Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, ora pro nobis!

Pope Francis announced the names of the 19 New Cardinals


Vatican City, Jan 12, 2014 / 05:57 am (CNA).-Today Pope Francis announced the names of the 19 men from various parts of the globe who will be appointed cardinals in February.

Image

Note: More info on the top 3 elected Cardinals is provided below.  After reviewing his selections, we shall have a better idea of the direction Bergoglio wishes to guide the Catholic Church.

Vatican City, Jan 12, 2014 / 05:57 am (CNA).- Today Pope Francis announced the names of the 19 men from various parts of the globe who will be appointed cardinals in February.
In the surprise announcement at the end of his Sunday Angelus, Pope Francis noted that the new Cardinals come “from 12 countries from every part of the world,” and “represent the deep ecclesial relationship between the Church of Rome and the other Churches throughout the world.”
The geographical distribution entails eight cardinals from Europe; seven from the Americas; and two from both Africa and Asia. No cardinals from the United States were named.
Besides some expected names, such as Archbishops Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State; Lorenzo Baldisseri, general secretary of the Synod of Bishops, Gerhard Mueller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; and Beniamino Stella, prefect of the Congregation for Clergy, the list includes several men from the far reaches of the globe.
Archbishop of Ouagadougou, Philippe Nakellentuba Ouedraogo, will join the College of Cardinals from Burkina Faso in west Africa, as will Bishop Chibly Langlois of Les Cayes, Haiti: both will be the only Cardinals from their countries.
Fr. Federico Lombardi of the Holy See’s Press Office noted that the Pope’s choice of these two men especially “shows concern for people struck by poverty.”
Pope Francis celebrates Mass for the Feast of the Epiphany in St. Peter's Basilica on Jan. 6, 2014. Credit: Kyle Burkhart / CNA.
 Pope Francis celebrates Mass for the Feast of the Epiphany in St. Peter’s Basilica on Jan. 6, 2014. Credit: Kyle Burkhart / CNA.
Three new Cardinals from Pope Francis’ own South America are on the list, including the current Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Mario Aurelio Poli, who replaced the then- Jorge Cardinal Bergoglio when he was elected Pope last spring.

New Cardinals
Pope Francis today in Rome at his noon Angelus announced the names of 19 new cardinals, 16 “electing” cardinals under the age of 80, and three “honorary” cardinals above the age of 80, and so not eligible to vote in a Conclave.
 
The ceremony to create these news cardinals will be in Rome on February 22, Feast of the Chair of St. Peter. It will be the first Consistory to create cardinals of Pope Francis.
 
Are there surprises? Yes, a number — except that most of these “surprises” have been rumored for many weeks, so we cannot really consider them “surprises” at all. But the choices are different than ones that might have been made by another Pope.
 
Pope Francis in general has chosen “lesser-known” men (for example, a lesser known prelate from the Philippines, Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I., Archbishop of Cotabato) and overlooked several prelates who might normally have been “expected” to have been named cardinals, especially Archbishop Francesco Moraglia, Patriarch of Venice, originally from Genoa (he was ordained a priest by Cardinal Giuseppe Siri of Genoa).
 
That is, Francis, by his choices, continues to give a powerful signal that he wants the Church to think less about herself — in his signature phrase, to not be “auto-referential” — and instead to think more about the poor and suffering in our world, to go increasingly “out of the sacristy” and into the “peripheries” to encounter those who are often forgotten and without hope.
 
So, under Francis, we are in a period when old schemes of ecclesial power and authority, and promotion, are being set aside in favor of a new emphasis on pastoral care in support of the marginalized and the suffering.
 
There are no Americans on the list (some had expected one or two American archbishops might be chosen). There is one from Great Britain: Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster.
 
The personal secretary of Pope John XXIII, Loris Capovilla, who is now 98, was chosen. He was present in 1959 when Pope John, at Catsel Gandolfo, asked for the Third Secrect of Fatima to be brought to him to read.
 
