Pontifical Low Mass at the Ateneo

Just when you think nothing "Catholic" would come out of the Ateneo, ;) the Ateneo Latin Mass Society under the spiritual direction of the highly-respected liturgist, Fr. Tim Ofrasio, SJ, organized a Pontifical Low Mass at the Oratory of Saint Ignatius, Loyola House of Studies, Ateneo de Manila University.

No less than Novaliches Bishop Antonio Tobias celebrated the Mass. Why? Maybe because the bishop who has direct jurisdiction over Ateneo STILL REFUSES to celebrate the TLM publicly and even publicly rebuke Ateneo and MST for their continuing public defiance of Church teaching???

PROBABLY!!!!!!!!

Anywho...

Thank God we have Bishop Tobias to celebrate this form of the Mass publicly in the university that is slowly becoming more anti-Catholic than ever before.

From the looks of it, more Ateneans who are loyal to the Church are taking a bolder step to stop the stupidity that some Jesuits are either teaching (oh, come on! Admit it!) or are rather trying to turn a blind eye to all the shenanigans that goes in there.

Here are some photos from the Mass

Hopefully we can see a Pontifical High Mass in the Katipunan Pyramid ehrm...Church of the Gesu. :D

Latin Mass at the Ateneo

I pray and hope that these "brave souls" led by the great Filipino liturgist, Fr. Tim Ofrasio, SJ, one of the few Jesuits I admire and respect, bring back the Ateneo to its Catholic roots.

Many thanks to the Ateneo Latin Mass Society for continuing their apostolate.

When will this be held at the Gesu?

PS:  This church is jokingly called among my confreres the Katipunan Pyramid, Loyola Enterprises (pun on Star Trek), Taj Arevalo.

And will the other Jesuits in LST attend the Mass?

Nah.

Go visit the society at their new blog site:  http://ateneolatinmass.wordpress.com/  maintained by the Monk's Hobbit.

Episcopal Church - quality over quantity?

The Episcopalian Church in the US has its membership from 2,006,343 members in 2009 to 1,951,907 in 2010.

Why could they be losing members?

They allowed ordination of women.

Ordained openly and active homosexuals.

Blessed homosexual unions.

Allowed contraception. I dunno if they support early term abortion.

And all those "signs of the times" aggiornamento theology that unfortunately, some theologians at Loyola, most in Maryhill and St. Vincent and Euntes advocate, are the very reasons that sifts the membership coffers of the Episcopalian Church. Note to these "Catholic" theologians:  JUST STOP IT.  IT's NOT WORKING.

As this quote from the report says:

"Departures to other churches have fueled Episcopal decline, as have decreasing baptisms and its graying population.

"These statistics contrast sharply with more theologically conservative Anglican churches in the global south, many of which are witnessing skyrocketing numbers.

"Despite all its liberal cheer leading about inclusiveness, the Episcopal Church is a dwindling, nearly all white, increasingly gray-headed denomination with a grim future, absent divine intervention."

So what, they aim for quality of members over quantity?

Like this quantity?

Uhm, can I phone a friend?

Read about the shrinking number of souls professing the Episcopalian Faith here.

By the way, ever heard of ANGLICANORUM COETIBUS?

GULP Alert: What is going on here?

The Catholicity of Euntes of Zamboanga is sooooo....inculturated?

Here is the infamous Missionary of Jesus Fr. Percy Bacani, who conducted an "Avatar Mass", yup I had to wash my hands with hand sanitizer just for typing those two words, now leading what seems to be a Mass, considering that there is an altar, covered with a plain white cloth that can be used later as chasuble, one teenie weeny candle on it, and he is wearing a white overlay stole over his secular clothing, which, uhm, obviously are all liturgical abuses identified by Redemptionis Sacramentum.

And here, which looks like a writing session of sorts or something.  Makes you feel like you are in pre-school again.  Ha!

It is a concelebrated Mass!!!!  Look at the man in pink shirt with a white overlay stole!

And they are singing "Making Melodies"?!?!?!?!?!

What is going on here?!?!

Diocese of Phoenix on Communion in both kinds

Now here is a classic case of journalism bias.

One report writes the facts behinds the decision, while the other conveniently misses it out (I guess) and gives more space to hippie rants.

I posted here both articles with my usual banter, of course.

***
This one from Catholic Culture


The Diocese of Phoenix has announced that it will issue norms specifying the conditions under which Holy Communion may be distributed under both species.

“The new norms will promote unity in the celebration of the Eucharist all around the world, and come from the revised General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 3rd Edition, together with the final edition of The Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds for the Dioceses of the United States of America,” the diocese stated in a press release.


“In the Roman Missal (1975), 14 instances were provided when the chalice could be offered to the laity,” the diocese noted. “From 1975 on, the United States, United Kingdom and Oceania were given experimental privileges for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds. [Now look out for this one here.] These privileges expired in 2005 and were not renewed by the Holy See. The new norms issued in June 2011 are what guide the liturgical practice today and in the future.”  [THERE WERE NORMS!!!  And the bishops did not tell us!  Then, why, pray tell, did the Philippines ever follow and are still DOING IT?!?!   Especially in convents and seminaries where seminarians and nuns receive Holy Communion ala Oreo Commercial, except the twist and lick that is.  They get their own Hosts and dunk it into the chalice!]

“These universal norms for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds greatly expanded those times when the chalice could be offered to the lay faithful for most of the Catholic world (since in most countries their practice was virtually non-existent),” the diocesan statement continued. “In the Diocese of Phoenix, like other places where the practice of reception from the chalice became frequent or even commonplace, the new norms call for the practice of less frequent distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds than the faithful may have been accustomed.”
[Here are the RARE exceptions.]

The ritual books state that Holy Communion may be offered at the Chrism Mass and feast of Corpus Christi. Additionally, it may be offered to a Catholic couple at their wedding Mass, to first communicants and their family members, confirmation candidates and their sponsors, as well as deacons, non-concelebrating priests, servers and seminarians at any Mass, as well as community members at a conventual Mass or those on a retreat or at a spiritual gathering. In addition, a priest may select other important solemnities in which it may be offered, e.g., parish patronal feast days or the celebration of the dedication of the church building, provided the conditions are met.

“In normal circumstances, only priests and deacons are to distribute Holy Communion,” the diocese added; “when both forms of Communion are used frequently, ‘extraordinary’ ministers of Holy Communion are disproportionately multiplied.”

***
And this one from the Arizona Republic.  Guess this paper needs a really serious reporter who knows Catholic teachings and liturgy


The Phoenix Diocese will stop offering consecrated wine for Communion at most Masses, a change considered one of the most fundamental to Roman Catholic Church customs in decades.

A diocesan statement said the change was being made based on Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted's understanding of the church's new translation of the Mass, called the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, and other church documents.

However, no other diocese in the country is known to be following suit, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops told The Arizona Republic.  [So?]

An effective date has not been announced.

The change will be one of the most significant in the Roman Catholic liturgy since the 1970s, when the distribution of wine [Not just wine you idjit!]  was approved for the United States.

For many Catholics in the '70s, that change to Communion - the central act of worship in the Catholic Mass [ah, what?!] - represented a greater role for laypeople, [come again?!] who for the first time in centuries were able to take both forms of Communion, bread and wine, and help distribute it. Before, the use of wine was reserved only for clergy.

Communion, a sacrament that symbolizes a spiritual union with Christ, is a widespread practice among Christian churches, following the commands of Jesus in the Gospels. But the Catholic Church believes the bread and wine used during the service actually are transformed [uhm, geez....] into the body and blood of Christ.

The change in practice by the Phoenix Diocese stirred an immediate controversy among priests, deacons and laypeople. Wine will be limited to only special occasions.

"The majority of priests were stunned and aghast at the announcement, and I hear some are planning to meet to see how best to respond," said the Rev. James Turner, pastor of St. Thomas More in Glendale. [HIPPIE PRIEST ALERT!] "While the bishop has the authority to make this policy change, there is no scriptural, theological or sacramental rationale that makes any sense."  [Well ask this priest is there is any "scriptural, theological or sacramental rationale that makes any sense" as to the distribution of Communion under both kinds?]

But the Rev. John Ehrich, pastor of St. Thomas the Apostle in Phoenix, said the liturgical law of the church provides for only specific circumstances under which both forms of Communion may be distributed.  [Unless you are Fr. James Turner who thinks the Catholic Church is now the Episcopalian or Lutheran Church?!]

