With regard to the upcoming conclave which will likely be sooner rather than later but we'll see. Bishop Strickland wrote an excellent substack post about this and his main theme was: we absolutely cannot accept another (my word, not Bishop Strickland's) man in that office who does not hold the Catholic faith. No matter who the cardinals vote for we must make it clear from the outset that if there are grounds to believe that this man does not hold the Catholic faith he must be rejected.
Say the conclave does elect another non-Catholic. How would the rejection take place? I can't imagine the Bishops suddenly acquiring spines and protesting. Laity marching in the streets? Just what could we do?
Our ship arrived this morning at Suva in Fiji, and we got to the Cathedral just in time for 8.30am mass (my scrupulous tendencies still yet get the better of me and get me to a NO mass when no TLM in sight).
Anyway, curious about something the priest (American... perhaps visiting) said in the homily, which I'd never encountered before...
"God has given us the 3 great(est) Theological Virtues of Love, Joy, and Peace." (???)
No explanation. I'm unsure if he was meaning these as the 3 great supernatural virtues, but regardless, this left me puzzled and reminded me of the dangers of going NO.
To be fair, the all male young adult choir were great, the (packed) congregation was modestly dressed and reverent.
Fr William Doyle, may he be canonised, in my opinion has produced the best manual on Scruples. An absolutely vital step by step first aid kit for the scrupulous. He has brought me peace, and I will forever be grateful to him.
Coincidentally, this is another soldier who should be endowed with the titular 'Saint'.
There is an excellent website dedicated to him, and I'd also highly recommend the spiritual book "To Raise the Fallen".
Is there an effort being made by scholars and language experts to create a Latin Braille language? A catechumen at my parish is totally blind, and he has told me that a Latin version of Braille doesn't exist.
I am very thankful for your new book, Dr. Kwasniewski. I just received my copy from Amazon.ca and it will definitely have a privileged place in my "Dr. K. Books" collection.
I agree completely that a reform of the new rite, or even celebrating the new rite with reverence and in the most traditional way possible, is not the solution. Being a diocesan priest, and not in one of the institutes that have permission to offer exclusively the TLM, I am obliged to say the NO in my parish. (My private Masses are always TLM, and I must admit that this has helped me to maintain much of my sacerdotal sanity over the years). I offer the parish NO Masses in the most traditional way I can (taking into account what I know my parishioners [and my bishop] will and will not tolerate), but I know from experience that even a reverent, unicorn NO is vastly different to the TLM. And the objection by some that "the NO is just as valid" is, in my opinion, setting the bar extremely low. The Catholic sacred rites are not supposed to be simply "valid"; they are meant to be a perfect expression of the Catholic Faith and of Divine Truths.
It is frustrating when I elaborate in a sermon or homily one of the profound truths of our Catholic Faith (such as the notion of the Mass as the Sacrifice of Calvary), and then have to offer a form of the Mass that does not adequately reflect that same truth. It's as if the current form of the liturgy undermines the dogmatic truths that it's supposed to convey and express in the most perfect way. It is somewhat akin to an experience of "spiritual schizophrenia," wherein the words of my sermon express one reality, while the gestures and rituals and prayers of the Mass express something contradictory. I notice this especially when I preach on themes such as the Real Presence, the transcendence of God, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the otherworldliness of the Catholic Faith, etc. The Novus Ordo Missae simply does not convey these truths adequately -- and often even seems to undermine them.
Thank you for writing another book that provides much spiritual consolation to many (including myself) during this time of dogmatic, moral, and liturgical chaos within Holy Mother Church. Despite all appearances to the contrary, the Barque of Peter will not capsize because God will use the fidelity of the few to restore what many today believe to be irretrievably lost forever.
With regard to the upcoming conclave which will likely be sooner rather than later but we'll see. Bishop Strickland wrote an excellent substack post about this and his main theme was: we absolutely cannot accept another (my word, not Bishop Strickland's) man in that office who does not hold the Catholic faith. No matter who the cardinals vote for we must make it clear from the outset that if there are grounds to believe that this man does not hold the Catholic faith he must be rejected.
