ACTION ITEM! “Church Madness” Championship 2017 – FINAL!

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

action-item-buttonYour attention is urgently needed.

Last year, St. John Cantius in Chicago ascended the brackets to be Numero Uno in the Church Madness tourney.

This year we see that the last surviving churches are the Institute of Christ the King’s Oratory in St. Louis, Missouri…

…and St. James in Louisville, KY….

Last year, I made the argument that what happens inside the church, liturgically, must be taken into consideration in determining its beauty.

I think we know what goes on at the Institute Church in St. Louis.

QUAERITUR: What goes on in St. James in Kentucky?

A trip to the website show me that at St. James they have a “Children’s Liturgy” (FAIL!), and that that post online which priest is scheduled for which Mass (FAIL!).  It is hard to find their Mass schedule (FAIL!).  They call most of their Masses “liturgies” (FAIL!).

Furthermore, you can see in their photo, above, that they have unspeakable things in their church, things which grate the very eyeball which which we are asked to gaze.  They have twisted their pews and they have in a prominent, visually unavoidable location … I can hardly bring myself to say it… a PIANO!

art-and-liturgy-church-madness-st-james-louisville-ky-interior-01

The horror!

No.  No, a thousand times no.   This is infra dignitatem and St. James will not receive my vote.  This is the sort of place that would have altar girls.  No. No. No.

The rest of the building, as beautiful as it is, is not enough to outweigh these defects.

What happens in the building counts for a great deal.

Therefore…

17_04_06_Madness_00

As of now the results are…

17_04_06_Madness_01

To VOTE for the St. Francis go…

>>HERE<<

For even thinking about voting for St. James go… HERE.  And then…

GO TO CONFESSION!

Posted in ACTION ITEM!, Lighter fare, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | 5 Comments

Wherein Google confers a new ecclesiastical title upon His Eminence

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Pewsitter can be useful in finding, quickly, what’s going on.  One of my gripes, however, is that they link to googly-translated pages.  Grrr.

Today, however, that produced an amusing moment.

They linked to an interview in German with Walter Card. Kasper for the occasion of his 60th anniversary of ordination.   This is how the googly-translated page came up for me:

17_04_06_screenshot_Kasper_01

Walter Kasper, courtesan cardinal!

The headline in German (original HERE):

“Ich war immer gern Priester”  [I’ve always been glad to be a priest.]
Vor seinem 60-jährigen Priesterjubiläum hat katholisch.de mit dem emeritierten Kurienkardinal Walter Kasper gesprochen. Im Interview gab der 83-Jährige auch Einblicke in Privates.

If could have been worse, I suppose, given that last part.   But then Fishwrap, Pill and Jesuits would liked it even more.

Walter Kasper, courtesan cardinal!   Perhaps this is Google’s Freudian-cyber slip, given that His Eminence’s desire that those who are living in a impenitent state of adultery should be given Holy Communion?

In any event, this is just a light moment and there is no need to get too serious with this post.

Google Translate!  Hours of linguist fun!

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , | 1 Comment

New, traditional Carmelite community for men

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From my email:

Thanks for all you do. I’ve enjoyed your blog for years.

I’m just contacting you to spread word of a new religious community starting which is called the Hermits of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel (“Eremitae Dominae Nostrae De Monte Carmelo”).

They are a group of laymen currently seeking canonical approval to observe the unmitigated Rule of St. Albert. They use the 1938 Carmelite Breviary, and seek to (…when they have priests) celebrate exclusively the EF (Carmelite Rite).

They are in need of prayer, some more notoriety, as well as financial assistance (’tis the season for alms!) in beginning their foundation.  They have a property available to them in North Carolina, but need help raising the funds to pay for the land.

Anyway, thanks for whatever you might think good to do for them. And my apologies if you’re already familiar with the community.

Here’s their website: https://www.eremitaednmc.org/

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Be The Maquis, The Campus Telephone Pole, The future and our choices | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Pray. Please, pray.

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Pray.  Please, pray.

One of the reasons why in today’s LENTCAzT I included a prayer for priests is because I have had emails and other contacts from good, traditionally oriented priests who are being persecuted by their superiors.  Even today, I had a note:

Pray for me… Today I have a meeting with the [personnel director of his diocese]. They are trying to sideline me into full-time hospital ministry.

I know another who has unjustly and without basis been stripped of faculties.  They won’t even talk to him.

I know another who is being forced to take a sabbatical year when all he wants to do is parish work.

I know another who… and another who… and another….

Common threads?  They want tradition.  Their superiors are liberals.

