Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

Posts Tagged ‘Progressive Drivel’

“Mass” at the Call to Action Conference

November 16th, 2012, Promulgated by Dr. K

One more time on the CTA conference that Fr. Spilly promotes and attends:

It’s absolutely disgraceful that any Catholic priest would be associated with Call to Action.


Call to Action 2012 Keynote Speaker

November 11th, 2012, Promulgated by Dr. K

In the previous post we explored Fr. Spilly’s promotion of the dissident Call to Action conference. Take a close look at the list of speakers Father was so kind to provide for us, specifically Patricia Fresen whom he references using the innocent sounding title “theologian”. Ms. Fresen was the keynote speaker at this year’s CTA. So, who is she? Apparently Fresen is a fake female bishop who helped establish the “Association of Roman Catholic Women-priests.”

The title of her address was “Less Pope, More Jesus.”

The bishopess Patricia Fresen

It makes Father’s attendance at, and endorsement of, CTA all the more disturbing.

UPDATE 11/12/12:

Here are some choice quotes from Ms. Fresen’s CTA speech.

1. “The present pope and the previous one are in schism … After all, a general council is the highest authority in the church, higher than the pope”
2. “The only way as I discovered in South Africa to bring about real systemic change is to do something against the system, and that’s what we’re doing [referencing the A.R.C.W.P.]. We claim equality and justice for women”

Related posts: one, two, three

Fr. Spilly Promotes Two Dissident Organizations

November 8th, 2012, Promulgated by Dr. K

Fr. Spilly to attend CTA again

Fr. William Spilly, pastor of the declining St. Elizabeth Ann Seton parish in Hamlin (now averaging 417 weekly attendees), boasted in his parish bulletin last weekend about his upcoming pilgrimage to the notorious “Call to Action” conference. Why is this a problem, you might ask?

Take a look at their homepage to discover CTA’s disturbing endorsements:

  • PRO- GAY MARRIAGE: “We are deeply gratified that Governor Martin O’Malley has joined fellow Catholic governors Andrew Cuomo of New York and Christine Gregoire of Washington in signing marriage equality legislation into law.” …and…“We are delighted that another Catholic governor has signed marriage equality legislation into law. Governor Christine Gregoire is a member of the ever-increasing Catholic majority that supports laws assuring fair and equal treatment for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their families.”…and… “We support marriage equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people not in spite of being Catholic, but because we are Catholic. As Catholics, we believe that we are all beloved children of God, and we want the laws of our land to mandate fairness, justice, and equality for all.”
  • PRO- BIRTH CONTROL, ABORTION: “Stand up for women this July 4th and celebrate the fact that the United States promotes religious liberty for everyone, not just bishops.” …and… “The Bishops don’t want to offer contraception to employees at Catholic hospitals and universities, citing religious liberty. But what about the religious liberty and conscience of the employees who work at these institutions who are both Catholic and non-Catholic? Don’t they have a right to decide their health care options?”
  • ANTI- HIERARCHICAL, PRO-DISSIDENT NUNS: ““At a time when the church hierarchy is beset by scandal, faithful Catholics are looking for moral leadership and have clearly placed their vote of confidence with the sisters,” said Jim FitzGerald, spokesperson for the Nun Justice Project and Executive Director of Call To Action.”
  • PRO- HOMOSEXUAL ACTS, MASTURBATION: “The Vatican’s legalistic parsing of Sister Margaret Farley’s work will only enhance her well-deserved reputation as a gifted scholar. Rome’s attempt to steer Catholics away from Just Love will serve instead as a recommendation for all those who seek a sexual ethic rooted in justice and mutuality, rather than in platitudes and abstractions. The positions Sr. Margaret articulates resonates with many Catholics, who seek to live out the values of our faith in the context of real life.”
  • PRO- PRIESTESSES, INVALID ORDINATIONS, INVALID MASSES: “Thirteen cities across the country will see Catholics holding protest vigils during Holy Week in support of women’s equality in the Catholic Church, including woman priests. ” …and… “Sign this petition that will be hand-carried by Fr. Roy Bourgeois, his lawyer and church justice leaders to the Vatican in October as part of a delegation witnessing for women’s ordination.”
  • PRO- RADICAL FEMINISM: “In the last few weeks, we have seen one attack after another against those who help our churches and mission but are denied a voice on decisions that affect them: church workers. March 12th, marks the third anniversary of Bishop Morlino’s firing of Ruth Kolpack–a dedicated church worker who spent 26 years of her life serving her local parish in the Diocese of Madison, only to be fired because she would not recant her master’s thesis on inclusive language.”
  • ANTI- ROMAN MISSAL TRANSLATION REVISION: ” Catholics across the country are about to go through one of the most widespread changes since the reforms of Vatican II: the words we speak at mass are about to change. Call To Action wants to ensure Catholics know the real history behind the mass translations and the Vatican’s unjust maneuvers to get them done. “

And this is just the first page! If you delve deeper into CTA’s archives, you’ll discover a long and detailed history of positions at odds with Catholic teaching.

Former prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, had this to say about Call to Action:

“The judgment of the Holy See is that the activities of ‘Call to Action’ in the course of these years are in contrast with the Catholic faith due to views and positions held which are unacceptable from a doctrinal and disciplinary standpoint. Thus to be a member of this association or to support it is irreconcilable with a coherent living of the Catholic faith.”

The long-tenured outgoing bishop of Lincoln, Fabian Bruskewitz, even went so far as to excommunicate members of CTA, with full approval of the Vatican. Yet here we are in the Diocese of Rochester, where diocesan priest Fr. Spilly is permitted to publicly acknowledge his membership in this anti-Catholic organization in a parish bulletin. Furthermore, Father links to CTA’s website on his parish homepage… and it’s the first link!
Surprise of all surprises, he also links to dissenting organizations such as Future Church and Voice of the Faithful. A couple years ago, the schismatic Spiritus Christi church could be found in his parish’s recommended links (see below).
Fr. Spilly reveals his membership in, and promotes, another questionable “Catholic” reform organization in this weekend’s bulletin column – Association of U.S. Catholic Priests. I’ll let Father speak to you about what this organization stands for:

Fr. Spilly on the Association of U.S. Catholic priests

Some highlights –
  • “Re-structuring the governing system of the Church that will ground its leadership in Christ-centered proclamation, service and love, avoiding any tendency of control and fear.”
  • “Accepting primacy of the individual conscience and an end to the present secretive processes where active and loyal members of the Church are perceived as “dissidents””
  • “Re-evaluating Catholic sexual teaching and pastoral practice that would recognize the profound mystery of human sexuality as well as the experience and wisdom of God’s people”
Perusing the Association’s website reveals other troubling comments:
  • “Bishop Tom Gumbleton spoke about how Vatican II changed his ministry from focusing on “saving souls” to answering the call to promote social justice.”
  • “Many of the comments expressed in these gatherings  are similar to those of previous gatherings.  The New Roman Missal was not greatly appreciated.  One mentioned that there was too much concern about the afterlife and not enough about here and now. Some mentioned that there was a sense of fear and intimidation in the church today.  “
  • “Using techniques from the Tampa schedule, the Cincinnati-area priests began with a session lamenting their experiences of the post-Vatican II Church followed by a session on hopes and dreams for the future.The lamentations were similar to those at the Florida gathering: abuse of power, fear, the Roman Missal debacle, the rift between younger and older priests, loss of vitality in the Church, hierarchical arrogance, lack of dialogue”
  • “The convention began with  a session in which priests were invited to verbalize their “laments” about their ministry … Their lamentations included recognition of a climate of fear, a distortion of Vatican II, the return of legalism and clericalism, the manner in which women are treated in the Church, stretching priests to the breaking point, struggles with the hierarchy, and loneliness.”

Why do I write about all this? Take a look at the past two presidential elections. The candidate most at odds with Church teaching won both times, and with a majority of the Catholic vote! Look at our parishes on Sunday and see how empty they have become. Check out the various surveys of so-called Catholics where over 90% openly admit to using artificial birth control. Our nation is descending into cultural rot, and Catholics are going down with it if not leading the charge. Is it any wonder that so many Catholics disregard Church teaching when you have priests like Fr. Spilly openly challenging the Faith in their parish bulletins and homilies? I beg our Apostolic Administrator and the next bishop to put a stop to open dissent from Rochester priests. Unlike what Bp. Gumbleton said at the Association of U.S. Catholic Priests conference, the ministry of the bishop and priest IS to save souls. Please start doing it!

Lost In Fantasy Land

September 30th, 2012, Promulgated by Dr. K

From today’s D&C letters to the editor:

Greatly disturbed by Vatican decision

We were greatly disturbed by the announcement that Bishop Matthew Clark was retiring immediately and that Bishop Robert Cunningham of Syracuse would serve as the administrator of the Rochester diocese until a new bishop is named by the pope.

Bishop Clark submitted his resignation to Rome in July when he reached 75, which is standard protocol. We understand that the pope normally accepts these resignations upon the appointment of a successor and the current bishop continues to serve until a replacement is named. Why did this highly unusual action happen here?

We strongly applaud Bishop Clark’s positive stand toward leadership roles of women in the church, his support of gay and lesbian Catholics and his generally progressive theological views. Apparently the conservative leaders in Rome disagree and the early retirement was their response. We do not agree with this action for someone who has served this community so lovingly and faithfully with kindness and integrity for so many years.


So… “Why did this highly unusual action happen here?

This highly unusual action happened because Bishop Clark was an abysmal failure as Bishop of Rochester. Bp. Clark fostered a culture of dissent that contributed to the near collapse of our diocese.

Are Tom and Barbara Clark and all of the Bp. Clark apologists living in fantasy land? Are you blind to the empty pews in your local parish? Maybe they attend Our Lady of Victory’s standing-room only Sunday morning Mass [I doubt it], but most parishes in the diocese have seen attendance drop by 30% or more in the past decade alone.

Let’s step out of fantasy land and enter into reality. The Diocese of Rochester needs a change in leadership.

Bus Full of Liberal Nuns Comes to Rochester

September 26th, 2012, Promulgated by Dr. K

The following advertisement just arrived in my inbox. Apparently, the wacky and uber-liberal “Nuns on the Bus” group is organizing a tour right here in the Diocese of Rochester.

Click image to see full size

Please continue to pray that Bp. Clark’s successor will arrive as quickly as possible.

Interesting Exhibit at Sacred Heart Cathedral

July 13th, 2012, Promulgated by Gen

If you have the time and ability to stop by the Cathedral any time soon, please do so! There is a very interesting exhibit chronicling the tenure of Bishop Clark, with some exceptional highlights, including:

  • a “bishop’s yarmulke” with the Red Wings’ logo on it (Catholics call it a “zucchetto“)
  • a photograph from Bishop Clark’s first Mass . . . which was celebrated in the Extraordinary Form. He’s wearing one of these.
  • a copy of his letter “Fire in the Thornbush,” along with a letter of protest
  • some charming family photos
  • a charming photo next to a smiling Bishop Hubbard
  • a photo of a young seminarian Mr. Clark, smiling pleasantly, wearing a spiffy cassock
I couldn’t help but notice the extreme irony in one of the photos. It was taken after his first Mass (presumably), with him in a beautiful traditional “fiddleback” Roman-style chasuble, standing on the steps of a high altar with his entire family. Standing next to the handsome young priest is a young, pretty nun in full habit. The altar, as far as one can tell, is adorned beautifully with candles, relics, flowers, etc. Looking at this, one is baffled as to how this zealous priest turned into a champion of heterodoxy, chasing away countless numbers of faithful, and endangering the spiritual well-being of myriads of Catholics. Above this scene, on the walls of the sanctuary, are painted the following words:
“O vos omnes qui transitis per viam, attendite et videte si est dolor similis sicut dolor meus.”
Translated, it means, “O, all you who come this way, look and see if there is any pain like unto mine.”
Pray for the Bishop. Pray for Rochester. Pray for the next Bishop.

Hare-esy reigns supreme

June 1st, 2012, Promulgated by Abaccio

Or, Reason number 197,286 why July 15 cannot come fast enough.

