Tuesday, January 2, 2018

Profession of the Apostolic Faith by three Successors of the Apostles in Astana

It is not licit (non licet) to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.
 
************
 


Profession of the immutable truths
about sacramental marriage


After the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris laetitia" (2016) various bishops issued at local, regional, and national levels applicable norms regarding the sacramental discipline of those faithful, called "divorced and remarried," who having still a living spouse to whom they are united with a valid sacramental matrimonial bond, have nevertheless begun a stable cohabitation more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse.

The aforementioned rules provide inter alia that in individual cases the persons, called "divorced and remarried," may receive the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion, while continuing to live habitually and intentionally more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse. These pastoral norms have received approval from various hierarchical authorities. Some of these norms have received approval even from the supreme authority of the Church.

The spread of these ecclesiastically approved pastoral norms has caused a considerable and ever increasing confusion among the faithful and the clergy, a confusion that touches the central manifestations of the life of the Church, such as sacramental marriage with the family, the domestic church, and the sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist.

According to the doctrine of the Church, only the sacramental matrimonial bond constitutes a domestic church (see Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 11). The admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" faithful to Holy Communion, which is the highest expression of the unity of Christ the Spouse with His Church, means in practice a way of approving or legitimizing divorce, and in this meaning a kind of introduction of divorce in the life of the Church.

The mentioned pastoral norms are revealed in practice and in time as a means of spreading the "plague of divorce" (an expression used by the Second Vatican Council, see Gaudium et spes, 47). It is a matter of spreading the "plague of divorce" even in the life of the Church, when the Church, instead, because of her unconditional fidelity to the doctrine of Christ, should be a bulwark and an unmistakable sign of contradiction against the plague of divorce which is every day more rampant in civil society.

Unequivocally and without admitting any exception Our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ solemnly reaffirmed God's will regarding the absolute prohibition of divorce. An approval or legitimation of the violation of the sacredness of the marriage bond, even indirectly through the mentioned new sacramental discipline, seriously contradicts God's express will and His commandment. This practice therefore represents a substantial alteration of the two thousand-year-old sacramental discipline of the Church. Furthermore, a substantially altered discipline will eventually lead to an alteration in the corresponding doctrine.

The constant Magisterium of the Church, beginning with the teachings of the Apostles and of all the Supreme Pontiffs, has preserved and faithfully transmitted both in the doctrine (in theory) and in the sacramental discipline (in practice) in an unequivocal way, without any shadow of doubt and always in the same sense and in the same meaning (eodem sensu eademque sententia), the crystalline teaching of Christ concerning the indissolubility of marriage.

Because of its Divinely established nature, the discipline of the sacraments must never contradict the revealed word of God and the faith of the Church in the absolute indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage. "The sacraments not only presuppose faith, but by words and objects they also nourish, strengthen, and express it; that is why they are called "sacraments of faith." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 59). "Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125).

The Catholic faith by its nature excludes a formal contradiction between the faith professed on the one hand and the life and practice of the sacraments on the other. In this sense we can also understand the following affirmation of the Magisterium: "This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age." (Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes, 43) and "Accordingly, the concrete pedagogy of the Church must always remain linked with her doctrine and never be separated from it" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).

In view of the vital importance that the doctrine and discipline of marriage and the Eucharist constitute, the Church is obliged to speak with the same voice. The pastoral norms regarding the indissolubility of marriage must not, therefore, be contradicted between one diocese and another, between one country and another. Since the time of the Apostles, the Church has observed this principle as St. Irenaeus of Lyons testifies: "The Church, though spread throughout the world to the ends of the earth, having received the faith from the Apostles and their disciples, preserves this preaching and this faith with care and, as if she inhabits a single house, believes in the same identical way, as if she had only one soul and only one heart, and preaches the truth of the faith, teaches it and transmits it in a unanimous voice, as if she had only one mouth"(Adversus haereses, I, 10, 2). Saint Thomas Aquinas transmits to us the same perennial principle of the life of the Church: "There is one and the same faith of the ancients and the moderns, otherwise there would not be one and the same Church" (Questiones Disputatae de Veritate, q. 14, a. 12c).

