Part II of Canadian Bishop Finally Grows a Sack of Balls: Cardinal Collins of Toronto Speak out against Tyrannical Overlord McGuinty on Bill 13

RED FLAG WARNING!!!! Due to the nature of this posting, there will be no allowances of any yellow flagging according to my blog rules (see August 2011). Anything, mildly inflammatory from anyone will be deleted and I will try to block you from this blog. If you hate what I write so much, use those fadangled Rights and Freedoms in Canada and worldwide to write your own blogpost on your own blog. Or just walk away. 

And back to our deal with the Bishop. Finally, in Canada, a Canadian bishop decided to grow a sack of balls and speak up on a major morality/sexual/ethics/political related issue. Nowhere in the history of the CCCB/Canadian Catholic Church since Vatican II, and my young life under 35 years of age have I witnessed such a spectacle. 

Remember that nerdy looking guy with the glasses and gray hair who looked like an aged Gilbert Lowe from Revenge of the Nerds? Yeah, that one who got the red hat from our Holy Papa Benedict the XVI? Yes. That guy. 

Cardinal Thomas Collins of the archdiocese of Toronto, held a press conference that was covered by a number of Toronto/Ontario major news outlets and discussed Bill 13. Unfortunately, there is no archived footage currently online on the outlets. Hopefully the diocesan website for Toronto will post up a video either on their main .com site, or their YouTube channel. Regardless, Collins has taken a stance on this issue and made a bold move doing the press conference in the public media, knowing full well this could bite him in the butt from those he works with, and also the government. In fact, he's being attacked left, right and center for doing do. Here's some examples from weblinks from the media:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1202019--cohn-the-catholic-church-versus-the-catholic-premier --> The liberal rag and public media engine for liberals everywhere in Toronto/Ontario and the Liberal Party (unoficially, but rarely do they criticize the party in this paper).
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/canadian-cardinal-talks-gay-straight-alliances-schools --> From a liberal catholic rag that is of theologically poor quality, espousing the "Jesus loves everybody" garbage that makes today's Church sermons suck and the "Let's be tolerant and inclusive to make the Church more welcoming and bring people back" arguments."
http://torontounderground.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/is-torontos-catholic-cardinal-collins-promoting-hate-with-his-gsa-stance/ --> Some Toronto left-wing socialist site. This is just another example of the vitrol and hate thrown our way at the Catholic church. Their latest front page article has another one of those "creepy B16" pics commonly shown to paint our Holy father in an evil light with the usual intolerance arguments by our enemies.

So what was the crux of what Cardinal Collins said and what's the commentary from the media? First, THIS: A statement from Him as part of the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario on the issue:

http://www.archtoronto.org/pdf/statementantibullyingmay2812.pdf

I`m going to try and pick the meatiest parts of the statement in order to show you how he`s decided to sacrifice his comfort and prestige and may be on his way to both the Papacy, and maybe, even martyrdom if Overlord McGuinty finds a way to legally enact a 1984 scenario.

Let`s start with this:
``.... This may not always happen in a Catholic school, for we are all sinners, but we earnestly try to live up to this standard. We have a rich array of spiritual resources, and methods developed 
out of our faith tradition, which not only fight bullying, but shape a school environment that is welcoming to all. Our schools also provide competent and compassionate personal support for 
individuals. We also consistently have sought, and continue to seek, to work together cooperatively with the Ministry of Education to assure that Catholic schools meet and exceed all 
government standards ....``

Here`s what he`s saying. Some of his detractors will say ``your schools are hypocritical and don`t teach the Gospel`` as he alluded to prior to this paragraph. HE OPENLY ADMITS that our schools have failed many a time in this regard, from the teachers to the students. This is a ``mea culpa on behalf of the liberal, watered-down catechized people if you will. He also is saying that the schools have their own, genuinely Catholic (and possible moral law abiding) methods for dealing with bullying and welcoming others. Also, the Catholic School system, aside from the religious ed courses unique to it, DO NOT teach outside of the government mandated curriculum (what teachers do in individual classes, is another story). In other words, they teach according to code. Could they be better, like Catholic private schools in their religious education? Absolutely! Remember though, the government cares only about the non-religious issues. In other words, "Our Catholic school systems render to Caesar the things that are due to Caesar, and to God that things that are God's" (cf. Mark 12:17). Also as a side note, this paragraph could contain proof that one of the four conditions are agreed upon for a just war under the Just War Theory: Consistent negotiations or means of dealing with the enemy are ineffective and have failed.

".... A "Gay-Straight Alliance" is a particular method of addressing one form of bullying, and providing personal support.  The GSA model was developed in the United States in the 1980's. Because this model is so closely related to a movement with particular views concerning the human person and the issues of life, people who disagree with those views are understandably concerned that the model can serve as a means not only to address bullying, but to promote the views with which they disagree. Those who share those views will no doubt wish to use the GSA methodology. They are certainly free to do so...."


Whoa! I can`t believe this. This is old news? Collins! Why the heck aren't you writing a book or something! I can't believe GSAs have been around for a long time that I feel guilty I didn't know the history. Really this is something that should be researched. As for the bolded paragraph ... that's right Collins. It is all tied together: Contraception, Abortion, Homosexual relations, Co-habitation .... It all points back to the value of the human person and the issue of life, that all life begins at conception and the person is given the soul at it. You really think when someone is pregnant they will birth anything but a human being? Of course those anti-life/anti-human views are simply self-serving, pointing to a person's selfish desire to deny life for their own wants.

Finally from his statement, I highlight this last question of a series of questions he asks to show that the government isn't thinking about one's best interests:

5. Apart from whatever one thinks of the idea of GSAs, in any particular school is a GSA the most effective method to help students being targeted by bullies? Who makes that decision in a 
local school? Is it those adults who are entrusted with responsibility for the local school community and all of its members? The new policy says that they do not. Is that wise? 


Here we have the most simplistic argument right here: Is this "anti-bullying policy" going to stop bullying? Well maybe for the homosexual kids, but what about the ones with mental disorders? The ones with physical handicaps? What about little Jimmy just cause he is actually a "nice guy" and the other boys are mean jock types? Or what about little Suzy who like Jason the cool guy and he likes her back, but because Lilette and her band of gossip-jackals who are dressing in skimpy shorts and crop-tops at the ages of 12, is jealous, she start malicious cyber-bullying online and gossiping with her friends at school, lowering the self-esteem of poor Suzy and possibly, Suzy ends up killing herself? Worse, it sounds like the adults will have NO say in this matter. You don't want a GSA in schools or want to promote different type of club that can more effectively manage a kid with possible/ID'd same sex attraction in a Catholic way? TOO BAD!!! What overlord McGuinty and his general in command, Broten say, goes. Worse, if a kid actually, practically, lives out their faith and actually knows his/her catechism 2357-2359, will a kid have to violate their consciece and faith to evade the "homosexual" or "tolerance" police from suspending or expelling him/her, even their own teacher??? Will the teacher use this as an excuse to lower their grades and due to this policy the teacher gets away with it? While we're at it, what about ADULT BULLYING via the abuse of power as the "tolerant" teacher? This has a lot of far reaching implications.

Now, what about other media coverage? here's some links:

http://www.torontosun.com/videos/1660439848001
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/29/fight-against-gay-straight-alliances-just-warming-up
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/29/mcguinty-bullies-catholic-schools
http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/05/28/church-rejects-ontarios-gay-straight-club-decision-accuses-government-of-micromanagement/
http://www.catholicregister.org./component/k2/item/14592-father-of-suicide-victim-pleads-for-anti-bullying-bill-that-protects-all-students
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/31/liberal-hypocrisy-on-catholic-schools

While there's a lot of 2ndary media coverage out there now that Pandora's box is open, I'll only highlight certain things:
- in the National post article, it lists this correctly about our Catechism: "The Catechism of the Catholic Church says homosexual behaviour is “intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstance can it be approved.” However, the Catechism also teaches that homosexuals “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” YES! Finally a mainstream media source actually gets it right and quotes/summarizes properly the Catechism's teaching. Combined with the sensitivity sentence it correctly quotes from paragraph 2357-2358. In a nutshell "love the sinner, hate the sin." Thank you National Post for finally doing this right!


