Thursday, November 6, 2014

John Vennari, Louie Verrecchio repeat the same error

 
Louie and John have not mentioned Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism for salvation. AG 7 is traditional and in agreemen with Tradiion on salvation.
Also how can UR 3 be an exception to Tradition and in particular the dogma on salvation ? Do we know any one in 2014 saved in imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3)?
They both are assuming that someone saved outside the visible limits of the Church are known and visible to us.
The fault is with the reader of the Council and not with the text of the Council.
The ambiguity and heresy comes from using an irrational premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
If they both did not infer that those saved in imperfect communion with the church are visible UR 3 would  be Traditional.
-Lionel Andrades
 

In faith he assumes there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In morals he assumes there are known exceptions to mortal sin.





Lionel:
Indignus:
In Par. 70 of Veritatis. S..JPII writes:
“The statement of the Council of Trent does not only consider the “grave matter” of mortal sin; it also recalls that its necessary condition is “full awareness and deliberate consent”.
Lionel:
Cardinal Ratzinger should have clarified that he was referring to conditions known only to God.
Similarly he has not clarified that those saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are known only to God and so are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
__________________________
In any event, both in moral theology and in pastoral practice one is familiar with cases in which an act which is grave by reason of its matter does not constitute a mortal sin because of a lack of full awareness or deliberate consent on the part of the person performing it.
Lionel:
The exception has nothing to do with the rule.
____________________________
Even so, “care will have to be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of ‘fundamental option’ — as is commonly said today — against God”, seen either as an explicit and formal rejection of God and neighbor or as an implicit and unconscious rejection of love. “For mortal sin exists also when a person knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason, chooses something gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice already includes contempt for the divine law, a rejection of God’s love.”
===========
Isn’t JPII saying the same thing here as Jimmy Akins? as far as the two conditions are concerned–which he says is confirmed by Trent?
Lionel:
I don’t know about JP II. He was not well and Cardinal Ratzinger overlooked the writing of Veritatis Splendor.
However Akins makes the same error in morals and in faith.
In faith he assumes there are known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In morals he assumes there are known exceptions to mortal sins.
In both cases what is invisible for us he assumes is visible and so is a factor in rejecting the Traditional teaching.
____________________________________
Isn’t he warning against trying to make more than the simple two conditions -a necessity for the commission of mortal sin?
Lionel:
It works that way among the liberals. Veritatis Splendor did a good job in criticizing the Fundamental Option Theory.-Lionel Andrades
______________________________________
 

They need mortal sin to be misrepresented to claim “invincibly ignorant” are saved in the millions ,similar to extra ecclesiam nulla salus?

Berto 
  • Lionel,
    I suspect they need mortal sin to be misrepresented that way in order to be able to claim “invincibly ignorant” are saved in the millions.
  •  

Is not implying that the dead now in Heaven are explicit exceptions on earth to Tradition, 'defective' for Una Voce ?



Una Voce International Federation: SSPX faithful "excommunications" illegal


International Una Voce Federation: threatened SSPX excommunications may be illegal





LONDON 4 November 2014 – The International Una Voce Federation which seeks to promote the traditions, particularly the liturgical traditions, of the Roman Catholic Church, within the official structures of the Church, today questioned the legality of a “notification” dated 14 October 2014 of the Roman See of Albano, Italy, claiming to ex-communicate those who receive the sacraments from, or attend religious services of, the Society of St Pius X (SSPX).
The Federation questions the legality of a notification in similar terms of Bishop Óscar Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, issued on 3 November 2014.
(The Federation has not mentioned that the SSPX priests in Albano are being forced to accept Vatican Council II interpreted with an irrational inference. Neither is the Bishop of Albano interpreting Vatican Council II without this irrational premise which makes the Council a break with Tradition.This is a first class heresy of a prelate  and it is not being addressed. It is a doctrinal issue.
Doctrine interestingly is the basis for the Bishop of Albano's action).



The Federation, which is a lay movement independent of any priestly or religious community, believes that preservation of doctrine, law and justice, as well as good pastoral practice, within the Church, is important.
 
(Vatican Council II (Ad Gentes 7) tells us that all need faith and baptism for salvation. It is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors and the Catechism of Pope Pius X. The bishop rejects Ad Gentes 7 when he infers that all Jews, Muslims,Protestants etc do not need to formally enter the Church for salvation ( to avoid Hell).For him LG 16,LG 8 etc refer to visible cases in 2014. So they are explicit exceptions for him to Ad Gentes 7 and Tradition.
He wants the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II with this irrationality of being able to see the dead on earth ( saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16), a ray of the Truth (NA 2), elements of sanctification and truth (LG 8), imperfect communion with the Church(UR 3).He wants the SSPX to assume that these theoretical cases of persons in Heaven, are known exceptions on earth  to Ad Gentes 7, extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed etc.
Upon this doctrinal basis, which is irrational,non traditional and heretical, he is placing sanctions on the SSPX and Una Voce is not commenting on this.)

The Federation believes that these “notifications” tend to imply that anyone who has ever attended services of the SSPX is not welcome in parish churches in these dioceses.

(This is the standard political arrogance of  the political Left in the Catholic Church.Now it is seen officially and in public).

This view is clearly in direct contrast with the emphasis of the Supreme Pontiff, Pope Francis, upon mercy and forgiveness, as well as the “openness of heart” requested by Pope Benedict XVI as a prelude to a healing of divisions “in the heart of the Church”.
(Those who 'do not believe' are excommunicating those who do believe. For those whom dogmas and doctrines are not important, excommunication is important. Also a Vatican Council (with a premise) which rejects dogmas and doctrines is an important factor for excommunication).
 