The persecution is rising with a panoply of tactics.

Seminarians, keep your heads down.  Fathers, be patient and use the sacrament of penance.

Everyone: GO TO CONFESSION.

 

Posted in Be The Maquis, Cri de Coeur, Liberals, Mail from priests, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, Urgent Prayer Requests | Leave a comment

Attacks on the magisterium and liturgical translation – Wherein Fr. Z rants

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

missale-romanum-altar-missalThe Magisterium is under attack.  There are strong, highly placed forces in the Church today who are undermining, firstly, the magisterium of John Paul II.  Of course it won’t stop there.  It can’t.  Each pontificate’s magisterial teachings ought to be in continuity with the pontificates of the past.  Sit down with Denzinger to see what I mean.

Today the perspicacious Fr. John Hunwicke wrote a post with the title: S John Paul’s legacy is under threat, but it is safe in the Ordinariates

Fr. H points at the deeply troubling discontinuity with our past, our Catholic identity, due to the sudden imposition of the artificial, cobbled-up prayers of the Novus Ordo and their subsequent ICEL mistranslation.  As troubling as the Latin versions of the Novus Ordo are, the trouble was compounded by the horrid translation we endured for decades until 2011 when we received a new translation according to new criteria laid down in the document Liturgiam authenticam. Hunwicke rightly underscores the growing attacks on the norms of LA and connects them to the larger liberal project of undermining the magisterium of John Paul II and Benedict.  He wrote:

That marvellous Roman document of 2001, Liturgiam authenticam, is currently reported to be under threat by the wolves who are becoming ever more unrestrained as they circle hungrily round the reinstatements of Tradition which blessed the end of the Pontificate of S John Paul II and that of Benedict XVI.

I rather think that it is arrant hypocrisy to canonise a Saint and, not more than a decade and a half later, to strive contemptuously to dismantle his legacy.

Although LA subverted the assumptions of Comme le prevoit, and thus of the style of vernacular Liturgy created in the 1970s, it was very soundly based on the very sound work done by an earlier generation of immensely erudite scholars; men and women the destruction of whose scholarship is one of the disgraces of the Rupture Years.

Prominent among these was the great student of liturgical Latin Christine Mohrmann. [Respectful bow of head.] She expressed the hope that modern European vernaculars might develop sacral, liturgical dialects. So LA talked about “the gradual creation in every vulgar tongue of a sacred style, to be recognised as the correct way of talking liturgically (sermo proprie liturgicus; para 27)” and the production of a “sacred vernacular language the vocabulary, syntax, and grammar of which are to be proper to divine worship” (para 47).  [Hunwicke goes on to write about the translation now used by the Ordinariate, of which he is a part.]

I suspect that Fr. Hunwicke is indirectly responding to the squeaks of Anthony Ruff, OSB, issued by The Bitter Pill (one of the UK’s worst catholic weeklies aka The Tablet).  Ruff petulantly attacked Card. Sarah who recently defended the current ICEL translation developed with the norms of Liturgiam authenticam and subsequently approved by many anglophone conferences of bishops.

In this matter, I have my own experience of looking at the Latin of the Novus Ordo prayers, and how their theology was edited by the creators of those prayers who either cut and pasted together the majority of them from bits and pieces of older orations, or who composed new prayers.  For years I placed the obsolete ICEL versions side by side with the Novus Ordo orations, and did the same with the current ICEL versions.   The differences are stark.

Could the current ICEL version be better?  Sure!  Could it sound less like a translation?  Sure!  However, I am not sure that’s such a good idea.  Why?  Two reasons occur to me right away.

First, the content of even the less than optimal Latin prayers must be accurately rendered.  Translation always “betrays” the original text, as the old chestnut says.  In a choice between having an accurate rendering of the content, which might be a little clunky, and having something smooth which doesn’t convey the original content as well, I’m going with accuracy.  Some priests whine about the new English versions.  I say the Novus Ordo in  English occasionally.  I find that, if I slow down a bit and think while I read aloud the prayers, they can be proclaimed well.   So, it is both possible to pray them well aloud and they are also pretty accurate when it comes to adhering to the Latin original.  Win and win.

