DECLARATIONRegarding the article entitled "Dalla parte della bambina brasiliana” [by Archbishop "Rino" Fisichella] and published in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO on March 15, we the undersigned declare:1. The fact [the rape of the little girl] did not happen in Recife, as the article states, but in the city of Alagoinha (Diocese of Pesqueira).2. All of us - beginning with the parish priest of Alagoinha (undersigned) - treated the pregnant girl and her family with all charity and tenderness. The Parish priest, making use of his pastoral solicitude, when aware of the news in his residence, immediately went to the house of the family, in which he met the girl and lent her his support and presence, before the grave and difficult situation in which the girl found herself. And this attitude continued every day, from Alagoinha to Recife, where the sad event of the abortion of the two innocent [babies] took place. Therefore, it is quite evident and unequivocal that nobody thought in "excommunication" in the first place. We used all means at our disposal to avoid the abortion and thus save all THREE lives. The Parish priest personally joined the local Children's Council in all efforts which sought the welfare of the child and of her two children. In the hospital, in daily visits, he displayed attitudes of care and attention which made clear both to the child and to her mother that they were not alone, but that the Church, represented by the local Parish priest, assured them of the necessary assistance and of the certainty that all would be done for the welfare of the girl and to save her two children.3. After the girl was transferred to a hospital of the city of Recife, we tried to use all legal means to avoid the abortion. The Church never displayed any omission in the hospital. The girl's parish priest made daily visits to the hospital, traveling from the city which is 230 km [140 mi] away from Recife, making every effort so that both the child and the mother felt the presence of Jesus the Good Shepherd, who seeks the sheep who need most attention. Therefore, the case was treated with all due care by the Church, and not 'sbrigativamente' [summarily], as the article says.4. We do not agree [with Archbishop Fisichella] that the "decision is hard... for the moral law itself". Our Holy Church continues to proclaim that the moral law is exceedingly clear: it is never licit to eliminate the life of an innocent person to save another life. The objective facts are these: there are doctors who explicitly declare that they perform and will continue to perform abortions, while others declare with the same firmness that they will never perform abortions. Here is the declaration written and signed by a Brazilian Catholic physician: "...As an obstetrician for 50 years, graduated in the National Medical School of the University of Brazil, and former chief of Obstetrics in the Hospital of Andarai [Rio de Janeiro], in which I served for 35 years until I retired in order to dedicate myself to the Diaconate, and having delivered 4,524 babies, many from juvenile [mothers], I never had to resort to an abortion to 'save lives', as well as all my colleagues, sincere and honest in their profession and faithful to their Hippocratic oath. ..."5. The affirmation [in the article] that the fact was made public in the newspapers only because the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife rushed to declare the excommunication is false. It suffices to notice that the case was made public in Alagoinha on Wednesday, February 25; the Archbishop made his pronouncement to the press on March 3; and the abortion was performed on March 4. It would be too much to imagine that the Brazilian press, before a fact of such gravity, would have silenced during the period of six days. Therefore, the news of the pregnant girl ("Carmen") was made public in the newspapers before the consummation of the abortion. Only after that, when asked by journalists, on March 3 (Tuesday), the Archbishop mentioned canon 1398. We are convinced that the disclosure of this therapeutic penalty (the excommunication) will do much good to many Catholics, making them avoid this grievous sin. The silence of the Church would be very prejudicial, especially considering that fifty million abortions are being performed every year around the world, and in Brazil alone one million innocent lives are ended. The silence may be interpreted as collusion or complicity. If any doctor has a "perplexed conscience" [as the article says] before performing an abortion (which seems extremely improbable to us), he should - if he is a Catholic and wishes to follow the law of God - seek a spiritual director.6. The article is, in other words, a direct attack of the defense of the lives of the three children vehemently made by Archbishop José Cardoso Sobrinho and leaves evident how much the author does not have the necessary data or information to speak on the matter, due to his utter ignorance of the facts. The text may be interpreted as an apologia of abortion, violating the Magisterium of the Church. The abortionist doctors were not in the moral crossroads mentioned by the text; on the contrary, they performed the abortion with full knowledge and coherence with what they believe and teach. The hospital in which the abortion on the little girl was performed is one of those in which this procedure is always performed in our state, under the cover of "legality". The doctors who acted as executioners of the twins declared, and still declare in the national media, that they did what they are used to doing "with great pride". One of them declared even that: "Then, I have been excommunicated many times".7. The author believed he could speak about [a situation] he did not know, and, what is worse, he did not even have the trouble of first speaking to his brother in the episcopate, and, for his imprudent attitude, he is causing great scandal among the Catholic faithful in Brazil who are believing that Archbishop José Cardoso Sobrinho was rash in his pronouncements. Instead of seeking his brother in the episcopate, he chose to believe in our openly Anti-clerical press.Recife-PE, March 16, 2009Fr. Cícero Ferreira de PaulaChancellor - Archdiocese of Olinda and RecifeMons. Edvaldo Bezerra da SilvaVicar General - Archdiocese of Olinda and RecifeFr Moisés Ferreira de LimaRector of the Archdiocesan SeminaryDr. Márcio MirandaAttorney for the Archdiocese of Olinda and RecifeFr. Edson RodriguesParish priest of Alagoinha-PE - Diocese of Pesqueira
A BRAVE STATEMENT
Live Event
The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate will broadcast live the Missa Cantata (yes, a Traditional Mass) for the Solemnity of St Joseph on Thursday, March 19, at 7pm EDT (11pm GMT) from the Our Lady of Guadalupe Chapel, in Connecticut.
Live broadcast will begin below at the time of the event.
