| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 539 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 534 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Facebook, Google, Twitter
|
| Latest Threads |
Fr Hewk: 2nd Sun of Adven...
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
5 hours ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 164
|
Leo XIV Grants Apostolic ...
Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 10:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 84
|
Archbishop Lefebvre’s fir...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 10:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 59
|
Confession for the Reluct...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:49 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 6,244
|
Feast of the Immaculate C...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:48 AM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 36,337
|
On the Preparation for th...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:47 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 7,621
|
The Golden Legend: Of the...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:46 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 9,837
|
Thoughts for the Sundays ...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:45 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 8,904
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Imma...
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
12-07-2025, 07:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 80
|
Second Sunday of Advent
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
12-07-2025, 11:49 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 23,010
|
|
|
| The SSPX is "Completely Regular" |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-30-2023, 07:28 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- No Replies
|
 |
Francis Allowed SSPX To Ordain Whomever They Wish
![[Image: wrbu2rykligw4ur6tbikwvu3aab41duh44u3h7y....92&webp=on]](https://seedus4268.gloriatv.net/storage1/wrbu2rykligw4ur6tbikwvu3aab41duh44u3h7y.webp?secure=BSukZgrxT9bfVXcCQUt9Bg&expires=1736082992&webp=on)
gloria.tv [Emphasis mine]| July 30, 2023
The Society Pius X is “completely regular,” James Bogle, a former Una Voce President, told Gloria.tv at the Roman Forum in Gardone, Italy (video below).
Bogle is a barrister in London. He counseled in the cases of Archie Battersbee (2010-2022) and Alfie Evans (2016-2018), who were sentenced to death by British courts, the latter despite interventions by the Polish, Italian and Vatican governments.
Francis "recognised" all [SSPX] sacraments, including marriage and confession, Bogle notes. In March 2015, Bishop Fellay was appointed a Vatican judge for all annulments and clerical misdemeanours in [SSPX].
Fellay told Bogle in May 2015 that Francis had written him a personal letter allowing him to ordain "whomever he wants", without having to consult the local bishops. Bogle calls this not just a recognition but a "special privilege".
A member of the Order of Malta, Bogle believes Francis has "saved" the order. At the 2014 Chapter General, a group of Germans were elected to the governing body and then tried to secularise the order by marginalising the professed members.
Francis stepped in and acted as a dictator, overriding all laws, codes and the Order's constitution. This led to the expulsion of the Germans. Francis’ authoritarian and “frankly not legal” style worked in the Order's favour “by accident”, says Bogle.
As for Francis' desire to close monasteries, Bogle recalls a dissolved monastery in Amalfi, Italy. Its historic building was worth €80M (!). With Francis' knowledge, the nuns were told that they were being suppressed and had to leave the convent.
They complied. For Bogle, the handling over of their property is dishonest, fraudulent, and even criminal.
For Bogle, Francis is reversing some fundamentals of the faith and thus “destroying the Church”. But given his treatment of PiusX he calls him "self-contradictory" and a “complex figure”.
Video of the interview here: https://gloria.tv/post/4EijeQ8zRX4S3BG9tVvSLuw3F
|
|
|
| St. Alphonsus Liguori: Daily Meditations for Ninth Week after Pentecost |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-30-2023, 07:03 AM - Forum: Pentecost
- Replies (6)
|
|
THE DESIRE JESUS HAD TO SUFFER FOR US
What a subject of wonder to the Angels must not the great love of God have been when they saw the Eternal Word become Man for the Redemption of fallen man! How is it possible, indeed, that God should be so enamoured of men and that men, who are so grateful to one another, should be so ungrateful to God?
I.
Jesus could have saved us without suffering; but He chose rather to embrace a life of sorrow and contempt, deprived of every earthly consolation, and a death of bitterness and desolation, only to make us understand the love He bore us, and the desire He had that we should love Him. He passed His whole life in sighing for the hour of His death, which He desired to offer to God to obtain for us eternal salvation. And it was this desire which made Him exclaim: I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized; and how am I straitened until it be accomplished? (Luke xii. 50). He desired to be baptized in His own Blood, to wash out, not indeed His own sins, but ours. O infinite Love, how miserable is he who does not know Thee, and does not love Thee!
This same desire caused Jesus to say, on the night before His death: With desire I have desired to eat this pasch with you. By which words He shows that His one desire during His whole life had been to see the time arrive for His Passion and Death, in order to prove to man the immense love He bore him. So much, therefore, O my Jesus, didst Thou desire our love, that to obtain it Thou didst not refuse to die. How can I, then, deny anything to a God Who has given His Blood and His life for the love of me?
II.
St. Bonaventure says that it is a marvel to see a God suffering for the love of men; but that it is a still greater marvel that men should behold a God suffering so much for them, shivering with cold as an Infant in a manger, living as a poor boy in a shop, dying as a criminal on a Cross, and yet not burn with love for this most loving God; and even go so far as to despise this love for the sake of the miserable pleasures of this earth. But how is it possible that God should be so enamoured of men, and that men who are so grateful to one another, should be so ungrateful to God?
Alas, my Jesus, I find myself also among the number of these ungrateful ones. Tell me, how couldst Thou suffer so much for me, knowing the injuries I would commit against Thee? But since Thou hast borne with me, and even desirest my salvation, give me, I pray Thee, a great sorrow for my sins, a sorrow equal to my ingratitude. I hate and detest, above all things, the displeasure I have caused Thee. If, during my past life, I despised Thy grace, now I value it above all the kingdoms of the earth. I love Thee with my whole soul, O God, worthy of infinite love, and I desire only to live in order to love Thee. Increase the flames of Thy love, and give me more and more love. Keep alive in my remembrance the love Thou hast borne me, so that my heart may always burn with love for Thee, as Thy Heart burns with love for me. O burning heart of Mary, inflame my poor heart with holy love.
Spiritual Reading
PRAYER–CONCLUSION
I have done. Some, perhaps will wish that I had given more space to the distinct examination of the question so much controverted, wherein consists the efficacy of grace, and which the Systems of different Schools attribute to–physical premotion,–to congruous grace,–to concomitant grace,–to a delectation which overcomes by reason of moral motion–to a delectation which overcomes by reason of its superiority in degree. But for this, such a book as mine, which I deliberately intended should be small and more likely to be read, would not have been enough. To explore this vast sea many volumes would be required. But this work has been sufficiently performed by others, and, moreover, it was beside my purpose. Still, however, I wished to establish the Proposition–that God gives to all the grace of Prayer, for the honour of God’s Providence and Goodness, and to be of assistance to sinners, to prevent them from giving themselves up to despair, thinking themselves deprived of grace; and, at the same time, to take from them all excuse for saying that they have not strength to resist the assaults of the senses and of hell. I have shown them that of those who are lost, no one is damned for the Original sin of Adam, but solely for his own sin, because God refuses to no one the grace of Prayer, whereby we may obtain His assistance to overcome every desire and every temptation.
After all, of course, my principal intention was to recommend to all men the use of Prayer, that most powerful and necessary means of grace, in order that all men may more diligently and earnestly attend to it, if they wish to be saved. Many poor souls lose God’s grace, and continue to live in sin, and are finally damned, for this very reason, that they did not pray, nor have recourse to God for assistance. The worst of the matter is (I cannot help repeating it), that so few preachers and so few confessors recommend Prayer to their hearers and penitents, without which it is impossible to observe the laws of God, and to obtain perseverance in His grace.
Having observed that so many passages, both of the Old and the New Testament, assert the absolute necessity of Prayer, I have taken care to see that on the Missions given by our Congregation, there should always be a Sermon on Prayer, which is now our custom of long years standing. And this I say, and repeat, and will keep repeating as long as I live, that our salvation wholly depends on Prayer; and, therefore, that all writers in their books, all preachers in their sermons, all confessors in their instructions to their penitents, should inculcate nothing more strongly than continual Prayer. They should admonish them, and unceasingly exhort them: Pray! Pray I Never cease to pray! For if you pray, your salvation will be certain; but if you leave off praying, certain will be your damnation. All preachers and directors ought to preach this; because, according to the teaching of every Catholic School, there is no doubt of this truth, that he who prays obtains grace and is saved. Those who practise it are too few; and this is the reason why so few are saved.
I.
PRAYER TO JESUS CHRIST, TO OBTAIN HIS HOLY LOVE
My crucified Love, my dear Jesus! I believe in Thee, and confess Thee to be the true Son of God and my Saviour. I adore Thee from the abyss of my own nothingness, and I thank Thee for the death Thou didst suffer for me, that I might obtain the life of Divine grace. My beloved Redeemer, to Thee I owe all my salvation. Through Thee I have hitherto escaped hell. Through Thee have I received the pardon of my sins. But I am so ungrateful that, instead of loving Thee, I have repeated my offences against Thee. I deserve to be condemned, so as not to be able to love Thee any more. But no, my Jesus, punish me in any other way, but not in this. If I have not loved Thee in time past, I love Thee now; and I desire nothing but to love Thee with all my heart. But without Thy help I can do nothing. Since Thou dost command me to love Thee, give me also the strength to fulfil this Thy sweet and loving precept. Thou hast promised to grant all that we ask of Thee: You shall ask whatever you will, and it shall be done unto you (Jo. xv. 7). Confiding, then, in this promise, my dear Jesus, I ask, first of all, pardon of all my sins; and I repent of them above all things, because I have offended Thee, O Infinite Goodness! I ask for holy perseverance in Thy grace until death. But above all, I ask for the gift of Thy holy love. Ah, my Jesus, my Hope, my Love, my All, inflame me with that love which Thou didst come on earth to enkindle! For this end make me always live in conformity with Thy holy will. Enlighten me that I may understand more and more how worthy Thou art to be loved, and that I may know the immense love Thou hast borne me, especially in giving Thy life for me. Grant, then, that I may love Thee with all my heart, and may love Thee always, and never cease to beg of Thee the grace to love Thee in this life; that always living in Thy love, and dying in Thy love, I may come one day to love Thee with all my strength in heaven, never to cease loving Thee for all eternity.
O Mother of beautiful love, O Mary, my advocate and refuge, who art of all creatures the most beautiful, the most loving, and the most beloved of God, and whose only desire it is to see Him loved! ah, by the love that thou bearest to Jesus Christ, pray for me, and obtain for me the grace to love Him always and with all my heart! This I ask and hope for from Thee. Amen.
II.
