From: Mark 9:41-50
Scandal
[41] "For truly, I say to you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose his reward. [42] "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea. [43] And if your hand causes you to sin cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. [45] And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell. [47] And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, [48] where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched. [49] For every one will be salted with fire. [50] Salt is good; but if the salt has lost its saltiness, how will you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another."
_______________________
Commentary:
41. The value and merit of good works lies mainly in the love of God with which they are done: "A little act, done for love, is worth so much" (J. Escriva, "The Way", 814). God regards in a special way acts of service to others, however small: "Do you see that glass of water or that piece of bread which a holy soul gives to a poor person for God's sake; it is a small matter, God knows, and in human judgment hardly worthy of consideration: God, notwithstanding, recompenses it, and forthwith gives for it some increase of charity" (St Francis de Sales, "Treatise on the Love of God", book 2, chap. 2).
42. "Scandal is anything said, done or omitted which leads another to commit sin" ("St Pius X Catechism", 417). Scandal is called, and is, diabolical when the aim of the scandal-giver is to provoke his neighbor to sin, understanding sin as offense against God. Since sin is the greatest of all evils, it is easy to understand why scandal is so serious and, therefore, why Christ condemns it so roundly. Causing scandal to children is especially serious, because they are so less able to defend themselves against evil. What Christ says applies to everyone, but especially to parents and teachers, who are responsible before God for the souls of the young.
43. "Hell", literally "Gehenna" or "Ge-hinnom", was a little valley south of Jerusalem, outside the walls and below the city. For centuries it was used as the city dump. Usually garbage was burned to avoid it being a focus of infection. Gehenna was, proverbially, an unclean and unhealthy place: our Lord used this to explain in a graphic way the unquenchable fire of hell.
43-48. After teaching the obligation everyone has to avoid giving scandal to others, Jesus now gives the basis of Christian moral teaching on the subject of "occasions of sin"--situations liable to lead to sin. He is very explicit: a person is obliged to avoid proximate occasions of sin, just as he is obliged to avoid sin itself; as God already put it in the Old Testament: "Whoever lives in danger will perish by it" (Sir 3:26-27). The eternal good of our soul is more important than any temporal good. Therefore, anything that places us in proximate danger of committing sin should be cut off and thrown away. By putting things in this way our Lord makes sure we recognize the seriousness of this obligation.
The Fathers see, in these references to hands and eyes and so forth, people who are persistent in evil and ever-ready to entice others to evil behavior and erroneous beliefs. These are the people we should distance ourselves from, so as to enter life, rather than accompany them to hell (St Augustine, "De Consensu Evangelistarum", IV, 16; St John Chrysostom, "Hom. on St Matthew", 60).
44. "Where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched": these words constituting v. 44 are not in the better manuscripts. They are taken from Isaiah 66:24 and are repeated as a kind of refrain in vv. 46 (omitted for the same reason as v. 44) and 48. Our Lord uses them to refer to the torments of hell. Often "the worm that does not die" is explained as the eternal remorse felt by those in hell; and the "fire which is not quenched," as their physical pain. The Fathers also say that both things may possibly refer to physical torments. In any case, the punishment in question is terrible and unending.
49-50. "Every one will be salted with fire." St Bede comments on these words: "Everyone will be salted with fire, says Jesus, because spiritual wisdom must purify all the elect of any kind of corruption through carnal desire. Or he may be speaking of the fire of tribulation, which exercises the patience of the faithful to enable them to reach perfection" (St Bede, "In Marci Evangelium expositio, in loc.").
Some codexes add: "and every sacrifice will be salted with salt". This phrase in Leviticus (2:12), prescribed that all sacrificial offerings should be seasoned with salt to prevent corruption. This prescription of the Old Testament is used here to teach Christians to offer themselves as pleasing victims, impregnated with the spirit of the Gospel, symbolized by salt. Our Lord's address, which arises out of a dispute over who is the greatest, ends with a lesson about fraternal peace and charity. On salt which has lost its taste cf. note on Mt 5:13.
_______________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Letters from across the Mississippi
Some people in the Belleville diocese seem a bit upset with Bishop Braxton. Let's see what one of them has to say:
From what I understand, all of most of the money for the repairs/redecorating came from private donations - If I am wrong, I hope someone corrects me. As far as the items highlighted above, far too many people have no clue as to how to dress for Holy Mass - if he addressed the current inabilityy of many Catholics on proper attire, then good for him!
As far as the chalices are concerned, many of us have complained about the rampant abuse of some priests who have repeatedly ignored the norms and liturgical laws on this matter for decades, to say nothing of the pathetic lack of respect one shows toward our Lord by using common glass or clay wine glasses for His Precious Blood.
With respect to the "bread" Sue is talking about, we can only imagine what she means. I would hope that priests were not so ignornant as to use illicit or, God forbid, invalid matter for confecting the Holy Eucharist - but these days we cannot be so sure. My money says she's a member of FOSIL, the dissenting goup of lay "Catholics" located in southern Illinois. Pray for her and for Bishop Braxton and the priests. They need our prayers precisely because of the constant attacks they are under from those who claim to be members of Christ's Church.
Two days later, another letter was printed:
More about the bishopAll bolding above is mine...Since I'm not from the diocese located in the People's Republik of Illinois, I can't comment as to specifics except to say that many, including maybe a third of the priests, are upset that they were consulted in the selection of the bishop.
Belleville Bishop Edward Braxton appears more concerned with the power of his office than the spiritual needs of his people.
Besides swiftly and extravagantly decorating his house, he has made pronouncements about what he feels is proper dress and photographs for our Catholic priests, proper gold chalices, proper communion bread, proper font in our diocesan paper and much more. He is unavailable for comment, and ignores diocesan tradition by refusing to meet with priests or the laity.
These actions do not follow the example and teachings of Jesus. Jesus lived humbly and taught lessons of service and inclusion.
Our priests are showing great courage in speaking out against the mistaken direction this bishop is taking us. Their many years of service and sacrifice deserve better. Our prayers and encouragement are with them.
Sue DeLorme
Lebanon
From what I understand, all of most of the money for the repairs/redecorating came from private donations - If I am wrong, I hope someone corrects me. As far as the items highlighted above, far too many people have no clue as to how to dress for Holy Mass - if he addressed the current inabilityy of many Catholics on proper attire, then good for him!
As far as the chalices are concerned, many of us have complained about the rampant abuse of some priests who have repeatedly ignored the norms and liturgical laws on this matter for decades, to say nothing of the pathetic lack of respect one shows toward our Lord by using common glass or clay wine glasses for His Precious Blood.
With respect to the "bread" Sue is talking about, we can only imagine what she means. I would hope that priests were not so ignornant as to use illicit or, God forbid, invalid matter for confecting the Holy Eucharist - but these days we cannot be so sure. My money says she's a member of FOSIL, the dissenting goup of lay "Catholics" located in southern Illinois. Pray for her and for Bishop Braxton and the priests. They need our prayers precisely because of the constant attacks they are under from those who claim to be members of Christ's Church.
Two days later, another letter was printed:
Bishop defendedGood for Marie! She seems to be clued in to what's going on. And she's right, we rarely hear of the good our bishops (or priests) do, but with dissenters who claim to be Catholic and their cohorts in the media, could we truly expect anything positive?
I am sick of reading all of the negative claptrap that some Catholics are writing about our Bishop Edward Braxton. From my standpoint, he is a very good bishop.
I invited him to visit our rosary-making group. I also attended one of his Masses. He has been busy attending to things that a bishop must do.
So he wants his home to be attractive, does that mean that he is vain? I think not. Members of the Fellowship of Southern Illinois Laity are constantly writing negative letters about him. I would not attend a Mass with a woman priest presiding, and I believe that is one of their ideas.
You never hear of all of the good things Braxton has done. I am sure there are many.
Marie Steinhardt
Freeburg
A new website- Feminists Anonymous
Feminists Anonymous is dedicated to God, the Father Almighty, Who went looking for His lost sheep, by the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and found her.A new endeavor to help those who have been tricked into the false feminist movement - Highly recommended!
Consistory Announcement
Pope Benedict XVI named 15 new cardinals today...the consistory is set for March 24. Boston's Archbishop Sean O'Malley was named as one of those who is to receive the red hat.
Gospel for Feb 22, Feast: The Chair of St. Peter, Apostle
From: Matthew 16:13-19
Peter's Profession of Faith and His Primacy
[13] Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, "Who do men say that the Son of Man is?" [14] And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." [15] He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" [16] Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." [17] And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven. [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven."
_____________________
Commentary:
13-20. In this passage St. Peter is promised primacy over the whole Church, a primacy which Jesus will confer on him after His Resurrection, as we learn in the Gospel of St. John (cf. John 21:15-18). This supreme authority is given to Peter for the benefit of the Church. Because the Church has to last until the end of time, this authority will be passed on to Peter's successors down through history. The Bishop of Rome, the Pope, is the successor of Peter.
The solemn Magisterium of the Church, in the First Vatican Council, defined the doctrine of the primacy of Peter and his successors in these terms:
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Peter's Profession of Faith and His Primacy
[13] Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, "Who do men say that the Son of Man is?" [14] And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." [15] He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" [16] Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." [17] And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven. [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven."
_____________________
Commentary:
13-20. In this passage St. Peter is promised primacy over the whole Church, a primacy which Jesus will confer on him after His Resurrection, as we learn in the Gospel of St. John (cf. John 21:15-18). This supreme authority is given to Peter for the benefit of the Church. Because the Church has to last until the end of time, this authority will be passed on to Peter's successors down through history. The Bishop of Rome, the Pope, is the successor of Peter.
The solemn Magisterium of the Church, in the First Vatican Council, defined the doctrine of the primacy of Peter and his successors in these terms:
"We teach and declare, therefore, according to the testimony of the Gospel that the primacy of jurisdiction over the whole Church was immediately and directly promised to and conferred upon the blessed Apostle Peter by Christ the Lord. For to Simon, Christ had said, `You shall be called Cephas' (John 1:42). Then, after Simon had acknowledged Christ with the confession, `You are the Christ, the Son of the living God' (Matthew 16:16), it was to Simon alone that the solemn words were spoken by the Lord: `Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in Heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the powers of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and what you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven' (Matthew 16:17-19). And after His Resurrection, Jesus conferred upon Simon Peter alone the jurisdiction of supreme shepherd and ruler over His whole fold with the words, `Feed My lambs....Feed My sheep' (John 21:15-17) [...]_________________________
"(Canon) Therefore, if anyone says that the blessed Apostle Peter was not constituted by Christ the Lord as the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible head of the whole Church militant, or that he received immediately and directly from Jesus Christ our Lord only a primacy of honor and not a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction: let him be condemned.
"Now, what Christ the Lord, Supreme Shepherd and watchful guardian of the flock, established in the person of the blessed Apostle Peter for the perpetual safety and everlasting good of the Church must, by the will of the same, endure without interruption in the Church which was founded on the rock and which will remain firm until the end of the world. Indeed, `no one doubts, in fact it is obvious to all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, Prince and head of the Apostles, the pillar of faith, and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and the Redeemer of the human race; and even to this time and forever he lives,' and governs, `and exercises judgment in his successors' (cf. Council of Ephesus), the bishops of the holy Roman See, which he established and consecrated with his blood. Therefore, whoever succeeds Peter in this Chair holds Peter's primacy over the whole Church according to the plan of Christ Himself [...]. For this reason, `because of its greater sovereignty,' it was always `necessary for every church, that is, the faithful who are everywhere, to be in agreement' with the same Roman Church [...]
"(Canon) Therefore, if anyone says that it is not according to the institution of Christ our Lord himself, that is, by divine law, that St Peter has perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of St Peter in the same primacy: let him be condemned.
"We think it extremely necessary to assert solemnly the prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God deigned to join to the highest pastoral office. "And so, faithfully keeping to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, for the glory of God our Savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and for the salvation of Christian peoples, We, with the approval of the sacred council, teach and define that it is a divinely revealed dogma: that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks "ex cathedra", that is, when, acting in the office of shepherd and teacher of all Christians, he defines, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, possesses through the divine assistance promised to him in the person of St. Peter, the infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are therefore irreformable because of their nature, but not because of the agreement of the Church.
"(Canon) But if anyone presumes to contradict this our definition (God forbid him to do so): let him be condemned" (Vatican I, "Pastor Aeternus", Chaps. 1, 2 and 4).
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Lawsuit accuses head of Vianney high of sexual abuse
Father Robert Osborne, president of St. John Vianney High School, was sued Tuesday by the father of a teen who says Osborne "sexually, physically and emotionally abused" the boy. . .[Fr. Osborne] also said that while he was aware of the family’s complaints to school administrators, he said he was not aware of any allegations of inappropriate behavior. "That is the first I’ve ever heard of that and I categorically deny it," he said. . .
Philippines Bishops Institute Mandatory Pro-Life Course....
... Without Which Sacraments Denied
LifeSiteNews Link
MANILA, Philippines, February 21, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The bishops of the Philippines have responded emphatically to growing pressure from anti-life activists, calling for accountability from Catholics on moral issues.This is a courageous step by these bishops in the face of the wickedness being pushed upon their people.
. . .
Those Catholics who promote or utilize artificial birth control methods may not be able to receive communion or other sacraments.
