The Byzantine Dominican

Orthodox and Catholic Union

2011-10-07T12:43:00.000-05:00

Metropolitan Kallistos Ware

That Ground Zero "Mosque"

2010-09-04T11:45:00.000-05:00

Let me begin by saying that I understand that what is planned is more than a mosque - in fact, it is being promoted as a Islamic community center which will include a worship space. I also realize that the proposed site is a number of blocks from the site of the former World Trade Center. But the name "Ground Zero Mosque" has been attached to the project.

Let me also be clear in stating up front that there is no question that there is no legal reason to prohibit the building of such a center.

Sadly, there are some who have leveled the charge of bigotry against those who oppose this center. Such a charge has a tendency of closing off debate.

Instead of allowing that to occur, let us examine a few facts.

The attacks on the World Trade Center and on the Pentegon of 11 September 2001 have left a scar on the American psyche comparable to that left by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941.
Those who perpetrated the attacks were devout members of a violent devout sect of Islam called Wahhabism.
Those who wish to build this center are members of sufism, a mystical, wholly separate sect of Islam which has a much more peaceful history.
The only places where Islam peacefully coexists with other religions are those places, such as the United States, where it is a tiny minority.
In nations where Islam is practiced by the majority of the population, respect for and tolerance of non-Muslim populations are indirectly proportional to the size of the Muslim majority; the higher the majority, the lower the respect. In fact, in Saudi Arabia, which is virtually 100% Muslim, the practice of Christianity is illegal, as is possession of a Bible.
The Qur'an calls for the spread of Islam by conquest, by Jihad or holy war. It calls for the universal imposition of Sharia law. It calls for the marginalization of Christians and Jews, and the death of all others, who refuse to convert to Islam.
While there are undoubtedly a large number of so-called Moderate Muslims, they are only able to be so by giving a spiritual interpretation to these statements, not a literal.
There are verses in the Qur'an instructing the believer to lie to non-Muslims about their intentions if such an action suits the spread of Islam.
The money for building the community center is to come from Muslim communities and nations which do hold to a literal interpretation of these verses.
Whether the intent is such or not, the building of such a center, within close proximity to the site of the World Trade Center, could be viewed by the Muslim communities abroad as a victory monument.
The families of the victims of the attack find the prospect of the center at this site hurtful.

Given these facts, the alarm over the prospect of the building of such a center at the site is not a result of bigotry. In fact, opposition is quite understandable.

If, as has been stated by the planners, this center is to be a place of peace and understanding; if Islam is indeed a religion of peace as so many have claimed; then why must the planners disrespect the families of the victims? Why do the planners spend some time educating the American people to assuage their fears? Why MUST the center be at the proposed site? Why not put it a mile away, where there is no direct association with 9-11?

If the Muslim community behind the planning of this center is interested in mutual understanding, can it not begin by trying to understand why there is such opposition - and rather than deny it or criticize it, meet it head on and defuse it?

Celebrating a life

2010-08-20T09:28:00.006-05:00

Word came to me early yesterday evening that my friend, Deacon Dr. Myron Kotch, had passed away.

I first met Myron Kotch long before his ordination, even before he earned his PhD. It was 1974, I was a freshman at Christian Brothers Academy in Syracuse, and he was moderating (or should I say babysitting?) a study hall.

At first, the big man with a thick Ukrainian accent intimidated this shy, timid 14-year old. But I never found him heavy-handed; he preferred using humor to cajole even the most obnoxious teenagers. And it worked. He was loved and respected by everybody who met him.

I saw him almost every day of my high school career, first in those study halls, and then in two of his classes, American History and Psychology.

After high school, we would have periodic visits, at first instigated by my friend and classmate, Paul Shaskan.

I was there in 1982 at his ordination. As a Methodist-raised Pentecostal, I had no frame of reference to understand the Liturgy, but there was something inside me that said "This is right". And, after 23 years and many steps along the way, I began my service as a cantor in that very same Ukrainian Catholic parish. I sometimes wonder if Deacon hadn’t cared enough to invite me whether I would be there at all.

Throughout the years, we remained in contact. He was always available - as a friend and as a mentor. Never once did he fail to show the love of the Lord he so dearly loved. And never did he fail to inspire those who knew him - inspire them to strive to be better than they were and to love all with the love of Christ.

When I spoke to Paul, he said that Dr. Kotch has been, and would always remain, his ideal of a friend and teacher.

Another classmate, Jeff Howard, he commented that Dr. Kotch not only taught him American History and Psychology, but he taught him to think. He had a way of connecting with each and every student, bringing out the best in him. And Jeff said that it was an honor to have been taught by him.

So it was. But more importantly, it was an honor to have called him friend.

I will miss him terribly.

If the place that Christ prepares for us is based on our merits, mine may be a one room shack, but Deacon Myron Kotch has a palace that puts Versaille to shame.

So it’s not “Farewell” that I say to my friend, but “See ya later”.

До побачення.

Our Father's care for us

2010-02-16T13:58:00.004-05:00

Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?

So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?

Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.
Matthew 6: 25-34

Some years ago, Bobby McFerrin urged us "Don't Worry, Be Happy". And, in a sense, that's what Jesus is saying here. But there's a difference.
What McFerrin was saying was don't life get you down — don't worry, be happy. Your life may even be terrible, but don't worry, be happy.

The problem is, he doesn't offer any hope that things will improve. Just suck it up and deal with it.

That's not what Jesus is saying.

There is hope - because Our Heavenly Father will watch out for us. His grace and love will buoy us up, He will provide for our needs. And He does that for everybody.
But not everybody is able to receive it. Most of us are caught up in our own selfish, sinful lives, missing the grace that comes our way.
How, then, do we receive his blessings? By seeking HIS kingdom. By seeking HIS righteousness. And ALL of his provision will come our way.
It's a daily struggle, a dying to self — seeking His Kingdom instead of our own desires.
But when we seek His Kingdom, an incredible thing happens; we forget about our desires. Our desires fade, and they're no longer ours.

That's what Lent is all about - letting go of our sins, our desires, and seeking His kingdom and His righteousness.

My God grant each of us success this Lent in that search.

St. Dominic Wants You!

2009-09-21T08:18:00.003-05:00

St. Dominic Wants You!

Dominican Laity strive to serve God through
Community — Prayer
Study — Service
Find out more
March 9th, 2010 6:30 pm an the CNY Marian Center
5180 West Taft Rd, North Syracuse NY
Between M&T Bank and Subway
Refreshments will be served.

What did Jesus say about homosexuality?

2008-11-24T08:47:00.004-05:00

OK. He said nothing. I admit it.

There are many calling themselves Christian who claim that the Gospels' silence on the matter is a tacit acceptance of it. So let us take this argument further.

What did He say about pedophilia? Nothing.

What did He say about bestiality? Nothing.

What about necrophilia? Incest? Again, nothing.

I trust, dear reader, that you are as disgusted as I at the thought of these perversions.

The fact is, Jesus said nothing about them because no Jew would ever entertain the thought of any. Jesus's audience was the Jew of his day, and all that He said must be understood in that context.

The Mosaic law is quite clear; any carnal relation outside of heterosexual marriage is sinful. St. Paul reflects this view. That Jesus didn't address the matter (beyond questions of lust and divorce being just as sinful as outright adultery) is merely an indication that it was not a matter of debate.

The early Church, however, did address the matter in her first council, that of Jerusalem, as recorded in the fifteenth chapter of Acts. One of the few requirements of Gentile converts was that they refrain from sexual immorality. In the context in which these early (Jewish) Christians spoke, is there any question that they would define sexual immorality in terms of the Mosaic Law?

And if the early Christians defined their Church as teaching that one ought to refrain from sexual immorality, what can we say of so-called Churches which accept such immorality? Can they even be called Christian? I think not.

The Election

2008-11-05T11:02:00.005-05:00

This morning I was beside myself with fear - fear over what will happen to our nation and to Christians during the Obama administration. Now, mind you, the fact that Mr. Obama is to be the first black President had no bearing on me; I would have loved to see Alan Keyes as President. No, my fears were based entirely on what I view to be Obama's atrociously misguided policies.

He has spoken of a civilian security force (read secret police or gestapo).

He has associates who have been domestic terrorists.

He is most definitely a Marxist - and don't forget what the Soviets did to the Christians.

But, then, this morning, it hit me.

Perfect Love casts out all fear.

He Who Is Perfect Love is on our side - not necessarily the side of the US (50 million babies murdered through abortion would pretty much turn Him against us), but on the side of the Church - not any particular Church, but the body of faithful Christians.
If God is for us, who can be against us.

The next few years may be tough (and the nation certainly deserves judgment), but He'll be with us, strengthening us as we put our hope, our trust in Him.

Be not afraid.

Election 2008: A non-typical view of the election

2008-10-27T09:40:00.004-05:00

Can a Catholic vote for Obama?

2008-10-15T21:31:00.003-05:00

There is a simple answer to this question.

Absolutely not!

Allow me to explain.

Catholic teaching is clear.

Abortion is an intrinsic evil which cannot in any way be willingly tolerated. This is not a new teaching, but is explicitly stated in the Church's earliest catechism, the first century Didache. And Scripture attests to the pre-born being individuals; in Luke 1, when the Virgin Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth, the 6-month fetus John reacts to presence of the embryonic Christ. To deny that newly fertilized egg is a human being is to deny the Incarnation of Christ, and hence Christianity. To support abortion while affirming that that life begins at conception is support murder.

There is no gray area. To be a Christian, one must logically repudiate abortion in any instance. Even in the case of rape and incest; would you murder the child for the sins of the father?

Of course, this doesn't permit us to go out and commit acts of violence in the name of stopping abortion. But it does mean that we must make it a priority in our voting. To do otherwise is to become a material participant in the sin of abortion, a mortal sin.

Marriage is a sacramental bond between one man and one woman. Any other arrangement is a direct violation of God's express purpose for the human race (remember, "man and woman he created them"?)