Next, Fr. Hunwicke brought up Christine Mohrmann (respectful head bow).  Morhmann showed that the ancient Latin prayers were not, in fact, the “vernacular” of Latin speakers of the day.  The Latin prayers had a sacral style that was different from the way people spoke everyday Latin.  This is apparent to anyone who has done work in speaking Latin, living Latin, or who has read a wide range of texts across the centuries.  Week after week of examining the Latin prayers, even in the Novus Ordo, reveals specialized vocabulary and the influence of Stoicism and Neo-Platonism.  My point is that the English used in Mass doesn’t have to sound like the English of everyday speech.   It wouldn’t mind in the least if our English translation were as elegant as the English versions used by the Ordinariate, based on Cramner’s elegant renderings (once purified of their heresies).  Maybe some day that’s what we will get through a “mutual enrichment” between the Roman and Anglican/Roman uses.  However, as far as today is concerned, we have a pretty accurate translation that doesn’t sound like the lowest common denominator of “dynamic” versions which libs want (because they don’t like the theology even of the Novus Ordo Latin originals).  I say, “So, it sounds like it is a translation.  GOOD! It IS a translation!  Let us not forget that we belong to the LATIN Church and that our liturgy, and hence our identity, is tied to the Latin language!”

If the English translation reminds people that it is, in fact, a translation, that’s fine with me.

If you don’t like the clunky English, just use the Latin.

Of course libs won’t do that, will they.  If you use Latin, people start asking questions about the content of the prayers.   Also, libs are wedded to the notion that everything has to be immediately grasped by the congregants (which results in other disasters for our identity and for the life of the Church).

In any event, I thank Fr. Hunwicke for the inspiration to rant on a topic I haven’t written much about for a while.

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, Latin, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, My View, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | 1 Comment

ASK FATHER: Vocation to priesthood, but I want only the Traditional Mass

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Priest VictimFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I have been reading it for 4 years and it has greatly helped me as a Catholic and in discerning my vocation.

I am 18 and strongly feel called to the priesthood.

My question is, are there any ways by which one can become a priest and say the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively, or at least mostly, without joining a PCED order such as the FSSP?

Will any bishop accept that?

I really can’t see it happening in my home diocese.  [I’m not surprised.]

I have considered trying to work something out with the Archdiocese of Rome, because I’ve heard the climate there is far more friendly in this regard, but I’m not really sure if it is a realistic idea or not.

First, I am pleased that you are giving proper consideration to the priesthood.  Good for you.

You want to serve the Church by saying the older, traditional form of Holy Mass.  That’s good.  I applaud you.

Were it up to me, I, too, would say only the Extraordinary Form.  That is to say, were the circumstances other than they are, I would say only the Extraordinary Form.  However, I am a priest for the whole Church.  Therefore, I do what I need to do in the circumstances I encounter. For example, I also say the Novus Ordo when called upon to do so.

There are a lot of people out there who, for various reasons, are not ready for the traditional forms either again (if they are older) or for the first time.  Happily, where I am I can bring what I have learned from the traditional Rite about the priesthood and about Mass to how I say the Novus Ordo.  Also, the contact between the two forms in that parish is making a big difference.  There is indeed a “mutual enrichment”.  We see people who have been going to the Novus Ordo now, on their own, trying out the older form of Mass and, after an experience with it, sticking with it.

We have to look at the Novus Ordo, for these good people, as a doorway into a larger world.  What popped into my head right now is the experience that the fictional characters in Doctor Who have when they go into the TARDIS for the first time: “It’s bigger on the inside!”, they say.  Also, yes, the TARDIS takes them into “the past”, but it mostly takes them into the future.  It’s a connection, continuity.

To use another analogy, for my supper I prefer steak and a tanin-rich cabernet.  That won’t work for infants.  They need the food that they need.  Your parents were in no way diminished when (not that long ago) they fed you mashed carrots with “choo-choo” noises to keep your attention.  As a matter of fact, they were ennobled, because they put you and your needs before their own.  That’s the essence of charity: sacrificial love, seeking the good of the other even at your own – especially at your own – expense.

12_05_04_pray_for_more_priests_bumper_sticker

Click!

Some will object that I am comparing the Novus Ordo to baby food and the Traditional Rite to grown up food.  Okay.  Object!  That’s what I am doing!  I will add, however, that grown ups can indeed survive on baby food.  I don’t think that they can thrive, but they can survive.  My analogy is not meant to demean people who go to the Novus Ordo any more than children are demeaned by being given age appropriate food.  It isn’t a surprise to anyone who reads this blog that I think that the older, traditional form is richer and superior to the Novus Ordo in many respects.  But people come to that realization in their own time.  On a personal note, the Mass that first caught my attention and was the vehicle for my coming into the Catholic Church was the Novus Ordo.  But it was the Novus fully informed already by the “mutual enrichment” that Benedict wanted for the Novus Ordo everywhere.  I was simply fortunate enough, thank you Jesus, to have encountered it when and where I did.  The gift that God gave me in lining up all those stars and planets now compels me in what I do today, especially through this medium.

