Canon Law and Catholic Publications

Last week there was a huge fiasco regarding the iphone app for Roman Catholics, leading major media outlets to conclude, erroneously, that the Church had just approved the Sacrament of Confession outside of the Confessional. Why? Because "A Catholic Bishop gave the application an Imprimatur". Unfortunately, too many people don't know what that means and indeed, the terms and what they imply can be confusing if one is not familiar with them.

What does it mean for a publication to have Church approval?

As usual, definitions are important here; both of the subject matter and what "approval" entails.

I'm going to focus on, specifically, publications. This can include scripture translations, books, prayers, or as we're seeing recently, applications.  What does it take, then, for the Church to approve a publication? And if it is approved, what does that really mean? Does it change theology?

Let's look at the process involved, step by step,  in the publication of a document, the applicable Code of Canon Law, and what is revealed within that.

1.  First, the author of a publication submits it to the Local Ordinary (The Bishop).

2.  The Local Ordinary assigns a Censor to review the work. [The Bishop does not review the work himself]

Canon 830.1 states:

"The conference of bishops can compile a list of censors outstanding in knowledge, correct doctrine, and prudence to be available to diocesan curias or can also establish a commission of censors which local ordinaries can consult; the right of each local ordinary to entrust judgment regarding books to persons he approves, however, remains intact. "   (The Latin is far more precise that what can be translated in the vernacular). 

Note what the Canon states about the Censor:

1. Outstanding in knowledge
2. Outstanding in correct doctrine
3. Outstanding in prudence

Note that either the Conference of Bishops compiles this list for the sake of the diocesan curias or establishes a commission for the Local Ordinaries to consult.

Note further that the Local Bishop's authority over to whom he is willing to entrust a publication remains intact; of the pool of censors, that means the Local Ordinary still gets to choose who will review the work.

What about the obligations of the Censor?

 The Censor has an important role, and there's a great deal to it which also involves the obligations of the Bishop to both the Censor and the Author.

Canon 830.2 states:

In fulfilling this office, laying aside any favoritism, the censor is to consider only the doctrine of the Church concerning faith and morals as it is proposed by the ecclesiastical magisterium.  

Nota Bene:

* The Censor cannot show favoritism 

* The Censor must consider ONLY the doctrine of the Church concerning faith/morals 

* That, as proposed by the magisterium [as opposed to popular fly-by-night ideas, etc.]

Canon 830.3 states:

A censor must give his or her opinion in writing: if is favorable, the ordinary, according to his own prudent judgment, is to grant permission for publication to take place, with his name and the time and place of the permission granted expressed. If he does not grant permission, the ordinary is to communicate the reasons for the denial to the author of the work.  

Let's take a look at that canon, because it reveals a great deal about the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur:

* A Censor must give his or her opinion in writing 

* If it is favorable,  [Nihil Obstat - "nothing obstructing"] the Bishop (according to his own prudent judgment, ie: does he trust the Censor?) MUST grant permission for the work to be published. 

* And, if this is the case, the Bishop must let it be published with his name, time, and place of the permission granted. [Imprimatur:  "It may be published"] 

* If the Bishop does not grant permission, he must communicate the reason for the denial to the author.

Let's use a simple example of this process. 

Let's just say I use my Master's degree to write a book about Catholic doctrine and its relevance to our culture today. It would be thousands of pages long, of course. It's also very likely every other student in my graduating class compiled the same kind of book with varying areas of specialization.

 Because of the subject matter of my book and the submissions of my friends, and the fact that we want to be taken seriously as legitimate theologians in contributing something to the Church, we submit our works to our local Bishop.

The Bishop doesn't look at the work himself; he's far too busy. Even if I knew him personally as a good friend, he probably still wouldn't read the book himself both to avoid the temptation of favoritism (explicitly prohibited by the Law) and because he's actually got better things to do - like preach and provide for the Sacraments.

Thus, as Canon Law established, the good Bishop takes my work and the work of all my fellow graduates and assigns each of these tomes to a Censor who has been appointed either by the Conference of Bishops or from a designated pool of Censors. In other words, he entrusts this work to, typically, a lay person with good  knowledge of doctrine and a sense of prudence.

Now, that appointed Censor might not like what I'm saying in my book, or may actually love it completely and want to make me a Saint because of it. However, the Censor cannot offer a visceral reaction. On the contrary, that Censor is obligated to objectively evaluate my book on the basis of Catholic faith and morals. Does anything I say in the book contradict the Faith outright?  Does it state something contrary to the moral teachings of the Church?

Mind you..there's a lot of leeway there...the Censor must use prudent judgment; perhaps some of my wording is imprecise and perhaps I don't work from definitions, and perhaps my work can be a bit wishy-washy in that regard. However, in the fair judgment of the Censor, does my work actually contradict, outright, the Faith and Morals of  Catholicism?

There are many factors there such as:  how well has this Censor been formed?  All theological degrees are not equal; the fact is, some universities are more faithful than others, some provide a more complete theology, others are...uh...lacking, to put it charitably. The fact is, the Censor is using his or her own judgment given their specific knowledge, no matter where it falls on the very broad spectrum. The Censor might actually be completely mis-informed about some areas of Catholic faith/morals, yet the Bishop may still trust his or her judgement with regard to my work.

So let's just say that the Censor read my thousand-page book and acted in accordance to Canon Law.  If he thought my work did not contradict Church teaching on faith and morals, he must give that approval in writing to the Bishop (Nihil Obstat - nothing obstructing), and the Bishop, unless he has reason to believe the Censor is way off, will accept that judgment and put his stamp (Imprimatur) on the publication...because he has to.

Now, to the contrary, if the Censor thought I was off my rocker, he must also tell the Bishop that, and even if the Censor gave his approval and the Bishop got an inkling maybe said Censor was wrong and looked further, discovering that I'm a total heretic, the Bishop must inform me that my work cannot be published and what I did wrong.  That would give me a chance to correct my book and then re-submit it. Or choose apostasy.

Does that make sense?

Further, does that help to reveal the fact that the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur on various questionable publications does not serve as "Church approval" by any means?  There are some Bishops who are more prudent than others in those they allow to censor work in their name, as we all know.  There are also a large number of people, Catholics included, who take these "stamps" to mean that the Bishop himself read and approved certain things. I assure you he did not, but for perhaps a few rare cases.

As a friend of mine suggested, why doesn't the work get assigned to a Canon Lawyer?  Answer:  Canon Lawyers are overworked and underpaid as it is. They have even less time than the Bishop to read the myriad of works submitted!

That still leaves one question:

What kinds of publications must be submitted to the Local Ordinary?

According to Canon 824, Any writings intended for publication and distribution should be submitted.

More specifically:

* Can 826.3  Prayer books for public or private use - required submission.

* Can. 827  Catechisms and catechetical materials require approval of the local ordinary.

* Can 827.2 Textbooks of scripture, theology, canon law, ecclesiastical history, or religious / moral disciplines require approval of "competent authority" in order to be used. (The authority referred to here may go beyond the local ordinary or require more than just the local Bishop's approval)

* Can 827.3 Books about about scripture, theology, canon law, ecclesiastical history, religious / moral disciplines not used as textbooks are recommended to be submitted to the local ordinary  [the type of thing I'm most likely to write]

Where does that leave bloggers?

Good question, isn't it?

Well, this is where Canon Law has not caught up with social media, which itself is in a constant state of flux. All we bloggers can do is take what we have and see how the law applies. We are encouraged to use social media to share our faith, to evangelize, to teach. However, we ARE subject to canon law; virtue and prudence should be our guides in what we publish.

Certainly, we are not asked or required to submit our blogs to the Bishop for approval. However, if I decided to publish my blog as a Catholic book, intended for distribution, it would be recommended that I submit it to my Ordinary. If I wrote a more formal work on the theology of the Church, or compiled prayers, I would be required to submit it, which, naturally, makes sense. After all, in the latter case I would be doing so as an act formal to the role of theologian; I would be trying to contribute to the theology of the Church in some formal way.

Disclaimer: With all that said, and with all I have written here, although I have tried to do this faithfully and with reference to the materials I received in graduate school, and with reference to the specific Canons, I have to offer this disclaimer:  my blog is not approved by the Bishop. It has not been submitted to a Censor and it's quite possible I am wrong on some point or have stated something improperly. Blogs should NEVER be used for formal study, although they can be useful to point to further information.

It disturbs me, though, that so many people put their faith in the stamps "Nihil Obstat" and "Imprimatur" when really, those approvals mean very little. They are only as good as the understanding, faithfulness, and integrity of the person reading the work.

Keep that in mind the next time you look at a work, and judge it not by those designations but rather by the actual content of the publication.

Your soul is worth far more than a faulty Imprimatur or mistaken Nihil Obstat.

And your intellect is worth far more than the media's interpretation of Catholic terms they don't even try to understand.

Faith and reason go together, my friends. Know the terms, know what they mean, and if you don't understand them don't ever be afraid to ask!  :-)

HABEMOS MISSALE ROMANUM!

Today, we watched history taking place: a singular moment in time, in a convergence of conflict, strife, unity and passion for Truth, in the ongoing struggle between humanity and divinity, of improper formation versus proper understanding of the liturgy. I'll never forget where I was in that moment.

While I watched this conference and the vote from my computer at work, I was brought back in time.....

The Council in Constantinople was overseen by Bishop St. Flavian (Bishop Flavius), back in 448 AD. His role was to defend the Faith against a serious Christological error being advanced by Eutyches, and indeed condemned it as heretical. Eutyches fought back and through the politics of the time, in 449 AD they were brought together again and St. Flavian, this time as a "party" and not presiding, made a profession of Faith and condemned the heretical errors of both Eutyches and Nestorius.

