“It was impossible to say Mass in the barrack, of course.”

Posted on 19 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

With God in RussiaOur religious liberties are not to be taken for granted.  I sometimes consider what I might do when they come for priests and bishops who continue faithfully to preach Catholic doctrine fully.

When my mind goes down this dark track, I inevitably recall what I read With God In Russia by Fr. Walter Ciszek, SJ, imprisoned during the Cold War years for being a Catholic priest. [UK link HERE.]

I finally looked up the passages I recalled from reading the book years ago.

It was impossible to say Mass in the barrack, of course. From time to time, however, Nestrov and I would take a walk into the forest, when we were free from work, and say Mass there. We used a big stump as our altar, and while one of us offered the Holy Sacrifice the other stood guard on the road. It was an experience I’ll never forget. In the heavy silence of the thick forest, you could hear the chipmunks running and the birds gathering overhead. Suddenly, you seemed very close to nature and to God. Everything seemed beautiful and somehow mysterious, all dangers for a time remote.

At other times, if we had an hour alone but couldn’t leave camp to say Mass, we would take turns reciting and memorizing the prayers of the Mass until we knew them all by heart. We were always aware that the Mass kit might be discovered, and we would lose our book and vestments, but we were determined that as long as we could get bread and wine we would try to say Mass.

 

And later…

After breakfast, I would say Mass by heart–that is, I would say all the prayers, for of course I couldn’t actually celebrate the Holy Sacrifice. I said the Angelus morning, noon, and night as the Kremlin clock chimed the hours. Before dinner, I would make my noon examen (examination of conscience); before going to bed at night I’d make the evening examen and points for the morning meditation, following St. Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises. Every afternoon, I said three rosaries–one in Polish, one in Latin, and one in Russian–as a substitute for my breviary. After supper, I spent the evening reciting prayers and hymns from memory or even chanting them out loud: the Anima Christi, the Veni Creator, the Salve Regina, the Veni, Sancte Spiritus, especially the Dies Irae and the Miserere–all the things we had memorized in the novitiate as novices, the hymns we had sung during my years in the Society, the prayers I had learned as a boy back home. Sometimes I’d spend hours trying to remember a line that had slipped my memory, sounding it over and over again until I had it right. During these times of prayer, I would also make up my own prayers, talking to God directly, asking for His help, but above all accepting His will for me, trusting completely to His Providence to see me through whatever might lie ahead. (pp. 88-89)

Fathers, seminarians, do you memorize?   It could be good to memorize a Mass formula, such as the classic Votive Mass of the Blessed Virgin Mary along with the Ordinary of Mass.

Frankly, we all should have the necessary prayers of Holy Mass memorized, right?

Parents, perhaps you could motivate your children (and yourselves) to memorize prayers and hymns and catechism answers through some prizes and so forth.

Memorization fell out of favor.  But once you have something memorized, it’s yours in way that it otherwise is … not.

Posted in Semper Paratus, TEOTWAWKI, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , ,
27 Comments

US Embassy in Rome warns US citizens about “Potential for Terrorist Attacks”

Posted on 18 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Everyone, I call upon you to pray for the defeat or conversion of Islamists.

Friends in Rome.. please… keep your heads on a swivel.  Be alert.  Stay frosty.  Go to confession.

Italy has tightened up security in the wake of Paris and on the verge of the opening of the Year of Mercy.  HERE

This has been sent via email to American ex-pats in Italy.

UNITED STATES EMBASSY ROME, ITALY

Security Message for U.S. Citizens: Potential for Terrorist Attacks

November 18, 2015

U.S. Embassy Rome informs U.S. citizens that the following locations have been identified as potential targets in Rome and Milan for terrorist attacks:

  • St. Peter’s Basilica in Vatican City (Rome)
  • the Duomo and La Scala in Milan
  • General venues such as churches, synagogues, restaurants, theatres, and hotels in both cities are possible targets as well.

Terrorist groups may possibly utilize similar methods used in the recent Paris attacks.  The Italian authorities are aware of these threats.

U.S. citizens are advised to remain vigilant and aware of their surroundings.  We encourage U.S. citizens to monitor media and local information sources and factor updated information into personal travel plans and activities.