So, to you, dear questioner, I suggest that you give yourself over to diocesan formation, happily, cheerfully, with a readiness to use both forms of the Roman Rite when needed according as your bishop asks.

In time I think the demographics will shift, as they inevitably do when young people grow older.  I am convinced that the older form of Mass is going to continue to grow and come to be in demand more and more.  Think of it this way.  Since the Second Vatican Council, we have been experiencing war in the Church.  Recently, Card. Sarah referred to “devastation”.  There have been a lot of casualties in this war leaving, as wars always do, a lot of orphans.  Orphans are raised in less than optimal circumstances, but they grow up.  When the orphans are young, they need age appropriate food.  See where I’m going?  But, when the war ends, as orphans grow up and go out into the wide world, the orphanage, we hope, empties.  The demographics shift.  I think that that is what will happen, if we can gain a period of stability.

There are bishops out there who are friendly to priests who say the older form.  However, I’ll bet you that every one of them would ask his priest, especially in parish ministry, also to say the Novus Ordo.  It may be in the future that more bishops will establish a wholly traditional diocesan parish staffed by diocesan clergy.  That’s my hope!

For all the good that the traditional groups such as the FSSP and the ICK do, and it is considerable, the real action will start when diocesan priests take up the banner.  That’s where the front line is.

Also, do not pin your long-range goals on bishops.  Bishops come and go.  There is line at the opening of Exodus: “In the mean time there arose a new king over Egypt, that knew not Joseph.”  As The Donald would say, “Believe me.”

Finally, whatever you have heard about the Diocese of Rome is far too rosy.  It is not a “friendly” climate for priests of a traditional leaning.  Furthermore, the Diocese of Rome is not all like the historic “centro” with its beautiful churches.  Get out into the periphery and it is an entirely different place, and one which I doubt you would care for.

I am convinced that when men are called to the priesthood, unless they have a strong sense of a call to a religious community of some kind, they should answer the call where they are, or in their native place.  Sometimes that doesn’t work out, but that’s, I think, where to start.  Are there exceptions?  Sure!  But that must be worked out carefully and with a lot of advice.

The moderation queue is ON.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, ACTION ITEM!, Priests and Priesthood, Seminarians and Seminaries | Tagged , | 19 Comments

LENTCAzT 2017 37 – Thursday – 5th Week of Lent, Passiontide: O Queen of Priests and Mother!

Posted on 6 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

17_02_28_LENTCAzT_2017Today is Thursday in the 5th Week of Lent. It’s Passiontide.  The Roman Station is Sant’Appolinare

We are getting close.

GO TO CONFESSION!

LENTCAzT 2017 37 Thursday 5th Week of Lent [ 4:59 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (1013)

Today we hear more from Robert Card. Sarah’s book, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise.  

US HERE – UK HERE

A good gift for your priests.

You might chime in if these podcasts are useful to you. I’m grateful for the feedback.

And, yes, by the way… Some music used today: US HERE – UK HERE – Easter is coming soon!   You got your music for Lent in advance.  How about music for Easter?

Posted in LENTCAzT, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, PODCAzT | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments

Fishwrap’s nutty over Card. Sarah’s address in Germany

Posted on 5 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

coyote-and-rocketOver at the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter) the “Wile E. Coyote of contemporary liberal catholicism”, Michael Sean Winters, had a nutty about Card. Sarah’s message to the Summorum Pontificum colloquium in Germany.  HERE

He picked on the new ICEL translation a bit, blah blah blah, but saved his ire for Benedict XVI and Summorum Pontificum. That document that frightens the daylights out of libs.

He wrote:

When Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum, he had no intention of starting a movement, [I think he probably did, given that he wrote a book with the same title as Romano Guadini’s Spirit of the Liturgy, and called for a “new liturgical movement.] still less of ideology.  [Buzzzzzz] My problem with those who favor the traditional worship of the church is not their taste, it is that they twist that taste into an ideological framework. [Asinus asellum culpat!] Cardinal Sarah had no harsh words for the traditionalists, only for the post-conciliar reforms. He was throwing red meat to people who have become a kind of cult, who look down on those who do not share their fondness for the old rite. If the charge of “schism” is to be thrown around, it is misplaced when applied to the vast, vast majority of Catholics who follow the new rite.  [This, from the National Schismatic Reporter.  I remind the readers that every time they print something or serve up their webpage they issue a middle-finger at legitimate authority’s directive to stop using the title “Catholic”. Meanwhile, most people who attend the traditional form the Roman Rite also want the sound preaching that goes with it: the “cult” they belong to is the “Catholic Church”.  That’s what they want.]

