25 December 2020: Fr. Reginald Foster, OCD – R.I.P. – 1st Anniversary of death

In your kindness please pray for the repose of the soul of a priest friend who died one year ago, today, Christmas Day.

Fr. Reginald Foster, OCD, was a famous Latinist. He was a complicated guy and not always easily comprehended… except in his astonishing gifts as a teacher.

I knew Fr. Foster from the mid-80’s. I attended his summer boot-camps. After I transferred to Rome, for many years I kept attending his “experiences” of Latin, at least twice a week.

There are some YouTube videos of him responding to questions, in Latin, of course. He is already rather badly reduced by that time, but you can see something of the power spark that drove him when he was younger and in better health.

And a kinder fellow, when you were in need, you couldn’t find if you tried.

1st year anniversary of his death.

V: Requiem aeternam dona ei, Domine.
R: Et lux perpetua luceat ei.
V: Requiescat in pace.
R: Amen.
V: Anima eius et animae omnium fidelium defunctorum per misericordiam Dei requiescant in pace.
R: Amen.

Posted in Four Last Things, Priests and Priesthood, Urgent Prayer Requests | Tagged
3 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 370

Photo by The Great Roman™

Today’s Fervorino.

By FSSP seminarians

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
Comments Off on Daily Rome Shot 370

Ed Pentin interviewed the Prefect of the CDW about “Traditionis custodes” and the Dubious Dubia.

At the National Catholic Register, Ed Pentin has an interview with Archbp. Roche, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

Roche’s responses are typical, in that they are replete with buzz words and jargon and the usual specious premises.  These premises will be repeated ad nauseum by the powers that be and subsequently parroted by their camp followers until people surrender under the sheer weight of B as in B, S as in S. Roche’s bottom line in the responses to Pentin’s questions is basically: We have power. You don’t. We are imposing our will on you. Merry Christmas and shut up.

Without the Merry Christmas part.

Some highlights.

When Pentin brought up the fact that canonists have disputed the legitimacy and coherence of both TC and the DD, as well as the obviously central can. 18 (about interpretation of laws) and can. 87 (about the ability of diocesan bishops to dispense from universal disciplinary laws), Roche simply played the canned message: “We have the power now.  We are the law now.” That’s the normal language version.  What he said was, “The responses to the various dubia are evidently legitimate and fully compliant with Canon Law in their elaboration by this Congregation whose authority in this matter is undisputed.”

“Evidently!”  In other words, “Shut up,” he explained.

When Pentin brought up the issue of people being marginalized, Roche emitted a smoke screen.  “…using the Missale Romanum of 1962 is by way of concession and is therefore not the normal provision of the Church’s liturgy as foreseen by the Second Vatican Council.”

Sorry, but the NOVUS ORDO was not foreseen by the Second Vatican Council!  The Novus Ordo is out of step with what the Council Fathers approved in Sacrosanctum Concilium.   Read the document and then think about the Novus Ordo.

Then he added some gas with the smoke: “The Roman Missal of the saintly Popes, Paul VI and John Paul II, is witness to an unaltered faith and uninterrupted and living tradition.”  Never mind that saintly Paul VI and John Paul II, along with the still living Pope Benedict XVI, all issued documents allowing the use of the 1962 Missale.   Three Popes.  And they knew/know more about the the Council meant than these present potentates will ever know.

When Pentin pointed out that a lot of people feel discriminated against and they have not been treated in a way consistent will all the blabbing about synodality (“walking together”), Roche replied, basically, “THERE’S NO DISCRIMINATION!”, and then mischaracterizes what John Paul II and Benedict XVI intended for the Vetus Ordo, including literally the word “generous” from the former.  According to Roche it was not the intention of Benedict that use of the 1962 Missale should expand, and he cherry picks a comment made to journalists in 2008, ignoring other things he said, as well as the FACT of the provisions in Summorum Pontificum which were preciously granted so that the use of that Missale could expand.

Then comes a real whopper.  Hillary Clinton couldn’t have done a better job of expressing her true feeling about those whom her actions affected:

As for your point on consultation, the Holy Father has listened very attentively to bishops and, more recently, the Congregation has responded to matters raised by them and various others.

What is important to realize now is that the Holy Father has spoken; the liturgical possibilities are in place; the challenge is to get on with it without licking one’s wounds when no one has been injured. As for your point on synodality, the word means “walking together,” which is the precise purpose of the Motu Proprio expressing the direction in which the Church is to walk in its prayer.

One gets a sense of why he was not liked in England.  “Get on with it without licking your wounds!   We’re WALKING TOGETHER now, DAMN IT!”

When Pentin asks about why the Roman Rite is being singled out, Roche dodges the issue by pedantically correcting Pentin’s terminology.

“No one has been injured.”  Uh huh.

The whole thing makes you feel like you need to wash your hands, use an eye wash, anything to get the residue off.

TC and the DD were massive blunders.   This house of cards they are trying to set up will inevitably fall.  They know this, I’m sure, which is why they are pushing it.

The callous responses of the Prefect reveal the true ideological, not pastoral, motive behind all of it as well as showing us their characters.

Posted in B as in B. S as in S., Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Pò sì jiù, Traditionis custodes, What are they REALLY saying?, You must be joking! | Tagged
20 Comments

ASK FATHER: I was going in for surgery, but I have staph. How can I fulfill my Christmas and Sunday obligation?

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I am having surgery Tuesday 12/28. I went to reconciliation Wednesday and was absolved. In my medical appointment to get the ok for surgery I was tested for staph infection and it came back positive. My question is can I Fulfill my Christmas obligation and Sunday obligation by viewing mass on live stream as I’m not sure with having a staph infection and the possibility of contacting Covid right before surgery would be in my best interest and also possibly giving someone else staph? Please let me know your thoughts on this as I want to remain in a state of grace in case I don’t make it in surgery.

I am so glad that you made it to confession.  Good choice!  Now persevere in resisting any occasions of sin and overcome.

It is a good thing to view Mass online and there are good options, especially for the TLM, well-done in lovely churches (and even daily in small private chapels).  However, watching Mass over the internet or some other means does not fulfill Mass obligation on days of precept.

In a situation such as yours, with the risk of spreading a staph infection or getting COVID, etc., you don’t have an obligation for Christmas and Sunday.

People are not bound to do what they can’t do.   For example, an old lady who is afraid of falling doesn’t have the obligation to attempt her ice-covered sidewalks and then try to get into church.   For example, you have a high fever and feel very weak, and you may be contagious.  For example, you are on the road all day, since before dawn, and have no idea where to go for Mass (though internet helps now) and it is now late in the day.   For example, a guy is getting ready to go to Mass and discovers that his garage is on fire.   For example, the local parishes have liturgical worship that is so offensively riddled with abuses and the preaching is so bad that a father of children doesn’t want to expose his family to it, alternatives being too far away.

That said, you might [NB: MIGHT… MIGHT!!!] contact your local pastor and ask him to dispense you from the Sunday obligation.  According to the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church in canon 1245, pastors of parishes have the ability to dispense your obligation in individual instances or commute your obligation to some other pious work (e.g., saying the Rosary, reading Scripture for a while – both of which can bring indulgences).

You can’t just assume that you have the dispensation or commutation. You have to receive it.  [NOT in the sense that you are obliged to seek a dispensation every time your garage burns or you get the collywobbles.  It’s just that we cannot assume we have been dispensed.   Getting sick isn’t a dispensation!  Your garage burning or it snowing 5 feet are not dispensations!  Those are attenuating circumstances that make your obligation nil, because “no one is bound to the impossible.  There IS NO OBLIGATION in those circumstances.  That said, a dispensation can remove all doubt about your circumstances and obligations.]  But such a dispensation should not be too hard to obtain.

You didn’t say what sort of surgery this is, or how serious your condition is, but I am confident that those reading this will stop as soon as this sentence has been scanned and will say a prayer for you:

Almighty God, protect your servant in this hour of anxiety and need.
Holy Mary, comfort of the afflicted, pray for us.
St. Joseph,  hope of the sick, pray for us.
St. Luke, pray for us.
Sts. Cosmas and Damian, pray for us.
St. Rene Groupil, pray for us.
St. Gianna Beretta Molla, pray for us.

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

ASK FATHER: When a pope dies, what happens to the motu proprios that he may have written? Do they die with him?

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

When a pope dies, what happens to the motu proprios that he may have written – do they die with him?

For example, when Pope Francis dies, what happens to the motu proprio on the TLM?

