Le Nouvel Esprit

https://www.lenouvelesprit.com/

– In depth articles on Vatican II, which include topics such as hermeneutics and Dignitatis Humanae “The task of Le Nouvel Esprit is to develop a middle position (between radical traditionalism and the view that Vatican II did not go far enough in reforms) that accepts the validity of Vatican II and that it is not a rupture from prior Catholic teachings. Our position starts with the profession that Vatican II is a gift of the Holy Spirit to the whole of humanity. This must be the starting point to understand the Council. Within this perspective our investigations are undertaken. 

This website was another really great find and am very happy to share it with all Vatican II defenders or questioners.

What you will find:

The words of the Council as spoken words of the Spirit ‘represent a deeper insight into the eternal mystery, and point out the paths by those entrusted with the task of bringing this mystery into the contemporary world‘”

Like a fresco the Council requires repeated meditations to glean out particular riches, a wealth originating from God Himself.

Every Pope from Vatican II onwards and the 1985 Extraordinary Synod believed that​the Spirit was operative within the Council, working through the Council Fathers in translating the divine words of the Spirit into human language in the Council texts​.

Makes me want to read some more!

Communion on the Hand Revisited

This post is an expanded version of my previous thoughts on the issue.

The real beauty about this article is that it avoids useless disputes. “Of these things put them in mind, charging them before the Lord. Contend not in words, for it is to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they grow much towards ungodliness.” (2 Tim 2:14-16, Douay-Rheims) Hence, I am not going to debate historical circumstance or conspiracy theories. You can have many arguments about all those things and really convince no one but those who have already made up their minds. Instead, in this article we dive into obedience and the sure charism of the teaching authority of the Church. Rather the gates of hell have prevailed or Christ’s promise to Peter that the gates of shall not prevail against the Church hold true to this day. (Mt 16:18)

Communion on the hand! Why the exclamation mark. First, because the Eucharist is the source and summit of our faith (Lumen Gentium, #11). Second, because it is a case of concern among many faithful. Is receiving Communion on the hand sinful?

My primary goal in writing is to bring awareness to the validity of Communion on the hand and calm the consciences of my brothers and sisters. I fully expect all readers to then double check my assertions with the Church authorities and what they have to say. I am just a layman. Please double check with your local bishop and he will calm your conscience even further. If I am wrong, please tell me.

To begin the discussion about Communion of the hand I would like to find a point of common agreement. I think that if you are reading this then we both agree that we want Jesus to be best served in all things. That is all this article is about. I fear that during covid-19 people that are accustomed to receiving Communion on the tongue may not receive Communion at all if it means receiving on the hand. I don’t want that to happen.

A novel approach, or at least one less taken, will be to read (or summarize) a passage from St. Faustina’s Diary. In paragraph 160, we can see that St. Faustina is sacrificing for sins and hoping that no sacrileges are committed that day. During Mass when receiving Communion on the tongue (as was the only way to receive when she was alive) another Host falls into her hands from the priest by accident. She felt a great love. Jesus said that he not only desires to rest in her heart but also in her hands.

Of course, the primary purpose of this episode was not to promote Communion on the hand, but it does not mean that we cannot learn something on the subject from it. Clearly, St. Faustina nor Jesus were tremendously frightened about her touching the Host (at least when it happened by accident). The lesson is that Jesus truly wants us to be with him especially in the Eucharist. Also, I think that we can agree, it is not about how we want to receive but about how Jesus wants to be received. -How he wants to be in us.

In discussing this topic, I am aware that I am dealing with the desire of Jesus to be with us and the summit and source of our faith. So not to overstep my reaches, I will not be commenting on if Communion on the hand is better or worse than Communion on the tongue. I will leave that to those to whom authority has been given to discuss that. What I do want to defend is the consciences of my brethren when attacked by others who say that Communion on the hand is a sin or sacrilege.

St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica has several articles devoted to the topic of the Eucharist. (Not a surprise). He clearly teaches that quantity is part of the substance of what makes Jesus truly present. (ST III:77:4) Thus, if you lose sufficient quantity Jesus is not present. So, receiving Communion on the hand does not mean that we need a microscope to ensure that no particles are lost. We have to remember that St. Thomas Aquinas was referring to substance in an Aristotelian fashion. In this mindset, matter is not at the atomic level but at the level of what would still be rationally considered the same substance to the eyes. Hence, if a piece of bread is so small it is more like a spec of dust, then it would no longer be considered a piece of bread. The same level of quantity would apply to St. Thomas’ definition of when quantity in the Sacred Species can be lost and the bread and wine stop being the true body and blood of Christ.  

Now the question is brought up, ‘is Communion on the hand sinful because particles of Jesus are lost (even non-microscopic ones) when you receive on the hand?’ My answer is no. Careful reception does not cause particles to be lost so it is not a sin. I personally think that we can become scrupulous as to when we see particles on our hands after receiving Communion and when we don’t.

Yes, we do need to be careful most especially about the Eucharist.

Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so, let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. Therefore, are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep. But if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But whilst we are judged, we are chastised by the Lord, that we be not condemned with this world.” (1 Cor 11:27-32, Douay-Rheims)

But our special care for the Eucharist should not lead us to scruples or other errors of unbalance. What do I mean by unbalance?

For leaving the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pots and of cups: and many other things you do like to these. And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition. For Moses said: Honor thy father and thy mother; and He that shall curse father or mother, dying let him die. But you say: If a man shall say to his father or mother, Corban, (which is a gift,) whatsoever is from me, shall profit thee. And further you suffer him not to do any thing for his father or mother, Making void the word of God by your own tradition, which you have given forth. And many other such like things you do.” (Mk 7:8-13, Douay-Rheims)

Just as there is the error of introducing some unholy and ‘new’ practice (not that Communion on the hand is new because it was also practiced in the ancient church) there is also the error of holding onto some practice for the wrong reasons and justifying it using religion. There are many great reasons why you may want to receive Communion on the tongue instead of on the hand. You may feel that it fosters greater faith. Yet, during a pandemic, for example, and your bishop asks you to receive on the hand – what do you do? Which is the greater virtue — that of obedience or that of pious traditional devotion?

Even if you argue that a bishop cannot legally in cannon law force people to receive Communion on the hand that is only dodging the question. Does it really matter if a bishop cannot do something in cannon law? According to cannon law bishops can only do about 7 + a few things and those are the 7 sacraments + a few juridical matters. Yet, throughout history when a bishop asked the faithful to do something they obeyed and did so promptly.

I would like to quote from 2 saints known for their extraordinary obedience. Note how St. Kolbe says that a superior commanding sin does not happen in practice.

Obedience of the intellect and the will is the most difficult vow to put into practice; however, in order to observe it perfectly, it is helpful to: 1) see in the superior, God who commands, and 2) consider that man cannot do anything better than that which the superior has ordered.” (SK-962)

-St. Maximillian Kolbe

The superiors can make mistakes, but we in obeying can never make a mistake. There is only one exception: if a superior should ever command a thing clearly evident to be a sin, even the smallest sin. This is a thing that does not happen in practice. In such a case the superior would not be the representative of God, and we would not be obliged to obey him. Apart from the superiors we cannot trust our reason, which can make a mistake. Only God, only He, infallible, most holy, most loving, He is our Lord, Father, Creator, End, Reason, Strength, Love… Our Everything!1

-St. Maximillian Kolbe

“What seems to me white, I will believe black if the hierarchical Church so defines.”

-St. Ignatius of Loyola

As a result, the only real reason to not obey a bishop when he asks us to do something has nothing to due with cannon law and all the more to do with if what they command is a sin.

Back to the topic of sin and Communion on the hand. Why do I say there is no sin? I base my answer largely on the sole fact that the Church has allowed Communion on the hand and it is guided by the Holy Spirit. If Communion on the hand was such a great problem or sin that would mean the Church has explicitly allowed something very wrong and has gone into grave error. It is my understanding of the Church that it is guarded against such grave errors by God’s grace. Several modern Popes and 1000s of bishops have not seen anything gravely wrong with Communion on the hand or they would have cancelled the practice and stopped the many publications with its mention of validity.

One such document is the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. (Liturgical documents like this one even go through the Vatican for approval) The one I reference from is the version with adaptations for United States. In paragraph 160, we see that the norm for receiving Communion in the States is standing, while those who kneel are not to be denied but addressed pastorally as to the reasons for the norm of standing. We also see that the faithful can receive on the tongue or on the hand. This along with many other documents or updates to documents show that the bishops clearly teach that the faithful may receive on the hand. (That does not mean there are valid exceptions to this rule though)

(The idea of kneeling while receiving the Eucharist in the United States of America is also addressed in paragraph 160 and we see that it says those who kneel are to be told pastorally to stand) Let’s skip that discussion for now. Kneeling though often bound up with receiving on the hand, in some traditional circles, is a sperate issue.

In fact, Communion on the hand was also an ancient practice of the church, such that we can add large numbers ancient popes and early bishops to the list of approvers as well. (I will leave this for you to research more deeply) Start with St. Cyril of Jerusalem. “When you approach, take care not to do so with your hand stretched out and your fingers open or apart, but rather place your left hand as a throne beneath your right, as befits one who is about to receive the King. Then receive him, taking care that nothing is lost.

This means Communion on the hand is part of the Church’s teaching on faith and morals as it relates to discipline. Yes, for some time the church did away with Communion on the hand. Yet, that does not mean the same Papal authority cannot bring it back. There was also great reservation about early reintroduction of Communion on the hand, yet those same Popes did not stop the practice showing that they supported it at least marginally. Additionally, the comments of past Popes allowing Communion on the hand with reserve should be read in conjunction with modern documents which do not state the allowance with so much reserve and restrictions. Some Papal documents are on topics of discipline that can change with time while others are on dogma that cannot change over time.

One example of Papal reserve can be found in Pope St. John Paul II. “In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been introduced. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. However, cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior but also to the pastors of the church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized. It is therefore difficult in the context of this present letter not to mention the sad phenomena previously referred to. This is in no way meant to refer to those who, receiving the Lord Jesus in the hand, do so with profound reverence and devotion, in those countries where this practice has been authorized.” (Dominicae Cenae, #11)2

Pope St. John Paul recognized that Communion on the hand was followed by instances were people had lower levels of respect for the Eucharist and he also recognized that there are those who receive Communion on the hand reverently. Notice how in this as in many other documents Papal authority recognizes the problems yet continues to allow the practice. What does not follow is  that Communion on the hand in and of itself causes a lack of faith. There would not be people receiving reverently, as Pope St. John Paul mentions, if Communion on the hand causes lack of faith in and of itself. Pope. St. John Paul II even revised the Roman Missal in 2002 yet did not remove the practice. These and many other examples show that the Church authorities were very aware of the situation yet never removed the practice on a global level for decades now. Hence, they do not believe it is a grave or even venial sin. (There were some restrictions in individual churches)

If you read further in Dominicae Cenae paragraph 11 you can even see Pope St. John Paul mention about consecrated hands. “To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist. It is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons, as is the case with acolytes in the exercise of their ministry, especially if they are destined for future ordination, or with other lay people who are chosen for this to meet a just need, but always after an adequate preparation.” (Dominicae Cenae, #11)3 The Church authority is aware that priests have consecrated hands and are hence those who should distribute Communion. Yet, in their wisdom this did not stop them from allowing Communion on the hand in their understanding of the teaching. 

