SSPX Superior Fr. Pagliarani’s homily for the 1 July 2026 consecration of bishops

Fr. Davide Pagliarani, the Superior of the SSPX, preached in French for about 37 minutes at the consecration of new bishops.  The English translation is some 2100+ words.   The English voice-over in THIS video is a bit loose.  The English translation is HERE.

HOWEVER… as I listened, Pagliarani also spoke about the Most Precious Blood of the Lord.  That part doesn’t result in the linked transcript.  I found a way to tease it out and I will include it, as is, after this precis of the released version.

I’ve been saying in conversations that the SSPX and Rome (the tight circle now around Leo) are talking past each other, as if they were speaking difference languages.  This is something that Pagliarani underscores.

A major theme is the inseparability of faith and Church.

Here is a summary for your convenience.

Pagliarani leads off saying the episcopal consecrations at Écône as a solemn, historic, and divisive event, but one whose meaning must be understood primarily as a manifestation of faith. He begins by thanking those who prepared the ceremony and those who traveled as pilgrims, then immediately frames the day’s central question: what do these consecrations mean? His answer is that they are not chiefly political, organizational, or sociological. They are an act ordered to preserving, living, and transmitting the Catholic faith as the Church has always taught it.

The speaker rejects the charge that one must choose between preserving the integral faith and remaining in the Church. He calls this a false dilemma. For Pagliarani, membership in the Church is founded above all on the integral profession of the faith of the Church. Therefore, he argues, fidelity to Tradition is not separation from the Church, but the very means of remaining within her. He insists that the Society does not seek a parallel Church, a factional identity, or a mere traditionalist sensibility. Its purpose is continuity with the faith, priesthood, Mass, sacraments, and doctrine handed down through twenty centuries.

Pagliarani also addresses accusations of disobedience or hostility toward the Pope. He insists that the Pope is loved and honored as Vicar of Christ, but argues that this love requires resisting situations in which the papal office appears, in his view, humiliated by being placed on the same level as false religions. He describes the conflict as one of language: the Society speaks “the language of faith” and Tradition, while the contemporary ecclesial establishment speaks the language of inclusion, listening, dialogue, and accompaniment. Pagliarani does not entirely reject accompaniment, but insists that it must follow the transmission of truth. The correct order, he says, is faith first, then Christian life, then accompaniment.

Pagliarani defends the consecrations as exceptional means proportionate to an exceptional need. He calls them a prudential provision for the future rather than provocation, challenge, or declaration of war. The reason for consecrating four bishops is described plainly: to secure the future, since the present bishops will not live forever and it would be irresponsible to wait until emergency conditions become irreversible. The act is therefore a foresight in service of the Church.

Pagliarani then turns to the new bishops. They are warned that they are receiving both an immense grace and a heavy cross. They are exhorted not to seek honor, power, or personal interest, but to disappear so that Christ may be known. Their office is defined in traditional episcopal terms: to preserve and transmit doctrine, sanctify souls, pray, sacrifice, and unite truth with charity. Pagliarani stresses that a bishop does not exist to manage an organization, cultivate publicity, or administer projects, but to lead souls to Heaven. At judgment, he says, what will matter is whether they preserved the faith, transmitted grace, and sanctified souls.

In addressing the faithful, Pagliarani speaks of their sacrifices, families, prayers, support for seminaries, and perseverance are praised as essential to the survival of this work. They are urged to remain simple, Catholic, humble, peaceful, and charitable. He warns them against controversy for its own sake, bitterness, resentment, and loss of hope. Even amid ecclesial crisis, he urges serenity because Christ has already conquered sin, death, and the world.

Pagliarani closes by presenting the consecrations not as an endpoint, but as a beginning. The future task is to continue forming priests, preaching, sanctifying souls, building Christian families, and handing on the faith whole and entire. His final appeal is Marian: the Blessed Virgin is invoked to preserve the Church, protect the Holy Father, strengthen the new bishops, sustain priests, and obtain perseverance in fidelity until death.

