Custody of the eyes(and of the senses) - a modern necessity. (First thoughts)

There is a traditional concept in Catholic moral teaching known as “Custody of the Eyes” wherein a person is very careful as to what they allow themselves to see (cf Job 31:1; Mat 5:28; Psalm 119:37 etc.) My daughter and I were talking about this teaching which I remember from my childhood but which we never hear of now. The principle behind the idea is that what we permit ourselves to look at will inevitably have an effect on what we think. Obviously true when you think about it, isn't it?

Our Lord clearly taught that we can sin - mortally - with our eyes if we look at others (or pictures, or films etc.) in a sensual way. Mortal sin is a very serious reality, and has almost been forgotten in a world where we are surrounded with endless images of the naked human body adorning every hoarding, bus shelter, magazine, TV screen. So ubiquitous is the practice that we have almost cease to notice the endless vulgar crudity which fills our daily environment. Even school textbooks and information leaflets show graphic images that would a generation ago have been called pornography, and to even posess them would have drawn down the threat of prosecution through the Courts.

But not today. To show any embarrassment or dislike of the situation is to immediately draw down the accusation that we are 'prudish' or 'insecure' or 'unsophisticated'. Parents who try to protect their children from looking at such things can even find that Social Services begin to take an interest in their childrearing practices, because they may be 'brainwashing' their children and depriving them of their human and sexual rights!

But the truth is still the truth whether it is politically acceptable or not. If we are created by God to 'know, love and serve Him in this life and be happy with Him in Heaven forever' as the old Catechism used to say, then we must follow the Laws He has given us in the Old and New Testaments, in the Church founded by Jesus Christ, and in the guidance of the Holy Spirit through our consciences. So we must not only practice custody of the eyes ourselves, but as parents and teachers, we must teach our children practice the same discipline of averting the eyes from immoral pictures, bad scenes on media screens, and anything that could lead to sinful thoughts.

However, I want to consider the wider aspect of 'custody of the eyes'. Here are some ideas I have come across and have begun meditating on. At the moment I am not sure where this exploration will lead me, but I am begining to realise that there is something incredibly profound in this apparently old-fashioned concept. I hope to develop my understanding of the idea, and will return to it in future posts.

Something to consider:

1. Apparently there is a rabbinic tradition about the reading of scripture in worship. When the scriptures are to be read in synagogue public worship, the reader is enjoined not to lift his eyes off the text he's reading. That seems counter-intuitive, and indeed counter all that we have ever been taught. But what if we, as individuals, not as Readers, were to practice doing this when we are praying or reading the Scriptures. During our own private prayer times, what if we really honoured the text and used this method to really focus ourselves and ground ourselves in waht we were meditating upon?

2. Try not looking around you during Mass or Benediction. Resist the impulse to look up, or greet others as they go past, or to look around at the source of any noise or disturbance elsewhere in the Church. Easy? Childs play? Try it! I can tell you from my own experience of having begun to try to put this idea into practice that this amazingly difficult. The self-control and self-discipline needed for such an apparently simple act is enormous. Indeed I would go so far as to say that the apparent simplicity of this practice hides one of the truly heroic virtues.

3. What about 'Custody of the ears?' 'Of the mouth?' 'Of the intellect, imagination and will?' One of the difficulties of living in the modern world is that we are daily beseiged by the influence of philosophies and errors that can totally mislead us. What if we resisted our passion to know the latest news, read the latest opinions, listen to the latest popular music, buy the latest clothes styles, taste the latest culinary delights, follow the latest fashion in ... well, in whatever we like to follow. Chose your poison, as the saying goes - but in this case choose it in order to destroy it. And of course, realise that you will never manage to do this on your own. Pray for the grace to do battle and overcome. You will need prayer, because each one of these 'poisons' represents a spiritual battlefield, and so without God's help, you haven't a hope in succeeding!

We need to remember St Paul's reminder that we must “work out [our] salvation in fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12).

Fr. Daren Zehnle, an American Catholic Priest, in his blog 'Servant and Steward' has also focused on this whole idea of 'custody of the senses'. He says:
"we must constantly return to two key questions: Do I welcome the love of Christ? And, Do I share the love of Christ?