It is not possible that anything definitively taught universally by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the church about faith and morals to be in grave error. (individual bishops, yes, they can error but not the group when united with Peter) I reiterate. The Church is guarded by the Holy Spirit from promoting matters gravely sinful and erroneous in its universal teaching. The Church has allowed Communion on the hand for a long time (and published many documents saying so), so Communion on the hand cannot therefore be a sacrilege or the Church has taught error and that means everything is up for grabs.

Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they do, however, proclaim infallibly the doctrine of Christ when, even though dispersed throughout the world but maintaining among themselves and with Peter’s successor the bond of Communion, in authoritatively teaching matters to do with faith and morals, they are in agreement that a particular teaching is to be held definitively. This is still more clearly the case when, assembled in an ecumenical council, they are, for the universal church, teachers of and judges in matter of faith and morals, whose definitions must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.” (Lumen Gentium, #25)4

The Holy Spirit assists the living Magisterium of the Church (CCC #688). As the Catechism of the Catholic Church also teaches, “Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in Communion with the successors of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome … when without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a ‘definite manner,’ they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful ‘are to adhere to it with religious assent’ which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.” (CCC #892)5

As the above quotes from Lumen Gentium and the Catechism shows, we owe the bishops teaching with the Ordinary Magisterium of the church about Communion on the hand deep and serious respect (religious assent). Therefore, to say that Communion on the hand leads to a decline in faith means that the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the church has taught something very harmful and gravely sinful.

Now not everything the bishops say is perfect. “When it comes to the question of interventions in the prudential order, it could happen that some Magisterial documents might not be free from all deficiencies.” (Donum Veritatis, #24)6

Yet, I don’t think that the documents about Communion on the hand, nor the topic of Communion on the hand are simply prudential but touches deeply into the faith. We need “to assess accurately the authoritativeness of the interventions which becomes clear from the nature of the documents, the insistence with which a teaching is repeated, and the very way in which it is expressed.” (Donum Veritatis, #24)7 Since, Communion on the hand has been allowed with authority in documents like the General Instruction for the Mass and the revised Roman Missals it has been repeated in time throughout history since the time of the Apostles and is dealing with grave subject matter I argue that Communion on the hand is guarded against error as being part of the teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Church.

I have read many arguments against receiving on the hand due to negative aspects of historical circumstance. (such that it came from various groups or social regions) These arguments if held would also have to be applied to other church historical acts surrounded by negative circumstances. This unfortunately would call into question a lot of things not just Communion on the hand. Either way, even if there were bad historical circumstances the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium has still spoken.

I have also read the various liturgical and faith-based arguments. Yet, I cannot accept these as holding much weight if they proceed to claim that the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium has promoted grave error, sin and lead many to lose faith in the sacred species. That is impossible.

Again, I make no comment about which is better (hand or tongue- I leave that to Pope). I simply state that my family and myself will not allow the mind of others to be swayed away from receiving Jesus simply because they receive on the hand. Take my opinion for what it is – that of a layman. On the day of judgment, I want to be known as one who holds to what I have written.

As a conclusion, I want to remind everyone that devotion to the Eucharist is so important. Just, because I support Communion on the hand does not mean I want its devotion to be less intense. Please receive Communion in a state of grace (Canon #916) and with the one hour fast (Canon #919). I also recommend coming early to pray to prepare, making a bow before reception, if local custom allows to show reverence, and saying a thanksgiving afterwards.

———————————————————————-

(1) Ricciardi, Rev. Antonio O.F.M. Conv., St. Maximilian Kolbe Apostle of our Difficult Age, Translated by Daughter’s of St. Paul. Daughter’s of Saint Paul, 1982 page 84.

(2) John Paul II, Letter, “Dominicae Cenae to all the Bishops of the Church on the Mystery and Worship of the Eucharist,” https://w2.vatican.va /content/john-paul-ii/en/letters/1980/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_1980022 4_ dominicae-cenae.html.

(3) ibid.

(4) Austin Flannery, O.P., General Editor, “The Basic Sixteen Documents: Vatican II Constitutions Decrees Declarations: A completely Revised Translation in Inclusive Language” Costello Publishing Company: New York.

(5) Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994 Libreria Editrice Vaticanna.

(6) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Instruction Donum Veritatis: On the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian,” https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19900524_theologian-vocation_en.html.

 (7) ibid.

———————————————————————-

All rights reserved.

Vatican II Marriage Quotes

Marriage Quotes from Vatican II from the 16 major documents. Vatican Website Translation. This list contains the majority but not every reference. Due to the large variation of words used for marriage or its context, (marriage, matrimony, wedlock, married, marry, engaged, betrothed, spouse, husband, wife, family, love, children, covenant, union, mother, father, domestic church, etc.) I did skip a few or miss some. In fact, Vatican II has many many more quotes related to marriage and the married life than it does to the Eucharist (Linked Here) and Mary (Linked Here) that I complied previously. (See also modern times and culture quotes Here)

The purpose is to show how marriage fits into Vatican II overall plan. Further details can be found by going to the cited paragraphs and reading the entire section instead of just the quotation. Even though the list is very long, I hope it can be of use to gather fruit and prepare for the great sacrament of marriage. Rather than omitting passages dealing with marriage only in a metaphorical or analogical sense I have included them for a fuller picture.

The following short form abbreviations have been used to reference the 16 major documents of Vatican II.

Apostolicam Actuositatem: [AA]

Ad Gentes: [AG]

Christus Dominus: [CD]

Dignitatis Humanae: [DH]

Dei Verbum: [DV]

Gravissimum Educationis: [GE]

Gaudium et Spes: [GS]

Inter Mirifica: [IM]

Lumen Gentium: [LG]

Nostrae Aetate: [NA]

Orientalium Ecclesiarum: [OE]

Optatam Totius: [OT]

Perfectae Caritatis: [PC]

Presbyterorum Ordinis: [PO]

Sacrosanctum Concilium: [SC]

Unitatis Redintegratio: [UR]

Words followed by paragraph numbers and particular quotes I though interesting to share.

betrothals:

LG[6]

betrothed:

GS[49]

domestic:

AA[11][13]

DH[5]

GS[43][52][67]

LG[11]

marriage:

AA[11][11][11]

GS[46][46][47][47][48][48][49][49][49][49][49][50][50][50][50][52][52][52][52]

LG[48][58]

OE[18]

OT[10][10]

PC[12]

PO[16][16]

SC[77][77]

marriages:

LG[29]

OE[18][18]

married:

AA[4][11][11][11][22]

GS[47][47][48][48][48][49][49][50][51][51][52]

LG[11][29][34][35][41]

PO[6][16]

UR[6]

marry:

GS[52][87]

OE[18]

PO[16]

matrimony:

GE[3]

GS[48][48][48][49][50]

LG[11]

OT[10]

SC[77][78][78]

wed:

GS[52]

wedding:

GS[32]

wedlock:

GS[49]

LG[11]

spouse:

GS[43][48]

LG[4][6][6][64][65]

PC[2][12]

PO[16]

SC[47][85][102]

spouses:

GS[48][48][48][48][48][48][48][48][49][49][50][50][52][52][52][52][87]

LG[11]

SC[77][78][78]

child:

GS[27]

LG[57]

childhood:

AA[30][31]

children:

AA[11][11][11][11][13][30][30]

AG[11][12][12]

CD[12][14][35]

DH[5][5][14]

DV[21][25]

GE[0][0][1][1][2][3][3][3][3][6][6][6][7][7][7] [8][8][10]

GS[27][40][42][48][48][48][48][48][49][50][50][50][50][51][52][52][52][52][52][61][68][87] [87][87]

IM[10][13][17][24]

LG[11][11][11][13][14][15][19][28][32][35] [35][37][37]

OT[8]

PC[2][24]

PO[15][16][18]

SC[2]

UR[3][3][17]

children’s:

AA[30]

husband:

GS[29][49][49]

LG[6]

PC[2]

husbands:

AA[11]

LG[35]

wife:

GS[49][49]

LG[7]

wives:

AA[11]

LG[35]

PO[16]

family:

AA[4][4][4][4][7][8][8][9][11][11][11][11][11] [11][16][18][27][30][30][30]

AG[1][16][16][22][41]

CD[12][16][28][34]

DH[5][6][15][15]

GE[3][3][3][3][3][3][8][9]

GS[2][3][8][24][25][26][26][29][32][32][32] [33][37][38][38][39][40][40][40][40][42][42] [42][42][43][44][45][46][46][46][47][47][48] [48][48][48][48][48][48][48][48][49][50][50] [50][50][52][52][52][52][52][52][52][52][52] [52][52][52][52][52][53][53][56][57][57][61] [63][67][69][69][71][74][75][75][77][77][86] [87][92][92][92]

IM[3][22]

LG[6][6][11][11][27][28][28][31][32][34][35] [35][35][35][51]

OE[18]

OT[3][5]

PC[15][22]

PO[6][12][17]

SC[111]

UR[2][14][23]

families:

AA[11][11][11][11][12][22]

AG[15][19][39]

CD[30]

GE[5][7][7]

GS[6][34][47][48][48][49][51][52][66][66][67] [74][74][75][75][84]

IM[14]

LG[43][43][43][69]

OE[21]

OT[2][2]

PC[1]

(m)Mother (as in the Holy Mother Church):

DV[11][19]

GE[0]

GS[43]

LG[14][15][41][42]

SC[4][14][21][60][85][102][122]

Mother (as in the Mother of God):

LG[15][46][51][52][53][54][54][54][54][55] [55][56][57][57][57][57][58][59][61][61][63] [66][66][66][66][67][67][68][69][69][69][69]

NA[3]

OE[30]

PC[25]

PO[18]

SC[103]

UR[15]

mother:

GE[3]

GS[48][52][61]

LG[6][53][53][53][53][56][56][56][56][61][63] [64][64][67]

OT[8]

SC[36][36][54][54][63][76][78]

motherhood:

GS[48]

PO[6]

mothers:

GS[67]

mother’s (as in Jesus’ mother):

LG[57][57]

(F)father:

AA[2][4][4][6][29]

AG[2][2][3][4][5][5][7][7][9][11][15][25]

CD[1][1][16][28]

DH[1][10][15]

DV[1][1][2][3][4][4][13][17][21]

GE[2]

GS[1][21][22][22][24][32][39][45][48][52][78] [92][92][93]

LG[2][2][2][2][3][3][3][3][4][4][4][4][5][8][10][11][15][17][17][17][18][19][21][27][27][28] [28][28][28][28][35][36][36][39][40][40][41] [41][41][41][42][44][46][48][48][49][51][53] [56][61][63][65][66][66]

NA[2][5][5][5]

OE[9]

OT[5][8]

PC[13][14][14][25]

PO[2][2][2][2][3][5][5][5][6][8][9][12][12][14] [14][14][15][16][16][17][18][18]

SC[6][6][6][6][7][9][12][84][104]

UR[2][2][2][2][7][8][15][20][23]

fatherhood:

GS[48]

fatherland:

AA[4]

GS[93]

UR[2]

fatherly:

AA[17]

GS[24]

LG[37]

OT[3][6]

(F)fathers:

AG[3][22][42]

CD[9][9][10][16][44][44]

DH[10]

DV[8][23]

GS[69][69]

IM[19]

LG[2][6][7][16][21][23][28][43][56][56][56] [67][69][69][69]

NA[4][4]

OE[1][30][30]

OT[2][16][21]

PC[18]

PO[9][11][19]

SC[5][50][92][112][122]

UR[15][15][15][16][17][24][24][24]

Father’s

GS[40][41][93][93]

LG[57][64]

UR[24]

bride:

DV[8][23]

LG[4][6][7][9][39][41][44][46]

SC[7][78][84]

bridegroom:

SC[84]

Lumen Gentium #6 “In the old Testament the revelation of the Kingdom is often conveyed by means of metaphors. In the same way the inner nature of the Church is now made known to us in different images taken either from tending sheep or cultivating the land, from building or even from family life and betrothals, the images receive preparatory shaping in the books of the Prophets.” … “John contemplates this holy city coming down from heaven at the renewal of the world as a bride made ready and adorned for her husband.” … “Often the Church has also been called the building of God. The Lord Himself compared Himself to the stone which the builders rejected, but which was made into the cornerstone. On this foundation the Church is built by the apostles, and from it the Church receives durability and consolidation. This edifice has many names to describe it: the house of God in which dwells His family

Lumen Gentium #7 “Christ loves the Church as His bride, having become the model of a man loving his wife as his body…”

Lumen Gentium #11 “Finally, Christian spouses, in virtue of the sacrament of Matrimony, whereby they signify and partake of the mystery of that unity and fruitful love which exists between Christ and His Church, help each other to attain to holiness in their married life and in the rearing and education of their children. By reason of their state and rank in life they have their own special gift among the people of God. From the wedlock of Christians there comes the family, in which new citizens of human society are born, who by the grace of the Holy Spirit received in baptism are made children of God, thus perpetuating the people of God through the centuries. The family is, so to speak, the domestic church. In it parents should, by their word and example, be the first preachers of the faith to their children; they should encourage them in the vocation which is proper to each of them, fostering with special care vocation to a sacred state.”

Lumen Gentium #27 “A bishop, since he is sent by the Father to govern his family, must keep before his eyes the example of the Good Shepherd, who came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to lay down his life for his sheep.”

Lumen Gentium #28 “Because the human race today is joining more and more into a civic, economic and social unity, it is that much the more necessary that priests, by combined effort and aid, under the leadership of the bishops and the Supreme Pontiff, wipe out every kind of separateness, so that the whole human race may be brought into the unity of the family of God.

Lumen Gentium #29 “It is the duty of the deacon, according as it shall have been assigned to him by competent authority, to administer baptism solemnly, to be custodian and dispenser of the Eucharist, to assist at and bless marriages in the name of the Church, to bring Viaticum to the dying, to read the Sacred Scripture to the faithful, to instruct and exhort the people, to preside over the worship and prayer of the faithful, to administer sacramentals, to officiate at funeral and burial services.” … “With the consent of the Roman Pontiff, this diaconate can, in the future, be conferred upon men of more mature age, even upon those living in the married state. It may also be conferred upon suitable young men, for whom the law of celibacy must remain intact.”

Lumen Gentium #31 “But the laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. ”

Lumen Gentium #32 “They also have for their brothers those in the sacred ministry who by teaching, by sanctifying and by ruling with the authority of Christ feed the family of God so that the new commandment of charity may be fulfilled by all. ”

Lumen Gentium #34 “For all their works, prayers and apostolic endeavors, their ordinary married and family life, their daily occupations, their physical and mental relaxation, if carried out in the Spirit, and even the hardships of life, if patiently borne—all these become “spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ“.”

Lumen Gentium #35 “In connection with the prophetic function is that state of life which is sanctified by a special sacrament obviously of great importance, namely, married and family life. For where Christianity pervades the entire mode of family life, and gradually transforms it, one will find there both the practice and an excellent school of the lay apostolate. In such a home husbands and wives find their proper vocation in being witnesses of the faith and love of Christ to one another and to their children. The Christian family loudly proclaims both the present virtues of the Kingdom of God and the hope of a blessed life to come. Thus by its example and its witness it accuses the world of sin and enlightens those who seek the truth.

Consequently, even when preoccupied with temporal cares, the laity can and must perform a work of great value for the evangelization of the world. For even if some of them have to fulfill their religious duties on their own, when there are no sacred ministers or in times of persecution; and even if many of them devote all their energies to apostolic work; still it remains for each one of them to cooperate in the external spread and the dynamic growth of the Kingdom of Christ in the world. Therefore, let the laity devotedly strive to acquire a more profound grasp of revealed truth, and let them insistently beg of God the gift of wisdom.”

Lumen Gentium #41 “Furthermore, married couples and Christian parents should follow their own proper path (to holiness) by faithful love. They should sustain one another in grace throughout the entire length of their lives. They should embue their offspring, lovingly welcomed as God’s gift, with Christian doctrine and the evangelical virtues. In this manner, they offer all men the example of unwearying and generous love; in this way they build up the brotherhood of charity; in so doing, they stand as the witnesses and cooperators in the fruitfulness of Holy Mother Church; by such lives, they are a sign and a participation in that very love, with which Christ loved His Bride and for which He delivered Himself up for her. A like example, but one given in a different way, is that offered by widows and single people, who are able to make great contributions toward holiness and apostolic endeavor in the Church. Finally, those who engage in labor—and frequently it is of a heavy nature—should better themselves by their human labors. They should be of aid to their fellow citizens. They should raise all of society, and even creation itself, to a better mode of existence. Indeed, they should imitate by their lively charity, in their joyous hope and by their voluntary sharing of each others’ burdens, the very Christ who plied His hands with carpenter’s tools and Who in union with His Father, is continually working for the salvation of all men. In this, then, their daily work they should climb to the heights of holiness and apostolic activity.”

Lumen Gentium #48 “Since however we know not the day nor the hour, on Our Lord’s advice we must be constantly vigilant so that, having finished the course of our earthly life, we may merit to enter into the marriage feast with Him and to be numbered among the blessed and that we may not be ordered to go into eternal fire like the wicked and slothful servant, into the exterior darkness where ‘there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth’.”

