Priest as MC vs Priest as Icon of Christ

 Subsequent to the visit of Fr Paul Turner to New Zealand there has been occasion for me to reflect on what it means to be a priest presiding at Mass. A priest friend of mine pointed out that we had been accustomed, consciously or otherwise, to think of the priest acting as Master of Ceremonies (MC) at the Mass whereas now we need to think of the priest differently. 

First of all, what does an MC do? The MC ensures continuity of the ceremony or ritual. He or she engages with the audience or congregation to explain what is happening or the format of what will happen. This has the aim of maintaining the involvement and interest of those present. A priest, who usually has a microphone, will not only lead prayers, explain the significance of what is happening, lead the singing, prompt posture changes, tell ministers to come forward to do their ministry, announce notices, and provide continuity through little interventions that helps the liturgy to flow. At worst he will act like some game show announcer who constantly makes quips and jokes the keep everyone cheerful. When there are situations involving school children or a predominantly non-Catholic congregation, such as at a funeral with many non-believers present, the priest can be drawn into this function.

However, when we get inside the liturgy of the Mass this should not be the case. Those who are gathered are a priestly people. Everyone has a role to play, according to their function as either ordinary or extraordinary ministers, as well as the roles proper to the people, whether lay or consecrated. They know the liturgy and do not need, as a rule, to be prompted or to have the liturgy explained to them. If prompts are required, in terms of posture or as instructions for the people such as at the Sign of Peace and the Dismissal, these are done by the deacon. If the priest does these roles, in the absence of a deacon, the action does not lose its nature. For example, the priest when he proclaims the gospel, which is a task proper of the deacon, he keeps his hands closed. Furthermore, the homily is intended to break open the Word of God not to have the predominant intention of entertainment or education.

What then is the role of the priest? In a technical sense, he acts "in persona Christi capitis" (in the person of Christ the Head) such that the people are acting as the members of the same Body of Christ. When he presides, it is the priest who prays with hands extended. Sometimes this is referred to as the orans position. What does this position signify? We are not told. Is it the position used by the Jews in the time of Christ as they stood in prayer? Is it the movement of the priest in the Mass in the extraordinary form under the 1962 Missal?

For me, in my opinion, it depends on what is being said. If it is an address to the people, such as "The Lord be with you" it is different to when the Collect is being said or the Post Communion Prayer being prayed. The difference can be noted in the dialogue prior to the Preface to the Eucharistic Prayer. The General Instruction to the Roman Missal (GIRM) states: "The priest calls upon the people to lift up their hearts towards the Lord in prayer and thanksgiving; he associates the people with himself in the Prayer that he addresses to the Father through Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit." (GIRM, 78) 

The instructions for the dialogue in the ordinary form differ from the extraordinary form. In the latter the priest, facing towards the altar, therefore facing East together with the people, place his hands on the altar, for "The Lord be with you," elevate his hands at "Lift up your hearts," before making a slight arc and joining his hands at his breast at the words "Let us give thanks to the Lord our God." he then extends his hands to pray the preface. In the ordinary form, facing the people, the priest says the same words, in the vernacular, with the actions: Extending his hands, say... The Priest raising his hands, continues... The Priest, with hands extended, adds...."  (ICEL Instruction on the Preface Dialogue). I read it this way: the first extension of hands is an opening of the arms towards the people with the palms of the hand directed towards them, the second movement, with palms facing upward, elevates the hands, the third movement, pulls the arms of the priest back extending them on either side of the body with palms (and wrists) facing the people. This position, if made as I indicate, is slightly uncomfortable but I think that is the point given the stress placed on a body in the cruciform position.

The posture at this point is the same as for the Collect, the Eucharistic Prayer and the Prayer after Communion. it is a posture of Christ crucified but also risen. We can also think of the Ascension as the risen Christ goes up in glory. The earthly liturgy rehearses the heavenly liturgy from Revelation 4: 1 - 5: 14 and the priest, representing Christ is the "Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered." (Rev 5: 6) Tertullian speaks of the orans posture of the Christian as imitating the crucified Christ. Thus, the priest within the action of the Eucharistic liturgy is not an MC but an icon of Christ who offers prayers to his heavenly Father. The focus of the priest is not on organizing the people. His actions and words are to invite them to join with him the prayer that he is making the Father. Ultimately, the extraordinary form and ordinary form pray is the same but the theology of the People of God more explicitly invites the participation of the people and joins them to the priest who is but one of the presences of Christ in the liturgy along with the people, the Word and the Blessed Sacrament.

When is the birthday of the Church?

I have noticed that people tend to speak of the "birthday of the Church" at Pentecost? However, is this the case? In the Roman Missal the preface for the feast day uses the expression: "as the Church came to birth" rather than "was born." This speaks to me of the idea that the Church is being born in an ongoing manner, as new members are added through baptism. It can also take into account the pre-existence of the Church in the Second Person of the Holy Trinity and to be in line with Jesus Christ being the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13: 8). 

Furthermore, when we think of Our Lord, his birth is when, as it states in the creed, "he became man." This is not the case for the Church. In fact, with Pentecost it can be said that "she came to birth in the Spirit." As the Second Eve she finds her origin from the side of Christ and is joined to him in a common life "consortium totius vitae" as the Bride of Christ sharing in his ministry, Proverbs 31: 10-31 and Ephesians 5: 22-33, and is being continually renewed in time.

A suitable text for this idea might be: "The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven, so are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we will also bear the image of the man of heaven." (1 Cor 15: 47-49)

This sense of becoming is also evident in the preface for the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. We read there: "For today the Virgin Mother of God was assumed into heaven as the beginning and image of your Church's coming to perfection...". The Church is a "work in progress." She sees in Our Lady the fulfilment of what she will become when, as we read in Lumen Gentium, 2:

He (God) planned to assemble in the holy Church all those who would believe in Christ. Already from the beginning of the world the foreshadowing of the Church took place. It was prepared in a remarkable way throughout the history of the people of Israel and by means of the Old Covenant. In the present era of time the Church was constituted and, by the outpouring of the Spirit, was made manifest. at the end of time it will gloriously achieve completion, when, as we read in the Fathers, all the just, from Adam and "from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect," will be gathered together with the father in the universal Church.

The danger of people contemplating the Church as being "born" or having a "birthday" is that they are going to fixate on the institution of the Church by the Lord in time as a solely historical event to which they are the heirs. The anamnesis of the Eucharist and Pentecost is a present reality which challenges the disciples to actualize the life giving action of the exitus and reditus of the Holy Trinity in their own time as you described in the perichoresis. 