The Christian message always brings hope
I come among you as a pastor, I come to confirm my brothers and sisters in the faith. This was the role that Christ entrusted to Peter at the Last Supper, and it is the role of Peter’s successors. When Peter preached to the multitudes in Jerusalem at Pentecost, there were visitors from Africa present among them. And the witness of many great saints from this continent during the first centuries of Christianity – Saint Cyprian, Saint Monica, Saint Augustine, Saint Athanasius, to name but a few – guarantees a distinguished place for Africa in the annals of Church history.Right up to the present day, waves of missionaries and martyrs have continued to bear witness to Christ throughout Africa, and today the Church is blessed with almost a hundred and fifty million members. How fitting then, that Peter’s successor should come to Africa, to celebrate with you the life-giving faith in Christ that sustains and nourishes so many of the sons ad daughters of this great continent!...Even amid the greatest suffering, the Christian message always brings hope. The life of Saint Josephine Bakhita offers a shining example of the transformation that an encounter with the living God can bring to a situation of great hardship and injustice. In the face of suffering or violence, poverty or hunger, corruption or abuse of power, a Christian can never remain silent. The saving message of the Gospel needs to be proclaimed loud and clear, so that the light of Christ can shine into the darkness of people’s lives.
Benedict XVI
Welcoming ceremony - Yaoundé, Cameroon
March 17, 2009
For continuing coverage of the Papal visit to Africa, visit the special websites of Radio Vaticana and of the Holy See.
Ongoing Vatican wars
Rino Fisichella, saboteur
On the matter of the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, in Brazil, and his brave defense of Church doctrine and Canon law, as well as the pathetic and repulsively lukewarm article written by the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, Archbishop "Rino" Fisichella, there is nothing else to add to the combative words of the great Spanish blogger Francisco José Fernández de la Cigoña.
The late intervention of Fisichella happened after Cardinal Re had already assured the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife of the support of the Holy See. But the careerists and showmen in the Vatican always have to appear when they are not being noticed.
Something is not working at the VaticanThe contradictions, the denials, saying something today when something else was said yesterday: it is all too much. With evident delight of all the enemies of the Church. Nothing of the sort has ever been seen. Some want the Church of certainties to become the Church of doubts. Where everything goes. Both black and white.Morals a la carte, renouncement to principles, the [notion that] everything goes according to what is convenient is being imposed de facto. Or at least this is what some intend. The result is that the walls of the fortress are being breached. And some are delighted. The truth is not in the Church anymore. Some say one thing, and others say the opposite. If all kingdom divided shall fall, there are some who are already popping the champagne.The news of the excommunication of those who participated in an abortion was not really [news], even though some wished to exploit the repugnant circumstances of the fact to attack the Church. Human life was sacred until the day before yesterday, from its conception to its end. Now, it seems it varies. It is [sacred] in some cases, and less so in others.The Church chose the excommunication of the qualified authors of abortion confronted with the astounding crime multiplied by millions. She could not have done so, and it would still be a crime and a sin. But she did it. I suppose that by weighing the pros and the cons. The terrorist attacks in which hundreds are killed, the cases of abuse of children of very young age, ... multiple rapes, the bombing of defenseless populations... [sic] Their perpetrators, guilty of most grievous sin, are not excommunicated latae sententiae. But those who perform an abortion are. Or at least they were until yesterday. It is unknown today.Because it seems that there are good abortions. Such as the one of Brazil. Quite a box has been opened! Let us now see how it will be closed.... Whoever participated directly and effectively in the abortion of the Brazilian girl is excommunicated. With the declaration of the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife or without it. The Brazilian prelate might not have declared what already had taken place. And, considering what happened, perhaps that would have been more prudent. But he did not do other than expressing what the Church affirmed until yesterday. And I would like to suppose that she still affirms it.I criticized the fact that a French bishop meddled in the Brazilian affair, and with words which almost justified that abortion. I believe that the Frenchmen are four at least by now. And they are now strengthened by an Italian who is none other than the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life. And the encomium mortis of the one who should in theory be the defender of life deserved the pages of L'Osservatore Romano. It is all absurd.You will now see the attempts, difficult if not impossible, to put the toothpaste back in the tube. The general interpretation, and it is enough to read the world media, is that the Church legitimizes an abortion. That there are good abortions. That the Church has at last given in. And that she has recognized her error.I am convinced that once again nothing will happen. ... I personally believe that Salvatore Fisichella, Rino to his friends, should resign today. Or be dismissed. And also the director of L'Osservatore.
Vianney, the model priest
[Pope Benedict XVI:] "In order to favor this tendency of priests towards spiritual perfection, upon which the effectiveness of their ministry principally depends, I have decided to call a special 'Year for Priests' which will run from 19 June 2009 to 19 June 2010". [This year marks] "the 150th anniversary of the death of the saintly 'Cure of Ars', Jean Marie Vianney, a true example of a pastor at the service of Christ's flock".The Pope will inaugurate the Year on 19 June, presiding at Vespers in St. Peter's Basilica where the relics of the saintly 'Cure of Ars' will be brought for the occasion by Bishop Guy Bagnard of Belley-Ars, France. He will close the year on 19 June 2010, presiding at a "World Meeting of Priests" in St. Peter's Square.During the course of the Year, Benedict XVI will proclaim St. Jean Marie Vianney as patron saint of all the priests of the world. A "Directory for Confessors and Spiritual Directors" will also be published, as will a collection of texts by the Supreme Pontiff on essential aspects of the life and mission of priests in our time.The Congregation for the Clergy, together with diocesan ordinaries and superiors of religious institutes, will undertake to promote and co-ordinate the various spiritual and pastoral initiatives which are being organised to highlight the role and mission of the clergy in the Church and in modern society, and the need to intensify the permanent formation of priests, associating it with that of seminarians.
Holy See Press Office
Note: Currently, Saint John Mary Vianney, is the Patron Saint of Parish Priests - declared so by the Pope who canonized him, Pius XI. More papal words on Saint John Mary Vianney: Sacerdotii Nostri Primordia (John XXIII).
Words of Doctrine:
Primacy at the service of Church unity
Fr. Nicola Bux and Fr. Salvatore Vitiello
Seventy years ago, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, a Roman, was elected Pope with the name Pius XII. In those days, no one could imagine that the college of cardinals or the college of bishops would ever fail to be “in agreement in what you profess – according to the words of the Apostle – so that you are perfectly united in your beliefs and judgements” (1 Cor 1,10). Also John XXIII, in his opening discourse to the Council, could speak of “renewed, serene and tranquil adhesion to all the teachings of the Church in its entirety and preciseness, as it still shines forth in the Acts of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council”. Could we ever imagine that the Church, the mystical Body of Christ, could speak not in unison? Could we ever conceive ecclesiology of communion, overlooking what the Council said about the primacy (cfr Lumen gentium 13, 22 e 23) ?
Therefore, the whole Church, bishops, priests and lay faithful, would do well to reflect on the meek and argued words of the Holy Father Benedict XVI at the Major Roman Seminary and at the Angelus on Sunday 22 February and put an end to “polemics that are born where faith degenerates into intellectualism and humility is substituted by the arrogance of being better than the other … a caricature of the Church that should be one in mind and heart ”. These words express a patient exercise of Primacy and should be accepted by all Catholics with humble docility.
The Holy Father knows that Primacy has its own 'martyrological structure' because “God's message cannot be chained up. ”(2 Tm 2,9) and this is true for every Pope. The Primacy of Peter exists and operates because ecclesial communion cannot be destructive, indeed the Creed calls it ‘Catholic’. On this matter it is better to turn to what he wrote as a theologian, in Introduction to Christianity: “one fundamental idea is documented, since the beginning, as determinant: the words refer to unity of place: the ‘Catholic church', is only a community united with the bishop, not partial groups, which, for some reason or another, have separated themselves from it. Secondly, what is referred to here is the unity of local Churches among themselves, since they are not to close in on themselves they are the Church only if they remain open to one another, forming the one Church […] the adjective ‘Catholic’ expresses the Church's episcopal structure and the necessity for unity of all the bishops among themselves […]” (It. edition, ed. Queriniana-Vaticana, 2005, p 335).
After observing that this idea does not constitute the primary element, he states: “Fundamental elements of the Church are rather forgiveness, conversion, penance, Eucharistic communion and then, on this basis, plurality and unity: plurality of the local Churches, which are Church only through insertion into the body of the one Church […]Episcopal constitution appears in the background as a means of this unity[…]. An ulterior stage, again in the order of means, will be constituted by the service of the Bishop of Rome. One thing is clear: the Church is not to be seen starting from her organisation, instead her organisation must be understood starting from the Church. However at the same time it is clear that, for the visible Church, visible unity is something more than simple ‘organisation’.[…] Only by being ‘Catholic’, that is visibly one but with multiplicity, can she respond to what is demanded by the Symbol. In a torn and divided world the Church must be a sign and a means of unity, she must cross barriers and unite nations, races, classes. To what point, also in this task, has she failed, we know all too well […]despite everything…instead of simply denigrating the past, we should above all demonstrate that we are ready to answer the call of the present, striving not simply to confess the Catholicity of the Creed, but to achieve it in the life of our torn world ” (It. edition, p 336-337). [FIDES]
Editorial Note:
The buck stops here!
"I am Peter. God gave me, and nobody else, the responsibility to govern His Church and foster her unity. I have vowed to do so, and I will fulfill it to the best of my ability." That is the main thrust of the Papal letter to the bishops, an "encyclical" in the etymological sense of the word, that is, a circular personal letter addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church.
"I believe that I set forth clearly the priorities of my pontificate in the addresses which I gave at its beginning. Everything that I said then continues unchanged as my plan of action."
In that plan of action, the "first priority for the Successor of Peter was laid down by the Lord in the Upper Room in the clearest of terms: 'You… strengthen your brothers' (Lk 22:32)". Strengthen, certainly, but for what? To fulfill the mission of the Church, salus animarum, which includes struggling against the real problem of our time.
"The real problem at this moment of our history is that God is disappearing from the human horizon, and, with the dimming of the light which comes from God, humanity is losing its bearings, with increasingly evident destructive effects." And he clarifies it: "Not just any god, but the God who spoke on Sinai; to that God whose face we recognize in a love which presses 'to the end' (cf. Jn 13:1) – in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen."
To the end, to the end... "Whoever proclaims that God is Love 'to the end' has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity..." And Peter is willing to suffer, to suffer abuse even from Catholics: "even Catholics who... thought they had to attack me with open hostility". He does not have to add explicitly, but it should be clear: "even from many of you, brother Bishops, to whom I adress this letter". The Catholics who offend him have lost track of what the priority of the Church is.
Their hostility, their hatred, is the same hatred that the world has always reserved for Christ and His followers. Yes, you world leaders, as well as you pseudo-Progressive Catholics, ambassadors of the world in the Church, whom do you serve when you hate? The Church? Why do you feel the need to hate? The world, following its prince, needs "to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint."
The Pope's message is clear: "this 'biting and devouring' also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom". Freedom in the Church must be a freedom subjected to the "supreme priority, which is love". Liberty not for its own sake (Liberalism), but always obedient to Christ through His Church, and though the only true "great defender" of all its Councils, the Pope: "Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life."
Amen.
Communiqué
of the Superior General
of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X [FSSPX / SSPX]
Pope Benedict XVI addressed a letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church, dated March 10 2009, in which he made them aware of the intentions which guided him in this important step which is the Decree of January 21, 2009.
After "an avalanche of protests was unleashed" recently, we greatly thank the Holy Father for having placed the debate at the level on which it should take place, that of the faith. We fully share his utmost concern for preaching to "our age, when in vast areas of the world the faith is in danger of dying out like a flame which no longer has fuel".
The Church lives, in fact, through a major crisis which cannot be solved other than by an integral return to the purity of the faith. With Saint Athanasius, we profess that "Whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the Catholic faith: whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally." (Quicumque Creed)
Far from wanting to stop Tradition in 1962, we wish to consider the Second Vatican Council and the post-Conciliar magisterium in the light of this Tradition which Saint Vincent of Lérins defined as that "which has been believed everywhere, always, by all" (Commonitorium), without rupture and in a perfectly homogenous development. It is thus that we will be able to contribute efficaciously to the evangelization asked for by the Savior (cf. Matthew, 28,19-20).
