Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 400 online users. » 0 Member(s) | 397 Guest(s) Applebot, Bing, Google
|
Latest Threads |
Pope Francis says Synod’s...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:59 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 53
|
If We Want to Promote the...
Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:54 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 54
|
Fr. Ruiz: Renewal of the ...
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:44 AM
» Replies: 16
» Views: 1,338
|
Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Last ...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-25-2024, 06:38 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 46
|
The Simulacrum: The False...
Forum: Sedevacantism
Last Post: Stone
11-25-2024, 06:36 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 68
|
Interview with the Editor...
Forum: The Recusant
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 07:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 149
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 09:03 AM
» Replies: 37
» Views: 4,002
|
Last Sunday after Penteco...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 08:57 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 11,665
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Twen...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:30 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 111
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Feas...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:27 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 141
|
|
|
Solange Hertz: Bring on the Clowns - Stating the Case for a Sacred Language |
Posted by: Stone - 12-21-2022, 06:39 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
With the great out-pouring of the Spirit of Vatican II we were promised a deluge of creative reforms unto the quickening of our lazy, outdated spiritual lives. That we have been shaken out of our shoes is simple fact, and if replacing benign lethargy with disgusted consternation is an improvement, large segments of the Catholic laity have made unprecedented progress. Until these latter days, when had they ever been privileged to see the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass celebrated by a priest vested as a clown, as happened in certain avant-garde quarters soon after the Council?
Many may have been surprised, but not some with a good working knowledge of Latin, who knew what to expect. What sent the clowns tumbling through the liturgy was the Council’s Decree on the Sacred Liturgy. In Chapter III, Article 36, paragraph 3 begins, “It is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used.” No explicit mention of clowns, of course, but they are there nonetheless, solidly packed into the word vernacular, set to jump out on cue as they are wont to do from the tiny car in the well known circus act.
Ironically enough the English word for our everyday tongue is directly derived from a Latin one: vernaculus. And as you may have guessed, it means “clown.” It is a diminutive of verna, which designated a slave born in the house, a familiar, and by transference, a native. He was not actually one of the family, but he had grown up in its midst and enjoyed some special privileges not shared by slaves acquired from the outside. Presumably he could make little jokes about family members which would not have been otherwise tolerated. Thus a vernaculus, literally “a little ole slave born in the house” came to mean a jester or a buffoon, low born but funny. (It is interesting to note that the Romans never referred to their mother tongue as a vernacular, but as their sermo patrius, an august distinction more like a patricular.)
Ergo, we might say that a priest celebrating Mass in the vernacular is not incongruous if nicely got up as a clown. Let loose in the liturgy, the vernacular by its very nature clowns. With one eye always on its audience, it can’t help playing the buffoon around sacred things. Running and jumping as it does through city streets, it has picked up lots of connotations. After all, having the run of TV, brothels, x-rated movies, spicy novels, rock lyrics and tabloids as well as private homes, ball parks, legislatures and other presumably respectable places, it can bring most anything into the sanctuary with it. No worshiper acquainted with the world can ignore its parodies and innuendoes. Solemn liturgical prayer thus infected by the vernacular becomes the “incense of another composition” typified in the Old Law, whose use on the altar was strictly forbidden (Ex.30:9).
But, we have been told ad nauseam, we must have a liturgy the people can understand! Precisely. Words must mean what they are meant to men and not something else, or they are just so many lies. The most beautiful Christian hymns take on all the allure of soap opera when translated into the language of soap operas. Take, for instance, the two basic Christian words “love” and “mystery.” What overtones haven’t they acquired? What is love in popular parlance but cheap emotion, if not worse, bringing into the imagination a host of low connotations? Where is the magnificent caritas of the Fathers in all this? And mystery? Must we have detectives, occultists, aliens from outer space and mangled TV victims upstaging the Victim of the Altar?
One of the sillier ditties in the English language is the singsong, “Sticks and stones can break my bones. But words can never hurt me.”
The truth is that sticks and stones break only bones, whereas words can break hearts and spirits. They can sadden unto death. Was it Socrates who said that using the wrong word harms the soul? Words have power to destroy souls for the very reason that they also have power to mend hearts, rejoice souls and impart life. Common experience teaches what words can do in conveying love or terminating a lifelong friendship. Even if repented, a bad word can produce effects which are ineradicable. In the order of grace and the sacraments, the effects of the simplest words are beyond measuring.
+
The power of speech was conferred on man as an attribute of his creation in the divine image. God did not give Adam so awesome a faculty for his own amusement or convenience, to communicate with Eve and his descendants, for even before these came to be Adam at God’s behest had named the animals, who could make sounds, but not words whereby to “name” or understand themselves. Preceding Eve and all her progeny, speech was given through Adam initially and principally to glorify God and converse with Him, and to exercise vicarious dominion over His material works. The Holy Ghost therefore begins St. John’s sublime Gospel by telling us that long before Adam, “In the beginning was the Word,” the divine Logos.
A human word reflects the most intimate activity of the Blessed Trinity, where God the Father, through the Holy Ghost, speaks everything that is or can be in his one co-eternal Word. He produces His idea of himself so perfectly by It that It issues as a consubstantial second Person, his only-begotten Son. The power of speech, of producing words conveying thought, therefore glorifies God in a way similar to the way God glorifies himself. Furthermore, because every human word effects a mysterious union of the material and the spiritual – invisible ideas being thereby clothed and made apprehensible to the senses – it effects an allegory of the Incarnation, foreshadowed by human speech in Eden. It is because God’s Word is truth itself that we were forbidden at Sinai to bear false witness, camouflaging thought by deceptive words, and in due time the Word made Flesh warned us that eventually we must answer for uttering even idle ones.
For the perfectly pure and integrated, if there are such people, perhaps the vernacular is safe to use in liturgical worship, but surely not for the laity plunged daily in the filth of this world. When the layman comes to church to pray he of all people needs a sacred language which is a step removed from his everyday living, one he can use for the same reason that he wears his best clothes on Sunday and the priest dons special vestments, out of reverence for his Eucharistic Lord and the supernatural exercise in which he is engaged. And it must be a language which other Christians like himself can employ, without subjective adulterations, so all can worship together with one mind and heart, in spirit and in truth, speaking the truth in prayer.
+
Original sin did not deprive us of our God-given speech. For a long time after the Fall “the earth was of one tongue and of the same speech” (Gen.11:1). It was the sin of Babel which destroyed this priceless legacy of Eden, abandoning mankind to verbal confusion. I remember once confiding my difficulties in mastering Spanish to a Spanish friar having trouble with English. “But child,” he consoled me, raising eyes and arms to heaven, “languages are a ponishment from God!” Like any other affliction, they must be endured in a spirit of humble atonement.
Not until after the promised Redeemer arrived on earth was the punishment of Babel mitigated. It came with the institution of the Church, the perfect new human society which issued from the side of Christ on the Cross much as Eve had issued from the side of Adam in Eden. Because it would exist in the world as one supernatural communion of persons whose purpose transcended the world, this society had to be given a means of communication for the here and now, but which would not be limited by the here and now. This was necessary to insure the unity of its members, to safeguard its changeless doctrine and to preserve its unique relationship to its Trinitarian God. To the world at large it might speak any language it pleased!
By divine decree, therefore, three languages were specially designated for this purpose, beginning their mission by proclaiming from a sign affixed to the redeeming Cross, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of Judeans” in Hebrew, Greek and Latin. In the fourth century St. Hilary of Poitiers wrote, “It’s mainly in these three languages that the mystery of God’s will was made manifest; and Pilate’s ministry it was to write in advance that the Lord Jesus Christ is the King of the Jews.” Commenting on these lines the great Abbot of Solesmes, Dom Guéranger, favorite target of modernist liturgists, wrote: “Thus God guided the hand of the Roman governor in the choice of the languages appearing on the inscription, as well as the terms in which this was conceived; and His Holy Spirit, speaking to men in the Sacred Scriptures, would also consecrate three languages, those which the Jewish people, gathered from the four winds of heaven for the Passover, could read on the title set above the head of the Redeemer. . . . Christ having come down to redeem us, and His testament in our favor having been opened by His death, according to the mind of the Apostle, the Holy Spirit, inspirer of the Scriptures, gave the books of the New Testament in the three languages of the Cross’ title.” [1] St. Matthew’s Gospel was written in Hebrew. St. Luke’s, St. John’s, Acts and the Epistles (except perhaps Hebrews) were rendered in Greek, and St. Mark’s in Latin.
From that time forth these three languages shared the paradoxical life of the Christian: Mystically they died to the world, all the while continuing to live in it. Beginning as vernaculars, they retained all their vernacular vitality, with the ability of producing new words as needed, but as befits conveyors of timeless truths, they are vested with the immutability of eternity. As creatures of God they possess “soul,” an active principle which gives them growth and being like all true languages, yet they have been purified, stabilized and raised to special status as vehicles of divine communication. Is it too much to say that like all appurtenances of the Altar, they assume the character and efficacy of sacramentals, that they channel grace in a way denied to vernaculars?
Dom Guéranger believed that God imparted a special efficacy to sacred words entirely independent of the faithful’s understanding of them. He cites a long passage from Origen to this effect: “There are things which seem obscure, which by the mere fact that they penetrate our ears, nonetheless bring great profit to our souls. If the gentiles believed that certain rhymes, which they call incantations, certain names which are not even understood by those invoking them, whispered by practitioners of magic, can put serpents to sleep or draw them out of their deepest pits; if it be said that these words have power to dispel the fevers and ills of the human body, that sometimes they can even throw souls into a kind of ecstasy where faith in Christ does not stop its effects, how much stronger and more powerful must we believe to be the recital of words or names from Holy Writ?
“Just as evil powers among infidels, as soon as they hear these names or formulas, come running to lend a hand to the work to which they feel called in accordance with the words uttered; so much more do the heavenly Virtues and angels of God who are with us – as the Lord taught His Church even in regard to little children – rejoice in hearing from our mouths, like pious incantations, the words and names found in Holy Writ. If we do not understand the words proceeding from our mouths, these Virtues who assist us hear them, and as if invited by a seductive song, hurry to come to our aid.
“It is an incontestable truth that there are a great number of Virtues in our midst, to whom the care of our souls and bodies has been confided. As they are holy, they delight in hearing us read the Scriptures; but their solicitude for us is doubled when we utter words which draw our spirits to prayer, albeit leaving our intellect bereft of light. The holy Apostle said so, and revealed a mystery worthy of man’s admiration when he taught that sometimes it happens that the spirit within us is in prayer while our intellect remains deprived of its function. Thus, by such pious attention, we draw the company and are assured of the help of the divine Virtues, at the same time that by pronouncing these words and name, we repel the attacks of evil powers.” [2]
+
The vocabularies of dead languages do not shift and change, sliding treacherously into obsolescence or ambiguity with the shifting contemporary scene, as does worldly palaver. Not tied to any particular time or place, they never go out of style. What they said to the Fathers they still say to us without shadow of alteration. For centuries they served not only the universal Church, but all the cultures of Christendom. Artists, philosophers, doctors, jurists, astronomers, merchants and poets communicated freely in them independently of national boundaries. Teaching in the sacred tongues, universities were attended by students of all ethnic varieties, providing a vast international exchange of knowledge from every corner of the Holy Roman Empire and beyond. Most important, until the end of the twentieth century, the Divine Office and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass could be attended intelligently and familiarly by Catholics anywhere.
Because the sacred languages provide unshakeable ground to orthodoxy, every serious revolution in modern times has labored to replace them with the vernacular on principle. In the name of the common man, who presumably couldn’t understand them, they were first removed from the secular world, thereby provincializing him and trapping him in his native culture. In our post-Conciliar days, what heretics could not accomplish has been put into practice by the false spirit of Vatican II, which has in effect banished the sacred languages from the parishes. Most religious and laity are now irretrievably cut off from the primary sources of their Faith and Church history because Latin, let alone Greek and Hebrew, are no longer taught in schools or seminaries. Divorced from any firsthand contact with the past, they are chained to the present at the mercy of translations and made prey to all the bias, deficient scholarship, poor taste and outright heresies of partisans.
There have been other sad losses: to name but one, Gregorian chant. That song of angels was never destined to be joined with any vernacular, but only for union with one chaste spouse, its original Latin. So far there has arisen no modern poet able to render a translation of propers and hymns worthy of introduction into a third rate anthology, let alone one that fits the music. The adulterous combinations so far attempted have proved so painful to ear and psyche, it’s small wonder that Gregorian has all but been abandoned along with its legitimate consort. This is not a question of mere esthetics, for as the old monastic adage has it, he who sings his prayer prays twice. Singing is a celestial activity shared with the angelic hosts. The sung word takes on an added perfection consummated in the wedding of sound and meaning, whereby one enhances the other. Nor can Gregorian be merely sung. To fulfill its true function it must be prayed. Whether the singer understands the words or not is of secondary importance. St. Teresa, a Doctor of the mystical life, knew very little of the Latin she sang in choir every day.
Not only provincial and impure, the vernacular has proved the perfect tool for promoting man-centered, do-it-yourself sentimental worship. Singing hymns inspired by bar room melodies or even a poor translation of Fortunatus’ incomparable Vexilla Regis is certainly not offering God our best. We are saying in effect, “It’s more important for us to understand what we are saying than to offer an inspired masterpiece, canonized by centuries of tradition, to the divine Majesty!” As if the criterion of good liturgy were our own individual feeble grasp of its meaning rather than its suitability to the end it serves.
+
Concocting worship to suit ourselves is a typically modernist aberration, ominous preparation for the Antichrist’s liturgy to come. Manipulating the past to suit their own prejudices, modernists must disregard the fact that God from Adamic times on down has told us exactly how He wishes to be worshipped if we are to be agreeable to Him. Public prayer especially is contrived at our risk. At Sinai, along with the Ten Commandments, Moses was shown in vision every detail of the worship to be offered under the Old Covenant and warned not to depart in any way from the “pattern on the Mount” (Heb. 8:5). In Apostolic times The Epistle of Barnabas averred that all these ancient prescriptions were in fact an allegory of the perfect Sacrifice which they prefigured. St. Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians, the earliest known text in which the word liturgy is used, lays down the law to the would-be improvisers of those days:
Quote:“We are obliged to carry out in fullest detail what the Master has commanded us to do at stated times. He has ordered the sacrifices to be offered and the liturgies accomplished, and this not in a random and irregular fashion. . . . He has, moreover, himself, by His sovereign will determined where and by whom He wants them to be carried out. Thus all things are done religiously, acceptable to His good pleasure, dependent on His will. . . . Each of us, brethren, must in his own place endeavor to please God with a good conscience, reverently taking care not to deviate from the established service. . .” [3]
The language in which all this is carried out cannot therefore have been left to the whims of the periti of any age. St. Basil in his work on the Holy Ghost deems it a necessity to surround sacred things with mystery: “In his wisdom Moses knew that familiar things easily uncovered are exposed to contempt; that those which are rare and isolated from contact excite as if naturally admiration and zeal. Imitating him, the Apostles and Fathers established at the very start certain Church rites and preserved the dignity of the mysteries by secrecy and silence; for that which is conveyed to the ears of the vulgar is no longer a mystery.” [4]
Dom Guéranger concluded “boldly from this fact that there are languages which are sacred and separated from others by divine choice, in order to serve as intermediaries between heaven and earth.” And again, “In the first place we declare it entirely false that, even in the beginnings of Christianity, the liturgy was ever celebrated in the vulgar tongues of all the peoples among whom the Faith was preached. . . . We dare affirm that until the fourth century Hebrew, Greek and Latin were the only ones used at the altar, which gives them a liturgical dignity utterly unique, and marvelously confirms the principle of sacred, and not vulgar, languages in the liturgy.” [5]
He supports his contention by the authority of St. Robert Bellarmine and theologians of the highest repute of the sixteenth century, with particular emphasis on the censure of the Sorbonne in 1526, leveled against the rationalist Erasmus. In his Paraphrases of the New Testament, Erasmus had deplored the fact that the common people were condemned to muttering prayers they couldn’t understand. To which the august university’s Faculty countered a classic statement of more than passing interest:
Quote:“This proposition, which is of a nature to turn away the simple, the ignorant and women from the vocal prayer prescribed by the rites and customs of the Church, as if such prayer became useless to them the moment they didn’t understand it, is impious, erroneous, and opens the way to the error of the Bohemians, who wanted to celebrate ecclesiastical offices in the vulgar tongue. . . Indeed the intention of the Church in her prayers is not merely to instruct us by the disposition of words, but also by conforming us to her objective, to have us voice the praises of God and plead for our necessities. Seeing this intention in those reciting these prayers, God deigns to kindle their affections, illumine their minds, relieve human weakness and dispense fruits of grace and glory.
“Such also is the intention of those who recite vocal prayers without understanding the words. They are like an ambassador who might not understand a communication his sovereign gave him to relay, but who, transmitting it according to the given order, nonetheless discharges a duty agreeable both to his sovereign and to him to whom he is sent. Moreover, a great number of passages from the Prophets are sung in the Church which, although not understood by the majority of singers, are nevertheless useful and meritorious for those pronouncing them; for in singing them agreeable service is rendered to divine Truth, who taught and revealed them.
“From whence it follows that the fruit of prayer does not consist only in understanding the words, and that it is a dangerous error to think that vocal prayer has no function beyond supplying knowledge of the Faith, whereas this kind of prayer is engaged in primarily to enkindle the affections, so that the soul, by raising itself to God with piety and devotion, may be revived and not frustrated, may obtain what its intention asks for and the intellect may merit enlightenment. Now, all these effects are rich and precious beyond a simple understanding of the words, which is of little use as long as affections in God are not excited.” [6]
Devout prayer requires very few words, if any. In fact our Lord cautioned us not to use too many. The more interior and elevated the prayer, the fewer words. Contemplative prayer, which is the highest use of the human intellect, requires none. The purpose of prayer, after all, is to pray, to contact God, not primarily to understand. Meditating on the verbal contents of the Mass or its related worship are properly speaking intellectual exercises and can take place outside prayer either alone or with others. Missals and commentaries once abounded for this purpose. During Mass we should pray. Who needs to translate every word of the Gloria, for instance, pondering shades of meaning, in order to pray it with the priest? Isn’t the word Gloria sufficient, with the intention of offering this magnificent praise to God? The Novus Ordo of the Mass has surfeited us with chatter. Not even its Canon is blessed with silence in which to concentrate our deepest faculties on the incomparable action which takes place there.
Are we to believe that Holy Mother Church has prescribed the use of dead languages in order to keep her children in ignorance of her mysteries? That understanding what one prays is of no importance? By no means. The Council of Trent lays down that
Quote:“every church will retain its ancient rites approved by the Holy Roman Church, mother and mistress of all churches; but, lest Christ’s sheep suffer hunger and the little children beg for bread and there be no one to break it for them, the holy Council orders pastors and all those having charge of souls often to explain during the celebration of Mass by them or others, something of the formulas read at Mass [i.e., during the sermon]; and among others to expound some of the details regarding the mystery of this Most Holy Sacrifice, especially on Sundays and feast days.” [7]
+
Dom Guéranger admits that after the passing of Cardinal Bona in the seventeenth century, “The Church modified her customs. . . but she could not abandon the principle. . . . The same depth always remains in the mysteries, the same weakness and the same dangers in the heart of man which is ever inclined earthward.” [8] Indeed the infamous Council of Pistoia, which anticipated the French Revolution by three years, and the Second Vatican Council by a century and three quarters, came close to establishing a new vernacularized religion. Fortunately it was energetically denounced in 1794 by Pius VI in the Bull Auctorem Fidei.
Among the many propositions condemned was one which voiced “the desire to see the liturgy restored to greater simplicity,” also to see it translated into the vernacular and recited aloud. Another, likewise condemned, affirmed it to be “contrary to the practice of the Apostles and the designs of God, not to supply the people with the easiest means of joining their voice with the voice of the Church,” i.e., by introducing the vernacular. The Council of Trent had already declared anathema “anyone who says that the Mass ought to be said in the vernacular only,” adhering to the principle that, “Although the Mass contains much instruction for the faithful, it has nevertheless not seemed expedient to the Fathers that it be celebrated everywhere in the vernacular.” [9]
The qualification “celebrated everywhere” was necessary here, for there had already been one notable exception: In the ninth century Pope John VIII had granted a concession to some Slavs to celebrate the liturgy in their native Slavonic. Writing to their great evangelizers Sts. Cyril and Methodius in 879, this pope had declared, “We have also noted that you are celebrating Mass in the barbarian tongue. . . That is why we have already forbidden you to do so in our letters addressed to you through Paul, Bishop of Ancona. You must therefore celebrate in either Latin or Greek, as does the Church of God which is spread throughout the earth and in all the nations.”
A weak pope in the judgment of ecclesiastical historians like Baronius, John eventually yielded to pressure and reversed his stand, granting liturgical status to the Slavic vernacular in Moravia. Dom Guéranger laments,
Quote:“Such examples of weakness on the Chair of Peter are rare, but history records them, and the children of the Church have no interest in dissimulating them, for they know that He who has guaranteed infallibility to the Roman pontiffs in the teaching of the Faith, has not preserved them from all fault in the exercise of the supreme government.”
He allows that the concession to the Slavs may have had some good short term results in speeding their conversion, but believed it to have fed schism in the long run.
After Hildebrand ascended the Chair of Peter as the great Gregory VII, the Duke of Bohemia requested the same concession for his people. He was stoutly refused. Although St. Gregory did not revoke the former permission, in 1080 he seized the occasion to lay down some principles in a letter to the Duke:
Quote:“For those who have seriously pondered the question, it is obvious that it was not without reason that it was pleasing to Almighty God that Scripture remain hidden in certain places lest, being accessible to the sight of all, it become familiar and exposed to scorn, or furthermore, that being misunderstood by some mediocre minds, it be an occasion of error to them.
“It is no excuse to say that certain religious [i.e., Sts. Cyril and Methodius] have suffered with condescension the desires of a people full of simplicity, or did not think it expedient to remedy the situation; for the primitive Church herself covered over many things which the holy Fathers later corrected after submitting them to serious examination. That is why, by the authority of blessed Peter, we forbid putting into practice what your people imprudently ask of Us, and for the honor of Almighty God, we enjoin you to oppose this vain temerity with all your strength.”
These words have a strange ring today.
In the twentieth century Pius XII continued the battle in his encyclical Mediator Dei, where he warned against exaggerating the external elements of liturgy, given that “the chief element of divine worship must be interior.” He deplored
Quote:“the temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics. . . We instance . . . those who make use of the vernacular in the celebration of the august Eucharistic Sacrifice. . . . The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth” (Par. 59-60).
Nonetheless he conceded, “In spite of this, the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people,” and the breach was made. The Second Vatican Council reiterated the ancient tradition to the extent that, “Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.[10] It also laid down that seminarians “should acquire a command of Latin which will enable them to understand and use the source material of so many sciences, and the documents of the Church as well.”[11] But wide liberties were accorded to “the use of the mother tongue,” to be determined by “competent territorial ecclesiastical authority,” subject to papal approval. [12]
+
With that, the flood gates were opened, and today Catholics must cope with the liturgical chaos that prevails throughout their Church today. Bring on the clowns! But God will not be mocked in His desire for sacred languages in His worship. Incredible as it may seem, the Byzantine Uniates who have been using the old Slavonic vernacular for centuries are prominent among those rushing to vernacularize. Why? Because the Slavonic vernacular which Pope John VIII permitted them a thousand years ago has become a “dead” language! In prolonged intimate contact with the Christian mysteries, it died to the world long ago like the old Greek it supplanted.
To some degree the same fate seems to be overtaking the Elizabethan English used in Anglican rites since the Reformation. It too began dying to the world and today is spoken and heard by the average person only in church services. Yet all the while modern English was developing, it remained staunchly at its post as the special medium of the Anglican liturgy and survives intact. If sufficient time remains for them, it may be interesting to see what happens to the crowd of vernaculi now clowning and tumbling around the Altar of God throughout the rest of the world.
Alas, Babel casts a long shadow, almost like a second original sin, and we must continue to struggle with the consequences, not only in our relations with God, but at all levels of existence. About a decade before the Council, I was asked to escort through Manila a Japanese Trappist Abbot en route from Japan to his General Chapter in France. We visited the venerable church of St. Augustine (the only one the war had left standing within the old Spanish Intramuros), and ended up talking with the Spanish Augustinian Superior and two sightseeing Vietnamese seminarians. Everything went swimmingly – in Latin. I didn’t catch all of it, but I was terribly flattered at being included, letting my schoolgirl declensions fall where they would. God, it seems, had mitigated Babel just for us Catholics, religious and lay alike, if we cared to avail ourselves of the dispensation. “Valete,” we all said when we finished, and I drove the Abbot back to his ship, a French liner waiting at the dock.
