07 November 2014

Syria: Christ’s followers, caught between Assad and the Caliphate

In a new book coordinated by Samuel Lieven, titled “The Black Book on the Condition of Christians in the World” and now on sale in Europe, Jean-Michel di Falco, Timothy Radcliffe and Andrea Riccardi attempt to document the scope of anti-Christian action around the world . The book is a collection of analyses by the world’s top scholars. Below is a preview of the chapter written by Italian journalist Domenico Quirico

As seen in Vatican Insider:

Christians in Syria: I came into contact with them straight away, on the second day of my umpteenth visit to the land of the revolution which turned into a horrific and ferocious civil war. Yabroud is located just over the Lebanese border. Its mountains seem far away, bare, rocky, solemn peaks crowned by clouds. In order to complete the first leg of the journey which should take me to Damascus, I skirt around the mountainside with a Free Syria Army reinforcement team, above deep and scary, cloud-filled gorges. At sundown, the vast Yabroud plain and Qara further in the distance, appear submerged in glorious sunlight, with cultivated fields and orderly orchards stretching out across it in a carpet-like pattern. But it is the sentinels of the desert; behind them are the endless plains that lead to Damascus; its cliffs and sand make the faraway sky seem cloudy.

This has been the land of Christians for centuries. They have held out against all odds: Crusades and the jihad, poverty and revolutions, fanaticism and indifference. Above all, they escaped the jaws of one unforgivable sin: desperation. On my previous four trips to Syria under rebellion I never paid much attention to the Christian community in the country ruled by Assad. They account for approximately 10-12% of the Syrian population but it is difficult to give precise estimates, as people’s religion is not stated on their personal identification documents. I confess that I saw it as a problem of secondary importance given the tragic abyss which 22 million Syrians, including Sunnis, Alawites, Arabs, Turkmens, Druses and Kurds, found themselves in. Of course I had noticed that the Christians in Free Syrian Army units were rather few. Certainly when I talked about it with the rebels many of their faces dropped just at the mention of them: “Christians have always been closely tied to Bashar out of interest and fear... They are suspicious of us revolutionaries and accuse us of being fundamentalists and fanatics. But in reality they are defending their interests, wealth and the social status they have gained. Fir this reason they see the regime as a safety net and us an unknown.”

But, they added, “there will be no vendettas in Aleppo”, a martyr city and symbol of the revolution that has been split down the middle, with neighbourhoods that have been freed on the one hand and the regime’s strongholds on the other. “There will also be a place for Christians in the new State that we visualise as democratic, pluralistic and multidenominational.”

Syrian Christians have traditionally always supported the Baath party and the nation-State. But they have also done so out of need. They see it as a way of holding back fundamentalism. Their Golden Age was the 1950’s, when they actively participated in the political and parliamentary life of a newly-independent Syria; in the 1954 elections they obtained 16 members of parliament. This was the only democratic election in the country’s entire history.

The emir of the Al Nusra Front group that had taken me hostage for a period of ten days was a good looking Lebanese man with blue eyes who came from the villages on the border to fight the holy war in Syria and settle the score with Hezbollah’s Shiites. Apparently they had carried out a massacre in his village. It was this chain of events that led to the of the moloch that was the Syrian civil war. A monk who was a warrior, just like his young fighters, prayer and war, an ascetic life where there was no room for smiles, food or piety. He would pass by the stable where his group of fighters were living in poor conditions, when it was not yet daylight, as knock on the iron doors with a stick he always carried with him, shouting: “Wake up, mujaheddin. God is calling, it’s prayer time!” He had a clever and cruel look in his eye and he had things all worked out in his mind. When I asked him what future lay ahead for Syria if they managed to get rid of Bashar, he said without hesitation: we will establish the Caliphate here, according to the will of the great and merciful God. Sharia law will reign supreme. But this will only be the beginning... We will then throw all Jews into the sea, conquer Lebanon and overthrow the atheist and corrupt regimes in Jordan, Iraq... and then Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, al-Andalus, Spain and all of God’s lands. And the Caliphate will return to its former glory, in the sacred days when Islam was victorious. I asked him what would happen to Christians in the future Caliphate: they have been living here for centuries, this is their home... They will have a better fate than that of the Alawites, Bashar’s Satanic sect, which we will hunt down and exterminate, right down to the very last man, woman and child. If Christians obey, they will be able to stay here, but they will have to pay a tax, like all dhimmis. As citizens, they will never enjoy the same rights as true believers!

