Friday, December 24, 2010
Pope gives Christmas message on BBC Radio
From
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12072115
God is faithful to his promises but often surprises us by how he fulfils them, the Pope has said in his first BBC radio broadcast.
Pope Benedict's Christmas message for the UK was broadcast as the Thought for the Day on Radio 4's Today programme.
He said he prayed for the sick and elderly and "those who are going through any form of hardship".
In his message, he recalled his recent UK visit with "great fondness" and said he was glad to greet listeners again.
"Dear friends from Scotland, England and Wales and indeed every part of the English speaking world, I want you to know that I keep all of you very much in my prayers during this holy season," he said.
It was the first time that the Pontiff has addressed a Christmas message especially for one of the countries he has visited during the year but the National Secular Society has criticised the BBC's decision to broadcast it.
Listeners heard him say: "I am glad to have the opportunity to greet you again, and indeed to greet listeners everywhere as we prepare to celebrate the birth of Christ."
He continued: "I pray for your families, for your children, for those who are sick, and for those who are going through any form of hardship at this time."
At the Christmas season, says Pope Benedict, our thoughts recall a moment in history when the Israelites were waiting for the Messiah whom they pictured as a great leader who would restore their freedom.
"The child that was born in Bethlehem did indeed bring liberation, but not only for the people of that time and place - he was to be the saviour of all people throughout the world and throughout history," he said.
It was not a political liberation, achieved through military means, he added, but rather "Christ destroyed death for ever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the cross".
He urged people to ask Jesus Christ to expel any darkness they have in their lives and added: "Let us give thanks to God for his goodness to us, and let us joyfully proclaim to those around us the good news that God offers us freedom from whatever weighs us down; he gives us hope, he brings us life."
Negotiations between the BBC and the Vatican went on for many months to enable the recording to take place.
Thought for the Day is broadcast within the Today programme at about 0745 GMT, from Monday to Saturday.
Since 1970, it has offered approximately three minutes of personal reflection from faith leaders and believers of a variety of religious denominations.
Bernard Longley, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham said the Pope's reception during his visit to the UK in September had influenced his decision to record the broadcast.
Crowds of supporters turned up to see the Pope at various public events during his four day-visit.
Others organised demonstrations against his stance on controversial subjects, including the ordination of women, and many protested over the sex abuse scandal, and Catholic opposition to contraception.
The UK's National Secular Society's Keith Porteous Wood said the BBC had made a mistake in inviting the Pope to deliver the message.
"I've no problem whatsoever with the message itself, which is a religious message," he said.
"But I think it's an extraordinarily bad choice for the BBC, and I think it's actually a slap in the face to these tens and hundreds of thousands of child abuse victims.
Atheist author and campaigner Richard Dawkins wrote in the Guardian that he thought the address was a "damp, faltering squib" and that the message centred on the concept of original sin.
"Ratzinger has much to confess in his own conduct, as cardinal and pope. But he is also guilty of promoting one of the most repugnant ideas ever to occur to a human mind: "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22)," he wrote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12072115
God is faithful to his promises but often surprises us by how he fulfils them, the Pope has said in his first BBC radio broadcast.
Pope Benedict's Christmas message for the UK was broadcast as the Thought for the Day on Radio 4's Today programme.
He said he prayed for the sick and elderly and "those who are going through any form of hardship".
In his message, he recalled his recent UK visit with "great fondness" and said he was glad to greet listeners again.
"Dear friends from Scotland, England and Wales and indeed every part of the English speaking world, I want you to know that I keep all of you very much in my prayers during this holy season," he said.
It was the first time that the Pontiff has addressed a Christmas message especially for one of the countries he has visited during the year but the National Secular Society has criticised the BBC's decision to broadcast it.
Listeners heard him say: "I am glad to have the opportunity to greet you again, and indeed to greet listeners everywhere as we prepare to celebrate the birth of Christ."
He continued: "I pray for your families, for your children, for those who are sick, and for those who are going through any form of hardship at this time."
At the Christmas season, says Pope Benedict, our thoughts recall a moment in history when the Israelites were waiting for the Messiah whom they pictured as a great leader who would restore their freedom.
"The child that was born in Bethlehem did indeed bring liberation, but not only for the people of that time and place - he was to be the saviour of all people throughout the world and throughout history," he said.
It was not a political liberation, achieved through military means, he added, but rather "Christ destroyed death for ever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the cross".
He urged people to ask Jesus Christ to expel any darkness they have in their lives and added: "Let us give thanks to God for his goodness to us, and let us joyfully proclaim to those around us the good news that God offers us freedom from whatever weighs us down; he gives us hope, he brings us life."
Negotiations between the BBC and the Vatican went on for many months to enable the recording to take place.
Thought for the Day is broadcast within the Today programme at about 0745 GMT, from Monday to Saturday.
Since 1970, it has offered approximately three minutes of personal reflection from faith leaders and believers of a variety of religious denominations.
Bernard Longley, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham said the Pope's reception during his visit to the UK in September had influenced his decision to record the broadcast.
Crowds of supporters turned up to see the Pope at various public events during his four day-visit.
Others organised demonstrations against his stance on controversial subjects, including the ordination of women, and many protested over the sex abuse scandal, and Catholic opposition to contraception.
The UK's National Secular Society's Keith Porteous Wood said the BBC had made a mistake in inviting the Pope to deliver the message.
"I've no problem whatsoever with the message itself, which is a religious message," he said.
"But I think it's an extraordinarily bad choice for the BBC, and I think it's actually a slap in the face to these tens and hundreds of thousands of child abuse victims.
Atheist author and campaigner Richard Dawkins wrote in the Guardian that he thought the address was a "damp, faltering squib" and that the message centred on the concept of original sin.
"Ratzinger has much to confess in his own conduct, as cardinal and pope. But he is also guilty of promoting one of the most repugnant ideas ever to occur to a human mind: "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22)," he wrote.
Another Prepartion for Christmas Meditation
Taken from Dom Gueranger's The Liturgical Year:
O Emmanuel! King of Peace! Thou enterest today the city of Thy predilection, the city in which Thou hast placed Thy temple--Jerusalem. A few years hence the same city will give Thee Thy cross and Thy sepulchre: nay, the day will come on which Thou wilt set up Thy judgement seat within sight of her walls. But today Thou enterest the city of David and Solomon unnoticed and unknown. It lies on Thy road to Bethlehem. Thy blessed Mother and Joseph her spouse would not lose the opportunity of visiting the temple, there to offer to the Lord their prayers and adoration. They enter; and then, for the first time, is accomplished the prophecy of Aggeus, that great shall be the glory of this last house more than of the first (Agg. 2:10); for this second temple has now standing within it an ark of the Covenant more precious than was that which Moses built; and within this ark, which is Mary, is contained the God whose presence makes her the holiest of sanctuaries. The Lawgiver Himself is in this blessed ark, and not merely, as in that of old, the tablet of stone on which the Law was graven. The visit paid, our living ark descends the steps of the temple, and sets out once more for Bethlehem, where other prophecies are to be fulfilled. We adore Thee, O Emmanuel! in this Thy journey, and we reverence the fidelity wherewith Thou fulfilleth all that the prophets have written of Thee; for Thou wouldst give to Thy people the certainty of Thy being the Messias, by showing them that all the marks, whereby He was to be known, are to be found in Thee. And now, the hour is near; all is ready for Thy birth; come them, and save us; come, that Thou mayst not only be called our Emmanuel, but our Jesus, that is, He that saves us.
O Emmanuel! King of Peace! Thou enterest today the city of Thy predilection, the city in which Thou hast placed Thy temple--Jerusalem. A few years hence the same city will give Thee Thy cross and Thy sepulchre: nay, the day will come on which Thou wilt set up Thy judgement seat within sight of her walls. But today Thou enterest the city of David and Solomon unnoticed and unknown. It lies on Thy road to Bethlehem. Thy blessed Mother and Joseph her spouse would not lose the opportunity of visiting the temple, there to offer to the Lord their prayers and adoration. They enter; and then, for the first time, is accomplished the prophecy of Aggeus, that great shall be the glory of this last house more than of the first (Agg. 2:10); for this second temple has now standing within it an ark of the Covenant more precious than was that which Moses built; and within this ark, which is Mary, is contained the God whose presence makes her the holiest of sanctuaries. The Lawgiver Himself is in this blessed ark, and not merely, as in that of old, the tablet of stone on which the Law was graven. The visit paid, our living ark descends the steps of the temple, and sets out once more for Bethlehem, where other prophecies are to be fulfilled. We adore Thee, O Emmanuel! in this Thy journey, and we reverence the fidelity wherewith Thou fulfilleth all that the prophets have written of Thee; for Thou wouldst give to Thy people the certainty of Thy being the Messias, by showing them that all the marks, whereby He was to be known, are to be found in Thee. And now, the hour is near; all is ready for Thy birth; come them, and save us; come, that Thou mayst not only be called our Emmanuel, but our Jesus, that is, He that saves us.
The History of Christmas
Taken from Dom Gueranger's The Liturgical Year:
We apply the name of Christmas to the forty days which begin with the Nativity of our Lord, December 25, and end with the Purification of the Blessed Virgin, February 2. It is a period which forms a distinct portion of the Liturgical Year, as distinct, by its own special spirit, from every other, as are Advent, Lent, Easter, or Pentecost. One same Mystery is celebrated and kept in view during the whole forty days. Neither the Feasts of the Saints, which so abound during this Season; nor the time of Septuagesima, with its mournful Purple; which often begins before Christmastide is over, seem able to distract our Holy Mother the Church from the immense joy of which she received the good tidings from the Angels (St. Luke 2:10) on that glorious Night for which the world had been longing four thousand years. The Faithful will remember that the Liturgy commemorates this long expectation by the four penitential weeks of Advent.
The custom of celebrating the Solemnity of our Saviour's Nativity by a feast or commemoration of forty days duration is founded on the holy Gospel itself; for it tells us that the Blessed Virgin Mary, after spending forty days in the contemplation of the Divine Fruit of her glorious Maternity, went to the Temple, there to fulfill, in most perfect humility, the ceremonies which the Law demanded of the daughters of Israel, when they became mothers.
The Feast of Mary's Purification is, therefore, part of that of Jesus' Birth; and the custom of keeping this holy and glorious period of forty days as one continued Festival has every appearance of being a very ancient one, at least in the Roman Church. And firstly, with regard to our Saviour's Birth on December 25, we have St. John Chrysostom telling us, in his Homily for this Feast, that the Western Churches had, from the very commencement of Christianity, kept it on this day. He is not satisfied with merely mentioning the tradition; he undertakes to show that it is well founded, inasmuch as the Church of Rome had every means of knowing the true day of our Saviour's Birth, since the acts of the Enrollment, taken in Judea by command of Augustus, were kept in the public archives of Rome. The holy Doctor adduces a second argument, which he founds upon the Gospel of St. Luke, and he reasons thus: we know from the sacred Scriptures that it must have been in the fast of the seventh month [note: Leviticus 23:24 and following verses. The seventh month (or Tisri) corresponded to the end of our September and beginning of our October] that the Priest Zachary had the vision in the Temple; after which Elizabeth, his wife, conceived St. John the Baptist: hence it follows that the Blessed Virgin having, as the Evangelist St. Luke relates, received the Angel Gabriel's visit, and conceived the Saviour of the world in the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, that is to say, in March, the Birth of Jesus must have taken place in the month of December.
But it was not till the fourth century that the Churches of the East began to keep the Feast of our Saviour's Birth in the month of December. Up to that period they had kept it at one time on the sixty of January, thus uniting it, under the generic term of Epiphany, with the Manifestation of our Saviour made to the Magi, and in them to the Gentiles; at another time, as Clement of Alexandria tells us, they kept in on the 25th of the month Pachon (May 15), or on the 25th of the month Pharmuth (April 20). St. John Chrysostom, in the Homily we have just cited, which he gave in 386, tells us that the Roman custom of celebrating the Birth of our Saviour on December 25 had then only been observed ten years in the Church of Antioch. It is probable that this change had been introduced in obedience to the wishes of the Apostolic See, wishes which received additional weight by the edict of the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian, which appeared towards the close of the fourth century, and decreed that the Nativity and Epiphany of our Lord should be made two distinct Festivals. The only Church that has maintained the custom of celebrating the two mysteries on January 6 is that of Armenia; owing, no doubt, to the circumstance of that country not being under the authority of the Emperors; as also because it was withdrawn at an early period from the influence of Rome by schism and heresy.
The Feast of Our Lady's Purification, with which the forty days of Christmas close, is, in the Latin Church, of very great antiquity; so ancient, indeed, as to preclude the possibility of our fixing the date of its institution. According to the unanimous opinion of liturgists, it is the most ancient of all the Feasts of the Holy Mother of God; and as her Purification is related in the Gospel itself, they rightly infer that its anniversary was solemnized at the very commencement of Christianity. Of course, this is only to be understood of the Roman Church; for as regards the Oriental Church, we find that this Feast was not definitely fixed to February 2 until the reign of the Emperor Justinian, in the sixth century. It is true that the Eastern Christians had previously to that time a sort of commemoration of this Mystery, but it was far from being a universal custom, and it was kept a few days after the Feast of our Lord's Nativity, and not on the day itself of Mary's going up to the Temple.
But what is the characteristic of Christmas in the Latin liturgy? It is twofold: it is joy, which the whole Church feels at the coming of the divine Word in the Flesh; and it is admiration of that glorious Virgin, who was made the Mother of God. There is scarcely a prayer, or a rite, in the liturgy of this glad season, which does not imply these two grand Mysteries: an Infant-God, and a Virgin-Mother.
For example, on all Sundays and Feasts which are not Doubles, the Church, throughout these forty days, makes a commemoration of the fruitful virginity of the Mother of God, by three special prayers in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. She begs the suffrage of Mary by proclaiming her quality of Mother of God and her inviolate purity, which remained in her even after she had given birth to her Son. And again the magnificent anthem, Alma Redemptoris, composed by the Monk Herman Contractus, continues, up to the very day of the Purification, to be the termination of each Canonical Hour. It is by such manifestations of her love and veneration that the Church, honouring the Son in the Mother, testifies her holy joy during this season of the Liturgical Year, which we call Christmas.
