Posts tagged Catechism of the Catholic Church
Part III of Archbishop Hepworth’s Interview with LifeSiteNews.com
Mar 10th
Here’s an excerpt. There’s more from Patrick Craine’s interview here.
“Homosexual sexuality played out in a same-sex relationship is, in fact, totally destructive of the heart of Christian teaching because it’s destructive of God as Creator, it’s destructive of God as Teacher, and it’s destructive of God as Redeemer,” he said.
“There is no space in Christianity for brute force condemnation, hate, and all that,” he continued. But, he said, “there is space within Christianity for absolutely, clearly teaching what Christ teaches. And if there’s one thing the New Testament and the Old Testament are clear on, it’s homosexuality.”
The archbishop spoke with LSN on Friday in Halifax, Nova Scotia before he addressed the local TAC parish, St. Aidan’s, about the Vatican’s recent offer to Anglicans for reunion with Rome. He began a worldwide tour over four weeks ago in order to encourage members of the TAC to accept the offer.
Archbishop Hepworth praised the treatment of homosexuality in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is primarily dealt with in paragraphs 2357-2359. “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is absolutely perfect,” he said. “It teaches what the Church teaches, and it then goes on to teach us a pastoral approach.”
The Church has always taught that homosexuals “are blessed in other ways, are in fulfillment in other ways,” the Archbishop said. “We’ve got to be game to teach that. … There are compensations that God gives for [disorder].”
“We just need to be much much more positive. If we simply condemn [homosexuality], we won’t win, and we’re not winning,” he continued. “But we’ve also been very reticent to teach exactly how God is present within marriage. In fact, most couples think God has little to do with marriage.”
“I think we need to teach more deeply about that,” he added.
The archbishop described the union of husband and wife as “God’s pathway for the world, in which the Creative God is closest to us.” True marriage, he said, is “a relationship open to creation, open to love, which is the love of God, which is the Spirit. This, in fact, is where God has chosen to dwell – within the family.”
He praised the pope for allowing Anglicans who reunite with the Church to continue ordaining married men because, he said, this “means there’s a family at the heart of the parish, in all its frailty.”
Unofficial Text of Cardinal Levada’s Address
Mar 8th
The Salt + Light blog has an unofficial transcription of the talk (“Five Hundred Years After St. John Fisher: Benedict’s Ecumenical Initiatives to Anglicans”) which Cardinal Levada delivered on Saturday evening at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. Here are some excerpts. My emphases.
The recent Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus, establishing—I don’t need to translate this, I suppose, it won’t come out so well in translation: “groups of Anglicans”—establishing personal ordinariates for groups of Anglicans seeking full communion with the Catholic Church, was not created in a vacuum. For many Anglicans, the possibility opened by this initiative has seemed to be a logical development of the official dialogues between the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church during the 45 year period since the end of the Second Vatican Council. Any discussion of Pope Benedict’s initiatives regarding Anglicans might therefore begin with a glance at this important history.
Cardinal Levada presents the Apostolic Constitution as the natural outgrowth of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) dialogue, of which he proceeds to provide a general outline. He recounts the several stages of the ARCIC process, set against the backdrop of the collapse of Catholic Faith and Apostolic Order in the Anglican Communion, of which women’s ordination and the homosexual movement are perhaps the most notable symptoms.
For Catholic Anglicans, he hits the nail squarely on the head.
The fundamental issue here, as many have noted, is the question of authority. This may be briefly summed up in the following two points. Does the revelation of God in Jesus Christ and in Scripture intend to let us know God’s will in a way that requires our obedience (for example, the imitation of Christ, the Ten Commandments)? And secondly, has God, in Christ, left His Church, founded on the Apostles, an authority by which it can assure that can know the correct meaning of the revelation, amidst sometimes varying human interpretations (for example, the sensus fidei, the ecumenical councils, the Magisterium of the Pope and bishops)?
The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion have found the expression of the Church’s Magisterium in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “the most complete and authentic expression and application of the catholic faith in this moment of time” (as they put it in their original petition for corporate reunion).
Pope John Paul’s Apostolic Constitution Fidei depositum promulgating the Catechism, points out that, “It is meant to support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy desire for the unity of all Christians, showing carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the catholic faith.”
As we met with Anglican consultants in the preparation of Anglicanorum coetibus, these bishops and theologians themselves proposed the Catechism of the Catholic Church as the norm of faith for the corporate groups of Anglicans who might avail themselves this new instrument for full corporate union with the Catholic Church. Thus, I would also characterize the Catechism as an ecumenical initiative of Pope Benedict XVI and of his predecessor.
