A Truly Useful Examination Of Conscience

Ladies and gentlemen, we have had set before us a myriad of "examinations of conscience" that are nothing more than shill pieces for some "social justice warrior" cause or another.  Here is a truly useful one.  

Political Life and the Ten Commandments

This examination of conscience is designed to help Catholics reflect on how their participation in political life aligns with the teachings of Christ and His Church. As citizens, we are called to engage in the public square while keeping God first in all things. Before going to Confession, prayerfully consider these questions, asking the Holy Spirit to illuminate areas where you may have strayed from God's will.

I. I am the Lord your God; you shall not have strange gods before Me.

Have I placed loyalty to a political party or candidate above my loyalty to God and His Church?

Have I compromised my faith or moral principles to advance a political agenda or maintain political allegiances?

Have I sought political solutions to problems while neglecting prayer and trust in God's providence?

Have I made an idol of political power, influence, or victory, placing hope in political outcomes rather than in God?

Have I supported or remained silent about policies that promote ideologies contrary to the natural law and the dignity of the human person, such as socialism that denies the right to private property, or collectivism that subordinates the individual to the state?

II. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Have I used God's name disrespectfully or blasphemed when discussing political matters?

Have I invoked God's name to justify positions that contradict Church teaching?

Have I cursed, blasphemed, or used profane language in political debates or out of anger over political outcomes?

Have I used sacred things irreverently in political satire or mockery?

III. Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day.

Have I deliberately missed Mass on Sunday or Holy Days of Obligation because of political activities or events?

Have I refused to attend Mass because of disagreement with my priest's or bishop's political views or statements?

Have I allowed political work or activism to prevent me from keeping the Lord's Day holy and set apart for rest and worship?

Have I prioritized political rallies, meetings, or media consumption over my Sunday obligation to worship God?

IV. Honor your father and your mother.

Have I shown disrespect or contempt for lawful authority, including civil leaders, even when I disagree with their policies?

Have I failed to show proper respect for my country and its legitimate governing institutions?

Have I neglected my duties as a citizen, such as voting, serving on juries, or being informed about important issues?

Have I shown excessive nationalism or patriotism that borders on idolatry, or conversely, have I failed to have reasonable love for my country and its genuine goods?

Have I caused division within my family through harsh or uncharitable political arguments?

V. You shall not kill.

Have I supported, promoted, or voted for candidates or policies that permit or fund abortion, the direct killing of innocent human life?

Have I supported candidates who oppose legal protection for unborn children, or have I minimized this grave evil by treating it as merely one issue among many of equal weight?

Have I advocated for or remained silent about euthanasia, assisted suicide, or attacks on the elderly and infirm?

Have I fomented, encouraged, or excused political violence or civil unrest?

Have I participated in or encouraged riots, destruction of property, or violent protests?

Have I used violent or threatening language in political discourse?

Have I wished harm upon political opponents or celebrated when harm befalls them?

Have I failed to speak out against violence when my political allies have engaged in or excused it?

VI & IX. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.

Have I supported or promoted policies that undermine marriage between one man and one woman?

Have I advocated for or remained silent about the legal recognition of so-called same-sex marriage, which contradicts the natural law and the Church's constant teaching?

Have I supported policies promoting sexual confusion, including transgender ideology that denies the reality of the human person as male and female?

Have I supported legislation or candidates who promote radical gender theory in schools or who support medical interventions that harm children's bodies in the name of gender transition?

Have I failed to defend the innocence of children against sexualized content in education or media?

Have I supported policies that promote contraception, undermine parental rights, or attack the sanctity of marriage and family life?

VII & X. You shall not steal. You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

Have I envied the wealth or success of others and supported political policies motivated by envy rather than justice?

Have I supported unjust taxation or redistribution of wealth that violates the right to private property?

Have I advocated for economic systems that deny human dignity, such as socialism or communism, which have historically led to poverty, oppression, and the violation of fundamental human rights?

Have I supported policies that enable or encourage government corruption, theft of public resources, or economic injustice?

Have I been willing to compromise my principles for personal financial or professional gain in the political sphere?

