Carl E. Olson's Blog, page 321

New DVD: "Changing Sides: How a Pro-life Presence Changed the Heart of a Planned Parenthood Director"

Now available from Ignatius Press:

Changing Sides: How a Pro-life Presence Changed the Heart of a Planned Parenthood Director

Can hearts really be changed on the issue of abortion?

This film tells the powerful true story of the conversion of a dedicated Planned Parenthood director to a leading Pro-life Activist. Abby Johnson was the director of the abortion facility that was the launching pad of the bold new pro-life effort - 40 Days for Life.

Abby believed that she was helping women by working for the nation's largest abortion operation, Planned Parenthood.  She quickly rose in the ranks to become the director of an abortion facility and was even given an "Employee of the Year" award.  

But one Fall morning everything changed.

Abby suddenly she found herself on the other side of the fence, facing the truth about abortion.  The real question now was, in her time of crisis, what would she do and who would help her?

This film reveals what happens when people pray, fast, sacrifice, love their enemies and take a stand on the most controversial issue of our time - abortion.  Fences come down, hearts change, and the love of God shines light in the darkest, most unexpected places.  And the evil of abortion is exposed and defeated.

The film includes exclusive interviews with those Abby encountered while she was on both sides of the fence including - the activists who prayed for her daily, the secular media who broke the big story of her conversion, the attorney who won the massive lawsuit that Planned Parenthood tried to silence her with and more.

Plus great "bonus" material featuring Fr. Frank Pavone, David Bereit, Shawn Carney, Peter Kreeft and former abortion provider Carol Everett!

Related:

• Unplanned: The Dramatic True Story of a Former Planned Parenthood Leader's Eye-Opening Journey Across the Life Line, by Abby Johnson

Saint Peter proclaims the truth about the One who is Truth

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for the Fourth Sunday of Easter, May 15, 2011 | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Acts 2:14a, 36-41
• Psa. 23: 1-3a, 3b4, 5, 6
• 1 Pet. 2:20b-25
• Jn. 10:1-10

Back in 2008, a major newspaper declared that Pope Benedict XVI is still a "mystery" three years into his pontificate. He remains, the reporter wrote, "something of a white-robed enigma to most Americans—including Catholics." To which I say, maybe most Americans, especially Catholics, should pay attention a bit better. If they did, the supposed "mystery" of the Holy Father would be solved. And, in fact, one Catholic author correctly noted that Benedict "doesn't want the pope to be the object of people's faith or veneration. He wants that to be Jesus."

Anyone who has spent some time reading the homilies, books, and essays of Joseph Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, knows how focused on Jesus Christ he is. I wonder: if reporters had been in Jerusalem two thousand years ago during the Feast of Pentecost, how might they have described the person and sermon of Peter? I suspect many would have been horrified at how exclusive and dogmatic the former fisherman was in his pronouncements: "Let the whole house of Israel know for certain that God has made both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified." How insensitive! How unsophisticated!

And what of Peter's bold call for those listening to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins? Clearly Peter (the reporters might explain) would need to learn how to be more politically adept, sensitive to the diverse cultural and religious backgrounds of those present on that dramatic day. But, no, Peter simply said his piece: "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." How strange. How mysterious! And how powerful, for Luke notes that about three thousand persons were baptized on that day.

A few years ago the document Dominus Iesus ("On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church," August 6, 2000) issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, upset many people—both Christian and non-Christian—because it upheld the Gospel uttered by Peter and the other apostles, albeit in a more elaborate and involved manner. Yet the document, for all of its theological nuance, was quite direct in its language:

"From the beginning, the community of believers has recognized in Jesus a salvific value such that he alone, as Son of God made man, crucified and risen, by the mission received from the Father and in the power of the Holy Spirit, bestows revelation (cf. Mt 11:27) and divine life (cf. Jn 1:12; 5:25-26; 17:2) to all humanity and to every person." (par 15).

The document further stated that "the truth of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Lord and only Saviour"—including his incarnation, death, resurrection, and gift of salvation—"must be firmly believed as a constant element of the Church's faith" (par 13). The man responsible for that document was, of course, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.

If these statements were merely the creations of power-hungry leaders or confused men, they would indeed be pitiful, ridiculous, and false. But if they are true, they demand a simple response: acceptance or rejection. Jesus, in today's Gospel, explains to the Pharisees that He is the gate for the sheep and that "whoever enters through me will be saved." There are thieves and robbers who will attempt to steal the sheep. These include men who will say that Jesus was just a good man, a fine teacher, an enlightened guru, a moral philosopher, or a political activist. But Jesus claimed to have power over life and death, as well as the power to judge souls. Before Abraham existed, Jesus said, "I AM" (Jn 8:58); He left no doubt about His unique, supernatural character. It is why many loved Him while others loathed Him.

It is sometimes said that religion should unite people. This is misleading. Only true religion can unite people because it has the power to divide truth from falsehood. Jesus, who is Truth, causes such division, and in dividing He unites those who follow Him. Mysterious? Yes, but only to those who wander outside the gate, without a shepherd.

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the April 13, 2008, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper in a slightly different form.)

The "experience of the heavenly liturgy has been lost since Vatican II."

Here is an excerpt from a lengthy and very thoughtful address on the new translation of the Roman Missal given last month by Auxiliary Bishop James Conley of Denver at the Midwest Theological Forum in Valparaiso, Indiana:

The key point here is that the words we pray matter. What we pray makes a difference in what we believe. Our prayer has implications for how we grasp the saving truths that are communicated to us through the liturgy.

For instance, our current translation almost always favors abstract nouns to translate physical metaphors for God. If the Latin prayer refers to the "face" of God, "face" will be translated in abstract conceptual terms, such as "presence." References to God's "right hand" will be translated as God's "power."

This word choice has deep theological implications. 

The point of the Son of God becoming flesh is that God now has a human face — the face of Jesus. Jesus is the image of the invisible God. Whoever sees him sees the Father.vi 

Yet if in our worship we speak of God only in abstract terms, then effectively we are undermining our faith in the Incarnation.

As Archbishop Coleridge says:  "The cumulative effect [of abandoning human metaphors for God] is that the sense of the Incarnation is diminished. God himself seems more abstract and less immediate than ever he does in Scripture or the Church Fathers."