Barack Obama has pledged the abortion industry to roll back every single restriction on abortion that exists in our legal system. He favor homosexual unions incorrectly termed "same-sex marriage".

Barack Obama stands against the unalterable teachings of the Catholic Church. A Catholic who votes for him is, essentially, defying the teachings of the Church, and thereby defying God himself.

Now, some may say, what about workers rights and all the other social programs which Obama supports just as does the Church.

The Church doesn't support programs so much as principles. There is very little said as regards the means of implementation. And, at the very least, McCain supports the same principles but with different solutions.

Therefore, there is no argument from the perspective of social programs.

If you are Catholic, you vote for Obama at the peril of your soul. (Or, for that matter, if you're Christian, you do so as well).

Listen to what Fr. John Corapi has to say.

Liturgical Norms: Our Keys to Spiritual Nourishment, Evangelization and Unity

2008-08-20T15:01:00.002-05:00

Liturgical Norms: Our Keys to Spiritual Nourishment, Evangelization and Unity

Posted using ShareThis

America Needs to repent - corporately

2008-07-16T09:39:00.000-05:00

Friends,

America is not in the best shape. I think we can agree.

When King Solomon dedicated Israel's First Temple to the Lord God, the Almighty said to him,
"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray, and turn from their wicked ways, and seek my face, then shall I hear from heaven and heal their land and forgive their sins."

I am asking that we all, in our families, our homes, in groups, join in prayer, not as church bodies (because as Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox, we have differences that some would, in good faith, believe that not to be possible), but as American Christians, and repent of our national sins, just as the prophet Daniel repented of the sins of his nation.

Every day in the first 2 weeks of August, let us pray and repent.

Please visit http://www.Americarepents.org for details and for a suggested prayer service - almost entirely drawn from scripture - that will lead us in repentance.

Remember, the apostle James wrote, "The prayer of a righteous man availeth much".

Lou

Benedictus Antiphon for July 3

2008-07-01T15:14:00.004-05:00

John 20:29 Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen and have believed.

Quia vidisti me, Thoma
KWEE-ah vee-DEE-stee may, TOH-mah
because you-have-seen me, Thomas

Credidisti.
kray-dee-DEES-tee.
you-have-believed.

Beati qui non viderunt
bay-AH-tee kwee nohn vee-DAY-roont
blessed-ones who not they-have-seen

et crediderunt.
ayt cray-dee-DAY-roont.
and they-have-believed.

Did you know that, if you're a Christian, that you are a priest?
Before God had even given them the Ten Commandments, He had told the Israelites that he would make of them a nation of Priests and Kings.
Later, in his first Epistle, St. Peter wrote to us that we are "A chosen generation, a Royal Priesthood".
Part of what that means is making intercession for the world. And we have our own sacrificial liturgy, the Liturgy of the Hours, where we offer the sacrifice of praise.
We can pray it in Latin or in English.
If you don't have it, you can get it at http://store.PrayInLatin.com
Your purchase helps me continue my work teaching the Church's language.

Lou

Offertory for 6/29/2008

2008-06-27T10:00:00.004-05:00

Daniel 3. Like as in the burnt offerings of rams and bullocks, and like as in ten thousands of fat lambs: so let our sacrifice be in thy sight this day, that it may please thee: for they shall not be confounded that put their trust in thee, O Lord.

Sicut in holocausto arietum et taurorum,
SEE-koot een hoh-loh-COW-stoh ah-REE-ay-toom ayt tah-oo-ROH-room
like in burnt-offering of-rams and of-bulls

et sicut in millibus agnorum pinguium:
ayt SEE-koot een MEEL-lee-boos ahn-YOH-room PEEN-gwee-oom
and like in ten-thousands of-lambs of-fat

sic fiat sacrificium nostrum
seek FEE-aht sahk-ree-FEE-chee-oom NOHS-troom
so let-it-be sacrifice ours

in conspectu tuo hodie, ut placeat tibi:
een kohn-SPAYK-too TOO-oh HOH-dee-ay, oot PLAH-chay-aht TEE-bee
in sight thine today, that it-might-be-pleasing to-thee

quia non est confusio confidentibus
KWEE-ah nohn ayst kohn-FOO-see-oh kohn-fee-DAYN-tee-boos
for not is confusion to-those-putting-trust

in te Domine
een tay, DOH-mee-nay
in thee, Lord

The Dominican Confiteor

2008-06-26T14:38:00.006-05:00

This version is found in the older Dominican books, as well as the post-Vatican-II editions.
Confiteor Deo omnipotenti
kohn-FEE-tay-ohr DAY-oh ohm-nee-poh-TEN-tee
I-confess to-God all-powerful

et beatæ Mariæ semper Virgini,
ayt bay-AH-tay mah-REE-ay SAYM-payr VEER-jee-nee
and to-blessed to-Mary always virgin

et beato Dominico Patri nostro,
ayt bay-AH-toh doh-MEE-nee-koh PAH-tree NOHS-troh
and to-blessed to-Dominic to-Father to-ours