On board ship to see him off, things were different, and the mystique of Babel closed in. Our final farewells were said in the company of a Spanish lady catechist and a Filipino gentleman. The Abbot spoke French and Japanese. The señora spoke Spanish and a little French. The Filipino spoke English, Spanish and Tagalog. I spoke French and English. Our conversation was something like musical chairs, with somebody always left out. The UN had nothing on us except simultaneous translators and headphones; we were all Catholics, meeting once in our lives and eager to communicate. After a half hour of gesticulating, however, we had finally come to the consensus that it was a beautiful day and Manila had a lovely harbor.
“Bonita!” said the Spanish lady. “Très beau!” said the Abbot. “Beautiful – très beau!,” said I. “Bonita, beautiful” said the Filipino gentleman. I doubt that I would ever have remembered these memorable words except for the striking contrast they presented with the previous scene at St. Augustine’s, where conversation flowed unhindered. When time came to say goodbye, we just waved, smiled and left. We were exhausted. The vernacular movement, which in those days was just making its appearance in the Church, lost me for good, and when a couple of years later Pope Pius XII issued his directive confirming Latin as the liturgical language, I for one was profoundly grateful.
At the risk of laboring the point, the vernacular is only for people who never mean to stray beyond their national boundaries or their dictionaries. It certainly can’t be for Catholics, whose Church has a divine mandate to “teach all nations.” The vernacular is by nature reactionary. In the past it has proved a ready made tool for heresy and chauvinism in fragmenting the Church and dismantling Christendom. Catholics who traveled extensively before the Council always returned with a strong sense of Church unity. “Everywhere I went,” they would say, “it was always the same Mass!” Now, unless they are master linguists, it has become incomprehensible outside their native countries.
Isn’t it ironic that Mother Church, the single largest international force for world peace, should be prevailed upon to discard her international languages on the very eve of the engulfing globalization now in progress? When a common means of communication has become absolutely vital to world unity? The Antichrist, who is busily at work building his new global kingdom, is not so foolish. Even now, under pressure of world economics, he is forging his own substitute for Latin, setting everyone to learning modern English, his chosen medium for international communication and the key to success for anyone who wants to get ahead.
[1] Dom Prosper Guéranger, Institutions Liturgiques 1840-1851, extracts by Jean Vaquié, Diffusion de la Pensée Française, 1977, p. 241.
[2] Op. cit., pp. 245-6.
[3] Quoted in Louis Bouyer, Liturgical Piety, Notre Dame Press, 1954, p. 33.
[4] Op. cit., p. 77.
[5] Institutions Liturgiques, p. 240.
[6] Quoted, op. cit., pp. 256-7.
[7] Conc. Trid. Sess. XXII, cap. VIII.
[8] Institutions Liturgiques, p. 240.
[9] Conc. Trid. Sess. XXII, cap. IX; Council of Trent, Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, VIII, Denzinger 946 (1749),
[10] Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, III,36, par. 2,3.
[11] Decree on Priestly Formation, V, 13.
[12] Sacred Liturgy, III,36, par. 2,3.
|
|
|
As a 'Gesture of Ecumenical Dialogue' Vatican to return to Greece Sculptures from Parthenon |
Posted by: Stone - 12-21-2022, 06:20 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis orders return to Greece of Parthenon sculptures held in Vatican
One of the three fragments of Parthenon Sculptures housed by the Vatican Museum that Pope Francis decided to return to Athens, is displayed in this undated photo provided by Vatican Museum. Credit: Vatican Museum/Handout/Reuters
CNN [adapted] | 18th December 2022
Pope Francis has decided to return to Greece three 2,500-year-old pieces of the Parthenon that have been in the papal collections of the Vatican Museums for more than a century.
The Vatican said in a brief statement on Friday that the pope was giving them to Ieronymos II, the head of the Greek Orthodox Church, as a gesture of ecumenical dialog with the Roman Catholic Church.
The Parthenon, which is on the Acropolis in Athens, was completed in the fifth century BC as a temple to the goddess Athena, and its decorative friezes contain some of the greatest examples of ancient Greek sculpture.
It was not immediately clear what plans Ieronymos had for the small sculptures.
According to the Vatican Museums website, one piece is the head of the horse that was pulling Athena's chariot on the west side of the building. The others are from the head of a boy and the head of a bearded male.
They have been in the Vatican since the 19th century.
The pieces are being returned to Greece as London and Athens continue to battle over the so-called Elgin Marbles.
Greek Culture Minister Lina Mendoni expressed her gratitude to Pope Francis "for the generous decision," saying in a statement that it supported the government's efforts for the return of the marbles from the British Museum.
Greece has repeatedly called for the permanent return of the 2,500-year-old sculptures, which British diplomat Lord Elgin removed from the Parthenon temple in the early 19th century when he was ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Greece's then-ruler.
The British Museum has always ruled out returning the marbles, which include about half of the 160-meter (525-foot) frieze that adorned the Parthenon, and insists they were legally acquired.
Earlier this month a Greek newspaper reported that a deal to return the marbles to Greece was close, but the Greek government said it was not imminent.
In March, the United Nations' cultural agency UNESCO urged Greece and Britain to reach a settlement.
|
|
|
Abp. Viganò: Trump’s endorsement of LGBTQ Republicans is a grave mistake |
Posted by: Stone - 12-21-2022, 06:02 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Abp. Viganò: Trump’s endorsement of LGBTQ Republicans is a grave mistake
The Republican Party is recklessly pursuing a minority of voters who are indulging in lifestyles that are contrary to the Commandments and to the common good.
Dec 20, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) — A large scandal has been created, as well as discouragement, upon learning the news of the gala event hosted by President Donald J. Trump for openly homosexual supporters of the Republican Party. This endorsement of LGBTQ ideology is even more serious if one considers that, only two days previously, Joe Biden signed the “Respect for Marriage Act” which recognizes the legal validity of so-called homosexual marriages in the United States, in violation of the Natural Law and also the Law of God.
The Democratic Party is totally anti-Christian and obstinately determined to implement the globalist agenda of the New World Order. On the other hand, the Republican Party is recklessly pursuing a minority of voters who are indulging in lifestyles that are contrary to the Commandments and to the common good. American Catholics find themselves today in the impossible situation of being represented by a political class that is revealing itself to be completely incapable of representing and expressing Catholic convictions in moral and religious matters. This causes voters to become disaffected, which is added to electoral fraud and scandals that are emerging about media censorship and the manipulation of electoral consensus.
Up until now, certain aspects of the political platform of the Republican Party were able to be overlooked to some extent due to the much more serious threat embodied by the Democratic Party. But it is now evident that the action of the deep state has contaminated the entire political elite without distinction, even involving Donald Trump, who up until now seemed to be a source of hope for the future of the United States.
A nation that offends the Law of God cannot hope to be blessed by the Lord, and those who support sinful lifestyles ought to think of the Judgment that awaits them rather than pleasing those who are corrupt in a calculated effort to win votes. This nonchalance in political action by Republicans is no less harmful than the open opposition to the perennial Magisterium of the Church on the part of Democrats.
I urge American Catholics to pray, asking the Lord to enlighten politicians of sound principles, urging them to fight with courageous commitment for the defense of the Natural Law and the Commandments of God.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop,
former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America
December 20, 2022
|
|
|
Ven. Louis of Granada: Remedies Against Anger and Hatred |
Posted by: Stone - 12-21-2022, 05:28 AM - Forum: The Saints
- No Replies
|
|
Anger is an inordinate desire of revenge.
Against this vice the Apostle strongly speaks: "Let all bitterness and anger, and indignation and clamor, and blasphemy be put away from you, with all malice. And be ye kind one to another, merciful, forgiving one another, even as God hath forgiven you in Christ" (Eph. 4:31-32). And Our Savior Himself tells us: "Whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment. And whosoever shall say, thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matt. 5:22).
When this furious enemy assails you, let the following considerations help you overcome its movements: Consider, first, that even beasts live at peace with their kind. Elephants do not war upon one another; sheep live peaceably in one fold, and cattle go together in herds. We see the cranes taking by turns the place of guard at night. Storks, stags, dolphins, and other creatures do the same. Who does not know of the friendship between the ants and the bees? Even the wildest animals live united among themselves. One lion is rarely known to attack another, neither will a tiger devour one of his kind. Yes, even the infernal spirits, the first authors of all discord, are united in a common purpose—the perversion of mankind.
Man alone, for whom peace is most fitting, lives at enmity with his fellow men and indulges in implacable hatred. All animals are born with weapons for combat. The bull has horns; the boar has tusks; the bird has a beak and claws; the bee has a sting; and even the tiny fly or other insect has the power to bite. But man, destined to live at peace with his fellow creatures, comes into the world naked and unarmed. Reflect, then, how contrary to your rightful nature it is to seek to be revenged upon one of your kind, to return evil for evil, particularly by making use of weapons which nature has denied you.
In the second place, a thirst for vengeance is a vice which befits only savage beasts. You belie your origin, you disgrace your decent, when you indulge in ungovernable rage, worthy only of a wild animal. Aelian tells of a lion that had been wounded by an African in a mountain defile. A year after, when this man passed the same way in the suite of King Juba, the lion, recognizing him, rushed among the royal guards, and, before he could be restrained, fell upon his enemy and tore him to pieces. Such is the model of the angry, vindictive man. Instead of calming his fierce rage by the power of reason, that noble gift which he shares with the angels, he abandons himself to the blind impulse of passions which he possesses in common with the brutes.
If it be hard to subdue your anger, excited by an injury from one of your fellow creatures, consider how much more God has borne from you and how much He has endured for you. Were you not His enemy when He shed the last drop of His blood for you? And behold with what sweetness and patience He bears with your daily offenses against Him, and with what mercy and tenderness He receives you when you return to Him.
If anger urges that your enemy does not deserve forgiveness, ask yourself how far you have merited God's pardon. Will you have God exercise only mercy toward you, when you pursue your neighbor with implacable hatred? And if it be true that your enemy does not deserve pardon from you, it will be equally true that you do not deserve pardon from God. Remember that the pardon which man has not merited for himself, Christ has superabundantly merited for him. For love of Him, therefore, forgive all who have offended you.
Be assured, moreover, that as long as hatred predominates in your heart you may make no offering which will be acceptable to God, who has said: "If thou offer thy gift at the altar, and there thou remember that thy brother hath anything against thee, leave there thy offering before the altar, and go first to be reconciled to thy brother, and then coming thou shalt offer thy gift" (Matt. 5:23-24). Hence you can realize how grievous is the sin of enmity among men, since it causes an enmity between God and us, and destroys the merit of all our good works. "We gain no merit from good works," says St. Gregory, "if we have not learned to endure injuries with patience."
Consider also that the fellow creature whom you hate is either a just man or a sinner. If a just man, it is certainly a great misfortune to be the declared enemy of a friend of God. If a sinner, it is no less deplorable that you should undertake to punish the malice of another by plunging your own soul into sin. And if your neighbor in his turn seeks vengeance for the injury you inflict upon him, where will your enmities end? Will there be any peace on the earth?
The Apostle teaches us a more noble revenge when he tells us "not to be overcome by evil, but to overcome evil by good" (Rom. 12:21). That is, to triumph by our virtues over the vices of our brethren. In endeavoring to be revenged upon a fellow creature you are often disappointed and vanquished by anger itself. But if you overcome your passion, you gain a more glorious victory than he who conquers a city. Our noblest triumph is won by subduing ourselves, by subjecting our passions to the empire of reason.
Besides these, reflect on the fatal blindness into which this passion leads man. Under the cover of justice or right, how often does it drive him to excess which cause him a lifelong remorse!
The most efficacious, the sovereign remedy against this vice is to pluck from your heart inordinate love of self and of everything that pertains to you. Otherwise the slightest word or action directed against you or your interests will move you to anger. The more you are inclined to this vice the more persevering you should be in the practice of patience. Accustom yourself, as far as you can, calmly to face the contradictions and disappointments you are likely to encounter, and their effect upon you will thus be greatly diminished.
Make a firm resolution never to speak or act under the influence of anger, nor to heed any suggestions, however plausible, which your heart may urge at such moments. Never act until your anger has subsided, or until you have once or twice repeated the Our Father or some other prayer. Plutarch tells of a wise man who, on taking leave of a monarch, advised him never to speak or act in anger, but to wait until he had repeated to himself the letters of the alphabet. Learn a lesson from this, and avoid the evil consequences of acting from the impulse of anger.
Ven. Louis of Granada. "Remedies Against Anger and Hatred," from The Sinner's Guide. TAN Books (1985).
Venerable Louis of Grenada is a celebrated theologian and writer. He joined the Dominican order at the age of 19 and immediately displayed a profound spiritual character. Venerable Louis Grenada became well-know for all of his ascetic writings including The Sinner's Guide, which many have rivaled with Kempis' Imitation of Christ.
|
|
|
First-ever Translation of a Programmatic 1949 Article by Bugnini |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 09:57 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- Replies (4)
|
|
“For a General Liturgical Reform”: First-ever Translation of a Programmatic 1949 Article by Annibale Bugnini
(Part 1)
NLM | November 16, 2022
NLM is very grateful to Carlo Schena for translating a text of crucial importance in understanding the history of the twentieth-century liturgical reforms, one that has apparently never been translated into English before. It is Annibale Bugnini’s programmatic article “Per una riforma liturgica generale,” published in the year 1949 (!) in Ephemerides Liturgicae vol. 63, pp. 166–84. The Italian text may be found transcribed (not without typographical errors) here. Mr. Schena worked from the original article, a facsimile of which may be found here. We will be publishing it in five parts. It goes without saying that this article is nothing less than a manifesto in favor of a massive overhaul of the entire liturgical life of the Church, the steps of which were to follow in due sequence from the experimental Easter Vigil of 1951 through the Holy Week and rubrical overhauls of 1955, the new code of rubrics in 1960, the 1962 editio typica missal, the postconciliar adaptations of 1965 and 1967, the Novus Ordo Missae of 1969, and so forth, through all the other liturgical books. The principles behind all of this were given here by Bugnini in 1949. – PAK
For a General Liturgical Reform
Annibale Bugnini
For some time now, there have been frequent discussions about the possible reform of liturgical books, especially the Roman Breviary. These honest intentions are desires that appear to be favoured by the most recent studies and editions of the liturgical books. Now, in reality, rather than any particular reform (i.e., mainly of the Breviary), one must more correctly speak of a general reform [of the liturgy], at which also Pope Pius X aimed.
As far as “the defence of the ancient codices and monuments” is concerned, although there is still a long way to go, some progress has nevertheless been made, so that now it does not seem that one can charge with audacious presumption those who, in their turn, undertook the beginning of this same [general] reform.
Ephemerides Liturgicae published in 1929, with the benign approval of those to whom it pertained, R. D. Schmid’s dissertation on a rationale for reforming the Roman Breviary. The Supreme Pontiff Pius XII seemed once again to encourage liturgical scholars to make the Roman Breviary their study (cf. Ephem. lit. 60 [1946]: 2 and 61 [1947]: 99).
And so, this wish was transmitted by the moderators of Ephemerides, at the beginning of last year, to their collaborators and to friends of the liturgy, so as diligently to collect amendments, wishes, and intentions, and to put them in writing. We are now collecting these responses together, making a selection, and publishing them. [1]
* * *
Last year, the editors of our Review, making some remarks on recent events concerning the liturgy, hoped that the reform begun by Pius X would be resumed in order to continue and complete it in line with the programme given to it by the Holy Pontiff (cf. Ephem. lit. 62 [1948]: 3–4). Certain clues, such as the new [Bea] translation of the Psalter ordered by the Holy Father Pius XII happily reigning, and authorised for use in the public and private recitation of the Divine Office, as well as the repeatedly expressed encouragements, gave good hope for a resumption of the work, which would have to possess a more distinctly pastoral tendency (as one could gather from the several concessions and indults of recent times) in view of a lightening up of the liturgical apparatus and a more realistic adjustment to the concrete needs of clergy and faithful in the changed conditions of today. Such reasons led the editors of the journal to invite their collaborators and friends to express their thoughts on the matter.
The invitation was extended, in a wholly private and confidential manner, so that a fairly exact idea of the real aspirations of the clergy of various categories could be gained: university professors, seminary teachers, priests in care of souls, directors of [charitable] institutions, brothers of different orders and congregations, missionaries, etc. In particular, we invited people who, because of their ministry—such as preaching to the clergy, serving as lecturers, directing houses of [spiritual] exercises, etc.—are often in contact with many clerics. Consideration was also given to the individual nations, so that all, roughly speaking, would be represented.
The proposals ranged from the most traditionalist to the most advanced positions. Some simply stuck to the submitted questionnaire, while others elaborated veritable dissertations. Some tried to establish a reform on a set of principles, others focused on details while neglecting the whole. For evident and obvious reasons, as the invitation letter expressly noted, we cannot publish the answers in full. We would have to print a massive volume, with the disadvantage of seeing the same things repeated dozens of times in different terms. We will attempt to give as succinct a report as possible, trying not to leave out anything that has been proposed, even if more than one suggestion shows weak, defective, and unacceptable aspects. We will then draw some conclusions, modestly expressing our own personal thoughts.
We would also like to warn that we shall, for the time being, only give the results of the referendum on questions regarding the approach to a presumable general reform and a reform of the Breviary, leaving for a later date those concerning the other liturgical books.
First of all, a word on the title of this report: “general reform.” In the present state of affairs, indeed, can one think of an only partial reform—for instance, of the Breviary alone, to mention the most discussed point—without considering the other parts of the liturgy: the Missal, the Ritual, the Pontifical, the ecclesiastical year, etc.? We don’t think so.
Nor does an excellent liturgist, who writes:
Quote:A desirable reform of the Roman Breviary—or, more precisely, a revision of the liturgical celebration of feasts and mysteries by means of the Mass and the Divine Office, fully adapted to the spiritual needs of modern Christianity, to the day’s public and private conditions—could not be fruitfully achieved in the present state of uncertainty with regard to liturgical legislation as such. Since the nineteenth century at least, we have been living on a compromise, inappropriately called the “Roman Rite,” between the pontifical rite personally celebrated by the Pope in the Vatican or at the Lateran, the basilican rite of the great Roman churches, the episcopal rite of the Latin cathedrals of the West, the monastic conventual uses and the uses of chapte
rs of canons, the needs of the parish ministry in urban or rural areas, and the needs of the private devotion of isolated priests or missionaries.
Thus, in its present state, the liturgy is a mosaic, or, if you like, an old building, built up little by little, at different times, with different materials and by different hands. If now one wants to remove or change (“modernize”) one or the other part, all the rest begins to crumble or no longer fits in with the restored part.
Indeed, even Pius X had the idea of gradually attaining a general reform. It must be added that certain pastoral problems, which at the time were only just beginning to be felt, have now taken on such proportions and have become so pressing that any failure to recognise them, to take them into account or to attempt a solution, would be the same as condemning the liturgy, the Church’s living prayer, to sterility or to an ineffective archaeologism. That is why we think that a liturgical reform will either be general or end up pleasing no one, as it would leave things as they are with their deficiencies, inconsistencies, and difficulties.
1. PRINCIPLES
The purported reform, in order to be organic and unitary, and thus lasting, should start from clear and well-defined principles.
One contributor formulates them as follows:
Quote:a) thetical principle: “melior est conditio possidentis” [the better condition, the one to be favoured, is that of the possessor], i.e., of tradition, which is to be presumed good, until it is proven bad, that is to say, less useful;
b) antithetical principle: one must keep to the brevity and simplicity of the divine command: “Sic orabitis: Pater noster...” [Thus shall you pray: Our Father…];
c) synthetic principle: one must do the one and not omit the other, i.e., preserve tradition and do not fear simplification.
Others state that “the reform must be conceived as a return to the primitive tradition of the celebration of the Christian mystery rather than as a compromise between this celebration [placed] in a subordinate position and the devotional superfetations [2] that have disarticulated it over the centuries.”
Hence the following principles [are to be followed]:
1) the predominance of the Temporal cycle over the Sanctoral;
2) the typical office infra hebdomadam [is to be] the 3-lesson weekday;
3) preservation of the strictly local character of the cultus of saints;
4) avoidance of the multiplication of “idea feasts”; [3]
5) avoiding the continual repetition of “commons.”[4]
There were those who, impressed “by the body of the general rubrics, burdened by the subsequent and often contradictory commentaries of the probati auctores [approved authors], so much so as to represent a whole that is more complicated than the ancient Corpus Iuris,” felt that a general reform must necessarily be preceded by a “methodical codification.”
But one should bear in mind that, genetically speaking, the rubric follows the text and not vice versa, and that, out of the principles on which the reform is to be based, laws may be deduced that will fix for the future every movement, addition, or suppression in the already-fixed body of the liturgical prayer Ordinary. Fundamentally, it seems to me that the question should be more of [arriving at] a few clear principles, to inspire and dictate the broad lines of the reform, instead of [elaborating] particular norms regulating one or another point of the various parts of the liturgy. Once the broad outlines have been established, the new rubrics can gradually be proposed, thus becoming automatically an integral part of the “methodical codification.”
To be continued...
[NOTES]
[1] This portion of the article is in Latin, while the remainder is in Italian: “Inde a brevi tempore crebrae disceptationes editae sunt super eventuali reformatione librorum liturgicorum, praesertim Breviari Romani. Iusta proposita sunt desideria, cui studia recentiora et textuum liturgicorum editiones favere videntur. Nunc vero magis quam cuiusdam reformationis, praecipue pro Breviario, rectius loqui necesse est de reformatione generali, quam etiam Pius Papa X intendebat. Ad ‘praesidium optimorum codicum et veterum monumentorum’ quod attinet, etsi adhuc longa restat via, aliquod tamen iter factum est, ita ut nunc de audaci praesumptione reprehendendi non videantur qui eiusdem reformationis incoeptus rursus aggressi fuerint. Ephemerides Liturgicae a. 1929 publici iuris fecerunt (illis, ad quos spectabat, benigne annuentibus) dissertationem R. D. Schmid de ratione reformandi Breviarium Romanum. Summus Pontifex Pius XII liturgiae cultores ad studium Breviarii Romani iterum impellere visus est (cf. Ephem. lit. 60 [1946] 2 et 61 (1947] 99). Hoc itaque optatum Ephemeridum moderatores ad suos adlaboratores et ad amicos liturgiae initio anni preteriti transmiserunt, ut emendationes, desiderata ac proposita sedulo colligerent a scriptis significarent. Quas responsiones nunc in unum seligendo colligimus, et publici juris facimus.”
[2] Superfetation (also spelled superfoetation) is the simultaneous occurrence of more than one stage of developing offspring in the same animal. Here, it seems to be a pejorative term that means the ongoing insertion of elements in the liturgy that are foreign to the original “conception.”
[3] The so-called Ideenfeste: relatively newer feasts centered on dogmas or other doctrinal and devotional themes (e.g. Corpus Christi, the Immaculate Conception, Christ the King, Sacred Heart, the Most Precious Blood, the Holy Family), as opposed to the more ancient feasts recalling the principal events of salvation history.
[4] E.g., the Common of Martyrs, the Common of Doctors, the Common of Virgins, etc.
|
|
|
Why the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is Offered at the Hour of Terce |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 08:33 AM - Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching
- No Replies
|
|
Dom Gueranger's The Liturgical Year, Monday within the Octave of Corpus Christi, discussing the work of the Holy Ghost in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Volume X, pg. 351):
Quote:"'The priest,' says St. John Chrysostom, 'comes forth, carrying, not fire, as under the Law, but the Holy Ghost.' It is a man who appears before us, but it is God who works.' 'How shall this be done?' said Mary to the angel, 'for I know not man.' Gabriel answers her: 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee.' 'And thou now askest me,' says St. John Damascene to an inquirer, 'how do the bread and wine and water become the Body and Blood of Christ?' I answer thee: 'The Holy Ghost overshadows the Church, and achieves this mystery, which is beyond all word and all imagination.'