 Image
 
 
Here are the names:
 
1. Pietro Parolin, Titular Archbishop of Acquapendente, Secretary of State.
2. Lorenzo Baldisseri, Titular Archbishop of Diocleziana, Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops.
3. Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, Archbishop-Bishop emeritus of Regensburg, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
4. Beniamino Stella, Titular Archbishop of Midila, Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy.
5. Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster, United Kingdom.
6. Leopoldo Jose Brenes Solorzano, Archbishop of Managua, Nicaragua.
7. Gerald Cyprien Lacroix, Archbishop of Quebec, Canada.
8. Jean-Pierre Kutwa, Archbishop of Abidjan, Ivory Coast.
9. Orani Joao Tempesta, O.Cist., Archbishop of Rio de Janeiro.
10. Gualtiero Bassetti, Archbishop of Perugia-Citta della Pieve, Italy.
11. Mario Aurelio Poli, Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
12. Andrew Yeom Soo jung, Archbishop of Seoul, South Korea.
13. Ricardo Ezzati Andrello, S.D.B., Archbishop of Santiago del Cile, Chile.
14. Philippe Nakellentuba Ouedraogo, Archbishop of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
15. Orlando B. Quevedo, O.M.I., Archbishop of Cotabato, Philippines.
16. Chibly Langlois, Bishop of Les Cayes, Haiti.
 
The three over the age of 80:
17. Loris Francesco Capovilla, Titular Archbishop of Mesembria.
18. Fernando Sebastian Aguilar, C.M.F., Archbishop emeritus of Pamplona.
19. Kelvin Edward Felix, Archbishop emeritus of Castries.
 
Perhaps the two most noticeable omissions are two Italians: Francesco Moraglia, Patriarch of Venice (recall that Pope John XXIII and Pope John Paul I were both Patriarchs of Venice before being elected Popes in 1958 and 1978, so Venice has been a very prominent see in the Church) and Cesare Nosiglia, Archbishop of Turin.
 
Two other important names not on the list: (1) The Vatican Librarian, the French Dominican scholar Jean-Louis Bruguès. When he was secretary of the
Vatican’s Congregation for Catholic Education, had opposed then-Cardinal Bergoglio’s choice to be Rector of The Catholic University of  Buenos Aires, Father  Victor Manuel Fernández, who is said to be very close to Pope Francis and one of his “ghost-writers” for papal documents; and (2) the Archbishop of Malines-Bruxelles, Belgium, André Léonard, considered a “conservative” and one of the “rising stars” in the Church in Western Europe.
 Here is a brief commentary on the first three choices of Pope Francis:
 
1. The first name on the list is that of the new Vatican Secretary of State, an Italian, Archbishop Pietro Parolin. This was a “necessary” choice, as Parolin, as Secretary of State, would (barring a complete revolution) have to be a cardinal.
 
But this simply reinforces the idea the Francis respects and trusts Parolin — that is, that he knew already when he named him Secretary of State at the end of the summer that he would, in consequence of that, make him a cardinal.
 
Parolin has spent his life in the service of the Holy See, first in Nigeria, then in Mexico, then in the Vatican Curia, and most recently in Venezuela as the Pope’s nuncio (ambassador) there, under the difficult circumstances of the presidency of Hugo Chávez (who died on March 5, almost one year ago).
 
So Parolin, who is fluent in Spanish, is very well-informed about the situation in Latin America today.
 
Parolin has also, over the years, followed closely events in Vietnam, and in China. He is well-informed on Asia.
 
Moreover, he was for a number of years the Vatican’s lead negotiator at nuclear arms reduction talks in Vienna. So he understands well the situation of global armaments and their control. He has been at the forefront of Vatican efforts to approve and implement the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Addressing the International Atomic Energy Agency on September 18, 2006, at its headquarters in Vienna, Austria, Parolin referred to this treaty as “the basis to pursue nuclear disarmament and an important element for further development of nuclear energy applications for peaceful purposes.” He said: “Since this treaty is the only multilateral legal instrument currently available, intended to bring about a nuclear weapons-free world, it must not be allowed to be weakened. Humanity deserves no less than the full cooperation of all states in this important matter.”
 
Parolin is a courteous, friendly man, very well-trained, profoundly dedicated to his work (he often works into the evening, 12-hour days), and he is exceptionally calm and balanced: key attributes for the delicate work of diplomacy, which seeks to find a way to resolve problems and disputes between contending, and sometimes unreasonable, parties.
 
Parolin is now the key “filter” between Pope Francis and the world’s diplomatic and political communities, where the worldly interests of nations and interest groups contend and clash.
 
He has said was taken by surprise when Pope Francis named him his Secretary of State, but Pope Francis clearly trusts him and will be relying greatly on him in the months ahead.
 
