Showing posts sorted by date for query John paul ii. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query John paul ii. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Wednesday, June 25, 2025
Is Abstinence Required on Civil Holidays?


For Traditional Catholics seeking to preserve the venerable customs of penance and prayer, the question naturally arises in 2025: Since July 4th falls on a Friday this year, are we still obligated to abstain from meat?

In today’s Church, the answer would be no—abstinence on Fridays outside of Lent is only “especially recommended,” not required. But for those who strive to maintain the immemorial practices of the Church, the answer lies in a deeper look at history, law, and the exceptions once granted for civil holidays like Independence Day.

Traditional Law: Friday Abstinence Is the Norm

From the earliest centuries, Friday abstinence was a universal precept. As a weekly commemoration of the Passion of Our Lord, it was required throughout the year. This obligation continued with few interruptions until modern times. Even into the 20th century, the 1917 Code of Canon Law mandated abstinence from meat on all Fridays of the year unless a Holy Day of Obligation occurred on that day outside of Lent. Before, even Fridays that were Holy Days of Olbligation still required abstinence, Christmas Day being the only exception.

Importantly, July 4th—the United States' Independence Day—has never been a Holy Day of Obligation. Thus, under traditional law, it remained a day of required abstinence whenever it fell on a Friday.

The 1931 Indult for Civil Holidays

However, a notable exception was introduced in 1931. Cardinal Fumasoni Biondi, Apostolic Delegate to the United States, communicated a special indult from Pope Pius XI allowing American bishops, ad quinquennium (for five years), to dispense from the laws of fasting and abstinence on civil holidays. As he wrote:

“The Sacred Congregation of the Council, in a letter dated 15 Oct 1931, informs me that, in view of the difficulties experienced by the faithful in observing the laws of fast and abstinence on civil holidays, His Holiness, Pius XI... granted to all the Ordinaries of the United States... the faculty to dispense their subjects from the laws in question whenever any of the civil holidays now observed occurs on a day of fast and abstinence, or of abstinence.”

This privilege, while notable, was:

  • Temporary: It lasted only five years unless renewed.
  • Discretionary: Bishops could exercise this faculty but were not required to.
  • Not self-executing: The faithful could not assume they were dispensed unless their bishop officially declared it.

Even into the 1950s and early 1960s, bishops selectively used this privilege. Some issued formal dispensations when a civil holiday fell on a Friday (e.g., the day after Thanksgiving), but others did not.

Independence Day: No Permanent Dispensation

There was never a permanent, universal dispensation from Friday abstinence for the Fourth of July.

Unlike myths surrounding the so-called “turkey indult” for the day after Thanksgiving, there is no documented perpetual exemption for meat consumption on Independence Day—even under Pope Pius XII or John XXIII. Any dispensation from Friday abstinence on July 4th had to be granted explicitly by the local bishop and typically appeared in diocesan announcements or parish bulletins.

Furthermore, by 1962—the benchmark year for many traditional Catholics—the universal law was still clear: unless July 4th was a Holy Day of Obligation (which it was not), or unless a specific diocesan dispensation was announced, the law of abstinence applied.

What Changed After Vatican II?

With Paenitemini in 1966, Paul VI allowed bishops’ conferences to substitute other forms of penance for Friday abstinence. The U.S. bishops followed suit, and Friday abstinence became “especially recommended,” but no longer binding under pain of sin outside of Lent.

This relaxation, coupled with the dramatic reduction in fasting days, has contributed to a massive weakening of Catholic penitential identity. But for those attached to the Traditional Latin Mass and the older calendar, fidelity to the traditional norms remains a vital part of living the liturgical life.

So, What Should a Traditional Catholic Do on Friday, July 4, 2025?

Unless a competent traditional priest or bishop explicitly dispenses the faithful from abstinence, the traditional law remains binding. Independence Day—though a civic holiday—is not a feast of the Church, and it has never been granted a permanent exception. Thus, traditional Catholics should abstain from meat on Friday, July 4th, 2025.

This act of penance is not a rejection of patriotism but a higher form of devotion: honoring the sacred customs of the Church above the shifting preferences of modernity.

Recovering a Lost Rhythm

Throughout the past two centuries, Catholic discipline in America has steadily waned. From a time of over 30 Holy Days of Obligation, year-round Saturday abstinence, and strict fasting regulations, we now find ourselves with a minimal observance required under current law.

But as St. Francis de Sales wisely said, “If you’re able to fast, you will do well to observe some days beyond what are ordered by the Church.”

For those who long to recover the rhythm of Catholic life, the solution lies not in waiting for mandates, but in choosing to voluntarily embrace tradition. This July 4th, let us abstain from meat, pray for our nation, and offer up our penance for the conversion of America and the restoration of Catholic order.

Want to learn more about the history of fasting and abstinence? Check out the Definitive Guide to Catholic Fasting and Abstinence.

Read more >>
Monday, March 24, 2025
The Certainty of Sainthood: How the Church Recognized Saints Through the Ages

Honoring the Saints

A saint is a person that lived a life of virtue, holiness, and union with God on earth. The Church recognizes a person’s sanctity by “canonizing” them. This means they are declared to be in Heaven and the Church presents the individual as one we are called to imitate. The Church does not canonize every soul in Heaven (even if known) but only those who the faithful are called to imitate and implore for aid.

The term "saint" is from the Latin word sanctus meaning "hallowed or “consecrated." The first person honored individually as a saint was Stephen, the first martyr. For nearly four centuries, praying to St. Stephen was incredibly popular. Beginning at the end of the second century, there were special celebrations on anniversaries of the martyrs' deaths. These martyrs were witnesses of Christ. They gave their lives for Him.

By the fourth century, sainthood was not just considered for martyrs. It was also for confessors and virgins. Saints could be monks, nuns, bishops, or any of the lay faithful. The saints are not merely the ones who have been canonized. 

How Can the Saints Hear Our Prayers?

“And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints” (Apocalypse 5:8)

The Book of Revelations written by St. John the Apostle specifically mentions how the prayers of the saints are presented before God in Heaven. The saints in Heaven are very much aware of what is happening on earth because God has in His order of the world permitted them to know of prayers addressed to them. In Matthew 17:3-5, the Prophets Moses and Elijah were very much aware of what was taking place on the earth. The saints themselves are witnesses of what occurs on earth as the Book of Hebrews specifically states: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us and persevere in running the race that lies before us” (Hebrews 12:1). And our Lord Himself in Luke 15:7-10 describes those in Heaven rejoicing over repentance on earth. How could they do so unless in the mystical order of the universe God has somehow permitted them to know and see what was happening on the earth?

The History of Canonizations

There is a special process involved with officially determining that someone is a saint. The Catholic Church determines that a person is definitely in Heaven when they canonize someone. But the process for canonization has changed over time.

1. Early Church: The recognition of saints in the early centuries was often a local and spontaneous process. Local bishops or communities would acknowledge the holiness and intercession of certain individuals.

2. 6th Century: By the 6th century, the Roman Martyrology began to record the names of saints and martyrs, and this served as a kind of official list of those worthy of veneration. However, formal canonization processes as we know them today did not yet exist.

3. 10th Century: The first recorded case of a Pope canonizing a saint was Pope John XV in 993 who canonized St. Ulrich of Augsburg. 

4. 12th Century: In the 12th century, the formal process of canonization began to take a definitive state. Pope Alexander III (1159–1181) established certain procedures, and the role of a formal canonization process became more structured.

5. 13th Century: In the 13th century, the papacy took a more direct role in investigating the lives of potential saints by the 13th century as the process began to appoint officials conducting inquiries and examinations.

6. 17th Century: By the 17th century, the authority to canonize saints became exclusively reserved to the Pope. Formal procedures included a thorough examination of the candidate's life, writings, and the verification of miracles attributed to their intercession.

7. 18th Century: The process of canonization was further codified in the 18th century by Pope Benedict XIV, who issued a comprehensive document titled "De Servorum Dei beatificatione et de Beatorum canonizatione" in 1734.

In the process towards sainthood, there are four steps someone must attain:

1. Servant of God: This is the initial title given to a person whose cause for sainthood has been officially opened by the Church. It signifies that the local bishop or the competent ecclesiastical authority has initiated an investigation into the person's life, virtues, writings, and reputation for holiness.