Lumen Gentium #51 “For all of us, who are sons of God and constitute one family in Christ, as long as we remain in communion with one another in mutual charity and in one praise of the most holy Trinity, are corresponding with the intimate vocation of the Church and partaking in foretaste the liturgy of consummate glory”

Lumen Gentium #58 “In the public life of Jesus, Mary makes significant appearances. This is so even at the very beginning, when at the marriage feast of Cana, moved with pity, she brought about by her intercession the beginning of miracles of Jesus the Messiah.”

Sacrosanctum Concilium #77 “The marriage rite now found in the Roman Ritual is to be revised and enriched in such a way that the grace of the sacrament is more clearly signified and the duties of the spouses are taught. “If any regions are wont to use other praiseworthy customs and ceremonies when celebrating the sacrament of matrimony, the sacred Synod earnestly desires that these by all means be retained”. Moreover the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 52, of this Constitution is free to draw up its own rite suited to the usages of place and people, according to the provision of Art. 63. But the rite must always conform to the law that the priest assisting at the marriage must ask for and obtain the consent of the contracting parties.”

Gaudium et Spes #46 “Of the many subjects arousing universal concern today, it may be helpful to concentrate on these: marriage and the family, human progress, life in its economic, social and political dimensions, the bonds between the family of nations, and peace.”

Gaudium et Spes #47 “The well-being of the individual person and of human and Christian society is intimately linked with the healthy condition of that community produced by marriage and family.” … “All these situations have produced anxiety of consciences. Yet, the power and strength of the institution of marriage and family can also be seen in the fact that time and again, despite the difficulties produced, the profound changes in modern society reveal the true character of this institution in one way or another.” …”In addition, married love is too often profaned by excessive self-love, the worship of pleasure and illicit practices against human generation.” … “Therefore, by presenting certain key points of Church doctrine in a clearer light, this sacred synod wishes to offer guidance and support to those Christians and other men who are trying to preserve the holiness and to foster the natural dignity of the married state and its superlative value.”

Gaudium et Spes #48 “The intimate partnership of married life and love has been established by the Creator and qualified by His laws, and is rooted in the conjugal covenant of irrevocable personal consent. Hence by that human act whereby spouses mutually bestow and accept each other a relationship arises which by divine will and in the eyes of society too is a lasting one. For the good of the spouses and their off-springs as well as of society, the existence of the sacred bond no longer depends on human decisions alone. For, God Himself is the author of matrimony, endowed as it is with various benefits and purposes. All of these have a very decisive bearing on the continuation of the human race, on the personal development and eternal destiny of the individual members of a family, and on the dignity, stability, peace and prosperity of the family itself and of human society as a whole. By their very nature, the institution of matrimony itself and conjugal love are ordained for the procreation and education of children, and find in them their ultimate crown. Thus a man and a woman, who by their compact of conjugal love “are no longer two, but one flesh” (Matt. 19:ff), render mutual help and service to each other through an intimate union of their persons and of their actions. Through this union they experience the meaning of their oneness and attain to it with growing perfection day by day. As a mutual gift of two persons, this intimate union and the good of the children impose total fidelity on the spouses and argue for an unbreakable oneness between them.

Christ the Lord abundantly blessed this many-faceted love, welling up as it does from the fountain of divine love and structured as it is on the model of His union with His Church. For as God of old made Himself present to His people through a covenant of love and fidelity, so now the Savior of men and the Spouse of the Church comes into the lives of married Christians through the sacrament of matrimony. He abides with them thereafter so that just as He loved the Church and handed Himself over on her behalf, the spouses may love each other with perpetual fidelity through mutual self-bestowal.

Authentic married love is caught up into divine love and is governed and enriched by Christ’s redeeming power and the saving activity of the Church, so that this love may lead the spouses to God with powerful effect and may aid and strengthen them in sublime office of being a father or a mother. For this reason Christian spouses have a special sacrament by which they are fortified and receive a kind of consecration in the duties and dignity of their state. By virtue of this sacrament, as spouses fulfil their conjugal and family obligation, they are penetrated with the spirit of Christ, which suffuses their whole lives with faith, hope and charity. Thus they increasingly advance the perfection of their own personalities, as well as their mutual sanctification, and hence contribute jointly to the glory of God.

As a result, with their parents leading the way by example and family prayer, children and indeed everyone gathered around the family hearth will find a readier path to human maturity, salvation and holiness. Graced with the dignity and office of fatherhood and motherhood, parents will energetically acquit themselves of a duty which devolves primarily on them, namely education and especially religious education.

As living members of the family, children contribute in their own way to making their parents holy. For they will respond to the kindness of their parents with sentiments of gratitude, with love and trust. They will stand by them as children should when hardships overtake their parents and old age brings its loneliness. Widowhood, accepted bravely as a continuation of the marriage vocation, should be esteemed by all. Families too will share their spiritual riches generously with other families. Thus the Christian family, which springs from marriage as a reflection of the loving covenant uniting Christ with the Church,(9) and as a participation in that covenant, will manifest to all men Christ’s living presence in the world, and the genuine nature of the Church. This the family will do by the mutual love of the spouses, by their generous fruitfulness, their solidarity and faithfulness, and by the loving way in which all members of the family assist one another.”

Gaudium et Spes #49 “The biblical Word of God several times urges the betrothed and the married to nourish and develop their wedlock by pure conjugal love and undivided affection.(10) Many men of our own age also highly regard true love between husband and wife as it manifests itself in a variety of ways depending on the worthy customs of various peoples and times.

