This is something I just came across and it is very interesting. It's called Ask Me Anything, and this time Archbishop Currie of St. John's got in front of the camera for CBC to answer any questions people ask him as they walk by.
As expected, nearly everyone just asked the same old questions about the sex abuse cases in the Church. Not only that, most of them asked as if Archbishop Currie himself was responsible. Others asked if it's even safe to be around a priest. It seems society at large is completely fixated on this whole issue. The Catholic Church is only seen in the public eye as a place where sex abuse of minors occurred, even though sex abuse happens everywhere and in many places at higher rates.
People spoke as if they had personally been a victim, even though they did not say they were.
In my opinion, it was kind of sad. I think it's rude and uncalled for for every single person to ask this bishop about the sex abuse case and imply that he and nearly every priest was and is involved. Respect took a back seat for these people.
But no wonder, the media bends over backwards to use every opportunity to talk about the sex abuse crisis in the Church. Even on unrelated matters, it will come up. Basically, if a news story involves the Church in any way, shape, or form, the sex abuse situation will also be talked about.
Of course, I do believe people have a right to information and so on. Plus, I ackowledge that what acutally did happen was very terrible and every precaution should be taken so that it never happens again. To see the video, please click below:
Ask Me Anything, I Am A Roman Catholic Archbishop - Connect with Mark Kelley
As a point of comparison, the CBC also ran an "Ask Me Anything" segment featuring a Muslim woman wearing a niqab, i.e. black clothing which covers her entire body and face. In comparison to the archbishop's interview, the people who approached this Muslim lady were very respectful and only asked inquisitive questions, never accusatory ones. No one was mean or harsh.
No one accused her of being a pawn for terrorists, or asked her what she is doing to stop extremism in her religion. No one asked if her husband is a terrorist or if she is related to one. No one lambasted her for all the people who have died because of terrorist attacks.
Yet, the archbishop, as far as anyone knows, is no more guilty or innocent that this lady. However, the reaction to each is completely different. Don't get me wrong, I do not believe anyone should have asked the above questions to this lady, and I think being respectful is a good thing. I'm just pointing out the double standard.
When it comes to Catholic priests or bishops, guilt is presumed, and proper manners and etiquette are seen as unnecessary. Yet, the utmost respect must be shown to anyone else, such as this Muslim lady. The people are so very cautious not to cause any form of offense to the lady, yet feel free to bash the good bishop.
If you look at the other interviews as well, none come in any way close to the level of anger displayed during the interviews with the archbishop. The seal hunter was treated pretty decently by most of the guests, with the possible exception of the vegetarian at the end.
Oh well, I guess that's the world we live in and why many commentators have pointed out that Catholicism is the last acceptable prejudice. It seems everyone is afforded basic civility, except a man wearing a Roman collar.
Here is the segment with the Muslim woman.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
No Comment from Archdiocese on Fraud Allegations
This is from my home archdiocese. It's a sad story because the man being charged with defrauding the Church of $500,000 also saved the archbishop's life. Sad and ironic.
VOCM.COM|No Comment from Archdiocese on Fraud Allegations | Article
VOCM.COM|No Comment from Archdiocese on Fraud Allegations | Article
What can an ex-priest do?
I didn't realize the life of an ex-priest was so restricted.
What can an ex-priest do? — UPDATED | The Deacon's Bench
What can an ex-priest do? — UPDATED | The Deacon's Bench
Jimmy Akin's take on new Corapi information
Jimmy Akin has produced a very thorough analysis of new information as it relates to the John Corapi incident. It seems to be a rather tangled web. One thing that really stands out is that the name "Black Sheep Dog" was registered a year ago, before this incident began (3 months ago)... Read the full story in the link below:
New Information on the Fr. Corapi Situation | Blogs | NCRegister.com
New Information on the Fr. Corapi Situation | Blogs | NCRegister.com
Monday, June 20, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Something unexpected happens with Fr. Corapi
Fr. John Corapi has announced that he is leaving the priesthood on the 20th anniversary of his ordination. He will now start a new "ministry" called Black Sheep Dog, which he says will be broader in its approach targeted to not only Catholics, but people from all walks of life.
