NOTE TO READERS: Registration, comments, Snail Mail and Email

medieval castle siege smEven as you read this, the blog is under siege by vile spammers trying to register to post their putrid slime. I have logs that show me what’s going on.

The drawbridge is raised. The gators are in the moat.  Oil is on the boil.

COMMENTS

To comment here, you have to be registered and your registration must be approved.

Registrations go into a queue, which I check when I can.  I’m not always near my computer.  Be patient.  Check once in a while to see if it went through.  The approval isn’t automated and I don’t manually send you confirmations.  Sorry.  I just don’t have time.  Some people write after trying to register multiple times.  You are probably already registered!  In these cases I’ll usually write back ASAP with a new temporary password.

If you register to comment, pay attention to that field where I ask information about you.  You don’t have to provide a biography, address or blood type.  Just write something that will show me that you aren’t a bot or a nefarious ne’er-do-well.  Your confirmation name is a good one, favorite encyclical, a brief explanation of circumincession… that sort of thing… easy stuff.

NB: I recommend that you do NOT use your email as your nickname here… unless, of course, you like lots of spam.  Also, I don’t like the use of names of real historical people, for example, of saints.  No, you are NOT St. Hillary of Poiters.

Also NB: Some people think that this is a open public forum and that they can come into may place and spew any ol’ damn thing they want under the cover of anonymity.  Some people think that they have a right to post, and to post any dreck they want.  Wrong.  I’m the Benevolent Dictator of my blog.  I turn on the queue when I want, where I want, for whom I want.

Furthermore, I allow zero discussion in my combox of my decisions about comments or why this or that comment appears or doesn’t appear.  Zero.  Mention: “My last comment didn’t appear… “… then neither will this one.  Mention: “Why did my comment disappear?”  That won’t appear.  Mention: “You’ll probably delete this, but…”.  I stop reading and it’s gone.  Period.  Zero.  No appeal.  Dura lex sed lex.

These policies help my blog’s combox not to descend into chaos or knucklehead stuff.

SNAIL MAIL

For those you who sent Christmas cards or other things over the last couple years, that snail mail address isn’t in use anymore.  It was a temporary mailbox.  I’ve had a couple notes from people asking if I got their snail mail.  Probably, if it wasn’t too recent. Bottom line, don’t send snail mail to that old address.  I terminated that mail box.

NEW USPS PO BOX ADDRESS:

Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
733 STRUCK ST
PO BOX 44603
Madison, WI 53744-4603

EMAIL

I get a lot of email.   Keep a couple things in mind.

First, if you have a question, use the ASK FATHER form on the top menu.  I pretty much delete others.  Otherwise, use the Contact form on the top menu.  Don’t send just links without explanations.  Keep ’em brief.  The longer they are, the more likely I’ll move on to something else.

I will hand threatening email over to law enforcement.

Finally, I direct you once again to my Litany For The Conversion Of Internet Thugs (a wry work in progress for private use only, when truly irritated, and when the alternative is foul language.)

Really finally, this blog needs updates, technical work.  I hope that will be possible.  Say a prayer or two that I can find someone reliable.

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Leave a comment

#ActonU 2017: Day 1

We have completed the first full day.

I gave my lecture today on Augustine and the City of Man.

A view of the great deco/liberty hall in the older portion of the otherwise state of art facility. I always like walking through this space

Tonight we heard from Russell Moore.  He was really good.

Afterwards, I caught up with friends on the deck.

Which drink is mine?

After this, with cigars I sat with one of the faculty (one of the smartest on the staff) and a entrepreneur, solider from Israel who also had several years in the yeshiva talking, arguing, about Jewish political theory.

Acton is a place where you wake up all those parts of the brain that haven’t been challenged for a while.

Tomorrow, as usual, TLM at 7:15.

Posted in On the road, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , | Leave a comment

ASK FATHER: Priest puts too much water into the chalice. Valid?

The Scruple Spoon

From a reader…

QUAERUNTUR (I generally take ONE question at a time, but I am feeling benign this afternoon… a rare occurance):

Your recent post this afternoon about validity around a Priest using “for all” instead of “for many” made me think of my own questions regarding validity based upon recent experience.

1) is it valid if the priest pours too much water into the chalice causing the wine to become diluted?

2) An older priest that says daily Mass regularly at a parish I attend does not break off a fraction of the host and place in the chalice before the “Lamb of God”. Does this render the Mass invalid?

Ad 1m.  If the priest adds too much water to the wine in the chalice, he “breaks” the substance of the wine.  At that point, there is no wine to consecrate and, hence, there can be no consecration.  That means that Mass was not celebrated.   However, it is possible that the Host was consecrated.  That means that the priest, technically, consecrated the Eucharist outside of Mass, which is a serious sin and crime.   Mind you, it can happen that an older fellow or a priest who isn’t tracking very well might do this by accident.  If that happens more than once, someone should be with him to correct the situation.  More wine must be added, for example.    Another way to avoid this is the use of the so-called “scruple spoon”.  I have a photo of one of these great gizmos among the headers for this blog.  With the “scruple spoon”, Father is able to dip up a tiny bit of water and add it to the chalice.  Easy.

The next part of this question is, obviously, how much water is too much?  

For this we, being good Unreconstructed Ossified Manualists, refer to our old manuals.  In the manual of dogmatic theology by Tanquerey, that tonic for the soul, I found the opinion that “quinta pars aquae ad vinum corrumpendum non sufficiat … a fifth part of water isn’t enough to break [the substance of] the wine”, and thus render it invalid matter for consecration.

Think about it.  One fifth of the volume of the wine usually isn’t very much.  So, priests should be very careful about this.  FATHERS!  DEACONS! SEMINARIANS!  PAY ATTENTION!

Ad 2m.  No.  Not putting the particle of Host into the Precious Blood does NOT invalidate the Mass.   At this point the priest has the Body and Blood of the Lord on the altar.  Now the critical thing is that he must consume them both to complete the Sacrifice.   Putting the particle into the chalice is highly significant, but it is not an element which is absolutely essential for Mass to have been celebrated.  This element could have developed from the ancient practice of the Bishop of Rome breaking pieces from his Host and sending them out to all the tituli (“parishes”) of the City to show their unity. At last, some saw the mingling of the Body with the Blood as a sign of the Resurrection.  If the two-fold consecration is the separation of the Blood from the Body, and therefore the death of the Lord, then their rejoining is like His resurrection.  Thus, when we receive Communion we have been given then sign that what we receive is truly the Lord gloriously risen.  This commingling should also give us a great sense of peace.  In the older form of Mass the priest makes the sign of the Cross thrice with the particle from rim to rim of the chalice saying, “May the peace of the Lord be with you always”.

