• Our Blogger

    Fr. Joseph Jenkins

  • When I began this blog, my header image was the New Testament scene where Jesus flogged the money-changers out of the temple. I imaged myself and all priests flogging the devils that distort the faith and assault believers. The faith that gives us consolation can and should also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    GA210286's avatarGA210286 on Impotence & Marriage
    Anonymous's avatarAnonymous on Ask a Priest
    jbg's avatarjbg on An Appeal to Reconciliation fo…
    Inveilis's avatarInveilis on Ask a Priest
    Mihaela Ghenea's avatarMihaela Ghenea on Ask a Priest

The Great Saturday or Sunday Sabbath Debate #4

Posted on August 16, 2012 by Father Joe

Cathy writes:

The Letter of Barnabas (74 A.D.)

“Moreover God says to the Jews, ‘Your new moons and Sabbaths cannot endure.’ You see how he says, ‘The present Sabbaths are not acceptable to me, but the Sabbath which I have made in which, when I have rested from all things, I will make the beginning of the eighth day which is the beginning of another world.’ Wherefore we Christians keep the eighth day [Sunday] with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead” (Barnabas 15:6-8).

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath.” (Colossians 2:16).

Here are some other writings that describe the Lord’s Day being celebrated on Sunday in later centuries (just for fun):

Ignatius of Antioch (110 A.D.) wrote:

“[T]hose who were brought up in the ancient order of things [i.e. Jews] have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s day, on which also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death” (Letter to the Magnesians 8).

Justin Martyr (155 A.D.) wrote:

“[W]e too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined [on] you—namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your heart. . . How is it, Trypho, that we would not observe those rites which do not harm us—I speak of fleshly circumcision and sabbaths and feasts? . . . God enjoined you to keep the sabbath, and imposed on you other precepts for a sign, as I have already said, on account of your unrighteousness and that of your fathers” (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 18, 21).

Tertullian (203 A.D.) wrote:

“Let him who contends that the Sabbath is still to be observed as a balm of salvation, and circumcision on the eighth day . . . teach us that, for the time past, righteous men kept the Sabbath or practiced circumcision, and were thus rendered ‘friends of God.’ For if circumcision purges a man, since God made Adam uncircumcised, why did he not circumcise him, even after his sinning, if circumcision purges? . . . Therefore, since God originated Adam uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, consequently his offspring also, Abel, offering him sacrifices, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, was by him [God] commended [Gen. 4:1-7, Heb. 9:4]. . . . Noah also, uncircumcised—yes, and unobservant of the Sabbath—God freed from the deluge. For Enoch too, most righteous man, uncircumcised and unobservant of the Sabbath, he translated from this world, who did not first taste death in order that, being a candidate for eternal life, he might show us that we also may, without the burden of the law of Moses, please God” (An Answer to the Jews 2).

The Didascalia (225 A.D.) stated:

“The apostles further appointed: On the first day of the week let there be service, and the reading of the Holy Scriptures, and the oblation, because on the first day of the week our Lord rose from the place of the dead, and on the first day of the week he arose upon the world, and on the first day of the week he ascended up to heaven, and on the first day of the week he will appear at last with the angels of heaven” (Didascalia 2).

Origen (229 A.D.) wrote:

“Hence it is not possible that the [day of] rest after the Sabbath should have come into existence from the seventh [day] of our God. On the contrary, it is our Savior who, after the pattern of his own rest, caused us to be made in the likeness of his death, and hence also of his resurrection” (Commentary on John 2:28).

Victorinus (300 A.D.) wrote:

“The sixth day [Friday] is called parasceve, that is to say, the preparation of the kingdom. . . . On this day also, on account of the passion of the Lord Jesus Christ, we make either a station to God or a fast. On the seventh day he rested from all his works, and blessed it, and sanctified it. On the former day we are accustomed to fast rigorously, that on the Lord’s day we may go forth to our bread with giving of thanks. And let the parasceve become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear to observe any sabbath with the Jews . . . which sabbath he [Christ] in his body abolished” (The Creation of the World).

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Sabbath | Leave a comment »

The Great Saturday or Sunday Sabbath Debate #3

Posted on August 15, 2012 by Father Joe

Cathy writes:

The Didache (Constitutions of the Holy Apostles) written in 70 AD:

“But every Lord’s day, gather yourselves together and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned” (Didache 14).

“And on the day of our Lord’s resurrection, which is the Lord’s day, meet more diligently, sending praise to God that made the universe by Jesus, and sent Him to us, and condescended to let Him suffer, and raised Him from the dead. Otherwise what apology will he make to God who does not assemble on that day to hear the saving word concerning the resurrection…?” (Didache, Vol. 7).

