Translate

Wednesday, November 16, 2022

ARCHBISHOP BROGLIO GETS IT ABOUT SACRAMENT OF THE MOST HOLY EUCHARIST, THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS AND ADORATION OF THE MOST BLESSED SACRAMENT AND HE IS ALSO FRIENDLY TOWARD TRADITION AND THE TRADITIONAL SACRMAMENTS

 YES, HIS EXCELLENCY GETS IT: WE EAT WITH OUR EYES FIRST!

My comment first: This bodes well for the so-called Eucharistic Revival the USCCB has initiated. Unless the USCCB has the courage to name what has caused the sad state of affairs with what has happened to the Mass and Catholic understanding of the Mass, the Second Divine Person of the Most Holy Trinity, and confusion about the unique “Real and Transubstantial Presence” of Christ in the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist, we will never experience a real Eucharistic Revival that approaches anything like what Catholics believe about the Mass and Real Presence of those who attend the TLM.

Ad orientem and kneeling for Holy Communion would go a long, long way in recovering Eucharistic sanity in Modern Roman Missal Masses.

And while they are at it, may I recommend that when speaking about the Sacraments, we don’t say that the “Eucharist” makes us one. No! Jesus Christ, the Risen Lord’s real presence in the Eucharist, in whatever form it is validly celebrated, unites us. 

Don’t say the Sacrament of Penance forgives us. No! The Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of Penance forgives us through the ministry of the ordained priest who act “in persona Christi” during absolution. Jesus forgives us not the Sacrament of Penance. 

From Catholic World Report:

Archbishop Broglio, ecclesial unity, and Eucharistic revival

Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio of the U.S. Archdiocese for the Military Services celebrates the annual Sea Services Pilgrimage Mass at the National Shrine of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton in Emmitsburg, Md., Oct. 2, 2022. (CNS photo/Jason Minick, courtesy Devine Partners)

Tuesday’s election of Archbishop Timothy P. Broglio, of the Archdiocese for the Military Services, as president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has brought about the usual comments from the usual places. Immediate commentary has ranged from nitpicking his response to the COVID vaccine to unevidenced accusations of his handling of claims of clergy sexual misconduct.

No one need look any further than coverage of this USCCB election to understand the divisions in the Church run deep.

As president, then, Archbishop Broglio inherits a pivotal leadership role at a time when the Church in the U.S. desperately needs unity.

What can bring this about? Holiness, as outgoing USCCB president Archbishop Jose H. Gomez simply reminded the U.S. bishops in his final presidential address just ahead of the elections. As the late Cardinal Francis E. George, O.M.I. of Chicago, himself a past president of the conference — once said: “The major task of the bishop is to look for the saints and encourage them.”

One of the bishops’ recent top priorities — the National Eucharistic Revival — is aimed at directly that: fostering sanctity among the faithful. None else can be the fruit of a greater Eucharistic faith, devotion and piety. No other can bring about the unity needed by the Church.

Even an event centered upon the source and summit of the Faith, however, has seemingly become fodder for the promotion of partisan agendas.

Oddly, there has been debate among the bishops as to the worthiness of personal and communal adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. It is the Eucharistic celebration of the Mass, some say, which is the source and summit of ecclesial life. It’s this kind of sacramental hairsplitting that has no basis in theological thought or practice.

To those diminishing Eucharistic adoration and devotion, Broglio says: “The Church tells us that this Eucharistic Presence in the tabernacle is a prolonging of the Sacrifice of the Altar.”

To those who seek to divide through broken, divisive Eucharistic theology, Broglio says: “[Jesus] is present in the midst of every parish and every community to make palpable His mission to unify what is divided, to heal what is sinful, sweeten the bitter, and give eternity to our joys and sorrows. The tabernacle must be the center of the community and the priest is there to make present in the same community Jesus in sacrament.”

