Fr. Perrone on the ground of our hope and certitude

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" (Assumption Grotto News, December 18, 2017)

No matter what some people might think of our parish, there is no regnant idea here of being the sole surviving remnant of true Catholicism, the last of the hardliners on Church doctrine -- theological and moral -- or on the liturgy. The truth is that we try merely to be faithful, as our Lord demands His disciples to be, of all He has given us. I like to think of this kind of conservatism as 'preservatism,' an appreciation and custody of what is most to be valued, rather than a stiff, desperate inflexibility. In fact, those who fit the ideal I believe directed by our faith are often (not always) the most reasonable, understanding, gracious, tolerant, and -- within limits -- accommodating people there are, liberal-minded people of a kind fast fading from the scene. There are, on the other hand, sternly rigid and harshly restrictive, dogmatically closed-minded folk of political correctness for whom there must be unbending conformity to the prevailing opinions of those who set the standard for culturally accepted norms. Those norms -- decidedly leftist -- will not admit disavowal by those upholding the perennial validity of an inherited body of intellectual truths and moral precepts.

There need not be an apology for wholeheartedly embracing the tradition of religious, philosophic, and moral truth. It is a precious inheritance which has been entrusted to our care, to be preserved for successive generations -- to Christians in particular. This legacy obliges those who recognize its worth to safeguard it from any who may dilute or abolish it. With regard to our parish, this means that we continue to teach doctrinal truths, that we covetously preserve our liturgical tradition, and that we insist on enduring moral truths (especially with regard to marriage and sexuality) which are of divine origin and which, for that reason, are irreformable.

What is it that is hapening in our beloved Catholic Church where many of our brethren seem eager to bow to the spirit of a rebellious age, dismissing past beliefs and ways as no longer tenable? More distressing perhaps is their silence in the face of creeping doctrinal novelties and liturgical caprice. Should there not be in a time of great confusion and moral obscurity, manifest clarity about what's true and right and decisive means put forth to preserve it? The mind and heart crave surety and stability rather than vagueness and diffidence, especially from our pope, bishops, and priests, those official guardians and expositors of the deposit of faith and heralds of Christ's Gospel.

There ought not to be doubt about the truths of faith, moral conduct, liturgical propriety and the worth of the apostolic tradition that has been bequeathed to us. It is a cause of wonderment that these certainties can be so readily discarded or adjusted to the spirit of the time -- a restless, ever shifting spirit which must soon forsake its devoted adherents for faddish novelties it has yet to propose.

In the meantime, while temporizing is condoned, those who insist on perennial truth and on tradition are dismissed, ridiculed, or hatefully regarded as enemies of progress. They ought not, however, to entertain doubts about what is right, good, true and beautiful. Confidence comes not from an egotistical estimation of being the measure of truth, but from Christ's indefectible Church which has weathered centuries of stormy controversy over what is true. It is the abiding presence in her of the divinely promised Spirit of Truth that is the foundation of certitude.

"God is our refuge and strength. Therefore we shall not fear even should the mountains tremble. The Lord of Hosts is with us" (Psalm 46). Being sure of God and of His promised fidelity is an anchoring, stabilizing, and healthy way of being a Catholic Christian. Saint Paul sounded a word of admonition to the Ephesians that would well be heeded in our day: "Be no longer children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the Head, into Christ" (4:14). I wish our parishioners to persevere in this age of anxiety and uncertainty as people who steadfastly 'speak the truth in love.' May you ive tranquilly in this often disconcerting, sometimes exasperating, manifestly troubled age.

Fr. Perrone

After Vatican II [1975-2050]

Just discovered (from a reader) this website with an abundance of research and writing on it about the Church. I still haven't "vetted" it for content (though I already see some things with which I disagree), and I don't know much about the author, Fr. Tom Richstatter, O.F.M., beyond what is published in this short bio (though it looks like he teaches classes on this material), In any case, it looks interesting. There's doubtless a lot here worth reading and knowing.

The "Index Page" for the website alone shows the extent of research and writing the site offers. Below are a couple of charts and commentary displayed under a tab somewhere on his website entitled "Chapter d30 After Vatican II [1975-2050 CE]":

Cultural and Theological Context

James D. Davidson (in an article "Alienation in the Catholic Church Today" p 22 in Robert J. Kennedy'sReconciling Embrace [Liturgy Training Publications, 1998]) states that Catholics who experienced their formative years during the 1950's and 1960's witnessed the following changes:

Item	Pre-Vatican II	Post-Vatican II
Liturgical Language	Latin	English
Liturgical Music	Gregorian chant	Folk
Liturgical Instruments	Organ	Guitar
Morality	Emphasis on Sexual Purity	Emphasis on Peace and justice
Ethics	Natural Law Ethics	Consequentialism (An emphasis on the context and consequences of behavior)
Faith	Faith is obligation	Faith is personal choice
The World	Other-worldliness	This-worldliness
Catholic Identity	Particularism (the superiority of Catholicism)	Ecumenism (an emphasis on how much Catholicism has in common with Protestant denominations)

Return to the top of this page -- Return to General and Introductory Materials Index -- Return to Fr. Tom's Home Page

Moving the Furniture

At a gathering of parish leaders on January 19, 2002 from St. Mary's Parish, Evansville (one of the parishes mentioned in Excellent Catholic Parishes by Paul Wilkes) we discussed the metaphor of "moving the furniture."  The theological concepts we hold are something like furniture in a room.  Sometimes when we introduce a new piece of furniture, the old ones need to be rearranged.  Applying this to the arrangement of our "theological furniture" before and after the Second Vatican Council we found several key items have been "moved."  These changes are summarized in the the following table:

Item	Pre-Vatican II	Post-Vatican II
Jesus	Divine	Divine and Human
God	Transcendent	Transcendent and Immanent
Grace	Thing / Quantitative	Personal Relationship, Process
Sacrament	Thing Administered Received Gives Grace	Celebration Act of Worship Reveals who God is Builds Church
Baptism	Takes away original sin	Makes one "Another Christ" Makes Church Makes Disciples/Ministers
Church	Institution Pope, Bishops, etc. Them	Body of Christ People of God Us
Bible	Protestant Book	Our story Faith witness
Eucharist	Sacrifice Good Friday	Meal Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday Meal : Sacrifice :: Sacrament : Union with God
Sin	Breaking the law Disobedience	Not loving God & neighbor Failure to grow
Confession	Telling sins to the priest	Reconciliation Public act Worship and Praise Celebration of God's Mercy Aid in human forgiveness and reconciliation
Priest	One set apart from	One in the midst of
Earth	Exile Boot camp	Incarnational Theology - The place of our salvation - God's dream for a harmonious, reconciled garden