VIII. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Have I spread false information, rumors, or detraction about political opponents?

Have I engaged in slander or calumny against those with whom I disagree politically?

Have I shared unverified news stories or propaganda without concern for truth?

Have I judged the interior motives of others harshly while giving benefit of the doubt to those who share my political views?

Have I misrepresented the positions of my opponents or the teachings of the Church to win arguments?

Have I used harsh, demeaning, or cruel words toward those with different political views?

Have I damaged the reputation of others through gossip or rash judgment?

Act of Contrition

After examining your conscience, pray an Act of Contrition:

O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because of Thy just punishments, but most of all because they offend Thee, my God, Who art all-good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to sin no more and to avoid the near occasions of sin. Amen.

Remember: The Church calls us to be faithful citizens who engage in political life while maintaining our primary allegiance to Christ and His Church. We must form our consciences according to truth, defend the dignity of every human person, and work for the common good while keeping God first in all things.

New Jersey Parish Using The Sacraments To Punish Those Not Bowing Before The Vaccine Idol

 HT - Eponymous Flower

The Code of Canon Law details why and how the Sacrament of Confession is to be administered by a Catholic priest.  The link is to Book IV, Part 1, Title IV, dealing solely with that sacrament,  Please note that Chapter III, Canon 991 specifically states that "every member of the Christian faithful is free to confess sins to a legitimately approved confessor of his or her choice, even to one of another rite".  

That said, by what chutzpah did the Church of the Precious Blood of Monmouth Beach NJ attempt to restrict the Sacrament only to those who've received the Covid vaccine?  Think of the logic, or lack thereof.  In order to have one's sins forgiven at that parish, the penitent would have had to commit another sin by receiving one of the morally-tainted vaccines.  This is the announcement as it appeared earlier on the parish website.  Note that this is an archived page for they amended the requirement in an even more bizarre fashion.

Here is the announcement as it exists at the time of this writing.  I can only imagine that they removed their previous draconian requirement because they drew some rightly-deserved rebukes.  But the parish priests only manifested their vaccine-enslavement in another way that violates yet another canon law.  On that first link, Chapter I, Canon 964 section 2 states "The conference of bishops is to establish norms regarding the confessional; it is to take care, however, that there are always confessionals with a fixed grate between the penitent and the confessor in an open place so that the faithful who wish to can use them freely."  In other words, the penitent has the right to anonymous confession, no if ands or buts.

Now I for one find it rather interesting that the parish is mandating that there be no barrier between the priest and the non-vaccinated penitent.  Why, one might think that if the priest were truly fearful of contagion, that he might want a barrier between them to block all those dastardly, deadly microbes that must ooze forth from every non-vaccinated person these days!  Sarcasm aside, we know the motive - to shame and punish those who will not sully themselves with vaccines derived by the usage of the bodies of murdered children.

Here we have the contact page for this parish.  All of us should contact this parish and advise them that their misdeeds, unless rectified, will not go unpunished in the next life.  If they persist in their punishment of the non-vaccinated people, parishioners should punish them in this life too by withholding their donations.

Deconstructing The Faith With Amoralis Lamentia

I need not spend too much time reinventing the wheel as it were.  Suffice it to say that if one has had their eyes open and if they haven't been given over to a pollyanna-esque happy-clappy self-deception, they will understand the dangers to souls that have been coming from the Vatican, at the apparent instigation of the pope.  The Wild Voice put together a chronology (not all-encompassing, by their own admission) of doings and sayings of Pope Francis that have been, at best, most unseemly for a Vicar of Christ.

I will post after the jump break two videos.  One is a talk given by John-Henry Weston, one of the two co-founders of LifeSiteNews, given at the same conference at which Michael Hichborn spoke when he spoke of "Catholic Charities and the Culture of Death".  Weston addresses the various things that the pope has done to undermine the Faith and he does so from the perspective of the Fatima predictions.

