Pade Pio Celebrating Mass

[Darran]

My own father woke up in the middle of the night 8 years ago with a monk standing at the foot of his bed. He couldn’t feel scared with the feeling of warmness comming from him.

He had terminal cancer, a tumor in the intestine. The next time a checkup was due at the hospital, the tumor had shrunk by such an extent that the doctor was almost in disbelief. He went to see a priest, who had a revised book of saints and allowed my father to flick through it to see if any of them looked farmiliar.

It was St Pio. He prophesied that his work would only begin in the next life, and he was right. He gave my dad an extension on his life until God made the demand for it.

He is a saint and very much deserving of it, and I will not hear anything on the contrary. He brought a whole family to stronger faith in God, to even begin to consider criticising him is an absolute scandal.

 

[JReducation]

You fail to see Padre Pio’s holiness, yet you beatify JPII?

What kind of contradiction in terms is that?

Padre Pio left behind him souls that were on fire for God.

JpII Left behind a church that is fast losing its Catholic identity.

I am not saying his beatification is invalid.

I am saying: Where is the Devil’s Advocate? I do not think he should be canonized whatsoever.

Why is it that people keep bringing up the term, “Devil’s Advocate?” The office of the same is still in place. The head of that office has been renamed, The Defender of the Faith. It is his job and that of his team to point to anything that remotely casts a shadow of doubt on his holiness. The cause of the saint does not move forward until this team rests its case and concedes to the Promoter of the cause.

The case then goes to a committee of cardinal theologians who read the reports. They look for possible cause to disqualify. If they find nothing, they send the case back to the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints. At that point, the Sacred Congregation sends the report to the Holy Father. The Holy Father will declare the person Venerable and wait for a proven miracle. When a miracle occurs, it must be proven and a report is sent to the Holy Father. After reading it, the Holy Father calls a conclave of cardinals who are experts on the matter. They advise him to proceed or not to proceed. The pope then asks the Sacred Congregation to prepare the decree and the Promoter of the bishop of the diocese to prepare the petition for canonization. At the end of the day, none of this is necessary. Popes can canonize without going through all of this.

Sanctity has nothing to do with an individual’s job rating. The state of the Church was not a situation caused by John Paul II. Therefore, it does not enter into discussion. The only part that enters into discussion is what he said and wrote while he was pope. His writings and teachings reveal a man of deep faith, intense prayer, a personal knowledge of God that was beyond that of most people, a life of suffering, love for the Church, the ability to forgive, and an extraordinary attempt to bring Christ’s message to every part of the world.

To say that he should not be canonized is almost sinful. This is not a choice that man makes. It is a choice that God makes. We can’t tell God that he cannot reveal a new saint to the Church.

Allow me to give you an example of a canonization that was opposed by the cardinals. St. Francis of Assisi. It was the Crusade. Francis has sealed a pact with the Muslims in Egypt that allowed his friars to travel through Egypt to Jerusalem with the promise that his friars would not try to convert the Muslims or Jews. Their mission was to serve the Christians and protect the Holy Places. Francis had also warned the Sultan of an impending attack that would have turned the war in favor of the Christians. The Christians lost and had to return to Europe.

The concern that Francis was not a preacher of the faith was brought to Pope Gregory IX. He stopped the process and proceeded to canonize Francis without further inquiry. As I said in a previous post, he stated that Francis had been his friend; therefore, he knew his sanctity personally. The case is similar here. Bl. John Paul was Pope Benedict’s friend and superior. Pope Benedict knew him personally. He saw him in a way that none of us could ever see him. As pope, he can factor these things into his decision. The Holy Spirit will not allow him to err on this matter. The idea that this man or any other should not be canonized, because we want to deposit our anger at his doorstep is uncharitable to the man and to God. God makes these choices, not us. We have to accept what God reveals.

**I don’t know much about Padre Pio but I will say one thing, who cares which way he celebrated mass? **Are we going to go through the histories of all the saints and go ‘oooo he celebrated the mass wrong way, naughty, naughty’ or ‘oooo he said a mean word here, naughty naughty’. I mean honestly he’s a saint, far holier than I’ll ever be and traditionalist though I am I am not even going to enter into discussions about whether he celebrated mass one way or why he did so because frankly its none of my business. Just my 2 cents… (or pence as we have in the UK)

And as for those questioning his holiness, I don’t even know what to say. It seems that even with his death the persecution and calumny does not stop.

The bold is mine. This is key. I believe that most people are focusing on that point, because they don’t know the gravity of his religious profession. At the end of the day, it makes no difference to his holiness how he celebrated mass or what language he used as long as he was a faithful Franciscan.

Let’s observe what Padre Pio promised. The formula for profession of vows of the Friars Minor and the other branches of the Franciscan Order goes like this:

“I, Brother N, vow and promise to almighty God, to the Blessed Virgin Mary and to our Holy Father Francis, to observe the rule and life of the Friars Minor, living is absolute and unquestioning obedience to the Church, our Holy Father Francis, the rule and the constitutions of the order, without property of my own and in chastity with my brothers.”

The questions on the table ware,

Did he observe the rule? That in itself covers the entire faith.
Did he obey without ever questioning, murmuring or resentment?
Did he observe holy poverty as did Francis of Assisi or as allowed by his superior?
Did he live as a brother, loving every man and woman without distinction of gender or condition?

 

[JReducation]

How he celebrated the mass is only relevant if he violated a command from his superior. There is little story about this in his life. It was a Franciscan holy day. Padre was on the schedule to celebrate mass for the pilgrims to San Giovanni. He felt sick. He asked the Guardian to be excused. The Guardian said no. He asked the Guardian if he would allow him to celebrate a low mass. The Guardian commanded him to celebrate a high mass in honor of the Franciscan saint. I have no idea which one. Padre Pio went out and celebrated the mass as directed. After the mass, he had to rest, because he was truly sick. But these are the heroic acts that made him a saint.

My own father woke up in the middle of the night 8 years ago with a monk standing at the foot of his bed. He couldn’t feel scared with the feeling of warmness comming from him.

He had terminal cancer, a tumor in the intestine. The next time a checkup was due at the hospital, the tumor had shrunk by such an extent that the doctor was almost in disbelief. He went to see a priest, who had a revised book of saints and allowed my father to flick through it to see if any of them looked familiar.

It was St Pio. He prophesied that his work would only begin in the next life, and he was right. He gave my dad an extension on his life until God made the demand for it.

He is a saint and very much deserving of it, and I will not hear anything on the contrary. He brought a whole family to stronger faith in God, to even begin to consider criticizing him is an absolute scandal.

That’s a beautiful story, thanks for sharing it. Did your priest or your father said that story to the Vatican or to the Capuchin friars?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Bluegoat]

How is infallibility with regard to sainthood managed in reference to the early saints who are now considered pious inventions?

 

[JReducation]

How is infallibility with regard to sainthood managed in reference to the early saints who are now considered pious inventions?

There were three types of canonization, two of which are infallible, vox populi and papal. The third kind is by a bishop. Prior to the 11th century or so, bishops canonized and then the pope would ratify. YOu needed the papal decree to make it an official statement of faith.

What is rather interesting is that none of the mythical saints were ever decreed by a pope. I use the word mythical very cautiously. We’re not sure if they are mythical. A great deal of myth has roots in some kind of truth. There is really nothing to explain.

Many saints were canonized by vox populi too:

Blessed Virgin Mary, Apostles, Fathers of the Church, Desert Fathers, Eastern Fathers and many others. Their sanctify was recognized by the people of God.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Darran]

That’s a beautiful story, thanks for sharing it. Did your priest or your father said that story to the Vatican or to the Capuchin friars?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thank you very much, I’m not sure if he did, but I would imagine so. I was fairly young and none of us knew it had happened untill my mother told us after he passed, so I can’t say myself.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Great elaboration JR. For those interested EWTN is running a special this coming Friday Night on St Padre Pio at 10pm Eastern Standard Time.

Peace

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Padre Pio did say mass once or twice versus populum as that was how the altar was arranged. The only rite he used was the traditional one in the form of 1962. He asked and received from Paul VI the assurance that he would never be required to celebrate according to any of the reformed usages, such as the 1965 and 67 changes. He died before the Novus Ordo Missae was introduced.

All priests over a certain age were exempted from celebrating the reformed usages. This is was special of Padre Pio nor did he specifically ask for it as it was granted to all over a certain age.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Seventh, SP and UE have not lifted the ban on the Seraphic Missal. They only allow the Latin Rite mass of 1962, which was different from the Seraphic Missal. We don’t know if the Seraphic Missal is ever going to be re-introduced or if we will have a revised form of the Extraordinary Form to fit the Franciscans. It seems to be going in that direction. Only time will tell.

Br JR,
Doesn’t this paragraph from “Instruction on the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum” lift the ban on the Seraphic Missal?
34. The use of the liturgical books proper to the Religious Orders which were in effect in 1962 is permitted.

 

[ATeutonicKnight]

Don’t know. It wouldn’t surprise me that Mother Angelica (EWTN) will be nominated for sainthood. Here, too, I fail to see her holiness – I don’t see anything unusual. She wore heavy leg braces for years, then one day decided to try to walk without them, and she could. What’s miraculous about that? (Maybe there is, I don’t know. Maybe she didn’t get the right treatment earlier in her life.)

Nothing unusual? Do you expect her legs to fall off and then miraculously re-attach themselves? Her legs weren’t supposed to work right ever again, and yet they did. That is what is so miraculous about it.

From denying Papal Infallibility, saying that one of my favorite Saints isn’t even a Saint, and then bashing one of the holiest women in America, I must say that I find your lack of Faith disturbing. You go to a public school, don’t you?

My advice is to read a book about Saint Padre Pio, pray the Rosary everyday, and then start reading the Catechism. Maybe then you’ll have more faith in the Church.

 

[JReducation]

Great elaboration JR. For those interested EWTN is running a special this coming Friday Night on St Padre Pio at 10pm Eastern Standard Time.

Peace

Darn it! We begin Grand Silence at Compline.

Br JR,
Doesn’t this paragraph from “Instruction on the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum” lift the ban on the Seraphic Missal?
34. The use of the liturgical books proper to the Religious Orders which were in effect in 1962 is permitted.

Did you see a post where I said that there were still many questions that bishops and major superiors had sent to Rome about SP and UE? One of the questions on the table is this one.

SP and UE are very clear about the right of the constitutions and major superiors of religious orders and congregations. It does not attempt to overrule them or trump them.

The question on the table is whether or not the Seraphic Missal can be voted back in by a General Chapter, since it was voted out by a General Chapter, promulgated by Pope Paul VI and replaced by the current Roman-Franciscan Missal, promulgated by Bl. John Paul II to replace the Seraphic Missal.

Canonically, if the current Roman-Franciscan Missal replaces the Seraphic Missal, then you cannot bring it back. However, if the current Roman-Franciscan Missal is viewed as the Franciscan expression of the Ordinary Form, then there is some canonical room to call back the Seraphic Missal as the Franciscan expression of the Extraordinary Form.

Once the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship answers this and the 3,000 other questions on its desk, if the answer is favorable, then the Seraphic Missal can be broiught back by a General Chapter. Each obedience would have to hold its own general chapter to legalize it for its friars.

In the meantime, there some work being done to adapt the current EF missal to the Franciscans. Some of the collects are being changed, some of the music, the seasons are being revamped to coincide with the seasons in the OF missal, readings are being moved around and feast days are being added and deleted according to the Franciscan liturgical calendar. This work can take years to be finished. It took almost 10 years to put together the current Roman-Franciscan Missal and Breviary. I don’t expect to be alive to see the project finished.

You have to create commissions from all of the obediences. Each piece has to be approved by General Chapters and then by the Vatican. Canon Law says that you can’t hold a General Chapter off schedule without the permission of the Holy Father. I remember when the current Franciscan missal was put together, they would not grant permission for a General Chapter for this. The obediences had to wait for their secheduled chapters and slip this into the agenda.

We’ll see what happens. It’s not a big deal to us. The Franciscans of the Immaculate just move things around in the current EF missal to fit the Franciscan calendar and even the most serious card carrrying traditionalist notices the difference. They have a non clerical brother who is a doctor of liturgy and he’s very good at this. I love listening to him speak about what can be done with the EF without doing violence to it and how to integrate it so that it can be used in a religious community without doing violence to the community.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Did you see a post where I said that there were still many questions that bishops and major superiors had sent to Rome about SP and UE? One of the questions on the table is this one.

SP and UE are very clear about the right of the constitutions and major superiors of religious orders and congregations. It does not attempt to overrule them or trump them.

The question on the table is whether or not the Seraphic Missal can be voted back in by a General Chapter, since it was voted out by a General Chapter, promulgated by Pope Paul VI and replaced by the current Roman-Franciscan Missal, promulgated by Bl. John Paul II to replace the Seraphic Missal.