For further information:

o    U.S. Consulate General in Naples  can be reached at (+39) 081-583-8111; the fax number is (+39) 081-583-8275/081-761-1804

o    U.S. Consulate General in Milan is located at Via Principe Amedeo, 2/10 and is open from 8:30am to 12:00pm for emergency services.  If you are a U.S. citizen in need of urgent assistance, the emergency number for the U.S. Consulate General in Milan is (+39) 02-290-351.

o    U.S. Consulate General Florence is located at Lungarno A. Vespucci, 38 and is open from 9:00am to 12:30pm for emergency services.  After hours emergency number for U.S. citizens is +(39) 055-266-951

o    U.S. Embassy to the Holy See is located on Via Sallustiana, Rome and can be reach after hours at +(39) 06-46741

  • Call 1-888-407-4747 toll-free in the United States and Canada or 1-202-501-4444 from other countries from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday (except U.S. federal holidays).

  • Follow us on Twitterand Facebook.

Everyone, I call upon you to pray for the defeat or conversion of Islamists.

Friends in Rome.. please… keep your heads on a swivel.  Be alert.  Stay frosty.  Go to confession.

Posted in The Religion of Peace | Tagged ,
20 Comments

After Paris… How do you feel these days? Safe? Less safe?

Posted on 18 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I don’t know about you, but over the last year or so I have become increasingly disciplined regarding my situation awareness.  When I get out of my car, I look around to see where everyone is.  When I walk out the door, I look around to see where everyone is.  When I walk into a place, I look around.  I know where the doors and exits are.  I see where everyone is, who comes in after me.  If I see someone that looks or behaves oddly, I keep an eye on them.

Since the attacks in Paris, I have been thinking about posting a poll about how you feel these days, but I can’t quite get the questions down.  So…I’ll just ask:

How do you feel these days?  Safe?  Less safe?  Are you afraid to go to public venues?  Malls?  Movie theaters?  Soft targets?

I have to go to New York City for a charity event in December and so I was talking by phone with a friend there about taking in the new Star Wars movie on opening night.  Afterward, out of curiosity, I brought up a movie schedule website to see where in Manhattan it would be playing.   Then it hit me: opening night of Star Wars… in Manhattan… in a movie theater.  Soft tempting terror target?  You bet.  “Do I really want to do that?”, I thought.

At IJReview, Erick Erickson has some thought provoking comments.

After Paris, I Want to Take My Gun to Star Wars

I have never worried or fretted about things like this. Even after the Aurora, CO, shooting at the “Dark Knight Rises” showing, I never once worried about going to a theater and getting shot. I have taken the view of Stonewall Jackson that, believing in God, I am as safe on the battlefield as I am in my bed. Of course, Stonewall Jackson was killed on the battlefield.

After the events of Paris and in light of the unvetted Syrian refugees coming into this country, I am rather nervous about going to the opening day of “Star Wars.” If I were a terrorist and wanted to find a large, unsecured gathering of Americans without arms, I would show up with a bomb at the local cinema on opening day of “Star Wars.”

Most theaters have policies that prohibit their patrons from carrying guns in. Gun owners, law abiding folks that they are, then tend to leave their guns in their cars when they go to the movies. [In NYC people are denied their 2nd amendment rights.] A terrorist or nut job ignoring the law could do a lot of damage before anyone could respond. A terrorist with an undetected bomb strapped to himself could do even more damage.

There are no metal detectors at the theater.

I would like to find a theater in my area that allowed concealed carry permit holders to bring their guns to the movies. In Brazil, crime has gotten so bad, the government has now passed a wide ranging gun liberalization law. The citizens can now carry guns to defend themselves since the government has been unable to protect them. [That’s the case in a growing number of American cities.] At American theaters, the American citizens should be put in the same position as Brazilian citizens. We should be allowed to arm ourselves to protect ourselves.

I typically am never worried about these things. The stories tend to be remote. [These things always happen to someone else… until they happen to you.] They tend to not bother me. But in Paris, the terrorists went to a music concert and went to a soccer game. They went where unarmed masses were and where security was poor. The terrorists at the soccer game were stopped by security nonetheless. But that was not the case at the theater.

[…]

Read the rest there.