The one following that is a homily posted by Sensus Fidelium entitled "The Road To The Dubia: Amoris Laetitia".  In it the priest lays out just why that document is a deliberate attack on three Sacraments: Confession, Communion, Matrimony.  He calls Amoralis Lamentia "a Henry VIII moment in the Church".  In the very beginning, he also gives definitions of Church Tradition, public revelation, etc.  Please invest the time to listen to these talks and to be informed.  If some, particularly parents, claim not to have the time to do so, understand that the eternal salvation of your children may well depend on you being informed about the spiritual wolves that are waiting to devour your children.  As Weston states, we must be informed so that we can both pray properly and speak in defense of the truth.  Now the videos:

Matthew Kelly Is At It Again

Matthew Kelly, who runs an outfit called "Dynamic Catholics", has apparently come up with another gimmick to sucker Catholics into buying his wares.  He has dubbed this one as the "Best Lent Ever".

Long time readers of this blog will recall that I've sounded alarms about previous stunts of his.  He has written books that contain serious errors regarding faith and morality; I've detailed these problems.  FYI, I've sent emails to him regarding these errors, hoping to gets some sort of clarification or even correction of these problems.  I've yet to receive the courtesy of a reply.

I'm seeing signs like the one to the right in parishes in the DC area.  Now think about the arrogance that is all over the language in this poster.  Kelly has the chutzpah to say that his program will give to its users their "best lent ever"?  Moreover, he dares to make jokes about the time-honored tradition of mortification and self-denial, holding them to be inferior to his dubious programs?

The attitude communicated in this poster is at best flippant and smart-alecky: two attitudes unbecoming the Catholic who purports to offer spiritual benefits.  Please don't reward this snarky behavior.  Pass up this dubious offer and stick to the Church's time-honored prescriptions for Lenten penance and reform.  They are the three activities described in yesterday's Ash Wednesday Gospel: prayer, fasting and almsgiving.  Of course be certain to make a good Confession this Lent season.

The Poison Pill That Is The Final Report From The Ordinary Synod On The Family

Voice of the Family published a piece yesterday that shows closer examination of the language used in the final report of the synod that ended last month.  I urge all to study it.  The language utilized in paragraphs 84-86 is really quite insidious.  As the title suggests, the sin-nod fathers place sociology - at least the progressive form of it - on a par with, or even above, the teachings of Jesus Christ.  It also places the gobblygoop uttered by the pope about the need for a "deeply merciful" church in a more comprehensive perspective.  VOTF correctly states that repentance is needed before any "integration".  The Church has always been "deeply merciful".  But real mercy can only happen within the context of the Sacrament of Confession, and that requires real repentance along with cessation of sinful activity by which the sinner excluded him/herself from the Church in the first place.

Also published yesterday was a piece by my blogging colleague at Vox Cantoris.  He writes about how a priest is waking up to the fact that the pope wants to change the Church by causing her to be alienated from her own moorings.  Ladies and gentlemen, because he is the pope, we know that he cannot solemnly promulgate error.  That's a promise from Jesus Christ Himself - but that's all He promised!  There are many other ways that much harm can be accomplished.

Cardinal Gerhard Muller, one of Germany's faithful prelates, states that the Church is going through "painful persecution".  While true, what he said might win the "understatement of the year" award.  He uttered one piece of truth that directly confronts the apparent mindset of those who composed those three paragraphs of the synod's final report: "The work of the Church is not to reflect the opinions of her members.  The Church's job is to reflect the point of view of her Head and Founder: Jesus Christ."  Clearly those "opinions of her members would include any foolish notion of "integration" of those in mortal sin before they properly avail themselves of the Sacrament of Confession.

The Multi-Marriage Ceremony - Obfuscation Of The Issue Of Sacrilege

Yesterday Catholic News Agency posted a piece by Kevin Jones and Ann Schneible entitled "No Scandal Here: How The 20 Couples Married By Pope Francis Were Legit".  Right there in the title can be seen a hint of the problem.  In all the reading I've done on this matter, I don't recall anyone casting doubt on the canonical legitimacy of what happened this past Sunday at St. Peter's Bascilica.

Possible sacrilege is another matter - one that is receiving too little attention.  The Sacrament of Matrimony, being a sacrament of the living, must be received in a state of sanctifying grace.  Else sacrilege will occur.  All reports indicate that at least a few couples were "CURRENTLY cohabitating": not "WERE cohabitating" but "CURRENTLY".

Now bear in mind these couples were selected by the Vatican for this Sunday ceremony.  Why were "CURRENTLY cohabitating" couples selected?  I asked a number of questions in a post Friday that I won't rehash here; please read the post and "Leon's" comment.  That comment is most telling in terms of marriage preparation in US parishes at least.  In a post on Saturday, I tried to reply to Leon as well as rehearse the preparation for my own First Confession.  I used those Baltimore Catechism questions to illustrate concerns as to whether those 20 couples were given ample time and teaching to avail themselves of that Sacrament, and to understand why fornication is mortally sinful.

Let's move back to the CNA article.  John Grabowski, a theology professor at Catholic University of America, had this to say about the Holy Father's approach: "What he wants to do is simply put the Church’s focus on mercy, on an encounter with Christ as the heart of its life."

"Put the Church's focus on mercy"??!?!  Odd!  Since when has the Church not focused on mercy?  No need to put focus on something if that focus is already there (and has been for two thousand years).  I will now link to an excellent piece written by Msgr Charles Pope (ht LifeSiteNews) regarding the mortal sin of fornication, which would have been the sin of those cohabitating.  One sentence is key, with this "focus on mercy".  It is "Mercy is accessed only by repentance".  It's toward the end of the article but the rest is very worthwhile.  If we're really going to "focus on mercy" there must be focus on the Sacrament of Confession, for only therein is forgiveness for mortal sin.

As I said in one of the previous posts, I know priests who make plain in their bulletins that any couples seeking marriage in their churches while living together will be required to separate.  Will the efforts of these good priests now be undermined by what happened Sunday?  While I hope not, I think so.

More On Today's Multi-Marriage Ceremony

BBC News did a little piece on the ceremony at St Peter's Basilica earlier today.  Naturally it had a nice leftist twist to it.  I await the full text.  Meanwhile I'll comment (in red) on the snippets that BBC did see fit to publish.

Sunday's ceremony at St Peter's Basilica in Rome comes three weeks before a meeting of Catholic bishops from around the world to examine church teachings on family matters.  A mere three weeks!  How about that?  Coincidence?

Very slowly, the church under the guidance of Pope Francis is facing the fact that many Catholic couples cohabit before marriage, use contraception freely and divorce and remarry without seeking an annulment, says the BBC's David Willey in Rome.  Mr. Willey, the Church has always been aware of these matters.  The Church has been around much longer than you or I have been alive, and has been dealing with these matters regularly during these past 2000 years.  Mr. Willey, these "facts" as you call them are sins.  Got that?  They are transgressions against God's laws and they always will be sins, and will be treated accordingly.

He (the Pope) said in his homily that families are bricks that build society, but also believes that the church should forgive those who have sex outside marriage or who don't obey church teaching to the letter.  Well, the Church does forgive such sins and has been doing so these past 2000 years - in the Sacrament of Confession.  But they must be sacramentally confessed for they are mortal sins.  That's why I went into such a long discussion about the Sacrament yesterday.  

As I said, I'd love to see the full transcript of today's nuptial homily.  No doubt some important details were omitted (inadvertently, of course).

Cohabitating Couples And The Sacrament of Confession

Earlier today Leon posted a comment to my post about the wedding of cohabitating couples.  Please note that he says that he, his wife and (I assume) other couples confessed right before their wedding ceremonies.  This raises a whole bevy of questions.   Let me preface these questions with some important clarifications.  As I ask questions and make remarks, I do not intend these to be construed as criticism of Leon and his friends.  I've no doubt that the actions they took were taken in good-faith compliance with their priests and marriage-prep instructors.  I suspect Leon and his friends were merely victims of poor catechesis resulting from the erroneous "spirit of Vatican II".  For that matter, their priests and marriage-prep instructors may well have been robbed of their proper Catholic formation by that same "spirit of Vatican II".  I know I was in my latter years of school.  Fortunately my sacramental preparation wasn't so corroded, as we used the Baltimore Catechism.  I'll be referring to that catechism later.  Now the questions arising from Leon's comment.