Canonically, if the current Roman-Franciscan Missal replaces the Seraphic Missal, then you cannot bring it back. However, if the current Roman-Franciscan Missal is viewed as the Franciscan expression of the Ordinary Form, then there is some canonical room to call back the Seraphic Missal as the Franciscan expression of the Extraordinary Form.

Once the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship answers this and the 3,000 other questions on its desk, if the answer is favorable, then the Seraphic Missal can be broiught back by a General Chapter. Each obedience would have to hold its own general chapter to legalize it for its friars.

In the meantime, there some work being done to adapt the current EF missal to the Franciscans. Some of the collects are being changed, some of the music, the seasons are being revamped to coincide with the seasons in the OF missal, readings are being moved around and feast days are being added and deleted according to the Franciscan liturgical calendar. This work can take years to be finished. It took almost 10 years to put together the current Roman-Franciscan Missal and Breviary. I don’t expect to be alive to see the project finished.

You have to create commissions from all of the obediences. Each piece has to be approved by General Chapters and then by the Vatican. Canon Law says that you can’t hold a General Chapter off schedule without the permission of the Holy Father. I remember when the current Franciscan missal was put together, they would not grant permission for a General Chapter for this. The obediences had to wait for their secheduled chapters and slip this into the agenda.

We’ll see what happens. It’s not a big deal to us. The Franciscans of the Immaculate just move things around in the current EF missal to fit the Franciscan calendar and even the most serious card carrrying traditionalist notices the difference. They have a non clerical brother who is a doctor of liturgy and he’s very good at this. I love listening to him speak about what can be done with the EF without doing violence to it and how to integrate it so that it can be used in a religious community without doing violence to the community.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Sorry about that, I see now.

While the pope may say that you can use it, it is still up to the General Chapter to really allow you to use it.

That is an interesting question. I know that the Carmelites surrendered our rite to Rome in the 1970’s but I do not know if it was an act of the General Chapter or not. Nor do I know if we must have a new act of the General Chapter to restore the use of it.

 

[JReducation]

Sorry about that, I see now.

While the pope may say that you can use it, it is still up to the General Chapter to really allow you to use it.

That is an interesting question. I know that the Carmelites surrendered our rite to Rome in the 1970’s but I do not know if it was an act of the General Chapter or not. Nor do I know if we must have a new act of the General Chapter to restore the use of it.

This is where things get fuzzy. Usually, when a decision is made at a General Chapter, it becomes law for the institute, unless the Chapter indicates that the Superior General has the authority to change it without another vote.

This is the big question about SP and UE for many of the religious communities. SP says, "If an individual community or an entire Institute or Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and statues."

Many canonists interpret this to mean that the Major Superior may grant the permission, provided that the constitutions give him such authority, because it says, “in accordance with”. The problem is that many constitutions do not address the liturgy, because no one ever thought that the question would resurfface. They voted for a change to the new Roman-Franciscan Missal, the vote was sent to the Holy Father and he approved. There was never a clause added to the constitution that said that it could be brought back or could not be brought back.

The only thing that is in the rule, not in the constitution, is that priests may not celebrate mass without permission from the superior of the house. This is different from other communities. Only Benedictines and Franciscans place this restriction on priests, because of the desire of Benedict and Francis not to give priests any sepcial consideration. The major superior can grant permission to celebrate the EF. Both SP and the rule allow him to do so. The question is does the major superior have the authority to grant permission to use a missal that was voted out? Was that vote intended as a binding law until another chapter changes it or was it simplly to get a consensus? That was over 40-years ago. Those who were there don’t remember all of the details. The Vatican has to decide if another vote is necessary or the Vatican can wave that requirement and allow the major superior to bring back the Seraphic Missal, if he wishes it to be so.

I hope that the vote is legally binding. This way, you must vote at a general chapter and if it’s broiught back, it is also legally binding. If the major superior has the authority to bring it back, the next one has the authority to suppress it again. I don’t like yoyos.

Remember, you and I belong to religious orders, not to religious congregations. Obedience in religious orders is much more complicated than in a congregation. Congregations do not have rules. They only have constitutions. You and I have both, a rule and a constitution. The constitution cannot trump the rule. It can only allow the major superior as much authority as the Law Giver granted him when he wrote the Rule. At the same time, you and I only have as much freedom as the a Law Giver granted us in the Rule. At the end of the day, we vow to live according to the rule and constitutions, not either or.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF