I recently was forwarded a youtube post about Eric Whitacre and his "Virtual Choir":
Here is the full version released:
Watching this got me to thinking about Sacred Music. The text of the piece above is a reflection on the nativity of the Christ child.
Lux Aurumque:
Light,
warm and heavy as pure gold
and the angels sing softly
to the newborn baby.
Lux, Lux
Lux, Lux
Lux Lux
Calida
Calida
Gravis que
Gravis que
Gravis que
Pura
Pura velut aurum
canunt et canunt et canunt
My thoughts came around to the melding of the sound and the meaning and there was something deep present!
Here is then the product of that thought:
In Sacred Music we often settle for “Festal” joy, which tends to amuse the intellect. Rather, Sacred Music should aim at “Sublime” joy, which humbles the intellect through wonder and awe at a mystery beyond itself.
Too often our Church Music is the saccharine expression of popularism that wants to amuse and, dare we say it, entertain. Sacred Music should express itself to a deeper part of the human heart than the appetites. It should penetrate to the core whence love springs from the melding of intellect and will touched by mystery.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
(Blessed) John Paul II
Vatican announces Pope John Paul II beatification events
By Cindy Wooden
VATICAN CITY (CNS)—The Vatican released a three-day schedule of events for the beatification of Pope John Paul II and warned against people selling counterfeit tickets to the beatification liturgy, which is free and open to all.
Pope Benedict XVI will preside over the beatification Mass at 10 a.m. May 1 in St. Peter’s Square, the Vatican said. Immediately after Mass the faithful can pray before Pope John Paul’s mortal remains, which will be set in front of the main altar in St. Peter’s Basilica.
The veneration “will continue until the flow of faithful ends,” it said.
Distributing the program Feb. 18, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, said the deceased pope’s remains will be in the casket in which he originally was buried in 2005 and will not be visible.
The casket will be reinterred in the Chapel of St. Sebastian on the main level of St. Peter’s Basilica in a “private” ceremony, which will occur only after the large crowds have stopped coming to pay their respects, Father Lombardi said.
The night before the beatification, a prayer vigil will be held in the grassy open space that was the ancient Circus Maximus in Rome, the Vatican said.
“It will be organized by the Diocese of Rome, which had the venerable servant of God as its bishop,” the note said. Cardinal Agostino Vallini, papal vicar for Rome, will lead the celebration and Pope Benedict is expected to watch through a video hookup.
The morning after the beatification, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, will celebrate a Mass of thanksgiving in St. Peter’s Square, the Vatican said.
U.S. Archbishop James M. Harvey, prefect of the papal household, which organizes the non-liturgical side of papal events, also issued a statement Feb. 18 emphasizing the fact that tickets will not be required to attend the beatification.
The archbishop’s statement, distributed in six languages, said he had been “informed of the existence of unauthorized offers by some tour operators, especially on the Internet,” claiming that for a fee they could help people get tickets to papal events, particularly the beatification Mass.
“For the beatification Mass of Pope John Paul II, as made clear from the outset, no tickets are required,” the statement said.
And for events that require tickets, such as the pope’s weekly general audience, the tickets “are always issued free of charge and no person or organization can request any kind of payment,” it said.
Copyright 2011 Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
By Cindy Wooden
VATICAN CITY (CNS)—The Vatican released a three-day schedule of events for the beatification of Pope John Paul II and warned against people selling counterfeit tickets to the beatification liturgy, which is free and open to all.
Pope Benedict XVI will preside over the beatification Mass at 10 a.m. May 1 in St. Peter’s Square, the Vatican said. Immediately after Mass the faithful can pray before Pope John Paul’s mortal remains, which will be set in front of the main altar in St. Peter’s Basilica.
The veneration “will continue until the flow of faithful ends,” it said.
Distributing the program Feb. 18, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, said the deceased pope’s remains will be in the casket in which he originally was buried in 2005 and will not be visible.
