Ubi Petrus

I know.  I’m a cranky old slug of a person who doesn’t like to see anyone have fun.  What else is new?  Now that we’ve cleared that up, I just wanted to point to a post by Fr. V at Adam’s Ale which describes in a far more civil manner than I’d be capable of (remember, I’m a curmudgeon) why you don’t find me clapping for the choir at the end of Mass.  Aside from the actions of Christ which are the center and summit of the Mass, Fr. outlines the whole host of people who help make Mass happen behind the scenes.  If they’re not getting applauded, neither should anyone else.

If I might be so bold – if you find someone did something unusually well at Mass, take the time after Mass to tell them so after Mass is over, privately.  That will mean far more to them than a smattering of culturally-induced applause.  And it may just be the personal touch that makes a huge difference in someone’s life.

I’m quite sure it’s a gag, but it probably would do quite well in our culture.  Brought to you by the fine folks at Aquinas and More, I present to you the “I Am Priest” vocations poster.

Just on the heels of the wretched news day that was yesterday we now hear that the bill to strip the Catholic Church of her ability to govern herself by her own methods in the state of Connecticut has been withdrawn.  Deo gratias! May we not see its ilk again in any form.

Update: AmP lets us know that the planned rally is still on.  Be there if you can!

Satan must be working overtime to keep up with all the idiocy flying around the world of late.  Now this:

President Obama on Monday signed an order to lift restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, a move he said rejects the “false choice” between science and morality.

False choice indeed.  The only thing false about it is his, and his supporters’, understanding of just how morality and science intersect.  The unprovoked killing of an innocent human being can never be moral, no matter the putative goods that may come of it.  Let us not forget here and now that not a single cure has been discovered using embryonic stem cells despite years of work and that several of those treatments that made it to the human testing phase have resulted in catastrophic failures (read: metastasizing tumors which kill the patients).

One of the first rules of morality is that you may never do evil that good may come of it.  Since I believe that Godwin’s Law has long since outlived its usefulness and is now nothing but a dull hammer used to quiet objections whenever modern insanity too closely resembles former, I’ll just say it right now.  This is work Josef Mengele would have gleefully approved of.  Yes, that name that faintly rings a bell – the “Angel of Death”, the man who performed medical experiments on living people for the purposes of furthering scientific understanding and, in theory, perhaps developing cures for some down the road.  But the most insidious commonality is he did this work because he could.

Who today would not be horrified to find out the treatment they had just undergone was founded on the research performed by Mengele?  Would not your life be filled with horror at the thought you had somehow benefited from the terrible deaths of so many at the hands of a man who did this without concern and without remorse, who had been able to tear the person from the body on which he was operating?

Science tells us these embryos are human beings; faith tells us they have immortal souls.  Common sense tells us they are people.  We, as American taxpayers, are now paying for the new Auschwitz, but the people whose murders are paid for by our tax dollars will never even be able to be stamped on their forearms.  This research won’t even give them that dignity.  Now, Mr. President, where is the false choice again?

When I first heard about this story I figured it had to be a misunderstanding.  Nobody could be so dense.  But then, we’re dealing with professional politicians here – density needs a whole new scale for that conversation.  In case you’ve been under a rock the past couple of days, in short, two Connecticut legislators have introduced a bill that would essentially establish the goals of VOTF as law for the Catholic Church in the state – to destroy the Apostolic nature of the Church and legally require it to be run as just any other company.  CNA has the full scoop.

“If this bill were to be enacted, your bishop, would have virtually, virtually no real relationship with the 87 parishes…they could go off independently, some of them could break off from the Church if they wished, and go their own way as has happened, for example, with the Episcopal Church. And the pastors would be figureheads, simply working for a board of trustees,” Bishop Lori explained at a meeting of Catholic school principals.

Let us pause briefly to remember that only a few months ago Connecticut was the scene of a vigorous battle over same-sex “marriage”.  Those in power in the state have some vendettas still to be fulfilled.  How does that tie in to a bill ostensibly intended to improve fiscal oversight in the aftermath of two cases where priests embezzled large amounts of Church funds for their own purposes?  How?