2. Venerable: If the initial investigation finds that the person lived a life of heroic virtue, the title is advanced to "Venerable." This stage does not imply that miracles have been attributed to the individual; rather, it acknowledges the person's exemplary life.

3. Blessed: To reach the next stage, beatification, at least one miracle (typically a medically unexplained healing) attributed to the intercession of the Venerable is required. Once beatified, the individual is given the title "Blessed," and their veneration is permitted in a specific region or religious community. In times before Vatican II, two miracles were required.

4. Saint: Canonization requires the verification of at least one additional miracle after beatification. When this criterion is met, the Pope declares the person a saint. In times before Vatican II, two miracles more miracles – hence four total – were required. 

Hence, a canonization procedure, either as done in ancient times or since the Middle Ages, consists of two main aspects – namely both investigation and declaration. In the early Church, investigation was carried out by various members of the local church community and the declaration that a particular martyr was worthy of veneration was done by the bishop. Throughout it all, the presence of after death miracles helped confirm that the soul of the person was in Heaven. After all, God can not confirm falsehood with proofs so if someone intercedes for people on earth and God works miracles through them after death, then that soul must be in Heaven.

Are Modern Canonizations Infallible?

While former canonizations were undoubtedly infallible, the same cannot be said for Canonizations after 1983. This is seen in the grave doubts on the validity of the canonizations of John Paul II and Paul VI. As a result of the changes in the canonization process following Vatican II, there is reasonable concern to believe that modern beatifications and canonizations are no longer infallible.  Since the promulgation of the new Code of Canon Law (1983) radically altered the procedures for the beatification and canonization of blessed and saints, serious doubts have arisen concerning the legitimacy of these new processes that favor speed and quantity over reliability. These concerns have only been exasperated by further changes in practice under John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and now Francis. 

Regardless of the theological debate over the infallibility of canonizations, the process has been altered so radically that the debate prior to the changes was about something entirely different from the current state of affairs. Although some of the individuals purportedly canonized by the past three popes may have merited being honored for heroic virtue under the former juridically reliable process, it is certainly not within the competence of any individual Catholic to sort out the cases. We will need to wait until the restoration of normalcy in the Church for the proper authorities to sort out this morass. Until such time, we cannot pick and choose which modern canonizations we want to acknowledge. As such, it is a best practice to refrain from calling “Blessed” or “Saint” anyone given such a title after the changes of the mid-1980s.

Read more >>
Tuesday, January 21, 2025
Why Catholics Must Adhere to the 1917 Code of Canon Law and Reject the Novelties of the 1983 Code

1917 vs 1983 Code of Canon Law

Principle 1: Authority and Validity of Law

Law Must Originate from a Valid Lawgiver

A fundamental principle in both civil and ecclesiastical law is that a law must be issued by a legitimate authority. In civil society, this requires that laws are passed in accordance with constitutional procedures and by recognized governmental bodies. Similarly, within the Church, a valid lawgiver is required to issue binding ecclesiastical laws.

In the Church, the Pope generally holds this authority. However, this authority is contingent upon his continued legitimacy as Pope. According to established Church teaching, if a Pope falls into heresy, he loses his office and thus his authority to promulgate laws. This concept is supported by notable canonists and theologians:

X. Wernz and P. Vidal (1943): "Through notorious and openly divulged heresy, the Roman Pontiff, should he fall into heresy, by that very fact [ipso facto] is deemed to be deprived of the power of jurisdiction even before any declaratory judgement by the Church. A pope who falls into public heresy would cease ipso facto to be a member of the Church; therefore, he would also cease to be head of the Church." (Ius Canonicum, 2:453)

Udalricus Beste (1946): "Not a few canonists teach that, outside of death and abdication, the pontifical dignity can also be lost by falling into certain insanity, which is legally equivalent to death, as well as through manifest and notorious heresy. In the latter case, a pope would automatically fall from his power, and this indeed without the issuance of any sentence, for the first See [i.e., the See of Peter] is judged by no one. The reason is that, by falling into heresy, the pope ceases to be a member of the Church. He who is not a member of a society, obviously, cannot be its head." (Introductio in Codicem, 3rd ed., Canon 221)

Thus, any laws or documents issued by a Pope who has lost his authority due to heresy are invalid and not binding. This principle calls into question the legitimacy of the 1983 Code of Canon Law if issued under such circumstances, especially considering the actions of John Paul II who promulgated the 1983 Code.

Principle 2: The Salvation of Souls as Supreme Law

Laws Must Not Harm Souls

Even if a law is issued by a legitimate authority, it must be rejected if it is harmful to souls or promotes sin. The maxim salus animarum, suprema lex (the salvation of souls is the supreme law) underscores this obligation. In 1984, Archbishop Lefebvre called the new code another grave problem undermining the Church and stated that the new Canon Law is very serious for it goes much further [i.e. promoting errors] than the Council itself in a October 29, 1984 conference at Stuttgart, Germany. 

The 1983 Code of Canon Law introduces a novel conception of the Church that undermines traditional ecclesiology and instead embraces the ecclesiology of Vatican II, which erases the distinction between clergy and laity. Canon 204 exemplifies this by defining all the faithful, clergy and laity alike, as partaking in Christ's priestly, prophetic, and royal functions. This new understanding dissolves the unique roles of the clergy, leading to the laicization of the Church. Such a shift is detrimental, as it aligns with Protestant reforms that laicized the priesthood, diminishing the sacred character of the clergy.

Archbishop Bugnini's reforms in the Liturgy further illustrate this harmful trend. The liturgical changes aimed to transform the Mass into an action of the entire "people of God," minimizing the role of the priest and the mystical nature of the Mass. This shift from God-centered worship to man-centered activity undermines the sanctity of the Eucharist and the priesthood.

The new Code even permits practices such as giving Communion to Protestants, a clear rupture from traditional Catholic teaching. This "eucharistic hospitality" contradicts the sacrament's role as a sign of unity in the Faith, thereby compromising the Church's doctrinal integrity. The 1983 Code is a codification of the errors of Vatican II, which are dangerous to souls as they undermine true doctrine, piety, and holiness. We see this reflected in the unmistakable collapse of Catholic praxis after Vatican II.

Conclusion

Catholics are bound by these two principles: the necessity of a valid lawgiver and the imperative to reject laws harmful to souls. Given either the questionable legitimacy of the authority behind the 1983 Code of Canon Law or its harmful spiritual consequences, Catholics are obliged to adhere to the strictness of the 1917 Code and reject the novelties introduced by the 1983 Code. While even the 1917 Code lessened discipline for Catholics in many regards, it nevertheless was a valid Code. The same unwaveringly statement of validity can not apply to the 1983 Code.

Salus animarum, suprema lex. Long live Tradition. Long live the True Catholic Church. Down with the counterfeit Church of the Modernists.

Read more >>
Tuesday, April 9, 2024
How Fasting on Vigils Was Reduced Over Time

Click for a larger image. Holy Saturday is not included as it is covered separately by Lenten regulations.

What are Vigils?

Even though the Great Fast of Lent has ended, our fasting has not ended. There are many other days of fasting this year, such as Ember Days and Vigils, which are still coming this year. Understanding fasting on Vigils is something that has been forgotten by the average Catholic today. And rediscovering this practice will help us better celebrate the feastday following the vigil while allowing us more shared days of penance.

Some feasts have vigils associated with them. The term “vigil” is used in several ways. It most properly refers to an entire day before a major feast day (e.g., the Vigil of Christmas, which refers to the entire day of December 24). This kind of vigil is a liturgical day in itself and marks the following day as a day of greater liturgical significance. This is the proper meaning of a vigil. In a similar way, the Catechism of Perseverance, published in 1849, states: “The word vigil signifies watching. The vigils are the days of abstinence and fast which precede the great festivals of the year. There are five; those of Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, Assumption, and All Saints. In some dioceses, the feast of St. Peter and St. Paul is also preceded by a vigil.”

NB: A Mass using the Sunday propers that is anticipated (i.e., offered) on a Saturday evening is sometimes, though incorrectly, called a vigil. This practice, however, is a post-Vatican II novelty and not part of Catholic Tradition, so I counsel Catholics to never attend such “vigil Masses” on Saturday evenings.

Definition of Key Terms in the Vigils Table:

Fasting: Fasting refers to how much food we eat. It means taking only one meal during a calendar day. The meal should be an average-sized meal as overeating at the one meal is against the spirit of the fast. Fasting generally means that the meal is to be taken later in the day. Along with the one meal, up to two snacks (technically called either a collation or frustulum) are permitted. These are optional, not required. Added up together, they may not equal the size of the one meal. No other snacking throughout the day is permitted. Fasting does not affect liquids, aside from the Eucharistic Fast which is a separate matter.

Abstinence: Abstinence in this context refers to not eating meat. Meat refers to the flesh meat of mammals or fowl. Beef, poultry, lamb, etc. are all forbidden on days of abstinence. Abstinence does not currently prohibit animal byproducts like dairy (e.g., cheese, butter, milk) or eggs, but in times past, they were prohibited. Fish is permitted along with shellfish and other cold-blooded animals like alligators. In times past, days of fasting were always days of abstinence as well; however, not all days of abstinence were days of mandatory fasting.

Partial Abstinence: Partial Abstinence refers to eating meat only at the principal meal of the day. Days of partial abstinence do not permit meat to be eaten as part of the collation or the frustulum. Partial abstinence started only in 1741 under Pope Benedict XIV as a concession and as part of a gradual weakening of discipline. Beforehand, days of abstinence were days of complete abstinence.

NB: The table concerns only fasting and abstinence for Vigils and thus omits other possible days of fasting and/or abstinence: Lent, Ember Days, Rogation Days, etc.

Explanation of Key Changes to Vigils in the English-Speaking World:

1. On March 9, 1777, Pope Pius VI reduced for English Catholics days of fasting to consist of the Ember Days; the forty days Lent; Wednesdays and Fridays in Advent; and the vigils of Christmas, Whitsun Sunday (i.e. Pentecost), Ss. Peter and Paul, and All Saints.

2. As mentioned in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record from 1882, Pope Benedict XIV in 1755 removed 18 feasts from double precept and reduced them to single precept. Shortly thereafter in 1778, Pope Pius VI reduced the number of holy days to 13. And as the Record states, "On this occasion, the obligation of hearing Mass was removed, as well as the obligation of abstaining from servile works." The Record continues: "the number of those Vigils to which the obligation of fasting had been attached [as of 1778] was in fact but eight - these being the Vigils of the feast of St. Laurence the Martyr (August 9th), and of seven of the nine suppressed feasts of the Apostles." No fasting was observed beforehand on the Vigil of St. John on December 26 or the Vigil of Ss. Philip and James on account of them always falling in Christmas and Pascaltide respectively.

3. The Vigil of Ss. Peter and Paul ceased being a fast day in America by 1842. In Great Britain, Ireland, Australia, and Canada the Vigil of Ss. Peter and Paul remained a day of fasting and abstinence up until the 1917 Code of Canon law. In 1902, the Holy Father granted a special dispensation for Catholics in England from fasting on the Vigil of Ss. Peter and Paul in honor of the coronation of King Edward VII, illustrating historical proof of its observance in the early part of the 20th century.

4. "The Catholic's Pocket Prayer-Book" published by Henri Proost & Co in 1924 notes "in the United Kingdom (except during Lent), abstinence is not binding on Ember Saturdays or on any Vigil that immediately precedes or follows a Friday or other day of abstinence."

5. Effective with the 1917 Code, fasting and abstinence were no longer observed should a vigil fall on a Sunday as stated in the code: "If a vigil that is a fast day falls on a Sunday the fast is not to be anticipated on Saturday but is dropped altogether that year." Before 1917, the fast of a Vigil that fell on a Sunday was observed instead on the preceding Saturday.

6. On January 28, 1949, the United States bishops issued modified regulations on abstinence in America again after receiving a ruling from the Sacred Congregation of the Council. Partial abstinence replaced complete abstinence for Ember Wednesdays, Ember Saturdays, and the Vigil of Pentecost.

7. In March 1955, Pope Pius XII abolished the liturgical Vigil of All Saints. The US Bishops requested an official determination from Rome on whether the custom of fasting and abstinence on the suspended Vigil of All Saints had also been terminated. They received a pre-printed notice in a response dated March 15, 1957, stating: "The Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites...looks simply to the liturgical part of the day and does not touch the obligation of fast and abstinence that are a penitential preparation for the following feast day." The US Bishop thereafter dispensed both the fast and partial abstinence law for the Vigil of All Saints.

8. On July 25, 1957, Pope Pius XII commuted the fast in the Universal Church from the Vigil of the Assumption to the Vigil of the Immaculate Conception on December 7, even though he had previously abrogated the Mass for the Vigil of the Immaculate Conception. 

9. In 1959, Pope John XXIII permitted the Christmas Eve fast and abstinence to be transferred to 23rd. While the United States, Great Britain, and Ireland kept the penance on December 24, other nations, including Canada and the Philippines, transferred it to December 23.

10. As stated in a January 1960 issue of the Catholic Standard and Times, following an October 1959 meeting, the Bishops of Canada issued new regulations taking effect in 1960 that provided that the law of abstinence henceforth will apply only on all Fridays of the year, while the regulations for fast and abstinence will apply only on four days—Ash Wednesday; Good Friday; December 7, the vigil of the feast of the Immaculate Conception, and December 23, the anticipated vigil before Christmas.

How are Vigils Observed?

There are two characteristics of vigils: penance and prayer. 

As to penance, many liturgical vigils, if not all, were originally also days of fasting and abstinence. Over time, the fasting and abstinence was dropped from many. By the time of the Catechism of Perseverance, there were only a few such vigils. But the days of fasting and abstinence differed – including on vigils in various places. For instance, by 1893, the only fasting days kept in Rome were the forty days of Lent, the Ember Days, and the Vigils of the Purification, of Pentecost, of St. John the Baptist, of Ss. Peter and Paul, of the Assumption, of All Saints, and of Christmas. This is summarized from the Handbook to Christian and Ecclesiastical Rome. In just a few years, Rome would abrogate the fast on the Vigil of the Purification and on the Vigil of St. John the Baptist. By the 1917 Code of Canon Law, fasting vigils were dropped universally to only four days: Vigils of Pentecost, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, All Saints, and Christmas. These are what Americans at that time were aware of, but previously, there were differing vigils.

By 1917, there were, however, still many other liturgical vigils on the calendar that were not obligatory days of abstinence at that time. For instance, before the changes to the Roman Rite liturgical calendar in 1955, nearly all feasts of the Apostles were preceded by a vigil. And the Church put those days in place to help us prepare for the importance of the feast of an Apostle, since all feasts of the Apostles were in former times Holy Days of Obligation. We have lost the importance of the feast days of the Apostles, I believe, in part due to losing the vigils. We can change that for ourselves by observing those feast days in our own prayer lives. And the same is true for the Vigil of All Saints (i.e., Halloween), a traditional day when we would fast and abstain from meat, but which is neither found in the Novus Ordo calendar nor even in the 1962 Missal.  Hence any of the older vigils (e.g., the Vigil of St. Lawrence, the Vigil of Epiphany, the Vigil of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, etc.) can and arguably, should, be observed with fasting and abstinence even if they are not obliged under penalty of sin. 

The second key feature of vigils is prayer. 

The Catechism of Perseverance explains this aspect well: “How should we spend the vigils? Whatever be our age, we should spend those days in a more holy manner than other days, in order to prepare for the celebration of the festival and to receive the graces which God always gives more abundantly at that time.” Praying an extra rosary, making time for mental prayer, and even praying into the evening as the vigil becomes the feastday itself are all worthwhile practices to make vigils slightly more penitential and all the more prayerful.

While we know that Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation should be spent in prayer, attendance at Holy Mass, and in avoidance of servile work, we often pay little mind to vigils since the Church over the past several decades has virtually eliminated them. But we must honor our Lady of Fatima’s call for penance and can model our example after that of our forefathers who observed the vigils in preparation for the feast.

