Ste. Marie Parish in Manchester NH offering Centering Prayer

By clicking on the link provided, you will be taken to the page for Joseph House which is described thusly:


A Contemplative Retreat House279 Cartier StreetManchester, New Hampshire 03102
Voice: (603) 627-9493Fax: (603) 666-4732email: mailto:SRmaryanne@josephhouse.mv.com
A retreat center for contemplative prayer in the classical Christian tradition. Erected in 1905 as part of Ste. Marie Parish, it served originally as a residence for the Brothers and later for the Sisters who taught in the adjacent school. Destined for demolition in 1986, it was providentially spared and has been transformed into a charming, 21-room retreat center.

Joseph House offers regular retreats in Centering Prayer. Please read the following article for an explanation as to some of the problems presented by Centering Prayer:


Centering Prayer Meets the Vatican
It is God's choice, not ours whether we enter the sphere of the divine.

Part one
By Dan DeCelles
Contemplative prayer has a long and venerable history among the many forms of Christian prayer. Centering prayer, by contrast, is the new kid on the block. It claims to be a technique of prayer that helps a person enter quickly and almost effortlessly into contemplation. (See below for fuller descriptions of each.) According to its advocates, anyone, at any stage in the Christian life, can use centering prayer with spectacular results.

Abbot Thomas Keating, O.C., one of its main proponents, says, "To move into that realm is the greatest adventure ... a new world appears within and around us and the impossible becomes an everyday experience."

Last December the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of' the Faith warned about the dangers of blending Christian prayer and Eastern methods of meditation (e.g., Zen, Transcendental Meditation and yoga). Although Some Aspects of Christian Meditation does not single out any persons or schools of thought by name, many of its warnings apply to the centering- prayer literature, including the writings of Abbot Keating and his spiritual disciple Father Basil Pennington, O.C.S.O. Both have backgrounds in Eastern meditation methods and cite those experiences favorably as instructive for today's Christians.

Early in the document the author, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, describes how the church Fathers combated early "errors" that affected the way Christians thought about prayer. He says, "Such erroneous forms, having reappeared in history from time to time on the fingers of the church's prayer, seem once more [today] to impress many Christians, appealing to them as a kind of remedy, be it psychological or spiritual, or as a quick way of finding God."

Several elements of these ancient errors find expression in centering prayer. In part two of this article, we'll look at two of these: a mistaken understanding of "union with God" and an overemphasis on the experiential dimension of prayer. First,
though, I want to call attention to the phrase "a quick wav of finding God." This phrase indicates the most obvious problem centering prayer has.

When God bestows the gift of contemplative prayer, it is normally to more mature Christians. The word "normally" is important. God is sovereign and gives his graces as he chooses, but normally he reserves this gift for those who have made some progress fighting vice and growing in virtue and in the fruit of the Spirit. This usually takes time.
Centering prayer, on the other hand, promises any Christian at any stage access to contemplative prayer. The impression its promoters give is that a person only has to read a brief description of the method, find a quiet room and, after a few minutes of "centering," experience a deep, contemplative sense of God's presence.

The promise of quick results may help to explain the popularity of centering prayer, but it cannot be dismissed as a mere sales gimmick. It is a direct antidote to what its promoters regard as a problem afflicting modem Western culture. Says Abbot Keating, "To the objection that we might be introducing contemplative prayer (to people] too soon, my answer is that our contemporaries in the Western world have a special problem with discursive meditation because of the ingrained inclination to analyze things [which] has led to the repression of our intuitive faculties.... This conceptual hang up ... impedes the spontaneous movement from reflection ... into contemplative prayer." What's needed, he suggests, is a method like centering prayer, a "means of exposing people to the actual experience ... essential to get beyond the intellectual bias."

People looking for a quick way of finding God are likely to run into two temptations that have plagued Christians from the beginning: to take a negative view of the material world, and to think contemplation is something they can attain all by themselves.
First, let's look at the proper way a Christian values the material world. God chose to come to us through the material world. He chose to reveal himself to us in the spoken words of the prophets, in his sovereign interventions in human history, and, above all, in Jesus, his eternally begotten Son, made man in time and space. He chose to redeem us through the physical death and resurrection of this man. He chose not to take us out of this world after we are united to him in baptism, but to leave us in the world. God even chose the physical sufferings we endure on this earth as a way we can draw closer to him, following in the footsteps of his Son.

It should not surprise us, then, that God wants the believer to approach him in and through the material world. "To grasp the depths of the divine," says Cardinal Ratzinger, the Christian meditates on the earthly life of Jesus. God reveals these depths "through the human-earthly dimension." When the Christian sees Jesus, he sees the Father (jn. 14:9); he grasps "the divine reality in the human figure of Jesus, his eternal divine dimension in its temporal form."
However, this sort of "human-earthly" meditation is considered a hindrance in centering prayer. "in centering prayer we go beyond thought and image, beyond the senses and the rational mind, to that center of our being where God is working a wonderful work," says Father Pennington "just sitting there, doing nothing. Not even thinking some worthwhile thoughts or making some good resolutions-just being." Abbot Keating goes further, "if you are aware of no thoughts, you will aware of something and that is a thought. If at that point you can lose the awareness that you are aware of no thoughts, you will move into pure consciousness.
Cardinal Ratzinger has reservations. He warns about methods which "try as far as possible to put aside everything that is worldly, sense perceptible, or conceptually limited." An approach of this sort to prayer may actually be "an attempt to ascend to or immerse oneself in the sphere of the divine, which as such is neither terrestrial, sense perceptible nor capable of conceptualization."

Besides the temptation to reject the material world in this approach there is another problem-indicated by Cardinal Ratzinger's use of the word "oneself" in the last quote-the temptation to ascend to God by one's own power or strength. In fact it is God's choice, not ours, whether we enter the sphere of the divine. "God is free to 'empty' us of all that holds us back .... to draw us completely into the Trinitarian life of his eternal love," but this gift is granted "not through our own efforts."

In the 16th century, Teresa of Avila noticed that as some Christians prayed they tried to stop thinking pre-mature, before God had given the grace of contemplation. In Interior Castle she said, "be careful not to check the movement of the mind ... and to remain there like a dolt." A century later, the church was confronted with a still more passive form of prayer in the teachings of Miguel de Molinos. It did not take long for "quietism" to be condemned.

Centering prayer's advocates occasionally remind their readers that contemplation is indeed a gift from God, but their clear and constant message is that God will give the gift. Every time. To everyone who uses the method. Their insistence that anyone can master the Centering-prayer technique and their virtual guarantee of success will lead many to a do-it- yourself approach to contemplative prayer. To be continued.

Centering Prayer
Rule 1: At the beginning of the prayer we take a minute or two to quiet down and then move in faith to God dwelling in our depths; and at the end of the prayer we take several minutes to come out, mentally praying the "Our Father" or some other prayer.

Rule 2: After resting for a bit in the center in faithful love, we take up a single, simple word that expresses this response and begin to let it repeat itself within.

Rule 3: Whenever in the course of the prayer we become aware of anything else, we simply gently return to the Presence by the use of the prayer word.
(Centering Prayer, by Basil Pennington, O.C.S.O., pg. 65)
Contemplative Prayer

[When Gods calls a person to contemplative prayer] the soul is no longer inclined to meditate by itself, to reason on the great truths of faith so as to arouse itself to acts of love of God. It receives "a supernatural recollection" which it could never acquire by its own efforts and "which does not depend on our own will." It is no longer the soul recollecting itself, it is God who recollects it and draws it toward the inner sanctuary. This is the beginning of contemptation, properly so called; it is infused since we cannot procure it for ourselves by our activity aided by grace.... In contemplation "the soul understands that the divine Master is teaching it without the sound of words." - - - Under this infused light "the soul is inflamed with love without comprehending flow it loves."

(Christian Perfection and Contemplation, by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., pp. 244-2.46, quotations are from various works of Teresa of Avila.)
New Heaven/New Earth, March 1990
[HOME]


This article may be found here: http://www.dotm.org/decelles-1.htm


Paul

La Salette Center for Christian Living offering Yoga

The La Salette Center for Christian Living is offering a Yoga retreat because of "popular demand." This calls for prayer:





Coming Back by Popular Demand
Details will follow in the next calendaror Call (508) 222-8530

A Yoga Retreat
January 13-15, 2006
Cost: $165
Judith Medeiros starts the New Year with a weekend of gentle yoga and relaxation. Give yourself the gift of some quiet time and space after the hectic holiday season. Hatha Yoga involves gentle stretching exercises, rhythmic breathing and deep relaxation techniques. No experience with yoga is necessary. There will begentle yoga postures, adapted and modified for people who wish to relieve stress, relax, be revitalized, and heal. Deep relaxation techniques will include meditative time with inspirational music and Sacred Scripture.


