Edward Pentin

The post All New Articles Are Now Published on My Substack Page appeared first on Edward Pentin.

Edward Pentin

Bishop Athanasius Schneider has encouraged the Catholic faithful to remain joyful, steadfast and fearless against the attacks of this world and from within the Church, remembering that their reward will be “the crown of life.”

Speaking June 14 to a London conference celebrating 60 years of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales, the auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, implored those present to “be faithful, keep the faith, the true faith, the one Catholic and apostolic faith.”

“The loss of faith and its corruption is the greatest misfortune for man, because it affects at its root the whole relationship with God,” Bishop Schneider said, before quoting St. Augustine of Hippo who warned: “If faith falters, love itself grows cold. In fact, if a man has fallen from faith, he must necessarily also fall from love; for he cannot love what he does not believe exists.”

Bishop Schneider, who has become known and respected worldwide for his Catholic orthodoxy, recalled that throughout the Church’s history, the faith has been “attacked internally by heresies and externally by persecutions, which have also caused apostasy.” Heretics and apostates, he added, have always existed in the Church, in the laity and the clergy — a reality, he said, that the Lord points out in the parable of the field of wheat and tares.

But those who resisted heresy and apostasy “were the true ornaments and lights of the Church of all times,” he added.

In answer to the question why God permits heresies in His Church, Schneider again quoted St. Augustine who said that many in the Church are “awakened from sleep by heretics, so that they may see God’s light and be glad.” Although the errors of heretics should not be approved, St. Augustine said, their works can help “to assert Catholic discipline against their wiles.”

Citing 5th century St. Vincent of Lerins, Bishop Schneider said that “unheard of doctrine” is “permitted as a test” and, quoting St. Paul, he said it is necessary that there be heresies “so that those who are approved may be made manifest among you.”

The Kazakh bishop, who wrote Credo – A Compendium of the Catholic Faith to help the faithful relate the Church’s teaching to the modern world, went on to stress that the Catholic faith “cannot allow itself to be explained and preached with vagueness.” Again quoting St. Vincent of Lerins, he said if the “new begins to mix with the old, the foreign with the domestic, the profane with the sacred, such an evil custom will necessarily creep in universally,” leaving “nothing intact” or “uncontaminated” within the Church, and “northing healthy, nothing pure.”

Doctrinal Ambiguities

Bishop Schneider also warned against doctrinal ambiguities and explained that since the Second Vatican Council, the “crisis in the Church” has been “characterized by indeterminacy and by the coexistence of contradictory doctrines and liturgical practices which are precisely the fundamental characteristics of modernism.”

St. Vincent of Lerins, he said, warned against such “profane novelties” which, if accepted, would “violate” the faith of the Fathers of the Church in whole or in part, and imply that the all the saints, clergy, faithful, and “vast army of martyrs” of the past had been in “ignorance for so long.” To the shepherds of the Church, St. Vincent stressed: “You have received gold; you must give gold in turn…transmit true gold, not counterfeit gold.”

Bishop Schneider also addressed those faithful who, in the general confusion in the Church, are  “persecuted and marginalized within the Church” through what St. Augustine called “the turbulent seditions of carnal men.”  Those who patiently endure such crosses, the saint said, have the intention of returning “when the tumult has subsided” but if that does not happen, “they hold fast to their purpose” and “defend to the death” the testimony of faith which is preached in the Church. These kinds of Christians are rare, St. Augustine said, but examples in history are “not lacking.”

Moreover, Bishops Schneider said, bishops have a “grave duty to resist heresies and protect their flock from such poisons,” and must act as good doctors. Quoting St. Cyprian, he warned against soothing the sinner “with flattering blandishments” that nourish the wrong-doing instead of rebuking him and “urging him onward to salvation.”

“It behooves the Lord’s priest not to mislead by deceiving concessions, but to provide with salutary remedies,” St. Cyprian wrote in De lapsis. “He is an unskillful physician who handles the swelling edges of wounds with a tender hand, and, by retaining the poison shut up in the deep recesses of the body, increases it.

“The wound,” he continued, “must be opened, and cut, and healed by the stronger remedy of cutting out the corrupting parts. The sick man may cry out, may vociferate, and may complain, in impatience of the pain; but he will afterwards give thanks when he has felt that he is cured.”

Recalling Karol Wojtyla’s words in 1976, that the world was “facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church,” Bishop Schneider urged the audience to uphold the faith of their baptism, and to “keep the traditional Catholic faith” as this is “the truly effective program to protect the Church of our day from becoming a debating club through so-called synodal methods” — something, he said, that St. John Henry Newman warned about in his own time in his 1850 book Certain Difficulties Felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching.

“Liberalism,” the English saint said, “is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another, and this is the teaching which is gaining substance and force daily. It is inconsistent with any recognition of any religion, as true. It teaches that all are to be tolerated, for all are matters of opinion. Revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective fact, not miraculous; and it is the right of each individual to make it say just what strikes his fancy.”

No Friend of the World

Bishop Schneider, who said today’s situation has some similarities with the times of persecution of the Church, urged the faithful not to compromise the Catholic faith for “supposed earthly and temporal advantages.” Again quoting, St. John Henry Newman, he stressed that the world will never be a friend of the Catholic faith, and that the “first and last thing in the mission of the Church is the salvation of the soul for eternity.” God became man “not to turn the whole earth into heaven, but to bring down a heaven upon earth,” Newman said.

But a Catholic, Bishop Schneider said, must at the same time “be fearless against the attacks of the world,” confident of Christ’s victory, and know he has entered the barque of Peter not to escape the world, “but to go forth in it upon the flood of sin and unbelief which would sink any other craft.” The Church is Catholic, St. John Henry Newman wrote in Discourses to Mixed Congregations, “because she brings a universal remedy for a universal disease. The disease is sin.”

Quoting Saint Elizabeth Hesselblad, a Swedish convert who refounded the Order of Saint Bridget in the 20th century, Bishop Schneider said God had instilled such a strong faith in her at the moment of her conversion, that she said, “Even if the Pope and all the priests were to lose the Catholic faith, my faith would still remain unshaken.”

“The Church can never be defeated by heresies,” encouraged Bishop Schneider in closing, adding that, as St.Augustine said, “they all came out of her, like useless branches pruned from the vine; but the Church always remains in her root, in her vine, in her charity. The gates of hell will not prevail against her.”

“Keep the faith, united under the banner of Christ the King,” Bishop Schneider said. “Rejoice over the Catholic Faith!” And quoting Revelation 2:10, he added: “Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life!”

Read the full text of Bishop Schneider’s talk here.

The post Bishop Schneider: Remain Joyful, Steadfast and Fearless in the Face of Attacks From the World and Within the Church appeared first on Edward Pentin.

Pope Francis, who famously advocated “making a mess,” applied that maxim to his pontificate, making it highly disruptive, divisive and tumultuous.

The mess generated much understandable unease, consternation and, at times, disgust, especially as such a deliberate approach to governance has never been consistent with the Catholic faith, the common good, Divine Revelation, and the natural law.

However, the flipside was that, like stirring a pot, it brought plenty of what had lain hidden in the darkness to the surface.

And in so doing, it has the potential to equip the next pope with the information needed to set about rectifying, if he so wishes, the problems Francis’ pontificate exposed.

So what could be critical areas that the next pope needs to address? Here is a list of 10 possible priorities:

1. Return to a Papacy as Source of Sound Doctrine and Unity

Although Pope Francis did much to try to bring the Church to the peripheries, the poor and the marginalized in an attempt to make her accessible to those who might not have given her a second glance, in doing so he often set aside doctrinal boundaries and canonical limits to papal power. He was also frequently criticized for departing from apostolic tradition, issuing statements that at least appeared to run contrary to established Church teaching — especially her moral teaching, and promoting indifferentism — the idea that all religions are valid paths to God. Together with a push towards synodality, in which uncatechized faithful had a significant say in a broad democratization of the Church, this led to doctrinal confusion in the Vatican and elsewhere, the Church in Germany being a prime example. Together with a failure to correct error and heresy, a trend that began before the Francis pontificate, the integrity of the faith has been undermined. An urgent priority for the next pope, therefore, will be to restore doctrinal clarity in faith and morals, good governance, and respect for canon law. Connected with this, the next pope will need to cease and root out the persecution and elimination of institutions, movements, bishops, clergy and laity who evidently bear good and ample fruits in terms of reverence, spiritual life, fidelity to Catholic doctrine, and vocations. He should allow any such persons or entities to grow and flourish rather than be cancelled — contrary to what often took place under Pope Francis where those who abused doctrine, moral teaching and the liturgy went unpunished and were allowed to thrive.

2. Clarification of Vatican II, Reform of the Jesuits

Closely connected with the first critical issue is a need for the next pope to clear up ambiguities regarding the Second Vatican Council, or at least tackle this concern which has grown in recent years. The Council has long been interpreted in ways which many stress differ from those intended by the Council fathers, and this became especially apparent during Francis’ pontificate. The ambiguity has often been blamed on a lack of clarity in interpreting the teachings of the Council which have themselves often been criticized for not being clear enough. Part of this return to clarity of teaching could also entail some kind of reform of the Jesuit Order. In his Demos Memorandum, Cardinal George Pell called for such a reform given the prevailing heterodoxy in the Society of Jesus and catastrophic decline in terms of vocations to the Order. “The Jesuit charism and contribution have been and are so important to the Church that they should not be allowed to pass away into history undisturbed,” the memo said.

3. Restore Traditional Papal Governance and Collegiality to the College of Bishops and Cardinals

Connected with papal power, the next pope will need to reassert greater collegiality with bishops and within the College of Cardinals. Due to a long-standing trend of centralization and overbearing bishops’ conference, the full realization of episcopal collegiality as envisioned by Vatican II has not taken place, and the autonomy and authority of bishops has been undermined. Regarding the College of Cardinals, in recent years and contrary to the stated wish for synodality, the majority of the cardinals with the exception of a few close aides, have been excluded from decision making, even though one of their principal roles is to act as advisers to the Pope. They also had few opportunities to meet because meetings of all cardinals during cardinal-making consistories were halted in 2014, also lessening the collegiality of the Sacred College. These factors led to a diminishment of the cardinals’ important role while excessive and unchecked power was placed in the hands of the Pope, contrary to the traditions of the past. This became so apparent under Pope Francis that observers said the papacy had become tyrannical with arbitrary exercises of power. The next pontiff will need to reaffirm what popes can and cannot do in accordance with apostolic tradition, and how much Magisterial weight should be placed on a pope’s various pronouncements — all significant topics of debate during Francis’ pontificate.

4. More Reverence in the Liturgy

The divine liturgy is the “summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed” and the “font from which all her power flows,” said Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on the liturgy. The liturgy also protects the Church against false teachings and inaccurate theology. Many, including Benedict XVI, have attributed today’s crisis in the Church largely to abuses of the liturgy that stemmed from the liturgical reforms of 1970, causing the Church to lose her Christocentric emphasis and replace it with a preference for entertainment that focuses on man rather than God. The next Pope will need to prioritize a return to more reverent worship by improving liturgical formation for both clergy and laity, prioritizing the supernatural (the purpose of the Church is supernatural), and emphasizing the First Commandment, the worship of God.

5. End Suppression of the Traditional Liturgy

Connected with the need to overcome liturgical abuses is the need to address a tendency to suppress, and Francis’ clear suppression of, the Traditional Latin Mass — a decision which was widely viewed as unjust, opposed to previous papal teaching, contrary to divine law, and the opposite of what many believed the liturgy needed at this time: greater sacredness, less worldliness, and more Christ-centered reverence that reaffirmed the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The next Pope will therefore have to ascertain how best to restore efforts, already begun by Pope Benedict XVI, in allowing the Church to draw on the riches of the increasingly popular Traditional liturgy while not endangering unity or exacerbating the “liturgy wars.”

6. Distance from Globalism, Secularism and Ties to Government Funding

Over the past 60 years, and largely as a result of the Second Vatican Council’s directive to open the doors of the Church to the world, the Holy See and the wider Church has allied with governments in an effort to help the poor, vulnerable and the marginalized. But while this has born some good fruit, it has also sprouted thorns. Her closeness to political factions, globalism, and growing dependence on state funding has led, especially in recent years, to compromises being made with secular values leading to a muting the Church’s voice on key moral issues, and a consequent “flattening” of her evangelical witness. This was particularly visible when it came to allying with the previous Biden administration but also in the Vatican’s increasingly frequent collaboration with multinational groups whose values have been diametrically opposed to the Church’s key moral teachings. The next Pope will need to courageously distance the Church from such ideological groups, governments and temporal affairs, as well as issues on which it has little competence such as climate change, and secular values of “diversity” and “inclusion” that tend to only really apply to those who adhere to the same secularist ideology. His main task will be to bring the Church back to her main duty: serving as the Lord’s instrument for the salvation of souls and propagating the faith.

7. Zero Tolerance on Clerical Sex Abuse

Pope Francis was elected on a mandate to tackle the sexual abuse crisis. He made some progress such as publishing the document Vos estis lux mundi that, although it contained weaknesses, aimed to make bishops more accountable. He also removed some bishops for covering up abuse. But a culture of secrecy remains and Francis himself repeatedly defended and protected offending bishops and high-ranking clerics, especially those to whom he was personally loyal (e.g. Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, Father Marko Rupnik, Theodore McCarrick, and Bishop Juan Barros Madrid). A critical issue for the next Pope will be to ensure greater justice and consistency in dealing with the issue, taking the lead in tackling abuse and not covering up for friends.

8. Homosexuality in the Church

Often called the “Pink Elephant in the Room,” the prevailing influence of those who maintain homosexuality is normal has been harmful. It has had a significant negative influence on her overall governance, ability to evangelize, and in attracting sound vocations. This attempt to normalize it within the Church, especially under Francis who had allied with groups that the Vatican had previously banned, has allowed cliques to grow, conspiracies of silence to worsen, and great injustices to be committed, not least in its thwarting of non-homosexual cardinals, bishops, priests and faithful from being heard and having a role in governing the Church. It has also left many homosexual clerics vulnerable to blackmail. The next Pope will have to work to at least identify problem areas, close down such homosexual groups, and show zero tolerance for incidents of homosexual practice in the priesthood and the Church hierarchy.

9. Good Stewardship of Vatican Finances

Despite some well publicized setbacks, Pope Francis’ pontificate had some successes in financial reform that laid the groundwork for improved management, and greater transparency and accountability. But challenges remain and the next Pope will need to fully implement the structural reforms Francis began in 2014 by removing the changes of subsequent years that had watered down the effects of the reforms. He will also need to appoint qualified lay persons to enact the reforms and embark on a thorough restructuring, especially regarding APSA, as well as introduce independent bodies of control. The next pope will also be required to address unresolved problems such as the Sloane Avenue Property Scandal, allegations that Vatican funds were used to buy witnesses against Cardinal Pell in his trial to prevent him uncovering financial corruption in the Vatican, and the complaint of ex-Auditor General Libero Milone who is suing the Vatican for unlawful dismissal.

10. Confront the Threat of Islam

Since the backlash against Pope Benedict XVI’s 2006 Regensburg Lecture, and especially during the Francis pontificate, the Vatican and the Church in general has beaten a retreat from tackling the threat of the spread of Islam in the West, preferring instead a policy of accommodation, dialogue on common issues, and an emphasis on fraternity but without Christ being mentioned or given clear prominence. This reached its pinnacle with Pope Francis’ Human Fraternity document and the Holy See’s support for such initiatives as the Abrahamic Family House. Such an approach often sidestepped such questions as persecution of Christians by Islamist groups or Muslim-majority governments and the importance of reciprocity when it comes to religious freedom. It has also prompted accusations of syncretism and indifferentism. The next pope will need to address these issues by, for example, stressing evangelization, providing clearer theological guidance to Islam, strengthening advocacy for persecuted Christians, and taking a firmer stand on reciprocity.

The post 10 Critical Issues Facing the Next Pope appeared first on Edward Pentin.

VATICAN CITY — Bishop Athanasius Schneider is calling for a “worldwide crusade of prayers for the upcoming Conclave” so that a pope is elected who has, above all, a “zeal for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls.”

The popular auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, is inviting the faithful to pray for a new pope who has such a quality so that he will strengthen the faithful and be uncompromising in his duties as Successor of Peter. In particular, he urges prayer so that the next pope will:

• defend the flock from unbelieving and  “worldly churchmen” who worship the “idols of the ideologies of the age”;
• free the Apostolic See from being chained to “the materialistic, morally depraved and anti-Christian globalist agenda of this world”;
• and has a willingness to defend at great cost if necessary the integrity of the Catholic faith, the Church’s liturgy, and Church discipline.

Bishop Schneider is also calling on “all true sons and daughters of the Church” to pray for a new Pope who will be “fully Catholic, fully Apostolic and fully Roman.”

He invites the faithful to pray for such intentions during Eucharistic Adoration, through the Holy Rosary, by means of Mass intentions, and through personal sacrifices, including fasting and acts of supernatural love for God and neighbour.

Bishop Schneider’s appeal follows the announcement that Cardinal Raymond Burke will be leading a May 1-9 novena  to Our Lady Good Counsel for the good of the universal Church, the election of a new pope, and the eternal rest of Pope Francis.

The bishop also has a new book out called Salve Regina — A Rosary Crusade to Plead for Holy Popes, a rallying cry to all Catholics to embark “on a Rosary Crusade, under her mantle, to repel the forces of evil and disentangle the vexing problems we face in these fraught times.”

***

APPEAL FOR A WORLDWIDE CRUSADE OF PRAYERS FOR THE UPCOMING CONCLAVE

May the Lord in His infinite mercy look upon the prayers, tears and sacrifices of all true Catholics who love our Mother Church, who in these days humbly and confidently implore the infinite Mercy of God for the miracle of the election of a Pope, who burning with the zeal for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls, will “strengthen the brethren in faith” (Luke 22:32), being uncompromisingly faithful to his name and duty as Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ on earth.

May through a new Pope, burning with the zeal for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls, the Lord come to the assistance of His Church, defending the flock of Christ from the intruding wolves of unbelieving and worldly churchmen who unabashedly are burning incense before the idols of the ideologies of the age, spiritually poisoning thereby the life of the Church, which resembles to a storm-lashed ship, in which “the bilgewater of the vices increased, and the rotten planks already sound of shipwreck,” as Pope St. Gregory the Great upon assuming the Papal office described the state of the Roman Church in his time.

May through a new Pope, burning with the zeal for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls, the Lord come to the assistance of the Apostolic See, which in our day is spiritually laying in chains, resembling to the material chains in which the Apostle Peter were put at the beginning of the life of the Church, freeing the Apostolic See from the chains of the alignment with the materialistic, morally depraved and anti-Christian globalist agenda of this world.

