The Hound Of Ulster

Right HERE.

But, the reality is that if the same Baby Boomers who are complaining about the changing demographics had not murdered so many of their children, they wouldn't be in this mess. By the numbers, 2500 innocent children have been legally murdered each year in Pittsburgh since January 1973, let alone the ones not counted from unrecorded yet equally intentional deaths caused by abortifacients like the Pill.

Diatribe may not be the best word, because it has come to carry a significantly negative connotation.

1: a prolonged discourse
2: a bitter and abusive speech or writing
3: ironic or satirical criticism

As I check over the possible options, I'm forced to reject the first one right off the bat.  The Duck is occasionally (perhaps even often) prolonged on his blog, but this is not one of those times.  He is also occasionally bitter and/or abusive, though I don't think the second meaning quite fits in this instance, either.  I'm going to go with #3 on this one.

Satirical irony is the Duck's forte.
 

From a Catholic World News ARTICLE, courtesy of IC's MARGARET:

Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City has announced that Governor Kathleen Sebelius should not receive Communion because of her support for legal abortion.

In a column appearing on May 9 in the archdiocesan newspaper, The Leaven, the archbishop said that Governor Sebelius has sent a "spiritually lethal message" by implying that she could remain a Catholic in good standing while supporting abortion on demand.

Of particulary interest to me was the Archbishop's account of the "pastoral" approach he'd taken to the matter:

He reported that he had met with her "several times over many months to discuss with her the grave spiritual and moral consequences of her public actions." Because the governor has now rejected his pleas and her public stand constitutes a scandal to the faithful, the archbishop said that he has now directed her to refrain from receiving Communion. Archbishop Naumann reported that he has asked Governor Sebelius to accept this directive, so that she will "not require from me any additional pastoral actions."

Another key point:

The governor will be welcomed back to Communion, the archbishop wrote, if she acknowledges her error, goes to Confession, and makes "a public repudiation of her previous efforts and actions in support of laws and policies sanctioning abortion."

THIS is the article that "started it all."  (And HERE'S a sample of the "reasoned response" it's generating.)
 

...by any stretch of the IMAGINATION.

Pope Benedict XVI called on U.S. bishops last week to "continue to welcome the immigrants who join your ranks today, to share their joys and hopes, to support them in their sorrows and trials and to help them flourish in their new home." Mr. Tancredo's response was to accuse the pontiff of "faith-based marketing" and claim that "the pope's immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church."

Sounds like Senator Tancredo has confused B16 with the Dems, who are interested in immigration at least partially for the purpose of recruiting new members to their party.  (And even then, I'm only willing to say "partially."  I think there are a number of perfectly legitimate reasons to be way more "pro-immigration" than Tancredo would ever want someone to be, Pope or otherwise.)

A strange confusion, methinks.  Tancredo has always been more than a little "Johnny One-Note," but this is a particularly unfortunate application of his "It's the Borders, Stupid" principle.  Couldn't possibly have chosen a less appropriate target, and his status as a "former Catholic" doesn't help his argument one little bit.

WSJ had the definitive response, in my opinion:

The pope welcomes immigrants because he's Catholic, not because they are. He isn't "marketing" his faith. He's practicing it.

One quick note: the WSJ headline is a bit misleading, because it sounds like Tancredo felt that he and his country had been "insulted" by the Pope.  But that was actually Lou Dobb's term.  Tancredo wasn't "insulted," he was insulting.
 

InsideCatholic has a massive POST in the recent Pew study, and on the apparent departure of Catholic from the Church.  Lots and lots of material there.  I'm almost unsure where to start.  (Deal Hudson has some THOUGHTS on the blog itself, and generates a number of intereesting responses.)

Myself, I need to think about it a lot more.  I'm not a good person to consider this, because I have next-to-no-sympathy for what I (probably uncharitably) refer to as the Dreher Syndrome.  I simply can't understand the "It felt and looked wrong, so I left in search of a place that felt and looked right."  Especially when it involves a discussion of what they felt their kids "need."

What about needing the Real Presence?

(Like I said: I shouldn't talk about this.  Excessively rational in my consideration, perhaps.  At least I think that's the solution Deal is suggesting.)
 

OK, so THIS doesn't make him radical.  But I'll bet some Americancatholic "experts" fall all over themselves in an effort to paint him that way.

In the preface to a new Italian-language book on the Eucharist, written by a bishop from Kazakhstan and released in January by the Vatican's official publishing house, Archbishop Albert Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige Don suggests that the reception of Communion in the hand has contributed to a general sense of "carelessness" about the Eucharist, as well as some flagrant abuses.

...

The practice of receiving Communion in the hand was not mandated by Vatican II, nor was it introduced in response to calls from the laity, Archbishop Ranjith writes.  Instead, he argues, an established practice of piety-- receiving the Eucharist kneeling, on the tongue-- was changed "improperly and hurriedly," and became widespread even before it was formally approved by the Vatican.
 

