Some Catholics have a problem with the perceived imbalance of this “limited” petition from Eucharistic Prayer II:

Remember, Lord, your Church,
spread throughout the world,
and bring her to the fullness of charity,
together with Francis our Pope
and N. our Bishop
and all the clergy.

Why end there? What about us lay people? (We are, by the way, mentioned just before this sentence.)

Pope Francis has dispatched the disgraced Cardinal O’Brien to several months of “spiritual renewal, prayer, and penance.” Was this on his mind in today’s homily?

When a priest, a bishop goes after money, the people do not love him – and that’s a sign. But he ends badly.

A lack of love, especially in a Church culture in which people are still largely predisposed to treat priests with great affection, is indeed a sign.

(St. Paul) did not have a bank account, he worked, and when a bishop, a priest goes on the road to vanity, he enters into the spirit of careerism – and this hurts the Church very much – [and] ends up being ridiculous: he boasts, he is pleased to be seen, all powerful – and the people do not like that!

A ridiculous end. And all the more sad that some clergy do not perceive the state with which they are viewed. A martyr, certainly, can be widely rejected and laughed at. But a buffoon will suffer the same fate.

Pope Francis requests:

Pray for us, that we might be poor, that we might be humble, meek, in the service of the people.

This is why I have no problem with the mention of pope, bishop, and clergy in the Eucharistic Prayer. Presiders don’t need to bother to add “laity,” though I appreciate the gesture. I’ve worked closely with priests for three decades. I know they need prayers. I don’t begrudge them the extra mention (if it is indeed that) before God.

Pope Francis asked for a reflection on Acts 20:28-30:

Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Read this fine passage, and while reading it, pray, pray for us bishops and priests. We have such need in order to stay faithful, to be men who watch over the flock and also over ourselves, who make the vigil their own, that their heart be always turned to [the Lord’s] flock. [Pray] also that the Lord might defend us from temptation, because if we go on the road to riches, if we go on the road to vanity, we become wolves and not shepherds. Pray for this, read this and pray. So be it.

I can attest to the great difficulty in remaining faithful in a marriage over the past seventeen years. It seems serene on the surface–what others see when my wife and I worship together, shop together, sit quietly in a room together, attend concerts and events and parties. But married life is difficult in ways I would not have imagined. But I feel fortunate. My wife prays for me, and I for her. And we keep working at it, mutually supportive of one another.

Some clergy–I don’t know how they maintain balance in what is essentially the eremitic lifestyle of a modern priest. How tempting it must be to consider drink, drugs, sex, gluttony, and other indulgences.

So, no: I have no problem whatsoever with the Holy Father’s message today.

June 21st will be the start of another run on freedom. It will be the start of the Fortnight For Freedom, 2013 edition.

During the Fortnight, our liturgical calendar celebrates a series of great martyrs who remained faithful in the face of persecution by political power—St. John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the First Martyrs of the Church of Rome, St. John Fisher, and St. Thomas More. Through prayer, study, and peaceful public action during the Fortnight for Freedom, we hope to remind ourselves and others all throughout the United States about the importance of preserving the fundamental right of religious freedom.

Religious freedom is indeed endangered in many places on the planet, though probably not the United States so much. The USCCB seems to believe that financial entitlements are part of a so-called freedom. I’m a skeptic on much, but not all of this. The institutional church itself has not had a lily white record on religious freedom. Women, including women religious, have been targets of bishops and clergy and even the laity who misunderstood or just simply opposed their service to the Church and the world.

I was heartened to learn that the “Nuns” are gassing up the “Bus” again. And this year, they’re inviting the bishops to hang with them, at least at the bus stops.

Many U.S. bishops also opposed Network’s lobbying on behalf of Obama’s health care reform plan, while others did not look kindly on Campbell’s social justice views and her activism during the presidential campaign.

But Campbell said Wednesday that she and the American bishops are on the same page on immigration reform, and she has invited them to join her group at stops along the way later this month and in June. “They don’t have to ride on the bus,” she said. “They can come stand with us at the events.”

I like that.

