Thursday, April 21, 2011

Archdiocese of Boston Parish Grading Blog

Numerous Catholics have weighed in on establishing a blog with information about the authenticity of Catholic teaching at parishes - parishes to flock to, parishes that are pretty good, parishes that are solid - some traditional, some charismatic - parishes to completely avoid, parishes that may have solid parochial vicars but the pastor is a train wreck, parishes that may have great confessors but other problems exist -- etc.

There are enough people who want to establish a resource, and so it will be moving forward.

But, it's more complicated than one might think. Some will be easy to place with a the stamp of approval, like Mary Immaculate of Lourdes and on the other end of the spectrum, the clapping fornicators, like Holy Family in Concord. There are others that may be on the way up the mountain that are better served with encouragment rather than hang an albatross around the neck.

The parties interested in putting up a blog, will be needing some brainstorming as it progresses. Maybe it should start with some basics -- parishes that we know are good, solid, traditional or charismatic -- and parishes that we know are places that are dangerous to the salvation of souls.

I have some really smart, thoughtful, prayerful people who are readers of the blog. Please give it some thought -- and prayer -- and drop me a line with feedback - or post it in the comments section.

It would seem many abandoned when the shenanigans at parishes got to be a near occasion of sin. There are places now to go to and ones to definitely avoid and the information should be out there.


Anonymous said...

Carol, this is an excellent idea. It should be done for each and every diocese in the United States.

However, I am not sure it would go over well with the powers that be. In a big archdiocese/diocese, you can get away with it. In a smaller one, there is hell to pay. Some of us can't afford (literally) trouble, as the means to defend ourselves are not there.

By the way, how does someone "drop you a line"?


Carol McKinley said...


I use aol and my email is cmmckinley. You can also go to my profile page and there's a link to my email.

The parish grading blog is going to be done by sources who will remain anonymous because of fear of retaliation -- which we know exists. It's the same old same old. The focus will be on the positive parishes and positive things happening. But it will warn of places that we all need to stay as far away as we would plutonium.

The interested parties are talking about posting bulletins and events that are scandalous which they feel will have the effect of putting the kibosh on it across the diocese. This has been an effective tool here and one where they'd like to centralize what's going on in parishes into one place.

It is a good idea - Jack O'Malley planted the seed, so kudos to Jack.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I got the impression Jack no longer goes to Mass.

I think it is a good idea, but to control for subjective opinion you need to have a standard to measure it up against.

I think it would be within our rights as a collective to come up with a statement that a priest would be willing to sign. Yes - an oath or an inquisition if you will. Otherwise it will be like a restaurant review.

You could for example ask if they observe the Vatican directive to withhold communion from public figures that support abortion.
That would be a yes or no. etc.
Sadly, you'd probably get maybe 10 priests from Boston willing to sign it. And it would essentially put a target on their backs.

Perhaps an event with Michael Voris as the speaker. Invite all the priests in the diocese. The RSVP list would probably be pretty telling.

And by the way...
Are so-called charismatic parishes 'good ones"? Considering the term has no ecclesiastical standing with the church. Personally I'm comfortable with this type prayer outside of Mass, but some of the Masses represent the worst liturgical abuse.

Anonymous said...

"You could for example ask if they observe the Vatican directive to withhold communion from public figures that support abortion.
That would be a yes or no. etc.
Sadly, you'd probably get maybe 10 priests from Boston willing to sign it. And it would essentially put a target on their backs."

I don't think you'd get any from my diocese to sign such a thing for the very same reason.

Carol McKinley said...


Nice seeing you. Been thinking of you, praying.

Jack hasn't been going to Mass but in a thread a few below, as we were commiserating, I said something like I didn't know how he could stand being away from the Eucharist and he said these thoughts hit him and he asked for some good parishes around where there's a Latin Mass and/or the Novus Ordo is sound and reverent. That's what started the whole conversation.

Good thoughts. Your points are well taken and confirm that what was said would have to be well-thought out.

There are a few charismatic parishes where the theology is very sound that come from Steuby. I came back onto the climb by a parish using charismatic praise and worship music. And, I still like it once in a while. It isn't my cup of tea for every week, but I do actually seek it out from time to time if it is low key.

For the record, I do believe in laying on of hands but from a priest in a state of grace and one or two lay people and. Talking in tongues I get wigged out by, don't like to be around it but I've known several very prayerful holy people who did it and I can clearly see their focus is on God. This isn't the same thing to me as a parish who is teaching dissent or something pagan.

Jack O'Malley said...

TheLastCatholicinBoston I got the impression Jack no longer goes to Mass.

I'm looking for one. I'm not litugically rigid. In fact, I'm learning Kumbaya in Kreyol. Figure I should have it down pat by Kohpoos Krysty.

Otherwise it will be like a restaurant review.

What's wrong with restaurant reviews?

Perhaps an event with Michael Voris as the speaker.

You'd have to hold it in a Motel 6. You heard about Wilkes-Barre?

Are so-called charismatic parishes 'good ones"?

They're great. Clap your hands. Wave your hands. Speak in tongues. Babble in Babylonian. Gabble in Gaelic. I n-ainm an Athair agus an Mhic agus an Spioraid Naomh. Lababab alabdfa alrnela nadlendlaerf adlfenak nbre!

