"En ego, o bone et dulcissime Iesu" Prayer before Jesus Crucified after Communion: plenary indulgence for the Fridays of Lent

Look down upon me, good and gentle Jesus,
while before Your face I humbly kneel and,
with burning soul,
pray and beseech You
to fix deep in my heart lively sentiments
of faith, hope and charity;
true contrition for my sins,
and a firm purpose of amendment.
While I contemplate,
with great love and tender pity,
Your five most precious wounds,
pondering over them within me
and calling to mind the words which David,
Your prophet, said of You, my Jesus:
“They have pierced My hands and My feet,
they have numbered all My bones.”
Amen.

Alternate Version

Behold, O good and sweetest Jesus,
I cast myself upon my knees in Thy sight,
and with the most fervent desire of my soul
I pray and beseech Thee to impress upon my heart
lively sentiments of faith, hope and charity,
with true repentance for my sins
and a most firm desire of amendment.
Whilst with deep affection and grief of soul
I consider within myself and mentally contemplate
Thy five most precious wounds,
having before mine eyes that which David,
the prophet, long ago spoke concerning Thee,
“They have pierced My hands and My feet,
they have numbered all My bones.” (Ps 22, 17-18)

From the Enchiridion of Indulgences: A plenary indulgence is granted on each Friday of Lent and Passiontide to the faithful, who after Communion piously recite the above prayer before an image of Christ crucified; on other days of the year the indulgence is partial.

L'Enchiridion indulgentiarum postconciliare (ediz. 1999) ricorda che:

8 § 1. Plenaria indulgentia conceditur christifideli qui ...
... qualibet feria sexta temporis Quadragesimae, orationem En ego, o bone et dulcissime Iesu, coram Iesu Christi Crucifixi imagine post communionem pie recitaverit;

Archbishop Nienstedt exonerated

Archbishop Nienstedt has been the subject of a non-stop crusade orchestrated by ex-Catholics, and Catholics in rebellion against the Church, simply because he stands for everything they are not: he is a loyal son of the Catholic Church.

"Now—out of the blue—comes an unidentified male who claims he was touched on his buttocks in 2009 by the archbishop while posing for a group photo. Nienstedt denies the charge, adding that he has never inappropriately touched anyone. Moreover, he has not been told the identity of his accuser."

The police identified and interviewed everyone who was in the photograph when the archbishop allegedly touched the boy's buttocks. No one at the Confirmation ceremony reported seeing anything like this happening. The photo shows Nienstedt standing behind the boy, one step up, meaning that he would have had to bend down to touch the boy's behind. To top things off, the photo shows Nienstedt with one hand on his crozier and the other on the boy's left shoulder. The police asked if anyone recalled a touching episode meant as a joke, or saw any touching between people, or remembered if someone was startled during the photo session. The answer to all three was unanimous: No.

What happened to Archbishop Nienstedt was not a mistake. It reflects a deeper problem: We are living in a culture of hate—hatred of all matters Catholic—led by those whose goal it is to take down a bishop. Every bishop is a potential target, but none more than those who are seen as being inimical to the "progressive" agenda.

Source: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

Thomas Aquinas: "the law of love does not require indiscriminate affirmation of everything about other persons"

"It might seem to follow that love must accept everyone, even enemies, just as they are, and to affirm them even in the error or sin which is present in them. But the law of love does not require indiscriminate affirmation of everything about other persons (cf St. Thomas Aquinas, S.t., 2-2, q.34, a.3).

One's love must be like Jesus's. He loves sinners and brings them into communion with Himself in order to overcome their error and sin. When the scribes and pharisees bring a woman caught in adultery to Jesus, He not only saves her from being stoned to death but warns her not to sin again (see John 8:3-11).

In a true sense, Jesus is not judgmental, He sets aside the legalistic mentality, readily forgives sinners, does not condemn the world, and points out that those who refuse to acknowledge their sinfulness are self-condemned by the truth they violate (see John 3:16-21). But He realistically recognizes sinners as sinners and never accepts error as truth...

Ask Father Cusick: "Should I attend a Catholic Wedding for a cohabiting couple?"

Dear Father,

What is your opinion on attending a co-habiting couple's catholic wedding? Refusing to attend a wedding must be a well-considered decision, as there will be hurt feelings, anger, and permanent estrangement among family members.I am involved in a situation where the soon to be married couple lives together.  I have a member(s) of my family who say they do not intend to attend the wedding because they disapprove of the living arrangements and don't wish to sanction what they view as a mockery of the sacrament of marriage. I realize that the couple are both completely lapsed Catholics, who lack repentance or shame, and that a church wedding is strictly for show.