The French Road Heresy Factory (aka St. Barnyard’s), as you all know, is home to a wide variety of Diocesan-sponsored dissent, from the President on down.  Here’s the latest bit:

Each summer, the Preaching Institute (previously noted by Mike here) hosts a workshop.  While the previous two presenters were priests who were fairly noted for such presentations, this year’s presenter is a bit…different. It’s layman Mark Hare

Yes, that Mark Hare.   The same Mark Hare that has spent years pushing against the Catholic teachings on sexuality in his columns, particularly in promoting homosexual so-called marriage.  The same Mark Hare that has written numerous positive articles about the schismatic Spiritus Christi Church.  The very same Mark Hare who works for Spiritus Christi while being a parishioner at the Cathedral.  Clearly, this is exactly the sort of fellow that ought to be able to explain homiletics.  Nothing like an aging liberal layperson teaching other aging liberal laypeople how to give an illicit homily…talk about the blind leading the blind!

On a more comical note, the summer workshop in 2010 featured “a sumptuous luncheon buffet,”  while in 2011, it simply included “lunch.”  This year, it has been cut to a half-day, with no meal included.

CMA Money at Work (?) – Regarding Clerical Illiteracy

May 23rd, 2012, Promulgated by Gen

It seems as if our CMA donations go to everything under the sun, except for making sure our priests are literate to a sufficient degree. This may sound harsh, but illiteracy (or poor reading comprehension skills) seems to be the only logical explanation for the following:

Many of you will note that the Blessed Sacrament is still in the church-proper of St. Thomas the Apostle in Irondequoit. Canon Law is very clear about the necessity of its presence and the ability of the laity to make holy hours and the like:

Can. 934 §1 The blessed Eucharist:

1° must be reserved in the cathedral church or its equivalent, in every parish church (this means “each and every one,” not “whichever ones please the administation”), and in the church or oratory attached to the house of a religious institute or society of apostolic life.

§2 In sacred places where the blessed Eucharist is reserved there must always be someone who is responsible for it, and as far as possible a priest is to celebrate Mass there at least twice a month. (Seeing as how Fr. Tanck stated a while ago that the problem was not necessarily a priest shortage, this seems like it should be a non-issue, especially when I guarantee that any of us could find priests willing to help at St. Thomas to offer the required two Masses.)

These particular excerpts from Canon Law are explicit, and cannot be denied if one has any grasp of reality or rhetoric. It seems as if the administration of Blessed Kateri “parish” are in touch with neither, seeing as how, and I quote:

“After consulting with the Chancellor of the Diocese of Rochester, it would seem that the canon you refer to encouraging that two Masses a month be celebrated in churches where the Eucharist is reserved does not bear the weight of obligation, and that the Blessed Sacrament does not have to be reserved in a church for it to be considered open and accessible for worship by the faithful.”

They have no legitimate reason to keep St. Thomas locked for the vast majority of the time, allowing Our Lord to sit solitary in the shadows, living his Agony in Gethsemane every day from dawn till dusk. Canon Law forbids it. Human decency forbids it. Pray for the people of St. Thomas, that their sufferings might be united with those of Christ the King, whose glorious and royal title is so horribly profaned on such a regular basis.

8 Themes of the LCWR Worldview

April 28th, 2012, Promulgated by Bernie

Here is a really good post by Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP, Ph.D. on his blog Domine, da mihi hanc aquam!

Given recent developments on the CDF/LCWR front, I thought I’d repost about a piece from April of 2009 on some of the presidential addresses delivered at the LCWR annual assemblies.  2012 editions are bracketed in red.]

… I did a little browsing on the website of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR). They have posted information about their annual assemblies, including the texts of the presidential addresses and keynote speeches.

I read through several of the keynote speeches, and I noticed a couple of themes… Here’s just a few in no particular order:
Read the whole post here

Not a Burden I Should Like to Bear

April 13th, 2012, Promulgated by Gen

We received the following email this morning from a parishioner at St. Anne/Our Lady of Lourdes. The woman who sent this in tries not to go to the cluster’s Masses, due to the insipid and illicit preaching of Joan Sobala, SSJ, but found herself out of options for a Good Friday service. She thus went to St. Anne and witnessed the following:

When they all processed in, Joan was, of course, right with the priests. When they got to the altar and went down for the prostration, Joan went right down with them. It was shameful. The priest prostrates himself because he is a priest, an “alter Christus,” an “other Christ,” but what is Sr. Joan? She’s a bitter wannabe. Maybe she’s got good intentions, but intent only goes so far. When the minute had passed, Fr. Tyman rose easily, with dignity befitting the tone of the Mass. However, Sr. Joan could not rise without the help of those around her. She looked like some kind of liberal weevil that had fallen out of a bad loaf of bread or something, wiggling around trying to get herself up again. Maybe that sounds mean, but let’s look at the perspective. This is Good Friday. Of all the days in the Church year when politicking should be left aside, this is it. Our Lord’s death should eclipse everything aside from itself. When you pull a stunt that distracts the congregation (which was pitiful compared to years past), you don’t deserve my compassion. Sure, I’ll pray for you, I’ll smile and be civil, but never presume that you should be the focus over God Himself. When I saw her being helped up I remembered why I started going to St. Boniface and Our Lady of Victory. Fr. Brickler never makes himself the center of attention. Fr. Kennedy says a nice Mass, too. Fr. Antinarelli conducts himself with humility and dignity. Well, not this dame. I feel sorry for her, definitely, but I feel sorrier for the people who have to put up with this kind of nonsense.

Like the woman who emailed us does, I pray for Sr. Joan often. I pray for our entire Diocese. People wonder why we have so few vocations, and then we see things like this, where an aging “progressive” nun upstages Jesus Christ Himself. Our priests look on from the sidelines and can’t do anything because she, and others like her, are the bosses in Rochester. There’s really nothing I can say or add that I haven’t already at some point over the past few years, so I’ll just close with this quote from Bishop Fulton Sheen:

“Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious.”

Sr. Joan Sobala, SSJ Named Diocesan “Director of Liturgy”

April 1st, 2012, Promulgated by Gen

Many of you will doubtless recall the article we posted a few weeks ago regarding Sr. Joan Sobala’s departure from Our Lady of Lourdes and St. Anne. We had been told by individuals in the parish office at St. Anne that Sr. Joan was going into an “active retirement,” much like Bishop Clark intends to. However, we did not know this “active retirement” would mean her becoming the chief liturgist for the Diocese. 