The reason for this abrupt plan is that Fr. Corapi thinks he is being treated unfairly by his superiors and that he is being silenced. He says in the Church legal system, a person is considered guilty until proven innocent when accusations of a sexual nature are made. He said some people do not want him in ministry, and are thus leaving him to linger until he eventually fades away into oblivion.
Fr. Corapi is fighting this perceived injustice by leaving the priesthood and thus becoming a free agent, not restricted, to teach and preach in whatever way he sees fit. Fr. John Corapi, now or soon to be simply Mr. John Corapi, however, wants to make clear that he does not hate the Church and he is in full obedience to her. He also says that he fully accepts the authority of bishops in this matter, regardless of his personal opinion.
There are many different attitudes in this case, basically ranging from supporting Corapi to seriously opposing his actions. Some say he is right to step away from the priesthood if they are silencing him. That he must continue his important ministry no matter what. Others, however, are saying he should follow the example of Jesus and not fight his accusers.
I've heard similar stories and how certain saints reacted to them. St. Gerard Majella, a Redemptorist, was falsely accused of impregnating a woman. Although he was persecuted for this, he remained silent, until eventually the woman confessed that it wasn't him. Ever since then, Redemptorists have decided not to defend themselves against accusations, but rather suffer through them.
Another case is that of St. Padre Pio. When his fame started to grow, his bishop became worried and put him out of sight. He did not like the attention, and this may have been a legitimate concern. But Padre Pio did not fight against it, he simply did whatever the bishop told him.
So, I have given the examples of Jesus Christ, St. Gerard, and Padre Pio and how they reacted to persecution. I think they provide a great example. However, I am not willing to say what Fr. Corapi did was completely wrong. I have nothing bad to say about this man, and he has taught some very good things over the years. In his estimation, this is his best course of action, and I will leave the judging up to God on that one.
Fr. Corapi does some things which are very good. For example, he forgives his accuser and wishes her well. He says he is still obedient to the Church and respects the decisions of the bishops. He has not abandoned his faith. Perhaps his new ministry will reach a lot of people and create a lot of good.
I wish John Corapi all the best whatever he decides to do.
The reason for this abrupt plan is that Fr. Corapi thinks he is being treated unfairly by his superiors and that he is being silenced. He says in the Church legal system, a person is considered guilty until proven innocent when accusations of a sexual nature are made. He said some people do not want him in ministry, and are thus leaving him to linger until he eventually fades away into oblivion.
Fr. Corapi is fighting this perceived injustice by leaving the priesthood and thus becoming a free agent, not restricted, to teach and preach in whatever way he sees fit. Fr. John Corapi, now or soon to be simply Mr. John Corapi, however, wants to make clear that he does not hate the Church and he is in full obedience to her. He also says that he fully accepts the authority of bishops in this matter, regardless of his personal opinion.
There are many different attitudes in this case, basically ranging from supporting Corapi to seriously opposing his actions. Some say he is right to step away from the priesthood if they are silencing him. That he must continue his important ministry no matter what. Others, however, are saying he should follow the example of Jesus and not fight his accusers.
I've heard similar stories and how certain saints reacted to them. St. Gerard Majella, a Redemptorist, was falsely accused of impregnating a woman. Although he was persecuted for this, he remained silent, until eventually the woman confessed that it wasn't him. Ever since then, Redemptorists have decided not to defend themselves against accusations, but rather suffer through them.
Another case is that of St. Padre Pio. When his fame started to grow, his bishop became worried and put him out of sight. He did not like the attention, and this may have been a legitimate concern. But Padre Pio did not fight against it, he simply did whatever the bishop told him.
So, I have given the examples of Jesus Christ, St. Gerard, and Padre Pio and how they reacted to persecution. I think they provide a great example. However, I am not willing to say what Fr. Corapi did was completely wrong. I have nothing bad to say about this man, and he has taught some very good things over the years. In his estimation, this is his best course of action, and I will leave the judging up to God on that one.
Fr. Corapi does some things which are very good. For example, he forgives his accuser and wishes her well. He says he is still obedient to the Church and respects the decisions of the bishops. He has not abandoned his faith. Perhaps his new ministry will reach a lot of people and create a lot of good.
I wish John Corapi all the best whatever he decides to do.
Friday, June 17, 2011
New Priest for St. John's NL
On Wednesday, June 15, 2011, Cecil Critch added "Fr." to his name, after being consecrated a priest by Archbishop Martin Currie. The nearly packed Cathedral-Basilica of St. John the Baptist in St. John's, Newfoundland was filled with the glorious sounds of the St. Bonaventure's College Wind Ensemble, Brass Ensemble, and Chamber Choir.
Over 2000 parishioners watched as the archbishop laid his name upon Cecil Critch's head. This is the official action which consecrates him to the priesthood. After the archbishop completed this ancient rite, he was followed by dozens of priests who did the same.
Overall, there were priests from across the province, totaling around 50. Father John Hillier and Dr. Michael Bautista were the witnesses of Fr. Critch's ordination.
This was a truly sacred event, and it all centered around Christ in the Eucharist. The number of priests and laity present evoked a magnificent atmosphere.
Prior to choosing the life of a priest, Cecil was a teacher and principal. Later he became a deacon, and now he is a ministerial priest of Jesus Christ.
After the ordination, there was a reception held at St. Bonaventure's school gymnasium.
God Bless Fr. Critch as he continues his spiritual journey.
Over 2000 parishioners watched as the archbishop laid his name upon Cecil Critch's head. This is the official action which consecrates him to the priesthood. After the archbishop completed this ancient rite, he was followed by dozens of priests who did the same.
Overall, there were priests from across the province, totaling around 50. Father John Hillier and Dr. Michael Bautista were the witnesses of Fr. Critch's ordination.
This was a truly sacred event, and it all centered around Christ in the Eucharist. The number of priests and laity present evoked a magnificent atmosphere.
Prior to choosing the life of a priest, Cecil was a teacher and principal. Later he became a deacon, and now he is a ministerial priest of Jesus Christ.
After the ordination, there was a reception held at St. Bonaventure's school gymnasium.
God Bless Fr. Critch as he continues his spiritual journey.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
If the Westboro Baptist Church did not exist, it would be necessary to create them
The Westboro Baptist Church is a tiny hate-filled church led by Fred Phelps from Topeka, Kansas. Although they boast a mere 71 members, they are probably one of the most well-known Christian churches in the United States or the world. They are known for protesting the funerals of fallen soldiers and desecrating the American flag. They also display placards declaring that "God hates fags".
But how did this minuscule group become so prevalent? Many people would say it is because they are so hateful and they just caught the media's attention. My controversial belief, however, is that some people are glad the Westboro Baptist Church exists. No, I'm not talking about other hateful people. I'm talking about certain atheists.
To atheists, the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is a perfect example of the dangers of religion. The WBC is how atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens want to portray all believers. The WBC unwittingly makes their point for them.
There are many hate groups out there, from the KKK and other white supremacist groups, so-called black power groups which are basically black supremacist groups, and everything in between. Yet, these groups are rarely portrayed in the media nowadays. On the other hand, the WBC gets plenty of airtime.
Atheists and religion-haters need this group. It's essential. All an atheist has to do to outline the dangers of religion is to say "westboro baptist church", and their point is made. There is no ambiguity. No one would say "yeah, but they also do a lot of good!" In a world of soundbites, the Westboro Baptist Church is very effective. It's something like the unenviable status achieve by McDonald's for anti-globalization advocates. To point out the dangers of globalization, all a group has to do is talk about how an evil profit-hungry organization like McDonald's is destroying the culture of many countries by putting their restaurants there.