Wave hello to the Lord and the Lord will wave hello to you! Hands, hands, hands. Church of the Happy Clappy Hands. Handshake of peace. Communion in the hand. Eucharistic ministers handling the Sacred Species with profane hands. Altar "servers" handling the sacred vessels. Jebby Reese getting creative with the liturgy. Handle some snakes. Gotta hand it to 'em. They got a handy dandy religion there.

Let's all give Pat O'Malley, Archbishop of Beantown a big hand. Way to go, Kardinal Kreyol.

j said...

Gee, Carol. By some divine or diabolic coincidence, our posts met in the ether! There is something preternatural about the internet ...

Jack O'Malley said...

That was meself. The tail end of my name got circumcised.

Carol McKinley said...

Very, very funny. We'll proceed with caution!

Anonymous said...

Here's a Veronica thought...

Why are we blasting this all over the internet? Surely chancery folks spy on you, Carol. Why tell them your next move?

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I had an elaborate response and my internet connection went down and i lost it.
I don't see how you can measure, grade or other wise critique The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without using orthodoxy as the standard.

I seriously wanted to offer to drive The Legend -Jack O'Malley- to Mass some Sunday.

We can go to a sedavacantist chapel if he likes or a V2 hootenanny or anywhere in between.
I pretty much know them all here in Bean town.

Carol McKinley said...

Jack, This is a phenomenal offer -- you will love our LCIB and he knows the lay of the land from the South Shore to Boston. (If we're encouraging him back to the Eucharist, I should think we'd be better off taking him directly to Christ's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church!

I agree about the orthodoxy of the Liturgy being the litmus.

Caroline said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jack O'Malley said...

Thanks to both LCIB and Carol. I've no problem getting me royal Irish arse to church -- it's just that I generally feel like throttling the "presbyter" halfway through the "service". That's why I always carry my rosary. It keeps my hands occupied so I eschew any mortiferous impulses.

As for Mary Immaculate of Lourdes, I went there a couple of times after Kardinal Kreyol shut down Holy Trinity. I don't understand why he moved it so close to Boston though. Couldn't he find a boarded up storefront in Pittsfield? Mary Immaculate had the novus ordo table in front of the High Altar which made for a very clumsy ad orientem Mass. I understand they have redone the sanctuary since.

I will be at a novus ordure "service" on Easter just to maintain the peace in the family. I will hold my nose. Which will probably discourage anyone from assaulting me with the "sign of peace."

And I am no sedevacantist even though I am thoroughly disappointed with Papa Ratzinger. I still keep expecting to see him in civvies with his V2 necktie. Just for the record, the SSPX (FSSPX) are not sedevacantists and by all accounts their Masses fulfill the Sunday obligation. As I mentioned, I've never attended one.

I do agree about the orthodoxy of the liturgy being paramount. As long as the balloons have been exorcised with holy water and salt, it's kosher as far as I am concerned. But think of the irony of the laity judging the degree of orthodoxy of the liturgy. How could that happen unless the Church itself had at least partially fallen into apostasy.

Then again there's Orthodoxy. No mucking about with the mass. No balloons. No Vestal Virgins in the sanctuary. No terpsichorean trollops tripping the light fantastic. A great hue and cry was raised when a change to traditional date of Easter was proposed some years back. But Catholics sheepishly accepted the novus ordo, the changes to the liturgical calendar, the vulgarization of the sacramental rites. Tradition is dead in the Roman Church. At least until the next great schism.

I am going to check Metropolitan Methodios' site to see if he has established an ordinariate for curmudgeonly Catholics.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

"But think of the irony of the laity judging the degree of orthodoxy of the liturgy. How could that happen unless the Church itself had at least partially fallen into apostasy."

EXACTLY my point.

The SSPX position of sedavacantists is that they defend their right to believe it. Which is more reasonable to me than suggesting that an active and notorious homosexual priest's sacraments are valid.

Yet the sedavacantists are the lunatics? Even locally is it unreasonable to believe that The Position of Cardinal is de facto vacant? I think Carol has suggested this on numerous occasions.

Jack, I'm glad you can get to Mass,I hope its valid. If you hear a crunching sound in the back it may be me grinding my teeth.

I know a sedavacatist Mass that serves a great breakfast after. The offer stands.

Have a joyful Easter.

Anonymous said...

Why should any Catholic have to suffer their way through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?

To even think of doing that should tell anyone with a rational mind all they need to know about the past fifty years state of affairs in the Church

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am tired of torturing myself.

When did the Catholic Church effectively become an instrument of torture for Catholics?

For me to fit in the current chaos, I would have to forget everything I was taught as a young girl. I refuse to do that.


Anonymous said...

Last Catholic,

Do you do to the CMRI chapel?


TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I don't know the CMRI folks but I'm sure I'd like them.
I am not a sedavacantist (yet- my wife say's) but I am a total sympathizer.

Attendance at the N.O. is generally mortification, when in my heart and spiritual discernment it becomes a true sacrilege, I will and have walked out.

Carol McKinley said...

I have and will continue to walk out when I hear heresy, see sacrilege. I no longed go to parishes where the priest withholds doctrine. But I find another Mass to fulfill my obligation.

I don't have any empathy for the sedevacanists. I am even more disgusted by them than I am the heretics within.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but haven't you said on numerous occasions that the Cardinal's seat in Boston is virtually absent?

Ain't that the same sedevacanists (vacant seat)"crazy talk"?

From my experience these groups attend Mass where the missal is followed to-the-letter (the 1962 or 1958) and as far as I can tell it is what brings them together.

