This message of great importance was just received. It seems that dead Popes cannot remain silent.
God has sent us so many saints and holy people to warn us about these times in which we live. How sad that few understand, and so they continue as if there were no heaven or hell. For those of us who do see the signs of the times, it certainly doesn’t hurt to read the following. If anything, it should bolster our morale by the re-assurance that the Church’s enemies will be foiled. The Church will be restored in her liturgy, and in all the splendor of her richness in which Christ has vested His immaculate Bride! She will be that shining City set on a hill!
From the visions of Sr. Anne Catherine Emmerich, volume 2, by Rev. Carl E. Schmoger, CSSSR:
“The child in the globe of fog typifies the plan conceived for the suppression of Catholicity enveloped, as in a cloak, by beautiful figures of rhetoric; the fog signifies imposture which works in the dark; the laughing of the child, the premature triumph of the plotters (men devoted to the pleasures of the table) at having outwitted the Sovereign Pontiff despite his protests and briefs! The book under the mantle represents the writings forwarded to Rome in favor of the projects. They were on their way, indeed, but they were incapable of preventing the discovery and defeat of the plot. Sister Emmerich saw the same wicked designer hunting up the decisions of the early Councils, on which occasion Pope Gelasius was shown her as opposing the Manicheans, prototypes of the modern Illuminati. The intention of annihilating the Pope and his authority [“collegiality” has certainly succeeded in undermining his authority!] really existed…I had many visions on this head, but I only recall the following: I beheld the only daughter of the King of kings attacked and persecuted. She wept bitterly over the quantity of blood shed [footnote: “numberless souls lost”], and cast her eyes on a race of valiant virgins [footnote: chaste priests, defenders of her rights] who were to combat at her side. I begged her to remember my country, as well as certain others that I named, and I petitioned for some of her treasures for the clergy, She responded: ‘Yes, it is true that I have great treasures, [my note: the perennial, sacred liturgy; the various ancient rites of the pre-Vatican II era?] but they tread them under foot.’ She wore a sky blue robe. – Then my guide exhorted me anew to pray and, as far as I could, to incite others to pray for sinners and especially for erring priests. ‘Very evil times are coming,’ he said. ‘The non-Catholics will mislead many. [Six Protestant ministers were consulted by Pope Paul VI in the fabrication of the N.O.] They will use every possible means to entice them from the Church, and great disturbances will follow.’
“I had then another vision in which I saw the King’s daughter armed for the struggle. Multitudes contributed to this with prayers, good works, all sorts 
of labors and self-victories which passed from hand to hand up to heaven where each was wrought, according to its kind, into a piece of armor for the virgin warrior. The perfect adjustment of the various pieces was most remarkable, as also their wonderful signification. She was armed from head to foot. I knew many of those who contributed the armor, and I saw with surprise that whole institutions and great and learned people furnished nothing. The contribution was made chiefly by the poor and lowly. – And now I saw the battle. The enemies’ ranks were by far the more numerous; but the little body of the faithful cut down whole rows of them. The armed virgin stood off on a hill. I ran to her, pleading for my country and those other places for which I had to pray. She was armed singularly, but significantly, with helmet, shield, and coat of mail, and the soldiers were like those of our own day. The battle was terrible; only a handful of victorious champions survived!
“They built a large, singular, extravagant church which was to embrace all creeds with equal rights; Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock. There was to be a Pope, a salaried Pope, without possessions. All was made ready, many things finished; but, in place of an altar, were only abomination and desolation. Such was the new church to be, and it was for it that he [referred to as N___] had set fire to the old one; but God designed otherwise….”
“Truth always shines with the brightness which belongs to it, while falsehood is wrapped in darkness; to dispel this darkness, it is enough to put falsehood in the presence of truth.” – St. Ignatius
Those of good will shall recognize the voice of the Shepherd when He speaks through His ministers, because as He says, “I know mine and mine know Me.” Beware of false pastors who no longer preach the Apostolic faith, but who instead, proclaim the diabolical error much in vogue these days, of a false, ecumenical indifferentism. Those who do so, are but ravenous wolves entering the house of God to devour the flock. They are everywhere!
AMEN, amen I say to you: He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber.
I preach Christ: were I preaching something else, I should be trying to climb up some other way. Christ, therefore, is my gate to you: by Christ I get entrance, not to your houses, but to your hearts.
