In this Mass (Sunday 1st May) is set forth the idea that work is noble, that workers are entitled to their just due from employers. The Introit tells us that

Wisdom rendered to the just the wages of their labours. St. Paul teaches that all work must be done in the ...Name of the Lord Jesus Christ (Epistle). Work done for the right reasons is pleasing to God.

The Alleluia reminds us that St. Joseph is our protector in all walks of life and will obtain for us grace to lead an innocent life. The Gospel reminds us that Jesus did manual labour and was thought to be the carpenter’s son. Thus, we should ask God to direct...the work of our hands (Offertory) and intercede with St. Joseph to make up what is wanting in our works that they may be pleasing to God bound together by charity, which is the bond of perfection (Gospel).

Mass of V Sunday After Easter is commemorated in the Mass.

With so many tribulations besieging the Holy Church, to whom can we better turn to intercede than St. Joseph?

Pope Pius XII introduced the I class Feast of St. Joseph, Workman, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, to counter the Communist secular holy day of May Day.

St. Joseph is the Patron of the Universal Church, and we can flee to him in our difficulties for he can, as a true foster Father to ourselves, find a way when there is no way.

Here follows the response of His Lordship, Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of St Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan on the Papal Exortation 'Amoris laetitia'

"Amoris laetitia": a need for clarification in order to avoid a general confusion

The paradox of the contradictory interpretations of "Amoris laetitia"

The recently published Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris laetitia” (AL), which contains a plethora of spiritual and pastoral riches with regard to life within marriage and the Christian family in our times, has unfortunately, within a very short time, led to very contradictory interpretations even among the episcopate.

There are bishops and priests who publicly and openly declare that AL represents a very clear opening-up to communion for the divorced and remarried, without requiring them to practice continence. In their opinion, it is this aspect of sacramental practice, which, according to them, is now to undergo a significant change that gives AL its truly revolutionary character. Interpreting AL with reference to irregular couples, a president of a Bishops’ Conference has stated, in a text published on the website of the same Bishops’ Conference: “This is a disposition of mercy, an openness of heart and of spirit that needs no law, awaits no guideline, nor bides on prompting.  It can and should happen immediately”.

This opinion was further confirmed by the recent declarations of Father Antonio Spadaro S.J., after the Synod of Bishops in 2015, that the Synod had established the “foundations” for the access of divorced and remarried couples to communion by “opening a door” that had still been closed during the previous Synod in 2014. Now, as Father Spadaro alleges in his commentary on AL, his prediction has been confirmed. There are rumours that Father Spadaro was a member of the editorial group behind AL.

The way to abusive interpretations appears to have been paved by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn himself, who said, during the official presentation of AL in Rome, with regard to irregular unions, that: “My great joy as a result of this document resides in the fact that it coherently overcomes that artificial, superficial, clear division between 'regular' and 'irregular'“. Such a statement suggests that there is no clear difference between a valid, sacramental marriage and an irregular union, between venial and mortal sin.   

On the other hand, there are bishops who claim that AL ought to be read in the light of the perennial magisterium of the Church and that AL does not permit access to communion for divorced and remarried couples, not even in exceptional cases. This statement is fundamentally correct and desirable. In fact, the content of every Magisterial text must, as a rule, be in its content consistent with the former teachings of the Magisterium of the Church, without any break.

It is no secret, however, that divorced and remarried couples are admitted to Holy Communion in a number of churches, without their being required to practice continence. It must be admitted that certain statements in AL could be used to justify an abusive practice that has already been going on for some time in various places and circumstances in the life of the Church.  

Certain statements of AL are objectively vulnerable to misinterpretations

Our Holy Father, Pope Francis, has invited us all to make a contribution to reflection and dialogue on the sensitive issues surrounding marriage and the family. “The thinking of pastors and theologians, if faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve greater clarity” (AL, 2).

If we analyze certain statements of AL with intellectual honesty within their proper context, we find ourselves faced with difficulties when trying to interpret them in accordance with the traditional doctrine of the Church. This is due to the absence of the concrete and explicit affirmation of the doctrine and constant practice of the Church, founded on the Word of God and reiterated by Pope John Paul II, who said, "However the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church's teaching about the indissolubility of marriage. Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who … are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that … they take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples" (Familiaris Consortio, 84).
 
Pope Francis had not established "a new general norm of Canon Law, applicable to all cases" (AL n. 300). He says, however, in note 336: "This is also the case with regard to sacramental discipline, since discernment can recognize that in a particular situation no grave fault exists". Obviously referring to the divorced and remarried, the Pope says in AL, no. 305 that, "because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin – which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end." In note 351, the Pope clarifies his statement by saying that "in some cases, this may include the help of the sacraments".

In the same chapter VIII of AL, n. 298, the Pope speaks of the divorced involved in “a second union consolidated over time, with new children, proven fidelity, generous self giving, Christian commitment, a consciousness of its irregularity and of the great difficulty of going back without feeling in conscience that one would fall into new sins. The Church acknowledges situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate”". In note 329, the Pope cites the document Gaudium et Spes of the Second Vatican Council; unfortunately, he does so in an incorrect fashion, because in the passage in question, the council refers only to valid Christian marriage. The application of this statement to divorced persons may cause the impression that a valid marriage is to be equated to the union of divorced persons, if not in theory, then in practice.

The admission of divorced and remarried persons to Holy Communion and its consequences

Unfortunately, AL contains no verbal quotes of the principles underlying the moral teaching of the Church in the form in which they are formulated in no. 84 of the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio and in the encyclical Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul II, particularly on the following topics of paramount importance: "fundamental choice" (Veritatis splendor, nos. 67-68), "mortal and venial sin" (ibid., n. 69-70), "proportionalism, consequentialism" (ibid., no. 75), "martyrdom and universal and unchanging moral norms" (ibid., no. 91 et seq.). However, a verbal quote from Familiaris Consortio n. 84 and of some of the most significant affirmations in Veritatis splendor would render AL unassailable by heterodox interpretations. General allusions to moral principles and to the doctrine of the Church are certainly insufficient in a controversial matter that is both sensitive and of fundamental importance.

Representatives of the clergy and even of the Episcopate are already affirming that according to the spirit of Chapter VIII of AL, the possibility that in exceptional cases, the divorced and remarried may be admitted to Holy Communion without being required to live in perfect continence cannot be excluded.

If we accept such an interpretation of the wording and spirit of AL, we must, if we want to be intellectually honest and respect the law of non-contradiction, also accept the following logical conclusions:

• The sixth Divine Commandment, which prohibits any sexual act that does not take place within a valid marriage, would no longer be universally valid, but would admit exceptions. In the present case, this would mean that the divorced could practice the conjugal act and even be encouraged to do so to help them maintain "mutual fidelity", cf. AL, 298. There could therefore be "fidelity" in a lifestyle that directly contradicts the express will of God. However, to encourage and legitimize acts that are and will always be, as such, contrary to the will of God, would mean to contradict Divine Revelation.

• The words of Christ himself: “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mt 19 :6) would no longer apply always and to all spouses, without exception.
  
  
• It would be possible, in a special case, to receive the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion while intending to continue one’s direct violations of God’s commandments: “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Ex 20, 14) and “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mt 19, 6; Gen 2, 24).
  
  
• The observance of these commandments and of the word of God would, in such a case, be a matter of theory rather than of practice, and would, therefore, lead the divorced and remarried into “deceiving themselves” (James 1: 22). It would, therefore, be possible to believe perfectly in the divine nature of the six Commandment and in the indissolubility of marriage without however acting accordingly.
  
