| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 458 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 456 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
|
|
| June 1st - Sts. Justin the Philosopher, Pamphilus, Caprais, Peter of Pisa, and Wistan |
|
Posted by: Stone - 06-01-2021, 07:08 AM - Forum: June
- Replies (3)
|
 |
Saints Honored on This Day: Sts. Justin the Philosopher, Pamphilus, Caprais, Peter of Pisa, and Wistan
ST. JUSTIN THE PHILOSOPHER, M.
From the life of the saint, compiled from his writings by Dom. Marand, the learned and judicious editor of St. Justin’s works, printed at Paris in 1742; and at Venice in 1747. Also from Tatian Eusebius, and the original short acts of his martyrdom, in Ruinart. On his writings, see Dom. Nourry, Apparatus is Bibl. Patr. Ceillier, and Marechal, Concordance des Pères, t. 1.
A. D. 167.
ST. JUSTIN was born at Neapolis, now Naplosa, the ancient Sichem, and formerly the capital of the province of Samaria. Vespasian, having endowed its inhabitants with the privileges belonging to Roman citizens, gave it the name of Flavia. His son Titus sent thither a colony of Greeks, among whom were the father and grandfather of our saint. His father, a heathen,* brought him up in the errors and superstitions of paganism, but at the same time did not neglect to cultivate his mind by several branches of human literature. St. Justin accordingly informs us,1 that he spent his youth in reading the poets, orators, and historians. Having gone through the usual course of these studies, he gave himself up to that of philosophy in quest of truth, an ardent love of which was his predominant passion. He addressed himself first to a master who was a Stoic; and after having stayed some time with him, seeing he could learn nothing of him concerning God, he left him, and went to a Peripatetic, a very subtle man in his own conceit: but Justin, being desired the second day after admission, to fix his master’s salary, that he might know what he was to be allowed for his pains in teaching him, he left him also, concluding that he was no philosopher. He then tried a Pythagorean, who had a great reputation, and who boasted much of his wisdom; but he required of his scholar, as a necessary preliminary to his admission, that he should have learned music, astronomy, and geometry. Justin could not bear such delays in the search of God, and preferred the school of an Academic, under whom he made great progress in the Platonic philosophy, and vainly flattered himself with the hope of arriving in a short time at the sight of God, which the Platonic philosophy seemed to have had chiefly in view. Walking one day by the sea-side, for the advantage of a greater freedom from noise and tumult, he saw, as he turned about, an old man who followed him pretty close. His appearance was majestic, and had a great mixture in it of mildness and gravity. Justin looking on him very attentively, the man asked him if he knew him. Justin answered in the negative. “Why then,” said he, “do you look so steadfastly upon me?” Justin replied: “It is the effect of my surprise to meet any human creature in this remote and solitary place.” “What brought me hither,” said that old man, “was my concern for some of my friends. They are gone a journey, and I am come hither to look out for them.”† They then fell into a long discourse concerning the excellency of philosophy in general, and of the Platonic in particular, which Justin asserted to be the only true way to happiness, and of knowing and seeing God. This the grave person refuted at large, and at length by the force of his arguments convinced him that those philosophers whom he had the greatest esteem for, Plato and Pythagoras, had been mistaken in their principles, and had not a thorough knowledge of God and of the soul of man, nor could they in consequence communicate it to others. This drew from him the important query, Who were the likeliest persons to set him in the right way? The stranger answered, that long before the existence of these reputed philosophers, there were certain blessed men, lovers of God, and divinely inspired, called prophets, on account of their foretelling things which have since come to pass; whose books, yet extant, contain many solid instructions about the first cause and end of all things, and many other particulars becoming a philosopher to know. That their miracles and their predictions had procured them such credit, that they established truth by authority, and not by disputes and elaborate demonstrations of human reason, of which few men are capable. That they inculcated the belief of one only God, the Father and author of all things, and of his Son Jesus Christ, whom he had sent into the world. He concluded his discourse with this advice: “As for thyself, above all things, pray that the gates of life may be opened unto thee: for these are not things to be discerned, unless God and Christ grant to a man the knowledge of them.” After these words he departed, and Justin saw him no more: but his conversation left a deep impression on the young philosopher’s soul, and kindled there an ardent affection for these true philosophers, the prophets. And upon a further inquiry into the credibility of the Christian religion, he embraced it soon after. What had also no small weight in persuading him of the truth of the Christian faith, was the innocence and true virtue of its professors; seeing with what courage and constancy, rather than to betray their religion, or commit the least sin, they suffered the sharpest tortures, and encountered, nay, even courted death itself, in its most horrible shapes. “When I heard the Christians traduced and reproached,” says he, “yet saw them fearless and rushing on death, and on all things that are accounted most dreadful to human nature, I concluded with myself that it was impossible those men should wallow in vice, and be carried away with the love of lust and pleasure.”2 Justin, by the course of his studies, must have been grown up when he was converted to the faith. Tillemont and Marand understand, by an obscure passage in St. Epiphanius,3 that he was in the thirtieth year of his age.*
St. Justin, after he became a Christian, continued to wear the pallium, or cloak, as Eusebius and St. Jerom inform us, which was the singular badge of a philosopher. Aristides, the Athenian philosopher and a Christian, did the same; so did Heraclas, even when he was bishop of Alexandria. St. Epiphanius calls St. Justin a great ascetic, or one who professed a most austere and holy life. He came to Rome soon after his conversion, probably from Egypt. Tillemont and Dom. Marand think that he was a priest, from his description of baptism, and the account he gave at his trial of people resorting to his house for instruction. This, however, is uncertain; and Ceillier concludes, from the silence of the ancients on this head, that he was always a layman: but he seems to have preached, and therefore to have been at least deacon. His discourse, or oration to the Greeks,4 he wrote soon after his conversion, in order to convince the heathens of the reasonableness of his having deserted paganism. He urges the absurdity of idolatry, and the inconsistency of ascribing lewdness and other crimes to their deities: on the other hand, he declares his admiration of, and reverence for, the purity and sanctity of the Christian doctrine, and the awful majesty of the divine writings which still the passions, and fix in a happy tranquillity the mind of man, which finds itself everywhere else restless. His second work is called his Parænesis, or Exhortation to the Greeks, which he drew up at Rome: in this he employs the flowers of eloquence, which even in his apologies he despises. In it he shows the errors of idolatry, and the vanity of the heathen philosophers; reproaches Plato with making an harangue to the Athenians, in which he pretended to establish a multitude of gods, only to escape the fate of Socrates; while it is clear, from his writings, that he believed one only God. He transcribes the words of Orpheus the Sibyl, Homer, Sophocles, Pythagoras, Plato, Mercury, and Acmon, or rather Ammon, in which they profess the unity of the Deity. He wrote his book on Monarchy,5 expressly to prove the unity of God, from the testimonies and reasons of the heathen philosophers themselves. The epistle to Diognetus is an incomparable work of primitive antiquity, attributed to St. Justin by all the ancient copies, and doubtless genuine, as Dr. Cave, Ceillier, Marand. &c., show; though the style is more elegant and florid than the other works of this father. Indeed it is not mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerom; but neither do they mention the works of Athenagoras. And what wonder that, the art of printing not being as yet discovered, some writings should have escaped their notice? Tillemont fancies the author of this piece to be more ancient, because he calls himself a disciple of the apostles: but St. Justin might assume that title, who lived contemporary with St. Polycarp, and others, who had seen some of them. This Diognetus was a learned philosopher, a person of great rank, and preceptor to the emperor Marcus Aurelius, who always consulted and exceedingly honored him. Dom. Nourry6 mistakes grossly, when he calls him a Jew: for in this very epistle is he styled an adorer of gods. This great man was desirous to know upon what assurances the Christians despised the world, and even torments and death, and showed to one another a mutual love, which appeared wonderful to the rest of mankind, for it rendered them seemingly insensible to the greatest injuries. St. Justin, to satisfy him, demonstrates the folly of idolatry, and the imperfection of the Jewish worship and sets forth the sanctity practised by the Christians, especially their humility, meekness, love of those who hate them without so much as knowing any reason of their hatred, &c. He adds, that their numbers and virtue are increased by tortures and massacres, and explains clearly the divinity of Christ,7 the maker of all things, and Son of God. He shows that by reason alone we could never attain to the true knowledge of God, who sent his Son to teach us his holy mysteries; and, when we deserved only chastisement, to pay the full price of our redemption;—the holy One to suffer for sinners,—the person offended for the offenders? and when no other means could satisfy for our crimes, we were covered under the wings of justice itself, and rescued from slavery. He extols exceedingly the immense goodness and love of God for man, in creating him, and the world for his use; in subjecting to him other things, and in sending his only-begotten Son with the promise of his kingdom, to those who shall have loved him. “But after you shall have known him,” says he, “with what inexpressible joy do you think you will be filled! How ardently will you love him who first loved you! And when you shall love him, you will be an imitator of his goodness. He who bears the burdens of others, assists all, humbles himself to all, even to his inferiors, and supplies the wants of the poor with what he has received from God, is truly the imitator of God. Then will you see on earth that God governs the world; you will know his mysteries, and will love and admire those who suffer for him: you will condemn the imposture of the world, and despise death, only fearing eternal death, in never-ending fire. When you know that fire, you will call those blessed who here suffer flames for justice. I speak not of things to which I am a stranger, but having been a disciple of the apostles, I am a teacher of nations,& c.”
St. Justin made a long stay in Rome, dwelling near the Timothin baths, on the Viminal hill. The Christians met in his house to perform their devotions, and he applied himself with great zeal to the instruction of all those who resorted to him. Evelpistus, who suffered with him, owned at his examination that he had heard with pleasure Justin’s discourses. The judge was acquainted with his zeal, when he asked him, in what place he assembled his disciples. Not content with laboring in the conversion of Jews and Gentiles, he exerted his endeavors in defending the Catholic faith against all the heresies of that age. His excellent volumes against Marcion, as they are styled by St. Jerom, are now lost, with several other works commended by the ancients. The martyr, after his first Apology, left Rome, and probably performed the functions of an evangelist, in many countries, for several years. In the reign of Antoninus Pius, being at Ephesus, and casually meeting, in the walks of Xistus, Tryphon, whom Eusebius calls the most celebrated Jew of that age, and who was a famous philosopher, he fell into discourse with him, which brought on a disputation, which was held in the presence of several witnesses during two entire days. St. Justin afterwards committed to writing this dialogue with Tryphon, which work is a simple narrative of a familiar unstudied conversation. Tryphon, seeing Justin in the philosopher’s cloak, addressed him on the excellency of philosophy. The saint answered, that he admired he should not rather study Moses and the prophets, in comparison of whom all the writings of the philosophers are empty jargon and foolish dreams. Then, in the first part of his dialogue, he showed, that, according to the prophets, the old law was temporary, and to be abolished by the new: and in the second, that Christ was God before all ages, distinct from the Father,—the same that appeared to Abraham, Moses, &c., the same that created man, and was himself made man, and crucified. He insists much on that passage, Behold, a virgin shall conceive.8 From the beginning of the conversation, Tryphon had allowed that from the prophets it was clear that Christ must be then come; but he said, that he had not yet manifested himself to the world.9 So evident was it that the time of his coming must be then elapsed, that no Jew durst deny it, as Fleury observes From the Apocalypse and Isaiah, by a mistaken interpretation, Justin inferred the futurity of the Millennium, or of Christ’s reign upon earth for a thousand years, before the day of judgment, with his elect, in spiritual, chaste delights: but adds, that this was not admitted by many true orthodox believers.10 This point was afterwards cleared up, and that mistake of some few corrected and exploded, by consulting the tradition of the whole church. In the third part, St. Justin proves the vocation of the Gentiles, and the establishment of the church. Night putting an end to the conversation, Tryphon thanked Justin, and prayed for his happy voyage: for he was going to sea. By some mistakes made by St. Justin in the etymologies, or derivation of certain Hebrew names, it appears that he was a stranger to that language. The Socinians dread the authority of this work, on account of the clear proofs which it furnishes of the divinity of Christ. St. Justin testifies11 that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, of curing the sick, and casting out devils in the name of Christ, were then frequent in the church. He excludes from salvation wilful heretics no less than infidels.
But the Apologies of this martyr have chiefly rendered his name illustrious. The first or greater, (which by the first editors was, through mistake, placed and called the second,) he addressed to the emperor Antoninus Pius, his two adopted sons, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Commodus, and the senate, about the year 150. That mild emperor had published no edicts against the Christians; but, by virtue of former edicts, they were often persecuted by the governors, and were everywhere traduced as a wicked and barbarous set of people, enemies to their very species. They were deemed atheists; they were accused of practising secret lewdness, which slander seems to have been founded on the secrecy of their mysteries, and partly on the filthy abominations of the Gnostic and Carpocratian heretics: they were said in their sacred assemblies to feed on the flesh of a murdered child; to which calumny a false notion of the blessed eucharist might give birth. Celsus and other heathens add,12 that they adored the cross, and the head of an ass. The story of the ass’s head was a groundless calumny, forged by a Jew, who pretended to have seen their mysteries, which was readily believed and propagated by those whose interest it was to decry the Christian religion, as Eusebius,13 St. Justin, Origen, and Tertullian relate. The respect shown to the sign of the cross, mentioned by Tertullian and all the ancient fathers, seems ground enough for the other slander. These calumnies were advanced with such confidence, and, through passion and prejudice, received so eagerly, that they served for a pretence to justify the cruelty of the persecutors, and to render the very name of a Christian odious. These circumstances stirred up the zeal of St. Justin to present his apology for the faith in writing, begging that the same might be made public. In it he boldly declares himself a Christian, and an advocate for his religion: he shows that Christians ought not to be condemned barely for the name of Christian, unless convicted of some crime; that they are not atheists, though they adore not idols; for they adore God the Father, his Son, and the Holy Ghost,14 and the host of good angels.* He exhorts the emperor to hold the balance even, in the execution of justice; and sets forth the sanctity of the doctrine and manners of Christians, who fly all oaths, abhor the least impurity, despise riches, are patient and meek, love even enemies, readily pay all taxes, and scrupulously and respectfully obey and honor princes, &c. Far from eating children, they even condemned those that exposed them.† He proves their regard for purity from the numbers among them of both sexes who had observed strict chastity to an advanced age. He explains the immortality of the soul, and the resurrection of the flesh, and shows from the ancient prophets that God was to become man, and that they had foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, the vocation of the Gentiles, &c. He mentions a statue erected in Rome to Simon Magus, which is also testified by Tertullian, Saint Austin, Theodoret, &c.15 The necessity of vindicating our faith from slanders, obliged him, contrary to the custom of the primitive church, to describe the sacraments of baptism and the blessed eucharist, mentioning the latter also as a sacrifice. “No one,” says he,16 “is allowed to partake of this food but he that believes our doctrines to be true, and who has been baptized in the laver of regeneration for remission of sins, and lives up to what Christ has taught. For we take not these as common bread and common drink; but like as Jesus Christ our Saviour, being incarnate by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation; so are we taught that this food, by which our flesh and blood are nourished, over which thanks have been given by the prayers in his own words, is the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus.” He describes the manner of sanctifying the Sunday, by meeting to celebrate the divine mysteries, read the prophets, hear the exhortation of him that presides, and make a collection of alms to be distributed among the orphans, widows, sick, prisoners, and strangers. He adds the obscure edict of the emperor Adrian in favor of the Christians. It appears that this Apology had its desired effect—the quiet of the church. Eusebius informs us,17 that the same emperor sent into Asia a rescript to the following purport: “When many governors of provinces had written to my father, he forbade them (the Christians) to be molested, unless they had offended against the state. The same answer I gave when consulted before on the same subject. If any one accuse a person of being a Christian, it is my pleasure that he be acquitted, and the accuser chastised, according to the rigor of the law.” Orosius and Zonaras tell us, that Antoninus was prevailed upon by the Apology of Justin to send this order.
He composed his second Apology near twenty years after, in 167, on account of the martyrdom of one Ptolemy, and two other Christians, whom Urbicus, the governor of Rome, had put to death. The saint offered it to the emperor Marcus Aurelius (his colleague Lucius Verus being absent in the East) and to the senate. He undertakes in it to prove that the Christians were unjustly punished with death, and shows how much their lives and doctrine surpassed the philosophers, and that they could never embrace death with so much cheerfulness and joy, had they been guilty of the crimes laid to their charge. Even Socrates, notwithstanding the multitude of disciples that followed him, never found one that died in defence of his doctrine. The apologist added boldly, that he expected death would be the recompense of his Apology, and that he should fall a victim to the snares and rage of some or other of the implacable enemies of the religion for which he pleaded; among whom he named Crescens, a philosopher in name, but an ignorant man, and a slave to pride and ostentation. His martyrdom, as he had conjectured, was the recompense of this Apology: it happened soon after he presented this discourse, and probably was procured by the malice of those of whom he spoke. The genuine acts seem to have been taken from the prætor’s public register. The relation is as follows:
Justin and others that were with him were apprehended, and brought before Rusticus, prefect of Rome, who said to Justin, “Obey the gods, and comply with the edicts of the emperors.” Justin answered, “No one can be justly blamed or condemned for obeying the commands of our Saviour Jesus Christ.” RUSTICUS—“What kind of literature and discipline do you profess?” JUSTIN—“I have tried every kind of discipline and learning, but I have finally embraced the Christian discipline, how little soever esteemed by those who were led away by error and false opinions” RUSTICUS—“Wretch, art thou then taken with that discipline?” JUSTIN—“Doubtles I am, because it affords me the comfort of being in the right path.” RUSTICUS—“What are the tenets of the Christian religion?” JUSTIN—“We Christians believe one God, Creator of all things visible and invisible; and we confess our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, foretold by the prophets, the Author and Preacher of salvation, and the Judge of mankind.” The prefect inquired in what place the Christians assembled. Justin replied, “Where they please, and where they can: God is not confined to a place: as he is invisible, and fills both heaven and earth, he is everywhere adored and glorified by the faithful.” RUSTICUS—“Tell me where you assemble your disciples.” JUSTIN—“I have lived till this time near the house of one called Martin, at the Timothin baths. I am come a second time to Rome, and am acquainted with no other place in the city. If any one came to me, I communicated to him the doctrine of truth.” RUSTICUS—“You are then a Christian?” JUSTIN—“Yes, I am.” The judge then put the same question to each of the rest, viz., Chariton, a man; Charitana, a woman; Evelpistus, a servant of Cæsar, by birth a Cappadocian; Hierax, a Phrygian; Peon, and Liberianus, who all answered, “that, by the divine mercy, they were Christians.” Evelpistus said he had learned the faith from his parents, but had with great pleasure heard Justin’s discourses. Then the prefect addressed himself again to Justin in this manner: “Hear you, who are noted for your eloquence, and think you make profession of the right philosophy, if I cause you to be scourged from head to foot, do you think you shall go to heaven?” Justin replied, “If I suffer what you mention, I hope to receive the reward which those have already received who have observed the precepts of Jesus Christ.” Rusticus said, “You imagine then that you shall go to heaven, and be there rewarded.” The martyr answered, “I do not only imagine it, but I know it; and am so well assured of it, that I have no reason to make the least doubt of it.” The prefect seeing it was to no purpose to argue, bade them go together and unanimously sacrifice to the gods, and told them that in case of refusal they should be tormented without mercy. Justin replied, “There is nothing which we more earnestly desire than to endure torments for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ; for this is what will promote our happiness, and give us confidence at his bar, where all men must appear to be judged.” To this the rest assented, adding, “Do quickly what you are about. We are Christians, and will never sacrifice to idols.” The prefect thereupon ordered them to be scourged and then beheaded, as the laws directed. The martyrs were forthwith led to the place where criminals were executed, and there, amidst the praises and thanksgivings which they did not cease to pour forth to God, were first scourged, and afterwards beheaded. After their martyrdom, certain Christians carried off their bodies privately, and gave them an honorable burial. St. Justin is one of the most ancient fathers of the church who has left us works of any considerable note.* Tatian, his disciple, writes, that, of all men, he was the most worthy of admiration.18 Eusebius, St. Jerom, St. Epiphanius, Theodoret, &c., bestow on him the highest praises. He suffered about the year 167, in the reign of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus. The Greeks honor him on the 1st of June; in Usuard and the Roman Martyrology his name occurs on the 13th of April.
St. Justin extols the power of divine grace in the virtue of Christians, among whom many who were then sixty years old, had served God from their infancy in a state of spotless virginity, having never offended against that virtue, not only in action, but not even in thought: for our very thoughts are known to God.19 They could not be defiled with any inordinate love of riches, who threw their own private revenues into the common stock, sharing it with the poor.20 So great was their abhorrence of the least wilful untruth, that they were always ready rather to die than to save their lives by a lie.21 Their fidelity to God was inviolable, and their constancy in confessing his holy name, and in observing his law, invincible. “No one,” says the saint,22 “can affright from their duty those who believe in Jesus. In all parts of the earth we cease not to confess him, though we lose our heads, be crucified, or exposed to wild beasts. We suffer dungeons, fire, and all manner of torments: the more we are persecuted, the more faithful and the more pious we become, through the name of Jesus. Some adore the sun: but no one yet saw any one lay down his life for that worship; whereas we see men of all nations suffer all things for Jesus Christ.” He often mentions the devotion and fervor of Christians in glorifying God by their continual homages, and says, that the light of the gospel being then spread everywhere, there was no nation, either of Greeks or barbarians, in which prayers and thanksgivings were not offered to the Creator in the name of the crucified Jesus.23
|
|
|
| Danes present digital coronavirus passport for travel abroad |
|
Posted by: Stone - 06-01-2021, 06:40 AM - Forum: COVID Passports
- No Replies
|
|
Danes present digital coronavirus passport for travel abroad
COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) — The Danish government on Friday presented its digital coronavirus passport enabling people to travel abroad or, in Denmark, go to the hairdresser, a tattoo parlor, dine inside a restaurant or wherever else it is needed.
“The corona passport we present today can be used from July 1 when you can travel within the EU,” said Finance Minister Nicolai Vammen.
Some 20% of Denmark’s population of 6 million have been fully vaccinated, according to the latest figures, he said.
During a press conference outside the Copenhagen airport, Health Minister Magnus Heunicke held up his phone to show the app, which only features a QR code and a green bar if the person has been vaccinated twice or recently tested negative for COVID-19.
“What we get now is an app that makes it easier and simpler to use,” Heunicke said. “There is no doubt that we will have to use it over the summer, but it is of course something that needs to be phased out.”
People will either have the code scanned or will flash it before entering an airport, a harbor, a train station, a hairdresser or an eatery.
In certain cases, a physical document can be sent in the mail to serve the same purpose as the app.
“It is a solution that is very easy to use,” said Wammen, adding that if it flashes red, it will not say why.
Wammen could not say whether all EU countries will be ready to go live by the end of June, allowing residents to reunite with friends and relatives living across 30 European countries.