 

 

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , , | 8 Comments

BUX “We are in a full crisis of faith!” Wherein Fr. Z muses on the times.

don nicola buxSome of you will remember those commercials years ago where some guys, sitting with friends is a loud restaurant, says something like, “My broker is Joe Bagofdonuts.  Joe says…”, and suddenly the entire restaurant is dead still with everyone leaning in, straining to hear.

When Msgr. Nicola Bux speaks we should listen.  Edward Pentin, arguably the best English language Vaticanista right now, interviewed Msgr. Bux (of the famous Bux Protocol™) at the NCRegister.

Monsignor Bux: We Are in a Full Crisis of Faith
[…]

To resolve the current crisis in the Church over papal teaching and authority, the Pope must make a declaration of faith, affirming what is Catholic and correcting his own “ambiguous and erroneous” words and actions that have been interpreted in a non-Catholic manner.

This is according to Monsignor Nicola Bux, a respected theologian and former consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith during Benedict XVI’s pontificate. [NB: former… but keep in mind that he had served under Benedict in that role, which tells you a great deal]

In the following interview with the Register, Msgr. Bux explains that the Church is in a “full crisis of faith” and that the storms of division the Church is currently experiencing are due to apostasy — the “abandonment of Catholic thought.”

Msgr. Bux’s comments come after news that the four dubia cardinals, seeking papal clarification of his exhortation Amoris Laetitia, wrote to the Pope April 25 asking him for an audience but have yet to receive a reply.

The cardinals expressed concern over the “grave situation” of episcopal conferences and individual bishops offering widely differing interpretations of the document, some of which they say break with the Church’s teaching. They are particularly concerned about the deep confusion this has caused, especially for priests.

“For many Catholics, it is incredible that the Pope is asking bishops to dialogue with those who think differently [i.e. non-Catholic Christians], but does not want first to face the cardinals who are his chief advisors,” Msgr. Bux says.

“If the Pope does not safeguard doctrine,” he adds, “he cannot impose discipline.” [Tell that to the priests in that that diocese in Nigeria.]

***

PENTIN Monsignor Bux, what are the implications of the ‘doctrinal anarchy’ that people see happening for the Church, the souls of the faithful and priests?

BUX The first implication of doctrinal anarchy for the Church is division, caused by apostasy, which is the abandonment of Catholic thought, as defined by St. Vincent of Lerins: quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditur (what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all). Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, who calls Jesus Christ the “Master of unity,” had pointed out to heretics that everyone professes the same things, but not everyone means the same thing. This is the role of the Magisterium, founded on the truth of Christ: to bring everyone back to Catholic unity.

St. Paul exhorted Christians to be in agreement and to speak with unanimity. What would he say today? When cardinals are silent or accuse their confreres; when bishops who had thought, spoken and written — scripta manent! [written words remain]— in a Catholic way, but then say the opposite for whatever reason; when priests contest the liturgical tradition of the Church, then apostasy is established, the detachment from Catholic thought. Paul VI had foreseen that “this non-Catholic thought within Catholicism will tomorrow become the strongest [force]. But it will never represent the Church’s thinking. A small flock must remain, no matter how small it is.” (Conversation with J. Guitton, 9.IX.1977). [A small flock… sigh…]

PENTIN What implications, then, does doctrinal anarchy have for the souls of the faithful and ecclesiastics?

BUX The Apostle exhorts us to be faithful to sure, sound and pure doctrine: that founded on Jesus Christ and not on worldly opinions (cf. Titus 1:7-11; 2:1-8). Perseverance in teaching and obedience to doctrine leads souls to eternal salvation. [NB] The Church cannot change the faith and at the same time ask believers to remain faithful to it. She is instead intimately obliged to be oriented toward the Word of God and toward Tradition.

Therefore, the Church remembers the Lord’s judgment: “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” (John 9:39). Do not forget that, when one is applauded by the world, it means one belongs to it. In fact, the world loves its own and hates what does not belong to it (cf. John 15:19). May the Catholic Church always remember that she is made up of only those who have converted to Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; all human beings are ordained to her (cf. Lumen gentium 13), but they are not part of her until they are converted.

PENTIN How can this problem best be resolved?

BUX The point is: what idea does the Pope have of the Petrine ministry, as described in Lumen gentium 18 and codified in canon law? Faced with confusion and apostasy, the Pope should make the distinction — as Benedict XVI did — between what he thinks and says as a private, learned person, and what he must say as Pope of the Catholic Church. [I believe JPII did the same before B16 did.] To be clear: the Pope can express his ideas as a private learned person on disputable matters which are not defined by the Church, but he cannot make heretical claims, even privately. Otherwise it would be equally heretical.

I believe that the Pope knows that every believer — who knows the regula fidei [the rule of faith] or dogma, which provides everyone with the criterion to know what the faith of the Church is, what everyone has to believe and who one has to listen to — can see if he is speaking and operating in a Catholic way, or has gone against the Church’s sensus fidei [sense of the faith]. Even one believer can hold him to account. [I have in mind a figure in the Church whom St Augustine describes as homo spiritalis.] So whoever thinks [Card. Rodriguez! Etc!] that presenting doubts [dubia] to the Pope is not a sign of obedience, hasn’t understood, 50 years after Vatican II, the relationship between him [the Pope] and the whole Church. Obedience to the Pope depends solely on the fact that he is bound by Catholic doctrine, to the faith that he must continually profess before the Church.

We are in a full crisis of faith! Therefore, in order to stop the divisions in progress, the Pope — like Paul VI in 1967, faced with the erroneous theories that were circulating shortly after the conclusion of the Council — should make a Declaration or Profession of Faith, affirming what is Catholic, and correcting those ambiguous and erroneous words and acts — his own and those of bishops — that are interpreted in a non-Catholic manner. [In June 1968 Paul issued with an Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio his great “Credo of the People of God“.  More on that below.]

Otherwise, it would be grotesque that, while seeking unity with non-Catholic Christians or even understanding with non-Christians, apostasy and division is being fostered within the Catholic Church. For many Catholics, it is incredible that the Pope is asking bishops to dialogue with those who think differently, but does not want first to face the cardinals who are his chief advisors. If the Pope does not safeguard doctrine, he cannot impose discipline. As John Paul II said, the Pope must always be converted, to be able to strengthen his brothers, according to the words of Christ to Peter: “Et tu autem conversus, confirma fratres tuos [when you are converted, strengthen your brothers].”

In 1967 the Church was being torn apart by wild ideas.  As an example of the chaos take the infamous “Dutch Catechism”.  Paul VI, talking Charles Journet, saw that the Church at the time was in a state of disaster.  He therefore called for a Year of Faith for 67-68 (much like Benedict did later).  At the end of the Year, Paul issued his “Credo of the People of God”, a text crafted on the basis of the Nicene Creed and expanded by Jacques Maritain and amended by the Holy Office.  Paul’s “Creed” is non-liturgical.

Paul VI pronounces the "Credo of the People of God" - 30 June 1968

Paul VI pronounces the “Credo of the People of God” – 30 June 1968

In his introduction to the text of the “Creed”, Paul, in his Apostolic Letter, wrote… and see if this doesn’t dovetail with what Msgr. Bux asked for (i.e., profession of faith in troubled times):

3. [W]e deem that we must fulfill the mandate entrusted by Christ to Peter, whose successor we are, the last in merit; namely, to confirm our brothers in the faith. With the awareness, certainly, of our human weakness, yet with all the strength impressed on our spirit by such a command, we shall accordingly make a profession of faith, pronounce a creed which, without being strictly speaking a dogmatic definition, repeats in substance, with some developments called for by the spiritual condition of our time, the creed of Nicea, the creed of the immortal tradition of the holy Church of God.

4. In making this profession, we are aware of the disquiet which agitates certain modern quarters with regard to the faith. They do not escape the influence of a world being profoundly changed, in which so many certainties are being disputed or discussed. We see even Catholics allowing themselves to be seized by a kind of passion for change and novelty. The Church, most assuredly, has always the duty to carry on the effort to study more deeply and to present, in a manner ever better adapted to successive generations, the unfathomable mysteries of God, rich for all in fruits of salvation. But at the same time the greatest care must be taken, while fulfilling the indispensable duty of research, to do no injury to the teachings of Christian doctrine. For that would be to give rise, as is unfortunately seen in these days, to disturbance and perplexity in many faithful souls.

Alas, I think that Paul himself contributed to that confusion, especially by signing off on the liturgical reform that went waaaaay beyond what the Council had mandated.  The general impression was, “If the way we say Mass can be so profoundly changed, then anything, even doctrine, can be changed.”

Consider the times.  What Paul did happened in the turbulent revolution years of 67-68.  Humane vitae, was issued then.  Turbulent years and crazy stuff is coming up now.  Protests not unlike those of the 60s are taking place.  There is an even more horrible “sexual” revolution going on, in which human nature itself is debased in what Card. Sarah rightly calls diabolical “gender theory”.  Now there seems to be a movement to nullify the teaching of Paul’s greatest accomplishment, Humanae vitae, afoot and also the Magisterium of John Paul II.

I had thought that at the end of the most recent Year of Faith, Benedict XVI would issue something very much like Paul VI’s “Credo of the People of God”.  But he resigned before the Year of Faith ended.

Were Francis to take up the entirely reasonable call to issue a “profession of faith” along the lines of what Bux called for, he would be following in the footsteps of Paul VI and he would also fulfill something that, I believe, Benedict XVI could have, should have, would have done in 2013.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Cri de Coeur, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Our Catholic Identity, Pope Francis, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices, Year of Faith | Tagged , , , , , , | 22 Comments

#ActonU 2017: Day 0

We have gathered again in Grand Rapids MI for Acton University 2017.

Once again there is a huge and diverse group from all over the world.

Tonight we have registered and greeted lots of old friends and now our first event is beginning.  After our first (excellent) meal, there is a talk by Hon. Janice Rogers Brown.

I would love for all of you to have the experience of Acton U.  I’ll give you some tastes along the way.

 


UPDATE

Sam Gregg is giving a talk.   He is maybe the smartest guy in the room.


Here is is explaining that he doesn’t use Powerpoint because, of course, power corrupts and Powerpoint corrupts absolutely.

And he just blasted Karl Rahner.  This is great.

Posted in On the road, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , | 5 Comments

ASK FATHER: Priest says “for all” in consecration. Invalid?

Say the Black Do the RedFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I just read an article from the Remnant which argued that the use of “for all” instead of “for many” did not invalidate the Mass.

This article was written immediately after the release of the new translation of the Ordinary Form, which was promulgated five years ago by Pope Benedict XVI. My question is whether a priest continuing to use “for all” in spite of the new, corrected translation would, in your opinion, invalidate the Mass.

The reason I ask is that my parents’ pastor does that and I fear that they are not attending a valid Mass.

Cutting to the chase, if that’s the only problem with the consecration, then, yes, the consecration is valid.

What your parent’s pastor is doing is wrong.  He should stick to the approved form for the consecration of the Precious Blood.  This is what I talk about constantly here: people shouldn’t have to worry that sacraments are perhaps invalid because of the antics of some knucklehead.

So, what that priest is doing is an abuse.  You and your parents don’t have to worry about validity.  However, if they were worrying about validity, others may also be worried.  You or your parents are within your rights to address a question about why Father uses that outdated form.  You should ask the bishop if what he is doing is valid or not.  You also have the right to address that question to the Holy See.

There are abuses and then there are abuses.  Some of them are more serious than others and require action on the part of the faithful.   We read in the Congregation for Divine Worship’s document Redemptionis Sacramentum 

6. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters

[183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favouritism.

[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

say_the_black_do_the_red_regular_mugSome abuses are not so serious and don’t warrant much energy.  For example, are blue used on a Marian feast?   Blue isn’t an official color except by exceptions.  But that’s not much of an abuse.  Does the priest genuflect in the Ordinary Form each time he passes before the tabernacle?  The rubrics say he shouldn’t, but, frankly, that’s just plain crazy.  Abuse? Yes.  Serious, certainly not.  However, if we get into issues having to do with the sacramental MATTER or FORM, we sit up straight and sharpen our eyes and ears.  Because nothing is more serious in the Mass than the valid consecration of the Eucharist, abuses of the sacramental form must be addressed.