Both lawmakers, who are prominent homosexuals, have been vociferous advocates of same-sex marriage in Connecticut and have spoken out against the Catholic Church’s opposition to both civil unions and same-sex marriage.

That’s how.  This is nothing more than penny-ante tit-for-tat, but on a scale so large it dwarfs the two legislators who started this whole ball rolling.  The Church does not, indeed cannot, operate under such conditions.  That the Catholic Church is explicitly called out in this proposed legislation cannot go unnoticed.  I’ll close with the same quote from Philip Lacovara as CNA in their piece:

“You now have before your Committee a bill that tests your fidelity to your constitutional duty. The bill is No. 1098, which candidly announces that its purpose is to ‘revise the corporate governance provisions [of the Connecticut Statutes] applicable to the Roman Catholic Church.’”

“In more than forty years as a constitutional law teacher and practitioner,” writes Lacovara, “I cannot recall a single piece of proposed legislation at any level of government that more patently runs afoul of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment that does this bill.”

Connecticut, once my home.  Step away from the abyss of untethered secularism and rampant illiberal liberalism.  The state known for the vigorous defense of Constitutional ideals by her citizens – so beloved as to earn the name “The Constitution State” – do not in such haste throw away all that merely to appease the wanton desires of a few.  May that great oak once again grow straight and strong, wrap her limbs around the Constitution as she once protected her colonial charter and protect it from destruction!

In my effort to get back on track in reading the Bible I came across this little tidbit, from Mark 17:14-21:

^14 And when they came to the crowd, a man came up to him and kneeling before him said, ^15 “Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is an epileptic and he suffers terribly; for often he falls into the fire, and often into the water. ^16 And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.” ^17 And Jesus answered, “O faithless and perverse generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him here to me.” ^18 And Jesus rebuked him, and the demon came out of him, and the boy was cured instantly. ^19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, “Why could we not cast it out?” ^20 He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.”

A couple of things jump out at me here.  First, verse 16:  “And I brought him to your disciples, and they could not heal him.”  Let us not forget that only a few chapters earlier, in Matthew 10:1 we see the Apostles were sent out with “authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity.”  So the disciples had been given the authority to cast out demons but have run into a case they could not solve.  This had to be demoralizing and confusing to the Apostles.  Something did not add up – either this demon was more powerful than Jesus or there was something wrong with them.

But in the midst of this confusion Jesus injects one of the most harsh statements you will find on His lips, “O faithless and perverse generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you?”  “Faithless and perverse.”  Certainly the Apostles must have been cut to the quick, not to mention the people around Him.  The words hurt to read even now, at least in part because they reflect how far we too have fallen.

He did not, however, leave this tongue lashing as His last statement.  “Bring him here to me.”  Despite all the failings in those around Him, Christ’s mercy overwhelms all.  With what seems like no effort the demon is cast out and the boy is cured.  The demon the Apostles could not budge is cast out by Jesus and the Apostles are left, I suspect, rather speechless.

Unable to understand how all of these preceding events add up the disciples ask Jesus to explain what has happened – why could they not cast out this demon even though they only recently been given the authority to do so?  Jesus’ reply must have been stunning.  “Because of your little faith.”  How often do we fail to believe that what Jesus has promised us He can – no, will – do?  Are we not often like the Apostles, willing to do some or most of what is asked of us but afraid to go the final distance and be completely committed?  This Lent let us take that extra step, be not faithless, but have faith “as a grain of mustard seed” and see the wonders God will work through us.

With Fr. Finigan (of The Hermeneutic of Continuity fame) being unscrupulously dumped on by The Tablet, Fr. Z has the perfect remedy – pound him!  I’d explain more, but that would ruin the comedic value – just click on the link and take the opportunity to pound a priest!

(BTW – Keith, I say you’re exempt from this.  Seminarians are poor as a general rule and there’s no need to exacerbate that.  See, I can be a reasonable person!)

One of the rules I try to follow when selecting excerpts to quote from a story I’m referring to is not to quote almost the whole thing – get just enough of it to get the reader interested and let them follow on to the original source.  It’s better for the original writer’s stats, and it affords the reader the opportunity to read other things from that writer.