The Bishop of Albano is the Rt Rev Marcello Semeraro, media spokesman of the Italian Bishops’ conference and secretary of the Papal inner Council of 9 advisers.

The Federation is asking the Holy See to advise that these notifications are defective and to require them to be modified so as to comply with the law of the Church and the decisions of the Holy See.
(Is not implying that the dead now in Heaven are  explicit exceptions on earth to Tradition, 'defective' ?)

Background


On 14 October 2014, the Chancery of the Diocese of Albano issued a notification to parish priests claiming that anyone who attends SSPX services, even, apparently, children, thereby “break communion with the Catholic Church” and can only be re-admitted to the Church after “an adequate personal path of reconciliation”. The notification reads:
(The children will be taught that Vatican Council II has to be accepted with an irrational premise. They will be taught to reject Ad Gentes 7 and to interpret LG 16,.LG 8 etc as referring to cases personally known in 2014 in Albano).
“The Catholic faithful cannot participate at Mass, neither request and/or receive sacraments from or in the Society. Acting otherwise would mean to break communion with the Catholic Church.
Therefore, any Catholic faithful who requests and receives sacraments in the Society of Saint Pius X, will place himself de facto in the condition of no longer being in communion with the Catholic Church. A readmission to the Catholic Church must be preceded by an adequate personal path of reconciliation, according to the ecclesiastical discipline established by the Bishop.”
Bishop Óscar Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, in a letter to his diocese dated 3 November 2014, states:
“It is not licit for the Catholic faithful to take part in the celebration of Mass in these conditions, neither to request nor to receive sacraments from the priests of the aforementioned "Society of Saint Pius X", including in private places turned into places of worship, without excluding, in case of obstinacy, also the ferendae sententiae penalties that may apply, according to the ecclesial spirit and that of protection of the faithful.

(Leftist conditions for a Church moving towards a one world religion, an ecumenical church in which the Eucharist will be eliminated or down played, Marian devotion will end, the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo Mass will be phased out with a new liturgy which could accomodate itself to the worship of the 'abomination of desolation,' mentioned in Scripture.) 
In the case of the rupture of ecclesiastical communion by the above-mentioned founded motives, in order to be later readmitted to the Catholic Church, a personal path of reconciliation (and eventually of removal of the canonical censure) will be required, according to the discipline advised by the Holy See and the [diocese's] own, established by the diocesan bishop.”

Canonical brief


The attitude of the Holy See has always been that lay faithful who receive the sacraments from priests of the SSPX are not excommunicated. Examples are as follows.
a. In 1991 Bishop Joseph Ferrario of Honolulu declared six lay Catholics excommunicated on grounds of schism for having procured the services of an SSPX bishop to administer confirmation. These appealed to the Holy See which, through Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, declared the decree invalid because their action, though considered blameworthy, did not constitute schism.
b. On 5 September 2005, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, affirmed that “the faithful who attend the masses of the aforesaid Fraternity are not excommunicate, and the priests who celebrate them are not, either—the latter are, in fact, suspended.” (Protocol n.55/2005, signed by the then Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Mgr Camille Perl).
c. On 27 September 2002, quoted and reaffirmed on 18 January 2003, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, stated that “In the strict sense you may fulfil your Sunday obligation by attending a mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.” (Letters signed by Mgr Camille Perl).
“To break communion with the Catholic Church”, i.e. excommunication, can only be incurred where there is both an “external violation of a law or precept” and it is “gravely imputable by reason of malice or culpability” (canon 1321) and only if the proper penalty is excommunication.
(The rejection of Vatican Council II (without the irrational premise), even after being informed, is a violation of Canon Law by the two bishops).
Excommunication is not the proper penalty for “participating at mass” or “requesting or receiving the Sacraments” from SSPX priests or in SSPX-administered places of worship. Thus:
a. It is accordingly not correct that excommunication is thereby incurred.
(Is it incurred automatically by the two bishops who do not accept Vatican Council II without the dead-man-walking-and-visible premise? The premise is important for them to break with the past.) 
b. In any event, those under the age of sixteen cannot incur a penalty (canon 1323.1); this would apply to those under this age who received baptism or confirmation.
Even when basing a canonical argument on the assumption that the SSPX has no canonical status in the Church and that its priests are suspended, following ordination without dimissorial letters, it does not follow that to seek the sacraments at their hands is an illegal act on the part of the lay faithful.
 
To say otherwise also conflicts with the provision in canon law (canon 1335) for the suspension of any prohibition of the celebration of the Sacraments or sacramental, or the exercise of a power of governance, when one of the faithful requests it for “any just reason”.

Furthermore, the notifications appear to challenge the Decree of the Congregation of Bishops dated 21 January 2009 lifting the excommunications of the SSPX bishops and instead seem to wish to re-impose those excommunications, within each diocese, contrary to this decree of a Congregation of the Holy See.

Moreover, it would be incongruous for the legislator to lift the excommunication of the bishops while imposing or maintaining it on the lay faithful to whom they minister.