May the Lord grant us a new Pope, who burning with the zeal for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls, will be ready to defend the integrity of the Catholic Faith, of the Catholic Liturgy and of the Church discipline, if necessary, at the cost of the supreme witness of his life out of love for Jesus Christ and the immortal souls.

May all true sons and daughters of the Church implore the miracle of the election of a new Pope, who will be fully Catholic, fully Apostolic and fully Roman. This they can do through prayers, especially with Holy Hours of Eucharistic Adoration, the Holy Rosary, priests and bishops through offering the sacrifice of the Mass in this intention, and also through personal sacrifices, which can consist in patiently bearing one’s life’s crosses, corporal and spiritual pains, corporal mortifications, fasting and especially acts of supernatural love for God and the neighbor.

We believe that the Lord will come to the assistance of His Church, which in our day resembles a ship in the night “in the midst of the sea, laboring in rowing, for the wind is against her.” May the Lord come again “about the fourth watch of the night, walking upon the sea, and saying: Have a good heart, it is I, fear not.” (Mk. 6:47-50)

April 26, 2025

+ Athanasius Schneider

The post Bishop Schneider Calls for ‘Worldwide Crusade of Prayers’ for Upcoming Conclave appeared first on Edward Pentin.

By Edward Pentin

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis’ death marks the end of a modernising and seemingly benign pontificate for most of the world, but for those who have followed it with any closeness, a time of turmoil, disruption and deep division.

Elected on a mandate of reform, Francis set out to make the Church less self-referential and more mission oriented, closer to the faithful and the peripheries, and more relevant to the times. In many ways he achieved this: those who would never give the Catholic Church a second glance, perceiving that she would not accept them, felt accepted and welcomed.

He strove to embrace Muslims, people with disabilities, migrants, the poor and the homeless, opening facilities for the latter in Rome and creating a Vatican department for the poor headed by the papal almoner whom he elevated to the rank of cardinal. His mission, he said, was to transform the Catholic Church into a “field hospital,” tending to people where they are, not judging them but offering them the Lord’s mercy and love instead.

Francis sought to give women more leadership roles in the Church and was noticeably and controversially eager to embrace LGBTQ people, forcefully speaking out against laws criminalizing homosexuality, disturbing many Catholics — especially in Africa — by allowing non-liturgical blessings of same-sex couples, and permitting civil unions, even though previous popes had firmly opposed such changes.

“He’s my hero,” said the singer Elton John in 2014, the first of many other celebrities, politicians, and well known figures — most of whom supported liberal positions at odds with the Church’s teaching — who would go on to express their admiration for the Argentine pontiff.

Francis had a clear ideological vision. The Church’s teaching, he wrote in his 2013 manifesto apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel), must “radiate forcefully and attractively” but not be based — although it ultimately was — on “specific ideological options.”

He aimed to create a more listening Church, an “inverted pyramid” that takes the People of God as its starting point — in sum, a grand vision of decentralization ostensibly geared towards creating a more democratic, localized Church “permanently in a state of mission” and seemingly capable of dealing with the complexities of the faith and human relationships in the world today.

But critics warned that such an approach was more akin to a Protestant model that departed from the Church’s apostolic tradition, threatening to undermine Rome’s authority, and the hierarchy in general. Cardinals expressed alarm, notably after a synod on the family in 2014 was rigged to produce a radical and modernist ideological outcome.

More significantly, in his eagerness to embrace the progressive tenet of inclusivity and his own, broad concept of mercy, Francis often set aside canonical limits to papal power, especially when it came to defending some of his friends accused of clerical sex abuse. This also applied to areas of the liturgy (on Holy Thursday, he washed the feet of Muslims and women which had previously never been allowed).

He ruled autocratically, not unusual for a pope who has all legislative, executive and judicial powers, but Francis issued more papal decrees, not dissimilar to executive orders, than any pope in modern history.

Under his watch, bishops, priests, religious and laity who had been bearing good fruit in terms of reverence, spiritual life, fidelity to Catholic doctrine, and booming vocations were cancelled or ostracized. “The more spiritual and supernaturally orientated they were, the more persecution they seemed to suffer,” a Portuguese priest told Newsmax on condition of anonymity due to fear of reprisals. “Meanwhile, in other quarters, those who committed abuses against doctrine, moral teaching and the liturgy seemed to go unpunished and were allowed to thrive.”

Francis was criticized for departing from apostolic tradition, not infrequently contradicting, or at least weakening, the Church’s moral teaching and, on occasion, promoting indifferentism, the idea that all religions are valid paths to God – a belief long considered a heresy in the Church as it undermines the unique role of Christ and the Catholic Church in salvation.

Together with his strong belief in what he called “synodality” — a democratization of the Church allowing Catholics, often untrained in theology and with progressive leanings, to have a significant say in the Church’s future — Francis introduced ambiguities and allowed doctrinal confusion to reign with significant consequences.

This became most evident in Germany. A four-year “synodal way” there (2019-2023) led to the German Catholic Church voting to support the blessing of same-sex couples, a push towards the ordination of women as priests, revisions of sexual morality, the abolition of priestly celibacy, and intercommunion with Protestants. The Pope and the Vatican opposed their reforms, but only tacitly, and so they have continued.

Synodality as a whole has remained suspect throughout Francis’ pontificate and has become viewed by many practicing Catholics as simply a vehicle for legitimizing heterodoxy. The Vatican’s former doctrinal chief, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, called the 2021-24 synod on synodality a “hostile takeover of the Church,” while a synod dedicated to the Amazon in 2019 caused uproar when an animist Indian statue, which Francis referred to as a Pachamama, was idolized in the Vatican and St. Peter’s Basilica.

Beyond the Church, Francis spearheaded efforts to engage in global politics. He tried to act as a papal peacemaker, organizing a prayer vigil early in his pontificate to avert the escalation of the conflict in Syria and working behind the scenes to restore US-Cuban diplomatic ties. In May 2023, he sent Cardinal Matteo Zuppi of Bologna as his peace envoy to Kiev, Moscow, and Jerusalem to try to resolve the conflicts there. The efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and unguarded remarks by Francis upset both Ukraine and Israel. But he did much to contribute humanitarian aid to those caught up in the conflicts, sending his almoner, Cardinal Konrad Krajewski, on missions to the war-torn regions.

Some of his strongest opposition came from signing a highly controversial secret agreement with Beijing on the appointment of bishops in 2018. Critics slammed the accord, influenced in its creation by the disgraced former Archbishop of Washington DC Theodore McCarrick, as an “incredible betrayal” and “absolutely incomprehensible” as Beijing further clamped down on religious freedom and would propose episcopal candidates for the Pope to approve. The Vatican said patience was needed for it to bear fruit and highlighted limited successes, but as it waited, it held back from publicly criticizing China’s human rights abuses, or coming to the defence of two prominent Catholics persecuted by the CCP: Jimmy Lai and Cardinal Joseph Zen. Wall Street Journal columnist Bill McGurn called the approach a “disaster” and “demoralizing.”

Francis travelled extensively, visiting over 60 countries. He became the first pontiff to ever set foot in the Arab peninsula (the United Arab Emirates) and Iraq, and was unafraid to travel to dangerous places, visiting Egypt at a time of heightened Islamist terrorism, and the Central African Republic during a civil war. He visited communist Cuba twice, the second time making history by being the first pope to meet the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church since the Great Schism of 1054. For reasons unknown, he never returned to his native Argentina as pope.

Francis’ relationship with the United States was cool at best. Although he made a largely successful visit to the country in 2015, he held a common Latin American grudge against its more prosperous, neoliberal northern neighbour. He had a particular dislike of American conservativism, despite its vigorous defense of Christianity, and expressed a preference early on in his pontificate for more “moderate” (i.e. progressive) bishops in the US. He said in 2019 it was “an honor that Americans attack me.”

The Pope received President Donald Trump at the Vatican in 2017 but his preferred candidate at that election was the socialist populist Bernie Sanders whom Francis invited, against the wishes of Obama-administration diplomats, to speak at the Vatican during the 2016 Presidential campaign. Four years later, his preference for Joe Biden was clear and the two had a close alliance, despite Catholic Biden’s public stance on abortion, same-sex marriage and other issues opposed to the Church’s teaching.

Critics said Francis’ closeness to Democrat-run globalism weakened the Church’s position on critical moral issues such as abortion, gender ideology and a host of other concerns, and that it epitomized his friendship with worldly powers and values in general. His supporters, such as fellow Argentine Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, would frequently say they had no other choice but to cooperate with them if they were to have any say in the public square at a time when religion was being steadily “privatized.”

Still, the complicity caused damage. The Pope’s position on the Covid-19 vaccines, insisting that to be vaxed was an “act of love” while having the Vatican stage a conference with Big Pharma CEOs, was just one example of problematic complicity. The Vatican drew especially close to the UN, including its Sustainable Development Goals that advocate contraception and reproductive rights, code for abortion. Under Pope Francis, the Vatican had a close alliance with population control advocates such as the SDGs chief architect Jeffrey Sachs, who became a frequent visitor and trusted adviser.

“All this and more demonstrates a line of obsequiousness to the current system of social control,” said Professor Stefano Fontana director of the Cardinal Van Thuan International Observatory on the Social Doctrine of the Church. The policies that the Church supported, he added, “either by proposing them itself or by remaining silent about their negative aspects, have caused great damage.”

A large part of that complicity and silence owed itself to Church dependence on government funding — something that grew under Francis and a reality that was exposed when the Trump administration effectively shuttered USAID. Some of the strongest reactions to that decision came from the Vatican and US bishops, including Francis’ open letter criticising the Trump administration’s policy on illegal migration. Catholic charities received millions of dollars from USAID, and probably many other similar agencies around the word, affecting the Church’s moral voice as the funding naturally came with explicit or implicit conditions.

Francis was mysteriously partial to those whose views were diametrically opposed to the Church, and freely received in private audience such figures as the philanthropist Alex Soros, former US President Bill Clinton, and pro-abortion Catholic politicians Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden. He praised the abortionist and Italian politician Emma Bonino, honouring her with a private visit armed with flowers and chocolates. He had little time for right-wing politicians, and never granted interviews to conservative media or orthodox Catholic media outlets.

Within the Vatican, he mostly consulted a small coterie of close advisers, creating a parallel governing structure and resulting in changes that took many cardinals by surprise, perhaps the most significant being when he arbitrarily amended the catechism to fully reject the death penalty.

Much of Francis’ pontificate could be read through his appointments. He promoted some worthy candidates such as Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, a popular and able Franciscan, whom he appointed the Patriarch of Jerusalem. But at other times he ignored protocol and personally hand-picked bishops, who more often than not tended to be Churchmen of dubious moral character.

Regarding structural reforms of the Roman Curia, the Pope merged several dicasteries into “super-dicasteries,” demoting the once supreme doctrinal office and promoting evangelization instead. He overhauled Vatican communications, and successfully reformed some aspects of Vatican finances even as scandals continued to mount under his watch. One led to the trial and unprecedented conviction of one of his closest collaborators, Cardinal Angelo Becciu. A Sardinian diplomat, Becciu has always maintained his innocence and insisted Francis knew about all his actions.

In many ways Francis was his own worst enemy in this regard. He allowed himself to be hampered by an “old guard” who were unwilling to change their management of finances for fear of exposing them, and by his own autocratic management style that critics say fostered a climate of fear, especially of retribution, and demoralization. His formal structural overhaul of the Roman Curia, while praised for emphasizing evangelization, was criticized for centralizing authority through the Secretariat of State while relegating doctrinal authority to national bishops’ conferences, a move viewed by some as leading to doctrinal inconsistencies.

Francis showed relatively little interest in liturgical issues, but he continued what he and his aides said was an “irreversible” path of reform that they claimed was consistent with the Second Vatican Council. However, his decision to suppress the traditional Latin Mass in 2021 courted significant controversy, even from those who did not adhere to Tradition. Welcomed by supporters who, like Francis, saw many traditional Catholics as dissenters from his pontificate, the Pope’s decree Traditionis Custodes shocked adherents of the old Mass in its severity. Many bishops initially ignored its instructions.

So how will history likely judge him? Under Francis’ leadership, the Catholic Church drew closer to worldly powers and non-believers, but arguably further away from the practicing faithful, especially in the West. Numbers of Catholics worldwide rose, but Church attendance and vocations were down, and most people during his pontificate continued to look elsewhere for salvation.

The pontificate bore fruit, but perhaps not the fruit wished for by Francis as he unwittingly revealed much inner corruption almost by default. With a progressive pope like Francis, many cardinals, bishops, and priests who dissented from Church teaching viewed him as one their own, and so felt emboldened to reveal themselves.

As the conservative American Cardinal Raymond Burke, known for his respectful criticisms of the Pope, once put it: Francis “brought out into the open all the terrible corruption, sexual, financial, doctrinal.” He “opened up a lot of people’s eyes to realise how lethal and how harmful” was the “rebellion” that took place after the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s, Cardinal Burke added. He also noted how, by suppressing the traditional liturgy that had been celebrated in the Church for centuries, it made Catholics appreciate it more. “Adherence to tradition is growing stronger every day,” he observed.

The Canadian Catholic writer Hilary White called this pontificate the “Great Clarification,” a period when a “polite middle way” of compromise with the modern world — a feature of the pontificates of Francis, Benedict XVI and John Paul II — began to die. It was a middle way, or status quo, White wrote, that “has no place in the crystalline world of absolute truth in which God dwells and which the Church is supposed to model here on earth.” It has never worked, White said, as the Church is supposed to be a beacon of truth in a world of lies and deception. Francis, unintentionally, through the harm caused by such a close collaboration with the modern world and its values, helped shine a light on this basic truth.

Francis also exposed a false understanding of the papacy that had grown up in the Church, especially since Pope John Paul II, but which dated back to Pope Pius IX in the 19th century. The English Catholic philosopher John Rist called it “creeping infallibility” leading to a kind of “papal absolutism” or “hyperpapalism,” and culminating in the kind of autocratic papacy that Francis embodied.

Francis may, therefore, be best remembered as the chief human protagonist of an apokalupsis — Greek for uncover or reveal. He provided the Church with the opportunity to address problems that would probably not have arisen under a less disruptive pontificate. That won’t of course excuse the mayhem, disunity, and anger he generated among faithful Catholics, but without the errors and malfeasance that occurred under his watch, the problems might never have come to light.

And for all the criticisms levelled against him, he will also leave a positive mark, showing the world, albeit often illicitly, a central aspect of the Catholic Church which is that the hand of God’s mercy extends to everyone, especially those who most need it, if they would only turn to Christ for help and forgiveness.

All this naturally has repercussions for the next conclave. Given the turmoil and divisions of Francis’ pontificate, the chances of the cardinals voting for a moderate, bridge-building, conservative candidate remain relatively high. This would align with the old Roman saying that a “fat pope follows a thin one,” meaning that the cardinals tend to choose a pope quite different to his predecessor.

They will also probably be looking for someone to make a serious effort to confront the internal Church problems that have existed for many years and which, through the Lord’s permissive will, Francis’ tumultuous pontificate brought to light.

This is the updated version of an article that was published in the April 2025 edition of Newsmax Magazine. 

The post Pope Francis Dies at 88 Marking the End of a Tumultuous and Divisive Pontificate appeared first on Edward Pentin.

Just a fortnight into the Trump presidency and the damage wrought by the Pope and the Vatican allying too closely with Democrat-run globalism on a variety of moral issues is becoming clear, the head of an Italian Church think tank has said.

In a Jan. 29 commentary entitled “Trump and the Vatican: War in Progress,” Professor Stefano Fontana wrote that early policy decisions of the Trump administration have exposed the extent to which the Vatican’s close alignment with a progressive globalist agenda has caused “great damage” by weakening her voice on a number of serious moral issues.

Fontana is director of the Cardinal Van Thuan International Observatory on the Social Doctrine of the Church, a research organisation founded in 2003 that emphasises fidelity to the Church’s established social teaching. Bishop Giampaolo Crepaldi, a former Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, helped found the observatory and is a regular contributor.

Describing globalism as a “totalitarian” and “elitist post-democratic system,” Fontana said it has brought together a wide range of powerful institutions managed by the US Democratic Party and including big tech, media corporations, academia, “philanthropic” institutions, governments, international agencies and European Union leaders. Some of the key issues it promoted were unlimited immigration, gender ideology, and a radical green agenda.

The existence of this system, he said, has now been confirmed by the fact that many of its partners are changing direction on some policies in the wake of Trump’s return to power. At the same time, Fontana believes the new Trump administration has “opened the doors to a counter system.”

As for the Church’s role, he believes there are “many reasons” to argue that her leaders have “contributed to that totalitarian system,” and he pointed out “many convergences” such as the objectives of the Biden administration, the World Economic Forum, the European Commission and the WHO “just to name a few of the clique.”

Significantly, he wrote that the Catholic Church’s leaders have failed to free the Church from this “dominant ideological power” and “from the meshes of a system.” At the same time, he said they failed support those bishops who were willing to resist it by, for example, denying Holy Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians such as Present Biden or Nancy Pelosi.

Instead, he said, the Vatican sent “messages of support and good wishes” to Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, arguing that the WEF “could do a lot for the common good.” Fontana pointed out what he sees as a discrepancy between serving the common good and advocating uncontrolled immigration, “health totalitarianism” during the COVID pandemic, and pushing the climate ideology that “lacks scientific foundations and brings poverty to the working masses.”

“All this and more demonstrates a line of obsequiousness to the current system of social control,” Fontana wrote, adding that the policies that the Church has supported, “either by proposing them itself or by remaining silent about their negative aspects, have caused great damage.”

Fontana singled out, as further examples of this complicity, the Church’s weak voice when it comes to abortion and gender ideology. “Her voice has become feeble and almost absent, preferring to intervene on immigrants and the environment,” he wrote. “In the meantime, however, the global liberal system extended the right [to abortion] to birth, enshrining it in the Constitution as in France, declaring it a human right as in the European Parliament, and many countries legalising the distribution of abortion pills by mail.”

“When, thanks to the appointments made by Trump in his first term, the Supreme Court abolished the previous legislation as unconstitutional and gave competence in the matter back to the States, the Vatican simply took note,” Fontana wrote. “Now Trump is freeing the pro-lifers who are imprisoned, but the Church had not mobilized any protest in their defense. Not a word has been heard.”

He added that no bishop has expressed regret for having closed churches and shrines in obedience to the WHO during the pandemic, “of having supported the self-interested lies of paid virologists,” and of having forced priests of his diocese to take the vaccine.

Furthermore, Fontana noted that Pope Francis has not corrected his slogan that to be vaccinated against Covid was “an act of love,” and added that, to him, actions and statements from the Church regarding gender ideology show the Church is “unwilling to fight any battle on the subject.”

“Homosexuality is now accepted as something natural — ‘God loves us as we are,’” he wrote, quoting recent words from Pope Francis to a transgender person and citing Fiducia Supplicans that allows for non-liturgical blessings of same-sex couples.

