QUAERITUR: Is sherry valid matter for the consecration during Mass?

Posted on 17 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

There had been several discussions recently about the topic of valid matter for the Eucharist, mostly related to low-gluten hosts and hosts using matter other than wheat. This made me remember something that happened at my parish while I was a kid. I grew up in the Rochester diocese, which, suffice it to say, is not known for widespread fidelity to the Church’s disciplines. One Sunday, the pastor asked each family of the parish to contribute a bottle of wine to be used for Communion for the subsequent Sundays. On one such Sunday, the wine used to consecrate the Precious Blood was sherry.

Since sherry is a fortified wine (containing both grapes and other spirits), would this have made the Sacrament invalid? Would the same rules that pertain to the host also apply to the wine used for consecration? Either way, it seemed to have been a well-intentioned but sketchy gesture on the part of the priest.

I have tackled this before, but it is worth repeating.

It is of divine institution that the only valid substances for transubstantiation are, for the Host, bread made from wheat and, for the Precious Blood, wine made from grapes or raisins (dessicated grapes).  The grapes used must be ripe, which rules out “wine” such as verjus. The wine for Mass can be red, white, dry, sweet, whatever.  Some prefer red because it resembles blood.  Some prefer white because it is easier to clean the linens afterward.

Sometimes questions come up about the use of wine which has very low alcohol content, called mustum, a wine which had the fermentation process halted by rapid freezing.  That is a valid substance because it is from grapes and the natural fermentation process began, making it wine.  It has an artificially low alcohol content, but mustum is consider valid wine.

However, there is the other end of spectrum to consider: wine which has an artificially high alcohol content.  Sometimes alcohol distilled from wine is added to wine in order to preserve it against spoiling or changing to vinegar.  This addition of wine alcohol produces “fortified wine”.  The usual types of “fortified wine” we encounter are port, sherry, madeira, marsala, and vermouth.

Unreconstructed Ossified ManualistFortified wines are valid matter so long as the wine-spirit added was distilled from grapes, that the quantity of alcohol added, together natural content from the fermentation, does not exceed 18% and that the additional alcohol is added during the process of fermentation.  You can read a good, brief article on altar wine in the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Also, because we Unreconstructed Ossified Manualists, we check our old theology manuals, such as Unreconstructed Ossified ManualistTanqueray’s Theologia Dogmatica.

We find in Tanqueray that wine for Mass has to be from ripe grapes, it can be of any color, not corrupted, and not frozen at the time of consecration.  Citing the Missale Romanum we are warned against wine that is turning bad.  As a matter of fact, it was (probably is still) illicit to say Mass with doubtful, soured wine.  And if the priest is not doubtful about it, and it is truly bad he sins gravely by consecrating it.  “Si fuerit aliquantulum acre… conficiens graviter peccat“, says   He would – knowingly – be attempting to consecrate something that is not wine and is therefore invalid matter.  That is not just bad, that is very bad.

By the way, the coffee mug which appears here is great for Mystic Monk Coffee!  It’s swell!

I would rule out vermouth, because herbs and so forth are added.

I would not use sherry because, if I am not mistaken, the addition of the spirits takes place after fermentation.

Marsala seems to be okay, so long as it is 18% or less.

Vin Santo, from dessicated grapes, is fine.  As the name implies, it is wine for the altar!

Port is valid, 18% or under.

All this information provides ample motive to stick with altar wines made by ecclesiastically approved vintners (unless you can’t for some reason).  If you have a doubt, Fathers, don’t use it.  Don’t screw around with validity of sacraments.

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

QUAERITUR: Everyone going forward at a “healing Mass” for Anointing of the Sick

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

I am a graduate student at ___, and over the past few weeks have received two emails (one related to the tragedy this past weekend) for “Healing Masses” in which (quoting the one) “priests…will be available to administer the Sacrament of the Sick–a special anointing to those who wish to receive it.”

Maybe I’m wrong but shouldn’t a person actually /be sick/ in order to receive the sacrament? The idea of a come one, come all approach to a sacrament like that seems…wrong. Are there any rules on who can or should receive the anointing?

The law is pretty clear.