Since the Eucharist is the memorial of the whole of Christ so too the life and nature of the Church embodies, albeit deficiently in her members, that reality. To this end the story and doctrine regarding Our Lady is the only true picture of what God wants for the Church as a whole. The feast of the Assumption can be seen as a Pentecostal event as lowly Miriam of Nazareth, through the power of her Son's resurrection, shares fully in his victory through the Holy Spirit. She realizes the destination of her humble faith by being crowned Queen of heaven and earth. Pentecost has approximately one hundred and twenty fearful and lowly individuals, transformed and infused by the Holy Spirit, to become a sign and sacrament of God's salvific power manifested in a community, the People of God, recreated perennially by Baptism and the Eucharist.

Feast of the Assumption of the BVM

 The Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary (BVM) from 1854 and the Assumption of the BVM in 1950 are the only times that popes have used their power to declare infallible doctrine. Catholics are required to give their consent to these doctrines as being an objective and constitutive part of the Catholic faith. Many non-Catholics will not even have heard of these things. Yet, these doctrines speak of profound truths regarding the person also known amongst her other titles as Mary of Nazareth, most likely a teenager, living in Nazareth from sometime before 4BC. She exclaims: "Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for the Mighty One has done great things for me" (Lk 1: 48-49) and indeed, on this patronal feast of New Zealand, we do call her blessed. Pope Pius XII summed up the mystery in this way: "Hence the revered Mother of God, from all eternity joined in a hidden way with Jesus Christ in one and the same decree of predestination, immaculate in her conception, a most perfect virgin in her divine motherhood, the noble associate of the divine Redeemer who has won a complete triumph over sin and its consequences, finally obtained, as the supreme culmination of her privileges, that she should be preserved free from the corruption of the tomb and that, like her own Son, having overcome death, she might be taken up body and soul to the glory of heaven where, as Queen, she sits in splendour at the right hand of her Son, the immortal King of the Ages." (Munificentissimus Deus, 40)

20th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 The episode we hear today is found only in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew. Furthermore, it is only in Matthew that the Lord says: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Mt 15: 24) I think that the Matthean community needed to hear this message. As a mixed community of Gentiles and Jews, which is apparent from elsewhere in the Gospel, the revolutionary idea that both Jews and Gentiles could be united as Christians in the new Law, based not on Moses but on the Sermon on the Mount, was a challenge. As we heard last week St Paul was mindful of the priority of the Jews in the history of salvation: "They are the Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises, to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah..." (Rm 9: 4-5) It remains that the offer of Christ is available to them, as we hear in the Solemn Intercessions on Good Friday: "let us pray also for the Jewish people, to whom the Lord our God spoke first... graciously hear the prayers of your Church, the people you first made your own may attain the fulness of redemption." The woman begs: "Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter tis tormented by a demon... Lord, help me." (Mt 15: 22 and 25) To the Jews, Jesus acknowledges their ancient Covenant: "It is not fair to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs" (Mt 15:26) while to the Gentiles the Lord responds to their faith: "Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish." (Mt 15: 28)

Instructions for Laity Attending Mass

 

A Priestly People – Participation in the Mass 

In Preface I of the Eucharist for Sundays in Ordinary Time we hear:

For through the paschal Mystery, he (Jesus) accomplished the marvelous deed, by which he freed us from the yoke of sin and death, summoning us to the glory of being now called a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for your own possession, to proclaim everywhere your mighty works, for you have called us out of darkness into your own wonderful light.

Recently Fr Paul Turner, an expert in the liturgy, came to speak to the clergy of the Palmerston North Diocese about how best to preside at Mass. His clarification of the liturgy has implications for everyone as they participate in the holy sacrifice, which is the Mass. To this end I provide an instruction to assist Mass attendees in their understanding and participation in the Mass. The laity are truly a priestly people and need to fully participate in the Mass according to their priestly dignity, founded in baptism and confirmation.

1.  Baptismal Dignity

Our participation at Mass is an obligation and privilege given through baptism and confirmation. It strengthens our communion as Catholics gathered in “one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Those who are baptized cannot participate in ministries. They should not do readings, prayers of the faithful, take up gifts at the offertory, act as altar servers or, in fact, pray the prayers of the Mass. It is only through baptism that we can cry out “Our Father.”

Those who are baptized but are not in full communion with the Catholic Church can perform some roles related to the ministry of the Word since we share it with them. They are not permitted, as a rule, to participate in those actions and roles associated with the Holy Eucharist since the unity asked of us by the Lord (see Jn 17: 21) is yet to be perfected. Bishops, priests, deacons, minsters and congregation members all have their own function and way of participating which has its own standing which should be respected.

This aspect of the liturgy needs some nuance when schools and colleges are involved. Nevertheless, baptism is a crucial aspect of our Catholic life which his implications in how we participate in the worship of the Church.

2.   Unity of Posture

Unity of posture speaks of the unity of the People of God. It is obvious that all cannot stand or kneel the same due to their health or stage of life. Nevertheless, as a rule, everyone should strive for unity, according to the instructions given in the liturgy and the laws of the Church. This does not mean our participation is to be mechanical as we realize our need to embody the truths we speak and hear.

3.   Preparation before Mass

As a priestly people, the baptized are required to be present for the whole of the celebration. Parishioners are urged to strive to be on time for Mass so that they can prayerfully prepare themselves for the liturgy. This is best done in a prayerful silence in the main body of the church. Those wishing to converse with others are best to do this outside or in the gathering area which is designed for this purpose. All Mass attendees, even if they arrive late, should be in the main body of the church to be united in the one Body of Christ. Fasting at least one hour before Mass can prepare us for the sacrament and make us mindful of the holiness of the gathering.

4.   Processions

The procession at the start of Mass is representative of the congregation as a pilgrim people. Processing with dignity, ministers, servers and clergy arrive at the sanctuary. They perform a profound bow together with the priest. Those holding candles and processional crosses do not need to bow at this point or genuflect if there is a tabernacle in the sanctuary. Throughout the Mass anyone coming forward to perform a ministry bows to the altar or, in the case of the servers, when they interact with the priest. The tabernacle is not acknowledged again until the conclusion of Mass.