Why is this a concern? Read the following from The New York Times:


Saturday, September 17, 2005
Christian yoga classes encourage poses and prayer
By Katie Zezima / New York Times

HAMILTON, Mass. -- When Cathy Chadwick instructed her three yoga students to move into warrior position, she didn't remind them to watch their alignment or focus on their breath. Instead Chadwick urged them to concentrate on the affirmation each made at the beginning of class after she read aloud the prayer of St. Theresa of Avila.
"Good Christian warriors," Chadwick softly said as the women lunged into the position.
Chadwick is one of a growing number of people who practice Christian yoga, incorporating Biblical passages, prayers and Christian reflections. Occasionally, teachers rename yoga postures to reflect Christian teachings or, as Chadwick did with warrior position, include religious metaphors.
Some, like Chadwick, had taken yoga classes and enjoyed the physical benefits but were uncomfortable with the fact that yoga is a Hindu practice. Others said yoga allowed them to connect with their spiritual sides, but it should be filled with their own religion.
"I feel more comfortable practicing yoga in conjunction with my faith," said Chadwick, whose class meets at Christ Church in this town 30 miles north of Boston. "When I practiced yoga before I felt I was being asked to open up to a deity, and that deity to me is a Christian deity."
A similar movement is taking place in Judaism, with teachers merging teachings or texts into yoga classes. Many who take part said Christian and Jewish yoga made the physical discipline more accessible to those otherwise unwilling to take a class for religious reasons.
Centers that teach only Christian or Jewish yoga are popping up across the country. Most classes teach hatha yoga postures, gentle enough to be performed by novices.
But critics of the alterations say that yoga is inherently Hindu, and that it is not possible to truly practice it without embracing that element.
"There is an element of superficiality or hypocrisy there," said Subhas R. Tiwari, a professor of yoga philosophy and meditation at the Hindu University of America in Orlando, Fla. "To try to take Hinduism or aspects of Hinduism outside of yoga is an affront. It's an act of insincere behavior."
Douglas R. Groothuis, a professor of philosophy at Denver Seminary, said that yoga was a Hindu practice structured to help people attain a higher spiritual state within, and that was incompatible with Christian teachings.
"I don't think Christian yoga works," he said. "It's an oxymoron. If it's truly Christian, it can't be truly yoga because of the worldviews."
The Vatican has also expressed misgivings about yoga. In a 1989 letter, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who is now Pope Benedict XVI, said practices like yoga and meditation could "degenerate into a cult of the body."
Even so, the number of people who practice Christian yoga is rapidly growing, said the Rev. Thomas Ryan, a Paulist priest in New York and editor of "Reclaiming the Body in Christian Spirituality."
Ryan, who developed many of the Christian yoga techniques adopted by others, said yoga postures were vehicles for people of all faiths to invite spirituality into the heart and body.
"It is better seen as a hardware to which one brings his or her own software and one's own faith understanding to transform the practice from within, so the intention is always critical," said Ryan, who is assembling a database of Christian yoga instructors.
Myriam Klotz, a reconstructionist rabbi and co-founder of the Yoga and Jewish Spirituality Teacher Training Institute at Elat Chayyim, a Jewish spiritual retreat center in Accord, N.Y., said she used yoga as a way to integrate the body into Judaism.
"I would like the Jewish experience to be more full-bodied," Klotz said, "and yoga is one of the best ways I have found to live a more full-bodied life. I don't mean to create a new Judiasm. It's being respectful of the yoga tradition and integrating the Jewish tradition and letting them befriend one another."
For example, if Klotz is teaching about the Jewish principle of people being grounded on Earth but stretching their souls up, she has students stand in mountain pose as a physical expression of that teaching.
Stephen A. Rapp, a Boston yoga teacher, developed Aleph-Bet yoga, a series of postures meant to represent Hebrew letters. Rapp said he saw the connection between poses and letters one day when, after he had shown his children yoga postures, he watched a scribe repair a scroll at synagogue.
For example, Rapp expresses the Hebrew letter bet in the posture Dandasana, where one sits on the ground with legs and arms straight out in front. Rapp believes postures are part of a physical yoga system into which spirituality is incorporated.
"It's the thinking about the shape and thinking about the symbol and what it means while also doing this form of exercise," he said. "It gives you a focus, an intention. You really have to have the intention correct in yoga."
But Swami Param, head of the Classical Yoga Hindu Academy in Manahawkin, N.J., said that if people could not acknowledge the Hindu element of yoga they should not bother studying it.
"As Hindus, we have no problem studying other religions," Param said, "but we give them the respect they deserve."


Paul

Mr. Douglas Bersaw quoted by a hate group

Mr. Douglas Bersaw of the Saint Benedict Center in Richmond, New Hampshire, is quoted at the website of Stormfront, a well-known hate group. This entry may be found on the internet:

Stormfront White Nationalist Community - The Curse of Cain and ...and it is also true to say, as it was recently put by Douglas Bersaw, that is, brother Anthony Mary, MICM, Prefect of The Third Order, MICM of SBC, NH: ...www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=100205 - 93k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages


Paul

The Church and the supernatural

This excellent article was written by Mr. Michael Brown and is featured at his website: http://www.spiritdaily.com:



A CHURCH THAT STRAYS FROM MYSTIC ROOTS BEGINS TO IMITATE SADDUCEES, PHARISEES
By Michael H. Brown
Striking it was, the other day, to hear from a priest who mentioned that it is now "politically incorrect" -- among priests -- to take spiritual phenomena such a weeping statues seriously.
It was striking because while it has been apparent for some time that many priests and bishops are no longer open to the supernatural, hearing it put in such terms crystallized it.
Politically incorrect.
Indeed, in the current climate, it is doubtful that apparition sites such as Lourdes in France and Fatima in Portugal would have passed muster ecclesiastically. What about Jesus Himself? Certainly, many theologians and other thinkers in the modern Church would have found it hard to believe that someone was actually going about healing the sick, casting out demons, speaking to God, experiencing apparitions, materializing wine, walking on water, calming storms, prophesying future events, raising the deceased, and Himself resurrecting.
There would have been much snickering about that -- for sure -- and so we have to ask ourselves if we as a Church are dangerously close to resembling Sadducees and Pharisees more than early-century Christians.
A hyper-skepticism and intellectualization of the Church -- the lack of a sense of the mystical -- has led to a lack of the sacred, and from this, like a dark fountain, have sprung many of the current problems in the Church, from empty pews, vacant monasteries, and bored congregants to unholy priests caught in scandal.
Sex abuse is the result of a priest who is out of touch with holiness.
Fantastic it is to say that too often the Spirit is no longer welcome in the Church. This is the root of many scandals.
In some ways, Pope Benedict XVI seems to be responding. Whether or not he will prove to be as open to the mystical as his predecessor, in the first seven months of his pontificate he has moved in a direction that seems to aim for the sacred -- promoting reading of the Bible, encouraging the use of Latin, and indicating deep concern for the wayward course of liturgical music (all the while preaching on ecumenism and love of everyone, whatever the denomination).
These are positive signs. The Pope has also tackled the issue of homosexuality in the Church. Such is relevant because when there is sin there is also a dearth of the Spirit.
Let's visit this issue for a moment: How will the new Vatican document on gays in the priesthood play out?
Whatever anyone tries to say, it sent a message that the Catholic Church is not a closet for ungodliness, and that includes homosexuality.
Period.
The Church deals with that sin with love but does not accept it and does not want sinners -- who are in need of ministry -- to lead it. Is this so unreasonable?
Yet in the U.S., as well as Australia and Canada, there already has been an attempt to "spin" the instruction. There are many who are trying to say that it allows homosexuals if they have been celibate for three years -- when what the document actually states is that anyone with deep-rooted homosexual tendencies is not right for the priesthood.
According to the document, "transitory" homosexual feelings, like those some may experience during the turmoil of youth, do not disqualify a man from the seminary -- as long as those transitory feelings have been eliminated.
The document does not repudiate men with homosexual inclinations who already are priests -- unless they are unchaste.
Bishop William Skylstad of Spokane, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said in a statement that the answer to the question of whether a homosexual man can be a good priest "lies in the lives of those men who, with God's grace, have truly been dedicated priests."
But as for future priests, that's a different matter; the Vatican is trying to clean up a mess that began when seminaries, like society itself, devoid of a transcendental sense, began to allow for anything.
"I believe that this statement means that it is not sufficient for the seminarian to be chaste for three years," says Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist, author and contributor to the Catholic Medical Association's document Homosexuality and Hope. "He must also first know himself; that is, understand his emotional conflicts which cause same-sex attractions and have worked to resolve those conflicts. Spiritual directors can help seminarians and priests by understanding that same-sex attractions are treatable and are not genetically determined. They can encourage seminarians and priests to face their emotional pain with the Lord's help, particularly their loneliness."
This means the purging too -- the self-cleansing -- of latent homosexuality (which was specifically mentioned in an earlier Vatican document).
Very dangerous it is at this time how even some bishops have said they will still accept gays in the wake of the document, and now it seems that the Vatican must move rapidly to halt such a misinterpretation of an important document -- one that can have the effect of a renewal if and only if it is strictly enforced.
In fact, the enforcement will prove more important than the document.
Those priests who are homosexuals and already ordained are allowed to remain as long as they are celibate, but the Vatican has said they should not be in a teaching capacity at seminaries. It may be wise for Rome to take this to the next step and review bishops or cardinals who are reported to be homosexual. There are rumors in the U.S., and in South Africa was a bishop who was openly and actively homosexual, displaying himself on the internet.
How could anything more quickly quash the Spirit?
We get allegations of such and while we will not post them unless there is official action -- and while we remind all that obedience to a bishop, no matter what one suspects, is important, along with authentic love for everyone, no matter what they struggle with -- the faithful should no longer be subject to the negative effects of such leadership.
A gay person cannot minister, but rather is in need of deliverance. That should be done with both strength and love. We all have our flaws. We all need purity. We may not excuse uncleanness.
Yet one major liberal Catholic newspaper did exactly that this week, apologizing for and showing disdain for the new Vatican document and calling the Vatican's terminology "repugnant." "To all those in positions of leadership in the Roman Catholic church who also happen to be homosexual," it said, "we offer our commiseration and sorrow that once again you have been forced to hear your sexuality, an element intrinsic to your humanity, described as an objective disorder."
This same publication never reports on anything mystical.
And so the question: Is sinfulness in the Church why some tend to be antagonistic to claims of apparitions, statues weeping, and similar phenomena? Is the reason because the tears of a statue indicate that something in very wrong in our society? Is at least some of it because most major apparitions strongly affirm strict, conservative, and orthodox Christianity?
Whatever the answer, the lack of a spiritual sense has threatened to turn Catholicism into nothing more than an institution. Without purity, authentic mysticism, and the sacred, without direct contact with holiness, the Church loses its membership.
"This is one of the reasons why in some parts of the world many Catholics abandon the Catholic Church for other Christian realities; they are attracted by a simple and effective proclamation that puts them in direct contact with Christ and allows them to experience the power of his Spirit," Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, preacher of the pontifical household, told Pope Benedict XVI last week.
Hyper-intellectualization, liberalism, and far too much emphasis on theology has dulled the Church, bored congregants, and opened the way for the rationalization of sin. With all due respect, when those in authority speak constantly with words like "catechesis" or in long polysyllables, we are not resembling the way the original Church spoke.
Are we not more than a doctrinal edifice?
We are. We are the Church of Christ. And that means we are the Church of miracles.
[see also: Psychology of homosexuality, part 2: gay tendencies can be healed and Are active homosexuals accepted by God?]

