My View For Awhile: EXILE!

Posted on 21 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I’m at the airport because I have to leave The Cupboard Under The Stairs.

  
The Powers That Be are switching off the power that is.   No electricity.

No, it’s not because I didn’t pay my power bill.

It’s about building inspection or … something.  A likely story.

So, I’m taking it on the road during the days the power is off.

  
Early flight.

It had a harrowing start.

I was on my way and realized I had forgotten my phone (aka The Precious).   I contemplated leaving anyway, but the blog has been under DoS attack recently which requires that I do server things to get it working.  Also, I make plans on the fly.   Given that Delta is so often late, we went home and we fetched it, Precious, yes we did. That meant a somewhat swifter trip to the airport than usual.   I managed to get to the gate a couple minutes before boarding because, as usual, Delta was – surprise – late.

This process guaranteed that I need less coffee this morning.

The experience demonstrates how attached – nay, rather – hooked we at these days on our gizmos.   There are times when I purposely leave my phone at home as I run errands or go for a social engagement.  But I confess to a certain uneasiness when I go out the door and The Precious isn’t in sight.

Imagine the disfunction that will result when the whole Grid collapses and people are suddenly without electricity.  

On that note, I will now fire up my Kindle and plug in my noise reducing earbuds.

 

UPDATE

Meanwhile, happily landed (softly), my bag having been the first on the conveyor even as I walked up, Uber having been summoned and met, I opened my email on the nearly forgotten Precious, to find photos from Gammarelli in Rome.  (Try that in Latin!)

They are cutting fabric for the GREEN set!

Remember the chasuble and cope?

   
   
Here come the rest.

   
    
 
These will be spectacular.

On the way into LGA we were on the approach that took us up the Hudson.  I usually get a starboard window when coming here, just in case. 

Not in order… obviously.

   
The Met!  Where I’ll be later, hopefully.

 
Booooo!

   
 

And since the traffic is horrid we, driving through Queens, passed a sign with some Latin.

  
I like the Latin and the sentiment, though I doubt I’ll ever go there.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
30 Comments

“I am the very model of a modern ultramontanist” – ZUHLIO RETURNS!

Posted on 20 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

We like Parody Songs around here.  Faithful Catholics have a sense of humor, after all.  Libs, not so much.

Over a First Things I spotted one worthy of passing along.

I AM THE VERY MODEL OF A MODERN ULTRAMONTANIST
by Clare Coffey

I am the very model of a modern ultramontanist
I’ve been congratulated as an excellent dialogist
I have degrees from all the best colleges of theology
I do not know quite what it means but I reject ontology
I understand the finer points both nuanced and theoretical
and when I go on twitter Ross Douthat calls me heretical
I’ve many sage remarks to make on what I call the Christ event
and just how many tragic deaths forbidden condoms could prevent

I much prefer to shun the works of any scholar scholastic
I find the very concept of forgiveness rather elastic
in short, as such an erudite and excellent dialogist
I am the very model of a modern ultramontanist

I’ve listed all the ways the church might deepen its humility
I send my kids to Jesuit factories of gentility
I’ve quoted bits of Newman and I’ve memorized my Bernardin
and when it comes right down to it I couldn’t name a mortal sin
I keep my Rahner library in an embossed ciborium
I purchase all my pinafores at a fair trade emporium
I sing a new church into life with quite a catchy guitar hook
And whistle all the airs from that infernal Haugen hymnal book

Then I can write decrials of a medieval mentality
and open letters calling for civil collegiality
In short as such an erudite and excellent dialogist
I am the very model of a modern ultramontanist

In fact, when l learn what’s meant by “abbot” and “episcopal”
When I have clearly understood why Mass precludes a disco ball
When I distinguish easily dissent from sensus fidei
And when I know the diff’rence twixt a rose window and rosary
When I can sing the Salve like a dutiful Gregorian
When I know all my heresies, Arian and Nestorian
In short when I have exercised my understanding to the full
A better ultramontanist never bestrode a papal bull

For though my theologic bent is bounded by this century
I’m of a temperament so fearless, plucky and adventur-y
You must admit that as an erudite elite dialogist
I am the very model of a modern ultramontanist

Brava!  Fr. Z kudos.

