Tuesday, May 19, 2026

I'm not impressed

... that's really not what I was hoping for...

Here's the puzzling thing: why do they need their own lineage of bishops? It's not as though there were a shortage of bishops, proportionally speaking; and we can be sure they ackowledge the orders and jurisdiction of the standard-issue bishop; His Holiness' own orders are just as good as any's, right? Having apparently been elected Bishop of Rome, he's Bishop of Rome as soon as he's a Priest, so we must suppose that the SSPX agree on that point. So what is the episcopacial emergency requiring emergency consecration of bishops? I'm not about to suggest that the whole College is without some unpleasant characters, but we put away all kinds of Donatism a long while ago, didn't we?

And I don't think the SSPX think or want to think they're Donatists, either.

So, what can the emergency of Episcopate be?

A Bishop is a Priest, of course; but priests are also priests. Of Course. Bishops handle two sacraments in especial: Confirmation, and Orders. That is, Bishops level up Catholics, and Bishops make priests. The SSPX governance want to continue making priests, and presuming they want no schism, any Bishop ought to do as well as another, so what they're actually afraid of must be that Rome wouldn't let them have the priests they want? There are still a few monasteries out there, making priests for themselves on occasion, without benefit of Cloistered Bishops. (I've heard that some bishops still don't like the Benedictines, but that's neither here nor there...)

Well. The other Fraternity (I know, I know, tense relations) seems to get priests ordained, somehow. There are Bishops who like them. I've known a good few of them, and none of them were soft, in any sense. Maybe their days are numbered shorter than I would like to imagine.

St. Jude, pray for us.

Tuesday, April 7, 2026

Your Holiness!

The English Parliament and their King have among them decided, again, to leave plainly vacant the See of Canterbury! Send them a fitting heir to St. Augustine!
~ an observer

Sunday, August 15, 2021

I am annoyed.

Someone is lying to the Holy Father; and the Holy Father, seemingly, believes the lie. SO very frustrating!

Thursday, July 29, 2021

Petre, Doce Nos!

Confirma fratrum! Oves pasce! Gentes Evangeliza! Secundum voluntas Ecclesiae, id est: voluntas Dei, doce nos!!

Aperi nobis Concilia!

Saturday, July 14, 2018

it might have been that I forgot to say it to people, for a while... say it to those who know you, when you can!

$$\begin{array}{rl}
\mathrm{XLI} & \mbox{Foreign adventures}\\
\mathrm{XLII} & \mbox{Safe returnings}\\
\mathrm{XLIII} & \mbox{Surprises}\\
\mathrm{XLIV} & \mbox{Reunions anticipated}\\
\mathrm{XLV} & \mbox{Room left for Providence}
\end{array}
$$

Thursday, April 5, 2018

"Thou Shalt Break Them..."

"... dash them in pieces, like a potter's vessel"

I was having a conversation a couple days ago, starting with the Road to Emmaus, and particularly On The Lord's Disappearing. You see, that was the Gospel Reading that day (Roman Extraordinary Calendar)

and someone else had recently primed me, putting forth words of Doubt re. the Lord's rising. Others, one Peterson in particular, have pointed out how Strange are the ways the Lord is present, post-resurrection... and it's sometimes spun by others into a case that the Resurrection was "simply" a collective or communal hallucination.

But before returning to the Conversaion, I want to point out that the Question of What the Risen Lord Looks Like, and whether it's Too Different from us still waiting to die the first time, actually aren't all that pertinent to the question of whether the Resurrection is a Fact. The Pertinent Facts as Reported are: Jesus not only died (unexpectedly! suddenly! "Pilate marvelled") three hours into a torment designed to last days, but he was bled dry and his heart pierced, in the sight of witnesses; and after being buried and sealed in by the labour of a Roman detail, staying thus sealed through two nights and into the Third Day, the tomb was found open, opened either by no-one or a single Angel, and Jesus' wrappings neatly folded, and Jesus himself Not There. If He was not raised, then his body was Still Somewhere, and quite unshrouded, just waiting for a clever Roman to find it.


