HOW CONVENIENT ARE THE TIMES FOR CONFESSION IN YOUR PARISH?

“Wait for faithful in the confessional,” Apostolic Penitentiary tells priests

(©ANSA) PRIESTS LISTEN TO PEOPLE'S CONFESSIONS

Major Penitentiary Cardinal Mauro Piacenza has warned that the Sacrament of Reconciliation is going through a crisis, particularly where confessors are facing a crisis

ANDREA TORNIELLIVATICAN CITY

Priests should sit and wait patiently for faithful in the confessional at times that are convenient for penitents. Cardinal Mauro Piacenza said this this afternoon during the inauguration of the course on the inner conscience, the private inner space of each individual. The week-long course has become something of a tradition. It will be taking place in the Chancery office and attended by about five hundred priests and seminarists who are approaching ordination. The meeting will conclude Friday with an Audience with Francis. In the afternoon there will be a penitential liturgy in the St. Peter’s Basilica, when the Pope will confess some of those present, inaugurating the “feast of forgiveness”, during which churches will stay open 24/7 for confessions.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation “is possibly the most concrete and real way to renew one’s personal meeting with Jesus Christ,” Piacenza said.  Although it is true that the celebration of this sacrament often comes after a long and trying inner journey and is a destination one reaches after a previous personal Church-mediated encounter with the Lord, there are cases of radical conversions taking place during the very celebration of the sacrament. During this time, a supernatural grace acts through the confessor, working on the penitent’s conscience and can lead to brief instants of unimaginable spiritual highs.”

“When we deal with the inner conscience, what we’re dealing with is God!,” the cardinal said. “The conscience is a shrine where God always speaks to all humans in accordance with creation  and to Christians in accordance with creation and redemption… Accompanying a brother in the process of discerning his or her personal way of acting and receiving everything that emerges from the inner conscience, means entering into sacred territory with this person and one needs to be extremely careful when doing so. It’s like walking on silk.”

Piacenza invited confessors to prepare  for the celebration of this sacrament by “invoking the Spirito f prudence and wisdom, asking the Lord to be his obedient instruments” and to pause for a moment of prayer after confession “to thank the Lord for what he has achieved through our poor persons and always invoke the protection of the Holy Spirit and the powerful intercession of the Mother of Mercy on each of the souls that have renewed their personal encounter with Christ through us.”

 “What all of us as well as penitentiaries of papal basilicas have noticed, is that the Sacrament of Reconciliation  is going through a crisis, particularly where confessors are facing a crisis. That is, where  the sacrament is only offered to “Catholic adults” who consciously ask for it and may even have the priest’s phone number at hand. But this risks reducing the sacrament to something individualistic  which has nothing to do with one’s personal encounter with Christ,” the cardinal said.

“The wisdom of the Church teaches us that [priests] should wait for penitents in the confessional, with that same patience that is typical of God.”

NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, ONLY CHRIST CAN SAVE US AND IT TAKES HUMBLE ACKNOWLEGEMENT OF THIS, KNEELING ON ONE'S KNEES, NOT IN ANY HAUGHTY STANDING POSITION! HUMILITY IN LITURGY, NOT HAUGHTINESS IS WHAT IS REQUIRED!

MY COMMENTS FIRST:  As a teenager, what was being taught to us by all the stripping of popular piety and traditional forms of reverence experienced in the 1962 Roman Missal, such as kneeling and the so-called "useless repetition" of our unworthiness, is that only God could save us poor miserable sinners as we approached him not with a haughty bodily position of standing, heads raised, and receiving Him triumphantly in the hand, but kneeling, striking one's breast each time the "Lord, I am not worthy..." was proclaimed not once, not twice, but three times, before Holy Communion! The priest had already done this not once, not twice but three times prior to his reception of Holy Communion.

Then those who were freed of all venial sin, had not broken the fast and had been absolved of mortal sins, if these had been committed, humbly approached the altar with heads bowed, hands folded and kneeled at the altar railing in humble anticipation of their Savior who alone saves them.

Kneeling for Holy Communion is the most humble acknowledgement that "I am a sinner" and in Christian humility showing it by the bodily posture of kneeling, which is of humble acknowledgement of one's sinful status and seeking God's forgiveness. Standing is not. Especially at Holy Communion standing in the Latin Rite is a sign of the haughtiness of those who wanted to diminish our sense of sinfulness after Vatican II by its false "spirit" and our "right" to Holy Communion would be emphasized. "I'm okay, you're okay" of the 1970's isn't served well by kneeling for Holy Communion! To say that only Christ saves us and not our own abilities and haughtiness goes against the spirit of the 1970's when standing for Holy Communion was shoved down the throats of the collective Catholic Church of that time and by denigrating the 1500 year tradition of kneeling for Holy Communion in humble acknowledgement of the truth of whom we are: SINNERS!

Pope Francis: humility is the path to salvation (Vatican Radio) Our salvation is not just in observing the Commandments, but in the humility to always feel the need to be healed by God. This was the message voiced by Pope Francis during Mass on Monday morning at the Casa Santa Marta. Pope Francis’ homily on Monday found inspiration in these words that Jesus addressed to his fellow citizens in Nazareth: “No prophet is accepted in his hometown”. It was a place where he never worked miracles because “they had no faith”. Jesus recalls two biblical episodes: the miracle of the healing of the leper Naaman, and the meeting of the prophet Elijah with the widow of Serapta who shared her last morsel of food and was saved from famine. “Lepers and widows – Pope Francis explained – in those days were the outcasts of society”. And yet, these two outcasts, welcomed the prophets and were saved, while the people of Nazareth did not accept Jesus because “they felt so strong in their faith”, so sure of their faithful observance of the Commandments, they felt they had no need for other salvation”. “It is the tragedy of observing the Commandments without faith: ‘I save myself because I go to the Synagogue every Saturday, I try to obey the Commandments, I do not want to hear that the leper or the widow is better than me!’ They are outcasts! And Jesus tells us: ‘if you do not put yourself on the margins, if you don’t feel what it is to be an outcast, you will not obtain salvation’. This is humility, the path of humility: to feel so marginalized that we need the Salvation of the Lord. He alone saves us, not our observance of the law. And they did not like this; they were angry and wanted to kill him”.   The Pope observed that this was the same anger initially felt by Naaman, because he felt that Elisha’s invitation to wash himself seven times in the Jordan was ridiculous and humiliating. “The Lord asked him for a gesture of humility, He asked him to obey like a child, to be ridiculous”. Namman turned and went off in a rage, but afterwards his servants convinced him to do what the prophet asked of him. That act of humility healed him. “This is the message for today – the Pope said - in this third week of Lent: if we want to be healed, we must choose the road of humility”. "In her Canticle Mary does not say she is happy because God was looking to her virginity, to her kindness or to her sweetness – all of them virtues that she possessed – no: because the Lord was looking to her humility, the humility of His servant, her smallness. This is what the Lord looks for. And we must take heed of this wisdom and put ourselves on the margins so that the Lord may find us. He will not find us at the center of our certainties. That is not where the Lord looks. He will find us on the margins, in our sins, in our mistakes, in our need for spiritual healing, for salvation; that is where the Lord will find us”.   “This – Pope Francis highlighted – is the path of humility”: “Christian humility is not within the virtue of saying: ‘I am not important’ and hiding our pride. No, Christian humility is telling the truth: ‘I am a sinner’. Tell the truth: this is our truth. But there is another truth: God saves us. He saves us when we are on the margins; He does not save us in our certainties. Let us ask for the grace of having the wisdom to put ourselves on the margins, for the grace of humility so that we may receive the Lord’s Salvation”.