"Bishop Olmsted is merely expecting the priests to follow the teaching of the church in this matter," he said, adding that he imposed restrictions at his parish four years ago.  [The priest did it a loooonnnggg time ago and did you hear anyone getting "stunned"and was "aghast"?   Guess none!]

Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is not aware of another U.S. diocese enacting such a restriction, although she noted that local bishops have the authority to do so.

The Rev. Al Schifano, a top church official in the Diocese of Tucson, said that Bishop Gerald Kicanas encourages Communion using both bread and wine and that the diocese will not change that under the new Mass translations. [Guess the bishop has his own set of laws, right?]

The Rev. Anthony Ruff, [*belch*] a professor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., called the move a step backward.

"It's sad to see," he said, because the move separates the church further ecumenically from others [what others?!  And you taught that this guy is a "world-renowned Benedictine liturgist".  No seriously.  He acts the same way as the OTHER GUY.]  and gives up "the gains we've made in the last half-century in our understanding of liturgy and sacraments."  [What gains?!  Empty churches?  Fewer priests?  More lay people at the altar?  Pro-abortion nuns?  Pro-RH priests?]

Catholic members of the community were as divided as the priests.

"I would think these church leaders would be more concerned about the droves of people leaving the Catholic Church as well as the worsening shortage of priests," said Dennis Kavanaugh, an attorney who attends Resurrection parish in Tempe. "These issues are much more substantial to the long-term health of the church rather than reinstating medieval rituals and directives."  [And the doomsdayers are here again.  These same group of people are the very same ones who said that if the Traditional Latin Mass gets regularized, droves of Catholic would leave the Church.  I guess it didn't happen.  Maybe they belong to that same group who predicted the end of the world, eh?]

Judi Wilson of Blessed Sacrament parish in Scottsdale said she will miss taking Communion wine, but she noted that the church teaches that Christ is fully available in bread or wine.  [God bless Judi!  And a laywoman knows and believes this!  But the attorney and that world-renowned Benedictine monk did not realize that, eh?  No, not the Filipino monk.  He did not say that.  But if he did, a package will be on its way to the Vatican, ASAP.  Bet on it!]

"It wouldn't make any difference," she said. "I will look forward to those times we can take the wine."

According to the diocese, the change was announced at a recent meeting of diocesan priests with Olmsted. [It was announced among the priests yet the priest in the earlier part of the news said that they will meet the bishop and were stunned and aghast!  Was he absent during the meeting?  He did not get the memo?!?!]  A diocese statement said new rules will be drafted and a time frame determined in the next few months.

Some priests said the date initially was supposed to coincide with the new Mass translation, which is set to debut Nov. 27. But negative reaction from some priests may have persuaded the bishop to hold off. [may!]

Olmsted declined a request for an interview. [Not with this reporter if you ask me!]The diocese issued a statement and a question-and-answer sheet to explain the move. 


New norms, or guidelines, that came out this year, the statement said, expanded the offering of Communion under the form of wine for most of the world, "but in the Diocese of Phoenix, the new norms call for the practice of less frequent distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds than the faithful may have been accustomed."

The option of offering both bread and wine for Communion has been in place since 1975. Catholics never have been obligated to take both and, until 1975, the practice had been forbidden since the mid-1500s. The church teaches that Christ and the full blessings of Communion are present in either form.  [And yet Fr. Anthony Ruff thinks this is a move backwards.  And the other priest were stunned and aghast!  Is this like a burger and fried thing?  Or pancake and syrup?  That you cannot enjoy the food without the other one?  Kinda like coffee and pan de sal here, eh?]

According to the diocesan statement, the United States is one of only a few countries where offering wine became common at Masses, often distributed with the help of non-ordained parishioners.  [Because the bishops of the USA, led by Cardinal Bernardin at that time, were the most stubborn and the ones who lead the dissent.  Poor Paul VI and John Paul II had to put up with them!]

The Rev. John Muir, a priest at the Newman Center in Tempe who is part of the diocese Office for Worship, said the change actually is a return to general practice of the church worldwide.  [That is what being Catholic is!  That is why Anthony Ruff and Anscar Chupungco despise the  Traditional Latin Mass because they lose their speaking engagements and won't sell books!  They need a Mass that they treat as a production number or a TV show!]

The use of consecrated wine for Communion "is a beautiful gift," he said, "to be given the right way, at the right time, with the right sacramental power."  [Ooooooo.....MST would hate this especially the underlined words!  Ha!]

He added, "Nothing in reality is being taken away. Catholics believe they receive the Precious Blood (the consecrated wine) under the species of bread."  [Unless you are talking to those two Benedictine monks and the theologians of MST, LST, Euntes and SVST.]

***

Read the actual statement from the Diocese and judge for yourselves.

Miriam Santiago's European History 101

Arrogant...

Lunatic...

Revisionist...

Just plain crazy.

She does not deserve to be paid by our taxes nor even be entrusted with the authority to govern us either us a legislator or as a government executive.

A Jesuit's take of the RH Bill

RH Bill vs. Five Levels of Self-Transcendence
Walter Ysaac, S.J.

***

The Reproductive Health (RH) bill is “a mindset and a value system” that are “secularist, materialistic, individualistic and hedonistic in the guise of development and modernity.” Thus, according to the CBCP statement during the “dialogue” meeting last May 10, 2011 (Philippine Star, May 11, 2011, pp.1 and 3), even the good provisions of the Responsible Parenthood (alias RH) bill are “inextricably woven” with the “bad provisions.” Example, it would include authorizing the government buying with taxpayers’ money artificial contraceptives that are already doubtful with regard to being abortifacient or dangerous to health of mother and child and father and to good family relationships, and distributing them upon request to anybody until prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration.  [not all pro-RH people know about this.  Those who know this but continue to promote the RH Bill are either paid hacks by the pharmaceutical companies and/or pro-abortion lobbyists masking as feminists.  Uhm, that's your oxymoron of the day folks!]

But the main defect and danger of the RP (“Responsible” Parenthood) bill is that it is imposed on the people, particularly the poor, by a government without regard for the culture or “world mediated by meanings and motivated by values” of the Filipino people. To really develop and update or “modernize” a people is to make them transcend and sublate themselves from the level of their experience to that of their understanding to that of their judgment to that of their decision up even to the highest level of their unconditional love which is a pure gift of God to us and can only be attained through authentic prayer or truly living relationship with God.  [and yet you have Fr. Bernas who trumps his "freedom to choose" thingy!  Well, of course, for Fr. Bernas the Constitution is more important than the salvation of your immortal soul!]

Now, the experience of the people must start from what they are now in their present culture, their presently accepted meanings and values. [Quite dubious if you ask me.] Anything imposed on them from above will be received according to their own experienced meanings and values which they have understood, affirmed and practiced and unconditionally loved as their own. If the RP bill has, from the start, meanings and values foreign or contrary to theirs, it will be ineffective, (i.e., will not produce the results desired by the bill, namely, reduce population growth), or worse, it will be like an experiment imposed on the throbbing flesh of the Filipino people, causing a lot of suffering and disruption in their lives as a people. Witness what happened to all the other countries who have allowed the imposition of such a mindset and value system to enter into their laws and cultures. [I hope that this line of reasoning is limited to the RH Bill because this line of reasoning of "not being influenced by a foreign culture" is how Vatican II fanatics trump to dissent with what "comes out of Rome".  So you have cases of liturgy that is "not Roman" but "Filipino".  Just saying.]

[I think this is the good part here.]  To have authentic development there is no substitute to self-transcendence (being attentive in experience, intelligent in understanding, reasonable in judgment, responsible in decision and unconditional in love) and sublation (the development from one lower level of living to a higher one will not only not result in any loss of what is good in the lower one but would raise and lift the good in the lower one to the richer level of good of the higher one and so will even need that lower-level good to grow into and become the richer higher-level good).

Thus, if reducing population growth is the end of the RP bill, then it should not impose from above a mindset and value system opposed to the culture of the Filipino people but must start by moving within that culture of the people and go hand in hand with them to develop that culture to more and more attentiveness, intelligence, reasonableness, responsibleness, and finally, to an unconditionalness in love that can transform their responsibleness, reasonableness, intelligence and attentiveness to an even higher (divine) level.


