for the first time in history the federal government is forcing church entities to provide for things that contradict church teaching. Maybe Moses wasn’t at his best when he confronted Pharaoh. Maybe the Good Shepherd was a bit off his game when he confronted the rulers of his day.

But those are just details.

Most Reverend William E. Lori

Bishop of Bridgeport

Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty
Link (here)

Equivocation

Blaise Pascal in his Provincial Letters of 1656 blamed Rome and the Jesuits for teaching the doctrine of equivocation, that is, that it was licit to lie under oath. But Rome and the Jesuits were teaching just the opposite. Pope Innocent X in 1649 denounced equivocation because it was "ecclesiastically subversive."

Link (here)

Jesuit On St. Thomas Aquinas

St. Thomas Aquinas

In Article 4 of the 93d Question of Aquinas’ “Treatise on Law,” with a class, I read the following passage: “Those things are subject to human government, which can be done by man; but what pertains to the nature of man is not subject to human government; for instance, that he should have a soul, hands, or feet.” What’s this “things not subject to human government” about? Is there anything not subject to human government?

The examples that Aquinas uses are striking. The fact that we have souls, hands, or feet is not subject to government. These attributes or parts of what we are were not the result of human legislation. In other words, what-it-is-to-be-a-human-being is not something that the government designs or causes, but rather finds. 

In other words, governments are limited by what-it-is-to-be-a-human-being. They reaffirm it but do not constitute it. The next question that arises is this: Can human legislation claim to rule things which do not belong to its competency? A common saying about the absolute sovereignty of the British Parliament, attributed to A. V. Dicey in the nineteenth century, was that a parliamentary law decreeing all blue-eyed babies to be killed would still be the law.  Obviously, the theory that allowed such a statement would elevate politics to a god-like power of deciding by itself what constitutes what a human being is. 

Link (here) to The Catholic World Report to read full article by Fr. James Schall, S.J.

Fr. Jacques Bigot, S.J.: Old School Jesuit Evangelization

Souls in Hell

The usual reply that both the men and the women make, when they do not consent to do what I tell them, in order to prepare themselves to become Christians, is that they are too wicked for that. 

Some say this truthfully, owing to the high opinion that they have of the greatness of our religion; and I endeavor to encourage them, by assuring them that the great God whom they have offended is so good that he will freely forgive them, if they are really desirous of serving him. 

I have seen several who were animated by the few words that I said to them, and who renounced all their vices in a manner that surprised me; and they have manifested great constancy in this, for I have not yet found one in fault from the Beginning of their conversion. Others say it solely through attachment to their evil ways, which they will not abandon. 

I endeavor, as much as I can, to inspire them with Fear of the fires of hell, in which all burn who have ever fallen into the same evil ways that I reprove in them. I show them some pictures of hell that I have; or I direct some fervent Christian, who is capable of instructing them, to show and explain these to them. 

Sometimes I am present at these explanations, without saying anything, in order to see what ideas our Christians form of our mysteries, and what replies are made by those whom they Instruct. When any new-comer arrives, his relatives come to beg me to lend them these instructive pictures, that they may explain the same to him. Haregouessemit came this morning to ask me for them. If you could procure me some pictures of the Judgment, of hell, of purgatory, and of paradise, such as you know would suit the minds of these Savages, you would Infinitely oblige me. 
Link (here) to Fr. Jacques Bigot, S.J. and his letter in The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents

Very Different

In the 1960, Fr. Gaspar Koelman, a Jesuit working in India, did a meticulous study of Patanjali, The Patanjala Yoga, that is invaluable even today. From a very different angle, in 1990 Ravi Ravindra, a Hindu scholar, published an insightful interpretation of the Gospel according to John entitled The Yoga of the Christ. And — lest we forget — there have been many columns, essays, and letters by Christian leaders cautioning Christians against being enchanted by physical practices that ultimately mean a whole way of life — possibly or probably incompatible with Christian values. So the fruits of my seminar — this latest “Jesuit Yoga” — need to be carefully assessed, for the sake of the general question, How can we benefit from the ancient and wise tradition of yoga, as Christians? My hope is to add at least two more to this series of reflections — Jesuit Yoga II and III — to spell out a bit more of what I mean. I also very much welcome comments from readers who (for better or worse) have brought yoga together with Christian (and/or Ignatian) spirituality.

Link (here) to read the full article by Fr. Francis Xavier Clooney, S.J. at Christian Yoga Magazine
Link (here) to read a New York Times article on the licentious nature of Hatha and Tantra yoga   

A critique of yoga (here)

Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J. on Yoga (here)

Fr. John Hardon, S.J. on Yoga (here)