BOOKS RECEIVED: New and Repeaters

Publishers send me books. I can’t read all of them, but I can give them a good scan. Here are a few of the more recently received.

You will have already seen the book on Luther, which I wrote about HERE. I post it again because it is quite engaging and instructive. I’ve read a few of the essays now and haven’t been disappointed.

Luther and His Progeny: 500 Years of Protestantism and Its Consequences for Church, State, and Society

US HERE – UK HERE

IMG_1917

Angelico Press is doing good work.  Here is another title.  It looks good.

Fatima, the First Hundred Years: The Complete Story from Visionaries to Saints

US HERE – UK HERE

 

Hopefully this next title from Ignatius Press will give help to people afflicted with same-sex attraction.  I haven’t looked into this one yet, but Ignatius is reliable.  Even though they were founded by a Jesuit, they aren’t going to Martinize the issue, if you get my drift.

Why I Don’t Call Myself Gay: How I Reclaimed My Sexual Reality and Found Peace by Daniel Mattson

US HERE – UK HERE

Another from Angelico Press

A Line Through the Human Heart: On Sinning and Being Forgiven Paperback by James V. Schall S.J.

US HERE – UK HERE

Great summer reading.

 

 

Posted in REVIEWS, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged ,
1 Comment

Jesuit James Martin: Back to the Reformation!

Jesuit James Martin – now best known, pretty much only know now, as a homosexual advocate – has become more strident.  Martin accuses the Church (therefore you, me, Christ) of homophobia. HERE  He has even suggested that the text of the Catechism of the Catholic Church about homosexuality should be changed. HERE

Card. Napier reacted:

Yes, Your Eminence, that’s pretty much it.

More on Martin at Crisis HERE.

May I suggest prayers for him?

The other day – at the request of a reader – I jotted off a prayer for Jesuits.  HERE

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
24 Comments

Catholic Herald: Is there really an Old Mass revival?

17_06_09_CH_screenshotFrom the UK’s best Catholic weekly the Catholic Herald, print edition (subscribe HERE).  My emphases and comments.

Is there really an Old Mass revival?

Ten years ago Benedict XVI lifted restrictions on the Old Rite. So what had changed in Britain, asks Dan Hitchens

At any time between the 1960s and about a decade ago, it would have seemed an unlikely occasion: an English bishop conferring the sacrament of Holy Orders on two deacons, according to the Extraordinary Form. Nevertheless, on Saturday June 17, Archbishop Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool will be doing just that, at  St Mary’s Church in Warrington.

The priests-to-be, Alex Stewart and Krzysztof Sanetra, are members of the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter (FSSP), which has a special attachment to the traditional liturgy.

Archbishop McMahon has designated St Mary’s as a centre for the Extraordinary Form (EF). The parish priest, Fr Armand de Malleray, believes these are the first EF ordinations in Britain in decades.

Rather neatly, the ordinations come just a few weeks before a significant anniversary. On July 7, 2007, Benedict XVI issued Summorum Pontificum, a motu proprio (papal edict) which gave priests and communities much more latitude to celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Missal. They could do so privately without needing permission from a bishop; if the laity requested the EF, “the parish priest should willingly accede.” [Sometimes I call it the Emancipation Proclamation.]

Summorum Pontificum has had a big cultural impact as well, according to Joseph Shaw, chairman of the Latin Mass Society. The EF “has a place in the life of the Church today which would have been unthinkable before 2007”, he says. More and more priests and bishops are celebrating the older rite. Institutes such as the FSSP are growing: “Formerly, the 1962 Missal was regarded as legally and theologically dubious even by many on the ‘conservative’ side of the debate in the Church: that attitude has now simply gone.” [That’s not the case everywhere, alas.  There is still strong opposition, though they disqualify themselves by their shrillness.]

Recent developments vindicate Shaw’s point. In February, Bishop Mark O’Toole of Plymouth established a permanent base for the traditional Latin Mass at St Edward the Confessor, Peverell, which has a weekly EF Mass. Catholics in the Diocese of Leeds have the same opportunity, at St Joseph’s, Bradford.

Meanwhile, the Oratorians, a congregation known – among other things – for celebrating both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form with reverence, are growing quickly: in the past few years four new Oratorian communities have sprung up.