The bishops have instituted a course for parishioners on the fundamentals of Church teaching, called the Basic Ecclesiastical Communities seminar. Catholics are required to take the course, which runs for eight consecutive Sundays, before receiving sacraments for themselves or their children, and upon entering adulthood.
. . .
The bishops are firm on the necessity of participating in the seminars before being allowed to receive sacraments.
“That’s the idea. That’s exactly the Church’s message. If you want to be a Catholic, act like one and follow the Church’s teachings,” Sister Arguelles said.
LifeSiteNews Link
Bozek and Bishop Leibrecht - Another View
one of the saddest days of his excellency's life
Springfield-Cape Girardeau Bishop John Leibrecht tells the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of his efforts to prevent Fr. Marek Bozek from jumping ship to join the St. Stan's schismatics:More here by DiogenesThe 75-year-old Leibrecht said he feels a "personal betrayal" in Bozek's decision. On the morning Bozek gave Leibrecht his final decision, Leibrecht asked the priest to sit down and take his coat off. Bozek refused.Creepy. And it gets creepier.
"I begged him not to leave. I gave him every reason I could think of," said Leibrecht, "but he made the decision anyway. It was," he paused, then began to cry softly, "it was one of the saddest days of my life."
Bozek, it appears, had begun studies for the priesthood in his native Poland but ran into an unenlightened superior with retrograde views about affective maturity:
No Communion, no joke
In his new book "The Truth (with Jokes)," Al Franken addresses public issues and people, including St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke. Mr. Franken alleges that Archbishop Burke is a hypocrite because he forbade U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., from receiving Holy Communion during the 2004 presidential campaign, yet he has not acted similarly regarding pro-abortion Republicans, such as Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In fact, Archbishop Burke's policy, solidly rooted in Church teaching and canon law, applies equally to Democrats and Republicans. The archbishop is responsible only for the Archdiocese of St. Louis. Mr. Kerry became an issue when he campaigned in St. Louis in 2004. Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Schwarzenegger have not made political sojourns to St. Louis. If they or other pro-abortion Republicans do, Archbishop Burke will respond evenhandedly.
Archbishop Burke was rightly concerned with the scandal that could result from allowing a public figure to receive Communion when he is committed to upholding abortion rights. Archbishop Burke was concerned with the spiritual well-being of Mr. Kerry.
In future commentary on the Church or Archbishop Burke, we hope Mr. Franken is more committed to reporting the truth. No joke.
Thomas J. Nash
Steubenville, Ohio
Director of Special Projects,
Catholics United for the Faith
Vatican defrocks priest in abuse case
I'm not certain what is meant by "defrocked" since, as far as I know, it's a term not used by the Church. Perhaps they meant that he was laicized?
The Vatican has defrocked a local priest accused of sexually abusing an altar boy who later committed suicide, the Archdiocese of Seattle announced Monday.More.
Gerald Moffat, 75, most recently a pastor at St. Hubert Parish in Langley on Whidbey Island, had been on administrative leave since July 2002, when molestation allegations against him first surfaced.
Supreme Court to weigh late-term abortion ban
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will consider the constitutionality of banning a type of late-term abortion, teeing up a contentious issue for a newly-constituted court already in a state of flux over privacy rights.We can pray the some sense of morality and justice permeates the minds of all the justices so that they will come see Partial Birth Abortion for what it truly is - one of the heinous crimes in the history of humanity!
The Bush administration has pressed the high court to reinstate the federal law, passed in 2003 but never put in effect because it was struck down by judges in California, Nebraska and New York.
The outcome will likely rest with the two men that President Bush has recently installed on the court. Justices had been split 5-4 in 2000 in striking down a state law, barring what critics call partial birth abortion because it lacked an exception to protect the health of the mother.
Source.
Vigilate et orate. . .
"Watch and pray." Matthew 26:41
The words I have chosen for my text today were spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ to His three disciples - Peter, James, and John - in the Garden of Gethsemani. Entering that garden of sorrow with the three whom He had chosen as His companions at that awful hour, He said to them: "Stay you here, and watch with me." And when, returning from His agony and prayer, He found those three asleep, His words of reproach were: "What! are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour with me? Peter, are you asleep? Could you not keep awake one hour! Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation." And at last, when the time of His prayer and agony, and of His disciples' sleep was over, "Rise," said He, "Rise, pray that you enter not into temptation."
Now what did our Lord mean by the word "Watch"? When He told Peter, James, and John to watch, and reproached them for not watching, what did He mean by the word so often and variously repeated? He meant, by that word, to tell them to keep awake and not to fall asleep. And why, since nighttime was the time for sleep? It was in order that they might pray, and by prayer escape the temptation which He knew was at hand. "Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation. . . . Behold, he that will betray me is at hand."
Now, let us at once follow out that lesson, that sad lesson of Gethsemani. Peter, James, and John, did not keep awake, did not watch as Jesus told them, but slept. Three times did their Master, leaving His own struggle and prayer, rising from His sweat of Blood, come to them and rouse them, telling them to keep awake and pray; and three times did they give in to their drowsiness and fall asleep again. And of course, then, they did not pray. Sleeping men do not pray. And because they did not pray they did not resist the temptation that was at hand.
The sleep was still in their eyes when the tempter was on them. He slept not: he watched; and, in the dark hour came, with lanterns and torches and a great crowd, with arms, and clubs, and sticks, to apprehend Jesus. It was the hour of temptation, and the drowsy disciples were not prepared for it. They made only a show of fight. One, the halfsleeping Peter, struck with his sword, but struck wildly, and only cut off a servant's ear. And that done - fugerunt omnes - they fled away, every one of them. An hour more, and one of the sleepers in the Garden, now terribly wide awake, is cursing and swearing in his denial of Jesus.
There is the lesson of the Garden. Instead of watching and praying, they slept and did not pray; and so when temptation came, as it did come quickly on them, all of them fell, and one of them into the most fearful and repeated sin.
And I think this drowsiness must have been habitual. Our Lord's warning to them to keep awake and pray would seem to point to this. But there is other evidence of their habits of sleep. You remember that on another occasion Jesus took Peter, James, and John with Him when He went apart to pray. He took them into a high mountain, and He was transfigured before them. The Gospel tells us of that Transfiguration. But it did not tell us of one circumstance of that scene on Mount Thabor.
St. Luke is the only Evangelist who mentions that Peter, James, and John, when they got to the top of the mountain, "were heavy with sleep;" and, as they did afterwards in the Garden, they slept while Jesus was praying. And as He prayed, and while they slept, He was transfigured. Then waking up, they saw His glory, the shining face and glittering raiment. But, mark, they had already lost some of that glorious vision, all of which they would have witnessed had they watched and prayed, as indeed they came to the mountaintop to do.
This time, it is true, no temptations came; but it was one of the acts that confirmed them in that habit of sleeping at time of prayer - a habit that led in the end to their cowardice and sin.
Very different was the habit of their Lord and Master. We read how He used to spend the night in prayer. He preached watching, and He practiced it. In the twenty-first chapter of St. Luke we read that He preached: "Watch you, praying at all times:" and in the very next verse we read that having spent the day in teaching, He used to go out at night and remain on Mount Olivet, that mount on the slope of which is the Garden of Gethsemani, where, as St. Luke tells us, it was His custom to go, that He might watch and pray.
The Church followed the example of her Founder. Vigils, or watches through the night, were, like the fasts, part of the public discipline of the first centuries. In the course of time the abuses incident on the gathering of large crowds at night caused that custom to be suppressed. But the word "vigil", still remains, reminding us of the night of watching and prayer that preceded the greater feasts.
In Ireland we still preserve the pious custom of watching by the bodies of the dead. We call it waking, that is, keeping awake. And you know why we wake: it is that we may pray. Watch and pray, then, when you go to these wakes. Wakeful prayer is ever pleasing to God. But guard against those abuses which have, in other lands, obliged the Church to stop those wakes, and which, alas! are not unknown even here. Do not forget this, then, dear friends. Wake, and pray; do not wake and drink, or wake and gossip in the house of death; but wake and pray.
It is kind for us to be watchers. St. Patrick left it as one of his blessed traditions. His four hours on the bare floor should be a reproach, if it cannot be a model to be imitated. He spent the greater part of the night in prayer, watching and praying for his people. And even now, in every religious rule, watching is a part of the discipline of the monastery and of the convent. Monks rise at dead of night to watch and pray. And nearer still, have not you, who live in this town, sometimes heard, at five o'clock in the bleak winter morning, the convent bell summoning the nuns to watch and pray? And has the thought of these Sisters, rising thus every morning to spend those hours in prayer, never brought a pang of self reproach to you, who perhaps find eight o'clock too early to hear Mass?
Let us then, dear brethren, with these lessons and examples before us, make our resolutions in regard to watching. Such resolutions are particularly fitting now, forLent is soon upon us . Lent is a time of penance, of bodily penance: it is a time when, in St. Paul's words, we chastise our bodies and bring them into subjection.
There are two things that these bodies of flesh demand and long for: food and sleep. By fasting we deny them food, by watching we deny them sleep. "Now" - as the Church declares in the words of St. Paul, at the opening of the Advent penance - "now is the hour for us to rise from sleep." And so it is, in the true and traditional spirit of this coming season of penance and prayer that the custom is here preserved of having, during Lent, a Mass in this cathedral, very early in the morning. And a moving sight that Lenten morning Mass is, that Watchers' Mass: a sight to thank God for.
God bless those watchful children of penance who, with such patient regularity, throng the streets of this town in the gray light of early morning. God bless them as they fill this great church when there is scarcely light enough in it to see their crowds. Yes, that is the message of the early bell that rouses so many of you from your sleep. Watch and pray: watch, pray. Rise and come to the Watchers' Mass. It is hard to rise; it is more pleasant to sleep than to watch; but still the Lenten bell tolls out: "Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation." It is a call to do penance. Rise, then, in the name of God, rise in the strength of the sign of the Cross, rise and come to Mass.
And not in Lent alone should we watch and pray. "Watch, and pray at all times," preached our Divine Lord; and since temptation is ever near at hand, we should ever prepare ourselves by prayer; and we cannot pray unless we watch. Watching, then, means rising in the morning, rising to pray: praying in the evening, lest we sleep instead of praying. That is exactly what I mean by telling you to watch and pray. I wish, dear brethren, I could tell you all I feel on this matter of rising in time for morning prayer or morning Mass.
I believe that slothful habits in the morning hours are the source of fearful evils to souls. I believe that countless souls are giving way to temptation every day who would resist that temptation if only in the morning they had watched and prayed - that is, if only they had sacrificed say one half hour's, even one quarter of an hour's slothful sleep, and had conquered themselves and risen to prayer.
Oh, who shall tell the sad record of hurried, unfinished prayers, of Masses lost, of good resolutions broken, of graces never gained, of lives that might have been saintly lives brought down to lowest levels, for the sake of half an hour's sleep in the morning! I do not touch the question of bodily health, though the greatest medical authorities of every age have told, and still tell us, that more than seven hours for most constitutions, and eight for some, is actually injurious, and as truly intemperate as excess in eating or drinking.
I do not press that, for I am here to plead for your souls' salvation and not for your bodily health. But this I do press - this question: Is half an hour's sleep at the end of a good night's rest worth a Mass? Is it worth that time spent in leisurely morning prayer and preparation for the temptations of the day? Is the time better employed in sleep than it would be in spiritual exercises? Will your day be happier for that extra sleep than it would be with that extra prayer? Oh, the Devil, the World, and the Flesh cry out at once, Sleep, and do not pray. The Devil, ever watching, is sure of a victory over sleepers: when Peter, James, and John fell, he has a well-grounded confidence in the power of sleep. Sleep on, says the Devil; time enough to say your prayers in the course of the day.
Sleep on, says the World; or if you rise, let it be for pleasure not for prayer. I will allow the sportsman to watch, I will allow the business man to watch - these may rise as early as they like; but the Christian must not watch and' pray, must not get up early that he may have sufficient time for his morning prayer. Sleep on, says the World; time enough for prayer; the day is long. Sleep on, says the Flesh; I must have my sleep. Why do you worry this poor body? I am comfortable, and without trouble: the time for that will come soon enough. I am not well; I should not be well if I kept early hours; I cannot stand the morning air, I am sure I cannot; I once caught cold going to Mass!
Ah, brethren, you see through it all plainly enough! How many colds have you caught when watching in pursuit of pleasure? Have you then so carefully measured your sleep, and been concerned so for your health? Will you give in to the Devil, the World, and the Flesh when they say to you: "Sleep on, and never mind your prayers"? or will you hear and obey the word of Jesus Christ, your loving Master and Model, when He says to you: "Watch and pray"? This is, I know, your answer: - Yes; we will watch and pray. Whatever has been our custom in the past, we are determined now to rise in time for morning Mass, when that is possible - but at least for leisurely morning prayer. We will not run the risk of yielding to temptation and of being plunged for ever into hell, for the sake of our morning's sleep.
The time for rest has not yet come, dear brethren, but it is not far off. If we are weary with our labour and our watching now, let us look forward to our everlasting rest. In the Office of Lent we read these words of hope: "May it not be in vain for you that you rise in the morning before the light: because the Lord has promised a crown to those that watch." God grant us so to watch now, and watching, so to pray, that we may soon see that day of rest! Grant us, 0 Lord, eternal rest; may we rest in peace. Amen!