2. The second name is that of the new head of the Synod of Bishops, also an Italian, Lorenzo Baldisseri. Pope Francis, moments after his election on March 13, famously removed his own cardinal’s cap and placed it on the head of then-Archbishop Baldisseri, who was acting as the Secretary of the Conclave. Vatican watchers immediately interpreted that as a sign that Baldiserri would be made a cardinal in the Pope’s first Consistory, and that has turned out to be a true forecast.
 
Born in Pisa, Italy, Baldisseri served in the Vatican’s diplomatic service in Guatemala, Haiti, Paraguay, India and — for 10 years — in Brazil.
 
So Baldiserri, who speaks Spanish and Portuguese fluently (and also English), has decades of personal experience in Latin America.
 
For the past two years, he has been the Secretary of the Congregation of Bishops, the body which studies the choices of bishops from around the world for the Latin-rite Church, so he knows well the process to choose bishops, and the more recent choices as bishops.
 
He is also an accomplished pianist, and has played in concerts in and out of the Vatican.
 
3. The third name, Gerhard Mueller, is another “necessary” choice. Pope Benedict named Mueller head of the Vatican’s chief doctrinal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
 
Mueller, who is a very tall, powerfully-built man, was trusted by Benedict in part because he has been handling the editing of Benedict’s collected works (Opera Omnia).
 
Mueller has been a close personal friend of Father Gustavo Gutierrez of Lima, Peru, considered to be the “father” of Liberation Theology. Mueller met Guttierrez in 1988 and has often visited him, spending weeks in Lima in study programs. “The Latin American ecclesial and theological movement known as ‘Liberation Theology,’ which spread to other parts of the world after the Second Vatican Council, should in my opinion be included among the most important currents in 20th century Catholic theology,” Mueller has said.
Mueller is also known for having said that the Church’s position on admitting to divorced and remarried Catholics to the sacrament of Communion is not something that can or will be changed. But other German Church leaders, including Cardinal Walter Kasper, have recently gone on record saying the teaching may and will be changed. So this is one important area of discussion and potential tension in coming months, leading up to the Synod on the Family in October.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The Patriarch Not Chosen
 (Photo: Francesco Moraglia of Venice; he was not made a cardinal)
There are only three Patriarchates in the Latin Church: Lisbon in Portugal, Jerusalem in the Holy Land, and Venice in Italy.
 The Emeritus Patriarch of Lisbon, José da Cruz Policarpo, is a cardinal. (The current Patriarch of Lisbon is Don Manuel José Macário do Nascimento Clemente, officially referred to as Manuel III; he was appointed by Pope Francis in May 18, 2013, replacing Policarpo who was resigned due to old age, and solemnly installed on July 6, 2013 at the Patriarchal Cathedral of St. Mary Major.)
 
Patriarch Faoud Twal of Jerusalem is not a cardinal.
 
And, for the moment, the Patriarch of Venice, Moraglia, will not be a cardinal.
 Venice is referred to as the “See of St. Mark” because the relics of St. Mark were brought to Venice from Alexandria in the early 800s. (The story of St. Mark is interesting and worth recalling also because it reveals how early the Gospel of Mark probably is. We know that St. Peter went to Antioch about seven or eight years after the death of Christ, in c. 40-41 A.D., and from there traveled through Asia Minor (as mentioned in 1 Pet 1:1), arriving in Rome in the second year of Emperor Claudius (42 A.D.) as Eusebius tells us in hisEcclesiastical History (2.14.6). Somewhere on the way, Peter picked up Mark and took him as travel companion and interpreter. Mark is believed to have written down the sermons of Peter (much like a reporter), the raw material for the Gospel According to St. Mark (Eccl. Hist. 15–16), before he left Peter and went to Alexandria in the third year of Claudius (43 A.D.). If this reconstruction is accurate, the words of the Gospel of Mark were written down within 10 years of the death of Jesus. In any case, relics believed to be the body of St. Mark were stolen from Alexandria in 828 A.D. by Venetian merchants and taken to Venice. A mosaic of the event in St Mark’s Basilica depicts sailors covering the relics with a layer of pork and cabbage leaves. Since Muslims are not permitted to touch pork, this was done to prevent Muslim guards from inspecting the ship’s cargo too closely. “History records no more shameless example of body snatching…” as John Julius Norwich put it. And thus the relics of St. Mark came to Venice.)
 
