CRITICAL CATHOLIC COMMENTARY
in the Twilight of Reason
Mary, Conceived without
Sin,
pray for us who have
recourse to Thee
CONSECRATION OF THE 2024 ELECTION TO THE
BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
Mary
Immaculate, living tabernacle of the
Divinity, where the eternal Wisdom lies
hidden to be adored and served by angels and
men, Queen of heaven and of earth, beneath
whose sway are subject all things that are
lower than God, Patroness of the United
States of America, sorrowful and mindful of
our own sinfulness and the sins of our
nation, we come to thee, our refuge and
hope. Knowing that our country cannot be
saved by our own works and mindful of how
much our nation has departed from the ways
of thy Son, we humbly ask that thou wouldst
turn thine eyes upon our country to bring
about its conversion. We consecrate to thee
the integrity of the upcoming election and
its outcome, so that what is spiritually and
morally best for the citizens of our country
may be accomplished, and that all of those
who are elected would govern according to
the spiritual and moral principles which
will bring our nation into conformity with
the teachings of thy Son. Give grace to the
citizens of this land so that they will
choose leaders according to the Sacred Heart
of thy Son, that His glory may be made
manifest, lest we be given the leaders we
deserve. Trusting in the providential care
of God the Father and thy maternal care, we
have perfect confidence that thou wilst take
care of us and will not leave us forsaken.
O Mary Immaculate, pray
for us. Amen
|
This
Consecration will remain on the Boston Catholic Journal
until midnight November 5th, 2024
We urge our readers to pray it every day until this
crucial election is decided.
(prayer composed by Father Chad Ripperger)
I Have
a Question for You ...
“Where do We Go From Here?”
When Pope Francis Eradicates the Latin
Mass
For the text version of this video, click
here
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
The Holy Catholic Faith
Where is it And Who is Keeping
it?
Has the
Post-Conciliar Church
Lost Custody of the Faith?
All indications are that is has.
The “Dark
Ages” — that disdainful term for the period in history following
the collapse of the Roman Empire in 476 A.D. until the 15th
century (a period correctly described as the Middle
Ages) is understood by the secular world to have
lasted roughly 1000 years, beginning in Florence, Italy.
Within the
post-Conciliar Catholic Church, however, it appears
that the term extends well beyond the 15th century;
indeed, some 500 years beyond it! According to contemporary
Catholic thought articulated within the past five papacies,
the “Dark Ages” really ended in 1965 at the conclusion
of the Second Vatican Council. All the doctrines and teachings
prior to that Council were only imperfectly, deficiently,
and insufficiently articulated or defectively understood.
The 1000
Years of Darkness
Only
the Second Vatican Council finally attained to enlightenment
in the divine economy, and after 1,965 years of suspension,
it alone has provided the final, sufficient, and correct
understanding of God and Church, man and nature. Prior to
that, according to post-Conciliar thought, Catholics had
essentially lived in darkness, specifically the darkness
of the “pre-Conciliar Dark Ages.” It may be said that where
the Rational Enlightenment “saved the world from religion,”
Vatican II saved the Church from Catholicism.
This argument
— that God concealed the “real” truth from us for
either 1500 years on the one hand (concerning Protestants)
or for 2000 years on other (concerning Vatican II) does
not, of course, speak well of God’s munificence, truth,
or goodness — and that it is the very argument to
be brought against Protestants by Catholics, is good to
keep in mind. Why would a good, loving, and truthful God
conceal the real nature of the Church, the Sacraments,
and true worship from us for so long?
Pay No
Attention to What You See!
We are told
so many times that what we see is no indication of what
is real.
It is true
in two venues: the political landscape, which
is really of not much interest to us here except as a paradigm
of our being told that what we perceive to be oppressive,
unjust, and despotic, is really a benevolent government
open to all its constituents. We are simply not socially-enlightened
enough (“woke” enough) to see it, you understand.