One sure way that we can both welcome the love of Christ and share it is to keep “custody of the senses.” We must keep custody of the eyes lest we see something that leads us to sin. We must keep custody of the ears lest we hear something that leads us to sin. We must keep custody of the mouth lest we lead others to sin. The well-known phrase, “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” is quite poignant, even today.

Keeping custody of the tongue is, perhaps, the most difficult to control but at the same time it is the one that does the most harm. When we are tempted to gossip about someone or some situation, we would do well to remember the words of Jesus: “What comes out of a person, that is what defiles” (Mark 7:20).

Let us make a concerted effort this Lent to root out the evil of gossip from our lives. Let us not only refuse to listen to it or to read it, but also and especially let us refuse to speak it.
Let us pray not only for ourselves but for each other that sin may be removed from our lives. Let this be our prayer: “A clean heart create for me, O God, and a steadfast spirit renew with me… Give me back the joy of your salvation, and a willing spirit to sustain me” (Psalm 51:12, 14). Amen."

What I believe, "and shall hold to my dying breath ."

THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
Given by His Holiness St. Pius X September 1, 1910.

To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.


I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.

And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated:

Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.

Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time.

Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously.

I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.

Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas.

I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion.

I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful.

Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.

Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labour, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles.

I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .

Look at this beautiful face. The fruits of the Holy Spirit embodied in a humble Priest.

Sometimes ordinary Catholics find it hard to 'warm to' Cardinal Newman. He seems so 'dry, ascetic, not very accessible', or 'too intellectual' - the list goes on ..
But I came across this video from Corpus Christi Watershed [see below] which shows his private Chapel, and I was struck by its homeliness. Just like my own home, and the homes of many Catholics, it is full of 'bits and pieces' - photos of those we want to pray for, In Memoriam cards, prayers we have come across and like - all stuck on the walls or leaning against a statue etc. This is the Chapel of a prayerful and humble person, with no pretentions to grandeur or impressiveness. I thought it gave a real insight to the man, the Priest and the Cardinal. I would have liked to know him!

Here is some further information from:
http://www.newmancause.co.uk/newman.html

Cardinal Newman, who is to be Blessed John Henry Newman, faced a life of trials, as he was suspected and even resented by some in authority. Several projects which he took up, including a magazine for educated Catholics, a mission at Oxford, and a new translation of the Bible, met with rejection or failure. On the other hand, many of his publications in this period were well-received: the Apologia pro Vita Sua(1864), a biographical account of Newman’s conversion; the Letter to the Duke of Norfolk (1875), which considered the relationship between conscience and the authority of the Church; and the Grammar of Assent (1870), on human reasoning and the act of faith, which although not always well understood by his contemporaries, would become generally acknowledged as an major contribution to both philosophy and theology.

During old age, Newman continued in Birmingham, quietly writing, preaching and counselling (from the age of twenty three he had been above all a pastor – ‘a father of souls’) until, when seventy eight, a big surprise came. As a tribute to his extraordinary work and devotion, Pope Leo XIII made the unprecedented gesture of naming Newman, an ordinary priest, a Cardinal. After a life of trials the news came as a joyful relief and Newman declared ‘the cloud is lifted for ever’. Cardinal Newman died on 11th August 1890 and received a universal tribute of praise.

The Times wrote: ‘whether Rome canonises him or not he will be canonised in the thoughts of pious people of many creeds in England.’ The Cork Examiner affirmed that, ‘Cardinal Newman goes to his grave with the singular honour of being by all creeds and classes acknowledged as the just man made perfect.’

Read what Pope John Paul II said about him in his Letter on the Bicentenary of Newman’s birth (on 22 January 2001):

Newman faced a life of trials, as he was suspected and even resented by some in authority. Several projects which he took up, including a magazine for educated Catholics, a mission at Oxford, and a new translation of the Bible, met with rejection or failure. On the other hand, many of his publications in this period were well-received: the Apologia pro Vita Sua (1864), a biographical account of Newman’s conversion; the Letter to the Duke of Norfolk (1875), which considered the relationship between conscience and the authority of the Church; and the Grammar of Assent (1870), on human reasoning and the act of faith, which although not always well understood by his contemporaries, would become generally acknowledged as an major contribution to both philosophy and theology.