Can.  1004 §1. The anointing of the sick can be administered to a member of the faithful who, having reached the use of reason, begins to be in danger due to sickness or old age.

In danger?  Danger of what?  Danger of… feeling bad?   I think not.  You don’t just throw around words like “danger”.  This means in danger of death.

And there is the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1514 “The anointing of the sick is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as anyone of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for him to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived”

Common point?  Danger of death!

Sacrosanctum Concilium says:

SC 73. “Extrema Unctio”, quae etiam et melius “Unctio infirmorum” vocari potest, non est Sacramentum eorum tantum qui in extremo vitae discrimine versantur. Proinde tempus opportunum eam recipiendi iam certe habetur cum fidelis incipit esse in periculo mortis propter infirmitatem vel senium.

In periculo mortis… in danger of death.

The recent and widespread practice of anointing anyone who is “not feeling well”, or even “along with a sick person but who doesn’t want to be left out”, is not consistent with a plain reading of the law of the CCC.

One can be in danger of death for many reasons.  For example, someone who is about to undergo some surgery requiring a general anesthesia could be in danger of death.  Someone about to be executed or go into battle are in danger of death, but those are not considered occasions for the sacrament because they are external to the person.  Once damage is inflicted through a wound and danger of death is obvious, that’s another matter.

Moreover, there are also persistent, chronic conditions which, while they may not lead to immediate death, nevertheless put one in danger of death (e.g., the onset of Alzheimer’s).

The sniffles, or having the collywobbles or being crapulous do not fit the criteria.  Neither do certain illnesses which, while debilitating, are not usually causes of death (e.g., arthritis, obsessive-compulsive disorders, being a liberal – okay… I slipped that in there for fun…).

In addition, I will remind everyone that, unless you are incapacitated, the Sacrament of Anointing should be received in the state of grace!

If you are not in the state of grace, and if you are not incapacitated (unable to communicate sorrow for your sins) it is doubtful that you benefit from the sacramental graces the sacrament is to confer (i.e. strengthening in body and soul, possible forgiveness of sins).

Therefore, go to confession before being anointed.

If you are lying on the sidewalk, unconscious after a bomb attack, you don’t have to go to confession first.  Right?

Anointing is not like the Sacrament of Baptism, which removes the stain of original and actual sins and confers an indelible character.  Confirmation and Holy Orders can be received in the state of sin and they still confer an indelible character.  If, however, they are received in the state of sin, the recipient doesn’t benefit from the graces of the sacrament until he returns to state of grace.  Morever, the recipient has committed a sacrilege in knowingly receiving a those sacraments while in mortal sin.  If you get married while not in the state of grace, you are still married!  The sacrament which is supposed to help you live a good married life more or else “dormant” in you until you are again in the state of grace.  You receive prevenient graces, of course, to help you repent of your sins and seek confession.  The same idea applies to the Sacrament of Penance: if you purposely withhold mortal sins during confession or you are not truly sorry, you don’t receive the graces the Sacrament of Penance is intended to impart (forgiveness of sins, habitual grace, strength against sinning in the future, deeper sorrow for sin, reconciliation with God and neighbor, etc.) and you commit the sin of sacrilege.  If you know you are surely not in the state of grace when receiving the Eucharist in Communion, you are not only not receiving graces from reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord, you bring on yourself even greater condemnation.  You commit the sin of sacrilege by knowingly receiving Communion while in mortal sin.

There is a helpful distinction of “sacraments of the living” and “sacraments of the dead”.  The “sacraments of the dead” are Baptism and Penance (because you are dead in sin and they bring you to life again).  All the others are “sacraments of the living” (because you must be alive in the state of grace to receive them).

The Sacrament of Anointing straddles these two categories in one instance: when the person cannot express sorrow for sins and receive absolution from the priest.  If a priest anoints a person who is incapable of response and in danger of death, the sacrament can not only possibly heal (according to God’s will), and strengthen the soul in the last moments of life, but also forgive sins.

