Attendent carrying the Cardinal's Saturno.
Cardinal Burke in prayer.
Ordination.
.
From the encyclical of Pius XI, AD CATHOLICI SACERDOTII:
.
...[T]he sublimity of the Catholic Priesthood and its providential mission in the world...
.
"A last tribute to the priesthood is given by the enemies of the Church. For as We have said on a previous page, they show that they fully appreciate the dignity and importance of the Catholic priesthood, by directing against it their first and fiercest blows; since they know well how close is the tie that binds the Church to her priests. The most rabid enemies of the Catholic priesthood are today the very enemies of God; a homage indeed to the priesthood, showing it the more worthy of honor and veneration.
.
Most sublime, then, Venerable Brethren, is the dignity of the priesthood. Even the falling away of the few unworthy in the priesthood, however deplorable and distressing it may be, cannot dim the splendor of so lofty a dignity. Much less can the unworthiness of a few cause the worth and merit of so many to be overlooked; and how many have been, and are, in the priesthood, preeminent in holiness, in learning, in works of zeal, nay, even in martyrdom.
.
Nor must it be forgotten that personal unworthiness does not hinder the efficacy of a priest's ministry. For the unworthiness of the minister does not make void the Sacraments he administers; since the Sacraments derive their efficacy from the Blood of Christ, independently of the sanctity of the instrument, or, as scholastic language expresses it, the Sacraments work their effect ex opere operato." - Pius XI, On the Catholic Priesthood
.
For more photos of the ordination click here and here.
Bongacious!
ReplyDeleteExcellant.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of my favorite encyclicals.
*
“No one knows how high I had gotten; only how far I have fallen.”
ReplyDeleteSatan’s lamentation.
In many Catholic depictions of the Holy Mother or a Saint, Satan is pictured coiled at their feet.
He misses the position through Pride, which he willingly abandoned.
It is ironic, that in the second set of pictures, Satan’s pride is once more demonstrated: the women receiving Holy Communion are pretending piety and righteousness while their heads are uncovered.
They are attending the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without placing a veil upon their heads knowing full well this is a contentious thing to do at the True Mass.
The picture of this is at the bottom of the pictures page, Satan’s place in the order of things.
It is noted that the men are dressed modestly; no flip-flops, cut offs, and Lady Ga Ga tee-shirts.
Mr. Nelson, is there some reason you cherry-picked the “No matter how rotten the Priest is” portion of the encyclical?
Does it speak to current Priest’s problems?
Are you re-assuring us that our Sacraments are valid?
*
"Does it speak to current Priest’s problems?"
ReplyDeleteOf course it speaks to current priests' problems -- and those in the past and those in the future. Has there ever been a period completely free of priest problems?
"Are you re-assuring us that our Sacraments are valid?"
Actually, the Church is. Terry's just passing on the message.
"They are attending the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without placing a veil upon their heads knowing full well this is a contentious thing to do at the True Mass."
They know that full well, do they? So you are able to read minds and know just what they do and do not know in full? Quite God-like, you are...
I hate it when Catholics presume to be more Catholic than the Catholic Church.
"...They know that full well, do they? So you are able to read minds and know just what they do and do not know in full? Quite God-like, you are...
ReplyDeleteI hate it when Catholics presume to be more Catholic than the Catholic Church..."
In December, 2010, I was in remote villages of Mexico.
I met with relatives of Mexican Martyrs, and Faithful that are the poorest of the poor.
They live in homes with no electricity and no running water. They are pretty much isolated from the modern world.
We spoke of problems within the Church.
Among many things they knew, women refusing to be submissive is a major problem facing us.
They could not fathom why and where this Pride comes from, especially among Catholics that sit in the lap of luxury, as those women in the pictures.
In my comment, I pointed it out as a source of consternation many feel when they see us heading in the right direction, only to have cold water thrown upon us by a bunch of disobedient women.
Just as they knew they would not be Eucharistic Ministers/Lectors/Associate Pastors at the Mass, they knew full well they should wear viels.
I do not lurk in the background waiting to do Satan's job of accusing.
I believed I pointed out a legitimate problem, in the proper venue and manner.
I know the source of this particular problem and who can solve it.
Would you care to know?
Meanwhile, I am interested to know Mr. Nelson's answers to the questions I posed.
"...I hate it when Catholics..."
Do not let hatred consume you.
*
Accoridng to the Code of Canon Law, by which Roman Catholics are governed, women are not required to veil at Mass.
ReplyDeleteOn what, then, do you base your misogyny now?