As you can tell, this was directed at the self-absorbed Promethean Neo-pelagians.  I don’t think they will appreciate the gift in full, however.  They sure didn’t appreciate the line of drink ware and bumper-stickers I made for them.  But liberals don’t have a sense of humor, do they.   They seek merely to suppress, as they did with Ross Douthat (mentioned above – HERE).  They don’t laugh because they consider themselves morally superior.  Poor waifs.

Discuss!

UPDATE:

It seems that the reclusive ZUHLIO has once again broken silence, once again expanding the different styles he has mastered….

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

The cover art has finally arrive, thanks to the great Vincenzo!

I-am-the-very-model-of-a-modern-ultramontanist-zuhlio2

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, HONORED GUESTS, Parody Songs | Tagged , , , , ,
20 Comments

“Bless our families, bless our children. Choose from our homes those who are needed for Thy work.”

Posted on 20 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I have lately mused about vocations.  Last Sunday was the Day of Prayer for Vocations.  What I mean by vocations, by the way, is vocations to the priesthood.  Yes, yes… I think about religious life as well.  When I think of vocations, it isn’t generic, including ever sort of possible vocation.  For me: it means priesthood.

Every knows that the plural of anecdote is “data”.   Thus, I am gathering “data” that applications to seminaries are down.   I would appreciate notes from Vocation Directors which I would keep entirely under wraps!

They will up, a few years ago.  They seem to be going down now.

I saw a thought provoking post at the blog of my friend Fr. Ray Blake, the great PP of Brighton.

Secular clergy are unattractive to the young

I am told by a priest of the diocese that in Westminster diocese there are no ordinations to the diocesan priesthood this year but apparently -according to the com-box there are seven however in Buenos Aires, this year has only three, my own diocese has only two seminarians spread over the whole six year course, some diocese have no seminarians, some diocese have far more bishops (active and retired) than seminarians..
But my own rather odd little parish, ‘least of the cities of Judah’, prays regularly for three men who came here to Mass and were very much part of our parish. One is at one of our English Oratories, another has joined one of the Traditional priestly societies and yet another has joined the most ascetic monasteries in Britain.

One of the things that attracted these young men here is Old Mass, all three came to it, all three had a great love for it. It does seem to be a source of vocations. As one teen age lad said, “I don’t understand a word of it but at least it gives you a chance to pray”. Prayer, communion with Christ is the source of vocation.

Personally I found it easier to speak to young men about priesthood when Pope Benedict so often spoke about the great value and the significance of the priesthood and the Sacred Liturgy. Now, there seems to so many warnings to young priests, so much criticism of young priests, even suggestion they might be mentally ill, it makes it far less attractive, perhaps there is sense that maybe young men considering the priesthood might be better off being tender hearted social workers, rather than servants of the altar.

One of the things that is at the back of mind is that young men are certainly not choosing the secular or diocesan priesthood though some religious orders aren’t doing too badly, especially those with something of traditional about them.

[…]

In France, for most people it will be easier in ten years time to get to the Traditional Mass than the Novus Ordo.

[…]

For all the rather sad holding on to the 1970s of some of the most senior clergy this is not where the Church will be in ten years time.

Read the whole thing over there.

Good observations from Fr. Blake, to whom I send kudos.

It’s not rocket science.  Again and again we see that traditional and reverent sacred worship, hard-identity priesthood, an open door, joy and a sense of humor, and lots of prayer draw men to the priesthood.

In my home parish we prayed for vocations to the priesthood and religious life at every Sunday Mass using this…

On this note… the Extraordinary Ordinary, Bp. Morlino of Madison, has been able to foster a large number of vocations for a mostly rural diocese.  How does he do it?  First, he asks men to think about the priesthood.    Duh, right?  He is supportive of his priests and seminarians.  And he says Mass, including the Extraordinary Form, happily and often.  Consider this:

Your Excellencies… THIS is how you do it.