5.  Posture throughout Mass

Throughout the celebration posture is governed, as a rule, by a Deacon although in his absence the priest will act. In general, Mass attendees should be aware of the required posture and act accordingly. When the presider stands, including when incense is used, all should stand and not wait until the deacon is in front of them. The invocation, “Let us pray” is not an instruction to stand. Rather, it invites us to pray as the words indicate. The posture for the Eucharistic Prayer, in the Diocese of Palmerston North, will be finalized by Bishop John Adams at the conclusion of the consultative process.

6.  Liturgy of the Word

The First and Second Readings, along with the Psalm, belong to the laity. The Gospel is proper to the clergy, especially deacons, as well as the homily. Readers bow to the altar as they come forward to proclaim the Word. All actions take place with suitable dignity and pace so that everyone understands what is proclaimed. Readers, along with Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, need to be mindful that their attire is suitable to their role even when deputed at late notice. The Alleluia or Gospel Acclamation is always sung otherwise it is omitted,

7.  Mass Parts

The parts of the Mass require the congregation to manifest their priestly dignity, in their baptism, and participation in the Eucharistic sacrifice. They need to be ready to speak from the start of prayers after the introduction given by the priest, “I confess…”, “I believe” and “Our Father” although it is traditional for the presider to initiate the Gloria. The “Holy, holy,” “Acclamation of Faith,” “Great Amen,” “Embolism” after the Our Father, and “Lamb of God” belong to the people and should not be led or spoken by the presider. If required, however, he may prompt the Acclamation of Faith to identify the option all can use.

8.  Silence

Silences are important throughout the Mass. They can take place after the readings, Gospel and homily, and after Holy Communion. The are times for prayer and reflection on what has just been received or done. Ministers or musicians should not pre-empt or prompt the presider but wait until he stands or indicates by other means that the next element of the liturgy can proceed.

9.  Holy Communion

Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion should not approach the altar as if they were concelebrants. To this end, they need to stand on the side or the foot of the sanctuary, rather than directly behind the altar alongside the deacon or concelebrants. It is appropriate for everyone to receive the Holy Eucharist under both species to reflect the banquet nature of the Mass and the fulness of the symbol. Holy Communion should be received from the altar by those who are present to that sacrifice. It should not be received, as a rule, from the tabernacle. 

1  Reception of Holy Communion

Priests take Holy Communion while others receive it. Only the ordained can communicate by intinction, when they dip the Host in the Precious Blood. Dipping the Host is not permitted by laity. They consume the Host as soon as it is handed to them. Extraordinary Ministers cannot depute one another with chalices or bowls. The posture and mode of reception of Holy Communion is up to the communicant. The standard means is standing and on the hand. This applies also to whether the communicant receives under or both kinds. Extraordinary Ministers say to those who come forward, who are not receiving Holy Communion, the invocation “Peace be with you.”

11 Conclusion of Mass

The people stand when the priest stands. They should not need to use “Let us pray” as a prompt. Notices should be kept short as the people remain standing. Sometimes, there may be longer speeches or presentations which will require for everyone to resume their seats. The presider venerates the altar and the other ministers process out with him after bowing to the altar. Once the recessional hymn is concluded it is helpful for people to depart without too much conversation so that those who are praying in thanksgiving can do so.

 

Feast of the Transfiguration

 It piques my interest that it is only in the Gospel of Matthew that we hear: "... and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white." (Mt 17: 2) In Mark we read: "... his clothes became dazzling white" (Mk 9: 3) and in Luke: "... the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white." (Lk 9: 28) The reference in Matthew, I propose, is connected to a theme of the Gospel with Jesus as the new Moses. Organized into five "books" Matthew's gospel has Jesus handing down the new law from the Mount of Beatitudes. This is the new Law for a new people established by his sacrifice on the cross where his divine Sonship is revealed: "Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, 'Truly this man was God's Son'. " (Mt 27: 54) 

Paul makes the comparison also between Moses and Jesus: "Now if the ministry of death, chiseled in letters on stone tablets, came in glory so that the people of Israel could not gaze at Moses' face, a glory now set aside, how much more will the ministry of the Spirit come in glory?" (2 Cor 3: 7-8) For Paul the veil over Moses face is that of the Law and it is this veil that remains to blind the Jews to the divinity of Jesus, revealed in the resurrection: "But their minds were hardened. Indeed, so to this very day, when they hear the reading of the old covenant, the same veil is still there, since only in Christ is it set aside. Indeed, to this very day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their minds, but when one turns to the Lord; the veil is removed." (2 Cor 3: 14-16) For Matthew, the Law is fulfilled in Jesus: "Do not think I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfil." (Mt 5: 17)

The Transfiguration of Jesus, therefore, not only reveals the glory of the Son of Man, but he also fulfils the law and the prophets in his person. Peter, James and John are privileged to see this and Jesus, with his face unveiled, shines upon them such that they will also be ultimately transformed by God's glory: "And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit." (2 Cor 3: 18) The consequence of this is that the apostles experience true freedom: "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." (2 Cor 3: 17) and, as he preaches to the Galatians: "For freedom Christ has set us free." (Gal 5: 1) The new Moses, Jesus Christ, leads his new people: "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." (Gal 3: 28) in a new exodus: Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him. They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure (Gk. exodus) which he was about to accomplish in Jerusalem (Lk 9: 30-31). Through his Passion death and resurrection, they will be governed by a new Law, which is founded in himself, and they receive an anticipation of their own risen state: "So it is with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised in a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus, it is written, 'The first Adam, became a living being'; the last Adam became a living spirit." (1 Cor 15: 42-25) We can see how the transfiguration leads to the resurrection: "Tell no one about the vision until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead." (Mt 17: 9) The revelation of Christ's glorified body speaks of our own future: "As was the man of dust, so are those who are of the dust; and as is the man of heaven. so are those who are of heaven. Just as we have become the image of the man of dust, we will also bear the image of the man of heaven." (1 Cor 15: 47-49)

19th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 Have you noticed that this episode of Peter, where he asks of the Lord: "Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water," (Mt 14: 28) and the declaration of faith: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God," (Mt 16: 16) only occur in the Gospel of Matthew? On both occasions Peter's faith, despite his protestations falls short. In the first case: "... he became frightened and beginning to sink, he cried out, 'Lord save me!'" (Mt 14: 30) and in the second, shortly after: "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church..." (Mt 16: 18), he fails when he: "... began to rebuke him (Jesus) saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This must never happen to you," only to get the response: "Get behind me, Satan!" (Mt 16: 23) Thus, Peter goes from "hero to zero." How can we make sense of this dynamic in the life of the Church and our own faith journey? I propose we can understand this in terms of the Marian and Petrine aspects of the Church: "'[The Church's] structure is totally ordered to the holiness of Christ's members. And holiness is measured according to the 'great mystery' in which the Bride responds with the gift of love to the gift of the Bridegroom.' Mary goes before us all in holiness that is the Church's mystery as the 'bride without spot or wrinkle.' This is why the 'Marian' dimension of the Church precedes the 'Petrine'." (CCC 773) Our participation at Mass is a social and juridical reality but its orientation and fulfilment lie in the great mystery of God's love and the holiness of the members of the Church, as they imitate Our Lady as the perfect disciple.

