— I WANTED TO SEND A CLEAR SIGNAL. I WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR: SOMETHING QUITE SPECIAL IS GOING ON HERE! HE IS HERE!, THE ONE BEFORE WHOM WE FALL TO OUR KNEES! PAY ATTENTION!..........
(Pope Benedict XVI explaining kneeling Communion to Peter Seewald)
Spain's Queen Sofia's refusal to kneel for Jesus prompted this outburst from a contributor to Praytell Blog (he mentions pictures of Padre Pio and Grace Kelly. I wonder where he saw those! his post is italicized)
...."Because every one that exalteth himself, shall be humbled; and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted." (Jesus Christ)
When I see beautiful photos of Grace Kelly and the Blessed Pio kneeling to receive, and then see this acrobatic publicity stunt!!, It is a reminder to me that this Pope's gentle reforms are particularly offensive to the high and mighty.
There is a freight train coming our way! Next year, the first Sunday of Advent we will no longer be using the same English (no changes for any of the other 9,999 translations of the Mass, just English!) Rome has spoken.
Why? ...remember words/concepts like 'Incarnate', 'grievous fault', etc. ? People from other countries do because they still say them. Every Sunday!! It was only the traitorous translators of the English missal who did away with these treasures along with much else....
I know what your thinking ....."Doesn't 'and became man' doesn't count for Incarnate?" Absolutely not since the credo has both 'and became man' 'et homo factus est' AND 'et Incarnatus est' , the English translators just decided to lessen the emphasis so they got rid of the latter phrase entirely. 'Incarnate is 'Too big of a word!' or else more sinisterly, they just didn't believe it THAT strongly!
Now the pope is telling the American Church to rejoin the rest of the Catholic Church in prayer and there are a number of clerics, who are livid! Imagine! Rome wants the American Church to pray the same way Catholics all over the world already do!! The nerve!!! So much for the American Church being the vanguard for change! The old 'peter-paul-and-mary crowd are griping and backstabbing!
If you can stomach it, visit the link below and you will discover many things! There is at least one priest advocate for homosexual marriage and homosexual sex and homosexual sex and ...!! who is especially angry about the pope's scheduled 2011 tsnami.
It has been a while since k.c. has seen a televised Mass from EWTN. Hopefully things have changed...Yes, those of you who have seen them already know what k.c. will say!
Why do so few people @ EWTN kneel for Holy Communion? I understand when people who are ignorant of what the pope is doing, ignore him. They are too busy putting bread on their table, or don't have cable or a computer. But what about pope groupies? (k.c. is one! and so are EWTNees!) If you watch EWTN, then I know you have cable! What about we who follow what the pope is doing and deliberately *choose* ignore his humble invitation to kneel for our dear Lord?
Father Anthony Ruff of with the 'in' crowd blog, Praytell, says he knows why American Catholics, both conservative and liberal refuse to kneel.....it is because we have benefited form two generations of good, post Vatican II liturgical formation !! Really!!!
There are those who would say that EWTN has gone over to the 'dark(usccb) side'. Ever since it passed out of Mother Angelica's control. I don't know what the problem is, but the daily spectacle of stalwarts 'standing' with the American Catholic Church against the Holy Father is a huge disappointment.
Praytell blog recently discussed our favorite topic: Kneeling for Communion!
Pray tell is run by Father Anthony Ruff OSB and is affiliated with Liturgical Press. On their home page, Father 'says' he actually likes kneeling..... would that it were true! Father shows a different side in the following exchange with someone called 'raymond lull'. (raymond apparently has been reading this blog!) Lull is red and Father Ruff's words will be green.
Lull>>>
The lands where latin-rite Catholics still kneel for Holy Communion are largely former Soviet Union republics…e.g. Latvia, Estonia, Kazakhstan. I have visited Latvia but know only second hand of the others.
If one were to think about what Catholics from these countries do not have in Common with the U. S. Catholics, the elephant in the room would be that one group has endured intense persecution for their Faith and the other has not.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider, of Kazakhstan, is most certainly the reason we are even having this discussion. He is the man who convinced the pope to re-introduce the Communion kneeler into papal liturgies. For Bishop Schneider the act of kneeling conveys a message from your body into your soul. That message is dependence like that of a child who waits to be fed, and intense gratitude, like that of the one leper who bothered to come back to our Lord and fell on his knees before Him to thank Him! Does not the word eucharist mean gratitude?
The Holy Father is commanding no one to kneel! He does invite us….and as Amercans reject wholesale his humble invitation to demonstrate gratitude, we are saying way too much about ourselves.
Fr. Ruff>>
I think you’re making a few unfair leaps here. I wouldn’t assume that people who don’t kneel for Holy Communion aren’t as grateful, nor would I assume that people who kneel have greater gratitude. Surely the human heart is more complex than that. (Perhaps – just perhaps – some proponents of kneeling are judgmental of others and lacking in humility.) Regarding your last line, Americans are perhaps saying about themselves that they’re obedient to their Bishops (since our Bishops don’t permit kneeling) and that they’ve been well-formed by a couple generations of renewed liturgical practice.
Humility and complete dependence upon God are very good things. Jesus spoke often of them. The problem is that kneeling for Communion suggests, rather, complete dependence upon a clergyman who feeds you like a child. There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus to even hint that Christians should have this childish attitude toward ordained authorities in their community.
I think for this question we need a richer and broader understanding of receiving Communion: humility and adoration, yes, but not only! Also sharing in the entire Paschal Mystery, anticipating one’s resurrection on the Last Day, being divinized by God’s grace, being given one’s full human dignity, completing one’s action in the EP, sharing with the gathered community, anticipating the final Banquet, and so forth.
(Father's original comments did not have bold print)
....But among the standard-setting practices of BenedictXVI, the one least understood – so far – is perhaps that of having the faithful kneel for communion. This is almost never done, in any of the churches all over the world. In part because the communion rails at which one knelt to receive communion have been abandoned or dismantled almost everywhere.>>>>>
Why is it so least understood, so hard to figure out? Just listen to Curly (Jack Palance) explain the 'secret of life' to Billy Crystal!
Bishop Schneider and the Holy Father have figured it out!
His Excellency Michael Mulvey has announced, via his website, the implementation of the new missal translation.
On the Corpus Christi Diocese website, goccn.org, there is a link to the USCCB's announcement of the new, true-to-the-underlying-Latin-prayer missal's implementation at the close of 2011.
Most everyone in the diocese is unaware that that all the familiar responses they say during Mass are being done away with. Of the hundreds of versions of the missal translated after Vatican II (into hundreds of languages) only one translation has been deemed to be deficient and worthy of being tossed into the dustbin..... Ours![don't ask why! there is no good answer for the USCCB, other than that the people who translated it were dishonest manipulators! May God have mercy on their souls.]
