Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Communion in the hand?

Here is a great video on how we should be receiving Communion....
Please take a moment and listen.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

The Mother

This book is titled "Th.e Mot.her" and written by Jos.eph Ca.rdinal Min.ds.enty and can be purchased here

As I read the book for the first time I will share passages I find particularly meaningful and if so moved, I'll share my own thoughts as well. My thoughts are in black and the book quotes are in red...Any highlighting is mine...

The field of public life and support of the family belongs to the man. The vocations of the woman is not in the realm of the mind but in the realm of the heart, the family home. Here she can be the helpmate of man, urging his spirit to nobler heights, forming and fashioning his heart. As bride and mother she reaches the sacred heights. After all, the most beautiful blossom and the most glorious crown of woman is the dignity of motherhood. This makes her queen, this makes her priestess of the great mystery. of life. Such a dignity is worthy of reverence. What approaches close to the sacred than reverential love?

This thought was well expressed by the husband of Miss Earhart when,meeting his wife after her record flight over the ocean said : " A tiny baby would have been preferable to this record. Had you died giving birth to a child, it would have been a more beautiful death than if you had found your grave in the waters of the ocean.:" --Modern woman has taken up every field of man's endeavor, but meanwhile she has forgotten one thing, how to be a wife and mother. And yet Josephoine Widmar exclaims in her psychological novel:"The body and soul of woman year for motherhood." Sigrid Undset has one of her heroines cry out: "I am a woman and so I must find my happiness in motherhood." Knauck Kahne expresses the same thought: " To be womanly, means to be motherly."

In the creation of our first parents God signified the duties which He was assigning to woman. He did not create the first woman from the head or foot of man. He fashioned her from man's side, close to his heart. She is not merely an instrument for the arbitrary use of man, she has the same human nature as he. She is called to be the helpmate of man, and chiefly to help him realize the blessing of God: "Increase and multiply." Her vocation is to help the temporal and eternal happiness of the family.

Does this sound old fashioned to you? Is your feminist side upset? Consider this next paragraph:

Those who hold the scepter of the world in their hands are those who give life to children. Woman can well afford to admit that she was not the architect of the grandiose, magnificent plan of St Peter's in Rome or of any other splendid cathedral. She has clothed with flesh something more magnificent, more beautiful than all the cathedrals int he world, mainly, an immortal soul.

True, mother works in the home, but her quiet labor radiates upon the entire nation. She passes on the entire treasure of culture from generation to generation. She builds up the future, and not merely the future of this earth: nay, her task reaches out into eternity, to the very heart of God.

Without her there can be no family, no home. Without her the strongest sources of human strength will disappear. Without her, goodness, love and mercy vanish. She is the sturdy staff upon which the wary pilgrim supports himself as he plods the dusty road of life. She is the unknown soldier of common everyday life. The hand that rocks the cradle holds the helm of the world. Everything that lives and dies on earth has it's origin in mother.

It sounds to me that this beautiful description of mother has been terribly lost today. Today a "career" is most important. "Where are you going to college?" This question was asked of me from freshman year on and it drove me nuts, today such importance is put on education. I ask where has education gotten the family? Are famlies better today with such education at our fingertips? Or have we educated ourselves on the non essential things and forgotten the vitally important tasks of being a wife and mother? Our society has SUFFERED from this elevation of education and loss of Motherhood.

More to come.....

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

The 15 stated promises of the Rosary

The Blessed Virgin Mary promised to Saint Dominic and to all who follow that "Whatever you ask in the Rosary will be granted." She left for all Christians Fifteen Promises to those who recite the Holy Rosary.

Imparted to Saint Dominic and Blessed Alan

  1. Whoever shall faithfully serve me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall receive signal graces.

  2. I promise my special protection and the greatest graces to all those who shall recite the Rosary.

  3. The Rosary shall be a powerful armor against hell, it will destroy vice, decrease sin, and defeat heresies.

  4. The Rosary will cause virtue and good works to flourish; it will obtain for souls the abundant mercy of God; it will withdraw the hearts of men from the love of the world and its vanities, and will lift them to the desire for eternal things. Oh, that souls would sanctify themselves by this means.

  5. The soul which recommends itself to me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall not perish.

  6. Whoever shall recite the Rosary devoutly, applying himself to the consideration of its sacred mysteries shall never be conquered by misfortune. God will not chastise him in His justice, he shall not perish by an unprovided death; if he be just he shall remain in the grace of God, and become worthy of eternal life.

  7. Whoever shall have a true devotion for the Rosary shall not die without the sacraments of the Church.

  8. Those who are faithful to recite the Rosary shall have during their life and at their death the light of God and the plenitude of His graces; at the moment of death they shall participate in the merits of the saints in paradise.

  9. I shall deliver from Purgatory those who have been devoted to the Rosary.

  10. The faithful children of the Rosary shall merit a high degree of glory in Heaven.

  11. You shall obtain all you ask of me by the recitation of the Rosary.

  12. All those who propagate the Holy Rosary shall be aided by me in their necessities.

  13. I have obtained from my Divine Son that all the advocates of the Rosary shall have for intercessors the entire celestial court during their life and at the hour of death.

  14. All who recite the Rosary are my sons and daughters, and brothers and sisters of my only Son Jesus Christ.

  15. Devotion of my Rosary is a great sign of predestination.

Praying the Rosary as a family daily has become a lost practice. But praying together daily as a family is so very important. Our Lady of Fatima asked us to pray the rosary for peace....

"Pray the Rosary every day in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary to obtain peace in the world . . . for she alone can save it." (Our Lady, July 13, 1917)

"God has placed peace in her hands, and it is from the Immaculate Heart that men must ask it." (Jacinta, shortly before her death)

"When you pray the Rosary, say after each mystery: 'O Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who have most need of your mercy.' " (June 13, 1917)

At Fatima, each time Our Lady appeared in 1917 she said, "Pray the Rosary every day."

Pope St. Pius X said: "If you want peace in your heart, in your home, in your country, assemble together every night and say the ROSARY". Many complain that it is a tedious repetition – that they cannot meditate on the mysteries.

