Daily Archives: April 6, 2013
Dominica in Albis Reblog
Today, the sunday immediately following Easter, goes under three different days.
The first is as the dominica in albis
The name comes from the ancient habit by which the newly baptised wore a white tunic for Easter and the following seven days, the sunday following Easter being the day when the white tunic was put away. Therefore, the day was called dominica in albis depositis or “sunday in which the white clothes are put away”.
This day is (or perhaps rather: was) also called “Quasimodo Sunday”, because on this day the anthiphon of the Tridentine Mass used the words taken from Peter, Quasi modo geniti infantes, Halleluja, rationabile, sine dolo lac concupiscite, something on the lines of “yearn the pure spiritual milk as if you were newborn children”. In the book “The Hunchback of Notre-Dame”, the protagonist is a deformed foundling who is, well, found on the easter following…
View original post 161 more words
It is rather indicative of the state of things that here seems to be an attempt to let the Pontiff pass as having formerly fallen out of grace by the Jesuit leadership.
The article is from the Italian Panorama, and it is singular in that it mentions a letter that would be in the drawer of the Pope's nephew, also a Jesuit, but that we do not get to see. Now, it seems to me either it is unfitting for a Jesuit to wash the dirty laundry in public – and then Father Jose' Luis Narvaja, the Pope's nephew, should keep schtum) or it is fitting, and then I'd love to see the famous letter documenting the Pope's “persecution”. As it is, we are in the middle: let's call it “rumours of the then Father Bergoglio possibly being put in a very dark corner because he was not liked by Father Kolvenbach”.
Which proves… what exactly?
It appears the “young” Bergoglio had been first a supporter of Padre Arrupe, then had “turned decisively against him”; but as Arrupe and Kolvenbach both stink of Liberation Theology to the sky, being persecuted by them doesn't prove anything, whereas the statement that Father Bergoglio “sided with Arrupe” is scary indeed, and one can only hope age intervened and cured this serious disease.
Summa summarum, if you read the excerpt from the Panorama article you may well be forgiven for thinking, as I do, that this is all about a conflict that, whilst it might well have occurred, does not do anything to establish any credentials of orthodoxy for the man destined to become Pope.
I would, in fact, pose a different question to better understand the matter: Bergoglio was head of the Argentinian Jesuits from 1973 to 1979, then rector of the Philosophical and Theological Faculty of San Miguel in San Miguel until 1986. I'd love to read an extensive journalistic report of his interventions in condemnation of Liberation Theology from 1973 to 1986, a thirteen-year period in which he was certainly influential enough to express his views, and to get them an audience.
Once we have this detailed report, we will be able to better gauge whether his time in Cordoba (which does appear to be a deminutio) was due to him being good, or simply not bad enough for the Kolvenbachs of the world.
“A 12-year-old girl in a New York City school cannot be given an aspirin by her teacher, even if she has a fever. The same girl cannot buy a large soda during lunchtime because Mayor Michael Bloomberg has decreed that it is not good for her. But she can be given a pill, unbeknownst to her parents, that could arguably abort her baby,” he said in a statement.
These words are from Micheal Donohue, of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, after the ruling from a New York judge that the so-called “morning after” pill be made available to people of absolutely any age without restriction.
If the Nazi judge gets his or her way, abortion will be available over the counter for people (I assume here: boys as well as girls) of absolutely every age: cue the girl of 12 (or the boy of 13) going at the counter without anyone having the right to ask them for identification of proof of age. The equally idiotic nannying of the very same girls in New York City only makes the contrast more unreal.
I know “what has the world come to” is an abused expression, but it does not lose any of its validity just because we must nowadays ask the question more often.
There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Reblog of the Day
As so often, I have difficulties in talking about the latest antics of a Cardinal without showing a lot of, say, Italian temperament. It isn’t good for my lever, either, so I tend to pass on more than some of the horrible news I hear coming from that corner.
This time, though, I must go back on the latest comments of Cardinal Meisner, because the way some Catholic news outlets tried to defend the indefensible exposes the utter confusion reigning in these disgraceful times.
It has been said, then, that never has the Cardinal said that the use of the “morning after pill” is justified; not on any circumstance. The poor Cardinal was merely badly advised, in that he was told the morning after pill can be used to prevent a pregnancy; which turned out to be, would you believe it, wrong.
Let us reflect on a couple of issues:
View original post 678 more words