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, Priests and Priesthood, Seminarians and Seminaries | Tagged , , ,
23 Comments

“For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”

Posted on 20 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

12_09_11_Joos_CommunionLet’s review 1 Cor 11:27-30:

Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.  Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.

Tough, right?

Does “discern body of the Lord” mean, “notice and attend to the needs of the poor around you?”  This is what libs suggest.  It’s also what writers in the ancient Church, such as St. John Chrysostom would suggest, and vigorously so!   Also, there is a section in Amoris laetitia that has this interpretation.  There is nothing in the least new about this.  It’s been around for centuries.

Does “discern the body of the Lord” mean merely attend to the needs of the poor?  No.

It can and does mean that, but that is not the only thing it means.

It also means being properly disposed to receive the Eucharist, that is, not receiving Communion in the state of mortal sin.

1 Cor 11 refers to our entire moral selves.  Hence, 1 Cor 11 involves both concern for mortal sin and concern for the poor. These are, as a matter of fact, flip sides of the same coin: if you are not (according to your ability and circumstances) taking care of the poor, you sin.

Right?

But there are other ways of sinning other than guilty negligence of the poor.

Right?

At this point, review what St. John Paul II wrote about 1 Cor 11 in his Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia 36:

“Along these same lines, the Catechism of the Catholic Church rightly stipulates that “anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion”.74 I therefore desire to reaffirm that in the Church there remains in force, now and in the future, the rule by which the Council of Trent gave concrete expression to the Apostle Paul’s stern warning when it affirmed that, in order to receive the Eucharist in a worthy manner, “one must first confess one’s sins, when one is aware of mortal sin”.75

74 No. 1385; cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 916; Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, Canon 711.
75 Address to the Members of the Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary and the Penitentiaries of the Patriarchal Basilicas of Rome (30 January 1981): AAS 73 (1981), 203. Cf. Ecumenical Council of Trent, Sess. XIII, Decretum de ss. Eucharistia, Chapter 7 and Canon 11: DS 1647, 1661.

That was refreshingly clear.

Amoris laetitia didn’t change what John Paul wrote (and which millennial tradition of commentaries and teachings have maintained).

The Church’s doctrine is the same today as it was before 8 April 2016.

The Church’s law is the same today as it was before 8 April 2016.

It remains that a priest cannot be required not to follow the Church’s law and he cannot be prevented from preaching Catholic doctrine, nor can he be compelled to preach something against the Church’s doctrine.

Really useful!

On another note, since I firmly hold that no real renewal of the Church is possible without a renewal of our sacred worship, Peter Kwasniewski pointed out that 1 Cor 11:27-29 was purposely excluded from the Novus Ordo Lectionary.  It is, however, in the older, traditional form of Holy Mass, for Corpus Christi and for Votive Masses of the Most Holy Eucharist.  A quick consultation of the new book Index Lectionum: A Comparative Table of Readings for the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite shows you that it is missing from the Novus Ordo and is present in the TLM.  My post on the book HERE.  US HERE – UK HERE – ITALY HERE

Thus, Summorum Pontificum, that great gift of Benedict XVI to the Church, that profound aid in his “Marshall Plan” to rebuild after the devastation against the encroaching dictatorship of relativism, provides a necessary corrective for a serious gap in our worship and, therefore, identity.  Once again we hear in our churches, in the context of Mass, “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord”, knowing full well that it means that we mustn’t approach the Eucharistic Lord for Communion in the state of mortal sin.

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, The Drill | Tagged , , ,
6 Comments

ASK FATHER: Dying man hasn’t asked for sacraments. Can he be anointed?

Posted on 19 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Extreme UnctionFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

We have a question and prayer need for a man dying of cancer. He is a remarried Catholic without an annulment who doesn’t receive Communion.

