Recent Posts

Showing posts with label church teaching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church teaching. Show all posts

Tuesday, 7 April 2015

A realization of hell



Public Domain--"Hortus Deliciarum - Hell" by en:Herrad of Landsberg - - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hortus_Deliciarum_-_Hell.jpg#/media/File:Hortus_Deliciarum_-_Hell.jpg
"If anyone says that a man can be justified even after death; or if he says that the punishments of the damned in hell will not last forever: let him be anathema."  First Vatican Council

When was the last time you heard a sermon on hell? For me, it was in Ireland at a Latin Mass in the Summer of 2013--a long time ago considering all the Masses I have attended since then.

A myth exists of the pre-Vatican II pastors emphasizing hell. That was not my experience. Vatican II did not change sermons, but a later instruction to priests concerning using the Scripture of the day more created the homily with which most of us are familiar.

Here is the "rule" from GIRM on homilies.

65. The Homily is part of the Liturgy and is strongly recommended, for it is necessary for the nurturing of the Christian life. It should be an exposition of some aspect of the readings from Sacred Scripture or of another text from the Ordinary or from the Proper of the Mass of the day and should take into account both the mystery being celebrated and the particular needs of the listeners.

Now, priests are much better trained in the Scriptures and can speak on the readings of the day, plus they are given much help from the Church through commentaries and the works of the Doctors of the Church. Note, however, that the "particular needs of the listeners" must be taken into account.

With so many Catholics no longer thinking, or even believing that one can go to hell because of the rampant heresy of "universal salvation", does this fact not indicate that preaching on hell is a particular need of every congregation?

So why the reticence?

Blesseds Jacinta and Francisco of Fatima,  SS. John Bosco, Teresa of Avila, Faustina, and others had visions of hell, visions which are not part of doctrine, but uphold the Church's teaching that hell is a terrible place of punishment to be feared and avoided.

Many councils refer to hell, even Vatican II reiterates the doctrine of hell.

"Since we know not the day nor the hour, on our Lord's advice we must constantly stand guard. Thus when we have finished the one and only course of our earthly life (cf. Heb. 9:27) we may merit to enter into the marriage feast with Him and to be numbered among the blessed (cf. Mt. 25:31-46). Thus we may not be condemned to go into eternal fire (cf. Mt. 25:41) like the wicked and slothful servant (cf. Mt. 25:26), into the exterior darkness where 'there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth' (Mt. 22:13; 25:30)." Lumen Gentium, no. 48. 

And...

"Therefore, all who die in actual mortal sin are excluded from the kingdom of God and will suffer forever the torments of hell where there is no redemption." First Vatican Council.

And...

The Councils of Basel, Ferrara and Florence make for interesting reading. Schism and the plague caused the Pope to move to Florence where important doctrines were clarified.

One can follow some of the history here. This council holds many important decrees concerning the sacraments among other significant statements on the Copts and Armenians, as well as many condemnations of various heretics and schismatics. There are also statements on indulgences and many other teachings,including teachings on Christ and the Trinity.

But, the section of the decrees highlighted in this post on hell follows. In this section, the Council Fathers refer to purgatory, and then, hell.

Also, if truly penitent people die in the love of God before they have made satisfaction for acts and omissions by worthy fruits of repentance, their souls are cleansed after death by cleansing pains; and the suffrages of the living faithful avail them in giving relief from such pains, that is, sacrifices of masses, prayers, almsgiving and other acts of devotion which have been customarily performed by some of the faithful for others of the faithful in accordance with the church's ordinances.
Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains. 

And there are more council documents concerning hell...

So, why no sermons on hell?

The majority of people seem to be living in mortal sin-most young people now fornicate, and homosexual relations have been accepted by most societies in the West.

Greed, which is another name for avarice, gluttony, anger, and the entire list of capital sins create headlines in the news relating to politicians and leaders of the world, including Catholic ones who support abortion and contraception.

Compromise is the name of the game.

And, yet, talking about hell seems verboten.  How can Catholics comes to a realization of hell if the pastors avoid the subject?

How can those thousands, if not millions of people, who may be facing eternal damnation not be challenged by pastors to think of their ultimate destiny? Natural law dictates that many sins have severe consequences.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church restates the seriousness of the four sins that cry out to God for vengeance.

1867 The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are "sins that cry to heaven": the blood of Abel,139 the sin of the Sodomites,140 the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt,141 the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan,142 injustice to the wage earner.143

It is time for priests to preach on hell for the good of all of our souls.