Even in the matter of sacramental form of the consecration we can make a distinction.  Say that a priest before the change of the translation said “for many” instead of “for all”, or say that, somehow, stupidly, this gets changed back to “for all” from the present “for many” and the priest continues to say “for many”.  Abuse?  Yes.  However, in this case, the priest is clearly doing something in conformity with long established tradition and common sense (pro multis means “for many” regardless of the absurd philological fan dances done by libs to make a word in Latin mean something it has never meant, based on an imaginary text in Aramaic that doesn’t exist).  So, today, saying “for all” is a worse abuse than the abuse of the aforementioned priest who stick to “for many”.  This is perhaps nitpicky.

An easy solution is found in using Latin, which eliminates the problem and, even better, using the Extraordinary Form.

Finally, perhaps you should get that priest some Say The Black Do The Red swag!  I’m sure he’d appreciate it.

Hmmm… come to think of it, when I get a moment, I’ll add car magnets to the Fr. Z Store. You could get packs of them and given them out to fellow parishioners for their cars.  Father will surely take note of several dozen cars in his lot that urge him to stop doing what he is doing.  I’ll get on that.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Engage in the “Battle for the Eternal Salvation of Souls” – Wherein Fr. Z beats to Quarters

UPDATE: 

So that you don’t miss it, I provide below an explanation of the Holy Father’s oft cited and puzzling maxim “time is greater than space”.  Don’t miss it.

___

A young writer at the increasingly helpful – and descriptive – Crisis in a new must-read offering penned:

No happy bromides about non-condemnation can erase Christ’s fifteen warnings about Hell. No heady defense of sin, no tangled jargon on “time” and “space,” can theorize the Four Last Things out of existence.

How often do I remind you here of the Four Last Things?  And why?  Because it’s my task to try to keep as many of you out of Hell as possible.  Put another, happier way, to help as many of you as possible to heaven.

Let’s look at this great piece at Crisis with my usual treatment:

Amoris Laetitia and the Four Last Things
JULIA MELONI

Hell—St. Teresa of Avila told her nuns to mentally visit the inferno during life so they would not be imprisoned in it after death. St. John Vianney sighed because the saints, who were so pure, cultivated holy fear while “we, who so often offend the good God—we have no fears.”  [I will sometimes ask people to imagine the first 10 seconds of a soul’s experience in Hell.]

At last month’s Rome Life Forum, Cardinal Burke recalled Fatima’s “terrifying vision of Hell, foreshadowed in the evils visited upon the world at the time.” That chilling image evokes a warning from Fr. Charles Arminjon’s The End of the Present World [US HERE – UK HERE]:

Remove the fear of eternal punishment from mankind, and the world will be filled with crime… Hell will simply happen sooner: instead of being postponed until the future life, it will be inaugurated in the midst of humanity, in the present life.

In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis announces: “No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!” (297). [I’d like to think that the Holy Father meant to add “… in this life.”] Josef Seifert warns that it’s “nearly unavoidable” to deduce a denial of Hell—a fear echoed by others. Anna Silvas notesAmoris Laetitia’s “missing” lexicon of eternity: “There are no immortal souls in need of eternal salvation to be found in the document!”  [We’ve seen here before.  HERE  That’s worth a review.]

But papal ghostwriter Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez is ebullient with joy because, as he declares in a 1995 article, “I rely firmly upon the truth that all are saved.” The author of Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing, Fernandez elsewhere rhapsodizes that extra-marital sex can express “ecstatic” charity and “Trinitarian richness.”  [BLECH… I’m not linking that.]

And Fernandez the papal ghostwriter—as Michael Pakaluk and Sandro Magister have shown—repeatedly plagiarizes his previous work in Amoris Laetitia. For instance, Fernandez’s 2006 declaration that “Trinitarian” love can be “realized within an objective situation of sin” is echoed in Amoris Laetitia 305.  [Can it?  I wonder. I doubt it.]

Last September, the four cardinals submitted their dubia out of grave concern for “the true good of souls.” They’ve now published a letter from April requesting an audience with the pontiff—who has not responded.

As the months of papal non-engagement grow, Pope Francis’s maxim that “time is greater than space” feels increasingly ominous. Fernandez—whose cited and uncited work also appears in Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium—has long claimed that we’re in an age of revolutionary “time.” [What just popped into my head was the phrase “perpetual revolution”.  On the issue of the phrase “time is greater than space”, see what I add at the end.]

In his book The Francis Project, [Not linking that either.] Fernandez laments that conservative “fanatics” can’t accept that the “Spirit”—which can “elude the supervision of the institution of the Church”—is leading us “toward a different phase.” It’s a phase where, apparently, God is “Mother” and “you should follow your conscience” and “a pope who tells us that God wants us to be happy on this earth will never ask us to be obsessed with sacrifice.” It’s a phase where, to quote Pope Francis, the Church isn’t “obsessed” with abortion or sexual ethics either.

It’s a phase where, to quote Evangelii Gaudium, “time is greater than space”—where “initiating processes” in politics and the Church advances a “utopian future” with “no possibility of return” (222). It’s a frankly eerie “final cause”—“the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future … which draws us to itself” (222).  [Brrrrrrr!]

So “time” and the “Spirit” are the utopia’s shining protagonists. Time lets reformers “work slowly but surely” (EG 223). Time lets each “region” seek its own “solutions” because “not all … doctrinal, moral, or pastoral issues need to be settled by … the magisterium” (AL 3). Eventually, the “Spirit … overcomes every conflict by creating a new … synthesis” (EG 230), enabling us “to see all things as he does” (AL 3).

Silvas senses here the “gnostic spirit of the cult of modernity”:

I think ‘the spirit’ to which Francis so soothingly alludes has more to do with the Geist of Herr Heigel … [which] manifests itself in the midst of contradictions and oppositions, surmounting them in a new synthesis…

We are in a world of dynamic fluidity here, of starting open-ended processes, of sowing seeds of desired change that will triumph over time. Other theorists—you have here in Italy, Gramsci and his manifesto of cultural Marxism—teach how to achieve revolution by stealth.