• Why "right before"?  Why were they not advised to take advantage of that sacrament at earlier times during their course?
• Were the cohabitating couples ever advised that they should separate (that is, cease fornication) during the course of their marriage preparation      
• If they were urged to confess, were they urged to confess the mortal sin of fornication?  Were they even taught why fornication is a mortal sin?

I suppose that list of questions could go into infinity, but I'll stop here.  As I said in the last post, no sacramental grace (including from matrimony) can accrue to those in a state of mortal sin unless one receives the Sacrament of Confession.  The fact that Confession in Leon's case seems to have been delayed until the eve of the wedding makes me wonder if that sacrament is being misunderstood, and to such an extent as to compromise the efficacy of that Sacrament.  As I said, I'll be trotting out the Baltimore Catechism (used to prepare me for my first confession).

Here is Question 384: What must we do to receive the Sacrament of Penance worthily?  To receive the Sacrament of Penance worthily we must:
       first, examine our conscience
       second, be sorry for our sins (contrition)
       third, have the firm purpose of not sinning again
       fourth, confess our sins to the priest
       fifth, be willing to perform the penance the priest gives us

If Confession really occurs on the eve of the wedding, how does that allow for a proper examination of conscience and, more telling, testing of the purpose of not committing fornication again?

Let's look at several other questions in succession, and I'll put comments in red.

Question 388: What is contrition? Contrition is sincere sorrow for having offended God, and hatred for the sins we have committed, with a firm purpose of sinning no more.  Under the scenario that Leon described, was a hatred for the mortal sin of fornication properly instilled in the marriage prep attendees?

Question 389: Will God forgive us any sin unless we have true contrition for it?  God will not forgive us any sin, whether mortal or venial, unless we have true contrition for it.  Unless that hatred of fornication has been instilled, there is no forgiveness of that mortal sin.  How can this be interpreted otherwise?

Question 390: When is sorrow for sin true contrition?  Sorrow for sin is true contrition when it is interior, supernatural, supreme and universal.

Question 391: When is our sorrow interior?  Our sorrow is interior when it comes from our heart and not merely from our lips.  So how are currently-cohabitating couples being taught to have interior sorrow?

Question 392: When is our sorrow supernatural?  Our sorrow is supernatural when, with the help of God's grace, it arises from motives which spring from faith and not merely from natural motives.  The natural motives in the case of marriage preparation might include "discharging the formality of confession" as though it was just another item on the "punch list" of things to do before the wedding.

As I pointed out in the previous post, if couples have been committing the mortal sin of fornication, they need to receive the Sacrament of Penance worthily before they can properly receive the Sacrament of Matrimony.  I recited and commented on the Baltimore Catechism questions to illustrate why I think it's highly unlikely that Leon and his friends were properly prepared to receive either Penance or Matrimony.  I have good reason to believe this scenario is repeated in parishes throughout the world.  Are the twenty couples being married tomorrow also victims of ill-considered marriage preparation?

The divorce rate for Catholics is roughly on a par with that of non-Catholic couples; that's indicative that God's laws about marriage and sexuality are not being taken seriously, assuming they are known at all.  I realize a good deal of Catholic education is below par, but in this day of the internet, there is no excuse for not filling in the gaps of our own education.

If the couples whom the Pope will marry tomorrow have indeed been properly instructed, I ask why the new article (particularly from Catholic sources) did not make that clear.  The lack of such mention leaves too much room for ambiguity and even scandal.

Unless There Is Repentance, God's Unconditional Love Will Be To No Avail

Simply put, God insists that we approach Him on His terms, not our own.  The Church of Nice, along with their atheist/progressive puppet masters, have trouble acknowledging that the first admonition of Jesus, as recorded in the Gospel of Mark is "repent".

