Sermon for the 17thSunday after Pentecost, September 19th, 2021 – Holy Mass, bis

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen

 

My dearly beloved in Our Lord,

 

Pope St Pius X, whose feast we have celebrated at the beginning of September, said that if the liturgy, the cult through which God is officially honored by, the Church, is not understood by the faithful, it will become fruitless sentimentality.

This is unfortunately the state of affairs which we now find ourselves in. The doctrinal and ascetic content of the liturgy, foremost of the Holy Mass, has become a book with seven seals for most.

Therefore I want to start giving you not only the sentiment of the Church about what is most sacred to her, but the doctrine in her own words, with just minimal comments.

The Holy Council of Trent issued its decree on the doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Mass on September 17, 1562, shortly before the closing of the Council after 17 years:

“The sacred and holy, ecumenical and general Synod of Trent – lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the same Legates of the Apostolic Sec presiding therein – to the end that the ancient, complete, and in every part perfect faith and doctrine touching the great mystery of the Eucharist may be retained in the holy Catholic Church; and may, all errors and heresies being repelled, be preserved in its own purity; (the Synod) instructed by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, teaches, declares; and decrees what follows, to be preached to the faithful, on the subject of the Eucharist, considered as being a true and singular sacrifice.”

Just as the “pastoral” and wish-washy language of “Vatican2” is soul-emptying, the language of the Catholic magisterium is solemn and enlightening in the true sense of the term! The authority of the Council is established, and its purpose clearly defined. Where there is no hatred for heresy and error, there is no love of the Truth! Roncalli’s (John XXIII) and Montini’s (Paul VI) declared intention of Vatican2 not condemning anyone or anything, would have made them suspect of heresy if they had not already been classified as such by the Holy Office earlier on, long before they occupied the See of Peter…

 

“CHAPTER I.

On the institution of the most holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

Forasmuch as, under the former Testament, according to the testimony of the Apostle

Paul, there was no perfection, because of the weakness of the Levitical priesthood; there

was need, God, the Father of mercies, so ordaining, that another priest should rise,

according to the order of Melchisedech, our Lord Jesus Christ, who might consummate,

and lead to what is perfect, as many as were to be sanctified. He, therefore, our God and

Lord, though He was about to offer Himself once on the altar of the cross unto God the

Father, by means of his death, there to operate an eternal redemption; nevertheless,

because that His priesthood was not to be extinguished by His death, in the last supper,

on the night in which He was betrayed, - that He might leave, to His own beloved Spouse the

Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, whereby that bloody

sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory

thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the

remission of those sins which we daily commit, - declaring Himself constituted a priest for

ever, according to the order of Melchisedech, He offered up to God the Father His own

body and blood under the species of bread and wine; and, under the symbols of those

same things, He delivered (His own body and blood) to be received by His apostles,

whom He then constituted priests of the New Testament; and by those words, Do this in

commemoration of me, He commanded them and their successors in the priesthood, to

offer (them); even as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught. For, having

celebrated the ancient Passover, which the multitude of the children of Israel immolated

in memory of their going out of Egypt, He instituted the new Passover, (to

wit) Himself to be immolated, under visible signs, by the Church through (the ministry of)

priests, in memory of His own passage from this world unto the Father, when by the

effusion of His own blood He redeemed us, and delivered us from the power of darkness,

and translated us into his kingdom. And this is indeed that clean oblation, which cannot

be defiled by any unworthiness, or malice of those that offer (it); which the Lord foretold

by Malachias was to be offered in every place, clean to his name, which was to be great

amongst the Gentiles; and which the apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians, has not

obscurely indicated, when he says, that they who are defiled by the participation of the

table of devils, cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord; by the table, meaning in both

places the altar. This, in fine, is that oblation which was prefigured by various types of

sacrifices, during the period of nature, and of the law; in as much as it comprises all the

good things signified by those sacrifices, as being the consummation and perfection of

them all.”

Many points of the doctrine here exposed, are further illustrated and explained either in the teaching of the same Council about the Holy Eucharist (Session XIII, Oct. 11, 1551) and about Communion under both species, and for little children (Session XXI, July 16, 1562) and a little later in the Roman Catechism, the Catechism of the Council of Trent, published under Pope St Pius V in 1566.

It is very much worth going through this magisterial text, passage by passage, in order to interiorize it and to make sure that you properly understand what the Church teaches! It is also worth procuring yourself a “good, old” book edition which contains the many scriptural references in the doctrinal text.

 

“CHAPTER II.

That the Sacrifice of the Mass is propitiatory both for the living and the dead.

 

And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same

Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a

bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy Synod teaches, that this sacrifice is truly

propitiatory and that by means thereof this is effected, that we obtain mercy, and find

grace in seasonable aid, if we draw nigh unto God, contrite and penitent, with a sincere

heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence. For the Lord, appeased by the oblation

thereof, and granting the grace and gift of penitence, forgives even heinous

crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the

ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering

being different. The fruits indeed of which oblation, of that bloody one to wit, are

received most plentifully through this unbloody one; so far is this (latter) from derogating

in any way from that (former oblation). Wherefore, not only for the sins, punishments,

satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those who

are departed in Christ, and who are not as yet fully purified, is it rightly offered, agreeably

to a tradition of the apostles.”

This chapter is eminently important, therefore you should try to read and understand it very well.

The identity of the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross and of Holy Mass is clearly established: “the victim is one and the same (…) the manner alone of offering being different”, ie. the one bloody offering on the Cross, and the offering in an unbloody manner at Mass.

And the propitiatory purpose of the Mass is clearly taught against Luther and all those who follow him, including the Montini rite of Mass which has purged practically all passages to that effect; and which supports heterodox views about Purgatory because it refuses to use the term “soul” when speaking of the dead!

Let us be “careful to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace”, as the Church exhorts us with the words of St Paul (Epistle). Let us be certain that we understand that this unity in charity must be founded on the rock of the one and only Truth: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (ibid.). Let us not tempt Our Lord by inquiring out of vain curiosity, as a doctor of the law does in today’s Gospel, but let us “do the truth in charity”, as St Paul exhorts us in the same chapter (Eph 4:15)

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

P. Arnold Trauner (paterarnold@hotmail.com), njemački i engleski

Sermon for the 16thSunday after Pentecost, September 12th, 2021 – Holy Mass

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen

 

My dearly beloved in Our Lord,

 

Bergoglio’s recent Motu proprio “Traditionis custodes” is giving ample occasion to conservatives and traditionalists to defend the “old Mass”.

In doing so they are playing Bergoglio’s game, which is that of typical modern dialectics. (From conflicting or even contradictory premises a new reality shall emanate: thesis vs antithesis → synthesis.)We find the same plan in Ratzinger’s “Summorum Pontificum” (2007) and the accompanying letter, where he states that the two legitimate forms of the Roman rite should fertilize each other. Ratzinger’s brainchild has always been “the reform of the reform”, which corresponds to another modern idea, that of permanent change, struggle and revolution, postulated to be identical with “progress”.

Conservatives, including SSPX, are like army generals who are busy with an eternal discussion about which part of the enemy army to attack: the infantry or the artillery? Which part of their own army to utilize or to strengthen: tanks, ships, missiles, bows and arrows…? While doing so they do not realize that they are losing the war because they cannot make up their minds as to what is what and as to what to do.

The battle line is not to know or decide whether one rite or the other is better, nicer, more appealing; whether or not to openly attack the other rite or to push on with you own agenda. The battle line is the decision whether or not the rite approved by Montini is a Catholic rite, a rite of the Church, or not; whether it is valid or not.

By all standards of Catholic Sacramental theology, Montini’s rite is not valid, intrinsically. I have explained this and will explain it often still – but not here and now.

Conservatives and traditionalists who have no clear stance on the question of the invalidity of the “new” Mass promulgated by Montini (Paul VI) on April 3^rd, 1969, are now being dealt with by Bergoglio in the most cynical manner possible (in an astounding parallel to what is happening in politics and society). He declares that the local ordinaries, the diocesan bishops, are the custodians of Tradition. Take that, “traditionalists”! The cynicism resides in the fact that in ordinary circumstances this is absolutely true: You are a Catholic because, among other criteria, you are in communion with your local ordinary and through him with the Pope. Only: the Church is not living and operating in normal circumstances because she is deprived of her visible head, a true Vicar of Christ, a Pope (formally speaking) and also of her jurisdictional hierarchy altogether (but not of her sacramental hierarchy of bishops, priests etc.).

Based on his true/false premise, Bergoglio decides, contrary to his predecessor Ratzinger (the deus ex machina for many conservatives, a pope-to-the-rescue), that the utmost restrictions must be placed on the celebration of the “old” rite. As some analysts have put it, he is turning the Tridentine Mass into a museum piece.