Over the past year, the nature of the Syrian civil war and its players have changed radically. The number of jihadist groups financed by Saudi Arabia and often made up entirely of foreign volunteers, have multiplied and are also stronger. In a land where the Free Syrian Army is no longer, these groups are the real opposition force that stands against the regular army. They have brought with them a fanaticism that was lacking in the first phase of the revolution. They see the regime’s overthrowal as the first phase in the process of re-establishing the Caliphate in a country that is a key player in the Middle East. Approaches to Christians vary: each katiba takes a more or less extremist stance depending on its composition – Chechens, Libyans, Tunisians, Tatars, Saudis and Europeans . Misinformation on both warring sides has given birth to numerous theories and myths. Western newspapers have collected and published terrifying stories about fundamentalist groups killing Christians and allegedly bottling their blood and sending it to the Saudis who finance their groups, to show that they are hard at work in this holy war! There has also been talk of Christian crucifixions based on videos from questionable sources. There are jihadist groups of dubious origin which may have been created or infiltrated by the regime’s secret services to spread confusion and conduct dirty military operations. For example, who shot Fr. Franz van der Lugt in the neck three times ? The Dutch Jesuit priest who agreed to stay in Homs’ old quarter which had been under siege for two years, despite the bombs and the lack of food, to show to the world that he “[did] not see Muslims or Christians” but “above all, human beings”. Was it the fundamentalists or the regular army that killed him to take revenge? Who kidnapped another Jesuit priest, Fr. Paolo Dall’Oglio, founder of the Mar Musa monastery – a place of extraordinary ecumenism where Muslims and Christians pray side by side ­– over a year ago? Unlike the Christian leaders he had often jad disagreements with, he had chosen to back the revolutionary side right from the start, against a regime which he denounced as corrupt and violent. Here we have a priest and revolutionary free from any contradictions and hypocrisy.

Some are adamant – though there is no confirmation – that Fr. Dall’Oglio was kidnapped by one of the jihad’s most radical groups, ISIL, which controls the territories on the Syria-Iraq border where the Italian Jesuit priest went missing. Dall’Oglio’s revolutionary values are of no importance to these new rebel fanatics in the face of two other capital “sins”: being Western and above all, Christian.

30 October 2014

Pope Emeritus Breaks Silence to Support Truth Over Dialogue

As seen on Aleteia:

When Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation in February of 2013, he said he would continue to serve the church "through a life dedicated to prayer.” He has made few public appearances since he left office, and has said and written even less.

His relative silence was broken Oct. 21, when his longtime secretary, Archbishop Georg Ganswein, read a 1,800-word speech written by Benedict on the occasion of the dedication of the Aula Magna at the Pontifical Urbaniana University to the Pope Emeritus.The university belongs to the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. It dedicated the hall as a “gesture of gratitude” for what Benedict “has done for the Church as a conciliar expert, with his teaching as professor, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and, finally, the Magisterium."

In the speech, the Pope emeritus said that dialogue with other religions is no substitute for spreading the Gospel to non-Christian cultures, and warned against relativistic ideas of religious truth as “lethal to faith.” He also said the true motivation for missionary work is not to increase the Church’s size but to share the joy of knowing Christ.

“The risen Lord instructed his apostles, and through them his disciples in all ages, to take his word to the ends of the earth and to make disciples of all people,” retired Pope Benedict wrote. “‘But does that still apply?’ many inside and outside the Church ask themselves today. ‘Is mission still something for today? Would it not be more appropriate to meet in dialogue among religions and serve together the cause of world peace?’ The counter-question is: ‘Can dialogue substitute for mission?’"

“In fact, many today think religions should respect each other and, in their dialogue, become a common force for peace. According to this way of thinking, it is usually taken for granted that different religions are variants of one and the same reality,” the retired Pope wrote. “The question of truth, that which originally motivated Christians more than any other, is here put inside parentheses. It is assumed that the authentic truth about God is in the last analysis unreachable and that at best one can represent the ineffable with a variety of symbols. This renunciation of truth seems realistic and useful for peace among religions in the world."