That was the sermon overall, but without the following:

On the feast of today, the feast of the Most Precious Blood, Our Lord very providentially expresses and summarizes perfectly the significance of these consecrations. He permits us to bring everything down to one point, to summarize everything in the Precious Blood of Our Lord.

He who does not know this Blood, who does not adore it and love it, does not know Our Lord and does not know the Redemption. And he who does not know Our Lord knows nothing and has understood nothing.

The Precious Blood is the unique remedy, the only remedy, the first and the last remedy for all the evils that afflict humanity. Why? Because all these evils come from sin. And the remedy for sin is the Precious Blood.

Everything evil comes from sin, and from one sin in particular. It is always the same kind of sin, from the very beginning until now: the exaltation of man. It is pride.

We are soaked in this today. This exaltation of man is everywhere: man as a wonder, man as seemingly perfect, man as seemingly possessing infinite power. In fact, all of this only pushes him toward pride. Ultimately, it pushes him toward contempt for God and toward apostasy, a silent apostasy. It comes from that.

And the more we exalt man, the more we become unbalanced, the more we become fanatics. We become far from God, and far from the true perfection of man. This is a disaster.

Man, full of all his rights, full of himself, becomes incapable of turning toward God, incapable of recognizing that he is wounded by sin. He needs redemption. He needs Our Lord. He needs His Precious Blood. That is the greatest evil of today, and of all history. It is the source of all the other evils, this disease, this excessive idea of man.

We have to recognize that. It penetrates very deeply. Unfortunately, even in the Church, this disease makes one blind. It blinds souls. It is not this that will bring souls back to God.

And so, by these consecrations, we want to do something. We want to continue to preach the Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We want to continue, in a certain way, to spread and pour out this Blood upon souls.

It is in His Blood that Our Lord founds His Church, the new and eternal covenant, and there is only one. Whoever thinks that there are two or three covenants no longer believes in the infinite and unique power of the Blood of Our Lord.

And in speaking of the power, the value, and the dignity of the Precious Blood of Our Lord, we cannot forget where it comes from. It was formed, brought forth, and furnished by the most pure blood of Our Lady.

It was Our Lady who gave to the Word His humanity. It was in her most pure and immaculate blood that the humanity of Our Lord was formed, and that the Blood of Our Lord was formed. And it is she who offers it with Our Lord for us.

It is she who first saw the Blood flow from Our Lord’s wounds on the Cross. It is she who collects it at the foot of the Cross, who keeps it, and who still presents it at the altar. It is she who, at Mass, spreads these graces to souls.

She has understood the power and the dignity of this Blood.

What a mystery. What a mystery, this association of Our Lady with her divine Son, always at His side.

You can see how all our faith, all our religion, all our love, turns around Our Lord, because everything turns around this Blood.

Posted in SSPX |
Leave a comment

A study in contrasts

Yesterday there was an episcopal consecration… in Laredo, Texas.

Today there was also an episcopal consecration in Ecône, Switzerland.

They were alike in some ways.  There were quite different in others.

You might have a look at both and consider the similarities and the differences.

Here is the video of the episcopal consecration in Ecône, Switzerland.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

Here is the video of the episcopal consecration in Laredo, Texas.

YouTube thumbnailYouTube icon

A helpful person sent me a photo of what was sung at the Communion time in Laredo. In the video this is at about 2:43:00.   Right click for larger.

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 |
Leave a comment

ASK FATHER: Female heads of dicasteries

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Father,
Thank you ALWAYS for your vocation and your continued guidance of so many souls. I am deeply grateful!
I am trying to wrap my head around the recent installment of two women (one lay and one religious) as heads of Dicasteries. This follows on Pope Francis’ installment of Sister Nathalie Becquart as undersecretary of the Synod (and incidentally the first woman voting member). How do we approach and understand this as NOT a rupture and not an innovation? Are these dicasteries separate enough from the teaching authority of the Magisterium that it doesn’t matter?