Which motu proprio about the Traditional Latin Mass?

The Apostolic Letter issued motu proprio by John Paul II called “Ecclesia Dei“?

The Apostolic Letter issued motu proprio by Benedict XVI called “Summorum Pontificum“?

The cruel Apostolic Letter issued motu proprio by Francis called “Traditionis custodes“, his Plessy v. Ferguson and now a shameful landmark in his legacy?

motu proprio, as the term suggests, is something issued on the legislator’s “own initiative”.    An MP can be for the sake of establishing some Pontifical institution or perhaps proclaiming a saint to be patron of this or that, as John Paul II did in 200o for St. Thomas More, Patron of Statesmen and Politicians, which carried with it liturgical honors as well.  They are often “rescripts” used for all sorts of tasks, particularly in response to some issue or exigency.

What legitimate Popes establish endures, unless they indicate a time frame for it to expire.

When Popes die, their legacy of law continues in force unless something that a subsequent legitimate Pope changes, overrides or undoes.

Hence, whatever is established by a legitimate Pope by means of an MP continues to be in force after the death – or I guess resignation, now – of the same until his successor makes changes.

I’m reminded of a great line in the murder mystery Gosford Park.  The Maggie Smith character, true to form in her quintessential dowager role, comments to the lady of the house about their little canine.

“You’ve still got that vile little dog, I see.”

“Yeah, the ones you hate last forever.”

So, too, with certain MPs and certain other aspects of this wonderous, indefectible, luminous Church in the 21st century.

And it has ever been so.

But the clock keeps ticking and the Church still belongs to Christ and in Heaven these worries do not trouble the blessed.

An important thing about MPs should be clarified, however.  Although an MP can still have force even when the grounds it is based on are false or even lies, it cannot overturn other rights which have been acquired through custom or through law unless the MP manifestly says it does.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged
10 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 369

Use your phone’s camera

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
Comments Off on Daily Rome Shot 369

GOOD NEWS in the Diocese of Phoenix regarding TC and the DD

TC and the DD… Traditionis Custodes (aka “Jailers of Tradition” aka “Taurina cacata”) and the Dubious Dubia.

In effect, this doesn’t exactly “round file” TC and the DD.  It is more like to…

… leaving it out on the steps in the rain.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Traditionis custodes | Tagged , ,
12 Comments

An important note about the Dubious Dubia™ for “Traditionis custodes”. The way to cut through the obvious cruel intent and BE TRULY PASTORAL.

Traditionis custodes, a cruel and incoherent document, exceeded in incoherent cruelty by the Responses to the Dubious Dubia™, must fail.

Together, they do something unprecedented: they attack diocesan bishops.

However, for all the bishops out there who are wondering what to do about this enormous headache two-fer,

Canon 87: “A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that it contributes to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church. He is not able to dispense, however, from procedural or penal laws nor from those whose dispensation is specially reserved to the Apostolic See or some other authority.”

Your Excellencies, Fathers, read the aforementioned documents carefully.

There is nothing in them that blocks can. 87.   There is nothing in them “reserved to the Apostolic See or some other authority”.

The only thing that sort of comes close is when, in a Response, the Congregation that a bishop can ask the Congregation for a dispensation about parish churches.  HOWEVER, that doesn’t mean that the bishop can’t grant the dispensation himself!  Sure, a bishop can ask, but he doesn’t have to.

This does not mean that bishops can dispense with whatever law they want.  But it does mean that, in the case of TC and the DD they can apply can. 87.  Furthermore, the DD are of doubtful legal force at all.  (HERE IMPORTANT)

Meantime, BISHOPS, FATHERS!   I have invited readers here to be a Custos Traditionis, turning the sock inside out.  HERE   

I explain it in greater detail there, but in a nutshell:

I propose…

… an informal association of prayer and penance dedicated to two petitions offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary, which are

  • the softening of hearts of those interpreting Traditionis custodes (bishops, Roman Congregation officials);
  • the overturning of, or reversal of, or major amendment of Traditionis custodes.

YOUR COMMITTMENT…

  • recite the beautiful and powerful Memorare prayer DAILY;
  • make an act of physical or material penance for the two intentions ONCE A WEEK.
Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Canon Law, Traditionis custodes | Tagged , ,
3 Comments

ASK FATHER: Not AGAIN! “Does attending an SSPX Mass fulfill one’s Sunday obligation?”