Our Blessed Mother gave this advice to St. Dominic: "This is why, before doing anything else, priests should try to kindle a love of prayer in people's hearts and especially a love of my rosary. If only they would all start saying it and persevere, God, in His mercy, could hardly refuse to give them His grace. So I want you to preach my Rosary!"

St. Louis de Montfort said: "I beg of you to beware of thinking of the Rosary as something of little importance – as do ignorant people and even several great but proud scholars. Far from being insignificant, the Rosary is a priceless treasure which is inspired by God." He also tells us: "For never will anyone who says his Rosary every day become a formal heretic or be led astray by the devil."

St. Dominic prayed to Our Lady that she would force the devils who possessed a man to reveal the truth about devotion to her. The devils were forced by Our Lady to reveal: "Now that we are forced to speak we must also tell you this: Nobody who perseveres in saying the Rosary will be damned, because she obtains for her servants the grace of true contrition for their sins and by means of this they obtain God's forgiveness and mercy."

St. Teresa of Avila tells us how priceless a treasure it is by showing the value and merits of a single HAIL MARY. Shortly after her death, she appeared to one of the Sisters of her Community and told her that she was willing to return to a life of suffering until the end of time to merit the degree of glory which God rewards one devoutly recited Hail Mary.

Other quotes from Pope's and Saints about the Rosary:

How beautiful is the family that recites the Rosary every evening."
Pope John Paul II

"The Rosary is a magnificent and universal prayer for the needs of the Church, the nations and the entire world."
Pope John XXIII

"The holy Rosary is a powerful weapon. Use it with confidence and you'll be amazed at the results."
by St. Josemaria Escriva

"Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world." Pope Pius IX

"When people love and recite the Rosary they find it makes them better.” St. Anthony Mary Claret

To be different we have to act differently, when people see us and talk to us do they see someone different than the world? Do they see holiness? Prayer, especially prayer as a family will help us be that difference and will help us on the path to holiness.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Women as Extraordinary Ministers, lectors and Alter "servers"

"Lay people and Nuns giving out Holy Communion during Mass was rightly considered an unthinkable act of sacrilege and irreverence only 30 years ago, and for centuries preceding. But now, lay people administering the Blessed Sacrament is an ordinary sight in the average Novus Ordo parish Church, and most Catholics think nothing of it - for they have been desensitized to desecration.

The terms "lay minister" and "Eucharistic minister" have been used rather loosely up until this point, because this is the terminology often found in parish bulletins. In actuality, there is no such terminology as "Eucharistic minister", the proper term is "EXTRAORDINARY MINISTER"."

On January 29th 1973, an Instruction was issued by the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship that authorised the introduction of Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist called Immense Caritatis. This document does not grant some revolutionary indult for any and every parish to permit lay people (including Nuns) to administer Communion, it authorises the use of extraordinary ministers in CASES OF GENUINE NECESSITY which are listed as:

* When there is no priest, deacon or acolyte. * When these are prevented from administering Holy Communion because of another pastoral ministry or because of ill health or advanced age. * When the number of the faithful requesting Holy Communion is such that the celebration of the Mass or the distribution of the Eucharist outside Mass would be unduly prolonged.

The Instructions stipulates that:

"Since these faculties are granted only for the spiritual good of the faithful and for cases of genuine necessity, priests are to remember that they are not thereby excused from the task of distributing the Eucharist to the faithful who legitimately request it, and especially from taking and giving to the sick."

First of all, it is not an act of disloyalty or disobedience to question the wisdom of the document in the first place, particularly when this permission is a revolution against all pre-Vatican ll rubrics that existed for centuries, rubrics that existed for reason of reverence, to safeguard against desecration and that were a matter of Catholic common sense. But even taking this document at face-value, it is difficult to envisage circumstances that would justify the use of extraordinary ministers. Today's so called Eucharistic ministers are actually operating in defiance to existing Vatican norms.

The bishop and priest alone are the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion. The deacon is the extraordinary minister, but he must have the permission of the local ordinary or of the pastor which may be given for a grave reason, and may be legitimately presumed in case of necessity (Canon Law 844) Article 1 - of the Minister of Holy Communion. In Pope John Paul ll's Encyclical Inaestimable Donum, he clearly states the role of women in the Celebration of the Mass. His Encyclical FORBIDS WOMEN TO BECOME ALTAR SERVERS.

In Inaestimable Donum it says:

Eucharistic Communion. Communion is a gift of the Lord, given to the faithful through the minister appointed for this purpose. It is not permitted that the faithful should themselves pick up the consecrated bread and the sacred chalice, still less that they should hand them from one to another.

10. The faithful, whether religious or lay, who are authorized as extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist can distribute Communion only when there is no priest, deacon or acolyte, when the priest is impeded by illness or advanced age, or when the number of the faithful going to Communion is so large as to make the celebration of Mass excessively long.(20) Accordingly, a reprehensible attitude is shown by those priests who, though present at the celebration, refrain from distributing Communion and leave the task to the laity.

This means that ordained ministers are first in line to distribute communion. My husband and I constantly shake our heads when women march up to "help" Father distribute communion when there is a deacon or even another priest there to do the job. And again, this "help" comes when there is a mere handful of people in church for a weekday Mass in the first place, even on most Sunday Masses would an extra 5 or ten minutes "unduly" prolong the Mass enough to require Extraordinary Ministers? The honest answer is no.

1 Corinthians 14:34: As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, even as the law says.

Another thing to consider is Biblical, Corinthians clearly states that women should "keep silence" in church. Does this mean they cannot say prayers out loud? No I don't think it does but in Timothy it also states

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Going back to submission, it seems all my posts lead back to this, but women aren't meant to teach men or be in the front of church, leading.

Titus 2 states our job is:

"Similarly, older women should be reverent in their behavior, not slanderers, not addicted to drink, teaching what is good,
so that they may train younger women to love their husbands and children,
to be self-controlled, chaste, good homemakers, under the control of their husbands, so that the word of God may not be discredited."
So that the WORD OF GOD may not be discredited. There is your job, fellow wives and mothers. To be " self controlled, chaste, good homemakers and under the control of your husband"

Vatican II is where all this started, women lectors, Extraordinary ministers, Altar "girls" or "servers" (new words, invented for the times)

Pre Vatican II NO ONE was allowed on the altar but the Ordained Ministers, Priest, Deacon, and acolytes. I'm not saying anything against the post Vatican II Mass but it allowed a lot of confusion. A reason for allowing un ordained "lay" altar boys was to foster the desire for the priesthood, but that quickly eroded into allowing girls, which was never supposed to happen. Allowing women on the altar just opens up more and more questions about Ordaining women to the priesthood.

Many woman complain that they want to "participate" in the Mass. We good news! You can! Your participation is this...

From Divine Intimacy, by Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D.:

The best way of assisting at Holy Mass is the one which makes us participate most in the sublime action taking place at the altar. The liturgical method is especially recommended; by having us recite the same prayers as the priest, it makes us follow more closely the various parts of the Holy Sacrifice. However, instead of being preoccupied with the exact rendering of the words, which is obligatory only for the priest, we should penetrate the meaning of the different prayers, especially those said at the principal parts of the Mass, such as the Offertory, Consecration, and Communion.

Although the liturgical method is very good, it is not the only one; the Encyclical Mediator Dei expressly says, "The needs and dispositions are not the same in all souls, and they do not continue to remain the same in each one." It is not uncommon, for example, that, after the following the liturgical method for a long time with fruit, a particular soul might feel the need of closing the Missal in order to taste a little more profoundly the very substance of the Mass and to "penetrate" it further. This is not going backward but forward. Instead of focusing the attention in a special way on the various ceremonies and prayers, the soul feels the need of "getting into intimate contact with the High Priest" (ibid.), in order to unite itself interiorly with His action, His offering, and His immolation. By doing this, she follows the Mass in a simple "loving attention" which is the characteristic of contemplative prayer. Without necessarily following the development of the Sacred Rite in all its various parts, the soul fixes the mind and heart upon the Mass drama with a general glance, made keen by love. Thus we advance in an ever clearer understanding of the Holy Sacrifice.

However, it will be well to return to the Missal from time to time, especially to follow the liturgy on Sundays and feasts; each time our soul does this we will find new light, and a new sense, which will help us to penetrate the very substance of the Holy Sacrifice


Inaestimable Donum
The Abuse of Extraordinary Ministers

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

The Veil

Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head -- it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair:but if it is disgraceful for a women to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil. For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God: but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man. That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man for man of woman: for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. Judge for yourselves:is it proper for a woman to pray to Gd with her head uncovered: Does not nature itself teach you that for a man to wear long hair is degrading to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her pride: For her hair is given to her for a covering. If anyone is disposed to be contentious, we recognize no other practice, nor do the Churches of God. Paul 11:1-11:16

St. Paul says something very curious. He says the woman ought to veil her head during mass "because of the angels." Paul tells us that the angels participate with us during mass, and this is reinforced by the writings of St. John: "And another angel came and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense that he might offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which is before the throne." (Revelation 8:3, see also Matt. 18:10). The angels watch everything that is going on during mass, as they participate in the same liturgy we do. They are also well aware of the customs of the Church and what they mean -- even the custom of veiling. Angels are offended when we ignore or refuse to follow any liturgical custom, whether it be failing to kneel or veil in the presence of our Eucharistic Lord.

Though the custom has generally lapsed in western cultures, particularly English-speaking nations, it is not erased entirely from the conscience of western Christians. For example; what's the first thing a Catholic mom does when her daughter is preparing for first communion and confirmation? She goes out and buys a veil. Likewise, what's one of the most important accessories to a bridal gown? Why it's the veil of course! Finally, when a baseball game or community event is opened in prayer, regardless of the religious denominations of those in attendance, what's the first thing everybody does? The men all remove their hats, and the women do not. Funny how that works, isn't it. This doesn't just happen by accident. It all goes back to the ancient Christian custom of veiling.

For 2,000 years, Catholic women have veiled themselves before entering a church or any time they are in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament (e.g., during sick calls). It was written into the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 1262, that women must cover their heads -- "especially when they approach the holy table" ("mulieres autem, capite cooperto et modeste vestitae, maxime cum ad mensam Dominicam accedunt") -- but during the Second Vatican Council, Bugnini (the same *suspected* Freemason who designed the Novus Ordo Mass) was asked by journalists if women would still have to cover their heads. His reply, perhaps innocently enough, was that the issue was not being discussed. The journalists (as journalists are wont to do with Church teaching) took his answer as a "no," and printed their misinformation in newspapers all over the world. 1 Since then, many, if not most, Catholic women have lost the tradition.

After so many years of many women forgetting or positively repudiating the veil, clerics, not wanting to be confrontational or upset radical feminists, pretended the issue didn't exist. When the 1983 Code of Canon Law was produced, veiling was simply not mentioned (not abrogated, mind you, but simply not mentioned). However, Canons 20-21 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law make clear that later Canon Law abrogates earlier Canon Law only when this is made explicit and that, in cases of doubt, the revocation of earlier law is not to be presumed; quite the opposite:
Canon 20 A later law abrogates or derogates from an earlier law, if it expressly so states, or if it is directly contrary to that law, or if it integrally reorders the whole subject matter of the earlier law. A universal law, however, does not derogate from a particular or from a special law, unless the law expressly provides otherwise.

Canon 21 In doubt, the revocation of a previous law is not presumed; rather, later laws are to be related to earlier ones and, as far as possible, harmonized with them.

Canons 27 and 28 add to the argument:

Canon 27 Custom is the best interpreter of laws.

