Bishop Schneider in choir robes
At that time, Müller said to Il Messengerothat – during a recent consistory – no senior Vatican official or even the Pope had mentioned Zen, with “no solidarity document, no prayer initiative for him”. Müller believes the Vatican’s deal with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has undermined the possibility of support for the cleric, warning the deal “does not serve the interests of the Holy See and the Vatican State to the ecclesial dimension and the truth”.
In the recent interview, Müller was asked again about the consistory, where he said “the topic was limited to the discussion of the already published document Praedicate Evangelium on the reform of the curia and on the Holy Year 2025.” He added: “There was no opportunity to discuss the burning issues, for example, about the frontal attack on the Christian image of man by the ideologies of posthumanism and gender madness or about the crisis of the Church in Europe”. Müller said “the view that everything popes have said or done in the course of church history is either dogma or law” in fact “contradicts the entire Catholic tradition, and especially Vatican II”.
Asked why there is more talk in the Church about topics such as ecology rather than Christ,Müller said: “In a world in which the meaning and goal of the human being are materially limited to temporary and transitory contents (such as the acquisition of power, prestige, money, luxury, pleasurable satisfaction), it is easier to become interesting as an agent of this program of a New World Order without God”. Turning to the Synodal Path in his own country, the cardinal remarked “one would not know exactly whether to speak of tragedy or comedy with respect to this event.” He argued that “the texts, very abundant but not very deep, do not deal with the renewal of Catholics in Christ, but with a surrender to a world without God.” The ongoing theme of sexuality “is not understood as the gift of God granted to human beings as created persons”, and instead “as a kind of drug to numb the basic nihilistic feeling with the maximum satisfaction of pleasure.”
Read the rest: https://catholicherald.co.uk/cardinal-muller-challenges-pope-francis-no-authority-to-change-teaching-of-church/
… but still no TLM for you!
This was posted recently on the Pope’s Twitter account:
The “plant paradigm” mentioned here is a good symbol, and in fact the preeminent one, for the “organic” nature operative in “handing down” of the tradition of the sacred liturgy, which grew from the seed planted by Christ in His passion, death and resurrection, in His institution of the “Last Supper” and the sacramental nature of his sacrifice as handed on by the apostles in the apostolic tradition, resulting in what we have today in the traditional Latin Mass.
The pope claimed in Traditionis custodes that the two liturgies, old and new, were competing in the Church to the detriment of unity and, thus, the old had to go.
Not a little ironically the tweet also recommends letting various organisms and plants grow together harmoniously within the environment, as Benedict proposed in Summorum Pontificum, decreeing that the new Mass and the traditional Latin Mass should both be permitted to flourish together in the Church for the good of all.
Yes, I agree with the Pope (or his official tweeter): when the flowers of liturgical variety compete, they operate for the overall good of the spiritual “ecosystem” of the Church.
Well, with the banning of the traditional Latin Mass I guess some plants are not good enough to survive the scorched-earth modernism of this papacy, even at the price of grievous self-contradiction. Modernism does not make for good, prejudice-free, equal opportunity gardening.
No TLM for you!
Join us for holy Mass and a continuing series on Saint Thomas and the virtues at the new Sunday traditional Latin Mass location in southern Maryland.
Sundays, 12 noon. Preceded by confessions beginning at 11:30.
One cardinal is speaking out in support of Cardinal Zen after the pope despicably dismissed him as a mere nuisance.
The Grand Master of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre - Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples, who lived in Hong Kong for eight years - has released a testimony in defence of the 90-year-old bishop emeritus whose trial is expected to begin. "China and the Church have in him a devoted son, one not to be ashamed of," he said. "He claims the freedom that every authentic political and civil system should defend".
Rome (AsiaNews) - "Card. Zen should not be condemned. Hong Kong, China and the Church have in him a devoted son, one not to be ashamed of. This is testimony to the truth," writes Card. Fernando Filoni, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples and today Grand Master of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, in an open letterpublished today from Rome.
The letter arrives at the beginning of the trial of Card. Zen Ze-kiun, the 90-year-old bishop emeritus, who is being tried together with five other pro-democracy figures on charges of failing to properly register a humanitarian fund of which they were trustees. The affair has become a symbol in a city where - as we recalled yesterday - there are more than 1,000 people in prison or on trial for political charges.