The battle continued, and in a very dramatic council, a false Council in Ephesus in August of 449. The heretics had taken control, and when St. Flavian and his supporters were sentenced to deposition, which was a condemnation of the Truth of the Church, a violation against the Faith. The Papal Legates (people who were acting in the role of the Pontiff and with his authority) protested, and a Deacon objected to the obvious violence of the heretics (for in general the heretics were prone to violence...we see nothing has changed in this age, either.) As the sentence began to be read, several bishops prostrated themselves asking him to go no further, trying to prevent the oncoming violence.

Dioscuros commanded the doors be opened and in streamed soldiers with clubs and other weapons. St. Flavian himself appealed to reason and to appeal from the Holy See in writing through the Papal Legates. Dioscuros was so incensed at this reasonable approach, the refusal of Flavius to kowtow to the violent objectives of the heretics, and his adherence to decency, logic, and diplomatic process that Dioscuros naturally had a violent reaction. He ordered his henchmen to cast St. Flavian to the ground, where he was beaten and trampled so severely that he died three days later. The Papal Legates fared better...one was beaten and unjustly imprisoned to prevent him from delivering St. Flavian's message to the Holy See. The other managed to flee after great difficulty and reveal to the Pontiff all that had occurred.

...Meanwhile, on November 17, 2009...

All of this was going through my head (what I could remember without looking it up) while watching the Bishop's debate today. Most of us who are plugged into the Catholic world via internet are familiar with the Bishops who tend towards dissent, and those who uphold Truth without compromise, and some that are theological squishy and hold the middle ground. We pray for them all, of course, but in all of it, we pray that the Holy Spirit act through them.

Today was no disappointment. It had all the drama of the past, but far less blood and guts. Today, in the course of an hour or so, all of which I was able to witness, I saw Truth, I saw betrayal, I saw political alignments and double-agents! I watched two particular Bishops, whom I expected to throw their lot in with Bishop "Catholics are stupid" Trautman step up to the plate and oppose him on his own ground!

I was so shocked I stopped working for awhile because I couldn't even FATHOM what I was seeing and hearing. There I was, a pen in one hand, a list of kid's names in another, a form in front of me...completely unnoticed.

History was happening. New alliances. Truth restored. A new translation far more faithful to the original Latin...restored. It has only to be moved to the Holy See for "Recognitio", the word for formal approval.

This moment was only slightly less important to me than the election of Pope Benedict XVI, and so I took stock of my surroundings. At that first moment, his election, I was in a pizza restaurant, the ONLY person among my co-workers who actually understood what was going on and REJOICED in it! Even the other proclaimed Catholics in my presence were utterly bored and had never heard of Cardinal Ratzinger or his importance to our Faith and to the world. Today, in this second moment, I was at work in a Catholic parish, realizing Bishop Serratelli might be speaking to ME and my future role in the promulgation of this new translation. I took stock of my surroundings, realized where I was as a parish employee, and was THRILLED at the thought I could help in this endeavor; both professionally and personally.

But!

It saddens me that MOST Catholics probably don't care about the Liturgy or the development of it, and so don't have any idea of the import of what transpired today. It is the recognition that this historical event is going to go unnoticed by so many souls professing this Faith that makes me realize that it IS akin to the trampling of St. Flavian.

Closing Speech - Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli, Chairman of the Bishop's Committee on Divine Worship

God bless dear Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli whose words upon the acceptance of the new faithful translation of the Roman Missal by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) were like perfectly pure, cool water to this dry, dying soul in the desert of the translation of the Mass within which I've been living from birth. It is such a GRACE to be studying Liturgy and Sacraments this semester and be able to see, clearly, how much we suffer with the bad translation dealt to us, which itself denies the very things for which St. Flavian WAS MARTYRED!

That cool water, the words of triumph, LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI washed over me as I realized this had REALLY HAPPENED! Yes! the Law of Prayer is the Law of Belief! Grace builds upon nature! If the Liturgy is unfaithful...then so are we! If the Liturgy is faithful...then so are we, and even more, we are made HOLY!

SALVATION IN THE PASCHAL MYSTERY, MORE FULLY REVEALED!

We all struggle with sin, and we need every mode to holiness we can find. The Liturgy is, in large part, how the canon of scripture was discerned and if we are not faithful to the Liturgy, we are not faithful to Christ, who comes to us, in Word and Sacrament, made present, drawing us ever closer to Him. Not as a symbol...but as a reality.

I can't contain my happiness at this new translation. I await with much prayer the Recognitio from the Holy See, and hope to be of assistance where I am needed in my particular state, to assist the Faithful in understanding these changes, why they were necessary, overdue, and the importance in our salvation.

Thank you, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thank you.

Amen.

*

Bishop St. Flavian, Patron Saint of the Liturgy** Pray for us!

** (By my own personal designation, not that of the Church)

NOTES:

* More information on Bishop St. Flavian, Martyr.

* Post on Church History summarizing heresy in the Early Church

Official Announcements from the St. Paul-Minneapolis Diocese

The following announcements are canonically required and serve to notify the Faithful of problematic situations or people in the diocese and Church. These are official directives from Archbishop Nienstedt and his words need to be obeyed, for they are spoken out of concern and love for we, the Faithful.