Return to the top of this page -- Return to General and Introductory Materials Index -- Return to Fr. Tom's Home Page

Sacraments Yesterday and Today

How is our thinking about sacrament and sacraments different than it was 50 years ago (pre Vatican II)?  What are the principal changes in sacramental theology during the past 50 years?  Once again I refer to the "tip of the pistol" metaphor.  What are those often unseen changes that have big implications.  Often the really important changes are not the most noticeable, not the things that the people in the pew would name as the "big changes."   I list what I have come to consider the 10 most important.  The following list is not in any particular "order of importance." 

1.  Anabatic / Katabatic   Before the Constitution on the Liturgy the anabatic dimension of the sacraments was not emphasized; the sacraments were primarily to "give grace" (the Katabatic movement) rather than considered primarily as acts of worship by the community.  The primary thing is not what we get, but what we give:  worship, praise, and thanksgiving to God.

2. Private to corporate and personal.  When the emphasis is on "what I get" from the sacraments, it's easy to think of sacraments as something administered to an individual. When we think of sacraments primarily as acts of corporate worship, liturgical worship is the act of the entire Body of Christ. This is why sacraments are always (ideally) celebrated by the worshiping community (at Sunday Eucharist).

Eucharist, at least the celebration of the Eucharist (1) when not separated from merely "receiving Holy Communion" is usually seen as a public act. The (2) Sacrament of Holy Orders and the(3) Sacrament of Confirmation are, with increasing frequency, celebrated in the midst of the Sunday worshiping community. The initiation of adults takes place at the Easter (Vigil) with the worshiping community. More and more, infant (4) Baptism and the (5) Anointing of the Sick are celebrated at Sunday Mass.  (6) Marriage is celebrated during the Eucharist, but is often not with the worshiping community but with the circle of friends who often are there not to worship God but only as friends, honoring the couple.   (7) Reconciliation seems to be the last sacrament to find its a public context.

3. Anamnesis   Anamnesis is another fundamental tip of the pistol change. Eucharist no longer "repeats"  or "re-presents" or "reminds" us of the passion death and resurrection of the Lord, but through anamnesis -- Liturgical Remembering we become mystically present to these events. This mystery of presence is one of the fundamental changes that is not been preached or taught sufficiently during the past 50 years.

4. Mysterion    The metaphor of the seven Shoeboxes. Another "invisible" but very important change has come in seeing sacraments not so much as seven distinct actions, but as the manifestation of God's loving plan for creation, beginning with Christ himself, the body of Christ, the Church, gathered to celebrate Eucharist, the other sacraments, the liturgical year and liturgy of the hours, indeed all of creation is sacrament of -- revelation of -- God's Trinitarian love. Key to this understanding is the Primacy of Christ.

5. Grace   I believe another major change comes in the understanding of grace: the movement from grace as a thing which can be quantified and classified, to the understanding of grace as God's love, God's Holy Spirit. This change is multiple implications which are important for our spiritual life and for our theological understanding.

6. The role of the community   Another fundamental tip of the pistol change is our understanding of who administers, or better, who celebrates the sacraments. Formerly the priest administered, performed, the sacramental act. Today, we understand that the worshiping community is the primary celebrant of the sacraments. The community is led, coached, by the presiding minister, who therefore always praise in the first person plural, "we", to which we give our consent, our Amen. I often think of this basic change as: Formerly I said Mass for the people, now I say Mass with the people. A tiny change, a preposition grammatically, but this tiny change represents an entirely new orientation on my part when I am leading the congregation. Until this change is more widely understood (which today it is not) people will still wonder why we are baptizing an infant during the Sunday Eucharist. "I don't even know that baby. What does the baptism have to do with me?" It has everything to do with you. The sacrament is not merely "for" the baby; it is for the entire community.

7. Mind/Body/Spirit   A new understanding of the human person. My former sacramental theology viewed the human person in more static, Aristotelian categories. The human being was composed of body and soul. The body came and went; the soul was immortal and consequently the soul was the important part. Ministry was about saving souls. And the soul was viewed in more static categories. You were either Catholic or you weren't. You were in the state of grace, or out of it. You were either married or you weren't. Today I view the person as an integral composite of mind body and spirit. Faith is a journey. Conversion is a process. These are very important tip of the pistol changes.

8. Minister of the Sacraments   Sacramental roles formerly sacraments were administered usually by the priest and received, by an individual. Now we see that the sacraments are celebrations of the community, the minister-celebrant is the parish, coached by the priest. In the recipient is also the parish.  I'm reminded of the description of sacrament by Soren Kierkegaard:  "Many Christians tend to view the minister/priest as the actor, God as the prompter, and the congregation as the audience. But actually, the congregation is the actor, the minister/priest merely the prompter, and God the audience." (Soren Kierkegaard. Purity of Heart Is to Will One Thing, New York: Harper & Row, 1956, pp 180-181. Quoted in Erickson, "Liturgical Participation" Worship 59 (1985) p 232.)

9. Sacred Scripture Another element which I believe is very important is the realization of the role played by sacred Scripture in our understanding of sacrament. Formerly Scripture and sacrament seemed unrelated. Sacrosanctum Concilium stress the importance that sacred Scripture plays in the liturgy. 

SC #24. Sacred scripture is of the greatest importance in the celebration of the liturgy. For it is from scripture that lessons are read and explained in the homily, and psalms are sung; the prayers, collects, and liturgical songs are scriptural in their inspiration and their force, and it is from the scriptures that actions and signs derive their meaning. Thus to achieve the restoration, progress, and adaptation of the sacred liturgy, it is essential to promote that warm and living love for scripture to which the venerable tradition of both eastern and western rites gives testimony.