PRAYER TO OBTAIN THE GRACE OF BEING CONSTANT IN PRAYER.
O God of my soul, I hope in Thy goodness that Thou hast pardoned all my offences against Thee, and that I am now in the state of grace. I thank Thee for it with all my heart, and I hope to thank Thee for all eternity. The mercies of the Lord I will sing for ever (Ps. lxxxviii. 2). I know well why I have fallen, because I have not had recourse to Thee when I was tempted, to ask for holy perseverance. For the future, I firmly resolve to recommend myself always to Thee and especially when I see myself in danger of offending Thee again. I will always fly to Thy mercy, invoking always the most holy Names of Jesus and Mary, with full confidence that when I pray Thou wilt not fail to give me the strength I need to resist my enemies. This I resolve and promise to do. But of what use, O my God, will all these resolutions and promises be, if Thou dost not assist me with Thy grace to put them in practice; that is, to have recourse to Thee in all dangers? O Eternal Father, help me, for the love of Jesus Christ, and let me never omit recommending myself to Thee whenever I am tempted. I know that Thou dost always help me when I have recourse to Thee; but my fear is that I should forget to recommend myself to Thee, and my negligence be the cause of my ruin, that is, the loss of Thy grace, the greatest evil that can befall me. Ah, by the merits of Jesus Christ, give me the grace to pray to Thee; but grant me such an abundant grace that I may always pray, and pray as I ought!
O my Mother Mary, whenever I have had recourse to thee, thou hast obtained for me the help which has kept me from falling! Now I come to beg of thee to obtain a still greater grace, namely, that of recommending myself always to thy Son and to thee in all my necessities. My Queen, thou obtainest all thou dost desire from God by the love thou bearest to Jesus Christ; obtain for me now this grace which I beg of thee–namely, to pray always, and never to cease to pray, even unto death. Amen.
Evening Meditation
THE PRACTICE OF THE LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST
“Charity endureth all things”
HE THAT LOVES JESUS CHRIST WITH A STRONG LOVE DOES NOT CEASE TO LOVE HIM IN THE MIDST OF TEMPTATIONS AND DESOLATIONS
I.
When a soul that loves God finds herself in this state of darkness, uncertainty, and fear, she must not lose courage; and neither must he who directs her become alarmed. Those sensual movements, those temptations against Faith, those feelings of distrust, and those attacks which urge her to hate Almighty God, are fears, are tortures of the soul, are efforts of the enemy; but they are not voluntary, and therefore they are not sins. The sincere lover of Jesus Christ resists valiantly on such occasions, and withholds all consent to such suggestions; but because of the darkness which envelops her she knows not how to distinguish, her soul is thrown into confusion, and the privation of the presence of Divine grace makes her fearful and sad. But it can be soon discovered that in these souls, thus tried by God, all is dread and apprehension, but not truth: only ask them, even in their state of desolation, whether they would willingly commit one single deliberate venial sin; they will reply that they are ready to suffer not one, but a thousand deaths, rather than be guilty of giving such displeasure to Almighty God.
II.
It is necessary, therefore, to make this distinction, that it is one thing to perform an act of virtue, such as to repel a temptation, to trust in God, to love God, and to will what He wills; and it is another thing to have the consciousness of really making these good acts. This consciousness of doing good contributes to our pleasure; but the profit consists, not in our being conscious of doing good, but in actually doing good. God is satisfied with our doing good, but deprives the soul of the consciousness of doing it in order thus to remove from her all self-satisfaction, which, of course, adds nothing to the merit of the good action; for our Lord ever desires our real advantage more than our satisfaction. St. John of the Cross wrote the following words to comfort a desolate soul: “You were never in a better state than at present; for you were never so deeply humbled, and so cut off from all attachment to this world, and at the same time you were never so thoroughly impressed with the conviction of your own wickedness. Neither were you ever so divested and purified of all self-seeking as now.” Let us, then, not believe that when we feel a greater tenderness of devotion we are more beloved by God; for perfection does not consist in that, but in the mortification of our own will, and in its union with the will of God.
|
|
|
|
| An Interesting Commentary on the Mark of the Beast and Current Biometric Technologies |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-29-2023, 07:29 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
An Interesting Commentary on the Mark of the Beast and our Current Biometric Technologies
The following is a question and answer posted on the Tradition in Action website [emphasis mine].
The answer is a very plausible possibility in the context of our current tech levels of advancement.
Dear TIA,
I write to you as a concerned Catholic.
I would like to ask your opinion on the so-called Biblical "mark of the beast."
Supposedly it’s a “chip embedded in the skin.” I have read some older articles that people will have all their documents and crypto-currencies embedded in a chip under their skin. But is that really true? Is this "the mark of the beast"?
In today's world, the introduction of “digital biometric identity” is rampant globally (face scan, finger scan, palm scan...) as a new way of identification possibly linked to vaccination status... and probably to digital currency...
Or do you think that the “mark of the beast” will be some kind of sensors implanted or wearable?
It seems ”the mark of the beast“ will be “digital biometric ID SYSTEM linked with crypto-currency and sensors where people have TO OBEY tyrannical governments…?”
What to do now? Is it acceptable to refuse mandatory biometric ID card (face photo and two fingerprints) which is already mandatory in many countries?
I would ask your opinion - or the opinion of a priest/theologian who works with you - about it all from Catholic perspective….
I wrote this question to THREE Catholic websites and to one priest – SILENCE.
C.F.E.
TIA responds:
Dear C.F.E.,
The mark of the beast to be stamped on the right hand of every man and on his forehead is referred to in the Apocalypse. It also states that whoever will not have that sign or name will not be able to buy or sell. Finally, it says that the sign is the number 666 (cf. chap 13: 16-18).
Fr. Cornelius à Lapide, summarizing the comments of the Church on this text, asks: “What will be the sign of the Antichrist?” We shorten his answers in the following opinions:
- Viegas opines that it will be the three things: the sign, the name and the number 666;
- St. Hippolitus and Pereira believe that it will be the word Denial, to express that the anti-Christians apostatized and denied Christ and His entire doctrine;
- Ribera supposes that the mark will be the figure of a dragon;
- Primasius, Ansbert and Prudencius opine that it will be a letter that will represent the Antichrist, opposed to the letter P with an X over it, which represents Christ.
Cornelius à Lapide further reports a great deal of speculation of various other Saints and Catholic thinkers on what would be the Antichrist’s name and number, which is not the case to transcribe here. (Cf. Commentaria in Scripturam Sacram, T. 21, Paris: Louis Vives, 1876, pp. 261-267)
With these presuppositions coming from previous opinions of Catholic commentators, we see that none of them imagined that today we would have the possibility to implant an electronic chip containing a code in one’s hand or forehead that could bear the sign, name and number of the Antichrist.
So, it seems to us legitimate to speculate, as you do, whether or not such a mark of the beast can be a chip with a code.
You elaborate on the mandatory biometrical ID suggesting that it is the mark of the beast.
We distinguish: It is true that indirectly the sign of the beast mentioned in the Apocalypse will identify the person. However, the text stresses that this identification is a consequence; the cause is the person’s adhesion to the Antichrist, this is why he agrees to receive his sign, name and number. It also places as a condition that it should be stamped on or under the skin in easily seen places (hand and forehead).
So, we would say that as long as the biometrical ID is not inserted in the person’s body, it cannot be directly related to that text of the Apocalypse. Should it be inserted, then it can.
Still a distinction should be made here: The biometrical ID per se, even when in a microchip, does not fulfill the conditions of the text. It should contain also the sign, name and number of the Antichrist.
Concluding, we would say that to have one’s biometrical ID does not necessarily imply that we are agreeing to receive the mark of the beast as long as it is a card that one carries in his pocket. If he allows the ID that is embedded in a microchip to be inserted into his body, he is opening his mind and body to be controlled by unknown persons. In this case, he is abdicating his free will and enslaving himself to a One World System that will decide what to do with him. In this case, he may be receiving the mark of the beast.
We hope these considerations answer your questions.
Cordially,
TIA correspondence desk
Posted July 27, 2023
|
|
|
|
| Bp. Williamson makes the N.O. Miracles a Condition of Holy Oils |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-28-2023, 05:27 PM - Forum: True vs. False Resistance
- Replies (5)
|
|
The following is a transcript of the communications read aloud by Fr. Hewko during this conference, queued for time:
✠ ✠ ✠
N. B. Notice that the conditions placed upon Fr. Hewko by Bp. Williamson to receive Holy Oils are that he (Fr. Hewko) publicly accept the Novus Ordo Eucharistic "miracles." As an aside, this begs the question, since there have been so many 'miracles' lately (see here, here, and here, for examples) one wonders if this acceptance applies to all the alleged miracles or just one or two?
But more importantly, observe that it is demanded of Fr. Hewko that he believe in the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo Mass and its subsequent 'miracles.' That is what is at stake. Public proclamation of the legitimacy of the New Mass.
Notice there is essentially no difference between what Bp. Williamson demands and what Bp. Fellay signed in the Doctrinal Declaration, which states that the Novus Ordo Mass is "legitimately promulgated." Very hard to distinguish between these two sides of the same coin!
Archbishop Lefebvre said this of the New Mass, in 1976(!): “And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith… Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion - another religion.” (Sermon, June 29, 1976).
✠ ✠ ✠
On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 Fr. Hewko wrote to Bp. Williamson [emphasis mine, any mistakes in transcription are also mine.]:
Your Excellency, Bp. Williamson,
Easter Greetings to you and wishing you good health and many graces from the Risen Savior!
May I appeal, once again, for Holy Oils for this year? I have asked Bp. Zendejas but so far, no response. I'm not sure why this silent treatment continues, it is rather puzzling to me.
If it is, as you said before, a deserved response for "misrepresenting your position on the New Mass," with all due respect, how can I misrepresent you when I simply quote your own words? It was never Abp. Lefebvre who taught these things, nor have I taken you out of context, in fact, have bent over backwards to try to justify your words, hoping they were just oversights. But truthfully, after so many repetitions in conferences and letters and after receiving punishments for opposing these publicly voiced opinions, it is clear these are not mere oversights.
However, in truth, how often you repeated these were merely your "opinions" and that many confreres will not agree. Fair enough, but why be punished if some priests do not agree? Why be treated as outcasts when priests repeatedly quote our Founder who said the direct opposite so many times?
Your Excellency, all I'm requesting are the basic tools for saving souls! Baptisms and Extreme Unctions cannot be given without Holy Oils (aside from emergency baptisms). Why would a differing opinion be an obstacle to receiving Holy Oils? Would Jesuit or Dominican bishops of yesteryear refuse Holy Oils to Franciscan or Carmelite priests for holding different opinions on Grace or the reasons for the Incarnation? These were hotly debated theological opinions that caused much fighting between Orders but, in spite of all the bickering between them, I'm sure charity prevailed in most cases and priests received Holy Oils, dispensations, and any permissions needed for the good of souls.
In this case, all I quote is Abp. Lefebvre who never promoted New Mass miracles publicly, nor that it gives grace, nor that it can nourish your faith. In fact, as time passes from 1970 to 1980's his position becomes more adamantly opposed to this Masonic tool to destroy the Faith in souls. Facts show he was absolutely accurate. I have witnessed the confusion in many souls and quite honestly, scandal, from what has been publicly promoted from Broadstairs.
Nevertheless, if I have countered these opinions, I have always defended your name and praised your history of defending the Faith and the immeasurable treasures you gave us in the seminary and your guidance to innumerable souls throughout the '80's, '90 and on. But if these are differing opinions, fine, but why should these be grounds for refusing the basic tools for saving souls who just want to get to Heaven?
The fact is, there are hundreds of families and souls I take care of, who are waiting all these years for confirmation and have been scandalized by these novel opinions and prefer to wait for a bishop of Abp. Lefebvre (not Thuc!) who will simply hold his stand on the New Mass questions. Don't they have the right by Mother Church to be wary of novelties? Don't they have the right given by Our Lord to request for bread and be given bread? Why should they be treated as outcasts when they merely stand by the positions of Abp. Lefebvre?
Lastly, for all the insistence on "no structure and organization" it appears by the punishments incurred by priests holding different opinions, that there truly is a structure and organization in place. We all knew the doctrinal shift of Bp. Fellay was not merely words and opinions when it was backed by punishments for opposing his new direction. Punitive transfers, imposed silence, and expulsions backed his shift of direction towards Modernist Rome. I was silenced for giving a sermon at a First Mass in Winona in 2012, which merely quoted Abp. Lefebvre repeatedly. Punishments prove the program. My point is why should priests holding differing opinions be punished since they are not dogmas but opinions? Why should we be refused Holy Oils? Who else can we turn to? Thuc line? No. Sedevacantists? No. Novus Ordo? No.
Please, Your Excellency, for the good of souls battling to survive this horrible confusion and apostasy, do not turn a deaf ear to my appeal.
If I have been amiss or have not understood, please correct me.
With all filial respect, humility and affection, yours,
In Christo Rege,
Fr. David Hewko
✠ ✠ ✠
On Thursday, April 20, 2023, Bishop Williamson replies:
Reverend,
When you deny the genuinely scientific evidence in favor of miracles taking place at Novus Ordo Masses said by Novus Ordo priests consecrated by Novus Ordo bishops, such as happened in Sokolka, Poland, in 2008, you are not living in the same world or Church as I am.
Please resort to any bishop who shares your own attitude towards reality. Please do not ask me again for Oils for as long as you are defying reality.
With good wishes, in Christo,
Bp. Williamson
✠ ✠ ✠
On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 11:17, Fr. Hewko wrote:
Your Excellency,
Then to whom do I turn? "For the whelps also eat of the crumbs that fall from the table of their masters."
In Christo Rege,
Fr. Hewko
✠ ✠ ✠
On Thursday, April 20, 2023, Bp. Williamson wrote:
Make up your mind. Choose.
Either you write in public, to all those people that you normally write to, that you have been wrong to deny the possibility of Eucharistic miracles at Novus Ordo Masses, and you quote several cases of such miracles which you now admit to have taken place. And you will have to persuade me that you sincerely mean what you write, and that you are not writing it just to deceive me. Judging by your past behavior that will be very difficult for you to do. And I have to remain the judge as to whether you may or may not have done it. And if you try any form of weaseling out of it, I will never again read an email of yours. Choose.
Or you find yourself a bishop who agrees with you. How about Bishop Pfeiffer?
In Christ,
Bp. Williamson
✠ ✠ ✠
On Friday, April 21, 2023 Fr. Hewko wrote [this was an excellent reply!]:
Your Excellency, Bp. Williamson,
Firstly, I thank you, since thirty-one years ago today, April 21, you ordained me in St. Mary's, Kansas. Thank you again, unworthy of such a grace as I truly am but please remember me in your prayers of the Breviary & Mass!
Secondly, in response to your request to publicly endorse the New Mass Eucharistic miracles as a condition to possibly receive Holy Oils, may I bring some things forward for consideration?
While St. Paul says "Charity believeth all things," St. John also warns to "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God." With regard to the New Mass Eucharistic miracles, I prefer to wait for the final approval of Mother Church, not the Conciliar propaganda. To give the appearance of authenticity, the Conciliarists have invented New Mass canonized "saints", New Mass "incorrupt" bodies, New Mass Marian "apparitions", New Mass Rosary mysteries and New Mass "Eucharistic miracles." One must ask what is the final cause is in all these? The bad tree produces bad fruit and the Conciliar New Religion and New Mass are certainly bad trees. It cannot be doubted that all of these phenomena lead souls directly to the New Conciliar Religion and New Mass. That's where lies the great danger!
It has been proven that some of the "miracles" for the new canonizations were not miracles at all; that Pope John XXIII's "incorrupt" body was heavily dosed with formaldehyde, as admitted by the morticians who treated his body. Some New Mass "miracles" have already been proven to be frauds. In the case of Sokolka, Poland, some Polish people have told me the bishop there was indicted for money laundering, left with a nun and, at least according to them and news reports, the new bishop has never declared this as a miracle but simply that "it confirms the faith." But they won't declare on it because the oncoming pilgrims bring financial stability.
Fr. Cordozo visited the Eucharistic "miracle" in Argentina and was refused admittance to view it, but remarked how the church had the Blessed Sacrament exposed in a flowery pastel monstrance with all the modern art surrounding it.
I guess if St. Thomas Aquinas were to treat this subject, he would admit that, in the case of a valid Mass where the Consecration truly took place, a miracle of this sort would be possible in the realm of God's omnipotence, but he would certainly have raised questions if it came from the New Mass. Belief in the New Mass "miracles," he couldn't deny, leads directly to the New Mass. The New Mass, although admittedly can be valid, nevertheless, leads to a loss of Faith, is often sacrilegious and represents a Rite that is "odious in God's sight" (as Our Lord told Marie-Julie Jahenny). True miracles confirm the Truth. True miracles confirm Catholic doctrine and the Faith. Will God permit miracles to confirm an odious Rite of Mass? Will God work miracles to reinforce errors, heresy and sacrilege that are nearly intrinsic to the New Mass? This is the question that poses the problem.
With all things considered, perhaps the more prudent ground to stand on, is to patiently withhold judgement and wait for Mother Church to come back to Tradition. Then the world will have the final reliable decision. All the while publicly promoting the pre-Vatican II Eucharistic miracles (of which there are plenty!) and saints, while at the same time, being extremely cautious with the post-Vatican II phenomena and so-called miracles. If the Conciliar Modernist episcopate can parade before the whole world (with Popes Paul VI and John Paul II's presence and approval) a fake Sister Lucia of Fatima, as has been forensically and scientifically proven, what other frauds are they not capable of flaunting?
Perhaps, the more prudent position is to take to heart the warnings of Our Lord: "For there will rise up false prophets, and wonders (e.g. false Eucharistic miracles), to seduce (if it were possible) even the elect" (St. Mark 13:22). Where do the New Mass Eucharistic "miracles" lead but to the New Mass? What devotions do they foster but the prayers and ecumenism of the New Mass? What do these shrines promote but the errors of Vatican II and confirm people in the faith of the Conciliar Church, which Abp. Lefebvre didn't hesitate to call a Modernist Church, and a "schismatic church" which leads to apostasy and heresy?
In this light, your Excellency, I can never promote, privately or publicly, the New Mass Eucharistic "miracles" for it would lead souls to the wrong Church and at the very least to confusion, and the devil works in confused waters! Please consider also possibly holding this position yourself, since we were warned that the devil can appear as an angel of light, and with what greater deceit can he mislead souls than the Conciliar Church, with its new priesthood, new sacraments, new Mass, new morality, new theology, new Code of Canon Law, new religion! How many "elect" have truly been seduced by the Conciliar Church and have lost the Faith? The statistics show millions! How many souls has it taken to Hell?
Now, with all this in consideration may I have the Holy Oils to continue being about my Father's business? [A side note, I do not presume to give Confirmations and I never will. On that, don't agree with Fr. Rafael, OSB].
Humbly asking your blessings, filially yours,
Fr. David Hewko
Post scriptum: The Thuc line is out of the question because it swims in doubt, scandals and craziness, as Archbishop Lefebvre advised, stay away! Therefore, Fr. Pfeiffer is out of the question.
|
|
|
|
| Mexico, Vatican "Favorable" To Novus Ordo Paganisation |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-28-2023, 06:45 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Mexico, Vatican "Favorable" To Novus Ordo Paganisation
![[Image: p2h4ifo9ne0qgya11ghptr7fur6fbrdg2m35tic....94&webp=on]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/p2h4ifo9ne0qgya11ghptr7fur6fbrdg2m35tic.webp?secure=6enAbN8NTg5SJEnK2qvpmg&expires=1690879294&webp=on)
gloria.tv | July 28, 2023
In June, the Mexican bishops submitted to the Vatican for approval a series of liturgical adaptations for presiding at paganised Eucharists.
San Cristóbal de Las Casas Cardinal Felipe Arizmendi told AciPrensa.com (July 25) that the Vatican had received the project favourably.
The idea is to incorporate into the liturgy "different ways of relating to God" of the Mexican Indians, such as the incensing performed by laymen, the role of a “senior layperson” [= woman], and ritual dances, most of which is pagan in form and content.
Arizmendi explained that the proposal was initially for his diocese, but in April, the Mexican bishops asked that it be extended it to all the country's Indians (16 peoples, 100K).
Mexico has been a fairly Catholic country, but the Novus Ordo bishops are working hard to change that. Indians who wish to remain Christians are moving in droves to neo-Protestant groups.
***
Mexican bishops submit ‘Indigenous liturgical adaptations’ to the Vatican for approval
![[Image: indigenas-en-basilica.jpg?w=670&h=447]](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/storage/image/indigenas-en-basilica.jpg?w=670&h=447)
Pilgrims from the Archdiocese of Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Diocese of Tapachula, and Diocese of San Cristóbal de las Casas in the Basilica of Guadalupe in May 2022. | Credit: Basilica of Guadalupe
ACI Prensa Staff | Jul 27, 2023
The Mexican Bishops’ Conference (CEM) has recently presented to the Vatican for its approval a series of Indigenous liturgical adaptations for the celebration of Holy Mass for the “original peoples” of the country.
Speaking with ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner, Cardinal Felipe Arizmendi, promoter of the initiative and one of those in charge of making the presentation to the Vatican, explained that the adaptations have the objective of “advancing the progress of inculturation of the Church in the native peoples and of taking responsibility for the celebration of Holy Mass with some elements of these cultures.”
“It’s not a question of creating a new Indigenous rite but of incorporating into the liturgy various ways of relating to God of these peoples and which express the same thing as the Roman rite, but in its cultural form.”
Before the Indigenous liturgical adaptations were presented by the Mexican Church to the Holy See, they had been approved during the 114th plenary assembly of the CEM, held April 17–21. The adaptations were approved by 103 of the 105 voting bishops.
Arizmendi, bishop emeritus of the Diocese of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, pointed out that “the proposal at first was for San Cristóbal de Las Casas, but in the assembly on April 19, the Mexican episcopate asked that it be for all the native peoples of the country.”
San Cristóbal de Las Casas is a town in the southern state of Chiapas that has approximately 1.1 million Indigenous-language speakers, making up 27% of the state’s population.
The cardinal explained that the text was first sent to the Episcopal Commission for Liturgical Pastoral Care.
“They asked me to present the text and write it up, to present it to the assembly,” he said. “The vote in favor was last April 19. Now the proposal is already in Rome, at the Dicastery for Divine Worship, awaiting its final approval.” The document was delivered in June.
Incorporating elements ‘without harming the eucharistic liturgy’
After almost 18 years as bishop of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Arizmendi joined a dialogue led by his successor — the current bishop of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Rodrigo Aguilar — to present a text to the CEM assembly on the subject.
Arizmendi said that “there are certain elements, which have been studied, that can be incorporated into the Holy Mass without harming the eucharistic liturgy.”
“We were studying and seeing what things could be taken into the Catholic liturgy, what things yes, what things no,” he said.
The cardinal explained that “the creators of these initiatives are the same Indigenous people of San Cristóbal de Las Casas” who have similar experiences with other communities in the country.
There are 16 major Indigenous peoples in Mexico with a population over 100,000 speaking their native language.
In addition, Arizmendi and Aguilar had the support of the president of the Episcopal Commission for Liturgical Pastoral Care of the CEM, Víctor Sánchez, the archbishop of Puebla.
Aguilar said the cardinal asked him to accompany him to Rome to present it to the Holy Father and his collaborators as a liturgical proposal.
The Holy See received the project favorably, he said, although no decision has been reached yet.
|
|
|
|
| Fr. Jean Violette 2003: How the SSPX used to Preach |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-28-2023, 05:57 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- No Replies
|
|
Fr. Hewko recently read this letter aloud during a sermon, making the point that what the Resistance continues to stand today for is what the SSPX always said about relations with Rome until the Society's formal shift away from this position in 2012.
Fr. Hewko also pointed out that what was written here about Fr. Aulangier in 2003 could perfectly be applied to Bp. Fellay and the upper hierarchy of the SSPX since at least 2012.
December 2003 - Canada District Superior's Letter
Taken from here [Emphasis mine].
Father Aulagnier expelled from the SSPX. The reasons for his expulsion are discussed herein.
This gives us cause to reflect on the position of the SSPX vis à vis Rome.
Dear Faithful,
Sad news: Father Aulagnier expelled from SSPX
Unfortunately I have sad news to end the year. Some of you may have seen it on the Internet. Indeed Father Aulagnier, one of Archbishop Lefebvre’s first and closest companion in the resistance, assistant to the Superior General, founding district superior of the French district had to be expelled from the Society. Last September we were saddened by the interview of Father Aulagnier to the Wanderer. At first I thought of replying earlier but then decided to wait to see how this affair would end. This interview, along with an extended article published in French on his website as well as in a French daily newspaper proved to be the last straw.
For a long time now, since 1998, he had publicly and virulently opposed the Society’s stand regarding negotiations with Rome. As well he disobeyed our constitutions and repeatedly disobeyed Bishop Fellay’s explicit orders thus giving a bad example. He had also created a very difficult situation within the Society trying to sway its members in pursuing an accord with Rome thus trying to cause division and even rebellion against the legitimate authority. The problem was not that he had contrary opinions but that he was airing them in public and trying to undermine the Superior General and the Society. This state of affairs had lasted long enough. Because it was Father Aulagnier and the respect he commanded in the Society, Bishop Fellay and the General Council were very patient but sometimes, even patience can be a fault.
After reading Father Aulagnier’s interview a few questions come to mind: why grant an interview to a newspaper, which is clearly against the SSPX? Are birds of a feather starting to flock together? Secondly Father Aulagnier seems to imply that those who disagree with his opinion and agree with the Superior General and the majority of SSPX members regarding the so-called reconciliation are “yes men”. This is not only insulting it is ludicrous. On the contrary as we will see, the SSPX’s present stand would seem more faithful to the Archbishop.
Now I have not read Father Aulagnier’s French articles I’ve only read the interview in the Wanderer. According to this article, I think we can summarize Father Aulagnier’s arguments in favor of a “reconciliation” in the following way: 1. The danger of schism. 2. His friendship with the “heroic” priests of Campos. 3. “The attitude of Rome is new.” 4. “Additionally I think that there is a danger in seeing this conflict last for ages.” Let us consider these points.
1. The danger of schism.
Our resistance is not rebellion. It is the necessary attitude of Catholics who want to keep the faith when faced with prelates who attack, deny or threaten it. We do not want to become Protestants! We continue to believe in the divinity of Our Lord and His social Kingship, His Church. The fact that we keep the faith and we continue to speak with the Roman authorities shows there is no danger of schism because we still recognize their authority. Dispensations and other ecclesiastical permissions have been sought and received from the Roman authorities. What is in question is not their authority but whether we can trust them or not. It is not just a matter of having a majority in a Roman commission. It is a matter of can we put ourselves under them and trust them to protect our Faith? Unfortunately the present Roman authorities have proven over and over they cannot be trusted, that they have not changed as we will point out later on.
The solution to this crisis will come from Rome when the Roman authorities come back to the integrity of the Faith. But until then we do well to continue our resistance. How long this will take is not our problem but God’s. But we cannot for the sake of a fake unity join those who promote errors [This applies to the not only the now-Conciliar SSPX, but the Fake Resistance as well - we cannot accept their errors for the sake of a 'fake unity.' - The Catacombs], who reduce the Church to a human institution, or simply one religion among others thus destroying it. So we continue Tradition and continue to denounce those who reject it in the name of a new conciliar church. As Archbishop Lefebvre said: by cutting themselves off from the previous popes, the modern Roman authorities are the ones who are schismatic. When Rome returns to the Faith the only matter for discussion will be who will become a bishop and who will he replace?
2. His friendship with the “heroic” priests of Campos.
Friendship is indeed a noble sentiment. But does it come before one’s duty or before one’s Faith. Further, I simply ask the question: Does it take heroic virtue to capitulate in the fight for Tradition in order to obtain recognition? Did it take heroic virtue to renounce their spiritual father, Bishop de Castro Mayer, to abandon and turn against their former comrades in arms? I don’t think so. Is Father Aulagnier also on the verge of choosing between the pre-Vatican II and the post-Vatican II Archbishop Lefebvre? As if there was a difference.
3. The attitude of Rome is new
This is the most unbelievable reason of all. Where has Father Aulagnier been for the past 5 years? Have the modern Roman authorities really changed? Has he forgotten what they have done to the Fraternity of St Peter, which is their own creation? Has he forgotten about the two sacrilegious prayer meetings of Assisi? The last one took place a week after they granted recognition to the “heroic” priests of Campos who did not say a word about it.By the way, hasn’t he noticed how quiet the “heroic” priests of Campos are since they signed their agreement? [Similarly in these last ten years, Fr. Hewko made the point that the priests of the SSPX are very quiety about Vatican II, about the errors of Pope Francis, about an agreement with modernist Rome, etc. - The Catacombs] Doesn’t he know that on May 24 2003, at the same time as Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos was offering the traditional Mass in St Mary Major, the Pope was giving the Catholic church of Saints Vincent and Anastasius, which contains the embalmed hearts of 22 popes, to the Bulgarian Orthodox to share? Some change!
He seems to have forgotten what Archbishop Lefebvre knew well and denounced: there are two Romes: Catholic Rome and the neo-modernist Rome. As did Archbishop Lefebvre, we adhere with our whole heart to Catholic Rome but reject the neo-modernist Rome. Catholic Rome has been infiltrated and is occupied by Modernists. This is a fact. The proclamation by Cardinal Castrillon that “The old Roman rite thus conserves in the Church its right of citizenship” is nice but changes nothing. It is perfectly in line with the neo-modernist ecumenism of the neo-modernist Romans, which is: Why not accept also the Mass of St Pius V? We accept everything else.
But we are not looking for acceptance. We will not be happy if at the next Assisi prayer meeting Bishop Fellay stands closer to the Pope than the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama shouldn’t even be there. We hope that at the next prayer meeting at Assisi to pray for peace the Pope will be surrounded by all the Catholic bishops consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This is where the true peace is. Encouraging prayers to false gods will not bring peace.
So the words of Archbishop Lefebvre to John Paul II in 1988 are still valid today: “The time for cooperation has not yet come.” Absolutely nothing has changed. The present Roman authorities continue to be faithful to their principles of the new theology, new ecclesiology new evangelization exemplified by the spirit of Vatican II and Assisi in which they want to draw us and of which we want no part.
The SSPX also continues faithful to the Catholic principles transmitted by the Archbishop. “We do not view reconciliation in the same way. Cardinal Ratzinger see it in the sense of bringing us to Vatican II. [As does Pope Francis and all the post-Conciliar Popes - The Catacombs] We see it as the return of Rome to Tradition. We cannot come together. It is a dialogue between the deaf.” For the renewal of the dialogue with Rome “I will raise the question on the doctrinal level: ‘Are you in agreement with the great encyclicals of all the previous popes? Are you in agreement with Quanta cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei, Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi of Pius X, Quas primas of Pius XI, Humani generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these popes and their teaching? Do you still accept the anti-modernist oath? Are you in favor of the social kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors it is useless to talk. As long as you refuse to reform the council in light of the doctrine of these popes who preceded you there is no dialogue possible. It is useless… The opposition between us is not a small thing. It is not sufficient for then to tell us: you can say the old Mass… No the opposition between is not there, it is the doctrine.” 1
4. “I think that there is a danger in seeing this conflict last for ages”.
In my opinion, I think we might see here the real reason for Father Aulagnier’s change. The fight is dragging on. He has been at the center of this fight for over 30 years. Maybe he is tired of the fight! But this is not the first time that a conflict over the faith has lasted for ages. The Arian crisis lasted over 70 years, the papal exile in Avignon 68 years, the great Schism 39 years. Is this a reason to abandon the fight to come to some arrangement? It’s a good thing St Athanasius didn’t get tired of being exiled, threatened, falsely accused, excommunicated etc. He wouldn’t be St Athanasius.
He seems to have forgotten that: “In other times heretics and schismatics left the Church. Today, as St Pius X warned us, they remain to make her evolve from within and to seduce, if it were possible all or part of the flock of the holy bishop… But one does not deal with this kind of enemy all the more so that he is cunning. One does not negotiate with him a false and separate peace. One fights him till the end, strong in his right – Deus vult - God wills it – reminding him of the truths he attacks in vain… Rome knows it made an error, a grave error: the excommunication (against Mgr Lefebvre). How to repair the error? Time will tell. In any case not without a frank return of the hierarchy to the total and integral confession of the catholic faith whole and entire. The day will come when Rome by its conversion will find our serenity.2 Seems like has lost his serenity.
Dear faithful do not lose your serenity, stand calm firm in the unchanging faith of all times. Do not abandon the fight. Sure it is dragging out. But we will win.
As usual we thank you for your continued support and assure you of our daily prayers for you and yours especially during the holy season of Advent and Christmastide. May you all have a happy and blessed Christmas and may the newborn Lord and His holy Mother and St Joseph reward and bless you in the coming year.
With my blessing,
Father Jean Violette
1. Fideliter #66 November-December 1988
2. Father Paul Aulagnier Fideliter #65 September-October 1988
|
|
|
|
| Paul VI Encouraged the Increase of Disciplinary and Theological Abuses in the Church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-27-2023, 06:12 AM - Forum: The Architects of Vatican II
- No Replies
|
|
Paul VI Encouraged the Increase of Disciplinary and Theological Abuses in the Church
TIA | January 28, 2006
On July 9, 1969, four months after founding the International Theological Commission(ITC), which was intended to be an organ parallel to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Paul VI explained the concept of liberty used in the documents of Vatican II. We reproduce here the core of his lecture.
With this allocution, Paul VI officially condoned the many abuses that had already occurred in the Church, and encouraged the others to come.
Today some "conservatives" try to save Vatican II by attributing such abuses only to some few radical elements that supposedly did not properly interpret the Council. The reality does not support this construal of the facts. The abuses were allowed and promoted by the new liberty the Council conferred to ecclesiastics, theologians and laypeople, as Paul VI clearly affirmed in this document.
[Below] is pictured the cover of volume VII of Insegnamenti di Paolo VI; [also pictured is] a photocopy of the Italian original text. At left below, we present our translation of the lines highlighted in yellow.
Quote:In the life of the Church and consequently, in the life of each one of her children, we will have, therefore, a period of a greater liberty, that is to say, of fewer legal obligations and less internal inhibitions.
Formal discipline will be reduced; all arbitrary intolerance will be abolished together with all absolutism; the positive law will be simplified; the exercise of authority will be tempered; the sense of that Christan liberty, which so greatly interested the first Christian generation when it was free from observance of the Mosaic Law and its complex rituals, will be promoted (Gal. 5:1).
- (Allocution "Educarsi all'uso schietto e magnanimo della liberta," July 9, 1969, in Insegnamenti di Paolo VI, Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana, 1969 p. 1004).
|
|
|
|
| The Dystopia Towards Which We Run |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-27-2023, 05:46 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Book Review of Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, Easton Press, 1978, 237 pp.
Brave New World is considered a landmark for its startling depiction of a dystopian science fiction future that is ruled not by oppression, but by pleasure. Published in 1932 by Aldous Huxley, this book became a classic esteemed in literary circles for its writing as much as its warning.
Huxley wrote not what he saw as fantasy, but as the fruits of seeds beginning to sprout in his own time. A future depicting man totally conquered by his appetites once may have seemed a work of fiction; now in the 21st century it seems inevitable.
![[Image: A_079_Bnw.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_079_Bnw.jpg)
Huxley's dystopian classic
Garden of Earthly Delights
This is Huxley’s dystopia: a world of seemingly paradisiacal pleasures that has entirely abandoned morality and any sense of nobler things. In this future Humanity has decisively traded dignity for empty gratification.
It all begins with convenience. Having children is inconvenient, as are the sacrifices of being a mother or father. The hardships and travail involved with raising children naturally pose threats to a society predicated on ease of comfort and enjoyment. To bypass this, and ensure a steady stream of quality controlled “citizens,” humans are born in labs, created in test-tubes to conform to society by design and conditioned from the beginning to love their place.
From birth the psychological conditioning begins, refined by amoral science to trap children in a mental prison from which they may never escape their whole lives, captives to brainwashing tactics and doomed to exist as mere consumers and sexual objects.
Hyper-sexuality is the “norm” in this world. Children are sexualized from a young age to lose any possible sense of modesty or reservation. Promiscuity is touted as normal, even “healthy.” Any child showing reluctance to engage in such acts is seen as a grave problem and sent away for special conditioning. Prior generations are viewed as incomprehensibly prudish to have “denied” children their “fun.”
As adults the citizens of Huxley’s world are endless consumers, conditioned to use and discard a stream of tawdry products. To save is to damage economic prosperity. To make or maintain things of quality is to impoverish the workplace.
Every relationship is vapid and mediocre, an endless flitting between superficial gossip and prurient indulgences. Orgies are substituted for religion, the only pathetic “height” to which this future man can aspire is found in the glorification of the flesh. All crosses have been cut to resemble T’s, a worshipful reference to Henry Ford’s Model-T, the beginning of mass production and the efficient, pleasure driven, materialist society of the future. Religion is mocked as the superstition of savages.
![[Image: A_079_Gra.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_079_Gra.jpg)
The novel’s Soma mirrors today’s “feel-good” mentality intent on avoiding all pain
With the advances offered by a godless science, the man of the future lives in perfect health and youth until he is 60, giving him decades to enjoy the nearly endless torrent of fleshly delights. Finally, if any anxiety should surface to interfere with his pleasures, it is drowned out, deadened by a scientific “wonder drug” called Soma that leaves its user in a blissful stupor.
This is the Greatest Happiness principle applied and taken to its logical consequences: All that matters is the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number of people. No God, no spirit, no soul, no concept of sin, no hardships; the natural virtues of sacrifice, delayed gratification or heroism are not permitted. Pain is heresy: All bow and debase themselves on the altar of their bellies-made-god.
Death to Life
The inevitable byproduct of Huxley’s pleasure-world is a culture inimical to life itself.
One particularly abominable passage portrays what is called the “Malthusian Drill,” where girls are trained to instinctively, almost involuntarily, consume contraceptives at the slightest possibility of pregnancy. Any “mishap” is immediately aborted, and about 30% of girls are outright sterilized, made incapable of bearing life.
In this future monogamy is taboo. Dating the same person more than once is viewed by society with deep suspicion. Even the terms “mother” and “father” are considered obscene. Pleasure is viewed as existing for its own sake. The reader gets the impression that the denizens of Huxely’s World State are confused by the very idea of pregnancy, as if linking sexuality to childbearing was a bizarre, perhaps comical, contradiction of the way things “should” be.
Is Huxley’s world so different from ours?
This is the appalling future painted by Huxley in 1932. A world of the perpetually infantile: heedless of death, bound in the mental chains of conditioning, deliberately helpless, dependent on technological systems, and drowned in the pleasant oblivion of drugs, promiscuity and artificially generated music.
![[Image: A_079_Quo.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_079_Quo.jpg)
Huxley accurately foresaw a future of man willingly enslaved
![[Image: A_079_Pho.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_079_Pho.jpg)
Now let us consider the world in which we live: a society that intentionally renders its adults psychologically infantile, helplessly dependent on technology, educated and trained to approve what society conditions them to approve and to disdain, slaves to their bodily appetites, drowning in endless drugs and medication, trained from youth to see not only sexual promiscuity but even sexual “identity” as an ultimate right.
Ours is a society that forces the sexualization of children, laughs at motherhood, is disturbed by sacrifice, and sees pleasure as the ultimate good. A world sterilizing its girls and boys with the transgender movement and discouraging families in the name of “overpopulation.” A people ruled by a One World State seeking to encompass the earth and ensure that all submit to the deadening numbness of man’s lowest nature.
Are Huxley’s predictions still science fiction?
Huxley saw in his day the cultural seeds of abomination. Analyzing the rebellious trends of the 1920s, he looked down the path the world was hurtling and penned this warning. If one were to paint a timeline between Huxley’s time and the age of Brave New World, one easily sees how we are well on our way – if not already there.
Perhaps what is worse is that Huxley himself seems to see no way to defeat the monster of his own making. The book ends with the suicide of the “savage,” the one man who tried and failed to stand against the ocean of debauchery.
There, but for the grace of God, go we.
And we, 90 years later, are doing everything we can to sever ourselves from God’s grace.
|
|
|
|
| St. Louis de Montfort: ‘God Will Raise up the Greatest Saints in the Latter Times’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-26-2023, 05:56 AM - Forum: The Saints
- Replies (2)
|
|
‘God Will Raise up the Greatest Saints in the Latter Times’
Taken from here.
In the 17th century, the world saw a great prophet of Our Lady and her coming Reign, which would be in the Latter Days of the history of the world. In his monumental work 'True Devotion to Mary,' St. Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort talks about the slaves of Mary to come, who “will surpass in holiness most other saints as much the cedars of Lebanon tower above little shrubs.”
He proclaims that he brings an authentic message from God about the greater honor and wider knowledge and more prominent love that God has reserved for Our Lady in the Latter Times, the last era of the Church before the End Times, so that Christ might reign in society in her, through her and with her. To Jesus through Mary.
St. Louis Grignion de Montfort
All the rich among the people, to use an expression of the Holy Spirit as explained by St. Bernard, all the rich among the people will look pleadingly upon the countenance of Our Lady throughout all ages, and particularly as the world draws to its end. This means that the greatest saints, those richest in grace and virtue, will be the most assiduous in praying to the most Blessed Virgin, looking up to her as the perfect model to imitate and as a powerful helper to assist them.
I said that this will happen especially towards the end of the world, and indeed soon, because Almighty God and His Holy Mother are to raise up great saints who will surpass in holiness most other saints as much as the cedars of Lebanon tower above little shrubs. …
These great souls filled with grace and zeal will be chosen to oppose the enemies of God who are raging on all sides. They will be exceptionally devoted to the Blessed Virgin. Illumined by her light, strengthened by her food, guided by her spirit, supported by her arm, sheltered under her protection, they will fight with one hand and build with the other.
With one hand they will give battle, overthrowing and crushing heretics and their heresies, schismatics and their schisms, idolaters and their idolatries, sinners and their wickedness. With the other hand they will build the temple of the true Solomon and the mystical City of God, namely, the Blessed Virgin, who is called by the Fathers of the Church the Temple of Solomon and the City of God.
By word and example they will draw all men to a true devotion to her and although this will make many enemies, it will also bring about many victories and much glory to God alone. This is what God revealed to St. Vincent Ferrer (1350-1419), that outstanding Apostle of his day, as he has amply shown in one of his works.
This seems to have been foretold by the Holy Spirit in Psalm 58: "The Lord will reign in Jacob and all the ends of the earth. They will be converted towards evening and they will be as hungry as dogs and they will go around the city to find something to eat." This city around which men will roam at the end of the world seeking conversion and the appeasement of the hunger they have for justice is the most Blessed Virgin, who is called by the Holy Spirit the City of God.
Continued
Taken from Treatise on True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, Part 1, n. 2. "Mary’s part in the sanctification of souls"
|
|
|
|
| A new eucharistic miracle in Latin America? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-24-2023, 10:42 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Seems Eucharistic miracles in the Conciliar Church are in abundance these days...!
And most "occur" either directly or indirectly with lay Eucharistic ministers.
This 'miracle' occurred in a town where there is no priest. The local lay minister hands out previously 'consecrated' hosts.
"For there will rise up false Christs and false prophets, and they shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce (if it were possible) even the elect." Mark 13:22
✠ ✠ ✠
A new eucharistic miracle in Latin America?
ACI Prensa [emphasis mine] | Jul 21, 2023
The first bishop of the Diocese of Gracias in Honduras, Walter Guillén Soto, has recognized a new eucharistic miracle that occurred a year ago in a rural parish in the small town of San Juan.
Gracias, in the department of Lempira, is a town and “municipio” of just over 57,000 inhabitants in western Honduras. Its foundation dates back to 1536, and its original name was “Gracias a Dios” (Thanks Be to God).
Instead of states and counties, the administrative districts in Honduras are called departments and “municipios.”
Just 22 miles south of Gracias is the town of San Juan, in the neighboring department of Intibucá. There in the chapel of the El Espinal community is where the eucharistic miracle declared by the prelate occurred: a blood stain on a corporal.
The moment of the miracle
On the afternoon of June 9, 2022, when the Catholic Church was celebrating the liturgical feast of Jesus Christ, Eternal High Priest (celebrated the Thursday after Pentecost), José Elmer Benítez Machado [a layman] arrived before anyone else at the chapel of the El Espinal community to celebrate the Liturgy of the Word [!] and distribute to the faithful the hosts previously consecrated by the priests of the diocese.
About 60 families live in El Espinal, spread throughout the mountainous region, dedicated mainly to agriculture and raising cattle, pigs, and poultry. Barely 15 families attend the Liturgy of the Word every Thursday conducted by laypeople, since they don’t have a priest based in the town.
Benítez was appointed an extraordinary minister of holy Communion two years ago to attend to the pastoral needs of the chapel dedicated to the Apostle James.
At about 5 p.m. local time, the Liturgy of the Word began. When it was time to distribute the Eucharist, Benítez opened the tabernacle and noticed that the corporal (sacred linen cloth), under and folded over the wooden ciborium and on a white satin cushion, showed large stains that seemed to be of human blood.
“I was amazed,” he told “EWTN Noticias,” the EWTN’s Spanish-language news program. “My first hope was: ‘It’s the blood of Christ.” However, in the confusion of the moment, and to complete his ministry, he continued with the celebration and distributed the Eucharist.
Before concluding, at the time of making the parish announcements, Benítez asked those present if they had seen any water leaking into the church or if they knew of anyone who had entered before. He then told what he had seen.
“Several of us responded that we had not seen any water leaking, and when he explained what had happened, we asked him to show the corporal,” Reginaldo Aguilar Benítez, parish coordinator and sworn witness in the investigation process, told “EWTN Noticias.”
Pedrina García, who was in the chapel at the time, said she did not doubt that it was a miracle. “This is something that God has put there for us,” she said.
The investigation
The next day, Father Marvin Sotelo and Father Oscar Rodríguez, Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus — who had come to the town of San Juan de Intibucá just two months before — went to the community of El Espinal to corroborate what the parish coordinator had told them over the phone.
Sotelo put the corporal in a plastic bag with a hermetic seal, kept it in his rectory, and handed it over to Bishop Guillén two days later.
Guillén was particularly skeptical and decided to keep it in his personal chapel while he decided what to do. “I’m not that prone to naively believing in things. Logic makes us prudent in terms of believing things without sifting through them and without analyzing them,” he told “EWTN Noticias.”
Almost three months later, the bishop ordered some scientific tests to be carried out at the Santa Rosa de Copán Medical Center, about 30 miles from Gracias, to evaluate the oxidation and dilution of the apparent blood.
Concluding that the necessary material was not available to carry out an analysis, the corporal was sent to the DISA Test toxicological center in Tegucigalpa, where Dr. Héctor Díaz del Valle, who holds a doctorate in chemistry and pharmacy, led the investigation.
At the end of October 2022, the analysis began with the intervention of an external forensic expert and an expert in analytical toxicology.
The same blood type on the Shroud of Turin and Lanciano
Initially, it was ruled out that the stains were of wood resin or animal blood. Subsequent procedures revealed that the blood was human and was type AB with a positive Rh factor, the same as the eucharistic miracle of Lanciano, Italy, as well as that found on the Shroud of Turin, also in Italy.
According to the World Population Review portal in Honduras, less than 2.5% of the population in that country has that same blood type.
The expert tests also ruled out that the pattern of the blood stains could have been made artificially.
Valle was surprised because the cloth “had contact with air, humidity; presumptive tests were carried out on the cloth and it did not dry properly” and yet to date “it does not show deterioration or fungus.”
In forensic investigations, presumptive and confirmatory tests are a useful tool in the study of blood stains.
After carrying out the investigations and putting the statements of the witnesses under notarized oath, the bishop of Gracias confirmed that it was a surprising occurrence. “I don’t place in doubt the credibility,” he said.
“I think that this extraordinary, visible, tangible, perceptible, verifiable sign of this manifestation of the blood of the Lord in an obscure community in the midst of the most extreme rurality of our agricultural environment says a lot at this time,” he said.
“You have to think that God seeks extremes to call us to the balance of good sense and truth. It seems to me that this is an extreme sign of God who manifests himself again, as he has done in the holy Scriptures, in the history of salvation, by those simple ones whom Mary praises for their lowliness,” the bishop said.
|
|
|
|
| ‘World ID’ Is Coming ‘Whether You Like It or Not’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-24-2023, 07:15 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
CEO of Company that Wants to Scan Your Irises: ‘World ID’ Is Coming ‘Whether You Like It or Not’
Brietbart | 21 Jul 2023
Alex Blania, CEO of Worldcoin, a company that wants billions of people to scan their irises to create a global system of authentication, says that a global form of ID is coming “whether you like it or not.”
Worldcoin was co-founded by Sam Altman, who is also the CEO of OpenAI, the company behind the controversial large language model ChatGPT. The AI mogul previously stated his hopes for the technology to “break capitalism” by enabling the more efficient allocation of resources.
![[Image: OpenAI-founder-Sam-Altman-creator-of-ChatGPT.jpg]](https://media.breitbart.com/media/2023/02/OpenAI-founder-Sam-Altman-creator-of-ChatGPT.jpg)
OpenAI founder Sam Altman, creator of ChatGPT (TechCrunch/Flickr)
Previous investors in Worldcoin include disgraced Crypto kingpin Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX.
The company uses technology that scans the irises of people around the world, data which is then used to grant access to the Worldcoin ecosystem, as well as a means of distinguishing between real people and bots.
This means that Worldcoin’s success will in part be driven by the success of AI in impersonating humans, a field that Altman’s OpenAI is also closely tied to.
In recent remarks, Blania said that eventually, anyone who wants to use the internet will need to be authenticated by Worldcoin or “something like it.”
“Something like World ID will eventually exist, meaning that you will need to verify [you are human] on the internet, whether you like it or not,” said Blania.
Coindesk summarizes the ambitious goals of Worldcoin:
Quote:To do this, they invented a physical device called “The Orb” that can scan your eyeball. The goal is for The Orb to eventually scan every eyeball of every human who walks the Earth. And at some point, if all goes well, everyone will have access to open-source and decentralized financial tools.
If Worldcoin was the brainchild of some random crypto bro, maybe it could be laughed away as a delusion of grandeur. But the project has real intellectual heft. It was co-founded by Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI (creator of ChatGPT), who’s arguably the most central player in the development of AI. Altman suspects that the world will change forever if — or when — AI becomes so advanced that it achieves AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence, meaning it truly surpasses the abilities of humans.
Distinguishing between bots and humans is rising in importance as AI continues to change the tech industry. Using biometric data, as Worldcoin does, is one potential solution — although the challenge for the company will be overcoming privacy concerns.
|
|
|
|
| St. Alphonsus Liguori: Daily Meditations for Eighth Week after Pentecost |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-23-2023, 06:18 AM - Forum: Pentecost
- Replies (8)
|
|
What joy will he experience at the Judgment when he hears these welcome words: Well done, thou good and faithful servant! Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord! But it is written: What things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. Let us weigh well what things we have hitherto been sowing, and let us do now what we shall then wish to have done.