Our readers are aware that, when Easter Sunday falls at its latest—that is, in April—the ecclesiastical calendar counts as many as six Sundays after the Epiphany. Christmastide (that is, the forty days between Christmas Day and the Purification) includes sometimes four out of these six Sundays; frequently only two; and sometimes only one, as in the case when Easter comes so early as to necessitate keeping Septuagesima, and even Sexagesima Sunday, in January. Still, nothing is changed, as we have already said, in the ritual observances of this joyous season, excepting only that on those two Sundays, the fore-runners of Lent, the vestments are purple, and the Gloria in excelsis is omitted.
Although our holy Mother the Church honours with especial devotion the Mystery of the Divine Infancy during the whole season of Christmas; yet, she is obliged to introduce into the liturgy of this same season passages from the holy Gospels which seem premature, inasmuch as they relate to the active life of Jesus. This is owing to there being less than six months allotted by the calendar for the celebration of the entire work of our Redemption: in other words, Christmas and Easter are so near each other, even when Easter is as late as it can be, that Mysteries must of necessity be crowded into the interval; and this entails anticipation. And yet the liturgy never tires in their praises, during the whole period from the Nativity to the day when Mary comes to the Temple to present her Jesus.
The Greeks, too, make frequent commemorations of the Maternity of Mary in their Offices of this season: but they have a special veneration for the twelve days between Christmas Day and the Epiphany, which, in their liturgy, are called the Dodecameron. During this time they observe no days of abstinence from flesh-meat; and the Emperors of the East had, out of respect for the great mystery, decreed that no servile work should be done, and that the courts of law should be closed, until after January 6.
From this outline of the history of the holy season, we can understand what is the characteristic of this second portion of the Liturgical Year, which we call Christmas, and which has ever been a season most dear to the Christian world.
We apply the name of Christmas to the forty days which begin with the Nativity of our Lord, December 25, and end with the Purification of the Blessed Virgin, February 2. It is a period which forms a distinct portion of the Liturgical Year, as distinct, by its own special spirit, from every other, as are Advent, Lent, Easter, or Pentecost. One same Mystery is celebrated and kept in view during the whole forty days. Neither the Feasts of the Saints, which so abound during this Season; nor the time of Septuagesima, with its mournful Purple; which often begins before Christmastide is over, seem able to distract our Holy Mother the Church from the immense joy of which she received the good tidings from the Angels (St. Luke 2:10) on that glorious Night for which the world had been longing four thousand years. The Faithful will remember that the Liturgy commemorates this long expectation by the four penitential weeks of Advent.
The custom of celebrating the Solemnity of our Saviour's Nativity by a feast or commemoration of forty days duration is founded on the holy Gospel itself; for it tells us that the Blessed Virgin Mary, after spending forty days in the contemplation of the Divine Fruit of her glorious Maternity, went to the Temple, there to fulfill, in most perfect humility, the ceremonies which the Law demanded of the daughters of Israel, when they became mothers.
The Feast of Mary's Purification is, therefore, part of that of Jesus' Birth; and the custom of keeping this holy and glorious period of forty days as one continued Festival has every appearance of being a very ancient one, at least in the Roman Church. And firstly, with regard to our Saviour's Birth on December 25, we have St. John Chrysostom telling us, in his Homily for this Feast, that the Western Churches had, from the very commencement of Christianity, kept it on this day. He is not satisfied with merely mentioning the tradition; he undertakes to show that it is well founded, inasmuch as the Church of Rome had every means of knowing the true day of our Saviour's Birth, since the acts of the Enrollment, taken in Judea by command of Augustus, were kept in the public archives of Rome. The holy Doctor adduces a second argument, which he founds upon the Gospel of St. Luke, and he reasons thus: we know from the sacred Scriptures that it must have been in the fast of the seventh month [note: Leviticus 23:24 and following verses. The seventh month (or Tisri) corresponded to the end of our September and beginning of our October] that the Priest Zachary had the vision in the Temple; after which Elizabeth, his wife, conceived St. John the Baptist: hence it follows that the Blessed Virgin having, as the Evangelist St. Luke relates, received the Angel Gabriel's visit, and conceived the Saviour of the world in the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, that is to say, in March, the Birth of Jesus must have taken place in the month of December.
But it was not till the fourth century that the Churches of the East began to keep the Feast of our Saviour's Birth in the month of December. Up to that period they had kept it at one time on the sixty of January, thus uniting it, under the generic term of Epiphany, with the Manifestation of our Saviour made to the Magi, and in them to the Gentiles; at another time, as Clement of Alexandria tells us, they kept in on the 25th of the month Pachon (May 15), or on the 25th of the month Pharmuth (April 20). St. John Chrysostom, in the Homily we have just cited, which he gave in 386, tells us that the Roman custom of celebrating the Birth of our Saviour on December 25 had then only been observed ten years in the Church of Antioch. It is probable that this change had been introduced in obedience to the wishes of the Apostolic See, wishes which received additional weight by the edict of the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian, which appeared towards the close of the fourth century, and decreed that the Nativity and Epiphany of our Lord should be made two distinct Festivals. The only Church that has maintained the custom of celebrating the two mysteries on January 6 is that of Armenia; owing, no doubt, to the circumstance of that country not being under the authority of the Emperors; as also because it was withdrawn at an early period from the influence of Rome by schism and heresy.
The Feast of Our Lady's Purification, with which the forty days of Christmas close, is, in the Latin Church, of very great antiquity; so ancient, indeed, as to preclude the possibility of our fixing the date of its institution. According to the unanimous opinion of liturgists, it is the most ancient of all the Feasts of the Holy Mother of God; and as her Purification is related in the Gospel itself, they rightly infer that its anniversary was solemnized at the very commencement of Christianity. Of course, this is only to be understood of the Roman Church; for as regards the Oriental Church, we find that this Feast was not definitely fixed to February 2 until the reign of the Emperor Justinian, in the sixth century. It is true that the Eastern Christians had previously to that time a sort of commemoration of this Mystery, but it was far from being a universal custom, and it was kept a few days after the Feast of our Lord's Nativity, and not on the day itself of Mary's going up to the Temple.
But what is the characteristic of Christmas in the Latin liturgy? It is twofold: it is joy, which the whole Church feels at the coming of the divine Word in the Flesh; and it is admiration of that glorious Virgin, who was made the Mother of God. There is scarcely a prayer, or a rite, in the liturgy of this glad season, which does not imply these two grand Mysteries: an Infant-God, and a Virgin-Mother.
For example, on all Sundays and Feasts which are not Doubles, the Church, throughout these forty days, makes a commemoration of the fruitful virginity of the Mother of God, by three special prayers in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. She begs the suffrage of Mary by proclaiming her quality of Mother of God and her inviolate purity, which remained in her even after she had given birth to her Son. And again the magnificent anthem, Alma Redemptoris, composed by the Monk Herman Contractus, continues, up to the very day of the Purification, to be the termination of each Canonical Hour. It is by such manifestations of her love and veneration that the Church, honouring the Son in the Mother, testifies her holy joy during this season of the Liturgical Year, which we call Christmas.
Our readers are aware that, when Easter Sunday falls at its latest—that is, in April—the ecclesiastical calendar counts as many as six Sundays after the Epiphany. Christmastide (that is, the forty days between Christmas Day and the Purification) includes sometimes four out of these six Sundays; frequently only two; and sometimes only one, as in the case when Easter comes so early as to necessitate keeping Septuagesima, and even Sexagesima Sunday, in January. Still, nothing is changed, as we have already said, in the ritual observances of this joyous season, excepting only that on those two Sundays, the fore-runners of Lent, the vestments are purple, and the Gloria in excelsis is omitted.
Although our holy Mother the Church honours with especial devotion the Mystery of the Divine Infancy during the whole season of Christmas; yet, she is obliged to introduce into the liturgy of this same season passages from the holy Gospels which seem premature, inasmuch as they relate to the active life of Jesus. This is owing to there being less than six months allotted by the calendar for the celebration of the entire work of our Redemption: in other words, Christmas and Easter are so near each other, even when Easter is as late as it can be, that Mysteries must of necessity be crowded into the interval; and this entails anticipation. And yet the liturgy never tires in their praises, during the whole period from the Nativity to the day when Mary comes to the Temple to present her Jesus.
The Greeks, too, make frequent commemorations of the Maternity of Mary in their Offices of this season: but they have a special veneration for the twelve days between Christmas Day and the Epiphany, which, in their liturgy, are called the Dodecameron. During this time they observe no days of abstinence from flesh-meat; and the Emperors of the East had, out of respect for the great mystery, decreed that no servile work should be done, and that the courts of law should be closed, until after January 6.
From this outline of the history of the holy season, we can understand what is the characteristic of this second portion of the Liturgical Year, which we call Christmas, and which has ever been a season most dear to the Christian world.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Preparation for Christmas Meditation
Taken from Dom Gueranger's The Liturgical Year:
O King of nations! Thou art approaching still nigher to Bethlehem, where Thou art to be born. The journey is almost over, and Thy august Mother, consoled and strengthened by the dear weight she bears, holds an unceasing converse with Thee on the way. She adores Thy divine Majesty; she gives thanks to Thy mercy; she rejoices that she has been chosen for the sublime ministry of being Mother to God. She longs for that happy moment when her eyes shall look upon thee, and yet she fears it. For, how will she be able to render Thee those services which are due to Thy infinite greatness, she that thinks herself the last of creatures? How will she dare to raise Thee up in her arms, and press Thee to her heart, and feed Thee at her breasts? When she reflects that the hour is now near at hand, in which, being born of her, Thou wilt require all her care and tenderness, her heart sinks within her; for, what human heart could bear the intense vehemence of these two affections--the love of such a Mother for her Babe, and the love of such a creature for her God? But Thou supportest her, O Thou the Desired of nations! for Thou, too, longest for that happy birth, which is to give to the earth its Savior, and to men, that corner-stone, which will unite them all into one family.
O King of nations! Thou art approaching still nigher to Bethlehem, where Thou art to be born. The journey is almost over, and Thy august Mother, consoled and strengthened by the dear weight she bears, holds an unceasing converse with Thee on the way. She adores Thy divine Majesty; she gives thanks to Thy mercy; she rejoices that she has been chosen for the sublime ministry of being Mother to God. She longs for that happy moment when her eyes shall look upon thee, and yet she fears it. For, how will she be able to render Thee those services which are due to Thy infinite greatness, she that thinks herself the last of creatures? How will she dare to raise Thee up in her arms, and press Thee to her heart, and feed Thee at her breasts? When she reflects that the hour is now near at hand, in which, being born of her, Thou wilt require all her care and tenderness, her heart sinks within her; for, what human heart could bear the intense vehemence of these two affections--the love of such a Mother for her Babe, and the love of such a creature for her God? But Thou supportest her, O Thou the Desired of nations! for Thou, too, longest for that happy birth, which is to give to the earth its Savior, and to men, that corner-stone, which will unite them all into one family.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the trivilization of sexuality regarding certain interpretations of "Light of the World"
Following the publication of the interview-book Light of the World by Benedict XVI, a number of erroneous interpretations have emerged which have caused confusion concerning the position of the Catholic Church regarding certain questions of sexual morality. The thought of the Pope has been repeatedly manipulated for ends and interests which are entirely foreign to the meaning of his words – a meaning which is evident to anyone who reads the entire chapters in which human sexuality is treated. The intention of the Holy Father is clear: to rediscover the beauty of the divine gift of human sexuality and, in this way, to avoid the cheapening of sexuality which is common today.
Some interpretations have presented the words of the Pope as a contradiction of the traditional moral teaching of the Church. This hypothesis has been welcomed by some as a positive change and lamented by others as a cause of concern – as if his statements represented a break with the doctrine concerning contraception and with the Church’s stance in the fight against AIDS. In reality, the words of the Pope – which specifically concern a gravely disordered type of human behaviour, namely prostitution (cf. Light of the World, pp. 117-119) – do not signify a change in Catholic moral teaching or in the pastoral practice of the Church.
As is clear from an attentive reading of the pages in question, the Holy Father was talking neither about conjugal morality nor about the moral norm concerning contraception. This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church and was summarized succinctly by Pope Paul VI in paragraph 14 of his Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, when he wrote that "also to be excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means." The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought. On this issue the Pope proposes instead – and also calls the pastors of the Church to propose more often and more effectively (cf. Light of the World, p. 147) – humanly and ethically acceptable ways of behaving which respect the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meaning of every conjugal act, through the possible use of natural family planning in view of responsible procreation.
On the pages in question, the Holy Father refers to the completely different case of prostitution, a type of behaviour which Christian morality has always considered gravely immoral (cf. Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, n. 27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2355). The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed not only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be summed up in the words of St. Paul: "Flee from fornication" (1 Cor 6:18). The practice of prostitution should be shunned, and it is the duty of the agencies of the Church, of civil society and of the State to do all they can to liberate those involved from this practice.
In this regard, it must be noted that the situation created by the spread of AIDS in many areas of the world has made the problem of prostitution even more serious. Those who know themselves to be infected with HIV and who therefore run the risk of infecting others, apart from committing a sin against the sixth commandment are also committing a sin against the fifth commandment – because they are consciously putting the lives of others at risk through behaviour which has repercussions on public health. In this situation, the Holy Father clearly affirms that the provision of condoms does not constitute "the real or moral solution" to the problem of AIDS and also that "the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality" in that it refuses to address the mistaken human behaviour which is the root cause of the spread of the virus. In this context, however, it cannot be denied that anyone who uses a condom in order to diminish the risk posed to another person is intending to reduce the evil connected with his or her immoral activity. In this sense the Holy Father points out that the use of a condom "with the intention of reducing the risk of infection, can be a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality." This affirmation is clearly compatible with the Holy Father’s previous statement that this is "not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection."
Some commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI according to the so-called theory of the "lesser evil". This theory is, however, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, n. 75-77). An action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed. The Holy Father did not say – as some people have claimed – that prostitution with the use of a condom can be chosen as a lesser evil. The Church teaches that prostitution is immoral and should be shunned. However, those involved in prostitution who are HIV positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another – even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity. This understanding is in full conformity with the moral theological tradition of the Church.
In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within marriage. In this regard it is also important to condemn any behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope says, such behaviour is the reason why so many people no longer see in sexuality an expression of their love: "This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being" (Light of the World, p. 119).