As Cardinal Levada notes, far from the Catholic Church imposing the Catechism on incoming Anglicans, it was the Anglican inquirers themselves, chief among them the bishops of the TAC, that suggested the text as a doctrinal standard for any future reunion. In Anglicanorum Coetibus, the Holy See is simply echoing the words of the Portsmouth Letter of the TAC College of Bishops.
Turning to the Anglican Communion, we can see the many elements that impel toward full unity: regard for the unifying role of the episcopate, an esteem for the sacramental life, a similar sense of catholicity as a mark of the Church, and a vibrant missionary impulse, to name but a few. These are by no means absent from the Catholic Church, but the particular manner in which they are found in Anglicanism adds to the Catholic understanding of a common gift. These considerations help us appreciate the Catholic Church’s insistence that there is no opposition between ecumenical action and the preparation of people for full reception into Catholic communion.
I like this! As Anglicanorum Coetibus itself states, the “liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion [soon to reside] within the Catholic Church” are “a precious gift nourishing the faith of the members of the Ordinariate and as a treasure to be shared.” The particular gift of the Anglican tradition will serve to enhance the common gift of revealed truth already subsisting in the Catholic Church– but imperfectly or incompletely expressed so long as brethren are separated from the One Fold.
Indeed, the first ecumenical action logically leads to the second: reception into full communion. Unitatis Redintegratio, that is, the decree on ecumenism, asserts that almost all people long for the one visible church of God, that truly Universal Church whose mission is to convert the whole world to the Gospel so that the world may be saved to the glory of God.
The Apostolic Constitution is the consummation of the Anglican-Roman Catholic conversation. The end of genuine ecumenical dialogue is reincorporation into the fullness of communion with the Successor of St. Peter and the bishops in communion with him.
This is the first time that the Catholic Church has reached out in response to men and women of Western Christianity who desire full communion and accorded them not just a place among many, but a distinctive place. This is not surprising. Twenty-eight years ago, the great historian of ecumenism, Fr. Yves Congar, wrote that if we take seriously that the Holy Spirit has been working among our fellow Christians, we have to take seriously the ways they express their beliefs. When their particular expression of faith adds harmony to ours, and ours add harmony to theirs, the logical step is to pass from talking longingly about unity to living in unity, a unity whose essence is revealed in harmonious diversity. The unity Christ desires is visible; it is not elusive or even unreachable. Likewise, the totality that Christ desires is visible. These assertions lie behind the famous teachings of Lumen gentium that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church, but it is equally true to say that the unity Christ desires for His Church can always be added to, just as there is room for another instrument in the orchestra. The totality that Christ desires does exist in terms of the elements of sanctification and truth that the Church possesses, but the sharing of those elements, then the manner of celebrating them, is still far from complete. We sometimes do not know the value of what we possess and we need the spirit-filled insights of others to recognize the treasures we have.
While taking care to disabuse his audience of too strict a comparison between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Anglican personal ordinariates (which are situated firmly in the tradition and law of the Latin Rite), Cardinal Levada makes it clear that the new structures are revolutionary in the life of the Catholic Church. The personal ordinariates facilitate the reunion of Anglican groups which will retain their distinctive gifts and corporate identity, sharing the elements of sanctification and truth in ways that will strengthen the witness of the Church in the world.
“You expect me to believe that?”
Feb 8th
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, “unfailingly adheres to this faith.”
890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:
891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine “for belief as being divinely revealed,” and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.” This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful “are to adhere to it with religious assent” which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
From a comment on a blog discussing Anglicanorum coetibus:
“Papal Infallibility for me is the dogma that prevents me from joining the Roman Catholic Church.”
In my work with potential converts to the Catholic faith, I can’t remember how many times someone has told me, “I just can’t accept ______” (fill in the blank). It might be the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, papal infallibility, transubstantiation, or some other Catholic doctrine. My response is always, “Tell me what you think the Church teaches about that.” When they tell me, it’s not surprising they’re having trouble accepting it. I wouldn’t be able to, either.
Taking just the matter of papal infallibility, it’s remarkable how many people confuse it with impeccability, thinking we’re claiming that the Pope can’t sin. Or they imagine that it applies to every single thing he says, and every random thought that crosses his mind. Frequently, people have a too-narrow idea of it, not understanding that it belongs to the whole Church, and flows from an adherence to the Magisterium.
Some people think it gives a kind of super-power to the Pope, when in reality it limits him simply to teaching the truth.