  
• The divine word of Christ : “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if a wife divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery” (Mark 10, 12) would no longer be universally valid, but would be subject to exceptions.
  
  
• A permanent, deliberate and free violation of God’s sixth Commandment and of the sacredness and indissolubility of true and valid marriage (in the case of divorced and remarried couples) would no longer be always a grave sin, that is to say, a direct opposition to the will of God.
  
  
• There could be cases of serious, permanent deliberate and free violation of one of the other commandments of God (e.g. in the case of a lifestyle of financial corruption) in which the person concerned could be granted access to the sacraments due to mitigating circumstances, without such access being made contingent upon a sincere resolution henceforth to abstain from such acts of sin and scandal.
  
  
• The permanent and infallible teaching of the Church would no longer be universally valid, particularly the teaching confirmed by Pope John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio, n. 84 and by Pope Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis, 29, according to which the precondition for admission to the sacraments of the divorced and remarried is perfect continence.
  
  
• The observance of the sixth commandment of God and of the indissolubility of marriage would become an ideal that is not attainable by all, but only by a kind of elite.
  
  
• The uncompromising words of Christ commanding men to observe the commandments of God always and in all circumstances, and even to take upon themselves considerable suffering in order to do so, in other words, to accept the Cross, would no longer be valid as absolute truth: "And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be cast into hell" (Mt 5, 30).

Admitting couples living in "irregular unions" to Holy Communion and allowing them to practice acts that are reserved for spouses in a valid marriage would be tantamount to the usurpation of a power that does not belong to any human authority, because to do so would be a pretension to correct the Word of God himself.

The danger of the Church’s collaboration in spreading the “plague of divorce”

Professing the eternal doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Church teaches: "The Church, since she is faithful to her Lord, cannot recognize the union of people who are civilly divorced and remarried. “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” (Mark 10:11-12). The Church manifests an attentive solicitude toward such people and encourages them to a life of faith, prayer, works of charity and the Christian education of their children. However, they cannot receive sacramental absolution, take Holy Communion, or exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities as long as their situation, which objectively contravenes God's law, persists" (Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 349)

Living in an invalid marital union and constantly contradicting the commandment of God and the sacredness and indissolubility of marriage signifies not to live in the truth. To declare that the deliberate, free and habitual practice of sexual acts in an invalid marital union could, in individual cases, no longer constitute a grave sin is not the truth, but a serious lie, and will therefore never bring genuine joy in love. Consequently, to grant permission to such persons to receive Holy Communion would be a bluffing, a hypocrisy and a lie. The Word of God in Scripture is still valid: "He who says 'I know him', but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him"(1 John 2: 4).

The Magisterium of the Church teaches us about the universal validity of the Ten Commandments: "Since they express man's fundamental duties towards God and towards his neighbor, the Ten Commandments reveal, in their primordial content, grave obligations. They are fundamentally immutable, and they oblige always and everywhere. No one can dispense from them" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2072). Those who claimed that God's commandments, including the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery" admit of exceptions and that, in some cases, people should not be held accountable for the fault of divorce were the Pharisees and, later, the Christian Gnostics of the second and third centuries.

The following statements of the Magisterium are still valid because they are part of the infallible Magisterium as expressed by the universal and ordinary Magisterium: "The negative precepts of the natural law are universally valid. They oblige each and every individual, always and in every circumstance. It is a matter of prohibitions which forbid a given action semper et pro semper, without exception. … are kinds of behaviour which can never, in any situation, be a proper response. … The Church has always taught that one may never choose kinds of behaviour prohibited by the moral commandments expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testaments. As we have seen, Jesus himself reaffirms that these prohibitions allow no exceptions: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments... You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness" (Mt 19:17-18)" (St. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, 52).

The Magisterium of the Church teaches us even more clearly: "A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith" (1 Tim 1: 5; cf. 3: 9; 2 Timothy 1: 3; 1 Peter 3 21; Acts 24, 16)” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1794).

In the event of a person committing objectively sinful moral acts in full awareness of the sinfulness of such acts, freely and deliberately, and with the intention of repeating such acts in the future, it is impossible to apply the principle of imputability for a fault because of mitigating circumstances. The application of the principle of imputability to such divorced and remarried couples would constitute hypocrisy and a Gnostic sophism. If the Church were to admit such people to Holy Communion even in a single case, it would contradict its own doctrine, give public testimony against the indissolubility of marriage and thus contribute to the spreading of the "plague of divorce" (II Vatican Council, Gaudium et spes, 47).

In order to avoid such an intolerable and scandalous contradiction, the Church, in its infallible interpretation of the divine truth of moral law and of the indissolubility of marriage, has, for two thousand years, steadfastly observed the practice of admitting to Holy Communion only those divorced who live in perfect continence and "remoto scandalo", without any exception or exceptional privilege.

The first pastoral task that the Lord entrusted to His Church was to teaching, the doctrine (cf. Mt 28, 20). The observance of the commandments of God is intrinsically linked to doctrine. For this reason the Church has always rejected any contradiction between doctrine and practical life, referring to such contradictions as “gnostic” or as the heretical Lutheran theory of "simul iustus and peccator". There should be no contradictions between the faith and the daily life of the children of the Church.

When dealing with the observance of the express commands of God and the indissolubility of marriage, we cannot speak of opposing theological interpretations. If God says, "thou shalt not commit adultery", no human authority could say "in some exceptional cases or for a good purpose you can commit adultery".

The following assertions of Pope Francis are very important; the Pope speaks about the integration of the divorced and remarried in the life of the Church: "This discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church. … The following conditions must necessarily be present: humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching. … There can be no risk that a specific discernment may lead people to think that the Church maintains a double standard" (AL, 300). These laudable statements in AL, however, remain without concrete specifications on the question of the obligation of the divorced and remarried to separate or at least to live in perfect continence.

When it is a question of the life or death of the body, no physician would express his opinions in an ambiguous manner. The doctor cannot tell the patient: "You have to decide whether or not to take the medicine in accordance with your conscience, while at the same time respecting the laws of medicine". Such behaviour on the part of a doctor would very likely be considered irresponsible. And yet, the life of our immortal soul is more important, since it is on the health of the soul that its fate for eternity depends.

The liberating truth of penance and of the mystery of the Cross

To say that remarried divorcees are not public sinners in the Church is a pretense of wrong facts. The true condition of all members of the Church militant on earth, moreover, is that of sinners. If the divorced and remarried say that their voluntary and deliberate acts against the sixth commandment of God are not always sinful or, at least, do not constitute major sins, they are deceiving themselves and the truth will not be in them, as St. John says: "If we say," We have no sin, "we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he who is faithful and just will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say, "We have not sinned," we make him a liar, and his word is not in us "(1 John 1: 8-10).

The acceptance on the part of the divorced and remarried of the truth that they are sinners and even public sinners will not deprive them of their Christian hope. Only the acceptance of reality and truth will enable them to take the path of a fruitful penitence according to the words of Jesus Christ.

It would be very beneficial to restore the spirit of the early Christians and of the time of the Fathers of the Church, when there was a living solidarity with public sinners on the part of the faithful; however, this solidarity was based on the truth. There was nothing discriminatory in such solidarity; on the contrary, the whole Church participated in the penitential progress of public sinners by prayers of intercession, tears, acts of expiation and acts of charity for their benefit.

The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio teaches that "even those who have strayed from the Lord's command and are still living in this state (divorced and remarried) may obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, if they persevere in prayer, penance and charity "(n. 84).

During the first centuries, public sinners were integrated into the praying community of the faithful and were instructed to kneel, with arms raised, to implore the intercession of their brothers. Tertullian gives us this moving testimony: "The body cannot rejoice when one of its members is suffering. It must suffer and strive for recovery in its entirety. When you stretch out your hands towards the knees of your brothers, it is Christ that you touch, it is Christ that you implore. Similarly, when they weep over you, it is Christ who sympathizes" (De paenitentia, 10, 5-6). St. Ambrose of Milan found similar words: "The whole church took upon herself the burden of the public sinner, suffering with him through tears, prayers and pain" (De paenitentia 1, 81).

It is true, of course, that the forms of the penitential discipline of the Church have changed. However, the spirit of this discipline must remain alive in the Church at all times. Today, priests and bishops relying on certain statements of AL are beginning to imply to the divorced and remarried that their condition does not render them public sinners from an objective point of view. They tranquillize them by stating that their sexual relations are not a grave sin. Such an attitude does not correspond to the truth. They are depriving the divorced and remarried of the possibility of a radical conversion to the obedience of God, letting these souls live in an illusion. Such a pastoral approach is very easy, cheap and costs nothing. There are no tears, prayers and intercessory works inspired by brotherly love to be offered for the benefit of the divorced and remarried.

In admitting the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion, even in exceptional cases, without asking them to stop performing acts contrary to the sixth commandment of God, and also presumptuously declaring that their manner of life is not a serious sin, we take the easy way out by pushing aside the scandal of the cross. Such pastoral care of the divorced and remarried is ephemeral and misleading. To all those who advocate this cheap and easy way out for the divorced and remarried, Jesus is still addressing the words, "Get thee behind me, Satan! Thou art an offence unto me because your thoughts are not those of God, but of men!” What  Jesus said to his disciples was that "If anyone would be my disciple, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me" (Mt 16: 24-25).

Regarding the pastoral care of divorced and remarried couples, we must rekindle in our day the spirit of following Christ through the truth of the cross and of penance, which alone can bring lasting joy, avoiding ephemeral pleasures that are ultimately misleading. The following words of Pope Gregory the Great are not only truly applicable to our current situation, but also shine a bright light on it: "We must not become too attached to our earthly exile, the conveniences of this life must not make us forget our true homeland lest our spirit become drowsy in the midst of these amenities. For this reason, God combines his gifts with visitations or punishments, to ensure that everything that delights us in this world becomes bitter for us and the soul is filled with the fire that always rekindles in us the desire of heavenly things and enables us to progress. This fire makes us suffer with pleasure, crucifies us gently and fills us with a joyful sadness” (In Hez., 2, 4, 3).

The spirit of the genuine penitential discipline of the early Church always remained alive in the Church at all times, until today. We have a shining example of it in the Blessed Laura Vicuna del Carmen, born in 1891 in Chile. Sister Azocar, who took care of Laura, recalled: "I remember that the first time I explained the sacrament of marriage, Laura fainted, probably because she understood from my words that her mother was living in mortal sin as long as she remained with that gentleman. During that time in Junín, only one family lived in accordance with God's will." Therefore, Laura multiplied her prayers and penances for her mother. She received her first communion on June 2, 1901 with great fervour; she wrote the following resolutions: "1. I want to love and serve you all my life, oh my Jesus; for this, I offer you my soul, my heart and my whole being. - 2. I prefer to die rather than offend you by sin; so I want to distance myself from anything that could separate me from you. - 3. I promise to do my best, even if I have to offer great sacrifices, that you may be ever more known and loved, and to repair the offences inflicted upon you daily by men who do not love you, especially the ones you receive from those who are close to me. - Oh, my God, grant me a life of love, mortification and sacrifice!" But her great joy was clouded by seeing her mother, present at the ceremony, not receiving communion. In 1902, Laura offered her life for her mother who was living with a man in an irregular union in Argentina. Laura multiplied her prayers and sacrifices for the true conversion of her mother. A few hours before she died, she called her mother to her bedside and said to her, "Mother, I am going to die. I have asked Jesus for this and my prayers have been heard. Almost two years ago, I offered my life for the grace of your conversion. Mother, will I not have the joy of seeing you repent before I die?" Her mother, shocked and overwhelmed, made the promise:" Tomorrow morning I will go to the church and I will go to confession." Laura caught the eye of the priest attending her and said: "Father, my mother has just promised to abandon this man; bear witness to her promise!" Then she added: "Now I can die happy!" With these words, she expired on 22 January 1904 in Junin de los Andes (Argentina), at the age of 13, in the arms of her mother, who rediscovered her faith and put an end to the irregular union in which she had been living.

The admirable example of the life of the young girl now known as Blessed Laura is a demonstration of the seriousness with which a true Catholic treats the sixth commandment of God and the sacredness and indissolubility of marriage. Our Lord Jesus Christ commanded us to avoid even the appearance of approving an irregular or adulterous union. The Church has always faithfully preserved and transmitted this divine command in its doctrine and practice, without any ambiguity. With the offering of her young life, Blessed Laura certainly did not intend to represent one of several possible different doctrinal or pastoral interpretations. One does not offer one’s life for a possible doctrinal or pastoral interpretation, but for an immutable and universally valid Divine truth. This truth has been demonstrated by a large number of saints who offered their lives, beginning with Saint John the Baptist to the simple faithful today whose name only God knows.

The need for “Veritatis laetitia”

Fortunately, there can be no doubt that AL contains theological affirmations, as well as spiritual and pastoral guidelines of great value. However, realistically speaking, it is insufficient to say that AL should be interpreted according to the traditional doctrine and practice of the Church. If an ecclesiastical document – which, in our case, is neither definitive nor infallible – is found to contain elements likely to give rise to interpretations and applications that could have dangerous spiritual consequences, all members of the Church, and especially the bishops, as the fraternal collaborators of the Supreme Pontiff in effective collegiality, have a duty to report this and respectfully request an authentic interpretation.

In questions concerning Divine Faith, the Divine commandments and the sacredness and indissolubility of marriage, all members of the Church, from the simple faithful to the highest representative of the Magisterium, must join in the effort to keep intact the treasure of faith and practice. In fact, it was the Second Vatican Council that taught: "The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One (cf. 1 Jn 2: 20.27), cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" (St. Augustine, De Praed. Sanct. 14 27), they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth. It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God (cf. 1 Thess 2: 13). Through it, the people of God adheres unwaveringly to the faith given once and for all to the saints (cf. Jude 3) penetrates it more deeply with right thinking, and applies it more fully in its life” (Lumen gentium, 12). The Magisterium, for its part, is "not above the Word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been transmitted" (II Vatican Council, Dei Verbum, 10).

It was the Second Vatican Council that encouraged all the faithful and especially the bishops to express their concerns and observations without fear, for the good of the Church as a whole. Servility and political correctness have introduced a pernicious evil into the life of the Church. The famous bishop and theologian of the Council of Trent, Melchior Cano O.P., said these memorable words: "Peter does not need our lies or flattery. Those who close their eyes to the facts and indiscriminately defend every decision of the Supreme Pontiff are those who contribute most to undermining the authority of the Holy See. They destroy its foundations instead of strengthening them."