During old age, Newman continued in Birmingham, quietly writing, preaching and counselling (from the age of twenty three he had been above all a pastor – ‘a father of souls’) until, when seventy eight, a big surprise came. As a tribute to his extraordinary work and devotion, Pope Leo XIII made the unprecedented gesture of naming Newman, an ordinary priest, a Cardinal. After a life of trials the news came as a joyful relief and Newman declared ‘the cloud is lifted for ever’. Cardinal Newman died on 11th August 1890 and received a universal tribute of praise. The Times wrote: ‘whether Rome canonises him or not he will be canonised in the thoughts of pious people of many creeds in England.’ The Cork Examiner affirmed that, ‘Cardinal Newman goes to his grave with the singular honour of being by all creeds and classes acknowledged as the just man made perfect.’

The Cardinal's Personal Chapel from Corpus Christi Watershed on Vimeo.

The Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady is still a Dogma of the Catholic Church

Mary is the gate proclaimed by the Prophet Ezekiel through which God entered into the World "while remaining shut" (Ezekiel 44:2).

I had a conversation recently with a few Catholic friends of mine, who I considered- and who considered themselves - to be completely orthodox Catholics. I was extremely surprised therefore to discover that none of them believed in the perpetual virginity of Our Blessed Lady. More surprisingly to me, they were completely unaware that this was in fact a Dogma of the Catholic Church!

I drew their attention to the teaching of the Catechism, which states that Roman Catholic Dogma is : "a truth revealed by God, which the magisterium of the Church declared as binding"

After a long conversation, during which it was clear that none of those present believed me, I promised that I would provide further information. Here it is.
[The information on the subject provided below, has been taken from the very useful website: 'The Marian Dogmas' which I recommend to anyone who wishes to obtain further information. http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/mariandogmas.html ]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these. (Catechism 88)

The Catholic belief that Mary is "ever virgin" is a Dogma of our Faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church asserts,

"The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary's real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man".


This statement reflects a more precise dogmatic statement issued at the First Lateran Council:

"If anyone does not, according to the holy Fathers, confess truly and properly that holy Mary, ever virgin and immaculate, is Mother of God, since in this latter age she conceived in true reality without human seed from the Holy Spirit, God the Word Himself, Who before the ages was begotten of God the Father, and gave birth to Him without injury, her virginity remaining equally inviolate after the birth, let him be
condemned".

Underlying this statement is the Church's consistent defense of the Incarnation: Jesus, Second Person of the Holy Trinity, true God from eternity, consubstantial with the Father, entered this world through the Blessed Virgin Mary who had conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit; therefore, we believe Jesus is true God and true man, with both a divine and human nature.

The perpetual virginity of Mary has traditionally been defended and examined in three parts:

• Mary's conception of Christ (virginitas ante partum);
• Her giving birth to Christ (virginitas in partu);
• And her remaining a virgin after the birth of Christ (virginitas post partum).

This formulation was used by many of the early Church Fathers -- St Augustine, St Peter Chrysologus, Pope St Leo the Great, St Gregory Nazianzus and St Gregory Nyssa.

Mary's virginity prior to the conception of Christ is quite clear from the Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke, where she is clearly identified as "a virgin". Moreover, when the Archangel Gabriel announced to Mary that she would bear the Messiah, she responded, "How can this be since I do not know man?" indicating her virginity.

At the other end of the spectrum is Mary's virginity after the birth of Christ. Succinctly, we as Catholics believe that Mary and Joseph did not have other children after the birth of Christ. No evidence exists either in Sacred Scripture or Tradition to believe otherwise.