IF THIS EDITORIAL IS TRUE, THEN POPE BENEDICT IS RIGHT: A SMALLER BUT PURER CHURCH IS THE ONLY OPTION, NOT ACQUIESCENCE TO THE PREVAILING SECULAR CULTURE

My Comments first: Sometimes I think editorialists are idiots. They make bold claims without any evidence other than anecdotal. The editorial below I got from my Yahoo search engine which posts stories in an obsessive way concerning gay rights. Obsessive! Fixated!

As you read this drivel, which makes the Church into a merely sociological phenomenon stripped of its supernatural graces where prevailing public opinion calls the Church to infidelity to Scripture, Tradition, Natural Law and her own magisterium, one can only wonder where following this editorial's advice would lead the Church.

Well, we know, if only the article would tell us. They could point to each and every classically liberal Protestant denomination, especially Anglicanism and its branches to see what happens when a denomination buys into the prevailing culture and forsakes the Gospel and natural law. They die!

While the Catholic Church certainly has her problems, she will remain forever, even as a remnant, fidelity, not numbers are important to us. Pope Benedict predicted what would happen, but true Catholics would remain and the Church would carry on once the prevailing culture and civilization is destroyed by its corruption and immorality and something more sane replaces it.

There is also an implicit slam against Pope Francis. It isn't cool yet to do it explicitly, but the days are coming and perhaps already here when the media beast, the anti-Christ will recognize that the only way to deal with Pope Francis is to go toe to toe with him. It is beginning slowly but surely.

Below is the article to which I refer above:

Why churches should brace for a mass exodus of the faithful

The more conservative churches, anyway

By Damon Linker | 6:25am ET

 

Tweet

inShare2

350

Still a boys' club. (REUTERS/Alessandro Bianchi)

A

few weeks ago, I wrote about how the sweeping acceptance of gay marriage in recent years is owed in large part to Christianity. Rejecting the rigidly hierarchical and stratified societies of the ancient world, Jesus Christ taught the equal dignity of all persons, proclaimed that the meek shall inherit the earth, and declared that the last shall be first and the first shall be last. The Western world has been working out the logic of these subversive teachings ever since, with the institutional transformation of marriage being the latest, though surely not the last, example of its social, moral, and political consequences.

But what if the next institutions to be leveled by the Christian ideal of equality are the churches themselves?
I'm not talking about all of the churches. I mean those that have resisted reforming themselves in light of women's equality — and specifically those that resist this reform from the top down, with ecclesiastical authorities enforcing male-centered dogma and doctrine. That's mainly the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons).

A contrast with Protestantism and Judaism is instructive. There are, of course, many gender traditionalists in both faiths — evangelical Protestants and Orthodox Jews. But there is no overarching authority in either religion stipulating that traditionalism is the only valid form of belief. That means there are other options besides apostasy for dissenters. Don't like the traditionalism of your congregation? If you're a Protestant, you can find a more liberal, mainline alternative. If you're a Jew, look for a Conservative, Reform, or Reconstructionist synagogue.

But in both Catholicism and Mormonism, there's often nowhere else to go. It's either love it or leave it.
I think it's likely that over the coming years these churches are going to confront a stark choice: Reform themselves in light of equality or watch their parishioners opt for the exits. In droves. (MY   COMMENT: No statement on liberal Protestantism's especially the Anglican Communion's decline and fall and that people are leaving churches not for Christianity but for nothing at all--pure secularism!)

Think about it: Men and women in the pews now live in a world in which nearly all obstacles to women's equality have been torn down. Where once women were relegated to submissive and subservient roles in the family, now domestic gender egalitarianism is the norm. Where once women were excluded from participating in politics — including denial of the vote — such strictures are now unimaginable. Colleges and universities that were once all-male have become coed. Just about every career that once excluded women is now open to them — including that most traditionally masculine occupation, military service. And so forth.
None of this is new. But this is: The churches are now largely populated by people who have no living memory of it ever having been otherwise. Living, studying, working, and voting in a world marked by ever-increasing recognition of the equal dignity of men and women, they go to church on Sunday and confront our culture's last significant institutional vestige of inequality — when that very institution worships the God who is the ultimate source of our egalitarianism.

The contradictions are unsustainable.
And they've already started to have a destabilizing impact.

The Catholic situation is even more volatile. American Catholics have become accustomed to worshipping in a state of cognitive dissonance, with a majority rejecting the church's sexual teachings, and an overwhelming majority (something in the range of 98 percent) dismissing its strictures on artificial birth control. This is relatively easy to do, because these issues don't come up very often in Mass.

(Elio Ciol/Corbis)

By contrast, the majority of Catholics who support women's ordination are confronted on the altar with the all-male priesthood every time they go to church. At the moment, frustration about the issue is muted because Pope Francis has inspired so much good will among the faithful — and raised such high hopes for reform. That has given the church some breathing room.

But it isn't going to last. As I've argued at length, there is no indication that anything of doctrinal substance is going to change under the new pope — and least of all on the ordination of women, a subject on which Francis has explicitly endorsed Pope John Paul II's position, which unequivocally dismissed the possibility. Sooner or later — and probably sooner — egalitarian-minded Catholics are going to lose their patience with the hierarchy's unpersuasive defenses of the status quo.