The other
venue, of course, is the ecclesiastical landscape,
specifically the Vatican, and more specifically the papacies
of the Vatican II pontiffs and the various Dicasteries under
them. Within this crumbling landscape we are told that all
the dismantling, removal, renovation, and ultimately the
detritus following Vatican II has resulted in a more beautiful,
vibrant, healthy, and faithful Church, with pews filled
at Sunday Masses; a Church brimming with baptisms, confirmations,
marriages, vocations, ordinations … a chrysalis bursting
in a renewal of all things holy and good! We are
simply too “rigid,” too “backward,” not “progressive-enough”
to see it. Because we do not “walk in Accompaniment with
the Spirit,” we are blind … you understand.
From Bergoglio’s dismissive
perspective, “looking back (indietrismo) is useless,”
1
and given Francis’s
insolent treatment of those who worship as our forefathers
did for 200 centuries, they are equally useless as well.
They are impediments to his progressive agenda; to use his
words, they are “imbavagliando,” “gagging” the Church.2
His aggressively
Modernist agenda set in motion by Vatican II, apparently,
is too far advanced for the possibility of retrenching.
It is “useless” to even entertain the possibility of
rapprochement with the Mass of the Ages and the 2000-year
spirituality inseparable from it; a Mass within which we
immediately find sanctity, solemnity, sacrality, holiness,
heavenliness, beauty, spirituality, form, sobriety, chant,
mystery, the choir of angels; in short, all that is egregiously
absent within the bland, mundane, and very worldly
Novus Ordo
“Mass of Paul VI.”
What, Exactly,
are We to Understand by “Keeping — and Having
Kept — the Catholic Faith”?
The notions
of Keeping, and having kept, the Catholic
Faith can only be understood as retaining (keeping), and
having preserved (kept), the one true holy Catholic and
Apostolic Faith that has been kept and
practiced for the 2000 years prior to Vatican II
— even when the practice of that venerable Faith has been
unjustly deprived through ecclesiastical duress.
That unchanging and unchangeable Faith is kept in
the unwavering allegiance to it despite persecution and
even deprivation. It can be physically removed from
us, but it cannot be taken away from us.
Indeed,
why do we keep anything at all? We only keep what
we want and value; what is good and beautiful. Understanding
this, we must ask, is there anything more beautiful this
side of Heaven than the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?
… than the Faith bequeathed to us by our fathers, by the
Saints, by the Martyrs — the Faith that has generated the
greatest and most brilliant constellation of saints and
martyrs in the history of the Church?
It cannot
be the case that Faith of the Church for the 2000 years
preceding December 8, 1965 (when the Second Vatican
Council was formally concluded) is no longer the Faith of
the Church now — for if the Faith is different
then the Church, which is
the embodiment of that Faith, is different, and if
the Church is different, the Church is no more. This cannot
be. Christ promised that this cannot be.
But it
can be said that the teaching of the Church
is now vastly different from the teaching of the
Church for the 200 centuries prior to John XXIII and his
five successors, and most especially in what are presented
to us as the “Conciliar” documents of Vatican II, documents
that vastly, even essentially, diverge from
centuries of incontestably authoritative Catholic teaching.
So much
so, in fact, that in its latest iteration under the papacy
of Francis, we have begun to ask in earnest, perhaps for
the first time in our lives, “has the post-Conciliar Catholic
Church, or perhaps more accurately, the “Post-Catholic-Conciliar-Church”
— an increasingly different Church that first emerged
from Vatican II and has continued to diverge from
it through every successive papacy until that rupture with
the past has culminated in a Church, together with its hierarchy,
largely lost custody of the Catholic Faith?
Loathsome
Since beginning this article
some days ago, some alarming news has begun to emerge from
credible sources that has necessarily changed the tenor
of this discussion, one which, much to our consternation,
now concerns not simply the nature of the custody
of the Faith vis-à-vis the papacy of Francis and the disaffected
ecclesiastical apparatus in the Vatican under him, but concerning
nothing less than the integrity*
of the Catholic Faith itself. It has come to our attention
that under the direction of Pope Francis, English Cardinal
Arthur Roche, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship,
together with other powerful figures within the Roman Curia
are preparing to completely abolish — for all time
— and with no possibility of reclaiming — what they
perceive as the threat posed by the celebration of the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass in Latin — in other words, The Latin
Mass, TLM, as it has been celebrated for 2000 years
which must yield to the Novus Ordo (New Order)
“Mass of Paul VI” exclusively — a Mass now
barely half a century (54 years) in the making
… and still in the making. In order to accomplish
this with absolute, clinical exactitude, Francis & Friends
have determined to stamp out the Latin Mass as something
loathsome.