18th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 Jesus response to the disciples who perceive a lack of food for the people is to say: "They need not go away; you give them something to eat." (Mtt 14: 16) This seeming refusal reminds me of the Lord's response to his Blessed Mother at the Wedding Feast of Cana. The answer, however, is not a definitive one as it invites a deepening of faith and trust. In both cases, it results in Jesus performing a miracle which far surpasses the expectations of those who made the original request. When we consider our life of faith and prayer, we need to avoid two extremes. On one end, there is the tendency to pietism which results in presumption while on the other, there is activism which results in despair. True trust in God and cooperation with grace results in hope. At Mass Jesus invites us to participate in his offering on the Cross. The bread and wine we bring as gifts looks feeble yet that is what we have been asked to provide. Jesus, as he did on that day, uses our efforts and offering, both temporal and spiritual, to work a miracle. With the multiplication of food the people were fed, with the Mass our sins are forgiven, and we are transformed by the Body and Blood of the Saviour, who multiplies graces and charisms for the benefit of our families and community.

Why hell?

 In my previous post I addressed Jesus' preaching on hell. It is non-negotiable that hell exists. After all, we say in the Apostles Creed: "... (Jesus) was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead....". This also refers to the mystery of hell as pre-existing the Resurrection and is sometimes referred to as the "harrowing of Hell" when Jesus descends to the Underworld to free the souls who had died. St Paul writes: "When it says, 'He ascended' what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of earth?" (Eph 4: 9) In the Office of Readings for Holy Saturday an ancient homily says: 

"Truly he goes to seek out our first parents like lost sheep; he wishes to visit those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death. he goes to free the prisoner Adam and his fellow prisoner Eve from their pains, he who is God, and Adam's son.

The Lord goes in to them holding his victorious weapon, his cross. When Adam, the first created man, sees him, he strikes his breast in terror and calls out to all: 'My Lord be with you all.' And Christ in reply says to Adam: 'And with your spirit.' And grasping his hand he raises him up, saying: 'Awake, O sleeper, arise from the dead, and Christ will give you light.' "

So, our first idea of hell is that state which held souls prior to the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. By rising he created heaven, which enabled souls to experience the divine life. This is the basis of the Universal Church which encompasses the whole of humanity in the fulfillment of the plan of the Holy Trinity for the human race from the beginning: "At this moment, as the Fathers put it, all the just from the time of Adam, 'from Abel, the just one, to the last of the elect' will be gathered together with the Father in the universal Church." (Lumen Gentium, 2)

However, when we hear Jesus speak of hell or Gehenna, he is referring to a state or place of never ending punishment which is different in character from the concept of Sheol, which is the state of the dead prior to the Resurrection. In the Bood of Revelation, it says: "Whoever conquers will not be harmed by the second death." (Rev 2: 11) This state is the enduring deprivation of the vision of God which has no remedy. Jesus warns of a peril greater than physical death when he teaches: "Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Mtt 10: 28)

It is interesting that our Lord makes the distinction between physical death and hell. It is also a place where body and soul experience suffering. This points not only to the reality of the bodily resurrection but also to a hell which is also experienced bodily. When we die, we do not become angels, who are pure spirit. The human condition presumes bodily existence which in turn presumes existence in space. Hell is therefore not just an idea or a state of existence but also a "place." Thus, by teasing out the implications of biblical data and Jesus' teaching we can arrive at various conclusions that point to the nature of hell.

The first idea I come to is that God is the Creator." He (Jesus) is the image of the unseen God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers - all things have been created through him and for him." (Col 1: 15-16) The whole of Creation is destined to participate in the divine life of the Holy Trinity with human beings, who are made in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1: 26) receiving the invitation to experience divinization by being joined to the god who created them. 

This brings us to the second point which is the revelation of God's nature. We are told: "... God is light and in him there is no darkness at all" (1 Jn 1: 5) and that God is love: "Whoever does not love, does not know God, for God is love." (1 Jn 4: 8) God, as Creator, does not participate or admit of darkness or of hatred and those who wish to participate in his life are therefore instructed by Lord to imitate God. He tells us that God is "perfect" (Mtt 5: 48) and "merciful." (Lk 6: 36) As the best of fathers, God knows what we need (Lk 11: 13).

Third, evil and sin are not created. These are parasitic upon created things and exists in the same way that a lie does, that is, it only has a reality as long as it is believed. Once the truth is revealed the lie has no purchase on reality.  Satan, as a spirit was created by God, but his kingdom is a lie. Jesus indicates this when he says: "He (the devil) was murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." (Jn 8: 44) The cause of the rebellion of Satan and other evil spirits against the loving rule of God is envy: "... for through the devil's envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his company experience it." (Wis 2: 24)

Fourth, God tolerates evil in this age, but it has no part in eternal life: St Paul tells us: "For he (Jesus) must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death." (1Cor 15: 25-26) We also have the parable of the weeds and the wheat where the Master of the harvest instructs his servants to wait until harvest concludes before the weeds will be destroyed and the righteous gathered in eternal life: "The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Mtt 13: 41-42)

This brings us to the fifth point - why allow for those who are evil to remain in existence at all? Jesus tells us that: "He is God not of the dead but of the living." (Mk 12: 27) God is a Creator not a destroyer. Those who do evil do not pass out of existence. Jesus says of Judas Iscariot: "The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would be better for that one not to have been born." (Mtt 26: 24) Those whose being is darkness experience the light of God's love not as infinite beatitude but as infinite destruction. Both good and evil encounter God but their experience is diametrically opposed. God does not will this: "This is right and acceptable in the sight of our savior, who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim 2: 3)

The sixth point builds directly on the fifth. What determines whether I go to hell or not? In the final analysis, it is me. I do so through exercising my freedom just as Satan exercised his. He, as pure spirit, made his definitive choice in an instant. I make my choice throughout the whole of my life. I do not live my life aimlessly or to no effect. I am accountable to the one who loves me and summoned me into existence with the intention that I respond with love for love. What I do in this life matters. In Revelation Jesus tells us: "See I am coming soon my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone's work." (Rev 22: 12) St Paul put it this way: "For all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil." (2 Cor 5: 10) If I, through my choices, become darkness in this life and estranged from God, I will experience the consequences of my actions in eternity, with the chief suffering caused by my separation from God: "These will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might..." (2 Thess 1: 9)

The seventh thought is that we cannot end without having mention of God's mercy. Even if I am darkness even the smallest scintilla of light will open the door to the merciful love of God. This mercy is given us through the sacrifice of the Cross. We hear every time we attend Mass: "For this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins." The example of the Good Thief, dying in agony alongside the crucified Christ suffices to illustrate the prerogative of mercy which is extended to all those who trust in Jesus and call upon his name even as they are dying: 

"One of the criminals who were hanged there kept deriding him and saying, 'Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us! But the other rebuked him, saying, 'Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed have been condemned justly, for we are getting what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong.' Then he said, 'Jesus remember me when you come into your kingdom.' He replied, 'Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise'." (Lk 23: 39-43)

Canonical Opinion on SSPX Appeal

 Recently I posted my take on the SSPX appeal to the Holy See against the declaration of their excommunication for schismatic ordinations of bishops. I shared this with a canonist friend of mine, Mr Paul Shogren, who is an independent canonist, for his comment. Among his response was this take on a couple of my ideas. His reply is in red:

3. Appeal Against Sentence I think it better to use 'Recourse' as this is not an appeal against a judicial sentence.

Since the Holy Father indicated, prior to the ordinations, that they would violate the law and trigger automatic excommunication I wonder if, in fact, an appeal is possible or at least advisable? This is not a standard appeal against a decision of an ecclesial authority. The declaration has been made by the Holy See itself. SSPX refer to canon 1353 regarding the suspensive effect that occurs when an appeal is made. However, canon 333 paragraph 3 states: "No appeal or recourse is permitted against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff." The declaration of the penalty was issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith acting on behalf of the Supreme Pontiff and with his permission. This situation would be clearer if the pope had signed the document in forma specifica which would have eliminated any ambiguity. He could also have handed down the sentence in forma Motu Proprio (on his own initiative). In any event, I struggle to see what an appeal would achieve. It can hardly argue the facts of the case and the penalty is automatic. Any appeal is therefore looking to challenge the Law itself as well as the authority of the Legislator to interpret the law as to what constitutes the delict of schism.

For what it's worth, I think the individuals concerned (recalling that the SSPX lacks juridic status) have a reasonable ground for recourse in as much as the declaration of the excommunication seemingly took place without any form of administrative penal process. I note that the DDF, when it declared the excommunication of Archbishop Vigano for schism, undertook an administrative penal process. Of course, one could reply that the DDF would only have foregone the administrative penal process if it had a solid canonical reason e.g. when they consulted the pope about the matter he dispensed the relevant procedural law (being a 'grave and extraordinary matter' the Prefect was bound to do present it to him under art. 31§1 Praedicate evangelium).

Perhaps the DDF are playing strategically here and enticing the SSPX bishops to undertake recourse so there can be some very solid juridic examination, and the SSPX will be forced to explicitly show whether they submit to the jurisdiction of the Pope and the Roman authorities during this recourse and what emerges from it; they will get what they asked for, to have the Pope personally examine their claims, but not on the terms they wanted. Leo says, "Yes I will consider your case, but like everyone else, according to the law, not just because you want to see me." Quite a brilliant strategy if my conjecture is correct.

4. The Office of Pope

If the appeal is against the Code and therefore Vatican II it is not only tilting against the authority of the Successor of Peter but the College of Bishops as a whole. SSPX seem to think that the Pope can act as an autocrat. If they had read the law under which they are appealing they would see canon 330 "Just as by the Lord's decision Saint Peter and the other Apostles constitute one college, so in a like manner the Roman Pontiff, the Successor of Peter, and the other bishops, the successors of the Apostles, are united among themselves." SSPX would be mistaken to think that the Pope would act in an arbitrary or unilateral way to undermine the penal law of the Church and the integrity of not only the 1983 Code but the recent legislation of Pope Benedict XVI regarding graviora delicta (more serious crimes) In short, I fear that SSPX will simply be digging themselves deeper into the hole that they have created by continuing to appeal this excommunication.

Art. 9 of the SST norms state that the DDF is the Supreme Tribunal for all graviora delicta (this is an exception to it being the Rota for judicial penal trials and the Signatura in the case of an administrative penal process), so the SSPX bishops will have their recourse decided by the same dicastery that declared the excommunications. The only recourse after the DDF for these graviora delicta is the Pope. 

I publish this because it gives readers of this blog an idea of how nuanced and complex canonical matters, especially those related to penal law, can be. Even though I am qualified in Canon Law my primary role is to act as Vicar General and as a Parish Priest. I am not suitably up to date with pontifical legislation. The situation can be complex, for example, there are judicial trials and administrative trials which have a separate character. Furthermore, it is not only the Code of Canon Law to be considered but also particular law when it comes to the jurisdiction and obligations of various dicasteries. Lastly, any priest, religious or lay person looking to defend or assert their rights within the Church needs to obtain professional advice rather than interpret the law by themselves. This, of course, costs money but if the issue at stake is important, given that the civil law processes take place on paper, it is crucial that you get the right advice from the outset, so you are not embarrassed as the proceedings or case comes before the appropriate authority.

17th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 Occasionally I hear people say things like: "Why don't priests preach on Hell?" For a start, priests use their homilies to break open the Word. It is not to vent on their personal hobby horses. Canon 767 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law states that: "... in the homily the mysteries of faith and the norms of Christian life are to be explained from the sacred text during the course of the liturgical year." In the Decree on the Life of Priests the Council Father taught: "... in every case their (the priest's) role is to teach not their own wisdom but the Word of God and to issue an urgent invitation to all men to conversion and holiness." (PO. 4) In any event, it is Jesus who preaches. We are his flock whom he feeds with his Word. We need to take seriously the Word we are given is a living and reliable account of the nature of God and the heavenly realities: "Today this scripture is being fulfilled in your hearing." (Lk 4: 21) Today Jesus preaches on Hell: "So it will be at the end of the age. the angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous and throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Mtt 13: 49-50) Elsewhere Jesus describes the state of Hell as: "outer darkness" (Mtt 8:12), "where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched" (Mk 9: 48) and a "great chasm... this place of torment" (Lk 16: 26 & 28) The Book of Revelation informs us: "Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found in the book of life was thrown into the fire." (Rev 20: 14-15) Let us not diminish or deny the consequences of deliberately, consciously and freely rejecting God's love. Let us also pray for others, especially of our acquaintance, that they experience the joy of the Gospel and come to know the love of God which saves us from such a fate.

