Vol 12 Issue 4 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
January 26, 2019 ~ Saint Polycarp, opn!
1. What is the Sacrament of Confirmation
2. Third Sunday after Epiphany
3. Saint John Chrysostom
4. Family and Marriage
Dear Reader:
As you may know, on January 18 there was the annual Pro-Life March at the Washington DC Mall. The estimate of participants was in the hundreds of thousands. As always, it went peacefully because as Catholics and normal American Citizens we are not confrontational. Apparently the Media and leftist extremists couldn’t condemn anything at the event until a video surfaced of a confrontation showing a Native American in the face of a high school student. The leftist activists turned it around and said the high school student was in the face of the Native American. The complete video along with other recordings show the high school students being harrassed by a belligerent group and then the Native Americans coming at the high school students in a determined force. A student turns toward them and keeps his stance. Here is what that student, Nick Sandmann, wrote as to what he saw, heard and felt:
I am providing this factual account of what happened on Friday afternoon at the Lincoln Memorial to correct misinformation and outright lies being spread about my family and me.
I am the student in the video who was confronted by the Native American protestor. I arrived at the Lincoln Memorial at 4:30 p.m. I was told to be there by 5:30 p.m., when our busses were due to leave Washington for the trip back to Kentucky. We had been attending the March for Life rally, and then had split up into small groups to do sightseeing.
When we arrived, we noticed four African American protestors who were also on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. I am not sure what they were protesting, and I did not interact with them. I did hear them direct derogatory insults at our school group.
The protestors said hateful things. They called us “racists,” “bigots,” “white crackers,” “faggots,” and “incest kids.” They also taunted an African American student from my school by telling him that we would “harvest his organs.” I have no idea what that insult means, but it was startling to hear.
Because we were being loudly attacked and taunted in public, a student in our group asked one of our teacher chaperones for permission to begin our school spirit chants to counter the hateful things that were being shouted at our group. The chants are commonly used at sporting events. They are all positive in nature and sound like what you would hear at any high school. Our chaperone gave us permission to use our school chants. We would not have done that without obtaining permission from the adults in charge of our group.
At no time did I hear any student chant anything other than the school spirit chants. I did not witness or hear any students chant “build that wall” or anything hateful or racist at any time. Assertions to the contrary are simply false. Our chants were loud because we wanted to drown out the hateful comments that were being shouted at us by the protestors.
After a few minutes of chanting, the Native American protestors, who I hadn’t previously noticed, approached our group. The Native American protestors had drums and were accompanied by at least one person with a camera.
The protestor everyone has seen in the video began playing his drum as he waded into the crowd, which parted for him. I did not see anyone try to block his path. He locked eyes with me and approached me, coming within inches of my face. He played his drum the entire time he was in my face.
I never interacted with this protestor. I did not speak to him. I did not make any hand gestures or other aggressive moves. To be honest, I was startled and confused as to why he had approached me. We had already been yelled at by another group of protestors, and when the second group approached I was worried that a situation was getting out of control where adults were attempting to provoke teenagers.
I believed that by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to diffuse the situation. I realized everyone had cameras and that perhaps a group of adults was trying to provoke a group of teenagers into a larger conflict. I said a silent prayer that the situation would not get out of hand.
During the period of the drumming, a member of the protestor’s entourage began yelling at a fellow student that we “stole our land” and that we should “go back to Europe.” I heard one of my fellow students begin to respond. I motioned to my classmate and tried to get him to stop engaging with the protestor, as I was still in the mindset that we needed to calm down tensions.
I never felt like I was blocking the Native American protestor. He did not make any attempt to go around me. It was clear to me that he had singled me out for a confrontation, although I am not sure why.
The engagement ended when one of our teachers told me the busses had arrived and it was time to go. I obeyed my teacher and simply walked to the busses. At that moment, I thought I had diffused the situation by remaining calm, and I was thankful nothing physical had occurred.