- The Post also cites that the Toronto DISTRICT (Public) School board examined in a survey what the most common reason for bullying is. While the pro-gay group EGALE stated 64% of gays have been subject to bullying, the TDSB looked at bullying across the board and found: "...The most cited reason was “body image” (38% in Grades 7 to 8; 27% in Grades 9 to 12), followed by grades or marks (17% and 12% respectively), and 7% in all grades noted language as a cause.The next three categories at 5% or lower were gender, religion and income. The issue of gay bullying did not register in the study.

- The CR story about the gay kid who committed suicide has two important highlights I must comment on: 1) The father in the story would rather see the bill protect the rights of all students, even as far as a merger of 13 and 14 (I disagree with this fully. Just pass the broad-spectrum bill 14). (2) The gay kid did a one up by starting a "rainbow club." Despite the name, this club was for all types of students affected by bullying. Even this openly gay kid, knew what the heck to do and not to close off and clique. Bullying is crap, regardless of whose doing it and who's targeted. He got it, McTyrant and Broten do not. Isn't it ironic that the gay kid knows what's better in this issue than the politicians?

- Blizzard's latest posting is quite poignant with her message. Here's the juicy and important points with my Fr. Z tinted comments:
> "Yep, our fearless leader is taking on the mantle not just of secular leader of the people of this province, but also as our moral, religious and spiritual authority" "
[Exactly! He wants to tell us what to think, do, and say. It's the first step towards a real 1984 scenario here. By 1984 I'm referring to George Orwell's titled book. Excellent read, get it. My older, borrowed school library copy at the time, even had the eye in the triangle on it. Creepy no?] 
> "And it’s pure hypocrisy. The premier’s four children went to Catholic school. His wife, Terri, teaches in a Catholic school. Education Minister Laurel Broten’s sons also go to Catholic school."
[ Exactly! What a stupid irony. You're screwing over the system you have put your kids in. If you really value public education McGuinty and Broteh, and you KNOW that what you are doing goes against the system, why the heck put your kids and work in the system?]
"The Catholic church isn’t a buffet. You don’t pick and choose which values you want and which you don’t. You either buy into the whole bundle — or you pull a Martin Luther and start your own religion."
[ HOLY BAT FARTS BATMAN!!!! Here's a secular media reporter who has just launched the bomb. 200% Correct! As a Catholic, when it comes to specific doctrines and dogmas, as well as central core teachings of the faith, one cannot be a Catholic and pick and choose what to believe. The same goes for those in charge of running the system. I personally think it's sad that a secular journalist gets the picture when so many liberal clergy, theologians, and laity don't. They purposely choose to ignore how the Catholic Church works. If it isn't a discipline or discussable topic, you can't reject it publicly (private discussion behind close doors, is another story). Really this is a bloody embarrassment on us. I think there's even a Ghandi quote about the average Catholic's hypocrisy too, and that I think made it into the Grade 11 World Religions textbook now used in the diocese of Toronto, the one with the Canadian Catholic perspective. And BTW, those other sects and religions did just that. They didn't like what Mean Old Rome was giving, they started their own sect of Christianity or religion]
"The Catholic system does what the public system cannot. It teaches morals and values and ethics to children. It’s able to enforce a stricter code of discipline, because it can expel students to the public system."
[ This is another good reason why people in Ontario, Canada, even if you send your kids to public school, or aren't Catholic, you should fight against the government on this. Save the union and trustee crap, This school system strives to do more than teach ABCs. People PURPOSELY put their kids in this system for these reasons. ALSO, the system is widely known for giving a kid overall a better education than its public counterparts.]
"So put up or shut up, Premier. You won the 2007 election squawking about religious schools being a horrific form of “segregation and sequestration.” So, either leave the Catholic schools alone. Or pull their funding and go with one public school system. And everyone, please. Simmer down and do us all a favour. It you don’t subscribe to Catholic beliefs, don’t put your kids in Catholic schools and don’t have family members teach in them."
[ This is one of the best closers of an editorial, ever. And this should also apply to everyone. either go do your own secular public thing and leave us alone, or if you are with us, "tolerate" the system or espouse its wholeness. It's works both ways you know. Tolerance is not unilateral.] 

Now, to end off this post, I'd like to quote a few paragraphs concerning this issue of freedom of moral conscience and man, from the 1993 JPII encyclical Veritatis Splendor. These paragraphs I think are a good summary of the Church's wisdom on this matter at hand:


42. 42. Patterned on God's freedom, man's freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the Council: "Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means" [The footnote for this is, believe it or not, a Vatican II document, Gaudium et Spes, paragraph 17.]. 
[ So Man cannot do this when an external force, such as one's social circle or his/her own government try to impose on their consceince and free will through the subversion of the civil law, which is infringing on the Natural Law that governs all humanity.]


For those who criticize the Church as a morality enforcer, as some of its critics say and will cheer McTyrant in opening the Catholic schools to be more "accepting," here's what JPII says on that: 95. ".... The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church's motherhood can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride of Christ, who is the Truth in person. "As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm .... The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection" [The key word is proposed. Our Holy Mother Church is not the arbiter, or in other words the enforcer of morality and rules on people. It won't lie in what it demands and you can even access the Catechism online at www.vatican.va,. Ironically McGuinty's actions support this paragraph and makes him look like the one who's enforcing things, not the Church.]


Finally, one last paragraph with no commentary from V.S. that I think pretty much sums up what Bill 13 will result in or become one of the first major steps toward : 


"101. In the political sphere, it must be noted that truthfulness in the relations between those governing and those governed, openness in public administration, impartiality in the service of the body politic, respect for the rights of political adversaries, safeguarding the rights of the accused against summary trials and convictions, the just and honest use of public funds, the rejection of equivocal or illicit means in order to gain, preserve or increase power at any cost — all these are principles which are primarily rooted in, and in fact derive their singular urgency from, the transcendent value of the person and the objective moral demands of the functioning of States.¹⁶⁰ When these principles are not observed, the very basis of political coexistence is weakened and the life of society itself is gradually jeopardized, threatened and doomed to decay (cf. Ps 14:3-4; Rev 18:2-3, 9-24). Today, when many countries have seen the fall of ideologies which bound politics to a totalitarian conception of the world — Marxism being the foremost of these — there is no less grave a danger that the fundamental rights of the human person will be denied and that the religious yearnings which arise in the heart of every human being will be absorbed once again into politics. This is the risk of an alliance between democracy and ethical relativism, which would remove any sure moral reference point from political and social life, and on a deeper level make the acknowledgement of truth impossible. Indeed, "if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism"


Everyone, please add Cardinal Collins to you prayers. I'm sure that people are now going to rally really hard against him for what he did, both in the public sphere of society, and even in his chancery offices and dioceses. He will not have it easy from this point on, even though he was not stern and aggressive in his message. That does not matter to liberals or the immoral, even being polite counts as an affront to their selfish desires, even if they don the clerical collar or the pointy hat. Whenever someone actually proclaims the Gospel and the Good News or the true Catholic faith in this day and age, they will be "crucified" for it. I'm sure this will only intensify in future, even after bill 13 passes and 14 is likely rejected. Let's also pray if this man lives on, that perhaps he might one day lead the church as our next Holy father as a viable candidate for the Papacy. 


Pax Tibi Christi, YCRCM. 


IMPORTANT UPDATE, June 5, 2012


Bad news everyone. I got this from a friend in my personal e-mail:


"Regrettably, Bill 13 passed today with the support of the majority of the Liberal and NDP Members of Parliament behind it.  The PC MPPS unanimously voted against it. The final vote was 65 in favor, 36 against."

Well, I am honestly not surprised. With only 1/3 of the house on our side, and with the recent chummying up of Horvath and McGuinty on the budget that was passed a month or so ago, as well as shared liberal and anti-Catholic ideologies (and an equal lust for power and wealth with no consideration for their constituents), I knew that the NDP and Lie-berals of Ontario would vote in favour. Also, with the passing of two rounds in the legislature, before many different non-Catholic and Catholic protest groups sprung into action with petitions and demonstrations, I pretty much predicted this bill was sunk. You have to cut them off before they go through even one round in parliament to make a difference. 