Fr. Walter L. Ysaac, S.J. is a Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at the Loyola School of Theology.

***

This is an actual breather if you ask me after the debacle that the Ateneo did when some of its professors expressed support for a Bill that is against Catholic teaching against contraception and after its former president gave a response that would not even qualify as a slap on the wrist.

But I am a bit disappointed in that the Jesuit did not even refer to the Magisterial teaching of the Church against artificial birth control methods.  Instead, he delved upon the cultural impacts of such a Bill that is literally pulled out of the private library of Hillary Clinton and Henry Kissinger!

But, be it as it may, it is still a breather!

Wear your clerical attire in public!

From UCANews

***

A Catholic bishop today called on all clergy to observe the Church’s dress code, especially when they appear in public “as an integral part of priestly decorum.”  [Do I hear an "Amen"?]


Bishop Leonardo Medroso of Tagbilaran, a canon lawyer, said ecclesiastical garb is not the external sign of the priesthood but an indicator of the “spiritual and priestly life” of the person concerned.  [It is a mark of who the person is, much like how a school or company uniform is.]

Some “shrink” from wearing the proper attire, he noted, preferring to go around in public in ordinary clothes.

This does not mean they are necessarily ashamed of their identity as priests or that they have a weak sense of their clerical identity, he said. [Uhm...My personal experience with those priests and religious who do so actually have this reason.]

“Rather, they do not like to get attention from people, who because of the attire, afford them privileged treatment, or to be looked down on or given suspicious glances,” Bishop Medroso said.  [or they just don't want to be acknowledged as priests in public.]

“They prefer to be left alone, free and unperturbed,” he added.  [Uhm.....]

The real purpose of priestly attire, according to the bishop, is to serve as public testimony that the one wearing ecclesiastical dress is an ordained minister.  [And bingo was his name-o!]

That is why, Bishop Medroso says, “the Church is insistent that her ordained ministers wear the ecclesiastical garb.” 

“His [priestly] life, his behavior, his prayer life, his decorum, his language … all of them has to communicate and articulate the reality of the priesthood,” Bishop Medroso said.  [and most of those who do not wear them actually don't act the way they are supposed to?  just asking.]

Clerical attire approved by the Philippine Catholic hierarchy is cassock or religious habit; clergyman’s suit; trousers of dark one-tone color, with the clerical collar.  [See examples below.]

The shirt, meanwhile, may also be either a polo or a formal embroidered Philippine shirt, with the distinctive cross.  [Uhm...]

“It is the official garb that is to be used by the clergy in their social life, the ecclesiastical uniform is supposed to be worn by them during public appearances,” the prelate said.

***

Are these perfect examples?

Fr. Paul Van Parijs, cicm

 

 Fr. Anscar Chupungco, osb

 

  Fr. Eugene Flameygh, cicm

 

By the way, these priests are some of the Founders of our favorite theology school, Maryhill School of Theology.

Or this one?

The so-called "peace advocate" Fr. Eliseo Mercado, Jr., OMI.  Peace advocate my @$$!  All this guy did is to name drop famous people he calls his "friends".  Ask him about Nur Misuari and the Ampatuans!

Or this other one?

Fr. Robert Reyes

He is in public right?

Or these ones?

Some of the Kape't Pandasal priests

Fr. Jboy Gonzales, sj

Our "fave" bishop, Bishop Chito Tagle, admirer of Martin Luther

 

In the office or even at school, the person who does not want to wear the uniform is someone who does not want to be associated with what the uniform or garb they are wearing signifies.

To fans of these men, don't give me that "what's important is what is in the inside." crap 

 

If that be the case, ask some of these men to stop insisting on their degrees and awards, because I know most of these do insist on it.

If that be case, isn't a a bad case of "holier than thou" because you are supposing that those who wear the clerical garbs are Pharisaical in their practice?  How sure are you that they are indeed "crunchy on the outside and juicy on the inside" ?

So does that mean that these people are not holy?

Just asking.

Why just not wear it?

Afraid to be recognized I guess.

UST vs. MST

Just like McDonald's....I am loving this!

***

MANILA, Sept. 12, 2011—Theology should not be used to advance one’s personal advocacy, especially when it runs contrary to Church teaching, according to the dean of the theology school of the University of Santo Tomas (UST).