Disgusted is a pretty strong word. If they don't see the pontificate of JPII as you do, I don't think that qualifies for disgust - I hope.

With all respect due, with the exception of the endless popapalooza JP2 pontificate was basically a loosing season, No?

Although he did coin the phrase
"Culture of Death."

Hope you had a nice Easter.

Carol McKinley said...


Easter was great. Hope your's was surrounded by love and many blessings. You and the family will continue to be in my prayers during the Divine Mercy Novena.

As far as my saying Cardinal O'Malley has abandoned his See (which he has), I've never doubted that Cardinal O'Malley is validly ordained and validly elevated. When I say the Chair of our See is sede vacante, I am saying his priorities are traveling around the world, first class, and telling us about them like Charles Kurault. He's checked out. He's an absentee father is all I'm saying.

That's much different than the things the sedevacanists say. The sedevacanists claim that the Chair of Peter is empty because the election of the Pope is invalid, the Sacraments are invalid, the Mass is invalid. I know quite a few people who disagree with the pontificate of Pope John Paul II but they didn't leave Christ's Church. They didn't set up shop to invite others to leave Christ's Church. Liturgical dance is nothing compared to that scandal.

The crazy culture of sweeping corruption under the rugs within the Church begins in the pews. It wasn't all JP's fault. I've read a lot of his writings and so I could never say his pontificate was a bust.


Anonymous said...

Don't hate the sedes, Carol. You owe them more than you do the O'Malleys and his ilk. The sedes haven't destroyed the Church, and there but for the grace of God goes yourself.

As an excellent diocesan priest recently told me, the sedes cannot be blamed for what they have done, as the churchmen the past fifty years have given them good reason to do what they have done and to think as they do.

As an aside, and don't ever forget this, you will not bring them back to the Church by insulting them and being disdainful of them. I tell you the truth, you will only reinforce their error more deeply within their heart by treating them like that.


TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I am not hugely invested in this sede thing but it is quite a novelty in Boston.

The argument that I find some what compelling is; if xxxx is a heretic and you can not have a heretic as Pope than XXXX can not be Pope. This has happened previously in history. I don't claim this is the case today, some do. As long as the Sedes hold to the magesterium, they are church shopping like the rest of us and happen to have some eccentric tastes.

For the record I have heard a Priest in good standing in the RCAB refers to adoration as 'cookie worship'. I believe the sacraments this particular priests offer are a true sacrilege.

..and the sedes are a problem?

Liturgical dance is a pagan ritual. My cookie worship pal loves it.

Anonymous said...

LCIB, we have a few priests here that refer to Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament in the same way.

I understand you what you are going through.

I understand the sedes too.

The SSPX, however, I do not understand. They recognize that Benedict XVI is the Vicar of Christ yet ignore him?


TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Vatican 2 was a pastoral council. It established no new dogma. Much of the "innovations" that have come about since that time are clearly error and many are formal liturgical abuses.

Can we stop making believe? There are and were individuals working together to destroy the church as it had been known for 2,000 years. You can call them modernists, progressives or DRE's, just please, oh please, can we call them objectively wrong?

Can we first agree that pastoral mistakes were made during V2?

I don't think they ignore the Pope, I think they could be accused of ignoring the 'suggestions' of V2, they probably would plead guilty to the charges.

Anonymous said...

Going back to the topic of good and bad parishes, I fear branding some parishes good and praising them on a blog with bring the wrath of the "progressive wing" down on those brave pastors and parochial vicars who fight the good fight.

I think most of the blog readers here can name the worst parishes in the diocese (never forgetting the Paulist Center and the contributions on the religious orders to the rot in Boston). Maybe the focus should be on exposing the bad, precisely and perhaps with pictures.


TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Perhaps we should start with:
Does the priest use two hands and raise the host above his head at the elevation.

I am not an expert, but I know of a few priests that clearly offer the Eucharist directly to the parishioners rather than elevation toward heaven. As in; 'take this' with a gesture toward the pews while holding the host without any elevation whatsoever. I also know a few that use one hand, like a salute of sorts rather than an elevation.

Again I am not an expert and do not feel that I am being overly scrupulous. But I have found the priests that offer the consecration in such a way are with out exception dogmatically weak.

I think in the whole 'grading' issue it will come down to subjective opinion unless it is based on objective dogmatic truth. 'Positions' on issues are nearly impossible to prove, but the rubrics and canon are easily identifiable.

Even the issue of extraordinary Eucharistic ministers. (EEM) Are they used only for extraordinary circumstances? I for one would draw the line at this. There are priest in the diocese that no longer use them. A simple list of parishes that do not use EEM probably would be an excellent start and may send a potentially very public message to the diocese.

Carol McKinley said...

V, I can't help being deeply offended by the sedes. To me, there as bad as the people who kidnapped our closed Churches and are holding nutty liturgies -- I have a post going up about that shortly. No matter what side they jump off of the ship, it's the same scandal to me.

M, we've thought through that concern - there's almost too many decent parishes now for the Chancery thugs to punish.

I'd really like the focus on the positive but I will post on the priests who have broken from Christ's Church and have stayed to drag the faithful with them. Fr. Ron Coyne in Randolph is another one to add to the spiritually lethal.