Thoughts on the SSPX Appeal

 It has been publicized in mainstream media that the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) will appeal their excommunication latae sententiae, by the law itself, which was declared by the Holy See after SSPX ordained four bishops contrary to the law. Without going into depth regarding the substance of the matter I have a few points I would like to make which speak more to the nature of the law and the doctrine enunciated by the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II).

1. Being Under the Law

The very fact that SSPX have appealed against the declared excommunication indicates that they regard themselves as coming under the law and that they were subject to the law prior to the actions they took. This appeal, furthermore, is made under the canons of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. To understand the purpose and intent of the 1983 Code I encourage those interested to read the Apostolic Constitution Sacrae Disciplinae Leges, which was promulgated by Pope St John Paul II in 1983 as he promulgated the law itself. He wrote: "Indeed, in a certain sense this new Code could be understood as a great effort to translate this same conciliar doctrine and ecclesiology into canonical language the conciliar image of the Church." (the emphasis is that of the Holy Father).

In this way it can be said that to place oneself under the law is necessarily to accept the doctrine and discipline of Vatican II which is something that SSPX have always refused! This is despite the fact that the founder of their movement signed the documents of Vatican II in the affirmative. This includes their latest Profession of Faith, in which they name the popes up to Pope Pius XII while pointedly omitting his successors. It can be said that the 1917 Code changed the form of the law but not its content whereas the 1983 Code maintained the form but changed the content. Yet, SSPX have not mentioned the 1917 Code in their appeal while maintaining the ecclesiology and liturgy which was maintained under that Code.

2. Excommunication Latae Sententiae

Excommunication by the law itself means that a trial is not required. With the action, such as cooperating in the procurement of an induced abortion, means the individual is automatically excommunicated upon the completion of the prohibited act. On this occasion the legislator informed SSPX that their proposed action would constitute behaviour subject to the latae sententiae excommunication. All the Holy See has achieved is to declare what the law has done.  In the English common law tradition this is called a summary offence. The onus lies on the offending individual not on the Crown. The onus, therefore, in this situation lies on SSPX to show that their actions did not in fact trigger the excommunication. This would involve an interpretation of the law which would directly oppose the explicit communication of the legislator himself. They are not in a position to challenge the legislator himself without confirming the truth of their schismatic behaviour.

3. Appeal Against Sentence

Since the Holy Father indicated, prior to the ordinations, that they would violate the law and trigger automatic excommunication I wonder if, in fact, an appeal is possible or at least advisable? This is not a standard appeal against a decision of an ecclesial authority. The declaration has been made by the Holy See itself. SSPX refer to canon 1353 regarding the suspensive effect that occurs when an appeal is made. However, canon 333 paragraph 3 states: "No appeal or recourse is permitted against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff." The declaration of the penalty was issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith acting on behalf of the Supreme Pontiff and with his permission. This situation would be clearer if the pope had signed the document in forma specifica which would have eliminated any ambiguity. He could also have handed down the sentence in forma Motu Proprio (on his own initiative). In any event, I struggle to see what an appeal would achieve. It can hardly argue the facts of the case and the penalty is automatic. Any appeal is therefore looking to challenge the Law itself as well as the authority of the Legislator to interpret the law regarding what constitutes the delict of schism.

4. The Office of Pope

If the appeal is against the Code and therefore Vatican II it is not only tilting against the authority of the Successor of Peter but the College of Bishops as a whole. SSPX seem to think that the Pope can act as an autocrat. If they had read the law under which they are appealing they would see canon 330 "Just as by the Lord's decision Saint Peter and the other Apostles constitute one college, so in a like manner the Roman Pontiff, the Successor of Peter, and the other bishops, the successors of the Apostles, are united among themselves." SSPX would be mistaken to think that the Pope would act in an arbitrary or unilateral way to undermine the penal law of the Church and the integrity of not only the 1983 Code but the recent legislation of Pope Benedict XVI regarding graviora delicta (more serious crimes) In short, I fear that SSPX will simply be digging themselves deeper into the hole that they have created by continuing to appeal this excommunication.

5. Conclusion

SSPX finds itself in an awkward position. It is challenging the Code while trying to use the Code. It is acknowledging the reality of excommunication while saying that no excommunication is justified even when it was told, in no uncertain terms, that their behaviour amounted to schism. Their fundamental choice is to become fully sede vacantist or to repent of their schismatic behaviour and reconcile with the Holy See.

16th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 What a beautiful reading we are given for the First Reading today! We hear: "Although you (God) are sovereign in strength, you judge with mildness, and with great forbearance you govern us, for you have power to act whenever you choose. Through such works you have taught your people that the righteous must be kind, and you have filled your children with good hope, because you give repentance for sins." (Wis 12: 18-19) Thus, if we wish to be righteous we must be kind. Indeed, if we wish to be loving we must be kind: "Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful..." (1 Cor 13: 4). If we bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit, likewise, kindness is required: "By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control." (Gal 5: 22) Let this reading help us in our familial and work relationships so that we act with forbearance and kindness. Many people come to confession with anger as an issue or sin against which they struggle. Sometimes this is derived from weakness and resentment with the remembrance of past hurts. May our faith help us to imitate God and act with kindness towards those who are close to us: "Be merciful, as your Father is merciful" (Lk 6: 36) and "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Mtt 5: 48)

Thoughts on Amoris Laetitia

 Shortly, Pope Leo will lead a conference focused on the reception of the document Amoris Laetitia (AL) which was promulgated by his predecessor Pope Francis. This document, not unlike Humanae Vitae (HV) in 1968, received a hostile reception in some quarters as commentators perceived it, on the basis of one footnote, as sanctioning laxity in the area of remarried divorced Catholics and the reception of Holy Communion. HV also is known for its rejection of artificial contraception but like AL encompassed a much larger context and perspective around human relationships and family life. So my first point in this discussion is that the document be read as a whole.

However, I in this treatment of the subject I would like to point out two canonical maxims which are relevant to pastoral praxis. These maxims represent the wisdom of centuries of engagement with sin and salvation mediated through the ministry of the Church. After all, we read in canon 27 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, that: "Custom is the best interpreter of laws." I take this to mean that the law of the Catholic Church is not the blind and rigid product of a machine but is meant to be lived in the context of a living communion and attentive to the needs of the people whom it serves. The Legislator, who is part of that communion, acts within the lived tradition and unwritten laws that have guided it from the beginning.

The first maxim is: "In cases of moral and physical impossibility the law does not bind." This is mentioned in the Code at canon 960 which speaks of the sacrament of penance as the ordinary means for those conscious of their guilt of grave sin to be reconciled to God and the Church. The canon continues: "Only physical or moral impossibility excuses from confession of this type; in such a case reconciliation can be obtained by other means." In a wide range of cases I have found individuals who wish to participate in the life of the sacraments but are constrained on the face of it though factors beyond his or her control. We cannot allow the law to be pushed into absurdity by bizarre or unusual cases for which the law was not designed in the first place.

This leads us to the second maxim: "The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church." The vindication of the law is to be found in love (Rm 13: 10). The Church loves her children and seeks the salvation of the whole of humanity according to the mission given her by the divine Saviour. She does not want to hear the reproach of the Lord who said: "Woe also to you, lawyers! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them." (Lk 11: 46) This maxim is enshrined in the final canon of the 1983 Code: "... and the salvation of souls, which must (lat. debet esse) always be the supreme law of the Church, is to be kept before one's eyes." (c. 1752) The imperative here tells us that salus animarum (the salvation of souls) is not optional. 

Thus, the pastors of the Church, in applying the law, are called to temper the objective severity that is necessary to protect sacraments and situations as well as discouraging sin, to draw everyone including sinners closer to God. To this end, the synodal process helps us to listen to others and hear their stories and experience of the law and the Church. It does not abrogate the law, but it renders the hearts of pastors open to the demands of love as well as the certainty of law.

SSPX and the Five Pillars of Protestantism

 In a previous post I referred to the SSPX as heading towards a position of being Protestant. How is this possible since they believe themselves to be more Catholic than the Pope? In this analysis I will look at the five constitutive elements of traditional Protestant theology which underpin their ecclesiology.  In reality these pillars presume a Catholic context and were intended as a means of reform but ended up becoming effectively a separate religion. I do not believe this to necessarily be the case in practice today. This is reflected in the theology of Communion from Vaytican II to which SSPX objects so vigorously. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since 1517! Nevertheless, if we look at what has happened to the Old Catholics, who separated from the Pope in 1870, they end up drifting into full communion with the Anglican church and other ecclesial communities which adhere to a fundamentally Protestant position.

1. The Corruption of the Papacy

According to this pillar the papacy is a fraud. The true church is a fellowship of true believers who were suppressed by the papacy in its lust for money and power. SSPX, in their Profession of Faith, accuse all the popes subsequent to Pius XII of being guilty of heresy. The penalty for heresy is latae sententiae excommunication and the loss of office. If SSPX are correct the Papal See is now vacant since the papacy is both a personal charism and an office. This was illustrated when Pope Benedict XVI resigned but retired as Pope Emeritus.

Being sede vacantist not only means repudiating the present pope. It includes impugning the College of Cardinals and of Bishops. It means that the Holy Spirit has not guided the Church in electing true Successors of Peter to be the rock of unity and to strengthen his brothers. In sum, since the Petrine Office is constitutive of Church, properly speaking, the Catholic Church is considered as being effectively anti-Church and the present Poper as an anti-Pope or even an anti-Christ.

2. The Priesthood of the Baptized

Once apostolic continuity has been broken, since the College of Bishops no longer legitimately transmits apostolic power through legitimate ordination by the laying on of hands, where does priestly ministry finds its validity. It must do so through sacramental means. If ordination in communion with Rome is not possible the foundation for priestly ministry can only be located in baptism. Having lost the ontological connection to apostolic ministry, through the rupture with the Successor of Peter, ministry becomes functional. At the SSPX ordination of their bishops they replaced the pontifical mandate with a construction of their own and justified the action by the pastoral needs of the Society. This means that the role is a functional one. Protestant ministers do not differ from their flock on account of ontology or an essential difference (see LG 10) rather they serve in a different capacity ultimately based in baptism. They have a job not a ministry.

3. Sola Scriptura (by Scripture alone)

If connection with Apostolic authority has gone and the priesthood is a function founded in baptism from where can authority be obtained? It cannot be from Rome and the mandate given St Peter by the Lord. Authority must be derived from Sacred Scripture, the interpretation of which is handed down by leaders of SSPX. It is they who as self-appointed verifiers of Biblical data and tradition decide what is truly "Catholic" in the absence of the Petrine Office and the College of Bishops gathered around him. The Anglican Church, which is really an ecclesial community, speaks of a three-legged stool of Sacraments, Scripture and Reason. This approach has led them to ordain women to the priesthood and to accept same-sex marriage! Additionally, having repudiated the Second Vatican Council, which of the Ecumenical Councils is accepted? Again, the authority to determine this will be sheeted back to how these Councils truly reflect the scriptural data. The decision lies with the doctrinal watchdogs of the SSPX hierarchy who fulfil a function arising from the pastoral need of their community. This sounds a lot like the "reason" leg of the Anglican stool.

4. Sola Fide (by faith alone)

In the Catholic Church, unlike the Protestant ecclesial communities, faith is not merely that of the individual. We pray in the baptismal liturgy, after the baptismal promises: "This is the faith of the Church. We are proud to profess it in Christ the Lord." This is the collective faith handed down over the centuries by the popes. It belongs to everyone. It cannot be subject to arbitrary choice. SSPX have decided that faith is something that they get to choose and define and that we are saved by adhering to it. We are no longer saved through the sacraments of the Catholic Church since these are tainted by the heresy alleged of the popes since 1962. In short, if salvation does not come through the Catholic faith maintained by the Pope and College of Bishops it must be brought about through faith alone. This is faith primarily in our Lord Jesus Christ however, since in the Nicene Creed, we pray: "I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church" one is led to believe that the SSPX belief in their own probity as guardians of Catholic tradition this is constitutive of their faith as individuals who choose to protest the legitimacy of the Roamn Catholic Church. Instead of having one Pope the individual and personal assent of faith means that each believer becomes his or her own pope!

