Father Shaun O'Connor of Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts: A priest who understands the message of 1 Corinthians 12

In his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici, Pope John Paul II wrote that, "Through their participation in the prophetic mission of Christ, 'who proclaimed the kingdom of his Father by the testimony of his life and by the power of his word,' the lay faithful are given the ability and responsibility to accept the Gospel in faith and to proclaim it in word and deed, without hesitating to courageously denounce evil." (No. 14).

And yet, how often do the lay faithful encounter opposition from other members of the laity as well as priests and religious when they strive to fulfill their prophetic mission and to "courageously denounce evil." Why is this? Largely because, "To understand properly the lay faithful's position in the Church in a complete, adequate and specific manner it is necessary to come to a deeper theological understanding of their secular character in light of God's plan of salvation and in the context of the mystery of the Church" (Christifideles Laici, No. 15).

Pope John Paul II explains that, "..all the members of the Church are sharers in this secular dimension but in different ways. In particular the sharing of the lay faithful has its own manner or realization and function, which, according to the Council, is 'properly and particularly' theirs. Such manner is designated with the expression 'secular character.' In fact the Council, in describing the lay faithful's situation in the secular world, points to it above all, as the place in which they receive their call from God.." (Christifideles Laici, No. 15).

We read in 1 Corinthians 12 that, "As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free persons, and we were all given to drink of one Spirit...there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, 'I do not need you.'" (1 Cor 12: 12, 13; 20, 21).

And yet, this is precisely what so many of the lay faithful encounter as they strive to fulfill their prophetic mission and to act as salt and light upon the secular world. Too often, the lay faithful are looked upon by certain priests and religious as "second-class citizens" within the Church. Then again, some parishes - anxious to maintain a status quo - will only permit a select few to participate in the life of the parish. 

But such an attitude is not holy. It is devilish. It is demonic: "..have you not made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil designs" (James 2: 4). And again, "For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every foul practice." (James 3: 16).

Let us all strive to remember that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not our "private preserve." Let's leave behind all pride, selfish ambition, envy and jealousy. And when we come across another who has been graced with particular gifts which we may not possess ourselves, let's give thanks to the Holy Spirit who distributes His gifts as He pleases and to whom He wants.

Father Shaun O'Connor, the new pastor of Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts, apparently understands this.  The parish bulletin this weekend reads, "Early in the New Year, Fr. Shaun wants to work with parish members to establish a committee to plan and implement a calendar of parish dinners and other events; and a committee to reach out to inactive members and to others in our area who might be interested in learning about the Catholic Faith.  If you'd be interested in either of these groups, please talk with Fr. Shaun after Mass or drop us an email to the office or leave a phone message."

This is a positive development.  At least it has the potential of being such.  In the past, I attempted to volunteer at Saint Mary's Church but was turned down because of my fidelity to the Magisterial teaching of the Church and because I'm not part of the small private "clique" of individuals who have been deemed "acceptable" by the status quo and have been relegated to "second-class" status.

Pray for Father Shaun's endeavour to be a success.  I don't expect to be included in parish ministry myself.  I'm not unrealistic.  But it looks as if the demonic attitude which asserts, "I do not need you"* may be on its way out.




*  See here.

Related reading here.

Vittorio Messori's concerns regarding Francis...

From Lifesite News:

MILAN, Italy, November 9, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — A best-selling Italian writer has broken his silence on the current papacy to voice concerns over Pope Francis’ attitude toward doctrine.

Vittorio Messori, 76, is best-known in the English-speaking world for his book-length interviews with then-Cardinal Ratzinger in The Ratzinger Report (1987) and with Pope John Paul II in Threshold of Hope. The journalist has now published an essay in an Italian Catholic magazine, Il Timore, outlining his fears that Pope Francis is turning the Catholic Church into a kind of “liquid society” in which the only certainty is uncertainty and the only constant is change.

The article, which is not available online, was first brought to the attention of the English-speaking world by Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register.

In his essay, Messori draws on the work of Zygmunt Bauman (1925-2017), the Jewish-Polish philosopher who introduced the concept of “liquid modernity” to sociology. “Liquid modernity” represents a change from what Bauman called “solid modernity.” Bauman wrote that the “liquid” modern man values individualism over social ties. He “flows through his own life like a tourist, changing places, jobs, spouses, values and even sexual orientation and gender.”

Bauman observed that such a man excludes himself from traditional networks of support, freeing himself from their restrictions or requirements. This extreme individualism has created societies in which, Messori writes, “everything is unstable and changeable.” Today it is acceptable to believe that change is “the only permanent thing” and that uncertainty is the “only certainty.”

Messori is troubled that these ideas have begun to influence religious faith. He writes that believers are becoming “disturbed by the fact that even the Catholic Church — which was an age-old example of stability — seems to want to become ‘liquid’ as well.”

Francis is engaging in chronological snobbery or what the French philosopher Jacques Maritain referred to as"chronolatry" in his work "Le paysan de la Garonne" - The Peasant of the Garonne.

Maritain defines chronolatry as the idolatry of what is newest or latest in time. This is the characteristic flaw of today's "progressive" who looks upon the wisdom of the ages and dismisses it as nothing more than "theories" which belong to the past.

Is there really any doubt that Francis views the Catholic Church as "outdated" and "stagnant."  recall what his niece had to say about the Church and his "mission" here.

Pope Francis' attitude toward dogma and his Brothers in the Episcopate: Evidence of Satanic pride?

"Pride is to be avoided, that pride of intellect which is more dangerous and more difficult to overcome than the pride of will, as Scupoli says.

This is the pride that renders faith and obedience to superiors difficult. One wants to be self-sufficient; the more confidence one has in one's own judgment the more reluctantly does one accept the teachings of faith, or the more readily does one submit these to criticism and to personal interpretation. In like manner, one so trusts to one's own wisdom, that it is with repugnance that others are consulted, especially superiors. Hence, regrettable mistakes occur. Hence comes also obstinacy of judgment, resulting in the final and sweeping condemnation of such opinions as differ from our own. Herein lies one of the most common causes of strife between Christian and Christian, at times even between Catholic writers. St. Augustine calls those who cause unfortunate dissensions, destructive of peace and of the bond of charity, 'Dividers of unity, enemies of peace, without charity, puffed up with vanity, well pleased with themselves and great in their own eyes.'*

To heal this intellectual pride: 1) we must first of all submit ourselves with childlike docility to the teachings of faith. We are undoubtedly allowed to seek that understanding of our dogmas which is obtained by a patient and laborious quest with the aid of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, especially St. Augustine and St. Thomas; but as the Vatican Council says, this must be done with piety and with discretion, following the maxim of St. Anselm: 'Faith seeking understanding.' Thus we avoid that hypercritical attitude that attenuates and minimizes our dogmas under pretense of explaining them. We submit our judgment not only to the truths of faith but to the directions of the Holy See.." (Fr. Adolphe Tanquerey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, p. 388, Tan Books).

Docility  to the teachings of faith is a remedy for pride of intellect.  But do we witness such docility in Pope Francis?

Recently he told an Argentinian newspaper that, “The world has changed and the Church can not withdraw into supposed interpretations of dogma."

Supposed interpretations? The Church's dogmas represent more than "supposed interpretations" of truth.  As the Catechism explains in paragraphs 88 and 89.

It was Archbishop Fulton Sheen who said that, "The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.

The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'

The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'

Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.

It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas." (The Electronic Christian, pp. 74-74).

We have a pope who says that he likes to argue with "conservative" Bishops (read orthodox, political terms do not belong in the Church).  Does this suggest humility or pride?

Bishop Robert McManus arrested

Pope John Paul II, in his book Rise, Let Us Be On Our Way, emphasizes that, "Just as a father shapes the faith of his children primarily by his example of prayer and religious fervor, so also a bishop inspires his faithful by his behavior.  That is why the author of the First Letter of Peter begs that bishops be 'a living example to the flock' (1 Peter 5:3)...A bishop is called to personal holiness in a particular way so that the holiness of the Church community entrusted to his care may increase and deepen...A bishop must guide and lead.  The faithful will listen to him and love him [to the degree that he imitates Christ, the Good Shepherd]..." (pp. 46, 48).

A bishop inspires his faithful by his behavior.  He does not inspire them by allowing dissent in his diocese or by getting arrested for DUI and hit and run - see here. 

When I learned of Bishop Robert McManus' arrest this past weekend, I was not entirely surprised.  For Bishop McManus has been very callous in his treatment of Catholics who are faithful to the Magisterial teaching of the Church.  He has ignored our heartfelt and charitably expressed letters.  He has refused to dialogue with me regarding my vocation.  He rescinded Robert Spencer's invitation to speak at the Catholic Men's Conference without contacting Mr. Spencer to allow him the dignity of making his case as to why he should be permitted to give his presentation.  So why bother to stop after hitting another automobile while driving under the influence?

Are you beginning to discern a pattern here?  The same bishop who has called upon others to increase their "spiritual stamina and fortitude" would do well to follow his own advice.  In a statement issued to the press, Bishop McManus indicated that he would accept the consequences of his actions.  This morning, standing before a judge, he pleaded "not guilty."  So much for spiritual stamina.

How do we put Bishop McManus' attitude in perspective?  Father Bede Jarrett, O.P., a master of the spiritual life - and an authentic model of holiness - explains that, "I can never value others, nor act charitably toward them, until I am fully conscious of the worth of my own soul.  Without that appreciation, I can never be of real service to any of them.  Once I have perceived my own dignity, I can perceive the dignity of others, and realizing the importance of saving my own soul, I shall be led also to help others to save theirs.  The proverb is indeed justified: 'Charity begins at home.'" (Classic Catholic Meditations, p. 100).