LCIB, you reminded us of something that is very offensive -- offensive enough to never return to a parish -- a priest who handles Our Eucharistic Lord with irreverence. There's a priest who visits around my parts who does the one hander - doesn't lift Christ at all but rather picks Him up from the table about 12 inches and then literally throws Him back onto the paten. When I see him coming down the aisle, my heart sinks.

This is definitely NOT scrupulous.

Here's the problem I have with basing the grade on the Liturgy.

Sometimes, the Canon is repeated verbatim, the priest is reverent, homily sound doctrinally - more than sound, it can even lead to examination of conscience and Grace--but the music is jazzed up. Or, there's one or two things that are not executed perfectly. But the priest is Marian, Eucharistic, Sacramental, preaching doctrine..

In no way is this the same thing as a Mass done by Fr. Higgins and others -- but just the same, people can benefit immensely from it and it is not scandalous.

Five years ago, I was where Maria is now. I had been so scandalized, As I've said before, I walked out of two Masses on one Sunday - and the third one, I might have except it was the last one in my area. Following that, I spent years waffling between being unable to go to Mass -- forcing myself with the help of Sacraments -- to finding a small circle of parishes that were reliable and sound -- ones I could count on to not have any type of scandal -- and teaching and preaching the faith. As soon as you go six months to a year (it took me two or three years) in a parish that is Catholic, it restores you.

I guess I'm saying there are all kinds of spiritual places where people are -- and priests are -- and it seems rational to portray things in a way that is accurate.


I know several priests who tell me that when they see me in the pews they say 'oh no' - and keep things on a tighter leash! A few weeks back, I went to a parish I thought I was a stranger at...which I kinda like. I went to take a music sheet from the usher, whom I did not know-- and he grinned and said "hi Carol"!

If the parish is already sound doctrinally -and there is a great priest- but a few things are a little off kilter in the parish, having us around can sometimes be like having the phantom gourmet show up at your restaurant?

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

May God guide us and lead us through this modernist madness!

"I guess I'm saying there are all kinds of spiritual places where people are -- and priests are -- and it seems rational to portray things in a way that is accurate."

I guess I'm saying you are thinking like a modernist to suggest we are at 'different spiritual places'. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. It owes its life not to our experience of it, but to Golgatha. My God, we are at ONE spiritual place, what we bring to the table? Our wretchedness and sin seeking his grace, glory and forgiveness.

Do you see how far the modernism of V2 has brought us from the sacrifice of the alter? Do you smell the smoke of Satan yet?
See; BXVI on Hermeneutics and Continuity.

If all Priests and the laity simply understood with their BRAIN rather than the ever elusive fuzzy-heart-experience that we are at the sacrificial alter of the Lord, the problems in the church would stop. I mean stop, dead, over, ca - put. (BTW attendance at this miracle is the crime of countless martyrs that led to their death - Nobody was ever executed for the faith for the protestant notion of a shared meal.) If we all seek to ascend to The Truth we find the victory of the cross, if we seek to ascend to some experience on some subjective scale we ascend to ourselves...MODERNISM!

Read the oath against modernism that all clergy took prior to 1968(?) and see what Saint Pius 10th defined as what faith IS and what it is NOT.

...having the phantom gourmet show up at your restaurant?
Jack also had something to say regarding restaurant reviews etc. like - what is the problem?

I'm sorry I find these truly offensive!

I am not a Sede (yet) but from my first hand experience it would be impossible to assist at TLM and come away with the impression that you were in attendance to 'share a meal'. It is the sacrifice of the alter as guided by the True Church through 2000 years of history.

This horizontal VS vertical Mass 'experience' is a Jesuit theological dead end that goes from 'community worship' to 'worship of community'. There are 10,000 theological rabbit holes to go down all with the essential fruit of; loss of orthodoxy.

If you go to orthodoxy, the rubrics and the cannon you take the personalities out of it.

I too Carol, seem to be a recognized entity in the RCAB. It is a peculiar blessing.

So lets talk about Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers.


Anonymous said...

Carol, I will wait until your post goes up to say any more about it, but I'd rather be with a bunch of sedes than a bunch of catholics in name only who have destroyed everything near and dear to my heart and soul the past fifty years. I can understand the mindset of the sede; the liberals who wants to remake the Church into their own image and likeness elude me.

Anonymous said...

Grammatical errors help keep me humble (in case anyone here was wondering how I did it - stay so humble, that is [it's a joke everyone!]).


Joseph D'Hippolito said...

Jack, I've been to charistmatic and Pentecostal churches during the past 18 months after my mom's death (long story, that). Yes, their worship is more spontaneous and enthusiastic than Catholic worship. So what? Too many Christians across the board engage in this snobbery where the worship style they enjoy is the "One True Style Approved By God." That lifts personal taste and atmospherics to a level where they don't deserve to be.

Remember, Jack, that regardless of what you think of Pentecostal or charismatic theology, Christ died and rose for them just as He did for you and me. Sadly, more Pentecostals and charismatics seem to comprehend the import and significance of that more than Catholics do, these days.

Anonymous said...

Dear Joe.
Spoken like a true V2 katholic with near zero Catholic formation.

"So what?" = it doesn't matter what religion you practice.

"One True Style Approved By God." = it is preposterous to suggest that Jesus formed The Church, The Catholic one, upon the Rock Peter.

"Snobbery" = again as if all faiths and religions are equal.

Carol said...

LCIB, Because I refuse to condemn a parish who may be singing one bread one body or praise and worship or using 'Eucharistic ministers' - etc., doesn't make me a 'modernist'. I've repeatedly made clear (and readers here know) that I don't tolerate any kind of error -- or even lack of teaching the Catechism.