Canon 28 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 5, a custom, whether contrary to or apart from the law, is revoked by a contrary custom or law. But unless the law makes express mention of them, it does not revoke centennial or immemorial customs, nor does a universal law revoke particular customs. 2

That which is Veiled is a Holy Vessel
Note what Paul says, "But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering." We don't veil ourselves because of some "primordial" sense of femine shame; we are covering our glory so that He may be glorified instead. We cover ourselves because we are holy -- and because feminine beauty is incredibly powerful. If you don't believe me, consider how the image of "woman" is used to sell everything from shampoo to used cars. We women need to understand the power of the feminine and act accordingly by following the rules of modest attire, including the use of the veil. By surrendering our glory to the headship of our husbands and to God, we surrender to them in the same way that the Blessed Virgin surrendered herself to the Holy Ghost ("Be it done to me according to Thy will!"); the veil is a sign as powerful -- and beautiful -- as when a man bends on one knee to ask his girl to marry him.

Now, think of what else was veiled in the Old Testament -- the Holy of Holies!
Hebrews 9:1-8
The former [Old Covenant] indeed had also justifications of divine service and a sanctuary. For there was a tabernacle made the first, wherein were the candlesticks and the table and the setting forth of loaves, which is called the Holy. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies: Having a golden censer and the ark of the testament covered about on every part with gold, in which was a golden pot that had manna and the rod of Aaron that had blossomed and the tables of the testament. And over it were the cherubims of glory overshadowing the propitiatory: of which it is not needful to speak now particularly. Now these things being thus ordered, into the first tabernacle, the priests indeed always entered, accomplishing the offices of sacrifices. But into the second, the high priest alone, once a year: not without blood, which he offereth for his own and the people's ignorance: The Holy Ghost signifying this: That the way into the Holies was not yet made manifest, whilst the former tabernacle was yet standing.

...The Ark of the Old Covenant was kept in the veiled Holy of Holies. And at Mass, what is kept veiled until the Offertory? The Chalice -- the vessel that holds the Precious Blood! And, between Masses, what is veiled? The Ciborium in the Tabernacle, the vessel which holds the very Body of Christ. These vessels of life are veiled because they are holy!

And who is veiled? Who is the All Holy, the Ark of the New Covenant, the Vessel of the True Life? Our Lady -- and by wearing the veil, we imitate her and affirm ourselves as women, as vessels of life.

This one superficially small act is:

  • so rich with symbolism: of submission to authority; of surrender to God; of the imitation of Our Lady as a woman who uttered her "fiat!"; of covering our glory for His glory; of modesty; of chastity, of our being vessels of life like the Chalice, the Ciborium and, most especially, Our Lady;
  • an Apostolic ordinance -- with roots deep in the Old Testament -- and, therefore, a matter of intrinsic Tradition;
  • the way Catholic women have worshipped for two millennia (i.e., even if it weren't a matter of Sacred Tradition in the intrinsic sense, it is, at the least, a matter of ecclesiastical tradition, which also must be upheld). It is our heritage, a part of Catholic culture;
  • pragmatic: it leaves one free to worry less about "bad hair days";
  • and for the rebels out there, it is counter-cultural nowadays, you must admit!

The question I'd like answered is, "Why would any Catholic woman not want to veil herself?"

*Wearing the veil during Mass shows devotion to the Virgin Mary.

*Wearing the veil during Mass shows submission and obedience to Christ and to the Catholic Church.

*Wearing the veil during Mass is an acknowledgement that a woman's role in the Church, the family, and society is different from man's role.

*A married woman who wears the veil in Church is also acknowledging her husband as the head of her family.

"Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians

When a woman covers her head in the Catholic Church it symbolises her dignity and humility before God, not men. It is no surprise women of today have so easily abandoned the tradition of the chapel veil (head covering) when the two greatest meanings of the veil are purity and humility.

The woman who covers her head in the presence of the Lord Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is reminding herself that she must be humble before God. As with all outward gestures, if it is practised enough it filters down into the heart and is translated into actions that speak volumes. The “veil” covers what the Lord calls, in Holy Scripture, “the glory of the woman”, her hair. Covering her hair is a gesture the woman makes spiritually to “show” God she recognises her beauty is less than His and His Glory is far above hers.

In doing this she is reminded that virtues cannot grow in the soul without a great measure of humility. So she wears the veil to please God and remind herself to practice virtue more ardently.

Yes, Christian women are supposed to veil during worship, and this is especially true for Catholic women who understand the incarnation of Christ and His real presence in the Blessed Sacrament. According to the Bible, this is not optional. All Christian women are expected to do it, but it is to be done voluntarily, without force or coercion. The custom was removed from the Canon Law of the Catholic Church, but it was never abrogated as a Biblical custom of the Faith. To veil properly, women must do so voluntarily, and they must do so with proper understanding of the custom and what it means.

I would also like you to ask yourself. Why do women in meeting the Holy Father still wear a veil? Certainly for respect, but does not Our Lord deserve more respect then the Holy Father? If the Holy Father wanted use of the veil to stop why are women still instructed to wear it in his presence?

Who got women to first remove the veil? It was the feminists, in particular the N.O.W. organization which in their Handbook the following quote was printed.

"A. Religion Resolutions, Because the wearing of a head covering by women at religious services is a symbol of subjection within many Church's.NOW recommends that all chapters take on a effort to have all women participate in a "national unveiling" by sending their head coverings to the talks forces chairman. At the Spring meeting of the task force of women and religion, these veils will be publicity burned to pretest the second class status of women in all Churches (Dec 1968)

Judge Bork in his book Slouching toward Gomorrah shows that these same women also on their cover stated:

"NOW is the time to take back control of our lives, NOW is not the time to assimilate to bureaucratic puppeteers who want to control, degrade, torture, kill and rape our bodies, NOW is the time to drop a boot heel in the groin of patriarchy. NOW IS THE TIME TO FIGHT BACK.

Do these sound like women you want to be like?

in the Jerome Biblical Commentary they explain why St Paul wrote his letter.

" Some Christian women, influenced perhaps by the liberal atmosphere of cosmopolitan Corinth and emboldened by the attitude of "the knowledgeable" toward ether freedom, were attending the assemblies without wearing a veil. Paul reprobates this behavior as unbecoming to a women, because God has established a hierarchy, in both the natural and the religious spheres, in which the female is subordinated to the male sex. This hierarchical subordination of the woman should be recognized in her behavior and dress. The veil is a symbol of this subordination."