Fontana also noted the Church’s “legal recognition of homosexual couples” which had hitherto been forbidden, and Cardinal Blase Cupich saying he is in favor adoption by same-sex couples.

In sum, Fontana said the Church’s alignment with these policies of globalism has resulted in damage to society, economic crises, social tensions, and a weakening of the Church’s teaching on key moral issues.

The post Trump’s Early Decisions Expose Damage Caused by Vatican Complicity With Democrat-Run Globalism, Says Italian Scholar appeared first on Edward Pentin.

Truth and the Mission of the Catholic Priest

By Cardinal Gerhard Müller, Rome

January 14, 2025

The essence or “real idea” (John Henry Newman) of the Sacrament of Orders is expressed in the words of the Risen Lord to his apostles:

“‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you… Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (Jn 20: 21-23).

In the room of the Last Supper, after washing the disciples’ feet, Jesus had already told them, with Peter at their head: “Very truly, I tell you, whoever receives one whom I send, receives me; and whoever receives me receives him who sent me.”(Jn 13:20)

In other words but with the same meaning of the sacramental priesthood representing Jesus Christ, the head of his body, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Holy Church Jesus says to the seventy disciples-two who are linked to the circle of the Twelve in participating in his messianic consecration and mission:

“Whoever listens to you listens to me,     and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” (Lk 10:16)

In the historical development of the Church’s faith awareness there is no increase in number of the articles of faith over time but rather a deeper understanding of their meaning (analogia fidei) – which always remains organically connected (nexus mysteriorum) to the totality of the revelation of the one and triune God (Thomas Aquinas, S.th. II-II q.1 a.7).

Vatican II summarizes this: “Christ, whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world (Jn 10:36), has, through his apostles, made their successors, the bishops, partakers of his consecration and his mission. […] Priests, although they do not possess the highest degree of the priesthood, and although they are dependent on the bishops in the exercise of their power, nevertheless they are united with the bishops in sacerdotal dignity. By the power of the sacrament of orders, in the image of Christ the eternal High Priest (cf. Heb 5:1-10; 7:24; 9:11-28), they are consecrated to preach the gospel and shepherd the faithful and to celebrate divine worship, so that they are true priests of the New Testament” (LG 28).

Thanks to the Incarnation and the eschatological sending of the Holy Spirit, the Church of the triune God is the universal sacrament of the world’s salvation. This alone makes it possible to comprehend the Christological origin, apostolic descent and profound spiritual efficacy of the ministry of priests as teachers of the Divine word, pastors of he souls and distributors of the sacramental graces.

The Church was not founded by Christ in order to pursue her own worldly interests but rather for the sake of the unique interest that God has in each one of his creatures. For we profess of the eternal Son of the Father: propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de cælis et incarnatus est.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life” (Jn 3:16). The Catholic priest is “one approved by him [God], a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly explaining the word of truth”(2 Tim 2; 15; cf.1 Tim 6:11).

What then is “the word of truth” or “sound teaching” that he is to proclaim as “a herald and an apostle and a teacher” (2 Tim 1:11ff.) without being ashamed or fearing the world (Rm 1,16)?

It is the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mc 1,1).The gospel is the message of the event that brought for us the final turn for the better, the message of “God, who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works but according to his own purpose and grace. This grace was given to us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim 1, 8-10). And this “word of truth” is to be found in “the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15). Paul writes to the Romans: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, ‘The one who is righteous will live by faith’” (Rom 1:16f.).

The bishops and presbyters are servants of Jesus Christ and must take care of the Church like a devoted father takes care of his household (cf. 1 Tim 3:5.15).

Just as Paul was appointed as a witness to Christ, “a herald and an apostle […], a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim 2:7), so, too, his pupils and collaborators in apostolic ministry and then also, as they continue the apostles’ mission and authority, the bishops and presbyters should profess that “there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself a ransom for all – this was attested at the right time” (1 Tim 2: 5f.).

Servants of the New Covenant in the Holy Spirit

The Apostle boasts that God has made him and his co-workers competent to be “ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor 3:6). He exercises the “ministry of the Spirit”, which leads to life, not the ministry of the letter, which kills. How “much more does the ministry of justification abound in glory” than the “ministry of condemnation” in the Old Covenant (cf. 2 Cor 3:9).

So priests should become aware of the glory of their ministry so that they can cope with the sufferings, insults and privations that they will inevitably encounter in their sacred vocation. The apostles and their successors are empowered in the Holy Spirit to be “ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor 3:6) because “the message of reconciliation” (2 Cor 5:19) has been entrusted to them to proclaim. It belongs to the New Covenant to make present Jesus’ sacrificial self-giving “with his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption” (Hb 9:12). Precisely in the ministry of those called to be apostles it must become clear that they are disciples of the betrayed, condemned and crucified Lord. This distinguishes the office of priest from secular positions of power with their high social prestige in the eyes of man. But from their religious superiors, their bishops and from the Pope as pastor of the universal Church priests need spiritual strengthening in their faith (cf. Lk 22:32).

Priests – who frequently meet with hostility, come up against a wall of silence and find themselves derided as being out of touch with the world – are in need of comfort not paternalism and public reprimand. The bishops in particular, on whom “the fullness of the sacrament of Orders [plenitudo sacramenti ordinis] is conferred” (LG 21), should be an example and pattern to the priests for their spiritual and moral life. Part of this is to offer them reassurance concerning the dogmatic foundations. For if it were not true that the Catholic priesthood originates from Christ and is passed on through its own special sacrament, then, although it could act in its own name, it would not be able to mediate supernatural life in the power of the Holy Spirit. As successors to the apostles, the bishops, together with the priests and deacons, are appointed by God in the Sacrament of Orders “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ” (Eph 4:12).

Vatican II sums this up concisely: “Wherefore the priesthood […] is conferred by that special sacrament; through it priests, by the anointing of the Holy Spirit, are signed with a special character and are conformed to Christ the Priest in such a way that they can act in the person of Christ the Head” (PO 2).

The one sacrament in its three degrees of ordination

Priests are, together with their bishop, who is the visible head of the presbyterium, in the words of Vatican II: “…true priests of the New Testament. Partakers of the function of Christ the sole Mediator (1 Tim 2:5), on their level of ministry, they announce the divine word to all. They exercise their sacred function especially in the eucharistic worship or the celebration of the Mass, by which, acting in the person of Christ and proclaiming his Mystery, they unite the prayers of the faithful with the sacrifice of their Head and renew and apply in the sacrifice of the Mass until the coming of the Lord(cf. 1 Cor 11:26) the only sacrifice of the New Testament, namely, that of Christ offering himself once for all a spotless Victim to the Father (cf. Hb 9:11-28). For the sick and the sinners among the faithful, they exercise the ministry of alleviation and reconciliation, and they present the needs and the prayers of the faithful to God the Father (cf. Hb 5:1-4). Exercising within the limits of their authority the function of Christ as Shepherd and Head, they gather together God’s family as a brotherhood all of one mind and lead them in the Spirit, through Christ, to God the Father. In the midst of the flock they adore him in spirit and in truth (cf. Jn 4:24). Finally, they strive in word and doctrine (cf. 1 Tim 5:17), believing what they have read and meditated upon in the law of God, teaching what they have believed, and putting in practice in their own lives what they have taught” (LG 28).

We can see clearly how by the second half of the first century, the apostolic functions of teaching, governing and sanctifying had already been transferred to the leaders of the communities, the episkopoi, presbyteroi and diakonoi. The official title “presbyter” at first denotes more the rank of leaders whereas episkopos is used more for the task of the person in charge of welfare. In the biblical context, the latter becomes a synonym for a shepherd/pastor. But the term apostle, too, displays a connection with the names for office holder of the post-apostolic period. The “episcopacy” taken away from Judas Iscariot is transferred to the subsequently chosen Apostle Matthias (Acts 1:20-26). And the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord entrusted the universal care of his lambs and sheep (cf. Jn 21:15-19), addresses himself as a fellow presbyter (1 Pet 5:1) to the shepherds of God’s flock, which was entrusted to them, too, by Christ. The faithful are called upon to consider “Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession” (Heb 3:1), “the great shepherd of the sheep” (Heb 13:20).

There is a recognisable Christological, apostolic and ecclesial connection underlying the development the technical terms to denote the office and determining the direction this takes. It is both senseless and confusing to translate “presbyter” with “elder” because it is not a question of the advantage of age but rather one of the precedence of the responsibility accorded to the office. Presbyters can quite easily be younger than their parishioners.

The college of presbyters has a head, who in the course of linguistic developments in the 2^nd century came to be referred to almost exclusively as a bishop, as compared to the presbyters, who now belonged to the second degree. The bishop ranks above the others, not on account of holding a position of greater power in the political sense or as within the organisation of a club, but because within the apostolic succession, in which all office-holders participate, he represents the principle of its Christological-vertical and apostolic-horizontal origins. So all presbyters are pastors or shepherd, but their bishop is the head shepherd pastor. “Thus the divinely established ecclesiastical ministry is exercised on different levels” (LG 28). The emerging terminology is more akin to Canon Law inasmuch as the one apostolic office is exercised “by those who from antiquity have been called bishops, priests [presbyters] and deacons” (ibid.). It must be added that bishop and presbyter are combined in the term priest-sacerdos on account of their inner closeness to Christ, the Head of the Church, whom they represent when presiding at the Eucharist, from which the Church lives.

Even after the emergence of the threefold office of bishop, presbyter and deacon and despite the different degrees of ordination and powers, what remains crucial is the direct personal relationship of every single office-holder to Christ. The presbyter is not the bishop’s delegate. The priest preaches, governs and sanctifies his parish in the authority and power of Christ, the true Head of the Church, while at the same time recognising the visible head of the Church in the bishop, too. The “fullness of the sacrament of Orders” (LG 21) is conferred on the bishops, so that they sanctify and govern the faithful in the person of the Head of the Church. But on their own level the presbyters also participate in the office of mediator and priest of Christ, which they exercise most supremely in the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice. So in spite of their hierarchical dependence on the bishop they are along with him “true priests of the New Testament” (LG 28), who teach, govern and sanctify in the person of Christ, the Head of the Church.

The distinguishing of the degrees of orders in passing on apostolic authority arose from the need for the various ministries in the Church. This has resulted in a system of the many co-workers, who are joined together in the bishop as the principle of the unity of the servants of the Church and the multiplicity of God’s co-workers, forming a communio of the presbytery and clergy of a diocese. This is why it is the bishop alone who confers orders through prayer and imposition of hands (Thomas Aquinas, S.th. Suppl. q.37 a.5). The bishop possesses the completio potestatis over the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ (S. th. suppl. q. 38 a. 1). In the unity of its origins in the apostolate, the Sacrament of Orders is not, despite the multiple degrees of ordination, something pieced together like parts of a whole. There is only one Sacrament of Orders that is participated in, albeit with graduated degrees of powers imparted. It is a distinctio totius potestativi in such a way that the fullness of power is given in one person, namely the bishop, who passes it on to different degrees in the ordination of priests and deacons and in the minor orders.

The fullness of the Sacrament of Orders is realised in the priesthood (according to the orders of bishops and priests), and in the other degrees of ordination within the limits of the powers conferred. Hence there is only one single Sacrament of Orders but a multiplicity of bearers of it in the different degrees of ordination (Thomas Aquinas, S.th. suppl. q.37 a.1 ad 2). The question of the dogmatic difference between bishop and presbyter and consequently of the sacramentality of episcopal consecration – which remains unclarified in most scholastic authors – is not going to be dealt with here. An answer is in any case only possible by examining more closely how their authority is directed towards the sacramental Body of Christ and the ecclesial Body of Christ. Vatican II decided the question dogmatically by stating that that the fullness of the Sacrament of Orders is transmitted “of its very nature” through episcopal consecration (LG 21). The bishop’s power to ordain and the chief pastor’s power of jurisdiction must not be torn apart. In episcopal ordination Christ bestows the authority to preach, to sanctify and to govern. This is not contradicted by the fact that bishops only exercise their offices of sanctifying, teaching and governing with the consent of the Roman Pontiff (LG 22; Nota praevia explicativa 2). But the relationship of the Pope to the bishops is not like that, for instance, of the Superior General of the Society of Jesus to his provincial superiors or of the Holy See as a subject of international law to the apostolic nuncios. That is why the Pope can only appoint bishops or remove them from office as a punishment according to a regulated procedure. Their equality in episcopal orders precludes all arbitrariness, the latter being nothing but harmful to the Church. For the Pope is not the Lord of the Church and the boss of the bishops, but rather “a permanent and visible source and foundation” of the unity of the universal Church and the whole episcopate in order to serve the truth of the gospel and the Church’s teaching” (LG 18).

The unity of the common priesthood and the sacramental priesthood in Christ

The relationship between clergy and laity is also not determined by the principle of one ruling over the other, but rather by their unity in the service of the Church for the salvation of the world. Their shared mission is rooted in Baptism, through which we become members of the one Body of Christ, the Church. This shared but also different participation in the priesthood of Christ is where the communion and mission of the Church are carried out: in the priesthood of all the baptized and in that of those ordained in the Sacrament of Orders as pastors of the People of God, that is, the bishops, priests and deacons.

It was the secret of the success of Reformation preaching that through the “rediscovery” of the universal priesthood the laity felt liberated from religious spoon-feeding by the “hierarchy” of Pope and bishops and from having to make financial contributions towards the Sacrifice of the Mass, in which the priest alone – for money – appeared to be able to procure the forgiveness of sins for the living and the dead. Now they no longer had to rely on the sacraments and the good will of their ministers. People felt they had personal and direct access to God in faith alone. By flattering the self-esteem and the urge for independence of the “laity”, i.e. the powerful princes and the burghers in the towns, by telling them that by virtue of the universal priesthood they had direct access to God and no longer required priests as their teachers and shepherds, the Reformers created an anti-hierarchical fervour and fostered alienation from sacramental thinking. This resulted in people wanting to set jealous boundaries between the baptized laity and the priests who allegedly threatened their maturity and freedom of conscience.

The whole pathos of freedom from authority and emancipation from every kind of immaturity that was propagated by Enlightenment philosophy combines with the Reformation’s “discovery” of the universal priesthood into a “paradigm shift” and becomes the principle of God’s revelation in the passing of history. “World history is the progress of the consciousness of freedom – a progress whose necessity we have to investigate”.[1] The Catholic Church, which Hegel identified with medieval feudal society, is Christianity at the stage of exteriority in the necessary progression of the dialectical unfolding of its idea as spirit and freedom. The priest, the saints, the visible rites and ceremonies in Catholicism are – in Hegel’s opinion – the expression of the exteriorization of religion and of a mindless performance of cult that binds the spirit to sensual things and subjugates its freedom. “The element of mediation between God and man was thus apprehended and held as something external. Thus through the perversion of the principle of Freedom, absolute Slavery became the established law.”[2]

Irrespective of such idealistically extravagant speculations about the self-realisation of the absolute spirit as it passes through world history, which renders any search for the unity of all Christians in the one Church redundant, a realistic view from the perspective of salvation history must open up a new appreciation of the sacramentality of the Church, her priesthood and her liturgy.

The important thing is for the Church, as the “same, identical historical subject” of belief in revelation, to mediate salvation in signs that are perceptible to the senses. Added to this are human beings as ministers and recipients of sacramental grace. All this results from man’s nature as body and soul and as a social being, but above all from the Incarnation, which gives invisible grace the visible form of its presence. It follows from God’s Incarnation that his humanity is the instrument for the mediation of divine salvation, and that this is done through human beings and in a human manner. “Rightly, then, the liturgy is considered as an exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ. In the liturgy the sanctification of the man is signified by signs perceptible to the senses, and is effected in a way which corresponds with each of these signs; in the liturgy the whole public worship is performed by the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, that is, by the Head and his members” (SC 7).

In the Catholic Church, priests and laity are not opposites in closed groups as in an estates-based society. Notwithstanding sociological alienations of the Church’s constitution over the course of history, the ecclesiological correct formulation must run: “In the Church there is a diversity of ministry but a oneness of mission. Christ conferred on the Apostles and their successors the duty of teaching, sanctifying, and ruling in his name and power. But the laity likewise share in the priestly, prophetic, and royal office of Christ and therefore have their own share in the mission of the whole people of God in the Church and in the world” (AA 2).

Although these ideas of the laity’s being dependent on the arbitrary behaviour of the priests were in circulation in the 15^th century, they were in fact the result of both a lack of knowledge of the faith on the part of the laity and negligent or incompetent teachers. The fact that the whole of the missionary People of God have been endowed with a priestly dignity and mission as well in the Old Testament (Ex 19, 6) as well in the New Testament (1 Pet 2:5.9) is not inconsistent with the ministry of the bishops-presbyters together with the Apostle as shepherds of the faithful in the name of Christ, “the chief shepherd” (1 Pet 5:4) and “the shepherd and guardian of your souls” (1 Pet 2:25). The ministry of the presbyters as shepherds is clearly derived from Christ, who governs, teaches and sanctifies his Church through them. Incidentally, there is no talk here of a “common” or “universal” priesthood and certainly not of a contrast between this and a presumptive “special” priesthood. When the Church’s holy and royal priesthood is spoken of, this refers to a characteristic of the holiness of God’s people (cf. Ex 19:6) as a temple of God “to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 2:5; cf. Rev 1:6; 20:6) and is a statement of the Church’s priestly mission to “proclaim the mighty acts” of God (1 Pet 2:9) to the people.

Priests and laity joined together in the sacrifice of Christ and the Church

“Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children, and live in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (Eph 5:1f.).This gives us the Christological and Christian definition of sacrifice: the essence of the sacrifice is love as the surrender of one’s whole being and life to God, from whom we have received everything (sacrifice of thanksgiving) and from whom we hope everything (sacrifice of supplication). Perfect love of God makes the sacrifice of love of neighbour possible.

God the Creator of the world, “who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing” (Eph 1:3), has no need of propitiation with gifts of the world, which is anyway his creation. In the Eucharist the bishop or presbyter, together with all the faithful, offers the sacrifice of thanksgiving in which the reconciliation with God granted us once and for all in Jesus Christ is now made present in the liturgical sign and the surrender of our hearts. This thanksgiving is not a matter of external applause for someone else’s successful achievement. Rather, it is an entering into, indeed a uniting with the thanksgiving that Jesus is in his person for the receipt of his divine nature and the inclusion of all mankind in his human nature through faith and baptism. Thus Christ is one with the Church as her Head and Body. The criticism of cult expressed both in the Old Testament and by Jesus is not incompatible with the sacramental memorial of Jesus’ Passion that he commanded the disciples at the Last Supper to perform. “The oblation of the Church, therefore, which the Lord gave instructions to be offered throughout all the world, is accounted with God a pure sacrifice, and is acceptable to Him; not that He stands in need of a sacrifice from us, but that he who offers is himself glorified in what he does offer, if his gift be accepted” (Irenaeus of Lyon, Haer IV, 18,1).