On the ground, too, priests are increasingly open to the EF. The Latin Mass Society said that EF Masses at Easter rose to a “record” level last year, with 200 such celebrations across Britain.

There seems to be a particular apostolic energy emanating from some traditional communities. [Important.] Take Gosport’s Marian Franciscans, who (as Constance Watson reports on page 22) have just set up a radio station.

All that said, the traditional Mass remains a relatively small part of the Church’s life. It is perhaps disproportionately popular with certain groups, such as younger Catholics. [Also important.  Think of this in terms of long term demographics and the “Biological Solution”.] What  some find an aid to devotion and prayer – the Latin, the silence, the solemn attention to liturgical detail, the fiddleback vestments, the  Gregorian chant, etc – is to others distracting or confusing. [1 Cor 3:2]

Shaw believes that the biggest obstacles to the spread of the EF are practical ones: “Priests’ lack of time to fit in extra Masses, and, next in importance, priests’ ignorance of Latin, which is a barrier to their learning and gaining confidence in it.”  [From my experience with priests I know this to be true.]

Nevertheless, Benedict’s 2007 document has had a significant ripple effect, which goes beyond those communities where the EF is most cherished. [We can call this “mutual enrichment”.  I also call it a knock-on effect.] The writer Joanna Bogle says: “Summorum Pontificum enormously helped the now widespread ‘reform of the reform’ of the liturgy, and in the longer term I think this will be its major significance.”  [Another comparison I’ve made is that Summorum Pontificum formed part of Benedict XVI’s “Marshall Plan”.]

Increasingly, Bogle argues, the liturgy resembles what Vatican II intended. “We have the benefits of reform – a measured pace of the Mass, audibility, being able to pray with the priest ‘from the heart’ rather than just following on a printed page, and so on – but without the gruesome gimmicks that fluttered around during those first post-Council years.”

Moreover, she says, it has become clear that the two forms are not so different. “I go to the Extraordinary Form occasionally, but I have actually found that having it available has made me appreciate the Ordinary Form in new ways,” Bogle says.

The process which began in 2007, then, continues to develop in unexpected ways. Benedict?XVI merely pushed the first domino.

For years I have insisted that Benedict XVI laid out, especially in Summorum Pontificum and his own ars celebrandi, in his writings before his ascent to the See of Peter, a kind of “Marshall Plan” for the Church.

You long-time readers here will remember this, but it has been a while since I’ve presented it.

Here it is again:

After World War II many regions of Europe were devastated, especially its large cities and manufacturing.  These USA helped rebuild Europe through the Marshall Plan so as to foster good trading partners and, through prosperity, stand as a bulwark against Communism.

After Vatican II many spheres of the Church were devastated, especially its liturgical and catechetical life. We need a Plan to rebuild our Catholic identity so that we can stand, for ourselves as members of the Church and in the public square for the good of society, as a bulwark – indeed a remedy – against the dictatorship of relativism.

The use of the older form of Mass is the key to revitalizing our sacred liturgical worship.  Revitalization of our sacred liturgical worship is the absolutely essential foundation, the ultimate sine qua non for the renewed life of the Church.  Without a rightly ordered sacred liturgy, none of our initiatives will succeed.  Hence, the importance of Summorum Pontificum.

What we are doing is of supreme importance.  It is essential that we do it well, intelligently, prudently, joyfully, relentlessly, lovingly.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Benedict XVI, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , ,
14 Comments

Fr. Z’s Voice Mail

I haven’t had many voicemails recently.   Perhaps everyone is busy with summer barbecues.

Wanna leave me voice mail?  You have three options:

 WDTPRS

 020 8133 4535

 651-447-6265

Since I pay a fee for the two phone numbers, USA and UK, I am glad when they get some use.  I occasionally integrate the audio messages into posts, when there are good questions or comments.

TIPS for leaving voice mail.

  1. Don’t shout.  If you shout, your voice will be distorted and I won’t be able to understand you.
  2. Don’t whisper.  C’mon.  If you have to whisper, maybe you should be calling the police, instead.
  3. Come to your point right away.  That helps.
  4. I don’t call you back.  I do listen to every message.
  5. Say from the onset if I can use your message in a post.