Card. Filoni writes: 'When on trial, he who can speak, speaks'. Jesus too did not shy away from this in a trial that would mark the history and life of a man who aroused admiration and deep religious respect: John the Baptist. Jesus too paid for his testimony to the truth: 'What is truth?' Pilate asked him ironically in a dramatic trial in which the Nazarene was accused of violating the sovereignty of Rome and on the verge of being sentenced to death. Another trial is being held these days. In Hong Kong. A city that I loved very much, having lived there for over eight years'.
The reference is to the years when Filoni was sent by the Holy See to Hong Kong in 1992 with the task of opening a Study Mission to closely follow the situation of the Church in China. "There I met Father Joseph Zen Ze-kiun," the cardinal recalls, "He was the Provincial of the Salesians. A Chinese man in everyway. Very intelligent, sharp, with a captivating smile. They used to say to me: 'He's a Shanghai man! Gradually I understood the meaning'. Filoni recalls his contribution to the encounter of cultures, while remaining fully Chinese - 'he never denied his identity'. He likens him in this to two figures such as the great Ming-era intellectual Xu Guangqi and the Jesuit bishop Aloysius Jin Luxian, both from Shanghai.
He then recalls how this was "a city of martyrs at the time of the Nazi-style occupation by the Japanese", of whose violence Card. Zen's own family was a victim, to the point of being forced to flee, losing everything.
"The young Zen," comments Filoni, "never forgot that experience and drew from it consistency of character and lifestyle; and then a great love for freedom and justice. Shanghai was heroic, and his sons were considered heroes, almost untouchable even by the communist regime. Card. Zen is one of the last epigones of those families. Heroes were never to be humiliated; it was also the mentality of the Chinese establishment, as it is in the West for the victims of our own Nazi-fascism'.
Filoni then recalls the years in which the cardinal now on trial taught in seminaries in mainland China, accepting the invitation of Bishop Jin Luxian: "He accepted for the good of the Church, a martyr," he comments, "who rose from his martyrdom and sought the path of survival; this was flexibility, not yielding. He looked ahead and did not enter into judgement towards people: it was his philosophy of life,' he said, 'political systemscan be judged, and his thinking on them was clear, but people cannot; the judgement is deferred to God who knows the hearts of men. His respect and support for the person has always been the cornerstone of his human and priestly vision, and so it remains to this day, even if he is being brought to trial in Hong Kong these days'.
He cites his 'moral and ideal integrity', which prompted John Paul II to appoint him bishop and Benedict XVI cardinal. "Some people consider him to be characteristically a little edgy," Filoni notes. "And who would not be so in the face of injustice and in the face of the demand for freedom that every authentic political and civil system should defend?
"I must testify to two more things," adds the Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples, "Card. Zen is a 'man of God'; sometimes intemperate, but submissive to the love of Christ, who wanted him to be his priest, deeply in love, like Don Bosco, with youth. This made him a credible teacher. He is 'authentically Chinese'. No one, among those I have known, I can say is as truly 'loyal' as he is".
"Hence - concludes Filoni - this testimony that 'in a trial is fundamental. Card. Zen should not be condemned. Hong Kong, China and the Church have in him a devoted son, one they should not be ashamed of. This is testimony to the truth.”
Dear Michael,
As I watched your latest video where you exhort us to resist, I wanted to give you some news from our little community in St Germain en Laye, France. It's been two years now, and we have been attending mass in front of locked doors every Sunday. God granted us sunny mornings for the last 5 months, but as we now enter autumn, we will need your prayers to support the cold and the rain. But we will not give up, the bishop is not giving us any answer (hiding behind Traditionis Custodes), so we stand united in front of this locked and empty church.
Please find here photos from the last 2 sundays, you can see that our community has grown a little.
Thank you for weekly videos, they give us strength and resolve.
Dieu vous garde.
ICR,
Philippe
UPDATE: The Congress has withdrawn the original Declaration and issued a new one since this article was published. Paragraph 10 now reads: “We note that pluralism in terms of differences in skin color, gender, race, language and culture are expressions of the wisdom of God in creation. Religious diversity is permitted by God and, therefore, any coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.”
NUR-SULTAN, Kazakhstan (LifeSiteNews) – Pope Francis has joined ecumenical and political leaders in signing a document stating that the “pluralism and differences in religion…are expressions of the wisdom of God’s will in creation.”
The declaration, which can be downloaded here with English text at the end of the document, was the culmination of the 7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions held in Kazakhstan.
It was read aloud by the leaders of the Congress on September 15, feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, after which Pope Francis delivered an address echoing the themes and language of the Declaration.