Works Cited:

1. Great Britain (1776): American Ecclesiastical Review (Hardy and Mahony, 1886), vol. 11, p. 469.https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_American_Catholic_Quarterly_Review/lz0QAAAAYAAJ 

2. USA (1789): American Ecclesiastical Review (Hardy and Mahony, 1886), vol. 11, p. 469.https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_American_Catholic_Quarterly_Review/lz0QAAAAYAAJ 

3. USA (1909): O'Neill, J.D. (1909). Fast. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05789c.htm

4. Great Britain (1909): O'Neill, J.D. (1909). Fast. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05789c.htm

5. Canada (1909): O'Neill, J.D. (1909). Fast. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05789c.htm

6. CIC (1917): Peters, Edward N.  1917 Pio-Benedictine Code of Canon Law: in English translation, with extensive scholarly apparatus.  San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2001. https://www.jgray.org/codes/ 

7. Canada (1952): https://sspx.ca/en/rules-fast-abstinence 

8. USA (1962): Rev. Heribert Jone, “Moral Theology: Englished and Adapted to the Laws and Customs of the United States of America,” (Newman Press, 2009), p. 285.

9. Canada (1962): The Catholic Standard and Times, Volume 65, Number 19, Published January 29, 1960. https://thecatholicnewsarchive.org/?a=d&d=cst19600129-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------- 

10. Great Britain (1962): 1962 Roman Catholic Daily Missal, (Angelus Press, 2004). 
Read more >>
Tuesday, January 30, 2024
Rejecting the Filioque Is A Heresy

It is evident with the crisis in the Catholic Church concerning not only the sexual abuse crisis but also the crisis in the Liturgy after Vatican II that some Catholics have become disillusioned with the current Catholic hierarchy. From an outside perspective, some might ask why they should remain Catholic and not convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, which is known for reverent, ancient liturgies under the name of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (or St. Basil the Great at some times). But on a deeper analysis, there is no refuge in Orthodoxy. While we often think of the Orthodox as schismatics and not as heretics, the doctrinal crisis has also affected them. In fact, the Orthodox are also heretics from the true Christian Faith in more than half a dozen ways as enumerated in the article "Should A Catholic Convert to Eastern Orthodoxy?"

"I am the Father are One" (John 10:30)

The Baltimore Catechism succinctly states, “In God there are three Divine persons, really distinct, and equal in all things – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.” The Roman Catechism, the most authoritative catechism ever written, expresses the reality that Almighty God – the one and only God – is in fact a Trinity of Persons. The Catechism explains the role of the three Divine Persons in the Incarnation:

"It is a principle of Christian faith that whatever God does outside Himself in creation is common to the Three Persons, and that one neither does more than, nor acts without another. But that one emanates from another, this only cannot be common to all; for the Son is begotten of the Father only, and the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. Anything, however, which proceeds from them extrinsically is the work of the Three Persons without difference of any sort, and of this latter description is the Incarnation of the Son of God.

"Of those things, nevertheless, that are common to all, the Sacred Scriptures often attribute some to one Person, some to another. Thus, to the Father they attribute power over all things; to the Son, wisdom; to the Holy Ghost, love. Hence, as the mystery of the Incarnation manifests the singular and boundless love of God towards us, it is therefore in some sort peculiarly attributed to the Holy Ghost."

We do not believe in three gods but in one God. The Athanasian Creed, one of the earliest professions of faith, confessed since at least the fifth century, declares:

“Thus the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. But there are not three gods, but one God. The Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, and the Holy Ghost is Lord. There are not three lords, but one Lord. For according to Christian truth, we must profess that each of the Persons individually is God; and according to Christian religion, we are forbidden to say that there are three gods or three lords.”

How is it, then, that there is a God the Father, a God the Son, and a God the Holy Ghost, but only one God? There is one divine substance, and three divine Persons. You and I are each only one substance and one person, but God is one substance and three Persons. Each of the Persons is fully divine and wholly possesses the divine substance. As Jesus Himself said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

The Trinity is One. We do not confess three gods, but one God in three Persons, the “consubstantial Trinity.” The divine Persons do not share the one divinity among Themselves but each of Them is God whole and entire: “The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Ghost is, i.e., by nature one God.” In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215): “Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature.”

What is the Filioque Controversy?

The Great Schism, also known as the East-West Schism, refers to the split between the Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church, which culminated in 1054 AD. The Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, and the legates of Pope Leo IX excommunicated each other. This formal declaration of excommunication marked the official schism between the Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Roman Catholic Church. Papal authority, the Filioque controversy, and even the practice of Saturday fasting, among other differences, brought about this schism.

The Filioque controversy is the theological dispute that centers around the phrase "and the Son" (Latin: for Filioque) in the Nicene Creed, which originally stated that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father. The controversy arose between the Western and Eastern Christian churches.

In the early centuries of Christianity, the Nicene Creed was widely accepted in both the Eastern (Greek-speaking) and Western (Latin-speaking) parts of the Christian world. The original version of the Nicene Creed, as established at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, declared that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father. However, the Western Church later added the phrase "and the Son" (Filioque) to affirm the double procession of the Holy Spirit from both the Father and the Son.

The Roman Catholic Church had first introduced the phrase “and the Son” (Filioque in Latin) at the Third Council of Toledo in 589. The Lyons Council II stated the doctrine firmly:

We profess faithfully and devotedly that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from two principles, but as from one principle; not by two spirations, but by one single spiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mistress of all the faithful, has till now professed, preached and taught; this she firmly holds, preaches, professes and teaches; this is the unchangeable and true belief of the orthodox fathers and doctors, Latin and Greek alike. But because some, on account of ignorance of the said indisputable truth, have fallen into various errors, we, wishing to close the way to such errors, with the approval of the sacred council, condemn and reprove all who presume to deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or rashly to assert that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two principles and not as from one.

The Filioque Defended at the Ecumenical Councils

The Second Council of Lyons began on May 7, 1274, in the Cathedral of St. John. The Pope gave a sermon outlining his threefold plan for the Council — to unite the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches, to send a Crusade to the Holy Land and to reform the morals of the clergy. On June 29th, the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, the entire Council and the Greek ambassadors took part in a High Mass sung by the Pope. The Credo (Nicene Creed) was sung in Latin and then again in Greek with the phrase “Qui a Patre Filioque procedit” (who proceeds from the Father and the Son) sung three times. The Greek acceptance of this doctrine was an important step towards the reunion of the two Churches. 

Yet, debate continued for centuries as this was again a point of disagreement at the Council of Florence in 1438. The Emperor and Patriarch agreed that the debates should begin, and on October 8, 1438, the delegates discussed the addition of “From the Son” (Filioque) to the Nicene Creed by the Roman Catholic Church. This was discussed in fourteen public sessions until December 13, 1438. Mark Eugenicus, the Metropolitan of Ephesus, claimed that the addition of the Filioque clause to the Nicene Creed had been against the Council of Ephesus in 431. While Mark Eugenicus was the main speaker for the Greeks, the Western Church answered through several speakers. The sessions were lively but the Latin speakers were unable to change Mark’s position.

March 1439 saw eight sessions between the 2nd and 24th where the procession of the Holy Ghost was debated. The Western Church argued that the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and the Son while the Greek Church through Mark Eugenicus insisted that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father only. Giovanni da Montenero, a Dominican provincial of Lombardy proved the Latin Church’s assertion through the use of Scripture, the writings of the Western and Eastern Fathers and the Councils. Da Montenero’s presentation convinced some of his hearers but not all. The Greeks were not used to metaphysical arguments or syllogisms in their theological discussions but they were very impressed by da Montenero’s quotes from the Eastern and Western Fathers.

Through this, a glimmer of light appeared. The Eastern Saints had stated that the Holy Ghost was produced “from both” and “through the Son” while the Western Saints wrote that the Holy Spirit came “from the Father and the Son.” Now it is axiomatic that Saints, whether East or West, cannot err in matters of faith for they are inspired by the same Holy Spirit. Therefore the words of both the Eastern and Western Saints must be true even though they expressed themselves differently. Bessarion, the Metropolitan of Nicaea and Greek delegate, phrased it this way: "The western and eastern Saints do not disagree, for the same Spirit spoke in all the Saints. Compare their works and they will be found harmonious."