Questions to ponder:

Why did St Paul say women should be veiled, if it were not important?

Why did the Church have the tradition of wearing the veil for nearly two thousand years, if it were not important?

Why did the Church mandate it in Canon Law?

Do you truly believe that the Church was wrong for two thousand years and just in the past few years became wise?


Fish Eaters
The Catholic Knight
Christian Family Outreach

Other good sources:
Tradition in Action

If you are interested let me know and I'll send you a free pamphlet on the Veil by Christian family outreach.

Monday, May 3, 2010

Immodest Dress, the mind of the Church

This is a delicate subject especially today when fashions are so very immodest but I want to share with you some thoughts from a wonderful booklet called Immodest Dress, The Mind of the Church by Louise Martin.

"As far back as 1921, the Church spoke out strongly against immodest fashions. At that time, Pope Benedict XV, in his encyclical Letter "Sacra Propediem" stated:

"One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a desire to please, they do not see to what degree the indecency of their clothing shocks every honest man and offends God. Most of them would formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christan modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on p8public thoroughfares, they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity"

For some 25 years, the late Reverend Bernard A Kunkel (he died in 1969) , then pastor of St. Cecilia's Church, Bartelso, Illinois, carried on what seemed to be an almost hopeless fight against the immodest fashions of our day. The following excerpts from Fr Kinkel's writings on immodest fashions appeared in the July 154 issue and the 2nd quarter 1969 issue of Divine Love magazine, and in the November-December 1957 issue of the Marylike Crusader.

" Our Blessed Mother in all her apparitions, is fully covered. At Fatima in 1917 she appeared in a world that was beginning to cut sleeves and necklines and to curtail skirts. Shouldn't she, the model for girls also in the 20th century, show some signs of following the modern trend? True, as Heavenly Queen, she is attired in queenly robes. Even so, she could do a little cutting of sleeves, neckline and skirt. Why so determined to cling to the traditional standards? Why doesn't she give the modern girl a break and give some sign that she approves a little cutting here and there?"

" The answer is she doesn't approve of the modern trend of uncovering those parts of the boy as the chest, upper arms, shoulders and thighs. She disapproves. In fact, she came down from heaven to earth to warn against this disrobing trend. Listen to what she revealed to little then year old Jacinta of Fatima, while Jacinta lay dying in a hospital in Lisbon, Portugal in 1920: "certain fashions will be introduced which will offend Our Divine Lord very much. Those who serve God ought not to follow these fashions. The Church has no fashions. Our Lord is always the same" And she also revealed to Jacinta that "sins that lead most souls to hell are the sins of the flesh"

Another voice to speak out strongly against the immodest fashions was that of the late Archbishop Albert G Meyer of Milwaukee, Wisconsin who on May 1, 1956, wrote a Pastoral Letter to the Clergy, Religious and Faithful of his Archdiocese on the subject of Modesty and Decency. We are going to quote from his Pastoral Letter.........

"One area of human life in which modestly particularly must exercise its influence on those who would be chaste and to help others preserves this virtue is in dress. With regard to clothing, modesty requires especially two things :first, care that ones does not make purity difficult for oneself, or for others, by one's own mode of dress, and second, a prudent but firm and courageous resistance to the styles and customs, no matter how popular or widespread, or adopted by others, which are a danger to purity. Pope Pius XII, in an address to a group of Catholic Actions girls on October 6, 1940, stated. 'Many women...give in to the tyranny of fashion, be it even immodest, in such a way as to appear not even to suspect that is is unbecoming. They have lost the very concept of danger, they have lost the instinct of modesty.'

As far back as 1928, Pope Pius XI sensed where this trend to uncover more and more of the body would lead if not corrected, and, on August 23, 1928 ordered a "Crusade Against Immodest Fashions, Especially in Schools Directed by Religious" The letter containing the order was sent to all Ordinaries of Italy through the Sacred Congregation of Religious.

In carrying out these Orders, certain Standards of dress were issued by the Cardinal-Vicar of Pope Pius, XI, Cardinal Pompili, on September 24, 1928.

with regard to the Church's Standards, bear in mind that as recently as the 19th century and early 20th, women were wearing their dresses near or down to their ankles and their sleeves were generally 3/4 length or down to heir wrists. During the 1860's women wore full length hoop skirts. By the 1970's skirts were still full length but had narrowed. The dress of the 18180's had a bustle that made the full length skirts full in back. Around 1920 women wore "hobble skirts"-- full in length that were narrow at the ankles. In the 1920's came the "flapper style" These were straight line short dresses, usually sleeveless, that ended at or above the knee. That was the beginning of the present trend! From that time on women's fashions have come to reveal more and more of the body.

Then on January 12, 1930 Pope Pius XI directed the Sacred Congregation of the Council to issue a strongly-worded letter on Christian modestly to the whole world. Yet to this day, very few Catholics have even heard of this document and scarcely anyone seems to know it's gravely worded contents. This 1930 letter imposed the obligation of com batting the immodest fashions and promoting modestly on all persons in authority -- Bishops and other ordinaries, parish priests, parents, Superioresses, and teachers in schools.

"By virtue of the supreme apostate which he wields over the Universal Church by Divine Will, our Most Holy Father Pope Pius XI has never ceased to..condemn emphatically the immodest fashions of dress adopted by Catholic women and girls, which fashion not only offends the dignity of women but conduces to the temporal ruin of the women and girls and what is still worse, to their eternal ruin, miserably dragging down other sin their fall....."

1. "The parish priest should command that feminine garb be based on modestly, and womanly ornament be a defense of virtue. Let them likewise admonish parents to cause their daughters to cease wearing indecorous dress.

2. "Parent's, conscious of their grave obligations toward the educations, especially religious and moral, of their offspring, should assiduously inculcate in their souls by worked and example, love for the virtues of modestly and purity, and since their family should follow the example of the Holy Family, they must rule in such a manner that all it's members, reared within the walls of the home, should find reason and incentive to love and preserve modesty."

3. " Let parents never permit their daughters to don immodest garb"

9. " women dressed immodestly are to be debarred from Holy Communion...further, if the offense be extreme, they may even be forbidden to enter the Church."

Donate, Cardinal Sbaretti
Prefect of Cong. of Council
Rome, January 12, 1930

The Standards, previously issued by the Cardinal-Vicar of Pope Pius XI, Cardinal Pompill on 9/24/28 are:

In order that uniformity of understanding prevail...we recall that a dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat, which does not over the arms at least to the elbows, and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent Materials are improper.

Is the origin of the 9/24/28 directives by pope pius XI well established?

Yes, it is. Bishop Douville of Quebec, Canada in his pastoral dated July 22, 1944, Quotes the exact directives given and adds that they were issued by the Vicar-Cardinal of Rome on Sept 24. 1928.

The Philippine Hierarchy officially recognized the 1930 Special Instructions of the Sacred Council as prescribing the Roman Standards of Modesty in dress for women and girls all over the world
Further, a "League of Modesty" was formed in Chicago as directed in the Instructions given by the Cardinal-Vicar of Rome.

Then in December of 1944, the late Father Bernard A. Kinkel (previously quoted in this article) began a modestly crusade, with Episcopal approval using these dress standers as a guide, codifying them and making a small, Ecclesiastically approved, temporary concession in the matter of sleeve length.

"marylike is modest without compromise, 'like Mary', Christ's Mother."

"Marylike dresses have sleeves extending to at least the elbow, and skirts reaching below the knees."

"Marylike dresses require full coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders and back, except for a cutout about the neck not exceeding two inches below the neckline in front and back and a corresponding two inches on the shoulders."

"Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer, they do no emphasize, unduly, parts of the body"

Pope Pius XII's refutation of certain sophism's:

In an address to the Latin Union of High Fashion on Nov 8, 1957, Pope Pius stated: "The most insidious of sophism's, which are usually repeated to justify immodesty, seems to be the same everywhere. One of these resurrects the ancient saying 'let there be no argument about things we are accustomed to', in order to brand as old fashioned the rebellion of honest people against fashions which are too bold..."
This fallacy consists in the implied notion that sin stops being sin as soon as one gets used to it. Imagine how many kinds of sin could be whitewashed in this way! The fact is that man can, so to speak, "get used to" just about any sinful practice but that does not make it any less offensive to God or less deserving of divine punishment. It is a common thing for such a one to say, though actually in self-condemnation, "It doesn't bother me at all...I see nothing wrong with it" And he is right: he doesn't' see anything wrong in it -- but this is no compliment to him. He has become morally and spiritually blind though repeated sin. His conscience is dead! Pope Pius goes ton to say:

There always exists an absolute norm to be preserved, no matter how broad and changeable the relative morals of styles maybe..Style may never give a proximate occasion of sin, and clothing's must be a shields against disordered sensuality.

Other voices on Modesty in Dress:

St John Chrysostom: You carry your snare everywhere and spread your nets in all places. You allege that you never invited others to sin. You did not, indeed by your words, but you have done so by your dress and your deportment and much more effectively that you could by your voice. When you have made another sin in his heart, how can you be innocent? Tell me whom does this world condemn? Whom do judges in court punish? Those who drink the poison or those who prepare it? you have prepared the abominable cup, you have given the death-dealing drink, and you are more criminal than are those who poison the body, you murder not the body but the soul. And it is not to enemies you do this, nor are you urged on by any imaginary necessity nor provoked by in injury, but our of foolish vanity and pride"

Padre Pio had extremely strong views on female fashion and dress. Any women that came to confession with a dress or skirt above the knee was sent away without getting into the confessional. When a women would manage to get in the confessional dressed somewhat improperly , they were ordered out by Padre Pio with him sometimes shouting...."Out, out, out!"

Padre Pio never tolerated tight skirt or short, now necked dresses. His severity increased each year. He would dismiss women from the confessional, even before they got inside if he discerned their dress to be inappropriate. He would rebuke some women with the words" Go get dressed"

more recently Father Robert J Fox writing in the June 29, 1980 issue of the National Catholic Register titled "Where did Modesty go?" states;

Together with the loss of the sense of sin -- which Popes for decades have been warning us was happening -- has come the loss of the sense of modestly. I've discovered that teenager and young adults have been exposed to so much nudity in our sex saturated society that they are often not conscious of what is even meant by the word 'modesty'.

"Frankly I find repellent tight jeans, low-neck blouses and scanty bathing suits. They are not beautiful. They are attractive only in the sense of appealing to the baser elements in fallen human nature.

"Many are led astray into serious sin by immodest attire that places suggestive thoughts in the minds of others. While it is true this immodesty has become general, yet the individual Christian must work to change the tide, even if at times it means standing alone and being ridiculed for living according to Christian morality, of which the modern world knows little"

I will end with my thoughts. I know this is alot of information and you might be saying this is too strict or too hard or maybe you are interested but think it's a monumental task or that you cannot buy clothes out in the real world with standards like this.

You can.

I was overwhelmed when I started, I thought I couldn't do things I wanted to do in a dress or skirt! But I can and have. I have ridden horses, ice skated, roller skated, hiked etc all in a dress or skirt that is below my knee. And it's not difficult. I have made the decision to be different that society and to set a higher standard for myself. I want to be Catholic, Mary like and for people to look at me and see something different from the world.

“Preach the gospel at all times.
If necessary, use words.”
Saint Francis of Assisi

This means that buying a wedding dress means finding one with sleeves, or a bridesmaid dress that is modest. It means a full bathing suit with board shorts to cover up. It means I need to be aware of my body at all times. Aware that men look at us differently than we look at ourselves. Modesty means, that I don't' tempt by my clothing, that I'm never a temptation and I cannot be viewed in a vulgar sense by what I'm presenting to the world.

I'd love your thoughts on this and if you are interested in the full version of this booklet let me know and I'll order some to give out!

God Bless!

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Music and Liturgy

Before Vatican II there was no doubt about what kinds of music were appropriate during the Mass. The only things allowed were a Capella and pipe organ. With Vatican II (1962-1965) came abuses, they "renovated" and deformed our Churches and they also renovated the liturgy. But that was not what Vatican II was about. If the documents are read it can be seen that many abuses were done in the name of Vatican II but with nothing from the documents backing them up.

