Why do you think Commonweal columnist Rita Ferrone wants Cardinal Sarah sacked?

"Off with His Head!" (New Oxford Notes, July-August 2018)



Rita Ferrone wants Robert Cardinal Sarah fired. Immediately. Pope Francis can’t afford to leave this man in his post as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments any longer. Why? Because, Ferrone says, Sarah “does not speak for the mainstream of the church.”

Ferrone calls for the cardinal’s head in a column for Commonweal (Mar. 23). And she doesn’t hold back. She accuses the Church’s top-most authority on matters liturgical of “either appalling ignorance of or an indifference to liturgical history.” She says he is guilty of “promoting distrust and resistance to the mainstream liturgical reform” of Vatican II. Sarah’s crime? He hasn’t shown sufficient enthusiasm for the modern practice of receiving Communion in the hand.

Ferrone’s dander was raised by a preface Sarah wrote to a new book by Fr. Federico Bortoli, an Italian priest, titled La Distribuzione della Comunione sulla Mano: Profili Storici, Giuridici e Pastorali (The Distribution of Communion in the Hand: A Historical, Juridical, and Pastoral Overview). Specifically, she takes exception to this passage:

[W]e can understand how the most insidious diabolical attack consists in trying to extinguish faith in the Eucharist, sowing errors and favoring an unsuitable manner of receiving it. Truly the war between Michael and his Angels on one side, and Lucifer on the other, continues in the heart of the faithful: Satan’s target is the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated host…. Why do we insist on communicating, standing, in the hand? Why this attitude of lack of submission to the signs of God?

Ferrone interprets Cardinal Sarah as claiming that those who take Communion in the hand while standing “are on the side of Lucifer in the great cosmic struggle of good against evil.” What chutzpah! And she rightly identifies this type of “extreme rhetoric” as one of the standard contentions of radical traditionalists of the SSPX variety.

Ferrone points out that most Catholics don’t “insist” on receiving Communion in this manner; doing so isn’t some sort of conscious act of rebellion against tradition. They’re doing what they’ve grown accustomed to doing, and what nearly everybody else in the Church is doing too and have done for the better part of their lives. You know, “when in Rome….”

Besides, the Church officially permits Communion in the hand. It “arose in apostolic times and endured for centuries,” Ferrone says. Sarah might prefer the “more recent historical practice” of receiving Communion on the tongue while kneeling, but the “venerable antiquity” of receiving in the hand while standing should “commend the practice to him as holy.” But no. Instead, Sarah “manages to slander Christians of the first millennium,” as well as those of the third.

Shame, shame, shame on Cardinal Sarah!

Whoa, hold on a minute. Before we join Commonweal’s kick-him-out chorus, let’s dig a little deeper.

Is there a connection? Our attitude toward the fragile unresistance of the Host and toward the defenseless vulnerability of the unborn infant?

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" (Assumption Grotto News, February 5, 2017):

Without veering into the arena of political commentary, allow me to say that Catholics ought to rejoice mightily that President Trump has made explicit and significant advances in the direction of the pro-life movement, to the extent that I feel real shame for those politicians who identify themselves as Catholics (though that may be a ploy, especially since they may in fact be excommunicated from the Church due to their pro-abortion voting) and who have been thus complicit in the abortion industry. Now here comes a non-Catholic man, who has no magisterium of the Church to direct him, and is the first president ot be unequivocally pro-life, and is actually doing something effective to prove his convictions.

As is often and rightly said, there will be no change in the crimes of abortion in the USA until there is a change of people's minds and a conversion of souls. The Church exists for this purpose. Faithful Catholics, however, have often been criticized for an over-emphasis on this "one issue." How any rational person can assume that the abortion problem is too important in political life is bewildering. Of all other social concerns which clamor for attention and remedy, can there be anything more urgent than to stop the willful killing of the innocent human lives of babies? Select any infant of choice and ask yourself the question whether it is a right to kill this human being. It is either madness or else demonic obsession that would admit the concession of such an evil. This "one issue" is of far, far greater importance than anything else, sins of sacrilege apart. Why are Catholics not united and vociferous in their opposition to these crimes against God and humanity? That needs to be probed.

Mother -- and now Saint -- Teresa of Calcutta is once reported to have said that abortion will not cease in our country until there's an end to the sacrilegious reception of Holy Communion -- i.e., until Catholics reform in respect to the Holy of Holies. If that assessment be correct, Catholics who commit sacrilege are the reason why abortion is still legal, or at least is widely practiced in our country! That may seem an absurd assertion, but there is some logic to it. If God Incarnate, truly present in the Holy Sacrament, is mishandled, received in a state of mortal sin, neglected, ignored, and profaned; if particles of the Blessed Sacrament (each of which carries the divine presence) are strewn on altar tops, flaked off the palm of the hands, and trampled upon the carpets of the churches (note that I speak here of the mistreatment of the very Son of God!), should we expect respect for mere human life? The easy fragility and unresistance of the Host has an analogous relation to the defenselessness and vulnerability of the pre-natal, infant life. If one can with impunity defile the one, why can one not slaughter the other?

While the reception of Holy Communion and the sacred liturgy are distinct topics they are related. Unless the people of the Church recover the true faith in its fullness, rediscover a rightful fear of the Lord, and conduct themselves reverently at Mass, there can be little hope for ending sacrilege and, by extension, there can be meager prospect for ending the abortion holocaust.