The majority of the Greek delegates voted in favor of the Filioque doctrine. There were further debates about other points of contention. It was decided that both unleaven and leaven bread would be allowed for the Eucharist. Purgatory was defined and the primacy of the Pope was affirmed. None of these questions were answered without lengthy debate and it was not until July 5, 1439, that first the Greeks and then the Latin delegates signed the decree of union. (Parts of the decree are included in the Documents section beginning “Let the heavens rejoice…”) Mark Eugenicus refused to sign the decree even after discussions with the Pope. On Monday, July 6, there was a procession to the Cathedral in Florence followed by a Pontifical Mass. Cesarini read out the decree in Latin, asking the Pope and Latin prelates if they agreed. They all proclaimed Placet (it is agreed upon). Bessarion read out the decree in Greek then requested the Emperor and the Greek prelates to acknowledge the truth of the decree. They also stated their agreement. A Te Deum was sung and the delegates left the Cathedral praising God with psalms. The Council continued and reunited the Roman Church with other Eastern Churches — the Armenians (1439), the Copts (1442), the Syrians (1444), the Chaldeans (Nestorians) and the Maronites of Cyprus (1445). In 1443, the Council left Florence to continue at the Lateran Palace in Rome.

The Greeks left for home on October 19, 1439, and arrived in Constantinople in February 1440. Sad news awaited the Emperor — his wife had died. This may explain why he failed to act promptly when some of the Eastern prelates who had remained behind in Constantinople refused to have anything to do with those who had agreed to a union with the Roman Church in Florence. There were soon more overt acts against the union of the Churches. Anthony, Metropolitan of Heraclea, made a public repudiation of his signature to the document in Florence. Mark Eugenicus wrote and spoke against the union. Early in 1441, a group of prelates who had signed the decree in Florence disavowed the union.

The new Patriarch of Constantinople, Metrophanes, (Patriarch Joseph had died at the end of the Council of Florence) declared in favor of the union and wrote an encyclical proclaiming it. However, his voice was not enough to overpower the flair and common touch of Mark Eugenicus’ writings. In 1444 the Papal fleet and army joined with Venice and Hungary to fight the Ottoman Turks. The Turkish army of about 60,000 men attacked the Christian armies of about 20,000 to 30,000 men at Varna on November 10, 1444. A brave effort to capture Murad II, the leader of the Ottomans, by the young King of Hungary and his 500 horsemen failed and the Christians were defeated. Many Christians were killed and the way to Constantinople was open to the Turks who did indeed capture the city in 1453. In the years 1450 to 1451, the Eastern Orthodox Church convened a Council in Constantinople and rejected the decree from the Council of Florence. The pro-union Patriarch was dismissed and the Orthodox Athanasius was appointed to take his place.

So what was the point of those years of arguments, of careful research, of endless discussions? Even though the union did not last, several points of doctrine were discussed and defined. Giovanni da Montenero’s masterful examination of the procession of the Holy Spirit through Scripture, the writings of the ancient Fathers and the Councils is just one example of the intricate and intense work that went into these definitions. For those years in Ferrara, Florence, and Rome, hundreds of men gathered to understand difficult theological concepts with the sincere wish to reunite. Perhaps in some hearts, this wish was joined with the hope for help in defeating the Turks or other less than purely selfless motives. Still, they continued — the illness of the elderly Patriarch and the Emperor, the monetary difficulties of the Pope, the homesickness and worry over their homeland, the frustrations between two different cultures — and all of these pressures delivered arguments that give us a deeper understanding of our faith. For more on the Councils, see the book "Nicea to Now."

The Church Fathers Defended the Filioque

Church Fathers in the West, such as St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430), supported the Filioque clause. St. Augustine emphasized the unity of the Trinity and argued that the Holy Ghost's procession from both the Father and the Son was consistent with the shared divine essence of the Trinity.

The Orthodox churches - and there are several that are not in communion even with one another - deny that the Holy Ghost, the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, proceeds from the Father and the Son. Those interested in the Church's treatment of this should look into Father Henry Chadwick's "The Early Church" or "Fr. John Meyendorff's "Byzantine Theology," which address this well. The Church Fathers all believed in the Filioque as well as shown in a powerful video debunking the errors of the Orthodox churches. All those who want to learn the truth should be compelled to watch that video.

Read more >>
Tuesday, December 26, 2023
2024 Patron Saint of the Year Devotion

UPDATE: RESULTS ARE IN.  SCROLL DOWN.  i received St. Ebontius, Bishop of Babastro, Spain, after its recapture from the Moors. Born in Comminges, Haute Garonne, France, he became a Benedictine and abbot before accepting the see of Babastro.

SPONSOR: This Devotion is being sponsored again this year by CatechismClass.com.  Whether you are looking for godparent preparation courses, Sacramental preparation for your children, or just to better learn the Faith as an adult, CatechismClass.com has courses for all ages and walks of life. Check out CatechismClass.com's affordable programs and make it a New Year's resolution to learn and live the Faith better than ever.

You can read about the past devotions in the following posts:
Again, I would like to take a few minutes to explain the devotion.

What is the Saint for the Year Devotion?  We pray that this year the Holy Ghost will again work so that all participants receive a saint that they will be able to pray to for aid throughout the entire year: St. Faustina wrote about it in her diary, Divine Mercy in My Soul. The excerpt is below.
“There is a custom among us of drawing by lot, on New Year's Day, special Patrons for ourselves for the whole year. In the morning during meditation, there arose within me a secret desire that the Eucharistic Jesus be my special Patron for this year also, as in the past. But, hiding this desire from my Beloved, I spoke to Him about everything else but that. When we came to refectory for breakfast, we blessed ourselves and began drawing our patrons. When I approached the holy cards on which the names of the patrons were written, without hesitation I took one, but I didn't read the name immediately as I wanted to mortify myself for a few minutes. Suddenly, I heard a voice in my soul: ‘I am your patron. Read.’ I looked at once at the inscription and read, ‘Patron for the Year 1935 - the  Most Blessed Eucharist.’ My heart leapt with joy, and I slipped quietly away from the sisters and went for a short visit before the Blessed Sacrament, where I poured out my heart. But Jesus sweetly admonished me that I should be at that moment together with the sisters. I went immediately in obedience to the rule.”Excerpt from Divine Mercy in My Soul, the Diary of St. Faustina"

Over the years, I've heard from many people of the great connection they have to their special patrons. Here is one of those stories from the past: 

I have Saints Marcus and Marcellianus ... they are twin brothers who were sent to prison before their death. St. Sebastian visited them continually in prison and helped keep their faith alive. They are buried near St. Felix and are specifically honored in Spain. OK now ... here are a couple of immediate ironies in regard to these saints ... I have a SPECIAL place in my heart for twins! As a child, I LOVED reading the story about St. Sebastian. I had a children's book of saints and I think I wore out the pages on St. Sebastian! Felix is my grandfather's name! Silvia, our exchange student, is from Spain! I am so excited to have these two saints to walk through 2006 with me! I'm looking forward as to where and how they will intercede for me.
How do I enter?  I will pull names for everyone who is a Patreon of this blog. You may submit up to 10 names for each Patreon, allowing you to have names drawn for your family and friends. The drawing will happen automatically for all who are patrons at any paid level. Sign up on Patreon for any paid level to support this blog, and you will be included. Unfortunately, due to the significant time investment I put into this devotion and many other responsibilities, I will only be able to do so for my Patreon supporters.

When will the saints be drawn?  This year, I will start the drawing of saints on the morning of the Feast of the Circumcision and the Octave Day of Christmas (i.e., January 1st). Drawings will occur as the Litany of Saints is recited.  That means results will likely be commented and/or messaged to Patreons by the late afternoon (US Central Time) on January 1st. This will be the only drawing this year. 

Please pass this message on through your blogs and/or email distribution lists, letting all of the Catholic Blogsphere have the chance to participate.