And they are stunningly unpersuasive. Here is the argument in its entirety: Christ chose 12 men to be his apostles; they in turn chose men to help them spread the word of God; today's priests and bishops are the direct descendants of these original apostles; therefore, the church doesn't have the power to ordain women.

The church would be on much firmer ground if the Gospels recorded Christ explicitly stating that he chose men to be his apostles because it is God's will that only men can serve in that role. But of course he said no such thing. A weaker but at least potentially defensible argument would involve some sort of claim about the nature of women being incompatible with ordination.

As it is, Catholics are left with: This is the way we do it, because we've always done it that way, and we can't change, so drop it.

The ideal of equality has transformed the family, the workplace, the military, the political world, and countless other areas of life — and the church thinks it can hold back the tide with this?
I'll go out on a limb and predict that it isn't going to work.

When parishioners finally get fed up, the only remaining question will be whether the church will respond creatively and adapt to the demands of justice and equality — or if, instead, it will choose intransigence. And watch the People of God march right out the door.

 

Damon Linker

Damon Linker is a senior correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is also a consulting editor at the University of Pennsylvania Press, a contributing editor at The New Republic, and the author of The Theocons and The Religious Test.

A GOOD INTERVIEW ON POPE FRANCIS BUT WITH A PROGRESSIVE SLANT

Share on twBut these are no glory days for many of those who toil within the immense bureaucracy of the Vatican.

Pope Francis, the surprise choice of last year's papal conclave, continues his efforts to reform the church by pushing it away from unforgiving edicts, complex theology, and the Vatican itself.

Will the bureaucrats fight back? For perspective, I called author John Thavis, who divides his time between Minnesota and Rome. A former Rome bureau chief with the Catholic News Service, he wrote the bestselling 2013 book "The Vatican Diaries: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Power, Personalities and Politics at the Heart of the Catholic Church."

In our interview, Thavis talked about dissent within the Vatican, the Pope's focus on the mother of Jesus and the devil, and the prospects for a long-lasting legacy.
 
Q: Is there an internal old guard that's working against the Pope in the Vatican bureaucracy known as the Curia?
 
A: There is an old guard at the Vatican which encompasses much of the Curia, and they've lost control of the papacy.

I've been back to Rome quite often over the past year, and every time it has struck me how the level of enthusiasm around the world for this new Pope is definitely a notch or two above that inside the Vatican.

You hear this when you talk to people who have made their careers there. They're disoriented by this new Pope and apprehensive when they say things how the church needs to decentralize, how it's not some kind of royal court.

He's also made some pointed remarks about the culture inside the Vatican, and they're not very flattering to people. And they're concerned that his first step was to name eight cardinals, almost all of whom live outside of Rome. He's not turning to the usual suspects and asking them to reform themselves.
 
Q: Can the old guard resist the Pope's reforms?
 
A: They're uncomfortable, but I don't think they're in a position to resist this. The Pope is the Pope. He's made it clear he wants change, and he has a mandate from the conclave.

Also, the Vatican culture is still largely driven by the Pope. If you're a Curia agency, you don't embark on some major new project without his blessing. Few new projects have begun because he's essentially ignoring them.

That's about the worst thing that can happen to the bureaucracy. They tend to justify their own existence by creating documents and holding conferences, and I've seen a big drop-off in that kind of activity over the past year.

This reflects his agenda. He believes the church has spoken enough about its theology and should be less focused on the bureaucratic and theoretical aspects of the Catholic faith.
 
Q: Apart from his increased focus on tolerance, what other messages is Pope Francis sending to the world?
 
A: He's not an erudite theologian. Instead, he reflects a lot of the grassroots experience of Catholicism in Latin America. He believes in prayer, in the gospel, in the daily mass.

He wants to spread the message that you have been saved by Jesus: Come meet us, we are a joyful community.
 
Q: What about his focus on uniquely Catholic issues, like the intense focus on Mary?
 
A: His devotion to Mary, mother of God, is very deep. One of his first acts as pope was to go to a Roman church and pray before a statue of Mary.

Pope Francis does not approach Mary from a theological point of view. He approaches her as a mother and as a sacrificial figure, and that's probably different than how Pope Benedict would have written or spoken about Mary.

This resonates with a lot of Catholics around the world, especially in Latin America, where devotion to Mary is quite common.
 
Q: What does the Pope focus on when it comes to the concept of evil?
 
A: He emphasizes the devil. We don't talk much about the devil in Western society, but this pope talks about the devil quite frequently.

If you asked him if the devil is real, he'd say yes. If you asked theologians teaching in Western universities, their answers would be much more nuanced.

One of his first talks mentioned the strength of the devil. He recently said that you don't try to dialogue or argue with the devil, you don't try to compromise.
 
Q: What's coming up on his agenda?
 
A: In terms of his reforms, I think structural reforms are going to go forward quickly. I expect he'll have a project to overhaul and streamline the Roman Curia within the next year, which is very fast in Vatican time.

At the same time, he's already laid out a strategy for talking about some very tough pastoral issues.

They'll surface in October when he meets with bishops. He expects to hear their voices about problems like the situation with divorced and remarried Catholics who cannot accept communion. He wants the bishops to come up with some pastoral creativity here.

I expect they'll also discuss birth control. The Pope has said the Catholic teachings are fine, but he said we need to find a way to reach the Catholic couples who find it impossible to accept them.

He's willing to raise these issues, throw them out there and say, "We need to have a dialogue here." He realizes there are elephants in the room, and the church can't keep ignoring them.
 
Q: What's next for his presence on the world stage?
 
A: He's traveling to the Holy Land and to Asia, going to Korea in August. He knows that Asia represents the biggest potential growth area for the church in the coming 10 or 20 years, with or without China.
 
Q: What are the limits of his push for reform?
 
A: Gay marriage, women's ordination – he's not going to touch those teachings, nor the actual teaching on birth control.

There are other limits, too. From a US point of view, one is the Catholic sex abuse scandal.

This is not a burning issue on his agenda. He believes the church has turned the corner on this, that they've put in safeguards and don't need to talk about it all the time. That's struck some Catholics in this country as a kind of gap.

A big question is whether he brings women – and laypeople in general – into decision-making positions in the Vatican. There will be some disappointment if he streamlines the bureaucracy but keeps cardinals, priests and bishops running the show.
 