So if someone says they can’t accept infallibility, or the Marian dogmas, or any other aspect of the Faith, let’s make sure what they “can’t accept” is what the Church really teaches.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Papal Infallibility, and the TAC
Jan 15th
Writing for the National Catholic Register, Pat Archbold addresses the issue of papal infallibility as a stumbling block to the acceptance of Anglicanorum Coetibus on the part of many Anglicans.
A hermeneutic is a hard thing to shake.
We all have our own hermeneutic, a lens through which we view the world, which can either serve to distort or clarify. The impression that I have is that William Lind may be wearing bifocals. He sees certain things with clarity while other things are distorted.
Lind writes at The American Conservative about the disintegration of the Anglican Communion and how Pope Benedict’s offer to Anglicans might be the first step in a “counter-reformation.”
With delightfully witty tone, he decries the abandonment of orthodoxy in favor of a wholly new religion of its own invention.
Starting sometime in the 1960s, God’s frozen people melted, generating the mother of all theological mud puddles. From the abandonment of Thomas Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer to the introduction of priestesses in the 1970s and the ongoing election of homosexual bishops, the Episcopal Church forsook traditional Christian doctrine in favor of its own invented religion.
He excitedly details the Pope’s offer to Anglicans and acknowledges the Pope’s shrewdness in creating separate ordinariates to shield them from the whims of liberal bishops and the bad taste of the “snakebelly-low post-Vatican II vernacular Roman Mass.”
While Lind is delighted with much of what is in Anglicanorum Coetibus, he worries about one giant fly in the ointment that might doom the entire enterprise to failure, the Catholic Faith.
One problem is likely to be the doctrine of papal infallibility, a 19th-century Roman innovation. The Apostolic Constitution stipulates that Anglicans would have to accept “The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church as the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the ordinariate.” This could mean accepting papal infallibility as expressed in the catechism, and if Rome remains inflexible on that point, Pope Benedict’s initiative seems likely to fail.
Leaving aside his ahistorical assertions, Lind sees papal infallibility as an obstacle to unity. Apparently lost on Lind is that papal infallibility as exercised by the Pope is the source of unity. Without the office of the Pope and the necessity of visible communion with it, all of Christianity would be the giant “theological mud puddle” that he rightly derides in his own Communion. The difference then would be that there would be nowhere to turn to achieve the unity and orthodoxy that he desires.
With no wish to sound harsh (I don’t mind being harsh I just don’t want to sound that way), we don’t want any Anglican that is hung up on Papal infallibility. If you desire the full faith, the faith as taught by the Apostles and protected by the Holy Spirit, come on over. If you wish to remain a de-facto Protestant, stay put. We have enough de-facto Protestants in the Catholic Church as it is.
Writing in the context of a Forward in Faith parish in the Church of England, Fr. Giles Pinnock, SSC, Parish Priest of St. Mary-the-Virgin, Kenton, has identified other “hang-ups” for some of his people.
As the vicar of an Anglo-Catholic parish that is presently discussing why we should respond positively to Anglicanorum coetibus, and why some might not want to, I can confirm that papal infallibility is a stumbling block for some.
As are inter alia, in no particular order:
- Humanae vitae
- the Marian dogmas – ie, the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception – ie, ‘how much of all this do we have to believe?’
- didn’t the Pope support Spain against England in past wars (I’m not kidding)
- Bloody Mary’s persecution vs Good Queen Bess putting it all back together (again, I’m not kidding)
- waiting for General Synod to come up with a better way for us to avoid women bishops (missing entirely the point of Anglicanorum coetibus)
- ‘our’ church buildings – although I do appreciate the wrench that many would experience in leaving for the last time a building in which they may have been baptized and married, seen children and grandchildren baptized and married, and from which parents may have been buried
- the Reformation had to happen because of the abuses of the monasteries
- humane and pastoral Anglicanism over against harsh dogmatic Rome
- … I could go on …
These are all fig leaves behind which hides an innate and visceral anti-Catholicism into which generations of Anglicans – particularly English Anglicans – have been indoctrinated in support of an English (or Anglophile) Anglican and anti-Catholic self-identification that is so deep set that it would in many apparently require genetic resequencing to overcome.
While many individual Anglicans — even within the Traditional Anglican Communion — may have “hang-ups” over papal infallibility or the acceptance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church as a doctrinal standard, a couple of points ought to be firmly established with respect to the doctrine of the TAC bishops themselves.