This is the Fatima centenary. The principal seer of the Blessed Virgin, Sister Lucia, was told to make prayers of reparation -- penitential compensation -- for "outrages, sacrileges, and indifference" which gravely offend God. This was told in 1917. We've made a long moral plunge since that time. Should we not make it our business to make such acts of 'apology' (for lack of a better synonym) to our Lord in the Holy Sacrament for all the mistreatment He has been receiving?

If you should ever lack intentions for your participation in Holy Mass or your reception of Holy Communions, know that making prayers of reparation to the offended God is a most noble objective. And, needless to add, making the most reverent, loving, and worthy reception of your Communion is an excellent way to advance your own spiritual life, to give honor to our affronted Lord, and ... here it is ... to contribute no small part to ending the horror of Abortion USA.

Two demurrals from Mirus

Edward Peters, "My I demur re Mirus this once?" (In the Light of the Law, September 13, 2016):

Pretty much everything Dr. Jeff Mirus writes is worth reading, but his latest column, correctly defending Pope Francis against charges of heresy based on his endorsement of the Buenos Aires Directive, overstates the argument in one small, technical regard and, I think, misses a larger, more important point in another. I basically agree with everything Mirus wrote, except as follows. Read more >>

Dr. John Lamont, "Dr. Jeffrey Mirus on marriage and the Eucharist" - via "Op-Ed: 'Adultery as a venial sin' -- and other absurdities of trying to defend the indefensible Francis Doctrine" (Rorate Caeli, September 15, 2016):

Dr. Jeffrey Mirus has recently published an article entitled ‘Not heretical: Pope Francis’ approval of the Argentine bishops’ policy on invalid marriages’ [available here]. The object of this article is to argue that Pope Francis has not asserted or endorsed heresy in approving of a recent document issued by some Argentinian bishops concerning the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. To justify this conclusion, Dr. Mirus makes a number of claims about moral behaviour and the discipline of the sacraments.

These claims urgently need to be addressed. Read more >>

Related: And now a response from Dr. Jeff Mirus, "Papal governance by sleight-of-hand strains my grasp of culpability and Canon Law" (CatholicCulture.org, September 16, 2016).

Fr. Perrone: Primavera, springtime, children, the Blessed Virgin, irrepressible hope of faith, and grand feast days of spring

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" [temporary link] (Assumption Grotto News, May 8, 2016):

Primavera - literally, 'the first green' -- is Springtime. Nature shows her loveliest, maidenly beauty at this very time. The famous, mysterious paintings by Botticelli comes to mind when I see the enticing, chaste blossoms of early spring. A tree just outside the rectory show herself at the most arresting just now. That tree -- which perhaps should be removed because its jumbled roots entangle the ground and stress the rectory's basement walls -- I can't get myself to take down simply because at this very time of year she dazzles me with her beauty. Ah! the season of love! Holy Church, seizing the opportunity, makes us look upon the loveliness of the Virgin Mary, She whose month this is. Both virginal and yet maternally fruitful, Holy Mary is the apogee of created beauty, of holiness and supernatural grace. Because this is the month of Mary we have the May Crowning today and the First Communion of our children. The comeliness of innocence is difficult to speak of in words but so readily recognized when seen. Children, springtime, Virgin Mary -- the three go naturally together, as various facets of this singular, perennially youthful manifestation of beauty.


It would be easy to fall prey to pessimism or cynicism over so many bad things happening in our world these days. It's a temptation to which we must not yield, not even an inch. Just as nature obstinately puts forth her glories in spring, just as the emergence of the sun causes life daily to spring up, just so God bestows the marvels of supernatural blessings upon His undeserving children day after day. We need to pull ourselves out of any self-indulgent tendencies towards moroseness about the many things we might (justly) find worthy of complaint and, with St. Paul, look above, upon the things of heaven, rather than down upon the base, sorroful things here below. I'm not suggesting we acquire the technique of "positive thinking" -- a vain, secularist, stupid exercise -- but that we recognize the truth of stubbornly insistent goodness in prevailing over evil, of beauty over vulgarity. In terms of our faith, it's the truth of Christ's victory over the devil, even though he, in the short run, is given his allotted time and influence to fulfil his providential role in making us struggle, fight, for the truth and for the kingdom of God so that by contending with him we might merit for ourselves a place in heaven.

Be ye then of good cheer, though you will surely have a share in the woes of this life. Spring is a reminder of the good things of God and an invitation to look above the many wicked beckonings of the evil one, and to persevere in hope. The Virgin Mary is the Mother of holy hope, Mater sanctae spei. We turn to Her with confident love, She who never abandons us "unaided" (as the Memorare reminds us).