The Declaration, which Pope Francis joined in signing, contains a paragraph stating that God willed the plurality of religions which are present in the world. Paragraph 10 reads: “We note that pluralism and differences in religion, skin color, gender, race and language are expressions of the wisdom of God’s will in creation. Thus any incident of coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.” (Emphasis original)
–– Update: The Congress has withdrawn the original Declaration and issued a new one since this article was published. Paragraph 10 now reads: “We note that pluralism in terms of differences in skin color, gender, race, language and culture are expressions of the wisdom of God in creation. Religious diversity is permitted by God and, therefore, any coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.”
The Declaration also noted how the Congress participants “stand in solidarity with the efforts of the United Nations and all other international, governmental and regional institutions and organizations, to promote dialogue among civilizations and religions, states and nations.” (Emphasis original)
Read the rest: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-signs-document-saying-differences-in-religion-are-part-of-gods-will-in-creation/
A recent papal statement seems to open the door to Holy Communion for pro-abortion politicians such as Nancy Pelosi
Pope FrancisPhoto by Michael Campanella/Getty Images(LifeSiteNews) — Four bishops, several priests, and numerous Catholic scholars have signed a statement rebuking Pope Francis for a recent statement about the reception of Holy Communion, according to which “everyone is invited to the supper of the wedding of the Lamb (Re 19:9). To be admitted to the feast all that is required is the wedding garment of faith which comes from the hearing of his Word.” The Pope wrote these words in his June 29 Apostolic Letter on the liturgy, Desiderio desideravi, but for the signatories of this new statement (see full text below), he omitted the “essential topic of repentance for sin for the worthy reception of the Eucharist.”
Therefore, the papal words about the “garment of faith” as the only requirement for the reception of Holy Communion, “contradict[] the faith of the Catholic Church,” as the authors wrote. They explain:
The Catholic Church has always taught that in order to receive the Holy Eucharist worthily and without sin, Catholics must receive sacramental absolution, if possible, for any mortal sins they may have committed and obey all other laws of the Church concerning reception of the Eucharist (as, for example, the laws concerning fasting prior to reception of the Eucharist).
If a sacramental confession is not possible, but the reception of Holy Communion urgent (such as for a priest celebrating Mass), the Sacrament of Penance has to be sought as soon as possible afterwards, and the penitent must have perfect contrition for his mortal sins. By extensively quoting from the Council of Trent’s documents, the signatories also make it clear that such teachings as presented in Pope Francis’ document have already been condemned as heresy. “The claim,” they write, “that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy.”
RELATED: Pope Francis doubles down on restrictions of the Latin Mass in new letter
This false teaching might become more important now at this historic moment. Only in May, a U.S. Bishop – Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone – publicly banned Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, from receiving Holy Communion because she is defying the Church’s teaching against abortion. “A Catholic legislator,” he then wrote, “who supports procured abortion, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin which is a cause of most serious scandal to others.”
It nearly looks as if Pope Francis’s June 2022 document is a response to that diocesan ruling, now stating that faith alone is sufficient for receiving Holy Communion.
As the new statement points out, “on the day that Desiderio desideravi was issued, Pope Francis received in audience Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives,” and on that day, she received Holy Communion at a papal Mass, in St. Peter’s, over which Pope Francis presided, thereby “causing scandal to Catholics over all the world,” in the statement’s words. The text continues: “When asked about her illegal reception of communion, Pope Francis expressed no disapproval of it. Instead, he responded by saying ‘When the Church loses its pastoral nature, when a bishop loses his pastoral nature, it causes a political problem. That’s all I can say.’ This response rebukes Archbishop Cordileone for his justified application of Canon 915.”
Among the signatories of this new statement are Bishop Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop André Gracida, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Bishop Robert Mutsaerts, Father Gerald E. Murray, Father James Altman, Father John Lovell and several other priests, along with well-known academic teachers such as Professor Claudio Pierantoni, Dr. John Lamont, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, Professor Anna Silvas, Dr. Anthony Esolen, Professor John Rist, and Professor Paolo Pasqualucci. Among Catholic scholars can be found Julia Meloni and George Neumayr. LifeSite’s John-Henry Westen and Liz Yore also signed the document.
