| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 504 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 499 Guest(s)
Applebot, Baidu, Bing, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
Vatican Newspaper: "Mothe...
Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 77
|
Twenty-third Sunday after...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:11 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 22,439
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:08 AM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 13,402
|
Bulletin: XXIII Sunday Af...
Forum: Bulletin of the Oratory of the Sorrowful Heart of Mary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:05 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 60
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St. ...
Forum: November 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
11-15-2025, 10:13 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 68
|
Fr. Hewko: 23rd Sun After...
Forum: November 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
11-15-2025, 10:05 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 74
|
Oratory Conference: St. C...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
11-14-2025, 11:47 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 88
|
Fr. Hewko Catechism: Ador...
Forum: Catechisms
Last Post: Deus Vult
11-14-2025, 11:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 55
|
Doctrinal Statement: Frs....
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
11-14-2025, 10:56 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 131
|
Doctrinal Statement: Frs....
Forum: Rev. Father David Hewko
Last Post: Stone
11-14-2025, 10:56 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 100
|
|
|
| Pope Leo XIII: Libertas Praestantissimum - On the Nature of Human Liberty |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 01:05 PM - Forum: Encyclicals
- No Replies
|
 |
Libertas Praestantissimum
On the Nature of Human Liberty
Pope Leo XIII - 1888
To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops of the Catholic World in Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
Liberty, the highest of natural endowments, being the portion only of intellectual or rational natures, confers on man this dignity — that he is “in the hand of his counsel”[1] and has power over his actions. But the manner in which such dignity is exercised is of the greatest moment, inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the greatest evil alike depend. Man, indeed, is free to obey his reason, to seek moral good, and to strive unswervingly after his last end. Yet he is free also to turn aside to all other things; and, in pursuing the empty semblance of good, to disturb rightful order and to fall headlong into the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen. The Redeemer of mankind, Jesus Christ, having restored and exalted the original dignity of nature, vouchsafed special assistance to the will of man; and by the gifts of His grace here, and the promise of heavenly bliss hereafter, He raised it to a nobler state. In like manner, this great gift of nature has ever been, and always will be, deservingly cherished by the Catholic Church, for to her alone has been committed the charge of handing down to all ages the benefits purchased for us by Jesus Christ. Yet there are many who imagine that the Church is hostile to human liberty. Having a false and absurd notion as to what liberty is, either they pervert the very idea of freedom, or they extend it at their pleasure to many things in respect of which man cannot rightly be regarded as free.
2. We have on other occasions, and especially in Our encyclical letter Immortale Dei,[2] in treating of the so-called modern liberties, distinguished between their good and evil elements; and We have shown that whatsoever is good in those liberties is as ancient as truth itself, and that the Church has always most willingly approved and practiced that good: but whatsoever has been added as new is, to tell the plain truth, of a vitiated kind, the fruit of the disorders of the age, and of an insatiate longing after novelties. Seeing, however, that many cling so obstinately to their own opinion in this matter as to imagine these modern liberties, cankered as they are, to be the greatest glory of our age, and the very basis of civil life, without which no perfect government can be conceived, We feel it a pressing duty, for the sake of the common good, to treat separately of this subject.
3. It is with moral liberty, whether in individuals or in communities, that We proceed at once to deal. But, first of all, it will be well to speak briefly of natural liberty; for, though it is distinct and separate from moral liberty, natural freedom is the fountainhead from which liberty of whatsoever kind flows, sua vi suaque sponte. The unanimous consent and judgment of men, which is the trusty voice of nature, recognizes this natural liberty in those only who are endowed with intelligence or reason; and it is by his use of this that man is rightly regarded as responsible for his actions. For, while other animate creatures follow their senses, seeking good and avoiding evil only by instinct, man has reason to guide him in each and every act of his life. Reason sees that whatever things that are held to be good upon earth may exist or may not, and discerning that none of them are of necessity for us, it leaves the will free to choose what it pleases. But man can judge of this contingency, as We say, only because he has a soul that is simple, spiritual, and intellectual — a soul, therefore, which is not produced by matter, and does not depend on matter for its existence; but which is created immediately by God, and, far surpassing the condition of things material, has a life and action of its own — so that, knowing the unchangeable and necessary reasons of what is true and good, it sees that no particular kind of good is necessary to us. When, therefore, it is established that man’s soul is immortal and endowed with reason and not bound up with things material, the foundation of natural liberty is at once most firmly laid.
4. As the Catholic Church declares in the strongest terms the simplicity, spirituality, and immortality of the soul, so with unequaled constancy and publicity she ever also asserts its freedom. These truths she has always taught, and has sustained them as a dogma of faith, and whensoever heretics or innovators have attacked the liberty of man, the Church has defended it and protected this noble possession from destruction. History bears witness to the energy with which she met the fury of the Manicheans and others like them; and the earnestness with which in later years she defended human liberty at the Council of Trent, and against the followers of Jansenius, is known to all. At no time, and in no place, has she held truce with fatalism.
5. Liberty, then, as We have said, belongs only to those who have the gift of reason or intelligence. Considered as to its nature, it is the faculty of choosing means fitted for the end proposed, for he is master of his actions who can choose one thing out of many. Now, since everything chosen as a means is viewed as good or useful, and since good, as such, is the proper object of our desire, it follows that freedom of choice is a property of the will, or, rather, is identical with the will in so far as it has in its action the faculty of choice. But the will cannot proceed to act until it is enlightened by the knowledge possessed by the intellect. In other words, the good wished by the will is necessarily good in so far as it is known by the intellect; and this the more, because in all voluntary acts choice is subsequent to a judgment upon the truth of the good presented, declaring to which good preference should be given. No sensible man can doubt that judgment is an act of reason, not of the will. The end, or object, both of the rational will and of its liberty is that good only which is in conformity with reason.
6. Since, however, both these faculties are imperfect, it is possible, as is often seen, that the reason should propose something which is not really good, but which has the appearance of good, and that the will should choose accordingly. For, as the possibility of error, and actual error, are defects of the mind and attest its imperfection, so the pursuit of what has a false appearance of good, though a proof of our freedom, just as a disease is a proof of our vitality, implies defect in human liberty. The will also, simply because of its dependence on the reason, no sooner desires anything contrary thereto than it abuses its freedom of choice and corrupts its very essence. Thus it is that the infinitely perfect God, although supremely free, because of the supremacy of His intellect and of His essential goodness, nevertheless cannot choose evil; neither can the angels and saints, who enjoy the beatific vision. St. Augustine and others urged most admirably against the Pelagians that, if the possibility of deflection from good belonged to the essence or perfection of liberty, then God, Jesus Christ, and the angels and saints, who have not this power, would have no liberty at all, or would have less liberty than man has in his state of pilgrimage and imperfection. This subject is often discussed by the Angelic Doctor in his demonstration that the possibility of sinning is not freedom, but slavery. It will suffice to quote his subtle commentary on the words of our Lord: “Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin.”[3] “Everything,” he says, “is that which belongs to it naturally. When, therefore, it acts through a power outside itself, it does not act of itself, but through another, that is, as a slave. But man is by nature rational. When, therefore, he acts according to reason, he acts of himself and according to his free will; and this is liberty. Whereas, when he sins, he acts in opposition to reason, is moved by another, and is the victim of foreign misapprehensions. Therefore, ‘Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin’.”[4] Even the heathen philosophers clearly recognized this truth, especially they who held that the wise man alone is free; and by the term “wise man” was meant, as is well known, the man trained to live in accordance with his nature, that is, in justice and virtue.
7. Such, then, being the condition of human liberty, it necessarily stands in need of light and strength to direct its actions to good and to restrain them from evil. Without this, the freedom of our will would be our ruin. First of all, there must be law; that is, a fixed rule of teaching what is to be done and what is to be left undone. This rule cannot affect the lower animals in any true sense, since they act of necessity, following their natural instinct, and cannot of themselves act in any other way. On the other hand, as was said above, he who is free can either act or not act, can do this or do that, as he pleases, because his judgment precedes his choice. And his judgment not only decides what is right or wrong of its own nature, but also what is practically good and therefore to be chosen, and what is practically evil and therefore to be avoided. In other words, the reason prescribes to the will what it should seek after or shun, in order to the eventual attainment of man’s last end, for the sake of which all his actions ought to be performed. This ordination of reason is called law. In man’s free will, therefore, or in the moral necessity of our voluntary acts being in accordance with reason, lies the very root of the necessity of law. Nothing more foolish can be uttered or conceived than the notion that, because man is free by nature, he is therefore exempt from law. Were this the case, it would follow that to become free we must be deprived of reason; whereas the truth is that we are bound to submit to law precisely because we are free by our very nature. For, law is the guide of man’s actions; it turns him toward good by its rewards, and deters him from evil by its punishments.
8. Foremost in this office comes the natural law, which is written and engraved in the mind of every man; and this is nothing but our reason, commanding us to do right and forbidding sin. Nevertheless, all prescriptions of human reason can have force of law only inasmuch as they are the voice and the interpreters of some higher power on which our reason and liberty necessarily depend. For, since the force of law consists in the imposing of obligations and the granting of rights, authority is the one and only foundation of all law — the power, that is, of fixing duties and defining rights, as also of assigning the necessary sanctions of reward and chastisement to each and all of its commands. But all this, clearly, cannot be found in man, if, as his own supreme legislator, he is to be the rule of his own actions. It follows, therefore, that the law of nature is the same thing as the eternal law, implanted in rational creatures, and inclining them to their right action and end; and can be nothing else but the eternal reason of God, the Creator and Ruler of all the world. To this rule of action and restraint of evil God has vouchsafed to give special and most suitable aids for strengthening and ordering the human will. The first and most excellent of these is the power of His divine grace, whereby the mind can be enlightened and the will wholesomely invigorated and moved to the constant pursuit of moral good, so that the use of our inborn liberty becomes at once less difficult and less dangerous. Not that the divine assistance hinders in any way the free movement of our will; just the contrary, for grace works inwardly in man and in harmony with his natural inclinations, since it flows from the very Creator of his mind and will, by whom all things are moved in conformity with their nature. As the Angelic Doctor points out, it is because divine grace comes from the Author of nature that it is so admirably adapted to be the safeguard of all natures, and to maintain the character, efficiency, and operations of each.
9. What has been said of the liberty of individuals is no less applicable to them when considered as bound together in civil society. For, what reason and the natural law do for individuals. that human law promulgated for their good, does for the citizens of States. Of the laws enacted by men, some are concerned with what is good or bad by its very nature; and they command men to follow after what is right and to shun what is wrong, adding at the same time a suitable sanction. But such laws by no means derive their origin from civil society, because, just as civil society did not create human nature, so neither can it be said to be the author of the good which befits human nature, or of the evil which is contrary to it. Laws come before men live together in society, and have their origin in the natural, and consequently in the eternal, law. The precepts, therefore, of the natural law, contained bodily in the laws of men, have not merely the force of human law, but they possess that higher and more august sanction which belongs to the law of nature and the eternal law. And within the sphere of this kind of laws the duty of the civil legislator is, mainly, to keep the community in obedience by the adoption of a common discipline and by putting restraint upon refractory and viciously inclined men, so that, deterred from evil, they may turn to what is good, or at any rate may avoid causing trouble and disturbance to the State. Now, there are other enactments of the civil authority, which do not follow directly, but somewhat remotely, from the natural law, and decide many points which the law of nature treats only in a general and indefinite way. For instance, though nature commands all to contribute to the public peace and prosperity, whatever belongs to the manner, and circumstances, and conditions under which such service is to be rendered must be determined by the wisdom of men and not by nature herself. It is in the constitution of these particular rules of life, suggested by reason and prudence, and put forth by competent authority, that human law, properly so called, consists, binding all citizens to work together for the attainment of the common end proposed to the community, and forbidding them to depart from this end, and, in so far as human law is in conformity with the dictates of nature, leading to what is good, and deterring from evil.
10. From this it is manifest that the eternal law of God is the sole standard and rule of human liberty, not only in each individual man, but also in the community and civil society which men constitute when united. Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man doing what he pleases, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the State; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law. Likewise, the liberty of those who are in authority does not consist in the power to lay unreasonable and capricious commands upon their subjects, which would equally be criminal and would lead to the ruin of the commonwealth; but the binding force of human laws is in this, that they are to be regarded as applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning anything which is not contained in the eternal law, as in the principle of all law. Thus, St. Augustine most wisely says: “I think that you can see, at the same time, that there is nothing just and lawful in that temporal law, unless what men have gathered from this eternal law.”[5] If, then, by anyone in authority, something be sanctioned out of conformity with the principles of right reason, and consequently hurtful to the commonwealth, such an enactment can have no binding force of law, as being no rule of justice, but certain to lead men away from that good which is the very end of civil society.
11. Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good and forbidding evil. And, so far from this most just authority of God over men diminishing, or even destroying their liberty, it protects and perfects it, for the real perfection of all creatures is found in the prosecution and attainment of their respective ends; but the supreme end to which human liberty must aspire is God.
12. These precepts of the truest and highest teaching, made known to us by the light of reason itself, the Church, instructed by the example and doctrine of her divine Author, has ever propagated and asserted; for she has ever made them the measure of her office and of her teaching to the Christian nations. As to morals, the laws of the Gospel not only immeasurably surpass the wisdom of the heathen, but are an invitation and an introduction to a state of holiness unknown to the ancients; and, bringing man nearer to God, they make him at once the possessor of a more perfect liberty. Thus, the powerful influence of the Church has ever been manifested in the custody and protection of the civil and political liberty of the people. The enumeration of its merits in this respect does not belong to our present purpose. It is sufficient to recall the fact that slavery, that old reproach of the heathen nations, was mainly abolished by the beneficent efforts of the Church. The impartiality of law and the true brotherhood of man were first asserted by Jesus Christ; and His apostles re-echoed His voice when they declared that in future there was to be neither Jew, nor Gentile, nor barbarian, nor Scythian, but all were brothers in Christ. So powerful, so conspicuous, in this respect is the influence of the Church that experience abundantly testifies how savage customs are no longer possible in any land where she has once set her foot; but that gentleness speedily takes the place of cruelty, and the light of truth quickly dispels the darkness of barbarism. Nor has the Church been less lavish in the benefits she has conferred on civilized nations in every age, either by resisting the tyranny of the wicked, or by protecting the innocent and helpless from injury, or, finally, by using her influence in the support of any form of government which commended itself to the citizens at home, because of its justice, or was feared by their enemies without, because of its power.
13. Moreover, the highest duty is to respect authority, and obediently to submit to just law; and by this the members of a community are effectually protected from the wrong-doing of evil men. Lawful power is from God, “and whosoever resisteth authority resisteth the ordinance of God”;[6] wherefore, obedience is greatly ennobled when subjected to an authority which is the most just and supreme of all. But where the power to command is wanting, or where a law is enacted contrary to reason, or to the eternal law, or to some ordinance of God, obedience is unlawful, lest, while obeying man, we become disobedient to God. Thus, an effectual barrier being opposed to tyranny, the authority in the State will not have all its own way, but the interests and rights of all will be safeguarded — the rights of individuals, of domestic society, and of all the members of the commonwealth; all being free to live according to law and right reason; and in this, as We have shown, true liberty really consists.
14. If when men discuss the question of liberty they were careful to grasp its true and legitimate meaning, such as reason and reasoning have just explained, they would never venture to affix such a calumny on the Church as to assert that she is the foe of individual and public liberty. But many there are who follow in the footsteps of Lucifer, and adopt as their own his rebellious cry, “I will not serve”; and consequently substitute for true liberty what is sheer and most foolish license. Such, for instance, are the men belonging to that widely spread and powerful organization, who, usurping the name of liberty, style themselves liberals.
15. What naturalists or rationalists aim at in philosophy, that the supporters of liberalism, carrying out the principles laid down by naturalism, are attempting in the domain of morality and politics. The fundamental doctrine of rationalism is the supremacy of the human reason, which, refusing due submission to the divine and eternal reason, proclaims its own independence, and constitutes itself the supreme principle and source and judge of truth. Hence, these followers of liberalism deny the existence of any divine authority to which obedience is due, and proclaim that every man is the law to himself; from which arises that ethical system which they style independent morality, and which, under the guise of liberty, exonerates man from any obedience to the commands of God, and substitutes a boundless license. The end of all this it is not difficult to foresee, especially when society is in question. For, when once man is firmly persuaded that he is subject to no one, it follows that the efficient cause of the unity of civil society is not to be sought in any principle external to man, or superior to him, but simply in the free will of individuals; that the authority in the State comes from the people only; and that, just as every man’s individual reason is his only rule of life, so the collective reason of the community should be the supreme guide in the management of all public affairs. Hence the doctrine of the supremacy of the greater number, and that all right and all duty reside in the majority. But, from what has been said, it is clear that all this is in contradiction to reason. To refuse any bond of union between man and civil society, on the one hand, and God the Creator and consequently the supreme Law-giver, on the other, is plainly repugnant to the nature, not only of man, but of all created things; for, of necessity, all effects must in some proper way be connected with their cause; and it belongs to the perfection of every nature to contain itself within that sphere and grade which the order of nature has assigned to it, namely, that the lower should be subject and obedient to the higher.
16. Moreover, besides this, a doctrine of such character is most hurtful both to individuals and to the State. For, once ascribe to human reason the only authority to decide what is true and what is good, and the real distinction between good and evil is destroyed; honor and dishonor differ not in their nature, but in the opinion and judgment of each one; pleasure is the measure of what is lawful; and, given a code of morality which can have little or no power to restrain or quiet the unruly propensities of man, a way is naturally opened to universal corruption. With reference also to public affairs: authority is severed from the true and natural principle whence it derives all its efficacy for the common good; and the law determining what it is right to do and avoid doing is at the mercy of a majority. Now, this is simply a road leading straight to tyranny. The empire of God over man and civil society once repudiated, it follows that religion, as a public institution, can have no claim to exist, and that everything that belongs to religion will be treated with complete indifference. Furthermore, with ambitious designs on sovereignty, tumult and sedition will be common amongst the people; and when duty and conscience cease to appeal to them, there will be nothing to hold them back but force, which of itself alone is powerless to keep their covetousness in check. Of this we have almost daily evidence in the conflict with socialists and members of other seditious societies, who labor unceasingly to bring about revolution. It is for those, then, who are capable of forming a just estimate of things to decide whether such doctrines promote that true liberty which alone is worthy of man, or rather, pervert and destroy it.
17. There are, indeed, some adherents of liberalism who do not subscribe to these opinions, which we have seen to be fearful in their enormity, openly opposed to the truth, and the cause of most terrible evils. Indeed, very many amongst them, compelled by the force of truth, do not hesitate to admit that such liberty is vicious, nay, is simple license, whenever intemperate in its claims, to the neglect of truth and justice; and therefore they would have liberty ruled and directed by right reason, and consequently subject to the natural law and to the divine eternal law. But here they think they may stop, holding that man as a free being is bound by no law of God except such as He makes known to us through our natural reason. In this they are plainly inconsistent. For if — as they must admit, and no one can rightly deny — the will of the Divine Law-giver is to be obeyed, because every man is under the power of God, and tends toward Him as his end, it follows that no one can assign limits to His legislative authority without failing in the obedience which is due. Indeed, if the human mind be so presumptuous as to define the nature and extent of God’s rights and its own duties, reverence for the divine law will be apparent rather than real, and arbitrary judgment will prevail over the authority and providence of God. Man must, therefore, take his standard of a loyal and religious life from the eternal law; and from all and every one of those laws which God, in His infinite wisdom and power, has been pleased to enact, and to make known to us by such clear and unmistakable signs as to leave no room for doubt. And the more so because laws of this kind have the same origin, the same author, as the eternal law, are absolutely in accordance with right reason, and perfect the natural law. These laws it is that embody the government of God, who graciously guides and directs the intellect and the will of man lest these fall into error. Let, then, that continue to remain in a holy and inviolable union which neither can nor should be separated; and in all things — for this is the dictate of right reason itself — let God be dutifully and obediently served.
18. There are others, somewhat more moderate though not more consistent, who affirm that the morality of individuals is to be guided by the divine law, but not the morality of the State, for that in public affairs the commands of God may be passed over, and may be entirely disregarded in the framing of laws. Hence follows the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and State. But the absurdity of such a position is manifest. Nature herself proclaims the necessity of the State providing means and opportunities whereby the community may be enabled to live properly, that is to say, according to the laws of God. For, since God is the source of all goodness and justice, it is absolutely ridiculous that the State should pay no attention to these laws or render them abortive by contrary enactments. Besides, those who are in authority owe it to the commonwealth not only to provide for its external well-being and the conveniences of life, but still more to consult the welfare of men’s souls in the wisdom of their legislation. But, for the increase of such benefits, nothing more suitable can be conceived than the laws which have God for their author; and, therefore, they who in their government of the State take no account of these laws abuse political power by causing it to deviate from its proper end and from what nature itself prescribes. And, what is still more important, and what We have more than once pointed out, although the civil authority has not the same proximate end as the spiritual, nor proceeds on the same lines, nevertheless in the exercise of their separate powers they must occasionally meet. For their subjects are the same, and not infrequently they deal with the same objects, though in different ways. Whenever this occurs, since a state of conflict is absurd and manifestly repugnant to the most wise ordinance of God, there must necessarily exist some order or mode of procedure to remove the occasions of difference and contention, and to secure harmony in all things. This harmony has been not inaptly compared to that which exists between the body and the soul for the well-being of both one and the other, the separation of which brings irremediable harm to the body, since it extinguishes its very life.
19. To make this more evident, the growth of liberty ascribed to our age must be considered apart in its various details. And, first, let us examine that liberty in individuals which is so opposed to the virtue of religion, namely, the liberty of worship, as it is called. This is based on the principle that every man is free to profess as he may choose any religion or none.
20. But, assuredly, of all the duties which man has to fulfill, that, without doubt, is the chiefest and holiest which commands him to worship God with devotion and piety. This follows of necessity from the truth that we are ever in the power of God, are ever guided by His will and providence, and, having come forth from Him, must return to Him. Add to which, no true virtue can exist without religion, for moral virtue is concerned with those things which lead to God as man’s supreme and ultimate good; and therefore religion, which (as St. Thomas says) “performs those actions which are directly and immediately ordained for the divine honor,”[7] rules and tempers all virtues. And if it be asked which of the many conflicting religions it is necessary to adopt, reason and the natural law unhesitatingly tell us to practice that one which God enjoins, and which men can easily recognize by certain exterior notes, whereby Divine Providence has willed that it should be distinguished, because, in a matter of such moment, the most terrible loss would be the consequence of error. Wherefore, when a liberty such as We have described is offered to man, the power is given him to pervert or abandon with impunity the most sacred of duties, and to exchange the unchangeable good for evil; which, as We have said, is no liberty, but its degradation, and the abject submission of the soul to sin.
21. This kind of liberty, if considered in relation to the State, clearly implies that there is no reason why the State should offer any homage to God, or should desire any public recognition of Him; that no one form of worship is to be preferred to another, but that all stand on an equal footing, no account being taken of the religion of the people, even if they profess the Catholic faith. But, to justify this, it must needs be taken as true that the State has no duties toward God, or that such duties, if they exist, can be abandoned with impunity, both of which assertions are manifestly false. For it cannot be doubted but that, by the will of God, men are united in civil society; whether its component parts be considered; or its form, which implies authority; or the object of its existence; or the abundance of the vast services which it renders to man. God it is who has made man for society, and has placed him in the company of others like himself, so that what was wanting to his nature, and beyond his attainment if left to his own resources, he might obtain by association with others. Wherefore, civil society must acknowledge God as its Founder and Parent, and must obey and reverence His power and authority. justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness — namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges. Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic States, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion, therefore, the rulers of the State must preserve and protect, if they would provide — as they should do — with prudence and usefulness for the good of the community. For public authority exists for the welfare of those whom it governs; and, although its proximate end is to lead men to the prosperity found in this life, yet, in so doing, it ought not to diminish, but rather to increase, man’s capability of attaining to the supreme good in which his everlasting happiness consists: which never can be attained if religion be disregarded.
22. All this, however, We have explained more fully elsewhere. We now only wish to add the remark that liberty of so false a nature is greatly hurtful to the true liberty of both rulers and their subjects. Religion, of its essence, is wonderfully helpful to the State. For, since it derives the prime origin of all power directly from God Himself, with grave authority it charges rulers to be mindful of their duty, to govern without injustice or severity, to rule their people kindly and with almost paternal charity; it admonishes subjects to be obedient to lawful authority, as to the ministers of God; and it binds them to their rulers, not merely by obedience, but by reverence and affection, forbidding all seditions and venturesome enterprises calculated to disturb public order and tranquillity, and cause greater restrictions to be put upon the liberty of the people. We need not mention how greatly religion conduces to pure morals, and pure morals to liberty. Reason shows, and history confirms the fact, that the higher the morality of States, the greater are the liberty and wealth and power which they enjoy.
23. We must now consider briefly liberty of speech, and liberty of the press. It is hardly necessary to say that there can be no such right as this, if it be not used in moderation, and if it pass beyond the bounds and end of all true liberty. For right is a moral power which — as We have before said and must again and again repeat — it is absurd to suppose that nature has accorded indifferently to truth and falsehood, to justice and injustice. Men have a right freely and prudently to propagate throughout the State what things soever are true and honorable, so that as many as possible may possess them; but Iying opinions, than which no mental plague is greater, and vices which corrupt the heart and moral life should be diligently repressed by public authority, lest they insidiously work the ruin of the State. The excesses of an unbridled intellect, which unfailingly end in the oppression of the untutored multitude, are no less rightly controlled by the authority of the law than are the injuries inflicted by violence upon the weak. And this all the more surely, because by far the greater part of the community is either absolutely unable, or able only with great difficulty, to escape from illusions and deceitful subtleties, especially such as flatter the passions. If unbridled license of speech and of writing be granted to all, nothing will remain sacred and inviolate; even the highest and truest mandates of natures, justly held to be the common and noblest heritage of the human race, will not be spared. Thus, truth being gradually obscured by darkness, pernicious and manifold error, as too often happens, will easily prevail. Thus, too, license will gain what liberty loses; for liberty will ever be more free and secure in proportion as license is kept in fuller restraint. In regard, however, to all matter of opinion which God leaves to man’s free discussion, full liberty of thought and of speech is naturally within the right of everyone; for such liberty never leads men to suppress the truth, but often to discover it and make it known.
24. A like judgment must be passed upon what is called liberty of teaching. There can be no doubt that truth alone should imbue the minds of men, for in it are found the well-being, the end, and the perfection of every intelligent nature; and therefore nothing but truth should be taught both to the ignorant and to the educated, so as to bring knowledge to those who have it not, and to preserve it in those who possess it. For this reason it is plainly the duty of all who teach to banish error from the mind, and by sure safeguards to close the entry to all false convictions. From this it follows, as is evident, that the liberty of which We have been speaking is greatly opposed to reason, and tends absolutely to pervert men’s minds, in as much as it claims for itself the right of teaching whatever it pleases — a liberty which the State cannot grant without failing in its duty. And the more so because the authority of teachers has great weight with their hearers, who can rarely decide for themselves as to the truth or falsehood of the instruction given to them.
25. Wherefore, this liberty, also, in order that it may deserve the name, must be kept within certain limits, lest the office of teaching be turned with impunity into an instrument of corruption. Now, truth, which should be the only subject matter of those who teach, is of two kinds: natural and supernatural. Of natural truths, such as the principles of nature and whatever is derived from them immediately by our reason, there is a kind of common patrimony in the human race. On this, as on a firm basis, morality, justice, religion, and the very bonds of human society rest: and to allow people to go unharmed who violate or destroy it would be most impious, most foolish, and most inhuman.
26. But with no less religious care must we preserve that great and sacred treasure of the truths which God Himself has taught us. By many and convincing arguments, often used by defenders of Christianity, certain leading truths have been laid down: namely, that some things have been revealed by God; that the Onlybegotten Son of God was made flesh, to bear witness to the truth; that a perfect society was founded by Him — the Church, namely, of which He is the head, and with which He has promised to abide till the end of the world. To this society He entrusted all the truths which He had taught, in order that it might keep and guard them and with lawful authority explain them; and at the same time He commanded all nations to hear the voice of the Church, as if it were His own, threatening those who would not hear it with everlasting perdition. Thus, it is manifest that man’s best and surest teacher is God, the Source and Principle of all truth; and the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the true Light which enlightens every man, and to whose teaching all must submit: “And they shall all be taught of God. “[8]
27. In faith and in the teaching of morality, God Himself made the Church a partaker of His divine authority, and through His heavenly gift she cannot be deceived. She is therefore the greatest and most reliable teacher of mankind, and in her swells an inviolable right to teach them. Sustained by the truth received from her divine Founder, the Church has ever sought to fulfill holily the mission entrusted to her by God; unconquered by the difficulties on all sides surrounding her, she has never ceased to assert her liberty of teaching, and in this way the wretched superstition of paganism being dispelled, the wide world was renewed unto Christian wisdom. Now, reason itself clearly teaches that the truths of divine revelation and those of nature cannot really be opposed to one another, and that whatever is at variance with them must necessarily be false. Therefore, the divine teaching of the Church, so far from being an obstacle to the pursuit of learning and the progress of science, or in any way retarding the advance of civilization, in reality brings to them the sure guidance of shining light. And for the same reason it is of no small advantage for the perfecting of human liberty, since our Savior Jesus Christ has said that by truth is man made free: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”[9] Therefore, there is no reason why genuine liberty should grow indignant, or true science feel aggrieved, at having to bear the just and necessary restraint of laws by which, in the judgment of the Church and of reason itself, human teaching has to be controlled.
28. The Church, indeed — as facts have everywhere proved — looks chiefly and above all to the defense of the Christian faith, while careful at the same time to foster and promote every kind of human learning. For learning is in itself good, and praiseworthy, and desirable; and further, all erudition which is the outgrowth of sound reason, and in conformity with the truth of things, serves not a little to confirm what we believe on the authority of God. The Church, truly, to our great benefit, has carefully preserved the monuments of ancient wisdom; has opened everywhere homes of science, and has urged on intellectual progress by fostering most diligently the arts by which the culture of our age is so much advanced. Lastly, we must not forget that a vast field lies freely open to man’s industry and genius, containing all those things which have no necessary connection with Christian faith and morals, or as to which the Church, exercising no authority, leaves the judgment of the learned free and unconstrained.
29. From all this may be understood the nature and character of that liberty which the followers of liberalism so eagerly advocate and proclaim. On the one hand, they demand for themselves and for the State a license which opens the way to every perversity of opinion; and on the other, they hamper the Church in divers ways, restricting her liberty within narrowest limits, although from her teaching not only is there nothing to be feared, but in every respect very much to be gained.
30. Another liberty is widely advocated, namely, liberty of conscience. If by this is meant that everyone may, as he chooses, worship God or not, it is sufficiently refuted by the arguments already adduced. But it may also be taken to mean that every man in the State may follow the will of God and, from a consciousness of duty and free from every obstacle, obey His commands. This, indeed, is true liberty, a liberty worthy of the sons of God, which nobly maintains the dignity of man and is stronger than all violence or wrong — a liberty which the Church has always desired and held most dear. This is the kind of liberty the Apostles claimed for themselves with intrepid constancy, which the apologists of Christianity confirmed by their writings, and which the martyrs in vast numbers consecrated by their blood. And deservedly so; for this Christian liberty bears witness to the absolute and most just dominion of God over man, and to the chief and supreme duty of man toward God. It has nothing in common with a seditious and rebellious mind; and in no tittle derogates from obedience to public authority; for the right to command and to require obedience exists only so far as it is in accordance with the authority of God, and is within the measure that He has laid down. But when anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is a wide departure from this divinely constituted order, and at the same time a direct conflict with divine authority; therefore, it is right not to obey.
31. By the patrons of liberalism, however, who make the State absolute and omnipotent, and proclaim that man should live altogether independently of God, the liberty of which We speak, which goes hand in hand with virtue and religion, is not admitted; and whatever is done for its preservation is accounted an injury and an offense against the State. Indeed, if what they say were really true, there would be no tyranny, no matter how monstrous, which we should not be bound to endure and submit to.
32. The Church most earnestly desires that the Christian teaching, of which We have given an outline, should penetrate every rank of society in reality and in practice; for it would be of the greatest efficacy in healing the evils of our day, which are neither few nor slight, and are the offspring in great part of the false liberty which is so much extolled, and in which the germs of safety and glory were supposed to be contained. The hope has been disappointed by the result. The fruit, instead of being sweet and wholesome, has proved cankered and bitter. If, then, a remedy is desired, let it be sought for in a restoration of sound doctrine, from which alone the preservation of order and, as a consequence, the defense of true liberty can be confidently expected.
33. Yet, with the discernment of a true mother, the Church weighs the great burden of human weakness, and well knows the course down which the minds and actions of men are in this our age being borne. For this reason, while not conceding any right to anything save what is true and honest, she does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoiding some greater evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good. God Himself in His providence, though infinitely good and powerful, permits evil to exist in the world, partly that greater good may not be impeded, and partly that greater evil may not ensue. In the government of States it is not forbidden to imitate the Ruler of the world; and, as the authority of man is powerless to prevent every evil, it has (as St. Augustine says) to overlook and leave unpunished many things which are punished, and rightly, by Divine Providence.[10] But if, in such circumstances, for the sake of the common good (and this is the only legitimate reason), human law may or even should tolerate evil, it may not and should not approve or desire evil for its own sake; for evil of itself, being a privation of good, is opposed to the common welfare which every legislator is bound to desire and defend to the best of his ability. In this, human law must endeavor to imitate God, who, as St. Thomas teaches, in allowing evil to exist in the world, “neither wills evil to be done, nor wills it not to be done, but wills only to permit it to be done; and this is good.”[11] This saying of the Angelic Doctor contains briefly the whole doctrine of the permission of evil.
34. But, to judge aright, we must acknowledge that, the more a State is driven to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection; and that the tolerance of evil which is dictated by political prudence should be strictly confined to the limits which its justifying cause, the public welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolerance would be injurious to the public welfare, and entail greater evils on the State, it would not be lawful; for in such case the motive of good is wanting. And although in the extraordinary condition of these times the Church usually acquiesces in certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true — that the liberty which is claimed for all to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.
35. And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the equity and prudence of the Church are those who profess what is called liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which We have spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such an abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as being wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to lavish liberty on all in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant toward the Catholic Church, by refusing to allow her the liberty of being herself free.
36. And now to reduce for clearness’ sake to its principal heads all that has been set forth with its immediate conclusions, the summing up in this briefly: that man, by a necessity of his nature, is wholly subject to the most faithful and ever enduring power of God; and that, as a consequence, any liberty, except that which consists in submission to God and in subjection to His will, is unintelligible. To deny the existence of this authority in God, or to refuse to submit to it, means to act, not as a free man, but as one who treasonably abuses his liberty; and in such a disposition of mind the chief and deadly vice of liberalism essentially consists. The form, however, of the sin is manifold; for in more ways and degrees than one can the will depart from the obedience which is due to God or to those who share the divine power.
37. For, to reject the supreme authority to God, and to cast off all obedience to Him in public matters, or even in private and domestic affairs, is the greatest perversion of liberty and the worst kind of liberalism; and what We have said must be understood to apply to this alone in its fullest sense.
38. Next comes the system of those who admit indeed the duty of submitting to God, the Creator and Ruler of the world, inasmuch as all nature is dependent on His will, but who boldly reject all laws of faith and morals which are above natural reason, but are revealed by the authority of God; or who at least impudently assert that there is no reason why regard should be paid to these laws, at any rate publicly, by the State. How mistaken these men also are, and how inconsistent, we have seen above. From this teaching, as from its source and principle, flows that fatal principle of the separation of Church and State; whereas it is, on the contrary, clear that the two powers, though dissimilar in functions and unequal in degree, ought nevertheless to live in concord, by harmony in their action and the faithful discharge of their respective duties.
39. But this teaching is understood in two ways. Many wish the State to be separated from the Church wholly and entirely, so that with regard to every right of human society, in institutions, customs, and laws, the offices of State, and the education of youth, they would pay no more regard to the Church than if she did not exist; and, at most, would allow the citizens individually to attend to their religion in private if so minded. Against such as these, all the arguments by which We disprove the principle of separation of Church and State are conclusive; with this super-added, that it is absurd the citizen should respect the Church, while the State may hold her in contempt.
40. Others oppose not the existence of the Church, nor indeed could they; yet they despoil her of the nature and rights of a perfect society, and maintain that it does not belong to her to legislate, to judge, or to punish, but only to exhort, to advise, and to rule her subjects in accordance with their own consent and will. By such opinion they pervert the nature of this divine society, and attenuate and narrow its authority, its office of teacher, and its whole efficiency; and at the same time they aggrandize the power of the civil government to such extent as to subject the Church of God to the empire and sway of the State, like any voluntary association of citizens. To refute completely such teaching, the arguments often used by the defenders of Christianity, and set forth by Us, especially in the encyclical letter Immortale Dei,[12] are of great avail; for by those arguments it is proved that, by a divine provision, all the rights which essentially belong to a society that is legitimate, supreme, and perfect in all its parts exist in the Church.
41. Lastly, there remain those who, while they do not approve the separation of Church and State, think nevertheless that the Church ought to adapt herself to the times and conform to what is required by the modern system of government. Such an opinion is sound, if it is to be understood of some equitable adjustment consistent with truth and justice; in so far, namely, that the Church, in the hope of some great good, may show herself indulgent, and may conform to the times in so far as her sacred office permits. But it is not so in regard to practices and doctrines which a perversion of morals and a warped judgment have unlawfully introduced. Religion, truth, and justice must ever be maintained; and, as God has intrusted these great and sacred matters to her office as to dissemble in regard to what is false or unjust, or to connive at what is hurtful to religion.
42. From what has been said it follows that it is quite unlawful to demand, to defend, or to grant unconditional freedom of thought, of speech, or writing, or of worship, as if these were so many rights given by nature to man. For, if nature had really granted them, it would be lawful to refuse obedience to God, and there would be no restraint on human liberty. It likewise follows that freedom in these things may be tolerated wherever there is just cause, but only with such moderation as will prevent its degenerating into license and excess. And, where such liberties are in use, men should employ them in doing good, and should estimate them as the Church does; for liberty is to be regarded as legitimate in so far only as it affords greater facility for doing good, but no farther.
43. Whenever there exists, or there is reason to fear, an unjust oppression of the people on the one hand, or a deprivation of the liberty of the Church on the other, it is lawful to seek for such a change of government as will bring about due liberty of action. In such case, an excessive and vicious liberty is not sought, but only some relief, for the common welfare, in order that, while license for evil is allowed by the State, the power of doing good may not be hindered.
44. Again, it is not of itself wrong to prefer a democratic form of government, if only the Catholic doctrine be maintained as to the origin and exercise of power. Of the various forms of government, the Church does not reject any that are fitted to procure the welfare of the subject; she wishes only — and this nature itself requires — that they should be constituted without involving wrong to any one, and especially without violating the rights of the Church.
45. Unless it be otherwise determined, by reason of some exceptional condition of things, it is expedient to take part in the administration of public affairs. And the Church approves of every one devoting his services to the common good, and doing all that he can for the defense, preservation, and prosperity of his country.
46. Neither does the Church condemn those who, if it can be done without violation of justice, wish to make their country independent of any foreign or despotic power. Nor does she blame those who wish to assign to the State the power of self-government, and to its citizens the greatest possible measure of prosperity. The Church has always most faithfully fostered civil liberty, and this was seen especially in Italy, in the municipal prosperity, and wealth, and glory which were obtained at a time when the salutary power of the Church has spread, without opposition, to all parts of the State.
47. These things, venerable brothers, which under the guidance of faith and reason, in the discharge of Our Apostolic office, We have now delivered to you, We hope, especially by your cooperation with Us, will be useful unto very many. In lowliness of heart We raise Our eyes in supplication to God, and earnestly beseech Him to shed mercifully the light of His wisdom and of His counsel upon men, so that, strengthened by these heavenly gifts, they may in matters of such moment discern what is true, and may afterwards, in public and private at all times and with unshaken constancy, live in accordance with the truth. As a pledge of these heavenly gifts, and in witness of Our good will to you, venerable brothers, and to the clergy and people committed to each of you, We most lovingly grant in the Lord the apostolic benediction.
Given at St. Peter’s in Rome, the twentieth day of June, 1888, the tenth year of Our Pontificate.
REFERENCES:
1. Ecclus.15:14.
2. See no. 93:37-38.
3. John 8:34.
4. Thomas Aquinas, On the Gospel of St. John, cap. viii, lect. 4, n. 3 (ed. Vives, Vol. 20, p. 95).
5. Augustine, De libero arbitrio, lib. 1, cap. 6, n. 15 (PL 32, 1229).
6. Rom.13:2.
7. Summa theologiae, lla-llae, q. Ixxxi, a. 6. Answer.
8. John 6:45.
9. John 8:32.
10. Augustine, De libero arbitrio, lib. 1, cap. 6, n. 14 (PL 32, 1228).
11. Summa theologiae, la, q. xix, a. 9, ad 3m.
12. See no. 93:8-11.
|
|
|
| The Popes on the Relationship between the Church and the State |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 12:48 PM - Forum: Encyclicals
- Replies (4)
|
|
Commissum Divinitus
ON CHURCH AND STATE
Pope Gregory XVI - 1835
To the Clergy of Switzerland.
Venerable Brothers and Dearly Beloved Sons, Greetings and Apostolic Benediction.
The duty of the apostolic office which God entrusted to Us demands that We continually watch over the Lord’s flock. We especially direct all Our zeal and thoughts to provide as much assistance as We can whenever the eternal salvation of the sheep and the Catholic religion seem to be in danger.. We are aware of and deplore the fact that Our enemies cunningly try many things, and not without success. Their works are an open blow against the Christian flock and an injury to the Catholic cause. This sorrow is aggravated because those who want to deceive the unwary claim that they do not intend to subtract anything from the integrity of the faith. They pretend to have as their only purpose the protection of the rights of the laity. They attempt, by a false pretense of public interest, to introduce, widely disseminate, establish, and somehow sanction the erroneous and wicked teachings which they follow.
2. Hence they dared to call together an assembly to deliberate, and to fabricate a rule whereby aspects of the temporal power in ecclesiastical affairs were revealed and defined. You already know that We are speaking about those things which were nefariously accomplished during January of last year in Baden in the canton of Aargau. Because of them you experienced sharp sorrow and even now they make you anxious and concerned. We cannot keep secret the fact that in the beginning We were influenced to do nothing. We believed that the laymen gathered in the appointed place with no other intention than to study those matters which concern religion. We further believed they wanted to proceed so that they might not only discuss the many aspects of the ecclesiastical power, but also so that they might offer plans to those who wield high civil authority; those persons might then confirm and sanction the plans by force of law.
3. The acts of that meeting were recently published by Gynopedius at Frauenfeld. These acts contain the names of the men who were present at the meeting, the speeches given by some of them in the sessions, and the articles passed there. We were horrified in reading those speeches and articles and the principles contained in them. We knew then that novelties were being introduced in the Catholic Church which are contrary to its teaching and discipline and which lead to the destruction of souls. We cannot allow this in any way.
4. He who made everything and who governs by a prudent arrangement wanted order to flourish in His Church. He wanted some people to be in charge and govern and others to be subject and obey. Therefore, the Church has, by its divine institution, the power of the magisterium to teach and define matters of faith and morals and to interpret the Holy Scriptures without danger of error. It also has the power of governance to preserve and strengthen in the true doctrine those whom it welcomes as children and to make laws concerning all things which pertain to the salvation of souls, the exercise of the sacred ministry, and divine worship. Whoever opposes these laws makes himself guilty of a very serious crime.
5. This power of teaching and governing in matters of religion, given by Christ to His Spouse, belongs to the priests and bishops. Christ established this system not only so that the Church would in no way belong to the civil government of the state, but also so that it could be totally free and not subject in the least to any earthly domination. Jesus Christ did not commit the sacred trust of the revealed doctrine to the worldly leaders, but to the apostles and their successors. He said to them only: “Whoever hears you, hears Me; whoever rejects you, rejects Me.” These same apostles preached the Gospel, spread the Church, and established its discipline not in accordance with the pleasure of lay authority, but even in spite of it. Moreover, when the leaders of the synagogue dared command them to silence, Peter and John, who had used the evangelical freedom, responded: “You be the judge of whether it is right in the eyes of God to listen to you rather than to God.” Thus, if any secular power dominates the Church, controls its doctrine, or interferes so that it cannot promulgate laws concerning the holy ministry, divine worship, and the spiritual welfare of the faithful, it does so to the injury of the faith and the overturning of the divine ordinance of the Church and the nature of government.
6. These principles are firm, unchangeable, and supported by the authority and tradition of the ancient Fathers. Bishop Ossius of Cordoba wrote to Emperor Constantius: “Do not become involved in ecclesiastical matters nor give us orders concerning these affairs. But rather learn this from us: God gives you the empire; He entrusts ecclesiastical power to us. Whoever secretly tries to snatch the empire away from you opposes God. By the same token, take care that you do not draw ecclesiastical power to yourself and become guilty of a great crime.” The Christian leaders were aware of this and they considered it a glorious thing to acknowledge publicly. Among them was the great leader Basil who said in the eighth synod: “What more can I say about you lay people? I have nothing else to say except that it is not permitted for you to speak concerning ecclesiastical matters. It is the duty of patriarchs, popes, and priests, to whom the duty of governing has been entrusted, to investigate and study these matters. They have the power of binding and loosing and of sanctifying. They are the ones who have the ecclesiastical and heavenly keys, not those who must be fed, sanctified, bound, and loosed.”
7. However, in the Baden meeting the matter was discussed differently. The articles which came forth from it attack the sound doctrine of ecclesiastical power and lead the Church itself into a scandalous and unjust slavery. It is even subject to the judgment of lay authority in the promulgation of decrees concerning dogma, and its disciplinary laws are declared to lack force and effect unless they are promulgated by the agreement of secular authority with an added proposition concerning the penalties against those who disobey. What then? Power is given to that same civil authority either to approve or to oppose the celebration of the diocesan synods, to inspect the synods, to oversee seminaries, and to confirm the system of their internal governance established by bishops, to remove clerics from ecclesiastical duties, to govern the religious and moral instruction of the people, and finally to regulate everything which, they claim, pertains to the external discipline of the Church, although these things may be of a spiritual nature or character and may concern the worship of God and the salvation of souls.
8. There is nothing which belongs more to the Church and there is nothing Jesus Christ wanted more closely reserved for its shepherds than the dispensation of the sacraments He instituted. The power to judge concerning their dispensation belongs only to those whom He established as ministers of His work on earth. It is wicked if the civil authority appropriates for itself anything in this holy office! It is wicked if the civil authority prescribes anything at all concerning it or gives orders to the ministers of the sacraments! It is wicked if it tries with its laws to oppose the rules handed down to Us in writing or by oral tradition from the early Church concerning the distribution of the sacraments to the Christian people. Our predecessor St. Gelasius said in his letter to Emperor Anastasius: “You know, most merciful son, that you are allowed to rule over the human race. Nevertheless, submit yourself to the bishops and seek from them the means of your salvation. In receiving the heavenly sacraments and in distributing them appropriately, you know that you should be subject rather than govern. You know therefore that in these things you depend on their judgment and that they do not want to be subjected to your power.” What seems to be incredible and portentous is that the meeting at Baden progressed to the point that even the right and office of dispensing the sacraments was attributed to secular authority. The articles which were rashly written concerning the sacrament of marriage in Christ and the Church certainly incline in this direction as does the support given for contracting mixed marriages. The requirement that Catholic priests bless these marriages while ignoring the religious differences between the spouses and the threats of punishment for those who refuse to do this illustrate this tendency.