Our Lord has taught us clearly what constitutes true love and the true joy of love: "He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me" (John 14, 21). When he gave man the sixth commandment and ordered him to observe the indissolubility of marriage, God gave it to all men without exception, not just to an elite. Already in the Old Testament, God said: "This commandment which I have given you today is certainly not beyond your strength and reach" (Deuteronomy 30, 11) and "If you want to, you shall keep the commandments to remain faithful to his will" (Ecclesiasticus 15, 15). And Jesus said to all, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Which commandments? And Jesus answered, thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery" (Mt 19: 17-18). From the teaching of the apostles, we have received the same doctrine: "For to love God is to keep His commandments. And His commandments do not weigh heavily upon us" (1 John 5: 4).

There is no true, supernatural and eternal life without keeping the commandments of God: "I command you to observe his commandments. I have set before you life and death. Choose life!" (Deuteronomy 30, 16.19). There is therefore no real life and no real, genuine joy of love without truth. "Love consists in living according to his commandments" (2 John 6). The joy of love is the joy of the truth. The authentically Christian life consists in the life and in the joy of truth: "Learning that my children live in the truth, there is nothing that brings me greater joy" (3 John 4).

St. Augustine explains the intimate connection between joy and truth: "I ask them all whether they do not prefer the joy of truth to that obtained by lies. And they do not hesitate over this question any more than over the question of happiness. For the happy life is the joy of the truth, we all want the joy of the truth "(Confessions, X, 23).

The danger of general confusion with regard to the indissolubility of marriage

For some time already, we have seen, in some places and environments of the life of the Church, the tacit abuse of the admission of divorced and remarried couples to Holy Communion without requiring them to live in perfect continence. The unclear statements in Chapter VIII of AL have given a new dynamism to the declared advocates of the admission of divorced and remarried couples to Holy Communion in special cases.

We now observe the phenomenon of the abuse beginning to spread even more in practice, since those in favour of it are now feeling justified to some extent. There is also obviously some confusion with respect to the interpretation of the relevant assertions in Chapter VIII of the AL. This confusion is increased by the fact that everyone, both supporters of the admission of the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion and their opponents, are saying that "The doctrine of the Church concerning this issue has not changed". 

Taking due account of historical and doctrinal differences, our situation shows some parallels and analogies with the general confusion caused by the Arian crisis in the 4th century. At that time, the apostolic and traditional faith in the true divinity of the Son of God was secured by means of the term "consubstantial" ("homoousios"), dogmatically proclaimed by the universal Magisterium of the Council of Nicaea I. The profound crisis of faith, accompanied by an almost universal confusion, was caused mainly by the refusal or avoidance strategies to use and profess the word "consubstantial" ("homoousios"). Instead, the clergy and mainly the episcopate began to propose alternative expressions that were ambiguous and imprecise, such as, for instance, "similar in substance" ("homoiousios") or simply “similar” ("homoios"). The formula "homoousios" adopted by the universal Magisterium of that time expressed the full and true divinity of the WORD with so much precision that it left no space for equivocal interpretation.

In the years 357-360, almost the entire episcopate had become Arian or Semi-Arian as a result of the following events: in 357, Pope Liberius signed one of the ambiguous formulations of Sirmium, in which the term "homoousios" was eliminated. Furthermore, the pope, in a scandalous move, excommunicated St. Athanasius. St. Hilary of Poitiers was the only bishop who dared to rebuke Pope Liberius severely for these ambiguous acts. In 359, the parallel synods of the Western episcopate in Rimini and that of the Eastern episcopate in Seuleukia had accepted fully Arian formulas that were even worse than the ambiguous formula signed by Pope Liberius. Describing the confusion of those times, St. Jerome said: "Everyone was surprised to realize that they had become Arians" ("Ingemuit totus orbis, et arianum se esse miratus est": Adv Lucif, 19).

Arguably, in our time, confusion is already spreading with regard to the sacramental discipline for divorced and remarried couples. There is therefore a very real basis for the assumption that the confusion may reach truly vast proportions, if one fail to propose and proclaim the following formula of the universal and infallible Magisterium: "Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance, which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples" (S. John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, 84). This formula is unfortunately and incomprehensibly missing in AL. However, the apostolic exhortation inexplicably contains the following statement: "In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living “as brothers and sisters” which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers" (AL, 298, n. 329). Such a statement leaves the impression of a contradiction with regard to the perennial teaching of the universal Magisterium, as formulated in the cited passage from Familiaris Consortio 84.

There is an urgent necessity for the Holy See to confirm and re-proclaim the cited formula of Familiaris Consortio 84, perhaps in the form of an authentic interpretation of AL. This formula may be seen, to some extent, the "homoousios" of our days. The lack of such a formal and explicit confirmation of the formula of Familiaris Consortio 84 from the Apostolic See could contribute to major confusion with regard to sacramental discipline, with the subsequent gradual and inevitable repercussions on doctrinal questions. This would lead to a situation to which it would be possible, in the future, to apply the following statement: "Everyone was surprised to find that divorce had been accepted in practice" ("Ingemuit totus orbis, et divortium in praxi se accepisse miratus est").

Confusion in sacramental discipline with regard to divorced and remarried couples, with its inevitable doctrinal implications, would contradict the nature of the Catholic Church, such as it was described by St. Irenaeus in the second century: "The Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered around the world, keeps them carefully as though inhabiting a single house, and she believes in an identical manner, as though she had only one soul and one heart, and she preaches, teaches and transmits in a unanimous voice, as though having only one mouth"(Adversus haereses, I, 10, 2).

The See of Peter, that is, the sovereign Pontiff, is the guarantor of the unity of the faith and of apostolic sacramental discipline. Considering the confusion regarding sacramental practice in respect of the divorced and remarried, and the many differing interpretations of AL amongst priests and bishops, one may consider justified the call on our beloved Pope Francis, the Vicar of Christ, the "sweet Christ on earth" (St. Catherine of Siena), to order the publication of an authentic interpretation of AL, which must necessarily contain the explicit proclamation of the disciplinary principle of the universal and infallible Magisterium concerning the admission of divorced and remarried couples to the sacraments, according to the formulation in Familiaris Consortio 84.

In the great Arian confusion of the 4th century, St. Basil the Great made an urgent appeal to the pope of Rome, asking him to give though his word a clear direction, so as finally to ensure unity in the thought of faith and charity (cf.. Ep. 70).

An authentic interpretation of AL by the Apostolic See would bring to the entire Church ("claritatis laetitia") the joy in clarity. Such clarity will ensure the joy in love ("amoris laetitia"), a love and a joy that would not be "according to the minds of men, but to the mind of God" (Mt 16, 23). And this is what counts for the joy, the life and the eternal salvation of the divorced and remarried, and of all men.

+ Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary Bishop
of the Archdiocese of St Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan

For those in the area who frequent this blog (I have followers the world over, why not Lancashire!) or those who want a little pilgrimage, why not head to Preston next Sunday.

St Walburge's will celebrate their patronal feast.
 
There will be High Mass and sermon in honour of St. Walburge on Sunday 1st May at 10.30 am, followed by a reception (in Garden weather permitting).

A guest choir, St. Philip Neri Singers from Manchester will be present for this special occasion. 

Music Programme
 
Franz Joseph Haydn (1732-1809), Little Organ Mass Cesar Franck (1822-1890), Dextera Domini Tomas Luis de Victoria (1548-1611), Beati immaculati Gregor Aichinger (1565-1628), Regina caeli

The Greater Litanies replaced the old Roman annual ceremony concerning a procession on this day to a sanctuary n the Claudian Way where a lamb was sacrifice was made to the Goddess of Frost, Robigo.

St. Gregory the Great reported the same route was followed and a Mass held at St. Peter’s. Purpose is to ask God’s blessing for a good harvest. If there is a procession, a Votive Mass of the Rogations, without Gloria or Credo, Preface of Easter, commemoration of St. Mark, is celebrated.

Litany of the Saints is said or sung during the procession, this can be in the vernacular. If no procession, Mass of St. Mark, Disciple of St. Peter, who called him his son. His Gospel reflects voice of St. Peter. Martyred in Alexandria, St. Mark’s body was later taken to the Cathedral in Venice in the IX Century where it is on display for the veneration of the faithful.

For those obligated to say the breviary, the Litany of the Saints, with its prayers must be recited and in Latin.

Adapted from Divine Intimacy by Father Gabriel of St Mary Magdalen, O.C.D.

Since last Sunday, the Church has been preparing us for the Ascension of the Lord.

Today, taking up the subject again, she goes a step further. Now she mentions the gift of God: the Holy Ghost – and His coming.

It is expedient to you that I go, for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you (Jn. 16.7).

The Apostles were about to loose the sensible, physical presence of their beloved Risen Lord and Master (cf., "The Divine Farewell"). However, the Risen Christ would not leave them orphans and would continue to help them invisibly by His Spirit, Who would take up His work with them. The Lord Jesus did His work in  a visible manner in their midst; the Holy Ghost would do His in a secret, hidden way, but in one no less efficacious and real. Such is the way that leads to the height of Christian perfection: not by our human sensibilities and reckoning which calculate a greater degree of comfort and consolation and, but by the “dark”, hidden and mysterious ways of the Spirit designed for our spiritual ‘purgation’ or purification which is indispensable for our more perfect intimacy with God. If the soul is convinced of this, it will remain, even in difficulties and in the most trying ones, and, if it neither understands nor sees its path, it will trust in the divine Paraclete, Who sees and knows well the goal to which He is leading it. The sensual man perceiveth not [the] things that are of … God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined. But the spiritual man judgeth all things; and he himself is judged of no man (1 Cor. 2.14-15).

The hearts of the Apostles could not comprehend what has happened to their Lord and Master and what is to happen still now that He is bidding them farewell because they are still dulled by sin. It was necessary that their Beloved Friend and Master, by dying on the Cross, destroy sin – the great obstacle to the action of the Holy Ghost – and then, when He had ascended into heaven, He would send the divine Paraclete Whom He merited for them and for us – after that man chose to listen to the deceitful and filthy infernal spirit – by His Passion. Therefore, theology teaches that the sending of the Holy Ghost to our souls is the principal fruit of the Passion of Our Lord.

I was fortunate to attend the Populus Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage to Rome last October as it also fell that the General Council of the Foederatio Internationalis Una Voce was at the same time and I was part of the official LMS delegation.

A film has now been released that shows the events last October by the Populus Summorum Pontificum organisers. I cannot embed it here for some reason, so you will have to click here to view.

Very little is known of the life of Venerable Abbot Beuno, a great saint of North Wales whose feast falls in the Extraordinary Calendar today.

We know very little. His Life was written many years after his repose, but even the bloody 16th-century Reformation could not erase the memory of this saint of God. Our holy father Beuno was born in the second half of the 6th century in the Welsh kingdom of Powys (according to another tradition – in the present-day western English county of Herefordshire, which at that time was part of Wales) and most likely was a grandson of a Welsh prince. As a young man, Beuno was taught in Herefordshire and learned the monastic life in the famous Bangor Monastery that had been founded by the holy Bishop Deiniol of Bangor.

In about 616 Beuno founded his main monastery at Clynnog Fawr in the historic region and modern county of Gwynedd in northwest Wales. Owing to the tireless labors of the monks of Clynnog Fawr, most of North Wales was enlightened with the Gospel. Beuno was ordained priest at Bangor and then was invited to become its abbot. In all the venerable man established no fewer than nine monastic centers in Wales and all of them became famous. According to popular tradition, Beuno was the uncle, spiritual father and patron of the holy martyr Winefride, whose veneration throughout the Middle Ages was great. Her relics were in Shrewsbury in England and her wonder-working well at Holywell in Wales has been a focus for continual pilgrimages for 1350 years.

It was said of Beuno that he was stern with stubborn sinners but was full of mercy and compassion for penitents and those who suffered. Towards the end of his life, Beuno was rewarded by the Lord with the gift of discernment and was able to penetrate into the depths and mysteries of the spiritual world. Throughout his life, Beuno worked numerous miracles of healing. He was also a very active and extremely successful missionary, his preaching of the Word of God reached many corners of Wales and south-west England. Among the contemporary theologians Beuno was famous for his knowledge of the Holy Scriptures.

The saint reposed peacefully a few days after Easter Sunday 640 (or 645) in Clynnog Fawr as a very old man. For most of his very long and fruitful life this holy man had wandered much, everywhere preaching the words of Eternal Life, founding monasteries, healing the sick and consoling the destitute, the suffering and those who had been forsaken by others. Frequently he retired to very secluded places for solitary prayer. Beuno established monasteries in Llanveynoe in Herefordshire in England (the Welsh form: Llanfeuno, “Church of Beuno”) and in Llanymynech. To this day there is a unique village called Llanymynech which is partly situated in Wales (Powys) and partly in England (Shropshire). Ancient traditions say that Beuno, as a wandering preacher, used to pay visits to the monastic islands in Wales at Bardsey and Anglesey. On Anglesey he may have founded a church, or, most likely, a monastery, in a place called Aberffraw.

Apparently Beuno for some while led a solitary ascetic life in Somerset in southwest England where a tiny and lovely church in Culbone – which stands to this day – served him as a cell (hence its name: cell = kill = killbeuno = Culbone). This is the smallest active parish church in all England. It is dedicated to St. Beuno who has been its patron for many centuries. This is a fine example (as well as the neighboring early English Church of St. Dubricius in Porlock) of an early hidden Celtic shrine in England and indicates the uninterrupted tradition of holiness. It is believed that it served Beuno as a cell and after his repose was converted into a chapel. Culbone church is located in a very quiet and remote place right beside the Bristol Channel, surrounded by nature, forest, pastures and small farms. Nearby is the steep Porlock hill and other high hills (typical for Somerset). The views are breathtaking and as you walk it seems that the sea merges with the sky and worldly civilization is far away. This is a typical setting for the ancient Celtic saints.

After his repose, Beuno was buried in Clynnog Fawr, and soon a chapel was erected above his grave. A great number of miracles occurred at his holy relics. Later the saint’s remains were translated to a new church where many miracles continued to occur. The veneration for Beuno was so strong that it even continued after the disastrous Reformation under Henry VIII, when all over Britain monasteries were closed, icons, relics and other holy objects were destroyed and the veneration of saints was officially prohibited.

Until the early 19th century there was a custom among the farmers in the vicinity of Clynnog Fawr to make donations to St. Beuno’s Church in the form of young lambs and calves on the feast of Whitsun (Trinity Sunday), as well as to lead sick cattle to the neighboring holy well dedicated to St. Beuno. There are records of countless cases of healing of sick domestic animals on that holy site. From the late medieval era, Clynnog Fawr church regularly celebrated a special service of intercession for the health of livestock. Children who suffered from many diseases – both before and after the Reformation – were brought and led to the holy well, bathed in it and left for a night inside the chapel on the grave or near the grave of the holy man; and many of them were miraculously cured. In most cases children and young people who had suffered from rickets and epilepsy left this place absolutely healthy.