Too often I hear at my own church homilies that proclaim the greatness of God's love (true enough) and that if we'd just "open ourselves to His love" our lives would be fuller.  Well, what does "open ourselves" mean?  I know full well that in that congregation are those in irregular marriages, those who call themselves "pro-choice", those who support sexual perversion (and who punish those priests who stand for God's teaching in that regard).  They will never "open themselves to His love" until they repent of their mortal sins - and many won't unless they are told, point-blank from the pulpit, just what specific sins endanger their immortal souls and that they need to get themselves to Confession pronto.  First things first - as exemplified in the Gospel of Mark (see Mark 1:15).

Today's Vortex delves more deeply into this matter.  I'll reiterate one key line of Voris's: God loves us unconditionally, but He does not save us unconditionally.

Guess What?? I'm Super-Catholic!!

At least that's what one Patheos-oriented blogger said of me and other faithful Catholics recently.  I understand that the bloggers of Patheos receive compensation based on the number of clicks their blogs receive; therefore I will not link to the post directly.  In regards to the "super-Catholic" crack we read his speculations regarding the thinking of the Holy Father:

"He means that holier than thou super-Catholics who spend much of their time demanding that the Impure be barred from the sacraments need to pipe down and accept the judgment of their pastors when they allow weak sinners to approach the Altar. He’s addressing a sort of latter day Jansenism that wants to keep as many people as possible from approaching the sacraments."

There's so much sloppy thinking in those few sentences to unpack, but I'll put forth a heroic effort.  (After all, I'm Super-Catholic, you know!)

We "super-Catholics" do NOT "demand that the impure be barred from the sacraments".  That statement betrays a complete disdain for Canon 915.  Let me post Canon 915 for review; it's really very simple. Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.

It is Canon 915, not "super-Catholics", that impose a demand, both to honor the dignity of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ AND to prevent a person in mortal sin from incurring the guilt of yet another mortal sin, the sin of sacrilegious Holy Communion.  We simply won't let that demand be swept under the rug and ignored out of cowardice and desire to toady to the powerful of this world.

He goes on to make a caricature of us as mean, niggardly scoundrels wanting to keep "weak sinners" from approaching the altar.  Well, no.  There's not a person alive (even among us super-Catholics!) who isn't a weak sinner.  Canon 915 does not address all such people - only those obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, to use the precise language from the Canon.  Not all "weak sinners" place themselves in that most serious predicament of being arrogantly in the practice of public mortal sin as do flagrant gays and abortionists and abortion enablers.  It is the latter who are to be denied Holy Communion for their own benefit.  Should they receive Holy Communion with unconfessed mortal sin on their souls, they incur the guilt of yet another mortal sin, namely the sin of receiving Holy Communion sacrilegiously.  When a prelate says they're being "pastoral" by overlooking their Canon 915 obligations, it usually means one of two things: 1) they need some consideration from a CINO big-wig, so they need to butter up that person by profaning the Eucharist or 2) they're afraid of being trash-talked should they dare to act like men of integrity.

An important note regarding the last paragraph.  In the first sentence I'm using a word that ended the political career of George Allen - simply because some folks have limited themselves to "valley girl" talk.  It is not my problem if my progressive trolls have an insufficient grasp of the English language and its vocabulary.  I will not dumb down mine accordingly.  Get off your duffs, pull out a dictionary and look the word up.  Chalk it up as an educational experience!  Now back to the Patheos prattle.

We wind up this expose with an examination of the last phrase "keep as many people as possible from approaching the sacraments".  Well, no.  That's our entire point.  I trust this author does recall that there is more than one sacrament.  When one has lost sanctifying grace due to mortal sin, there is one sacrament to which they must fly in haste to avoid eternal damnation.  Of course I'm referring to the Sacrament of Confession.  We encourage all - particularly those whom the Patheos blogger dismissively calls "impure", to make good and frequent use of that Sacrament of Confession.  After they've been restored to a state of grace, by all means receive the Eucharist.

How NOT To Promote Confession

The video below was posted by a young priest three years ago in an attempt to convince people to go to Confession.  One could say it's rather "novel".  See additional remarks below the video.



Unique, wasn't it?  Let's hope it remains unique, meaning "not to be repeated".