et omnibus Sanctis, et vobis, fratres,
ayt OHM-nee-boos SAHNK-tees, ayt VOH-bees, FRAH-trays
and to-all to-Saints, and to-you, brothers

quia peccavi nimis cogitatione,
KWEE-ah payk-KAH-vee NEE-mees koh-jee-taht-see-OH-nay
because I-have-sinned according-to thought,

locutione, opere, et omissione,
loh-koot-see-OH-nay, OH-pay-ray, ayt oh-mee-see-OH-nay,
speach, work, and omission

mea culpa;
MAY-ah KOOL-pah;
by-mine by-fault;

precor vos orare pro me.
PRAY-kohr vohs oh-RAH-ray pro may.
I-beg you to-pray for me.
Remember Pray in Latin — Satan Hates it!
Copyright Louis Pizzuti

Singing the Divine Office

2008-06-24T10:47:00.003-05:00

Last year, I spoke of the dearth of materials available for singing the Liturgy of the Hours.

Well, that situation hasn't changed much.

So, I figured the best thing to do is make the chant of the old office available in print.

This past week, I have republished the Antiphonarium Ordinis Prædicatorum (the Antiphonary of the Order of Preachers) and the 1911 Antiphonale Romanum (Roman Antiphonal). The Roman Antiphonal contains all the chant necessary to sing the day hours of the 1962 Roman Breviary, which is currently approved by Rome for those who prefer the older, Extraordinary Form of the Roman Mass.

Both can be ordered at http://lulu.ByzantineDominican.com

Cantemus Domino - Let us Sing to the Lord.

Lou

Offertory Antiphon for Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul, Graduale Simplex

2008-06-24T10:20:00.007-05:00

One of the often ignored jewels of Gregorian Chant which came out of the decrees of the Second Vatican Council is the Graduale Simplex, or Simple Gradual. This is the Communion Antiphon for the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul, which we celebrate this Sunday.

Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo Ecclesiam meam.
You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church

Tu es Petrus,
too ays PAY-troos
Thou art Peter

et super hanc petram
ayt SOO-payr hahnk PAY-trahm
and upon this rock

ædificabo Ecclesiam meam.
ay-dee-fee-KAH-boh ay-KLAY-see-ahm MAY-ahm
I-will-build Church mine.

For more prayers like this, including the Rosary and the Ordinary of the Mass, visit
http://lulu.byzantinedominican.com/

The Pray in Latin video is here!

2008-06-13T13:32:00.001-05:00

Can a Catholic Dissent?

2008-06-03T08:27:00.004-05:00

In a word, no.

Let me explain.

I use the word "Catholic" to indicate one who is in communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.

By the Vatican I definition of Papal Infallibility, it is impossible to be in communion with the Pope without assenting to Papal Infallibility. "So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema." Pastor Aeternus. Certainly, one cannot rationally hold that Rome does not have the right to define who and who is not in communion with her.

Papal Infallibility applies only in those cases where the Pope makes a definition regarding faith or morals.

The Ordination of Women is a perfect example of this. Pope John Paul II stated explicitely that the Church has no power to confer ordination to women.
In other words, it cannot be done.
It is not a question of justice.
It is not a question of fairness.
It is a question of what is POSSIBLE.

A woman can no more become a priest than can a man give birth.
This is the Church's teaching. And, given that it has been defined both by tradition and by a Pope, it is an irreformable teaching.

One who would dissent from this is denying Papal Infallibility, and, as such, by definition, ceases to be Catholic.
This is not a case of judgment by the Church. It is a case of simple logic.

The Church does not impose excommunication for private opinion.

The situation changes, however, in the case of a woman who attempts to be ordination, or a bishop who attempts such an ordination. Such a person is no longer holding an opinion, but has publicly declared that they are no longer in communion with the Bishop of Rome. They have publicly repudiated Papal Infallibility, and have therefore publicly excommunicated themselves.
Do you see that the Church is not punishing them for dissent? The Church imposes no judgment in this case, but, in declaring them excommunicated, the Church recognizes that they have cut themselves off.

So, a Catholic cannot dissent, because
1) In dissenting, one implicitly rejects Papal Infallibility
2) In rejecting Papal Infallibility, one is no longer in Communion with Rome, and therefore
3) In dissenting, one ceases to fall under the definition of Catholic.

In short, the term Catholic Dissent is self-contradictory and meaningless.

On Presenting the Faith

2008-05-28T11:38:00.010-05:00

here was a time that I relished, absolutely relished, the opportunity to debate my beliefs — political, religious or otherwise. I used to describe myself as a verbal scrapper.

And, in all those arguments, I never made a single convert. Oh, I won arguments, I changed minds. But I never changed a heart.

After many years of being red in the face, I learned a valuable lesson.The Holy Spirit, not man, changes hearts.

St. Paul wrote, "Always be ready to give a defense of your faith". He didn't say, "Always be ready to beat people into spiritual and intellectual submission."