One needs to know what a “dicastery” is.

Before 2022, keep in mind that all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.

A dicastery is the broader term: a department or major organ of the Roman Curia.

Until 2022 a congregation was, one particular kind of dicastery. Under Pastor Bonus in 1988, “dicasteries” included the Secretariat of State, Congregations, Tribunals, Councils, and Offices. So, in the older system, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was a dicastery, but the Roman Rota was also a dicastery of a different type.   They had a hierarchy.  The congregations had juridical sections.  They were headed by bishops, usually also cardinals.  The members were Cardinals and bishops.

Since 2002 Praedicate Evangelium the official terminology has changed. The Roman Curia is now described as being composed of the Secretariat of State, the Dicasteries, and other Institutions, “all juridically equal among themselves.” The old “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,” for example, is now the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.  It was once “La Suprema”.  Now its “La ‘Meh'”.

In the old system, congregations tended to have stronger executive and disciplinary competence, while councils were often more pastoral, promotional, or consultative.

As far as the Synod is concerned, there is a female (ergo non-ordained) under-secretary.

So what?  Big deal.

Does the office of the Synod have any jurisdiction or legislative power, exercise of both requiring sacred orders?

No, not in the ordinary sense. The present office is the General Secretariat of the Synod, and its ordinary role is administrative, coordinative, consultative, and preparatory. It is “a permanent institution at the service of the Synod of Bishops” and is “directly subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Its stated competence is the preparation and implementation of Synod Assemblies, plus other questions the Pope may entrust to it.  Can. 343 says that the Synod of Bishops discusses questions and expresses its wishes, but does not resolve them or issue decrees, unless the Roman Pontiff grants it deliberative power; even then, the Pope must ratify the decisions. The General Secretariat does not possess ordinary legislative power as a Curial office. Praedicate Evangelium states generally that a Curial institution “cannot issue laws or general decrees having the force of law” or derogate from universal law, except in individual and particular cases with papal approval in forma specifica.

Hence, is consultative. The legislative authority remains with the Roman Pontiff, or with those who possess legislative power according to law. The Synod office does not legislate on its own.

So a woman is in the leadership of the Synod, and as a voting member.  So what?  So what is, how does a non-ordained person of either sex have a the ability to VOTE in a Synod of BISHOPS.

Also, a religious sister was appointed as the Dicastery for the Prefect of the Dicastery for Integral Human Development.

Does the Dicastery for the Prefect of the Dicastery for Integral Human Development have any legislative power or jurisdiction?

The Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development has no ordinary legislative power.

Its proper field is chiefly promotional, pastoral, coordinative, and consultative: human dignity, human rights, health, justice and peace, economy and work, care for creation, migration, humanitarian emergencies, and the study and dissemination of Catholic social doctrine. It supports particular Churches and episcopal conferences rather than governing them as a superior ordinary.

The Dicastery is competent regarding Caritas Internationalis and the International Catholic Migration Commission, according to their statutes, and it exercises responsibilities reserved to the Holy See in establishing and supervising certain international charitable associations and funds.

So this Dicastery cannot make universal or general Church law. It can act administratively within the competence assigned to it by papal law, statutes, or special mandate, regarding matters and institutions expressly entrusted to it. It does not have general jurisdiction over diocesan bishops, episcopal conferences, or the faithful in the way a diocesan bishop governs his diocese or the Pope governs the universal Church.

Hence, you can pull any person off the street to be the head of this office.  He/she would not have governance in this dicastery that could require the sacred orders required for governance.  They can “administrate” entities that aren’t operated under the aegis of orders, even if their heads are clerics, as is usually the case with Caritas (a Cardinal).

Other “dicasteries” such as Doctrine of the Faith, Bishops, Clergy, Worship, etc., are an entirely different matter from these … Mickey Mouse Club chapters.