"But Denmark is ready," he said.
|
|
|
|
| California Restaurant Charges Customers Wearing Masks Extra $5 |
|
Posted by: Scarlet - 05-31-2021, 10:04 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
 |
Brilliant Move, California Restaurant Charges Customers
Wearing Masks Extra $5
May 29, 2021 | Link
This is a brilliant move by the owner of Fiddleheads Cafe in Mendocino, California. The owner charges an extra $5 to customers who wear masks. Not only does this discourage liberal moonbats from dining; thereby creating a more positive, fun and friendly atmosphere; the owner uses the $5 surcharge to fund charity. In addition there is an additional $5 surcharge if you are caught in the cafe bragging about your vaccination.
In many red states, and regions that value freedom, the aggregate mask-wearing populace is now self-identifying as leftist sheep. Any negative incentive against the masked moonbats is a method to cull the risk of contact with the unstable folks. Brilliant !
[url=https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/556081-california-cafe-charges-customers-wearing-masks-5][/url]CALIFORNIA– A California cafe owner is charging customers who wear face masks $5 to dine at his establishment.
Chris Castleman, 34, who owns Fiddleheads Cafe in Mendocino, Calif., put up a sign on Sunday notifying customers of the additional fee, according to NBC news.
“I don’t think $5 to charity is too much to ask from mask wearing customers who claim to care so much about the community they live in,” Castleman told the news outlet.
[…] “It’s about time that the proponents of these ineffective government measures start paying for the collateral damage they have collectively caused,” the cafe owner said.
News of the dining fines comes after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced new guidance on masks earlier this month, stating that those who are vaccinated do not need to wear face coverings in most settings.
At the start of the pandemic, California was one of the first states to institute a shelter-in-place order, shuttering most small businesses in the state. Some of the first cases of COVID-19 were found on the West Coast beginning in late February and early March 2020.
Castleman told NBC News that he was forced to close his cafe temporarily in June after the local government warned that mask wearing was not optional during the coronavirus pandemic.
"The government shut everything down," he said. "Everyone wearing a mask is complicit."
During that time, Castleman said that he did follow state orders and provided only curbside service to his customers, though he argued that it was too much to require masks for servers and other workers, NBC News reported.
|
|
|
|
| New from Archbishop Viganò: The Great Reset from start to finish |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 05:49 PM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
New from Archbishop Viganò: The Great Reset from start to finish
With the pandemic, little by little they told us that isolation, lockdowns, masks, curfews, 'live-streamed Masses,' distance-learning, 'smartworking,' recovery funds, vaccines, and 'green passes' would permit us to come out of the emergency, and, believing in this lie, we renounced the rights and lifestyles that they warned us would never return:
'Nothing will be the same again.'
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
May 31, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – This first Festival of Philosophy [1] is dedicated to Msgr. Antonio Livi, of whom we all preserve a heartfelt and grateful memory, both for his witness of faith as well for his rare erudition in the theological disciplines. The learned Roman prelate is united to me in a particular way by his path of “conversion” to Tradition, which led him, a few years before me, to the assiduous celebration of the venerable Apostolic Liturgy, in perfect coherence with the doctrine in which he was extremely well-versed. Both of us found ourselves rediscovering the treasures of the Mass of our Ordination, with the consolation of also rediscovering our Priesthood in its fullness. If we wish to remember Monsignor Livi worthily today, I think that we cannot neglect the School of “Common Sense” of which he was the initiator, and that in this moment represents an opportunity to deepen our understanding of the present reality: the great upheavals of this past year, the so-called pandemic, and, more generally, the crisis in which both the world and the Church find themselves. The lack of “common sense” in individuals has in large part made possible this assault against God, against the Church, and against the human race that is represented by the Great Reset and the ideology it expresses. Irrationality, the abdication of reason, the annihilation of critical judgment and the denial of evidence are the true pandemic virus of our time, which in rebellion against God manifests a delirium of omnipotence and in collective madness reveals the just nemesis of this wicked challenge. Saint Paul exhorts us to a rational faith, rationabile obsequium (Rom 12;1), in which faith and reason, like two wings, make us ascend to the contemplation of the Truth, that is, of God Himself. Thus, the Apostle’s warning also implies a healthy distance from the thinking of the world: nolite conformari huic sæculo (Rom 12:2).
A significant precedent
When Stalin decided in 1932 to eliminate millions of Ukrainians in the genocide of Holodomor, he planned a famine as an instrument of social engineering, through which to nationalize agricultural lands and then allocate the profits to industry. Stalin wrote:
Quote:In order to eliminate the Kulaks as a class, the policy of limiting and eliminating single groups of Kulaks is not enough... it is necessary to break the resistance of this class with an open battle and to deprive it of the economic sources of its existence and development. (Josef Stalin, Questioni di leninismo, Rome, 1945).
Stalin then had wheat, beets, potatoes, vegetables, and every sort of food seized; he forbade any sort of commerce – does this sound familiar? – and confiscated the financial resources of the Ukrainians. Children fleeing the countryside were arrested and deported to collective farms called “kolkhozes” and to orphanages, where they died from malnutrition. The Central Committee prohibited movement – a sort of lockdown ante litteram – and accused those who denounced the massacre of the Ukrainians of being the enemy of the people. Holodomor deniers – using the term in its proper sense – maintain that the genocide of 1932-1933 in the Soviet Ukraine never happened or that it occurred without premeditation. The regime’s censorship contributed to hiding a tragedy that today is recognized by many countries as a crime against humanity and that, upon analysis of its method and goal, was also an example of a “Great Reset.”
If a Ukrainian had wondered how it could be that the Russian government, faced with a famine, did not help the population by sending food but rather forbade commercial activity and movement, thereby aggravating the situation, he would have committed the same error as many today who, in the presence of an alleged pandemic, ask why governments have preemptively undermined public health, weakened national pandemic plans, forbidden effective treatments, and administered harmful if not deadly treatments and are now forcing citizens – using the blackmail of perpetual lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, and unconstitutional “green passes” – to submit to vaccines that not only do not guarantee any immunity but actually carry serious short-term and long-term side effects, as well as further spreading more resistant forms of the virus.
Changing our point of view
Looking for any sort of logic in what is told us by the mainstream media, by our government leaders, by virologists and so-called “experts” is an arduous challenge that disappears as if by magic and turns into the most cynical rationality if we only have the intellectual honesty to overturn our point of view. We should therefore renounce the comforting premise which tells us that our leaders act for our good, and more generally the idea that our interlocutors are honest, sincere, and animated by good principles.
Believe me, I understand that it would be easier to bask in the illusion that “everything will be fine” and that this pandemic really is a huge disaster that none of us were prepared for. It is much easier to think that the leaders of the world ought to be judged with grateful indulgence, forgiving them for mistakes that anyone in the same position could have made in the fight against the “invisible enemy.” It warms the heart to believe that the multinational pharmaceutical companies and international health agencies have nothing at heart but our good, and that they could never distribute, solely for economic calculation, experimental drugs that will end up making us all chronically ill or will exterminate us. And it is incredibly difficult and psychologically exhausting to face the daily domestic struggle we have to endure with relatives and friends, acquaintances and colleagues at work, simply because we consider the COVID narrative absurd. Being considered “conspiracy theorists” or “deniers” and being made the object of pity, contempt, or social condemnation is a thankless fate, especially when the people who believe in the global lie are dear to us. And it is even more thankless to feel discriminated against and ostracized even from our ecclesial community, all the more so when we see the ideological flattening in conformity with the mainstream narrative on the part of the bishops and the highest levels of the Hierarchy.
The reality is quite different, and not wanting to accept it makes us fall into that cognitive dissonance that social psychology has extensively studied. The reality is not only different but diametrically opposed to what we are being told, and it will be better for us if we want to understand it, recognize it, face it, and fight it with all our strength – also because the modus operandi with which similar cases have been carried out in the course of history is substantially the same.
Let’s put ourselves in the shoes of the proponents of the Great Reset
Let’s start from the point of view of those who organized this plot rather than of those who are suffering it unknowingly. If we put ourselves in the shoes of a Bill Gates, a George Soros, or a Klaus Schwab, it will not be difficult to understand that if we shamelessly declare that we have decided to decimate the world population by means of a gene serum, in all probability we will not obtain the consent of the masses nor the support of institutions, because making our criminal plan known would provoke a revolt and above all it would reveal our cards.
In reality, we have even declared our plans on several occasions; we have written them in the proceedings of our congresses; we have reiterated them in interviews and institutional meetings; we have even had them engraved on the Georgia Guidestones. Perhaps our admission of this criminal design sounded too brazen, and those who may have felt threatened preferred to look elsewhere, blaming instead those who raised the alarm, unheeded like Laocoon.[2]
And so we decide to tell the “beautiful fable” of global commitment, of eco-sustainability, of inclusivity, of resilience in the face of a virus that we ourselves probably created in a laboratory in Wuhan financed by us, presenting it as a deadly pandemic that requires immediate measures to be taken that are justified by the health emergency. And since there could not really be an emergency since it is simply a flu syndrome, an almost normal coronavirus just as happens in any other year, we have to ask the officials of the WHO – an entity financed almost completely by us and by our ally the Chinese communist dictatorship – to give directives prohibiting treatment, creating a high number of deaths attributable to COVID, and leading patients to death by imposing forced ventilation on them. Obviously the pharmaceutical companies, of which we are shareholders through the Black Rock investment fund, have every interest in producing vaccines without the usual experimentation period, because at the same time that treatments are prohibited, the laws protecting public health can also be waived, and the vaccines – or rather, the gene serums – can be authorized for experimental distribution. And to seal the pactum sceleris with the Chinese regime, we can snow it under with orders for masks, swabs tests, ventilators, and medical supplies, even though we know that they are useless and do not comply with health parameters. In the meantime, our “experts” – who are almost always former employees or whose institutes and consultancies we sponsor – sow panic in the media with projections and forecasts as absurd as they are terrifying, while journalists and television hosts prostitute themselves to their new boss, renouncing professional ethics and their duty to respect the truth at all costs. But we know well that money and fame can easily purchase the sycophantic collaboration and complicit silence of many, especially if they owe their positions to us, if we are shareholders of the newspapers they work for or the main buyers of their advertising space. At the same time, we ensure that public funds are allocated to fund the media, obviously with the implicit expectation that they will promote the official narrative and censor every dissenting voice.
Healthcare is also in our hands, and for years now! We have progressively destroyed the public healthcare system, making use of our personnel in national governments, in the European Union, and in international organizations; and after destroying it we lamented its inefficiency and recommended that it be replaced with private healthcare, of which we are shareholders. What remains of public health is nevertheless set up on a business model that places profit before the provision of services, and in any case it is always the State that pays off the debts of healthcare companies. We know well that the profits to be made off the pandemic are quite tempting to many, even to the point of remaining silent in the face of hospitalizations that are useless or that will even lead to the death of the patient as a result of the treatments that we have mentioned instead of giving them home care. Three thousand euros per day for an intensive care bed for a COVID patient thus legitimizes the social alarm, because those beds are few – we have had their number reduced in recent years thanks to complacent politicians – and in order to increase them during a full pandemic emergency the State spends exorbitant amounts without going through a process of taking bids. If we then manage to use swab tests to make people believe that a very high percentage of the population is positive for the virus, we will guarantee the persistence of the state of emergency, and with it the lockdown and containment measures that destroy the economy. And this is exactly what we want: to cancel small businesses, forcing the population to purchase online everything they can no longer buy in the local family-run store, making money even off the pizza parlor or the restaurant that in order to survive is forced to use delivery companies of which we made sure we were shareholders. Finally, in order to make this assault complete, we increase illegal immigration thanks to our “humanitarian” foundations and NGOs, thereby increasing crime, diverting funds from citizens that are earmarked instead towards dealing with immigration costs, and making Europe be invaded by waves of Muslims who demand rights. Their presence allows us to inexorably break up the social and religious fabric of nations, in the name of “welcoming” and leveraging the sense of guilt, the danger of racism and the do-good rhetoric that we have even succeeded in getting the Catholic Church to accept. Obviously the social destabilization we have created allows us to promulgate laws against discrimination and racial hatred, repressing the dissent of those who feel invaded and threatened. Finally, thanks to the State debt due to the pandemic and the social emergency we have artificially created, we are able to impose the disbursement of funds from the International Monetary Fund, the Central European Bank, and the European Union, putting the population into the noose of debt and constraining it to invest those funds according to criteria and “conditionalities” that only serve to make the transformation of society, the technological community, and the “green economy” even more irreversible: this is the Great Reset.
First we succeeded in creating fear of an “invisible enemy” and silencing the dissenting voices of scientists, intellectuals, and simple citizens; then we succeeded in making people believe that the salvation of the world depends on vaccines; now we are able to blackmail billions of human beings, who will be told that if they want to return to some form of loosening of the restrictions that have been imposed they must accept the “green pass” in order to travel abroad, go to the stadium or go shopping. The pressure we have placed on the masses is such that many will accept these forms of control. Soon they will put out their hands to have a subcutaneous chip implanted that will permit us to bring our plan to its completion.
All this is now a reality: both the vaccine passport, which will not necessarily be limited to COVID, as well as electronic payments in place of cash. “No one could buy or sell unless he had the mark” (Rev 13:17). Thus it will only take pressing a button to cancel a person from social life – and we will be the ones who press it.
And as an insult against the civilization we hate, we force the masses to feed on beetles and larvae, extolling their nutritional properties and their low environmental impact, while we reserve choice meats for ourselves. We ask them to renounce private property in exchange for universal income, with which they can pay us the leasing for their 30-square-meter housing unit, obviously with zero emissions. We send them around on electric scooters made in China while we ride in custom-built cars that cause all sorts of pollution, cruise around on very expensive yachts and travel by helicopter. And while laid-off fifty year olds get jobs as delivery boys, we receive billions in dividends from our companies based in tax havens. We have reached such a level of enslavement of the masses that we have no reason to fear any revolt, which in any case would be quelled with truncheon blows as the media and our ally the Left remained silent.
Even if the pandemic farce does not have the desired effects due to unforeseen events, we already have the next step ready: the climate emergency as the pretext for imposing the “ecological transition” and “sustainable development.” Or else we will start yet another conflict in the Middle East so as to provoke terrorist attacks in our cities and sow panic among the population. And if these tried and tested methods don’t succeed, we could invent – why not? – an alien attack, about which some of our friends are beginning to open the famous Overton Window: what better than extra-terrestrials can be considered an “invisible enemy” to feed collective fear, after decades of films in which we show invasions of creatures from outer space? On the other hand, the masses believe everything the mainstream media tells them – as we have seen in recent months – no matter how absurd and irrational it may be. If you see it on television, it must be true!
The modus operandi of the Great Reset
And now, taking off the shoes of Gates and Soros, we observe the entire operation from the outside, seeking to identify the recurring elements. The first, as I said earlier, is the secrecy of the criminal design of the elite and the need to cloak it in acceptable ideals. The second is the creation of an emergency situation – in the past it could have been a war fought with weapons, today a bacteriological war or a conflict fought financially – that makes recourse to the solutions that the elite has prepared and planned inevitable. The third element consists in the apparent solution that allows for the implementation of those “reforms” and limitations of personal liberties that in normal times would be unacceptable and illegitimate. This will split society internally, creating new enemies of the people and distracting them from the real architects of the conflict.
If we think about the attack of September 11, 2001, we understand that the modus operandi is essentially the same, as also happened with the Gulf War or the Libyan Civil War. The terrorist threat was used as prophasis, an apparent cause, a false pretext for authorizing investments in the military industry, the tightening of controls on the populace, political upheavals, and to appropriate energy resources in Iraq and Libya and prevent the economic independence of the nations of the former French colonies in West and Central Africa. The destabilization thus achieved fueled the ethnic substitution plan in Europe and at the same time stripped Africa of the young generations that would have been able to make it prosperous and autonomous. It also struck the Catholic communities in the former colonies by fueling Islamic fanaticism as a prerequisite for bloody conflicts and now exports those conflicts to a de-Christianized Europe that inertly watches the daily burning of its churches, while a petulant Swedish girl is used by the system as an apocalyptic preacher of climate change and global warming.
At the base of this modus operandi there is always a lie, that serves to hide the true intentions of the elite and makes us accept as inevitable those changes that, in conditions of relative normality, would have resulted in revolts that were difficult to stifle. The blaming of dissenters, the criminalization of those who do not accept subjecting themselves to the vaccine, the psychiatrization of “deniers” or “conspiracy theorists” are taking shape in recent months with the formation of detention camps, the prohibition of travelling without health checks and above all thanks to the pounding drum of the media. The spread of 5G technology, which in many countries has gone unnoticed due to the lockdowns, will allow population tracking by means of apps or a subcutaneous chip in constant connection with the internet.
The Great Reset has numerous precedents
The lie, therefore, is the consistent mark of the architects of the various Great Resets of the last few centuries. The Protestant Pseudo-Reformation was a Great Reset, which struck at Europe’s unity of faith, creating a laceration whose disastrous consequences are still seen today. The French Revolution was a Great Reset, as was the Italian Risorgimento, as well as the Russian Revolution. The two World Wars were Great Resets, along with the Industrial Revolution, the Revolution of 1968, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Each time, if you notice, the apparent reason for these revolutions never corresponded to the real one. The selling of indulgences as a pretext for Luther’s revolt leveraged the desire of the German Princes to take possession of the monasteries and dioceses and had to obtain the spread of heresy in the world and the weakening of the Papacy, the first defense of Christianity. In France, the poverty of the people was a pretext for the cancellation of the monarchy and the establishment of the Masonic and anti-Christian Republic. The division of the Italian States and the aspiration to an ideal of national unity was the pretext for the destruction of kingdoms and duchies and the annexation of the Papal States to the Kingdom of Italy, whose monarchy was subservient to the Masonic lodges and in its turn was cancelled by them as soon as the task was completed. The oppression of the Russian peasants was the pretext for the elimination of the Czar and the establishment of the communist dictatorship. The claim of individual nationalities was the pretext for the First World War in order to cancel the Austro-Hungarian Empire and perpetuate ethnic conflicts. In the Second World War, Nazism – first financed and then combatted – was a pretext for colonizing Europe and subjecting it economically and culturally to American liberal capitalism and Russian communism, thereby weakening it. The condition of laborers was the pretext for exploiting them in the factories and feeding the Moloch of modern capitalism. Young people’s desire for freedom was the pretext for corrupting their intellect and will, for breaking up the traditional family with divorce, cancelling motherhood with contraceptives and abortion, and striking at the very concept of authority. The end of the Soviet Bloc and its satellite countries was the pretext for spreading liberal capitalism and consumerism and morally corrupting a people exhausted by seventy years of communist dictatorship, whose strenuous opposition to the New World Order is the reason for the recent and continuous attacks on President Putin.
The Great Reset also involves the Church
In this long series of Great Resets organized by the same elite of conspirators, not even the Catholic Church has managed to escape. She too, with Vatican II, saw a greater understanding of the liturgy by the people given as a pretext for destroying the apostolic Mass, cancelling the sacred language and profaning the rites. And the longing for unity with heretics and schismatics was the pretext by which conciliar ecumenism was inaugurated, which laid the ideological foundations for the present apostasy. The democratization of the Church, in the name of an alleged greater participation of the laity, has served only as a pretext for progressively undermining papal power and parliamentarizing the power of the bishops, who are today reduced to mere executors of the decisions of the Bishops’ Conferences.
The lies of the various Great Resets
Like all frauds, those that are hatched by the devil and his servants are based on false promises that will never be kept, in exchange for which we give up a certain good that will never be restored to us. In Eden, the prospect of becoming like gods led to the loss of friendship with God and to exclusion from eternal salvation, which only the redemptive Sacrifice of Our Lord was able to repair. The revolution against the Catholic monarchies was obtained by the promise made to the lower classes, which was never kept, offering them prosperity and a reduction of taxes. Those who believed in the deception saw their world collapse and found themselves much more oppressed than before. The Industrial Revolution was accepted because it promised new jobs in the factories, but those who left the countryside or the family shop found themselves exploited on the assembly line, torn from the traditional rhythms of the village and crammed together in the bleak outskirts of the large metropolises.
With the pandemic, little by little they told us that isolation, lockdowns, masks, curfews, “live-streamed Masses,” distance-learning, “smartworking,” recovery funds, vaccines, and “green passes” would permit us to come out of the emergency, and, believing in this lie, we renounced the rights and lifestyles that they warned us would never return: “Nothing will be the same again.” The “new normal” will still be presented to us as a concession that will require us to accept the deprivation of freedoms that we had taken for granted, and accordingly we will compromise without understanding the absurdity of our compliance and the obscenity of the demands of those who command us, giving us orders so absurd that they truly require a total abdication of reason and dignity. At each step there is a new turn of the screw and a further step towards the abyss: if we do not stop ourselves in this race towards collective suicide we will never go back.
The lie, therefore. A lie that we also find denounced in Sacred Scripture: if the Serpent had said to Adam and Eve that by eating the fruit of the tree they would lose immortal life and all of the gifts that God had given them, we would still be in Eden. But what can we expect from the one who is “a murderer from the beginning,” “a liar and the father of lies” (Jn 8:44). Was it not thanks to lies and false testimony that Our Lord was condemned, accused by the Sanhedrin of having told people not to pay taxes to Caesar? Was it not with deception and blackmail that the High Priests pushed Pilate to have the Son of God crucified, threatening Pilate that if he found Him innocent he would set himself against the Roman Emperor?
The Great Reset is the last step before the New World Order
It is our duty to reveal the deception of this Great Reset, because it may be traced back to all the other assaults that in the course of history have tried to nullify the work of redemption and establish the tyranny of the Antichrist. Because this is in reality what the architects of the Great Reset intend. The New World Order – a name which significantly echoes the conciliar Novus Ordo – overturns the divine cosmos in order to spread infernal chaos, in which everything that civilization has painstakingly constructed over the course of millennia under the inspiration of grace is overturned and perverted, corrupted and cancelled.
Each of us must understand that what is happening is not the fruit of an unfortunate sequence of chance occurrences, but corresponds rather to a diabolical plan – in the sense that the Evil One is behind all this – which over the centuries pursues a single goal: destroying the work of creation, nullifying the redemption, and cancelling every trace of good on the earth. And in order to obtain this, the final step is the establishment of a synarchy in which command is seized by a few faceless tyrants who thirst for power, who are given over to the worship of death and sin and to the hatred of life, virtue and beauty because in them shines forth the greatness of that God against whom they still cry out their infernal “Non serviam.” The members of this accursed sect are not only Bill Gates, George Soros, or Klaus Schwab, but also those who for centuries have been plotting in the shadows in order to overthrow the Kingdom of Christ: the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Warburgs, and those who today have formed an alliance with the highest levels of the Church, using the moral authority of the Pope and bishops to convince the faithful to get vaccinated.