This is, perhaps, the worst possible alternative out there to Sr. Joan leading a parish. We have seen the destruction of her current assignment, the decline in attendance, contribution, and participation. Now, being in a position wherein she will work closely with Bishop Clark and Sr. MaryAnn Binsack, she will have a much stronger and more potent ability to insert her dissident agenda into Catholic hearts and minds. This is shameful, especially coming at a time when so much good is around the corner for our Diocese. In a recent interview, Sr. Joan stated, and I quote, “I intend to welcome a free spirit into the Mass, a spirit that should have been there sooner. Church isn’t about fancy ceremonies or big words or even big ideas; it’s about love. After all, that’s how I’ve lived my life, and how our brother and sister Jesus lived, too.”

Click here for more regarding Sr. Joan and her forthcoming assignment, which will take effect sometime in July.

Margot Van Etten believes the Church Disdains Women

February 18th, 2012, Promulgated by Abaccio

Have you ever noticed how tiresome the arguments put forth by the pseudo-Catholic left become over time?  If not, grab yourself a coffee and read these remarks from one of Bishop Clark’s beloved army of “Lay Ecclesial Ministers,” Margot VanEtten, Campus Minister/Director of the Newman Community at SUNY Brockport.  Isn’t it nice to realize that Bishop Clark’s reign of heterodoxy has but 148 days until he submits his retirement papers?  After that, this craziness will be on borrowed time.  Mrs. VanEtten, commenting on this article in America Magazine, (a notoriously heterodox catholyc weekly loved, adored, and glorified by those who worship the “Spirit of Vatican II,”) says the following, emphasis and (commentary) mine:

Of course young women are not attracted to the Church.  Why would anyone be drawn to an institution that seems to have such little respect for them? Here’s the evidence:
-before you even begin to discuss the priesthood, the Church has not made the steps it would if women were truly valued, such as opening the diaconate to them.(see later in this post, when we cite Margot’s semi-official bio.)
-Women are not being listened to adequately.  Women’s experience too often appears to be ignored or disdained.  Like most women, I am not interested in a form of “feminism” which has been developed by men and imposed on me as “authentic”. (Clear rejection of Theology of the Body, and essentially of a great multitude of Catholic teachings.  I would suggest she, or any other woman blinded by this misconception, read this book.  The Church has repeatedly failed to seek out, value or listen to the experience of women. Rather, leaders still continue to write of us as the “Other”.
-Most of the activities which in an earlier day required women to be members of a religious order if they wished to undertake them can now be engaged with in the secular world.  You don’t have to be a sister to teach, to be a nurse, to be a missionary-or even to get and advanced education. Moreover, the opportunities women have in the secular world are far more determined by their skills rather than their gender. Why should it be surprising that women focus there? (The same can be said of men…so this is not gender-specific in the least…)

If the Church truly values women, it will address their experience of these issues rather than ignore, stifle or spin them. (Read: Let me be a priest)
I say this as a minister who is loyal and loves the faith despite these grave deficiencies, and I continue to encourage young women to see the Church as a spiritual home. Unfortunately, all too often the voice that discourages them comes from the Church’s leaders-(might I note that perhaps the voice that discourages true femininity are the wannabewomymnpreestz who are all too often the “Church’s leaders” in Rochester.  Why would a young woman wish to join a religious order filled to the brim with bitter, embattled old women who despise the very Church they claim to serve? What intelligent, self-respecting young woman would choose to surround herself with post-menopausal women who wish nothing more than to diminish their femininity, in favor of masculinity and call it “feminism” and consider themselves young, hip, social change agents? Note that vocations to orthodox women’s religious orders where femininity is embraced are booming!) not from the secular world.

By Margot VanEtten on February 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Now, let us examine Mrs. VanEtten’s bio:

Margot is the Full-time Campus Minister for the Newman Community.  She has been involved in teaching, campus life, and ministry for more than thirty years.

Margot has a Masters’ Degree in Theology and is an ABD (“all but dissertation”) in English. Along with her husband Larry, she completed the Diocese of Rochester’s Permanent Deacon Training Program. (I wanna be a priest! I wanna be a deacon! I have the same training, so why can’t I do it?  You must hate women, Pope Benedict!) She taught English at Finger Lakes Community College and (many years ago) at Penn State.  At St. Bernard’s Institute she taught “Introduction to Spirituality” and developed a course in Sacred Ecology. (Sacred what now?  I will note that Mrs. VanEtten is somewhat obsessed with “animal rights,” so I should not be surprised.  Something tells me that her courses at St. Barnyard’s are…much like most of the courses at the French Road Heresy Factory.) She also developed a course in Self Defense for Women which she has taught at FLCC, Nazareth College and at Harp Karate in Rochester, where she is an instructor. (Margot holds Black Belts in four Martial Arts, which she has been practicing and teaching for more than fifteen years).  

In addition, Margot is a Certified Sign Language Interpreter.  She has been an Interpreter for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology, as well as Coordinator of Interpreters for the RIT Campus Ministry, and was Pastoral Assistant for St. Mary’s Church of the Deaf (now Emmanuel Church of the Deaf).  She has published two articles about religious interpreting and has designed programs for Sexual Harassment Awareness for a local consulting company as well as the Self-defense program offered at Harp Karate and various area colleges.  She has wide experience in interfaith ministries and worship,(Oh joy!) and brings a lot of enthusiasm to her work and ministry on campus.

Well, that doesn’t exactly sound like a Catholic bio, but rather that of an earth-obsessed, liberal feminist.  Well, let’s see what sort of mission statement Mrs. VanEtten’s SUNY Brockport Newman Community espouses:

In recognition of the importance of spiritual growth in the development of the whole person, the mission of the Newman Catholic Community at SUNY Brockport is to:

  • Promote and encourage the spiritual growth of all members of the College through opportunities for prayer, growth and study. (not necessarily, it appears, Catholic growth…)
  • Reach out to all members of the student community and support their growth in body, mind and spirit. (Apparently it’s the YMCA now)
  • Nurture a sense of community that respects and honors diversity. (Read: all religions are equal.)
  • Support the development of a strong interfaith ministry and community on campus. (Why?)
  • Encourage generous service to those in need.
  • Be present and available to listen, console, and challenge with love.