Since the bishop as shepherd and teacher, but also when presiding at the liturgy, acts in the person of Christ, the High Priest of the New Covenant, he is also referred to as a high priest: “For if Jesus Christ,our Lord and God, is Himself the chief-priest of God the Father, and has first offered Himself a sacrifice to the Father, and has commanded this to be done in commemoration of Himself, certainly that priesttruly discharges the office of Christ, who imitates that which Christ did; and he then offers a true and full sacrifice in the Church to God the Father, when he proceeds to offer it according to what he sees Christ Himself to have offered” (Cyprian of Carthage, Ep 62, 14).

In the oldest extant complete ordination ritual, which has been handed down to us by Hippolytus (ca. 200), the bishop is called a high priest because he offers the gifts of the Church as thanksgiving to the Father through Christ in the Holy Spirit (TA 3): this term hiereus/sacerdos later comes to comprise both degrees of ordination, both the episcopate and the presbyteriate, and links them closely together. The fact that all the faithful are called “priests of God and of Christ” (Rev 20:6) in no way passes into oblivion.

In his City of God Augustine, too, describes the subject universally familiar to subsequent ecclesial and theological tradition in order to justify the common priesthood of all the faithful and the ministerial priesthood of bishops and presbyters: “and this [being priests of God] refers not to the bishops alone, and presbyters, who are now specially called priests in the Church (qui proprie iam vocantur in ecclesia sacerdos); but as we call all believers Christians on account of the mystical chrism, so we call all priestsbecause they are members of the one Priest (sic omnes sacerdotes, quoniam membra sunt unius sacerdotis). Of them the Apostle Peter says, “ a holy people, a royal priesthood’” (Civ XX, 10).

This inner connection established by Augustine between the priesthood of all believers and the priestly-sanctifying ministry of bishops and priests by virtue of their sharing in the one priesthood of Christ is again taken up by Vatican II in Lumen Gentium “Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless interrelated: each of them in its own special way is a participation in the one priesthood of Christ. The ministerial priest, by the sacred power he enjoys, teaches and rules the priestly people; acting in the person of Christ, he makes present the Eucharistic sacrifice, and offers it to God in the name of all the people. But the faithful, in virtue of their royal priesthood, join in the offering of the Eucharist. They likewise exercise that priesthood in receiving the sacraments, in prayer and thanksgiving, in the witness of a holy life, and by self-denial and active charity.” (LG 10).

As Thomas Aquinas, one of the most reliable witnesses to Catholic tradition, says: “As to the priests of the New Law, they may be called mediators of God and men, inasmuch as they are the ministers of the true Mediator by administering, in His stead, the saving sacraments to men” (S.th. III q.26 a.1 ad 1). “Moreover, they fulfil the office of mediator, non quidem principaliter et perfective, sed ministerialiter et dispositive” (Thomas Aquinas, S. th. III q.26 a.2). This also holds true when speaking of Christ as the sole Head of the Church and the bishops as head of their local churches and the Pope as visible head of the whole Church. “Now the interior influx of grace is from no one save Christ, whose manhood, through its union with the Godhead, has the power of justifying; but the influence over the members of the Church, as regards their exterior guidance, can belong to others. […]First, inasmuch as Christ is the Head of all who pertain to the Church in every place and time and state; but all other men are called heads with reference to certain special places, as bishops of their Churches. Or with reference to a determined time as the Pope is the head of the whole Church, viz. during the time of his Pontificate” (S. th. III q.8 a.6). The bishops are pastors because they visibly exercise the pastoral office of Christ whereas as only Christ calls himself the door, for it is only through him that we can really enter the house of God (cf. Augustine, Tract. in Io. 46). Certain titles and verbal images for Christ can also be applied analogously to his servants (shepherd, teacher, priest, mediator); others apply univocally and exclusively to him (Word made flesh, Bread of Life, Light of the World, Redeemer).

Summary: After rising from the dead and before being seated at the right hand of the Father to exercise his rule in the new Kingdom of God, Jesus charges the eleven disciples with a universal mission because now all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him.

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the time.” (Mt 28:18-20)

This says everything about the legitimacy of the Church and of the apostolic office of the apostles and their successors, who come to be called bishops and presbyters (= priests). They exercise their ministry for the building up of the Church and the growth of the Body of Christ by being teachers and pastors to the faithful, those sanctified in Christ and the Holy Spirit (cf. Eph 4:11).

Cardinal Gerhard Müller

[1]Georg W.F. Hegel, Philosophie der Weltgeschichte I, 63 (PhB 171a).

[2]Georg W.F. Hegel, Philosophie der Weltgeschichte IV, 822 (PhB 171d).

The post Full Text: Cardinal Müller’s Rome Talk on the ‘Truth and the Mission of the Priest,’ January 14, 2025 appeared first on Edward Pentin.

Confraternities of Catholic Clergy: Rome, 15 January 2025

Walking on Water

Father Ezra Sullivan OP

General intro: Walking on Water

I would like to begin by telling the organizers of this conference that I am doubly thankful for their work. First of all, I am grateful for the fact that they organized a similar conference in 2015. Back then— when I was twenty pounds lighter and had no grey in my beard—I attended the conference here in Rome, at this very same venue, and the entire event was very striking to me. Aside from the excellent talks, it was also a time of fraternity. I remember sitting near a particularly talkative and friendly Scotsman during one of the meals. We really hit it off — we saw eye-to-eye on things, dove into interesting theological discussions, and, most importantly, his jokes were pretty funny. We exchanged info. A number of months later, I happened to be giving a talk in Edinburgh, so I contacted Fr. Steven, and took a train to meet him. He was the soul of hospitality, showed me around his hometown—and even drove me to another town and bought me lunch, though he didn’t really have the time. Priestly friendship in a time of need; I’m still in awe at his generosity.

So I’m grateful to the organizers for what they created a decade ago, and I’m grateful to be invited to speak here now. I’m particularly honored to be among this fine roster of speakers, each of whom I admire, not least for the courage they have shown these past ten years in their fidelity to the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic faith.

Troubled Times

No time, since the fall of Adam and Eve, is without its troubles, but some times are more troubled than others. Just as in nature there are times of rain and times of bright sunshine; and just as in politics there are times of war and times of peace, so some seasons of life are stormier than others.

For many, their sense of “troubled times” comes from news reports of international upheaval. In Florida, hurricanes are an annual source of interest and conversation; in California, it’s the forest fires. For years, one of the main topics of conversation was COVID. Then the conflict in Ukraine gained worldwide attention. After that, the conflict between Palestine and Israel. And other wars threaten on the horizon.

The political cycle also reveals the troubles of our times: bribery, incompetence, bluster, insults, embarrassments, weak laws, biased law-enforcement, widespread lawlessness. The economy seems weak; many good folks are without jobs; and those with jobs often struggle to make ends meet.

All of this may make an observer wonder where the world is going. Are we heading toward a worldwide tyranny? Will our basic rights be expunged? Is the environment headed toward destruction if we don’t turn things around? Can we avoid mass casualties? How will the Church navigate these choppy waters?

The storms of life

The following incident is so important that it is related by each of the Gospels. After having multiplied the loaves and fish to feed a crowd of thousands, Christ made his disciples “get into the boat and go before him to the other side. … When evening came, the boat by this time was many furlongs distant from the land, beaten by the waves; for the wind was against them” (Mt 14:21-24, passim).

 Christ commands his disciples to get into the boat. To clamber into a boat and attempt to navigate it across the waters is to use an instrument created by reason—the vessel itself—in order to harness the powers of nature and direct them to a voluntary end, in this case, the other shore—the goal established for them by Christ.

Although experienced in the ways of sailing, the disciples nevertheless were told to embark on a dangerous endeavor. In ancient times, it was fairly uncommon for Israelites—including fishermen—to know how to swim.[1] Even when waters were calm, to traverse a lake was perilous. Perhaps that day the disciples did not suspect that any storm would arise. Guides in Israel will tell pilgrims that sudden squalls can appear without warning on the Sea of Galilee.

To anyone who is dry, any storm can be unpleasant; but to a person on a boat, a storm is fearsome. Darkness during a storm causes even greater fright, for without the sun or stars, the sailor cannot see the shore nor orient himself in the right direction.

 The Gospel text says that the disciples were “beaten by the waves”: the rushing water battered against them, uncaring. “The wind was against them”: it blew contrary to their strain, and seemed almost maliciously to thwart their efforts to do good. Mark 6:48 adds, “they were tossed about while rowing”: despite doing their best, the waves “beat” them, conquered their strength, snuffed out their courage, and laid bare their weakness. Nature itself and all the circumstances of that moment seemed to rise up against their intention to obey Christ. If we are attentive and join the disciples in this moment, we can discover lessons that tell us about the storms of life that we priests face, and how to be holy in our troubled times.

Troubles in the Church

Just as there were troubles out on the water, so there were troubles—probably felt more intensely, because they were more personal—on deck. The boat with the disciples can simultaneously represent the Church as a whole, as when St. Gregory the Great, upon being elected as pope, wrote in a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, “I, unworthy and weak, have taken charge of an old and grievously shattered ship (for on all sides the waves enter, and the planks, battered by a daily and violent storm, seem ready to shipwreck).”[2] The boat can also represent your community, and your own personal life, especially your vocation. Gregory the Great also uses this imagery, saying, “On every side I am tossed by the waves of business, and sunk by storms, so that I may truly say, ‘I am come into the depth of the sea, and the storm has overwhelmed me’ (Ps 69:2).”[3]

With respect to the Church, there is undeniable turmoil on the deck of Peter’s bark. Our age is surely not without the troubles of times past: corrupt clergy, rebellious laity, widespread heresy, unveiled scandals, accusations of injustice on all sides—just listen to what St. Paul lists: hidden things of dishonesty, craftiness, adulterating the word of God (2 Cor 4:2); false apostles (2 Cor 11:13); those who “serve not Christ our Lord but their own belly: and by pleasing speeches and good words seduce the hearts of the innocent” (Rom 16:18); men who “pervert the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7); “men who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain” (1 Tim 6:5).

Church history shows that problems with, for, and from the clergy have never ceased. Every ecumenical council, and nearly every local council, has made the “reform of the clergy” one of its main themes. For example, the first canon of the First Ecumenical Council, held at Nicaea in 325, treats the problem of clergy who have been castrated, essentially saying that if they did it to themselves, they are not to continue their ministry. Another canon, can. 17, laicizes clergy who “devises schemes for dishonest profit.” In one century, a council condemns false ordinations by a man pretending to be bishop; another condemns the practice of ordaining men who are ordained for love of glory or power; over a span of over a thousand years, council after council repudiates bishops who ordain men for personal gain and profit, priests who embrace heresy, and any cleric that lives a dissolute life; the Council of Trent reformed nearly aspect of clerical life, and these reforms lasted nearly 500 years; and, as we all know, Vatican II reshaped the life of the clergy, and the jury is still out on the results, but the storms faced in the ordained life have certainly not ceased.

As for your community, there might yet be additional trouble and turmoil. It is not infrequent that parishes the Western world over are nearly drowned in debt, failing infrastructure, lower mass attendance, indifference to the sacraments, lack of energetic and competent volunteers, liturgy wars, and difficult personalities. Perhaps there are other, particular storms that threaten to swamp your local boat.

Then, there is you personally: Some are struggling with the present scars of past sufferings, unresolved trauma, moral wounds of betrayals, misunderstandings, injustices endured, injustices perpetrated, lost opportunities, thwarted ambitions, unrealized hopes, disappointments, failures, and disasters. Health troubles, money troubles, family troubles: if you do not suffer from them, someone you love does suffer from them, and you might lament that you can do little to alleviate their pain. Then there is issue of your sin: sins committed, habits developed, temptations knocking at your door, and all the many difficulties of living up the calling of being a Catholic. Perhaps there are some here that feel far from home and beaten by the waves, as if all the winds of life are against you, and you cannot master them no matter how hard you row, how much you trim your sails.

God: Creator of the waters, Master of the storm

 With the turbulent storm boiling all around us, let us zoom out of the scene and see the Sea of Galilee grow gradually smaller as we climb higher and higher into the air, until we can see the curve of the globe and notice that there are other places entirely without storms. Christ, for instance, was atop the mountain, alone, praying—and, it seems, entirely dry. Peoples have commonly seen mountaintops as the abode of the gods. The craggy heights of Mt Olympus and the snowy peak of Mt Fuji were the homes of preternatural beings, inaccessible, distant, and relatively unaffected by the surging world below. Christ was on the mountain in his human body, but in his divine nature, with God the Father and the Holy Spirit, he exists transcendentally above all of creation. As the Psalmist sings: “The LORD is high above all nations, and his glory above the heavens! Who is like the LORD our God, who is seated on high, who looks far down upon the heavens and the earth?” (Ps 113:4-6). God looks down upon the created heavens, because He is infinitely above them. His immeasurably perfect being is untroubled by flux, untouched by decay, unmarred by the seas of chaos. From all eternity, God is unchanged and unchanging. St Augustine puts it this way:

You are before all the past by the eminence of Your ever-present eternity: and You dominate all the future … and once it has come it will be past, but You are always the self-same, and Your years shall not fail [Ps 102:27]. Your years neither come nor go, that all may come. Your years abide all in one act of abiding … whereas our years shall not all be, till all are no more. Your years are a single day; and Your day comes not daily but is today, a today which does not yield place to any tomorrow or follow upon any yesterday. In You today is eternity. … You are the Maker of all time, and before all time You are. … And no time is co-eternal with You, for you stand changeless.[4]

From that changeless eternity, God created the flow of time, which is marked by change in the world. Within that world, God also made the oceans: Gen 1:6, “God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament.” Similar to how the “place” in which time exists is this changing, created world, so God also commanded water to “be in place”: “God said, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place’” (Gen 1:9). When waters are in one place, they are level, and provide a measure for what is level. There is a “place” in present creation for danger, uncertainty, even some elements of chaos, but as St. Basil the Great reminds us, those waters are surrounded by the order of dry land, that is, by the intelligible wisdom of the enduring Word of God.[5]

 Within the world of incomplete order and partial chaos, God placed man. Creating the human soul from nothing and matching it with a suitable body, God endowed man with rationality, which enables man to craft what he needs for his flourishing. So men made boats. With the invention of boats came the discovery of seasickness.

Man is not a master of chaos, but with some skill, he can often navigate through the chaos and arrive to stable land on the other side. Other times, man must rely on the immediate intervention of God to escape alive.

 God made this world. He fashioned these times, He formed these waters, He allows these storms, and He has commanded us to enter them. God’s providence has placed you precisely where you are, at this very time, and He has equipped you to weather the storm with His help. It is natural to desire safety, tranquility, predictability. But sometimes, the storm is our lot. As Tolkien narrates in The Lord of the Rings:

[Gandalf said] “Sauron the Great, the Dark Lord … has indeed arisen again. … Always after a defeat and a respite, the Shadow takes another shape and grows again.”

‘I wish it need not have happened in my time,’ said Frodo.

‘So do I,’ said Gandalf, ‘and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”[6]

The very nature of God teaches us that peace exists perfectly in His own divine nature, and only imperfectly here on earth. All times are troubled, and our time has special troubles, but these troubles are above the chaos of sin embraced by the heart, which entails a spiritual distance from the Holy Trinity. It is our call to enter the chaos and there, in the heart of it, to encounter the peace of Christ.

Peter’s call to walk on water

We come now to consider Peter, not insofar as he is a symbol of popes and bishops, but as he symbolizes the ordained priest who encounters dangers and difficulties in the midst of his vocation.

“Lord, if it is you, bid me come to you on the water” (Mt 14:28): this is what every man says when he discerns his call from God: “bid me do something supernatural, to meet you on unstable waters in troubled times.”

Holiness is more than merely being honest and upright. The major ethical systems have some belief in the Silver Rule: “Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you.” That is, avoid robbery, violence, extortion, defrauding another of his rights, harming his reputation, and so on. Many cultures have a version of the Golden Rule, which is stated positively: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Hence, virtues such as generosity, kindness, honesty, fair play, and justice are inculcated. Throughout the world, one can find people who help clothe the naked with extra clothes; and feed the poor, if they have food to spare; and serve the common good to which they belong. But to avoid evil on the one hand, and to practice all of these on the other than, does not constitute the essence of holiness. Christ says to his disciples: “And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same” (Lk 6:33).

There is a certain exterior form of religiosity that is closer to holiness but is only the exterior shell to the nourishing nut within. This exterior conformity is not so much righteousness; it is rightness in action. The almost holy person does nothing that Christ and the Church forbid. He does not take the name of God in vain; he not only avoids all outward adultery, he also avoids unchastity and uncleanness, in all looks and words and thoughts that lead to it; he avoids harmful words, all backbiting, gossip, detraction, rash judgment, arrogant tones, and unedifying conversation. He not only avoids excessive wine, whiskey, or gin, he also abstains at times when such drink would be legitimate; he keeps trim because he cares for his body, and because he is exacting on fast days, and because gluttony does not rule him. He tries to avoid unnecessary contention, and strives to live peaceably with others; and if his enemies should harm him, he remains calm and does not seek revenge, and he does not willingly wrong or grieve his neighbor, for he remembers the example of Christ and the saints.

A good man does not limit himself to doing the cheap and easy things; he is not slothful, but works hard at whatever he does; he is reasonable, even-keeled, and reliable. If he has a charismatic personality, he is not thereby arrogant; if he is mild and retiring, he is nonetheless friendly and likeable. When necessary, he comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable; he instructs the ignorant, strengthens the weak, and encourages the good. He is faithful in all his duties, but especially those derived from his state of life. The good priest celebrates mass precisely without adding, omitting, or changing anything; he genuflects before the Blessed Sacrament without self-consciousness; he accepts compliments without vanity—and without asking for them; he keeps the books accurately, and works with parish staff and volunteers well; is not indifferent to the needs of his people, but does not allow the demands of the few to dominate the reasonable expectations of the many; in private, he says the Divine Office, and is attentive to the meaning of the words; he will even pray the rosary in free moments, and spend time before the Blessed Sacrament; he recognizes that moderate recreation is good, but does not allow himself to waste hours watching television programs when his time could be better spent; he prepares for his homilies thoughtfully, and delivers them without heresy or narcissism.

Despite all of this, a good man might still lack the heroic goodness and virtue that the Church calls holiness. If he does good things attentively, yet harbors in his heart a selfish motive, then the man is not holy at all: he might be vain, or a hypocrite. If he does all these things merely out of duty, and to avoid criticism from the people, or punishment from the bishop, then he is only a worker in God’s kingdom, but not yet a co-heir with the son.

The totality of the natural world, before the corruption of sin, was declared “very good” by God on account of the perfection of the species that exist within it, the splendor of their beauty as individuals and in relation to one another, the processes by which all things are ordered to their ultimate good, and so on. However, the good of grace is incalculably greater, for by it humans are regenerated and participate in the divine nature.^[7] St. Thomas says that grace is so great that “The justification of the wicked, which terminates at the eternal good of a participation in the Godhead, is greater than the creation of Heaven and earth, which terminates at the good of mutable nature.”^[8] Matthias Scheeben extends this reasoning and argues that grace “has its measure and end only in the infinity of God” and therefore in a certain sense is infinite: “Every degree of grace is infinitely valuable.”^[9] Thus, if we were to take all earthly treasures, every beautiful chalice and crucifix and painting, all of St. Peter’s Basilica and every church that has ever existed, and add to that the entire earth and indeed the whole cosmos—this would still be less than the smallest amount of grace, for the supernatural exceeds the natural even more than the human being exceeds the ant. Thus, holiness is supernatural — it aims at a good that is not found in nature.[10]

What is lacking from a merely good person is this: a sincere, abiding, fervent love of God. The horizon of his heart is the limits of this world. Perhaps one of the best images to understand this is image of a wife who does not love her husband. A number of men have shared with me this experience; and it is also utilized in Sacred Scripture, such as by the Prophet Hosea.

We can easily imagine the situation of a man who is in love with his wife, who in romance brings her flowers and tries to please her. Meanwhile, she gives him the cold shoulder. Sure, she does her duties for the family: maybe she cooks and cleans, or takes the children to school, or works to help support the family. She might even give her husband the perfunctory kiss. But it is obvious that she does so without love. The husband doesn’t expect enthusiasm from her, or some exaggerated emotional response to his presence. He just wants to know that she cares for him, not just as a provider but as a husband whom she loves. Not just what he can do for her, what advantages he brings, but for who he is in himself. Instead of seeing herself as a beloved, however, the wife sees herself in a contractual relationship and she tries to manipulate him and the situation to her advantage, even when she goes through the motions of married life.

What a difference is the man who loves God, in contrast to one who only obeys Him! The good man obeys God like a mercenary, but the holy man obeys out of love. The name of Christ is in his heart, and on his tongue. Like St. Dominic, he either always speaks to God or of God. His heart is a burning furnace lit by the fire of divine charity. His delight is in the Lord his God; his entire soul is full of the overflowing presence of God; he spends all of his strength to please God; he knows that God is a friend, and he speaks often with him, and intimately, with trust and thanks and affection.

• The love of God unites you with Him in the depths of your mind, will, and affections;
• The love of God effects a “mutual indwelling” between you and God, whereby you rest in His heart, and He rests in yours;
• The love of God produces an “ecstasy” in which you are brought outside of your own petty interests, and you focus on the glory and honor of God, and the good of souls so that they might love God as well;
• The love of God stirs up a zeal in you, so that you desire intensely to serve Him, and to strive against whatever hinders the love of God and the salvation of souls;
• The love of God melts the coldness of your heart, which has seen many chilling things; and it softens and opens your heart to love again, especially to love God and His friends;
• The love of God can even induce a “wound of love” in which you feel pain at being distant from God, and you long to be united with Him forever in heaven;
• The love of God inflames your fervor, so that you and your neighbor might possess God more fully, and be rid of all your imperfections which cool your love;
• The love of God forms, enlivens, and directs every other act that you do, so that it is a cause of your actions: all for the love of God. Thus, Thomas Aquinas calls charity the “foundation or root” of all virtues by uniting them to God, the source of all life; it is the “mother” of all virtue because through the power of God “charity conceives the acts of the virtues within itself.”^[11]
• Therefore, the love God enables you to withstand all pressure, to endure every pain, to cut a path through the wind and waves of this present darkness, and to arrive on the bright solid shore of eternal life.

How do we live out such a love of God? It is impossible on your own. Significantly, the Egyptian hieroglyphic of “doing a thing impossible” was a man’s walking upon water.[12]

 Humans can do natural things on their own, such as taking a spouse, getting a job, cultivating a garden, and so on. But because of sin, a person with his natural powers can achieve natural goods imperfectly, with many mistakes, and then only as directed to some natural end. But all of us are called to be holy: this supernatural end cannot be achieved on our power, no matter how sincere his intentions and how strong his efforts.

         A plant, plucked up from the soil, could more easily re-plant itself than a man can achieve his supernatural vocation without grace.

         A man whose heart has been ripped out, and replaced with a stone, could more easily replace his vital organ than a man could achieve his supernatural vocation without grace.

         A civilization subject to nuclear apocalypse wherein all buildings, all cultural artifacts, all records of its history, could more easily rebuild itself to its former glory than a man could achieve his supernatural vocation without grace.

         To live our supernatural vocation of loving God above all things, and loving our neighbor with God’s own love, is more difficult than for a man to walk on water by his own power.

         Aquinas: “in the state of corrupted nature man cannot fulfil all the Divine commandments without healing grace.”[13] Again: “because all have sinned and cannot of themselves be justified, they need some other cause to make them just.” That cause is the grace that comes from the redemptive work of Christ.[14]

Christ comes to us, so that we might come to him

“in the fourth watch of the night [Christ] came to them, walking on the sea” (Mt 14:25). There are many lessons here.

First, Christ sees our troubles—past, present, and those yet to come—and he cares. Christ was on the mountain, and yet knew of the plight of his friends; even now, in heaven, he sees our troubling times, and he has particular compassion for his friends.

According to Homer, Kronos, the god of Time, divided the world among his three sons: “Hades drew the lot of the mists and the darkness, Zeus was allotted the wide sky,” and to Neptune, “the gray sea to live in forever.”^[15] But to Christ belongs the earth, the sea, the sky—all times, all places, for as God Incarnate he transcends all creation while providentially working within it.

Second, although we cannot see him, Christ sees us. We should not make the mistake common to atheists and infants, a mistake I like to call the “peak-a-boo” fallacy, namely: to think that if we cannot see someone, they cannot see us; or they might not even exist. Knowledge is asymmetrical. The higher can have knowledge of the lower, even when hidden from the lower: the man can see the ant, even if the ant only sees his footprints, and God sees us and knows us more intimately than we see and know ourselves.

It should not surprise us that Christ is hidden from us now. He was hidden even when he walked the earth: hidden in his birth, except from a few; hidden in his youth, but for a single moment in the Temple; hidden in his maturity, but for three years, and even then, when harassed he stayed outside of Jerusalem, and when brought to the edge of a hill to be thrown over, he disappeared from the crowd. How much more, now that he is in heaven, would Jesus remain hidden from the world that knows him not, and rejects him when it cannot avoid seeing his works. The present state after his Ascension is one of faith; we “walk by faith and not by sight” (2 Cor 5:7). In heaven, all will be clear, all will be calm. The light of Christ will illuminate the city of God and warm each heart. But right now, clouds of can evil blot out our ability to see in the light of the divine sun, and a tempest can stir up our fears and threatens to sink us in a maelstrom of emotion. But God sees us, and His knowledge is one full of love.

There is a scene in the movie A Princess Bride that perfectly illustrates merely intellectual knowledge of someone’s sufferings. An evil count captures and tortures the hero Wesley on a terrible Machine and says,

“I’m sure you’ve discovered my deep and abiding interest in pain. At present, I’m writing the definitive work on the subject, so I want you to be totally honest with me on how The Machine makes you feel. … What did this do to you? Tell me. And remember, this is for posterity, so be honest. How do you feel?”

In contrast, the knowledge of a friend is not cold and calculating, merely intellectual and devoid of the warmth of love. To the contrary, upon hearing of a friend’s suffering, we suffer too. Thus, when Christ sees our troubles, his seeing is a knowledge with love. On the divine level, this is because the Word of God is never separated from the Holy Spirit, who is the love of God: it is a Word continually breathing divine love.

Third, when Christ sees our trouble, he acts to save us. With his almighty power, God sustains all things in their being, but when He comes to us, he does so personally. He does not merely resolve our problem from afar; he wants to be near us; he wants us to be near him. His help is not merely an interior strengthening, but the gift of His own divine presence. How different that is from how the pagan gods were seen to help men. Virgil relates how Aeneas and his men cast into a terrible storm, meanwhile, the news filtered down to Neptune of the turmoil above.^[16]

In this scene, Neptune’s physical distance from the storm is matched by an emotional distance from the men in danger. As he lifts his serene face from the waves, he commands the winds to return to their proper home and to bother the men no more: with his voice, he stills the storm: “Thus Neptune, and—no sooner said than done—he calmed the sea, chased off the massed clouds, and brought back the sun.”^[17] But the closest Neptune comes to the men is to use his trident to lever their ships off of a reef. He never meets them face-to-face, because he does not love them.

Through the Incarnation, God shows us that He descends to our tempestuous times, and He comes to us in the flesh of Christ and He shares our troubles. Immune from all evil in the celestial kingdom, the Son of God assumed to himself human nature, taken from the Virgin Mary’s womb, so that He might be close to us as a man and experience all that we suffer, except for sin itself.

Christ’s coming down from the mountain and walking upon the waters toward the disciples in the storm is, therefore, an image of his earlier descent into our world: “for us men, and for our salvation, he came down from heaven.” The abasement of God out of love for us is realized in Jesus Christ, who lowered himself into the pit of our world like a rescuer who, with ropes and pulleys, plunges down into a deep, dark cavern to save miners from their prison of perpetual night. Christ does not merely send someone else to help; nor does He help by stirring up His own power acting from a distance: Christ comes personally and says, “Take heart, it is I; have no fear” (Mt 14:27).

Fourth, Christ walks on the water toward us. Why does Christ walk? When a person is in an emergency, don’t we run to help? Why didn’t he immediately appear to them and stop the storm in a single moment of divine power? We could not endure a sudden stop to the terrors of our wild imaginations, any more than passengers can endure a sudden stop in a speeding car. When God walks toward us, with each step He takes, we are better able to discern his presence and come to realize that we are not alone, that “though the waters rage and foam … The LORD of hosts is with us” (Ps 46:3). As St. John Chrysostom said, in walking toward the disciples, Christ teaches us not to seek a speedy riddance of evil, but to bear with patient courage such things that befall us. In the midst of turmoil, we expect immediate sunshine and calm waters. But the slowness of God’s walking helps us realize that we are ultimately helpless without Him, and that only He is our savior. To see the difficulty helps us grasp the greatness of his saving love.

We may also note that, though the disciples thought they were seeing a misty phantasm, Christ came to them in his very body. He wants to save them with his flesh and blood. By doing so, Christ gives the disciples the opportunity to cry out to him, so that they might be saved. Christ’s action here is a supremely priestly act: he sacrifices his own safety in order to save others, which enables them to help others be saved. We can recognize in this instance a dim echo of the truth that the Son of God took flesh and came to earth, so that he might save us through his death; his death was a priestly sacrifice; and he extends his sacrifice through priestly hands in the holy mass. Christ does not save by taking control of the boat himself, as if he too were subject to troubled times. Christ does not merely guide them exteriorly, by explaining how to escape danger. Christ saves them by showing that wherever he is, there is peace and safety—even when the contrary seems to be the case.

In other words: Christ became a priest so that you could become a priest, so that you could bring him physically present to the Church in the Holy Eucharist; he wanted to save in a priestly way, so that he could extend his priesthood in you, and so that your priestly sacrifice, in turn, would be a chief means by which he saves the world. In sum, by allowing the disciples to endure the temporary wind and waves, but then by coming in his bodily presence, Christ showed them—and they in turn show us—that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom 10:13).

My brother priests, let us never forget that at all costs it is necessary for us to come nearer to Christ in the intimacy of our hearts. We should fear nothing, for Christ is with us. If you have offended him, he is the pardon of God; if you have forgotten him, he remembers you; if you are in the darkness of a storm, he sees you, he comes to you, and he will raise you up again. He loves you with infinite tenderness, and he reaches out his hand to save you, to embrace you, to transform you into an alter Christus. Christ will encourage you, cure your wounds, dry your tears, heal your sores, strengthen your weak legs, and help you to once again walk on water.

Father Ezra Sullivan OP is professor of moral theology and psychology at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas.
He is also author of Alter Christus, Priestly Holiness on Earth and in Eternity (2022), an acclaimed book on the priesthood. 

[1] See Acts 27:43, which assumes that not all on the boat could swim.

[2] Epistulae, Book I, letter 4.

[3] Epistulae, Book I, letter 5. Gregory used the same imagery while writing his bishop friend Leander: “I am in this place tossed by such billows of this world that I am in no wise able to steer into port the old and rotten ship of which, in the hidden dispensation of God, I have assumed the guidance. Now in front the billows rush in, now at the side heaps of foamy sea swell up, now from behind the storm follows on. And, disquieted in the midst of all this, I am compelled sometimes to steer in the very face of the opposing waters; sometimes, turning the ship aside, to avoid the threats of the billows slantwise. I groan, because I feel that through my negligence the bilgewater of vices increases, and, as the storm meets the vessel violently, the rotten planks already sound of shipwreck. With tears I remember how I have lost the placid shore of my rest, and with sighs I behold the land which still, with the winds of affairs blowing against me, I cannot reach. If, then, you love me, dearest brother, stretch out to me in the midst of these billows the hand of your prayer; that from helping me in my labours you may, in very return for the benefit, be the stronger in your own.” Book I, letter 43.

[4] Augustine of Hippo, Confessions, trans. F.J. Sheed (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1943), 270-71, adapted for consistency.

[5] See Basil the Great, Haxaemeron, hom. 4 no. 5: “Not only the water which was covering the earth flowed off from it, but all that which had filtered into its depths withdrew in obedience to the irresistible order of the sovereign Master. And it was so. This is quite enough to show that the Creator’s voice had effect.”

[6] J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings: 50^th Anniversary Edition: The Fellowship of the Ring (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004), 51.

[7] See ST I–II, q. 100, art. 4.

[8] ST I–II, q. 113, art. 9, co.

[9] Matthias Scheeben, The Glories of Divine Grace, trans. Patrick O’Shaughnessy (Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 2000), 47.

[10] See John Wesley, “The Almost Christian,” in Sermons on Several Occasions (London: The Epworth Press, 1950; org. 1787).

[11] For these titles and descriptions of charity, see ST II-II, q. 23, a. 8, ad 1-3 respectively. See my exposition on the effects of charity in Habits and Holiness, 399-401.

[12] https://sacred-texts.com/egy/hh/hh060.htm

[13] ST I-II, q. 109, a. 4, co.

[14] Aquinas, Commentary on Romans, c. 3, l. 3, n. 306.

[15] Homer, Iliad, trans. Richmond Lattimore (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2011), book 15, ll. 189-90.

[16] Virgil, Aeneid, trans. Stanley Lombardo (Indianapolis, IN; Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2007), book I, ll. 105-9, 121-25, 137-8, 148. Line breaks removed.

[17] Aeneid, book I, ll. 170-3.

The post Full Text of Dominican Fr Ezra Sullivan’s Rome Talk to Confraternities of Catholic Clergy, January 15, 2025 appeared first on Edward Pentin.

The Confraternities of Catholic Clergy United Kingdom | Australia | United States

Rome Conference

Lecture Theatre, Casa Tra Noi

Via Monte del Gallo, 113

00165 Roma

16 January 2025

Goodness and the Mission of the Priest

Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke

To speak of goodness and the mission of the priest is to speak of God, of His Being which is All Truth, All Beauty, and All Goodness, and of His life with us in virtue of the Mystery of the Redemptive Incarnation, by which we participate in His Truth, Beauty, and Goodness. It is, therefore, to speak of God the Son Incarnate, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and, in particular, to speak of His Pastoral Charity. Christ as the Head and Shepherd of the Church, God the Father’s flock in every time and place, pours forth the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit upon the Church, into the souls of the members of the Church, members of His Mystical Body,^[1] living branches inserted into Him the Vine.^[2] It is not to speak of an idea, an ideology, or a movement, but to speak of the reality of life in Christ in the Church.

The priest is consecrated to be the pastoral charity of Christ for His flock, above all in the offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, at every time and in every place. Through Ordination to the Holy Priesthood, the soul of the priest receives an indelible mark which gives him the grace to act in the person of Christ as Head and Shepherd of His flock until Christ returns in glory at the end of time to bring to consummation His saving work.

Regarding the spiritual life of the priest, Saint Pope John Paul II, in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on the formation of priests in our time, declared:

The internal principle, the force which animates and guides the spiritual   life of the priest inasmuch as he is configured to Christ the Head and Shepherd, is pastoral charity, as a participation in Jesus Christ’s own pastoral charity, a gift freely bestowed by the Holy Spirit and likewise a task and a call which demand a free and committed response on the part of the priest.^[3]

The identity of the priest, which also defines his mission, is the pastoral charity of Christ the Head and Shepherd of the flock. The heart of the priest, therefore, is conformed to the Heart of Christ the High Priest, most especially when the priest offers the Eucharistic Sacrifice. The offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the form of all other aspects of the priestly life and ministry. Saint John Mary Vianney, the Curé of Ars described the objective reality of the priestly vocation as “… the love of the Heart of Jesus.”^[4]

Essential to our mission as priests is to reflect the supreme goodness of God the Son Incarnate, Jesus Christ the Eternal High Priest. To deepen the appreciation of our participation in the goodness of God the Son Incarnate, I wish to reflect with you on the demand – inherent in the priestly vocation, in priestly ordination, and in the priestly mission – to be a sure moral guide for the faithful in our pastoral care. The Directory for the Life and Ministry of Priests tells us:

As pastor of the community, the priest exists and lives for it; he prays, studies, works and sacrifices himself for the community. He is disposed to give his life for it, loving it as Christ does, pouring out upon it all his love and consideration, lavishing it with all his strength and unlimited time in order to render it, in the image of the Church, Spouse of Christ, always more beautiful and worthy of the benevolence of God and the love of the Holy Spirit.

This spousal dimension of the priest as pastor will help him guide his community in service to each and every one of its members, enlightening their consciences with the light of revealed truth, wisely guarding the evangelical authenticity of the Christian life, correcting errors, forgiving, curing the sick, consoling the afflicted, and promoting fraternity.^[5]

The ministry of pastoral charity necessarily requires care for the life of the community entrusted to us. This care is expressed daily in many and often hidden ways: the counsel given to spouses who are experiencing difficulties in their married life, the comforting of parishioners who are suffering a serious illness or have lost a family member in death, the formation of children and young people, and a host of other pastoral activities by which the priest concretely pours out his life for the well-being of the flock.