Hence a revolution through an “incremental change of praxis” across time. [Creeping Incrementalism] Slowly, inexorably, “region by region, bishops around the world begin to ‘interpret’ Amoris Laetitia” subversively—“to a point of no return.” Buenos Aires, Rome, San Diego, the Philippines, Malta, Germany, Belgium, and Sicily have one by one embraced Communion for those in adultery—with some areas earning direct praise and thanks from the pontiff.

The four cardinals’ April letter told Pope Francis how “painful” it is to see “that what is sin in Poland is good in Germany, that what is prohibited in the archdiocese of Philadelphia is permitted in Malta.” Fernandez, for his part, has proudly claimed that Pope Francis goes “slowly” because he’s “aiming at reform that is irreversible.

So eternity must yield to “time”; the Four Last Things—death, judgment, Heaven, and Hell—must be swallowed up by the sparkly worldly utopia. Silvas sees the “end game” as “a more or less indifferent permission for any who present for Holy Communion”:

And so we attain the longed-for haven of all-inclusiveness and “mercy”: the terminal trivialization of the Eucharist, of sin and repentance, of the sacrament of Matrimony, of any belief in objective and transcendent truth, the evisceration of language, and of any stance of compunction before the living God.

A long, subversive march through the Church [“march”?… perpetual revolution?] —synced to the “siren song” of “accompaniment,” the mellifluous music of “mercy.”

At the Rome Life Forum, Cardinal Burke preached Fatima’s prophetic message of saving souls from “mortal sin and its fruit: eternal death.” He preached prayer, penance, reparation, and Marian consecration; he preached that pastors’ “failure to teach the faith” endangers souls “mortally, in the deepest spiritual sense.”

Cardinal Caffarra starkly described the world’s present attempt to place Christ and his gospel on “trial.” He described an Evil One who utters “banalities about man,” who seduces man into sin out of sneering “contempt.” The cardinal quoted Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor before Christ: “You judge of men too highly … they are born slaves … I swear to you that man is weaker and lower than You have ever imagined him to be!”

Cardinal Caffarra imagined Satan taunting God with an “anti-creation,” a sin-soaked hell on earth: “And man will say: it is better in the alternative creation than in your creation.” It’s precisely what Fr. Arminjon described—Hell irrupting into the present life, Hell happening early because mankind scoffs at its eternal reality.

No happy bromides about non-condemnation can erase Christ’s fifteen warnings about Hell. [No wonder some Jesuits say that we can’t know what Christ really said, because they didn’t have tape recorders.] No heady defense of sin, no tangled jargon on “time” and “space,” can theorize the Four Last Things out of existence. Cardinal Burke calls us to battle for the eternal salvation of souls; Cardinal Caffarra calls us to testify for Christ and his gospel—currently on trial.

More about that phrase, “time is greater than space”.  What’s that all about?

Tracey Rowland explains this in her terrific recent book Catholic Theology.  She wrote that this is an element of the Pope’s:

… ‘People’s Theology’. One of the most extensive articles on this subject is Juan Carlos Scannone’s ‘El papa Francisco y la teologia del pueblo’ published in the journal Razón y Fe. 86 In this paper Scannone claims that not only is Pope Francis a practitioner of ‘People’s Theology’ but also that Francis extracted his favourite four principles – time is greater than space, unity prevails over conflict, reality is more important than ideas, and the whole is greater than the parts – from a letter of the nineteenth-century Argentinian dictator, Juan Manuel de Rosas (1793– 1877) sent to another Argentinian caudillo, Facundo Quiroga (1788– 1835), in 1834. These four principles, which are said to govern the decision-making processes of Pope Francis, have their own section in his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium and references to one or other of them can be found scattered throughout his other papal documents. Pope Francis calls them principles for ‘building a people’. A common thread running through each of these principles is the tendency to give priority to praxis over theory. [Read that again… priority of praxis over theory.  Remember my comments that, right now more than ever even in the 80’s and 90’s, “pastoral” is used as a weapon against “doctrine”, “intellect”, “academics”, even “magisterium”, and certainly “law”.] There is also a sense that conflict in itself is not a bad thing, that ‘unity will prevail’ somehow [Hegel?] and that time will remove at least some of the protagonists in any conflict. The underlying metaphysics is quite strongly Hegelian, [yep] and the approach to praxis itself resembles what Lamb classified as ‘cultural-historical’ activity and is associated primarily with Luther and Kant rather than Marx. Professor Loris Zanatta of the University of Bologna has published an article entitled ‘Un papa peronista?’ in which he makes the claim that Pope Francis has used the word pueblo or people some 356 times in his papal speeches, that Pope Francis believes that poverty bestows upon people a moral superiority, and accordingly, that for Pope Francis, the ‘deposit of the faith’ is to be found preserved among the poor living in ‘inner city neighbourhoods’.  Such a reading situates Pope Francis squarely in the territory of Scannone’s ‘People’s Theology’.

Rowland, Tracey. Catholic Theology (Doing Theology) (Kindle Locations 4240-4257). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Friends, if you want to understand more about Pope Francis, you should obtain this book as soon as possible.

 Catholic Theology.  

US HERE – UK HERE

Some of you will ask…

“What must we do?  What is our role in this Battle?”

First, examine your lives and consciences and GO TO CONFESSION.

Next, lay people, start forming your own “base communities”, in which you read together and study the classics and the solid documents of the Church’s perennial Magisterium.  Do not lie down mute before heterodox teaching: ask questions.  If you aren’t satisfied with the answers, ask the questions again.

Pray and offer mortifications for your pastors and each other.  Offer acts of reparation for the sins of priests and bishops who act like hirelings.

Embrace our traditional devotions and our traditional sacred liturgical worship.

Be ready to suffer.  Ready yourself for the Cross.  Be willing to stay on that Cross as long as it is offered.  Get your head into a mental place where, when the suffering comes, you will have the interior resources to bear it.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, Four Last Things, GO TO CONFESSION, Pope Francis | Tagged , , , , | 24 Comments

PIZZA RAT LIVES! The legend continues.

This one is especially for Fr RS who really liked the recent Grizzy Bear v SUV post.

One of my urban heroes is dear old Pizza Rat.

A New York City Subway rat hit pay dirt one day with a slice of pizza.  Determined to get that slice to safety, it put might and main into getting it down the stairs.

Let this be a lesson to us. Our challenges might be scary and heavy to bear, but WE CAN DO IT, darn it!

Pizza Rat’s legend was born some time ago, and while it didn’t fade entirely, its scroll off most of our screens.