SC 51 (Cp 2 Eucharist). The treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that a richer share in God's word may be provided for the faithful.  [Flannery's translation:  "... so that a richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God's word."]  In this way a more representative portion of holy Scripture will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years. 

Our current Lectionary for Mass contains 14% of the Old Testament and 71% of the New Testament (85% of the Bible); whereas the Missal of 1963 (the Missal in use before our current Lectionary) contained only 01% of the Old Testament and 17% of the New Testament (18% of the Bible).   Often when people speak of the Ordinary Form of Mass and the Extraordinary Form of Mass they say "The difference is that the one is Mass in English and the other is Mass in Latin" without realizing that there are deeper, but less noticeable, changes also.

10. Viewpoint   A very far reaching change has occurred "under the iceberg" regarding what the very word "sacrament" implies. Formerly it referred to "something we receive" now it refers to "something we are" (to use a phrase I learned from Prof. Ken Himes).  I am reminded of the article by the President-Rector in The Raven last week. Speaking of Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament he remarked that we are each a monstrance.  "We are monstrances too. We share the task, like the vessel, of bringing the face of Christ to bear upon a world so in need of his visage."  We are visible signs of invisible grace, signs of God, Doors to the Sacred.

Return to the top of this page -- Return to General and Introductory Materials Index -- Return to Fr. Tom's Home Page

To Think About

Do you think the spirit of the Second Vatican Council is being implemented today? Why or why not?   [A participant in this class once wrote:   "Thank you, Holy Spirit, for the Second Vatican Council.  But where is the next step, Spirit? Your gentle breeze isn't moving on to gale force winds. This freshness is rapidly becoming stagnant air.  Soon the smog will cover us all and we won't remember why we got into this boat to begin with. Some will hide in the bottom of the boat and construct a plan to build a more seaworthy vessel. Some will look to the sky and begin to cry. Some will curse you for meddling in a situation where you don't belong. Some will become paralyzed and do nothing. But the remainder will leap overboard, put their foot into the water and start walking toward the shore.  Please be ready with breakfast."  [R. Cavanaugh, summer 1993]

Return to the top of this page -- Return to General and Introductory Materials Index -- Return to Fr. Tom's Home Page

Click here to go to return to the overview of this history   Click here to return to the previous chapter

Copyright: Tom Richstatter.  All Rights Reserved.  This page was created by Fr. Thomas Richstatter, O.F.M.  Every effort has been, and is being made to acknowledge sources when the ideas are not my own.  Any failure to comply with the United States Copyright Act (Title 17, United States Code) will be corrected immediately should I become aware of it.  This site was updated on 11/11/10 .  Your comments on this site are welcome at  trichstatter@franciscan.org

How trendy experiments in music and liturgy have led to the triumph of bad taste, banality, and a deflated sense of the sacred

Composer and Catholic James MacMillan writing in a recent issue of Standpoint:

In the 1970s many well-intentioned types thought that such 'folk' music and pop culture derivatives would appeal to teenagers and young people and get them more involved in the Church, when the exact opposite has happened. It is now thought that these trendy experiments in music and liturgy have contributed to the increasing risible irrelevance of liberal Christianity, and that liturgy as social engineering has repulsed many. Like most ideas shaped by 1960s Marxist ideology it has proved an utter failure. Its greatest tragedy is the willful disingenuous, de-poeticisation of Catholic worship. The Church has simply aped the secular West's obsession with 'accessibility,' 'inclusiveness,' 'democracy,' and anti-elitism, resulting in the triumph of bad taste, banality and a deflation of the sense of the sacred in the life of the church."

Maybe this is the sort of trendy banality he had in mind -- gone-to-seed, perhaps?




Well, the choreography of the latter is almost good enough to serve for the closing "Christmas-in-Heaven" performance in Monty Python's The Meaning of Life, if that's not being overly generous. The horror of it all is just the philistine assumption that any of this belongs to the worship of Almighty God.

Liberal Tradition, Yes; Liberal Ideology, No?

In a provocative essay, R. R. Reno, "Liberal Tradition, Yes; Liberal Ideology, No" (First Things, December, 2017), responds to critics who regard him as shifting to a "mirror image of the anti-American, anti-capitalist left." This is, of course, not quite true, as Reno goes on to show. What interests me here, however, is his reference to Ryzard Legutko's The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies, which Adrian Vermeule reviewed sympathetically in the January 2017 issue of First Things, in an article entitled "Liturgy of Liberalism."

As Reno notes, "Vermeule endorses Legutko's central claim, which is that the liberal consensus in the post-1989 West has taken on many of the attributes of the communism that dominated Poland when Legutko came of age. The countries in the West that promote liberal democracy are not islands of toleration, diversity, and free inquiry. Instead, Vermeule writes, echoing Legutko, they are dominated by “a spreading social, cultural, and ideological conformism.” Liberalism has become a religion. Those who dissent are heretics."

Of course, critics will regard this way of talking as hyperbolic and distorting -- like trying to equate perversions such as political correctness with Soviet gulags or Cambodian killing fields. But Reno responds:

But neither Legutko nor Vermeule is equating Berkeley with the closed city of Gorky. They are comparing them—and finding some telling similarities. Both places impose a rigid orthodoxy and stifle dissent. Gorky used secret police, while Berkeley relies on a suffocating climate of opinion. This is a crucial difference, as Ahmari points out. But it does not erase the similarities.

Legutko’s goal—my goal—is not to undermine “liberalism.” It is to clear away some of the blind dogmatism that has built up in the West, especially since 1989. It won’t do to label our efforts “illiberal” just because they call into question the dominant mentality of our time. In fact, that accusation reinforces the totalitarian atmosphere. Contemporary liberalism rarely answers critics. Instead, it silences dissent by labeling it “extremist,” “far-right,” “authoritarian,” and “illiberal.” We can’t come to grips with the problems we face in 2017 if we are constantly policed. And in any event, as Vermeule points out in our last issue (“A Christian Strategy”), our loyalty is to Christ, not to any particular political philosophy or tradition. This transcendent loyalty disenchants political ideologies, and freedom from the idolatry of politics is the soul of true liberalism.