“It is nevertheless lethal to faith. In fact, faith loses its binding character and its seriousness, everything is reduced to interchangeable symbols, capable of referring only distantly to the inaccessible mystery of the divine,” he wrote.

Pope Benedict wrote that some religions, particularly “tribal religions,” are “waiting for the encounter with Jesus Christ,” but that this “encounter is always reciprocal. Christ is waiting for their history, their wisdom, their vision of the things.” This encounter can also give new life to Christianity, which has grown tired in its historical heartlands, he wrote.

“We proclaim Jesus Christ not to procure as many members as possible for our community, and still less in order to gain power,” the retired Pope wrote. “We speak of him because we feel the duty to transmit that joy which has been given to us.”

17 October 2014

Cardinal Burke says statement from Pope Francis defending Catholic teaching is ‘long overdue’

From LifeSiteNews.com:

In a candid interview Monday, Cardinal Raymond Burke voiced the concerns of many of his brothers in the Synod hall and lay Catholic activists throughout the world that the public presentation of the Synod has been manipulated by the organizers in the General Secretariat.

He strongly criticized yesterday’s Relatio post disceptationem, or “report after the debate,” which the Catholic lay group Voice of the Family had called a “betrayal,” saying it proposes views that "faithful shepherds ... cannot accept," and betrays an approach that is "not of the Church." He called on Pope Francis to issue a statement defending Catholic teaching.

“In my judgment, such a statement is long overdue,” he told Catholic World Report’s Carl Olsen. “The debate on these questions has been going forward now for almost nine months, especially in the secular media but also through the speeches and interviews of Cardinal Walter Kasper and others who support his position.”

“The faithful and their good shepherds are looking to the Vicar of Christ for the confirmation of the Catholic faith and practice regarding marriage which is the first cell of the life of the Church,” he added.

The relatio, he said, proposes views that many Synod fathers “cannot accept,” and that they “as faithful shepherds of the flock cannot accept.”

The document, among its most controversial propositions, asks whether “accepting and valuing [homosexuals’] sexual orientation” could align with Catholic doctrine; proposes allowing Communion for divorced-and-remarried Catholics on a “case-by-case basis”; and says pastors should emphasize the “positive aspects” of lifestyles the Church considers gravely sinful, including civil remarriage after divorce and premarital cohabitation.

“Clearly, the response to the document in the discussion which immediately followed its presentation manifested that a great number of the Synod Fathers found it objectionable,” Burke told Olsen.

“The document lacks a solid foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium. In a matter on which the Church has a very rich and clear teaching, it gives the impression of inventing a totally new, what one Synod Father called ‘revolutionary’, teaching on marriage and the family. It invokes repeatedly and in a confused manner principles which are not defined, for example, the law of graduality.”

Burke lamented that the bishops’ interventions are not published, while the General Secretariat chose to publish the controversial relatio, which was intended as a merely provisional summary of the first week that is under review by the fathers this week.

“All of the information regarding the Synod is controlled by the General Secretariat of the Synod which clearly has favored from the beginning the positions expressed in the Relatio post disceptationem of yesterday morning,” he said.

“While the individual interventions of the Synod Fathers are not published, yesterday’s Relatio, which is merely a discussion document, was published immediately and, I am told, even broadcast live. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to see the approach at work, which is certainly not of the Church.”

While critics of Burke's public interventions in the Synod debates have portrayed him as representing a fringe, he was elected by his brother bishops to moderate one of the three English-speaking small groups discussing the relatio this week.

12 October 2014

The Most Pro-Life “Doctor Who” Ever—10 Points You Missed

From CatholicVote.org:

On Saturday October 4 the BBC ran the most boldly pro-life, explicitly anti-abortion TV show in the history of Doctor Who, and maybe in all of modern television.

The show was so skillfully crafted that pro-abortion folks might not know what hit them yet, but they will soon.

Here are the 10 pro-life highlights that you may have missed from this sci-fi gem.

For non-Who fans, I’ll provide a little bit of background along the way. As for spoilers: consider yourself warned! (You can buy the episode for $3 on iTunes or other digital providers.)