The guidance and direction of the community also require attention to the particular challenges of the time and place of the community. I speak of community in the widest sense, because the guidance and direction of the priest, while they are directed towards the parishioners, are also expected by persons of good will who are not yet members of the Church. The Directory for the Life and Ministry of Priests further specifies the identity of the priest as guide of the community: “In order to be a good guide of his People, the priest must also be attentive to the signs of the times: those larger and deeper ones which concern the universal Church and its sojourn in the history of man, and those which more closely affect the specific situation of a particular community.”^[6] As the Directory goes on to point out, this guidance requires “the constant and correct study of theological and pastoral problems, and the exercise of a knowledgeable reflection on the social, cultural and scientific data presented to our epoch.”^[7]

In any case, the carrying out of the responsibility is delicate and there is a strong temptation to avoid addressing issues which we know have clear moral implications for our people. We struggle, for instance, to know how to address most effectively the grave evils of procured abortion and euthanasia, gender reassignment, and the denial of the free exercise of religion in our nations and in the world.

In the United States, for example, the struggle for the advancement of the respect for the inviolable dignity of human life has been intense for decades. Our government follows openly and aggressively a totally secularist philosophy with its inherent anti-life, anti-family, and anti-religion agenda. For example, government officials refuse to talk about the destruction of the innocent and defenseless human life of the unborn and of those burdened by advanced years, grave illness, or special needs, describing it as the promotion of health. The truth is expressed by the words of Pope Saint John Paul II, who calls the attacks against human life like abortion and euthanasia by their proper name, namely, murder.^[8]

 Even though the language of Christian faith may be used in public discourse and the name of God may be invoked, programs and policies are proposed and legislated, which totally fail to respect God and His Law written upon the human heart.^[9] What is especially saddening is that numerous government officials present themselves as practicing Catholics, while engaging in public speech and political action which are gravely injurious to good morals.^[10] Catholics in public office, who obstinately persist in advocating and providing for the most egregious violations of the natural moral law, are the cause of the gravest scandal; they confuse and lead into error their fellow Catholics and non-Catholics alike regarding the most fundamental truths of the moral law.

The culture in Western Europe, for example, has become pervasively secularized. A culture which is totally Christian in its roots and owes its entire development to the Christian faith now does not want in any way to be associated with the name of Christ. It is a culture which is dying, but there are many faithful Christians living in Western Europe who have not given up hope and who work to transform the society. They look for signs of hope that the battle against secularization, against practical atheism, can be won for the sake of life, of the family, and the spread of the true faith.

With all the difficulties which we face in the world, the world has never needed more the Church to be strong in defending the Christian roots of our culture. Many of our countrymen are not ashamed to invoke the name of God and of His only-begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. Many defend the right to observe the dictates of a rightly-formed Christian conscience against those, even in government, who want to force Christians to violate the dictates of conscience regarding the most fundamental moral truths, that is, the inviolable dignity of innocent and defenseless human life, and the integrity of marriage as the faithful, enduring and life-giving union of one man and one woman. But the forces which would lead us down the path of cultural death through the denial of the Christian roots of our culture are strong, and we must be steadfast in encouraging all who are engaged in the battle for life and for a culture of life.

In the education we provide in families and in schools, in our Sunday homilies and in our catechetical instruction, we must have as our goal the formation of consciences according to the truth revealed by God in nature and in Sacred Catholic Tradition. In a special way, we must dedicate ourselves to the formation of the faithful, especially of children and young people, in purity of body and spirit, the first expression of which is respect for life and the integrity of the family. With regard to abortion, for example, we must assist troubled mothers directly and also engage in the work of educating our children and young people to know the truth that “the institution of matrimony itself and conjugal love are ordained for the procreation and education of children, and find in them their ultimate crown.”^[11] It, therefore, also demands that we teach our children and young people the virtue of purity, which prepares a man and a woman to give themselves totally to each other and to their offspring in marriage. Sadly, our culture has robbed from the work of education the teaching of the very first lessons of life, the lessons without which nothing else which the culture teaches us makes any sense.

The tireless promotion of the culture of life, in accord with the truth inscribed upon the heart of every man and announced in the Gospel, in fact, responds to the deepest longing of every man and of society itself. Right reason itself teaches us the Golden Rule which Our Lord Jesus Christ enunciated in the Sermon on the Mount. God the Father inscribes upon every human heart the truth declared by Our Lord: “So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.”^[12]

Sadly, secular culture is becoming more and more a culture of death, an anti-culture, but we, as Catholics, created in the image of God and redeemed by the Most Previous Blood of Christ, know that the culture can be transformed by our cooperation with God’s grace. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself began the description of His vocation and mission as the Good Shepherd with the words: “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.”^[13] Our Lord, seated in glory at the right hand of the Father, continues the mission through His Church, through us who are the living members of His Mystical Body.

The first presupposition of our tireless struggle to advance the respect for the inviolable dignity of innocent human life, for the integrity of marriage and the family, and for the freedom to worship God “in spirit and truth”^[14] is the truth that the struggle against total secularization, which is, by definition, opposed to human life, to the family, and to the practice of religion is full of hope. It is, by no means, futile, that is, it is not ultimately destined to failure. The fundamental presupposition is the victory of life, which Our Lord Jesus Christ, has already won.

Christ animates the Church in time with the grace of His victory over sin and death, accomplished on Calvary, until the victory reaches its consummation, at His Final Coming, in the Heavenly Jerusalem, when He inaugurates “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.”^[15] The Christian voice, the voice of Christ, which reaches us through the Apostolic ministry, remains always strong in the world. The voice of men and women of good will, who recognize and obey the law of God written upon their hearts, remains strong. For this reason we, as sure moral guides, must cooperate more efficaciously with the grace of Christ for the transformation of the world, and help the faithful and all men, for whose salvation we have been consecrated, to bear faithful testimony to the immutable truths of the moral law.

 Living in a totally secularized culture, we must open our eyes to see that many recognize the human bankruptcy of our culture and are looking with hope to the Church for the inspiration and strength to claim anew the God-fearing and Christian foundations of every truly human society.

The second fundamental presupposition of our struggle to advance the culture of life, of the family, and of religion is the essential relationship of the respect for human life and the respect for the integrity of marriage and the family. The attack on the innocent and defenseless life of the unborn has its origin in an erroneous view of human sexuality, which attempts to eliminate, by mechanical or chemical means, the essentially procreative nature of the conjugal act. The error maintains that the artificially altered conjugal act retains its integrity. The claim is that the act remains unitive or loving, even though the procreative nature of the act has been radically violated. In fact, it is not unitive, for one or both of the partners withholds an essential part of the gift of self, which is the essence of the conjugal union. The so-called “contraceptive mentality” is essentially anti-life. Many forms of so-called contraception are, in fact, abortifacient, that is, they destroy, at its beginning, a life which has already been conceived.

The manipulation of the conjugal act, as Pope Saint Paul VI prophetically observed, has led to many forms of violence against marriage and family life.^[16] Through the spread of the contraceptive mentality, especially among the young, human sexuality is no longer seen as the gift of God, which draws a man and a woman together, in a bond of lifelong and faithful love crowned by the gift of new human life, but, rather, as a tool for personal gratification. Once sexual union is no longer seen to be, by its very nature, procreative, human sexuality is abused in ways that are profoundly harmful and indeed destructive of individuals and of society itself. One has only to think of the devastation which is daily wrought in our world by the multi-million dollar industry of pornography.

It is instructive to note that Pope Benedict XVI, in his Encyclical Letter on the Church’s social doctrine, Caritas in Veritate, makes special reference to Pope Saint Paul VI’s Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, underscoring its importance “for delineating the fully human meaning of the development that the Church proposes.”^[17] Pope Benedict XVI makes clear that the teaching in Humanae Vitae was not a matter of “purely individual morality,” declaring: “Humanae vitaeindicates the strong links between life ethics and social ethics, ushering in a new area of magisterial teaching that has gradually been articulated in a series of documents, most recently John Paul II’s Encyclical Evangelium vitae.”^[18] Pope Benedict XVI reminds us of the essential part which a right understanding of our sexuality has in true human development.

In treating the whole question of procreation, he underscores the critical nature of the right understanding of human sexuality, marriage and the family.  He declares:

The Church, in her concern for man’s authentic development, urges him to have full respect for human values in the exercise of his sexuality. It cannot be reduced merely to pleasure or entertainment, nor can sex education be reduced to technical instruction aimed solely at protecting the interested parties from possible disease or the “risk” of procreation. This would be to impoverish and disregard the deeper meaning of sexuality, a meaning which needs to be acknowledged and responsibly appropriated not only by individuals but also by the community.^[19]

The respect for the integrity of the conjugal act is essential to the advancement of the culture of life. In the words of Pope Benedict XVI, it is necessary “once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the deepest needs and dignity of the person.”^[20]

The relationship of the Magisterium to our eternal salvation lies at the very foundation of our life in Christ. In a world which prizes, above all else, individualism and self-determination, the Christian is easily tempted to view the Magisterium in relationship to his individualism and self-pursuit. In other words, he is tempted to relativize the authority of the Magisterium. The phenomenon today is popularly known as “cafeteria Catholicism.”

Pope Benedict XVI, in his 2010 Christmas Address to the College of Cardinals, the Roman Curia and the Governorate of Vatican City State, spoke clearly and strongly about the profoundly disordered moral state in which our world finds itself, today. He spoke about the grave evils of our time, for example, the sexual abuse of minors by the clergy, the marketing of child pornography, sexual tourism, and the deadly abuse of drugs.

Regarding the grave evils which beset the world, in our day, Pope Benedict XVI declared that they are all signs of “the tyranny of mammon which perverts mankind”^[21] and that they result from “a fatal misunderstanding of freedom which actually undermines man’s freedom and ultimately destroys it.”^[22] They are manifestations, to be sure, of a way of living, to use the words of Pope Saint John Paul II, “as if God did not exist.”^[23]

Reflecting on the grave evils which are destroying us as individuals and as a society, and which have generated a culture marked predominantly by violence and death, the Holy Father reminded us that, if we, with the help of God’s grace, are to overcome the grave evils of our time, “we must turn our attention to their ideological foundations.”^[24] He then identified directly and unequivocally the ideology which fosters these evils: a perversion of ethos, of the moral norm, which has even entered into the thinking of some theologians in the Church.

Referring to one of the more shocking manifestations of the ideology, namely, the so-called moral position that the sexual abuse of children by adults is actually good for the children and for the adults, he declared:

It was maintained – even within the realm of Catholic theology – that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a “better than” and a “worse than”. Nothing is good or bad in itself. Everything depends on the circumstances and on the end in view. Anything can be good or also bad, depending upon purposes and circumstances. Morality is replaced by a calculus of consequences, and in the process it ceases to exist.^[25]

Pope Benedict XVI describes a moral relativism, called proportionalism or consequentialism in contemporary moral theology, which has generated profound confusion and outright error regarding the most fundamental truths of the moral law.^[26] It has led to a situation in which morality itself indeed “ceases to exist.” If, therefore, the irreplaceable moral order, which is the way of our freedom and happiness, is to be restored, we must address with clarity and steadfastness the error of moral relativism, proportionalism and consequentialism, which permeates our culture and has also entered, as the Holy Father reminds us, into the Church. Our priestly mission as sound moral guides demands that we alert the faithful in our care and help them in following the way of goodness of life.

To confront the ideology, Pope Benedict XVI urged us to study anew the teaching of his predecessor, Pope Saint John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, “Regarding Certain Fundamental Questions of the Church’s Moral Teaching.” In Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II, in the words of Pope Benedict XVI, “indicated with prophetic force, in the great rational tradition of Christian ethos, the essential and permanent foundations of moral action.”^[27] Reminding us of the need to form our consciences, in accord with the moral teaching of the Church, our Holy Father also reminded us of “our responsibility to make these criteria [these moral foundations] audible and intelligible once more for people today as paths of true humanity, in the context of our paramount concern for mankind.”^[28]

Later, in the same Christmas Address, His Holiness recalled his “encounter with the world of culture in Westminster Hall,” during his pastoral visit to the United Kingdom in September of 2010, during which he reflected “on the proper place of religious belief within the political process.”^[29] Taking inspiration from the example of Saint Thomas More, he addressed directly “the ethical foundations of civil discourse.”^[30] As a service to culture, in general, he set forth the Catholic understanding of the matter with these words:

The centr1al question at issue, then, is this: where is the ethical foundation for political choices to be found? The Catholic tradition maintains that the objective norms governing right action are accessible to reason, prescinding from the content of revelation. According to this understanding, the role of religion in political debate is not so much to supply these norms, as if they could not be known by non-believers – still less to propose concrete political solutions, which would lie altogether outside the competence of religion – but rather to help purify and shed light upon the application of reason to the discovery of objective moral principles.^[31]

Pope Benedict XVI noted that the role of religion in public discourse “is not always welcomed,” for various reasons which can also include “distorted forms of religion, such as sectarianism and fundamentalism.”^[32]

He observed, however, that such distortions do not justify the exclusion of religion from public discourse, for “reason too can fall prey to distortions, as when it is manipulated by ideology, or applied in a partial way that fails to take full account of the dignity of the human person.”^[33] What remains necessary and true is the right relationship of faith and reason. The Holy Father concludes: “This is why I would suggest that the world of reason and the world of faith – the world of secular rationality and the world of religious belief – need one another and should not be afraid to enter into a profound and ongoing dialogue, for the good of our civilization.”^[34]

Religion, he continued, “is not a problem for legislators to solve, but a vital contributor to the national conversation.”^[35]In the light of the irreplaceable role of religion in public life, the Holy Father expressed his “concern at the increasing marginalization of religion, particularly of Christianity, that is taking place in some quarters, even in nations which place a great emphasis on tolerance.”^[36]

He then gives a telling description of some of the more troubling manifestations of the effort to alienate religion from the public forum. His words which I now quote shed light on the absurdity and indeed moral perversity of a public order which fails to respect the proper role of religion:

There are those who would advocate that the voice of religion be silenced, or at least relegated to the purely private sphere. There are those who argue that the public celebration of festivals such as Christmas should be discouraged, in the questionable belief that it might somehow offend those of other religions or none. And there are those who argue – paradoxically with the intention of eliminating discrimination – that Christians in public roles should be required at times to act against their conscience. These are worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square.^[37]

Pope Benedict concluded with an invitation to safeguard and foster the right relationship of faith and reason, which is essential to the pursuit of the common good, of the good of society.

In the 2010 Christmas Address, he concluded his reference to his speech in Westminster Hall with these urgent words:

This fundamental [moral] consensus derived from the Christian heritage is at risk wherever its place, the place of moral reasoning, is taken by the purely instrumental rationality of which I spoke earlier. In reality, this makes reason blind to what is essential. To resist this eclipse of reason and to preserve its capacity for seeing the essential, for seeing God and man, for seeing what is good and what is true, is the common interest that must unite all people of good will. The very future of the world is at stake.^[38]

There can be no question of the urgency with which Pope Benedict XVI called the faithful and all persons of good will to reverse the decline of western Christian culture by engaging public discourse with the fundamental truths of the moral law, as taught to us by reason and our Catholic faith. As priests, we have an irreplaceable service to offer to the faithful in our care and to all persons of good will: to announce and to illustrate the fundamental truths of the moral law.

In his Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI addressed the same concern precisely in terms of human development, indicating the harm done to society, in general, when religion is excluded from public discourse. He described the deleterious societal effect of two extremes, the exclusion of religion and religious fundamentalism, in these words:

The exclusion of religion from the public square – and, at the other extreme, religious fundamentalism – hinders an encounter between persons and their collaboration for the progress of humanity. Public life is sapped of its motivation and politics takes on a domineering and aggressive character. Human rights risk being ignored either because they are robbed of their transcendent foundation or because personal freedom is not acknowledged. Secularism and fundamentalism exclude the possibility of fruitful dialogue and effective cooperation between reason and religious faith. Reason always stands in need of being purified by faith: this also holds true for political reason, which must not consider itself omnipotent. For its part, religion always needs to be purified by reason in order to show its authentically human face. Any breach in this dialogue comes only at an enormous price to human development.^[39]

To the degree that we restore respect for the essential relationship between faith and reason, to that degree we are filled with hope for the future of a culture which, otherwise, can only be in decline.

Making pilgrimage to the ancient shrine of Saint James the Greater at Compostela in Spain, in November of 2010, Pope Benedict XVI urged Europeans to recognize the great gift of God’s love in the world, in Jesus Christ, and to follow Him in holiness of life. His words to the faithful of Europe, who have grown so forgetful of God and even hostile to His Law, apply also to other dechristianized nations. His words are further illuminated by the context of his pilgrimage, for the very purpose of a pilgrimage is to open our eyes to the great mystery of God’s love in our lives, that is, to open our eyes to see the extraordinary nature of ordinary living. Let us listen to the words of Pope Benedict XVI:

God is the origin of our being and the foundation and apex of our freedom, not its opponent. How can mortal man build a firm foundation and how can the sinner be reconciled with himself? How can it be that there is public silence with regard to the first and essential reality of human life? How can what is most decisive in life be confined to the purely private sphere or banished to the shadows? We cannot live in darkness, without seeing the light of the sun. How is it then that God, who is the light of every mind, the power of every will and the magnet of every heart, be denied the right to propose the light that dissipates all darkness? This is why we need to hear God once again under the skies of Europe; may this holy word not be spoken in vain, and may it not be put at the service of purposes other than its own. It needs to be spoken in a holy way. And we must hear it in this way in ordinary life, in the silence of work, in brotherly love and in the difficulties that the years bring on.^[40]

The words of our Holy Father make clear the inherent dynamism of the life of the Holy Spirit within us, leading us to give witness to the mystery of God’s love in our lives and so to convert our own lives more fully to Christ and to transform our world. The Holy Spirit never ceases to inspire us as priests to guide the souls in our care to the daily conversion of their lives to Christ.

The service of the Bishop and of his principal collaborators, the priests, as true teachers of the faith and sure moral guides is critical and indeed irreplaceable in the lives of individuals and in the life of society. The entire content of our faith, what Saint Paul calls the deposit of faith, is found in Sacred Scripture and Tradition.^[41] The faith, in its integrity, has been entrusted to the Church by Christ through the ministry of the Apostles. The deposit of faith is the teaching of the Apostles and the living of that teaching in the life of prayer and the sacramental life, and the witness of the teaching in the moral life. The foundation is the sound doctrine which finds its highest expression in the Sacraments, above all the Holy Eucharist, and which is witnessed in the holiness of life of the believer.^[42]

 Let us, obedient to the Magisterium, engage with new enthusiasm and new energy in the struggle to advance the culture of truth and love in our nations. The struggle is fierce, and the contrary forces are many and clever. But the victory has already been won, and the Victor never fails to accompany us in the struggle, for he is faithful to His promise to us: “[A]nd behold, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”^[43]

Raymond Leo Cardinal BURKE

[1] Cf. Rom 12, 5; 1 Cor 10, 16; 12, 12. 27; Eph 4, 12; and Col 1, 24.

[2] Cf. Jn 15, 1-5.