I am not certain that Reno or Vermeule go far enough, in light of Christopher A. Ferrara's penetrating critique of the Liberal tradition itself in Liberty, the God that Failed (2012). But one can learn a great deal from their analysis, which is certainly illuminating as far as it goes.

I should also mention Timothy D. Lusch's exclusive interview with Ryszard Legutko, "A Demon-Haunted Europe: Democracy's Totalitarian Impulse" (New Oxford Review, October 2017), which we have reposted by permission of the publisher here. Lugtko is a professor of philosophy at Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland, a member of the European Parliament, and one of the more astute critics of the totalitarian impulses in contemporary western liberal democracies.

A Demon-Haunted Europe: Democracy’s Totalitarian Impulse

"An Exclusive Interview with Ryszard Lugutko" (New Oxford Review, October, 2017)

by Timothy D. Lusch

Timothy D. Lusch is an attorney and writer. His writing has appeared in Saint Austin Review, The University Bookman, Chronicles, and at CrisisMagazine.com and CatholicExchange.com. He blogs about books at PityItsPithy.com.

Ryszard Legutko is a professor of philosophy at Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland. He is also a member of the European Parliament, a Polish politician, and an author. He has written one of the most consequential works on political philosophy to be published in recent years, The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies. In this profound and vital book, Legutko argues that liberal democracies — specifically in Europe — have much in common with communism. He traces the twin developments of liberalism and democracy and shows how, at their precise intersection, the totalitarian impulse rises. With grave implications for freedom in the West, and for traditional institutions like the Catholic Church, Legutko sounds a warning: either recognize the danger and defeat it, or be destroyed by it.

NOR: Professor Legutko, you have written a significant book with particular appeal for the people and institutions of the West. Following your thesis, the seed of slavery seems to be sewn into the fabric of liberal democracy. What implications does this have with respect to our understanding of freedom? Is our understanding of freedom undergoing a paradigmatic shift such that we will demand greater freedoms (e.g., determining our gender identity) and end up with less (e.g., enforcement of “gender identity” rights and language limiting the speech of dissenters)?

Legutko: I am not sure we demand greater freedom today. On the contrary, I think freedom has ceased to be a highly valued commodity. What is happening is that some groups demand certain privileges, often called “rights,” and other groups seem favorable to these demands because they see in them a vehicle for constructing a new society compatible with their outrageous ideologies. When we see, for example, privileges granted to homosexuals, including the right to marry and adopt children — rather unusual privileges, to be sure — we mistake it for the growth of freedom in general. But this is an erroneous conclusion.

Take gender. It is a strange concept, and rather absurd, because not only does it undermine the obvious biological differences on which the existence of the human race has depended from time immemorial, but it makes this strange concept an instrument to reconstruct the entire human culture, including the humanities, art, law, philosophy, even natural sciences and mathematics. Its aim is to restructure society and the human mind — to make a mental, political, social, and cultural revolution — not to enlarge our freedom. One can compare it to Marxism and its theory of class struggle, which some people in the past believed serves the cause of freedom while in fact it is a tool for a revolution, not only in social relations but also in the humanities, art, law, philosophy, natural sciences, and mathematics. (For instance, multi-valued logic was said to be correlated to the growth of imperialism, and the general theory of relativity allegedly contradicted the dialectics of nature.)

In the case of both Marxism and gender, we have an attempt to make a deep restructuring of society. Revolutions hardly ever enlarge our freedom, though the revolutionaries often include “freedom” among their slogans. In the early stages of a revolution, people are lured by such slogans — and, indeed, some kind of freedom is given to them following the breakdown of the existing rules and the ensuing chaos. But soon the revolutionaries tighten their grip on society and impose the new rules that are stricter and more humiliating than before. The world before the gender revolution certainly had more freedom than it has now. Laws were less intrusive, the humanities more open and diversified, philosophy less dogmatic, human relations less legalistic. Likewise, as a result of granting privileges to homosexuals, we have experienced significant encroachments on the freedom of speech and many other liberties, and, consequently, on liberty in general.

The Church as champion of "bourgeois religion"?

R. R. Reno, "Bourgeois Religion" (First Things, December, 2017), offers an excoriating assessment of the Catholic hierarchy today. Excerpts follow. (Legere, et orare):

The Catholic Church’s retreat from anything resembling clarity about sexual morality does not surprise me. It’s been a long time coming. Catholicism and other forms of establishment Christianity in the West tend to take the form of bourgeois religion. That term denotes the fusion of church culture with the moral consensus held by the good, respectable people who set the tone for society as a whole. In the aftermath of the sexual revolution, that consensus shifted. For a long time now it has been socially acceptable to divorce and contracept. Soon thereafter it was OK to cohabitate, and then the good and responsible people who run things adopted an affirmative attitude toward gay sex. During all this, the same consensus became hostile to those who say otherwise. It became “cruel,” “hateful,” and “bigoted” to call something wrong that the bourgeois consensus now deems right. In this way, the good and responsible people did not just accommodate themselves to the sexual revolution; they took ownership of it.

Amid this change, most Catholic bishops and priests have been disoriented. Not too long ago, they were happy chaplains of the bourgeois, the good people, who tended to affirm the moral code that the Church taught. As the sexual revolution worked its way through elite culture, bishops and priests were eager to sustain their place as chaplains of the establishment consensus.... Do the loving thing! This noble and conveniently vague imperative offers wide latitude. In the smug and self-complimenting culture of the bourgeois, that meant pretty much anything they did was by definition loving. These sorts of people are always seeking to do what’s best!

.. Reconciling the Catholic Church with the sexual revolution is necessary in order to preserve Catholicism as a bourgeois religion. Unless this is done, more and more of the good and responsible people will come to regard the Church as a regressive, harmful force in society, a source of repression and bigotry that is antithetical to the spirit of inclusion and affirmation that promotes human flourishing. This is especially obvious in the controversy surrounding divorce, remarriage, and communion. These are good, sensitive people trying to make the best of a difficult situation! How can the Church deny them communion? The same is true for those who use artificial means of contraception or who are committed to another person of the same sex—which is why it’s reasonable to think the pontificate will seek to muddy the Church’s teaching on those issues as well ...