Conclusion


The Federation is thus obliged to question the notifications since they appear to undermine papal legislation and canon law.
Fr Relyea 1
 
(The basis of the notifications is doctrine. The bishops want the SSPX to accept Vatican Council II. There can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II. One with the irrational premise and the other without it.The bishops are referring to the irrational one. They are referring to the  premise of being able to see the dead now in Heaven, who are allegedly visible on earth, to be explicit exceptions to all needing the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. Invisible for us cases are supposed to be visible. Hypothethical cases are supposed to be examples of salvation outside the visible limits of the Church in the present times.Theoretical cases, are examples for the bishops, of being saved  without the baptism of water and Catholic Faith in 2014.We cannot name any one saved this year without the baptism of water yet these persons  are real for the bishops in their interpretation of Vatican Council II.They are trying to force this on Catholics in general.False doctrine is being extended to Holy Mass).
- Lionel Andrades
 
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/11/una-voce-international-federation.html#more
 
 

Ecclesia Dei, SSPX and the Latin Mass Society interpret Vatican Council II with the same irrationality as the two bishops

Excommunication can only forgiven with absolution in the Confessional.
The two bishops need to affirm the faith, rectify the scandal and go for Confession).

 

 

Excommunication of SSPX faithful: LMS Press Release

4 NOVEMBER 2014

PRESS RELEASE ON THE STATUS OF THE FAITHFUL WHO RECEIVE THE SACRAMENTS FROM PRIESTS AND BISHOPS OF THE SOCIETY OF ST PIUS X.

Bishop Semararo

FROM THE LATIN MASS SOCIETY

COMMENT: letters from the Bishop Semeraro of Albano, Italy, and then from Bishop Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, have declared that the lay faithful who receive the sacraments from priests and bishops of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) are automatically excommunicated, and would need to go through a process authorised by the bishop to be readmitted to communion with the Church (i.e., not simply confession). The Latin Mass Society holds no brief to defend the position of the SSPX, which is canonically irregular, but feels it necessary to point out that these letters are not just ill-considered but have potentially very serious pastoral consequences. They imply that anyone who has ever been to Mass said by a priest of the SSPX is not welcome in the churches of these dioceses.
 
(This is a leftist policy which was already being implemented in Catholic Churches for example the Church of St. Suzanna in Rome, under the Paulist Fathers.This is the Church of the American community. The Paulist Fathers have close contacts with the Jewish Left and support their policies)
The Church of Santa Susanna - Home of the American Catholic Church in Rome
 
This conflicts not only with the ‘opening of hearts’ requested by Pope Benedict XVI as a prelude to a healing of these divisions ‘in the heart of the Church’, but equally with the emphasis on mercy of Pope Francis.

CANON LAW BRIEFING: In light of canonical advice from our National Chaplain and Canonical Adviser, Mgr Gordon Read, the Latin Mass Society would like to clarify some canonical principles in relation to the recent statements of Bishop Semeraro of Albano, Italy, and Bishop Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, lest misunderstandings spread to dioceses around the world.

Bishop Sarlinga
1. Basing a canonical argument on the assumption that the Society of Pius X (SSPX) has no canonical status in the Church and that its priests are suspended following ordination without dimissorial letters, it does not follow that to seek the sacraments at their hands is an act of formal schism on the part of the lay faithful.
(Is it schism when the bishops interpret Vatican Council II assuming we can see the dead on earth who are explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Tradition related to the dogma? This is the position of the two bishops and that of the Congregation  for the Doctrine of the Faith.)
a. Such a conclusion conflicts with the lifting of the excommunication of the bishops of the SSPX by Pope Benedict XVI in 2009: it would be incongruous for the legislator to lift the excommunication of the bishops while imposing or maintaining it on the lay faithful to whom they minister.
b. It also conflicts with the provision in canon law for the effects of suspension or excommunication of a priest to be lifted when someone approaches the priest subject to the penalty in order to receive a sacrament (canon 1335).

2. Excommunication by adherence to a schism can only be incurred where there is both a schismatic intention and an external act (canon 1321).
( The rejection of the two bishops of  Ad Gentes 7, which states all need faith and baptism for salvation does not constitue schism, a rejection of Vatican Council ? The bishops are denying Vatican Council II .They are not saying that AG 7 says all non Catholics need 'faith and baptism' to go to Heaven and avoid Hell. Hindus, Jews, Muslims  do not have Catholic Faith and the baptism of water. Protestants do not have Catholic Faith.
For the two bishops LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc  refer to cases in Heaven saved without the baptism of water and who are exceptions to Ad Gentes 7. In other words these are hypothtical cases accepted in theory but  who are known and visible in 2014 to be exceptions to AG 7 and extra ecclesiam nulla salus. They would have to be personally known, nameable, to be exceptions to Tradition.)
a. It is clear therefore that excommunication is not incurred by those seeking the sacraments at the hands of priests of the SSPX without a schismatic intention.
b. Were a member of the lay faithful to incur excommunication by a schismatic intention, this would be a matter of the private forum (the confessional), and not the public forum.
c. Those under the age of sixteen cannot in any case incur a penalty (canon 1323.1); this would apply to those under this age who received baptism or confirmation.

3. The attitude of the Holy See has always been that lay faithful who receive the sacraments from priests of the SSPX are not excommunicated. Examples are as follows.
a. In 1991 Bishop Joseph Ferrario of Honolulu declared six lay Catholics excommunicated on grounds of schism for having procured the services of an SSPX bishop to administer confirmation. These appealed to the Holy See which, though Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, declared the decree invalid because their action, though considered blameworthy, did not constitute schism.
b. On 5th September 2005, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, affirmed that ‘the faithful who attend the Masses of the aforesaid Fraternity are not excommunicates, and the priests who celebrate them are not, either—the latter are, in fact, suspended.’ (Protcol n.55/2005, signed by the then Secretary of the PCED, Mgr Camille Perl)
(True.However Ecclesia Dei and the SSPX interpret Vatican Council II with the same irrationality. The Ecclesia Dei accepts the Council and the SSPX rejects it.They are using the same irrationality as the two bishops which comes from a misunderstanding of the Letter of the Holy Office, during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. The Letter assumed that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were visible and known to us to be exceptions to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeeny.)
c. On 27th September 2002, quoted and reaffirmed on 18th January 2003, the Holy See, through the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, stated that ‘In the strict sense you may fulfil your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X.’ (Letters signed by Mgr Camille Perl).

