The Church Year: Feb. 4, 2012

Today is Saturday of the 4th week in Ordinary Time. The liturgical color is green.

In the Extraordinary Form, this is the season after Epiphany, and the liturgical color for today is white.

 

Saints & Celebrations:

On February 4, there is no special fixed liturgical day in the Ordinary Form.

In the Extraordinary Form, we celebrate St. Andrew Corsini, OC, bishop, and confessor who died in A.D. 1373. It is a Class III day.

If you’d like to learn more about St. Andrew Corsini, you can click here.

For information about other saints, blesseds, and feasts celebrated today, you can click here.

 

Readings:

To see today’s readings in the Ordinary Form, you can click here.

Or you can click play to listen to them:

 

Devotional Information:

According to the Holy See’s Directory on Popular Piety:

The Contemporary Period

44. Following the French revolution with its objective of eradicating the Christian faith and its overt hostility to Christian worship, the nineteenth century witnessed a important liturgical revival.

This was preceeded by the development of a vigorous ecclesiology which saw the Church not only in terms of a hierarchical society but also as the People of God and as a worshipping community. Besides the revival of ecclesiology, mention must also be made of the flowering of biblical and patrictic studies, as well as the ecclesial and ecumenical concerns of men such as Antonio Rosmini (+1855) and John Henry Newman (+1890).

The history of the renaissance of liturgical worship reserves a special place for Dom Prosper Guéranger (+ 1875), who restored the monastic life in France and founded the abbey of Solesmes. His conception of the Liturgy is permeated by a love for the Church and for tradition. The Roman Rite, he maintained in his writings on Liturgy, was indispensable for unity and, hence, he opposed autochthonous forms of liturgical expression. The liturgical renewal which he promoted has the distinct advantage of not having been an academic movement. Rather, it aimed at making the Liturgy an expression of worship in which the entire people of God participated.

The Church Year: Feb. 3, 2012

Today is Friday of the 4th week in Ordinary Time. The liturgical color is green.

In the Extraordinary Form, this is the season after Epiphany.

 

Saints & Celebrations:

On February 3, in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form, we celebrate St. Blaise, bishop of Sebaste and martyr, who died in A.D. 317. In the Ordinary Form, it is an optional memorial, and in the Extraordinary Form, it is a commemoration.

In the Ordinary Form we also celebrate, St. Ansgar, bishop. It is an optional memorial.

If you’d like to learn more about St. Blaise, you can click here.

If you’d like to learn more about St. Ansgar, you can click here.

For information about other saints, blesseds, and feasts celebrated today, you can click here.

 

Readings:

To see today’s readings in the Ordinary Form, you can click here.

Or you can click play to listen to them:

 

Devotional Information:

According to the Holy See’s Directory on Popular Piety:

43. The Catholic Reform strengthened the structure and unity of the Roman Rite. Given the notable missionary expansion of the eighteenth century, the Reform spread its proper Liturgy and organizational structure among the peoples to whom the Gospel message was preached.

In the missionary territories of the eighteenth century, the relationship between Liturgy and popular piety was framed in terms similar to, but more accentuated than, those already seen in the sixteenth and seventeenth ceturies:

  • the Liturgy retained a Roman character and hence remained, at least partially, extraneous to autochthonous culture. The question of inculturation was practically never raised, partly because of the fear of negative consequence for the faith. In this respect, however, mention must be made of the efforts of Matteo Rici in relation to the question of the Chinese rites, and those of Roberto de’ Nobili on the question of the Indian rites;
  • popular piety, on the one hand, was subject to the danger of religious syncretism, especially where evangelization was not deeply rooted; while on the other, it became more autonomous and mature: it was not limited to reproducing the pious practices promoted by the missionaries, rather it created other forms of pious exercises that reflected the character of the local culture.

The Church Year: Feb. 2, 2012

Today is Thursday of the 4th week in Ordinary Time. The liturgical color is white.

In the Extraordinary Form, this is the season after Epiphany.

 

Saints & Celebrations:

On February 2, in the Ordinary Form, we celebrate the Presentation of the Lord. It is a feast.