The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X assures Benedict XVI of its will to address the doctrinal discussions considered "necessary" by the Decree of January 21, with the desire of serving the revealed Truth which is the first charity to be shown towards all men, Christian or not. It assures him of its prayers so that his faith may not fail and that he may confirm all his brethren (cf. Luke 22 32).
We place these doctrinal discussions under the protection of Our Lady of All Trust, with the assurance that she will obtain for us the grace of faithfully delivering that which we received, "tradidi quod et accepi" (I Cor. 15,3).
+ Bernard Fellay
LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS
BENEDICT XVI
TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
concerning the remission of the excommunication
of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre
Dear Brothers in the Episcopal Ministry!
The remission of the excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without a mandate of the Holy See has for many reasons caused, both within and beyond the Catholic Church, a discussion more heated than any we have seen for a long time. Many Bishops felt perplexed by an event which came about unexpectedly and was difficult to view positively in the light of the issues and tasks facing the Church today. Even though many Bishops and members of the faithful were disposed in principle to take a positive view of the Pope’s concern for reconciliation, the question remained whether such a gesture was fitting in view of the genuinely urgent demands of the life of faith in our time. Some groups, on the other hand, openly accused the Pope of wanting to turn back the clock to before the Council: as a result, an avalanche of protests was unleashed, whose bitterness laid bare wounds deeper than those of the present moment. I therefore feel obliged to offer you, dear Brothers, a word of clarification, which ought to help you understand the concerns which led me and the competent offices of the Holy See to take this step. In this way I hope to contribute to peace in the Church.
An unforeseen mishap for me was the fact that the Williamson case came on top of the remission of the excommunication. The discreet gesture of mercy towards four Bishops ordained validly but not legitimately suddenly appeared as something completely different: as the repudiation of reconciliation between Christians and Jews, and thus as the reversal of what the Council had laid down in this regard to guide the Church’s path. A gesture of reconciliation with an ecclesial group engaged in a process of separation thus turned into its very antithesis: an apparent step backwards with regard to all the steps of reconciliation between Christians and Jews taken since the Council – steps which my own work as a theologian had sought from the beginning to take part in and support. That this overlapping of two opposed processes took place and momentarily upset peace between Christians and Jews, as well as peace within the Church, is something which I can only deeply deplore. I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news. I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility. Precisely for this reason I thank all the more our Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust which – as in the days of Pope John Paul II – has also existed throughout my pontificate and, thank God, continues to exist.
Another mistake, which I deeply regret, is the fact that the extent and limits of the provision of 21 January 2009 were not clearly and adequately explained at the moment of its publication. The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.
In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" – the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope – to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes. The collegial bodies with which the Congregation studies questions which arise (especially the ordinary Wednesday meeting of Cardinals and the annual or biennial Plenary Session) ensure the involvement of the Prefects of the different Roman Congregations and representatives from the world’s Bishops in the process of decision-making. The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.
I hope, dear Brothers, that this serves to clarify the positive significance and also the limits of the provision of 21 January 2009. But the question still remains: Was this measure needed? Was it really a priority? Aren’t other things perhaps more important? Of course there are more important and urgent matters. I believe that I set forth clearly the priorities of my pontificate in the addresses which I gave at its beginning. Everything that I said then continues unchanged as my plan of action. The first priority for the Successor of Peter was laid down by the Lord in the Upper Room in the clearest of terms: "You… strengthen your brothers" (Lk 22:32). Peter himself formulated this priority anew in his first Letter: "Always be prepared to make a defence to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3:15). In our days, when in vast areas of the world the faith is in danger of dying out like a flame which no longer has fuel, the overriding priority is to make God present in this world and to show men and women the way to God. Not just any god, but the God who spoke on Sinai; to that God whose face we recognize in a love which presses "to the end" (cf. Jn 13:1) – in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen. The real problem at this moment of our history is that God is disappearing from the human horizon, and, with the dimming of the light which comes from God, humanity is losing its bearings, with increasingly evident destructive effects.
Leading men and women to God, to the God who speaks in the Bible: this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the Successor of Peter at the present time. A logical consequence of this is that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity, their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith – ecumenism – is part of the supreme priority. Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light – this is interreligious dialogue. Whoever proclaims that God is Love "to the end" has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity – this is the social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the Encyclical Deus Caritas Est.
So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church’s real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who "has something against you" (cf. Mt 5:23ff.) and to seek reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents – to the extent possible – in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole. Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?
Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint.
Dear Brothers, during the days when I first had the idea of writing this letter, by chance, during a visit to the Roman Seminary, I had to interpret and comment on Galatians 5:13-15. I was surprised at the directness with which that passage speaks to us about the present moment: "Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another." I am always tempted to see these words as another of the rhetorical excesses which we occasionally find in Saint Paul. To some extent that may also be the case. But sad to say, this "biting and devouring" also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom. Should we be surprised that we too are no better than the Galatians? That at the very least we are threatened by the same temptations? That we must always learn anew the proper use of freedom? And that we must always learn anew the supreme priority, which is love? The day I spoke about this at the Major Seminary, the feast of Our Lady of Trust was being celebrated in Rome. And so it is: Mary teaches us trust. She leads us to her Son, in whom all of us can put our trust. He will be our guide – even in turbulent times. And so I would like to offer heartfelt thanks to all the many Bishops who have lately offered me touching tokens of trust and affection, and above all assured me of their prayers. My thanks also go to all the faithful who in these days have given me testimony of their constant fidelity to the Successor of Saint Peter. May the Lord protect all of us and guide our steps along the way of peace. This is the prayer that rises up instinctively from my heart at the beginning of this Lent, a liturgical season particularly suited to interior purification, one which invites all of us to look with renewed hope to the light which awaits us at Easter.
