Cult vs. Community

Many years ago, I was fortunate to be a member of a solid, lay community. For almost seven years, I got up and prayed with my companions, a house of fourteen in a community of two-thousand, worked at various jobs, and even worked full-time for a while for the community. I learned discipline, order, virtue training, and servanthood.

The community was outward looking, involved in many "ministries" which reached out to the very pagan community in which it was located. We had street ministry, coffee house ministry, youth and children catechesis, members working in parishes in RCIA and other ministries, and homosexual rescue ministry.

This community had one huge focus which brought us all together. We all loved Jesus Christ, and He was (and still is) the center of our lives.

Communities bring life to other people, evangelize, grow.

Cults are inward looking, centering on the members themselves, and become stagnant spiritually. Frequently, Catholic cults, and, yes, there are some, care more about the group than the people outside the group.

Yes, commitment was an important and necessary part of the community to which I belonged. We met daily in our small groups, weekly in groups of one-hundred, based on the Mosaic organization, and weekly in larger groupings, monthly with the entire community. One met with one's spiritual director once a week, or once every two weeks.

Ministries met to organize, plan, go out into the world to spread the love of Christ to all.

Cults just exist to feed themselves. And, cults usually believe things which are not Catholic, and even against Church teaching.

The sign that a person is in a cult rather than a community can be isolationism, or paranoia. Indeed, the cult defends its own position by turning the wagons inward, or by digging a moat and throwing alligators in the moat.

Not good.

Not healthy.

As people come together for protection and common support, one can follow two simple rules to "take the temperature" of the group and determine whether the group has fallen into the sickness of a cult, or is a healthy community.

Rule One, are the members orthodox and following the teachings of the Catholic Church, loyal to Rome and to the Magisterium?

Rule Two, are the members reaching out to others, spreading the Gospel, doing works of mercy both spiritual and material?

If one can answer "yes" to both questions, one has encountered a healthy community.

If one of the answers is "no", run the other way.

Years ago, I encountered a Catholic community which had one goal-to sustain itself and keep the community going. This community had become cultic, focusing inwardly on itself and its members and not reaching out. Not surprisingly, many of the members had deviated in their beliefs so that they no longer followed Church Teaching.

Cults can seem orthodox, until one speaks with members who begin to exhibit paranoia, exclusivity, pride. Orthodoxy means following the Church in teaching and in practice. Sadly, cults may be found at either extreme spectrum of schismatic ideas, both traditional and liberal.

A healthy community does not have members who are hiding from the world, but members who are trying to save souls.

Preaching the Gospel and saving souls is the call of every Catholic.

Christ gave us a command, not a suggestion when He said this:

Matthew 28:19 Douay-Rheims

19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Each lay person is called to teach, to evangelize, to bring others to Christ. We are not called merely to protect ourselves from spiritual danger. 

A strong community does protect its members, but those members also must respond to the love of God for all people.

Learn the difference. To become a member of a cult will endanger your immortal soul.

Another sign of cultic behavior is liturgical rigorism. Those trads who do not believe the NO is valid have departed from Church teaching and have fallen into a cultic mindset. Rigorism is not the same as obedience to liturgical norms. Obedience to the Church's rules on liturgy, on ritual, is a virtue. Only attending a TLM on Sunday,and not attending Mass if only a NO is available is a mortal sin, and those who join together holding such a false idea have formed a cult.

Be careful, be honest, be open to others, be truly orthodox. love Christ above all, and be obedient.

Then, you will be in the loving arms of the Church and not in a cult.

See also

http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2015/08/paranoia-vs-prep-and-ouroboros.html

What part of John 6

54 do non-Catholics, non-Christians not understand? And, why? Christ said this sentence and highlighted it with "Amen, amen", which means "pay attention, please". 

Life in this verse means sanctifying grace...no Eucharist, no grace, no salvation, no heaven.

Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

A short meditation on the EF

The EF just IS.

The EF is Saruman of White. The NO is Saruman of many colors.

The Mass has been fragmented.

The EF does for what us what we strive for in the NO.

The EF envelopes us in grace.

Transformation II

Our transformation through the Eucharist is one of becoming Christ for the world. Cardinal Burke, St. John Paul II and the Pope Emeritus all ponder the humility of the priest before the Eucharist.

If the priest allows himself to become transformed, truly living his role as alter Christus, then the people of God will see Christ clearly.

From the Pope Emeritus' "Letter Proclaiming a Year for Priests on the 150th Anniversary of the 'Dies Natalis' of the Cure of Ars," June 16, 2009.

Saint John Mary Vianney taught his parishoners primarily by the witness of his life. It was from his example that they learned to pray, halting frequently before the tabernacle for a visit to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament....This way of educating the faithful to the Eucharistic presence and to communion proved most effective when they saw him celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Those present said that 'it was not possible to find a finer example of worship...He gazed upon the Host with immense love.'"