“And how can he be other than an adversary to God, who takes pains about temporary things night and day, but takes no care of things eternal? Who takes care of washings and temporary food every day, but does not take care of those that endure forever? How can such a one even now avoid hearing that word of the Lord, ‘The Gentiles are justified more than you’ as He says, by way of reproach, to Jerusalem, ‘Sodom is justified rather than thou.’ For if the Gentiles every day, when they arise from sleep, run to their idols to worship them, and before all their work and all their labors do first of all pray to them, and in their feasts and in their solemnities do not keep away, but attend upon them; and not only those upon the place, but those living far distant do the same; and in their public shows all come together, as into a synagogue: in the same manner those which are vainly called Jews, when they have worked six days, on the seventh day rest, and come together in their synagogue, never leaving or neglecting either rest from labor or assembling together… If, therefore, those who are not saved frequently assemble together for such purposes as do not profit them, what apology wilt thou make to the Lord God who forsakes his Church, not imitating so much as the heathen, but by such, thy absence grows slothful, or turns apostate or acts wickedness? To whom the Lord says to Jeremiah, ‘Ye have not kept My ordinances; nay, you have not walked according to the ordinance of the heathen and you have in a manner exceeded them… How, therefore, will anyone make his apology who has despised or absented himself from the church of God?” (Didache, Vol. 7).

“…every Lord’s day, hold your solemn assemblies, and rejoice: for he will be guilty of sin who fasts on the Lord’s day, being the day of the resurrection…” (Didache, Vol. 7).

“On the day of the resurrection of the Lord, that is, the Lord’s day, assemble yourselves together, without fail, giving thanks to God, and praising Him for those mercies God has bestowed upon you through Christ, and has delivered you from ignorance, error, and bondage, that your sacrifice may be unspotted, and acceptable to God, who has said concerning His universal Church: ‘In every place shall incense and a pure sacrifice be offered unto me; for I am a great King, saith the Lord Almighty, and my name is wonderful among the heathen,’ [Malachi 1:11, 14]” (Didache, Vol. 7).

Lou writes:

I will comment on your references of Sunday-keeping before 100 AD. Your first reference to Sunday-keeping before 100 AD is the Didache. Unfortunately, the last ten volumes of the Didache is a most unreliable source. The first six volumes are recognized as containing the binding force of the Word of God, the rest (from which you gather your information) is the work of human compilation and contrivance. The Didache is, properly speaking, the first six chapters and no more.

Father Joe responds:

Good work, Cathy, you answered Lou’s challenge and he had to tell a fable to escape the trap he made for himself!

Turning to Lou, since its teachings ring as heretical to your SDA ears, you join the likes of F. E. Vokes in saying that the DIDACHE must be later fiction.

Sorry, Lou, I do not know who told you that the DIDACHE was a counterfeit, but you were misled. Cathy is again right on target. While there is an evolutionary character to the work, its style, language, etc. all point to its authenticity in its various sections. Fragments of the DIDACHE have been found in Latin, Coptic, Georgian, and Greek (particularly of the DOCTRINA that you oppose).

The DIDACHE TON DODEKA APOSTOLON is universally held as a first century Syrian document dated around 60 AD to 70 AD. That means that it was not written long after St. Paul’s letters and about the same time period as our Gospels. It has sixteen chapters in total. The first six that you hold in high regard deal with the “Way of Life” and the “Way of Death.” Chapters seven through ten deal with liturgical affairs like baptism, fasts, and the Eucharist. You reject these chapters, not because they reflect a different hand or a later date (which is not true) but because you find their content offensive. The fact that Christians could be involved with such “Catholic” things during the “living memory” period after Jesus puts your every dissent into question. You would be more consistent and honest to spurn the entire work. Chapters eleven through fifteen cover church laws and discipline, including THE PROPER KEEPING OF THE LORD’S DAY (Sunday) and the election of bishops. Chapter sixteen prophesies the Lord’s return WITH ALL THE SAINTS (oops! I guess they were not sleeping after all). Cathy was brilliant in mentioning this document. It undermines every misconception and lie (even if inadvertent) that you might conjure up.

The DIDACHE was well known in the early Church. There are even references to some of the parts you disavow. It influenced the APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS and was promoted by St. Athanasius. It also includes the earliest known Church condemnation of abortion.