After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything in liturgical matters, especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council. Eventually, the idea of the givenness of the liturgy, the fact that one cannot do with it what one will, faded from the public consciousness of the West. In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope's authority is bound to the Tradition of faith, and that also applies to the liturgy. It is not "manufactured" by the authorities. Even the pope can only be a humble servant of its lawful development and abiding integrity and identity. . . . The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition. . . . The greatness of the liturgy depends - we shall have to repeat this frequently - on its unspontaneity (Unbeliebigkeit).Cardinal Ratziner, Spirit of the Liturgy

If we read Vatican II documents on the Liturgy we find:

pg 33

116. The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. There fore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. Other kinds of sacred music especially polyphony *, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action as laid down in Article 30

* polyphony def:
In music, polyphony (from the Greek πολύς /po΄lis/ many and φωνή /fo΄ni/ voice) is a texture consisting of two or more independent melodic voices, as opposed to music with just one voice (monophony) or music with one dominant melodic voice accompanied by chordshomophony).

120. The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem in the Latin Church, for it is the traditional musical instrument, the sound of which can add a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lifts up men's minds to God and higher things. But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship in the judgement and with the consent of the competent territorial authority. This may be done however only on condition that the instruments are suitable or can be made suitable for sacred use, that they accord with the dignity of the temple and that they contribute to the edification of the faithful.

pg 97

63 In permitting the using of musical instruments the culture and traditions of the individual people must be taken into account.

from the Encylcical on Sacred Mucic 1955 :

21. Certainly no one will be astonished that the Church is so vigilant and careful about sacred music. It is not a case of drawing up laws of aesthetics or technical rules that apply to the subject of music. It is the intention of the Church, however, to protect sacred music against anything that might lessen its dignity, since it is called upon to take part in something as important as divine worship.

58. These norms must be applied to the use of the organ or other musical instruments. Among the musical instruments that have a place in church the organ rightly holds the principal position, since it is especially fitted for the sacred chants and sacred rites. It adds a wonderful splendor and a special magnificence to the ceremonies of the Church. It moves the souls of the faithful by the grandeur and sweetness of its tones. It gives minds an almost heavenly joy and it lifts them up powerfully to God and to higher things.

59. Besides the organ, other instruments can be called upon to give great help in attaining the lofty purpose of sacred music, so long as they play nothing profane nothing clamorous or strident and nothing at variance with the sacred services or the dignity of the place. Among these the violin and other musical instruments that use the bow are outstanding because, when they are played by themselves or with other stringed instruments or with the organ, they express the joyous and sad sentiments of the soul with an indescribable power. Moreover, in the encyclical Mediator Dei, We Ourselves gave detailed and clear regulations concerning the musical modes that are to be admitted into the worship of the Catholic religion.

I want to talk about this quote from Vatican II

However, those instruments which are, by common opinion and use, suitable for secular music only, are to be altogether prohibited from every liturgical celebration and from popular devotions.

in our society that LOVES music, if you can call it that. What instruments are secular in our musical world? guitar and drums and two that spring instantly to mind. There is a difference between religious music and sacred music.........sacred music is music for the Mass.
"Thus, at the instance and under the sponsorship of the Church, sacred music, through the course of centuries, has traversed a long road by which, though sometimes slowly and laboriously, it has finally reached the heights: from the simple and natural Gregorian modes, which are, moreover, quite perfect in their kind, to great and even magnificent works of art which not only human voices, but also the organ and other musical instruments embellish, adorn and amplify almost endlessly. Just as this progress in the art of music shows clearly how dear to the heart of the Church it was to make divine worship more resplendent and appealing to Christian peoples, so too it made clear why the Church also must, from time to time, impose a check lest its proper purposes be exceeded and lest, along with the true progress, an element profane and alien to divine worship creep into sacred music and corrupt it." Pope Pius XII

Religious music can be anything with a religious verse, but religious music isn't for the Mass or to be played in Church. Play it in your car or your home. Only Sacred music is for the Mass.

We live in a time where just about anything goes in our Churches. Things that were never meant to be. We now have girl "alter servers" communion in the hand and yes guitar and drum sets in Church. These are an abuse, plain and clear. We will not attend a Mass in which the guitar or drums are being played. We've walked out of many and will continue to do so until the proper sacred atmosphere of the Mass is restored.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Communion on the tongue

"Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the
people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs
to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of
reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it but what is consecrated, hence
the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for
touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone to touch it, except from
necessity, for instance if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency." St. Thomas Aquinas

"Whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the Body and of the Blood of the Lord... For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the Body of the Lord" - 1 Corinthians 11:27,28

Pope Benedict to Catholics:
Kneel and Receive on the Tongue Only

Pope Benedict XVI does not want the faithful receiving Communion in their hand nor
does he want them standing to receive Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. According to
Vatican liturgist, Monsignor Guido Marini, the pope is trying to set the stage for
the whole church as to the proper norm for receiving Communion for which reason communicants
at his papal Masses are now asked to kneel and receive on the tongue.

The Holy Father's reasoning is simple: "We Christians kneel before the Blessed
Sacrament because, therein, we know and believe to be the presence of the One True
God." (May 22, 2008)

According to the pope the entire Church should kneel in adoration before God in the
Eucharist. "Kneeling in adoration before the Eucharist is the most valid and radical
remedy against the idolatries of yesterday and today" (May 22, 2008)

The pope's action is in accord with the Church's 2000 year tradition and is being
done in order to foster a renewed love and respect for the Eucharist which presently
is being mocked and treated with contempt. The various trends and innovations of our time (guitar liturgy, altar girls, lay ministers, Communion in the hand) have worked together to destroy our regard for the Eucharist, thus advancing the spiritual death of the church. After all, the Eucharist is the very life and heartbeat of the Mystical Body around which the entire Church must revolve.

Kneeling also coincides with the Church's centuries old ordinance that only the
consecrated hands of a priest touch the Body of Christ in Holy Communion. "To priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist." (Council of Trent) This teaching is beautifully expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica: "Because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament."