Congregations (of those in sacred orders) were a vastly superior concept, completely contrary to the view of the Church as an evolving NGO.

Female (non-ordained) heads of dicasteries.

Innovation?  Of course.

Rupture?   Of course.

Such are the times we are in.

I write this three hours before the SSPX begins the consecration of bishops without papal mandate on the basis that the Church is in a state of emergency.

Just sayin’.

 

 

Posted in ASK FATHER Question Box, SESSIUNCULA |
Leave a comment

Leo wrote to the SSPX. The SSPX wrote back. Fr. Pagliarani’s response.

Leo XIV wrote an impassioned letter to the SSPX. I posted it HERE. Leo wrote with a plea not to go forward. He hinted at dialogue.   NB: I turned off comments here and posted this as an update also with Leo’s letter to the SSPX, which seemed appropriate.  Discussion can continue there.


Letter from the Superior General in Response to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV

The Superior General
To His Holiness
Pope Leo XIV

Ecône, 30 June 2026

Most Holy Father,

Thank you very much for the letter that Your Holiness so kindly addressed to me.

I have been deeply touched by Your paternal solicitude.

For a long time, I had hoped to have the opportunity of meeting You in person, in order to express to You directly our sincere desire to serve the Church. Unfortunately, that opportunity has not presented itself.

I ask only that You consider the sincerity of this intention, which is in no way feigned. Paradoxically, in the present circumstances, we believe it to be our very duty to do everything possible to mend Christ’s seamless garment, torn by forces and pressures incompatible with a truly Catholic spirit. I ask only that You consider the authenticity of this intention before making a decision concerning the Society of Saint Pius X. It is not yet too late.

Far be it from us to separate ourselves from the Roman Church. We desire, on the contrary, to serve her by means that are extraordinary, as one would assist a mother in distress who requires particular help, even if such help is not understood by everyone. Yet I am certain that the Holy Father could understand it.

The Holy See has shown itself capable of understanding very complex situations and of allowing time for discernment.

May I therefore filially ask Your Holiness to take the time necessary for that discernment.

If my own words are not sufficient, I would ask You to reflect upon two very simple facts. First, in 1988 the Society was already declared schismatic, for reasons and in circumstances entirely analogous to those of today. Yet, after so many years, we are speaking together as a father and his son. Your Holiness is paternally urging me to avoid a schism which, theoretically, has already taken place. Does not Your very attitude—whose paternal concern I deeply appreciate—constitute proof that the Society is neither schismatic nor hostile to the Church?

Secondly, some years ago, the Holy See entrusted two bishops of the Church with the task of engaging in dialogue with the Society of Saint Pius X: Bishop Vitus Huonder, then Bishop of Chur, now deceased, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana. Both, after taking the necessary time for discernment, recognised the profoundly Catholic spirit of the Society and bore public witness to it.

Above all, however, I venture to address Your Holiness in the name of the thousands of souls who have rediscovered the Catholic faith and the practice of religion through the apostolate of the Society. This is a fact of which Your predecessors themselves took note. These souls have but one desire: to attain salvation through this instrument which Divine Providence has placed at their disposal. They have suffered, and they are sincere. I am confident that Your paternal heart as universal Shepherd will be moved by this very particular situation. One day, all the difficulties between the Holy See and the Society will be resolved. A gesture of understanding on Your part, far from harming unity, could only manifest before the world and before all Christians Your concern for unity and Your goodness as a father.

I leave all this to Your consideration. I renew my prayers for Your Holiness.

For a long time, even before Your election, I have been praying to Saint Rita for the present situation. I saw in the election of an Augustinian Pope a sign of hope. I am certain that the Saint will intercede. It is never too late.

Please give us Your blessing.

I take this opportunity to remain, with the deepest devotion in Our Lord,

Don Davide Pagliarani

Posted in Leo XIV, SSPX | Tagged
Leave a comment

Daily Rome Shot 1653: Procession with the chains of St. Paul

Yesterday there was a procession at St. Paul’s outside the walls with the chain that held St. Paul in his captivity.

The reliquary was borne by members of the Archconfraternity of the Most Holy Trinity of the Pilgrims and Convalescents, which St. Philip Neri founded at The Parish™.  They were specifically requested to participate.  Their reputation grows.

Please remember me when shopping online and use my affiliate links.  US HEREWHY?  This helps to pay for health insurance, utilities, groceries, and now also my late mother’s place.  At no extra cost, you provide help for which I am grateful.  

 

A few days ago, I posted a Mom’s Stuff Page. You readers know a LOT about a LOT. Hence, I want to tap your knowledge. And if you see something you want, let me know. Since then, two people have reached out interested to purchase something in the photos. I’ll post more photos soon. I’ll have to move nimbly with this process and I really have no idea what I am doing. I’ve gotten some good advice, however. The last piece of hard news was that the inspector said the roof needs to be replaced on my mom’s house. Please keep me in your prayers and please say a prayer for my late mother as well, 11th hour convert, mother of a priest.

Black to move. Mate in … ?

NB: I’ll hold comments with solutions ’till the next day so there won’t be “spoilers” for others.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
4 Comments

Prayer for the SSPX and Leo

On this last day of the month dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Our Lord, day before the Feast of the Most Precious Blood, I offer this petition to the Most Holy Trinity.

Mindful that the SSPX church in Paris, Saint Nicholas du Chardonnet is the seat of Our Lady Queen of the Clergy, I ask Our Lady to place her protective mantle over her sons, Leo and all the priestly members of the SSPX.

I ask our Lord, with His High-Priestly Heart wide open, to pour down His Most Precious Blood on Leo and the priests of the Fraternity.

May Christ’s Precious Blood and our Lady’s mantle purge and repel every demonic influence, any and all spirits of discord and pride.

Let the work of the Holy Spirit soften what is hard and move what is stubborn in their hearts and minds.

May the Holy Apostle Martyrs, Sts. Peter and Paul, Vicar of Christ and the Apostle of the Gentiles, petition from the Almighty the gift of abundant courage for both Leo and the Fraternity in this critical moment, courage to be generous, courage to postpone.

I raise this prayer with confidence to the Most Holy Trinity, God Three and One in the Most Holy Name of Jesus.

God the Father, have mercy on us.
God the Son, have mercy on us.
God the Holy Spirit, mercy on us.
Mary, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us.
Sts. Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Posted in SSPX, Urgent Prayer Requests |
10 Comments

ASK FATHER: Frequency of confession and confession of venial sins

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

During confession recently the priest told me I don’t have to confess venial sins, because receiving the Eucharist takes them away. He also said I don’t have to go to confession more than once a month (it was two weeks since my last confession). Are these things true? I’d like to hear your perspective on this. Thank you.

Venial sins are sins and they are valid matter for the Sacrament of Penance. The priest is correct in saying that venial sins can be forgiven through reception of Communion in the state of grace, along with other means as well.

Regarding the priest’s “advice” about going “more than once a month… that seems to me to be a bit imprudent to tell a penitent. People should go to confession as often as they need to go.

That said, I don’t know you and I don’t know that priest. That priest isn’t a mind reader and neither am I.

It may be that he sensed in you – whom I do not know at all – a whiff of scrupulosity because you confessed venial sins. Again, I don’t know.

Strictly speaking, you are not obliged to confess all or any venial sins, although they may be confessed. Sometimes it is salutary to go to confession even when you are not aware of a mortal sin, because one of the effects of the sacrament is to strengthen you in regard to temptations. In a case like that, venial sins are valid matter for confession. In such a case, one might say to the priest that you desire the strengthening of the sacrament against some temptation.

Since we are on the topic, and I mentioned “other means as well”, we could review ways in which venial sins can be forgiven. I don’t intend this to be completely exhaustive.

Venial sins are forgiven by any grace-moved act that turns the soul back toward God and away, at least implicitly, from the disorder of the sin. St. Thomas Aquinas’ key principle is that venial sin does not destroy sanctifying grace, as mortal sin does. Instead, it “clogs” or hinders the soul’s movement toward God. Therefore, it is removed by a movement of grace or charity, with at least virtual displeasure for sin. It need not involve explicit recollection of each venial sin.

The principal means by which venial sins are forgiven are these:

1. Sacramental confession. Venial sins may be confessed validly and profitably, though they are not required matter for confession as mortal sins are. The Council of Trent says venial sins “may be rightly and profitably” declared in confession, yet may be omitted without guilt and “can be expiated by many other remedies.”

2. Holy Communion, as the priest in question said. The Eucharist remits venial sins in those properly disposed. Trent calls it an “antidote” by which we are freed from “daily faults” and preserved from mortal sins. The Roman Catechism teaches that the Eucharist remits “lighter sins, commonly called venial,” though this presumes no obstinate attachment or prevailing delight in those sins.

3. All sacraments received fruitfully. Since the sacraments confer grace, St. Thomas says that “by all the sacraments of the New Law without exception” venial sins are remitted, insofar as grace is conferred and the soul is moved toward God.

4. Acts of contrition, charity, and penance. An act of contrition, an act of love of God, sincere sorrow, fervent prayer, or any real movement of charity can remit venial sin. St. Thomas Aquinas says no fresh infusion of habitual grace is required. A movement proceeding from grace is sufficient.

5. The Confiteor, striking the breast, and the Our Father. St. Thomas explicitly lists general confession, the beating of the breast, and the Lord’s Prayer, especially because in the Our Father we ask, “Forgive us our trespasses.”

6. Sacramentals and reverent devotional acts. The use of Holy Water, receiving episcopal blessings, prayers said in a dedicated church, and similar sacramentals remit venial sins, not mechanically, but insofar as they stir reverence, penance, and charity.

7. Fasting, prayer, almsgiving, works of mercy, reconciliation, and bearing suffering. These are the traditional penitential works and works of mercy. The Roman Catechism, following Scripture and the Fathers, names fasting, prayer, and almsgiving as principal forms of penance, and also mentions reconciliation with one’s neighbor, tears of repentance, charity, reading Scripture, reciting the Roman Breviary or Liturgy of the Hours, and sincere worship as contributing to forgiveness.

A couple points. First, venial sins are not forgiven while the will remains attached to them. Second, the guilt of venial sin may be remitted without all the temporal punishment being remitted. Aquinas makes this distinction explicitly. These acts remove guilt, but the remission of punishment depends on the fervor of charity aroused.

In sum, venial sins are forgiven by confession, Holy Communion, fruitful reception of the sacraments, acts of contrition and charity, the Our Father, penitential works, and sacramentals, provided there is at least implicit repentance and no actual attachment to the sin.

Everyone…

GO TO CONFESSION!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION | Tagged
5 Comments

Leo XIV has written to the SSPX: “I plead with you and ask you with all my heart: please turn back!”

Leo XIV has written to the SSPX.

UPDATE: Fr. Pagliarani’s response to Leo HERE


 

LETTER OF POPE LEO XIV
TO THE SUPERIOR GENERAL
OF THE PRIESTLY FRATERNITY OF SAINT PIUS X

___________________________________

To The Reverend
Davide Pagliarani
Superior General
of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X

With a paternal heart, and aware of the responsibility entrusted to me by the Lord as the Successor of the Apostle Peter, I address you and, through you, the bishops, priests, seminarians and faithful connected to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X.

The Church recognizes the devotion to liturgical life, commitment to priestly formation, apostolic zeal and desire for fidelity to Tradition that characterize many people and communities connected to your Fraternity. This has motivated the attentive and generous attitude that my Predecessors have consistently shown to you.

In this spirit, and filled with Christian affection, I plead with you and ask you with all my heart: please turn back! I urge you to consider carefully the spiritual good of the faithful, because the schismatic act you are about to undertake would deprive them of the licit and, in some cases, even valid reception of the Sacraments, which they love and seek for their sanctification.

The Church is open to a path of dialogue and understanding that the Holy Spirit can make possible and fruitful.

I pray for you, because to tear the seamless garment of Christ is a sin of extreme gravity. May the Lord enlighten your consciences and awaken your hearts. With a sorrowful yet hopeful heart, I feel it is my duty, through the authority received from Christ, to ask you to desist from your intended act. I entrust these intentions to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Mother of Good Counsel.

From the Vatican, 29 June 2026

Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul

LEO PP. XIV


UPDATE:


Letter from the Superior General in Response to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV

The Superior General
To His Holiness
Pope Leo XIV

Ecône, 30 June 2026

Most Holy Father,

Thank you very much for the letter that Your Holiness so kindly addressed to me.

I have been deeply touched by Your paternal solicitude.

For a long time, I had hoped to have the opportunity of meeting You in person, in order to express to You directly our sincere desire to serve the Church. Unfortunately, that opportunity has not presented itself.

I ask only that You consider the sincerity of this intention, which is in no way feigned. Paradoxically, in the present circumstances, we believe it to be our very duty to do everything possible to mend Christ’s seamless garment, torn by forces and pressures incompatible with a truly Catholic spirit. I ask only that You consider the authenticity of this intention before making a decision concerning the Society of Saint Pius X. It is not yet too late.

Far be it from us to separate ourselves from the Roman Church. We desire, on the contrary, to serve her by means that are extraordinary, as one would assist a mother in distress who requires particular help, even if such help is not understood by everyone. Yet I am certain that the Holy Father could understand it.

The Holy See has shown itself capable of understanding very complex situations and of allowing time for discernment.

May I therefore filially ask Your Holiness to take the time necessary for that discernment.

If my own words are not sufficient, I would ask You to reflect upon two very simple facts. First, in 1988 the Society was already declared schismatic, for reasons and in circumstances entirely analogous to those of today. Yet, after so many years, we are speaking together as a father and his son. Your Holiness is paternally urging me to avoid a schism which, theoretically, has already taken place. Does not Your very attitude—whose paternal concern I deeply appreciate—constitute proof that the Society is neither schismatic nor hostile to the Church?

Secondly, some years ago, the Holy See entrusted two bishops of the Church with the task of engaging in dialogue with the Society of Saint Pius X: Bishop Vitus Huonder, then Bishop of Chur, now deceased, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana. Both, after taking the necessary time for discernment, recognised the profoundly Catholic spirit of the Society and bore public witness to it.

Above all, however, I venture to address Your Holiness in the name of the thousands of souls who have rediscovered the Catholic faith and the practice of religion through the apostolate of the Society. This is a fact of which Your predecessors themselves took note. These souls have but one desire: to attain salvation through this instrument which Divine Providence has placed at their disposal. They have suffered, and they are sincere. I am confident that Your paternal heart as universal Shepherd will be moved by this very particular situation. One day, all the difficulties between the Holy See and the Society will be resolved. A gesture of understanding on Your part, far from harming unity, could only manifest before the world and before all Christians Your concern for unity and Your goodness as a father.

I leave all this to Your consideration. I renew my prayers for Your Holiness.

For a long time, even before Your election, I have been praying to Saint Rita for the present situation. I saw in the election of an Augustinian Pope a sign of hope. I am certain that the Saint will intercede. It is never too late.

Please give us Your blessing.

I take this opportunity to remain, with the deepest devotion in Our Lord,

Don Davide Pagliarani

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
37 Comments

Daily Rome Shot 1652: tiara

From St. Peter’s Basilica from The World’s Best Sacristan™.