Worst of all, Cardinal Sarah and the traditionalists seem to be exercising a variety of secularism in that they believe God has stopped his activity in the world, that he makes himself accessible in the Tridentine rite and that rite only, and all the ills of the church flow from the fact that we have left that “golden age.” [In my experience, the vast majority of people who prefer the traditional forms don’t have that view.  Most of them, who are too young to have known the time before the Council, have simply grown into the older form, or even grown up into it.  Moreover, this is not a homogeneous group.  Not at all.] Leave it we did, and not a moment too soon. The church was well served by Trent, liturgically, doctrinally, pastorally, but no council’s perspective lasts forever.  In thinking that Trent’s rules and rites are the only legitimate ones, the traditionalists seek to bind God in the 1950s. It can’t be done, and it is wrong to try. It is God alone who will have the last word, not the cardinal prefect.

Card. Sarah and Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum really spook these people.

And my favorite line from earlier in Wile E.’s piece:

The reform of the liturgy that began after the Second Vatican Council has been an overwhelming success.

Mass attendance in Belgium: 5%
Mass attendance in the Netherlands: 5%

Has the Novus Ordo been a huge success? Even if 100% of the 5% who still go to Mass in those places really love the Novus Ordo as it is celebrated there, has the reform been a huge success?  Even in these USA, where attendance is still a little higher?

Note Wile E.’s technique.  What he has done here is also what he does to the folks at Acton Institute, such as Fr. Sirico and Sam Gregg.  He mischaracterizes them with a false label, “liberatarians”, and then allows no other possibility.  They are all that way!  That’s what he did here, too: “the traditionalists”, “cult”, “ideology”. He paints false pictures and wants the reader simply to accept them.  That’s his trick.  Sort of like what Wile E. does with the bungee in the following.

What really scares libs is that Card. Sarah spoke of the future.  

Benedict XVI and Card. Sarah have the future in mind.  Benedict XVI clearly had the future in mind when he desired to spark a New Liturgical Movement, and when he desired a “mutual enrichment” of the two forms.  Because Holy Mass is at the very heart of the Church’s identity, if you change the Mass you change Catholic identity. Benedict and Card. Sarah have it exactly right and that terrifies the libs.

As Card. Sarah communicated to the colloquium:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger tirelessly repeated that the crisis that has shaken the Church for fifty years, chiefly since Vatican Council II, is connected with the crisis of the liturgy, and therefore to the lack of respect, the desacralization and the leveling of the essential elements of divine worship. “I am convinced,” he writes, “that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy.”

And yet it is precisely the disintegration that the libs embrace.

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices | Tagged , , | 36 Comments

Idea for “Play Mass” kit for boys – UPDATED

Posted on 5 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

UPDATE: 5 April:

From the nice folks who have this business.

We have had quite a few phone call orders for censors in the last several days…. I should have realized much quicker than I did that you were helping us.  Thanks!

The promo code has been causing some issues, so I HAVE SIMPLY CHANGED THE PRICE ONLINE TO 50% SALE PRICE, NO PROMO CODE NEEDED.  Do you think you could write one sentence after your post stating that please.

 

Also, you might look around at other items which they have at 50% off.

__ Originally Published on: Apr 3, 2017

I occasionally post about children “playing Mass“.

Recently I received an email about a family owned and operated business which specializes in incense and incense hardware. Agnus Dei.

They have lots of kids, so explore their site!

Right now they are clearing out at 50% off and already low price a high quality brass censer which is only 4″ in diameter in gold or silver.

This might be a good addition to a high quality “playing Mass” kit.

COUPON 355 047 – offer expires (goes up in smoke?) on 30 April.  Give them a call: HERE

 

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

DECREE of Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” about 13 May 2017 – Our Lady of Fatima

Posted on 5 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I received from the offices of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” the following DECREE.

This decree says that on 13 May 2017, the 100th Anniversary of the apparitions at Fatima, it is granted and permitted using the Extraordinary Form to celebrate a Votive Mass of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (from 22 August) as 2nd Class and to use the pertinent commemorations.

17_04_05_PCED_DECREE_FATIMA

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Just Too Cool, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, Our Solitary Boast | Tagged | 4 Comments

LENTCAzT 2017 36 – Wednesday – 5th Week of Lent, Passiontide: Mass and unfaithful priests

Posted on 5 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

17_02_28_LENTCAzT_2017Today is Wednesday in the 5th Week of Lent. It’s Passiontide.  The Roman Station is San Marcello.