Some great days just ahead of us. Next Sunday will be Pentecost, that once minor Jewish festival forever converted into a Christian feast of momentous significance through the coming of the Holy Spirit. We will celebrate the day with full solemnity at the 9:30 Solemn High Mass with the 'Credo' Mass by Mozart. The Men's League will gather to appear before the Eucharistic Lord this Saturday at 6:30 a.m. adoring and petitioning Him for things many and untold. The Sacrament of Confirmation will be conferred not this Tuesday but one week from then -- on the 17th. Our friend, Father Aiden Logan will return here to give a talk on patriotism (a much neglected topic) on May 22 in a fundraising event for the K of C. Then, of top-drawer significance, Corpus Christi Sunday will greet us on May 29th with its stirring, inspiring prayers and chants composed by St. Thomas Aquinas. This day concludes with the Eucharistic Procession and the four-fold blessing with the Blessed Sacrament. Concerning which I want to sent out a general call to our parishioners to see if any families (or individuals) would set up and adorn the outdoor altars for Corpus Christi Sunday, altars upon which the Lord will repose. We need four such altars by four families or persons. It's an honor for anyone to undertake this, a task which is -- I think -- not too onerous and immensely rewarding. If you think you'd like to do this for the Lord and for your parishioners, please call the rectory soon and let us know. You'll be given particulars about what's to be done and what the parish will supply for you.


In fine I should mention the feast of the Sacred Heart June 3 which we will observe with all due solemnity this year, accompanied by Schubert's Mass in G Minor at the 7:00 evening Mass; the special Mass at 9:30 a.m. June 5, the day of Canonization of Saint-elect Stanislaus Popcaynski, founder of the Marians, whereupon the Schubert Mass will again be performed and the image of the Saint will be blessed, and an open banquet will be offered to all in the gym following the Mass. (More about that day later.)

For the moment, however, delight in the pleasant expectation of these joyful celebrations in these most lovely days of Primavera.

Fr. Perrone

Just what the German hierarchy has been waiting for

Sandro Magister, "The German Option of the Argentine Pope" (www.chiesa, April 28, 2016): "Cardinal Kasper and the progressive wing of the Church of Germany have gotten what they wanted. On communion for the divorced and remarried, Francis is on their side. He made up his mind a while ago, and has acted accordingly."

Although this should go without saying ...

As Canonist Ed Peters points out, "The law before 'Amoris' is the law after" (In the Light of the Law, April 10, 2016):

Holy Communion is to be withheld from divorced-and-remarried Catholics in virtue of Canon 915 which, as has been explained countless times, does not require Catholic ministers to read the souls of would-be communicants, but rather, directs ministers to withhold holy Communion from those who, as an external and observable matter, “obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin”. The Catechism of the Catholic Church 2384 describes civil remarriage after divorce as “public and permanent adultery” (something obviously gravely sinful), so, if Francis had wanted to authorize the administration of holy Communion to divorced-and-remarried Catholics (and he did not want to repudiate CCC 2384, 1650, etc.) he would have had to have wrought a change in the law contained in Canon 915.

Read more >>

Rod Dreher: "Did you ever think you would live to see this? The Pope is refuting the magisterial teaching of his own Church... Poor historical, sacramental Catholicism."

I'm not sure I'd put it quite like that, but here's Rod Dreher, commenting on the Pope cracking the door to Lutheran communion (American Conservative, November 16, 2015):

Francis continues to, um, amaze. From Rocco Palma’s report on the Pope’s meeting with Lutherans in Rome on Sunday, as part of an ecumenical dialogue: 

In an answer that’s almost certain to resonate broadly across the ecumenical scene (and elsewhere, quite possibly show his hand on his intended course following last month’s Synod on the Family), the pontiff – clearly wrestling with the plea – pointedly appealed less to the standard prohibition of the Eucharist for Protestant communities than to the woman’s discernment in conscience.

As if to reinforce the point, in a move clearly decided in advance, Francis publicly presented the pastor with a chalice which appeared identical to the ones the Pope gave the archbishops of Washington, New York and Philadelphia during his late September US trip. 

Quoting from his answer to a question posed by a Lutheran woman married to a Catholic man, about when she and her husband can expect to receive holy communion together (it is forbidden in the Catholic Church for non-Catholics — Orthodox Christians excepted under certain conditions — to receive communion): 

I can only respond to your question with a question: what can I do with my husband that the Lord’s Supper might accompany me on my path? It’s a problem that each must answer [for themselves], but a pastor-friend once told me that “We believe that the Lord is present there, he is present” – you believe that the Lord is present. And what’s the difference? There are explanations, interpretations, but life is bigger than explanations and interpretations. Always refer back to your baptism – one faith, one baptism, one Lord: this Paul tells us; and then consequences come later.

I would never dare to give permission to do this, because it’s not my own competence. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and then go forward. [Pauses] And I wouldn’t dare – I don’t dare say anything more. 

In other words: let your conscience be your guide. Who is the Pope to judge? 

It is not in the competence of the pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church to say that a Protestant cannot receive communion in a Catholic mass Really? 

Here Dreher quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1400, which says:

1400 Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, “have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.” It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, “when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory.”

Dreher observes the shift from this:

“Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible” is now “One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and then go forward.”

Of course he “would never dare to give permission to do this,” the Jesuit pope said, Jesuitically, but said so in winking at doing that very thing. Hard to avoid the conclusion that Pope Francis just effectively rewrote the Catechism, and destroyed a Eucharistic discipline that has existed since the Reformation. Did you ever think you would live to see this? The Pope is refuting the magisterial teaching of his own Church, and not on a small matter either.

Here is how one reader sees the matter: "In an era when everything is becoming up for grabs, the Pope adds to the disorientation. It is not one big thing, but all the combined little things that make Francis a catastrophe."