I want to say this again: I don't believe there were bad motives involved in the translations we have now.

I think the root problem with the translations we have now is that the translators seriously misunderstood the nature of the divine liturgy.

Our current translations treat the liturgy basically as a tool for doing catechesis. That's why our prayers so often sound utilitarian and didactic; often they have a kind of lowest-common-denominator type of feel. That's because the translators were trying to make the "message" of the Mass accessible to the widest possible audience.

But Christ did not give us the liturgy to be a message-delivery system. Of course, we pray what we believe, and what we pray shapes what we believe. Lex orandi, lex credendi. But the liturgy is not meant to "teach" in the same way that a catechism teaches, or even in the same way that a homily teaches.

On this point, the words of the great liturgical pioneer, Father Romano Guardini, are worth hearing again:

The liturgy wishes to teach, but not by means of an artificial system of aim-conscious educational influences. It simply creates an entire spiritual world in which the soul can live according to the requirements of its nature. ….

The liturgy creates a universe brimming with fruitful spiritual life, and allows the soul to wander about in it at will and to develop itself there. ….

The liturgy has no purpose, or at least, it cannot be considered from the standpoint of purpose. It is not a means which is adapted to attain a certain end — it is an end in itself.vii

This is the authentic spirit of the liturgy.

As Guardini says, the liturgy aims to create a new world for believers to dwell in. A sanctified world where the dividing lines between the human and the divine are erased. Guardini's vision is beautiful: "The liturgy creates a universe brimming with fruitful spiritual life."

The new translation of the Mass restores this sense of the liturgy as transcendent and transformative. It restores the sacramentality to our liturgical language. The new translation reflects the reality that our worship here joins in the worship of heaven.

The new edition of the Missal seeks to restore the ancient sense of our participation in the cosmic liturgy.

The Letter to the Hebrews speaks of the Eucharist bringing us into the heavenly Jerusalem to worship in the company of angels and saints.viii The Book of Revelation starts with St. John celebrating the Eucharist on a Sunday. In the midst of this, the Spirit lifts him up to show him the eternal liturgy going on in heaven.ix

The message is clear: The Church's liturgy is caught up in the liturgy of the cosmos. And our Eucharistic rites have always retained this vision of the cosmic liturgy.

The Gloria and the Sanctus are two obvious points of contact. In the first, we sing the song that the angels sang at the Nativity. In the latter, we sing in unison with the angelic choirs in heaven; we sing the song that both St. John and the prophet Isaiah heard being sung in the heavenly liturgy.

The oldest of our Eucharistic Prayers, the Roman Canon, lists the names of the 12 apostles along with 12 early saints. This is meant to correspond to the 24 elders who John saw worshipping around the heavenly altar.x 

The Roman Canon also includes a prayer for the holy angels to bring the sacrifices from our altar up to God's altar in heaven.

And of course the Communion Rite includes the Vulgate's translation of the invitation that St. John heard in the heavenly liturgy: Blessed are those who are called to the Supper of the Lamb.xi

Yet we need to recognize that this experience of the heavenly liturgy has been lost since Vatican II.

Read the entire piece, published today by ZENIT.

Related Ignatius Insight Articles and Excerpts:

• The Mass of Vatican II | Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.
• Walking To Heaven Backward | Interview with Father Jonathan Robinson of the Oratory
• Ideas Have Liturgical Consequences | Reverend Brian Van Hove, S.J.
• How Should We Worship? | Preface to The Organic Development of the Liturgy by Alcuin Reid, O.S.B. | by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Foreword to U.M. Lang's Turning Towards the Lord: Orientation in Liturgical Prayer | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
• Learning the Liturgy From the Saints | An Interview with Fr. Thomas Crean, O.P., author of The Mass and the Saints
• Does Christianity Need A Liturgy? | Martin Mosebach | From The Heresy of Formlessness: The Roman Liturgy and Its Enemy
• Rite and Liturgy | Denis Crouan, STD
• The Liturgy Lived: The Divinization of Man | Jean Corbon, OP
• Reflections On Saying Mass (And Saying It Correctly) | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• A Year of Crisis, Revisited | Hubert Jedin's 1968 Memorandum to the West German Episcopal Conference

The Purpose of Creation

The Purpose of Creation | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | Ignatius Insight | May 14, 2011

"God made the world so that there could be a space where he might communicate his love and from which the response of love might come back to him."
— Pope Benedict XVI, "The Day of the New Creation" (Homily at the Easter Vigil, 23 April 2011, L'Osservatore Romano, English, April 27, 2011)

"It is not the case that in the expanding universe, at a late stage, in some tiny corner of the cosmos, there evolved randomly some species of living being capable of reasoning and of trying to find rationality within creation, or to bring rationality into it."
— Pope Benedict XVI, "The Day of the New Creation."

I.

After the blessing of the new fire at the Easter Vigil, we heard the reading of the creation from Genesis. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Leo Strauss pointed out that this account has its own internal order according to the nature of the motion of the creatures on each day of creation. The account of Genesis is not, as it sometimes seems, "irrational." The heavens and the earth were not God. He is before they were; they came to be from nothing. God is not part of the universe; He is complete in His inner being without the universe. It was not created to supply a deficiency in God, as some of the ancient writers thought.

In other words, before the cosmos was, God is. The tense of the latter verb is correct, not "was" but "is."

In his homily for the Easter Vigil, Benedict XVI asked whether, as some say, it would not be better to omit this supposedly outmoded cosmological reading: just proceed immediately to things more pertinent to us. The fathers of the Church, Benedict told us, never understood the days of creation cosmologically. But they did understand that the Genesis account provided the foundation for thinking of what this creation means in its very essence. Why did God not leave the void alone? Why did He cause what is to be?

"The Church wishes to offer us a panoramic view of whole trajectory of salvation history, starting with creation, passing through the election and liberation of Israel to the testimony of the prophets by which this entire history is directed ever more clearly towards Jesus Christ." The Scriptures do not offer a "scientific" description of sidereal events. They do present an overall understanding of why these events happened. The overall understanding of the cosmos is shot through with intelligence, from beginning to end.