Starting June 21st, we’ll join in the chorus for both freedom and our sisters in faith. I’ll do another Two Weeks of Worthy Women, and I’d like to invite interested readers to write up some favorites from history. Last year, we walked with these worthies: Maude Petre, Teresa of Avila, Mary MacKillop, Marie-Anne Blondin, Thea Bowman, Jeanne d’Arc, Juana Inés de la Cruz, Hildegard of Bingen, Mother Théodore Guérin, Anne-Marie Javouhey, Louise (Mother St Andrew) Feltin, Gertrude of Helfta, Mary Ward, and Marguerite Porete. I’d like to go with fourteen different women. I’d like to find women who have experienced harassment from religious institutions, not necessarily Catholic. Nobody living. Guest writers welcome. And your suggestions to give us fourteen worthy reads starting fifty-one days from today.

CNS reported on Pope Francis meeting with B16′s CDF head. As reported, sisters and theologians were not on the docket, but praise for the movement to addressing sex predators.

For the defenders of the innocent, all eyes will be on the Holy Father to see what he does with bishops who were snookered by sex addicts. This has been where the antigospel has erupted most grievously in the hierarchy, probably more even than its treatment of women.

Speaking of which, I was noticing the hand-wringing over the Marini “brothers” here. Will the old MC get his job back? Somehow, I doubt it. Once Msgr G Marini has finished up his job, wouldn’t it be delicious if Pope Francis hired a lay liturgist to run pontifical ceremonies? A woman. In an alb. If you thought the fuss over washing the feet of Muslim girls was harsh …

Here’s a quote of the day from last month, via RNS. Robert Mickens, The Tablet:

It’s not clear that it would make any difference to have a pope with an African or Latin American face if he turned out to be more Roman than Caesar.

The North American and European cardinals talking about going “outside Europe” are crazy like foxes. They know well that a pope from outside Europe will work out about as well (nor not) as the last two choices from outside Italy. I think I’m sticking to my meme of the past decade: a bishop should be chosen from among the priests of the diocese. Perhaps a see as important as Rome might merit someone from the region. But generally, I’d say a bishop in Marquette, Michigan, say, should be chosen from among the clergy of Marquette. A bishop for Portland from the clergy of that Oregon diocese. Selecting a pope, a bishop for Rome, from the ranks of bureaucracy, from another country even, and from anything less than a pastoral and administrative position in working with people makes no sense practically, traditionally, or Scripturally.

At minimum, nobody campaigning for the spot should be considered. That said, I noticed a blog commentator somewhere talking about the “via negativa” factor from embittered cardinals. Maybe those with king-making aspirations will be limited to the role of king-breaker, passing on stories, and urging journalists and even other cardinals to consider supporting doomed candidates.

It’s why I’m praying for the conclave. We need a good pastor. I’m not convinced that another diehard conservative will sway the Barque enough for another Council. But regardless of ideology, we need a good pastor who can pull the plug on the curia.

Is it about time LA’s ex-archbishop gets an expose in the LA Times? A few of my liturgical colleagues still give a nod or two when passing his shrine, but I’ve always counted myself as a skeptic where the Frequently Misspelled One is concerned. With records released yesterday that uncover questionable administrative decisions and policies, Cardinal Mahony offered up the index card:

I have a 3 x 5 card for every victim I met with on the altar of my small chapel. I pray for them every single day. As I thumb through those cards I often pause as I am reminded of each personal story and the anguish that accompanies that life story.

Cardinal Mahony was a JPII bishop. He brushed aside concerns about the size of his cathedral. (Thanks to the attacks on the architecture, many critics missed the mark on the one-foot-longer-than-NYC thing, and the sidelining of those protesting priorities.) He seemed intent on preserving the public perception of an institution with a corrupt underbelly.

The cardinal does concede that it was different in the 1980′s. And maybe it was. If so, it was victim advocates, lawyers, and Catholic protest groups who were ahead of the curve on the moral track in dealing with predation. That probably doesn’t set well with the “orthodox” crowd. But there you have it.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 97 other followers