I.
What great consolation he will enjoy at the Judgment hour who, for the love of Jesus Christ, has been detached from all worldly things; who has loved contempt, and mortified the body; who, in a word has loved only God!
What joy will he experience in hearing these welcome words: Well done, thou good and faithful servant! Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord! Be glad and rejoice, for now thou art saved, and there is no longer any fear of being lost.
On the contrary, the soul which leaves this life in a state of sin, will, even before Jesus condemns it, condemn itself, and declare itself deserving of hell.
O Mary, my powerful advocate, pray to Jesus for me. Help me, now that thou art able to help me. For then thou wouldst have to see me perish and not be able to assist me.
What things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap (Gal. vi. 8). Let us consider what things we have hitherto been sowing, and let us do now what we shall then wish to have done.
If now, within an hour, we had to stand for judgment, how much should we be willing to give to purchase another year? And how are we going to employ the years which remain for us?
II.
The Abbot Agatho, after long years of penance, when he thought of Judgment, would say: “What will become of me when I shall be judged?” And holy Job exclaimed: What shall I do when God shall rise to judge? And when he shall examine, what shall I answer him? (Job. xxxi. 14). And what shall we answer when Jesus Christ calls us to account for the graces He has bestowed upon us, and for the bad use we have made of them?
O my God, deliver not up to beasts the souls that confess to thee (Ps. lxxiii. 19). I do not deserve pardon, but Thou wouldst not have me to lose confidence in Thy mercy. Save me, O Lord, and raise me up from the mire of my miseries. I desire to amend my life, do Thou assist me.
The cause to be decided at the hour of our death will be one that will involve eternal happiness or eternal misery. Hence we should be most careful in using our utmost endeavours to secure success. Each one, considering this, should say to himself: Yes, this is true. Why, therefore, do I not leave all things to give myself entirely to God? Seek ye the Lord, while he may be found (Is. lv. 6). The sinner who thinks to find God at the Judgment after death will not find Him. But in life he who seeks Him, finds Him.
O Jesus, if hitherto I have despised Thy love, I now seek for nothing but to love Thee and to be loved by Thee. Grant that I may find Thee, O God of my soul!
Spiritual Reading
PRAYER
GOD WISHES ALL MEN TO BE SAVED.
Taking, then, for granted that Prayer is necessary for the attainment of Eternal Life, as we have proved, we ought, consequently, to take for granted also that every one has Divine assistance to enable him actually to pray, without need of any further special grace; and that by Prayer he may obtain all the other graces necessary to enable him to persevere in keeping the Commandments, and thus gain Eternal Life; so that no one who is lost can ever excuse himself by saying that it was through want of the aid necessary for his salvation. For as God, in the natural order, has ordained that man should be born naked, and in want of several things necessary for life, but then has given him hands and intelligence to clothe himself and provide for his other needs; so, in the supernatural order, man is born unable to obtain salvation by his own strength; but God in His goodness grants to every one the grace of Prayer, by which he is able to obtain all other graces which he needs in order to keep the Commandments and to be saved.
But before I come to treat this point, I must first establish Two Preliminary Propositions:
FIRST PRELIMINARY PROPOSITION
GOD WISHES ALL MEN TO BE SAVED, AND THEREFORE CHRIST DIED TO SAVE ALL MEN.
(a) God wishes all men to be saved.
God loves all things that He has created: For thou lovest all things that are, and hatest none of the things which thou hast made (Wis. xi. 25). Now love cannot be idle: “All love has a force of its own, and cannot be idle,” says St. Augustine. Hence love necessarily implies benevolence, so that the person who loves cannot help doing good to the person beloved whenever there is an opportunity: “Love persuades a man to do those things which he believes to be good for him whom he loves,” says Aristotle. If, then, God loves all men, He must, in consequence, will that all should obtain Eternal salvation, which is the one and sovereign good of man, seeing that it is the one end for which he was created: You have your fruit unto sanctification; and the end life everlasting (Rom. vi. 22).
This doctrine, that God wishes all men to be saved, and that Jesus Christ died for the salvation of all, is now a certain doctrine taught by the Catholic Church, as theologians in common teach, for example, Petavius, Gonet, Gotti, and others, besides Tourneley, who adds, that it is a doctrine all but of Faith.
1.–Proved from Decision of the Church.
With reason, therefore, were the Predestinarians condemned, who, among their errors, taught that God does not will all men to be saved, as Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, testifies of them: “The ancient Predestinarians asserted that God does not will all men to be saved, but only those who are saved.” These persons were condemned, first in the Council of Arles, A.D. 475, which pronounced “anathema to him that said that Christ did not die for all men, and that He does not will all to be saved.” They were next condemned in the Council of Lyons, A.D. 490, where Lucidus was forced to retract, and also to proclaim, “I condemn the man who says that Christ did not suffer for the salvation of all men.” So also in the ninth century, Gottschalk, who renewed the same error, was condemned by the Council of Quercy, A.D. 853, in the third Article of which it was decided, “God wills all men, without exception, to be saved, although all men be not saved.” These men were justly condemned, precisely because they taught that God does not will all men to be saved; since from the proposition that those whom God wills to be saved are infallibly saved, it would logically follow that God does not will even all the faithful to be saved, let alone all men.
This was also clearly expressed by the Council of Trent, in which it was said that Jesus Christ died, “that all might receive the adoption of sons,” and again it says: “But though He died for all, yet all do not receive the benefits of His death.” The Council, then, takes for granted that the Redeemer died not only for the elect, but also for those who, through their own fault, do not receive the benefit of Redemption. Nor is it of any use to affirm that the Council only meant to say that Jesus Christ has given to the world a ransom sufficient to save all men; for in this sense we might say that He died also for the devils. Moreover, the Council of Trent intended here to reprove the errors of those innovators, who, not denying that the Blood of Christ was sufficient to save all, yet asserted that in fact it was not shed and given for all. This is the error which the Council intended to condemn when it said that our Saviour died for all. Further, in Chapter VI, it says that sinners are put in a fit state to receive justification by hope in God through the merits of Jesus Christ: “They are raised to hope, trusting that God will be merciful to them through Christ.” Now, if Jesus Christ had not applied to all the merits of His Passion, then, since no one (without a special revelation) could be certain of being among the number of those to whom the Redeemer had willed to apply the fruit of His merits, no sinner could entertain such hope, not having the certain and secure foundation which is necessary for hope; namely, that God wills all men to be saved, and will grant pardon to all sinners made worthy of it by the merits of Jesus Christ.
2.–Proved from the celebrated text of St. Paul.
On the other hand, both the Scriptures and all the Fathers assure us that God sincerely and really wishes the salvation of all men and the conversion of all sinners, as long as they are in this world. For this we have, first of all, the express words of St. Paul: Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. ii. 4). The sentence of the Apostle is absolute and decisive–God wills all men to be saved. These words in their natural sense declare that God truly wills all men to be saved; and it is a certain rule received in common by all, that the words of Scripture are to be interpreted in the literal sense, except in the sole case where the literal sense is repugnant to Faith and morals. St. Bonaventure writes precisely to our purpose when he says: “We must hold that when the Apostle says, God wills all men to be saved, it is necessary to grant that He does will it.”
It is true that St. Augustine and St. Thomas mention different interpretations which have been given to this text, but both these Doctors understand it to mean a real will of God to save all, without exception.
And concerning St. Augustine, we shall see just now that this was his true opinion; so that St. Prosper protests against attributing to him the idea that God did not sincerely wish the salvation of all men, and of each individual, as an aspersion on the holy Doctor. Hence the same St. Prosper, who was a most faithful disciple of his, says: “It is most sincerely to be believed and confessed that God wills all men to be saved; since the Apostle (whose very words these are) is particular in commanding that prayers should be made to God for all.”
The argument of the Saint is clear, founded on St. Paul’s words in the above-cited passage: I desire, therefore,… that supplications, prayers … be made for all men (1 Tim. ii. 1); and then he adds: For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who will have all men to be saved (1 Tim. ii. 3, 4). So the Apostle wishes us to pray for all, exactly in the sense that God wishes the salvation of all. St. Chrysostom uses the same argument: “If He wills all to be saved, surely we ought to pray for all. If He desires all to be saved, do you also be of one mind with Him.” And if in some passages in his controversy with the Semi-Pelagians, St. Augustine seems to have held a different interpretation of this text, saying that God does not will the salvation of each individual, but only of some, Petavius well observes that here the holy Father speaks only incidentally, not with direct intention; or at any rate, that he speaks of the grace of that absolute and victorious will (voluntas absoluta et victrix) with which God absolutely wills the salvation of some persons, and of which the Saint elsewhere says, “The will of the Almighty is always invincible.”
Let us hear how St. Thomas uses another method of reconciling the opinion of St. Augustine with that of St. John Damascene, who holds that antecedently God wills all and each individual to be saved: “God’s first intention is to will all men to be saved, that as Good He may make us partakers of His goodness: but after we have sinned, He wills as Just to punish us.” On the other hand, St. Augustine (as we have seen) seems in a few passages to think differently. But St. Thomas reconciles these opinions, and says St. John Damascene spoke of the antecedent will of God, by which he really wills all men to be saved, while St. Augustine spoke of the consequent will. He then goes on to explain the meaning of antecedent and consequent will: “Antecedent will is that by which God wills all to be saved; but when all the circumstances of this or that individual are considered, it is not found to be good that all men should be saved; for it is good that he who prepares himself, and consents to it, should be saved; but not good that he who is unwilling and resists… And this is called the consequent will, because it presupposes a foreknowledge of a man’s deeds, not as a cause of the act of will, but as a reason for the thing willed and determined.” …
And again: “God, by His most liberal will, gives grace to every one that prepares himself–who wills all men to be saved; and therefore the grace of God is wanting to no man, but as far as He is concerned He communicates it to every one.” … And St. Thomas again, and more distinctly, declares what he means by antecedent and consequent will: “A judge antecedently wishes every man to live, but he consequently wishes a murderer to be hanged; so God antecedently wills every man to be saved, but He consequently wills some to be damned; in consequence, that is, of the exigencies of His justice.”