The corruption of authority is the necessary premise of the Great Reset
Along with an awareness of the criminal lie of the entire system, we must also take note of the corruption of authority and the failure of the social, political and religious model that is the child of the Revolution. Modern democracy has proven to be, once again, a deception with which it was desired to oust Christ the King from His lordship over individuals and over societies, under the apparent pretext of giving the people a power that has in fact been usurped by an anti-Christian and antichristic elite. When it is stated that authority does not derive from God but resides in the people; when religion is not considered as a supernatural transcendent principle but instead as an amorphous immanent sentimentalism or a variant of anthropology; when morality loses its bond with the eternal law inscribed by God in human nature and instead adapts to fashions, nothing prevents those who govern as well as the governed from being dishonest and simply pursuing their own particular interests, because there is no longer good and evil, reward and punishment, heaven and hell. Everything is then based on a perverted concept of liberty corrupted into license: one can betray, steal, kill, and lie without hesitation, without that fear of God that in other times was able to curb our inclination to evil: if not out of love for the Creator and Redeemer than at least out of fear of the punishment that our evil conduct would inexorably entail.
We find ourselves facing a political class without ideals, in whom the bonum commune was first replaced by political programs which they used to obtain consent, and today by the simple subservience of those who govern us to the interests who get them elected, pay them, and demand their absolute obedience to the demands of the New World Order. We have reached the point at which even the vote, which was once exalted as the highest expression of democracy, is considered an annoying tinsel, to be granted only if those in charge are certain that they can bend it in their favor, and where it is expressed otherwise it can be modified or ignored: the colossal electoral fraud of the American presidential elections is a striking example of this.
But if the politicians and world leaders are subservient to the globalist elite and do not pursue the good of the citizens, the social contract fails, and the authority with which they believe they are endowed is lost, since it has no ratification, either from above – since the supernatural principle and bond of authority have been cancelled – or from below. And this is nothing but infamous dictatorship and hateful tyranny – a tyranny that cannot be overthrown by appealing to the revolutionary principles that determined it, but by returning to recognize that “there is no authority except from God” (Rom 13:1), and that the “secularism” of the State is a blasphemy, since it denies the sovereign rights of the Creator and Redeemer over those whom He has created and redeemed.
A crisis of authority that also involves the Hierarchy
That authority which, since the French Revolution, was usurped from the Lord and attributed to the popular will, had remained intact within the Church to some extent. Up until sixty years ago she proclaimed the Kingship of Christ not only over His subjects, over societies and nations, but principally over Herself, recognizing Our Lord as the Head of the Mystical Body and the Pope as His Vicar on earth. Vatican II shifted the Kingship of Christ in an eschatological key, and the Church thus found herself a victim of that same democratic deception into which civil societies had fallen almost two centuries earlier. By weakening the doctrine on sin, making the morality of each situation unique, and recognizing the legitimacy of error and false religions, the Catholic Church dethroned herself with her own hands, reducing herself to having to beg for approval and legitimization from the powerful of this world, to whose orders she has submitted. It is no coincidence that Bergoglio has archived the title “Vicar of Christ” as being a thing of the past: if the Church is replaced by an NGO that preaches “green theology”, promotes the Inclusive Capitalism of the Rothschilds and organizes conferences on vaccines with Anthony Fauci, whoever presides over her does not exercise authority in the name of Christ but ends up being a puppet accomplice in the hands of the puppeteer:
He who, on earth, usurps my place,
my place, my place,
which in the presence of the Son of God is vacant,
of my burial-ground hath made a sewer
of blood and stench; whereby the Pervert,
who fell from hence, is there below appeased.
(Paradiso XXVII, lines 22 and ff.)[3]
In this crisis of authority – which involves both temporal and spiritual power – a great responsibility must be attributed to the so-called moderates, who appear to be the voluntary or involuntary fifth column within the social body. Among these we must include almost all of the representatives of the parliamentary oppositions in the various nations – the Italian opposition first of all – and the parties of the so-called center-right. Even those who criticize the illegitimate and unconstitutional rules enacted by the present governments under the pretext of the pandemic do not in the least question the ideological bases of free-market capitalism that today has merged with communism in an alliance that would have been inconceivable in other times. And they do not question these bases because they agree with them.
The error of the ‘moderates’
The same mistake of deploring the effects without recognizing and fighting the causes is made by conservative Catholics, who while understanding the apostasy of the highest levels of the Hierarchy under the reign of Bergoglio, do not dare to admit that if it has reached the point of offering idolatrous worship to the Pachamama, this has been made possible thanks to Dignitatis Humanae, that the sabbath of Astana is the coherent application of Nostra Aetate, and that the German Synodal Path – that is, the declaration of schism without its official condemnation by the Holy See – is the logical conclusion of Gaudium et Spes. And there is no need to demonstrate that the conciliar documents are nothing more than the translation of revolutionary and Masonic principles into the ecclesial context.
We know, however, that the lie is the emblem of the Devil, the distinctive sign of his servants, the hallmark of the enemies of God and the Church. God is truth; the Word of God is true, and He Himself is God. Speaking the truth, shouting it from the rooftops, and unveiling the deception is a sacred work, and no Catholic – nor anyone who has still preserved a shred of decency and honor – may shrink from this duty.
The response of the good
Each of us has been desired, thought of, and created in order to give glory to God and to be part of a great design of providence. From all eternity the Lord has called us to share with Him in the work of redemption, to cooperate in the salvation of souls and the triumph of the good. Each of us today has the possibility of choosing to align himself with Christ or against Christ, to fight for the cause of good or to make himself an accomplice of the workers of iniquity. The victory of God is most certain, as certain as the reward that awaits those who make the choice to enter the battlefield alongside the King of kings; and the defeat of those who serve the enemy is also certain, as is their eternal damnation.
Do you want to lose the supreme good that has been prepared for you, only for the sake of a quiet life and not to stand out from the crowd, out of cowardice and human respect, trading eternity for an apparent and ephemeral good? I exhort you to be witnesses of Christ, courageous champions of truth and goodness: on the benches of parliament, in hospital wards, from the chairs of schools and universities, from the altar and the pulpit, at work, in the office, in the shop, in the family, in your daily commitments and, yes, even in pains and trials. Be worthy heirs of the saints who have preceded you, remembering that you will have to answer for your silence, your complicity, and your cooperation with evil. If you can escape the condemnation of men, you will not be able to escape the judgment of God; just as you will be rewarded for the good you have done and witnessed to.
This rebellious and apostate generation can be fought with everyone’s contribution: from the doctor who finally denounces the harmful treatments imposed by criminal protocols, to the policeman who refuses to apply illegitimate rules; from the parliamentarian who votes against unfair laws, to the magistrate who opens a file for crimes against humanity; from the professor who teaches students to think for themselves, to the journalist who reveals the deceptions and conflicts of interest of the powerful; from the father who defends his children against vaccination, to the son who protects his elderly parent without abandoning him in a nursing home; from the citizen who claims the right to natural freedoms, to the artisan and restaurateur who do not accept the oppression of those who prevent them from opening their business; from the grandfather who warns his grandchildren about the dangers of the dictatorship, to the youth who does not allow himself to be seduced by fashions and influencers.
Let us restore the Crown to Christ the King that was torn from him by the Revolution
And when this farce has collapsed – because it will inexorably collapse, and it will collapse soon – commit yourselves everyone, with renewed zeal, so that the crown that His enemies have torn from Him may be restored to our king. Make Our Lord reign in your souls, in your families, in your communities, in the nation, in work, in education, in the laws and courts, in the arts, in information, in all areas of private and public life. May our most holy mother and queen, Mary Most Holy, who many times has admonished us about the dangers and punishments that await the world if it does not convert and do penance and may Jesus Christ reign in the holy Church, driving out the unworthy, the fornicators and the mercenaries.
Only where Christ reigns is there true peace and concord: pax Christi in regno Christi. To Him, the beginning and end of all things, the Alpha and the Omega, may the confident and fervent prayer arise from each one of us and from the human family, asking Him to preserve us in His grace, strengthen us in virtue, and make us courageous witnesses of the Gospel so that we may thus achieve eternal beatitude in Heaven.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
30 May 2021
In Festo Ss.mæ Trinitatis
Endnotes
[1] http://www.accademianuovaitalia.it/index...nezia-2021
[2] Laocoon, the priest of Apollo, warned the Trojans to “beware of Greeks bearing gifts” when they wanted to accept the Trojan horse.
[3] In Dante’s Paradiso, these words are spoken by Saint Peter in condemnation of Boniface VIII.
|
|
|
|
| May 31st - Sts. Petronilla and Angela de Merici |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 09:42 AM - Forum: May
- Replies (1)
|
|
May 31 – St Petronilla, Virgin
Though the Church makes but a simple commemoration of this illustrious Virgin in the office of this day, we will not fail to offer her the homage of our devout veneration. On the twelfth of this month, we kept the feast of the noble Virgin and Martyr, Flavia Domitilla; it is probable that Aurelia Petronilla was also of the imperial family of the Flavians. The early traditions of the Church speak of her as being the spiritual daughter of the Prince of the Apostles; and though she did not, like Domitilla, lay down her life for the Faith, yet she offered to Jesus that next richest gift—her Virginity. The same venerable authorities tell us, also, that a Roman Patrician, by name Flaccus, having asked her in marriage, she requested three days for consideration, during which she confidently besought the aid of her Divine Spouse. Flaccus presented himself on the third day, but found the palace in mourning, and her family busy in preparing the funeral obsequies of the young Virgin, who had taken her flight to heaven, as a dove that is startled by an intruder’s approach.
In the 8th Century, the holy Pope Paul the First had the body of Petronilla taken from the Cemetery of Domitilla, on the Ardeatine Way. Her relics were found in a marble sarcophagus, the lid of which was adorned, at each corner, with a dolphin. The Pope had them enshrined in a little Church, which he built near the south side of the Vatican Basilica. This Church was destroyed in the 16th Century, in consequence of the alterations needed for the building of the new Basilica of Saint Peter; and the Relics of St. Petronilla were translated to one of its Altars on the west side. It was but just that she should await her glorious Resurrection under the shadow of the great Apostle who had initiated her in the Faith and prepared her for her eternal nuptials for the Lamb.
Thy triumph, O Petronilla, is one of our Easter joys! We lovingly venerate thy blessed memory. Thou disdainedst the pleasures and honors of the world, and thy virginal name is one of the first on the list of the Church of Rome, which was thy mother. Aid her, now, by thy prayers. Protect those who seek thine intercession, and teach us how to celebrate, with holy enthusiasm, the Solemnities that are soon to gladden us.
|
|
|
|
| Week after Trinity Sunday |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 09:38 AM - Forum: Pentecost
- Replies (5)
|
|
Monday After Trinity Sunday
Having, by his divine light, added fresh appreciation towards the sovereign mystery of the august Trinity, the Holy Ghost next leads the Church to contemplate that other marvel, which concentrates in itself all the works of the Incarnate Word, and leads us, even in this present life, to union with God. The mystery of the Holy Eucharist is going to be brought before us in all its magnificence; it behooves us, therefore, to prepare the eyes of our soul for the worthy reception of the light which is so soon to dawn upon us. As during the whole year, we have never lost sight of the mystery of the Holy Trinity, and all our worship has unceasingly been offered to the Three diving Persons; so, in like manner, the blessed Eucharist has uninterruptedly accompanied us throughout the whole period of the Liturgical Year, either as the means for our paying our homage to the infinite Majesty of God, or as the nourishment which sustains the supernatural life. Though we knew and loved these two ineffable mysteries before, yet the graces of Pentecost have added much to both our knowledge and our love; yesterday, the mystery of the Trinity beamed upon us with a great clearness than ever; and now we are close upon the solemnity, which is to show us the holy Eucharist with an increase of light and joy to our faith.
The blessed Trinity is, as we have already shown, the essential object of all religion; it is the center to which all our homage converges; and this, even when we do not seem to make it our direct intention. Now, the holy Eucharist is the best of all the means whereby we can give to the Three divine Persons the worship we owe Them; it is, moreover, the bond whereby earth is united with heaven. It is easy, therefore, to understand how it was that holy Church so long deferred the institution of the two festivals immediately following Whitsuntide. All the mysteries we have celebrated up to this time were contained in the august Sacrament, which is the memorial and, so to say, the compendium of the wonderful things wrought in our favor by our Redeemer. It was the reality of Christ’s presence under the sacramental species that enabled us to recognize, in the sacred Host, at Christmas, the Child that was born unto us, in Passiontide the Victim who redeemed us and at Easter the glorious conqueror of death. We could not celebrate all those admirable Mysteries without the aid of the perpetual Sacrifice; neither could that sacrifice be offered up, without its renewing and repeating them.
It was the same with the Feasts of our Blessed Lady and the Saints,—they kept us in the continual contemplation of the holy Sacrament. When we honored Mary on the solemnities of the Immaculate Conception, the Purification, or the Annunciation, we were honoring Her who had, from her own substance, given that Body and Blood which was then offered upon our altars. As to the Apostles and the Martyrs, whose memories we solemnized, whence had they the strength to suffer so much and so bravely for the faith, but from the sacred banquet which we then celebrated, and which gives courage and constancy to them that partake of it? The Confessors and Virgins, as their Feasts came round, seemed to us as so many lovely flowers in the garden of the Church, and that garden itself all fruitful with wheat and clusters of grapes, because of the fertility given by Him who is called in the Scriptures both Wheat and Wine.
Putting together all the means within our reach for honoring these blessed citizens of the heavenly court, we have chanted the grand Psalms of David, and hymns, and canticles, with all the varied formulas of the Liturgy;—but nothing that we could do towards celebrating their praise could be compared to the holy Sacrifice offered to the divine Majesty. It is in that Sacrifice that we entered into direct communication with them, according to the energetic term used by the Church in the Canon of the Mass (communicantes). The blessed in heaven are ever adoring the most holy Trinity by and in Christ Jesus our Lord; and it is by the Sacrifice of the Mass that we were united with them in the one same center, and that we mingled our homage with theirs; hence they received an increase of glory and happiness. So, then, the holy Eucharist, both as Sacrifice and Sacrament, has always been prominently before us. If we are now going to devote several days to a more attentive consideration of its magnificence and power; if we are now going to make more earnest efforts to taste more fully its heavenly sweetness; it is not a something fresh, which attracts our special notice and devotion for a season, and will then give way for something else: no; the Eucharist is that element prepared for us by the love of our Redeemer, of which we must always avail ourselves in order that we may enter into direct communication with our God, and pay him the debt not only of our worship, but also of our love.
And yet, the time would come when the Holy Ghost, who governs the Church, would inspire her with the thought of instituting a special solemnity in honour of that august mystery in which all others are included. There is a sacred element which gives a meaning to every feast that occurs during the Year, and graces it with the beauty of its own divine splendor;—that sacred element is the most holy Eucharist, and itself had a right to a solemn festival in keeping with the dignity of its divine object.
But that festive exaltation of the divine Host and those triumphant processions so deservedly dear to the present generation of Christians, were not practicable in the ages of the early Persecutions. And when those rough times had passed away, and the courageous Martyrs had won victory for the Church, those same modes of honoring the Eucharist would not have suited the spirit and form of the primitive liturgical observances, which were kept up for ages following. Neither were they needed for the maintenance of the lively faith of those times; they would have been superfluous for a period such as that was, when the solemnity of the Sacrifice itself, and the share the people at large took in the sacred Mysteries, and the uninterrupted homage of liturgical chants sustained by the crowds of Faithful adorers around the Altar, gave praise and glory to God, secured correctness of faith and fostered in the people a superabundance of supernatural life, which is not to be found nowadays. The divine Memorial produced its fruits; the intentions our Lord had in instituting the Eucharist were realised and the remembrance of that institution which used then to be solemnised as we now celebrate Mass on Maundy Thursday, was deeply impressed on the minds of the Faithful.
This state of things lasted till the beginning of the 13th Century, when, as the Church expresses it (in the Collect for the Feast of the Stigmata of St. Francis), a certain coldness took possession of the world; faith grew weak, and the vigorous piety which characterised the christians of the previous ages became exceedingly rare. There were grand exceptions, here and there, of individual saintliness; but there was an unmistakable falling off amidst people at large, and the falling off was progressive; so much so indeed that there was danger that the Mystery which, by its very nature, is the Mystery of Faith, would suffer in a special manner from that coldness, that indifference, of the new generation. Even at that period, hell had been at work stirring up sacrilegious teachers here and there who dared to throw doubts upon the dogma of the Real Presence; fortunately, the people easily took alarm, and as a general rule, were too strong in the old faith to be led astray. The Pastors, too, of the Church were alive to the danger,—for there were souls who allowed themselves to be deceived.
Scotus Erigena had formulated the sacramentarian heresy: he had taught that the Eucharist “was but a sign, a figure of spiritual union with Jesus, of which the intellect alone could be cognizant.” His teaching made little impression; it was regarded as mere pedantry and was too novel to make head against catholic tradition such as was to be found exposed in the learned writings of Paschasius Radbert, Abbot of Corbie. The sophistry of Scotus was revived in the 11th Century by Berengarius; but although its new promoter was more crafty and conceited than its originator, and did greater and more lasting mischief, yet it died with him. The time for hell to play havoc with such direct attacks as these had not yet come; they were laid aside for others of a more covert kind. That hotbed of heresies, the empire of Byzantium, fostered the almost extinct germ of Manicheism; the teaching of that sect regarding the flesh,—that it is the work of the evil principle,—was subversive of the dogma of the Eucharist. While Berengarius was trying to bring himself into notice by the noisy, but ineffectual, broachings of his errors, Thrace and Bulgaria were quietly sending their teachers into the West. Lombardy, the Marches, and Tuscany, became infected; so did Austria in several places, and almost all at one and the same time; so, too, did three cities of France—Orleans, Toulouse, and Arras. Forcible measures for repressing the evil were used; but it was one which knew how to grow strong by retreat. Taking the South of France for the basis of its operations, the foul heresy silently organized its strength during the whole of the 12th Century. So great was the progress it made thus unperceived that when it came publicly before the world at the beginning of the 13th Century, it had an army ready for the maintenance of its impious doctrines. Torrents of blood had to be shed in order to subdue it and deprive it of its strongholds; and for years after the defeat of the armed insurrection, the Inquisition had to exercise active watchfulness in the provinces that had been tainted by the Albigensian contagion.
Simon of Montfort was the avenger of the Catholic faith. But while the victorious arm of the Christian hero was dealing a death blow to heresy, God was preparing for his Son, who had been so unworthily outraged by the sectarians in the Sacrament of his love, a triumph of a more peaceful kind, and a more perfect reparation. It was in the year 1208 that a humble Religious of the Congregation of the Hospitallers, by name the Blessed Juliana of Mont-Cornillon near Liége, had a mysterious vision in which she beheld the moon at its full, but having a hollow on its disc. In spite of all her efforts to divert herself from what she was afraid was an illusion, the same vision appeared before her as often as she set herself to pray. After two years of such efforts and earnest supplications, it was revealed to her that the moon signified the Church as it then was; and that hollow she observed on its disc expressed the want of one more solemnity in the Liturgical Year;—a want which God willed should be supplied by the introduction of a feast to be kept annually in honour of the institution of the blessed Eucharist; the solemn commemoration made of the Last Supper, on Maundy Thursday, was no longer sufficient for the children of the Church, shaken as they had been by the influences of heresy; it was not sufficient even for the Church herself, who on that Thursday has her attention divided by the important functions of the day, and is wholly taken up a few hours later by the sad mysteries of the great Friday. At the same time that Juliana received this communication, she was also commanded to set to work and make known to the world what she had been told was the divine will. Twenty years, however, passed before the humble and timid virgin could bring herself to put her person thus forward. She at length mentioned the subject to a Canon of Saint Martin’s of Liége named John of Lausanne, whom she much respected for his great holiness of life; and she besought him to confer with men of theological learning on the subject of the mission confided to her. All agreed that not only there was no reason why such a Feast should not be instituted, but moreover that it would be a means for procuring much glory to God and great good to souls. Encouraged by this decision, the saintly Juliana got a proper Office composed and approved for the future Festival; it begins with the words: Animarum cibus, and a few portions are still extant.
The Church of Liége, to which the universal Church owes the yesterday’s solemnity of the Blessed Trinity, was predestined to have the honor of originating the Feast of Corpus Christi. It was a happy day when in the year 1246, after so many delays and difficulties, the then Bishop of Liége, Robert de Torôte, published a synodical decree that each year, on the Thursday after Trinity Sunday, there should be observed in all the Churches of his Diocese, with rest from servile work, and with the preparation of fasting on the eve, a solemn Feast in honour of the Blessed Sacrament.
But the mission of the Blessed Juliana was far from being at an end; she had to be punished for having so long deferred it. The Bishop died; and the decree he had issued would have long been a dead letter, had there not been one, the only one, Church of the Diocese whose Clergy were determined to carry the decree into execution: these were the Canons of Saint Martin-au-Mont. Though there was no authority during the vacancy that cared to enforce the observance, yet in the year 1247, the Feast of Corpus Christi was kept in that privileged Church. Robert’s successor, Henry de Gueldre, a warrior and grandee, took no interest in what his predecessor had had so much at heart. Hugh de Saint Cher, Cardinal of Saint Sabina, and Legate in Germany, having gone to Liége with a view to remedy the disorders to which the new episcopal government had given rise, heard mention of the decree of the late Bishop Robert, and of the new Feast. The Cardinal had formerly been Prior and Provincial in the Order of St Dominic; and was one of the theologians who, having been consulted by John de Lausanne, had favored the project. He was of the same mind when Legate; and claimed the honor of keeping the Feast himself and singing Mass with much solemnity. Not satisfied with that, he issued a Circular dated December 29, 1253, which he addressed to the Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and Faithful of the territory of his legation; and in that document, he confirmed the decree of the Bishop of Liége and extended it to all the country over which he was Legate, granting one hundred days’ indulgence to all who, contrite, and after confession of their sins should, on the Feast itself or during its Octave, devoutly visit a Church in which the Office of Corpus Christi was being celebrated. In the year following, the Cardinal of Saint George in Velabro, who had succeeded as Legate, confirmed and renewed the ordinances made by the Cardinal of Saint Sabina. These reiterated decrees, however, failed to remove the widespread indifference. A terrible blow had been given, by the proposed Feast, to the powers of hell, and Satan excited every possible opposition to it. As soon as the Legates had taken their departure, several local Superiors, men of note and authority, published their own ordinances in opposition to what had been already given. In 1258, the year of the Blessed Juliana’s death, there was still but the single Church of Saint Martin that would celebrate the Feast, which it was her mission to spread throughout the entire world. But she left the continuation of her work to a holy Recluse of the name of Eve, to whom she had confided her secrets.