Q: How might he change things in the long term for the Catholic church?
 
A: If he enjoys a number of productive years on the throne, this could be a pontificate that transforms the Catholic church in many, many ways.

It depends on whether he gets the rest of the church's hierarchy on board and whether the things he says start to be heard at local parishes on Sundays.

It also depends on how many years he has to bring in his own people. Over the next five years, he will have a chance to name half of the cardinals who will vote in the next conclave. He'll also have had a chance to name one third or half the bishops around the world.

The more time he has to appoint people, the more his impact will be.

Randy Dotinga is a Monitor contributor.

TO BE FAITHFUL TO GOD, SCRIPTURE, TRADITION, NATURAL LAW AND THE MAGISTERIUM, DOESN'T THE CHURCH HAVE TO RISK MAKING THE WORLD AND WORLD GOVERNMENTS AS MAD AS HORNETS?

With the increase of secularism in world governments, executive, legislative and judicial, where religion is looked upon with suspicion when brought to the public square, don't we as Catholics need to prepare ourselves to deal with the marginalization, ridicule and outright hostility towards us a Catholics, if we are to be faithful Catholics? Isn't the trend with most governments to curtail religious freedom and keep religion closed behind the iconostasis of the Church's doors and property?

These are the things that government and secularism do not want in the public square and in fact government acting as the anti-Christ want to change in the Catholic Church and will continue to exert influence and power on the Church to do so acting as a false magisterium:

1. Artificial Contraception including unfettered access to abortion even in Catholic hospitals and institutions--the Church must  be pro-life and be martyred for it if necessary!

2. Promiscuity and same sex marriage--the Church must uphold the Faith and Morals of the Church which can also be found in natural law in terms of ordered sexuality according to the mind of God and what constitutes disordered sexuality. Marriage between one man and one woman and for a lifetime is ordered by God, man is to be obedient to God's plans and decrees!

3. Tied into the desire to promote disordered forms of sexuality and marriage is the corruption of the Catholic dogma of Holy Orders, the ordination of women--the Church must be unashamed and proclaim the natural law spousal relationship of Christ the Bridegroom to His bride the Church and that Holy Orders is a powerful and dogmatic sign of this in calling only men to this Sacrament.

4. Other perversions of natural law in terms of medical ethics, and manipulation of conception--the Church must base all her teachings on Scripture and Tradition and where these do not speak to modern problems of technology and science, then natural law must be the basis for moral decisions.

I am sure there are more things that the Catholic Church teaches and believes to be revealed by God that will continue to place us as Catholics on a collision course with secularism.

Are our Catholics today well informed and well formed in Catholicism to stand up and be martyred? Or will they go the way of Judas and Peter at the Passion?

WHAT'S UP WITH OPPOSITION TO TRADITIONAL (AS IN THE EXTRAORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS) ACTS OF PIETY AND SPIRITUALITY?

Jonathan Day who lives in London, England and writes comments on the Praywhine (I mean Praytell) blog writes the following about his experience of the Mass where he lives my comments follow:

"...I wonder how many “EF supporters” would welcome a Latin Mass of Paul VI.
The Mass that I described is not peculiar to our parish, by the way: you will find it on Sunday at several London churches, including Westminster Cathedral. 

These Masses have Latin, beautiful music (chant, but also baroque, classical and contemporary composers), bells and incense, and in general a very reverent style of celebration. However, in our parish:

- the priest faces the congregation throughout
- there are no birettas or maniples
- there is an exchange of the peace — it’s quiet and it ends quickly, but it’s there
- there are female altar servers
- there are extraordinary ministers of communion
- communion is received standing, in both kinds
- communicants can receive in the hand or on the tongue; about 1/3 of them choose the latter
- the canon of the Mass is said aloud (as the NO rubrics indicate)

I think this is typical for these solemn Latin Masses in London — Farm Street, St Mary’s Cadogan Street, the Cathedral, etc.. An exception is the London Oratory, where the style is much more “Tridentine”; most people who attend the Masses I described above tend to avoid the Oratory, for this reason.

There is an Association for Latin Liturgy in the UK (google it) promoting the Mass of Paul VI done entirely or partially in Latin. It maintains a directory of churches who provide this..."

MY COMMENTS: Jonathan Day likes Latin. So do I but in the Catholic Mass a little Latin goes a long way for me. I've always been an advocate for a controlled use of the vernacular in the EF Mass. I think a wonderful compromise would for all the changing parts of the EF Mass to be in the vernacular as an option, not a mandate, and everything else that doesn't change as is.

For me the problem with the Ordinary Form of the Mass is not so much the lack of Latin, although I would endorse a mandate of Latin only for the non-changing parts of the Mass, but a lack of reverence in so many parishes, and perhaps a majority of parishes in the USA.

The problem with my hypothesis of a lack of reverence in most Mass on any given Sunday in the USA is that the word reverence has been corrupted. Reverence is now seen as excitement, noise and entertainment as in the Los Angeles Religious Education Conference.

Let's look at the things that Jonathan seems to think is intrinsic to the Ordinary Form of the Mass and a part of this 44 year patrimony (as opposed to 1500 years prior to the 1970 Missal).

1. The priest facing the congregation--while in principle I don't think this is completely problematic, from the psychological and sociological point of view it is as it turns prayer to God the Father into prayer through the congregation as the congregation becomes the focus of the priest in proclaiming Christ's prayers to His Father through the power of the Holy Spirit. The facial expressions of the priest, being able to see what he looks like, what he is doing makes the Mass facing the people into a sort of clericalism that is missing in the ad orientem Mass. While facing the people isn't wrong, facing ad orientem need not have a phobic reaction as though this is something evil or bad or opposed to Vatican II. It isn't. Neither is the 1962 missal by the way!

2. No birettas or maniples, hatred of these two things is simply small minded, these are not required in the OF Mass and I've never worn a biretta in my life even at the EF Mass. But so what if these are used!

3. I have no problem with the exchange of peace that is noble in simplicity and sober; I have no problem without it. It is optional, but I always have it in my OF Masses and it is a part of the Solemn High EF Mass, but entirely clerical, although since we normally don't focus on the congregation and micro manage them during the EF Mass in terms of postures, who's to stop someone from exchanging the Kiss of Peace when the priest does with the deacon and subdeacon?

