Vol 15 Issue 14 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
April 2, 2022 ~ Saint Francis of Paula, opn!
1. Sacrament of Penance
2. Passion Sunday
3. Saints Agape, Chionia and Irene
4. Family and Marriage
5. Articles and notices
Dear Reader:
April is the Month of the Blessed Sacrament. It is sometimes forgotten since we are preoccupied with Holy Week and Easter. Many parishes have First Holy Communion during this month of April, but our schedule places Holy Communion in the month of May—the Month of Mary. That April is appropriate to be the Month of the Blessed Sacrament is due to the fact that Our Lord Jesus Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper on the first Holy Thursday, which generally falls in the month of April. Also, with March dedicated to Saint Joseph and May dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary it is fitting that having April dedicated to the Blessed Sacrament causes us to that the three months combined represent the Holy Family, the earthly trinity—and how best when one thinks of Jesus’ hidden life in Nazareth with Joseph and Mary, to think of His hiddenness in the Blessed Sacrament. While we hear during Holy Week while reading the Passion Gospels the words of Our Lord, What? Could you not watch one hour with me? (Matt. 26:40; cf. Mark 14:37), we are touched by the reality that Our Lord Jesus Christ is in the Tabernacle in the Church alone. If we are able to spend some extra time during this month with Our Lord hidden in the Tabernacle, let us do so. In His desire to be with us, He remains in the Church for our benefit.
As always, enjoy the readings provided for your benefit.—The Editor
_______________
WHAT IS THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE
SECTION 1
The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins
CHAPTER 2
The Properties of the Church’s Power to Forgive Sim
§ 5. The Church’s Power to Forgive sins as a True Power of Absolution
By the Church’s Absolution sins are truly and immediately remitted. (De fide.)
According to the view of the Reformers, absolution is a mere declaration that sins are forgiven on the ground of fiducial Faith: nudum ministerium pronuntiandi et declarandi, remissa esse peccata confitenti, modo tantum credat se esse absolutum (D 919). As against this the Church firmly insists that the power of absolution is a true and real power of absolution, by which sins committed against God are immediately remitted.
The proof derives from John 20, 23. According to the words of Jesus, the act of the remission of sins, performed by the Apostles and by their successors, has the effect that sins are remitted by God. There is a causal connection between the active remitting and the passive being remitted.
The interpretation of the Reformers is exegetically untenable as they take the expression remittere to mean two things in the one sentence: “Those to whom you declare that sins are remitted to these they are remitted.”
It is true that the scope of the Church’s power to forgive sins was disputed in Christian antiquity, but the representatives of Montanistic and Novatianistic rigorism held, just as firmly as the representatives of the Church, to the fact that the Church truly and immediately forgives sins in addition to its power of canonical punishment by exclusion from the Church. The originator of the Edict on Penance transmitted by Tertuliian declared: “I remit the sins of adultery . . . and of fornication” (D 43). St. Cyprian speaks of a forgiveness of sins accomplished by the priests (remissio facta per sacerdotes: De lapsis 29). St. John Chrysostom, in a contrast between the Old Testament and the New Testament priesthood, expressly rejects the declaration theory: “The Jewish priests had the power of cleansing from bodily leprosy, or rather in no wise to cleanse, but merely to declare the cleansed to be clean. . . . As against this, our priests received the power, not merely of declaring an unclean soul, instead of a leprous body, to be clean, but of entirely purifying it” (De sacerd. III 6).
§ 6. The Universality of the Church’s Power to Forgive Sins
The Church’s power to forgive sins extends to all sin without exception. (De fide.)
The attempts of the Montanists and the Novatianists to limit the scope of the Church’s power to forgive sins, were rejected as heretical by the Church. According to the teaching of the Council of Trent, Penance was instituted as a reconciliation of the faithful with God “as often as they fall into sin after /422/ Baptism” (quoties post baptismum in peccata labuntur). D 911; cf. 895, 430. It follows from this that Penance can be repeated at will, and that all sins without exception committed after Baptism can be remitted by the Church’s power to forgive sins.