I have no intention here of blaming the opinion that men are predestined to glory previously to the provision of their merits; I only say that I cannot understand how those who think that God, without any regard to their merits, has elected some to eternal life, and excluded others, can therefore persuade themselves that He wills all to be saved; unless, indeed, they mean that this will of God is not true and sincere, but rather a hypothetical or metaphorical will…
It is certain that the happiness of a creature consists in the attainment of the end for which he was created. It is likewise certain that God creates all men for eternal life. If, therefore, God, having created certain men for eternal life, had thereupon, without regard to their sins, excluded them from it, He would in creating them have utterly hated them without cause, and would have done them the greatest injury they could possibly suffer in excluding them from the attainment of their end, that is, of the glory for which they had been created: “For,” says Petavius in a passage which we abridge, “God cannot feel indifferent whether He loves or hates His creatures, especially men, whom He either loves to eternal life or hates to damnation. Now it is the greatest evil that can befall man to be alienated from God and to be reprobate; wherefore, if God wills the everlasting destruction of any man’s soul, He does not love him, but hates him with the greatest hatred possible in that kind which transcends the natural order.” … “Wherefore,” Petavius concludes, “if God loves every man with a love which is antecedent to his merits, He does not hate his soul, and therefore He does not desire the greatest evil to him.” If, then, God loves all men, as is certain, we ought to hold that He wills all to be saved, and that He has never hated any one to such a degree that He has willed to do him the greatest evil, by excluding him from glory previously to the prevision of his demerits.
I say, however, and repeat again and again, that I cannot understand it; for this matter of predestination is so profound a mystery, that it made the Apostle exclaim: Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How incomprehensible his judgments, and how unsearchable his ways! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? (Rom. xi. 33, 34). We ought to submit ourselves to the will of God, Who has chosen to leave this mystery in obscurity in His Church, that we all may humble ourselves under the deep judgments of His Divine Providence. All the more, because Divine grace, by which alone men gain eternal life, is dispensed more or less abundantly by God entirely gratuitously, and without any regard to our merits. So that to save ourselves it will always be necessary for us to throw ourselves into the arms of the Divine Mercy, in order that God may assist us with His grace to obtain salvation, trusting always in His infallible promises to hear and save the man who prays to Him.
But let us return to our point, that God sincerely wills all men to be saved.
3.–There are other texts which prove the same thing.
As I live, saith the Lord, I desire not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked may turn from his way and live (Ezech. xxxiii. 11). He says that not only does He not will the death, but that He wills the life of a sinner; and He swears, as Tertullian observes, in order that He may be more readily believed in this: “When moreover He swears, saying, as I live, He desires to be believed.”
Further, David says: For wrath is in his indignation, and life in his will (Ps. xxix. 6). If He chastises us, He does it because our sins provoke Him to indignation; but as to His will, He wills not our death but our life; Life in his will. St. Basil says concerning this text, that God wills all to be made partakers of life. David says elsewhere: Our God is the God of salvation; … of the Lord are the issues from death (Ps. lxvii. 21). On this Bellarmine says: “This is proper to Him; this is His nature; our God is a saving God, and His are the issues from death–that is, liberation from death”; so that it is God’s proper nature to save all, and to deliver all from eternal death.
Our Lord says: Come to me, all ye that labour and are burdened, and I will refresh you (Matt. xi. 28). If He calls all to salvation, then He truly wills all to be saved. Again, St. Peter says: He willeth not that any should perish, but that all should return to penance (2. Pet. iii. 9). He does not will the damnation of any one, but He wills that all should do penance, and so be saved.
Again the Lord says: Behold I stand at the gate and knock. If any man shall open to me the door I will come in to him. Why will you die, O house of Israel? Return ye and live (Ezech. xviii. 31, 32). What is there that I ought to do more to my vineyard, that I have not done to it? (Is. v. 4). How often would I have gathered together thy children, as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and thou wouldst not! (Matt. xxiii. 37). How could the Lord have said that He stands knocking at the hearts of us sinners? How exhort us so strongly to return to His arms? How reproach us by asking what more He could have done for our salvation? How say that He has willed to receive us as children, if he had not a true will to save all men? Again, St. Luke relates that our Lord, looking on Jerusalem from a distance, and contemplating the destruction of its people because of sin, wept: Seeing the city, he wept over it (Luke xix. 41). Why did He weep then, says Theophylact (after St. Chrysostom), seeing the ruin of the Jews, unless it was because He really desired their salvation? How, then, after so many attestations of our Lord, in which He makes known to us that He wills to see all men saved, how can it ever be said that God does not will the salvation of all? “But if these texts of Scripture,” says Petavius, “in which God has testified His will in such clear and often-repeated expressions, nay even with tears and with an oath, may be abused and distorted to the very opposite sense–namely, that God determined to send all mankind (except a few) to perdition, and never had a will to save them, what dogma of Faith is so clear as to be safe from similar injury and cavil?” … And Cardinal Sfondrati adds: “Those who think otherwise seem to me to make God a mere stage-god; like those people who pretend to be kings in a play, when indeed they are anything but kings.”
4.–Proved from the general consent of the Fathers.
Moreover, this truth, that God wills all men to be saved, is confirmed by the general consent of the Fathers. There can be no doubt that all the Greek Fathers are unanimous in saying that God wills all and each individual to be saved. So, St. Justin, St. Basil, St. Gregory, St. Cyril, St. Methodius, and St. Chrysostom, all adduced by Petavius. But let us see what the Latin Fathers say.
St. Jerome: “God wills to save all; but since no man is saved without his own will, God wills us to will what is good, that when we have willed, He may also will to fulfil His designs in us.” And in another place: “God therefore willed to save those who desire (to be saved); and He invited them to salvation that their will might have its reward; but they would not believe in Him.”
St. Hilary: “God would have all men to be saved, and not those alone who are to belong to the number of the elect, but all absolutely, so as to make no exception.”
St. Paulinus: “Christ says to all: Come to me, etc.; for He, the Creator of all men, so far as He is concerned, wills every man to be saved.”
St. Ambrose: “Even with respect to the wicked He had to manifest His will (to save them), and therefore He could not pass over His betrayer, that all might see that in the election even of the traitor He exhibits His desire to save all … and, so far as God is concerned, He shows to all that He was willing to deliver all.” …
St. Chrysostom asks: “Why then are not all men saved, if God wills all to be saved?” And he answers: “Because every man’s will does not coincide with God’s will, and He forces no man.”
St. Augustine: “God wills all men to be saved, but not so as to destroy their free will.” He says the same thing in several other places to which we shall refer later.
Evening Meditation
THE PRACTICE OF THE LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST
“Charity endureth all things”
HE THAT LOVES JESUS CHRIST WITH A STRONG LOVE DOES NOT CEASE TO LOVE HIM IN THE MIDST OF TEMPTATIONS AND DESOLATIONS
I.
Let us come now to the means which we have to employ in order to vanquish temptations. Spiritual masters prescribe a variety of means; but the most necessary, and the safest, of which only I will here speak, is to have immediate recourse to God with all humility and confidence, saying: “Incline unto my aid, O God; O Lord make haste to help me!” This short prayer will enable us to overcome the assaults of all the devils of hell; for God is infinitely more powerful than all of them. Almighty God knows well that of ourselves we are unable to resist the temptations of the infernal powers; and on this account the most learned Cardinal Gotti remarks that “whenever we are assailed, and in danger of being overcome, God is obliged to give us strength enough to resist as often as we call upon Him for it.”
And how can we doubt of receiving help from Jesus Christ, after all the promises He has made us in the Holy Scriptures? Come to me, all you that labour and are heavy laden, and I will refresh you (Matt. xi. 28). Come to Me, ye who are wearied in fighting against temptations, and I will restore your strength. Call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me (Ps. xlix. 15). When thou seest thyself troubled by thine enemies, call upon Me, and I will bring thee out of danger, and thou shalt praise Me. Then shalt thou call, and the Lord shall hear: thou shalt cry, and He shall say, Here I am (Is. lviii. 9). Then shalt thou call upon the Lord for help, and He will hear thee: thou shalt cry out, Quick, O Lord, help me! and He will say to thee, Behold, here I am; I am present to help thee. Who hath called upon him and he despised him? (Ecclus. ii. 12). And who, says the Prophet, has ever called upon God, and God has despised him and given him no help? David felt sure of never falling a prey to his enemies, whilst he could have recourse to God. He says: Praising, I will call upon the Lord: and I shall be saved from my enemies (Ps. xvii. 4). For he well knew that God is close to all who invoke His aid: The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him (Ps. cxliv. 18). And St. Paul adds that the Lord is by no means sparing, but lavish of graces towards all that pray to Him: Rich unto all that call upon him. (Rom. x. 12).
II.
Oh, would to God that all men had recourse to Him whenever they are tempted to offend Him; they would then certainly never commit sin! They unhappily fall, because, led away by the cravings of their vicious appetites, they prefer to lose God, the Sovereign Good, than to forego their wretched short-lived pleasures. Experience gives us manifest proofs that whoever calls on God in temptation does not fall; and whoever fails to call on Him, as surely falls: and this is especially true of temptations to impurity. Solomon himself said that he knew very well that he could not be chaste unless God gave him the grace to be so; and therefore he invoked Him by prayer in the moment of temptation: And as I knew that I could not otherwise be continent, except God gave it … I went to the Lord and besought him (Wis. viii. 21). In temptations against purity (and the same holds good with regard to those against Faith), we must take it as a rule never to stay and combat the temptation hand to hand; but we must endeavour immediately to get rid of it indirectly by making a good act of the love of God or of sorrow for our sins, or else by applying ourselves to some indifferent occupation calculated to distract us. As soon as we discover a thought of evil tendency, we must disown it immediately, and, so to speak, close the door in its face, and deny it all entrance into the mind, without tarrying in the least to examine its object or errand. We must cast away these foul suggestions as quickly as we would shake off a hot spark from the fire.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: A_038_Paul6Liberty01.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/Images/A_038_Paul6Liberty01.jpg)
![[Image: A_038_Paul6Liberty02b.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/Images/A_038_Paul6Liberty02b.jpg)
![[Image: A_079_Rev.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/ImagesA/A_079_Rev.jpg)
![[Image: 89uyhgmqfkd2v9lcio8s9fk153hqm8l752rifto....84&webp=on]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/89uyhgmqfkd2v9lcio8s9fk153hqm8l752rifto.webp?secure=Sx-MpJdRYEZ3QrNMc99IEg&expires=1690486584&webp=on)