Send snail mail to:
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf
733 Struck St.
PO BOX 44603
Madison, WI 53744-4603

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes |
Comments Off on Fr. Z’s Voice Mail

Brick by Brick in Minneapolis

From a reader comes this news…

Father,

Here are a few photos from last nights beautiful Confirmation and Mass in our Archdiocese. Last night it was very encouraging to see so much effort put forward by so many for the traditional liturgy.
Confirmations in the Traditional Rite followed by a Pontifical High Mass at the Faldstool took place June 7th, 2017, at the Basilica of St. Mary in Minneapolis, MN celebrated by the Most Reverend Andrew Cozzens. The music, featuring Palestrina’s Missa Papae Marcelli, was provided by the Chorus Omnium Sanctorum. Confirmands from five area parishes participated and nearly 700 were in attendance.

The photos he sent.  Brick by brick.

 

 

allsaintsconfirm2

allsaintsconfirm3

allsaintsconfirm1

allsaintsconfirm4

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged
24 Comments

Good Summer Reading: William Forstchen – Lost Regiment Series

During the American Civil War a Union regiment is being transported by ship.  They fall into a tunnel of light and emerge on the ocean of another planet.  They rapidly encounter the descendants of 10th century Russians.   There is conflict.  But their real conflict is not with other humans on this planet, brought here during different centuries from different places.  The true enemy are the 10′ tall human eating aliens who slowly over decades migrate in a circle around the lands harvesting their “cattle”.  The Yankees decide that they are not going down without a fight.

I have been working through a series by William Forstchen, who wrote the scary EMP survival novels beginning with One Second After (US HERE – UK HERE).  This series is quite a different genre Civil War Science Fiction.   However, it has many of the same elements, which will become apparent as you read them.   They are ripping good yarns.  The first of the series, the Lost Regiment series, is… Rally Cry

(US HERE – UK HERE)

Later, there will also be the descendants of ancient Rome, Latin speakers, who become allies.

They are quite well written, with good character development.  He has quite the imagination coupled with a solid knowledge of 19th century technology.

I am several books in now.   There was something which I thought you would enjoy.

Speaking of Latin, at one point, marching into battle against the flesh-eating Horde, the newly formed and trained regiments of Yankees, Rus, and Romans sing as they march.

Their tattered flag fluttered in the breeze. Vincent stopped to look at it—“Hawthorne’s Guard,” emblazed in faded gold letters upon its stained silken folds, an action the men had done themselves when he was reported missing after the first defense of Suzdal. He looked over at Dimitri for a moment, distant memories stirring. At the front of the column were the corps banners, and the flags of the two republics and of the army moving to join them.

Marcus edged his mount up beside Vincent’s.

A trumpet call echoed and a thunder of drums sounded. The first battalion wheeled out of line, went into column of fours, and turned to the north and the road to Hispania. As it approached the review stand, the 7th Suzdal moved out in front and marched past. Vincent drew his saber and saluted the colors as they passed. The crowds lining the walls and crowding the hills to the west cheered wildly.

The song started somewhere in the middle of the mass formation, and within seconds the entire army started to sing “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” in Latin.

It sounded so strange to Vincent, as if it were some absurd schoolyard exercise led by a warlike and demented teacher of ancient languages. Yet it had a power to it, as if an ideal engendered within the song could somehow leap across the universe.

“It’s worth dying for,” Vincent whispered.

The enemy in this series is seriously nasty.  Forstchen paints a lush picture of their migratory warrior culture, their spirituality and gruesome customs especially in regard to their “cattle” whom they harvest.

I found online a Latin version of the Battle Hymn… alas a verse is missing.

REI PUBLICAE PAEAN MILITARIS

Vidi oculis, ut Deus fulgidus incederet;
Mox vindemiam conculcans uvas ira conteret,
Liberavit fulgur ensis celeris quo nos terret:
Procedit Veritas!

CHORUS:
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Procedit Veritas!

Vidi Dominum castorum centum cinctum ignibus;
Aram posuere Deo vespertinis roribus;
Lego iustam Dei legem luridis lampadibus:
Est dies Domini!

CHORUS

Tuba cecinit quae numquam ad receptum personat;
Corda lustrat hominum quos iudicandos advocat;
Cito, anima, responde, pes dum laetus advolat:
Procedit Dominus!

CHORUS

Deus lilliis refulgens ultra mare natus est;
Christi puritate noster animus sacratus est;
Moriamur Deo, nobis dire qui necatus est:
Procedit Dominus!

CHORUS:
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Gloria! Gloria! Alleluia!
Procedit Dominus!

Not bad!

Also for your summer reading – or any season reading pleasure – check out Chris Kennedy‘s rollicking books in which I, Father John Zuhlsdorf, am a character!  I die painfully … once… but at this point in the tale I’m alive again.  And I have some of the best lines in the books!   For more, check this out HERE.  They, too, are military, and, again, there are very bad flesh eating aliens.  I’m sensing a theme.  I’ve described Kennedy’s books in the past as being Galaxy Quest meets The Magnificent Seven crossed with Stargate and an added dash of Indiana Jones.  The whole saga starts with the Chinese invasion of Seattle…

 

I am also mentioned in the Count To A Trillion series by John C. Wright (US HERE – UK HERE) and, recently, in a book by David Athey (US HERE – UK HERE).

Posted in Just Too Cool, REVIEWS | Tagged , , ,
6 Comments

“Begone, symbolic construct!” – UPDATE

Arturo-Sosa-AbascalUPDATE 8 June: BELOW

Originally Published on: Jun 2, 2017 ___

A while back, the head of the Jesuits, their Superior General Fr. Arturo Sosa Ascobal, opined that we don’t know what the Lord taught because no one had a tape recorder. HERE That wayward notion effectively empties Christianity of its content. He tried, unconvincingly in my opinion, to walk the statement back even while defending it.

In an interview with El Mundo via InfoCatólica Sosa now offers other gems for our consideration. When asked about the ordination women, he replies that the Church needs a “different hierarchy with different ministries”. He also said, “The Pope has already opened the door of the diaconate by creating a commission. Then more doors could open.” Of course the Pope did nothing of the kind in establishing that deaconette commission, and he has slammed the door pretty hard on the ordination of women, as had all Popes before him. Asked about same-sex marriage, Sosa burbles for a bit, with a snap of his fingers he says, “Sacraments aren’t born like *this*.”

About the existence of the Devil, Sosa said:

Desde mi punto de vista, el mal forma parte del misterio de la libertad. Si el ser humano es libre, puede elegir entre el bien y el mal. Los cristianos creemos que estamos hechos a imagen y semejanza de Dios, por lo tanto Dios es libre, pero Dios siempre elige hacer el bien porque es todo bondad. Hemos hecho figuras simbólicas, como el diablo, para expresar el mal. Los condicionamientos sociales también representan esa figura, ya que hay gente que actúa así porque está en un entorno donde es muy difícil hacer lo contrario.

From my point of view, evil forms part of the mystery of freedom. If the human being is free, he can choose between good and evil. Christians believe that we are made in the image and likeness of God, therefore God is free, but God always chooses to do good because he is all goodness. We have made symbolic figures, like the devil, to express evil. Social conditionings also represents that figure, since there are people who act this way because it is in an environment where it is very difficult to do the opposite.

So, the Superior General of the Jesuits does not believe that the Devil exists as a real, person being. The Devil, according to this Jesuit, is a symbolic construction of ‘evil”.

CCC 391 says:

Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy.  Scripture and the Church’s Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or the “devil”.  The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel, made by God: “The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing.”

Lateran IV said that the Devil is an angel and affirms that angels are personal beings.

According to Sosa, however, I guess the Lord was not tempted by Satan and in Matthew 4 Jesus said: “Begone symbolic construct!”

The Lord apparently didn’t mean what He said about the Prince of this World.

What’s next?

Maybe the Lord Himself is also a “symbolic construct”!

I can see it now.  The Jesuits will have to change all their stationary: The Society of Symbolic Construct.

No more SJ.  Instead… SS?   The Symbolists? The Constructors?

UPDATE:

How about this…. The Jesuits themselves are really just a symbolic construct.  They were, after all repressed once.  A good days work by Pope Clement XIV, Papa Ganganelli.