Picking one's way through the Synod aftermath

The diversity of perspectives is staggering:

• Edward Pentin, "Priestly Confraternity Grateful to Synod for Affirming Church Teaching" (National Catholic Register, November 4, 2015)
• Sandro Magister, "Synod of Discord. Toward a “De Facto Schism” in the Church?" (www.chiesa, November 4, 2015): "Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet lays bare the ambiguities of the synodal text. Which has not brought unity but has papered over the divisions. The conflict between 'hermeneutic of continuity' and 'hermeneutic of rupture.' The dilemma for Francis"
• James Martin, S.J. "Top Five Accomplishments of the Synod on the Family" (American Media, October 28, 2015)
• Dr. Janet E. Smith, "What Comes After the Synod" (First Things, November 5, 2015)
• Taylor Marshall, "My 7 Point Wish List for a Catholic Synod of Family: An Earnest Challenge for Bishops and Priests" (Taylor Marshall, November 4, 2015)
• Adferto, "RORATE EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Athanasius Schneider reaction to Synod: Door to communion for divorced & remarried officially kicked open" (Rorate Caeli, November 4, 2015)
• Theodore Davey, "The internal forum" (The Tablet, July 27, 1991) [already back then!]
• "Church, Pope, and Gospel" (The Tablet, October 26, 1991)
• "A pastoral approach to remarried divorcees. Three German Catholic bishops" (The Tablet, September 25, 1993)
• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CONCERNING THE RECEPTION OF HOLY COMMUNION BY THE DIVORCED AND REMARRIED MEMBERS OF THE FAITHFUL" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, September 14, 1994)
• "Remarried divorcees 'must be celibate'" (The Tablet, February 20, 1999)
• Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts "Declaration: II. Concerning the Admission to Holy Communion of Faithful Who are Divorced and Remarried" (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, June 24, 2000)
• Christopher Lamb, "Communion: internal solution for divorcees that's already there" (The Tablet, October 22, 2015)
• Christa Pongratz-Lippitt, "Synod opened the door for those divorced and remarried, Kasper says" (National Catholic Reporter, November 4, 2015).

[Hat tip to Paul Borealis]

October Synod preview: turbulence ahead

Michael Voris, "The Curtain Rises" (Video + transcript) (Church Militant, October 2, 2015):

It's almost here. The curtain is beginning to rise on the Synod Showdown. By this weekend all the delegates will be assembled in Rome, and the great clash will be underway.

Of course, those clerics and their fan boys who are agitating for change keep dismissing all the talk of showdown and clashes and arguments. They want to downplay it as much as possible. But for those who have been paying close attention to all the behind-the-scenes drama (and the not-so-behind-the-scenes drama), it's very clear that the dynamite has been laid, and all that's left is for the match to be struck.

There are cardinals and bishops and archbishops present in Rome who have made quite clear that they support giving Holy Communion to divorced and remarried Catholics. There are others who have openly lobbied for not only homosexuality to be welcomed and celebrated as a great gift to the Church, but others who actually have publicly stated the Church should begin marrying homosexual men and women. These agitators are looking for a way to overthrow Church teaching in practice while keeping up the appearance, at least in most cases, of not hurting it.

Read More, or watch the video >>

Related:

• "Gay CDF Priest 'Comes Out,' Declares Church Must Change" (CM, October 3, 2015).
  
• "Developing: Vatican Responds to Gay CDF Priest" (CM, October 3, 2015)

Eberhard Schockenhoff: The heterodox theologian behind the German bishops' revisionism

Our friend Monica Miller did some digging on the internet to find works by the German moral theologian Eberhard Schockenhoff, who is apparently on the German bishops' "A" list when it comes to advising them. She found the following items, which may be helpful in seeing what the Church is up against. His book, Natural Law and Human Dignity: Universal Ethics in an Historical World(Washington, DC: Catholic University Press, 2003), is not very old, but it has been said of him that he believes the Church should abandon Natural Law ethics and ambrace a new model of ethics based on human experience. His views on this were out there since 2012.

Here's the publisher's summary of his book:

Do human rights apply only to a certain culture group or can they be demanded of all cultures and religions? This discussion about a common world ethos demonstrates how relevant and explosive that question is. In his study of ethical relativism and historical thinking, Eberhard Schockenhoff shows how the universal recognition of fundamental norms that guarantee the minimum conditions for human existence can be substantiated.

Dealing critically with the two most important branches of research in present-day moral theology―autonomous morality and teleological ethics―the author presents a new theological-ethical theory of natural law. Integrating the theory of practical reason and Aquinas' understanding of natural inclinations, Schockenhoff compares this synthesis to the insights of present-day anthropology. This method allows him to re-establish a connection to classical natural law ethics. In so doing, he indicates how ethics can fulfill its most important duty: to arrive at the recognition of anthropologically grounded material norms without falling prey to a logical error. According to Schockenhoff, claims of natural law and of human rights formulate an indispensable minimum, while biblical ethics (the decalogue and the Sermon of the Mount) and the high ethos of the world religions point the way to an encompassing realization of the concept of the good life.

Renowned moral theologian Eberhard Schockenhoff is professor at Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg. He is the author of numerous works and managing editor of Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ethik. Brian McNeil is a parish priest in Munich and a translator of theological literature.

Also see the related article by Giacomo Galeazzi, "The Church should grant communion to divorced and remarried persons" (Vatican Insider, June 4, 2015):

"Divorced and remarried persons are entitled to receive communion." At the seminar in Salzburg by Austrian Catholic Action, the German theologian Eberhard Schockenhoff, a professor of moral theology at the University of Freiburg, has launched an appeal for a "theological re-evaluation " of divorced and remarried persons and a new way to interact with them by the Church. According to Schockenhoff, the Catholic news agency Adista reports, the Church must emphasize its readiness for reconciliation in the spirit of the biblical sources and the practice of the early Church, breaking away from an attitude of "moral condemnation" that provokes in the interested parties a "painful feeling of exclusion".

Benedict XVI himself admits that communion for divorced and remarried persons is an open question. He spoke about it in a meeting with the priests of the diocese of Aosta on July 25, 2005 and, more officially, in his speech to the Roman Rota, on 28 January 2006. Both times, the Pope urged them to "deepen" a particular case: the possible invalidity of a marriage in the Church celebrated without faith, for those who, having passed to a second union, have returned to the practice of Christian life and request communion. Read more >>

And here is a PDF file of an article by Schockenhoff interpreting St. Thomas Aquinas, "The Theological Virtue of Charity (IIa IIae, qq. 23-46)," translated by Grant Kaplan and Frederick G. Lawrence, a chapter a book edited by Stephen J. Pope, entitled The Ethics of Aquinas(Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2002), pp. 244-257.

The escape clause hear round the world ...

The underground correspondent we keep on retainer in an Atlantic seaboard city that knows how to keep its secrets, Guy Noir - Private Eye, just about lost it again.

Writing about a new post by D. G. Hart, a Calvinist who, he says, "continues to needle Catholics," he writes:

DG Hart continues to needle Catholics. He also continues to sound more sane and more Catholic than most Catholic commentators posting these days. At least in my book. The Gospel is NOT proclamation of a done deed, but the propostion of an offer to accept. Hence the momentousness of evangelization. Versus the commonly perceived triviality of the New Evangelization. I guess the new voices would have us believe Francis Xavier died on an island off of China telling people there they were already "mercy'd" and could chill. Somehow I doubt he would be down with that. But then he was blessed with not just holiness but also with basic common sense. Just saying... More pastoral pearls from the New Media false messiah that is John Allen's CRUX...

Here's Hart:

Don’t listen to the polls but only to Jesus except when he teaches about what will become of Jerusalem:


Q. Recent polls indicate that some 70 percent of Catholics in the United States (and 66 percent in Ireland) do not believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, but rather a symbolic presence.

I happen to be one of them. I am Jesuit-educated, and I have written to my pastor with my question but have been greeted with stone silence. If these polls are even halfway true, why is this elephant in the room never addressed or even mentioned in church? Are we all condemned to hell for this belief? (Duxbury, Massachusetts)

A. The beliefs of the Catholic Church are not determined by plebiscite. That is to say, what is fundamental in determining the core content of the Catholic faith is not how people feel, but what Jesus said. And for that, we go to the sixth chapter of John’s Gospel.

Jesus has just multiplied the loaves and the fish to feed 5,000 people, and the crowds are in awe. The very next day, Jesus says something that turns out to be very controversial (Jn 6:35, 51): “I am the bread of life … the living bread that came down from heaven … and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” People are shocked and ask: “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?” (Jn 6:52).

Even his followers are horrified. Christ has every opportunity to pull back and explain. “Wait,” he might have said, “I was only speaking figuratively.”

Instead, he presses the point, watching as people start to drift away: “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him” (Jn 6:54-56).

Later, at the Last Supper, Jesus reaffirms this teaching in language that is virtually identical.

Polling data varies widely regarding this teaching. The National Catholic Reporter, for example, found in a 2011 survey that 63 percent of adult Catholics believe that “at the consecration during a Catholic Mass, the bread and wine really become the body and blood of Jesus Christ.”

But as I said at the start, polling data is largely irrelevant, except to this extent (as your question suggests): If a fair number of Catholics do not subscribe to a long-held and central article of faith, the Church should doubtless do more to proclaim and explain that teaching.

As to your last line, about the consequences of not believing, one thing is certain: No one is going to hell who sincerely  follows the dictates of his own properly formed conscience [Huh?! This is as obscure as the annulment doctrine . Just what constitutes salvation anyway, 'good' intent? Most apparently so.] So why worry about that? Why not focus instead on determining what Jesus taught?


So bishops should teach what the Bible teaches or [should] church members [...] follow their [own properly formed] consciences? No wonder the polls’ results and authority.

The inevitable showdown over Communion for couples in irregular relationships

Paul Vallely, Visiting Professor in Public Ethics at the University of Chester and Senior Fellow at the Brooks World Poverty Institute at the University of Manchester, is an admirer of Pope Francis. His significantly-titled Pope Francis: Untying the Knots: The Struggle for the Soul of Catholicism(London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013) has been translated into four other languages.