I never understood why either of the two groups of protestors were engaging with us, or exactly what they were protesting at the Lincoln Memorial. We were simply there to meet a bus, not become central players in a media spectacle. This is the first time in my life I’ve ever encountered any sort of public protest, let alone this kind of confrontation or demonstration.
I was not intentionally making faces at the protestor. I did smile at one point because I wanted him to know that I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation. I am a faithful Christian and practicing Catholic, and I always try to live up to the ideals my faith teaches me – to remain respectful of others, and to take no action that would lead to conflict or violence.
I harbor no ill will for this person. I respect this person’s right to protest and engage in free speech activities, and I support his chanting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial any day of the week. I believe he should re-think his tactics of invading the personal space of others, but that is his choice to make.
I am being called every name in the book, including a racist, and I will not stand for this mob-like character assassination of my family’s name. My parents were not on the trip, and I strive to represent my family in a respectful way in all public settings.
I have received physical and death threats via social media, as well as hateful insults. One person threatened to harm me at school, and one person claims to live in my neighborhood. My parents are receiving death and professional threats because of the social media mob that has formed over this issue.
I love my school, my teachers and my classmates. I work hard to achieve good grades and to participate in several extracurricular activities. I am mortified that so many people have come to believe something that did not happen – that students from my school were chanting or acting in a racist fashion toward African Americans or Native Americans. I did not do that, do not have hateful feelings in my heart, and did not witness any of my classmates doing that.
I cannot speak for everyone, only for myself. But I can tell you my experience with Covington Catholic is that students are respectful of all races and cultures. We also support everyone’s right to free speech. I am not going to comment on the words or account of Mr. Phillips, as I don’t know him and would not presume to know what is in his heart or mind. Nor am I going to comment further on the other protestors, as I don’t know their hearts or minds, either.
I have read that Mr. Phillips is a veteran of the United States Marines. I thank him for his service and am grateful to anyone who puts on the uniform to defend our nation. If anyone has earned the right to speak freely, it is a U.S. Marine veteran.
I can only speak for myself and what I observed and felt at the time. But I would caution everyone passing judgement based on a few seconds of video to watch the longer video clips that are on the internet, as they show a much different story than is being portrayed by people with agendas.
I provided this account of events to the Diocese of Covington so they may know exactly what happened, and I stand ready and willing to cooperate with any investigation they are conducting.
It is sad but to be expected that the Conciliar Bishop and the Catholic School did not defend or search for facts, but believed the media—who pointed out these students were pro-life, Catholic, white and supported the President and therefore evil—and thus condemned these young students who were in actuality being harrassed by adults. Hopefully, now that the truth has become known we will support our youth and teach them, even as young adults, to not fear defending themselves even though they may be condemned by the world. That, as parents, we will also back them.
We must wait to see if these adults apologize to these adolescents, especially for not defending them against the injustice of adults.
As always, enjoy the readings and commentaries provided for your benefit. —The Editor
________________
WHAT IS THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION?
by Rev. Courtney Edward Krier
Summary of Church Teaching Concerning Confirmation*
§ 4. The Necessity of Confirmation
It follows from its institution by Christ that Confirmation is indispensable to the Church in her totality. It procures for her supernatural strength for the overcoming of the internal and external difficulties which the Divine Founder of the Church foretold for her (Mt. 10, 16 et seq.; John 15, 20).
2. For the Individual
A baptised person can achieve eternal salvation even without Confirmation. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
The Council of Trent declared that nothing keeps the regenerate from entering into Heaven. D 792. Tradition is unanimous in teaching that the baptised person who departs this life in a state of grace before the imposition of the bishop’s hands is saved. Cf. Ps.-Cyprian, De rebapt. 4; Synod of Elvira, can. 77 (D 52 e); Ps.-Melchiades (Decretum Gratiani, c. 2 D. 5 de consecr.). Thus Confirmation, unlike Baptism, is not necessary for salvation with the necessity of an indispensable means (necessitate medii). It is necessary for salvation to this extent, that it contributes to the perfection of salvation. S. th. III 72, I ad 3; 72, 8 ad 4. /367/ Even if there be no express Divine commandment to receive Confirmation, the Divine mandate to receive it may be deduced from its institution by Christ (praeceptum divinum implicitum). Church Law prescribes its reception by all the faithful if the occasion for its reception offers (CIC 787). The neglect of the Sacrament from contempt (ex contemptu) is a grievous sin. D 669. Christian charity towards oneself demands that such an important means of grace should not be left unused.
3. Confirmation of desire
Like Baptismal grace so also the grace of Confirmation (not the Confirmation character) can, in case of necessity, be received by the desire for the Sacrament (votum confirmationis, Confirmation of desire). As the grace of Confirmation presupposes the grace of Baptism, Baptism of desire at least must precede it, if not temporally at least conceptually. S. th. III 72, 6 ad 1 and 3.
§ 5. The Minister of Confirmation
1. The Ordinary Minister
The ordinary minister of Confirmation is the Bishop alone. (De fide.)
The Council of Trent declared in opposition to the antihierarchical tendencies of certain medieval sects (Waldenses, WyclifEans, Hussites), and to the practice and teaching of the Greek Orthodox Church which regards simple priests as its regular ministers: Si quis dixerit, sanctae confirmationis ordinarium ministrum non esse solum episcopum, sed quem vis simplicem sacerdotem, A.S D. 873. Cf. D 419, 424, 450, 465, 572, 608, 697; CIC 782 Par 1.
According to the testimony of the Acts of the Apostles (8, 14 et seq.; 19, 6), the rite of the communication of the Spirit was performed by the Apostles. Their successors are the bishops. In the West, the administration of Confirmation was always considered to be the privilege of the bishop. Witnesses for this are St. Hippolytus of Rome (Trad. Apost.), Pope St. Cornelius (Ep. ad Fabium), St. Cyprian (Ep. 73, 9), Ps.-Cyprian (De rebapt. 5), the Synod of Elvira (can. 38 and 77; D 52 d-e), St. Jerome (Dial. c. Lucif. 9), Pope St. Innocent I (Ep. 25, 3). Pope Innocent agrees with St. Hippolytus in distinguishing the Confirmation anointing on the forehead from the baptismal anointing performed by the priests, and emphasises that the former alone is the privilege of the bishops: “The priests are not allowed to mark the forehead with the same oil (with which they may anoint the baptised); this is the privilege of the bishops alone, when they communicate the Holy Ghost ” (D 98). In the Orient also, the bishop was originally the regular minister of Confirmation as Bishop Firmilian of Caesarea (Ep. 75, 7 in St. Cyprian’s Collection of Letters), The Didascalia (II 32, 3; III 12, 2), St. John Chrysostom (In Actus homil. 18, 3) attest.
Reason
As a Sacrament of perfection, Confirmation, as is appropriate, is administered by the possessors of the fullness of the sacerdotal power, the generals of the militia christiana, the bishops, who thereby impose on the recipients an obligation to wage spiritual warfare. S. th. III 72, 11; S. c. G. IV 60. The administration by the bishop strengthens the consciousness of the solidarity of the faithful with the bishop, and thus serves to preserve and reinforce the unity of the Church. Cf. St. Bonaventura (In Sent. IV d. 7 a. 1 q. 3.).
2. The Extraordinary Minister
The extraordinary minister of Confirmation is a priest on whom this full power is conferred by the common law or by a special apostolic indult. (Sent. certa.) CIC 782, Par. 2. Cf. D 697, 573.