The Case of Fr. Leonard Feeney

The Case of Fr. Leonard Feeney [Excerpt from The Reign of Mary (winter 1992)]. . . In this very liberal climate which reigned in the United States, the students of the St. Benedict Center were particularly upset by the erroneous interpretation given to certain dogmas, especially among those involved in the Ecumenical movement. In their opinion, the false interpretation which was being given to the dogma that "Outside the Church there is no salvation," was at the basis of all this liberal teaching. And in reaction to this, they gave the same dogma a most rigorous interpretation. They were playing into the hands of the liberals. This rapidly stirred up a reaction, and in April of 1949, Dr. Maluf and three other professors, all members of the St. Benedict Center, were expelled from the Jesuit house in Boston for having taught an erroneous doctrine. They claimed that all those who were not explicitly members of the visible Church were damned, and accused all those who denied this of being heretics.

In order to explain the reasons to the press, the Very Reverend William L. Keheler, S.J., President of Boston College, declared: "They persisted in teaching, both in and outside the classroom, doctrines which contradicted the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, ideas that fostered fanaticism and intolerance." The affair became a scandal when on April 17, 1949, Father Leonard Feeney publicly undertook the defense of these professors and their doctrine.

The following day, Richard J. Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston, without any warning to the interested parties, declared to the press that Father Leonard Feeney was suspended a divinis, in the archdiocese and the St. Benedict's Center was placed under interdict. Considering this double sanction to be against canon law, Father Feeney appealed to Rome. From then on, there was open war bewteen the priest and local authorities.

On the 8th of August, 1949, Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani, Secretary of the Holy Office, wrote to the Archbishop of Boston and sent him a Declaration of this Holy Office to be conveyed to Father Feeney, which made clear the sense in which one should understand the doctrine that "There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church." Father Feeney refused to adhere to this declaration and wrote with regard to the matter that "it can be considered as having established a two-sided policy in order to propagate error." On October 28, Father Feeney was expelled from the Jesuit Order.Things remained unchanged until September 14, 1952.

At this point, the Archbishop of Boston demanded that Father Feeney retract his false interpretation and make an "explicit profession of submission" to the Roman Declaration within one month or suffer the penalty of being reduced to the state of a layman. Father Feeney, accompanied by four witnesses, presented himself before his Archbishop. He told him that his only option was to declare the letter of Marchetti-Selvaggiani "absolutely scandalous because it was frankly heretical." Then he asked His Excellency if he was in agreement with the views expressed by the Roman Declaration. He obtained the following response: "I am not a theologian. All that I know is what I am told." Then, in the presence of these witnesses, Father Feeney accused the Archbishop of failing to perform his duty, and left.

On September 24, 1952, a letter was sent from the St. Benedict Center to Pius XII, accusing the Archbishop of Boston of heresy. In October of 1952, Cardinal Pizzardo summoned Father Feeney to present himself in Rome for a hearing by the Holy Office. Father Feeney accepted on condition that they told him beforehand what the charges against him were. Not receiving any response, he did not comply. On February 16, 1953, the Acta Apostolicae Sedis announced the excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney. The following is an official translation of the Decree:
"Since Father Leonard Feeney remained in Boston (St. Benedict Center) and since he has been suspended from performing his priestly duties for a long time because of his grave disobedience to the Authority of the Church, in no way moved by repeated warnings and threats of incurring excommunication ipso facto, and has still failed to submit, the most Eminent and Reverend Fathers, charged with the responsibility of safeguarding faith and morals, during a plenary session held on February 4, 1953, have declared him excommunicated with all the effects that this has in law."On Thursday, February 12, 1953, Our Most Holy Father Pius XII, Pope by Divine Providence, has approved and confirmed the decree of these Most Eminent Fathers, and ordered that this be made a matter of public record."Given in Rome in the general quarters of the Holy Office, February 13, 1953. Marius Crovini, notary."

Since then, and in spite of the sanction of the Holy See, Father Feeney has made the St. Benedict Center the headquarters of a Society of about one hundred individuals who call themselves the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and who have undertaken to propagate this condemned doctrine about the salvation of non-Catholics, while accusing the Archbishop of Boston and all who agree with his interpretation of being heretics.

Declaration Letter to Archbishop Cushing from the Holy OfficeTHE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICEFrom the Headquarters of the Holy OfficeAugust 8, 1949 Protocol Number 122/49Your Excellency:This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom : "Outside the Church there is no salvation."After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their opinions and complaints, and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, the same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from the fact that the axiom: "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutes mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities. Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session, held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the August Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgement but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (Denziger, n. 1792). Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.

However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Saviour gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on his apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt., 28:19-20). Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place, by which we are commanded to be incorporated by Baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth. Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation, without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory. In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the Sacrament of Regeneration and in reference to the Sacraments of Penance (Denziger, nn. 797, 807).

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, "On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ." (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.) For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.

Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is composed here on earth, the same August Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."Toward the end of this same Encyclical Letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition " in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, loc. cit., 342)With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution "Singulari quadam," in Denziger, nn. 1641, ff. - also Pope Pius IX in the Encyclical Letter "Quanto conficiamur mœrore" in Denzinger, n. 1677). But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Hebrews, 11:6).

The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to fellowship of His children" (Denz., n. 801)From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical "From the Housetops," fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.From these declarations which pertain to doctrine certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Act, 20:28)Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of Canon 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.

Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorites, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threqatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest and an ordinary member of the Church.Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church Authority, called the "imprimatur," which is prescribed by the sacred canons.Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them applies without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation. In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remainYour Excellency's most devotedF. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1910)Vol. 14, TOLERATION, J. Pohle But does the proposition that outside the Church there is no salvation involve the doctrine so often attributed to Catholicism, that the Catholic Church, in virtue of the principle, "condemns and must condemn all non-Catholics"? This is by no means the case. The foolish unchristian maxim that those who are outside the Church must for that very reason be eternally lost is no legitimate conclusion from Catholic dogma. The infliction of eternal damnation pertains not to the Church, but to God, Who alone can scrutinize the conscience.

The task of the Church is confined exclusively to the formulating of the principle, which expresses a condition of salvation imposed by God Himself, and does not extend to the examination of the persons, who may or may not satisfy this condition. Care for one's own salvation is the personal concern of the individual. And in this matter the Church shows the greatest possible consideration for the good faith and the innocence of the erring person. Not that she refers, as is often stated, the eternal salvation of the heterodox solely and exclusively to "invincible ignorance", and thus makes sanctifying ignorance a convenient gate to heaven for the stupid. She places the efficient cause of the eternal salvation of all men objectively in the merits of the Redeemer, and subjectively in justification through baptism or through good faith enlivened by the perfect love of God, both of which may be found outside the Catholic Church. Whoever indeed has recognized the true Church of Christ, but contrary to his better knowledge refuses to enter it, and whoever becomes perplexed as to the truth of his belief, but fails to investigate his doubts seriously, no longer lives in good faith, but exposes himself to the danger of eternal damnation, since he rashly contravenes an important command of God. Otherwise the gentle breathing of grace is not confined within the walls of the Catholic Church, but reaches the hearts of many who stand afar, working in them the marvel of justification and thus ensuring the eternal salvation of numberless men who either, like upright Jews and pagans, do not know the true Church, or, like so many Protestants educated in gross prejudice, cannot appreciate her true nature.