Since this document is authentic, Cathy has successfully answered your challenge to give testimony prior to 100 AD in favor of Sunday worship over the Saturday synagogue service (see first post). You need to respond intelligently, without subterfuge to the texts she gives you.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Apostles, Sabbath | Leave a comment »

The Great Saturday or Sunday Sabbath Debate #2

Posted on August 14, 2012 by Father Joe

This post gives my response (only) to the legalistic argument for the Saturday sabbath over the Sunday observance made by Lou, one of the Internet’s more offensive anti-Catholics.  

Father Joe writes: 

As for Scripture verses that seem to put things in a more balanced perspective, we read:

“For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never be the same sacrifices which are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near” (Hebrews 10:1).

Believers in Jesus assemble on Sunday to commemorate the Lord’s Supper and the one sacrifice that makes true and lasting reparation to the throne of God. The Sunday Eucharist, not temple sacrifice or synagogue service, is the foretaste of the “good things” offered by our Savior.

“Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith” (Galatians 3:23-26).

The coming of Christ has changed many things. God, who is Spirit, is reflected in the face of Jesus Christ. This ushers in a new age regarding the economy of images. Thus, the early Christians developed religious art and statuary to convey their faith and devotion. Christian faith in Jesus is paramount and the Sunday observance of his resurrection becomes an element of the new law over the old.

“For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them.’ Now it is evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for ‘He who through faith is righteous shall live’; but the law does not rest on faith, for ‘He who does them shall live by them.’ Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us— for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who hangs on a tree’ – that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (Galatians 3:10-13).

The law was the Hebrew elaboration upon the Ten Commandments and the various ancient divine mandates. While the commandments retain their binding force, it is in light of Christ’s two-fold commandment to love God and neighbor. The old law is reinterpreted in light of the Christ-event and the lived-situation of converts for whom the “eighth day” was the principal occasion for celebrating their faith and their spiritual adoption.

“For Christ is the end of the law, that everyone who has faith may be justified” (Romans 10:4).

This confirms the Catholic interpretation of Matthew 5:17-18. Heaven and earth, as we knew it, has indeed passed away.

There are various Scriptures that place the spirit of the law over the letter. This might also be applied to the Christian Sunday since believers taking a day to praise and honor God will surely please our Lord. I can just see Lou now with his Seventh Day Adventist proclivities, banging his feet and shouting at God: “That’s not fair, God! They did not keep the right day! They had no right to single out Sunday as a day to commemorate Christ’s resurrection and to assemble. It is Saturday or nothing! They should be punished, not rewarded for remembering and loving you!”

“Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our sufficiency is from God, who has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant, NOT IN A WRITTEN CODE BUT IN SPIRIT; for the written code kills, BUT THE SPIRIT GIVES LIFE. Now if the dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such splendor that the Israelites could not look at Moses’ face because of its brightness, fading as this was, will not the DISPENSATION OF THE SPIRIT BE ATTENDED WITH GREATER SPLENDOR? For if there was splendor in the dispensation of condemnation, the dispensation of righteousness must far exceed it in splendor. Indeed, in this case, what once had splendor has come to have no splendor at all, because of the splendor that surpasses it. For if what faded away came with splendor, what is permanent must have much more splendor. Since we have such a hope, WE ARE VERY BOLD . . .” (2 Corinthians 3:5-12).

Our Lord is alive in his Church, making his presence and authority available. When Christ’s disciples were condemned by the Pharisees for plucking and eating the ears of grain on the Sabbath, our Lord defended them, saying, “And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD OF THE SABBATH” (Matthew 12:7-8). The rabid imitation of SDA faith that Lou promotes makes him an heir to the Pharisees. Lou witnesses this attitude on a viciously anti-Catholic website operated by his partner in crime Nicholas.  Dispersions against those who worship God on Sunday (and not a pagan deity either) fall upon men and women who act in good faith. Instead of supporting their efforts to bring Jesus Christ back into people’s lives, they ridicule those who want a restoration of blue laws as pawns of the anti-Christ and associates of the Whore of Babylon.

There is a real sickness in their polemics. We need to pray for them.