May I humbly propose my "novel" idea?  Let a video be made, where the presenter (be they cleric or lay) conducts him/herself as a rational, dignified adult as opposed to acting like a barker selling snake-oil at a carnival side-show.  Unfortunately we just saw the latter.

Moreover, how about the presenter treating his/her viewers as though they too were mature, rational adults rather than treat them as though their mental/emotional developments were stunted at the teeny-bopper level?  Again, we saw the latter.

St. John Vianney, the Cure of Ars, never tried to "entertain" his congregation into receiving the Holy Sacrament of Reconciliation.  What did he do?  He preached the truth from his pulpit.  He let his congregation knew precisely what constituted sin.  He was not afraid to preach on the Four Last Things.  He made very clear that mortal sins (and he defined them explicitly), unconfessed at the end of one's life, would cause a person to go to hell.  I read in a life of his where he told a penitent, who didn't have sufficient contrition, in no uncertain terms that he was damned if he retained his current attitudes.

The sainted Cure certainly didn't put on "dog and pony shows" such as that you just saw.  He realized that as a priest he stood as an Alter Christi, not a stand-up-comic clone.  He treated the subject matter of sin and reconciliation with all due gravity.  Were people intimidated by this?  Did they avoid his confessional?  Quite the contrary.  People came from places far and wide to have him hear their confession.  After the long travels, they would wait patiently in his line for days.  That's right - days!   Not minutes, not hours -days!

The juvenile approach that this video evinced was bad enough, but the bit about the "just-baptized feeling" borders on dangerous.  Ladies and gentlemen, the sacraments are not about "feelings" at all.  Maybe "feelings" are present and maybe they aren't.  It doesn't matter.  The efficacy of the sacraments is due to them being instituted by Jesus Christ Himself and administered by His Church.  If one properly confesses to a priest, their sins are - in fact - forgiven when the priest gives the absolution.  One can literally jot down the date and time that Father absolved them of a heinous mortal sin.  No doubt there is a peace of mind, but that is far different from "feelings".

Let me be clear about one thing.  I mean no disparagement to this young priest at all.  I've no doubt that his heart is in the right place.  At least this is an attempt to get people to avail themselves of the sacrament.  He's young.  I suspect this was part and parcel of his seminary formation.  I trust a little real-world experience will cure this.  Let us pray that the new Pontiff will correct any lackluster priestly education.

Note to commenters:  Please don't bother with "but it's cute!"  Ladies and gentlemen, "cute" is not what is needed.  The Sacraments must be treated with dignity and respect.  The truth must be presented without gimmicks.  Souls are going to hell and the Sacraments were instituted to save them.  That is a very serious matter and it's an insult to truth to try to "lighten it up".

Irish Law Targets The Confessional Seal

The Justice Minister of Ireland has proposed 5-year sentences for priests who don't report cases of sexual abuse when they hear it confessed in the confessional.  Needless to say, a proper outrage has arisen not only from the clergy but also the laity.

Make no mistake.  This is not about "protecting children and the vulnerable".  It is an excuse to attack the priesthood.  Does anyone really think that any serial abuser will step into a confessional if he/she knows they'll be reported?

I might suggest an immediate cessation of the "face-to-face" confession.  Restore the practice of all confessions taking place in a screened confessional.  I suggest it not only for Ireland (St Patrick must be rolling in his grave) but for all Catholic churches.  With all the attacks that the Church here is undergoing in the U.S., it's just a mater of time before this confession stunt is attempted here.

The Light Is On For You

For several years now, the Archdiocese of Washington, during Lent, has conducted the above-named effort of re-acquainting Catholics with the Sacrament of Confession.  On Wednesdays during Lent, each and every parish will have their confessionals open from 6:30pm - 8:00pm.  To my knowledge, this is the first year that the Diocese of Arlington is joining the effort.

If anyone has been away from the Sacrament for a while and feels a bit awkward about it, the priest will be happy to assist you.  Please come and receive Our Lord's forgiveness and sacramental grace.  You won't regret it.

Is That A Carbon Footprint On Your Forehead??