To all such, the Church does not close the gate of Heaven, although she insists that there are essential means of grace which are not within the reach of non-Catholics. In his allocution "Singulari quadam" of 9 December, 1854, which emphasized the dogma of the Church as necessary for salvation, Pius IX uttered the consoling principle: "Sed tamen pro certo...." (But it is likewise certain that those who are ignorant of the true religion, if their ignorance is invincible, are not, in this matter, guilty of any fault in the sight of God). (Denzinger n. 1647) . . . As early as 1713 Clement XI condemned in his dogmatic Bull "Unigenitus" the proposition of the Jensenist Quesnel: . . . no grace is given outside the Church. . . just as Alexander VIII has already condemned in 1690 the Jansenistic proposition of Arnauld: . . . (Pagans, Jews, heretics, and other people of the sort, receive no influx [of grace] whatsoever from Jesus Christ). . . Catholics who are conversant with the teachings of their Church know how to draw the proper conclusions. . .

Baltimore Catechism No.3A Catechism of Christian Doctrine prepared and enjoined by order of the Third Plenary Council of BaltimoreIMPRIMATURS:Archbishop John McCloskey of New York 1885Archbishop Gibbons Baltimore 1885Archbishop Michael Augustine N.Y. 1901Archbishop Patrick Hayes N.Y. 1921NIHIL OBSTATS:Rev. Remigius LaFort, Censor Librorum 1901Arthur Scanlan, Censor Librorum 1921Q. 510. Is it ever possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church?A. It is possible for one to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, provided that person (I) has been validly baptized; (2) firmly believes the religion he professes and practices to be the true religion, and (3) dies without the guilt of mortal sin on his soul.Q. 511. Why do we say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church?A. We say it is only possible for a person to be saved who does not know the Catholic Church to be the true Church, because the necessary conditions are not often found, especially that of dying in a state of grace without making use of the Sacrament of Penance.Q. 512. How are such persons said to belong to the Church?A. Such persons are said to belong to the "soul of the church"; that is, they are really members of the Church without knowing it. Those who share in its Sacraments and worship are said to belong to the body or visible part of the Church.

The New Catholic Dictionary (1929)SOUL OF THE CHURCHFrom the 16th century, the Catholic theologians expressed more definitely the theological doctrine of the distinction between the Soul and Body of the Church. . . This distinction. . . is formally expressed by Bellarmine in his study on the members of the Church. According to him, men belong to the Body of the Church by virtue of external profession of the faith, and participation in the sacraments; and to the Soul of the Church through the internal gifts of the Holy Ghost, faith, hope, and charity. He draws three general conclusions relative to the members of the Church. There are those: (a) Who belong always to both the Body and Soul of the Church; (b) Who belong to the Soul without belonging to the Body; (c) Who belong to the Body but not to the Soul. This teaching has generally been followed by Catholic theologians.

P. Pius IX Solemn AllocutionSingulari QuadamDecember 9, 1854It is to be held of faith that none can be saved outside the Apostolic Roman Church . . . but nevertheless it is equally certain that those who are ignorant of the true religion, if that ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty in the matter in the eyes of the Lord.(Denzinger 1641,ff.)

P. Pius IX EncyclicalQUANTO CONFICIAMURAugust 10, 1863We all know that those who are invincibly ignorant of our religion and who nevertheless lead an honest and upright life, can, under the influence of divine light and divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who knows and sees the mind, the heart, the thoughts, and the dispositions of every man, cannot in His infinite bounty and clemency permit any one to suffer eternal punishment who is not guilty through his own fault." (Denzinger 1677)

St. Bernard"De Baptismo" "What is clearer than that the will is taken for the act, when the act is excluded by necessity?"

St. AugustineTreatise on Baptism"When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body.""All who are within in heart are saved in the unity of the ark."

Vol. 7, HERESY, J. Wilhelm Once heresy is in possession it tightens its grip by the thousand subtle and often unconscious influences which mould a man's life. A child is born in heretical surroundings: before it is able to think for itself its mind has been filled and fashioned by home, school, and church teachings, the authority of which it never doubted. When, at a riper age, doubts arise, the truth of Catholicism is seldom apprehended as it is. Innate prejudices, educational bias, historical distortions stand in the way and frequently make approach impossible. The state of conscience technically termed bona fides, good faith, is thus produced. It implies inculpable belief in error, a mistake morally unavoidable and therefore always excusable, sometimes even laudable. . .

Vol. 6, GOOD FAITH, Joseph F, DelaneyOne who is in this condition, so far as the violation of positive law, or even, in certain junctures, of the natural law, is concerned, is said to labour under an invincible error, and hence to be guiltless. This consideration is often invoked in behalf of those who are outside of the visible affiliation of the Catholic Church. . .

Vol. 8, JUSTIFICATION, J. Pohle"But, not to close the gates of heaven against pagans and those non-Catholics, who without their fault do not know or do not recognize the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Catholic theologians unanimously hold that the desire to receive these sacraments is implicitly contained in the serious resolve to do all that God has commanded, even if His holy will should not become known in every detail."

Vol. 2, BAPTISM, William H.W. FanningX. SUBSTITUTES FOR THE SACRAMENT. . .It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that when the baptism of water becomes a physical or moral impossibility, eternal life may be obtained by the baptism of desire or the baptism of blood. (1) The baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis) is a perfect contrition of heart, and every act of perfect charity or pure love of God which contains, at least implicitly, a desire (votum) of baptism. . .This doctrine is set forth clearly by the Council of Trent. . . and the contrary propositions are condemned by Popes Pius V and Gregory XII, in proscribing the 31st and 33rd propositions of Baius. . . It is true that some of the Fathers of the Church arraign severely those who content themselves with the desire of receiving the sacrament of regeneration, but they are speaking of catechumens who of their own accord delay the reception of baptism from unpraiseworthy motives. Finally, it is to be noted that only adults are capable of receiving the baptism of desire.

A Catholic Dictionary, Attwater(Imprimatur/Nihil obstat 1946) SALVATION Outside the Church. "Outside the Church, no salvation." This dogma refers to those who are outside the Church by their own fault. There is a command to enter the Church, which is the prescribed way to Heaven. He who refuses to join the Church which Christ founded, recognizing that Christ comanded adhesion to his Church, is in the way of perdition. But those who are in invincible ignorance will not be condemned merely on account of their ignorance. . .Those non-Catholics who are saved are in life outside the visible body of the Church, but are joined invisibly to the Church by charity and by that implicit desire of joining the Church which is inseparable from the explicit desire to do God's will.DESIRE, BAPTISM OF, is one of the two possible substitutes for Baptism of water. When it is not possible thus to be baptized, an act of perfect contrition or pure love of God will supply the omission. Such acts are a perfect and ultimate diposition calling for the infusion of sanctifying grace, and at least implicitly include a desire and intention to receive Baptism of water should occasion offer. Infants are not capable of Baptism of desire. An heathen, believing, even though in a confused way, in a God whose will should be done and desiring to do that will whatever it may be, probably has Baptism of desire. It may reasonably be assumed that vast numbers of persons unbaptized by water have thus been rendered capable of enjoying the Beatific Vision.

St. Thomas AquinasSumma Theologica Part II. Question 66. Article 11". . . a man receives the effect of Baptism by the power of the Holy Ghost, not only without Baptism of Water, but also without Baptism of Blood: forasmuch as his heart is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe in and love God and to repent of his sins: wherefore this is also called Baptism of Repentence.""The other two Baptisms are included in the Baptism of Water, which derives its efficacy, both from Christ's Passion and from the Holy Ghost. Consequently for this reason the unity of Baptism is not destroyed.""The other two. however, are like the Baptism of Water, not, indeed, in the nature of sign, but in the baptismal effect. Consequently they are not Sacraments."Article 12.". . .the shedding of blood for Christ's sake, and the inward operation of the Holy Ghost, are called baptisms, in so far as they produce the effect of the Baptism of Water. Now the Baptism of Water derives its efficacy from Christ's Passion and from the Holy Ghost, as already stated. These two causes act in each of these three Baptisms: most excellently, however, in the Baptism of Blood. For Christ's Passion acts in the Baptism of Water by way of a figurative representation; in the Baptism of the Spirit of of Repentence, by way of desire; but in the Baptism of Blood, by way of imitating the Divine act. In like manner, too, the power of the Holy Ghost acts in the Baptism of Water through a certain hidden power; in the Baptim of Repentence by moving the heart; but in the Baptism of Blood....Question 68. Article 2.". . . the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forstalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that worketh by charity, whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly.

Doctrinal and Scriptural CatechismRev. P. Collot, Doctor of the Sorbonne (1904) Approved by Archbishop John Hughes, D.D., NY.Q. How [can baptism be supplied] in adults?A. Either by martyrdom or by an act of charity, with the desire of receiving it as soon as they can.Children have but one way, which is martyrdom; and adults have two, martyrdom or an act of charity, together with the desire or receiving it as soon as possible.This is the reason why it is said that there are three sorts of Baptism: the Baptism of blood, the Baptism of the Holy Ghost or of desire, and the Baptism of water, although in reality there is but one, which is that given with water, while pronouncing the words: In the name oft he Father, etc.Q. Does attrition of itself justify the sinner?A. No; but it disposes him to receive the grace of justification by absolution, in which the efficacy of the sacrament of Penance principally consists.Q. What difference is there between perfect contrition and attrition?A. !st. The one is caused by love, and the other by shame or fear. 2nd. The one justifies the sinner, and the other only disposes him for justification [by absolution].

