Last year, the Archbishop of Dijon (Yes!!) expelled some clergy from his diocese because they refused ever to concelebrate with him.
In one sense, this is interesting news, because it implies that we now have a generation of senior prelates who have not even read the Conciliar documents of Vatican II.
But it is sad to witness a new wave of persecution. And ... even more worryingly ... his Grace claimed that his actions are merely a prolepsis of what PF was shortly to enact (Traditionis custodes had not then been published.)
I do not believe that Concelebration is something which we all need to avoid, totally and invariably, as an absolutely essential matter of conscience. From time to time, I republish old pieces which make clear the Magisterial basis of my belief.
But the Dijon deed is darkly dirty.
You see, what his Grace is doing is to use the old dodge, beloved of persecutors, of the Trick Question.
I have heard of a Scandinavian Lutheran ordinand who was suspected of having doubts about the Ordination of Women. His 'bishop' dealt with the matter by calling in his 'chaplain', a 'womanpriest', to celebrate the 'Eucharist' there and then on the study table, so that the young man could demonstrate his conformity and submission by 'communicating'.
During the penal times in our own country, Recusants hauled before the courts could get the Tudor law off their backs by simply ... going to Church! Elizabeth Tudor did not, indeed, make windows into men's souls; they could believe what they liked, but they must conform together with the rest of the community.
And when Recusant clergy were being tortured, there was often the Bloody Question: "If England were invaded by an army blessed by the Pope, in order to remove Elizabeth, would you fight for your Queen or for your Pope?"
I humbly urge brother priests not be fooled by such malevolent tricks.
To be honest, my own weakness has always been for la Mostarda di Cremona.
9 comments:
I knew about Cremona's violins of course, but this is the first I heard of their Mostarda. This blog teaches me so many unexpected things.
I have two comments. First, the story of the "Scandinavian Lutheran ordinand" is true; it happened in the Diocese of Gothenburg of the Church of Sweden after the retirement of its bishop, the last Swedish Lutheran bishop who was opposed to women's ordination, in 1990, Dr. Bertil Gaertner, whose successor, Lars Eckerdal, was determined to thrust priestesses on the diocese (indeed, it how has a flaminica as its CEO). I have written about this elsewhere:
https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=13-06-035-i
Cf.: http://trushare.com/96may03/MY03SWED.htm
An excerpt from the former
"Dr. Folke T. Olofsson, a docent at Uppsala University, described the case of a Pentecostal minister in the Gothenburg diocese, who wanted to become a priest in the Church of Sweden. The bishop told him that he would not make him sign the declaration as a condition of ordination, but that he would have to receive Communion from a woman priest. And if he was willing to do it right then, the bishop said he would telephone a woman priest who worked in the diocesan offices and would have her come right up to the bishop’s office to celebrate the Eucharist."
And here is Dr. Olofsson's article, behind a paywall, unfortunately:
https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=17-09-032-f
Second, concerning "Elizabeth Tudor did not, indeed, make windows into men's souls; they could believe what they liked, but they must conform together with the rest of the community." This "adage" is almost always misquoted; in its original, the assertion was that she did not make windows into men's "hearts," not their "souls," which is more to Fr. Hunwicke's point. Queen Elizabeth never uttered the remark, so far as we can tell; rather, its author was Sir Francis Bacon, where it occurs in his "Observations on a Libel" of 1592. The phrase also appears in a letter of Sir Francis Walsingham written in 1589 or 1590, when Sir Bacon was one of his secretaries, cf. James Spedding et al. The Works of Francis Bacon (14 vols., 1857-74), Vol. I, Lord Bacon's Letters and Life, pp. 178, 98.
I loathe concelebration, but since reading Father Hunwicke's posts about it, I have come to realise and accept that it is part of our Catholic heritage and has its place on certain occasions. I still don't like concelebrated masses though.
Will you fight for your Queen or your Pope? is not a trick question at all.
It cuts right to the heart of the matter.
Did Thomas More not say “I have no window to look into another man’s soul”? Or did Robert Bolt filch it from another Tudor?
Dear Reverend Fr.
Reference “ . . . fighting for one's Pope”, one wonders whether any particular Pope will elicit, in a Catholic, a less-than-willing-to-die-for-attitude, compared to any other Pope.
But, the good news is that I now have ordered my first “Mostarda di Cremona” and thank you for the information.
in Domino
That Cremona Mustard sounds like just the thing for Christmas, but I remain a Colman's man myself.
I don't like concelebrations either, but I'm not sure why you're defending these priests, much less comparing them to those martyred by Bloody Bess. Diocesan priests make a promise to obey their bishop. If he tells them to concelebrate a Mass, they must do so. This seems like a clear case of quite literally insubordination.
Giffy: That is not how obedience, or insubordination works. One "obeys" one's superiors according to what is legitimate, and within their authority.
Post a Comment