This love is an eminently human one since it is directed from one person to another through an affection of the will; it involves the good of the whole person, and therefore can enrich the expressions of body and mind with a unique dignity, ennobling these expressions as special ingredients and signs of the friendship distinctive of marriage. This love God has judged worthy of special gifts, healing, perfecting and exalting gifts of grace and of charity. Such love, merging the human with the divine, leads the spouses to a free and mutual gift of themselves, a gift providing itself by gentle affection and by deed, such love pervades the whole of their lives:(11) indeed by its busy generosity it grows better and grows greater. Therefore it far excels mere erotic inclination, which, selfishly pursued, soon enough fades wretchedly away.

This love is uniquely expressed and perfected through the appropriate enterprise of matrimony. The actions within marriage by which the couple are united intimately and chastely are noble and worthy ones. Expressed in a manner which is truly human, these actions promote that mutual self-giving by which spouses enrich each other with a joyful and a ready will. Sealed by mutual faithfulness and hallowed above all by Christ’s sacrament, this love remains steadfastly true in body and in mind, in bright days or dark. It will never be profaned by adultery or divorce. Firmly established by the Lord, the unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dignity of wife and husband, a dignity acknowledged by mutual and total love. The constant fulfillment of the duties of this Christian vocation demands notable virtue. For this reason, strengthened by grace for holiness of life, the couple will painstakingly cultivate and pray for steadiness of love, large heartedness and the spirit of sacrifice.

Authentic conjugal love will be more highly prized, and wholesome public opinion created about it if Christian couples give outstanding witness to faithfulness and harmony in their love, and to their concern for educating their children also, if they do their part in bringing about the needed cultural, psychological and social renewal on behalf of marriage and the family. Especially in the heart of their own families, young people should be aptly and seasonably instructed in the dignity, duty and work of married love. Trained thus in the cultivation of chastity, they will be able at a suitable age to enter a marriage of their own after an honorable courtship.”

Gaudium et Spes #50 “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents. ” … “Marriage to be sure is not instituted solely for procreation; rather, its very nature as an unbreakable compact between persons, and the welfare of the children, both demand that the mutual love of the spouses be embodied in a rightly ordered manner, that it grow and ripen. Therefore, marriage persists as a whole manner and communion of life, and maintains its value and indissolubility, even when despite the often intense desire of the couple, offspring are lacking.”

Gaudium et Spes #52 “Parents or guardians should by prudent advice provide guidance to their young with respect to founding a family, and the young ought to listen gladly. At the same time no pressure, direct or indirect, should be put on the young to make them enter marriage or choose a specific partner.” … “All those, therefore, who exercise influence over communities and social groups should work efficiently for the welfare of marriage and the family.” … “Christians, redeeming the present time and distinguishing eternal realities from their changing expressions, should actively promote the values of marriage and the family, both by the examples of their own lives and by cooperation with other men of good will. ” … “Those too who are skilled in other sciences, notably the medical, biological, social and psychological, can considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family along with peace of conscience if by pooling their efforts they labor to explain more thoroughly the various conditions favoring a proper regulation of births.”

Presbyterorum Ordinis #6 “Although they have obligations toward all men, priests have a special obligation to the poor and weak entrusted to them, for our Lord himself showed that he was united to them, and their evangelization is mentioned as a sign of messianic activity. With special diligence, attention should be given to youth and also to married people and parents. It is desirable that these join together in friendly meetings for mutual aid in leading more easily and fully and in a Christian manner a life that is often difficult. Priests should remember that all religious, both men and women, who certainly have a distinguished place in the house of the Lord, deserve special care in their spiritual progress for the good of the whole Church. Finally, and above all, priests must be solicitous for the sick and the dying, visiting them and strengthening them in the Lord.”

Presbyterorum Ordinis #16 “.. indeed, it is not demanded by the very nature of the priesthood, as is apparent from the practice of the early Church and from the traditions of the Eastern Churches. where, besides those who with all the bishops, by a gift of grace, choose to observe celibacy, there are also married priests of highest merit. This holy synod, while it commends ecclesiastical celibacy, in no way intends to alter that different discipline which legitimately flourishes in the Eastern Churches. It permanently exhorts all those who have received the priesthood and marriage to persevere in their holy vocation so that they may fully and generously continue to expend themselves for the sake of the flock commended to them.” … “In this way they profess themselves before men as willing to be dedicated to the office committed to them-namely, to commit themselves faithfully to one man and to show themselves as a chaste virgin for Christ and thus to evoke the mysterious marriage established by Christ, and fully to be manifested in the future, in which the Church has Christ as her only Spouse. They give, moreover, a living sign of the world to come, by a faith and charity already made present, in which the children of the resurrection neither marry nor take wives.”

Apostolicam Actuositatem #4 “This plan for the spiritual life of the laity should take its particular character from their married or family state or their single or widowed state, from their state of health, and from their professional and social activity. They should not cease to develop earnestly the qualities and talents bestowed on them in accord with these conditions of life, and they should make use of the gifts which they have received from the Holy Spirit.”

Apostolicam Actuositatem #11 “Since the Creator of all things has established conjugal society as the beginning and basis of human society and, by His grace, has made it a great mystery in Christ and the Church (cf. Eph. 5:32), the apostolate of married persons and families is of unique importance for the Church and civil society.

Christian husbands and wives are cooperators in grace and witnesses of faith for each other, their children, and all others in their household. They are the first to communicate the faith to their children and to educate them by word and example for the Christian and apostolic life. They prudently help them in the choice of their vocation and carefully promote any sacred vocation which they may discern in them.

It has always been the duty of Christian married partners but today it is the greatest part of their apostolate to manifest and prove by their own way of life the indissolubility and sacredness of the marriage bond, strenuously to affirm the right and duty of parents and guardians to educate children in a Christian manner, and to defend the dignity and lawful autonomy of the family. They and the rest of the faithful, therefore, should cooperate with men of good will to ensure the preservation of these rights in civil legislation and to make sure that governments give due attention to the needs of the family regarding housing, the education of children, working conditions, social security, and taxes; and that in policy decisions affecting migrants their right to live together as a family should be safeguarded.”