BACKGROUND
Bishop Marcello Semeraro of Albano, Italy, in a letter to his diocese dated 14th October 2014, declared:
The Catholic faithful cannot participate at Mass, neither request and/or receive Sacraments from or in the Society. Acting otherwise would mean to break communion with the Catholic Church.
(This bishop interprets Vatican Council II with an irrational premise. This is a doctrinal issue which he should sort out first. To reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Nicene Creed ( I beleive in one baptism or the forgivness of sin and not three or more known baptisms) and Vatican Council II (AG 7) is a doctrinal issue).
Therefore, any Catholic faithful who requests and receives Sacraments in the Society of Saint Pius X, will place himself de facto in the condition of no longer being in communion with the Catholic Church. A readmission to the Catholic Church must be preceded by an adequate personal path of reconciliation, according to the ecclesiastical discipline established by the Bishop.
(The Sacrament of Reconciliation is necessary for bishops in public mortal sin.This is  first class heresy, according to the heirarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.)
See: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/pope-close-advisor-and-member-of.html
Bishop Semeraro is coincidentally the Secretary to the Council of Cardinals set up to advise the Pope. Albano is the location of the Italian headquarters of the SSPX.

Bishop Óscar Sarlinga of Zárate-Campana in Argentina, in a letter to his diocese dated 3rd November 2014, declared:
-It is not licit for the Catholic faithful to take part in the celebration of Mass in these conditions, neither to request nor to receive sacraments from the priests of the aforementioned "Society of Saint Pius X", including in private places turned into places of worship, without excluding, in case of obstinacy, also the ferendae sententiae penalties that may apply, according to the ecclesial spirit and that of protection of the faithful.
Walsingham
(The error of the SSPX priests is that of the Bishops and also Dr.Joseph Shaw,Chairman  of the  Latin Mass Society of England and Wales..
They interpret Vatican Council II with an irrational premise and so a pastoral Council opposes dogmatic teachings, including extra ecclesiam nulla salus).
 
- In the case of the rupture of ecclesiastical communion by the above-mentioned founded motives, in order to be later readmitted to the Catholic Church, a personal path of reconciliation (and eventually of removal of the canonical censure) will be required, according to the discipline advised by the Holy See and the [diocese's] own, established by the diocesan bishop.
(This is a pastoral novelty .
Excommunication can only forgiven with absolution in the Confessional.
The two bishops need to affirm the faith, rectify the scandal and go for Confession)-Lionel Andrades.
See: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/11/another-bishop-excommunicates-faithful.html#more

The Latin Mass Society, founded in 1965, promotes and supports the celebration of the Traditional Mass and sacraments (Extraordinary Form, Vetus Ordo) within the official structures of the Church and with the permission and cooperation of the bishops and the Holy See.
http://www.lmschairman.org/
 

Nine Ways of Prayer of St.Dominic

The Nine Ways of Prayer of St. Dominic is a treasured Dominican document on St. Dominic’s manner of praying. It was written by an anonymous author, probably at Bologna, between 1260 and 1288. Sister Cecilia of the Monastery of St. Agnes at Bologna (who had received the habit from St. Dominic) and others who had known him personally were most likely the source of this information.

These ways of prayer were the actual practice of our Holy Father. Standing, bowing, kneeling—St. Dominic knew that the gestures of the body could powerfully dispose the soul to prayer. In this experience of bodily prayer, the soul in turn is lifted to God in an act of praise, thanksgiving, and supplication. These ways of prayer are a glimpse into the inner life of St. Dominic and his intense love for God.
First of all, bowing humbly before the altar as if Christ, whom the altar signifies, were really and personally present and not just symbolically. As it says, ‘The prayer of the person who humbles himself will pierce the clouds’ (Ecclesiasticus 35:21). He used sometimes to say to the brethren the text from Judith, ‘The prayer of the humble and meek has always been pleasing to you’ (Judith 9:16). It was by humility that the Canaanite woman obtained what she wanted (Matthew 15:22-28), and so did the prodigal son (Luke 15:18-24). Also, ‘I am not worthy to have you come under my roof’ (Matthew 8:8). ‘Lord, humble my spirit deeply because, Lord, I am utterly humbled before you’ (Ecclesiasticus 7:19; Psalms 118). So the holy father, standing with his body erect, would bow his head and his heart humbly before Christ his Head, considering his own servile condition and the outstanding nobility of Christ, and giving himself up entirely to venerating him.

He taught the brethren to do this whenever they passed before a crucifix showing the humiliation of Christ, so that Christ, who was humbled for our sake, might particularly see us humbled before his greatness. Similarly he told the brethren to humble themselves like this before the whole Trinity when¬ever ‘Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit’ was recited solemnly.