4. I have no problem in principle with altar girls. However, I think a good argument can be made of making way for a culture of recruiting young men from the ranks of altar boys and adult men servers. There was and is now a culture of this in the EF Mass once again. Priests are critical for the Church, not optional if we are to maintain our God-given sacramental system, especially the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Whatever can promote more men to consider the priesthood, the better!

5. I have no problem with Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion when needed (meaning there are no priests or deacons available for the various stations needed) nor any problem with the common chalice except for hygiene concerns. I am in favor of intinction in this regard which lessens the needs for hoards of non clerical Communion Ministers.

6. What in the name of God and all that is holy is the problem with receiving Holy Communion kneeling which has the longest and most revered tradition in the Latin Rite, Western Rite, of the Catholic Church? I find opposition to receiving Holy Communion kneeling irrational. I continue to believe that if no other change in the OF Mass was mandated except for kneeling for Holy Communion, we would see a tremendous increase in traditional piety and reverence for this Sacrament, received and adored. We have more than a few communicants who choose to kneel for Holy Communion. Some of these who kneel receive in the hand--and not on the run when they do so! But what is so horrible about receiving exclusively on the tongue. What problems does it present? How many problems are reported with Communion in the Hand, from a disregard completely for the particles of Holy Communion that remain on the hands to people taking the Host back to pew, home or thrown on the floor or shared with children who beg for a part?

7. I have no problem with multiple Eucharistic Prayers prayed in a voice tone that is heard, although it should be in softer tones in my humble opinion. I can see how the silent canon in the EF Mass can be very effective if people understand the spirituality and reverence behind it, as entering the Holy of Holies in a sort of a iconstasis way through silence rather than screen and doors blocking the view of what is going on in the sanctuary.  For me chanting the Eucharistic Prayer acts as a way of elevating this portion of the Mass over a loud proclamation. This prayer, as with all prayers, should be prayed humbly, quiet or in an low audible voice enhanced by a sound system.

I am sure Jonathan Day attends very reverent and beautiful OF Masses in Latin in London and that these are reverent. But just as reverent would these be with the things he seems to abhor and for no real good reason except that's how it has been done for 44 years.

O THE PAIN AND MISERY BUT A GOOD LENTEN PENANCE!

I had arthroscopic surgery yesterday on my right knee for a torn meniscus. I did great after the surgery but since mid morning today the pain has increased. I was given two different types of prescription pain killers but didn't want to take any but at 5pm I gave in and my knee still hurts but now I don't care! Weeeee! Please pray that I have a quick recovery. Not suppose to drive for four weeks! But that ain't happening!

TWO EXTREMES IN THE CHURCH

It is no secret that there are two small extremes in the Church. On the one hand there are a minority of traditionalists who despise the Ordinary Form of the Mass, yes, despise it, despite the fact that it is the means to the sacramental experience of the One Sacrifice of the Cross and the Risen Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity are given by God to us and received by us.

Then there are the small minority of progressives who despise the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, yes, despise it, despite the fact that it is the means to the sacramental experience of the One Sacrifice of the Cross and the Risen Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity are given by God to us and received by us.

How did this ungodly spirit of Vatican II, with a small "s" develop in the Church in both of these extremes in the Church? As Pope Francis has reiterated time and again ideologies usually are inspired of an evil spirit, the devil. I'm glad he's preaching on the devil again because the answer to so many sins and ideologies in the Church is the devil, especially when division is brought to the Church. How much division have we had since Vatican II, beginning with the Liturgy, then to the bishops and priests and then to religious life and then to rank and file laity guided by divided clergy, religious and their bishops?

Isn't it time to do both forms of the Mass in the best way possible and wait for the Vatican to revise the Ordinary Form as they have done so for the Anglican Ordinariate? Only the pope can approve of any revisions to the Ordinary Form or make any changes to the Extraordinary Form as Pope Benedict did with one of the prayers in the Good Friday Liturgy.

It is time to focus on Christ, His Sacrifice, His resurrection, His ascension, His giving of the Spirit, His mandate to spread the Faith to all the world and His return at our death and the end of time. Is there anything more important or is bickering about the Mass the substance of Catholic Faith?

THE SINGING NUN!

BOMBSHELL! POPE FRANCIS JUDGES AND CONDEMNS TO HELL UNREPENTANT MAFIA!

The Holy Father's hell fire and damnation talk is quite forcefully stated! He said if the mafia did not change they would go to HELL! Look here!

And this is the Bombshell:

“This life you are living will not bring you happiness or joy. The power and money you have obtained from so many dirty dealings, from mafia crimes, are covered in blood. You won’t be able to take it to the life beyond.” So “convert; there is still time to prevent yourselves from going to hell, which is what awaits you if you don’t change your path.” You have had a father and a mother; think of them and convert.”

When is the last time you heard any pope be so judgmental?  You heard today from Pope Francis! Kudos!

WOULD POPE FRANCIS NAME THIS MAN THE NEW ARCHBISHOP OF LIVERPOOL, ENGLAND?

WOULD POPE FRANCIS NAME A NEW ARCHBISHOP TO LIVERPOOL, ENGLAND WHO PROMOTES AND CELEBRATES THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS AND ENCOURAGES THE ORDINARY FORM MASS TO BE CELEBRATED IN LATIN AND AD ORIENTEM? YES!
Pope appoints Bishop Malcolm McMahon as Metropolitan Archbishop of Liverpool

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Friday named the current bishop of Nottingham, Malcolm Patrick McMahon to be the new Metropolitan Archbishop of Liverpool.

Archbishop-Elect McMahon’s Mass of Installation as Archbishop of Liverpool will be celebrated at 12.00 noon on Thursday 1 May 2014, the Feast of St Joseph the Worker, in the Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King, Liverpool.

Speaking at a press conference on Friday in the Metropolitan Cathedral, Archbishop-Elect McMahon said:

‘I am honoured and humbled to have been appointed by our Holy Father Pope Francis as Archbishop of Liverpool. I promise to do my best to repay the trust that he has placed in me, and which the priests and people of the Archdiocese of Liverpool are being asked to put in me from today.

‘I would like to thank Archbishop Patrick Kelly for his many years of service in this Archdiocese, and Bishop Tom Williams, who has been Apostolic Administrator since Archbishop Kelly’s retirement last year.