It has always been my opinion that if a priest doesn't know of the couple's living arrangements, it 's because he doesn't want to know., I believe it is presumptuous and sanctimonious for anyone to refuse to attend the wedding of this couple. If the priest is willing to marry them, who are they to question the priest's decision to marry the couple by boycotting the wedding?  Furthermore, if the boycotters remain true to these guidelines, the sad truth is very few marriages ought to be attended, as it is my firm belief that almost all young couples today are engaging in relations before marriage (many, publicly) . 

I will be attending the wedding, and am angry and disappointed with those who have elected to not attend, as I feel their actions are extreme, and will accomplish nothing but damaged familial relations. I agree with your advice regarding non-attendance in the situations you mentioned in your column, but would be interested in your thoughts on this very common scenario of co-habitation before marriage.

A.

Hello A.,

We do not know if the couple went to confession before the ceremony. The marriage is a graced opportunity for them to grow in conversion and your participation as an example of Catholic Faith can be a help in that direction.

I do agree with you that if someone thinks they have knowledge the couple is living together it is a judgment to make the leap that this means they are fornicating.

You may want to find a good solid prayerbook for married couples and a Bible with special pages for recording childrens' births and sacraments for wedding gifts as gentle reminders to practice the Faith.

Have a wonderful time at the celebration and thank you for supporting Catholic sacramental  marriage.

Blessings,

Father

Have a Catholic question? For an answer send yours to Father Cusick to mcitl DOT blogspot DOT com AT gmail DOT come

Pope to Clergy of Rome: "Do you cry?"

TO THE CLERGY OF ROME: STERILE PRIESTS DO NOT HELP THE CHURCH
 
Vatican City, 6 March 2014 (VIS) – This morning, in the Vatican's Paul VI Hall, Pope Francis met with the clergy of the diocese of Rome. The central theme of the meeting, inspired by the Gospel of St. Matthew, was mercy. The Holy Father recalled how Jesus walked through towns and villages, feeling compassion for those he encountered; people who were “tired and worn out, like sheep without a shepherd”. “We are not here to perform a spiritual exercise for the beginning of Lent, but rather to listen to the voice of the Spirit that speaks to everyone in the Church in this, our time, which is indeed the time of mercy”.

This “time of mercy” was Pope Francis' first point of reflection. “Today, we forget everything too easily, including the teaching of the Church! This is in part inevitable, but we must not forget the important content, the great intuitions and that which has been consigned to the People of God. And divine mercy is among these. … It is up to us, as ministers of the Church, to keep this message alive, above all in preaching and in our gestures, in signs and in pastoral choices, such as the decision to restore priority to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and at the same time to works of mercy”.

Secondly, the Pope asked, “What does it mean to be a priest?”. He explained that “priests are moved by their sheep, like Jesus when he saw the people, tired and exhausted, like sheep without a shepherd”. He commented that the priest, following the example of the Good Shepherd, is a man of mercy and compassion, close to his people and the servant of all. “In particular, the priest demonstrates the depths of his mercy in administering the Sacrament of Reconciliation; he shows this in all his attitude, in his way of welcoming, listening, advising and absolving. … But this derives from how he lives this Sacrament himself. … If a person lives this himself, in his own heart, he is also able to give it to others in his ministry”.

The Holy Father added that the heart of a priest must be susceptible to being moved, as “sterile priests do not help the Church. … We can think of today's Church as a kind of 'field hospital', where we need to tend to injuries. … There are many people who are wounded by material problems, by scandals, even in the Church. … People wounded by the illusions of the world. … We priests must be there, close to these people. Mercy means, above all, taking care of wounds. When a person is injured, this is the immediate help they need, not analyses; the special care can follow, but first we need to tend to the open wounds. Do you know what your parishioners' wounds are? Are you close to them?”

In the Sacrament of Reconciliation, mercy means “neither undue laxity nor excessive rigour”. “Often, as priests, we hear of the experience of the faithful who say they have encountered in Confession a very 'rigid' or a very 'flexible' priest, lax or rigorous. That there may be differences in style is normal, but these differences must not relate to the substance, that is the healthy moral doctrine and mercy. Neither the lax nor the rigorous bear witness to Jesus, because neither of them truly take on the people they meet. … True mercy truly takes the person on board … and acts like the Good Samaritan. … Neither laxity nor rigour make holiness flourish”.