In the Extraordinary Form, we celebrate the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It is a Class II day.

If you’d like to learn more about the Presentation of the Lord, you can click here.

If you’d like to learn more about the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, you can click here.

For information about other saints, blesseds, and feasts celebrated today, you can click here.

 

Readings:

To see today’s readings in the Ordinary Form, you can click here.

Or you can click play to listen to them:

 

Devotional Information:

According to the Holy See’s Directory on Popular Piety:

The Feast of the Presentation of Our Lord

120. Until 1969, the ancient feast of the presentation of Our Lord, which is of Oriental origin, was known in the West as the feast of the Purification of Our Lady, and closed the Christmas season, forty days after the Lord’s birth. This feast has for long been associated with many popular devotional exercises. The faithful:

  • gladly participate in the processions commemorating the Lord’s entry into the Temple in Jerusalem and his encounter with God, whose house he had come to for the first time, and then with Simeon and Anna. Such processions, which in the West had taken the place of licentious pagan events, always had a penitential character, and were later identified with the blessing of candles which were carried in procession in honor of Christ, “the light to enlighten the Gentiles” (Lk 2, 32);
  • are sensitive to the actions of the Blessed Virgin in presenting her Son in the Temple, and to her submission to the Law of Moses (Lk 12, 1-8) in the rite of purification; popular piety sees in the rite of purification the humility of Our Lady and hence, 2 February has long been regarded as a feast for those in humble service.

121. Popular piety is sensitive to the providential and mysterious event that is the Conception and birth of new life. Christian mothers can easily identify with the maternity of Our Lady, the most pure Mother of the Head of the mystical Body – notwithstanding the notable differences in the Virgin’s unique Conception and birth. These too are mothers in God’s plan and are about to give birth to future members of the Church. From this intuition and a certain mimesis of the purification of Our Lady, the rite of purification after birth was developed, some of whose elements reflect negatively on birth.

The revised Rituale Romanum provides for the blessing of women both before and after birth, this latter only in cases where the mother could not participate at the baptism of her child.

It is a highly desirable thing for mothers and married couples to ask for these blessings which should be given in accord with the Church’s prayer: in a communion of faith and charity in prayer so that pregnancy can be brought to term without difficulty (blessing before birth), and to give thanks to God for the gift of a child (blessing after birth).

122. In some local Churches, certain elements taken from the Gospel account of the Presentation of the Lord (Lk 2, 22-40), such as the obedience of Joseph and Mary to the Law of the Lord, the poverty of the holy spouses, the virginity of Our Lady, mark out the 2 February as a special feast for those at the service of the brethren in the various forms of consecrated life.

123. The feast of 2 February still retains a popular character. It is necessary, however, that such should reflect the true Christian significance of the feast. It would not be proper for popular piety in its celebration of this feast to overlook its Christological significance and concentrate exclusively on its Marian aspects. The fact that this feast should be “considered […] a joint memorial of Son and Mother” would not support such an inversion. The candles kept by the faithful in their homes should be seen as a sign of Christ “the light of the world” and an expression of faith.

Jimmy Answers Questions from Non-Catholics (CAL 1/25/12)

Jimmy Akin answers:

I want to believe — how do I pray for belief? (NOTE: Here’s the article I mentioned that I wrote on Pascal’s Wager.)

How long do annulments generally take? Before you go through the process, can you get an idea of whether or not you have a chance of getting one?

How can I go through an RCIA program since I travel a lot for my job?

Why has the Catholic liturgy in America become so watered-down?

How does the Catholic Church justify its collaboration with the states throughout history?

Are the Assumption and Coronation of Mary metaphors of us being crowned in heaven with our full bodies, or are they just special things that happened to Mary?

Why has the Catholic Church been a hindrance to individual liberty since the Magna Carta?

I saw something on the History Channel that said Jesus married Mary Magdalen and had children — is this possible?

Click Play to listen . . .

or you can . . .

Subscribe_with_itunes
CLICK HERE!

. . . or subscribe another way (one of many ways!) at JimmyAkinPodcast.Com.

