About Thomas Droleskey

Dr. Thomas A. Droleskey is a Catholic writer and speaker . He is the publisher-editor of Christ or Chaos.com, a site that has featured over 900 articles since the beginning of 2006, many dealing with his embrace of sedevacantism. Hundreds of his articles appeared in The Wanderer, the oldest weekly national Catholic newspaper, between 1992 and 2000. He was a contributor to The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture between 2001 and 2003. Droleskey's articles have appeared in the American Life League's Celebrate Life magazine. He also contributed articles to The Remnant and for Catholic Family News. His articles also appeared for two years in The Four Marks. Dr. Droleskey was an adjunct professor of political science at the C. W. Post Campus of Long Island University between January of 1991 and July of 2003, reprising his association there for a winter intersession course, which was taught between December 28, 2006, and January 11, 2007. He had taught political science around the nation since January of 1974, receiving numerous awards for excellence in teaching. Many of his students have converted to the Catholic Faith. Formerly a pro-life activist, Droleskey was the candidate for Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York on the Right to Life Party line in 1986. He was the party's candidate for Supervisor of the Town of Oyster Bay in 1997, and he challenged then Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato for the party's senatorial nomination in 1998, receiving over 37% of the primary vote. Droleskey has campaigned for pro-life candidates around the country. He is now retired from all involvement in partisan politics, concentrating instead on the promotion of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen. Dr. Droleskey has lectured extensively around the nation for the past twenty years, driving nearly 1,000,000 miles in the last twenty-five years of his lecturing around the nation. His thirty-six hour lecture program, Living in the Shadow of the Cross, has been given in twenty different venues across the United States. Another lecture program, "To be Catholic from the Womb to the Tomb," was given in eleven different places across the nation. His work is dedicated to the restoration of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition and of the Social Reign of Christ the King. Droleskey is devoted to the establishment of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ and the Queenship of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. His first book, Christ in the Voting Booth, was published by Hope of Saint Monica, Inc., 1998. His second book, There Is No Cure for this Condition, was published by Chartres Communications in 2001. G.I.R.M. Warfare (The Traditional Latin Mass versus the General Instruction to the Roman Missal) was published in 2004; Restoring Christ as the King of All Nations, Droleskey's compendium of fifty-three articles about the immutable doctrine of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ, was published in June of 2005. Three e-books, There Is No Shortcut to Cure This Condition, Conversion in Reverse: How the Ethos of Americanism Converted Catholics and Contributed to the Rise of Conciliarism and Meeting the Mets: A Quirky History of a Quirky Team, have been published in the past four years. The latter book, for which this particular Word Press site was created initially in 2012, is also available in a paperback format. Droleskey served for some years on the Board of Advisers of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists. He has served on the boards of the National Association of Private and Independent Catholic Schools and on the board of 100% Pro-Life Pac. He is listed in the 2001-2002 edition of the Marquis Who's Who in America. Droleskey, who was born on November 24, 1951, is married to the former Sharon Collins. Their first child, Lucy Mary Norma, was born in Sioux City, Iowa, on March 27, 2002. A native of Long Island, Droleskey and his family now live in the United States of America.

July 2, 2014, Republished Reflection

July 2, 2014, Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary within the Octave of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Commemoration of Saints Processus and Martinian:

Magnificat. Today is the magnificent feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary to her cousin, Saint Elizabeth, and her preborn Divine Son’s preborn Precursor, Saint John the Baptist.

This date, July 2, marks the end of the period of Our Lady’s Visitation, which began on April 2, lasting until the day after the octave day of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist. Our Lady’s perfect Charity for her cousin and her Divine Son’s Precursor should prompt us to perform the Spiritual and Corporal Works of Mercy at all times, making sure as well to proclaim the Holy Name of Mary, she whom all generations are duty bound to call blessed, as the Mother of God who made possible our salvation by her perfect fiat to the will of God the Father at the Annunciation and who is the Queen of Heaven and on earth, the very Immaculate Conception who prays for us now and at the hour of our deaths.

The promised commentary on the recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America will be published on Friday, July 4, 2014. Other writing projects are taking priority right now. Thank you for your patience.

A blessed Feast of the Visitation to you all.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saints Processus and Martinian, pray for us.

Magnificat

The criminal act of tampering with the calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church by the scions of the counterfeit church of conciliarism is one of the great felonies of all time. The harmony and rhythm of the inherent order found in the calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church is laden with deep theological meaning and full of material for spiritual reflection and meditation. Such is the case with the feast that is celebrated today in the calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary to her cousin, Saint Elizabeth, in the hill country of Judah.

The calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church places feasts at times of the year for very specific reasons. Today’s feast, the Visitation, a mystery we meditate upon every day if we pray all fifteen decades of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary daily, is celebrated eight days after the birth of Saint John the Baptist, that is, on the day of the circumcision of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s cousin and precursor.

This is the day that Our Lady left the hill country of Judah to return to Nazareth for the final six months of her own pregnancy. Thus, the liturgical Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary commemorates the end of her period of visiting Saint Elizabeth, a period that had begun on April 2, which was eight days after Our Lady had been told the news of Saint Elizabeth’s pregnancy by Saint Gabriel the Archangel at the Annunciation. Thus, the actual day of the Visitation was April 2. The period of Our Lady’s visit lasted three months, meaning that the first trimester of her carrying the preborn Jesus was spent away from home helping her cousin prepare to deliver her own Divine Son’s precursor. The placement of this liturgical feast in the calendar of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service on May 31, therefore, makes no sense whatsoever (other than randomly selecting a Marian feast to close the Marian month of May).

God does nothing by accident or happenstance. Our Lady was visited by Saint Gabriel the Archangel on March 25, giving her perfect fiat to the will of the Father so as to enflesh the Son by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. She set off immediately for the hill country of Judah, a journey that took her eight days to complete. Upon arriving for her three month period of assisting Saint Elizabeth and Saint Zacharias, Our Lady heard Saint Elizabeth was inspired by the Holy Ghost to complete the first part of the Ave Maria had been begun by Saint Gabriel the Archangel eight days before. Saint Gabriel said, Ave Maria, gratia plena, Dominus tecum; Benedicta tu in mulieribus et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Jesus. . Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women. Saint Elizabeth said: Benedicta tu in mulieribus et benedictus fructus ventris tui. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. “Blessed art thou amongst women.” How can any Protestant say that the Angelic salutation given by Saint Gabriel to Our Lady and continued by Saint Elizabeth is unworthy of being on the lips of everyone who truly believes in the Sacred Divinity of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ?  The exaltation of Our Lady as being the Mother of God and thus the Blessed Mother of us all is present in Saint Luke’s Gospel for all who have the honesty and the humility to see it and to recognize in Our Lady the very means by which our salvation was made possible.

Saint Elizabeth went on: “And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me. For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.” (Lk. 1:43-44)

The Church teaches us that it was at the moment Saint John the Baptist leapt for joy in his mother’s womb that he was freed of Original Sin. The moment of Saint John’s preborn ecstasy thus teaches us about the inviolability of all innocent human life. The preborn Saint John heard the voice of Our Lady, who was carrying within her the preborn Jesus, the One Whose precursor Saint John was meant to be. This should serve as a fundamental lesson to all Catholics everywhere about the inviolability of the fruit of mother’s wombs.

The God-Man placed Himself in total solidarity with every child in every mother’s womb when He was conceived as a helpless embryo in Our Lady’s womb by the power of the God the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine: Et homo factus est. That both Saint Elizabeth, who knew that the fruit of Mary’s womb was her Lord, and Saint John the Baptist, were exultant over the fact of the Incarnation should remind us once more that the Incarnation changes everything about human existence–and that there is not one aspect of daily life that is not meant to be lived in the conscious and public recognition that the Word became Flesh to dwell amongst us and to win back for us on the tree of the Holy Cross what was lost for us on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden. This is a lesson that the naturalists among us, ever eager to speak and act as though the Incarnation and the entirety of the Deposit of Faith are matters of complete indifference to social order, ought to remember.

Our Lady went on to proclaim her Magnificat, which is required under pain of mortal sin in most instances to be prayed every evening by all priests around the world near the close of vespers:

My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. Because He as regarded the humility of His handmaid; for behold henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Because He that is mighty, hath done great things for me; and holy is His name. And His mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear Him.

He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and hath exalted the humble.

He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away. He hath received Israel His servant, being mindful of His mercy: as He spoke to Abraham and his seed for ever. (Lk. 1: 46-55)

Dom Prosper Gueranger provided us with a superb commentary on Epistle that is read in today’s offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:

The Church introduces us into the depth of the mystery. What she has just been reading to us is the explanation of that word of Elizabeth’s which sums up the whole of to-day’s feast: ‘When thy voice sounded in mine ear, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.’ O voice of Mary, voice of the turtledove, putting winter to flight, and announcing springtime flowers and fragrance! At this sweet sound John’s soul, a captive in the darkness of sin, casts off the badge of slavery, and suddenly developing germs of highest virtues, appears as beautiful as a bride decked in nuptial array: and, therefore, how Jesus hastes unto this well-beloved soul! Between John and the Bridegroom, oh! what ineffable outpourings ! what sublime dialogue passes between them, from womb to womb of Mary and Elizabeth! In this happy meeting, the sight, the hearing, the voice of the mothers belong less to themselves than to the blessed fruit each bears within her; thus their senses are the lattices through which the Bridegroom and the friend of the Bridegroom see one another, understand one another, speak one to the other!

The animal man, it is true, understands not in this language. ‘Father,” the Son of God will soon exclaim: “I give thee thanks for that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones. Let him, therefore, that hath ears to hear, hear; but, Amen, I say unto you, unless ye become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven, nor know its mysteries.’ Wisdom shall nevertheless be justified by her children, as the Gospel says. The simple-hearted in quest of light, with all the straightforwardness of humility, let pass unheeded those mocking shadows playing over the marshes of this world; they know that the first ray of the eternal Sun will disperse these phantoms, leaving emptiness before those who run in pursuit of them. These wise little ones already feed upon that which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, having a foretaste, here below, of eternal delights.

Ineffably is John the Baptist experiencing all this. Accosted by the divine Friend who has been beforehand in seeking him, his soul at once awakens to full ecstasy. Jesus, on this side, is now making his first conquest; for it is to John that is addressed amongst all creatures (Mary of course excepted) the sacred nuptial-song uttered to the soul of the Word made Flesh, making his divine Heart throb with emotion. To-day the prophecy of the Magnificat was first uttered, and to-day also the divine union expressed by the Holy Ghost in the Canticle of Canticles is fully realized. Never more fully than on this happy day shall the sacred transports of the Spouse be justified; never shall they find a more faithful response! Let us warm ourselves at these celestial fires; let us join our enthusiasm to that of eternal Wisdom, who makes his first step, this day, in his royal progress towards mankind. Let us unite with our Lord in imploring the Precursor at last to show himself. Were it not ordered otherwise from on high, his inebriation of love would verily have made him at once break down the wall that held him from appearing, then and there, to announce the Bridegroom. For he knows that the sight of his countenance, preceding the face of the Lord himself, will excite the whole earth to transports; he knows that his own voice will be sweet when once it has become the organ of the Word calling the bride to him.

Together with Elizabeth let us extol, in the Gradual, the Blessed Virgin to whom we owe all these joys, and within whom love still encloses him whom the whole world could not contain.

The prayer composed by Dom Prosper Gueranger at the conclusion of his commentary on this great feast is worth repeating in its entirety:

Who is she that cometh forth beautiful as the morning rising, terrible as an army set in array. O Mary, this is the day on which thine exquisite brightness, for the first time, gladdens the earth. Thou bearest within thee the Sun of justice; and his early beams, striking first the mountain tops whilst the vales below are yet left in darkness, at once enlighten the Precursor, who is said to be the greatest ever born of woman. The divine Son, swift in his ascending course, will soon bathe the lowly valleys in his radiant fires. But how full of race and beauty are these his first gleams peering through the veiling cloud! For thou, O Mary, art the light cloud, the hope of earth, the terror of hell. Contemplating from afar, through its heavenly transparency, the mystery of this day, Elias, the father of prophets, and Isaias, their prince, did both of them descry the Lord. They beheld thee speeding thy way across the mountains and they blessed God; ‘for,’ saith the Holy Ghost, ‘when winter hath congealed the waters into crystal, withered the valleys, and consumed as with fire the green mountains, a present remedy to all is the speedy coming of a cloud.’

Haste, O Mary! Come thou to all of us; do not let the mountains alone, enjoy thy benign influence, bend thee down to those lowly, ignoble regions wherein the greater part of mankind but vegetates, helpless to scale the mountain heights; let thy kindly visit reach down even to the deepest abyss of human perversity wellnigh bordering on the gulf of hell; let the beams of saving life reach even there. Oh! would that from the thralldom of sin, from the plain where the vulgar throng is swaying to and fro, we were drawn to follow in thy train! How beauteous are thy footsteps along our humble pathways, how aromatic the perfumes wherewith thou dost inebriate earth this day! Thou wast all unknown, nay, thou was even an enigma to thyself, O thou fairest among the daughters of Adam, until thy first going forth led thee unto our poor hovels and manifested thy power. The desert, suddenly embalmed with heavenly fragrance, hails the passage, not of the figurative Ark, but of the ‘litter of the true Solomon.’ in these days of the sublime nuptials which he has vouchsafed to contract. What wonder, then, if at rapid pace thou dost speed across the mountains, since thou art bearing the Bridegroom who, as a giant, strideth from peak to peak.

Far different art thou, O Mary, from her who is portrayed in the sacred Canticle as hesitating, in spite of the heavenly call, to betake herself to active work, foolishly captivated by the sweets of mystic repose in such a way as to dream of finding it elsewhere than in the absolute good pleasure of the Beloved! Thou art not one, at the voice of the Spouse, to make difficulties about clothing thyself again with the garment of toil, of exposing thy feet, were it never so much, to be soiled within the dusty roads of the earth. Scarcely has he given himself to thee immeasurably as none else can know than, ever on thy guard against the mistake of remaining all absorbed in the selfish enjoyment of his love, thou thyself dost invite him to begin at once the great work which brought him down from heaven to earth: “Come, my Beloved, let us go forth into the fields, let us rise up early to see if the vineyards flourish, to hasten the budding of the fruits of salvation in souls; there it is, that I wish to be all thine.’ And leaning upon him, no less than he upon thee, without thereby losing aught of heavenly delights, thou dost traverse our desert; and the Holy Trinity perceiveth between Mother and Son sympathies, harmonious agreements, unknown until then even to thee; and the friends of the Bridegroom, hearing thy sweet voice, on their side also comprehend his love and partake in thy joy. With him, with thee, O Mary, ae after age shall behold sols innumerable who, swift-footed even as the roe and the young hart, will flee away from the valleys and gain the mountain heights where, in the warm sunshine, heaven’s aromatic spices are ever fragrant.

Bless, O Mary, those whom the better part so sweetly attracts. Protect that Order whose glory is to honour in a special manner thy Visitation. Faithful to the spirit of their illustrious founders they still continue to justify their sweet title by perfuming the Church on earth with the fragrance of that humility, gentleness and hidden prayer which made this day’s mystery so dear to the angels eighteen hundred years ago. Finally, O Lady, forget not the crowded ranks of those whom race presses, more numerous than ever nowadays, to tread in thy footsteps, mercifully seeking out every object of misery, teach them the way in which alone is possible to devote themselves to their neighbour without in any way quitting God; for the greater glory of god and the happiness of man multiply such faithful copies of thee. May all of us, having followed, in the degree measured out to us by him who divides his gifts to each one as he wills, meet together in our home yonder, to sing in one voice together with thee, an eternal Magnificat!

This Magnificat of Our Lady can be ignored only at the great peril of one who says, albeit falsely as Protestantism is not Christianity (as Father Frederick Faber noted, there is no Christianity where there is no Mass), he follows Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ but who believes that honoring His Blessed Mother is somehow un-Scriptural. “For behold henceforth all generations shall call me blessed” either means what it says or it does not. We must pray that those outside of the true Church that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope, will make the Magnificat their prayer and come into the true Church, found today in the catacombs where no concessions are made to conciliarism or to the ravenous wolves who dare to cast off dogmatic truths as they see fit to suit their own Modernist proclivities, to be devoted and totally consecrated sons and daughters of Our Lady, the woman who made possible our salvation and who was given to us by her Divine Son to be our Mother as He hung dying on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem us.

Those of us who are Catholics have an obligation to meditate quite carefully on the Second Joyful Mystery, which we celebrate liturgically today, July 2, 2012. We must meditate upon the selflessness of Our Lady, who thought nothing of making a journey immediately after receiving the news of the miraculous conception of the Word as Flesh in her own virginal and immaculate womb by the power of the Holy Ghost. We must have that same selflessness to perform both the Corporal and the Spiritual Works of Mercy no matter how much we are taxed physically as a result. If we are totally consecrated to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, then we know that she will use our unseen efforts and prayers and penances and sacrifices in ways that will be made manifest to us only in eternity. And we must learn from the Visitation that the assaults upon innocent human life in the womb demand our prayers and our attention as we seek to plant the seeds for the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King as the ultimate fruit of the Triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. For just as the fruit of Our Lady’s womb was recognized by Saint Elizabeth and by Saint John the Baptist, so must the world recognize the fruit of Our Lady’s womb as its King in every aspect of its life and social activity.

The great feast that we celebrate today beckons us to meditate upon the Joyful Mysteries of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary. Indeed, we should try to pray all fifteen decades of the Rosary every day, should we not? And Saint Louis de Montfort, the great apostle of True Devotion to Mary, gave us a wonderful prayer with which to start the mystery of the Rosary that comprises today’s glorious liturgical feast:

 

We offer you, Lord Jesus, this second decade in honour of the Visitation of your holy Mother to her cousin Saint Elizabeth. Through this mystery and the intercession of Mary we ask for a perfect love of our neighbour. . . .

(After the decade is completed:) May the grace of the mystery of the Visitation come into me and make me truly charitable.

And what is true Charity? It is to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of all those outside of the true Church into her maternal bosom, something that the counterfeit church of conciliarism eschews, meaning that true Charity, the Charity of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus that beat within the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of Our Lady as It was formed out of her own Immaculate Heart, so full of that true Charity, is not be found therein.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Elizabeth, pray for us.

Saint Zachary, pray for us.

Saints Processus and Martinian, pray for us.

Appendix

From The Mystical City of God on the Visitation

 

When the most holy Mother Mary arrived at the house of Zacharias, the Precursor of Christ had completed the sixth month of his conception in the womb of saint Elisabeth. The body of the child John had already attained a state of great natural perfection; much greater than that of other children, on account of the miracle of his conception by a sterile mother and on account of the intention of the Most High to make him the depositary of greater sanctity than other men (Matth. 11, 11). Yet at that time his soul was yet filled with the darkness of sin, which he had contracted in the same way as the other children of Adam, the first and common father of the human race; and as, accord ing to the universal and general law, mortals cannot receive the light of grace before they have issued forth to the light of the sun (Rom. 5, 7) ; so, after the first, the original sin contracted by our nature, the womb of the mother must serve as a dungeon or prison for all of us, who have laden upon ourselves this guilt of our father and head, Adam. Christ our Lord resolved to anticipate this great blessing in his Prophet and Precursor by conferring the light of his grace and justification upon him six months after his conception by saint Elisabeth, in order that he might be distinguished as well in holiness, as he was in his office of Precursor and Baptist.

216. After the first salutation of Elisabeth by the most holy Mary, the two cousins retired, as I have said at the end of the preceding chapter. And immediately the Mother of grace saluted anew her cousin saying: “May God save thee, my dearest cousin, and may his divine light communicate to thee grace and life (Luke 1, 40). At the sound of most holy Mary’s voice, saint Elisabeth was filled by the Holy Ghost and so enlightened interiorly, that in one instant she perceived the most exalted mysteries and sacraments. These emotions, and those that at the same time were felt by the child John in the womb of his mother, were caused by the presence of the Word made flesh in the bridal chamber of Mary s womb, for, making use of the voice of Mary as his instrument, He, as Redeemer, began from that place to use the power given to Him by the eternal Father for the salvation and justification of the souls. And since He now operated as man, though as yet of the diminutive size of one conceived eight days before, He assumed, in admirable humility, the form and posture of one praying and beseeching the Father. He asked in earnest prayer for the justification of his future Precursor and obtained it at the hands of the blessed Trinity.

217. Saint John was the third one for whom our Redeemer made special petition since his presence in the womb of his mother. His Mother was the first for whom He gave thanks and prayed to the Father; next in order was her spouse, saint Joseph, for whom the incarnate Word offered up his prayers, as we have said in the twelfth chapter; and the third one was the Precursor saint John, whom the Lord mentioned by name in his prayers to the Father. Such was the great good for tune and privilege of saint John, that Christ our Lord presented to the eternal Father the merits of his Passion and Death to be endured for men; and in view thereof He requested the sanctification of this soul. He appointed and set apart this child as one who is to be born holy as his Precursor and as a witness of his coming into the world (John 1, 7); as one who was to prepare the hearts of his people in order that they might recognize and receive Him as the Messias. He ordained that for such an exalted ministry the Precursor should receive all the graces, gifts and favors which are befitting and proportionate to his office. All this the Father granted just as the Onlybegotten had requested it of Him.

218. This happened before the most holy Mary had put her salutation into words. At the pronunciation of the words mentioned above, God looked upon the child in the womb of saint Elisabeth, and gave it perfect use of reason, enlightening it with his divine light, in order that he might prepare himself by foreknowledge for the blessings which he was to receive. Together with this preparation he was sanctified from original sin, made an adopted son of God, and filled with the most abundant graces of the Holy Ghost and with the plenitude of all his gifts; his faculties were sanctified, subjected and subordinated to reason, thus verifying in himself what the archangel Gabriel had said to Zacharias; that His son would be filled with the Holy Ghost from the womb of his mother (Luke 1, 17). At the same time the for tunate child, looking through the walls of the maternal womb as through clear glass upon the incarnate Word, and assuming a kneeling posture, adored his Redeemer and Creator, whom he beheld in most holy Mary as if enclosed in a chamber made of the purest crystal. This was the movement of jubilation, which was felt by his mother Elisabeth as coming from the infant in her womb (Luke 1, 44). Many other acts of virtue the child John performed during this interview, exercising faith, hope, charity, worship, gratitude, humility, devotion and all the other virtues possible to him there. From that moment he began to merit and grow in sanctity, without ever losing it and without ever ceasing to exercise it with all the vigor of grace.

219. Saint Elisabeth was instructed at the same time in the mystery of the Incarnation, the sanctification of her own son and the sacramental purpose of this new wonder. She also became aware of the virginal purity and of the dignity of the most holy Mary. On this occasion, the heavenly Queen, being absorbed in the vision of the Divinity and of the mysteries operated by it through her most holy Son, became entirely godlike, filled with the clear light of the divine gifts which She participated; and thus filled with majesty saint Elisabeth saw Her. She saw the Word made man as through a most pure and clear glass in the virginal chamber, lying as it were on a couch of burning and enlivened crystal. The efficacious instrument of all these wonderful effects was the voice of most holy Mary, as powerful as it was sweet in the hearing of the Lord. All this force was as it were only an outflow of that which was contained in those powerful words: “Fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum; by which She had drawn the eternal Word from the bosom of the Father down to her soul and into her womb.

220. Filled with admiration at what She saw and heard in regard to these divine mysteries, saint Elisabeth was wrapt in the joy of the Holy Ghost; and, looking upon the Queen of the world and what was contained in Her, she burst forth in loud voice of praise, pronouncing the words reported to us by saint L,uke: “Blessed are Thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy, and blessed art Thou, that has believed, because those things shall be accomplished, that were spoken to Thee by the Lord.” In these prophetic words saint Elisabeth rehearsed the noble privileges of most holy Mary, perceiving by the divine light what the power of the Lord had done in Her, what He now performed, and what He was to accomplish through Her in time to come. All this also the child John perceived and understood, while listen ing to the words of his mother; for she was enlightened for the purpose of his sanctification, and since he could not from his place in the womb bless and thank her by word of mouth, she, both for herself and for her son, extolled the most holy Mary as being the instrument of their good fortune.

221. These words of praise, pronounced by saint Elisabeth were referred by the Mother of wisdom and humility to the Creator; and in the sweetest and softest voice She intoned the Magnificat as recorded by saint Luke (Ch. 1, 46-55). 46. My soul doth magnify the Lord; 47. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48. Because He hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 49. Because He that is mighty hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. 50. And his mercy is from generation unto generation to them that fear Him. 51. He hath shewed might in his arm; He hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. 52. He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble. 53. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich He hath sent empty away. 54. He hath received Israel, his servant, being mindful of his mercy; 55. As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and his seed forever.

222. Just as saint Elisabeth was the first one who heard this sweet canticle from the mouth of most holy Mary, so she was also the first one who understood it and, by means of her infused knowledge, commented upon it. She penetrated some of the great mysteries, which its Authoress expressed therein in so few sentences. The soul of most holy Mary magnified the Lord for the excellence of his infinite Essence; to Him She referred and yielded all glory and praise (I Tim. 1, 17), both for the beginning and the accomplishment of her works. She knew and confessed that in God alone every creature should glory and rejoice, since He alone is their entire happiness and salvation (II Cor. 10, 17). She confessed also the equity and magnificence of the Most High in attending to the humble and in conferring upon them his abundant spirit of divine love (Ps. 137, 6). She saw how worthy of mortals it is to perceive, understand and ponder the gifts that were conferred on the humility of Her, whom all nations were to call blessed, and how all the humble ones, each one according to his degree, could share the same good for tune. By one word also She expressed all the mercies, benefits and blessings, which the Almighty showered upon Her in his holy and wonderful name; for She calls them altogether “great things”; since there was nothing small about anything that referred to this great Queen and Lady.

223. And as the mercies of the Most High over flowed from Mary s plenitude to the whole human race, and as She was the portal of heaven, through which they issued and continue to issue, and through which we are to enter into the participation of the Divinity; therefore She confessed, that the mercy of the Lord in regard to Her is spread out over all the generations, communicating itself to them that fear Him. And just as the infinite mercies raise up the humble and seek out those that fear God; so also the powerful arm of divine justice scatters and destroys those who are proud in the mind of their heart, and hurls them from their thrones in order to set in their place the poor and lowly. This justice of the Lord was exercised in wonderful splendor and glory upon the chief of all the proud, Lucifer and his followers, when the almighty arm of God scattered and hurled them (because they themselves precipitated themselves) from their exalted seats which befitted their angelic natures and their graces, and which they occupied according to the original (Isaias 14; Apoc. 12) decree of the divine love. For by it He intended that all should be blessed (I Tim. 2, 4) while they, in trying to ascend in their vain pride to positions, which they neither could attain nor should aspire to, on the contrary cast themselves from those which they occupied (Isaias 14, 13). In their arrogance they were found opposed to the just and inscrutable judgments of the Lord, which scattered and cast down the proud angel and all his followers (Apoc. 12, 8). In their place were installed the humble of heart through the mediation of most holy Mary, the Mother and the treasure house of his ancient mercies.

224. For the same reason this divine Lady says and proclaims that God enriches the needy, filling them with the abundance of his treasures of grace and glory; and those that are rich in their own estimation and presumptuous arrogance, and those who satisfy their heart with the false goods, which the world esteems as riches and happiness, the Most High has banished and does banish from his presence, because they are void of the truth, which cannot enter into hearts filled and occupied with falsehood and deceit. He received his servants and his children, the people of Israel, remembering his mercies in order to teach them, wherein prudence, truth and understanding (Bar. 3, 14), wherein free and abundant life and nourishment, wherein the light of the eyes and peace consists. He taught them the way of prudence and the hidden paths of wisdom and discipline, which is concealed from the princes of the gentiles, and is not known to the powerful, who dominate over the beasts of the earth and entertain themselves and play with the birds of the air and heap up treasures of gold and silver. Nor can the sons of Agar and the inhabitants of Teman, who are the wise and the proudly prudent of this world, ever attain this wisdom. But to those that are sons of the light (Galat. 3, 7), and who are sons of Abraham by faith, hope and obedience, the Most High distributes it; for in this manner has it been promised to his posterity and his spiritual children, made secure by the blessed and happy Fruit of the virginal womb of the most holy Mary.

225. Saint Elisabeth looking upon Mary the Queen of creation understood these hidden mysteries ; and not only those, which I am able to express here, did this fortunate matron understand, but many more and greater sacraments, which my understanding cannot comprehend; nor do I wish to dilate upon all that have been shown to me, lest I unduly extend this history. But the sweet discourses and conversations, which these two holy and discreet ladies held with each other, reminded me of the two seraphim, which Isaias saw above the throne of the Most High, repeating the divine and always new canticle: Holy, holy, etc., while they covered their head with one pair of wings, their feet with another, flew with the third pair (Isaias 6, 2). It is certain that the inflamed love of these two holy women exceeded that of all the seraphim, and Mary by Herself loved more than they all together. They were consumed in the flame of divine love, extending the two wings of their hearts in order to manifest to each other their love and in order to soar into the most exalted intelligence of the mys teries of the Most High. With two more wings of rarest knowledge they covered their faces; because both of them discussed and contemplated the sacrament of the King (Tob. 12, 7), guarding its secrets within themselves all their lives; also because they restrained their discourse and subjected it to their devoted faith, without giving scope to proud inquisitiveness. They also covered the feet of the Lord and their own with the third pair of seraphic wings, because they were lowered and annihilated in their own humble estimation of themselves at the sight of such great Majesty. Moreover since most holy Mary enclosed within her virginal womb the God of majesty himself, we can with reason and with literal truth say, that She covered the seat where the Lord sat enthroned.

226. When it was time to come forth from their retirement, saint Elisabeth offered herself and her whole family and all her house for the service of the Queen of heaven. She asked Her to accept, as a quiet retreat, the room which she herself was accustomed to use for her prayers, and which was much retired and accommodated to that purpose. The heavenly Princess accepted the chamber with humble thanks, and made use of it for recollecting Herself and sleeping therein, and no one ever entered it, except the two cousins. As for the rest She offered to serve and assist Elisabeth as a handmaid, for She said, that this was the purpose of visiting her and consoling her. O what friendship is so true, so sweet and inseparable, as that which is formed by the great bond of the divine love! How admirable is the Lord in manifesting this great sacrament of the Incarnation to three women before He would make it known to any one else in the human race! For the first was saint Anne, as I have said in its place; the second one was her Daughter and the Mother of the Word, most holy Mary; the third one was saint Elisabeth, and conjointly with Her, her son, for he being yet in the womb of his mother, cannot be considered as distinct from her. Thus “the foolishness of God is wiser than men,” as saint Paul says.

227. The most holy Mary and Elisabeth came forth from their retirement at nightfall, having passed a long time together; and the Queen saw Zacharias standing before Her in his muteness, and She asked him for his blessing as from a priest of the Lord, which the saint also gave to Her. Yet, although She tenderly pitied him for his affliction, She did not exert her power to cure him, because She knew the mysterious occasion of his dumbness; yet She offered a prayer for him. Saint Elisabeth, who already knew the good fortune of the most chaste spouse Joseph, although he himself as yet was not aware of it, entertained and served him with great reverence and highest esteem. After staying three days in the house of Zacharias, however, he asked permission of his heavenly Spouse Mary to return to Nazareth and leave Her in the company of saint Elisabeth in order to assist her in her pregnancy. The holy husband left them with the understanding that he was to return in order to accompany the Queen home as soon as they should give him notice; saint Elisabeth offered him some presents to take home with him; but he would take only a small part of them, yielding only to their earnest solicitations, for this man of God was not only a lover of poverty, but was possessed of a magnanimous and noble heart. Therewith he pursued his way back to Nazareth, taking along with him the little beast of burden, which they had brought with them. At home, in the absence of his Spouse, he was served by a neighboring woman and cousin of his, who, also when most holy Mary was at home, was wont to come and go on the necessary errands outside of the house.

INSTRUCTION WHICH THE QUEEN AND LADY GAVE ME.

228. My daughter, in order that thy heart may be ever more and more inflamed with the desire of gaining the grace and friendship of God, I wish very much that thou grow in the knowledge of the dignity, excellence and happiness of a soul, that has been endowed with this privilege; however, remember that it is so admirable and of so great a value that thou canst not comprehend it, even if I would explain it to thee; and much less canst thou express it in words. Look upon the Lord and contemplate Him by means of the divine light, which thou receivest, and then thou wilt understand that the Lord performs a greater work in justifying a soul than in having created all the orbs of heaven and the whole earth with all the beauty and perfection contained within them. And if on account of the wonders which creatures are able in part to perceive in these works by the senses, they are impressed with the greatness and power of God, what would they say and think if they could see with the eyes of their soul the preciousness and beauty of grace in so many creatures, who are capable of receiving them?

229. There are no terms of human language equal to the task of expressing what participations and perfections of God are contained in sanctifying grace. It is little to say that it is more pure and spotless than the snow; more refulgent than the sun; more precious than gold or precious stones, more charming, more amiable and pleasing than all the most delightful feasts and entertainments, and more beautiful than all that in its entirety can be imagined or desired by the creatures. Take notice also of the ugliness of sin, in order that by the opposite thou mayest come to so much the better under standing of the beauty of grace; for neither darknesses, nor rottenness, nor the most horrible, the most dreadful, nor the foulest of creatures can ever be compared to sin and to its ugliness. The martyrs and saints understood much of this mystery (Heb. 11, 36), who in order to secure the beauty of grace and preserve themselves from the ruin of sin, did not fear fire, nor wild beasts, nor the sword, nor torments, nor prisons, ignominies, pains, afflictions, nor death itself, nor prolonged and perpetual suffering; for to escape all these must be counted for little or nothing, and must scarcely be thought of in comparison with one degree of grace, which souls may attain, even though they be the most abject of the whole world. All this the men, who esteem and seek after the fugitive and apparent beauty of creatures, are ignorant of; and whatever does not present to them this deceitful beauty, is for them vile and contemptible.

230. Thou perceivest therefore something of the greatness of the blessing, which the incarnate Word conferred upon his Precursor in the womb of his mother; and because saint John recognized it, he leaped for joy and exultation in the womb of his mother. Thou wilt also see what thou thyself must do and suffer in order to attain this happiness, and in order not to lose, or in the least impair this most precious beauty by any fault, nor retard its consummation by any imperfection, no matter how small. I wish that in imitation of my cousin Elisabeth, thou do not enter into any friendship with any human creatures, except those, with whom thou canst and shouldst converse about the works of the Most High and of his mysteries, and with whom thou canst learn to pursue the true path of his divine pleasure. Although thou art engaged in important undertakings and works, do not forget or omit thy spiritual exercises and the strictness of a perfect life; for this must not only be preserved and watched over, when all things go smoothly, but also under the greatest adversity, difficulty and labor; for imperfect human nature takes occasion of the slightest circumstance to relax its vigilance. (The Venerable Mary of Agreda, The Mystical City of God, Volume II: The Incarnation, pp. 174-186.)

July 1, 2014, Republished Reflection

July 1, 2014, Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus within the Octave of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Octave Day of the Feast of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist:

As yesterday’s fifty-two page commentary, A New Sense for a New Faith, part two, took so long to write and required long days at the computer into the overnight hours, I will not have a commentary on the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America that were handed down yesterday, June 30, 2014, the Commemoration of Saint Paul. Those who have followed my work should realize that my commentary will seek to address root causes beyond the particular results. It is to not to seek the “perfect” at the expense of the “good” to point out that the “good” may not be as good as it looks. More on that later in the week, although there is an outside chance of the commentary being completed in time for posting by tomorrow morning. Outside chance.

There is a republished reflection, The Laver of Redemption, offered to the readers of this site today, the Feast of the Most Precious Blood Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The Most Precious  Blood of Jesus is our laver of redemption, as our own sins, each and every single one of them, caused It to be shed during the events of Holy Thursday and Good Friday.

It was the thought of coming into contact with the horror of our sins, the very antithesis of His Sacred Divinity, that caused Our Lord to sweat droplets of His Most Precious Blood in His Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane.

It was our sins that caused the Most Precious Blood of Jesus to be shed so terribly during His cruel scourging at the Pillar.

It was our sins that caused the Most Precious Blood of Jesus to be shed as He was crowned with thorns to mock His Sacred Kingship over men and their nations.

It was our sins that caused the Most Precious Blood of Jesus to continue to be shed from the scourging and the crowning as He walked up the steps to be judged by the Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate. Droplets of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus are still venerated by pilgrims as proceed on their knees up the Sancta Scala in Rome right across from the Basilica di San Giovanni Laterano.

It was our sins that caused the Most Precious Blood to be shed as Our Lord’s hands and knees were crucified.

It was our sins that caused the Most Precious Blood of Jesus to be shed unto Its last drop as He hung on the gibbet of the Holy Holy Cross for three hours, flowing in a torrent as Our Lord’s wounded side was pierced with the lance of Saint Longinus.

What is It that is poured out onto our souls when they are Absolved by a true priest in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance? The Most Precious Blood of Jesus.

The Most Precious Blood of Jesus strengthens us when we receive It worthily in Holy Communion.

It was the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus on the wood of the Holy Cross that ratified the New and Eternal Covenant He inaugurated at the Last Supper, thereby obliterating forever the old sacrifices of  the blood of bulls and goats and lambs in Temple worship, thus superseding he Old Covenant of the Jews.

We must celebrate this great Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus, which was pumped through Our Divine Redeemer’s Sacred Body by His Most Sacred Heart, the very font of Mercy, with gratitude that we, sinners who caused It to be shed in torrents under the most unspeakably cruel conditions, are bathed unto our redemption by Its merits. May we never take the Most Precious Blood of Jesus for granted.

Our Lady or the Rosary, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

The Laver of Redemption

Today is the Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Saviour Jesus Christ. It was six months ago now that the New Year began with the Feast of the Circumcision, the first time in which the Most Precious Blood of Jesus was shed on this earth. We are into the second six months of Anno Domini 2014, commemorating liturgically the Blood whose shedding made possible our regeneration in the Baptismal font and the Blood whose merits are poured out on us as a laver of redemption every time we avail ourselves of the Sacrament of Penance. The entire month of July is devoted to the Most Precious Blood of Jesus.

The Most Precious Blood of Jesus was pumped through His arteries by that same Sacred Heart, Which was formed out of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. There was for a period of nine months, as the unborn Jesus developed in the tabernacle of His virginal and immaculate Mother’s womb, an interchange of the blood between Mother and Son, making Our Lady, who gave the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity His Sacred Humanity by the power of the God the Holy Ghost, the first to receive the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer. She received from Him what she had given Him, signifying the tremendous and mysterious–nay, almost impenetrable–union that existed between the Theandric Person and herself, who had  been conceived immaculately and thus preserved from all stain of Original and Actual Sin. The Most Precious Blood that Our Lady gave to her Divine Son would be splattered on her as she watched Him shed every single drop of It to redeem us on the Wood of the Holy Cross.

The Most Precious Blood of Jesus has replaced the blood of goats and bulls and lambs, which was a mere foreshadowing of the Blood of all telling that would be shed for the many so that the lintels of the doorposts of their souls could be signed with It, the Blood of the Paschal Lamb, and thus avoid the angel of eternal death and damnation when they gave up their spirits and breathed their last in this vale of tears. It alone has the power to forgive sins and to regenerate eternal life in the souls of the faithful who seek out Its infinite and inexhaustible merits in the confessional. We receive the Most Precious Blood of Jesus every time we receive Holy Communion. Every single particle of a consecrated Host is the entirety of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the God-Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Saviour Jesus Christ. We are thus not only healed of sin by the Most Precious Blood of Jesus; we are nourished unto eternity by It.

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ poured out His Most Precious Blood for us to pay back for us in His Sacred Humanity the blood debt of Adam’s sin that was owed to Him in His Infinity as God. One drop of His Most Precious Blood at the Circumcision would have been good enough to redeem us. He chose, though, to undergo the events of His fearful Passion and Death so as to show us, His rational creatures who are frequently so ungrateful and lukewarm, the depth of His love for us and to show us that we must be ready to shed our blood, both figuratively and literally, for Him and His Holy Church. And we must be ready to give unto the others the forgiveness that was poured out over us in the Sacrament of Baptism and is poured over us by the merits of the Most Precious Blood, applied to us in time by the words and actions of an alter Christus acting in persona Christi, repeatedly in the Sacrament of Penance. We must never be slow to offer others the Mercy that was won for us by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s emptying Himself completely of the substance that made His human life possible, His Most Precious Blood.

As we seen from the accounts of mystics, such as the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed His Most Precious Blood in the Garden of Gethsemane when capillaries burst in His head and His extremities as He underwent His Agony, seeing at that time all of the sins of all human beings, including yours and mine, for all eternity. The very thought of coming into contact in His Sacred Humanity with the antithesis of His Sacred Divinity, sin, caused Him to sweat droplets of His Most Precious Blood. Have we resisted sin to the point of shedding blood, as Saint Paul discusses in his Epistle to the Hebrews?

For where there is a testament, the death of the testator must of necessity come in. For a testament is of force, after men are dead: otherwise it is as yet of no strength, whilst the testator liveth. Whereupon neither was the first indeed dedicated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been read by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water, and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, Saying: This is the blood of the testament, which God hath enjoined unto you.

The tabernacle also and all the vessels of the ministry, in like manner, he sprinkled with blood. And almost all things, according to the law, are cleansed with blood: and without shedding of blood there is no remission. It is necessary therefore that the patterns of heavenly things should be cleansed with these: but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Jesus is not entered into the holies made with hands, the patterns of the true: but into heaven itself, that he may appear now in the presence of God for us. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holies, every year with the blood of others:

For then he ought to have suffered often from the beginning of the world: but now once at the end of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin, by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment: So also Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many; the second time he shall appear without sin to them that expect him unto salvation. (Hebrews 9: 21-28.)

Dom Gueranger puts it this way in The Liturgical Year:

John the Baptist [whose nativity’s octave is commemorated today] has pointed out the Lamb, Peter has firmly established his throne, Paul has prepared the bride; their joint work, admirable in its unity, at once suggests the reason for their feasts occurring almost simultaneously in the cycle. The alliance being now secured, all three fall into shade; whilst the bride herself, raised up by them to such lofty heights, appears alone before us, holding in her hands the sacred cup of the nuptial-feast.

This gives the key of to-day’s solemnity, revealing how its appearance in the heavens of the holy liturgy at this particular season is replete with mystery. The Church, it is true, has already made known to the sons of the new covenant, in a much more solemn manner, the price of the Blood that redeemed them, its nutritive strength and the adoring homage which is its due. On Good Friday earth and heaven beheld all sin drowned in the saving stream, whose eternal flood-gates at last gave way beneath the combined effort of man’s violence and the love of the divine Heart. The festival of Corpus Christi witnessed our prostrate worship before the altars whereon is perpetuated the Sacrifice of Calvary, and where the outpouring of the precious Blood afford drink to the humblest little ones, as well as to the mightiest potentates of the earth, lowly bowed in adoration before it. How is it, then, that holy Church, is now inviting all Christians to hail, in a particular manner, the stream of life ever gushing from the sacred fount? what else can this mean, but that the preceding solemnities have by no means exhausted the mystery? The peace which this Blood has made to reign in the high places as well as in the low; the impetus of its wave bearing back the sons of Adam from the yawning gulf, purified, renewed and dazzling white in the radiance of their heavenly apparel; the sacred Table outspread before them on the waters’ brink, and the chalice brimful of inebriation–all this preparation and display would be objectless, all these splendours would be incomprehensible, if man were not brought to see herein the wooings of a love that could never endure its advances to be outdone by the pretensions of any other. Therefore, the Blood of Jesus is set before our eyes at this moment as the Blood of the Testament; the pledge of the alliance proposed to us by God; the dower stipulated by eternal Wisdom for this divine union to which he is inviting all men, and its consummation in our soul which is being urged forward with such vehemence by the Holy Ghost.

It is thus incumbent upon us today, the Feast of the Most Precious Blood and the Octave Day of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist, to make any and all sacrifices that we need to make to assist every day at the Immemorial Mass of Tradition offered by true bishops and true priests who make no concessions to conciliarism or to the nonexistent legitimacy of its false shepherds.

The Precursor of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Saint John the Baptist, leapt for joy in the womb of his mother, Saint Elizabeth, as he heard the sound of the voice of Our Lady, carrying within her virginal and immaculate womb the One whose path he would prepare. Saint John the Baptist prepared the way by his preaching for the coming of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to assume His Public Ministry. May he, by his prayers from eternity, help us to prepare for the worthy reception of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity each day at the offering of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition wherein everything points seamlessly to the fact we are present at the very Sacrifice of the Cross at which the Most Precious Blood was shed for our redemption and for our nourishment unto eternity.

Father Frederick Faber’s The Precious Blood, which has been quoted much on this site in recent months, provides us with excellent food for thought on this glorious feast day:

The life of the Precious Blood in the Mind of God from all eternity is in one sense a real life, and in another sense an unreal one. It was not an actual life. It was a life of predestination, of foreseen beauty, of multiplied divine intentions. It was a specially divine intervention, if we may use such a word. It was an idea which could not have come to any mind but that of God, and therefore the complacency which it caused in the Divine Mind was immense. It was a sort of second Word to God, a created expression of his uncreated perfection. It was part of the most grand and glorious thought of God, the Incarnation. It was a most important part of it. It was also a specially chosen part, selected for the accomplishment of our dominion of its Maker. In the mist dear and dread Mind of God it was a fountain always flowing. The beauty of its flowing had been one of his unbeginning gladnesses. It was the fountain which gave forth, multitudinous and beautiful as the creation of the radiant angels, the countless predestinations of the infinitely varying souls of men. The mystery of all election was the first glassed in its beaming depths. It was its spray, which caught the golden light of eternal things, and fell down before the throne, even as it is still falling now, and in starry showers of splendor. It was a mirror too in which the manifold countenances of the divine perfections looked always, and loved to make their beauty bearable to mortal eye. It is there to this day, that the opposition in God are seen to be harmonious most simple and worshipful. All parts of creation give us double views of God, simultaneous views of his seeming opposite perfections, just as on the Mount of Olives the eye may rest at will either on the Dead Sea or on the Holy City. But of no part of creation is this so true, or true in so high a sense, as of the Precious Blood. Redeeming grace tells the whole history of God, so far as it can be told, unfolds his character in all of its breadth which is comprehensible, and as it were recites and magnifies each separate perfection; and redeeming grace is the specialty of the Precious Blood. Moreover, the Precious Blood, dwelt also in the Mind of God as the type and model of all creation, whether fallen or unfallen. In its unity lay the germs of all created loveliness and of all created variety. Mary was its first shadow, its first reflection, the freshest copy of the original. No wonder then that it was an infinite delight to the Three Divine Persons. Tot hem it was none the less real because it was not yet actually created; for to god the solidest created substance is but as shadow compared with the reality of his ideas. Thus from all eternity did the Precious Blood reign like a sovereign thing in the adorable complacency of God.

As it had lived an eternal life in the Mind of God before creation, so also did it live a life of visible effects and real jurisdiction form the beginning of the world, before it had become itself an actual created thing in the mystery of the Incarnation. It was the Precious Blood which hindered the fall of man from being as irretrievable as the fall of angels had been. It did real work in every single soul which was created in those four thousand years. It altered their position in the world. It made the eye of God look differently on them. It rained supernatural graces upon their hearts. It diminished temporal chastisements. Neither was it less influential in the counsels of God than in the souls of men. It caused his compassion to overspread the whole earth. It turned the chronicles of the world into a succession of types, and shadows, and predictions of itself. While it was itself preparing all things for its own coming and shedding,it so controlled all things that they rather seemed to be a preparation for itself. It sounded in every thing that God said. It impressed its character upon every thing that God did. It underlay all heathen life, and all Hebrew life. It was the significance of the most significant, and also of the most insignificant events It moulded all sanctity into an onlooking for itself. It beautified the hearts of men for God with supernatural desires. For all those forty ages it was the secret meaning and the hidden agent of the world. All that blossomed upon earth blossomed only because the Precious Blood watered the soil under the ground. Who would not long to see it, as it would one day be, in the actual Human Heart which was to be its living chalice? Even the patience of long-waiting God might vouchsafe to yearn for the actual creation of the Precious Blood. How sweet then to him must have been that dear sanctity of Mary, whose beautiful compulsion caused the Word to anticipate his time!

But the hour arrived, and the Creator became a part of his own Creation. The Precious Blood was actually created, and rose and fell in pulses of true human life, and filled with joyous being the Sanctuary of the Sacred Heart, and lived its life of Three-and-Thirty Years among men. These Three-and-Thirty Years formed in all true senses the longest and most important epoch of the history of creation. They were filled with countless actions, the value of each one of which was infinite. The vocations stamped upon millions of souls came from those actions of God made man. Their energies are vigorously ruling the world at this hour. The have moulded age after age since then. All holiness has been but an infinitely diversified copy of them. Out of their merits the attributes of God daily drink their fill, and yet those merits still abound and overflow. Out of their merits the Sacraments are drawing incalculable exuberance of grace all day and night; and they are still full to the very brim, and capable of saving unnumbered new creations. Out of the satisfactions of those years the jurisdiction of the Church has drawn unlimited indulgences; yet no visible impression has been made on their abundance. Poetry and art go to those years as to a school of heavenliest beauty; and all times and all minds find the lessons fresh and new. Theology sits by them as by abysses of divine wisdom, and one while is actively weaving her wondrous science out of them, and another while, captivated by their beauty, forgets to weave, is rapt in contemplation, and becomes devotion. As to devotion, those years are its very cloister and its garden. That life is God made visible to his creatures as the rule of life. It lays bare the very foundations of morals. It reveals the possibilities of human actions, while it also paints as in a picture the indefinable operations of the Holy Ghost. It is a freshness and a joy to think that, at this hour of the peaceful dawn, thousands of souls are silent before God, caught in the sweet snares of the beauty of these earthly years of Jesus. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ revealed to the Blessed Michael of Florence, the Camaldolese, how he longed that those who loved him should honor the Thirty-three Years with affectionate minuteness. It has been the characteristic devotion of all the saints. The souls that have been most drawn to meditate upon the attributes of God have learned their science in that other science of the Three-and-Thirty Years. Sometimes this devotion takes special possession of a religious order for some length of time. Sometimes it fastens upon a single religious house, and develops itself with marvellous fertility. This appears to have been the case with the Carmelite convent at Dole in the seventeenth century. To Sister Anne of Cross, lay-sister, it was the form and type of her whole life. It came natural to her do even her ordinary actions in thirty-threes. Still more did her penances and devotions take that shape. When that she was asked if she did not weary of such a reiterated devotion, she replied that, so far from it, it always came to hear as new. The devotion of Mother Louisa of Jesus was even yet more remarkable. She could hardly occupy her soul with any thing but the Thirty-Three Years; and the abundant lights she received from God in prayer had chiefly reference to this devotion. The first years of the Sacred Infancy were “delicious” to her soul. She had an especial attraction to contemplate the first time Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ bent on his knees, and clasped his hands, in prayer to the Father. Her holiness seemed always to be a participation in some of the interior dispositions of Jesus upon earth; and the characteristics of her spiritual life, consequent upon this devotion, were persevering fervor and extreme joyousness. She imprinted this devotion upon the whole community, and also upon the externs who came across her.