You can be in a spiritual place where you can let minor things like that roll off your back, when there is a fabulous priest and sound doctrine and a respectful and valid Liturgy. I was definitely not in this place five years ago, I don't think Maria is in this place. There is nothing spiritually offensive about being able to focus on the Canon in the Garden of Gethsememe and following Christ to his Death, through minor flaws, being a witness in a parish that is doctrinally sound otherwise.

On the other hand, splitting from Christ's Church, and enticing others to split from Christ's Church, is the worst kind of treason there is, especially while you're pretending it is faithfulness to Our Lord. The Voice of the Faithful Crowd at least has the excuse they have been robbed of their faith. There is no such excuse for the sedevacanists. They are anathema.

Charismatic Masses are not my cup of tea but they are legitimate and in full communion with Christ's Vicar.

Funny story - have you ever seen one of the prayer services where a priest prays over somebody and they 'fall in the spirit'? I used to think it was drama, fake, daffy - etc. One day, I went to a regular confession with a priest who sometimes participates in these prayer services. He's a faithful, sound priest - and it wasn't a charismatic service - just a regular old confession. After the Sacrament, we spent some time talking and at the end, he wanted to finish with a prayer. There I was listening to his beautiful prayer and praying it with him and all of a sudden I realize I was going down. I didn't but boy it took everything in me -- me, who is a feisty spirited, very strong woman -- it took all I had to fight it off. That was the end of my skepticism on that one!

There are some very sound priests, who are teaching our faith with zeal, but there may be minor things that could be annoying if you are not in the place where minor things roll off your back. That's what I am talking about. You should know better than to make what I'm saying about sensitivity to minor things as some kind of approval of any priest teaching error -- or any priest who avoids teaching the faith.

I've been faithfully working to promote teaching without error, for too hard and long to be mischaracterized like that.

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

Anonymous, let me answer each of your responses:

"So what?" = it doesn't matter what religion you practice.

For one thing, I've never said that. For another, I don't believe it. Search my latest post on this thread or any on this entire blog. Where have I ever said that? If you can't find it, it's because it doesn't exist. Also, if you can't find it, I expect an apology.

Spoken like a true V2 katholic with near zero Catholic formation.

Really? How would you know what my "Catholic formation" was?

"One True Style Approved By God." = it is preposterous to suggest that Jesus formed The Church, The Catholic one, upon the Rock Peter.

And within that same Catholic church is the same problem I talk about: people infatuated either with "progressive" or "traditionalist" atmospherics without considering Who Christ is or what He did.

Besides, Catholicism has become borderline apostate, if it hasn't jumped that line, already (just like the liberal Protestants).

Finally, Christ didn't die to found any institution. He died to redeem humanity because He was the only one capable of fulfilling God's demands for atonement. Those who embrace His sacrifice for themselves and proclaim Him as "Lord and Savior," as the evangelicals would put it, receive salvation. Those who don't remain under God's condemnation for sin.

How many Catholics understand that these days?

"Snobbery" = again as if all faiths and religions are equal.

I think my last comment undercuts your assertion.

Before you make accusations, anonymous, I suggest you stop confusing your own flatulence for oxygen, if you know what I mean....

Then again, you probably don't...

Anonymous said...

for clarification. You said "Too many Christians across the board engage in this snobbery where the worship style they enjoy is the "One True Style Approved By God."

Flannery O'Connor called it Catholic smugness. The Roman Catholic Church makes the claim that YES it is the one true holy and apostolic church. I called in to question your formation at the suggestion that this does not really matter and that some how the whole world will die and skip into heaven. This flies in the face of 2,000 years of Christian theology. Christ taught about hell on many occasions, if nobody goes there why would he have bothered?

Regarding Pentecostal or charismatic "theology". Honestly is there such a thing? I know there are religious practices, but as far as I know there is no actual unique theology, per say.

The Catholic theological point: Christ died for all VS Christ died for many is an extremely important reference to the new covenant.

"Christ died for all VS Christ died for many" in the Mass this phrase was changed at V2 in theological circles it is hotly debated for good reason.

You also said "Sadly, more Pentecostals and charismatics seem to comprehend the import and significance of that more than Catholics do, these days."

If I was looking for fellowship, a few laughs and some music that "really gets me going" on a Sunday I wouldn't be going to the Latin Mass. I am not against these things, its just that they are not religious practice as revealed through the magisterium and history.

See - Catholics believe and have for 2,000 year that Jesus Christ comes, truly present body blood soul and divinity in the form of Bread and wine at the sacrifice of the Mass. Because Jesus, the True Man and True God instituted this as a sign of the new Covenant it changes things.

You also said "Those who embrace His sacrifice for themselves and proclaim Him as "Lord and Savior," as the evangelicals would put it, receive salvation. Those who don't remain under God's condemnation for sin."

Joe what you have here is the classic protestant sin of presumption. You will need a solid Priest who knows his theology to explain this to you. It is highly unlikely that you will take my word for it nor should you. Many of us have been there.

Sorry about the loss of your Mother.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Hey Carol,
I'll take a shot an answering.

I am not condemning parishes nor am I condemning any particular priest who does not suit me or what I PERSONALLY prefer. There needs to be a dialogue about error and the falling away from dogma (objective truth and firm teaching) in the church as all levels.