Again, from the CCC:

1532 “The special grace of the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick has as its effects: the uniting of the sick person to the passion of Christ, for his own good and that of the whole Church; the strengthening, peace, and courage to endure in a Christian manner the sufferings of illness or old age; the forgiveness of sins, if [IF] the sick person was not able to obtain it through the sacrament of penance; the restoration of health, if it is conducive to the salvation of his soul; the preparation for passing over to eternal life”.

Remember: You commit a sacrilege by receiving a sacrament (of the living) in the state of sin!  That includes Anointing (unless you are incapacitated).  The two sacraments you can receive when not in the state of grace are Baptism and Penance (’cause that’s what they’re for).  Anointed, in certain circumstances, crosses over.

Another point, as long as I am on this.

The fact that the Sacrament of Anointing, in some circumstances, forgives mortal sins, then the only valid and licit minister of the sacrament is a sacerdos, a priest or bishop.

  • DEACONS CANNOT CONFER ANOINTING OF THE SICK.

Neither can nuns in pantsuits with a lapel pin.  Neither can a parish volunteer. Therefore, they cannot validly anoint even when there is not danger of death.  Period.  If they attempt to anoint in the manner of a priest, they commit the sin of sacrilege for abusing the sacrament and they can incur a censure for simulation of a sacrament.

Only a priest or bishop validly administers the sacrament of anointing.

These Masses wherein everyone is invited to come forward seem to be quite widespread.  I think the argument that “everyone is sick in some way” is an abuse the sacrament.

There is such a thing as sacrilege.  Sacrilege is a sin.  It is the improper use of something or someone sacred.

Let the Sacrament of Anointing be used, and be used properly!  It need not be conferred only when danger of death is immediate.  Even the older form of the sacrament, the traditional form, can be conferred in the situations when the newer form can be, but for the right reasons.

A brave bishop should address this matter of anointing in a pastoral letter in the near future.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged , , , , , ,
98 Comments

Pope Francis slaps down those who resist the Holy Spirit

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Pope Francis has been saying Mass semi-publicly in the chapel of the Casa S. Marta, where he has been living.  He has been giving a “fervorino” at Mass, that is, a brief, usually off the cuff, sermon.  So far, there is no indication that these little daily blips are going to be in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, but let that pass.

Today, commenting about St. Stephen the Proto-martyr, Francis made remarks about the Holy Spirit and the anniversary of the the Second Vatican Council and people who don’t like change.

The site of Vatican Radio has something of the fervorino.  They, alas, don’t provide the whole text.  They cut it up, adding commentary, even in the audio reportage.  The English site provided less than the Italian site.  Irritating.  Don’t we want the whole text?  If the whole text isn’t important enough to give in toto, then how important is it?  But let that pass.

Francis quoted Stephen before he was killed, according to the Vatican Radio piece which I checked against the Italian… and you can see how cut up this is:

“the Holy Spirit upsets us because it moves us, it makes us walk, it pushes the Church forward.” He said that we wish “to calm down the Holy Spirit, we want to tame it and this is wrong.” Pope Francis said “that’s because the Holy Spirit is the strength of God, it’s what gives us the strength to go forward” but many find this upsetting and prefer the comfort of the familiar.
Nowadays, he went on, “everybody seems happy about the presence of the Holy Spirit but it’s not really the case and there is still that temptation to resist it.” The Pope said one example of this resistance was the Second Vatican council which he called “a beautiful work of the Holy Spirit.” But 50 years later, “have we done everything the Holy Spirit was asking us to do during the Council,” he asked. The answer is “No,” said Pope Francis. “We celebrate this anniversary, we put up a monument but we don’t want it to upset us. We don’t want to change and what’s more there are those who wish to turn the clock back.” [The Italian says: “Ci sono voci che vogliono andare indietro…. there are voices which want to go back”] This, he went on, “is called stubbornness [“essere testardi”] and wanting to tame the Holy Spirit.”
The Pope said the same thing happens in our personal life. “The Spirit pushes us to take a more evangelical path but we resist this.” He concluded his homily by urging those present not to resist the pull of the Holy Spirit. “Submit to the Holy Spirit,” he said, “which comes from within us and makes go forward along the path of holiness.”

Some people in the traditionalist camp are going to have a spittle-flecked nutty about this.

Let’s breathe into a paper bag and think about what is going on.