Whether you are a gun owner or not, a gun carrier or not, and even if you are an opponent of gun ownership, it seems to me that we all need to exercise real prudence these days and situational awareness.    If everyone were more alert when out and about (rather than keeping eyes glued to the damn phone screen with loud music in ear buds), bad guys would have a harder time making people into victims.

I say, make it really hard for bad guys to do their bad guy things.  Make it dangerous for them.  Make them want to be somewhere else.

Have you changed anything in your life because of the fear of terrorist attacks or rising crime?   Have you had a serious conversation about any of these things with a friend or a loved one?

And remember… GO TO CONFESSION!

Posted in GO TO CONFESSION, Semper Paratus, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, The Religion of Peace | Tagged
85 Comments

ASK FATHER: The mantelletta and other clerical gear were “abolished” but under Summorum Pontificum can they be used? Wherein Fr. Z rants.

Posted on 18 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

mantelletta and cappaFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I am writing with a follow up question to your post yesterday (16 November) on the subject of the mantelletta. HERE In your response to the reader, you mentioned the (dolorous) decision, issued motu proprio, of the blessed pope, Paul VI, that white washed Catholic liturgy by flattening out the hierarchy and their attire.  Alas, think of what a papal procession may have looked like, in various times of the year!

In any case, my question is this, although the law of Pope Paul concerning mantellettas is in vigor, how is it now to be understood in light of Summorum Pontificum and, even more, of Universae Ecclesiae.  That is to say, since the liturgical laws in force in 1962 are to be followed by Bishops , would it not be the case that a Bishop outside of his own Diocese (and the other occasions on which it is to be worn) and Cardinals in Rome would be required to wear a mantelletta when engaged in anything connected to the more ancient form of the Mass?  Is it not also so, then, that every Bishop should have a mantelletta tailored so as to “be prepared for every good work”?

When you read the 1969 Instruction on the “Dress, Titles, and Coat of Arms of Cardinals, Bishops and Lesser Prelates,” approved by Paul VI, you often find the word “abolished”: the mantelletta is “abolished”, as is the sash with tassels, the red tabarro, the galero and the red plush hat, the colored hose and shoe buckles for lesser prelates, the red tuft on the biretta for prelates of honor, the mantellone for lesser prelates…. All “abolished.”

What does it mean to abolish or suppress an article of clothing?

What is being abolished is the necessity of wearing them. They are not forbidden. In the instruction, nowhere is it stated, “Cardinals may not wear…”.  It simply states that certain articles of clothing are “abolished” or sometimes “suppressed”.

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you are squealing like piglets. “The Pope clearly wanted to get rid of all this … this… frippery!  This is proof that you hate Vatican II!  And you hate the poor too!  And mercy!”

Some may find this pedantic, but we must ask:  What does the author of the Instruction really say about the motivation behind abolishing the obligation of wearing such things?

Having referred to “spiritual values”, the author of the document writes of the sensitivity of the modern mentality to avoid extremes, to bring decorum into harmony with simplicity, practicality, and a spirit of humility and poverty,

“which must always and preeminently shine forth in those who, by their investiture in ecclesiastical offices, have some special responsibility in the service of the People of God.”

The committee which was given the task of studying this issue prior to the promulgation of the this instruction was cautioned to “take account, at the same time and in just measure, tradition, modern needs, and deeper values implicit in certain forms of living, exterior and contingent though they be.”

Thus, the motive for the “abolishing” of certain articles of clothing had in mind the need to keep things simple, to demonstrate humility and obedience, and to attend to the needs and mindset of the modern mind.

However…

The modern mind of 2015 is not the same as the modern mind of 1969.

In this last half century, the world has moved beyond some of the assumptions of the 1960’s. While modern dress has arguably gotten more casual, great attention – even obsession – is paid to presentation, grooming, and appearance.  Watch TV commercials.

Furthermore, individuality is king! Those who shun those trends and overarching individuality and put on a regulated uniform now stick out.

I think that the counter-cultural “sign value” of clerical dress is even more important today than it was in 1969.  This goes for choir dress, too.