The troublesome part is the middle -- Mary's virginity in giving birth to Christ. We remember that one of the sufferings inherited because of original sin is that of "child bearing pains": The Lord God said to Eve, "I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children." (Genesis 3:16) Since Mary was free of original sin by her Immaculate Conception, she would be free of "child bearing pain." In wrestling with this belief, the early Church Fathers then struggled to explain this virginity. The Western Fathers seemed to emphasize Mary's physical integrity; for instance, Pope St Leo the Great said, "She (Mary) brought Him forth without the loss of virginity, even as she conceived Him without its loss . . . (Jesus Christ was) born from the Virgin's womb because it was a miraculous birth." On the other hand, the Eastern Fathers emphasized Mary's joy and freedom from pain in giving birth to Jesus, the Son of God. In either case, remember, the Gospel of St Luke simply stated, "She gave birth . . ."

Father Karl Rahner, without delving into all of the anatomical details, focused on the spiritual reality of Mary's virginity: "Mary bore the Son of God. Her childbearing must have been essentially different from other women since she was free of the effects of original sin. Her virginity, childbearing and motherhood are together in union with the Will of God."

Please note that the Church never has authoritatively ruled on the interpretation or specifics of "virginitas in partu".

Moreover, on July 27, 1960, the Holy Office (now the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) warned against discussing this issue in a way ". . .clearly opposed to the traditional doctrine of the Church and the devotional sense of the faithful."

In all, we need to emphasize and revere both the virginity and motherhood of Mary. Vatican II asserted: "For in the mystery of the Church, which is itself rightly called mother and virgin, the Blessed Virgin stands out in eminent and singular fashion as exemplar both of virgin and mother."

Medical Miracles: how does the Church decide?

This post may also be found at: http://heraldsgospelsinengland.blogspot.com/


There is a very interesting article which appears on the Zenit website (See ROME, MAY 30, 2010 - http://www.zenit.org/index.php?l=english) on the subject of how the Church authenticates miracles. It is by Father John Flynn, LC, and the full article may be found by following the above link.

The article gives very useful information regarding the way that the Vatican authenticates miracles. Catholics are accustomed to the idea of miracles generally, and in particular, of people being cured through the intercession of the saints. However many find it difficult to give a reasoned response to the sceptical questions of those around them. Fr. Flynn refers us to a recent book "Medical Miracles: Doctors, Saints, and Healing in the Modern World" (Oxford University Press) by Jacalyn Duffin. She is a Doctor who holds the Hannah Chair for the history of medicine at Queen's University, Ontario, Canada and during her researches she examined 1,400 miracles cited in canonizations from 1588 to 1999.

Her interest in the subject arose when she was asked to examine tissue samples, and some time later, documentation, which were part of a canonization process. She began to realize that these must exist for every canonized saint.

Soon after, she researched hundreds of these records and considers that she reviewed between a third and a half of all miracles deposited in the Vatican archives since the rules governing canonizations were laid down in 1588.

Evidence

Many people today are unaware that the regulations that were part of the Counter-Reformation reforms demand a rigorous gathering of evidence and a scrupulous examination of the material by medical and scientific experts. For a healing to be deemed miraculous it should be of an incurable illness and the recovery should be complete and instantaneous.

In respect of suspected miracles the Church always acts as a ‘Devil’s Advocate,’ and relies on a scientific scepticism to test their validity. In the records of the miracles that Duffin examined she found that the religious authorities readily deferred to the opinion of scientists and withheld a judgment until they were convinced that the experts were prepared to label the events as inexplicable.

Duffin noted there is much argument over whether, just because there is no apparent explanation for a cure, it really means that the event is a miracle. For example, one of her colleagues explained that while we may not know the natural explanation, one must exist.

Duffin’s response is that to assert that a miracle simply cannot occur is no more rational and no less than an act of faith than the belief that miracles can happen.

The Catholic Church of course believes in the possibility of divine intervention, but it first uses all of medicine's and science’s resources to remove the possibility of any natural explanations of the cures. In addition, the Vatican does not recognize healing miracles in people who have refused orthodox medicine to rely solely on faith. The intervention of doctors provides objective medical evidence that avoids any possible manipulation of the case in question.

The use of doctors to rigorously sift through the available evidence has increased and indeed, the Church does not rely exclusively on Catholic doctors. The inquiries examined the faith of all witnesses, doctors included. Even where doctors were Catholic many admitted they did not regularly practice their faith. Indeed a couple had been excommunicated, but nevertheless they were not disqualified from being witnesses. Nowadays the medical and scientific expertise of doctors of other faiths, or none, has been given in testimony.

Since the second half of the 17th century, the evidence of the doctors treating the patient has been supplemented by independent medical observers, and today the number of experts consulted in every case matches or even exceeds the numbers of doctors attending.

Ultimately a miracle is only declared when the medical experts admit that they are unable to find any natural explanation as to how a person recovered when the best scientific medicine failed.

Text of the Pope Benedict condemns Britain’s proposed equality law.

Thank God for the Pope! We need to hear this loud and clear from our own hierarchy. Ultimately we may need to struggle against unjust laws with the “missionary zeal” that our Holy Father speaks of here. If Christians have moral courage and unity, we can achieve wonders.

See this from: Times Online at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7011095.ece

The Vatican condemned Britain’s proposed equality law yesterday, complaining that legislation to give homosexual equal rights “violates natural law”. On the day Rome finally confirmed that the Pope would make a state visit to Britain this year, the Vatican launched an unprecedented attack on the human rights policies of Gordon Brown, claiming that they threatened religious freedom and urging Catholic bishops to fight back with “missionary zeal”. ....
The Pope’s words indicated the level of Catholic anger, shared at the highest levels of the Church of England, at the Labour Government’s repeated moves to marginalise religion in public life.
In a speech in which he confirmed a four-day visit to Britain in midSeptember the Pope said: “Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet, as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.”

Peter Smith, Archbishop of Cardiff, also joined the chorus of Catholic attacks on Britain’s equality legislation. “We are getting there but we are not there yet. There have been serious difficulties. The Church, of course, upholds absolutely the equal dignity of every person irrespective of their faith, age, ability and so on. But there is a misunderstanding: sometimes in government legislation equality seems to mean that we are all absolutely equal, which we are not. We are equal in dignity.”

Text of the Pope's address to the Bishops of England and Wales:

Many thanks for the rather elusive text of the Holy Father's address, to the Website of St Mary Magdalen Parish, Brighton. See:
http://marymagdalen.blogspot.com/2010/02/text-of-popes-address-to-tyhe-bishops.html )


Dear Brother Bishops,

I welcome all of you on your ad Limina visit to Rome, where you have come to venerate the tombs of the Apostles Peter and Paul. I thank you for the kind words that Archbishop Vincent Nichols has addressed to me on your behalf, and I offer you my warmest good wishes and prayers for yourselves and all the faithful of England and Wales entrusted to your pastoral care. Your visit to Rome strengthens the bonds of communion between the Catholic community in your country and the Apostolic See, a communion that sustained your people’s faith for centuries, and today provides fresh energies for renewal and evangelization.
Even amid the pressures of a secular age, there are many signs of living faith and devotion among the Catholics of England and Wales.

I am thinking, for example, of the enthusiasm generated by the visit of the relics of Saint Thérèse, the interest aroused by the prospect of Cardinal Newman’s beatification, and the eagerness of young people to take part in pilgrimages and World Youth Days.On the occasion of my forthcoming Apostolic Visit to Great Britain, I shall be able to witness that faith for myself and, as Successor of Peter, to strengthen and confirm it. During the months of preparation that lie ahead, be sure to encourage the Catholics of England and Wales in their devotion, and assure them that the Pope constantly remembers them in his prayers and holds them in his heart.

Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed. I urge you as Pastors to ensure that the Church’s moral teaching be always presented in its entirety and convincingly defended. Fidelity to the Gospel in no way restricts the freedom of others – on the contrary, it serves their freedom by offering them the truth.

Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society.

In doing so, you are not only maintaining long-standing British traditions of freedom of expression and honest exchange of opinion, but you are actually giving voice to the convictions of many people who lack the means to express them: when so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?

If the full saving message of Christ is to be presented effectively and convincingly to the world, the Catholic community in your country needs to speak with a united voice. This requires not only you, the Bishops, but also priests, teachers, catechists, writers – in short all who are engaged in the task of communicating the Gospel – to be attentive to the promptings of the Spirit, who guides the whole Church into the truth, gathers her into unity and inspires her with missionary zeal.

Make it your concern, then, to draw on the considerable gifts of the lay faithful in England and Wales and see that they are equipped to hand on the faith to new generations comprehensively, accurately, and with a keen awareness that in so doing they are playing their part in the Church’s mission. In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate. It is the truth revealed through Scripture and Tradition and articulated by the Church’s Magisterium that sets us free. Cardinal Newman realized this, and he left us an outstanding example of faithfulness to revealed truth by following that "kindly light" wherever it led him, even at considerable personal cost. Great writers and communicators of his stature and integrity are needed in the Church today, and it is my hope that devotion to him will inspire many to follow in his footsteps.

Much attention has rightly been given to Newman’s scholarship and to his extensive writings, but it is important to remember that he saw himself first and foremost as a priest. In this Annus Sacerdotalis [Year for Priests], I urge you to hold up to your priests his example of dedication to prayer, pastoral sensitivity towards the needs of his flock, and passion for preaching the Gospel. You yourselves should set a similar example. Be close to your priests, and rekindle their sense of the enormous privilege and joy of standing among the people of God as alter Christus. In Newman’s words, "Christ’s priests have no priesthood but His … what they do, He does; when they baptize, He is baptizing; when they bless, He is blessing" (Parochial and Plain Sermons, VI 242). Indeed, since the priest plays an irreplaceable role in the life of the Church, spare no effort in encouraging priestly vocations and emphasizing to the faithful the true meaning and necessity of the priesthood. Encourage the lay faithful to express their appreciation of the priests who serve them, and to recognize the difficulties they sometimes face on account of their declining numbers and increasing pressures. The support and understanding of the faithful is particularly necessary when parishes have to be merged or Mass times adjusted. Help them to avoid any temptation to view the clergy as mere functionaries but rather to rejoice in the gift of priestly ministry, a gift that can never be taken for granted.

Ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue assume great importance in England and Wales, given the varied demographic profile of the population. As well as encouraging you in your important work in these areas, I would ask you to be generous in implementing the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, so as to assist those groups of Anglicans who wish to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church. I am convinced that, if given a warm and open-hearted welcome, such groups will be a blessing for the entire Church.

With these thoughts, I commend your apostolic ministry to the intercession of Saint David, Saint George and all the saints and martyrs of England and Wales. May Our Lady of Walsingham guide and protect you always. To all of you, and to the priests, religious and lay faithful of your country, I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing as a pledge of peace and joy in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Posted by Fr Ray Blake

SPIRITUAL BOUQUETS: A LENTEN OPPORTUNITY

I remember most of the Sisters of Mercy who taught me in my Catholic Primary School in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, and later in Mount Lourdes Grammar School, high on a hill overlooking Lough Erne, in the same country town. Some I loved dearly. Others I just liked. Occasionally, as with Sr. Eucharia our Headmistress, I tried to avoid their apparently all-seeing eyes! All of them, I respected, and thought of them as holy women who were very special.

They always smelt of lavender soap, and they never, ever ran! If we were making a noise in the classroom, we knew when our teacher was coming because you could hear the soft rattle of her Rosary beads, even if you never heard her quiet footsteps!

It never occurred to me that they were ever young, or indeed that some of them were just a few years older than myself. I remember being shocked, but delighted, when one day during the school holidays I had reason to visit the school, and happened to be walking past the tennis courts. There I discovered Sr. Rita playing tennis with Sr. Clement. What a surprise to see the long skirts of their habits hitched up very decorously to just below their knees, and the two of them laughing and hitting the ball back and forward, unhindered by the formal rules of the game. I was about 14 years of age at the time. Now, looking back, I imagine that these two young Sisters were only about 22, but to me they were ageless - beyond the normal rules of aging.