The following warning from Pope John Paul II remains current and valid: "The confusion, created in the conscience of many faithful by the differences of opinions and teachings in theology, in preaching, in catechesis, in spiritual direction, about serious and delicate questions of Christian morals, ends up by diminishing the true sense of sin almost to the point of eliminating it" (Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitenia, 18).

The meaning of the following statements of the Magisterium of the Church is fully applicable to the doctrine and sacramental discipline concerning the indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage:

• "For the Church of Christ, watchful guardian that she is, and defender of the dogmas deposited with her, never changes anything, never diminishes anything, never adds anything to them; but with all diligence she treats the ancient doctrines faithfully and wisely, which the faith of the Fathers has transmitted. She strives to investigate and explain them in such a way that the ancient dogmas of heavenly doctrine will be made evident and clear, but will retain their full, integral, and proper nature, and will grow only within their own genus — that is, within the same dogma, in the same sense and the same meaning” (Pius IX, Dogmatic Bull Ineffabilis Deus)


• "With regard to the very substance of truth, the Church has before God and men the sacred duty to announce it, to teach it without any attenuation, as Christ revealed it, and there is no condition of time that can reduce the rigor of this obligation. It binds in conscience every priest who is entrusted with the care of teaching, admonishing, and guiding the faithful "(Pius XII, Discourse to parish priests and Lenten preachers, March 23, 1949).

• "The Church does not historicize, does not relativize to the metamorphoses of profane culture the nature of the Church that is always equal and faithful to itself, as Christ wanted it and authentic tradition perfected it" (Paul VI, Homily from October 28, 1965).

• "Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ" (Paul VI, Encyclical Humanae Vitae, 29).

• "Any conjugal difficulties are resolved without ever falsifying and compromising the truth" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).

• "The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm [of the Divine moral law]. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).

• “The other principle is that of truth and consistency, whereby the church does not agree to call good evil and evil good. Basing herself on these two complementary principles, the church can only invite her children who find themselves in these painful situations to approach the divine mercy by other ways, not however through the sacraments of penance and the eucharist until such time as they have attained the required dispositions” (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 34).

• "The Church's firmness in defending the universal and unchanging moral norms is not demeaning at all. Its only purpose is to serve man's true freedom. Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the truth"(John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).

• “When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the "poorest of the poor" on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal" (emphasis in original) (John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).

• "The obligation of reiterating this impossibility of admission to the Eucharist is required for genuine pastoral care and for an authentic concern for the well-being of these faithful and of the whole Church, as it indicates the conditions necessary for the fullness of that conversion to which all are always invited by the Lord“ (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration on the admissibility to the Holy Communion of the divorced and remarried, 24 June 2000, n. 5).

As Catholic bishops, who - according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council - must defend the unity of faith and the common discipline of the Church, and take care that the light of the full truth should arise for all men (see Lumen Gentium, 23 ) we are forced in conscience to profess in the face of the current rampant confusion the unchanging truth and the equally immutable sacramental discipline regarding the indissolubility of marriage according to the bimillennial and unaltered teaching of the Magisterium of the Church. In this spirit we reiterate:

• Sexual relationships between people who are not in the bond to one another of a valid marriage - which occurs in the case of the so-called "divorced and remarried" - are always contrary to God's will and constitute a grave offense against God.

• No circumstance or finality, not even a possible imputability or diminished guilt, can make such sexual relations a positive moral reality and pleasing to God. The same applies to the other negative precepts of the Ten Commandments of God. Since “there exist acts which, per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).

• The Church does not possess the infallible charism of judging the internal state of grace of a member of the faithful (see Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1). The non-admission to Holy Communion of the so-called "divorced and remarried" does not therefore mean a judgment on their state of grace before God, but a judgment on the visible, public, and objective character of their situation. Because of the visible nature of the sacraments and of the Church herself, the reception of the sacraments necessarily depends on the corresponding visible and objective situation of the faithful.

