Star-struck popes confirm "hermeneutic of continuity"!

Doubtless you've heard about how Salma Hayek, Richard Gere, and George Clooney were feted and awarted with medals by Pope Francis recently to promote the work of a foundation inspired by the pontiff, Scholas Occurrentes. "Important values can be transmitted by celebrities," said one of the organizers, Lorena Bianchetti. There's a short video from the event at this site.

Now comes the intrepid Amateur Brain Surgeon, founder of ABE Ministries, with balm for the wounds of wounded conservative and traditionalist Catholic souls. First, from a book entitled Shepherd of Souls: A Pictorial Life of Pope Pius XII, he points to a page showing how Pius XII was a movie buff, a fan of Clark Gable, and, writes the author:

When the movie King of Hollywood, his wife and daughter were granted a private audience, the subsequent callers were kept waiting in the reception hall for two hours. When Clark Gable's visit ended, Bishop Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli followed. This bishop is now known as Pope John XXIII.

Finally, from the May 9, 1967 issue of the Sydney Morning Herald, ABS quotes from an article with a banner photo of Pope Paul with his arms outstretched to welcome actress Claudia Cardinale at a special audience to mark World Social Communications Media Day. The article says:

Claudia Cardinale worse a mini-skirt, Gina Lollobrigida braved her critics, but Sophia Loren couldn't make it to an unprecedented meeting between Pope Paul VI and the world of showbiz yesterday.

... the film stars stole the show -- even from the Pope himself, who was garmented in dazzling white robes.

Claudia was the first to bring gasps when she walked to her seat near the Pope's throne wearing her mini-little black dress.

Miss Cardinale recently married outside Italy a man who is not the father of her son, born when she was unmarried.

The Church forgave her early sins, but not her marriage to a man the Church considers to be still married to his first wife.

Then came Lollobrigida, who, at first, stood in a small crowd and then was escorted to a chair in a reserved section immediately facing the Throne.

On the way a bearded Swiss Guard stopped her, but a horrified officer reprimanded the Guard with: "Obviously, you don't go to the cinema."

Miss Lollobrigida was recently acquitted of an obscenity charge brought over a falling towel scene in her latest film.

But she has also earned the Church's disapproval because of her legal separation from her husband, Milko Skofic.

... But Miss Loren, who has been embroiled for years in an alleged bigamy case over her marriage to producer Carlo Ponti, disappointed the crowd by preferring to continue work on a film, although invited.

Pope Pius XII's Vatican plot to assassinate Hitler?!

Thomas D. Williams, "New Book Reveals Vatican Plot to Assassinate Hitler" (CM, October 22, 2015):

Although many people have come to swallow the caricature of Pope Pius XII as "Hitler's Pope," after the malicious smear campaign by John Cornwell, the facts now seem overwhelmingly to reveal the opposite: Not only was Pius adamantly opposed to the Führer's policies; he actively sought to have him assassinated.

A fascinating new book by intelligence expert Mark Riebling, Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler, offers a compelling narrative of the actions taken by Pope Pius to stop Hitler from carrying out his campaign of world domination and ethnic cleansing.

Backed by a mass of carefully compiled documentation, Riebling shows that Pius cooperated in a variety of plots, initiated by patriotic, anti-Nazi Germans, to assassinate Hitler and replace the National Socialist regime with a government that would make peace with the West.

The Nazis, in fact, were deeply disturbed by the election of Pius XII in 1939, well aware of Pacelli's many anti-Nazi statements and actions. They commissioned an assessment of the situation from Albert Hartl, a former Catholic priest, who warned that the Catholic Church would prove a serious threat to the Third Reich.

"The Catholic Church fundamentally claims for itself the right to depose heads of state," Hartl wrote, "and down to the present time it has also achieved this claim several times." This statement seemed to embolden disaffected German officers who were seeking assistance to overthrow Hitler.

In 1938, several high-ranking German officers began turning against Hitler, for fear he would lead the country into a devastating war. One of these, General Ludwig Beck, was joined in this endeavor by Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of the Abwehr (Germany's intelligence agency), and his deputy, Colonel Hans Oster.