St. Ambrose, "De obitu Valentiniani""But I hear that you grieve because he did not receive the sacrament of baptism. Tell me now what else have we if not desire and will? He in very truth had this wish that, before he came to Italy, he should be initiated into the Church and immediately baptized by me . . . . Had he not then the grace which he desired so earnestly? Did he not have the grace he demanded? Certainly, for he who demands receives. But if it is a fact that because the sacraments are not solemnly celebrated they have no value, then the martyrs if they were only catechumens would not receive the crown of glory; for no one is crowned who is not initiated. But if people are absolved in their own blood, then this man's piety and will absolved him."

The Catechism of the Council of Trent. . . should any unforseen accident deprive adults of baptism, their intention of receiving it, and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness. . . . such is the efficacy of true contrition. . . that through it we obtain from God the immediate pardon of our sins.

THE CATECHISM EXPLAINEDRev. Francis Spirago, Professor of Theology(c) 1899, 1921, by Benziger Bros. (Printers to the Apostolic See)Nihil Obstat: Scanlon. Imprimatur: Archbishop Hayes, D.D.NY3. Whoever through his own fault remains outside the Church will not be saved.If, however, a man, through no fault of his own, remains outside the Church, he may be saved if he lead a God-fearing life; for such a one is to all intents and purposes a member of the Catholic Church.The majority of men who have been brought up in heresy think that they belong to the true Church; their error is not due to hatred of God. A man who leads a good life and has the love of God in his heart, really belongs to the Church, and such a one is saved, not by his heresy, but by belonging to the Church. St. Peter said: "In every nation he that feareth God and worketh justice is acceptable to Him" (Acts x. 35). . . .All who lived up to their lights were Christians, though they might have been looked upon as godless, as, e.g., Socrates among the Greeks, Abraham and Elias among the Jews. They do not belong to the body of the Church, that is, they are not externally in union with the Church, but they are of the soul of the Church, i.e., they have the sentiments which the members of the Church should have.Thus the Catholic Church has members both visible and invisible.The visible members are those who have been received into the Church by Baptism. The following are not members: The unbaptized (heathens, Jews, Mohammedans), formal heretics (Protestants), and schismatics (the Greeks), those who are excommunicated. The invisible members are those who without any fault of their own are outside the Church leading God-fearing lives."If baptism by water is impossible, it may be replaced by the baptism of desire, or by the baptism of blood, as in the case of those who suffer martyrdom for the faith of Christ.The Emperor Valentinian II was on the way to Milan to be baptized when he was assassinated; St. Ambrose said of him that his desire had been the means of his cleansing. The patriarchs, prophets, and holy men of the Old Testament had the baptism of desire; their love of God was ardent, and they wished to do all thaty He commands. God accepts the will for the deed; in this He manifests His superabundant loving kindness. But all the temporal penalties of sin are not remitted by the baptism of desire.God has imprinted the natural law on the heart of every man; this forms the fundamental rule of human actions.A young child who has done something wrong - lied, perhaps, or committed a theft, feels uncomfortable, frightened, or ashamed; though it may never have heard of the Ten Commandments, it is conscious that it has done amiss. It is the same with heathen who knows nothing about God's commandments. Hence we may conclude that there is a LAW OF NATURE in every human heart, a law not written upon it, but inborn in it; an intuitive knowledge of right and wrong. St. Paul declares that the Gentiles do by nature those things that are of the law (what the Ten Commandments enjoin), and consequently they will be judged by God according to the natural law (Rom. ii. 14-16).

Radio Replies, Vol II.Fathers Rumble and CartyImprimatur 1940 Archbishop John G. Murray722. Does Catholic doctrine allow that the soul of an unbaptized heathen can enter heaven?
Not in the case of unbaptized infants who die before coming to the use of reason and the stage of personal responsibility. The heathens who do come to the age of personal responsibility can attain to the supernatural order of grace and inherit that very heaven for which baptism is normally required on certain conditions. For example, a pagan may never have heard of the Gospel, or having heard of it, may have quite failed to grasp its significance. He remains a heathen, knowing no better, and dies without receiving the actual Sacrament of Baptism. In such a case God will not blame him for that for which he is really not responsible. At the same time, God wills all men to be saved, and will certainly give that heathen sufficient grace for his salvation according to the condition in which he is. If that heathen, under the influence of interior promptings of conscience and the actual inspirations of grace given by God, repents sincerely before death of such moral lapses as he has committed during life, he will secure forgiveness, and save his soul in view of the Baptism he would have been willing to receive had he known it to be necessary, and could he have done so. We Catholics say that such a heathen has been saved by Baptism of Desire. The desire, of course, is implicit only.

St. Robert Bellarmine "De Ecclesia Militante"". . . (again) there are those who belong to the soul [of the Church] and not the body, as [are] catechumens or the excommunicated, if indeed they have charity [state of grace], which can happen."

Council of Trent, Session VII, Concerning the Sacraments in General, Canon 4If anyone says that the Sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but superfluous, and that without them or their desire [aut eorum voto] men can obtain from God the grace of justification through faith alone, although all [Sacraments] are not necessary for every individual: Let him be Anathema.[Denzinger 847]

Story of a Soul, St. Therese of Lisiuex, Chapter OneI saw something further; that Our Lord's love shines out just as much through a little soul who yields comepletely to His Grace as it does through the greatest. True love is shown in self-abasement, and if everyone were like the saintly doctors who adorn the Church, it would seem that God had not far enough to stoop when He came to them. But He has, in fact, created the child who knows nothing and can only make feeble cries; and the poor savage with only the natural law to guide him; and it is to hearts such as these that He Stoops.

Vol. 10 CHURCH, G.H. JoyceThe Necessary Means of Salvation. - In the preceding examination of the Scriptural doctrine regarding the Church, it has been seen how clearly it is laid down that only by entering the Church can we participate in the redemption wrought for us by Christ. Incorporation with the Church can alone unite us to the family of the second Adam, and alone can engraft us into the true Vine. Moreover, it is to the Church that Christ has committed those means of grace through which the gifts He earned for men are communicated to them. The Church alone dispenses the sacraments. It alone makes known the light of revealed truth. Outside the Church these gifts cannot be obtained. From all this there is but one conclusion: Union with the Church is not merely one out of various means by which salvation may be obtained: it is the only means.This doctrine of the absolute necessity of union with the Church was taught in explicit terms by Christ. Baptism, the act of incorporation among her members, He affirmed to be essential to salvation. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark, xvi, 16). Any disciple who shall throw off obedience to the Church is to be reckoned as one of the heathen: he has no part in the kingdom of God (Matt., xviii, 17). St. Paul is equally explicit. "A man that is a heretic", he writes to Titus, "after the first and second admonition avoid: knowing that he that is such a one is . . . condemned by his own judgement" (Tit., iii, 10 sq.) The doctrine is summed up in the phrase, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. This saying has been the occasion of so many objections that some consideration of its meaning seems desirable. It certainly does not mean that none can be saved except those who are in visible communion with the Church. The Catholic Church has ever taught that nothing else is needed to obtain justification than an act of perfect charity and of contrition. Whoever, under the impulse of actual grace, elicits these acts, receives immediately the gift of sanctifying grace, and is numbered among the children of God. Should he die in these dispositions, he will assuredly attain heaven. It is true such acts could not possibly be elicited by one who was aware that God has commanded all to join the Church, and who nevertheless should wilfully remain outside her fold. For love of God carries with it the practical desire to fulfil His commandments. But of those who die without visible communion with the Church, not all are guilty of wilful disobedience to God's commands. Many are kept from the Church by ignorance. Such may be the case of numbers among those who have been brought up in heresy. To others the external means of grace may be unattainable. Thus an excommunicated person may have no opportunity of seeking reconciliation at the last, and yet may repair his faults by inward acts of contrition and charity.It should be observed that those who are thus saved are not entirely outside the pale of the Church. The will to fulfil all God's commandments is, and must be, present in all of them. Such a wish implicitly includes the desire for incorporation with the visible Church: for this, though they know it not, has been commanded by God. They thus belong to the Church by desire (voto). Moreover, there is a true sense in which they may be said to be saved through the Church. In the order of Divine Providence, salvation is given to man in the Church: membership in the Church Triumphant is given through membership in the Church Militant. Sanctifying grace, the title to salvation, is peculiarly the grace of those who are united to Christ in the Church: it is the birthright of the children of God. The primary purpose of those actual graces which God bestows upon those outside the Church is to draw them within the fold. Thus, even in the case in which God saves men apart from the Church, He does so through the Church's graces. They are joined to the Church in spiritual communion, though not in visible and external communion. In the expression of theologians, they belong to the soul of the Church, though not to its body. Yet the possibility of salvation apart from visible communion with the Church must not blind us to the loss suffered by those who are thus situated. They are cut off from the sacraments God has given as the support of the soul. In the ordinary channels of grace, which are ever open to the faithful Catholic, they cannot participate. Countless means of santification which the Church offers are denied to them.