Christ promised to His Church and transmitted to His Church the power to forgive sins without limitation. The expressions quodcumque solveris (Mt. 16, 19), quaecumque solveritis (Mt. 18, 18), quorum remiseritis peccata (John 20, 23) show that the power in question is conceived to be as inclusive and as general as possible. In addition to this Christ transferred His mission, in which the unlimited power to forgive sins is contained, to the Church (John 20, 21). He Himself put this power into operation by the forgiveness of the most grievous sins. Cf. John 7, 53 to 8, 11; Luke 7, 36-50; Luke 23, 43; Mt. 26, 75.
In the time of the Apostles, St. Paul exercised the power of absolution given to him by Christ, by the re-acceptance of a sinner at Corinth, who had given grave scandal, probably by the crime of incest (2 Cor. 2, 10; cf. I Cor. 5, 1 et seq.).
The passages cited by the opponents of this doctrine, Mt. 12, 31 et seq.; Mk. 3, 28 et seq.; Luke 12, 10 (sin against the Holy Ghost), and Hebr. 6, 4-6, refer to the sin of obduracy, which because of a lack of due dispositions, cannot be forgiven. 1 John 5, 16 does not treat of the power to forgive sins, but speaks of the exclusion of those lapsed from Christ from the intercessory prayer of the Church.
In Christian antiquity the generality of the Church’s power to forgive sins is witnessed by the Pastor Hermae, St. Dionysius of Corinth, St. Irenaeus of Lyons, St. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian in the work De poenitentia, St. Cyprian, St. Pacian, St. Ambrose and St. Augustine (cf. Par. 4). Invoking Holy Writ St. Pacian says: ” He says whatsoever you shall loose; He excepts nothing whatsoever. He says whatsoever, be it great or little ” (Ep. 3, 12). St. Ambrose expresses himself similarly: “God makes no distinction; He promised His mercy to all, and has conferred the power of forgiveness on all His priests without exception” (De poenit. I 3, 10).
In spite of the basic recognition of the universality of the power to forgive sin, the discipline of penance was very strict in the primitive Church. Public penance was granted once only, and absolution of very grievous sins was sometimes deferred to the end of the sinner’s life, and in individual exceptional cases refused altogether. In order to meet an exaggerated rigorism, the Council of Nice (325), in can. 13, resolved that: “in regard to those in a dying condition, the ancient Church rule should be observed that nobody departing this life be deprived of the last and most necessary viaticum.” D 57. Cf. D 95, in, 147.
§ 7. The Judicial Character of the Church’s Power to Forgive Sins
The exercise of the Church’s power to forgive sins is a judicial act. (De fide.)
The Council of Trent defined, against the Declaration Theory of the Reformers, that the priestly absolution is a judicial act: Si quis dixerit /423/ absolutionem sacramentalem sacerdotis non esse actum iudicialem, A.S. D 919. Christ, as the same Council declared, appointed priests: “as overseers and judges (tamquam praesides et iudices), who are given the competency by virtue of the power of the keys, to pronounce the forgiveness or the retention of sins.” D 899.
A juridical process demands three essential elements: a) Judicial power (auctoritas iudicalis); b) Knowledge of the state of the facts (cognitio causae); and c) Judicial sentence (sentenria iudicialis).
a) Christ transferred the power to forgive sins to the Apostles and to their legitimate successors. The incumbents of this power exercise it in His name and in His authority.
b) The power to forgive sins is twofold, since it includes the power to remit or to retain. The application of this powei must not be arbitrary, but must be related to the objective norm of the Divine law and to the state of conscience of the sinner. It follows from this that the possessor of the power must know and conscientiously examine the objective facts and the subjective state of the penitent.
c) In view of his investigation of the guilt and disposition of the sinner, the priest, in his capacity of God’s representative, pronounces the judicial sentence, by virtue of which the sins are forgiven or retained. The retention, like the remission, is a positive judicial sentence (sententia retentionis: D 899), not merely a non-using of the power of absolution. The imposition of works of atonement is also an act of judicial power.