Read more >>

The Messiah's consciousness: an Advent meditation

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" [temporary link] (Assumption Grotto News, December 21, 2014):

We are in the habit of celebrating birthdays–for good reason. These were the days when we first came to the light of day, bringing–we would like to think–great joy to our mothers. In reality, the day of our conception is even more important than our birthday for it is the day our lives began, though we were unmindful of the fact at the time. 

In the case of the Son of God become man in the chaste womb of the ever-Virgin Mary, He was indeed mindful of His first earthly “home” on His conception day, celebrated in the Church on March 25^th, nine months before Christmas day. His first thought upon entering the world was the sacrifice He had come to make of His human life for saving our souls. “Behold, I have come to do your will, (Father). ...and by that ‘will’ we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.’ (Hb. 10:9,10). Our Lord then entered our world conscious of Himself and of His purpose and mission among men. If we understand this fully, it would mean also that Christ-in-the-womb knew all things in His embryonic state–specifically that He knew us, not as an anonymous mass of humanity, but as individuals, with our total history present to His mind. 

With many errors circulated by presumably well-intended but ignorant (modernist) preaching, many would think the above statements pious hyperbole–claims having been made that Jesus did not know many things, even His identity as God! To hear a reliable voice on the matter, I turn to the orthodox teaching found in the marvelous encyclical (it still is, after so many years) of Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis. “The most loving knowledge...with which the divine Redeemer pursued us from the first moment of the Incarnation surpasses the diligent grasp of any human mind. For, by that blessed vision which He enjoyed when He was just received in the womb of the Mother of God, He has all the members of the Mystical Body (the Church) consciously and perpetually present to Him, and embraces them with saving love. In the manger, on the cross, in the eternal glory of the Father, Christ has all the members of the Church before Him, and joined to Him far more clearly than each one knows and loves himself.” 

I quote this passage to make you realize something almost forgotten nowadays in our Christmas meditations, namely, that the Infant Babe we behold in the manger was a most knowing, fully conscious and indeed infinitely-aware Person who, according to the teaching set forth above, would know you as you are in the present moment, in your past, and in your everlasting future. The Christ Child’s omniscience contrasts with the uncomprehending and empty-eyed-stare of the ox and ass around the manger surely, but it also contrasts with our rather feeble grasp of the divinity of Jesus in that Child. “He was in the world...but the world knew Him not” (Jn. 1:10). Artists fashioning the creche have often made the Infant’s eyes look aware of us before Him. No mindless baby-look in His eyes! Our Lord was conscious of who He was and that He had come “for us men and for our salvation.” This realization of Infant Christ’s cognizance puts a realistic interpretation on many things about the Christmas story that we might otherwise regard as poetical embellishment in phrases such as “sleep in heavenly peace” and “radiant beams from Thy holy face” or “the hopes and fears of all the years are met in Thee tonight’ and “veiled in flesh the Godhead see,” and so on. This is a lesson for us not only about the images we make of the nativity figures in the stable but a lesson about Christ in His other most lowly form of the Holy Eucharist. Just as we would say that He is no oblivious baby in the manger, neither is He unknowing of you when you come before Him in the Holy Sacrament.

And while we’re on the subject of Christ’s infinite knowledge, let’s add a word about Holy Mary, since the liturgy today speaks of Her. She, when responding to the Archangel Gabriel at the annunciation, surely knew what She was agreeing to when She said, “Let it be done to me, according to your word.” Some misguided men have not hesitated to attribute ignorance to Mary in what was being proposed to Her. Gabriel did say that “the Most High will overshadow you” and that the holy offspring to be born of Her would be called “the Son of God.” That ‘overshadowing’ would have been understood from Mary’s knowledge of the Old Testament as the place where the divine presence was preserved (first in the desert tabernacle and later in the Temple). She also knew from reading Isaiah that the Messiah would be the “mighty God.” She would have then known that the Presence in Her was God! 

It is then a bad sign of the times in which we live that we so readily attribute ignorance to Mary at the Annunciation and to Jesus both in His adult life as well as in the manger. It is not they, but we who are ignorant.