'Eucharistic ministers'... The more proper term is "extraordinary Eucharist ministers"(EEM) and as Voris has said better than I - they are for extraordinary circumstances.
Is there any doubt that the use of EEM has diminished reverence for the Eucharist and the true presence?

Have you ever followed somebody out of Mass if you noticed them stealing the Eucharist? I have. (I'll save the detail for another time.) Have you ever found The Eucharist on the floor or left in the pews?
What about priests who will give communion to known non-Catholics? Is this error or true sacrilege?
The dogma is that all who partake in the Eucharist should be in a state of grace or get to confession as soon as possible- objectively is this the case?
Is there really any doubt that the use of EEM has been a classic; 'solution looking for a problem' since the USCCB begged for it from Rome nearly a generation ago? If you haven't noticed the Pope now gives communion only on the tongue, while on the knees. It's a hint.

If the practice of EEM stopped dead next Sunday, objectively would it hurt the church or help the church?

This is a line in the sand I am willing to draw. I also suspect it is coming.

It certainly is a more sound judgment than "I like Fr. XXX because of his XXXX"

" 'modernist'. I've repeatedly made clear...I don't tolerate any kind of error... the Catechism. "

Which Catechism? (there are many) and read the Oath before you judge yourself regarding modernism, it is an eye opener.

I like your style but even a loose cannon needs to reload once in while.

...let minor things like that roll off your back... Making peace with error is different than having peace in the face of error. Chase down a satanist stealing the Eucharistic and you'll know what I mean. The Church militant were not traded in for the church peaceful or the church passive at V2 as some would have us believe.

The whole splitting thing. There is a danger in the pursuit of orthodoxy that one eventually sees oneself as "holier than the Pope".
I would never suggest anybody leave the ark. I do suggest that there are Sedes who are closer to Rome than some of the so-called popular and "fabulous priests".
Stick with dogma and there will be no need to concern yourself with cults, even insidious ones like 'fabulous priest' worship. (see Fr. E etc.)

"Charismatic Masses are not my cup of tea but they are legitimate and in full communion with Christ's Vicar." I'd suggest a little homework before you make such a blanket judgment. I think Fr. McDonough (RIP -of Mission Church) would offer many caveats. It is only out of Charity that they should not be dismissed out of hand as spiritualism.

I too have been 'slayed in the spirit' it has no scriptural basis nor recognition by The Church. It is quite possibly diabolical in nature leading to...letting things roll off ones back. (but I could be wrong)

If the issue and abuse of EEM is a small thing, what exactly is a big thing?

"They are anathema." To my knowledge this statement has never been made by Rome about the sedevacantists. I believe on the other hand I could find you several places in historical church documents that refer to things as 'anathema' that are in common practice since V2.

On the South Shore apparently we have a new religious practice of EEM washing there hands on the alter with squirt bottle hand cleaner. It is great to see them pass the bottle and squirt it for each other, really builds community. It is yet another V2 offensive absurdity.

Carol McKinley said...


Many blessings to you and your family on this glorious day!

Each time you post here in the comments section, it comes across to me as if it's your first time coming here and you have no idea that I've spent the last ten years not only talking about errors but putting ginourmous efforts into getting these abuses stopped, helping the victims of them! (In fact, I don't know anyone in the Archdiocese whom I can say has come anywhere near the ten years of dialoging about errors of dogma and abuses in the Liturgy.) I don't think there is anyone who is even remotely familiar with my work who could read what I write and walk away with the understanding that I am a 'modernist' who 'makes peace' with scandal and error.

When I write, I am assuming that a) readers know that history or b) they read a few posts and get my shtick. So, when you see something I'm writing like "Eucharistic Ministers" - when I am writing it, it's a quick and dirty reference to what we all know is an error, but simply what the people doing it call themselves. It is an observation, not an endorsement.

Yes, I have seen every kind of abuse of the Eucharist. I've stopped people from walking away with the Eucharist in their hand. Once, at a wedding, I took the Eucharist out of some child who was not a Catholic and was 'playing' with Christ in his hand, and consumed Christ. I've picked up the Eucharist from the floor and consumed. These things have happened so rarely, that in my 40 years of going to a Novus Ordo, the sum of these abuses is less than five. A satanist could just as easily show up at the Latin Rite, remove the Eucharist from his or her mouth. That is not going to stop them.

A major flaw is futzing with the Canon or using some matter that makes you question the validity of the Mass. Other major flaws would include some kind of clownish antics or something in the homily that would lead a soul to take pride in their sins, or question the Catechism.

Charism is a word that is used in two ways -

It's another word for 'mysticism' - - which is absolutely, positively an endowment from Christ. There is a 2000 year history of the validity of mystical prayer. It does not seem that you are a believer in the mystical, which is a misfortune. There are gifts - and they are of an angelic nature - that come from mystical prayer. This is documented in the lives of many of our Saints.

Re: my experience getting weak as the priest prayed with me "slaying in the spirit" - Yes, these things can be diabolical - that is why one must be very, very careful. I have no attachment to whether it was diabolical or angelic. The story as I told it, was that I thought people were making it up, histrionics. I was shocked that it isn't feigned. I did not put much stock into it, nor have I ever been back. It was just a "huh" I was wrong about that kind of moment.

Carol McKinley said...