The conviction that the forgiveness of sins was a judicial act is clearly expressed in the practice of the Early Church. After the confession of sin and the imposition of penance the sinner was formally ejected from the communion of the faithful (excommunicated) and, when the penance had been performed, solemnly re-accepted. Tertullian designated the Court, which tried the sinner, “a supremely significant prehrninary judgment of the future judgment” (summum futuri iudicii praeiudicium; Apol. 39). St. John Chrysostom says in view of Mt. 18, 18: “The judge sits on earth; the Lord acts according to His servant, and whatever the latter judges on earth, that judgment is ratified in heaven” (Hom. 5, 1 in Is. 6). (To be continued)
————————–
The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers
M. F. Toal
THE GOSPEL OF THE SUNDAY
JOHN viii. 46
At that time Jesus said to the multitudes of the Jews: Which of you shall convince me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not.
The Jews therefore answered, and said to him: Do not we say well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus answered: I have not a devil: but I honour my Father, and you have dishonoured me. But I seek not my own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth. Amen, amen, I say to you: If any man keep my word, he shall not see death for ever.
The Jews therefore said: Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest: If any man keep my word, he shall not taste death for ever. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? and the prophets are dead. Whom dost thou make thyself?
Jesus answered: If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father that glorifieth me, of whom you say that he is your God. And you have not known him, but I know him. And if I shall say that I know him not, I shall be like you, a liar. But I do know him, and do keep his word. Abraham your father rejoiced that he might see my day: he saw it and was glad.
The Jews therefore said to him: Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was made, I am.
They took up stones therefore to cast at him. But Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.
ST JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, BISHOP AND DOCTOR
On the Respect Due to the Church of God, and to the Sacred Mysteries
I believe that many of those who long ago forsook us, and deserted to the gatherings of iniquity, today are present among us. And I wish that I might know them with certainty, that I might cast them forth from this sacred abode, not that they might remain shut out, but that having mended their ways they might return again. Just as fathers, should their sons provoke them, are wont to drive them from the house, and forbid them the table; not indeed that they may for ever be deprived of these things, but that being so reproved they may become better, because of this, and may be restored with due honour to the paternal inheritance.
This shepherds too are wont to practise. For they separate the sheep with mange from those that are healthy, and when they are cured of the disease they return to the flock; and so the rest are not infected. It is for this reason we desire to know them. And though we cannot tell them with our eyes, these words of ours mark them; and where it touches their conscience, it will readily persuade them to withdraw themselves in secret, teaching them that he alone is of the household who reveals a disposition worthy of the Christian way of living: just as he who while living unworthily becomes a partaker of this sacred Supper, though he approaches hither in the body, yet is he cast out, and more truly sent forth than those who have been shut out, and who may not partake of the sacred table.
For these latter have been excluded according to God’s laws, and while remaining without have yet a good hope of presently returning; and if they seek to amend their faults, they can return again with a pure conscience to the Church from whence they were banished. But they who have stained themselves, and have been warned that they must not return before being purified of the blemish of their sins, and then conduct themselves shamelessly, make more grevious their wound. For there is no sin so grevious as shamelessness after sin committed.
Many partake of the Sacred Mysteries but once in the year; others twice, others oftener. Who among these are we to praise? They who come once? Or they who come oftener? Or those who come less frequently? Neither those who come once nor they who come oftener, nor they who come more rarely, but they who come with a clean heart, with unclouded conscience, with a manner of life that is without reproach. Let such as these approach: they who are not of this kind, let them not come even once, for they take judgement and damnation unto themselves. For as food that has the power to nourish, if it enter into one who has a stomach infected with disease, injures and aggravates everything, and becomes a cause rather than a remedy for sickness, so is it with this tremendous Mystery.
Will you partake of this spiritual table, the table of the King, and then soil your body again with filth? Do you anoint it with ointments, and then fill it up with foulness? Do you consider that it suffices for the forgiveness of the sins of the whole year if you at each returning year partake of communion, and then at the end of the week give yourself again to your former conduct?
Tell me this. If you after forty days were restored to health again from a serious illness, should you return again to those things that earlier had brought on your sickness, would you not squander uselessly all your former efforts? And if the things of the body are spoiled in this way, how much more the things that depend on our own free will and decision? And if there be bitterness in your mouth, you do not eat even the simplest food: how then, I ask you, when there is so great foulness in your soul do you dare to partake of the Sacred Mysteries? What forgiveness is there for this? For the Apostle says: Whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord (I Cor. xi. 29); that is, he shall have the same guilt, and the same punishment, as those who crucified Christ. For as those butchers became guilty of His Blood, so likewise are they who partake unworthily of the Eucharist. For as he who has tom the royal purple, or bespattered it with mud, has equally insulted the one who wears it, so those who take to themselves the Body of the Lord, and receive It with an impure soul, treat Him with the same mockery as they who dishonour the royal apparel.