Not sure if he attends Mass. His daughter-in-law’s pastor said he could receive the Anointing of the Sick and Communion because there was an exception in the case of the dying. The patient has not requested the sacraments or has agreed to a visit from the priest.

However Father said that Canon Law allowed for an exception in these cases. So assuming that this ill man would not be living in sinful actions on his death bed, if he desired to go to confession would that be sufficient to receive Communion? Second question, could he receive Communion if he did not express a desire to confess?

The pastor offering the sacraments to this man is a canon lawyer as well.

A Mass has been offered for this man.

Thank you for having Mass said for this man.  Why wait until a person dies to have Masses said?

While it is true that in case of danger of death there is a great deal of flexibility given in the administration of sacraments, the sacraments – and the persons own will – are to be respected.

The Sacrament of Anointing, is one the sacraments “of the living”, that is, they are to be received by one who is in the state of grace.  If a person is compos sui and make his own decision and understand what is going on, he must be given a chance to make his confession before being anointed.   Otherwise, if his communication is impeded, he should indicate by signs and respond to the priest’s questions.  If a person is not sui compos, cannot respond, and isn’t aware of what is going on, such a person can be anointed and, in that case, the sacrament can also act for the forgiveness of sins.

He he says he doesn’t want to be anointed, doesn’t want the priest, etc., … well… there it is.

The same is said, of course, for Communion, as Viaticum or not.  If this person is not in the state of grace, if he is able he should make his confession before receiving any sacrament.

Of course danger of death can accelerate things greatly, but, if a person is able by signs or speech to indicate at least sorrow for sins and love of God, that should first be ascertained.

Everyone: GO TO CONFESSION!  You don’t know when it will be your turn.  Today?  Tomorrow?  It will happen.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Four Last Things, GO TO CONFESSION | Tagged ,
5 Comments

ASK FATHER: Date for 2nd marriage set at parish before Tribunal decision

Posted on 19 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

My in laws divorced one year ago. My father in law is remarrying one month from now. He filed the annulment paperwork late last year and was told by the deacon handling it that it would “come through” last month. Nothing yet. My husband and I are disturbed by the fact that his parish (not in our diocese) allowed him to set the wedding date and complete marriage preparation courses even though he is already married in the eyes of the church. Now we’re concerned about what may occur if the annulment is not granted in time. We are considering writing to the bishop of that diocese to express our concern about this situation. It really doesn’t make sense in light of the church’s teaching on marriage and annulment. Do you agree that a letter to the bishop is warranted? Or are we being too nitpicky since no sacraments have been given falsely?

First, allow me to nitpick.  Some people, even informed people working in the Church who ought to know better,  use phrases like “granting an annulment” (or not “granting one”, as the case may be).  This is imprecise terminology which leads to confusion. The Church does not “grant” an annulment as though an annulment were some sort of a prize, or honor, or distinction… or a divorce.  Rather, the Church, through Her tribunal system of educated professionals, examines the facts presented in an orderly way and then makes a declaration based on those facts. It’s similar to a doctor making a diagnosis. We don’t say, “Doctor Bombay granted me a diagnosis of rickets.”

If we stop using unhelpful terminology, we might stem the tide of looking at a declaration of nullity as some sort of reward that the Church either kindly bestows or stingily withholds, or indulgently squanders or righteously refuses to grant. Rather, if we use more precise terminology, such as “The Tribunal determined the marriage was null,” or even better “The Tribunal was able to find sufficient proof of nullity,” or “The Tribunal was not convinced the marriage was null”, then we demonstrate a better grasp of reality.

Anyway, it is a Really Bad Idea™ for a parish (priest or staff) to set a date for a marriage until it is certain that both parties are free to marry.

In this case, no date should have been set until and unless the Tribunal issued a declaration of freedom to marry, stating not only that the previous marriage had been declared null, but also that no restrictions were placed on the party.  In some cases, even if the marriage is proven null, the Tribunal has the ability to place a restriction on one or both parties, stating certain conditions which need to be met (e.g., psychological counseling) before a subsequent marriage can take place.

Ideally, Catholics should not consider moving towards a prospective marriage until their freedom to marry has been established. That said, we do not live in an ideal world.  “Kind” pastors who ignore these norms in order to give people what they think they want end up creating more problems than they solve.

The question you ask is whether a letter to the bishop is warranted in this case.

Perhaps, but there are a lot of variables that come into play.

On the one hand, the bishop should know what is going on in his parishes.  Was this, for example, a one time stupid mistake? Or is this part of a larger pattern of imprudence or disobedience?  Some bishops might act swiftly and mete out the appropriate discipline. Some bishops, themselves of the mistakenly “pastoral” school of thought, might react by putting a fire under the tribunal to grind out a decision more quickly, thinking that will eliminate the scandal. Yet other bishops might just shrug and ignore the matter.

I think a more helpful course of action would, first, to have a conversation with your father-in-law. Ask what his plans are should the declaration of nullity either not be issued, or be issued after the date of the proposed wedding, or be issued with a restriction.  Perhaps a phone call to the pastor asking why a date was set without the freedom of both parties to marry being established is warranted. The response you receive from your father-in-law and from the pastor in question might help answer your question of whether a letter to the bishop is appropriate.

Whatever course of action you take, do it prayerfully, with patience, and without acrimony or an accusatory tone.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Canon Law, One Man & One Woman | Tagged , ,
8 Comments

PODCAzT 144: Pope Francis’ ‘Amoris laetitia’, Ch. 4: “Love in marriage”

Posted on 18 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

UPDATE: I fixed the glitch at 24:02-24-22. Sorry about that. It was a lot of reading – with interruptions – and editing together.  If you had an “overlap” in that time range, you can download again or listen again and it should now be okay.

There has been a lot of controversy about the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, the Joy of Love, as it is being called in English. Most of the controversy surrounds the 8th Chapter. And yet many have pointed out that the Exhortation has some great strengths, among them Chapter 4, entitled “Love in marriage”.

So that you do not know only the controversies, and so that you have really heard what the Holy Father says in Chapter 4 … here it is.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

The text I read, as carefully as I can, is as it appears on the Vatican’s website. They may alter or amend it in the future, but here is the text as it stands now.

For the purpose of a smooth reading, a first experience of the chapter, I don’t read footnotes. That would be too ponderous. Also, I won’t quote the inline chapter and verse references to Scripture. You can see both of those when you read the text, which, at the time of this writing, you can download as a PDF from the Vatican’s website HERE.

I hope this will be helpful to you, in whole or in part. I can tell you that it was extremely useful to me. I had read it when it came out – before it came out, but silently, Reading it aloud, and trying to give sense to the black on the white, turned out to be, among other things, an examination of conscience for me.

Therefore, I urge you, not only to listen to this, but to go back and read the document – especially so you can get the notes and references which I left out – but also to use it as a mirror in which you see yourself.

Remember: Amoris laetitia is an exhortation – an urging -an encouraging – from Peter.

We must allow ourselves to grasp what he is saying and then work with it with honesty.

 

Posted in Francis, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, PODCAzT, Synod | Tagged , , ,
4 Comments

Is #AmorisLaetitia being beta tested?

Posted on 18 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

beta testSoooo…. Amoris laetitia is out.

Or is it?

Not a few times on this blog have I pointed out that, by the time the texts of documents are released officially in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) changes are made.

When we got the name of the document in Latin (called the “incipit”), I wrote to someone in Rome asking what the rest of the sentence was.  Some people were having a little fun with Amoris laetitia as, for example, “The Pleasure of Lust”, which , standing free, it can mean.  I didn’t get any (serious) response back.

Anyway… here is an exchange from the combox under a different thread:

Charles E Flynn says:
18 April 2016 at 10:50 AM

There should have been a beta version of Amoris laetitia.

[What’s out IS the Beta Version. The final, official version will be in Acta Apostolicae Sedis.]

What is “beta testing”?  As I understand it, software goes through an initial trial called alpha testing inside the company that made it.  That works out big problems.  Then comes beta testing, which goes on outside the company that made it.  After beta testing, the final version is released to the public.

John_Edsays:
18 April 2016 at 2:45 PM

Acta Apostolicae Sedis? What’s that? Are you saying that AL is just a work in progress?

[AAS is the official gazette of and instrument of promulgation of the Holy See. Definitive texts are found in the AAS, usually some months after their initial release! I think this is a serious issue, because people rarely if ever go to the AAS and work from the official text. They rush to use what was originally released, in various languages, without double-checking them against what is officially published later on. For example, between the initial release of, say, the Latin of Veritatis splendor (yes, it was released also in Latin on the first day and the Latin text was published in L’Osservatore Romano the next day), and the release of the official text in AAS, there were hundreds of text changes. I know. I looked at them side by side. Most of them were small things, but they were changes. So, until we have an final, official version in the AAS, yes, this is a BETA. It’s been done this way for a while now.]

I have mentioned numerous times on this blog, problems with translations of documents.

I wrote years ago:

For a long time I have warned people about bad English translations of papal documents. 

There are methodological problems in that the documents are no longer composed in Latin.

The Latin text, which is the official text, is itself a translation.

However, since no one refers to the Latin text… few people know this.  Thus, they are always working with compromised versions of documents.

Moreover, the texts they are working with were those released at the time of the presentation of the document, even though the LATIN is itself revised [there is not Latin of Amoris laetitia, which is hilarious, given that we have an incipit!] before publication in is final official form in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.  But no one goes back to revise the vernacular versions in keeping with the changes in the Latin! Lot’s of people are misquoting documents because the vernacular docs themselves were never updated.

Imagine, for example, doing your doctoral thesis on something that involves papal documents.  Because you are modern doctoral candidate at a hip school that shuns Pharisaical nitpicking, no one expects you to know Latin, right?  So, you are stuck using vernacular versions of documents that were released to the PRESS many months before the official Latin version appeared in the Acta.  Remember, once the version appears in the Acta, that’s the official version.  How d’ya like them apples?

So, is Amoris laetitia being beta tested?  If I were still around the Press Office, I’d be asking that question until I got an answer.

Moderation queue is ON.

BTW… the online ACTA is about a year behind.  HERE  But it has been behind since about 1909.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , ,
15 Comments

POLAND: Eucharistic miracle! Bleeding Host is human cardiac tissue

Posted on 18 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Detail from Daniel Mitsui’s new image of the Sacred Heart!

I don’t know about you, but I’ve had a less than enjoyable time for a while now. That said, in this time I have also hardened my resolve in several spheres.

And yet, there are little bright points. Remember that scene in the The Return of the King when Sam and Frodo, in Mordor, see a break in the lowering clouds and spy a star?  Forget the iffy movies, here is the text:

“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”

I spotted this at Aletheia (it was a writer from Aletheia, by the way, who asked Card. Schoenborn the question that got the tangled response about development of doctrine that has made us scratch our heads).

Eucharistic Miracle in Poland Approved by Bishop After Testing

Sometimes, yes, the supposed “bleeding host” will prove, upon examination, to be mere red bread mold.

But sometimes, a “bleeding host” is put under the microscope and through the tests and it’s discovered to be human cardiac tissue.

In 2013, in Poland, a bleeding host proved to be precisely that, as it was announced today by Bishop Zbigniew Kiernikowski, of the Diocese of Legnica:

“On 25th December, 2013 during the distribution of the Holy Communion, a consecrated Host fell to the floor and then was picked up and placed in a water-filled container (vasculum). Soon after, stains of the red colour appeared. The former Bishop of Legnica, Stefan Cichy, set up a commission to observe the phenomenon. In February 2014, a tiny red fragment of the Host was seperated and put on a corporal. The Commission ordered to take samples in order to conduct the thourough tests by the relevant research institutes.

In the final announcement of the Department of Forensic Medicine we read as follows:

In the histopathological image, the fragments of tissue have been found containing the fragmented parts of the cross striated muscle. (…) The whole (…) is most similar to the heart muscle with alterations that often appear during the agony. The genetic researches indicate the human origin of the tissue.  [Not just normal heart tissue, but distressed heart tissue.]

In January this year I presented the whole matter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the Vatican. Today, according to the recommendations of the Holy See, I ordered the parish vicar Andrzej Ziombro to prepare a suitable place for a display of the Relic so that the faithful could give it the proper adoration.”

A wonderful gift to Poland, and for the many pilgrims who will be heading to Poland this year, either for World Youth Day or their personal intentions, in this Year of Mercy.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Posted in Just Too Cool, Year of Mercy | Tagged
36 Comments

ASK FATHER: If Orthodox schismatics can receive Communion, why not divorced and remarried (adulterers)?

Posted on 18 April 2016 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

“Amoris Latitia” contains the footnote [351] stating those living in
irregular unions can be admitted to holy communion in some
circumstances; the idea being that they may be in the state of grace, despite how (objectively) they are living in a publicly sinful state. Based on the constant practice and teachings of the Church, this is erroneous.

However, canon law permits holy communion to be distributed to schismatics: “Catholic ministers may licitly administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the oriental churches which do not have full Communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask on their own for the sacraments and are properly disposed. This holds also for members of other churches, which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition as the oriental churches as far as these sacraments are concerned” (CIC 844 § 3).

Is not schism, and adultery, both to be regarded as publicly sinful situations? In other words, if holy communion is to be denied to adulterers, does it not have to be denied to schismatic as well (despite how canon law sanctions it)? The alternative being, if in principle schismatics may receive holy communion if “properly disposed”, does not such proper disposition potentially apply to all other categories of public sinners?

We have to be careful with words, terms.  As the old adage runs: Seldom affirm, never deny, always make distinctions.

The 1983 Code for the Latin Church, can. 751, gives us definitions of heresy, apostasy, and schism.

The Code rarely gives definitions of terms. When it does, that is how the term is to be used throughout the Code and subsequent commentaries. Other definitions of these words may hold weight in other areas, but in canon law that is how these defined words are to be used.

Canon 751 says that schism is the withdrawal (detrectatio) of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him. By this canonical definition, then, someone who was baptized into, say, the Greek Orthodox Church, cannot be canonically considered a schismatic. Why? He has not withdrawn any submission to the Supreme Pontiff because he was never in submission to the Supreme Pontiff.  He cannot be accused of the canonical crime of schism.  That doesn’t mean that there isn’t a schism.  It means that in the eyes of the Code that guy isn’t considered schismatic.

Most members of the Orthodox Churches are not subject to the canonical crime of schism.  Those who commit schism in order to become Orthodox… that’s another kettle of borscht. Hence, to say that they are in an objective state of sin (canon law deals mainly with crime, and tangentially with sin) would go outside canon law’s definition.

Look.

Consider a person who was baptized as an infant in the Greek Orthodox Church, and then brought up in accord with the teachings and beliefs of that Church.  It is an entirely different thing to choose, as an adult, to attempt to enter into a marriage while one’s spouse remains alive!

Even considering that one’s guilt may be diminished because of ignorance, one is still responsible for one’s actions as an adult. If those actions have placed one in an objective state of sin, the burden lies on one’s own shoulders to extract oneself from that state (with the help of a confessor) or to demonstrate (with the help of one’s pastor and/or a trained canonist) that one’s irregular situation can be regularized.

The Church’s merciful solicitude towards our separated brethren, who share our belief in the efficacy of the sacraments and apostolic succession, who find themselves in circumstances where they have no reasonable access to their own priests, must not be confused with the ill-conceived notions of mercy that would gloss over one’s responsibility to own up to one’s own actions and set one’s own house in order before approaching the sacraments… and that means Eucharist, certainly, but Penance too, since we need to amend our lives to receive absolution.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Both Lungs, Canon Law, GO TO CONFESSION, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged ,
1 Comment