Pope Pius XII EncyclicalHumani GenerisAugust 12, 1950. . . although this sacred Office of Teacher in matters of faith and morals must be the proximate and universal criterion of truth for all theologians, since to it has been entrusted by Christ Our Lord the whole deposit of faith - Sacred Scripture and divine Tradition - to be preserved, guarded and interpreted, still the duty that is incumbent on the faithful to flee also those errors which more or less approach heresy, and accordingly "to keep also the constitutions and decrees by which such evil opinions are proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See," is sometimes as little known as it it did not exist. What is expounded in the Encyclical Letters of the Roman Pontiffs concerning the nature and constitution of the Church, is deliberately and habitually neglected by some with the idea of giving force to a certain vague notion which they profess to have found in the ancient Fathers, especially the Greeks. The Popes, they assert, do not wish to pass judgement on what is a matter of dispute among theologians, so recourse must be had to the early sources; and the recent constitutions and decrees of the Teaching Church must be explained from the writings of the ancients.Although these things seem well said, still they are not free from error. It is true that Popes generally leave theologians free in those matters which are disputed in various ways by men of very high authority in this field; but history teaches that many matters that formerly were open to discussion, no longer now admit of discussion.Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who hears you, heareth me"; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgement on a matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.It is true that theologians must always return to the sources of divine revelation: for its belongs to them to point out how the doctrine of the living Teaching Authority is to be found either explicitly or implicitly in the Scriptures and in Tradition. Besides, each source of divinely revealed doctrine contains so many rich treasures of truth, that theology through the study of its sacred sources remains ever fresh: on the other hand, speculation which neglects a deeper search into the deposit of faith, proves sterile, as we know from experience. But for this reason even positive theology cannot be on a par with merely historical science. For, together with the sources of positive theology God has given to His Church a living Teaching Authority to elucidate and explain what is contained in the deposit of faith only obscurely and implicitly. This deposit of faith our Divine Redeemer has given for authentic interpretation not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Teaching Authority of the Church. But if the Church does exercise this function of teaching, as she often has through the centuries, either in the ordinary or extraordinary way, it is clear how false is a procedure which would attempt to explain what is clear by means of what is obscure. Indeed the very opposite procedure must be used.

Pope Pius XI EncyclicalMortalium animos, Jan. 6, 1928The teaching authority of the Church in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that the revealed doctrines might remain for ever intact and might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men. This authority is indeed daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him; but it has the further office of defining some truth with solemn decree whenever it is opportune, and whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or again to impress the minds of the faithful with a clearer and more detailed explanation of the articles of sacred doctrine. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no fresh invention is introduced, nothing new is ever added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained within the deposit of Revelation divinely committed to the Church; but truths which to some perhaps may still seem obscure are rendered clear, or a truth which some may have called into question is declared to be of faith.

Vol. 10 MASS, J. Pohle. . . the Church has surrounded with certain conditions, which priests are bound in obedience to observe, the application of Mass for certain classes of the living and dead . . . For a deceased heretic the private and hypothetical application of the Mass is allowed only when the priest has good grounds for believing that the deceased held his error in good faith (bona fide. Cf. S.C. Officii, 7 April, 1875). . . In like manner Mass may be celebrated privately for the souls of deceased Jews and heathens, who have lead an upright life . . .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Added Comments: The sources in which this Catholic doctrine can be found are certainly not limited to the sources referenced here. It may even be said that the defense of this doctrine has been overdone since only a couple of these authoritative quotes should be sufficient proof for any Catholic, especially the Council of Trent, the Encyclical "Quanto Conficiamur" or the Letter from the Holy Office under Pius XII explaining the doctrine for Fr. Feeney. The last excerpt is alone sufficient to show the Church's official recognition of this doctrine in a practical way by allowing priest's to offer Mass for the souls of deceased non-Catholics. Careful note should be taken especially of what Pope Pius XII says in Humani Generis on page eleven. We can be sure that Pope Pius XII had this "grave controversy" of the Boston College in mind when he authored this Encyclical as it was written after the Declaration letter of the Holy Office, and before Fr. Feeney was excommunicated. He makes it clear that it is solely the office of the living Teaching authority to interpret, elucidate and explain that which may be only implicitly and obscurely contained within the deposit of faith. The possibility of baptism of desire in a non-Catholic is a solid teaching of our faith. However, the probability of such a thing occuring is another matter. Judging from the Church's Ordinary teaching on this it would seem that such justification by perfect love and contrition is possible but not very probable. It would seem silly, however, to expect the Church to define the degree of probability: whether it is simply difficult, very difficult, or very-very difficult, etc. This doctrine clearly shows the infinite Mercy of God and supports the teachings that God wills the salvation of all men, and that if anyone is damned it is through their own fault. The objection may be raised that the doctrine of Baptism of Desire with invincible ignorance would destroy the zeal of Catholic missionaries to convert pagans and natives. Those who think this obviously do not understand the doctrine. We only need to look at the zeal of a Catholic pastor for his parishioners. Even though his parishioners, as Catholics, are in the one true Church - "the way of salvation" - with all the means of grace at their disposal, the parish priest works with much zeal to help keep each member of his flock securely in the state of grace. Knowing this to be so, what must be the zeal of a missionary who seeks to convert savages from "the way of perdition"? The Catholic doctrine of Baptism of Desire in fact greatly supports the zeal of missionaries in their work of conversion: it gives them a greater hope that any particular savage they work with may just be one who is well disposed to do God's will and be more easily converted to the secure "way of salvation", and possibly having even the implicit desire of Baptism. It seems that the followers of Fr. Feeney at the St. Benedict Center are coming to see the light. Although they still unfortunately deny the Catholic doctrine of "baptism of desire", they no longer follow Fr. Feeney in considering it to be a heresy: In their January 1992 issue of the Crusader, the doctrine of "baptism of desire" has been classified as an "undefined theory" in which "each man has as much right to his opinion as the other." They have yet to see, however, that they are still in error and have no right to hold an opinion contrary to Church teaching on this matter.

The Catechism on the necessity of Baptism

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.59 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.60 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.61 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."62 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

This is the teaching of the Magisterium. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is, as Pope John Paul II said in his Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, "a sure norm." As a sure norm, it must be accepted by all who claim to be Catholic.

Paul

The Rosary: A Most Suitable Remedy

The following is taken from the Encyclical Letter Ingruentium malorum of His Holiness Pope Pius XII which was published on September 19, 1951, the anniversary of the La Salette apparition:


"We do not hesitate to affirm again publicly that we put great confidence in the holy rosary for the healing of the evils that afflict our times. Not with force, not with arms, not with human power, but with divine help obtained through the means of this prayer will the Church, strong like David with his sling, be able to confront the infernal enemy, addressing to him the words of the young shepherd: 'You come against me with sword and spear and scimitar, but I come against you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel that you have insulted. Today the Lord shall deliver you into my hands....All this multitude, too, shall learn that it is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves. For the battle is the Lord's, and he shall deliver you into our hands.'

For this reason, we earnestly desire, Venerable Brothers, that all the faithful, following your example and your exhortation, conscientiously respond to our paternal admonitions, uniting their hearts and voices with the same ardor of charity. If the evils and the assaults of the wicked increase, so likewise must the zeal of all upright people increase and become even more vigorous. Let them strive to obtain from our most loving Mother, especially through this form of prayer, that better times may quickly return for the Church and for society."

Paul

More anti-Semitism from Mr. Douglas Bersaw

By clicking on the link provided, you will be redirected to the message board for the "American Patriot Friends Network" - http://www.apfn.net/ Here, you will come across a quotation from Mr. Douglas Bersaw, one of the founders of the Saint Benedict Center in Richmond, New Hampshire. The Saint Benedict Center is well-known for its rabid anti-Semitism and its refusal to accept the Church's understanding of the old axiom "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus."

Here is the relevant section from the message board in question:


"Reliving their Good Friday perfidy, they attempt to again become the 'rulers of the people', and to use the rulers and the civil servants of the nations in their treacherous plots, like they used Herod, Pilate and the Roman soldiers. And like the carnal Jews then, they seek an earthly kingdom; their backs bent down, they see and desire only base and earthly things, being blinded to the spiritual and moral. For that is Zionist Occupational Government, to subvert the nation's governments and institutions for Jewish schemes of plunder and ruination, inevitably victimising and corrupting, ruining the host, whether it be by actually manning the governments or by otherwise influencing the policies, such as through banking, finance or the media. And it is also true to say, as it was recently put by Douglas Bersaw, that is, Brother Anthony Mary, MICM, Prefect of the Third Order, MICM of SBC, NH:


“Ever since the “sceptre has passed from Judah” [Genesis 49:10] they can only exercise real political power through the gentile nations. That is why the Jews could not sentence Our Lord to death, only the Romans could. Today, we in America are their Romans. Their invasion and conquering of Palestine and the continued exercise of their power here are only possible because we support them completely with all they need, and for no other reason.”

This quote may also be found at the website of a White Supremacist anti-Semitic hate group calling itself Stormfront.

Paul

Vatican to Boston Archdiocese...

Vatican tells Boston Archdiocese to stop Catholic Charities from brokering adoptions unless same-sex couples are excluded. Click on the link provided for full article.