To those who misunderstand Eucharistic adoration and its esteemed position in the Church’s life of worship and prayer, Broglio says: “[N]ever far from our minds is the basic doctrine of the Church regarding Eucharistic adoration: it is born of the Mass and guides us to the Mass. Obviously, it is impossible to have adoration without first having had a celebration of the Mass. Adoration offers us the opportunity to adore the very special and unique presence of the Lord. We celebrate His presence in our midst.”

To those who erroneously want to separate Christ by putting the Mass at odds with Eucharistic adoration, Broglio says: “Adoration … leads us to the celebration [of the Mass]. We must cultivate this desire for union and presence in the culminating moment of our salvation. The accent is also on the community. The celebration knows no limits of time and space, because it transports us to the liturgy of heaven.”

As plans for the Revival continue to unfold, and its fruit continues to be borne out in the life of the Church through teaching and practice, Archbishop Broglio’s leadership will be crucial. Let’s pray for him as he begins his formidable new role.

36 comments:

Tom Makin said...

Maybe AB Broglio can bring some much needed discipline to not only the USCCB but to the church in the USA as a whole. Enough nonsense; "accompaniment", "go to the periphery", "Synod on synodality", "smell like the sheep" etc. How about "come to the altar rail and adore Him".

Jerome Merwick said...

We might get a bishop like Broglio who understands and appreciates the fundamentals, but I have serious doubts whether he or any other bishop could possibly bring any discipline to the USCCB. Like our FBI, the best thing the USCCB could possibly do is disband itself. It's a topheavy, expensive bureaucracy that has done far more harm than good to the faith in our country. And, for the life of me, I cannot begin to understand why more Catholics are not completely fed up with their semi-annual junkets to Baltimore or elsewhere, which includes meals, air fare, hotels (and you can bet none of them are staying at Economy Suites or Comfort Inn) and of course the meeting halls where these dinosaur marathons take place--all on the dime of the faithful. And of course, every meeting includes someone making some inane proclamation about how we need to be concerned for the poor. I'm sorry, because I know there are some good bishops who participate in this charade, largely because they have to, but this is just a racket, plain and simple. It continues, because we remain silent and let it continue.

OK, I'll get off my soap box now.

TJM said...

This article which references a New York Times article, no less, will grieve Pope Francis and His Roche:

https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2022/11/new-york-times-report-old-latin-mass.html

TJM said...

Jerome Merwick,

You have said it better than anybody else. The USCCB is worthless and dangerous to the Faith.

TJM said...

One big positive about Archbishop Broglio. He gave the big middle finger to Traditionis Crudelis (Custodes):

https://www.latinmassdir.org/archbishop-timothy-p-broglio-grants-continuation-of-latin-mass-within-the-archdiocese-of-the-military-services-usa/

Anonymous said...

Has Archbishop Broglio changed his approach in regard to the TLM?

That is, trads had attacked him a few years ago as he rejected the notion of TLM-only priests who would serve the military Archdiocese.

-- Archdiocese of Military: Better to Have No Priests than Traditional Ones

https://liturgyguy.com/2017/06/17/archdiocese-of-military-better-to-have-no-priests-than-traditional-ones/

Liturgy Guy declared:

"In his letter (see above), Archbishop Broglio argues against the Military accepting priests as chaplains who only offer the traditional Mass, also called the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

"In the letter the archbishop compares the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite to the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Church. He argues that eastern rite priests have to be bi-ritual if they are military chaplains and must offer the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, suggesting the same holds true for priests offering the traditional Mass.

"He also states that the Divine Liturgy is much older than the “liturgy established by the Council of Trent."

Pa.

Mark Thomas

TJM said...

Father McDonald, the Archbishop’s bio says he is fluent in Italian. Maybe you paisans need to get together to share liturgical ideas!

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

As usual, you do not know what you are talking about and posting endless non sequiturs prove nothing. But Archbishop Broglio told the Pope to shove it when it comes to the TLM. Will you commit hari kari when PF dies?

Anonymous said...