The Jews put Him to death upon a cross; they who receive Him with unworthy hearts dishonour Him. Therefore, though the sins may be diverse, the affront is the same. This troubles many of you, this confounds many, this gnaws at the conscience of many who listen to me; and not alone the consciences of you who hear me, but even more than you, it troubles our conscience who speak to you. For this teaching is for every man: for all have the same afflictions, and for this reason I set before you the common remedies. This is the doing of the divine benevolence: that he who speaks, and he who listens, share the same nature and are subject to the same laws: so each alike is guilty who offends them. And why is this? That he may correct with moderation; that he may be prompt to bestow forgiveness on those who have sinned; that mindful of his own infirmity he will not make his rebuke unendurable.
If therefore there is one among you of those who gather together with you in the Church who is a fornicator, and you observe him approaching the sacred mysteries, say to the dispenser of them: This man is unworthy of the mysteries: exclude him who is unworthy of our sanctities. For if such a man is not worthy to declare the justices of God (Ps. xlix. 16), consider how he adds to his punishment should he touch the sacred table; and not alone he, but you also who countenance him. For He said not: ‘and you committed adultery’; but: and with adulterers thou hast been a partaker (Ps. xlix. 18).
Save us, what an evil, to cover up the rottenness of another! For the Lord says that you make yourself a sharer of the retribution that will come to them; and rightly too. For the other had the excuse of passion; though this is no justification for pardon. You had not even this. Why then, since you shared not in his pleasure, do you make yourself an associate and a partaker of his punishment? Neither let you make to me that remark which is laden with selfishness: What is it to me? I mind my own affairs. For then do you best care for your own affairs, if you care for them by helping the need of your neighbour; as Paul has also said: Let no man seek his own, but that which is another’s (I Cor. x. 24), so that he may thus find what is his own. For when one who has sinned sees that all tum away from him, he will then come to see that his sin is something evil and reprehensible. But should he see that others do not consider his conduct to be unworthy, and accept him without complaint, and even encourage and abet him, then will the approval of others, abetting his own corrupt soul corrupt also the judgement of his conscience.
Many, not submitting to these grave corrections have after their return among us been very indignant, and have complained that we turned them away from the Sacred Table and shut them out from Communion. And so I am forced to speak of these things, so that you may understand that I do not turn away, but seek to unite; nor do I repel or exclude, but seek rather by trials to help you. For the fear of chastisement falling on the consciences of those who do wrong destroys and consumes sin as fire touching wax, and while it remains there preserves the soul clean and undefiled, and thus brings us to a greater degree of confidence. And just as the physician who ministers bitter medicine to those whom food disgusts drives out distressing poisons and helps to revive the lost appetite, so that our accustomed food is eaten with even greater appetite, so does he who uses sharp words, and helps to purify the evil thoughts of the heart, and lift the heavy burden of sin, allowing the conscience to breathe, and thus prepares the soul to taste with even greater delight the precious Body of the Lord.
Rightly then has the blessed Paul told us: Obey your prelates and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls (Heb. xiii. 17). You no doubt carefully look after your own affairs, and if they are well ordered you have no account to render for those of others. But a priest, though his own life should be well ordered, yet, if he has not an earnest care for yours also will go down to Gehenna with the reprobate. And often, though not betrayed by sins of his own, he perishes because of those of others.
And since we have spoken sharply to those who partake unworthily of the Sacred Mysteries, it is necessary that we speak also to you who minister them, that you may dispense those Gifts with great carefulness: for otherwise your chastisement will not be light. For should you while knowing that a man is unworthy permit him to partake of the Sacred Table, his blood will be required at your hands. And should he be a general of the imperial army, or a Prefect, or even one whose head is encircled by the imperial diadem, and should he approach while unworthy, forbid him. Yours is a higher authority than his. Take care not to provoke the Lord, by not purifying His Body.