9. These things ought to be condemned because the civil authority makes laws concerning the celebration of a divinely established sacrament and dares to order the priests in such a serious matter. But they ought to be reproached even more so because they foster an absurd and impious idea which they call “indifferentism;” indeed they depend on it as necessary. Moreover, they oppose Catholic truth and Church doctrine which forbids mixed marriages as disgraceful because of the communion in holy things and because of the serious danger of the perversion of the Catholic spouse and the perverted education of the future children. Nor did the Church ever grant the free power to contract such a marriage unless conditions were added which prevented the causes of danger and deformity.
10. Jesus Christ conferred on His Church the supreme power of administering religion and governing Christian society. This is not subject to the civil authority. In his letter to the Ephesians the apostle teaches that Christ established this ecclesiastical power for the benefit of unity. And what is this unity unless one person is placed in charge of the whole Church who protects it and joins all its members in the one profession of faith and unites them in the one bond of love and communion? The wisdom of the Divine Lawgiver ordered that a visible head be placed over a visible body so that “once so established, the opportunity for division might be removed.” Wherefore, although for all the bishops whom the Holy Spirit placed as governors of the Church of God there is a common dignity and in matters of rank there is nevertheless equal power, there is not the same rank in the hierarchy for all and they do not all have the same extent of jurisdiction.
Using the words of St. Leo the Great; “Among the holy apostles there was a similarity of honor but a distinction of power: while the election of all was equal, it was given only to one to have preeminence among the others … because the Lord wanted the sacrament of evangelical duty to belong to the office of the apostles; thus He placed it principally in St. Peter, the head of all the apostles.” He granted this to Peter alone out of all the apostles when He promised him the keys of the kingdom of heaven and entrusted to him the obligation of feeding the Lord’s sheep and lambs and the duty of strengthening his brothers. He wanted this to extend to Peter’s successors whom He placed over the Church with equal right. This has always been the firm and united opinion of all Catholics. It is Church dogma that the pope, the successor of St. Peter, possesses not only primacy of honor but also primacy of authority and jurisdiction over the whole Church. Accordingly the bishops are subject to him.
11. In the words of St. Leo, who continues speaking about the Holy See of Peter: “It is necessary that the Church throughout the world be united and cleave to the center of Catholic unity and ecclesiastical communion, so that whoever dares to depart from the unity of Peter might understand that he no longer shares in the divine mystery.” St. Jerome adds: “Whoever eats the lamb outside of this house is unholy. Those who were not in the ark of Noah perished in the flood.” Just as he who does not gather with Christ, so he who does not gather with Christ’s Vicar on earth, clearly scatters. How can someone who destroys the holy authority of the Vicar of Christ and who infringes on his rights gather with him? It is through these rights that the pope is the center of unity, that he has the primacy of order and jurisdiction, and that he has the full power of nurturing, ruling, and governing the universal Church.
12. We tearfully admit that this was attempted at the meeting in Baden. The pope alone and no bishop has the right to transfer the days fixed by the Church for celebrating feasts and observing fasts and to annul the precept of attending Mass. This was clearly established in the constitution Auctorem fidei published by Our predecessor Pius VI on August 28, 1794, against the Pistoians.
13. The items contained in the Baden articles are contrary to this and are much more harmful because on the issue of discipline they reserve the right for the civil authority. The special privilege of removing religious congregations which live under a rule from the jurisdiction of the bishops and subjecting these congregations directly to himself belongs to the pope-a right popes have used from the earliest times. The articles of the Baden convention abridge this right. They make no mention of the necessity of asking and obtaining the permission of the Holy See. Thus plans may be undertaken by a secular authority through which, after the exemption of the monastic orders is abolished in Switzerland, regular congregations can be made subject to the authority of the ordinary bishops.
14. To these, We should add those things which they indicate have been authorized concerning the rights of bishops. If these things are examined mote deeply and referred back to the principles from which the articles made in the Baden conference proceed, they seem to confirm that the jurisdiction of the bishops neither can nor should be swayed by the supreme authority of the pope. Nor should they be circumscribed by any limitations. Neither should We omit those things which were proposed concerning either the erection of a metropolitan see or the unification of some of those dioceses to another cathedral church located beyond the boundaries of Switzerland. The rights of the Holy See in this matter were ignored. Thus civil authority acted as if it were totally free in these serious issues to establish by its own right those things which it considered to be advantageous for the spiritual needs of the people. We pass over many other things which would be too tiresome to enumerate individually. However, they inflict great harm on this Holy See of Peter and threaten, violate, and despise its dignity and authority.
15. Since this is the situation and the Church is confronted by so great and open a disturbance of sound doctrine and ecclesiastical rights and by so great and serious a danger to the Catholic cause in these regions, it behooved Us to raise Our voice from this holy mountain soon after the meeting of Baden was held and to openly criticize, reprove, and condemn those articles to everyone who participated in the conference. We delayed Our decision on their wickedness up until now because We hoped that those who administer civil affairs would totally reject and disapprove of them. The matter did not, for the most part, come to pass according to Our expectation. On the contrary, We, greatly sorrowing, learned that laws were enacted which confirmed those articles and protected them by public decree.
16. We, in Our role as teacher and universal doctor, ought diligently to beware lest anyone be led into error by Our action and conclude that the articles of the Baden meeting are not inconsistent with the teaching and discipline of the Church. We know that We cannot hesitate or be silent any longer. As this is a matter of very serious importance, We subjected these articles to a careful examination. We have heard the advice and received the opinions of the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church and have considered the entire matter carefully by Our own will and with sure knowledge. With the fullness of the apostolic power, We reprove and condemn the aforementioned articles of the meeting of Baden as containing false, rash, and erroneous assertions; as detracting from the rights of the Holy See, overthrowing the government of the Church and its divine constitution, and subjecting the ecclesiastical ministry to secular domination; and as proceeding from condemned premises. We decree that they should forever be considered condemned.
17. While We intend to point these things out openly because of Our apostolic duty, it remains for Us to speak with paternal affection to you who have taken on a part of His governance, the fullness of which the Prince of Shepherds entrusted to Us. Among so many evils which besiege the Catholic Church in these evil times, what great trials press upon Our heart! We have experienced great sadness, especially from those things which were daringly attempted recently. It should be enough to direct your attention to it, and it should not be necessary to explain the details.
18. In Our sorrow We must not neglect to mention that what you did in guarding the Catholic cause and caring for the salvation of the flock entrusted to your care brought Us great solace. Therefore, We give thanks to the Father of mercies and the God of all consolation who comforted Us with you while We were oppressed by such tribulation. We must arouse your devotion. We exhort you to fight for the cause of God and the Church with greater zeal as the attacks of the enemy become more severe. It is your duty to stand as a wall so that no other foundation can be placed other than the one which has already been laid. It is also your duty to keep the faith undefiled. There is another sacred trust which you should firmly defend, namely, the holy laws by which the Church establishes its discipline, and the rights of this Apostolic See. Therefore, act according to the position which you hold, according to the dignity with which you are vested, according to the authority which you received, according to the sacrament by which you bound yourselves in solemn consecration. Unsheathe the sword of the spirit which is the word of God. Denounce, beseech, rebuke in all patience and teaching. Labor and struggle for the Catholic religion, for the divine authority and laws of the Church, for the See of Peter and its dignity and rights “so that not only those who are upright may remain safe but also so that those who were deceived by seduction may be called back from error.”
19. Moreover, so that the desired outcome may result from these cares and labors under taken by Our venerable brothers, We also address those of you who are ministers of the sacraments, shepherds of souls, and preachers of the divine word. It is your duty to be totally united with them in will, to be inflamed with the same zeal, and to be in harmony with them in this work so that the people might be protected from all danger of error and contamination. Exert yourselves so that everyone thinks the same thing and no one allows himself to be led astray by strange teachings. Let everyone avoid profane novelties, cling to the Catholic faith, and submit himself to the power and authority of the Church. Each person should bind himself ever more firmly to this See which the strong Redeemer of Jacob placed as an iron pillar and as a bronze wall against the enemies of religion. You should receive these enemies as people who ought to be educated in the law of Christ and of the Church.
20. It should be obvious that the secular power and those laws enacted by it concerning the welfare of civil society ought to be obeyed, not only because of the fear of wrath but also because of conscience. It is never permitted, however, to shamefully abandon the faith because of it. Since the spirits of the people are trained in this way, consider your labors to be both for the tranquility of the citizens and the welfare of the Church; these two things cannot be separated from one another.
21. May the most merciful God, from whom comes every perfect gift, accomplish these Our wishes. May Our apostolic blessing which We lovingly impart to you, venerable brothers, to Our brothers in the Lord, and to the faithful be a sign of good things which We ardently desire for this part of the Catholic flock.
Given in Rome, at St. Peter’s, on the 17th day of May in the year 1835, the fifth year of Our Pontificate.
|
|
|
|
| Miami Doctor Dies After Receiving First Dose Of Pfizer Vaccine |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 12:41 PM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- No Replies
|
|
Miami Doctor Dies After Receiving First Dose Of Pfizer Vaccine
Zero Hedge | Jan 08, 2021
As the US sees 4K confirmed COVID-19 deaths in a single day, the CDC is reporting another shocking potential reaction to the new mRNA-vector COVID-19 vaccines: A doctor in Miami has died two weeks after receiving his first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech jab.
Heidi Neckelmann, the widow of Dr. Gregory Michael, said her husband was vaccinated on Dec. 18, and died 16 days later. He was 56 years old, according to Sputnik. Patients typically receive a second dose of the vaccine 3 weeks after the first. Neckelmann also shared the news in a Facebook post, cited above.
"In my mind his death was 100 percent linked to the vaccine. There is no other explanation," she said. "He was in very good health. He didn’t smoke, he drank alcohol once in a while but only socially. He worked out, we had kayaks, he was a deep sea fisherman," she added.
What's more, the doctor started to experience unusual symptoms, and three days after vaccination, small spots began to appear on Gregory Michael's feet and hands. In response, he went to the emergency room at Mount Sinai. As his blood count was not in the normal ranges, he was admitted to the ICU, his wife told Sputnik. Shortly after, he suffered a stroke and died.
Three days after vaccination, small spots began to appear on Gregory Michael’s feet and hands. In response, he went to the emergency room at Mount Sinai. As his blood count was not in the normal ranges, he was admitted to the intensive care unit, according to Heidi Neckelmann. Unfortunately, shortly after, he suffered a stroke and died.
According to Darren Caprara, director of operations at the Miami-Dade medical examiner’s office, Gregory Michael's death is the first that the county medical examiner's office has seen where a COVID-19 vaccine could have played a role.
Earlier, Carlos Palestino, the brother-in-law of Mexican doctor Karla Cecilia Perez, was paralyzed hours after receiving the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, according to reports.
There have been several anecdotal reports about patients dying after receiving the vaccine in Europe, the US and elsewhere, in both trials, and during the emergency phase of the rollout.
|
|
|
|
| The Liturgical Year: January 8th - Third Day in the Octave of the Epiphany |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 11:42 AM - Forum: Christmas
- No Replies
|
|
January 8 – Third Day within the Octave of the Epiphany
Taken from The Liturgical Year by Dom Prosper Gueranger (1841-1875)
The great Mystery of the Alliance of the Son of God with the universal Church, and which is represented in the Epiphany by the Magi, was looked forward to by the world in every age previous to the coming of our Emmanuel. The Patriarchs and Prophets had propagated the tradition; and the Gentile world gave frequent proofs that the tradition prevailed even with them.
When Adam, in Eden, first beheld her whom God had formed from one of his ribs, and whom he called Eve, because she was the Mother of all the living (Genesis 3:20) —he exclaimed, “This is the bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. Man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall be two in one flesh.” (Genesis 2:23-24) In uttering these words, the soul of our first Parent was enlightened by the Holy Spirit and, as we are told by the most profound interpreters of the Sacred Scriptures (such as Tertullian, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, &c.), he foretold the Alliance of the Son of God with his Church, which issued from his Side when opened by the spear on the Cross; for the love of which Spouse, he left the right hand of his Father, and the heavenly Jerusalem, his mother, that he might dwell with us, in this our earthly abode.
The second father of the human race, Noe—after he had seen the Rainbow in the heavens, announcing that now God’s anger was appeased—prophesied to his three Sons their own respective future and, in theirs, that of the world. Cham had drawn upon himself his father’s curse; Sem seemed to be the favored son—for from his race, there should come the Savior of the world; but the Patriarch immediately adds: “May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem.” (Genesis 9:27) In the course of time, the ancient alliance that had been made between God and the people of Israel was broken; the Semitic race fluctuated in its religion, and finally fell into infidelity; and at length, God adopts the family of Japheth, that is, the Gentiles of the west, as his own people; for ages, they had been without God, and now the very Seat of religion is established in their midst, and they are put at the head of the whole human race.
Later on, it is the great God himself that speaks to Abraham, promising him that he shall be the father of a countless family. “I will bless thee,” says the Lord, “and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven.” (Genesis 22:17) As the Apostle tells us, more numerous was to be the family of Abraham according to the faith than that which should be born to him of Sara. All they that have received the faith of a Mediator to come, and all they that, being warned by the Star, have come to Jesus as their God—all are the children of Abraham.
The Mystery is again expressed in Rebecca, the wife of Isaac. She feels that there are two children struggling within her womb; and this is the answer she receives from God when she consulted him: “Two nations are in thy womb, (Genesis 25:22) and two peoples shall be divided out of thy womb; and one people shall overcome the other, and the elder shall serve the younger.”
(Genesis 25:23) Now, who is this “younger” child that overcomes the elder but the Gentiles, who struggle with Juda for the light and who, though but the child of the promise, supplants him who was son according to the flesh? Such is the teaching of St. Leo and St. Augustine.
Next, it is Jacob who, when dying, calls his twelve sons, the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel, around his bed, and prophetically assigns to each of them the career they were to run. Juda is put before the rest; he is to be the King of his brethren, and from his royal race shall come the Messias. But the prophecy concludes with the prediction of Israel’s humiliation, which humiliation is to be the glory of the rest of the human race. “The scepter shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a Ruler from his thigh, till He come that is to be sent, and he shall be the Expectation of the Nations.” (Genesis 49:10)
When Israel had gone out of Egypt and was in possession of the Promised Land, Balaam cried out, setting his face towards the desert, where Israel was encamped: “I shall see him, but not now; I shall behold him, but not near. A Star shall rise out of Jacob, and a scepter shall spring up from Israel … Who shall live when God shall do these things? They shall come in galleys from Italy; they shall overcome the Assyrians, and shall waste the Hebrews, and at the last, they themselves also shall perish.” (Numbers 24:17, 23-24) And what kingdom shall succeed this? The kingdom of Christ, who is the Star, and the King that shall rule forever.
David has this great day continually before his mind. He is forever celebrating in his Psalms the Kingship of his Son according to the flesh: he shows him to us bearing the Scepter, girt with the Sword, anointed by God his Father, and extending his kingdom from sea to sea: he tells us how the Kings of Tharsis and the Islands, the Kings of the Arabians and of Saba, and the Princes of Ethiopia shall prostrate at his feet and adore him: he mentions their gifts of gold.
(Psalm 71)
In his mysterious Canticle of Canticles, Solomon describes the joy of the spiritual union between the divine Spouse and his Church, and that Church is not the Synagogue. Christ invites her, in words of tenderest love, to come and be crowned; and she, to whom he addresses these words, is dwelling beyond the confines of the land where lives the people of God. “Come from Libanus, my Spouse, come from Libanus, come! Thou shalt be crowned from the top of Amana, from the top of Sanir and Hermon, from the dens of the lions, from the mountains of the leopards.” (Song of Solomon 4:8) This daughter of Pharaoh confesses her unworthiness: I am black, she says; but she immediately adds that she has been made beautiful by the grace of her Spouse.
(Song of Solomon 1:4)
The Prophet Osee follows with his inspired prediction: “And it shall be in that day, saith the Lord, that she shall call me, My Husband, and she shall call me no more Baali. And I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth and she shall no more remember their name … And I will espouse thee to me forever … And I will sow her unto me in the earth, and I will have mercy on her that was without mercy. And I will say to that which was not my people: Thou art my people; and they shall say: Thou art my God. (Hosea 2:16-17)
The elder Tobias, while captive in Babylon, prophesies the same alliance. The Jerusalem which was to receive the Jews after their deliverance by Cyrus, is not the City of which he speaks in such glowing terms; it is a new and richer and lovelier Jerusalem. “Jerusalem! City of God! bless the God eternal, that he may rebuild his tabernacle in thee, and may call back all the captives to thee. Thou shalt shine with a glorious light. Nations from afar shall come to thee, and shall bring gifts, and shall esteem thy land as holy. For they shall call upon the great Name in thee … All that fear God shall return thither. And the Gentiles shall leave their idols, and shall come into Jerusalem, and shall dwell in it. And all the kings of the earth shall rejoice in it, adoring the King of Israel.” (Tobias 13, 14)
It is true, the Gentiles shall be severely chastised by God, on account of their crimes; but that justice is for no other end than to prepare those very Gentiles for an eternal alliance with the great Jehovah. He thus speaks, by his Prophet Sophonias: “My judgment is to assemble the Gentiles, and to gather the kingdoms: and to pour upon them my indignation, all my fierce anger: for with the fire of my jealousy shall all the earth be devoured. Because then I will restore to the people a chosen lip, that all may call upon the name of the Lord, and may serve him with one shoulder. From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia shall my suppliants, the children of my dispersed people, bring me an offering.” (Zephaniah 3:8-10)
He promises the same mercy by his Prophet Ezechiel: “One King shall be over all, and they shall no more be two nations, neither shall they be divided any more into two kingdoms. Nor shall they be defiled any more with their idols: and I will save them out of all the places in which they have sinned. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God. And they shall have One Shepherd. And I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will establish them, and will multiply them, and will set my Sanctuary in the midst of them forever.” (Ezekiel 37:22)
After the Prophet Daniel has described the three great Kingdoms, which were successively to pass away, he says there shall be a Kingdom “which is an everlasting Kingdom, and all kings shall serve him (the King), and shall obey him.” He had previously said: “The power” (that was to be given to the Son of man) “is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away; and his Kingdom shall not be destroyed.” (Daniel 7:27)
Aggeus thus foretells the great events (Haggai 2:7-8) which were to happen before the coming of the One Shepherd, and the establishment of that everlasting Sanctuary, which was to be set up in the very midst of the Gentiles: “Yet one little while, and I will move the heaven, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land. And I will move all Nations, and the Desired of all nations shall come.”
But we should have to cite all the Prophets in order to describe, in all its grandeur, the glorious spectacle promised by God to the world when, being mindful of the Gentiles, he should lead them to the feet of Jesus. The Church has quoted the Prophet Isaias in the Epistle of the Feast, and no Prophet is so explicit and so sublime as this son of Amos.
The expression of the same universal expectation and desire is found also among the Gentiles. The Sibyls kept up the hope in the heart of the people; and in Rome itself, we find the Poet Virgil repeating, in one of his poems, the oracles they had pronounced. “The last age,” says he, “foretold by the Cumean Sibyl, is at hand; a new and glorious era is coming: a new race is being sent down to earth from heaven. At the birth of this Child, the iron age will cease, and one of gold will rise upon the whole world … No remnants of our crimes will be left, and their removal will free the earth from its never-ending fear.” (Virgil, Eclog. IV)
If we are unwilling to accept, as did St. Augustine and so many other holy Fathers, these Sibylline oracles as the expression of the ancient traditions—we have pagan philosophers and historians, such as Cicero, Tacitus, and Suetonius, testifying that, in their times, the world was in expectation of a Deliverer; that this Deliverer would come not only from the East, but from Judea; and that a Kingdom was on the point of being established which would include the entire world.
O Jesus, our Emmanuel! this universal expectation was that of the holy Magi, to whom thou didst send the Star. No sooner do they receive the signal of thy having come than they set out in search of thee, asking—where is He born that is King of the Jews? The oracles of thy Prophets were verified in them; but if they received the first-fruits of the great promise, we possess it in all its fullness. The Alliance is made; and our souls, for love of which thou didst come down from heaven, are thine. The Church is come forth from thy divine side, with the Blood and Water; and all that thou dost for this thy chosen Spouse, thou accomplishest in each of her faithful children. We are the sons of Japheth, and we have supplanted the race of Sem, which refused us the entrance of its tents; the birthright, which belonged to Juda, has been transferred to us. Each age, do our numbers increase, for we are to become numerous as the stars of heaven. We are no longer in the anxious period of expectation; the Star has risen, and the Kingdom it predicted will now forever protect and bless us. The Kings of Tharsis and the Islands, the Kings of Arabia and Saba, the Princes of Ethiopia, are come, bringing their gifts with them; all generations have followed them. The Spouse has received all her honors, and has long since forgotten Amana, and Sanir, and Hermon, where she once dwelt in the midst of wild beasts; she is not black, she is beautiful, with neither spot nor wrinkle upon her, but in every way is worthy of her divine Lord. Baal is forgotten forever, and she lovingly speaks the language given her by her God. The One Shepherd feeds the one flock. The last Kingdom, the Kingdom which is to continue forever, is faithfully fulfilling its glorious destiny.
It is thou, O Divine Infant! that bringest us all these graces and receivest all this devoted homage of thy creatures. The time will soon come, dear Jesus! when thou wilt break the silence thou hast imposed on thyself in order that thou mightest teach us humility—thou wilt speak to us as our Master. Cæsar Augustus has long ruled over Pagan Rome, and she thinks herself the kingdom that is to have no end; but she and her Rulers must yield to the Eternal King and his eternal City: the throne of earthly power must now give place for the Throne of Christian charity, and a new Rome is to spring up, grander than the first. The Gentiles are looking for thee, their King; but the day will come when they will have no need to seek thee, but thou, in thy mercy, wilt go in search of them, by sending them apostles and missioners, who will preach thy Gospel to them. Show thyself to them, as He to whom all power has been given in heaven and on earth; and show them also Her whom thou hast made to be Queen of the universe. May this august Mother of thine be raised up from the poor Stable of Bethlehem, and from the humble dwelling of Nazareth, and be taken on the wings of Angels to that throne of mercy which thou hast made for her, and from which she will bless all peoples and generations with her loving protection.
† † †
We will now borrow some of those Canticles, wherewith the several Churches were formerly wont to celebrate the Epiphany. Prudentius, the Prince of our Latin Liturgical Poets, thus sings the Magi’s journey to Bethlehem.
Hymn
En Persici ex orbis sinu,
Sol unde sumit januam,
Cernunt periti interpretes
Regale vexillum Magi.
Lo! in the heart of Persia’s world, where opens first the gate unto the rising sun, the Magi, most wise interpreters, perceive the standard of the King.
Quod ut refulsit, cæteri
Cessere signorum globi:
Nec pulcher est ausus suam
Conferre formam Lucifer.
It sone, and the other stars of heaven put out their lights: not even would the lovely Day-Star show his face.
Quis iste tantus, inquiunt,
Regnator, astris imperans:
Quem sic tremunt cœlestia,
Cui lux, et æthra inserviunt?
‘Who,’ say they, ‘is this great King, wo commands the stars? at whose presence the heavens tremble, and light and air do his bidding?
Illustre quiddam cernimus,
Qod nesciat finem pati:
Sublime, celsum, interminum,
Antiquius cœlo, et chao.
‘The sign we see tells us of that great Being, who is eternal and infinite—the most high, exalted, boundless One, who existed before heaven and earth were made.
Hic ille Rex est Gentium,
Populique Rex Judaïci,
Promissus Abrahæ Patri,
Ejusque in ævum semini.
‘This is he that is King of the Gentiles, and King of the Jews: he was promised to our Father Abraham, and to his seed for ever.
Æquanda nam stellis sua
Cognovit olim germina
Primus sator credentium,
Nati imolator unici.
‘For Abraham, the first parent of believers, and the sacrificer of his only Son, was told that his race should become numerous as the stars of heaven.
Jam flos subit Davidicus,
Radice Jesse editus:
Sceptrique per virgam virens,
Rerum cacumen occupat.
‘At length the Flower of David is come, springing from Jesse’s root: blooming by his sceptre’s rod, he now rules over the universe.’
Exin sequuntur perciti
Fixis in altum vultibus,
Qua stella sulcum traxerat,
Claramqe signabat viam.
Then quickly do they follow, with their gaze fixed aloft, and the Star sails through the air, pointing the bright path to be pursued.
Sed verticem pueri supra
Signum pependit imminens,
Pronaque submissum face
Caput sacratum prodidit.
But when the Star had reached the point direct above the Child’s head, it hovered there: then stooping down its torch, it showed the sacred face they sought.
Videre quod postquam Magi,
Eoa promunt munera,
Stratique votis offerunt
Thus, myrrham, et aurum regium.
The Magi looked upon the Babe, then opening their eastern treasures, prostrate, and offer him the votive homage of incense, myrrh, and kingly gold.
Agnosce clara insignia
Virtutis, ac regni tui,
Puero, cui trinam Pater
Prædestinavit indolem.
These, dear Babe, are the rich tokens of thy power and kingdom, for they mark the triple character which thy Father would have us recognize.
Regem Deumque annuntiant
Thesaurus et fragrans odor
Thuris Sabæi: ac myrrheus
Pulvis sepulcrum prædocet.
The Gold proclaims him King; the sweet-smelling Saba Incense declares him to be God; and the Myrrh signifies that he is Man, for it is the symbol of his future tomb;
Hoc est sepulcrum, quo Deus,
Dum corpus exstingui sinit,
Atque id sepulcrum suscitat,
Mortis refregit carcerem.
That Tomb, whereby God broke open the prison of Death, after he had permitted his sacred Body to suffer death, and the Tomb had raised it up again to life.
† † †
We find in the Sacramentary of the ancient Gallican Church the following beautiful prayer.
Prayer
Deus qui dives es in omnibus misericordia, Pater gloriæ, qui posuisti Filium tuum lumen in nationibus, prædicare captivis redemptionem, cæcis visum, remissionem peccatorum, et sortem inter sanctos per fidem, qui es in Christo largus miserator indulge. Per eumdem Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
O God, who in all thy works art rich in mercy! Father of glory! who didst set thy Son as a light to the Gentiles, that he might preach redemption to captives, and give sight to the blind; O thou that art through Christ plenteous in thy mercy! grant us the remission of our sins, and fellowship through faith with the Saints. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
† † †
Let us celebrate the mystery of the Birth of Jesus and his alliance with mankind, by this Sequence taken from the ancient Roman-French Missals.
Sequence
Lo! the year has brought us once again the much loved Feasts.
Let our voices unite in the hymns of the Angels.
On this day, Christ, as a Bridegroom, came from his Mother’s womb.
He hath rejoiced to run, as a giant, the way of this our life.
The Angelis host make earth re-echo with their song: Glory in the highest!
Peace on earth to men of good will!
Now begins the most glorious of the eras of time; now too has come that truthful last age of the Cumæan Sibyl’s song.
Let the Virgin come, bringing new times to the world. The day is at hand for the iron age to cease, and the golden one to spring up on the earth.
The bright sun begins to lengthen out our days and months.
Balaam’s Star wakens up the Magi, and puts to flight the night’s dark gloom.
Christ is born:—all the prophecies are fulfilled which were fore-spoken by the two people, the Gentiles and the Jews.
The vestiges of crime, both new and old, are now all wiped away and destroyed.
O wonderful and unheard-of Mother! A Virgin faithfully believes, and the Fruit is in her womb.
The gate, which was ever closed, is opened to the Lord.
When he, the great God, assumed the nature of man.
Grant us, O Jesus! ever to hold fast these wondrous gifts, which thou hast bestowed upon us. Amen.
† † †
The sublime Poet of the Syrian Church, St. Ephrem, thus sings the sweet mysteries of the Birth of Jesus.
Hymn
There came the husbandmen of Bethlehem, and they paid homage to him who was the protector of their life, and thus, in their joy, did they prophesy: ‘Hail! thou the appointed cultivator of our lands! Thou shalt till the soil of our hearts, and thou shalt put into the garnerhouse of life the harvests they yield.’
The vine-dressers came next. They spoke the praises of the Vine grown from the root and branch of Jesse, that bore, from its venerable stock, the virginal Fruit. ‘We beseech thee,’ said they, ‘reform us into vessels worthy of thy new Wine, which maketh all things new. Restore thy vineyard to its former state. Hitherto, it has produced nought but wild grapes. Ingraft thine own scions on our vines.’
Then, because Joseph was a Carpenter, Carpenters approach to this his Son. ‘We greet thy happy birth,’ say they: ‘we hail thee as our Prince, for thou it was didst plan the Ark of Noe. Thou wast Architect of that tabernacle so soon built, and to last but for a time. We beseech thee, be thou our glory, and make for us that yoke of thine, which we intend to carry; for it is a light yoke, and a sweet burden.’
A like instinct brought the newly married to the new-born Babe: they saluted him, and said: ‘Hail, Child! whose Mother is the Spouse of the Holy One! O blessed nuptials those, where thou art to be present! O blessed Spouses they, who shall see the Wine that had failed flow out abundantly at thy bidding!
Little Children, too, cried out: ‘O happy we, to whom it has been given to have thee for our Brother and our Companion! Happy day! and happy children who, on that day, shall be permitted to praise thee, the tree of life, who hast humbled thy immensity to the littleness of our infant age!’
The report of the prophecy that a Virgin would one day bring forth a Child, came to the women’s ears; and each one hoped that this privilege would fall to their lot. ‘Noble women, and beautiful women, hoped that they might be thy mother.We bless thee, O Most High God, that thou choosest for thy Mother one that was poor.’
Young Maidens, too, were presented to Jesus, and they prophesied, saying: ‘I may be uncomely, or I may be beautiful, or I may be poor: but thine will I be,and to thee will I cling. I will prefer espousals with thee to those I could contract with mortal man.’
† † †
Let us, in honour of the Blessed Mother, sing this sweet Hymn used by some Churches in the Middle Ages.
Sequence
Let us sing that word, so good and sweet: Ave—Hail! It was by that salutation that the Virgin was made the sanctuary of Christ—the irgin, who was both his Mother and his Child.
Greeted by that Hail, the Virgin, born of the family of Davd, conceived the Divine Fruit in her womb&mdas;She that was the Lily amidst the thorns.
Hail! thou Mother of the true Solomon, thou Fleece of Gedeon! The Magi, by their three gifts, praise thy delivery.
Hail! thou hast given birth to the Sun! Hail! thou hast given us to see the Sun, and thereby hast restored life and power to this fallen world.
Hail! thou Spouse of the Divine Word! Haven of the sea! Burning Bush! Cloud of sweet aromatic spices! Queen of Angels!
We beseech thee, convert us; and commend us, so converted, to thy Son, that he bestow upon us the eternal joys of heaven. Amen.
|
|
|
|
| Man Testifies In Italian Court That He Rigged Machine To Switch Votes To Biden |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 11:05 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- Replies (1)
|
|
BOMBSHELL: IT Expert And Global Defense Contractor Testifies In Italian Court That He And Others Rigged Machines To Switch Votes To Biden In US Election
En-volve.com | January 6, 2020
An employee of one of the world largest defense contractos, Leonardo SpA, has sounded the alarm and provided a shocking deposition detailing his role in the most elaborate criminal act affecting a US election.