Where are they all now? The convent is closed I am told. The schools continue to function as Catholic schools but with lay teachers. A couple of years ago, I returned to Ireland and had the opportunity to revisit my old haunts. It was during the summer holidays and the school was deserted. But everything had changed. The lovely gardens were now rough and untidy and the beautiful grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes, that I used to pass daily on my way to and from school, was overgrown and unkempt. The little shrine to St Anthony in the Primary school, where every morning I used to spend a few minutes having a little chat to him was long gone, though the old statue was retained and placed out in the open in a corner of the building. I was so sad to see that everything which the Nuns had so carefully tended and loved had all decayed, and the Nuns themselves were now long forgotten. I could have wept!

But nothing can bring back the past, though it can survive in our hearts and memories. The reason all these images flooded back to me is because I was reminded by a friend that there used to be a lovely old pious Catholic tradition of making a Spiritual Bouquet as a gift for people one cared about. One promises to say a number of prayers or Rosaries, hear Masses, offer up one's Holy Communions, attend Benedictions etc. for the person, or for Our Lord or Our Lady on special Feast Days. I had long forgotten it. But the Nuns in Ireland once taught this beautiful tradition to generations of children, of whom I was one of the last to hear it. But I have decided that I am going to revive it, and I shall now make one as ad Lenten offering.

As Lent proceeds, as always, I very easily slip away from my initial enthusiastic promises to use the time to make some form of Reparation. I am deliberately using the language that those dear Nuns taught me, for as a child I had no problem in believing that we are Sinners, with totally undisciplined instincts. Anyone who doesn't believe that doesn't know themselves very well - and I am sorry to say that I have never had any reason to change my opinion about myself!

But what exactly does Reparation mean in this context for Catholics?
Christ's Sacrifice was perfectly accomplished when He said, "It is finished." He paid the price of our redemption. That much is a fact. But St. Paul said, "Now I rejoice in my suffering for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of His body, that is, the Church...."

How odd! What does he mean?

St. Alphonsus explains it thus: "Can it be that Christ's passion alone was insufficient to save us? No. It left nothing more to be done; it was more than sufficient to save all men. However, for the merits of the Passion to be applied to us, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, we need to cooperate by patiently bearing the trials God sends us, so as to become like our head, Christ."

This is called 'reparation.' It is a theological doctrine of the Catholic Church. Reparation is the foundation of many confraternities and pious associations – to make reparation for our sins and for the sins of mankind.

That infinite merit of Christ's Passion and Sacrifice on Calvary enables us to add our daily prayers, labors, trials, and sufferings to those of our Lord. Thus, we become actually co-redeemers with Christ, sharing in His suffering. Isn't that wonderful!

But what exactly are we making reparation to God for? Well, to show that, even though we know that we have been forgiven them, we are truly sorry for our own offences against Him (i.e. our Sins) and also, because we are part of that great Communion of the Saints, we can also make some reparation for the sins of others. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, n.2412, n.2487, n.2454, n. 2509 teaches that every offense committed entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven.

The greatest offering of reparation is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But we can also offer our Holy Communions, our Rosaries, our prayers and our day to day duties and sufferings - however apparently trivial!

So the Spiritual Bouquet means that we make a little present of these for that particular intention, for ourselves or for another person. Of course we can just offer up the actions without doing anything else, but the old tradition gave us a way to make something tangible to show what we have done. The Nuns taught us how to make a little card, often with a Holy Picture on the front, listing the little offerings we have made. The pictures above show examples. To most modern minds, this can seem terribly childish and unsophisticated, but generations of pious Catholics maintained the practice, and these little cards were often made by people from every possible backgrounds. Lay people made them. Priests and Religious made them. Even Popes made them! So actually we are in good company.

Suggestions for prayer:

___ Masses heard
___ Holy Communions
___ Hours of the Divine Office
___ Hours of Adoration
___ Novenas
___ Rosaries
___ Acts of Penance
___ Stations of the Cross
___ Other

The completed card would be treasured by the recipient. After all, wouldn't it be lovely to receive a card which said "10 Rosaries are being offered for your intentions." or "4 Novenas are being prayed for you," and so on!