Every once in a while someone writes something that makes that rule downright hard to follow.  Archbishop Naumann’s article on the Catholic Key blog, which will also show up in the Archdiocesan newspaper, is one of those.  He writes with sincerity and steadfastness and the reader can sense the pain it causes him to have to write in such hard terms.  I dare say he indeed has a Bishop’s heart.  I’ve selected only a few snips from this post, but believe me the whole thing is a gem all its own.  I, for one, applaud the Archbishop for doing what had to be done and writing what had to be written.  As with all Bishops, he remains in my prayers.

Normally, it would be a source of joy and pride to have a Catholic from Kansas named by the President to an important Cabinet Post. Unfortunately, I experience neither with President Obama’s selection of Governor Kathleen Sebelius as his choice to serve as the Secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

…

As you are aware, because of her long history both as a legislator and Governor of consistently supporting legalized abortion and after many months of dialogue, I requested Governor Sebelius not to present herself for communion. I did this in the hope that it would motivate Governor Sebelius to reconsider her support for what is an intrinsic evil – the destruction of innocent human life by abortion. I also took this pastoral action to protect others from being misled by the Governor’s public support and advocacy for legalized abortion.

The appointment of Governor Sebelius as the Secretary of HHS concerns me on many levels. With her history of support for legalized abortion and embryonic stem cell research, it is troubling the important influence that she will have on shaping health care policies for our nation. Having elected President Obama with his own record of support for legalized abortion, our nation should not be surprised by his appointment of a Secretary for HHS who shares his views. Though many people voted for President Obama, not because of his support for legalized abortion but despite it, voters in effect gave him the ability to appoint individuals who share his anti-life views to his Cabinet and even more troubling to the courts.

Last year during one of our RCIA sessions on the Liturgy the question was asked, “if this is the Latin rite, why is the ‘Kyrie’ still in Greek?”  Stumped, we all were.  Some fidgeting about how “Amen” is Hebrew and thus even the Latin Rite was never entirely in Latin ensued.  But why, when the Church transitioned from Greek to Latin this part remained, well, who knows?  The Catholic Encyclopedia from New Advent gives some help:

Its introduction into the Roman Mass has been much discussed. It is certain that the liturgy at the Rome was at one time said in Greek (to the end of the second century apparently). It is tempting to look upon our Kyrie Eleison as a surviving fragment from that time. Such, however, does not seem to be the case. Rather the form was borrowed from the East and introduced into the Latin Mass later. […] The first evidence of its use in the West is in the third canon of the Second Council of Vaison (Vasio in the province of Arles), in 529. From this canon it appears that the form was recently introduced at Rome and in Italy (Milan?): “Since both in the Apostolic See as also in all the provinces of the East and in Italy a sweet and most pious custom has been introduced that Kyrie Eleison be said with great insistence and compunction, it seems good to us too that this holy custom be introduced at Matins and Mass and Vespers” (cf. Hefele-Leclercq, “Histoires des Conciles”, Paris, 1908, pp. 1113-1114; Duchesne, “Origines”, p. 183). The council says nothing of Africa or Spain, though it mentions Africa in other canons about liturgical practices (Can. v). It appears to mean that Kyrie Eleison should be sung by the people cum grandi affectu.

…

We may suppose, then, that at one time the Roman Mass began (after the Introit) with a litany of general petitions very much of the nature of the third part of our Litany of the Saints. This would correspond exactly to our great Synapte in the Syrian Rite. Only, from what has been said, we conclude that the answer of the people was in Latin — the “Miserere Domine” of Etheria, or “te rogamus, audi nos”, or some such form. About the fifth century the Greek Kyrie Eleison was adopted by the West, and at Rome with the alternative form Christe Eleison. This was then sung, not as in the East only by the people, but alternately by cantors and people. It displaced the older Latin exclamations at this place and eventually remained alone as the only remnant of the old litany.

So … we don’t have exactly a specific answer, but at the end it looks to say that at one point it was said in Latin in the Western Church, but by the fifth century was nearly universally in Greek.  That’s the history.  The why, well, I’m still working on that.  I’m going to drop the folks at NLM a line and see if they have any ideas.