Therefore it is that, as St. Fulgentius observes, the Church could not more seasonably pray for the coming of the Holy Ghost, than at the consecration of the Sacrifice, wherein, as under the shadow of the Spirit in the Virgin's womb the Wisdom of the Father united Himself with the Man chosen by Him for the divine espousal, so the Church herself is united by the Holy Ghost to Christ, as a bride is to her spouse, or the body to its head. It is on account of this that the hour of Terce (nine o'clock), the hour wherein the divine Paraclete came into this world (at Pentecost), is the one set apart by the Church, on each of her festivals, for the solemn celebration of the great Sacrifice, over which this blessed Spirit presides in the omnipotence of His operation."
Adapted from here.
|
|
|
EU funds test of biometric payments from digital wallets |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 08:04 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
EU funds test of biometric payments from digital wallets
The proposed future.
Reclaim the Net.com | December 19, 2022
The EU Commission will provide funds to a consortium whose job is to launch a payments pilot for the bloc’s digital ID wallet.
The NOBID (Nordic-Baltic eID Project) has been chosen to head a multi-national consortium comprising a number of companies such as Thales and iProov, who are expected to start the pilot focusing on payments – one of four EU digital identity pilots – in March 2023.
“iProov is delighted that the NOBID consortium has been awarded funding and chosen to proceed with the pilot,” said Andrew Bud, founder and CEO of iProov. “This project will prove biometric-enabled Verifiable Credentials can address the emerging challenges of the increasingly complex world of payments.”
Other than the two companies, what is referred to as “technological partners” includes Signicat, RB, Auðkenni, IPZS, Poste Italiane, Intesi Group, InfoCert, FBK and Latvian State Radio, and Television Center.
NOBID consists of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden, while, as previously announced, six states will make up the consortium – Denmark, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, and Norway.
They have been entrusted by the Commission to “pilot and shape” the future of digital payments and identity for EU’s 27 member countries. The funding will come from the EU Commission’s DIGITAL Europa Program.
In addition, banks and financial companies from Germany, Norway, Denmark, Italy, and Iceland will also be involved (DSGV, DNB and BankID, Nets, Intesa Sanpaolo, PagoPA and ABILab. and Greiðsluveitan), with the consortium tasked with developing the pilot backed by several digital government agencies and technology providers, NOBID announced.
NOBID representatives are convinced that they already have enough experience to produce a large-scale payments pilot, which is described as a top priority in the EU’s “vision” of its future digital ID wallet.
NOBID also said that the payments pilot will be based on existing infrastructure, to provide payment issuance, instant payments, account-to-account transfers, and payment acceptance both in-store and online.
Last month, the EU claimed its digital ID wallet will be ready in 2024, centralizing citizens’ identity documents such as national ID, driving license and bank accounts.
The criticism of the scheme comes both from privacy advocates and companies. EDRi (European Digital Rights), an association of civil and human rights groups, said it would be unconstitutional and illegal in several countries, such as Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands.
Meanwhile, companies worry about the cost of integrating the digital ID wallet with their infrastructure.
|
|
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: 50 Maxims for Perfection |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 07:31 AM - Forum: The Saints
- No Replies
|
|
Saint Alphonsus’ 50 Maxims for Attaining Perfection
To desire ardently to increase in the love of Jesus Christ.
Often to make acts of love towards Jesus Christ. Immediately on waking, and before going to sleep, to make an act of love, seeking always to unite your own will to the will of Jesus Christ.
Often to meditate on his Passion.
Always to ask Jesus Christ for his love.
To communicate often, and many times in the day to make spiritual Communions.
Often to visit the Most Holy Sacrament.
Every morning to receive from the hands of Jesus Christ himself your own cross.
To desire Paradise and death, in order to be able to love Jesus Christ perfectly and for all eternity.
Often to speak of the love of Jesus Christ.
To accept contradictions for the sake of Jesus Christ. [especially relevant today]
To rejoice in the happiness of God.
To do that which is most pleasing to Jesus Christ, and not to refuse him anything that is agreeable to him.
To desire and to endeavor that all should love Jesus Christ.
To pray always for sinners and for the souls in purgatory.
To drive from your heart every affection that does not belong to Jesus Christ.
Always to have recourse to the most holy Mary, that she may obtain for us the love of Jesus Christ.
To honor Mary in order to please Jesus Christ.
To seek to please Jesus Christ in all your actions,
To offer yourself to Jesus Christ to suffer any pain for his love.
To be always determined to die rather than commit a willful venial sin.
To suffer crosses patiently, saying, “Thus it pleases Jesus Christ.“
To renounce your own pleasures for the love of Jesus Christ.
To pray as much as possible.
To practice all the mortifications that obedience permits.
To do all your spiritual exercises as if it were for the last time.
To persevere in good works in the time of aridity.
Not to do nor yet to leave undone anything through human respect.
Not to complain in sickness.
To love solitude, to be able to converse alone with Jesus Christ.
To drive away melancholy [i.e. gloom].
Often to recommend yourself to those persons who love Jesus Christ.
In temptation, to have recourse to Jesus crucified, and to Mary in her sorrows.
To trust entirely in the Passion of Jesus Christ.
After committing a fault, not to be discouraged, but to repent and resolve to amend.
To do good to those who do evil.
To speak well of all, and to excuse the intention when you cannot defend the action.
To help your neighbor as much as you can.
Neither to say nor to do anything that might vex him. And if you have been wanting in charity, to ask his pardon and speak kindly to him.
Always to speak with mildness and in a low tone.
To offer to Jesus Christ all the contempt and persecution that you meet with.
To look upon [religious] Superiors as the representatives of Jesus Christ.
To obey without answering and without repugnance, and not to seek your own satisfaction in anything.
To like the lowest employment.
To like the poorest things.
Not to speak either good or evil of yourself.
To humble yourself even towards inferiors.
Not to excuse yourself when you are reproved.
Not to defend yourself when found fault with.
To be silent when you are disquieted [i.e. upset].
Always to renew your determination of becoming a saint, saying, “My Jesus, I desire to be all Yours, and You must be all mine.”
|
|
|
Quattour Antiphonae (Final Four Antiphons) |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 07:12 AM - Forum: In Honor of Our Lady
- Replies (3)
|
|
Quattour Antiphonae (Final Four Antiphons)
Taken from here.
These four prayers, aside from the Hail Mary, are perhaps the four most popular Marian prayers. They are used in both private and public devotions and hold a prominent place in the Liturgy of the Hours as the concluding antiphons for Compline. Franciscans were apparently one of the first to introduce these prayers into the Liturgy and St. Bonaventure is credited with being the first to add them to the Office around 1274. From the 14th century on they have been used universally in the Latin Rite as concluding Antiphons for Compline.
Alma Redemptoris Mater
Mother Benign of Our Redeeming Lord
Alma Redemptoris Mater was composed by Herman Contractus (Herman the Cripple) (1013-1054). It is mentioned in The Prioress' Tale in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, which testifies to its popularity in England before Henry VIII. Contractus composed it from phrases taken from the writings of St. Fulgentius, St. Epiphanius, and St. Irenaeus. At one time Alma Redemptoris Mater was briefly used as an antiphon for the hour of Sext for the feast of the Assumption, but since the 13th century it has been a part of Compline. Formerly it was recited only from the first Sunday in Advent until the Feast of the Purification (Feb. 2), but with the revision of the Liturgy of the Hours, it can be recited anytime during the year. The traditional collects, which are not part of the original prayer, are also given below.
ALMA Redemptoris Mater, quae pervia caeli
Porta manes, et stella maris, succurre cadenti,
Surgere qui curat, populo: tu quae genuisti,
Natura mirante, tuum sanctum Genitorem
Virgo prius ac posterius, Gabrielis ab ore
Sumens illud Ave, peccatorum miserere.
Tempus Adventus
V. Angelus Domini nuntiavit Mariae.
R. Et concepit de Spiritu Sancto.
Oremus.
Gratiam tuam, quaesumus, Domine, mentibus nostris infunde: ut qui, Angelo nuntiante, Christi Filii tui incarnationem cognovimus; per passionem eius et crucem, ad resurrectionis gloriam perducamur. Per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
Donec Purificatio
V. Post partum, Virgo, inviolata permansisti.
R. Dei Genetrix, intercede pro nobis.
Oremus.
Deus, qui salutis aeternae, beatae Mariae virginitate fecunda, humano generi praemia praestitisti: tribue, quaesumus; ut ipsam pro nobis intercedere sentiamus, per quam meruimus auctorem vitae suscipere, Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, Filium tuum. Amen.
MOTHER of Christ, hear thou thy people's cry
Star of the deep and Portal of the sky!
Mother of Him who thee made from nothing made.
Sinking we strive and call to thee for aid:
Oh, by what joy which Gabriel brought to thee,
Thou Virgin first and last, let us thy mercy see.
During Advent
V. The Angel of the Lord announced unto Mary.
R. And she conceived by the Holy Spirit.
Let us pray.
Pour forth, we beseech Thee, O Lord, Thy grace into our hearts: that as we have known the incarnation of Thy Son Jesus Christ by the message of an Angel, so too by His Cross and passion may we be brought to the glory of His resurrection. Amen.
From Christmas Eve until the Purification
V. After childbirth thou didst remain a virgin.
R. Intercede for us, O Mother of God.
Let us pray.
O God, who, by the fruitful virginity of blessed Mary, hast bestowed upon mankind the reward of eternal salvation: grant, we beseech Thee, that we may experience her intercession, through whom we have been made worthy to receive the author of life, our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son. Amen.
|
|
|
Prayers of Saint Ambrose before Mass for each Day of the Week |
Posted by: Stone - 12-20-2022, 07:02 AM - Forum: Prayers and Devotionals
- No Replies
|
|
Prayers of Saint Ambrose before Mass for each Day of the Week
This prayer is often ascribed to St. Ambrose (340 - 397), but scholars today ascribe the work to Jean de Fecamp (12th cent.). These prayers have been an important part of priestly private devotions since the Middle Ages and were included in the Missal by Pius V. The form of the prayers below have been modified for use by either the clergy or the laity. Those sections proper to the clergy are given in parentheses and alternates for the laity, if present, follow in brackets.
Sunday
O SUPREME High Priest and true Pontiff, Jesus Christ, who didst offer Thyself to God the Father as a pure and spotless Victim upon the Altar of the Cross for us miserable sinners, who didst give us Thy Flesh to eat and Thy Blood to drink, and who didst ordain that Mystery in the power of the Holy Spirit saying: "As often as you do this, do it in remembrance of me"; I ask Thee by this same Blood of Thine, the great price of our salvation, and by that wonderful and unspeakable love with which Thou dost love us so much so as to wash us from our sins in Thy Blood, as miserable and unworthy though we are: (teach me, Thy unworthy servant, whom among Thy other gifts, Thou hast deigned to call to the priestly office, not for my own merit but only out of the worthiness of Thy mercy) I beseech Thee teach me through Thy Holy Spirit to handle so great a Mystery with such great reverence and honor, with such fear and devotion, as are due and fitting. Through Thy grace make me always to believe and to understand, to conceive and to firmly hold, and to think and speak of this wondrous Mystery in such a way as it pleases Thee and benefits my own soul. Let Thy good Spirit enter into my heart where He may silently resound and, without clamor of words, speak all truth. For Thy Mysteries are indeed exceedingly deep and covered with a sacred veil. On account of Thy great mercy grant me to (celebrate) [assist] at the Solemnity of the Mass with a clean heart and a pure mind. Free my heart from all unclean, unholy, vain and hurtful thoughts. Defend me with a loving and faithful guard, the mighty protection of Thy blessed Angels, so the enemies of all good may go away ashamed. Through the virtue of this great Mystery and by the hand of Thy holy angel, drive away from me and from all Thy servants the stubborn spirit of pride and vain-glory, of impurity and uncleanness, of doubting and mistrust. May those who persecute us be confounded; may they perish those who make haste to destroy us.
Monday
O KING of virgins and lover of chastity and innocence, extinguish in my body by the dew of Thy heavenly blessing whatever may kindle the burning of wanton desire, so purity of body and soul may abide in me. Mortify in my members the incitements of the flesh and all lustful emotions. Also give me true and persevering chastity with Thine other gifts which please Thee in truth, so that I may with chaste body and pure heart offer unto Thee a sacrifice of praise. For with how great a contrition of heart and flowing of tears or a chastity of body and purity of soul should that divine and heavenly Sacrifice be celebrated, wherein Thy Flesh is in truth eaten, wherein Thy Blood in truth is drunk, wherein things lowest and highest, earthly and divine, are united, where the Holy Angels are present, where Thou art in a marvelous and unspeakable manner both Priest and Sacrifice.