We are getting close. Should this be a PASSIONCAzT? That might garner more attention.

GO TO CONFESSION!

Standard Podcast [ 5:00 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (772)

Today we hear more from Robert Card. Sarah’s book, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise.  Do yourself a favor….

US HERE – UK HERE

A good gift for your priests.

You might chime in if these podcasts are useful to you.

Meanwhile, reader sent voicemail feedback…

Posted in LENTCAzT, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, PODCAzT | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments

A beautiful Catholic school

Posted on 4 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

This is wonderful.

Atonement Academy, is a classical, college preparatory school for grades pre-K through 12th. It is the parish school of Our Lady of the Atonement Parish and is located in San Antonio, TX.

Yes, friends, it is still possible to do beautiful things.

There is one element in the video that I want to emphasize.  The pastor has been there for over 30 years.

As long as there is a revolving door of pastors, we won’t be able to build wonderful things like this.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Fr. Z KUDOS, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | 17 Comments

SSPX reaction to Pope Francis’ move on validity of marriages

Posted on 4 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

15_09_01_SSPX_livesIn the wake of Pope Francis’ decision to have diocesan ordinaries see to validity of SSPX marriages (HERE) the SSPX issued a statement at their website (HERE)

At first the SSPX communiqué rehashes what the Holy Father did.   Then…

[…]

The Society of Saint Pius X conveys its deep gratitude to the Holy Father for his pastoral solicitude as expressed in the letter from the Ecclesia Dei Commission, for the purpose of alleviating “any uncertainty regarding the validity of the sacrament of marriage”. Pope Francis clearly wishes that, as in the matter of confessions, all the faithful who want to marry in the presence of a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X can do so without any worries about the validity of the sacrament. It is to be hoped that all the bishops share this same pastoral solicitude.  [Indeed, it is to be hoped!]

The priests of the Society of Saint Pius X will strive faithfully, as they have done since their ordination, to prepare future spouses for marriage according to the unchangeable doctrine of Christ about the unity [NB!] and indissolubility of this union (cf. Mt 19:6), before receiving the parties’ consent in the traditional rite of the Holy Church.

[…]

I like that bit about indissolubility.

The SSPX might not have had faculties to witness marriages, but I’ll bet none of their priests told couples anything screwy about the indissolubility of marriage.  The SSPX might not have had faculties to receive confessions (they do now), but I’ll bet none of their priests told penitents that they didn’t have to have firm purpose of amendment.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, SSPX | Tagged , , | 19 Comments

A Lefty Jesuit (I know – tautology) v. Archbp. Chaput

Posted on 4 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

UPDATE:

Radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt picked up on this and is tweeting about it.  @hughhewit

Follow me, while you’re at it. @fatherz

_____

chaputI heard about something disturbing which happened recently.  It involves a Jesuit.  Big surprise, right?

Let me from the top say that “I wasn’t there.”  However, I bet that there are some folks out there who can dig into this more expertly than can I.

Apparently Archbp. Chaput had been invited to speak to an interdenominational group of lawyers, judges, etc., in Sacramento, California.  Archbp. Chaput would speak, along with a couple of other people, and then there would be a discussion.  Civilized.  They have, in the past, had representatives of other religions.

However, one of the members of the steering committee of the group, the Jesuit priest and the principal of the local Jesuit High School, threw a fit because the invitee was Archbp. Chaput.  The Jesuit even said that he wouldn’t come to their own organizations event were Archbp. Chaput to be there.

When news of the Jesuit hissy fit got back to Philadelphia, Chaput graciously bowed out of the event rather than serve as a point of division.

Why does this bother me to the point that I want to post about it?

First, this is yet another example of a lefty shouting down, black-balling, someone with whom he disagrees.   I am reminded of other recent occasions in California, when immature students, no doubt egged on by liberal profs, snuffed out a speaker engagement with violence.   Young people are taught to do this.  The Jesuit who did this to Archbp. Chaput is an educator… at a high school.  “If he comes, I won’t come!”, is what you do if the invitation was extended a CEO of Big Business Abortion, not to the Archbishop of Philadephia.

Second, this is another example of Jesuit antics.  Click HERE.  Is this what Jesuits do?  Deny dialogue?

Third, one doesn’t have to think that the sun, moon and stars rise and set on Archbp. Chaput to recognize that he’s got game.   For example, a few years ago, Chaput gave a great speech at Houston Baptist University called “The Vocation of Christians in American Public Life”.  That was not a Catholic environment.  He has a track record of performing well in these situations, which advance ecumenical concerns in a concrete, positive way.  Baptists were more gracious to the Archbishop than this Jesuit.

