What Does The Prayer Really Say?
W D T P R S

Here is a second part of the Angelus interview with three of the four excommunicated bishops of the SSPX.  Part One was here. 

Today we look at what SSPX Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais has to say, twenty years after the illicit consecrations in Ecône.

My emphases and comments.  I have changed some formatting.  Here is the interview with SSPX Bp. Bernard Fellay.  This interview is in the recent number of the publication of the SSPX called Angelus.

Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais

Q: Your thoughts on the state of the Church after 20 years of episcopacy?

Tissier de Mallerais: John Paul II did nothing to rebuild the Faith. [Nothing?] The great apostasy has been increasing; the youth are almost completely lost in impurity and drugs. The social kingship of Christ is completely destroyed by religious liberty and the rights of man. We are living the great apostasy of which St. Paul speaks to the Thessalonians: “venerit dicessio primum” (II Thess. 2:3).  [Rather apocalyptic.  Maybe so… maybe so…]

Q: What has changed, if anything, in the Society?

Tissier de Mallerais: What kind of Society? The Fraternity of St. Pius X? If this, sure, the Fraternity has grown, thanks to God, from 150 to 450 priests; double the number of brothers. Not many new priories; better to secure the common life of priests! But many new missions everywhere. Not many new countries which are not necessary. We must develop what we have begun. This is sufficient.

Q: How many countries have you visited since your consecration?

Tissier de Mallerais: Almost all the countries in which our priests work except Japan and Korea. How many would this be? Probably more than 30 or 40.

Q: What has impressed you about the faithful on your many confirmation circuits?

Tissier de Mallerais: Of course, the many families with the many children. Sometimes more than ten children—marvelous! It is the effect of the grace of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Also, with this come the many new schools for boys and girls, primary schools besides our priories in many places. Thus, church, priory and school are now the normal unit.  [An interesting demographic observation: This means that there are children of the first followers of Archbp. Lefevbre who have never known anything but conflict and harsh rhetoric about Rome and the Pope.]

Q: Consider how things might have been without the consecrations?

Tissier de Mallerais: We would have died: old priests, only old priests, old Brothers, old Sisters, seminaries empty and dead; and no Fraternity of St. Peter nor anything else. Tradition would have died. [Does this strike anyone as hubris?] So the bishops’ consecrations were “un acte saveur.” The “operation survival” has been a complete success, thanks to God and thanks to the heroic act of Archbishop Lefebvre!

Q: Is the situation with Rome more encouraging after 20 years?

Tissier de Mallerais: No, nothing has changed. Only the motu proprio of July 7, 2007, was an unexpected miracle, and it changes radically the practice of the Holy See towards the traditional Mass. But, practically, the return to Tradition is small among the priests. Only young priests, a few of them, are interested. [Perhaps more than a few.  But the point is that they tend to be young.] But as for religious liberty, [which is what I think is the true obstacle] the rights of man, the interest of Rome in our work: nothing has changed — induratio cordium! A hardening of the hearts, a blindness of the minds.  [On both sides… both sides are guilty.]

Q: What would you say to those who, in 1988, predicted the Fraternity of St. Pius X was creating a parallel Church? Has not history proved them wrong?

Tissier de Mallerais:  I answer: Where is the Church, my dears? Recognize the tree by its fruits. Where the fruits are, there the Church is. I do not mean that the Church is reduced to the Fraternity, but that her heart is in the Fraternity. [A subtle distinction, but I wonder if that isn’t, again, a sign of a mentality that the SSPX has a "higher" Magisterium than the Roman Pontiff?  The SSPX is, like the Donatist view after the persecutions in the early Church, the "true" church of the "pure"?] The true Faith, the true teaching, the non-bastard sacraments: [Sacraments are either valid or they aren’t, and they all have Christ as their minister.  From that point of view, what he said is very unfortunate, perhaps even verging on blasphemy.  But I think he is driving is not just the validity, but what the post-Conciliar rites convey or don’t convey.] all this is in the Fraternity. Everywhere else, there is a mixture full of compromises because of liberalism and weakness of mind. The parallel Church is the Vatican II-Newchurch: her spirit, her new-religion or no-religion.  [It seems more and more that this fellows attitude is that the SSPX is the true Church with the true Catholic Faith and that anything else is simply false, a false religion.]

Q: What stands out as the most important development of the past 20 years? The death of the Archbishop? The election of Benedict XVI? The Motu Proprio?

Tissier de Mallerais: The answer is our perseverance, our existence. [A "siege" mentality?] The miraculous continuation of Tradition. The consecration of the bishops was only a means to this end. No, Msgr. Lefebvre’s death, the election of Benedict XVI, and so on were not events of significance. Really, no particular event happened during the past 20 years, but only the miracle of the survival of Tradition. 

Q: Many Catholics who began to fight alongside the Archbishop years ago now feel inclined to unite forces with a seemingly more conservative Rome by allying themselves with organizations with a more “regular status” within the Church.  [Meaning, probably, the FSSP, and perhaps even dioceses where the TLM is made available widely.]

Tissier de Mallerais: Yes, many losses. Because of lack of principles, unfaithfulness to the fight of the Fraternity, seeking compromises, wishing peace, desiring the victory before the time foreseen by God. [He is very focused on fighting.  Also, He seems to know God’s will pretty clearly.  He also perhaps thinks that the people who leave off following the SSPX in favor of unity with Rome are rather stupid.] These poor people (priests, religious, lay people) are liberals and pragmatics. Seduced by the smiles of the people in the Vatican, I mean the prelates of the Roman Curia. [Probably meaning Card. Castrillon Hoyos.  Also the Holy Father?] People that were tired by the long, long combat for Faith: “Forty years, that’s enough!” But this one will last 30 more years. So do not cease, do not seek “reconciliation,” but fight on!  [There is a strong will to fight.  But for real unity?  I suspect very little.]

Q: What is your most memorable recollection of the Archbishop?

Tissier de Mallerais: When, on October 13, 1969, he opened to us the door at 106, route de Marly, Fribourg, Switzerland, alone, without any priests, receiving us nine seminarians in the two flats that he had rented from the Salesian Fathers. Alone and 63 years old, and beginning all things with us, poor young men! This was moving, to see how he took care of us, giving us spiritual conferences, very simple, theological, with St. Thomas Aquinas and his experience as a missionary. An archbishop, former superior general of 3,000 members, former Apostolic Delegate, and now alone with nine young men to begin something for the sake of the priesthood, something of which he did not even know the future. Realize this faith!  [Impressive in many ways.]

Q: What is the most memorable time in your seminary formation?

Tissier de Mallerais: Unbelievable! My first contact with the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas during the marvelous lectures of Rev. Fr. Thomas Mehrle, O.P., who would come every week from Fribourg to teach us Christ and God at Ecône. How delightful it was to hear Fr. Mehrle commenting on the Summa and we, at the time, reading our Summa in Latin, the wonderful Latin of St. Thomas. [That’s wonderful Latin?!?] How many hours of delight, every day, from 8:15 to 9, at my table in my room, with the Summa to meditate and to learn! And now, I do the same thing, exactly the same!  [Then he reads more Thomas in one morning than most seminarians get in four years of major seminary despite what the 1983 Code of Canon Law requires!  But he had someone who helped him learn to read it.]

Q: Would you say that the fight for the Mass has changed dramatically since the consecrations?

Tissier de Mallerais: Absolutely not. Nothing has changed! The persecution against the actual young priests who retake the old Mass is the same as the persecution against the good priests, parish priests who, 40 years ago, remained faithful to the Mass of their ordination.  [Yes.  This is true.  But some of us had the steel to stay.]

With very few exceptions, the bishops are enraged against the traditional Mass. Their new religion is against the true Mass, and the true Mass destroys their new false religion, a religion without sacrifice, expiation, satisfaction, divine justice, penance, self-denial, asceticism; the religion of the so called “love, love, love” [or as I call it, "luv"] that is nothing but words.  [He has a point here, though he pushes it too far.  He seems not to accept that God can work through any means it pleases him to use.  I wonder if he isn’t a bit of a theurgist.]

Q: Contrariwise, would you say that the fight for doctrine has become more important?

Tissier de Mallerais: It is the same fight: [fight fight fight]  ratio cultus, ratio fides. The rule of the Faith is the rule of the liturgy, and the rule of the liturgy is the rule of the Faith: lex orandi, lex credendi; lex credendi, lex orandi. The motto is reciprocal. [This is very true.  As I have written a hundred times on this blog and in my articles, there is a reciprocal relationship between how we pray and what we beleive.  Change the one, you change the other.] The traditional Mass is the most magnificent expression of the Kingship of Christ, while regnavit a ligno Deus– God has reigned by the wood of the Cross. The mystery of Redemption, as a perfect and superabundant atonement for the sins of mankind is expressed in the traditional Mass. On the contrary, this mystery is darkened and blurred by the New Mass.  [At least in the way it is celebrated in most places, certainly in the dreadful translations, and in some respects in the Latin prayers which were altered.  But it strikes me that the Novus Ordo was implemented as the books themselves contained in so few places that this is also somewhat unfair.  Still, I am very sympathetic to what he said here.]

Consequently, the fight against religious liberty cannot be separated from the fight for the Mass. [Interesting.] The same is true for the fight against ecumenism, because if Christ is God, so He is able to atone and satisfy by His Passion for all sins; also, He alone has the right to rule the civil laws according to the Gospel. I see no separation between the fight for the Mass, the fight for the Christian spirit of sacrifice, and the fight for the social kingship of Christ. The modernists see no difference between their new Mass, their refusal of the mystery of Redemption, [Well… that’s just silly.] and their denial of the social kingship of Jesus Christ. [Interesting.] Tout se tient.  [This phrase refers to a system in which "everything is related" to the other parts.]

Q: What does it mean that, besides Bishop Rifan, Rome has not given traditional bishops to any of the Ecclesia Dei communities? Does this not vindicate the Archbishop’s decision?

Tissier de Mallerais: Yes, sure! The people in Rome (with some exceptions) do not want traditional bishops! They still do not want it. Occupied Rome [fight! fight!] cannot allow (to) herself traditional bishops existing in the Church. It would be the destruction of their destruction! Bishop Rifan had been duly brainwashed [!  Remember his comments about people who go over to Rome?  They are "weak minded".] before he was “reconciled.” He maintains the holy traditional Mass but no longer fights against the New Mass, religious liberty, and so on. He had to stop fighting. [fight!]

Ecclesia Dei communities had to accept never to criticize the Second Vatican Council and the New Mass. [I think that is simply not true.  V2 and the NO can be criticized by anyone!  But they cannot be denied.] They were silenced, and they accepted to remain silent. It was the price of their “reconciliation.”

So Archbishop Lefebvre was fully right, as he stated only totally Catholic and totally free bishops, free from any influence of liberal Rome, [but not free to agree with Rome, not free not to be forever at war with someone or something….] could work for the sake of the Church until the conversion of the Pope.  [Until the "conversion of the Pope…."  NB: "the conversion of the Pope".]

Q: What do you foresee as the greatest challenges facing the Society and the faithful in the next few years?

Tissier de Mallerais:  First of all, our perseverance in refusing the errors of the Second Vatican Council.

Secondly, our strength in refusing any “reconciliation” with occupied [!] Rome.

Thirdly, our growth in schools, academies, and colleges to sustain Catholic education and help families.

Fourthly, resisting any persecution from the civil authorities and proclaiming Christianity as the only source of civilization.  [I think this refers to problems in Europe and the "hate speech" that is more and more the accusation leveled against anyone who preaches a non-secularist, non-relativist message.]

Q: What do you think would be Archbishop Lefebvre’s assessment of the crisis as things stand in 2008?

Tissier de Mallerais: He would denounce not only liberalism — that was the case with Paul VI — but modernism, which is the case of Benedict XVI: a true modernist with the whole theory of up-to-date modernism! [So, for this fellow, Benedict XVI is an up-to-date modernist.]  It is so serious that I cannot express my horror. I keep silent. [This is keeping silent?] So Archbishop Lefebvre would shout: “You heretics, you pervert the Faith!” [Did Archbishop Lefebvre ever call Paul VI or John Paul II "heretics" or "modernists"?]

Q: What counsel would you give to parents rearing Catholic children in today’s world?

Tissier de Mallerais: Not only have children and many children, but rear them, educate them! Do not simply nourish them, do not simply feed them!  [Good advice.]

And send them to true Catholic schools where they will be not only protected against the corruption of the world but also formed as Christian persons. [Good advice.]

Q: What advice would you offer to young men and women contemplating the religious life?

Tissier de Mallerais: Do not “contemplate” it, do not even “try” it, but enter into it with decision and persevere in it! O God, poor wills!

Q: Which books do you think are most essential for the faithful in these days?

Tissier de Mallerais: For all, their missal (Mass book) and their catechism. For young men, books on the social kingship of Christ. For young ladies, books on cooking, sewing and how to furnish a home. [That’s gonna be interesting.]

Q: What do you foresee in the next 20 years?

In Europe, Islamic republics in France, Britain, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands.  [Yah… I’m afraid so.  I am with Oriana Fallaci on this.]

In the United States of America, bankruptcy and social war.

In Rome, the apostasy organized with the Jewish religion.  [So, we’re back to the Jews.]

In us, heroism, Christian heroism.

In the Society, the consecration of new bishops, if it seems necessary. I am getting old.  [I wonder if they, or some, in the SSPX are not concretely talking about consecrating more bishops.]

In Rome, a new Pope? Really, if he would become worse, there is no need. If he is to become Petrus Romanus, yes, indeed. This is my hope.  [NB: The reference to "Petrus Romanus" refers to the so-called prophecy about Popes attributed to St. Malachy.  "Petrus Romanus" is the very last on the long list cryptic phrases in Latin purporting to identify all the popes from that time to the end of the world.  Some of them are strangely accurate.  "Petrus Romanus …. Peter the Roman" will be the last Pope and at that time Rome is to be destroyed.  As I said at the very top, this guy is rather apocalyptic.]

Born in Sallanches (upper Savoy) in 1945, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, after several years of university studies which made him a Master of Arts, entered in October of 1969 the Seminary of St. Pius X then situated in Fribourg, Switzerland. Ordained priest at Ecône on June 29, 1975, he was immediately nominated professor at the Seminary of St. Pius X. He became Rector in 1979, and served in that capacity until 1983. After fulfilling the task of chaplain of the novitiate of the Sisters of St. Pius X at St. Michel-en-Brenne, France, he became, in 1984, the Secretary General of the Society. He was consecrated a bishop in 1988 and is currently at the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecône, Switzerland. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais has made a specialty of critically analyzing the Declaration of Religious Liberty of the Second Vatican Council.

When I wrote my WDTPRS articles on the Roman Canon, I had to dig deeply into the pro multis question.  I did four articles on the formula of consecration of the Precious Blood.

Here is an excerpt from one of those articles:

His Eminence Joseph Card. Ratzinger confronts this in God Is Near Us: The Eucharist, The Heart of Life (Ignatius Press, 2003).   His Eminence makes three points (pp. 37-8, n. 10): 1) Jesus died to save all and to deny that is not in any way a Christian attitude, 2) God lovingly leaves people free to reject salvation and some do, and 3):

“The fact that in Hebrew the expression “many” would mean the same thing as “all” is not relevant to the question under consideration inasmuch as it is a question of translating, not a Hebrew text here, but a Latin text (from the Roman Liturgy), which is directly related to a Greek text (the New Testament).  The institution narratives in the New Testament are by no means simply a translation (still less, a mistaken translation) of Isaiah; rather, they constitute an independent source” (emphasis added).

What Card. Ratzinger did here is cut loose the raft of emotion and conjecture lashed to the pier built by Lutheran scholar Joachim Jeremias, upon which ICEL justified rendering “for many” as “for all”.  Remember that Jeremias and then Fr. Max Zerwick, SJ (in Notitiae in 1970) used Aramaic and Isaiah 53 arguments for their change to “for all.”  Whether Jeremias was right or wrong (and I think his argument was at best tenuous) is entirely beside the point now.   First, we are not Protestants who approach doctrine from a standpoint of sola Scriptura … Scripture alone.  Second, we are not historical-critics when we approach the consecration of the Mass, we are believing Catholics.  Third, the Missale Romanum and the Tradition and teachings of the Church have their own value, a value not to be abandoned in the face of conjecture and the vagaries of historical-critical Scripture scholarship or the concerns of non-Catholics.  Fourth, the Missale Romanum is in Latin.  This is a key point which every reader of WDTPRS must understand.   

Translation of the Missale Romanum is not translation of Sacred Scriptures.  The Missale constitutes its own source and must be respected as such.

 

Furthermore, this is a done deal.  His Holiness has made his decision.

 

What Does the Prayer Really Say?  34th and Last Sunday in Ordinary Time – Solemnity of Christ the King

ORIGINALLY PRINTED IN The Wanderer in 2003

This is the last column of WDTPRS focusing on the proper prayers of Sunday Masses (at least for now).  In the first year we looked at the opening prayers or collects of the Sundays, always published a week ahead of time so that you could think about them at Mass.  In the second year we examined the offertory prayers or Super oblata.  This last year we have delved into the Post communion prayers.   The column will continue, friends.  But you will have to wait a couple weeks to see what I have in store for this coming year.   

I dearly appreciate readers’ feedback each week.  I am getting e-mail and your snail-mail letters are being forwarded (on the editor’s schedule, of course).  I can’t post comments from everyone who writes, but I do read every word you take the time to offer.   I should add that in the last three years the pieces of hate mail I have received about this column I could tally using one hand only.  (This is not an invitation for more.)  Thus, I conclude that these articles have positively resonated with far more people than they have irritated them.  That is something to which the folks at ICEL and our chief shepherds might hearken also.

POST COMMUNIONEM
LATIN (2002 Missale Romanum – Christ the King):
Immortalitatis alimoniam consecuti,
quaesumus, Domine,
ut, qui Christi Regis universorum
gloriamur oboedire mandatis,
cum ipso in caelesti regno sine fine vivere valeamus.

This seems to be of new composition based in part on the Postcommunio of the Feast of Christ the King celebrated on the last Sunday of October in the traditional Roman calendar used in the 1962MR: Immortalitatis alimoniam consecuti, quaesumus, Domine: ut, qui sub Christi Regis vexillis militare gloriamur, cum ipso, in caelesti sede, iugiter regnare possimus.  It is quite thoroughly redacted now.  Look at all the m’s, or rather listen to all the m’s and the v’s!   What comes to mind is the vast organum of visible and invisible creation humming beneath the eternal chorus praising God forever when He is “all in all”.  That “sine fine vivere valeamus” is a thrill and an improvement, I think.  On the other hand, I regret the loss of the military imagery, so important to us in the Church Militant, awaiting the coming of the King who banner (vexilla) we strive to merit calling our own even in this life.

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Lord,
you give us Christ, the King of all creation,
as food for everlasting life.
Help us to live by his gospel
and bring us to the joy of his kingdom.

Let us heft the colossal Lewis & Short Dictionary for the last time (in this WDTPRS cycle) and look at a word meaning much more than what a divorced man pays to his estranged wife.  “Nourishment, food, sustenance, support” is what Latin alimonia means.  It also means in the Latin Vulgate of the Bible, “for the food of the burnt-offering”.   Transferred into a New Testament context, we might equate it with the bread and wine for the Mass, together with other sacrificial offerings provided by the people.   Consequor means “to follow, follow up, press upon, go after, attend, accompany, pursue any person or thing” as well as “to follow a model, copy, an authority, example, opinion, etc.; to imitate, adopt, obey” and “to reach, overtake, obtain”.  Thus, by extension, or consequently, this means “to become like or equal to a person or thing in any property or quality, to attain, come up to, to equal.”   It is possible to translate consecuti as many older hand missal might, simply as “having received”.  But in the context of the feast of Christ the King, it seems to me that we need something more.

At times you will note that certain key words in prayers recur in pairs or patterns on different Sundays.  The last time we examined consequor was in the Post communion of the 3rd Sunday of Ordinary Time.  In that same prayer we also found, like today, a form of glorior.  Many times we have looked at gloria, the basis of the verb glorior, and how in early Latin writers such as Hilary of Poitier it stands for a a divine characteristic, a transforming might, which God will share with us to make us forever and ever more like Him.   In today’s prayer we also use vivere, and on the 3rd Sunday we heard, with forms of glorior and consequor also vivificare.   We want “to live”, and not just here and now, but forever in the transforming presence of Life itself for eternity.  We are talking about having life and having it abundantly (cf. John 10:10) which comes to fulfillment only at the end of the world.  The Latin Vulgate has St. Paul using a form of glorior several times, and some of those texts are a crowbar for us to pry open this prayer.  You will want to review for sure 1 Cor 1:28 ff. and also Ephesians 2:8-10: “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God – not the result of works, so that no one may boast (ne quis glorietur).  For we are what he has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life.”  Properly understood, there is no confusion in this with the false understanding of some Protestants about faith and works.  Also, St. Paul said, “But far be it from me to glory (gloriari) except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Galatians 6:14).   The only way to the glory that lasts, that cannot be lost and the world cannot stain, strip or grind away is through the sacrificial love of God and neighbor that Christ modeled on Calvary and in washing His disciples’ feet in the Cenacle.

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Having been remodeled according to the nourishment of immortality,
we beseech you, O Lord,
that, we who glory in obeying the mandates of Christ the King of all things,
will be able to live with Him without end in the heavenly kingdom.

Notice that consecuti in the Latin original agrees with nos (hidden in the subject of the verb quaesumus) and that it is a perfect participle of a deponent verb, so it has active meaning of a action that took place in the past but has present effects.  Something has been accomplished here on the last Sunday of the year, which looks to the moment of the ending of the world and the coming of the King: immortalitatis alimoniam consecuti – literally we could read this as more than just “we have received the food of immortality” and instead see in this prayer something like “we have been reshaped according to the model of food of immortality”.  What this means is that we have been transformed by what we received.   There seems to be a shift of perspective in this prayer.  

So very often in the Post communion prayers we acknowledge that since we have been nourished by what we received in Communion and we are further begging God to transform us through it in an ongoing way now so that we can be made apt for heaven later.  Now, it seems that we are acknowledging that we in fact have been transformed according to the model (consecuti) of the nourishing offering (alimonia) which bears a diving transforming power conferring the immortality heaven (immortalitas).   Note that while consequor is a deponent verb and would not usually sound passive in meaning, the verb also means, and this is what today I have chosen to stress, “to follow a model”.  Thus, in the present perfect time of this participle, I am going to say “having been remodeled according” rather than, “having modeled ourselves”, etc.  

Also, closely attend to what impact of the tense of consecuti.  At the end of the year, our transformation has in fact taken place with ongoing effect in the present (that is, the time when the priest is pronouncing the prayer).   While we clearly haven’t been perfected yet, we nevertheless as Christians are living in a state of “already, but not yet” regarding this immortalitatis alimonia.   We are baptized.  We have been conformed according to the model of Christ (consecuti) and even integrated into His divine Person, the Church.  Thus, the way has been opened by baptism to the Eucharist and to heaven.   The reception of the Eucharist in (a good) Holy Communion is the sign and pledge of what is to come.  So, this prayer is a triumphant example of confidence.  At the same time this confidence of baptized, Eucharist transformed Catholics, is also a paean of humility: we are glorified precisely in obeying, in obedience to Christ’s commands.   St. Paul said, “But far be it from me to glory (gloriari) except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Galatians 6:14).   The only way to the glory that lasts, that cannot be lost and the world cannot stain, strip or grind away is through the sacrificial love of God and neighbor that Christ modeled on Calvary and in washing His disciples’ feet in the Cenacle.

At the end of this cycle of WDTPRS some observations are in order.  When I began this series’ three years ago, I said that I was not going to try to create translations that can be used instead of the ICEL versions now in use.   I was not striving to produce translations that were smooth and polished and ready for public declamation.  Rather, my “literal translations” would seek to stir interest in the prayers of Mass, provoke discussion, and help enter into the sacred action with mind and will engaged.  My profound hope is that they have helped you in some way.  If anything in these columns lead you to participate actively at Mass with “fuller, more conscious, and more active” participation then WDTPRS has succeeded.  

In addition, I wanted WDTPRS to be a lobby or a tool to promote the evolution of good, sound, accurate and beautiful translations in the future.  This is why I have urged you the readers to letters of support to bishops and those in charge of these matters.  Third, very often I have asked you to pray for bishops and give them support at least by means of your fasting and other mortifications.  The work of a bishop is extremely complicated and the production of liturgical translations is daunting and vast.  

Fourth, I have opened myself up to feedback and comments from you and many have generosity responded.  From years of experience of working on the internet, I have learned how important it is to make a project like this interactive.  St. Augustine, in his magisterial De doctrina christiana, which effectively established the philosophy of education for a millennium and a half, warned the potential “sacred preacher” that he must take great care to consider with sympathy the needs and abilities of those who must simply sit and listen to him talk.  So, if I invite you to read this each week, I will gladly read what you send in return.  To all who have written, I am grateful.

Finally, the most important goal of this series is to inspire a greater love of the all riches presented to us by Holy Mother Church, particularly in our beautiful sacred liturgy, both in Latin and in English.

Next week, we will launch ourselves into a new undertaking.  I will present a re-introduction of sorts so that new people (perhaps to whom you are giving gift subscriptions) who may have come lately to this series may see what we are doing.&