Author: John Schultz

An answer to my question – why don’t priests sing?
“Perhaps it’s a habit, developed in years of wanting to spare the congregation their miked but imperfect voice.”
And I’m sure that’s true. Which is why I am not a proponent of the type of microphones that make the priest sound like he is speaking from a location one micron away from your ear drum. I think that if sound system output is at a medium level, it makes people have to concentrate just a bit more to listen. And it’s nice to be able to get away from the mic or turn off the mic if you’d rather not be heard singing, telling the deacon his homily was too long, or asking the altar boy to please get the sacramentary instead the binder all the announcements are in. “Tommy – I need the big red book. The red one. Over there. Gold ribbons. Tommy – not over where the lector talks – the little table… c’mon Tommy, turn around and go to the little table…”

Has some great stuff today. See the link at the right. Or if you are facing the other way it’s on your left.

Don’t mess with God’s plan, OK?

for the American Bishops to whom this applies:
We haven’t heard a “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”
I’m 30, grew up at the poster-Parish for the “Zero Tolerance for Latin” craziness right after Vatican II, and I know what that means.
It doesn’t mean “Mistakes were made.”

Over on Sirman on the mount there’s a response to my previous post.
Here’s a little tidbit back.
First – I’ll summarize my logic. I’m into Truth. Truth is good. The Truth is a gift from God, and acting in truth here on earth is our calling. There’s no question that many priests and bishops have either participating actively in or turned a blind eye to evil. Criminal and civil courts will no doubt address those matters in great detail. There’s not a single person who isn’t outraged, shocked and shaken by the fact that priests and bishops have been a party to and encouraged evil acts.
My problem with the interview on WMAL was that both the journalist and the man interviewed stepped outside of discussing the truth and made an indictment against the entire Church. I’m not using “hostile media” or “person with an axe to grind” as a “caveat.” Fact is, statements were made that were both sloppy and inaccurate and I think it’s appropriate to not only point that out, but express some consternation *and* express concern about the motives.
I’m Catholic and believe all that the Church teaches. That’s my bias. But this isn’t about bias – it’s about truth, and it’s wrong to vilify the entire Church and American Bishops in this context.
Now – here’s a small point, but it needs to be said: I stand by my comment around the use of the term “sexual terror” as demagoguery. Show me where that phase has been used in the English language prior to the widespread terrorist attacks of the latter part of the 20th century to present and I will concede the point. Otherwise – in the context of the interview with it’s inaccuracies, vitriol and sloppiness, that phrase is merely a rhetorical flourish that punches up the inaccuracies and vitriol.