Moraglia was named Patriarch of Venice two years ago, in January, 20912, by Pope Benedict XVI, succeeding Cardinal Angelo Scola on the throne of St. Mark. He took up his post in March 2012.

Moraglia was born in Genoa on May 25, 1953 and was ordained priest by Cardinal Giuseppe Siri on June 29, 1977. A doctor in dogmatic theology, he worked a director of the office of Culture and at the University of the Diocese of Genoa, as a professor of Christology, anthropology, the sacramentary and history of theology at the Theological Faculty of Northern Italy and as dean and professor at the Higher Institute of Religious Studies of Liguria.

Moraglia was considered a “Ratzingerian,” both from a theological and liturgical point of view. However, on more than one occasion, the bishop took a supportive position on behalf of unemployed factory workers.
 
From the Journal of Dr. Robert Moynihan

Russian Orthodox Church under fire over Stalin calendar

Russian Orthodox Church under fire over Stalin calendar

Image
 (Reuters) – The Russian Orthodox Church has come under heavy criticism on the Internet this week over a 2014 wall calendar published by a revered monastery’s printing house that features portraits of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
The black-and-white calendar, titled “Stalin” and costing 200 roubles ($6), is advertised as “a great gift for veterans and history fans”. Historian Mikhail Babkin brought it to public attention on his blog on Jan.7.
“Disgrace, shame and insult to all those who perished,” one person wrote in one of nearly 200 comments under Babkin’s post, referring to the millions who died because of Stalin’s forced farm collectivisation and brutal political repression.
The Russian Orthodox Church, which was severely persecuted under Stalin but has enjoyed a resurgence since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, said it dismissed the head of the printing house in July once it found out about the printing but the calendars had already been delivered.
“The Russian Orthodox Church was subject to the most severe repressions during Stalin’s rule when thousands of priests were deported and executed. Releasing such a publication in a church establishment … is morally unacceptable,” Vakhtang Kipshidze, a spokesman for the Russian Orthodox Church, told Reuters.
But reflecting the sympathy for Stalin still felt by many Russians who credit him with victory in World War Two and giving their country a superpower status, Kipshidze added:
“Though one should work on the assumption that both in the Russian Orthodox Church and in the Russian society there are differing views on the role Joseph Stalin played in the Russian history and everybody has the right to hold on to their views.”
Critics of the Kremlin accuse President Vladimir Putin of burnishing Stalin’s image and celebrating the Soviet Union’s modernising achievements to prop up national pride.
Since returning to the Kremlin in mid-2012, Putin has also sought to appeal to conservative voters to boost his own authority and has increasingly promoted the Russian Orthodox Church as the standard bearer for national values.

"Monsters in the church of Pope Francis are priests who teach the substance of the Catechism."

"Monsters in the church of Pope Francis are priests who teach the substance of the Catechism."

Little Monsters


One could devote the contents of an entire blog to keeping an eye on what the Pope is saying!

Today, we find Pope Francis explaining that priests can become little Frankensteins and this gives him the goose bumps.

Francis, who headed the Jesuits' novice training program in his native Argentina in the 1970s, also warned the superiors of some of the failings of seminary training, or "formation," such as when would-be priests merely "grit their teeth, try not to make mistakes, follow the rules smiling a lot, just waiting for the day when they are told 'Good, you have finished formation."

"This is hypocrisy that is the result of clericalism, which is one of the worst evils," Francis was quoted as saying, returning to the issue of clericalism — or a certain cronyism and careerism among the men of the cloth — that he has frequently criticized.

The training of priests, he said, must be a "work of art, not a police action."

"We must form their hearts. Otherwise we are creating little monsters. And then these little monsters mold the people of God. This really gives me goose bumps," he was quoted as saying....

"I am not speaking about people who recognize that they are sinners: we are all sinners, but we are all not corrupt," Francis said. "Sinners are accepted, but not people who are corrupt."

What is this gobblygook supposed to mean?

The entire matrix of the Jesuit religious order is corrupt and they are teaching said corruption to hundreds of thousands of souls in our schools, apostolates, magazines, newspapers and periodicals.

He could not possibly have missed the 350 elephants in the room with him.

Moreover, why would Pope Francis hand-pick a Cardinal to advise him on restructuring Rome whose own Chancery is one of the worst examples of cronyism in the 2000 year history of the Roman Catholic Church?

Are we to believe the Pope told the superiors of the Jesuits that the monster in the Church is the teaching and preaching of moral teachings?