In the next several days, the Primate of the TAC will release via The Anglo-Catholic several important documents. For the first time, the entire text of the October 2007 “Portsmouth Letter” (in which the TAC appealed to the Holy See for a means to achieve corporate reunion) will be available to the general public. As this document was part of an ongoing dialogue between the TAC episcopate and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to this point, only brief excerpts have been publicized. The release of the entire letter will make very clear the unambiguous position of the TAC.
From one of the excerpts already released, it is known that our bishops have proposed the Catechism as “the most perfect expression of the Catholic faith in the world today,” a faith which they “aspire to hold and teach.” Some have tried to rationalize and “spin” this confession. Perhaps the curious phrase “the most perfect expression” provides some wiggle room? Certainly the TAC bishops could not have meant to accept the recent Marian dogmas or those of papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction?
The coming days will make these questions crystal clear. But for those holding out for wiggle room, I’ll go ahead and burst their bubble. After all, though some have endeavored to ignore the facts, the reality is no secret.
Anglicanorum Coetibus informs us:
§5 The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate.
There is a very simple reason for this requirement in the Apostolic Constitution. The bishops of the TAC themselves proposed the Catechism as the doctrinal standard for a future corporate reunion — and their confession of the doctrines contained therein was unconditional.
Far from the admission of any wiggle room, the full text of the “Portsmouth Letter” makes absolutely clear that our bishops assent, not to the teaching of the Catechism generally, but to specific doctrines — indeed to those doctrines upon which all of the others hang. The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is accepted without reservation. The ministry of the Successor of St. Peter is confessed in terms that would be familiar to a father of the First Vatican Council!
Not only did the TAC bishops assembled — unanimously — approve the text of the letter to the Holy See, the entire college signed their confession in a solemn act. Here is what the same Catechism says of a solemn oath:
2150 The second commandment forbids false oaths. Taking an oath or swearing is to take God as witness to what one affirms. It is to invoke the divine truthfulness as a pledge of one’s own truthfulness. An oath engages the Lord’s name. “You shall fear the LORD your God; you shall serve him, and swear by his name.”
2151 Rejection of false oaths is a duty toward God. As Creator and Lord, God is the norm of all truth. Human speech is either in accord with or in opposition to God who is Truth itself. When it is truthful and legitimate, an oath highlights the relationship of human speech with God’s truth. A false oath calls on God to be witness to a lie.
2152 A person commits perjury when he makes a promise under oath with no intention of keeping it, or when after promising on oath he does not keep it. Perjury is a grave lack of respect for the Lord of all speech. Pledging oneself by oath to commit an evil deed is contrary to the holiness of the divine name.
This solemn oath of the TAC bishops is irrevocable. And from October 2007, the Catechism of the Catholic Church has been, at least, the de facto official doctrine of the Traditional Anglican Communion.
As in Fr. Pinnock’s Church of England congregation, there are not a few of our people in the TAC who look forward to union with Rome and ask, “How much of this will I have to believe?” Let us be clear. Whatever happens in the coming months, the decisions to be made are essentially ecclesiastical politics; the doctrinal questions have long been decided. Our bishops have not confessed the Catechism of the Catholic Church with reservations; the Catechism, in its entirety, is commended to the faithful of the TAC by our whole episcopate. This is faith that we “aspire to hold” and that our bishops are pledged to teach.
For those communicants of the TAC who are yet reluctant to accept unfamiliar or difficult doctrines on the authority of the Roman Pontiff, what of your own bishops? You believe them to be the successors to the Apostles and you have a duty to heed the call of your shepherds. These same bishops believe themselves to be led by the Holy Ghost, now to set aside the contentions of the past and to sacrifice for the unity of Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. You may not be persuaded by the Bishop of Rome, but will you reject even your own shepherds? Heed the voice of the Spirit speaking through them “ut omnes unum sint.”
Ecclesiastical Sundries
Jan 4th
- Fr. Hunwicke speculates that the Catechism of the Catholic Church was specified as the doctrinal standard for the personal ordinariates as a nod toward the affection Anglican Catholics have always had for the East. A good thought, but the answer is much simpler. The CCC was defined as “the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate” because this was the formulary solemnly subscribed by the bishops of the TAC and professed in their October 2007 “Portsmouth Letter” to the Holy See. See this comment. More on that later. I would also observe that, whatever happens in the synodical processes of the ACA/TAC in coming months, no communicant of the TAC will be asked to accept any doctrine that has arguably not already been the official teaching of our bishops since 2007.