Hey, Mr. Gainseville burning preacher man! Don't burn the Koran! We'll send you thousands, wait,...MILLIONS of Oregon Catholic Press Missals which we will help you burn with extreme prejudice and animus! Give us time to take off work and we'll come join you!
>>>>...Much water has flown under the Tiber's bridges, carrying away splendor and mystery from Rome since the Pontificate of Pius XII.... [T]he banalities and translations which have ousted the sonerous Latin and Greek are of a supermarket quality which is quite unacceptable. Hand shaking and embarrassed smiles or smirks have replaced the older courtesies: kneeling is out, queuing is in, and the general tone is like BBC radio broadcast for tiny tots....<<<< [courtesy of pblosser and joseph pearce]
...It is very sad that Guinness, who passed away in 2000, did not live to see any restoration of the Liturgy which he loved.
I probably have said this before, but I will repeat it anyway: Laity! do not be discouraged when our priests and bishops continue to stop their ears at our Holy Father's call to restore worship, and reverence, and humility! Better people than we have endured the same frustration --only worse because they had no straw at which to grasp, no distant glimmer.
I believe God is testing us! Our clergy, as whole, have royally failed that test! So now He -has given us a pope who is reaching over and around disobedient and unbelieving clergy...straight out to us-laity.
Can a bishop keep us from hearing the Mass in Latin? No! The Holy Father has given that decision to us-laity!
Can a bishop keep us from kneeling for Communion? No! The Holy Father's humble example has rudely interrupted the United States Council of Catholic Bishops' slickly worded info-mercial for standing.[How these bishops must dread that someone will ask them the meaning of the Holy Father's gesture. There can be no good USCCB answer to that question!]]
Laity! Get your Sensus Fidelium on!
If we don't kneel now...then we can blame no priest, no bishop, nor peer pressure. The Holy Father has given that decision over to each and every layperson.
Even more than that, he doesn't just hold kneeling out as 'an option'. Rather, his daily reminder at papal liturgies, all and every! exalts kneeling as the ideal!!
The Holy Father is gently inviting us to have our bodies do what our souls already need to be doing. True, the Pope issues no fiat, no bull, no command....he gestures like a nervous teenage boy who stands with unruly slicked down hair and a 'white sportcoat' and silently extends his hand to his would-be dance partner. And for now, we refuse. We sit, like the girl who pretends not to see because she's afraid of what her smart-aleck girlfriends might say ....
Our cause will not go away! It is the pope's cause! It is the pope's cause because it is our Lord's!!
Father Z's blog revisited this topic several days ago, 28 AUG. One comment seems to indicate that 'old hippies' in the USCCB may try to use the occasion of the introduction of our new English Translation to confuse people about 'obedience' and kneeling......
>>>That being said I have found a “Bulletin Insert” on the USCCB website which is linked to the new Missal Translation area.Link: (http://www.nccbuscc.org/romanmissal/resources-bulletins5.shtml)This insert and description uses language that I have never seen before.Granted, I am an attorney, so my reading may be nuanced and over-technical, but it seems as if there is a slight shift in thinking: “...The new edition of the General Instruction asks the Conference of Bishops in each country to determine the posture to be used for the reception of Communion and the act of reverence to be made by each person as he or she receives Communion. The Conference of Bishops of the United States has determined that in this country Communion will be received standing and that a bow will be the act of reverence made by those receiving. These norms may require some adjustment on the part of those who have been used to other practices, however the significance of unity in posture and gesture as a symbol of our unity as members of the one body of Christ should be the governing factor in our own actions. ..” The part that concerns me is: the USCCB “...has determined that in this country Communion WILL BE received standing…”
<<<< “The Conference of Bishops of the United States has determined that in this country Communion will be received standing ” (!!)
Hey Defend Us In Battle!
That USCCB insert to which you are referring is old. I have found posts quoting it going back to 2003. The USCCB site webpage doesn’t have a date. Whoever linked it to the new translation is either not paying attention to its contents, or else is deliberately contravening the Holy Father’s own humble example.
The days of bishops’ conferences usurping the authority of individual bishops or that of the Pope and ‘determining’ things. are over.
to those who say kneeling catholics are drawing attention to themselves:
Is it drawing attention to oneself to follow what your conscience tells you is right even when others don’t see it that way? yes.
Were the few who stood by our Lord in His Agony drawing attention to the themselves?
yes. Sometimes “drawing attention to yourself” is not a bad thing.
Instructing the ignorant is almost always a good thing.
k.c.
Comment by kneeling catholic — 29 August 2010 @ 12:36 am
......"Much of the music that has come up over the last 30 years will no longer be useable," said Father Alan Jurkus of St. Alphonsus Parish in Greendale, who sent out a letter this month notifying members of the coming changes.......
Why do no Orthodox or any other early Apostolic splinter churches have Hand Communion ?
Finally an orthodox Christian from St. Mary Magdeline blog answers: That's the way they have always done it!
Doesn't that just make sense? Why else would they resemble pre Vatican II Roman Catholics in this regard? The only logical explanation is that Communion on the tongue had to have been the general practice of the Catholic Church at whatever time the split of each group occured. In the case of the Copts, Armenians, and Nestorians....we are going back way into the 400s. Any other explanation means that separatechurches, each one antagonistic to all the others, all independenty decided to introduce the same identical innovation. [here we count Communion directly on the tongue as the 'innovation']
Hence, in k.c.'s opinion, the oft repeated axiom that: "Hand Communion was commonly practiced in the Catholic Church up until the year 1000": is a big, fat, lie!
k.c.
listen to Scott........
I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and to my limited knowledge Eucharist given in the hand has never been a widespread or accepted practice in the Church. Certainly we Orthodox – Eastern or Oriental - would be horrified at the thought nowadays. St. Basil the Great in the 4th Century wrote very clearly that the practice was only justified during times of persecution, presumably because priests might not be available to distribute the Eucharist in person. The text implies that to receive in the hand under other circumstances, outside of persecution, would be a grave fault. Other references from the first millennium, including references from the Western Church, support the conclusion that the normal and accepted manner of reception of the Holy Eucharist was in the mouth, given by a spoon, as it is still today in the East, and in Eastern rites in communion with the Roman Catholics.It appears that only St. Cyril of Jerusalem (also 4th Century) mentions reception in the hand as if it might be an accepted and legitimate practice, and this is the passage that is typically trotted out as evidence from this early period.In other words, to answer the question, my belief is that the Eastern churches didn’t “abandon” the practice. I think the likelihood is that they never particularly condoned it, but allowed it as a necessary evil during times of extreme persecution. It became unnecessary after the Peace of Constantine in 313, as another contemporary reference appears to indicate.Here is a link with further information. http://www.catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.aspI’m sorry I don’t have more information from the Orthodox point of view. It has never occurred to me that such a practice might have been legitimate at any time in the history of the Church. I will certainly look deeper into the history of the practice, particularly its history in our Church.....