Such fear of something holy! As though the Mass of 2000
years can be shackled and plunged into a dungeon of unfathomable
depth, hidden from sight, concealed as a destructive secret,
and made irrecoverable to memory! How can we begin to imagine
such malice in the Church toward those within the
Church; how are we to begin to grasp the Church promulgating
such an evil law and with an iron fist as hateful
as the crushing fist of any petty dictator?
Too Catholic (for Ecumenism)
The Latin Mass, however, must
go: apart from the many contrived and ultimately superficial
reasons for abolishing the Latin Mass, the principal reason
is this: it is an impediment to Ecumenism,
the very corner-stone of Vatican II.
This is the real reason behind the vitriolic,
almost pathological animosity exhibited toward the Latin
Mass by the liberal, Modernist Church of Vatican II and
its principal proponent, Jorge Bergoglio: The Latin Mass
is not amenable to non-Catholics; it is … too Catholic,
it bears within itself the history, the memory, the devotion,
the filial love of two hundred centuries of generations
of Catholics who cleaved to the Faith through persecution
and hardship and for many, to the point of the shedding
of their blood.
Dwindling participation on
the Novus Ordo (Vernacular) Mass, and an alarming
increase in participation in the (Latin) Mass, especially
among young Catholics, appears to be the principal motivation
behind this draconian measure. The belief that Traditional
Catholics will become Vernacular “Paul VI Mass” Catholics
by heavy-handed decree; that they will be forced into this
free-form Mass by Procrustean measures, is nearly delusional.
It will not happen. I do not know what will happen,
but I am confident that this fiction will not occur.
Schism may occur. Were this the case, it would appear
from several informed sources that Francis himself would
be the formal cause of schism, and hence the Schismatic.
This is not a shocking possibility.
Of course,
we must ponder the question on everyone's mind: the fearful
question that wrenches our gut: where do
Traditional Catholics go from here — should the hammer
fall on the Faithful?
Who is To Answer This?
Shall Canon Lawyers decide
this … who are part of the very ecclesiastical apparatus
that is prejudicial against the continued celebration of
the Latin Mass? Even were Canon Lawyers able
to answer this (they are not), it is not theirs to decide,
for:
Ecclesiastical
law derives its formal authority from the supreme
legislator understood as the reigning Roman Pontiff
who, in his person, “possesses the totality of
legislative, executive, and judicial power.”
In other
words, since there is no superior above the pope,
3
Francis is exempt from, and
not subject to, Canon Law
… and will do as he has ever
done: whatever he wills, which, as
a matter of record, has not always, or even often, been
just, or even good.
Francis alone, then — temporally
speaking — will determine where we go from here, and given
his outspoken animosity toward the Latin Mass that preceded
Vatican II for 2000 years, and his even greater contempt
for Traditional Catholics, it appears that he is prepared
to offer us two options only:
-
Go to the Novus
Ordo (New Order) “Mass of Paul VI”
-
The second option is
intended to be optimally coercive:
No Mass at all. Essentially, “Attend
the Novus Ordo Mass or leave the Church.”
What crime, we must
ask, have these Catholics committed in continuing
to worship in Latin (until Francis repealed Summorum
Pontificum, three years ago in Traditionis Custodes,
2021) as their Catholic Religion has always worshipped up
to a mere 70 years ago? Is this the crime
that will cause them to be expelled from the Church?
Who is prepared to call
the Tridentine Mass — the worship of God
in Latin — a crime?
This Missal, This Mass
(the Tridentine Mass), promulgated in Quo Primum
(Pope Pius V, 1570):
“Grant[s] to all priests of the Latin
Rite the right to celebrate the Roman Mass [of 1570]
in perpetuity.”4
Whether or not, under the iron
fist and the unbending will of Francis, matters come to
such a destructive, divisive, and unimaginably ignominious
conclusion remains to be seen. Perhaps it is rumor after
all. By all accounts, we will know by mid-July.
Why the Vatican has said
nothing to quash these rumors is a matter of ominous speculation.
Geoffrey K.
Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Printable
PDF Version
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
_________________________
*
integrity: the quality or state
of being complete, sound, unimpaired or undivided, uncompromised
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/integrity;
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/integrity
1
https://thedialog.org/vatican-news/pope-francis-reminds-u-s-catholics-being-backward-looking-is-useless/
2
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2022/06/14/pope-francis-traditionalist-gag-243151
3 “The First See is judged
by no one” (#1404, The Code of Canon Law of the Catholic
Church, 1983).
4 “We require then that
all men, everywhere, shall embrace and observe the teachings
of the sacred and holy Roman Church, mother and mistress
of other churches; and that at no time in the future should
Mass be sung or recited otherwise than according to the
manner of the missal which we have published,
in any of the churches of the provinces of Christendom,
of Patriarchal, Cathedral, Collegiate or parochial status,
secular and regular belonging to any kind of order, monasteries,
both of men and women, also the military orders, and churches
without cure of souls or chapels, in which conventual Mass
is customarily celebrated or ought to be celebrated according
to the rite of the Roman Church, either aloud with a choir,
or in a low voice.”
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius05/p5quopri.htm
Are you prepared
to be
“Surprised
by God”
...
or Francis?
“Christians [note: not
Catholics] who say “it’s
always been done that way,”
and stop there, have hearts
closed to the surprises of
the Holy Spirit. They are
idolaters and rebels will
never arrive at the fullness
of the truth ... Obstinacy
is also the sin of idolatry:
the Christian who is
obstinate sins! The sin of
idolatry.” (Pope Francis 18
Jan 2016)
Who, we
are compelled to ask, is the real
“idolater”
and who the real
“rebel”?
In other words, the Church,
then, has been obstinate and in darkness
…
until the arrival of Francis
…
What does this say of God? What does it say of the last 265 popes
who preceded Francis? That they have all been obstinate and each
of them idolaters? From what he says, Francis alone is the one,
true, enlightened pope to whom God, after 2000 years, finally
deigned to reveal what he himself describes as “the fullness of truth”
about matters pastoral, theological, and doctrinal — which had either
eluded all his predecessors, or from whom God chose to
conceal the real truth until the inauguration of Francis as
the penultimate culmination of the papacy.
It is much like the arguments that Catholics have ever brought against
Protestants since Martin Luther: would a supremely good and loving God
conceal the “real” truth about authentic Christian doctrine and revelation
(and all that is essential to salvation) for 1400 years until the arrival
of Luther? For 1400 years the Christian world, then, had lived in ignorance,
darkness, and idolatry. Is that our conception of a supremely good and
loving God — that He deceived all those prior to Luther — and more to
the present point, prior to Francis? These two (in many ways reciprocal
personalities) consider themselves God’s unique emissaries to whom,
for the first time since Saint Peter, God has finally revealed
the real truth.
It is a variation of another contemporary and chilling mantra: “There
is only one God, and Francis (after Luther) is His prophet.” All before
him were either deceived by God, or are liars and idolaters.
Given this apparently monumental ego we are forced to ask, who is
the real “idol” and who the “idolater”? The answer to each appears
to be the same: Francis. Francis as the idol, and Francis as the idolater
adulating himself as God’s chosen revealer of the truth
— which had been withheld from all saints and sinners ... until Francis
came to Rome. His widely lauded (and widely publicized) “humility” appears
to only be exceeded by his own grandiose self-assessment as the intrepid
articulator of the new “more compassionate”, “less judgmental”, “all-inclusive”
Church — in which the only sin is the “obstinate” adherence to
what the Church has taught as indefeasibly true for 2000 years.
After all, where there is no judgment there is no sin
— which is to say, if nothing is evil, everything is good;
if every “life-style” is understood as “contributing its own unique
value” (however abhorrent)
to the Church, then the “Church” becomes tautologous with the
“World” and effectively indistinguishable from it. The Corpus Christi
becomes the Corpus Mundi (the Body of Christ becomes the Body
of the World").