Anyways. The Road to Emmaus. At the end of it, Jesus disappears from their sight. It's an unusual move, for an ordinary critter like me, but this is not the first time that Jesus has removed himself from view, in an unlikely way. I had thought of the end of the exchange in the Temple Courtyard, when the Pharisees took up stones to throw at Him, but He hid himself. But, then, how did He do that? And what did it look like? Then She My Friend pointed out also another time, when the crowd would have Taken Jesus and Made Him King. How do you hide, when you're out in the open? What does it look like?

And we talked about at what moment Jesus disappears: is it when he's recognized? (that's what seems to be happening at Emmaus) But in the Temple, it seems to be when the Pharisees refuse to see Him. Then again, as my Friend said, when the crowd would have Crowned Him, indeed He is their King, but they're seeing only the Man in the Son of Man, and not the Son of God.

My Friend also pointed out how, at Emmaus, Jesus seems not to be meaning to stop, but ready to be on His way --- He likes to be Invited, we agreed --- but it's as though He has a Place to Get To, and Things to Do... in fact, from Emmaus, He says elsewhere, he was going to Galilee, and at Galilee he had some other conversations, especially with Peter, lasting well after he was Recognized... But, still, Things to Do...

"Thou shalt break them" says the Psalmist; but also God tests the heart as fire tests gold, says the Proverbs... It turns out there are More Things that Fire does to gold than just clean it up and confirm its goldness: firing gold anneals it. Why do you anneal gold? Because if you hammer it when it's hard, it won't move as much; but more, hard means brittle. When brittle, you can break it, even like a potter's vessel... and then it won't take the shape you want. Clearly, that's No Good.

When the crowd would have seized Him, when the Pharisees would have stoned him, they had become brittle. There was no more work to be done by hammering; they must be put back into the fire, to soften them and purify, if it might be. At Emmaus, When they recognize Him, His work there is done; and at Galilee, Peter needed some work, too, and was ready for it.

... There was more in our chatting, but ... this here feels like a finished note.

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

How beautiful the feet...

If you have watched Chariots of Fire ("bring me my bow of burning gold...") you ought to remember that scene in which Eric Liddel is knocked over the picket of a Quarter-mile race, gets up, and then overtakes the whole field from twenty yards behind the last.

It's a fantastic victory. If you've any heart at all you are holding your breath with all the onlookers, watching this glorious impossible thing being done.

And Liddel, of course, collapses again at the end of it because it really was impossible, according to human wisdom. And here's the thing: we're nearly all physically capable of things impossible according to human wisdom, if we don't have to think about them. We can pull muscles on reflex (as I found last Monday) to arrest a fall (and golly did it smart for hours after); some folk get nasty electric shocks and really do throw themselves across great distances, because all their muscles twitch at once before they've any time to smart from it and they really had no choice in the matter.

But Liddel, according to that film, wills himself to run beyond any ability he could count on a second time. It hurts, and you can tell that it's hurting him before he's even caught up the next runner, you can see in his face the dread of anticipation before he's even got up. And it's a stupid thing to do, really, even according to athletic wisdom. And still it evokes an admiring thrill, "such wonders the Lord has made!"

Something like that is the only sense I can make of the first obvious parsing of that half-verse in Today's second reading from Isaiah
And the Lord was pleased to bruise Him in infirmity...
We of course, have no right to bruise eachother, any more than a runner has any right to trip knock a fellow off the track. But the starter, the umpires, the on-lookers can't help but exult in such sportsmanship, such determination to put things right, once they have gone wrong.

There is a second parsing, of course, because the same text also means The Lord Himself was pleased to be bruised. But the Trinity takes a deal of getting-used-to; and even if Isaiah knew that, still Iscariot and his buyers hid it from themselves.