There appears to be a renewed attempt to substitute adherence to environmentalism for authentic Lenten practices.  As noted last week, Blessed Sacrament in Chevy Chase has pulled the "lenten carbon fast" out of the mothballs and is foisting it on their unsuspecting parishioners (causing the death of many trees with all that paper used, I might add).

We now see from Catholic News Services that the so-called "Catholic Coalition On Climate Change" wants us to do things like "give up disposable paper products such as napkins and paper towels"  We should be grateful that they didn't include toilet paper in that litany.  Of course the incandescent light bulb has to go; that seems to be a common one.  Why?  Well, as their Dan Misleh says, "Lent is the perfect time to examine our lifestyles," he added. Even giving up a food item like chocolate or ice cream "reminds us that we do need to live more within our means, more in touch with people who don't have any of these things."  That's not why we sacrifice things.  We do so to remind ourselves that these things are fleeting and that we must prepare ourselves for eternal life.  Oh, by the way - they plan to send "Catholic Climate Ambassadors" to brainwash "educate" us on their enlightened thinking.


CARBON FOOTPRINT ALERT!

 Now I have a question.  With all this talk of "reducing carbon footprints", what do these earth-worshippers think of the Ash Wednesday liturgical practice of burning palm leaves and applying them to the foreheads of penitants?  I can imagine that some are in a tizzy that those palm leaves weren't put in a compost pile, but instead were burned (polluting the air and corroding the ozone layer, to boot) and that this is done world-wide.  Will we soon hear from them clarion calls to reject even more tradition, one that again recalls to us our mortality, to worship Gaia and Mother Earth?

Forget all this environmentalism.  Let this Lent for you be a true time of repentance and renewal.  One of the most useful things to come out of the Archdiocese of Washington in recent years has been Cardinal Wuerl's "The Light Is On For You" program.  It is an effort to get Catholics to resort to the Sacrament of Confession; and it appears to be working.  Prior to that, when I went to Confession, I could just walk straight from the church doors into a confessional.  Now I have to wait in lines of 8-10 people.  I'm not complaining!  This is a good, healthy sign that people are taking their spiritual welfare seriously.  So go to Confession - regularly.  Get to daily Mass.

I'd also suggest prayer at the abortion centers, to ask God's mercy on our nation and to perhaps reach out to troubled women.  Today was the start of the 40 Days for Life, a campaign of prayer and outreach that is now international in scope.  To learn more of this program and to find a location near you, visit that website and click on the locations tab.  Right off the bat I can tell you that there are campaigns in Silver Spring, Germantown, College Park, Northwest DC, Fairfax, Severna Park.

The Light Is On For You

For the past several years, Archbishop Wuerl has instituted a program called "The Light Is On For You".  It is a most commendable effort to encourage more frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation.  I link to it above as there are useful guides to the sacrament, particularly the examination of conscience that must be done to receive the sacrament most profitably.  One "across the diocese" implementation is that all parishes will be hearing confessions on Wednesday evenings from 6:30pm - 8:00pm.  Additional confession schedules can be located under the "locate a parish" section.

Before the inception of this program, when I went to confession I could just walk right into a confessional without waiting.  Nowadays, there are lines of people waiting to confess.  Believe me, I'm not complaining.  This is quite nice to see, as people are starting to take their lives - both here and eternal - seriously.

Healing and Reconciliation After Abortion

In today's Catholic Standard is a column by Archbishop Donald Wuerl that is, in my opinion, an excellent summary of the Church's outreach to women who have aborted their children.  His Excellency makes plain the crucial and pivotal role that the Sacrament of Reconciliation has in making the post-abortive woman whole again, as it removes the blight of the mortal sin and allows grace to flow back into her.  Their is also the role of Project Rachel, a post-abortive healing ministry.  Several of my friends have been directors of the Project Rachel in Archdiocese of Washington.

I echo the Archbishop's call to anyone who has been involved in an abortion - get immediately to Confession and have that deadly burden removed from your soul.  After that, receive Our Lord in Holy Communion.  Do take part in Project Rachel.  God bless you.