Wednesday, February 14, 2018

UPDATE: Massive liturgical changes - Benedict XVI's reaction

A weak Pope Emeritus fights for the liturgy he loves so much.

 
Four months ago, this Blog had revealed that this year the Novus Ordo Lectionary and Calendar are to be imposed upon the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Mass. However, there is increasing opposition within the Roman Curia to such changes - led by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. A man of integrity and a towering intellect whose theological writings will endure, Benedict XVI, albeit very frail, does not want the dismantling of the work done that culminated in Summorum Pontificum.
 
Benedict XVI's letter to the Italian daily Corriere della Sera, published on 7 February 2018, gives a hint of where the Pope Emeritus' heart lies.
 
“Dear Dott. Franco, 
I was moved that so many readers of your newspaper would like to know how I am spending this last period of my life. I can only say that with the slow decline of my physical forces, interiorly, I am on a pilgrimage towards Home. It is a great grace for me to be surrounded in this last, sometimes a little tiring, piece of road, by such love and goodness that I could not have imagined. In this sense, I also consider the question of your readers as an accompaniment along a stretch. This is why I cannot but be grateful, assuring all of you of my prayers. Best regards.” (Emphasis ours)
However, the modernist wing continues the implementation of its task unabated. The so-called 'reform of the reform' will be further weakened, at the expense of the pre-Conciliar liturgy as much as possible. More on this to follow...

Thursday, February 1, 2018

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

Monday, January 15, 2018

Pro Tridentina (Malta) on LinkedIn.

Image result for linkedin
Pro Tridentina (Malta) is now on LinkedIn. LinkedIn is a business- and employment-oriented social networking service that operates via websites and mobile apps. The aim is to use this medium to organise Tridentine Masses on a regular basis, in particular in the South of Malta and Gozo. Contact us on:

Thursday, January 4, 2018

Maltese bishop who loved the Tridentine Mass dies

 

 
With sadness we announce the death of  Bishop Francis George Adeodatus Micallef, O.C.D., Vicar Apostolic Emeritus of Kuwait, in Malta, who died yesterday, aged 89. As Pro Tridentina (Malta) had reported some years ago, Bishop Micallef was one of the 2 Maltese bishops who have said the Tridentine Mass since Summorum Pontificum. Following is a short biography of this great man, taken from Dictionary of Maltese Biographies, by Michael J. Schiavone:
 
Micallef was born at Birkirkara and studied at the Lyceum. At the age of 18 he joined the Discalced Carmelites. Between 1950 and 1955 Micallef studied theology in Rome and obtained his licentiate in theology. In 1970 Micallef was elected provincial of the Maltese Discalced Carmelites. In 1973 he served as superior of an international community in Rome until November 1981, when he was appointed apostolic vicar for Kuwait.
 
Micallef was consecrated bishop by John Paul II at St Peter's Basilica on 6 January 1982. Micallef was the only Catholic bishop in Kuwait during the invasion by Iraq in August 1990, and he was the sole link with the Holy See during this period.
 

Monday, January 1, 2018

The Dangers of Traditional Catholic Isolation in Malta

Messa-in-latino 2
Holy Mass is not for the elite but for all people of good will.
After the promulgation of Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum, many in Malta began to re-discover, not only the traditional Latin Mass, but also pre-Vatican II morals and teachings.  And they wanted more of it.  Pro Tridentina (Malta) was a catalyst in all this, and its efforts were emulated by other individuals. Some seminarians also approached the group but wanted to remain 'in hiding' so to speak, for fear of harassment by the Church. 

People began to go to the Tridentine Mass when it was available, or to the Novus Ordo Mass that retained a vestige of traditional Catholicism. Women began to wear a veil at Church and began to dress a little more modest when they went to Holy Mass. Men went well dressed, not in their t-shirts and shorts.

Afterwards, some began to just go to the Tridentine Mass because they had experienced the liturgical abuse and were tired of it.  They wanted something deeper and more reverent.  They studied how the Catholic Church was before and after Vatican II and were saddened by the ‘disorientation’ of most Catholics.  Then they discovered that the Novus Ordo Mass was made up, unlike all the other Rites in the history or the Catholic Church.

So far so good. But then, isolation came in.  Contrary to what Pro Tridentina (Malta) had worked for, some former members began to see themselves as the fortunate Catholics who now know the truth about the Mass and Vatican II.  They now perceive all the Novus Ordo Catholics as ignorant and wrong.

Another group now encourages these people to stop talking with Novus Ordo Catholics, or going to their events, because of all the evil activities that go along with these gatherings, (bad music, drinking, dressing scantly and dancing).  They do not want to support their perceived immoral lifestyles by hanging around these people.  They also see Novus Ordo people as extremist and fanatics. 

This can be a dangerous isolation.  This has already happened in Malta, as is the case with the St. Athanasius ICC or when one becomes a sedevacantist. The Catholic Church in Malta has to monitor such groups - even those that pretend to obey the Archbishop of Malta -  and alert the faithful accordingly. Why are we urging such a course of action, when Pro Tridentina (Malta) and many of its members suffered directly by the actions of the Maltese Curia?

Because almost every sedevacantist, and member of these groups, feel that all people in the institutional Catholic Church are bad, and even some say that they going to hell. Heading towards the sedevacantist position is a very perilous path that could end in complete isolation without a Mass to attend or a priest to administer sacraments.
    Pro Tridentina (Malta) believes in staying in the canonical Catholic Church, no matter how bad the Pope, bishops, priests, religious may be.  Since its founding in 2007, it believes in reforming the Church from within, as extremely difficult as that may be. And it will continue to criticise where it sees wrongdoing by people in the Church.

    Pro Tridentina (Malta) does not feel superior to Novus Ordo Catholics. Its former first President used to say in fact that we should rather think that God led us to tradition because we are so wicked that we otherwise might not be able to save our souls. Still,  as well as there being traditional Catholics who tend towards isolationism, there are also modernist Catholics who tend towards rejection, demonisation and mockery of traditional Catholics.