Tuesday
WHO can worthily (celebrate) [assist] at this Sacrifice unless Thou, Almighty God, makest one worthy? I know, O Lord, yea, truly do I know and this do I confess to Thy loving-kindness, that I am unworthy to approach so great a Mystery on account of my sins and numberless negligences; but I know, and truly with my whole heart do I believe and with my mouth confess that Thou canst make me worthy, who alone canst make clean one conceived of unclean seed and canst make sinners to be righteous and holy. By this Thine almighty power I beseech Thee, O my God, to grant that I, a sinner, may (celebrate) [assist] at this Sacrifice with fear and trembling, with purity of heart and streams of tears, with spiritual gladness and heavenly joy. May my mind feel the sweetness of Thy most blessed Presence and the guardianship of Thy holy Angels round about me.
Wednesday
O LORD, ever mindful of Thy venerable Passion, I, though a sinner, approach Thine Altar so I might offer Thee that Sacrifice which Thou hast instituted and commanded us to offer in remembrance of Thee for our salvation. Receive it, I beseech Thee, O God Most High, for Thy holy Church and for the people whom Thou hast purchased with Thy Blood. (And since Thou hast willed that I, a sinner, should be in the midst between Thee and Thy people, although Thou perceivest not in me the evidence of good works, at least refuse not the service of the ministry which Thou hast given me; let not the price of their salvation be wasted through my unworthiness, whose saving Victim and redemption Thou didst deign to be.) I also bring before Thee, O Lord, if Thou wilt deign to consider them, the tribulations of the people, the perils of the nations, the groans of prisoners, the misery of orphans, the necessities of strangers, the helplessness of the weak, the depression of the weary, the infirmities of the aged, the aspirations of the young, the vows of virgins, and the lamentations of widows.
Thursday
O LORD, Thou art merciful unto all and hatest nothing that Thou hast made. Remember what we are made of, for Thou art our Father, Thou art our God. Be not angry with us for ever, nor withhold the multitude of Thy mercies from us; for it is not in our righteousness, but in Thy great compassion that we humbly place our prayers before Thee. Take from us our iniquities and graciously enkindle the fire of Thy Holy Spirit within us. Take from us our hearts of stone and give us hearts of flesh, which may love Thee, prefer Thee, delight in Thee, follow Thee, and enjoy Thee. O Lord, out of Thy mercy we beg Thee to look favorably upon Thy family awaiting the service of Thy holy Name, May the prayers of none be ineffectual, nor the petitions of any be unfruitful. Do Thou put into our minds such prayers as Thou mayest delight graciously to hear and answer.
Friday
O LORD, Holy Father, we beseech Thee on behalf of the souls of the faithful departed that this great Sacrament of Thy love may be for them health, salvation, joy and refreshment. O Lord and my God, may it be a great and abundant feast of Thee, the living Bread, who camest down from heaven and givest life unto the world; a feast of Thy holy and blessed Flesh, of the Lamb without spot, who takest away the sins of the world; the Flesh which was conceived of the Holy Spirit and taken from the holy and glorious womb of the blessed Virgin Mary; the Flesh of Thy most sacred Side pierced by the soldier's spear from which the Fountain of mercy flowed forth; with which after being fed and satisfied, refreshed and comforted, they may rejoice in Thy praise and glory.
O LORD, upon Thy mercy I pray that the fullness of Thy blessing and the sanctification of Thy divinity may descend upon the bread to be offered unto Thee. May the invisible and incomprehensible majesty of Thy Holy Spirit also descend as it came down of old upon the sacrifices of the Fathers; which will both make our oblations Thy Body and Blood, and teach (me Thy unworthy priest) [us, Thy unworthy servants], to treat so great a Mystery with purity of heart and with tears of devotion, with the reverence and trembling, so that Thou mayest graciously and favorably receive this sacrifice (at my hands) for the wellbeing of all, both the living and the departed.
Saturday
I ENTREAT Thee, O Lord, by this most holy mystery of Thy Body and Blood with which we are daily fed and given to drink, are washed and sanctified in Thy Church, and are made worthy partakers of the one supreme Divinity, grant unto me Thy holy virtues, that filled by them I may draw near to Thine Altar with a good conscience. May these heavenly Sacraments be made unto me salvation and life, for as Thou hast said with Thy holy and blessed mouth, "The bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever."
SWEETEST Bread, heal the palate of my heart that I may taste the pleasant savor of Thy love. Heal it of all infirmities that I may find sweetness in nothing other than Thee. O purest Bread, having all delight and all savor, which ever refreshest us and never failest, let my heart feed on Thee and may my inmost soul be fulfilled with the sweetness of Thy savor. The Angels feed upon Thee fully: let the wayfaring man feed on Thee according to his measure, that, refreshed with such a Viaticum, he may not fall by the way.
HOLY Bread, O living Bread, O pure Bread, who camest down from heaven and givest life unto the world, come into my heart, and cleanse me from all defilement of flesh and spirit. Enter into my soul: heal and cleanse me within and without; be the protection and continual health of my soul and body. Drive far from me all foes that lie in wait; let them flee at the presence of Thy power, so that being guarded without and within by Thee, I may come to Thy kingdom straight away: where, not as now in mysteries, but face to face, we shall behold Thee: when Thou shalt have delivered up the kingdom to God, the Father, and shalt be God, all in all. Then shalt Thou satisfy me with Thyself in wondrous fullness, so that I shall never hunger nor thirst any more. Who with the same God the Father and the Holy Spirit livest and reignest forever and ever. Amen.
-Source [Link offers the Latin version as well.]
|
|
|
Pascendi exposes Modernist [and False Resistance] tactics |
Posted by: Stone - 12-19-2022, 03:39 PM - Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching
- Replies (2)
|
|
Pascendi exposes Modernist tactics
Pope St. Pius X exposes the tactics used by Modernists to spread their errors.
This article by Fr. Francois Knittel was originally published in the April 2004 issue of The Angelus magazine.
Modernist tactics according Pascendi Gregis
We wish to honor Pope St. Pius X, the first canonized pontiff that the good Lord gave us since St. Pius V, by remembering his teachings. The task is not easy, since the teachings of his 11-year pontificate are abundant: his Catechism;[1] frequent Communion[2] and at an early age;[3] Catholic Action;[4] devotion to Our Lady;[5] the responsibility of those who govern the Church;[6] the Priesthood;[7] the doctrine of St. Thomas of Aquinas[8] and that of many others.
Some of the most interesting of St. Pius X's teachings to recall are those on Modernism. The three documents vital to the subject are Lamentabili Sane (July 3, 1907), Pascendi Dominici Gregis (Sept. 8, 1907), and Sacrorum Antistitum (Sept. 1, 1910). Without any doubt, the most well-known aspect of this teaching on Modernism is the description that St. Pius X gives of the successive faces of the Modernist: the philosopher, believer, theologian, critic, apologist, and reformer. It is a long and arduous text that measures up to the challenge which confronted the Church and its magisterium.
As for us, we will emphasize what St. Pius X wrote on the tactics of the Modernists. The holy Pope was worried not only about the doctrinal aspects of this question, but also about the progress of this error in minds and hearts. How could a doctrine so complex, overwhelming, and contrary to the natural structure of human intelligence have such dissemination? How can we justify all the new measures taken by the Pope—Anti-Modernist Oath, vigilance counsels, exclusion of Modernists from the priesthood and teaching positions, prohibition to publish, control over priestly conventions—knowing that the Church always had to fight against one heresy or other in the course of its history? Why such particular treatment? From the very beginning of his encyclical on Modernism, St. Pius X said:
Quote:Still it must be confessed that the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ has in this days increased exceedingly, who are striving, by arts, entirely new and full of subtlety, to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, if they can, to overthrow utterly Christ's kingdom itself."[9]
What are these new arts full of subtlety used by the Modernists unmasked by the Pontiff?
Enemies within
Above all, they are the enemy inside the Church itself. For if we consult our catechism, we will see that those who are outside the Church are the infidels, the heretics, the schismatics, and the apostates. Some were never part of the Church (infidels), some abandoned the Church because of their sins against the Faith (heretics and apostates), or against charity (schismatics), but all, some sooner than others, separated themselves from the Church. That very same separation had the advantage of clarifying the situation and alerting the Catholic faithful against the teachings and actions of these “devouring wolves.”
Nothing of the sort happened with the Modernists whose primary characteristic is to try to stay within the Church at all cost:
Quote:That we make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuous they appear.[10] [W]e allude... to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself,... and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church. ...And this policy they follow willingly and wittingly, both because it is part of their system that authority is to be stimulated but not dethroned, and because it is necessary for them to remain within the ranks of the Church in order that they may gradually transform the collective conscience—thus unconsciously avowing that the common conscience is not with them, and that they have no right to claim to be its interpreters."[11]
Thus it is obvious that there is a firm desire not to get out of the visible structure of the Church, so that they can, at their whim, modify it from the inside. These are the wolves mentioned by Our Lord, “in the clothing of sheep” (Mt. 7:15). Their dissimulation is not accidental, but essential to their works; without it they could not do anything.
Destroying the Catholic Faith itself
By remaining within the Church under false pretenses, the Modernists try to modify, and thus destroy, the Catholic Faith. Their attacks are not going to be against an institution or a dogma in particular, but will aim at the very virtue of faith:
Quote:Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic Truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt.[12] Certainly this suffices to show superabundantly by how many roads Modernism leads to the annihilation of all religion. The first step in this direction was taken by Protestantism; the second is made by Modernism; the next will plunge headlong into atheism.[13] And now, can anybody who takes a survey of the whole system be surprised that We should define it as the synthesis of all heresies? Were one to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate the sap and substance of them all into one, he could no better succeed than the Modernists have done."[14]
It is true that any heresy destroys the Catholic Faith by implicitly doubting the authority of God the Revealer. For if we believe in the revealed truths (Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption, Holy Eucharist, etc.) it is not by personal taste, whim, or opinion, nor because said truths are evident. The only true motive that makes us believe without the shadow of a doubt is precisely the authority of God, who cannot lie, who cannot be in error, who cannot be ignorant. But to deny a dogma is the equivalent of denying God, who unveiled His mysteries for us, His inerrancy and infallibility. It is in that sense that willful heresy will result in the loss of the virtue of faith.
Modernism, as St. Pius X teaches, not only will result in the loss of the virtue of faith like any other heresy, but will even make the existence of said virtue impossible. In Modernism, everything is reduced to a natural dimension, everything is enclosed in the subject, everything is borne out of the desires coming from the depth of consciousness. There is no longer any room for supernatural, mysterious, external, and objective realities. The problem is no longer on this or that particular point of doctrine or morals, but it is the very possibility of the act of faith as defined by our catechism which is destroyed.
Hence “there is no part of Catholic truth which they do not strive to destroy.” Hence also the definition of Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.” Hence finally, the ultimate consequence of this revolutionary movement is “atheism.”
Smokescreen of confusion in Modernist doctrine
At the service of his will to effect the radical subversion of Catholic doctrine within the Church, the Modernist will use several subterfuges. First, he will mix in his speeches and writings, in a strange and dangerous fashion, Catholicism and Rationalism. What is Rationalism? Pope Pius IX defined it in the Syllabus of Errors (1864) as:
Quote:Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural forces, to secure the welfare of men and nations." (Condemned Propostion No. 3)
Upon reading this definition of Rationalism, we cannot but notice the radical opposition between Rationalism and the Catholic Faith. One of the infallible signs betraying the Modernist character of an author or some writing, is precisely that adulterous union between Catholicism and Rationalism:
Quote:For they double the part of the rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error.[15] Hence, in their books you find some things that might well be expressed by a Catholic, but in the next page you will find other things which might have been dictated by a rationalist."[16]
This adulterous union between Catholic thought and rationalist thought is the direct result of the Modernist's will to stay within the Church in order to change the Faith from inside. To speak clearly against the Faith would immediately render them visible and mark them in everyone's eyes with the infamous seal of heresy and apostasy! That is why they never speak clearly.