“Instead, mercy accompanies the path of holiness, and helps growth. But how? Through pastoral suffering, which is a form of mercy. What does pastoral suffering mean? It means suffering with the people, like a father and a mother suffer for their children, and I would say also with anxiety”.
Pope Francis shared with the clergy some questions that helped him when a priest comes to him for advice. “Do you cry? How many of us cry when faced with the suffering of a child, the destruction of a family, before the many people who cannot find their path? The tears of a priest … Do you cry, or is this a clergy that has lost its tears? Do you cry for your people? Do you battle with the Lord for your people, like Abraham fought?”

The Bishop of Rome concluded by commenting that in the end, “we will be judged for how we have been able to be close to 'every flesh', to our neighbours, to the flesh of our brothers. … At the end of time, only those who have not been ashamed before the flesh of his injured and excluded brother will be admitted to the contemplation of Christ's glorified flesh”.

Pope Francis in Corriere della Sera: "Matrimony is between a man and a woman."

News media are reporting that Pope Francis has "approved" or "recognized" civil unions in his just-published interview in Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. I don't see that approval here in his comments, do you?

Corriere della Sera: Many countries regulate civil unions. Is it a path that the Church is able to understand? But to what end point?

Pope Francis: Matrimony is between a man and a woman. The lay states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of living together, pushed by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, for example to assure healthcare. They treat arrangements (pacts) of living together of various kinds, of which they did not know to direct in their diverse forms. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety."

Italian:
Molti Paesi regolano le unioni civili. È una strada che la Chiesa può comprendere? Ma fino a che punto?
 
«Il matrimonio è fra un uomo e una donna. Gli Stati laici vogliono giustificare le unioni civili per regolare diverse situazioni di convivenza, spinti dall’esigenza di regolare aspetti economici fra le persone, come ad esempio assicurare l’assistenza sanitaria. Si tratta di patti di convivenza di varia natura, di cui non saprei elencare le diverse forme. Bisogna vedere i diversi casi e valutarli nella loro varietà».

Pope Francis states his view, which is the Church's view, on the matter of defining "marriage" or matrimony very clearly: it is between a man and a woman, at the beginning of his answer to the question. His answer is formulated in such a way as to exclude other definitions of marriage, such as between two people of the same sex.

He then goes on to discuss the solutions of the "lay state", or civil government, and "their" solutions to arrangements of living together in order to provide secure health care, among other things. The pope simply states that these living arrangements exist, which are not marriages, and that the civil governments, the "lay state", must find some way to regulate them because of needs like health care.

The Church does not evaluate human relationships in their variety in order to change the definition of marriage but at the same time does not oppose the provision of health care to human persons; this would be absurd. His comments about civil regulation of relationships outside of marriage does not amount to approval or support for civil unions.

A clever bit of writing makes a sensational headline with the use of the words "recognize or "accept". It all hinges on what you mean by the words "accept" or "recognize". That the Holy Father recognizesand accepts that civil unions exist, like the rest of us, is not news. Factual acceptance of civil unions and moral approbation of civil unions, which the media imply, are two very different things. 

More media spin.

Link to English translation of the Pope's interview at Zenit.org.

Canon Law Center on "banning" of TLM at Fisher-More College: "unlawfully restricting the rights of the faithful"

With the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, the diocesan bishop no longer has the discretion either to permit or restrict the celebration of Mass according to the usus antiquor, a prerogative he previously enjoyed. Thus, no bishop has the authority to arbitrarily restrict the celebration of Mass according to the traditional Roman Rite. While the diocesan bishop has “all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of his pastoral function” (CIC/83, c. 381, §1), his authority is not absolute.

The faithful have a right, enshrined in ecclesiastical law, to have access to the Mass and sacraments celebrated according to the usus antiquior.Celebration of the traditional Roman liturgy is no longer a privilege extended to the faithful on an individual basis but rather a right that can be properly vindicated if requests for such celebrations are not satisfied (cf. SP, art. 7).

[...]

For several years following the promulgation of Summorum, the legal mechanisms for the vindication of rights relative to the proper implementation of the motu proprioleft much to be desired. With the promulgation of the InstructionUniversae Ecclesiae of April 30, 2011, the universal law of Summorum was effectively given teeth: the process of hierarchical recourse may now be utilized by faithful who believe their rights have been violated by a decision of an Ordinary which appears to be contrary to the motu proprio. (cf. UE, 10 § 1)

The recent letter of Bishop Olson to Fisher-More College certainly appears to represent such a decision. Insofar as it has unlawfully restricted the rights of the faithful, the bishop’s administrative act can and ought to be challenged. 

Source: Rorate-Caeli.blogspot.com