Everybody probably knows the song "Gather Us In."
But here's an excellent parody of the song, which I found at Catholic Answers Forum. I don't know if the poster who posted it made it up themselves, or if someone else did, but it is funny!
Gather Us In
Here in this place, a bad song is starting,
Now will the altar turn into a stage.
All that is holy is slowly departing,
Making a way for the coming New Age.
Gather us in, for we are like captives.
Skipping the Mass, that would be wrong.
But Lord hear our plea, regarding M. Haugen:
Give him the courage to put down that bong.
Dear Father Smith make a beeline procession,
Run if you have to, make it real terse.
If you can start this Mass very quickly,
Maybe we'll only have to sing one verse.
Here's the link to the thread: Gather Us In parody
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
National Catholic Reporter...
should be renamed National Catholic Distorter, given their slant on Catholic news and comments by readers.
Their slogan should read: We distort, you decide.
Their slogan should read: We distort, you decide.
As impossible as it may sound...
I think I have found a "hymn" that may be worse than "Sing a New Church."
It's called "Song of the Body of Christ," and the title is the only part of the song that mentions Jesus in any form. From no direct mentions of God in the lyrics to downgrading the Eucharist from a sacrifice to a "meal," this is probably the worst song ever to be in the pages of a Catholic hymn.
The President talked about change in his campaign. How about change from the unsingable, near heretical songs in the hymnals to something more suitable and something that reflects Catholic teachings? That would be change to believe in.
It's called "Song of the Body of Christ," and the title is the only part of the song that mentions Jesus in any form. From no direct mentions of God in the lyrics to downgrading the Eucharist from a sacrifice to a "meal," this is probably the worst song ever to be in the pages of a Catholic hymn.
The President talked about change in his campaign. How about change from the unsingable, near heretical songs in the hymnals to something more suitable and something that reflects Catholic teachings? That would be change to believe in.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
3 days
Three days until President Barack Obama is inaugurated as our next President.
Now, what I'm about to say may seem unpopular, but I think it's necessary. As Americans and Catholics, it is our duty to support our new President by showing respect for the office. That's not to say we can't disagree or oppose what he stands for. For example, I find his positions on abortion and taxes to be abhorrent. But on January 20, he will be my President and the President for all Americans.
Some may say, "liberals didn't give Bush a chance, so it's payback time." But is that really the attitude Jesus would have us show? Eye for eye, tooth for tooth? In Romans, St. Paul tells us to submit to government authority (Romans 13:1) and that unless laws are instituted that prohibits the exercise of our faith and the following of God's laws, we are to, within the best of our abilities, obey them. Obviously, we cannot support abortion, but laws that do not conflict with God's commands are to be obeyed.
I will continue to express opposition to abortion and any law that may be passed under Obama (as well as future Presidents) that conflict with the faith, but I will also show respect for our new President. Let us also pray for him, that he may make the right choices as our President.
Now, what I'm about to say may seem unpopular, but I think it's necessary. As Americans and Catholics, it is our duty to support our new President by showing respect for the office. That's not to say we can't disagree or oppose what he stands for. For example, I find his positions on abortion and taxes to be abhorrent. But on January 20, he will be my President and the President for all Americans.
Some may say, "liberals didn't give Bush a chance, so it's payback time." But is that really the attitude Jesus would have us show? Eye for eye, tooth for tooth? In Romans, St. Paul tells us to submit to government authority (Romans 13:1) and that unless laws are instituted that prohibits the exercise of our faith and the following of God's laws, we are to, within the best of our abilities, obey them. Obviously, we cannot support abortion, but laws that do not conflict with God's commands are to be obeyed.
I will continue to express opposition to abortion and any law that may be passed under Obama (as well as future Presidents) that conflict with the faith, but I will also show respect for our new President. Let us also pray for him, that he may make the right choices as our President.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Tonight
Depending on what happens tonight, I'll either be extremely happy tomorrow or somewhat depressed.
I know, I'm being mysteriously cryptic on purpose. :)
I know, I'm being mysteriously cryptic on purpose. :)
Monday, January 5, 2009
California court rules on Episcopal parish dispute
California court sides with Episcopals over property
This conflicts with an earlier Virginia court ruling which sided with the parishes in that case.
A couple of observations:
1) The court seems to be getting involved with Episcopalian church law and trying to apply secular law to it. Hopefully, this isn't an omen regarding any future lawsuits involving gay marriage or "women ordination." Then again, this is California we're talking about.
2) Goes to show what happens when any members of the church depart from doctrine and dogma. In this country, at least right now, we don't have to worry about being hauled off to jail for following Christ or going to Mass. So, a second and more insidious tactic is being used against Christianity in this country: heresy, apostasy. Yes, that's what the ordination of openly unrepentant homosexuals involves: heresy and apostasy.
Granted, we're all sinners, and that's why there's the Sacrament of Confession. But this goes beyond that: the Episcopalian bishop in question has no intentions of repenting of his sinful lifestyle. It's one thing to try to turn away from sin, and fail, and quite another to refuse to turn away.
This conflicts with an earlier Virginia court ruling which sided with the parishes in that case.
A couple of observations:
1) The court seems to be getting involved with Episcopalian church law and trying to apply secular law to it. Hopefully, this isn't an omen regarding any future lawsuits involving gay marriage or "women ordination." Then again, this is California we're talking about.
2) Goes to show what happens when any members of the church depart from doctrine and dogma. In this country, at least right now, we don't have to worry about being hauled off to jail for following Christ or going to Mass. So, a second and more insidious tactic is being used against Christianity in this country: heresy, apostasy. Yes, that's what the ordination of openly unrepentant homosexuals involves: heresy and apostasy.
Granted, we're all sinners, and that's why there's the Sacrament of Confession. But this goes beyond that: the Episcopalian bishop in question has no intentions of repenting of his sinful lifestyle. It's one thing to try to turn away from sin, and fail, and quite another to refuse to turn away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)