[3] “Principium interius, virtus scilicet qua presbyteri vita spiritualis animetur et quasi manuducatur, quatenus is configuratur Christo Capiti et Pastori, ponendum est in caritate pastorali, id est in particpatione ipsius caritatis pastoralis Christi Iesu; quae et gratuitum Spiritus Sancti donum erit, et simul munus et liberum responsale presbyteri responsum.” Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Adhortatio Apostolica Postsynodalis Pastores Dabo Vobis, “De sacerdotum formatione in aetatis nostrae rerum condicione,” 25 Martii 1992, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 84 (1992) 691-692, n. 23. [PDV]. English translation: Pope John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis, “On the Formation of Priests in the Circumstances of the Present Day,” 25 March 1992 (Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1992), pp. 57-58, n. 23. [PDVEng].

[4] “…l’amour du Cœur de Jésus.” A. Monnin, Esprit du Curé d’Ars, Saint J.-B.-M. Vianney dans ses Catéchismes, ses Homélies et sa Conversation (Paris: Pierre Téqui, 2007), p. 90. English translation by author.

[5] «Pastor communitatis, sacerdos pro ea exsistit et vivit, precatur, studet, laborat et se vovet; pro ea paratus est ad vitam fundendam, illam amans cum Christo, totum amorem suum suamque aestimationem conferens in eam, enixe nec circumscripto tempore operam dans ut eam reddat, ad imaginem Ecclesiae Sponsae Christi, pulchriorem usque et oblectamento Patris et amore Spiritus Sancti dignam.

Haec ratio sponsalis vitae presbyteri, qua pastoris, efficiet ut is communitatem regat, alacriter omnibus serviens et unicuique membro eius, eorum conscientias illustrans lumine veritatis revelatae, cum auctoritate custodiens evangelicam vitae christianae authenticitatem, errores corrigens, ignoscens, vulnera sanans, moerores consolans, fraternitatem provehens». Congregatio pro Clericis, Directorium pro Presbyterorum Ministerio et Vita (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994), pp. 62-63, n. 61 [DPMV]. English translation: Congregation for the Clergy, Directory on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1994), pp. 66-67, no. 61. [DPMVEng].

[6] “Ut Populi sui bonus sit rector, Presbyter ad signa quoque temporum cognoscenda erit attentus: cum ampliora et altiora, ad Ecclesiam universalem et ad eius iter in hominum historia pertinentia, tum viciniora certae definitaeque singularum communitatum condicioni.” DPMV, p. 55, n. 56. English translation: DPMVEng, p. 59, no. 56.

[7] “… constantem postulat et rectam informationem in studio quaestionum theologicarum et pastoralium, exercitium sapientis meditationis de argumentis socialibus, culturalibus et scientificis, quae aetatem nostrum notant.” DPMV, p. 55, n. 56. English translation: DPMV, p. 59, no. 56.

[8] Cf. Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Litterae Encyclicae Evangelium vitae, 25 martii 1995, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 87 (1995) 401-522.

[9] Cf. Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Adhortatio Apostolica Post-Synodalis Christifideles Laici, “De Vocatione et missione Laicorum in Ecclesia et in mundo,” 30 Decembris 1988, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 81 (1989) 454-457, n. 34.

[10] Cf. can. 1369.

[11] “Indole autem sua naturali, ipsum institutum matrimonii amorque coniugalis ad procreationem et educationem prolis ordinantur iisque veluti suo fastigio coronantur.” Sacrosanctum Concilium Oecumenicum Vaticanum II, Constitutio Pastoralis Gaudium et Spes, “De Ecclesia in Mundo Huius Temporis,” 7 Decembris 1965, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 58 (1966) 1068, n. 48. English translation: Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, “On the Church in the Modern World,” 7 December 1965, in The Documents of Vatican II, Vatican Translation (Strathfield, NSW (Australia): St Pauls Publications, 2009), p. 160, no. 48.

[12] Mt 7, 12.

[13] Jn 10, 10.

[14] Jn 4, 24.

[15] 2 Pt 3,13; Cf. Rev 21, 1.

[16] Cf. Paulus PP. VI, Litterae Encyclicae Humanae Vitae, “De propagatione humanae prolis recte ordinanda,” 25 Iulii 1968, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 60 (1968) 492-494, n. 17.

[17] “… ut progressionis prorsus humana significatio describatur, quam Ecclesia proponit.” Benedictus PP. XVI, Litterae Encyclicae Caritas in Veritate, “De humana integra progressione in caritate veritateque,” 29 June 2009, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 101 (2009) 651, n. 15. [CV]. English translation: Pope Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, “On Integral Human Development in Charity and Truth,” 29 June 2009 (Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2009), p. 20, no. 15. [CVEng].

[18] “… de re morali solummodo singulorum…. Litterae encyclicae «Humanae vitae» solida vincula designant, quae inter vitae ethicam et ethicam socialem intercedunt, magistrale quoddam insinuantes argumentum, quod gradatim variis in documentis auctum est, novissime in Ioannis Paul II Litteris encyclicis Evangelium vitae.” CV 651, n. 15. English translation: CVEng, p. 21, no. 15.

[19] “Ecclesia, cui cordi est verus hominis progressus, monet eum ad plenam valorum observantiam, in sexualitate quoque exercenda: quae ad meram rem hedonisticam ludicramque redigi non potest, sicut educatio sexualis in technicam institutionem coartari non potest, si tantum cura habeatur eos quorum interest arcendi a quodam contagio vel a generandi «periculo». Hoc modo pauperior fieret et altus sexualitatis sensus extenuaretur, qui econtra agnosci et accipi debet cum responsalitate tam singularum personarum quam communitatis.” CV 680, n. 44. English translation: CVEng, pp. 73-74, no. 44.

[20] “novis generationibus adhuc proponendi pulchritudinem familiae et matrimonii, congruentiam huiusmodi institutionum cum altioribus postulatis cordis dignitatisque personae.” CV, 681, n. 44. English translation: CVEng, p. 75, no. 44.

[21] “… espressione della dittatura di mammona che perverte uomo.” Benedictus PP. XVI, “Allocutiones: Omina Nativitatis novique Anni Curiae Romanae significantur.” 20 Decembris 2010,” Acta Apostolicae Sedis 103 (2011) 36. [Omina]. English translation: Pope Benedict XVI, “Benedict XVI’s Christmas greeting to the College of Cardinals, the Roman Curia and the Governorate: Resolved in faith and in doing good,” L’Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English, 22-29 December 2010, p. 13. [OminaEng].

[22] “… un fatale fraintendimento della libertà, in cui proprio la libertà dell’uomo viene minata et alla fine annullata del tutto.” Omina, p. 36. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[23] “… « etsi Deus non daretur ».” Ioannes Paulus PP. II, “Adhortatio Apostolica Post-Synodalis de vocatione et missione Laicorum in Ecclesia et in mundo, Christifideles laici,” 30 Decembris 1988, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 81 (1989) 454, n. 34. English translation: Pope John Paul II, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici on the Vocation and the Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church and in the World, 30 December 1988 (Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1988), p. 95, no. 34.

[24] “… dobbiamo gettare uno sguardo sui loro fondamenti ideologici.” Omina 36. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[25] “Si asseriva – persino nell’ambito della teologia cattolica – che non esisterebbero né il male in sé, né il bene in sé. Esisterebbe soltanto un « meglio di » e « un peggio di ». Niente sarebbe in se stesso bene o male. Tutto dipenderebbe dalle circostanze e dal fine inteso. A seconda degli scopi e delle circostanze, tutto potrebbe essere bene o anche male. La morale viene sostituita da un calcolo delle conseguenze e con ciò cessa di esistere.” Omina 36-37. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[26] Cf. Ioannes Paulus PP. II, “Litterae Encyclicae de quibusdam quaestionibus fundamentalibus doctrinae moralis Ecclesiae, Veritatis splendor,” 6 Augusti 1993, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 85 (1993) 1193-1194, n. 75.

2⁶ “… indicò con forza profetica nella grande tradizione razionale dell’ethos Cristiano le basi essenziali e permanenti dell’agire morale.” Omina 37. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[28] “… nostra responsabilità rendere nuovamente udibili e comprensibili tra gli uomini questi criteri come vie della vera umanità, nel contesto della preoccupazione per l’uomo, nella quale siamo immersi.” Omina 37. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[29] Benedictus PP. XVI, “Allocutiones: V, Iter Apostolicum Summi Pontificis in Regnum Unitum: Londinii in Aula Vestmonasteriensi colloquium Benedicti XVI cum primoribus Societatis Civilis; cum doctis vivis culturae, scientiis et oprum conduction deditis; cum Corpore Legatorum et Religiosis Auctoritatibus,”17 Septembris 2010, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 102 (2010) 635. [Westminster].

[30] Westminster 636.

[31] Westminster 636-637.

[32] Westminster 637.

³³ Westminster 637.

[34] Westminster 637.

[35] Westminster 637.

[36] Westminster 637.

[37] Westminster 637.

[38] “Questo consenso [morale] di fondo proveniente dal patrimonio cristiano è in pericolo là dove al suo posto, al posto della ragione morale, subentra la mera razionalità finalistica di cui ho parlato poco fa. Questo è in realtà un accecamento della ragione per ciò che è essenziale. Combattere contro questo accecamento della ragione e conservarle la capacità di vedere l’essenziale, di vedere Dio e l’uomo, ciò che è buono e ciò che è vero, è l’interesse comune che deve unire tutti gli uomini di buona volontà. È in gioco il futuro dell mondo.” Omina 39. English translation: OminaEng, p. 13.

[39] “Tum exclusio religionis ex ambitu publico, tum quoque fundamentalismus religiosus, consortionem inter personas impediunt earumque consociatam operam ad humanitatem provehendam. Vita publica rationum cumulo extenuatur et res politica pugnacem vultum adhibet. Iura humana in periculo versantur ne observentur, quia suo transcendenti fundamento orbantur vel humana non agnoscitur libertas. In laicismo et fundamentalismo facultas amittitur frugiferi colloquii atque efficacis cooperationis inter rationem et religiosam fidem. Ratio semper fide est purificanda, quod etiam de politica ratione est dicendum, quae non debet putare se omnipotentem esse. Religio quoque semper ratione est purificanda ut suum authenticum humanum vultum demonsstret. Huius dialogi abruptio per quam onerosum erga humanitatis progressionem secum fert pretium.” CV 692, n. 56. English translation: CVEng, pp. 94-95, no. 56.

[40] “Dios es el origen de nuestro ser y cimiento y cúspide de nuestra libertad: no su oponente. ¿Cómo el hombre mortal se va a fundar a sí mismo y cómo el hombre pecador se va a reconciliar a sí mismo? ¿Cómo es posible que se haya hecho silencio público sobre la realidad primera y esencial de la vida humana? ¿Cómo lo más determinante de ella puede ser recluido en la mera intimidad o remitido a la penumbra? Los hombres no podemos vivir a oscuras, sin ver la luz del sol. Y, entonces, ¿cómo es posible que se la niegue a Dios, sol de las inteligencias, fuerza de las voluntades e imán de nuestros corazones, el derecho de proponer esa luz que disipa toda tiniebla? Por eso, es necesario que Dios vuelva a resonar gozosamente bajo los cielos de Europa: que esa palabra santa no se pronuncie jamás en vano: que no se pervierta haciéndola servir a fines que lo son impropios. Es menester que se profiera santamente. Es necesario que la percibamos así en la vida de cada día, en el silencio del trabajo, en el amor fraterno y en las dificultades que los años traen consigo.” Benedictus PP. XVI, “Homiliae: II, Iter Apostolicum Summi Pontificis in urbem Compostellam – In eucharistica celebratione sacro Compostellano anno recurrente,” Acta Apostolicae Sedis 102 (2010) 881-882. English translation: Pope Benedict XVI, “Compostelian Jubilee Year Mass at Santiago de Compostela: God resounds anew under the skies of Europe,” L’Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English, 10 November 2010, pp. 5 and 8.

[41] Cf. 1 Tm 6, 20; and 2 Tm 1, 12-14.

[42] Cf. CCC, no. 84.

[43] Mt 28, 20.

The post Full Text of Cardinal Raymond Burke’s Presentation to Priests of the Confraternities of Catholic Clergy appeared first on Edward Pentin.

3rd International Convocation of the Confraternities of Catholic Clergy

Beauty and the Mission of the Priest

Address of

Robert Cardinal Sarah

Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

Casa Tra Noi, Rome

15 January 2025

Introduction

Dear brothers in the priesthood of Jesus Christ:

As I said in my homily during Holy Mass earlier, it is a great privilege and a joy to be with you. You have made the effort to come to Rome on pilgrimage in this jubilee year from your different apostolates across the world. Thank you. Thank you for coming to share in the priestly fraternity that this conference affords—may it truly build you up and strengthen you. Thank you for coming to the tombs of the Apostles Peter and Paul that are the very heart of this City—may your prayers before them strengthen you in your vocation as ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God (1Co 4:1). May this particular time of grace confirm you in the faith that comes to us from the Apostles from which it is our joy to live and which it is our solemn duty to teach undiminished and intact.

I am very grateful for the invitation to speak on ‘Beauty and the Mission of the Priest’. There is very much that is ugly and evil in our world, and at times even in the Church, and it is easy even for priests to become discouraged and depressed. And yet, dear brothers, do you remember the beauty of your first offering of the Holy Mass? Do you remember the emotion, perhaps also the tears, that it occasioned? Our first Mass may have been many years ago now, but the beauty of offering the Holy Sacrifice is the same today and every day! The beauty of our vocation to our particular configuration with Jesus Christ, the beauty of our ministry and of our witness in bringing Him to others and in bringing others to Him remains undiminished—even if we are older, tired or discouraged. My brothers, I hope that the time we have together this evening can encourage you and serve in some way to renew you in your vocation—because priests are indispensable for the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Our Lord has great need of each one of us, dear Fathers!

What is beauty?

We live in an age marked by subjectivism and relativism and at such a time any response to the question: “What is beauty?” is likely to draw from many of our contemporaries the response: “That depends upon your tastes or preferences.” Such subjectivism empties beauty of any objective content: it renders every taste and wish—even those society once regarded as quite abhorrent—equally acceptable.

The English philosopher, Roger Scruton (1944-2020) energetically refutes this. “To imagine that we can…see beauty as nothing more than a subjective preference or a source of transient pleasure, is to misunderstand the depth to which reason and value penetrate our lives.” Scruton continues:

It is to fail to see that, for a free being, there is right feeling, right experience and right enjoyment just as much as right action. The judgement of beauty orders the emotions and desires of those who make it. It may express their pleasure and their taste: but it is pleasure in what they value and taste for their true ideals. (Beauty: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, 2011 pp. 163-64)

Let us take this sound philosophical reasoning and apply it to the theological sphere.

As Catholics, we hold that Jesus Christ is the definitive revelation of God in human history, and that His teaching, faithfully handed on by the Church down to us today, is objectively true. It is what Almighty God, our Creator, has revealed to us about what it is to be truly human; what we must do to attain eternal life with Him in heaven.

Hence, for the Catholic, there is most certainly right action, right doctrine and right worship—just as the definitive revelation of God in Jesus Christ clearly excludes certain experiences, enjoyments and desires. We have the privilege of living in the Truth and are not limited merely to philosophical speculation. Thus, we must say that in the light of Divine Revelation, subjectivism in faith or morals or worship is false. It is not of God. It leads souls to hell, not to heaven.

Another Eminent speaker addressed the questions of “Truth” yesterday, and another still shall study “Goodness” with you tomorrow, and so I shall confine myself to saying that true beauty is that which participates in the objectivity of the revelation of God in human history. That is to say that, theologically (and morally, pastorally, etc.) beauty is not primarily a question of aesthetics but a question of whether this or that perceptible aspect of our worship of God and our lives lived in and from that worship truly participates in that which is of Jesus Christ, who is Beauty and Truth and Goodness incarnate.

For God alone is beauty, and His Incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, is the most beautiful man who has existed even— especially! —as he hung on the ugly contradiction of the Cross. His beauty is not because of his physique, but because of His integrity, His holiness, His sacrificial dedication to His Mission. He is beautiful because He is completely given over to the accomplishment of His Father’s will.

As priests of Jesus Christ, we would all do well to consider this very carefully. We are called to become the close friends of Christ. Indeed, we are not simply called to become an alter Christus—another Christ— but indeed to become ipse Christus, that is, to become Christ himself; to enter into his self-donation to the Father. It is possible to be an alter Christus and be a functionary, and there are too many examples of truly ugly functionaries in the Church today.

But if by our every breath we strive to become ipse Christus—even if those breaths are ones drawn amidst the pain and suffering of the crosses we must carry—our ongoing cooperation with His grace which was given to us in a specific way in the Sacrament of Holy Orders will configure us more closely to the Beautiful Christ. It will make of us, frail and weak men, a work of God’s redemptive beauty for the glory of Almighty God, the salvation of our souls and the souls we are called to serve.

This is fundamental. Christ is beauty itself, and the priest’s vocation is beautiful when it truly participates in the sacrificial self-offering of Christ in the particular circumstances he is called to serve. As a man I know my limits. I know my sins. I know my incapacities. As a priest of Jesus Christ, I am called to become something I can never achieve by myself. But by His grace it is possible: the beautiful face of Jesus Christ, the definitive revelation of God in human history can shine in me and through me; but only if I cooperate with that grace today and renew my resolve to do so for as many more tomorrows as I am given on this earth.

As I said, we should all consider this reality very carefully. It has implications across every element of our priestly ministry, and I am sure that the other speakers this week will be exploring many of them. The conference organisers have asked me to speak specifically in respect of beauty in the Sacred Liturgy in the life and mission of the priest, which I shall do now very happily, for as Cardinal Ratzinger once said:

The Church stands and falls with the Liturgy. When the adoration of the divine Trinity declines, when the faith no longer appears in its fullness in the Liturgy of the Church, when man’s words, his thoughts, his intentions are suffocating him, then faith will have lost the place where it is expressed and where it dwells. For that reason, the true celebration of the Sacred Liturgy is the centre of any renewal of the Church whatever. (See: A. Reid ed., Looking Again at the Sacred Liturgy with Cardinal Ratzinger, St Michael’s Abbey Press, 2003, p. 139).

Beauty and the Sacred Liturgy

Some Principles

Those of us who have been born outside of Europe can probably remember very well our first visit to this continent, particularly our first visit to Rome. When we have grown up hearing about St Peter’s Basilica in Rome and the great cathedrals of Chartres, Munich and so on, and have only ever seen pictures of them, actually to stand in them for the very first time takes our breath away. And this is right. We are in the presence of a beauty that participates in and conveys the beauty of God Himself!

If we travel a little, we will encounter many different styles of ecclesiastical architecture. The austere, solid simplicity of the Romanesque will confront us with the Christ-God (usually portrayed in the apse). The height and detail of the gothic cathedrals will cause our souls to soar towards God. The Baroque and the Rococo will show us how mere men have exuberantly celebrated the magnificence of the Incarnation with every creative fibre of their beings. The great churches of the Christian East will immerse us in the heavenly court. The contrast with the churches and chapels in which we serve may be quite dramatic. We may even feel a little discouraged at the lack of what we have back at home. Some of the churches we may visit may even seem a little too much for our tastes.