Furthermore, the law of God mandated circumcision, and yet through the intervention of St. Paul, and the acceptance of St. Peter at the Council of Jerusalem, the Church abrogated that which was a major sign of membership in the People of God. One would not have to become Jewish before becoming a Christian. The matter of transferring the Sabbath to the day that commemorated Christ’s resurrection would seem a far easier matter and there is no critical debate among believers. “He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal” (Romans 2:29). Of course, up until modern times, many Christians, and Catholics in particular, took both Saturday and Sunday as special days of rest to be with family and to reaffirm their commitment to God. Many Catholics attend the Saturday night anticipatory Mass for Sunday. The Neocatechumenal Way, a religious association in the Church for post-baptismal catechesis, celebrates its liturgies ONLY on the Saturday Hebrew Sabbath. A menorah candle burns on the altar and the congregation dances the Jewish Mishnah around the altar at the end of the liturgy. They pledge obedience to the Pope and function entirely within the good graces of the Roman Catholic Church. They have so many vocations that they operate a number of their own seminaries, including a notable one in New Jersey. Thus, one could say that there is a growing restoration of the ancient Hebrew elements and the significance of the Jewish Sabbath, particularly as blended to the resurrection theme so very important on Sunday.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Church, Sabbath | Leave a comment »

The Great Saturday or Sunday Sabbath Debate #1

Posted on August 13, 2012 by Father Joe

This post is the start of an argument about the Hebrew Saturday sabbath over the Christian Sunday observance.  Nicholas and Lou, two of the Internet’s more offensive anti-Catholics, attacked the Christian practice of Sunday observance.  I have not saved here the website post from Nicholas that was the catalyst for this discussion.  Lou is the visible point-man for the pseudo-SDA view in this debate.

Cathy writes:

First, I would like to make one important clarification: I do not believe God “changed” the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. I believe that the Saturday Sabbath has “passed away” and is not included in the NEW Covenant. Rather, we have the Lord’s Day, Sunday, on which we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. (See Revelation 1:10)

Lou writes:

So, you say that you don’t believe that God “changed” the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. But you believe that the *Saturday* Sabbath has “passed away.” That is a direct contradiction of the Lord Jesus’ words. For Jesus says:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matthew 5:17-18).

For as long as the heavens and the earth remain, God’s law, including His Sabbath, will also remain. That means forever! The text in Revelation 1:10 is not a reference to Sunday, but to the Sabbath day, of which Jesus proclaimed He is “Lord.”

Father Joe responds:

I think what Cathy is trying to say is that there was no singularly recorded moment wherein God spoke from heaven, declaring that the Jewish Sabbath would be transferred to Sunday. She is correct in this sense, although Lou is not far from the truth when he argues that the Catholic Church moved the obligation, or at least the center of gravity, from Saturday to Sunday, the so-called “eighth day” in Patristic testimony. We must remember that Lou and his friend Nicholas are biblical fundamentalists (at least of a sort). Lou might ask for evidence of the Sunday Sabbath before 100 AD, but he really does not mean it, at least if the testimony is extra-biblical (outside the literal Scriptural testimony). He is quick to mimic the bad scholarship that would dismiss other ancient Christian documents as spurious. It is as if the Bible emerges from some nebulous vacuum, and not from a teaching Church or from a canon negotiated by bishops, albeit under the influence of the Holy Spirit. This is what makes debate with his likes so very difficult. He is the supreme interpreter of Holy Writ. The Church and all her traditions are as weeds to be burned. History and truth becomes subjective with any facts to the contrary ignored or twisted to fit a preconceived bigotry. As for the topic at hand, the evidence seems to indicate that the shift did not happen all at once. The first Christians were Jewish and maintained their synagogue participation on the Sabbath. However, as the Church added to her numbers many Gentile converts, the Hebrew customs and rituals decreased in value. The expulsion of the Christian Jews from the synagogue and the subsequent persecution would be the straw that broke the camel’s back. The Christians were also gathering on Sunday for the commemoration of the Lord’s Supper (tied to an agape or love-feast). Every Sunday was seen as a celebration of Christ’s resurrection. Cathy has all this quite right.

As for Revelation 1:10, this is part of a late document, between 90 and 120 AD. It is the last book of the New Testament to be written. Lou is very wrong in saying that “the Lord’s day” in this text refers to the Saturday “Jewish” Sabbath. The phrase “the Lord’s day” was a code word universally used by Christians to signify Sunday. Lou is guilty of bad scholarship here and ignorance of God’s Word. John writes: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet saying . . .” The trumpet imagery is borrowed from the Sinai theophany in Exodus and in other eschatological situations. The day that commemorated our Lord’s resurrection is tied in with his Second Coming and the Judgment. The Hebrew Sabbath, while important to the early Jewish Christians, did not have the devotional weight of the Christian Sunday because the resurrection of Jesus was seen as a new creative event, the proof of our redemption and hope for eternal life in Christ. John sees all time after the resurrection as End-Times. The victory is already won in Christ. We are merely awaiting the final consummation in the Lord.