This way of prayer was the beginning of his devotion: bowing deeply.
St. Dominic also often used to pray throwing himself down on the ground, flat on his face, and then his heart would be pricked with compunction and he would blush at himself and say, some¬times loudly enough for it actually to be heard, the words from the gospel, ‘Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner’ (Luke 18:13). And with great devotion and reverence he would recite the words of David, ‘It is I who have sinned and done unjustly’ (2 Samuel 24:17). He would weep and groan passionately and then say, ‘I am not worthy to look upon the height of heaven, because of the greatness of my sin; I have provoked your anger and done evil in your sight’ (Prayer of Manasseh 9-10). He would also say, emphatically and devoutly, the verse from Psalm 43:25, ‘My soul is laid low in the dust, my belly is stuck to the earth.’ And again, ‘My soul is stuck to the floor, make me come alive according to your word’ (Psalms 118:25).

Sometimes, wanting to teach the brethren with what reve¬rence they ought to pray, he would say to them, ‘The Magi, those devout kings, entered the house and found the child with Mary, his mother (Matthew 2:11). Now it is certain that we have found him too. God and man, with Mary his handmaid, so come, let us fall down and worship before God, let us weep before the Lord who made us’ (Psalms 94:6).

He exhorted the young men too, saying to them, ‘If you cannot weep for your own sins, because you have none, still there are many sinners to be directed towards mercy and love, for whose sake the prophets and apostles groaned in distress, and for their sake too Jesus wept bitterly when he saw them (Luke 19:41), and similarly the holy David wept and said, “I saw the half-hearted and I pined away”’ (Psalms 118:158).
For this reason, rising up from the ground, he used to take the discipline with an iron chain saying, ‘Your discipline has set me straight towards my goal’ (Psalms 17:36). This is why the whole order determined that all the brethren, out of respect for the memory of St. Dominic’s example, should take the discipline on their bare backs with sticks of wood every ferial day after Compline, saying the Miserere or the De profundis. They were to do this either for their own sins or for those of others whose gifts support them. So no one, however innocent, should withdraw himself from following this holy example.
After this, St. Dominic, standing before the altar or in the chapter room, would fix his gaze on the crucifix, looking intently at Christ on the cross and kneeling down over and over again, a hundred times perhaps; sometimes he would even spend the whole time from after Compline until midnight getting up and kneeling down again, like the apostle James, and like the leper in the gospel who knelt down and said, ‘Lord, if you will you can make me clean’ (Mark 1:40), and like Stephen who knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them’ (Acts 7:59). And a great confidence would grow in our holy father Dominic, confidence in God’s mercy for himself and for all sinners, and for the protection of the novices whom he used to send out all over the place to preach to souls. And sometimes he could not contain his voice, but the brethren would hear him saying, ‘To you, Lord, I will cry, do not turn away from me in silence, lest in your silence I become like those who go down into the pit’ (Psalms 27:1), and other such words from sacred scripture.

At other times, however, he spoke in his heart and his voice was not heard at all (1 Samuel 1:13), and he would remain quietly on his knees, his mind caught up in wonder, and this sometimes lasted a long time. Sometimes it seemed from the very way he looked that he had penetrated heaven in his mind, and then he would suddenly appear radiant with joy, wiping away the abundant tears running down his face. At such times he would come to be in an intensity of desire, like a thirsty man coming to a spring of water (Ecclesiasticus 26:15), or a traveler at last approaching his own country. Then he would grow more forceful and insistent, and his movements would display great composure and agility as he stood up and knelt down.

He was so accustomed to genuflecting that, when he was on a journey, whether in a hostel after the toils of the road or on the road itself, while the others were sleeping or resting, he would return to his genuflections as to his own special art and his own personal service. This way of prayer he taught more by the example of his practice than by what he said.
Sometimes, when he was in a priory, our holy father Dominic would stand upright before the altar, not leaning on anything or supported by anything, but with his whole body standing erect on his feet. Sometimes he would hold his hands out, open, before his breast, like an open book, and then he would stand with great reverence and devotion, as if he were reading in the presence of God. At such times he seemed to be medita¬ting, savoring the words of God in his mouth and, as it were, enjoying reciting them to himself. He had made his own the Lord’s practice which we read about in Luke 4:16, ‘Jesus went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as it was his custom to do, and stood up to read.’ And it says in Psalm 105:30, ‘Phineas stood and prayed and the pestilence stopped.’

At other times he joined his hands and held them tightly fastened together in front of his eyes, hunching himself up. At other times he raised his hands to his shoulders, in the manner of a priest saying Mass, as if he wanted to fix his ears more attentively on something that was being said to him by someone else. If you had seen his devotion as he stood there, erect in prayer, you would have thought you were looking at a prophet conversing with an angel or with God, now talking, now listening, now thinking quietly about what had been revealed to him.

When he was travelling, he would steal sudden moments of prayer, unobtrusively, and would stand with his whole mind instantaneously concentrated on heaven, and soon you would have heard him pronouncing, with the utmost enjoyment and relish, some lovely text from the very heart of sacred scripture, which he would seem to have drawn fresh from the Savior’s wells (Isaiah 12:3).

The brethren used to be greatly moved by this example, when they saw their father and master praying in this way, and the more devout among them found it the best possible instruction in how to pray continuously and reverently, ‘as the eyes of a handmaid are on the hands of her mistress and as the eyes of servants are on the hands of their masters’ (Psalms 122:2).
Sometimes, as I was told personally by someone who had seen it, our holy father Dominic was also seen praying with his hands and arms spread out like a cross, stretching himself to the limit and standing as upright as he possibly could. This was how he prayed when God restored the boy Napoleon to life at his prayer at San Sisto in Rome, both in the sacristy and in the church during the Mass in which he rose from the ground, as we were told by that devout and holy sister, Cecilia, who was present with a great crowd of others and saw it all. Like Elijah when he raised the widow’s son, he stretched himself out over the boy’s body (1 Kings 17:21).