We see remarkable traces of the same devotion in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s answer to the prayers of Frances of the Mother of God, Carmelitress at Dieppe, distinguished for her devotion to the Precious Blood. When she was praying for the soul of Sister Catherine of the Angels, she asked Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ after Communion to apply to Sister Catherine’s soul one drop of his Precious Blood in order to achieve her deliverance. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ answered, “I have given her one of my steps,” thus showing the value of his least actions. At another time she made the same prayer for Sister Elizabeth of the Nativity, asking for one drop of the Precious Blood; and Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ answered, “I will give her one of my tears, the efficacy of which is so great that it would turn hell into paradise, if it were applied there.” These answers seem to imply a special devotion in Frances of the Mother of God to the Thirty-Three Years; and that saintly religious was one of the most remarkable among the holy persons of the seventeenth century.

We speak very truly when we divide the world into many worlds. We take of the vegetable world, and the mineral world, and the animal world. We even subdivide these into lesser world. We go to the sidereal world to learn the immensities of space. Geology opens a world to us, which overshadows us with its distances of time. We call a man a little world in himself; and the microscopic world, which it is so rife with new aspects of God, delights us with all that it insinuates of the possibilities and likelihoods of the invisible world of immaterial and angelic life. We call these by the name of worlds, because they seem like complete creations in themselves, and are each of them a distinct revelation of God, distinct from all other revelations of him, and yet harmonizing with them all. They are separate shadows of God. The are his wisdom and his beauty, his power and his love, seen from different points of view. He is many Creators in one Creator. We are very right in making his one world into many worlds. So it is with the Incarnation. The whole material universe is not so vast as that one world of the Incarnation, nor capable of so many or such magnificent subdivisions. Intellectually or spiritually, the Thirty-Three Years form a world far vaster than the world of stars. They can even bear to be subdivided into many other worlds, which are still spacious enough for the swift intelligences of angels, as well as the rapidity of glorified human minds, to traverse for eternity, finding fresh wonders evermore. The Precious Blood has one biography in Mary’s Womb, where it issued from the lone sanctities of her immaculate heart. It has another in Bethlehem, and another in Egypt, and another in Nazareth, and another on the shores of Gennesareth, and another in Jerusalem, and another in Galilee. Each of these is a world beyond the measures of our science, a cloister for devotion, and yet a cloister in which eternity has ample room. God’s vastness is a living vastness. It carries itself everywhere, and everywhere is entire and transcends the necessities of space. Each of these separate worlds of the life of Jesus upon earth is tied by some occult sympathy to some particular attribute, or group of attributes to God. Thus we learn in the life of Mother Margaret of the Blessed Sacrament, Carmalitess, at Dijon, that the souls which are called to a special devotion to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Resurrection have always a peculiar attraction to worship the divine sanctity. These are glimpses of that glad science of the Three-and-Thirty Years, which will be part o four unutterable bliss beyond the grave. Surely it makes the world seem wearier than ever, to think of the unsuspected grandeurs which the mysteries of our sweet Jesus are waiting to pour out into our souls, when he has received us into his kingdom.

It is plain, from what has been said, that our knowledge of the inward life of the Precious Blood during the Thirty-Three Years must be very superficial. Nevertheless, we must put it before ourselves as clearly as we can. Its first beginning was in the thrills of beatific joy. We shall see reasons afterward for carefully noting this. The beginning of the Human Life of Jesus was not gradual. It had no dawn. Its very union with the Divinity rendered this impossible. It broke out of nothingness into the blaze of consciousness and blessed ecstasy. It saw God as not even Mary sees him now. It saw him, went out of sight of all creation toward comprehending him, enjoyed him as not all heaven after the Doom will enjoy him, and adored him as no fabulous number of possible worlds could ever have adored him. This was the first pulse of the Precious Blood. They very first throb had in it an incalculable immensity of gladness. Out of its first moment all worlds might be gladdened beyond their power of bearing gladness. Save the Uncreated Jubilee, the sweet Spirit of the Father and the Son, never was there jubilee like that of the Precious Blood in its beginning. Yet from that hour the jubilee has never ceased; it has never lessened; it has never changed. Its pulses are not tides. They imply no vicissitude. They betoken only an equable impetuosity of immutable delight. The gladness which flashed like lightning out of the eyes of the Infant into the heart of Mary was unabated when the same eyes drooped languidly toward her upon Calvary. The blessedness which broke forth like a creation of light in the glory of the Resurrection had never left the Sacred Heart even during the Way of the Cross. But, with the beatific joy, the Precious Blood had all other joys as well. That Human Life as a joy in itself, a joy in its divine union, independently of its vision of God. It was a joy in the love and possession of so sweet a Mother. It was a joy in the unearthly tranquility of Joseph’s deep, loving adorable heart,. It was a joy in the jubilee of the worshipping angels. It was a joy in the very bitterness of its redeeming woes, and it was a joy in the intensity of its own loves of God and men.

But it was a life also of colossal of sorrows, even though they abated not the joy. Never did blood of man throb with such excesses of anguish as the Precious Blood of our most dear Redeemer. Its sorrows were lifelong. Their excesses exceeded all the tortures of the martyrs. There was never a moment which was not occupied with sorrow. The jubilee never commingled with the woe, not tempered it, nor compensated for it. Nay, rather, all joys intensified the sorrows. Joy, surely, is in itself a diviner thing than sorrow; for there can be no sorrow in the Ever-blessed. But sorrow was more human; and therefore it was chosen as the instrument of man’s redemption; and thus to us it becomes more divine, because it brings God to us and raises us up to God. Thus sorrow was more natural to the Precious Blood. It was a life more congenial to its nature. Moreover, it was its official life. For by sorrow it was to accomplish its redeeming work. Its shedding was to be not only the consummation of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s suffering, but the chosen suffering, in which precisely the work of redemption was to lie. Jesus–thrice blessed be his most dear Name!–is all our own, neither can we spare any thing of him. Yet it was precisely his Soul which was to redeem us, nor the Passion of his Body which was to be exactly our expiation. It was the shedding of his Blood which was to cleanse us from our sins. The remedy of the Fall was precisely in the Saviour’s Blood. All the sorrows of his life grew up to the shedding of his Blood, and were crowned of his life grew up to the shedding of his Blood, and were crowned by it; and his shedding the last drops of its after he was dead was significant of the work it had to do. The Soul, and the Body, and the Blood lay separate; and the sacrifice was thus complete. (Father Frederick Faber, The Precious Blood, written in 1860 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers in 1978, pp. 162-167.)

We must realize that there can be no peace in the souls of men or in their nations or the world unless each man everywhere comes to recognize that the price of human redemption was wrought for us by the God-Man as He shed His blood to redeem us. There is no secular salvation in any ideology or program or policy. There is salvation only in the Blood of the Divine Redeemer. We must resist the entreaties of the naturalists who tell us repeatedly that they have a plan for world peace or for national security that either ignores or is indifferent to this simple fact: the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ the source of our peace and sanctification.

Father Faber wrote about these points in The Precious Blood:

It is plain that some millions of sins in a day are hindered by the Precious Blood; and this is not merely a hindering of so many individual sins, but it is an immense check upon the momentum of sin. It is also a weakening of habits of sin, and a diminution of the consequences of sin. If then, the action of the Precious Blood were withdrawn from the world, sins would not only increase incalculably in number, but the tyranny of sin would be fearfully augmented, and it would spread among a greater number of people. It would wax so bold that no one would be secure from the sins of others. It would be a constant warfare, or an intolerable vigilance, to preserve property and rights. Falsehood would become so universal as to dissolve society; and the homes of domestic life would be turned into wards either of a prison or a madhouse. We cannot be in the company of an atrocious criminal without some feeling of uneasiness and fear. We should not like to be left alone with him, even if his chains were not unfastened. But without the Precious Blood, such men would abound in the world. They might even become the majority. We know of ourselves, from glimpses God has once or twice given us in life, what incredible possibilities of wickedness we have in our souls. Civilization increases these possibilities. Education multiplies and magnifies our powers of sinning. Refinement adds a fresh malignity. Men would thus become more diabolically and unmixedly bad, until at last earth would be a hell on this side of the grave. There would also doubtless be new kinds of sins and worse kinds. Education would provide the novelty, and refinement would carry it into the region of the unnatural. All highly-refined and luxurious developments of heathenism have fearfully illustrated this truth. A wicked barbarian is like a beast. His savage passions are violent but intermitting, and his necessities of sin do not appear to grow. Their circle is limited. But a highly-educated sinner, without the restraints of religion, is like a demon. His sins are less confined to himself. They involve others in their misery. They require others to be offered as it were in sacrifice to them. Moreover, education, considered simply as an intellectual cultivation, propagates sin, and makes it more universal.

The increase of sin, without the prospects which the faith lays open to us, must lead to an increase of despair, and to an increase of it upon a gigantic scale. With despair must come rage, madness, violence, tumult, and bloodshed. Yet from what quarter could we expect relief in this tremendous suffering? We should be imprisoned in our own planet. The blue sky above us would be but a dungeon-roof. The greensward beneath our feet would truly be the slab of our future tomb. Without the Precious Blood there is no intercourse between heaven and earth. Prayer would be useless. Our hapless lot would be irremediable. It has always seemed to me that it will be one of the terrible things in hell, that there are no motives for patience there. We cannot make the best of it. Why should we endure it? Endurance is an effort for a time; but this woe is eternal. Perhaps vicissitudes of agony might be a kind of field for patience. But there are no such vicissitudes. Why should we endure, then? Simply because we must; and yet in eternal things this is not a sort of necessity which supplies a reasonable ground for patience. So in this imaginary world of rampant sin there would be no motives for patience. For death would be our only seeming relief; and that is only seeming, for death is any thin but an eternal sleep. Our impatience would become frenzy; and if our constitutions were strong enough to prevent the frenzy from issuing in downright madness, it would grow into hatred of God, which is perhaps already less uncommon than we suppose.

An earth, from off which all sense of justice had perished, would indeed be the most disconsolate of homes. The antediluvian earth exhibits only a tendency that way; and the same is true of the worst forms of heathenism. The Precious Blood was always there. Unnamed, unknown, and unsuspected, the Blood of Jesus has alleviated every manifestation of evil which there has ever been just as it is alleviating at this hour the punishments of hell. What would be our own individual case on such a blighted earth as this? All our struggles to be better would be simply hopeless. There would be no reason why we should not give ourselves up to that kind of enjoyment which our corruption does substantially find in sin. The gratification of our appetites is something; and that lies on one side, while on the other side there is absolutely nothing. But we should have the worm of conscience already, even though the flames of hell might yet be some years distant. To feel that we are fools, and yet lack the strength to be wiser–is not this precisely the maddening thing in madness? Yet it would be our normal state under the reproaches of conscience, in a world where there was no Precious Blood. Whatever relics of moral good we might retain about us would add most sensibly to our wretchedness. Good people, if there were any, would be, as St. Paul speaks, of all men the most miserable; for they would be drawn away from the enjoyment of this world, or have their enjoyment of it abated by a sense of guilt and shame; and there would be no other world to aim at or to work for. To lessen the intensity of our hell without abridging its eternity would hardly be a cogent motive, when the temptations of sin and the allurements of sense are so vivid and strong.

What sort of love could there be, when we could have no respect? Even if flesh and blood made us love each other, what a separation death would be! We should commit our dead to the ground without a hope. Husband and wife would part with the fearfullest certainties of a reunion more terrible than their separation. Mothers would long to look upon their little ones in the arms of death, because their lot would be less woeful than if they lived to offend God with their developed reason and intelligent will. The sweetest feelings of our nature would become unnatural, and the most honorable ties be dishonored. Our best instincts would lead us into our worst dangers. Our hearts would have to learn to beat another way, in order to avoid the dismal consequences which our affections would bring upon ourselves and others. But it is needless to go further into these harrowing details. The world of the heart, without the Precious Blood, and with an intellectual knowledge of God, and his punishments of sin, is too fearful a picture to be drawn with minute fidelity.

But how would it fare with the poor in such a world? They are God’s chosen portion upon the earth. He chose poverty himself, when he came to us. He has left the poor in his place, and they are never to fail from the earth, but to be his representatives there until the doom. But, if it were not for the Precious Blood, would any one love them? Would any one have a devotion to them, and dedicate his life to merciful ingenuities to alleviate their lot? If the stream of almsgiving is so insufficient now, what would it be then? There would be no softening of the heart by grace; there would be no admission of of the obligation to give away in alms a definite portion of our incomes; there would be no desire to expiate sin by munificence to the needy for the love of God. The gospel makes men’s hearts large;and yet even under the gospel the fountain of almsgiving flows scantily and uncertainly. There would be no religious orders devoting themselves with skilful concentration to different acts of spiritual and corporal mercy. Vocation is a blossom to be found only in the gardens of the Precious Blood. But all this is only negative, only an absence of God. Matters would go much further in such a world as we are imagining.

Even in countries professing to be Christian, and at least in possession of the knowledge of the gospel, the poor grow to be an intolerable burden to the rich. They have to be supported by compulsory taxes; and they are in other ways a continual subject of irritated and impatient legislation. Nevertheless, it is due to the Precious Blood that the principle of supporting them is acknowledged. From what we read in heathen history–even the history of nations renowned for political wisdom, for philosophical speculation, and for literary and artistic refinement–it would not be extravagant for us to conclude that, if the circumstances of a country were such as to make the numbers of the poor dangerous to the rich, the rich would not scruple to destroy them, while it was yet in their power to do so. Just as men have had in France and England to war down bears and wolves, so would the rich war down the poor, whose clamorous misery and excited despair should threaten them in the enjoyment of their power and their possessions. The numbers of the poor would be thinned by murder, until it should be safe for their masters to reduce them into slavery. The survivors would lead the lives of convicts or of beasts. History, I repeat, shows us that this is by no means an extravagant supposition.

Such would be the condition of the world without the Precious Blood. As generations succeeded each other, original sin would go on developing those inexhaustible malignant powers which come from the almost infinite character of evil. Sin would work earth into hell. Men would become devils, devils to others and to themselves. Every thing which makes life tolerable, which counteracts any evil, which softens any harshness, which sweetens any bitterness, which causes the machinery of society to work smoothly, or which consoles any sadness–is simply due to the Precious Blood of Jesus, in heathen as well as in Christian lands. It changes the whole position of an offending creation to its Creator. It changes, if we may dare in such a matter to speak of change, the aspect of God’s immutable perfections toward his human children. It does not work merely in a spiritual sphere. It is not only prolific in temporal blessings, but it is the veritable cause of all temporal blessings whatsoever. We are all of us every moment sensibly enjoying the benignant influence of the Precious Blood. Yet who thinks of all this? Why is the goodness of God so hidden, so imperceptible, so unsuspected? Perhaps because it is so universal and so excessive, that we should hardly be free agents if it pressed sensibly upon us always. God’s goodness is at once the most public of all his attributes, and at the same time the most secret. Has life a sweeter task than to seek it, and to find it out?

Men would be far more happy, if they separated religion less violently from other things. It is both unwise and unloving to put religion into a place by itself, and mark it off with an untrue distinctness from what we call worldly and unspiritual things. Of course there is a distinction, and a most important one, between them; yet it is easy to make this distinction too rigid and to carry it too far. Thus we often attribute to nature what is only due to grace; and we put out of sight the manner and degree in which the blessed majesty of the Incarnation affects all created things. But this mistake is forever robbing us of hundreds of motives for loving Jesus. We know how unspeakably much we owe to him; but we do not see all that it is not much we owe him, but all, simply and absolutely all. We pass through times and places in life, hardly recognizing how the sweetness of Jesus is sweetening the air around us and penetrating natural things with supernatural blessings.

Hence it comes to pass that men make too much of natural goodness. They think too highly of human progress. They exaggerate the moralizing powers of civilization and refinement, which, apart from grace, are simply tyrannies of the few over the many, or of the public over the individual soul. Meanwhile they underrate the corrupting capabilities of sin, and attribute to unassisted nature many excellences which it only catches, as it were by the infection, by the proximity of grace, or by contagion, from the touch of the Church. Even in religious and ecclesiastical matters they incline to measure progress, or test vigor, by other standards rather than that of holiness. These men will consider the foregoing picture of the world without the Precious Blood as overdrawn and too darkly shaded. They do not believe in the intense malignity of man when drifted from God, and still less are they inclined to grant that cultivation and refinement only intensify still further this malignity. They admit the superior excellence of Christian charity; but they also think highly of natural philanthropy. But has this philanthropy ever been found where the indirect influences of the true religion, whether Jewish or Christian, had not penetrated? We may admire the Greeks for their exquisite refinement, and the Romans for the wisdom of their political moderation. Yet look at the position of children, of servants, of slaves, and of the poor, under both these systems, and see if, while extreme refinement only pushed sin to an extremity of foulness, the same exquisite culture did not also lead to a social cruelty and an individual selfishness which made life unbearable to the masses. Philanthropy is but a theft from the gospel, or rather a shadow, not a substance, and as unhelpful as shadows are want to be. (Father Frederick Faber, The Precious Blood, published originally in England in 1860, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 53-59.)

One of the greatest tragedies of the conciliar revolution is that it has robbed so many Catholics around the world of access to the merits of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

We can only see, however, how so many Catholics act with equanimity when they see a man claiming to be the Vicar of Christ on earth fawning over the symbols of false religions, thinking nothing of the simple fact that this same disciple of the New Theology did not use one single, solitary moment of his trip to the United States of America nearly three months ago to make an exhortation to Catholics to pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary.

Why should Catholics be concerned about “loftier theological arguments” when the counterfeit church of conciliarism of which they are a part, whether wittingly or unwittingly, has denied them access to the merits of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? The world described by Father Faber in the passage from The Precious Blood just quoted is our world today!

The Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ flowed from His Most Sacred Heart, which was formed out of and is in perfect communion with the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

May we pray to Our Lady, Mary Immaculate, to help us to be so cleansed by her Divine Son’s Most Precious Blood that we will have by means of penance and mortification blood running through our arteries and veins that carries holy sentiments of deep and filial attachment to First and Last Things, being ever ready to shed our blood, both figuratively and literally, in defense of the fullness of the Holy Faith without compromise or any taint of error, being especially willing to make all sacrifices necessary to help our families and friends persevere to the point of their dying breaths in states of Sanctifying Grace, offering as many Rosaries each day as our the duties of our states-in-life permit. Those who die in a state of Sanctifying Grace will, having had the seal of the Blood of the Paschal Lamb Himself placed on their lips, know the reward of the eternal merits of the Laver of Redemption in an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise.

O Most Precious Blood of Jesus, have mercy on us.

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

The Chaplet of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus

Seven “effusions of the Blood of Christ”, implicitly or explicitly mentioned in the Gospels, are recalled in a series of biblical meditations and devotional prayers: the Blood of the Circumcision, the Blood of the Garden of Gethsemane, the Blood of the Flagellation, the Blood of the Crowning of Thorns, the Blood of the Ascent to Calvary, the Blood flowing from Christ’s side pierced by the lance. Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy

This Chaplet is divided into seven groups, containing thirty-three “Our Fathers” in honor of the thirty-three years during which the Precious Blood flowed in the veins of Jesus, before it was poured out on the Cross for our salvation. After each group, the “Glory be to the Father” is recite in thanksgiving to the Holy Trinity for this great gift of the Precious Blood. While reciting these prayers, you are asked to meditate on each of the seven bloodsheddings of Jesus

V. O God, come to my assistance. R. Lord, make haste to help me. V. Glory be to the Father, etc. R. As it was in the beginning, etc.

1st Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood in the Circumcision

Let us ask for chastity of soul and body. Our Father five times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray, You, Lord, help your people whom You have redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

2nd Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood while praying in the Garden of Olives.

Let us ask for the spirit of prayer. Our Father five times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray You, Lord, help your people whom You have redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

3rd Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood in the scourging

Let us ask for the grace of mortification. Our Father five times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray you, Lord, help Your people whom You have redeemed with Your Precious Blood

4th Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood in the crowning with thorns

Let us ask for contempt of worldly honors. Our Father five times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray you, Lord, help Your people whom You redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

5th Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood while carrying the Cross

Let us ask for patience. Our Father five times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray You, Lord, help Your people whom You redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

6th Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood in the Crucifixion

Let us ask for contrition for our sins. Our Father five time. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray You, Lord, help your people whom You redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

7th Mystery – Jesus shed His Blood and water when His side was pierced.

Let us ask for the grace of perseverance. Our Father three times. Glory be to the Father, etc. We pray You, Lord, help Your people whom You redeemed with Your Precious Blood.

Eternal Father, I offer Thee the Precious Blood of Jesus Christ in atonement for my sins, in supplication for the holy souls in Purgatory and for the needs of Holy Church. Amen  (Chaplet of the Most Precious Blood.)

Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

June 29-30, 2014, Article

June 29, 2014, Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul and the Commemoration of the Sunday within the Octave of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

June 30, 2014: Commemoration of Saint Paul:

A New Sense for a New Faith, part two, took four days to complete, including almost the entirety of Saturday, June 28, 2014, the Feast of Saint Irenaeus, and today, the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul. As I have other work that needs to be completed during the summer, articles about Jorge, including his most recent interview, will be spaced far between. The Argentine Apostate never knows when to shut up. I, for one, am not going to spend much time until he travels to the Republic of Korea in August.

The current article could have been broken up into three or four separate parts. I chose to continue work on the article without doing so as it is meant to be a comprehensive treatment on certain passages in Sensus fidei in the life of the Church and in the Instrumentum Laboris that has been issued in preparation for the revolutionary work of the forthcoming hootenanny that Jorge will be holding this October that goes by the name of the “extraordinary synod of bishops on the family.”

Let met state once again that I realize full well that these articles are “too long” for many people. So be it. I do not write in the “sound bite” or with “bullet points” as I am endeavoring to leave behind a body of work that provide readers with sustained points and primary documentation from papal teaching that transcend the immediacy of any given moment. It is simply my desire to offer up this work to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slave of Christ the King through Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart as some small way to give Him honor and glory and to make some bit of reparation for my many sins. I can tell you this, however: work such as that required for this article is certainly penitential.

Also, I want to inform readers about a very fine post on the Novus Ordo Watch Wire concerning Jorge’s having joked about Eve’s creation by God out of a rib from Adam’s side, a prefiguring of Holy Mother Church being born from the wounded side of the New Adam, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The Novus Ordo Watch Wire post correctly points out how Catholics are required to believe the inerrant words of Sacred Scripture, written as they were under the Divine inspiration of God the Holy Ghost, noting the decision of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1909 on this point and the teaching contained in Pope Pius XII’s Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.

There is only one thing that I would like to add to the excellent post at Novus Ordo Watch Wire.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, although a vulgar, visceral man of incomparable crudity, may have joked about God’s creation of Eve. The denial of Special Creation of Adam and Eve by God, however, is standard fare for the so-called” Biblical scholars of the conciliar revolution. Even some presbyters installed for Motu communities have called the Creation account in The Book of Genesis to be “allegorical.” I have heard this taught in a seminary. I have heard in classrooms as a undergraduate at Saint John’s University in Jamaica, New York, and I have heard from the lecterns of many formerly Catholic parishes in conciliar captivity.

The denial of Special Creation of Adam and Eve by God is no joke to the Modernists, who are deadly serious about propagating their heretical contention. To deny Special Creation is to get rid of a Catholic’s understanding of the dogma of Original Sin as taught by Holy Mother Church and to embrace the biological evolutionism of Charles Darwin in order to justify the theological evolutionism of the likes of the late Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. The entire conciliar revolution is premised upon acceptance of both forms of evolutionism.

Indeed, the then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger explained to us twenty-three years ago, that is, on June 27, 1990, that a way had be found to dismiss the binding nature of the decrees against Modernism and the decisions of the Pontifical Biblical Commission:

1990: The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms – perhaps for the first time with this clarity – that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.

In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church’s anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time. (Joseph Ratzinger, “Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation,” published with the title “Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia,” in L’Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, cited at Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete)

Jorge may have told his blasphemous joke. Joseph Ratzinger, though, was completely serious about preparing the way for what labeled on December 22, 2005, as the “hermeneutic of continuity,” a subject that has been discussed on this site many, many times now. As  I have noted so many times, there is no space between Ratzinger and Bergoglio on matters of substance. Their differences are only on the margins of the conciliar revolution and in matters of style.

Finally, a little rejoinder to Jorge’s comment in his interview that Karl Marx “stole his ideas” from Christianity.”

Really?

Like what?

The dialectical principle came from Georg Wilhem Friedrich Hegel. Marx adapted this false principle, rejecting Hegel’s dialectical idealism in favor of his own dialectical materialism.

Atheism?

Marx’s beliefs that man is merely matter without a soul?

Marx’s belief that religion was the “opiate of the masses.”

Pope Pius XI provides a very good antidote to this in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937:

57. On this point We have already insisted in Our Allocution of May 12th of last year, but We believe it to be a duty of special urgency, Venerable Brethren, to call your attention to it once again. In the beginning Communism showed itself for what it was in all its perversity; but very soon it realized that it was thus alienating the people. It has therefore changed its tactics, and strives to entice the multitudes by trickery of various forms, hiding its real designs behind ideas that in themselves are good and attractive. Thus, aware of the universal desire for peace, the leaders of Communism pretend to be the most zealous promoters and propagandists in the movement for world amity. Yet at the same time they stir up a class-warfare which causes rivers of blood to flow, and, realizing that their system offers no internal guarantee of peace, they have recourse to unlimited armaments. Under various names which do not suggest Communism, they establish organizations and periodicals with the sole purpose of carrying their ideas into quarters otherwise inaccessible. They try perfidiously to worm their way even into professedly Catholic and religious organizations. Again, without receding an inch from their subversive principles, they invite Catholics to collaborate with them in the realm of so-called humanitarianism and charity; and at times even make proposals that are in perfect harmony with the Christian spirit and the doctrine of the Church. Elsewhere they carry their hypocrisy so far as to encourage the belief that Communism, in countries where faith and culture are more strongly entrenched, will assume another and much milder form. It will not interfere with the practice of religion. It will respect liberty of conscience. There are some even who refer to certain changes recently introduced into soviet legislation as a proof that Communism is about to abandon its program of war against God.

