Suggested Reading:



Basic
Traditional C
atholic
Audio

Free Catholic Audio Library
in Latin & English


Audio Books,
devotions, and
prayers
:
L
isten to them
or download them

completely free
 


Baltimore

  Catechism

online

Baltimore Catechism - the most authoritative Catholic Catechism ever printed

Discover what
the Church

has taught for
2000 Years
before
Vatican II

Newly Formatted
with hyperlinks
for improved readability

Read online
or

Download the PDF



The Little Office

The Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary
of the
Blessed Virgin Mary




Pope Pius V Catechism of Trent

Catechism of the Council of Trent New Edition

New Edition (free)



Novena to
St Jude

 Novena to St Jude Printable 4-fold with one piece of paper

Printable Booklet
on 1 sheet
of paper, 4-fold, free



Learn your Faith through this free series of  video presentations by
Dominican Friars

St. Thomas Institute

St. Thomas Institute
 


Boston Catholic Journal

Write us:

editor@boston-catholic-journal.com

Boston Catholic Journal

HOME

 

 


Boston Catholic Journal - Critical Catholic Commentary in the Twilight of Reason

 

 

Boston Catholic Journal

Martyrology for Today


CRITICAL CATHOLIC COMMENTARY

in the Twilight of Reason


 

 

Mary, Conceived without Sin, Pray for us who have Recourse to Thee

Mary, Conceived without Sin,

pray for us who have recourse to thee

 

___________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

“… or in another language.”

Leo abolishes Latin as the Language of the Church and makes a dramatic step toward the de-construction of the Catholic Church

Why Leo’s Eliminating Latin as
the Language of the Church
...

will Result in Irrecoverable Loss
  for the Catholic Church

 

§1. The curial institutions will normally draft their acts
in Latin or in another language.”
*

 

In less than six months, Pope Leo XIV has made one of the most significant steps toward the de-construction of Catholicism since 1963

 

The Roman Catholic Church as a magisterial institution possessed of the inexpungable character of divine certainty, has written, decreed, formalized, legislated and expressed itself in Latin — the language through which it has authoritatively taught for at least 1,600 years and 10 months prior to Pope Leo XIV’s shocking and sweeping mandate on November 24, 2025 that pronouncements of the Church’s curial offices are no longer to be exclusively rendered in Latin, but “in Latin or in another language.”

Despite rhetoric to the contrary, this is a monumental shift in paradigm: until Leo XIV, every “Curial act” — until last month — had been “drafted” by default in Latin as it had been for over 1,600 years.

First of all, are we to really understand that the directive to use “Latin or … another language” applies only to deliverances of the Roman Curia, and second, that such deliverances themselves are to be understood as “drafts only” and not final forms? And in the end, does it really matter?
 

A Dramatic Shift in Paradigm

I will argue that there are not simply compelling, but indisputable reasons that the Roman Catholic Church, prior to Leo, used Latin not as just a theological, but a precise juridical, pedagogical, archival, and institutional language.

Why, in a dramatic shift of paradigm, Leo has apparently chosen otherwise, we can only speculate upon — which I will not do. However, if we choose the least contentious (but misleading) explanation we will probably arrive at something like the following:


Drafts only?

If we argue that by its explicit wording this paragraph pertains to “drafts” only, that is to say, to preliminary versions, tentative in nature only, and understood as being presented in a provisional form waiting to be rendered into the logical and historical framework of the 1,600-year Latin in which, and through which, the Church has always articulated itself, its dogmas, and its doctrines, then all is well.

It nevertheless remains that even in their most articulate vernacular form, these several (many?) languages can only, and at best, approximate any Latin version —and will, at worst, deviate from it.  Either Latin cannot be reconciled with these vernaculars, or these vernaculars cannot be reconciled with Latin.

This leaves the Roman Revisionists with an uncomfortable choice: one language group must be left out in the cold. They cannot choose to leave out Latin without undermining the very historical framework and foundation upon which the Church exists. But given the Leonine mandate how, then, shall they proceed?