....The Latin Mass Society has announced that Bishop Athanasius Schneider ORC, Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganga in Kazakhstan, will be attending the forthcoming priests’ training conference to be held at Downside Abbey from Tuesday 10th to Friday 13th August. Bishop Schneider will celebrate a Solemn Pontifical Mass in the Extraordinary Form in the Abbey Church at Downside on Thursday 12th August at 11.00am. He will also deliver a lecture as part of the conference......
Thanks to Father Ray Blake for publicizing this!!
k.c.
sadly, there are many if not an overwhelming majority of 'conservatives' who still do not accept the importance of 'lex orandi'. Some negative comments have surfaced regarding Father's hosting Bishop Schneider....... gemoftheocean said... Phisiocrat - do be a bit careful and realize that in the western church for the 1st thousand years or so Communion was distributed in the hand.
To which your's truly must respond! Gem!
Are you still at it??
If hand Communion were widespread until 1000 AD "or so", then why don't any of the Orthodox who split with us around that time, practice Hand Communion?
Why do none, absolutely none of the Apostolic groups, like the Nestorians, Armenians, or Copts who split with us since 400 AD or so, practice Hand Communion?
Do you know of any group which split off from us, except for the 16th CTY reformers, which practice Hand Communion?
This is most likely the same tune to which St. Edmund Campion and his fellow martyrs, Sherwin and Briant, sang Te Deum when they learned that they were to be drawn and quartered.
It has been the song of martyrs and the joy of persecuted Catholics for well over a thousand years. It was well known throughout the Church prior to the great Wreckovation. The Te Deum needs to make a comeback!
(this is a google translation of Bishop Schneider's 24 April 2010 letter)
Praise our Lord Jesus Christ!
Dear Mr. Dr. Rafael Vitola Brodbeck and all friends of the blog SAVE THE LITURGY!
Having seen the goals of Your blog, I think they are commendable and very current. They try to walk with the authentic spirit of the Church, cultivating the "sentire cum ecclesia", ie thinking and how the Church. Divine Providence has given to our time the most precious gifts in the person of Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope shows in his teaching and practical examples to the whole Church in unequivocal and clear the true spirit of the liturgy.
Even before the pontificate Cardinal Ratzinger he left a rich education on the Sacred Liturgy, especially in his book "The Spirit of the Liturgy." If we love the Church, we follow with great docility liturgical teaching and the specific examples that pertain to the liturgy of the Supreme Pastor of the Church. I think this Pope had entered history as Pope angelic, like Pope and zealous lover of Divine worship.
The teaching and example of Pope Benedict XVI are the most authentic interpretation of liturgical spirit of Vatican II. God grant that every bishop and priests to meekly accept this liturgical teaching of the Pope and implement it in their churches. I want to encourage you all to continue this noble and vital goal for the church, which is living with abundant spiritual fruit liturgy and promote the sanctity and its authentic spirit in the Church of our times.
For that I thank and bless you in Christ and His Blessed Mother Mary,
+ Bishop Athanasius Schneider, ORC Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Don't lose hope! Corpus Christi's Bishop Emeritus, Edmund Carmody distributes Communion to kneeling Communicants with the diocese' master of ceremonies, Fr. Pete Elizardo stands in the background.
Who is responsible? The new Bishop Mulvey? Bishop Emeritus Carmody? Father Peter Marsalek, the president of the school?
most of Father's blogger's are cautious, e.g. this comment from 'ipadre'>>I would love to use it now, but, I will wait for the signal from my bishop and the USCCB. All of this preparation is good and well, but they did nothing when they forced this current translation on the poor people. < <<
Dear ipadre!
how about this? let’s demand that liturgists stop using the old ICEL ASAP period. (The Vatican has declared it is worthy of the dustbin! If that judgment is warranted, then the time to stop using it has long since passed!) God’s children are hungry and the American Church just keeps feeding them stones.
Let’s just teach the people the ordinary Latin responses as per Paul VI’s wishes. We then can wait 20 years or so until the last ‘Woodstock’ anti-new translation bishop retires and then implement the new translation!
Each year, in only the 6 weeks of Lent, people forget the forgettable ICEL ‘Gloria’. It would be best for them to forget the entire old ICEL liturgy. As long as they keep practicing it, it will never die out.
Don't know the location where this first one is filmed. I hope it was faked!
This one is more of a montage. pitting the beauty of the liturgy of the ages against ...... well-known scenes....including Cardinal Schonborn and his now-famous balloon mass where he consecrated pita bread and passed out huge Chunks to everyone...(Please recall how he sent out his lieutenant to say the Cardinal learned this liturgy from the Chaldeans--who- by the way -lick the Eucharist from the floor if it falls! Ok, your Eminence, I didn't see anyone licking up all those crumbs at your joke of a liturgy!)
The German title of this, 13 May, video from Gloria.tv is 'lay ministers of Communion'. We see people kneeling for Jesus when they receive from the Pope, but everywhere else it is Communion AOW [any old way]!
btw, those guys with the white hoods are penitents. The scenes towards the close of the video are from a Holy Week procession in Spain. Apparently it has long been customary, hundreds of years before the KKK copied them, for penitents to wear hoods which point towards heaven.
…(40 seconds into the tape) …it was a huge tragedy in that the Mexican people knew how to respond, and in a specific way they knew how to fix the errors of their authorities, authorities from both sides… their political authorities from the side of the state and their ecclesiastical authorities from the Church’s side…. They [the people] were often seen as nothing more than a pawn on a chess board to be moved around … neither the state nor the Church in their games of opposition and lies, could ever dream that Catholic people were capable of rising up in arms…and the political and military authorities were oppressing the people…thinking that being a Catholic incapacitated you, they thought that Catholicism was only for old people … or for cowardly men…Never did they think the Catholics could rise up in arms. And when they did take up arms, the authorities never thought that the war was going to be so difficult and to last for three years …. [in an earlier episode Meyer recounts the miracle of how the Cristero insurgency could survive for three years without ANY outside help and battle its well supplied, atheist/leftist, government to a standstill . The 'settlement' to the stalemate was negotiated by the Church. The 50,000 Cristeros laid down their arms and went home. Many were then arrested and hung. The Church went on being controlled and persecuted. ]
This is an excellent paper on our buddies, our heroes, the Cristeros! Miss Scott makes her point: The 'Cristiada' Cristero Rebellion of the 1920s in Mexico was a lay movement. The Catholic Church officially and openly opposed it, even though the movement was dedicated to saving the Church in Mexico.