• It is not morally licit to engage in sexual relations with a person who is not one’s legitimate spouse supposedly to avoid another sin. Since the Word of God teaches us, it is not lawful "to do evil so that good may come" (Romans 3, 8).

• The admission of such persons to Holy Communion may be permitted only when they with the help of God's grace and a patient and individual pastoral accompaniment make a sincere intention to cease from now on the habit of such sexual relations and to avoid scandal. It is in this way that true discernment and authentic pastoral accompaniment were always expressed in the Church.

• People who have habitual non-marital sexual relations violate their indissoluble sacramental nuptial bond with their life style in relation to their legitimate spouse. For this reason they are not able to participate "in Spirit and in Truth" (see John 4, 23) at the Eucharistic wedding supper of Christ, also taking into account the words of the rite of Holy Communion: "Blessed are the guests at the wedding supper of the Lamb!" (Revelation 19, 9).

• The fulfillment of God's will, revealed in His Ten Commandments and in His explicit and absolute prohibition of divorce, constitutes the true spiritual good of the people here on earth and will lead them to the true joy of love in the salvation of eternal life.


Being bishops in the pastoral office those, who promote the Catholic and Apostolic faith ("cultores catholicae et apostolicae fidei", see Missale Romanum, Canon Romanus), we are aware of this grave responsibility and our duty before the faithful who await from us a public and unequivocal profession of the truth and the immutable discipline of the Church regarding the indissolubility of marriage. For this reason we are not allowed to be silent.

We affirm therefore in the spirit of St. John the Baptist, of St. John Fisher, of St. Thomas More, of Blessed Laura Vicuña and of numerous known and unknown confessors and martyrs of the indissolubility of marriage:

It is not licit (non licet) to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.

By making this public profession before our conscience and before God who will judge us, we are sincerely convinced that we have provided a service of charity in truth to the Church of our day and to the Supreme Pontiff, Successor of Saint Peter and Vicar of Christ on earth .

31 December 2017, the Feast of the Holy Family, in the year of the centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima.


+ Tomash Peta, Archbishop Metropolitan of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop-Bishop of Karaganda
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana

REVIEW: The Dictator Pope

For those who may want to know what people have to say about "The Dictator Pope" -- A Review by Mr. Stuart Chessman (http://sthughofcluny.org/2018/01/the-dictator-pope.html).
 
************
 
 
The Dictator Pope
By “Marcantonio Colonna”

The Dictator Pope hit our Kindles (it’s not yet in hard copy) just in time for Christmas. I can tell you, after a quick read, that it’s the best Vatican expose since 1999’s Gone with the Wind in the Vatican by “I Millenari” (indeed, some of the targets in the curia seem to be the same in both these works). But the focus of the Dictator Pope greatly differs from that work. It concentrates not so much on inside “revelations” but on the career, background and circumstances on one individual – namely, Pope Francis. It seeks to deepen our understanding of what is already known, to provide background and to “connect the dots” among people and policies.

The Dictator Pope is streamlined, succinct and well written. Here and there (such as in his discussion of the situation of the Knights of Malta) our author – “Marcantonio Colonna” – does seem to display specific knowledge beyond what has been published previously. Yet, as I noted, this book does not emphasize journalistic “leaks.” We indeed are told Pope Francis directed the contribution of funds to the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. But does that supposed fact have any significance given what we already know about the media support, both direct and indirect, given to the Democratic Party by Francis – surely of incomparably greater value to Hillary than any money Francis could put on the table?

For several reasons the Dictator Pope strikes me as reliable. For one thing, Colonna’s description of Jorge Bergoglio’s style and modus operandi agrees very well with what I have been told by those with more direct knowledge than I possess of his doings in both Rome and Argentina. It also corresponds to certain reports that have appeared now and then in the European – never the English language – mainstream press. Curiously, some of these unflattering accounts are found in sources – like the German media – otherwise entirely aligned with Bergoglio.