What is more, without a single language invested with what attains to apodictic certainty through nearly two millennia of historical authority through unbroken doctrinal, juridical, and theological form — in Latin — a single authoritative linguistic source, to which every “other language” must appeal or submit to in the way of final and decisive denotation, providing both recourse and redress to competing vernaculars.  A plurality of languages clearly cannot achieve this.
 

On the other hand

If this indeed is the case, why bother to add the disjunctive or” (“or in another language.”) in the first place? What is the purpose of introducing this qualification at all?

That is to say, if the directive that, “The curial institutions will normally draft their acts in Latin or in another language” does not constitute a clear divergence from the unique historical language of the Church, why is it directed to do so in “another” language, not simply as permissive, but in so stating, implicitly endowing “another” (any language) with the same historically stable and unique characteristics that are inherent within, and inextricable from Latin? Especially in the way of precision and immutability (I will explain a bit further on)?

Notice, too, that the word “will” is used as an imperative — not “can,” nor “are allowed to,” but is applied with equal force to both the vernacular and the Latin — but how can this possibly be?

A literal Latin composition will always differ from every vernacular rendering. What is more, each and every translation distinct from the Latin will differ not just from any “optional,” “alternate,” or even “concurrent” Latin rendering — but from each other as well. In other words, every vernacular translation will be applied without prejudice to each other. All will be “correct” despite any nuance within, or latent conflict between, them.

To further complicate matters, given many translators (and assuming that each translator possesses a mastery of the subtleties inherent in their own language) and subsequent revisions by still other translators within that language, the combined likelihood of a divergence in translation between languages is not just “possible”— but inescapable.
 

What does this mean for the Church?

In abrogating the only non-evolving language — Ecclesiastical Latin — the language through which alone the stringent conceptual architecture of the Church has been articulated, sustained, and preserved, defining its dogma, and sixteen millennia of doctrine — the Magisterium of the Church will be divided between the Church of roughly 1600 years prior to Pope Leo XIV, and the post-Leonine Magisterium articulated, not through one, but through many languages in many translations. In a word, should this prove to be the case, it is a move away from apodictic Magisterial certainty.

 If this is what Leo XIV intends, it is not just momentous, but potentially catastrophic, and this is why: the distinct linguistic morphology of Latin is not shared by any other language — it possesses an unparalleled and historically embedded matrix of denotation and meaning — not only which has been — but in which it has been consistently propagated through sixteen centuries in a way indispensable to matters doctrinal and juridical within Holy Mother Church.

Any appeal to certainty — a certainty absolutely vital to doctrine and unimpeachable magisterium — which falls short of an unequivocal standard to which all translations must appeal for univocal substantiation — that alone can exclude all possible translational doubt — of itself subverts the very certainty that it seeks, or must abolish apodictic certainty itself — and with it, Holy Mother Church.

In subsequent articles I will explain why I believe this to be the case if — and only if — Leo’s directive pertains only to “Curial acts” and their “drafts”…

_________________________

 

* “General Regulations of the Roman Curia, 24.11.2025
Title XIII
LANGUAGES IN USE
Art. 50
§1. The curial institutions [*] will normally draft their acts in Latin or in another language.”

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2025/11/24/0896/01618.html

 

Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
 

December 16, 2025
Feast of St. Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli and martyr

 

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________

 

 

The Most Urgent Question of Our Time:

When the Son of Man Comes, will He Find Faith on Earth? 

(St. Luke 18.8)

 

     No more stunning, no more frightening, and perhaps no more ominously portentous words are spoken in all the Gospels, in fact, in the entire New Testament — perhaps even in the entirety of Sacred Scripture itself; words that have become increasingly fraught with significance with every passing year of the most unfortunate papacy of Francis — a papacy not just  likely … but I believe with certainty … will be understood not simply as among the worst … but the worst … the most destructive to the Faith and to the Church in the annals of 2000 years of Church history.