On the 29th day of August, 1261, James Pantaléon ascended the papal throne under the name of Urban the Fourth. He owed his election to this dignity to his great personal merits, for by birth (Troyes, in France, was his native town), he had nothing to recommend him. He had been Archdeacon of Liége; and there had met with the Blessed Juliana, and had approved her work. In this his exaltation to the papacy, Eve thought she had an indication of God’s providence. She induced the Bishop, Henry de Gueldre, to send his written congratulations to the new Pontiff, and at the same time, to entreat him to confirm, by his own approbation, the Feast which had been instituted by Robert de Torôte. About that same time, several supernatural events had attracted public attention, and in particular, the prodigy at Bolsena near Orvieto, where the papal court happened to be then residing,—the prodigy of a corporal having been stained with blood by a miraculous Host. These events seemed as though providentially permitted. in order to rouse Urban’s attention, and to confirm him in the holy zeal he had formerly evinced for the glory of the Blessed Sacrament. St. Thomas of Aquin was appointed to compose according to the Roman rite, the Office for the Feast; which Office was to be substituted for the one prepared by the Blessed Juliana, and which she had adapted to the ancient liturgy of France, The Bull Transiturus was published soon after; it made known to the Church the Pope’s intentions. Urban there mentions the revelations which had come to his knowledge before his election; and declares that, in virtue of his apostolic authority, and for the confounding of heresy and for the increase of the true faith, he institutes a special Solemnity in honor of the divine Memorial left by Christ to his Church. The day there fixed for the Feast is the fifth Feria (that is, the Thursday) after the Octave of Pentecost; for the Papal document does not mention, as the decree of the Bishop of Liége had done, the Feast of the Blessed Trinity, which had not yet been received into the calendar of the Church of Rome. In imitation of what had been done by Hugh de Saint Cher, the Pontiff granted a hundred days’ indulgence to all the Faithful who, being contrite and having confessed their sins, should assist at Mass or Matins at first or second Vespers of the Feast; and for assisting at Prime, Tierce, Sext, None, and Compline, forty days for each of those Hours. He also granted a hundred days, for each day within the Octave, to those who should assist on any such day at the Mass and the entire Office. Though thus entering into all these details, there is not an allusion to the Procession, for it was not introduced till the following Century.
All now seemed settled; and yet, owing to the troubles which were then so rife in Italy and the Empire, the Bull of Urban the Fourth was forgotten, and remained a dead letter. Forty years and more elapsed before it was again promulgated and confirmed by Pope Clement the Fifth at the Council of Vienne. John the Twenty-second gave it the force of a settled law by inserting it in the Clementines, about the year 1318; and he had thus the honor of putting the finishing hand to the great work which had taken upwards of a century for its completion.
The Feast of the Blessed Sacrament, or as it is commonly called, Corpus Christi, began a new phase in the Catholic worship of the Holy Eucharist. But in order to understand this, we must go more thoroughly into the question of Eucharistic worship as practised in the previous ages of the Church: the inquiry is one of importance for the full appreciation of the great Feast, for which we must now be preparing our souls. No preparation, so it seems to us, could be more to the point than the devoting the two next days to a faithful and compendious study of the chief features in the history of the Blessed Eucharist.
It belongs to thee, O holy Spirit, to teach us the history of so great a Mystery. Scarcely has thy reign begun upon the earth when, faithful to thy divine mission of glorifying our Emmanuel, who has ascended into heaven, thou at once raisest our eyes and hearts up to that best gift of his love, whereby we still possess him under the eucharistic veil. During those long ages of the expectation of nations it was thou didst bring the Word before mankind; thou spakest of him in the Scriptures, thou proclaimedst him by the Prophets. O thou that art the Gift of the Most High! thou art also infinite Love; and it is through thee, as such, that are wrought all the manifestations which God vouchsafes to make to us his creatures. It was thou that broughtest this divine Person, the Word, into the womb of the immaculate Virgin Mary, there to clothe him with sinless flesh, and so make him our Brother and our Savior. And now that he has ascended to his Father and our Father, depriving us of the sight of his human nature, all beauteous with its perfections and charms; now that we have to go through this vale of tears deprived of his visible company;—he has sent thee unto us; and thou art come, O divine Spirit, as our Consoler. But the consolation thou bringest us, dear Paraclete! is ever the same;—it is the faithful remembrance of our Jesus; yea, more, it is his divine Presence, perpetuated by thee in the Sacrament of Love. We had been already told that this would be so that thou wouldst not speak of thyself or for thyself; but that thou wouldst come to give testimony of the Emmanuel, continue his work, and produce his divine likeness in each one of us.
How admirable is this thy fulfilment of thy sublime mission which is all for the glory of Jesus! O divine Spirit, Guardian of the Word in the Church! it is far beyond our power to describe how great is thy vigilance over the word of teaching, brought by the Savior to this earth of ours, a teaching which is the true expression of himself and which coming, as he himself does, from the mouth of the Father, is the nourishment of his Bride here below. But with what infinite respect and vigilance, O holy Spirit, dost thou not preside over the august Sacrament, wherein is present, with all the reality of his adorable Flesh, that same Incarnate Word who, from the very first of creation, was the center and object of all thy dealings with creatures! It is by the mystery which is produced by thine omnipotence that the exiled Bride recovers her Spouse; it is by thee that she traverses the long ages of time, holding and prizing her infinite treasure; it is by thee that she, with such superhuman wisdom, puts it to profit, by so arranging, so modifying, her discipline, yea, her very life, as to secure in each age of time the greatest possible faith, respect, and love towards the Divine Eucharist. If she anxiously hide It from the profane men that would only turn their knowledge into blasphemy; or if she lavish upon It all that Liturgy can give of pomp and magnificence; or if again she bring It forth from her sacred temples and triumphantly carry It in processions through the crowded streets of cities, or the green lanes of the quiet country, it is thou, O divine Spirit, that inspirest her with what is best; it is thy divine foresight that suggests to her what is the surest means for gaining, in each respective period and age, the most of honour and love for that Jesus of hers who is ever present in the Sacred Host, and who deigns to let his love be delighted with being thus among the children of men.
Vouchsafe, O Holy Ghost, to aid us in our contemplations of this sacred Mystery. Enlighten our understandings, inflame our hearts, during these hours of preparation for its Feast. Give to our souls the knowledge of that Jesus who is coming to us beneath the Sacramental veil.
May this holy Mystery be to us, during this last portion of the year and its liturgy, our Bread to support us on the journey we have still to make through the desert before we can reach the mount of God; we have yet a great way to go, and a way so different from the one we have already passed through, when we had the company of our Jesus in the Mysteries he was working for our salvation. Be thou, O holy Spirit, our guide in those paths which the Church, under thy direction, is courageously traversing, and is every day approaching nearer to the end of her pilgrimage here below. Yet, scarcely have we entered on this second portion of our Year, than thou, divine Spirit, bringest us to the banquet prepared by divine Wisdom where the pilgrim gets the strength he needs for his journey. We will walk on, then, in the strength of this heavenly food; and when our course is run, we will, with the same Bread to support us, cry out with the Spirit and the Bride that our Lord Jesus may come to us, at that last hour, and admit us into his eternal kingdom.
In honor of the adorable Sacrament, and in memory of the Blessed Juliana, to whom the Church owes the Feast she is about to celebrate, we will offer our Readers today and during the Octave the main portions which are still extant of the Office which bears her name. It will be interesting to them to hear how this Office was drawn up; we give the details as supplied to us by the Bollandists, in the Life written of her by one of her contemporaries.
Juliana, then, began to ask herself whom she should get to compose the Office of the great Feast. She knew of no clever man, nor any holy priest, who seemed to her fitted for the work; so, trusting solely to divine Wisdom, she made up her mind to select a young brother of the Hospital, named John (not the John de Lausanne, of whom we have previously spoken), whose innocent life had been revealed to her by God. John refused the work, declaring that it far exceeded his powers or learning; he begged her to excuse him as he was but an ignorant man. Juliana knew all that; but she also knew that divine Wisdom, whose work she was furthering, could speak admirable things through an unlearned man; she kept to her purpose; and John, unable to resist the entreaties and influence of Juliana, began his labours. She prayed, and he wrote; and with the efforts of the two united, the work progressed in a way that surprised the young Brother. He attributed all, and he was not far wrong, to Juliana’s prayers. When he had got any considerable portion of the composition ready, he gave it to her, saying: “This, Sister, is what heaven sends thee: read it, and examine whether I have put down anything, either in the chant or the words, which needs correction.” She would then take it; and by the wonderful infused wisdom which she possessed, would examine and, where needed, correct; but with so much prudence and judgment that not even the most expert critics could find anything to change. And thus, by the wondrous help of God, was completed the whole Office of the new Feast.
The Antiphons we here subjoin were taken, by the Bollandists, from a very ancient Directorium of the Church of Saint-Martin-au-Mont.
They are the Antiphons assigned for the Benedictus and Magnificat of each day within the Octave.
Animarum cibus Dei Sapientia nobis carnem assumptam proposuit in edulium, ut per cibum hujus pietatis invitaret ad gustum divinitatis.
The Wisdom of God, the food of souls, hath offered to us, for our nourishment, the Flesh he had assumed to himself; that, by this food of his love, he might lead us to taste of what is divine.
Discipulis competentem conscribens hereditatem, sui memoriam commendavit inquiens: Hoc facite in mei commemorationem.
Leaving to his Disciples a worthy inheritance, he urged them to be mindful of himself, saying: do this in memory of me.
Totum Christus se nobis exhibet in cibum, ut sicut divinitus nos reficit quem corde gustamus, ita nos humanitus reficiat quem ore manducamus;
Christ gave his whole self to us as our food; that as he, whom we taste with out heart, divinely refreshes us, so he, whom we receive with our mouth, might refresh us by his human nature;
Et sic de visibilibus ad invisibilia, de temporalibus ad æterna, de terrenis ad cœlestia, de humanis ad divina nos transferat.
And thus it is, that he gives us to pass from things visible to invisible, from temporal to eternal, from earthly to heavenly, from human to divine.
Panem angelorum manducavit homo, ut qui secundum animum cibum divinitatis accipimus, secundum carnem cibum humanitatis sumamus: quia sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus.
Men hath eaten of the Bread of Angels; so that we who, according to the soul, receive the food of the godhead, may take, according to the flesh, the food of Christ’s humanity: for, as the rational soul and the flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ.
Panis vitæ, panis angelorum, Jesu Christe vera mundi vita; qui semper nos reficis, in te nunquam deficis, nos ab omni sana languore, ut te nostro viatico in terra recreati, te ore plenissimo manducemus in æternum.
O Bread of Life! O Bread of Angels! Jesus Christ, true life of the world! who ever feedest us, and never failest in thyself! heal us of all our weakness; that being refreshed on earth by thee as our viaticum, we may feed on thee, to our fill, in eternity.
Suo Christus sanguine nos lavat quotidie, cum ejus beatæ passionis quotidie memoria renovatur.
Daily doth Christ wash us in his Blood, for daily is renewed the remembrance of his sacred Passion.
Sanguis ejus non infidelium manibus ad ipsorum perniciem funditur; sed quotidie fidelium suavi ore sumitur ad salutem.
His Blood is not shed by the hands of faithless men, which would be to their destruction; but daily is it received, and sweetly, and to their salvation, by the Faithful.
Verus Deus, verus homo semel in cruce pependit, se Patri redemptionis hostiam efficacem offerens: semper tamen invisibiliter est in mysterio, non passus sed quasi pati repræsentatus.
Once did Christ, true God and true Man, hang upon the Cross, and offer himself to the Father, as an effectual victim of redemption; yet is he ever invisibly present in the Mystery, not suffering, but represented as suffering.
Dominus Jesus Christus vulnere quotidie sacrificatus, mortalibus in terra præstitit cœlesti fungi ministerio.
The Lord Jesus Christ, who is daily sacrificed, but without a wound, grants to mortals on earth to fulfill a heavenly mystery.
Hæc igitur singularis victima Christi mortis est recordatio, scelerum nostrorum expurgatio, cunctorum fidelium devotio, et ætern&aelg; vitæ adeptio. This incomparable Victim is, then, the remembrance of Christ’s death, the cleansing away of our crimes, the devotion of all the Faithful, and the pledge of life eternal.
|
|
|
|
| Pope Pius XII: Ad Caeli Reginam - Proclaiming the Queenship of Mary |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 08:00 AM - Forum: Encyclicals
- No Replies
|
|
Ad Caeli Reginam
Proclaiming the Queenship of Mary
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F5...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F5b%2F0d%2F96%2F5b0d9688aeb9ccb72c5a21e503d4623c.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
To the Venerable Brethren, the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops and other Local Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Holy See.
Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Blessing.
From the earliest ages of the Catholic Church a Christian people, whether in time of triumph or more especially in time of crisis, has addressed prayers of petition and hymns of praise and veneration to the Queen of Heaven. And never has that hope wavered which they placed in the Mother of the Divine King, Jesus Christ; nor has that faith ever failed by which we are taught that Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, reigns with a mother’s solicitude over the entire world, just as she is crowned in heavenly blessedness with the glory of a Queen.
2. Following upon the frightful calamities which before Our very eyes have reduced flourishing cities, towns, and villages to ruins, We see to Our sorrow that many great moral evils are being spread abroad in what may be described as a violent flood. Occasionally We behold justice giving way; and, on the one hand and the other, the victory of the powers of corruption. The threat of this fearful crisis fills Us with a great anguish, and so with confidence We have recourse to Mary Our Queen, making known to her those sentiments of filial reverence which are not Ours alone, but which belong to all those who glory in the name of Christian.
3. It is gratifying to recall that We ourselves, on the first day of November of the Holy Year 1950, before a huge multitude of Cardinals, Bishops, priests, and of the faithful who had assembled from every part of the world, defined the dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into heaven[1] where she is present in soul and body reigning, together with her only Son, amid the heavenly choirs of angels and Saints. Moreover, since almost a century has passed since Our predecessor of immortal memory, Pius IX, proclaimed and defined the dogma that the great Mother of God had been conceived without any stain of original sin, We instituted the current Marian Year[2] And now it is a great consolation to Us to see great multitudes here in Rome — and especially in the Liberian Basilica — giving testimony in a striking way to their faith and ardent love for their heavenly Mother. In all parts of the world We learn that devotion to the Virgin Mother of God is flourishing more and more, and that the principal shrines of Mary have been visited and are still being visited by many throngs of Catholic pilgrims gathered in prayer.
4. It is well known that we have taken advantage of every opportunity — through personal audiences and radio broadcasts — to exhort Our children in Christ to a strong and tender love, as becomes children, for Our most gracious and exalted Mother. On this point it is particularly fitting to call to mind the radio message which We addressed to the people of Portugal, when the miraculous image of the Virgin Mary which is venerated at Fatima was being crowned with a golden diadem.[3] We Ourselves called this the heralding of the “sovereignty” of Mary.[4]
5. And now, that We may bring the Year of Mary to a happy and beneficial conclusion, and in response to petitions which have come to Us from all over the world, We have decided to institute the liturgical feast of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen. This will afford a climax, as it were, to the manifold demonstrations of Our devotion to Mary, which the Christian people have supported with such enthusiasm.
6. In this matter We do not wish to propose a new truth to be believed by Christians, since the title and the arguments on which Mary’s queenly dignity is based have already been clearly set forth, and are to be found in ancient documents of the Church and in the books of the sacred liturgy.
7. It is Our pleasure to recall these things in the present encyclical letter, that We may renew the praises of Our heavenly Mother, and enkindle a more fervent devotion towards her, to the spiritual benefit of all mankind.
8. From early times Christians have believed, and not without reason, that she of whom was born the Son of the Most High received privileges of grace above all other beings created by God. He “will reign in the house of Jacob forever,”[5] “the Prince of Peace,”[6] the “King of Kings and Lord of Lords.”[7] And when Christians reflected upon the intimate connection that obtains between a mother and a son, they readily acknowledged the supreme royal dignity of the Mother of God.
9. Hence it is not surprising that the early writers of the Church called Mary “the Mother of the King” and “the Mother of the Lord,” basing their stand on the words of St. Gabriel the archangel, who foretold that the Son of Mary would reign forever,[8] and on the words of Elizabeth who greeted her with reverence and called her “the Mother of my Lord.”[9] Thereby they clearly signified that she derived a certain eminence and exalted station from the royal dignity of her Son.
10. So it is that St. Ephrem, burning with poetic inspiration, represents her as speaking in this way: “Let Heaven sustain me in its embrace, because I am honored above it. For heaven was not Thy mother, but Thou hast made it Thy throne. How much more honorable and venerable than the throne of a king is her mother.”[10] And in another place he thus prays to her: “. . . Majestic and Heavenly Maid, Lady, Queen, protect and keep me under your wing lest Satan the sower of destruction glory over me, lest my wicked foe be victorious against me.”[11]
11. St. Gregory Nazianzen calls Mary “the Mother of the King of the universe,” and the “Virgin Mother who brought forth the King of the whole world,”[12] while Prudentius asserts that the Mother marvels “that she has brought forth God as man, and even as Supreme King.”[13]
12. And this royal dignity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is quite clearly indicated through direct assertion by those who call her “Lady,” “Ruler” and “Queen.”
13. In one of the homilies attributed to Origen, Elizabeth calls Mary “the Mother of my Lord.” and even addresses her as “Thou, my Lady.”[14]
14. The same thing is found in the writings of St. Jerome where he makes the following statement amidst various interpretations of Mary’s name: “We should realize that Mary means Lady in the Syrian Language.”[15] After him St. Chrysologus says the same thing more explicitly in these words: “The Hebrew word ‘Mary’ means ‘Domina.’ The Angel therefore addresses her as ‘Lady’ to preclude all servile fear in the Lord’s Mother, who was born and was called ‘Lady’ by the authority and command of her own Son.”[16]
15. Moreover Epiphanius, the bishop of Constantinople, writing to the Sovereign Pontiff Hormisdas, says that we should pray that the unity of the Church may be preserved “by the grace of the holy and consubstantial Trinity and by the prayers of Mary, Our Lady, the holy and glorious Virgin and Mother of God.”[17]
16. The Blessed Virgin, sitting at the right hand of God to pray for us is hailed by another writer of that same era in these words, “the Queen of mortal man, the most holy Mother of God.”[18]
17. St. Andrew of Crete frequently attributes the dignity of a Queen to the Virgin Mary. For example, he writes, “Today He transports from her earthly dwelling, as Queen of the human race, His ever-Virgin Mother, from whose womb He, the living God, took on human form.”[19]
18. And in another place he speaks of “the Queen of the entire human race faithful to the exact meaning of her name, who is exalted above all things save only God himself.”[20]
19. Likewise St. Germanus speaks to the humble Virgin in these words: “Be enthroned, Lady, for it is fitting that you should sit in an exalted place since you are a Queen and glorious above all kings.”[21] He likewise calls her the “Queen of all of those who dwell on earth.”[22]
20. She is called by St. John Damascene: “Queen, ruler, and lady,”[23] and also “the Queen of every creature.”[24] Another ancient writer of the Eastern Church calls her “favored Queen,” “the perpetual Queen beside the King, her son,” whose “snow-white brow is crowned with a golden diadem.”[25]
21. And finally St. Ildephonsus of Toledo gathers together almost all of her titles of honor in this salutation: “O my Lady, my Sovereign, You who rule over me, Mother of my Lord . . . Lady among handmaids, Queen among sisters.”[26]
22. The theologians of the Church, deriving their teaching from these and almost innumerable other testimonies handed down long ago, have called the most Blessed Virgin the Queen of all creatures, the Queen of the world, and the Ruler of all.
23. The Supreme Shepherds of the Church have considered it their duty to promote by eulogy and exhortation the devotion of the Christian people to the heavenly Mother and Queen. Simply passing over the documents of more recent Pontiffs, it is helpful to recall that as early as the seventh century Our predecessor St. Martin I called Mary “our glorious Lady, ever Virgin.”[27] St. Agatho, in the synodal letter sent to the fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical Council called her “Our Lady, truly and in a proper sense the Mother of God.”[28] And in the eighth century Gregory II in the letter sent to St. Germanus, the patriarch, and read in the Seventh Ecumenical Council with all the Fathers concurring, called the Mother of God: “The Queen of all, the true Mother of God,” and also “the Queen of all Christians.”[29]
24. We wish also to recall that Our predecessor of immortal memory, Sixtus IV, touched favorably upon the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, beginning the Apostolic Letter Cum praeexcelsa[30] with words in which Mary is called “Queen,” “Who is always vigilant to intercede with the king whom she bore.” Benedict XIV declared the same thing in his Apostolic Letter Gloriosae Dominae, in which Mary is called “Queen of heaven and earth,” and it is stated that the sovereign King has in some way communicated to her his ruling power.[31]
25. For all these reasons St. Alphonsus Ligouri, in collecting the testimony of past ages, writes these words with evident devotion: “Because the virgin Mary was raised to such a lofty dignity as to be the mother of the King of kings, it is deservedly and by every right that the Church has honored her with the title of ‘Queen’.”[32]
26. Furthermore, the sacred liturgy, which acts as a faithful reflection of traditional doctrine believed by the Christian people through the course of all the ages both in the East and in the West, has sung the praises of the heavenly Queen and continues to sing them.
27. Ardent voices from the East sing out: “O Mother of God, today thou art carried into heaven on the chariots of the cherubim, the seraphim wait upon thee and the ranks of the heavenly army bow before thee.”[33]
28. Further: “O just, O most blessed Joseph), since thou art sprung from a royal line, thou hast been chosen from among all mankind to be spouse of the pure Queen who, in a way which defies description, will give birth to Jesus the king.”[34] In addition: “I shall sing a hymn to the mother, the Queen, whom I joyously approach in praise, gladly celebrating her wonders in song. . . Our tongue cannot worthily praise thee, O Lady; for thou who hast borne Christ the king art exalted above the seraphim. . . Hail, O Queen of the world; hail, O Mary, Queen of us all.”[35]
29. We read, moreover, in the Ethiopic Missal: “O Mary, center of the whole world, . . . thou art greater than the many-eyed cherubim and the six-winged seraphim . . . Heaven and earth are filled with the sanctity of thy glory.”[36]
30. Furthermore, the Latin Church sings that sweet and ancient prayer called the “Hail, Holy Queen” and the lovely antiphons “Hail, Queen of the Heavens,” “O Queen of Heaven, Rejoice,” and those others which we are accustomed to recite on feasts of the Blessed Virgin Mary: “The Queen stood at Thy right hand in golden vesture surrounded with beauty”[37]; “Heaven and earth praise thee as a powerful Queen”[38]; “Today the Virgin Mary ascends into heaven: rejoice because she reigns with Christ forever.”[39]
31. To these and others should be added the Litany of Loreto which daily invites Christian folk to call upon Mary as Queen. Likewise, for many centuries past Christians have been accustomed to meditate upon the ruling power of Mary which embraces heaven and earth, when they consider the fifth glorious mystery of the rosary which can be called the mystical crown of the heavenly Queen.
32. Finally, art which is based upon Christian principles and is animated by their spirit as something faithfully interpreting the sincere and freely expressed devotion of the faithful, has since the Council of Ephesus portrayed Mary as Queen and Empress seated upon a royal throne adorned with royal insignia, crowned with the royal diadem and surrounded by the host of angels and saints in heaven, and ruling not only over nature and its powers but also over the machinations of Satan. Iconography, in representing the royal dignity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, has ever been enriched with works of highest artistic value and greatest beauty; it has even taken the form of representing colorfully the divine Redeemer crowning His mother with a resplendent diadem.
33. The Roman Pontiffs, favoring such types of popular devotion, have often crowned, either in their own persons, or through representatives, images of the Virgin Mother of God which were already outstanding by reason of public veneration.
34. As We have already mentioned, Venerable Brothers, according to ancient tradition and the sacred liturgy the main principle on which the royal dignity of Mary rests is without doubt her Divine Motherhood. In Holy Writ, concerning the Son whom Mary will conceive, We read this sentence: “He shall be called the Son of the most High, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father, and he shall reign in the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end,”[40] and in addition Mary is called “Mother of the Lord”;[41] from this it is easily concluded that she is a Queen, since she bore a son who, at the very moment of His conception, because of the hypostatic union of the human nature with the Word, was also as man King and Lord of all things. So with complete justice St. John Damascene could write: “When she became Mother of the Creator, she truly became Queen of every creature.”[42] Likewise, it can be said that the heavenly voice of the Archangel Gabriel was the first to proclaim Mary’s royal office.
35. But the Blessed Virgin Mary should be called Queen, not only because of her Divine Motherhood, but also because God has willed her to have an exceptional role in the work of our eternal salvation. “What more joyful, what sweeter thought can we have” — as Our Predecessor of happy memory, Pius XI wrote — “than that Christ is our King not only by natural right, but also by an acquired right: that which He won by the redemption? Would that all men, now forgetful of how much we cost Our Savior, might recall to mind the words, ‘You were redeemed, not with gold or silver which perishes, . . . but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb spotless and undefiled.[43] We belong not to ourselves now, since Christ has bought us ‘at a great price’.”[44]/[45]
36. Now, in the accomplishing of this work of redemption, the Blessed Virgin Mary was most closely associated with Christ; and so it is fitting to sing in the sacred liturgy: “Near the cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ there stood, sorrowful, the Blessed Mary, Queen of Heaven and Queen of the World.”[46] Hence, as the devout disciple of St. Anselm (Eadmer, ed.) wrote in the Middle Ages: “just as . . . God, by making all through His power, is Father and Lord of all, so the blessed Mary, by repairing all through her merits, is Mother and Queen of all; for God is the Lord of all things, because by His command He establishes each of them in its own nature, and Mary is the Queen of all things, because she restores each to its original dignity through the grace which she merited.[47]
37. For “just as Christ, because He redeemed us, is our Lord and king by a special title, so the Blessed Virgin also (is our queen), on account of the unique manner in which she assisted in our redemption, by giving of her own substance, by freely offering Him for us, by her singular desire and petition for, and active interest in, our salvation.”[48]
38. From these considerations, the proof develops on these lines: if Mary, in taking an active part in the work of salvation, was, by God’s design, associated with Jesus Christ, the source of salvation itself, in a manner comparable to that in which Eve was associated with Adam, the source of death, so that it may be stated that the work of our salvation was accomplished by a kind of “recapitulation,”[49] in which a virgin was instrumental in the salvation of the human race, just as a virgin had been closely associated with its death; if, moreover, it can likewise be stated that this glorious Lady had been chosen Mother of Christ “in order that she might become a partner in the redemption of the human race”;[50] and if, in truth, “it was she who, free of the stain of actual and original sin, and ever most closely bound to her Son, on Golgotha offered that Son to the Eternal Father together with the complete sacrifice of her maternal rights and maternal love, like a new Eve, for all the sons of Adam, stained as they were by his lamentable fall,”[51] then it may be legitimately concluded that as Christ, the new Adam, must be called a King not merely because He is Son of God, but also because He is our Redeemer, so, analogously, the Most Blessed Virgin is queen not only because she is Mother of God, but also because, as the new Eve, she was associated with the new Adam.
39. Certainly, in the full and strict meaning of the term, only Jesus Christ, the God-Man, is King; but Mary, too, as Mother of the divine Christ, as His associate in the redemption, in his struggle with His enemies and His final victory over them, has a share, though in a limited and analogous way, in His royal dignity. For from her union with Christ she attains a radiant eminence transcending that of any other creature; from her union with Christ she receives the royal right to dispose of the treasures of the Divine Redeemer’s Kingdom; from her union with Christ finally is derived the inexhaustible efficacy of her maternal intercession before the Son and His Father.
40. Hence it cannot be doubted that Mary most Holy is far above all other creatures in dignity, and after her Son possesses primacy over all. “You have surpassed every creature,” sings St. Sophronius. “What can be more sublime than your joy, O Virgin Mother? What more noble than this grace, which you alone have received from God”?[52] To this St. Germanus adds: “Your honor and dignity surpass the whole of creation; your greatness places you above the angels.”[53] And St. John Damascene goes so far as to say: “Limitless is the difference between God’s servants and His Mother.”[54]
41. In order to understand better this sublime dignity of the Mother of God over all creatures let us recall that the holy Mother of God was, at the very moment of her Immaculate Conception, so filled with grace as to surpass the grace of all the Saints. Wherefore, as Our Predecessor of happy memory, Pius IX wrote, God “showered her with heavenly gifts and graces from the treasury of His divinity so far beyond what He gave to all the angels and saints that she was ever free from the least stain of sin; she is so beautiful and perfect, and possesses such fullness of innocence and holiness, that under God a greater could not be dreamed, and only God can comprehend the marvel.”[55]
42. Besides, the Blessed Virgin possessed, after Christ, not only the highest degree of excellence and perfection, but also a share in that influence by which He, her Son and our Redeemer, is rightly said to reign over the minds and wills of men. For if through His Humanity the divine Word performs miracles and gives graces, if He uses His Sacraments and Saints as instruments for the salvation of men, why should He not make use of the role and work of His most holy Mother in imparting to us the fruits of redemption? “With a heart that is truly a mother’s,” to quote again Our Predecessor of immortal memory, Pius IX, “does she approach the problem of our salvation, and is solicitous for the whole human race; made Queen of heaven and earth by the Lord, exalted above all choirs of angels and saints, and standing at the right hand of her only a Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, she intercedes powerfully for us with a mother’s prayers, obtains what she seeks, and cannot be refused.”[56] On this point another of Our Predecessors of happy memory, Leo XIII, has said that an “almost immeasurable” power has been given Mary in the distribution of graces;[57] St. Pius X adds that she fills this office “as by the right of a mother.”[58]
43. Let all Christians, therefore, glory in being subjects of the Virgin Mother of God, who, while wielding royal power, is on fire with a mother’s love.
44. Theologians and preachers, however, when treating these and like questions concerning the Blessed Virgin, must avoid straying from the correct course, with a twofold error to guard against: that is to say, they must beware of unfounded opinions and exaggerated expressions which go beyond the truth, on the other hand, they must watch out for excessive narrowness of mind in weighing that exceptional, sublime, indeed all but divine dignity of the Mother of God, which the Angelic Doctor teaches must be attributed to her “because of the infinite goodness that is God.”[59]
45. For the rest, in this as in other points of Christian doctrine, “the proximate and universal norm of truth” is for all the living Magisterium of the Church, which Christ established “also to illustrate and explain those matters which are contained only in an obscure way, and implicitly in the deposit of faith.”[60]
46. From the ancient Christian documents, from prayers of the liturgy, from the innate piety of the Christian people, from works of art, from every side We have gathered witnesses to the regal dignity of the Virgin Mother of God; We have likewise shown that the arguments deduced by Sacred Theology from the treasure store of the faith fully confirm this truth. Such a wealth of witnesses makes up a resounding chorus which changes the sublimity of the royal dignity of the Mother of God and of men, to whom every creature is subject, who is “exalted to the heavenly throne, above the choirs of angels.”[61]
47. Since we are convinced, after long and serious reflection, that great good will accrue to the Church if this solidly established truth shines forth more clearly to all, like a luminous lamp raised aloft, by Our Apostolic authority We decree and establish the feast of Mary’s Queenship, which is to be celebrated every year in the whole world on the 31st of May. We likewise ordain that on the same day the consecration of the human race to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary be renewed, cherishing the hope that through such consecration a new era may begin, joyous in Christian peace and in the triumph of religion.
48. Let all, therefore, try to approach with greater trust the throne of grace and mercy of our Queen and Mother, and beg for strength in adversity, light in darkness, consolation in sorrow; above all let them strive to free themselves from the slavery of sin and offer an unceasing homage, filled with filial loyalty, to their Queenly Mother. Let her churches be thronged by the faithful, her feast-days honored; may the beads of the Rosary be in the hands of all; may Christians gather, in small numbers and large, to sing her praises in churches, in homes, in hospitals, in prisons. May Mary’s name be held in highest reverence, a name sweeter than honey and more precious than jewels; may none utter blasphemous words, the sign of a defiled soul, against that name graced with such dignity and revered for its motherly goodness; let no one be so bold as to speak a syllable which lacks the respect due to her name.
49. All, according to their state, should strive to bring alive the wondrous virtues of our heavenly Queen and most loving Mother through constant effort of mind and manner. Thus will it come about that all Christians, in honoring and imitating their sublime Queen and Mother, will realize they are truly brothers, and with all envy and avarice thrust aside, will promote love among classes, respect the rights of the weak, cherish peace. No one should think himself a son of Mary, worthy of being received under her powerful protection, unless, like her, he is just, gentle and pure, and shows a sincere desire for true brotherhood, not harming or injuring but rather helping and comforting others.
50. In some countries of the world there are people who are unjustly persecuted for professing their Christian faith and who are deprived of their divine and human rights to freedom; up till now reasonable demands and repeated protests have availed nothing to remove these evils. May the powerful Queen of creation, whose radiant glance banishes storms and tempests and brings back cloudless skies, look upon these her innocent and tormented children with eyes of mercy; may the Virgin, who is able to subdue violence beneath her foot, grant to them that they may soon enjoy the rightful freedom to practice their religion openly, so that, while serving the cause of the Gospel, they may also contribute to the strength and progress of nations by their harmonious cooperation, by the practice of extraordinary virtues which are a glowing example in the midst of bitter trials.
51. By this Encyclical Letter We are instituting a feast so that all may recognize more clearly and venerate more devoutly the merciful and maternal sway of the Mother of God. We are convinced that this feast will help to preserve, strengthen and prolong that peace among nations which daily is almost destroyed by recurring crises. Is she not a rainbow in the clouds reaching towards God, the pledge of a covenant of peace?[62] “Look upon the rainbow, and bless Him that made it; surely it is beautiful in its brightness. It encompasses the heaven about with the circle of its glory, the hands of the Most High have displayed it.”[63] Whoever, therefore, reverences the Queen of heaven and earth — and let no one consider himself exemppt from this tribute of a grateful and loving soul — let him invoke the most effective of Queens, the Mediatrix of peace; let him respect and preserve peace, which is not wickedness unpunished nor freedom without restraint, but a well-ordered harmony under the rule of the will of God; to its safeguarding and growth the gentle urgings and commands of the Virgin Mary impel us.
52. Earnestly desiring that the Queen and Mother of Christendom may hear these Our prayers, and by her peace make happy a world shaken by hate, and may, after this exile show unto us all Jesus, Who will be our eternal peace and joy, to you, Venerable Brothers, and to your flocks, as a promise of God’s divine help and a pledge of Our love, from Our heart We impart the Apostolic Benediction.
53. Given at Rome, from St. Peter’s, on the feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the eleventh day of October, 1954, in the sixteenth year of our Pontificate.
REFERENCES:
1. Cf. constitutio apostolica Munificentissirnus Deus: AAS XXXXII 1950, p. 753 sq.
2. Cf. Iitt. enc. Fulgens corona: AAS XXXXV, 1953, p. 577 sq.
3. Cf. AAS XXXVIII, 1946, p. 264 sq.
4. Cf. L’Osservatore Romano, d. 19 Maii, a. 1946.
5. Luc. 1, 32.
6. Isai. IX, 6.
7. Apoc. XIX, 16.
8. Cf. Luc. 1, 32, 33.
9. Luc. 1, 43.
10. S. Ephraem, Hymni de B Mana, ed. Th. J. Lamy, t. II, Mechliniae, 1886, hymn. XIX, p. 624.
11. Idem, Oratio ad Ssmam Dei Matrem; Opera omnia, Ed. Assemani, t. III (graece), Romae, 1747, pag. 546.
12. S. Gregorius Naz., Poemata dogmatica, XVIII, v. 58; PG XXXVII, 485.
13. Prudentius, Dittochaeum, XXVII: PL LX, 102 A.
14. Hom. in S. Lucam, hom. Vll; ed. Rauer, Origenes’ Werke, T. IX, p. 48 (ex catena Marcarii Chrysocephali). Cf. PG XIII, 1902 D.
15. S. Hieronymus, Liber de nominibus hebraeis: PL XXIII, 886.
16. S. Petrus Chrysologus, Sermo 142, De Annuntiatione B.M.V.: PL Lll, 579 C; cf. etiam 582 B; 584 A: “Regina totius exstitit castitatis.”
17. Relatio Epiphanii Ep. Constantin.: PL LXII, 498 D.
18. Encomium in Dormitionem Ssmae Deiparae (inter opera S. Modesti): PG LXXXVI, 3306 B.
19. S. Andreas Cretensis, Homilia II in Dormitionem Ssmae Deiparae: PG XCVII, 1079 B.
20. Id., Homilia III in Dormitionem Ssmae Deiparae: PG XCVII, 1099 A.
21. S. Germanus, In Praesentationem Ssmae Deiparae, 1: PG XCVIII, 303 A.
22. Id., In Praesentationem Ssmae Deiparae, n PG XCVIII, 315 C.
23. S. Ioannes Damascenus, Homilia I in Dormitionem B.M.V.: P.G. XCVI, 719 A.
24. Id., De fide orthodoxa, I, IV, c. 14: PG XLIV, 1158 B.
25. De laudibus Mariae (inter opera Venantii Fortunati): PL LXXXVIII, 282 B et 283 A.
26. Ildefonsus Toletanus, De virginitate perpetua B.M.V.: PL XCVI, 58 A D.
27. S. Martinus 1, Epist. XIV: PL LXXXVII, 199-200 A.
28. S. Agatho: PL LXXXVII, 1221 A.
29. Hardouin, Acta Conciliorum, IV, 234; 238: PL LXXXIX, 508 B.
30. Xystus IV, bulla Cum praeexcelsa. d. d. 28 Febr. a. 1476.
31. Benedictus XIV, bulla Gloriosae Dominae, d. d. 27 Sept. a. 1748.
32. S. Alfonso, Le glone de Maria, p. I, c. I, 1.
33. Ex liturgia Armenorum: in festo Assumptionis, hymnus ad Matutinum.
34. Ex Menaeo (byzantino): Dominica post Natalem, in Canone, ad Matutinum.
35. Officium hymni Axathistos (in ritu byzantino).
36. Missale Aethiopicum, Anaphora Dominae nostrae Mariae, Matris Dei.
37. Brev. Rom., Versiculus sexti Respons.
38. Festum Assumptionis; hymnus Laudum.
39. Ibidem, ad Magnificat 11 Vesp.
40. Luc. 1, 32, 33.
41. Ibid. 1, 43.
42. S. Ioannes Damascenus, De fide orthodoxa, 1. IV, c. 14; PL XCIV, 1158 s. B.
43. I Petr. 1, 18, 19.
44. I Cor. Vl, 20.
45. Pius Xl, litt. enc. Quas primas: AAS XVII, 1925, p. 599.
46. Festum septem dolorum B. Mariae Virg., Tractus.
47. Eadmerus, De excellentia Virginis Mariae, c. 11: PL CLIX, 508 A B.
48. F. Suarez, De mysteriis vitae Christi, disp. XXII, sect. 11 (ed Vives, XIX, 327).
49. S. Irenaeus, Adv. haer., V, 19, 1: PG VII, 1175 B.
50. Pius Xl, epist. Auspicatus profecto: AAS XXV, 1933, p. 80.
51. Pius XII, litt. enc. Mystici Corporis: AAS XXXV, 1943, p. 247.
52. S. Sophronius, In annuntianone Beatae Mariae Virginis: PG LXXXVII, 3238 D; 3242 A.
53. S. Germanus, Hom. II in dormitione Beatae Mariae Virginis: PG XCVIII, 354 B.
54. S. Ioannes Damascenus, Hom. I in Dormitionem Beatae Mariae Virginis: PG XCVI, 715 A.
55. Pius IX, bulla Ineffabilis Deus: Acta Pii IX, I, p. 597-598.
56. Ibid. p. 618.
57. Leo Xlll, litt. enc. Adiumcem populi: ASS, XXVIIl, 1895-1896,p.130.
58. Pius X, litt enc. Ad diem illum: ASS XXXVI, 1903-1904, p.455.
59. S. Thomas, Summa Theol., I, q. 25, a. 6, ad 4.
60. Pius Xll, litt. enc. Humani generis: AAS XLII, 1950, p. 569.
61. Ex Brev. Rom.: Festum Assumptionis Beatae Mariae Virginis.
62. Cf. Gen. IX, 13.
63. Eccl. XLIII, 12-13.
|
|
|
|
| May 31st - The Queenship of the Blessed Virgin Mary |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 07:17 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- Replies (3)
|
|
Excerpt from the Mystical City of God:
The Mystical City of God
Book 8 - Chapter 8
THE CORONATION OF THE MOTHER OF GOD
We call that the throne of the Divinity, from which God manifests Himself to the saints as the principal cause of their glory and as the infinite, eternal God, independent of all things and on whose will all creatures depend, from which He manifests Himself as the Lord, as the King, as the Judge and Master of all that is in existence. This dignity Christ the Redeemer possesses, in as far as He is God, essentially, and as far as He is man, through the hypostatic union, by which He communicates his Godhead to the humanity. Hence in heaven He is the King, the Lord and supreme Judge; and the saints, though their glory exceeds all human calculation, are as servants and inferiors of this inaccessible Majesty. In this the most holy Mary participates in a degree next inferior and in a manner otherwise ineffable and proportionate to a mere creature so closely related to the Godman; and therefore She assists forever at the right hand of her Son as Queen (Ps. 44, 10), Lady and Mistress of all creation, her dominion extending as far as that of her divine Son, although in a different manner.
After placing the most blessed Mary on this exalted and supereminent throne, the Lord declared to the courtiers of heaven all the privileges She should enjoy in virtue of this participation in his majesty. The Person of the eternal Father, as the first principle of all things, speaking to the angels and saints, said to them: “Our Daughter Mary was chosen according to our pleasure from amongst all creatures, the first one to delight Us, and who never fell from the title and position of a Daughter, such as We had given Her in our divine mind; She has a claim on our dominion, which We shall recognize by crowning Her as the legitimate and peerless Lady and Sovereign.” The incarnate Word said: “To my true and natural Mother belong all the creatures which were created and redeemed by Me; and of all things over which I am King, She too shall be the legitimate and supreme Queen.” The Holy Ghost said: “Since She is called my beloved and chosen Spouse, She deserves to be crowned as Queen for all eternity.”
Having thus spoken the three divine Persons placed upon the head of the most blessed Mary a crown of such new splendor and value, that the like has been seen neither before nor after by any mere creature. At the same time a voice sounded from the throne saying: “My Beloved, chosen among the creatures, our kingdom is Thine; Thou shalt be the Lady and the Sovereign of the seraphim, of all the ministering spirits, the angels and of the entire universe of creatures. Attend, proceed and govern prosperously over them, for in our supreme consistory We give Thee power, majesty and sovereignty. Being filled with grace beyond all the rest, Thou hast humiliated Thyself in thy own estimation to the lowest place; receive now the supreme dignity deserved by Thee and, as a participation in our Divinity, the dominion over all the creatures of our Omnipotence. From thy royal throne to the centre of the earth Thou shalt reign; and by the power We now give Thee Thou shalt subject hell with all its demons and inhabitants. Let all of them fear Thee as the supreme Empress and Mistress of those caverns and dwelling–places of our enemies. In thy hands and at thy pleasure We place the influences and forces of the heavens, the moisture of the clouds, the growths of the earth; and of all of them do Thou distribute according to thy will, and our own will shall be at thy disposal for the execution of thy wishes. Thou shalt be the Empress and Mistress of the militant Church, its Protectress, its Advocate, its Mother and Teacher. Thou shalt be the special Patroness of the Catholic countries; and whenever they, or the faithful, or any of the children of Adam call upon Thee from their heart, serve or oblige Thee, Thou shalt relieve and help them in their labors and necessities. Thou shalt be the Friend, the Defender and the Chieftainess of all the just and of our friends; all of them Thou shalt comfort, console and fill with blessings according to their devotion to Thee. In view of all this We make Thee the Depositary of our riches, the Treasurer of our goods; we place into thy hands the helps and blessings of our grace for distribution; nothing do We wish to be given to the world, which does not pass through thy hands; and nothing do We deny, which Thou wishest to concede to men. Grace shall be diffused in thy lips for obtaining all that Thou wishest and ordainest in heaven and on earth, and everywhere shall angels and men obey Thee; because whatever is ours shall be thine, just as Thou hast always been ours; and Thou shalt reign with Us forever.”
In the execution of this decree and privilege conceded to the Mistress of the world, the Almighty commanded all the courtiers of heaven, angels and men, to show Her obedience and recognize Her as their Queen and Lady. There was another mystery concealed in this wonder, namely, it was a recompense for the worship and veneration, which, as is clear from this history, the most blessed Mary, notwithstanding that She was the Mother of God, full of grace and holiness above the angels and saints, had bestowed upon the saints during her mortal pilgrimage. Although during the time when they were comprehensors and She yet a pilgrim, it was for her greater merit, that She should humble Herself beneath them all according to the ordainment of the Lord; yet now, when She was in possession of the kingdom, it was just, that She should be venerated, worshipped and extolled by them as her inferiors and vassals. This they also did in that most blessed state, in which all things are reduced to their proper proportion and order. Both the angelic spirits and the blessed souls, while rendering their adoration to the Lord with fear and worshipful reverence, rendered a like homage in its proportion to His most blessed Mother; and the saints who were there in their bodies prostrated themselves and gave bodily signs of their worship. All these demonstrations at the coronation of the Empress of heaven redounded wonderfully to her glory, to the new joy and jubilee of the saints and to the pleasure of the most blessed Trinity. Altogether festive was this day, and it produced new accidental glory in all the heavens. Those that partook more especially therein were her most fortunate spouse saint Joseph, saint Joachim and Anne and all the other relatives of the Queen, together with the thousand angels of her guard.
