Pope Francis has canonized Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Oscar Romero and five other saints.
This morning in St. Peter’s Square, before a crowd of about 70,000 people, Pope Francis presided over Holy Mass for the canonization of the saints while the Synod of Bishops on young people, the faith and vocational discernment is underway in the Vatican, Oct. 3-28, 2018.
He also proclaimed canonized saints Francesco Spinelli, Vincenzo Romano, Maria Caterina Kasper, Nazaria Ignazia of Saint Teresa of Jesus, and Nunzio Sulprizio. To read entire report click here
Then click here to read a thoroughly documented commentary on “The Canonization Crisis” published on The Remnant website.
I’d forgotten all about these canonisations until a fellow parishioner reminded me this morning after Mass. We were talking about the widespread scandals of recent weeks and months, and she added that it was going to be all downhill from today. I asked her “why today?” She then reminded me that Pope Paul VI (pictured below with the six Protestant ministers whom he invited to help him create a new Mass, one that would be acceptable to our – increasingly – separated Protestant brothers and sisters), is now being rewarded for this scandal by “canonisation”. Along with Archbishop Romero, advocate for the poor. I’m no expert on the life and times of Archbishop Oscar Romero, so this article is interesting – especially in its conclusion.
From left: A. Raymond George (Methodist), Ronald Jaspar (Anglican),
Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian),
Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran),
Eugene Brand (Lutheran),
Max Thurian (Ecumenical community of Taize).
I NEVER refer to “Saint” John Paul II or “Saint” John XXIII. Nor will I acknowledge “Saint Paul VI”. Will you?
Part of the Catholic Truth series, Thinking Through Catholic Truth – The Big Questions…Answered.
Young people are ‘leaving the Church in droves,’ says Scots delegate to Vatican youth synod By James Farrell
Young people are ‘leaving the Church in droves for all the wrong reasons,’ according to Scotland’s representative to a global Vatican meeting of young people.
Sean Deighan, 23, a youth worker for Glasgow Archdiocese, will be one of 300 young representatives to attend the Synod on Young People, the Faith, and Vocational Discernment to be held in Rome from March 19 to 24.
The meeting is being held ahead of a Synod of Bishops in October that will focus on youth.
“I didn’t realise it was such a select group [attending the meeting] and it’s a great privilege,” Mr Deighan said. “I hope that my voice will be heard and by extension I hope the representative voice of all young people in Scotland will be heard. I’m optimistic that real results will materialise from the pre-synodal meeting. I think what needs to be addressed is that young people are leaving the Church in droves for all the wrong reasons.
“They are leaving the Church because of what they think the Church is and not the reality. If we want to pursue the new evangelisation authentically then we need to present the Church authentically and young people need to see that.”
“When young people see the Church being presented authentically, it’s attractive,” Mr Deighan said. “We have never had to dress things up or use false pretences to get people in the Church. It has always been the reality of the Church’s message which they are attracted to.”
At the Angelus on Sunday February 18, Pope Francis called on young people from around the world to take part in the preparatory work of the upcoming synod.
“I strongly desire that all young people might be the protagonists of this preparation,” Pope Francis said. “And so they will be able to contribute online through linguistic groups moderated by other young people.”
The Pope was referring to an initiative promoted by the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops, under the direction of its general secretary, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldiserri. Young people have been invited to join a Facebook group through the Synod website, http://www.synod2018.va, and from March 12 will have the opportunity to send questions to Pope Francis for the Synod on the group page.
“Pope Francis insisted on showing great concern for the ‘distant’—the young people of the ‘peripheries,’ those who are not part of our network of Catholics faithful,” Cardinal Baldisseri said in conversation with the Vatican website.
“The participants will be able to ask questions, propose ideas and therefore act as intermediaries between the ecclesial institution that derives from the people of God and secular society. The experience that will be proposed to them will consist in getting to know the Church better, discovering what we are more deeply.”