_________________
Adapted from...Sermons 1877-1887
by Fr Arthur Ryan
President of St. Patrick's College
Thurles, Ireland
St. Patrick's College, in 1992, ceased to be a Seminary.
The words I have chosen for my text today were spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ to His three disciples - Peter, James, and John - in the Garden of Gethsemani. Entering that garden of sorrow with the three whom He had chosen as His companions at that awful hour, He said to them: "Stay you here, and watch with me." And when, returning from His agony and prayer, He found those three asleep, His words of reproach were: "What! are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour with me? Peter, are you asleep? Could you not keep awake one hour! Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation." And at last, when the time of His prayer and agony, and of His disciples' sleep was over, "Rise," said He, "Rise, pray that you enter not into temptation."
Now what did our Lord mean by the word "Watch"? When He told Peter, James, and John to watch, and reproached them for not watching, what did He mean by the word so often and variously repeated? He meant, by that word, to tell them to keep awake and not to fall asleep. And why, since nighttime was the time for sleep? It was in order that they might pray, and by prayer escape the temptation which He knew was at hand. "Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation. . . . Behold, he that will betray me is at hand."
Now, let us at once follow out that lesson, that sad lesson of Gethsemani. Peter, James, and John, did not keep awake, did not watch as Jesus told them, but slept. Three times did their Master, leaving His own struggle and prayer, rising from His sweat of Blood, come to them and rouse them, telling them to keep awake and pray; and three times did they give in to their drowsiness and fall asleep again. And of course, then, they did not pray. Sleeping men do not pray. And because they did not pray they did not resist the temptation that was at hand.
The sleep was still in their eyes when the tempter was on them. He slept not: he watched; and, in the dark hour came, with lanterns and torches and a great crowd, with arms, and clubs, and sticks, to apprehend Jesus. It was the hour of temptation, and the drowsy disciples were not prepared for it. They made only a show of fight. One, the halfsleeping Peter, struck with his sword, but struck wildly, and only cut off a servant's ear. And that done - fugerunt omnes - they fled away, every one of them. An hour more, and one of the sleepers in the Garden, now terribly wide awake, is cursing and swearing in his denial of Jesus.
There is the lesson of the Garden. Instead of watching and praying, they slept and did not pray; and so when temptation came, as it did come quickly on them, all of them fell, and one of them into the most fearful and repeated sin.
And I think this drowsiness must have been habitual. Our Lord's warning to them to keep awake and pray would seem to point to this. But there is other evidence of their habits of sleep. You remember that on another occasion Jesus took Peter, James, and John with Him when He went apart to pray. He took them into a high mountain, and He was transfigured before them. The Gospel tells us of that Transfiguration. But it did not tell us of one circumstance of that scene on Mount Thabor.
St. Luke is the only Evangelist who mentions that Peter, James, and John, when they got to the top of the mountain, "were heavy with sleep;" and, as they did afterwards in the Garden, they slept while Jesus was praying. And as He prayed, and while they slept, He was transfigured. Then waking up, they saw His glory, the shining face and glittering raiment. But, mark, they had already lost some of that glorious vision, all of which they would have witnessed had they watched and prayed, as indeed they came to the mountaintop to do.
This time, it is true, no temptations came; but it was one of the acts that confirmed them in that habit of sleeping at time of prayer - a habit that led in the end to their cowardice and sin.
Very different was the habit of their Lord and Master. We read how He used to spend the night in prayer. He preached watching, and He practiced it. In the twenty-first chapter of St. Luke we read that He preached: "Watch you, praying at all times:" and in the very next verse we read that having spent the day in teaching, He used to go out at night and remain on Mount Olivet, that mount on the slope of which is the Garden of Gethsemani, where, as St. Luke tells us, it was His custom to go, that He might watch and pray.
The Church followed the example of her Founder. Vigils, or watches through the night, were, like the fasts, part of the public discipline of the first centuries. In the course of time the abuses incident on the gathering of large crowds at night caused that custom to be suppressed. But the word "vigil", still remains, reminding us of the night of watching and prayer that preceded the greater feasts.
In Ireland we still preserve the pious custom of watching by the bodies of the dead. We call it waking, that is, keeping awake. And you know why we wake: it is that we may pray. Watch and pray, then, when you go to these wakes. Wakeful prayer is ever pleasing to God. But guard against those abuses which have, in other lands, obliged the Church to stop those wakes, and which, alas! are not unknown even here. Do not forget this, then, dear friends. Wake, and pray; do not wake and drink, or wake and gossip in the house of death; but wake and pray.
It is kind for us to be watchers. St. Patrick left it as one of his blessed traditions. His four hours on the bare floor should be a reproach, if it cannot be a model to be imitated. He spent the greater part of the night in prayer, watching and praying for his people. And even now, in every religious rule, watching is a part of the discipline of the monastery and of the convent. Monks rise at dead of night to watch and pray. And nearer still, have not you, who live in this town, sometimes heard, at five o'clock in the bleak winter morning, the convent bell summoning the nuns to watch and pray? And has the thought of these Sisters, rising thus every morning to spend those hours in prayer, never brought a pang of self reproach to you, who perhaps find eight o'clock too early to hear Mass?
Let us then, dear brethren, with these lessons and examples before us, make our resolutions in regard to watching. Such resolutions are particularly fitting now, forLent is soon upon us . Lent is a time of penance, of bodily penance: it is a time when, in St. Paul's words, we chastise our bodies and bring them into subjection.
There are two things that these bodies of flesh demand and long for: food and sleep. By fasting we deny them food, by watching we deny them sleep. "Now" - as the Church declares in the words of St. Paul, at the opening of the Advent penance - "now is the hour for us to rise from sleep." And so it is, in the true and traditional spirit of this coming season of penance and prayer that the custom is here preserved of having, during Lent, a Mass in this cathedral, very early in the morning. And a moving sight that Lenten morning Mass is, that Watchers' Mass: a sight to thank God for.
God bless those watchful children of penance who, with such patient regularity, throng the streets of this town in the gray light of early morning. God bless them as they fill this great church when there is scarcely light enough in it to see their crowds. Yes, that is the message of the early bell that rouses so many of you from your sleep. Watch and pray: watch, pray. Rise and come to the Watchers' Mass. It is hard to rise; it is more pleasant to sleep than to watch; but still the Lenten bell tolls out: "Watch, and pray that you enter not into temptation." It is a call to do penance. Rise, then, in the name of God, rise in the strength of the sign of the Cross, rise and come to Mass.
And not in Lent alone should we watch and pray. "Watch, and pray at all times," preached our Divine Lord; and since temptation is ever near at hand, we should ever prepare ourselves by prayer; and we cannot pray unless we watch. Watching, then, means rising in the morning, rising to pray: praying in the evening, lest we sleep instead of praying. That is exactly what I mean by telling you to watch and pray. I wish, dear brethren, I could tell you all I feel on this matter of rising in time for morning prayer or morning Mass.
I believe that slothful habits in the morning hours are the source of fearful evils to souls. I believe that countless souls are giving way to temptation every day who would resist that temptation if only in the morning they had watched and prayed - that is, if only they had sacrificed say one half hour's, even one quarter of an hour's slothful sleep, and had conquered themselves and risen to prayer.
Oh, who shall tell the sad record of hurried, unfinished prayers, of Masses lost, of good resolutions broken, of graces never gained, of lives that might have been saintly lives brought down to lowest levels, for the sake of half an hour's sleep in the morning! I do not touch the question of bodily health, though the greatest medical authorities of every age have told, and still tell us, that more than seven hours for most constitutions, and eight for some, is actually injurious, and as truly intemperate as excess in eating or drinking.
I do not press that, for I am here to plead for your souls' salvation and not for your bodily health. But this I do press - this question: Is half an hour's sleep at the end of a good night's rest worth a Mass? Is it worth that time spent in leisurely morning prayer and preparation for the temptations of the day? Is the time better employed in sleep than it would be in spiritual exercises? Will your day be happier for that extra sleep than it would be with that extra prayer? Oh, the Devil, the World, and the Flesh cry out at once, Sleep, and do not pray. The Devil, ever watching, is sure of a victory over sleepers: when Peter, James, and John fell, he has a well-grounded confidence in the power of sleep. Sleep on, says the Devil; time enough to say your prayers in the course of the day.
Sleep on, says the World; or if you rise, let it be for pleasure not for prayer. I will allow the sportsman to watch, I will allow the business man to watch - these may rise as early as they like; but the Christian must not watch and' pray, must not get up early that he may have sufficient time for his morning prayer. Sleep on, says the World; time enough for prayer; the day is long. Sleep on, says the Flesh; I must have my sleep. Why do you worry this poor body? I am comfortable, and without trouble: the time for that will come soon enough. I am not well; I should not be well if I kept early hours; I cannot stand the morning air, I am sure I cannot; I once caught cold going to Mass!
Ah, brethren, you see through it all plainly enough! How many colds have you caught when watching in pursuit of pleasure? Have you then so carefully measured your sleep, and been concerned so for your health? Will you give in to the Devil, the World, and the Flesh when they say to you: "Sleep on, and never mind your prayers"? or will you hear and obey the word of Jesus Christ, your loving Master and Model, when He says to you: "Watch and pray"? This is, I know, your answer: - Yes; we will watch and pray. Whatever has been our custom in the past, we are determined now to rise in time for morning Mass, when that is possible - but at least for leisurely morning prayer. We will not run the risk of yielding to temptation and of being plunged for ever into hell, for the sake of our morning's sleep.
The time for rest has not yet come, dear brethren, but it is not far off. If we are weary with our labour and our watching now, let us look forward to our everlasting rest. In the Office of Lent we read these words of hope: "May it not be in vain for you that you rise in the morning before the light: because the Lord has promised a crown to those that watch." God grant us so to watch now, and watching, so to pray, that we may soon see that day of rest! Grant us, 0 Lord, eternal rest; may we rest in peace. Amen!
_________________
Adapted from...Sermons 1877-1887
by Fr Arthur Ryan
President of St. Patrick's College
Thurles, Ireland
St. Patrick's College, in 1992, ceased to be a Seminary.
Gospel for Tuesday, 7th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 9:30-37
Second Prophecy of the Passion
[30] They went on from there and passed through Galilee. And He (Jesus) would not have any one know it; [31] for He was teaching His disciples, saying to them, "The Son of Man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and when He is killed, after three days He will rise." [32] But they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask Him.
Being the Servant of All
[33] And they came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house He asked them, "What were you discussing on the way?" [34] But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest. [35] And He sat down and called the Twelve; and He said to them, "If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all." [36] And He took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in His arms, He said to them, [37] "Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me, receives not Me but Him who sent Me".
______________________
Commentary:
30-32. Although moved when He sees the crowds like sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36), Jesus leaves them, to devote time to careful instruction of the Apostles. He retires with them to out-of-the-way places, and there He explains points of His public preaching which they had not understood (Matthew 13:36). Here, specifically, for a second time, He announces His death and resurrection.
In His relationships with souls Jesus acts in the same way: He calls man to be with him in the quiet of prayer and there He teaches him about His more intimate plans and about the more demanding side of the Christian life. Later, like the Apostles, Christians were to spread this teaching to the ends of the earth.
34-35. Jesus uses this argument going on behind his back to teach His disciples about how authority should be exercised in His Church--not by lording it over other, but by serving them. In fulfilling His own mission to found the Church whose head and supreme lawgiver He is, He came to serve and not to be served (Matthew 20:28).
Anyone who does not strive to have this attitude of self-forgetful service, not only lacks one of the main pre-requisites for proper exercise of authority but also runs the risk of being motivated by ambition or pride. "To be in charge of an apostolic undertaking demands readiness to suffer everything, from everybody, with infinite charity" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 951).
36-37. To demonstrate to His Apostles the abnegation and humility needed in their ministry, He takes a child into His arms and explains the meaning of this gesture: if we receive for Christ's sake those who have little importance in the world's eyes, it is as if we are embracing Christ Himself and the Father who sent Him. This little child whom Jesus embraces represents every child in the world, and everyone who is needy, helpless, poor or sick--people who are not naturally attractive.
_______________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Second Prophecy of the Passion
[30] They went on from there and passed through Galilee. And He (Jesus) would not have any one know it; [31] for He was teaching His disciples, saying to them, "The Son of Man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and when He is killed, after three days He will rise." [32] But they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask Him.
Being the Servant of All
[33] And they came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house He asked them, "What were you discussing on the way?" [34] But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest. [35] And He sat down and called the Twelve; and He said to them, "If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all." [36] And He took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in His arms, He said to them, [37] "Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me, receives not Me but Him who sent Me".
______________________
Commentary:
30-32. Although moved when He sees the crowds like sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36), Jesus leaves them, to devote time to careful instruction of the Apostles. He retires with them to out-of-the-way places, and there He explains points of His public preaching which they had not understood (Matthew 13:36). Here, specifically, for a second time, He announces His death and resurrection.
In His relationships with souls Jesus acts in the same way: He calls man to be with him in the quiet of prayer and there He teaches him about His more intimate plans and about the more demanding side of the Christian life. Later, like the Apostles, Christians were to spread this teaching to the ends of the earth.
34-35. Jesus uses this argument going on behind his back to teach His disciples about how authority should be exercised in His Church--not by lording it over other, but by serving them. In fulfilling His own mission to found the Church whose head and supreme lawgiver He is, He came to serve and not to be served (Matthew 20:28).
Anyone who does not strive to have this attitude of self-forgetful service, not only lacks one of the main pre-requisites for proper exercise of authority but also runs the risk of being motivated by ambition or pride. "To be in charge of an apostolic undertaking demands readiness to suffer everything, from everybody, with infinite charity" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 951).
36-37. To demonstrate to His Apostles the abnegation and humility needed in their ministry, He takes a child into His arms and explains the meaning of this gesture: if we receive for Christ's sake those who have little importance in the world's eyes, it is as if we are embracing Christ Himself and the Father who sent Him. This little child whom Jesus embraces represents every child in the world, and everyone who is needy, helpless, poor or sick--people who are not naturally attractive.
_______________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Monday, February 20, 2006
Alter Christus - The Priest in the Confessional
The holy season of Lent is the "tempus acceptabile", the "dies salutis". Every zealous priest is bent on the spiritual regeneration of his parish: sinners must be converted, good Christians become more spiritual, fervent souls advance in holiness. One of the most efficacious means at the priest's disposal is the confessional. There he comes into direct and personal contact with each individual soul, and can apply to them the merits of Christ's Precious Blood. But the extent of his influence on them, ex opere operantis, will depend very much on the dispositions he brings to the tribunal of penance. Let us then, in this recollection, examine some of the virtues which will help him to reap abundant fruit from this ministry, viz. Zeal - Prudence - Kindliness.
ZEAL
There are many and cogent reasons why the priest should love this sacred function of his ministry and be filled with an ardent zeal for it. Nowhere else, except at the altar, does he exercise so sublime and tremendous a power. It is only as an "alter Christus" that he can pronounce the words of absolution: .. Ego te absolvo. . .". How eager should he not be to make use of this divine prerogative and to secure for his flock the inestimable blessings of it? Often his sacramental absolution will save souls from hell, free them from the slavery of Satan, and restore them to the friendship of God. It will always cleanse them from sin, make them purer and brighter in the eyes of God, and obtain for them graces of amendment and sanctification.
Moreover, this Sacrament gives the zealous priest the opportunity to instruct the faithful, to encourage and help them in their fight against sin, in the acquisition of virtues. And for himself he has there a most abundant source of merits, by accepting readily and joyfully the great inconveniences, the weariness and tediousness of this obscure and often hard ministry. Not infrequently too he may find there his own sanctification, at times by the horror and sorrow for sin he experiences at the contact of human miseries, and the spirit of reparation it evokes in him, at times by the edification he receives from pure and generous souls.
If anywhere, it is especially in the tribunal of penance that the priest needs the cardinal virtue of prudence. Without it, he may give invalid absolutions, where necessary dispositions are lacking, - confirm sinners in their loose morality, by condoning evils which the modern world advocates, - or send away unabsolved, and thus perhaps alienate from the Church, penitents who could have been made duly repentant. . . He has to judge each case not only by the principles of moral law, but also according to the special circumstances and subjective dispositions of the penitent. And these must be kept in mind too for the penance he imposes, lest he err and harm souls by excess either in severity or in leniency.
Not only "qua judex", but also "qua doctor et medicus", does he greatly need prudence: to give penitents proper advice as to the remedies against their faults and the practical means to grow in Christian perfection. . . And for himself, too, prudence is imperative, to avoid the dangers and pitfalls which may present themselves, especially about matters "de sexto", in the performance of even this most sacred duty.
Suffice it to mention that other great quality of the good confessor: kindliness. Its effects on the penitents are obvious. Where they meet with sympathy and gentleness, confession, even of great sins, is easy. When they fear harshness, either they will not approach the confessional, or they will hide their more shameful deeds... And the good Christians who wish for help and guidance from their confessors will seek it only if they find in him the kindly heart of a true Father. . .
In the confessional, more than anywhere else, the priest must model his heart upon the Heart of the Divine Master, and seek to imitate His compassionate tenderness towards sinners, His loving patience towards all who came to Him.
__________________________
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 50.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
ZEAL
There are many and cogent reasons why the priest should love this sacred function of his ministry and be filled with an ardent zeal for it. Nowhere else, except at the altar, does he exercise so sublime and tremendous a power. It is only as an "alter Christus" that he can pronounce the words of absolution: .. Ego te absolvo. . .". How eager should he not be to make use of this divine prerogative and to secure for his flock the inestimable blessings of it? Often his sacramental absolution will save souls from hell, free them from the slavery of Satan, and restore them to the friendship of God. It will always cleanse them from sin, make them purer and brighter in the eyes of God, and obtain for them graces of amendment and sanctification.
Moreover, this Sacrament gives the zealous priest the opportunity to instruct the faithful, to encourage and help them in their fight against sin, in the acquisition of virtues. And for himself he has there a most abundant source of merits, by accepting readily and joyfully the great inconveniences, the weariness and tediousness of this obscure and often hard ministry. Not infrequently too he may find there his own sanctification, at times by the horror and sorrow for sin he experiences at the contact of human miseries, and the spirit of reparation it evokes in him, at times by the edification he receives from pure and generous souls.
* Am I sufficiently conscious of the great trust God has placed in me by making me the depository of His mercies, and of the corresponding obligation to dispense God's pardon to souls in search of it?PRUDENCE
Am I not slow at times to respond to reasonable calls, because I may be too engrossed by my own ease and comfort?
Does my zeal for souls make me eager to avail myself of the opportunities of the confessional to bring souls close to God, or am I tempted to be a mere retailer of absolutions?
Do I encourage "the pious practice of frequent confession" mindful of Pius XII's warning that to act otherwise "is contrary to the spirit of Christ and disastrous for the mystical body of our Saviour" (Enc. on the Mystical Body).
If anywhere, it is especially in the tribunal of penance that the priest needs the cardinal virtue of prudence. Without it, he may give invalid absolutions, where necessary dispositions are lacking, - confirm sinners in their loose morality, by condoning evils which the modern world advocates, - or send away unabsolved, and thus perhaps alienate from the Church, penitents who could have been made duly repentant. . . He has to judge each case not only by the principles of moral law, but also according to the special circumstances and subjective dispositions of the penitent. And these must be kept in mind too for the penance he imposes, lest he err and harm souls by excess either in severity or in leniency.
Not only "qua judex", but also "qua doctor et medicus", does he greatly need prudence: to give penitents proper advice as to the remedies against their faults and the practical means to grow in Christian perfection. . . And for himself, too, prudence is imperative, to avoid the dangers and pitfalls which may present themselves, especially about matters "de sexto", in the performance of even this most sacred duty.
* These grave considerations must not make me timorous or despondent: the graces of my vocation are ample security and sure ground for confidence. But they must re-awake in me: the sense of duty to keep up my knowledge of moral theology, the indispensable requisite to act with prudence; a holy fear which must put me on my guard against all weaknesses and compromises with sin in others, also against unhealthy sensations and attractions in myself; the habit of humble prayer and trust in God's help, when engaged in this holy but difficult ministry: "Da mihi, Domine, sedium tuarum assistricem sapientiam, etc." (cf. 'Oratio sacerdotis antequam confessiones excipiat').KINDLINESS
Suffice it to mention that other great quality of the good confessor: kindliness. Its effects on the penitents are obvious. Where they meet with sympathy and gentleness, confession, even of great sins, is easy. When they fear harshness, either they will not approach the confessional, or they will hide their more shameful deeds... And the good Christians who wish for help and guidance from their confessors will seek it only if they find in him the kindly heart of a true Father. . .
In the confessional, more than anywhere else, the priest must model his heart upon the Heart of the Divine Master, and seek to imitate His compassionate tenderness towards sinners, His loving patience towards all who came to Him.
* Do I keep patient and gentle with all penitents, on all occasions, even when tired or annoyed?"There is no surer sign of a fervent priest than the love of the confessional. It is the first duty that a lax priest avoids and evades." (Manning)
Am I trying to strengthen myself always with thoughts of faith: seeing in front of me souls to be saved and sanctified in the Blood of Christ?
Is it my constant endeavour and prayer that I may be a confessor after the Heart of Jesus? "Cor sacerdotis, cor Christi."
__________________________
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 50.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
What Exactly Is Marek Bozek's Current Visa Status?
As posted somewhere or another (and I don't recall right now), Marek Bozek was supposedly granted an R-1 (Religious Worker Visa) to work in the U.S. and a question arose about how long he might be employed for St. Stanislaus. From what I saw, there is an initial term of the visa for up to a 3 year period which is renewal for an additional 2 years, but cannot exceed 5 years.
So now, the questions:
Has his status changed since he has left the Catholic diocese of Springfield?
Visa Documention Source.
So now, the questions:
Has his status changed since he has left the Catholic diocese of Springfield?
(6) Change of employers. A different or additional organizational unit of the religious denomination seeking to employ or engage the services of a religious worker admitted under this section shall file Form I-129 with the appropriate fee. The petition shall be filed with the Service Center having jurisdiction over the place of employment. The petition must be accompanied by evidence establishing that the alien will continue to qualify as a religious worker under this section. Any unauthorized change to a new religious organizational unit will constitute a failure to maintain status within the meaning of section 241(a)(1)(C)(i) of the Act.What qualifications are necessary to obtain a visa, or revise it?
The alien must be coming to the United States for one of the following purposes: solely to carry on the vocation of a minister of the religious denomination; to work for the religious organization at the request of the organization in a professional capacity; or to work for the organization, or a bona fide organization which is affiliated with the religious denomination, at the request of the organization in a religious vocation or occupation.What is meant by a bonafide religious organization?
Bona fide nonprofit religious organization in the United States means an organization exempt from taxation as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it relates to religious organizations, or one that has never sought such exemption but establishes to the satisfaction of the Service that it would be eligible therefor if it had applied for tax exempt status.Whew!!! This needs to be read in quiet, without numerous distractions so that it can be assimilated properly.
Bona fide organization which is affiliated with the religious denomination means an organization which is both closely associated with the religious denomination and exempt from taxation as described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as it relates to religious organizations.
Minister means an individual duly authorized by a recognized religious denomination to conduct religious worship and to perform other duties usually performed by authorized members of the clergy of that religion. In all cases, there must be a reasonable connection between the activities performed and the religious calling of the minister. The term does not include a lay preacher not authorized to perform such duties.
Professional capacity means an activity in a religious vocation or occupation for which the minimum of a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree is required.
Religious denomination means a religious group or community of believers having some form of ecclesiastical government, a creed or statement of faith, some form of worship, a formal or informal code of doctrine and discipline, religious services and ceremonies, established places of religious worship, and religious congregations, or comparable indicia of a bona fide religious denomination. For the purposes of this definition, an inter-denominational religious organization which is exempt from taxation pursuant to section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 will be treated as a religious denomination.
Visa Documention Source.
Thought for the Day - The "Thief"
At an airport one night with several long hours before her flight.
She hunted for a book in an airport shop,
bought a bag of cookies and found a place to drop.
She was engrossed in her book but happened to see,
that the man sitting beside her, as bold as could be,
grabbed a cookie or two from the bag in between,
which she tried to ignore to avoid a scene.
So she munched the cookies and watched the clock,
as the gutsy cookie thief diminished her stock.
She was getting more irritated as the minutes ticked by,
thinking, "If I wasn't so nice, I would blacken his eye."
With each cookie she took, he took one too,
when only one was left, she wondered what he would do.
With a smile on his face, and a nervous laugh,
he took the last cookie and broke it in half.
He offered her half, as he ate the other,
she snatched it from him and thought....ooh, brother!
This guy had some nerve and he's also rude,
why he didn't even show any gratitude!
She had never known when she had been so galled,
and sighed with relief when her flight was called.
She gathered her belongings and headed to the gate,
refusing to look back at the thieving ingrate.
She boarded the plane, and sank in her seat,
then she sought her book, which was almost complete.
As she reached in her baggage, she gasped with surprise,
there was her bag of cookies, in front of her eyes.
If mine are here, she moaned in despair,
the others were his, and he tried to share.
Too late to apologize, she realized with grief,
that she was the rude one, the ingrate, the thief!
___________
How many times have we absolutely known that something was a certain way, only to discover later that what we believed to be true, was not?
___________
Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier. Be the living
__expression of God's kindness: kindness in your face, kindness in your eyes,
kindness in your smile." Mother Teresa
Hat Tip to Howard B.
She hunted for a book in an airport shop,
bought a bag of cookies and found a place to drop.
She was engrossed in her book but happened to see,
that the man sitting beside her, as bold as could be,
grabbed a cookie or two from the bag in between,
which she tried to ignore to avoid a scene.
So she munched the cookies and watched the clock,
as the gutsy cookie thief diminished her stock.
She was getting more irritated as the minutes ticked by,
thinking, "If I wasn't so nice, I would blacken his eye."
With each cookie she took, he took one too,
when only one was left, she wondered what he would do.
With a smile on his face, and a nervous laugh,
he took the last cookie and broke it in half.
He offered her half, as he ate the other,
she snatched it from him and thought....ooh, brother!
This guy had some nerve and he's also rude,
why he didn't even show any gratitude!
She had never known when she had been so galled,
and sighed with relief when her flight was called.