In other words, revelation gives intelligibility to history. History is the accurate explanation of what happened, including divine events in the world. We can eventually find out the scientific details of cosmic events by ourselves. Revelation was not needed for what men could eventually discover by themselves. In fact, the general principles of the scriptural account of creation and the scientific knowledge of what happened are becoming in our time more and more in agreement. If we look at what Scripture intends and what we can judge to have happened, we find remarkable agreement. Revelation and science are not as opposed as was once claimed.

Read the entire essay on Ignatius Insight...

www.FatimaForToday.com

A press release for a new website, www.FatimaForToday.com, from Ignatius Press:

Passport not needed to visit Fatima online

FatimaForToday.com offers books, videos for all ages and interests

SAN FRANCISCO, May 13, 2011 – Ninety-four years ago today, three Portuguese youngsters were contemplating the miraculous apparition they'd just experienced. From that day forward, those children – and the tiny village of Fatima – offered the world a new message of hope through the Virgin Mary's fervent call to prayer, penance and conversion.

On the 94th anniversary of Our Lady's first appearance to Francisco and Jacinta Marto and their cousin, Lucia dos Santo, Ignatius Press today launched a website, FatimaForToday.com, devoted to Our Lady of Fatima and available resources for anyone interested in exploring the mysteries and blessings of Fatima.

FatimaForToday.com provides quick access to a variety of books and videos on Our Lady of Fatima, and it enables parishes and organizations to schedule Fatima-related events – including visits by Fr. Andrew Apostoli, C.F.R., one of the world's foremost experts on Fatima.

"We are thrilled and humbled by the opportunity to bring FatimaForToday.com to life on the 94th anniversary of Our Lady's first appearance at Fatima," said Ignatius Press President Mark Brumley. "The message of Fatima is as relevant and important today as it was when Mary first presented it to the children. We hope that the new website will support that message by serving as the source for information and resources covering every aspect of Fatima."

"The message of Fatima has often been described as a brief summary of the essentials of Christian living," Fr. Apostoli writes in his new book, Fatima for Today. "Our lady of Fatima has given us a great reminder of these essentials for our difficult times."

In addition to Fr. Apostoli's book, the new website provides access to the groundbreaking film The 13th Day and the follow-up docu-drama Finding Fatima. Also available is information on a booklet  What Happened at Fatima, published by Catholic Truth Society, and a variety of other books and videos that will bring Fatima to life for people of all ages. There's even a Fatima coloring book for children!

Fr. Apostoli, a founding member of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, has been teaching and preaching retreats and parish missions for several decades. He hosted the EWTN TV special "Our Lady of Fatima and First Saturday Devotion," and Catholic TV developed and aired a three-part series on Fatima for Today earlier this year.

For more information about www.FatimaForToday.com or to schedule an interview with Ignatius Press President Mark Brumley or Fr. Andrew Apostoli, C.F.R, please contact Alexis Walkenstein with The Maximus Group at 678-990-9032.   

Some thoughts on the catholicity of jazz

I've been battling a head cold-meets-tree allergies combo this week, which means my head has often felt like a hot air balloon has been shoved into my nasal cavity (neat image, eh?) Feeling better today, thankfully, and trying to catch up on a host of odds, ends, and in-betweens.

Some heavier blog material is in store, but I just read a fun post, "The Catholic Roots of Jazz?", by Joe Trabbic on the "End of the Modern World" blog, and wanted to blather about it for a bit. Joe writes:

Jelly Roll Morton was a key figure in the early development of jazz. Some people even regard him as the first real jazz musician, the man who brought together various musical forms into the new thing that we now know as jazz. Jelly Roll's real name was Ferdinand Joseph LaMothe and he was raised Catholic, but the dissolute life that he began leading as a teenager, when he secretly took a job as a piano player in a New Orleans brothel, quickly made his Catholicism unrecognizable. But who knows the hearts of men save their Maker?

He goes on to mention early jazz giants Dominic "Nick" LaRocca and Louis Armstrong, and then remarks upon Dave Brubeck, one of the finest (and longest-performing) jazz pianists, saying, "Well, if jazz didn't have anything Catholic about it, why did one of the greats of later jazz, Dave Brubeck, decide to enter the Church of Rome?"

He admits he is having fun with it, but the two questions are interesting: "Does jazz have Catholic roots?" and "Is jazz Catholic?" The first one, it seems to me, is bound up to a large degree with the history of jazz, which is a complicated matter. But it is pretty evident that jazz, to put it rather simplistically, has roots in both the European cIassical tradition and very American forms of music—ragtime, blues, early country, spirituals, gospel, dance music, etc.—harkening back not only to New Orleans, but Chicago, New York, Texas, and a variety of other places, especially throughout the southeastern United States. Elijah Wald's How The Beatles Destroyed Rock 'n' Roll: An Alternative History of American Popular Music (Oxford University Press, 2009), offers a fascinating and slightly iconoclastic version of that history, especially in the first seven chapters. Jazz was, in the beginning, very much dance music, and was usually associated with a less than upstanding life-style. And that image was hardly helped in the 1940s and '50s when many jazz musicians came under the spell of heroin and other drugs.

One of my heroes, G. K. Chesterton, had nothing good to say about the jazz of the 1920s and 1930s. I beg to differ with him, but I'm sure it was an unusual and even jarring thing for the Englishman to hear. It was a music filled with great energy, imbued with a beguiling combination of rawness (sometimes sexual in nature) and sophistication (often classical in origin), being both very rhythmic and melodic, with an ever-increasing harmonic complexity. I own dozens of books on jazz (and close to 11,000 songs classified as "jazz" on my iTunes), and they all agree that defining "jazz" is a very difficult matter. Barry Ulanov was one of the first great jazz critics (he was also a Catholic scholar—more on that in a moment), the author of A History of Jazz in America (Viking Press, 1954) and A Handbook of Jazz (Viking, 1960). He wrote, in the latter book, "The harder one listens to jazz, the more one hears European rather than African influences—the folk songs of England, Scotland, and Ireland, of France and Germany and even the Balkans, rather than the music of the jungle and the coast settlements from which the slave ships came."