Do not offer a sword in place of food. And should such a man, because of his infirmity, approach so that he may take part, fear not to forbid him. Fear the Lord God, not man. If you fear a man, he will scorn you; and you will anger God. If you fear God you will be dear to him, and revered by men. Should you fear of yourself to do this, then send him to me. I shall not suffer him to attempt to do this. I would give up life itself first, rather than communicate the Blood of the Lord to the unworthy. Far better to be deprived of one’s own life, for God’s sake, than to save that life, and be deprived of God; to Whom be honour, praise and glory now and for ever. Amen.
———————–
APRIL 3: SS. AGAPE, CHIONIA and IRENE, VIRGINS AND MARTYRS (A.D. 304)
IN the year 303, the Emperor Diocletian issued a decree rendering it an offence punishable by death to possess or retain any portion of the sacred Christian writings. Now there were living at that time at Thessalonica in Macedonia three Christian sisters, Agape, Chionia and Irene, the daughters of pagan parents, who owned several volumes of the Holy Scriptures. These books were kept so carefully concealed that they were not discovered until the following year when the house was searched. after the sisters had been arrested upon another charge.
One day, when Dulcitius the governor had taken his seat on the tribune, his secretary Artemesius read the charge-sheet, which had been handed in by the public informer. It ran as follows: “The pensioner Cassander to Dulcitius, President of Macedonia, greeting. I send to your Highness six Christian women and one man who have refused to eat meat sacrificed to the gods. Their names are Agape, Chionia, Irene, Cassia, Philippa and Eutychia, and the man is called Agatho.”
The president said to the women, who had been arrested, “Fools, how can you be so mad as to disobey the commands of the emperors?” Then, turning to the man, he asked, “Why will you not eat of the meat offered to the gods, like other subjects?” “Because I am a Christian,” replied Agatho. “Do you adhere to your determination?” “Certainly I do.” Dulcitius next questioned Agape as to her convictions. “I believe in the living God,” was her answer, ” and I will not lose all the merit of my past life by one evil action.” “And you, Chionia, what have you to say for yourself?” “That I believe in the living God and therefore I cannot obey the emperor’s orders.” Irene replied when asked why she did not comply, “Because I was afraid of offending God.” “What do you say, Cassia?” inquired the judge. “That I desire to save my soul.” “Then will you not partake of the sacred offerings?” “No, indeed, I will not.” Philippa declared that she would rather die than obey, and so did Eutychia, a young woman recently widowed who was about to become a mother. Because of her condition, she was separated from her companions and taken back to prison, while Dulcitius proceeded to press the others further. “Agape”, he inquired, “what have you decided? Will you act as we do, who are obedient and dutiful to the emperor?” “It is not right to obey Satan”, she answered, ” I am not to be influenced by anything that you can say.” “And you, Chionia”, persisted the president, “what is your ultimate decision?” “My decision remains unchanged.” “Have you not some books or writings relating to the religion of the impious Christians?” he asked. “We have none: the emperor now on the throne has taken them all from us”, was the reply. To inquiries as to who had converted them to Christianity Chionia would only say, “Our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Then Dulcitius gave sentence: “I condemn Agape and Chionia to be burnt alive for having out of malice and obstinacy acted in contravention of the divine edicts of our lords the Emperors and Caesars, and for continuing to profess the rash and false religion of the Christians, which all pious persons abhor. As for the other four”, he added, “let them be kept in close captivity during my pleasure.”
After the martyrdom of her elder sisters, Irene was again brought before the president, who said to her, “Your folly is patent enough now, for you retained in your possession all those books, parchments, and writings relating to the doctrine of the impious Christians which you were forced to acknowledge when they were produced before you, although you had previously denied that you had any . . . Yet even now, notwithstanding your crimes, you may find pardon if you will worship the gods . . . . Are you prepared to do so?” “No”, replied Irene, “for those who do so are in danger of hell fire.” “Who persuaded you to hide those books and papers for so long?” “Almighty God, who has commanded us to love Him unto death. For that reason we prefer to be burnt alive rather than give up the Holy Scriptures and betray Him.” “Who knew that you had those writings hidden away?” “Nobody”, replied Irene, “except Almighty God; for we concealed them even from our servants lest they should inform against us.” “Where did you hide yourselves last year when the emperors’ edict was first published?” “Where it pleased God: in the mountains.” “With whom did you live?” persisted the judge. “We were in the open air—sometimes on one mountain, sometimes on another.” ” Who supplied you with food?” “God, who gives food to all flesh.” “Was your father privy to it?” “No, he had not the least idea of it.” “Which of your neighbours was in on the secret?” “Inquire in the neighbourhood and make your search.” “After you returned from the mountains did you read those books to anyone?” “They were hidden in the house, but we dared not produce them: we were in great trouble because we could no longer read them day and night as we had been accustomed to do.”
Irene’s sentence was a more cruel one than that of her sisters. Dulcitius declared that she like them had incurred the death penalty for having concealed the books, but that her sufferings should be more lingering. He therefore ordered that she should be stripped and exposed in a house of ill fame which was kept closely guarded. As, however, she appeared to be miraculously protected from molestation, the governor afterwards caused her to be put to death. The acts say that she suffered at the stake, being compelled to throw herself into the flames. But this is improbable, and some later versions speak of her being shot in the throat with an arrow.
As we read of these noble women who preferred to die rather than yield up their copies of the Sacred Scriptures, and as we consider the loving care lavished by the monks of a later generation upon copying and illuminating the gospels, we may with advantage question ourselves as to the value which we attach to God’s written word. Irene and her sisters were distressed when they could not read the sacred books at all hours. Many of us in these latter ages do not even read them every day although we have every inducement and encouragement to do so. The very facilities which we have for obtaining cheap and well-printed Bibles seem to render us less appreciative and less studious of the word of God—in spite of the exhortations of our pastors. There is a salutary lesson for all in the story of Agape, Chionia and Irene.
[The names mean Love, Snow and Peace in Greek—Editor]
(Butler’s Lives of the Saints)
_______________
CANA IS FOREVER
COUNSELS FOR BEFORE AND AFTER MARRIAGE
By Charles Hugo Doyle (1949)
Chapter Four: PROXIMATE PREPARATION FOR MARRIAGE
Emotional maturity
Let us consider another and a most important requisite for happiness in marriage: emotional maturity. Emotion has the same physical basis as a mental reaction but the primary end of emotion is to move. For instance, a person who is hungry will be moved to steal something to eat; a person who is afraid will be moved to shout his lungs out or run like a rabbit. The examples of emotional stimuli I have mentioned list but two of the four primary emotions, namely hunger and fear, while the other two are rage and pain. All other emotions are offshoots of these four; e.g., anxiety, worry, sorrow, admiration, scorn, revenge, shame, envy, reproach, and a multitude of others. Without emotions you would be a moron; with an overdose of emotion you are a social misfit, an abnormal member of society.
Control of emotions, mastery of emotions, is a very important part of the training for living. Without control emotions can, if allowed to run rampant, bring on a neurosis, ulcers of the stomach, or can even lead to a prison cell. Anger, for instance, can move one man to use harsh words, another man to strike his wife, and yet another man to kill. Which of these three would you say had the most control and which man most lacked control? Nothing is more destructive of marital bliss than is emotional immaturity, and oddly enough, a person may be perfectly developed physically and intellectually and yet be emotionally immature. For instance, the adolescent or grown man who pouts for long periods over real or imaginary wrongs, who flies into towering rages, hollers and curses; or the young teen-age girl or young woman who goes into fits of anger and screams, slams doors, stamps her feet, dashes to her room and throws herself face down on the bed to pour out her tears, are people who are emotionally immature.
Here is a list of other things that indicate emotional immaturity.
(1) Gloominess over little failures
(2) Pessimism over slight difficulties
(3) Complete panic when frightened or in an emergency
(4) Throwing or breaking things when angry or crossed
(5) Tears when thwarted, disappointed or upset
(6) Selfishness, aggressiveness, rebelliousness, stubbornness
(7) Needless and prolonged worry over trifles
(8) Morbid fears, strong hates, and unreasonable prejudices.
But how, you ask, may one acquire emotional control?
To this I answer:
(1) Know yourself as you really are.
(2) Be individual. Try to pick your own hats and clothes.
(3) Fight your own battles.
(4) Don’t seek sympathy from others.
(5) Don’t feel sorry for yourself.
(6) Never be indecisive.