There is written evidence that in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries people were healed from many ailments on bathing in this sacred spring. St. Beuno is considered to be the patron of sick children and sick cattle in Wales to this day. Beuno’s well at Clynnog Fawr still remains a destination for pilgrimages today, even though it was partly damaged by vandals in 2010. There is another holy well dedicated to Beuno in Holywell, Flintshire, situated close to its far more famous neighbour – the well of Beuno’s niece St. Winefride. From this well there begins a heritage route devoted to St. Beuno. There is an ancient and now unused church of St. Beuno and a well associated with him at the foot of a hill in the village Carnguwch, Gwynedd.

Early in the 20th century archaeologists discovered the remains of the original chapel where relics of St Beuno had been kept. Many churches are dedicated to this saint. This demonstrates that St. Beuno and his disciples built a large number of churches and monasteries in various districts of Wales and in the border areas of England. The majority of churches that bear his name can be found in northern and northwestern Wales, including on the Isle of Anglesey and in the Lleyn Peninsula. Churches dedicated to the holy man can also be found in central, eastern Wales and in the Clwyd region.

Operation Storm Heaven was launched by Catholic Action for Faith and Family and His Eminence Cardinal Burke not that long ago and seeks to unite faithful Catholics throughout the World in the largest Rosary Crusade in History to implore God to open the floodgates of His Mercy.

So much confusion and chaos reigns in our society and even in the Catholic Church. So many have fallen away from the True Faith. Our families, our Faith and our values are under attack from every angle and direction.

Cardinal Burke explains more in this short video presentation below:

Cardinal Burke has expressed his wish to increase the number of Rosary Warriors that are storming Heaven with prayer on the 1st day of each month.

So many have fallen away from the True Faith. Perhaps you have a family member or loved one who has been caught in this terrible spiritual snare.

The family and marriage are under unscrupulous attack from every angle and direction. The most basic notions of the natural law are being distorted and deformed. Insanity is rapidly becoming the absolute law which compromises our Christian freedom.

Cardinal Burke insists that in this spiritual battle “our first and most important armament is prayer and especially the Rosary which is one of our most powerful prayers. Given the gravity of the attacks on human life and on marriage and the family today, we must storm heaven with prayer.”

If we stand united storming Heaven with our prayers, Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin Mary will be pleased by the chorus of Rosaries in union with the Holy Mass being celebrated by Cardinal Burke on the 1st of every month.

And just as during the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, when the Catholic forces had no chance of victory, St. Pius V asked Christians throughout Europe to beseech Heaven for help by praying the Rosary. Our Lady heard the united prayers of Her children and, against all odds, the Christian fleet was victorious against the Moslem fleet and changed the course of History.

Our Faith and our families need to be defended in our secular and Godless society. If we unite and raise our voices to Heaven, victory will once again be obtained through the Holy Rosary!

For more information please click here.

Sunday 24th April 2016 at 1130am

Today the liturgy begins to direct our thoughts toward the coming Ascension of Jesus: “A little while, and now you shall not see Me . . . because I go to the Father.” The Gospel (Jn 16, 16-22) which relates this passage is taken from the discourse that Our Lord made to the Apostles at the Last Supper. His purpose was to prepare them for His departure, before He went to His Passion; but the Church presents to us this farewell speech of Jesus today, before His Ascension. Having accomplished His mission, Jesus must return to the Father who sent Him. One day we shall have to do the same; earth is not our lasting dwelling, but the place of our pilgrimage. Jesus has said so: “A little while, and now you shall not see Me; and again a little while, and you shall see Me ....” These words which were enigmatic for the Apostles, who did not understand them, are now clear to us: “a little while”‑that is our short lifetime, and very soon we too must leave the earth and follow Jesus to heaven where we shall see Him in His glory. Then, as our Lord said, “your heart shall rejoice; and your joy no man shall take from you.” However, before reaching this happy state, we have to endure the difficulties, struggles, and sufferings of life on earth. Although it is “short “ compared with the “eternal weight of glory” (2 Cor 4, 18) which awaits us, the Lord knows that for us, overcome as we are by the trials of life on earth, it is “much” and painful. He warns us, therefore, so that we shall not be scandalized: “You shall lament and weep, but the world shall rejoice . . .” The world rejoices and wants to rejoice at any cost, because it is immersed in the pleasures of this life, with no thought of what awaits it beyond. If it cannot escape the inevitable sufferings of life, it tries to stifle its sorrow in pleasure, by contriving to extract from every fleeting moment all the enjoyment possible. A Christian does not do this; he imposes on himself a life of sacrifice and renunciation, in view of heavenly happiness: “You shall be made sorrowful,” said Jesus, “but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.”   

The Epistle (1 Pt 2, 11‑19) likewise exhorts us to live on earth with our eyes turned toward heaven. “Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, to refrain yourselves from carnal desires which war against the soul.” The pilgrim cannot delay to enjoy the pleasures and joys which he meets on the road, or he will endanger the success of his journey and may even run the risk of not reaching the end. So the Christian, God's pilgrim, cannot allow himself to be detained by the things of earth; he can use them and even enjoy them, if Providence puts them in his way, but only with a detached heart which immediately leaves them behind. Nothing can delay him, for he is in a hurry to reach the goal. The life of a Christian is like that of a traveler in a foreign land, who never delays because he is anxious to get back to his own country. The Secret of the Mass very aptly puts on his lips the following prayer: “May these mysteries, O Lord, quench the ardor of our earthly desires, and teach us to love only the things of heaven!” We need this prayer very much, for present satisfactions and goods, with their tangible, concrete character, may always make an impression on our senses and heart, even to the point of detaining us in our progress toward heaven, and of making us forget the emptiness of all earthly things. Another characteristic of the pilgrim is that he is never satisfied until he reaches his native land; this unrest throws a veil of sadness over his life. Thus, the Christian, God's pilgrim, can never be wholly content until he reaches heaven and possesses God. Today, sighing, he runs toward Him; he quickens his step, sustained by the hope of meeting Him “face to face” some day. His hope, however, is accompanied by a feeling of sadness, because he hopes for what he does not yet possess. His is the holy sadness of those who are seeking God. Let us thank God if He has made us experience this; it is a good sign; it is a sign that our heart has been captivated by His love, and that earthly things can no longer satisfy it. Once again the words of Jesus comfort us: “Your sadness shall be changed into joy.”

Colloquy
“O my Delight, Lord of all creatures and my God! How long must I languish for Your presence? O tedious, O painful, O dying life! What lonely, hopeless solitude! When then, O Lord, when, when ... What shall I do, my sovereign Good. What shall I do? Must I desire not to desire You? Ah! my God and Creator, You wound and do not heal; You strike but leave no wound; You kill to give more life! In a word, O my Lord, You do what You wish, because You are almighty! Let it be so, my God, because it is Your will; I have no other will than to love You.    “O Lord, my Creator, my anguish draws this complaint from me, making me speak of that for which there is no remedy until You provide one. My soul is in a narrow prison: it longs for liberty, yet would not move one slightest degree from Your will. O my Glory, either increase my pain or cure it altogether.