‘I am grateful to my family and friends, my Dominican brethren, and the priests and people of the Diocese of Nottingham for their support, guidance and friendship. I am naturally sorry to be leaving Nottingham, my home for the last thirteen years, and I will miss the people there; I hope that the prayers of my Diocese will come with me as I prepare to bid them a fond farewell shortly after Easter.

‘The Archdiocese of Liverpool has a long and proud history, rich in the tradition of missionary discipleship. We just have to think of the many priests, deacons, religious and laypeople who have done so much to proclaim the Kingdom of God and who gave their lives in his service, and the Archdiocese’s parishes, churches and schools are living witnesses to God’s love for us. The rich and living Catholic heritage of the Archdiocese should inspire us and challenge us, and I know that I can rely on the prayers and support of the Catholic faithful as I take up the challenge which lies ahead of me.

'I am also looking forward to working with my fellow Christians from other Churches and communities, people from all religious traditions, and civic and political leaders, building up the good relationships which already exist between us, in our endeavour to serve the common good.

‘From the day of my installation I will do my level best to lead, guide and serve the people of this great Archdiocese, in Liverpool, west Lancashire and the Isle of Man, Catholic and non-Catholic alike. There is much work to be done, because the challenges which we face as a community are real. But we are a people of hope; just as the Metropolitan Cathedral of Christ the King is visible for miles around, speaking to us of God’s presence in our midst, I pray that all of us in the Archdiocese of Liverpool will be living signs of God’s eternal love, proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ in all that we say and do.

‘I ask for the prayers of our heavenly patrons, Our Blessed Lady Immaculate, Saint Joseph and Saint Kentigern, and the entire Catholic community as I begin my ministry as Archbishop of Liverpool, and I assure you of my prayers in return. Let us make the words of Pope John Paul II, spoken here in the Metropolitan Cathedral in 1982, our own:

“Send forth your Spirit, O Lord! Renew our hearts and minds with the gifts of light and truth. Renew our homes and families with the gifts of unity and joy. Renew our cities and our countries with true justice and lasting peace.”’

BIOGRAPHY:

Born in London in June 1949, Malcolm Patrick McMahon was ordained to the priesthood in 1982. He was ordained bishop in the Cathedral Church of St Barnabas, Nottingham, on 8 December 2000.

In 1992 he was elected Prior Provincial of the English Province of Dominicans, based in London. He was re-elected in 1996 and held office until 2001.

Archbishop-Elect McMahon is Chair of the Bishops' Conference Department of Education and Formation and is National President of Pax Christi, the International Catholic Movement for Peace. He is also Chair of the Catholic Education Service for England and Wales (CESEW) and Chair of the board of trustees for the Catholic Trust for England and Wales.

Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/03/21/pope_appoints_bishop_malcolm_mcmahon_as_metropolitan_archbishop_of/en1-783405 

of the Vatican Radio website 

Bishop Malcolm McMahon, Bishop of Nottingham, it is said is to be named the new bishop of Liverpool, England and there are rumors that Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor wishes him to be his successor when he retires.

These are some of the things Bishop McMahon has said of the liturgy:


FOREWORD TO LATIN MISSAL FOR THE LAITY BY RT REV MALCOLM McMAHON, O.P.
Bishop of Nottingham

When I was a boy most people went to Mass with a missal in their hands, or devotional books like The Treasury of the Sacred Heart, which helped them to follow the Mass and to participate in it. There was a general trend in those days, going back to Pope St Pius X (d. 1914), urging the faithful to ‘participate actively’ in the Mass. In the 1960s, the Second Vatican Council (or Vatican II) took up and continued the same theme.

Back then, of course, Mass was in Latin. People used their missals to understand more deeply the prayers of the Mass, and they also knew how to sing in Latin. At the very least Latin is as important for our culture and worship as Hebrew is for the Jewish people. Since Vatican II, Mass in the vernacular language (English in our case) has become widespread, but it began as, and remains, a concession. Vatican II envisaged that the Mass would ordinarily be celebrated in Latin, and it stressed the need for the faithful to be able to say or sing together in Latin the parts of the Mass which pertain to them, and it commended the use of Gregorian chant, saying that it should be given pride of place in liturgical functions.

More recently, in the autumn of 2005, bishops from around the world gathered in Rome for an Extraordinary Synod to mark the end of the Year of the Eucharist. The bishops put a series of suggestions to Pope Benedict, one of which proposed that Mass at international gatherings should be in Latin, and ‘that the possibility of educating the faithful in this way [should] not be overlooked.’ The pope responded with his exhortation Sacramentum caritatis in 2007 in which he endorsed this particular proposition in its entirety. Many of our parishes are fortunate to be able to welcome Catholics from all over the globe and from a wide range of language groups, making Mass often a truly international gathering which manifests the catholicity of our Church. Many of our parishioners are fortunate enough to be able to travel abroad, going to Mass at international gatherings. On these occasions the catholic, i.e. universal, nature of the Church becomes especially apparent, and it is most appropriate to celebrate this by the use of Latin, the official and universal language in the Western Church, and to sing our timeless heritage of Gregorian chant.

It is a mistake to assume that the Mass should be translated into simple English, because the Mass never is and never can be fully understood. Even a translation should give us a glimpse of the unsearchable beauty of God. The Mass is a mystery whose depths we can never plumb, whose treasures we can never exhaust, all the while drawing more riches and grace for us. Pope Benedict reminds us that it is God’s gift and God’s work, or it is nothing at all. To emphasize the central position of Christ in the Mass, the Pope asks us to ‘turn towards the Lord’, Conversi ad Dominum – the ancient call to prayer in the early Church:

‘The idea that the priest and people should stare at one another during prayer was born only in modern Christianity, and is completely alien to the ancient Church. The priest and people most certainly do not pray one to the other, but to the one Lord. Therefore, they stare in the same direction during prayer: either towards the east as a cosmic symbol of the Lord who comes, or, where this is not possible, towards the image of Christ in the apse, towards a crucifix, or simply towards the heavens, as our Lord Himself did in his priestly prayer the night before His Passion (cf. John 17.1). In the meantime the proposal made by me... is fortunately becoming more and more common: rather than proceeding with further transformations, simply to place the crucifix at the centre of the altar, which both priest and the faithful can face and be led in this way towards the Lord, whom everyone addresses in prayer together.’