How, we ask, are we to reconcile this nouveau
and all-inclusive Church envisioned by Francis,
and which dangerously accords with the world — with what Christ tells
us concerning our relationship to the world: “If you had been of the
world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the
world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates
you.” (St. John 15.19) How are we to understand this all-inclusiveness
— that is the charter of the contemporary world — with a very clear
admonishment to the contrary: "Love not the world, nor the things which
are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father
is not in him.” (1 Saint John 2.15). Despite Francis’s effort
to reconcile the two, they are ontologically distinct and diametrically
opposed. The proof? Christ on the Cross.
The “Old Wine Skin” and the “New” Church
It turns out that “old wineskin” — for
200 years understood to be Judaism — is the historic Catholic Church.
(I deliberately refrain from calling it “traditional”, a concept
which has been defamed and relegated to a nonsensical connotation of
“old” and “outdated” in liberal circles both within the Church and outside
of Her) That is to say, for Francis it is the Church itself prior
to Francis that is the old wineskin. The old wineskin, the “old”
Church, preceded him. The “new” is in the making of Francis’s image:
the “being-surprised-by-God-Church”.
It is a Church in which faithfulness to the teachings of Christ,
Sacred Scripture, and the Church is now understood as “obstinacy”.
What is more, it is “idolatry” according to Francis’s homily
on January 18, 2016 at the Casa Santa Marta:
“Christians who obstinately maintain ‘it’s always been done this way,’
this is the path, this is the street—they sin: the sin of divination.
It’s as if they went about by guessing: ‘What has been said and what
doesn’t change is what’s important; what I hear—from myself and my closed
heart
— more than the Word of the Lord.’ Obstinacy is also the sin of idolatry:
the Christian who is obstinate sins! The sin of idolatry. ‘And what
is the way, Father?’ “Open the heart to the Holy Spirit, discern
what is the will of God.”
Are we, then, clueless, and have we been so for two millennia? Do we
not know the will of God already? Did not Christ Himself reveal it
to us? Was this not the purpose of His Incarnation, together
with His salvific suffering and death on the Cross? If He did not reveal
to us His will which is one with the will of the Father, then Holy Scripture
is fraudulent. Do we know the Commandments? The Sermon on
the Mount? The entire New Testament? Even the Old?
Should we have to resort to “discerning the will of God” in situations
where His express will is already known as it is revealed in
the four Gospels and the Epistles? Do we really have to “discern” the
will of God concerning adultery, homosexuality, the worthy reception
of the Holy Eucharist — all of them presently issues only
because Francis had made them so by his deliberate ambiguity where there
is nothing ambiguous about them in Scripture or Church teaching?
Are you prepared to be “Surprised” by God”?
Or should we more realistically say,
“Surprised by Francis”?
He has a very clear, progressive, and repressive liberal agenda
that is at odds with millennia of Church teaching which he attempts
to make irrelevant, outdated, and out-of-touch, to feed an apparently
narcissistic hunger for adulation from men by attempting to accommodate
Church teaching to the corrupt and scandalous demands of the world.
Will he go so far as to abrogate some of it, perhaps even much of it
(although, canonically, he cannot) in his effort to establish a détente
with the world and other religions? We do not know, but the indicators
are ominous for the Church as She has stood for 2000 years.
Perhaps Francis should make a greater effort to read Sacred Scripture,
Patristics, and delve into the Deposit of Faith periodically
… than trying to “discern” what is already clear, and waiting
to be “surprised by God” — only to be surprised to find that the Church
has kept faithful (not “obstinate”) custody of what God
has already revealed — perhaps to the displeasure of Francis and the
liberal coterie of bishops who are attempting to dismantle what the
blood of the Martyrs had kept intact, and held inviolable.
That Francis has so much as entertained and encouraged
discussion about long-settled issues concerning homosexuality, adultery,
divorce, and the Eucharist as the signal bond of unity in the Church;
that he has planned to “commemorate” and “celebrate” the 500th anniversary
of the “Reformation” in Sweden, together with the schismatic Martin
Luther who shattered Christian unity and detested the Catholic Church,
is a scandal of epic proportions to the faithful and cause of incalculable
confusion in the Church. Confusion is a cloven print in the already
scorched earth following the Second Vatican Council, and the ineluctable
prelude to division, the second cloven print that desecrates
the Sanctuary.
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Printable PDF Version
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
Vindictive,
Arrogant, Despotic, and Vengeful
Francis is a Pope ...
but
not
a
“Holy”
“Father”
Understand this:
To love the
pope is to will him every good and no evil.