Every time I go to NYC I watch for him in the subways.  Alas, although I’ve seen a lot of rats, I haven’t seen him.

Until today!

Pizza Rat is back in a new video. And I am certain that this is the very same Pizza Rat of yore. This time our intrepid PR is in Crowne Heights in Brooklyn.

The prize?  Why… PIZZA of course!

NEVER GIVE UP! NEVER SURRENDER!

Posted in Just Too Cool, Lighter fare | Tagged | 6 Comments

Looking for an approved Catholic version of The Bible? Not much help at this site.

The Catholic Church gave the Bible to the world. Only the Catholic Church could compile and authenticate as inspired ancient Christian writings, so that error and spiritual danger was avoided. The Catholic Church is the only authentic interpreter of the Sacred Scriptures and their guardian.  Everyone who ever opens any Bible should thank God for the Catholic Church.

That said, because there are zillions of versions in gazillions of tongues available, one might imagine that, in this electronic age, there could be a kind of “Bible central” where one could go to find approved versions in the desired languages. Right? That sounds like a 21st century kind of thing to do with the vaunted tools of social communication.

Since the Catholic Church’s HQ is The Vatican, wouldn’t the website of The Vatican, the Holy See, be a good place to have such a “Bible central”?  Given the primacy of God’s inspired word, there should be quite the page.

Check this out. HERE This is the Vatican website’s “Bible Index”.

Screen Shot 2017-06-20 at 09.37.27

In a nutshell, this says that if you want to find the Bible, go to the website of your own conference of bishops for an updated version.

Alas, they don’t provide links to those conferences… and you would think that they would be known… in The Vatican.

A friend of mine wrote:

They left a message saying you have to go check your own episcopal conference’s website.

Thank you, our shepherds, who needs the Latin version anyway (OK neovulgata, still). And, I am sure when the clandestine faithful in China or North Korea or such manage to get on the web for ten minutes once in a month they will find their own episcopal conference’s website very exhaustive.

Right.   Also, he brings up a good point.   Shouldn’t the Vatican website have, at least, the approved LATIN version of Holy Writ?  Perhaps also a recognized GREEK version of the New Testament?  Just the basics?

I wonder if this is, in part, a way to reduce traffic and strain on what must be a really busy site/server.  Surely it can’t be because they want to deemphasize the importance of the Holy See and farm more things out to conferences of bishops.

We might want to keep an eye on that page to see if there are any updates.

The moderation queue is ON.

UPDATE:

A reader sent a link… buried… on the Vatican website.  I update this with trepidation.   Want your Latin Vulgate?  HERE

Posted in I'm just askin'... | Tagged , , , | 29 Comments

Disgusting: “One Priest’s Plan to Queer the Catholic Church”

A disgusting site called VICE (please don’t go there) has a story:

One Priest’s Plan to Queer the Catholic Church

The priest in question is Jesuit… Jesuit… James Martin, SJ.

It’s an interview.

Don’t.

Meanwhile… Clement XIV Swag HERE

Where’s that prayer I wrote for Jesuits?

Posted in Liberals, Sin That Cries To Heaven | Tagged , , , | 11 Comments

ASK FATHER: Is there an Archangel Uriel?

Michael

Michael

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

My daughter asked me if I had heard of an Archangel Uriel. I believe only 3 are named in Scripture and we must be careful about a name that could be an evil spirit. Info online seems to indicate there is a Uriel.  Is he really an Archangel?

As you say yourself, from Scripture we know the names of three Archangels: Michael, Gabriel and Raphael.  There are other, apocryphal names of angels, but we are not to use them or invoke them.

That said, some Christians, Eastern Orthodox and Anglicans for example, invoke Uriel.  Ethiopian Christians, who accept as canonical the Book of Enoch (in which Uriel is mentioned) invoke Uriel.  The Catholic Church does not accept Enoch as canonical scripture.

Moreover, a council or synod (“walking together”) held in Rome in 745 with Pope St. Zachary, wanted to curb a growing over-emphasis in the veneration of angels.  Therefore, the synod reduced the officially recognized list of angels to Michael,Gabriel and Raphael, thus striking the names of others, found in apocryphal writings, such as Uriel.

So, it may be that Uriel is an Archangel.  I know that Michael, Gabriel and Raphael are because the Catholic Church invokes them.  We must be careful about all others.

 

Posted in ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged , | 11 Comments

Corpus Christi in bombed out Cologne in 1947

No, no… everything is better now since the “reforms” of the liturgy and the way doctrine and law have been de-emphasized in the name of the spirit of Vatican II.  No.  Everything is so much better now… really… better.. it is…

That’s right… they’ve got nothing on us! What a vibrant and faithful Church we have now! The seminaries are full, convents are packed, confession lines are long. There are so many schools and hospitals being built. And try to count the wedding and baptisms! Well! I’m mean… wow… right?

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism | Tagged , | 15 Comments

URGENT PRAYER ALERT! The Four Cardinals of the Five Dubia ask an AUDIENCE

4 cardinals 5 dubiaFrom Edward Pentin at the faithful National Catholic Register (not to be confused with faithless Fishwrap):

Full Text of Dubia Cardinals’ [The Four Cardinals who submitted the Five Dubia] Letter Asking Pope for an Audience
The April 25 missive was hand-delivered to the Pope on May 6 but has received no response.

Edward Pentin

Here below is the full text of the letter, signed by Cardinal Carlo Caffarra on behalf of the four dubia cardinals, asking Pope Francis for an audience to discuss deep concerns over the Pope’s apostolic exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love).

The Holy Father has yet to acknowledge the cardinals’ written request. […]

“Most Holy Father,

It is with a certain trepidation that I address myself to Your Holiness, during these days of the Easter season. I do so on behalf of the Most Eminent Cardinals: Walter Brandmüller, Raymond L. Burke, Joachim Meisner, and myself.

We wish to begin by renewing our absolute dedication and our unconditional love for the Chair of Peter and for Your august person, in whom we recognize the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus: the “sweet Christ on earth,” as Saint Catherine of Siena was fond of saying. We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant, nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus. We are moved solely by the awareness of the grave responsibility arising from the munus of cardinals: to be advisers of the Successor of Peter in his sovereign ministry. And from the Sacrament of the Episcopate, which “has placed us as bishops to pasture the Church, which He has acquired with his blood” (Acts 20:28).