She gathered her belongings and headed to the gate,
refusing to look back at the thieving ingrate.
She boarded the plane, and sank in her seat,
then she sought her book, which was almost complete.
As she reached in her baggage, she gasped with surprise,
there was her bag of cookies, in front of her eyes.
If mine are here, she moaned in despair,
the others were his, and he tried to share.
Too late to apologize, she realized with grief,
that she was the rude one, the ingrate, the thief!
___________
How many times have we absolutely known that something was a certain way, only to discover later that what we believed to be true, was not?
___________
Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier. Be the living
__expression of God's kindness: kindness in your face, kindness in your eyes,
kindness in your smile." Mother Teresa
Hat Tip to Howard B.
Christians, Islam and the Future of Europe
How, and why, Islam can be part of “Catholic” Europe. On two conditions: a strong Christianity, and Muslim self-reform. A conference held in Denver, Colorado, at the invitation of the archdiocese.
by Sandro Magister
by Sandro Magister
Cynthia Davis Chastized For Speaking Against "Plan B"
A recent Letter to the Editor is a classic exposition of stupidity:
There is such a thing as a chemical abortion - most educated individuals know this. If the pregnancy has already occurred, the use of this "poison" will result in the death and destruction of an innocent human life. Who, now, appears as the uneducated one who needs to do some research to get her facts straight, Kimberly?
The link to the letter is here.
Davis should research before sounding offIt's irrelevant whether or not "Plan B" is classified as an abortion drug by the state or some other agency. Of course, while it is true that it is impossible to abort a nonexistent pregnancy, the mere fact that "Plan B" prevents a "FERTILIZED EGG" (a human being) from being implanted on the uterine wall makes it abortifacient. This fact is not dependent on some government agency stating the obvious.
I was appalled by the letter written by Cynthia Davis (Feb. 12 Journal). Not only for her need to press her religious views on others, but by her complete and total lack of information regarding Plan B. To refer to it as "poison" is asinine. It's not arsenic, after all.
Secondly, Plan B is not an abortion drug; it is not classified as such. It does not abort a fetus, but rather keeps a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall to keep a pregnancy from ever taking place. You can't abort a nonexistent pregnancy. It is only effective in the first 72 hours after unprotected sex, not three months down the road. She should definitely research topics before starting to sound off on them. This isn't the first time she has come off looking uneducated and uninformed.
There is such a thing as a chemical abortion - most educated individuals know this. If the pregnancy has already occurred, the use of this "poison" will result in the death and destruction of an innocent human life. Who, now, appears as the uneducated one who needs to do some research to get her facts straight, Kimberly?
I don't see how it can be the decision of anyone but the woman herself whether she needs to use Plan B. It is her body, not public domain. I know that if I were raped I would immediately seek a prescription for Plan B. I would not put myself through the emotional trauma of carrying a child conceived by rape.One's inability to comprehend the reasons why the state should protect all human life has no bearing on the issue. Directly willed abortion is always criminal - it is always morally wrong.
Also, should women that have multiple children or can't afford to have another child not be given the option of using Plan B when another form of birth control has failed? That is her decision, not yours.This is a perfect example of the contraceptive/child murdering mentality. It's all about one's own ego, comfort, and pleasure. There is no regard for the sanctity of human life and even less for the foundational structure of society, the family.
Secondly, if a pharmacist does not want to fill a prescription for a form of birth control, then said pharmacist should shop around before taking a position. If a pharmacist does not want to fill such prescriptions, then they should seek employment at a pharmacy that has the same views and does not fill any type of prescription for birth control. There are several hospitals with religious affiliations in the area that would be perfect for them.Poor Kimberly is confused. Having embraced contraception as a panacea for a happy and carefree lifestyle, she has dulled her intellect with the poisons offered by the Culture of Death. Perhaps, we can look forward to the day when a pharmaceutical is developed which will permit those who are too lazy or obstinate to seek the truth to pop a pill which will flush and clean their brains of the nonsense they perceive to be knowledge.
Kimberly Dotson
The link to the letter is here.
Bishop Vasa Discusses the "H" Word...
In our “compromising age” we are loath to name something too strongly. If we do, we are accused of harshness, judgmentalism, perhaps arrogance, certainly intolerance and possibly pharisaism. While it is always necessary to speak the truth with love, the Church also believes and teaches that it is also necessary to speak the truth with strength. It is necessary to defend truth and not be too quick to rationalize, justify or excuse misleading teachings or teachers. There is a point at which passive “tolerance” allows misleading teachings to be spread and propagated, thus confusing or even misleading the faithful about the truths of the Church. There is a very strong word, which still exists in our Church, which most of us are too “gentle” to use. The word is “heresy.” We perhaps think that heresy is a thing of the past. We think perhaps of the Arian heresy or the Pelagian heresy or the Manichaen heresy. We might even maintain that there are no longer any heretics because that conjures up images of inquisitions and burnings at the stake. I do not, in any way, seek to validate or justify any kind of “vigilante” theology, but we do need strong words to combat erroneous and fallacious teaching. (Emphasis added)Tolerance for heresy and heretics is a major problem in the Church today. I was told over the weekend of another prevalent example among the many going on here, about a woman in RCIA who was told by a lay RCIA instructor that Jesus did not know that he was God until He was baptized by St. John the Baptist - and that this was His reason for going into the desert...This deadly contagion spreads like a communicable disease, infecting many who come in contact with it.
Bishop Vasa's column is here.
Gospel for Monday, 7th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 9:14-29
The Curing of an Epileptic Boy
[14] And when they came to the disciples, they saw a great crowd about them, and scribes arguing with them. [15] And immediately all the crowd when they saw Him (Jesus), were greatly amazed, and ran up to Him and greeting Him. [16] And He asked them, "What are you discussing with them?" [17] And one of the crowd answered Him, "Teacher, I brought my son to you, for he has a dumb spirit; [18] and wherever it seizes him, it dashes him down; and he foams and grinds his teeth and becomes rigid; and I asked Your disciples to cast it out, and they were not able." [19] And He answered them, "Oh faithless generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him to Me." [20] And they brought the boy to Him; and when the spirit saw Him, immediately it convulsed the body, and he fell on the ground and rolled about, foaming at the mouth. [21] And Jesus asked his father, "How long has he had this?" And he said, "From childhood. [22] And it has often cash him into the fire and into the water, to destroy him; but if You can do anything, have pity on us and help us." [23] And Jesus said to him, "If you can! All things are possible to him who believes." [24] Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, "I believe; help my unbelief!" [25] And when Jesus saw that a crowd came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, "You dumb and deaf spirit, I command you, come out of him, and never enter him again." [26] After crying out and convulsing him terribly, it came out, and the boy was like a corpse; so that most of them said, "He is dead." [27] But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him up, and he arose. [28] And when He had entered the house, His disciples asked Him privately, "Why could we not cast it out?" [29] And He said to them, "This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer and fasting."
_______________________
Commentary:
17. The demon who possessed this boy is described as a "dumb spirit" because dumbness was the main feature of the possession. On diabolic possession cf. note on Matthew 12:22-24.
19-24. As on other occasions, Jesus requires submission of faith before He works the miracle. The exclamation of Jesus refers to the request of the boy's father (verse 22), which seemed to suggest some doubt about God's omnipotence. The Lord corrects this way of asking and requires him to have firm faith. In verse 24 we can see that the father has quite changed; then Jesus does the miracle. The man's strengthened faith made him all-powerful, for someone with faith relies not on himself but on Jesus Christ. Through faith, then, we become sharers in God's omnipotence. But faith is a gift of God, which man, especially at times when he is wavering, should ask humbly and tenaciously, like the father of this boy: "I believe, help my unbelief," and like the Apostles: "Increase our faith!" (Luke 17:5).
28-29. "In teaching the Apostles how to expel a spirit as evil as this He is teaching all of us how we should live, and telling us that prayer is the resource we should use to overcome even the severest temptations, whether they come from unclean spirits or from men. Prayer does not consist only in the words we use to invoke God's clemency but also in everything we do, out of faith, as homage to God. The Apostle bears witness to this when he says: `Pray constantly' (1 Thessalonians 5:7)" (St. Bede, "In Marci Evangelium Expositio, in loc.").
_________________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
The Curing of an Epileptic Boy
[14] And when they came to the disciples, they saw a great crowd about them, and scribes arguing with them. [15] And immediately all the crowd when they saw Him (Jesus), were greatly amazed, and ran up to Him and greeting Him. [16] And He asked them, "What are you discussing with them?" [17] And one of the crowd answered Him, "Teacher, I brought my son to you, for he has a dumb spirit; [18] and wherever it seizes him, it dashes him down; and he foams and grinds his teeth and becomes rigid; and I asked Your disciples to cast it out, and they were not able." [19] And He answered them, "Oh faithless generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you? Bring him to Me." [20] And they brought the boy to Him; and when the spirit saw Him, immediately it convulsed the body, and he fell on the ground and rolled about, foaming at the mouth. [21] And Jesus asked his father, "How long has he had this?" And he said, "From childhood. [22] And it has often cash him into the fire and into the water, to destroy him; but if You can do anything, have pity on us and help us." [23] And Jesus said to him, "If you can! All things are possible to him who believes." [24] Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, "I believe; help my unbelief!" [25] And when Jesus saw that a crowd came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, "You dumb and deaf spirit, I command you, come out of him, and never enter him again." [26] After crying out and convulsing him terribly, it came out, and the boy was like a corpse; so that most of them said, "He is dead." [27] But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him up, and he arose. [28] And when He had entered the house, His disciples asked Him privately, "Why could we not cast it out?" [29] And He said to them, "This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer and fasting."
_______________________
Commentary:
17. The demon who possessed this boy is described as a "dumb spirit" because dumbness was the main feature of the possession. On diabolic possession cf. note on Matthew 12:22-24.
19-24. As on other occasions, Jesus requires submission of faith before He works the miracle. The exclamation of Jesus refers to the request of the boy's father (verse 22), which seemed to suggest some doubt about God's omnipotence. The Lord corrects this way of asking and requires him to have firm faith. In verse 24 we can see that the father has quite changed; then Jesus does the miracle. The man's strengthened faith made him all-powerful, for someone with faith relies not on himself but on Jesus Christ. Through faith, then, we become sharers in God's omnipotence. But faith is a gift of God, which man, especially at times when he is wavering, should ask humbly and tenaciously, like the father of this boy: "I believe, help my unbelief," and like the Apostles: "Increase our faith!" (Luke 17:5).
28-29. "In teaching the Apostles how to expel a spirit as evil as this He is teaching all of us how we should live, and telling us that prayer is the resource we should use to overcome even the severest temptations, whether they come from unclean spirits or from men. Prayer does not consist only in the words we use to invoke God's clemency but also in everything we do, out of faith, as homage to God. The Apostle bears witness to this when he says: `Pray constantly' (1 Thessalonians 5:7)" (St. Bede, "In Marci Evangelium Expositio, in loc.").
_________________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Australian "Catholics" seek CDF clarification on Cardinal’s comments
The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith has been asked to clarify the legitimacy of Sydney’s Cardinal George Pell’s publicly stated views on the importance of individual conscience in moral decision-making.
A group of Catholics claims that the Cardinal’s denial of the priority given to conscience places his views outside the mainstream of Catholic doctrine.
Members assert that, based on The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Cardinal’s “explication of Catholic doctrine is inaccurate, misleading and not true to the Catholic tradition”.
Frustration at the lack of accountability within the Church hierarchy triggered a letter, signed by 25 Catholics, to the CDF’s Prefect, American Archbishop William Levada, in November 2005, seeking clarification. Three months later, there has been no acknowledgement of the letter, let alone a response. The CDF is the Vatican department that deals with orthodox doctrine. Its previous head was the then Cardinal Ratzinger.
Lead signatory to the letter Mr Frank Purcell said that a number the Cardinal’s public statements on the primacy of conscience, over a number of years and given standing in the media, were difficult to reconcile with the teaching of the Church.
“Given his prominence in the Church, many Australians take his view as normative and representative of Catholic doctrine,” Mr Purcell said. The letter asks the CDF to request Cardinal Pell to confine his comments “to the excellent statement on conscience found The Catechism of the Catholic Church”.
It continues: “Here it is clearly stated that 'Man has the right to act in conscience and freedom so as personally to make moral decisions... especially in religious matters' (paragraph 1782). The Catechism certainly emphasizes the importance of the formation of a right conscience, but it insists that 'a human being must always obey the certain judgement of his conscience'. The same paragraph (1790) goes on to admit that moral conscience can 'remain in ignorance' and make 'erroneous judgements'. Nevertheless Catholics must still follow their conscience. The Catechism approvingly quotes Cardinal John Henry Newman's dictum that 'Conscience is the aboriginal vicar of Christ' (1778)".
The letter continues: “Our problem with his public stance is that he constantly places personal conscience and truth as taught by the church in opposition to each other, and thus distorts the role of both in Catholic tradition. By caricaturing any claim to the primacy of conscience as a rejection of the church's teaching, he sets up a false dichotomy and this results in a rejection of the legitimate role of informed conscience. In his public statements he emphasizes the teaching of the church, but fails to acknowledge that this does not completely exhaust the process. Truth must be assimilated into individual lives. He adopts the stance that any doubt or conscientious questioning is tantamount to rejecting the magisterium. He seems to adopt an entirely static notion of truth, and omits all reference to church tradition as a process of coming to truth.
“We believe that the authentic Catholic tradition is that conscience holds primacy in the process of moral decision-making. Certainly we accept that Catholics are bound to take biblical and church teaching as a central and integral element in moral discernment, but that in the end conscience is the ultimate norm of each person's moral action.”
Mr Purcell said the letter was not an attack on the Cardinal but a seeking of clarification on the importance of individual conscience in moral decision-making. Nor was the group demanding a hurried answer from the CDF, but simply an acknowledgement of the letter.
“The group only decided to go public because of the wide dissemination of Cardinal Pell's views and the apparent failure of the Vatican to respond to the letter. No modern bureaucracy fails to acknowledge receipt of correspondence. It is a matter of courtesy and respect,” Mr Purcell said.
Those who signed the letter are:
Sr Veronica Brady, IBVM, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, University of Western Australia.
Emeritus Professor Max Charlesworth, parent, Professor of Philosophy, Deakin University.
Paul Collins, historian and broadcaster.
Rev. Fr Michael Elligate, Chaplain, University of Melbourne.
Judge Chris Geraghty, the District Court of New South Wales.
Marilyn Hatton, parent, adult educator.
John Hill, parent, clinical therapist, marriage and relationship counsellor.
Rev. Fr Eric Hodgens, Parish Priest, Archdiocese of Melbourne.
Helen Jagoe, parent, former General Secretary, International YCW. Re.
Fr James Littleton, MSC, educator.
Kathleen McPherson, parent, Community Health Services.
Mark McPherson, parent, Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Consultant, former YCW full-time worker.
Rev. Fr Frank Martin, Parish Priest, Archdiocese of Melbourne.
Sr Cecilia Merrigan, CSB, former International Congregational Leader, Sisters of Saint Brigid.
Rev. Fr Peter Murnane, OP, Dominican Friar, preacher.
Dr Anne O'Brien, psychologist, adult educator.
Emeritus Professor Tom O'Donnell, Foundation Chair of the Catholic Education Commission, Victoria, former member of the National Catholic Education Commission.
Frank Purcell, parent, lecturer in Politics, La Trobe University.
Bernard Ryan, parent, religious educator, Catholic high school.
Ellen Smiddy, parent, community worker, former YCW leader.
Brian Smiddy, parent, former YCW leader, trade union official.
Mary Stanwix, parent and pharmacist.
Justin Stanwix, parent and barrister.
Kevin Walcot, adult educator.
_______________________
I received this in an email update from "Online Catholics", an Australian "Catholic" periodical comprised primarily of numerous dissenting views and attempts to justify its dissent - much like an Australian National Catholic Distorter.
Many people, in trying to escape the demands of the Gospel and the Church, make an unsupportable appeal to "primacy of conscience", many times, disregarding the fact that a conscience must also be rightly formed and well-informed. If one's conscience is rightly or well formed and well-informed, it would not be at odds with Church teaching.
A Catholic must also see that his conscience is formed in conformity with the teachings of the Church. While one has a right not to be compelled to act against his will or conscience, it must be understood that one's conscience is not the arbiter of truth and a faithful Catholic will do all he can to try and understand the Church's teaching, and, in properly forming his conscience, he will be completely willing to submit to the Church's authority in the matter.
Many, still yet, in selectively quoting the Catechism, Cardinal Newman, or other Church documents, do so by failing to accept or take in the fullness of what the Church teaches or what the author intends. Some, for example, selectively call upon part of Gaudium et Spes:
It will be interesting to see what response, if any, this group receives. I think that these people will not be happy with the answer they may receive.
A group of Catholics claims that the Cardinal’s denial of the priority given to conscience places his views outside the mainstream of Catholic doctrine.
Members assert that, based on The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Cardinal’s “explication of Catholic doctrine is inaccurate, misleading and not true to the Catholic tradition”.
Frustration at the lack of accountability within the Church hierarchy triggered a letter, signed by 25 Catholics, to the CDF’s Prefect, American Archbishop William Levada, in November 2005, seeking clarification. Three months later, there has been no acknowledgement of the letter, let alone a response. The CDF is the Vatican department that deals with orthodox doctrine. Its previous head was the then Cardinal Ratzinger.
Lead signatory to the letter Mr Frank Purcell said that a number the Cardinal’s public statements on the primacy of conscience, over a number of years and given standing in the media, were difficult to reconcile with the teaching of the Church.
“Given his prominence in the Church, many Australians take his view as normative and representative of Catholic doctrine,” Mr Purcell said. The letter asks the CDF to request Cardinal Pell to confine his comments “to the excellent statement on conscience found The Catechism of the Catholic Church”.
It continues: “Here it is clearly stated that 'Man has the right to act in conscience and freedom so as personally to make moral decisions... especially in religious matters' (paragraph 1782). The Catechism certainly emphasizes the importance of the formation of a right conscience, but it insists that 'a human being must always obey the certain judgement of his conscience'. The same paragraph (1790) goes on to admit that moral conscience can 'remain in ignorance' and make 'erroneous judgements'. Nevertheless Catholics must still follow their conscience. The Catechism approvingly quotes Cardinal John Henry Newman's dictum that 'Conscience is the aboriginal vicar of Christ' (1778)".
The letter continues: “Our problem with his public stance is that he constantly places personal conscience and truth as taught by the church in opposition to each other, and thus distorts the role of both in Catholic tradition. By caricaturing any claim to the primacy of conscience as a rejection of the church's teaching, he sets up a false dichotomy and this results in a rejection of the legitimate role of informed conscience. In his public statements he emphasizes the teaching of the church, but fails to acknowledge that this does not completely exhaust the process. Truth must be assimilated into individual lives. He adopts the stance that any doubt or conscientious questioning is tantamount to rejecting the magisterium. He seems to adopt an entirely static notion of truth, and omits all reference to church tradition as a process of coming to truth.
“We believe that the authentic Catholic tradition is that conscience holds primacy in the process of moral decision-making. Certainly we accept that Catholics are bound to take biblical and church teaching as a central and integral element in moral discernment, but that in the end conscience is the ultimate norm of each person's moral action.”
Mr Purcell said the letter was not an attack on the Cardinal but a seeking of clarification on the importance of individual conscience in moral decision-making. Nor was the group demanding a hurried answer from the CDF, but simply an acknowledgement of the letter.
“The group only decided to go public because of the wide dissemination of Cardinal Pell's views and the apparent failure of the Vatican to respond to the letter. No modern bureaucracy fails to acknowledge receipt of correspondence. It is a matter of courtesy and respect,” Mr Purcell said.
Those who signed the letter are:
Sr Veronica Brady, IBVM, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, University of Western Australia.
Emeritus Professor Max Charlesworth, parent, Professor of Philosophy, Deakin University.
Paul Collins, historian and broadcaster.
Rev. Fr Michael Elligate, Chaplain, University of Melbourne.
Judge Chris Geraghty, the District Court of New South Wales.
Marilyn Hatton, parent, adult educator.
John Hill, parent, clinical therapist, marriage and relationship counsellor.
Rev. Fr Eric Hodgens, Parish Priest, Archdiocese of Melbourne.
Helen Jagoe, parent, former General Secretary, International YCW. Re.
Fr James Littleton, MSC, educator.
Kathleen McPherson, parent, Community Health Services.
Mark McPherson, parent, Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Consultant, former YCW full-time worker.
Rev. Fr Frank Martin, Parish Priest, Archdiocese of Melbourne.
Sr Cecilia Merrigan, CSB, former International Congregational Leader, Sisters of Saint Brigid.
Rev. Fr Peter Murnane, OP, Dominican Friar, preacher.
Dr Anne O'Brien, psychologist, adult educator.
Emeritus Professor Tom O'Donnell, Foundation Chair of the Catholic Education Commission, Victoria, former member of the National Catholic Education Commission.
Frank Purcell, parent, lecturer in Politics, La Trobe University.
Bernard Ryan, parent, religious educator, Catholic high school.
Ellen Smiddy, parent, community worker, former YCW leader.
Brian Smiddy, parent, former YCW leader, trade union official.
Mary Stanwix, parent and pharmacist.
Justin Stanwix, parent and barrister.
Kevin Walcot, adult educator.
_______________________
I received this in an email update from "Online Catholics", an Australian "Catholic" periodical comprised primarily of numerous dissenting views and attempts to justify its dissent - much like an Australian National Catholic Distorter.
Many people, in trying to escape the demands of the Gospel and the Church, make an unsupportable appeal to "primacy of conscience", many times, disregarding the fact that a conscience must also be rightly formed and well-informed. If one's conscience is rightly or well formed and well-informed, it would not be at odds with Church teaching.
A Catholic must also see that his conscience is formed in conformity with the teachings of the Church. While one has a right not to be compelled to act against his will or conscience, it must be understood that one's conscience is not the arbiter of truth and a faithful Catholic will do all he can to try and understand the Church's teaching, and, in properly forming his conscience, he will be completely willing to submit to the Church's authority in the matter.
Many, still yet, in selectively quoting the Catechism, Cardinal Newman, or other Church documents, do so by failing to accept or take in the fullness of what the Church teaches or what the author intends. Some, for example, selectively call upon part of Gaudium et Spes:
...it often happens that conscience goes astray through ignorance which it is unable to avoid, without thereby losing its dignity.while disregarding the remainder of the text:
This cannot be said of the man who takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded by the habit of committing sin. (Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, 7 December 1965, n. 16.)As I cannot do justice to this subject here, please review this excellent article on the Role and Freedom of Conscience.
It will be interesting to see what response, if any, this group receives. I think that these people will not be happy with the answer they may receive.
Gospel for the 7th Sunday in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 2:1-12
The Curing of a Paralytic
[1] And when He (Jesus) returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that He was at home. [2] And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room for them, not even about the door; and He was preaching the word to them. [3] And they came, bringing to Him a paralytic carried by four men. [4] And when they could not get near Him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above Him; and when they had made an opening, they let down the pallet on which the paralytic lay. [5] And when Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven." [6] Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, [7] "Why does this man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" [8] And immediately Jesus, perceiving in His spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question thus in your hearts? [9] Which is easier to say to the paralytic, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Rise, take up your pallet and walk?' [10] But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"-- He said to the paralytic-- [11] "I say to you, rise, take up your pallet and go home." [12] And he rose, and immediately took up the pallet and went out before them all; so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, "We never saw anything like this!"
_______________________
Commentary:
4. Many Jewish houses had a terraced roof accessible by steps at the back. The same structure can be found even today.
5. Here Jesus emphasizes the connection between faith and the forgiveness of sins. The boldness of the people who brought in the paralytic shows their faith in Christ, and this faith moves Jesus to forgive the man's sins. We should question how God views our faith: the faith of these people leads to the instantaneous physical and spiritual curing of this man. We should notice also that one person's need can be helped by the merits of another.
In this man's physical paralysis, St. Jerome sees a type or figure of spiritual paralysis: the cripple was unable to return to God by his own efforts. Jesus, God and man, cured him of both kinds of paralysis (cf. "Comm. in Marcum, in loc."). Cf. notes on Matthew 9:2-7.
Jesus' words to the paralytic--"Your sins are forgiven"--reflect the fact that his pardon involves a personal encounter with Christ; the same happens in the Sacrament of Penance: "In faithfully observing the centuries-old practice of the Sacrament of Penance--the practice of individual confession with a personal act of sorrow and an intention to amend and make satisfaction--the Church is defending the human soul's individual right, man's right to a more personal encounter with the crucified forgiving Christ, with Christ saying, through the minister of the Sacrament of Reconciliation: `Your sins are forgiven'; `Go, and do not sin again' (John 8:11). As is evident, this is also a right on Christ's part with regard to every human being in the soul's life constituted by the moment of conversion and forgiveness" (John Paul II, "Redemptor Hominis", 20).
7-12. Here we find a number of indicators of Jesus' divinity: He forgives sins, He can read the human heart and has the power to instantly cure physical illnesses. The scribes know that only God can forgive sins. This is why they take issue with Our Lord's statement and call it blasphemous. They require a sign to prove the truth of what He says. And Jesus offers them a sign. Thus just as no one can deny that the paralytic has been cured, so no one can reasonably deny that he has been forgiven his sins. Christ, God and man, exercised power to forgive sins and, in His infinite mercy, He chose to extend this power to His Church. Cf. note on Matthew 9:3-7.
______________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
The Curing of a Paralytic
[1] And when He (Jesus) returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that He was at home. [2] And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room for them, not even about the door; and He was preaching the word to them. [3] And they came, bringing to Him a paralytic carried by four men. [4] And when they could not get near Him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above Him; and when they had made an opening, they let down the pallet on which the paralytic lay. [5] And when Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven." [6] Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, [7] "Why does this man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" [8] And immediately Jesus, perceiving in His spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question thus in your hearts? [9] Which is easier to say to the paralytic, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Rise, take up your pallet and walk?' [10] But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"-- He said to the paralytic-- [11] "I say to you, rise, take up your pallet and go home." [12] And he rose, and immediately took up the pallet and went out before them all; so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, "We never saw anything like this!"