Indeed, with every generation following that devastating Second Vatican Council — that scorched earth assault on Tradition and historical Catholicism — the question increasingly verges on an implied and obvious answer.

Indeed, we must wonder if the question that Christ poses … “When the Son of Man comes will He find Faith on earth?” … is, in fact, spoken of this generation, or of one soon — very soon, to come.
 
As with so many of Christ’s teachings, this troubling question is too often and too deftly explained away — especially by the overwhelming number of the liberal theologians and bishops who have proliferated and multiplied since 1962 — which is to say, by “the learned and the wise”. If we heed them, it would appear that either Christ does not know what He is saying, or we do not know what He is saying — although we all agree that He said something ... that sounds suspiciously clear.
 
We must, however, pay careful attention to these twelve words, …. perhaps more now than at any
other time in Church history.



“When the Son of Man comes will He find Faith on earth?”

These are twelve words, however, to which we must pay careful attention, perhaps more now than at any other time in Church history.

However reluctant we are to take Christ at His word — which becomes increasingly inconvenient to us — we must recognize that Jesus never spoke idly: His words, His teachings — and yes, His Commandments — were always uttered to one explicit end: the salvation of souls — attaining to Heaven and everlasting happiness and to avoiding Hell and eternal misery.

The Jewish religious authorities — “the learned” of His own time — had scornfully dismissed Christ’s warning that not so much as stone would remain standing in the great Temple 1 ... the very Temple within which, 70 years later, these words were fulfilled when Rome laid waste in days what took 46 years to build.

We tend to view such alarming statements made by Jesus — and there are many — with the same scorn and disdain today.
    

Indeed ... what has become of the “Faith of our Fathers?”

A mere fifty years ago we ourselves would have instinctively replied “Of course He will find faith! There simply must be some deeper, some obscure and less evident meaning to this that we do not presently understand — and what He appears to be saying, He is not really saying at all. Surely the “learned” of our own day can deftly explain the answer to this troubling question. In the end, they will conclude, Jesus is really asking something entirely different from what He appears to be asking and that it has nothing to do with our very real defection from the Faith.”

It is likely that many Jews of Jesus’ time — both the learned and the unlearned — had replied in much the same way. In fact, they did. 

In other words, to us, our faith, the Faith of the Catholic Church for two millennia, could no sooner disappear than ... well, the stones of the great Temple 2000 years ago!

If, however, we take a careful inventory of our present and undeniably dismal and increasingly scandalous situation in the Church — especially as it has unfolded in the last five decades — Jesus does not quite appear as ... “perplexing” ... as so many apparently make Him to be.

Candidly Ask yourself the following:

Has the Faith — the Catholic Faith — flourished in the last 50 years, or has it withered?

Are vocations to the Priesthood and Religious life growing or dwindling?

Are Catholics having more children or are they having fewer children?

Are Missionary efforts, to the end of (dare we say it?) “conversion” as mandated by Christ encouraged as intrinsic to Catholicism — or are they discouraged as impolite, obtrusive, culturally imperialistic and inherently inimical to the “Ecumenical spirit of Vatican II” — especially as interpreted by Pope Francis for whom “proselytism is solemn nonsense,” to use his own words, words that mock the sacrifices of countless missionary saints through the 2000 years preceding Vatican II more enlightened” understanding  of the Great Commission*?

Rather, we find that “conversion” to Christ and His Church is actively discouraged — that especially under Pope Francis it is no longer understood as a holy and inherently necessary endeavor — instead, it is disdained, even dismissed, as “socially and culturally incorrect” — indeed, we find that promoting our Catholic Faith — as Christ has commanded us to— has been  forbidden by Francis and his “progressive” coterie of feckless and disaffected cardinals and bishops! What pope, prior to Vatican II, could ever have envisioned this?