The simple rules that I've learned are few:

Live your faith. As St. Paul put it, "Put on love". Even when you don't feel like it, behave like you're a Christian, like you're a Catholic. Not as a phony put on, but as an act of obedience to God. Love is a choice, not a feeling.
Know your faith. Study scripture. Study the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Study the Catechism of the Catholic Church. One excellent guide in understanding what the Church has always taught is A Commonitory, by St. Vincent of Lérins.
Be willing to give a defense. Notice, don't attack with your knowledge. That's not defense. Deflect heresies with the truth.

Remember the four pillars of Dominican Life

Apostolate
Community
Contemplation
Study

None of them say "Conversion by verbal sword"

Summorum Pontificum - What does it mean?

2007-07-09T09:46:00.003-05:00

With the long awaited release of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, there is much confusion in the reporting on it, even from otherwise solid catholic sources.
So let's review a little bit.
1) The Tridentine and Novus Ordo liturgies are no longer to be considered different rites, but different uses of the same rite (just as the liturgy approved for Anglican converts is not an Anglican Rite, but rather the Anglican use of the Roman Rite). Why is this important? First and foremost, it states in no uncertain terms that the Novus Ordo is not some new departure, but is the ROMAN RITE, which will (hopefully) cut down - or eliminate - the abuses that have occured in the last 37 years.
2) There is no longer a need for the faithful - or priests - attached to the 1962 Missal(i.e., the traditional use) to go begging their Bishop to allow them to worship God in this fashion. Any priest may offer it as a private mass, and any pastor may allow it in his parish.
3) The 1962 Breviary is allowed for those in orders and for those who are expected to pray a valid form of the Divine Office.
4) Contrary to reports, the Good Friday prays for the Conversion of the Jews are not reinstated; they were deleted prior to the 1962 Missal.
5) Contrary to reports, Latin is not forbidden during the Triduum (it has always been licit to say the Novus Ordo in Latin). Neither is the 1962 Missal forbidden during the Triduum. What is forbidden is the celebration of private Masses according to the 1962 Missal during the Triduum.
6) Parishes may now be established which celebrate accordign to the 1962 Missal.

Many have suggested that this Motu Proprio was a move on the part of Benedict XVI aimed at reconciling the Society of St. Pius X. Personally, I doubt it. He has stated that a priest who celebrates according to the 1962 Missal may not reject the possibility (and therefore the validity) of celebrating according to the 1970 Missal. SSPX certainly will never agree to this.

No, this is not an olive branch to the Traditionalist who have left the Church to wallow in their own dissention. It is an encouragement to those of us who believe that the faith of Vatican II is the faith of Nicea; who believe that the Roman Mass is centered on Christ, not Man.

Papa Benedicte, tibi gratias agimus. Semper te benedicat Dominus noster, Jesus Christus.

Misconceptions about Tridentine Mass

2007-06-28T08:26:00.001-05:00

The word is that the long awaited Motu Proprio liberalizing the celeberation of the traditional Latin Rite Mass, AKA the Tridentine Mass or the 1962 Missal, will be issued on July 7.

However, in reading the news reports, one cannot but be struck by the ignorance regarding this Mass and the Vatican II reforms.

Vatican II never, ever, forbade the use of Latin. In fact, the Conciliar Document dealing with the Liturgy stresses that, while the vernacular be permitted in parts of the Mass, Latin be maintained as the language of the Mass.
Vatican II never, ever, mandated that the priest face the people. In fact, it never suggested it.
In the Tridentine Mass, the priest doesn't necessarily face away from the people; the priest faces east, towards the rising sun, because Christ is the Sun of Righteousness. Accordingly, most Catholic church are traditionally built so that the priest and the people both face east. Within this symbolism, the priest facing the people is symbolically turning his back on Christ (but, I hope, this is not truly the case in the heart of the priest). However, at St Peters Basilica in the Vatican, when the priest faces east, he is facing the people.
The new Liturgy, the Novus Ordo, can be celebrated in Latin. Indeed, watch any Mass from the Vatican, and Latin is indeed the language. All of the typical editions of the various liturgical books are all in Latin.
The Tridentine Mass need not be celebrated in Latin; the 1965 Missal, which was a direct result of the Council, has this Mass in the Vernacular. However, I doubt that this usage will be included in the Motu Proprio.

It is a pity that the press consistently misrepresents the substance of the Vatican II reforms.

The Vatican's Abandoment of the Divine Office

2007-06-25T11:42:00.001-05:00

The further I delve into the study of chant, the more I realize that the Church does little more than give lip service to the public celebration of the Divine Office, the Liturgy of the Hours.