Paul

A word of thanks

The staff of the Spiritual Children of Saint Rita would like to thank you for your support and for your continued prayers. The apostolate is growing quickly and the website has been receiving thousands of hits. Together, let's all strive to imitate St. Rita the peacemaker as we continue on our faith journey.

Paul

Mayor Menino, intrinsically evil acts and Catholic Charities

A group of Catholic activists believes that Boston Mayor Thomas Menino should not be honored at the Catholic Charities' annual Christmas fundraising dinner because of his support for abortion and same-sex "marriage" and are calling for a boycott of the event. However, Mr. Paul Grogan of The Boston Foundation, a major donor to Catholic Charities, has indicated that the foundation will attend the dinner since he believes "it's not right to reduce funds for the poor as part of a protest."

This argument is specious. This because prudent judgments are required of every Catholic before contributing time, energy and resources to any proposed project. Moreover, there are almost unlimited opportunities within the Church to fulfill one's responsibilities toward the Church and the poor in one's own parish, diocese, nation and. throughout the world. But there is something else to consider here. And it is this: contestation in the Church tends toward schism and this is a grave matter. Pope Paul VI often spoke of the widespread contestation within the Church which originated at Vatican II and has continued to our present time. By contestation, Pope Paul VI was referring to public insubordination. And the chief example of this is the radical theological dissent from the Church's constant and most firm moral teaching.

Among the Church's constant and most firm moral teaching is the idea that there are explicit kinds of human acts, specified by the object of moral choice, that are always and everywhere morally wrong, for the very reason that a willingness to choose an object of this kind displays a disordered will (i.e., moral evil). The Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1755, states that: "A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting 'in order to be seen by men'_. The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil."

And No. 1756 says, "It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it."

The Catechism identifies various other kinds of intrinsically evil acts, proscribed by absolute norms. Among these are: the intentional killing of the innocent (2373), as in infanticide (2268) and abortion (2273), mercy killing or euthanasia (2277); masturbation (2352); fornication (2353); rape (2356); homosexual acts (2357); adultery (nn. 2380-2381) and contraception (2370).

No Catholic who desires to exercise prudence when making a contribution to a certain project will engage in dishonesty by overlooking the grave nature of contestation within the Church and the scandal which will result from honoring politicians who reject the Church's constant and most firm moral teaching regarding those human acts which are intrinsically evil.

God love you,
Paul Anthony Melanson

Pope Benedict XVI to abandon the idea of Limbo

As reported by Stephen McGinty for The Scotsman, the Catholic Church is preparing to abandon the idea of limbo, a place or state of infants dying without the Sacrament of Baptism who suffer the pain of loss but not the pain of sense.

As Pope Benedict XVI said in a 1984 interview, "Limbo has never been a defined truth of faith. Personally, speaking as a theologian and not as head of the Congregation, I would drop something that has always been only a theological hypothesis."

In fact, the last time limbo was mentioned in a papal document was in a bull written by Pope Pius VI in 1794. However, in that document, the Holy Father did not teach the existence of limbo, he merely rejected the arguments of the Jansenists against it.

Truly we live in fascinating times. I can hardly wait to read what the Church's Magisterium will teach us on the subject. I am particularly interested because Catholics have wrestled with this problem for centuries. Since the beginning of the 20th century, many theologians have defended the idea that infants dying without the Sacrament of Baptism could attain Heaven and the Beatific Vision. Various substitutes for the Sacrament of Baptism have been proposed such as the prayers of the parents and their desire (which would take the place of the infants desire for Baptism) or the idea that infants who die before the Sacrament can be administered attain the use of reason at the moment of death by a divine illumination permitting the child to decide for God etc.

This is really an interesting problem. This because if we say that all infants who die without Baptism achieve Heaven, then some will say, "Why bother with Baptism since infants are saved anyway." And such an attitude would contradict Church teaching. Moreover, in 1958 the Holy Office warned against this opinion saying that it "lacked solid foundation."

Both the Second Council of Lyons in 1274 and the Council of Florence held between 1438 and 1445, taught that: "The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with only original sin soon go down into hell, but there they receive different punishments" (Denziger 464, 693). Of course, as previously mentioned, theologians distinguish between the "pain of loss" (or exclusion from the Beatific Vision) and the "pain of sense" (resulting from external means and felt by the senses even after the body's resurrection). The Church never taught that unbaptized infants who died would be punished forever in hell as are mortal sinners.

As Mr. McGinty mentions in his article, Pope John Paul II gave a theological commission "the task of looking into the issue in 2004 and there has always been speculation that he wanted to drop the concept after he wrote his own papal document which gave no clear answer to the question of what happens to children who die before being baptized."

And so we wait to hear from Holy Mother Church.

Paul

Weeping statues and chastisement

Readers of Mr. Michael Brown's website Spirit Daily www.spiritdaily.com are aware that he has been chronicling various accounts of weeping statues. The latest statue reported to be weeping is located in Sacramento at the Vietnamese Catholic Martyrs Church. Mr. Brown has noted that: "Whenever statues weep, there is concern that events may be coming to those regions. Weeping statues long preceded the disaster in Louisiana. Whether it was related or unrelated, there was also a "miraculous" image on a tree in Manhattan before September 11.

And so additional questions:
Why so many in Texas? Why Sacramento, which is the capital of California? And why would there be such a strong Viet Nam connection?

These are excellent questions. The late Fr. Albert Joseph Hebert, in his important work on weeping statues entitled "The Tears of Mary and Fatima: Why?," (published in 1983) referred to several instances of statues having wept throughout Louisiana (Chapter XIII) and wrote that a certain man (whom he dubbed Cuban Exile or "CE") had obtained "a large beautiful Our Lady of Fatima statue of his own. This statue was to shed tears many times in the metropolitan area of New Orleans."

In his book, Fr. Hebert asks, "Why did the North American International Pilgrim Virgin statue, which wept in so many places, have its most famous weeping in New Orleans? Why was another famous Fatima statue ("AW's"), which wept in many places in the United States, also present several times in New Orleans? And, why, only recently, 1980, did another Fatima statue weeping sequence occur in the metropolitan New Orleans area?"

Of course, devout Catholics now know why. But then, we have the advantage of hindsight. What does all of this mean for Sacramento? Only time will tell. Keep the people of Sacramento in your prayers.

Paul

Toward a Fifth Marian Dogma

Behold Your Mother: The Fifth Marian Dogma by Fr. Peter Damian M. Fehlner, FI, STD


When our Lord just before dying and consummating His redemptive sacrifice on the Cross addressed these words (cf. Jn 19, 25-27) to the beloved disciple John (and through him to all of us) and told John (and through him also every one of us) to take her into our homes-hearts, He was also telling us to behold, contemplate her as His compassionate Mother and ours, viz., as the WOMAN, the IMMACULATE COREDEMPTRIX.

A great deal has been said and written in recent years concerning the possibility and need to define dogmatically the Marian titles of Coredemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces and Advocate, a “fifth” Marian dogma: divine Maternity, perpetual Virginity, Immaculate Conception, Assumption being the first four, with that of the Coredemption, etc., said by some to be the “final” Marian dogma in the sense that such a definition would, with the preceding four Marian dogmas, round out and render definitive the Marian synthesis in part sketched in chapter 8 of the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II.

In many academic circles, including the theological, such proposals have not met with favor, indeed often enough with rather decided and occasionally violent opposition. Such proposals are seen in those circles, not as an integration of the doctrine of Vatican II, but as a reversion to an outmoded way of theologizing about the Mother of God with unmistakable signs of a devotionalism or Marian maximalism incompatible with and embarrassing to the ecumenism sponsored by Vatican II and promoted by the present Holy Father.

Were the issue only one of devotional practice (a type of orthopraxis), the critics of the movement might have a case. Devotion qua actus humanus admits of too much and of too little. As even the critics implicitly admit, however, rather than moderation in the exercise of Marian devotion, the primary issue is the nature of orthopraxis itself as guided by dogmatic faith, indeed as encapsulating that faith at its heart. To the person who does not believe in the divine, virginal maternity any form of hyperdulia is too much by definition. Whereas for someone who does accept and believe in the dogma of Ephesus any devotion of his in practice seems too little in contrast with the devotion God’s own Son in fact has given and continues to give to His Mother in observing the fourth commandment.

The point might be put in the form of a question thus: what is the measure of too much (maximalism) or of too little (minimalism) devotion to Our Lady? De Maria numquam satis! From a purely pragmatic standpoint the old axiom guiding the Marian piety so many Saints east and west is simply indefensible. From a dogmatic standpoint it may well be the only acceptable guideline. St. Bonaventure says (Sermo I de purificatione) that he had never heard of a Saint without devotion to Mary or a great Saint without great, viz., maximal, devotion to the Virgin Mother.

What in principle defines maximal Marian devotion? Obviously the title Theotokos – Dei Genitrix. But like the NAME Jesus – Jahweh or He Who Is -, the actual honor due those NAMES is proximately defined in virtue of their roles in the great sacrificial work on Calvary, continued in the mystery of the Eucharist in the Church. St. Paul writes to the Philippians, ch. 2, v. 9: “For which reason – namely Jesus’ sacrificial obedience – God (viz., the Father) has given Him a NAME above every other name, before which every knee in heaven, on earth and under the earth (the trina mundi machina) must bend and every tongue proclaim Jesus is in the glory of God the Father.” Rendering such honor has always been recognized in the liturgy to include in some way the Mother of the Savior before and above all others. The Communicantes et memoriam venerantes in primis beatae et semper gloriosae Virginis Mariae Matris Dei et Domini nostri Jesu Christi… of the Roman Canon puts it concisely. The ancient Marian hymn Quem terra, pontus, aetera alludes to this in referring to Mary as the one who bore the trinam regentem machinam.