Christianity orients us upward and toward the divine. Bourgeois religion is horizontal. It takes its cues from the consensus of the moment, the opinions of the good and responsible people. This reduces Christianity to a political religion organized to buttress the status quo. The Francis papacy largely follows this pattern, making it quite predictable. We can count on Pope Francis to talk about the poor in exactly the same way that people do in Berkeley, which means with great earnestness and little consequence.

This papacy is not hard to figure out. Pope Francis and his associates echo the pieties and self-complimenting utopianism of progressives. That’s not surprising. The Jesuit charism is multifaceted and powerful. I count myself among those profoundly influenced by the spiritual genius of St. Ignatius. Yet there’s no disputing that for centuries Jesuits have shown great talent in adjusting the gospel to suit the powerful. And so, I think the European establishment can count on the Vatican to denounce the populism currently threatening its hold on power. I predict that this papacy will be a great defender of migrants and refugees—until political pressures on the European ruling class become so great that it shifts and becomes more “realistic,” at which point the Vatican will shift as well. What is presently denounced will be permitted; what is presently permitted will be denounced.

This will not end well. The West has seen a long season of loosening, opening up, and deconsolidation, of which the sexual revolution is but a part. Our establishment is committed to sustaining this consensus. This is why it has been at war with Catholic intransigence, which is based on the Church’s insistence that she answer to timeless, unchanging, and demanding truths. It’s foolish for the papacy to make a peace treaty with this establishment consensus. It’s theologically unworkable. It’s also politically inept. For the establishment consensus is failing, and that includes the sexual revolution, which made many promises that were not fulfilled.

Related: Link

Is it time to move beyond Vatican II?

An excerpt from a recent church bulletin in Windsor, Canada:

So much justification for departures from orthodox Catholic teaching has been proffered in the name of Vatican II over the past 50 years, that one can become numb. In recent years questions have started to arise as to how long Vatican II can serve as a motivating force. The circumstances that brought about the convocation of the Second Vatican Council are no longer the driving factors in contemporary Catholic life. Nowadays we are facing new challenges: Dramatically falling Mass attendance, an aging Catholic populace without adequate replacement from the young, a lack of priestly and religious vocations, declining standards for liturgy and sacred music, and so forth. Ecumenism and relations with our Protestant brethren must no longer be primary concerns when Catholics themselves do not sufficiently understand their own faith. The old justifications have become tired, while the growth of traditional liturgy, the devotional life, Latin Mass communities, and the authentic fellowship found therein have become concrete examples of how Catholicism can flourish when it is presented and lived in all its fullness.

These notions have been articulated thoroughly and thoughtfully by Fr. Hugh Somerville-Knapman, OSB, a Benedictine monk and priest in England, in a blog post, Vale Vatican II. One excerpt:

“It happened over half a century ago, was conditioned by and directed to the world of the 1960s, a world that has changed beyond recognition as of 2017. It described itself as a pastoral council, and it sought to repackage the teaching, life and worship of the Church to suit a world in flux. For this very reason the Council was necessarily going to have a best-before date. That date has been passed. The sad thing is that its milk turned sour very soon after packaging.”

The full post is here: https://hughosb.com/2017/09/25/vale-vatican-ii-moving-on/

[Hat tip to A.B.]

Even this supporter of Teilhard de Chardin finds Massimo Faggioli's and James Martin's effort to rehabilitate him "weird"

Read especially the last parts of Mark Lambert's "I may surprise you with a defence of Teilhard de Chardin" (November 23, 2017).

... his reputation as a bit of a rebel means that an approval of a proposal asking for Pope Francis to remove the monitum has almost inevitably, drawn support from Pope Francis merry band of theological nitwits & cheering boys. The fact that such people as Fr. James Martin and Massimo Faggioli are cheering for the petition to remove the monitum (warning) against the writings of Teilhard... well... it speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Ii could easily be argued that the central error of our times is evolutionism taken as a paradigm for the whole of reality, including God, revelation, tradition, and morality. As Father Z puts it, if Teilhard's writings were ambiguous and seriously erroneous when the monitum was imposed, then surely they still are? ...

... I can't help but be disappointed by this constant desire to forego the practice and common sense of the past and re-write everything in the ink of modern secularism. Isn't this glib jostling for attention intellectually drab and dishonest?

Yes I defend Teilhard de Chardin's extravagant and audacious writings. I love them! As a scientist he wanted a free-ranging, peer review of his work. His ideas should be challenged, but not demonised. But I don't mistake them for the teaching of my Church, and I don't regret or seek to revoke the very valid monitum placed on them in 1962. Fr Teilhard de Chardin accepted the Holy See's censure, & he would have accepted the monitum as a just act by the teaching authority of the Church, just as he accepted the censure of his superior in 1925. The fact that Faggioli and Martin are seeking to rehabilitate him somehow is weird (given he is pretty much old hat these days), and strikes me as just another anti-orthodoxy bandwagon for them to jump on.

[Hat tip to J.M.]

Christian defeatism?

Our underground news correspondent, Guy Noir - Private Eye, recently sent me this:

There is widespread misgivings in every church about the increasing evidence of Christian defeatism. A monthly periodical created a sensation with an article entitled, “Have Christians lost Their Nerve?” Most of the bishops whom I met in Rome had read his article and none was inclined to dispute its depressing conclusions.... One feared that the ecumenical movement was taking what little was left of the fight out of the Church:

“Christ said ‘They will throw you out of the synagogues.’ Today we priests are being invited to preach in the synagogues. Too many of our Catholics are like the pale tepid lot who Dante said were not fit for Heaven and too cheap for Hell. He wasn’t going to bother to speak about them. Just look at them and pass on. The great word now is ‘Dialogue,' which means futile conversation between Christians of different communions, none of whom has any real belief in anything which he professes. Another popular word is ‘Encounter, which means meeting God rather less then half way.”

