CARDINAL DEW DEFIES CHRIST'S DEMAND: FEED MY SHEEP

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, Fb or Messenger. Scroll down for other comments.

Cardinal Robert Sarah offers the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

Dear Cardinal Dew

To set the record straight: just over a week ago you informed a Massgoer at St Patrick's, Kilbirnie that your reason for denying the faithful in the Wellington Archdiocese their right to Communion on the tongue was that "the bishops have decided".

If "the bishops have decided" to deny Communion on the tongue, your Eminence, why do they deny it only in your Archdiocese, and not in any other in New Zealand?

And did you mean, your Eminence, that "the bishops have decided" because the Vatican has approved a ban on Communion on the tongue?

If that's the case, your Eminence, you and the bishops would seem to have been gravely misled. In December 2020 the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship did indeed reject a dubia appealing a decision of Bishop Richard Stika of Knoxville suspending Communion on the tongue "for the duration of the pandemic", and so upholding the bishop's ruling.

Archbishop Arthur Roche, Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, cited a letter sent in August by the congregation’s prefect, Robert Cardinal Sarah, in which the cardinal wrote: “in times of difficulty (e.g. wars, pandemics), Bishops and Episcopal Conferences can give provisional norms which must be obeyed … These measures given by the Bishops and Episcopal Conferences expire when the situation returns to normal.”

For one thing, the situation in New Zealand has never been anything other than 'normal'.  NZ has had 26 deaths from COVID-19. Pretty much like a normal bad flu season. 

And for another thing, here's what Dr Peter Kwasniewski has to say on the matter: 

"The constitution “Pastor Bonus” states that the Prefect of a Congregation speaks in the person of the Congregation. Moreover, Archbishop Roche is not even the Prefect of the CDW, so neither the pope nor the CDW as such has said anything “coram Ecclesia.” (meaning, 'in the face of the Church, and public). 

Dr Peter Kwasniewski

"As a letter sent from the offices of CDW, Secretary Roche’s letter has zero force of law. 

Archbishop Roche’s letter declines to issue a ruling on the matter in question. Instead, it states that a ruling has already been effected by Cardinal Sarah’s circular letter of August 15, 2020.

In other words, it is to Sarah’s declaration ‘coram ecclesia’ that this particular point of law owes its authority."

https://catholiccitizens.org/news/93588/cardinal-sarahs-signature-absent-from-vatican-letter-backing-ban-of-communion-on-tongue-during-covid/

"Everyone understands that emergency situations can arise that may temporarily debar Catholics from the reception of sacraments. However, bishops have a solemn obligation to keep such periods as short as possible. Unquestionably they would be abusing their episcopal authority if they made arbitrary rules  that not only contradicted universal legislation, but also redounded to the disadvantage of some members of the flock, such as those who adhere to the older form of the Roman rite." 

https://onepeterfive.com/bishops-communion-hand-tongue/

What's more, the signature of Cardinal Robert Sarah, who was at the time prefect of the Congregation, did not appear in that letter from the Congregation. It would seem like dirty work was done at the crossroads. 

The signature of the Vatican’s liturgy chief is missing from a controversial letter signed by the secretary of the Vatican body that supervises worship and sacraments in the Church. The letter supports the decision of a U.S. bishop (Stika - ed) to ban reception of Holy Communion on the tongue in his diocese on account of the coronavirus outbreak. 

The letter contradicts a 2009 letter from the same Congregation regarding the same question in the midst of the H1N1 influenza pandemic. At that time, the Vatican under Pope Benedict, wrote that CHURCH LAW on the subject stipulates, “each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue” and that it may not be abrogated.

While the Vatican's letter quoted Cardinal Robert Sarah’s August 15 letter titled “LET US RETURN TO THE EUCHARIST WITH JOY!” as justification for suspending Holy Communion on the tongue, at no point in this document (Sarah's letter - ed) did the cardinal make such a point. He only referred to bishops giving “provisional norms which must be obeyed” without mentioning anything about such norms including rules for the reception of Holy Communion.