At the end of the youth meeting representatives will approve a document, the result of the work of the entire week, which will express their point of view on the reality of youth in the Church and present their expectations, their doubts and their hopes. This document will then help guide reflections at the synod in October. Source – SCO
I know it’s been a while, but when I was a schoolgirl we were taught about the Faith, that we were Catholics and should be knowledgeable and be able to explain it to those we met outside of school, friends etc. and later, in the workplace, colleagues. There was no mention of, let alone emphasis on, the fact that we were “young Catholics”, a separate type of Catholic from everyone else. We didn’t have “special” Masses for the young, etc. That’s the beauty of the Traditional Latin Mass, with which I grew up – it cannot be manipulated into a performance tailored to particular groups. We were simply Catholics. This contemporary emphasis on reaching out to the young as if they ARE a different type of Catholic has led to a great deal of muddled thinking, beginning with this…
Those young people identified in the above SCO report, are not leaving the Church because they are young. They are leaving it – as the author writes – for all the wrong reasons, and that is because, there IS no “right reason” to leave Christ and His Church. Someone needs to clarify for those youngsters who say they believe in Jesus, admire Jesus etc. but just don’t like the Church or “institutionalised religion” that, like love and marriage, as the old song goes, you can’t have one without the other. Christ cannot be separated from His Church – that’s the way HE has arranged things.
Think of your favourite quotes from Scripture and from saints, to drive home this message to the young. Plenty read this blog, I’m told, so how would YOU convince them that, not only is there no right reason to leave Christ’s Church, but there is no “wrong” reason either – leaving the Church for any reason means that they are risking damnation – spelt out, they are risking suffering Hell fire for all eternity. Not cool. Convince them to begin their journey to the fullness of the Faith which they have manifestly not been taught and which, if they truly knew it, would love it and never dream of leaving it. What’s the first thing you would advise a young person seeking the Faith in its fullness to do… where’s the best place to begin that journey?
February 9, 2018 Il Giornale Interview with Father Fausto Buzzi, SSPX (pictured) – Taken from Catholic Family News…
Tradition represents the only possible future for the Church. Fr. Fausto Buzzi has clear ideas. A priest of the Society of Saint Pius X, founded by Marcel François Lefebvre on November 1, 1970, following the Second Vatican Council, Buzzi is today the assistant to the superior of Italy.
He fought for several years, in the Association Alleanza Cattolica (Catholic Alliance). Then, in 1972, came the meeting with Archbishop Lefebvre and his entrance into the seminary at Ecône. In this exclusive interview, the priest of the Society of Saint Pius X spoke about the doctrinal reunification with the Vatican.
What is still dividing the Society of Saint Pius X from the Catholic Church?
It’s good to clarify that the Society of Saint Pius X doesn’t have anything that separates it from the Catholic Church. We are united to the Catholic Church, and we’ve never been separated from her, despite the divisions with the authorities of the Church. Now, these divisions do not come from us. Archbishop Lefebvre always said that they condemned him, he who was the first to be praised by the Popes, especially Pius XII. It is Rome that changed, and with the Second Vatican Council distanced herself from the centuries-old Tradition of the Church. To be succinct, one can say that what separates us from Rome are grave and fundamental doctrinal problems.
A Catholic parish priest once told me: “They talked a lot about schism, but they never had the theological caliber of Archbishop Lefebvre.” Is that so?
Many criticize or condemn the Society of St. Pius X without knowing it, and without understanding the grave reasons for which place it in hostility with the ecclesiastical authorities. Today many people, priests and lay persons, are starting to ask themselves what is taking place in the Church, and are opening their eyes to the fact that those who have been labeled for many years as schismatics, are perhaps those who have remained the most faithful to the Catholic Church, and paradoxically, the most faithful to the Papacy. In our seminaries, Archbishop Lefebvre wanted us to study the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the other classical theology texts. I assure you, that it was a great grace for us to receive such a profound and solid formation.
What is your opinion on Pope Francis?