Granted, a rejoinder might be: how important is such a doctrinal consideration? After all do not questions of mariology occupy a rather decidedly subordinate and lower rung of the veritatum hierarchia, on the margin rather than at the core of theological discussion, particularly today?
To this the supporters of a definition reply in the negative. Questions of mariology, particularly that of the coredemption and its corollaries: the universal maternal mediation and advocacy of Mary in the Church unique to her, directly touch upon the central question of our theology and spirituality, the wisdom of the Cross and the meaning of the Pauline phrase: one God (the Father) and one Mediator of all the man-God Jesus, sole Redeemer (cf. I Tim. 2, 5-6). Is the famous dictum Christus solus Redemptor based on this passage of St. Paul exclusive or inclusive of Mary?

This is in the final analysis what the debate over the title Coredemptress is about and why it is the central debate of contemporary theology – as indeed it was clearly that on the eve of Vatican II. Those tending to accent the importance of Marian devotion in the life of the Church and of its members, indeed of all men, were known as “christotypologists”, viz., those who stressed the uniqueness of Mary in pertaining to “the order of the hypostatic union” and so her unique place in the Church as “preeminent” member of the Church; whereas those who tended to downplay such devotion and not differentiate it specifically from the veneration or dulia paid the other saints and from their intercessory role were known as “ecclesiotypologists”.

The first group insisted on the active, though subordinate role of the Virgin in the great sacrificial act whereby the Redeemer effected our ransom. The second group would not concede to Mary on Calvary more than a mere “passive” exemplarity vis-à-vis the Church. As in every other great christological controversy of the past two millennia the resolution of the Marian issue determines how in theory and practice the christological issue is resolved.
And in the past, without exception, affirming the Marian not only as close to but as inseparable from the core of Christian theology: no Christ without Mary, no Christian theology without also being Marian theology, has been the condition for a maximal recognition of the NAME; denying that has been the prelude to banalizing the NAME. A priori we may logically expect in virtue of this principle Card. Newman formulated so concisely (cf. the sermon entitled “The Glories of Mary for the Sake of Her Son” in Discourse to Mixed Congregations (London 1899) pp. 342-359) that the “christotypical” approach to the question of the Coredemption rather than the ecclesiotypical is the one calculated to give the maximal glory to the NAME of Redeemer, and that such glory will be given by every tongue by merging with Mary’s: Et exsultavit spiritus meus in Deo Salvatori meo (or salutari meo). This is what the NAME Jesus means as translated by St. Jerome – God is my Savior (or my Salvation). Only by venerating Mary under the title COREDEMPTRESS can we harmonize our praise of the Savior for the redemption which He has wrought for us.

Dogmatic definitions do indeed impact on theology and theologians, but they do so because first of all they are doxological acts of the entire Church, acts which have always involved the Mother of the Church, Mater et Magistra Apostolorum (St. Bonaventure).
Now it is true that Vatican II did not choose to employ the title Coredemptress, and only sparingly used that of Mediatrix. But neither did the Council forbid their use as critics of the proposed definition never cease to repeat. The Council for pastoral reasons abstained from deciding the doctrinal question then debated and still debated. But the Council did not forbid the study of this question, indeed the Church encourages such study. And any fair reading of chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium indicates that promotion of those titles matches exactly the thrust both of tradition and of Vatican II.

Another way of formulating the central issue of modern theology is this: joint predestination of Jesus and Mary as the centerpiece of the economy of salvation, or Christ alone. The genius of Luther, apart from whether one likes or dislikes him, agrees or disagrees with him, was to have formulated the question in that way: a spirituality whose primary mode is either Marian or not, a theology of the cross whose primary mode is defined with or without the Coredemptress. Luther unfortunately chose the “without Coredemptress” option, despite himself thereby underscoring the Marian dimension of “our theology” (Bl. John Duns Scotus) and every major theological question to be the key to its resolution.

The Catholic reply has always been: by the eternal counsels of God the “Christ alone” includes Mary without confusion of persons, indeed as a means to identifying and worshiping her Son as God and Savior. For her inclusion thus is the divinely appointed instrument of His Incarnation, of His redemptive work and of its application. Whence Marian devotion, as St. Bonaventure insists in commenting the purification-presentation of Jesus and Mary, is the primary, fundamental, distinctive feature of all Christian life, thought, sanctity, joy. It is not possible in virtue of the only divine salvific dispensation to be Christ-like without being Mary-like (Paul VI, at the sanctuary of Bonaria in Sardinia, 1970), for the simple reason that God became like us in becoming like Mary, viz., her Son.

Extensive research, in the past and currently, has amply demonstrated that the doctrine now known in theology as the coredemption is no mere theological opinion, whose content at least has been explicitly asserted by the Magisterium, on occasion with the use of this title as with Pope Pius XI and Pope John Paul II. Hence there can be no question of its truth, only of the opportuneness of a definition, either because of insufficiently precise articulation, and/or because the best moment for such a definition to be maximally beneficial for the Church and the salvation of souls has not arrived.

In the light of this the major objections to the doctrine: whether these be taken to refer to its truth or to the opportuneness of its dogmatic definition, take on quite a different color. Rather than demonstrate the promotors of the definition to be “maximalists”, they serve quite effectively to rivet attention on the central place of the mystery of Mary at the foot of the cross and aside the altar in the life and thought of the Church.
The objections are many, but in great part reducible to three types or categories. The first might be dubbed the generic, in the sense that support of a definition of the coredemption rests on a concept of theology rendered obsolete by Vatican II. But how could such an assumption tirelessly repeated by the critics be true? It would invalidate Vatican II. And the complementary proposition, that Vatican II in lauching a “new style” in theology “more biblically, ecumenically, pastorally sensitive” forbade the use of terminology and methods characteristic of the preconciliar mariology and indispensable to a defense of the coredemptive thesis, appears nowhere in the documents of Vatican II. The “preconciliar” mariology was not “unbiblical, anti-ecumenical, pastorally insensitive”. Dogmatic mariology as traditionally practiced in the Church, nowhere more so than when focusing on the coredemption, is the only kind of theology which can aspire to being profoundly biblical, ecumenical and pastorally sensitive.

The second type of objection might be dubbed the ecumenical because the objectors claim coredemption poses an insurmountable obstacle to ecumenism to which the Church is now committed. Objections of this type from non-Catholics are made to demonstrate the impossibility of the doctrine; by Catholics to prove why a definition is inopportune. One version of the objection will claim that affirming the coredemption detracts from the unique, distinctive role of Jesus as Redeemer. The simplest, most telling exposure of what is wrong with the argument is to retort it: if this is so, then the title Mother of God is even more a detraction. The fact is the affirmation of the divine, virginal Maternity affirms and reveals the distinct divine person of the Child of Mary. The affirmation of the maternal Coredemption affirms and reveals the distinct character of her Child’s redemptive work.

The other version touches on the pneumatological. To proclaim Mary as Coredemptress is to put her in the place of the Holy Spirit. In reply: not to proclaim Mary as Coredemptress is to revive the old Joachimism, to divorce in practice the mission of the Holy Spirit from that of the Son, the canonical or institutional aspects of the Church from the charismatic, and in the end to permit the evil spirit to occupy the place of the Holy Spirit in the economy of salvation. Both theoretically and practically resolution of key issues touching the bases of a Christian spirituality revolves about the relation of the Virgin to the Holy Spirit: is she in the words of St. Francis Spouse of the Holy Spirit and therefore Mother of God? Is she in the words of St. Maximilian the created Immaculate Conception because the Holy Spirit is the uncreated Immaculate Conception, therefore Coredemptress and Mediatrix of all graces?

The traditional Catholic affirmative in response to such questions helps us to deal with the third type of objection: cultural irrelevance of the traditional approach in mariology which converges on the mystery of the Coredemption today. It is just this affirmative which enables us to grasp the mythical character of the generation gap and cultural gulf. No such gap-gulf exists requiring a radical departure from the traditional dogmatic mariology, precisely and above all because of the IMMACULATE WOMAN of Genesis 3: 15, who is the Virgin Mother and victorious Coredemptress.

The Diocese of Manchester NH and New Age Reiki

Catholic medical Center has offered New Age Reiki

By clicking on the link provided, you will notice that the Catholic Medical Center (CMC) has offered New Age Reiki and has ran this advertisement:


Yoga: Beyond the BasicsApril 12th / 7:15 PM - 8:30 PMLocation: Parish of the TransfigurationCost: $60 (8 weeks)
For those who have already experienced an introduction to yoga, embrace the next level of yoga with all the health benefits. Registration required. Cost $60 (8 weeks) Call Ask-A-Nurse at 626-2626 to register or "double-click" below to register on-line.
Parish of the Transfigurtion107 Alsace StreetManchester, NH

The Parish of the Transfiguration has offered workshops in both Reiki and Yoga. The deception continues.