The Diocese has made a brief press statement on the matter which can be linked here: http://www.archtoronto.org/pdf/statementbill13june512.pdf 

However, because it's short, I'm pasting this in its entirety here:

"June 5, 2012 
Statement from the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario  
re: Accepting Schools Act (Bill 13) 


Today the Ontario Legislature has passed Bill 13. The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario has expressed serious concerns regarding certain aspects of this legislation, as have numerous other individual citizens and groups. 


Recognizing that the Accepting Schools Act is now the law, Catholic partners will seek, as we 
have always done, in a way that is in accord with our faith, to foster safe and welcoming school 
communities. Bullying, in any form, is unacceptable. At the core of our Catholic Christian 
beliefs is the command to welcome every person with love and respect.  
  
Thomas Cardinal Collins 
Archbishop of Toronto 
President, Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario"

While I was initially enamoured that Collins grew a set of balls, and my ideas in that post will not change, this statement is sadly weak and pathetic, and to me smells of cow-towing to the government. At least it's consistent with his major press release last week in terms of the language. However, this does not give me any new or growing confidence in Collins on this matter. Rather, it displays a lack of action and we'll just "do what we've always done. I think that what's really needed is an affirming statement that we'll keep on fighting for the Church, even so far as to suggest canonical penalties for Broten and McGuinty, especially excommunication for McGuinty He's got a public, sinful rap-sheet a mile wide in his public dissent from the faith as a politician, that I'm sure even a 1/2 cursory look would be ground for excommunication. I'll tell you that if Collins does that, He'll be the first bishop since Vatican II in North America, possibly worldwide, to formally excommunicate a major government figure, and may even earn him the Papal Tiara out of admiration by his fellow Cardinals. 

Please Cardinal Collins, if you see this post, or your secretaries or whomever brings this to your attention, please continue fighting and please consider using this heavy handed weapon for the Faith. Please let the Cardinal Virtues of Prudence, Justice, and Fortitude reign mighty! All Catholics in the present in your diocese, and those to be born in future, need your leadership NOW, or the Faith will continue to die out. We few committed and practising laity cannot fight this political, cultural, and  spiritual war alone. Don't abandon your troops. I'll be praying for you, Your Eminence. 

However, there is one silver lining that might be possible. The 6 O'clock news said something along the lines that while this is assent and law, Catholic schools do not have to be forced to do exactly as the government mandates, something about constitutional rights and such. Well there are rights federally, so perhaps between those long held constitutional rights, and those of the Charter (ironically which might be able to be used for good in this instance) may allow Catholic schools to say "whatever" and continue to hold whatever Catholic-centred single sex attraction clubs, or create ones with a broader focus and incorporates those with SSA in a Catholic manner. It was a 15 second blurb, so I didn't get all of the statement.  


However after a view of Toronto's only moderately conservative newspaper, http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/05/ontario-mpps-pass-anti-bullying-bill 
I found out the weapon the schools can use: ".... Campaign Life Coalition, which has rejected the entire Bill 13, claiming it is the government’s backdoor attempt to implement its controversial sex education curriculum, called on all Catholic ratepayers to encourage their school boards to invoke Section 93 which provides constitutional protection for their religious beliefs in education ...."


Regardless, all groups who speak for the rights of parents and Catholic education should continue to fight. 

However, if this continues not only in Ontario but in other provinces (e.g. Alberta's government apparently is attacking home-schoolers as well), then the Catholic schools may have to do one of two things or the families involved:

1) Sever financial ties with the government, close down a number of facilities, pour whatever remaining money exists into the leftover ones, and make Catholic education totally private, like other monotheistic religious schools if they plan to KEEP the existing framework of the catholic school boards in the provinces (but fire those damn trustees and unions. Most don't give two rat's behinds about the faith.)

OR

2a) Families might have to start banding together and homeschooling their kids or create homeschools by hiring teachers privately to instruct their kids in groups and/or send their kids to the few already existing Catholic Private boarding and day schools as well as create new ones. This is possible albeit with great financial and social sacrifices, but can be highly rewarding. I know a family personally that has accomplished this, and the kids are quite mature and way beyond their years. Conversing with the oldest kid whose almost a teen is like talking to a miniature adult! Now, If the government goes after their rights like in other provinces, then

2b) We will have to get our religious education in secret, or perhaps operate like Jewish kids do prior to their bar/bat mitzvahs: Normal day hours learning government mandated school stuff, and then privately off campus from 4-6, get parish/private religious education of the best kind. And if Catholicism becomes illegal to be taught anywhere ..... well, that's a really bad scenario but I won't go into crazy land/chastisement stuff right now.

Everyone, all I can say is continue to support your groups or join new ones, continue to invest in orthodox Catholic Novus Ordo AND extraordinary form initiatives and parishes, please get involved with your child's schools, and please pray intently and furiously. The Devil is at large and the wolves are circling the best of us, even our Holy Father. 

Pax, YCRCM. 

Part I of Canadian Bishop Finally Grows a Sack of Balls: Cardinal Collins of Toronto Speak out against Tyrannical Overlord McGuinty on Bill 13

Hello All and anyone viewing this blog entry,

Well, I'll say May 28, 2012 has been quite a day in the faith/political atmosphere of Canada. As part of the Conservative Catholic/Traditional Catholic supporting blogosphere, one of the things I see daily from the more emotionally charged and angry parts of our side of this liturgical and spiritual front, is that a number of the bloggers call the Bishops something to the effect of "spineless cowards" for not standing up for the faith and letting our Church decrease to less than 25% of all Catholics attending Mass once a week. While I do agree to a certain extent, some bloggers and internet celebrities, like to make the cowardliness of the Bishops their daily bread and butter for their  "audience" of superiorly right wing people (which I don't know how many that is), be they readers or fellow commentators. They give the impression that bishops give into novelties and the secular world, and act as power hungry individuals who sit on thrones like CEOs of companies in their dioceses, and choose not to fulfill their role as sheperds, defenders, and teachers of the faith, as well as to foster anger and disgust for those bishops. Many of those bishops have failed and when they do, those far right blogosphere guys like Michael Voris on his Vortex, or the Canadian version of Voris, John Pacheco (and Steve G, though Steve is the more prudent of the two commentators on their site, So Con or Bust) come out guns ablazing.

Hey, I agree when a bishop acts not in keeping with the faith, give em a verbal or theological cream pie to the face, though you might want to apply a different heavy-handed, but Christ-centered approach unlike those guys I mentioned above (yeah yeah go ahead and use the whip of chords on the moneychangers example. The thing is, their joyless tone drives otherwise hungry Catholics away, while other bloggers or YouTubers receive more hits). View their content if you want to see what I'm talking about.

But I have also started to see a trend in our Catholic faith. Our bishops, slowly but surely, one at a time, are starting to grow their "balls again" so to speak: the USA Bishops for the first time in decades since Vatican II were united for the first time on a central issue of the faith (the contraception mandate forced on institutions by Obama), Bishop Morlino of Plateville's attempt to reintroduce valid catechesis and liturgy to a nasty and ``Spirit of Vatican II`` possessed diocese of Plateville in the USA with priests from a traditionally-minded order, and recently, in Canada, A certain red hat and hopefully, future pope, launched a bomb (albeit one in need of more TNT in the casing).

The demon that the tyrant Overlord McGuinty, Premier of Ontario and current provincial leader of the Liberal Party, wants to enforce on kids for the sake of the homosexual vote: Bill 13. Here is the link for the bill in parliament, which is being disguised as an ``anti-bullying bill``:
http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&Intranet=&BillID=2549
Please read this in full! So why should one as a Catholic be opposed to this bill? Let's start with the preamble, my commentary in red 'Fr. Z' tinted colour with bold text as emphasis:
"Preamble

The people of Ontario and the Legislative Assembly:

Believe that education plays a critical role in preparing young people to grow up as productive, contributing and constructive citizens in the diverse society of Ontario; 

Believe that all students should feel safe at school and deserve a positive school climate that is inclusive and accepting, regardless of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability; [Yeah the usual stuff of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that liberally constructed "thing" of that liberal fool Trudeau. Hmmm, so what do you mean by sexual orientation "safety" and "climate"???] ...."