For us, Pope Francis isn’t any better or worse than the other Popes of the [Second Vatican] Council and the post-Conciliar era. He works “on the same building site” begun by John XXIII, that of the auto demolition of the Catholic Church, to construct another that conforms to the liberal spirit of the world. Actually, I’ll say something further: the current Pope is not as responsible as was Paul VI. This Pope saw the Council through, he finished it, he made all of the reforms. Now, all of this is the cause of the gravest crisis which we see in the Church. Certainly, these actions and words of Pope Francis seem graver than those of his predecessors. But that’s not the case. Today, it’s the media effect that makes things much more evident, than was previously the case. In substance, however, the actions of Paul VI were much graver than those of Francis.
But Bergoglio seems to have taken more steps forward, in your (the SSPX’s) regard…
Certainly he has not taken doctrinal steps forward, in our regard. Rather he considers us as an institution of the “periphery.” As such, we are the recipient of certain kindnesses on his part. When he was a cardinal in Buenos Aires, one of our priests brought him the life of our Founder to read. He read it, and was left with a serious impression; perhaps this, too, contributed to him having special consideration for us. Many ask themselves, however, why he wasn’t so kind to the Franciscans of the Immaculate who had been decidedly embracing Catholic Tradition. Instead, he treated them harshly, with extreme severity, to the detriment of mercy.
Many consider you “extremists” of the Faith…
Look, Faith is a theological virtue, it’s a theological virtue that can grow infinitely, because the object is God Himself, so there’s no limit to faith. In this sense, being extremists would be something virtuous. That said, I can quote the words of Our Lord when He said, for example, “He that is not with Me, is against Me” or the words of St. Peter: “there is no other Name under Heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved.” Tell me if these aren’t “extremist” words. If we then consider the Martyrs who died rather than betray their Faith, how do we judge them? As extremists? It seems to me than the sense of the Faith is being lost.
What do you think of the doctrinal debate surrounding Amoris Laetitia?
You’re causing me to repeat myself, with this question. If on one hand, all the initiatives to correct this document and to defend the Christian family (indissoluble and sanctified by a sacrament) have been praiseworthy, the true problem is upstream. Do you know where the root of Amoris Laetitia lie? We find them in the Council document Gaudium et Spes. Therefore, as I said the terrible crisis in the Church is traced back to her DNA, that is, Vatican II. Think about it: if, instead of Gaudium et Spes, Pius XI’s encyclicalI Casti Connubi was published in its place; would we have the catastrophic Amoris Laetitia today? I don’t think so.
What about the rehabilitation of Luther?
What do you want me to tell you? To rehabilitate the biggest heresiarch in history, he who laicized the whole Christian Religion, who caused the Church to lose entire nations, is a doctrinal suicide and the falsification of history. The rehabilitation of Luther is part of the ecumenical utopia of the past 50 years. A utopia which leads Catholics to apostasy, which is no longer silent but deafening. I suggest reading a new book on Luther published recently: Il vero volto di Lutero (“The True Face of Luther,” Edizioni Piane) written by one of our priests, a professor of ecclesiology at the seminary of Ecône. One will understand the absurdity of this false rehabilitation, reading this book.
Do you think a future doctrinal reunification between you and the Vatican, is possible?
I am not a prophet. I wish that this would take place, above all for the salvation of many souls who risk losing themselves for eternity. But if you’ll allow me, I want to tell you what we can do today to contribute to the triumph of Tradition in the Church. We must ourselves – each Catholic – bishops, priests and [lay] faithful, return to the Catholic Tradition of all time, and nobody must fear feeling themselves to be against the authorities of the Church. Because, in fact, this isn’t going against them, but on the contrary, it’s the most effective way to help them understand that returning to Tradition is the one and only future of Holy Church. Source – Catholic Family News
We often receive emails asking questions about the state of the Church and how to deal with it. I’m afraid that I sometimes feel impatience with certain enquirers, especially if they are members of the older generation, when we were all taught very clearly that our Catholic Faith could never contradict Reason. Therefore, it seems to me, any (older) person of average intelligence should know, through their Catholic sense, that everything, from the introduction of a new Mass right up to and including Amoris Laetita, cannot be from God. In any event, I replied to the most recent enquirer – who is a younger Catholic, really seeking answers to questions others have asked – by sending some suggested reading. I think, however, that these latest questions might spark some very knowledgeable and interesting responses from our bloggers, so I recommended that our enquirer wait while greater minds than mine go to work…
Catholic Truth Question Time
(1) Were there things in the Church that were needing ‘fixed’ at the time the Second Vatican Council was called?
(2) Was the Mass in Latin alienating to people and preventing them from becoming close to Our Lord? Note: I would like to know where to find evidence to back up my opinion that this was not the case – apart from statistics which show that the Church was thriving in the 1960s
(3) Where did the initiative to change the Mass come from….did the faithful want it? And if it did come from an infiltration of Freemasons in the Church how can we prove this e.g. I have heard that Bugnini was a Freemason but where is the evidence?
Well, folks? To work!
From America Magazine…
An ordinary Sunday morning. No parish assignment, no preaching. So I decide to go to a church that celebrates the Latin Mass every Sunday at 11 AM. I knew it would be in Latin, but I wasn’t sure if it would be the old Tridentine or new post-Vatican II Latin Mass. Clearly it was Tridentine! One reason to attend was to see if I could feel comfortable being the main celebration of the Latin Mass.
The church was half-filled, older men and women, some families with children, and a number of people in their 30’s who followed with their missals. The music, all in Latin, was in abundance with 90 percent sung by the choir and little by the congregation. The opening procession included 8 servers in surplices (all male), an assistant to the priest and the main celebrant…
REACTIONS. During the celebration I felt very uncomfortable. It was strange and foreign. Even though I was very familiar with the Tridentine Mass from my childhood, it seemed remote and distant. The Mass seemed to focus on the priest whose words for the most part could not be heard (they were in Latin anyway!) and who rarely faced the people. The choir performed well and their singing overrode the priest, who had to wait several times until they finished singing.
In my mind I could not but think back to the Second Vatican Council, and all that the Council and subsequent documents tried to bring about – active participation, emphasis on the important things, vernacular, elimination of accretions and repetitions, etc. It was sad and disheartening. What happened? Why would the Catholic faithful seek out and attend this older form of the Mass? Is the Tridentine Mass an aberration? What does it say about the reforms of Vatican II?
After the Mass, I was tempted to talk with some of those present. But I decided not to as I feared I would have been negative and perhaps controversial. My feelings were still very raw. One thing I know: I myself will never freely choose to celebrate the Tridentine Mass. Click here to read article in full
From Traditional Catholic Priest (Blog)…
Constantly I hear from people that they do not go to the Latin Mass because they do not understand Latin. (Some even think that the homily is in Latin.) So please, just for now, let us put aside the argument of the language; Latin or English and go to the prayers and actions that are part of the rubrics of the two masses. Let us also look at who is the center of focus and the way the people participate, dress and receive God in Holy Communion at the two masses.
As a priest, I want to re-clarify what are the differences on how Jesus is treated in the two masses. This will be from my own stand point as a priest who has for years celebrated the New Mass in English and Spanish, and now, for the last 7 years offered the Ancient Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…
From my view up on the altar, the difference between the Ancient Mass and the New Mass is like day and night. Archbishop Sample, from Portland Oregon, put it well when he said at the Sacra Liturgia Conference in Rome, that he wants all of his priests to learn and offer the Latin Mass because of the effect it has on them understanding their role as priests. He said that offering the Holy Latin Mass has changed him completely and now he finally understands the sacrificial aspect of his priesthood..
As a priest who says the New Mass and the Latin Mass, the Latin Mass has by far more rubrics built right into the Latin Mass to protect the Body and Blood of Jesus from being desecrated in any manner. It clearly has the strong sacrificial component of the Holy Mass and priesthood. It does not have the protestant emphasis on the Last Supper and “doing this in remembrance of Me” like the Luther advocated. It also has prayers and gestures that facilitate more easily the adoration that Jesus deserves from us His creatures. And because of this, the Latin Mass pleases God way more than the New Mass. Click here to read article in full
Comments invited – how did YOU vote in the poll: and why?