Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau says his office and the Ottawa Archdiocese are arranging a meeting between he and Archbishop Terrence Prendergast to discuss his pro-abortion stance and whether he will be permitted to receive Communion.
Asked about indications from the archdiocese that he could be denied Communion, the self-professed Catholic politician told CBC, “I look forward to having a conversation with the bishop where he can explain, if that is the case, his views on that.”…. (Source)
The bishops “views” are not just views, Justin. They represent the tradition that has been handed down, and in short order, it looks like you are going to be asked to stay in the Pew.
Bishop Schneider also rejected the idea that concern for the liturgy is less important than, or even separate from, concern for the poor. “This is erroneous. The first commandment which Christ gave us was to adore God alone. Liturgy is not a meeting of friends. It is our first task to adore and glorify God in the liturgy and also in our manner of life. From a true adoration and love of God grows love for the poor and our neighbour. It is a consequence.” (Source)
“Liturgy is not a meeting of friends.” That’s a zinger or what?
As Federal Liberal leader and professed Catholic Justin Trudeau continues to resolutely defend his pro-abortion position, one Canadian bishop has come out saying that a “pro-abortion Catholic politician” could be denied reception of Holy Communion if “fraternal correction” proves unsuccessful.
Referring to the Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law, Ottawa’s Auxiliary Bishop Christian Riesbeck told LifeSiteNews.com, “Out of concern for safeguarding the reverence that is due Our Lord in the Eucharist, and to avoid scandal, one could possibly apply this norm even in the case of a pro-abortion Catholic politician who is extremely vocal about his position.”
Canon 915 states that those who are “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” Following the teaching of Jesus in chapter six of the Gospel of John, Catholics believe Holy Communion to be the very body of Jesus himself. A Catholic must be in communion with Catholic teaching and belief to present oneself to receive Holy Communion at Mass….(Source)
Folks, Bishop Christian Riesbeck is just the kind of new blood in the Episcopacy that we need in order to show the public and ourselves that we mean business when we talk about denying Communion for obstinate pro-abortion politicians. When was the last time you heard a Canadian bishop even consider such a proposal? At least now, it’s a real possibility. That’s a huge change in momentum for the Canadian Church, and it only takes one bishop to shift the dialogue from “should we do this?” to “why shouldn’t we?” Subtle but huge. He’s a canon lawyer and sees things more in black and white than grey. He has the full support of Archbishop Terrence Prendergast.
Go on. Post a few comments of support in the comments box of this thread, and I’ll flip him the link. He might very well be taking a lot of heat for his position, and he needs our support!
For the past few decades, so-called Catholic politicians have been flaunting their pro-abortion views at the Church, or cowardly ducking the question by playing the fool and the hypocrite. Most recently, Justin Trudeau, the leader of the Federal Liberal Party has decreed that anyone holding pro-life views is not welcome to run as a candidate in the Liberal Party. He is merely the latest case in a long line of pseudo-Catholic politicians who have profited handsomely on the backs of unborn babies, or to put more accurately, on their crushed skulls and dismembered bodies.
I’m not sure why it is, but this situation has been permitted to continue for DECADES without an appropriate reaction for the Canadian bishops. Let’s review a few good reasons why our Bishops might want to educate Justin as to why he can’t be Catholic and a Fascistic Pro-Abort at the same time.
The Vatican’s chief prosecutor of sex abuse crimes said the church needs to do more to develop the process for punishing bishops who fail in their duty to protect children. U.S. Father Robert W. Oliver, promoter of justice in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the church does have “procedures to deal with bishops who are negligent in supervision. It is a crime.” However, he said more work needs to be done on the procedures. (Source)
OK. So let me get this straight: The Vatican prosecutor wants bishops to be disciplined for failing in their duty to protect children, but for some reason few in the hierarchy today can apply the same principles to a case that is just as compelling. The bishops have as much of a responsibility in their duty to protect the Eucharist from uncontestable defilement from obstinate (and most of them are, let’s not kid ourselves) pro-abort politicians, and yet where is the outrage there? No where. You get a tepid reaction, if you’re lucky.
I mean, seriously, if we really believe Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, what does this profanation say about our Faith? I think logic tells us all that we need to know, and there’s no getting out of there, either.
Sorry, Jesus my Saviour and King, it looks like you’re a second-class citizen.
Here’s a lacuna for everyone: if a priest or bishop spoke NOT ONE WORD in their whole ministry, but protected the Holy Eucharist from defilement and profanation, his would be the better road and we would all be blessed for it.
One gesture, your Grace, just place your anointed hand over the ciborium when they obstinately approach the altar. That’s it. Why is that so hard to do? Do we fear man more than God?