He also prayed in the same way when he rescued the English pilgrims near Toulouse, when they were nearly drowned in the river (cf. 97).

This was how the Lord prayed when he hung on the cross, his hands and arms stretched out, when, with great cries and weeping, his prayer was heard because of his reverence (Hebrews 5:7). The holy man of God, Dominic, did not use this kind of prayer regularly, but only when, by God’s inspiration, he knew that some great wonder was going to occur by virtue of his prayer. He neither forbade the brethren to pray like this nor did he encourage it. When he raised the boy from the dead, praying standing with his arms and hands stretched out like a cross, we do not know what he said. Perhaps he used the words of Elijah, ‘Lord my God, I beseech you, let the soul of this boy return within him’ (1 Kings 17:21), just as he followed his manner of praying. But the brethren and the sisters and the cardinals and the rest who were there were paying attention to his manner of praying, which was unfamiliar and remarkable to them, and so they did not take in the words he spoke. And afterwards they could not ask the holy and extraordinary man, Dominic, about it, because in this deed he had shown himself to be an object of awe and reverence to them all.

However he did sometimes recite seriously, deliberately and carefully, the texts from the Psalms which refer to this manner of praying, such as Psalm 87:10. ‘I cried to you, Lord, all day long I have stretched out my hands to you’ with the rest of that psalm, and Psalm 142:6-7, ‘I have stretched out my hands to you, my soul is like soil without water before you, speedily hear me, Lord.’

This makes it possible for anyone who prays devoutly to understand the teaching of this father, praying this way when he desired to be extraordinarily moved towards God, or rather, when he felt himself being moved by God in a particularly expansive way, through some hidden inspiration, in view of some special grace for himself or for somebody else, on the basis of David’s doctrine, Elijah’s symbolism, Christ’s love and Dominic’s devotion.
He was also often found stretching his whole body up towards heaven in prayer, like a choice arrow shot straight up from a bow (Isaiah 49:2). He had his hands stretched right up above his head, joined together or slightly open as if to catch something from heaven. And it is believed that at such times he received an increase of grace and was caught up in rapture, and that his prayer won from God, for the order he had founded, the gifts of the Holy Spirit and, for himself and for his brethren, such delight and enjoyment in putting the Beatitudes into practice that each one would consider himself blessed in the most pro¬found poverty, in bitter grief, in severe persecution, in great hunger and thirst for righteousness, in all the cares and worries of mercy (Matthew 5:3-10), and that they would all consider it a pleasure to observe the commandments with devotion and to follow the evangelical counsels. At such times the holy father seemed suddenly to enter the Holy of Holies and the third heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2). And so, after this kind of prayer, he bore himself like a prophet, as is related in his miracles, whether he was rebuking or dispensing or preaching. Just one example must be given here, briefly, for edification’s sake.

Once at Bologna, after praying like this, the holy master Dominic asked the advice of some of the senior brethren about some decision that had to be made. This was his normal practice because, as he said, something may be shown to one good man which is not shown to another, as can be seen in the prophets. The sacristan then came and called one of the people taking part in this council to go to the women’s church, to hear a confession, I think. He added, stupidly, though not, as he thought, loudly enough to be heard by the holy master Dominic, ‘A beautiful lady is asking for you; come at once.’ Then the Spirit came upon St. Dominic and he began to be disturbed in himself, and the councilors looked at him with fear. Then he told the sacristan to come to him and he asked him, ‘What did you say?’ He replied, ‘I was asking for a priest to come to the church.’ And the father said, ‘Reproach yourself and confess the sin which came to your lips. The God who made all things made me aware of what you thought were your secret words.’ And he disciplined him there severely and long, so that those who were present were moved to compassion because of his bruises. Then he said, ‘Go, my son; now you have learned how to gaze at a woman in the future. Make sure you do not judge of her appearance. And you too should pray that God will give you chaste eyes.’ In this way he knew what was hidden, rebuked the brother’s folly and punished him and taught him, as he had foreseen it all in prayer. And the brethren were amazed that this was what he said had to be done. And the holy master said, ‘All our justice, by comparison with that of God, is nothing better than filth’ (Isaiah 64:6).

So the holy father did not remain long in this kind of prayer, but returned to himself as if he were coming from far away, and at such times he seemed to be a stranger in the world, as could easily be seen from his appearance and his behavior. While he was praying he was sometimes clearly heard by the brethren saying, as the prophet did, ‘Hear the voice of my supplication while I pray to you and while I lift up my hands to your holy temple’ (Psalms 27:2). And the holy master taught the brethren to pray like this, both by his words and by his example. He quoted from Psalm 133:2, ‘At night lift up your hands to the holy place,’ and Psalm 140:2, ‘The raising of my hands like an evening sacrifice.’
The holy father Dominic also had another beautiful way of praying, full of devotion and grace. After the canonical hours and the grace which is said in common after meals the father would go off quickly to some place where he could be alone, in a cell or somewhere. Sober and alert and anointed with a spirit of devotion which he had drawn from the words of God which had been sung in choir or during the meal, he would settle himself down to read or pray, recollecting himself in himself and fixing himself in the presence of God. Sitting there quietly, he would open some book before him, arming himself first with the sign of the cross, and then he would read. And he would be moved in his mind as delightfully as if he heard the Lord speaking to him. As the Psalm says, ‘I will hear what the Lord God is saying in me, because he will speak peace to his people and upon his saints, and to those who turn to him with all their heart’ (Psalms 84:9). It was as if he were arguing with a friend; at one moment he would appear to be feeling impatient, nodding his head energetically, then he would seem to be listening quietly, then you would see him disputing and struggling, and laughing and weeping all at once, fixing then lowering his gaze, then again speaking quietly and beating his breast. If anyone was inquisitive enough to want to spy on him secretly, he would find that the holy father Dominic was like Moses, who went into the innermost desert and saw the burning bush and the Lord speaking and calling to him to humble himself (Exodus 3:1ff). The man of God had a prophetic way of passing over quickly from reading to prayer and from meditation to contemplation.