In regard to the attacks that Archbishop Broglio had sustained from "traditionalists":

Archbishop Broglio had rejected the request from "traditionalists" that he permit TLM-only priests to serve within the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA.

Archbishop Broglio insisted that a priest who offered the TLM must offer as well the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.

In turn, certain "traditionalists" denounced Archbishop Broglio's rejection of TLM-only priests.

That demonstrated that within the TLM community, a profound rejection of Summorum Pontificum existed.

That is, trads would accept only certain parts of Summorum Pontificum...they would reject that which they pleased.

In regard to the notion of TLM-only priests, Pope Benedict XVI had declared:

"Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.

"The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness."

Too many "traditionalists" rejected Pope Benedict XVI's liturgical peace plan.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

In regard to the attacks that Archbishop Broglio had sustained from "traditionalists":

Archbishop Broglio had rejected the request from "traditionalists" that he permit TLM-only priests to serve within the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA.

Archbishop Broglio insisted that a priest who offered the TLM must offer as well the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI. In turn, certain "traditionalists" denounced Archbishop Broglio's rejection of TLM-only priests.

That demonstrated that within the TLM community, the profound rejection of Summorum Pontificum existed. That is, trads would accept only certain parts of Summorum Pontificum...they would reject that which they pleased.

In regard to the notion of TLM-only priests, Pope Benedict XVI had declared:

"Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.

"The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness."

Too many "traditionalists" rejected Pope Benedict XVI's liturgical peace plan. But Pope Benedict XVI had refused to tolerate the rejection of the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.

Archbishop Broglio refused also to have tolerated the exclusion of the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

I appreciate that during his press conference, Archbishop Broglio had rejected any attempt that would have pitted him against Pope Francis.

Archbishop Broglio was asked to respond to those “who would characterize [his] election as showing different priorities from those of Pope Francis.”

Archbishop Broglio emphasized that he was "in communion with Pope Francis...We're brother bishops, we certainly know each other."

Archbishop Broglio added that he was unaware as to why his election in question indicated "dissonance with Pope Francis."

Unfortunately...but expected...there are folks who have reduced Archbishop Broglio's election to that of a war against the Vicar of Christ.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."This bodes well for the so-called Eucharistic Revival the USCCB has initiated."

Yes!

Father McDonald, I have read today many articles from the past few years that pertained to Archbishop Broglio.

I am confident that he will help to guide successfully the Eucharistic Revival that I believe is on the horizon.

One thing is certain: Archbishop Broglio has rejected the Latin Church's liturgical war that the liturgical warmongers have waged for decades.

He has attempted to accommodate those attached to the TLM...while he has refused to have tolerated attacks the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.

Father McDonald...yes, the situation in regard to the Eucharistic Revival is favorable...it bodes well.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Fr. ALLAN McDonald

"TJM said...
Mark Thomas,
As usual, you do not know what you are talking about and posting endless non sequiturs prove nothing. But Archbishop Broglio told the Pope to shove it when it comes to the TLM. Will you commit hari kari when PF dies?"

Fr. ALLAN McDonald, I know you like to post TJM's comments, they make up close to 50% of the postings here these days.

But, really, suggesting suicide is beyond the nutty fringe and you should not post comments like this.

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

Archbishop Broglio told PF to shove it. Read his letter and quit stinking up Father McDonald’s blog with your piffle

Jerome Merwick said...

How to recognize a post from Captain Sanctimony:

1). It will tell part of the truth about a Church leader to either make him look bad or good, according to C.S.'s purposes, but leave out key points that could compromise his assertion.

2). It will be preceded by or followed by at least two more consecutive posts by himself.

3). If the post mentions Bergoglio, it will include the term "holy" at least twice--usually even more.

4). If the post is about anyone who disagrees with Bergoglio, it will usually include the term "satanic".

5). The post will bash traditional Catholics and blame them for at least one problem in the Church.

6). The post will be smug in its tone.

7). As you read the post, you will visualize an awkward 11 year-ol-boy with no friends agreeing with his grandmother about what a great singer Wayne Newton is.