1. THE PREGNANT MOON
In case you don’t know, Doctor Who is a Time Lord who seeks adventures throughout time and space. Though an alien, he looks human and travels with a female (usually non-romantic) human companion.



In this latest episode “Kill the Moon,” the Doctor and companion Clara Oswald land on the moon in 2049 (along with Courtney, a teenage student from the school where Clara teaches).

Serious fluctuations in the moon’s physics are causing death and destruction on earth. Humans have given up space exploration, but they send a few astronauts to investigate–armed with nuclear weapons.

They meet the Doctor and have some scary experiences with deadly spider-like creatures. But by the end of the first act the Doctor discovers the real problem. The moon, which appeared to be growing and breaking apart—turns out to be a giant space egg, ready to hatch. Cue the moral drama.

2. LUNAR ULTRASOUND
Guessing at this answer, the Doctor dives into a strange cavern of fluid and comes back with proof. Using his ubiquitous sonic screwdriver, he takes a sonographic image—an ultrasound of the moon.



The picture is rendered in the familiar blue and red tones that all of us and many pregnant women have seen.

It reveals the image of a fetus, albeit one that is several hundred billion tons large and bears huge wings. It is curled into the full interior of the moon, with the surface as its shell.

Four characters are on scene to digest this news: the Doctor, Clara, Courtney, and the female lead astronaut Captain Lundvik. They marvel at the image, but for very different reasons.

3. “UNIQUE AND UTTERLY BEAUTIFUL”
The first reactions are vivid. The Doctor sets the tone.



“Doctor, what is it?” Clara asks. He cannot contain his wonder. “I think it is unique. I think that’s the only one of its kind in the universe. I think that that is utterly beautiful.”

For many years the Doctor has been a hero who is fearless, but not because he has an abundance of courage—instead, because he has wonder. When other people see monsters, he sees the beauty of creation.

That sense of wonder is now turned into the womb of humanity. But human fear is not solved so easily.

4. “HOW DO WE KILL IT?”
Captain Lundvik shatters the feeling of wonder with cold realism. “How do we kill it?”


The hatching is already causing catastrophe on earth, and maybe when it fully hatches it will destroy the earth entirely. Or maybe it won’t. They aren’t sure.

“Kill the moon?” The Doctor slams Lundvik’s proposal on the table for all of them to look at plainly. He turns off the ultrasound, making the creature disappear while they discuss its fate.

Recent seasons have made the Doctor face situations where he can succumb to his fears and destroy life, or affirm his better nature and trust ways to affirm the inherent value of life, sometimes taking leap of faith.

Even when facing genocide and torture the plotline has favored the life-affirming choice—until now. Would it continue to do so in an abortion analogy?

5. “IT’S A LITTLE BABY!”
Courtney’s youth and compassion assert themselves. “It’s a little baby!” she reacts in horror to Lundvik’s drive towards death.



Clara joins the chorus. “Stop. Right, listen. This is a, this is a life. I mean this, this must be the biggest life in the universe.”

“It is killing people. It is destroying the earth,” Lundvik insists. Her reasons are sympathetic, but still driven too narrowly by fear.

“You cannot blame a baby for kicking,” Clara chimes back.

Lundvik is quick to reach her own dehumanizing conclusions about life in this womb. “It’s an exoparasite. Like a flea, or a head louse.”

“I’m gonna to have to be a lot more certain than that if I’m going to kill a baby” proclaims Clara.

The Doctor’s companions have often been his conscience. He battles his own apprehensions and hatreds. Clara, Amy Pond and others have entreated and even shamed the Doctor into making the right choice—the pro-life choice. Now it’s humanity’s turn.

6. EVERYTHING IS DEATH
Captain Lundvik is not bloodthirsty, but she has fallen into despair. She only sees the destruction that might (but might not) befall if they don’t choose death.

To her, space has not elicited wonder, but dread: “the stars, the blackness, that’s all dead. Sadly that is the only life any of us will ever know.”

Courtney sees more. “There’s life here. There’s life just next door.” But Lundvik cannot hope.

Still, Lundvik is not a villain. She feels trapped. She doesn’t want to abort. “Listen I don’t want to do this. All my life I dreamed about coming here. But this is how it has to end.”