Inter Mirifica #3 “It is, therefore, an inherent right of the Church to have at its disposal and to employ any of these media insofar as they are necessary or useful for the instruction of Christians and all its efforts for the welfare of souls. It is the duty of Pastors to instruct and guide the faithful so that they, with the help of these same media, may further the salvation and perfection of themselves and of the entire human family. In addition, the laity especially must strive to instill a human and Christian spirit into these media, so that they may fully measure up to the great expectations of mankind and to God’s design.”

Inter Mirifica #14 “Similarly, effective support should be given to good radio and television programs, above all those that are suitable for families. Catholic programs should be promoted, in which listeners and viewers can be brought to share in the life of the Church and learn religious truths. An effort should also be made, where it may be necessary, to set up Catholic stations. In such instances, however, care must be taken that their programs are outstanding for their standards of excellence and achievement.”

Unitatis Redintegratio #6 “Church renewal has therefore notable ecumenical importance. Already in various spheres of the Church’s life, this renewal is taking place. The Biblical and liturgical movements, the preaching of the word of God and catechetics, the apostolate of the laity, new forms of religious life and the spirituality of married life, and the Church’s social teaching and activity – all these should be considered as pledges and signs of the future progress of ecumenism.”

In Defense of Vatican II: Beauty Will Save the World. — Gaudium et Spes 22

Dr. Larry Chapp James Matthew Wilson and Bishop Robert Barron. Two Champions of Beauty One of the things I have long pondered is why it is that people fall away from the faith.  Obviously, they do so for a variety of reasons so I will not attempt a “one size fits all” answer to that complex […]

In Defense of Vatican II: Beauty Will Save the World. — Gaudium et Spes 22

The Universal Call to Holiness: The Eucharistic Liturgy and the Unity of Sanctity and Sacrifice — Gaudium et Spes 22

By Larry Chapp “The profession ‘There is only one God’ is, precisely because it has itself no political aims, a program of decisive political importance: through the absoluteness that it lends the individual from his God, and through the relativization to which it relegates all political communities in comparison with the unity of the God […]

The Universal Call to Holiness: The Eucharistic Liturgy and the Unity of Sanctity and Sacrifice — Gaudium et Spes 22

Dives into why Vatican II reformed the Liturgy so the Universal Call to Holiness would become more apparent in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

Quotes from inside “But it is also true that for many Catholics the liturgy had become a passive experience, something the priest did up on the altar, in silence, and in a language that was not the mother tongue of those gathered.  Mass had become a place of quiet contemplation, of private devotions, and not a place of communal worship in any outward way.  It was indeed a grand spectacle when done well, and we would do well to retrieve many aspects of the solemn trappings of that liturgy.  But a ‘spectacle’ in and of itself, is not a liturgy, and the Council sought to remedy such tendencies. 

The demand that Latin be the only language of the liturgy is a Eurocentric conceit that now makes the Church look like a medieval museum piece rather than the living, worldwide, communion of the Body of Christ.  I know, I know… if the Liturgy is in a single language it adds unity to the Church and thereby creates a “universal language” that also (supposedly) reinforces the catholicity of the Church.  But one has to wonder as to what kind of “unity” a universal language creates, keeping in mind that uniformity is not the same thing as unity and that the true unity of the Church comes from Christ and his Eucharistic presence and not in this or that language of the liturgy. 

Furthermore, and not to put too fine a point on it, the claim that the loss of Latin is a “dilution” of the Mass flies in the face of the empirical fact that the Church has always had a multiplicity of rites, many of which have never used Latin and which have mysteriously thrived despite that fact. Indeed, rites such as the Byzantine Catholic liturgy are every bit the equal of the old Latin Mass in their solemnity and sacral dignity.  I am not arguing that the suppression of the old Latin liturgy was a good thing or that we cannot learn from it as we seek to reform the Novus Ordo.  But I am saying that the universal use of Latin is in no way a requirement for good liturgy. 

De graves erreurs de Vatican II ? — + Archidiacre +

Après avoir supprimé la possibilité d’hérésies contenues dans les doctrines annoncées par le Concile Vatican II, nous discuterons de la possibilité d’erreurs graves dans le Magistère conciliaire dans ce qui est imposé avec autorité.

De graves erreurs de Vatican II ? — + Archidiacre +

Does a Teaching Need to be a Dogma Extraordinarily Proclaimed to be Binding or Guarded from Grave Error? Can Something only Part of the Ordinary (and not Universal) Magisterium be a Grave Error?

The theologians seem to agree that, although the guarantee of infallibility applies in its strictest sense only to the exercise of the extraordinary magisterium, that is, to ex cathedra pronouncements, yet in the exercise of his powers of the ordinary Magisterium, the Pope has the protection and guidance of the Holy Spirit, at least to the extent that Almighty God would not allow him to make a serious mistake in teaching the universal Church.” (Papal Social Principles: A Guide and Digest, Fr. Thomas J. Harte, C.Ss.R., Ph.D., Bruce Publishing Co., 1956). For a lot more quote translate this page to English Erros graves do Vaticano II? – Apologista Católicos (apologistascatolicos.com.br)

Syllabus of Errors Condemns the View that Catholics Should Only Accept Extraordinary Teaching

Read Point 22 in the Syllabus of Errors! The following point is in error. “22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and authors are strictly bound is confined to those things only which are proposed to universal belief as dogmas of faith by the infallible judgment of the Church.—Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.” — You can’t only accept extraordinary teaching but must also accept ordinary teaching, which all ecumenical council fall under, even the pastoral ones of the medieval ages and Vatican II with religious submission. Even though religious submission is different than the assent of faith it is still gravely serious.

Vatican II On False Religions — The Catholic of Honor

“This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way […]

Vatican II On False Religions — The Catholic of Honor