When he was reading like this on his own, he used to venerate the book and bow to it and sometimes kiss it, particularly if it was a book of the gospels or if he was reading the words which Christ had spoken with his own lips. And sometimes he used to hide his face and turn it aside, or he would bury his face in his hands or hide it a little in his scapular. And then he would also become anxious and full of yearning, and he would also rise a little, respectfully, and bow as if he were thanking some very special person for favors received. Then, quite refreshed and at peace in himself, he would continue reading his book.
He also used to observe this way of prayer when he was going from one country to another, especially when he was in a lonely place. He disported himself with his meditations in his contemplation. And sometimes he would say to his travelling companions, ‘It is written in Hosea, “I will lead her to a lonely place and speak to her heart”’ (Hosea 2:14). So sometimes he went aside from his companion or went on ahead or, more likely, lingered far behind; going on his own he would pray as he walked, and a fire was kindled in his meditation (Psalms 38:4).

A curious thing about this kind of prayer was that he seemed to be brushing away ashes or flies from his face, and because of this he often defended himself with the sign of the cross. The brethren thought that in this kind of prayer the saint acquired the fullness of sacred scripture and the very heart of the understanding of God’s words, and also a power and boldness to preach fervently and a hidden intimacy with the Holy Spirit to know hidden things.

Thus it happened once, to mention just one story out of many which we omit, that the devil came to the church of the Friars Preachers in Bologna in the form of a young man of frivolous, licentious character and asked for someone to hear his confession. Five priests were brought to him, one after another. This was because the first confessor was so viciously disturbed and enflamed by his words that he got up from listening to his confession and refused to hear such dreadful things to the end. The second did the same and so did the third, fourth and fifth. But they went away without saying anything and they were not prepared to reveal this confession because, as far as they were concerned, what they had heard was a sacramental confession, even though it was the devil’s. Then the sacristan approached St. Dominic, who was in the priory at the time, complaining about these priests, because five of them had not been able to hear one sinner’s confession. ‘It’s scandalous,’ he added, ‘the priests preach penance and then they refuse to give a penance to sinners.’ Then the holy father Dominic got up from his reading and prayer and contem¬plation, not, I think, unaware of what was afoot, and went to hear the devil’s confession. When he entered the church, the devil came to him and at once the holy father recognized him and said to him, ‘You evil spirit, why do you tempt the servants of God under this veil of piety?’ And he rebuked him severely. The devil disappeared at once, leaving the church reeking of sulfur. And the sacristan was appeased and stopped being angry with the priests.
Text for The Nine Ways of Prayer (1997) is used with permission of Father Simon Tugwell, O.P. and Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd, publisher.
http://nashvilledominican.org/charism/st_dominic/nine_ways_of_prayer

http://wdtprs.com/blog/


 
 

Alan’s Wish

Featured article from November's Spirit of Medjugorje
Alan’s Wish
By June Klins
Every Monday evening, the website, marytv.tv broadcasts a wonderful program called “Fruit of Medjugorje” at 8:00 P.M. Each episode features the testimony of one or more people whose lives have been changed through Our Lady of Medjugorje. All of the programs can be accessed in the archives on their website. The following testimony was taken from Episode #133, which was originally aired on September 29, 2014. This is the testimony of Barbara Labrosse.
As she introduced herself, Barbara explained that she wanted to share a story that happened to her brother, Alan. She began by saying that her family was from a town in Northern Ireland called Ballymena. Her mother was Catholic and her father was Protestant. After her mother’s first pilgrimage to Medjugorje in the 1980s, she began leading pilgrimages there, and after 25 years of going there and praying, her father converted to Catholicism.
In 2009, Alan, the youngest of Barbara’s three brothers, was invited to go on a pilgrimage with his cousin and aunt. Alan protested, “I’m not going there among those holy rollers.” But his cousin did not want to go without him, so he finally agreed.
His aunt attested that Alan was the first one to come up with the deposit. Barbara was surprised at that, because Alan, who was 29 at the time, spent what little money he had for partying.
Ave Maria” spelled out in stones on Cross Mountain