The casket will be reinterred in the Chapel of St. Sebastian on the main level of St. Peter’s Basilica in a “private” ceremony, which will occur only after the large crowds have stopped coming to pay their respects, Father Lombardi said.
The night before the beatification, a prayer vigil will be held in the grassy open space that was the ancient Circus Maximus in Rome, the Vatican said.
“It will be organized by the Diocese of Rome, which had the venerable servant of God as its bishop,” the note said. Cardinal Agostino Vallini, papal vicar for Rome, will lead the celebration and Pope Benedict is expected to watch through a video hookup.
The morning after the beatification, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, will celebrate a Mass of thanksgiving in St. Peter’s Square, the Vatican said.
U.S. Archbishop James M. Harvey, prefect of the papal household, which organizes the non-liturgical side of papal events, also issued a statement Feb. 18 emphasizing the fact that tickets will not be required to attend the beatification.
The archbishop’s statement, distributed in six languages, said he had been “informed of the existence of unauthorized offers by some tour operators, especially on the Internet,” claiming that for a fee they could help people get tickets to papal events, particularly the beatification Mass.
“For the beatification Mass of Pope John Paul II, as made clear from the outset, no tickets are required,” the statement said.
And for events that require tickets, such as the pope’s weekly general audience, the tickets “are always issued free of charge and no person or organization can request any kind of payment,” it said.
Copyright 2011 Catholic News Service/U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Dominican Sisters in Oak Ridge
A great local news story about our Nashville Dominicans that live here in town.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The Catholicism Project
Fr. Barron's Catholicism Project looks awesome!
I can't wait for it to come out (Fall of 2011)
But don't take my word for it - watch the Trailer:
For more info go to his website: http://www.wordonfire.org/Home.aspx
I can't wait for it to come out (Fall of 2011)
But don't take my word for it - watch the Trailer:
For more info go to his website: http://www.wordonfire.org/Home.aspx
Made for Each Other
The USCCB has an ad hoc committee on the Defense of Marriage. They have produced a series entitled: "Made for Each Other: A Catechetical and Educational Aid on Sexual Difference and Complementarity".
I think it looks promising.
Here is a link to the first video of the series: http://www.usccb.org/marriageuniqueforareason/
I look forward to the rest!
I think it looks promising.
Here is a link to the first video of the series: http://www.usccb.org/marriageuniqueforareason/
I look forward to the rest!
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Thursday, December 30, 2010
The Phoenix Case
I repost an article here about a decision of a Bishop in Phoenix, Arizona. It is an excellent dress-down of the situation and the media storm surrounding it. The bottom line: You are either Catholic or you are not!
Catholic Bishop Right to Push Back Against Culture of Death
by Gerard Nadal | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 12/28/10 12:25 PM
The measure comes after last May’s confrontation between Sister Margaret McBride, the hospital’s administrator who gave permission for an 11-week pregnant woman with a severe case of pulmonary hypertension to have an abortion, and Bishop Olmsted who notified her in private that her actions were formal cooperation in the child’s death, and therefore incurred a latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication.
Much confusion swirls around this case, and needs to be cleared in the interest of defending the good name of a good bishop.
First, a recap of the initial controversy last May. Pulmonary hypertension is a gravely serious condition that is exacerbated by pregnancy. Testing done at Saint Joseph’s indicated a fairly advanced stage of the disease, and it was deemed that the 27 year-old mother of four would in all likelihood not make it to term with her pregnancy. Termination of the pregnancy was advocated as the means of saving the life of the mother. Thus, the ethical crossroads.
The moral guide for hospitals and healthcare institutions is spelled out in Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (ERD’s). Directives #45 and #47 both spell out the rules for dealing with a case such as this, and Bishop Olmsted, a Doctor of Canon Law, has made it clear that this case did not fall within the parameters of these directives and what is known as the Principle of Double Effect.