This is what
it means for a Catholic to love anyone.
We love Pope
Francis in this way; we will him every good and no evil.
Do we admire
him? Absolutely not! Do we esteem him. No! Is he
dear to us? Not in the least.
He is, canonically,
our pope — but few of us would predicate of him the two
consecutive words historically associated with the Vicar
of Jesus Christ on Earth: “Holy Father.” He has consistently
demonstrated himself to be neither.
Click
here to continue reading
A Reflection on the Legacy of a Steward
Francis,
Ecumenism,
and the Divisions within us
All are Welcome, Except All
the Children ...
Francis
will die
— although we do not wish his death, nor the death
of any man — but it is, withal, the temporal end
of every man, pontiff or layman, commoner or king. Reflecting
on this as Francis recently celebrated his 87th birthday,
we are moved to observe something very simple about
his stewardship over the House that the Lord has entrusted
to him.
For 10 years now, Francis
has attempted to
“renovate”
a House that is not his, but only placed in his care
as a steward. The majestic facades, the incense-imbued
silence within, dimly colored with the stained-glass
light of a late afternoon; the soaring spires that proclaimed
the great Triumph of the Cross abroad for all to see
— these were not his to depredate: they belonged to
God and to His simple servants who raised them to His
glory through the coppers they gave and through the
rough, calloused, hands that engraved every niche in
stone by dint of a devotion every bit as indestructible
as the tip of the chisel the stone yielded to.
Some of these Francis
and his bishops simply tore down; others they emptied
by
“consolidating”
them with other Catholic parishes who were equally bleeding
parishioners and sold them to Muslims whose adherents
grew as exponentially as ours diminished. Some were
sold to Evangelical Protestants ...
Click to continue reading
Martyrology for Today
Semen est sanguis Christianorum (The blood of Christians
is the seed of the Church) Tertullian, Apologeticum,
50
ROMAN MARTYROLOGY
Sunday
September
15th
in the
Year
of Grace
2024
Time
after
Pentecost
This Day, the Fifteenth Day of September
The Octave of the Nativity and the
Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
At Rome, on the Nomentan road, the birthday of
blessed Nicomedes, priest and martyr.
As he said to those who would compel him to sacrifice: "I
sacrifice only to the Omnipotent God who reigns in Heaven",
he was for a long time scourged with leaded whips, and thus
went to our Lord.
In the diocese of Chalons, St. Valerian,
martyr, who was suspended on high by the governor
Priscus, and tortured with iron hooks. Remaining immovable
in the confession of Christ, and continuing joyfully to
praise Him, he was struck with the sword by order of the
same magistrate.
At Marcianopolis, in Thrace, St. Melitina,
a martyr, in the time of the emperor Antoninus and
the governor Antiochus. She was twice led to the temples
of the Gentiles, and as the idols fell to the ground each
time, she was hanged and torn, and finally decapitated.
At Adrianople, the holy martyrs Maximus,
Theodore, and Asclepiodotus, who were crowned
under the emperor Maximian.
Also, St. Porphyrius, a comedian,
who, in the presence of Julian the Apostate, being baptized
in jest, and suddenly converted by the power of God, declared
himself a Christian. Forthwith, by order of the emperor,
he was struck with an axe, and thus crowned with
martyrdom.
The same day, St. Nicetas,
a Goth, who was burned alive for the Catholic faith, by
order of king Athanaric.
At Cordova, the holy martyrs Emilas,
deacon, and Jeremias, who ended their martyrdom in
the persecution of the Arabs by being beheaded, after a
long detention in prison.
At Toul, in France, St. Aper, bishop.
Also, St. Leobinus, bishop
of Chartres.
At Lyons, St. Albinus, bishop.
The same day, the decease of St. Aichard,
abbot.
In France, St. Eutropia, widow.
And elsewhere in divers places, many other holy martyrs,
confessors, and holy virgins.
Omnes sancti
Mártyres, oráte pro nobis.