- The Turks want the relics of St. Nicholas of Myra returned to Demre in (what is now) Turkey. Uh, no. Perhaps y’all could return the Hagia Sophia or repent of the Armenian Genocide? I won’t hold my breath.
- Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, the Pope’s personal secretary, has visited the mentally unstable woman who attacked the Holy Father (and seriously injured Roger Cardinal Etchegaray) during the processional at Christmas Eve Mass.
Outside the Truth No Union Can Ever Be Attained
Dec 21st
Yesterday was the sixtieth anniversary of the publication of the Instruction On the “Ecumenical Movement” by the Holy Office (as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was formally known). Addressed to Catholic ordinaries of places, the Instruction laid out the principles by which the Catholic Church should approach the matter of ecumenism. Within a few short years of the publication this Instruction, these sound principles would largely be abandoned, giving way to the empty “ecumenism” of the progressives with its scandalous interfaith gatherings, ambiguous joint statements, and interminable ‘dialogue’.
In stark contrast to the false ecumenism born of the ’spirit of Vatican II’, through his Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, the Holy Father seeks to attain the proper end of the only genuine ecumenism: the reconciliation of separated brethren with the Church on the basis of Catholic Truth.
Therefore the whole and entire Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained: by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding the nature and way of justification, the constitution of the Church, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ. It should be made clear to them that, in returning to the Church, they will lose nothing of that good which by the grace of God has hitherto been implanted in them, but that it will rather be supplemented and completed by their return. However, one should not speak of this in such a way that they will imagine that in returning to the Church they are bringing to it something substantial which it has hitherto lacked. It will be necessary to say these things clearly and openly, first because it is the truth that they themselves are seeking, and moreover because outside the truth no true union can ever be attained.
Returning Anglicans are called to embrace the Catholic Faith in its fullness. Article I, §5 of Anglicanorum Coetibus states, “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate.” While “the liturgical, spiritual and pastoral traditions of the Anglican Communion” are recognized as “a precious gift” and “a treasure to be shared,” we must not imagine that these can be set up against the Faith expressed in the Catechism. Our Anglican tradition must be interpreted in light of Catholic Truth (as Anglo-Catholics have always sought to do) and, where elements of that tradition can not be reconciled with the Faith of the Universal Church, those elements must be finally cast aside.
As Archbishop Hepworth has noted, while the Apostolic Constitution does not erect a ritual church for incoming Anglicans, the personal ordinariates do indeed look very much like one. As we have long desired, Anglicanorum Coetibus provides for traditionalist Anglicans a safe haven, a refuge where our venerable traditions can flourish in the heart of the Church, free from the interference of ofttimes ignorant, indifferent, or even hostile local bishops. The prerogatives accorded the new ordinariates are truly extraordinary (the right of the Governing Council to submit a terna for the appointment of a new ordinary, for example). We will be exceptional in our married clergy, our venerable Anglican liturgical forms, and the spirituality of the Book of Common Prayer. But while the sixteenth century reformers added much of value to our tradition (e.g. the central role of Holy Scripture, an emphasis on patristic teaching, &c.), the excesses and corruptions of the Protestant Reformation must finally be purged. We will be exceptional in our Anglican expression of the Faith, but we will not have license to contradict it.
Prior to the publication of Anglicanorum Coetibus, there were those of us Anglicans who conceived of corporate reunion in terms of so-called “intercommunion,” a communio in sacris without assent to a common faith. In this way, they imagined, we could enjoy the benefits of communion — the sharing from a common altar and the “legitimacy” guaranteed by our official recognition by Rome — without having to officially accept the historically contentious doctrines of papal infallibility, universal jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the recent Marian dogmas. Those who accepted these peculiarly Roman doctrines as “pious opinions” and those who rejected them as heresies could continue to coexist in the same church; we could have our doctrinal cake and eat it too.
The Church is calling us not to the illusion of intercommunion but to a genuine communion, a union in the fullness of the Catholic Faith. Those who avail themselves of Anglicanorum Coetibus must not do so with mental reservations. For many, no doubt, some of the doctrines taught in the Catechism may prove difficult. Study, reflection, and prayer — time — will be necessary for many to come to terms with these doctrines. Thankfully, the Church does not bid us to understand these teachings before we can enter into her communion. We are asked only to trust in the Church, to believe in these doctrines on her authority to propose them as revealed by God.
It is necessary to say these things clearly and openly, first because it is the truth we are seeking, and moreover because outside the truth no true union can ever be attained.
H/t to Rorate Caeli for noting the anniversary of this Instruction.