In essence the principle states that a lifesaving procedure that cannot be delayed, such as the removal of a cancerous uterus before the baby can be taken in a Cesarean section at viability (~25 weeks gestation), is permissible so long as the death of the baby is the indirect and unintended effect. The life-saving treatment and resolution of a disease with immediate lethal consequence if no treatment is rendered is the good effect. The unintended death of the baby is the bad, or second (double) effect.
Such circumstances are extremely rare, given how early a baby can be delivered before full term at 40 weeks. The mother’s life must be in immediate danger and the treatment of her disease, which would also result in the death of the baby, cannot be forestalled. The case at Saint Joseph’s did not rise to the level of Double-Effect, as the baby was the sole target of intervention.
While the assessment on the part of physicians was dire, no treatment of the disease was even attempted. There are several medications that can be employed to attempt a reduction in the severity of the disease, none of which appear to have been dispensed in this case. From that point on, the actions of the hospital and Sister McBride pointed toward more than an isolated and extreme case where the decision to abort could have been simply dismissed as one bad judgment call.
There are several hospitals within a three-mile radius of Saint Joseph’s, some mere blocks away, where this woman’s husband could have taken her for the recommended abortion. They were no more than ten minutes from any number of facilities that would have performed the abortion, if that was what the couple wanted. All reports of the incident indicate that at no point was the couple told that Saint Joseph’s does not target babies for death as a means of treating a disease. Again, no evidence has surfaced that the physicians attempted to treat her medically.
This is a critical distinction that separates Catholic healthcare from its secular counterparts. Many physicians resort to abortion as a defensive strategy to avoid potential litigation. Others have signed on to the eugenics agenda and aggressively promote abortion for Down Syndrome and other babies with trisomic disorders, spinal tube defects such as spina bifida and anencephaly, and a host of other imperfections.
Patients who seek Catholic healthcare do so because of the assurance that the facility and its clinicians adhere to the ERD’s. They do so because they seek the assurance that they will be told the truth and treated in accord with Catholic moral norms, and not railroaded down the disastrous path American medicine has decided to follow. The Phoenix case is an excellent example of what happens when rebels take charge and deceive their patients and the bishop.
At the time, I remarked to peers in medicine and to groups I was invited to address that there had to be much more to this story than meets the eye. No Catholic hospital faithful to the ERD’s ad the Magisterium, within a stone’s throw of several other hospitals, makes such a decision, especially without consulting the local bishop. I opined, and was pilloried for it, that Sister McBride was presiding over a shadow healthcare system that was active in promoting an agenda that ran counter to the mission of the Church. Nobody commits first-degree murder as a first crime. No Catholic hospital administrator, especially a professed religious, signs off on such an abortion for the first time in the manner in which Sister McBride conducted herself.
There was an arrogance, an independent and defiant air about it that pointed to something deeper and darker, something that would eventually come to light.
This past week, Bishop Olmsted shared with the world the extent to which there has been a shadow system operating for over a quarter of a century, performing abortions, sterilizations, and dispensing all manner of contraception. Sister McBride, as it has now been revealed, is hardly the compassionate administrator who made a good-faith, though horrific decision.
In Part II, how Bishop Olmsted was lied to, lied about, what happens next in his courageous pushback against the rebellion within his healthcare system, and its implications nationally for Catholic healthcare.
http://www.lifenews.com/2010/12/28/catholic-bishop-right-to-push-back-against-culture-of-death/
Catholic Bishop Right to Push Back Against Culture of Death
by Gerard Nadal | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 12/28/10 12:25 PM
The measure comes after last May’s confrontation between Sister Margaret McBride, the hospital’s administrator who gave permission for an 11-week pregnant woman with a severe case of pulmonary hypertension to have an abortion, and Bishop Olmsted who notified her in private that her actions were formal cooperation in the child’s death, and therefore incurred a latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication.
Much confusion swirls around this case, and needs to be cleared in the interest of defending the good name of a good bishop.
First, a recap of the initial controversy last May. Pulmonary hypertension is a gravely serious condition that is exacerbated by pregnancy. Testing done at Saint Joseph’s indicated a fairly advanced stage of the disease, and it was deemed that the 27 year-old mother of four would in all likelihood not make it to term with her pregnancy. Termination of the pregnancy was advocated as the means of saving the life of the mother. Thus, the ethical crossroads.
The moral guide for hospitals and healthcare institutions is spelled out in Ethical and Religious Directives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (ERD’s). Directives #45 and #47 both spell out the rules for dealing with a case such as this, and Bishop Olmsted, a Doctor of Canon Law, has made it clear that this case did not fall within the parameters of these directives and what is known as the Principle of Double Effect.
In essence the principle states that a lifesaving procedure that cannot be delayed, such as the removal of a cancerous uterus before the baby can be taken in a Cesarean section at viability (~25 weeks gestation), is permissible so long as the death of the baby is the indirect and unintended effect. The life-saving treatment and resolution of a disease with immediate lethal consequence if no treatment is rendered is the good effect. The unintended death of the baby is the bad, or second (double) effect.
Such circumstances are extremely rare, given how early a baby can be delivered before full term at 40 weeks. The mother’s life must be in immediate danger and the treatment of her disease, which would also result in the death of the baby, cannot be forestalled. The case at Saint Joseph’s did not rise to the level of Double-Effect, as the baby was the sole target of intervention.
While the assessment on the part of physicians was dire, no treatment of the disease was even attempted. There are several medications that can be employed to attempt a reduction in the severity of the disease, none of which appear to have been dispensed in this case. From that point on, the actions of the hospital and Sister McBride pointed toward more than an isolated and extreme case where the decision to abort could have been simply dismissed as one bad judgment call.
There are several hospitals within a three-mile radius of Saint Joseph’s, some mere blocks away, where this woman’s husband could have taken her for the recommended abortion. They were no more than ten minutes from any number of facilities that would have performed the abortion, if that was what the couple wanted. All reports of the incident indicate that at no point was the couple told that Saint Joseph’s does not target babies for death as a means of treating a disease. Again, no evidence has surfaced that the physicians attempted to treat her medically.
This is a critical distinction that separates Catholic healthcare from its secular counterparts. Many physicians resort to abortion as a defensive strategy to avoid potential litigation. Others have signed on to the eugenics agenda and aggressively promote abortion for Down Syndrome and other babies with trisomic disorders, spinal tube defects such as spina bifida and anencephaly, and a host of other imperfections.
Patients who seek Catholic healthcare do so because of the assurance that the facility and its clinicians adhere to the ERD’s. They do so because they seek the assurance that they will be told the truth and treated in accord with Catholic moral norms, and not railroaded down the disastrous path American medicine has decided to follow. The Phoenix case is an excellent example of what happens when rebels take charge and deceive their patients and the bishop.
At the time, I remarked to peers in medicine and to groups I was invited to address that there had to be much more to this story than meets the eye. No Catholic hospital faithful to the ERD’s ad the Magisterium, within a stone’s throw of several other hospitals, makes such a decision, especially without consulting the local bishop. I opined, and was pilloried for it, that Sister McBride was presiding over a shadow healthcare system that was active in promoting an agenda that ran counter to the mission of the Church. Nobody commits first-degree murder as a first crime. No Catholic hospital administrator, especially a professed religious, signs off on such an abortion for the first time in the manner in which Sister McBride conducted herself.
There was an arrogance, an independent and defiant air about it that pointed to something deeper and darker, something that would eventually come to light.
This past week, Bishop Olmsted shared with the world the extent to which there has been a shadow system operating for over a quarter of a century, performing abortions, sterilizations, and dispensing all manner of contraception. Sister McBride, as it has now been revealed, is hardly the compassionate administrator who made a good-faith, though horrific decision.
In Part II, how Bishop Olmsted was lied to, lied about, what happens next in his courageous pushback against the rebellion within his healthcare system, and its implications nationally for Catholic healthcare.
http://www.lifenews.com/2010/12/28/catholic-bishop-right-to-push-back-against-culture-of-death/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