Today, I make available also

Clement_XVI_Mug_01 Clement_XVI_Mug_02

For all the selections click

>>HERE<<

And, in your new Clement XVI mug enjoy some

MYSTIC MONK COFFEE!

When you are irked and frustrated with attacks on clarity and fidelity to Catholic doctrine, why not make yourself an invigorating Z-mug filled with freshly brewed coffee from the wonderful Carmelites in Wyoming?   Look at it as a kind of aroma therapy, without all the effeminate new-age garbage.

Don’t suppress your urge for that great mug of Mystic Monk Coffee!

UPDATE 8 June:

Check out the piece at the UK’s best Catholic weekly, the Catholic Herald.   Apparently I wasn’t the only one who was puzzled by the Superior of the Jesuits reducing the Devil to a mere “symbolic construct”.   That’s, after all, what he did.

The SPOKESMAN of the Superior told the Catholic Herald that the Superior:

“Father Sosa was asked to comment on the question of evil. In his response, he pointed out that evil is part of the mystery of freedom. He noted that if the human being is free, it means he can do good or evil; otherwise, he would not be free.

“Human language uses symbols and imagery. God is love. To say God symbolizes love is not to deny the existence of God. The devil is evil. Similarly, to say the devil symbolizes evil is not to deny the existence of the devil.” [What an answer.  How about: YES, he believes in the Devil.  Or: NO, he doesn’t believe in the Devil.  What is this?]

The spokesman went on: “Like all Catholics, Father Sosa professes and teaches what the Church professes and teaches. He does not hold a set of beliefs separate from what is contained in the doctrine of the Catholic Church.”  [How about: YES, he believes in the Devil.  Or: NO, he doesn’t believe in the Devil.]

The spokesman was then asked whether Fr Sosa believes that the Devil is an individual with a soul, intellect and free will. He replied: “As I said in my response yesterday, Father General Arturo Sosa believes and teaches what the Church believes and teaches. He does not hold another set of beliefs apart from what is contained in the doctrine of the Catholic Church.”

So, the Superior of the Jesuits hasn’t answered the questions.  Instead his spokesman made a couple of statements about believing what the Church believes.

How hard is it, if you believe what the Church believes, to stand up in public and say clearly what the Church believes?

The whom Christ calls “the Devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41)… is an angelic being.  Angels are persons.  The Devil is a personal being.  Is this hard?

No, wait.  This same Superior General of the Jesuits also called into question what we can believe that Christ said, since, as he put it, they didn’t have tape recorders back then.

Be sure to read what Archbp. Chaput wrote recently.  HERE  Including:

Medieval theologians understood this quite well. They had an expression in Latin: Nullus diabolus, nullus redemptor. No devil, no Redeemer. Without the devil, it’s very hard to explain why Jesus needed to come into the world to suffer and die for us. What exactly did he redeem us from?

The devil, more than anyone, appreciates this irony, i.e., that we can’t fully understand the mission of Jesus without him. And he exploits this to his full advantage. He knows that consigning him to myth inevitably sets in motion our same treatment of God.

Posted in Liberals, You must be joking! | Tagged , , , ,
42 Comments

ASK FATHER: Can babies see angels?

guardian angelFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Some other Catholic moms and I were discussing how babies often gaze off into space and smile. Some of the mom’s said they had been told that babies can see angels. This is certainly a lovely idea, but I was curious to hear your thoughts on it. I know angels are spiritual and non-corporeal beings, but that they have appeared in human form (such as in today’s reading from Tobit in the Ordinary Form of the Mass!). Curious to hear your thoughts on the topic.

I am inclined to say yes.  Here is why.

Friends of mine told me that when their grandson was very little, he would have infantile but seemingly real conversations with someone unseen.  When he visited his grandparent’s house, he immediately latched onto a small statue of an angel, which he would carry about while he was there, though he was always content to leave it at their home and not desire to take it with him.  One day, when he was about two, over the baby monitor in his room his parents heard him talking to someone about where his “binky” (dummy) was.  When they went to the room to investigate, there he was sitting on his bed.  He said, dejected, that he couldn’t see his angel anymore.

Also, one of my favorite saints, St Frances of Rome (d 1440) is famous for having been able to see and communicate with her Guardian Angel.