By an indult of the Apostolic See special power was given, with effect from 1st January, 1947: a) To Parish Priests within their own territory; b) To permanent Vicars (can. 471) and to the administrator of a vacant parish (can. 472); c) To priests to whom, in a definite territory with a definite church, the full spiritual care with all parochial rights and duties has been exclusively and permanently transferred. These are empowered personally to confer the Sacrament of Confirmation on those of the faithful who live in their territory if, a) these, in consequence of serious illness, are in actual danger of death, so that their death is to be reckoned with, and b) the Diocesan Bishop is not available or is lawfully prevented from being present, and another
bishop who could represent the Diocesan Bishop is not to be had (emergency Confirmation). If anybody other than those named in the Indult are confirmed there results an invalidation of the Sacrament and the loss of the power to confirm (can. 2365). Decretum S. Congregationis de Disciplina Sacramentorum “Spiritus Sancti munera” of 14. 9. 1946 (AAS 38, 1946, 349 et seq.). Special directions were given for mission fields (AAS 40, 1948, 41).
Pope St. Gregory the Great granted the administration of Confirmation to priests in Sardinia, on the condition that a bishop was not available (Ep. IV 26). In numerous cases later Popes empowered simple priests to administer Confirmation.
In the Eastern Church the administration of Confirmation by simple priests has gradually become the general practice since the 4th century. The Apostolic Constitutions (end of the 4th century) grant the power to impose hands in Confirmation (χειροθ’σία) not merely to bishops but also to presbyters (VIII 28, 3). This development was strongly promoted by the distinction made between the completion and the administration of the Sacrament on the analogy of the Holy Eucharist, that is, between the consecration of the myron reserved to the bishop, and the anointing with the consecrated myron performed by the priest. (Cf. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. myst. 3, 3.) The validity of the Greek Confirmation celebrated by priests, which has always been recognised by the Catholic Church is explained by a tacit privilege of the Apostolic See (thus Pope Benedict XIV. De synode dioec. VII 9, 3; cf. D 697; per Apostolicae Sedis dispensationem).
The extraordinary power to confirm possessed by simple priests is to be regarded as deriving from the papal jurisdictivc power, not as a delegated extra-sacramental consecration-power, but as a constituent part of the power of consecration received by the priest in Holy Order. This power of consecration, however, is limited, and can be used only in virtue of the papal power of the Keys.
§ 6. The Recipient of Confirmation
a) Confirmation can be received by any baptised person who is not already confirmed, (Sent. certa.)
Even infants can validly receive Confirmation, as is proved by the practice current in the West up to the thirteenth century, and to-day in the Eastern Church. Corresponding to its purpose of equipping the baptised person to /369/ be a soldier of Christ, Confirmation is more suitably administered only to those who have attained the use of reason, that is, those who have reached the seventh year of life or so. This is the time prescribed by the competent law (CIC 788) as a general rule. However, exceptions are admissible, especially in danger of death. Emergency Confirmation can and should be administered to young children also, as a higher state of grace has, as a consequence, a higher state of glory. S. th. III 72, 8 ad 4.
b) The repetition of Confirmation is invalid and grievously sinful.
The imposition of hands, which Pope St. Stephen I, invoking Tradition, ordered for those returning from heresy (D 46) is, in opposition to the view of St. Cyprian (Ep. 74, 5), not to be regarded as a repetition of Confirmation, but merely, as the addition “in poenitentiam” indicates, as a reconciliation ceremony. As the view prevailed in antiquity that Sacraments administered in heresy, in spite of their validity, did not confer the Holy Ghost until the person was received into the Church (cf. St. Augustine, De bapt. III 16, 21; III 17, 22), the reconciliation-rite was regarded as the occasion of the communication of the Holy Ghost. In consequence, in this rite, the imposition of hands was accompanied by a prayer to the Holy Ghost (cf. St. Leo I, Ep. 159, 7; 167, 18), so that the rite of reconciliation had a great similarity to Confirmation.
For the worthy reception of Confirmation the state of grace is necessary. The remote preparation involves instruction for Confirmation. Cf. Cat. Rom. II 3, 17 et seq.
(To be continued)
————————–
The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers
M. F. Toal
THE GOSPEL OF THE SUNDAY…
[Message clipped] View entire message