There is no doubt in my mind that the “testardi… the stubborn… the stiff-necked” Francis is speaking about are the SSPXers.  He is not talking about those who are actually in union with the Roman Pontiff and who are legitimately making use of Summorum Pontificum.

Benedict was all about protecting the Council from the left and from the right.  Benedict was all about reading the Council correctly and defending it from false readings.  As a matter of fact he tackled this in his last days as the Roman Pontiff.  HERE

What Francis did in the fervorino today must, I think, be read in terms of what Francis himself has been saying, as well as in terms of what Pope Benedict did.

For example, a week ago Saturday, Francis slapped down dissenters from doctrine in his fervorino.  HERE.  He hit pretty hard, too.  Francis said, just over a week ago, that negotiating away parts of the Faith is “the path of apostasy, of disloyalty to the Lord”.

He has a “path” and “journey” image there. He uses the same image today… going forward or going backward. Francis did not say “turn back the clock”.  At Fishwrap editor Tom Fox wrote a piece about his fervorino and twice misquotes “turn back the clock”.  They don’t read Italian over there or check the Italian, I guess.  And how much attention did Fox and the National Schismatic Reporter give to Francis harsh words about dissenters?  I think you know the answer.

Let’s go to the next step and review what Benedict did.

Benedict did a lot to get the SSPX back into the fold, but he did not give them ice cream cones, either.   For example, Benedict played hardball with the SSPX through the Doctrinal Preamble.  Remember when Benedict lifted the excommunications of the SSPX bishops?  Here is what Benedict wrote to the world’s bishops in 2009:

The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, [NB] in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.

In light of this situation, it is my intention henceforth to join the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” – the body which has been competent since 1988 for those communities and persons who, coming from the Society of Saint Pius X or from similar groups, wish to return to full communion with the Pope – to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This will make it clear that the problems now to be addressed are essentially doctrinal in nature and concern primarily the acceptance of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar magisterium of the Popes.

Is Francis really that far from Benedict in this matter?

Posted in Benedict XVI, Ecclesiae unitatem, Our Catholic Identity, SSPX, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The Drill, The future and our choices, Throwing a Nutty, Vatican II, What are they REALLY saying? | Tagged , , , , ,
200 Comments

Happy Birthday Benedict XVI!

Posted on 16 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Today is Benedict XVI’s 86th birthday.

I will say Holy Mass today for his intention.

Will you all stop and say a prayer for Benedict, perhaps even several times today?  Ask others to do so as well?

He has great devotion to Our Lady.  Perhaps you could say the Rosary for him.

We all owe him much gratitude.

 

Posted in Benedict XVI, Just Too Cool | Tagged
32 Comments

Boston’s Wake

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In your charity, please pray for the victims in Boston and for their loved ones.

As some prepare for wakes, this is a wake up call for a country and for families and individuals.

One of the most important petitions we Catholics have traditionally prayed is:

“A subitanea et improvisa morte… From a sudden and unprovided death, spare us O Lord.”

A sudden death can be a blessing.

A sudden and unprovided death is a horrifying prospect.

What is an “unprovided death”? One by which you die – and you will die – without the Last Rites from the priest or a chance to repent of unconfessed sins even with a perfect act of contrition.

You want to have your temporal affairs in order.  How much more should we have our spiritual affairs in order?  You don’t know the place or the hour.

LUKE 12:20!

There are many good prayers which we could use to ask God to help us to a good death.

Here is a traditional prayer which once was enriched with an indulgence.

A PRAYER FOR DELIVERANCE FROMAN UNPROVIDED DEATH

Hear us, O God of our salvation! and issue not the decree for the completion of our days before Thou forgivest us our sins; and because penance avails not in hell, and there is no room there for amendment, therefore do we humbly pray and beseech Thee here on earth, that, giving us time to pray for pardon, Thou wouldst grant us also forgiveness of our sins. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Take away, merciful Lord, all errors from Thy faithful people, avert from them the sudden destruction of the wasting pestilence; that those whose wanderings Thou dost justly chastise, Thou wouldst vouchsafe in Thy tender pity to cherish when corrected. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Antiphon: Sin no longer, O my soul! Think upon the sudden change from sin to endless woe. There, in hell, penance is not accepted, and tears profit not. Turn, then, whilst thou hast time; cry out and say: Have mercy upon me, O my God!