Summorum Pontificum does not seek to create a sort of “Colonial Williamsburg” liturgy.  It does not intend to recreate a moment in the past merely for historical curiosity. A central point of Benedict’s reform is to recapture and reintegrate the spirit of the ancient liturgy of the Church, our heritage, which is ever sacred and valid.  This is vital for an effective renewal of every sphere of the Church’s life and mission.  In all our endeavors we begin with and return to our liturgical worship of God.

Therefore, obedience to the liturgical dress – and that includes choir dress – required at the reference year Summorum Pontificum designated, will again today instill a proper sense of humility and order.

It’s not “What I want to wear”, but rather, “What do the books require that I wear?”, and subsequently “Will I subjugate myself own desire to the requirements of that spirit and decorum?”

The use of a mantelletta was a mark of humility for those greater prelates who wore it. Whereas the mozzetta demonstrated jurisdiction, the mantelletta showed a humbling of that jurisdiction before the greater jurisdiction of the local bishop or, in Rome, the Holy Father himself.

In this time radical individualism, clerical dress is a powerful counter-cultural sign.

Proper choir dress reveals a spirit of humility.  Submission to the ordering of seniority and hierarchy and jurisdiction is a spiritual value that clerics need to foster.  For example, the place of clerics in processions and in seating in choir followed certain rules.  They are followed loosely, but they are known.  Furthermore, this humble ordering is a value that seminarians and young priests should experience, for the sake of their own priestly identity which includes the service of the Church in humility.   (As an aside, study your average Novus Ordo entrance procession with a lot of clergy these days.  Not terribly edifying, is it.  But I digress.)

In sum, the obligation to wear these old things is no longer in force.  They may be worn, but it is not obligatory. (On a side note, the obligation that women once had to cover their heads in Church is no longer in force, but that doesn’t mean that they must not now wear hats or veils.  Maniples and birettas were once obligatory for Mass.  Now they are not.  They may be used, but they aren’t requirements. But I digress.)

In the context of liturgical celebrations with with Extraordinary Form, the older gear may be worn, but it is not obligatory.  The newer rules for choir dress may be followed as well, though it would probably be better to follow the older rules.

francis_benedict_election_MozzettaRemember, Fathers and seminarians, that a mantelletta or a certain kind of fascia or a buckle, or a mozzetta, in themselves, are not going to get us to heaven on their own.  For example, bishops and popes – even the Pope of the current parenthesis – don’t have to wear the mozzetta all the time.  There are, however, occasions in which such trappings and signs of office, solemn and traditional, have their proper place.  They send signals.  The non-use of these symbols also sends signals.  Frankly, I think it is wrong for the Pope to dress down in certain formal occasions, such as audiences with heads of state, or consistories, or the Urbi et Orbi blessings, etc.  I don’t see it as “humble” at all.  I see it more as that radical individuality that I mentioned, above. Other Popes did it, all his predecessors did, but he doesn’t? Sometimes we have to conform and put on all the gear as a sign of respect for office and for others.  But… enough of that.  He’s Pope and I’m not and this isn’t the pressing issue we face right now.  I’ll conform to my style of dress, suited to my station, in choro and on other occasions.

People who say that these things are not important, or are bad, or that they should be eliminated are just plain wrong.  That is a naive, shallow, approach to who we are. Liberals have a spittle-flecked nutty over these things. I say that Catholics are not “either/or” when it comes to the dynamic interplay of the humble and the lofty.  We are “both/and”, in proper measure, time and place.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, Seminarians and Seminaries, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , ,
10 Comments

Mercy requires Truth and the move away from sin. “Mercy is not moral peek-a-boo.”

Posted on 18 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Mercy requires Truth and the move away from sin. "Mercy is not moral peek-a-boo."

Some folks are blabbing about mercy mercy mercy while shoving truth under the rug.  They suggest that mercy trumps truth, dogma, law conversion, etc.  Wrong. We have to call people on that.

There is a good article at Crisis Magazine today about Mercy and its lately neglected twin TRUTH.

St. John Paul II: No Mercy Without Truth

by John M. Grodelski

Mercy featured prominently in the polemics surrounding the recently concluded Synod on the Family. Mercy was frequently counterpoised to dogma as an appeal to dilute ecclesiastical practice and admit to Holy Communion those who were now “remarried.” Cardinal Kasper went so far as to publish a book between the 2014 and 2015 Synod sessions, Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life(New York: Paulist, 2014).

One might walk away from these events with the impression that, suddenly, the Church had discovered its vocation to mercy and was now busy making up for lost time when it was, presumably, unmerciful. Yet one should remember that St. John Paul II was the Pope who laid enormous stress upon Divine Mercy, emphasizing it as God’s premier attribute particularly relevant for contemporary man, and underscoring that focus by making the canonization of the “secretary of mercy,” Sr. Faustyna Kowalska, the first of the new millennium. If St. John Paul II’s first encyclical, Redemptor hominis, laid out the programmatic focus of his pontificate as one of Christian humanism, so we should not forget that his second encyclical, Dives in misericordia—issued 35 years ago this November 30—focused on the God who is “rich in mercy.” So much for the myth of the Church just awakening to her mission of mercy.

In the course of remembrance, however, we should go back even further, to a probably largely forgotten text from St. John Paul II’s prepapal writings, “Problem prawdy i milosierdzia” (The Problem of Truth and Mercy). That short text dates from 1957 and was one of twenty brief articles printed under the title “Elementarz etyczny” [The Ethics Primer] in Tygodnik Powszechny, the independent Catholic weekly then-published in Kraków. The articles in that series largely grapple with issues in modern philosophy having implications for faith and are distinguished by their succinct presentation of those questions in the light of faith.

[…]

Mercy, likewise, is not moral peek-a-boo. Mercy requires moving away from evil: “Where [mercy] enters in, evil effectively gives way. Where evil does not give way, mercy is not there—but we also add, where there is no mercy, evil does not yield. Mercy does not accept sin nor looks upon it as if peeking between one’s fingers, but only and exclusively helps in conversion from sin….  Divine mercy goes strictly in tandem with justice” (all translations mine).

[…]

I interrupt this sample to remind you of my call to Pope Francis to name John Paul Doctor of the Church with the title Doctor Misericordiae on Divine Mercy Sunday. HERE (Maybe some people who initially resisted me on this have finally started to figure out why I called for this?)

Skipping a bit to show how instructive this article is… this relates to the recent Catholic/Lutheran confusion provoked by comments made by the Holy Father. HERE and HERE

[…]

The scrupulous nominalist Martin Luther imported this voluntarism into Protestant theology through his doctrine of forensic justification: man is always sinful and never righteous, he is merely declared righteous by God, grace changing nothing. Man is moral dung. Grace is snow. The snow covers the dung, but does not change it: don’t go tip-toeing through the snowdrops barefoot…

[…]

Read the rest there.  It’s worth your time and attention.

 

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , , , ,
5 Comments

YOUR URGENT PRAYER REQUESTS

Posted on 17 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

YOUR URGENT PRAYER REQUESTSPlease use the sharing buttons! Thanks!

Registered or not, will you in your charity please take a moment look at the requests and to pray for the people about whom you read?

Continued from THESE.

I get many requests by email asking for prayers. Many requests are heart-achingly grave and urgent.

As long as my blog reaches so many readers in so many places, let’s give each other a hand. We should support each other in works of mercy.

If you have some prayer requests, feel free to post them below.

You have to be registered here to be able to post.

I still have a pressing personal petition.  Really.

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
37 Comments

Some differences between Catholics and Lutherans on Baptism, Eucharist, Priesthood

Posted on 17 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In a comment elsewhere, someone wondered about differences between Catholics and Lutherans.  HERE

I cannot go into deep detail about these differences.  Books can be written about each point, and have been.

Here are my lunch break reflections while the US Bishops are having lunch during their annual meeting.

Keep in mind that I am a former Lutheran convert to the Catholic Church.  I was validly baptized as a Lutheran.  I rejected the Lutheran catechism and instruction when I was 7 years old because I couldn’t square their message about corruption with the beauty of the music of Mozart.  After a vaguely Christian time and a pagan period I was brought into the Church formally in 1982 following private instruction lasting a couple years and involvement in the choir at St. Agnes in St. Paul. My longer story is elsewhere. I made my Profession of Faith according to the traditional, longer form, as found in the Rituale Romanum HERE, publicly during a Vespers service, kneeling in the sanctuary before the Blessed Sacrament exposed.  I renewed my Profession of Faith before I was ordained to the diaconate and to the priesthood at the hands of St. John Paul II.