I’ll not have another word for you here until after Christmas day has come and gone. My purpose in writing as I have above is that I don’t want you to come to church on Christmas as a “faithless and perverse generation” (Mt 17:17) or as “foolish men, slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken” (Lk 24:25). Come to adore Him, the Lord. Venite, adoremus Dominum.

Fr. Perrone

Pope Pius XII "blocked" from canonization machine

"Pope Francis says Pius XII's beatification won't go ahead" (The Times of Israel, May 26, 2014):

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (AP) -- Pope Francis remained firm in his refusal to allow the beatification of Pope Pius XII, the World War II-era pope accused by some Jews of not speaking out enough against the Holocaust, because he doesn't have enough miracles in his record. [One is required]

As he flew from Ben-Gurion International Airport Monday night at the conclusion of two day visit to Israel, Francis spoke of his position on the matter and made it clear that, for the time being, the beatification won’t go ahead.

“There’s still no miracle,” he said. “If there are no miracles, it can’t go forward. It’s blocked there.”

It has always amazed me how the Catholic world, above all, has apparently fallen for the hateful screed directed against this good Pope -- screed stemming from Rolf Hochhuth's 1963 drama, The Deputy, which fabricated the calumny that Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope" (soundly debunked as a myth). The matter has been thoroughgoingly refuted, and numerous prominent Jews, from Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir to President of the World Jewish Congress Nahum Goldmann, are on record for publicly thanking Pope Pius XII for his protection of thousands of Jews within the precincts of Vatican City and his summer residence Castel Gondolfo during the Nazi Holocaust.

Furthermore, as to lack of a miracle in the case of Pope Pius XII, this report surfaced some years ago, as one of our readers points out. I wonder what's happened to it? Anybody know? "Possible Miracle of Venerable Pius XII Emerges; Validates His Heroic Virtue in the Face of Mainstream Misconception" (St. Michael Society, January 20, 2010).

[Hat tip to L.S.]

Another dissenting opinion on the canonizations

Our undercover correspondent we keep on retainer in an Atlantic seaboard city that knows how to keep its secrets, Guy Noir - Private Eye, just sent us the link to the following article, with this commentary:

Uh oh! I am recommending an article in The Remnant. Yikes. But as a recovering Calvinist, the references to the permissive versus active will of God do warm the heart. Besides, this makes sense. Woodward's "Making Saints" played a role in my conversion, so I guess I have a reflexively protective reaction to all the miracle-waiving.

Somehow it reminds me of Reagan. The conservatives loved it when he used TV and imaging to score a home run. But later the chickens came home to roost with Clinton and Obama's telegenic prowess. Likewise, it was all good for JPII to waive a miracle since he was a conservative's favorite who came of age in Communist Poland. But now that Francis is following suit, some are thinking, errr, not so much.

"The Fast-tracked Canonization: A Lamentable Lack of Prudence," written by Father Celatus (The Remnant, April 23, 2014):

Critics have complained that Pope Pius XII did nothing to help victims of Nazi atrocities; critics have complained that Pope John Paul II did nothing to help victims of clergy abuse. The irony is that the Vatican shows more sensitivity to Jewish concerns than it does to the victims of its own clergy.

Why are these canonizations being fast-tracked?

Is it "extreme" of me to ask that? While I never met Blessed John XXIII and don't know too much about him beyond the little I've read, Blessed John Paul II is the Pope under whom I was received into the Church, the only Pope with whom I've actually exchanged a handshake, and I have every reason to have loved and appreciated His Holiness during his earthly life and to appreciate him still. Here are some of the positive things being said in the mainstream media about the pending canonizations of Blessed John XXIII and John Paul II:


Yet I have also scratched my head a bit over what seems a rather precipitous and fevered rush to canonize these two popes. My reservation has nothing to do with doubting the Church's authority to canonize them, doubting their presence in heaven, or thinking ill of these soon-to-be sainted popes who were in their earthly lives undoubtedly sinners just as we all are. (Indeed, we know that among the saints whose veneration the Church approves there were many that were never formally canonized at all, but are nevertheless recognized as saints by the Church.) Rather, in much the way that Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman questioned the timing of Vatican I's declaration of papal infallibility (without in any way questioning the declaration itself), I think there are those who wonder whether there are not reasons for finding the timing of these particular canonizations a trifle imprudent.