During his homily, Francis told his fellow Jesuits to use mercy, not morality, when they preach.

Do I understand that he is telling religious superiors not to teach seminarians the moral teachings of the Church and to teach them not to teach it?

Monsters in the church of Pope Francis are priests who teach the substance of the Catechism. Those little monsters create monsters who teach the moral teachings of the Church to the people of God, inside of their parishes and homes.

Seminaries are places where the artwork of theological mistakes and errors are to flourish and are training camps for forming priests so they do not teach the substance of the Catechism.

See what he's getting at?

LOL.

I sure hope this is another misunderstanding.

A lot of us are developing a severe case of the goosebumps.

http://throwthebumsoutin2010.blogspot.ca/2014/01/little-monsters.html

Father Manelli’s Pastoral Report to the Franciscans of the Immaculate

From: Rorate-caeli.blogspot.ca

Father Manelli’s Pastoral Report to the Franciscans of the Immaculate

The following is a translation of the fourth part of Fr. Stefano Manelli’s Pastoral Report to the Franciscans of the Immaculate titled “The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum for the growth of the Religious Life," issued after the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum. The first parts are available in Italian on Chiesa e postConcilio.  Fr. Manelli, in his Introduction, using St. Ambrose’s image of the Church as the moon that reflects the light of Christ the sun, speaks as follows: 

Mindful of the words and thoughts of the holy Archbishop of Milan let us now turn our attention to the real situation of the Church in which we live.  Let us say first of all that it is certainly not difficult to admit that today the splendor of the Bride of Christ is passing through an eclipse of perhaps singular proportions in her two thousand year history.  This crisis, that embraces the entire inner life of the Bride of Christ, according to the Holy Father Benedict XVI, ‘depends in great part of the collapse of the liturgy’ that happened not in the Council but in the post-Conciliar time.

Father Manelli goes on to offer concrete numbers that show the precipitous decline in the major religious orders.  The main part of the Pastoral Report, using patristic, medieval and post-Tridentine sources, lays out clearly the relationship of the Religious Life and the Liturgy, the Religious Life and the Mass, and the Religious Life and the Divine Office.  Part 4 deals with the consequences of the liturgical reform after the Second Vatican Council.

-------------------------------------------------------

The Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum” for the growth of the Religious Life 

 Fr. Stefano M. Manelli, F.I.
(Founder and Minister General of the Franciscans of the Immaculate)

4.  What happened in the decade of the 1960s?

Until the decade of the 1960s, the liturgical patrimony that characterized every single Religious Order remained nearly unchanged, save for the appropriate marginal modifications regarding, for example, the liturgical calendar, which has always been enriched or trimmed under the watchful supervision of the official Church.  In those years the Church still enjoyed an extraordinary fecundity of religious vocations, an accompanying growth in the Missions, and a solidity and maturity of the Christian life of the people of God.

What happened, instead, from the ‘60s and afterwards?  In effect, it happened that after the celebration of the Second Vatican Council, which was an assemblage the likes of which the Church had never had in her past, there was an expectation of liturgical reform. In the actual carrying out of the reform, rather than go about the reform with the purpose of a hoped for increase and growth in the Christian life, the process of reform took a very different  turn, which, when one looks at the facts, has negatively affected the Church, and, even more, has negatively affected above all the framework itself of the Religious Life (especially in the West).

More devastating—let us note this again—has been the negative influence of the Novus Ordo on the Religious Life, as already referenced above (with respect to the devastating losses in nearly all the Orders and Religious Institutes).  And here we cannot fail to mention as well the sadness caused by the closing of so many monasteries and religious houses,  as well as the closing of the greater part of the seminaries for priests and brothers, with the consequence of an aging clergy, the drop in the Missions without a turnover of missionaries, and the continual increase in the number of towns that even in Italy remain without a pastor,  again because of lack of vocations.

And if we want to ask ourselves why the negative influence of the Novus Ordo has been such a problem for the Church and has been even more a problem above all for the Religious Life, the answer is very simple:  because the whole Church lives from the Liturgy, as even Vatican II taught, and as Pope John Paul II said in his letter to the bishops, Dominicae Coenae of February 1980, when he spoke of the “close and organic bond between the renewal of the Liturgy and the renewal of the whole life of the Church.  The Church does not only act in the liturgy, she also expresses herself in the liturgy.  She lives by the liturgy and receives from the liturgy the strength for her life.” (75)  And Pope Benedict XVI affirms that in the liturgy “the Christian finds the Church as such, putting into action her essence, as She who believes and the mediatrix of Grace.  All the rest is secondary.” (76).

The Religious Life, then, has been subjected even more to the negative influence of the Novus Ordo, because it is above all a life that is “liturgical”, as explained above, and as a consequence, the Religious Life has not been able and is not able to be shaped by the Liturgy in its most vital foundations.  It is with the liturgy that the Religious Life has a relationship of simbiosis and synergy, whether in times of fecundity or times of barrenness. One could also say that the Liturgy and the Religious Life stand or fall together.  This is the perennial supernatural dynamic of the Religious Life grafted on to the Liturgy and the Liturgy grafted on to the Religious Life.

As a consequence, a Liturgy well grounded, stable, and solid is proven and assured as such above all by the vitality and fecundity of the monastic and religious life; and, in turn, a monastic and religious life that is solid and fruitful in growth, is proof and guarantees in the most secure way the authenticity of the Liturgy of the Mystical Body of Christ.  But a monastic and religious life that is in the devastating condition of in reverse gear, so to speak, of not walking forward, as is the case today, can only be a testimony to a Liturgy that lacks that foundational consistency and “vital force”, according to the precise expression of Pope John Paul II.

74.  If one looks at the reality of the situation regarding the people, it is by now obvious to all that the attendance of the people of God at Holy Mass on days of obligation, in the past 40 years, in our Italy, has literally fallen from a precipice: from an average of 60% in attendance at Mass that was the average in the ‘50s to 9-10% today (this is without speaking of the median Mass attendance in Europe of 5%!).  And what does one say about the collapse in the number of those going to the Sacrament of Confession, of the delaying of or refusal to baptize children, of the striking increase in marriages that are only civil, of the frightful increase in contraception and abortion (without even speaking of homosexuality or pedophilia)?  But it is easy when discussing this phenomenon to feel the obligation to oppose this line of thinking with the counter argument that it is not the fault of the Liturgy if society has taken this disastrous path.  To offer that argument, however, shows a rejection and a putting down of what is the great salvific mission of the Liturgy in the world.  We must not forget that the threefold basis of the true Christian life is built on the three “Lex”: Lex orandi, Lex credendi, Lex vivendi. The link between these three laws is ab intus, from within.  One cannot stand without the others.

As a consequence:  a soild Lex orandi (namely, daily prayer that is constant and faithful; liturgical, Eucharistic, Marian; vocal, mental, affective, contemplative), is the matrix for a solid Lex credendi.  A solid Lex credendi (namely, to believe all the truths of faith that the Church sets forth to be believed; to receive the Sacraments, to follow the Magisterium of the Church, in obedience to the Pope), is the matrix for a solid Lex vivendi.  A solid Lex vivendi(namely, living a life of Grace, avoiding sin, combatting vices, practicing the Christian virtues in familial obligations and those owed to society) is the matrix of a Christian life that is holy and sanctifying!

But if the Lex orandi is not genuine and solid, what does one find? One finds the fruits according to the gospel teaching of Jesus: “A good tree cannot bear bad fruit”. (Mt. 7,18).  One sees the poisonous fruits of a faith that is confused and fragile, of a faith perhaps syncretistic or distorted to the point of denying the truths of the Catholic faith concerning the Most Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, most holy Mary, the doctrine of Hell (closed or nonexistent), the Eucharist, Confession, etc…One sees the poisonous fruits of a Christian life that is disordered and misled by the passions and the world, that gives assent to moral deviations (divorce, abortion, euthanasia, contraception, concubinage, homosexual acts, indecent ways of dressing, pornography, etc…..)

One finds, more and more in the social sphere, the profanation of Sunday (against the Third Commandment) in mass culture, the shocking fall in Mass attendance and practice of the Sacraments (Confessions, Communion, but also Baptism for infants), while at the same time there is a proliferation of drugs, discos and gay bars, with crowds of people at stadiums, at “festivals” of all sorts, in theaters, slaves to the TV, suffering from the disease of hedonism with all of its terrible costs.  Poor society, poor humanity!

75.  John Paul II, Dominicae Coenae, 1980
76.  Benedict XVI, Davanti al Protagonista. Alle radici della liturgia, Ed. Cantagalli,
         Siena

Translation and Introduction by Father Richard G. Cipolla