Tuesday, June 06, 2006

random thoughts for a Thursday

  1. The McCarrick Mystique Oh please. This tribute to Cardinal McCarrick is so sweet that it should have a warning notice that it's dangerous for diabetics to read.

  2. What's up with all the sudden media interest in the Catholic church?The Philadelphia Enquirer is running a front page series on bitter Catholics and the Washington Post sent someone on safari to Old Saint Mary's in DC to watch the Tridentine Mass.

  3. I was reading the Pope's biography, Milestones 1927-1977. In it he mentions that there were 40 or 50 guys in his ordination class in 1951. This year American Catholics were told to rejoice because a whopping 17 men were ordained in Nebraska and all of 12 were ordained in the DC diocese. How far we have fallen.
  4. There will be Eucharistic Adoration at St. Matthew's Cathedral in Washington, DC on June 19th. Young Fr. Caulfield will give the homily and offer confession. If you're in the city stop by.
  5. Matt Abbot has a lovely article about a fine Catholic family who run an extraordinary internet business.
  6. One of these days I'm going read a book on Paul VI. He sure seems to have done a lot of weeping fits. Devout Life has an odd little tale abut one them.

4 comments:

Christine said...

"Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat who has spearheaded attempts by Capitol Hill Catholics to reach some consensus with the church, praised McCarrick for his “meaningful, pastoral counsel.” He is, she said, “a moral force.”

This was the funniest part of the article! lol

Screwtape said...

The press is interested in the Church only because it always picks up on the salacious. Maybe the current wave is due to Pope Contradiction's recent meaningless rumblings in Poland.

Maybe the dope from Connecticut meant to say "moral farce." (I'm always willing to assume the most charitable explanation.)

Or I guess maybe he meant "immoral force." With a politician, one can never be sure.

This one's a little behind events. Capitol Hill "Catholics" reached a consensus a long time ago - we'll pretend to listen to you if you pretend we're members in good standing in the Church.

You haven't visited my Blog site yet (gulagzek.blogspot.com). You need to read the letter from Whittaker Chambers to William F. Buckley. There's even a poem by Philip Larkin that's very nice and some of my own poor efforts. There's a piece of doggerel with dirty words, but the explanation, er, explains why - I think - I hope.

Now, if you'd titled your Post "randy thoughts for a Thursday" you'd be swamped and maybe even invited to blather on 60 Minutes! You could say exactly what you did say and they wouldn't know the difference.

Aut vincere aut mori.

Tradcatholic said...

I read the article on the good Catholic family - one question...I always thought that 'good Catholic families' named their kids after saints - Wiley?? Woodman?? Wade??

What's with wthat?

Screwtape said...

Dear Trad:

I'll explain.

You see, since we're all Catholics now, mostly anonymously, our family trees are more than likely chuck full of saints. According to the late Wojtyla, given all that new evidence for evolution he announced to the atheists he addressed not long ago at a Pontifical instution, we undoubtedly have orangutan ancestors - at the rate he was going I'm surprised he didn't canonize a few.

After all, I live in a community (SLC, UT) full of Later Day ones.

Were I to be baptized for the first time, I could call myself St. Dweeb. And I'd make Father Trendy take the red ball off his nose and do it.