Secular and Jewish critics have complained that Pope Pius XII didn't do enough to help the Jewish victims of the Nazi holocaust (though I think there's ample evidence to confute that silly conceit), and the Church has slowed down his case and continued to defer it despite very good reasons for promoting it. Critics have likewise complained that Blessed John Paul II did not do enough to help the victims of clerical sexual abuse, as in his alleged passivity if not complicity in the case of the founders of the Legionaries, Maciel Marcial (though I think there is good evidence against his knowing complicity), but administrators of his cause have not let these concerns deter them.

Other concerns have been raised as well. Professor Roberto de Mattei, for example, whose credentials are above dispute, suggests that when the Church canonizes one of the faithful, "it is not that she wants to assure us that the deceased is in the glory of Heaven," but rather that "She proposes them as a model of heroic virtue." The person proposed for canonization therefore might be an exemplary religious, pastor, father of a family, etc. In the case of a Pope, it is assumed that he must have exercised heroic virtue in performing his mission as Pontiff, as was for example, the case for Saint Pius V or Saint Pius X. That sounds like the bar is being set pretty high -- enough, at least, to give some pause in the present matter.

Now it is true that Mattei also goes on to offer reasons why he believes that the pontificate of John XXIII was "objectively harmful to the Church," which goes well beyond my competence to assay, although I have to wonder whether his analysis of the question of infallible judgments in the case of matters not directly pertaining to the doctrinal content of faith and morals does not touch on some significant considerations.

Finally, there is also this video during Holy Week by Michael Matt, which, in the final analysis, I think cannot be simply shrugged off as silly traddy nonsense. I think he is right that Blessed John Paul II would probably agree that his own canonization should not be fast-tracked, but time ought to be taken to set aside all grave doubts -- not only for the sake of the critics, but for the sake of the Church and the candidate for canonization himself. The consequences of not doing so, as he points out, could include providing substantial fodder for the enemies of the Church.

So put me down as an obedient son of the Church who will always happily submit to Mother Church, but a son who is a trifle less than enthusiastic about the timing of these canonizations. What can I say? Maybe it can be chalked up to having Blessed Cardinal Newman as my patron ... well, perhaps. (As I said at the outset, he was less than enthusiastic about the timing of Vatican I's declaration of papal infallibility.) In the end, these opinions aren't going to make any difference to what happens on Divine Mercy Sunday; but I'm grateful for a Church that allows for the expression of concerns by the laity, whatever they may be worth, and whoever may turn a deaf ear.

Related?

“The splendid absurdity of the coming event can be grasped when we recognize that John XXIII and John Paul II would both have been condemned for their ideas and their words had they expressed them when Pius IX was in power.”

Commonweal (August 11, 2000), two weeks before Pope John Paul II’s double beatification of Popes Pius IX and John XXIII

The case for Pacelli's canonization

Adfero argues a case for the canonization of Pacelli (RC, April 22, 2014), noting that the case for beatification was launched by Pope Paul VI and that a very strong case can be made from a standpoint of sheer numbers alone:

For those who say we are now living in the greatest age of the Church, let us consider the numbers below, just for the dioceses of the United States during the reign of Pius XII [Eugenio Pacelli]. They are remarkable, to say the least -- if the canonization of a Pope also takes into consideration the appraisal of his pontificate (other than his personal holiness and his prophetical wisdom, both of which are irreproachable regarding Pope Pacelli), then these surely deserve observation:

Adfredo concludes:

While all these numbers may make one yearn for the Church of old, a few of them are truly staggering for the modern mind to comprehend in today's Catholic-lite world: a 200+% increase in American converts; a nearly 250% increase in seminaries built; a 200+% increase in seminarians; and a 50% increase in priests. All of this happened over Pius XII's glorious 19-year-reign.

While we do not question the canonization of a saint, we can say, looking at these numbers, that there is a strong case to be made that the lineup on April 27 is short one great man.

Related: Rita Ferrone, "Room at the Font: Is the RCIA Still Working?" (Commonweal, April 22, 2014):

From 2005 to 2010 adult baptisms fell by 41 percent. Those losses were masked by a gain in adult receptions into full communion; then those totals began to fall too.