Possible?  Sure.  I don’t know if all babies can do this, but I suspect that some can… for a while.

Why not?

Do not forget to ask the help of your Angel Guardian and to thank him for his good care.

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

Obligatory reading? Differing suggestions.

fishwrapI’m sure you are all wondering what is going on at the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter – aka National Sodomitic Reporter these days.  A quick scan of their stories includes:

  • When women become a clear and present danger at the Vatican (which pushes for the ordination of women (written by an open lesbian who learned her craft at the knee of Sr. Margaret Farley)
  • Maybe it’s time to reconsider calling priests “Father” (by a Presybterian elder who should mind his own damn business)
  • What would we do without NCR? (I have lots of ideas about that – but this was offered by the aforementioned lesbian)
  • (ADDED 9 June): Sr. Margaret Farley at theological meeting: ‘We have not gone far enough’ (they thinks she’s just wonderful – read what the CDF thought of her HERE)

But today I note in particular a piece by the Wile E. Coyote of the catholic Left, Michael Sean Winters, in which he suggests that Card. Coccopalmerio‘s (esp. HERE) strange …

  • Commentary on ‘irregular unions’ should be required reading for all pastors

At the foundation of all the commentaries which suggest, as Card. Coccopalmerio and others do, that people can receive Communion after having sinned mortally and without confession and a firm purpose of amendment, is the premise that some people cannot keep God’s commandments, that God’s commandments are ideals to which not all are to be held, that these ideals are in fact impossible for some to keep.

That flies directly in the face of what the Church has been teaching clearly for a very long time indeed.

How about learning what the CHURCH teaches before we go off into speculative fancies?

Here is what the Session VI Council of Trent (1547 – Paul III, gloriously reigning) teaches about the possibility of obeying the Commandments (my emphases):

CHAPTER XI
THE OBSERVANCE OF THE COMMANDMENTS AND THE NECESSITY AND POSSIBILITY THEREOF

But no one, however much justified, should consider himself exempt from the observance of the commandments; no one should use that rash statement, once forbidden by the Fathers under anathema, that the observance of the commandments of God is impossible for one that is justified.

For God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding admonishes thee to do what thou canst and to pray for what thou canst not, and aids thee that thou mayest be able.[58]

His commandments are not heavy,[59] and his yoke is sweet and burden light.[60]

For they who are the sons of God love Christ, but they who love Him, keep His commandments, as He Himself testifies;[61] which, indeed, with the divine help they can do.

For though during this mortal life, men, however holy and just, fall at times into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial, they do not on that account cease to be just, for that petition of the just, forgive us our trespasses,[62] is both humble and true; for which reason the just ought to feel themselves the more obliged to walk in the way of justice, for being now freed from sin and made servants of God,[63] they are able, living soberly, justly and godly,[64] to proceed onward through Jesus Christ, by whom they have access unto this grace.[65]

For God does not forsake those who have been once justified by His grace, unless He be first forsaken by them.

Wherefore, no one ought to flatter himself with faith alone, thinking that by faith alone he is made an heir and will obtain the inheritance, even though he suffer not with Christ, that he may be also glorified with him.[66]

  1. St. Augustine, De natura et gratia, c.43 (50), PL, XLIV, 271.
  2. See 1 John 5:3.
  3. Matt. 11:30.
  4. John 14:23.
  5. Matt. 6:12.
  6. Rom. 6:18, 22.
  7. Tit. 2:12.
  8. Rom. 5:1f.
  9. Ibid., 8:17.

This isn’t hard.  It is what the Church has always taught in different ways and formats.  For example, today I received in my email a passage from The Sincere Christian Instructed in the Faith of Christ, from the Written Word (1870) by Bishop George Hay.  Here is a bishop teaching, faithfully, what the Church teaches.  Perhaps this sort of thing should be “obligatory reading”?

Q. 6. Are we able, by the strength of nature alone, to keep the commands of God?
A. By our own natural strength alone, without the help of God’s grace, we are not able to keep the commands, nor, indeed, so much as to think a good thought towards our salvation. Thus the scriptures declare, that we are not sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God,” 2 Cor. iii. 5. “And no man can say, the Lord Jesus, but by the Holy Ghost,” I Cor. xii. 3: that is, no man can say it, so as to be conducive to his salvation. And our Saviour himself, to show our total inability of doing any good of ourselves, and without his divine assistance, says, “Without me you can do nothing,” John xv. 5; and he confirms the same truth by the similitude of a vine, and its branches, saying,”As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in me,” verse 4.