".... Believe that students need to be equipped with the knowledge, skills, attitude and values to engage the world and others critically, which means developing a critical consciousness that allows them to take action on making their schools and communities more equitable and inclusive for all people, [In other words political activitsts for the Liberal party line or NDP party line] including LGBTTIQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, transsexual, two-spirited, intersexed, queer and questioning) people; [So what about religious people, atheistic people, handicapped people .... etc? Seems pretty focused on a specific group of people.]

Recognize that a whole-school approach is required, and that everyone — government, educators, school staff, parents, students and the wider community — has a role to play in creating a positive school climate and preventing inappropriate behaviour, such as bullying, sexual assault, gender-based violence and incidents based on homophobia; [Of which would include forcing Catholic schools to NEVER actually teach the Catholic Fatih as outlined in the Catechism paragraphs 2357-2359 because, well saying their acts are "intrinsically disordered" and "contrary to the natural law" is a hate crime and homophobic]

Acknowledge that there is a need for stronger action [Again with the action???] to create a safe and inclusive environment in all schools, and to support all students, including both students who are impacted by and students who have engaged in inappropriate behavior, to assist them in developing healthy relationships [That is LBGTTIQ types, not heterosexual ones] , making good choices [as long as they do not constitue absolute true ethics and morals of course and are societally appropriate], continuing their learning and achieving success.

The ``recognize`` paragraph in the preamble is the start of why Catholics are not going to like when this bill gets assent after the third reading. Let's delve a little bit further shall we:

   1.  (1)  Subsection 1 (1) of the Education Act is amended by adding the following definition:

“bullying” means repeated and aggressive behaviour by a pupil where,

  (a)  the behaviour is intended by the pupil to cause, or the pupil ought to know that the behaviour would be likely to cause, harm, fear or distress to another individual, including psychological harm or harm to the individual’s reputation, and

  (b)  the behaviour occurs in a context where there is a real or perceived power imbalance between the pupil and the individual based on factors such as size, strength, age, intelligence, peer group power [including those of a specific religion], economic status, social status, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, family circumstances, gender, race, disability or the receipt of special education; (“intimidation”) [This could be widely interpreted by lawmakers, judges, justices of the peace, and the Human Rights councils to include the "special education" that a Catholic child receives in their schools under instruction of the faith. So you can say bye bye to anything remotely connected to Catholicism because the "intimidation" is associated with our moral and ethical teachings.]

5.  The Act is amended by adding the following section:

Bullying Awareness and Prevention Week

   300.0.2  (1)  The week beginning on the third Sunday in November in each year is proclaimed as Bullying Awareness and Prevention Week. [So, what will this entail? Will Catholic schools be forced to bring in pro-homosexual speakers that may encourage the children anywhere from saying that these relationships are OK against the teachings of the faith, to encouraging sexual acts, and what about staging those mock pride parades in elementary school years? My point is that there is no specific outline as to what is to be promoted in these weeks and again, the law is about INTERPRETATION. If the people interpreting the law interpret it liberally, and the people in the seat of power are liberal or worse, in their minds are anti-Catholic bigots, Catholic kids, teachers, and parents can kiss their rights to a good solid Catholic education goodbye. If they ever come to a court case, they will likely lose.]

Same, purpose

   (2)  The purpose of subsection (1) is to promote awareness and understanding of bullying and its consequences in the school community. 

Section 6, subsection 3 is lengthy to post here, but if you read it, it gives way to much power to the Minister of Education to do many things such as: "...establish policies and guidelines with respect to disciplining pupils, including policies and guidelines respecting,  (a)  the use of disciplinary measures within a framework that,            (i)  identifies pupil behaviours that are inappropriate and that, without excluding less serious behaviour, include bullying, sexual assault, gender-based violence and incidents based on homophobia,...." "(d)  training for all teachers and other staff;". Also, because the Minister of Education will wield such power in the Amended Education Act, she or he can do things like: `` ... establish policies and guidelines with respect to bullying prevention and intervention in schools, including policies and guidelines respecting, (a)  training for all teachers and other staff; (b)  resources to support pupils who are impacted by bullying; (c)  the resources provided, as part of programs described in section 312, to pupils who have been suspended or expelled for bullying;   (d)  procedures that allow pupils to report incidents of bullying safely and in a way that minimizes the possibility of reprisal;   (e)  the use of disciplinary measures within the framework described in clause (6) (a) in response to bullying;  (f)  procedures for responding appropriately and in a timely manner to bullying. [Do you really comfortable with a person such as Broten weilding that much power over your child's teachers and his/her education? Worse the teachers organizations under this law will have to force their teachers to obey these policies and enact them, and if found out they are not doing so, Jimmy's miracle teacher will get the pink slip and never return to teaching if the college finds the teacher guilty of disobeing the governments' policies with regard to these rules]

I've only picked a few examples of the law to be passed for you to see that it is too vague and also too controlling to give the government and associated legal bodies that much power over your child's Catholic (and also public) education. 

Anyways, this post is getting too long, so I`m going to do part II with the focus on the man of the hour ....

YCRCM.

Quickpost: Seraphic Strikes Again

Hi Everyone:

Minor business: Well, something big happened in Canada. For the first time in decades, a bishop publicly spoke out against (or more like weakly discussed) a critical social/political issue that would affect faith and morals. I'm just trying to find the video source and I need time to make the big post, which I won't get till tomorrow after night shift.

Major Business: Here's some "awesome sauce" from Dorothy Cummings McClean (a.k.a. Seraphic of Seraphic Singles) on who nice Catholic girls and nice Catholic bachelors should avoid when pursuing dating and a potential marriage

By the way, there is something seriously wrong with chastity education when all we tell girls is to look out for guys who just want sex. We should also be telling girls to look out for guys who just want a security blanket (e.g. seminarians who date), or who just want a friendly smokescreen (e.g. gay guys who date girls), or who are too cheap to pay for a therapist (e.g. cute guys who meet up so they can tell you about other girls) or who are looking for the non-sexual perks of marriage without having to get married first (e.g. guys who "need" help with their laundry/cooking/cleaning). 

And no doubt guys should be warned against NCG who aren't really interested in marriage right now as much as they are in emotional adventures and the rush of falling in love and the thrill of lover's triangles and all that powerful operatic crap girls read about in books.

Just some add-ons though Seraphic: how about NCBs avoid girls who are simply "gold diggers", superficial "hotties" and for Catholic ones devoted to their faith, to avoid lukewarm Catholics who just want the Church for theirs and their children's major milestones, and won't put in the time to truly educate, and show example to, their kids?

See the full post here:
http://seraphicsinglescummings.blogspot.ca/2012/05/be-my-girlfriend-but-you-should-know.html

YCRCM.

``Yes, Lord: You know that I love you`.` Reflection on a Gospel from a Novus Ordo Mass for Friday, Seventh Week of Easter Cycle 1/Year 1 at Lunchtime

Hello Everyone.

It's kind of exciting that I'm getting 20-50 page-views per day now. Gives me a little hope now as things aren't exactly peachy keen in my personal life.

Any ways, I decided to go on my lunch break Friday to a parish that is a 5-minute walk from my workplace. The best part is that because it is a parish whose priestly order has a charism that focuses on redemption and the offering of sacraments that was contrary to the challenges in the Church at the time of its foundation. So They offer confession before almost all their major masses and every one on Sunday (Thank the Lord! Here's an order and a parish that knows about the worthy redemption of the Sacrament of the Eucharist!!!!!).

So obviously I went for confession, but also I stayed for Mass because I wanted to offer prayers and my spiritual work of being there to the Lord concerning an  intention in a minor, but personal important spiritual conflict I am having, and feel that I know what the outcome will be based on a key statement.

The homily was given by the chaplain from my workplace. The Gospel reading for Friday, May 25 in the Novus Ordo from the CCCB lectionary for Canada, was from John 21:15-19. Nutshell version: Jesus wants Peter to be a leader and step up and spread the mission of His Church but also he hints that he will die not by his own hands or naturally (that is he will undergo the Passion, Death and Resurrection). He does a well-known reversal of when Peter denies Christ 3 times in the Passion: Christ asks him 3 times ``Do you love me?" and of course Peter says yes, but Christ replies "Feed my lambs."

The chaplain decided to focus on this famous reversal, speaking about the theme of Love. His ending on the topic was a little weak, and personally I felt that the priest could have gone a bit more into explaining about the virtue of Charity (which is also called Love) or explaining more about the highest level of Love which the trinity expressed perfectly: Divine Love, or Caritas. You can read Pope Benedict's Encyclical on that Caritas in Veritate (Love in Truth) with regard to that.

However, what struck me from that day's homily, was that he likely used a recent tragedy as a literary device in order to emphasize a point about the Love of Christ. The summation is that  a young man, who fell in love with a woman, was rejected. He then proceeded with a firearm to her, threatens her or someone else, and in the end he shot himself. I thought I heard "students" or "student" in the homily so after an internet search, this is the story that matched the most times in links. The news item is from India and it is fairly recent, having happened last week involving young university students:

http://www.ndtv.com/article/cities/man-shoots-self-in-girls-hostel-after-being-rejected-by-woman-211348

After relating the story, the priest said that yes, the man "loved" the woman, but is this really love? That question, got me thinking a bit, and I can conclude that, no it's not. Love should not end in a person shooting one's self, and further love cannot be present in forcing another person to do one's bidding or express emotions not there. Instead, all that is present is submission to a more dominant person, fear, and unhappiness. The main point that I remember the priest speaking from this, is that the love of the Trinity has to be present at the core of us as Catholics (I think he used the Holy Spirit. It would make sense as some priests and a doctoral student I know has said that the Holy Spirit is Love.). If our actions are devoid of true, Christian love, well .... I cannot remember what the priest said about that, but I can say that obviously if faith without works is dead, the reverse can also be (and in Catholicism must be,) true. If part of our faith is that our Trinity expresses the most perfect form of love, Caritas, and we ourselves are vessels for the Holy Spirit from Baptism and must carry out God/Christ's Love as part of our Catholic life, then yes, Love/the Theological Virtue of Charity/Caritas must be at the very core of what we do as Catholics (how we do it, though, and how this teaching has been misapplied, is another kettle of fish).

It was a nice little piece of mind that day, concerning that conflict I had and still do on my mind. I pray and hope in that conflict that the Theological virtue of Love will be present. It was definitely my verbal spiritual nourishment, in addition to the ULTIMATE spiritual nourishment found in the Eucharist of our Blessed Lord as his Glorified body present on Earth.

Hoped you enjoyed what I have shared, Pax. YCRCM.

Quickpost: A fun thought from Seraphic AKA Dorothy Cummings Mclean of the Catholic Register

Here's a fun little quip I found online from a blog called Charming Disarray, in response to a post called "The Wrong Kind of Modesty" by Seraphic of her blogs (a.k.a. Dorothy Cummings Mclean of the Catholic Register):

" .... Perhaps Trad communities in the USA would profit from knowing that Trads in western Europe have less paranoid standards of female modesty. We are also laissez-faire about mantillas. We also drink hard spirits to a certain extent."

lol! Now that's my kind of TLM/EF/TC female! Where do I find a young spirited lass like that whose not taken already???

Musing and charmed, YCRCM.

Quickpost: Fr. Z. on the Sacrament of Reconciliation Formula. PRIESTS PLEASE READ.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/05/quaeritur-you-are-absolved-of-your-sins-instead-of-i-absolve-you/

Cause I am anti-liturgical and anti-sacramental abuse. "Say the black and do the red" please, for the sake of our souls.

YCRCM.

Quickpost: Finally CCCB try to stay ahead of the Curve

Here's a quick post to acknowledge my bishop's conference actually doing something right:

http://www.cccb.ca/site/images/stories/pdf/Freedom_of_Conscience_and_Religion.pdf

This is a pastoral letter about freedom of conscience, inspired by Obama's reign of political enforcement on Catholic's consciences with the contraception issue. It's also going on here in various provinces, but most well known in Ontario with McGuinty proposing his anti-Catholic Bill 13 disguised in the form of an "anti-bullying" bill or should I say a selective protection/discrimination bill.

Anyways a small round of applause to the CCCB for TRYING. However two notes:
1) This is really "dead on arrival" like the other pastoral letter to young people on sexual mores. Unless this is talked about in Joe Catholic's church pulpit by his average to somewhat liberal minded/heterodox pastor, or distributed by the parishes, this will once again have no effect on the average Catholic.

2) Mixed blessing: Pro is that they are footnoting the key Vatican II documents and a lot of JPII and B16. The bad thing is that freedom of conscience and relations with the state and governments, as well as social doctrine, has already been covered in depth by prior popes and there is not one single reference to one of those pre Vatican II popes. CMON CCCB!!!! JPII and B16 are not the ONLY good popes out there to speak on this. Really. much better research could have been done.

Regardless, READ THE DOCUMENT!!!!! SPREAD THE WORD!!!! Perhaps we, the Canadian Catholic Blogosphere can keep this thing alive a little more and put it on life support vs needing the crash cart and declaring this letter "clinically dead."

YCRCM.

Quickpost: Lahey is laicized

Hello All.

Many of you have probably heard of the case of ex-bishop Raymond Lahey who was caught in Canada in possession of kiddie porn on his computer. I've mentioned it briefly in other posts when I've ranted. My country's "wonderful" bishop's conference, the CCCB, just published this:

http://www.cccb.ca/site/eng/media-room/statements-a-letters/3338-cccb-statement-on-raymond-lahey

In a nutshell, the only thing this guy can do now is administer reconciliation in dire straits of death if there is no valid priest around to do so or is heavily impeeded. THANK GOD that the virtue of justice has been held to an extent in the Catholic Church, that this guy cannot hold ANY office in the Church ever again. What he has done is irreprehensible and only fueled further the fire to the critics who lash out at our Church, saying all our priests in the Church are sexual predators.

Now, I do take some excpetion to those violated by these sick ephebophiles who used the cover of the Church and priesthood to carry out their sick homosexual tendencies. I understand the damage psycholgically that can be done in such acts and they are right to their anger at being violated in many different aspects. Worse, those who abuse the priesthood to do these acts are twisted and ruin the majority of priests who don't engage in these acts. If you are going to live a homosexual life or one with same sex attraction (SSA), DO NOT abuse a position of authority and respect to do so, on behalf of your fellow homosexuals and those in the position of power you serve (even if they aren't homosexual). 

As for the legal punishment, well I do not think there will be much justice as the liberal justice system is corrupt in Canada, between abuse of the liberally constructed (under Pierre Elliot Trudeau in the 60's as prime minister) Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and also our lax judiciary representatives, who only give out major or near maximum/max sentences for heinous crimes like sexual crimes with pedophilia and/or associated murder (e.g. the Rafferty likely rape and certain murder case of Tori Stafford). Even regular old murderers get their 1st degree sentences reduced due to "time spent in custody" and I've even heard of a stupid 2-for-1 rule for those in the Don County Jail in Toronto, Ontario, because the conditions are horrible there!

That's why I'm glad that Lahey is getting what he deserves for his crime. He has shamed the Church, shamed the priesthood, those he was serving in his Maritimes diocese, and also too, those with SSA. Yes, them too he has shamed and misrepresented and NOT shown what the Catechism teaches about them: that they too are beings created in the image of God, to be treated with the same diginity and respect as any other created human being, like those of other races, nationalities, colour, etc. Not to mention most people, likely even those with SSA, find kiddie porn and kiddie acts irreprehensible (save the minority of those involved in NAMBLA. I won't even say what that is. Go do an internet search).

All I can say henceforth now, is that we pray for a number of things:
1) To the Lord in reparation for the atrocities that we commit as a concupiscent human race, via our prayers, acts like First Fridays and rosaries and indulgences.
2) To the Lord in defence of the clergy, that the majority of those who do not do these heinous acts be protected highly from attacks by the Devil.
3) For those who have been ravaged and scandalized in any way by Lahey's actions, be it directly or as a pastor bishop of a diocese, etc.
4) For all those with same-sex attractions, that they be graced and blessed in their daily struggles in life.
5) Lastly, for ex-bishop Lahey, that he will realize the sinful devastation he has brought on to multiple parties (Church, those with SSA, his former constituents of his diocese), as well as for himself. For as a priest, his soul has been further consecrated with a 3rd indelible mark after baptism and confirmation. His judgement in the afterlife will be that much more harsh due to his status and this surely will be weighed heavily on the integrity of his soul by our Lord. May he come to a true and full repentance for his sins and by the grace of God, and find someway to function in this world with his priestly faculties stripped, in reparation for his crimes.

Sad and spent, YCRCM

Quickpost: FSSP in Ottawa, Ontario, moving to new parish

Hello All,

Just a quickpost right now. Here's some news from Ottawa on the Church's personal Latin Mass Ordinate, the Fraternal Society of St. Peter (FSSP), who has a parish that is moving to a new church building:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/With+Latin+mass+parish+secures+future+drawing+from+past/6562537/story.html

YCRCM.

Study in America Magazine: Why People Leave the Catholic Church and What They Want

Hello All.

Still need to get myself to hunker down and change the posting on the SSPX part II. Unfortunately it won't be until a bit later this week. I just finished 4 straight days of shifts and 3 of them are night shift (booooo!!!) and I got only a brief respite till tommorow's night shift. Those just kill me and I sleep in for 5-6 hours immediately after the following day. I might as well conisder the whole day lost.

Anyways I was scouring the blogs I usually read last week, and I found this link from a friend of mine on another Catholic blog (sorry, can't reveal the blog else it's obvious who I am. I don't think he knows I blog under a pseudoname, but I want to keep it that way):

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=13347

This article has a bishop who did a study in his American diocese in Trenton, New Jersey, from fallen away parishoners. Hopefully he asked a lot more people than the Jersey Shore Snookis and Situations out there. lol! ok it was a corny Jersey Shore joke. Then again, maybe it would be interesting to ask each of them about their collapsed faith lives. We do know Snooki a.k.a. Nicole Polizzi was an altar server as in a Youtube Video on her personal channel, she said she "used to hold the candles and the book for the priest."

But I digress. While reading the article above, I couldn't help but read the articles featured reasons as to why they fall away from a few direct statements in the survey. There were many more items to break apart in the 2nd half of the article with regard to what people want in the Church, but I chose to focus this post on the first 1/2 with reasons why those people left the church, and my commentary in blue text. As always, this is from the viewpoint of a young adult, Roman Catholic, male layperson in Canada who received a private Catholic high school education (more truer to Magisteriam Teaching) and has been a Catholic revert for 2.5 years now.

Reason 1: The Church hierarchy is corrupt and evil!

".... One respondent wrote: “I separated my family from the Catholic Church and turned to an alternate religion for a while and then returned knowing I had the right religion but the wrong people running it.” Several chose to specify that they separated themselves from “the hierarchy....”

Alright, here we have a case of "I left the Church cause the idiots running the show are corrupt." First let's get the rough stuff out of the way. Yes, the instiutional Church has screwed up, as you have seen some occasions here on YCRCMB. What I meant by the institutional church is: the liberal or weakly-catechized teachers of Catholic schools, the numerous lax or liberal priests, the religious brothers and sisters (Fr. Z. will sometimes refer to the sisters and the "Magisterium of Nuns"), your parents, etc. Many people in the wake of the "Spirit of"/misapplication of Vatican II" took all sorts of liberties with their positions in power. Furthermore, yes we've seen priests in financial and even sexual scandal or bishops who have failed to uphold even Canon Law. Disgraced and likely lacized Raymond Lahey is the most recent example to mind here in Canada. So sorry if you sadly got one of these priests, teachers, or even your parents, who failed to teach you the authentic true tenets of the Catholic Faith.

Now, does this mean that the whole Church is bad???? No. As a whole, Christ in Matthew 16:18 vowed to Peter when he infomred him he would have His teaching authority (knowing he would die on the Cross), that ``the gates of Hell shall not prevail against [the Church] when it comes to providing us the means of spirtual salvation. Further when we look at the individuals in the Church in positions of power, when they screw up or are corrupt all the way to the Popes themselves (e.g. the Medici line of popes), the Church will still be there for us and theologically and spiritually remain intact till His Second Coming (a.k.a. the end of all existence). If it has survived corruption before, it will continue to survive, and be the spiritual link to our salvation despite what happens in its physical walls and organization.

In addition, all throughout our salvation history including the Old Testament, God (and Jesus once the Word Made Flesh existed) used ordinary, sinful men, to carry out God's love and desire for our selves to unify us with him. In the OT, think of for example, king David, whom was one of the most, if not the greatest, king(s) of Israel of all time. He sent poor Uriah to die in battle to claim his wife for himself (Uh David? hello? I think there is a commandment of those big 10 about coveting your neighbour's goods???). Once a prophet came and chided him did he finally realize "Oh no!!!!". Yes even this great king was flawed. And look at the Apostles themselves. They were all sinners, heck Matthew was even a reviled tax collector, and they were the big 12 who carried out Christ's authority and began what is the awesome Catholic Church. Also don't forget, of those sinful apostles, two of the four Gospels were written by a member each, including that reviled tax collector.

Reason 2a, b, c: Female roles, Peer involvement, and Spiritual Mentorship

" One 23-year-old woman said: I felt deceived and undervalued by the church. I didn’t understand certain things and found no mentors within the church. I just stopped going because my community of friends and family were no longer in the church ... 

2A, "DEPRECIATION OF WOMAN": Man, this is a much larger kettle of fish when you deal with the Church and feminism. I won't tackle the ideaology in depth, other than to say that thanks to 2nd wave radical feminism, it has misled both sexes (incl. men in supporting this) to believe in more than just human rights and true equality for women, including misandry (man-hating) and a passion to rule the world and punish all men or those who won't go along with their agenda. Now this woman is by no means shown to be a radical feminist, or a feminist at all for that matter, but I have to adress her deception and undervaluing. I also am sorry for this young woman, that with the liberal wave of the "Spirit of Vatican II" came a lie in the form of women infiltrating every crevice of the Church and taking over it like a rebellion, and the poor examples of conduct shown by her role models of both sexes. Maybe even being told of things like womynpriests and even a woman pope.That was not the truth and you should have not been even led to believe such a thing. Blame our stupid higher ups and the "Magisterium of [pantsuit] Nuns" for that one, and us laity for just going along with that.

I will say, however, that the Church does have many positive roles for women. One of the better fruits of Vatican II was the opening of liturgical "ministries" once held by minor orders to the Laity. This young woman, and yourselves too any female readers, can actively get involved in the Liturgy. Because of an indult (indults are supposed to be "special priviledges" not the norm in the Church) that got widespread to a point, Pope John Paul II had to be prudent and for the sake of civility, he made altar serving available to women in Churches and dioceses that allow it (some bishop's don't or pastors in their parishes don't and the bishop OKs this.) So one could be a female altar server. There are other lay ministries in the Mass, like extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, and lectors that PROCLAIM the Word of God. Also there are female sacristans, directors of religious education/catechists, and even pastoral associates. If you want to be somewnat more valued as a young person in the Church, show them you mean business!!!! Turn the tides and show them you love your Mother Church and the Holy Father and Want to make a good, positive, orthodox difference in your parish and keep it alive! Also as a side note, there have been many female saints and some powerful writers such as St. Joan of Arc, St. Hildegard of Bingen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hildegard_of_Bingen),  Mother Theresa, and Alice Von Hildebrand who've made their mark so to speak on the Church's history as key figures (and Saints!). A modern day Catholic phenom or example is Dr. Janet Smith. Also, John Paul II has adressed this modern state of Women in the Church in a very heartfelt letter here: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