58. See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has gone so far as to say that he’s met Communists who are “good” people because their alleged “love” for the poor. He has called himself a servant of the poor, whose material plight has long been his driving force in life.

Yet it is that Pope Pius XI, while decrying the injustices caused by the liberal economic system of Modernity that helped to spawn Marxism, urged the poor to remain poor in spirit despite their material poverty:

45. But the poor too, in their turn, while engaged, according to the laws of charity and justice, in acquiring the necessities of life and also in bettering their condition, should always remain “poor in spirit,”[29] and hold spiritual goods in higher esteem than earthly property and pleasures. Let them remember that the world will never be able to rid itself of misery, sorrow and tribulation, which are the portion even of those who seem most prosperous. Patience, therefore, is the need of all, that Christian patience which comforts the heart with the divine assurance of eternal happiness. “Be patient, therefore, brethren,” we repeat with St. .lames, “until the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, patiently bearing until he receive the early and the later rain. Be you therefore also patient and strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.”[30] Only thus will be fulfilled the consoling promise of the Lord: “Blessed are the poor!” These words are no vain consolation, a promise as empty as those of the Communists. They are the words of life, pregnant with a sovereign reality. They are fully verified here on earth, as well as in eternity. Indeed, how many of the poor, in anticipation of the Kingdom of Heaven already proclaimed their own: “for yours is the Kingdom of Heaven,”[31] find in these words a happiness which so many of the wealthy, uneasy with their riches and ever thirsting for more, look for in vain! (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)

Behold the contrast between a true pope and a false one.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

A New Sense for a New Faith, part two

The entire goal of Sensus fidei in the life of the Church is to provide a theological justification for Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s plans to expedite the evolutionary processes, if you will, of the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s logical path of degeneration to the point of complete paganism. Although the point has been made several times before on this site, the counterfeit church of conciliarism is rapidly matching the heretical and schismatic Anglican sect’s complete abandonment of any semblance of even a generic sense of Christianity in order to assuage the consciences of those steeped in lives of unrepentant sins, whether those sins be of the natural or unnatural variety.

The authors of Sensus fidei in the life of the Church attempted to explain that the conciliar religion’s concept of the sense of their false faith must be distinguished from public opinion as found in the realm of civil “democracies,” which are, of course, actually republics in that a pure democracy is a form of government in which the whole number of citizens meeting eligibility requirement gather in assembly to  directly decide matters of public policy (e.g. ancient Athens and the “town meeting” form of government that to this very day in some New England communities), before proceeding to extol the role of public opinion in the gathering of the sense of the faithful. Such must ever be the fate of minds who reject what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI considered the “crystal-clear logic” of Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Scholasticism that is disparaged by Jorge Mario Bergoglio as producing a “church that is closed-in-on-itself” and thus incapable of letting what he thinks is the Third Person of Most Blessed Trinity “blow freely” without being “caged in” by the “filter” of a dogmatically “rigid” past.

Here is the supposed rejection of public opinion as the foundation of the sense of the faithful while admitting that it does have a “proper role in the Church”:

One of the most delicate topics is the relationship between the sensus fidei and public or majority opinion both inside and outside the Church. Public opinion is a sociological concept, which applies first of all to political societies. The emergence of public opinion is linked to the birth and development of the political model of representative democracy. In so far as political power gains its legitimacy from the people, the latter must make known their thoughts, and political power must take account of them in the exercise of government. Public opinion is therefore essential to the healthy functioning of democratic life, and it is important that it be enlightened and informed in a competent and honest manner. That is the role of the mass media, which thus contribute greatly to the common good of society, as long as they do not seek to manipulate opinion in favour of particular interests.

114. The Church appreciates the high human and moral values espoused by democracy, but she herself is not structured according to the principles of a secular political society. The Church, the mystery of the communion of humanity with God, receives her constitution from Christ. It is from him that she receives her internal structure and her principles of government. Public opinion cannot, therefore, play in the Church the determinative role that it legitimately plays in the political societies that rely on the principle of popular sovereignty, though it does have a proper role in the Church, as we shall seek to clarify below. (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Extensive and Protracted Comments:

There is a great deal of error in this one paragraph. Much time has to be taken to examine the matter in depth as the conciliar revolutionaries must by their very reprobate nature distort the meaning, history and application in concrete circumstances of Holy Mother Church’s Social Teaching.

First, it is false that political power derives its legitimacy from the people. Although it will be explained below that the people may choose to adopt any particular form of government as befits the pursuit of the common good in accord with the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, the source of all sovereignty is God, not the people.

Pope Leo XIII made this eminently clear in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

30. Now, natural reason itself proves convincingly that such concepts of the government of a State are wholly at variance with the truth. Nature itself bears witness that all power, of every kind, has its origin from God, who is its chief and most august source.

31. The sovereignty of the people, however, and this without any reference to God, is held to reside in the multitude; which is doubtless a doctrine exceedingly well calculated to flatter and to inflame many passions, but which lacks all reasonable proof, and all power of insuring public safety and preserving order. Indeed, from the prevalence of this teaching, things have come to such a pass that may hold as an axiom of civil jurisprudence that seditions may be rightfully fostered. For the opinion prevails that princes are nothing more than delegates chosen to carry out the will of the people; whence it necessarily follows that all things are as changeable as the will of the people, so that risk of public disturbance is ever hanging over our heads.

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God.

32. So, too, the liberty of thinking, and of publishing, whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrance, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountain-head and origin of many evils. Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. These remain ever one and the same, and are no less unchangeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption. Whatever, therefore, is opposed to virtue and truth may not rightly be brought temptingly before the eye of man, much less sanctioned by the favor and protection of the law. A well-spent life is the only way to heaven, whither all are bound, and on this account the State is acting against the laws and dictates of nature whenever it permits the license of opinion and of action to lead minds astray from truth and souls away from the practice of virtue. To exclude the Church, founded by God Himself, from life, from laws, from the education of youth, from domestic society is a grave and fatal error. A State from which religion is banished can never be well regulated; and already perhaps more than is desirable is known of the nature and tendency of the so-called civil philosophy of life and morals. The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals. She it is who preserves in their purity the principles from which duties flow, and, by setting forth most urgent reasons for virtuous life, bids us not only to turn away from wicked deeds, but even to curb all movements of the mind that are opposed to reason, even though they be not carried out in action.

33. To wish the Church to be subject to the civil power in the exercise of her duty is a great folly and a sheer injustice. Whenever this is the case, order is disturbed, for things natural are put above things supernatural; the many benefits which the Church, if free to act, would confer on society are either prevented or at least lessened in number; and a way is prepared for enmities and contentions between the two powers, with how evil result to both the issue of events has taught us only too frequently.

34. Doctrines such as these, which cannot be approved by human reason, and most seriously affect the whole civil order, Our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs (well aware of what their apostolic office required of them) have never allowed to pass uncondemned. Thus, Gregory XVI in his encyclical letter “Mirari Vos,” dated August 15, 1832, inveighed with weighty words against the sophisms which even at his time were being publicly inculcated-namely, that no preference should be shown for any particular form of worship; that it is right for individuals to form their own personal judgments about religion; that each man’s conscience is his sole and allsufficing guide; and that it is lawful for every man to publish his own views, whatever they may be, and even to conspire against the State. On the question of the separation of Church and State the same Pontiff writes as follows: “Nor can We hope for happier results either for religion or for the civil government from the wishes of those who desire that the Church be separated from the State, and the concord between the secular and ecclesiastical authority be dissolved. It is clear that these men, who yearn for a shameless liberty, live in dread of an agreement which has always been fraught with good, and advantageous alike to sacred and civil interests.” To the like effect, also, as occasion presented itself, did Pius IX brand publicly many false opinions which were gaining ground, and afterwards ordered them to be condensed in summary form in order that in this sea of error Catholics might have a light which they might safely follow. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

The conciliar revolutionaries celebrated the “joys” of Modernity as “good” in and of themselves even though they are contrary to Divine Revelation and to right reason. Again, one must face the plain reality that these revolutionaries profess a false religion and thus are not members of the Catholic Church, no less officials within her.

Second, yes, the Catholic Church can adapt herself to any legitimate form of government, including the republican form of democratic governance, as long as those governments are directed toward their proper end by pursuing the common temporal good in light of man’s Last End, the possession of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven. Our true popes have urge children of Holy Mother Church to obey just laws and to resist those that are repugnant to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law by making use of the liberties accorded them by the civil law. Holy Mother Church does not, however, esteem “democracy’s” supposed “high human and moral values.

Writing in his encyclical letter on the French Third Republic, which came into existence in 1871 following the overthrow of Emperor Napoleon III (Louis Bonaparte) and then proceeded to institute gravely anti-Catholic legislation that caused many Catholics in France to protest its legitimacy, Pope Leo XIII wrote that Holy Mother Church accepts as legitimate all forms of government that aim to promote the common good, noting that she is not blind to the inherent defects, such as the separation of Church and State, found in that same Third Republic:

12. We have expressly recalled some features of the past that Catholics might not be dismayed by the present. Substantially the struggle is ever the same: Jesus Christ is always exposed to the contradictions of the world, and the same means are always used by modern enemies of Christianity, means old in principle and scarcely modified in form; but the same means of defense are also clearly indicated to Christians of the present day by our apologists, our doctors and our martyrs. What they have done it is incumbent upon us to do in our turn. Let us therefore place above all else the glory of God and of His Church; let us work for her with an assiduity at once constant and effective, and leave all care of success to Jesus Christ, who tells us: “In the world you shall have distress: but have confidence, I have overcome the world.”[5]

13. To attain this We have already remarked that a great union is necessary, and if it is to be realized, it is indispensable that all preoccupation capable of diminishing its strength and efficacy must be abandoned. Here We intend alluding principally to the political differences among the French in regard to the actual republic — a question We would treat with the clearness which the gravity of the subject demands, beginning with the principles and descending thence to practical results.

14. Various political governments have succeeded one another in France during the last century, each having its own distinctive form: the Empire, the Monarchy, and the Republic. By giving one’s self up to abstractions, one could at length conclude which is the best of these forms, considered in themselves; and in all truth it may be affirmed that each of them is good, provided it lead straight to its end — that is to say, to the common good for which social authority is constituted; and finally, it may be added that, from a relative point of view, such and such a form of government may be preferable because of being better adapted to the character and customs of such or such a nation. In this order of speculative ideas, Catholics, like all other citizens, are free to prefer one form of government to another precisely because no one of these social forms is, in itself, opposed to the principles of sound reason nor to the maxims of Christian doctrine. What amply justifies the wisdom of the Church is that in her relations with political powers she makes abstraction of the forms which differentiate them and treats with them concerning the great religious interests of nations, knowing that hers is the duty to undertake their tutelage above all other interests. Our preceding Encyclicals have already exposed these principles, but it was nevertheless necessary to recall them for the development of the subject which occupies us to-day.

15. In descending from the domain of abstractions to that of facts, we must beware of denying the principles just established: they remain fixed. However, becoming incarnated in facts, they are clothed with a contingent character, determined by the center in which their application is produced. Otherwise said, if every political form is good by itself and may be applied to the government of nations, the fact still remains that political power is not found in all nations under the same form; each has its own. This form springs from a combination of historical or national, though always human, circumstances which, in a nation, give rise to its traditional and even fundamental laws, and by these is determined the particular form of government, the basis of transmission of supreme power.  (Pope Leo XIII, Au Milieu Des Sollicitudes, February 16, 1892.)

Pope Leo XIII was not praising the French Third Republic. He was only stating that it was possible for Catholics to work within it for the common good, noting that the sovereign of all states is God Himself, not the people. Christ the King is sovereign. His language was measured and diplomatic as he endeavored give the Concordat between the Church and the Third Republic a chance to work.

Pope Leo XIII, however, went on to reiterate Holy Mother Church’s absolute condemnation of the separation of Church and State in France that had been condemned consistently by his predecessors dating back to Pope Pius VII’s Post Tam Diuturnas, April 29, 1814. While Holy Mother Church will adapt herself to the particular circumstances in which her children live and tolerate the existence of such a situation, she never yields anything to the the anti-Incarnational errors of the modern civil state that is but the misbegotten issue of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry:

28. We shall not hold to the same language on another point, concerning the principle of the separation of the State and Church, which is equivalent to the separation of human legislation from Christian and divine legislation. We do not care to interrupt Ourselves here in order to demonstrate the absurdity of such a separation; each one will understand for himself. As soon as the State refuses to give to God what belongs to God, by a necessary consequence it refuses to give to citizens that to which, as men, they have a right; as, whether agreeable or not to accept, it cannot be denied that man’s rights spring from his duty toward God. Whence if follows that the State, by missing in this connection the principal object of its institution, finally becomes false to itself by denying that which is the reason of its own existence. These superior truths are so clearly proclaimed by the voice of even natural reason, that they force themselves upon all who are not blinded by the violence of passion; therefore Catholics cannot be too careful in defending themselves against such a separation. In fact, to wish that the State would separate itself from the Church would be to wish, by a logical sequence, that the Church be reduced to the liberty of living according to the law common to all citizens.…It is true that in certain countries this state of affairs exists. It is a condition which, if it have numerous and serious inconveniences, also offers some advantages — above all when, by a fortunate inconsistency, the legislator is inspired by Christian principles — and, though these advantages cannot justify the false principle of separation nor authorize its defense, they nevertheless render worthy of toleration a situation which, practically, might be worse.

29. But in France, a nation Catholic in her traditions and by the present faith of the great majority of her sons, the Church should not be placed in the precarious position to which she must submit among other peoples; and the better that Catholics understand the aim of the enemies who desire this separation, the less will they favor it. To these enemies, and they say it clearly enough, this separation means that political legislation be entirely independent of religious legislation; nay, more, that Power be absolutely indifferent to the interests of Christian society, that is to say, of the Church; in fact, that it deny her very existence. But they make a reservation formulated thus: As soon as the Church, utilizing the resources which common law accords to the least among Frenchmen, will, by redoubling her native activity, cause her work to prosper, then the State intervening, can and will put French Catholics outside the common law itself. . . In a word: the ideal of these men would be a return to paganism: the State would recognize the Church only when it would be pleased to persecute her. (Pope Leo XIII, Au Milieu Des Sollicitudes, February 16, 1892.)

This is what was happening in France at that time. This is what happening all over thew world today. Yet it is that the conciliar revolutionaries have long praised the ethos of “pluralism” and “religious liberty” and “separation of Church and State” and “freedom of the press” and “freedom of speech” despite all of the objective evidence testifying to the prophetic statements made by our true popes in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries. Then again, of course,the conciliar revolutionaries are busy celebrating those who are said to “live on the existential peripheries” as a result of the tide of evils that have been let loose by Modernity and that Modernism has enabled by its heresies, apostasies, errors and by its every celebration of the world in its liturgically abominable and sacramentally barren Protestant and Judeo-Masonic liturgical service.

Insofar as the case of France, a country where so-called “gay marriage” was approved in 2013 without a word of protest from Jorge Mario Bergoglio, it is well known that the leaders of the French Third Republic responded to Pope Leo XIII’s careful explication and application of Catholic principles with even more anti-Catholic legislation than before, which is what prompted Pope Saint Pius, who had the inestimable benefit of not having had any experience in the diplomatic service of the Holy See,wrote the following forceful and completely unequivocal words in Vehementer Nos almost exactly fourteen years later, that is, on February 11, 1906.

Our soul is full of sorrowful solicitude and Our heart overflows with grief, when Our thoughts dwell upon you. How, indeed, could it be otherwise, immediately after the promulgation of that law which, by sundering violently the old ties that linked your nation with the Apostolic See, creates for the Catholic Church in France a situation unworthy of her and ever to be lamented? That is, beyond question, an event of the gravest import, and one that must be deplored by all the right-minded, for it is as disastrous to society as it is to religion; but it is an event which can have surprised nobody who has paid any attention to the religious policy followed in France of late years. For you, Venerable Brethren, it will certainly have been nothing new or strange, witnesses as you have been of the many dreadful blows aimed from time to time by the public authority at religion. You have seen the sanctity and the inviolability of Christian marriage outraged by legislative acts in formal contradiction with them; the schools and hospitals laicized; clerics torn from their studies and from ecclesiastical discipline to be subjected to military service; the religious congregations dispersed and despoiled, and their members for the most part reduced to the last stage of destitution. Other legal measures which you all know have followed: the law ordaining public prayers at the beginning of each Parliamentary Session and of the assizes has been abolished; the signs of mourning traditionally observed on board the ships on Good Friday suppressed; the religious character effaced from the judicial oath; all actions and emblems serving in any way to recall the idea of religion banished from the courts, the schools, the army, the navy, and in a word from all public establishments. These measures and others still which, one after another really separated the Church from the State, were but so many steps designedly made to arrive at complete and official separation, as the authors of them have publicly and frequently admitted.

2. On the other hand the Holy See has spared absolutely no means to avert this great calamity. While it was untiring in warning those who were at the head of affairs in France, and in conjuring them over and over again to weigh well the immensity of the evils that would infallibly result from their separatist policy, it at the same time lavished upon France the most striking proofs of indulgent affection. It has then reason to hope that gratitude would have stayed those politicians on their downward path, and brought them at last to relinquish their designs. But all has been in vain-the attentions, good offices, and efforts of Our Predecessor and Ourself. The enemies of religion have succeeded at last in effecting by violence what they have long desired, in defiance of your rights as a Catholic nation and of the wishes of all who think rightly. At a moment of such gravity for the Church, therefore, filled with the sense of Our Apostolic responsibility, We have considered it Our duty to raise Our voice and to open Our heart to you, Venerable Brethren, and to your clergy and people-to all of you whom We have ever cherished with special affection but whom We now, as is only right, love more tenderly than ever.

3. That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man’s eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man’s supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. “Between them,” he says, “there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-“Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur.” He proceeds: “Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them…. As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. — “Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere…. Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error.”[1]

4. And if it is true that any Christian State does something eminently disastrous and reprehensible in separating itself from the Church, how much more deplorable is it that France, of all nations in the world, would have entered on this policy; France which has been during the course of centuries the object of such great and special predilection on the part of the Apostolic See whose fortunes and glories have ever been closely bound up with the practice of Christian virtue and respect for religion. Leo XIII had truly good reason to say: “France cannot forget that Providence has united its destiny with the Holy See by ties too strong and too old that she should ever wish to break them. And it is this union that has been the source of her real greatness and her purest glories…. To disturb this traditional union would be to deprive the nation of part of her moral force and great influence in the world.“[2] (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)

Although this quotation is very familiar to longtime readers of this site, do want to emphasize yet again this one sentence: “Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.” The conciliar “popes” have never ceased praising the separation of the Church and State, which should help to convince the unconvinced that they have not been true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter and that the “church” they head is but the counterfeit ape of the Catholic Church.

The modern civil state with its reliance on the falsehoods of “popular sovereignty,” “freedom of religion,” “separation of Church and State” and maintained by “public opinion,” each of which is praised, celebrated and exalted by the conciliar revolutionaries has done away with the truth contained in the following statement: God (as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church) is a majority of One.

Paragraphs 113 and 114 from Sensus fidei in the life of the Church are meant to set up the reader for a very revolutionary discussion of how public opinion, although it is not part of the Catholic Church’s Divine Constitution, nevertheless plays a role in the development of pastoral approaches, something that will be discussed below in the context of the Instrumentum Laboris that has been issued in preparation for Jorge’s upcoming “extraordinary synod on the family” that will be held within the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Banks of the Tiber River in October of this year.

Here are the next pertinent passages from Sensus fidei in the life of the Church:

115. The mass media comment frequently on religious affairs. Public interest in matters of faith is a good sign, and the freedom of the press is a basic human right. The Catholic Church is not afraid of discussion or controversy regarding her teaching. On the contrary, she welcomes debate as a manifestation of religious freedom. Everyone is free either to criticise or to support her. Indeed, she recognises that fair and constructive critique can help her to see problems more clearly and to find better solutions. She herself, in turn, is free to criticise unfair attacks, and needs access to the media in order to defend the faith if necessary. She values invitations from independent media to contribute to public debates. She does not want a monopoly of information, but appreciates the plurality and interchange of opinions. She also, however, knows the importance of informing society about the true meaning and content both of her faith and of her moral teaching

116. The voices of lay people are heard much more frequently now in the Church, sometimes with conservative and sometimes with progressive positions, but generally participating constructively in the life and the mission of the Church. The huge development of society by education has had considerable impact on relations within the Church. The Church herself is engaged worldwide in educational programmes aimed at giving people their own voice and their own rights. It is therefore a good sign if many people today are interested in the teaching, the liturgy and the service of the Church. Many members of the Church want to exercise their own competence, and to participate in their own proper way in the life of the Church. They organise themselves within parishes and in various groups and movements to build up the Church and to influence society at large, and they seek contact via social media with other believers and with people of good will. 

117. The new networks of communication both inside and outside the Church call for new forms of attention and critique, and the renewal of skills of discernment. There are influences from special interest groups which are not compatible, or not fully so, with the Catholic faith; there are convictions which are only applicable to a certain place or time; and there are pressures to lessen the role of faith in public debate or to accommodate traditional Christian doctrine to modern concerns and opinions. (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Fatigued Man’s Bleary-Eyed Commentary:

First, While Holy Mother Church will always defend her doctrine, which has received from her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom, Christ the King and has maintained inviolate by the infallible guidance and protection of God the Holy Ghost, she has never “welcomed debate as a manifestation of religious freedom.” The Catholic Church is the true and only teacher of Christianity and thus it is that she jealously safeguards her Divinely appointed role as the the only true teacher and the only sanctifier of men in the whole world.

For the sake of the one person who has never read these articles before or for the sake of a reader or two who may have read them but has forgotten the quotes below soon after reading them, here are healthy antidotes to the poison contained in the papal quotations below:

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

“For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of “naturalism,” as they call it, dare to teach that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,” viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching “liberty of perdition;” and that “if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.”

And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right.” But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

This so clear that anyone as to obliterate the sophistic praise of the very diabolical instruments that have been used to convert Catholics from the Holy Faith into a ready acceptance of everything presented by lords of Modernity as being true and good even though they are repugnant to the peace and happiness of eternity. We live in age of insanity and injurious babbling that suits the insane babblers of conciliarism so very well.

The conciliar masters of contradiction attempted to explain the distinctions between public opinion and the sensus fidei before going on to embrace “consultation” as a means of deciding that they think is the Catholic Church’s pastoral practices as an effort is made to “renew” the Church’s doctrine. The translation of this is most simple: The conciliar revolutionaries use the word “renew” to signify a change what true sense of the Holy Faith informs us is repugnant to the honor and glory of the Most Holy Trinity and to the good of the souls for whom Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and His Death on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem.

After all, of course, the conciliar revolutionaries have been attempting to peddle the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service as a “liturgical renewal” when it is nothing other than a wholesale overthrow of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church in favor of the errors of conciiarism and its “reconciliation” with the principles of Modernity.

Second, there is no such thing as a “conservative” or a “progressive” Catholic. Such are the misapplication of the labels used to identify the false opposites of naturalism to the realm of the Holy Faith, where one and all are bound to be united to everything contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith without any reservation and qualification whatsoever, admitting that, as Pope Leo XIII tried to address in Au Milieu Sollicitudes, February 16, 1892, Catholics might and do disagree at times over the application of the principles of Holy Mother Church’s Social Teaching in concrete circumstances.

As pertains to the doctrine of the Holy Faith, we are simply Catholic, nothing else.

Pope Leo XIII made this very clear in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896:

Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which is the first of those bonds which unite man to God, and whence we receive the name of the faithful – “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. iv., 5). That is, as there is one Lord and one baptism, so should all Christians, without exception, have but one faith. And so the Apostle St. Paul not merely begs, but entreats and implores Christians to be all of the same mind, and to avoid difference of opinions: “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms amongst you, and that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment” (I Cor. i., 10). Such passages certainly need no interpreter; they speak clearly enough for themselves. Besides, all who profess Christianity allow that there can be but one faith. It is of the greatest importance and indeed of absolute necessity, as to which many are deceived, that the nature and character of this unity should be recognized. And, as We have already stated, this is not to be ascertained by conjecture, but by the certain knowledge of what was done; that is by seeking for and ascertaining what kind of unity in faith has been commanded by Jesus Christ. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

To speak in terms of “conservative” and “progressive” Catholics is to divide that which is indivisible, the Mystical Body of Christ that is the Catholic Church.  The divisions that exist between Catholics in the past fifty years have been caused by conciliarism, not by the Holy Faith.

The expression of the Catholic Faith is meant to be clear, not foggy. The expression of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith is precise, not ambiguous or subject to a variety of different interpretations. While it is certainly the case that many theological questions (such as the coexistence of God’s Divine foreknowledge of human events with human free will, a matter that divided the Thomists and the Dun Scotists and is still a matter of active debate among orthodox Catholic theologians) are subject to legitimate interpretations and explanations, the dogmas of the Faith are meant to be grasped clearly by the human mind and accepted on the authority of the One Who has revealed them and caused them to be expressed in precise terms by legitimate popes and councils of the Catholic Church. While it is certainly true that the application of certain theological principles in concrete circumstances can be fraught with subjective considerations and other difficulties of the practical order, solemnly defined dogmatic truths demand the assent of the mind and the will without any degree of dissent or deviation whatsoever.

The Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas has been a major protection against the imprecise expression of the doctrines of the Church and a sure guide to their definitive explication. One true pope after another has recognized this to be the case. Pope Saint Pius X did so in a tribute to Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctoris Angelici:

For just as the opinion of certain ancients is to be rejected which maintains that it makes no difference to the truth of the Faith what any man thinks about the nature of creation, provided his opinions on the nature of God be sound, because error with regard to the nature of creation begets a false knowledge of God; so the principles of philosophy laid down by St. Thomas Aquinas are to be religiously and inviolably observed, because they are the means of acquiring such a knowledge of creation as is most congruent with the Faith; of refuting all the errors of all the ages, and of enabling man to distinguish clearly what things are to be attributed to God and to God alone….

St. Thomas perfected and augmented still further by the almost angelic quality of his intellect all this superb patrimony of wisdom which he inherited from his predecessors and applied it to prepare, illustrate and protect sacred doctrine in the minds of men. Sound reason suggests that it would be foolish to neglect it and religion will not suffer it to be in any way attenuated. And rightly, because, if Catholic doctrine is once deprived of this strong bulwark, it is useless to seek the slightest assistance for its defense in a philosophy whose principles are either common to the errors of materialism, monism, pantheism, socialism and modernism, or certainly not opposed to such systems. The reason is that the capital theses in the philosophy of St Thomas are not to be placed in the category of opinions capable of being debated one way or another, but are to be considered as the foundations upon which the science of natural and divine things is based; if such principles are once removed or in any way impaired, it must necessarily follow that students of the sacred sciences will ultimately fail to perceive so much as the meaning of the words in which the dogmas of divine revelation are proposed by the magistracy of the Church. . . . (Pope Saint Pius X, Doctoris Angelici, quoted in James Larson’s Article 11: A Confusion of Loves.) 

This is why it is so important for the conciliar revolutionaries to have made war upon the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas and to have recourse to “meeting the people where they are” that is nothing other than a descent into sentimentality and emotionalism in order to tickle the itching ears of unrepentant sinners.  Those who get in the way of theological “renewal” are said to be without “mercy” or love” even though it is they, believing Catholics, who are showing forth their true love of God as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church and for souls by refusing to make any concessions to the errors and the diabolical agenda of the conciliar revolutionaries.

Having extolled the possible role of public opinion in the “development” of the sensus fidei, the apostates who wrote Sensus fidei in the life of the Church, attempted once again to prove that the two are not the same thing explaining the “proper” role of public opinion in the life of their false church.

Got all that?

It is fatiguing.

Why delay?

Be fatigued:

118. It is clear that there can be no simple identification between the sensus fidei and public or majority opinion. These are by no means the same thing. 

i) First of all, the sensus fidei is obviously related to faith, and faith is a gift not necessarily possessed by all people, so the sensus fidei can certainly not be likened to public opinion in society at large. Then also, while Christian faith is, of course, the primary factor uniting members of the Church, many different influences combine to shape the views of Christians living in the modern world. As the above discussion of dispositions implicitly shows, the sensus fidei cannot simply be identified, therefore, with public or majority opinion in the Church, either. Faith, not opinion, is the necessary focus of attention. Opinion is often just an expression, frequently changeable and transient, of the mood or desires of a certain group or culture, whereas faith is the echo of the one Gospel which is valid for all places and times. (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Quick Comment:

There has been nothing more changeable and transient than the ever-changing doctrines, liturgies and pastoral practices of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, which is degenerating to the point of self-caricature.

Back to those who specializing in giving believing Catholics a case of exhaustion (hey, I get a little funny when I am tired):

ii) In the history of the people of God, it has often been not the majority but rather a minority which has truly lived and witnessed to the faith. The Old Testament knew the ‘holy remnant’ of believers, sometimes very few in number, over against the kings and priests and most of the Israelites. Christianity itself started as a small minority, blamed and persecuted by public authorities. In the history of the Church, evangelical movements such as the Franciscans and Dominicans, or later the Jesuits, started as small groups treated with suspicion by various bishops and theologians. In many countries today, Christians are under strong pressure from other religions or secular ideologies to neglect the truth of faith and weaken the boundaries of ecclesial community. It is therefore particularly important to discern and listen to the voices of the ‘little ones who believe’ (Mk 9:42). (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Another Quick Comment or Two:

First, curious, is it not, that the authors of do not name that among the “public authorities” who persecuted Catholics in Holy Mother Church’s infancy were the Jews. They did so with great fury prior to the chastisement that Christ the King visited upon them in 70 A.D. as he used the pagan Romans to punish them for their unbelief as they were dispersed into the quarters of the known world.

Second, the Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits may have been viewed with suspicions by many at first. Each, however, received the favor of true Successors of Saint Peter. Pope Innocent III was particularly solicitous of the Franciscans and the Dominicans as he knew that their respective founders, Saint Francis of Assisi and Saint Dominican de Guzman, were true sons of Holy Mother Church. The Jesuits, for their part, were meant by Saint Ignatius of Loyola to be the Pope’s Army in defense of the Holy Faith.

The “lay movements” spawned by conciliarism may have had the favor of the conciliar “popes” and the approval of a large number of the “bishops.” Each of these “movements,” however, have enjoyed the favor of the conciliar “popes” precisely because their religious sentiments are those of conciliarism, not Catholicism. Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, despite his recent meeting with a delegation from the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, has authorized a major warfare upon them because they have held to a great deal of the Catholic Faith, including the devotion that large numbers of them have for the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that is “approved” for use under the Motu proprio of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007.

Although very tired by this all, there are eight more sections of this bilge to plow through before connecting this all to the agenda of the new Instrumentum Laboris in part three:

119. It is undoubtedly necessary to distinguish between the sensus fidei and public or majority opinion, hence the need to identify dispositions necessary for participation in the sensus fidei, such as those elaborated above. Nevertheless, it is the whole people of God which, in its inner unity, confesses and lives the true faith. The magisterium and theology must work constantly to renew the presentation of the faith in different situations, confronting if necessary dominant notions of Christian truth with the actual truth of the Gospel, but it must be recalled that the experience of the Church shows that sometimes the truth of the faith has been conserved not by the efforts of theologians or the teaching of the majority of bishops but in the hearts of believers (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Pointed Comment:

There’s that word “renew” again as the suggestion is made “to renew the presentation of the faith in different situations, confronting dominant notions of Christian truth with the actual truth of the Gospel.” In other words, the apostates are saying that it is necessary to rethink the “message” as “dominant notions of Christian truth” held by some stuffy theologians yield to the “hearts of believers.” This means that there can be a conflict between “dominant notions of Christian truth” and the “actual truth of Gospel, meaning the “actual truth” has been obscured by Holy Mother Church’s true popes and true councils and those of her Fathers and Doctors whose writings “corrupted” this “actual truth.” There is a word for this: Gnosticism.

Actually, of course, the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, has conserved the teaching of the Catholic Church, which never changes her manner of speaking:

[The Ancient Doctors] knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, they sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith which is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error.

“Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it.

It is as if the innovators pretended that they always intended to present the alternative passages, especially to those of simple faith who eventually come to know only some part of the conclusions of such discussions which are published in the common language for everyone’s use. Or again, as if the same faithful had the ability on examining such documents to judge such matters for themselves without getting confused and avoiding all risk of error. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor Saint Celestine who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.

“In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is required than the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic truth is camouflaged.” (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)

These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be anathematized. (Constantinople III).

These and many other serious things, which at present would take too long to list, but which you know well, cause Our intense grief. It is not enough for Us to deplore these innumerable evils unless We strive to uproot them. We take refuge in your faith and call upon your concern for the salvation of the Catholic flock. Your singular prudence and diligent spirit give Us courage and console Us, afflicted as We are with so many trials. We must raise Our voice and attempt all things lest a wild boar from the woods should destroy the vineyard or wolves kill the flock. It is Our duty to lead the flock only to the food which is healthful. In these evil and dangerous times, the shepherds must never neglect their duty; they must never be so overcome by fear that they abandon the sheep. Let them never neglect the flock and become sluggish from idleness and apathy. Therefore, united in spirit, let us promote our common cause, or more truly the cause of God; let our vigilance be one and our effort united against the common enemies.

Indeed you will accomplish this perfectly if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to yourselves and to doctrine and meditate on these words: “the universal Church is affected by any and every novelty” and the admonition of Pope Agatho: “nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.” Therefore may the unity which is built upon the See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May it be for all a wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of countless blessings. To check the audacity of those who attempt to infringe upon the rights of this Holy See or to sever the union of the churches with the See of Peter, instill in your people a zealous confidence in the papacy and sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian wrote: “He who abandons the See of Peter on which the Church was founded, falsely believes himself to be a part of the Church . . . .

But for the other painful causes We are concerned about, you should recall that certain societies and assemblages seem to draw up a battle line together with the followers of every false religion and cult. They feign piety for religion; but they are driven by a passion for promoting novelties and sedition everywhere. They preach liberty of every sort; they stir up disturbances in sacred and civil affairs, and pluck authority to pieces.(Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

Would that they had but displayed less zeal and energy in propagating it! But such is their activity and such their unwearying labor on behalf of their cause, that one cannot but be pained to see them waste such energy in endeavoring to ruin the Church when they might have been of such service to her had their efforts been better directed. Their artifices to delude men’s minds are of two kinds, the first to remove obstacles from their path, the second to devise and apply actively and patiently every resource that can serve their purpose. They recognize that the three chief difficulties which stand in their way are the scholastic method of philosophy, the authority and tradition of the Fathers, and the magisterium of the Church, and on these they wage unrelenting war. Against scholastic philosophy and theology they use the weapons of ridicule and contempt. Whether it is ignorance or fear, or both, that inspires this conduct in them, certain it is that the passion for novelty is always united in them with hatred of scholasticism, and there is no surer sign that a man is tending to Modernism than when he begins to show his dislike for the scholastic method. Let the Modernists and their admirers remember the proposition condemned by Pius IX: “The method and principles which have served the ancient doctors of scholasticism when treating of theology no longer correspond with the exigencies of our time or the progress of science.” They exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those “who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind…or endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church“; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: “We therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.” Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: “I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

There is a special irony, however, found in Paragraph 119 of Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church as the true Catholic Faith today is found in the hearts of believing Catholics in the underground, not in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Back to the brutal apostates and their tortuous schemes:

c) Ways of consulting the faithful

120. There is a genuine equality of dignity among all the faithful, because through their baptism they are all reborn in Christ. ‘Because of this equality they all contribute, each according to his or her own condition and office, to the building up of the Body of Christ.’[133] Therefore, all the faithful ‘have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church’. ‘They have the right to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful, but in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reference to the Pastors and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals.’[134] Accordingly, the faithful, and specifically the lay people, should be treated by the Church’s pastors with respect and consideration, and consulted in an appropriate way for the good of the Church.  (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

121. The word ‘consult’ includes the idea of seeking a judgment or advice as well as inquiring into a matter of fact. On the one hand, in matters of governance and pastoral issues, the pastors of the Church can and should consult the faithful in certain cases in the sense of asking for their advice or their judgment. On the other hand, when the magisterium is defining a doctrine, it is appropriate to consult the faithful in the sense of inquiring into a matter of fact, ‘because the body of the faithful is one of the witnesses to the fact of the tradition of revealed doctrine, and because their consensus through Christendom is the voice of the Infallible Church’.[135]   (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

A Comment that will require a moment or two of your time:

Insofar as instances of pastoral abuse or immoral conduct or heterodox teaching heard from the pulpit or taught in a school, then, yes, of course, the faithful have a right and duty to make their concerns known privately, although there might be occasions when serious abuse might have to rebuked publicly according to the teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas on the matter if all private entreaties fail to rectify the abuse.

Begging a thousand pardons here, but how respectful have the conciliar authorities been to members of the laity who brought instances of grave clerical immorality to the attention of their “bishops” and various chancery factotums? In most cases, of course, the members of the laity–not a few members of the conciliar clergy, have been treated with contempt as they were browbeaten, intimidated by diocesan attorneys or attorneys for the diocese’s insurance companies and castigated for daring to call abuse by its proper name.

The only recourse that victims of clerical immorality had was to threaten or to actually file lawsuits and to take matters into the public domain, whereupon the conciliar officials, at least at first, castigated them all over again and engaged in all manner of delaying tactics that were designed to keep their protection of the sodomites that they had recruited and promoted completely under wraps as though it was but the figments of the imaginations of “gold-digging” Catholics. I suggest that those who have any doubt about this fact should consider the massive amount of documented evidence that Mrs. Randy Engel amassed in The Rite of Sodomy. Remember, Father Carlos Urrutigoity is the conciliar vicar general of the Diocese of Ciudad del Este, Paraguay, despite his proven record of abusive behavior (see Relevant Once Again: A Special Report on the Society of Saint John (2000) and No Excuses For Those Who Indemnify the Society of Saint John), and that “Monsignor Batista Ricca is still the head of the Vatican Institute for Religious Works (the Vatican Bank) despite his own proven perversity.

Begging yet another thousand pardons, but how respectful have the conciliar authorities in many places shown themselves to believing Catholics who have complained about “liturgical abuses” and aberrant teachings and practices that they know are abhorrent to the Most Blessed Trinity and harmful to souls and to the common good as well? These Catholics have also been treated with great cruelty, especially by the first generation of Catholic revolutionaries appointed by Paul the Sick and promoted by “Saint John Paul II,” men whose apostate minds believe and lips spoke exactly as Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been doing for the past fifteen months, sixteen days in his masquerade as “Pope Francis.”

Yes, yes, yes, power to the “people” with the little exception of those who are considered not part of the “people” by the lords of the conciliar revolution. There is no “consultation” with believing Catholics, only castigation, scorn, mockery and ridicule from the lips of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who is always inveighing against “judging others,” at the Casa Santa Marta.

Talk about hypocrisy, Jorge.

As to the teaching of Faith and Morals and the discipline meted out by Holy Mother Church, however, the faithful have only to be concerned about following the teaching of Pope Leo XIII, contained in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, to be living echoes of their shepherds, warding off error, imagine that, as much as it is within their power, ability and competence to do: 

No one, however, must entertain the notion that private individuals are prevented from taking some active part in this duty of teaching, especially those on whom God has bestowed gifts of mind with the strong wish of rendering themselves useful. These, so often as circumstances demand, may take upon themselves, not, indeed, the office of the pastor, but the task of communicating to others what they have themselves received, becoming, as it were, living echoes of their masters in the faith. Such co-operation on the part of the laity has seemed to the Fathers of the Vatican Council so opportune and fruitful of good that they thought well to invite it. “All faithful Christians, but those chiefly who are in a prominent position, or engaged in teaching, we entreat, by the compassion of Jesus Christ, and enjoin by the authority of the same God and Savior, that they bring aid to ward off and eliminate these errors from holy Church, and contribute their zealous help in spreading abroad the light of undefiled faith.” Let each one, therefore, bear in mind that he both can and should, so far as may be, preach the Catholic faith by the authority of his example, and by open and constant profession of the obligations it imposes. In respect, consequently, to the duties that bind us to God and the Church, it should be borne earnestly in mind that in propagating Christian truth and warding off errors the zeal of the laity should, as far as possible, be brought actively into play

The faithful would not, however, so completely and advantageously satisfy these duties as is fitting they should were they to enter the field as isolated champions of the faith. Jesus Christ, indeed, has clearly intimated that the hostility and hatred of men, which He first and foremost experienced, would be shown in like degree toward the work founded by Him, so that many would be barred from profiting by the salvation for which all are indebted to His loving kindness. Wherefore, He willed not only to train disciples in His doctrine, but to unite them into one society, and closely conjoin them in one body, “which is the Church,” whereof He would be the head. The life of Jesus Christ pervades, therefore, the entire framework of this body, cherishes and nourishes its every member, uniting each with each, and making all work together to the same end, albeit the action of each be not the same. Hence it follows that not only is the Church a perfect society far excelling every other, but it is enjoined by her Founder that for the salvation of mankind she is to contend “as an army drawn up in battle array.” The organization and constitution of Christian society can in no wise be changed, neither can any one of its members live as he may choose, nor elect that mode of fighting which best pleases him. For, in effect, he scatters and gathers not who gathers not with the Church and with Jesus Christ, and all who fight not jointly with him and with the Church are in very truth contending against God. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

A final comment on Paragraphs 120 and 121, which is also relevant to Paragraph 122 below, should be made for your thoughtful consideration.

How can Catholics in the conciliar stuctures today, having been fed a steady diet of heresy, apostasy and blasphemy and exposed to all manner of unspeakable sacrilege, serve as “witnesses to the fact of the tradition of revealed doctrine” when they have taught to revile that tradition and/or are entirely ignorant of it?

To the next two paragraphs of Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church:

122. The practice of consulting the faithful is not new in the life of the Church. In the medieval Church a principle of Roman law was used: Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari et approbari debet (what affects everyone, should be discussed and approved by all). In the three domains of the life of the Church (faith, sacraments, governance), ‘tradition combined a hierarchical structure with a concrete regime of association and agreement’, and this was considered to be an ‘apostolic practice’ or an ‘apostolic tradition’.[136] (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

123. Problems arise when the majority of the faithful remain indifferent to doctrinal or moral decisions taken by the magisterium or when they positively reject them. This lack of reception may indicate a weakness or a lack of faith on the part of the people of God, caused by an insufficiently critical embrace of contemporary culture. But in some cases it may indicate that certain decisions have been taken by those in authority without due consideration of the experience and the sensus fidei of the faithful, or without sufficient consultation of the faithful by the magisterium.[137]  (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

A Mercifully Short Observation:

What was noted above is apropos yet again concerning the inability of most Catholics in the conciliar structures to serve as “witnesses” to anything other than the false “traditions” of the false conciliar religion.

It is, though, in Paragraph 123 that the framework is being established for the acceptance of “same-sex couples” and public fornicators, adulterers, mutants (transvestites) and other unrepentant sinners as outlined in not-so-subtle terms in the Instrumentum Laboris issued in preparation for Jorge’s embrace of “pastoral outreach” to those who find themselves in the “existential peripheries” that are called in the world “alternative living arrangements” that really are ancient paths to personal and social ruin and to Hell itself.

Moreover, to say that “that certain decisions have been taken by those in authority without due consideration of the experience and the sensus fidei of the faithful, or without sufficient consultation of the faithful by the magisterium” is to blaspheme the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, Who has always guided the magisterium infallibly. It is to exalt the role of the “people”–and a people who are misinformed about the true teachings of the Catholic Church–even while contending that “public opinion” is not the same as the sensus fidei.

Hubris writ large.

To the final three sections of Sensus fidei in the life of the Church that will be reviewed for present purposes and for the sanity of the readers and of this writer himself (obviously, what, if any, I ever had to begin with):

124. It is only natural that there should be a constant communication and regular dialogue on practical issues and matters of faith and morals between members of the Church. Public opinion is an important form of that communication in the Church. ‘Since the Church is a living body, she needs public opinion in order to sustain a giving and taking between her members. Without this, she cannot advance in thought and action.’[138] This endorsement of a public exchange of thought and opinions in the Church was given soon after Vatican II, precisely on the basis of the council’s teaching on the sensus fidei and on Christian love, and the faithful were strongly encouraged to take an active part in that public exchange. ‘Catholics should be fully aware of the real freedom to speak their minds which stems from a “feeling for the faith” [i.e. the sensus fidei] and from love. It stems from that feeling for the faith which is aroused and nourished by the spirit of truth in order that, under the guidance of the teaching Church which they accept with reverence, the People of God may cling unswervingly to the faith given to the early Church, with true judgement penetrate its meaning more deeply, and apply it more fully in their lives [Lumen Gentium, 12]. This freedom also stems from love. For it is with love that … the People of God are raised to an intimate sharing in the freedom of Christ Himself, who cleansed us from our sins, in order that we might be able freely to make judgements in accordance with the will of God. Those who exercise authority in the Church will take care to ensure that there is responsible exchange of freely held and expressed opinion among the People of God. More than this, they will set up norms and conditions for this to take place.’[139]  (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Hermeneutic of Self-Contradiction Comment:

Who wrote this?

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel?

Someone on the drafting committee that produced Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church wrote the following in Paragraph 118:

First of all, the sensus fidei is obviously related to faith, and faith is a gift not necessarily possessed by all people, so the sensus fidei can certainly not be likened to public opinion in society at large. (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Did that same person draft the following words in Paragraph 124 above?

Public opinion is an important form of that communication in the Church. ‘Since the Church is a living body, she needs public opinion in order to sustain a giving and taking between her members. Without this, she cannot advance in thought and action.  (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Which is it?

Well, I suppose that we just are supposed to forget Aristotle’s principle of non-contradiction. That went out the conciliar window with the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas.

As to what is thought to be the Catholic Church’s “advancing” in “thought and action,” there is need only to have recourse to Pope Saint Pius X:

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Those who do not see by now that the conciliar ecclesiology of “power to the people” is false and can never come from any instrumentality of the Catholic Church, no matter how “unofficial” it is alleged to be, does not want to make the sacrifices of human respect necessary to do so. I mean, Paragraph 124 admits that the conciliar concept of “public opinion” as part of the “normal” processes of what they allege to be the Catholic Church was unknown until after the “Second” Vatican Council. So much for “rooted in tradition.”

Ah, I digressed, as I meant to cover three paragraphs at once. Paragraph 124, however, cried out for individualized attention.

Now, at long last, to the final two paragraphs of this “unofficial” “official” document before connecting to the Instrumentum Laboris for Jorge’s Oktoberfest on the Tiber:

125. Such public exchange of opinion is a prime means by which, in a normal way, the sensus fidelium can be gauged. Since the Second Vatican Council, however, various institutional instruments by which the faithful may more formally be heard and consulted have been established, such as particular councils, to which priests and others of Christ’s faithful may be invited,[140] diocesan synods, to which the diocesan bishop may also invite lay people as members,[141] the pastoral council of each diocese, which is ‘composed of members of Christ’s faithful who are in full communion with the Catholic Church: clerics, members of institutes of consecrated life, and especially lay people’,[142] and pastoral councils in parishes, in which ‘Christ’s faithful, together with those who by virtue of their office are engaged in pastoral care in the parish, give their help in fostering pastoral action’.[143]

126. Structures of consultation such as those mentioned above can be greatly beneficial to the Church, but only if pastors and lay people are mutually respectful of one another’s charisms and if they carefully and continually listen to one another’s experiences and concerns. Humble listening at all levels and proper consultation of those concerned are integral aspects of a living and lively Church. (Sensus fidei in the life of the Church.)

Final Commentary on This Particular Madness Before Drawing Matters to a Conclusion:

Endless committees doing endless things to destroy the actual sensus Catholicus. These revolutionaries and their committees and “consultations,” albeit with the theologically and liturgically and morally “correct” kind of conciliar Catholics, have been very successful in helping to brainwash the average Catholic into looking up the actual teaching of Holy Mother Church with scorn and disdain. The result has been a new sense for a new faith, one that is as loathsome in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, as every other false religion.

Where is this all leading?

I will let the Instrumentum Laboris explain it all to you:

31. The family is acknowledged in the People of God to be an invaluable asset, the natural setting in which life grows and develops and a school of humanity, love and hope for society. The family continues to be the privileged place in which Christ reveals the mystery and vocation of the person. In addition to commonly affirming these basic facts, the great majority of respondents agree that the family has the potential of being this privileged place, despite their indicating, and often explicitly recounting, the worrisome difference between the forms of the family in today’s world and Church’s teaching in this regard. Real-life situations, stories and multiple trials demonstrate that the family is experiencing very difficult times, requiring the Church’s compassion and understanding in offering guidance to families “as they are” and, from this point of departure, proclaim the Gospel of the Family in response to their specific needs. (Instrumentum Laboris.)

Saint Anthony Mary Claret found families in irregular situations in Cuba in the Nineteenth Century, meeting them “where they were” to bring them out of lives of sin so that those involved therein could save their immortal souls as members of the Catholic Church:

Here he was met by disturbing news. In this town of pilgrimage [Cobre] where the island’s most famous shrine was located, his missionaries had found hardly a dozen legitimately married couples! He praised their diligence in having substantially raised this figure prior to his arrival but–even so! This shocking situation required a strong hand–the hand of a patient but uncompromising prelate. The unhappy fact was that the Spanish-descended Cubans rarely condescended to marry their Negro and mulatto concubines, even when their half-caste progeny might number as many as nine or ten. Rightly suspecting that this intolerable state of affairs might prove typical, he attacked the problem vigorously. A committee was appointed to study each case individually. On its recommendations, he let it be known, all such unions must be regularized or, where impediments existed, dissolved!

It was a most trying undertaking, fraught with complications, both tragic and absurd. Persons who expressed their willingness, even eagerness, to legalize their unions were frequently not free to receive the Sacrament of marriage. Others, without the excuse of impediments under Church law were sometimes overcome with indignation to hear that they were expected to make wives of their colored concubines. There were emphatic affirmations that Spain prohibited mixed marriages, a fallacy the archbishop had no need to consider. In all her colonial history Spain had never forced any such regulation. However, for any who persisted in this persuasion in spite of Padre Claret’s assurances, his command was clear. They must immediately terminate their illicit unions. It would be a painful problem–the provision for their innocent children–but it would have to be faced. Although he praised God that many of these easy-going folk accepted their prelate’s reprimands contritely and docilely obeyed his injunctions to amend their lives, Cobre had certainly given him a first-hand acquaintance with the repugnant moral deterioration that had engulfed a traditionally Christian nation. (Fanchon Royer, The Life of St. Anthony Mary Claret, published originally by Farrar, Straus and Cudahy in 1957 an republished in 1985 by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 130-131.)

Countless are the examples of Catholic bishops and priests, many of them raised to the altars of Holy Mother Church, who worked to reform the morals of the people who had been entrusted to their pastoral care.

Another Spaniard, Saint Francis Solano, for example, preached a sermon in the public square in Lima, Peru, in 1610 during which he prophesied of the great earthquake that God would visit upon Lima to chastise the people there for their ingratitude and immorality:

By the time Francis had reached the market, the theme of his sermon was clear. God was love, yet man was constantly thwarting that love. Many times this was because of thoughtlessness, but there were also countless times when it was because of sheer selfishness, and even malice. Well, atonement for sin must be made by means of penance.

“Unless you do penance, you shall likewise,” Our Lord had said to his disciples.

“I will say these words, too,” Francis thought. “Oh, Heavenly Father, may they help some souls tonight to turn away from sin!”

Naturally many at the market were astonished when they saw the Father Guardian of Saint Mary of the Angels making his way through their midst. Since his return from Trujillo he had appeared in the streets only rarely, and certainly never in the evenings. Then in a little while there was even more astonishment. Father Francis had come not to buy for his friars, or even to beg. He had come to preach!

At first, however, since business was brisk, not much heed was paid to his words. Merchants vied with one another in calling out the merits of their wares while customers argued noisily for a lower price. Beggars whined for alms. Babies cried. Dogs barked. Donkeys brayed. Older children ran in and out of the crowd intent upon their games. Music was everywhere–weird tunes played by Indian musicians on their wooden flutes, gay Spanish rhythms played on guitar and tambourine. At the various food students succulent rounds of meat sizzled and sputtered as they turned over slow fires. Then suddenly a thunderous voice rang about above the noisy and carefree scene:

“For all that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father but is in the world.”

It was as though a bombshell had fallen. At once the hubbub died away, and hundreds of Lima’s startled citizens turned to where a grey-clad friar, cross in hand, had mounted an elevation in the center of the marketplace and now stood gazing down upon them with eyes of burning coals. But before anyone could wonder about the text from Saint John’s first epistle, Francis began to explain the meaning of concupiscence: that, because of Original Sin, it is the tendency within each person to do evil instead of good; that this hidden warfare will end only when we have drawn our last breath.

“If we were to die tonight, would good or evil be the victor within our hearts” he cried. “Oh, my friends! Think about this question. Think hard!

Within just a few minutes Lima’s marketplace was as hushed and solemn as a cathedral. All eyes were riveted upon the Father Guardian and all ears were filled with his words as he described God’s destruction of the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrha because of the sins committed within them.

“Who is to say that here in Lima we do not deserve a like fate?” he demanded in ringing tones. “Look into your hearts now, my children. Are they clean? Are they pure? Are they filled with love of God?”

As the minutes passed and twilight deepened into darkness, the giant torches of the marketplace cast their flickering radiance over a moving scene. As usual, crowds of people were on hand, but now no one was interested in buying or selling. Instead, faces were bewildered, agonized and fearful. Tears were streaming from many eyes as Francis’ words continued to pour out in torrents, urging repentance while there was still time.

“Can we say that we shall ever see tomorrow?” he cried, fervently brandishing his missionary cross. “Can we say that this night is not the last we shall have in which to return to God’s friendship?”

As these and still more terrifying thoughts struck home one after another, the speaker stretched out both arms, bowed his head, and in heartrending tones began the Fifth Psalm. At once the crowd was filled with fresh sorrow and made the contrite phrases their own:

Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy.

“And according to the multitude of Thy tender mercies, blot out my iniquity.

“Wash me yet more from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

“For I know my iniquity, and my sins is always before me.

“To Thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before Thee: that Thou mayest be justified in Thy words, and mayest overcome when Thou art judged . . .”

Soon wave upon wave of sound was filling the torch lit marketplace as priest and people prayed together. Then Francis preached again, doing his est to implant a greater sorrow for sin and an even firmer purpose of amendment in the hearts of his hearers. Finally, looking neither to right nor left, he prepared to depart for Saint Mary of the Angels. But on all sides men and women pressed about him, sobbing and begging for his blessing.

“Father, please pray for me!” cried one young girl. “I’ve deserved to go to Hell a thousand times!”

“Last year, I robbed a poor widow of ten pounds of gold!” declared a swarthy-faced Spaniard. “May God forgive me!”

“‘I’m worse than anyone,” moaned a wild-eyed black man. “Tonight, I was going to kill a man . . . and for money!”

So it was that first one, then another, cried out his fault and expressed a desire to go to Confession at once. But Francis had to refuse all such requests. Yes, he was a priest. It was his privilege and duty to administer the Sacraments. But he was also a religious, and bound by rule to various observances. One of them was that he must be in his cell at Saint Mary of the Angels by a certain hour each night.

“There are other priests in the city who can help you, though,” he said kindly. “Go them now, my children. And may the Holy Virgin bring you back to her Son without delay.” (Mary Fabyan Windeatt, Saint Francis of Solano: Wonderworker of the New World and Apostle of Argentina and Peru, published originally by Sheed and Ward in 1946 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers in 1994, pp. 167-172.)

This is just a slight contrast with the approach taken by Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of revolutionaries, who doubt the ability of the truths of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, when preached with conviction for love of Christ the King and for the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem, to touch hearts and to reform lives in an instant.

Wait a minute!

The problem is more basic than that: Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of conciliar revolutionaries do not believe in the binding truths of the Divine Positive Law as they have been explicated by the Catholic Church from time immemorial and they scoff at the ability of the “people” to understand the Natural Law:

30. The language traditionally used in explaining the term “natural law” should be improved so that the values of the Gospel can be communicated to people today in a more intelligible manner. In particular, the vast majority of responses and an even greater part of the observations request that more emphasis be placed on the role of the Word of God as a privileged instrument in the conception of married life and the family, and recommend greater reference to the Bible, its language and narratives. In this regard, respondents propose bringing the issue to public discussion and developing the idea of biblical inspiration and the “order in creation,” which could permit a re-reading of the concept of the natural law in a more meaningful manner in today’s world (cf. the idea of the law written in the human heart in Rm 1:19-21; 2:14-15). Moreover, this proposal insists on using language which is accessible to all, such as the language of symbols utilized during the liturgy. The recommendation was also made to engage young people directly in these matters. (Instrumentum Laboris.)

Yes, They Go After the Natural Law Comment:

Nothing is beyond the reach of these revolutionaries. This makes sense, though when you consider the fact that the lords of conciliarism have made short work of the binding precepts of the Ten Commandments, especially the First through Third Commandments, as a result of false ecumenism and inter-religious “prayer services” and by their words and actions praising the beliefs and esteeming the symbols of one false religion after another. Why not try to re-read the Natural Law, therefore?

A pagan, Cicero, had a very good, although not perfect, grasp of the Natural Law when he defined as follows in his Republic:

True law is right reason conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal, whose commands urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain us from evil. Whether it enjoins or forbids, the good respect its injunctions, and the wicked treat them with indifference. This law cannot be contradicted by any other law, and is not liable either to derogation or abrogation. Neither the senate nor the people can give us any dispensation for not obeying this universal law of justice. It needs no other expositor and interpreter than our own conscience. It is not one thing at Rome, and another at Athens; one thing to-day, and another to-morrow; but in all times and nations this universal law must forever reign, eternal and imperishable. It is the sovereign master and emperor of all beings. God himself is its author, its promulgator, its enforcer. And he who does not obey it flies from himself, and does violence to the very nature of man. And by so doing he will endure the severest penalties even if he avoid the other evils which are usually accounted punishments. (Cicero, The Republic.)

Cicero had it almost entirely correct. Almost. He was wrong in asserting that the natural law does not need any “other expositor and interpreter than our own conscience.” He lived before the Incarnation and before the founding of the true Church upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. Cicero thus did not know that man does need an interpreter and expositor of the natural law, namely, the Catholic Church. Apart from this, however, Cicero understood that God’s law does not admit of abrogations by a vote of the people or of a “representative” body, such as the Roman Senate in his day or the United States Congress or state legislatures, et al. in our own day.

Pope Leo XIII explained in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900, that the Catholic Church is the guardian of the Natural Law and that men need her guidance to hep them to know it fully and to keep it as befits redeemed creatures:

Consequently Jesus Christ, the creator and preserver of faith, also preserves and nourishes our moral life. This He does chiefly by the ministry of His Church. To Her, in His wise and merciful counsel, He has entrusted certain agencies which engender the supernatural life, protect it, and revive it if it should fail. This generative and conservative power of the virtues that make for salvation is therefore lost, whenever morality is dissociated from divine faith. A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. “If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he burneth” john xv., 6). “He that believeth not shall be condemned” (Mark xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

Although much more time could be spent examining the Instrumentum Laboris in the detail that has been given to Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church, there is really no need to do as the results of the “extraordinary synod on the family” have been cooked for a long time now. The Instrumentum Laboris is the result of the answers to questions that were sent to the world’s conciliar “bishops” eight months ago and were the subject of extensive commentary in Always Asking All The Wrong Questions, part one and Always Asking All the Wrong Questions, part two.

The “extraordinary synod on the family” will do the following things:

1. Following the practice of the heretical and schismatic Greek Orthodox, divorced and civilly remarried Catholics without a decree of nullity from the conciliar officials, not that it is worth anything, will be permitted to receive what is purported to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service on a case-by-case basis handled by means of the interior form of the conciliar “reconciliation room.” In other words, everybody goes hand to stick their paws out to receive what they think is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

2. The nullity process itself will be “streamlined” even further, making it possible for “decisions” in a matter of months, if not sooner.

3. “Pastoral outreach” to “unmarried couples” will be enlarged and expanded.

4. The “internal forum” solution, which has been used for decades now by cooperative priests and presbyters, will be adopted to assuage the consciences of married couples who find it “too difficult” to avoid the use of contraceptives. “Education” in methods of “natural family planning” will be recommended as the way to “plan” the number of children a married couple desires to have. For the refutation of “natural family planning,” please see Forty-Three Years After Humanae Vitae, Always Trying To Find A Way and Planting Seeds of Revolutionary Change.

5. “Ministries” to those engaged in the commission of perverse sins against nature will be expanded and found more universally than they have been up until to now, confined in some dioceses to a few well-known dens of iniquity (e.g. Saint Francis Xavier Church in New York, Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco, California, Saint Brigid’s Church in Westbury, New York, Saints Cyril and Methodius Church in Deer Park, New York, Saint Joan of Arc Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota, among so many, many others).  The children who are unfortunate to be in the care of unrepentant practitioners of perversity with be baptized and welcomed into conciliar schools, thereby mainstreaming acceptance of perverse behavior and overthrowing any lingering concept of a detestation of personal sin that might be lurking in the hearts of Catholics who are as of yet attached to the conciliar structures.

Here is proof from the Instrumentum Laboris itself:

b) Concerning Unions of Persons of the Same Sex

Civil Recognition

110. On unions of persons of the same sex, the responses of the bishops’ conferences refer to Church teaching. “There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family. […] Nonetheless, according to the teaching of the Church, men and women with homosexual tendencies ‘must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided’” (CDF, Considerations regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons, 4). The responses indicate that the recognition in civil law of unions between persons of the same sex largely depends on the socio-cultural, religious and political context. In this regard, the episcopal conferences describe three instances: the first exists when repressive and punitive measures are taken in reaction to the phenomenon of homosexuality in all its aspects, especially when the public manifestation of homosexuality is prohibited by civil law. Some responses indicate that, in this context, the Church provides different forms of spiritual care for single, homosexual people who seek the Church’s assistance. (Instrumentum Laboris)

Reality Checks Provided by Saint Paul the Apostle and Pope Saint Pius V:

Here is the sort of “pastoral care” recommended by Saint Paul the Apostle:

Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use against which is their nature.

And in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

And as they liked not to  have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.  (Romans 1: 24-32)

Writing under the Divine inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, Saint Paul the Apostle, condemned “shameful affections.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis and others in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, speak of a “gay orientation.”

It is telling that the misnamed conciliar Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of a “homosexual orientation” while Saint Paul the Apostle wrote about shameful affections. And it is because at least one of those who served as a peritus under the liturgical revolutionary Annibale Bugnini, C.M., on the Consilium that planned the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo service, which boasts of a containing almost every passage of Sacred Scripture in its triennial cycle of Sunday readings and its biennial cycle of weekday readings, excludes verses twenty-four to thirty-two of the first chapter of Saint Paul the Apostle’s Epistle to the Romans.

Oh, the name of that one person? Yes, sure, thanks for asking. Rembert George Weakland, O.S.B. (see Weak In Mind, Weakest Yet In Faith and Just A Matter of Forgiveness?)

Pope Saint Pius V offered his own version of “pastoral care” to those who persist in crimes against nature:

That horrible crime, on account of which corrupt and obscene cities were destroyed by fire through divine condemnation, causes us most bitter sorrow and shocks our mind, impelling us to repress such a crime with the greatest possible zeal.

Quite opportunely the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] issued this decree: “Let any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature . . . be removed from the clerical order or forced to do penance in a monastery” (chap. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a grave offense may not advance with greater audacity by taking advantage of impunity, which is the greatest incitement to sin, and so as to more severely punish the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime and who are not frightened by the death of their souls, we determine that they should be handed over to the severity of the secular authority, which enforces civil law.

Therefore, wishing to pursue with the greatest rigor that which we have decreed since the beginning of our pontificate, we establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime, by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss. (Pope Saint Pius V, Horrendum illud scelus, August 30, 1568.)

Just a slightly different approach, wouldn’t you say? A true pope understood the horror of such a detestable sin on the part of the clergy and sought to administer punishment to serve as a medicinal corrective for other priests and to demonstrate to the laity the horrific nature of such a moral crime. A false “bishop” seeks to protect his “institution” and the “clerical club.” Quite a different approach.

Mind you, I am not suggesting the revival of this penalty in a world where it would not be understood and where the offender would be made a “martyr” for the cause of perversity, only pointing out the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that clerics and others in ecclesiastical authority who are guilty of serious moral crimes are deserving of punishment, not protection, by their bishops. Such is the difference yet again between Catholicism and conciliarism.

Moreover, the Instrumentum Laboris called for a “non-judgmental” approach to taken toward those living perversely sinful lives by means, whether or not with the “blessing” of the civil authorities by means of “civil unions” and “same-sex marriages”:

113. Every bishops’ conference voiced opposition to “redefining” marriage between a man and a woman through the introduction of legislation permitting a union between two people of the same sex. The episcopal conferences amply demonstrate that they are trying to find a balance between the Church’s teaching on the family and a respectful, non-judgmental attitude towards people living in such unions. On the whole, the extreme reactions to these unions, whether compromising or uncompromising, do not seem to have facilitated the development of an effective pastoral programme which is consistent with the Magisterium and compassionate towards the persons concerned.

114. A factor which clearly has an impact on the Church’s pastoral care and one which complicates the search for a balanced attitude in this situation is the promotion of a gender ideology. In some places, this ideology tends to exert its influence even at the elementary level, spreading a mentality which, intending to eliminate homophobia, proposes, in fact, to undermine sexual identity. (Instrumentum Laboris)

Only those who not believe that homosexuality is seriously disordered and that the acts associated therewith cry out to Heaven for vengeance can claim that thee is such a thing as “homophobia.” It is not to hate anyone or to judge the subjective state of his soul, which is known to God alone, to judge and condemn sinful actions.

Pastors of the Catholic Church have an obligation to judge sinful actions for what they are and to tell sinners in clear, unmistakeable terms: Quit your lives of sin. You risk the fires of Hell if you do not.

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ never reaffirmed anyone in a life of sin. While he dissuaded those who were about to stone his friend, Saint Mary Magdalene, when she was caught in adultery, he told his friend the following:

Go, and now sin no more. (John 8: 11.)

The conciliar revolutionaries are bereft of the Catholic Faith.

Why is this so hard to understand and accept?

The Instrumentum Laboris devoted an entire ten paragraphs to the care of those steeped in unrepentant sins of perversity that cry out to Heaven for vengeance even though there is one way to care for them, to discharge the Spiritual Works of Mercy to them, including admonishing the sinner in no uncertain terms, to quit his sins lest he be condemned to Hell for all eternity. In no small measure, of course, the the sin of Sodom has spread like wildfire in the world because of the indifference and/or complacency shown by the conciliar officials, to say nothing of the active support, approval and glorification of this sin against nature by conciliar “bishops,” priests/presbyters, religious and laity.

Laughably, the Instrumentum Laboris recommends not using the word “gay” to describe those who have shameful affections:

116. When considering the possibility of a ministry to these people, a distinction must be made between those who have made a personal, and often painful, choice and live that choice discreetly so as not to give scandal to others, and those whose behaviour promotes and actively — often aggressively — calls attention to it. Many conferences emphasize that, due to the fact that these unions are a relatively recent phenomenon, no pastoral programs exist in their regard. Others admit a certain unease at the challenge of accepting these people with a merciful spirit and, at the same time, holding to the moral teaching of the Church, all the while attempting to provide appropriate pastoral care which takes every aspect of the person into consideration. Some responses recommend not using phrases such as “gay,” “lesbian” or “homosexual” to define a person’s identity. (Instrumentum Laboris)

Go tell this to Jorge Mario Bergoglio:

Speaking of other problems within the administration of the Holy See, including rumours of a ‘gay lobby’ within the Vatican, Pope Francis said there are many saintly people working in the Curia but also those who are not so saintly and cause scandals which harm the Church. Quoting from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, he said that people with homosexual tendencies must not be excluded but should be integrated into society. “If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge him?” he asked. (Francis the Revolutionary holds press conference on flight back from Brazil.)

A human being’s identity is based upon the fact that he has a rational, immortal soul made in the image and likeness of God that has been redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on the wood of the Holy Cross whether or not the person knows or accepts this fact. Period.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has done more to advance the agenda of what Mrs. Randy Engel terms the “homosexual collective” than anyone else before him in the counterfeit church of conciliarism and even in the secular world-at-large. Call Me Jorge has the details of how Franciscans, long a stronghold of the homosexual agenda, in the Archdiocese of Boston featured “Who Am I To Judge” t-shirts, buttons and banners for those walking in the annual “pride” parade in this month of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Sensus fidei, anyone?

117. Many responses and observations call for theological study in dialogue with the human sciences to develop a multi-faceted look at the phenomenon of homosexuality. Others recommend collaborating with specific entities, e.g., the Pontifical Academy of the Social Sciences and the Pontifical Academy for Life, in thoroughly examining the anthropological and theological aspects of human sexuality and the sexual difference between man and woman in order to address the issue of gender ideology.

118. The great challenge will be to develop a ministry which can maintain the proper balance between accepting persons in a spirit of compassion and gradually guiding them to authentic human and Christian maturity. In this regard, some conferences refer to certain organizations as successful models for such a ministry. (Instrumentum Laboris)

Preaching from the pulpits of Catholic churches must be firm in the denunciation of sin and clear about the compassion that awaits repentant sinners in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. Unreprentant sinners can never be affirmed, coddled or in any way congratulated for their entirely free-will choice to place themselves, objectively speaking, on the path to Hell. There is nothing to “understand” about perverse behavior. Holy Mother Church has all of the gifts given unto her by God the Holy Ghost to effect their conversion. The counterfeit church of conciliarism lacks those gifts and lacks even the desire to effect a true conversion to personal sancity.

For present purposes, my good and few readers, if there are who have read thus far in this long article, only one more passage from the Instrumentum Laboris will be cited:

119. Sex education in families and educational institutions is an increasingly urgent challenge, especially in countries where the State tends to propose in schools a one-sided view and a gender ideology. Formation programmes ought to be established in schools or parish communities which offer young people an adequate idea of Christian and emotional maturity to allow them to face even the phenomenon of homosexuality. At the same time, the observations show that there is still no consensus in the Church on the specific way of receiving persons in these unions. The first step would be a slow process of gathering information and distinguishing criteria of discernment for not only ministers and pastoral workers but also groups and ecclesial movements. (Instrumentum Laboris)

Conciliar programs of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments have done as much as, if not more than, similar programs in secular brainwashing and detention centers (sometimes referred to as “schools) to propagate promiscuity among the young and acceptance of sodomy as a practice that is expressive of “love.”

Pope Pius IX warned us about such programs in the following passages contained in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

65. Another very grave danger is that naturalism which nowadays invades the field of education in that most delicate matter of purity of morals. Far too common is the error of those who with dangerous assurance and under an ugly term propagate a so-called sex-education, falsely imagining they can forearm youths against the dangers of sensuality by means purely natural, such as a foolhardy initiation and precautionary instruction for all indiscriminately, even in public; and, worse still, by exposing them at an early age to the occasions, in order to accustom them, so it is argued, and as it were to harden them against such dangers.

66. Such persons grievously err in refusing to recognize the inborn weakness of human nature, and the law of which the Apostle speaks, fighting against the law of the mind;[43] and also in ignoring the experience of facts, from which it is clear that, particularly in young people, evil practices are the effect not so much of ignorance of intellect as of weakness of a will exposed to dangerous occasions, and unsupported by the means of grace.

67. In this extremely delicate matter, if, all things considered, some private instruction is found necessary and opportune, from those who hold from God the commission to teach and who have the grace of state, every precaution must be taken. Such precautions are well known in traditional Christian education, and are adequately described by Antoniano cited above, when he says:

Such is our misery and inclination to sin, that often in the very things considered to be remedies against sin, we find occasions for and inducements to sin itself. Hence it is of the highest importance that a good father, while discussing with his son a matter so delicate, should be well on his guard and not descend to details, nor refer to the various ways in which this infernal hydra destroys with its poison so large a portion of the world; otherwise it may happen that instead of extinguishing this fire, he unwittingly stirs or kindles it in the simple and tender heart of the child. Speaking generally, during the period of childhood it suffices to employ those remedies which produce the double effect of opening the door to the virtue of purity and closing the door upon vice.[44]

Thus is condemned all classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments is prohibited. Prohibited also, of course, is the graphically explicit speech of the conciliar “popes” and their disciples who promote the “theology of the body” that engages in the most vile, vulgar forms of speech that would never issue forth from the mouth of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, or that of His Most Blessed Mother. Such vile, vulgar forms of speech have never issued forth from the lips of our saints, who maintained custody of their eyes and who shunned all immodest speech at all times.

The upcoming “extraordinary synod on the family” will be just another step in the conciliar revolution of placing it on the fact track to a complete, seamless merger with the Anglican sect, which has long since made its “official peace” with “moral issues.

Indeed, among the other heresies spouted in the past few days by his mouth that is an engine of heresy, blasphemy, apostasy and sacrilege, Jorge Mario Bergoglio dared to blaspheme Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by saying that He was not a “moralist”:

“And this is why the people followed Jesus, because He was the Good Shepherd. He wasn’t a moralistic, quibbling Pharisee, or a Sadducee who made political deals with the powerful, or a guerrilla who sought the political liberation of his people, or a contemplative in a monastery. He was a pastor! A pastor who spoke the language of His people, Who understood, Who spoke the truth, the things of God: He never trafficked in the things of God! But He spoke in such a way that the people loved the things of God. That’s why they followed Him.” (Whom do I like to follow?.)

Blasphemer.

At the root of the entire conciliar agenda, including its agenda for the family, is the lack of any sense of the horror of personal sin, including Mortal Sin itself.

While it is true that many who are steeped today in what are Mortal Sins in the objective order of things may not understand or accept this to be so and/or may seek to minimize, it is the case nevertheless that each Mortal Sin wounds the soul, making it a captive to the devil and thus making it an instrument of chaos, disorder, anger, oftentimes displaced at those who seek to admonish it, and perhaps even violence in their own lives and that of those around them and the world-at-large. The family and the world are in the mess that they are because of the commission of unrepentant sins, most of which are protected under cover of the civil law and celebrated in every single aspect of what passes for “popular culture.” For a discussion of the horror of Mortal Sin, please see Saint Alphonsus de Liguori’s “On the Malice of Mortal Sin,” which is found in the appendix below, although the following sentence from that sermon might serve as a sober antidote to what the conciliar revolutionaries believe are nothing more than “irregular” situations: “Hence Hell and a thousand Hells are not sufficient chastisement for a single mortal sin.”

The path to personal ruin and social chaos that we see all around us today was charted as a direct, inevitable result of the Protestant Revolution against the Social Reign of Christ the King and the rise of the multifaceted, interrelated maze of naturalistic ideologies and “philosophies” that can be termed collectively by the name of Judeo-Masonry (see To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part one and To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part two.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of conciliar revolutionaries do not believe that each of the problems in the world is caused by Original Sin and the Actual Sins of men, thus showing themselves to be utterly ignorant of the truths of the Catholic Faith concerning the offense that sin is in the eyes of God, how it wounded Our Lord once in time and how it wounds His Mystical Body, the Church Militant on earth, today. These truths were summarized so very clearly by Silvio Cardinal Antoniano (and quoted by Pope Pius XI in the aforementioned Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929, by Pope Saint Pius an by Pope Pius XI directly:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.  (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

Every true and lasting reform has ultimately sprung from the sanctity of men who were driven by the love of God and of men. Generous, ready to stand to attention to any call from God, yet confident in themselves because confident in their vocation, they grew to the size of beacons and reformers.   . No doubt “the Spirit breatheth where he will” (John iii. 8): “of stones He is able to raise men to prepare the way to his designs” (Matt. iii. 9). He chooses the instruments of His will according to His own plans, not those of men. But the Founder of the Church, who breathed her into existence at Pentecost, cannot disown the foundations as He laid them. Whoever is moved by the spirit of God, spontaneously adopts both outwardly and inwardly, the true attitude toward the Church, this sacred fruit from the tree of the cross, this gift from the Spirit of God, bestowed on Pentecost day to an erratic world. (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)

Saint Irenaeus, whose feast we celebrated on Saturday, June 28, 2014, explained the nature of the conciliar approach of a supposed “love” for sinners as he analyzed and condemned the heresies of Carpocrates:

5. And thus, if ungodly, unlawful, and forbidden actions are committed among them, I can no longer find ground for believing them to be such. And in their writings we read as follows, the interpretation which they give [of their views], declaring that Jesus spoke in a mystery to His disciples and apostles privately, and that they requested and obtained permission to hand down the things thus taught them, to others who should be worthy and believing. We are saved, indeed, by means of faith and love; but all other things, while in their nature indifferent, are reckoned by the opinion of men-some good and some evil, there being nothing really evil by nature. (Against Heresies, Book I.)

Saint Irenaeus simply made no concessions at all to the heretics of his own day, the gnostics, whose false religion does indeed play an important role in shaping the Modernist mind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who desires to jettison the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church as presented to by Holy Mother Church under the infallible guidance of God the Holy Ghost in order to “re-read” the Scriptures and to re-read even the Natural Law. Jorge has the “secret” ability to do this. We simply have to “trust” him. How did the “trust me” slogan work out with the thirty-ninth President of the United States of America, James Earl Carter, Jr.

While Saint Irenaeus urged the Vicar of Christ to be gentle with those who returned to the Faith after being involved in heresy, he was firm in his denunciation of heresy as he sought the conversion of those steeped within its grip. We can no do no less in our own day as we rely upon the intercessory help of the Mother of God and of the Apostles Saints Peter and Paul, who gave up their lives rather than to compromise the integrity of the Faith.

Today, June 29, 2014, is the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, one of the most glorious days in the entirety of Holy Mother Church’s liturgical year. These twin pillars of the Church of Rome were steadfast in their proclamation of the truths of the true Faith. Saint Peter, our first pope, had denied Our Lord three times before repenting. Saint Paul had persecuted the true Church before he, a Jew, was converted by Our Lord Himself, thus showing Himself, the God-Man, to cast His disapproval upon the “Second” Vatican Council’s Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965.

Here is the account of the apostolic labors and martyrdom of our beloved Saints Peter and Paul as found from the readings for Matins in today’s Divine Office:

Dearly beloved brethren, in the joy of all the holy Feast-days the whole world is partaker. There is but one love of God, and whatsoever is solemnly called to memory, if it hath been done for the salvation of all, must needs be worth the honour of a joyful memorial at the hands of all. Nevertheless, this feast which we are keeping to-day, besides that world-wide worship which it doth of right get throughout all the earth, doth deserve from this city of ours an outburst of gladness altogether special and our own. In this place it was that the two chiefest of the Apostles did so right gloriously finish their race. And upon this day whereon they lifted up that their last testimony, let it be in this place that the memory thereof receiveth the chiefest of jubilant celebrations. O Rome these twain are the men who brought the light of the Gospel of Christ to shine upon thee These are they by whom thou, from being the teacher of lies, wast turned into a learner of the truth.

These twain be thy fathers, these be in good sooth thy shepherds, these twain be they who laid for thee, as touching the kingdom of heaven, better and happier foundations, than did they that first planned thine earthly ramparts, wherefrom he that gave thee thy name took occasion to pollute thee with a brother’s blood. These are they who have set on thine head this thy glorious crown, that thou art become an holy nation, a chosen people, a city both Priestly and Kingly, whom the Sacred Throne of blessed Peter hath exalted till thou art become the Lady of the world, unto whom the world-wide love for God hath conceded a broader lordship than is the possession of any mere earthly empire. Thou wast once waxen great by victories, until thy power was spread haughtily over land and sea, but thy power was narrower then which the toils of war had won for thee, than that thou now hast which hath been laid at thy feet by the peace of Christ.

It is well suited for the doing of the work which God had decreed that the multitude of kingdoms should be bound together under one rule, and that so the universal preaching of the Gospel should find easier entry into all peoples, since all were governed by the empire of one city. But this city, knowing not Him, Who had been pleased to make her great, used her lordship over almost all nations to make herself the minister of all their falsehoods and seemed to herself exceeding godly because there was no false god whom she rejected. But the tighter that Satan had bound her, the more wondrous was the work of Christ in setting her free. (From Matins, Divine Office, June 29.)

The lesson for Holy Mass today, which will be read again on the Feast of Saint’s Chains on August 1, 2014, described how an angel of Lord freed our first pope from his bondage at the hands of Herod as he, Saint Peter, slept so soundly that the angel had to wake him up:

In those days, Herod the king set hands on certain members of the Church to persecute them. He killed James the brother of John with the sword, and seeing that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to arrest Peter also, during the days of the Unleavened Bread. After arresting him he cast him into prison, committing the custody of him to four guards of soldiers, four in each guard, intending to bring him forth to the people after the Passover. So Peter was being kept in the prison; but prayer was being made to God for him by the Church without ceasing. Now when Herod was about to bring him forth, that same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains, and outside the door sentries guarded the prison. And behold, an angel of the Lord stood beside him, and a light shone in the room; and he struck Peter on the side and woke him, saying, Get up quickly. The chains dropped from his hands. And the angel said to him, Gird yourself and put on your sandals. And he did so; and he said to him, Wrap your cloak about you and follow me. And he followed him out, without knowing that what was being done by the angel was real, for he thought he was having a vision. They passed through the first and second guard and came to the iron gate that leads into the city; and this opened to them of its own accord. And they went out, and passed on through one street, and straightway the angel left him. Then Peter came to himself, and he said, Now I know for certain that the Lord has sent His angel and rescued me from the power of Herod and from all that the Jewish people were expecting.  (Acts 12: 1-11.)

Do not be agitated by the events of the moment as each of the events unfolding quickly before our eyes is simply part of the Great Apostasy. More and more chastisements are to be visited upon us, and we must accept each with joy and gratitude because God has so ordained it that we would be alive in these challenging times.

Saint Peter was freed by no “movement,” traditional or otherwise.

Saint Peter was freed by no “strategy” to keep silent about the truths of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in order to curry favor with the officials of the day.

Saint Peter was freed by the hand of Christ the King Himself through the work of His angel.

Do not be concerned about how a true pope will be restored to the Throne of Saint Peter. This will happen in God’s good time, which is not, quite by the way, our time. We must be something that comes hard to many Americans, who want tangible “solutions” now and without any kind of delay.

Christ the King will release the chains that fetter the Chair of Peter today in His good time and by means so miraculous that each of the warring tribes in the underground Church at present will recognize the miracle for what it is without any murmuring. This is because such a miracle will occur, most likely, after a terrible chastisement that will make the ones we are experiencing at present to seem like so much child’s play.

In the end, you see, we know that Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart will triumph. She promised that this would be so when she appeared to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin Lucia dos Santos in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, ninety-seven years ago.

Our Lady simply asks us to pray her Most Holy Rosary and to penance for the conversion of sinners as we offer up all to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

All we must do is to be faithful to Our Lady as the servants of her Divine Son, Christ the King, through her Immaculate Heart, which is united in such a matchless communion of love with the His Most Sacred Heart.

What are we waiting for?

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.

Appendix

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori On the Malice of Mortal Sin

“Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 1 LUKE ii. 48.

 MOST holy Mary lost her Son for three days: during that time she wept continually for having lost sight of Jesus, and did not cease to seek after him till she found him. How then does it happen that so many sinners not only lose sight of Jesus, but even lose his divine grace; and instead of weeping for so great a loss, sleep in peace, and make no effort to recover so great a blessing? This arises from their not feeling what it is to lose God by sin. Some say: I commit this sin, not to lose God, but to enjoy this pleasure, to possess the property of another, or to take revenge of an enemy. They who speak such language show that they do not understand the malice of mortal sin. What is mortal sin?

First Point. It is a great contempt shown to God.

Second Point. It is a great offence offered to God.

  First Point. Mortal sin is a great contempt shown to God.

  1. The Lord calls upon Heaven and Earth to detest the ingratitude of those who commit mortal sin, after they had been created by him, nourished with his blood, and exalted to the dignity of his adopted children. ”Hear, O ye Heavens, and give ear, Earth; for the Lord hath spoken. I have brought up children _ and exalted them; but they have despised me.” (Isa. i. 2.) Who is this God whom sinners despise?; He is a God of infinite majesty, before whom all the kings of the Earth and all the blessed in Heaven are less than a drop of water or a grain of sand. As a drop of a bucket, . . . as a little dust. ” (Isa. xl. 15.) In a word, such is the majesty of God, that in his presence all creatures are as if they did not exist. ”All nations are before him as if they had no being at all.” (Ibid. xl. 17.) And what is man, who insults him? St. Bernard answers: “Saccus vermium, cibus vermium.” A heap of worms, the food of worms, by which he shall be devoured in the grave. ”Thou art wretched and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.” (Apoc. iii. 17.) He is so miserable that he can do nothing, so blind that he knows nothing, and so poor that he possesses nothing. And this worm dares to despise a God, and to provoke his wrath. ”Vile dust,” says the same saint, “dares to irritate such tremendous majesty.” Justly, then, has St. Thomas asserted, that the malice of mortal sin is, as it were, infinite: ”Peccatum habet quandam infinitatem malitiae ex infinitatem divine majestatis.” (Par. 3, q. 2, a. 2, ad. 2.) And St. Augustine calls it an infinite evil. Hence Hell and a thousand Hells are not sufficient chastisement for a single mortal sin.

2. Mortal sin is commonly defined by theologians to be “a turning away from the immutable good.” St. Thom., par. 1, q. 24, a. 4; a turning ones back on the sovereign good. Of this God complains by his prophet, saying: ”Thou hast forsaken me, saith the Lord; thou art gone backward. ” (Jer. xv. 6.) Ungrateful man, he says to the sinner, I would never have separated myself from thee; thou hast been the first to abandon me: thou art gone backwards; thou hast turned thy back upon me.

3. He who contemns the divine law despises God; because he knows that, by despising the law, he loses the divine grace. “By transgression of the law, thou dishonourest God.” (Rom. ii. 23.) God is the Lord of all things, because he has created them. ”All things are in thy power… Thou hast made Heaven and Earth.” (Esth. xiii. 9.) Hence all irrational creatures the winds, the sea, the fire, and rain obey God, “The winds and the sea obey him.” (Matt. viii. 27.)”Fire, hail, snow, ice, stormy winds, which fulfil his word.” (Ps. cxlviii. 8.) But man, when he sins, says to God: Lord, thou dost command me, but I will not obey; thou dost command me to pardon such an injury, but I will resent it; thou dost command me to give up the property of others, but I will retain it; thou dost wish that I should abstain from such a forbidden pleasure, but I will indulge in it. ”Thou hast broken my yoke, thou hast burst my bands, and thou saidst: I will not serve.” (Jer. ii. 20.) In fine, the sinner when he breaks the command, says to God: I do not acknowledge thee for my Lord. Like Pharaoh, when Moses, on the part of God, commanded him in the name of the Lord to allow the people to go into the desert, the sinner answers: “Who is the Lord, that I should hear his voice, and let Israel go?” (Exod. v. 2.)

4. The insult offered to God by sin is heightened by the vileness of the goods for which sinners offend him. ”Wherefore hath the wicked provoked God.” (Ps. x. 13.) For what do so many offend the Lord? For a little vanity; for the indulgence of anger; or for a beastly pleasure. ”They violate me among my people for a handful of barley and a piece of bread.” (Ezec. xiii. 19.) God is insulted for a handful of barley for a morsel of bread! God! why do we allow ourselves to be so easily deceived by the Devil?”There is,” says the Prophet Osee, “a deceitful balance in his hand.” (xii. 7.) We do not weigh things in the balance of God, which cannot deceive, but in the balance of Satan, who seeks only to deceive us, that he may bring us with himself into Hell. ”Lord,” said David, ”who is like to thee ?” (Ps. xxxiv. 10.) God is an infinite good; and when he sees sinners put him on a level with some earthly trifle, or with a miserable gratification, he justly complains in the language of the prophet: ”To whom, have you likened me or made me equal? saith the Holy One.” (Isa. xl. 25.) In your estimation, a vile pleasure is more valuable than my grace. Is it a momentary satisfaction you have preferred before me?”Thou hast cast me off behind thy back.” (Ezec. xxiii. 35.) Then, adds Salvian, “there is no one for whom men have less esteem than for God.” (Lib. v., Avd. Avar.) Is the Lord so contemptible in your eyes as to deserve to have the miserable things of the Earth preferred before him?

5. The tyrant placed before St. Clement a heap of gold, of silver, and of gems, and promised to give them to the holy martyr if he would renounce the faith of Christ. The saint heaved a sigh of sorrow at the sight of the blindness of men, who put earthly riches in comparison with God. But many sinners exchange the divine grace for things of far less value; they seek after certain miserable goods, and abandon that God who is an infinite good, and who alone can make them happy. Of this the Lord complains, and calls on the Heavens to be astonished, and on its gates to be struck with horror: ”Be astonished O ye Heavens, at this; and ye gates thereof, be very desolate, saith the Lord.” He then adds: ”For my people have done two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living water, and have digged to themselves cisterns broken cisterns that can hold no water.” (Jer. ii. 12 and 13.) We regard with wonder and amazement the injustice of the Jews, who, when Pilate offered to deliver Jesus or Barabbas, answered: ”Not this man, but Barabbas.” (John xviii. 40.) The conduct of sinners is still worse; for, when the Devil proposes to them to choose between the satisfaction of revenge a miserable pleasure and Jesus Christ, they answer: “Not this man, but Barabbas.” That is, not the Lord Jesus, but sin.

6. “There shall be no new God in thee,” says the Lord. (Ps. Ixxx. 10.) You shall not abandon me, your true God, and make for yourself a new god, whom you shall serve. St. Cyprian teaches that men make their god whatever they prefer before God, by making it their last end; for God is the only last end of all: “Quidquid homo Deo anteponit, Deum sibi facit.” And St. Jerome says: ”Unusquisque quod cupit, si veneratur, hoc illi Deus est. Vitium in corde, est idolum in altari.” (In Ps. Ixxx.) The creature which a person prefers to God, becomes his God. Hence, the holy doctor adds, that as the Gentiles adored idols on their altars, so sinners worship sin in their hearts. When King Jeroboam rebelled against God, he endeavoured to make the people imitate him in the adoration of idols. He one day placed the idols before them, and said: “Behold thy gods, Israel!” (3 Kings xii. 28.) The Devil acts in a similar manner towards sinners: he places before them such a gratification, and says: Make this your God. Behold! this pleasure, this money, this revenge is your God: adhere to these, and forsake the Lord. When the sinner consents to sin, he abandons his Creator, and in his heart adores as his god the pleasure which lie indulges. ”Vitium in corde est idolum in altari. ”

7. The contempt which the sinner offers to God is increased by sinning in God’s presence. According to St. Cyril of Jerusalem, some adored the sun as their god, that during the night they might, in the absence of the sun, do what they pleased, without fear of divine chastisement. “Some regarded the sun as their God, that, after the setting of the sun, they might be without a God.” (Catech. iv.) The conduct of these miserable dupes was very criminal; but they were careful not to sin in presence of their god. But Christians know that God is present in all places, and that he sees all things. ”Do not I fill Heaven and Earth? saith the Lord,” (Jer. xxiii. 24); and still they do not abstain from insulting him, and from provoking his wrath in his very presence: “A people that continually provoke me to anger before my face.” (Isa. Ixv. 3.) Hence, by sinning before him who is their judge, they even make God a witness of their iniquities: ”I am the judge and the witness, saith the Lord.” (Jer. xxix. 23.) St. Peter Chrysologus says, that, “the man who commits a crime in the presence of his judge, can offer no defence.” The thought of having offended God in his divine presence, made David weep and exclaim: “To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee.” (Ps. i. 6.) But let us pass to the second point, in which we shall see more clearly the enormity of the malice of mortal sin.

  Second Point. Mortal sin is a great offence offered to God. 

 8. There is nothing more galling than to see oneself despised by those who were most beloved and most highly favoured. Whom do sinners insult? They insult a God who bestowed so many benefits upon them, and who loved them so as to die on a cross for their sake; and by the commission of mortal sin they banish that God from their hearts. A soul that loves God is loved by him, and God himself comes to dwell within her. ”If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him.” (John xiv. 23.) The Lord, then, never departs from a soul, unless he is driven away, even though he should know that she will soon banish him from her heart. According to the Council of Trent, ”he deserts not the soul, unless he is deserted.”

  9. When the soul consents to mortal sin she ungratefully says to God: Depart from me. “The wicked have said to God: Depart from us.” (Job xxi. 14.) Sinners, as St. Gregory observes, say the same, not in words, but by their conduct. ”Recede, non verbis, sed moribus.” They know that God cannot remain with sin in the soul: and, in violating the divine commands, they feel that God must depart; and, by their acts they say to him: since you cannot remain any longer with us, depart farewell. And through the very door by which God departs from the soul, the Devil enters to take possession of her. When the priest baptizes an infant, he commands the demon to depart from the soul: ”Go out from him, unclean spirits, and make room for the Holy Ghost.” But when a Christian consents to mortal sin, he says to God: Depart from me; make room for the Devil, whom I wish to serve.

10. St. Bernard says, that mortal sin is so opposed to God, that, if it were possible for God to die, sin would deprive him of life;”Peccatum quantum in se est Deum perimit.” Hence, according to Job, in committing mortal sin, man rises up against God, and stretches forth his hand against him: ”For he hath stretched out his hand against God, and hath strengthened himself against the Almighty.” (Job. xv. 25.)

11. According to the same St. Bernard, they who wilfully violate the divine law, seek to deprive God of life in proportion to the malice of their will;”Quantum in ipsa est Deum perimit propria voluntas.” (Ser. iii. de Res.) Because, adds the saint, self-will”would wish God to see its own sins, and to be unable to take vengeance on them.” Sinners know that the moment they consent to mortal sin, God condemns them to Hell. Hence, being firmly resolved to sin, they wish that there was no God, and, consequently, they would wish to take away his life, that he might not be able to avenge their crime. “He hath,” continues Job, in his description of the wicked, ”run against him witb his neck raised up, and is armed with a fat neck.” (xv. 26.) The sinner raises his neck; that is, his pride swells up, and he runs to insult his God; and, because he contends with a powerful antagonist, ”he is armed with a fat neck.”“A fat neck” is the symbol of ignorance, of that ignorance which makes the sinner say: This is not a great sin; God is merciful; we are flesh; the Lord will have pity on us. O temerity! illusion! which brings so many Christians to Hell.

Moreover, the man who commits a mortal sin afflicts the heart of God. “But they provoked to wrath, and afflicted the spirit of the Holy One.” (Isaias Ixiii. 10.) “What pain and anguish would you not feel, if you knew that a person whom you tenderly loved, and on whom you bestowed great favours, had sought to take away your life! God is not capable of pain; but, were he capable of suffering, a single mortal sin would be sufficient to make him die through sorrow. ”Mortal sin,” says Father Medina, ”if it were possible, would destroy God himself: because it would be the cause of infinite sadness to God.” As often, then, as you committed mortal sin, you would, if it were possible, have caused God to die of sorrow; because you knew that by sin you insulted him and turned your back upon him, after he had bestowed so many favours upon you, and even after he had given all his blood and his life for your salvation. (The Malice of Mortal Sin.)

June 28, 2014, Update

June 28, 2014, Feast of Saint Irenaeus within the Octave of the Feasts of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus (and a commemoration in some places of the Most Pure Heart of Mary):

The completion of at two-part series explaining how the International Theological Commission’s latest “unofficial” official document is taking a lot longer than expected, The new “unofficial” “official” document is meant to provide theological justification of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s revolutionary agenda for the family that he has outlined for us on a number of occasions that is formalized in the working document (Instrumentum Laboris) for his “extraordinary synod on the family. The work is taking longer because  there are many points made gratuitously in the text of Sensus fidei in the life of the Church and in the “working document” that need to be explicated with great care. As only seventy-nine readers had accessed A New Sense for a New Faith, part one, there does not appear to be a great demand for part two. However, it is for the few who do continue to read the articles on the site when they are published and for those who will do so in the future that this effort is being made. Thank you for your patience. 

While certainly superfluous at this point as the proofs of the counterfeit nature of concilarism are more than evident, the current effort is being made once again to explain to the readership of this site that there is no way to “save” the conciliar religion and its false “popes” as being in concert with the Catholic Faith. The conciliar religion is false. Its “popes” and “bishops” have been and continue to be apostates.

There will be two more original articles on this site after the publication of part two of Thursday’s article before my total attention is turned entirely to the completion of volumes two and three of Conversion in Reverse. It is well past time for me to concentrate on the completion of this trilogy and to spend time next week inserting corrections into the text of  volume one that a reader was generous enough to spend time making at no expense. We are very grateful for the reader’s generous service, which was applied as well to the first collection of this site’s articles that will be placed in print-on-demand format next month.

In other words, I ask longtime readers of this site to bear with me as I complete this work. I am, in case you have not noticed it lately, repeating points made countless times in response to the countless times that the conciliar apostates, starting with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, have repeated their false beliefs and/or have escalated the path of the degeneration caused thereby.

Most Pure Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Saint Irenaeus, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

June 27, 2014, Republished Reflections

June 27, 2014, Feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus:

Today is the Feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. Three republished reflections are offered to the readership of this site today: No One Is A Stranger to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Tender Mercies and Enthroning the Heart of True, Unsurpassed Love In Our Homes.

We are so ungrateful and so indifferent in the face of the great, tender mercies that have been showered upon us by the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, formed out of and beating as one with the Immaculate Heart of Mary. A marvelous reflection, written by Father Francois Charmot, S.J., in In Retreat With the Sacred Heart summarizes the Trinitarian nature of the love that flows out for us from the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus:

If I did not have some knowledge of the Heart of Jesus, how little would I realize the love of the Father!

But, looking upon the pierced Heart of the Incarnate Word, I can say with assurance: blessed be Thou, O Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who, in Him, has heaped upon us all Thy spiritual blessings!

Before the creation of the world Thou hast chosen us in Jesus, in order that we may be holy with Him, through the love of the blessed Trinity.

Thy Son is charity, as Thou, Father, art charity.

He is all charity, as thou art all charity.

The charity of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is the same, equal in Three Persons.

There are not three charities, but one singe coeternal love.

With what love I have been loved infinitely, neither more nor less by Thee, Father, than by the Son and by Thy Holy Spirit, since before the creation of the world!

If I believe that Jesus loves me, I believe that His Father loves me just as much, and it is Thy Word who declares to me that Thou, Father, and Thy Holy Spirit wish to dwell in me.

All those whom the Heart of Jesus loved: His disciples, the children, the sinners, the diseased, the poor, the humble, the persecuted.

Thou, Father, also loved them with the same love.

The Blessed Virgin was loved no less by Thee than by Thy Son, her Son, and by Thy Spirit.

O Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, blessed be Thou for having foreordained that we should be Thy Sons in thine only begotten Son, sons of adoption through Thy Son incarnate

Thou hast willed, by this gracious predestination, that the Heart of Thy well-beloved Son should make us sharers in the love of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

For this Heart encompasses all that the charity of the Three Persons could communicate from its Fire to the Incarnate Word.

In this Heart we possess by heritage such an effusion of the Holy Spirit, such a furnace of love, such an ocean of mercy, such an outpouring of tenderness, that it is impossible to imagine any others in some perfect creature which would be closer to infinite charity.

That is why, O Father, we know thy love through the Heart of Jesus.

Kind Father, kindest of Fathers, incomparably kind Father, Thou hast willed that through the pierced Heart of Thy Son, we should know the extent of Thy charity, Thy goodness, Thy paternity,  Thy longanimity, Thy mercy, Thy pardon, Thine eternal remission of sin.

And when this Heart which has so loved men–even to the shedding of all Its blood for them–finally ceased to beat, the death of Thy Son bore witness, even as the sacrifice of His Father who had delivered Him, that the love of the Three Persons for us outweighs the very life of the Man-God.

Through the pierced Heart of Thy Son, O infinitely good Father, grant me the grace to believe implicitly in Thy love, to love Thee as a Son, as Thy Son Jesus, who abandoned Himself to Thee in the agony and on the cross in utter helplessness and total destitution, solely because Thou were His Father. (Father Francois Charmot, S.J., In Retreat With the Sacred Heart, The Newman Press, 1956, pp. 16-18.)

A blessed Feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus to you all!

Let us never be ungrateful or indifferent to the tender mercies shown us by the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. Let our own hearts fly unto these tender mercies through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

This date, June 27, is usually the date on which the Feast of Our Lady of Perpetual Help is celebrated or commemorated. Although it is suppressed this year, we can nevertheless pray the devotions to Our Lady of Perpetual Help, which we do every Tuesday evening following our family Rosary and will do this evening as well.

Part two of yesterday’s article, A New Sense for a New Faith, part one, will appear tomorrow, Saturday, June 28, 2014, the Feast of Saint Irenaeus within the Octave of the Feast of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. It is meant to a way to send Jorge off on vacation by reviewing the convergence of revolutionary forces that he has let loose to do the work of Antichrist in his false church and in the world-at-large as part of his “new evangelization.”

An article or, more likely, a video presentation, should appear next week once the Supreme Court gets through announcing its end-of-term decisions in various cases, including the Hobby Lobby case that concerns the ObamaDeathCare “family planning” mandate. Just as a baseball season consists of one hundred sixty-two games, making daily “life or death” commentaries by sports columnists so laughable, a term of the Supreme Court of the United States of America can only be judged when it is over. It is yet to be seen whether the remaining cases deliver the same kind of rebukes to the reigning caesar’s quest for total power and thought control as have been issued within the past few days.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

Our Lady of Perpetual Help, pray for us.

No One Is A Stranger To the Sacred Heart of Jesus

“Get outta here,” audibly muttered an elderly gentleman while sitting in a pew at Saint Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church in Farmingville, Long Island, New York, on Friday, December 6, 2002, the Feast of Saint Nicholas and the First Friday of the month of December that year.

“Well, welcome to the Society of Saint Pius X,” I told myself as we made our first tentative steps into the Society’s chapels. “Saint Paul would have had a rough time with this crowd,” I told Sharon later as we drove back with Lucy, who was then just a  little over eight months old, to our basement apart in Bethpage, Long Island, New York, thirty miles away.

That would be a common refrain in the years thereafter as our journeys took us to various “unexplored” territories, although, as noted over three years ago now, we were welcomed very warmly by many people in various chapels, including at Saint Michael’s until we came to understand that it is wrong to have any association with a chapel where it is believed that one can recognize the validity of a claimant to the Throne of Saint Peter while reserving the “right” to “sift” through his teachings and pronouncements.

We had gone to Saint Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church for the first time on that day in 2002 as our dear friend, Father Salvatore V. Franco, a priest of the Diocese of Brooklyn who had been ordained in 1953, was one week away from his death at the age of seventy-six from a blood cancer that he, who had suffered from congestive heart failure for years, did not know he had until just weeks earlier. Father Franco was good enough to offer the Immemorial Mass of Tradition for us in his kitchen in Westbury, New York, shortly after our return to Long Island following Lucy’s birth in Sioux City, Iowa, on March 27, 2002. We had had quite enough of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service during the week, having found refuge from this abomination while I was lecturing in California in the first three months of 2002 by assisting at Masses of independent priests (and at what we realize now were simulations of the true Mass by presbyters). We wanted no more to do with the Novus Ordo and we were going tired of the growing sense of accommodation that we found in indult circles. With Father Franco approaching death, though, we decided that we could have no more contact with the Novus Ordo, and it was this that prompted us to stick our toes into the water at Saint Michael the Archangel Church in Farmingville.

Obviously, one does not want to make a mistake about where to go Mass. It took me about three and one-half years to recognize that the resist but recognize approach of the Society of Saint Pius X was as a recrudescence of the Gallicanism that had been condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, and that was summarized so brilliantly by a French bishop, Emile Bougaud, in the Nineteenth Century:

The violent attacks of Protestantism against the Papacy, its calumnies and so manifest, the odious caricatures it scattered abroad, had undoubtedly inspired France with horror; nevertheless the sad impressions remained. In such accusations all, perhaps, was not false. Mistrust was excited., and instead of drawing closer to the insulted and outraged Papacy, France stood on her guard against it. In vain did Fenelon, who felt the danger, write in his treatise on the “Power of the Pope,” and, to remind France of her sublime mission and true role in the world, compose his “History of Charlemagne.” In vain did Bossuet majestically rise in the midst of that agitated assembly of 1682, convened to dictate laws to the Holy See, and there, in most touching accents, give vent to professions of fidelity and devotedness toward the Chair of St. Peter. We already notice in his discourse mention no longer made of the “Sovereign Pontiff.” The “Holy See,” the “Chair of St. Peter,” the “Roman Church,” were alone alluded to. First and alas! too manifest signs of coldness in the eyes of him who knew the nature and character of France! Others might obey through duty, might allow themselves to be governed by principle–France, never! She must be ruled by an individual, she must love him that governs her, else she can never obey.

These weaknesses should at least have been hidden in the shadow of the sanctuary, to await the time in which some sincere and honest solution of the misunderstanding could be given. But no! parliaments took hold of it, national vanity was identified with it. A strange spectacle was now seen. A people the most Catholic in the world; kings who called themselves the Eldest Sons of the Church and who were really such at heart; grave and profoundly Christian magistrates, bishops, and priests, though in the depths of their heart attached to Catholic unity,–all barricading themselves against the head of the Church; all digging trenches and building ramparts, that his words might not reach the Faithful before being handled and examined, and the laics convinced that they contained nothing false, hostile or dangerous. (Right Reverend Emile Bougaud, The Life of Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque. Published in 1890 by Benziger Brothers. Re-printed by TAN Books and Publishers, 1990, pp. 24-29.)

 It is nevertheless the case that, despite some “unfriendly Indians,” shall we say, among the laity who were most unwelcoming and condemnatory of my indulterer past and highly suspicious of my “conversion” to the cause of tradition, we were most edified by the commitment of the priests of the Society of Saint Pius X to the immutable doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King and their uncompromising commitment to opposing the prevailing “popular culture.”. We will always be grateful for the commitment to Catholic teaching found in chapels of the Society of Saint Pius X, praying also, of course, that, just perhaps, one of their bishops and many of their priests will come to recognize that True Popes Never Need to Convert to the Faith.

Hostility to and suspicions about “strangers” in various traditional venues, both in the “resist but recognize” and the sedevacantist camps, betray a most decidedly un-Catholic view of others.

As noted a few years ago now, the clergy and religious and laity of the Society of Saint Pius V are forever on the lookout for “strangers,” people who might be associated with “clergy who derive their orders, whether in whole or in part, from bishops consecrated in the lineage of the late Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngo Dinh Thuc,” a position refuted thoroughly and demolished utterly by Mr. Mario Derksen in Open Letter to Bishop Clarence Kelly. One can see the “looks,” the suspicions and then hear the whispers and the muttering that takes place as the “stranger,” suspected immediately of being a “Thucie,” if you will, is placed under observation until he gets that tap on the shoulder while attempting to recollect himself for the offering of the perfect prayer that is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Such suspicions are not limited to the Society of Saint Pius V. Oh, far from it, sad to report.

Indeed, one of the most disturbing things that we have heard in the past decade was how an independent, militantly anti-sedevacantist priest gave instructions to his ushers not to permit “strangers” into his chapel, explaining that a priest must “know” who is going to his Mass. This attitude was expressed again three years ago by one of his clerical admirers whilst we were at breakfast with him. Our mouths were agape with shock. Since when is this anything other than cult-like behavior? Since when?

I defy anyone to cite any precedent for this in any functioning parish of the Catholic Church prior to the “election” of “Saint John XXIII” on October 28, 1958.

Catholics, especially in urban and suburban areas, moved freely from one parish to another for Mass on weekdays and on many Sundays as their travels or schedules required. They were not viewed with hostility or suspicion as they entered the doors of a Catholic Church. They were not questioned as to their Catholic credentials. They simply took their places quietly and recollected themselves for the offering of the unbloody perpetuation of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s one Sacrifice to the Father on the wood of the Holy Cross in Spirit and in Truth in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world. No priest in the 1950s, for example, “had to know” each of the several hundred people who might be assisting at any one of his offerings of Holy Mass. A priest with the mind of Christ the King and whose heart is conformed to Our King’s Most Sacred Heart through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary does not live in fear and he never worries about who is going to be at his Mass.

Let us call habitual, institutionalized pastoral policies of hostility to and/or suspicions about “strangers” by its proper name: Xenophobia. It is nothing other than that, and it must be condemned as thoroughly foreign to the tender mercies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. It is shameful and calls to mind the hateful, mean-spirited behavior of those whose hearts were darkened by the Albigensian heresy that Our Lady instructed Saint Dominic de Guzman, the founder of the Order of Preachers, to fight and to destroy by means of the Most Holy Rosary that she gave to him to pray and to promote.

No one is a stranger to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

No one.

Let me reiterate this point in case any of the very few readers of this site missed it.

No one is a stranger to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

No one.

The Most Sacred Heart of Jesus suffered for all men. The Most Sacred Heart of Jesus beats for us in the Most Blessed Sacrament awaiting acts of love from every man alive on the face of the earth, being repaid, however, with such lukewarmness and tepidity and ingratitude from those who think that they are more trustworthy than the “strangers” who might have mustered up the courage to take some baby steps out of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to embrace the truth of our ecclesiastical situation in this time of apostasy and betrayal. How is it not possible to see the image of the suffering Christ in those souls placed within our paths by Divine Providence, less yet treat them as strangers deserving of fear and suspicion?

Many have been the times when Our Lord or one of His saints appeared in a hidden form to test the charity of men, to see if they would extend to a child or to a beggar the care and concern and gentleness of heart that they would give to Him.

Saint Edward the Confessor, for example, had a great devotion to Saint John the Evangelist, Our Lord’s beloved disciple. Disguised as a poor man begging for alms, Saint John appeared to Saint Edward the Confessor, the just king of England from 1042 to 1066 who governed according to the Mind of Christ the King and sought to be just to his subjects. Having no money on his person, Saint Edward took off his royal ring and gave it to the beggar. Saint Edward did not recognize the beggar as the saint to whom he was very devoted. It did not matter to him. Saint Edward took the man to be one of his subjects. This did not matter to him. He treated him the way that he would have treated Our Lord in the very flesh. And Saint John sent the ring back to Saint Edward with a message that foretold the latter’s death.

Saint John of God, journeying in what appeared to most men to be an aimless manner, going from here to there so frequently that he was thought to be utterly mad, carried the Christ Child for a long distance, not knowing at first Who he had on his strong back. He was not afraid of the stranger, not afraid of what the stranger would “do” to him. Why? Because he had the loving, trusting heart of the Divine Redeemer and because he trusted not in his physical strength, which was immense, or any kind of weapons such as he used during his time as a soldier. He trusted in the power of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary. He explained his trust to his spiritual director, Saint John of Avila, who never ceased to be amazed by his directee’s Christ-like trust and faith:

“What if doors are slammed in your face?”

“Then they are, although I can’t think they will be. That was never my experience in the past.”

“In the past, you presented a quite different appearance. Not that you went about in shining garments, but at least you were a conventionally attired giant. Now you’re a giant in fustian girt with rope. Head bare. Feet bare. Your height, your flesh pared down to the bone by penances, your garb may well arouse doubts and questions. Don’t forget that the Castilian peasant has something of the gypsy in his make-up. He is changeable of mind and often superstitious. Other pilgrims don cloaks, carry long staffs and have cockleshells on their hats. These externals identify them and readily gain them food and lodging. You’ve no cloak nor rod scallop shell, that ancient emblem of the pilgrim. Who will believe you are going to Guadalupe?

“I don’t know, replied John,” “and I cannot see that it matters. In the end, it is not what I wear that will determine whether I find shelter or not, but the mysterious will of God. As for cloak, staff and shell, what use are they?” Touching his rosary, he said, “Our Lady’s beads are greater protection than any cloak.” (Corville Newcomb Brother Zero: A Story of the Life of Saint John God, Dodd and Mead and Company, 1959, p. 126.)

Yes, there are times when “strangers” mean us harm.

So what?

Saint Meinrad knew that the men coming to visit him in his hermitage were going to rob and kill him. He invited them into his hermitage nevertheless. He treated them the way that he would have treated Our Lord, knowing that he would have to make an accounting of himself to Him in a very short time. He did not want to die exercising his legitimate right of self-defense. He died showing men intent on doing him violence the very kindness and solicitude that he showed everyone else who found his various hermitages even though he preferred the solitude of prayer. No one was a “bother” to him. He made time for all. His needs were secondary to those who came to call upon him to seek his counsel and direction. And it was this that he gave to the men who killed him. It is thus not for nothing that Saint Meinrad is known as the “Martyr of Hospitality.” That is indeed quite a different approach than that of fear and suspicion that is exhibited by some tradtionally-minded Catholic clergy and priests when it comes to refusing to give to others the tenderness of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus that is given so readily to them.

A similar example of Catholic charity exhibited to a visitor known to be dangerous was that given us by Father Eldred Leslie, a traditional priest in the Republic of South Africa, who was murdered in January of 2009 by a man who had stolen from him before. He did not go into hiding even though he had been robbed by many people in the past, including by the man who would murder him. He continued serving out in the open, fearless of the consequences, knowing that he had to extend the charity of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus to all he encountered:

According to Kenny, this was not the first time that his uncle had fallen victim to crime since arriving in the area about ten years ago. “Since arriving here he has been robbed and had his house broken into about 15 times and that’s a conservative figure” he said.

Despite all this Father Leslie continued to do good in the area. He was well known in the area especially for his work with street children and the poor. “He gave street children and destitute people food and even paid school fees for some of the children,” Kenny said. (Fr. Eldred Lesley Murdered in Johannesburg.)

Father Leslie is also a martyr of hospitality and charity, is he not?

Indeed, the openness of Catholic parishes throughout her history has subjected priests to all manner of dangers. Those who are especially close to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary know that it is a privilege to die while offering–or preparing to offer–the ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross that is Holy Mass. A Franciscan priest named Father Leo Heinrichs died as a martyr of the Eucharist, being ready to accept whatever kind of death that God will send him, praying, though, to die at the feet of Our Lady herself. His prayer was answered at Saint Elizabeth’s Church in Denver, Colorado, where he served as superior of the Franciscan monastery and pastor of the parish:

Father Leo was traveling again after three years. He arrived in Denver on Sept. 23, 1907, to take up his new assignment — superior of the monastery and pastor of St. Elizabeth’s Church.

Five months later, in mid-February, he addressed a parish women’s group. His listeners would recall a comment he made: “How sweet it is to die at the feet of Mary!”

At a funeral on Friday, Feb. 21, 1908, Father Leo offered this thought in his eulogy — “Death may come at any time and under peculiar circumstances. We must live so that when the end comes we will be at peace with God, and then to us death will have no terror, but will be merely the transition to a happier life.”

The next day, he changed the priests’ Sunday Mass schedule. He chose to offer the 6 a.m. Mass instead of his usual 8 a.m. service, so that he could attend a Knights of Columbus Communion breakfast.

In the congregation for the 6 a.m. Mass was 50-year-old Giuseppe Alia, a baptized Catholic who had fled from Sicily with an anarchist sect. He exiled to South America, where his group determined to kill priests who had opposed their propaganda. Alia was designated the sect’s assassin.

A targeted Italian priest was believed to have moved to the United States, and Alia followed his trail to New York City. The intended prey was subsequently believed to have continued on to Denver, bringing his hunter to the Rocky Mountain city. Unable to find the Italian priest, Alia settled on taking down any priest.

As the time for distribution of Holy Communion arrived at the 6 a.m. Mass on Feb. 23, 1908, Alia joined the faithful who knelt at the altar railing. After Father Leo placed the host on Alia’s tongue, the stranger spat the wafer to the floor, then reached into his bulky winter coat and pulled a pistol from the band of his trousers.

An altar boy, seeing the weapon, tried to alert Father Leo, but there was no time. Aiming directly at the priest’s heart, Alia pulled the trigger.

Father Leo fell in front of a statue of the Virgin Mary — “How sweet it is to die at the feet of Mary” — and struggled to make his last priestly act, recovering two of the blessed hosts from the floor and returning them to his chalice.

Witnesses said that he had a smile on his face while he was being administered the Last Rites of the Catholic Church.

An off-duty police officer and others in the church tackled Alia as he attempted to flee. (Father Leo Heinrichs, Martyr of the Eucharist.)

Here is another account of the martyrdom of Father Leo Heinrichs, O.F.M., who, apart from being a martyr of the Eucharist, is also the Protomartyr of Colorado:

Father Leo Heinrichs, O.F.M., arrived at St. Elizabeth’s on September 23rd, 1907.  His term as pastor lasted exactly five months.  Soon the poor of Denver learned they had a friend in the pastor of St. Elizabeth’s, and every morning a line formed at the friary gate.  No one went away without food and a kind word.  Father Leo received permission to return to Germany to visit his family after an absence of over twenty one years; but he postponed his journey until after June 7th, 1908, when he planned to give First Communion to a class of seventy children. Death interrupted Father Leo’s plans.

A week before his death, Father Leo spoke at the Young Ladies’ Sodality meeting. He remarked, while speaking of the Ever-Immaculate Mother of God, “If I had my choice of a place where I would die, I would choose to die at the feet of the Blessed Virgin.”  Father Leo usually went to confession on Tuesdays, but he also made his confession the night before his death.  That Saturday night he asked Father Wulstan Workman to celebrate the 8 a.m. Mass, so that he (Father Leo) could attend a meeting.  That change to the 8 a.m. Mass spared Father Wulstan’s life, and led to Father Leo’s murder at the early Mass.

Father Leo’s murderer was a fifty year old anarchist, Giuseppe Alia, recently arrived through Ellis Island.  Alia hated priests because of some wrong, real or imagined, that he suffered in Sicily.  The would-be assassin arrived before Mass and seated himself in the third row, in front of the pulpit, alone in the congregation of three hundred souls.  The anarchist intended to shoot a priest during the homily, but at the 6 a.m. “Workingmen’s Mass,” there was only a short sermon from the altar steps, so the men would not be late for work.  Thwarted but undismayed, Alia remained at Mass, and at Communion knelt at the altar rail to receive the Host from Father Leo.  Alia received the Host, then spat it into his hand and flung it at Father Leo’s face.  The Host dropped to the floor outside the communion rail as Alia drew his handgun and aimed it at Father Leo’s heart.  An altar boy screamed “Look out, Father!” as the anarchist fired at Father Leo.  The mortally wounded priest exclaimed “My God, my God!”  The priest fell to the floor; he placed the ciborium on the step of Our Lady’s altar, and managed to place two spilled Hosts back into the ciborium before strength left him.  In a last gesture, Father Leo pointed to the spilled Hosts that he was now too weak to pick up.  Rose Fisher, an eyewitness, reported that Father Leo died smiling, at the foot of the Blessed Mother’s altar.  Father Wulstan Workman, who had switched with Father Leo for the later Mass, administered the Last Rites.  Father Wulstan told the Denver Post, “I would have been killed and he would be alive now.  There is one way to solve the affair that I can see, and that is that God chose the better man.”

Alia attempted to flee the Church, but E.J. Quigley, a conductor for the Denver & Rio Grande Railroad, tripped him, and Daniel Cronin, an off-duty policeman, subdued and arrested the murderer.  Alia stated that, if he had not been stopped, he would have shot more priests.  Alia was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death within a few weeks of the murder.  Shortly before the execution, a Franciscan priest from St. Elizabeth’s visited Alia in prison.  The unrepentant anarchist cursed and swore at the priest.  Alia never expressed any remorse, and, despite the pleas of the friars at St. Elizabeth’s, he was hanged at the Colorado State Penitentiary in Canon City.  Alia’s last words, reportedly, were “Death to the priests!”

At the post mortem examination, the coroner found that a bullet through the left ventricle of Father Leo’s heart was the cause of his death.  The anarchist had loaded his pistol with sharpened bullets, so, as the murderer thought, to inflict maximum damage.  The coroner also found that Father Leo’s upper arms and waist were wrapped in leather straps.  Each strap was studded with rows of pointed iron hooks, which pierced the skin.  Around the priest’s waist the skin was calloused and scarred, but showed no sign of infection.  Father Leo secretly practiced this extreme form of mortification, perhaps to help him master his quick temper.  None of his confreres had any idea of his self-inflicted penances. When the friars entered Father Leo’s room after his death, they found that he slept on a wooden door.  Also discovered in his room was a translation Father Leo made, from German to English, of the life of Father Victorin Delbrouck, O.F.M., a young Belgian missioner who died a martyr in China in 1898.  The short biography was published after Father Leo’s death.

Because of the murder, Bishop Nicholas Matz of Denver had to reconsecrate St. Elizabeth’s church.  Father Leo Heinrich’s funeral, on February 26th, 1908, was the largest seen in Denver in many years.  The Governor of Colorado and the Mayor of Denver attended, as well as thousands of ordinary folks.  The crowds followed the cortege to the railroad station, where Father Leo’s casket was placed on an eastbound train.  After a four day journey, Father Leo’s body returned to St. Bonaventure’s in Paterson, New Jersey.  Twenty thousand people viewed Father Leo’s body at the friary there.  On March 2nd, 1908, after the funeral Mass at St. Bonaventure’s, three thousand accompanied his body across the Passaic River to burial in the Franciscans’ plot at Holy Sepulchre Cemetery in Totowa, New Jersey.  Father Leo was buried in his Franciscan habit, sandals on his feet, and a purple and gold stole over his shoulders.

In 1911, the Franciscan church in East Paterson (now Elmwood Park), New Jersey, was dedicated to St. Leo the Great, but was named in memory of Father Leo Heinrichs, O.F.M. (Father Leo Heinrich, O.F.M.)

 Everyone is welcome in a Catholic church. Everyone, including those who might very well do us harm. There is never any reason to fear. Our Lady has our “backs” now and for all eternity. That was good enough for the martyrs. Isn’t it good enough for us?

There is no injustice or madness or imprudence in this if we consider how cruel and ungrateful we have been to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus by treating It with such coldness and neglect, by making us strangers to Its love for us by refusing to make time, if at all possible in this era of apostasy and betrayal, to spend time in prayer before the Most Blessed Sacrament in Which It awaits our acts of adoration, thanksgiving, reparation and petition. We are the ones who have estranged ourselves from the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Consider this prayer composed by Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque in honor of her Divine Visitor, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who revealed to her the secrets of His Most Sacred Heart:

O Divine Heart of Jesus, inexhaustible Source of love and goodness, ah! how I regret that I have forgotten Thee too much and loved Thee so little! O Sacred Heart, Thou dost merit the reverence and love of all hearts which Thou hast cherished so much and laid under infinite obligations. And yet Thou dost receive from the greater number nothing but ingratitude and coldness, and especially from my own heart which merits Thy just indignation. But Thy Heart is all full of goodness and mercy, and of this I wish to avail myself to obtain reconciliation and pardon. O Divine Heart, I grieve intensely when I see myself guilty of such cowardice and when I consider the ungrateful conduct of my wicked heart, which has so unjustly stolen the love that it owes to Thee and bestowed it on myself or on vain amusements.

O Heart most meek, if the sorrow and shame of a heart that recognizes its error can satisfy Thee, pardon this heart of mine for it is sorry for its infidelity and ashamed of the little care which it has taken to please Thee by its love. O Sacred Heart of my Saviour, what could I expect from all this but Thy displeasure and condign punishment if I did not hope in Thy mercy. O, Heart of my God, Heart most holy, Heart to which alone belongs to pardon sinners, do Thou in Thy mercy pardon this poor miserable heart of mine. All its powers unite in a supreme effort to make reparations to Thee for its wanderings from Thee and the disordered application of its love.

Ah! how have I been able hitherto to refuse Thee my heart, I who have so many obligations to make Thee its sole possessor, nevertheless I have done so. But now how I regret that I have wandered away from Thee, from the love of Thee who art the Source of all goodness, in a word, from the Heart of my Jesus, who although needing me not, hast sought me out and lavished Thy favors on me. O adorable Heart of Jesus, is it possible that my heart can have treated Thee thus, my heart which depends entirely on Thy love and thy benefits and which, if Thou shouldst take them from it, would fall into the utmost extremes of misery or be reduced to nothingness? Ah! how I am beholden to Thy goodness, O indulgent Heart of my Saviour, for having borne with me so long in my ingratitude! Oh! how timely Thy mercies come to pardon my poor, inconstant heart!

O Heart of my Jesus, I now consecrate to Thee and give Thee all my love and the source of my love, which is my heart; I give Thee both irrevocably, although with great confusion for having so long refused Thee Thine own possessions. O Divine Heart, my very capability of bestowing my poor hear on Thee is a proof of Thy great love for me, but alas! I have availed myself badly of such a favorable opportunity to merit Thy love and grace. Oh! how great is my confusion at the thought of this! O Heart of my Jesus, reform my faithless heart, grant that henceforth it may bind itself to Thy love by its own, and that it may approach Thee as much in the future as it has wandered away from Thee in the past, and as Thou art the Creator of my heart, may Thou, I beseech Thee, one day give it the crown of immortality.

We have wounded the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. We have done so. I know only too well the vain amusements that occupied my life for far too long, vain amusements for which I must make reparation until the day I die.

Oh, yes, we do indeed wound the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus so carelessly and so frequently, do we not? All the more reason to be even more careful in returning a true love from our truly repentant hearts to the very font of Divine Love, something that Father John Croiset noted:

Consider that it was no less afflicting and sad for Jesus Christ to see the ingratitude of the majority of the faithful, who would have only coldness and indifference for Him in the Sacrament of His love. He saw the little esteem, nay, even the contempt with which they would treat this greatest proof of His love. He saw that no matter what He might do to be loved by the faithful, even dwelling always amongst them in the Blessed Eucharist, neither this excess of His love, nor His benefits, nor His very presence would be capable of making the greater part of them love Him or would prevent them from forgetting Him. he saw that those churches in which He was to be sacramentally present would be left for most of the time without adorers. He saw what little reverence, nay, what disrespect would be shown in His presence. He saw clearly how the greater part of His followers, who spend long hours in vain amusement and useless visits and complete idleness, would rarely find a quarter of an hour to spend before Him in the Blessed Sacrament. He knew how many others would visit Him only under compulsion and without either devotion or reverence. And finally, He saw the very small number who would eagerly visit Him and devoutly adore Him. He saw clearly that the greater number take no more notice of Him than if He were not really present in the Blessed Sacrament or than if He were a person of no consequence.

The harsh treatment which He received from the Jews, Gentiles and heretics was indeed very painful to Him, but they were His open enemies. But could we ever thought it possible that those who recognize His benefits, that those who make profession of being faithful to Him, that His own children should not only be insensible to His benefits and in no way touched with compassion at the sight of the grief caused by such contempt, but that they should treat Him with contempt by their irreverences and sacrileges? Our Saviour might well say: “If pagans and Turks and infidels had treated Me so, I might have endured it.” “for if my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne it”. (Ps. 54:13), but that Christians, Catholics whom I have not only redeemed, but have fed and nourished with my Body and Blood, should have nothing but contempt for Me, that they should treat Me with ingratitude, is too much. “But thou a man of one mind, my guide and my familiar: who didst take sweetmeats together with me! (Ps. 54: 14-15)

What must be the sentiments of this most generous and tender Heart of Jesus which has so loved men, and which finds in the hearts of those men only coldness and contempt? “I am become a reproach among my enemies.” (Ps. 30: 12). If after exposing Myself to the contempt and hatred of My enemies in the midst of the outrages which I suffer, I could at least find a large number of faithful friends who would console Me! But it is quite the contrary: “They that saw me without fled from me.” (Ps. 30:12) The greater number, seeing that I have disguised Myself under the feeble appearance of bread in order to have the pleasure of dwelling among men, abandon Me and forget Me as a person who has no place in their hearts, “I am forgotten as one dead from the heart.” (Ps. 30:13)  (Father John Croiset, The Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, republished by TAN Books and Publishers.)

No one is a stranger to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

We cannot estrange ourselves from the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus more than we have already in our lives by viewing with fear and suspicion those we consider to be “strangers,” especially when we consider how little we have returned by way of fervent receptions of Holy Communion, time spent in abiding prayer before the Most Blessed Sacrament and our acts of love and reparation during the course of a day to the Heart of Hearts that was pierced with lance as It poured out the sacramental elements of Blood and water onto the earth.

May each Rosary we pray help to melt our hardened hearts and to see in each person a child of God by adoption, treating him with the love that the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus gives us with such ardor and fidelity no matter how far we have strayed, no matter how little good use we have made of Its tender mercies in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance.

Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary of reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary now?

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.

Our Lady of Perpetual Help, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.