Antiphon: In the midst of life we are in death: whom, then, O Lord, shall we seek to be our helper, save Thee, O Lord! although Thou art indeed angry with us because of sins? O Holy Lord, holy and strong, holy and merciful Saviour! deliver us not ever to a bitter death.

V. – Lest, overtaken by the day of death, we seek time for penance, and be not able to find it.

R. – Hearken! O Lord! and have mercy on us; for we have sinned against Thee.

We beseech Thee, Almighty God, receive in Thy fatherly pity Thy people flying to Thee from Thine anger; that they who fear to be chastised by the rod of Thy Majesty in the suddenness of death, may be made worthy to rejoice in Thy gracious pardon. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

We beseech Thee, Almighty God, graciously to incline Thine ear to the assembly of Thy Church, and let Thy mercy prevent Thine anger in our behalf; for if Thou shouldst mark iniquities, no creature shall be able to stand before Thee: but in that marvellous charity, through which Thou didst create us, pardon us sinners, and destroy not the work of Thine own hands by sudden death. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

O God! in Whose sight every heart trembles and every conscience is awed; show forth Thy mercy upon us Thy suppliants, that we, who trust not in the excellence of our own merit, may never know Thy judgments in the suddenness of our death, but may receive Thy pardon. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Prayer

Most merciful Lord Jesus! by Thine agony and bloody sweat, and by Thy death, deliver me, I beseech Thee, from a sudden and unprovided death. O most gentle Lord Jesus! by Thy cruel and ignominious scourging and crowning with thorns, by Thy cross and most bitter Passion, and by Thy goodness, I humbly pray Thee, let me not die unprepared and pass from this life without the Holy Sacraments. Jesus, my best Beloved, my Lord! by all Thy labours and sorrows, by Thy precious Blood, and by Thy most holy Wounds, and by those last words spoken on the cross by Thee: “Deus meus, Deus meus, ut quid dereliquisti me?? – “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” and again: “Pater, in manus tuas commendo spiritum meum,” – “Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit,” most ardently I pray Thee, save me from a sudden death. Thy hands, O Redeemer! have wholly made and formed me: ah! suffer not death to take me unawares; give me, I beseech Thee, time for penance; vouchsafe that I may pass from this life happily in Thy grace, that I may love Thee with my whole heart, and praise and bless Thee forever and ever.

Amen.

Our Father…
Hail Mary…
Glory Be To The Father…

My dear people… dear readers… GO TO CONFESSION.

Parents of small children… teach your children their Faith and make sure they are making good confessions and good Communions.  Give them a good example.

Fathers, please… go to confession and hear confessions.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Four Last Things, GO TO CONFESSION, Our Catholic Identity, TEOTWAWKI | Tagged , , , ,
19 Comments

Sr. Simone Campbell spins the CDF smackdown of the LCWR. Hilarity ensues.

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In a story about the CDF smackdown on the LCWR, USA Today quotes Sr. Simone Campbell of the ultra-poltical, ultra-liberal Nuns on the Bus crowd.

Sr. Campbell is too smart actually to believe this, but let’s read it anyway:

[…] Sister Simone Campbell of Network, a Catholic social justice lobbying group, said Monday that she would wait and see how this plays out across time and changes in Vatican bureaucracy that may be ahead under Francis.

“The censure (of the LCWR) has always been about politics.  [?!?] And politics are shifting in the church right now. We know when politics shift, there are opportunities and there are risks,” said Campbell.

“But we are concerned that Catholic sisters below the decision-making level are caught in the bigger picture of Vatican politics. We’re sort of the soccer ball here. My most optimistic self had hoped that CDF report would never be mentioned again but in light of the broader politics, I think it was overly optimistic of me,” Campbell said.

[…]

Politics.

Riiiiight.  What a rich fantasy life.

They are all just poor little soccer balls, being kicked around by the boys.  It’s all just a political game and the poor nuns are caught in the middle.

