Credidimus Caritati 私たちは天主の愛を信じた

2024年から贖いの業の2000周年(33 - 2033)のノベナの年(2024-2033)が始まります

Letter to Friends and Benefactors #85 聖ピオ十世会

2015年12月09日 | 聖ピオ十世会関連のニュースなど

アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

愛する兄弟姉妹の皆様、フェレー司教様の「友人と恩人の皆様への手紙」85号を英語でご紹介いたします。

天主様の祝福が豊かにありますように!

トマス小野田圭志神父(聖ピオ十世会司祭)

Letter to Friends and Benefactors #85

Mgr-fellay-LAB-85

Dear Friends and Benefactors,

With the multiplication of murderous attacks in Europe and Africa, and with the bloody persecution of many Christians in the Middle East, these recent months show us how profoundly troubled the situation of the world is. In the Church, the recent Synod on the Family and the upcoming start of the Holy Year do not fail to cause legitimate worries. Given this confusion, it seemed helpful to us to inform you of our reflections by responding to your queries. We think that this presentation will make it possible to highlight more clearly how we who are devoted to Tradition should react to the problems facing us today.

On September 1st, Pope Francis, on his own initiative, decided to allow all the faithful to make confessions to priests of the Society of St. Pius X during the Holy Year. How do you interpret this gesture? What does it mean for the Society?

We were in fact surprised by this action of the Holy Father on the occasion of the Holy Year because we, like everyone else, learned about it through the press. How do we understand this gesture? Allow me to make use of an image. When a fire is raging, everyone understands that those who have the means to do so must endeavor to put it out, especially if there is a shortage of firefighters. So it is that through all fifty years of this terrible crisis that has shaken the Church, particularly the tragic lack of confessors, our priests have devoted themselves to the souls of penitents, invoking the case of emergency foreseen by the Code of Canon Law.

As a result of the Pope’s act, during the Holy Year, we will have ordinary jurisdiction. In the image I mentioned, this has the effect of giving us the official insignia of firefighters, whereas such a status was denied us for decades. In itself, it adds nothing new for the Society, its members, or its faithful. Yet this ordinary jurisdiction will perhaps reassure people who are uneasy or others who until now did not dare to approach us. For, as we said in the communiqué thanking the Pope, the priests of the Society wish for one thing only: “To perform with renewed generosity their ministry in the confessional, following the example of untiring devotion that the saintly Curé of Ars gave to all priests.”

On the occasion of the Synod on the Family, you sent a petition to the Holy Father, then a declaration. Why?

The purpose of our petition was to point out as clearly as possible to the Supreme Pontiff the seriousness of the present hour and the decisive impact of his ruling in moral matters of such importance. Pope Francis learned of our sentiments on September 18th, before his departure for Cuba and the United States, and he informed us that he would change nothing of the Catholic doctrine concerning marriage, particularly its indissolubility. But we feared that, in practice, the indissoluble character of the matrimonial bond would be disregarded. And this is in fact what happened, on the one hand with the motu proprio reforming the procedure for declaring the nullity of marriages, and on the other hand with the final document of this Synod. Hence my declaration intending to recall to mind the constant teaching of the Church on a multitude of points that were discussed and sometimes called into question during the month of October. I will not conceal from you the fact that to me the sorry spectacle that the Synod presented seems particularly shameful and scandalous on more than one count.

Shameful and scandalous how?

Well, for example this dichotomy between doctrine and morality, between teaching the truth and tolerating sin and the most immoral situations. We understand that one should be patient and merciful with sinners, but how will they convert if their sinful situation is not denounced, if they no longer hear anyone talking about the state of grace and its opposite: the state of mortal sin, which inflicts death on souls and consigns them to the torments of hell? If someone were to measure the infinite offense caused by the slightest mortal sin against God’s honor and sanctity, he would die of astonishment. The Church must firmly condemn all the sins, vices, and errors that corrupt the truth of the Gospel. She must not compromise with scandalous behaviors or acknowledge a culpable acceptance of them or the public sinners who attack the sanctity of marriage. Why does the Church no longer have the courage to speak this way?