The obstacle I went to the priest for, which I was struggling with for a few years, was lifted after the experience. He is a holy and faithful priest. So in processing it, I will testify that it was more likely than not that some demon on my back was pried off and out and like a 50 pound weight strapped to your back that somebody rips off, my equilibrium was probably thrown a bit.

Christ can and most certainly does, endow priests with such gifts. You can doubt it all you want, but I would say it is blasphemy to say this gift is not of God and is diabolical in nature.

The sedes are what they are, Judases. Our baptismal duty is to call them back to Christ's Church, not invite others to join the pack of people betraying Christ and the Church He gave His Life to leave us.

There are many priests who are holy, Sacramental, teaching our faith that comes from the Catechism approved by Christ's Vicar on earth -- whom even Christ said -- what you shall bind, shall be bound. This was Christ's way of letting us all know that He understood that He was leaving the Church in human hands. But He is always with It, until the end of time. Those who have left it, have left Him. That is what is diabolical.


TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

I've no trouble with the mystical.

Here is my favorite part of the Oath.
"I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that FAITH IS NOT a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source."

Like most things from Rome there is much to consider.

I go to your blog because I believe you discuss important topic for contemporary Catholics. I find you to have a refreshing dose of audacity and a good old fashioned Irish bullshit detector.

With all do respect to your decades of swell work (of which I am completely ignorant) if you don't see that the distribution of communion by the laity is a large elephant in the living room of the Church in America then you are enraptured in the modernist Church. This is an orthodoxy issue recognized by many leaders and scholar within the Church and certainly is NOT a sedavacantist issue. (although they righteously point to this error)

"A satanist could just as easily show up at the Latin Rite, remove the Eucharist from his or her mouth. That is not going to stop them."


Ironically the hard lefties and the sedavacantist would agree on this.
What's the big deal? Its a cookie anyway.

So here it is, can you tell me straight?

The total elimination of the use EEM would be a step in the right direction for the church, yes or no? If your answer is an obvious yes, I'm sorry I missed it.

If you say No, I won't bother with your blog again, OK?

There are a few priest that have taken this step in the right direction - The Roman Catholic direction, away from the faulty USCCB direction.

Thanks for your candor.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

RE; second response.

"but I would say it is blasphemy to say this gift is not of God and is diabolical in nature."

From the Catholic encyclopedia
Blasphemy ..."signifies etymologically gross irreverence towards any person or thing worthy of exalted esteem."

The church has not noted that knocking folks over by pushing on foreheads is officially worthy of exalted esteem, or did I miss something?

I would think tearing apart Rosaries, smashing stained glass or desecrating vestments and the like would constitute blasphemy.

I think having laity dressed inappropriately for Mass approach the alter during the consecration the using hand sanitizer in some kind of mock washing is far more a blasphemy than criticism of a free form creative very loosely 'catholic' prayer spirit session. But maybe that's just me.

The scriptural reference to 'bound on earth...' is a recognized reference to the sacrament of confession.

It seems like your experience with the Sedes has been a very difficult and painful one, I am sorry for that. My experience has been joyful even humorous at times and nothing but reverent at Mass. I certainly get more of a kick out of them than the VOTF priestesses who run the show at many many parishes.

Carol McKinley said...


Thanks for your thoughts. I wouldn't trade our Irish BS detector for a million bucks!

I wasn't looking for respect, just giving a point of reference for the things I write.

If I'm at a Mass (or two as I was today) where the priest faithfully teaches the danger of unrepentant sin, the blindness that results, the value of the Sacrament of Confession, does a full teaching about the indulgence of Divine Mercy, Our Lady of Guadalupe, where confessions are going all day long, Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is done in the Hour of Mercy, A prayer of deliverance is said, Benediction - a First Class Relic of St. Faustina was brought out and we all venerated it, as well as venerated the image of Divine Mercy -- was I wringing my hands about the use of the Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist? Absolutely NOT. These holy priests who taught our faith with zeal, delivered Sacramental Grace, promoted our devotions -- the fact that they used EEMs did not even get on my radar screen, much less could it ever be described as 'the elephant in the room'! I was too immersed in the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord and the devotions and teachings of our Church.

Would I be happier if no EEMs were not used? You betcha! I go out of my way to get out of their line. I could count less than a handful of times in the past five years I've taken the Blessed Sacrament from a lay person. I only did it then, because I was cornered and the only way out was to draw attention to myself.

However, I'm not going to throw these kinds of priests and parishes under the bus because they permit laity to stampede the Sanctuary. To say there is value in promoting the faithful to go to these parishes is a ginormous understatement.

I've never had any kind of experience with the sedes. As low as I have been in grace, I thankfully have never made my way to the sedes. You'd be about as likely to see me there as you would see me working at planned parenthood. In fact, the people working at planned parenthood to demoralize women, sexualize them, kill their children - to me - is a much lesser crime against God than the sedes.

What I meant by their blasphemy,
is that their blasphemy is blasphemehy against the Holy Spirit. Against the authentic Sacraments of Christ's Church. It is an unforgivable sin in the Catholic religion.

Good luck to them with it. All I am saying is, I would not invite others to join them - for obvious reasons.

BTW - We can add St. Jerome's in Weymouth to our short list! Wowee.

Peace brother. Did you enjoy the day?

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

To the "anonymous" who criticizes me: You are not only a coward but you are a stupid coward. You accuse me of the "protestant sin of presumption" when your entire response is filled with presumption! Take the log out of your own eye before you try taking the splinters out others.