I say let them veil if they wish- it's laudable. I wish that men would also cover their heads. But that's a personal preference, not the law of the Church. You have no right to impose your preferences on anyone, and certainly no right to accuse them of sin.
Shame on you.
Terry, this is reason #1 why I despise seeing Burke et al in 30 foot trains-- it encourages exactly this type of batshittery.
ReplyDeleteThom, don't despise the cappa magna. It's part of our great and glorious tradition. Burke and other traditionally vested cardinals and bishops have nothing to do with remarks such as the one above. It doesn't encourage anything of the sort.
ReplyDeleteTerry, thanks for the link to these great pictures.
Andrew
Nothwithstanding the fact that women are mandated to cover their heads by Canon Law, Scripture and Tradition, the post-Vatican II Church capitulated on this point with nary a protest. Influenced by the spirit of adaptation to the modern world, a generalized relaxation of formalities in the sacred rituals and a more casual dress for Mass, many women began to leave off the head covering - even though Church discipline had not changed. But everything else was being changed, simplified, relaxed, thrown out or off – why not the veil?
ReplyDeleteFinally, the 1983 new Code of Canon Law gave implicit approval to this egalitarian trend simply by ignoring all mention of women’s veils.
It's awesome that it took you 2 paragraphs to say what I related in one sentence:
ReplyDelete"Accoridng to the Code of Canon Law, by which Roman Catholics are governed, women are not required to veil at Mass."
I'm very impressed with the photos as well as the solemnity and dignity of the rite - which was the point of the post - not whether or not women covered their heads.
ReplyDeleteI think photos such as these help us to understand the context and suitability of the traditional vesture of prelates and priests for the Roman rite. I'm not at all put off by the Cardinal in the cappa magna.
We never seem to balk at the elaborate vestments and accoutrements employed by Eastern Orthodox clergy and hierarchy, therefore I no longer understand why we so adamantly resist the traditional Roman vesture.
Yep--cappa magnas were part of our "glorious tradition" when bishops and cardinals were princes and potentates that needed to be bowed and scraped to like the royalty they wished to be. That is no more.
ReplyDeleteI am certainly for a beautiful, solemn, and traditional celebration of the Liturgy, but allowing stuff like this to go on, is nothing but pure camp and the feeding of egos.
Tell me that poor boy really needed to be dressed like that and carry HE's hat or that man needed to be dressed in an 18th military uniform and carry that BIG spear for this ordination to take place in the old rite and be valid? This relates to Christ how?
We must be very, very careful to note the difference between "liturgical vesture" and others.
ReplyDeleteThe cappa magna is not a "liturgical vesture."
I am wont to reserve splendor to the vesture for the Mass, and not the man.
Show me a splendiferous cope, or a chasuble that equals the glory of the phelonion, and I'll be on board.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat? I didn't say anything.
ReplyDeleteThanks be to God! Brick by brick the Faith of Our Fathers is being restored.
ReplyDelete“As these heresies spread out and become dominant, the precious light of Faith will be extinguished in souls by the almost total corruption of customs.” --Our Lady of Good Success on the 20th Century
Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. --2 Thessalonians 2:14
Clark, are you quoting Our Lady of Good Success as she is creatively quoted by Marian Horvat and the Tradition in Action folk? I've done some research on that apparition, and it seems the ONLY source in English or Spanish is available from folks who all but spit (well, they do spit on him figuratively) on the pope and his predecessor and who are obsessed with restoring a class system where people "know their betters" (and I do not mean having class, either).
ReplyDeleteSo you think women not wearing veils is indicative of the corruption in their souls? Please tell me no, you don't seem like the type.
1) I have no idea what you are talking about. I got the quote from a reliable source on the approved messages of OLOGS.
ReplyDelete2.) I was commenting on Terry's post.
3.) Re: Veils...I think they should be worn, but at this point in time (with the corruption of the Church, her clergy and religious and society at large) should be optional. Optional AND encouraged, but still optional.
"the approved messages of OLOGS"
ReplyDeleteI think all that was approved was that there was in fact an apparition. But all of the words from that apparition are publicized under the auspices of Tradition in Action and people associated with them. This includes the stories about Mother Mariana enduring the "torments of Hell for 5 years", which I guess would mean she suffered more than any Saint ever (Did Christ even suffer the torments of Hell?)
Check out their website to see what kind of people we're talking about. They are just overflowing with Christian charity and filial submission to the Church over there.
I didn't mean to jump on you, but if you do a search you'll find that Horvat and her allies are the original source material.
Thom, the phle-what?
