29th June: Feast of SS Peter & Paul

29th June: Feast of SS Peter & Paul

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation? Or distress? Or famine? … For I am certain of this; that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.          (St Paul : Romans: 8:35)

From the Gospel of St Matthew…

At that time, Jesus came into the quarters of Caesarea Philippi, and He asked His disciples, saying Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? But they said “Some, John the Baptist, and other some, Elias, and others, Jeremias or one of the prophets. Jesus saith to them: but whom do you say that I am? 

St Peter
Simon Peter answered, and said: “Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.”

And Jesus answering said to them: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but My Father Who is in heaven: and I say to thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and to thee  will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.  (Matthew: 16:13-19)



This is a Feast Day thread with a difference.  It is posted to mark the Feast, with bloggers encouraged to discuss all and any relevant issues connected with this holy day, as usual,  and to post favourite prayers, hymns, stories, even jokes (in the “good clean fun” category). That’s what we normally do on Feast days. 

In addition, however, this time, I wish to draw attention to the fact that a home-schooling family asked me if it would be possible to draw on the great knowledge of the Faith displayed by our bloggers, to answer some questions about key teachings on this centrally important Feast of the Church;  the doctrine of indulgences was mentioned since they’d been learning about indulgences in a lesson recently – and, naturally, I said “yes, of course”.  Ask away! 

I will email the link to that family and then it’s over to our committed team of bloggers to deliver the goods and services… 

Happy Feast day to all readers, bloggers and visitors to this site! 

Comments (61)

  • RCA Victor

    The reactions to this Communique seem to be all over the map. Was talking with several people after Mass this morning who were overjoyed at Bp. Fellay’s firmness, but who also didn’t know what, if anything, elicited this statement. Once again, I hope some background information emerges sooner than later.

    July 3, 2016 at 11:46 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      That is the worrying thing – I experienced it myself after Mass yesterday – that the default position of too many people seems to be that they are very pleased to keep things as they are. That’s not healthy.

      July 4, 2016 at 10:19 am
  • RCA Victor


    I think it’s important to make a distinction between wanting to keep things as they are vs. wanting to make sure that the Society is not fooled into making a bad deal. The people I’ve talked to and listened to fall into the latter category – that is, they look forward to regularisation, but not at the expense of the very existence and mission of the Society. However, it sounds as though your ears have picked up more of the former category.

    I myself was not concerned that our leadership would be lured by the Nattering Nabobs of Nincompoopery into some obscure trap, but clearly the anxiety level has been high on that account, among many.

    Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see how Rome reacts to this. Francis has already muttered some rant about “ultra-conservatives,” but it wasn’t clear if he was referring to the SSPX (probably not, since the SSPX has no earthly power to “slow him down” – http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/f097d071452519419beb6dd2f9f34310-609.html

    July 4, 2016 at 5:11 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      You are right in that the people I’m thinking of are the type who are quite determined that no deal will ever be good enough!

      As for the non-SSPX “ultra conservatives” – where are they? Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider seem to have gone to ground. A very loud silence all around. I’m told that Cardinal Sarah is speaking out all the time but when I Googled his name, the last report is dated May.

      So, what, pray tell me, is going on?

      July 4, 2016 at 7:29 pm
  • RCA Victor July 4, 2016 at 7:59 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      Well what WOULD have been going on if I’d not replaced your photo, is that you and I might have been landed with a copyright law suit!

      The clue was in the name of the company right across the image 😀

      As for the answer to the question – who – on this earth – knows? Things are just SOoooooo bad now…


      July 4, 2016 at 9:02 pm
      • RCA Victor


        Sorry about that! More chocolate in post as we speak….

        July 4, 2016 at 11:39 pm
  • Christina

    “I have this theory that chocolate slows down the ageing process…It may not be true, but do I dare to take the chance?”

    July 4, 2016 at 11:03 pm
    • editor


      Are you mad, woman? Of COURSE you take the chance!

      July 4, 2016 at 11:07 pm
    • RCA Victor


      I’ve also heard that haggis speeds up the ageing process. No wonder I’ve aged so quickly since my visit to Scotland in 2008!!

      July 4, 2016 at 11:46 pm
      • editor

        RCA Victor,

        Groan… don’t remind me of that visit, especially the drive from the airport when you asked me “what is the population of Glasgow?” and I hadn’t a clue! When I later told a friend up visiting from England, she made me laugh with her response: “That’s the kind of question only a man would ask on arrival in a new city. A woman would ask “where are the shops”! 😀

        July 5, 2016 at 12:42 am
      • RCA Victor


        LOL – I’d forgotten about that tourist-type question! You should have just handed me Fodor’s Guide to Glasgow and told me to look it up myself! I know you keep a copy in your back seat….

        July 5, 2016 at 1:16 am
  • leprechaun

    Madame Editor,

    Returning to the Communiqué issued by Bp. Fellay on the Feast of Ss. Peter and Paul, and the views it gave rise to about why the SSPX appears to be adopting an isolationist role, the situation is that Bp. Fellay is getting conflicting statements from Rome.

    One source says that the Society can be reconciled with Rome without having to accept the Documents of Vatican II and without having to remain non-critical of the errors they contain, whilst another source says just the opposite. There is no longer just one voice speaking on behalf of the Vatican.

    Consequently, until this issue is resolved, there can be no further progress.

    This has been expounded very well by Fr. Karl Stehlin in a sermon he gave on his return from the meeting in Switzerland where the Communiqué originated.

    It can be seen on Youtube at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3WhKZezE5Y

    July 7, 2016 at 5:01 pm
    • RCA Victor


      That is a very welcome clarification, but if memory serves, this double-dealing was also encountered by the Society during the reign of Benedict XVI – in fact, from the Pope himself, wasn’t it? The same irreconcilably conflicting signals: you must accept Vatican II and the NO, vs. you may continue to criticize the Council and reject the NO just as you are doing now…ending with the ultimate stiffening of Benedict against regularisation without submission.

      Father also continues the rejection of the “Resistance” position, by emphasizing (around 12:04) that the SSPX does not expect a “conversion” of Rome before accepting a deal, but that the Pope recognizes the importance of preserving Tradition in the life of the Church, and that he wants the presence of Tradition within the Church.

      (Contrast this with the latest contemptuous statement of Francis regarding the “ultra-conservatives” whom he will not allow to “slow him down.” Does Francis even understand what the SSPX is and does?).

      It also appears that the Communique was not, as some of us previously conjectured, in response to a specific proposal, but in response to the ongoing confusing and contradictory statements from Vatican officials.

      July 7, 2016 at 8:00 pm
  • crofterlady July 7, 2016 at 9:12 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: