Vol 12 Issue 26 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
June 29, 2019 ~ Saints Peter and Paul
1. What is the Holy Eucharist
2. Third Sunday after Pentecost
3. Commemoration of Saint Paul
4. Family and Marriage
5. Articles and notices
Dear Reader:
Pope Pius XII, confirming the decisions of his predecessors, Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII and Pius XI, wrote during the centenary of the introduction of the Feast and Mass to the Universal Church the encyclical, Haurietis Aquas (May 15, 1956) as a testament that a Catholic’s relationship with Christ must be the love one gives to Him who has first loved us (cf. 1 John 4:19).
The other reason which refers in a particular manner to the Heart of the divine Redeemer, and likewise demands in a special way that the highest form of worship be paid to it, arises from the fact that His Heart, more than all the other members of His body, is the natural sign and symbol of His boundless love for the human race. “There is in the Sacred Heart,” as Our predecessor of immortal memory, Leo XIII, pointed out, “the symbol and express image of the infinite love of Jesus Christ which moves us to love in return.”(Cfr. Encl. “Annum Sacrum”: Acta Leonis, vol. XIX, 1900, p. 76.) . . .
For these reasons, the Heart of the Incarnate Word is deservedly and rightly considered the chief sign and symbol of that threefold love with which the divine Redeemer unceasingly loves His eternal Father and all mankind.
It is a symbol of that divine love which He shares with the Father and the Holy Spirit but which He, the Word made flesh, alone manifests through a weak and perishable body, since “in Him dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”(Col. 2:9)
It is, besides, the symbol of that burning love which, infused into His soul, enriches the human will of Christ and enlightens and governs its acts by the most perfect knowledge derived both from the beatific vision and that which is directly infused.(Cfr. Sum Theol. III, q. 9 aa. 1-3: ed. Leon., vol. XI, 1903, p. 142.)
And finally—and this in a more natural and direct way—it is the symbol also of sensible love, since the body of Jesus Christ, formed by the Holy Spirit, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, possesses full powers of feelings and perception, in fact, more so than any other human body.( Cfr. Ibid. Ill, q. 33, a. 2, ad 3m; q. 46, a: ed. Leon., vol. XI, 1903, pp. 342, 433.) . . .
Consequently, the honor to be paid to the Sacred Heart is such as to raise it to the rank—so far as external practice is concerned—of the highest expression of Christian piety. For this is the religion of Jesus which is centered on the Mediator who is man and God, and in such a way that we cannot reach the Heart of God save through the Heart of Christ, as He Himself says: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one cometh to the Father save by Me.”(John 14:6) . . .
When we adore the Sacred Heart of Jesus Christ, we adore in it and through it both the uncreated love of the divine Word and also its human love and its other emotions and virtues, since both loves moved our Redeemer to sacrifice Himself for us and for His Spouse, the Universal Church, as the Apostle declares: “Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life, that He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Eph. 5:25-27)
Besides the acts of worship, to adore, to be contrite, to thank and to supplicate there is, then, the obligation to imitate Christ’s love in one’s own life:
That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts, that being rooted and founded in charity you may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth, and length, and height, and depth; to know also the charity of Christ which surpasseth all knowledge, that you may be filled unto all the fulness of God. (Eph. 3:17-19.)
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation or distress? or famine? or nakedness? or danger? or persecution? or the sword? . . . But in all these things we overcome because of Him that hath loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Rom. 8:35, 37-39.)
The faithful who participate in the First Friday and First Saturday devotions when offered, who consecrate their family to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who pray the Rosary together as a family will find the love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary the foundation of their lives as they feel impelled to return the love Jesus and Mary have showered upon them.
One may appropriately conclude with these words of Pope Pius XI:
Wherefore, even as consecration proclaims and confirms this union with Christ, so does expiation begin that same union by washing away faults, and perfect it by participating in the sufferings of Christ, and consummate it by offering victims for the brethren. And this indeed was the purpose of the merciful Jesus, when He showed His Heart to us bearing about it the symbols of the passion and displaying the flames of love, that from the one we might know the infinite malice of sin, and in the other we might admire the infinite charity of Our Redeemer, and so might have a more vehement hatred of sin, and make a more ardent return of love for His love.(Miserentissimus Redemptor, Par. 11)
As always, enjoy the readings and commentaries provided for your benefit. —The Editor
________________
WHAT IS THE HOLY EUCHARIST
By Rev. Courtney Edward Krier
Reception of Chalice: Denial of Christ’s Real Presence and Church Authority
During the Council of Constance, which convened to end the Western Schism, the errors of John Wyclif would be condemned during Session VIII (May 4, 1415) and reconfirmed by the Bulls, Inter Cunctas and In eminentis of February 22, 1418 by Pope Martin V (1417-1431):
- In the sacrament of the altar the material substance of bread and likewise the material substance of wine remain. (Cf. DB 581)
- In the same sacrament the accidents of the bread do not remain without a subject. (Cf. DB 582)
- In the same sacrament Christ is not identically and really with His own bodily presence. (Cf. DB 583)
- If a bishop or priest is living in mortal sin, he does not ordain, nor consecrate, nor perform, nor baptize. (Cf. DB 584)
- It is not established in the Gospel that Christ arranged the Mass. (Cf. DB 585)
- God ought to obey the devil. (Cf. DB 586)
- If man is duly contrite, every exterior confession on his part is superfluous and useless. (Cf. DB 587)
- If the pope is foreknown and evil, and consequently a member of the devil, he does not have power over the faithful given to him by anyone, unless perchance by Caesar. (Cf. DB 588)
Wyclif’s writings would soon spread across Europe and find a welcome in Bohemia as his former Czech students returned to Prague from Oxford.
John Hus (+1415) latched onto the doctrine of Wyclif, especially the rejection of the authority of the Church over matters of faith and morals. Born at Husinetz, a village in the present Czech Republic, in 1369, John Hus went to Prague to study at the University. He earned his living by singing and serving Masses (It was common for the person requesting a Mass to give a stipend to the servers and, if a high Mass, the choir also). Observing the scandalous living of the clergy, he saw in the teachings of Wycliff a call to reform the Church. As frequently appears, the basis is to return to the early Church, by which falsely it means re-interpreting the Bible and rejecting the authority of the Church. The passage in John’s Gospel, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you (6:54), was propagated as a departure from the command of Christ and the early Church and so it became the rallying cry of the Jan Hus and his followers to demand to also receive the chalice. The Church authorities pointed to verse 52 in which Christ also said, If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world, and afterwards in verses 58 and 59 when Christ said, As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. Though Hus himself did not deny Our Lord’s presence, the Church understood that to accept the demands would lead to many errors. First, the stress on the necessity led many to demand that after baptism the children be given the Host and Chalice, for only if they received this could they then be saved. Then, that they did not receive the Blood of Christ unless they received the Chalice, denying that after the Resurrection Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity are united inseparably in His glorified state so that where Christ is, there is absolutely His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. This is fully recognized by the adoration, latria, given to the Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. O’Connor rightly writes:
There was also a more substantial difficulty associated with the request for a return of the cup to all the faithful, and it involved the centuries-old problem concerning the real and the symbolic aspects of the Eucharist. The double Consecration of the bread and cup symbolized the separation of Christ’s Body and Blood when he shed his Blood for us on Calvary. The risen Christ, however, was present whole and entire in both of the consecrated elements since he was understood to be incapable of undergoing in the Sacrament actual separation of his Body and Blood. Aquinas and other theologians explained this by the theory of concomitance. (O’Connor, 131)
As O’Connor states, this is what the Church accepts as stated by Saint Thomas, which is no different than what Guitmund and Lanfranc wrote in opposition to Berengarius. Here are the words of the Angelic Doctor:
It is absolutely necessary to confess according to Catholic faith that the entire Christ is in this sacrament. Yet we must know that there is something of Christ in this sacrament in a twofold manner: first, as it were, by the power of the sacrament; secondly, from natural concomitance. By the power of the sacrament, there is under the species of this sacrament that into which the pre-existing substance of the bread and wine is changed, as expressed by the words of the form, which are effective in this as in the other sacraments; for instance, by the words: “This is My body,” or, “This is My blood.” But from natural concomitance there is also in this sacrament that which is really united with that thing wherein the aforesaid conversion is terminated. For if any two things be really united, then wherever the one is really, there must the other also be: since things really united together are only distinguished by an operation of the mind. (S.T., III, 76, 1)
As the Holy Eucharist cannot be separated from being a Sacrifice, O’Connor then continues:
By this distinction the differences between the symbolic and real aspects of the Sacrament were preserved. The One and Identical Lord was completely present under the appearances of each of the elements; his death was memorialized through the symbolic separation of Body and Blood. Some of the Utraquists tended to lose sight of this truth and claimed that the twofold reception was necessary not only for the symbolic completion of the Sacrament but also for its actual completion, as if the Lord were only imperfectly or incompletely received under one form. (Op. cit., 131)
As the followers of Hus insisted on receiving Our Lord under both species, sub utraque specie, they were called Utraquists. Hus was tolerated by the Archbishop of Prague, Zbynek, due mainly because Hus was seen as a pawn in the struggle between the various parties as a result of the Western Schism, in which three papal claimants, three rival Emperors and the Council of Pisa (1409) allowed an excuse for one to ignore papal authority and gain popularity. When King Wenceslaus II of Bohemia was deposed as Emperor in 1400, he attempted to have the University side with him by giving the Czech students a greater voice than the Germans. As Jan Hus was opposed to the Church, the Bohemian king saw to it later that Hus led the University by which the Wycliffian views were adopted and spread throughout Bohemia. When Emperor Sigismund called for the Council of Constance, he also commanded Hus to stand trial, despite Wenceslaus’ sovereignty. During the fifteenth session on July 6, John Hus was condemned. His errors, when the Council of Constance (1415-18) first gathered, dealt primarily with Church authority as did the Wycliffites. The Church had not forbidden the Chalice through a decree and the Utraquists in the beginning demanded the Chalice, saying the Church was wrong in denying them and spoke only of its necessity—both an attack upon Church authority, but not the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist directly. Previously, in the thirteenth session, on June 15, 1415, the fathers of the Council had issued this Definition of Communion under One Species:
Since in some parts of the world certain ones have rashly presumed to assert that Christian people should receive the sacrament of the Eucharist under both species of bread and wine, and since they give communion to the laity indiscriminately, not only under the species of bread, but also under the species of wine, after dinner or otherwise when not fasting, and since they pertinaciously assert that communion should be enjoyed contrary to the praiseworthy custom of the Church reasonably approved which they try damnably to disprove as a sacrilege, it is for this reason that this present Council . . . declares, decides, and defines, that, although Christ instituted that venerable sacrament after supper and administered it to His disciples under both species of bread and wine; yet, notwithstanding this, the laudable authority of the sacred canons and the approved custom of the Church have maintained and still maintain that a sacrament of this kind should not be consecrated after supper, nor be received by the faithful who are not fasting, except in case of sickness or of another necessity granted or admitted by law or Church; and although such a sacrament was received by the faithful under both species in the early Church, yet since then it is received by those who consecrate under both species and by the laity only under the species of bread, since it must be believed most firmly and not at all doubted that the whole body of Christ and the blood are truly contained under the species of bread as well as under the species of wine. Therefore, to say that to observe this custom or law is a sacrilege or illicit must be considered erroneous, and those pertinaciously asserting the opposite of the above mentioned must be avoided as heretics and should be severely punished, either by the local diocesan officials or by the inquisitors of heretical depravity. (Cf. DB 726; later approved by Martin V 1418)
As reasons for demanding the Chalice were developed, it was clear the same errors as Berengarius and others were resurrected. By time the Council of Constance ended, the errors of the Hussites (the followers of Jan Hus’ movement) had departed substantially from the teaching of the Church and, in the formulary of receiving the Hussites back into the Church, those errors are enunciated as follows:
Articles1-4, 9-10 treat of communions with said heretics.
- Likewise, whether he believes that anyone deliberately despising the rite of the Church, the ceremonies of exorcism and catechism, of consecrated baptismal water, sins mortally. (Cf. DB 665)
- Likewise, whether he believes, that after the consecration by the priest in the sacrament of the altar under the semblance of bread and wine, it is not material bread and material wine, but the same Christ through all, who suffered on the Cross and sitteth at the right (hand) of the Father. (Cf. DB 666)
- Likewise, whether he believes and maintains that after the consecration by the priest, under the sole species of bread only, and aside from the species of wine, it is the true body of Christ and the blood and the soul and the divinity and the whole Christ, and the same body absolutely and under each one of these species separately. (Cf. DB 667)
- Likewise, whether he believes that the custom of giving communion to lay persons under the species of bread only, which is observed by the universal Church, and approved by the sacred Council of CONSTANCE, must be preserved, so that it be not allowed to condemn this or to change it at pleasure without the authority of the Church, and that those who obstinately pronounce the opposite of the aforesaid should be arrested and punished as heretics or as suspected of heresy. (Cf. DB 668)
- Likewise, whether he believes that a Christian who rejects the reception of the sacraments of confirmation, or extreme unction, or the solemnization of marriage sins mortally. (Cf. DB 669)
- Likewise, whether he believes that a Christian in addition to contrition of heart is obligated out of necessity for salvation to confess to a priest only (the priest having the proper faculties), and not to a layman or laymen however good and devout. (Cf. DB 670)
- Likewise, whether he believes, that the priest in cases permitted to him can absolve from sins a sinner who has confessed and become contrite and enjoin a penance upon him. (Cf. DB 671)
- Likewise, whether he believes that a bad priest, employing the proper matter and form and having the intention of doing what the Church does, truly consecrates, truly absolves, truly baptizes, truly confers the other sacraments. (Cf. DB 672)
(Inter Cunctas, February 22, 1418)
The Hussites would splinter into various factions, but united in proclaiming Jan Hus a martyr and joining forces whenever the Pope or the Emperor sent an army to force them into accepting Catholic teaching and authority. The Hussites, thus united in a nationalistic spirit, were able to defend themselves but with the loss of Church structure and faith.
The rejection of Church Authority and the consequent turning to Scripture privately interpreted resulted from the members of the Church hierarchy scandalizing the priests and laity. The Western Schism with three persons claiming to be pope and the rivalry of sovereigns brought such disorder and chaos into the lives of the priests and faithful that they found it necessary to independently decide who they would choose to believe, and ultimately chose to believe none. The Council of Constance attempted to obtain Church Unity by reforms, but kings and princes—including bishops and archbishops of royal lineage—impeded the reforms for no other reason than being able to live decadent lives which brought the Church into the service of the Medici family as an example; or the Archbishop of Cologne claiming title to the funds of Muenster and Osnabruck and leaving them without any bishop; and, by the end of the century, an Alexander VI as Pope (1492-1503).
At the same time, the Church had to consider her teaching of the Holy Eucharist and did so during the Council of Constance:
a) Christ instituted the Mass in substance and directed the Apostles how to say Mass.
b) The Agape, or meal before Mass, is not part of the Mass.
c) The Agape is abrogated by Church authority in which fasting is now required.
d) An unworthy priest does not invalidate a sacrament if he rightly administers it.
e) Our Lord is wholly present whether under the appearance of bread or wine.
f) Nothing remains of the substance of bread or wine after the consecration.
g) The consecration must be of both bread and wine.
h) The celebrating priest must receive under both species.
i) Receiving under one kind, that is, the Host, has been a custom always found in the Church, and the Church now practices this custom universally.
j) No one may deny the Church has the authority to prohibit the partaking of the Chalice (sub utrique specie).
k) The return to ancient customs no longer employed by the Church is forbidden.
The fourteenth century would prepare the minds and hearts of the people to listen to the innovators and not the Church. Only those who held fast to the teachings of the Church and accepted her authority would be able to withstand the next onslaught of error.
————————–
The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers
M. F. Toal
THE GOSPEL OF THE SUNDAY
LUKE xv. 1-10
At that time: The publicans and sinners drew near unto Jesus to hear him. And the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying: This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them. And he spoke to them this parable, saying: What man of you hath an hundred sheep: and if he shall lose one of them, doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the desert, and go after that which was lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, lay it upon his shoulders, rejoicing: and coming home, call together his friends and neighbours, saying to them: Rejoice with me, because I have found my sheep that was lost? I say to you, that even so there shall be joy in heaven upon one sinner that doth penance, more than upon ninety-nine just that need not penance.
Or what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a lamp, and sweep the house, and seek diligently until she find it? And when she hath found it, call together her friends and neighbours, saying: Rejoice with me, because I have found the silver piece which I had lost. So I say to you, there shall be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance.
EXPOSITION FROM THE CATENA AUREA
V. 1. The publicans and sinners drew near unto Jesus to hear him . . . .
AMBROSE, in Luke: From what was said in the preceding verses you learned that you must not be held fast by earthly things; that you are not to place fleeting things before those that last for ever. But since human frailty cannot maintain a firm footing in this so uncertain world, the Good Physician shows you a remedy even against error. The Merciful Judge does not deny us the hope of pardon; so we have, they drew near to hear Jesus.
Gloss: Publicans, that is, they who exacted, or farmed, the public taxes and who make a business of worldly gain.
THEOPHYLACTUS: It was for this He had taken flesh, to receive sinners as a physician receives the sick. But the real sinners, the Pharisees, repaid His kindness by murmuring against Him. Hence:
V. 2. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured against him, saying . . .
GREGORY, Hom. 34 on the Gospel: From which we may gather that true justice feels compassion, the false only scorn; though the just are also wont to feel angry with sinners, and rightly so. But what is done through zeal for the divine law is one thing, what is done through the swelling of pride another. For the just, outwardly, heap up reproaches against sinners, but out of devotion to the divine law, while inwardly they retain the bond of charity. In their own minds they place those they correct above themselves. They correct those subject to them, because of discipline, but through humility they keep a watch on themselves.
They however who pride themselves on a righteousness that is hollow despise everyone else, and are without any compassion for the weak. And the more they believe they are not sinners, the worse sinners they become. The Pharisees were undoubtedly of these; murmuring against the Lord because He received sinners, and from their own dried-up hearts rebuking the Fount of compassion. But because they were sick, and so sick that they did not know they were sick, the Heavenly Physician treats them as with soothing foments; saying to them:
V. 3. And he spoke to them this parable, saying:
He gave them a similitude which a man could understand from within himself, but which however referred to the Author of all men. For as the hundred is a perfect number He Himself possessed a hundred sheep; since He possessed the natures of both angels and of men.
V. 4. What man of you hath an hundred sheep: and if he shall lose one . . .
CYRIL, Catena PG: From this we learn the extent of our Saviour’s kingdom. For He says that there are a hundred sheep; bringing to a perfect number the sum of the rational creatures subject to him. For the hundred is a perfect number, being made of ten decades. But one from this number went astray, namely, the race of men who inhabited the earth. AMBROSE: A Rich Shepherd, of whom all we are but the hundredth part of what is His.
GREGORY, as above: One was lost when man through sin forsook the pastures of true life. But ninety-nine remained in the desert; for the number of the rational creatures, that is, of Angels and of men, who were created to know God, was lessened by the fall of man. Hence there follows: Doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the desert? For the angelic choirs remained in heaven. For then did man abandon heaven, when he sinned. And so that the perfect sum of the sheep might once more be made full in heaven fallen man was sought for on earth. Hence follows: And go after that which was lost till he find it.
CYRIL: Was He then displeased with the rest, but moved with compassion towards but one? Far from it. For they are safe; the Right Hand of the Most High encompasses them. But He needs must have compassion on the one perishing, that the remaining number might not be imperfect (incomplete). For this one brought back to safety the hundred will once more have its due perfection.
AUGUSTINE, Questions on the Gospels, II, 32: Or, He spoke of the ninety-nine whom He left in the desert as signifying the proud, having solitude as it were in their souls; in that they wish to be regarded as singular: to these unity is lacking for perfection. For when anyone withdraws from unity he withdraws through pride: desiring to be his own master, he does not follow that Master Who is God. With Him God numbers all who are reconciled through repentance, which in tum is gained through humility.
GREGORY NYSSA: But when the Shepherd found the sheep He did not punish it, He did not bring it back to the flock by driving it before Him, but, placing it on His own shoulders, and bearing it with gentleness, He restored it to the flock. Hence:
V. 5. And when he hath found it, lay it upon his shoulders, rejoicing.
GREGORY: He laid the sheep upon His shoulders in that taking upon Him our nature He bore the burthen of our sins. Finding the sheep He returns home; for our Shepherd, man now redeemed, has returned to His heavenly kingdom. Hence follows:
V. 6. And coming home, call together his friends and neighbours . . .
He calls the choirs of heaven His friends and neighbours, and they are His friends, because in their steadfastness they unceasingly uphold His will. They are His neighbours also, since being forever in His Presence He gives them the perfect enjoyment of the vision of His glory.
THEOPHYLACTUS: The heavenly powers are spoken of as sheep, in that every created nature in comparison with God Himself is as the beasts. In that they are rational they are called His friends and neighbours. GREGORY: And we must note that He did not say: Rejoice with the sheep that has been found, but, Rejoice with me; for our life is in truth His joy, and when we are restored to heaven we shall complete the feast of His rejoicing.
AMBROSE: Now the angels since they are rational do fittingly rejoice in the redemption of man. So there follows:
V. 7. I say to you, that even so there shall be joy in heaven . . .
Let this incite us to a just and upright life, that each man believes that his own conversion to God is pleasing to the angelic choirs; whose protection he should seek, and whose good will he should fear to lose.
GREGORY: The Lord confesses that there is more rejoicing in heaven over converted sinners than over those who remained faithful. For these oftentimes knowing themselves free of the burthen of grave sin stand indeed in the way of divine justice, yet they do not long for and sigh for the heavenly kingdom; and not infrequently they are reluctant to give themselves to the practice of the higher virtues, content in the knowledge that they do not commit any of the more grievous sins.
On the other hand it will often happen that those who are mindful of having committed certain grave sins, being moved to sorrow by this remembrance, the love of God is then kindled in their heart. And because they recognize that they had strayed from God, they make good the losses that went before with the gains that now follow. Greater therefore is the rejoicing in heaven. A leader in battle will have a warmer regard for the soldier who had first yielded and run away, and then had fought bravely back, than over the soldier who had never yielded, yet had never thrust bravely forward. So does the farmer love more the fields that now cleaned of weeds bear a fruitful crop, than the land which had never grown thorns, yet neither had it ever yielded a bountiful crop.
But with this we should also know, that there are many just in whose life there is joy so great that the repentance of no sinner whatever can awaken a greater joy. From this we may gather how pleasing to God is the humbled and afflicted heart of the just, if there is such rejoicing in heaven when the unjust through repentance rejects the evil he has done.
———————–
JUNE 30
Commemoration of St. Paul, Apostle
1. St. Paul received little attention in yesterday’s feast and so has today for his own. Until modern times, it would have been practically impossible for the pope and the clergy of Rome to celebrate each saint in his own basilica, since the two churches are a considerable distance apart. Everybody loves St. Paul, and Christians are continually drawing new inspiration and fervor from his letters in the Bible. This Apostle was born in Tarsus, in Cilicia, probably a few years after our Lord’s birth. This birthplace rendered him a Roman citizen, although his parentage was Jewish. He learned the trade of tentmaker, and went to Jerusalem, where he associated himself with some Pharisees and studied to be a doctor of Law in the school of Gamaliel. Paul (at that time known as Saul) had never seen Jesus, but he learned about the latter’s recently founded Church and fiercely persecuted it, hunting down adherents of the little sect as far away as Damascus. It was while he was on his way to this city that the miracle of his conversion occurred, and this is what the Church celebrates in today’s feast.
After his sudden conversion and his baptism in Damascus, Paul went into the desert of Arabia to prepare himself for his mission. At length, returning to Damascus, he found that the hatred of the Jews there was so intense as to make it hazardous for him to remain. He then went to Jerusalem to see Peter, and Barnabas introduced him to the Christian community. He was forced by the hatred of the Jews to leave this city also, and returned to his home city, Tarsus. About the year 42, Barnabas took him to Antioch and back to Jerusalem, whence they set out on their first missionary journey, which occupied the years 44 to 48. Paul made another such journey from 51 to 54, and a third which lasted until 58. At Pentecost of that year he was arrested by the Jews in Jerusalem as a despiser of the Law. After two years of imprisonment he was brought to trial; to avoid being handed over to the Jews, he demanded the privilege of being tried as a Roman citizen. In Rome he lived in a rented house under light surveillance. When he was acquitted, it seems that he made another missionary journey, first to Spain and then to the churches he had previously established in Asia Minor, and Greece. In 66 he returned to Rome and was beheaded there by the Emperor Nero, in the year of 67.
2. “He to whom I have given my confidence is no stranger to me, and I am fully persuaded that he, the just judge, has the means to keep my pledge safe, until my audit-day comes’ (Introit). The thoughts St. Paul had during his second imprisonment in Rome are set down in a letter to Timothy: “The spirit he has bestowed on us is not one that shrinks from danger; it is a spirit of action, of love, and of discipline. Do not blush, then for the witness thou bearest to our Lord, or for me, who am his prisoner; share all the tribulations of the gospel message as God gives thee strength. Has he not saved and called us to a vocation of holiness? It was not because of anything we had done; we owe it to his own design, to the grace lavished on us, long ages ago, in Christ Jesus. Now it has come to light, since our Savior Jesus Christ came to enlighten us; now he has annulled death, now he has shed abroad the rays of life and immortality, through that gospel which I have been appointed to herald, as an apostle and a teacher of the Gentiles. This is what I have to suffer as the result; but I am not put to the blush. He, to whom I have given my confidence, is no stranger to me, and I am fully persuaded that he has the means to keep my pledge safe, until that day comes” (II Tim, 1:7-12).
Paul was in bonds because he had become the herald, apostle, and teacher of the heathen world, happy in the privilege of suffering for his Master. He knew the one to whom he had entrusted himself; he knew the treasure he had accumulated by his efforts and sufferings in preaching the gospel; he knew that God could preserve this precious treasure undamaged for him until the day of judgment, for in God’s hands, nothing entrusted is ever lost. God would surely change all the momentary pains, borne for His sake, into eternal, imperishable joys; he would soon reward unspeakably the brief span of life the Apostle devoted to the service of the gospel Such firm belief had St. Paul, standing face to face with death, that he could rejoice in his captivity, privations, and sufferings. Faith in Jesus Christ can never disappoint anyone.
“I promise you who have forsaken all and followed me that you shall have your reward a hundredfold and obtain everlasting life” (Communion). Few have brought to such perfection as St. Paul the sacrifice of all things for love of God. First, he had persecuted the Church, as fierce champion of the traditions handed down by his forefathers (cf. Epistle). “And then, he who set me apart from the day of my birth; and called me by his grace, saw fit to make his Son known in me, so that I could preach his gospel among the Gentiles. My first thought was not to hold any consultations with any human creature; I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who had been apostles longer than myself; no, I went off into Arabia” (Epistle ).
His violent conversion had been Paul’s awakening to mysterious powers, a budding of new life; the complete capitulation of mind and will to the thoughts of God: “Lord, what .wilt thou have me do?” (Acts 9:6.) There was no looking back, no wailing over a broken life and the loss of what had previously meant everything to him; only the plea: Lord, take me from myself and give me to Thyself! He desired only to announce Christ. “Him would I learn to know, and the virtue of his resurrection, and what it means to share his sufferings, moulded into the pattern of his death, in the hope of achieving resurrection from the dead” (Phil. 3:10, 11). Paul no longer expects anything from himself and his own activities; all that he has and does is pure mercy from God. Having left all things, he will receive the hundredfold reward of an overflowing measure of participation in the passion of Christ, as foundation and measure of participation in the glory of this risen Master. Paul understood well what it means to be a Christian.
3. Our faith will not deceive us. Like Paul, we have in it a spirit of fortitude, of love, of prudence (that is of moderation), so that we take, with equal calmness, joy and sorrow. We beg the Apostle to obtain for us the continued grace of a living faith similar to his.
During the Eucharistic celebration, we take our sacrifices to the altar. In the consecration, we allow ourselves to be taken up into the Sacrifice of Christ. In Holy Communion we receive the strength to live, like St. Paul, entirely for Christ’s interests, and thus to become mature in charity—ready for participation in the sufferings and resurrection of our Lord.
Collect: O God, who by the preaching of the blessed apostle Paul didst teach a multitude of nations, grant that we may feel the power of his advocacy whose memory we are honoring. Amen.
(Benedict Baur)
THE YEAR
AND OUR CHILDREN
Planning the Family Activities for Christian Feasts and Seasons
By Mary Reed Newland (1956)
15
THE FEAST OF PENTECOST
THE GIFTS AND THEIR FRUITS
Charity, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Long-suffering, Faith, Mildness, Modesty, Continency, and Chastity, the fruits that the gifts will bear in us, will form in the most positive way our relation with our children and our ability to communicate teaching to them, as well as their receptiveness to our teaching.
Charity, Joy, and Peace are the fruits that touch our soul’s relation to God Himself. Charity is our love for God, the fruit of His love in us. Joy is our spirit of thankfulness, our joyous awareness of His goodness. Peace lets us rest in God, and be at rest with ourselves, with the members of our family, with all men. It will do us little good to know doctrine perfectly and be able to communicate it, if our teaching is not warm and glowing with these qualities.
Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Long-Suffering, Faith, Mildness are qualities that have to do with our relations with our children, our families, our neighbors. Patience “bears with” infinite numbers of trials, as every parent knows. Kindness is not irritable nor resentful, is lacking in malice. Goodness pours out goodness, warming the hearts of all around it with goodness. Long-suffering “puts up with,” waits for the answer to prayer, waits before judging or losing patience before discouragement, perseveres and does not throw up its hands and vow it “can do no more for such a one.” Faith means that we are impeccably truthful, our word is as good as our oath; we are punctual, not given to exaggeration, to flattery. Mildness means that we are gentle and forbearing, overlooking wrong, slights, and harboring no ill will or resentment.
Modesty, Continency, and Chastity have relation to ourselves.
That Modesty is a fruit of the Holy Spirit sheds much light on the overwhelming immodesty of our times. We had thought it was a decision one made for oneself. Now we discover that it comes of following the inspiration of the Holy Spirit—or else one is not modest. This rings true. Immodesty of bearing, conduct, dress, demeanor, regard for others, is like a flood unimpeded by any channels of convention. The immodest scoff at the modest as though they themselves had weighed both sides of the matter carefully and made an enlightened and uninhibited choice. One is not free to choose. Modesty is a fruit, not a choice. It is a state of mind, an attitude, which grows in the soul that follows the prompting of the Love of God. This clarifies the whole question, and should spur parents to a more careful, more zealous tending of their children’s souls, encouraging them to explain the gifts, to pray together for the grace to use the gifts.
Modesty also relates to the moderate use of things, even those things that are lawful. Here it seems especially to be one of the fruits of Counsel.
Continency means repression of the passions: the passion of anger, the passion for pleasure, for honor, for wealth; the sexual passions. Indeed, to understand that Continency is a fruit, and not a choice, does explain a lot.
Chastity relates to the chaste custody of the senses because they are the avenues to the soul by which sin enters. One easily sees that Chastity is a fruit of all the gifts: of Knowledge, which teaches how and why we are to use our senses; of Fear of the Lord, which wishes not to offend Him in the use of them; of Piety, which teaches us a respect for our neighbor’s soul and body as well as our own, and so forth.
To state that these are fruits, not choices, does not imply that we are not free to choose to be chaste or modest or continent. But there is a difference between blithely choosing, and then failing to be. The will is tempered and made strong and pure only by its co-operation with the Holy Spirit. Here is where our choice lies. We choose to work with Him or against Him, and whatever our choice is here foretells our fruits.
All of this is simplified, in an effort to relate the use of our gifts in a practical way to our daily life. We have learned so much about our bodies—and so little about our souls. To study the liturgy for Pentecost, the feast of the Holy Spirit, will profit us only in the most meager way if we do not make continual effort to know the Holy Spirit. How can we praise with the rest of the Church, in the prayers and Masses of the season, when we barely know what it is we praise? We know the work of God the Father as our Creator, and the work of God the Son as our Redeemer. Let us strive to know the Holy Spirit and His work, for He is our Sanctifier. Then on Pentecost we will understand what it means that He pours forth His grace upon us. We will know how to go about using His grace, and we will be able to thank Him with full hearts.
(To be continued)
—————————
Father Krier will be in Los Angeles July 2. He will be in Pahrump, Nevada on July 11 and Eureka, Nevada, July 19. On July 20 He will be in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
—————————
For those who purchase through Amazon, please help support the work here at Saint Joseph’s by going through this link: http://smile.amazon.com/ch/94-2855162
—————————–
The topics of Faith and Morals will correspond to the Roman Catholic Faith in Tradition and the Magisterium. The News will be of interest. The commentaries are for the reader to ponder and consider. The e-mail address will be for you to provide thought for consideration. The donations will be to support the continuation of this undertaking.
While the Newsletter is free of charge it is not free of cost. Please consider supporting St Joseph’s Catholic Church with a tax – deductible donation by clicking the secure link: Donate
Or if you prefer send a check to
Catholic Tradition Newsletter
c/o St Joseph’s Catholic Church
131 N. 9th St
Las Vegas, NV 89101