2B, "No Mentors": I partially disagree with the respondent on this one. Where I disagree is that there are many good mentors in the Church, even if they are not in traditional roles. We tend to think of mentors as simply the priests, bishops, or nuns. While laity cannot provide traditional spiritual direction or deep counselling (high school and hospital chapliancy seems different from that,) mentors or role models in the church can extend to people we don't think of normally: the sacristan, the head of a ministry such as lectoring, the youth minister, maybe even the parish secretary or humble Ms. Lumen Christi who goes to her weekly Mass, prays the Rosary daily, and has her wits about her with regards to the true teachings of the Catholic faith while looking after her children and grandchildren in her spare time! Just because there aren't a lot of clergy to look up to, or a lack of clergy who are traditional and don't espouse worldly values, it doesn't mean there are a lack or good mentors out there. Also if its true Church knowledge you are looking for, there's laypeople doing apologetics and teaching it right (e.g. Catholic Answers, Fr. Z) on the Internet, and maybe even your own diocese (though that can WIDELY vary according to what your bishop ``allows`.`) If it really is that bad, then thanks to today's technologies, go out there and find out the Truth for yourself! Thanks to the marvels of the Internet and other technology and cheap printing, the true Catholic faith in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and its Compendium or other good solid literature is one Amazon.com order away, or one is just a click away from the Vatican's/Popes of present and pasts' major writings on www.vatican.va/. Also, you are not alone. There are lonesome good faithful Catholic youngsters out there too if you know where to look. They are also amonst the pews.  I'm sure they'd love a friend like you too and also to feel not alone out there. That's what I did myself to revert, though a youth ministry helped me start to get there. And if you have the guts, go be that mentor! Go get the training and form that youth minsitry (a lot of hard work required though, so be firm in commitment!) Change the outlook on things! Finally, there are more traditional orders of nuns and priests springing up in correlation with the New Evangelization, and even the average seminarian or priest of the John Paul II and Benedict XVI generations is becoming more sound and reliable as spiritual mentors. Why if your local seminary allows contact with those seminarians outside of the parish in their practicum year, maybe a seminarian could be your mentor! They are relatively young too!

2C: Peer Involvement: I 100% support this woman's statement on it. For high schoolers, and even more so young adults who aren't married, the institutional Church overall, sucks, when it comes to reaching this age group. It seems still the big focus is: Getting those sacraments pumped into kids` spiritual veins like some sort of vaccine up to Confirmation age, Marriage, and seniors. They are the institutional Church`s biggest "clients/consumers" to use crude business terminology. Sadly this approach makes it much harder for youth to appreciate the Church, and when their parishes or communities (including univerisities) have nothing to offer or what is offered is rather POOR and uninviting like my univeristy years were, it`s either tackle the world alone with whatever little Catholic Faith you got, or ``join the party`` of the secular, amoral, hedonist culture of the world and do whatever you want (and hopefully nothing serious will befall you .... ). However, there are efforts being made to incorporate youth into the Church`s daily life again. In the wake of declining parish populations and a slow but steady revival of Church theological and spiritual orthodoxy, parishes and dioceses are waking up to realize this group needs to be sought out as they are LOSING the youth to the world, flesh, and the Devil (if priests even acknolwedge his existence to begin with). Numerous parishes are even getting in there and dealing with pre-teens as, to paraphrase the EDGE (TM) youth ministry program that deals with Gr. 6-8 pre-teens: These kids are at a precous stage in their physical, mental, and especially spritual development as young Catholics. They are metaphorically ``on the edge`` and if we don`t reach out to them in this ever increasigly aggresive secular world, we may lose them forever and they won`t remain in the Catholic Church .... and likely never desire to come back. This idea even extends to the teenage years and especally for young adults prior to marriage years. Even good young Catholic men and women like myself, can fall after that stage, even if they got a `better upbringing` in their youth and teens. Once they hit university, if they aren`t strong enough to hit the wall of secularism that smacks them in the face, or stay within a supportive Catholic parish/community, well you get the picture. Therefore, youth ministries of varying degrees are emerging. Now, not all ministries are equal. Some are organized programs like LIFETEEN(TM) and EDGE (TM) needing large bodies of people in a core team (priest, youth minister, leaders), while others are one to few person gigs with a less structured focus meeting less frequently. Also, not all ministers are theologically conservative, depending on their background, personality, and even what they are studying in their post-secondary Catholic school. This is where you gotta do your research and find one that will help you to love the Church (including its teachings) and also enhance your personal spirituality. However, for this survey respondent in particular, it was even much harder for her, as those people she looked up to bought into the secular culture of the world and gave her poor example to live up to as a Catholic. Sometimes, you just gotta bite the bullet and go against the grain of those you know, and YOU be the shining example of the faith, that ``light of the world, the salt of the Earth`` to your family and friends. You be the catechist, you be the ``New Evangelization`` in your actions and knowledge of the faith and maybe you will call your friends and family back to the spiritual arms of Mother Church (she is a mother in a sense, the ``Bride of Christ.``). As a last note, do look around your city and parish for youth ministries and even singles communities of Catholics, or even Catholic dating services, if you are seriously considering marriage yourself. Just be careful which one you use. Ì recommend the one promoted on Catholic Answers, www.catholicmatch.com/ as that one is not a secular dating site, nor is it geared towards extreme ultra/rad-trad Catholics either.

Reason 3: THE LITURGY!!!!!!: ``“I tried different Catholic churches in the area because I just didn’t seem to be getting anything out of the Mass, especially the homily.” Another person said, “I stopped going regularly because the homilies were so empty. And whenever the church wanted to raise money, they dropped the homily and talked money.” There were many complaints about the quality of homilies as well as about poor music at Mass.`` [My text is now red colour as I'm going into Fr.Z rant mode]

Homiletics/Catechesis
AHHHHHH!!!!! If there is any one thing that ticks me off as to making people leave parishes, it's this. Priests and higher clergy (Deacons included), the homily is not the time to express your wishy-washy liberal sentiments or to promote social justice causes. It is also not "me" time to say something that makes you feel good nor joke around (though I'd make an exception for using it as a literary device to introduce your topic of necessity). The homily is the time to make sense of the Liturgy of the Word's readings to the congregation, to tell "the moral of the story" as it were from the mouth of Christ himself, and even to relate Christ's teachings to modern day life, and that may include reiterating Catholic teachings (yes, of THAT CATECHISM) and even apologetics as well. People crave those good, solid homilies they can take home, even just one nugget of spiritual umph to nourish their souls and minds, geared towards the objective truth of the Lord. They also are in a world of constant flux and are relying on YOU to tackle those issues, like that YouTube kid who says he loves Jesus but hates organized religion. We hate when you abuse the message of Christ to promote your latest church fundraizing campaign DURING THE MASS (unless you also teach us a theological lesson about the necessity of a parish building and its centrality to our faith) or even replace the homily with a "guest speaker" from the local diocesan charity that also deals out money to pro-abortion side arm divisions (knowingly or unknowingly). If you have to announce this stuff due to the commands from the bishops (an every Mass this Sunday kind of thing), the proper place in the Ordinary Form is before the dismissal, and in the EF prior to the "continuation of the Gospel" before the Homily. However you could also have people optionally listen after a Mass, and you don`t waste time with the uninterested early self-dismissal people either.