Yet there were some positive initiatives on the occasion of this Synod, such as the book by eleven cardinals (following one by five cardinals last year); and also the volume by the African prelates; one by Catholic lawyers; the handbook by three bishops, etc.

These fortunate initiatives that appeared recently promoting the defense of marriage and the Christian family give us a glimmer of hope. This represents a salutary reaction, even if certain responses leave something to be desired. Let us hope that this may be the beginning of an awakening throughout the Church that will lead to a rectification and real conversion.

Last spring, in a sermon given at the church of Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet in Paris, Bishop de Galarreta said that the Church seemed to be in the process of producing “antibodies” to fight the aberrant proposals being made by progressives on the subject of marriage, who align themselves with current customs instead of seeking to amend them according to Gospel teaching. This reaction on the moral level is beneficial. And since morality is closely connected to doctrine, this could be the start of a return of the Church to her Tradition. We pray for this every day!

In the name of mercy, some prelates, like Cardinal Kasper, are trying, if not to change the doctrine of the Church about the indissolubility of marriage, at least to relax the discipline on communion for divorced-and-remarried persons, or to modify its judgment on unnatural unions. What should we think about all these so-called pastoral exceptions?

The Church can legislate, that is, establish its own laws, which are simply clarifications of the divine law. But in the area of marriage being debated today, Our Lord has already settled the question quite clearly: “What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder” (Matt. 19:6), and immediately afterward: “Whosoever shall put away his wife…committeth adultery” (Matt. 19:9). Therefore the Church has only one thing to do: tell the faithful of the divine law and enshrine it in ecclesiastical laws. In no case can the Church diverge in any way from it; that would be to fail in its mission, which is to hand on the revealed deposit of faith. In plain language, in the matter under consideration, the Church can only declare that there was no marriage to begin with, but in no case can it annul or dissolve a marriage that is valid in itself.

Of course ecclesiastical laws can add conditions necessary for the validity of a marriage, but always in keeping with the divine law. The Church thus can declare a marriage invalid due to lack of canonical form, but it will never be above the divine law to which it is subject. What is more, it is necessary to state that unlike human and ecclesiastical law, divine law allows for no exceptions, because it is not made by human beings who cannot foresee all possible cases and are obliged to allow room for exceptions. The infinitely wise God has foreseen all possible situations, as I wrote in the petition to the Pope: “the law of God, expression of his eternal love for mankind, is in itself the supreme mercy for all periods of history, all persons, and all situations.”

Is not the September 8 motu proprio that simplifies the procedure for declarations of nullity of marriage a way of recalling the principle of the indissolubility of marriage, while offering easy canonical terms for evading it?

The new motu proprio regulating canonical arrangements dealing with annulment processes claims, of course, to be an answer to a serious contemporary problem: that of numerous broken families. If you want to examine these cases in order to propose a swifter solution, insofar as it corresponds to the divine law on marriage, very good! But in the present context, that of modern secularized and hedonistic society, and of ecclesiastical tribunals already doing what is forbidden, this motu proprio runs the risk of becoming a legal ratification of the disorder. The result could be much worse than the recommended remedy. I very much fear that one of the key points of the Synod may have been resolved by creating a “back door” that opens the way to a supposed “Catholic divorce,” because concretely the Church is exposing itself to many abuses, especially in countries where the bishops, won over to progressivism and subjectivism, exercise precious little supervision…

In the Holy Year to begin on December 8th, is not a mercy without repentance or conversion being touted?

It is true that, in the current climate, an appeal to mercy too easily neglects the indispensable act of conversion, which requires contrition for one’s sins and a horror of sin as an offense against God. Thus I deplored in the last Letter to Friends and Benefactors (#84) the Honduran Cardinal Maradiaga’s complacent support of a new spirituality whose notion of mercy does not require repentance.