I pray for Bishop McManus every day while meditating on the mysteries of the Holy Rosary.  I pray that he will begin to perceive his own dignity so that he will begin to perceive the dignity of others.  Until then, he will never be able to authentically shepherd.  You cannot manage a diocese with a hit and run attitude.

What should be our attitude toward the Magisterial teaching of the Church?

In her most recent blog post, Stacy Trasancos, a Catholic writer who contributes a regular column for The Catholic Free Press, writes, "One thing I learned very quickly about Catholicism was that Catholics argue a lot. I wanted to be faithful to the Magisterium but I was often confused about the details. If I listened to this argument from a trusted theologian, and learned it, then I thought I was being sufficiently faithful. I thought, naively, that theologians all learned the same things, kind of like mathematicians, and they just taught it. I even began a Masters degree in theology with that purpose in mind — I want to be able to communicate the faith better.

Then I began to encounter opposing theological arguments, and that left me confused. Who is right? 'Wait! I thought we all just learned the catechism and spread the word.' It’s not so simple. Theologians, laity all the way to the Pope, often disagree. Church Councils dealt with disagreements. There have always been disagreements, even among the Apostles. Over time I realized something really quite profound. Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth. In this way we aid the Magisterium, remaining in service to this authority, not in opposition to it. We grow together." (See here).

What of this?  May a Catholic disagree with [dissent from] the Magisterial teaching of the Church?  Is there such a thing as "faithful dissent"?  In a word, no.  In its 1990 Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith addressed this matter in detail and, in so doing, provided us with a helpful commentary on the nature of what Vatican II (Lumen Gentium, No. 25) refers to as "religious submission of soul" or of "will and mind" which all of the faithful - including theologians - must give to authoritative Magisterial teachings, even when they are proposed noninfallibly.

First of all, let's see what Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council had to say:


"Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place. For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old, making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock. Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking."


Getting back to the CDF's Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, the document clearly differentiates, in No. 24, between questioning and dissent [or disagreement] by ephasizing that "the willingness to submit loyally to the teachings of the Magisterium...must be the rule" when questioning Magisterial teachings.  Any questioning of Magisterial teachings by the theologian must take place within the context of the religious submission of mind and will which is owed to the more-than-human authority within the Church.  What do we mean by "more-than-human-authority"?  Read the second sentence of Lumen Gentium 25 above: "For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ.."

The CDF Instruction goes on to clearly repudiate the false claim that dissent is somehow reconcilable with Church teaching.  In his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, No. 113, Pope John Paul II emphasizes that, "dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God."

May Catholics challenge the Magisterium by disagreeing with it?  Not if they wish to remain in communion with the Church.  It is important to recall the teaching of Dei Verbum of the Second Vatican Council: "..the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church,  whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed."


The issue here is: Who speaks for the Church?  Who has the authority from Christ Jesus to settle disputes which may arise within the Church?  The answer is that is that this authority is vested exclusively in the Pope and the Bishops in communion with the Holy Father.  The Church is Mater et Magistra (the title of an Encyclical Letter of Pope John XXIII), Mother and Teacher.  The Magisterium alone has been entrusted with the task of authentically interpreting the Word of God, whether found in Sacred Scripture or Tradition.

This post should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person.  She comes across as a delightful young lady who is bright and personable.  She has so much good to offer.  It is offered only in the service of truth and charity.

Code of Canon Law:

Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.


§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Related reading on the sensus fidelium here.

President Obama and the basic incapacity to listen...

It comes as no surprise that President Obama admits to ignoring the Restoring Honor rally (which he refers to as the "Beck Rally." See here. When the President and other liberals aren't dismissing their opponents as being "bigots", they simply ignore them. This is the characteristic sign of irreverence.

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand defines irreverence as, "the basic incapacity to listen..the attitude that already knows everything before being has the opportunity to inform us. Irreverence is the impertinent, arrogant attitude that makes our minds deaf and blind to reality - the more so, the deeper and more sublime the object.." (The Charitable Anathema, p. 112).

Irreverence is not the proper response to value. But what more can one expect from an egocentric opportunist who poses as a statesman? President Obama is not at all interested in meeting the demands of truth or in acknowledging those valid points raised by political opponents. Which is why he dismisses the Restoring Honor rally by implying that "a certain portion of the country" has been stirred up by Mr. Beck - the implication being that those in attendance cannot think for themselves.

As time marches on, it is becoming increasingly clear to the American people that President Obama, the "Yes we can" President, is nothing more than an intellectual fraud. Especially since he now admits he is powerless to fix the economy.

He has proven himself to be most competent in one area: taking vacations. One should stick to what one is good at I suppose.