Let us turn to the Scripture that Lou cites, Matthew 5:17-18. Again, he displays his ignorance of the Word of God and his troubled use of isolated passages as proof texts. He interprets these verses as evidence that the Hebrew Saturday Sabbath is a permanent affair. However, Christians have never understood this text in this way. The assertion “Till heaven and earth pass (away)” does not necessarily mean the end of the world. Rather, it means the PASSING AWAY of the world, as we knew it. Regarding the matter of the Sabbath, it is, as Cathy would have us understand, the transition from the Saturday to the Sunday holy day. Of course, the text is saying a great deal more. Jesus has come to fulfill the law and the prophets. The ancient law and traditions bind them “till heaven and earth pass away” and “until all is accomplished.” This occurs with the revelatory event of Christ’s paschal mystery, his passion, death and resurrection.

John’s Gospel makes this delineation clear from the mouth of Jesus on the Cross: “After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the scripture), ‘I thirst.’ A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, ‘It is finished’; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:28). The Gospel is addressed to those in the final age, the age foretold by Isaiah of “new heavens and a new earth” (Isaiah 65:17; 66:22). However, during Jesus’ public ministry, they are still living in the setting of the old law, anticipating what would come.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Commandments, Sabbath | 1 Comment »

Dim Prospects for the Society of St. Pius X

Posted on July 19, 2012 by Father Joe

I would not argue against the desire for the Society of St. Pius X to preserve its identity, as long as such does not include a persistent and deliberate opposition to the rest of the Church’s self-understanding.

I would also not argue against the discernment of a silent apostasy to which we must respond.  However, we must not be deaf to the loud or blatant rebellion and dissent from various members, on the right and left, that afflicts the institution founded by Christ. The greatest threat to papal authority today is not a strained collegialism but an arrogant disobedience.  Given their continued participation in this assault, I am not optimistic that the conditions demanded upon by the Society will pass muster with the Holy See.

Despite the negotiations, reconciliation will not come by spurning the directives of the Holy Father while not budging upon their own obstinacy toward an authentic Ecumenical Council of the Church, Vatican II. Any such forced reconciliation would damage real ecclesial unity. While they speak of “canonical normalization,” they cannot even concur with the living Church over which Code of Canon Law actually applies and is in force. Despite their profession in the “monarchial constitution” of the Church under the Pope, they feel they still need a “deliberative vote” before deciding if they will listen to him or not. Is it not peculiar that they attack collegialism in the universal Church but demand upon it for themselves, even arguing that it trumps papal demands?  That is certainly not my idea of ecclesial obedience.

I am also not blind to the possible shades of Father Feeney in reference to the Church “outside of which there is no salvation nor possibility to find means leading to salvation.” They are usually very careful not to associate themselves with these extremists, despite a shared affection for traditionalism.  While the Church is certainly the great mystery or sacrament of salvation where we encounter Christ, this would seem to invalidate even the more restrained strands of ecumenism. The Church has affirmed that elements of Catholicism with which the Protestants absconded like baptism and faith in Jesus Christ still have some pervading value. While the issue is more complicated with Jews, we acknowledge that Christ is the fulfillment of the one covenant that God first established with them (Cardinal Dulles and Cardinal Ratzinger, i.e. the Pope). The Church is necessary for salvation because there is no way to the Father apart from Jesus Christ. The Church is his Mystical Body. Thus, both are one and integral to salvation. The irony is that if the Society refuses reunion then they will be condemned by their own definition as outside that visible body “by which the supreme power of government . . . belongs only to the Pope, Vicar of Christ on earth.” The only possible solution they might find for this conundrum would be the sedevacantism that some of them apparently have already embraced. Declaring the Chair of Peter vacant, they can define themselves as the true Church and appoint one of their own bishops as the Pope, or in actuality as an anti-pope. Given online sermons and writings from various of their priests, my suspicions are that a number of them will join the Society of St. Pius V in this regard. I hope I am proven wrong.

Further, it is one thing to say that we oppose the abuses from the nebulous spirit of Vatican II; however, they continue to castigate the council itself. As I recall, the Holy See implied that such would be a deal-breaker. It is certainly okay and proper “to uphold the declarations and the teachings of the constant Magisterium of the Church.” Vatican II must be understood or interpreted in light of the traditions and constant faith of the Church.  However, instead of seeing continuity, they stress a break “in regard to all the novelties of the Second Vatican Council which remain tainted with errors, and also in regard to the reforms issued from it.” While it lacks certain specificity, this statement can readily be interpreted as a general repudiation of the Church today in all her elements from the catechism to the sacraments.  Is this what they meant to say?