This is about doctrine not politics.  Read for yourself the doctrinal assessment of the LCWR by the CDF.  HERE

Dear readers, allow me to remind you of the LCWR’s keynote speaker for their last assembly.  Barbara Marx Hubbard.   She described herself on her Facebook page: “I am an 82 year old Visionary enjoying “Regenopause 2.” Regenopause 1 is from 50 to 80. # 2 is 80 and beyond. I feel I am here to be a voice for the Collective Emergence of humanity as a Co-creative Universal Species!”  Hubbard is into some seriously messed up stuff.  More on her HERE

No, Sister Campbell, the nuns are not innocent victims.

The nuns brought it on themselves when they started to “move beyond the Church” and even beyond Jesus.

Posted in Liberals, Throwing a Nutty, Women Religious | Tagged , , ,
43 Comments

Pope Francis: “Where there is calumny, there is Satan himself.”

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Today, in his fervorino at Mass, Pope Francis again mentioned the Enemy of your soul, the Devil.

He talks about the Devil frequently when speaking off the cuff.

From the site of Vatican Radio with my emphases and comments:

The Pope drew inspiration from the daily readings, in particular the first reading that recounts the episode of Stephen, the first martyr of the Church, being dragged before the Sanhedrin because of his witness to the Gospel. Pope Francis noted that Stephen was a victim of calumny. He is accused of “false witness” but it is not a “fair fight, a fight between good men”, noted Pope Francis, because Stephen’s enemies chose the path of a dirty fight, “the path of calumny”. Calumny he continued is worse than sin – it is the direct expression of Satan.
“We are all sinners; all of us. We all commit sins. But calumny is something else. It is of course a sin, too, but it is something more. Calumny aims to destroy the work of God, and calumny comes from a very evil thing: it is born of hatred. And hate is the work of Satan. Calumny destroys the work of God in people, in their souls. Calumny uses lies to get ahead. And let us be in no doubt, eh?: Where there is calumny, there is Satan himself. ”
From the behaviour of the accusers, Pope Francis then turned his attention to the accused. Stephan, he noted, does not return falsehood with falsehood: “He does not want to go that way to save himself. He looks to the Lord and obeys the law”, being in the peace and truth of Christ. And that Pope Francis said “is what happens in the history of the Church“, because from the first martyr until today there have been numerous examples of those who have witnessed to the Gospel with great courage:
“But the age of martyrs is not yet over, [Get that?  Don’t imagine that you are safe just because you don’t live in modern Nigeria or 20th century Mexico or ancient Rome.] even today we can say, in truth, that the Church has more martyrs now than during the first centuries. [St. Augustine Zhao Rong and 119 companions, 498 Spanish martyrs, …] The Church has many men and women who are maligned through calumny, who are persecuted, who are killed in hatred of Jesus, in hatred of the faith: some are killed because they teach the catechism, others are killed because they wear the cross … Today, in many countries, they are maligned, they are persecuted … they are our brothers and sisters who are suffering today, in this age of the martyrs“.
And again Pope Francis repeated “The age of martyrs is not yet over, the Church has more martyrs now than during the first centuries”. This age of “such great spiritual turmoil” reminded the Pope of an ancient Russian icon that depicts Our Lady covering the people of God with her mantle:
“We pray to Our Lady to protect us, and in times of spiritual turbulence the safest place is under the mantle of Our Lady. [Schutzmantelmadonna!] She is the mother who takes care of the Church. And in this time of martyrs, she is the protagonist, the protagonist of protection: She is the Mother. (…) Let us state with faith: Mother, the Church is under your protection: Care for the Church. ‘”

Just the other day, the Pope spoke about the harm caused by gossip.

What is calumny?  From the good old Catholic Dictionary:

Calumny is the deprivation of another of his good name by imputing to him, behind his back, something injurious to his reputation of which the speaker or writer knows he is innocent. It incurs an obligation of making restitution so far as possible.

Related to calumny is detraction.