With a special Apostolic Blessing, I remain
The remission of the excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without a mandate of the Holy See has for many reasons caused, both within and beyond the Catholic Church, a discussion more heated than any we have seen for a long time. Many Bishops felt perplexed by an event which came about unexpectedly and was difficult to view positively in the light of the issues and tasks facing the Church today. Even though many Bishops and members of the faithful were disposed in principle to take a positive view of the Pope’s concern for reconciliation, the question remained whether such a gesture was fitting in view of the genuinely urgent demands of the life of faith in our time. Some groups, on the other hand, openly accused the Pope of wanting to turn back the clock to before the Council: as a result, an avalanche of protests was unleashed, whose bitterness laid bare wounds deeper than those of the present moment. I therefore feel obliged to offer you, dear Brothers, a word of clarification, which ought to help you understand the concerns which led me and the competent offices of the Holy See to take this step. In this way I hope to contribute to peace in the Church.
An unforeseen mishap for me was the fact that the Williamson case came on top of the remission of the excommunication. The discreet gesture of mercy towards four Bishops ordained validly but not legitimately suddenly appeared as something completely different: as the repudiation of reconciliation between Christians and Jews, and thus as the reversal of what the Council had laid down in this regard to guide the Church’s path. A gesture of reconciliation with an ecclesial group engaged in a process of separation thus turned into its very antithesis: an apparent step backwards with regard to all the steps of reconciliation between Christians and Jews taken since the Council – steps which my own work as a theologian had sought from the beginning to take part in and support. That this overlapping of two opposed processes took place and momentarily upset peace between Christians and Jews, as well as peace within the Church, is something which I can only deeply deplore. I have been told that consulting the information available on the internet would have made it possible to perceive the problem early on. I have learned the lesson that in the future in the Holy See we will have to pay greater attention to that source of news. I was saddened by the fact that even Catholics who, after all, might have had a better knowledge of the situation, thought they had to attack me with open hostility. Precisely for this reason I thank all the more our Jewish friends, who quickly helped to clear up the misunderstanding and to restore the atmosphere of friendship and trust which – as in the days of Pope John Paul II – has also existed throughout my pontificate and, thank God, continues to exist.
Another mistake, which I deeply regret, is the fact that the extent and limits of the provision of 21 January 2009 were not clearly and adequately explained at the moment of its publication. The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.
In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" – the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope – to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes. The collegial bodies with which the Congregation studies questions which arise (especially the ordinary Wednesday meeting of Cardinals and the annual or biennial Plenary Session) ensure the involvement of the Prefects of the different Roman Congregations and representatives from the world’s Bishops in the process of decision-making. The Church’s teaching authority cannot be frozen in the year 1962 – this must be quite clear to the Society. But some of those who put themselves forward as great defenders of the Council also need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church. Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries, and cannot sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.
I hope, dear Brothers, that this serves to clarify the positive significance and also the limits of the provision of 21 January 2009. But the question still remains: Was this measure needed? Was it really a priority? Aren’t other things perhaps more important? Of course there are more important and urgent matters. I believe that I set forth clearly the priorities of my pontificate in the addresses which I gave at its beginning. Everything that I said then continues unchanged as my plan of action. The first priority for the Successor of Peter was laid down by the Lord in the Upper Room in the clearest of terms: "You… strengthen your brothers" (Lk 22:32). Peter himself formulated this priority anew in his first Letter: "Always be prepared to make a defence to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you" (1 Pet 3:15). In our days, when in vast areas of the world the faith is in danger of dying out like a flame which no longer has fuel, the overriding priority is to make God present in this world and to show men and women the way to God. Not just any god, but the God who spoke on Sinai; to that God whose face we recognize in a love which presses "to the end" (cf. Jn 13:1) – in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen. The real problem at this moment of our history is that God is disappearing from the human horizon, and, with the dimming of the light which comes from God, humanity is losing its bearings, with increasingly evident destructive effects.
Leading men and women to God, to the God who speaks in the Bible: this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the Successor of Peter at the present time. A logical consequence of this is that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity, their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith – ecumenism – is part of the supreme priority. Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light – this is interreligious dialogue. Whoever proclaims that God is Love "to the end" has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity – this is the social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the Encyclical Deus Caritas Est.
So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church’s real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who "has something against you" (cf. Mt 5:23ff.) and to seek reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents – to the extent possible – in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole. Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim him and, with him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?
Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things – arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them – in this case the Pope – he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint.
Dear Brothers, during the days when I first had the idea of writing this letter, by chance, during a visit to the Roman Seminary, I had to interpret and comment on Galatians 5:13-15. I was surprised at the directness with which that passage speaks to us about the present moment: "Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you are not consumed by one another." I am always tempted to see these words as another of the rhetorical excesses which we occasionally find in Saint Paul. To some extent that may also be the case. But sad to say, this "biting and devouring" also exists in the Church today, as expression of a poorly understood freedom. Should we be surprised that we too are no better than the Galatians? That at the very least we are threatened by the same temptations? That we must always learn anew the proper use of freedom? And that we must always learn anew the supreme priority, which is love? The day I spoke about this at the Major Seminary, the feast of Our Lady of Trust was being celebrated in Rome. And so it is: Mary teaches us trust. She leads us to her Son, in whom all of us can put our trust. He will be our guide – even in turbulent times. And so I would like to offer heartfelt thanks to all the many Bishops who have lately offered me touching tokens of trust and affection, and above all assured me of their prayers. My thanks also go to all the faithful who in these days have given me testimony of their constant fidelity to the Successor of Saint Peter. May the Lord protect all of us and guide our steps along the way of peace. This is the prayer that rises up instinctively from my heart at the beginning of this Lent, a liturgical season particularly suited to interior purification, one which invites all of us to look with renewed hope to the light which awaits us at Easter.
With a special Apostolic Blessing, I remain
Yours in the Lord,
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
From the Vatican, 10 March 2009
URGENT MATTER
The Pope defends himself;
cries against moral lynching of Traditionalists
UPDATED
A letter of Pope Benedict XVI to all Bishops of the world on the removal of the excommunication of the Bishops of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX) and on all aspects involving the subsequent problems related to Bishop Richard Williamson is set to be released tomorrow (Thursday). Several Italian news sources provide some excerpts of the letter this morning, and we will provide a translation as soon as possible.