It is for reason that Pope Paul VI in his May 1969 pastoral letter to the world's
bishops reaffirmed the Church's teaching on the reception of Communion, stating that: "This method on the tongue must be retained." (Memoriale Domini) This came in response to the bishops of Holland who started Communion in the hand in defiance of the centuries old decree from the Council of Rouen (650 A.D.) where this practice was condemned as sacrilegious. "Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layperson, but only in their mouths." To date this prohibition has never been overturned legally.

Today Communion in the hand is carried on illegally and has become a major tool of the enemy to destory the Faith throughout the world. For this practice serves no other purpose than to warp our conception of Jesus Christ and nourish a contempt for the sacred mysteries. It's no wonder St. Basil referred to Communion in the hand as "a grave fault."

That is to say, Communion in the hand is not tied with Catholic tradition. This practice was first introduced to the Church by the heretical Arians of the 4th century as a means of expressing their belief that Christ was not divine. Unfortunately, it has served to express the same in our time and has been at the very heart of the present heresy and desecration that is rampant throughout the universal Church. If we have 'abuse' problems today it is because we're abusing the Sacrament - it's backfiring on us!

Thanks to Communion in the hand, members of satanic cults are now given easy access to come into the Church and take the Host so that they bring it back to their covens where it is abused and brutalized in the ritualistic Black Mass to Satan. They crush the Host under their shoes as a mockery to the living God, and we assist it with our casual practice? Amongst themselves the satanists declare that Communion in the hand is the greatest thing that ever happened to them, and we do nothing to stop it?

Hence, the Holy Father is doing his part to try to purge the Church of abuse and we as members of Christ are called upon to assist him. For your encouragement we include the following quotation from Cardinal Llovera, the new prefect for the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments speaking to Life Site News on July 22, 2009: "It is the mission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments to work to promote Pope Benedict's emphasis on the traditional practices of liturgy, such as reception of Communion on the tongue while kneeling."

Also worth considering is the recent decree from Cardinal Caffarra, the Archbishop of Bologna Italy, forbidding the practice of Communion in the hand: "Many cases of profanation of the Eucharist have occurred, profiting by the possibility to receive the consecrated Bread on one’s palm of the hand... Considering the frequency in which cases of irreverent behavior in the act of receiving the Eucharist have been reported, we dispose that starting from today in the Metropolitan Church of St. Peter, in the Basilica of St. Petronius and in the Shrine of the Holy Virgin of St. Luke in Bologna the faithful are to receive the consecrated Bread only from the hands of the Minister directly on the tongue." (from his decree on the reception of the Eucharist, issued April 27, 2009)

Technically all bishops and clergy are bound to follow the Holy Father's directive on this issue, but in the meantime the faithful are not obliged to wait for the approval of their bishop in order to kneel for God. The directives of the Holy Father are not subject to the veto or scrutiny of the bishops and therefore all pastors and laity have a right and duty to put these directives into practice for the edification of their communities.

Our Lady's Workers of Southern California"

David Martin


"In the name of Jesus every knee should bend" - Philippians 2:10

Anima Christi
Soul of Christ, sanctify me. Body of Christ, save me. Blood of Christ, inebriate me. Water from the side of Christ, wash me. Passion of Christ, strengthen me. O good Jesus, hear me. Within Thy wounds, hide me. Separated from Thee let me never be. From the malignant enemy, defend me. At the hour of death, call me. To come to Thee, bid me, That I may praise Thee in the company Of Thy Saints, for all eternity. Amen.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Clapping in Church

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (future Pope Benedict XVI): "Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment."

Pope St. Pius X: "It is not fitting that the servant be applauded in His Masters House".

Hab. 2:20: "But the Lord is in His holy temple, silence before Him, all the earth!"

Zeph. 1:7: "Silence in the presence of the Lord your God!"

Cardinal Francis Arinze is prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments in Rome. When His Eminence speaks about the liturgy, our ears should perk up and listen. He stated that “…when we come to Mass we don’t come to clap. We don’t come to watch people, to admire people. We want to adore God, to thank Him, to ask Him pardon for our sins, and to ask Him for what we need.” [Adoremus Bulletin; Vol. IX, no.7, Oct. 2003]

I wanted to give some food for thought on what currently goes on in Catholic Churches. We clap for anything nowadays. Boy scouts, the choir or the newly married couple. The question is WHY?

What is our reason for going to Mass?

To worship God.

What is the Mass?

The Mass as "Unbloody Sacrifice":

Very early on, the Church saw the Mass as a mystical reality in which the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is renewed. Responding to Protestant sects who denied that the Eucharist is anything more than a memorial, the Council of Trent (1545-63) declared that "The same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner" in the Mass.

This does not mean, as some critics of Catholicism claim, that the Church teaches that, in the Mass, we sacrifice Christ again. Rather, the original sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is presented to us once more.


The Mass is us standing once again at Calvary, watching the sacrifice of Jesus for our sins.
Why during such an awesome moment would you want to pull your gaze from Christ to focus on anyone or anything else? Why would you desire to clap at such an occasion?

My father in law has a saying : "People more attention pay to what you do than what you say"

If a non Catholic would walk in to our Church and see us applauding any tom, Dick or Harry for their accomplishments would they think that we TRULY believe that Jesus Christ is present in our Tabernacles? If as Catholics we TRULY believed that Christ was present in the tabernacle would we turn our attention away from that to clap for the newly married? or the boy scouts? the Choir? or our local softball team?

We have to remember that as Catholics we are always preaching our beliefs to others......and as St Franics said:

“Preach the gospel at all times.
If necessary, use words.”
Saint Francis of Assisi

When my husband and I got married we got someone before the Mass to inform the congregation that there was to be NO clapping at Mass. Once we got to the reception, they announced Mr and Mrs Grant Gil and the place went nuts with applause, in the proper place and at the proper time.

We as Catholics need to remember that everything has meaning and we need to keep God the center and focus of the Mass, we are secondary.

God Bless!