However, many jazz musicians of the past few decades—especially since the lae 1960s—have purposefully sought to incorporate more non-European rhythms—African, Cuban, etc.—into their music (jazz really is, in many ways, the original "worldbeat music"). The fact is, jazz has long been notably "catholic" in the sense of being recognizably "jazz" while presenting itself in a wide range of forms and schools, with distinctive sounds coming from New Orleans, Chicago, Kansas City, and the West Coast. Those unfamiliar with jazz could be forgiven if they, upon hearing pieces by Armstrong, Charlie Parker, early/mid/or late Miles Davis, and Weather Report, muttered, "I have no idea what those have in common." But the common thread of jazz, I think, is the unique improvisational conversation that takes place between musicians within a certain foundational structure. This is true whether the jazz in question is defined as traditional, bop, cool, post-bop, free, fusion, or otherwise (for those interested in a detailed and learned excursion, see The Jazz Book: From Ragtime to the 21st Century [Lawrence Hill Books, 2009], by Joachim-Ernst Berendt and Günther Huesmann [seventh edition]).

Having said that, as far as I know, the two best-known practicing/serious Catholics who were/are world-class jazz musicians are Brubeck and pianist/composer Mary Lou Williams, herself a convert. Duke Ellington wrote three "Sacred Concerts"—1965, '68, '73—but they were apparently for an Episcopalian setting. But it appears that the legendary trumpeter and bandleader Dizzy Gillespie may have been Catholic. This piece about Williams (check out the picture of her with Pope Paul VI!) provides the following background:

However, by the mid-1950s, jazz was losing its audience to rock 'n roll, forcing many jazz artists to work in Europe. While Williams was working in France, she suffered a spiritual crisis/awakening and returned to New York. She gave up performing and devoted her time and energy to helping drug-addicted musicians get clean.

She also devoted herself to prayer and fasting. The Baptist church she was attending wasn't open during the week, but the Catholic church was. Williams spent long hours praying in front of the tabernacle, and eventually converted to Catholicism in 1957. Lorraine Gillespie, wife of trumpeter Dizzy Gillespie, was her godmother.

Her spiritual director advised her to give up the dangerous work of drug rehabilitation and return to music. He suggested that she offer up her playing as prayer for others.

Dizzy Gillespie introduced Williams to Bishop Wright, who headed the Diocese of Pittsburgh from 1959 to 1969. The two became friends in the early 1960s — she would return to Pittsburgh to visit her family.

Williams wrote music for a "jazz mass" in 1970; I've not heard the entire work, but the clips suggest a very time-bound piece with a heavy gospel and blues flavor. Brubeck composed a piece, "To Hope! A Celebration Mass" in 1996 that seems to have a much more classical/European sound to it. Regardless, I've long said that I never want to hear jazz at Mass, now matter how well it is played or composed, for while jazz is very beautiful, powerful, and even spiritual (in the best sense of that word), it's very nature—improvisational, largely profane (in the correct sense of that word)—is not well-suited, in my judgment, to liturgical settings.

But I would also insist that outside of liturgical settings, good jazz is good music, which means it is an artistic expression in keeping with Catholicism, which prizes and recognizes all that is good, true, and beautiful. Personal tastes differ, it goes without saying, and I can only take a little bit of Ornette Coleman or Cecil Taylor before I turn to the Blue Note albums of the 1950s and '60s, or the trio albums of Keith Jarrett, or the recent works of Joshua Redman, Brad Mehldau, Roy Hargrove, and so forth. Great jazz, to my mind and ear, is a marvelous combination of structure and improvisation, where intelligent musical conversation takes place upon a chosen, mutual theme, revealing both the individual thoughts/voices of those participating, as well as the deeper meaning and heart of the piece they are playing. It is a music that recognizes and honors and draws upon tradition while speaking about and within that tradition in the here and now. In my mind, jazz bears a certain analogy to the human condition: we are creatures endowed with great freedom, but freedom is to be exercised in pursuing the good, recognizing and respecting the limits and boundaries of our nature and of creation as established by God the Creator.

Ulanov (b. 1918), who played classical violin (until a car accident made it impossible) and whose father was a well-known concertmaster, converted to Catholicism in 1951 while he was becoming known as one of the finest jazz critics and editors of the time. He had a Ph.D. from Columbia, organized jazz concerts, edited or wrote about jazz for Downbeat, Metronome, Esquire, Vogue, and other magazines. His obituary in the New York Times states, "Mr. Ulanov placed popular culture within the context of American art rather than isolating it as mere entertainment, and wrote some of America's first serious books on jazz. He taught at Princeton University and Barnard College for almost four decades, covering subjects as varied as literature, art, religion and psychology." He wrote books on Duke Ellington, Bing Crosby, Thèrése of Liseux, Alphonsus of Liguori, and Augustine; his 1960 book, Sources & Resources: The Literary Traditions of Christian Humanism, is a remarkable and beautifully written work that has chapters on patristics, Augustinian thought, Boethius, Gregory the Great, St. Bernard, Dante, John of the Cross, Pascal, Newman, and many others. My guess is that Ulanov, who died in 2000, would say that jazz can be Catholic, and I would agree, while always recognizing that the sacred and profane have their proper places and purposes, and that great music, art, and literature will always, in some way, express truth and reveal beauty.

UPDATE: Here is "An Idiosyncratic List of Instrumental Jazz Albums (By Real Jazz Musicians) For People Who Swear or Think They Do Not and Cannot Like Jazz", originally posted on this blog in June 2010 (with a list of recommended classical pieces as well). Highly subjective? Yes. Helpful? I hope so:

• Miles Davis: Kind of Blue. A timeless masterpiece, worthy of the many accolades. You can't go wrong with Miles up until the late 1960s, when things get, um, electrified.

• Keith Jarrett: The Köln Concert. Improvised solo piano of the highest order. Also see Jarrett's later solo album of standards, The Melody At Night, With You, recorded as he was recovering from a lengthy illness.

• Herbie Hancock: Maiden Voyage. A concept album and a tone poem of sorts, focused on oceanic themes. Hancock's Gershwin's World and The New Standard demonstrate how gifted he is at interpreting other composer's music.

• John Coltrane: Ballads. An ideal introduction to Coltrane, whose incredible music can often be dense and intimidating (Ascension, anyone?). The collection, Coltrane for Lovers, is an equally good place to start.