[T]here are many who, according to a custom of this life, are called good people,—good men, good women, innocent, and observers as it were of what is commanded in the law; paying respect to their parents, abstaining from adultery, doing no murder, committing no theft, giving no false witness against any one, and observing all else that the law requires—yet are not Christians; and for the most part ask boastfully, like these men, “Are we blind also?” But just because all these things that they do, and know not to what end they should have reference, they do to no purpose, the Lord has set forth in today’s lesson the similitude of His own flock, and of the door that leads into the sheepfold. Pagans may say, then, “We live well”. If they enter not by the door, what good will that do them, whereof they boast? For to this end ought good living to benefit everyone, that it may be given him to live forever: for to whomsoever eternal life is not given, of what benefit is the living well? For they ought not to be spoken of as even living well, who either from blindness know not the end of a right life, or in their pride despise it. But no one has the true and certain hope of living always, unless he know the life, that it is Christ; and enter by the gate into the sheepfold.
You know what is meant by the ruler’s table: you there find the body and blood of Christ; let him who comes to such a table be ready with similar provision.[i.e., to reciprocate, to return love for love] And what is such similar provision? As He laid down His life for us, so ought we also, for the edification of others, and the maintenance of the faith, to lay down our lives for the brethren. To the same effect He said to Peter, whom He wished to make a good shepherd, not in Peter’s own person, but as a member of His body: “Peter, lovest thou me? Feed my sheep.” This He did once, again, and a third time, to the disciple’s sorrow. And when the Lord had questioned him as often as He judged it needful, that he who had thrice denied might thrice confess Him, and had a third time given him the charge to feed His sheep, He said to him, “When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shall be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.” And the evangelist has explained the Lord’s meaning: “But this spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God.” “Feed my sheep” applies, then, to this, that thou shouldst lay down thy life for my sheep.
We were saying that by Christ we have a door of entrance to you; and why? Because we preach Christ. We preach Christ; and therefore we enter in by the door….. Remember, then, how the Lord Jesus Christ is both the door and the Shepherd [of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church].
+++
In spite of the turmoils tossing about the Barque of Peter, the darkness of apostasy throughout Christendom, the looming prospect of horrific wars, our faith assures us that Our Lord is still the Good Shepherd. Blessed are we to whom it has been given to enjoy a relationship of love in an encompassing intimacy with the Divinity!
God Shepherd, beloved of my soul,may I never be separated from Thee, but always abide in thy love!
Well, things are getting interester and interester ! 🙂
The latest report is that an international conference on the liturgy will be taking place on June 25-28. Participating will be Cardinals Burke and Ranjith. It is reported that 300 or so are expected to attend “Sacra Liturgia 2013”.
One of the objectives will be to “heal the post-conciliar liturgical disputes”. While the N.O. will certainly not be repudiated – that would be too much to expect – I hope much good will come from this. The article is on the Zenit site here.
John Vennari, writing for CFN, introduced the John Allen article with this note: “A personal note on reading Allen’s write-up: once again Cardinal Bergoglio strikes me as a post-Conciliar man of the 1970s. I was surrounded (and quite frankly, sickened) by such ‘humanity-centered’ clergymen while in diocesan Catholic high school from 1972-76. And yes, there are some impressive points about Bergoglio, the fact that he is a ‘hands-on’ governor, etc., though we hope he uses these strengths for a true good. The future under Francis remains to be seen. Oremus.”
What can we do, but pray??
+++
I [John Allen] spent this week in Argentina in search of insight into Pope Francis from the people who know him best as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the man who was their archbishop for 15 years.
For sure, the first impression here is deep national pride. Locals say there’s probably never been a better-attended Holy Week in the history of Argentine Catholicism than after Francis’ election.
A Via Crucis procession in Rosario, the country’s third-largest city, usually draws 200,000 people, but this time it attracted 350,000; attendance at the cathedral in Buenos Aires was estimated to be two to three times greater than 2012. All across the country, church-goers reported standing-room-only crowds and long lines for confession.
The election of an Argentine pope seems to have had a soothing effect on the culture generally.
A talented young Argentinian journalist named Ines San Martin, my aide and translator this week, tells the following story.
She was on a bus in Buenos Aires when the driver and a passenger got into a shouting match, with the passenger demanding the driver’s license number and threatening to call the police. Just as things seemed on the brink of falling apart, an elderly woman stood up and said: “What are you fighting about? We’ve got an Argentinian pope!”
Everyone smiled, including the two protagonists, and the tension just melted away.
Drilling deeper, however, it’s clear that despite the insta-hagiography that always surrounds a new pope, Bergoglio was hardly a cultural icon in Argentina before his election. He kept a low profile, and many Argentines say they’re getting to know him only now along with the rest of the world.
Perhaps the most spectacular example is Hebe de Bonafini, one of the co-founders of the famed “Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo” whose children disappeared during Argentina’s “Dirty War.” Over the years she’s accused Bergoglio of representing fascism, once even leaving a bucket of urine in his cathedral in protest.
Five days after his election, Bonafini published an open letter to the new pope expressing astonishment over what she’d learned: “I’m surprised to hear many of my friends explain about your commitment to the slums … Don Francis, I didn’t know about your pastoral work. I only knew that the leader of the church in Argentina lived in the cathedral, the cathedral towards which we’ve screamed, ‘You kept quiet when they took [our children] away!’”
It also seems clear that Bergoglio wasn’t perfect, despite the fact that it’s hard right now to find many Argentines willing to say so out loud. For instance, vocations to the priesthood have been falling in Buenos Aires on his watch, despite the fact they’re up in some other dioceses. Last year the archdiocese ordained just 12 new priests, as opposed to 40-50 per year when Bergoglio took over. (For the record, people say that Bergoglio did his best to support his priests and seminarians, taking a special interest in seminary life.)
The future pope also certainly had his critics. Some conservatives grouse that he was too committed to the social gospel and not enough to proclaiming the faith; some liberals saw him as an enemy of liberation theology and social emancipation. Others say Bergoglio could come off as fairly inscrutable and a bit “political.”
More than once, I heard a version of the following quip: “I didn’t know what he was really thinking … he is a Jesuit, you know!”
I’ve published articles and interviews along the way where this sort of material can be found at length. Pulling back from the details, I’ll highlight here the three main conclusions I’ll take away from this week-long swing:
A missionary church
First, there seems universal agreement that the heart of Francis’ pastoral vision is a desire for a missionary church, a church that moves out into the streets to meet people where they are and to respond to their real needs, both human and spiritual. Over and over again, people who’ve lived and worked with Bergoglio cite some version of two of his favorite sayings:
Within that missionary vision, Bergoglio always had a special preference for those on the margins of life.
“His vision was for the church to reach out to those who have been tossed onto a sort of existential garbage heap,” said Federico Wals, a 32-year-old layman who served as Bergoglio’s spokesperson since 2007. “He was especially concerned for those about whom society didn’t seem to care, such as single mothers, the poor, the elderly, the unemployed.”
Perhaps the signature pastoral innovation associated with the Bergoglio years is his emphasis on putting priests into the slums and shantytowns of Buenos Aires, known here as the villa miseria. He didn’t just want priests visiting the slums — he wanted them living there, sharing the lives of the people so they’ll understand what the gospel means to them.
Here’s the payoff from this insight.
I arrived in Argentina under the assumption that what we’ve seen from Francis so far is mostly a matter of style, and that the real substance of his papacy is yet to come.
That is, things like spurning the papal limo, living in the Casa Santa Marta, and going to a youth prison for Holy Thursday struck me as preliminaries to the real heavy lifting — filling key Vatican positions, or responding to the child sexual abuse crisis and threats to religious freedom in various parts of the world.
People who know the pope best, however, insist that his opening act is a whole program of governance in miniature.
Bishop Jorge Eduardo Lozano of Gualeguaychú, Argentina, a close friend of Bergoglio who worked under him as an auxiliary in Buenos Aires for six years, told me that these gestures of humility and simplicity haven’t just been about the pope’s own personality.
“They’re actually an expression of his magisterium,” Lozano said Thursday afternoon, speaking at the headquarters of the Argentine bishops’ conference.
“He’s sending a message to other cardinals, bishops and priests that this is what we need to do – to reach out to people, not being content to wait for them to come to us,” Lozano said. “More broadly, he’s sending the same message to all Catholics everywhere.”
In other words, Lozano insisted, these gestures aren’t just a charm offensive but an expression of a whole pastoral plan, offering a clear signal about where the new pope intends to carry the church.
Not a conservative
Second, most early profiles of Francis describe him as a theological and political conservative, largely based on two points of his biography: that he resisted some expressions of liberation theology as a Jesuit provincial in the 1970s, and that he’s had a rocky relationship with the center-left government of Argentine President Cristina Kirchner, especially over the issue of gay marriage.
While both things are true, people who know the lay of the land here insist there’s little meaningful sense in which Bergoglio could be described as a “conservative,” at least as measured by the standards of the church. They make three points:
Guillermo Villarreal, for instance, is a veteran journalist who covered Bergoglio for the Catholic Information Agency of Argentina, a church-sponsored news service.
He told me that during the six years that Bergoglio served as president of the bishops’ conference, from 2005 to 2011, he had an impressive record in being able to broker consensus, losing only one vote over that span — a disagreement in 2009 and 2010 over how hard a line to take against Argentina’s gay marriage bill.
According to Villarreal, Archbishop Héctor Rubén Aguer of La Plata, Argentina, was the leader of the hawks, while Bergoglio supported a less confrontational line. The issue wasn’t whether to sign off on gay marriage, but how incendiary the rhetoric against it ought to be, and whether the church could signal support for other measures to protect the civil rights of same-sex couples.
Given that history, Villarreal said, most Catholics in Argentina wouldn’t think of Bergoglio as representing the right wing of the country’s bishops.
Alicia Oliveira, a former judge and critic of Argentina’s military regime during the 1970s, says that for more traditionalist circles in Argentina, Bergoglio always seemed “very light, very leftist,” so much so that she believes conservative elements in the country’s hierarchy may have mobilized to block his election to the papacy eight years ago. (Not so much this time, she believes, but only because he wasn’t mentioned nearly as prominently as a candidate.)
Mariano de Vedia, who covers religion and politics for La Nación, added another piece to the picture.
The only other Jesuit prelate in the country, he explained, is retired Bishop Joaquín Piña Batllevell of Puerto Iguazú. Back in 2006, Governor Carlos Rovira of the Misiones province where the diocese is located was seeking to jury-rig the provincial constitution in order to stay in power indefinitely.
Piña became the leader of a local movement called the United Front for Dignity, which fielded candidates for a constitutional assembly to block Rovira’s ambitions. It was seen as a progressive pro-democracy uprising, basically a left-of-center enterprise.
According to de Vedia, it’s widely believed that Piña was operating with the behind-the-scenes blessing of his fellow Jesuit Bergoglio — another reason, he said, that people in the know would not regard Bergoglio as a “conservative.”
Perhaps the most interesting read on where Bergoglio stands came from Juan Carr, a renowned social activist in Argentina and a 2012 Nobel Peace Prize nominee.
In Latin American Catholicism, he told me April 3, “I’ve noticed a growing split between a church completely focused on the spiritual side, and a church that’s completely committed to the social issues but without addressing the devotional needs of the people.”
“Bergoglio is a rare figure who transcends that divide, embracing both.”
What does all this mean going forward?
According to Fr. Pedro Brunori, an Opus Dei priest who served for ten years as director of the Vatican Information Service and who’s now back in Argentina as a hospital and university chaplain, it’s likely that the most significant opposition to Francis over time will come from the Catholic right rather than the left.
Some conservatives, Brunori predicted in an April 2 interview, may well see the “simplification” of Catholic life under Francis as “eliminating something of the essence of the church.”
A strong governor
While people in other parts of the Catholic world may be wondering if Francis can get control of the bureaucracy in Rome and bring it to heel, that doesn’t seem to be a major concern of anyone who watched him work in Argentina.
As Maria Elena Bergoglio, the pope’s 64-year-old sister told me on April 3, her brother is “plenty tough enough” to lead.
Three characteristics of his administrative style stand out.
First, there’s little filter between Bergoglio and the people involved in the decisions he has to make. Those who’ve watched him work say that when he’s facing a tough choice, he’ll pick up the phone himself and collect information from various quarters, usually without letting any particular person know who else he’s consulting. He’ll listen carefully, think and pray about it, and then come to his own conclusion.
Bergoglio’s penchant for collecting and analyzing information on his own means that he’s less dependent on aides and intermediaries than many CEOs in other walks of life. Wals said that in Buenos Aires, Bergoglio was basically “his own right hand.”
Among other things, that may suggest the breathless anticipation in Rome over who Francis picks as the next Secretary of State may be slightly exaggerated — this may well turn out to be a pope who’s his own “prime minister.”
Second, he’s a man comfortable exercising authority. Lozano said that during the twice-monthly meetings Bergoglio held with his six auxiliary bishops in Buenos Aires, he would always go around the table and solicit advice, and he took it to heart. When it came time to decide, however, things weren’t put up for a vote — Bergoglio made the call, and never seemed anxious or overwrought about it.
Third, Bergoglio may be a peace-loving man of the people, but he’s no naïf about the use of power to make his vision stick.
Wals, for instance, noted that the new pope’s very first episcopal appointment was the choice of 65-year-old Mario Aurelio Poli of Santa Rosa as his successor in Buenos Aires. That move came on March 28, just 15 days after Francis was elected — among other things, a sign that the wheels may grind more quickly under this pope.
Further, Poli is another former Bergoglio auxiliary, and Wals said the appointment is clear sign of “continuity” with the pope’s broad pastoral outlook.
In the same way, Bergoglio also didn’t shrink from holding people accountable. Villarreal, for instance, said he’s familiar with at least one instance in which a priest wasn’t toeing the line, and after giving him a chance to straighten out, Bergoglio didn’t blink about sending him packing.
Given all that, what sort of reform might one expect from Francis?
In our conversation Thursday evening, Lozano laid out a reform agenda for his friend — not in the sense of pressuring him, but rather by way of explaining what one might expect given the kind of leader he knows Francis to be.
Lozano said that any structural reform Francis may execute will be in service to his concern with promoting a missionary church. It won’t be reform merely for the sake of efficiency, but to “clear away obstacles to carrying the gospel to the world.” Lozano then ticked off five such challenges:
(On that score, Wals predicted Francis may actually close the Vatican Bank based on his history in Buenos Aires. When Bergoglio took over in the late 1990s, Wals said, the archdiocese was a part owner of several local banks. Bergoglio quickly sold those shares and put the church’s money into private banks as a normal client.)
(Francis seemed to begin that Friday by telling [1] German Archbishop Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to pursue “protective measures for minors, help for those who suffered violence in the past, [and] the necessary produces regarding the guilty parties,” as well as prompting bishops’ conferences “to formulate and enact the necessary directives in this field which is so important for the witness of the church and its credibility.”
“These are all things I’ve talked about with him over the years, and that we’ve discussed among the bishops,” Lozano said. “If he calls me, I’ll give him the full list!”
Originally on line at:
http://ncronline.org/print/blogs/all-things-catholic/who-francis-may-be-based-who-bergoglio-was
Update, Thursday, April 11: It is now being reported that, indeed, the pontificate of Pope Francis will be consecrated to our Lady of Fatima on May 13. Santuario de Fatima.
Our Blessed Lord says in Scripture that He does not trust the heart of man. If that is so, why should we? Therefore, I do not place my hopes in the man Jorge Mario Bergoglio. I place my hopes in the knowledge that our Lady made a promise and that in all certainty, it will be fulfilled: Her Immaculate Heart will triumph, the restoration of the Church’s divine splendor now obscured, will shine forth once more, and this will be accomplished through the docility of a Pope who obeys heaven’s requests.
Will it be Pope Francis? 
Time will tell, but what is certain is that our Lady of Fatima can never be ignored, silenced, nor her messages buried. We keep hearing over and over that word, “FATIMA”. She will not go away!
Below is the latest bit of news which continues to feed our hopes. (I translated only the pertinent part but the entirety in Spanish can be found on the Zenit site.)
+++
The President of the Portuguese Episcopal Conference, José Policarpo, in his opening of the 181st Plenary Assembly on April 8, said that Pope Francis twice asked him to consecrate his ministry to Our Lady of Fatima.
“Pope Francis,” said the Cardinal-Patriarch, “asked me twice to consecrate his new ministry to Our Lady of Fatima. It is a request that I can fulfill in the silence of prayer.” He said, “It would be nice if all of the Episcopal Conference were to be associated in the realization of this request. Mary will guide us in all our work and also in the method of fulfilling the desire of Pope Francis.”
Present were the apostolic nuncio, archbishops and bishops, church representatives and agents of social communication.
The Virgin Mary appeared to three shepherd children in 1917 in the town of Fatima. Their prophecies [although not yet all] have been dramatically fulfilled and each year millions of faithful make pilgrimages to the sanctuary. John Paul II consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary – as requested by our Lady [Our Lady specifically asked for Russia, not the world, to be consecration in union with all the world’s bishops, something which has not yet been done.] who appeared to the three seers – a year after the assassination attempt on May 13, 1981, which was considered a miracle to not have been killed by Ali Agca. [Notice that the purported “accomplishment” of 1984 is completely ignored? Everybody is on to it that it wasn’t true!]