Nevertheless, if you read carefully the various documents published on the subject of the Holy Year, particularly the Bull of Indiction of the Jubilee, you see that the fundamental idea of conversion and contrition for sins in order to obtain forgiveness is present. Despite the reference to an ambiguous mercy that is said to consist of restoring to a human being his “incomparable dignity” rather than the state of grace, the Pope means to promote the return of those who have left the Church, and he multiplies the concrete initiatives to facilitate recourse to the sacrament of penance. Unfortunately, he does not ask himself why so many people have left the Church and stopped practicing their faith, and whether there might be some connection to a certain Council, its “cult of man”, and its catastrophic reforms: unbridled ecumenism; a desacralized and protestantized liturgy; a relaxation of morals, etc.

Then can the faithful devoted to Tradition participate without risk of confusion in the Extraordinary Jubilee Year decreed by the Pope? Especially since this Year of Mercy intends to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of Vatican II, which is supposed to have knocked down the “walls” in which the Church was enclosed…

Quite obviously there arises the question of our participation in this Holy Year. In order to resolve it, a distinction is necessary between: the circumstances that bring about a Holy Year or Jubilee and its very essence.

The circumstances are historical, connected with the major anniversaries of the life of Jesus, in particular of his redemptive death. Every fifty years, or even every twenty-five years, the Church institutes a Holy Year. This time around, the point of reference for the opening of the Jubilee Year is not just the Redemption — December 8th is necessarily connected to the redemptive work begun with the Immaculate Mother of God — but also the Second Vatican Council. This is most unsettling, and we reject it forcefully, because we cannot rejoice in, but rather must weep over, the ruins caused by this Council: the precipitous drop in vocations, the dramatic decline of religious practice, and above all the loss of faith described by John Paul II himself as a “silent apostasy”.

Nevertheless the essential components of a Holy Year remain: it is a special year in which the Church, upon the decision of the Supreme Pontiff, who holds the power of the keys, opens wide her treasures of graces so as to bring the faithful closer to God, especially by the forgiveness of sins and the remittance of the punishments due to sin. This the Church does in the sacrament of penance and by indulgences. Such graces do not change; they are always the same, and only the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, has power over them. We might also note that the conditions for obtaining the indulgences of the Holy Year are still the same: confession, communion, prayer for the intentions of the Pope — which are objective and traditional, not personal. Nowhere in the reminder of these habitual conditions is there any question of adhering to the conciliar novelties.

When Archbishop Lefebvre, with the whole seminary of Écône, went to Rome during the Holy Year of 1975, it was not to celebrate Council’s tenth anniversary, although Paul VI had mentioned that anniversary in the Bull of Indiction. Rather it was an opportunity to profess our Romanitas, our attachment to the Holy See, to the Pope who, as the successor of Peter, has the power of the keys. Following in the footsteps of our venerable founder, during this Holy Year we will concentrate on the essential components of it: repentance so as to obtain divine mercy through the intermediary of His one Church, despite the circumstances that some have thought necessary to invoke as requirements for celebrating this year, as was the case already in 1975 and again in 2000.

We could compare these two elements, the essential and the circumstances, to the contents and the packaging that surrounds them. It would be detrimental to reject the graces belonging to a Holy Year just because it is being presented in defective packaging, without considering the fact that this packaging does not alter the contents, unless the circumstances were to absorb the essentials, and unless, in the present case, the Church no longer had at her disposal the graces proper to the Holy Year because of the damage done by Vatican II. But the Church was not born fifty years ago! And, through the grace of Christ who is “the same yesterday, today and for ever,” (Heb. 13:8) it remains and will remain the same, despite a Council open to a world of perpetual change…

In several recent statements you seem to want to anticipate the one hundredth anniversary of Fatima by inviting the faithful to start preparing now. Why?

Le sanctuaire de Fatima.

Fatima.

From the perspective mentioned in this letter and in order to insist on the urgency of conversion, we thought of connecting these corporal and spiritual works of mercy that we are invited to perform this year with the centenary of the apparitions in Fatima, in which Our Lady insisted so much on the necessity of conversion, of oneself and of the world, on the necessity for works of penance and on prayer, especially the Rosary. Imploring divine mercy is closely connected with the Fatima apparitions: the Blessed Virgin invited us to pray and do penance, and this is how we will obtain mercy, not otherwise. It seems to me quite beneficial to tie these two future anniversaries together this way by making them two years of efforts to draw closer both to the Most Blessed Virgin Mary and to Our Lord, both to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to the merciful Sacred Heart.

The Society of St. Pius X will organize an international pilgrimage to Fatima from August 19th to 20th, 2017. But already we can and even must prepare ourselves, especially when Catholic morality is seriously being challenged.

More than ever, on this feast day of November 21st, which for us is a major anniversary of the Declaration by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1974—a veritable charter for our battle for the Church of all ages—let us maintain a Catholic attitude in all circumstances, whatever the difficulties and trials may be. Let us have the mind of the Church, let us be faithful to Our Lord, let us remain devoted to his Holy Sacrifice, to his teachings, to his examples. Yesterday I read that Cardinal Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, feared a “protestantization of the Church”. He is right. But what is the new Mass, if not a protestantization of the Mass of all time? And what are we to think about the Pope who, like his predecessors, goes to a Lutheran church? When we see how the five hundredth anniversary of the Protestant Reformation in 2017 is being prepared, how the figure of Luther is now saluted, although he was one of the major heresiarchs and schismatics in history, ferociously opposed to the Roman Catholic Church, it is enough to make you lose heart! Truly, Archbishop Lefebvre saw correctly when he said that “the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, for our salvation, is the categorical refusal to accept the Reformation,” because between Luther’s reform and the one undertaken by Vatican II there is more than one point in common. And with him, we say again that, “without any rebellion, bitterness, or resentment, we pursue our work of priestly formation under the guidance of the never-changing Magisterium, convinced as we are that we cannot possibly render a greater service to the Holy Catholic Church, to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to posterity.”

You understand this very well, dear friends and benefactors of the Society of St. Pius X. Your fervent prayers, your admirable generosity, and your constant devotion are for us an invaluable support. Thanks to you, the work of Archbishop Lefebvre is developing everywhere. With all my heart I thank you for this.

We pray to Our Lady to obtain for you all the graces that you need. We ask the Good Lord to grant you His blessings for you and your families, so that you may prepare for the great feast of Christmas by a holy Advent, and that you may entrust the coming year, with its joys and crosses, to our Mother in Heaven.

On the Feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin, November 21, 2015
+ Bernard Fellay

Lettre aux Amis et Bienfaiteurs n°85
Carta a los Amigos y Bienhechores n° 85
Brief an die Freunde und Wohltäter Nr. 85
Lettera agli Amici e Benefattori n° 85


マチアス・ガオドロン神父(聖ピオ十世会)「シノドゥスは、教会の深い分裂の印象を与えている」

2015年12月09日 | 聖ピオ十世会関連のニュースなど

アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

愛する兄弟姉妹の皆様、

 聖ピオ十世会司祭 マチアス・ガオドロン神父様のシノドゥスの分析 「シノドゥスは、教会の深い分裂の印象を与えている」を英語でご紹介ます。

天主様の祝福が豊かにありますように!

トマス小野田圭志神父(聖ピオ十世会司祭)

The Synod gives the impression of a deeply divided Church

6_hostie-communion-eucharistie

Father Matthias Gaudron, of the Society of Saint Pius X, was ordained a priest by Bp. Tissier de Mallerais in 1990. For twelve years he was rector of Sacred Heart International Seminary in Zaitzkofen (Bavaria). Currently he is a professor at the Institut Sainte-Marie in the canton of Saint-Gall (Switzerland). Author of the Catechism of the Crisis in the Church (Angelus Press), he analyzes the Final Report of the Synod on the Family in this article, which first appeared in the monthly bulletin of the District of Germany, Mitteilungsblatt (December 2015), and on his website.

English translations.