Arturo D’elio outlined the scheme that proved successful in using Leonardo computer systems and military satellites located in Pescara, Italy. Recent reports of a hack at Leonardo now appear to have been an orchestrated cover to mitigate blowback on the corporation which is partially owned by the Italian government.
A press release by Nations In Action revealed details:
Quote:Nations In Action, a government transparency organization, partnered with the Institute of Good Governance to thoroughly investigate and research the election irregularities which yielded the long awaited proof that a flawless plot to take down America was executed with extraordinary resources and global involvement. Americans and elected officials now have proof that the election was indeed stolen.
This provides the mechanism for each state to recall their slate of electors immediately or face lawsuits and request all federal government agencies to lock down all internal communications, equipment and documentation from the Rome Embassy. “Make no mistake, this is a coup d’etat that we will stop in the name of justice and free and fair elections,” stated Maria Strollo Zack, Chairman of Nations in Action.
The Institute for Good Governance issued the following statement:
Quote:Our mission is to provide the full truth, expose the perpetrators of this horrific crime, and ensure that every person involved, regardless of position, be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Nations In Action and the Institute for Good Governance are making the following demands on elected officials:
• Depose State Department officials starting with Rome staff including Stefan Serafini
• Immediately strip Leonardo SpA of all contracts and seize assets
• All congressional members must speak out against this foreign and domestic interference or face recalls and suspicion of involvement
• Implement the most severe penalties for participants who had knowledge or participated and refuse to assist in the investigation
Maria Strollo Zack, founder of Nations In Action added, “States must prosecute all illegal voting activities and provide immediate legislative remedies. There can only be zero tolerance for criminal interference in American elections. This international conspiracy must be met with swift action by the President and be fully supported by elected officials for the protection of voting integrity and the prosperity of our great nation.”
The text of the general affidavit read:
Quote:I, Prof Alfio D’Urso, Advocate/Lawyer, of Via Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, 95131 Italy, do hereby provide the following affidavit of facts as conveyed in several meetings with a high level army security services official:
Arturo D’Elia, former head of the IT Department of Leonardo SpA, has been charged by the public prosecutor of Naples for technology/data manipulation and implantation of viruses in the main computers of Leonardo SpA in December 2020. D’Elia has been deposed by the presiding judge in Naples and in sworn testimony states on 4 November 2020, under instruction and direction of US persons working from the US Embassy in Rome, undertook the operation to switch data from the US elections of 3 November 2020 from significant margin of victory for Donald Trump to Joe Biden in a number of states where Joe Biden was losing the vote totals. Defendant stated he was working in the Pescara facility of Leonardo SpA and utilized military grade cyber warfare encryption capabilities to transmit switched votes via military satellite of Fucino Tower to Frankfurt Germany. The defendant swears that the data in some cases may have been switched to represent more than total voters registered. The defendant has stated he is willing to testify to all individuals and entities involved in the switching of votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden when he shall be in total protection for himself and his family. Defendant states he has secured in an undisclosed location the backup of the original data and data switched upon instruction to provide evidence at court in this matter.
I hereby declare and swear the above stated facts have been stated in my presence.
DATED this 6th day of January 2021 at Rome, Italy.
General Affidavit
|
|
|
|
| Evidence arises that Antifa planned Wednesday’s Capitol storming? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-08-2021, 08:51 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Evidence arises that Antifa planned Wednesday’s Capitol storming
There must be a complete and thorough inquiry into the mob action.
January 7, 2021 (American Thinker) — First, to state the obvious, there is no question that Trump-supporters criminally entered the Capitol and behaved abominably. All who breached the inadequate protective perimeter must be prosecuted to the full measure of the law. Throw the book at them!
But there are grounds for suspicion that provocateurs, anxious to discredit Trump, his supporters, conservatives, and those who question the integrity of the presidential vote may have been the point of the spear in violently attacking the Capitol. Rowan Scarborough reports in the Washington Times:
Trump supporters say that antifa members disguised as one of them infiltrated the protesters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.
A retired military officer told The Washington Times that the firm XRVision used its software to do facial recognition of protesters and matched two Philadelphia antifa members to two men inside the Senate.
The source provided the photo match to The Times.
One has a tattoo that indicates he is a Stalinist sympathizer. antifa promotes anarchy through violence and wants the end of America in favor of a Stalinist-state. "No more USA at all" is a protest chant.
XRVision also has identified another man who, while not known to have antifa links, is someone who shows up at climate and Black Lives Matter protests in the West.
Video available on Twitter (for now) shows a crowd at one door the Capitol and Trump-supporters shouting "That's Antifa!" and trying to stop a black-clad person with a helmet that says "Trump" on its back (suitable for news cameras) from breaking into the building.
Twitter video screen grab (cropped).
OMG! BUSTED! Video shows Trump supporters stopping & pulling away Antifa men from breaking the Capitol windows. Trump supporters are heard yelling out “That’s Antifa!!!”
Dems set us up & GOP just threw us under the bus over a trap. Surreal! Wow! pic.twitter.com/f7ExMZ0DcD
This dramatic photo of a black-clad younger climber does not resemble a middle-aged Trump-supporter. It is someone who prepared and probably trained.
Whoever participated in this incursion is a criminal and ought to be prosecuted. Mobs are a terrible thing and can become intoxicated, egged on into behavior most individuals in the mob would not plan and would regret later. That does not excuse them for responsibility, but it does heighten the payoff if and when an agent provocateur acts in order to enflame opponents into self-destructive acts.
There must be a complete and thorough inquiry into the mob action. I wish that I had more faith in the FBI.
Published with permission from the American Thinker.
|
|
|
|
| Freemasonic Plan to Destroy the Catholic Church |
|
Posted by: Elizabeth - 01-07-2021, 11:32 PM - Forum: Catholic Prophecy
- No Replies
|
 |
Father Emmanuel Barbier, a well-known anti-modernist and anti-masonic author, transcribed a document dated April 3, 1844, in which a high-ranking leader of Italian masonic forces called Nubius explains to another highly-placed mason how the quiet revolution will work. He writes, "Now then, in order to ensure a pope in the required proportions, we must first of all prepare a generation worthy of the kingdom of which we dream...
"Cast aside the old men and men of a mature age; go to the youth, and if possible, even to children...It is to the youth that we must go, it is the youth that we must lead, unperceived by them, under the flag of the secret societies. In order to advance with prudent steps on this dangerous but sure way, two things are absolutely necessary. You must have the simplicity of doves and the prudence of the serpent...Never pronounce before them a word of impiety or impurity: Maxima debetur puero reverentia...Once your reputation has been established in colleges, high schools, universities, and seminaries, once you have gained the confidence of professors and students, make sure that especially those who enter the ranks of the clergy be pleased with your meetings...
"Such reputation will give your doctrine access to the young clergy and to convents. In a few years, this clergy will naturally have invaded all functions: they will govern, administer, judge, from the Sovereign's council, be called to choose the Pontiff who must reign; and this Pontiff, like most of his contemporaries, will be more or less imbued with Italian and humanitarian principles that we will start placing in circulation...Let the clergy move forward under your standard always believing they are advancing under the banner of the apostolic Keys. Cast your net like Simon Bar Jonas; spread it to the bottom of sacristies, seminaries, and convents, rather than casting it to the bottom of the sea; if you do not precipitate anything, we promise you a catch even more miraculous than his...
"You will have fished a revolution dressed in the Pope's triple crown and cape, carrying the cross and the flag, a revolution that will need only a small stimulus to set fire to the four corners of the earth." (Nubius, Secret Instructions on the Conquest of the Church, excerpted from Les infiltrations maconiques dans l'Eglise,Masonic Infiltrations in the Church, Paris/Brussels: Desclee de Brouwer, 1901, p. 5).
http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/201...m.html?m=1
|
|
|
|
| February 11th - Our Lady of Lourdes and St. Severinus |
|
Posted by: Elizabeth - 01-07-2021, 11:10 PM - Forum: February
- No Replies
|
|
Our Lady of Lourdes
(1858)
The first of the eighteen apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the humble Bernadette Soubirous took place at Lourdes on February 11, 1858. On March 25th, when Bernadette asked the beautiful Lady Her name, She replied: I am the Immaculate Conception. The Church for long centuries had believed in Her Immaculate Conception, Her exemption from every trace of the original sin which through Adam, our first and common father, separated man from his God. It was never proclaimed a dogma, however, until 1854. Mary Herself, in 1830, had asked of a Vincentian Sister at the Rue du Bac in Paris, that a medal be struck bearing Her likeness and the inscription: O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.
Our Lady by Her apparitions at Lourdes in 1858 seems to convey Her appreciation for the formal proclamation of Her great privilege, by Pius IX, in 1854. Countless and magnificent miracles of healing have occurred at Lourdes, confirmed by physicians and recorded in the Lourdes shrine Book of Life. To name but one: a doctor wrote a book describing the great miracle he had witnessed for a dying girl, whom he had observed on the train that was carrying handicapped persons from Paris to Lourdes. He had not expected her to survive and return home from the sanctuary.
Through the Lourdes Apparitions, the devotion of persons in all parts of the world to the Immaculate Mother of God has been wonderfully spread, and countless miracles have been wrought everywhere through Her intercession. The Virgin Mother of God is truly the chosen Messenger of God to these latter times, which are entrusted to Her, the chosen vessel of the unique privilege of exemption from original sin. Only with Her assistance will the dangers of the present world situation be averted. As She has done since 1858 in many places, at Lourdes, too, She gave us Her peace plan for the world, through Saint Bernadette: Prayer and Penance, to save souls.
Saint Severinus
Abbot
(† 507)
Saint Severinus, of a noble family in Burgundy, was educated in the Catholic faith at a time when the Arian heresy reigned in that region. He forsook the world in his youth and dedicated himself to God in the monastery of Agaunum, which consisted only of scattered cells until, some time later, the Catholic King Sigismund built there the great Abbey of Saint Maurice.
Saint Severinus became the holy abbot of Saint Maurice, with its distinct convents for men and women, all of whom bore voluntarily the yoke of penance and celibacy without solemn vows. The Abbot had governed his community for many years in the exercise of penance and charity, when, in 504, Clovis, the first Christian king of France, who was lying ill of a fever, sent his chamberlain to conduct the Saint to court. After his physicians had for two years endeavored without success to cure him, Clovis was told that the sick from all parts recovered their health by the prayers of Saint Severinus. The Abbot therefore took leave of his monks, and told them he would never see them again in this world.
On his journey he healed Eulalius, Bishop of Nevers, who had been for some time deaf and dumb; he also healed a leper at the gates of Paris. And coming to the palace he immediately restored the king to perfect health, by covering him with his own cloak. He cured many other sick persons at the court and in Paris. The king, in gratitude, distributed large alms to the poor and released all his prisoners.
Saint Severinus, returning toward Agaunum, stopped at Chateau-Landon in Gatinais, where two priests served God in a solitary chapel. Foreseeing his imminent death, he asked admittance among them, and they received this stranger, whom they soon greatly admired for his sanctity. His death followed shortly after, in 507. This site became the Abbey of Saint Severinus, with a beautiful church dedicated to him. His relics were later scattered, when this church was plundered.
|
|
|
|
| February 10th - St. Scholastica |
|
Posted by: Elizabeth - 01-07-2021, 11:06 PM - Forum: February
- Replies (1)
|
|
Saint Scholastica
Abbess
(480-543)
Of this Saint but little is known on earth, save that she was the very pious younger sister of the great patriarch Saint Benedict, and that, under his direction, she founded and governed a numerous community near Monte Casino. Saint Gregory sums up her life by saying that she devoted herself to God from her childhood, and that her pure soul rose to God in the likeness of a dove, as if to show that her life had been enriched with the fullest gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Her brother was accustomed to visit her once every year, before Lent, and she could not be sated or wearied with the words of grace which flowed from his lips. On his last visit, after a day passed in spiritual conversation, the Saint, knowing that her end was near, said, My brother, leave me not, I pray you, this night, but discourse with me till dawn on the bliss of those who see God in heaven. Saint Benedict would not break his rule for the sake of natural affection, but his sister bowed her head and prayed, and there arose a storm so violent that Saint Benedict could not return to his monastery, and they passed the night as she had prayed, in heavenly conversation.
Three days later Saint Benedict saw in a vision the soul of Saint Scholastica going up in the likeness of a dove into heaven. Then he gave thanks to God for the graces He had given her and the glory which had crowned them. When she died, Saint Benedict as well as her spiritual daughters, and the monks sent by their patriarch to her conventual church, mingled their tears and prayed, Alas! alas! dearest mother, to whom dost thou leave us now? Pray for us to Jesus, to whom thou art gone. They then devoutly celebrated holy Mass, commending her soul to God; and her body was borne to Monte Casino, where her brother lay her in the tomb he had prepared for himself. It was written that they all mourned her many days. Finally Saint Benedict said, Weep not, my sisters and brothers; for assuredly Jesus has taken her, before us, to be our aid and defense against all our enemies, that we may remain standing on the evil day and be perfect in all things. Her death occurred in about the year 543.
|
|
|
|
| Prayer for a Cure - Arthritis Saint |
|
Posted by: Hildegard of Bingen - 01-07-2021, 09:02 PM - Forum: Prayers and Devotionals
- No Replies
|
 |
The Arthritis Saint
FOR A CURE
Glorious Saint Alphonsus, loving Father of the poor and the sick, all thy
life you devoted yourself with a charity really heroic to lightening their
spiritual and bodily miseries. Full of confidence in thy tender pity for
the sick, since thy yourself have patiently borne the cross of illness,
I come to thee for help in my present need . . . . . . (Mention it)
Loving Father of the suffering, Saint Alphonsus, whom I invoke as
the Arthritis Saint, since you have suffered from this disease in your
lifetime, look with compassion upon me in my suffering. Beg God to
give me good health. If it is not God's will to cure me, then give me
strength to bear my cross patiently and to offer my sufferings in union
with any Crucified Savior and His Mother of Sorrows, for the glory of God
and the salvation of souls, in reparation for my sins and those of others,
for the needs of this troubled world, and for the souls in purgatory.
Our Father. Hail Mary. Glory Be.
Saint Alphonsus, patron of the sick, pray for me. [i] Amen.
[/i]
|
|
|
|
| French government increases police surveillance of general population |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-07-2021, 07:21 PM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
French government increases police surveillance of general population
Population surveillance records set up by law enforcement bodies may include information regarding ‘political opinions, philosophical and religious beliefs, or trade union membership.’
PARIS, France, January 7, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Police surveillance of the French population is set to increase as new measures quietly installed by the government last month were approved on Tuesday by the Council of State, the highest administrative court that has the power of assessing the legality of decisions made by the administration.
The new dispositions were published discreetly on December 2 with the signatures of prime minister Jean Castex and interior minister Gérald Darmanin. The next day, an internet news outlet specialized in digital news and new technologies exposed the move, revealing that under the government decrees, population surveillance records set up by law enforcement bodies may include information regarding “political opinions, philosophical and religious beliefs, or trade union membership.”
Surveillance records may now also include “health data that reveal particular danger,” such as mental health problems or psychiatric internment.
The decrees modified existing dispositions by allowing surveillance records to extend to groups and associations: “legal entities” as opposed to individuals who to date were the only people on whom “files” could legally by started.
These government measures are executive decisions over which Parliament has no control and is not consulted. For the French, they came out of the blue at a point in time when the government and the presidential party “La République en marche” were facing demonstrations against a “global security law” presently still under discussion. The draft law aims to allow private agencies to carry out police missions, as well as drone surveillance, and would prohibit citizens from posting footage showing identifiable law enforcement personnel online.