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Does attending an SSPX Mass fulfill one’s Sunday obligation? I’m asking because I ran across the linked article below written by John Salza in November of this year arguing that attending an SSPX Mass does NOT fulfill the Sunday obligation to assist at Mass. The article threw me for a loop, as I’ve heard about the 9/27/2002 letter from Msgr. Perl, but not his 4/15/2002 letter; nor had I heard about the 2012 and 2015 letters from Ecclesia Dei, which seem to cast doubt on such attendance fulfilling the Sunday obligation.

This keeps coming up.  Some people who ought to know better simply want to rehash it and rehash it, and they get it wrong.

When I worked for the Holy See’s dicastery which had competence in the matter, the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, it was the position that, yes, you could fulfill your obligation on a day of precept at a Mass celebrated with the 1962 Missale Romanum by a priest of the SSPX.   By 2002 some new dynamics entered into question, creating some doubts and contradictions.  However, when there doubts about laws, in the absence of anything absolutely authoritative, the more benign way of interpreting law should prevail.  People’s freedoms are to be expanded and their obligations restricted.

Canon law was and is clear and it has not changed:

Canon 1248, §1 A person who assists at a Mass celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the feast day itself or in the evening of the preceding day satisfies the obligation of participating in the Mass.

There is no question that the Mass celebrated is in a Catholic Rite. The priests of the SSPX are Catholic priests and not some other kind of priests.  Regardless of their unique and somewhat thorny canonical status, they are priests of the Catholic Church and not some other Church.  They are even able to receive faculties from competent authority. They validly absolve sins even when there is no danger of death. They witness marriages and say the nuptial Masses.

The aforementioned Pontifical Commission on various occasions wrote that, yes, you can fulfill the obligation at an SSPX chapel. Not only that, you can, out of justice, give money in the collection for having received a service.

Those responses from the Commission concerned the SSPX, and not spin off groups from the SSPX.

If there are conflicting letters, it just goes to show that it is an evolving situation and one that people should get overly worked up about it.

Let’s just get over this and relax.

Look.  The anomalous and slowly evolving SSPX situation is complicated.  When things are really complicated in the Church, we are charity bound to cut people some slack and interpret restrictive laws as strictly as possible so as to give people maximum latitude.

I am convinced that the Enemy knows that he cannot win if we succeed in renewing the life of the Church through a recovery of our traditional liturgical rites.   Therefore, the Devil is going to fuel feuds, create strife and prompt the hardening of hearts.

Moreover, Old Scratch and demons are the ultimate lawyers.   If they can keep us quibbling and mired in the details, we are rendered ineffective.

Posted in Canon Law, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, SSPX | Tagged , ,
5 Comments

ASK FATHER: How does one get invited to the Synod (“walking together”) on Synodality

From a reader..

QUAERITUR:

I wanted to thank you for your original and powerful exhortation, via the death of a rabbit, to go to confession. As a consequence I did indeed go to confession and made a clean breast of some very awful sins going back a long way which had been imperfectly, if at all confessed. So the first part of my thank you is to let you know.  [Thanks for that… that post is HERE]

The second part is a suggestion. Can we start a long countermarch through the institutions? Would be possible to start with the Synod on Synodality? How does one get invited?

How does one get invited…. How does one get invited….

The powers that be, in control of the “synodal (‘walking together’) process” are absolutely closed to hearing, to seeing, to caring for people who desire traditional Catholic liturgical worship.    They will give all their attention and “accompaniment” to every possible aberrant group and dissidents, but not to traditional Catholics.

I suppose one approach might be to keep ‘pinging’ them with a note here, a note there.  I suggest that those notes be accompanied by Spiritual Bouquets.

That’s a key.   We have to pray for these people, as well.   They wish us ill.  Therefore, we have to pray for them.  They marginalize us.  We have to pray for them.  They try to strip things that are good and holy from the lives of many.  We have to pray for them.

Pray and try to forgive them.  Remember that Christ said that if we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven.

In the end all their games will fail.  Until them there is a lot of suffering to endure.  But we were chosen by God to live in this time, so the suffering has to be embraced as part of the plan.

Meanwhile, we should put aside small differences and unite our hearts and voices to strengthen precisely our hearts and our voices.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices | Tagged
4 Comments