In his book (pp. 130-131), Vallely relates some details that bear on how Pope Francis may understand the issues of Holy Communion for the divorced and re-married, and other couples in "irregular" situations. Vallely relates that in Argentina, very little ado is made over distributing Holy Communion to such individuals. Fr. Augusto Zampini, a diocesan priest in Buenos Aires, writes:

“In Buenos Aires [Bergoglio] came across more concrete problems. When you’re working in a shanty town, 90 percent of your congregation are single or divorced. You have to learn that Communion for the divorced and remarried is not an issue there. Everyone takes Communion.... Bergoglio never altered his doctrinal orthodoxy on such matters but he did not allow dogma to overrule the priority of pastoral concern.”

Vallely then quotes Buenos Aires ‘slum’ priest Father Juan Isasmendi, who said “[Bergoglio] was never rigid about the small and stupid stuff, because he was interested in something deeper.”

On the one hand, the generous takeaway from this will be that the man who became Pope Francis has always had a generous "heart for the poor and marginalized." On the other hand, trying to implement such a "pastoral" policy in the Church at large will inevitably lead to conflict with those still willing to defend the inviolability of Church doctrine.

Cardinal Burke, for example, in his February 8 interview that was broadcast on France 2 (see full translation HERE), responded to the question, “If Pope Francis insists on this path, what will you do?” by declaring: "I will resist. I cannot do anything else."

[Hat tip to J.V.]

Extraordinary Community News: Fasting from Communion, Spiritual Communion, Month of Plenary Indulgences, Upcoming Masses

"I will go in unto the Altar of God
To God, Who giveth joy to my youth"
Tridentine Community News (October 26, 2014):

Fasting from Holy Communion: The Proposal and a Possible Alternative

On Sunday, October 19, Assumption Grotto Pastor Fr. Eduard Perrone published a thought-provoking column in his parish bulletin: He suggested that to help Catholics grow in devotion to the Holy Eucharist, they might consider abstaining from receiving Holy Communion from a while. Such an action would guard against complacency in receiving the Blessed Sacrament by fostering a greater hunger and yearning to be united with our Lord in this precious gift.

Many Catholics would agree that even when one is in the state of grace, reception of Holy Communion can become routine. If one deems oneself unworthy to receive Communion, whether because of a state of serious sin or because one simply does not feel properly disposed that day, it is only natural at that point to feel a certain longing to receive the Blessed Sacrament. That is why Holy Mother Church has long recommended making an Act of Spiritual Communion under such circumstances.

While Fr. Perrone certainly makes an interesting and laudable point, this column would like to suggest an alternative means to increase one’s resolve to receive Holy Communion worthily and without complacency: Try making a commitment to gain a Plenary Indulgence for the Poor Souls in Purgatory [one per day may be gained] for every Holy Communion you receive. Associating some extra effort with each Holy Communion will help develop a stronger devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and a greater appreciation for the gift of receiving the Real Presence. It will simultaneously provide important assistance to the Holy Souls who cannot help themselves, as well as help us recognize how significant each Holy Communion can be to ourselves and to other souls.

One of the easiest ways to gain this Plenary Indulgence is to pray the Rosary in a church. This can be done by oneself, or by praying it as part of a group, as our community strives to do before every Sunday Mass. Another easy way is to spend a half hour in adoration before the Blessed Sacrament. All efforts to gain a Plenary Indulgence must, of course, be under the usual conditions: Confession within 20 days, reception of Holy Communion once per Plenary Indulgence sought, prayer for the Holy Father’s intentions, and freedom from attachment to sin.

An Act of Spiritual Communion

While we are on the subject, it is worthwhile for all Catholics to know a formula for making a Spiritual Communion. We present below a prayer by St. Alphonsus Maria de’ Liguori. This can be prayed either when one is abstaining from receiving Holy Communion at Mass, or during the day when one is simply trying to live more united with our Lord. Making an Act of Spiritual Communion is enriched with a Partial Indulgence.

My Jesus, I believe that Thou art present in the Blessed Sacrament. I love Thee above all things, and I desire Thee in my soul. Since I cannot now receive Thee sacramentally, come at least spiritually into my heart. As though Thou wert already there, I embrace Thee and unite myself wholly to Thee; permit not that I should ever be separated from Thee.

All Saints and All Souls Day Masses

A High Mass for All Saints Day – a Holy Day of Obligation in the United States – will be offered at Flint’s All Saints Church on Saturday, November 1 at 11:00 AM. The celebrant will be a visiting priest from the Fraternity of St. Peter, Fr. Gregory Pendergraft.

High Masses for All Souls Day – Monday, November 3 in the Tridentine Calendar – will be held at 7:00 PM at two area churches: Our Lady of the Scapular in Wyandotte, Michigan, and St. Joseph in Detroit.

Because of the pending relocation of the St. Benedict Tridentine Community that week, no All Souls Day Mass will be held in Windsor this year. Speaking of which, next week’s column will address the new sites for the Windsor Tridentine Mass; the pastors of our new host churches have requested that announcements be withheld until a few remaining details are finalized. Rest assured that Sunday and Tuesday Masses in the Extraordinary Form will continue.

Month of All Souls Plenary Indulgences

Each year the Church grants a Plenary Indulgence applicable only to the Souls in Purgatory to those who visit a cemetery and pray, even if only mentally, for the dead, from November 1-8. The indulgence can be gained once per day on each day, under the usual conditions which are listed earlier in this column.