Those who have no clear cut stance on the question of the Authority in the Church in the present day, have no real means to fight off Bergoglio’s logic. SSPX in particular are writing and screaming; while making it clear to anyone who has eyes to see, that they are in full communion with Bergoglio, minus the official signature and stamp. (Here in Austria they have acquired one of the oldest churches in the heart of Vienna in May. It has been purportedly donated to them by the Italian congregation which used that church. Small presents maintain a friendship, as we say: “Kleine Geschenke erhalten die Freundschaft.”)

 

Let us let the dead bury their dead, as Our Lord says (cf Mt 8:22; Lk 9:60), and follow him instead of exhausting our little forces in entrenched battles that hold no promise of success!

Our situation is precarious because our numbers are small; the number of priests offering the true and unchanged Mass is even smaller; the number of such priests refusing any compromise with adulterated and viciated celebrations, especially through the “una cum”, the mentioning of Bergoglio/Francis in the Canon of the Mass, is even smaller. The greater number of traditionalist priests fool themselves and the faithful by a laxist pastoral attitude in this regard, and in many other regards.

Again, parallel to the disintegration of society which demands a constant inner effort of vigilance and refocusing on that which is essential, the noxious environment in many traditionalist circles is a constant threat to the integrity of our mind, and of our Faith. As in the body gangrene mostly starts from something small and unimportant, but which has been neglected, so in the spiritual life unnoticeable decline or degradation precedes total demise! “Nemo repente fit pessimus. - No one becomes all-bad suddenly.”

In the congregations which demand my priestly assistance, there are small but clear signs of decline and deterioration:

The priest does not look at the congregation during Holy Mass; this is very strictly forbidden by the rubrics of the Missal. But sounds remain perceptible, and thus I notice that regularly people sit themselves right after having received Holy Communion. There is no reasonable logic or explanation for this since they will be back on their knees as soon as the priest says the Communio and Postcommunio! So why on earth would anyone even contemplate sitting down right after having received Our Lord’s Body in the Holy Eucharist? If you are that tired, you should be in your bed, not in the chapel! Objectively it is an outrage; subjectively a total lack of comprehension of the reality of communion. It is like saying: “Ah, Jesus, you are there? That’s nice. Have a good time! I’m resting… I’m tired. Hope you understand.”

Those who have come from the “new” Mass are easier to excuse; but still, they need to catch up quickly with the realities and exigencies of the Catholic life. They do not realize how important it is to kneel and to objectivate their attitude and behavior. Again and again there are people who stand during parts of a low Mass, and even during the priest’s blessing.

Another alarming fact which I have witnessed in different locations over the past months, is the fact that there is a good number of young men who start attending Mass. But it does not come to their mind that they could and should learn how to serve Mass. Even if you do not regularly serve Mass (because there are altar boys already), as a Catholic teenager or young man you should know at least the basics of serving: giving the responses, ringing the bell, assisting the priest at the Offertory and after Communion. It is not normal that the priest needs to give the responses and serve himself at the altar. He can do it; but it should be the last resort. Not practicing the “dialogue Mass” does not mean that you cannot or should not learn to give the responses, and know how to accurately ring the bell – even the girls and ladies. Sometimes there is no one else at Mass, and then you are called to represent the Church during this particular celebration of Mass.

St Pius X said that in his day and age, the greater number of Catholics must be numbered among the ignorant with regards to the truths of the Faith. What would he say or write now?… Certainly you do not need to know everything, or become an erudite scholar of Mass or its rubrics. But it remains true that one cannot love what he does not know! Making the effort of knowing at least the basics of the inner works of Holy Mass will open wide your horizon of praying at Mass, instead of just enduring it… which is the great danger and menace, at least for the next generation.

Let us ask Our Lady, whose most holy Name we celebrate today. She has snatched us from the peril of muslim invasion on that day (Vienna, 1683)! May she also protect our Faith, and guide us through the perils of the present exhausting battles!

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

 

P. Arnold Trauner (paterarnold@hotmail.com), njemački i engleski

Sermon for the 14thSunday after Pentecost, August 29th, 2021 – Serving two lords…

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen

 

My dearly beloved in Our Lord,

 

Today Holy Church gives us St Paul’s words to the Galatians to contemplate: “Walk in the spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and the spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary one to another.” He thereby comments Our Lord’s words from the sermon on the mount: “No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will sustain the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”

Mammon means earthly possessions in as far as they are not rightly acquired or possessed. In this sense it comprises all things on earth in as far as they are an obstacle or an hindrance to serve God, Our Lord and Creator.

Whenever things are over-simplified, we need to be aware that there is something fishy in this. In German we call this “Engführung – narrowing down”. In psychology you can call it an obsession. There is nothing wrong with a strong idea; a leading thought; a red thread running through your thinking and your actions. But this is very different from narrowing virtually everything down to just one thought or fact.

Feeneyites are obsessed with what they call the “dogma of salvation”. They forget about all the rest of theology. But a dogma is always connected to all other dogmas, and you are not allowed to lose sight of the greater picture.

Mammonites are obsessed with money. They forget about all other aspects of life, which becomes a simple function of money. But you are not going to be able to eat money (because it stinks!) when things get tough, and it is very wrong to weigh all aspects of life against money.

Many Catholics are obsessed with solving the problem in the Church, that she has no hierarchy or authority (a Pope). They scrutinize entire theological libraries in order to find the solution. But they are going round in circles because such a situation has never existed before, and therefore theology and the magisterium have not dealt with this situation ex professo or authoritatively; and the solution cannot be found in books.

St Paul gives us the solution of the dilemma by enumerating the effects or the fruit of serving either one lord or the other (for the essential battle for dominance is going on inside our own self): the works of the flesh as opposed to the fruit of the spirit, in today’s Epistle… And Our Lord and Savior teaches us what we are so reluctant and stupid to learn – “o stulti corde… O foolish, and slow of heart… (Lk 24:25): “Be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. Is not the life more than the meat, and the body more than the raiment? (…) O ye of little faith! Be not solicitous therefore, saying, what shall we eat, or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed? For after all these things do the heathen seek.” Then he draws the only permissible conclusion which requires more than a little faith: “For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things. Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and His justice; and all these things shall be added unto you.”

Everyone has the same problems. As Catholics we are the only ones to have the true solution; but we are usually most unwilling to accept it as such.

AB Lefebvre wrote to Fr Guérard des Lauriers who provided him with a watertight argument regarding the formal vacancy of the See of Peter, that he found this over-simplified, and that he preferred practical solutions to the problem. It just so happens that his followers are still at it; and that he simply mistook an explanation for a solution. The explanation must come from theology. The solution must come from Christ because the Church is His Spouse, and not our piece of cake!

We have the ground solid Great Commandment – and we make so little case of it although Our Lord says that all of God’s revelation – the law and the Prophets – are resumed in it.

We have the good, substantial and soul-nourishing prayers that the Church has given us. The acts of Faith, Hope and Charity, and the act of Contrition in their proper form contain the quintessence of theology in these matters, namely the formal reason why we believe, why we hope, why we love… Practically no one is interested in those. Rather one chooses a lighter and shorter form which is deficient; while another prefers an inflated form which hides the formal element among many words and expressions (drowning the fish, as the French say).

“Non multa, sed multum. - Not many, but much.” Not many different things, but much of one thing. We don’t need 36 guiding principles for our Christian conduct; but we need to deduct all things from the Great Commandment, or reduce our actions, words and thoughts to it, “for one thing only is necessary” (cf Lk 10:42). Holy Church in today’s Mass gives us similar thoughts:

“Behold, O God, our protector, and look on the face of Thy Christ: for better is one day in Thy courts above thousands.” (Intr., Ps 83:10-11). One day spent close to God is better than thousands spent far from Him!

“It is good to confide in the Lord, rather than to have confidence in man. It is good to trust in the Lord, rather than to trust in princes.” (Grad., Ps 117:8-9) Nothing illustrates this better than the craze which has been going on for the past one-and-a-half years! A state gone wild, a state playing Providence or “daddy-taking-care-of-it” (“der Papa wird’s schon richten…”) is not only a mad concept, it is also ungodly and anti-godly. For there is but one divine Father who provides for all in the best manner possible. No state can do this, or should pretend to do it.

So let us firmly determine our own self, our mind and will, to serve this best of Fathers, “the King of kings, and Lord of lords.” (1Tim 6:15) Let us stop trying wasting our time in order to obtain the best of both worlds: “No man can serve two masters. You cannot serve God and mammon.”

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

P. Arnold Trauner (paterarnold@hotmail.com), njemački i engleski

Sermon for the 11thSunday after Pentecost, August 8th, 2021 – Effeta (from Aug. 9, 2015)

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen

 

My dearly beloved in Our Lord,

 

Holy Mother Church really wants to drive home this point during the time after Pentecost: “By God's grace I am what I am...” (Epistle, end)

St Paul reminds the first Christians that he himself is a tremendous example of the efficiency of God's grace. He who in good faith had persecuted God's Church, has literally been humbled – he had been thrown off his horse on his way to imprison Christians in Damascus – and then exalted by God's grace, even as far as to being counted among the Apostles and the Prince of the Apostles alongside St Peter.