I am publishing the full text of both announcements:

Official Announcement

Saint Paul, MN, August 2009 – It has come to the attention of the Archdiocese that a group calling itself the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (CCCR) is planning a 2010 ‘synod’ in the Archdiocese entitled, ‘Claiming Our Place at the Table’.

While the agenda for the proposed synod purports to be an exploration of the role of baptized Catholics within the institutional Church of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, it is not being conducted under the auspices of the Archdiocese, the universal Roman Catholic Church, or any entity or organization affiliated with the Archdiocese or the universal Roman Catholic Church.

The Archdiocese wishes it to be known that the Catholic Coalition for Church Reform, the 2010 synod, and individuals endorsing the same, are not agents or entities of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis or the Roman Catholic Church. Moreover, the Archdiocese wishes to lovingly caution those members of the faithful participating in the ‘work/study groups’ and intending to attend the synod of the potential that the issues on which CCCR will seek reform are magisterial teachings of the Church, and are therefore to be believed by divine and catholic faith. The Archdiocese also wishes to remind the faithful of its need to shun any contrary doctrines, and instead to embrace and retain, to safeguard reverently and expound faithfully, the doctrine of faith and morals proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church.

****Author's Note: The phrase "therefore to be believed by divine and catholic faith" indicates that the problem with this group have to do with the highest order of teachings, therefore the "reforms" this group is seeking to make are declared Heresies. The penalty for participating in such "reforms" has to do with Canon 1364.1, Heresy/Apostacy and can lead to the penalty of excommunication.

Official Announcement

On June 26, 2009, the Supreme Pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI, decreed that Deacon Martin Kelly Shanahan, a permanent deacon of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, is dismissed from the clerical state ex officio et in poenam and released from all obligations of the clerical state. This supreme penalty was imposed on Mr. Shanahan after he abandoned the Catholic Church, sought 'priestly ordination' from a female bishop of the Apostolic Catholic Orthodox Church, and then attempted to administer the sacraments (simulation). The same decree indicated that the canonical censures incurred by Mr. Shanahan as a result of his schism remain in force.

The Archdiocese wishes the faithful to be aware that any ‘Mass’ or sacrament administered by Mr. Shanahan, with the exception of baptism, is invalid. The August 2000 declaration by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dominus Iesus, does not apply to Mr. Shanahan’s attempted presbyteral ordination nor does it make any statement regarding the validity of the Orders of the Apostolic Catholic Orthodox Church.

I would encourage ALL of my readers to read Dominus Iesus for yourselves, for your own edificiation and education, but keeping in mind that it's not about Mr. Shanahan. (Hint: You'll only understand what is being said in this communication from the Archdiocese if you read the document. GO READ!)

To all of my faithful readers (and even the unfaithful ones!), keep an eye on your Archdiocesan web pages and newspapers where these announcements are published and promulgated. They are important for you to know and even to disseminate on your own to others of the faithful who might be in danger of succombing to the popular heresies of the time.

There are a LOT of lukewarm, uncatechized Catholics who simply don't see why they can't participate in heretical "reforms" because they don't know that they are heresy. There are people who don't know what Ecclesial Communities are in union with Rome or are in Schizm but claiming a Catholic title.

You don't have to have a blog to help the Bishop disseminate information to others, and in fact, as the faithful, it is your DUTY to assist him in this.

Please pray for any souls that lead others astray or are led astray themselves by those who seek to usurp or destroy the Church.

*

Mantilla-twitch and Hat-tip to Ray Marshall at Stella Borealis

Why are you looking at me funny? Can't I wear a mantilla and a hat at the same time?

Ordination Mass at the Cathedral of St. Paul

This morning I attended the Ordination Mass at the Cathedral of St. Paul, and it is the first time I've had the opportunity to be present for such an auspicious event.

In following advice from a friend, I arrived sometime around 8:45, wanting to be CERTAIN to get a parking place, because, let's face it; women's shoes are NOT made for walking. Not the kind of shoes that go with nice skirts, anyway. So it was that I had time to wander around the Cathedral and pray Morning Prayer in Sacred Heart Chapel.

For those who have never been to our Cathedral, it is history personified. The stained glass, the pillars, the altar...everything is a link to the very beginning of the Church, right from the side of Christ. One cannot possibly look ANYWHERE without seeing a connection to the Universal Church, whether through those who built this structure, those who first touched American soil, the first converts, and even the immense marble pillars that support the baldacchin over the high altar have a tale to share for those who inquire.

But today wasn't about that...it was about something with far more impact on us all than any building will EVER have.

I found my way to a pew in the rear section as the entire front section of the Cathedral was reserved for concelebrating priests and friends/family of those being ordained. Although I know one of them, I didn't feel I could claim a place among such elect, so found a spot near the front of the rear. It wasn't long, though, before someone recognized me and beckoned me forward to join her in the frontward section, so gratefully I stood and found myself in one of the prime locations in the Cathedral; somewhere near the middle of the front.