Only one of the four traditionalist bishops of the Society of St. Pius X has shown any real interest in the overtures of Pope Benedict XVI. Bishops Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Alfonso de Galarreta and Richard Williamson threatened internal schism within the Society, warning that any agreement with the Vatican would result in surrendering the fight against worldwide apostasy. This is strong language, literally saying that contemporary Catholicism is a false religion. Indeed, when we look at a number of their priests and apologists, they slam the whole business as capitulation to “the Modernist Pope” and “the Modernist Rome.” Some of their sermons online and various writings go so far as to call counterfeit both the “Novus Ordo” priesthood and the “new” Mass.  One writer claimed that since Cardinal Ratzinger was made a bishop under the new ritual that he did not share in the episcopacy and thus could not be a genuine pope.  People like that will not want to “pollute” themselves with any association with the rest of us.  There is a lot of wishful thinking, but after almost a half-century separation, many of them have gotten used to their independence. Slamming the rest of the Church and slurring the Holy Father, at least in sermons and in routine discourse has become second-nature. They do not seem the least bit afraid that they might be committing blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.  Even Bishop Bernard Fellay has lamented this problem. It has become a habit hard or next to impossible to break. They will not reconnect with what they see as the enemy.

Pope Benedict XVI was very kind to lift their excommunication. However, I would not be surprised if Lefebvrites should invoke its reimposition.  After all, they never actually acknowledged it anyway.  All it would take is the consecration of another unapproved bishop.  Such would force the Church’s hand. The Society itself seems aware that their current response will not suffice for Rome. Thus, they will not be coming home any time soon. While pledging fidelity, they are not going to budge until (in their estimation) the day comes “when an open and serious debate will be possible which may allow the return to Tradition of the ecclesiastical authorities.” In other words, they are saying that they are RIGHT and Rome is WRONG and that nothing will change until the post-Vatican II leadership gives in.

(Lumen Gentium) “Each and all these items which are set forth in this dogmatic Constitution have met with the approval of the Council Fathers. And We by the apostolic power given Us by Christ together with the Venerable Fathers in the Holy Spirit, approve, decree and establish it and command that what has thus been decided in the Council be promulgated for the glory of God.”–Pope Paul VI

Given in Rome at St. Peter’s on November 21, 1964.

I will now wait for hell to freeze over.

I do not think the devil will be wearing a coat any time soon.

Responding to the Pope, here is the difficult condition laid down by the Lefebvrites for reunion:  “The freedom to preserve, share and teach the sound doctrine of the constant Magisterium of the Church and the unchanging truth of the divine tradition and the freedom to accuse and even to correct the promoters of the errors or the innovations of modernism, liberalism, and Vatican II and its aftermath.”

Indeed, it looks like the devil is stoking the fire.

Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Muller explains (July 20):  “The purpose of dialogue is to overcome difficulties in the interpretation of the Second Vatican Council, but we cannot negotiate on revealed faith, that is impossible. An Ecumenical Council, according to the Catholic faith, is always the supreme teaching authority of the Church.”

Can the Society of St. Pius X Really Be Reconciled?

Archbishop DiNoia, Ecclesia Dei and the Society of St. Pius X

SSPX recognizes papal authority, hints discussions will continue

Eternal Rome vs. the Magisterium:  A Contemporary Myth

SSPX Calls Vatican Recociliation Offer ‘Clearly Unacceptable’

Society of St. Pius X vs. Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter

Lefebvrians say they can only accept doctrinal preamble on three “conditions”

Vatican’s Doctrine Chief: Pius X Society Must Accept Vatican II Teachings

Filed under: Bishops, Catholic, Eucharist, Faith, Magisterium, Pope, Tradition | 19 Comments »

Faith & Values in the News

Posted on July 11, 2012 by Father Joe

Tribute concert held for Catholic who saved Jewish children

Irena Sendler was a Polish Catholic who saved some 2,500 Jewish children by smuggling them out of Warsaw’s ghetto.  She was eventually captured and faced cruel torture.  Nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2008, she lost out to Al Gore for his movie on global warming.  The late Pope John Paul II was repeatedly voted down because of the Church’s stance on human sexuality and the sanctity of life.  It did not seem to matter that President Reagan, President Gorbachev, and Prime Minister Thatcher claimed that he was the chief catalyst and their partner in bringing down the Iron Curtain and a Communist Eastern Europe.  After all, President Obama, another winner, has done so much more for world peace… or has he?  Hum.  I guess the Nobel Peace Prize is officially a meaningless joke… too bad.