8). It will end with "Pax" (rather ironic, considering his disdain for Latin).

There's probably more--in fact there IS one I just remembered:

9). The posts usually have the effect of driving readers away or discouraging them from engaging in any kind of back-and-forth discussion. After all, you can't argue with people who know everything.

Bellum,



TJM said...

Jerome Merwick,

Touche!!! I suspect some of our better posters like John Nolan could not take the nonsense any longer

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

FRMJK, like you I dislike these kinds of sophomoric statements and these Catholics would have their knuckles whacked by Sister Mary Kunda Kunda in her traditional garb and order. And like you, I dislike listening to statements contrary to the Catholic Faith through Pope Francis’ synodal way. Yet he calls us to listen to to this crap and thus, faithful to His Holiness, I will participate in the listening Church. We need to listen to TJM types as a listening Church and my blog a listening blog.

Jerome Merwick said...

Once again, the Clueless Cleric demonstrates the left's inability to discern intent and their malicious mischaracterization of words, intent and situations (INSURRECTION!). Just as President Trump's vocal observations about the crime illegal aliens bring to America was presented to us by the left as "absolute proof" of his alleged racism, so too does this priest embrace the crybaby disingenuousness of his like-minded heroes.

"Will you commit hari kari when PF dies?" is a rhetorical question employed by its author to illustrate the absurdity of someone else's position. It emphasizes that absurdity by the sheer ridiculousness of the notion of someone doing such a thing. To call that question "suggesting suicide" is downright dishonest and whiny.

I don't agree with any single person who posts here 100% of the time, but if we are going to disagree with each other, let's at least stop jumping to such lame and transparently manipulative conclusions.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Jerome - The intent was malicious, as are many of the comments made by TJM. They are personal attacks, slanders, lies, etc.

You LIKE TJM's style and you AGREE with his sentiments, so you lamely excuse his hari kari comment as "rhetorical.

TJM said...

Fr K,

Heal thyself. You called President Trump evil, yet he started no new wars, improved the lives of working men and women and gave us the Court that reversed Roe v Wade. Your Party in the last 2 years has done the opposite of that. Are you sad Joe doesn't have the votes to reverse Dodd? I think the person who says this has a very hard time distinguishing between good and evil. You voted for a Party that wanted taxpayers to fund the Abortionatoriums durings the pandemic and call abortion "healthcare."

Jerome Merwick,

Of course it was rhetorical, but he is a Democrat, so his cognitive abilities are limited.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Jerome - There, again, you see TJM's malicious intentions. Yes, I said President Trump was evil and I'd say it again. And it isn't "rhetorical." Trump is a dangerous transactionalist who cares for noone but hiumself. That's makes him evil.

TJM has repeatedly accused me of favoring abortion rights. Although I have corrected his error, he keeps it up. There's the malicious intent. He thinks if he tells a lie often enough it will become true.

Keep defending TJM and I will keep mining the malicious gold that he has posted here over the years in rebuttal.

Jerome Merwick said...

Oh, poor Father K! So certain he can read the minds of others. Why, if I had that special ability, I might assert that he simply hates Trump because Trump offends his effete sensibilities, but then I too would be guilty of attempting to mind-read.

I could even point out that Trump stood to gain nothing from his foray into politics, and actually lost a lot of money. But if I did that, I would be mind-reading the indignant careerist politicians of both parties who despise Trump. I would be attempting to mind-read by assuming that the fact that they came to Washington with so-so incomes and left very rich--no, that kind of mind-reading would mean that I could read into someone's bad intentions.

I couldn't possibly attempt to do that. It would also be an attempt to mind-read if I were to say that this priest enjoys the plaudits and approval of an inflexible group of other rarified people who need to feel elite and above the masses by their disdain for such a vulgar man as Trump!

No, no, no, I would be trying to mind-read. That just won't do!

Jerome Merwick said...