Some interpretations have presented the words of the Pope as a contradiction of the traditional moral teaching of the Church. This hypothesis has been welcomed by some as a positive change and lamented by others as a cause of concern – as if his statements represented a break with the doctrine concerning contraception and with the Church’s stance in the fight against AIDS. In reality, the words of the Pope – which specifically concern a gravely disordered type of human behaviour, namely prostitution (cf. Light of the World, pp. 117-119) – do not signify a change in Catholic moral teaching or in the pastoral practice of the Church.
As is clear from an attentive reading of the pages in question, the Holy Father was talking neither about conjugal morality nor about the moral norm concerning contraception. This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church and was summarized succinctly by Pope Paul VI in paragraph 14 of his Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, when he wrote that "also to be excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means." The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought. On this issue the Pope proposes instead – and also calls the pastors of the Church to propose more often and more effectively (cf. Light of the World, p. 147) – humanly and ethically acceptable ways of behaving which respect the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meaning of every conjugal act, through the possible use of natural family planning in view of responsible procreation.
On the pages in question, the Holy Father refers to the completely different case of prostitution, a type of behaviour which Christian morality has always considered gravely immoral (cf. Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, n. 27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2355). The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed not only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be summed up in the words of St. Paul: "Flee from fornication" (1 Cor 6:18). The practice of prostitution should be shunned, and it is the duty of the agencies of the Church, of civil society and of the State to do all they can to liberate those involved from this practice.
In this regard, it must be noted that the situation created by the spread of AIDS in many areas of the world has made the problem of prostitution even more serious. Those who know themselves to be infected with HIV and who therefore run the risk of infecting others, apart from committing a sin against the sixth commandment are also committing a sin against the fifth commandment – because they are consciously putting the lives of others at risk through behaviour which has repercussions on public health. In this situation, the Holy Father clearly affirms that the provision of condoms does not constitute "the real or moral solution" to the problem of AIDS and also that "the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality" in that it refuses to address the mistaken human behaviour which is the root cause of the spread of the virus. In this context, however, it cannot be denied that anyone who uses a condom in order to diminish the risk posed to another person is intending to reduce the evil connected with his or her immoral activity. In this sense the Holy Father points out that the use of a condom "with the intention of reducing the risk of infection, can be a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality." This affirmation is clearly compatible with the Holy Father’s previous statement that this is "not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection."
Some commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI according to the so-called theory of the "lesser evil". This theory is, however, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, n. 75-77). An action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed. The Holy Father did not say – as some people have claimed – that prostitution with the use of a condom can be chosen as a lesser evil. The Church teaches that prostitution is immoral and should be shunned. However, those involved in prostitution who are HIV positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another – even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity. This understanding is in full conformity with the moral theological tradition of the Church.
In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within marriage. In this regard it is also important to condemn any behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope says, such behaviour is the reason why so many people no longer see in sexuality an expression of their love: "This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being" (Light of the World, p. 119).
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
The Dangers of Too Much Participation at Mass
By Denise Caffrey
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass recalls and re-enacts the Sacrifice of Christ at Calvary. It is the greatest and most important form of prayer, adoration, reparation and thanksgiving which we can offer to God, Our Almighty Father. At Mass the priest takes the place of Christ on Calvary and offers up Christ’s Supreme Sacrifice for man. The Church has always encouraged and promoted the participation of laypeople and persons other than the priest in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Whilst the priest alone can perform the most important aspects of the Mass, others are given the authority to assist and enhance the celebration to make it more pleasing and more spiritual. Canon law and Sacred Tradition gives us rules as to the length and extent of participation by others in the Mass. Thus we have rules for deacons, altar servers, choirs, etc. There are also rules governing the actions and responses of the laity in the pews. These are done to ensure that the Sacrifice of the Mass is valid and suitable as sacrifice for Almighty God. The whole Church is to celebrate the same form of Mass in union with one another regardless of language or nationality.
During the Sacrifice of the Mass, the priest alone can offer up the prayers of the Mass especially those of Consecration. He is assisted in his prayers by those around him. The Church has always regulated the level of participation by others at Mass and these rules have been kept for many centuries ensuring the continuity and transcendence of the Mass. However, in the last two generations, levels of participation by laity have greatly increased and now pose numerous threats towards the sanctity of the Mass and have increased the potential for abuse. This has been aided by the change in the ordinary form of the Mass from the Tridentine Rite to the Novus Ordo Rite, which is said in the vernacular. With the language of the Mass now in the spoken language of the people, laypeople are being offered more opportunity to participate in the new form of the Mass, and while many see advantages to this, there are inherent dangers towards these levels of participation by the laity.
There is a danger for the priest, when he is assisted far more by the laity than what he would have been previously. This begins in his teaching and his ministry. He is encouraged to view the Mass as a meal rather than a Sacrifice. This makes both him and others see the Mass as a meal to be shared, rather than a re-enactment of Calvary and a Sacrifice. This view is quite detrimental to his Catholic faith. It leads to a loss of faith and lack of belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. He loses belief in power of transubstantiation at the Consecration. He begins to take the Protestant view that the Bread and Wine do not become the Body and Blood of Christ at Consecration. Even if he does retain this belief, he can lose reverence and awe in the presence of the Eucharist. He handles and treats the Body and Blood of Christ in a casual manner, as he would any other object. It is no longer treated as a sacred object. From these, stem great abuses of the Blessed Sacrament and Holy Communion at Mass.
The priest is also encouraged to delegate his duties to laypeople. Duties which he would previously carry out are now being handled by laypeople. While this can be useful and often necessary in the absence of a priest, this is increasingly being used in every parish even when there is a priest close by and available. Masses have begun to be replaced at times by Eucharistic Services, which have no priest in attendance and operated completely by laypeople. This takes away from the faith of the laity and encourages in them the belief that one is as good as the other. These are in no way equal for nothing can replace the importance of the Sacrifice of the Mass, not even the Eucharist.
In a similar way, the priest is being encouraged to delegate the giving of Communion to laypeople. The Eucharist can only be consecrated by the consecrated hands of a priest, so it is only right that consecrated hands be the ones to handle the Blessed Sacrament and give the Eucharist to faithful Catholics. The Church does allow for circumstances which permit the use of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. But these circumstances are very limited and the extraordinary ministers must be specially blessed and adhere to a number of conditions. One of the main circumstances in which they are allowed, is when a very large number of laypeople (in the hundreds or thousands) attend a Mass and there is a great shortage of priests. They should be the exception rather than the rule. Unfortunately, this allowance by the Church is being greatly abused by parishes everywhere in order to encourage participation in the Mass.
In every parish, they have put together a list of Eucharistic Ministers, which is used every week. It completely disregards the conditions laid down by the Church as to the use of Extraordinary Ministers and the times when these can be used. Eucharistic Ministers are used at every single Mass, even when the number attending in no way requires another helper at Communion. It is frequent to see more than one Eucharistic Minister giving Communion and sometimes the priest will even sit aside and allow Communion to be given solely by the Ministers at the altar. Eucharistic Ministers often proceed to the Tabernacle to retrieve a ciborium and give out Communion, even when they were not asked or originally required to before Communion. Eucharistic Ministers are given little or no teaching on the Blessed Sacrament or on the proper way to handle or give out Holy Communion. Thus, they have little or no true respect for the Eucharist and can even be lacking in the belief of the Real Presence.
These attitudes are damaging to both the priest and the laity involved. The Eucharist starts to lose a special place to the priest when others take over his duties at Communion. He starts to lose belief in transubstantiation and the Real Presence in the Eucharist. The Eucharist can start to become seen as a casual item or simply a piece of bread. Likewise, a similar effect happens to the laity who becomes Eucharistic Ministers. The Eucharist is seen as an item to be handled as one likes in any manner which they think suitable. This handling makes them lose reverence in the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament, and some even begin to see themselves to be on equal standing with the priest. Many priests and Eucharistic Ministers do not see or realise the subtle effects of their actions and the consequences from them which build up slowly over time.
The constant use of Eucharistic Ministers and the encouragement of the belief that the Mass is a meal rather than a Sacrifice are some of the reasons behind the recent trend for Communion to be received in the hand. This practice is widespread across the entire Church, and is used to get the laity attending the Mass to participate in it. The belief that the Eucharist can be handled by un-consecrated hands such as those of the Ministers encourages the laypeople to receive Communion in their hands. This has led to a loss of belief in the Real Presence and loss of respect for the Blessed Sacrament. If the Eucharist can be handled by anyone, then it ceases to be a Sacred Object in the eyes of man. All laypeople are being encouraged to receive Communion at Mass and they have begun to see this as a right. Even those who are not baptised Catholics, those who are in a state of grievous sin or those who are completely unprepared are given Communion and this can damage their souls instead of helping them spiritually. The priest has lost most of his control over the Eucharist at Communion; he is no longer able to prevent those who are unworthy to receive from receiving Communion.
This widespread participation of Communion in the hand has led to much abuse of the Blessed Sacrament, both in obvious ways and in unseen ways. Abuse and disregard for the Host is often practised and is usually visible to those around. But further abuse occurs in unseen ways. The Real Presence is in every particle of the Host, no matter how minuscule. These particles, unseen to the naked eye, fall or transfer from the Host with each usage. These end up on the hands and clothes of laypeople when Communion is given on the hand. Abuse to the Eucharist occurs from this, in the actions of these people afterwards.
The practice of standing for Communion is often done for expediency during Communion. Communion can be delivered in a faster manner and this attitude is encouraged by a fast-paced modern world. It encourages the laity in the belief that the Mass is a meal rather than a Sacrifice. Approaching the altar at Communion, standing with hands outstretched, gives the notion that what one is about to receive is only physical food. The Host is treated as bread alone and the Real Presence is begun to be ignored. The act of standing to receive Communion indicates that the person views themselves to be on an equal standing with the Lord. Receiving Communion on the tongue while kneeling is not only a humble, penitential act but it is an act of adoration towards the Eucharist. The layperson acknowledges their state as a sinner by receiving on the tongue and they kneel to show their humbleness before God. They do not touch the Blessed Sacrament with unworthy, sinful hands. But they also adore God in the Real Presence in the Eucharist by these same actions. They show their understanding and belief in the Real Presence and they act with awe and reverence before the Eucharist. Many little acts of adoration before the Blessed Sacrament are lost by those who do not kneel to receive Communion.
While much abuse occurs from too much participation by the laity at Communion, there are other instances in which participation by the laity becomes excessive. Before the Canon of the Mass, and the Consecration, comes the teaching that is given through Holy Scripture and sermons. In previous times, these were delivered by the priest or by the deacon after receiving a blessing from the priest. The sermons were mainly based on the interpretation and application of the teachings involved in the Scripture readings and Gospels for the Mass on the day. But now, the laity is being actively encouraged to take part in this aspect of the Mass. In this way, the priest begins to lose his place as teacher to the people. He is no longer seen as the one giving the Scripture reading to the laypeople. The Scripture reading begins to lose its aspect for teaching. The lay reader is often seen to be just reading a story or passage. The priest begins to lose his awareness of the Scripture readings used during Mass and the applications that can be taken from them for sermons. Sometimes the sermons themselves are delivered by laypeople. These usually are on subjects that have no relevance to the Scriptures used during the Mass or have no teachings of the Catholic Church. The loss of instruction at these times is great. The Scriptures used are given no application and teaching, and the laypeople attending will often disregard what they contain if they are not expanded on.
Laypeople have always been encouraged to participate at Mass through music, song and chant. When these are suitable, respectful and spiritual, they can greatly enhance the spiritual aspect of the Mass and the Sacrifice becomes more pleasing. But the current effort to get more participation by the laity has led to use of unsuitable music and lyrics. Laypeople are encouraged to participate by playing musical instruments which they are proficient at, but not all these are suitable for Mass. The use of modern, electrical instruments and the combination of some of these instruments often becomes loud, noisy and distracting. The Church seems more like a concert hall than a place of sacrifice and prayer. The music from these instruments becomes displeasing and unspiritual during the Mass. The lyrics from hymns that are used are often unsuitable for the occasion for which they are used or contain erroneous teaching about the Mass or the Catholic Faith. Protestant hymns are being used increasingly and are replacing the more suitable traditional Catholic hymns. There is little regulation over the content of hymns used. However, even the use of traditional hymns can be done wrongly. Hymns are being used for something which they are unsuitable for. This often happens with old Latin hymns being used in the wrong context.
Laypeople are encouraged to become more involved in the Mass through the responses that are assigned for them during the Liturgy. Through these responses, they can be attentive to what is happening during the Mass and they combine their prayers with the prayers of the priest, to make the Mass a united prayer by all who attend. But apart from these responses, the prayers of the Mass are those which should only be spoken by the priest. The priest takes the place of Christ and becomes our intercessor to God. The prayers he says are for him to say in this role. However, laypeople are taking some of these prayers and using them for themselves also. They speak aloud prayers which the priest should say alone. Usually they do this for certain prayers, such as those immediately before or after the Our Father. But in some places, the laypeople are encouraged to say aloud the Canon of the Mass and the prayers of Consecration. This practice takes away from the spirituality of the Mass and the understanding that it is a Sacrifice and a re-enactment of Calvary.
When the Mass is viewed as a Sacrifice and a re-enactment of Calvary, then the altar and the area surrounding it is seen as a sanctuary, a holy ground. Only those directly involved in the Mass are allowed on this holy ground during the celebration. The priests and deacons are consecrated and blessed to perform the rituals and prayers of the Mass, and they have a rightful place there. Altar boys are also permitted for numerous reasons. They perform tasks that would otherwise take the priest away from the altar and the celebration of the Mass. The altar boys also take the place of the laity at the altar. They represent the laypeople present and provide a direct connection between the priest at the altar and the laypeople in the pews. They are also present in order to prepare and inspire them towards the priesthood. This is why altar boys must always be preferable to altar girls. Because of these assigned roles, there is no need for additional laypeople to be around the altar during Mass. The presence of other laypeople on the altar at various times during the Mass, taking duties from the priest or deacon, instils the notion that the Mass is a meal to be shared around a table. It instils the idea that all are worthy to approach the altar no matter what the individual states of their souls are or what their standing with the Church is.