Marcantonio Colonna shows the stuff of a true historian in creating a narrative of the Bergoglio years and offering his judgment on what he describes. Instead of nonsense about “God’s choice,” the colorful account of the Dictator Pope has the ring of truth: the relentless rise to the top of an ambitious and manipulative man, the making of strategic alliances and political concessions leading to the acquisition of the papacy and the imposition of the Pope’s personal agenda, the ruthless elimination of real or imaginary enemies, the advancement of unworthy and corrupt favorites. The Vatican as described in this work reminds us of the stories of the Renaissance papacy told in the great histories of Leopold von Ranke and Ludwig von Pastor. Indeed, Marcantonio Colonna himself draws comparisons between Pope Francis and certain ruthlessly ambitious, often megalomaniac and, in one or two cases, perhaps even insane popes of the 14th – 17th centuries, as so well described by his illustrious predecessors.

This portrait of Pope Francis outlined in the Dictator Pope, though, requires some qualification. For one thing, the popes of the past to whom Colonna compares Francis may have been lacking in one or more – or many – of the Christian virtues ( and often in sound judgment as well ) but they were strong characters who battled against and among other powerful rival families and factions within the Church and with the great secular kingdoms and principalities of their day. Francis only has to contend with the bureaucratic ninnies of the post – Vatican II Catholic hierarchy. Regarding today’s secular powers – like the news media – Francis pursues a policy of obsequious and abject submission. For, without exception, the policies of Francis are those of the Western secular establishment from whose support Francis derives all his power.
 
Furthermore, these notorious popes of the past showed rare taste in art and culture. I don’t know what the reign of Francis has to offer in comparison – a homoerotic nativity scene or one of Cardinal Ravasi’s exhibits? And whatever else they were doing, the popes of the Renaissance also devoted great personal attention to the liturgy – the celebration of the papal ceremonial was a major attraction of that period. Pope Francis either disregards the liturgy altogether or “repurposes” it for political statements.

I also must take issue with Colonna’s unduly restrictive characterization of significance of the papacy of Francis. For if Francis were simply one more unscrupulous, ambitious and opportunistic prelate – like Alexander VI – we could consider him simply a regrettable but ultimately remediable failure of the papal election process. But the added dimension of Francis’s papacy is his clear ideological commitment to Catholic progressivism. Whether that is simply a cynical means to the acquisition of power (as Colonna implies) or is a matter of personal conviction is irrelevant  – it is by now an unalterable aspect of his character.  Whatever the origin of his beliefs may be,  Pope Francis is a man with a mission to “unleash” and “make irreversible” the Vatican II – to make permanent what has been done since 1962-65  and to implement further radical changes in Catholic liturgy, morality and theology.  And the policies of Pope Francis are not a bolt from the blue, but the logical culmination of the disastrous trends in theology, morality, liturgy and government in the Catholic Church that have been allowed to develop and fester since 1962-65. 

 Pope Francis’s progressive agenda involves not just the completion of a revolution within the Church but the final, absolute subjection of the Church to the dominant secular powers of 21st century.

Marcantonio Colonna’s narrative helps us to see the current situation in the Church more clearly. And a clear view of what’s going on is always a major first step forward towards reform. The response of the Vatican to this book, we hear, is a search for the author’s identity. For the rest of us, Dictator Pope is a challenge: to reflect, to pray and to take action.

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Merry Christmas!
 On all days and at all times, dearly beloved, does the birth of our Lord and Savior from the Virgin-mother occur to the thoughts of the faithful, who meditate on divine things, that the mind may be aroused to the acknowledgment of its Maker, and whether it be occupied in the groans of supplication, or in the shouting of praise, or in the offering of sacrifice, may employ its spiritual insight on nothing more frequently and more trustingly than on the fact that God the Son of God, begotten of the co-eternal Father, was also born by a human birth. But this Nativity which is to be adored in heaven and on earth is suggested to us by no day more than this when, with the early light still shedding its rays on nature, there is borne in upon our senses the brightness of this wondrous mystery.
 
 

The Divine goodness, dearly beloved, has indeed always taken thought for mankind in divers manners, and in many portions, and of His mercy has imparted many gifts of His providence to the ages of old; but in these last times has exceeded all the abundance of His usual kindness, when in Christ the very Mercy has descended to sinners, the very Truth to those that are astray, the very Life to those that are dead: so that Word, which is co-eternal and co-equal with the Father, might take our humble nature into union with His Godhead, and, being born God of God, might also be born Man of man.

~~Pope St. Leo

Friday, December 22, 2017

Sermon on Fasting

 
EMBER FRIDAY (Today)  
EMBER SATURDAY (Tomorrow)
 
*******
 

On Fasting

By St. John Chrysostom

 
 

Fasting is the change of every part of our life, because the sacrifice of the fast is not the abstinence but the distancing from sins. Therefore, whoever limits the fast to the deprivation of food, he is the one who, in reality, abhors and ridicules the fast. Are you fasting? Show me your fast with your works. Which works? If you see someone who is poor, show him mercy. If you see an enemy, reconcile with him. If you see a friend who is becoming successful, do not be jealous of him! If you see a beautiful woman on the street, pass her by.
 
In other words, not only should the mouth fast, but the eyes and the legs and the arms and all the other parts of the body should fast as well. Let the hands fast, remaining clean from stealing and greediness. Let the legs fast, avoiding roads, which lead to sinful sights. Let the eyes fast by not fixing themselves on beautiful faces and by not observing the beauty of others. You are not eating meat, are you? You should not eat debauchery with your eyes as well. Let your hearing also fast. The fast of hearing is not to accept bad talk against others and sly defamations.
 

Let the mouth fast from disgraceful and abusive words, because, what gain is there when, on the one hand, we avoid eating chicken and fish and, on the other, we chew-up and consume our brothers? He who condemns and blasphemes is as if he has eaten brotherly meat, as if he has bitten into the flesh of his fellow man. It is because of this that Paul frightened us, saying: “If you chew up and consume one another be careful that you do not annihilate yourselves.”
   
If you cannot go without eating all day because of an ailment of the body, beloved one, no logical man will be able to criticize you for that. Besides, we have a Lord Who is meek and loving and Who does not ask for anything beyond our power. Because He neither requires the abstinence from foods, neither that the fast take place for the simple sake of fasting, neither is its aim that we remain with empty stomachs, but that we fast to offer our entire selves to the dedication of spiritual things, having distanced ourselves from secular things.


For there exist, there really exist, ways which are even more important than abstinence from food which can open the gates which lead to God with boldness. He, therefore, who eats and cannot fast, let him display richer almsgiving, let him pray more, let him have a more intense desire to hear divine words. In this, our somatic illness is not a hindrance. Let him become reconciled with his enemies, let him distance from his soul every resentment.
    
We have said enough about those who are missing, being that we want to eliminate them from the excuse of shame. For they should not be ashamed because food does not bring on shame, but the act of some wrongdoing. Sin is a great shame. If we commit it, not only should we feel ashamed but we should cover ourselves exactly the same way those who are wounded do. Even then we should not forsake ourselves but rush to confession and thanksgiving.  


We have such a Lord Who asks nothing of us but to confess our sins, after the commitment of a sin which was due to our indifference, and to stop at that point and not to fall into the same one again. If we eat with moderation, we should never be ashamed, because the Creator gave us such a body, which cannot be supported in any other way except by receiving food. Let us only stop excessive food because that attributes a great deal to the health and well-being of the body.
 
Let us therefore in every way cast off every destructive madness so that we may gain the goods, which have been promised to us in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Father and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
 
Abridged from St. John Chrysostom homilies “On Fasting.”

Thursday, December 21, 2017

Catholic Processions


 Holy Week
*
Ecuador
*
Arm of St. Teresa of Avila
*
*
Good Friday Procession
*
*
Holy Week
*
*
Feast of the Sacred Heart
*
*
*
Good Friday
*
Good Friday
Skull of St. Vincent Ferrer
*
*
Good Friday (Our Lady of Sorrows)
Procession of St. Isidore
*
*
Lima, Peru
*
*
*
Fatima, Portugal