5. Sola Gratia (by grace alone)

Since individual faith, manifested in obedience to the programme and theology of SSPX, mediates salvation it follows that we are saved by grace alone. We do not cooperate with grace since our reasoning, represented by the development of doctrine at Vatican II, avails us naught. The antiquarianism of the Society determines that history has come to an end. The doctrine of the Church is preserved in amber, beautiful but inert. The sacraments of the Catholic Church no longer objectively mediate salvation. The society founded on the act of faith of Peter and his Successors is illegitimate, if not pernicious and sinful. The believer is therefore saved by grace since the sacraments serve merely a pastoral function when they are divorced from the authority of the Holy See. Those priests ordained by the Catholic Church are all suspect and thus the validity of the sacraments they confect. The Church they serve is not an extension of the Incarnation but a human construct subject to all the weaknesses that attend that condition. The infallibility of the Pope, ex cathedra, only holds with their permission. The infallibility of Ecumenical Councils on matters of defined doctrine likewise requires their imprimatur and nihil obstat. The sensus fidelium of the millions of Catholics who are obedient to the See of Peter and their bishops means nothing. Without the institution the means for justification can only be that of grace alone.

Conclusion

All of this points to the constitutive nature of the Petrine office as the essential guarantor of Catholic faith and sacraments - ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia (Where Peter, there the Church) The Marian Fiat and the Petrine Tu es Christus form the foundations of the Church as a society of divine origin which is in the world but not of the world. It cannot be treated as a museum piece immune to change. After all, Pope Pius XI allowed for the liturgy in the vernacular in the Syro-Malabar rite, and Pope Pius XII reformed the liturgy for Holy Week in 1955. The Hypostatic Union of the Saviour, Second Person of the Holy Trinity, also holds for the Church, human and divine. SSPX cannot usurp this reality no matter how sincere they are in their beliefs. There is no salvation in disobedience and protest.

15th Sunday in Ordinary Time

 Why is the reception of the Good News so inconsistent? For some the Mass is a grace filled moment of encounter with the God who loves them enough to die for them: "But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears for they hear. Truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but did not see it, and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it" (Mtt 13: 16-17) Yet others, including many cradle Catholics, remain indifferent to the Holy Eucharist? The Gospel gives the following reasons: "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in the heart... a person who has no root, but endures only for a while, and when trouble or persecution arises on account of the word, that person immediately falls away... the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the lure of wealth choke the word, and it yields nothing." (Mtt 13: 19; 21 and 22) I propose an additional reason, which St Paul gives to explain why the Jews refuse to accept the Gospel: "I can testify that they (the Jews) have a zeal for God, but it is not enlightened. For being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they have not submitted to God's righteousness. For Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes." (Rm 10: 2-4) If we substitute "values" for "law" we can understand that many people hope to serve God through living out values, many of which are received from or articulated by the Catholic Church. St Paul tells us that such an approach is futile and will not yield the fruit of the Kingdom: "For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I came to you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. My speech and my proclamation were not with plausible words of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God." (1 Cor 2: 2-5) Let us, therefore, be sure to keep Jesus Christ at the centre of our faith.

Excommunication of SSPX

 By the time I write this, I expect that the illicit ordination of bishop by the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) will have taken place. Pope Leo XIV has told the Society: "I pray for you, because to tear the seamless garment of Christ is a sin of extreme gravity." When he uses the expression "extreme gravity" he is alluding to the canonical offences outlined under the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI as graviora delicta (more serious offences/crimes) which was codified in the new Book of Processes included in the 1983 Code of Canon Law. This means that if SSPX do indeed proceed with the ordinations they will be excommunicated latae sententiae, that is, by the law itself. No trial is required. The Pope can choose to declare the excommunication to confirm that the penalty has been incurred.

How did we get to this? It is a long story. I will restrict myself to a brief narrative. When SSPX, whose founder had been present at Vatican II and signed the documents in the affirmative, illicitly ordained bishops, in defiance of Pope St John Paul II, the offending bishops were excommunicated. Subsequently, the excommunications were lifted in 1 July 1988 by Joseph Ratzinger the prefect for the CDF. When he became Pope Benedict XVI had talks with the Society. In those the society recognized him as the legitimate successor of Peter. This had the effect of recognizing his predecessors going back to Pope St John XXIII. Some of the members of SSPX refused to accept this and remain as sede vacantists, that is, they do not recognize the popes after Pope Pius XII as true popes. The Holy Father also granted the indult Summorum Pontificum in July 7, 2007 to give greater access to the Mass in the extraordinary form, as it was termed. Furthermore, once this agreement was reached Pope Benedict moved the discussion with SSPX from the competence of the Congregation for Divine Worship to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In other words, this was no longer a situation of disagreement over liturgy but one of potential heresy since SSPX refused to accept the decrees of an Ecumenical Council.

Recently, SSPX have sent an affirmation of faith to the Holy See. It is interesting that it mentions there a repudiation of errors stating: "I consequently reject all errors contrary to this Faith, and in particular those of liberalism, indifferentism, modernism, ecumenism, and laicism, condemned by Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII, Saint Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII." In other words, it seems they allege these errors against all popes from Pope St John XXIII onwards. They have effectively returned to a sede vacantist posture. This is also a complete rejection of the Second Vatican Council which entails a rejection of canon 749 paragraph 2 in the 1983 Code declaring the infallibility of Ecumenical Councils, when they declare doctrine which is to be held as definitive by the faithful. The ordinations of bishops reveals a deeper truth. SSPX have a position that can only be maintained by those who repudiate the popes from Pope St John XXIII onwards. This position becomes more and more untenable as time passes. It is inconceivable that the Holy Spirit would deny the Church a pope for a long period of time. Such protests end up in the position of the Protestants which accuse the papacy of being a fraud perpetrated on the true Church which remain invisible and incorrupt. When you have one of the pillars of Protestantism the others will follow: faith alone, grace alone, Scripture alone and the priesthood of the baptized.

Given that there are congregations and religious orders, that celebrate the Mass in the extraordinary form and are in full communion with the Holy See, I anticipate that those who love the Mass in its pre-conciliar form will have to make a choice. They either follow the hierarchy of SSPX and risk schism along with them, or they adhere to full communion with the Catholic Church which maintains the legitimacy of the Second Vatican Council and the legitimacy of the popes. I do not think there is room for compromise. the theology of Communion which is fundamental to understanding Vatican II is not up for debate. As a dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium, by definition, is fixed doctrine that has been stated by the Church to be free from error. The excuse of SSPX for the ordinations was to meet the pastoral needs of the people but the excommunication latae sententiae will damage the pastoral life as followers of SSPX will receive invalid sacraments from the hands of excommunicated bishops.