We Catholics believe all that is contained in the teachings of the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the revealed and defined teachings of the Scriptures and the Magisterium.  God teaches us these things through the Church and we are bound to give assent to them with mind and will.  As we say in the Act of Faith, I firmly believe the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because God has revealed them, Who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

Catholics believe that Christ instituted seven sacraments.  They are outward signs, instituted by Christ, which confer grace.

Lutherans believe in only two sacraments for sure, Baptism and Eucharist, with a possibility of Penance.

They believe different things about the effects of those sacraments.

Insofar as Baptism is concerned, Lutherans believe that, through Baptism, God declares that a sinner is just, counts a sinner among the just, by reason of the imputation (covering of the sinner) with the merits of Christ. The sinner remains corrupt in sin, but the “alien” (i.e., from outside of the sinner, from Christ) merits of Christ cover him over and make him to seem justified. This is a once and for all time event. There are other issues too, concerning grace and works, grace and freedom of will, justification by grace or by faith alone, etc. That said, Baptism conferred by Lutherans is valid despite differences in belief in the effects of Baptism. Some Protestants think that Baptism is only an outward, public sign of one’s inward faith, and that it does not forgive sins or renew us interiorly.

Catholics believe that justification takes a person out of the state of Original Sin and into a state of being an adopted child of God through the action and graces and merits of Christ. Justification is ongoing together with Sanctification, by which the person is renewed. Justification and sanctification are conferred through Baptism, which forgives sins and makes us sons of God and members of the Body of Christ, the Church. The Holy Spirit, infused into us with baptism, justifies and sanctifies us. With the indwelling of the Holy Spirit comes sanctifying grace, which can be lost through sins that are deadly to the spirit, mortal. This state can be regained through the normal means of the Sacrament of Penance (and certain other ways).

As far as the Eucharist is concerned, Catholics believe that, with the consecration by a validly ordained priest (Lutherans do not believe in sacramental ordination that confers an ontological character – rather, every man is his own priest), bread and wine are changed in their substance into the Body and Blood of Christ even though the outward appearance and characteristic accidents of bread and wine remain for our human senses. After this change of substance, trans-substantiation, Christ is truly present in the Eucharistic species, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. So long as the outward accidents remain and the species are recognizable as, in their accidents, being bread and wine, they are still the Eucharist and Christ is truly present in them, even in very small quantities of the Eucharistic Body and Blood. When the Eucharistic species are destroyed or significantly altered in their outward accidents, they cease being the Eucharist and Christ is no longer present in them. Furthermore, we Catholic believe that the celebration of the Eucharist represents and renews and makes present again both the Last Supper of the Lord during His Passion as well as the Sacrifice of Cross on Calvary. The celebration of the Eucharist is Christ’s atoning, propitiatory Sacrifice, which, though it occurred at one fixed point in time, is renewed and made present again through the actions of the priest, who acts as alter Christus. Mass is the true, real, renewal of the Sacrifice in an unbloody way that once took place in a bloody way, historically, on Calvary. This is done through the actions and words of the ordained priest.

Lutherans believe that anyone can celebrate the “Lord’s Supper” (some few Lutherans call it “Mass”) though some are called by the community to preside in the central role. The Lord’s Supper is not the Sacrifice renewed. Lutherans do not believe that the substance of bread and wine change, transubstantiation. They think that Christ is present together with the bread and wine for as long as Christ is needed to be there, a kind of “consubstantiation”. (Some Lutherans don’t like that term, but I’m not getting into that fight.) That is to say, that for Christ to be present, there must be institution, distribution and reception.  If it is not received, Christ isn’t present.  Once no longer needed there for reception, Christ is no longer present and there is left merely bread and wine. They believe Christ is truly present, when required for reception, but not in an enduring way. Luther used the image an iron that is heated and then it cools again: the iron and the heat are there together and then only the iron is there.  However, some Lutheran churches are starting to reserve their eucharistic species and even to adore what they reserve, even kneeling outside their eucharistic communion services.  An interesting development as they become more “sacramental”.  Furthermore, the Lord’s Supper is a memorial merely. It does not renew the Sacrifice of Calvary or the Last Supper, but rather commemorates them. Lutherans believe in a priesthood of all believers. There is no sacramental priesthood or consecration of the Eucharist or sacramental absolution of sins or conferral of confirmation. Matrimony is not a sacrament, nor is anointing. Lutherans have two sacraments, Baptism and “Eucharist”. Their baptism is valid because water is poured on the skin while the Trinitarian form is pronounced. Their “Eucharist” is not the Eucharist. They do not believe it is a sacrament in the sense we do and there is no valid priesthood to confect it, etc. They do not believe, as Catholics do, that sacraments are outward signs instituted by Christ Himself that confer grace. For Lutherans, they are outward signs of realities that are taking place.