Is our understanding of the Catholic Church, as an absolutely unique institution indispensable to the ordinary means of salvation, emphasized as urgently today (if it is emphasized at all) as it was a hundred years ago? Fifty years ago? Indeed, is the concept itself — of the singularity and indispensability of the Holy Catholic Church — still deemed an actual dogma and a viable concept at all?

For all our insolence and equivocation, we know the answers, and we are uncomfortable with them, for they fly in the face of Christ and all that He taught — to say nothing of Sacred Scripture, Holy Tradition, and the Sacred Deposit of the Faith entrusted to the Catholic Church by God Himself.

Indeed, Christ’s question takes on a greater sense of urgency still, for the sheep are scattered and confused as never before. The papacy of Francis has been disastrous for the Church. Why? Precisely because he has taken Vatican II to its logical conclusion: the irrelevance of the Church.

Ubi est Pastor?

Where is the Shepherd? Who is earnestly addressing this spiritual malaise and religious decay due to the indolence and dereliction of the vast majority of American and European bishops who appear far more eager for secular plaudits than the now quaint and discredited notion of “the salvation of souls.” Pope Francis has effectively declared this mandate defunct in favor of the rehabilitation of bodies, societies, economies, and “the environment”. That the passing material environment of man is infinitely less important than the eternal abode of his soul, often appears to elude Francis. Indeed, it appears to elude most Catholics whose mantra increasingly coincides with the world’s: Social activism! ... not interior conversion away from this world ... and to Christ.

Shame! Shame on us! By our silence, our fear of being disparaged by “other Catholics” for the sake of Christ, we condone this travesty — are complicit in it ... even promote it!

What will motivate us to recognize, and to redress, this frightful and ultimately deadly state of affairs?

There are, after all, other contenders in this world for the souls of men ... seen and unseen! As our own wick smolders, others blaze! The burning Crescent of Islam, poised like a scimitar, and every bit as deadly, glows and grows in the east, and with it, not an ethnic, but a Religious Cleansing to which the world remains indifferent — an expunging of every vestige of Christianity in partibus infidelium. And even Islam has its secular collaborators: the European Union — once a continent raised up from utter barbarism to a civilization formed and ennobled by its Catholic heritage — will no longer tolerate the inclusion of its indissoluble Christian heritage within its Constitution. Not only does it thoroughly repudiate its own Christian cultural heritage — it prohibits it — even banishes it! This is nothing less than self-loathing. And perhaps it ought to be.

Surely, then, in our effort to remedy this impending state of dissolution, we will first turn to our bishops, since they are, preeminently, the “Teachers and Guardians of the Faith”. But more often than not — much more often than not — in the well-appointed office at the end of the corridor we do not find a shepherd of souls but a deeply sequestered, occasionally avuncular, and predictably remote ... “administrator.”

Relegating his prime responsibility as Teacher and Promoter of the Faith ... to others, in the form of Lay committees and subcommittees largely “chaired” by liberal Catholics more concerned with social issues than the salvation of souls, are we confident that the patrimony of our faith will somehow percolate through this strata of already contaminated soil and reach our children authentically and intact? Is our fear mitigated ... or further exacerbated ... by our bishops’ resolute lack of diligence in being attentive to what Catholic colleges and theologians in their own dioceses are really teaching — and who are teaching the teachers ... who, in turn, are teaching our children?

Do you think that your bishop actually — that is to say, cognitively — is aware of, or even concerned with — what the teachers themselves are actually teaching?

Not in this diocese. Not in Boston. In fact, the former Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley had routinely feted, praised, and held up as exemplary, the clueless “Catechists” who churn out our children to the Sacrament of Confirmation — with no clue whatever of that in which they are being confirmed. By comparison, even the dismal failure of our public schools in Boston must be deemed a stunning success.

For most of us — especially in the Archdiocese of Boston, but no less elsewhere — the answer is, as they say, a “no-brainer:” it is a universally resounding no. Most of us find, to our growing dismay and deepening cynicism, that our bishops appear to have “more important,” more ... “pressing” things to do ... than to communicate the Faith to the faithful ... especially the children.