Special Requiem Mass at St. Hyacinth Church

On Saturday, November 8 at 12:00 Noon, there will be a special Requiem Mass at Detroit’s St. Hyacinth Church for the repose of the soul of Fr. Frank Skalski. Fr. Skalski was the long-time pastor of St. Hyacinth who was responsible for the church’s remarkable restoration. The celebrant will be Fr. Peter Hrytsyk.

St. Hyacinth is one of our area’s most stunningly beautiful churches and is well worth a visit. Secure, guarded parking is available in the lot behind the church.

Tridentine Masses This Coming Week

• Mon. 10/27 7:00 PM: Low Mass at St. Joseph (Feria [Mass of Twentieth Sunday After Pentecost] – Celebrant may also choose a Votive Mass)
• Tue. 10/28 7:00 PM: High Mass at St. Benedict/Assumption-Windsor (Ss. Simon & Jude, Apostles)
• Fri. 10/31 7:00 PM: Solemn High Mass at Christ the King, Ann Arbor (Votive Mass of Christ the King) – Dinner for young adults age 18-35 follows Mass, organized by Juventútem Michigan
• Sat. 11/01 11:00 AM: High Mass at All Saints, Flint (All Saints)

[Comments? Please e-mail tridnews@detroitlatinmass.org. Previous columns are available at http://www.detroitlatinmass.org. This edition of Tridentine Community News, with minor editions, is from the St. Albertus (Detroit), Academy of the Sacred Heart (Bloomfield Hills), and Assumption (Windsor) bulletin inserts for October 26, 2014. Hat tip to A.B., author of the column.]

A pastor thinks we may be receiving Communion too often

Pastor of Assumption Grotto parish in Detroit, Fr. Eduard Perrone, offers an interesting and thoughtful counter to Pope St. Pius X's recommendation of frequent, even daily, Communion in his weekly parish newsletter, "A Pastor's Descant" (updated weekly) (Assumption Grotto News, October 19, 2014). He writes:

... I’ve begun to think that we generally may be receiving Communion too often. This opinion – radical, controversial and much against the grain – is a reversal of the thought of Pope Saint Pius X who, in his time, encouraged the frequent and even daily reception of Holy Communion. His motives then must be seen in the context of the times in which he lived. Times have changed, however, and men’s attitudes have changed as well. What I’m proposing for consideration is that we fast from frequent Holy Communion for a time in order to make us hunger and yearn for Christ. Analogous to this would be the dietary problem of many Americans today who are eating far too much and too often, and as a consequence have health problems. In a similar way, we’re overeating the Holy Eucharist, being unmindful of Christ’s Presence therein, and being poorly suited to receive Him. The result is spiritual illness – ironic to say so – and perhaps even, according to Saint Paul again, physical sickness as a consequence (cf. 1 Cor. 11:30).

Consider those who receive Communion without a thought to Who it is they’re receiving; or take someone who frequently sins and confesses and receives Communion but without having made a firm resolution to sin no more. Saint Paul had sharp words of reproach to those who receive the Eucharist, without examining themselves as to whether they are worthy of Communion or those who communicate without “recognizing the Body.” Perhaps we should stop what we’re doing so thoughtlessly, taking “time out” from receiving Communion, in order to recover our spiritual senses. For this, a fast, that is, a refraining from Holy Communion for a while might help us to become healthier, expanding our desire for receiving Christ, becoming hungry for Him. Making acts of Spiritual Communion, prayers of desire to receive the Holy Sacrament, is useful towards that end. Hours of adoration and visits to the Blessed Sacrament may also help stimulate an appetite for a devout reception of the Holy Eucharist.

Am I proposing a new Jansenism? I think not. We’re sorely in need of a greater awareness of the Inestimable Gift of the Eucharist and of the requisite worthiness to receive It. We’ve become gluttonous children of God who need to hunger for Him....

Related: Fr. Perrone interviewed by parishioner, Michael Voris, on the mode of receiving Communion.

The Dangers of "Routine Communions"

As the centenary of the death of Pope Saint Pius X approached this summer, Fr. Timothy Finigan, in "What I Want is Mercy, Not Sacrilege: The Dangers of 'Routine Communions'” (Faith Magazine, July-August, 2014), while recognizing the infinite graces that have flowed from this pious practice, assessed the dangers that can arise when the Eucharist is viewed as a human prize rather than a divine privilege. Excerpt:

Priests who speak on these matters will probably be confronted by the protest “Are you saying that I am being irreverent by standing and receiving communion in the hand?” It is time that we stopped caving in to this childish passive aggression, in favour of helping the majority of ordinary faithful to benefit from external signs of reverence that they quickly recognise as helping reinforce belief in the real presence.

... I can almost hear the cry from some quarters of “Jansenism! Jansenism!” ... The debate on who should and should not receive Holy Communion needs to be re-framed according to classical Catholic spiritual teaching. Nobody wants to see frequent Holy Communion disappear from the lives of Catholics, but it is equally necessary that Holy Communion should once again be understood as a sacrament to be received with due preparation, in a state of grace, and in a state of life that accords with the teaching of Christ and the Church.

Christ quoted the word spoken to Hosea desiring a real change of heart, and not an empty external ritual. We could reword His call without disrespect: “What I want is mercy, not sacrilege.”