The image of our crucified Lord on the altar does not obstruct the priest from the sight of the faithful, for they are not to look to the celebrant at that point in the Mass. The priest is not more important than the Lord; we are to turn our gaze towards the Lord. These are norms which should become widespread if we are to worship more in keeping with the mind of the Church, and expressed by Vatican II. Pope Benedict adds,

‘The Eucharistic celebration is enhanced when priests and liturgical leaders are committed to making known the current liturgical texts and norms. Perhaps we take it for granted that our ecclesial communities already know and appreciate these resources, but this is not always the case. These texts contain riches which have preserved and expressed the faith and experience of the People of God over its two thousand year history.’ (Sacramentum caritatis, 40)

For the faithful to participate actively at Mass, as has been mandated by successive popes as well as the Second Vatican Council, they must be familiar with the texts and chants. It is for this end that this book has been produced, and I warmly commend it.

Rt Rev Malcolm McMahon, O.P.
Bishop of Nottingham
Memorial of St Scholastica, 2010 

My Comments: If this man is named the new Archbishop of Liverpool, I suspect the more progressive types in the Church, those who like the liturgy as celebrated in Los Angeles last week for their so-called Religious Education Conference which they have the temerity to say is in continuity with the 1962 Missal, that they will say that Pope Francis is still just following the recommendations made to Pope Benedict as to whom will be bishops. They will say this even more than a year after Pope Francis election. 

I don't think so!

HAVEN'T I BEEN SAYING THIS ALL ALONG? DUH!

The National Catholic Register, which deserves it name, had a brief interview with Cardinal O'Malley. You can read the full interview by pressing here.

The Reporter, Joan Desmond, asked this question of the Cardinal:

Pope Francis has expressed sympathy for Catholics who cannot receive the Eucharist because they have divorced and remarried, and some German bishops say that Church teaching on the indissolubility of marriage should be modified. Can you give us any information on this issue, which will be addressed at the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on Marriage and the Family?

Cardinal O'Malley: The Church will not change her teaching on the indissolubility of marriage.

There will be an effort to help those people who have had a failed marriage and try to sift through ways [to consider what] can be done. The Holy Father is anxious to discuss that, but I think it is premature to make any forecast for how it will play out.

The simplification of the annulment process would be a wonderful first step for addressing a very crucial pastoral problem for the Church.

My Comments: What I have been saying all along is that the annulment procedure will be made more user friendly and that there will be a clarification on the Internal Forum which is penitential as it can only take place in the context of Confession and its seal but only after the External Forum is exhausted and inconclusive about the validity of the sacramental aspect of the marriage.

The internal forum, for better or worse, has been used by priests in this country for decades now and bishops don't normally offer any guidance on its use. This is a loose canon in the Church and it need more canonical definitions to avoid abuse but also to make clear it is available, but the circumstances need to be clear.

POPE BENEDICT AND POPE FRANCIS ON VATICAN II'S UNFINISHED BUSINESS 50 YEARS ON

I MUST SAY THAT I AM SYMPATHETIC TO HIS VIEWS ESPECIALLY HIS CRITQUE OF SOME TRADITIONALISTS WHO ARE SO NEGATIVE ABOUT POPE FRANCIS

I copy this from Rorate Caeli:

An Interview with Professor Mario Palmaro

by Lorenzo Prezzi

The Message to Traditionalists: 
“Spread the Faith in the World”

THE LOST OPPORTUNITY OF THE “LEFEBVRIANS”

Professsor Palmaro, you (and the ecclesial world you in some way interpret) rightly supported Pope Benedict’s attempt to bring into [full] communion the “schismatic” Lefebvrian movement. But in July 2012 when their General Chapter refused the invitation from the Holy See, what was your view on the matter? What do you think now of that attitude?

Even though I have never been part of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius (FSSPX) founded by Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, I had the fortune of getting to know them firsthand a few years ago. Together with the journalist Alessandro Gnocchi, we decided to go and see this world with our own eyes, and to describe it in two books and some articles. I must say that many prejudices that I had held turned out to be unfounded; I met very good priests, nuns and brothers dedicated to a serious experience of Catholic life, graced with openness and cordiality. I was struck very favorably by the figure of Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Bishop who leads the FSSPX - a good man of great faith. We discovered a world of lay faithful and priests who pray every day for the Pope, even if they have placed themselves in a definitive position of being critical especially with regard to the liturgy, religious liberty and ecumenism. We saw many young people, many religious vocations, many “normal” Catholic families who frequent the Fraternity. Priests in their cassocks, while walking the streets of Paris or Rome, were stopped by people asking them for comfort and hope.

We are well-acquainted with the polymorphism of the contemporary Church in the world, which is to say that nowadays calling yourself Catholic is not the same as following the same doctrine; heterodoxy is greatly diffused and there are nuns, priests and theologians who openly contest or deny portions of Catholic doctrine. For this reason, we asked ourselves: how is it possible that there is room for everyone in the Church except these brothers and sisters who are Catholic in every way and are absolutely faithful to 20 of all the 21 councils which have taken place in the course of Catholic history?

While we were writing the first book, news arrived about the revocation of the excommunications through Pope Benedict XVI’s historical decision. What remained at that point was the canonical regularization of the Fraternity. Pope Benedict held this reconciliation dearly and it has yet to be concretized. I maintain that Benedict’s pontificate was a historical opportunity for full reconciliation, and it was a real shame to let this train pass. I have always sustained that the FSSPX must do all that is possible for their canonical regularization, but I would add that Rome has to offer Monsignor Fellay and his faithful the guarantee of respect and freedom, above all in the celebration of the Vetus Ordo and in the doctrine that is normally taught within the Fraternity’s seminaries, the perennial one.

DEFENSIVE AGGRESSIVENESS

The full support towards Pope Benedict XVI does not seem to be carried out now with Pope Francis. Are popes accepted or are they “chosen”? What does the papacy represent today?

The fact that a pope is “liked” by people is completely irrelevant to the two-thousand-year logic of the Church: the pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth and he has to please Our Lord. This means that the exercise of his power is not absolute, but is subordinate to the teaching of Christ, which is found in the Catholic Church, in Her Tradition and fostered by the life of Grace through the Sacraments.

Now, this means that the pope himself can be judged and criticized by the [ordinary] Catholic, on the condition that this happens in the perspective of love for the truth, and that as a criteria of reference, Tradition and the Magisterium are used. A pope contradicting a predecessor in matters of faith and morals has to, without question, be criticized. 