Results:

Name Saint
Anna St. William of Pontoise
Vincent St. Valentine of Rome
Jaime St. Ennodius
AuliyaMarie St. Hitto of Saint-Gall
JL St. Crispina
Julio Blessed Maria Bartholomew
CTC St. Mark the Evangelist
JWC St. Daniel the Prophet
SEC St. Cloud
ABR St. Tironensian Order
SRR St. Simeon-Francois Berneux
RAR St. Charles Borromeo
MHC St. Paul the first hermit
JDC St. Catherine of Genoa
JT The Martyrs of Hayle
ZR St. Henry II
Randy St. Simeon, Bishop and Martyr
Kimberly St. Joseph the foster Father of Jesus Christ
Tom St. Abraham, father of Isaac
Gina Blessed Anthony of Pavonio
Tucker St. Jerome
Mother Mary Paul St. Lambert of Vence
Sr Mary Agnes St. Aderald
Jake St. Gemma Galgani
Emily St. Laura of Saint Catherine of Siena
Nick Pope St. Pius V
Mary St. Marguerite Bourgeois
Kristen Blessed Odo of Beauvais
Cheyanne Pope St. Pius X
Carolyn St. Anthony Zaccaria
Paul St. Rufino
Amelia Blessed William Andleby
CcKenna St. Aderald
Kenli St. Aventinus of Tours
Steven St. Peter Fourier
JoAnn St. Cosmas
Stephen St. Rene Goupil
Bernadette St. Stephen of Mar Saba
Erin St. Bruno
Kevin Blessed Terence
Niamh Our Lady of the Rosary
Malachy St. George
Mulreann St. Edward the King
Sean St. Alexander the martyr
Michael St. Bernard of Thiron
Jesse St. Meneve
Jen St. Theophilus of Corte
Chris St. Thomas More
Ryan Blessed Andre de Soveral
Libby Blessed Herman the Cripple
Noah Blessed Henry
Bella Blessed Josefa Naval Girbes
Tim W St. Quintus the Thaumaturge
John D St. Estelle
Xavier St. Louise de Marillac
Griffin St. Charles Garnier
Elijah St. Artaldus
James St. Adelelmus of Flanders
Max St. Irenaeus of Lyons
Jacob St. Conon, Bishop of the Isle of Man
Christopher Blessed Sadoc and Companions
Christian C Blessed Villana
Gabriel St. Adelin of Seez

If you are not familiar with your saint, I encourage you to research online and even pick up a copy of Father Hugo Hoever's "Live of the Saints," which I read daily.  While the book does not include saints canonized in recent years, it is something that I highly recommend.

Here is a prayer to honor any saint: http://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2006/01/prayer-to-venerate-any-saint.html
Read more >>
Saturday, September 23, 2023
The Importance and History of Ember Days


The Ancient Institution of Ember Days

Ember days are categorized by three elements: prayers for both thanksgiving and petition, penance in the form of fasting and abstinence, and ordinations. Like Rogation Days, Ember Days developed early in these times, taking the form that would continue for centuries. The Catholic Encyclopedia explains:

“At first the Church in Rome had fasts in June, September, and December; the exact days were not fixed but were announced by the priests. The Liber Pontificalis ascribes to Pope Callistus (217-222) a law ordering the fast, but probably it is older. Leo the Great (440-461) considers it an Apostolic institution.” 

By the time of Pope Gregory I, who died in 601 AD, they were observed for all four seasons though the date of each of them could vary. In the Roman Synod of 1078 under Pope Gregory VII, they were uniformly established for the Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday after December 13th (St. Lucia), after Ash Wednesday, after Pentecost Sunday, and after September 14th (Exaltation of the Cross).

While they were initially observed only in Rome, their observance quickly spread as the Catholic Encyclopedia further adds:

“Before Gelasius the ember days were known only in Rome, but after his time their observance spread. They were brought into England by St. Augustine; into Gaul and Germany by the Carlovingians. Spain adopted them with the Roman Liturgy in the eleventh century. They were introduced by St. Charles Borromeo into Milan. The Eastern Church does not know them. The present Roman Missal, in the formulary for the Ember days, retains in part the old practice of lessons from Scripture in addition to the ordinary two: for the Wednesdays three, for the Saturdays six, and seven for the Saturday in December. Some of these lessons contain promises of a bountiful harvest for those that serve God.” 

Dom Prosper Guéranger adds that the institution of the Ember Days is further based on the fast ordered by God for the changing of the seasons in the Old Testament. Thus, the Church hallowed that fast and adopted it for the worship of the True God thus fulfilling the Lord’s words that He came not to abolish but to complete (cf. Matthew 5:17) what was instituted in the Old Testament:

“We may consider it as one of those practices which the Church took from the Synagogue; for the prophet Zacharias speaks of the fasts of the fourth, fifth, seventh, and tenth months. Its introduction into the Christian Church would seem to have been made in the apostolic times; such, at least, is the opinion of St. Leo, of St. Isidore of Seville, of Rabanus Maurus, and of several other ancient Christian writers. It is remarkable, on the other hand, that the orientals do not observe this fast.” 

Spirituality of the Ember Days

The purpose of Ember Days is, in the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia, to “thank God for the gifts of nature, to teach men to make use of them in moderation, and to assist the needy.” As a result, their focus differs from the focus of the Rogation Days to which they are often compared. An article on Liturgies.net explains the separate, specific focus of Rogation Days as such:

“Rogation Days are the four days set apart to bless the fields and invoke God's mercy on all of creation. The 4 days are April 25, which is called the Major Rogation (and is only coincidentally the same day as the Feast of St. Mark); and the three days preceding Ascension Thursday, which are called the Minor Rogations. Traditionally, on these days, the congregation marches the boundaries of the parish, blessing every tree and stone, while chanting or reciting a Litany of Mercy, usually a Litany of the Saints.” 

In addition to the general purpose of thanking God and invoking His blessings, the author of Barefoot Abbey provides specific intentions for each of the Ember Days by season so that we can render thanks to Almighty God for the fruits of the earth which specifically become instruments of His grace through the Sacraments:

Winter or Advent Ember Days are after the Feast of St. Lucy (December 13th): Give thanks for the olives that make holy oils for Unction. Spring or Lenten Ember Days are after Ash Wednesday: Give thanks for the flowers and bees that make blessed candles as in for Baptism and upon the alter. Summer or Whit Ember Days are after the Solemnity of Pentecost: Give thanks for the wheat used to make the Eucharist hosts. Autumn or Michaelmas Ember Days are after the Feast of Exaltation of the Holy Cross (September 14): Give thanks for the grapes that make wine for the Precious Blood of Christ.  

By writing these down and recalling them for the Ember Days of each season, we can be more intentional in what we are thanking God for in any given season. In this respect, the Ember Days further distinguish themselves from the Rogation Days.

The Cultural Impact of the Ember Days to Japan

Ember Days would remain obligatory for the faithful until the changes immediately after Vatican II in the mid-1960s. In fact, their observance has led to several long-term cultural implications. For instance, Ember Days are the reason we have “tempura” dishes in Asian cuisine. For instance, shrimp tempura is based on Ember Days, which are known as quatuor tempora in Latin.

Portuguese (and Spanish) missionaries to the Far East would invite the converted Japanese to fast during the quator tempora by eating a dish that consisted of battered and deep-fried seafood and vegetables called “Peixinhos da Horta” in Portuguese which literally translated to “little fishes from the garden.” It is a dish consisting of bell peppers, squash, and green beans that is fried into a flour-based batter. The term steadily gained popularity in southern Japan and became widely used to refer to any sort of food prepared using hot oil, battered or not. This term would persist even after Catholicism was outlawed by the Japanese and the Church’s missionaries were executed or exiled in the late 1500s. It was not until the 1870s that Christianity legally returned to Japan. But the faithful of Japan continued to keep the Faith alive in their families, including through the keeping of fast and abstinence days.

Ember Days Are Always on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays

Ember Days are observed on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays in keeping with the ancient weekly devotional fast that originated with the Apostles. On the rationale for fasting on these days, St. Peter of Alexandria, Patriarch of Alexandria until his death in 311 AD, explains: “On Wednesday because on this day the council of the Jews was gathered to betray our Lord; on Friday because on this day He suffered death for our salvation.” Likewise, the 1875 Catechism of Father Michael Müller adds: “This practice began with Christianity itself, as we learn from St. Epiphanius, who says: ‘It is ordained, by the law of the Apostles, to fast two days of the week.’” Some places added Saturday fasting as well, as noted by St. Francis de Sales who writes, “The early Christians selected Wednesday, Friday and Saturday as days of abstinence.” 