As a reader commented in an email:

... the problems are not simply a Catholic liturgical thing, but represent the larger and seismic generational shift. People no longer think of approaching God as requiring much acknowledgement of grandeur or holiness. The newer emphasis is that God is not so much 'Other' as he is 'For Us.' And this without the pivotal pre-acknowlegement of the Cross as opening up our access to Him. Of course it makes sense. If sin is downplayed, and if God's universal salvific will is read as simply God's unconditional love, then communion is simply the equivalent of the club membership ritual. Every member gets to participate as long as they show up. Even the kids. "Let the little children..." The mass is no longer communion with someone but affirmation of worth.

Wow! And too true!!

Those of us who are converts from Protestantism may even remember greater reverence, of sorts, in our erstwhile communions than we are apt to experience in certain AmChurch Catholic parishes these days. We may not have had the true Body and Blood of Christ, but we were taught that the Lord's Supper, whatever we supposed it to be, was something special. You had to be old enough to have an inkling of what it's about, and if you had big things to still get right with God, you abstained.

How different today, when you're likely to feel like an oddity if, out of awe and reverence for our Lord, you choose to abstain rather than queue up in the communion line. As my contact put it: "Same symbols but close to an entirely different religion. In the new cult the problem is not how God sees us, since he loves us. It is how we see ourselves."

Auguste Comte's dream of a religion of man has come true.

"The impoverishment of the Church’s liturgical culture is a major problem for the remarried"

William Oddie offers some surprising ruminations on the question "If they can’t receive Communion, what is left for them to be part of?" -- surprising because of their liturgical implications (and vice versa):

The fact that for most of the Church’s history frequent reception was not the normal practice may bear a little reflection. To begin with, it is surely the case that automatic reception of Holy Communion is in itself undesirable: it was supposed to be part of the heightened sense of “participation” in the celebration that post-conciliar liturgists went on about: what it has actually led to in practice is a huge loss of reverence for the sacraments in general (the growth of automatic reception was mirrored at every stage by a corresponding decline in recourse to sacramental confession), and in a loss of reverence for the sacrament of the altar in particular.

This, and much more >>

[Hat tip to JM]

The old (relatively new) debate over Communion in the hand

My good friend and colleague, canonist Ed Peters is frequently bemused by how often this issue continues to resurface. As a canon lawyer, he sees absolutely no issue here. Reposing a near-absolute trust in his judgment about canon law (concerning which I am little more than a tyro), I heartily agree with him that there is no canonical problem with the practice of Communion in the hand. As I understand the matter, it was introduced into the United States and various other countries under an indult; that is, as a canonically licit exception to the ordinary and otherwise normative practice of reception on the tongue.

Having conceded this point of agreement, I would insist that there nevertheless remain a number of other grounds on which the practice may (indeed must) be considered and evaluated other than simply that of canonical licitness, and I have little doubt that my friend (Peters) would agree. I can think of a number of such grounds that might be considered, though I do not intend to explore them here for myself -- such as theological grounds, historical grounds, symbolic grounds, moral grounds, and even grounds of sacramental and liturgical aesthetic fittingness.

In any case, having done a bit of historical digging into the origins of this controversy, I was gratified to see that Michael Voris and his staff have put together another excellent detailed documentary-length investigation into the issue, which is ordinarily available only to "premium subscribers," and not merely to viewers of the comparatively tiny, sound-bite-sized "Vortex" episodes available daily for free to the unwashed and unpaying public.

Below is a brief Vortex episode introducing the series; and just for this week only, one key episode of the series, Sleight of Hand: Reception Deception, is being made available to the public at no charge.

Extraordinary ministers at Papal Mass deny Communion in the hand

While Pope Francis doesn't reject Communion in the hand (remember Rio?), it's nice to see the convention retrieved under Pope Benedict XVI continued in Rome: Communion on the tongue. Check it out:


Now just imagine one of your lay "Eucharistic ministers" try that in your local AmChurch parish! Isn't this crazy? All hell would break loose, and you know it!

For a good discussion of the issue by Bishop Athanasius Schneider, author of Dominus Est – It Is the Lord! Reflections of a Bishop of Central Asia on Holy Communion(Newman House Press, 2009):


There is also a whole series that Michael Voris is producing on ChurchMilitant.TV called "Sleight of Hand - Reception Deception," that goes into the history and theology, as well as the motive that moved some to push through the widespread change in the practice, but you have to have a premium account to access it, unfortunately. It's excellent, and pulls together a lot of material that would be difficult for one person to dredge up for himself.

Latin Mass Society Video: The Manner of Receiving Holy Communion

"The scandal that is eating the heart out of the Catholic Church in America"

Fr. Vincent Fitzpatrick, "The scandal that is eating the heart out of the Catholic Church in America" (American Life League, March 24, 2014):

Here is the text of Canon 915: “Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”

Several American bishops have made statements to the effect that a bishop must exercise “discretion” regarding whether to “impose the penalty” of denial of Communion. Among them: Chaput, Dolan, O’Malley, and Wuerl.

All bishops who refuse to “impose the penalty” are participating in a lie. Namely, that denial of Communion is a penalty.

Denial of Communion is NOT a penalty.

So? What is the import of this fact?

It means that denial of Communion is not an option that MAY be chosen. It is MANDATED by Canon 915. No bishop, priest, or other minister of Communion is free to disobey Canon 915, for the simple reason that the action Canon 915 forbids is ALWAYS gravely sinful.

Read more >>

[Hat tip to Sir A.S.]