Really, we beg the question: if no one teaches the teachers — who, then, teaches the children? If they are not brought the faith by those to whom it has been entrusted — the bishops, the episcopacy — who will bring it to them?
Will they — how can they — acquire the Faith ... if no one brings it to them? Saint Paul is very clear about this:


“How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they be sent ...?” (Romans 10.14-15)


Ask yourself candidly: do you know more ... or less ... of your Catholic faith than your children? Very likely more — although, in all honesty, it is probably little. You politely assent to the now quaint Catholic notion that “parents are the primary teachers of their children,” but knowing little of your own Faith, you simply shell out $175.00 per child and pan off this grave responsibility to others of whom you know nothing, and who themselves largely know nothing of the faith they presume to teach. You go through the motions as careless of what your children are taught in their 10 years of “Religious Education” as your bishop is of what the teachers teach. 10 years later, and $1500 poorer per child, you scratch your head and wonder why Johnny still does not know God, and why Judy never goes to Mass — and yet we have agreed that you know more than your children ...

What, then, we must ask — with growing apprehension — will your children teach their children ...?


What will they — who know even less than you — teach those who know nothing?


Total Ignorance

The momentum, as we see, is inexorable — until it culminates in total ignorance: every generation knows less of their faith than the generation preceding it. It is, in the end, the devolution from doctrine to legend, from legend to fiction, and from fiction to myth.

That is not just a poor, but a stultifying and ultimately deadly patrimony.

This default — at every level — in transmitting the authentic Catholic faith intact ... leaves Jesus question very suddenly very real.

“Recently, a Gallup poll was taken on Catholic attitudes toward Holy Communion. The poll showed serious confusion among Catholics about one of the most basic beliefs of the Church. Only 30 percent of those surveyed believe they are actually receiving the Body and Blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.”

The problem is more than mathematical; as we have seen, it is exponential. 70% of Catholics do not possess this most fundamental, this most essential understanding of the core article of genuine Catholic doctrine: that “Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His Blood, you have no life in you.” Heavy stuff!

It is not just a matter of the greatest concern, but nothing less than a matter of the gravest dereliction that most Catholics do not realize — do not know — that the very Mass itself is an abbreviation of “The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”, and that it is really a Sacrifice, the actual re-enactment of Calvary before their very eyes!

This failure of understanding ... culminates in a failure in Faith. It possesses, in significant ways, the remorseless characteristics of mathematical certainties. Not understanding, grasping — having never been taught — the most elementary features of the faith, how can they be understood to possess what they have not acquired, and how can they transmit, pass on, what they do not possess? It is inescapable. 

Prognostication, of course, is for fools.

But the words of Christ are certainties that will come to pass.

“Weep not for Me, but for your children,” 5 Christ told the sorrowing women on the road to Calvary.

Jesus’ question, then — “When the Son of Man comes will He find faith on earth?”—  is not a “rhetorical question” at all; it is a question fraught with enormous significance ... the frightful answer to which appears to be unfolding before our very eyes ... but that is if you take Christ at His word — and given Jesus’ track record on things yet to come, we would do well and wisely to give pause for more than thought.

Are you worried now ...? Not nearly enough.

And this is all the more frightening still.

Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal

Comments? Write us:  editor@boston-catholic-journal.com

   Printable PDF Version

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________

 

 

The Holy Catholic Faith
Where is it And Who is Keeping it?

The Catholic Church that we Once Knew and Recognize no Longer

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.

Continue reading

 

___________________________________________________________________________

 


Martyrology for Today

Semen est sanguis Christianorum (The blood of Christians is the seed of the Church) Tertullian, Apologeticum, 50

2004 Roman Martyrology by Month

 

 

 

2004 Roman Martyrology

 

 

Thursday, December 18th in the Year of Grace 2025

 

This Day, the Eighteenth Day of December
 

1.  At Jerusalem, Saint Modestus, bishop, who, after the Holy City had been taken and laid waste by the Persians, restored the monasteries and filled them with monks, and with great labor repaired the sanctuaries destroyed by fire.