(7) Avoid too much sentimentality over persons or causes.
(8) Resist parental over-possessiveness.
(9) Check first signs of jealousy.
(10) Resist feelings of depression. Laugh at yourself.
(11) Train your emotions as you would your will.
(12) Learn to check your tongue when you are angry.
If this looks like a superhuman task it is not so difficult if you keep in mind that control of emotions does not mean suppression. Control of emotions means direction into channels that are founded on reality and bring material and spiritual satisfactions to you. Victory over self is achieved with great effort! It may spell the difference between happiness and unhappiness here and hereafter.
Anyone who plans marriage ought to make certain that he or she is emotionally mature and that the mate is also grown up emotionally, for without this maturity such a marriage is certain to be unhappy if not doomed to failure.
Vocational maturity
There is one more maturity that is equally important and should be well founded before any thought of marriage enters one’s head, and that is vocational maturity. By vocational maturity is meant simply the know-how and acquisition of a trade, position, or profession that will permit the future husband to support a family and the acquisition of vocational knowledge that will permit a young woman to manage a home and wisely govern her children.
No wise young man will consider marriage until he has spent at least two years working at his chosen trade, profession, or position. Wisdom also demands that savings of from $1200 [written in 1947] upward ought to have been laid away against the wedding day, as well as a permanent assured monthly salary income. It is an accepted rule that the first week’s pay ought to be large enough to pay the rent for the month. No fear is so haunting, so destructive, as that which results from economic insecurity. Love and an empty stomach are poor companions. Too, any young woman who considers marriage, yet possesses no skill in homemaking, cooking, and housekeeping, is one who is asking for trouble.
Prudence in choosing a potential mate
Now we come to the very important consideration of when and how to choose a mate, what to look for in a mate, and how not to spoil your chances of marriage.
All authorities on the subject agree that the best age for a man to marry is between twenty-two and twenty-nine and for a woman between twenty-one and twenty-eight. Allowing oneself a year at the most for courtship and engagement, a girl ought not to consider seriously any one individual before she is twenty, and no man ought to consider making a final choice of a life companion until he is at least twenty-one.
And how is a choice to be made? Believe me, there is a lot more skill than chance to picking the right person in marriage. It would appear prudent to write down a list of the qualities that you insist your one and only should have and then keep your eyes and your heart open. Here are a few suggestions for that list:
Good morals
Intelligence
Fine physique
Neatness
Sportsmanship
Sincerity
Dependability
Good sense of humor
Truthfulness
Consideration for others
Thoughtfulness
Nice manners
Modesty
Personality
Industry
Good family background
When making your list, be sure you determine whether you have these required qualities yourself—if not, set out to acquire the ones you lack. The time of proximate preparation should be spent not only in the eradication of evil habits but also in the acquisition of the virtues needed for happiness in marriage.
If diligent search has led you to believe that there is no one in your immediate circle of friends and acquaintances with the minimum of the ideals you have set for your future wife or
husband, you should circulate. Join a club in a neighboring parish, attend church socials, political organizations, and sports groups, or mixed bowling leagues. Hold out, though, for a formal
introduction and don’t accept the two-toned whistle or the moron’s mating call of “Hi, Toots!” as any substitute.
A “knock-down” to someone who appears to have most of the qualities you have set for a suitable “steady” is but the beginning. An introduction alone is useless without the follow-through. Here is where tact and common sense plus warmth of character come into play. Girls who want to know a man better will ask him where he lives and what he does, thus affording him a chance to talk about himself—the male failing. It places the girl at the receiving end of the conversation, makes her a good listener. If he stalls, start him on the weather, sports, his home, brothers and sisters. Get around to speaking about church, and let him know right from the start that you are a Catholic.
If things progress according to plan, invent a little house party during the following week. Tell him you were planning to have a few friends in and ask him if he would join them. In the case of a young man making a play for a nice young lady he has just met, he might suggest a movie with a couple of friends or a dance.
(To be continued.)
————————-
Father Krier will be in Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 5. He will be in Pahrump, Nevada, April 7 and Eureka, Nevada, on April 21.
————————-
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
Visit us on the Worldwide Web: http://stjosephlv.org
e-mail news and comments to: tcatholicn@yahoo.com