“O death, in you is life, and I know not why men dread you! Yet who that has not always loved God would not fear you? Since I am such a one, what do I desire and ask? Will death be the punishment which my faults have deserved? Do not permit it, O my Sovereign Good, for it cost You much to redeem me!

"O my soul, submit to the will of your God; it is best for you. Serve Him and trust in His mercy; when by penance you have won some little claim to pardon for your sins, He will ease your pain. Do not try to rejoice until you have suffered. But, O my true King and Lord, I am incapable even of this, unless You sustain me by Your power and majesty. With Your help, I can do all things” (T.J. Exc, 6).  

Writing in the National Catholic Register, His Eminence Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke says a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, ‘by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.’

Cardinal Burke writes ......

The secular media and even some Catholic media are describing the recently-issued post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, “On Love in the Family,” as a revolution in the Church, as a radical departure from the teaching and practice of the Church, up to now, regarding marriage and the family.

Such a view of the document is both a source of wonder and confusion to the faithful, and potentially a source of scandal not only for the faithful but for others of good will who look to Christ and his Church to teach and reflect in practice the truth regarding marriage and its fruit, family life, the first cell of the life of the Church and of every society.

It is also a disservice to the nature of the document as the fruit of the Synod of Bishops, a meeting of bishops representing the universal Church “to assist the Roman Pontiff with their counsel in the preservation and growth of faith and morals and in the observance and strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline, and to consider questions pertaining to the activity of the Church in the world” (Canon 342). In other words, it would be a contradiction of the work of the Synod of Bishops to set in motion confusion regarding what the Church teaches, and safeguards and fosters by her discipline.

The only key to the correct interpretation of Amoris Laetitia is the constant teaching of the Church and her discipline that safeguards and fosters this teaching. Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium (No. 3). The very form of the document confirms the same. It is written as a reflection of the Holy Father on the work of the last two sessions of the Synod of Bishops. For instance, in Chapter Eight, which some wish to interpret as the proposal of a new discipline with obvious implications for the Church’s doctrine, Pope Francis, citing his post-synodal apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, declares:

I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion. But I sincerely believe that Jesus wants a Church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching, “always does what good she can, even if in the process, her shoes get soiled by the mud of the street” (No. 308).

In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he personally believes is the will of Christ for His Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.” The personal, that is, non-magisterial, nature of the document is also evident in the fact that the references cited are principally the final report of the 2015 session of the Synod of Bishops, and the addresses and homilies of Pope Francis himself. There is no consistent effort to relate the text, in general, or these citations to the magisterium, the Fathers of the Church and other proven authors.

What is more, as noted above, a document which is the fruit of the Synod of Bishops must always be read in the light of the purpose of the Synod itself, namely, to safeguard and foster what the Church has always taught and practiced in accord with her teaching.

In other words, a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, by its very nature, does not propose new doctrine and discipline but applies the perennial doctrine and discipline to the situation of the world at the time.

How then is the document to be received? First of all, it should be received with the profound respect owed to the Roman Pontiff as the Vicar of Christ, in the words of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council: “the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity of both the Bishops and of the whole company of the faithful” (Lumen Gentium, 23). Certain commentators confuse such respect with a supposed obligation to “believe with divine and Catholic faith” (Canon 750, § 1) everything contained in the document. But the Catholic Church, while insisting on the respect owed to the Petrine Office as instituted by Our Lord Himself, has never held that every utterance of the Successor of St. Peter should be received as part of her infallible magisterium.

The Church has historically been sensitive to the erroneous tendency to interpret every word of the pope as binding in conscience, which, of course, is absurd. According to a traditional understanding, the pope has two bodies, the body which is his as an individual member of the faithful and is subject to mortality, and the body which is his as Vicar of Christ on earth which, according to Our Lord’s promise, endures until His return in glory. The first body is his mortal body; the second body is the divine institution of the office of St. Peter and his successors.

The liturgical rites and the vesture surrounding the papacy underline the distinction, so that a personal reflection of the Pope, while received with the respect owed to his person, is not confused with the binding faith owed to the exercise of the magisterium. In the exercise of the magisterium, the Roman Pontiff as Vicar of Christ acts in an unbroken communion with his predecessors beginning with St. Peter.

I remember the discussion which surrounded the publication of the conversations between Blessed Pope Paul VI and Jean Guitton in 1967. The concern was the danger that the faithful would confuse the Pope’s personal reflections with official Church teaching. While the Roman Pontiff has personal reflections which are interesting and can be inspiring, the Church must be ever attentive to point out that their publication is a personal act and not an exercise of the Papal Magisterium. Otherwise, those who do not understand the distinction, or do not want to understand it, will present such reflections and even anecdotal remarks of the Pope as declarations of a change in the Church’s teaching, to the great confusion of the faithful. Such confusion is harmful to the faithful and weakens the witness of the Church as the Body of Christ in the world.

With the publication of Amoris Laetitia, the task of pastors and other teachers of the faith is to present it within the context of the Church’s teaching and discipline, so that it serves to build up the Body of Christ in its first cell of life, which is marriage and the family. In other words, the post-synodal apostolic exhortation can only be correctly interpreted, as a non-magisterial document, using the key of the Magisterium as it is described in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (85-87).

The Church’s official doctrine, in fact, provides the irreplaceable interpretative key to the post-synodal apostolic exhortation, so that it may truly serve the good of all the faithful, uniting them ever more closely to Christ Who alone is our salvation. There can be no opposition or contradiction between the Church’s doctrine and her pastoral practice, since, as the Catechism reminds us, doctrine is inherently pastoral:

The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates (890).

The pastoral nature of doctrine is seen, in an eloquent manner, in the Church’s teaching on marriage and the family. Christ Himself shows the deeply pastoral nature of the truth of the faith in his teaching on Holy Matrimony in the Gospel (Matthew 19, 3-12), in which He teaches anew the truth of God’s plan for marriage “from the beginning.”

During the past two years, in which the Church has engaged in an intense discussion of marriage and the family, I have frequently recalled an experience from my childhood. I was raised on a family dairy farm in rural Wisconsin, the youngest of six children of good Catholic parents. Ten o’clock Sunday Mass at our parish church in the nearby town was clearly at the heart of our life of faith. At a certain point, I became aware of a couple, friends of my parents from a neighboring farm, who were always at Holy Mass but never received Holy Communion. When I asked my father why they never received Holy Communion, he explained to me that the husband was married to another woman and, therefore, could not receive the sacraments.

I recall vividly that my father explained to me the Church’s practice, in fidelity to her teaching, in a serene manner. The discipline obviously made sense to him, and it made sense to me. In fact, his explanation was a primary occasion for me to reflect on the nature of marriage as an indissoluble bond between husband and wife. At the same time, I must say that the parish priest always treated the couple involved with the greatest respect, even as they took part in parish life in a manner appropriate to the irregular state of their union. For my part, I always had the impression that, even though it must have been very difficult to be unable to receive the Sacraments, they were at peace in living according to the truth about their marital state.

Over more than 40 years of priestly life and ministry, during 21 of which I have served as a bishop, I have known numerous other couples in an irregular union for whom I or my brother priests have had pastoral care. Even though their suffering would be clear to any compassionate soul, I have seen ever more clearly over the years that the first sign of respect and love for them is to speak the truth to them with love. In that way, the Church’s teaching is not something which further wounds them but, in truth, frees them for the love of God and their neighbor.