_______________________
Commentary:
4. Many Jewish houses had a terraced roof accessible by steps at the back. The same structure can be found even today.
5. Here Jesus emphasizes the connection between faith and the forgiveness of sins. The boldness of the people who brought in the paralytic shows their faith in Christ, and this faith moves Jesus to forgive the man's sins. We should question how God views our faith: the faith of these people leads to the instantaneous physical and spiritual curing of this man. We should notice also that one person's need can be helped by the merits of another.
In this man's physical paralysis, St. Jerome sees a type or figure of spiritual paralysis: the cripple was unable to return to God by his own efforts. Jesus, God and man, cured him of both kinds of paralysis (cf. "Comm. in Marcum, in loc."). Cf. notes on Matthew 9:2-7.
Jesus' words to the paralytic--"Your sins are forgiven"--reflect the fact that his pardon involves a personal encounter with Christ; the same happens in the Sacrament of Penance: "In faithfully observing the centuries-old practice of the Sacrament of Penance--the practice of individual confession with a personal act of sorrow and an intention to amend and make satisfaction--the Church is defending the human soul's individual right, man's right to a more personal encounter with the crucified forgiving Christ, with Christ saying, through the minister of the Sacrament of Reconciliation: `Your sins are forgiven'; `Go, and do not sin again' (John 8:11). As is evident, this is also a right on Christ's part with regard to every human being in the soul's life constituted by the moment of conversion and forgiveness" (John Paul II, "Redemptor Hominis", 20).
7-12. Here we find a number of indicators of Jesus' divinity: He forgives sins, He can read the human heart and has the power to instantly cure physical illnesses. The scribes know that only God can forgive sins. This is why they take issue with Our Lord's statement and call it blasphemous. They require a sign to prove the truth of what He says. And Jesus offers them a sign. Thus just as no one can deny that the paralytic has been cured, so no one can reasonably deny that he has been forgiven his sins. Christ, God and man, exercised power to forgive sins and, in His infinite mercy, He chose to extend this power to His Church. Cf. note on Matthew 9:3-7.
______________________
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland. Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Controversy and Marek Bozek
Controversy follows Marek Bozek from Poland to St. Louis
By Tim Townsend
(c) ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
02/18/2006
Perhaps also, he could explain how one is to receive the graces to nurture the virtue of charity if one deliberately chooses disobedience and defiance? There are far too many problems with Bozek's rationale, a rationale which is nothing more than a justification for his own schismatic actions and behavior. The attempt to explain away an unlawful and sinful disobedience while comparing it to a refusal to obey an unlawful command is repugnant and unworthy of one who claims to be a Christian.
He defied his own bishop and he defied Archbishop Burke. He rejects and disobeys the lawful commands and directives of both. He defies the Church by teaching that which is contrary to what the Church teaches regarding the liceity and validity of the Sacraments. He defies the laws of the Church regarding his lack of faculties to celebrate the Sacraments by appealing to Canon Law. He even defies Christ, our Saviour, because he defies the Church which Christ founded and established.
This man has absolutely NO clue. If I were to make such statements publicly, I'm certain that I would be declared as delusional, at the very least! We will wait and see if Bozek is called to task for his "cogent" observations. Nevertheless, incoherent statements of this nature are indicative of a mind which is grossly confused, or certain facts are being manipulated to distort the truth.
Additionally, one can safely assume that he has never seen the Code of Canon Law which provides explicit rules and procedures for the governance of the Church. And surprisingly, there are canons which directly address when the bishop can and must do what he has done...But then, when one is no longer Catholic, why on earth would one consider himself bound by laws of a Church to which he no longer supports or believes.
St Louis Post Dispatch article here.
By Tim Townsend
(c) ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
02/18/2006
Mark 1:21-22Perhaps, the priest/theologian could explain why our Lord chose to be obedient unto death, rather than to cry out for justice or appeal to the truth...Did He not tell Pilate that he would have no power over Him had it not be given to him from above...
They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught. They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
______________________
The Gospel reading for this recent Sunday was from the book of Mark, the namesake of the young Catholic priest in green vestments who stood in the sanctuary addressing his flock.
The Rev. Marek Bozek was talking about authority. But only the most literal-minded in attendance could have believed Bozek's words were meant as a general lesson on the subject.
Most of those sitting in the pews had been through two years of battles with the St. Louis archdiocese over the control of their church, St. Stanislaus Kostka parish. And they knew Bozek's words about authority and obedience were aimed squarely at the man who had declared the priest excommunicated from the Catholic church: St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke.
Catholics, said the 31-year-old Bozek, are taught to revere the church's authority and the authority of those in the church hierarchy. Though it is central to the church, he said, "obedience, thank goodness, is not the highest value."
Perhaps also, he could explain how one is to receive the graces to nurture the virtue of charity if one deliberately chooses disobedience and defiance? There are far too many problems with Bozek's rationale, a rationale which is nothing more than a justification for his own schismatic actions and behavior. The attempt to explain away an unlawful and sinful disobedience while comparing it to a refusal to obey an unlawful command is repugnant and unworthy of one who claims to be a Christian.
"There are three other values that are higher: justice, truth, charity," he said. "Authority and obedience need to serve these three values. If any authority demands of you obedience that would be unjust, untruthful, uncharitable, you - as a Catholic - not only can be disobedient, but should be disobedient."And here is the crux of his problem. Having become a self-appointed arbiter of Truth, Justice, and Charity, he has decided precisely what authorities he will obey - which, in this case, is none other than the board which hired him and provides his livelihood, at least for now...
He defied his own bishop and he defied Archbishop Burke. He rejects and disobeys the lawful commands and directives of both. He defies the Church by teaching that which is contrary to what the Church teaches regarding the liceity and validity of the Sacraments. He defies the laws of the Church regarding his lack of faculties to celebrate the Sacraments by appealing to Canon Law. He even defies Christ, our Saviour, because he defies the Church which Christ founded and established.
The story of the fight over St. Stanislaus, like any good story, has produced dramatic plot lines ("Archbishop removes priests from St. Stanislaus"), a variety of settings ("Another parish gets official Polish nod") and intriguing characters ("Burke formally denies sacraments to defiant board").One needs to be able to properly discern what is and what is not "justice and injustice"...Unfortunately, Bozek seems incapable of making a proper judgment in the matter as it would be applied to the St Stanislaus situation.
In December, a new character was introduced: Marek Bozek, the young rebel savior.
A hard childhood
When Bozek was 5 years old in Poland his father was murdered, most likely, he said, by Soviet troops stationed nearby along the Poland-Soviet Union border. He said the case was never investigated or prosecuted.
"I saw my dead father's body," he said. "I saw his brains."
His mother left him and his younger sister "within weeks or months" of his father's death and remarried. Bozek was adopted by his aunt and uncle and his sister was raised by their grandmother.
"I was old enough to be conscious of what happened and young enough that it influences the rest of your life," he said.
Bozek talks with pride about his association, as a teenager, with anti-communist Polish groups. He sees himself today as a passionate idealist who will stand up to injustice.
On Christmas Eve, when he celebrated his first Mass at St. Stanislaus, Bozek said he had not come for the glory.I was given Fr. Guzoski's name and email address from a reader from Poland when the Bozek issue first came up...The facts speak for themselves. If Fr. Guzoski says he was kicked out of the seminary, are we not to believe him, but rather believe a man who has demonstrated an inability to keep his promises and who opposes what the Church and our Archbishop tell us?
"I did not come here to be powerful, to be a warrior or a hero," he said in his homily. And yet that's the way he was perceived - an idealistic young priest from Poland who had stood up to communism and was now promising - despite professional and spiritual risk - to lead the members of St. Stanislaus in their fight with authority.
In his Christmas Day homily, Bozek told his congregation something else about himself: Before coming to Missouri, he had left his seminary in Poland after being accused of "promiscuous homosexuality," accusations, he said, which were never proven.
Bozek entered the seminary in his hometown of Olsztyn, in the archdiocese of Warmia, when he was 23. He quickly became a presence at the seminary, called Hosianum, and was elected president of the student body in his first year.
"I am a person who is either loved or hated," said Bozek. "I cause extreme reactions, so very fast I made friends there, and probably some enemies."
Two years later, Bozek was confronted by the seminary's rector at the time, the Rev. Jan Guzowski, and was told to leave the seminary immediately.
In an interview, Guzowski said some of Bozek's classmates had accused him of propositioning them. "When we did an investigation, we found homosexual pornography in his room," said Guzowski. "That was the last straw."
Bozek said that's news to him. "There's nothing I can say to it, it's his version and I've never heard of any of it before," he said. "I left on my own responsibility."There is probably much which is "news" to him...
Warmia's archbishop, Edmund Michal Piszcz, later investigated. He said "nothing was really proven" in the case, but agreed with Guzowski that Bozek had been removed from the seminary.Was there no indication that he was asked to leave not one, but two seminaries? Apparently not...He wanted to evangelize to non-Catholics - Well, he certainly has his work cut out for him now...
Bozek maintains that he left on his own.
Soon afterward, in the spring of 2000, the Rev. David Hulshof, director of Springfield-Cape Girardeau's vocations office, received an e-mail from Bozek inquiring about a career in the diocese.
When Hulshof asked Bozek why he wanted to come to Missouri, Bozek told him "he left his seminary freely to perhaps better serve in a missionary diocese where everyone wasn't Catholic," Hulshof said.
Over its 25,700 square miles of southern Missouri, the diocese of Springfield-Cape Girardeau claims 64,000 Catholics - about 5 percent of the population. Because there are so few Catholics in southern Missouri, it is considered a missionary diocese, and Bozek said it was this characteristic that attracted him.Am I the only one who sees this as a bit far-fetched? What sort of research would have been done to make such a discovery in the middle of the US. Really, I would like to know....Are there statistics where we can look this up somewhere...How exactly was this determination made? Are there no other places in the US where the "stats" are worse? Forgive my skepticism, but I'm not taking this bait.
In a letter of recommendation to the diocese, Piszcz wrote: "I know Marek would like to continue his formation for a priesthood and as his hitherto existing archbishop I give him my own recommendation."Strange. A reasonable person, upon seeing or hearing of a certain pattern regarding one's character or behavior, might be concerned and seek clarification so that some sort of help could be provided...
He did not mention why Bozek left Hosianum.
"There is no reason why if someone is accused of something at one place they cannot go on to another," Piszcz said recently.
After he was ordained in 2002, Bozek was assigned to be an associate pastor at St. Canera parish in Neosho.
He spent about 18 months there before Bishop John J. Leibrecht, leader of the Springfield-Cape Girardeau diocese, reassigned him to St. Agnes Cathedral in Springfield in the summer of 2004. Leibrecht said he'd been told Bozek was preparing to tell his congregation in Neosho from the pulpit that he was homosexual. Bozek denies it.
Leibrecht asked Bozek if he had "an agenda." Bozek said he did not, but Leibrecht decided the rumors were distracting from Bozek's ministry - which Bozek says was true - so he brought the priest to Springfield.Bozek has no agenda???? What then, is this current escapade in which he is involved? Is it not an agenda to bring "justice" and "truth" (or at least his versions) to the poor persecuted people of St. Stanislaus?
Bozek said he is "a celibate and chaste priest."
Break with SpringfieldOf course! We are supposed to believe that God was calling him to reject his promises and his duties...that God was calling him to disobedience. In all truth, to which some seem so oblivious, God knows that the Sacraments were never taken away from the people. To state or imply otherwise is either a flagrant manifestation of ignorance or a deliberate lie. And to accept the claim that God was calling him to this rebellion is to ask us to reject that same God. Such a calling to disobedience and rebellion would be an impossibility. Only the evil one would be calling him to such an action.
By fall, people in Springfield, including Leibrecht, were hearing rumors that Bozek was considering leaving for St. Stanislaus. But the bishop said when he asked the priest about his plans, Bozek always denied it. Bozek finally came to Leibrecht's office in early December and told him he was abandoning his vow of obedience to the bishop in order to heed God's call. God, Bozek told his bishop, was calling him to return the sacraments to the parishioners of St. Stanislaus.
The 75-year-old Leibrecht said he feels a "personal betrayal" in Bozek's decision. On the morning Bozek gave Leibrecht his final decision, Leibrecht asked the priest to sit down and take his coat off. Bozek refused.Apparently, for him, obedience has always been an issue.
"I begged him not to leave. I gave him every reason I could think of," said Leibrecht, "but he made the decision anyway. It was," he paused, then began to cry softly, "it was one of the saddest days of my life."Like everyone confused by sinfulness and slavery, one digs in his heels ever deeper to confirm himself in his sin and reinforce his own attitudes.
Since December, Bozek has maintained that his only reason for leaving his diocese, betraying his bishop and risking excommunication was to bring the sacraments back to the people of St. Stanislaus. His resolve has only strengthened since he arrived.
"I would never get involved here if the archbishop had not taken away the sacraments from these people," he said. "This is the biggest atrocity in the 21st century in the Catholic church - to use the sacraments as a game. That's a bigger abuse than the abuse of minors, or at least the same gravity, because the sacraments are the most holy thing for Catholics. If you take seriously what the church teaches about sacraments, it's the very presence of the Lord. And how can you use the very presence of God to manipulate someone?"Let's get this straight - the Archbishop's removal of the priests from the parish because of the actions of the board and his establishing another parish where the the people could receive the sacraments is the "BIGGEST ATROCITY in the 21st CENTURY". . ."a BIGGER ABUSE THAN the ABUSE OF MINORS"?