Ironically, I might have seen more had I remained in the rear and held my aisle position! But I digress.

The Mass began with a solemn chant, and all turned towards the entrance. I was in fact, entranced by the Crucifix held aloft amidst the smoke of incense and back lit by the bright sunshine even as it reflected the lights of the cavernous Cathedral nave. Slowly the procession, the likes of which I'd never seen before today, passed through the center; acolytes (seminarians), first bearing incense and the cross and candles, then the MC's (Master of Ceremonies), Deacons, Priests...finally those to be ordained, followed by the principle Concelebrants, most notable being several Bishops, including one from Chicago as well as our most recent Bishop-Elect, and of course his Excellency the Most Reverend John C. Nienstedt. They were followed by two priests (or seminarians?) garbed in vimpae, which look like humeral veils, bearing something with great respect. I later saw them bearing the Mitres and the Bishop's Crosier.

The readings were alternating English/Spanish, and at first I wondered about this, then realized that one or two of those to be ordained had spent a great deal of time in service to our Hispanic Catholics, so clearly, they would be in attendance. As I speak Spanish, I enjoyed both reading the translations as well as listening to the Word proclaimed in that language. Truth be told, though, I still didn't clearly understood it, nor would I have in Latin. (And for Mass, I prefer Latin...it's far more universal than a bilingual Mass...again, I digress!)

Rite of Ordination

Now for the big moment. Or rather...moments. Quite a series of them.

This begins, other than the Consecration, the most beautiful Ritual of the Church, and the most meaningful. I realized just in reading the program that this entire semester has prepared me to be able to absorb the import of this Mass. There I was, with Luke-Acts fresh in my memory, having written papers that focused on God's call to those He intends to be set aside, and, of course, on the Priesthood itself...in awe at watching the first Century taking place before my very eyes!

I must say here, that with this realization, I became very very conscious of the four brick and stone pillars surrounding us, signifying the four Gospels and their authors. I became very aware of the sanctity of the Church, the foundation, the protection, and the safety to be found within those walls. It was a safety that is not earthly, but spiritual, for any of us might be called to shed our blood just as did our Lord...yet His promises would NEVER fail us. It was a profound moment of gratitude for Jesus Christ and His Priesthood. It was a profound moment of knowing what it means to be Catholic.

The Rite of Ordination begins with the deacon calling forward those to be ordained. At the sound of their name, each stood, in turn, called out "Present!", passed the communion rail and mounted the steps to the altar, then turned to face the Archbishop. When all three were there, after some additional prayers, came the Election of the Bishop and Consent of the People.

The program cued us with the following:

Bishop: "Relying on the help of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, we choose these, our brothers, for the Order of the Priesthood."

Assembly: Thanks be to God!

The program notes here that the people show assent with applause. Which was, of course, quite enthusiastic, as you might imagine!

After this, the Archbishop gave his homily, from his Chair, not the lectern. He was speaking to the three ordinands who were seated before him. Unfortunately, for some reason although I greatly enjoyed his homily, I can't tell you the content! I can say, however, that his words were not for those men alone, but for us all, in some way, and I hope to come across a text version so that I can take time to read and digest the wisdom he conveyed today.

After the homily came another major moment; this is the Promise of the Elect, where the candidates must declare their intention to undertake the office of the priesthood and exercise their ministry worthily in imitation of Christ the High Priest.

Then...the Promise of Obedience. An all-or-nothing moment. Even I got cold feet, and no one was asking me to commit to anything! One cannot help but realize the weight of the moment, the gift being offered...and the free will to refuse.

One by one, the men went forward, bowed, knelt before the seated Bishop, and placed his folded hands in the Bishop's, pledging obedience. This is not done as a group, but individually. After this, the three men stood facing the altar, and then prostrated before it, and Our Lord, as the congregation stood and prayed the Litany to the Saints.

My friends, I can tell you...the Cathedral was FULL. Both the seen and the unseen.

Laying on of Hands

The ordinands again approach the Bishop, and, each in turn, kneel before him as he lays his hands on their heads, signifying the gift of the Holy Spirit conferring the priestly office. They return to their places, the congregation is seated, and each of the priests present ascend the altar to also impose hands to signify the new candidate's incorporation into the presbyterate.

Following this is the Prayer of Ordination, and the Investiture with the Stole and Chasuble, where the newly ordained priests are vested. Finally, they, once again, in turn, approach the Bishop so that he may anoint their hands with the Sacred Chrism.

The sign of peace, an embrace, is passed between the ordained, first the Bishop, and then, again, all the priests present file forward to greet their brother priests.