The Synod of Bishops in Rome, which inspired hope and fear in equal measure, concluded on October 25, 2015. The Synod neither recommended administering the sacraments to divorced-and-remarried persons nor called for a more favorable attitude toward homosexuality, as many progressive Catholics and bishops would have wished. Nevertheless the Synod did not defend Catholic truth in clear terms either. It is unfortunately true, as Cardinal Kurt Koch of the Roman Curia said: there are “no doors that are shut”. Finally, the question of whether, despite everything, a new sacramental practice will be introduced still remains open.

As far as homosexuality is concerned, the Synod found terms that are still clear enough when it declared, in no. 76, that homosexual unions are incompatible with God’s plan for marriage. The document also states that it is absolutely unacceptable for international associations to exert pressure on poor countries by conditioning financial aid to them on the official legalization of “marriage” between persons of the same sex.

Further on, however, on the subject of the divorced-and-remarried, no. 84 includes statements that are unacceptable. Is it actually true that “the Holy Spirit pours out His gifts and charisms upon them for the good of all”? Although strictly speaking one can still accept this sentence, inasmuch as “gifts and charisms” do not necessarily presuppose the state of grace, this is no longer the case in the following sentence: “They should not feel that they are excommunicated. On the contrary, it is necessary for them to be able to develop as living members of the Church.” It is true that divorced-and-remarried persons are not excommunicated, as long as they do not separate themselves from the Church or deny the faith. They remain members of the Church, therefore; nevertheless they are no longer “living” members thereof but “dead” members. A living member, in theological language, is a Catholic who is in the state of grace. With every serious sin, a member is lost; consequently the sinner indeed remains bound to Christ and to His Church but as a dead member in which the divine life has ceased to flow. Divorced-and-remarried persons live in a permanent state of serious sin. As long as they are unwilling to put an end to their marital life, which is against God’s will, they cannot receive forgiveness either through the sacrament of Penance as other people who are just as guilty of mortal sin do, for the simple reason that absolution is given validly only if there is contrition and a firm purpose of amendment. In this state, they cannot really “progress” but at most ask, by participating in the life of the Church, for the grace and strength that they need to leave their sinful situation behind.

We find ambiguities in no. 86 too. There we read that the dialogue of divorced-and-remarried persons with a priest, “in the internal forum, contributes to the formation of a correct judgment on what hinders the possibility of a fuller participation in the life of the Church and the steps that can foster it and make it grow”; what does that mean? It seems that a little door is left open so as to allow these Catholics—after having reflected maturely, decided in conscience, etc.—to approach the sacraments. Divorced-and-remarried Catholics per se pose no major theological problems. As soon as they abandon their life of sin, they can once again go to confession and then receive Holy Communion. But as long as they do not do this, no priest who respects the teaching of Christ and of the Church can give them permission to receive communion. This paragraph was the most controversial of the Synod and received the necessary two-thirds majority, with 178 votes, only with great difficulty.

Elsewhere Pope Francis already opened up another way that might resolve these “problems”. Acting on his own authority and bypassing all the institutions established to modify the laws of the Church, Pope Francis simplified the procedure for causes of nullity of marriage: there are serious reasons to fear that in the future there will be a plethora of dubious declarations of nullity, and that many civilly remarried couples will be able to have their marriage regularized in the Church. Thus in the realm of teaching, marriage remains indissoluble, but in practice a sort of “Catholic divorce” could see the light of day.

The Synod of Bishops gives the impression of a deeply divided Church. On the one hand, a majority of bishops could not be found who were willing to break openly with the traditional teaching of the Gospel, while on the other hand, no majority could be found either to set forth this doctrine clearly and unambiguously. After two questionnaires circulated within the Universal Church and two synods of bishops, there has been no result but a compromise document that recognizes divorced-and-remarried persons as “living members of the Church”, which of course does not permit them to receive communion but does not clearly forbid it, either. Thus the Synod could scarcely have ended in a worse way: the conservative bishops, who would have rejected an open break with doctrine, are reassured because the indissolubility of marriage was not affected. The progressive bishops, although they did not obtain all that they would have liked, can nevertheless continue along their path toward the relaxation of doctrine and discipline.