In light of a widespread lack of reverence for the Eucharist, the archbishop suggests that it is "high time to review" the policy.

It's hard for me to imagine that most of the American bishops would be willing to deal with the firestorm that would accompany changing this.  But it sure is nice to hear someone "high up" talking about it.

THIS sort of thing is always nice. (HT: AMERICAN PAPIST)

The US bishops' conference has issued a rebuke to a group of 18 Democratic legislators who objected to a statement by Pope Benedict XVI that lawmakers who support abortion should not receive the Eucharist.

The statement released by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on Friday, May 18, confirms that an individual who commits a mortal sin "should not approach the Eucharist until going to confession." While clearly affirming the Church's stand abortion, the statement stops short of saying that legislators who support the practice should not receive Communion. Instead the bishops' conference urges lawmakers "to educate themselves about the teaching of the Church, and to seek pastoral advice so that they can make informed decisions with consistency and integrity."

That's how Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos describes B16's thoughts on the Tridentine rite, becoming the latest high-ranking Vatican official to confirm that "something is definitely in the works."

Castrillon Hoyos stressed that Benedict's plans to revive the Tridentine rite did not represent a "step backward, of a regression to times before the reforms." Rather, it is an offer to the faithful to have greater access to what he said was a "treasure" of the church.

"For this reason, the Holy Father intends to extend to the entire Latin church the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass and the sacraments" according to the latest version of the Tridentine Mass, from 1962.

The pope would decree it an "extraordinary form of the unique Roman rite," he said.

The entire speech is HERE. (Yes, I know that link's pretty worthless. And the Babelfish VERSION is mostly humorous. It does give you the overall "drift" of the piece, though.)

I think I need to break out of my blogging cocoon to hunt down reactions.

Well, actually...it's yesterday's. And the AP isn't "Associated Press," like you might expect...it's American Papist.

I've been staying away from the ol' feed reader of late, because I haven't opened it since my latest WY trip, and it's going to be terrifying once I do open it. So I haven't really been fed my usual material in a couple weeks - which has probably revealed just how little original material there actually is on this blog.

Still, I can't stay completely out of the loop, so I've checked a couple of my favorite blogs from time to time. Today's was American Papist's turn, and he LINKED to a real DOOZY from my "neck-of-the-woods." Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say the neck that is still mine for at least for another month.

With concurrence of our major consultative bodies, I have requested that the first major property to be sold will be the Archdiocesan Catholic Center, located on Wilshire Blvd., in the mid-Wilshire area of Los Angeles. It is only right that the Archdiocese begin this process by demonstrating our commitment to reach final settlement in these cases by selling our central administrative building. We would then either lease other lesser office space for our ministries and services, or possibly lease back some space in the existing building.

Not saying it's an unreasonable approach to the financial problems of the diocese, or that there is any sort of troubling, sneaky activity going on here. (One might wonder why "we" have a "Archdiocesan Catholic Center" on Wilshire Blvd. in the first place, but that's a seperate issue.)

But it's yet another reminder of the depressing state of affairs here in Los Angeles. And that's not really what I'm looking for at the moment. (Nor is KAREN, it would appear.)

Time to avoid the feed reader again.

THIS is welcome news indeed.

The Pope was asked whether he supported Mexican Church leaders threatening to excommunicate leftist parliamentarians who last month voted to legalize abortion in Mexico City.

"Yes, this excommunication was not an arbitrary one but is allowed by Canon (church) law which says that the killing of an innocent child is incompatible with receiving communion, which is receiving the body of Christ," he said.

"They (Mexican Church leaders) did nothing new, surprising or arbitrary. They simply announced publicly what is contained in the law of the Church... which expresses our appreciation for life and that human individuality, human personality is present from the first moment (of life)".

Prepare yourselves for a high number of shrill, outraged "The Church is always interfering with politics" cries from the lefties. (If anyone could come up with some reason why The Church should be expected to leave politics alone, I'd be interested to hear it. Politics deals as heavily with morality as just about anything else we do, and why would we want The Church to stay out of that? Isn't that exactly where we want The Church's guidance?)

A friend of mine sent me this Curt Jester LINK. It's fairly pointy at times, and fairly flippant at others. But it's also nearly all true. (That probably says something about what we "pew-folks" thinks about the state of the American Catholic Church. There might be some stubbed feelings when reading this sort of thing, but there will also be a lot of head nodding.)

If you notice the Cantor moving their arms about strangely or playing weird instruments, do not be alarmed and call a psychiatric hospital. These are considered normal behaviors for a cantor.

Cantors also have the strange speech impediment where they are unable to say priest. They will use words instead like presider to overcome this problem.