Detraction covers those sins commonly referred to as uncharitable talk; it is unjustly depriving another of his good name behind his back, either by calumny or by saying that which is true; in the latter case there is no right to publish what is true against him without just cause if it is not publicly known, for every man has a right to his good reputation so long as he can retain it.  But for a just cause (e.g., the public good, or to protect the innocent) the secret sin of another may be made known.   The degree of seriousness of detraction is in accordance with the harm done the person detracted and the malice of the speaker; being a sin against justice as well as charity it leaves an obligation of making restitution as far as possible.  He who by listening to detraction encourages it actively or passively sins equally with the detractor.

Note the obligation to make restitution.  If you publicly detract from a person’s reputation, you must make equally public corrections and/or apologies.

Be careful of those dark, satanic feathers.  They seem to very light, harmless even.  But they can kill.  Once they are out of the pillow, you won’t be able to collect them and get them back into the pillow again.

Posted in Four Last Things, Francis, Modern Martyrs, Our Catholic Identity, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , , ,
9 Comments

Fr. James Martin’s spin on the CDF smackdown of the LCWR

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The spin continues.

Another example comes from Fr. James Martin, SJ of America Magazine.    (Remember his Twitter campaign to show appreciation of the nuns?)

Martin’s arguments against despair over CDF’s smackdown of the the LCWR do not convince.   This is a good example of what is called “special pleading”.  Here are his arguments.

1) Pope Francis is new to the job and, therefore, he doesn’t want to undo something the CDF was doing under Benedict XVI.

I guess that is why he refused to use the mozzetta or other papal garb, why he put aside Benedict’s ferula (though it sounds like he may use it again), and why he isn’t living in the Apostolic palace.   He is convening the Gang of 8 to undo Benedict’s curia.  He has only provisionally confirmed Benedict’s appointments to the highest curial offices.  It’s all because he doesn’t want to undo things that were going on under Benedict.

That’s right!  The one thing Francis really wouldn’t want to do, is go against Benedict’s policy concerning the LCWR.

2) He probably didn’t follow the LCWR affair closely before he was Pope and, therefore, is just going along with the CDF until he learns more.

Translation: the CDF is lying to him.  If this were true, Pope Francis didn’t benefit much from all that great Jesuit training.  Apparently, he isn’t able to grasp an explanation or the history of the LCWR affair.  Otherwise, it could mean that Francis is shallow or craven, that he can’t say “No, let’s wait and keep this quiet until I get the full picture.”

What Martin may be missing here is that a) he does understand what is going on, b) the CDF’s briefing on this was convincing, and c) he really does agree with the CDF.

3) The appointment of the Franciscan (read: gosh, he must be poor and humble and nice and really compassionate and not all legalistic and stuff), as Secretary of the Congregation for Religious serves as a counterweight to the CDF’s newest meanie, mean, unfair, nun-bashing, knuckle-dragger move.

What is lost in this explanation is that the Congregation for Religious is pretty much irrelevant now that the CDF has its own process underway.  The CDF trumps everyone in this matter because it concerns doctrine, not whether the sisters are living in apartments, or wearing veils, or have two or three years for novices…. if LCWR groups have any novices, that is.

4) Since Francis was also a religious (a Jesuit), he’ll probably be sympathetic in the future.

Translation: the CDF is not really telling him the truth.  Once the nuns get a chance to talk to him, he’ll switch to their side.

It could be that Francis’ experience as a Jesuit might not work in the sisters’ favor.  Francis battled mightily to keep his brethren in order when it came to the introduction of Liberation Theology when he was the Jesuit provincial in Argentina.  He would have had to fight his brethren, other provincials in Latin America and also Jesuit HQ in Rome.  And he was treated pretty badly by his brethren, too.  He fought and stood firm against bad theology.

Does anyone think that the guy who fought that hard and at such great cost against bad theology is going to go against the recommendation of the CDF and go over to the side of a bunch of women religious who are moving “beyond the Church” and beyond Jesus?

I have a strong dubitation.

Lastly, Fr. Martin does not think this spells doom for the LCWR.

Pope Francis and the CDF didn’t exactly send the sisters an ice cream cone.

The leaders of the LCWR have a choice.  Conform and reform or be prepared for the consequences which are as sure to result as the night follows the day.

Posted in Brick by Brick, Liberals | Tagged , ,
14 Comments

Fishwrap starts to spin Holy See’s smackdown of the LCWR

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Let the games begin!

The Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter) is now between a rock and a hard spot.

The NSR and LCWR are practically one flesh.  At the same time, NSR has been crooning about Pope Francis new “humble” style.

I have been predicting that liberals will eventually turn on Francis (HERE). He will reaffirm things that they want overturned and they will go for him.

The CDF’s Francis-approved smackdown of the LCWR today present a dilemma.

Over at the NSR, there is a first attempt to spin out from between the rock and hard spot.

The writer, Joshua McElwee, has been among the most zealous supporters of the LCWR.

Watch how McElwee attempts to redirect attention from Francis’ involvement to the role of dicasteries of the Roman Curia.

Pope Francis reaffirms LCWR critique, plan to reform
Joshua J. McElwee

[…]

Notice of Monday’s meeting could reawaken a divide between members of the Vatican bureaucracy over how to handle the sisters’ group.

While the doctrinal congregation may be taking a hard-line approach, [the villain of the story] the Vatican congregation responsible for overseeing the work of religious orders [the good guys] around the world recently has taken a more sensitive tack, even indicating it sought dialogue with the sisters.  [What a load of … peach cobbler!  “hard-line”… “dialogue”… “sensitive”… If you can clear that loud buzzing from your head as you read this, the CDF has been in constant “dialogue” with the LCWR.  McElwee suggests that the CDF refuses to “listen”, as opposed to the “sensitive” Congregation.  Did an LCWR sister ghost write this for him?]

The April 6 appointment of Franciscan Fr. José Rodríguez Carballo as the second-in-command of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Pope Francis’ first appointment to the Vatican bureaucracy, seemed to approve the softer approach: [Oh?] Rodríguez’s colleagues said he is someone who seeks collaboration rather than conflict.

[…]

McElwee is dodging a couple things.

The CDF is the only dicastery that matters for the LCWR right now.

Pope Francis approved what the CDF did today.

Keep your eyes on the ball! 

Posted in Brick by Brick, Liberals, Women Religious | Tagged , , , ,
20 Comments

Recent LCWR statements – context for the Holy See’s smackdown

Posted on 15 April 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Today the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith smacked down, hard, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.  This is, as you may remember, the group of leaders of communities of women religious (not all the religious themselves, but the leaders), who have recently been under scrutiny by the Holy See… and rightly so.

When Francis was elected, they issued this statement. HERE

Prayers for Pope Francis
March 13, 2013

The Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) offers its congratulations and heartfelt prayer to Pope Francis as he assumes the papacy at this critical time for the Catholic Church.

Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio demonstrated great dedication to the mission of the Church during his leadership in Argentina. As he serves in the papacy, we trust that his many gifts will continue to be spent on behalf of the universal church, and most especially for people who live in poverty in all parts of the world.

As a conference of leaders of orders of Catholic sisters in the United States, we welcome Pope Francis’s spiritual leadership and look forward to working with him in carrying forward the Gospel message.

In the wake of today’s Francis-approved smackdown, they issued this statement. HERE

LCWR Statement on Meeting with CDF
April 15, 2013

On April 15, 2013 Sister Florence Deacon, OSF, LCWR president; Sister Carol Zinn, SSJ, LCWR president-elect; and Sister Janet Mock, CSJ, LCWR executive director; met with Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF); Archbishop Luis Ladaria, secretary of CDF; and other members of the CDF dicastery. Archbishop J. Peter Sartain was also present.

The LCWR officers reviewed the activities of this past year since receiving the report of CDF’s doctrinal assessment of LCWR in April 2012.

In his opening remarks, ArchbishopMüller informed the group the he had met with Pope Francis who “reaffirmed the findings of the assessment and the program of reform for this Conference of Major Superiors“.

The conversation was open and frank. [I’ll bet it was.] We pray that these conversations may bear fruit for the good of the Church.

Although the sisters have been whining for months that they have been treated unfairly by the mean old Vatican men, Francis agrees with the CDF.

Francis agrees that the sisters need to change they ways.

Posted in Francis, Magisterium of Nuns, Our Catholic Identity, Women Religious | Tagged , , ,
33 Comments