From the Pastor: Aunt Irma Gets Blessed!
My Aunt Irma is a hoot. She is willing to do what others just dream of doing. Or wouldn’t ever dream of doing. Nonetheless, she is willing to go through with things others sometimes only wish that somebody would do. This Christmas she was telling us all about her latest plans and, I must admit, what she is doing is being as wise as a serpent while being as simple as a dove. Aunt Irma is courageously combating evil where others much stronger and seemingly capable than her, out of fear, fail to tread.
She got her latest idea from Fiducia Supplicans, a document recently published by the Vatican’s expert on kissing. Aunt Irma claims to be a Latin scholar and she translated the title thusly: “'Supplicans' gives us the English 'suppliants' or 'beggars,' and 'Fiducia' is the Latin root for the once-popular dog name, 'Fido.' So a rough translation is 'Begging like a dog.'” She also provided a more vulgar translation, one that those in the know can smugly laugh about at their next “Guess My Pronouns” party and so will not be given here. After droning on for something like 4000 words about what a “blessing” is, the document finally got around to stating its true purpose, which is to give the green light to priests and bishops who pretend that God is pleased with the intimate relations of men/men and women/women whose activities used to be relegated to red light districts. Aunt Irma said that as she was reading it she was astounded by how it contradicted itself so blatantly about how “individuals” are often rightly blessed without demanding to know the status of their morality but then turned around and insisted that “couples” could/should be blessed even if it is known (no prying necessary) that they are living in “irregular” relationships. Of course, she recognized that that was only a pretext for the next logical step taken by the document and the reason it was written in the first place, the blessing, no questions asked or admitted, of unrepentant openly homosexual couples (not individuals). None of that surprised her but it did disappoint her. But when her Bishop came out with a wishy-washy non-commital defense of the document, one obviously written in hopes that he could edify his many “gay” priests and fellow bishops and not get himself “Stricklandized” by Rome, while trying to gaslight his faithful Catholic priests and people into thinking that if they just read the document as he had, they, too, would see that it doesn’t say what it says or mean what it means, she had enough. She immediately conceived her new mission: to show her Shepherd the ramifications of opening up a can of worms by allowing the blessing of evil.
The first thing she did was to send her Bishop an edited version of a story found in the 14th chapter of Saint Matthew’s Gospel, re-rewritten in light of (or in the darkness of) Fiducia Supplicans.
At that time Herod the Tetrarch heard the fame of Jesus. And he said to his servants: I hope this is another John the Baptist: and therefore mighty works won’t shew forth themselves in him. For Herod had rewarded John and bought him off, and put him into a position of power, because of Herodias, his brother’s wife. For John said to him: It is not lawful for thee to have her. But hey, man, what the heck. Let me give you two a blessing! And having a mind to put him in the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, he synoded the people: because they esteemed him as a prophet. But on Herod’s birthday, the daughter of Herodias danced before them: and pleased Herod. Whereupon he promised with an oath, to give her whatsoever she would ask of him. But she being instructed before by her mother, said: Give my incestuous, erotic dancing the blessing of John the Baptist. And the king was struck giddy because of his oath, and he salivated with them that sat with him at table; he commanded it to be given. And he sent for John, who was entertaining a certain American Jesuit priest in the Praetorium. And his blessing was dished up like a sumptuous dessert: and it was given to the damsel, and she brought it to her mother. And a New York TImes photographer just happened to be there to capture the whole thing and silence the naysayers.
Of course, this was just the beginning. Next, she brought a beautiful Nativity Collection to the Cathedral so that the Bishop could bless it. This Fontanini set was quite stunning, except that the figures of Mary and Joseph had been replaced by two Pachamamas. When he saw that he was being photographed by an NYT reporter and hesitated to impart his blessing, she whipped out a leather-bound copy of his response to Fiducia Supplicans and asked him what the problem was. He quickly gave his non-liturgical blessing. A few days later, she showed up at the chancery with two of her lady friends, each wearing identical wedding dresses and sporting shiny, new rings. The thruple received a blessing in front of a limo with a “Just Married, Married, Married” sign. The ever-present Times photographer was also there because this was almost certainly as non-scandalous and spontaneous a request as could possibly be made.
She plans to keep upping the ante by asking for blessings upon ever more disgusting “irregular” unions until the Bishop finally cracks. How long will it take before her Bishop issues a retraction of his initial response and speaks out against this latest divisive document? Stay tuned. And watch for news stories about an old woman with a tuxedo-wearing goat...
With prayers for your holiness,
Rev. Fr. Edwin Palka