Speaking of mind-reading, I too can mine "malicious gold" and I seem to remember a certain priest superciliously opining that a lot of Americans admire Trump because they feel inferior and his macho posturing validates them--or something to that effect.

Of course, such a view utterly ignores the fact that American Politics had become so burdened by politicians fearfully pandering to vocal (and often small) special interest groups and experiencing utter terror that someone might be offended by them, reducing most mainstream pol8iticans into mealy-mouthed eunuchs. I wouldn't presume to mind-read, but it could be possible that maybe, just maybe, a large sector of Americans decided enough is enough.

Then again, such people would be deplorable and a threat to effete elites who are so entitled to govern and run our institutions. I wouldn't dare mind-read to the point of assuming a certain priest fancies himself as one such "enlightened" person. No, no, no, not me!

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Jerome - People reveal their minds, attitiudes, and their intentions by what they say and do. It doesn't take a mind-reader to understand them.

Trump had the one thing he wants - adulation - to gain from entering politics. One of the major causes of his decline in wealth was of his own making. FORBES tells the story: "No, Trump Is Not Losing ‘3 To 5 Billion’ Dollars From Presidency" https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2019/08/14/no-trump-is-not-losing-3-to-5-billion-from-presidency/?sh=4cc399db4a2d

Yes, there are many who supported Trump and who continue to do so because they find his persona and his behavior appealing. What I've said here and elsewhere: "Trump's faults are what draw other to him precisely because they share the same, or many of the same faults. This is memesis a la Rene Girard: 'Man is the creature who does not know what to desire, and he turns to others in order to make up his mind. We desire what others desire because we imitate their desires.' And, "In the Trump universe, Cheap grace is the offer of security without reconciliation, wealth without responsibility for others, freedom without responsibility, progress without ecological awareness, and the maintenance of personal (private) dignity via any means necessary including, but not limited to, violence, disloyalty, name-calling, and character assassination."

And if you don't consider YOURself enlightened, what do you consider yourself? Uninformed?

Jerome Merwick said...

Me? I'm just a regular guy who used to be as full of himself as you seem to be Father. I even used to be a Democrat. And Oh, I was SO SURE that I was enlightened back then!

I could say more, but that would verge on doing the very thing I'm so tired of reading from you.

ByzRus said...

To those diminishing Eucharistic adoration and devotion, Broglio says: “The Church tells us that this Eucharistic Presence in the tabernacle is a prolonging of the Sacrifice of the Altar.”

What I find interesting about this quote is the lengths some have gone to in the last 50+ years to put as much distance as possible between the two.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

"Full of himself" I will understand as a euphemism for someone who knows a lot. Education is a good thing, don't you agree?

A little Geritol might help with your tired feeling...

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Must see Geritol commercial:
https://youtu.be/G6MlXc-Bao4

TJM said...

Fr K,

If you vote Democrat you are an abortion enabler and complicit in evil. If Biden and Pelosi aren’t evil then no one is.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

TJM - That's another of the falsehoods you like to repeat.

"Enabler" is not a term the Church uses in such cases. But, because it suits your nefarious purposes, revealing your mind, attitude, and intentions (note that, Jerome) you stick to it. Try looking into the question of "cooperation" in Catholic moral theology.

As I and others have said here before, in choosing candidates for office the Church's guidance, not yours, is what a good Catholic should follow. As much as it pains you and others, that guidance is trustworthy while yours is not.

TJM said...

Fr K,

I cannot imagine any rational person voting for the Party which supports intrinsic evil and destroys the livelihoods of the working class just to make the Hollyweird loonies happy. <aybe you should walk in the working classes shoes. Under Church guidance there has to be a proportional reason. There is no "proportional" reason to vote for the Baby Killers. The Church said proportional, so what is the proportional reason that somehow trumps intrinsic evil?

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

TJM - What you can or cannot imagine is irrelevant.

I cannot imagine any rational person thinking that your voting guidance is superior to the Church's. Your absurb non-sequitur, "...just to make the Hollyweird loonies happy..." is another example of why your reasoning is worthless.