Every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities which appear and disappear according to the necessities of the cause and the opportunities of the moment. It is this evidence which gave the encyclical Pascendi its particular structure. To reveal the Modernist in hiding, St. Pius X had to explain in detail all the disguises, tricks and feints used by the Modernist to avoid the judgment of the Magisterium:
Quote:It must be first noted that every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities: he is a philosopher, a believer, a theologian, an historian, a critic, an apologist, a reformer. These roles must be clearly distinguished from one another by all who would accurately know their system and thoroughly comprehend the principles and consequences of their doctrines."[17]
Lastly, the final trait of the Modernist: he gives the impression that his doctrines lack global vision. Thus, in the eyes of an unwary Catholic, the doctrines of the Modernists will appear fluctuating, insecure, indecisive, and even contradictory. Pope Pius X did not share that view as he explained in several instances:
Quote:But since the Modernists... employ a very clever artifice, namely, to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered and disjointed one from another, so as to appear to be in doubt and uncertainty, while in reality they are firm and steadfast, it will be of ad vantage... to bring their teachings together here into one group, and to point out the connection between them, and thus to pass an examination of the sources of the errors, and to prescribe remedies for averting the evil.[18] In the writing and addresses they seem not infrequently to advocate now one doctrine now another so that one would be disposed to regard them as vague and doubtful. But there is a reason for this, and it is to be found in their ideas as to the mutual separation of science and faith.[19] It may be... that some may think We have dwelt too long on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it was necessary, both in order to refute their customary charge that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not consist in scattered and unconnected theories but in a perfectly organized body, all the parts of which are solidly joined so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all."[20]
Undoubtedly, one of the benefits of Pascendi Gregis was to show the Modernist doctrine in all its scope and as a coherent system. To stick one's finger into the Modernist machinery is to lose your whole body. To be Modernist in history will lead, little by little, to become so in exegesis and philosophy as well. The adulterous union between Catholic principles and rationalist principles is a fundamental perversion very frequently condemned by the Popes.
Practice of Modernism
After showing us how the Modernists are the enemy within, who endanger the very Faith without ever giving a global overview of their system, Pope Pius X unmasked three practical points that make the Modernists actions particularly dangerous. When in spite of their deceptions, some Modernists are unmasked by the authority, called to public retractation, or even publicly condemned, they usually give the appearance of submission to the measures that affect them:
Quote:But you know how fruitless has been Our action. They bowed their head for a moment but it was soon uplifted more arrogantly than ever.[21] And thus, here again a way must be found to save the full rights of authority on the one hand and of liberty on the other. In the meanwhile the proper course for the Catholic will be to proclaim publicly his profound respect for authority-and continue to follow his own bent.[22] And so they go their own way, reprimands and condemnations notwithstanding, masking an incredible audacity under a mock semblance of humility. While they make a show of bowing their heads, their hands and minds are more intent than ever on carrying out their purposes."[23]
That apparent submission is perfectly coherent with the deliberate decision of the Modernists to stay in the Church. If they rebelled against authority or openly despised the truths of our Faith, they would thus unmask themselves. That apparent submission to the decisions of the authorities, even hard penalties, is a key element of Modernist tactics.
The other side of the coin in that the return of a Modernist to the totality of the Faith is always doubtful. How can one be certain of the sincerity of such a conversion when dissimulation and hypocrisy are at the root of the system? Didn't all these fashionable Modernist theologians of the last 50 years repeatedly swear the Anti-Modernist Oath: Chenu, Rahner, Congar, Küng, Drewerman and Boff, to mention a few? With that apparent submission to the authorities, Modernists frequently lead as well an externally exemplary life:
Quote:To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they possess, as a rule, a reputation for the strictest morality."[24]
Here, too, they could not remain in the Church without apparently keeping the discipline of the Church and its way of life. The apostate or the one who seeks laicization will bring himself to the attention of the Catholic faithful.
In virtue of the necessary connection between what one thinks and what one does, it is legitimate to think that this exemplary life is nothing but external. Let us recall for instance, the weird relations maintained by Teilhard de Chardin, Karl Rahner,[25] or Hans Urs von Balthasar,[26] and of the prince of liberation theologians, the Franciscan Leonardo Boff who recently abandoned the priesthood.[27]
Attracting public opinion
The last Modernist tactic indicated by Pope Pius X is the manipulation of public opinion. This manipulation is done in two phases:
1. It is necessary to silence any serious opponent of Modernism. Any serious debate with said opponent will be avoided, his works opposed to Modernism will not be mentioned, and their publication will even be prevented if possible, and
2. at the same time, every Modernist speech or book will be praised to the sky. The use and multiplication of pen names used by some Modernist authors will give the impression of a wave of opinion, when frequently, in fact, we are dealing with a few authors singing one another's praises.
Quote:...[t]he boundless effrontery of these men. Let one but open his mouth and the others applaud him in chorus, proclaiming that science has made another step forward; let an outsider but hint at a desire to inspect the new discovery with his own eyes, and they are on him in a body; deny it, and you are an ignoramus; embrace and defend it, and there is no praise too warm for you. In this way they win over any who, did they but realize what they are doing, would shrink back with horror.[28] But of all the insults they heap on them, those of ignorance and obstinacy are the favorites. When an adversary rises up against them with an erudition and force that render him redoubtable, they try to make a conspiracy of silence around him to nullify the effects of his attacks, while in flagrant contrast with this policy towards Catholics, they load with constant praise the writers who range themselves on their side.[29] When one of their numbers falls under the condemnation of the Church the rest of them, to the horror of good Catholics, gather round him, heap public praise upon him, venerate him almost as a martyr to truth.[30] Under their own names and under pseudonyms they publish numbers of books, newspapers, reviews, and sometimes one and the same writer adopts a variety of pseudonyms to trap the incautious reader into believing in a whole multitude of Modernist writers."[31]
When truth is no longer the measure of the validity of an argument, then there is no other way than to look for palliatives to cover its intrinsic weakness. In an era of democracy, truth does not count for much, only the majority; neither does honesty, only power and fame. On the contrary, woe to those who do not blow with the prevalent winds of history. Woe to those who do not board the great ship of progress. They will be buried alive in a lead coffin. They will not find publishers for their books, nor a single magazine for their articles, no chair for them to teach, and the faithful will never hear their voice even though it is the voice of the Good Shepherd.
A secret society?
To conclude his analysis of Modernist tactics with practical advice, Pope Pius X called for the unmasking of Modernism. Faced with such hypocritical and deceitful error, only one thing needs to be done: bring it out to the light of day so that all can see its evil.
Quote:We must now break silence, in order to expose before the whole Church in their true colors those men who have assumed this evil disguise."[32]
It is very interesting to compare this order of the Holy Pontiff with that of his predecessor Pope Leo XIII in the encyclical Humanum Genus in condemnation of Freemasonry:
Quote:We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is.[33]
The comparison of these two texts—one on Modernism and the other on Freemasonry—does suggest a similarity between these two revolutionary events. The two Pontiffs seems to suggest a kinship between the Masonic sect and the Modernist sect. Perhaps some will think excessive the use of the expression “Modernist sect.” However, here too, we are only echoing the teachings of Pope St. Pius X:
Quote:We think it is obvious to every bishop that the type of men called Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group. In this way they are injecting the virus of their doctrine into the veins of Christian society, publishing books and articles either unsigned or under false names. A fresh and careful reading of Our said encyclical reveals clearly that this deliberate shrewdness is to be expected from those men We described in it. They are enemies all the more formidable as they are so close. They take advantage of their ministry by offering their poisoned food and catching the unguarded by surprise. They supply a false doctrine which is the compendium of all errors."[34]
Thus, St. Pius X did speak of the Modernists as an “underground group.” Few authors have noticed and examined this detail. In an article of April 1964, Jean Madiran did made the following observations:
Quote:In the encyclical Pascendi, Pope Pius X mentioned several times and in various manners the “occult” action of Modernists. Is it a secret society in the strict sense? The encyclical Pascendi implies it though does not affirm it clearly. Three years later, however, this formal accusation was made by Pope Pius X (Sacrorum Antistitum of Sept. 1, 1910): [the] Modernists, whose personality was described in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, have not stopped agitating in order to disturb the peace of the Church. Neither have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group. ...We have consulted books and magazines that gave the “history” or the “results” of Modernism since World War II: we did not find any mention of this specific aspect of the question. Not only is the secret society is omitted, but the presentation of Modernism made by many authors implicitly denied it ever existed. It is denied by the fact that their presentation of Modernism is incompatible with the existence of the secret society of Modernists. They do mention writers, investigators, editors, and clergymen undoubtedly in error, but guileless souls: certainly true for many, but insufficient to explain the historical phenomenon of Modernism. It does not explain its organized preponderance, nor the concerted campaigns, nor the medley of insults and praises, nor the premeditated tactics, nor the occult activities described in the encyclical Pascendi. Neither does it explain the accusation of “underground group” of the Motu Proprio of Sept. 1, 1910 [Sacrorum Antistitum].
All the stories of the Modernist crisis, these “analyses” of Modernism, and the judgments expressed have been radically corrupted because of the systematic ignorance and dissimulation of such an important element of judgment... By hiding the existence of the secret society, the historians obviously did not shed any light on its disappearance. Nonetheless, this is an unresolved historical question, indeed, an open question, that is, when did the secret society of Modernists cease to exist? We cannot even ask if they were “reconstituted” at a later date, for to be reconstituted it is necessary to have ceased to exist; but we do not know if and when it was dissolved. Not only is no answer given, but the question itself is not even raised. Historians of the crisis think that the encyclical Pascendi in 1907 mortally wounded Modernism and that that was the end of it, and even too brutal and complete of an end. That was not the position of Pope Pius X who, three years later, on Sept. 1, 1910, clearly affirmed: “Nor have they ceased to recruit followers to the extent of forming an underground group.” They had not ceased. But then, when did they cease? Or did they ever cease?"[35]
The Modernist is an apostate and a traitor
In conclusion, we will let Fr. Calmel, O.P., give us a panoramic view of the question of Modernism in its theological, moral, spiritual, and tactical aspects:
Quote:The classic heretic—Arius, Nestorius, Luther—even if he had some wistful desire to remain in the Catholic Church, did everything necessary to be ousted. He fought openly against Divine Revelation, the sacred deposit of which is guarded by the Church. The heretic, or more accurately the Modernist apostate like a Loisy or Teilhard de Chardin, deliberately rejects the whole doctrine of the Church, but desires to remain in the Church and takes the necessary measures to stay in. He dissembles and feigns with the hope of changing the Church in the long run—or, as the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin wrote, to rectify the Faith — from the inside.
The Modernist has in common with other heretics the rejection of Catholic Revelation. But he differentiates himself from other heretics, because he hides this rejection. We must insist on this: the Modernist is an apostate and a traitor. You may ask, “Since the position of the Modernists is fundamentally disloyal, how can he keep it all his life without destroying his internal mental balance?” Is psychological balance compatible with a perpetually maintained duplicity in the most supreme questions? We must answer that yes it is, as far as the ringleaders are concerned.
With respect to the followers, the question of the psychological imbalance within a never-failing hypocrisy is less acute. When these followers are priests—alas, only too frequently—they usually end up marrying, thus putting an end to the necessity of dissimulation. For once they are married, they will continue to be apostate, but will stop being Modernists. Things become clearer with respect to them. They no longer have to fake the virtues of a Catholic priest.
Concerning the ringleaders, prelates with important charges, if they can practice their Modernism without serious damage, it is with a doubt because they are distracted by accomplices who never get tired of singing their praises. Distracted from looking at themselves, they manage to escape the burning questions of a slowly dying moral conscience. In any case, the blindness of the mind and the hardening of the heart will always be the end of the road, but without necessarily leading to dementia. We are certain that closing oneself in spiritual darkness does not happen at once, but it is prepared slowly by numerous acts of resistance to grace. This divine chastisement is merited by numerous sins. What is more, if any other sinner can recognize himself as such and beg divine mercy, we must admit that a sinner of that type cannot convert if not for a great miracle of grace: a very rare one."