+++
Let’s keep praying, specially the rosary, for the fulfillment of the promises of Our Lady!
Part 2 of 2:
In the Old Testament, the worship of God by the Israelites developed under His direction through Moses. They, who had but the figure, the foreshadowing of the Redeemer, first worshipped in simple, portable tents until the building of Solomon’s temple, that great edifice constructed so as to elicit awe for the magnificence of God. It was built with massive amounts of cedar, tons of finely quarried stone, and decorated with sheets of solid gold. The king himself went heavily into debt, but he wanted it built so “that all the people of the earth may learn to fear thy name, as do thy people Israel and may prove that thy name is called upon on this house, which I have built.” ( I Kings 8:43) How terribly wicked it would have been for the Israelites to have abnegated the temple for a return to more humble, more simple worship in their tents of the past!
Yet, we hear Catholics of our day and age saying that since the early Church was poor, we should embrace the poverty and simplicity of the first Christians! Think of the absurdity of the idea. They sound like the Pharisees of Luke 19: 39 who told our Lord to rebuke the people for giving Him a King’s reception. We have our King and our God in our midst, and if we really believe it, we must show it to the world by how we welcome Him when, together, we “come to Mt. Sion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem and to the company of many thousands of Angels” (Hebrews 12:22), i.e., at every Mass.
Where is our Faith?
Like Solomon, the Church by her public liturgical solemnities must desire “that all the people of the earth may learn to fear thy name”, “and may prove that thy name is called upon on this house” as the one and only true foundation which the Lord has built upon the rock of Peter, outside of which there is no salvation.
We continue with our quotes from The Manual of the Holy Catholic Church:
Fourth, Sacred ceremonies are so far from being contrary to the humility and simplicity of the Gospel, that they are grounded on the very constitution and frame of our nature, which must be instructed in spiritual things, by means of such helps as fall under our senses, for the same reason that Almighty God, by means of sensible things in the Holy Sacraments, confers his grace, which is spiritual, and invisible, to our souls.
Finally, Can anything be conceived more splendid and magnificent than what God himself commanded to be done both in the sacred vestments used by his priests in the Old Law, and the profusion of riches in everything regarding his temple? and shall we accuse him on this account of encouraging worldly pride and vanity in his people? This example of God himself gives the most ample sanction to all the magnificence that can be used in his holy service.
Q. Do not the ceremonies convey too much of worldly ostentation, which nourished pride instead of humility; such as the ornamentation of altars and the magnificence of priestly vestments?
A. It is surprising to see how prone people are to deceive themselves. Let us suppose the greatest splendor and magnificence to be used in the cases mentioned, in whose heart can they be imagined to nourish pride or vanity? not in the people who see them.
On the contrary, experience in both cases teaches, that ceremonies produce the opposite effect, and inspire the beholders with sentiments of reverence and respect. Now as to the priests who use these sacred vestments, however rich and magnificent they may be, they serve only to bring to mind the passion of Jesus Christ, which they represent, and the sacred virtues of humility, purity, mortification, and love of Jesus Christ, with which his priests ought to be adorned.
Q. Ought we then to pay great respect to sacred ceremonies?
A. Most undoubtedly; they deserve very great respect and veneration to be paid them, both on account of the ends for which they are used and of the sacred truths which they represent and holy instructions which they impart, and of the authority by which they are instituted; and, therefore, the Church in the general council of Trent, condemns, and pronounces an anathema on all those who shall presume to say that it is lawful to despise or ridicule or, to alter or change by private authority, any of the approved ceremonies of the Church. (Sess. vii, can. 13) [Furthermore, as St. Augustine says, should the ceremonies of the Church be indiscriminately altered or abandoned, her ministers would be guilty of disturbing the common order and peace of the Church.]
The foreshadowing of the sacrifices for atonement and redemption has culminated in the perfect Sacrifice of Calvary continually re-presented on our altars at Mass. It is the duty of our hierarchy to safeguard this priceless gift from God and to not let it be dimmed by stripping it of its external glory.
The last of the twelve constituent parts of the Mass (and which dates back to the 4th or 5th century) is the Postcommunion, a prayer mainly of petition in which the priest implores that all receive the fruits of the Sacrifice of the Mass. If any of the faithful do not partake of a sacramental Communion, they should make a spiritual one so that they, too, may greatly benefit from the prayers of the Postcommunion.