(“All
ye Holy Martyrs, pray for us,”
from the Litaniae Sanctorum, the Litany
of the Saints)
Response: Thanks be to God.
|
Roman Martyrology by Month
Why the Martyrs Matter
Each day we bring you a calendar,
a list really, of the holy Martyrs who had suffered and died
for Christ, for His Bride the Church, and for our holy Catholic
Faith; men and women for whom — and well they knew — their
Profession of Faith would cost them their lives.
They could have repudiated all three (Christ, Church, and Catholic
Faith) and kept their lives for a short time longer (even the
lapsi * only postponed their death — and
at so great a cost!)
What would motivate men, women, even children and entire families
to willingly undergo the most evil and painfully devised tortures;
to suffer death rather than denial?
Why did they not renounce their Catholic Faith when the first
flame licked at their feet, after the first eye was plucked
out, or after they were “baptized” in mockery by boiling water
or molten lead poured over their heads? Why did they not flee
to offer incense to the pagan gods since such a ritual concession
would be merely perfunctory, having been done, after all, under
duress, exacted by the compulsion of the state? What is a little
burned incense and a few words uttered without conviction, compared
to your own life and the lives of those you love? Surely God
knows that you are merely placating the state with empty gestures
…
Did they love their wives, husbands, children — their mothers,
fathers and friends less than we do? Did they value their own
lives less? Were they less sensitive to pain than we are? In
a word, what did they possess that we do not?
Nothing. They possessed what we ourselves are given in the Sacrament
of Confirmation — but cleaved to it in far greater measure than
we do: Faith and faithfulness; fortitude and valor, uncompromising
belief in the invincible reality of God, of life eternal in
Him for the faithful, of damnation everlasting apart from Him
for the unfaithful; of the ephemerality of this passing world
and all within it, and lives lived in total accord with that
adamant belief.
We are the Martyrs to come! What made them so will make us
so. What they suffered we will suffer. What they died for, we
will die for. If only we will! For most us, life will be
a bloodless martyrdom, a suffering for Christ, for the sake
of Christ, for the sake of the Church in a thousand ways outside
the arena. The road to Heaven is lined on both sides with Crosses,
and upon the Crosses people, people who suffered unknown to
the world, but known to God. Catholics living in partibus
infidelium, under the scourge of Islam. Loveless marriages.
Injustices on all sides. Poverty. Illness. Old age. Dependency.
They are the cruciform! Those whose lives became Crosses because
they would not flee God, the Church, the call to, the
demand for, holiness in the most ordinary things of life made
extraordinary through the grace of God. The Martyrology we celebrate
each day is just a vignette, a small, immeasurably small, sampling
of the martyrdom that has been the lives of countless men and
women whom Christ and the Angels know, but whom the world does
not know.
“Exemplum enim dedi vobis”, Christ
said to His Apostles: “I have given you an example.” And His
Martyrs give one to us — and that is why the Martyrs matter.
-
A Martyr is one who suffers
tortures and a violent death for the sake of Christ
and the Catholic Faith.
-
A Confessor is one who
confesses Christ publicly in times of persecution and who
suffers torture, or severe punishment by secular authorities
as a consequence. It is a title given only given
to those who suffered for the Faith —
but was not killed for it — and
who had persevered in the Faith until the end.
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
Boston Catholic Journal
Note: We suggest that you explore
our newly edited and revised
“De
SS. Martyrum Cruciatibus — The Torments and Tortures of the
Christian Martyrs”
for an in-depth historical account of the sufferings of the
Martyrs.
*
Those early Christians who renounced their Catholic Faith
in times of persecution. When confronted with the prospect
of torture and death if they held fast to their faith in
Christ, they denied Him and their Faith through an act of
sacrificing (often incense) to the pagan Roman gods and
in so doing kept their lives and/or their freedom and property.
Totally Faithful to
the Sacred Deposit of Faith entrusted
to the Holy See in Rome
“Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti
verbum Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
“I
know your works ... that you have but little power,
and yet you have kept My word, and have not denied
My Name.”
(Apocalypse 3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2024 Boston Catholic
Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise stated,
permission is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal
for the copying and distribution of the articles
and audio files under the following conditions:
No additions, deletions, or changes are to be made
to the text or audio files in any way, and the copies
may not be sold for a profit. In the reproduction,
in any format of any image, graphic, text, or audio
file, attribution must be given to the Boston Catholic
Journal.
|
|