Also, I recall when I was younger that, at the Luther Northwestern Seminary in my native place, they would annually have their Lutheran form of “Mass” in Latin.  Yes, there are/were such things.

Lutherans, in a way, look on their confession of sins as a sacrament. Luther referred to “penance” as a sacrament in the Large Catechism. Some Lutheran prayerbooks have a rite for penance. But they do not believe that the action and words of the one who hears that confession and pronounces words of forgiveness are sacramentally effective, as when the Catholic priest gives absolution.

This isn’t everything that can be said about differences between Catholic and Lutheran beliefs.  Books are written about each aspect I touched on.  But this is a start for those who know very little about them.

However, if you are a true Lutheran, you don’t believe what the Catholic Church believes about Eucharist and Priesthood.  Not believing what we believe, you cannot receive Communion in the Catholic Church.  If you believe what the Catholic Church teaches… then you had better become a Catholic in order to be true to yourself.

I would also say, if you are Catholic but you don’t adhere to Catholic teaching, you are in serious trouble, particularly if you have been properly instructed and you choose against Catholic teachings.

The Second Vatican Council issued a spiritual warning in Lumen gentium 14.  Here it is via the Catechism of the Catholic Church when addressing the issue of salvation outside the Church (846ff):

How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it(LG 14).

I quoted LG 14 via the CCC to show that what LG 14 contains isn’t obsolete.

If you are not Catholic, but you have come to believe what the Catholic Church teaches, and you refuse to enter the Church by your own will (not because you are afraid, etc.), you are in serious peril for your eternal soul.

If you are Catholic, but you pick and choose what to believe among those teaches that you are bound to accept, you are in serious peril for your eternal soul.

So, convert if you need conversion.  That might mean for some of you Catholic who won’t submit to the Church’s teachings… don’t put others in peril by your lack of submission and your heresy.  We would prefer to see you come around and believe, and the door is always open to you, but otherwise… get out.

Moderation queue is ON.  Helpful comments might be welcomed.

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism | Tagged
31 Comments

HELP! The dire state of US Military Chaplains

Posted on 17 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
HELP! The dire state of US Military Chaplains

CLICK TO GIVE

The US Bishops are meeting in their annual plenary session.  Yesterday, Most Rev. Timothy Broglio, Archbishop for the Military Services, delivered a presentation on the dire state of the number of chaplains serving the military and their families.

His presentation is dire.  He doesn’t pull punches.   Broglio starts about 34:00.  On demand page HERE: 2015-11-16 Afternoon Session

(This video is no longer available.)

(Apparently either the blog doesn’t like that code or that code doesn’t like this blog.  Interesting.  I wonder if this can be embedded by anyone else.)

He calls on all the bishops to be more open to the service of their priests as military chaplains.

You readers who are not diocesan bishops can’t send men to serve, but you can support the work of military chaplains by sending a donation.

To make a donation online, please go to www.milarch.org/waystogive2

 

 

 

Posted in ACTION ITEM! | Tagged , , ,
16 Comments

Fishwrap’s Thomas Reese, SJ, attacks the US Bishops as they meet for not conforming to his agenda

Posted on 17 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

PopeFrancis_sunlightJesuit Thomas Reese, who was sacked from his post as editor of Amerika Magazine by the directive of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has a piece today at the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter) in which he reprimands the US Bishops even while they are meeting in their annual plenary session.

BTW… since the Bishops are meeting (and many of them are reading this on their smart phones as they meet… PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, Your Eminences and Your Excellencies, strip the NCR of the word “Catholic” from their title.  