Why do I say this?
1) Consider the fact that, 20 years after the publication of the second edition of the LOTH, there is still no official english translation of it. The official translation of the 1974 edition is so poorly presented that, unless one is a liturgical scholar, knowing which texts to select becomes an exercise in futility. And the psalm translation used is presented in such a way that it is far from conducive to the use of Gregorian Chant.
2) Consider the fact that, 30+ years after the new Office's official promulgation, it is rare to hear it even recited at the parish level. In November 1995, newly received into the Catholic Church, I wrote to the local Latin Ordinary, reminding him of section 100 of Sacrosanctum Concilium: “Pastors of souls should see to it that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and the more solemn feasts. ” He wrote back to me, suggesting that I speak to the rector and organist of the Cathedral. I did that, and, although I spent the next 2-1/2 years as a cantor there, there was never a celebration of the Vespers, let alone any other hour. The reason? In the words of the rector, “We have to find the right time to do it.” When is not the right time to pray?
3) Consider the fact that no chant has been officially promulgated for the antiphons in the new office. Yes, Liber Hymnarius, vol. 2 of the new Antiphonale Romanum has been published, and, thankfully, contains many newly recovered old Latin hymns (but, again, not english translation is yet available, after 24 years). But there is no music for the antiphons. Contrast this with the last major reform of the Office, Pius X's Breviarium Romanum of 1911. The companion Antiphonale Romanum was published in 1912 - the next year.

As to the Eastern Catholic Churches, I cannot say for sure. I know that my own parish does not regularly celebrate the Office; Great Compline on Christmas Eve, Great Friday Matins (on Thursday evening), Great Friday Vespers, Jerusalem Matins, and an abbreviated Paschal Matins is the extent of it.

If the Divine Office is indeed the prayer of the Church, why is it not better promoted?
If the Divine Office is the means whereby the Royal Priesthood is exercised, why is it not better promoted?

Why don't the Catholic Churches truly support this gift from God?

Are Evolution and Reality in conflict?

2007-06-21T13:04:00.002-05:00

I received this in an email from a friend, and I thought the information was worth passing along. Lou

Embryology

An example often given to try to convince students of the evolution theory is the long discredited idea that the embryo growing in the mother has "gill slits."

Ernst Haeckel, a German embryology professor, invented this silly idea in 1869, after he read Darwin's book. He claimed that the embryos of all different animals look very similar as they develop inside their mother. He even made huge charts of his drawings of these different unborn creatures and traveled all over Germany and converted people into believing the evolution theory.

The truth of the matter is, he lied. His own university held a trial and convicted him of fraud. While it is true that the human embryo has little wrinkles of skin under its head, these are not gill slits. They never functioned as a breathing appartus at any time. Actually, the little folds of skin develop into bones in the ear and glands in the throat. To teach that the has gill slits is simply a lie.

This teaching needs to be removed from real science text books.

It is interesting that this idea has been proven wrong since 1875, yet it is still used in textbooks all across the world as evidence of evolution. It appears that someone is trying to brainwash you into believing this theory. It is also a heart-rending fact that this is the only scientific evidence used to justify abortion.

Abortionists would like for us to believe that the baby growing inside the mother is not yet a human being. Nothing could be further from truth!
(You can read more at his web-site http://www.drdino.com/)

Daniel Barton (Catholic Christian who believes that God created everthing in His plan).

Devil Especially Hates Prayers In Latin, Says A Priest Known As 'Rome's Exorcist

2007-06-19T22:02:00.002-05:00

This is from Spirit Daily originally appearing on May 30, 2007, and is used by permission.
_________________________________________