Arnold Lunn, 1968

Fr. Perrone: a father's worry over his children's spiritual future

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" (Assumption Grotto News, October 29, 2017):

A priest is rightly called father because he has a spiritual progeny, his people, a family he was given through mother Church. Being a parent of sorts, the priest has duties toward his children, to provide for them in the things of the spirit. Dispensing the sacraments and imparting instruction through preaching and teaching are the most necessary of his duties. As parenting in its ordinary sense entials more than ensuring that basic necessities are met, so the priest-father has more to do than fulfillment of the fundamentals of pastoral care. Among these extras is his parental duty to worry. No parent worthy of the name passes his days without anxiety for the welfare of his children. Their good health, proper education, safety, and that personal security which makes for happiness are surely among things parents often worry about in regard to their children.

So do I, a spiritual father, worry about my parishioners' spiritual welfare. In particular, I have spiritual concern over what may happen to them in the times ahead. The present moment may be secure enough, but the prognosis is not good. Every good parent does his best to get his children off to a good start in the early years of his children's lives. The time inevitably comes when children become young adults and must fend for themselves in a highly troubled world and amidst "a crooked and perverse generation" (Phil 2:15). Looking ahead I do not see good days for the Church. While there are some signs of betterment for Christians in American society, these are tenuous and fragile. In our beloved Church, signs are less promising for a restoration of stability and clear doctrine. Moral permissiveness and equivocation in teaching seem to be getting the upper hand as the pope and many bishops, theologians, and a number of priests teach ambiguously or even outright falsely, giving grave scandal. It pains me even to mention this yet I'm aware that my people cannot be unmindful of at least some of what's been said and done due to professional and social media. Best efforts have been made to 'put a good spin' on what's been happening from the highest to the local parish levels of the Church. A time comes, however, when the obvious conclusions must be drawn and one must come to grips with the harsh reality of a Church already sharply divided over what is authentic Catholic teaching on moral living and ecclesiastical discipline. And here my parental worry kicks in. How will my parishioners fare if and when a schism (rupture) breaks out in the Church and one must make a declaration of where one stands? What principles will be employed in making that decision? Social pressure to conform? The measure of one's own evil tendencies? The bad example of some of the hierarchy? I think of the heartbreak of Christ when He asked: "Will you also leave Me?" or the foreboding in His rhetorical question: "When the Son of Man comes again will He find faith on earth?" Sadness grips me when I hear the blatant lies being spread about doctrine and right morals. My predecessors in this parish and I have tried to do our paternal duty towards our spiritual children in teaching the truth and encouraging our people to live by it. This must be an ongoing task for the priest, especially in view of the mighty leftist propaganda. The natural tendency in nature is towards dissolution rather than towards betterment, unless a counterforce is exerted. In other words, things by themselves don't get better and better but rather progressively worse when unattended. With the present weak leadership in the Church and the corruptive influence of the media, that needed force is not to be presumed.

The disciples once asked our Lord, "Will only few be saved?" Divine Wisdom did not give a direct answer. The incertitude over the outcome of salvation ought to stir up some salutary worry. While the true Church cannot die and while Christ will ever remain with it until time's end, there is no surety of any particular person being among the saved. And so, I will worry and pray for my parishioners.

I must set aside these dark ruminations to speak of some upcoming dates. Wednesday this week will be All Saints Day, a holy day of obligation. Masses will e at 6:30, 9:30, noon, and 7:00 p.m. Thursday is All Souls Day. Masses will be offered in the morning at 7:30, 8:15, 8:00, 10:00, 11:00, 11:30 and 7:00 p.m. Everybody should participate at Mass on that day -- or better, at several Masses, praying for the dead. (Communion may only be received up to two times per day, but one may assist at Mass without any limit.) Visits to the cemetery with prayers for the dead during the first eight days of November may gain aa plenary indulgence for them.

Get yourselves ready to engage in the annual parish Forty Hours Devotion,a time for the whole parish to adore the Blessed Sacrament. Every individual in the parish ought to spend at least an hour in the church during the time of November 10-11. More on this next week.

Truth Decay

Yet another angst-ridden message from our underground correspondent, Guy Noir - Private Eye, this time arriving by bicycle courier in a large envelope. The hand-written message, with splotches of ink, made me wonder if Guy had used a quill pen to compose the missive. In the envelope I also found a pack of four Havana cigars. Nice.

Guy's message referenced a piece by Sandro Magister entitled "World's End Update ..." (Settimo Cielo, October 20, 2017), which I tracked down on the internet. Then followed his brief comments:

It's getting old. This new universalism has by now been so often suggested and homaged by so many recent popes that one could honestly argue it's part of the postconciliar development of doctrine. I no longer know what to say. Ralph Martin's "Who Will Be Saved?" offered a complete, Catholic, and biblical response to it. Trouble being, though, as Bishop Barron pointed out in his online debate over Martin's corrective, the conservatives' ballyhoooed Benedict XVI himself seems to support some sort of universalism in his encyclical on hope. We can laud tradition all we want, but at some point have to admit that postconciliarism is often an apology for, versus a friend of, Tradition. When the Four Last Things are shined up with new porcelain theological caps after receiving a Balthasarian root canal, Developmentalism is becoming the new orthodoxy, no matter how hard the forced smile from places like First Things. We are all Mormons now.

So it goes ...

Fr. Perrone: without an intense, devout life, Catholics will not survive the age

Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" (Assumption Grotto News, October 15, 2017):

The saintly priest, learned theologian, and catechist extraordinaire, Fr. John A. Hardon, was fond of saying that without an intense, devout life Catholics will not survive the age. I admit that at the time I thought this a ruse to shock his audience into taking their faith seriously. The longer I live in this age, however, the more I become convinced that this priest got it right. In recent decades we've seen great numbers of Catholics cease to practice their faith while others have exited the Church for small community non-denominational churches or trendy mega-churches that offer swingin' and swayin' worship services with an appealing "prosperity" message. I've heard many a sorrow-laden complaint from Catholics who have lost family members or relatives to such groups. It seems that no family has been wholly exempt from the defection. I did a little checking among my own family and close relatives to see how things stacked up in this regard. In a fast count from a pool of 52 family members and close relatives on my mother's side only (my siblings and their children, uncles, aunts, and first cousins), there were only 20 out of 52 still practicing the Catholic faith in which they were reared and living in a Christian manner.