It may be helpful to illustrate one example of the need to interpret the text of Amoris Laetitia with the key of the magisterium. There is frequent reference in the document to the “ideal” of marriage. Such a description of marriage can be misleading. It could lead the reader to think of marriage as an eternal idea to which, in the changing historical circumstances, man and woman more or less conform. But Christian marriage is not an idea; it is a sacrament which confers the grace upon a man and woman to live in faithful, permanent and procreative love of each other. Every Christian couple who validly marry receive, from the moment of their consent, the grace to live the love which they pledge to each other.

Because we all suffer the effects of original sin and because the world in which we live advocates a completely different understanding of marriage, the married suffer temptations to betray the objective reality of their love. But Christ always gives the grace for them to remain faithful to that love until death. The only thing that can limit them in their faithful response is their failure to respond to the grace given them in the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. In other words, their struggle is not with some idea imposed upon them by the Church. Their struggle is with the forces which would lead them to betray the reality of Christ’s life within them.

Over the years and, in a particular way, during the past two years, I have met many men and women who, for whatever reason, are separated or divorced from their spouse, but who are living in fidelity to the truth of their marriage and continuing to pray daily for the eternal salvation of their spouse, even if he or she has abandoned them. In our conversations, they acknowledge the suffering involved but, above all, the profound peace which is theirs in remaining faithful to their marriage.

Some say that such a response to separation or divorce constitutes a heroism to which the average member of the faithful cannot be held, but, in truth, we are all called, whatever our state in life, to live heroically. Pope St. John Paul II, at the conclusion of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, making reference to the words of Our Lord at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount — “Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5, 48) — taught us the heroic nature of our daily life in Christ with these words:

As the [Second Vatican] Council itself explained, this ideal of perfection must not be misunderstood as if it involved some kind of extraordinary existence, possible only for a few “uncommon heroes” of holiness. The ways of holiness are many, according to the vocation of each individual… The time has come to re-propose wholeheartedly to everyone this high standard of ordinary Christian living: the whole life of the Christian community and of Christian families must lead in this direction (Novo Millennio Ineunte, 31).

Meeting men and women who, notwithstanding a breakdown in marital life, remain faithful to the grace of the Sacrament of Matrimony, I have witnessed the heroic life which grace makes possible for us daily, every day.

St. Augustine of Hippo, preaching on the feast day of St. Lawrence, Deacon and Martyr, in the year 417, used a beautiful image to encourage us in our cooperation with the divine grace which Our Lord has won for us by His Passion and Death. He assures us that in the garden of the Lord there are not only the roses of martyrs but also the lilies of virgins, the ivies of spouses, and the violets of widows. He concludes that, therefore, no one should despair regarding his vocation for “Christ has died for all” (Sermon 304).

May the reception of Amoris Laetitia, in fidelity to the Magisterium, confirm spouses in the grace of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, so that they may be a sacrament of the faithful and enduring love of God for us “from the beginning” which reached its fullest manifestation in the Redemptive Incarnation of God the Son. May the Magisterium as the key to its understanding see to it “that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 890).

Second Sunday After Easter

From Divine Intimacy
Fr. Gabriel of St. Magdalene, OCD

“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep.” Jn. 10:11
 
The liturgy today sums up in the gentle figure of the Good Shepherd all that Jesus has done for our souls. The shepherd is everything to his flock; their life, their sustenance, and their care is entirely in his hands, and if the shepherd is good, they will have nothing to fear under his protection, and they will want for nothing. Jesus is pre-eminently the Good Shepherd: He not only loves, feeds, and guards His sheep, but He also gives them life at the cost of His own. In the mystery of the Incarnation, the Son of God comes to earth in search of men who, like stray sheep, have wandered away from the sheepfold and have become lost in the dark valley of sin. He comes as a most loving Shepherd who, in order to take better care of His flock, is not afraid to share their lot. Today’s Epistle ( I Pt. 2:21-25) shows Him to us as He takes our sins upon Himself that He may heal us by His Passion: ‘Who His own self bore our sins in His Body upon the tree that we, being dead to sin, should live to justice; by whose stripes you were healed. For you were as sheep going astray; but you are now converted to the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.’ (I Pt. 2:24-5)

In today’s Gospel (Jn. 10:11-16), Jesus said, ‘I am the Good Shepherd, and I give my life for my sheep.’ (cf. Jn. 10:11) In the Office for Paschal-time, the Church chants many times: ‘The Good Shepherd is risen, He who gave His life for His sheep and who died for His flock.’ What could be a better synthesis of the whole work of the Redemption? It seems still more wonderful when we hear Jesus declare: ‘I am come that they may have life and may have it more abundantly.’ Jn. 10:10 In truth, He could well repeat to each one of us: ‘What more could I have done for you that I have not done?’ (cf. Is. 5:4) Oh, would that our generosity in giving ourselves to Him had no limits, after the pattern of His own liberality in giving Himself to us!

Again, Jesus said: 'I am the good shepherd I know Mine, and Mine know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father.’ Jn. 10: 11.16. Although there is no question here of equality, but merely that of a simple comparison, it is nevertheless very consoling and glorious for us to see how Jesus likes to compare His relations with us to those He has with His Father. At the Last Supper also, He said: ‘As the Father hath loved Me, I also have loved you,’ Jn, 15:9 and again: ‘...as Thou Father, in Me, and I in Thee; that they also may be one in Us.’ Jn. 17:21 This shows that between us, the sheep, and Jesus, our Shepherd, there is not only a relation of acquaintance, but also one of love, and better still, of communion of life, similar to that which exists between the Son and the Father. It is by means of the grace, faith, and charity, which the Good Shepherd acquires for us by His death, that we arrive at such intimacy with our God—so deep that it makes us share in His own divine life.

A close relationship of loving knowledge is here established between the Good Shepherd and His sheep—one so intimate that the Shepherd knows His sheep one by one and can call them by name; and they recognise His voice and follow Him with docility. Each soul can say: Jesus knows me and loves me, not in a general abstract way but in the concrete aspect of my needs, of my desires, and of my life; for Him to know me and to love me is to do me good, to encompass me more and more with His grace, and to sanctify me. Precisely because He loves me, Jesus calls me by name: He calls me when in prayer He opens to me new horizons of the spiritual life, or when He enables me to know my faults and weaknesses better; He calls me when He reprimands me or purifies me by aridity, as well as when He consoles and encourages me by filling me with new fervour; He calls me when He makes me feel the need of greater generosity, and when He asks me for sacrifices or gives me joys, and still more, when He awakens in me a deeper love for Him. Hearing His call, my attitude should be that of a loving little sheep who recognizes the voice of its Shepherd and follows Him always.

Colloquy:

“O good Lord Jesus Christ, my sweet Shepherd, what return shall I make to You for all that You have given me? What shall I give You in exchange for Your gift of Yourself to me? Even if I could give myself to You a thousand times, it would still be nothing, since I am nothing in comparison with You. You, so great, have loved me so much and so gratuitously, I who am so small, so wicked and ungrateful. I know, O Lord, that Your love tends toward the immense, the infinite, because You are immense and infinite..Please tell me, O Lord, how I ought to love You.”

“My Love, Oh Lord, is not gratuitous, it is owed to you... Although I cannot love You as much as I should, You accept my weak love. I can love You more when You condescend to increase my virtue, but I can never give You what You deserve. Give me then, Your most ardent love by which, with your grace, I shall love You, please You, serve You, and fulfil Your commands. May I never be separated from You, either in time or in eternity, but abide, united to You in love, forever and ever.” (Ven. R. Jourdain)