Father Slater notes in “A Short History of Moral Theology” published in 1909 how these weekly devotional fasts gradually ended but were retained for the Ember Days:

“The obligation of fasting on all Wednesdays and Fridays ceased almost entirely about the tenth century, but the fixing of those days by ecclesiastical authority for fasting, and the desire to substitute a Christian observance at Rome for certain pagan rites celebrated in connection with the seasons of the year, seem to have given rise to our Ember Days… About the tenth century the obligation of the Friday fast was reduced to one of abstinence from flesh meat, and the Wednesday fast after being similarly mitigated gradually disappeared altogether.” 

Ember Days in the Early 1900s

The days of obligatory fasting as listed in the 1917 Code of Canon Law were the forty days of Lent (including Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday until noon); the Ember Days; and the Vigils of Pentecost, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, All Saints, and Christmas. Partial abstinence, the eating of meat only at the principal meal, was obligatory on all weekdays of Lent (Monday through Thursday). And of course, complete abstinence was required on all Fridays, including Fridays of Lent, except when a holy day of obligation fell on a Friday outside of Lent. Saturdays in Lent were likewise days of complete abstinence. Fasting and abstinence were not observed should a vigil fall on a Sunday as stated in the code: “If a vigil that is a fast day falls on a Sunday the fast is not to be anticipated on Saturday but is dropped altogether that year.”

Canon 1006 of the 1917 Code further stated men were to be ordained only on Ember Saturdays, Holy Saturday and the Saturday before Passion Sunday, but the Code added “if a serious cause intervenes, the bishop can have them even on any Sunday or feast day of the order.” Episcopal consecration was reserved for Sundays and for Feasts of the Apostles. Thus, even the 1917 Code kept the ancient practice of holding Ember Days as privileged days for ordinations. 

Many changes though would continue through the 20th century. In one such change, on January 28, 1949, the United States bishops issued modified regulations on abstinence in America again after receiving a ruling from the Sacred Congregation of the Council. Partial abstinence replaced complete abstinence for Ember Wednesdays, Ember Saturdays, and the Vigil of Pentecost. Previously, all Ember Days were days of complete abstinence.

Changes to Ember Days in the Early 1960s

By 1962, the laws of fasting and abstinence were as follows as described in Moral Theology by Father Heribert Jone and adapted by Father Urban Adelman for the “laws and customs of the United States of America” copyright 1961: 

“Complete abstinence is to be observed on all Fridays of the year, Ash Wednesday, the Vigils of Immaculate Conception and Christmas. Partial abstinence is to be observed on Ember Wednesdays and Saturdays and on the Vigil of Pentecost. Days of fast are all the weekdays of Lent, Ember Days, and the Vigil of Pentecost. If a vigil falls on a Sunday, the law of abstinence and fasting is dispensed that year and is not transferred to the preceding day.” 

1960 also saw a change to the calculation of how the autumnal Ember Days can follow as the Barefoot Abbey website explains:

“Autumn Ember Days are unique in their scheduling. With the 1960 revisions to the breviary rubrics and the newly instituted system of counting Sundays from August to December, Pope John XXIII added that the September Ember Days should not only follow the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross as they had historically done, but also fall after the 3rd Sunday of September.” 

Gregory DiPippo explains in more detail how the counting of Sundays changed at this time:

“The first Sunday of each of these months is the day on which the Church begins to read a new set of scriptural books at Matins, with their accompanying antiphons and responsories; these readings are part of a system which goes back to the sixth century...The 'first Sunday' of each of these months is traditionally that which occurs closest to the first calendar day of the month, even if that day occurs within the end of the previous month… In the 1960 revision, however, the first Sunday of the months from August to November is always that which occurs first within the calendar month.” 

Thus, not only did fasting change before Vatican II but the possible dates of the Ember Days were changed as well.

The Abandonment of Our Heritage

Shortly after the close of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI issued an apostolic constitution on fasting and abstaining on February 17, 1966, called Paenitemini, whose principles were later incorporated into the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Paenitemini allowed the commutation of the Friday abstinence to an act of penance at the discretion of the local ordinaries and gave authority to the episcopal conferences on how the universal rules would be applied in their region. Abstinence which previously began at age seven was modified to begin at age fourteen. Additionally, the obligation of fasting on the Ember Days and on the remaining vigils was abolished.

Father Lew, commenting on the post-conciliar changes, admonishes priests accordingly:

“True, modern canon law is silent about the Ember Days. But tucked away in an obscure corner of the 1970 missal is a reference to ‘the Four Times, in which the Church is accustomed to pray to our Lord for the various needs of men, especially for the fruits of the earth and human labours, and to give him public thanks’ (Normæ Universales de Anno Liturgico, 45). The same words remain in the 3rd editio typica of this missal, published in 2002. However, the ‘adaptation’ of these days is left to Bishops’ Conferences: they can decide how many are to be observed, and when, and with what prayers. A couple of ‘fast days’ are duly marked on each year’s Ordo for the church in England and Wales, one in Lent and one in October, with the suggestion of celebrating a votive Mass of a suitable kind. Surely so ancient a tradition as the Ember Days must not be allowed to fade away.” 

May we all return to the practice and observance of the Ember Days for the glory of God and for reparation for sin. Offering up our fasts for vocations and for the priests who are ordained on – or around the Ember Days – would be a meritorious and charitable work we can do. And we can spend more time learning about this part of our heritage. Like Ember Days, so much of our history of fasting and abstinence has been forgotten.

Want to learn more about the history of fasting and abstinence? Check out the Definitive Guide to Catholic Fasting and Abstinence.

Read more >>
Friday, July 7, 2023
Should A Catholic Convert to Eastern Orthodoxy?

The Divine Liturgy celebrated at St. Mary's Byzantine Catholic Church in Whitting, IN shows that it is possible to have the beauty of Eastern Liturgies in Communion with Rome.

Is Orthodoxy the True Faith?

It is evident with the crisis in the Catholic Church concerning not only the sexual abuse crisis but the crisis in the Liturgy after Vatican II that some Catholics have become disillusioned with the current Catholic hierarchy. From an outside perspective, some might ask why they should remain Catholic and not convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, which is known for reverent, ancient liturgies under the name of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (or St. Basil the Great at some times).

But on a more deep analysis, there is no refuge in Orthodoxy. While we often think of the Orthodox as schismatics and not as heretics, the doctrinal crisis has also affected them. Some definitions to start from the Catholic Modern Dictionary of Father John Hardon:

Heresy: In the Roman Catholic Church, heresy has a very specific meaning. Anyone who, after receiving baptism, while remaining nominally a Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts any of the truths that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith is considered a heretic. Accordingly four elements must be verified to constitute formal heresy; previous valid baptism, which need not have been in the Catholic Church; external profession of still being a Christian, otherwise a person becomes an apostate; outright denial or positive doubt regarding a truth that the Catholic Church has actually proposed as revealed by God; and the disbelief must be morally culpable, where a nominal Christian refuses to accept what he knows is a doctrinal imperative.

Schismatic: According to Church law, a schismatic is a person who, after receiving baptism and while keeping the name of Christian, pertinaciously refuses to submit to the Supreme Pontiff or refuses to associate with those who are subject to him. The two factors, submission to the Pope and association with persons subject to him, are to be taken disjunctively. Either resisting papal authority or refusing to participate in Catholic life and worship induces schism, even without further affiliation with another religious body. Like heresy, schism is formal and culpable only when the obligations are fully realized.

How is the Orthodox Church Falling Into Heresy?