A secular book about exorcism says that one thing rankles demons.
"The devil doesn't like Latin," writes Tracy Wilkinson in The Vatican's Exorcists. "That is one of the first things I learned from Father Gabriele Amorth, long known as Rome's chief exorcist, even though that has never been his formal title.
"Now past the age of eighty, Father Amorth has dedicated the last decades of his life to regaining a measure of respectability for exorcism. Despite his advancing age, he continues to perform the rite several times a week at his office in Rome.
"Scores of people seek him out. He prefers to use Latin when he conducts exorcisms, he says, because it is most effective in challenging the devil."
That tidbit comes to us at a time when Benedict XVI is ready to loosen restrictions on Latin Mass. It's in the new book -- a secular and sometimes skeptical but fascinating glimpse into the world of Italian priests who see their job as casting out demons.
While the numbers dwindle in countries like the Canada, France, and the U.S., exorcists are on the rise on the Vatican's home turf -- thanks largely to priests such as Father Amorth.
In Italy the number of exorcists has grown tenfold in the past decade, according to the priest (who is himself author of two bestsellers, An Exorcist Tells His Story and An Exorcist: More Stories). Credit is also due to the legacy of John Paul II -- who made the notion of exorcism, which was founded by Jesus Himself, respectable again.
Father Amorth was born in Modena in northern Italy and has been a priest since 1954. In 1986 he began performing exorcisms under the tutelage of the vicar for Rome.
According to Wilkinson, Father Amorth accepted the task "after praying to the Virgin Mary for her steadfast guidance and protection."
"On the walls of Amorth's exorcism chamber, eight Crucifixes and pictures of the Madonna are hanging, plus a picture of Saint Michael the Archangel," says the book. "A two-foot-high statue of the Virgin Mary, the Madonna of Fatima, sits on a corner table.
"There are also pictures of the late Pope John Paul II; the popular saint Padre Pio; Amorth's mentor, Father Candido; and Father Giacomo Alberione, the founder of the Society of Saint Paul Congregation."
Father Amorth them "my protectors," adding that "the more recent addition of John Paul's has been especially effective and helpful."
"The demons become very agitated at his presence," Father Amorth says of the late Pope -- who himself performed several exorcisms during his pontificate and warned of the rise of dark forces both in 1977 and then in 2005 just days before he lapsed in his final bout with illness.
How is exorcism done? There is the Crucifix. There is the Holy Water. There are the ritual prayers. Many times, those afflicted have to come back on a regular basis -- the process a gradual one.
In Father Amorth's appointment book, women outnumber men by three to one. That is perhaps because they are more in tune with the spiritual, says the exorcist, or because they are special targets as the descendants of Eve.
The very word "hysteria" -- so often seen in the possessed -- comes from the Greek word hyster for womb. Greeks believed it was caused by abnormalities in the uterus.
"I maintain that in part, the reason is because women are the ones who do the most praying," says the priest. "Another reason is women are more inclined to approach a priest than are men, in case of need."
In some cases, say other exorcists, the devil attempts to mask possession as insanity. This sets up conflict with the far newer practice of psychology -- which looks down on exorcism as the psychiatrist's couch has replaced the confessional.
"An exorcism is the residue of a medieval practice completely devoid of any foundation in reason," the book quotes Sergio Moravia, a philosopher at the University of Florence, as saying. "I don't think it's crazy. It's worse."
Exorcists counter that psychological diagnoses such as "multiple personality" and "schizophrenia" are clinical covers for an infestation.
That opinion is shared by the many who have sought the services of Father Amorth -- finding relief when the devil was cast away after years of frustration at the hands of psychiatrists who saw their problems so differently.
Blessed salt and Holy Water are often used not just by the exorcists themselves, but by those who have been exorcised -- to stave off further disturbances.
Extraordinary strength, preternatural knowledge, speaking in foreign tongues unknown to the victim, vomiting of strange objects, and violent aversion to holy objects make pure psychological explanations suspect in strong cases.
Prayer, of course, also chases the devil and his manifestations away -- apparently, Latin in particular.
Bishop Andrea Gemma of Isernia -- who himself performs exorcisms -- ascribes the Church's move from Latin as part of a global plot to undermine Christianity.
"The devil is happy with the near-disappearance of Latin," said the bishop.
Does exorcism mask psychological illness with the supernatural, or is psychology itself a ruse, at least in certain instances, to prevent deliverance?
We have only to study the ministry of Jesus to know the answer.
[resources: The Vatican's Exorcists, An Exorcist Tells His Story, and An Exorcist: More Stories]

You can purchase my book, Pray it in Latin at PrayinLatin.com or at the Byzantine Dominican Store

On Sequences

2007-06-18T12:39:00.002-05:00

God has graced me by allowing me to live my spiritual life breathing with both lungs of the Church, both east and west. And, as a cantor, one of my great joys is knowing the chant, and the liturgical propers, for both the Roman and Byzantine rites.

Two years ago, I had been approached to full an organist position at a local Roman parish. During the interview, I noted that the first Sunday that I would minister in the parish would be Pentecost, and I asked if they wanted the chant version of Veni Sancte Spiritus, or if there was a preferred hymn setting. The response I received was "O, we don't do that here". And, my immediate inward response was "and I won't minister here".

Parallelling the Byzantine Kontakion, the western Sequence (also called Prose) is an important part of the western spiritual heritage. Originating in the tenth century, or earlier, it is a liturgical hymn of praise, proclaiming the theme of the feast, sung between the Alleluia and the Gospel (the Novus Ordo places it before the Alleluia). By the time of the Council of Trent in the 16th century, there were literally hundreds of sequences.

Trent cut back the number of sequences to 4

Victimae Paschali Laudes, for Easter
Veni Sancte Spiritus, for Pentecost
Lauda Sion Salvatorem, for Corpus Christi
Dies Irae, for the Requiem

In the 17th century, Stabat Mater was added to this list, for Our Lady of Sorrows.
Vatican II eliminated Dies Irae as a Mass sequence and added it to the Office as an optional hymn.
Before Vatican II, some of the Orders retained special sequences. The Dominican Gradual has sequences for St. Dominic, St. Francis, and Christmas; the Benedictine appendix to the current Roman Gradual has a sequence for St Benedict.
One can argue the wisdom of eliminating the vast majority of sequences. But the fact that these few remain make them all the more important, all the more precious. They are part of the liturgical patrimony of the west, and ought not be discarded, but cherished.
And, maybe, just maybe, would should think about singing the sequences devotionally, or perhaps before Mass. After all, Trent didn't forbid them, just took them out of their place after the Alleluia.