ReplyDeleteNote that it was St. John Chrysostom, patron saint of my church (but not my parish), who pointed out in the 3rd century that women should be veiled; not because St. Paul says so, but out of respect to the angels present during Mass.
Note also that Orthodox Christian women have also thrown off their babushkas.
Nan, it is the E. vestment most comparable to the W. chasuble.
ReplyDeleteI would personally agree with S. JC, but I would take it a step further to apply to men as well, especially in light of Jewish custom. "Remember that G-d is always above."
Poodles would work in well here.
ReplyDeleteAs would Ed Hardy.
ReplyDeleteBut didn't St. Paul say it was because of the angels?
ReplyDeleteI think its a venerable custom, but it no longer has any meaning OUTSIDE of Church. Wasn't it true that at one time, that was how women showed deference and respect in general? As in, it had a particular meaning within the cultural milieu.
As I understand it, very few women wore veils in the US before the 1960s - they covered their heads, but it was mostly hats. And women often wore hats anyway in those days (as did men, real ones, not baseball caps).
You're right, Mercury- Paul's admonition is very culturally-specific.
ReplyDeleteJews, both men and women, cover their heads (always if orthodox, sometimes if reformed) at the very least while at prayer and in synagogue. Muslim men should ALWAYS cover their heads, but especially during prayer. Jews and Muslims do this not out of respect for others, but respect for God. And this custom is ESPECIALLY important in houses of prayer, but really everywhere.
"God is always above us."
You'll notice that even in W. Christendom male clerics still use head coverings. (Priests have gone away from the simple zuccheto, but I'd like to see it return. Bishops still wear them.)
I took the time to contact the Church in Quito, Ecuador, where the apparition occured.
ReplyDeleteThe apparition is approved by Rome, and there is a statue there that was painted by the Holy Angels.
I also spoke with Miss Horvat, and found her very charitable and never once spoke in heresy.
In relation to the message of our Mother:
Russia was the first country, in 1920, to legalize abortion.
Russia is now moving to make abortion illegal.
The conversion of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is coming.
Before Vatican Council II, we prayed at every Mass for this.
No prayer is left unanswered.
"...On what, then, do you base your misogyny now?..."
My statements were not made due to misogyny.
They were aimed at a result of Scientism; feminist behavior.
*
Perhaps some of the message is true. Perhaps Horvat is nice in person. But from what I have read, her calumnies and speculations against the pope and others are way out of line.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't buy the "The Blessed Mother revealed these things to Mother Mariana, who died without telling anyone, then more than a hundred years later a Franciscan was told the story and the content of the apparitions"
I have read the information on Ecuadorian websites, and the only thing I can find remotely resembling what Ms. Horvat claims are in the English parts. The Ecuadorian sites do talk about Mariana, and they talk about "Nuestro Señor de Buen Succeso", but all the stuff claimed by TIA is only to be found on TIA and on websites using them as a source.
And also: If she endured the torments of Hell for 5 years - is that even theologically possible? That would mean she suffered more than any other saint EVER. I do not believe Christ suffered Hell either.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy problem with TIA is that the only message they seem to give is that just about everyone is going to hell unless they agree with the authors' views on several things, such as feminine modesty, Protestants, music, etc.
ReplyDeleteTheir site fills me with despair and mortal fear for myself and everyone I love, for I fear that I am going to hell unless I get everything exactly right (which means agreeing with the TIA authors, of course).
Also, calumniating the pope is never a good idea. Oooohh, he wore sunglasses!
"I also spoke with Miss Horvat, and found her very charitable and never once spoke in heresy."
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm so relieved that you were able to bestow upon her your imprimatur, which as we all know is far more Catholic than any bishop's or Pope's.
But you still haven't old me how it is you know that those bare-headed women KNEW "full well" that they were in error by not wearing veils. I won't go into whether or not they should or should not -- I just want to know what gift you have that allows you to peer into the minds and hearts and catechetical background of each of those women, and then assess their culpability (which you claim is full).
Aw, forget about it....pointless, isn't it?
And I don't want to forget the main point of the post, which is that it is marvelous to see the solemnity and beauty of this rite.
Mercury, No, I appreciate the information. My understanding (from non-crazies/pre-internet) is that the apparition and messages are approved. Are there no other sources on OLOGS whatsoever?
ReplyDeleteWell, since Horvat advertises her book as "the only source available in English", I'd imagine not. Even the Spanish sources that purport to give the text and story as is - even they are written by people associated with Horvat and her organization. I think it's impossible to find in-depth information that does not ultimately derive from Horvat or one of her close associates.
ReplyDeleteI once found another Spanish source on a Catholic website from South America that gave a very differed story.