Q. 7. Are we able to keep the commands by the help of God’s grace?
A. Yes we are; and God, who requires us to keep his commands, is never wanting on his part to give us sufficient grace for that purpose. The truth of this is shown from several reasons.1. The scriptures are full of the warmest exhortations to all to keep the commandments, which certainly would be unbecoming the divine wisdom, if it was impossible to keep them with the help of God’s grace, or if that grace was ever refused us. 2. God every where obliges man to keep his commandments, under pain of eternal punishment. Now, it is totally inconsistent with his justice, and makes God a cruel tyrant, to say he would punish us for breaking his commands, if it was impossible for us to keep them. 3. We read of several in the scripture who actually did keep them perfectly, and are highly praised on that account, such as Abraham and Job, and particularly the parents of St. John the Baptist, of whom the scripture says, that”they were both just before God, walking in ALL THE COMMANDMENTS and justifications of the Lord, without blame,” Luke i, 6. 4. God himself declares, in the very first command, that he shows mercy to thousands of those that love him and keep his commandments,” Exod. xx. 6. 5. And St. Paul assures us, that God is never wanting on his part to give us all necessary assistance to keep them, saying,”God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what you are able to bear, but will make also, with the temptation, issue,”(that is, a way to escape) “that you may be able to bear it,” 1 Cor. x. 13.

More HERE

Here is some truly obligatory reading.

Ch. 6. First Decree – On Justification (13 January 1547)

CANON XVIII. – If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

2082 What God commands he makes possible by his grace.

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Hard-Identity Catholicism, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , ,
6 Comments

Oooo Canada! East v West

euthanasia_syringeThe Bishops of the Atlantic region of Canada, the Atlantic Episcopal Assembly (Archdioceses and Dioceses of Antigonish, Bathurst, Charlottetown, Corner Brook and Labrador, Edmundston, Grand Falls, Halifax, Moncton, Saint John (NB), St. John’s and Yarmouth) issued a pastoral letter in November 2016 in which they veered towards sacramentalizing euthanasia… in the sense of giving a quasi-blessing to euthanasia by giving the Last Sacraments to those who intend to commit that form of suicide.

Get it?  Suicide is a sin.  If a person intends to commit a sin, she can’t receive the sacraments, even the sacrament of penance.  Period.

Hence, as I wrote in a previous post on this,

“It is inconceivable to me that such a letter would have gotten past the rest of the Canadian Conference, or the Nuncio, or the CDF, or for that matter the guy who runs the gas station at the corner of Faith St. and Charity and who goes to Mass on Sundays.  What were they thinking?”

However, please note that the bishops in Western Canada had already issued in September 2016 a pastoral letter in which they took a position that is clearly in keeping with the Church’s teaching on euthanasia.

So, it’s East v West.   Did the Eastern Bishops purposely give their Western brethren the bird?  How else to explain this?  And this is one reason why I find the Easter Letter so confusing?

Given this confusion we have to ask hard questions.

Think about the (really bad) proposal of devolving the oversight of doctrine to conferences of bishops.  We have already seen the circus that has resulted between the bishops of Germany and the bishops of Poland taking contrary positions about the objectively confusing notions in Amoris laetitia.   Now we have two groups of bishops within the same conference taking opposite positions.  What’s next? Bishops deciding what is sound doctrine within their own dioceses on their own authority without regard to their own conference?   Isn’t that is where we started?   And then what?  How about the bishop deciding that the people in, say, Broward County can believe one thing and the people in Indian River County another?  How about the parish of St. Ipsidipsy one thing and the “Engendering Togetherness Community of Welcome” another?

Hmmm… that already sounds familiar.

Meanwhile, the Eastern Canadian bishops had their ad limina visit in Rome.  While they were there, they did a video with the clear cooperation of CNS, in which they doubled down on their position.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

More from LifeSite HERE and HERE.

Posted in The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged ,
14 Comments