Fourth, the Jesuit’s behavior in the presence of these non-Catholics surely made them scratch their heads and wonder, “What’s going on in the Catholic Church?” and “How is it that Chaput, who is a high player in the USCCB, who was elected by the US bishops to go to the Synod, who hosted the Pope in Philadelphia, is so bad that this priest is acting like this?”  In other words, the Jesuit probably scandalized them and lowered the Church in their eyes.  I wasn’t there, of course.

This is how the catholic Left operates.  They use the tactics of the secular Left.  Silence any opinion that does not jive with your own.  Allow no dialogue.

I have read the Archbishop’s thoughtful book: Strangers in a Strange Land: Living the Catholic Faith in a Post-Christian World.  You might give it a shot.  Review HERE at NRO.

US HERE – UK HERE

In a spirit unity with that lefty Jesuit, I will deny the opportunity of dialogue and close the combox.

Posted in Liberals | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Pope Francis provides for valid SSPX marriages

Posted on 4 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

traditional marriage certificateUPDATE 6 April:

I want to make a point.  Specific marriages (that is, involving real people not theoretical cases) are assumed to be valid, unless they are declared by a tribunal not to have taken place at all.  Some marriage ceremonies are undertaken without the proper “form” being observed (e.g., lack of an authorized witness to receive the vows – bishop, pastor, priest with delegation, etc.).  Hitherto, SSPX weddings have had a defect in the form observed because their priests have lacked proper delegation.  But!  The marriages enjoy the presumption of validity until proper authority has made the estimation that there is a problem.  That is accomplished through a proper canonical procedure.  Documents are submitted.  A case is drawn up and examined.  A determination is made and communicated.  In the case of lack of or defect of form, the process is pretty simple.  Anyway, I just want to emphasize that, in the eyes of the Church, marriages are presumed to be valid until they are shown with moral certainty not to be.

___ Originally Published on: Apr 4

For about the thousandth time, I look forward to the day that the SSPX is fully reconciled. Under the unlikely pontificate of Pope Francis, steps are being made. Just as Nixon went to China, it seems that Pope Francis may be the one to get this job done together with SSPX Bp. Fellay. Fellay, by the way… how ‘about that guy? He is proving to be a great leader.

Over the years my two biggest concerns have been the validity of sacramental confessions and the validity of marriages. To review, for absolution to be valid, the priest confessor has to have the faculty to absolve. Ordination is not, by itself, enough. To exercise the power of the keys, the priest needs permission from the legitimate authority of the Church. Also, for marriage to be valid, it must be witnessed by witness authorized by the Church. The couple give to each other the sacrament of matrimony. However, for the marriage to be valid, the proper form must be followed. One of the elements of the form is that there is a witness who is authorized by the Church. Hitherto, the priests of the SSPX did NOT have the faculty to receive sacramental confessions. Except in the extraordinary cases of danger of death, their absolutions were, in themselves, invalid. That doesn’t mean that the penitent never received any sort of graces, but they did not receive valid absolution. However, for the Year of Mercy Pope Francis (in a rather indirect and foggy way) gave the priests of the SSPX the faculty to absolve validly. After the Year of Mercy, Francis extended the faculty indefinitely. That takes care of the absolution issue. The priests of the SSPX, however, are still not authorized witnesses of marriage. Thus, the marriages witnessed by the SSPX are not valid. This is something that can be easily resolved. However, it has not yet been resolved.

Now we learn that steps are being taken to resolve the SSPX marriage issue.

In the Bolletino today we read with my emphases and comments:

Letter of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” to the Ordinaries of the Episcopal Conferences concerned on the faculties for the celebration of marriages of the faithful of the Society Saint Pius X, 04.04.2017

Your Eminence,

Your Excellency,

As you are aware, for some time various meetings and other initiatives have been ongoing in order to bring the Society of St. Pius X into full communion. Recently, the Holy Father decided, for example, to grant all priests of said Society the faculty to validly administer the Sacrament of Penance to the faithful (Letter Misericordia et misera, n.12), such as to ensure the validity and liceity of the Sacrament and allay any concerns on the part of the faithful.

Following the same pastoral outlook which seeks to reassure the conscience of the faithful, despite the objective persistence of the canonical irregularity in which for the time being the Society of St. Pius X finds itself, the Holy Father, following a proposal by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, has decided to authorize Local Ordinaries the possibility to grant faculties for the celebration of marriages of faithful who follow the pastoral activity of the Society, according to the following provisions.