Excerpts:
The letter will announce that the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" will be placed under the authority of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (though, as of this moment, it is not clear if only regarding doctrinal matters). The Pope makes clear for Traditionalists that it is not possible to "freeze" the Magisterial authority of the Church in 1962 - but he also chides those who proclaim themselves to be "great defenders of the Council" but who do not wish to understand that Vatican II carries with it "the entire doctrinal history of the Church".
The Pope is frank with those who proclaim ecumenism, but who do not wish to follow through with it with the Fraternity: "May we consign to utter indifference a community in which there are 491 priests, 215 seminarians, ... 117 brothers, 164 sisters, and thousands of faithful? Should we truly let them drift away from the Church? Are we allowed to simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical and marginal group, from the search for unity and reconciliation?"...
...
"A mishap unpredictable to me was the fact that the Williamson affair was placed above the remission of the excommunication. The discreet gesture of mercy towards the four Bishops, ordained validly but not licitly, appeared unexpectedly as a completely different matter: as a denial of the reconciliation of Christians and Jews, and thus as a repeal of that which the Council had clarified for the path of the Church regarding this matter."
...
"I am saddened by the fact that even Catholics, who in the end should have known better how things stand, considered having to assail me with a hostility ready for attack. For this, I thank even more the Jewish friends who have helped to promptly remove the misunderstanding and to reestablish an atmosphere of friendship and trust."
Some of the concluding words are strong: "The impression is often given that our society feels the need for at least one group to which no tolerance is to be granted; which one may perfectly abuse with hatred. And if anyone - in this case the Pope - dares to approach them, he also loses his right to tolerance and he also may be treated with hatred, with no fears or reservations."
________________________________
UPDATE (1300 GMT): Complete German text (Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung). Since the Holy See Press Office has announced that official versions of the letter in Italian, German, French, English, Spanish, and Portuguese will be made available tomorrow, and since some of the most relevant excerpts were already translated above, we will wait for the official release this Thursday.
Note: We have kept the above link to the version made public by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, but have decided to remove the text from the blog while the official text remains embargoed by the Holy See (until Thursday, 1100 GMT) .
Cardinal Mahony Scandal: Rebukes Holocaust Denier; Remains Silent on Pro-Abortion Catholics
Released March 6, 2009
Washington, DC (6 March 2009) – American Life League is asking Cardinal Roger Mahony if his public ban of a Holocaust-denying bishop signals his willingness to take a similar position on pro-abortion advocates in his own archdiocese and parish.
Mahony, head of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, announced March 3 that he is banning Bishop Richard Williamson from any Roman Catholic Church, school, or other facility in the archdiocese for denying certain facts about the Nazi Holocaust.
“Since Cardinal Mahony is taking such a strong public position against the Nazi holocaust denier, Bishop Richard Williamson, SSPX, we are hopeful it signals a new attitude towards those who deny and actively support the American holocaust of abortion,” said Michael Hichborn, spokesman for American Life League.
Mahony and two officials of the American Jewish Committee signed a commentary that stated, "Holocaust deniers like Williamson will find no sympathetic ear or place of refuge in the Catholic Church, of which he is not — and may never become — a member.”
"Cardinal Mahony's apparent ire regarding one Holocaust denier should provoke him to enforce Catholic Church law when it comes to pro-abortion public figures, that is if he is to consistent," Hichborn stated.
“Canon law is clear. Supporting so-called abortion rights is intrinsically evil, and obstinate persistence in grave, manifest sin requires denial of Holy Communion. For pro-abortion public figures to be allowed to receive Holy Communion is a huge scandal,” Hichborn continued. “How many people have taken this as a form of silent consent?”
Hichborn is the head of American Life League’s Canon 915 project, directed at encouraging bishops and priests to protect the Holy Eucharist from sacrilege.
“Banning a brother bishop from even entering a church is a serious and extreme step,” said Hichborn. “We are waiting for Cardinal Mahony to take similar measures for those who support the intrinsic evil of abortion.”
[In the picture: Mahony celebrates the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe with pro-abortion Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the rector of the Guadalupe Basilica - Dec. 3, 2006]
_____________________________________________________RECESS for a few days; urgent news may be posted at any moment.
Lacordaire: "That stream is sanctity"
Assumpsit Iesus Petrum, et Iacobum, et Ioannem fratrem eius, et duxit illos in montem excelsum seorsum: et transfiguratus est ante eos. Et resplenduit facies eius sicut sol: vestimenta autem eius facta sunt alba sicut nix. (From the Gospel for Ember Saturday in Lent and for the Second Sunday in Lent, Matthew xvii, 1-2: "Jesus took Peter and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart: and He was transfigured before them. And His face did shine as the sun, and His garments became white as snow.")
It is easy for me... to show that Catholic doctrine enjoys a superhuman moral efficacy, even as a consequence of the interaction which it keeps between man and God. ... Now, in virtue of what does Catholic doctrine operate this superhuman transformation in the soul? Is it directly? Is it simply because it says to us, "Be humble, be chaste, be apostles, be brethren"?
Ah..., but everyone says this to us more or less earnestly: there is not a man steeped in pride who has not invoked the humility of others; not a man drowned in sensuality who was not invoked the purity of his victims; not a man who has not invoked apostleship to propagate his ideas, and fraternity to establish his empire! But the ear of man remains closed to those invitations of selfishness, or to those dreams of reason; it listens to them without hearing; it hears, without obeying.
Catholic doctrine would have succeeded no better, if it had spoken to man only of man; if it had proposed to him, as the spring of its action, only his interest, his duty even, and his dignity. To render man humble, chaste, apostle, brother, it has taken its basis outside of him: it has placed it in God.