Important Apostolic Letter, 1998

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_05071998_dies-domini_en.html

So many families do not understand that the entire day of Sunday is for worship, not merely the time the members attend Mass. Cardinal Burke reminds us of the holiness of Sunday in his book.

Memoricide and Memory Continued

What has been lost astounds me daily. For example, the laity at the TLM do not know their own unwritten rubrics, which were passed down for centuries, albeit with local differences.

For example, I try to explain over and over, that when the priest gets up after sitting on the side, the laity stand as well. And, the laity do not say the altar server parts of the TLM.

Sadly, some who have come over from idiosyncratic groups attempt to push their agendas on to the normal role of the laity.

Another odd thing is the insistence of men only in choirs. For centuries, there were women singing in churches. The choir loft was invented so that women could sing and not be in the altar or "monastic choir" area. Also, women and girls, taught by nuns, were sacristans for a long time as well.

Too many lay people have lost the sense of reverence, even in the TLM and either do not discipline their children or talk as soon as Mass is over.

These are all signs of memoricide.

Once a Catholic identity is gone, it has to be set-up again from scratch, which can be difficult. When certain personalities get involved in pushing certain ideals which did not even exist before the so-called watershed of Vatican II, confusion reigns.

Again, I wrote quite a while ago on the false romanticizing of a TLM past. However, we must keep memory of what went before.

I have an unusually excellent memory, which is a gift from God, and as a person who grew up with the TLM, which did not disappear before I was 19, I have tried to discuss lay habits and customs, so that extremes are not put into place and so that some of the older ways are kept.

Some younger TLMers become hysterical in their efforts to create something which never existed, while ignoring their own role as parents first.

By the way, us TLM kids learned the Latin before we made our First Holy Communion at age eight.

Why are parents not teaching their children the Latin? I offered to hold a Latin class and no one was interested.

Memoricide.................

Memory and Memoricide Continued

I am still thinking of finishing my doctorate which has to do with the the Traditional Liturgy and continuity in the Anglican community, leading to the Ordinariate.

I have interviewed some clergyman on the point both in the states and in England.

My idea is one connected to this concept that the Liturgy keeps the memory of Catholicism alive in a community, and that "memoricide" totally disrupts the Catholic community in order to make it disappear.

Henry VIII tried this, as did Elizabeth I. The Muslim conquests attempted this as well. To destroy the liturgical infrastructure of the Church is to destroy the Church.

No Mass, no sacraments, no Catholic marriages, no vocations and so on...

Memoricide works. The Czech Republic, before the Soviet invasion, was a country with a long, alive heritage of Catholicism. The Soviet government succeeded in making it one of the most secular countries in Europe.

Memoricide destroys family histories as well. Those of my readers who have been following my ancestor series know how important oral tradition is in families, especially Catholic families.

Oral tradition is exactly what we have in the Traditional Mass.

Pray, that if it is God's Will, I can finish this study. Money is a problem, but so is the lack of stability in my life.

February 24, 303 VI

With the ruins of the churches in Rome and in all the provinces, in the cities and in the countryside, with the destruction of the Scriptures and libraries of the cathedrals and basilicas, came a loss which would have impacted the daily lives of the Christians.

No longer would they have easy access to the sacramental life of the Church. By the end of 303, the clergy would have been imprisoned or scattered. Some would have melted into the houses of the laity. Some would have left the areas for safety, like the Seminary Priests during the Protestant Revolt in England.

That the clergy went underground is obvious for one reason-the Faith survived. In some places, as the persecution intensified (and, remember, it was empire-wide), entire congregations would disappear. Parishes and dioceses would disappear forever. Not one of the churches mentioned in the Book of Revelation survived.

Sometimes, it is easier to hide in a very large city. Sometimes, it is easier to hide in the country.

We know from the history of the liturgy, that the Mass was at first in the cities in the cathedrals and was high mass. We know that the low mass came about because of the dispersal of the Catholics from the urban areas into the countryside.

Smaller, unknown churches with simplified rubrics became the order of the day. We also know that the catacombs, the ancient tombs of Rome, were used for mass.

The catacombs would have been implemented for burials only until the end of the fourth century, when Catholics were free to bury their dead above ground.

But, in the time of Diocletian, the catacombs would have been places for mass. So, from the third to the end of the fourth centuries, these underground places provided safe havens for worship, not for living.

Thanks to wiki for photo of The Good Shepherd from S. Callisto catacomb.

Many of the new martyrs were buried in the older tomb areas.