Second, the mere fact that you take pride in your own attendance at the Latin Mass means you are far more of the Pharisee than the publican when it comes to Jesus' parable about those two. If the Eucharist were all that spiritually powerful, then why don't the priests...let alone the faithful...act more Christ-like upon receiving it. And I cite you as Exhibit A in that regard.

It obviously doesn't have any power to negate the "smugness" that you so righteously claim to have, nor that of other Catholics.

I assure you, "anonymous," Protestants, Pentecostals and Eastern Orthodox will enter the Kingdom before you do.

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

One more thing, "anonymous": If you ever criticize me for being "presumptuous" for that last statement, let me tell you that I'm paraphrasing Jesus's statement to the self-proclaimed "orthodox" of His day, with whom you would fit in rather well, I think.

Anonymous said...

Hey Joe,
The True Church will be ready when you are ready to come home.

Presumption is a very specific theological issues. It has to do with 'once saved, always saved' error. I knew you wouldn't really be interested...

Pride at the Latin Mass?
I'm not even going to address that.

"I assure you, "anonymous," Protestants, Pentecostals and Eastern Orthodox will enter the Kingdom before you do."

A real Catholic would stick to their own business and understand it is Christ alone who judges our soul. But thanks for casting the first stone anyway OK?

I am not self-proclaimed. Orthodoxy is real, I seek it, it stands alone outside of my belief, I can only hope to ascend to it.
If you are playing churchy--nice guy with other religious sects who owe there roots to a drunken defrocked priest (Martin Luther) good luck to ya.

Oh , before I forget, that fart comment would have hurt my feelings...if I had any.

TheLastCatholicinBoston said...

Thanks for the response.

"I'm not going to throw these kinds of priests and parishes under the bus because they permit laity to stampede the Sanctuary."

I don't know what to tell ya...
buses and stampedes?...

I'm done with this blog, you have been pretty clear on your discernment on the issues of EEM.

I think you are wrong, dead wrong. It is a question of order and obedience and giving to God what is Gods.

This my last comment on your blog as TLCB or anonymous, I will not be coming to your blog again.

You have my email and I hope to see you around the increasingly small Catholic circle.


Joseph D'Hippolito said...

The True Church will be ready when you are ready to come home.

Still not brave enough to give out your name, eh, "anonymous"?

The "True Church" is wherever Christ is honored as Lord, Savior and Second Person of the Trinity. It is whether people embrace His atoning sacrifice on the cross for their redemption and obey Him...not esoteric theologies or group identities, be they Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Eastern Orthodox or anything else.

The fact that you fail to realize that makes you more of a target for Satan's temptations to pride than you ever realize.

Carol McKinley said...

LCIB, I'm sorry to hear that. My position on the EME's is that it is a suffering, but a minor one, so long as the priest is teaching the Catechism as approved by Christ's Vicar on Earth,the fullness of the teaching of our Sacraments and devotions - and he uses valid matter, says valid prayers of the Canon and gives the Divinity of Christ the respect He deserves in the Eucharist. It is a blip on the radar screen. If it bothers you, as it does me, get in the line of the priest. That's my position.

BTW - one thing you mentioned above stated that the scriptural reference to binding is about confession. This is how it plays out at the level of the penitent. But Christ was speaking to His Apostles and their successors who literally have the duty to write the criteria for what we have to go to confession for.

That make sense?

The Apostles and their successors have the duty to write the guidelines that drive us to the Confessional for the last 2000 years.

The reasons why He agreed to guide the Deposit of Faith through the Holy Spirit but be subservient to what mortals bind as sin, was because He knew there was much suffering ahead with wisdom that is less than Divine - and He led by example to stay with and behind the Pope and his Deposit of Faith - come what may.

Obedience and giving to God what is God's is exact opposite of what the sedes do with their blasphemy of the Sacraments and Christ's Church - so we couldn't be any further apart on this one!

Things were horrendous here in Boston ten years ago -- but John Paul II generation has been ordained and many are now pastors. The Woodstockers and clapping fornicators are dying on the vine. We have a long way to go - but it is better than good in a lot of parishes now.

There are numerous in parishes hostile to Catholic teaching and our schools have just been made hostile places to teach Catholic doctrine - with one exception I know of - St. Pauls in Hingham. You've got to pick up your family and get to a priest who is forming Catholics with authentic teaching.

Numerous people believe it's time for a navigational map. Perhaps both teaching and the Sacred Liturgy should be different categories.

God be with you. You are always welcome here should you change your mind. I'll drop you an email and I hope too to run into you.

Peace of Christ.

Jerry said...

Wow Carol, you riled up the crowd pretty good! While I can't recommend attending the new Mass, I'm happy to see folks trying to find the more reverent ones. There is salvation there.

Sedevacantism is heresy and schism. Vatican I defined that there would always be a pope and that his Faith would not fail, according to Our Lord's prayer for St. Peter. As for schism, Pope Boniface VIII defined ex cathedra that personal subjection to the pope is absolutely necessary for salvation.

The latter decree also excludes Protestants and Orthodox from salvation, in contrast to what Joseph wrote. Furthermore, Catholics who deviate from the Faith fall from grace, too, per Vatican I, the Athanasian Creed, and more.

Carol McKinley said...

Jerry, It sure seems I did. Who'd a thunk a reference on where to find sound teaching and salvation would bring a hailstorm of wrath? Thank you for setting the record straight on the teaching of salvation.