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

Heresy from The Pulpit Part Four

Cardinal Wolsey: More! You should have been a cleric! 
Sir Thomas More: Like yourself, Your Grace? from A Man for All Seasons
Two other errors have crept into the Catholic Church and are heard even from the pulpit.

The first error in this category of "wishy thinking" came from the Protestants and the second may come from false seers.

The first is this, "Our faith is 2,000 years old. Our thinking is not." Now, this is actually a motto of a Protestant denomination which prides itself on re-working doctrine. The great error here is the separation of faith and doctrine. Our faith, as Catholics, is the same thinking as 2,000 years ago, which we call the "depost of faith". We learn to "think like Catholics", one of my tags.

Here is the CCC, with a rather long introduction for your benefit to undestand that definitions are important to our Faith. We do not believe, of course, in sola fide--see my posts on the solas.

ARTICLE 2

THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION

74 God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth":29 that is, of Christ Jesus.30 Christ must be proclaimed to all nations and individuals, so that this revelation may reach to the ends of the earth:

God graciously arranged that the things he had once revealed for the salvation of all peoples should remain in their entirety, throughout the ages, and be transmitted to all generations.31
I. THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION
75 "Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."32
In the apostolic preaching. . .
76 In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
- orally "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";33
- in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing".34
. . . continued in apostolic succession
77 "In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority."35 Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."36
78 This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, "the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes."37 "The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer."38
79 The Father's self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: "God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. And the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness."39
II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE
One common source. . .
80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".41
. . . two distinct modes of transmission
81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42
"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44
Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions
83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus' teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church's Magisterium.

III. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE HERITAGE OF FAITH

The heritage of faith entrusted to the whole of the Church
84 The apostles entrusted the "Sacred deposit" of the faith (the depositum fidei),45 contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. "By adhering to [this heritage] the entire holy people, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing and professing the faith that has been handed on, there should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful."46
The Magisterium of the Church
85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48
87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

The second error is this: "God is revealing new things daily".  No, the teaching of the Catholic Church is that Revelation ended with the last word of the book of the Apocalypse. 

The Church alone may interpret Revelation but there is no new revelation. False seers are deemed false because they attempt to push "new revelation". Protestants also allow for new revelation because it suits their idea of sola fide.

If you hear priests from the pulpit, or at meetings, or in prayer groups bending the defintions of both Revelation and Tradition, please question them. And correct them if they are in error. That is a corporal work of mercy, by the way.


Saturday, 21 February 2015

Revisionist Church History

Matthew 8:20New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)

20 And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.”

Having one of my degrees in history, I am able to spot false revisionist history. Revisionist history became a popular ideological tool of academia, a tool which is now used at every level of education, down to kindergarten. Revisionist history is one reason I did consulting for schools in the early 2000s, bringing them back to Classical Education, using original sources, instead of propaganda generated in the 1970s. Unfortunately, revisionist historians infiltrated the scholarly discipline of Church History, to the point where many things which are now normally accepted by Catholics in the pew can be traced to ideologies perpetrated by various revisionist Catholic historians who departed from centuries of Church teaching, including history.

Three dangerous developments worm their way into the minds and hearts of Catholic through the lies of revisionist history. More than three exist, but these are the most pernicious.

Some of these lies affect the nature of Christ's mission on earth, but let me start with the least "stupid" and move towards the worst revisionist ideal.

Today, the first one I want to consider is the lie that the Early Church was not persecuted and that the history of the martyrs is exaggerated. Secular historians have always desired to undermine the power of the Early Church, including some Protestant church historians, as it strengthens the argument that the Church was not that strong immediately after the Apostolic Age.

Early historians outside of Biblical texts testify to the large, planned extermination of Christians. As I noted in the series last year, February 24, 303, Christianity, or Catholicism, to be exact, came under the empirical title of "heresy", as paganism, and specifically, empire-emperor worship, was the state religion.

Those who try and undermine the impact of Catholicism need only read St. Augustine, and look at the number of dioceses, cathedrals, and churches which existed at the time of the Fall of Rome. At the Council of Carthage, six Catholic provinces of 466 dioceses just in Africa alone were represented by bishops. When Huneric, an Arian and King of the Vandals, exiled the African bishops, 464 went into hiding or moved out of their dioceses to other safe havens. Some were martyred. Ironically, the date of his removal of the bishops was February 24, 484,181 years after Diocletian's persecution began. And those numbers reflect the Church in northern Africa without consideration of the Church in the Levant or Europe.

The lie that the Church was, one, not large, and two, not persecuted, has popped up in articles online as late as two months ago.  What is behind this lie may be the growing worship of the State, which, of course, would never hurt Christians. This lie lulls people into a false sense of security, especially Catholics, as the State wants all to believe it supports religious freedom. Not so then, not so now. Many Catholics still trust the State when they should be very wary as there is a conflict of interests in most Western countries between Catholicism and State practices and beliefs.

The second revisionist lie involves the spreading of the falsity of the following of chastity for priests and bishops in the Early Church. One only needs to look at the writings of the Fathers on the importance of chastity and the growing discipline of celibacy in the priesthood, as well as the lives of the myriad celibate and chaste saints to bring this untruth into the light. Those who push for the married priesthood and who want to destroy the discipline of celibacy in the Church have developed this revisionist historical lie. Yes, some of the early bishops, and even the Apostles, were married. But, we know that these men entered into celibate relationships, even Peter leaving his family, when God called him to Rome.  The exhortation of St. Paul that a bishop should be a man with one wife is not a revisionist interpretation that there was polygamy, but that if the wife died, the cleric would not remarry. This is true today in the rule of the Ordinariates, those priests who have come in under the Personal Provision of St. John Paul II, and deacons. In fact, with the re-establishment of the deaconate, it was the desire of the Church that such men, and the new Ordinariate and PP priests, would enter into Josephite relationships with their wives. But, sadly, some bishops ignore this desire on the part of the Church, and also ask for exemptions. Celibacy has been, since the time of Christ, the norm which became the accepted discipline over the years.

The last and third revisionist lie of history is to me one of the most pernicious. I have referred to this many times on this blog, but as it reared its ugly head this week, I bring it up again.

This is the lie, perpetrated after Vatican II, that the Holy Family, specifically St. Joseph and Jesus, were "middle class".

When I hear this lie, from the pulpit and see it, as I have this week in a little Lenten book passed out at church, I want to break into laughter.

Those of us who have studied the history of the ancient and medieval world know one thing for sure. There existed the rich, about 5% of any given population, and the very poor, about 95%.

The middle class came into being in the late medieval, early Renaissance boom of banking and trade, and the term was not even in print until the mid-1700s. The word, bourgeoisie, originally meant a person who lived and worked in a town, rather than in the agricultural world.

The entire concept of a middle class as existing in the class structure of the Roman Empire is not only terribly unhistorical, but laughable.

There are several reasons for this creeping lie concerning workmen, such as Jesus and Joseph, who were carpenters, being middle class.

The first is the denial of holy poverty. The Protestant historians were the first to deny the value of poverty, following their guides, the Protestant theologians, who saw and still see, poverty as punishment for gross sin. Those who are middle class are blessed by God because they are holier than the poor, and so on. 

For centuries before the 1970s, holy poverty was held up as not only an ideal, as practiced by the great religious orders, but as a comfort for the vast majority of  Catholics in the world who were living in poverty. Priests pointed to the simplicity and poverty of the Holy Family as an example for all families to follow. One of the reasons the orders made vows of poverty was directly linked to Christ's own poverty, in an effort to live exactly as He did while on earth. Holy poverty links one to the denial of self and detachment from worldly goods, hardly a popular subject for priests in the pulpit these days.

The second reason for perpetuating the lie of the Holy Family as middle class is the constant re-definition of the working class in recent years. To blur the distinctions between labor or blue collar and white collar workers, some historians have purposefully looked to the Holy Family as an example of middle class wealth gotten by work of the hands.

Well, it is true that plumbers and carpenters make more money than I ever did teaching, but this comparison of modern workmen cannot be made with those of the past. I made $21 per hour as a college teacher, while I paid my plumber $70 per hour to fix a pipe. That the term "laborers" now covers those who make 100,000 USD a year or more in the construction business, or those who make expensive hand-made furniture, like someone I know who charges $800 for a hand-made chair, has nothing to do with the lot of the Holy Family.

Those who worked with their hands in the ancient times were either slaves, or just above the slave class, that is freemen, who worked for very poor wages. Even an independent furniture maker, or a builder of walls, would not be paid today's market prices for labor. These modern fees have come about because of the lack of skilled workers, or unions.

The ancient world upper class did not have any responsibility to pay fair wages, an idea which simply did not exist outside of Judaism and Christianity. There is a reason why one of the four sins which cry out to God for vengeance includes not giving a fair wage to workers....because it was a huge problem in the ancient world! That the one, true God through the prophets exhorted the Hebrews on this very point reveals the depth of the sins of greed and pride among the few rich.

Joseph and Jesus would have "gotten by", as we say in the Midwest, but just. The typical laborer in the Roman and Jewish world would have been poor by even today's standards-small houses of one or two rooms, dirt floors, work space connected to the house and so on. Mary's daily trip twice a day to the well reveals her poverty. They had no maid, no helpers, no family that we know of, only the Son of God who humbled Himself to live among the poorest of people in the ancient world, the Jews, long subdued and taxed mercilessly.

The third reason, but not the end of the list, for the perpetuation of the lie which states that Jesus, Mary and Joseph were middle class, is the worst reason of all.

When the Catholic Church members, especially in the United States, became middle class, they no longer wanted to remember their impoverished ancestors, or even their recent past. The new middle class wanted to forget the trials and sufferings of poverty and not be reminded of their duties to the still poor.

To purposefully forget one's past poverty means that a person has fallen into the sin of pride and desires the esteem of others in the society. To identify with a poor Christ means that one cannot forget that we are all poor, indeed, naked before God.

The comforts and consolations of the middle class prevent people from growing in the one virtue which invited God into the heart, and mind and soul--humility.

Today, there is about three feet of snow on the ground. Yesterday, I asked a couple to take me shopping as I am almost out of food. I can pay for it, but I have no way to get to the grocery stores unless I take a cab.

They said "no".

This type of thinking, even among Catholics, has to do with the revisionist history people hear from the pulpit and read in their Lenten meditations. Many priests themselves are too comfortable in middle class lifestyles, like going on extensive vacations, even more than once a year, driving expensive cars, eating out frequently at the best places. They cannot preach what they themselves do not live.

They do not understand the Holy Family. They do not understand what it means to create a holy family in their own parishes. They may not think of the necessity of Jesus giving Mary to John at the Cross. Why? She had no one else and would have been forced into the street--(and another proof of her ever-virginity, as there were no so-called brothers and sisters of Christ to take her in.)

Think on that.

Without Joseph and Jesus, Mary would have had to rely on her community for things. Perhaps, they would not have helped her, thus Jesus remembering her plight from the place of His Death.

I have no Joseph, no Jesus in my home to help me. How many others are overlooked, especially in these places of bad weather, because they do not measure up to the false idea of the middle class Jesus?

I shall nibble on what I have and be comforted by the thought that the Holy Family lived in poverty and had great joy even in suffering, and perhaps, having days without adequate food.

That is the model still for Catholics today. Revisionists allow themselves to judge and to not be involved with the plight of others because "their Jesus" did not suffer poverty.

He did. He still does.

From Philippians 2:

 Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others. Let the same mind be in you that was[a] in Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God,
    did not regard equality with God
    as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself,
    taking the form of a slave,
    being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
    he humbled himself
    and became obedient to the point of death—
    even death on a cross.
Therefore God also highly exalted him
    and gave him the name
    that is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus
    every knee should bend,
    in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue should confess
    that Jesus Christ is Lord,
    to the glory of God the Father.



Tuesday, 6 January 2015

Spiritual Pacifists


Someone recently made a comment that they did not like the phrase "Church Militant". This person thought it was too militaristic.

What about the old teaching that at Confirmation we become "soldiers of Christ"?

Three battles wage daily and we are part of these battles.

First, the battle in our own soul, mind, heart, imagination and will.

Second, the battle against the world and all the pressures and distraction it brings into our lives.

Third, the battle against Satan and his legions of demons.

I think the Church Militant is a most appropriate name, as opposed to those who want to be in the Church Mushy.

How is it that so many Catholics have become spiritual pacifists?

Christ Himself waged spiritual war not only in His forty days in the desert, but on the Cross.

The Cross is a sign of victory.




Sunday, 4 January 2015

We Are Not Equal Part Seven


There is no such thing a coincidence, only God-incidences.

Returning to the theme of predilection, today's reading of the Te Deum praises God for choosing and watching over His People.


O God, we praise Thee, and acknowledge Thee to be the supreme Lord.
Everlasting Father, all the earth worships Thee.
All the Angels, the heavens and all angelic powers,
All the Cherubim and Seraphim, continuously cry to Thee:
Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts!
Heaven and earth are full of the Majesty of Thy glory.
The glorious choir of the Apostles,
The wonderful company of Prophets,
The white-robed army of Martyrs, praise Thee.
Holy Church throughout the world acknowledges Thee:

The Father of infinite Majesty;
Thy adorable, true and only Son;
Also the Holy Spirit, the Comforter.
O Christ, Thou art the King of glory!
Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father.
When Thou tookest it upon Thyself to deliver man,
Thou didst not disdain the Virgin's womb.
Having overcome the sting of death, Thou opened the Kingdom of Heaven to all
believers.

Thou sitest at the right hand of God in the glory of the Father.
We believe that Thou willst come to be our Judge.
We, therefore, beg Thee to help Thy servants whom Thou hast redeemed with Thy
Precious Blood.
Let them be numbered with Thy Saints in everlasting glory.


V.  Save Thy people, O Lord, and bless Thy inheritance!
R.  Govern them, and raise them up forever.


V.  Every day we thank Thee.
R.  And we praise Thy Name forever, yes, forever and ever.

V.  O Lord, deign to keep us from sin this day.
R.  Have mercy on us, O Lord, have mercy on us.

V.  Let Thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us, for we have hoped in Thee.
R.  O Lord, in Thee I have put my trust; let me never be put to shame.

Te Deum laudamus: te Dominum confitemur.
Te aeternum Patrem omnis terra veneratur.
Tibi omnes Angeli; tibi caeli et universae Potestates;
Tibi Cherubim et Seraphim incessabili voce proclamant:
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth.
Pleni sunt caeli et terra maiestatis gloriae tuae.
Te gloriosus Apostolorum chorus,
Te Prophetarum laudabilis numerus,
Te Martyrum candidatus laudat exercitus.
Te per orbem terrarum sancta confitetur Ecclesia,
Patrem immensae maiestatis:
Venerandum tuum verum et unicum Filium;
Sanctum quoque Paraclitum Spiritum.
Tu Rex gloriae, Christe.
Tu Patris sempiternus es Filius.
Tu ad liberandum suscepturus hominem, non horruisti Virginis uterum.
Tu, devicto mortis aculeo, aperuisti credentibus regna caelorum.
Tu ad dexteram Dei sedes, in gloria Patris.
Iudex crederis esse venturus.
Te ergo quaesumus, tuis famulis subveni: quos pretioso sanguine redemisti.
Aeterna fac cum sanctis tuis in gloria numerari.

V.  Salvum fac populum tuum, Domine, et benedic hereditati tuae.
R.  Et rege eos, et extolle illos usque in aeternum.

V.  Per singulos dies benedicimus te.
R.  Et laudamus nomen tuum in saeculum, et in saeculum saeculi.

V.  Dignare, Domine, die isto sine peccato nos custodire.
R.  Miserere nostri, Domine, miserere nostri.

V.  Fiat misericordia tua, Domine, super nos, quemadmodum speravimus in te.
R.  In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.


(note...whenever I play Gregorian Chant, no matter what time of day or night, 
the birds in the courtyard and 
neighborhood here in Malta begin to sing. 
This has happened over and over in the months I have been here.)


We Are Not Equal Part Five

Today's Gospel, well-known especially to those who attend the TLM, brings home the point that not all people are equal.

Note verse 5-not all to whom Christ is revealed "comprehend" or accept Him.

The pertains not only to the Jews at the time of Christ, but to all those who hear the Word of God and reject Him.

Verses ten through twelve could not be more specific in relating the rejection of the Jews and the acceptance of the Gospel who hear the Word of God, who hear Christ and accept His Truth. Those who accept Christ become "sons of God" and those who do not are not "sons of God".

Those who are enlightened, the same term used by St. Paul in the second reading, are given power to become sons of God.  And, those people, the new chosen, are born of the Will of God, God's Will not man's will.

Again, we are faced with the mystery of predestination, of predilection.

Christ alone reveals the Father to us, no one else does this. Therefore, those who accept Christ, those who become Christians, either through their parents at baptism or older, become the chosen ones of God, preordained from all time.

Let me here quote, again, Garrigou-Lagrange. What he explains is the Teaching of the Catholic Church, and, again, you may go back to the two long selections I placed on the blog in order for you to understand that not all are equal according to God's Will.

The Supreme Principles
Nothing comes to pass, either in heaven or on earth, unless God either brings it to pass in mercy, or then in justice permits it. This principle, taught in the universal Church, shows that there is in God a conditional and antecedent will, relative to a good which does not come to pass, the privation of which He permits in view of some higher good.
To this principle we must add another: [1457] God does not command the impossible. From these two revealed principles derives the distinction between God's efficacious consequent will and His antecedent will, which is the source of sufficient grace.
All that God wills, He does. This principle has no exception. All that God wills (purely, simply, unconditionally) comes to pass without our freedom being thereby in any way forced, because God moves that freedom sweetly and strongly, actualizing it, not destroying. He wills efficaciously that we freely consent and we do freely consent. The supreme efficacy of divine causality, says St. Thomas, [1458] extends to the free mode of our acts.
Many repeat these principles, but do not see that they contain the foundation of the distinction between the two kinds of grace, one that is self-efficacious, the other simply sufficient which man may resist, but not without divine permission.
Hence we find that in the ninth century, to terminate the long controversy with Gottschalk, the Council of Thuzey (860): at the instance of the Augustinian bishops, harmonized God's will of universal salvation with the sinner's responsibility. That Council's synodal letter [1459] contains this sentence: Whatever He has willed in heaven or on earth, God has done. For nothing comes to pass in heaven or on earth that He does not in mercy bring to pass or permits to come to pass in justice.
Since God's love is the cause of created goodness, says St. Thomas, [1460] no created thing would be better than another, if God did not give one a great good than He gives to another. This is equivalent to St. Paul's word: [1461] What hast thou that thou hast not received?

Have the synodal cardinals who are fighting the long teaching of the Church regarding marriage understand or even know the teaching of the Church on these matters? Are they rebellious? Have they lost their faith in grace and God's Will? Do they understand that all have sufficient grace, and that some say "no" to this grace? See my long series on January 1st and follow through with reading the two long selections from Garrigou-Lagrange, who merely recapitulates the Church's teaching on grace and predilection, seen in today's Gospel.


John 1:1-18Douay-Rheims 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
This man came for a witness, to give testimony of the light, that all men might believe through him.
He was not the light, but was to give testimony of the light.
That was the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name.
13 Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
15 John beareth witness of him, and crieth out, saying: This was he of whom I spoke: He that shall come after me, is preferred before me: because he was before me.
16 And of his fulness we all have received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18 No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Monday, 22 December 2014

The Trinity Under Threat

Lately, it has dawned on me that there are several threats in this world against the revelation of the Trinity.

Now, as Catholics, we have been given the truth, that God is Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Let me quote the CCC here:

234      The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the “hierarchy of the truths of faith.”56 The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men “and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin.”57 (2157, 90, 1449)
235      This paragraph expounds briefly (I) how the mystery of the Blessed Trinity was revealed, (II) how the Church has articulated the doctrine of the faith regarding this mystery, and (III) how, by the divine missions of the Son and the Holy Spirit, God the Father fulfills the “plan of his loving goodness” of creation, redemption, and sanctification.


236      The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology (theologia) and economy (oikonomia). “Theology” refers to the mystery of God’s inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and “economy” to all the works by which God reveals himself and communicates his life. Through the oikonomia the theologia is revealed to us; but conversely, the theologia illuminates the whole oikonomia. God’s works reveal who he is in himself; the mystery of his inmost being enlightens our understanding of all his works. So it is, analogously, among human persons. A person discloses himself in his actions, and the better we know a person, the better we understand his actions. (1066, 259)
237      The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the “mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God.”58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel’s faith before the Incarnation of God’s Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit. (50)
242      Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325) that the Son is “consubstantial” with the Father, that is, one only God with him.66 The second ecumenical council, held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed “the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father.”67 (465)
243      Before his Passover, Jesus announced the sending of “another Paraclete” (Advocate), the Holy Spirit. At work since creation, having previously “spoken through the prophets,” the Spirit will now be with and in the disciples, to teach them and guide them “into all the truth.”68 The Holy Spirit is thus revealed as another divine person with Jesus and the Father. (683, 2780, 687)

246      The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque).” The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: “The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration.... And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.”75


247 The affirmation of the filioque does not appear in the Creed confessed in 381 at Constantinople. But Pope St. Leo I, following an ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, had already confessed it dogmatically in 447,76 even before Rome, in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, came to recognize and receive the Symbol of 381. The use of this formula in the Creed was gradually admitted into the Latin liturgy (between the eighth and eleventh centuries). The introduction of the filioque into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed by the Latin liturgy constitutes moreover, even today, a point of disagreement with the Orthodox Churches.

248 At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father’s character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he “who proceeds from the Father,” it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.77The Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque). It says this, “legitimately and with good reason,”78 for the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as “the principle without principle,”79 is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, he is, with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds.80 This legitimate complementarity, provided it does not become rigid, does not affect the identity of faith in the reality of the same mystery confessed.

The threats to the truth of the Trinity being professed in the world come from three sources. I shall name these in order to show that Catholics must be clear on the teaching of the Trinity, and uphold the doctrine of the Trinity, without error.
First of all, the Muslim religion denies the Trinity. Jesus is not God and there is no Holy Spirit. There is only one god and not Three Divine Persons. Some historians of religion state that the Muslims accepted this simplistic belief as the belief in the Trinity is a mystery and difficult for some people to accept. This interpretation of their denial of a revealed truth given hundreds of years earlier could be true.
Second, I have been reading commentaries from theologians on Vassula Ryden and she confuses the nature of the Three Divine Persons. I suggest going back and looking at my posts which linked two sources explaining the fact that her statements concerning Christ and the Father are at variance with the Catholic Church's teaching.
Some other seers have also confused the Father with the Son, making the Father a material being which He is not. The Father is spirit. Only Christ is Incarnated. The Mormons do not believe that Christ is equal to the Father, that Christ was not always God. And, so on. 
Third, New Age "Catholics" and some charismatics do not understand the Church's teaching on the Holy Spirit as coming from the Father and the Son.  This indicates, of course, an equality of the Three Persons and the understanding we have of Christ being "consubstantial" with the Father, which we say in the Creed at Mass. Those who think that the Holy Spirit is somehow not connected with Christ want to separate the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity from the Father and the Spirit.
God is One, but the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, the Holy Spirit is not the Son, the Holy Spirit is not the Father, the Son is not the Holy Spirit. 
To confuse this order is to deviate from Catholic teaching, which is revealed by God. 
Of course, it is Satan who wants all humans to fall into confusion as how and what we believe determines how we live. 
I shall write more on the Trinity later. But, be aware our wonderful teaching is under threat by those who do not want to follow what God has revealed to the Church through the Scriptures and Tradition.
to be continued...

Sunday, 16 November 2014

If I only had time to teach one thing for the rest of my life....

 There are more posts than these-especially on evangelizing the baptized...baptism is so misunderstood now.



22 Sep 2014
The newer rite tends to emphasize becoming a part in the body of Christ, which is fine and good, but it is at the expense of the reality that baptism is our rebirth in water and spirit which is necessary as the Gospels tell us.
22 Jan 2014
I shall get back to Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical on love after this post. I must write about the terrible confusion in the Church regarding the sacrament of Baptism. Now, I have written about this before, but the confusion is so ...
06 May 2012
OK, back to the necessity of Baptism. Today, a person in my parish noted that it was not necessary to get babies baptized who were seriously ill in the hospital, (are you ready for this?) because one could not have a baptismal ...
04 May 2012
I shall get back to Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical on love after this post. I must write about the terrible confusion in the Church regarding the sacrament of Baptism. Now, I have written about this before, but the confusion is so ...
10 Mar 2013
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the ...
11 Apr 2013
Good answer to a question on the baptism of a child of lesbian parents.... Posted by Supertradmum · http://relevantradio.com/dailyquestions/some-friends-of-mine ... Labels: baptism, same sex marriage debate ...
28 Dec 2012
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),4 and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn ...
02 Jun 2013
Magical thinking seems to be the most common problem I constantly meet with Catholics regarding Baptism, Confirmation and the Last Rites. Serious problems exist because many Catholics do not understand that the ...

13 Jan 2013
A good Jesuit priest gave an excellent sermon today for the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord. Today, one of the three Epiphanies of Christ, the other two being the Feast of the Three Kings, and the other the Wedding Feast at ...
04 Jan 2014
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the ...
10 Jun 2013
You will probably be expected to attend some form of preparation before the baptism, commonly two sessions. This is partly to enable you to participate actively in the service, but also because baptism has always been seen ...