Christ ordained twelve men to the priesthood on Holy Thursday and instituted the Mass on that same eve and on Good Friday. Over the centuries, the Church, through divine inspiration, has refined the Liturgy of the Mass to augment that which Christ gave us at the Last Supper and at His Glorious Passion. He reserved the priesthood for men alone, so it is only right that these consecrated men and their male assistants be those present at the altar. For women, there has been reserved other roles, which while not actively involved in the celebration of the Sacraments, are still important and valuable for the running of the Church and the proclamation of the Faith. Returning the levels of lay participation at Mass to what they have been in previous centuries, will not only ensure the sanctity and spirituality of the Mass, it will promote and encourage belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and the tenets of the Catholic Faith.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass recalls and re-enacts the Sacrifice of Christ at Calvary. It is the greatest and most important form of prayer, adoration, reparation and thanksgiving which we can offer to God, Our Almighty Father. At Mass the priest takes the place of Christ on Calvary and offers up Christ’s Supreme Sacrifice for man. The Church has always encouraged and promoted the participation of laypeople and persons other than the priest in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Whilst the priest alone can perform the most important aspects of the Mass, others are given the authority to assist and enhance the celebration to make it more pleasing and more spiritual. Canon law and Sacred Tradition gives us rules as to the length and extent of participation by others in the Mass. Thus we have rules for deacons, altar servers, choirs, etc. There are also rules governing the actions and responses of the laity in the pews. These are done to ensure that the Sacrifice of the Mass is valid and suitable as sacrifice for Almighty God. The whole Church is to celebrate the same form of Mass in union with one another regardless of language or nationality.
During the Sacrifice of the Mass, the priest alone can offer up the prayers of the Mass especially those of Consecration. He is assisted in his prayers by those around him. The Church has always regulated the level of participation by others at Mass and these rules have been kept for many centuries ensuring the continuity and transcendence of the Mass. However, in the last two generations, levels of participation by laity have greatly increased and now pose numerous threats towards the sanctity of the Mass and have increased the potential for abuse. This has been aided by the change in the ordinary form of the Mass from the Tridentine Rite to the Novus Ordo Rite, which is said in the vernacular. With the language of the Mass now in the spoken language of the people, laypeople are being offered more opportunity to participate in the new form of the Mass, and while many see advantages to this, there are inherent dangers towards these levels of participation by the laity.
There is a danger for the priest, when he is assisted far more by the laity than what he would have been previously. This begins in his teaching and his ministry. He is encouraged to view the Mass as a meal rather than a Sacrifice. This makes both him and others see the Mass as a meal to be shared, rather than a re-enactment of Calvary and a Sacrifice. This view is quite detrimental to his Catholic faith. It leads to a loss of faith and lack of belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. He loses belief in power of transubstantiation at the Consecration. He begins to take the Protestant view that the Bread and Wine do not become the Body and Blood of Christ at Consecration. Even if he does retain this belief, he can lose reverence and awe in the presence of the Eucharist. He handles and treats the Body and Blood of Christ in a casual manner, as he would any other object. It is no longer treated as a sacred object. From these, stem great abuses of the Blessed Sacrament and Holy Communion at Mass.
The priest is also encouraged to delegate his duties to laypeople. Duties which he would previously carry out are now being handled by laypeople. While this can be useful and often necessary in the absence of a priest, this is increasingly being used in every parish even when there is a priest close by and available. Masses have begun to be replaced at times by Eucharistic Services, which have no priest in attendance and operated completely by laypeople. This takes away from the faith of the laity and encourages in them the belief that one is as good as the other. These are in no way equal for nothing can replace the importance of the Sacrifice of the Mass, not even the Eucharist.
In a similar way, the priest is being encouraged to delegate the giving of Communion to laypeople. The Eucharist can only be consecrated by the consecrated hands of a priest, so it is only right that consecrated hands be the ones to handle the Blessed Sacrament and give the Eucharist to faithful Catholics. The Church does allow for circumstances which permit the use of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. But these circumstances are very limited and the extraordinary ministers must be specially blessed and adhere to a number of conditions. One of the main circumstances in which they are allowed, is when a very large number of laypeople (in the hundreds or thousands) attend a Mass and there is a great shortage of priests. They should be the exception rather than the rule. Unfortunately, this allowance by the Church is being greatly abused by parishes everywhere in order to encourage participation in the Mass.
In every parish, they have put together a list of Eucharistic Ministers, which is used every week. It completely disregards the conditions laid down by the Church as to the use of Extraordinary Ministers and the times when these can be used. Eucharistic Ministers are used at every single Mass, even when the number attending in no way requires another helper at Communion. It is frequent to see more than one Eucharistic Minister giving Communion and sometimes the priest will even sit aside and allow Communion to be given solely by the Ministers at the altar. Eucharistic Ministers often proceed to the Tabernacle to retrieve a ciborium and give out Communion, even when they were not asked or originally required to before Communion. Eucharistic Ministers are given little or no teaching on the Blessed Sacrament or on the proper way to handle or give out Holy Communion. Thus, they have little or no true respect for the Eucharist and can even be lacking in the belief of the Real Presence.
These attitudes are damaging to both the priest and the laity involved. The Eucharist starts to lose a special place to the priest when others take over his duties at Communion. He starts to lose belief in transubstantiation and the Real Presence in the Eucharist. The Eucharist can start to become seen as a casual item or simply a piece of bread. Likewise, a similar effect happens to the laity who becomes Eucharistic Ministers. The Eucharist is seen as an item to be handled as one likes in any manner which they think suitable. This handling makes them lose reverence in the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament, and some even begin to see themselves to be on equal standing with the priest. Many priests and Eucharistic Ministers do not see or realise the subtle effects of their actions and the consequences from them which build up slowly over time.
The constant use of Eucharistic Ministers and the encouragement of the belief that the Mass is a meal rather than a Sacrifice are some of the reasons behind the recent trend for Communion to be received in the hand. This practice is widespread across the entire Church, and is used to get the laity attending the Mass to participate in it. The belief that the Eucharist can be handled by un-consecrated hands such as those of the Ministers encourages the laypeople to receive Communion in their hands. This has led to a loss of belief in the Real Presence and loss of respect for the Blessed Sacrament. If the Eucharist can be handled by anyone, then it ceases to be a Sacred Object in the eyes of man. All laypeople are being encouraged to receive Communion at Mass and they have begun to see this as a right. Even those who are not baptised Catholics, those who are in a state of grievous sin or those who are completely unprepared are given Communion and this can damage their souls instead of helping them spiritually. The priest has lost most of his control over the Eucharist at Communion; he is no longer able to prevent those who are unworthy to receive from receiving Communion.
This widespread participation of Communion in the hand has led to much abuse of the Blessed Sacrament, both in obvious ways and in unseen ways. Abuse and disregard for the Host is often practised and is usually visible to those around. But further abuse occurs in unseen ways. The Real Presence is in every particle of the Host, no matter how minuscule. These particles, unseen to the naked eye, fall or transfer from the Host with each usage. These end up on the hands and clothes of laypeople when Communion is given on the hand. Abuse to the Eucharist occurs from this, in the actions of these people afterwards.
The practice of standing for Communion is often done for expediency during Communion. Communion can be delivered in a faster manner and this attitude is encouraged by a fast-paced modern world. It encourages the laity in the belief that the Mass is a meal rather than a Sacrifice. Approaching the altar at Communion, standing with hands outstretched, gives the notion that what one is about to receive is only physical food. The Host is treated as bread alone and the Real Presence is begun to be ignored. The act of standing to receive Communion indicates that the person views themselves to be on an equal standing with the Lord. Receiving Communion on the tongue while kneeling is not only a humble, penitential act but it is an act of adoration towards the Eucharist. The layperson acknowledges their state as a sinner by receiving on the tongue and they kneel to show their humbleness before God. They do not touch the Blessed Sacrament with unworthy, sinful hands. But they also adore God in the Real Presence in the Eucharist by these same actions. They show their understanding and belief in the Real Presence and they act with awe and reverence before the Eucharist. Many little acts of adoration before the Blessed Sacrament are lost by those who do not kneel to receive Communion.
While much abuse occurs from too much participation by the laity at Communion, there are other instances in which participation by the laity becomes excessive. Before the Canon of the Mass, and the Consecration, comes the teaching that is given through Holy Scripture and sermons. In previous times, these were delivered by the priest or by the deacon after receiving a blessing from the priest. The sermons were mainly based on the interpretation and application of the teachings involved in the Scripture readings and Gospels for the Mass on the day. But now, the laity is being actively encouraged to take part in this aspect of the Mass. In this way, the priest begins to lose his place as teacher to the people. He is no longer seen as the one giving the Scripture reading to the laypeople. The Scripture reading begins to lose its aspect for teaching. The lay reader is often seen to be just reading a story or passage. The priest begins to lose his awareness of the Scripture readings used during Mass and the applications that can be taken from them for sermons. Sometimes the sermons themselves are delivered by laypeople. These usually are on subjects that have no relevance to the Scriptures used during the Mass or have no teachings of the Catholic Church. The loss of instruction at these times is great. The Scriptures used are given no application and teaching, and the laypeople attending will often disregard what they contain if they are not expanded on.
Laypeople have always been encouraged to participate at Mass through music, song and chant. When these are suitable, respectful and spiritual, they can greatly enhance the spiritual aspect of the Mass and the Sacrifice becomes more pleasing. But the current effort to get more participation by the laity has led to use of unsuitable music and lyrics. Laypeople are encouraged to participate by playing musical instruments which they are proficient at, but not all these are suitable for Mass. The use of modern, electrical instruments and the combination of some of these instruments often becomes loud, noisy and distracting. The Church seems more like a concert hall than a place of sacrifice and prayer. The music from these instruments becomes displeasing and unspiritual during the Mass. The lyrics from hymns that are used are often unsuitable for the occasion for which they are used or contain erroneous teaching about the Mass or the Catholic Faith. Protestant hymns are being used increasingly and are replacing the more suitable traditional Catholic hymns. There is little regulation over the content of hymns used. However, even the use of traditional hymns can be done wrongly. Hymns are being used for something which they are unsuitable for. This often happens with old Latin hymns being used in the wrong context.
Laypeople are encouraged to become more involved in the Mass through the responses that are assigned for them during the Liturgy. Through these responses, they can be attentive to what is happening during the Mass and they combine their prayers with the prayers of the priest, to make the Mass a united prayer by all who attend. But apart from these responses, the prayers of the Mass are those which should only be spoken by the priest. The priest takes the place of Christ and becomes our intercessor to God. The prayers he says are for him to say in this role. However, laypeople are taking some of these prayers and using them for themselves also. They speak aloud prayers which the priest should say alone. Usually they do this for certain prayers, such as those immediately before or after the Our Father. But in some places, the laypeople are encouraged to say aloud the Canon of the Mass and the prayers of Consecration. This practice takes away from the spirituality of the Mass and the understanding that it is a Sacrifice and a re-enactment of Calvary.
When the Mass is viewed as a Sacrifice and a re-enactment of Calvary, then the altar and the area surrounding it is seen as a sanctuary, a holy ground. Only those directly involved in the Mass are allowed on this holy ground during the celebration. The priests and deacons are consecrated and blessed to perform the rituals and prayers of the Mass, and they have a rightful place there. Altar boys are also permitted for numerous reasons. They perform tasks that would otherwise take the priest away from the altar and the celebration of the Mass. The altar boys also take the place of the laity at the altar. They represent the laypeople present and provide a direct connection between the priest at the altar and the laypeople in the pews. They are also present in order to prepare and inspire them towards the priesthood. This is why altar boys must always be preferable to altar girls. Because of these assigned roles, there is no need for additional laypeople to be around the altar during Mass. The presence of other laypeople on the altar at various times during the Mass, taking duties from the priest or deacon, instils the notion that the Mass is a meal to be shared around a table. It instils the idea that all are worthy to approach the altar no matter what the individual states of their souls are or what their standing with the Church is.
Christ ordained twelve men to the priesthood on Holy Thursday and instituted the Mass on that same eve and on Good Friday. Over the centuries, the Church, through divine inspiration, has refined the Liturgy of the Mass to augment that which Christ gave us at the Last Supper and at His Glorious Passion. He reserved the priesthood for men alone, so it is only right that these consecrated men and their male assistants be those present at the altar. For women, there has been reserved other roles, which while not actively involved in the celebration of the Sacraments, are still important and valuable for the running of the Church and the proclamation of the Faith. Returning the levels of lay participation at Mass to what they have been in previous centuries, will not only ensure the sanctity and spirituality of the Mass, it will promote and encourage belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist and the tenets of the Catholic Faith.
Friday, December 17, 2010
EU rules Ireland should change current abortion laws
From www.bbc.co.uk/news
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Irish abortion laws violated the rights of one of three women who sought terminations in Britain.
The woman, who was in remission for a rare form of cancer, feared it might return as a result of her pregnancy.
While abortion in the Republic is technically allowed if a woman's life is at risk, the court said that was not made possible for the woman involved.
But it ruled two other women in the case had not had their rights breached.
The court said the Irish government had failed to properly implement the constitutional right to abortion if a woman's life was in danger.
Correspondents say the ruling is likely to force the Dublin government to introduce new legislation or bring in new guidelines.
Irish Taoiseach Brian Cowen said politicians now needed to consider the implications of the ruling.
"It's an issue for the whole political spectrum to consider," he said.
The first two women in the case were a single mother who had other children in care and a woman who did not want to become a single parent.
Ireland is now under pressure to do what successive Irish governments have avoided doing for almost 20 years - alter its abortion laws.
In theory, it would not be a major change. It would simply reflect the judgement of the Irish Supreme Court in 1992 which ruled that a woman whose life was in danger should be allowed an abortion.
In practice, defining what constitutes a threat to life for the mother will be a legal minefield.
Changing the law would also be a political minefield. Ireland is bitterly divided over abortion, and the Irish government has plenty of other priorities at present with the financial crisis and a general election early next year.
The European Court ruling means Ireland must now reconsider its abortion legislation. The current government will be in no rush to do so.
All three women said they had suffered medical complications on returning to the Irish Republic and said they believed they had not been entitled to an abortion under Irish law.
They all complained that Irish restrictions on abortion had stigmatised and humiliated them, risking damage to their health.
However the third woman had argued that even though she believed her pregnancy had put her life at risk, there was no law or procedure for her to have her right to an abortion established.
The court said that the government in Dublin had breached the third woman's right to respect for her private life by its "failure to implement the existing constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland".
It ruled that "neither the medical consultation nor litigation options, relied on by the Irish government, constituted effective and accessible procedures which allowed the third applicant to establish her right to a lawful abortion in Ireland".
The court said that the only non-judicial way of determining the risk to a woman's life - on which the government relied - was an ordinary medical consultation between the woman and her doctor. It described this as "ineffective".
It said that women and their doctors both ran a risk of criminal conviction and imprisonment "if an initial doctor's opinion that abortion was an option as it posed a risk to the woman's health was later found to be against the Irish constitution".
The court said Irish constitutional courts were not appropriate for determining whether a woman qualified for a lawful abortion.
Under Irish law, abortion is a criminal act although a referendum in 1983 amended the constitution acknowledging the mother's right to life was equal to that of the child.
Following several legal cases, the Irish Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that abortion was lawful if the mother's life was at risk.
However, the Irish parliament has never enacted legislation regulating the constitutionally guaranteed right.
The three women were all supported by the Irish Family Planning Association. They have not been identified, although two are Irish nationals and one is a Lithuanian who is resident in the Irish Republic.
The UK-based abortion charity BPAS - which submitted written observations to the court - welcomed the ruling.
"The lack of clarity as to when abortion may be lawful in Ireland puts women and doctors in an impossible situation, and the sooner this can be remedied the better," said BPAS chief executive Ann Furedi.
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Irish abortion laws violated the rights of one of three women who sought terminations in Britain.
The woman, who was in remission for a rare form of cancer, feared it might return as a result of her pregnancy.
While abortion in the Republic is technically allowed if a woman's life is at risk, the court said that was not made possible for the woman involved.
But it ruled two other women in the case had not had their rights breached.
The court said the Irish government had failed to properly implement the constitutional right to abortion if a woman's life was in danger.
Correspondents say the ruling is likely to force the Dublin government to introduce new legislation or bring in new guidelines.
Irish Taoiseach Brian Cowen said politicians now needed to consider the implications of the ruling.
"It's an issue for the whole political spectrum to consider," he said.
The first two women in the case were a single mother who had other children in care and a woman who did not want to become a single parent.
Ireland is now under pressure to do what successive Irish governments have avoided doing for almost 20 years - alter its abortion laws.
In theory, it would not be a major change. It would simply reflect the judgement of the Irish Supreme Court in 1992 which ruled that a woman whose life was in danger should be allowed an abortion.
In practice, defining what constitutes a threat to life for the mother will be a legal minefield.
Changing the law would also be a political minefield. Ireland is bitterly divided over abortion, and the Irish government has plenty of other priorities at present with the financial crisis and a general election early next year.
The European Court ruling means Ireland must now reconsider its abortion legislation. The current government will be in no rush to do so.
All three women said they had suffered medical complications on returning to the Irish Republic and said they believed they had not been entitled to an abortion under Irish law.
They all complained that Irish restrictions on abortion had stigmatised and humiliated them, risking damage to their health.
However the third woman had argued that even though she believed her pregnancy had put her life at risk, there was no law or procedure for her to have her right to an abortion established.
The court said that the government in Dublin had breached the third woman's right to respect for her private life by its "failure to implement the existing constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland".
It ruled that "neither the medical consultation nor litigation options, relied on by the Irish government, constituted effective and accessible procedures which allowed the third applicant to establish her right to a lawful abortion in Ireland".
The court said that the only non-judicial way of determining the risk to a woman's life - on which the government relied - was an ordinary medical consultation between the woman and her doctor. It described this as "ineffective".
It said that women and their doctors both ran a risk of criminal conviction and imprisonment "if an initial doctor's opinion that abortion was an option as it posed a risk to the woman's health was later found to be against the Irish constitution".
The court said Irish constitutional courts were not appropriate for determining whether a woman qualified for a lawful abortion.
Under Irish law, abortion is a criminal act although a referendum in 1983 amended the constitution acknowledging the mother's right to life was equal to that of the child.
Following several legal cases, the Irish Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that abortion was lawful if the mother's life was at risk.
However, the Irish parliament has never enacted legislation regulating the constitutionally guaranteed right.
The three women were all supported by the Irish Family Planning Association. They have not been identified, although two are Irish nationals and one is a Lithuanian who is resident in the Irish Republic.
The UK-based abortion charity BPAS - which submitted written observations to the court - welcomed the ruling.
"The lack of clarity as to when abortion may be lawful in Ireland puts women and doctors in an impossible situation, and the sooner this can be remedied the better," said BPAS chief executive Ann Furedi.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Abortion and the occult: a glimpse inside life at a death mill
Virginia, December 13, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com)
When Abigail Seidman’s mother had an abortion over twenty years ago, it marked the beginning of her plunge into some of the darkest places in human experience.
Seidman herself, a one-time atheist, is now a pro-life activist and shared her intimate knowledge of life inside the abortion clinic where her mother began to work as a nurse in a recent LifeSiteNews.com interview.
According to Seidman, her mother’s descent into the abortion culture was not motivated by the usual social talking points - to save women from dangerous back-alley abortions, or to “help” women in difficult situations - or even for the money. It was a religion – literally.
Seidman described her mother’s abortion clinic as “pervaded with occult imagery and practices.” The workers considered “abortion to be a form of sacrifice,” would perform the procedure as a sort of ritual, and worshipped deities embodying death, she said.
Sadly, as a teenager, Abigail and her unborn baby fell victim to this mentality, through an abortion that her mother encouraged, despite Seidman’s disagreement.
It’s not the sort of thing that many people like to think about, and many might even deny it is true. But Seidman is emphatic that pro-lifers must acknowledge abortion’s connection with the occult - and recognize it as a key part of pulling out the abortion industry by the roots.
“It’s not just a boogeyman,” Seidman told LifeSiteNews.com. She said she believes “the occult believers are the ‘core’ of the pro-abortion movement, just as the born-again Christians are the ‘core’ of the pro-life movement.”
“I see no harm in striking at its heart, and informing ‘pro-choice’ people (particularly the well-meaning but misguided Christians) of who and what they are truly associating themselves with,” she said.
The mother of two does not claim that her experience is the norm for abortion clinics, saying that “many if not most” clinics are “strictly business” about abortion, and that many abortion workers are liberal Christians or atheists. But she is not alone: Seidman’s story aligns strongly with the experience of Rev. Thomas Euteneuer, an exorcist and former president of Human Life International, who has spoken for years on abortion’s connection to the occult.
Seidman says that there was ritual drug use, “sacred prostitution,” and ritual abortions performed after-hours, involving clinic staff who had intentionally become pregnant.
“I always had a ‘feeling’ that there was something ‘wrong’ or ‘dangerous’ there - almost a feeling of a presence, which I now recognize as being the exact opposite of the Presence that I feel in a church,” she said. The workers worshipped a Goddess whose “truest form” was recognized as “the Great Dragon” - a name she was later surprised to discover in the Bible.
At the same time, she gave a heartening picture of the effect of pro-life prayer, as witnessed from the other side of the battle line. In particular, she recalled her experience with one pro-life warrior - an old woman who would quietly pray for hours outside her clinic - whom she credits for her own eventual conversion.
“She was a tiny, frail, very elderly woman, who each Friday would walk to the clinic, kneel on the sidewalk at the corner (some distance away from the entrance), and pray the Rosary,” wrote Seidman on her blog. “Sometimes she would be there for hours, through any weather, with her bony knees on pavement that could be blazing hot, freezing cold, or soaking wet.
“I saw her every Friday I was there, and she always smiled at me when she arrived and again when she left, but never said a word.”
One day, after the old woman had prayed “for at least three hours, in freezing rain,” the clinic owner finally invited the little old lady inside for some tea - and attempted to convince her that her prayers were utterly wasted.
“When the owner finished speaking, the old lady put her teacup down, and said ‘God knows what I’m doing out there, and it matters to him even if it doesn’t matter to you or anyone else. My prayers have value to God. And if I can change one heart - even ONE’ - and she looked straight into my eyes as she said this - ‘then it will have all been worth it. I know God will reward me in the end.’ The clinic owner rolled her eyes, sighed, and shook her head. The old lady stood up, thanked us for the tea, and left.
“I never forgot her.”
Seidman, who says she “accepted Jesus Christ as my savior in June 2010” after a period of study and reflection, is set to be received into the Catholic Church next Easter. Through her story she has proved the triumph of good over evil by rejecting the despair that gripped her post-abortive mother - and forging her dark experiences into a weapon against it.
When Abigail Seidman’s mother had an abortion over twenty years ago, it marked the beginning of her plunge into some of the darkest places in human experience.
Seidman herself, a one-time atheist, is now a pro-life activist and shared her intimate knowledge of life inside the abortion clinic where her mother began to work as a nurse in a recent LifeSiteNews.com interview.
According to Seidman, her mother’s descent into the abortion culture was not motivated by the usual social talking points - to save women from dangerous back-alley abortions, or to “help” women in difficult situations - or even for the money. It was a religion – literally.
Seidman described her mother’s abortion clinic as “pervaded with occult imagery and practices.” The workers considered “abortion to be a form of sacrifice,” would perform the procedure as a sort of ritual, and worshipped deities embodying death, she said.
Sadly, as a teenager, Abigail and her unborn baby fell victim to this mentality, through an abortion that her mother encouraged, despite Seidman’s disagreement.
It’s not the sort of thing that many people like to think about, and many might even deny it is true. But Seidman is emphatic that pro-lifers must acknowledge abortion’s connection with the occult - and recognize it as a key part of pulling out the abortion industry by the roots.
“It’s not just a boogeyman,” Seidman told LifeSiteNews.com. She said she believes “the occult believers are the ‘core’ of the pro-abortion movement, just as the born-again Christians are the ‘core’ of the pro-life movement.”
“I see no harm in striking at its heart, and informing ‘pro-choice’ people (particularly the well-meaning but misguided Christians) of who and what they are truly associating themselves with,” she said.
The mother of two does not claim that her experience is the norm for abortion clinics, saying that “many if not most” clinics are “strictly business” about abortion, and that many abortion workers are liberal Christians or atheists. But she is not alone: Seidman’s story aligns strongly with the experience of Rev. Thomas Euteneuer, an exorcist and former president of Human Life International, who has spoken for years on abortion’s connection to the occult.
Seidman says that there was ritual drug use, “sacred prostitution,” and ritual abortions performed after-hours, involving clinic staff who had intentionally become pregnant.
“I always had a ‘feeling’ that there was something ‘wrong’ or ‘dangerous’ there - almost a feeling of a presence, which I now recognize as being the exact opposite of the Presence that I feel in a church,” she said. The workers worshipped a Goddess whose “truest form” was recognized as “the Great Dragon” - a name she was later surprised to discover in the Bible.
At the same time, she gave a heartening picture of the effect of pro-life prayer, as witnessed from the other side of the battle line. In particular, she recalled her experience with one pro-life warrior - an old woman who would quietly pray for hours outside her clinic - whom she credits for her own eventual conversion.
“She was a tiny, frail, very elderly woman, who each Friday would walk to the clinic, kneel on the sidewalk at the corner (some distance away from the entrance), and pray the Rosary,” wrote Seidman on her blog. “Sometimes she would be there for hours, through any weather, with her bony knees on pavement that could be blazing hot, freezing cold, or soaking wet.
“I saw her every Friday I was there, and she always smiled at me when she arrived and again when she left, but never said a word.”
One day, after the old woman had prayed “for at least three hours, in freezing rain,” the clinic owner finally invited the little old lady inside for some tea - and attempted to convince her that her prayers were utterly wasted.
“When the owner finished speaking, the old lady put her teacup down, and said ‘God knows what I’m doing out there, and it matters to him even if it doesn’t matter to you or anyone else. My prayers have value to God. And if I can change one heart - even ONE’ - and she looked straight into my eyes as she said this - ‘then it will have all been worth it. I know God will reward me in the end.’ The clinic owner rolled her eyes, sighed, and shook her head. The old lady stood up, thanked us for the tea, and left.
“I never forgot her.”
Seidman, who says she “accepted Jesus Christ as my savior in June 2010” after a period of study and reflection, is set to be received into the Catholic Church next Easter. Through her story she has proved the triumph of good over evil by rejecting the despair that gripped her post-abortive mother - and forging her dark experiences into a weapon against it.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Vatican hits back against WikiLeaks revelations
From http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/vatican-hits-back-against-wikileaks-revelations-20101211-18tc2.html
December 11, 2010
The Vatican hit back Saturday after cables released by WikiLeaks indicated it had refused to cooperate with an Irish probe into child sex abuse by Catholic priests in Dublin.
The Vatican press office expressed scepticism at the reliability of the reports in a statement that referred to "the extreme seriousness of publishing such a large amount of secret and confidential material, and its possible consequences".
"Naturally these reports reflect the perceptions and opinions of the people who wrote them and cannot be considered as expressions of the Holy See itself, nor as exact quotations of the words of its officials," it said.
"Their reliability must, then, be evaluated carefully and with great prudence, bearing this circumstance in mind."
A cable from the US embassy in Rome, carried by The Guardian, had said requests for information by Ireland's Murphy Commission "offended many in the Vatican... because they saw them as an affront to Vatican sovereignty".
The Murphy commission's findings, published in November 2009, caused shock across Ireland and the worldwide Catholic community by detailing how Church authorities covered up for paedophile priests in Dublin for three decades.
Dated February 26 this year, the cable quoted US diplomat in Rome Julieta Noyes as saying, "While Vatican contacts immediately expressed deep sympathy for the victims and insisted that the first priority was preventing a recurrence, they also were angered by how the situation played out politically".
Apart from the "affront to Vatican sovereignty", the cable said Vatican officials were annoyed that Dublin "did not step in to direct the Murphy Commission to follow standard procedures in communications with Vatican City.
"Adding insult to injury, Vatican officials also believed some Irish opposition politicians were making political hay with the situation by calling publicly on the government to demand that the Vatican reply."
Ultimately, the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, wrote to the Irish embassy and ordered that any further requests go through diplomatic channels.
The US ambassador to the Holy See, Miguel Diaz, said in a separate statement, "We condemn in the strongest possible terms the disclosure of what is alleged to be classified State Department information. We will not comment on the content or the authenticity of that information."
Diaz hailed the Obama administration's "robust foreign policy that focuses on promoting America?s national interests and leading the world in solving the most complex challenges of our time".
"The Embassy of the United States to the Holy See has engaged in ongoing efforts with the Vatican to turn interfaith dialogue into actions in many of these areas, for the sake of the common good," he said.
Another cable concerning the Vatican revealed by WikiLeaks Saturday showed that Britain feared Pope Benedict XVI's invitation for disgruntled Anglicans to switch to Catholicism might spark anti-Catholic violence at home.
A 2002 cable published by the New York Times revealed that US diplomats believe some top members of the Vatican's hierarchy still harbour anti-Semitic views.
Other cables said the Vatican agreed to help the United States in behind-the-scenes lobbying of states to join the Copenhagen Accord on climate change, and was instrumental in securing the release of 15 British navy personnel detained by Iran in 2007.
© 2010 AFP
This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.
December 11, 2010
The Vatican hit back Saturday after cables released by WikiLeaks indicated it had refused to cooperate with an Irish probe into child sex abuse by Catholic priests in Dublin.
The Vatican press office expressed scepticism at the reliability of the reports in a statement that referred to "the extreme seriousness of publishing such a large amount of secret and confidential material, and its possible consequences".
"Naturally these reports reflect the perceptions and opinions of the people who wrote them and cannot be considered as expressions of the Holy See itself, nor as exact quotations of the words of its officials," it said.
"Their reliability must, then, be evaluated carefully and with great prudence, bearing this circumstance in mind."
A cable from the US embassy in Rome, carried by The Guardian, had said requests for information by Ireland's Murphy Commission "offended many in the Vatican... because they saw them as an affront to Vatican sovereignty".
The Murphy commission's findings, published in November 2009, caused shock across Ireland and the worldwide Catholic community by detailing how Church authorities covered up for paedophile priests in Dublin for three decades.
Dated February 26 this year, the cable quoted US diplomat in Rome Julieta Noyes as saying, "While Vatican contacts immediately expressed deep sympathy for the victims and insisted that the first priority was preventing a recurrence, they also were angered by how the situation played out politically".
Apart from the "affront to Vatican sovereignty", the cable said Vatican officials were annoyed that Dublin "did not step in to direct the Murphy Commission to follow standard procedures in communications with Vatican City.
"Adding insult to injury, Vatican officials also believed some Irish opposition politicians were making political hay with the situation by calling publicly on the government to demand that the Vatican reply."
Ultimately, the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, wrote to the Irish embassy and ordered that any further requests go through diplomatic channels.
The US ambassador to the Holy See, Miguel Diaz, said in a separate statement, "We condemn in the strongest possible terms the disclosure of what is alleged to be classified State Department information. We will not comment on the content or the authenticity of that information."
Diaz hailed the Obama administration's "robust foreign policy that focuses on promoting America?s national interests and leading the world in solving the most complex challenges of our time".
"The Embassy of the United States to the Holy See has engaged in ongoing efforts with the Vatican to turn interfaith dialogue into actions in many of these areas, for the sake of the common good," he said.
Another cable concerning the Vatican revealed by WikiLeaks Saturday showed that Britain feared Pope Benedict XVI's invitation for disgruntled Anglicans to switch to Catholicism might spark anti-Catholic violence at home.
A 2002 cable published by the New York Times revealed that US diplomats believe some top members of the Vatican's hierarchy still harbour anti-Semitic views.
Other cables said the Vatican agreed to help the United States in behind-the-scenes lobbying of states to join the Copenhagen Accord on climate change, and was instrumental in securing the release of 15 British navy personnel detained by Iran in 2007.
© 2010 AFP
This story is sourced direct from an overseas news agency as an additional service to readers. Spelling follows North American usage, along with foreign currency and measurement units.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Abuse probe offended Vatican - Wikileaks
From www.rte.ie/news
Disclosures by Wikileaks of diplomatic cables have shed new light on the tensions between the Government and the Vatican during the Murphy investigation into clerical child abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.
A leaked cable from the US Embassy to the Holy See suggests that many in the Vatican were offended by requests for information from the Murphy Commission, which they saw as an affront to Vatican sovereignty.
The publication of the Murphy report in November 2009 caused much controversy, not least because it revealed that the Vatican had failed to reply to a request from the Murphy Commission for information relating to reports of clerical child abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.
The cable, published by the Guardian newspaper today, claims that Vatican officials were angry that the Irish Government didn't step in to direct the Murphy Commission to follow standard procedures in its communications with the Holy See.
In the end, the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, wrote to the Irish Embassy requesting that proper diplomatic channels be followed.
According to the leaked diplomatic cable, the Government decided not to press the Vatican on the issue.
Other leaked cables reveal the extent to which the Vatican attempts to exert its influence on the world stage, lobbying to keep Turkey out of the European Union, and arguing for a ban on human cloning.
Disclosures by Wikileaks of diplomatic cables have shed new light on the tensions between the Government and the Vatican during the Murphy investigation into clerical child abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.
A leaked cable from the US Embassy to the Holy See suggests that many in the Vatican were offended by requests for information from the Murphy Commission, which they saw as an affront to Vatican sovereignty.
The publication of the Murphy report in November 2009 caused much controversy, not least because it revealed that the Vatican had failed to reply to a request from the Murphy Commission for information relating to reports of clerical child abuse in the Dublin Archdiocese.
The cable, published by the Guardian newspaper today, claims that Vatican officials were angry that the Irish Government didn't step in to direct the Murphy Commission to follow standard procedures in its communications with the Holy See.
In the end, the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, wrote to the Irish Embassy requesting that proper diplomatic channels be followed.
According to the leaked diplomatic cable, the Government decided not to press the Vatican on the issue.
Other leaked cables reveal the extent to which the Vatican attempts to exert its influence on the world stage, lobbying to keep Turkey out of the European Union, and arguing for a ban on human cloning.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Newly Approved Apparition in USA
From http://www.shrineofourladyofgoodhelp.com/htmPages/g_hst_p3.html
Three important decisions were reached by the Church during the early 1850’s:
• On November 21, 1851, the Bishops of the United States admonished the faithful through the decrees of the First Plenary Council of Baltimore that no parish is complete until it has schools adequate to the needs of its children.
• On December 8, 1854, the Pope declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception
• Seven years earlier, at a conference in Baltimore, the Bishops of the United States, under her title of the Immaculate Conception, chose Our Blessed Mother as the patron of the United States
Shortly after these important events in the Church, two manifestations of the Blessed Virgin Mary occurred, one in Europe and the other in North America:
• In February of 1858, the Immaculate Mother manifested herself and expressed her will to St. Bernadette in Lourdes, France.
• A year and eight months later, on October 9, 1859, the Queen of Heaven manifested herself to Adele Brise in Champion (Robinsonville), Wisconsin, USA. Note: Refer to the Snapshot on the Contact/Map page to find out why Robinsonville changed their name to Champion.
According to Sister Pauline LaPlant, to whom Adele often told her story:
“ She [Adele] was going to the grist mill about four miles from here [Champion] with a sack of wheat on her head […]. As Adele came near the place, she saw a lady all in white standing between two trees, one a maple, the other a hemlock. Adele was frightened and stood still. The vision slowly disappeared, leaving a white cloud after it. Adele continued on her errand and returned home without seeing anything more. She told her parents what had happened, and they wondered what it could be — maybe a poor soul who needed prayers?
“On the following Sunday, she had to pass here again on her way to Mass at Bay Settlement, about eleven miles from her home [...]. This time, she was not alone, but was accompanied by her sister Isabel and a neighbor woman [Mrs. Vander Niessen]. When they came near the trees, the same lady in white was at the place where Adele had seen her before. Adele was again frightened and said, almost in a tone of reproach, 'Oh, there is that lady again.'
“Adele had not the courage to go on. The other two did not see anything, but they could tell by Adele’s look that she was afraid. They thought, too, that it might be a poor soul that needed prayers. They waited a few minutes, and Adele told them it was gone. It had disappeared as the first time, and all she could see was a little mist or white cloud. After Mass, Adele went to confession and told her confessor how she had been frightened at the sight of a lady in white. He [Father William Verhoef] bade her not to fear, and to speak to him of this outside of the confessional. Father Verhoef told her that if it were a heavenly messenger, she would see it again, and it would not harm her, but to ask in God’s name who it was and what it desired of her. After that, Adele had more courage. She started home with her two companions, and a man who was clearing land for the Holy Cross Fathers at Bay Settlement accompanied them.
"As they approached the hallowed spot, Adele could see the beautiful lady, clothed in dazzling white, with a yellow sash around her waist. Her dress fell to her feet in graceful folds. She had a crown of stars around her head, and her long, golden, wavy hair fell loosely around her shoulders. Such a heavenly light shone around her that Adele could hardly look back at her sweet face. Overcome by this heavenly light and the beauty of her amiable visitor, Adele fell on her knees.
" 'In God’s name, who are you and what do you want of me?’ asked Adele, as she had been directed.
“ ‘I am the Queen of Heaven, who prays for the conversion of sinners, and I wish you to do the same. You received Holy Communion this morning, and that is well. But you must do more. Make a general confession, and offer Communion for the conversion of sinners. If they do not convert and do penance, my Son will be obliged to punish them’
“ 'Adele, who is it?'' said one of the women. 'O why can't we see her as you do?' said another weeping.
“ ‘Kneel,’ said Adele, ‘the Lady says she is the Queen of Heaven.’ Our Blessed Lady turned, looked kindly at them, and said, ‘Blessed are they that believe without seeing. What are you doing here in idleness…while your companions are working in the vineyard of my Son?’
“ ‘What more can I do, dear Lady?’ said Adele, weeping.
“ ‘Gather the children in this wild country and teach them what they should know for salvation’
“ ‘But how shall I teach them who know so little myself?’ replied Adele.
“ ‘Teach them,’ replied her radiant visitor, ‘their catechism, how to sign themselves with the sign of the Cross, and how to approach the sacraments; that is what I wish you to do. Go and fear nothing. I will help you.’ "
The manifestation of Our Lady then lifted her hands, as though beseeching a blessing for those at her feet, and slowly vanished, leaving Adele overwhelmed and prostrate on the ground.
When the news spread about Adele Brise’s vision of the Blessed Virgin, most people believed the account and were astonished. Some considered the event a demented delusion. Adele Brise, however, considered it a commission to catechize the children and admonish the sinners of the Bay Settlement. To honor the alleged apparition, Adele’s father erected a makeshift chapel near the spot of Adele’s vision.
Reports of Favors and Graces:
Because we are continually hearing stories of people who visit The Chapel and have their prayers answered, we are interested in keeping records of all favors and graces granted to those who come to this Shrine. Please send us details of healings and miraculous favors that directly result from a visit to The Chapel, or to requests made of Our Lady Of Good Help or Sister Adele. The Shrine of Our Lady Of Good Help
4047 Chapel Drive
New Franken, WI 54229
Commission of Investigation and Final Decree
God continues to reveal Himself to individuals "not indeed for the declaration of any new doctrine of faith, but for the direction of human acts" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II q174 a6 reply 3).
In 2009, the most Reverend David L. Ricken, Bishop of Green Bay, opened a formal Church investigation into the apparitions that occurred in 1859 on the site of the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help. While private revelation, the task of the commission was to review all the historical information on the apparitions, as well as the life of the Sister Adele and test its consistency with Public Revelation as guarded by the Catholic Church. On Wednesday, December 8, 2010, the feast day of the Immaculate Conception, the Bishop announced that based on the findings of the commission, he officially approves the Marian apparitions that occurred on the site of the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help at Champion, Wisconsin.
Reading from his decree, the Bishop stated, “I declare with moral certainty and in accord with the norms of the Church that the events, apparitions and locutions given to Adele Brise in October of 1859 do exhibit the substance of supernatural character, and I do hereby approve these apparitions as worthy of belief (although not obligatory) by the Christian faithful.”
This declaration makes the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help at Champion the first and only Marian shrine in the United States that is on the site of an approved apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Three important decisions were reached by the Church during the early 1850’s:
• On November 21, 1851, the Bishops of the United States admonished the faithful through the decrees of the First Plenary Council of Baltimore that no parish is complete until it has schools adequate to the needs of its children.
• On December 8, 1854, the Pope declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception
• Seven years earlier, at a conference in Baltimore, the Bishops of the United States, under her title of the Immaculate Conception, chose Our Blessed Mother as the patron of the United States
Shortly after these important events in the Church, two manifestations of the Blessed Virgin Mary occurred, one in Europe and the other in North America:
• In February of 1858, the Immaculate Mother manifested herself and expressed her will to St. Bernadette in Lourdes, France.
• A year and eight months later, on October 9, 1859, the Queen of Heaven manifested herself to Adele Brise in Champion (Robinsonville), Wisconsin, USA. Note: Refer to the Snapshot on the Contact/Map page to find out why Robinsonville changed their name to Champion.
According to Sister Pauline LaPlant, to whom Adele often told her story:
“ She [Adele] was going to the grist mill about four miles from here [Champion] with a sack of wheat on her head […]. As Adele came near the place, she saw a lady all in white standing between two trees, one a maple, the other a hemlock. Adele was frightened and stood still. The vision slowly disappeared, leaving a white cloud after it. Adele continued on her errand and returned home without seeing anything more. She told her parents what had happened, and they wondered what it could be — maybe a poor soul who needed prayers?
“On the following Sunday, she had to pass here again on her way to Mass at Bay Settlement, about eleven miles from her home [...]. This time, she was not alone, but was accompanied by her sister Isabel and a neighbor woman [Mrs. Vander Niessen]. When they came near the trees, the same lady in white was at the place where Adele had seen her before. Adele was again frightened and said, almost in a tone of reproach, 'Oh, there is that lady again.'
“Adele had not the courage to go on. The other two did not see anything, but they could tell by Adele’s look that she was afraid. They thought, too, that it might be a poor soul that needed prayers. They waited a few minutes, and Adele told them it was gone. It had disappeared as the first time, and all she could see was a little mist or white cloud. After Mass, Adele went to confession and told her confessor how she had been frightened at the sight of a lady in white. He [Father William Verhoef] bade her not to fear, and to speak to him of this outside of the confessional. Father Verhoef told her that if it were a heavenly messenger, she would see it again, and it would not harm her, but to ask in God’s name who it was and what it desired of her. After that, Adele had more courage. She started home with her two companions, and a man who was clearing land for the Holy Cross Fathers at Bay Settlement accompanied them.