In the Gospel Our Lord heals a man who can neither hear nor speak. This is our condition if we are without God's grace: We cannot make proper use of our senses which should be the physical instruments of our sanctification. Neither can we understand the word of God – the teaching of Our Lord and of Holy Church – nor can we properly use our tongue to honor and praise God as He deserves to be honored and praised by his reasonable creatures.

The good use of our tongue is particularly important and difficult.

St James in his epistle consecrates the greater part of chapter 3 to the christian duty of mastering one's tongue. “He who does not offend in his speech, is a perfect man... (v. 2) Thus the tongue is a small organ and presumes of great things (v. 5)” The whole passage (Jam 3, 1-12) is very much worth reading and re-reading!

The Imitation of Christ gives us precious hints in book 1, chapters 10 & 20. “A bad habit and the neglect of our tending to perfection is an important reason for our not holding back our tongue... (ch. 10) It is easier to keep total silence, than to keep the measure in speaking... No-one speaks securely who does not love to be silent... (ch. 20)”

It is an important duty for parents to educate their children in such a way that their natural curiosity in hearing and the profusion in talking is cut back to a virtuous measure. For this is an important effect of original sin and a vicious form of being self-centered (egoistic); and it is impossible that purity of mind and of body be kept for any long time by children as they grow up if their curiosity has not been properly mastered and brought under control!

For the adult it is very difficult – according to the teaching of St James – to stay out of trouble in talking. Either we talk too much – which occurs by far more often – or too little.

The discernment – when to speak and when to remain silent – is a difficult one. Each one of us should know his natural inclination and default in this matter, and act accordingly to acquire true virtue.

Female discretion is a very important thing, especially for a married wife. Since women normally are rather inclined to talk too much, a wife can only be a good and precious companion and counselor to her husband if she is discreet, i.e. if she knows to hold back her tongue normally – for only then her words will be appreciated and truly useful.

One thorny matter with regards to our duty of charity is what we call fraternal correction. This properly concerns the serious duty to keep our neighbor away from sin or from the proximate occasion of sin. There is a strict obligation to correct our neighbor if all of the following conditions apply:

- The person is in a true spiritual necessity. This is the case if we know that the sin or the will to commit a sin is certain, or if a person does not better himself without our correction, or if no-one else corrects that person. If we can presume that the person is sinning through invincible ignorance, then there is no duty to correct him unless there is damage being done through his actions.

- There is a great spiritual necessity – which is the case whenever mortal sin is involved.

- There is reasonable hope of the person bettering himself. So there is normally no need to correct people whom we do not know (e.g. on the train, in the street...). Sometimes it is better to leave the correction for a later time, when true amendment can be more readily be expected – e.g. wait to correct someone until his passion of anger etc. has calmed down!

- The correction can be done without serious disadvantage for yourself. This does not apply to those who have an obligation to correct others according to the position that they are holding. Thus parents must correct their children for the reason of piety (lat. pietas, i.e. in virtue of the IV^th commandment) even at the risk of great personal disadvantage.

Whenever all of these conditions apply, there is a serious duty to correct one's neighbor. This can be done through words, but also sometimes it is enough to give a decisive look; or to turn a conversation to a different topic; or to withhold one's support from the person.

The order to be kept is according to Our Lord's words in the Gospel (Mt 18,15-17; cf. Lk 17,3): First you must correct the person under four eyes (alone); if this fails, you take one or two persons into your confidence (in order to be more convincing); only if this also proves to be fruitless you must tell the authority.

This matter of fraternal correction with all its distinctions and sub-distinctions should be well known and well considered by all adults. Today we have no “normal” authority in place which would usually correct abuses. So much more must we endeavor to accomplish any duty which comes from charity. – And God alone knows how many sins have been, and still are being committed by wrongly applying correction to our neighbor!

St Paul encourages the Ephesians (4,15) “to practice the truth in charity”. And after having admonished the Galatians to practice charity, he exhorts them that while they are biting each other they may be careful not to be devoured all together (5,15)!

“Ephphetha!” (Gospel) May our senses be opened for that which is godly, and closed to all that which is ungodly. May God's grace, truth, wisdom and charity strengthen our mind and body (cf. Post-communio prayer) so that we in turn may be no more darkness, but “light in the Lord” (Eph 5,8), having become similar to the great mysteries celebrated by Holy Church these days, in the Transfiguration of Our Lord and Savior, and the bodily Assumption of Our Blessed Lady.

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

P. Arnold Trauner (paterarnold@hotmail.com), njemački i engleski