The new statement by clergymen and scholars also refers back to the Code of Canon Law, especially can. 915 (and more), which lays down the same rules about the worthy reception of Holy Communion as presented above. The signatories state:
The purpose of these canons is to prevent grave sin on the part of the person unworthily receiving the Eucharist, to prevent scandal, and to prevent the desecration of the sacrament by such unworthy reception. These canons are still in force. They cannot be validly repealed, because their content expresses the divine law concerning the Eucharist that is taught in the Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradition.
In a sense, one could see this new statement by Pope Francis, on faith being the only condition for receiving Holy Communion, as a linchpin and summary statement of his pontificate. Early on, from 2014 on, he promoted the idea of giving Holy Communion to unrepentant remarried divorcees; then he opened up the idea of Protestants following their own conscience when deciding to receive Holy Communion.
In addition, the Pope has been encouraging pro-abortion Catholics to receive Holy Communion and even called pro-LGBT advocate Father James Martin, S.J. as a Vatican counsellor. In all of these cases, the Pope allows Catholics to receive Holy Communion who are objectively violating the Church’s laws and teachings, thus promoting moral relativism.
LifeSite asked Professor Claudio Pierantoni, one of the signatories of this new statement, to comment on the papal words in light of the above-mentioned case of Nancy Pelosi. He wrote:
We have thought necessary to issue this statement because this error can lead to great scandal, like that of admitting to Communion politicians who publicly approve of abortion, or even promote it directly with their actions. This is precisely what has been happening recently in the US, after the ruling of the Supreme Court that overturned the infamous Roe versus Wade, when President Biden and Speaker Pelosi, both Catholic, openly supported the campaign in favor of restoring the “right” to abortion all over the country. The pope not only omitted to rebuke Biden and Pelosi for this scandalous stance; not only omitted to support those bishops who did implement canonical censures against such politicians, but went to the extreme of criticizing those bishops (though making no names), arguing that such censures (like excommunication), “are not pastoral,” and “cause political problems.”
Now this papal document (Desiderio desideravi) affirming that “the garment of faith” is “all that is required” to be admitted to the Eucharistic banquet, seems to provide a theological justification for this attitude, which could have been thought to be simply the result of political opportunism. This scandal had moreover a striking confirmation through the coincidence that Nancy Pelosi received Holy Communion in St. Peter’s basilica, on the feast of Peter and Paul, the very same day in which Desiderio desideravi was published. Such an attitude on the part of the pope is, of course, the opposite of true “pastorality,” since the first duty of the spiritual pastor is to warn the sinner, and particularly the public sinner, not only of the seriousness of his fault, but of the immense damage that is caused to millions of Catholics who are thereby deceived and led to think that this can be an acceptable and orthodox behavior.
Please see here the full statement, with the list of signatories at the end of the text. A pdf of the statement can be downloaded HERE and a Spanish version HERE.
The recent Apostolic Letter Desiderio desideravi, given June 29th 2022, the Feast of SS. Peter and Paul, states:
The natural meaning of these words is that the only requirement for a Catholic to worthily receive the Holy Eucharist is possession of the virtue of faith, by which one believes Christian teaching on the grounds of its being divinely revealed. Moreover, in the Apostolic Letter as a whole there is silence on this essential topic of repentance for sin for the worthy reception of the Eucharist.
This natural meaning contradicts the faith of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has always taught that in order to receive the Holy Eucharist worthily and without sin, Catholics must receive sacramental absolution, if possible, for any mortal sins they may have committed and obey all other laws of the Church concerning reception of the Eucharist (as, for example, the laws concerning fasting prior to reception of the Eucharist). However, if a Catholic is unable to confess mortal sins but has a grave reason for receiving the Eucharist (such as a priest who may be required to celebrate Mass at a given time but who is unable to go to Confession), such a person must be confident to the best of his ability that he have perfect contrition for any mortal sins that he may have committed.
The claim that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy.
The holy and ecumenical Council of Trent, Decree concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist (October 11th 1551).
Chapter VII. The Preparation that Must be Employed to Receive the Holy Eucharist Worthily
If it is not becoming for anyone to approach any of the sacred functions except solemnly, certainly, the more the holiness and the divinity of this heavenly sacrament is understood by a Christian, the more diligently ought he to take heed lest he approach to receive it without great reverence and holiness [can. 2], especially when we read in the Apostle those words full of terror: “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the body of the Lord” [1 Cor. 11 :29 ]. Therefore, the precept, “Let a man prove himself” [1 Cor. 11:28], must be recalled to mind by him who wishes to communicate. Now ecclesiastical usage declares that this examination is necessary, that no one conscious of mortal sin, however contrite he may seem to himself, should approach the Holy Eucharist without a previous sacramental confession. This, the holy Synod has decreed, is always to be observed by all Christians, even by those priests on whom by their office it may be incumbent to celebrate, provided the recourses of a confessor be not lacking to them. But if in an urgent necessity a priest should celebrate without previous confession, let him confess as soon as possible.