It is in the name of God, by the power of the relationship which it has created between God and ourselves, by the efficacy of its dogmas, of its worship, and of its sacraments, that it changes within us that corpse which rebels against virtue; that it reanimates it, resuscitates it, purifies it, transforms it, clothes it with the glory of Tabor, and having thus armed it from head to toe, sends it forth into the distress of the world, as a new man, still feeble by nature, but strengthened by God, towards Whom his unceasing aspiration ascends.
It is thus ... that the miracle of our transfiguration is accomplished in Catholic doctrine: humility, chastity, charity, and all the interior elevations which result from these are but effects of a higher virtue giving the movement to all the rest. Without religion, without the interaction of soul and God, the whole Christian edifice crumbles -- consequently, that interaction, which is the keystone of the arch, is efficacious in a superhuman manner, since it bears man above humanity.
...humility, chastity, the charity of apostleship and of fraternity, obedience, penitence, voluntary poverty...are but branches of a single stream. ... There is ... a stream into which merge all those scattered virtues which I have named: and that stream is sanctity.
Henri-Dominique Lacordaire
Conférences de Notre-Dame de Paris (1844)
Conférences de Notre-Dame de Paris (1844)
A Vatican II Moment
brought to you by the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle
Catholics, in their ecumenical work, must assuredly be concerned for their separated brethren, praying for them, keeping them informed about the Church, making the first approaches toward them. But their primary duty is to make a careful and honest appraisal of whatever needs to be done or renewed in the Catholic household itself, in order that its life may bear witness more clearly and faithfully to the teachings and institutions which have come to it from Christ through the Apostles.
Unitatis Redintegratio, 4
Some Australian Bishops seem to be on their way to distort all Sacraments of the Church. For decades, in Queensland, an invalid form of Baptism was tolerated by a local Bishop - until the very late intervention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Now, a "Joint Confirmation" was being planned in New South Wales for next May - Anglican pseudo-confirmations conferred by the local Anglican leader in Newcastle and Catholic confirmations conferred by the Bishop of Maitland-Newcastle. This spectacle of Sacramental confusion was being encouraged by the local Bishop, until the (timely) intervention of the Congregation for Divine Worship. As The Herald reports, "Rome intervened, forcing its cancellation, citing the possibility of 'confusing messages' being given to churchgoers".
A Traditional rising in Cornwall
At Lanherne in mid-Cornwall a part of Pope Benedict’s quiet revolution is occurring. A youthful order is embracing the 1962 liturgical books in their entirety. Even in far-flung Cornwall new shoots are growing fast!
“In a beautiful valley about midway between the small town of St Columb Major and the sea, lies the Teresian Carmelite Convent of Lanherne...”: so begins the little booklet giving the history of this important site in Cornwall, important among other things for its Catholic history, especially its post-Reformation struggles. This former manor house belonging to the Arundell family became home for about 200 years to the Carmelites, (in fact the oldest carmel in England). This carmel had been founded in Flanders at the time of the Reformation. About seven years ago the Carmelite nuns decided to leave Lanherne and move to the Carmel at St Helens to continue their life there. However, they were determined to find a contemplative community who would make sure that Lanherne continued as a place of spirituality and prayer. Divine Providence, as always, provided an answer. The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate took up residence.
The two orders - The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate - have interesting histories. The friars were founded in 1970 and the sisters some years later. Both are now of Pontifical Right and belong to the First Order of Franciscans (it is most unusual for Franciscan nuns to belong to the First Order). For more information about both friars and sisters, it is a good idea to read the brief history of the foundation entitled, Franciscan Legend of the Immaculate, which is obtainable from Lanherne.
The sisters have two branches. The Apostolic Sisters are involved with many and various apostolates in an ever increasing number of countries and the contemplative branch have four houses: two in Italy, one in the Philippines and the fourth at Lanherne. More foundations will follow.
Whereas the Carmelites were an elderly community, the exact reverse is the case at Lanherne. There are twelve sisters at present, most of them in their thirties and forties. The rule is strict - very strict - by English standards: why do the British find discipline so hard to cope with?
Now, of particular interest to Mass of Ages readers, the nuns at Lanherne have been using the 1962 Mass Rite on a daily basis since June 2008. Their chaplain - one of their own Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate - and a US citizen had no prior experience of celebrating the rite but is doing very well with the 1962 Missal. The Conventual Mass is sung daily - the Masses are open to the faithful. The chapel, the most modern part of the building (nineteenth century), is built in the style of Louis XIV, with rich ornamentation, and contains a beautiful altar of Bath stone in the Gothic style: there are three exquisite medallions in the front of the altar representing the Agony in the Garden, the Crucifixion, and the Last Supper; in the niches are finely sculptured figures representing Our Lady, St John the Baptist, St Anne, St Teresa, St Joseph, and the Angel Gabriel. Pillars of marble and alabaster support the base, and the tabernacle, also of alabaster, is surmounted by four beautifully carved angels in adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.
The chaplain and the nuns have had to learn everything right from the beginning - rites, rubrics, the lot, and this has required many hundreds of hours of learning. They are awaiting the publication and delivery of new Traditional breviaries. I hope that before Easter the full Office (1962) will be in use. This will comprise of Matins (at midnight), and during the day Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers and Compline. The Office will be recited according to the Roman Seraphic Breviary (i.e. Franciscan Rite 1962). This too will mean a huge amount of teaching and learning. Remember, also, the whole office is sung on a daily basis. At present all four contemplative houses are using the 1962 Missal and the two Italian houses are also using the full 1962 Office.
“The first of the seminary priests of Douai to suffer martyrdom in England, St Cuthbert Mayne, is intimately connected with Lanherne”, says the booklet. One of the Arundells riding to Lanherne brought back the crown of the head of the martyr, and 430 years later, this wonderful relic is exposed after Mass every Sunday for the faithful to venerate. What gifts God gives us!
What is happening at Lanherne is perhaps the most important of the restoration work being undertaken in the UK to fully re-establish the 1962 rites. This is the first religious order fully to use the 1962 liturgical books in England and Wales since about 1964. Readers of Mass of Ages will I’m sure want to be involved and kept informed of developments.
How can we help?
1. First and foremost - prayers for the nuns and for all the Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Immaculate. 2. These Franciscans own nothing at all. They depend entirely upon benefactors for their daily living - including all food. 3. Returning to the 1962 rites is costing a good deal of money, particularly in buying expensive liturgical books.
I’m sure that readers and LMS members will want to support this wonderful work which is flowering in deepest Cornwall. Please send your donations to the Reverend Mother, Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate, Lanherne, Newquay, Cornwall TR8 4ER. Cheques should be made payable to the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate. Mother asks me to inform you that all benefactors are prayed for daily and will be sent a copy of the brief history of Lanherne. Please be generous.
The Contemplative Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate issue a monthly magazine entitled De Vita Contemplativa. Although aimed at monasteries and religious generally, it is well worth reading by the laity. Subjects include an editorial, the Magisterium, the Fathers of the Church, Liturgy, the Saints etc. If you would like to receive a copy, then please write to the Reverend Mother at Lanherne (address above).
Mass at Lanherne is offered daily at 8.00 am on all weekdays and at 10.00 am on Sundays and Holy Days.
Hindsight is 20/20
From Der Spiegel's interview with the Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay:
SPIEGEL: Why did you respond so late to Williamson's crude theses?Fellay: I confess that I didn't take the situation seriously enough
Wagner Affair over
The Holy Father has relieved the Rev. Mons. Gerhard Wagner from accepting the office of Auxiliary Bishop of Linz (Austria).
Events
1. Father Jonathan Romanoski, FSSP, sends us information about the upcoming International Week of Gregorian Chant in Guadalajara (Jalisco), Mexico:
FIRST INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF GREGORIAN CHANT
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO. 23-28 March 2009
Guadalajara, Jalisco, MEXICO. 23-28 March 2009
The Unive
rsidad Autónoma de Guadalajara and the Gregorian Society of Mexico, A.
C., with the support of the International Association for the Study of Gregorian Chant, will hold the “First International Week of Gregorian Chant,” 23-28 March 2009, in the lovely city of Guadalajara, Jalisco. There will be 6 days of cultural activity dedicated to the “sacred music par excellence,” which shall include conferences, recitals, an introductory course with Professor Rafael Martinez, an intermediary course with Dr. Herminio Sanchez de la Barquera, and an advanced course for teachers on semiological interpretation given by Professor Nino Albarota, who recently received an honorary doctorate from the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music in Rome (PIMS). Introductory Course: designed for all those who desire to know, value and sing Gregorian chant. It is desirable that they have some knowledge of musical notation. The cost is approximately $110 U.S. (1600 mexican pesos).
Intermediate Course: designed fot those have begun a study of Gregorian Chant, and who desire to go deeper into study of musical style and interpretation. The cost is approximately $135 U.S. (2000 mexican pesos).
Advanced Course: designed for those who have degrees in Music, those with advanced studies in Gregorian Chant, directors of choirs who include or desire to include Gregorian Chant in their repertoire. The cost is approximately $160 U.S. (2400 mexican pesos)
Recitals: All choirs are invited to participate with their Gregorian repertoires in the various recitals which will take place in the metropolitan area. The number of choirs will thus determine the number of recitals.
Conferences: A team of experts will expound the “sacred music par excellence,” to the general public, as well as increase the knowledge and interest of musicians of the Church by this supreme model.
Conditions:
o All courses will be conducted in Spanish, though oral translations may be possible for a group of foreign speakers.
o The cost of the course will include for each participant the course material of each level- a Graduale Triplex, for the Intermediary and Advanced Courses; a Liber Cantualis and a Cantus Selecti for the Introductory Course.
o After having signed up, the participant of the Intermediary and Advanced Courses will receive notice by email of the pieces upon which to work during the courses. The participant will be required to study them, so as to make the most of the class time in the analysis of interpretation. On the day of registry, there will be a brief exam on these pieces which will have to be passed so as to enter the desired course.
o Two concerts are scheduled for two nights- Friday the 27th, and Saturday the 28th. Certificates of particpation will be given, without exception, after the final concert. The participation of all students at both events is required.
For more information please contact:
LCG. José María López Ventura
Presidente de la Sociedad Gregorianista de México, A.C.
sociedadgregorianista@yahoo.com.mx or canto_gregoriano@uag.mx
(52) (33) 3648-8824 ext. 32678.
From the US, 011-52-33-3648-8824 ext. 32678.
To speak with an English speaking representative please contact:
Rev. Jonathan Romanoski
padre.romo@gmail.com
402-403-1783,
skype: “Romanovius”
Angelis suis Deus mandavit de te
[Christ], who did not sin and cannot sin, submits Himself to the test and due to this is able to share in our infirmity (cf. Hb 4, 15). He lets Himself be tempted by Satan, the enemy, who opposed the salvific project of God in favor of men since the beginning.Almost in passing, in the brevity of the account [of the Temptation], before this obscure and dark figure which dares to tempt the Lord, appear the angels, luminous and mysterious figures. The angels, the Gospel says, "served" Jesus (Mk 1, 13); they are the counterpoint to Satan. "Angel" means "envoy". Throughout the Old Testament we find these figures who, in the name of God, aid and guide the men. ...The angels serve Jesus, who is certainly above them, and His dignity is proclaimed here in the Gospel in a clear, though discreet, way. In fact, even in a situation of extreme poverty and humility, when He is tempted by Satan, He remains the Son of God, the Messiah, the Lord.Dear brothers and sisters, we would remove a notable portion of the Gospel if we forgot these beings sent by God, who announce His presence among us and are a sign of Him. Let us call upon them often, so that they may support us in the effort to follow Jesus to the point of being identified with him.Let us ask them, in particular today, to watch over me and my coworkers in the Roman Curia, who this afternoon, like every year, begin the week of spiritual exercises. Mary, Queen of the Angels, pray for us!
Benedict XVI
March 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)