In this prayer, we also express our grateful sentiments to God for being so intimately present. We ask Him to abide with us as the darkness of evening approaches; to enable us to return His love; to grant us every grace necessary to persevere in the Faith against the assaults of the world, the flesh, and the devil.
We can imagine the joy of the apostles in being with our Lord for the 40 days before his Ascension! It was then that he explained many things to them. And in order to teach, govern and sanctify all of mankind, He gave them authority and power to preach, baptize, loose and bind. The deposit of Faith entrusted by Christ to the Apostles is the pearl of great price which we may be reasonably assured of preserving in its integrity by assisting at the ancient, Traditional Latin Mass. As astounding as this claim may sound, it is Gihr who very clearly explains why:
“The liturgy is, indeed, the main channel by which dogmatic tradition is transmitted; dogma is the root of all ecclesiastical life, of discipline and of worship. Worship is developed out of the doctrine of the faith; in the liturgical prayers, in the rites and ceremonies of the church, the truths of Catholic faith find their expression…the more fixed, unchangeable and inviolable the liturgical formula of prayer..the better…to preserve intact and to transmit unimpaired the original deposit of faith…[A]ll the primitive liturgies proclaim and prove that our faith is in perfect harmony with that of the first ages of the Church.”
Prayer: “Lord Jesus Christ, who didst vouchsafe after Thy resurrection to converse forty days with Thy disciples, and instruct them in all the mysteries of faith; teach me, I beseech Thee, to live according to Thy doctrine, and strengthen my faith that I may never doubt Thy Divine Revelation. Amen.”
_____________________
The N.O. dates back to April 3, 1969 when it was first promulgated by Paul VI, and, according to his friend Jean Guitton, to make it more compatible with Protestant theology: “The intention of Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy – but what is curious is that Paul VI did that to get as close as possible to the Protestant Lord’s supper… there was with Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or at least to correct, or at least to relax, what was too Catholic, in the traditional sense, and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass.”
“I do not for one instant profess to believe that all the world is about to turn Catholic; I am quite sure that it is not; I even think it probable that we are on the verge of a Great Apostasy……[O]n the one side will stand human society ranged against her, in ranks and companies of which hardly two members are agreed upon anything except upon opposition to her. There will be the New Theologians of that day, as of ours; new schools of thought, changing every instant, new discoveries, new revelations, new presentations and combinations of fragments of old truth. And on the other side will stand the Church of the ages, with the marks of her Passion deeper than ever upon her. From the one side will go up that all but eternal cry, ‘We have found her out at last; she is forsaken of all except of a few fanatics at last; she is dead and buried at last’. And on the other side she will stand, then as always, wounded indeed to death, yet not dead; betrayed by her new-born Judases, judged by her Herods, and her Pilates, scourged by those who pity while they strike, despised and rejected, and yet stronger in her Divine foolishness than all the wisdom of men; hung between Heaven and earth, and yet victorious over both; sealed and guarded in her living tomb, and yet always and forever passing out to new life and new victories.
“So, too, then as now, and as at the beginning, there will be secret gardens where she is known and loved, where she will console the penitent as the sun rises on Easter Day; there will be upper rooms where her weeping friends are gathered for fear of the Jews, when the doors being shut, she will come and stand in the midst and give them Peace; on mountains, and roads, and by the sea, she will walk then, as she has walked always, in the secret splendor of her Resurrection.” – Mgr. R. H. Benson, 1911
There is so very much I have to do this week that unless something of importance comes up, I will most likely not be posting until after Easter.
Then, I would like to finish the series on theology of the TLM in pictures. Also, I will be posting the second part on “humility/deterioration”.
One more thing: I skimmed through a couple of posts on a Spanish blog, written by an Argentinian Catholic, and from what he says, I can only advise that we all intensify our prayers. I cannot imagine that Our Lord will allow the confusion in His Church to continue many years longer. Pray for in increase in the love of God, detachment, and purification of hearts.
I leave you with a thought for this week: “Affliction and pain depend on how we take them, and man is only afflicted through having what he is unwilling to have, or through not having what he desires to have. Take his self-will away, and his spirit becomes tranquil and enjoys peace.” – St. Catherine of Sienna
May His peace reign in your hearts!