Reese’s comments at Fishwrap, riddled through with tisking and finger-wagging that is simultaneously smarmy and condescending, accuse the US bishops of not conforming enough to how he imagines Pope Francis thinks.

Reese points to the list of issues that the US Bishops approved for their focus.  To wit:

Family and marriage
Evangelization
Religious freedom
Human life and dignity
Vocations and ongoing formation

He contrasts the US Bishops’ points with a list from Francis (that he cooked up in his head). To wit:

A poor church for the poor
The church as a field hospital, a church of mercy and compassion
The practice of synodality at all levels of the church
The end of clericalism and the empowerment of the laity
The promotion of justice and peace and the protection of the environment

Reese pits Francis against the US Bishops.

Reese thinks that the activities of the US bishops should depend on a central point of reference (i.e, the list Reese imagines that Pope Francis might make).

Funny…. I don’t recall Reese getting all excited about Pope Benedict’s priorities as an agenda for the US Bishops.

On the other hand, I now bring to the attention of the readership Francis’ own written thoughts about bishop conferences gleaned from Francis’ own Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium.

First…

16. … It is not advisable for the Pope to take the place of local Bishops in the discernment of every issue which arises in their territory. In this sense, I am conscious of the need to promote a sound “decentralization”.

I hope you got that.

Pope Francis thinks that bishops can determine for themselves what issues they need to focus on.  Apparently the Pope trusts the bishops more than Reese.

Next…

32. … The Second Vatican Council stated that, like the ancient patriarchal Churches, episcopal conferences are in a position “to contribute in many and fruitful ways to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit”. Yet this desire has not been fully realized, since a juridical status of episcopal conferences which would see them as subjects of specific attributions, including genuine doctrinal authority, has not yet been sufficiently elaborated. Excessive centralization, rather than proving helpful, complicates the Church’s life and her missionary outreach.

For Reese, when you change Popes you change theologies.

Either you are a centrist and you want the Pope to run bishops conferences, or you are not and you don’t.

It is beyond dispute that a goal for Pope Francis is decentralization.

Ironically, that doesn’t always set well with liberals, who will use anything they can to brow beat the US Bishops into conforming to their will.

What Reese did at Fishwrap reminds me of what the US nuns did during the debates about ObamaCare.   They wanted to impose their own magisterium – The Magisterium of Nuns – over and against the Bishops.

Behold the Magisterium of Reese.

UPDATE:

At any given time the combox over at the Fishwrap is a fever swamp of hatred and invective.   But it is amazing how much the readers over there hate the US bishops.

Dear readers, think before posting and use the Internet Prayer.  A little venting is one thing, the bile you see at Fishwrap is another.

Posted in Liberals | Tagged ,
13 Comments

Thanksgiving and Advent.. it’s COFFEE time!

Posted on 16 November 2015 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Thanksgiving and Advent.. it's COFFEE time!In these USA, Thanksgiving Day is coming up fast.  After that, Advent will be upon us.

You may have need for both hostess gifts when you are invited to people’s homes for Thanksgiving.  You may have need for small gifts for office events or stocking stuffers.

Remember… Mystic Monk Coffee.  

You could give people 5 lbs bags, of course.  Everyone would be happy if you did.  The Carmelites in Wyoming would be happy.  They are building their monastery from this coffee.  The recipients would be happy.  They’d think of you with every cup.  I’d be happy, knowing that you were happy … ehem… and because I get a percentage of the sale.  And, having sparked all this happiness you would be happy too.

Everyone’s happy!  See how easy this is?

And there is the spiritual component as well.   Be sharp for your examination of conscience before you GO TO CONFESSION.

Alternately, you might try the Sampler Page and get a passel o’ little packets of coffee, just 2 oz. each.  They have four different 9 pack sample options and one 30 pack.  (Go for the 30… just do it.)

Also, you are going to need lots of coffee for your own entertaining.

They also have Teas.

Order now.  Get it in time.

Mystic Monk Coffee!  It’s swell!

Thanksgiving and Advent.. it's COFFEE time!

 

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged ,
Comments Off on Thanksgiving and Advent.. it’s COFFEE time!