I would like to suggest that even if we feel more comfortable in one style of architecture than another, that is not necessarily the point. The point is that the beauty that we experience in the great cathedrals of Europe or in the humble churches and chapels of our home countries is because of the building’s integrity. That is to say, the building is what it is supposed to be, and nothing else: a holy place, the house of God and the gate of heaven (cf. Gn 28:16-17), a sacred place set aside for the liturgical worship of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit—constructed out of love of God and with all the generosity and skill that is available. In this respect a small chapel in an African village can have just as much integrity as any Roman Basilica. So too can a rural chapel in America or Australia, regardless of its particular style or even perhaps its lack of participation in one of the great architectural styles.

We have probably also had the experience of celebrating the Sacred Liturgy in places that lack such integrity. Sometimes there may be a just reason: to offer Mass for a dying person for example, or even on some great occasion when the church or the Cathedral would be too small. But in such cases, we naturally do as much as we can to make the place as sacred as possible.

But sometimes churches and chapels lack this integrity. We know this instinctively: something with us recoils at the spatial arrangement or at this or that particular liturgical furnishing or item. Howsoever artistically worthy it is in itself, or expensive it was, or however renowned the artist who designed it, it is simply out of harmony or does not work in the use to which it has been put. It lacks that integrity that allows it to participate in the beauty of Christ that is made manifest in the Sacred Liturgy, and lead us to Him, and instead, draws attention to itself. It lacks that true nobility and harmony which is the fertile soil in which transcendence takes root and grows.

I have used the analogy of church architecture to delineate the principle of integrity as a fundamental component of liturgical beauty. So too, this principle of integrity can and must be applied to the liturgical rites themselves. The liturgical rites we celebrate must be exactly what they are supposed to be, and nothing else.

Let me give you a common example. Where in the rubrics of concelebration is there provision for concelebrating priests or bishops to take out their telephone and take photos? I continue to be astonished and deeply scandalised by this utter lack of integrity by men vested for the unique work of Christ, that only they themselves can perform, behaving like passing teenage tourists in the midst of the Sacred Liturgy! There is no place for this in the Sacred Liturgy. A priest or a bishop who behaves like this must examine his conscience and seek a profound renewal in the nature and meaning of the liturgy. He must ponder and examine if he really believes in Jesus’ presence in the Eucharist celebration.

There are, no doubt, many other examples, but the principle is what is important: the liturgical rites we celebrate must be exactly what they are supposed to be, and nothing else. Herein its beauty lies. So-called creativity or even inculturation that changes the Sacred Liturgy into a religious meeting, or a cultural show has nothing to do with the worship of Almighty God that we promised faithfully to celebrate at our ordinations! We are servants, not masters, of the Sacred Liturgy! Even bishops are merely its custodians and protectors, not its proprietors.

This principle does, of course, imply that we are faithful to the liturgical books as they are given to us by legitimate authority. We can talk a little bit more about that in discussing the ars celebrandi later. The reformed liturgical books do contain options, and it is possible, sometimes by means of such options, to entirely transform the liturgical ambience or feel of any given liturgical celebration.

Here I want to make an appeal for that hermeneutic of reform in continuity spoken of by Pope Benedict XVI (Address, 22 December 2005). This is a personal opinion, but it seems to me that the reformed liturgical books desperately need that continuity with the liturgical tradition that the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council sought to reform if they are to be true, beautiful and good and thereby do the best they can for the sanctification and edification of God’s Holy People. Others may disagree. But in my reading of the Council, this is what it intended: reform in continuity and not rupture with the past.

This raises two related questions and if I say too much about them, I will probably get into trouble, so I will be brief. But something must be said.

Firstly, the seemingly outdated question of the ‘reform of the postconciliar liturgical reform’ whereby the modern liturgical books are revised with a view to enriching them with elements that were lost in the reform itself. This is very much out of fashion with the authorities at present, but the motivation and reasoning behind taking such steps have lost none of their validity. It is not for me to say when the Lord, in His Providence, may allow this question seriously to be considered once again, but perhaps some our younger brother priests here today will live to see the reformed liturgical books made even more beautiful. I often think of the missal for the Ordinariates of former Anglicans and the riches it contains as an example of what could be possible.

The second question is that of the celebration of the preconciliar liturgical rites, the usus antiquior of the Roman rite. I have said before, particularly in the light of the evident fruits that these rites have brought forth in recent decades, that:

Despite intransigent clerical attitudes in opposition to the venerable Latin-Gregorian liturgy, attitudes typical of the clericalism that Pope Francis has repeatedly denounced, a new generation of young people has emerged in the heart of the Church. This generation is one of young families, who demonstrate that this liturgy has a future because it has a past, a history of holiness and beauty that cannot be erased or abolished overnight. (Twitter, 8 July 2021)

I maintain that. And whilst I understand that at present many priests find themselves in a very difficult position in respect of the usus antiquior, I encourage you never to forget or to deny the profound truth taught by Pope Benedict:

What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.  It behoves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. (Letter to Bishops, 7 July 2007)

I have said enough, perhaps too much or even too clumsily for some: at least I did not speak about the beauty and pastoral value of the legitimate practice of celebrating the modern liturgy ad orientem!!!

Keeping in mind the principle of liturgical integrity as an essential component for liturgical beauty (and liturgical truth and goodness) let us move on to examine some practical applications of this principle.

Some Applications

The 2007 Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis of Pope Benedict XVI “On the Eucharist as the Source and Summit of the Church’s Life and Mission,” which is the fruit of the reflections of the 2005 Synod of Bishops, is a very good place to start. In fact, I would like to suggest that this is a very important document for liturgical formation which is very much neglected. If you have not studied it, please do so. If it has been some time since you last looked at it, please revisit it. It will guide you in seeking to ensure that your liturgical celebrations have integrity, that they are what they are supposed to be, and nothing else.

Pope Benedict provides much wise counsel distilled in the light of the turbulent years of post-conciliar liturgical life considered by the Synod Fathers. Perhaps the best of all is his simple statement: “Everything related to the Eucharist should be marked by beauty.” (n. 41)

We could do well to use this as the foundation of an examination of conscience for our own liturgical practice: is everything about the liturgy we celebrate with our people marked by beauty according to the means available to us? Or have we become content with less than beautiful—or even clearly inappropriate—practices, objects, rites, music, etc?

If the Eucharist is truly the source and summit of the Church’s life and mission, we cannot settle for second-best, or worse. If we do this, we are building on faulty foundations and one way or another what we build up on these insecure foundations will come crashing down. Remember the words of Cardinal Ratzinger I quoted earlier: “The Church stands and falls with the Liturgy…. For that reason, the true celebration of the Sacred Liturgy is the centre of any renewal of the Church whatever.”

Our concern for beauty in the liturgy, then, is by no means esoteric or merely aesthetical. It is fundamentally pastoral. As priests our first duty is at the altar of God. From there everything else flows. If we cannot ensure that what we do at God’s altar is as it should be, as beautiful and integral as possible, we are failing in our first duty before Almighty God. We may be blessed with many other gifts that can serve the Lord and the Church well and in important ways, but our very first duty is to become a homo liturgicus whose life and mission emanates from the altar. The example of our devotion to our sacred duties will then enable us to become a pater liturgicus, forming others in the Sacred Liturgy by our very example. This is perhaps something we ourselves experienced when we were younger, with the priests who fostered our own vocations simply by being priests absorbed in the sacred mysteries it was their privilege to celebrate.

In Sacramentum Caritatis Pope Benedict most famously speaks of the ars celebrandi: “the art of proper celebration” of the liturgical rites, “the fruit of faithful adherence to the liturgical norms in all their richness.” He notes that concern for this is in no way contrary to the Second Vatican Council’s desire to promote real, actual and fruitful participation in the liturgy, but that in fact “the primary way to foster the participation of the People of God in the sacred rite is the proper celebration of the rite itself.” (n. 38).

Put in the language we have been using, a proper ars celebrandi displays integrity. The rites are celebrated as they should be celebrated, as well as it is possible given the circumstances—and of course according to the demands of the different feasts and seasons of the Church’s year. We saw this integrity in the example of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI: they were serious, serene and prayerful at the altar. They manifested a reverence and an awe for the things of God that were truly edifying.

We too must build up our people by our profound recollection in the Sacred Liturgy. If we pray the liturgical texts rather than reading them perfunctorily, people will participate in the riches they contain. If we give ourselves to the liturgical rites and truly enter into them, just as Christ offered Himself on the Cross, people will know that we are not mere functionaries getting a job done, but men of God standing before Him in awe, profoundly aware of the privilege that is ours. This is our vocation! This is whom God calls us to be! This is how we shall build up the Church on earth and lead souls to salvation!

Of course, His Eminence is in Rome and not in a busy parish back at home, you may be thinking. Yes, this is easy to say but not so easy to achieve. I grant you that is true. But, dear Fathers, it is fundamentally a question of priorities. We all have to learn that we cannot do everything that is asked of us. We must prioritise. And in so doing, the ars celebrandi, the integrity of our celebration of the Sacred Liturgy—which is the very foundation and source of life for our very priesthood—can never be relegated to second place. The Worship of Almighty God must come first, as God made clear to Moses in the commandments on Mount Sinai (cf. Exodus 20) and as our Lord taught in respect of the greatest commandment. (cf. Mk 12:29) Other pastoral activity rightly flows from our worship of God, but it must not impede it.

But the objection has some validity. Here in Rome ceremonies are well organised and it is easy enough to maintain an appropriate recollection (usually, that is—even cardinals can talk too much in sacristies and during concelebrations!).

I would like to suggest, Fathers, that you seriously invest in this recollection in your parishes and apostolates. Form your people in the need for silence in the sacristy and insist on it. Let the hushed atmosphere bespeak the importance of the mysteries about to be celebrated. And, somehow, take time to prepare and recollect yourself in silence — perhaps pray the vesting prayers — and take time to form your intention. This may require a little discipline at first, but I used the word “invest” intentionally.

Reasserting the sacredness of the liturgy by observing silence before celebrating it will not only form others well, it will give space for our busy priestly souls to breathe. It will enable us to enter into the mysteries we are about to celebrate more intimately. It will change what may sometimes seem utterly routine into an experience akin to our first Mass once again. It is well worth the investment.

Sacramentum Caritatis reminds us of the important fact that liturgical music is an integral element of the ars celebrandi. In considering this Pope Benedict reflects somewhat wryly that “as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.” (n. 42) How right he is! There is very much work to be done in singing the liturgy rather than simply singing something at the liturgy.

I am aware how difficult this responsibility of the priest can be, particularly when he is newly appointed and encounters people of good will and enthusiasm but with erroneous formation in liturgical music. When beauty and integrity are equated to personal preference and individual taste, this can lead to much stress and even deep conflict.

Fathers, I encourage you not to flee from this necessary confrontation between what is ugly and what is beautiful, but to engage in it with much charity, in fidelity to the truth and with a very great deal of patience. We do not wish to drive souls away, but we must find ways of leading them to the discovery of the beauty of the Church’s heritage of liturgical music, particularly Gregorian chant, and of the importance and value of modern liturgical compositions that “correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons.” (Sacramentum Caritatis, 42) In the English-speaking world much good work has been done in providing resources for the singing of the liturgy, and this must be encouraged.

In order to make a contribution of my own in this area I have been working on a book The Song of the Lamb: Sacred Music and the Heavenly Liturgy together with Peter Carter, the young and zealous American Executive Director and Founder of the Catholic Sacred Music Project, of which I am privileged to be a Patron. We hope that it will be published by Ignatius Press later this year, and in it I try to address many practical questions which I hope will be of help to priests and to musicians in restoring truly beautiful liturgical music to our churches.

I can only encourage you to do your best in this difficult area, to invest in well-formed lay personnel to assist you, particularly if your own musical gifts are not great, and to give them the resources they need so to do. Sacred Music is not an optional extra, but an integral element to the beauty of the Sacred Liturgy. If we do not accept the responsibility that is ours in this area, difficult as it is, who shall?

There are two other specific topics that I would like to mention. The first is our use of the option of concelebration. I say “option” deliberately because in some places concelebrating any and every Mass at which a priest is present has become almost obligatory, and one can be regarded as somehow disloyal for not doing so. Yet, if one has already offered Mass on a given day, or shall be doing so later on, one should not binate by concelebrating without the just cause or required pastoral necessity that Canon Law stipulates. (cf. Canon 905 §1).

Obviously, the Bishop is the competent authority to permit this, and concelebrating with the Bishop himself has great symbolic value, particularly on occasions such as the Chrism Mass in Holy Week, at other gatherings with the Bishop, during retreats, etc. He can permit one to binate by concelebrating on a given occasion for just cause, but in truth he cannot require it. No priest can be required to concelebrate Mass.

It seems to me that this practice has become too exaggerated, and we need to become a little more ‘chaste,’ as it were, in respect of concelebration. There are too many instances of priests behaving inappropriately whilst concelebrating Mass, as if they just happen to be there wearing some of the priestly vestments but are not focussed on offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Idle talk, taking photos, casual posture, etc. all betray an ugly lack of integrity in what is happening. Concelebration can be a very beautiful thing: but it must not be abused.

It is also worth reflecting on the fact that whilst some form of the concelebration of priests with the bishop is found in liturgical history (usually ceremonially, not sacramentally) the concelebration of priests with priests in the absence of the bishop is a complete innovation. This is not the place to discuss the theological and liturgical issues involved, but for further study I recommend the English translation of the French Carmelite Friar Father Joseph de Sainte-Marie’s book, The Holy Eucharist—The World’s Salvation published by Gracewing Press in 2015. His considerations will certainly help us to rethink many practices related to concelebration.

The second area I would like to consider is our praying of the Divine Office. Our principle that the liturgical rites we celebrate must be exactly what they are supposed to be, and nothing else applies here also. Our celebrations of the Divine Office must be beautiful moments of worship of God, of intimate adoration of Him—even if for the most part we must pray the Hours by ourselves.

Of course, this is much easier for monastics and conventual religious whose vocation is to sing the Office in choir. That is not possible very often in parishes—though I encourage you to do all you can to celebrate the Divine Office with the correct ars celebrandi with your people as often as you are able. Open this treasure to your people and form them in its riches, perhaps by way of a Lenten initiative, or on greater feasts. In some situations it may even be pastorally advisable to celebrate solemn vespers for an occasion and not the Holy Mass. We do not have to celebrate Mass absolutely every time we meet together!

So too, our celebrations of the Office at retreats and gatherings of priests ought to be rich and beautiful with ceremony and song. We can become too accustomed to its recitation alone, forgetting that it is a liturgical rite to be celebrated like any other. So too, even though the breviary permits us to pray one hour in the middle of the day, when we can we should not forget that there are three day hours: Terce, Sext and None. The Church has permitted us to pray one of them when we are busy, but the priest is a man of God, not a business manager, and when we can, during retreats, if illness or age takes us away from the many demands of the active apostolate, etc., I strongly recommend returning to the beautiful tradition of praying these three-day hours. Even when we are no longer in the front line of pastoral ministry, as it were, it is essential that our work of prayer for the Church and the world continues. And this is a most beautiful part of our vocation, to stand of God, in his presence, even when we are old or sick. Otherwise, we are belying ourselves and telling God lies when we pray the Psalm 118: 163-164: “Lord, I hate and abhor falsehood, but I have your Law. Seven times a day I praise you for your righteous ordinances”.

We could continue all evening and discuss more related issues – the necessary interiority and worthy comportment and vesture of the priest, his responsibility in giving good example to altar servers and to possible future vocations, the irreplaceable value of the beautiful gesture of kneeling in the liturgy, the necessity to avoid the temptation to celebrate weddings and funerals perfunctorily, the need for good preaching, the dangers that the use of various forms of media can pose to the integrity of the Sacred Liturgy, etc. But I hope from what I have said above, the relevant principles are clear. If you wish, we can speak a little about some of these things afterwards.

So too, I have not addressed the question of the liturgical formation of priests here—you are not seminarians! But it is a very important issue that requires careful consideration. If any of you are privileged to be called to be seminary formators, I would be happy to speak further about this.

Conclusion

In 2015, early on in his retirement, Benedict XVI wrote a forward to the Russian edition of his collected works on the liturgy. It provides us with a more than apposite conclusion to our considerations this evening:

Let nothing be preferred to the Sacred Liturgy. With these words in his Rule (43:3) St. Benedict established the absolute priority of the Sacred Liturgy over any other task of monastic life. But even in monastic life this was not immediately taken into account, because agricultural and intellectual work was also an essential task for monks. In agriculture as well as in the crafts and the work of formation, there could be some temporal matters that might appear more important than the liturgy. Against this backdrop, Benedict, with the priority given to the liturgy, unequivocally emphasizes the priority of God himself in our lives: “On hearing the signal for an hour of the divine office, the monk will immediately set aside what he has in hand, yet with gravity.” 

In the consciousness of the people of today, the things of God and thus of the liturgy do not appear at all urgent. There is an urgency about every possible thing. But the matter of God does not seem to be urgent. Now one might point out that monastic life is in any case something different from the life of people in the world, and that is certainly correct. And yet the priority of God whom we have forgotten holds true for everyone. If God is no longer important, the criteria for establishing what is important are displaced. Humans, in putting aside God, submit themselves to the constraints that make them the slave of material forces and thus at odds with their dignity.

In the years following the Second Vatican Council I became aware again of the priority of God and of the Sacred Liturgy. The misunderstanding of the liturgical reform which has spread widely in the Catholic Church has led to more and more emphasis on the aspects of education and one’s own activity and creativity. The doings of people almost obliterated the presence of God. In such a situation it became increasingly clear that the Church’s existence lives from proper celebration of the liturgy and that the Church is in danger when the primacy of God no longer appears in the liturgy nor consequently in life.

The deepest cause of the crisis that has upset the Church lies in the obscuring of the priority of God in the liturgy. All this led me to devote myself to the theme of the liturgy more than previously because I knew that the true renewal of the liturgy is a fundamental condition for the renewal of the Church…

After many efforts, even in retirement, to promote this renewal Pope Benedict went to his eternal reward just over two years ago. The task of that renewal now rests squarely upon our shoulders dear Fathers, each of us according to the mission we have been given.

I hope that, if you have not already, you will be able to pray for him at his tomb in St Peter’s Basilica whilst you are in Rome. Perhaps also we can ask his help in the beautiful work that is ours, of which he himself was a beacon.

Thank you, dear Fathers. God bless you; God bless your families and all the people you serve.

The post Full Text of Cardinal Robert Sarah’s Address to Confraternity of Catholic Clergy appeared first on Edward Pentin.