Within the glorious body of the Queen, over her heart, was visible to the saints a small globe or monstrance of singular beauty and splendor, which particularly roused and rouses their admiration and joy. It was there in testimony and reward of her having afforded to the sacramental Word an acceptable resting–place and sanctuary, and of her having received holy Communion so worthily, purely and holily, without any defect or imperfection, and with a devotion, love and reverence attained by none other of the saints. In regard to the other rewards and crowns corresponding to her peerless works and virtues, nothing that can be said could give any idea; and therefore I refer it to the beatific vision, where each one shall perceive them in proportion as his doings and his devotion shall have merited.
WORDS OF THE QUEEN
The Virgin Mary speaks to Sister Mary of Agreda, Spain
My daughter, if anything could lessen the enjoyment of the highest felicity and glory which I possess, and if, in it, I could be capable of any sorrow, without a doubt I would be grieved to see the holy Church and the rest of the world in its present state of labor, notwithstanding that men know me to be their Mother, Advocate and Protectress in heaven, ready to guide and assist them to eternal life. In this state of affairs, when the Almighty has granted me so many privileges as his Mother and when there are so many sources of help placed in my hands solely for the benefit of mortals and belonging to me as the Mother of clemency, it is a great cause of sorrow to me to see mortals force me to remain idle, and that, for want of calling upon me, so many souls should be lost. But if I cannot experience grief now, I may justly complain of men, that they load themselves with eternal damnation and refuse me the glory of saving their souls.
How much my intercession and the power I have in heaven are worth has never been hidden in the Church, for I have demonstrated my ability to save all by so many thousands of miracles, prodigies and favors operated in behalf of those devoted to me. With those who have called upon me in their needs I have always shown myself liberal, and the Lord has shown himself liberal to them on my account. The Most High still wishes to give liberally of his infinite treasures and resolves to favor those who know how to gain my intercession before God. This is the secure way and the powerful means of advancing the Church, of improving the Catholic reigns, of spreading the faith, of furthering the welfare of families and of states, of bringing the souls to grace and to the friendship of God.
|
|
|
|
| SiSiNoNo (1997): The True Notion of Tradition |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-31-2021, 07:14 AM - Forum: In Defense of Tradition
- No Replies
|
|
SiSiNoNo - January 1997 No. 19
The True Notion of Tradition
An Abridged text of the discourse given by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais at Versailles, May 19, 1995
![[Image: Bishop_Malleraisa.jpg]](http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/Images/1997_January/Bishop_Malleraisa.jpg)
Modernist Rome has declared us schismatics because we hold a supposedly false notion of Tradition. I am going to show that it is the faithful of Tradition who have the true notion of Tradition and, consequently that it is those who declare us schismatics, the neo-modernists, who have a false evolutionary notion of Tradition, which they call "living tradition."
Tradition is essentially immutable, unchangeable: That however does not prevent it from being living-we will show in what manner- nor from undergoing a homogeneous development. To begin, let's look at the first point.
TRADITION IS ESSENTIALLY IMMUTABLE
Card. Billot, under Pope Pius XI, explained this in a work entitled: De Immutabilitate Traditionis Contra Modernam Haeresim Evolutionismi, Concerning the Immutability of Sacred Tradition (1929). This is no invention or opinion, it is the most classic doctrine of the Church: Tradition does not change. In fact, the word tradition comes from the Latin tradere which means to transmit. Tradition is the transmission without change of that which has been deposited. If in the course of the transmission there is a change, then in deed there is a breach of faith, there is a falsification of the deposit transmitted. We see this, for instance, if the transmission of popular tradition (i.e., folklore) ; but fidelity is so much more important in the transmission of the supernatural deposit of divine revelation, that is to say the treasure of truths revealed by the prophets, Our Lord Jesus Christ and ending with the Apostles. The revealed deposit is completed at the time of the death of the last Apostle.
St Pius X in the decree Lamentabili (1907) condemns the following:
Quote:Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles [Proposition 21].
The proposition was condemned because it meant that there could have been other later revelations which could have been added to the revelation given to the Apostles. The Magisterium of the Church has solely the role of preserving and faithfully explaining this deposit of Revelation. This is what Vatican Council I says in the decree Pastor aeternus:
Quote:The Holy Spirit has not been promised to the successors of Peter that, under His revelation, they might make known a new doctrine, but in order that, with His assistance, they sacredly preserve and faithfully set forth the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is to say, the deposit of the faith.
Pope Pius IX had many years before condemned the error of progression in matters of doctrine held by those who said doctrine must evolve as human knowledge advances in his encyclical Qui pluribus (1846):
Quote:It is by as great a fraud...that these enemies of divine revelation, who bestow the highest praises on human progress, wish, with a truly reckless and sacrilegious audacity, to bring it [the progressist error] into the Catholic religion, as if religion was not the work of God, but that of men, or was some philosophic discovery that human methods could perfect.
Let us hold firmly to the essential immutability of the divine tradition. It is a deposit to faithfully trasmit-and that’s that! Later we will explain in what way there is a certain progress, but this principle must be clearly established and firmly held; otherwise, we cannot continue.
TRADITION IS LIVING BECAUSE EACH ONE OF US LIVES IN IT
This essential immutability does not prevent Tradition from being living. The modernists speak of "living tradition." We also speak of the living tradition, but not in the same way, as we are going to see.
Here is what we understand by "living tradition":
That tradition is immutable does not prevent it from being living; that is to say that Catholics of yesterday, today and tomorrow live in it. Tradition is living because one lives in it.
We are going to see the life and development of divine tradition first as it concerns the individual; then as it manifests itself in the Church considered as a whole. It is very important to make a distinction between these two things.
Tradition is the revealed deposit. What is in the revelation? Essentially, the revelation is the intimate life of God which is communicated to us by grace and by the sacraments. The intimate life of God is God displaying himself in three divine Persons, and the entirety of this life is communicated to us by grace, the sacraments, and Our Lord Jesus Christ. That is the essential core of the Christian revelation, the very terms of this deposit one must keep. Living tradition is the same as saying that one lives the life of God, that one is imbued with this divine life, that one lives it by the intellect, by the will, by faith, by hope, by charity and by all the virtues.
Now this Christian life-this life of tradition in our hearts, persons, and surroundings-is a participation in the immutable life of God. God does not change. The blessed in heaven contemplate the immutable God in eternity which fills them with an immense joy for all eternity. They are delighted to contemplate the same and unchanging God forever, the Source of an inconceivable and inexpressible life. This is their eternal rejoicing, and nevertheless they are fixed in the immutable. See then the error of the progressists, who wish that this would not be constant change…. No! - The spiritual life is the most unchangeable! Look at the saints in their contemplation. They are fixed on God and that is sufficient for them and nourishes their lives. I am not speaking of the ecstasies possible on earth with the body almost suspended. I am speaking of the soul who, while conducting his ordinary activities, is completely immersed and transformed in God, firm and unchangeable. We understand well that the more we live this Tradition, the more we will be fixed in the immutable who is God, and the further we will be removed from the evolution of perpetual change.
For the modem evolutionists on the contrary, life consists of perpetual change. It is very difficult for them to conceive that the highest life which already exists here on earth for the saints, for the contemplatives and those who devote themselves to prayer and meditation, consists of the contemplation of the unchangeable-and yet, thus it is!
But this life of tradition, this contemplation of the unchangeable, should nevertheless progress within each one of the faithful. There is a progression, a progressive deepening in the course of the spiritual life;
1) First, there is a development in the object of the faith. The faithful should not only learn more and more about the scope of all the revealed truths but also the consequences of the revealed truths in practical life, e.g., the consequences of the divinity of Jesus Christ for social and political life, etc….
2) There is also a development in the intensity of the faith, in the extent that we live this revealed truth more vigorously (STI, II q.52). Great saints have a deeper faith because they adhere more steadfastly to God and His revelation.
3) There is also another development as regards the individual. This is the advancement in the power of faith when the Christian submits his entire life to the rule of the Faith. As Sacred Scripture says: "The just man lives by the faith" (Rom. 1:17).
4) Finally, in the individual, there is also a development in the fruits of the faith. A living faith is accompanied by charity and the entire retinue of the infused virtues and gifts of the Holy Ghost, whose intrinsic law is to grow without ceasing, provided that the tendencies toward vice are fought. The Faith is then the root of the progress of each Catholic towards holiness.
It is undeniable that living tradition exists in each individual, provided that there has been authentic transmission, and that this tradition has been increased within the individual by the deepening and fruitfulness of the faith.
FALSE IDEAS OF DEVELOPMENT
This development of the Faith, of Christian virtues, of the life of Tradition does not apply to the Church taken in her totality. In effect, neither in the sources of the spiritual life nor in the case of the holiness of the most saintly among the Catholics, nor in the number of saints, can one establish a spiritual development.
1) Let us first consider the sources of this life of Tradition. These sources do not increase, do not change. The Church possesses from Her inception the seven sacraments. N o one can add an eighth sacrament, as the charismatics do with their laying on of hands. No one can suppress one or another of the sacraments as the modernists do, as for example in the case of Confirmation or of Penance. The sources of holiness are always the same. They are always as plentiful. One has only to drink at them.
2) Can there be an evolution in the model of holiness? -No, there is no development. The model of sanctity no longer evolves because "the form of all perfection" is Our Lord Jesus Christ, as it states in the ritual for the taking of the habit by religious sisters. Though saints may appear different, they are only variations on the same theme,...different arrangements of the same flowers of the same bouquet, as St. Francis de Sales explains. Thus the code of the sanctity of the Church does not change, just as the code of morality does not change. This is of equal value for all times. To wish to establish a new religious life in the 20th century is an illusion. It is an error. Opus Dei, with that which could be its motto: "Work, Commitment, Influence" is the very example of this illusion.
3) Perhaps you could object: "But nevertheless, in the degree of sanctity there is a development in the Church. In the 20th century the saints are much more holy than before! There are some great saints in the 20th century!"...Count them on the fingers of one hand! Martyrs have been canonised, it is true. St Pius X was canonised, it is true, but that was before the Council. Padre Pio is just before the Council. After the Council does one find saints? Surely, there will always be some of them, but they are few indeed and I promise that they are not of the conciliar Church! We are far from progress. In fact, there is a regression.
However, let us admit that an increase in sanctity in the Church lover time is not necessary. However, let us admit that an increase in sanctity in the Church over time is not necessary. God raises up the saints as He wishes, when He wishes, to lift the level of each century, but one does not observe that one century regularly produces more great saints than the preceding century .We do not have this imaginary progress in which the modernists believe. Let us then refute the ideas of this pseudo-progress.
In spite of everything, there is, in this immutable Tradition, an admirable capacity for application to all contingent circumstances. It is a matter of applying the eternal and unchanging principles to the problems and necessities of each century .The Council of Nicea is not the same as the Council of Florence, the Council of Florence is not the same as the Council of Trent, the Council of Trent is not the same as Vatican Council I. In each there is a different application, but the principles were always the same. Hence, we see here that there is a vitality to tradition in that it is capable of applying itself to each era.
Tradition is alive in that it applies itself above all to struggling against the errors of each era, against the dangers which threaten the souls of each century .It was of this that Pope Pius IX was speaking in Gravissimas Inter (1862):
Quote:The Church, because of her divine institution, must take the greatest care to keep intact and inviolate the deposit of the divine faith, keep unceasing watch over all her efforts for the salvation of souls and pay great attention to driving away and eliminating everything which can be opposed to the faith and can put in danger, in one way or another, the salvation of souls [His Excellency's emphasis added-Ed.].
Doctrine has this marvelous faculty of application!-to condemn, to eliminate, to reject everything which opposes the Faith and salvation of souls.
THE FALSE AGGIORNAMENTO OF VATICAN II
After Vatican Council II, the opposite was done. No one any longer wished to condemn anything and there was talk of adaptation, of aggiornamento. But this is a false adaptation! The proof of it was they did not wish to condemn the con- temporary errors such as Communism. The 400 signatures gathered by Archbishop Lefebvre to condemn it remained in a desk drawer. They did not want to condemn the contemporary errors of Liberalism, of Modernism, etc…. They did not want to apply the revealed deposit to the danger which was currently threatening souls. This unrealistic claim of adaptation on the part of the modernists is nonsense!
Vatican II wanted to make an adaptation that was a mutation a priori, artificial, with a Protestant and modernist interpretation. Catholic application is not a mutation. It is simply the applying of unchangeable principles to contingent circumstances. The principles are living because they apply themselves! That is the important thing! It is precisely because the transmission is living, that is to say applied, that the Church constantly draws new propositions from her own and immutable treasure...new condemnations of heresies for example, or new dogmatic definitions. It is necessary at certain times to put the finger on certain errors, to add a certain dogmatic precision, as for example when the Council of Trent defined (against the Protestant errors) the Mass. That is applying the immutable principle to the needs of the era. That is what Vatican Council II did not do. It let the principles fall, under the pretext of adaptation, to the thinking of the modern world! Where there is a true adaptation, there is a battle in proportion to the errors to be battled and to the dangers which menace the eternal life of souls.
It remains to be shown how, in this matter of application in the course of time, tradition undergoes a homogeneous development.
THE HOMOGENEOUS DEVELOPMENT OF DOGMA
This application-this necessity to respond to the needs of each era and protect souls against errors properly constitutes, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the divine force of a certain development of doctrine, e.g., new dogmatic definitions. But be on guard! This development is homogeneous. It is not a mutation but a homogeneous development. This is contrary to the view of the modernists who wish it to be an evolutionary development. The homogeneous progress of the Tradition of the Church is entirely a progress in l) precision, and 2) explanation.
That is to say, that which had been universally believed in previous times is, in later years, isolated and embossed. It is like a rough diamond, having been mined from the quarry and not yet very pretty, taken to the gem cutter who is going to chisel it into a thousand surfaces in order that one can view it from all its angles with thousands of reflections. But it is the same diamond! There is simply a development in the particulars-all the colors of the rainbow are going to be refracted but there is no development in substance. A gem cutter who might want to re-chisel it afterwards would fail. This is development in precision.
There is also a development in explanation. There is a passing from the implicit to the explicit. That which one believed implicitly is going to be believed explicitly. For example, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Pope over all the bishops of the world. This has always been believed, but implicitly {otherwise the Church would not have survived). After Vatican Council I, this is now believed explicitly.
St. Thomas, while addressing the growth of the articles of Faith in the course of the Old Testament, sets forth a doctrine that can also, in a certain way, be applied to the New Testament:
Quote:…..alone must say then that the articles of faith are never increased in their substantial content, as time goes by, because all that the later men have believed had been contained, although implicitly, in the faith of the Fathers who preceded them [thus, that which Isaiah said was contained in the faith of Moses, for example, was already in the faith of Abraham].
We must remember this very important doctrine of St. Thomas: in the Old Testament, the number of articles of the faith increased because the Holy Spirit disclosed more and more explicitly the revealed truths {STII,II, q.l, a.7).
After the New Testament {with the death of St. John) there is no more revelation. But there is the proposition by the Magisterium of the Church. In the Old Testament there had been an increase of the Revelation and thus of the articles of Faith. In the New Testament there is an increase in the proposition by the organs of Tradition, especially the Magisterium, and hence a passage from the implicit to the explicit. In the Old Testament it is God's Rev- elation itself which passes from the implicit to the explicit; in the New Testament, Revelation is ended, it is the proposition by the Church which passes from the implicit to the explicit. There is then a development, not in the articles of the Faith but in the explanation of the truths of the revealed deposit.
It is a homogeneous development. It is a development like a bud which blossoms...like a bud which opens up very beautifully, but remains the same bud. There is an unfolding, but without alteration; a displaying of all that which had been contained within from the outset. One calls this homogeneous because there is no mutation. It is the same living species, the same plant, it is a development without mutation, it is the same reality unfolding itself and making explicit all its details, but it is the same reality.
THE UNSURPASSABLE SUMMIT
Finally, this homogeneous development leads to a point which cannot be surpassed, which is, precisely, the defined truth. Once a truth is defined, for example, ex cathedra by a pope or in an ecumenical council, as was the Immaculate Conception (by Pope Pius IX) or the Assumption of the Most Holy Virgin (by Pope Pius XII), that truth, thus defined, constitutes an unsurpassable peak. One cannot improve upon it.
Catholic doctrine says that defined truths are irrevocable. They are no longer susceptible to development. They must always be believed in the same meaning in eodem sensu eademque semper sententia as the Anti-Modernist Oath puts it. They have been stated precisely with the assistance of the Holy Ghost. They are no longer subject to a subsequent development, even, I would say, in their formulation. The dogmatic formulas, the words employed, are no longer subject to improvement. Take for example the word transubstantiation used to ex- press the conversion of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ at the Mass The word conversion is a very vague word in Latin. It means change and/or passage from one condition to another, but it does not suffice. One must state precisely that it is a transubstantiation: all the substance of the bread is changed into the Body of Christ, all the substance of the wine is changed into the Blood of Christ. And indeed it could never be better stated. One cannot imagine of a new formulation which could say it better, because this is the diamond finely crafted by the Holy Ghost. And all the subsequent heretics are going to try to find another word, for example Fr. Schillebeeckx, who invents the word transignification and falls into heresy. Time and again, in each newly defined dogma, the Church eventually attains an unsurpassable height. That is to say that the truths which have not yet been defined have not yet reached their unsurpassable summit, and, therefore, they can still have an homogeneous development.
It remains no less true that, in the aggregate, the doctrine of the faith grows and develops itself homogeneously. It is open to development by a further preciseness in the explanation of points which have not yet been defined.
DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE
This is the way we must understand what St. Vincent of Lerins said in his celebrated Commonitorium which affirms the immutability of Tradition and at the same time homogeneous development, too.
But perhaps someone will say "is there then within the Church no progress in religion?" Assuredly there is, and a very great progress, for who is there who would be so hardened against men and so hateful towards God that he would dare oppose such a progress? It is however in this manner; there is a progress, there is in truth an advancement in the faith, but not a change.
St. Vincent of Lerins (d.445) remains very timely, replying to today's modernists that there is a development in the faith, but not a change, not a mutation: "There is a development when a thing in itself is enlarged; there is a change when something is changed into another thing" (RJ2174).
This change is inadmissible for tradition, for the deposit of the faith. St. Vincent wrote:
Quote:...[u]nderstanding, knowledge and wisdom must increase and powerfully grow in one and in all, both in each individual man and in the Church, during the passage of time and of the ages, but grow solely within its own species, that is to say within the same dogma, in the same sense and in the same meaning. In eodem dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia [This expression was lifted textually by Vatican Council I and for the Anti-Modernist Oath-Ed.]
Thus, St. Vincent of Lerins insists on continuity .There is a development he says, but a homogeneous development. There is no substantial change.
THE HOMOGENEOUS DEVELOPMENT OF THE LITURGY
The liturgy has also experienced a homogeneous development. The so-called "Mass of St. Pius V" is the result of centuries of liturgical developments which have, little by little, sculptured the prayers of the Mass and the other liturgical prayers of the missal, to form that inestimable jewel that the holy Pope St. Pius V codified. The Canon, the essential part of this Mass, was al- ready completed by the time of St. Gregory the Great (reigning 590- 604). There had previously been a whole development; and indeed afterwards prayers were added, by no means secondary, such as those of the Offertory. We don't in the least assert that the Mass of St. Pius V "descended from heaven," for that would not conform to reality. It was perfected during the 11th to the 14th century. But when St. Pius V codified it his bull Quo Primum (1570), it becomes an unsurpassable summit. It is the completed liturgical expression of the dogmas of the Mass (e.g., Real Presence, Eucharistic Sacrifice, true sacrifice which is one and the same as the Sacrifice of the Cross) and of the veneration which is due to that which is effected by the holy Mass. And St. Pius V codified this Ordo Missae precisely as the insurmountable barrier raised up against the Protestant heresy and all subsequent heresies.
One must affirm then that this Mass is an unsurpassable expression of faith and adoration, and, therefore, we must affirm that the fabrication by Pope Paul VI of a new Mass-by his experts, notably Mgr. Bugnini-by the reconstitution of ancient formulas which had fallen into disuse and which, in particular, had not been retained by St. Pius V, is something artificial. It is not a homogeneous development. It is a thing artificially constrained and not a time-honored and spontaneous advancement. They attempted an abrupt development, but this was erroneous.
This new Mass is no longer a precise manifestation of the Faith, rather it is a regression. The dogmas are less clearly manifested, the Real Presence is less affirmed, the propitiatory Sacrifice is toned down. One passes from the explicit to the implicit, from the clear to the ambiguous. It is the opposite of an homogeneous development which is an advancement in explanation. The New Mass is the opposite of true progress and that is why we do not accept it. That is the reason that we ask the faithful to not assist at the New Mass except for reasons of expediency. And if one assists at the New Mass, at such a time, it is in a passive way. One cannot assist actively at the New Mass because the Mass does not express the Faith and the respect due that which is taking place. This Mass "represents a striking departure from" the dogma on the Holy Mass, defined at the Council of Trent (Session 22), as Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci wrote to Pope Paul VI (The Ottaviani Intervention, Sept., 1969).
THE "LIVING TRADITION" OF THE NEO-MODERNISTS
What about the evolutionary concept of the so-called "living tradition" of the Conciliar Church. What do the modernists mean by this term?- They mean a non-homogeneous evolution, hence, a change. By the term "living tradition," the Conciliar Church does not mean an inviolate transmission of a deposit which one lives and which progresses in a homogeneous fashion through explanation. It is not that at all! What is it then?-It is an evolutive tradition! -evolutive via a twofold process:
1) The assimilation of elements foreign to the revealed deposit. (One is going to add exterior elements to the revealed deposit—extraneous elements.)
2) By regression from the explicit to the ambiguous, from the clear to the equivocal.
Regarding the second point, you have a clear illustration of this regression from the explicit to the ambiguous in the New Mass. In- deed the many mixed doctrinal declarations (catholico-protestant and/ or catholico-orthodox) of recent years produce some ambiguous texts where truth and error blend together under the sign of equivocation.
Let's talk about the first process of the evolution of tradition as understood by modernists, that is, the assimilation of extraneous elements into the revealed deposit. Vatican Council II, in a passage perhaps too little understood, makes a declaration of intention:
Quote:The Council intends above all to judge by this light [of the Faith] the values most highly esteemed by our contemporaries, and to link them again to their divine source (Gaudium et Spes, #11).
What are those values esteemed by our contemporaries? ...Roger Aubert, a priest-precursor of the council, will tell us that they are democracy and freedom. It is a case then of introducing them into the doctrine of the Church, by the re-linking of these values "to their divine source." The Council continues:
Quote:In fact, these values [of our contemporaries], to the extent that they originate in human nature, which is a gift of God, are very good, but the corruption of the human heart often turns them from the requisite order, and that is why they need to be purified.