• Jan Garbarek: Twelve Moons. This is recommended for those who like melancholy music with a strong sense of Nordic bleakness. By the way, Garbarek and Jarrett have recorded several albums together, including Belonging, which is an up-tempo, joyous set.

• Sonny Rollins: Saxophone Colossus. There is a lot to choose from with the prolific Rollins, but this classic album has "St. Thomas," a bouncing calypso piece that simply cannot be resisted. A more recent album with the same upbeat sound is Global Warming.

• Brad Mehldau: The Art of the Trio, Vol. 1. It's impossible to do wrong by Mehldau (I've seen him perform live twice, and he is a stunning pianist). For those looking for an eclectic, cross-over sound, check out Largo; for those who like cinematic, epic pieces, find the recently released Highway Rider.

• Joshua Redman: Joshua Redman. Redman's later work has become more dense and intricate, so begin with his debut album, which is big, fun, and more straight forward.

• Bill Evans: Sunday At The Village Vanguard. It's hard to imagine anyone disliking this beautiful set of music from one of the greatest jazz trios. Also see The Best of Bill Evans.

• Wynton Marsalis: Standard Time, Volume 5: The Midnight Blues. Marsalis has a vast body of work, but I think nearly everyone will enjoy this mellow, gorgeous album. And Joe Cool's Blues, a tribute to "Peanut's" music recorded with his father, Ellis, is a very fun disc.

• Branford and Ellis Marsalis. Loved Ones. An emotional, reflective album of duets by saxophone-playing son and pianist-playing father. Melodic and memorable.

• James Carter: Gardenias For Lady Day. This tribute album to Billie Holiday is one of my more "out there" picks, from a venturesome and versatile young saxophonist. Something for everyone.

• Kurt Rosenwinkel. Heartsong. Another gamble, but I come back to this album, by an exceptional young guitarist, on a regular basis. For a more traditional, mellow sound, see Rosenwinkel's recent release, Standards Trio: Reflections.

• Weather Report. Heavy Weather. I'm not much for fusion, but Weather Report is the exception, as their signature tune, "Birdland," demonstrates. The Best of Weather Report also works.

Fr. Federico Lombardi's notice summarizing the Instruction Universae Ecclesia

Also from Vatican Information Service, the notice summarizing the Instruction Universae Ecclesia:

NOTICE ON NEW INSTRUCTION UNIVERSAE ECCLESIA

VATICAN CITY, 13 MAY 2011 (VIS) - Following is the notice, in full, summarizing the new Instruction Universae Ecclesia regarding the application of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" issued by Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office.

 "Instruction on the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum (of 7 July 2007, entered into effect 14 September 2007) was approved by Pope Benedict XVI last 8 April and carries the date of 30 April in liturgical remembrance of Pope St. Pius V.

  The Instruction, called Universae Ecclesiae on the basis of the first words of the text in Latin, comes from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, to which the Pope also entrusted the task of monitoring the observance and application of the Motu Proprio. It therefore bears the signatures of its president, Cardinal William Levada, and secretary, Msgr. Guido Pozzo.

 The document was sent to all the Bishops in the past weeks. Remember that "Instructions clarify the prescripts of laws, elaborating on and determining the methods to be observed in fulfilling them" (CIC, can. 34). As is said in n.12, the Instruction was issued "with the desire to guarantee the proper interpretation and the correct application of the Motu Proprio 'Summorum Pontificum'".

 It is natural that, in its application, the Instruction follow the law contained in the Motu Proprio. The fact that this occurs now, three years later, is easily explained by recalling that in the Pope's Letter accompanying the Motu Proprio, he explicitly said to the Bishops: "I invite you to send to the Holy See an account of your experiences, three years after this Motu Proprio has taken effect. If truly serious difficulties come to light, ways to remedy them can be sought." The letter accompanying the Instruction thus bears with it the fruit of a three year trial of the application of the law, which was foreseen from the beginning.

 The document is presented in plain wording and is easily read. Its Introduction (nos. 1-8) briefly recalls the history of the Roman Missal up to the last edition of John XXIII in 1962 and the new Missal approved by Paul VI in 1970 following the liturgical reform of Vatican Council II. It repeats the fundamental principle that there are "two forms of the Roman Liturgy, defined respectively as extraordinaria and ordinaria: they are two usages of the one Roman Rite, one alongside the other. Both are the expression of the same lex orandi of the Church. On account of its venerable and ancient use, the forma extraordinaria is to be maintained with appropriate honor" (n. 6).

 The purpose of the Motu Proprio, expressed in the following three points, bears repeating: a) to offer to all the faithful the Roman Liturgy in its most ancient usage, considered as a precious treasure to be preserved; b) to effectively guarantee and ensure, for all who ask for it, the use of the forma extraordinaria; and c) to promote reconciliation at the heart of the Church (cf. n. 8).

A brief section of the document (nos. 9-11) recalls the tasks and powers of the Commission Ecclesia Dei, to which the Pope "has conferred ordinary vicarious power" on the subject. Among others, this has two very important consequences. First of all, this Commission can decide on  recourses legitimately sent to it against eventual measures taken by bishops or other Ordinaries that seem to be in conflict with the dispositions of the Motu Proprio (while retaining the possibility of further challenging the decisions of the Commission itself before the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura). Moreover, it falls to the Commission, with the approval of the Congregation for Divine Worship, to take care of eventual editions of liturgical texts for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite (for example, it is to be hoped that, following the document, new saints and new prefaces will be added).

 The properly normative part of the document (nos. 12-35) contains 23 brief points on different topics.

 The competence of diocesan bishops to implement the Motu Proprio is reasserted, with the reminder that in cases of controversy regarding the celebration in the forma extraordinaria, the Commission Ecclesia Dei will adjudicate.

 It clarifies the concept of coetus fidelium stabiliter existens ("where there exists a stable group of faithful"), whose desire to attend the celebration in the forma extraordinaria is to be willingly accepted by pastors. While leaving an evaluation of the number of persons necessary to constitute such a group to the prudent assessment of the pastors, it specifies that it not be necessarily constituted by persons belonging to a single parish, but can be composed of persons coming from different parishes or even different dioceses. Always keeping in mind respect for the widest pastoral needs, the Instruction proposes a spirit of "generous welcome" toward the groups of faithful who request the forma extraordinaria and the priests who occasionally ask to celebrate that form with some faithful.