Inside the Mind of Evil: Obama Administration’s HHS Decision

Under the headline “Contraceptive mandate could face tough sledding in Supreme Court” the LA Times is reporting:

The Supreme Court and the Obama administration, already headed for a face-off in March over the constitutionality of the healthcare law, appear to be on another collision course over whether church-run schools, universities, hospitals and charities must provide free contraceptives to their students and employees.

The dispute stems from one of the more popular parts of the new healthcare law: its requirement that all health plans provide “preventive services” for free. That category includes vaccines and such routine screenings as cholesterol checkups and mammograms. Starting this year, it also includes coverage of birth control pills, IUDs and other contraceptives.

Catholic leaders reacted fiercely when the administration announced in recent days that it would hold most religious institutions to that mandate, even those that have moral and religious objections to what some of their lawyers describe as “abortion-inducing drugs.”

Already two religious colleges have sued, and their cause got a major boost earlier this month from a unanimous Supreme Court decision that greatly expanded the definition of religious freedom.

Personally, I’m optimistic that this is going to get overturned. The policy is so bad that it’s only a question of who will reverse it. Several options spring to mind. Will it be the next Republican administration? The Supreme Court? Congress? The Obama administration itself?

This will not stand.

The policy is so bad, and so certain to be reversed, that I have difficulty understanding why the Obama administration would pursue it. The jackbooted, “jam it down your throat” approach that the Obama administration has taken in this is shocking. It’s a real, “What were they thinking?” situation.

I’m still trying to figure that out. Is this to be chalked up simply to incompetence (e.g., not realizing the kind of pushback this would create) or is it to be chalked up to conscious, deliberate evil—the same kind of disturbing, jackbooted, Orwellian authoritarianism that the Obama administration displayed in its bid to tell churches who they must hire as ministers (the case that the Supreme Court just slapped down 9-0). Or maybe it was a combination of incompetence and evil, with different members of the Obama administration displaying different degrees of those two vices.

Maybe they think that this would please the base in a way that would get the more votes.

Really?

I mean, if you’re already mandating free contraceptives for virtually the whole population then you’ve got about all the bounce from your base that you are going to get. Forcing Catholic schools, hospitals, and charities offer free contraceptives to those they provide insurance to is going to create a lot of bad press, and simply allowing a religious conscience exception for those institutions would allow you to have the same base bounce without the bad press. It’s impossible to see how you would get more votes out of this. By making yourselves look like jackbooted totalitarians you are going to get fewer votes—if for no other reason that you have revealed your naked antipathy to the Catholic faith and will make it all the more difficult for squishy Catholics to rationalize voting for you.

Sure, way too many Catholics accept contraception, but there’s a difference between not-agreeing-with-Church-teaching and wanting-to-see-one’s-Church-coerced-into-violating-its-teachings, and there’s certainly a difference between undertaking a policy that will allow squishy Catholics to continue to support you and forcing the leaders of their Church into a position where they will start actively campaigning against your policy.

The timing is even worse, with Pope Benedict ramping up religious liberty as a key concern, and focusing in particular on religious liberty in the United States by lighting a fire under the American bishops in the current series of ad limina talks.

This is just bad politics, and it will hurt them more than help them in the next election.

That’s no way to “Win The Future”!

If they understand that, then what is the reason behind the move?

I’ve heard some speculate that it’s part of a grand gambit to destroy Catholic healthcare in America by creating more and more lines Catholic hospitals will not cross, forcing them to either give up their Catholic identity or go out of business.

Or maybe it’s part of a one-presidential-term-used-to-achieve-maximum-societal-transformation-leading-to-a-secular-totalitarian-America plot.

Or maybe they think they’re doing some kind of too-clever-by-half thing of creating a policy that they know will be reversed but will still leave their larger goals in place (free contraceptives for almost everyone).

Frankly, I don’t know what they think that they’re doing.

They still need lots of pushback, though, so be sure to HEED THE U.S. BISHOPS’ URGENT ACTION ALERT (CLICK HERE).

In the meantime: What do you think they’re trying to do?