True Christian Inclusion

2007-05-03T21:00:00.001-05:00

The Sunday of the Samaritan Woman (5th Sunday of Pascha)

Acts 11:19-26, 29-30

John 4:4-42

That's exactly what our Lord is dealing with in this Gospel passage. In his day, the Samaritans and Jews didn't speak; the Samaritans were the descendants of Israelites who intermarried with Assyrians after the 7th century BC invasion and occupation of the Jewish northern kingdom.
But not only were they not ethnically pure, they had some different religious ideas. They rejected the Jerusalem temple in favor of their own place of sacrifice, a hilltop called Shiloh
Bad. Very bad. They were different. Indefensible.
So how does Jesus deal with Samaritans?
Well, first of all, he used one as an example of loving one's neighbor. Remember the parable of the Good Samaritan? The Jewish leaders and the rich ignored the beaten & robbed person lying on the side of the road. But the Samaritan, the lowly, wrong-believing, wrong-worshiping, half-breed Samaritan showed godly love to this person.
Now, we see Him here offering the water of life, offering salvation, to a Samaritan. And not just any Samaritan; he offers eternal life to a Samaritan woman!

We see Jesus living out the very thing that the Apostle Paul would later write: there is no Jew or Gentile, no male or female in Christ. His salvation is available to all. He doesn't care who we are; He loves each of us, and wants each of us to be with Him for all eternity.
That's how Paul and Barnabas could go and preach to the Hellenists - the Greeks.

Our God is inclusive regarding race and gender.

BUT, he is also exclusive.

1. He wants us to worship him, exclusively: "I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before me". "Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one God. You shall love the Lord with all your heart, all your strength, and with all your mind."
2. Not only does He want us to worship Him exclusively, he wants us to live for Him exclusively. How many times did Jesus heal a person and then say, "Go and sin no more". He requires us to repent; there is no sin in Him. How can we abide in Him (as He has told us to do) if we persist in our sin? We can't. So it's not a question of His rejecting us because we sin, so much as we cut ourselves off from Him by our sin.
So, my friends, be wary of those Christian bodies which claim to be inclusive. If their claim to inclusiveness is based on not recognizing sin for what it is, can it really be inclusive? Or, in not requiring repentance, have they really excluded Christ?

ICEL strangles the Church

2007-03-06T16:00:00.002-05:00

I can't see a vibrant Novus Ordo (i.e., Vatican II Mass) Catholic faith until we are given the new translation (hopefully soon?).

I don't question the validity of the liturgy as written in the Original Latin.

However, the current ICEL translation (the ONLY translation approved for use in the US) is horrendous, lacking in orthodox faith, and pandering to a lowest-common denominator quasi-protestant mentality.

As an example, take the collect (the prayer before the readings at Mass and at the end of the Office) for the second Monday in Lent.

ICEL: God our Father, teach us to find new life through penance. Keep us from sin, and help us live by your commandment of love .

The Italian translation from "Maranatha.it" (which, by all accounts, is a faithful translation)
O Dio, che hai ordinato la penitenza del corpo come medicina dell'anima, fa' che ci asteniamo da ogni peccato per aver la forza di osservare i comandamenti del tuo amore. Per il nostro Signore.

My Translation of the Italian:
O God, who has ordained bodily penance (lit. penitence of the body) as medicine for the soul, grant that we abstain from every sin in order to have the strength to observe the commandments of your love.

Missing from the ICEL version is the notion of penance being a medicine for the soul. Missing also is that God has so ordained it.
Missing from the ICEL version is the notion that WE bear the responsibility of abstaining from sin; rather, it asks that God keep us from sin.
Missing from the ICEL version is the notion that God's commandments are founded in His love; rather, we ask that He help us live by His "commandment of love". So His commandments have become one?

The ICEL version appears devoid of any true theological value; there is nothing for reflection by believer, nothing to bring the believer deeper into penance. Rather it's in the mode of "Hey Dad, help me out will ya?"

Last night, I did a similar translation of the Collects for the 5 Sundays of Lent. Well, actually, I did the first 4 Sundays and the Annunciation. I stopped after that because I was too depressed to continue.

May God have mercy on His Church.

Isn't Latin a dead language?

2006-10-31T08:21:00.001-05:00

I often have people ask me, "Isn't Latin a dead language?" or "Didn't the Church outlaw Latin with Vatican II?"

In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, Latin is no longer used for everyday conversation, but it's the basis for a large part of our English vocabulary. In fact, even the word "vocabulary" has Latin roots, from "voco", to call or "vox", voice.

And the Catholic Church didn't outlaw Latin. The Vatican II Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy allows the use of the vernacular in portions of the Mass. Sadly, most bishops took that as license to abolish the language. (Of course, Latin is the language of the Roman - or Latin - Catholic Church. Other Catholic Churches in communion with Rome, such as the Ukrainian or Melkite, have never used Latin as a principle language).
So why pray in this language?
1) The saints prayed in Latin
2) The official version of most prayers is still in Latin.
3) The meaning of some prayers is often obscured by poor translations. Take for example the Gloria. The English says, "Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth." The Latin is "Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis" - "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men (or people) of good will". A small difference, but significant.
4) Knowing how to pronounce Latin properly opens up the world of Gregorian Chant, which, as the Vatican II Fathers wrote, retains the pride of place in the Liturgy. In other words, the Church teaches that the principle music in the Holy Mass is, and should remain, Gregorian Chant. Now isn't that preferable to some of the drivel that passes for liturgical music today?