 Also very important is the clarification (n. 19) according to which the faithful who request the celebration of the forma extraordinaria "must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria" or against the Pope's authority as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church. Such would, in fact, be in obvious contradiction of the purpose of the Motu's "reconciliation".

 Important indications regarding the "qualified priest" to celebrate the forma extraordinaria are also given. Naturally, he should not have impediments from a canonical aspect. He should know Latin sufficiently well and know the rite to be celebrated. Bishops should, therefore, make adequate formation possible in the seminaries to such ends and the possibility is noted, if other qualified priests are unavailable, of the assistance of priests from the Institutes established by the Commission Ecclesia Dei (which normally use the forma extraordinaria).

 The Instruction repeats that every priest, whether diocesan or religious, has the right to celebrate the Mass sine popolo (without a congregation) in the forma extraordinaria if they so desire. Therefore, if it is a celebration with the participation of only one minister, the individual religious do not need the permission of their superiors.

 Always in reference to the forma extraordinaria, there follow norms regarding the liturgical rubrics and use of liturgical books (such as the Ritual, the Pontifical, and the Ceremonial of Bishops), the possibility of using the vernacular for the readings (proclaimed either after the Latin language readings or even in alternative to them in "Low Masses"), the possibility for clerics to use the pre-reform Breviary, and the possibility of celebrating the Sacred Triduum of Holy Week for groups of faithful who request the ancient rite. As regards holy ordination, the use of ancient liturgical books is only permitted in the Institutes that are under the Commission Ecclesia Dei.

 On finishing the letter, one is left with the impression of a well-balanced text that intends to promote - as intended by the Pope - a serene usage of the pre-reform liturgy by priests and faithful who feel its sincere desire for their spiritual well-being: even more, a text that intends to guarantee the legitimacy and efficacy of such usage in keeping with what is reasonably possible. At the same time, the text is animated with trust in the bishops' pastoral wisdom and insists very strongly on a spirit of ecclesial communion that should be present in all - faithful, priests, and bishops - so that the purpose of reconciliation, so evident in the Holy Father's decision, not be hindered or frustrated but fostered and attained".

Universae Ecclesia Instruction on application of "Summorum Pontificum"

Via the Vatican Information Service, here is the full text of the just-released instruction for the application of "Summorum Pontificum":

UNIVERSAE ECCLESIA INSTRUCTION

VATICAN CITY, 13 MAY 2011 (VIS) - Today the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" published the Instruction on the application of Benedict XVI's Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum".

 The document, approved by the Pope, bears the date of 30 April in liturgical remembrance of Pope St. Pius V. It is signed by Cardinal William Levada and Msgr. Guido Pozzo, respectively president and secretary of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei".

 I. Introduction

1. The Apostolic Letter "Summorum Pontificum" of the Sovereign Pontiff Benedict XVI given Motu Proprio on 7 July 2007, which came into effect on 14 September 2007, has made the richness of the Roman Liturgy more accessible to the Universal Church.

2. With this Motu Proprio, the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI promulgated a universal law for the Church, intended to establish new regulations for the use of the Roman Liturgy in effect in 1962.

3. The Holy Father, having recalled the concern of the Sovereign Pontiffs in caring for the Sacred Liturgy and in their recognition of liturgical books, reaffirms the traditional principle, recognised from time immemorial and necessary to be maintained into the future, that "each particular Church must be in accord with the universal Church not only regarding the doctrine of the faith and sacramental signs, but also as to the usages universally handed down by apostolic and unbroken tradition. These are to be maintained not only so that errors may be avoided, but also so that the faith may be passed on in its integrity, since the Church's rule of prayer (lex orandi) corresponds to her rule of belief (lex credendi)."1

4. The Holy Father recalls also those Roman Pontiffs who, in a particular way, were notable in this task, specifically Saint Gregory the Great and Saint Pius V. The Holy Father stresses moreover that, among the sacred liturgical books, the Missale Romanum has enjoyed a particular prominence in history, and was kept up to date throughout the centuries until the time of Blessed Pope John XXIII. Subsequently in 1970, following the liturgical reform after the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI approved for the Church of the Latin rite a new Missal, which was then translated into various languages. In the year 2000, Pope John Paul II promulgated the third edition of this Missal.

5. Many of the faithful, formed in the spirit of the liturgical forms prior to the Second Vatican Council, expressed a lively desire to maintain the ancient tradition. For this reason, Pope John Paul II with a special Indult Quattuor abhinc annos issued in 1984 by the Congregation for Divine Worship, granted the faculty under certain conditions to restore the use of the Missal promulgated by Blessed Pope John XXIII. Subsequently, Pope John Paul II, with the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei of 1988, exhorted the Bishops to be generous in granting such a faculty for all the faithful who requested it. Pope Benedict continues this policy with the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" regarding certain essential criteria for the Usus Antiquior of the Roman Rite, which are recalled here.

6. The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI and the last edition prepared under Pope John XXIII, are two forms of the Roman Liturgy, defined respectively as ordinaria and extraordinaria: they are two usages of the one Roman Rite, one alongside the other. Both are the expression of the same lex orandi of the Church. On account of its venerable and ancient use, the forma extraordinaria is to be maintained with appropriate honor.

7. The Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" was accompanied by a letter from the Holy Father to Bishops, with the same date as the Motu Proprio (7 July 2007). This letter gave further explanations regarding the appropriateness and the need for the Motu Proprio; it was a matter of overcoming a lacuna by providing new norms for the use of the Roman Liturgy of 1962. Such norms were needed particularly on account of the fact that, when the new Missal had been introduced under Pope Paul VI, it had not seemed necessary to issue guidelines regulating the use of the 1962 Liturgy. By reason of the increase in the number of those asking to be able to use the forma extraordinaria, it has become necessary to provide certain norms in this area.