Edmonton’s Roman Catholic Archbishop is taking exception to comments made Wednesday by federal liberal leader Justin Trudeau. Trudeau says his party will make sure no one who opposes abortion will be accepted as future candidates for the Liberals.
Archbishop Richard Smith says it’s outrageous that the comments came on the eve of the March for Life rallies across the country. “To time that statement to coincide with these voices is obviously a deliberate slap in the face.” The archbishop said thousands of people were coming together across Canada to defend all life, including that in the womb. Read the rest of this entry »
Here’s a little bit of humor to spruce up your Triduum.
My parents live in the suburbs of Montreal. They attend a good parish that celebrates the Mass reverently, with a nice choir, a pipe organ, incense, etc. The building itself is very old and beautiful. Their Good Friday service was very well done and very reverent. However they had a glitch in their liturgy for Holy Thursday with respect to the washing of the feet, because they tried an “innovation.” The outcome is sad but kinda funny. Read the rest of this entry »
The death of a loved one is it difficult and emotional time for family and friends. Because emotions can easily overrun sound judgment at such a time, it is important to wrap your head around the meaning of a funeral beforehand so that you don’t get disappointed by any misunderstandings. It’s really not that complicated.
First of all, there is nothing inherently wrong when a family and friends recall the good qualities of a deceased person whom they loved. They should cling to those positive memories and let go of the negatives.
But there is a time and a place for everything. The funeral is neither the time nor the place for a eulogy. The funeral plays a unique and irreplaceable role of intercession for the soul of the deceased.
Can you think of any sacrament (or any other moment in the Christian life, for that matter) in which we stand before God and brag about how great we are? No. In every sacrament, the emphasis is on God’s greatness, our weakness, and our rejoicing in God’s mercy to fill the gap between us.
A funeral is no different. In fact, a funeral is the moment par excellence to turn to God’s mercy because time has run out on the deceased. In a sense, the funeral is more about God than about our loved one. All the prayers and actions in a funeral centre on imploring God’s forgiveness on that person, emphasizing our hope in the mercy obtained for us through the Death and Resurrection of Christ.
There’s an old song by the Newsboys called “Real good thing.” Although it’s not about a funeral, the refrain is very relevant in understanding a funeral.
When we don’t get what we deserve, that’s a real good thing, a real good thing
When we get what we don’t deserve, that’s a real good thing, a real good thing
The first line refers to eternal damnation while the second line refers to eternal salvation. Indeed, in Christ, we can aspire to avoid what we really deserve by our sins, and hope to obtain the eternal bliss that we could never deserve on our own. The Newsboys were cleverly using paradoxical language that would seem absurd and even unjust to a secularist but which expresses the profound mysteries of the Faith.
Because we rely on God’s mercy and not our merits, there is no need at the funeral to expand on the deceased’s virtues. It’s not a job interview as if we had to convince God or ourselves of the deceased’s worthiness for salvation.
Nor is it a time for the family and friends to use the virtues of the deceased as a means to blow off some steam. It’s not about you. It’s about your deceased loved one. You’ll do him much more good at the funeral by praying for the repose of his soul while praising God’s generosity. Save your praise of the deceased for an appropriate moment later.
So next time you’re at a funeral, focus on eternal things: pleading with God, in a hope-filled manner, to grant eternal life on your loved one. Continue praying for your loved one’s soul until the day you die. Only the hope of him resting in God’s arms will bring you lasting solace.
The thing is, even aside from the sacrilege and even blasphemy inherent in such celebrations, they are singularly ineffective on both the natural and supernatural levels. They don’t attract people to the Faith. They don’t change people’s lives, or put them on a path of salvation. What they do, is show an exhausted Church turning to desperate tricks in a bid to draw a few people in. But such efforts are always doomed to fail, as the Church and especially the Mass are not forms of entertainment, and fully secular entertainments will always be a far more attractive alternative for those looking for a secular-type good time. (Source)
…especially at 2:51.
My question is why they even bother with a male priest? Get the woman with the Boa to officiate.
These people honour me with their…er…exotic dances and snakes, but their hearts are far from me.
How come this kind of thing never makes it to the things to talk about in an interview?
These disputes are often caused by reading into the Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy later ideas or enthusiasms, of differing merit, which are simply not there. For example, Mass facing the people, having the entire liturgy in the vernacular, communion in the hand, the introduction of altar girls and of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are commonplace now, but have nothing to do with the Council itself. Sometimes an appeal to the “spirit” of Vatican II is made to justify these later innovations, but this ignores the authoritative nature of the Council’s texts, dissipates their integrity and relativises them. (Source)
Sadly, in Ottawa, we were not given permission to discuss Vatican II and especially those topics above. Too controversial. Might upset too many people.
In the Spirit of Vatican II Church, harmony, peace, and tranquility trumps truth, obedience, and beauty.
Not a positive experience for yours truly. Not at all.