Remembering the Real in Real Presence

I woke up this morning to find this story:  I LOVE to see somebody actually defending Our Lord!  That’s exactly what Fr. Thomas Petri, OP, did.  Thank you so much, dear father!  Some are going to rant and rave that he is using the Eucharist as a “political football”, but he’s simply showing belief in the Real Presence.  This is a no-brainer.  All the other priests not coming to the same conclusion are the ones who are playing “political football.”  Quite sadly, some aren’t going to be like Tarcisius because they don’t want to get beat up. (For those who don’t know the story: (  They are the ones that are constantly weighing the benefits and the consequences of whether or not to prevent the sacrilege of the Eucharist, when we all should really just be following the law that guides us.  Can’t go wrong there.  It’s a sacrilege, plain and simple.

So, can we look at the canons pertaining to reception of the Eucharist in the cases of Catholics (and yes, they are still Catholics, albeit bad ones) who hold a pro-abortion stance?  There are really two kinds. There those who hold this position privately and those who hold this position, and even champion it, publicly.

Canon 915 addresses the public sinner.  You know, the guy who says “I am a devout Catholic BUT I believe in a woman’s ‘right to choose’, gay marriage, and priestesses!” (Cough!  Tim Kaine!):

Can.  915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion. (Emphasis is all mine because I didn’t want anyone to miss anything!)

Tim knows what the Church teaches, yet he rejects it, and he does so very manifestly.  Canon 915 says he should not be admitted to Holy Communion.  Easy peasy.  Please note that it doesn’t say that HE should not present himself for Communion.  It says he should not be admitted to it.  It’s not a judgment call on his part, nor on the part of the person holding the Host up in front of Tim Kaine, who knows who he is and what he champions. (Ideally that should be a priest, but that’s another blog post.)

Canon 916 addresses the sinner whose sin cannot be determined by the priest (or whoever) holding the Host in front of them.  The burden of not allowing admittance now shifts to them.

Can.  916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

I’ve heard some political linebackers in the Church try to do a bit of pretzel twisting and colluding of the two canons by saying “Well, how is the person distributing Communion to know if Tim Kaine truly understands the Church teachings?” or “Well, how do we know if Tim Kaine didn’t go to confession right before Mass?”

Well here’s the answer to this nonsense.  First of all, stop blending Canon 915 and 916, which deal with manifest sin and private sin, respectively.   Canon 915 has no remedy for lack of understanding or going to confession.  Why?  Because the sin is so public it is scandalous and it can cause even more scandal and sacrilege when people see someone who’s never publicly recanted walking up to receive Our Lord.  A public, obstinate sinner must not only repent and go to confession privately but must publicly repent, or they continue to commit the sin of scandal.  It’s gone beyond the simple private sinner’s examination of conscience because it’s brought public scandal.

For instance, unless you live under a rock, we all know Tim Kaine’s stance on abortion.  Say Tim Kaine repents of his position, goes to confession, but never publicly recants the ideology.  What are the people in the pews to think?  Uh, maybe “How can we be giving Our Lord to someone who is pro-abortion???”  They have no way of knowing if he repented and went to confession.  All they see is someone publicly opposing the teachings of the Catholic Church receiving Communion, which is supposed to be a sign of communion with the truths of the Church!  Others might also be thinking “Hey, if he can hold this position and receive Communion, why can’t I?”  Still others might be led to a lack of belief in the Real Presence.  I mean, hey, if they’ll give Our Lord to someone touting those positions, why would we believe that we hold the Eucharist as something as precious as Our Lord, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity?  In short, it’s scandalous all the way around, which is why we have Canon 915.

A failure to hold people to Canon 915 does great danger to the Faith and surely doesn’t encourage the rest of the faithful hold ourselves to Canon 916.  All of this contributes to lack of belief in the Real Presence.  If we don’t get serious as a Church about sacrilege, well, I suppose, it can’t get much worse than the world we’re living in today with such a blatant disregard for life and morality.  Maybe fire raining down from the sky?  It’s kind of ironic that Tim Kaine was chosen on “Sodom and Gomorrah” weekend, isn’t it?

Let’s also remember that denial of the sacraments is not only to protect the rest of the faithful from scandal, but it’s also a remedy to help the sinner.  Letting Tim Kaine, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, the Kennedy family, etc., skate on the Eucharist doesn’t help their souls.  It’s called “tough love”, my friends, but it is love no less.  Spare the rod, spoil the child.

Please, Holy Father, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests of the Church – restore the belief of the real in Real Presence!   Thank you to all of you priests who have been willing to suffer abuse to do so.  Let us pray for them and many more to join them!


Clothing NOT Optional

This showed up in my Facebook news feed. Now that she’s been “bullied,” I’d like to also add a “mom of boys” rant and “wife to a husband” tongue lashing. Can this woman be this incredibly naïve? I can’t fathom that level of cluelessness but I suppose it does exist. (warning: if you click on this link you will see an ever so slightly clothed chick. I’d prefer you didn’t click but I kind of have to cite the source.)

The lady who was bullied for wearing a short dress to a wedding speaks out
Naija Tabloid Monday, July 04, 2016 Entertainment

Remember the lady who was ridiculed for wearing a short dress to a wedding? She is a fitness and nutrition coach named Liz Krueger from Minneapolis and she has hit back at the criticism by starting her own hashtag, #KruegerKindness, to inspire women to do kind things for each other.

First of all, no, I don’t remember this. I’m finding it hard to believe poor taste is news these days but whatever.

Mrs Krueger, in late june, uploaded a photo of her wearing the dress on Instagram with the caption:

“If only I knew that choosing this dress for a wedding on a 90 degree day meant so many women would be out rightly rude to me, and even come up behind me slap my ass as I’m standing alone. It was a dare from her friends, bc I was a target”.

Please, girlfriend. You didn’t put on this dress because it was going to be hot. You put on this dress because you wanted to be SEEN as hot and you wanted everyone to look at you. You weren’t “bullied” because of what you were wearing. You were “bullied” for what you weren’t wearing which was, namely, clothes. Band aids don’t count and it’s usually considered proper to actually dress for a wedding, not to undress for it.

Let me give you some wedding etiquette. It’s not “you” day. It’s the bride and groom’s day. You were being every bit as obnoxious as the guy who has had one too many and makes a pass at any woman in the room, as well as the mother of the bride. You had about as much thought for the bride and groom as that guy.

Next, I’m a mom. I would have either ask you to put on some clothes or I’d have to take my young sons out of there because I didn’t know I was attending a Playboy photoshoot. Don’t think I would? Think again. Seriously, you weren’t just embarrassing yourself but everyone in the entire room. Of course, I’m the “religious bigot” (that’s what those with a shred of common sense are called these days) so I’d also tell you that you were being a tad bit more than a near occasion of sin to the men in the vicinity. Seriously.

And then proceed to spill a full beer spilt down my arm. Just one of maaaaany acts of kindness of the night. Yup. That happened. Good thing for thick skin, being able to laugh at things and not take it personally, and good friends/hubby by my side #adultsarebullystoo .’ Regardless, we had one heck of a fun night and no “grown” women’s comments/glares could bring me down as a wedding guest:)

OK, I’m not into the bullying but really, somebody should have told you that the vast amount of “thick skin” showing was a tad bit over the top. And, back to embarrassing…Either your husband is as big of an attention seeker as you or he was probably also embarrassed. What kind of man wants all the other guys in the room looking lustily at the wife? Well, maybe he does but I’m sorry for him if that’s the case. Wonder if being a father of a girl would change that, or if he’d be happy if everyone wanted to sleep with his daughter? Are the fathering skills of Richie Sambora really going to be the new norm? “You want to wear that string bikini baby? Let’s get it into a magazine for all to see!”

Mrs Krueger also took to Facebook to thank a popular U.S blogger Constance Hall, for supporting and defending. She wrote:

‘She gets me. She supports me. And guess what? She doesn’t even know me. I am not playing a victim. I am not attention seeking. I am not vain. I am not slutty. I was not trying to upstage a bride. I didn’t have an agenda when I put on this dress. I’m not trying to name names or call anyone out. I’m not “a model trying to heighten my career. I’m sticking up for myself and my body, and the fact I can post about a bad experience I had at a wedding. Did I know it would go viral? Ummm no. I post every single day, but clearly this struck a cord with society.’

I have no clue who Constance Hall is but not vain or trying to upstage the bride when you put on the dress?! Were you in a pitch black room? Blind maybe? I can’t say whether or not you knew this would go viral but honey, you wanted attention and you wanted it bad. You don’t purchase a little number (a very little next to nothing number) like that unless you do.

She said she posted it to bring attention to the fact that women don’t treat each other well’ and that she hoped women would stop being disrespectful. She also penned a post explaining that when she attended the wedding, her intent was simply to ‘accompany my friend to a wedding, and have a fun girls night.’

Pot, meet kettle. Talk about women not treating each other well. Here’s a clue. When you want other women’s husbands, boyfriends and sons to stare at your barely clad body, you aren’t treating them well. Again, moms in the room were probably looking for blindfolds for their sons, not to mention wives and girlfriends. You were being completely disrespectful of yourself and everyone in the room. Have fun? We couldn’t care less if you wanted to have fun but don’t inflict yourself on everyone with eyes.

“A dress does not warrant being harassed by a group of girls, to make me feel like I was in middle school again. I think everyone in this situation learned a lesson, myself included. Be nice to each other. It’s what we learn as little kids. Why can’t we do it as adults?” She wrote.

So, what would you have done if someone privately pulled you aside and said that dress was inappropriate? Really, what would you have done? Would you have stopped for a second to give that message any credibility or would you have just played the “judgmental!” card? Methinks the latter, simply because you didn’t take any pause to buying it or putting it on in the first place. The people at the wedding were trying in their own idiotic way to say just that. They were offended by you because you were being offensive. Could they have handled it a different way? Sure, but the outcome would have been the same. It was all about you and the fact that everyone is just supposed to give you the thumbs up for every ridiculous outfit you choose to wear.

The fitness and nutrition coach posted a number of pictures of herself wearing dresses  (There’s a shocker!) to Instagram captioned with ‘the many looks of Liz Krueger’ and started her hashtag #kruegerkindness on Sunday morning.

‘I’m starting my own kindness movement #KruegerKindness! Whether it’s just a party of 1 (me), or others want to join me! I’m going to actively make it a priority to do good things for other women, every single day from here on out,’ she wrote. ‘I’m hoping to inspire others to do the same, just as I have with fitness journey. “

So, now you have to look like a hooker to be fit? Again, please. It has nothing to do with a fitness journey. It’s about having respect for yourself and those around you, especially a husband, to keep your dang clothes on. It has zero to do with “body shaming” (I mean it’s clear there’s not an ounce of fat on her perfect body) and everything to do with a lack of decent, basic morality and thought for those around you.

“A movement for women, by women, and it’s starting with me! If you want to join me in this movement, share your stories on social media with #KruegerKindness and let’s kill all the mean girls with kindness.”

As a mom of young women, no thanks. Movements like “Everyone look like a prostitute!” are not movements I want my family getting behind. Do I want my kids looking like they stepped out of a “Little House on the Prairie” book? No. I actually love fashion.  That said, I don’t want my girls to be a near occasion of sin for anyone else. Do they always understand my limited fashion rules of skirts to the top of the knees, leggings aren’t pants, and no underwear showing? Hardly. I’m sure that’s payback for my lack of understanding with my parents. I really don’t care. When they are in my sight, forget it, and I can only hope they have enough respect for their parents to follow through when they are out on their own. Do they think I have a clue? Probably not but they will get it when they have their own spouses and own children. There are just some things you don’t share with the outside world.

Just a note to the ladies during this nice, hot summer… Call me a prude, I really don’t care. Bikinis are pretty much underwear. I mean, really, what makes them different? The cute designs? You’re wearing a bra and panties and sometimes they’re even smaller. Deal. . Cleavage? Do I need to say more? (I remember a priest once saying if he could put the Host in your cleavage, your shirt was too dang low – hooray for bluntness?!) And the super short skirts? Sometimes I have to wonder if some women don’t have friends or mothers. When you bend over, jump up and sit, “I see Paris, I see France…” pretty much runs through my head. We really can see your underwear and quite often. It’s really mortifying and it happens all the time. In short, many of us just don’t want to see your “goods.” Your husbands don’t want others ogling your “goods”. If they do, then they are probably losers who never quite grew up and are using you to tend to their mid-life crises. Pathetic at best. Dads REALLY don’t want guys ogling their daughters (unless, or course, again, they are pathetic). We parents definitely don’t want you catching our sons’ attentions. We’ve got enough to deal with there. So, ya. We’re going to judge your attire if it makes living a moral life just a little harder. It’s not like it isn’t hard enough.

To the women who are thinking “I can’t help what guys are thinking?” and “I’m not responsible for what runs through guys’ heads?” Uh, yeah, you can and you are when you’re wearing a band aid. Give the poor guys a break! and stop playing dumb!  Take a little responsibility. To the Catholic babes out there… Think near occasion of sin. Do you really want to be one?

To the completely misguided girls out there trying to please or catch the eye of some guy or another…Think Grace Kelley and Audrey Hepburn (please don’t ask who they are. I fear there’s a whole generation who missed out on shear elegance. And, no, I’m not that old.) You can be fashionable without being frumpy OR flashing the flesh. Be elegant! When you think of elegance, does anyone truthfully think of Liz Krueger?

I’d like to take a moment to plug an on-line magazine (by young people instead of some dated gal like me) that is trying to convey all of these same ideas of modesty (See? I’m not so outdated after all!): If you’ve got someone in your life who thinks they need skimp to be attractive, it’s a nice site.

So, #bekindwearclothes!