…
Canon 11. If anyone says that faith alone is sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist, let him be anathema. [Si quis dixerit, solam fidem esse sufficientem praeparationem ad sumendum sanctissimum eucharistiae sacramentum, anathema sit.]
This claim also contradicts Canons 915 and 916 of the Latin Code of Canon Law, and Canons 711 and 712 of the Oriental Code of Canon Law.
Latin Code of Canon Law
Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.
Oriental Code of Canon Law
Canon 711. A person who is conscious of serious sin is not to celebrate the Divine Liturgy nor receive the Divine Eucharist unless a serious reason is present and there is no opportunity of receiving the sacrament of penance; in this case the person should make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible.
Canon 712. Those who are publicly unworthy are forbidden from receiving the Divine Eucharist.
The purpose of these canons is to prevent grave sin on the part of the person unworthily receiving the Eucharist, to prevent scandal, and to prevent the desecration of the sacrament by such unworthy reception. These canons are still in force. They cannot be validly repealed, because their content expresses the divine law concerning the Eucharist that is taught in the Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. This has been pointed out in the Declaration of June 24th 2000 by the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, concerning the admission to Holy Communion of faithful who are divorced and remarried:
The Code of Canon Law establishes that “Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion” (can. 915). … The prohibition found in the cited canon, by its nature, is derived from divine law and transcends the domain of positive ecclesiastical laws: the latter cannot introduce legislative changes which would oppose the doctrine of the Church. The scriptural text on which the ecclesial tradition has always relied is that of St. Paul: “This means that whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily sins against the body and blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first only then should he eat of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks a judgment on himself.”
Pope Francis has indicated by his words and actions that he holds the view expressed by the natural meaning of the words of Desiderio desideravi cited above.
In his Angelus for the feast of “Corpus Domini” on June 6, 2021, Pope Francis said:
… there is another strength that stands out in the fragility of the Eucharist: the strength to love those who make mistakes. It is on the night he is betrayed that Jesus gives us the Bread of Life. He gives us the greatest gift while he feels the deepest abyss in his heart: the disciple who eats with Him, who dips the morsel in the same plate, is betraying Him. And betrayal is the worst suffering for one who loves. And what does Jesus do? He reacts to the evil with a greater good. He responds to Judas’ ‘no’ with the ‘yes’ of mercy. He does not punish the sinner, but rather gives His life for him; He pays for him. When we receive the Eucharist, Jesus does the same with us: he knows us; he knows we are sinners; and he knows we make many mistakes, but he does not give up on joining his life to ours. He knows that we need it, because the Eucharist is not the reward of saints, no, it is the Bread of sinners. This is why he exhorts us: “Do not be afraid! Take and eat.”
The statement that the Eucharist is not the reward of saints but the bread of sinners might be understood in an orthodox sense if taken in isolation. However, placed in the context of the reception of the Eucharist by Judas referred to in the Angelus address (cf. John 13:23-27), and in the context of Pope Francis’s other words and actions, it suggests that renunciation of sin is not necessary for one’s reception of the Eucharist to be acceptable to God. This view is borne out in the following statement from Desiderio desideravi: ‘Indeed, every reception of communion of the Body and Blood of Christ was already desired by him in the Last Supper’ (n. 6).
The teaching of the Council of Trent cited above condemns the position of Martin Luther on faith and justification. Pope Francis has publicly expressed his agreement with the condemned positions of Luther. In an in-flight press conference on June 26th, 2016, Pope Francis stated:
I think that Martin Luther’s intentions were not mistaken; he was a reformer. Perhaps some of his methods were not right, although at that time, if you read Pastor’s history, for example – Pastor was a German Lutheran who experienced a conversion when he studied the facts of that period; he became a Catholic – we see that the Church was not exactly a model to emulate. There was corruption and worldliness in the Church; there was attachment to money and power. That was the basis of his protest. He was also intelligent, and he went ahead, justifying his reasons for it. Nowadays, Lutherans and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken.