"As they approached the hallowed spot, Adele could see the beautiful lady, clothed in dazzling white, with a yellow sash around her waist. Her dress fell to her feet in graceful folds. She had a crown of stars around her head, and her long, golden, wavy hair fell loosely around her shoulders. Such a heavenly light shone around her that Adele could hardly look back at her sweet face. Overcome by this heavenly light and the beauty of her amiable visitor, Adele fell on her knees.
" 'In God’s name, who are you and what do you want of me?’ asked Adele, as she had been directed.
“ ‘I am the Queen of Heaven, who prays for the conversion of sinners, and I wish you to do the same. You received Holy Communion this morning, and that is well. But you must do more. Make a general confession, and offer Communion for the conversion of sinners. If they do not convert and do penance, my Son will be obliged to punish them’
“ 'Adele, who is it?'' said one of the women. 'O why can't we see her as you do?' said another weeping.
“ ‘Kneel,’ said Adele, ‘the Lady says she is the Queen of Heaven.’ Our Blessed Lady turned, looked kindly at them, and said, ‘Blessed are they that believe without seeing. What are you doing here in idleness…while your companions are working in the vineyard of my Son?’
“ ‘What more can I do, dear Lady?’ said Adele, weeping.
“ ‘Gather the children in this wild country and teach them what they should know for salvation’
“ ‘But how shall I teach them who know so little myself?’ replied Adele.
“ ‘Teach them,’ replied her radiant visitor, ‘their catechism, how to sign themselves with the sign of the Cross, and how to approach the sacraments; that is what I wish you to do. Go and fear nothing. I will help you.’ "
The manifestation of Our Lady then lifted her hands, as though beseeching a blessing for those at her feet, and slowly vanished, leaving Adele overwhelmed and prostrate on the ground.
When the news spread about Adele Brise’s vision of the Blessed Virgin, most people believed the account and were astonished. Some considered the event a demented delusion. Adele Brise, however, considered it a commission to catechize the children and admonish the sinners of the Bay Settlement. To honor the alleged apparition, Adele’s father erected a makeshift chapel near the spot of Adele’s vision.
Reports of Favors and Graces:
Because we are continually hearing stories of people who visit The Chapel and have their prayers answered, we are interested in keeping records of all favors and graces granted to those who come to this Shrine. Please send us details of healings and miraculous favors that directly result from a visit to The Chapel, or to requests made of Our Lady Of Good Help or Sister Adele. The Shrine of Our Lady Of Good Help
4047 Chapel Drive
New Franken, WI 54229
Commission of Investigation and Final Decree
God continues to reveal Himself to individuals "not indeed for the declaration of any new doctrine of faith, but for the direction of human acts" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II q174 a6 reply 3).
In 2009, the most Reverend David L. Ricken, Bishop of Green Bay, opened a formal Church investigation into the apparitions that occurred in 1859 on the site of the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help. While private revelation, the task of the commission was to review all the historical information on the apparitions, as well as the life of the Sister Adele and test its consistency with Public Revelation as guarded by the Catholic Church. On Wednesday, December 8, 2010, the feast day of the Immaculate Conception, the Bishop announced that based on the findings of the commission, he officially approves the Marian apparitions that occurred on the site of the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help at Champion, Wisconsin.
Reading from his decree, the Bishop stated, “I declare with moral certainty and in accord with the norms of the Church that the events, apparitions and locutions given to Adele Brise in October of 1859 do exhibit the substance of supernatural character, and I do hereby approve these apparitions as worthy of belief (although not obligatory) by the Christian faithful.”
This declaration makes the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Help at Champion the first and only Marian shrine in the United States that is on the site of an approved apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Pope decrees sainthood for Italian, beatification for 11 others
Vatican City, Dec 10, 2010 (Catholic News Agency/EWTN News).
Pope Benedict XVI has advanced the sainthood causes of 16 Catholics. The announcement was made following the Pope’s meeting with Cardinal Angelo Amato, head of the Vatican’s office for the causes of saints, Dec. 10.
The Church’s newest saint will be Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, an missionary founder and Italian bishop who died in 1931. The Pope has authorized a miracle attributed to Bl. Conforti’s intercession, the second needed to affirm his sainthood.
These most recent decrees authorized by the Pope include a miracle attributed to the intercession of Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, an Italian bishop who died in 1931.
He founded the Pious Society of St. Francis Xavier for Foreign Missions, the Xaverian missionaries, who through his guidance brought about a renewal of the missionary spirit at the turn of the 20th century. The missionaries first spearheaded evangelization efforts to China. They are now present in a variety of countries throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas.
While his most recent miracle was not described, the first miracle attributed to Blessed Conforti came about in 1965. After prayers for his intercession from Xaverian sisters in Burundi, 12-year old Sabina Kamariza was cured of pancreatic cancer. He was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 1996.
In addition to the miracle attributed to Bl. Conforti, the Pope has also authorized miracles attributed to an Italian priest, the Spanish foundress of a religious institute, the Portuguese foundress of an order of hospitalier sisters and a Brazilian sister who died in 1992. They will all be beatified for miracles attributed to their intercession.
Further papally-authorized decrees will recognize the martyrdom of German Father Alois Andritzki killed in the Nazi’s Dachau concentration camp in 1943 and six Spanish priests who all died for the faith during their country's civil war in 1936. No dates have been released yet for the ceremonies that will recognize them as blesseds.
"Heroic virtue" was decreed in the lives of a 20th-century Italian priest, a Lebanese religious brother of the Melkite Catholic tradition, an Italian sister and foundress of a religious congregation and a Spanish religious sister.
A series of steps marks the road to sainthood. First, the cause is begun on a local, diocesan level at which time information is collected on the person known to have led an exemplary or "heroic" Christian life.
Information is collected at the local bishop's request, resulting in a biography of the person, any writings they created, and testimonies from witnesses being sent to the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints. After further investigation by a panel, those who advance are either recognized for their "heroic virtue" and declared "venerable" or declared martyrs for the faith, thus bypassing the venerable stage to be beatified and declared "blessed."
"Venerables" to whose intercession a miracle is attributed advance by further papal decree to be beatified and declared “blessed.”
Once a person is declared “blessed,” the final step to canonization and recognition as a saint is the attribution of a second miracle for non-martyrs and a single miracle for those who suffered martyrdom.
The following is a complete list of the new saints, blesseds and venerables, as released by the Vatican.
New Saint
• Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, Italian archbishop-bishop and founder of the Pious Society of St. Francis Xavier for Foreign Missions (1865-1931).
New Blesseds
• Servant of God Francesco Paleari, Italian priest of the "Cottolengo" Institute (1863-1939).
• Servant of God Anna Maria Janer Anglarill, Spanish foundress of the Institute of Sisters of the Holy Family of Urgell (1800-1885).
• Servant of God Marie Clare of the Child Jesus (nee Libania do Carmo Galvao Meixa de Moura Telles e Albuquerque), Portuguese foundress of the Franciscan Hospitaller Sisters of the Immaculate Conception (1843-1899).
• Servant of God Dulce (nee Maria Rita Lopes Pontes), Brazilian religious of the Congregation of the Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God (1914-1992).
Newly Declared Martyrs to be Beatified
• Servant of God Alois Andritzki, German diocesan priest who died in the concentration camp of Dachau (1914-1943).
• Servants of God Jose Nadal y Guiu (1911-1936) and Jose Jordan y Blecua (1906-1936), Spanish diocesan priests, killed in hatred of the faith during religious persecution in Spain.
• Servants of God Antonio (Miguel Faundez Lopez), Spanish professed priest of the Order of Friars Minor (1907-1936) and Bonaventura (ne Baltasar Mariano Munoz Martinez) Spanish cleric of the Order of Friars Minor (1912-1936), as well as Pedro Sanchez Barba (1895-1936) and Fulgencio Martinez Garcia (1911-1936), Spanish priests and pastors of the Third Order of St. Francis of Assisi, killed in hatred of the faith during religious persecution in Spain.
New Venerables
• Servant of God Antonio Palladino, Italian diocesan priest and founder of the Congregation of Dominican Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament (1881-1926).
• Servant of God Bechara (Selim Abou-Mourad), Lebanese religious of the Basilian Salvatorian Order of the Melkites (1853-1930).
• Servant of God Maria Elisa Andreoli, Italian foundress of the Congregation of Reparatrix Sisters Servants of Mary (1861-1935).
• Servant of God Maria Pilar of the Sacred Heart (Maria Pilar Solsona Lamban), Spanish religious of the Institute of the Daughters of Mary, Religious of Pious Schools (1881-1966).
Pope Benedict XVI has advanced the sainthood causes of 16 Catholics. The announcement was made following the Pope’s meeting with Cardinal Angelo Amato, head of the Vatican’s office for the causes of saints, Dec. 10.
The Church’s newest saint will be Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, an missionary founder and Italian bishop who died in 1931. The Pope has authorized a miracle attributed to Bl. Conforti’s intercession, the second needed to affirm his sainthood.
These most recent decrees authorized by the Pope include a miracle attributed to the intercession of Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, an Italian bishop who died in 1931.
He founded the Pious Society of St. Francis Xavier for Foreign Missions, the Xaverian missionaries, who through his guidance brought about a renewal of the missionary spirit at the turn of the 20th century. The missionaries first spearheaded evangelization efforts to China. They are now present in a variety of countries throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas.
While his most recent miracle was not described, the first miracle attributed to Blessed Conforti came about in 1965. After prayers for his intercession from Xaverian sisters in Burundi, 12-year old Sabina Kamariza was cured of pancreatic cancer. He was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 1996.
In addition to the miracle attributed to Bl. Conforti, the Pope has also authorized miracles attributed to an Italian priest, the Spanish foundress of a religious institute, the Portuguese foundress of an order of hospitalier sisters and a Brazilian sister who died in 1992. They will all be beatified for miracles attributed to their intercession.
Further papally-authorized decrees will recognize the martyrdom of German Father Alois Andritzki killed in the Nazi’s Dachau concentration camp in 1943 and six Spanish priests who all died for the faith during their country's civil war in 1936. No dates have been released yet for the ceremonies that will recognize them as blesseds.
"Heroic virtue" was decreed in the lives of a 20th-century Italian priest, a Lebanese religious brother of the Melkite Catholic tradition, an Italian sister and foundress of a religious congregation and a Spanish religious sister.
A series of steps marks the road to sainthood. First, the cause is begun on a local, diocesan level at which time information is collected on the person known to have led an exemplary or "heroic" Christian life.
Information is collected at the local bishop's request, resulting in a biography of the person, any writings they created, and testimonies from witnesses being sent to the Vatican's Congregation for the Causes of Saints. After further investigation by a panel, those who advance are either recognized for their "heroic virtue" and declared "venerable" or declared martyrs for the faith, thus bypassing the venerable stage to be beatified and declared "blessed."
"Venerables" to whose intercession a miracle is attributed advance by further papal decree to be beatified and declared “blessed.”
Once a person is declared “blessed,” the final step to canonization and recognition as a saint is the attribution of a second miracle for non-martyrs and a single miracle for those who suffered martyrdom.
The following is a complete list of the new saints, blesseds and venerables, as released by the Vatican.
New Saint
• Blessed Guido Maria Conforti, Italian archbishop-bishop and founder of the Pious Society of St. Francis Xavier for Foreign Missions (1865-1931).
New Blesseds
• Servant of God Francesco Paleari, Italian priest of the "Cottolengo" Institute (1863-1939).
• Servant of God Anna Maria Janer Anglarill, Spanish foundress of the Institute of Sisters of the Holy Family of Urgell (1800-1885).
• Servant of God Marie Clare of the Child Jesus (nee Libania do Carmo Galvao Meixa de Moura Telles e Albuquerque), Portuguese foundress of the Franciscan Hospitaller Sisters of the Immaculate Conception (1843-1899).
• Servant of God Dulce (nee Maria Rita Lopes Pontes), Brazilian religious of the Congregation of the Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God (1914-1992).
Newly Declared Martyrs to be Beatified
• Servant of God Alois Andritzki, German diocesan priest who died in the concentration camp of Dachau (1914-1943).
• Servants of God Jose Nadal y Guiu (1911-1936) and Jose Jordan y Blecua (1906-1936), Spanish diocesan priests, killed in hatred of the faith during religious persecution in Spain.
• Servants of God Antonio (Miguel Faundez Lopez), Spanish professed priest of the Order of Friars Minor (1907-1936) and Bonaventura (ne Baltasar Mariano Munoz Martinez) Spanish cleric of the Order of Friars Minor (1912-1936), as well as Pedro Sanchez Barba (1895-1936) and Fulgencio Martinez Garcia (1911-1936), Spanish priests and pastors of the Third Order of St. Francis of Assisi, killed in hatred of the faith during religious persecution in Spain.
New Venerables
• Servant of God Antonio Palladino, Italian diocesan priest and founder of the Congregation of Dominican Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament (1881-1926).
• Servant of God Bechara (Selim Abou-Mourad), Lebanese religious of the Basilian Salvatorian Order of the Melkites (1853-1930).
• Servant of God Maria Elisa Andreoli, Italian foundress of the Congregation of Reparatrix Sisters Servants of Mary (1861-1935).
• Servant of God Maria Pilar of the Sacred Heart (Maria Pilar Solsona Lamban), Spanish religious of the Institute of the Daughters of Mary, Religious of Pious Schools (1881-1966).
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Friday, December 3, 2010
St. John Bosco and the mysterious dog "Grigio"
From http://www.miraclesofthesaints.com/2010/10/miracles-with-dogs-birds-other-animals.html
Among all the amazing episodes in the life of Don Bosco, one of the greatest was the appearance of the dog "Grigio" -a huge grey dog that appeared suddenly at moments of danger, reappeared on many occasions and disappeared some years later when the danger was over. He asked for neither food nor shelter, was savage as a wolf against an enemy, but gentle as a lamb with the boys of the Oratory, and whom St. John "Don" Bosco gave the name of Grigio -"the grey one."
Don Bosco was once passing through the thickly populated quarter which lay near Valdocco late at night. It had a bad reputation: shady characters could skulk behind the tufts of scrub and brushwood and burst our upon the passerby. His mother, Margaret Bosco, was always anxious when her son was our late at night. Don Bosco had passed the last buildings of the town when a huge grey dog appeared and walked by his side.
He was startled at first, but as he found that the creature seemed friendly, he accepted its company and went on to the Orarory. When he reached the door the dog turned around and trotted off in the direction whence it had come. Every night henceforward, when Don Bosco was out late, the same thing happened. He found the dog waiting for him whenever there was a lonely part of the town to be traversed.
One night, he became aware of two suspicious-looking men who were following him, matching their pace to his. When he tried to avoid them by crossing the road, they crossed too. He decided to rum back, bur at the moment he did so they were on him. A cloak was thrown over his head and a handkerchief thrust into his mouth. He struggled to free himself and call for help, but it was useless. Suddenly, with a terrific howl, Grigio appeared and rushed upon them. Leaping on the one who held the cloak, he forced him to let go, then bit the second and flung him o n to the ground. The first tried to escape but Grigio was after him, rolled him too in the mud and stood over them both, growling furiously.
"Call off your dog!" they cried to Don Bosco.
"I will call him off if you will let me go about my business," he replied.
"Yes, anything..only call him off!"
"Come, Grigio," said Don Bosco, and the dog immediately obeyed, while the two men, terrified, made off in double quick time.
Another night, Don Bosco was on his way home when a man hiding behind a tree fired twice at him at such close range that it seems almost impossible that both shots had missed. Then, throwing away the pistol, the man rushed upon him. But at this exact moment, Grigio mysteriously appeared and seized the man, and dragged him a few feet away, growling fiercely all the while. He then released the man who instantly fled in terror, and the dog once more escorted Don Bosco home.
On another occasion it was from a whole band of thugs that this mysterious companion saved him. Don Bosco had reached a lonely spot when, hearing steps, he turned to see a man close to him with an uplifted stick. Don Bosco was a swift runner in those days, but his enemy was swifter and soon caught up with him. It was a moment of action. Don Bosco, with a well-directed blow of the fist, sent the man sprawling. His howl of pain brought several others out of the bushes where they had been hiding. They were all armed with heavy sticks, and things now looked black for Don Bosco. Once more, at the crucial moment, the terrific howl of Grigio was heard. He ran around and around his master, growling and showing his formidable teeth until one by one the ruffians turned and disappeared.
One night, instead of accompanying Don Bosco, Grigio went to the Oratory and refused to let him go out, lying down across the door of his room, for once growling and showing ill temper towards Don Bosco when he made the slightest attempt to dislodge him.
"Don't go out, John," said his mother; "if you won't listen to me, at least listen to that dog; he has more sense than you have."
Don Bosco gave in at last, and a quarter of an hour later a neighbor came in to warn him that he had overheard two rogues planning to attack him.
Another evening after supper the dog appeared in the playroom, and all the boys of Don Bosco's Oratory gathered around him and made much of him. They patted him, pulled his ears, stroked his head, the little ones rode on him. He regarded them with grave eyes until at last they brought him into the refectory where Don Bosco was still at supper. "Why, Grigio, old fellow, what brings you here?" he said. Grigio went up to him, put his great head on the table, looked at him and wagged his tail.
"What do you want, old boy? A bit of cheese or polenta?" No, he wanted neither. "Then, if you won't have anything," said his master, stroking the great head, "then go home to bed."
Grigio gave him one long look, turned around and trotted out. The reason of this unusual visit of Grigio was never really known, but it does show the remarkable gentleness and kindness of this "stray dog" who was nevertheless incredibly vicious and protective of Don Bosco on numerous occasions.
The last time Don Bosco saw him was one night in Castelnuovo. He was going from Murialdo to Moncucco and it was growing dark. He had to pass some farms and vineyards that were guarded by savage dogs. "I wish I had Grigio here," he said to himself. As if the wish had suddenly produced him, Grigio appeared with every sign of delight at meeting his friend, wagging his tail, and he walked the whole way with him.
It was lucky he was there, for two dogs at a farm they passed rushed out upon them, but Grigio in a vicious offensive soon sent both of them flying with their tails between their legs. When Don Bosco reached the friend's house to which he was bound, they were astonished to see the magnificent dog and wondered where Don Bosco had picked him up. When they sat down to supper he was lying beside them, but when Don Bosco rose to give him some food, he was not to be seen. In fact, that was the last of Grigio. The enemies of the Saint had grown tired of plotting against him, and the mysterious protector was never to be seen again.
So how can the incredible timing and actions of "Grigio" the stray dog be explained? How is it that he mysteriously showed up at just the right moment on not one, but numerous occasions to literally save the life of Father John Bosco? Was Grigio an Angel in the form of a dog? Or was he simply a dog that was mysteriously guided by God to protect Don Bosco? But how then did he seem to appear out of nowhere? One thing is for sure: God was with St. Don Bosco because he had long ago given himself completely to the service of God, and God worked incredible miracles through his intercession, that he might be a holy example to all the poor boys who came to the Oratory that he had founded which literally became for them a heavenly refuge.
[Source for the above information is the excellent book “St John Bosco” by F.A. Forbes, Tan Books, 2000.]
Among all the amazing episodes in the life of Don Bosco, one of the greatest was the appearance of the dog "Grigio" -a huge grey dog that appeared suddenly at moments of danger, reappeared on many occasions and disappeared some years later when the danger was over. He asked for neither food nor shelter, was savage as a wolf against an enemy, but gentle as a lamb with the boys of the Oratory, and whom St. John "Don" Bosco gave the name of Grigio -"the grey one."
Don Bosco was once passing through the thickly populated quarter which lay near Valdocco late at night. It had a bad reputation: shady characters could skulk behind the tufts of scrub and brushwood and burst our upon the passerby. His mother, Margaret Bosco, was always anxious when her son was our late at night. Don Bosco had passed the last buildings of the town when a huge grey dog appeared and walked by his side.
He was startled at first, but as he found that the creature seemed friendly, he accepted its company and went on to the Orarory. When he reached the door the dog turned around and trotted off in the direction whence it had come. Every night henceforward, when Don Bosco was out late, the same thing happened. He found the dog waiting for him whenever there was a lonely part of the town to be traversed.
One night, he became aware of two suspicious-looking men who were following him, matching their pace to his. When he tried to avoid them by crossing the road, they crossed too. He decided to rum back, bur at the moment he did so they were on him. A cloak was thrown over his head and a handkerchief thrust into his mouth. He struggled to free himself and call for help, but it was useless. Suddenly, with a terrific howl, Grigio appeared and rushed upon them. Leaping on the one who held the cloak, he forced him to let go, then bit the second and flung him o n to the ground. The first tried to escape but Grigio was after him, rolled him too in the mud and stood over them both, growling furiously.
"Call off your dog!" they cried to Don Bosco.
"I will call him off if you will let me go about my business," he replied.
"Yes, anything..only call him off!"
"Come, Grigio," said Don Bosco, and the dog immediately obeyed, while the two men, terrified, made off in double quick time.
Another night, Don Bosco was on his way home when a man hiding behind a tree fired twice at him at such close range that it seems almost impossible that both shots had missed. Then, throwing away the pistol, the man rushed upon him. But at this exact moment, Grigio mysteriously appeared and seized the man, and dragged him a few feet away, growling fiercely all the while. He then released the man who instantly fled in terror, and the dog once more escorted Don Bosco home.
On another occasion it was from a whole band of thugs that this mysterious companion saved him. Don Bosco had reached a lonely spot when, hearing steps, he turned to see a man close to him with an uplifted stick. Don Bosco was a swift runner in those days, but his enemy was swifter and soon caught up with him. It was a moment of action. Don Bosco, with a well-directed blow of the fist, sent the man sprawling. His howl of pain brought several others out of the bushes where they had been hiding. They were all armed with heavy sticks, and things now looked black for Don Bosco. Once more, at the crucial moment, the terrific howl of Grigio was heard. He ran around and around his master, growling and showing his formidable teeth until one by one the ruffians turned and disappeared.
One night, instead of accompanying Don Bosco, Grigio went to the Oratory and refused to let him go out, lying down across the door of his room, for once growling and showing ill temper towards Don Bosco when he made the slightest attempt to dislodge him.
"Don't go out, John," said his mother; "if you won't listen to me, at least listen to that dog; he has more sense than you have."
Don Bosco gave in at last, and a quarter of an hour later a neighbor came in to warn him that he had overheard two rogues planning to attack him.
Another evening after supper the dog appeared in the playroom, and all the boys of Don Bosco's Oratory gathered around him and made much of him. They patted him, pulled his ears, stroked his head, the little ones rode on him. He regarded them with grave eyes until at last they brought him into the refectory where Don Bosco was still at supper. "Why, Grigio, old fellow, what brings you here?" he said. Grigio went up to him, put his great head on the table, looked at him and wagged his tail.
"What do you want, old boy? A bit of cheese or polenta?" No, he wanted neither. "Then, if you won't have anything," said his master, stroking the great head, "then go home to bed."
Grigio gave him one long look, turned around and trotted out. The reason of this unusual visit of Grigio was never really known, but it does show the remarkable gentleness and kindness of this "stray dog" who was nevertheless incredibly vicious and protective of Don Bosco on numerous occasions.
The last time Don Bosco saw him was one night in Castelnuovo. He was going from Murialdo to Moncucco and it was growing dark. He had to pass some farms and vineyards that were guarded by savage dogs. "I wish I had Grigio here," he said to himself. As if the wish had suddenly produced him, Grigio appeared with every sign of delight at meeting his friend, wagging his tail, and he walked the whole way with him.
It was lucky he was there, for two dogs at a farm they passed rushed out upon them, but Grigio in a vicious offensive soon sent both of them flying with their tails between their legs. When Don Bosco reached the friend's house to which he was bound, they were astonished to see the magnificent dog and wondered where Don Bosco had picked him up. When they sat down to supper he was lying beside them, but when Don Bosco rose to give him some food, he was not to be seen. In fact, that was the last of Grigio. The enemies of the Saint had grown tired of plotting against him, and the mysterious protector was never to be seen again.
So how can the incredible timing and actions of "Grigio" the stray dog be explained? How is it that he mysteriously showed up at just the right moment on not one, but numerous occasions to literally save the life of Father John Bosco? Was Grigio an Angel in the form of a dog? Or was he simply a dog that was mysteriously guided by God to protect Don Bosco? But how then did he seem to appear out of nowhere? One thing is for sure: God was with St. Don Bosco because he had long ago given himself completely to the service of God, and God worked incredible miracles through his intercession, that he might be a holy example to all the poor boys who came to the Oratory that he had founded which literally became for them a heavenly refuge.
[Source for the above information is the excellent book “St John Bosco” by F.A. Forbes, Tan Books, 2000.]
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Dueling billboards face off in Christmas controversy
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/30/dueling-billboards-face-off-in-christmas-controversy/
From Laura Dolan, CNN
'Tis the season to be jolly? Not entirely.
An atheist billboard that calls Christmas "a myth" has sparked a growing controversy near the Lincoln Tunnel, a 1.5-mile-long twin tube that connects New Jersey to New York.
The full message, which appears with a nativity scene, reads: "You know it's a myth. This season, celebrate reason."
Its $20,000 price tag was paid for by American Atheists, a New Jersey-based atheist advocacy group, David Silverman, the group's president, told CNN.
"We are addressing the 50 million atheists in this nation," Silverman said.
He said the group erected the sign in a high-traffic area in an effort to challenge drivers to "think hard about whether or not they actually believe in what is, in reality, an invisible magic man in the sky."
Silverman said he is uncertain if it will stay through Christmas or come down on December 21.
The sign, located near the tunnel's New Jersey entrance, has stirred controversy among Christian organizations, prompting one group to erect its own pro-Christmas billboard.
"We decided to counterpunch after a donor came forward seeking to challenge the anti-Christmas statement," said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a New York-based Catholic advocacy group.
The League's billboard reads: "You Know It's Real: This Season Celebrate Jesus."
It was erected at the tunnel's Manhattan entrance at a cost of $18,500, according to Donohue.
This is not the first time atheist billboards have called religion into question.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Wisconsin-based atheist advocacy group, has placed comparable billboards in some 45 cities and 30 states since October 2007, according to the group's co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor.
In 2008, the British Humanist Association paid for buses in London, England, to be adorned with the slogan: "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
But Donahue says such signs are antagonistic.
"I'm not Hindu, I'm not Buddhist, I'm not Jewish but I wouldn't go around denigrating other people's religions and their gods," he said. "[Silverman] ought to respect our religion. He doesn't have to join it."
Silverman says the holiday season has been co-opted by newer traditions.
"There is no flying reindeer in the Bible," he said. "This is not just about Jesus."
From Laura Dolan, CNN
'Tis the season to be jolly? Not entirely.
An atheist billboard that calls Christmas "a myth" has sparked a growing controversy near the Lincoln Tunnel, a 1.5-mile-long twin tube that connects New Jersey to New York.
The full message, which appears with a nativity scene, reads: "You know it's a myth. This season, celebrate reason."
Its $20,000 price tag was paid for by American Atheists, a New Jersey-based atheist advocacy group, David Silverman, the group's president, told CNN.
"We are addressing the 50 million atheists in this nation," Silverman said.
He said the group erected the sign in a high-traffic area in an effort to challenge drivers to "think hard about whether or not they actually believe in what is, in reality, an invisible magic man in the sky."
Silverman said he is uncertain if it will stay through Christmas or come down on December 21.
The sign, located near the tunnel's New Jersey entrance, has stirred controversy among Christian organizations, prompting one group to erect its own pro-Christmas billboard.
"We decided to counterpunch after a donor came forward seeking to challenge the anti-Christmas statement," said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a New York-based Catholic advocacy group.
The League's billboard reads: "You Know It's Real: This Season Celebrate Jesus."
It was erected at the tunnel's Manhattan entrance at a cost of $18,500, according to Donohue.
This is not the first time atheist billboards have called religion into question.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Wisconsin-based atheist advocacy group, has placed comparable billboards in some 45 cities and 30 states since October 2007, according to the group's co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor.
In 2008, the British Humanist Association paid for buses in London, England, to be adorned with the slogan: "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
But Donahue says such signs are antagonistic.
"I'm not Hindu, I'm not Buddhist, I'm not Jewish but I wouldn't go around denigrating other people's religions and their gods," he said. "[Silverman] ought to respect our religion. He doesn't have to join it."
Silverman says the holiday season has been co-opted by newer traditions.
"There is no flying reindeer in the Bible," he said. "This is not just about Jesus."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)