Among the statements of the Holy Father was the following: "There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the Liturgy growth and progress are found, but not a rupture. What was sacred for prior generations, remains sacred and great for us as well, and cannot be suddenly prohibited altogether or even judged harmful."2

8. The Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" constitutes an important expression of the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff and of his munus of regulating and ordering the Church's Sacred Liturgy.3 The Motu Proprio manifests his solicitude as Vicar of Christ and Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church,4  and has the aim of: a) offering to all the faithful the Roman Liturgy in the Usus Antiquior, considered as a precious treasure  to be preserved; b) effectively guaranteeing and ensuring the use of the forma extraordinaria for all who ask for it, given that the use of the 1962 Roman Liturgy is a faculty generously granted for the good of the faithful and therefore is to be interpreted in a sense favourable to the faithful who are its principal addressees; c) promoting reconciliation at the heart of the Church.

II. The Responsibilities of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei"

9. The Sovereign Pontiff has conferred upon the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" ordinary vicarious power for the matters within its competence, in a particular way for monitoring the observance and application of the provisions of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" (cf. art. 12).

10. § 1. The Pontifical Commission exercises this power, beyond the faculties previously granted by Pope John Paul II and confirmed by Pope Benedict XVI (cf. Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", artt. 11-12), also by means of the power to decide upon recourses legitimately sent to it, as hierarchical Superior, against any possible singular administrative provision of an Ordinary which appears to be contrary to the Motu Proprio. § 2. The decrees by which the Pontifical Commission decides recourses may be challenged ad normam iuris before the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura.

11. After having received the approval from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" will have the task of looking after future editions of liturgical texts pertaining to the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite.

III. Specific Norms

12. Following upon the inquiry made among the Bishops of the world, and with the desire to guarantee the proper interpretation and the correct application of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", this Pontifical Commission, by virtue of the authority granted to it and the faculties which it enjoys, issues this Instruction according to can. 34 of the Code of Canon Law.

The Competence of Diocesan Bishops 13. Diocesan Bishops, according to Canon Law, are to monitor liturgical matters in order to guarantee the common good and to ensure that everything is proceeding in peace and serenity in their Dioceses5, always in agreement with the mens of the Holy Father clearly expressed by the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum".6 In cases of controversy or well-founded doubt about the celebration in the forma extraordinaria, the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei will adjudicate.

14. It is the task of the Diocesan Bishop to undertake all necessary measures to ensure respect for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, according to the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum".

The coetus fidelium (cf. Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", art. 5 § 1) 15. A coetus fidelium ("group of the faithful") can be said to be stabiliter existens ("existing in a stable manner"), according to the sense of art. 5 § 1 of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", when it is constituted by some people of an individual parish who, even after the publication of the Motu Proprio, come together by reason of their veneration for the Liturgy in the Usus Antiquior, and who ask that it might be celebrated in the parish church or in an oratory or chapel; such a coetus ("group") can also be composed of persons coming from different parishes or dioceses, who gather together in a specific parish church or in an oratory or chapel for this purpose.

16. In the case of a priest who presents himself occasionally in a parish church or an oratory with some faithful, and wishes to celebrate in the forma extraordinaria, as foreseen by articles 2 and 4 of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", the pastor or rector of the church, or the priest responsible, is to permit such a celebration, while respecting the schedule of liturgical celebrations in that same church.

17. § 1. In deciding individual cases, the pastor or the rector, or the priest responsible for a church, is to be guided by his own prudence, motivated by pastoral zeal and a spirit of generous welcome. § 2. In cases of groups which are quite small, they may approach the Ordinary of the place to identify a church in which these faithful may be able to come together for such celebrations, in order to ensure easier participation and a more worthy celebration of the Holy Mass.

18. Even in sanctuaries and places of pilgrimage the possibility to celebrate in the forma extraordinaria is to be offered to groups of pilgrims who request it (cf. Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", art. 5 § 3), if there is a qualified priest.

19. The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.

Sacerdos idoneus ("Qualified Priest") (cf. Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", art 5 § 4) 20. With respect to the question of the necessary requirements for a priest to be held idoneus ("qualified") to celebrate in the forma extraordinaria, the following is hereby stated:  a) Every Catholic priest who is not impeded by Canon Law7 is to be considered idoneus ("qualified") for the celebration of the Holy Mass in the forma extraordinaria. b) Regarding the use of the Latin language, a basic knowledge is necessary, allowing the priest to pronounce the words correctly and understand their meaning. c) Regarding knowledge of the execution of the Rite, priests are presumed to be qualified who present themselves spontaneously to celebrate the forma extraordinaria, and have celebrated it previously.

21. Ordinaries are asked to offer their clergy the possibility of acquiring adequate preparation for celebrations in the forma extraordinaria. This applies also to Seminaries, where future priests should be given proper formation, including study of Latin8 and, where pastoral needs suggest it, the opportunity to learn the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite.

22. In Dioceses without qualified priests, Diocesan Bishops can request assistance from priests of the Institutes erected by the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", either to the celebrate the forma extraordinaria or to teach others how to celebrate it.

23. The faculty to celebrate sine populo (or with the participation of only one minister) in the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite is given by the Motu Proprio to all priests, whether secular or religious (cf. Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", art. 2). For such celebrations therefore, priests, by provision of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", do not require any special permission from their Ordinaries or superiors.

Liturgical and Ecclesiastical Discipline 24. The liturgical books of the forma extraordinaria are to be used as they are. All those who wish to celebrate according to the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite must know the pertinent rubrics and are obliged to follow them correctly.

25. New saints and certain of the new prefaces can and ought to be inserted into the 1962 Missal9, according to provisions which will be indicated subsequently.

26. As foreseen by article 6 of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum", the readings of the Holy Mass of the Missal of 1962 can be proclaimed either solely in the Latin language, or in Latin followed by the vernacular or, in Low Masses, solely in the vernacular.

27. With regard to the disciplinary norms connected to celebration, the ecclesiastical discipline contained in the Code of Canon Law of 1983 applies.

 28. Furthermore, by virtue of its character of special law, within its own area, the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" derogates from those provisions of law, connected with the sacred Rites, promulgated from 1962 onwards and incompatible with the rubrics of the liturgical books in effect in 1962.