The main benefactors of the hateful speech of the Westboro Baptist Church are groups that want to eradicate religion. The church is so tiny, it's not worth even mentioning in a national dialogue, yet they command an incredible presence. This 71-member group has such a strong identity that simply typing "west" in Google will show "Westboro Baptist Church" as the third suggestion. Also, typing "fred" will show the church's founder "Fred Phelps" as the seventh suggestion.
The hope among atheists is to simply associate groups like the Westboro Baptist Church with all religious conservatives. This group, say the atheists, are just one more group among many that are exactly like this. As an example of this, Michael Cobb from the University of Toronto (whose religion is unknown to me) wrote a book called "God Hates Fags: The Rhetorics of Religious Violence (Sexual Cultures)". Cobb is using a line from the WBC and using it as the title of his book about "religious violence". He is using the specific case of the WBC to incriminate all religious people.
Using only a small amount of logic will show the falseness of these assertions. If the beliefs of the WBC are so common, why would everyone focus on that tiny group? Why not choose a group that has a million members, not a microscopic 71.
Perhaps the Westboro Baptist Church is so pleased with its fame that it never bothers to ask where it came from and who it serves.
But how did this minuscule group become so prevalent? Many people would say it is because they are so hateful and they just caught the media's attention. My controversial belief, however, is that some people are glad the Westboro Baptist Church exists. No, I'm not talking about other hateful people. I'm talking about certain atheists.
To atheists, the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) is a perfect example of the dangers of religion. The WBC is how atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens want to portray all believers. The WBC unwittingly makes their point for them.
There are many hate groups out there, from the KKK and other white supremacist groups, so-called black power groups which are basically black supremacist groups, and everything in between. Yet, these groups are rarely portrayed in the media nowadays. On the other hand, the WBC gets plenty of airtime.
Atheists and religion-haters need this group. It's essential. All an atheist has to do to outline the dangers of religion is to say "westboro baptist church", and their point is made. There is no ambiguity. No one would say "yeah, but they also do a lot of good!" In a world of soundbites, the Westboro Baptist Church is very effective. It's something like the unenviable status achieve by McDonald's for anti-globalization advocates. To point out the dangers of globalization, all a group has to do is talk about how an evil profit-hungry organization like McDonald's is destroying the culture of many countries by putting their restaurants there.
The main benefactors of the hateful speech of the Westboro Baptist Church are groups that want to eradicate religion. The church is so tiny, it's not worth even mentioning in a national dialogue, yet they command an incredible presence. This 71-member group has such a strong identity that simply typing "west" in Google will show "Westboro Baptist Church" as the third suggestion. Also, typing "fred" will show the church's founder "Fred Phelps" as the seventh suggestion.
The hope among atheists is to simply associate groups like the Westboro Baptist Church with all religious conservatives. This group, say the atheists, are just one more group among many that are exactly like this. As an example of this, Michael Cobb from the University of Toronto (whose religion is unknown to me) wrote a book called "God Hates Fags: The Rhetorics of Religious Violence (Sexual Cultures)". Cobb is using a line from the WBC and using it as the title of his book about "religious violence". He is using the specific case of the WBC to incriminate all religious people.
Using only a small amount of logic will show the falseness of these assertions. If the beliefs of the WBC are so common, why would everyone focus on that tiny group? Why not choose a group that has a million members, not a microscopic 71.
Perhaps the Westboro Baptist Church is so pleased with its fame that it never bothers to ask where it came from and who it serves.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Bach - Cantata "Erhöhtes Fleisch und Blut" BWV 173: I. Sinfonia
This piece was written for Pentecost Monday (today). It also happens to be one of my favorites from Bach.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)