The first day that Alan arrived in Medjugorje, he climbed Cross Mountain. He did the same on the second day. He said that he did not know why he was in Medjugorje, but he knew that there was a reason. On the third day, he mentioned to someone, “If there was anywhere I’d like to die in the world, it would be here.” On that same day, he climbed Cross Mountain again, while his friends waited for him in the café below. He asked them to keep an eye on him because it was very dark. He sent a text message which read,“I knew I was meant to come here. This is the most beautiful place on earth.” When he descended the mountain, he met his friends in the café.
As he was leaving, Alan phoned his mother, Teresa, in Ireland. He told her, “I love it here. It is the most beautiful place. I was meant to come here.” His mother said that he sounded happy and said that he had had a full Confession –a good Confession. His mother was pleased because he had not been attending Mass and had not gone to Confession for many years, although he had been brought up in the faith. His mother said, after that, there was a pause, as if he wanted to tell her something. But they hung up, and she went to bed at midnight, after saying her prayers. At 2:45, Teresa was awakened to use the facilities. Upon her return to the bedroom, she heard a voice she described as coming from the Holy Spirit, clearly say, “Teresa, you must pray for Alan’s soul.” She really didn’t think much of it, because she had just spoken with Alan hours before and he sounded good. Nevertheless, she prayed the Divine Mercy Chaplet for him, and then went back to sleep.
The next morning, Barbara’s aunt went to awaken Alan and her cousin, who were sharing a room. As her cousin tried to wake Alan, he realized that Alan was no longer alive.
Barbara’s aunt called two priests in Ireland with the news and they came to the house to break the news to Teresa and her husband. Barbara was living in England at the time, so she flew back to Ireland. She tried to make some phone calls to find out about Alan’s body, but it was difficult with the language barrier. Finally she was able to connect with someone who spoke English. They explained to her that Alan’s body could not be released until an autopsy was done. Alan died on Saturday, September 26, 2009. The following Wednesday, they got a phone call saying that Alan’s body was sent to Mostar for the autopsy and would be sent home after that.
The undertaker who most of the Catholics in Ballymena used, Wally John, came to see Barbara and her family and explained that they would not be able to see Alan because he would not be embalmed. He said that in Bosnia, they do not embalm the bodies and usually bury them within a day because of the heat. Teresa and her husband were very distressed. Teresa cried, “I will not accept that. I need to see his face. I need to see that it was my son!” So Wally John explained that all he could do was put a glass thing over his face and under a special light, and they could see him for 10 minutes.
In the meantime, Barbara’s aunt was still in Medjugorje, and she shared with the people there how distressed Teresa was because she would not be able to see the face of her son. People in Medjugorje they didn’t even know started to fast and pray that Barbara’s mother and father would be able to see the face of their son.
After the autopsy in Mostar, Alan’s body was flown to Vienna and then on to Heathrow. His body stayed overnight there in a car and was brought to Belfast the next day, where it was picked up. It had been seven days now since Alan’s death. His body, which had not been embalmed, had traveled in the heat through all those different countries and climates.
When Wally John, the undertaker, arrived at their house, they were surprised to see a smile on his face. He brought the body into the sitting room. While they sat in another room waiting, Barbara dreaded what would happen when her parents would see their son. Soon Wally John called the family into the room and opened the coffin. They were all shocked when they saw that Alan had no signs of rigor mortis. There was not a mark on him. Barbara related, “He actually was dressed and looked like a saint. He had a black suit on him, a white shirt, and a black tie.” Wally John the airport that morning. Apparently a gentleman in Mostar dressed her brother. He personally bought the suit. On the pocket it said, “To my Mama.” This gentleman wrote a letter to explain that he wanted Alan’s mother to see her son in a beautiful suit to go home.
Wally John said that he couldn’t understand – that this was a miracle – a miracle due to the people’s prayer and fasting in Medjugorje. He said that after 25 years of being an undertaker, he could only describe it as a miracle. Alan was laid out until the third day. He was buried on the feast day of St. Faustina, October 5.
As if this were not incredible enough, Barbara said there was more to the story. When they got the autopsy report, it said that Alan had died of natural causes. It is called “Sudden Death Syndrome.” He did not have a heart attack; his heart just stopped beating. The report said that he had died between 3:00 and 4:00 in the morning, but the pathologist in Mostar said that his heart stopped beating at 3:00 A.M. When Barbara told her parents this information, her mother jumped off the sofa and was hysterical. After she calmed down, Teresa related that the night that Alan died, she was praying at 3:00 A.M. for her son’s soul as Our Lord had requested, as He was coming for him. Here she was thousands of miles away, praying for his soul as he passed away!
Theresa passed away 18 months later. Up until that time, she had been to Medjugorje 60 times! She had witnessed many miracles, but this one was the greatest. Barbara said,“And the greatest thing that Our Lady repaid her back for was my mother needed to see the face of her son. And [through] Our Lady – due to the people of Medjugorje praying and fasting and believing – she got her wish. She didn’t just get to see his face – she got to spend three beautiful days with him.” Barbara repeated that Alan was sent home looking like a saint – no marks or embellishments. She concluded her testimony: “And in his pocket, when his body was taken from the hotel where he had passed away – there was a medal. And on this medal was the Divine Mercy. It was sent home with him in his coffin. Amen.”
Following Barbara’s testimony was the testimony of a funeral director from Ireland. He said: “My name is Martin and I’m a funeral director in Ireland and I just listened to Barbara’s testimony and I’m just giving a professional opinion in regard to the human remains being dead for 10 days. We’re sitting here [in Medjugorje] at the minute and it’s into the middle of September, and it’s quite warm. The human body can start to break down quite quickly after death–within a very short period of time, discoloration of the body. The more the body is moved, the more discoloration takes place… I think the family has received a great grace from the prayers and fasting of the people of Medjugorje, that [they] were able to see their brother [and son], which is a very important part of Irish culture – to be able to see this body before burial. Our Lord came back to the apostles to let them see Him after the Resurrection. I think that tells us as human beings that a loving God has given them a great grace where he has allowed the family to do their goodbyes.”