This man has absolutely NO clue. If I were to make such statements publicly, I'm certain that I would be declared as delusional, at the very least! We will wait and see if Bozek is called to task for his "cogent" observations. Nevertheless, incoherent statements of this nature are indicative of a mind which is grossly confused, or certain facts are being manipulated to distort the truth.
Additionally, one can safely assume that he has never seen the Code of Canon Law which provides explicit rules and procedures for the governance of the Church. And surprisingly, there are canons which directly address when the bishop can and must do what he has done...But then, when one is no longer Catholic, why on earth would one consider himself bound by laws of a Church to which he no longer supports or believes.
Most of St. Stanislaus's parishioners also belong to, or at least attend, other churches closer to where they live. And although some chose not to accept the sacraments at their other churches during the months when St. Stanislaus was without a priest, none of them was barred from seeking the sacraments elsewhere. Many took part in whatever sacraments they felt they needed at another parish.Bingo!!! Tim Townsend strikes gold with the truth!
Bozek insists that the members of St. Stanislaus have the right to the sacraments in their own church, and that right is worth his own exile.What an understatement! This explains a great deal and it probably the most enlightening statement in the article.
Leibrecht said Bozek's sacraments logic was "very, very weak."
"There were other reasons than that," he said. "I thought to myself, something else is going on here, there are other motivations he had."He's a hired hand - hired at the will and whim of a board which has no regard for the Church or her authority. How devoted are they going to be to a mere hired hand?
He said he thought he'd understood Bozek, "but I'm less sure that I understand him now."
Hopeful after meeting
Few people who know Bozek believe that, even if he could, he would stay at St. Stanislaus for the rest of his career. "He's 31 years old," said Hulshof. "I don't see him staying in one place for the rest of his life."
Bozek himself hints that his situation at St. Stanislaus is tenuous, and depends largely on how things work out between St. Stanislaus and the archdiocese. "For right now, I see myself as the pastor of St. Stanislaus. As long as they need me," he said. "But if my presence becomes the main obstacle to the reconciliation, I am going to go away."
Bozek is living in the U.S. on a religious worker's visa, and has a one-year contract with St. Stanislaus, which can be extended. He is paid $1,900 per month, his rent is paid for, he receives a food allowance and he has insurance benefits.If this is true, it certainly serves no purpose. Hopefully, he does not see requests for his conversion, repentance, and reconciliation as "hate mail". But then, as human nature tells us, many think they are persecuted when in fact, others, out of love for Christ and neighbor, offer fraternal correction.
Bozek and Burke met last Tuesday. Neither would talk about what they discussed, though Bozek said he left the meeting more hopeful for a reconciliation.
Meanwhile, parish activity at St. Stanislaus is buzzing. Bozek has started an adult education class on the reforms of the Second Vatican Council and a movie night. He is busily recruiting altar servers, Eucharistic ministers and lectors. St. Stanislaus counted 250 households as members when Burke removed the priests 18 months ago, compared to 500 today, according to Bozek. The new priest is putting about 800 people in the pews each weekend over the course of three Masses, including one celebrated in Polish.
The hardest part of his new job is dealing with the hate mail accusing him of pedophilia and rampant homosexual acts, Bozek said.
He is determined, however, not to become distracted from what he considers his main job: saving souls. He relies on a Latin phrase, per aspera ad astra (through the thorns to the stars), to help him get through the loneliest points. "Christianity is not about easy solutions, it's about just and true solutions," he said. "And sometimes justice demands self-sacrifice."If he is truly concerned with saving souls, he would not be leading people away from the Church. He would not be engaging in distortions of fact about the Archbishop denying the Sacraments to the "faithful". He would not be engaged in acts which rupture the unity of the Church nor would he be supporting the actions of a renegade board which engages in a rebellious and defiant atitude toward the lawful bishop of the local Church. Leading souls away from the Church is gravely sinful - sinful unto eternal damnation.
In Bozek's mind the heroic stature he has acquired in some parts of the St. Louis Catholic world for standing up to Burke is tempered by the knowledge that he's hurt people - especially Leibrecht - and a belief that he is simply an actor cast in an ongoing drama. This is not a struggle he was seeking.Bozek is still confused about a number of issues...He is in such need of prayer. Let us not forget to pray for him.
"This crusade found me," he said.
St Louis Post Dispatch article here.
Opus Dei demands cuts to Da Vinci Code
The conservative Roman Catholic group at the centre of The Da Vinci Code, the film adaptation of Dan Brown's controversial novel, has called on the film-makers to change the ending so as not to offend Catholics.More from the Guardian here
For those who like "The Da Vinci Code"...
...there is another book which includes:
Coded messages ... Catholic conspirators ... Historical schemes ... A deep and stunning surprise about Jesus ...Sounds similar to Dan Brown's thriller, yes? Want more?
Now comes lawyer-historian-writer Steve Berry with "Link...The Templar Legacy."His theological thriller features coded messages, Catholic conspirators, historical schemes and - what else? - a deep and stunning surprise about Jesus.
Berry also tosses in militant monks, cliff-hanger chapter endings, a bunch of violence (some of it in Copenhagen, most of it in southern France) and some historical insight into the Knights Templar, thought by real historians to be gone since the 14th century.
Alter Christus - Helps to Perseverance in Fervor
"If only I could persevere in these dispositions" is often the anxious thought that comes to us on days of greater fervour: for experience has taught us how difficult it is to carry out, amidst the cold blasts of the world, resolutions taken in the sheltered warmth of the sanctuary. Even if there were no temptations and onslaughts from without, there would still be constant danger from our inherent fickleness and waywardness: how easily the mind loses sight of the ideal pursued, how quickly the will wearies of effort. . .
We know the remedy: constant watchfulness over the state of our soul and frequent renewal of our purpose. And we know where we can find it: in our examination of conscience, which we should do every day; in our confession, every week; in our recollection day, every month... Do we make a diligent use of these helps to perseverance in fervour?
OUR DAILY EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE
It was one of the obligations which the 1917 Code of Canon Law (can. 125) urged upon clerics. All ascetical writers insist on its necessity for spiritual progress. We have grown familiar with it during the long years of our seminary training... And, probably, we have never wholly given up that salutary exercise. But are we earnest enough about it, and do we gather serious fruit from it? - Often perhaps it turns out to be a superficial, perfunctory exercise. So many causes may contribute to rob it of nearly all its value: routine, preoccupations and worries, monotonous recurrence of the same faults, weariness and fatigue at the end of the day...
Let us arm ourselves against these dangers by a generous resolve to fight courageously against all difficulties, and by practical means to secure a fruitful examen of conscience: determine the place and the time and the method which experience has taught us are best for us. It is essential that we should examine carefully, every night, how we fared during the day: the sins and faults commItted, our shortcomings in the practice of virtues and in the duties of our ministry; then, reassert our determination not to put up with our failings but to try again and aim at thorough fidelity to our ideal.
* If every evening, at the feet of the crucifix or near the Sacred Heart in the tabernacle, we go through this exercise earnestly, we shall certainly find in it a great help to persevere in our fervour.
OUR WEEKLY CONFESSION
Our confession day ought to be for us, every week, another unfailing source of renewed fervour. The earnest preparatory examination of our conscience, the feelings of sincere contrition, above all the graces of the Sacrament: all combine to re-awaken in us fidelity to our ideal and generosity in the pursuit of it.
This supposes of course that we surround the Sacrament with all the care and reverence due to it. Too easily perhaps priests neglect in their own case what they recommend so earnestly to their penitents. Their preparation is hurried and superficial; the confession itself is made in an off-hand manner, perhaps between two distracting conversations; the penance is performed mechanically...
Of how much additional grace they who treat the Sacrament so lightly deprive themselves! Nor will they find in it the stimulus to renewed fervour it would prove if received with greater devotion.
The possibility of getting such a periodical renewal of fervour on our confession day ought to be an additional reason for us to be regular with our confessions and to observe the common practice of confessing every week. Longer intervals may be forced upon us by circumstances, but are they not at times merely the result of our want of appreciation and eagerness, - of insufficient generosity, - of a repugnance that could be overcome by greater humility and faith?
* Let us examine what influence our confession day habitually has upon our spiritual life. - What shall we do to increase it? . . .
One of the most efficacious means to renew periodically our fervour is the monthly recollection. We know how urgently Pius X and Pius XI recommended it in their exhortations to the clergy. .. Let us renew our resolution to make the most of this great stimulus to perseverance.
If we have in our diocese the great advantage of recollection days in common for priests, let us make every sacrifice to be present at them. But the fruit of those gatherings will depend on our earnestness and spirit of recollection during the prescribed exercises, and on the practical applications we make to ourselves by personal reflection.
If left to ourselves, let us make sure of a day and a time when we can find the necessary leisure for the customary exercises, and compensate the drawback of our isolation by a more intimate contact with Our Lord in fervent and somewhat prolonged prayer.
* Do we profit by our recollection day to examine seriously our life in the light of our vocation, of our retreat resolutions, perhaps also of our particular obligations in some association of priests (if we have joined any)?
Do we take this occasion to seek the very profitable help of spiritual direction, when circumstances make this possible?
Our priestly ideal is too grave a concern to neglect anything that may help us towards it. - "Admoneo te ut resuscites gratiam Dei quae est in te. . ."
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 38.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
We know the remedy: constant watchfulness over the state of our soul and frequent renewal of our purpose. And we know where we can find it: in our examination of conscience, which we should do every day; in our confession, every week; in our recollection day, every month... Do we make a diligent use of these helps to perseverance in fervour?
OUR DAILY EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE
It was one of the obligations which the 1917 Code of Canon Law (can. 125) urged upon clerics. All ascetical writers insist on its necessity for spiritual progress. We have grown familiar with it during the long years of our seminary training... And, probably, we have never wholly given up that salutary exercise. But are we earnest enough about it, and do we gather serious fruit from it? - Often perhaps it turns out to be a superficial, perfunctory exercise. So many causes may contribute to rob it of nearly all its value: routine, preoccupations and worries, monotonous recurrence of the same faults, weariness and fatigue at the end of the day...
Let us arm ourselves against these dangers by a generous resolve to fight courageously against all difficulties, and by practical means to secure a fruitful examen of conscience: determine the place and the time and the method which experience has taught us are best for us. It is essential that we should examine carefully, every night, how we fared during the day: the sins and faults commItted, our shortcomings in the practice of virtues and in the duties of our ministry; then, reassert our determination not to put up with our failings but to try again and aim at thorough fidelity to our ideal.
* If every evening, at the feet of the crucifix or near the Sacred Heart in the tabernacle, we go through this exercise earnestly, we shall certainly find in it a great help to persevere in our fervour.
OUR WEEKLY CONFESSION
Our confession day ought to be for us, every week, another unfailing source of renewed fervour. The earnest preparatory examination of our conscience, the feelings of sincere contrition, above all the graces of the Sacrament: all combine to re-awaken in us fidelity to our ideal and generosity in the pursuit of it.
This supposes of course that we surround the Sacrament with all the care and reverence due to it. Too easily perhaps priests neglect in their own case what they recommend so earnestly to their penitents. Their preparation is hurried and superficial; the confession itself is made in an off-hand manner, perhaps between two distracting conversations; the penance is performed mechanically...
Of how much additional grace they who treat the Sacrament so lightly deprive themselves! Nor will they find in it the stimulus to renewed fervour it would prove if received with greater devotion.
The possibility of getting such a periodical renewal of fervour on our confession day ought to be an additional reason for us to be regular with our confessions and to observe the common practice of confessing every week. Longer intervals may be forced upon us by circumstances, but are they not at times merely the result of our want of appreciation and eagerness, - of insufficient generosity, - of a repugnance that could be overcome by greater humility and faith?
* Let us examine what influence our confession day habitually has upon our spiritual life. - What shall we do to increase it? . . .
One of the most efficacious means to renew periodically our fervour is the monthly recollection. We know how urgently Pius X and Pius XI recommended it in their exhortations to the clergy. .. Let us renew our resolution to make the most of this great stimulus to perseverance.
If we have in our diocese the great advantage of recollection days in common for priests, let us make every sacrifice to be present at them. But the fruit of those gatherings will depend on our earnestness and spirit of recollection during the prescribed exercises, and on the practical applications we make to ourselves by personal reflection.
If left to ourselves, let us make sure of a day and a time when we can find the necessary leisure for the customary exercises, and compensate the drawback of our isolation by a more intimate contact with Our Lord in fervent and somewhat prolonged prayer.
* Do we profit by our recollection day to examine seriously our life in the light of our vocation, of our retreat resolutions, perhaps also of our particular obligations in some association of priests (if we have joined any)?
Do we take this occasion to seek the very profitable help of spiritual direction, when circumstances make this possible?
Our priestly ideal is too grave a concern to neglect anything that may help us towards it. - "Admoneo te ut resuscites gratiam Dei quae est in te. . ."
"Deus, in te sperantium fortitudo, adesto propitius invocationibus nostris: et quia sine te nihil potest mortalis infirmitas, praesta auxilium gratiae tuae; ut in exsequendis mandatis tuis, et voluntate tibi et actione placeamus. Per C.D.N."__________________________
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 38.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)