Father Matthias Gaudron

 


聖ピオ十世会 2015年12月聖伝のミサの報告 SSPX Japan Traditional Latin Mass

2015年12月09日 | 聖ピオ十世会関連のニュースなど
アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

愛する兄弟姉妹の皆様、

 昨日は聖母の無原罪の御宿りの祝日でした。マリア様の罪の汚れの無いこと、のみならず、天主のみ旨を果たすための愛を込めた完全な協力を黙想しました。

 さて、2015年12月の聖伝のミサの報告です。12月は、大阪では初金、初土のミサを行い、初金曜日のミサののちには御聖体降福式を行いました。

 東京では、生まれたばかりの赤ちゃんが洗礼を受け、天主の娘となりました。東京では、50名の愛する兄弟姉妹の皆様が聖伝のミサに与ることができ、大変うれしく思います。私たちがますますイエズス・キリストを賛美し、礼拝し、感謝し、愛することができますように!

天主様の祝福が豊かにありますように!
トマス小野田圭志神父(聖ピオ十世会司祭)


【報告】
アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

大阪での御ミサの報告をお送りいたします。

12月4日(初金) 至聖なるイエズスの聖心の随意ミサ には14名、
12月5日(初土) 聖マリアの汚れなき御心の随意ミサ 16名が御ミサに与る御恵みを頂きました。 デオグラチアス!!

金曜日には御ミサ後聖体降福式ではイエズス様を知らない多くの人々、知っていてもその愛に応えようとしない人々、天主に逆らう人々のために御聖体にましますイエズス様に償いの祈りとロザリオをお捧げいたしました。ずべての人々がイエズス様の愛の深さを知り、その聖心に喜びと慰めを見出すことができるようになりますように、マリア様と一緒にお祈りを捧げることが出来ました。天主様の御憐みと愛の深さに感謝いたします。

金曜日、土曜日のお説教をとおして、待降節にあたってイエズス様を良くお迎えする準備をするためにマリア様を良く知り、私達のもとへ来られることを私達以上に待ち望んで下さっているイエズス様の聖心をより深く愛することが出来るようにマリア様に倣う決心を致しました。

土曜日の御ミサ後の公教要理は旧約のイスラエルの民についてでした。


【報告】
アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

昨日一昨日と、初金と初土の御ミサと、御聖体降福式等ありがとうございました!!(*^▽^*)♪幸せな時間はあっという間に過ぎてしまいますね☆彡

日本のカトリックの方々が、マリア様の御心を受けて、マリア様の御心を以って、イエズス様の聖心を、御神性に、天主であるイエズス様に相応しいやり方で、相応しい礼拝と、天主イエズス様になすべき心と態度と愛を以って礼拝する事ができますように、感謝する事ができますように、讃美する事ができますように!

日本の全ての方々が、イエズス様の聖心の愛の深さを知り、イエズス様の聖心に慰めと救いと平和と喜びを、唯一の救い主であるイエズス様を見出す事ができますように!!

日本の為にお祈り致しますm(__)m
私の為にもお祈りをお願い致しますm(__)m

【報告】
アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!

大阪でのミッション、ありがとうございました。
昨日、今日と神父様のお説教を拝聴しながら本当にマリア様を通してイエズス様のために救霊の事業に少しでもお手伝いしたいと思いました。
小野田神父様のマリア様に対する愛と、信頼と、いろんな思いが聞いている私達にどんどん伝染してきたかのように感じました。

どうぞお体に気を付けてください。

では、クリスマスに御会いするのを楽しみにしております。

聖母の汚れなき御心よ小野田神父様の為に祈りたまえ。
聖母の汚れなき御心よ日本のために祈りたまえ。

【報告】
Dear Fr Onoda:

今日の東京でのミサの参列者数は下記の通りです。

ミサの参列者数
男: 24人(内、子供1人)
女: 26人(内、子供2人)
計: 50人(内、子供3人)


--このブログを聖マリアの汚れなき御心に捧げます--

アヴェ・マリア・インマクラータ!
愛する兄弟姉妹の皆様をお待ちしております
【最新情報はこちら、年間予定一覧はこちらをご覧ください。】