So, if one "purifies" these values of "liberty," of "democracy," of "the rights of man," etc, they are very good and can be assimilated into Catholic doctrine. This is to say that the new profane "dogmas" of the French Revolution-liberty, equality, fraternity, democracy, the rights of man, all that-must be assimilated by Catholic doctrine. One is going to find religious liberty, freedom of conscience, ideological pluralism in the State, and the free concurrence of ideologies (as proclaimed by Pope John Paul II when he spoke at Strasbourg to the European Parliamentl in letting it be understood that Communism is ultimately a chance for the Church, a competition between two rival ideologies, etc.).
This assimilation of dubious elements, completely foreign to rev- elation, is an alienating hodge-podge and thus an execration which profanes the deposit of the Faith and, moreover, has been condemned by the popes. Here is the authorised commentary on Gaudium et Spes (#11), that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger proposes:
Quote:The problem of the 1960s was to acquire the better of the values drawn from two centuries of "liberal" culture. There are in fact some values which, although born outside the Church, can find their place purified and corrected in its vision of the world. This is what has been done.2
Thus, under the pretext that Tradition and divine Revelation should be adaptable to the contemporary mentality, they want to introduce into Catholic doctrine these contemporary ideas, these false principles of the contemporary spirit, which is to say the liberal, revolutionary spirit.
Now that which Vatican II says in Gaudium et Spes (#11), one finds in the works of Card. Congar (de- ceased), and also in those of Roger Aubert, a specialist in Church history .Yves Congar and Roger Aubert were writing in that vein around 1950, 15 years before Gaudium et Spes. They are truly the precursors of the Council. Gaudium et Spes ( #11 ) is an implicit citation of Fr. Congar:
Quote:The progressivists of the 19th century [e.g., Abbe Felicite-Robert de Lamennais, the French liberal hero of the 19th century] too often took, just as they stood, ideas born in another and often hostile world, ideas still laden with a hostile spirit, and tried to introduce them into Christianity-thinking, that is, to "baptise" them Reconciling the Church with a positive modern world [which was ruled upon and condemned in its entirety by the Syllahusin 1864] could not be done by introducing the ideas of the modern world into the Church just as they stood. That required a work in depth by which the permanent principles of Catholicism would take a new development by assimilating, after extracting and purifying as necessary , the valid contributions of that modern world.3
Note that this last sentence will be repeated exactly in Gaudium et Spes (*11)!... It is thus a development of doctrine by assimilation of liberal ideas; an assimilation absolutely inadmissible, absolutely impossible.
Secondly, it is an illusion to wish to "extract and purify" these ideas of the modern world. The popes have condemned them purely and simply. They did not seek to "purify" them. But Yves Congar is mightier than all those popes! ? ...than Pius VI, Pius VII, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII and St. Pius X who have condemned these errors without appeal.
In 1951, Church historian Fr. Roger Aubert takes up the Congarian thesis of purification and assimilation:
Quote:The collaborators of I’Avenir [the newspaper of De Lamennais] had not taken sufficient care in rethinking the principles which were going to permit them, by means of the necessary discernments and purifications, to assimilate into Christianity the ideas of democracy and liberty, which, born outside "of the Church, had developed in a spirit hostile to it.4
And so you see how modernists use, the tactic of copying one another in order to propagandize their false doctrine. Yet, despite this false credibility, the Church can never rectify and assimilate elements foreign to Her and condemned by Her.
But a disciple of Fr. Congar and of Roger Aubert, Fr. Bernard Sesboue, SJ ., recycles the Congarian thesis and dresses it up as a critique, explicit this time, of the popes of the 19th century:
Quote:The drama of those pontifical declarations is that they had not discerned the element of Christian truth which lay hidden in demands that appeared at that time as attacks against religion and as a revolt against the rights of God. ...Thus the ideal which was signified by "the rights of man" was blocked off for a long time because men did not succeed in recognising there the distant heritage of the Gospel.5
The popes did not lack discernment! They condemned those errors. Those errors were condemned and remain condemned. The popes have declared these pseudo-values incapable of being assimilated into Catholic doctrine.6 To claim that these popes had not known how to make the distinction, to assert that the condemnation of liberal "values" is therefore a mistake, is an act of impiety against these popes; it is an injustice; it is a lie. The popes have done their duty, with the assistance of the Holy Ghost. They have vigorously excluded any attempt at reconciliation between the Church and the principles of the Revolution. They have been genuine witnesses of Tradition, witnesses of a Tradition which lives because it combats.
THE FRUITS OF STERILITY AND OF DEATH
The faithful transmission of Tradition is the necessary condition of its spiritual fecundity, just as sterility, when such is the case, is an infallible sign of infidelity in the transmission of the deposit. It is an illustration of Our Lord's words on the false prophets:
Quote:By their fruits you will know them. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit (Mt. 7:17- 18).
Thanks be to God, there is good fruit amongst us. Therefore the tree is good and the Tradition authentic. It is fruitful in zeal for one's own conversion by the Spiritual Exercises; for the conversion of one's neighbour by the work of the apostolate. It bears the fruit of families with numerous children, where the flame of the Faith is passed on to a whole new generation. It is fruitful in priestly and religious vocations, etc….
On the contrary, we verify that wherever Tradition has been adulterated, there we find the fruits of sterility and of death. In general, the so-called conciliar Church is languishing and dying of sterility. Parents no longer have children. Catholics no longer get married. There are no longer large families, thus no more vocations, and, as a result, seminaries are closing. Novitiate houses are empty, churches also, and they are being sold. It is the apostasy of the young generation. The young are completely lost. They abandon the Faith which has not been passed on to them. There has been a break in its transmission.
Let us remember this lesson. Tradition is alive as long as the deposit of the Faith is accurately transmitted. On the contrary, it dies of sterility where the transmission has been interrupted. Neo-modemism has killed Tradition because it has not transmitted it. It has falsified it; it has adulterated it, disarming it when faced with error in order to join it to the error. Archbishop Lefebvre had the great grace of simply passing on that which he had received, as was engraved on his tombstone at Econe, according to the words of St. Paul (1 Co. 11:23): Tradidi quod et accepi…. I have transmitted that which myself have received. But to transmit it faithfully, what a struggle he had to carry on! What intrepid resistance to all the pressures exerted on him to make him adopt the New Mass!-to prevent him from continuing the seminary and his work in 1975-76! What a heroic struggle in 1988 to resist the enticement of a booby-trapped consecration and to proceed with "Operation Survival of Tradition," even against the wishes of the pope!
This is the fighting Tradition which assures, by its struggle, the necessary conditions of its integral transmission and of its vitality. It is especially the Holy Mass of all times, which needs neither permission nor indult to remain in force and to make the Christian life fruitful. It is the Mass which constitutes "tradition at its highest degree of power and solemnity," as our teacher Dom Guillon loved to say, following the lead of Dom Gueranger.7 By its permanence and its fruits in the midst of the "antiliturgical heresy,"8 it is the traditional Roman Mass which sums up and focuses the essential struggle and the combative vitality of the authentic tradition of the Church. Pray then to God that He gives us the grace of fidelity to this Mass, and this Mass will assure us of receiving the genuine Tradition and of transmitting it faithfully to a whole new generation.
- Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais
1. Discours au Parlement Europen, II act. 1988 n.8.
2. Interview with Vittorio Messori, "Pourquoi la foi est en crise," in the monthly]e'sus, *II Nov. 1984, p.2.
3. Vraie etfaus-se re'form dans I~glise, Cerf, Paris 1950, pp.345-346.
4. In Tolerance et Communaute Humaine, Rencontr. de la Sarte 'a Huy, Castermann, act. 1951, pp.81-82.
5. "La doctrine de la liberte religieuse est-elle contraire ala tradition de l'Eglise? ." In Docu. mentsEpiscopat, the bulletin of the Secretaria1 of the Bishops' Conference of France, * 15, act. 1986, p15.
6. Cf. Syllabus, the last condemned propositioI1 (*80): "The Roman Pontiff can, and ough1 to, reconcile himself, and come to terms widJ erogress, liberalism and modern civilization: (DZ 1780).
7. The liturgy is "tradition at its highest power" Dom Gueranger says in his Institutiom Liturgiques in the chapter entitled "La Composante Antiliturgique du Protestantisme."
8. Dom Gueranger's expression, ibid
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
|
| SiSiNoNo (1996): Who Remembers Fatima? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-30-2021, 11:18 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- Replies (1)
|
|
SiSiNoNo - June 1996 No. 16
Who Remembers Fatima?
This past May 13th was the seventy-ninth anniversary of the first apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima, Portugal. This great event has fallen into complete oblivion due to the inaction of the Catholic hierarchy. A shroud of complete silence covers the only survivor of the three seers of that event, Sr. Maria Lucia of the Immaculate Heart, known as Sr. Lucy. Though cloistered in the Carmel of Coimbra since 1948, she used to receive authorized visits from Church personalities, from cardinals and researchers of the apparitions, as well as letters from all over the world. Since 1954, these visits were limited by Church authorities, to the point of being abolished altogether in 1960. In that year the public revelation of the famous "Third Secret" of Fatima by the Pope was to take place, which never happened. Since 1960 Sr. Lucy has been forbidden to talk about the apparitions, not even by letter, except to cardinals (since they have free access to the cloister) and close relatives and acquaintances if approved by the authorities. No one can approach her in the visiting parlor of the convent. The permits for the visits are issued by Joseph Card. Ratzinger, prefect of the congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, but he has not granted any for many years. The very one who has seen and spoken to Mary and Our Lord is "cut off" beyond the already rigid rules of the cloister.
That the Vatican wants to forget Fatima is shown by the fact that the fundamental scientific and official studies done on the apparitions have yet to be authorized by the authorities in charge. We refer to Fr. Alonso's 14-volume publication (1976) which gathered, classified, and commented on 5,396 Fatima documents, including interviews with Sr. Lucy.1
Does the hierarchy understand the importance of the "Message of Fatima"? We refer especially to the requests for the Communion of Reparation of the five First Saturdays, and to the Consecration of Russia to Her by a public act, made simultaneously by all the bishops of the world.
THE REAL CONSECRATION OF RUSSIA, IGNORED BY PIUS XI AND PIUS XII
None of these requests has ever been fulfilled. The first one has received little notoriety. For the second, if some consecrations did take place, none were valid because none were carried out as specified. The two requests are interconnected. Our Lady of Fatima said on July 13, 1917:
Quote:...I come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays of the month. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace. Otherwise she will spread her errors throughout the world provoking wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will suffer martyrdom, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, it will convert and a period of peace will be given to the world.
This consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary was asked for the first time in an apparition in the Convent of Tuy, Spain, on June 13, 1929. Pope Pius XI was made aware of it before August, 1931:
Quote:[T]he time has come where God asks the Holy Father to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart, in union with all the Bishops of the world, promising by this act to save her.
The result of this solemn consecration would be the conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith. Russia will not convert to the Faith without Divine intervention, in which, however, churchmen have been called to co-operate.
But fear of Russia's reaction and that of the world's other superpowers has been stronger than the desire to fulfill the Divine request! Subsequent to Pius XI, who did nothing regarding it in order to safeguard his (failed) attempt to establish an opening with the Soviet Union, there took place consecrations concerning Russia in many forms but not as prescribed by the Blessed Mother. In his radio message of October 31, 1942, to Portugal, Pius XII consecrated the Church and the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, containing a special mention, however very discreet, of Russia. This act, however, was ineffective towards the conversion of Russia because it lacked the necessary prerequisites. The Blessed Mother asked specifically for Russia alone to be consecrated. Besides, it must take place with the all bishops of the world. Neither of these two necessary conditions was met on the occasion of this papal address.
Following this, on July 7, 1952, Pius XII in his Apostolic letter, Sacro Vergente Anno, addressed to the people of Russia, made a consecration of "all the people of Russia" to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that there would come about "a true peace, brotherly harmony and the freedom due to everyone." Note that this was a consecration made in general terms, with no mention of reparation nor of conversion and lacking any solemnity. There was no order given to the bishops of all the world to join explicitly with the Pope in this consecration.
Pope John XXIII, with his policy emphasis on Ostpolitik, did nothing. In the closing session of the Second Vatican Council (Nov. 26, 1964), Pope Paul VI limited himself to the consecration to Mary Immaculate of "all the human family." The attitude of Pope Paul VI to the Fatima message was skeptical aloofness. He went to Portugal on the occasion of the Jubilee of the Apparitions (May 13, 1967) but limited his visit to one day. He never went to the apparition site and did not give Sr. Lucy the private audience she desired.
THE NEGLECT CONTINUES WITH JOHN PAUL II
The present pontiff showed interest in Fatima after having suffered the well-known attempt on his life on May 13, 1981. In a month's time he entrusted the entire "human family" to the protection of the Virgin. Sr. Lucy insisted in interviews with Church officials that the consecrations of Pius XII were not valid. Pope John Paul II proceeded then to make new consecrations in the form of an "Act of Dedication" of the world to God through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This was done in union - purely spiritually - with "all of the pastors of the Church," none of whom, on their part, consecrated anything. This was repeated on October 16, 1983, and on March 25, 1984, in Rome. But these "acts" are to be considered totally void because they defied the conditions. Russia was not even mentioned and the world's bishops were not physically assembled.
Since then, attempts have been made to obtain a consecration as prescribed. The Pope and Church leaders have reacted with annoyance, stating that everything required had been accomplished. The question was closed. In 1989, typewritten statements appeared, attributed to Sr. Lucy, which affirmed that the Act of Dedication of 1984 met the requests of the Madonna. But an error consistently appears in these letters saying that the papal Act of Dedication [by Pope John Paul II] fulfilled Our Lady's request to consecrate "the world." However, Sr. Lucy has always said the Blessed Mother said that "Russia" was to be consecrated exclusively and never "the world." Hence, the authenticity of these statements is dubious. To save credibility, an attempt has been made to establish that the recent upheaval in Eastern Europe and the "Communist crisis" demonstrated that the Act of Dedication of Pope John Paul II was bearing results. Russia was seen as starting to convert. Our Lady, however, did not say she wanted Russia to convert to freedom of conscience or to democracy, but to the Catholic Faith. Instead of expanding, Catholicism in Russia suffers yet another persecution. The facts show that the Pope has not carried out the wishes of the Blessed Mother.
A TERRIBLE WARNING
When heaven commands, man cannot do as he pleases. He must follow the example of Naaman the Syrian, who obeyed to the letter what Eliseus the Prophet had commanded him to do despite what he thought of such a command - to be cured of leprosy by washing seven times in the Jordan River, indeed (IV Kings 5:1-14)!? Nevertheless that is exactly what happened. The above-mentioned popes have not possessed the faith of Naaman. They have not believed that by a mere act of consecration (as Our Lady has requested) there could take place such a great event as the conversion of Russia.
Will the popes continue to ignore Heaven's requests? No. The consecration will be made, but it will be made late. This is what was foretold by Our Lord to the seer, emphasising what the Blessed Mother had said at Fatima, in a vision going back to 1931, at Rianjo, Spain, in the face of the passive attitude of Pius XI:
Quote:[T]ell my ministers, who behave like the king of France by procrastinating in carrying out my wishes, that they will follow him into suffering the same misfortune. It is never too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary....Like the king of France, they will regret it and will do it, even though late...
What is the significance of this reference to the king of France? To what event does Our Lord refer? It is the request made in a vision to St. Margaret Mary Alacocque and brought to the attention of Louis XIV in 1689, to consecrate explicitly France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus; but which the "Sun King" did not fulfill. Louis XVI did make an act of consecration, but it was already "too late." He was overthrown and was executed. According to this prophecy, then, the popes could suffer a similar fate, due to their obstinacy. A Pope will, finally, make the consecration forced by a situation of extreme danger for the Church. There hovers over the papacy the prophecy of a terrible punishment because of continual disobedience and lack of faith. But it is a prophecy which can be thwarted by a change of heart on the part of those for whom the message was intended. It is an awesome prophecy because it does not say that it will be "too late," but "late," leaving one to understand that after the consecration, however late it will be, the Church will undergo a rebirth.
THE QUESTION OF THE THIRD SECRET
Continual refusal has persisted to a greater degree in the matter of the revelation of the so-called Third Secret of Fatima. By this is meant the third part of the secret given the three little seers on Friday, July 13, 1917 and made public gradually by Sr. Lucy (with the exception precisely of the Third Secret). The secret forms part of a single unit. It contains "three things": (1) the vision of hell; (2) the proclamation to establish the devotion of the five First Saturdays, and the Consecration of Russia to avoid the chastisement of World War II (prophesied with extreme exactness). In the second part of the Secret, then, Our Lady, after having announced that the First World War was about to end, seemed to connect the beginning of the Second World War to the lack of the consecration of Russia; (3) the third part or "Third Secret," put into writing by Sr. Lucy in January, 1944, and given to the Bishop of Leiria (who did not want to read it) on May 17, 1944 and transmitted to Rome on April 16, 1957. Even Pius XII did not want to read it. By the instructions given by Sr. Lucy, it was to be made public by 1960. The seer has always said that, because of its contents, this part of the secret of Fatima could not be revealed in the same way as the other two. As for its being made public, she has deferred to the judgement of the higher ecclesiastic authorities.
The Third Secret begins almost certainly after the last sentence of the text of the other two messages Sr. Lucy has made known. This sentence is:
Quote:In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be kept, etc.
The presence of that "etc.," shows that Sr. Lucy has given to understand the sentence in question is not a prophecy which is aimed at Portugal exclusively (as some have attempted to claim) but is the beginning of an announcement concerning the keeping of the dogma of Faith in the Christian nations. In all likelihood, the Third Secret is concerned with the preservation of the deposit of Faith, that is to say, its specific object is Holy Mother the Church. It is very likely that in it are prophesied the grave upheavals the Catholic Church was to be subjected to due to the actions of its hierarchy. The betrayal of the Faith through the fault of its shepherds is surely foreseen in the Third Secret. This is why the present Official Church, of which these shepherds hold the controls of power, have not the least reason to make it known and do everything in their power to make sure that it would fall into oblivion.
It does not deal with the end of the world, as some have tried to insinuate, even though one cannot rule out that it also mentions material punishments. The Third Secret concerns the Church, the painful obfuscation of the Faith in which we find ourselves. This can be deduced also from what Pope John Paul II said to Sr. Lucy in the brief meeting (May 13, 1985) which she confided to Card. Oddi in 1985: That it is not convenient to make the secret known because the world "would not have understood it." What could there possibly be in the secret that would be difficult for the faithful to understand, if not the revelation that the Third Secret prophesies that the present Official Church is a Church apostate from the Catholic truth?
But haven't the faithful sensed this by now? What can they think of a Church that instead of worshipping God practices the worship of man and woman?...that has removed the Most Holy Trinity from Holy Mass?...that proclaims belief in a "One God" valid for all religions, even the most contrary to Christianity?...which no longer mentions original sin, immortality of the soul, particular nor final judgement, nor Paradise?...which allows the belief that hell is empty?...that when it is compelled to talk about traditional truths in the New Catechism, she explains them as being opinions (subjective) of Church Traditions instead of being truths, (objective) which by and for themselves are dogmas which the Church makes her own?...that has established a Novus Ordo Mass of which the Protestants approve?...that often maintains silence about the Divine nature of Christ, because if it proclaimed it, its so-called "dialogue" would end abruptly?...which affirms that by His death on the Cross, Jesus has already saved everybody, even those who do not believe in Him as being the Son of God?...that no longer takes into consideration that the conversion of the world to Christ is a fundamental duty, because to attempt to convert would be a violation of "freedom of conscience" of the followers of other religions?...that has embraced in everything the errors of Protestant theology?…which honors the "martyrs" of the heretics and erases its own from the calendar?...that works tirelessly for the unification of Catholicism with all of the other religions and sects, dissolving itself thereby in the embrace of false ecumenism?...that speaks obsessively about the world's problems, especially political, and never about Eternal Life, and which replaces Catholicism by a deistic humanism, such as that of the Masons?
In what is purported to be the last interview allowed to her (Dec. 26, 1957), Sr. Lucy complained to Fr. Fuentes about the ever-advancing spiritual deafness and loss of faith:
Quote:Father, the Holy Virgin is very sad because no one pays any attention to her message, neither the good nor the bad. The good keep up on their own way, but without concerning themselves about the message. The bad, seeing that God's chastisement has not touched them yet, continue on with their sinful living and do not care about the message. Father, God is about to punish the world and He will do it in a terrible way. The Heavenly chastisement is imminent. [This was on the eve of the Second Vatican Council, which has represented for the Church - the late Father Congar stated - what the states General were for the French Revolution - Ed.] Tell them [the Bishop of Leiria and Pius XII, who refused to read the Third Secret - Ed.] that the Holy Virgin said to my cousins Francisco and Jacinta and to me repeatedly that many nations will disappear from the face of the earth, that Russia will be the means used to accomplish the punishment from Heaven, if we do not succeed in the conversion of this poor Nation, first....Father, the devil is about to begin a decisive battle against the Virgin, and because he is capable of offending principally God and perverting in a short time the greater number of souls, he is doing everything in his power to gain the souls of the persons consecrated to God Father, let us not expect to receive calls to penance from the Holy Father, addressed to the entire world; and don't let us even expect them to come from our Bishops, each in his own diocese, nor from the Religious congregations (or orders). No, Our Lord has already used these means, but the world has ignored them. This is why it is now necessary for each one of us to begin, on his own, the spiritual reform of self. Each one must save not only his own, but all the souls that God has placed in his path.
And the means to bring about the "spiritual reform" of ourselves and of others are the true Catholic means for the salvation of souls, that is, "prayer and sacrifice," "the Holy Rosary," and the "devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary "
- Aemillianus
1. All dates and facts quoted in this article are taken from the fundamental works on Fatima. The three volumes by Br. Michel de la Sainte Trinite, Toute la verite sur Fatima, editions de la Contre Reforme Catholique, Sait Parres-les-Vaudes, 1985, ss., and from the abridged version by Br. François de Marie des Anges, Fatima, joie intime, evenement mondial, by the same publisher, 1991. The text of the secret, which we partially quote, is found on pp.59-63 of the latter book and the interview granted to Fr. Fuentes, quoted pp.283-286.
|
|
|
|
| SiSiNoNo: To Apostasy by Way of Obedience |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-30-2021, 11:05 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
SiSiNoNo [slightly adapted]- November 1996 No. 18
To Apostasy by Way of Obedience
This article is an answer to a letter to the Editor written to Courrier de Rome, the French translation of Si Si No No.
The letter, written by a bewildered priest follows immediately, preceding the article.
Quote:To the Editor:
Please clarify me on the following. In the editorial of Fr. Giancarlo Politi in the bulletin Mondo e Missione (Feb., 1995), I read on the subject of our four Catholic missionaries slain in Algeria. I quote verbatim:
"They were not in that part of Africa to conduct crusades or to proselytize, an objective that the Church nowhere pursues."
I have read the same thing in the newsletter of Fr.Van Straaten whom I have always admired and even supported in a modest way. I would like to know if the injunction of Jesus to his apostles “Go and teach all nations….” no longer implies proselytizing, and, if it doesn’t, since when. I have always believed that that was indeed the task of the apostles. Has the mission of the priesthood been changed?