These facts may make us wonder about many things. First, of the necessity of faith in Christ and of keeping His commandments. Without whole-hearted acceptance of all that Christ has revealed by His Church and without a state of grace, one cannot hope to be saved. Then, about the Church. It is by definition one, founded by our Lord: "Upon this rock I will build My Church" with Peter as its rock foundation (Mt 16:18). It is this Church which holds the true doctrine of Christ since it alone is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15). Christ's apostles and their line of successors were handlers-on (transmitters) of 'tradition,' that is, of their authority, powers, the truth and the practices they received from Christ. Efforts to deviate from that apostolic inheritance were made from the earliest days of the Church. Thus were the faithful flock warned of those who would deceive and mislead the flock, false teachers and false prophets (Mt 24:24; 2 Tim 4:3-4), those "even of your own number" who would "draw away the disciples after them" (Acts 20:30). On account of the ever present danger of being misled and of departing from truth, Saint Paul admonished succeeding generations of the Church to "guard the truth that has been entrusted to you" (2 Tim 1:14) and to "hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth of by [written] letter" (2 Thes 2:15).

The Catholic Church is the only Church which has existed uninterruptedly from apostolic times, unbroken in historical continuity. This is an indisputable fact. You will find the Catholic Church in every year since the first day of the Christian era. While the church as Christ's body has matured and organically grown in acquiring a greater clarity in its beliefs (the creed), in a more developed way of celebrating the Christian "mysteries" (the liturgy and the sacraments), and in a worldwide institutional expansion, yet she has remained true to her divine charter, being essentially as she has always been from the beginning and as she is destined to remain until the Lord returns.

The claim is made, of course, that the Catholic Church at some point erred and went astray from what Christ had intended from the beginning. [But] with the publication and now easy availability of the Fathers of the Church (and especially of the Apostolic Fathers -- those who immediately succeeded the apostles) and other early Church writings, it is clear for anyone who would care to investigate the matter that the early Church is the same Catholic Church we know today in all essential aspects. From these documents we learn many things: how Mass was said and the sacraments celebrated; the deeper theological understanding of the faith revealed in time by the Holy Spirit (who "will teach you all things, and bring to remembrance all that I have said to you" (Jn 14:26) and which was formulated in the ancient creedal statements; how holy orders were transmitted from bishop to bishop, and from bishop to priest; etc. Only the Catholic Church did all these things from the beginning of the Christian era and only she continues to do them faithfully.

The problem of defection from the true Church and from its faith plagued the Church from its earliest days. Already in the Book of Revelation we find mention of a sect known as the Nicolaitans (e.g. 2:6). St. Paul wrote against the beliefs of the Gnostics. Aberrant sects claiming to be some manner or other of 'church' apart from the unique historical body of the Catholic Church are fraudulent. There can't be a 'spontaneous generation' of a new Christian body claiming to be in any sense authentic. There must be, and is, but 'one body, one Spirit, one hope, one faith, one baptism, one God' (cf. Eph 4:4-5).

Of course, in our families there are those who are simply non-practitioners, those who still regard themselves as Catholics but who can't be bothered going to Sunday Mass or to Confession. Our Lord warned that the way to salvation was a narrow one, that few would find it (Mt 7:14), and that when He would return to earth there might be but a few who would have kept the faith (cf. Lk 18:8).

there are many diverse reasons why people cease to practice the Catholic faith or who leave holy Church for something other. The lure of sensuality and worldliness -- always a powerful force -- is not to be discounted. There's also the scandalous lives of bad Catholics which are discouraging; the incredible permissive things we now hear coming from Rome, from certain bishops, "theologians," and priests; the fallout from the clergy scandals of recent times; the enormous ignorance of Catholics about their faith and their history; the irreverent way priests and laity deport themselves at Mass such as to belie the doctrines of the Real Presence and the sacrificial nature of the Mass; the great number of divorces with remarriages of Catholics outside the Church; the Church's condemnation of all forms of artificial birth control; the circulation of the pernicious teaching that "one religion is as good as another" (indifferentism). Take all these things together and ... voilà! ... you have all that's needed for a great exodus from the true Church.

Christ is not indifferent about truth, about fidelity to the practice of the faith, or about His Church. The only Church which has perdured through the centuries since the time of its founding is the one, true Church of Christ: the Catholic Church, a truth "which nobody can deny, which nobody can deny."

Fr. Perrone

P.S. Today, Sunday, marks the fourth anniversary of my Mother's death. Mom and Dad were devout believers both. How profoundly grateful I am for the faith my parents passed on to me! I pray for them and I pray to them for the return of our family members who have strayed from the one truth Catholic Church.

Austin Ruse: "James Martin SJ Thinks You're a Nazi"

Austin Ruse: "James Martin SJ Thinks You're a Nazi" (Crisis Magazine, September 29, 2017): "... Martin became incensed when Catholic Vote said he had been 'beaten' in a debate. He said it was a call for violence against him. Yet, now he is saying his critics are no better than Nazis, and his friend McElroy compares them to cancer. One wonders how far McElroy, Martin, Scalia, Faggioli, and Ivereigh want to go in getting rid of those they do not like."

"Farewell to the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family"

Mark Latkovic, "Farewell to the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family" (CWR, October 6, 2017). Wow.

Lifesite petition supporting the "filial correction" of Pope Francis for allowing the propagation of confusion and heterodoxy

In July of 2016, an international group of 45 scholars, academics and pastors petitioned Pope Francis for clarification on his Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. Later that year, four cardinals published their now well-known five questions, or "dubia" (Latin for "doubts") concerning Amoris Laetitia, after receiving no response from Pope Francis. In July of 2017, 62 scholars, pastors and others, sent Pope Francis a "filial correction" (or Correctio) accusing him of "propagating heresy" by equivocal passages in Amoris Laetitia and by "other words, deeds and ommissions." Again, after a month of waiting in vain for a response from Pope Francis, the authors of the Correctio have published their document.

The the document is over 25 pages long, some of it in untranslated Latin, and can be found online at various sites. Clear summaries can be found here and here.

Now I see that LifeSite has launched a PETITION where others can add their names to the signatories. I also see that, despite the Correctio's framer's original intention to voluntarily exclude bishops and cardinals, that Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi, has sent in his name to be added to the original list of signatories. Others will probably follow suit.