Reacting to Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s speech sponsoring the “reproductive health” (RH) bill last month, Fr. Rodel Aligan, O.P. [Dean, Faculty of Sacred Theology, UST] said the phrase “follow your own conscience” has long been abused.  [I wish we always have a dollar every time we hear that!]

Aligan said a person cannot just invoke his or her conscience without studying the Church’s teachings as well as a careful scrutiny of one’s self before God. This is because one’s conscience, while certain, can be wrong.  [Your conscience must be guided properly.  This is what pro-contraception politicians say.  Access to information!  But they conveniently miss out giving the info about what the Church teaches about the subject.  This is what the Jesuits of Ateneo keep on saying:  "Let them decide according to their consciences."  As if the Church shackles you!]

“A conscience may be right and certain or erroneous and certain. Generally, a certain conscience comes from right conscience,” the Dominican priest said in an interview with The Varsitarian, UST’s newspaper.

“[A person] has the right to follow [his or her] own conviction provided that he or she remains sincerely disposed to continue his or her inquiry [about the teachings of God],” he added.

The Varsitarian report quoted Aligan as saying Santiago’s speech, “The Reproductive Health Act, Part 1: Primacy of Conscience in Catholic Theology,” contained little knowledge and was perilous to its audience.  [Can we hear an "Amen" for this?]

Santiago studied theology at the Maryhill School of Theology, a proponent of liberation theology — the Marxist elements of which had been strongly condemned by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the former head of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who is now Pope Benedict XVI.  [And women ordination and Lutheran theology about salvation and the Eucharist...]

In her speech, Santiago said: “If, after proper study, reflection, and prayer, a person is convinced that his or her conscience is correct, in spite of a conflict with the moral teachings of the Church, the person not only may but must follow the dictates of conscience, rather than the teachings of the Church.”

But Aligan, quoting the late Pope John Paul II, said Catholics have the duty to know whether their consciences are right.

Another theologian, Fr. Joel Jason, dean of studies of San Carlos Seminary, emphasized that one may not commit an act that is wrong even with a good intention.

“Kahit na maganda ‘yung intention mo (Even if your intention is good), you cannot do something that is evil in order to get something good. Kasi if you do something evil, it will be tantamount to committing sin,” Jason said in the Varsitarian article.

Jason said the Church will remain faithful to the teachings of Christ, however unpopular they are. (Dominic Francisco)

***

Since when was doctrine born out of the SWS Survey?

Thanks to Miriam Santiago and her obnoxiously big mouth,  MST is now under watch not only from the CBCP but from the Vatican as well!

Serves them right!

Meet Dr. Jose de Mesa

Taken from our favorite dissident school in the South, Euntes Mission Center

***

Jose M. de Mesa, Ph.D. a married Filipino Theologian, is a professor of Applied Systematic Theology at De La Salle University, Manila. He obtained his Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the Catholic University, Louvain, Belgium. He is a member of the Louvain Theological and Pastoral Monographs and is on the advisory board of Concilium. [the great dissident journal founded by some of the greatest dissidents of our time among them Yves Congar, Hans Küng, Karl Rahner, and Edward Schillebeeckx] His publications included: In Solidarity with the Culture; Studies in Theological Re-rooting; Basic Realities and Processes and Doing Christology, the Re-appropriations of a Tradition.   [even earthworms won't recycle these rubbish.]

The speaker started by introducing himself as a married person which established certain veracity in speaking about family life in the perspective of a non-celibate.  [same as saying "I am married.  You are a celibate priest and bishop. Don't teach me anything about morality in a married state."] He also presented the preferred approach in seeing marriage, which has undergone lots of humiliation throughout the history of the Church, that is, “blessing-centered” rather than “problem-centered”.    [problem centered?  since when did the Church teach that to us?] He traced back the vision of marriage from the time of the Church Fathers and the succeeding epoch as highly influenced by Hellenistic dualists’ philosophy.  [Not what the Bible says?  Right.] Such philosophy influenced a lot in the way of thinking of the church and the implementation of her practices, which has become a tradition that is carried from one century to another.