Say the conclave does elect another non-Catholic. How would the rejection take place? I can't imagine the Bishops suddenly acquiring spines and protesting. Laity marching in the streets? Just what could we do?
Our ship arrived this morning at Suva in Fiji, and we got to the Cathedral just in time for 8.30am mass (my scrupulous tendencies still yet get the better of me and get me to a NO mass when no TLM in sight).
Anyway, curious about something the priest (American... perhaps visiting) said in the homily, which I'd never encountered before...
"God has given us the 3 great(est) Theological Virtues of Love, Joy, and Peace." (???)
No explanation. I'm unsure if he was meaning these as the 3 great supernatural virtues, but regardless, this left me puzzled and reminded me of the dangers of going NO.
To be fair, the all male young adult choir were great, the (packed) congregation was modestly dressed and reverent.
Congregations outside the modern West are usually much more modest and reverent.
Obviously the preacher does not understand the concept of theological virtues, which are always and only faith, hope, and charity.
It is a difficult question, when to skip Mass vs. when to attend to fulfill an obligation. I address this issue here:
https://www.traditionsanity.com/p/the-sunday-mass-obligation-in-a-time-ae2
Fr William Doyle, may he be canonised, in my opinion has produced the best manual on Scruples. An absolutely vital step by step first aid kit for the scrupulous. He has brought me peace, and I will forever be grateful to him.
Coincidentally, this is another soldier who should be endowed with the titular 'Saint'.
There is an excellent website dedicated to him, and I'd also highly recommend the spiritual book "To Raise the Fallen".
Yes, Fr Willie Doyle is a treasure! My daughter Rose wrote a piece about him some time ago:
https://onepeterfive.com/fr-willie-doyle-jesuit-battlefront/
Congrats on the new book ! I look forward to reading it.
Is there an effort being made by scholars and language experts to create a Latin Braille language? A catechumen at my parish is totally blind, and he has told me that a Latin version of Braille doesn't exist.
I've never thought of that, and don't know the answer.
(I do know that at least one of my books, "Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness," is available in Braille.)
I am very thankful for your new book, Dr. Kwasniewski. I just received my copy from Amazon.ca and it will definitely have a privileged place in my "Dr. K. Books" collection.
I agree completely that a reform of the new rite, or even celebrating the new rite with reverence and in the most traditional way possible, is not the solution. Being a diocesan priest, and not in one of the institutes that have permission to offer exclusively the TLM, I am obliged to say the NO in my parish. (My private Masses are always TLM, and I must admit that this has helped me to maintain much of my sacerdotal sanity over the years). I offer the parish NO Masses in the most traditional way I can (taking into account what I know my parishioners [and my bishop] will and will not tolerate), but I know from experience that even a reverent, unicorn NO is vastly different to the TLM. And the objection by some that "the NO is just as valid" is, in my opinion, setting the bar extremely low. The Catholic sacred rites are not supposed to be simply "valid"; they are meant to be a perfect expression of the Catholic Faith and of Divine Truths.
It is frustrating when I elaborate in a sermon or homily one of the profound truths of our Catholic Faith (such as the notion of the Mass as the Sacrifice of Calvary), and then have to offer a form of the Mass that does not adequately reflect that same truth. It's as if the current form of the liturgy undermines the dogmatic truths that it's supposed to convey and express in the most perfect way. It is somewhat akin to an experience of "spiritual schizophrenia," wherein the words of my sermon express one reality, while the gestures and rituals and prayers of the Mass express something contradictory. I notice this especially when I preach on themes such as the Real Presence, the transcendence of God, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the otherworldliness of the Catholic Faith, etc. The Novus Ordo Missae simply does not convey these truths adequately -- and often even seems to undermine them.
Thank you for writing another book that provides much spiritual consolation to many (including myself) during this time of dogmatic, moral, and liturgical chaos within Holy Mother Church. Despite all appearances to the contrary, the Barque of Peter will not capsize because God will use the fidelity of the few to restore what many today believe to be irretrievably lost forever.
Just bought your trilogy. Groceries can wait.