Insofar as possible, the Local Ordinary is to grant the delegation to assist at the marriage to a priest of the Diocese (or in any event, to a fully regular priest), such that the priest may receive the consent of the parties during the marriage rite, followed, in keeping with the liturgy of the Vetus ordo, by the celebration of Mass, which may be celebrated by a priest of the Society.  [So, a priest who is fully “regularized”, whether he is a diocesan priest or a priest of a religious institute serving there, etc., can be present at the wedding and he would receive the vows.  The SSPX priest could do the rest.]

Where the above is not possible, [I wonder about that: for example, of the SSPX priest refuses to play ball?] or if there are no priests in the Diocese able to receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society who is also to celebrate the Holy Mass, reminding him of the duty to forward the relevant documents to the Diocesan Curia as soon as possible.  [Pretty easy.]

./.

To the Ordinaries
of the Episcopal Conferences concerned

Certain that in this way any uneasiness of conscience on the part of the faithful who adhere to the Society of St. Pius X as well as any uncertainty regarding the validity of the sacrament of marriage may be alleviated, and at the same time that the process towards full institutional regularization may be facilitated, this Dicastery relies on Your cooperation.

The Sovereign Pontiff Francis, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei on 24 March 2017, confirmed his approval of the present letter and ordered its publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 27 March 2017.

Gerhard Card. L. Müller
President

+ Guido Pozzo
Secretary
Titular Archbishop of Bagnoregio

So there it is.

This move confirms the Holy See‘s view that SSPX marriages are – in general – not valid due to a defect of form.  As to specific marriages, all marriages are presumed valid until proper authority has made a determination about them. Lack of or defect of form cases are pretty easy to figure out.

I hope there are not any thick SSPXers out there who refuse to go along.

How is this being reported? Let’s look at Crux with my emphases and comments:

Pope Francis offers way to recognize marriages by traditionalist group

Pope Francis has made another concession to the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X (SSPX),in an attempt to bring the group into full communion with the Church.
The latest olive branch was extended on Tuesday, when a method was announced for their marriages to be considered valid in the Church.
Currently, priests of the society lack the necessary permissions to conduct Catholic weddings, so the marriages in their chapels are not considered valid by Church authorities.
Under the new system – outlined in a letter by Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the head of the Vatican’s doctrine office, who also serves the President of the Commission which deals with the SSPX [the Pont. Comm. “Ecclesia Dei“] – a local bishop would have a priest of his diocese attend the wedding at the SSPX chapel, and receive the consent of the parties, while the SSPX priest celebrates the wedding liturgy according to the traditional rite.
Müller also said if no priest of the diocese was available, then the bishop could give the necessary faculties to the SSPX priest to receive the consent from the parties, and have him send the necessary paperwork to the diocese.

[… some blah blah…]

Francis seems to be trying to sidestep this doctrinal roadblock by looking directly at the pastoral situations, with this latest letter citing the pope’s concern over “any uneasiness of conscience on the part of the faithful who adhere to the Society of St. Pius X as well as any uncertainty regarding the validity of the sacrament of marriage may be alleviated.”
Perhaps by increasing contact between the local bishops and local SSPX congregations – which often have no communication at all – the pope is hoping to break down some of the psychological and cultural obstacles to unity.
However, the SSPX does not think it needs these permissions, [great guys, but they are wrong] and a visit to any of their websites will give you pages and pages of explanations of why their priests have all the faculties necessary to perform their ministry.
And although Francis is known as a “pope of gestures,” these gestures on priestly faculties are probably not the ones the rank-and-file traditionalists want to see him make, and that takes the pope back to the doctrinal roadblock he has been trying to circumvent.
In an interview earlier this year, Fellay said “the main obstacle is the degree of obligation of adherence to the Second Vatican Council,” in particular mentioning the SSPX “will not yield” on questions such as “the way in which ecumenism is practiced, [ehem… that’s not a doctrinal problem] including statements very dangerous for the faith, that make you think all have the same faith; the liturgical question or the relationship between the Church and the State.” [i.e., religious liberty]
Those are questions which it is doubtful this pope will answer in a way the traditionalists will accept, even if they don’t have to worry about the validity of their marriages.  [Grrrr…. at the end, the writer had to piddle on future.  The solution isn’t that difficult: because the issues that the SSPX has trouble with are, in fact, fraught with difficulties, simply allow that people have freedom to disagree about what they mean.]

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, SSPX, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , | 24 Comments