We must distrust both the worldly logic where the pope is judged by democratic criteria which satisfies the majority, and the temptation to “papolatry” according to which “the pope is always right.” Furthermore, for decades now we have become used to criticizing many popes from the past in a destructive manner, exhibiting scarce historiographic seriousness; well then, we don’t see why reigning popes or the most recent ones are spared in any way from any type of criticism. If Boniface VII or Pius V are judged why not also judge Paul VI or Francis?

AGAINST MODERNISM

In the world of the sites (internet) and magazines on Tradition, of late, a frequent display of strong aggressiveness has been noted. Is it true? What are the causes? What do you think of this?

The behavior-problems in some tradition-associated people or entities is serious and cannot be denied. A truth presented or proposed without charity is a truth betrayed. Christ is our way, truth and life and therefore we must always take our example from Him, Who was always steadfast in the truth and invincible in charity. I believe the world of Tradition is sometimes sharp and polemical for three reasons: the first, is a certain syndrome of isolation, which renders [them] suspicious and vindictive, and manifests itself through personality problems; the second, is the genuine scandal that certain directions in contemporary Catholicism stir up in those who know the doctrinal teaching of the popes and the Church prior to Vatican II; the third, for the lack of charity that official Catholicism has shown to these brothers, who are apostrophized with contempt as “traditionalists” or “Lefebvrians” forgetting that, anyway they are nearer the Church than the members of any other Christian confession ever could be or even any other religion. The official Catholic press does not even dedicate a line to this reality – which includes hundreds of priests and seminarians – and yet they might offer pages to thinkers that have nothing even vaguely Catholic about them.

Commenting on the Vatican instruction with regard to the Franciscans of the Immaculate, you invoked conscientious objection for the religious as to the liturgical indications. In what way [then] must the religious obey their spiritual family? How do you place conscientious objection in the tradition of the Syllabus?

The issue of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, is in my view very sad. It concerns provisions made by an external commissioner and decided upon by Rome in unusual haste and with equally unexplainable severity. Since I know this religious family very well, I find this decision to be completely unjustifiable and [so] along with other three scholars I presented a sort of appeal to the Vatican.

In synthesis, I remind you, that the provisions “remove” the founder, and forbid the celebration of the Old Rite to all of the priests in the Congregation, [this] in manifest contradiction to what was established by Benedict XVI in his Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum. You are right: the resistance to an order from legitimate authority always poses problems for the Christian, even more so if he is a member of a religious family. Nonetheless, in this case there are some aspects clearly unacceptable, and I maintain that the priests of the Franciscans of the Immaculate should continue to celebrate the Mass in the Extraordinary Form of the Vetus Ordo, securing that bi-ritualism which I know was the normal practice for the Friars. I would add, in a Church shaken by thousands of problems and rebellions where glorious congregations are dying out for lack of vocations, it is not good to see the Franciscans of the Immaculate being hit like this as they instead, have abundant vocations all over the world.

In your opinion, what are the most evident limits of the “conciliar” (or “liberal” if you wish) Catholic sensibility? What are its most obvious weaknesses?

In my view, the fundamental problem is its relationship with the world, marked by an attitude of subjection and dependency, almost as if the Church must adapt Herself to the whims of men, when instead we know that it is man who needs to adapt to the will of Christ, the King of history and the universe. When Pius X harshly attacked Modernism, he wanted to ward off this mortal temptation to Catholicism: the changing of doctrine to go along with the spirit of the world. Given that humanity has been prey to the process of dissolution which began with the French Revolution (followed by modernity and post-modernity) the Church is more than ever called to resist that spirit of the world. Many choices made by the Church in the last 50 years are instead the symptom of giving in [to it]: the liturgical reform, which constructed a Mass for contemporary sensibilities by destroying a Rite in force for centuries, orienting everything towards the word, the assembly, participation, [while] mortifying the centrality of the Sacrifice; the insistence on the universal priesthood, which has devalued the ministerial priesthood, disheartening generations of priests and bringing on an unprecedented crisis in vocations; “sacred” architecture which built anti-liturgical monsters; the de facto abolition of the Four Last Things, when the theme of the salvation of souls (and the risk of eternal damnation) is the only supernatural subject matter which differentiates the Church from a philanthropic agency; and so forth.

BECOMING SAINTS

Believers are united on the essential and are divided on controversial issues. Everyone, however, is called to respect and accompany those who are burdened by suffering and the fatigues of life. How does one’s spiritual sensibilities change when suffering passes through the days with violence, as is happening to you?

The first thing that shakes you up about sickness is that it hits us without any warning and at a time we do not decide. We are at the mercy of events, and we can do nothing but accept them. Grave illness obliges one to become aware that we are truly mortal; even if death is the most certain thing in the world, modern man tends to live as if he should never die.

In sickness you understand for the first time that life on earth is but a breath, you recognize with bitterness that you have not made it that masterpiece of holiness God had wanted. You experience a profound nostalgia for the good that you could have done and for the bad that you could have avoided. You look at the Crucifix and you understand that this is the heart of the Faith; without sacrifice Catholicism wouldn’t exist. Then you thank God for having made you a Catholic, a “little ” Catholic, a sinner, but who has an attentive Mother in the Church. So, grave sickness is a time of grace, but often the vices and miseries that have accompanied us in life remain, or even increase [during it]. It is as if the agony has already begun, and there is a battle going on for the destiny of my soul, because nobody can be sure of their own salvation.

On the other hand, this sickness has allowed me to discover a remarkable amount of people who love and pray for me; families who recite the rosary in the evening with their children for my recovery. I have no words to describe the beauty of this experience which is an anticipation of the love of God and eternity itself. The greatest suffering I experience is the idea of having to leave this world which I am so fond of and is so beautiful even if also so tragic; of having to leave many friends and relatives; but most of all, of having to leave my wife and children who are still at a tender age.

Sometimes I imagine my home, my empty study, and the life that will continue there even if I am no longer present. It is a scene that hurts, but it is extremely realistic: it makes me realize what a useless servant I have been, and that all the books I have written, the conferences and articles, are nothing but straw. But my hope is in the mercy of the Lord, and in the fact that others will pick up part of my aspirations and battles and will continue on in “the ancient duel”.

[Source: Settimana (Ed. Dehoniane), October 27, 2013, issue n. 38/2013, p. 12-13. Translation: Contributor Francesca Romana.]

Posted by New Catholic at 3/19/2014 09:19:00 PM