Mindful, as we presbyters dutifully are, of the approach at the end of this month of the Feast of Christ the King, I looked out the Form of Consecration ordered by the dear old Sacred Congregation of Rites (28 April 1926) to be made on that Day.
I discovered a curiosity. On the Internet I found an English translation one paragraph longer than the Latin form printed in the current (editio quarta 1999) Enchiridion Indulgentiarum.
That missing paragraph prays for those still involved in the darkness of Idolatry or Islamism, and concludes "Turn thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race once called thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Saviour; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life".
I'm not sure that the word "once" is necessary, and I do think that this form of words, to a pedantic or already prejudiced mind, might obscure the facts that it was only some Jews in one particular place at one particular time who "called down the Blood of the Saviour" ... and by no means all the Jews of every time and place. How could it have been? Our blessed Lady, surely, did not join in that cry, and she is a Jewess, the Daughter of Sion. Similarly, it was not all the Romans, or all the soldiers, of all the times and places, who drove in the nails, but one particular infantry platoon.
Yet some such prayer seems all the more appropriate as we approach the End Times, when all Israel will be brought in (Romans 11:13 to end, especially 26). We are all impoverished if we forget the eschatological dimensions of the Apostolic Preaching. (S Paul's teaching about the Faithful Remnant is also important.)
And our Faith risks being unbalanced if we forget the importance in Divine Providence of that remarkable People.
Thank you, Father. That is an excellent point. One is quite irritated when one hears people say "the Jews," forgetting that Our Lady was Jewish, along with the Apostles and the disciples.
ReplyDeleteIt is the same canard one hears from Irish nationlists. "The English" caused the famine in Ireland, when it was Sir Charles Trevelyan, a Malthusian, who was largely responsible, or perhaps the Russell Ministry.
Any older missal or strict reprints (altho these will use the not so good Mass for the Feast of the Assumption of c. 1951 when the Dogma was proclaimed) has that text. It is one of these many things which sound harsh and impolite, but are correct.
ReplyDeleteIn our church we pray this act of consecration of mankind to the Sacred Heart of Jesus according to the original, longer version, though not in Latin, but in the vernacular.
ReplyDeleteDaer Father. The Covenant applied to all Jews not particular Jews and it is not wrong to say that all Jews suffered the curses (Covenants come with both blessing and curses)any more than it is wrong to say the Japanese attacked These United States at Pearl Harbor even though not every Jap then living was involved in the attack.
ReplyDeleteIn Kkgs we read how innocent Jews suffered owing to the perfidy of their Kings.
When Ezechiel identified the chosen people as scorpions we understand he is not describing every individual Jew as, obviously quite a few were righteous.
One must the distinguish corporate liability of the Jewish Nation as a whole (triggered by the Jewish leadership stratum's guilt for deicide, the leadership being the "directing mind" to use a corporate law expression, of that nation, and the determinant of its behaviour - a fundamental principle of corporate law) and that of individual Jewish persons. The fact that individual liability is not equal to corporate liability does not negative such corporate liability.
ReplyDeleteAvB.
P.S.: Si Dominae cujusdam oxoniensis in missis memineris ...
No reason for you to know this, but in the eyes of GOD the word Jewess has been used so many times by evil people for unChristian purposes that it is one of the few words that no longer should be used by well-meaning people.
ReplyDeleteEngland is a wonderful nation, but it has sorely misused and disrespected its heritage. I long for the days when, after repenting of its harsh and unChristian ways, the English people again can speak a beautiful language, untarnished by so many wicked generations of foul-mouthed foolish and vain ancestors.
So, a generalization of guilt regarding the Jewish people is wrong and bigoted but the grand generalization of accusing the English nation in a blanket statement of "disrespect[ing] its heritage" and in need of "repenting of its harsh and unChristian ways" is not bigoted?! The woke mentality never ceases to amaze me.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTo use the motto (not exactly "a tag") of the great St. John Henry Newman is not the mendacious act of "hijacking" as so meanly interpreted above, but in fact a gesture of gratitude and homage to the incomparable English scholar convert, to whom I owe much. The old adage that "imitation is the highest form of praise" applies in this case. The above commentator does what the Woke invariably do: insult, assume the worst in those they deem their opponents, and project their own deficiencies. Only a mean-spirited and illogical interpretation---two of the signal insulting responses of the Woke, as they typically have no cogent arguments---would see it in those nasty terms. As for being woke, I notice that it was not I in these comments who couched historical perspective/discussion in the tired, manipulative, and trite Marxist propaganda of race and gender (as if using "Jewess," as Father Hunwicke does in this blog, for example---a somewhat old-fashioned but quite common and normally innocent way to refer to a female Jewish person, as in actress, prophetess, etc.---were a term of abuse or bigotry). As for praying for the conversion of dear England, since (mercifully) you do not know me, I must wonder how you know that I do not do that on a regular basis---which I do. Leave it to the Woke to attribute the worst interpretation and motives to everything and everyone that does not submissively conform to to their warped world view---and to attribute to others what they themselves do and are.
ReplyDeleteWell God bless you, at least you care about the issue. I assumed you are not English because your style of argumentation is so - to be fair - Prussian (at best).
ReplyDeleteI believe each of us is destined to be something wonderful in heaven, if we are not so foolish as to stop hoping and trusting in God and loving God, and I know how far the English nation has fallen from its heavenly destiny. I don't think you --- with your guttersnipe and ignorant defense of the typical snide English use of the word Jewess - know how far the English nation has fallen. I pity your ignorance. You say words of spite towards me, my young friend, but you - a woke Prussian, I think, in a way you have not yet understood - do not know how much I wish those who are fortunate enough to be English could see England as I have seen it, at least in dreams or in moments of prayer, an England that is as much England, in a better world, despite its past sins, as any given soul is as much as that soul can be, in a better world, despite the poor soul's past sins. Please know, my young friend, that I pray for people like you every day. Feel free to have the last word, tell me again about your hatred for the "Woke", and your hatred for me. Newman would not have approved, but you never claimed to be Newman.
I am neither young nor "Prussian" nor hate you---so much for the depths of your insights. Your unfounded assumptions betray your own ignorance. As is typical with the Woke, such assumptions are ridiculous and irresponsibly strewn about. I do, however, dislike your generalizations and unrecognized affinity with the corrosive Woke frame of mind that aligns with the projects of the worst enemies of our religion and of Western civilization---reducing irresponsibly everything to the handy and manipulative tropes of race and gender. By the way, you have no idea what linguistic English usage God would approve nor what Newman would have approved or not---these risible assumptions are just the fruits of blind hubris. You can have the last word, as I certainly will not waste my time or the time of the readers of this blog in revisiting this particular comments section. And, no, I am not your friend but your ideological adversary who will still pray for you and hope to meet you joyously and in harmony in Heaven, where the horrors of wokery will have no place.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy friend, I don't think you are right to think of yourself as "my" adversary - I think that is (while not a lie) not true. Anyway, I offered you the last word on the subject, so I appreciate your hopes for a heavenly future, and God Bless.
ReplyDelete