However, in our day and age, such places of safety will be more and more rare. With the great intrusiveness of privacy, less and less communities will be isolated. But, the world is a very big planet, and the remnant will be small. To think there will be no safe havens is not realistic, but to pretend there will be many is also unrealistic.

That the remnant may consist of less numbers than what we could imagine is a strong possibility. But, as in all times of persecution, those who can get away from the worst areas of hatred will be those who have a plan.

I know two people who escaped the Nazi take over of Czechoslovakia. They managed to get out because they either obeyed a parent who told them to go, now, (the teen woman), or they skillfully planned an escape (the teen man).

They both made it to England, fell in love there, and finally traveled to Canada, where they lived most of their long lives.

The woman in this couple had a sister who did not escape. She did not obey her father's warning to "leave now".  She was never found. I myself tried to help the woman locate her sister, but we had to give up.

The use of common sense and the use of discernment can make a difference between life and death.

Some Catholics would have left Rome and gone into country areas, away from the towns and cities where the arrest of Catholics would be easiest. They would not have gone alone. There would have been "safe houses" as in England in the 15th and 16th centuries.

The spread of Christianity partly was owing to the dispersal of the Roman citizens across Europe.

This type of movement may happen again, but with a difference. However, people would have to be willing to be displaced, to move, to leave all, for the sake of the Gospel being handed down to the next generation.

Like the forever missing sister, some who refused to flee died. Some did not have a choice, as they were arrested. But, some survived.

Therefore, one must adopt a flexible attitude of being alert. One must help establish safe houses. One must be willing to sacrifice all.

(Thanks to Father  Michael G. Nevin in a series of talks at St. Kevin's, Dublin Latin Mass Chaplaincy, for notes on the history of the liturgy in early Rome.)

To be continued....

From a Friend on The Mass

http://www.stspeterandpaulbasilica.com/files/homilies/2014-01-26.mp3

Partial Answer to A Priest on Noise in The Mass

Mary and Martha-thanks so wikimedia

http://blog.adw.org/2013/09/pastoral-perspectives-on-silence-in-church/

A smart friend of mine sent me this article. Take time to read it. Not only is it shocking, but it shows the depth of the falling away of the sense of Fear of the Lord and persistence of people centered worship. Humanism is alive and well in the Church.

I am only going to correct a few of the errors I see in this priest's thinking. I have not read the comments, either, but only the article.

First, large Churches existed from day one and from day one, contrary to popular belief, the Masses were mostly solemn high Masses. Small, intimate Masses only happened after the Church was heavily persecuted, and the simplicity of the Liturgy corresponded either to the need for hiding, or for the need of the displacement of the Mass from the urban areas to the country. Catholicism, as we see in Revelation, was urban from the start and the Mass would have been ornate. Contrary to Protestant belief, the Mass was more complicated and an expression of "high liturgy" for many reasons, including the main one, which was that the Bishop presided.

Now, the idea of silence was already common in both pagan and Jewish liturgical celebrations. We see St. Paul reminding the women to be silent in Church, not because they wanted to read, but because they were gossiping about who was getting married, who was pregnant again and who got a new donkey.

The ideal of silence in the Liturgy has, for centuries, been connected to Fear of the Lord, and the understanding of Transcendence.

This sense of Transcendence was part of the congregations sense of the sacred. God was God and duty plus appropriate worship was due to Him. The idea of respect would have been prevalent in the early Christian times, as the people were used to hierarchies and the appropriateness of behavior.

Which leads me to my second point. The moderns have no sense of appropriateness in dress, speech, eating, drinking, praying and so on. They have no sense of the sacred. How this happened is a combination of many things, including the changes in the Liturgy, but I blame the entire cultural shift in the past thirty years to the ideal and, indeed, idolization, of CASUAL.

Being casual is equal to sincerity, and sincerity is not a virtue. As I noted a few posts ago, one can make a heresy out of sincerity. Being casual indicates several psychological  problems, such as a lack of boundaries and a certain type of narcissism which allows a person to think that they never need to conform to outside, cultural values.

This priest is also confused on then nature of our relationship with God. We are creatures, sons and daughters of the Most High, owing God worship which is due to Him because He is God and because we are not gods.

That people go to Church on Sunday for community is the another point I want to cover. Wrong, wrong, wrong,
as community should be happening daily, during the week, with people building community. Some of you may remember that after many frustrating Sundays in parishes where the noise level was worse than in Marks and Spencers, it dawned on me that the reason why people talked so much before and after Mass, was that they did not have real relationships during the week. If there was real community, as in the old TLM days, people would not need to talk on Sunday, as they would be fraternizing, helping each other out and so on during the week.

One last point-when do people listen to God? If we do not have silence in our lives, we cannot hear God. and there are times when the entire community should be listening to God.

I can write more and maybe I shall, but not tonight. God bless this priest and may he learn to love God more than people. We love people because we love God, not for their own sakes. This idea is missing in this article.

Continued: Home Schooling Advice: The Mass Part 24-2

Continued from last post...

St. Julie Billiart

Directress: When the priest puts on the amice he kisses the cross on it and touches his head with it. Besides the priest's garments,what other things must we get ready? (Forest of hands again). Margaret?

Margaret: The chalice and the other things for the altar.

Directress:  If the person who is getting the things ready is not a Priest, what must he remember to do when touching the chalice?

Margaret: He must not touch it with his hands, but must use a piece of silk cloth.

Directress: Why?

Joan: Because during the Mass the chalice contains Our Lord's blood.

Directress: (as Margaret takes the next object):

What is that?

Margaret: It is the purificator.

Directress: What is that used for?

Margaret: To wipe the chalice.

Directress: Now the next thing. (Margaret takes up the paten in her fingers.) What has she done wrong?

Several: She should not have touched it with her hand but with a piece of silk.

Directress: What is the paten for?

Cicely: It is for the Host to rest on. (The pall, chalice veil, and burse are taken out and named at the same time.)

Directress: What is in the burse?

Cicely: The corporal.

Directress: Take it out, and look at it. The name comes from the Latin word corpus-a body. It is so called because it is the cloth on which the Body of Jesus is going to rest. The priest may not put down the Chalice or the Host on the altar unless the corporal is there. Now we must get the altar itself ready.....

The class then discusses the altar and the altar stone, connected to the relics from the Catacombs of Rome, which are needed in every altar and remind us of the Masses first said on the tombstones of the martyrs in Rome. The children set up the candles, which the teacher says reminds them of the small lights in the catacombs, which were dark, and that even in 1923, were used to light the way for people into the catacombs which were open. The Directress then asked the children what else went on the altar and they said three altar cloths, the Missal stand and Missal.  They also discussed the credence table, the cruets with wine and water, the little towel and basin, the bells the biretta and then they all together were going to go through the actions of the Mass together when the bell rang. Now the items used were smaller versions of the real ones, or ones, which were not used for Mass, but purchased for the school for teaching. This is an important distinction. 

I chose this section for two reasons. One, the absolute correct words for items must be used. And, two, children are capable of great reverence regarding altar ware and vestments.

In the earliest days of Montessori, many orders picked up her methods of teaching the Mass and the sacraments, as well as other subjects. These orders included houses, convents, schools and colleges of the Notre Dame de Namurs, the Fransican Missionaries of Mary, the Sisters of Mercy, the Ursulines, the Dominicans, the Benedictines, and others.

Early Montessori School

Eight Year Olds at The Gates of Heaven in 1923: Home Schooling Advice on The Mass Part 23

Dowanhill 1932

Here is a transcript of a class of school children of the average age of eight in 1923. Part One.

This was transcribed exactly in a school in Dowanhill, Glasgow and not based on a special presentation, but on a typical day in this school. The children had handed the miniature vestments and altar ware on the children's altar. There answers are spontaneous and learned in the manners I have described so far and by watching.

Directress: This morning the priest is wearing white vestments, because it is the Octave of the Epiphany. What do we mean by the Octave of the Epiphany?

Mary: It means the eighth day after.

Directress: On what other days does the priest wear white?

Kathleen: On the Feasts of Our Lord and Our Lady.

Directress: Any others?

Joyce: Of the saints who are not martyrs.

Directress: Yes, also on the Feast of the Holy Angels. (The Directress chooses a white chasuble from amongst the others and holds it up). Now who can tell me what the colour white signifies?

Cicely: It is to show purity and innocence.

Directress: Whilst we are talking of colours, who can tell me on what days the priest wears a red vestment?

Cicely: On the FeastS of the Holy Martyrs.

Directress: Any others? (Pause). Also on the Feast of Pentecost. What other colours does the priest wear?

Margaret: Purple.

Dowanhill Catholic Teacher Training College

Directress: When does the priest wear purple?

Margaret: During Lent.

Directress: At any other time?

Cicely: During Advent.

Directress: Are those all the liturgical colours used?

Several: No, Miss X, also green and black.

Directress: When is black used?

Margaret: At Masses for the dead.

Directress: At any other time?

Mary: On Good Friday.

Directress: Very good, and when is green used?

Joan: On all the other days which are not special days.

Directress: Who can tell me which vestments are changed according to the different Feasts and times of the liturgical year?

Joyce: The chasuble, the stole, and the maniple.

Directress: Anything else?

Mary: Also the thing-I do not know what it is called-which is put under the Missal.

Directress: That is the Missal cloth; and we must not forget the tabernacle veil, the chalice veil, and the burse. Now who would like to lay out the vestments which the priest uses for Mass?

(All hands do up eagerly). Well, Joan, you may try. (Joan takes up the chasuble).

Directress: What is the name of the vestment which you have in your hands?

Joan: This is the chasuble.

Directress: Of what does the chasuble remind us?

Mary: It is to remind us of the Cross which Our Lord carried on His shoulders.

Dowanhill Pugin Designed Chapel, 1898 at The College

Directress: The next one, Joan. (She picks up the alb).

Joan: This is the alb.

Directress: What does it represent?

Margaret: It is to remind us of the robe which Herod put on Our Lord, when they mocked Him.

Directress: Now, the other things. (Joan picks up the amice, girdle, stole and maniple, and their significance is explained). Will somebody arrange them in their right order as the priest will want them when he puts them on. (This is done). As the priest puts on the garments, he says a special prayer with each. Do you see that little cross on the amice? What is that to remind us of?

Mary: That the Mass is the same Sacrifice as that of the Cross.

To be continued......from The Appendix in The Child in the Church  London: Sands and Co.: 1929 by Maria Montessori.

Home Schooling and Religion, Parts 17 and XI The Mass

The highest form of worship we have in the Catholic Church is the Mass. This great gift is accessible to those who are intellectuals, non-intellectuals, and of all age groups.

Those who do not bring their babies to Mass miss the point of this great gift, as one, even in the Tridentine Mass, has never needed to know how to read to appreciate and understand it.

Those who say they do not like the TLM because they cannot understand Latin also miss the point, which Montessori makes over and over. We learn not merely by the word, but by action, symbols, music, rubrics.

The Mass is foremost a spiritual experience. Those who deny this to children are denying them the highest form of man's reaching up to God and God's reaching down to man.

Take all the children to Mass, no matter how old. Get them missals and not other books. This is important. And, no Cheerios, as millions managed for centuries without these.

My next post in this series will begin the sections on character building. The previous 16 are listed here, in case you missed these.
http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.ie/2013/08/new-home-schooling-series-not-yet.html

To be continued...

Part 68: DoC: St. Ambrose and Perfection

In Chapter 18 on his book on perfection for the clergy, Ambrose takes a digression into speaking to youth on modesty. He connects modesty with chastity.

On the different functions of modesty. How it should qualify both speech and silence, accompany chastity, commend our prayers to God, govern our bodily motions; on which last point reference is made to two clerics in language by no means unsuited to its object. Further he proceeds to say that one's gait should be in accordance with that same virtue, and how careful one must be that nothing immodest come forth from one's mouth, or be noticed in one's body. All these points are illustrated with very appropriate examples.

67. Lovely, then, is the virtue of modesty, and sweet is its grace! It is seen not only in actions, but even in our words, so that we may not go beyond due measure in speech, and that our words may not have an unbecoming sound. The mirror of our mind often enough reflects its image in our words. Sobriety weighs out the sound even of our voice, for fear that too loud a voice should offend the ear of any one. Nay, in singing itself the first rule is modesty, and the same is true in every kind of speech, too, so that a man may gradually learn to praise God, or to sing songs, or even to speak, in that the principles of modesty grace his advance.


Some people think that what we call "manners" are things with which society can dispense. On the edge of the fall of the Roman Empire. as the barbarians were edging towards Rome, a fall which was inevitable, but in the future, Ambrose could see that there was a need for grace in speech and deportment.

Wouldn't it be nice if those in the Catholic Church before and after Mass understood the necessity for silence? Would it not be wonderful if those in the media would understand reticence?

68. Silence, again, wherein all the other virtues rest, is the chief act of modesty. Only, if it is supposed to be a sign of a childish or proud spirit, it is accounted a reproach; if a sign of modesty, it is reckoned for praise. Susanna was silent in danger, and thought the loss of modesty was worse than loss of life. She did not consider that her safety should be guarded at the risk of her chastity. To God alone she spoke, to Whom she could speak out in true modesty. She avoided looking on the face of men. For there is also modesty in the glance of the eye, which makes a woman unwilling to look upon men, or to be seen by them.

Too often in our culture, we believe that speech must be aggressive to be taken seriously. We believe that speech shows integrity, and silence means deception. This is a new and odd idea which has grown with the over-stimulation of the media.


The silent man or woman was honored in older stories and folktales, as those listening could understand that humility meant reflection, reticent, right judgement, a quiet spirit. Youth do not have to be loud.

69. Let no one suppose that this praise belongs to chastity alone. For modesty is the companion of purity, in company with which chastity itself is safer. Shame, again, is good as a companion and guide of chastity, inasmuch as it does not suffer purity to be defiled in approaching even the outskirts of danger. This it is that, at the very outset of her recognition, commends the Mother of the Lord to those who read the Scriptures, and, as a credible witness, declares her worthy to be chosen to such an office. For when in her chamber, alone, she is saluted by the angel, she is silent, and is disturbed at his entrance, and the Virgin's face is troubled at the strange appearance of a man's form. And so, though she was humble, yet it was not because of this, but on account of her modesty, that she did not return his salutation, nor give him any answer, except to ask, when she had learned that she should conceive the Lord, how this should be. She certainly did not speak merely for the sake of making a reply.


Silence marks the mature Christian who does not have to prove anything to anybody. 

Are we too argumentative just for the sake of pride? Can we not wait, listen, reflect?

The silence of the desert fathers and the monastic life of Ambrose indicated a healthy balance of contemplation and action.

One gives up rights in being silent. The humble man is wiser than he who speaks too much and about nonsense.

I am an idea person. Too many conversations are about things, such as vacations, cars, clothes. How sad that people are stuck in the pride of goods, rather than in the contemplation of God.

70. In our very prayers, too, modesty is most pleasing, and gains us much grace from our God. Was it not this that exalted the publican, and commended him, when he dared not raise even his eyes to heaven? Luke 18:13-14 So he was justified by the judgment of the Lord rather than the Pharisee, whom overweening pride made so hideous. Therefore let us pray in the incorruptibility of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price, 1 Peter 3:4 as St. Peter says. A noble thing, then, is modesty, which, though giving up its rights, seizing on nothing for itself, laying claim to nothing, and in some ways somewhat retiring within the sphere of its own powers, yet is rich in the sight of God, in Whose sight no man is rich. Rich is modesty, for it is the portion of God. Paul also bids that prayer be offered up with modesty and sobriety. 1 Timothy 2:9 He desires that this should be first, and, as it were, lead the way of prayers to come, so that the sinner's prayer may not be boastful, but veiled, as it were, with the blush of shame, may merit a far greater degree of grace, in giving way to modesty at the remembrance of its fault.

The is nothing wrong with shame. Shame means one is not arrogant about sin.

71. Modesty must further be guarded in our very movements and gestures and gait. For the condition of the mind is often seen in the attitude of the body. For this reason the hidden man of our heart (our inner self) is considered to be either frivolous, boastful, or boisterous, or, on the other hand, steady, firm, pure, and dependable. Thus the movement of the body is a sort of voice of the soul.

I know some ladies who have commented here and on other blogs would disagree with this reading. However, I am convinced that deportment mirrors virtue.

Why we have, as a culture, come to prize a lack of manners with honesty is beyond me.

How we hold ourselves, body language, can be that of walking in virtue and peace.

72. You remember, my children, that a friend of ours who seemed to recommend himself by his assiduity in his duties, yet was not admitted by me into the number of the clergy, because his gestures were too unseemly. Also that I bade one, whom I found already among the clergy, never to go in front of me, because he actually pained me by the seeming arrogance of his gait. That is what I said when he returned to his duty after an offense committed. This alone I would not allow, nor did my mind deceive me. For both have left the Church. What their gait betrayed them to be, such were they proved to be by the faithlessness of their hearts. The one forsook his faith at the time of the Arian troubles; the other, through love of money, denied that he belonged to us, so that he might not have to undergo sentence at the hands of the Church. In their gait was discernible the semblance of fickleness, the appearance, as it were, of wandering buffoons.


Ambrose is referring to arrogance. I see it at dinner parties. The loud man who must boast of his business acumen, his success. Such a man is graceless.

I see it in women who dress younger than their years. A forty-seven year old walking and dressing like a teen indicates a disjoint in the soul.

A conversation behind me on a bus loud and full of self-righteous gossip can prove to be two hardened hearts, as charity is lacking.

A narcissist cannot stop interrupting or talking. These things show a lack of virtue and maturity.

Why do we value these coarse traits?

73. Some there are who in walking perceptibly copy the gestures of actors, and act as though they were bearers in the processions, and had the motions of nodding statues, to such an extent that they seem to keep a sort of time, as often as they change their step.

74. Nor do I think it becoming to walk hurriedly, except when a case of some danger demands it, or a real necessity. For we often see those who hurry come up panting, and with features distorted. But if there is no reason for the need of such hurry, it gives cause for just offense. I am not, however, talking of those who have to hurry now and then for some particular reason, but of those to whom, by the yoke of constant habit, it has become a second nature. In the case of the former I cannot approve of their slow solemn movements, which remind one of the forms of phantoms. Nor do I care for the others with their headlong speed, for they put one in mind of the ruin of outcasts.

Ambrose is referring to the road-rage of his time.

I see this in Bayswater. Men walking on the pavement not making way for women, not deferring to ladies.

This is a violence of our times, a sign of arrogance and superiority. 

75. A suitable gait is that wherein there is an appearance of authority and weight and dignity, and which has a calm collected bearing. But it must be of such a character that all effort and conceit may be wanting, and that it be simple and plain. Nothing counterfeit is pleasing. Let nature train our movements. If indeed there is any fault in our nature, let us mend it with diligence. And, that artifice may be wanting, let not amendment be wanting.

Modesty and manners indicate a humble, gentle spirit. This can be learned. In a community, these traits are absolutely necessary for the peace of the whole.

Families must retrench and teach the gentility which flows from the virtues. Anything less is selfishness.

76. But if we pay so much attention to things like these, how much more careful ought we to be to let nothing shameful proceed out of our mouth, for that defiles a man terribly. It is not food that defiles, but unjust disparagement of others and foul words.These things are openly shameful. In our office indeed must no word be let fall at all unseemly, nor one that may give offense to modesty. But not only ought we to say nothing unbecoming to ourselves, but we ought not even to lend our ears to words of this sort. Thus Joseph fled and left his garment, that he might hear nothing inconsistent with his modesty. Genesis 39:12 For he who delights to listen, urges the other on to speak.


To avoid senseless and uncharitable talk, I am accused of being anti-social. But, the truth is that it is more virtuous to run away from gossip and wasteful, silly talk than to engage in it.

77. To have full knowledge of what is foul is in the highest degree shameful. To see anything of this sort, if by chance it should happen, how dreadful that is! What, therefore, is displeasing to us in others, can that be pleasing in ourselves? Is not nature herself our teacher, who has formed to perfection every part of our body, so as to provide for what is necessary and to beautify and grace its form? However she has left plain and open to the sight those parts which are beautiful to look upon; among which, the head, set as it were above all, and the pleasant lines of the figure, and the appearance of the face are prominent, while their usefulness for work is ready to hand. But those parts in which there is a compliance with the necessities of nature, she has partly put away and hidden in the body itself, lest they should present a disgusting appearance, and partly, too, she has taught and persuaded us to cover them.

78. Is not nature herself then a teacher of modesty? Following her example, the modesty of men, which I suppose is so called from the mode of knowing what is seemly, has covered and veiled what it has found hid in the frame of our body; like that door which Noah was bidden to make in the side of the ark; Genesis 6:16 wherein we find a figure of the Church, and also of the human body, for through that door the remnants of food were cast out. Thus the Maker of our nature so thought of our modesty, and so guarded what was seemly and virtuous in our body, as to place what is unseemly behind, and to put it out of the sight of our eyes. Of this the Apostle says well: Those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary, and those members of the body which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour, and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. 1 Corinthians 12:22-23 Truly, by following the guidance of nature, diligent care has added to the grace of the body. In another place I have gone more fully into this subject, and said that not only do we hide those parts which have been given us to hide, but also that we think it unseemly to mention by name their description, and the use of those members.

79. And if these parts are exposed to view by chance, modesty is violated; but if on purpose, it is reckoned as utter shamelessness. Wherefore Ham, Noah's son, brought disgrace upon himself; for he laughed when he saw his father naked, but they who covered their father received the gift of a blessing. Genesis 9:22 For which cause, also, it was an ancient custom in Rome, and in many other states as well, that grown-up sons should not bathe with their parents, or sons-in-law with their fathers-in-law, in order that the great duty of reverence for parents should not be weakened. Many, however, cover themselves so far as they can in the baths, so that, where the whole body is bare, that part of it at least may be covered.

This type of respect is almost unknown in our too-laid back society.

Today, I saw an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist in blue jeans. We have lost the sense of respectful honor for God, for each other.

We have no sense of time an place for actions, speech, dress.

The sacredness of Mass is ruined by the senseless talk of who is going where and what is happening tomorrow.

Modesty and humility, propriety and virtue go hand in hand.

A child can learn to be modest and virtuous. He has the grace from baptism to be so.

Nothing is lacking but example and discipline.

If parents are modest, children will be as well.

80. The priests, also, under the old law, as we read in Exodus, wore breeches, as it was told Moses by the Lord: And you shall make them linen breeches to cover their shame: from the loins even to the thighs they shall reach, and Aaron and his sons shall wear them, when they enter into the tabernacle of witness, and when they come unto the altar of the holy place to offer sacrifice, that they lay not sin upon themselves and die. Exodus 28:42-43 Some of us are said still to observe this, but most explain it spiritually, and suppose it was said with a view to guarding modesty and preserving chastity.

Without outward discipline, there is no interior discipline. Without interior discipline, one cannot pursue perfection. The hierarchy of the soul is reflected in the integrity of the body.

To be continued....The next section I "discuss" here will be St. Ambrose on the Four Cardinal Virtues...so much, so little time.

Supertradmum, the sinner, with saints

Here I am in Dublin with two saintly men, I feel so fortunate to have met. Of course, you recognize Bishop Athanasius Schneider  auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan.  As I am writing today and tomorrow on the Mass and the Eucharist, I can appeal to his work and his life of defending the Eucharist. His main work is Dominus est.

I shall refer to this tomorrow. 

Feast Day of St. Thomas Aquinas and the Mass

I have a list of personal patrons and St. Thomas Aquinas is one of these. Today is his feast day.

Sadly, we have no Mass today for some good reasons, only a Communion service, which I shall skip, as it is in the evening, in the darkness and I have sciatica still.

Oh well. So, to celebrate without the Mass, here is a great idea from the greatest philosopher who ever lived and the most important one for the Catholic Church.

He states that the Eucharistic Sacrifice is so elevated that Christ Himself must offer this. Ergo, the priest is the alter Christus, the other Christ, offering the most sacred sacrifice. Here is Garrigou-Lagrange explaining Aquinas on the Mass. This section is truly sublime and most beautiful. From  REALITY—A Synthesis Of Thomistic Thought, Chapter 40.


This sacrament is so elevated that it must be accomplished by Christ in person. [944] And again: In the prayers of the Mass the priest indeed speaks in the person of the Church, which is the Eucharistic unity; but in the sacramental consecration he speaks in the person of Christ, whom by the power of ordination he represents. [945] When he baptizes, he says "I baptize thee": when he absolves, he says "I absolve thee"; but when he consecrates, he says, not "I consecrate this bread," but, "This is My body." [946] And when he says "Hoc est corpus meum," he does not say these words as mere historical statement, but as efficient formula which produces what it signifies, transubstantiation, namely, and the Real Presence. But it is Christ Himself who, by the voice and ministry of the celebrant, performs this substantiating consecration, which is always valid, however personally unworthy the celebrant may be. [947].

Is it then sufficient to say [948] that Christ offers each Mass, not actually, but only virtually, by having instituted the sacrifice and commanded its renewal to the end of the world? This doctrine, from the Thomistic viewpoint, depreciates the role of Christ. Christ Himself it is who offers actually each Mass. Even if the priest, the instrumental minister, should be distracted and have at the moment only a virtual intention, Christ, the one high priest, the principal cause, wills actually, here and now, this transubstantiating consecration. And further, Christ's humanity, as conjoined to His divinity, is the physically instrumental cause of the twofold transubstantiation. [949].

It is in this sense that Thomists, together with the great majority of theologians, understand the following words of the Council of Trent: "In the two sacrifices there is one and the same victim, one and the same priest, who then on the cross offered Himself, and who now, by the instrumentality of His priests, offers Himself anew, the two sacrifices differing only in their mode." [950].

Substantially, then, the Sacrifice of the Mass does not differ from the sacrifice of the cross, since in each we have, not only the same victim, but also the same priest who does the actual offering, though the mode of the immolation differs, one being bloody and physical, the other non-bloody and sacramental. Hence Christ's act of offering the Mass, while it is neither dolorous nor meritorious (since He is no longer viator): is still an act of reparative adoration, of intercession, of thanksgiving, is still the ever-loving action of His heart, is still the soul of the Sacrifice of the Mass. This view stands out clearly in the saint's commentaries on St. Paul, [951] particularly in his insistence on Christ's ever-living intercession. Christ also now, in heaven, says Gonet, [952] prays in the true and proper sense (by intercession): begging divine benefits for us. And His special act of intercession is the act by which, as chief priest of each Mass, He intercedes for us. Thus the interior oblation, always living in Christ's heart, is the very soul of the Sacrifice of the Mass; it arouses and binds to itself the interior oblation of the celebrant and of the faithful united to the celebrant. Such is, beyond doubt, the often repeated doctrine of St. Thomas and his school. [953].

Each Mass, finally, has a value that is simply infinite. This position is defended by the greatest Thomists against Durandus and Scotus. [954] This value arises from the sublimity both of the victim and of the chief priest, since, substantially, the Sacrifice of the Mass is identified with that on the cross, though the mode of immolation is no longer bloody but sacramental. The unworthiness of the human minister, however great, cannot, says the Council of Trent, reduce this infinite value. Hence one sole Mass can be as profitable for ten thousand persons well disposed as it would be for one, just as the sun can as easily give light and warmth to ten thousand men as to one. Those who object 41 have lost sight, both of the objective infinity which belongs to the victim offered, and of the personal infinity which belongs to the chief priest.