Here is something interesting at The Parish™.  For extra credit, who can explain this?

White mates in 4.

NB: I’ll hold comments with solutions ’till the next day so there won’t be “spoilers” for others.

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
6 Comments

ASK FATHER: If God love us infinitely why does He not speak to us directly?

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

At another Catholic site I saw this question and I was wondering how you would answer it. How can it be said that God loves us infinitely when He never speaks to us directly or shows Himself to us directly?

Okay, the pressure is on! Firstly, I don’t want to compete with anyone in questions like this, because they are hard and we can approach them in differing ways, just as we can view the twinkle of a finely cut gem from varying angles.

Let’s break this down.

“How can it be said…”.

It can be said because in the first place God’s love is considered by what God is, not by the degree to which we presently feel or perceive Him.

God does not “have” love as a passing affection. God is love: Deus caritas est (1 John 4:8).

God’s act of loving is identical with His own infinite being.

There is a philosophical adage that guides us here: that which is received, is received in the manner of the one receiving… quidquid recipitur in modo recipientis recipitur. When God loves a creature, the creature receives that infinite love in a finite way, according to its finite capacity. But the divine act from which it comes is not finite. Analogy: a cup receives only a cupful from the ocean, but the ocean is not thereby reduced to a cup.

Now we come to the meat of the question, probably the motive behind the question.

“…when He never speaks to us directly or shows Himself to us directly?”

There is longing in this question, which we should all have.

For the sake of brevity, we leave apart special, rare instances when God seems directly to communicate in clear terms with one of us, such as seems to have been the case with, for example, St. Margaret Mary.   Some people experience powerful interior locutions, etc.   In the normal course of the developing spiritual life, God “speaks” to us apophatically in silences and seeming distance, in mental prayer, by mediation, etc.

Why does infinite love come to us so often through silence, distance, obscurity, and mediation?

God will not overwhelm us with the unveiled vision of His essence. Even in the Transfiguration Christ did not reveal His divinity to Peter, John and James: He revealed only a tiny bit of His divinity.  Scripture gives the reason: “Man shall not see me and live” (Exodus 33:20). The direct vision of God belongs to glory, to the Beatific Vision.  Even then, the vision of God will be infinitely beyond our grasp.

In this life, however, we are strangers and sojourners, pilgrim soldiers. We know God through faith, grace, sacraments, Scripture, conscience, providence, transcendentals like beauty, along with suffering, and charity. These are mediated forms, but mediation does not make love unreal.  A mother’s love may be signaled, mediated through the food she prepares, her sacrifices, giving correction, in letters during absences, and the self-giving labor of years. The child may not always feel loved, yet the love may be most real precisely where it is least dramatic.

God’s hiddenness preserves the conditions of faith and love.  There is an old saying in theater: everything is nothing.  That is, if the entire set is red and costumes are red without contrasts, if the music is always fortissimo and relentless, people simply tune out.  If God were constantly manifest with irresistible clarity, obedience might become compulsion, repentance panic, worship self-preservation. He gives enough light to seek Him, enough obscurity to make seeking a free act. “We walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7).  We continue to peer through that “dark glass”, like Moses who peered through the crack in the rock hoping to see God pass.

Finally, the Christian answers that God has in fact spoken and shown Himself directly, above all in Christ.

“In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2). And again: “No one has ever seen God; the only Son… he has made him known” (John 1:18). The Incarnation is God’s direct self-disclosure accommodated to human weakness.

I think it was St. Hilary of Poitier who describes the eternal Son as the perfect invisible image of the invisible Father and describes the incarnate Son as the perfect visible image of the invisible Father.  In all that Christ said and did, He reveals God, shows us God.

The Christian answer is the Cross. “God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).

Infinite love is not demonstrated chiefly by private voices or visible apparitions. It is proven by the Son of God giving Himself for us, then drawing us toward the vision where silence will end and …

“We shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2).

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box |
9 Comments