Contrary to the proposed security law, the government decrees published on December 2 cannot be opposed or discussed by the political representation and civil society. Their only option was to take the texts to the Council of State.
Left-wing entities such as Amnesty International, the communist labor union CGT and other trade unions, as well as left-wing media criticized the decrees for having shifted and enlarged the rights of the police. Activities of the historic “Renseignements généraux” — the French equivalent of the “Special Branch” — which kept voluminous (and sometimes frankly fanciful) data files about political activists and opponents as well as potential terrorists were so decried that the body was dissolved in 2008, to be replaced by a new entity that also absorbed the “DST” or counter-espionage agency.
Surveillance has continued in a different form, not always with success as regards Islamic terrorism, as supposedly dangerous individuals with special “S” files have been able, over the years, to participate in deadly attacks.
The fight against terrorism is certainly one of the aims of the controversial government decrees, but under cover of security, personal beliefs, convictions, health data covered by medical confidentiality and mere “opinions” are now susceptible of being filed by law enforcement bodies, while until now only “activities” posing a threat to public security could be registered.
In other words, only active “radicals” could in principle be identified, registered and monitored. Now, professing certain beliefs (Islamic, but also Christian or Catholic) or political preferences (such as monarchism or anti-LGBT convictions, in theory), allows the French police or “gendarmes” to gather and keep information for future use and ongoing surveillance of individuals and groups.
Such surveillance involves monitoring internet and social media use, including the collecting of posted images and comments under aliases. The use of artificial intelligence to collect such information is implicitly permitted.
The long list of collectible data includes personal photographs (not excluding facial recognition, according to some critics), all manner of identifying information regarding personal documents, home addresses, family status (including information about minor children), sporting activities, behavior and life habits, nationality, social status, addictions … And, of course, “religious practice and habits.”
Interestingly, a person’s gender, “sexual orientation,” race and ethnicity are not included in this seemingly exhaustive list.
Official police files will also be permitted to contain complete information — and individual files — about people having had “direct and non-fortuitous” contact with registered individuals and groups. To date, such information was very limited and would be registered in “dangerous individuals” personal files.
The decree is in fact so widely worded that very large numbers of individuals and groups could be subject to very detailed surveillance without any judiciary control whatsoever, especially in a context where the French Republic has opted for strenuous defense of the culture of death and is at the same time tightening control of education and home-schooling.
Besides several trade unions and syndicates, two Christian groups decided to take the decrees to the Council of State in order to obtain their “suspension” through an emergency procedure. Both “VIA,” formerly known as the Christian Democrat Party (PCD) presided by Jean-Frédéric Poisson, a former presidential candidate in the most recent election that saw Emmanuel Macron ascend to power, and the Fondation de Service politique which stands for Christian and conservative values, underscored the grave derogations to human rights and individual fundamental liberties that the decrees will allow.
The right not to be in any way subject to “interference because of one’s opinions, even religious opinions” was in particular enshrined in France’s “Universal declaration of human rights” in 1789 (although that did not prevent the French Revolution from persecuting Catholics and mass-killing priests and religious).
The Council of State published its decision rejecting all emergency recourses against the decrees on January 4, including those of VIA and the Fondation de Service politique. The interim relief judge observed that while the filing of political opinions, religious beliefs and trade union membership had not been previously submitted to the special digital liberties commission (CNIL), this was not a problem in his view as it is “coherent” existing surveillance of such “activities,” which is “legal.”
But actions are actions: surveilling opinions is based on “presuppositions,” VIA-leader Jean-Frédéric Poisson commented on Wednesday. The decrees would allow the state to collect data about the opinions of citizens who would be considered as “a priori” threatening public security.
Nor did the judge find the wording of the decrees too wide: reserving this surveillance to persons and groups who pose a danger to public security and the safety of the State is safeguard enough, he wrote.
It later emerged that the said interim relief judge, Mathieu Herondart, was the cabinet director of a former justice minister under Emmanuel Macron, Nicole Belloubet, from 2017 to 2020.
Both Jean-Frédéric Poisson and the Fondation de service politique have announced that they will take the affair to the European Court of Human Rights.
|
|
|
|
| MSM Already Using Capitol Hill Riot To Call For More Internet Censorship |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-07-2021, 12:59 PM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- Replies (2)
|
|
MSM Already Using Capitol Hill Riot To Call For More Internet Censorship
Zero Hedge | Jan 07, 2021
The United States received a very small taste of its own medicine today as rioting Trump fanatics temporarily forced their way into the nation’s Capitol building, and now the whole nation is freaking out.
I am being generous when I say that America was given a very small taste of its own medicine; unlike the horrific coups and violent uprisings the US routinely orchestrates in noncompliant nations around the world, this one stood exactly zero chance of seizing control of the government, and only one person was killed.
I am also being generous when I say the rioters “forced their way” in; DC chose not to increase its police presence in preparation for the protests despite knowing that they were planned, and there’s footage of what appears to be cops actively letting them through a police barricade. There was some fighting between police and protesters, but contrasted with the unceasing barrage of police brutality footage which emerged from Black Lives Matter demonstrations a few months prior it’s fair to say the police response today was relatively gentle.
Quote:the police opened the [*****] gates. pic.twitter.com/HyDURXfoaB
Predictably, this entirely American disruption has blue-checkmarked commentariat shrieking about Vladimir Putin on social media.
Quote:Of course. Of course. pic.twitter.com/00Xw0eC7Uw
Future historian: "As right-wing mobs were terrorizing the Capitol, liberal truth-tellers kept their eyes on the real villain." #BlueAnon pic.twitter.com/VNpLASbD1L
Just as predictably, it’s also got them calling for the censorship of social media.
The New York Times has published two new articles titled “The storming of Capitol Hill was organized on social media” and “Violence on Capitol Hill Is a Day of Reckoning for Social Media”, both arguing for more heavy-handed restrictions on speech from Silicon Valley tech giants.
In the former, NYT’s Sheera Frenkel writes “the violence Wednesday was the result of online movements operating in closed social media networks where people believed the claims of voter fraud and of the election being stolen from Mr. Trump,” citing the expert analysis of think tank spinmeister Renee DiResta of “Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset” fame. As usual no mention is made of DiResta’s involvement in the New Knowledge scandal in which a Russian interference “false flag” was staged for an Alabama Senate race.
Quote:“These people are acting because they are convinced an election was stolen,” DiResta said.
“This is a demonstration of the very real-world impact of echo chambers.”
“This has been a striking repudiation of the idea that there is an online and an offline world and that what is said online is in some way kept online,” DiResta adds.
The storming of the capital hill was organized on social media. Time to stop acting like things said online don't translate into real-world action. https://t.co/tpEZZ2KfGZ
This narrative which seeds the idea that unregulated communication on the internet will lead to violent uprisings is funny coming from Frankel, who, as a Twitter follower recently observed, wrote a piece in 2018 condemning the Iranian government for restricting protesters’ social media access during the demonstrations at that time.
“Social media and messaging apps have become crucial to antigovernment demonstrators around the world, as a means of both organizing and delivering messages to other citizens,” Frankel wrote.
“Not surprisingly, restricting access to such technology has become as important to government crackdowns as the physical presence of the police.”
In the other article, co-authored by Frankel, Mike Isaac and Kate Conger, the message is driven home even less subtly.
“As pro-Trump protesters stormed the Capitol building on Wednesday and halted the certification of Electoral College votes, the role of social media companies such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in spreading misinformation and being a megaphone for Mr. Trump came under renewed criticism,” reads the article, adding, “So when violence broke out in Washington on Wednesday, it was, in the minds of longtime critics, the day the chickens came home to roost for the social media companies.”
The article reports on the US president’s temporary suspension of social media privileges for allegedly inciting violence with his posts, then discusses the various kinds of disinformation and violent ideation being circulated in Trump discussion forums.
“Those alternative social media sites were rife with Trump supporters organizing and communicating on Wednesday,” NYT tells us. “On Parler, one trending hashtag was #stormthecapitol. Many Trump supporters on the sites also appeared to believe a false rumor that Antifa, a left-wing movement, was responsible for committing violence at the protests.”
“We know the social media companies have been lackadaisical at best” at stopping extremism from growing on their platforms, Jonathan Greenblatt, director of the Anti-Defamation League, told NYT. “Freedom of expression is not the freedom to incite violence. That is not protected speech.”
Quote:“Those alternative social media sites were rife with Trump supporters organizing and communicating on Wednesday,” NYT tells us. “On Parler, one trending hashtag was #stormthecapitol. Many Trump supporters on the sites also appeared to believe a false rumor that Antifa, a left-wing movement, was responsible for committing violence at the protests.”
“We know the social media companies have been lackadaisical at best” at stopping extremism from growing on their platforms, Jonathan Greenblatt, director of the Anti-Defamation League, told NYT. “Freedom of expression is not the freedom to incite violence. That is not protected speech.”
Violence on Capitol Hill Is a Day of Reckoning for Social Media https://t.co/UqDuAWShfg
We will likely see many more such articles in the coming days, arguing for increased regulation of internet communication to prevent future incidents like today.
In and of itself this won’t sound terribly concerning to the average citizen. Nothing wrong with taking steps to prevent people from plotting violence and terrorism on social media, right?
But how do you predict what protests are going to be “violent”? How do you decide which protests and what political dissent need to be censored and which ones should be permitted to communicate freely? Do you just leave it up to Silicon Valley oligarchs to make the call? Or do you have them consult with the government like they’ve been doing? Are either of these institutions you’d trust to regulate what protests are worthy of being permitted to organize online?
But how do you predict what protests are going to be “violent”? How do you decide which protests and what political dissent need to be censored and which ones should be permitted to communicate freely? Do you just leave it up to Silicon Valley oligarchs to make the call? Or do you have them consult with the government like they’ve been doing? Are either of these institutions you’d trust to regulate what protests are worthy of being permitted to organize online?
Because the actual power structures in the United States seem to be interested in simply censoring the internet to eliminate political dissent altogether.
In 2017 top officials from Facebook, Twitter and Google were brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee and admonished to come up with policies that will “prevent the fomenting of discord” in the United States.
Quote:Friendly reminder that last year representatives of Google/Youtube, Facebook and Twitter were instructed on the floor of the US Senate that it is their responsibility to "quell information rebellions" so as to "prevent the fomenting of discord.”https://t.co/X4Hc56fH0k
World Socialist Website reported the following in 2017.
Quote:Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii demanded, for her part, that the companies adopt a “mission statement” expressing their commitment “to prevent the fomenting of discord.”
The most substantial portion of the testimony took place in the second part of the hearing, during which most of the Senators had left and two representatives of the US intelligence agencies testified before a room of mostly empty chairs.
Clint Watts, a former U.S. Army officer, former FBI agent, and member of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, made the following apocalyptic proclamation: “Civil wars don’t start with gunshots, they start with words. America’s war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America.”
He added, “Stopping the false information artillery barrage landing on social media users comes only when those outlets distributing bogus stories are silenced — silence the guns and the barrage will end.”
That sounds an awful like government officials and operatives telling social media corporations that it’s their job to censor communication which could facilitate any kind of unrest, no matter how justified.
Do you trust these monopolistic megacorporations to decide whether or not people’s dissident speech is acceptable? I don’t.
As Julian Assange is condemned to remain falsely imprisoned and the mass media ramp up their case for more imperial narrative control, we are now in a battle for the sovereignty of our very minds.
|
|
|
|
| The Mystical City of God by Venerable Mary of Agreda |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-07-2021, 09:48 AM - Forum: Resources Online
- Replies (58)
|
|
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD
THE DIVINE HISTORY AND LIFE OF THE VIRGIN MOTHER OF GOD
[ POPULAR ABRIDGEMENT]
by Venerable Mary of Agreda
Translated from the Spanish by Reverend George J. Blatter
1914, So. Chicago, Ill., The Theopolitan; Hammond, Ind., W.B. Conkey Co., US..
IMPRIMATUR:
+H.J. Alerding
Bishop of Fort Wayne
Mystical City of God, the miracle of His omnipotence and the abyss of His grace the divine history and life of the Virgin Mother of God our Queen and our Lady, most holy Mary expiatrix of the fault of eve and mediatrix of grace. Manifested to Sister Mary of Jesus, Prioress of the convent of the Immaculate Conception in Agreda, Spain. For new enlightenment of the world, for rejoicing of the Catholic Church, and encouragement of men. Completed in 1665.
Translation from the Original Authorized Spanish Edition by Fiscar Marison (George J. Blatter). Begun on the Feast of the Assumption 1902, completed 1912.
This work is published for the greater Glory of Jesus Christ through His most Holy Mother Mary and for the sanctification of the militant Church and her members.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD, THE DIVINE HISTORY AND LIFE OF THE VIRGIN MOTHER OF GOD
INTRODUCTION [see below]
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 1
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 2
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 3
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 4
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 5
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 6
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 7
THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD - BOOK 8
* * *
INTRODUCTION
SPECIAL NOTICE TO THE READER
NOTHING that essentially differs from the teachings of the Catholic Church can rightfully be taught or believed by any man or under any pretext. Moreover, even the essential doctrines can be taught and expounded only in the sense and spirit approved, or at least not disapproved, by the Church. This at once will establish the position which private revelations, whether coming from Heaven or originating from hallucination, merely human or devilish, hold in the Church of God.
There can be no doubt that God can and does manifest to chosen souls hidden things in addition to what He teaches through the public ministry of His Church. It is also an accepted truth that He sometimes reveals them to his friends for the express purpose of communicating this extra knowledge to other well disposed persons through the natural and human means at the disposal of those receiving his revelations. These manifestations He invariably surrounds with enough evidence to satisfy all requirements of a cautious and well founded human belief. It follows naturally that whenever He thus surrounds private revelations with evidences of their heavenly origin, He will be pleased with a rational and loving belief and dissatisfied with a captious and obstinate unbelief of the facts or truths thus privately revealed. Where, however, these external evidences are wanting, or wherever holy Church intimates the least direct or indirect disapproval, there any faith in private revelation would be not only foolish, but positively wrong.
FULL APPROVAL
The Church has as yet given no public and full approval to private revelations of any kind; nor will she ever do so, since that would be really an addition to the deposit of faith left by Christ. But tacitly and indirectly she has approved many private revelations, and among them the writings of Mary of Agreda. She could well do so, since there are no writings of that kind which exhibit more reliable human proofs of divine origin than the “Ciudad de Dios” of the Venerable Servant of God, Mary of Jesus of Agreda.
The existence of the Bible justifies the query, whether there are not other books that have been written under supernatural guidance, though we know of course that none of them can ever have the same importance and authenticity as the Bible. For the Bible was provided as the record of the general revelations of God to mankind at all its stages to the end of times.
A VAST FIELD BETWEEN
Evidently there remains an immense domain of truths outside the range of natural human knowledge and not specially revealed in the Bible. You will at once say: that whole field is covered by the one true religion. Of course it is. The teaching and ministry of men especially appointed for that purpose, the practice and example of those eminent in the Christian virtues, the writings of those versed in higher truths, are the ordinary means of spreading truth and leading men to their great destiny. But besides all this, history proves that God, for special purposes, often grants to his friends higher insight into supernatural truths and facts, which, if at his command they are recorded in writing, are intended by Him as an additional source of higher knowledge and well deserve to be considered as private revelations.
EARMARKS OF DECEIT
Past ages simply teem with writings that claim to be derived from or based on divine revelation or inspiration. Many of them are clearly nothing but frauds, showing the signs of conscious or unconscious hallucination. Many again seem beyond mere natural human powers of insight, but at the same time in their authorship and tendencies show nothing divine or beneficent, thus proving that besides human error and malice the sinister and treacherous knowledge of malign spirits often finds its way into such writings. Ancient sorcery and magic and modern spiritism have their root in this sort of preter natural communication.
TO BE CLOSELY SCRUTINIZED
Hence it would be foolish not to demand the closest inquiry into anything put forward as private revelation. Fortunately it is easy to apply sure and unfailing tests. All that is necessary, is to ascertain the character and motives of the writer and the result or drift of his writings. Mahomet proves himself an epileptic adventurer and his Koran a travesty of Judaism and Christianity, settling like a blight upon civilization. Joseph Smith and his companions turn out to be rebellious incendiaries and murderers and their book of Mormon a ridiculous fake, establishing a fanatic and bigamous theocracy.
The fakir Dowie pretending prophecy, ends as a lunatic in a bankrupt Zion, yet leaving millions to his relatives. The humbugging Eddy, after crazy-quilting scraps from the Bible with shreds of Buddhism, Brahmanism and Theosophy, shuffles off her wrinkled coil amid a numerous following of dupes who rather expected her faked science to keep her perpetually alive or raise her up from the dead.
Is there any difficulty in discovering the fraud in revelations of such a kind? Yet they claim divine inspiration and very often contain passages which show sources of information and deceit not altogether human. The sinister manifestation of spiritism and the astounding information often furnished by mediums, are not all sleight of hand or illusion of the senses; some of these things can be explained only by assuming interference of a sinister spirit world.
REALLY ANOTHER ARGUMENT FOR PRIVATE REVELATIONS
Would it not be absurd to concede the communication with evil spirits or departed souls, damned or otherwise, (and all reasonable people concede it), and deny the possibility of communing with the good spirits or souls and with God? Who would want to limit the power of God in this way? It will not do to claim that all the communication of God and the good spirits takes the ordinary course provided in the public ministry of the true religion. For it does not. Saint Paul saw things that he dared not reveal, though he was not slow in writing down his other revelations. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and the Infallibility was privately revealed many times before they were officially defined and accepted as self-understood truths by all reasonable men. Before these doctrines were defined, who had the greater prudence and insight? Those people who refused to believe these truths because they were privately revealed, or those who examined those revelations and finding them humanly credible, and not contrary to the true religion, simply accepted them as revealed by God? I should think the latter showed themselves ahead of their times and far more enlightened in their belief than the former, who persisted in a finical unbelief concerning all private revelations.
NO DIFFICULTY TO DISTINGUISH THE TRUE FROM THE FALSE
If we find that the author of alleged private revelations has been a faithful adherent of the one true religion established by God, that he has led a good and blameless life, that his writings do not run counter to the Bible nor to the public teachings of the true Church, that he was not actuated by motives of selfish gain, pecuniary or otherwise, that the writings themselves tend toward the practice of perfection both as far as the writer as well as the reader is concerned, that they have not been openly disapproved by the Church; then certainly, if the information recorded is such that it would presuppose supernatural inspiration or direct communication with the higher world, we are not justified in immediately rejecting the writings as fraudulent. Closer examination may easily lead to reasonable certainty that they are privately revealed. But we all know that this acceptance can never mean anything more than a mere human belief, not the belief of faith, such as for instance is demanded by holy Scripture. In fact, as soon as any such writing lays claim to implicit faith, it certainly is no revelation and ought to be rejected at once as spurious.
MARY OF AGREDA
She was the daughter of Francis Coronel and Catherine of Arana, born April 2, 1602, in the small town of Agreda near Tarazona in Spain. In 1617 she entered the convent of the discalced Franciscan Nuns in the Convent of the Immaculate Conception in Agreda and took her vows one year later. In 1625 she was chosen abbess, much against her wishes, and, except during a short intermission, was re-elected every three years until she died, in 1665. The fame of her prudence and foresight, not only in the government of her convent but in other matters, soon spread outside the convent walls and persons of the highest rank in state and Church were eager to obtain her counsel in important affairs. King Philip IV visited her several times in her convent and corresponded with her about national affairs for many years. But she was no less famous for her exalted virtues. In many respects her life was a faithful copy of that of St. Francis. The miracle of bilocation related of her is in fact more remarkable and lasted a longer time than that recorded anywhere in the lives of the saints. Her good sense, her truthfulness, her sincerity, her humility, her unselfish love of God and man eminently adapted her for the communication of messages from God to men.
WHAT INDUCED HER TO WRITE
In all writing that lays claim to private revelation, the motives of the writer must be closely scrutinized. If it appears to be a self-imposed task, for selfish ends, pecuniary or otherwise, tending to particularity in religious teachings or practice not approved by the established faith or written without knowledge or consultation of the rightful superiors, it ought to be rejected as spurious. God will reveal nothing for such purpose or under such circumstances, and He will permit human error and deceit and the sinister influence of hell to run their natural course. Nothing of all this appears in the writings of Mary of Agreda. Though she was urged interiorly and exteriorly to record the facts of history revealed to her concerning the Mother of God, she resisted for twelve years and was finally induced to write only through the positive commands of her superiors. Reluctantly she began her history in the year 1637 and finished it in the year 1645, continually asking to be relieved from the task because she thought herself unworthy. As soon as the insistence of her superiors relaxed and an error of judgment on the part of an outside confessor gave her a plausible excuse, she burned all her writings, thus destroying the labor of many years. When this came to the knowledge of the higher authorities and when they insisted on her rewriting the history which continued to be supernaturally made known to her, she again succeeded in delaying the task for ten years. Only the strictest command under obedience and the threat of censures finally induced her to write the manuscript which she began in 1655 and finished in 1665, and which is still preserved in the convent of Agreda.
WHY REVEALED TO A WOMAN
It is to be remembered that God’s almighty power is restricted to no particular instrument; He creates out of nothing. In the case of Balaam, he used not only that wicked man but even his beast for special revelation. It does seem that He prefers women for private revelation. He chose men to reveal the great public truths of the Bible and to attend to the public teaching, but to women in the new law He seems to have consigned the task of private revelations. At least most of the known private revelations have been furnished us by women and not men. We must infer from this that they are better adapted for this work. In fact, no special learning or great natural insight is required of a messenger; such qualities might tend to corrupt or narrow down the inspired message to mere human proportions, whereas private revelation is given precisely for the purpose of communicating higher truths than can be known or under stood naturally. Humility, great piety and love, deep faith are the requisites of God’s special messengers. Women as a rule are more inclined to these virtues than men, and therefore are not so apt to trim the message of God down to their own natural powers of understanding. In choosing women for his special revelations He gives us to understand from the outset, that what He wishes to reveal is above the natural faculties of perception and insight of either man or woman.
HOW WAS “CIUDAD” (CITY OF GOD) RECEIVED?
As soon as the “City of God” appeared in print it was welcomed and extolled as a most wonderful work. The different translations found no less enthusiastic welcome in nearly all the European countries. It secured the immediate approbation and encomium of the ordinaries, the universities, the learned and eminent men of Christendom. There is probably no other book which was so closely scrutinized by those in authority, both civil and religious and afterwards so signally approved as the “City of God.” By order of Innocent XL, Alexander VIIL, Clement IX., Benedict XIIL, and Benedict XIV. it was repeatedly subjected to the closest scrutiny and declared authentic, worthy of devout perusal and free from error. The title “Venerabilis” was conferred upon the author. A large sized volume would be required to record the praises and commendations written in favor of the great “City of God.”
OPPOSITION
As the “City of God” so strenuously maintains the prerogatives of the Mother of God and the authority of the Popes, it was not to be expected that it should escape the malicious slander and intrigues of those tainted with Jansenism and Gallicanism. Many members of the Sorbonne in Paris were secret or open adherers of these sects at the time when the “Ciudad” was first published in French about the year 1678. The first translation in French was very inexact and contained many interpolations and false versions of the original. Dr. Louis Elias du Pin and Dr. Hideux of the Sorbonne made this translation the foundation of virulent attacks. Du Pin was called by Pope Clement XI. “Nequioris doctrinse homi-nem,” “A man of pernicious doctrines.” Hideux turned out to be a rabid and fanatical Jansenist, cut off from the Church as a heretic. As they and other members of the Sorbonne succeeded in enlisting the sympathy of influential Gallican courtiers and church dignitaries, both in Paris and at Rome, they secured a clandestine prohibition of the “City of God,” which appeared in the acts of the Congregation of the Office. When it was discovered, no one could be found who would dare stand 1–2 sponsor for it, and immediately Pope Innocent XL, on November 9, 1681, annulled the act, positively decreeing that the “City of God” be freely spread among the clergy and laity. The very fact that this prohibition did not issue from the Index Commission but from a department not concerned with the examination of books, proves that it owes its insertion to Gallican intrigue, secretly extending even to high circles in Rome, and to the fair- minded, this sectarian attempt will be a convincing argument for the excellence and orthodoxy of the doctrines contained in the revelations of Mary of Agreda.
MANY EDITIONS
The popularity and excellence of the great history of the Mother of God is also evidenced by its widespread diffusion. It has appeared in over sixty editions in Spanish, Italian, French, Portuguese, German, Latin, Arabic, Greek, and Polish. Does it not seem providential that the first English translation of this great work should have been reserved for our own times? No other language on the face of the earth is the medium of so many theories, sects and isms as the English language and the “City of God” is a most timely and efficient antidote for the epidemic of false doctrines, which is sweeping over all the earth, and affects especially the English-speaking portion of the human race.
EXPECTATIONS OF THE TRANSLATOR
The translator and promoter of the “City of God” is confident that it will not be one of the books idly filling the shelves of libraries, but one which at the first cursory inspection will arouse the desire of further inquiry and lead to repeated and attentive perusal.
The translation herewith offered is as exact and as perfect a rendition of the original Spanish into English, as ten years of assiduous labor and a considerable experience in literary production give a right to expect. The subject-matter surely ought to secure for it a proper place in the more elevated ranks of English Literature.
May this first English translation, under the guidance of our holy faith, bring forth abundant fruits of the Spirit among English-speaking people in all parts of the world.
APPROBATIONS
THE first Pope officially to take notice of “Ciudad de Dios” was Pope Innocent XI, who, on July 3, 1686, in response to a series of virulent attacks and machinations of some members of the Sorbonne, known to be Jansenists, issued a breve permitting the publication and reading of the “Ciudad de Dios.” Similar decrees were afterward issued by Popes Alexander VIII, Clement IX and Benedict XIII. These decrees were followed by two decrees of the Congregation of Rites, approved by Benedict XIV and Clement XIV, in which the authenticity of “Ciudad de Dios” as extant and written by the Venerable Servant of God, Mary of Jesus, is officially established. The great pope Benedict XIII, when he was archbishop of Benevent, used these revelations as material for a series of sermons on the Blessed Virgin. On Sept. 26, 1713, the bishop of Ceneda, Italy, objecting to the publication of the “City of God,” was peremptorily ordered by the Holy Office to withdraw his objections as interfering with the decree of pope Innocent XI for the universal Church.
The process of canonization of Mary of Agreda was promoted by the Spanish bishops and other eminent men of the Church soon after her death in 1666. It has resulted so far in securing her the title of Venerabuis, thus clearing the way to her beatification, for which, let us hope, God will soon raise a promoter among the many pious and eminent men who hold in esteem her writings and have learned of her holy life and of the miracles wrought at her tomb.
Feast of the Annunciation
Fiscar Marison
(Rev. George J. Blatter)
To download a PDF of this book, click HERE.
|
|
|
|
| UK Lockdown Cops To Stop People In The Street, Issue Fines, Target "Anti-Lockdown, Anti-Vaccine Prot |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-07-2021, 09:25 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
UK Lockdown Cops To Stop People In The Street, Issue Fines, Target "Anti-Lockdown, Anti-Vaccine Protesters"
Zero Hedge | Jan 07, 2021
Senior Scotland Yard officials have announced the adoption of a new ‘hardline’ lockdown policy to stop and question people if they are out in the street, and to issue on the spot fines if they cannot provide a reasonable excuse for being out of their houses.
The London Telegraph reports that London’s MET police issued a statement noting that “With fewer ‘reasonable excuses’ for people to be away from their home in the regulations, Londoners can expect officers to be more inquisitive as to why they see them out and about.”
“Where officers identify people without a lawful reason to be away from home they can expect officers to move more quickly to enforcement,” the statement further noted.
Quote:The Met has outlined a stricter #Covid #coronavirus enforcement approach following the introduction of new national lockdown restrictions. https://t.co/ciKspZ691d
New lockdown laws, announced Monday by Prime Minister Boris Johnson by way of a TV briefing, are yet to be debated or voted on by parliament.
Police have the power now to issue on the spot fines of £200, which can be doubled every time a lockdown ‘breach’ is committed.
Fines of up to £10,000 can also be handed out to anyone holding gatherings or house parties.
A woman who organised a New Year's Eve party in #Kensington has been reported for a £10,000 fine for breaching #Covid regulations.
Quote:It is up to all of us to do the right thing and officers will continue to take action against those who break the rules. https://t.co/WwHddd796X
Scotland Yard says that the fines will be more readily handed out, even to those who are simply not wearing a mask.
“After ten months of this pandemic, the number of people who are genuinely not aware of the restrictions and the reasons they are in place is vanishingly small,” commented MET Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist, adding that the responsibility of police is to “preserve life”.
“We know the overwhelming majority of Londoners will do the right thing by staying at home, wearing masks and not gathering, but a small minority continue to ignore rules put in place to protect the NHS and save lives,” Twist added.
“We can no longer spend our time explaining or encouraging people to follow rules they are wilfully and dangerously breaching,” he continued, emphasising that police will no longer be lenient with those daring to leave their houses.
“Less than a month ago we launched a new digital fines system, which makes it quicker and easier for officers to issue fines on the spot,” Twist warned, adding “if people continue to break the rules, putting themselves, their families and their communities at greater risk, our officers are ready to act robustly.”
John Apter, the chairman of the Police Federation stated that policing of the third lockdown will be amped up, noting “It will be easier for police to have one consistent rule for people to follow across the whole country, which means it is easier for people to understand and comply with what is expected of them.”
Apter specifically singled out ‘anti-lockdown, anti-vaccine protesters’, saying that “we now have a hardcore element who are against the rules.”
“The majority of the public will do what is expected of them, but I think there is a real issue over the virus and lockdown fatigue. There is a real frustration and the police often deal with the sharp end of that as people are angry when challenged,” Apter added.
Evidence of the ramped up lockdown policing has already been witnessed with dozens police officers marching through Hyde Park in military fashion before stopping to demand IDs from people:
Quote:Platoon of Police patrolling Hyde Park demanding ID@JuliaHB1 @talkRADIO pic.twitter.com/MuyGNlm9RT
In an incident at Marble Arch, cops questioned an old woman for feeding pigeons:
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: zmagi.jpg4_.jpg?resize=768%2C581&ssl=1]](https://i0.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/zmagi.jpg4_.jpg?resize=768%2C581&ssl=1)
![[Image: Noah-sacrifice.jpg?resize=768%2C618&ssl=1]](https://i1.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Noah-sacrifice.jpg?resize=768%2C618&ssl=1)
![[Image: Esau_and_Jacob_Presented_to_Isaac.jpg?w=340&ssl=1]](https://i2.wp.com/sensusfidelium.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Esau_and_Jacob_Presented_to_Isaac.jpg?w=340&ssl=1)
![[Image: Image-1-768x1024.jpg]](https://en-volve.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Image-1-768x1024.jpg)
![[Image: Screen-Shot-2014-10-30-at-10.40.41-PM.png]](https://i2.wp.com/www.globalfieldtrip.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Screen-Shot-2014-10-30-at-10.40.41-PM.png)
![[Image: Untitled.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7vn0DWhf4tA/XFiPxzDvPXI/AAAAAAAAIqY/_OHrQBf2KFso2U3ulGrmnhnZ6Ie4TmYZgCLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.jpg)
![[Image: StBenedict_speaking_to_StScholastica.jpg]](https://catholichotdish.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/StBenedict_speaking_to_StScholastica.jpg)
![[Image: 37625075_455964678204242_669969914406528....jpg?w=775]](https://ecclesiacontramundum.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/37625075_455964678204242_6699699144065286144_n.jpg?w=775)