Your suggestion that there are no proportional reasons, that such cannot exist, is contrary to the Church's teaching which states that such may, indeed, exist. For many of us, they do.

What the Church also does, which you fail to understand, is leave that conscientious decision to each voter. Your have your decision-making process, which I respect, I have mine, others have theirs. In the end I choose the canidate(s) I think are best suited for the office, as you do.

Jerome Merwick said...

Oh for heaven's sake TJM, please get off of Fr. K's back! He's already EXPLAINED it to us unwashed, non-elite morons: "Nuance" has permitted him to seek (and reject) the Church's "guidance" about voting. There are so many other more important issues in which the Democrats clearly have more Christian compassion than stupid Republicans, and abortion and the mere 60 million children "choiced" out of existence since 1973 under protection of the law is just a peripheral issue.

The Democrats have solved poverty every time they dominate government. They make sure more of us ARE in poverty, thus creating a true equity! And they have solved the race problem by encouraging black people to despise white people forever, since we don't deserve anything less than their most virulent contempt! And Johnson's perpetuated "Great Society" successes have given us no less than three generations of illegitimacy institutionalized and fostered fatherlessness at a level we never thought we would enjoy in America--and we all know that rising crime rates have NOTHING to do with fatherlessness, because the Democrats have informed us that White Supremacy is the cause! And feeding the military industrial complex with the "smart" wars (to inversely paraphrase Donald Trump) is essential to the economy of the investor and executive class who run the defense industry.

There's oh, so much more success for the Democrats to boast about, so stop being such a narrow-minded, single-issue peasant and leave Father alone. After all he, Charles Schwab, Yuval Harrari, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and whoever is drugging Joe Biden enough to prop him up and pretend he is awake are the ones who know what is best for our country.

60 million dead--in Stalin's words, that just a "statistic"! Get over it!

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Jerome, I'm glad the Geritol worked.

No, I have not rejected the Church's guidance on voting. That is a baseless claim.

Your MAGA-esque screed regarding Democrats is just so much, well, spleen venting.

Your vote counts as much as mine, so when you convince enough people to vote for candidates you favor, all the problems of the world will be solved. Bon chance.

Sophia said...

Sophia here: Jerome and TJM, you are absolutely correct about Fr. K. You have used his own criteria to do that: Fr. K. says "Jerome - People reveal their minds, attitudes, and their intentions by what they say and do. It doesn't take a mind-reader to understand them."
Exactly! Precisely! Right back at you Fr. K! "People do reveal their minds, attitudes, and their intentions by what they say and do. It doesn't take a mind-reader to understand them." In fact, you reveal more about yourself than you even suspect! I would say that you are -like Democrat politicians when they accuse Republican politicians of doing, or planning to do, something unethical, wrong, immoral, evil, that they themselves are guilty of-projecting, when you accuse others of negative behaviors, intentions when it's you that are guilty of them. However, you and the Death Party (credit the faithful, insightful shepherd, Cardinal Burke with that very accurate appellation) are mostly conscious of what you are doing but erroneously think most of your audience will not recognize it for what it is. In other words, like so many dishonest people, you and they hope to get away with your despicable tactics! And yes, I recognize that I am being much more direct than I typically am, in calling you out on your vicious attacks on others. But this correction is not merely being made out of anger, although I admit that I am angry - but primarily in the hope that it may penetrate your defenses and lead to a change! After all, "Hope springs eternal"!

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Sophia - "...conscious of what you are doing but erroneously think most of your audience will not recognize it for what it is."

Yes, I am conscious of what I am doing. I don't vote "willy-nilly" as some may. I don't vote straight party lines as some think is the only acceptable strategy. I choose conscientiously the candidates I think are best for office. I am glad you recognize it "for what it is."

I will await your "calling out" in anger - though charity would better - those who viciously attack me and others. Although I do this in "hope," I will not hold my breath.