7. GRAPHIC IMAGES

The Doctor lays bare the consequences of Lundvik’s proposal. Sure, killing the moon will stop its hatching, because “there’ll be nothing to make it break up. There’ll be nothing trying to force its way out.”

But euphemisms will not do, either. “The gravity of the little dead baby will pull all the pieces back together again. Of course it won’t be very pretty. You’d have an enormous corpse floating in the sky. Might have some very difficult conversations to have with your kids.”

“I don’t have any kids,” Lundvik says, displaying her deep loneliness.

8. THE DOCTOR LEAVES
At this point the sophistication of the writers moves to a new level. The Doctor becomes the emotionally distant boyfriend, and more definitively, the voice of pro-choice empowerment itself.

He leaves. He knows the right decision, but refuses to help the human women make it.



“Whatever future humanity might have depends on the choice that is made right here, right now. Kill it. Or let it live. I can’t make this decision for you.”

Clara pleads with him to stay, to give wisdom—to help them make the right choice. But he gets nasty. “Sorry, well actually I’m not sorry. It’s time to take the stabalizers off your bike.”

Then he postures his abandonment in words that Planned Parenthood could not have written better itself. “It’s your moon, womankind. It’s your choice.”

In “Doctor Who,” the lead actor changes every few years, under the plot conceit that before he dies he can regenerate into a new body. He’s the same person but with a varying personality.

This year’s Doctor is more practically minded, but considerably more insensitive—sometimes intentionally, sometimes absent-mindedly. It is his character flaw along with combating his interior hatreds.

In this episode it was perfectly played into the dismissive posture towards women offered by the pro-choice movement.

9. LIGHTS OUT
With the three girls left to make their abortion decision, Clara patches into mission control and asks all of earth to weigh in during the next hour: “We have a terrible decision to make. We can kill this creature or let it live. We don’t know what’s going to happen when it hatches—if it will hurt us, help us, or just leave us alone. We have to decide together. If you think we should kill the creature turn your lights off. If you think we should take the chance, let it live, leave your lights on. We’ll be able to see. Goodnight earth.”



The earth then chooses: and one country at a time, its lights go off. It makes a massive choice to kill. (An interesting contrast with the moral choice made at the end of “The Dark Knight.”)

But as the timer counts to zero and Lundvik reaches to push the nuclear button, Clara jumps in and turns off the nukes permanently. She knew life was the right choice.

Just in case some people still haven’t figured out the episode was a giant analogy to abortion, the countdown display declares “ABORTED.” Clara aborted the abortion.

The choice made, the Doctor comes back and they transport to earth to watch what happens. The moon hatches into a giant winged creature. Its shell does not rain down on earth to destroy humanity, but disintegrates harmlessly. The creature lays a new egg—a “new moon”—and physics is restored.

We learn that humanity, having seen the beauty of creation that it almost killed, is inspired to reach to the stars again, and eventually populates the universe.

10. PATRONIZING PRO-CHOICE PLATITUDES
The brutal coda to this episode affirms both life and friendship. Clara is furious with the Doctor for leaving instead of helping her.


Clara begs for a good reason why he left. He can’t be as callous as he seems. But she is wrong. “It wasn’t my decision to make. I told you.”

“You know what, shut up. I am so sick of listening to you,” Clara rages. Leaving “was cheap, it was pathetic, no, no, it was patronizing.”

“No, that was me allowing you to make a choice about your own future,” the Doctor persists in one last attempt to defend pro-choice ideology. “That was me respecting you.”

“My God, really, was it?” Clara yells back as tears well up. “Yeah well, respected is not how I feel.”

“I was helping.”

“What, by clearing off?”

“Yes.”

“Well then clear off,” for good, she says.

Telling these women that abortion was “your choice” was the opposite of friendship.

Nor is this a mere platitude about it not mattering what you choose as long as you choose it. Clara didn’t want the Doctor to stay regardless of the choice she made. Clara wanted him to stay precisely to help her choose life.

“I nearly didn’t press that button. I nearly got it wrong. That was you, my ‘friend,’ making me scared, making me feel like a bloody idiot. You walk our earth, Doctor. You breathe our air. You make us your friends and that is your moon too, and you can damn well help us when we need it.”