Now, far be it from me to judge an organizational leader by his or her supposed mission, but…well…actually…that’s exactly what I’m going to do.  Does anything in that mission statement even suggest Catholicism specifically? Any mention of the Sacraments, of Holy Mass, of growing in knowledge of the faith?  Note the phrase “spiritual growth through…prayer, growth, and study.” First of all, how can one encourage spiritual growth through opportunities for growth?  That, my friends, is meaningless drivel!  Respect diversity and develop a strong interfaith community?  That sure doesn’t sound like someone who believes that “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”  Perhaps the lack of an authentically Catholic presence on college campuses plays some part in the lack of twenty-somethings who attend Mass regularly, hm?

It’s amazing what rotten fruit has arisen in the thirty years since Bishop Clark published “Fire in the Thornbush,” his infamous pastoral letter on “Women in the Church.” You can find Cleansing Fire’s review of his 2010 book on essentially the same subject, Forward in Hope: Saying Amen to Lay Ecclesial Ministry” here.  Finally, I will note (again) Ecclesiae de mysterio 4, which essentially explains that what happens here in Rochester is quite illicit:

Article 4

The Parish Priest and the Parish
The non-ordained faithful, as happens in many worthy cases, may collaborate effectively in the pastoral ministry of clerics in parishes, health care centers, charitable and educational institutions, prisons, Military Ordinariates etc. Provisions regulating such extraordinary form of collaboration are provided by Canon 517, 2.

1. The right understanding and application of this canon, according to which “If the diocesan bishop should decide that due to a dearth of priests a participation in the exercise of the pastoral care of a parish is to be entrusted to a deacon or to some other person who is not a priest or to a community of persons, he is to appoint some priest endowed with the powers and faculties of a pastor to supervise the pastoral care”, requires that this exceptional provision be used only with strict adherence to conditions contained in it. These are:

a) ob sacerdotum penuriam and not for reasons of convenience or ambiguous “advancement of the laity“, etc.;

b) this is participatio in exercitio curae pastoralis and not directing, coordinating, moderating or governing the Parish; these competencies, according to the canon, are the competencies of a priest alone.

Because these are exceptional cases, before employing them, other possibilities should be availed of, such as using of the services of retired priests still capable of such service, or entrusting several parishes to one priest or to a coetus sacerdotum [group of priests].(75)

In any event, the preference which this canon gives to deacons cannot be overlooked.

The same canon, however, reaffirms that these forms of participation in the pastoral care of parishes cannot, in any way, replace the office of Parish Priest. The same canon decrees that “The diocesan bishop … is to appoint some priest endowed with the powers and faculties of a pastor to supervise the pastoral care”. Indeed, the office of Parish Priest can be assigned validly only to a priest (cf. Canon 521, 1) even in cases where there is a shortage of clergy.(76)

2. In the same regard, it must be noted that the Parish Priest is the Pastor proper to the parish entrusted to him(77) and remains such until his pastoral office shall have ceased.(78)

The presentation of resignation at the age of 75 (Clark mandates retirement at 70.) by a Parish Priest does not of itself (ipso iure) terminate his pastoral office. Such takes effect only when the diocesan Bishop, following prudent consideration of all the circumstances, shall have definitively accepted his resignation in accordance with Canon 538, 3 and communicated such to him in writing.(79) In the light of those situations where scarcity of priests exists, the use of special prudence in this matter would be judicious.

In view of the right of every cleric to exercise the ministry proper to him, and in the absence of any grave health or disciplinary reasons, it should be noted that having reached the age of 75 does not constitute a binding reason or the diocesan Bishop to accept a Parish Priest’s resignation. This also serves to avoid a functional concept of the Sacred Ministry.(80)

Blessed Kateri Parish Council votes to remove Blessed Sacrament from Open Churches

February 3rd, 2012, Promulgated by Monk

In a stunning display of arrogance, the parish council of Blessed Kateri parish voted at the December 2011 meeting to remove the Blessed Sacrament from St. Thomas the Apostle and St. Salome Churches. “Consensus was reached” declares the council! (see parish council meeting minutes below). These Churches are not closed. Both have been currently declared open by Bishop Clark and available for worship (as stated in his letter to the Vatican). It is astounding that, as pastor, Fr. Tanck would sit by and allow such a vote to be taken by his parish council. They have no ecclesiastical authority whatsoever to even recommend removing the Holy Eucharist from a Catholic Church. Why isn’t the parish council demanding the pastor provide the required canonical pastoral support to the Churches entrusted to his care?
The DOR along with liberal pastors such as Fr. Tanck, continue to foster a lay-run American church and misguide the laity as to their proper role in the church.

“Real estate and building assets are currently being reviewed by the Finance Council.
One major opportunity for savings the committee has recommended, which they
estimate will save $20K for the remainder of the 2011-2012 fiscal year, would happen if
the heat is reduced down to the ~50 degree range (to maintain temperature above
freezing to avoid pipe/water damage) inside the St. Salome church, St. Thomas church
and St. Thomas parish center. If the temperature is indeed lowered to reduce heating
costs for the rarely used spaces, Funerals or Weddings will need to be scheduled at one
of the three open sites and daily prayer at St. Thomas would need to be moved. Also,
all meeting and events currently scheduled at the STA parish center would need to be
rescheduled at one of the other parish sites.
It was brought to the attention of the pastoral council during the Dec 14th meeting that
Canon 934.2 law states that where the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved, there must
always be someone responsible for it and, insofar as possible, a priest to celebrate Mass
there at least twice a month.

Therefore, based on the pastoral council’s obligation to foster fiscal responsibility, and
that there are no current plans to schedule a weekly Mass in either the St. Salome or St.
Thomas the Apostle buildings, the Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha Pastoral Council
recommends that the Most Holy Eucharist be removed from both St. Salome and St.
Thomas the Apostle churches. Consensus was reached by the council regarding this recommendation

Fr. Tanck Moves Against St. Thomas

January 27th, 2012, Promulgated by Gen

Surgite, eamus. Ecce qui me tradet, prope est.

With his words in this past weekend’s bulletin from Bl. Kateri Tekakwitha Parish, Fr. Tanck twisted the dagger he has already so skillfully plunged into the heart of every St. Thomas parishioner.

“In our planning, however, we still need to do more to contain our costs. Among the costs we presently carry are the maintenance, care and insurance coverage of several buildings that we do not use to their full potential because we are able to accommodate our offices, ministries, programs and divine worship in fewer facilities. Our developing Strategic Plan calls for us to divest ourselves of unneeded buildings and real estate; we will soon begin the process of doing so.
I am sure raising these concerns will open old wounds among some of our parishioners, but I hope all will see this as positive proof that we are moving forward as a new unified parish community and good steward of our resources.”

It’s funny how the same fellow who rebuked parishioners for being attached to a “building” can now seize upon the convenience of that notion in order to take further steps towards the dismemberment of the Faith in Irondequoit. Buildings which aren’t used are a burden on the “parish”‘s finances? No kidding, Father. Here’s a dynamic idea: use the buildings, rather than let them sit there leaking and gathering dust. When you have a worship space that accommodates around 1,000 people, it does not make sense to forsake it for whatever mindless reason Fr. Tanck has contrived.

I am making no effort to hide my vitriol for this man’s actions, for they speak of the prevailing passive-aggressive contempt the Diocese has for anyone or anything that dares to reflect a global Catholicism, rooted in Tradition more sacred than any of these “administrators” can imagine. Whether or not they care to admit it or not, these men who are as so many lords in their castles are soon to be shown to be as so many jesters in the court of the next bishop who shall reign here. Error has no rights, and there are few errors so egregious as the mistreatment of devout and charitable parishioners whose only desire is to praise God without the malicious intervention of men such as this. There is no excuse for the lack of pastoral sensitivity seen in this situation. “I am sure raising these concerns will open old wounds among some of our parishioners.” Are you, Father? You seem to be acting like a pediatrician who looks gleefully at his frightened and hesitant patient, and then says to her, “I’m going to give you a shot. It’ll probably hurt a lot, and you might cry and feel rotten, but it’s what you need.”

What adds a particular awareness of Fr. Tanck’s demeanor in this matter is the reference in the financial committee minutes to turning off the water, heat, etc. at St. Thomas.

“Andrew suggested that all of the following buildings (STA church, SS church, STA house, STA parish center) be ‘mothballed’. This would include turning off all utilities and placing antifreeze in pipes. This will save money on utilities. (This is similar to SMM school process. The school was “mothballed” until a buyer was found.)”

Ah, well, thank God we’ll be able to save some money by making parishioners sit in a cold dark church to offer their Rosaries. (Sorry, I made a mistake: “The daily recitation of the Rosary at STA could be moved to the Adoration Chapel.” Isn’t that generous, folks?) And, mercy of mercies, “Only one Mass a year is needed at the churches to ensure tax-exempt status.”

Now let’s read that for what it is. 1. Get the people out of St. Thomas itself. Fr. Tanck seems to favor an “out of sight, out of mind” approach to this matter. 2. The properties will be easier to sell. Note the sanctimonious tone through all of these quotes – I can practically see the “it’s for your own good” after every single one. 3. We’ll allow a Mass or two per year, not for the salvation of souls, but for the sanctification of our coffers. We’re still tax-free, you know!

I would offer more commentary, but I don’t think that’s necessary. Fr. Tanck and the Finance Committee have both spoken more through their actions than I could ever interpret here.

You can read the Bulletin here, and the Financial Committee minutes here.

Abusive Language in the Confessional

November 1st, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

This morning, I was speaking with a woman after Mass, and the topics of ad orientem liturgy and tabernacle placement came up. The woman and I agreed that the main reasons for vehement hatred of ad orientem liturgy (and, implicitly, tabernacle placement) stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of what they main and represent. This is something we have already discussed and will doubtless discuss again. What stuck with me from this conversation, though, was the following story:

“I really like all the Latin music, but I need to hear a strong cantor. I used to be able to go St. Anne, but what good is beautiful music when you’ve got an ugly Mass? So I figured that I should just listen to that kind of music on my own, because no parish around me does it. But then someone suggested I go to the cathedral. I didn’t think it could be as bad as people had said, but when I got there I was so upset by what I saw. Forget Mass and music even. I walk in, and there’s no truly visible tabernacle. Sure, you can see it if you’re sitting in the right spot, and it really is a nice little adoration chapel, but for crying out loud, our churches used to be adoration chapels! We didn’t need to dethrone Jesus to make a point that ought not even be made – if people just embraced the real Vatican II, we wouldn’t have all this pent-up anger and aggression.

“So picture me, standing there almost in tears. I realized, though, that there was a priest hearing confession there. So I decided to go in and unburden myself, and hopefully receive some comfort, calming, and healing. I entered the room, knelt down, and started listing my sortfallings. When I got to my anger about what I saw just outside, the priest started yelling at me, saying ‘You people don’t know anything. We did this for you. How dare you criticize things you don’t understand or try to talk about things you don’t know about?’ I broke down in tears, and he didn’t do anything. I don’t even remember if he gave me absolution or not. All I knew is that I felt spiritually abused. I can’t ever go back there, not that I’d even want to  do that anyways.

This is an outrage, having priests using the confessional, not as the place where Christ’s comfort and forgiveness are brought to us, but as some sort of political soapbox. Since when is it alright to bully the faithful in and through the sacraments of the Church? I remember when I was young, and I was told that I should confess that I had a problem with change. I had to be maybe 8, and I didn’t know why I was being told to confess this by the sister teaching us, but I assumed she saw something deeper in me than I did. And so I went to confession and said, “Bless me father, for I have sinned. It comes down to my having a hard time with seeing change in the Church.” This priest, who was certainly not flying the banner of orthodoxy, was quiet for a moment, then simply said, “What?” We went on to discuss how things like this in themselves aren’t sins, but that the anger, aggression, and tempers they can produce may lead to sin. Of course, I didn’t know anything about Church politics at that age, but looking back I can see that the nun who taught me was concerned that I went to a parish that was abiding by the actual, not imagined, Spirit of Vatican II. The priest and I didn’t get into politics, naturally, but I am certain the present-day me would tend not to agree with this fellow on much. What is important, though, is that he used the confessional as it ought to be used. It was a place of reflection, forgiveness, and understanding, not admonishment for holy zeal or a torrent of anger for exhibiting orthodox tendencies.

I ask for your prayers for this woman, that she remain firm in faith despite the childish actions of some of our diocesan clergy. (Please note, the priest in question is not currently stationed at the Cathedral.)

I Was Working in the Lab Late One Night . . .

October 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

It seems sometimes that our only consolation is that “at least it’s not happening at Mass.” This is particularly true for an upcoming . . . concert . . . at Sacred Heart Cathedral. Let me preface everything I am about to say by expressing my respect and admiration of the capability of the musicians at Sacred Heart Cathedral. They are all quite gifted musicians whose goal is, ultimately, the glory of God. Of course, we could get into the whole mandolins-at-Mass-isn’t-giving-glory-to-God-debate, but that’s not what this post is about.

What this post is about, however, is this concert I mentioned. The cathedral will be host to the United States premier of Rachel Laurin’s Symphony No. 2, which in itself is pretty innocuous. Churches host concerts all the time, and so long as there’s nothing profane and the Blessed Sacrament is appropriately reposed elsewhere, they can prove to be quite beneficial for the community.

The premier of this symphony, though, is not the only aspect of this event. The concert is being held on Sunday, October 30th, the day before Halloween. So, naturally, the logical thing to do is post fliers around the Diocese advertising this concert as a great opportunity to show up at the Cathedral in costume. (I guess Sr. MaryAnn Binsack’s weekly “Casper” costume doesn’t sate the palate of these philistines.)

The Symphony contains themes from Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Fall of the House of Usher,” a great work, to be sure. I am certain that Ms. Laurin’s work reflects the darkness of Poe’s writing, and I am in no way criticizing her music, the performance of it, or the quality of the performers. What I am criticizing, though, is the classless idea to dress up in (secular) costumes for a (secular) concert in a church, i.e. a sacred space. This extra little twist to an otherwise acceptable event is just like the Passion Mime, which crosses the line between what is in good taste and what is in bad taste. Concerts = wonderful. Costume parties in cathedral = not so wonderful.

Isn’t that a confusing equation? No, you say? Well, it must be confusing, seeing as how the people in charge of the music/social functions at Sacred Heart don’t seem to grasp this concept. The church is a place where people gather, ideally, to pray. Of course, well-built churches have good acoustics, and so concerts may serve to build up the reputation and financial stability of a church. Churches are not built to be used as settings for masquerade parties. They aren’t built to be suitable for good music. They aren’t even built to facilitate community interaction. They are built in order to gather the people of God together, not to talk, not to play dress-up, not to have pizza parties, but to worship.

But, of course, we can’t blame people if this concept, too, is confusing. When our churches look like social halls, and when the Mass turns into some sort of group self-help session with refreshments, how can we expect the people in charge to foster an environment of dignity and respect for the Blessed Sacrament?

So, while at the same time, there will be a Missa Cantata St. Stanislaus, you’re more inclined to see this at Sacred Heart:

Focus fail?

October 20th, 2011, Promulgated by Mike

The University of Dayton will host a conference next month exploring the role of the laity in the Church. Empowered by Baptism: The Mission of the Laity Today will focus on how the laity “continues to energize the Catholic faith.”

“For the church to be strong today, we need lay people to step up and be involved,” said the Rev. James Fitz, S.M., vice president for mission and rector of the University. “The church can take its mission out into the world only if lay people feel that vocation and take that mission into neighborhoods, workplaces and all parts of society.”

Bishop Matthew Clark, Bishop of Rochester, N.Y., and author of Forward in Hope: Saying AMEN to Lay Ecclesial Ministry, will deliver a keynote address at 10 a.m. on “The Challenge of the Contemporary Lay Vocation.”

Clark, who has served as Rochester’s bishop for 32 years, has actively supported and promoted increasing the number of lay ministers as well as expanding the roles of lay people in the church.

One wonders whether Fr. Fitz and the conference organizers are aware that weekend Mass attendance in the Diocese of Rochester has dropped by more than 1/3 in just the last 10 years, despite modest growth in our overall population (story here). At first blush this would seem to be the polar opposite of the energized Catholic faith of which the UoD article speaks.

Could it be that Bishop Clark’s incessant focus on lay ministry has come at the expense of what should have been his primary concern, the spiritual well-being of his flock?

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

BTW, Rich Leonardi wrote about Bishop Clark’s appearance at this conference here. The comments are worth perusing (and not just because a couple of them are mine).

Lord, Save Us From Liturgists

October 14th, 2011, Promulgated by Bernie

By Pat Archbold, National Catholic Register

There are certain phrases that conjure up images so frightful one shudders at the mere mention. Swarm of killer bees. School of piranha. National Meeting of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions. Brrrrrrr.

Going on right now members of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions from around the country are meeting in Portland Oregon. Now I am sure that some of the members of these liturgical commissions are very fine people. Call me jaded, but when all these good people get together. Bad things, man. Bad things…

Read more:

First, Consider Orthodoxy

October 9th, 2011, Promulgated by Bernie

1. "Supper at Emmaus" center panel from the "Resurrection" triptych by artist Dick Kane, Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Brighton

(This is the first in a series of posts on the Lourdes triptych of the “Resurrection”)

One of the ways that I determine if a work of liturgical art is good is by assessing its orthodoxy. A work of liturgical art displayed in a church, especially in the chancel or altar area, must be unambiguously orthodox. It must not veer from tradition in regards to content, faith, piety, and cherished tradition.[1] In addition, liturgical arts that illustrate Holy Scripture are scripture -in images- and therefore must not be altered in content to accommodate peculiar ideas or social and political issues, or to undermine tradition.

Let’s take a look at the new triptych of the “Resurrection” now displayed on the back wall of the chancel in Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Brighton and measure it against my standard of unambiguous orthodoxy.

2. "The Resurrection", Dick Kane; Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Brighton

The three panels of the triptych depict events surrounding the resurrection of Christ. In the left panel Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene near the tomb (John 20.11-18). The center panel shows us the supper at Emmaus where Jesus is recognized by the two disciples whom he joined and walked with on the way into Emmaus. (Luke 24.13-35) In the right panel the resurrected Jesus has appeared to Peter and six disciples on the beach of the Sea of Galilee. He roasts some fish for their breakfast. The apostles are shown with a bulging net of fish filled to the top as a result of Christ’s instructions to put the net over the side of the boat, after catching nothing all night.(John 21:1-13) All three scenes are meant to testify, through eye-witnesses, that Jesus rose from the dead.

There is a problem in the center panel of the triptych that raises a question of orthodoxy. The painting veers from scripture and tradition by representing one of the disciples (the one on the left) as a woman. Both disciples, however, were almost certainly men and tradition has always presented that interpretation both in commentaries and in art.

Our Lady of Lourdes Church bulletin, October 2, says emphatically that the second disciple is (not just a woman, but) Mary, the wife of Cleopas.[2]  Cleopas is the only named disciple in the Emmaus story. In a homily delivered at Lourdes the priest is just a little less certain; he described the second disciple as probably the wife of Cleopas.

However, the identity of Cleopas’ traveling companion is not known. There have been various guesses: Some suppose him to have been Peter; it was also, early on, a very common opinion that it was Luke, and that the Evangelist, through modesty, did not mention his own name. Others even make Cleopas to actually have been Alphaeus, making the second disciple -the companion- the apostle, James, Alphaeus’ son.

And, yes, there have even been some people who have guessed that the second disciple was Mary, the wife of Cleopas. John 19:25 does mention “Mary the wife of Cleopas” that was at the foot of the cross of Christ. It is reasonable, they say, to suppose that the companion to Cleopas on the road to Emmaus was his wife. But, there is a big problem with this interpretation. Luke had previously mentioned “Mary” in Luke 24:10 as being among the women at the empty tomb that reported what they had seen and heard to the apostles and, in Luke 24:32 Cleopas said that “certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulcher”. If the companion on the road to Emmaus was Cleopas’ wife, he would have said, “My wife and other women…” or “Mary and other women…” or “The woman (Mary) and other women…”

Furthermore, if one of the disciples was a woman, why did Luke say “And they said to him (Jesus)…”? In first century Palestine, women did not converse with men in public, certainly not with strangers even if the husbands were present. The second disciple could not have been a woman. By employing “they” Luke is telling us that there is a conversation involving three men.

Nowhere is there any hint that Cleopas’ traveling companion on the road to Emmaus –the second disciple- was the wife of Cleopas.

3. "Jesus and the Two Disciples On the Road to Emmaus", by Duccio, 1308-1311, Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Siena.

In addition, in the history of Christian art, liturgical or otherwise, I can find no representation of the Supper at Emmaus (except for possibly one [3] ) in which one of the disciples is depicted as a woman. The traditional imagery for this scene from the Gospel is overwhelmingly always orthodox, the two disciples are depicted as men.

4. "Supper at Emmaus" by Caravaggio and commissioned by the Roman nobleman Ciriaco Mattei in 1601. The person standing is a servant.

So, what is the reason for this innovation? Why introduce an image of a woman to represent a person who was almost certainly a man and has always been interpreted and pictured as a man? I’ll leave you to your own conclusions (but it might help you to know that the lay pastoral administrator [leader] of our Lady of Lourdes is an active women’s ordination advocate “…working solely for the ordination of women as priests…  into an inclusive and accountable Catholic Church. To this end, we work to: renew church governance to be inclusive, accountable and transparent; bring about justice and equality for Catholic women; incorporate women-centered theologies into every-day Catholicism.” [4])

The concern, of course, is that innovative imagery in the liturgy could be a strategy of deception, a deliberate attempt to hide an agenda –“to slip one by”- or compromise objective truth for the purpose of manipulation. This is why orthodoxy is so important when it comes to the liturgy of the Church. The liturgy and all that is associated with it is “official” and communal, not personal or sectarian. If a person finds meaning in an innovative representation of the Supper at Emmaus or in a transgender crucifix and hangs such an image in his home, that’s fine. That is private spirituality. But, innovation in the liturgy cannot be tolerated because abuse will surely creep in. The last 40 years have proven it.

5. The “Road to Emmaus” Icon by Sister Marie Paul OSB of the Mount of Olives Monastery, Jerusalem (1990), a private commission by theologian Father Thomas Rosica. Here we see the companion as Cleopas' wife or, at least, a woman. Notice that the good sister even has Jesus (a stranger!) talking directly to the woman. Just in case you don't get sister's point she has reduced Cleopas' role to that of the second disciple. The artist has painted the veil of the woman white, the lightest tone in the icon and therefore visually emphasizes the woman. Look at the icon while squinting, especially at the area depicting the supper. This is the area of the icon with the sharpest contrast; the white of the veil boldly contrasts with the black of the wall, thus attracting the most attention. (Now look at the central panel in the Lourdes triptych. Where is the lightest color (white), strongest contrast, and most active (vibrant) pattern?)

In the case of the Lourdes triptych the proverbial “red flag” ascends the pole. Is there a hidden agenda in the case of the innovative triptych at Lourdes?

I believe so.

(I have some other issues with this triptych that I will share in a future post. I just wanted to start with a post that examines the orthodoxy of the triptych. Orthodoxy should be the first thing to look for in evaluating works intended to be sacred art used in the liturgy.)



[1] “…the Church has, with good reason, always reserved to herself the right to pass judgment upon the arts, deciding which of the works of artists are in accordance with faith, piety, and cherished traditional laws, and thereby fitted for sacred use.” Chap. VII 122, Sacrosanctum Concilium. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Second Vatican Council.

[2] or Cleophas, a different spelling. There is even some uncertainty, however, as to whom Cleopas actually was, making the companion even less likely to be Cleopas’ wife!

[3] Supper at Emmaus (1648), Rembrandt van Rijn (1606 – 1669). It’s possible the disciple at the left end of the table was meant to represent a woman. Rembrandt’s painting, of course, was not meant to be a liturgical work (to hang in a church).







[4] from the Women’s Ordination Conference (WOC) webpage


Picture Sources

1. by a parishioner at Our Lady of Lourdes

2. Lourdes parishioner

3. Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena.



Some (extraordinary) Food for (ordinary) Thought – Installment III

October 5th, 2011, Promulgated by Gen


Why do liberals love manipulating the Agnus Dei into this hippie litany of environmental activism (Tree of Life, Flower of Love, Vine of Hope, etc. miserere nobis), but “conservative” Catholics are frowned upon for frowned upon when they change out the words “dona nobis pacem” with “dona eis requiem” in a funeral Mass?They’re both unapproved changes in the Ordinary Form, but still, the reaction to one is always more vehement than reaction to the other . . .

Note: In the Extraordinary Form, a Requiem (Funeral) Mass changes the words of the Agnus Dei from “have mercy on us” to “grant him/her eternal rest” (in Latin, of course). This was dropped in the Ordinary Form, where at funeral Masses we have the familiar “grant us peace” without variation.