Improvising Illinois priest barred from pulpit

The bishop did the right thing.  However, this priest should have been disciplined a long time ago.  The earlier translation did not allow clergy to change the prayers to fit their whims.  This was abuse.  The liturgy is not our personal possession but the rite of the whole Church.  We are servants of the altar, not its master.

Vatican lauds ordination of China’s missing bishop

The Red Chinese are up to their old tricks.

Newly ordained Chinese bishop of Shanghai goes missing

We need to pray for this bishop and the Church in China and Hong Kong.

Footloose: NYC Couple Arrested for Dancing

Arrested for dancing?  How do you feel about the actions you hear of lately? For instance, the EPA is using drones to monitor farmland, NYC is banning large soda, and the U.S. government will tax you if you don’t buy health insurance – are these acts infringing upon what you consider your personal freedom?  I guess Gene Kelly singin’ and dancin’ in the rain would get him arrested today.

Olympian Becomes a Sister

Here is a great Vocations story!

Socialite Denise Rich dumps U.S. passport

She was a major fundraiser for Democrats and their causes, raking in millions.  She moved freely among and was part of the entertainment industry and liberal Hollywood crowd who think they know what is best for our country.  But I guess her own fortune meant more to her than her country.  Rather than pay her share in taxes she gave up her citizenship.  I may be a poor man but I would not take all the money in the world for my U.S. citizenship!  God bless America!

Filed under: News | 2 Comments »

The Mystical Body of Christ

Posted on June 29, 2012 by Father Joe

The Body of Christ has yet another meaning and here we are indebted to St. Paul. The union that exists between Christ and his people (since their baptism into Christ by the waters of the sacrament) is identified as the Body of Christ by St. Paul. Looking at 1 Corinthians 12:27, we read: “Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it.” St. Paul refers to the Church as the Body of Christ. He likens all of us, united to Christ and to each other, as in an intimate union. At Baptism, each of us, if you will, becomes a cell in that body and at the same time participating in the life of the whole body with its head, Christ. That union is not a physical union as in nailing two boards together, nor is it a moral union as when people are united as members of the same club or organization. This union of Christ and his members is unique; so much so, that we have to make up a new phrase to help us understand it. We call it the Mystical Body of Christ. All of us are united to Christ and to one another. Christ tried to inform us of this union with the parable of the vine and the branches. As the branch must adhere to the vine to live; we must adhere to Christ. Life must flow through Christ, the vine, to the branches, bringing about the fruit of our lives. St. Paul, back when he was Saul, persecuted the early Christians. Our Lord called out to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” He asked, “Who are you, Lord?” The Lord responded, “I am Jesus the one you are persecuting” (see Acts 9: 4-5 and Acts 22: 7-8). Again, our attention is called to the union between Christ and his people. Christ also said, “Whatever you do to the least of my brethren, you do unto me” (Matthew 25: 40). Modern social concerns tell us to see Christ in the poor, underprivileged and handicapped persons. We see in these references a reality telling us of the union that is likened to the human body. Christ is the head. We are the members. All of us are important. St. Paul says, “Does the hand say to the foot, I have no need of you?” (see 1 Corinthians 12: 15). All of us have our mission in the Church, the gathered-together people with Christ. Each of us has a mission. It may be very different from another’s mission; but, each of us is important. When we say in the Nicene Creed, “I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church” or in the Apostles’ Creed, “I believe in … the holy catholic Church,” this does not refer only to the hierarchy but to the whole Christ. At Mass, we beseech God, not to look on our sinfulness, but on the faith of the Church. When I hear this, I think of the known and unknown sacrifices being made by missionaries and martyrs, the unseen raising of children, care for the poor and the sick, and the elderly praying with gnarled hands. This Mystical Body has a structure like the human body with its skeleton; otherwise, it would collapse. Our structure is the Pope, bishops, priests and lay people. The union of people is composed of the saints in heaven, the ones who are striving to get to heaven (pilgrim people) and those waiting for perfection so as to be entirely one with Christ. While Jesus has a human body, a resurrected body; now, he also has the Church as his Mystical Body, where we are united spiritually in its members to Christ and to one another. At baptism we became children of God, members of the divine household and family. We are in union with Christ, both when we pray alone and when we worship together.

