Stella Maris

Today marks the 39th anniversary of Humane Vitae, the last encyclical letter promulgated by Pope Paul VI on 25 July, 1968. To say that it fell upon deaf ears is an understatement. The encyclical was literally, "On human life," and the many facets the transmission of human life has in our lives.

Just to set the context, Pope John XXIII (now Blessed) formed a commission to deal with the matter of the Church's stance on artificial contraception in the early 1960's, letting the bishops at the Second Vatican Council know that he himself would personally be dealing with the issue. The council fathers, nevertheless, dealt with the topic briefly in Gaudium et Spes #51, without saying too much. For this reason, many convinced themselves that the Church would approve "the pill" and open up the world of artificial contraception to the Catholic world. I'm told that during this period, especially between the opening of Vatican II in 1962 and the arrival of the encyclical in 1968, many priests told people that "the pill" would be approved soon, so they could just go ahead and start using it without guilt.

It was not to be. Pope Paul VI received both the majority report and the minority report from the papal contraception commission. The majority report said that the Church should change its traditional stance against contraception. This report was leaked to the press, it is thought, in order to pressure an affirmative decision from the Pope Paul. The minority report, penned with the help of a certain Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, stated that the Church should reaffirm the traditional teaching with new language. Pope Paul agreed.

The response to Humanae Vitae was open revolt by priests and laity alike. A group of priests, led by Fr. Charles Curran, published a full-page article in the New York Times (I think?), stating that they rejected the teaching and that Catholics should feel free to reject the teaching as well, and follow their "personal conscience." [Based on the timetable that the article appeared, it is clear that most of the theologians did not have time to read the Pope's encyclical before their rejection of it was published.] This was followed by statements from bishop's conferences throughout the world that essentially affirmed the teaching, but told the faithful that they could feel free to follow their "personal consciences" on the matter–see, for example, the Winnipeg Statement. [In 1990 the Filipino bishops came out with a document apologizing to their people for failing to teach Humanae Vitae.]

Most Catholics, it is fair to say, have never even heard the Church's teaching "On Human Life." Most are informed by our sex-crazed culture that babies are not convenient.

Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body was written to explain the teaching of Humanae Vitae in a way that the entire picture of the human person, from his creation at the beginning to his destiny to live with God forever, in view.

Here is a great article by Janet Smith that talks about Humanae Vitae. The Wikipedia entry is good. And here is something to wet your appetite for some of John Paul II's Theology of the Body.

In conclusion, let us thank God for preserving this teaching on human sexuality and the freedom it brings in our sexually-broken culture. Let us also thank God for the grace He worked in the Servant of God, Pope Paul VI, to proclaim this truth with courage. May we follow his example.

Actually, the best time for this rite is just after it has stopped raining. Moses knew this well: when the Egyptians went to cross the Red Sea it was still dry! Moses waited until they thought they were safe from the water! I wonder what Moses thought when he looked through his rear-view mirror! That's right, he did sing that song, didn't he? Hilarious! This post is from Chris Tilling's blog, Chrisendom:

I don't know if others are like me, but if it has been a really rainy day I'm often sorely tempted to drive through the large puddles that gather on the side of roads next to the pavements (sidewalks) on my way home. If Anja is with me, I normally get bullied out of going where the spirit leads - through the puddle - but things are even more tempting if an unsuspecting pedestrian happens to be in the potential vicinity of the consequent 'tidal wave'. I'll never forget the look on one chap's face in St Andrews as I looked back in my rear view mirror. Boy did I get him good! Now, my point in writing this post: You've heard of 'drive-by shootings' I suppose? For those boring, rainy evenings, I've developed a missionary and liturgical exercise to help wile away those tedious hours and at the same time to spread the joy of the gospel. Namely, I wanted to recommend an evening of 'drive-by baptisms'.

All that is necessary for the performance of this rite:

A rainy evening with lots of puddles near pavements full of pedestrians
A car (preferably one fast enough to flee disturbed victims, er, baptism candidates, and one reliable enough not to break down at what could be a very inopportune moment).
Priestly costumes - or at least some kind of appropriate headwear.
A large crucifix
Brother Josh McManaway helpfully suggests the addition of appropriate bumper stickers on the car for added effect. For example: "God is my Pilot"; "He made me do it!"; "Car + Puddle = Baptism" etc.
A copy of 'Tilling's Drive-by Baptism Liturgy' ©™
Someone to drive, and someone else to repeat the liturgy from an open window on the pavement side of the car at the candidate. Optional extra would include a third person to perform the sign of the cross from the back window at the candidate.

Instructions as to the performance of the rite (including a free copy of 'Tilling's Drive-by Baptism Liturgy' ©™):

Continued

Turning Towards The Lord

In recent issues of Catholic newspapers throughout the country many front pages were graced with pictures of priests celebrating the Mass of Blessed Pope John XXIII, also called the "extraordinary use," by Pope Benedict XVI. Captions for these pictures often went something like this: priest saying Mass with his back to the people.

This is frustrating, especially because most people use this same language.

At a certain level this description is true as far as it goes. Yes, the priest does indeed have his back to the people. Yet, this fails to accurately portray the historical roots or the breadth of this traditional posture. Firstly, and most essentially, the priest is not facing away from the people in any moral sense–as though he is excluding them. Rather, he is leading the people in prayer as ALL OF THEM FACE THE LORD IN PRAYER TOGETHER. Secondly, this is a way of praying that both the churches in the Latin West and the Greek East have shared since the time of the Apostles themselves, almost 2000 years. To this day, as far as I know, ALL the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches pray with priest and people facing the same direction during the Eucharistic Prayer.

What is very sad is that somehow Roman Catholics have come to view this posture of the priest as "having his back to us." I was having a conversation with a high-ranking U.S. bishop who told me that it was not until he was in his latter years of seminary (during the 70's) that he learned that the priest and people were in a position of unity, facing the same direction.

I discovered this in college when a friend corrected me concerning the priest "having his back to us." He invited me to read a book by…

Continued Here…

I was reading CatholicReport.org and found a link to this wonderful post on Mormonism. It's from a blog written by Carson Weber, who I met a couple years back in Steubenville through our mutual friend Rob Corzine.

When you have five minutes, read this article. It proves Mormonism is a sham.