Sincerely,
(Signed by Fr. X)
[The editor answers.]
...To help you to understand, let's recall two pontifical texts. The first is taken from the encyclical Pascendi of Pope St. Pius X against Modernism:
Quote:That we should act without delay in this matter [to condemn Modernism] is made imperative especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; but what is to be most dreaded and deplored, in her very bosom,…We allude...to many who belong...to the priesthood itself, who, animated by a false zeal for the Church, lacking the solid safeguards of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, put themselves forward as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the Person of the Divine Redeemer, Whom, with sacrilegious audacity, they degrade to the condition of a simple and ordinary man…Enemies of the Church they certainly are, nor indeed would he be wrong in regarding them as the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church. For, as We have said, they put into operation their designs for her undoing, not from without but from within. Hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain from the very fact that their knowledge of her is more intimate. Moreover, they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fibers. And once having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to diffuse poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth which they leave untouched, none that they do not strive to corrupt [from Daughters of St. Paul edition. - Ed.].
That was in 1907. Forty years later, Pius XII in his encyclical Humani Generis against neo-Modernism or the "New Theology" wrote:
Quote:it is apparent, however, that some today, as in apostolic times, desirous of novelty, and fearing to be considered ignorant of recent scientific findings, try to withdraw themselves from the sacred Teaching Authority and are accordingly in danger of gradually departing from revealed truth and of drawing others along with them into error.
There is another danger all the more serious because it is concealed beneath the mask of virtue. There are many who, deploring disagreement among men and intellectual confusion, through an imprudent zeal for souls, are urged by a great and ardent desire to do away with the barrier that divides good and honest men. These advocate an eirenism by which they set aside questions dividing men and aim not only at joining forces to repel the attacks of atheism, but also at reconciling things opposed to one another in the field of dogma…Through their enthusiasm for an imprudenteirenism they consider as an obstacle to fraternal union things founded on the laws and principles given by Christ and on institutions founded by Him, or which are the defense and support of the integrity of the Faith, the removal of which would bring about the union of all but only to their destruction. [from the Daughters of St. Paul edition - Ed.]
Pius XII tells us these ruinous opinions were then being disseminated "among the secular and regular clergy, in seminaries and religious institutions."
That was in 1950. Today those Churchmen, deformed by neo-Modernism in the seminaries and religious institutions and having stage-managed the last Council, are in power in the Church and occupy the key positions in the Catholic hierarchy, putting to work their "counsels of destruction" to unify the human race "in a common ruin." "Blind and leaders of the blind...," says St. Pius X:
Quote:...puffed up with the proud name of science, they have reached that pitch of folly at which they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true meaning of religion; in introducing a new system in which "they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other and vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, unapproved by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity , they think they can base and maintain truth itself” (Pascendi).
Amidst this Modernism, resistance by a Catholic, and most particularly by a priest, is a duty. It's a matter of choosing between aberrant and erroneous human judgments and the infallible judgment of the Church, which for 2000 years has taught that ... :
Quote:...nothing which pertains to the perennial and certain doctrine of the Church and which, in any way whatsoever, direct or indirect, relates to the truths of faith or morals, nothing of the constitution of the Church, nothing of that which has been fixed by Christ and, through His mandate, by the holy Apostles is subject to change (G .Siri, La Giovinezza della Chiesa, ed. Giardini, Pisa, 1983).
We repeat to these destructive clerics the words of St. Edmund Campion, martyr of the Anglican schism:
Quote:"In condemning us, you condemn the Church of all times. For what is there that She believed and taught that we also do not believe?"
The current ordeal is one of extreme severity because "the masterstroke of Satan," as Archbishop Lefebvre has called it, has placed the authority of popes at the service of neo-Modernism, and therefore the deception is much more grave and widespread. Nevertheless, the problem is not insurmountable. It is sufficient to recall that in the conflict between Faith and authority the Faith will prevail because authority is at the service of the Faith and not the contrary.
For we can do nothing against the truth, but only for the truth (II Cor. 13:8).
Let us take the case of Fr . Werenfried van Straaten in the article "A Fruit of the Heretical Post-Conciliar Ecclesiology: the New Charity of Fr. Van Straaten" (Courrier de Rome, March, 1995). To justify his total reversal of direction, he echoes Pope John Paul II:
Quote:Rightly the Pope has forbidden all forms of proselytism. In that case we must help in the formation of Orthodox priests in order that they would be capable of instructing those that they are going to baptize (L 'echo de l'amour, Oct. 1994).
This premise must be proven and to prove it one must prove that the Vicar is superior to the Invisible Head of the Church, who has commanded that which John Paul II forbids! Now, in the conflict between an inferior authority (a pope) and a superior authority (Our Lord Jesus Christ), obedience is owed to the superior authority. It is Catholic moral theology which teaches this. In such a case the subject does not disobey the Superior, but he obeys an authority higher than the Superior: "I owe you my love," St. Bruno writes to Pope Pascal II, "but I owe a greater love to the One who has created both you and me" (P.L. 163 col.463). But Leo XIII writes in two encyclicals:
Quote:[w]hen...an order of authority is contrary to reason, to the eternal law, to the authority of God, then we wish to make it known, it is legitimate to disobey in order to obey God (Libertas Praestantissimum, 1888).
And it would not be just to accuse those who act in this manner of disregarding the duty of submission to authority; for the princes whose wills are in opposition to the will and the laws of God, thereby over-step the limits of their power. (Diuturnum Illud).
Obedience to the pope, the prince of the Church, does not evade the moral law: the duty to obey him always supposes that his order would be both licit and lawful, that is to say that it would not be in opposition to reason, to the eternal law and to the divine order. On the other hand, the principle according to which one must "obey God rather than men" applies to the pope just as to any other authority on earth. On this point Catholic theologians, although differing widely on the question of an "heretical pope," are in perfect agreement.
Unlike yesteryear, it is necessary today to have these principles clearly in mind so one does not risk justifying what is contrary to the Gospel (as Fr. Van Straaten does) solely because the pope said it, even though it means abandoning the Faith of the Universal Church to follow the private thought of a man simply because he sits on the chair of Peter while Peter is not speaking by his mouth. St. Thomas teaches (Summa Theologica II, II, Q.2a) that the subjects also sin against the Faith when they follow the "authorities in the Faith" [bishops and popes], even if at the same time they warn these authorities that they are falling away from the Faith of the Universal Church. In this case, subjects are released from their normal ties of subjection and obedience and they have the duty and the right to defend their own Faith.
Quote:When the shepherd changes into a wolf, the first duty of the flock is to defend itself. Normally, without doubt, doctrine descends from the bishops to the faithful, and those who are subjects, in the order of the faith, are not to judge their superiors. But in the treasure of revelation there are some essential points which every Christian, by the very fact of his title as Christian, is bound to know and defend (The Liturgical Year, Vol. IV, Dom Guéranger; Feast of St. Cyril of Alexandria).
"BUT THE POPE IS INFALLIBLE"
Some will object, "But the pope is infallible." Be careful! First of all, infallibility has not been promised in order to add "novelties" to the "deposit of the faith," but solely to preserve, explain and defend the truths already revealed:
Quote:The Holy Spirit has been promised to the successors of Peter not that they may make known, under His revelation, a new doctrine, but in order that, with His assistance, they may piously preserve and faithfully set forth the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is to say the deposit of the faith. (Vatican I, Constitution De Ecclesia Christi, D.1836).
Besides, the pope can express himself at four very distinct levels:
1. at the level of the extraordinary infallible Magisterium (ex cathedra).
2. at the level of the ordinary infallible Magisterium.
3. at the level of the ordinary non-infallible Magisterium.
4. at the level of the theologian or of the private person. (This is the case in Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II's recent book-interview.)
We immediately exclude from infallibility this last level, because it is evident that infallibility has not been promised to the pope as a private person.
The extraordinary infallible magisterium (ex cathedra) applies when the pope "fulfilling his charge as pastor and teacher of all Christians;...defines, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, that a doctrine on faith or morals must be held by the entire Church" (Pastor Aeternus, see also Vatican I, D.1839, etc.).
The ordinary infallible magisterium applies when the truth being taught is proposed by the pope...:
Quote:...as having been previously defined, or as having always been believed or acknowledged in the Church, or as being attested to by the unanimous and continuing consent of theologians as Catholic truth (Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, t. VIII col. 1705).
Thus, for example, Leo XIII is infallible when, in the encyclical Providentissimus, he teaches as always believed by the Church the absolute absence of errors in the faithfully preserved texts of Sacred Scripture.
It is only at these two primary levels that the teaching the pope exposes is guaranteed to expose faithfully that which is truly contained in divine Revelation. There is, on the other hand, the ordinary magisterium non-infallible, simply authenticated, wherein...:
Quote:...a teaching is praised, recommended, or simply affirmed [by the pope] without any indication of its belonging to revelation or to the constant and universal Catholic tradition and without any indication of strict obligation imposed by the faith or by the submission due to the sovereign authority of the Roman Pontiff (Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, to VII col. 1713).
Normally one also owes obedience, even if it is neither unconditional nor absolute, to the non-infallible and merely authentic magisterium of the pope. However, one does not owe him any obedience whatsoever when, opposed to a non-infallible judgment of the Church or even of the constant and universal faith of the Church. In this case, resistance is not only justified, it is a duty. It is born not of a spirit of error nor of rebellion, but rather of charity.
Quote:
Fr. Van Straaten’s project to finance the Russian Orthodox Church did not go down well with some benefactors of the association he founded, “Aid to the Suffering Church.”… “They sustain that it would be wrong to finance a ‘schismatic’ Church, separated from Rome and a slave to the former Communist regime.”… “The former Soviet Union is a mission field and the western Church is not up to evangelizing this vast territory,” he said. “Only the Orthodox Church can do that and we should help it with all the means - financial and non - we have at our disposal.” He is certain that the Pope will approve his initiative. “John Paul II has said that reconciliation with the Orthodox Church is the greatest task entrusted to us at the end of this second millennium. He has been informed of this initiative of ours to guarantee an annual wage of $1,000 to each of the 6,000 priests of the Russian Church and he has urged us to press on,” said Fr. Van Straaten. “They used to call me the last Cold War general,” he said. “I have always had many enemies some of whom are priests with progressive ideas. Now they are saying: look at that old conservative….what a surprise he has turned out to be.” - (30 Days, No.12, 1994)
The gravity of the current crisis is precisely owing to the lack of security in the faithful that, in normal times, was offered to them by the ordinary non-infallible magisterium of the popes. It is true, however, that, at this level, Our Lord Jesus Christ did not promise any infallibility to Peter (Mt. 16: 18; Lk. 22:22) or to his successors “according to the constant interpretation of theologians," but only concerning his ex cathedra teaching (Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, t. VII col. 1717). The assurance which in normal times is derived from the non-infallible magisterium of the pope is only linked to the care that he takes not to deviate from the doctrine transmitted by the Apostles. Today this care has disappeared because that "unchecked passion for novelty" of which St. Pius X spoke also corrupts the mentality of the one who sits on the throne of Peter and who so wrongfully affirmed it at the beginning of his pontificate:
Quote:If the Lord has called me "with such thoughts...with such sentiments, it is in order that they ...find a resonance in my new and universal ministry (The Angelus, March, 1979).
This is the same as saying, "It is no longer the pope who must conform himself to Tradition, but Tradition which must conform itself to the mentality of the pope."
One risks tremendous aberrations if these sad realities are ignored and one conducts himself as if all goes well without hindrance in the current ecclesiastical situation. From his unproven and erroneous premise - "Rightly the Pope has forbidden all forms of proselytism" - Fr. Van Straaten deduces that Catholics must subsidize the proselytism of the Orthodox churches, in aiding "the formation of Orthodox priests in order that they would be capable of instructing those that they are going to baptize." It is no indifferent matter to God whether souls should be baptized in His one and only Catholic Church or in schism and heresy!
The Church has always condemned the subsidizing of non-Catholics as a grave sin against truth and charity (see Encyclopedia Cattolica, under the word Cooperation, col. 498). Fr. Van Straaten has forgotten his dogmatic and moral theology. He no longer seems to have the Faith which tells us the pope is there to keep and promote the Catholic Faith and not to demolish it (II Cor. 10:8). All this because of a false concept of obedience improperly raised to the level of a theological virtue. Yet, it is a moral virtue in which one can sin, yes, by default, but also by excess, in obeying "in matters contrary to a law or to a superior precept." This constitutes an "improper obedience" or, more accurately, "servility" (Roberti-Palazzini, Dizionario di teologia morale, ed. Studium).
As we have written:
Quote:In practice, no one has ever explicitly imposed upon a Catholic in the name of obedience a denial of his very Faith…But they have and do impose on him a new "course for the Church" which, in implying the negation of everything that the Church has taught and done on the basis of the doctrinal principles up until Vatican Council II, leads straight to apostasy. (Courrier de Rome, March, 1990, "The Duty to Resist!").
In other words, to apostasy by way of "obedience," which is by nature a denial of reason.
- Hirpinus
|
|
|
|
| May 30th - St. Joan of Arc |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-30-2021, 08:11 AM - Forum: May
- No Replies
|
|
May 30th - St Joan of Arc, Virgin
While the angelic hosts acclaim the Incarnate Word as he tak possession of his eternal throne, a virgin at the head of the armies of earth re-echoes the praises of heaven She was a child of the countryside, pious, gentle, and utterly ignorant, especially of the art of war, but Michael the soldier of God trained her with the aid of the Virgin Martyrs Catherine and Margaret, and suddenly like a challenge thrown to modern naturalism in the broad daylight of history, she made her appearance, at the age of seventeen as an incomparable warrior. Her victories, her personal influence and strategical genius equal those of the most famous captains of any times. But she surpasses them all in heroism , in her childlike simplicity, virginal purity, and faith in her Lord Jesus, the Son of St. Mary, for whom she died—even greater at the stake at Rouen than in the days of her triumph.” De par le Roi du ciel” (By order of the King of Heaven) was the motto on her banner. By order of The King of Heaven, her sovereign liege, in whose royal service she is day by day, she calls upon cities to return to their lawful obedience. By the order of the King of Heaven she intimates to the English that she has been sent to drive them out of France. ‘For,’ as she declared to the Dauphin’s representative, ‘the kingdom does not appertain to the Dauphin, but to my Lord. But it is the will of my Lord that the Dauphin should be made king and should hold the kingdom in commendam.’ ‘And who is thy Lord?’ asked Baudricourt. ‘My Lord is the King of heaven.’
To Charles she said: “I am called Joan the Maid, and through me does the King of heaven give you to understand that you shall be viceregent of the king of heaven who is king of France.” To the Duke of Burgundy, who was then in alliance with the enemy, she said: “I tell you by order of the King of heaven, that all who make war on the said holy kingdom, make war on the king Jesus, the King of heaven and of all the earth.”
Joan came into the world on the feast of the glorious Epiphany, which manifested the divine Child to the world as the Lord of lords. It was during these days of his Ascension, when he takes his seat at the right hand of his Father, that she began her campaigns in 1428, achieved her greatest triumph in 1429, and closed her warlike career in 1430.
She died May 30, 1431, the eve of the Feast of Corpus Christi ― a worthy consummation for a life like hers, a supreme consecration for her cause. as her soul rose from the flames to join Michael and his hosts and the Virgin Martyrs at the court of the immortal King of Ages, she left the church on earth prostrate before Christ, the King, the Ruler of the Nations, who as it were, holds his royal assizes where he is glorified in the mystery of faith.
![[Image: Joan-of-Arc-Coronation-Charles-VII-Reims...1024&ssl=1]](https://i2.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Joan-of-Arc-Coronation-Charles-VII-Reims-1854.jpg?resize=745%2C1024&ssl=1)
The following account of her life is given by the Church:
Quote:Joan of Arc was born in the town of Domrémy (which was once in the diocese of Toul, but belongs now to that of Saint Dié) in the year of our Lord 1412. Her parents were noted for their virtue and piety. When she was but thirteen years old, and knew nothing but house work, field work, and the first elements of religion, she learnt that God had chosen her to deliver France from her enemies and restore the kingdom to its former independence. She enjoyed familiar intercourse with the Archangel Michael and SS Catherine and Margaret, who during five years, instructed her how to fulfill her mission. Then, desiring to obey the command of God, she addressed herself to the governor of Vaucouleurs, who, after having several times repulsed her, at length gave her and escort to take her to King Charles.
Following in all things the divine commands, she overcame all the difficulties of the long journey, and arrived at Chinon in Touraine, where she furnished the king with proofs that her mission was from God. She proceeded to Orleans, and in a few days inflicted three defeats on the enemy, relieved the town, and raised her banner aloft in triumph. Then, after other military successes in which the assistance of God was clearly manifested, she brought Charles to Rheims, where he was solemnly crowned king. She would not rest even then, but, having learnt from her heavenly voices that God would permit her to fall into the hands of the enemy she went bravely on to meet what was to befall her.
She was taken prisoner at Compiègne, sold to the English, and sent to Rouen for trial. She had to defend herself against many accusations, but her purity was never impugned. She suffered all things with patience for the sake of Lord Jesus Christ. The wicked judges who tried this gentle and innocent virgin, condemned her to be burnt. So, fortified by the holy Eucharist, which she had long desired, and her eyes fixed upon the Cross while she constantly murmured the name of Jesus, she took her flight to heaven on May 30, in the nineteenth year of her age. The holy Roman Church which she had always loved, and to which she had often appealed, undertook, under Pope Calixtus III, her rehabilitation, and towards the end of the nineteenth century Leo XIII gave permissions for the introduction of the cause of beatification. Finally, after diligent examination and approbation of fresh miracles Pius X inscribed her among the Blessed and permitted the diocese of France to keep the feast with a special Office and Mass.
O King of Glory, who dost today ascend above the heights of heaven, thou didst drink of the torrent in the way and therefore dost thou now lift up thy head. Thy ancestor David prophesied it, thine Apostle proclaimed it. Thou didst humble thyself unto death, even the death of the cross, and therefore has God the Father exalted thee on this day, therefore does every knee bow at thy name, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth. It was becoming that the law of the Head should be the law also of all those who were to be called to share his glory. Before all ages, in the great Counsel of which, as the Church sings on Christmas Day, thou wert the Angel, the conditions of definitive victory and eternal success were thus laid down.
The Gospel tells us that the hour would come fro the disciples of Jesus to give testimony and that men would think to serve God by putting them to death. Joan, like Jesus, was questioned, judged and condemned with all the legal forms and imposing ceremonial of orthodoxy. But, O ye enemies of Joan and of France, ye thought yourselves her executioners, and ye were offering her in sacrifice. France was saved, for God accepted the virginal victim. Her passing mission became a permanent patronage, and the deliverer of her country on earth has become her immortal protectress in heaven.
![[Image: 8-.jpeg?w=694&ssl=1]](https://i0.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/8-.jpeg?w=694&ssl=1) |
|
|
|
| May 30th - Sts. Felix and Ferdinand |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-30-2021, 07:58 AM - Forum: May
- Replies (1)
|
|
May 30 – St Felix I, Pope and Martyr
The holy Popes of the primitive ages of the Church abound during these last days of our Paschal Season. Today, we have Felix the First, a Martyr of the persecution under Aurelian, in the 3rd Century. His Acts have been lost, with the exception of this one detail; that he proclaimed the dogma of the Incarnation, with admirable precision, in a Letter addressed to the Church of Alexandria—a passage of which was read, with much applause, at the two Œcumenical Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon.
We also learn from a law he passed for those troubled times of the Church, that this holy Pontiff was zealous in procuring for the Martyrs the honor that is due to them. He decreed that the Holy Sacrifice should be offered up on their tombs. The Church has kept up a remnant of this law, by requiring that all Altars, whether fixed or portable, must have, amongst the Relics that are placed in them, a portion of some belonging to the Martyrs. We shall have to speak of this custom in a future volume.
The Liturgy gives us this short notice regarding the holy Pontiff.
Quote:Felix, a Roman by birth, and son of Constantius, governed the Church during the reign of the emperor Aurelian. He decreed that the Mass should be celebrated upon the shrines and tombs of the Martyrs. He held two ordinations in the month of December, and made nine Priests, five Deacons, and five Bishops for divers places. He was crowned with Martyrdom, and was buried on the Aurelian Way, in a Basilica which he himself had built and dedicated. He reigned two years, four months, and twenty-nine days.
Thou, O holy Pontiff, didst imitate thy Divine Master in his Death, for thou gavest thy life for thy sheep. Like him, too, thou art to rise from thy tomb, and thy happy soul shall be reunited to its body, which suffered death in testimony of the truth thou proclaimedst at Rome. Jesus is the first-born of the dead; thou followedst him in his Passion, thou shalt follow him in his Resurrection. Thy body was laid in those venerable vaults, which the piety of early Christians honored with the appellation of Cemeteries—a word which signifies a place wherein to sleep. Thou, O Felix, wilt awaken on that great day, whereon the Pasch is to receive its last and perfect fulfillment:—pray that we also may then share with thee in that happy Resurrection. Obtain for us that we may be faithful to the graces received in this year’s Easter; and prepare us for the visit of the Holy Ghost, who is soon to descend upon us, that he may give stability to the work that has been achieved in our souls by our merciful Savior.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-i3...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-i3xeWmfghxg%2FVWx3f6juGmI%2FAAAAAAAAvM4%2Fms1h4tzq_Dk%2Fs1600%2Fjustin%252Bmartyr.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
![[Image: restuarant-fee-1.jpg]](https://theconservativetreehouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/restuarant-fee-1.jpg)
![[Image: Vigano_black_and_white_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg]](https://assets.lifesitenews.com/images/made/images/remote/https_www.lifesitenews.com/images/local/Vigano_black_and_white_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg)
![[Image: petronilla1.jpg4_.jpg?w=480&ssl=1]](https://i2.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/petronilla1.jpg4_.jpg?w=480&ssl=1)
![[Image: PETRONILLA.jpg?w=230&ssl=1]](https://i1.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/PETRONILLA.jpg?w=230&ssl=1)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2F...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fb%2Fb9%2FAllegory_of_the_Eucharist_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
![[Image: Coronation_Of-the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary_-_...C694&ssl=1]](https://i0.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Coronation_Of-the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary_-_Fra_Angelico_081.jpg?zoom=1.5625&resize=688%2C694&ssl=1)
![[Image: ChildrenofFatima.jpg]](http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/Images/1996_June/ChildrenofFatima.jpg)
![[Image: Fr_Van_Straaten.jpg]](http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/Images/1996_November/Fr_Van_Straaten.jpg)
![[Image: 3-4.jpg?resize=713%2C1024&ssl=1]](https://i0.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/3-4.jpg?resize=713%2C1024&ssl=1)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.c...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.com%2Fimages-medium-large-5%2Fpope-felix-i-pope-and-saint-mary-evans-picture-library.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