Finally, your homily might be ALL the Catechesis that a kid or adult will get in their whole week. No, you CANNOT TRUST the separate school systems as they are under the thumb of the government who gives them most of their funding or teachers who teach under the guise of ``tolerance`` and ``anti-bullying.``  They must obey whatever the government dictates or suffer financially, and that might include promoting social justice causes that contradict Church teaching. Worse, not all your teachers that work in those systems are Catholic. And the ones that are? I dare you to quiz them on their basics: What is the Trinity? What is the Mass? What is the Eucharist? What are the 7 Sacraments? Do they know what Sin is? Is there such a thing as Sin? Many would not be able to give a straight answer I'd bet you. Also, if the school administration and teachers are brainwashed socially and liberally beyond reasoning, the minute you step foot and mention SIN of any kind or a teaching on the big issues like papal infallability, abortion, euthanasia etc. I guarantee you will likely not be let back in to that school. Therefore clergy, you got only one shot a week to teach these people something about the true Faith. If you don't want to and espouse a "Jesus loves everybody" message, they'll find NOTHING UNIQUE about the Catholic faith vs. the other faiths out there, or worse will think you aren't serious about your position and are just "sucking on the power teat" as it were. Now if they like that kinda "lukewarm" thing, fine, but maybe you should look ahead to the future 10-20 years down the road when your donating parishoners die and the collection baskets thin out because the next generation isn't giving a lot and not having enough children (or none if they are contracepting), and the next two generations are leaving/have left the parishes after Confirmation. Just saying!

In fact, I'm personally switching my parish for the Novus Ordo, as this above is one of the reasons. At least at the new N.O. parish I'm seeking has priests that give good traditionally-minded hiomilies, one of them leaning more on solid catechesis and spirituality while another excels at applying the Gospel and LOTW to the modern world. That's the stuff I crave baby!!! And it seems this young woman does too.

The Liturgical Music
Now to tackle music. Music's purpose in the liturgy is outlined here in the Papal Instruction Liturgicam Sacram " 5. Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when it is celebrated in song, with the ministers of each degree fulfilling their ministry and the people participating in it" (I, 5). In other words, it is used as an accompanyment to help lift your soul and help you be in a prayerful mood for the Mass and be able to particilate in it more fully. This document, BTW, was issued by the Vatican II pope, Paul VI. Let's look further into this document: "60. The new melodies for the vernacular texts certainly need to undergo a period of experimentation in order that they may attain a sufficient maturity and perfection. However, anything done in churches, even if only for experimental purposes, which is unbecoming to the holiness of the place, the dignity of the liturgy and the devotion of the faithful, must be avoided." (V, 60) I post this with regard to that fodangled new pop-ish stuff and those tunes of the 60's and 70's in your parents' days where pop hits were turned into Churchy songs (or in the worst cases even used) as well as some of the new genres like "praise and worship." What can we take from this? Look, there is leeway for experiementation and development of new sacred music in Church history. But that does not give you the right to incorporate whatever music you like in the liturgy, just to be "in with the times." If we want secular garbage we'll get that off YouTube and we don't need it elsewhere. We young people can't stand when adults try to "cramp our style" so to speak.

Also accompanying that paragraph is this: " .... Musical instruments can be very useful in sacred celebrations, whether they accompany the singing or whether they are played as solo instruments. "The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem in the Latin Church, since it is its traditional instrument, the sound of which can add a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lift up men's minds to God and higher things." "The use of other instruments may also be admitted in divine worship, given the decision and consent of the competent territorial authority, provided that the instruments are suitable for sacred use, or can be adapted to it, that they are in keeping with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful."[43]" (VI, 62) Secular instruments and elements might be okay, but have to be assessed as to whether they are or are not geared to the liturgy. Also, just by their sound/nature, some instruments are clearly poorly suited or not at all for the liturgy (e.g. drums, electric guitar when it's not electrically changed by an amp to sound acoustic, and even acoustic guitars to some extent) should be either cautiously used or not at all. The Church, the choir loft, and especially the sanctuary, is not suitable for a rock concert! Sadly there's that territorial authority thing  (cough, bishops, cough) so em if you get a liberal one, well don't be suprized to find the aging hippie band or the folk choir with a guitar at the parish. As for the LIFETEEN/EDGE rock group bands, well I'm mixed. I say the best thing is, well fine let them have their band playing P and W music (if they have to have a band at all for those Masses) but do introduce them to Gregorian Chant and other better Church music to see the gamut of "allowable" music and read to the youth the document above, as well as some of the Vatican II stuff that also speaks with regard to the liturgy. Practically, Is there a schola or a choir school/cathedral they can take a day/eve trip to see? Maybe a secular choir that performs classical/baroque pieces out of musical respect or reverence?

Now you might say, what about the corny music that passes for liturgical ``hymns``? Well likely they got by thanks to your bishop cause of this: "54. In preparing popular versions of those parts which will be set to melodies, and especially of the Psalter, experts should take care that fidelity to the Latin text is suitably harmonized with applicability of the vernacular text to musical settings. The nature and laws of each language must be respected, and the features and special characteristics of each people must be taken into consideration: all this, together with the laws of sacred music, should be carefully considered by musicians in the preparation of the new melodies. The competent territorial authority will therefore ensure that in the commission entrusted with the composition of versions for the people, there are experts in the subjects already mentioned as well as in Latin and the vernacular; from the outset of the work, they must combine their efforts." (V, 54). So in a nutshell, if the bishop is lax and lets this stuff by, well too bad if your pastor okays it use. This is where you have to let your bishop and pastor know you don't like what they do. If they don't listen, you have every right to walk and register at another parish that does respect the Church's liturgical tradition and has music that elevates your soul in the liturgy of the Mass. You also have the right to take your money and put it into the hands of competent musical ministers or choirmasters, and withhold it if your parish is screwing with your ability to truly worship Christ in the Mass in a proper, liturgically correct, manner. It is your hard earned money after all. Also one can protest with their feet: The Church CANNOT deny you your sacraments as long as you are not excommunicated (with exception to reconciliation likely at the hands of the bishop), so you can go to any Catholic Church and attend their Mass, including ones with all the smells and bells and Gregorian Chant if your home parish keeps singing "Gather us In" from that Gather hymnal and "Send down the fire".

My point is, well, the lady has a valid point! Not all this kind of modern stuff is liked by our generation, and we do like the traditional uplifting Church music. We want music that lifts our souls to participate more fully in the Mass, and if you aren't doing it parish X, we have the right and we will go to parish Y that has that unless we are, like "whatever." though we likely won't come back for a long time or never if we have that attitude. You can't deny us our sacraments and kick us out for our liturgical musical preferences. Furthermore, not everyone is moved by your type of music (though not everyone, even some faithful young Roman Catholics, are moved by Gregorian Chant and actually are moved by Praise and Worship or other forms of liturgical music). My point is, move with your feet and your wallet if you can't stand the bandstand.

Alright rant mode OFF. Unfortunately the liberal/mainstream media has made a mess in the minds of many average people with this one, Reason # 4: ".... The scandal surrounding the sexual abuse of minors by clergy was mentioned often. One man said that what did it for him was “the bishop’s refusal to list pedophile priests on the diocesan Web site and his non-support of the effort to lift the statute of limitations for bringing sexual abuses cases forward in the courts"

Well I cannot stand for this person's diocese. However, generally, those priests and bishops who have done anything like this, you've made the Church worse and you deserve the criminal and civil and Church penalties you get. Even Canada is not immune. It is generally known that some of the nuns and priests who took care of Native Canadian reserve school and residences, treated the Natives with abuse of multiple kinds. Also, recently a bishop from the Maritimes, Raymond Lahey, was found with pornography with his computer in 2009. So there's no shortage of stories even for Canada. However, generally, as a whole, the majority of Church clergy do not engage in this kind of activity. In fact this can be applied to every major profession in modern society. The expression is "a few rotten apples spoil the bunch". Now, I will not perform apologeitcs on the Church sex crisis in this post in detail as it's been extensively covered by other Internet and media apologists. For Canadians, the best arguments I can recommend are found in the works of Michael Coren of Sun Media TV, especially "Why the Catholic Church is Right." He tackles the issue with a whole chapter RIGHT FROM THE START of his book. As for the rest of you viewers you can also view Michael Voris' video series on this matter in his little 6-10 min daily faith blurb called "The Vortex" on youtube. Search for Michael Voris, Vortex, and sex scandal or crisis in Catholic Church. I believe he did the weeklong series at the beginning of September in 2010 when the 2nd wave of the crisis hit or was still at high tide?

And this is where I will retire. I could spend many a day on this portion of the survey and more, but this mind has other things he'd like to devote his time to. Enjoy the read, and as always, my blog rules are in effect, so think before posting.

Pax Tibi Christi, YCRCM.