***

“Kill the Moon” was a thoroughly pro-life story.

Yet it was effective. It did not preach or caricature. The dialogue sizzled. It was riveting, morally serious, and often fun.

While the writers may have felt they were sprinkling in enough “pro-choice” rhetoric to mollify pro-choice elites, that ultimately won’t do. They took that rhetoric and laid it bare as platitudes about women’s choice and empowerment, cheap and patronizing, an abandonment of women.

The moon baby was not a monster, but neither was Lundvik. Her motivations were understandable, and we could relate to all her conclusions. She didn’t want abortion, she just felt she had no choice.

But ultimately Lundvik’s perspective was wrong—despair had narrowed her vision. Life and friendship is the answer.

Finally seeing the wonder of life, Lundvik tells Clara “Thank you. Thank you for stopping me. Thank you for giving me the way back.”

Thank you for stopping abortion.

Not bad for 50 minutes of campy sci-fi.

06 October 2014

Cardinal Burke: Synod should take Communion proposal ‘off the table’

As seen in CatholicHerald.co.uk:

The highest ranking American bishop at the Vatican says this month’s Synod of Bishops on the family should mark the end of a high-level debate over whether to make it easier for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Communion.

“The matter really has to be clarified at this point so that this doesn’t continue,” Cardinal Raymond L Burke, prefect of the Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature, told Catholic News Service October 1st. “For this to go on for another year, it can only do harm.”

By church law, divorced and civilly remarried Catholics are not admitted to Communion unless they obtain an annulment of their first, sacramental marriages or abstain from sexual relations with their new partners, living together as “brother and sister.”

Pope Francis has said the predicament of such Catholics exemplifies a general need for mercy in the church today. He invited German Cardinal Walter Kasper to address the world’s cardinals at the Vatican in February, when the cardinal argued that, in certain cases, the church can “tolerate something that, in itself, is unacceptable”: a couple living together as husband and wife in a second union.

The topic is sure to be one of the most discussed at the Oct. 5-19 extraordinary synod on the family, following a lively public debate at the highest levels of the church.

Cardinal Burke is one of five cardinals — three of them of synod fathers — who contributed to a new book of essays arguing against Cardinal Kasper’s proposal.

“I cannot see how (the proposal) can go forward if we are going to honor the words of our Lord himself in the Gospel according to St. Matthew, in which he said the man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery,” said Cardinal Burke, who heads the Vatican’s highest court. “The person who’s living in an irregular union is living in an adulterous union and therefore cannot be admitted to the sacraments until that situation has been rectified.”

While he said the debate over Cardinal Kasper’s proposal “can only be a healthy thing as long as there’s an honest and deep exchange of views on the matter,” he said protracted discussion at the highest levels has bred confusion.

“This has gone on now for several months and I see that in the media there’s the expectation that there’s going to be some change in the church’s teaching,” Cardinal Burke said. “I hear from bishops and priests that many people are coming to them and insisting that they can now receive the sacraments because they interpret that somehow the church has already changed her teaching. And that isn’t healthy.”

The October 2014 synod is not supposed to reach definitive conclusions but prepare the agenda for a larger world synod a year later, which will make recommendations to the pope. Yet, Cardinal Burke voiced hopes that church leaders would conclude their debate on the Communion question during the first phase of the process.

“What I would hope would happen at (the 2014 synod) is that this issue be clarified and it be off the table,” he said.

Pope Francis is the “first teacher of the faith,” who is expected to author an apostolic exhortation based on the two synods, but he “wanted to call the presidents of conferences of bishops from around the world to hear their thinking, and if he hears from them that there is no point in further discussion of the matter and it should be taken off the table, that would be a wonderful thing,” the cardinal said.

Cardinal Burke said he could not estimate how many of the nearly 200 bishops attending the synod might be open to Cardinal Kasper’s proposal, though he said he saw support in Europe and resistance among bishops in Africa. But he said he could not envision the German cardinal’s recommendation prevailing.

“These are bishops, these are shepherds of the flock, who are Catholic. I can’t imagine them accepting this proposal,” he said. “I don’t know quite how I would be able to digest it.”