On September 19, 2016 we delivered to Your Holiness and to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith five dubia, asking You to resolve uncertainties and to bring clarity on some points of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia.

Not having received any response from Your Holiness, we have reached the decision to ask You, respectfully and humbly, for an Audience, together if Your Holiness would like. We attach, as is the practice, an Audience Sheet in which we present the two points we wish to discuss with you.  [An Audience Sheet…]

Most Holy Father,

A year has now gone by since the publication of Amoris Laetitia. During this time, interpretations of some objectively ambiguous passages of the post-synodal Exhortation have publicly been given that are not divergent from, but contrary to, the permanent Magisterium of the Church. Despite the fact that the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith has repeatedly declared that the doctrine of the Church has not changed, numerous statements have appeared from individual Bishops, Cardinals, and even Episcopal Conferences, approving what the Magisterium of the Church has never approved. Not only access to the Holy Eucharist for those who objectively and publicly live in a situation of grave sin, and intend to remain in it, but also a conception of moral conscience contrary to the Tradition of the Church. And so it is happening — how painful it is to see this! — that what is sin in Poland is good in Germany, that what is prohibited in the archdiocese of Philadelphia is permitted in Malta. And so on. One is reminded of the bitter observation of B. Pascal: “Justice on this side of the Pyrenees, injustice on the other; justice on the left bank of the river, injustice on the right bank.”

Numerous competent lay faithful, who are deeply in love with the Church and staunchly loyal to the Apostolic See, have turned to their Pastors and to Your Holiness in order to be confirmed in the Holy Doctrine concerning the three sacraments of Marriage, Confession, and the Eucharist. And in these very days, in Rome, six lay faithful, from every Continent, have presented a very well-attended study seminar with the meaningful title: “Bringing clarity.

Faced with this grave situation, in which many Christian communities are being divided, we feel the weight of our responsibility, and our conscience impels us to ask humbly and respectfully for an Audience.

May Your Holiness remember us in Your prayers, as we pledge to remember You in ours. And we ask for the gift of Your Apostolic Blessing.

Carlo Card. Caffarra

Rome, April 25, 2017

Feast of Saint Mark the Evangelist

*

AUDIENCE SHEET [NB]

1. Request for clarification of the five points indicated by the dubia; reasons for this request.

2. Situation of confusion and disorientation, especially among pastors of souls, in primis parish priests.”

In primis, parish priests.

Pray, friends, pray.

PRAY.  Offer fasts and mortifications.  PRAY.

action-item-button

Posted in ¡Hagan lío! | Tagged , , , | 17 Comments

I’m cool about a certain popular devotion. Wherein Fr Z goes all ‘RAH!’

divine_mercyThe often inflammatory Maureen Mullarkey has written several posts about her discomfort with the Divine Mercy devotion and chaplet.

She makes the point that I would make: I LONG for Divine Mercy.  I would add that I long for it probably not knowing how much I truly need it and, were I to truly understand my need, I might quite simply die.  So, praying for it can’t be bad.  As a matter of fact, it is a sine qua non of my life.

That said: I can’t warm up to this devotion.  I’m a convert and I took to the Rosary as if I had said it all my life.  But this one… nope.  And I have asked myself why for years.

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you readers are asking along with the spittle-flecked nutty libs, “If you are Catholic you HAVE TO love this!  It’s just… the BEST!  I mean mercy is so… soooo…. Don’t you understand how wonderful it is?  It’s on EWTN!!! Do you really HATE VATICAN II?!? (‘YES! He DOES!’, shout the libs.)”

Sorry, I just can’t warm up to it.  And I prefer the Sunday after Easter to be Dominica in albis, just as it has always been.  Quasimodo Sunday.  Does that exclude “Divine Mercy” as a focus?  No, of course it doesn’t.  Don’t have a spittle-flecked nutty.

What is it that puts me off this devotion?  Perhaps it is that saccharin soul-annihilating chant with which the chaplet sung.  Please JUST KILL ME! Perhaps it is the dreadful art that goes with it. Alas, I can’t un-see it… with it’s pastels.  Perhaps it is the invasion of that dreadful art into sanctuaries, HUGE cheesy prints among the potted plants propped up near altars as if it were some equal fixture that I don’t care for.

And I even like some of that old fashioned, even sugary devotional art because – yes, it’s kinda corny – but it stems from true love.   I don’t mind the sweet stuff about Our Lady of Fatima or our Guardian Angels (though I picture them as something quite different).

To obtain mercy is there something lacking in the recitation of the Rosary?  Is there something missing in the devotion to the Sacred Heart?   They work for me, thank you very much.  They’ve worked for a loooong time.

Maureen has some choice quotes from her musings which, in part, give voice to some aspects of my lack of enthusiasm for the Divine Mercy chaplet (especially).  HERE and HERE and HERE

Namely…

  • As anecdotal evidence goes, there seem to be more Catholics uneasy with the Faustina engine—fueled as it is on syrup—than I had expected.
  • My essay said nothing about feminized priests. It mentioned only the painting of a feminized Jesus, cloaked in a gauzy haze and drained of virility.
  • Faustina’s visions conjure a feminized Jesus—a kitchen table Jesus drained of masculinity; one who feels, who talks about his feelings as a woman would. Worse, He Who spoke the universe into existence speaks to Faustina in the phrasings of a dime novel.
  • Ignatius of Loyola advised his followers to steer clear of women: “All familiarity with women was to be avoided, and not less with those who are spiritual, or wish to appear so.” The militant Ignatius, a “new soldier for Christ,” grasped something that we moderns in the West dislike admitting: A feminized Church is a weak institution. It puts soft devotions ahead of the Cross.
  • The words of Domenico Bartolucci (d. 2013), the last great Chapel Master of the Sistine Chapel Choir, resound more compellingly with each passing year:
    Gregorian chant was born in violent times, and it should be manly and strong, and not like the sweet and comforting adaptations of our own day. 
    What Cardinal Bartolucci said of chant and polyphony applies as well to our devotions. The Jesus of our devotional life should also be manly and strong. The grand nature of the Christian claim diminishes in any devotion—however popular—that depicts a plaintive Jesus who drops by with a fail-proof recipe for redemption. And who dramatizes his feelings the way a woman might.

Mind you, I have not made a detailed study of the writings of St. Faustina, but what I have read did not keep me reading eagerly.  I’m sure that there are some bits that are great and others that are not so great.