Liturgy of the Eucharist

This was not in the program, but when the gifts were brought forward, a chalice and ciborium were taken to the Bishop, and these were in turn, given to each of the newly ordained priests with the solemn admonition of the importance of their priestly ministry in consecrating the bread and wine into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

The new priests stood with the Primary Concelebrants in direct participation, for the first time, of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

From where we were seated, or rather, kneeling, it was quite impressive to be across the aisle from the hundreds of priests who remained standing, uttering, softly, in a reverent rumble, the words of Consecration. It was absolutely humbling, and in those moments, I was perhaps more able to sense the connection to priests all over the world, saying those same words, with the same intent, in union with one another, with the Pope.

The words of St. Irenaeus came to me: "There is one bishop, one altar...one sacrifice."

One High Priest. And all His chosen Sons, united, and He comes to us through their anointed hands.

Conclusion

There was a humorous moment as the Deacon stood and read where each of the three new priests would be available for blessings after the Mass. He read from a book and indicated simply that Fr. Ebert would be in St. Mary's chapel...to his right in the back.

The Archbishop, with a mischievous expression, standing at his Chair, just behind the Deacon but fully visible, quickly gestured to the back right of the Cathedral. A few chuckled.

The Deacon read that Fr. Eilen would be in St. Joseph's Chapel, to his left.

The Archbishop, right on cue, quickly gestured, pointing to the chapel to the rear left, immediately returning his hands to the proper pose. More chuckles. Louder, this time.

The Deacon read that Fr. Johnson would be found in St. Peter's Chapel, again, to his right.

The Archbishop, after a little pause, quickly pointed to his immediate right, and returned to his previous position. Outright laughter ensued.

The poor Deacon had NO IDEA what our beloved Archbishop was doing!

Blessings

I wasn't initially planning to go to one of the chapels for a blessing. I knew that only one of the new Fathers has met me and would not remember whether I was there to receive his blessing or not, although, of course I wanted to be a part of that tradition, as well. One of the wonderful things about attending an ordination Mass is receiving one of the First Blessings from the newly ordained, and perhaps kissing his newly-anointed hands!

So I let others leave, knelt down to pray for awhile, and then checked to see whether I had any time at all. Just a little. Feeling a bit "led", I walked towards St. Luke's pillar (and just now, as I write this, recognize the significance of that, given the studies of my semester). I paused to take a photo of the Saint, and just then, Archbishop-emeritus Flynn passed me, within arm's reach, Archbishop Nienstedt passed, blessing us (almost personal at that sparse point), and our new Bishop-elect passed by, greeting a Franciscan Friar who was actually waiting for me to take my photo, I think!

I continued on towards St. Joseph's chapel, praying to him as I also have a great devotion to him, and have for a long time. Somehow, I think my Guardian Angel must have orchestrated it, but I managed to weave through the crowd, never pushing anyone, just being moved along, even ushered by other people, and it wasn't long before I stood at the entrance to the chapel.

It was my great privilege to kneel before Fr. Eilen, grasp his hand, congratulate him, and receive his blessing, which was, as it were, almost a consecration to Jesus through Mary. Amen, Father.

*

And so, after this long winding epic post, please let me have the wonderful privilege to congratulate our Newly Ordained Priests: Father Douglas Allen Ebert, Father Allen Paul John Eilen, and Father Michael Chrun Johnson. You are all in my prayers. Thank you for giving your fiat to Our Lord!

*

*** You may be interested to know that Fr. Johnson was one of the seminarian blogers at Future Priests of the Third Millenium. Comments are turned off at that blog, but it is well worth following!

Armchair Archbishops

There is something I consistently see out of people who claim to be "good Catholics", and it makes me wonder at their definition of terms. What lexicon are they using that makes them translate the Latin into that particular self-aggrandizing phrase?

Our wonderful Archbishop recently wrote a very pastoral (in the PROPER sense!) letter (1) to a disruptive dissident group in our Archdiocese. I am not going to post links to either the letter or the website I'm about to discuss as I don't want any more attention than necessary brought to this issue. Nor do I want the self-hating group of "Catholics" to obtain any benefit of publicity from my blog.

The real issue I want to discuss really has nothing to do with the heterodox problem children, anyway, but those who claim to be "orthodox" while wearing their vitriol on their sleeves.

How does one get dressed in the morning with that tacky stuff all over them?

I read the letter from the Archbishop and found it to be clear, concise, and to the point. The group it was directed at cannot mistake the point he is making unless, as the song says, they are "reading between the lines to misunderstand." (2)

And of course, from THAT group I expect such idiocy. If they AGREED with the Bishop and followed Church teaching, he wouldn't have written the letter in the first place!

What disturbs me is that another blogger posted the letter on his site with some minor commentary, and his post was very positive. He obviously supports the good Archbishop.

Unfortunately, his readers immediately began deconstructing the letter, nitpicking minor phrases, other readers began making weird arguments from silence as though perhaps they thought the Bishop should have written an extensive Apostolic Exhortation (3) instead of the letter that was proper to the situation.

This drives me NUTS! This is completely disrespectful of the Bishop who, one knows, is already going to be taking a massive hit from this group (which has not ceased to harass him from the very announcement he was coming to our diocese); does he really need to be brought down by "friendly fire"?

What is up with these "Armchair Archbishops" who apparently think they know more than one of the best of our Shepherds?

I'm quite certain such pastoral letters are difficult to write, especially when addressing a serious ongoing issue in a particular diocese. Of course the Bishop must hone in on the most immediate of issues, for who is going to read a ten-page exhortation? No one. My goodness, the Pope can't get people to read even his shortest of works, who's going to read the Bishop's if he doesn't get to the point immediately? He doesn't need to drag in what he's already said to this group, very publicly. He doesn't need to reiterate every teaching of the Church that MIGHT have bearing on the issue just to satisfy the snarkiest of "orthodox Catholics".

How dare ANY of us be so arrogant to nitpick a Bishop? It's treading a very thin line, one I've addressed in previous posts. Under Canon Law, we owe respect to our priests and bishops, and when we start making stupid and snarky criticisms of our leaders, what message does that send to others? If we profess to have respect for our Magisterium, guess what? It starts at home. It starts with the priests (which means not villifying them in blogs and comboxes), it starts with the Bishops (ditto), and it means that if we can't edify, we should maybe keep our mouths shut.

By the way, that applies to others as well. The blog I'm citing (but not citing) is one I read, although I avoid the combox as it tends to be overwhelmed with ad hominem attacks from overzealous followers. Most of whom, it seems some days, think they would make perfect Bishops. I thank God every day for the intervention of the Holy Spirit in that matter!

When we get snarky like that, it sends a message to the non-Catholic world, and rightly...they see it as infighting. Which it is. Completely unnecessary infighting, for aren't we actually on the same page? Allegedly? After all, we tend to agree that the letter is a good one. Then why tear it to pieces? Such an action completely undermines the Bishop, and for what?

There might be a time to criticize the words of a Bishop (NEVER attacking the Bishop or priest themselves!), just as there might be a time to criticize the words of others. But this can ALWAYS be done in charity. And perhaps blogs aren't the proper venue for such criticism. Perhaps there's a better way. Something more proper. Something more in line with humility and holiness and less in line with the hostile bashing comments typica to a secular newspaper article.

People, the world already hates Catholics. Don't invite more hostility, please. And don't encourage it.

Perhaps when a Bishop does something good, instead of deconstructing his words in order to ask why he didn't say what we think he should, maybe we should sit back, remember that the Holy Spirit is in charge, and, at least in the case of my Archdiocese, He is very much in contact with our Shepherd.

Maybe the lay-Bishops in their armchairs should stand down and let the Holy Spirit do his job, and maybe they (and we all) should do ours: to support the Bishop, pray for him, sacrifice for him, and act according to our Baptismal call to preach the gospel to all nations. We don't do a very good job of that if we're busy snarking off at the Bishop over inane details in a letter written for a specific situation.

/rant

Hmmm...I think I just might write a letter of support to our Bishop tonight.

*

NOTES:

(1.) A Pastoral Letter is one written by someone with Pastoral Authority regarding a matter of pastoral significance

(2.) Sabra Girl by Nickel Creek, lyrics: "Rosy the lines you wrote with your hand. Reading between them to misunderstand."

(3.) An Apostolic Exhortation is a document by the Pope explaining certain matters of doctrine, disciplines or practices, usually does not contain new teachings but is used to "exhort" the faithful to follow certain teachings and/or practices. It is commonly issues by the Pope after a Synod of Bishops

Welcome, Archbishop Nienstedt!

Today, my dear friend Ray forwarded me the official press release announcing the end of the reign of Archbishop Flynn, and the beginning for Archbishop Nienstedt.

Friday, May 2, 2008
It's Official: Archbishop John C. Nienstedt is the Archbishop of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.

FROM: The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
CONTACT: Dennis B. McGrath
Director of Communications

…FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

THE MOST REVEREND JOHN C. NIENSTEDT OFFICIALLY ASSUMES DUTIES AS ARCHBISHOP OF SAINT PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS

SAINT PAUL, MN, MAY 2, 2008 -- Archbishop John C. Nienstedt, 61, officially assumed the duties of Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis today, following the retirement of Archbishop Harry J. Flynn, who has led the Archdiocese since February of 1995. Archbishop Flynn was notified by the Vatican that his resignation was official on May 2, his 75th birthday and the normal age of retirement for archbishops.

Pope Benedict XVI appointed then Bishop Nienstedt to the post of Coadjutor Archbishop on April 24th of last year. A coadjutor archbishop essentially serves in a familiarization role until the sitting archbishop retires. Nienstedt had served the prior six years as Bishop of New Ulm, Minnesota.

A native of Detroit, he was ordained in 1974 following studies at Sacred Heart Seminary there and at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. He served as associate pastor or pastor of numerous Detroit area parishes and as rector of Sacred Heart Seminary in Detroit. In June of 1994, he was named an Auxiliary Bishop of Detroit by Pope John Paul II. He served as bishop for the Dearborn, Downriver, Monroe, Northwest Wayne, Southland and Western Wayne Vicariates, before becoming Bishop of New Ulm in 2001.