Filed under: Awalt Papers | Leave a comment »

Christ, Resurrected in the Body

Posted on June 28, 2012 by Father Joe

As we consider the incarnation of Christ as human, truly having a physical body and soul, we embrace the truth that he was like us in all things but sin. His body did not remain simply a physical body as we know ours. Something special happened to it. After Christ grew in wisdom and grace for thirty-three years, he died, was buried and rose again. That resurrection did something wonderful to his body. This resurrection was not just a return to life as usual as it was for poor Lazarus, even though it was Christ’s same body that suffered and died. It was a resurrected body. Perhaps a little hint of what it may have been like could be gleaned from reading about the Transfiguration of Christ (Luke 9:28-36)? This is perhaps why Mary Magdalene did not recognize Christ at first after the resurrection? This is why the apostles were hesitant in their recognition. St. Thomas was invited to put his hands into the wounds as a proof for him that it was really Christ in a new way. Likewise, this is why the apostles were slow to recognize him on the shore after the resurrection preparing breakfast for them. We can never know the physical body of Christ by sight, touch and voice in this life; but, we will spend all eternity gazing on the resurrected Christ in his human body, drinking in the beauty, the splendor, the loveliness, and glory of that resurrected body. But there is more. In the funeral Mass, the prayer is said, “Christ will raise our mortal bodies to be more like his own in glory … we hope to share in your glory … on that day we shall see you as you are, we shall become like you….” This is the destiny of our bodies to share in the glory that is Christ. This is the reason we are buried in consecrated ground for while we are the temple of God, as St. Paul calls our body, it has not yet appeared what we will be. It is on account of this that we respect our bodies; they are good in themselves, but destined for glory where every tear, disability and shortcoming will be wiped away. This is our reason for respect for life born, unborn and aged; the human body will rise again when Christ calls out to us, as he did to Lazarus, to come forth. We will enter into the resurrected life of Christ. When we receive Communion, it is the resurrected Christ— body, soul and divinity— that we receive. The scars and wounds have become badges of glory which prompt us to say, “Praise to you, resurrected and glorified Christ!”

Filed under: Awalt Papers | Leave a comment »

Fortnight for Freedom: EWTN The World Over

Posted on June 27, 2012 by Father Joe

Host RAYMOND ARROYO’S exclusive interviews with CARDINAL FRANCIS GEORGE, OMI, Archbishop of Chicago and CARDINAL DONALD WUERL, Archbishop of Washington to kick of the USCCB’s Fortnight for Freedom, their national campaign of teaching and witness for religious liberty.

MOST REV. ROBERT MORLINO, bishop of Madison, on religious liberty, the federal budget proposed by Congressman Paul Ryan, and the “Nuns on the Bus” campaign by some Catholic religious sisters in protest of the proposed Ryan budget.

Filed under: Fortnight for Freedom | 1 Comment »

True God & True Man

Posted on June 26, 2012 by Father Joe

The Body of the Lord is referenced in our Liturgy, in the Scriptures and in our Theology. What is the meaning of this “body” in our faith? The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity became human— one of us— without losing what he was, and yet becoming what he was not. Jesus Christ is truly human. He took his humanity from Mary as she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Christ is really one of us. He bled. He was hungry. He was beaten physically. But, he also enjoyed the happy moments of his life with us as he engaged in family life at Nazareth. He said “My delight is to be with the children of men” (Proverbs 8: 31). He enjoyed the food of the Last Supper, at Cana, and at his home away from home, with Martha, Mary and Lazarus at Bethany. He also ate with sinners, not to countenance what they do wrong, but to let them know he had come to save them from their sins. He suffered the frustration and failure to be understood. In other words, he did not say to all of us, “do as I say,” as much as “do as I do.” Pick up your cross and follow me. He walked the walk. When we go to Communion, we receive Christ, body and soul, as well as the Divine Christ. He is our friend, as he called himself at the Last Supper. He is our brother, truly, in sharing our humanity. When the celebrant offers us Communion, he says, “the Body of Christ,” to which we respond, “Amen,” firmly and out loud, as our profession of faith in Christ present in his humanity, and not in some spiritual sense only. Did it ever occur to us that before Christ took on our humanity, he could never suffer. Prior, he had no human nature, no body to feel pain. Yet Christ opened himself up to suffering by taking on our humanity as a testimony of his love for us. Christ did not just appear to be human as early heresies tried to say. He was not just play acting, not just resembling us— he was truly human. He became human not just for thirty-three years and during his ministry on earth, but forever— for all eternity. This is why Christ prays, because he is human as well as divine. He prayed to his Father. He sought refuge in strength and prayer. He taught us to pray, “Our Father,” not just “my” Father.

Filed under: Awalt Papers | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »

  • Calendar

    October 2026
    S M T W T F S
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031

  • The Awalt Papers

    This is the home of the AWALT PAPERS, the posting of various pieces of wisdom salvaged from the writings, teachings and sermons of the late Msgr. William J. Awalt.

  • Meta