Just one comment. The whole idea of sending a "correction" to the Pope sounds radical. Some have called it 'epochal.' Yet it may be important to bear in mind that the document does not accuse Pope Francis of formal heresy. Rather, it argues that the Pope has allowed heterodox opinions to proliferate by his silence when asked for clarification (as by the four cardinals last year), by his prolix and confusing declarations in interview, and his appointment to positions of influence within the Church men who publicly dissent from Catholic teaching on the sacraments. It is, in short, a filial cri de cœur directed to the Holy Father asking for him to raise the torch of truth and illumine the darkness amid the sea of benighted confusion in which so many feel as if they are drowning.

Please pray for His Holiness, Pope Francis, for the whole Church, and for all affected by the confusion abroad.

Silence of the Shepherds

Why is it that Catholic bishops seem to be plumping for Muslims? Why do they issue statements about Islam that are dishonest and misleading? Why do they appear to be so intent on protecting the image of Islam? If you’ve asked yourself these questions, you’re not alone. Given current events and the historical record of Islam’s aggressive campaigns against the Christian West, the rational thinker could be forgiven for believing that the leaders of the Christian world might just want to pay a bit more attention to contemporary anti-Christian violence — thousands of terror attacks, beheadings, stabbings, kidnappings, rapes, torching of churches and Christian-owned businesses — committed by Muslims, in the name of Islam.

Instead, most of the world’s Catholic bishops (with some heroic exceptions, such as Ignatius Joseph III Younan, patriarch of the Syriac Catholic Church of Antioch, and Jean-Clément Jeanbart, Melkite Greek Catholic archbishop of Aleppo), when they’re not extolling the virtues of Islam as a “religion of peace,” can be found counseling their flocks against so-called Islamophobia — anti-Islam sentiment, bias, or violence — typically in the immediate aftermath of a Muslim-perpetrated act of terror or instance of anti-Christian persecution.

For example, in May, after Muslim militants in the Philippines burned down the Cathedral of Mary Help of Christians, murdered more than a hundred Catholics, and held a dozen others hostage, Bishop Edwin de la Peña y Angot of the Marawi prelature worried out loud that the ensuing anti-Muslim sentiments might damage interreligious dialogue. “Some of the natural biases that Christians have against Muslims will be stirred up again,” he said in an interview (Zenit, June 9). “Interfaith dialogue is a very fragile process and these incidents can destroy the foundation that we have built.” About anti-Christian sentiments among Muslims, the bishop was silent.

"George Weigel: The Swan Song of the Catholic Neocons"

[Disclaimer: Rules ##7-9]

A Review of George Weigel’s Lessons in Hope: My Unexpected Life with St. John Paul II (Basic Books, 2017), by Dr. Jesse Russell, Fetzen Fliegen (A Remnant newspaper blog, September 7, 2017):

The notorious journalist and friend of Catholic traditionalist Patrick Buchanan, Hunter S. Thompson once wrote in his famous essay “The Hippies”: “The best year to be a hippie was 1965, but then there was not much to write about, because not much was happening in public and most of what was happening in private was illegal.”

A similar statement could be made of Catholic neoconservatives: the best year to be a Catholic neoconservative was 2001. September 11 had given the green light to the destruction of any country that stood in the way of the New World Order’s goal of global hegemony. With magazines like First Things and books such as Witness to Hope and The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, the very polite triumvirate of neoconservative leaders, Fr. Richard Neuhaus, George Weigel, and Michael Novak, had not only complete control over the American reception of John Paul II’s life and work, but increasing access to the White House of President George W. Bush.

Many bishops such as Charles Chaput, Francis George, and Timothy Dolan (whom Weigel refers to as an “old friend”) were the under the spell of Weigel, Neuhaus, and Novak. Even the lumbering, felt-banner-adorned battleship of old liberals called the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops was turning toward the shores of the “new” Catholic conservativism born from Fr. John Courtney Murray and Jacques Maritain.

But then something happened. Like a Greek tragic hero, the Catholic neocons at the apex of their power, fell from grace.

Pope Francis further democratizes liturgy

Jason Horowitz, "Pope Francis Shifts Power From Rome With 'Hugely Important' Liturgical Reform" (New York Times, September 9, 2017):

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis, who has used his absolute authority in the Vatican to decentralize power from Rome, made a widespread change Saturday to the ways, and words, in which Roman Catholics worship by amending Vatican law to give national bishop conferences greater authority in translating liturgical language. Read more >>

See also New Catholic, "Breaking: Motu Proprio 'Magnum Principium' granting authority on liturgical translations to Bishops' Conferences" (Rorate Caeli, September 9, 2017), which has an English translation of the Motu Proprio, analysis of "Canon 838 in the Light of Conciliar and Post Conciliar Sources," and, further, "A key to reading the moto proprio 'Magnum principium'" by X Arthur Roche, Archbishop Secretary, Congregation for Divine Worship & the Discipline of the Sacraments.

In Cupichianity, Love means never having to say "I believe you [God] exist"!!!

"I can see lots of great Christians with my new glasses!"
Bruvver Eccles, "Do atheists make the best Christians?" (Eccles is saved, August 26, 2017).

Commenting, of course, on the statement in the Chicago Sun Times (August 24, 2017) by Cardinal Cupich, who wrote:

Some of the greatest Christians I know are people who don't actually have a kind of faith system that they believe in. But, in their activity, the way they conduct themselves, there's a goodness there. It might not be articulated in a faith context like my own, but there's a goodness there that is a witness that encourages me.

[Hat tip to JM]

"Still a bulwark of sanity in our big and zany Church"?

Those, paraphrased, are the words of Guy Noir - Private Eye in a recent message to me via carrier pigeon, as per usual lately. He was commenting on an article by Thomas Joseph White, "Catholicism in the Modern World" (First Things, August 25, 2017), which is, indeed, reassuringly sane.

After linking to this other article and remarking, "much as I've carped over JPII’s TOB overreach or Jos. Ratzinger’s exegesis of Genesis, more than a little do I miss them," he then turned to White's article, saying about it (his actual words):

There is also this fascinatingly fusionary list, with Newman, Garrigou-Lagrange (!) and Ratzinger too. Somehow reassures me there is still a bulwark of sanity in our big and… being kind, zany… Church.