There is a theme which recurs down thru the centuries....from the common people of the 4th century who joined with Athanasius 'against the world' of Catholic bishops and kept the Church from embracing Arianism, to the English peasants of the 'Pilgrimage of Grace' who stood up for their Faith when priests and Bishops had long since surrendered ...on up to the brave Cristeros of the 1920s who saved the Church in Mexico from complete annihilation: The Church needs the laity, the 'sensus fidelium', to hold her true to her mission, to save her! Do not be discouraged when our bishops and priests are mealy-mouthed or scared or just plain traitors ---better people than we have endured this very same tragedy! And believe it, sisters and brothers.... those people intercede for us now at God's altar!
We need the clergy to get us into heaven, but God does not force them to go there with us! When our leaders wobble then we must do all the more to make the Church's mission and her saving message clear and never, ever expect a pat on the back from some well-heeled cleric.
We must only hope to hear 'well done' from ..............................One!
"“without their [ the Bishops'] permission and without their orders we are throwing ourselves into this blessed struggle for our liberty, and without their permission and without their orders we will go on until we conquer or die.”
(members of the Quintanar brigade, 1928)
Viva Cristo Rey!
k.c.
The Many Faces of the Cristero Rebellion Sonya Leigh Scott Sonya Leigh Scott, a member of Phi Alpha Theta, is a graduate student in history from Champaign, IL. She wrote this paper for Dr. José Deustua in History 5400, Latin America, during the fall of 2008. The power struggle simmering between the Catholic Church and the Mexican national government erupted with Catholic bishops and priests suspending religious worship in protest of the anticlerical policies of the Calles administration on July 31, 1926.197 President Plutarco Elias Calles called for “submission to the law,” known as Calles Law, that implemented anticlerical conditions set forth in the Constitution of 1917.198 Laws that controlled property rights in Article 27 of the Constitution forbade Church ownership of property and limited foreign ownership. All land served the public interest by the protection of communal rights of indigenous groups and redistribution of land under control of a strong national government.199 Under Calles’ Law, the government nationalized all church buildings, outlawed religious houses, banned public religious functions, and required priests to register in order to avoid severe fines or imprisonment.200 Examination of the Cristero Rebellion as simply a conflict between church and state misses the many faces, or nuances, that surrounded the uprising. In the work of historians from Jean Meyer, in the 1970s, to Ramon Jrade in the 1980s, and more recently the works of Jennie Purnell and Adrian Bantjes, reveals a multilayered portrait of the rebellion. The secular nature and the anticlerical position of the Calles administration are clear. What proves more complex, however, is how the conflict is defined. Was the rebellion a “holy war” with religious motivations? Was the conflict based in an economic struggle between a variety of peasant groups and the policies of a strong national government? Was the rebellion the culmination of long-standing grievances between the Church and the state? Or, as Purnell suggests, was the rebellion the articulation of factional conflicts between various communities that included economic, political, regional, and community concerns?201 This paper examines the complexities of the Cristero Rebellion, exploring the motivations of the many factions that emerged on both sides of the conflict and the many faces of the participants. The rebellion cannot 197 Matthew Butler, “The ‘Liberal’ Cristero: Ladislao Molina and the Cristero Rebellion in Michoacan, 1927-9.” Journal of Latin American Studies 31, no. 3 (October, 1999): 645; Jennie Purnell, Popular Movements and State Formation in Revolutionary Mexico: The Agraristas and Cristeros of Michoacan (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1999), 72. 198 Purnell, 76. 199 Earl Shorris, The Life and Times of Mexico (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004), 272; Purnell, 76. 200Matthew Butler, “The Church in ‘Red Mexico’: Michoacan Catholics and the Mexican Revolution, 1920-1929,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 55, no. 3 (July, 2004): 530. 201 Purnell, 3. be characterized as purely a battle between two dominating forces. Like much of Mexican history, the story of the rebellion is one of continuing struggle for political, economic, and regional autonomy among a variety of groups. Indeed, the portrait of the Cristero Rebellion has many facets, each with its own interests, ideologies, hopes, and dreams. The Face of the State In 1925, Tobasco cacique Tomas Garrido Canabal criticized Catholic clerics and stated that “’the cassocked vultures have seized their prey, digging their talons into the heart of the Indian, who is less prepared than any other race to resist the seduction of the whole ritual farse.’”202 President Plutarco Elias Calles, like Canabal, believed that the power of the Church obstructed modernization and that he must eliminate the power of the Church and its domination of the peasantry.203 Calles wanted absolute control and was suspicious of the politicization of the Church after the creation of a fairly successful Catholic Party in 1912. Although the party had dissolved, Calles sought to rid Mexico of the potential for Church control. The origins of the ideology of de-fanaticization were found in radical liberalism of the nineteenth-century scientific positivism, Marxism, and Protestantism. Mexican revolutionaries understood the revolution as more than an economic struggle, but also one of spirituality. They considered religion, like many of their Russian counterparts, a “drug” and the “Catholic ritual […] a seductive trick designed to exploit ignorant peasants ‘hallucinated by floats, adorned with clouds, little angels, chalices and all the artiface the clergy uses to cheat them out of their last penny.’”204 They clerics accused of sustaining the “backwards” nature of rural peasantry and presenting an obstacle to the formation of a modern state. However, the development of a secular state was not the only motivation for Calles’ actions toward the Church. Following the February 1926 proclamation of the “primate of Mexico” in which he “repeated a 1917 declaration that the Church did not recognize the constitution,” Calles proceeded to fully implement all the provisions of the Constitution regarding the Church.205 He called for “submission to the law” that would be required anywhere and explained that this did not indicate the ‘decatholicisation’ of Mexico.206 The Church antagonized Calles who 202 Manifesto a los obreros organizados de la republica y al elemento revolucionario (Villehermosa, Tabasco, 1925), 9-10 in Adrian A. Bantjes, “Idolatry and Iconoclasm in Revolutionary Mexico: The De-Christianization Campaigns, 1929-1940.” Mexican Studies/Estidios Mexicanos 13, no. 1. (Winter, 1997): 94. 203 Butler, 520. 204Guanajuato Veccinos Moroleon, to Sec. Gob., 31 December 1934, DGG 2.347, exp. 2.347(8)15257, AGN in Bantjes, 96. 205 Butler, Church, 521. 