25 September 2014

New Confession Schedule

While in a foreign country, it can be difficult to find English speaking priests to hear confession. There are a few who have volunteered to hear confession in the Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (more popularly known as The Duomo.)  Just tell the guards in the side entrance, for mass and prayer, that you will be going in for confession.

As these priests are volunteers, they may not always be present on their scheduled times. If this should happen, Don Mario Portella is willing to hear confession by appointment. Just send him an email to see if he is available.



Monday

Fr. Kurian          10:00-12:00


Tuesday

Fr. Kurian          10:00-12:00
Mons. Rinaldo    10:00-12:00


Wednesday

Mons. Rinaldo    11:00-12:00
Fr. Kurian           17:00-18:45


Saturday

Don Mario         16:30-1700
                        Also after the Vigil Mass

Sunday

Don Mario         10:30-11:30









15 March 2014

Lent 2014 Theme

As we begin another season of Lent, it is always important to recognise the suffering Christ endured for us. It was a sacrifice, an act of love, which rendered onto to us not what we deserved under justice but what God gave onto us under His love and mercy.

In his Lenten message for 2010, the His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI mentions, “Just as man needs bread, so does man have even more need of God. Saint Augustine notes: if ‘justice is that virtue which gives everyone his due…where, then is the justice of man, when he deserts the true God?’…Adam and Eve, seduced by Satan’s lie, snatching the mysterious fruit against the divine command, replaced the logic of trusting in Love with that of suspicion and competition; the logic of receiving and trustfully expecting from the Other with anxiously seizing and doing on one’s own, experiencing, as a consequence, a sense of disquiet and uncertainty. How can man free himself from this selfish influence and open himself to love? – God has paid for us the price of the exchange in His Son, a price that is truly exorbitant…Conversion to Christ, believing in the Gospel, ultimately means this: to exit the illusion of self-sufficiency in order to discover and accept one’s own need – the need of others and God, the need of His forgiveness and His friendship…This happens in the Sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.”

Let us then make use of these Sacraments and draw closer to God. It is by sharing in His passion, be it by voluntary penance or by accepting and offering up the sufferings He allows, that we shall partake in the glory of His Resurrection. 

13 February 2014

The Demonstration in Rome: Burke, the only Pastor among his Sheep

From Rorate Caeli:

On January 11, 2014, there was a public demonstration in the Piazza Santi Apostoli led by “Manif pour Tous—Italia”*, in defense of the natural family and against the approval of a law concerning homophobia, now in discussion in the Parliament. The purpose of the demonstration (just like those in the past organized in the whole of Italy) is to safeguard freedom of thought and opinion (Article 21 in the Italian Constitution), and to safeguard the natural family, of which the Constitution speaks in Articles 29, 30 and 32, based on marriage between a man and a woman.

As always, we were present and helped with the organization. The demonstration was marked by a great number of families, a great number of young people, and also priests. But as the jounrnalist, Marco Tosatte, sagely commented on his blog on “La Stampa”, of all Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals that fill the city of Rome, there was only one who was present at the demonstration: the American Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke.

Yes, you understood correctly. That Cardinal who has been criticized so much because he is a lover of tradition and of beautiful liturgy, deeply held personal positions that today seem to be seen as something negative, to be thrown out and condemned. Meanwhile, the only one present, the only one to make the support of the Church felt, the only one to give moral support in a battle on principles that are non-negotiable, being fought for by laity who are vigorously leading the battle against oppression of the spirit and of freedom of expression—the only one was Cardinal Burke.



At this point permit me a historical digression that offers a parallel to this situation. We go back in memory exactly thirty years, in 1984, when another great Cardinal, Giuseppe Siri, gave an interview to Msgr. Virgilio Levi for the weekly magazine, Oggi. On this occasion Msgr. Levi asked the Cardinal the following question in a provocative way: “Your Eminence, why do you parade around in a pectoral cross made of gold and precious gems, when nearly all bishops at this time have restricted themselves to a simple cross of silver, metal or wood?” The answer, quite lucid, was as follows: “I do not parade around with this cross. I wear it. First of all because I am not a hypocrite. I have seen wooden pectoral crosses encrusted with gems on the back facing the cassock. What is the sense of that? Secondly, because this cross was given to me as a gift when I was consecrated a bishop by the emigrants from Liguria living in Argentina, who number about 5 million, exactly twice those in their Motherland, and in wearing this cross I honor them, and I remember them. Thirdly, because poverty is not about these things. Finally, because I was praised by the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, who, on the occasion of my trip to Russia recognized the honesty of a man who dared to visit that country wearing clerical dress and the signs of his rank without hiding them.”

Now we could write a long comment about this, but we are firmly convinced that it is not necessary, intelligenti pauca.

In the anomalous current trend to avoid clear positions on anything and to play down even the memory of the rituals associated with the Church in favor of dramatic, dialectical, and combative statements about poverty, no one finds the time to go down into the street and give living witness as asked for by the Pope in a loud voice during the Chrism Mass of March 28, 2013. The words of Pope Frances echo in our hearts: “…I ask this of you: be pastors who smell of the ‘smell of your sheep’. May you hear these words!” To this we say: Would that these words were heard! Would that these pastors were seen!

And we today have seen and heard only Cardinal Burke, a true pastor down among his sheep.

Monthly Theme: February 2014

"When the day came for them to be purified as laid down by the Law of Moses, the parents of Jesus took him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord...Now in Jerusalem there was a man named Simeon. He was a just man...It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death until he had set eyes on the Christ of the Lord...and he said, 'Now, Master, you can let your servant go in peace, just as you promised; because my eyes have seen the salvation which you have prepared for all the nations to see, a light to enlighten the pagans and the glory of your people Israel."
(Luke 22, 22-32)

These words coming from Luke's Gospel remind us that if we remain faithful to the Commandments of God, i. e., the precepts of Christ and his Church, God will always give us what is necessary to continue in peace. This requires not just having faith in God, but hope as well. Just like Simeon who had to wait until the end of his life, as the gospel passage tells us, if we don't give into our own frustrations even if we may be justified in our anger, the Holy Spirit will always work within us. And, just as Mary and Joseph interceded in bringing peace to that man who had been waiting, so too will they bring onto us. They held the Christ child in their arms and because our Saviour himself trusted them. Our prayers shall be answered if we follow the example of Simeon and the Holy Family.

The Good Lord will always put us to the test. And, even if we are caught off guard by whatever situation or event that suddenly presents itself, we will always be able to rise above the situation knowing that God never abandons us to our trials. Why? Because we will have done everything to entrust ourselves to God's grace that can work in every human being. Let us always ask for that daily grace that comes from God alone.

14 January 2014

Monthly Theme: January 2014

Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of King Herod, behold, Magi came from the East to Jerusalem, saying, "Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East and have come to worship him"...And behold, the star that they had seen in the East went before them, until it came and stood over the place where the child was. And when they saw the star they rejoiced exceedingly. And entering the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they worshipped him. And opening their treasures they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.
(MT 2: 1-2, 9-12)

How can this Scripture passage relate to us today? As the Holy Father, Benedict XVI, said during his homilies on the Feast of the Epiphany (2007 & 2008)...The light shining in the night at Christmas illuminating the Bethlehem Grotto, where Mary, Joseph and the shepherds remained in adoration, shines out today and is manifested to all. The Epiphany is a mystery of light, symbolically suggested by the star that guided the Magi on their journey. The true source of light, however, the sun that rises from on high (LK 1: 7-8) is Christ.

But what is this light? Is it merely an evocative metaphor or does this image correspond to reality? The Apostle John writes in his First Letter, God is light; in him there is no darkness (1 JN 1:5); and further on he adds, God is love. The Holy Father goes on to say that, the light that shone forth at Christmas, which is manifested to the peoples today, is God's love revealed in the Person of the Incarnate Word. Attracted by this light the Magi arrived from the East. The arrival in Bethlehem from the East to adore the newborn Messiah is a sign of the manifestation of the universal King to the peoples and to all who seek the truth.

As the pope suggests, it is sin and its justification that darkens our souls and decision making. But for those who have the slightest opening in their hearts to cooperate with the grace of God will always be guided by Him. Why? Because He wants not just to give us hope but He wants to share that infinite love that will lead us to the joys of life everlasting.