Perhaps the chaplet is more of a female thing than a  male thing, I don’t know.  Maureen seems to think so, and, from what I gather from her tone, she doesn’t think that that’s good for the Church as a whole.   If I read her right, she thinks its popularity is a symptom of a feminized Church.

Is she right?

All I know is that I don’t care to use that particular devotion.  If other people want to, hey, great.   I know that men seem to like reciting the Rosary with other men.

And the “Combat Rosary” is sure a hit.

I wonder if my coolness is influenced by my old pastor and mentor the late and famed Msgr. Schuler.  Maybe he steered me away from this devotion.  He was right about the NeoCats and the Legion and several other things that have, over time, proven to be a bust.  Schuler didn’t have time for the Divine Mercy Chaplet.  The Rosary was good enough for him, as he would say.  I must say, if it was good enough for him, then it’s good enough for me.

“… then it’s good enough for me”, which reminds me of something.

We of the Church Militant could use a good march cadence, or better yet, a run to cadence chant.  Here’s an impromptu run to cadence chant for those of us sticking with the good old Rosary (the … stands for the gentle way that drill instructors have of suggesting, that, after they sing the verse, then, “If you don’t mind, would you please repeat it after me – if it isn’t too much trouble?”).  Imagine a drill instructor with a really good chant doing this…

DOUBLE TIMERAH!
HHHU!CATH’LIC!

Left right lay o…
A lo right a lay o…
A lefty right a lay o…
O YAH!…
OORAH!..
ROS’RY!…
Good for you…
Good for me…

Gimme that ol’ time Holy Ros’ry…
Gimme that ol’ time Holy Ros’ry…
Gimme that ol’ time Holy Ros’ry…
‘Cause it’s good enough for me.

It was good for Saint Dominic…
It was good for Louis de Montfort…
It was good for PADRE PIO…
And it’s good enough for ME!

REFRAIN: Gimme that ol’ time Holy Ros’ry…

It was good at the Battle of Vienna…
It was good at Muret…
It was good at Lepanto…
And it’s good enough for ME!

OORAH!…
O YAH!…
HOLY!…
ROS’RY!……

R!  [R!]- Roman prayers!…
O! [O!]- Out loud!…
S!  [S!] – Say it proud!…
A!  [A!] – Always clear!…
R!  [R!] – Recite it now!…
Y!  [Y!] – You should too!…

A left right left…
A lefty right a lay-eft…

OORAH!…
O YAH!….

The TEE.EL.EM.’s a rolling down the strip…
[Saint Ipsidipsy]’s gonna take a little trip…
Kneel down, face East, and bow your head…
Best thing you’ll ever do until your DEAD…
OORAH!…
O YAH!….
Cath’lic Cath’lic have you heard?…
We’re storming heaven ’til we get the word…
Up in the mornin’ in the drizzilin’ rain…
We’re saying the Rosary again and again….
TEE EL EM and Rosary to boot…
We’re squarin’ our pack and we’re loadin’ our shoot…
If I don’t do it like they do in Rome…
Then box me up and SEND ME HOME…
OORAH!…
O YAH!….

A lo right – a lo right a lay o…
Lo right – a lefty right a lo…
A  Lo right – a lo right a lay o…
Combat Rosary is ALL I KNOW…

OORAH!…
O YAH!…
HOLY!…
RO-SA-RY!…
COMBAT!…
RO-SA-RY!…

Every where we go-o…
People want to know-o…
How we pray-ay…
So, we tell them…
We’re the one’s with Rosaries you’ve heard so much about!…
We’re motivated, dedicated whenever we go out!…
People say we’re crazy for the Rosaries we use!…
We use Combat Rosaries so WHO THE HELL ARE YOU?…

Etc.

At least that’s how I hear it in my head.

I carry one of these super-strong Rosaries in my spare mag pouch! The Swiss Guards have them too!  For the story click HERE and HERE (esp. 18:00)

16_05_07_Combat_Rosary_ad

(It might be fun to do that run with the Swiss… I’m just sayin’ – ‘rah.)

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", Our Catholic Identity, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged | 81 Comments

UPDATE – Urgent Prayer Request: dying priest

UPDATE 19 June – PM:

Just to let you know and to renew my request for prayers, my fried Fr. James Stromberg at last passed away.  With him at the time were some close friends and the Sisters.  They sang the Salve Regina as he breathed his last.

Rest in peace.

___

Originally  Published on: Jun 15, 2017

May I beg of the readership some prayers for a nonagenarian priest friend of mine?  I’ve been told that Fr. James Stromberg, retired professor of philosophy at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, is dying.  He is presently being cared for by the Little Sisters of the Poor, who are so good to infirm priests.  Friends and priests now have a round the clock vigil going for him.

I would appreciate your prayers for him as well.

Go forth, Christian soul, from this world
in the name of God the almighty Father,
who created you,
in the name of Jesus Christ, Son of the living God,
who suffered for you,
in the name of the Holy Spirit,
who was poured out upon you,
go forth, faithful Christian.

May you live in peace this day,
may your home be with God,
with Mary, the virgin Mother of God,
with Joseph, and all the angels and saints.

I commend you, my dear brother,
to almighty God,
and entrust you to your Creator.
May you return to him
who formed you from the dust of the earth.
May holy Mary, the angels, and all the saints
come to meet you as you go forth from this life.
May Christ who was crucified for you
bring you freedom and peace.
May Christ who died for you
admit you into his garden of paradise.
May Christ, the true Shepherd,
acknowledge you as one of his flock.
May you see the Redeemer face to face,
and enjoy the vision of God for ever.
R. Amen.

Lord Jesus Christ, Savior of the world,
we pray for your servant, James,
and commend him to your mercy.
For his sake you came down from heaven;
receive him now into the joy of your kingdom.
For though he has sinned,
he has not denied the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,
but has believed in God
and has worshipped his Creator.
R. Amen.

And…

O Blessed Joseph, you gave your last breath in the loving embrace of Jesus and Mary. When the seal of death shall close his life, come with Jesus and Mary to aid Father James Stromberg. Obtain for him this solace for that hour – to die with their holy arms around me. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I commend his soul into your sacred arms. Amen.

Posted in Four Last Things, Mail from priests, PRAYER REQUEST, Urgent Prayer Requests | 11 Comments