The Church has been living in the medieval way of thinking for which Dr. de Mesa proposed a re-visioning of the church’s view of marriage as well as our negative (subconscious) accusations of marital commitment.  [This is the language of Modernists.  Anything from the past is bad.  Anything they think of and as long as it does not resemble anything from the past is not only good, but the best.]  Dualism has become problematic and has been marginalizing a good number of the faithful. It has an enormous influence in Catholicism and the consequences of its paradigm have reflected so much in many of her doctrines, beliefs, and traditions. Missionaries and the clergy in this regard have become problem solvers and experts of marriage which they never experienced themselves.   [Bingo!  There it is folks!  This theologian does not even try to draw the great teaching of St. Paul about the mystical marriage of Christ with the Church and how this relates to the Christian view of marriage.  But no, he says its all influenced by Hellenistic philosophy.]

For centuries, the vision of marriage and everything that is related to sexuality have been looked down and considered second class or low class as it were.  [Geez!  It was that bad?  Poor parents fo St. Therese of Liseux who are both Blessed.  But I guess he does not even believe in canonizations anymore, too.] This made the Church hierarchical and put married couples below as inferior with emphasis on the fallenness of women and weakness of children.   [Modernists will always paint a gloomy picture of pre-Vatican II.  Because of this premise, you now accept that the Church has been in a quandary for centuries that we need to fix it.  And the jolly old 60s fixed it with Vatican II.  Church is always hierarchical, well it still is.  Women are fallen, according to them but not to us.  Guess he does not even know Catherine of Siena and Teresa of Avila.  And children are weak, well physically they are, that is why they need adults.  So if you talk to these Modernist, who abhor the Church hierarchy but would not dare you question their authority, do not accept their premise about the sorry state of the Church before Vatican II.]

The proposed approach, that is, the “blessing-centered” or “creation-centered” approach makes missionaries and the church hierarchy as human witness who are able to listen to the threshold of marital life. This was made possible in the implementation of the double thrust of Second Vatican Council which is aggiornamento in her doctrine and ad fontes as regards our traditions.  [ Ah yes!  Vatican II!  The super council!  The mother of all councils!  The only council canonized by dissidents!]  This basically is not innovative but rather a process reclaiming the lost piece of the original Christianity as Jesus envisioned.   [remember folks!  These dissident theologians would always paint a picture that the Church has been corrupted for hundreds of years and that Vatican II and their own brand of Christianity brought it back to its "pristine beauty".  "Just as Jesus envisioned it", like homosexual marriage, women priests, divorced clergy, contraception and abortion, which these dissidents support.]

Marriage, which majority of the world population is engaged with, sparks a certain interest that demands a particular response from the church that neglects its importance for a long time. By the lecture on the mission of the family in the church, new paradigm has been opened for further reflection. As an epilogue for the lecture on this day, Dr. de Mesa showed us a movie about a married couple which serves as a prologue for tomorrow’s session.   [Guess it is a copy of their home video, eh?  Ha!]

***

You see, when it stinks, you know their is a rotting fish somewhere.

Dr. Jose de Mesa is one of them.

One of these days, you'll see, this guy would lose his license to teach theology.  And that University in Belgium would lose its title as a Catholic university.

Well, I might be too late for this but the university is already contemplating dropping the adjective Catholic from its official name.

If you find that your theology professor studied there at Louvain, Belgium, dump your Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Your professor would not use it.

You see, they are the authority in Church teaching, not the Pope nor the bishops in communion with him.

That my friends, was how Jesus envisioned the Church to be, like what Dr. de Mesa wanted it to be.

Or is it the other way around or is this the Church of De Mesa?

Find the liberals!

I have a simple game for you folks!

Find the liberals and dissidents in the list of faculty members of the...(drum roll please!)

LOYOLA SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY!

If you regularly read the blog, you'll get a lot of names in there.

Look for the names in the LST faculty list here.

A week after this post, I will give the names of these liberals and what they "advocate".  I may not get all of them, but hey I know a good sampling of those in the list!

And most of it, you do not hear in the streets or in your churches. But their venom is spread through their students, seminarians and nuns and future lay theologians.

So what do you get in return?

This one!

(When are they going to serve the roast pig?  Ha!)

So happy scouting!

And bring a bottle of Holy Water with you just for good measure.

Ha!