On the day that Desiderio desideravi was issued, Pope Francis received in audience Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Nancy Pelosi has been publicly forbidden to receive communion under Canon 915 by her ordinary, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone. The grounds for this measure were her consistent political support for the complete legalization of abortion up to birth. After the audience with Pope Francis, Nancy Pelosi received communion at a mass in St. Peter’s over which Pope Francis presided, causing scandal to Catholics over all the world. When asked about her illegal reception of communion, Pope Francis expressed no disapproval of it. Instead, he responded by saying ‘When the Church loses its pastoral nature, when a bishop loses his pastoral nature, it causes a political problem. That’s all I can say.’ This response rebukes Archbishop Cordileone for his justified application of Canon 915.
The Apostolic Letter Desiderio desideravi is not an infallible teaching, because it does not satisfy the necessary conditions for an exercise of papal infallibility. The canon of the Council of Trent is an exercise of the infallible teaching authority of the Church. Therefore, the contradiction between Desiderio desideravi and the defined doctrine of the Council of Trent does not falsify the claim of the Catholic Church to be infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit when by an exercise of her teaching office she requires all Catholics to believe a doctrine as being divinely revealed. On the possibility of a pope publicly teaching error, see the Correctio filialis addressed to Pope Francis by a number of Catholic scholars (https://www.
We, the undersigned, confess the Catholic faith concerning the worthy reception of the Eucharist as it is defined by the Council of Trent, according to which faith alone is not a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist. We encourage all the bishops and clerics of the Catholic Church to publicly confess the same doctrine about the worthy reception of the Eucharist, and enforce the related canons in order to avoid grave and public scandal.
[Signed.]
Please see here the list of first signatories. Scholars and clergymen are invited to contact us should they wish to sign this document: mhickson@
Most Rev. Joseph Strickland, Bishop of Tyler
Most Rev. René Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi
Most Rev. Robert Mutsaerts, Auxiliary Bishop of S’Hertogenbosch in Netherlands
Most Rev. Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan
Fr. James Altman
Dr. Heinz-Lothar Barth, until 2016 professor of Latin and Greek at the University of Bonn
Donna F. Bethell, J.D.
James Bogle, Esq., MA TD VR, barrister-at-law and former President of Una Voce International
Deacon Nick Donnelly, MA
Anthony Esolen, PhD
Matt Gaspers, Managing Editor, Catholic Family News
Dr. Jules Gomes, biblical scholar and Rome correspondent, St. Michael’s Media
Maria Guarini, STB, editor of the website Chiesa e postconcilio
Sarah Henderson, DCHS, MA (Religious Education and Catechetics), BA
Dr. Maike Hickson, PhD, journalist
Dr. Robert Hickson, retired professor of literature and philosophy
Dr. Dr. Rudolf Hilfer, Stuttgart, Germany
Dr. Rafael Huentelmann, Editor in Chief, METAPHYSICA
Dr. Peter A. Kwasniewski, PhD
Dr. John Lamont, DPhil
Fr. John P. Lovell
Deacon Eugene McGuirk
Martin Mosebach
Brian M. McCall, Editor in Chief, Catholic Family News
Patricia McKeever, B.Ed. M.Th., Editor, Catholic Truth (Scotland)
Julia Meloni, B.A. Yale, A.M. Harvard, author
Fr. Cor Mennen, lic. canon law, former seminary professor
Fr. Michael Menner
Dr. Sebastian Morello, BA, MA, PhD, essays editor for the The European Conservative
Fr. Gerald E. Murray, J.C.D., Pastor, Church of the Holy Family, New York, NY
George Neumayr, author
Fr. Guy Pagès
Paolo Pasqualucci, ret. professor of philosophy, University of Perugia, Italy
Dr. Claudio Pierantoni, Universidad de Chile, PhD History of Christianity, PhD Philosophy
Dr. Carlo Regazzoni, philosopher of culture
Dr. John Rist, emeritus professor of Classics and Philosophy, University of Toronto, FRSC
Eric Sammons, Editor, Crisis Magazine
Edward Schaefer, president, The Collegium
Wolfram Schrems, Mag. theol., Mag. phil.
Anna Silvas, BA, MA, PhD, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, University of New England, Australia
Dr. Michael Sirilla, PhD
Anthony P. Stine, PhD
Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Netherlands
Dr. phil. habil. Berthold Wald, retired professor, Theological Faculty of Paderborn, Germany
John-Henry Westen, Co-Founder and Editor in Chief of LifeSiteNews.com
Elizabeth Yore, Esq., Founder, Yore Children