Footnotes
1 Acerbo Nimis (April 15, 1905).
2 Sacra Tridentina Synodus (Dec. 20, 1905).
3 Quam Singulari (Aug. 8, 1910).
4 Il Fermo Proposito (June 11, 1905).
5 Ad Diem Ilium Laetissimum (Feb. 2, 1904).
6 Jucunda Sane (Mar. 12, 1904).
7 Haerent Animo (Aug. 4, 1908).
8 Doctoris Angelicis (June 29, 1914).
9 Pascendi Dominici Gregis, ed. Claudia Carlin (Pierian Press), p. 71.
10 Ibid., col. 2.
11 Ibid., p. 83, col. 2.
12 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
13 Ibid., p. 90, col. 1.
14 Ibid., p. 89, col. 1.
15 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
16 Ibid., p. 78, cols. 1,2.
17 Ibid., p. 72, col. 2.
18 Ibid., p. 72, col 2.
19 Ibid., p. 78,col. 1.
20 Ibid., p. 88, col. 1.
21 AW., p. 72, col. 1.
22 AW, p. 82, col. 1.
23 AW., p. 83, col. 2.
24 Ibid., p. 72, col. 1.
25 Courrier de Rome, (March 1995), p. 8.
26 Si Si No No, Italian ed., (Dec. 1992), p. 7.
27 Translator's note: He died shortly thereafter.
28 Pascendi, p. 86, col. 2.
29 Ibid., p. 9l, col. 2; p. 92, col 1.
30 Ibid., p.92, col. 1.
31 Ibid., p. 92, col. 1.
32 AW., p. 72, cols. 1, 2.
33 The Papal Encyclicals, vol. 2 (Pierian Press), p. 99, col. 2.
34 Sacrorum Antistitum (Sept. 1, 1910), The Doctrinal Writings of St. Pius X (Manilla, Philippine Islands: Sinag-tala Publishers, 1974).
35 Author's translation of a Spanish translation (for which he could not find a reference) of an article originally in French.
Translated for Angelus Press by Fr. Jaime Pazat de Lys of the Society of St. Pius X. The author, Fr. Francis Knittel, was ordained for the Society of St. Pius X in 1989 and a former District Superior of Mexico.
|
|
|
Pope Francis has already signed resignation letter in case of bad health |
Posted by: Stone - 12-19-2022, 11:45 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis has already signed resignation letter in case of bad health
Pope Francis leads a mass for Our Lady of Guadalupe at St. Peter's Basilica on December 12, 2022 in Rome, Italy.
CNN | December 18, 2022
Pope Francis has revealed in a new interview that he has already signed his resignation letter to be used in the event of him becoming “impaired.”
Francis made the comment in an interview with Spanish news outlet ABC, published Sunday, when asked what would happen if a pope is suddenly rendered unable to perform his duties due to health issues or an accident.
Francis said he wrote the letter several years ago and gave it to then-Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who resigned in 2013.
“I have already signed my renunciation. The Secretary of State at the time was Tarcisio Bertone. I signed it and said: ‘If I should become impaired for medical reasons or whatever, here is my renunciation,’” Francis was quoted as saying.
“I don’t know who Cardinal Bertone has given that letter to, but I handed it to him when he was the Secretary of State,” Francis said, adding that this was the first time he had spoken publicly about the letter’s existence.
Francis said past pontiffs Paul VI and Pious XII had also drafted their letters of renunciation in the event of a permanent impairment.
Francis, 86, appears to be in good health apart from knee problems. He has often been seen with a walking stick and sometimes uses a wheelchair due to pain in his right knee.
Earlier this year, he canceled a trip to Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan after doctors said he might also have to miss a later trip to Canada unless he agreed to have 20 more days of therapy and rest for his right knee.
Last year, he had surgery to remove part of his colon due to diverticulitis, a common condition.
In 2013, Francis’ immediate predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, made the almost unprecedented decision to resign from his position, citing “advanced age” as the reason and startling the Catholic world.
It marked the first time a pope had stepped down in nearly 600 years. The last pope to step down before his death was Gregory XII, who in 1415 quit to end a civil war within the church in which more than one man claimed to be pope.
|
|
|
Colorado is going to start drinking recycled sewage |
Posted by: Stone - 12-19-2022, 11:42 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
America’s western water crisis is so bad that Colorado is going to start drinking recycled sewage
Eric Seufert, owner and manager of 105 West Brewing Co., poses for a photo at his brewery room Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2022, in Castle Rock, Colo.
He brewed a test batch of beer in 2017 with water from recycled sewage.
AP PHOTO/BRITTANY PETERSON
Fortune.com | October 21, 2022
When Eric Seufert brewed a test batch of beer in 2017 with water from recycled sewage, he wasn’t too concerned about the outcome. The engineering firm that approached him about the test explained the process, and together they sipped samples of recycled water. Seufert quickly understood it wasn’t too different from how water is normally handled.
“Every stream and river in this country has someone putting in their wastewater after they’ve treated it,” he said.
After tapping the keg and having a taste, the owner of 105 West Brewing Co. in Castle Rock, Colorado proudly served it at his bar.
Brewing beer, cooking food, and refilling water bottles with recycled wastewater could soon become standard practice in a state that’s synonymous with its pristine-tasting snowmelt and mountain springs.
Last week, Colorado’s water quality agency gave unanimous preliminary approval to regulate direct potable reuse — the process of treating sewage and sending it directly to taps without first being dispersed in a larger water body. Pending a final vote in November, the state would become the first to adopt direct potable reuse regulations, according to WateReuse, a national group advocating for the method.
“Having well-developed regulations … helps ensure projects are safe and that project proponents know what will be required of them,” said Laura Belanger, water resources engineer with the non-profit Western Resource Advocates.
As the state’s population explodes and regional water supplies dwindle, recycling water for drinking is a significant opportunity for stretching a limited supply, said Kevin Reidy, conservation specialist for the Colorado Water Conservation Board. And he said it’s a game changer in a place like Castle Rock, a city of 75,000 just south of Denver nestled under its prominent namesake butte, that relies primarily on pumping finite groundwater for drinking.
“I think it’s an important tool for the long term because it gives water providers options to respond to future scarcity of water supplies, whether drought-driven or other reasons,” said Mark Marlowe, director of Castle Rock Water.
The utility already reuses about 14% of its wastewater, sending it to a creek from the treatment plant, and re-drawing it farther downstream. But as climate change leads to more arid conditions in the western U.S., the creek’s flow is becoming less reliable.
With a dry bed, water is “lost” into the ground rather than recaptured and sent back out to taps. Blending highly treated wastewater directly at the facility would eliminate that climate risk, Marlowe said.
The process, which typically entails disinfecting wastewater with ozone gas or ultraviolet light to remove viruses and bacteria, then filtering it through membranes with microscopic pores to remove solids and trace contaminants, is gaining interest as communities grapple with extended droughts. While many U.S. states don’t explicitly prohibit this type of water reuse, developing statewide standards can encourage more rapid adoption, said Reidy of the Colorado conservation board.
There are no specific federal regulations for direct potable reuse. However, projects have to comply with federal health standards for drinking water.
Like many Colorado cities, Castle Rock is still evaluating the cost and urgency of adopting direct potable reuse, but plans to begin testing next year so they can be ready to move quickly if needed. Even so, it could be three to five years before the new source is available.
That’s actually a short timeline for developing a new water supply, much speedier than building a reservoir over 20 to 30 years, said Reidy. “You’re looking at the long-term viewpoint.”
The interest is widely shared among other Colorado Front Range cities, many involved in the rule making process. The region anticipates rapid population growth over the next few decades, and treating sewage for drinking is how that growth will be met, said Greg Baker of Aurora Water.
“It becomes more and more difficult to acquire new water,” Baker said. “The more we can take advantage of water we already have, the better for all of us.”
Treated wastewater from local rivers and creeks often must be returned to the source for downstream users, who are owed minimum flows as required by various laws. But imports, such as Colorado River water pumped over the continental divide and down to the Front Range, can in many cases be completely used up.
Nearly all the water in Aurora can be reused. The city is currently reusing about 10%, filtered through the South Platte River bank, and is well-positioned to accommodate future growth by expanding recycling, Baker said.
Florida, California and Arizona are moving swiftly to adopt regulations as well, and a handful of other states are beginning the process or have existing projects. As conditions continue to decline on the Colorado River, Arizona faces deep mandatory water cuts, while pressure mounts for California to give up more of its share — a strong incentive to find ways to stretch what they have.
Denver and Colorado Springs — the state’s most populous cities — already recycle the majority of their water through downstream exchanges with other cities and for non-drinking uses, such as watering parks. Both expect to someday recycle water for drinking purposes, but officials are concerned their reusable supplies from the stressed Colorado River soon could face mandatory reductions.
“If you’ve built a big direct potable reuse system and you don’t have it even for a few years, that causes some problems,” said Greg Fisher, demand planning manager at Denver Water.
“If we are relying on those reusable (drinking water) supplies to meet our customers’ needs, our ability to meet their needs is put at risk,” Fisher said.
Water recycling projects can carry a large price tag, although federal funding is available. The Environmental Protection Agency offers low-cost loans for water infrastructure projects, including recycling. Through the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s water recycling programs, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law offers over $1 billion over the next five years for non-federal water recycling projects.
As part of the program, $20 million was recently granted to El Paso’s water board to help construct a direct potable reuse facility. The project is expected to save 13,000 acre-feet of water annually — enough to supply about 26,000 households.
Not all projects will meet requirements for federal assistance, so costs could fall to users. But delaying reuse and relying on new water — if it’s available — can be expensive.
“You have to compare it to the cost of new supplies and where you’ll store that,” Reidy said.
Seufert already knows he can make good beer from recycled water. He’s more worried about keeping the cost of business down.
“I’m concerned that the resources will be there for the planned growth in an affordable way for this region,” Seufert said. “But, as of now, I trust that they’re working on it.”
|
|
|
Everyone in Europe will now pay for CO2 emissions |
Posted by: Stone - 12-19-2022, 11:36 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
Computer translated from the Dutch site NosNews December 18, 2022;
Everyone in Europe will pay for CO2 emissions
The bullet went through the church last night after long negotiations: residents of the European Union have to pay for the greenhouse gases they emit. This means that with every refueling and when the heating is switched on, it must be paid because of the harmful substances that are released as a result.
People who insulate their homes well, purchase a heat pump or switch to an electric car can receive a subsidy from a special fund. There will also be money for people who have less to spend, also as a result of inflation. More than 86 billion euros is available in that fund.
CO2 emissions must more than halve
The measures are part of a package of climate laws. CO2 emissions must decrease by 55 percent by 2030. European industry, which already has to do this in part, will have to deal with higher emission costs, and companies from outside Europe will pay at the border for their emissions. The money that is collected with this can be spent on climate plans.
Citizens and companies have to pay for the CO2 from the exhaust and the chimney. This is done via energy companies and pumping stations. They have to pay for emission allowances and then pass on the costs to the customer who comes to refuel or turns on the gas heater.
"I am pleased that a balanced agreement has been reached on the largest climate legislation package in the EU ever," said MEP Esther de Lange ( CDA ). She was one of the negotiators and responsible for coordinating the Green Deal and chief negotiator for the Social Climate Fund.
"With this deal, we are drastically reducing emissions in Europe, but in a socially responsible manner without killing European industry. The introduction of ETS for transport and buildings is necessary to achieve our climate goals. This cannot be done without social measures to help people make this transition. European companies and families are already confronted with exceptionally high energy prices."
In recent days, there has been consultations on three major climate plans that had to be coordinated: CBAM, ETS and the Social Climate Fund.
In Europe, heavy industry companies are only allowed to emit what they have CO2 certificates for . This is called the ETS ( emissions trading system see the image below ). Every year, the EU determines how many of these so-called CO2 certificates may be distributed among industry. The amount of allowances that are distributed decreases every year, so that European emissions decrease.
Companies are allowed to trade with those rights, hence the name of the emissions trading system. If a company produces economically, that company can sell the other certificates to polluting companies that need extra rights. More economical companies are therefore more advantageous and there is a financial incentive to start producing sustainably.
There was a fear that this system would cause companies to leave Europe. Because companies in Europe have to pay extra for their emissions, their products are more expensive than those of companies from outside Europe. This unfair competition would allow companies to choose to settle outside Europe. Therefore, the industry received part of its rights for free and received subsidies, partially nullifying the financial incentive to make sustainability.
The EU has come up with a solution to this: it CBAM ( see image below ). As soon as polluting companies from outside Europe want to sell their stuff in Europe, they pay at the border for their CO2 emissions.
NOS / Harm Kersten
Figures a few years ago Environment Central that the Dutch are responsible for three times as much CO2 emissions as an average world citizen.
Fossil fuel oil and natural gas are the largest CO2 emitters when burned, especially when they are burned to produce electricity.
The plans will start as it stands in 2027, the Social Climate Fund a year earlier. Citizens are expected to be small amounts. For example, a refueling, says a spokesperson, will on average not be more than 10 euro cents more expensive, it is expected. Plans have been made for the energy crisis.
|
|
|
|