206 Ibid. already sought its end, or at least minimizing its strong presence in Mexico. The State sought to end what they believed to be the hegemony of the Church over the Mexican people, in particular, indigenous and rural populations. In order to modernize, the secular state must rid Mexico of fanaticism and mysticism that kept the people ‘backwards’ and without a national identity. The Mexican government wanted absolute control over the social, cultural, economic, and political lives of the people, and the Church was considered a significant obstacle. The Face of the Church The Catholic Church, although present in the daily life of many Mexicans and a fixture in many rural communities, was noticeably absent from the rebellion. The majority of priests, according to Jean Meyer, were quite hostile to the cristeros. Meyer found that in January 1927, out of 3,600 priests, only five were participated in the rebellion. One hundred priests were “actively hostile,” sixty-five were neutral but provided support to the cristeros, forty were “actively favorable,” and 3,600 priests left their parishes.207 The Vatican had forbade bishops and priests aiding the insurgents and demanded that they follow the law of the land. Many feared persecution as priests had been attacked and murdered and so fled to the cities or went into hiding in the hinterlands of Mexico under the protection of their parishes.208 Mexican clerics suspended of worship on 31 July, 1926, in order to encourage private worship. This was “an attempt to put the sacraments and the clergy beyond the reach of civil law.”209 However, the “majority of clergy withdrew from rural areas and sought refuge in the big towns under the control of the Government.”210 Not only did the majority of priests withdraw from their parishes, they encouraged nonviolence, patience, and humility. According to Aurelio Acevedo, one of the cristero rebels, “the very Fathers forbade us to fight for Christ, for the religion our fathers taught us and then reaffirmed for us in baptism, confirmation and our first communion.”211 Many priests offered sermons opposing the cristeros, calling them ‘cattle-thieves’ and discouraging parishioners from participation in rebel activities.212 A few priests, such as Fr. Adolfo Arroyo, the vicar of Valparaiso, stayed with his parishioners and joined the rebellion in defense of the Church. Fr. Arroyo criticized his fellow priests and wrote, “The overwhelming majority of the bishops and priests, displaying a criminal 207 Meyer, 75. 208 Ibid. 69. 209 Butler, 531. 210 Meyer, 70. 211 Interview of Meyer with Aurelio Acevedo, in Meyer, Cristeros, 70. 212 Ibid. degree of conformism, wallowed in an accursed inertia, all expecting sheer miracle from Heaven to give liberty to the Church.” They were content to give exhortations and say a few prayers. The priests had recourse to theology and, without further consideration, announced the illicit nature of the violent struggle in defence of the Church.213 Msgr. Gonzalez y Valencia, Archbishop of Durango wrote in a pastoral letter on February 11, 1927, “We never provoked this armed movement. But now that this movements exists, and all peaceful means have been exhausted, to our Catholic sons who have risen in arms for the defence of their social and religious rights … we must say: be tranquil in your consciences and receive our blessing.”214 Because of Vatican-issued orders that bishops and priests abandon their parishes and spiritual duties, and submit to the mandates of the Constitution, priests rarely supported the rebellion. Fear of persecution and death also created a barrier to clerical support, although many priests found ways to remain with their parishioners as spiritual leaders and conduct the sacraments covertly. The face of the Church was not represented among the cristeros, only the presence of a few priests who felt they could not and would not abandon their charges. If the rebellion was a conflict between the Church and the state, the Church was missing. The Faces of the Cristeros In ideological, socioeconomic, and geographical terms, the cristeros were the most diverse of all the actors in the rebellion. They were, in other words, not engaged in a large collective action, rather the cristeros represented numerous causes and concerns, not all of which were religious. Jennie Purnell writes that “communities did not rebel en masse during the cristiada unless revolutionary anticlericalism and agrarianism attacked local resources, values, and institutions that had been successfully defended until the revolution itself.”215 In fact, the peasants were deeply divided on the issue of rebellion and their opinions reflected their economic interests, the impact of agrarian reform on their villages and towns, and their feelings toward local authorities. Although various communities and factions shared religious beliefs, there were differing political viewpoints.216 The rebellion acquired the name cristero because of the battle cry “¡Viva Cristo Rey!” and not necessarily because they shared a single view.217 213Archives of Aurelio Acevedo, notes on the religious persecution, armed defense, and agreements, by Fr. Adolfo Arroyo, MS of 8 pp., 24 January 1934, in Meyer, Cristeros, 69-70. 214 “Outside the Flaminian Gate,” pastoral letter of Msgr. Gonzalez y Valencia, 11 February 1927. Original sheet in the possession of Jean Meyer (double sheet written on recto and verso), in Meyer, Cristeros, 67. 215 Purnell, 19. 216 Ibid. 8. 217Ramon Jrade, “Inquiries into the Cristero Insurrection against the Mexican Revolution.” Latin American Research Review 20, no. 2. (1985): 54. Some cristeros engaged in rebellion for purely political and economic reasons. Ladislao Molina, a large landowner in Michoacan, did not demonstrate any religious motivation, and was known to embrace liberal ideology first, and Catholicism second.218 According to Jose Perez, a delegate to the National League for the Defence of Religious Liberty (LNDLR), writing to his superiors, “he is not a cristero: whilst he is a Catholic, he is also a liberal, and does not fight for the same reasons as the Catholics. He has his own point of view, but it is personal.”219 In the case of Molina, and most likely others like him, “Catholicism served as a dissident ideology for resisting state encroachments on his sphere of influence.”220 Some of the cristeros focused their revolutionary efforts on the local agraristas who benefited from Cardenas-era land reforms.221 Agrarian land reform created sporadic problems throughout Mexico as villages and towns lost territorial autonomy. However, the problem for the cristeros did not necessarily revolve around the agraristas, it revolved around religion with political overtones. Cristero Jose Gonzalez Romo wrote in a letter to agrarista Jesus Morfin, “Tell the agraristas that we are not fighting them because they are agraristas, but because they support the tyrant who is trying to wipe out the religion of our country and hand us over to the Protestant Gringos.”222 Government control over land distribution often meant foreign ownership and control, the previous statement suggests that some cristeros saw a connection between elimination of the Catholic Church, and the introduction of liberal, state-controlled, and foreign-based exploitation. Despite the economic and political tones of the rebellion, defense of religion still motivated many of the cristeros. Because of their commitment to Church restoration, they often defied the Church’s instruction to obey the laws and observe restraint and non-violence. In a letter to the parish priest, the Quintanar Brigade wrote, “without their permission and without their orders we are throwing ourselves into this blessed struggle for our liberty, and without their permission and without their orders we will go on until we conquer or die.”223 Many cristeros “believed they were fighting a ‘holy war’ against an anticlerical government frequently depicted as the Anti-Christ.”224 218 Butler, 645. 219 Archivo Aurelio Robles Acevedo, Mexico City, caja 20/expediente 90/foja 14117, Perez to Guerrero, Morelia, 22 February 1929, in Butler, Molina, 646. 220 Butler, 649. 221 James Krippner-Martinez, “Invoking ‘Tato Vasco’: Vasco de Quiroga, Eighteenth – Twentieth Centuries,” The Americas 56, no. 3. (January, 2000): 23. 222 Archives of the Society of Jesus, Mexican Province, 9 April 1929 in Meyer, Cristeros, 107. 223 Archives of Aurelio Acevedo; collective letter of the Quintanar Brigade to the parish priest of Mesquitic, Norberto Reyes, in Meyer, Cristeros, 71. 224 Javier Villa-Flores, “Religion, Politics, and Salvation: Latin American Millenarian Movements,” Radical History Review Issue 99 (Fall, 2007): 246. According to Javier Villa-Flores, during periods of “accelerated cultural, political, and economic change,” increased religious and spiritual participation is common.225 He suggests that the cristeros, in response to crisis, mobilized around a religious belief that served as a source of motivation.226 Alliances and grassroots defense of the Church solidified in response to the rapid changes the government attempted to impose.227 In fact, cristeros were not only found in peasant communities and rural villages, but in urban areas as well, although their character and composition were significantly different. In the cities, large urban networks formed. They engaged in clandestine operations collecting taxes for supplies, obtaining ammunition and food to sustain the rebels, and formed elaborate communication networks. Workers and artisans, along with professionals filled the urban ranks of the cristeros. Women played a critical role as cristeros. They carried messages, ammunition, obtained and delivered food, among many other duties, at great peril.228 What united the cristeros was their need to cope with and respond to government controls over every aspect of their lives. Government attacks against the Church mobilized the cristeros. The Church, in many ways, was the symbol of autonomy, of cultural identity, an institution that sustained the people through decades of turmoil. Conclusion The question remains, after this short discussion of the actors of the Cristero Rebellion, was this a conflict based on religion, or was it more a conflict between competing factions based on economic and political interests? We have seen that the Church as an institution played a very minor role, if any role at all. We have also seen that economics and local interests figured strongly in mobilizing the cristeros as in the ongoing conflict between the agraristas and the peasants. Agrarian and land reform provided much of the fuel for the cristiada. Religion served as a common denominator mobilizing the lower and middle class against the elite. Devotion to the church bound diverse antigovernment sentiments, and the government’s action against the Church and religious freedom were springboards that propelled the cristiada. In the Cristero Rebellion a variety of concerns converged, and the Church served as a symbol and catalyst for anti-government expression. The desire of the government to inflict its control over Mexican life and create a new national identity based on secular terms intensified the commitment of many Catholics to practice their religion, with or without clerical guidance or support. 225 Ibid. 243. 226 Ibid. 242. 227 Butler, 525. 228 Meyer, 95, 128-130.
One of the lame excuses the Cardinal's defenders gave was that he was only imitating the Chaldean/Assyrian Eucharistic practices. This was to explain why people were casually munching on pieces of Eucharist which they bit off from large Chunks which they held in their hands.
K.C. recently spoke with a Chaldean Catholic who explained that:
1) a lay Chaldean would never dare touch the Holy Eucharist and would only receive directly in the mouth. 2) She had observed Chaldean priests who - when a Host was accidentally dropped -- dropped to their knees, bent down and licked the Host from the floor.
I didn't bother asking her about Chaldean use of balloons.
2002 interview with Focolare's foundress. If having a Voodoo chief assist the 2002 Assisi prayer meeting (http://www.vatican.va/special/assisi-testimonianze_20020124_en.html#chef amadouGasseto), or having a statue of Buddha placed over a tabernacle, or having the Pope kiss the Koran (http://www.jimmyakin.org/2006/04/jp2_and_the_qur.html) shook you up a little, then maybe you better buckle your seatbelt!!! Assisi is "only a beginning" says Miss Lubich.....
>>>ROME, FEB. 19, 2002 (Zenit.org).- Chiara Lubich, founder of the Focolare Movement, addressed the question of ecumenism and progress in interreligious dialogue, following the World Day of Prayer in Assisi last month.Lubich has organized a series of initiatives for this year, such as a "Hindu Christian Seminar" (Castel Gandolfo, June 14-18), and an International Conference of Muslim Friends of the Focolare Movement (Nov. 1-3). Over the past few weeks Lubich has met with religious leaders who were in Assisi.Following are excerpts from an interview with Lubich, published in the Feb. 10 issue of Città Nuova magazine (http://www.cittanuova.it).
Q: What could help this event, and the solemn commitments taken by religious leaders, to have the greatest impact? Do you see a concrete contribution on the part of the Focolare Movement?
Lubich: As for the first question, we should see this gathering as the historic event that it was, and not as an isolated moment. It has already, and not just in the Christian world, sparked local prayer events and other moments for peace building. It is not an isolated event, because there should also be a follow-up to it in some way. That´s what we´re hoping for.After Sept. 11, we have yet another reason to meet and pray to God for peace. In reality, certain wars going on in different regions of the world are not just the result of hatred and resentment over injustices that have been inflicted, or built-up bitterness that then explodes.These are all negative factors, but perhaps simply human factors. With the emergence of widespread terrorism, we are facing what the Pope has called "forces of evil." To vanquish them, human efforts alone are not enough, nor it is sufficient to set the political world in motion.The religious world has to come to grips with the need to make good triumph over evil -- Good with a capital G -- through a common effort to create all across the planet that universal brotherhood in God that religions are called to bring to fulfillment. Only this brotherhood can be the soul of that world community which recent Popes have spoken of and which many Christians aspire to.The hope in our heart is that Assisi 2002 will mark the beginning of a series of well-planned initiatives prepared and carried out by those who have this responsibility so that the cry "war never again" becomes a reality.As for the Focolare Movement, since it is the fruit of a charism for our times, we feel we are already in tune through our different dialogues, activities and spirit, with the needs of today. However, the event in Assisi helped to speed up the movement. We´ll do our best to keep up and increase the pace. As with everything, we are always at the total service of what the Spirit and the Church may ask of us.
Q: Among some Christians there is a certain reluctance when it comes to interreligious dialogue. They are afraid of losing their identity or that syncretism might occur. What is your opinion on this? What would you say to someone who is hesitant about getting involved in this dialogue?
Lubich: It is definitely not wrong to fear losing one´s identity or to be wary of syncretism when it comes to approaching the faithful of other religions. If we think that any Christian is capable of getting involved in dialogue then we run a real risk. In fact, only those who are prepared for it, who have the vocation to it, should do so.On the other hand, in this day and age, in many different countries, persons of different religions live right next door to one another. So there must be a way to relate. I believe that as Christians we can do so by putting into practice the love that Jesus brought about on earth and this love has certain demands.It is a love that has to go out to everyone, not just to our relatives and friends, following the example of the love of the heavenly Father who sends the rain and the sun on the bad and the good alike, which means on our enemies, too. Furthermore, it is a love that urges us to take the initiative in loving, without expecting to be loved, just as Jesus did. Thus, when we were still sinners, when we were not loving, he gave his life for us.It is a love that urges one to see the other as oneself, to love the other as oneself. This love is not just a matter of words and feelings; it is concrete. It requires that we make ourselves one with the others, that we "live" the person we are with, in their pain and in their joy, so as to understand them and help them effectively.Finally, this love requires us to see Christ in the person we love. This means that even though we love a given individual, Christ takes whatever we do, whether good or bad, as having been done to himself. My advice to reluctant Christians, therefore, would be what I have just explained to you, so as to put them at peace and encourage them to love, too.
Q: You mentioned the golden rule in your talk, as did the Pope, Patriarch Bartholomew and Cardinal Kasper. How can this help dialogue?
Lubich: It is the basis upon which interreligious dialogue can be built. The sacred books of the world´s religions affirm that you should do to others what you would like others to do to you (see Matthew 7:12).Practically speaking, this rule asks everyone to love. It does it with the very voice of one´s religion through the presence of this sentence, which is none other than one of the "seeds of the Word," that is, principles of truth that are present in different faiths.
>>>>....Según han apuntado estas fuentes, que no han sabido concretar con exactitud en qué consistirá la medida, hablan, sin embargo, de dos posibles hitos. Por un lado, la supresión del indulto universal para recibir la Sagrada Comunión en la mano. La otra posibilidad es que, por fin, el Papa se anime a celebrar la Santa Misa in cena Domini según la "forma extraordinaria" del Rito Romano. .....<<<
k.c. has it from reliable sources that Corpus Christi Cathedral (Corpus Christi diocese) conducted all five of its Masses this weekend of March 7th 'ad orientem' http://www.goccn.org/mass.asp .
The reorientation of the altar was well received by the parishioners with many commenting both on the awe they felt and the extraordinary reverence with which the parish's priests celebrated the ordinary form of the Mass!!
[by John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter, yesterday! March 3rd, 2010]
ROME -- For the better part of five years, plenty of experts on Catholic liturgy have been waiting for the “real” agenda of Pope Benedict XVI, known as a traditionalist on matters of worship, to emerge from beneath a façade of patience seemingly built on dropping hints rather than imposing sweeping new rules.
Now, however, the pope’s own liturgist insists that the patient façade is actually the agenda.
One month ago, that papal liturgist, Msgr. Guido Marini, sparked wide debate with his public call for a “reform of the reform,” suggesting to some a desire to roll back the clock on liturgical reforms associated with the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). However, Marini insists that no such rollback is underway, and no dramatic new rules are in the works.
When Benedict employs more traditional touches in his own liturgies, such as giving Communion on the tongue, those amount to “proposals,” Marini said, intended to gradually influence the church’s liturgical culture, and are not harbingers of forthcoming papal edicts.
“I don’t believe that the liturgy of the church needs any radical changes or distortions,” Marini said, saying he “fully” agrees with a comment from then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, that Catholic liturgy needs a “period of stability” after the wave of dramatic, and at times contentious, reforms that flowed from Vatican II.
Marini, the master of papal liturgical celebrations, spoke in an exclusive interview with NCR Feb. 9 in his Vatican office. (Read more of the interview here: Q & A with Msgr. Guido Marini, papal liturgist.)
When Marini addressed a Jan. 6 conference in Rome sponsored by the Australian Confraternity of Catholic Clergy and the U.S.-based Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, he seemed to call into question at least some of the reforms from Vatican II, such as active participation by laity in the liturgy and greater “inculturation,” meaning adjusting the church’s rites to reflect local cultures.
In his conversation with NCR, however, Marini said that undoing those reforms is not what he had in mind. Marini conceded that the liturgical winds are blowing in a traditional direction, but said any change should happen slowly and without new upheaval.
“I believe it’s a matter of consolidating what we already have, in a more authentic way, according to the true mind of the church,” Marini said. He said that’s what Benedict has in mind when he talks about “development in continuity.”
Marini, 44, has served as Benedict’s master of liturgical celebrations since October 2007. In that role, he is the chief organizer of the pope’s own celebrations; liturgical policy for the wider church is set by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, presently headed by Spanish Cardinal Antonio Cañizares.
Trying to turn back the clock on Vatican II “wouldn’t make any sense, because it’s not how the life of the church works,” Marini said. New developments, he said, should happen “organically,” and “the best way, the most correct way ... is certainly not to reject the reforms that were determined by the Second Vatican Council.”
In his Jan. 6 speech, Marini also pointed to certain specific practices that have been adopted in Benedict’s own liturgical celebrations. They included placing a cross on the altar during Mass, so that both priest and people are oriented toward God rather than one another, and the practice of administering Communion to people on the tongue while kneeling rather than taking it in the hand while standing.
Marini told NCR, however, that Benedict’s style is to “propose” these practices so that they may be slowly “welcomed” into the life of the church, rather than imposing them by authority.
“It’s the style of the current pope to move forward not by imposing things, but proposing them. The idea is that, slowly, all this may be welcomed, considering the true significance that certain decisions and certain orientations may have,” Marini said.
Marini did not rule out, however, that such practices might be made binding at some future point.
“Whether sometime down the line, in the future, what the pope is presenting should become more of a disciplinary norm [for the whole church], we don’t know and can’t say,” he said.
Marini said much the same spirit of preferring gradual evolution to dramatic exercises of authority applies to Benedict’s decision in 2007 to authorize wider celebration of the older Latin Mass, the so-called Tridentine rite. No one is compelled, he said, to worship according to that rite, but rather both now have “full legitimacy.”
“What’s important now is that both forms of the Roman rite look upon one another with great serenity,” he said, “realizing that both belong to the life of the church and that neither is the only true, authentic expression.”
In general, Marini suggested, anyone expecting a dramatic liturgical overhaul from Benedict is likely to be disappointed.
“The pope has a vision based on great faith in the life of the church,” he said. “The church has its own sense of time, its own rhythms. … Sometimes things can’t just be imposed. They have to slowly enter into the way of thinking of the church, its way of feeling, its climate.
“Within that,” Marini said, “maybe one can eventually arrive at providing a more precise disciplinary norm, but maybe first you have to shape a consensus.”
[John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.]
[from K.C. ... to my priest readers who have already condemned me: Fathers! Help me! Please tell me why neither 'Jesus' nor 'Mary' are ever mentioned in Miss Lubich's address? ] ...from the 'youth for a United World' website>>>>>from: http://www.mondounito.net/spip.php?article243&lang=en&id_rubrique=17&parent=14
At the beginning of January, Chiara began her visit to India to strengthen the bonds of reciprocal love and fraternity with the Hindus she met on various occasions. Among the many meetings, we report the one with the Swadhyaya Movement whose leaders Chiara met during the Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi in January 2002.
Close to Thane, a city with 500 thousands inhabitants to the north of Mumbai, there is a Cricket stadium which can sit 50 thousand people. On January 16 Dadaji Athawale’s Movement held the "Sports Festival". It involves 300 thousand young people in tournaments all around India. It finishes with this festival including the cricket and race finals and prize giving to all national winners. This activity involves six Indian States and the parade of all the representatives is accompanied by typical music and dances. Dadaji and his heir Didi arrived at the stage after going all around the stadium by car among the crowd that cheered to show their love and acknowledgment for this leader. Swadhyaya means self-awareness = to understand that God is in us. The founder is called Shri Pandurang Shastri Athawale, and is well known as Dada (elder brother) o Dadaji (master Dada). Dada teaches that God lives in every human being and that the fulfillment of the spiritual unit will bring in itself the solutions for all the world problems. "Only those who see the invisible can do the impossible" (Dada). The Swadhyaya Movement has 8 million members and has widespread irradiation. The "zones" parade has also been mixed with songs made with the writings and poems by Dadaji, also by choreographies and stage games. Other 20 thousand people followed the events from outside on two big screens. Many of those had had to travel 2800 kilometers by train!! There were also present civil and political authorities, also from the artistic and sports areas. A huge map of the world at the side of the stage turned slowly showing a Sanskrit writing: "We want to make the world a place in which God may be at home" During the speeches, they very often referred to their "ideal", as they call it, made of fraternity, listening to the Scriptures and application of them, friendship, forgiveness, love and unity. A moment during the program was reserved for the presentation of the Focolare. First of all Didi wanted to introduce Chiara and Natalia: "Today we introduce -she said- a big Movement spread in more than a 150 countries with millions of members, just like ours. They work for the good of society and their ideal is based on what Chiara Lubich says. Today she is in Mumbai, she is not feeling well so the doctor would not let her come. But she is present among us, and has sent a representative. I met Chiara in Assisi, where only two women spoke during the big interreligious prayer: she and me. I was deeply touched by her, and I wanted to keep in contact. We have also been in touch with the Focolare in America. We have to be one human family: this is their ideal as well as ours. Dadaji was born in 1920, as well as Chiara, and like her, he began to spread this spirit in 1943". After this introduction, Chiara’s message was read -we enclose it- and it was often interrupted by applause, especially when she made Hindi quotations or when she appealed to universal brotherhood.
[Miss Lubich's address follows...]
Mumbai, January 16th 2003
Dear Everyone,
It was with great joy that I had accepted the invitation to speak to you today, and for this reason I sincerely thank the well-deserving founder of your wonderful family, Reverend Dada Athavale.
You might ask me: you come from so far. How did you hear about us? I’ll tell you how it happened. A year ago Mrs. Didi Talwalkar came to see me in Rome, in Italy, where I live. She spoke to me about you, about the Reverend Dada, about the high ideals that animate you and the many endeavors you are involved in. I really admired all that she told me. Above all, I found in the words of Mrs. Didi a remarkable harmony between the spirit of your family and that of the Focolare Movement, which I represent. This made us experience an immediate and profound friendship with one another.
I remember that one of these similarities became evident when she told me that you see God in all people and therefore that you devote yourselves to your neighbors with much love. This has given rise to many social works that are flourishing everywhere in your family. It is like this with us too: love of neighbor is fundamental in our Movement. Indeed, like you, we are very committed to living its requirements, because it is a love that is directed to everyone, making no distinctions between those who are pleasant or unpleasant, beautiful or ugly, young or old, Hindu, Christian or Muslim, etc. It is a love, which asks us to be the first to love, without waiting to be loved. It asks us to love the other person as we love ourselves, sharing his or her sufferings, successes, joys.... It is also a concrete love; it is not expressed only with words but with facts. And this can easily be seen in the many works that have begun in your family as in ours. Moreover, this love is even ready to love enemies, to respond to offenses with forgiveness, as we find in a very beautiful image in your Hindu tradition: "While the axe chops the sandalwood, it in turn offers its virtue by scenting the axe with its fragrance."
Then if this love is lived by two or more persons together, it becomes mutual love, and I know that among you there is what you call "divine brotherhood".
Very well, my dear young people, you can understand that it is very important that we spread this love to as many people as possible. If we do, we will see portions of universal brotherhood rising up everywhere. The destiny of humanity depends on it.
In fact, as you all know, today peace is being threatened more than ever before. After September 11th, with the crumbling of the towers in New York and with widespread terrorism, it is becoming increasingly clear that all this is not only the fruit of hatred among individuals or peoples, but that it is the effect also of the dark forces of Evil, of Darkness, as the Pope, John Paul II, also said.
Thus, the situation is such that it is not enough to oppose such danger solely with human forces, such as political or diplomatic ones. We need to engage the forces of Good.
And this was the reason for the meeting held a year ago in Assisi, in Italy, where Mrs. Didi and I met one another. At that time the representatives of the major religions of the world [including Amadou Gasseto an African Voodoo chief] gathered together to invoke peace from heaven. But it is not even enough just to pray for peace. We must all do something to safeguard it.
We know that the imbalance in the world between rich countries and poor countries is one of the factors, perhaps the most decisive, that generates resentment, hostility, revenge, terrorism. Therefore, we need to create greater equality, to bring about a kind of communion of goods. However, we cannot move goods unless we move hearts. Therefore, we need to spread love, that reciprocal love which generates brotherhood.
We are already doing this. But if we all do so more and more, universal brotherhood will spread, and as a consequence, solidarity will blossom, goods will be distributed more justly, and the rainbow of peace will shine over the world, the world which, in a few years, will be in your hands, my dear young people.
Chiara Lubich CreditsWho are weContact usPhoto galleriesDocuments
outburst from a contributor to Praytell Blog (he mentions pictures of Padre Pio and Grace Kelly. I wonder where he saw those! his post is italicized)