 

2.  At Eleutheropolis in Palestine, the passion of fifty holy soldiers, who, in the time of the emperor Heraclius, were slain for the faith of Christ by the Saracens besieging Gaza.

 

3.  In Brittany, Saint Judicael, who greatly promoted peace between the Bretons and the Franks, and, having laid down the office of king, is said to have spent his life in the monastery of Saint Méen.

 

4.  At Andenne in Brabant, Saint Begga, widow, who, after the murder of her husband, founded the monastery of the Blessed Virgin Mary, under the Rules of Saints Columban and Benedict.

 

5.  In the monastery of Fulda in Austrasia, Saint Sturm, abbot, who, a disciple of Saint Boniface, evangelized Saxony and, at the command of his master, took care to have this celebrated monastery rebuilt, and was its first abbot.

 

6.  On Mount Mercury in Lucania, Saint Christopher of Collesano, monk, who, together with his whole family, devoted himself earnestly to spreading the monastic life.

 

7.  Near Brussels in Brabant of Lorraine, Saint Vivina, first abbess of the monastery of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Bigards.

 

8.  At Rome on the Caelian Hill, Saint John of Matha, priest, who, a Frenchman by birth, founded the Order of the Most Holy Trinity for the Ransom of Captives.

 

9.  At Barcelona in Spain, Saint Joseph Manyanet y Vives, priest, who, in order that all families might be made perfect after the example of that holy family of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph of Nazareth, founded the Congregations of the Sons and of the Daughters of the Holy Family.

 

10.  In the village of Don Benito near Badajoz in Spain, blessed Matilda of the Sacred Heart Téllez Robles, virgin, who, seeing in her neighbor the image of Christ Himself, gave herself with kindness and diligence, especially to the material and spiritual help of the poor, and founded the Congregation of the Daughters of Mary, Mother of the Church.

 

11.  At Rome, at Saint Sabina on the Aventine, blessed Hyacinth (Henry) Cormier, priest, who, as Master General, prudently governed the Order of Preachers, greatly fostering theological and spiritual studies.

 

 

__________________________________________________________________

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)

 ℟. Thanks be to God.

 

 

 

The 1956 edition below, issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII, is a revision of the typical edition of 1749, which had been promulgated by Pope Benedict XIV remained the foundational text for later updates throughout the 18th–20th centuries up to 2004 — the English translation of which remained the sole source of the Martyrology until the present translation of the 2004 Roman Martyrology by the Boston Catholic Journal in 2025.
 

 

 

1956 ROMAN MARTYROLOGY

 

Thursday, December 18th in the Year of Grace 2025


This Day, the  Eighteenth Day of December
 

At Philippi, in Macedonia, the birthday of the holy martyrs Rufus and Zosimus, who were of the number of the disciples, by whom the primitive Church was founded among the Jews and the Greeks. Their happy martyrdom is mentioned by St. Polycarp, in his epistle to the Philippians.

At Laodicea, in Syria, the martyrdom of the Saints Theotimus and Basilian.

In Africa, the holy martyrs Quinctus, Simplicius, and others, who suffered in the persecution of Decius and Valerian.

In the same country, St. Moysetes, martyr.

Also, in Africa, the holy martyrs Victurus, Victor, Victorinus, Adjutor, Quartus, and thirty others.

At Mopsuestia, in Cilicia, St. Auxentius, bishop, who, while he was a soldier under Licinius, preferred to surrender his military insignia rather than to offer grapes to Bacchus. Having been made bishop, he was renowned for merit, and rested in peace.

At Tours, St. Gratian, consecrated first bishop of that city by Pope St. Fabrian. Celebrated for many miracles, he calmly went to his repose in the Lord.


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.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


1959 Roman Martyrology by Month

January

February

March April May June
July August September October November December


 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 



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.

 

 


 

Boston Catholic Journal

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 - 2025 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.