“I am grateful to His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, for his confidence in naming me Archbishop of Saint Paul and Minneapolis,” Archbishop Nienstedt said. “It is a tremendous responsibility for pastoring the people of God now assigned to my care. I ask for the prayerful support of both Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

Ever since our new Archbishop was named Co-Adjutor, faithful Catholics have rejoiced, while those ascribing to the plague of Modernism have villified him, sight unseen. There were dire predictions about him from the latter crowd, which in many ways paralleled the reaction of the same crowd to the election of Pope Benedict XVI. Even the reaction of the media and non-Catholics has been negative towards this man, who has proven in his year with us that he is faithful and he is a true Shepherd. He is fair, he is pastoral, and truly, he will not waver on the teachings of faith and morals. The modernists indeed have something to fear...time to put the crystals away!

I have not met the new Archbishop, although I have been glued to his writings and responses to the hot-topic crowds, demanding that he acquiesce to their own definition of "dialogue". I have been present in meetings, the only "conservative" (I hate that term) Catholic in a crowd of "liberals" (I hate that term, too), as they advanced crazy rumors. What shocked me was that many in this group had met him and had a very positive experience and impression of him. But they were fearful that their pet projects would be taken away. (And right they should fear if their projects are against Catholic teaching!)

One of the funniest rumors I heard though, I just can't help but share: someone had heard that our new Archbishop is going to forbid women to teach religion.

I nearly snorted coffee out my nose on THAT one! And indeed, I broke out laughing at the sheer stupidity! When I finally could respond, wiping the tears from my eyes, I said that such an idea is pure idiocy; Archbishop Neinstedt is no fool, and there is no Church document in existance upon which he would base such a move.

I DID say that he would be within his rights (and ours!) to reinstate male-only altar servers. And this is quite possible, although I doubt he would do such a thing immediately. He has stated and has proven that he is not interested in making mass changes - rather, he is working to get to know his people, and in my opinion, he is going about things very wisely.

I did not tell the crowd of liberals around me that I would fully support the institution of male-only altar servers. I'd be first in line to applaud such an action! I feared they would lynch me and I wouldn't be able to finish my coffee before going to my martyrdom.

As I said, I've not met the new Archbishop, but I have nothing but a sense of trust in his leadership, and hope to one day have the opportunity to meet him.

GOD BLESS HIM and THANK YOU, POPE BENEDICT XVI for appointing him as our new Archbishop! Please keep him in your prayers!

Archbiship Emeritus Harry Flynn

I HAVE met our now Archbishop Emeritus on a few occasions, and also have nothing but good feelings toward him. He was a good Shepherd to us, and now he can follow his true gift; his Pastoral heart. Archbishp Flynn took a LOT of flack for his actions while he's been our leader, and I'll never say he didn't make mistakes. Public ones. But I do believe his heart was in the right place, he did what he felt best at the time, and I do believe he learned from his own mistakes. He is human, and we can't fault him for his humanity. Especially when we would have been as likely or MORE likely to make the same mistakes, or worse ones, if we were in the same boat.

Archbishop Flynn has a heart for the individual, and went about his work in that manner. I don't believe he was an Administrator; that wasn't his gift. And he saw his ministry in the way that Jesus saw His own; to reach out to each soul. Through Archbishop Flynn's actions, our seminary has turned around, Perpetual Adoration chapels have flourished, and countless people can testify to his personal touch in reaching out to them in profound moments in their lives. He was an Archbishop who never stopped being a parish priest.

I met him a couple years ago when my Pastor was installed at my parish. At the time, a bunch of crazy baby-boomer women were going around the deaneries and having "Listening Sessions" at various Modernist parishes, ostensibly to provide a study on women's perspectives on their role in the Church. I was not able to attend any of them. The "research" wasn't done by the time the Bishop came to my parish, and when I greeted him, I asked for a moment of his time. I told him that he was going to be getting a file of flawed research that was NOT representative of how women really feel about the Church. I explained that as a woman, I have found the Church to be the last sanctuary, the ONLY sanctuary, and the ONLY place I can go to be the woman God wants me to be. We aren't seeking to be priests...we are seeking to be like Mary, we are seeking to be holy women according to her example, and I wanted him to know that this is the prevailing view that he would not receive with that file.

I thanked him for our priests at my parish (we love them!), and for his time, and I started to go...but he wouldn't let go of my hand. Archbishop Flynn looked me right in the eyes and discussed the situation with me even further. He didn't just nod and smile like a politician and thank me for my opinion...what we discussed was a real conversation, even though it was brief, and since that day, I have been thanking God for such a man as our leader. Maybe he didn't seem to act in ways people thought he should, but I guarantee you that his personal efforts have brought a great number of individuals to embrace a life of personal holiness which is hugely contributing to the authentic Spirit of our community.

God bless Archbishop Flynn, Thank you for your service! Please always remember him in your prayers.


NOTE: For those interested, Father Valenchek has an awesome post on the proper response to our Bishops, well worth reading for everyone!