The Orthodox generally reject the following dogmatically defined truths which a Christian must accept:

  1. The Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and the Son. Those interested in the Church's treatment of this should look into Father Henry Chadwick's "The Early Church" or "Fr. John Meyendorff's "Byzantine Theology," which address this well. The Church Fathers all believed in the Filioque.
  2. The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary (i.e., that She was conceived without the stain of original sin) despite significant proof from the Early Church Fathers. It is well known that a number of Orthodox prelates believed this.
  3. Papal Supremacy. This is well defended by Fr. Francis Dvornik in "Byzantium and the Roman Primacy."
  4. The indissolubility of Marriage since the Orthodox allow a second and even a third marriage for divorced persons. On the contrary, the Magisterium has always maintained the prohibition of divorce and remarriage, even for Eastern Rite Catholics (Council of Lyon II [1274], Benedict XIV [1743] due to our Lord's own words (Matthew 19:6).
  5. The state of the soul needed to approach the Blessed Sacrament.
  6. The use of artificial contraception as being opposed to the will of God.
  7. The fact that Baptism may validly be received only once.
There is No Unified Body of Doctrine in the Orthodox Church

The Orthodox Church is actually not a unified Church but a collection of different groups with different beliefs, which attacks two fundamental marks of the Church. The four marks of the Church can only be present in the Church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ. And Orthodoxy attacks two of them significantly:

Oneness: St. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians asserted that there is “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:5). The Church is one because she was founded by Jesus, the one and only Son of God, Who taught one unified body of doctrine. Granted, there is great diversity in the Church regarding cultures, gifts, ways of life, and offices, yet there is unity in government (under the visible head, the Pope), faith, and sacraments. The Roman Catechism explains, “The first mark of the true Church is described in the Nicene Creed, and consists in unity….”  Likewise, the Baltimore Catechism teaches, “The Church is one because all its members agree in one faith, are all in one communion, and are all under one Head.” 

Catholicity (i.e., Universality): The word "Catholic" literally means “universal.” The Church is the universal body of believers established by Christ and meant for all people of all corners of the world for all times (cf. Matt. 28:18-20; Apoc. 5:9-10). The etymology of the word “catholic” is the Greek adjective katholikos, which is related to the adverb katholou, meaning “in general” or “according to the whole.” This definition helps communicate the fact that the Catholic Faith is for people of every place, culture, and class. There is no one who is not called to a member of the true Faith. As St. John relates in the Book of the Apocalypse: “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; because Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, in Thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation” (Apoc. 5:9).

How exactly does Orthodoxy violate this? A revert from Orthodoxy explains: 

In hindsight, I came to realise that what Greek Orthodoxy lacked was the universality of the Creed; “I believe in ONE, holy, CATHOLIC and Apostolic Church…”. I experienced holiness and Apostolic succession, but didn’t feel the oneness in the increasingly splintering Orthodox churches nor any sense of universality. I felt cut off from my family and peers, because the Greeks showed no interest in my desire to evangelize the Australian people. I was told sternly, “That’s not our way, not our spirit. No one will listen to you because you are not Greek. Besides, you joined a Greek church, why do you want to change us? We are Greek, that’s who we are.” I couldn’t reconcile this attitude with Christ’s solemn command to baptise the nations, nor the actions of the Apostles in the Book of Acts.

As long as the Orthodox attack fundamental dogmas of the Christian Religion, they can never be an option. On the contrary, the Catholic Church comprises many Eastern Rite Catholics who left Orthodoxy to be reunited with Rome and the oneness of doctrine but retain their beautiful and reverent liturgies. 

In fact, some groups like the Society of St. Josaphat are aligned with the SSPX in the fight for Tradition and for the preservation of the Eastern Rites.

Resources for Anyone Tempted to Leave Traditional Catholicism for Orthodoxy

Books:

Articles:

Videos:

Read more >>
Friday, December 9, 2022
The Roman Catechism Explained for the Modern World

Known as the “Roman Catechism,” the “Catechism of St. Pius V,” and the “Catechism of the Council of Trent,” this book has fallen into extreme disuse. In fact, the word “catechism” today is often used only in reference to the post-conciliar Catechism of the Catholic Church, originally published by Pope John Paul II in 1992. Sadly, however, this modern catechism fails in many respects: its verbose language, its frequent references to the novelties of Vatican II as opposed to actual dogmatic works, and the recent errors promulgated by Pope Francis in regard to capital punishment. In fact, the number of religious education programs that feel they must teach children from this catechism is frightening – no young child could attempt to learn from a text that is best suited for an undergraduate or master’s course. So why do we either water down the Faith or teach children that the only true source of doctrine is the 1992 text?

Unbeknownst to many, the new catechism is far from the only catechism. St. Peter Canisius, who was instrumental in fighting Protestantism in Germany, wrote the first catechism in 1555, known as the Catechism of St. Peter Canisius. Less than a decade later in 1562, the Roman Catechism was commissioned by the Fathers of the Council of Trent, who saw the need for an authoritative explanation of the Faith for the universal Church. Prepared under St. Charles Borromeo’s supervision and issued by Pope St. Pius V in 1566, it remains the most authoritative catechism in print. 

The notion that the “Catechism” is the exclusive right to the 1992 text promulgated by Pope John Paul II is absurd. In fact, as the crisis in the Church deepened, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) commented on the failure of modern catechesis in the Church when he said in 2003, “It is evident that today religious ignorance is enormous; suffice it to speak with the new generations. Evidently, in the post-conciliar period the concrete transmission of the contents of the Christian faith was not achieved.”  This echoed his previous sentiments published before the New Catechism was written: “The catastrophic failure of modern catechesis is all too obvious.”  The target audience is really any adult Catholic who wants to better learn aspects of the Faith which they may have never known, due to poor catechesis they received.

Why This Book?

The Roman Catechism is rather verbose and hard to read for many. To make the teaching of the Roman Catechism clearer to today’s readers, and especially regarding the many moral issues facing our world today, Mr. Plese has sought to present the teaching of the Roman Catechism augmented by the Catechism of St. Pius X, the Baltimore Catechism, the Sacred Scriptures, and the writings of the saints to make this forgotten catechism available, accessible, and understandable for the crisis we find ourselves in. This book is specifically written for today’s doctrinal crisis, thus addressing issues for the modern Catholic, which were never covered by Father Spirago in The Catechism Explained and which go beyond the basics covered in the Baltimore Catechism.

Endorsements

The Roman Catechism has been a trusted source of Catholic doctrine for centuries. Mr. Plese has done a great service in transmitting this classic catechism for the modern world.

- Bishop Athanasius Schneider

Our age is almost unique in its lack of sound catechesis.  Matthew Plese’s work fills an enormous need by making better known the clarity of the Roman Catechism.  Given that many people today lack a foundation in basic religious concepts, Plese’s explanation of the Roman Catechism will make this treasure more accessible and useful to a contemporary audience.  Mr. Plese has performed a great service to the Church by completing this detailed and deep explanation of this treasure of the Church.

- Dr. Brian McCall

The Roman Catechism, commonly known as The Catechism of Trent, is the most important catechism in the history of the Catholic Church. It was composed by order of an Ecumenical Council, at the height of the Protestant Revolution, to give pastors precise, succinct definitions of the dogmas of the Faith, and it became the gold standard for teaching and preaching the dogmas of the Faith for 350 years. It is still authoritative, and it is the only catechism quoted in the 1992 Catechism—it is quoted 20 times—because it gives such beautiful, clear definitions of the dogmas of the Faith. The Roman Catechism Explained for the Modern World gives an excellent introductory commentary on the Catechism of Trent, so that contemporary Catholic readers will hopefully be motivated to appreciate and make use of this great treasure.

- Hugh Owen, Director, Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation

Many Catholics today are confused about the teachings of their faith.” This is troubling and not something a faithful Catholic would expect to hear 20 centuries after Christ “dwelt among us.” It is probably more accurate to say “most prelates ordained and charged with teaching the Catholic faith are confused about it.” This little book on catechism aims to address this confusion with four simple implements of teaching whose beauty and simplicity I would be wrong to reveal; rather that you should take up this book and become immersed in them and turn that neon light out yourself. 

- Mike Church, Radio & TV Presenter on The CRUSADE Channel

How to Order

Kindle Version ($9.99): https://amzn.to/3W0K9Sb

Paperback Version ($17.95): https://amzn.to/3XPfV6u

PDF Version ($9.99): https://www.patreon.com/acatholiclife/shop/roman-catechism-explained-for-modern-pdf-10244

Patreon members at the $10 tier or above will get the book on PDF for free.

Read more >>


Copyright Notice: Unless otherwise stated, all items are copyrighted under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. If you quote from this blog, cite a link to the post on this blog in your article.

Disclosure of Material Connection: Some of the links on this blog are “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate, for instance, I earn a small commission from qualifying purchases made by those who click on the Amazon affiliate links included on this website. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”