Confirmation and Holy Orders 29. Permission to use the older formula for the rite of Confirmation was confirmed by the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" (cf. art. 9 § 2). Therefore, in the forma extraordinaria, it is not necessary to use the newer formula of Pope Paul VI as found in the Ordo Confirmationis.

30. As regards tonsure, minor orders and the subdiaconate, the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" does not introduce any change in the discipline of the Code of Canon Law of 1983; consequently, in Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life which are under the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", one who has made solemn profession or who has been definitively incorporated into a clerical institute of apostolic life, becomes incardinated as a cleric in the institute or society upon ordination to the diaconate, in accordance with canon 266 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law.

31. Only in Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life which are under the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, and in those which use the liturgical books of the forma extraordinaria, is the use of the Pontificale Romanum of 1962 for the conferral of minor and major orders permitted.

Breviarium Romanum 32.       Art. 9 § 3 of the Motu Proprio "Summorum Pontificum" gives clerics the faculty to use the Breviarium Romanum in effect in 1962, which is to be prayed entirely and in the Latin language.

The Sacred Triduum 33. If there is a qualified priest, a coetus fidelium ("group of faithful"), which follows the older liturgical tradition, can also celebrate the Sacred Triduum in the forma extraordinaria. When there is no church or oratory designated exclusively for such celebrations, the parish priest or Ordinary, in agreement with the qualified priest, should find some arrangement favourable to the good of souls, not excluding the possibility of a repetition of the celebration of the Sacred Triduum in the same church.

The Rites of Religious Orders 34.       The use of the liturgical books proper to the Religious Orders which were in effect in 1962 is permitted.

Pontificale Romanum and the Rituale Romanum 35.  The use of the Pontificale Romanum, the Rituale Romanum, as well as the Caeremoniale Episcoporum in effect in 1962, is permitted, in keeping with n. 28 of this Instruction, and always respecting n. 31 of the same Instruction. _______________ 1. BENEDICTUS XVI, Litterae Apostolicae Summorum Pontificum motu proprio datae, I, AAS 99 (2007) 777; cf. Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, third edition 2002, n. 397. 2. BENEDICTUS XVI, Epistola ad Episcopos ad producendas Litteras Apostolicas motu proprio datas, de Usu Liturgiae Romanae Instaurationi anni 1970 praecedentis, AAS 99 (2007) 798. 3. Cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 838 §1 and §2. 4. Cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 331. 5. Cf. Code of Canon Law, Canons 223 § 2 or 838 §1 and §4. 6. BENEDICTUS XVI, Epistola ad Episcopos ad producendas Litteras Apostolicas motu proprio datas, de Usu Liturgiae Romanae Instaurationi anni 1970 praecedentis, AAS 99 (2007) 799. 7. Cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 900 § 2. 8. Cf. Code of Canon Law, Canon 249; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, 36; Declaration Optatum totius, 13. 9. BENEDICTUS XVI, Epistola ad Episcopos ad producendas Litteras Apostolicas motu proprio datas, de Usu Liturgiae Romanae Instaurationi anni 1970 praecedentis, AAS 99 (2007) 797. COM-ED/                                                                             VIS 20110513 (2680)

Fr. Andrew Apostoli's answers to questions about the Third Secret

From Appendix D of Fatima For Today: The Urgent Marian Message of Hope, by Fr. Andrew Apostoli, C.F.R.:

The Third Secret was first made public at the Beatification Mass of Francisco and Jacinta Marto on May 13, 2000, in the Cova da Iria where the secret was originally revealed to the three children on July 13, 1917. Unfortunately, controversy created by certain objections surrounded the Third Secret almost from the moment it became public. We will look at each main objection separately, and offer a response to each.

Objection: The original Third Secret was written on one sheet of paper.

Many clerics who were familiar with the original text, including bishops who worked with popes John XXIII and Paul VI, said that the Third Secret was written on a single sheet of paper (e.g., Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, who read the Third Secret with Pope John XXIII). [1]

The controversy came about when on June 26, 2000, the Vatican released a copy of Sister Lucia's handwritten text in a four-page format. [2] Though there are several possible ways a single sheet of paper can be turned into more than one page (written on both sides, folded and written on multiple sides, etc.) or copied onto more than one page, some critics said that the Vatican copy could not have been made from the authentic text and that some other document exists that contains the real Third Secret.

The Vatican copy of Sister Lucia's handwritten manuscript appears in the document The Message of Fatima prepared by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In the introduction, the secretary of the Congregation at the time, Archbishop Bertone, stated: "There is only one manuscript, which is here reproduced photostatically." Sister Lucia herself confirmed the validity of the Vatican text. Archbishop Bertone and Bishop Seraphim de Sousa of Leiria met with Sister Lucia at her Carmelite convent in Coimbra, Portugal, on April 27, 2000. The Archbishop presented two envelopes to Sister Lucia. The first or outer envelope contained the second envelope, which held the Third Secret. Touching it with her fingers, Sister Lucia said, "This is my letter." Then, while reading it, she said, "This is my writing." [3] When asked if this document was the one and only Third Secret, Sister Lucia answered, "Yes, this is the Third Secret, and I never wrote any other." [4]

We have additional proof from Sister Lucia that the photocopy of the Third Secret was authentic. She met again with Archbishop Bertone on November 17, 2001. A communique about that meeting carried this most important point:

With reference to the third part of the secret of Fatima, [Sister Lucia] affirmed that she had attentively read and meditated upon the booklet published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith [The Message of Fatima] and confirmed everything that was written there. To whoever imagines that some part of the secret has been hidden, she replied: "everything has been published; no secret remains." To those who speak and write of new revelations, she said: "There is no truth in this. If I had received new revelations, I would have told no one, but I would have communicated them directly to the Holy Father." [5]

Objection: The text of the Third Secret released by the Vatican contains no words attributed to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Read the entire Appendix on Ignatius Insight...

Fr. Andrew Apostoli on "The Son Rise Morning Show", Friday, May 13th...

... on Sacred Heart Radio to talk about his book, Fatima For Today: The Urgent Marian Message of Hope (Ignatius Press, 2010; also available as an Electronic Book Download and a Downloadable Audio File).

Fr. Apostoli will be on at about 6:35 am ET. The show can be heard online via the Sacred Heart Radio website.