“In times of difficulty (e.g. wars, pandemics), Bishops and Episcopal Conferences can give provisional norms which must be obeyed. Obedience safeguards the treasure entrusted to the Church. The measures given by the Bishops and Episcopal Conferences expire when the situation returns to normal,” wrote Sarah in his August letter.

Cardinal Sarah, when asked in a MAY 2020 INTERVIEW during the height of the pandemic about what should be done when Catholics return to churches after the lockdowns and may be told it is “more appropriate” to receive Communion in the hand, replied: “There is already a rule in the Church and this must be respected: the faithful are free to receive Communion in the mouth or hand.

”Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, a Thomistic theologian and liturgical scholar, told LifeSiteNews that the Congregation’s letter to Bishop Stika was “most unfortunate.”

“It undermines the universal norms and tradition of the Church, reiterated many times, concerning the most appropriate and reverent manner for receiving the Holy Eucharist,” he said.

Kwasniewski said that the letter establishes a “dangerous open-ended precedent.”

“Since it is clear from all actual scientific evidence that we are not in a grave pandemic like the 1918 Spanish Flu, much less the Bubonic plague, the decision reflects and reinforces the panic-driven response of civil and ecclesiastical authorities,” he said.

“In this way the CDF’s defense of Bishop Stika’s policy establishes a dangerous open-ended precedent that can be easily abused, given how often there are seasonal illnesses that threaten the lives of certain members of the faithful.

Moreover, since many doctors and pastors recognize Communion on the tongue as no less hygienic than communion in the hand (and indeed have argued that communion in the hand presents its own hygienic problems), the decision also betrays a lack of appreciation for the age-old wisdom of the Church as well as a lack of consultation with qualified experts,” he added.

The liturgical scholar noted that the Congregation’s letter only adds to the “worldwide crisis of sacrilege and apostasy” when it comes to Catholic belief.

“Above all, the decision strengthens the worst plague of our time, namely, the utilitarian pragmatism that has made the Mass into a communion service, and communion into a mere token of our belonging, which we feed to ourselves like ordinary food.

No emergency could ever justify compelling the faithful, in many cases against their consciences, to adopt a practice that conflicts with the spirit of humble adoration given to Our Lord in the host, whom the Church entrusts to the hands of ordained ministers. In that sense, this decision contributes to the counter-catechesis of bad liturgy that has created a worldwide crisis of sacrilege and apostasy,” said Kwasniewski.

Kwasniewski’s point about the “counter-catechesis of bad liturgy” is backed by data. Last year, Pew research FOUND that only one-third of Catholics believe that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Jesus.

That's in the States. Given that New Zealand is more pagan than the US - indeed is the most pagan country in the entire world - the number of Catholics here who believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is likely to be even lower than one-third. 

Kwasniewski said the Congregation’s letter to Bishop Stika “far from being the end of this discussion, indicates instead the ill-informed and confusing advice the faithful are receiving from the hierarchy today.”

He cautioned Catholics about the decision, saying that they “cannot be obliged by anyone on earth to violate tradition, law, common sense, conscience, and medical evidence.”

https://catholiccitizens.org/news/93588/cardinal-sarahs-signature-absent-from-vatican-letter-backing-ban-of-communion-on-tongue-during-covid/

Your Eminence, not only do you refuse your flock the right to Commuion on the tongue but now, at the diktat of our totalitarian, socialist Government you have cancelled Masses.

We thank God that your closure of churches in the Wellington Archdiocese, along with Novus Ordo Mass cancellation and locking Our Lord up worldwide, is driving the faithful into the arms of the traditional Church and the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass. You are encouraging a great revival of the Mass of the Ages. Good on you, your Eminence, for that. 

But even if God is drawing such great good out of evil, you and the priests who connive at the evil of church closures will not be exonerated. 

Our Lord promised spiritual supremacy to St Peter: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven" :(Mt 16:19). And in Jn 21:21 He fulfills that promise, by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church. The superintendency of his sheep is St Peter's, not a Prime Minister's.

And do you dare, your Eminence, to defy Our Lord's thrice-repeated demand of Peter?

 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: 

Feed my sheep.