The Sacrifice of the Mass

Posted on November 17, 2011 by Fiat

THE NEED OF THE SACRIFICE OF THE ALTAR

From the Manual of the Catholic Church, 1906 ed.

Q.  What need was there for the Sacrifice of the altar, since we were fully redeemed by the Sacrifice of the cross?

A.  First, That we might have, in the Sacrifice of the altar, a standing memorial of the death of Christ.

Second, That the memory of our Savior’s passion being thus daily renewed, and presented to Almighty God, might be a continual means to draw down His blessing upon us and to thank Him for his daily favors in a manner worthy of Him, and to obtain pardon for the sins we are daily committing against Him.

Third, That the Christian people might have an efficacious means of approaching daily to God through our Savior Jesus Christ, who is the Victim here offered.

Fourth,  That they might have, to the end of the world, an external Sacrifice, in which they might join together in offering supreme homage to God, as the servants of God had always done from the beginning of the world.

Fifth, That all the figures and sacrifices of the old law, and of Melchisedech, might be perfectly fulfilled, according to that of our Savior:  “Amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one title shall not pass from the law, till all be fulfilled,” Matt. v. 18.

Sixth, That by the Sacrifice of the altar, the fruits of His death might daily be applied to our souls.

Q.  How are the fruits of our Savior’s death applied to our  souls by the Mass?

A.  Jesus Christ died upon the Cross for all mankind in general;  that is, He offered to God a full and ample satisfaction for the injury done Him by the sins of the whole world.  In the Mass, by mystically renewing, and presenting to His Father the death He suffered on the Cross, He obtains His [Heavenly Father’s] acceptance of the same for the actual benefit of those in particular for whom the Mass is offered; and, by this means, those graces which He merited for mankind in general by His death, are actually applied to, and bestowed upon our souls in such abundant manner, as our wants require and as our dispositions are capable of receiving.

THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS NOT DISTINCT FROM THE SACRIFICE OF THE CROSS

This painting by Rogier van der Weyden (1400-1464) depicts in art the perennial teaching of our Faith.  Our Lord’s head is turned so as to gaze upon his priest at the altar who offers to His Heavenly Father the same sacrifice He Himself offered on Calvary, though at the altar, in an unbloody manner. Notice that the server is holding a spear.  He represents St. Longinus who on Calvary declared the divinity of Jesus, just as in this work of art, he acknowledges the living God made present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass when the priest pronounces the words of Consecration. 

This is our Faith.   The sacrificial aspect is made quite clear in the Traditional Latin Mass which is also known as the Tridentine Mass.

Posted in Keeping the dogma of the Faith | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Michael Saw it With His Own Eyes

Posted on November 14, 2011 by Fiat

Michael Voris, that is.

Isn’t this the truth?  I laughed at his comment about the “bedsheets”.   I can relate to what Mr. Voris experienced.  Just this morning, while at the post office, I encountered a dear friend and we did exactly what Michael V. did in this video.  We talked, and talked, and remembered, compared, and lamented; and we wondered about the darkness that has descended upon the Church.

The N. O. churches are ‘disintegrating’.   It will not be long before the only fully active and zealous Catholics left will be those who have found their way to the Traditional communities where the ancient Mass and the fullness of our Faith continues to be taught by young, holy, dedicated priests.  And thus, the gates of hell will not prevail.

Those who are pinning their hopes on the “new translation” to revitalize their parishes are fooling themselves.

I see it, oh, so very clearly.  The lines of demarcation are being drawn. On which side will you find yourself?

(By the way, have you offered prayers for the Holy Souls in Purgatory today?)

Here is Michael Voris to tell you what he has seen these past fifty years:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Remember the Poor Souls in Purgatory!

Posted on November 12, 2011 by Fiat

Since our souls possess the three faculties of will, memory, and intellect,  we can be sure that those we have known and loved here on earth, and who may now be in Purgatory,  do retain memories of us.  How appreciative they must be to know that our love for them continues when we assuage their pains and speed their flight into heaven with our prayers and sacrifices.

I can tell you that I personally have felt the request for the aid of my prayers from deceased souls.   Haven’t you?

Perhaps I may write a little of this later on.  Right now, we have to get settled back into our groove after a very nice and extended vacation.

Would you in your charity, please take a moment right now to pray for the poor, helpless, suffering souls who long to be with Our Lord?

O Lord, who art ever merciful and bounteous with Thy gifts, look down upon the suffering souls in purgatory. Remember not their offenses and negligences, but be mindful of Thy loving mercy, which is from all eternity. Cleanse them of their sins and fulfill their ardent desires that they may be made worthy to behold Thee face to face in Thy glory. May they soon be united with Thee and hear those blessed words which will call them to their heavenly home: “Come, blessed of My Father, take possession of the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”

—————————

edit:  And, yes, heaven, hell and purgatory are places.  Jesus didn’t say, “Come, blessed of My Father, enter into a state of mind.”  I had to make this amendment due to what I recently heard a priest say when he denied a locality to the afterlife.

Posted in Feast Days | Tagged | Leave a comment

What is the Principle Upon Which Tradition Proceeds?

Posted on October 27, 2011 by Fiat

From the Manual of The Holy Catholic Church, 1906

The Traditions of the Church

Q.  What is meant by tradition?

A.  The handing down from one generation to another, whether by word of mouth, or by writings, those truths revealed by Jesus Christ to his apostles, which either are not at all contained in the Holy Scripture, or at least are not clearly contained in them;  of which we have seen above several instances.

Q.  What is the principle upon which tradition proceeds?

A.  It is the laying down, as an invariable rule, to be observed in every generation, firmly to adhere to the doctrine received from the preceding generation, and carefully to commit the same to the succeeding generation, without addition or diminution.

Q.  Was this principle of tradition established by the apostles?

A.  It was most firmly established by them, and they used the most efficacious means to preserve it.

Q  What were these means?

A.  We find these following laid down in their sacred writings:  First, They warmly exhorted the faithful, and strictly commanded them to stick close to the doctrine which they had delivered to them, and to teach the same inviolate to those after them.  Thus, “O Timothy,” says St. Paul, “keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge, falsely so called, which some promising, have erred concerning the faith,” 1 Tim. vi. 20.  “Hold the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith, and in the love which is in Christ Jesus.  Keep the good things committed to thy trust by the Holy Ghost, who dwelleth in us,” 2 Tim. i 13.  “And the things which thou hast heard of me before many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also,”  2 Tim. ii. 2.  “Continue thou in those things which thou hast learned, and which have been committed to thee, knowing of whom thou hast learned them,”  2 Tim. iii. 14.

Such are the injunctions which he laid upon the pastors of the church in the person of his disciple Timothy.  And to show the bishops, or chief pastors, are particularly charged with the obligation of adhering to the doctrine delivered to them from the apostles, when relating to Titus the qualities of these chief pastors among others, he says, that a bishop ought to “embrace that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine, and convince the gainsayers, – who must be reproved, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucre’s sake,” Tit. i. 9; where we see the strict charge laid upon the pastors, both to adhere to the true doctrine themselves, and to defend it against seducers.

The same injunction of adhering to the doctrine they had received, by tradition, from the apostles, he lays upon all the faithful in these words: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle,” 2 Thess. ii. 15.   St. Jude also writes his on purpose to enforce this duty on the faithful, and says, “I was under a necessity to write to you, to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, “ Jude, ver 3.

Such strong and repeated injunctions laid upon all, and especially upon the pastors of the church, who are appointed by Jesus Christ to be the guardians and teachers of the Faith, could not fail to make the deepest impression upon their minds, and have in all ages been considered as the great rule of their conduct in preserving the true doctrine inviolated.

Second, Not content with laying such strict commands upon the faithful to adhere firmly to the old doctrine handed down from the beginning, they also warn them against  all broachers of new doctrine, describe their manners, foretell their reprobation and damnation, and command the faithful to avoid them.  St. Paul writes to Timothy;  “Now the Spirit manifestly saith, that, in the last times, some shall depart from the faith, fiving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, and having their consciences seared;” 1 Tim. iv. 1

What an impression must this description make upon the minds of all serious Christians! what a horror must it raise in them against all innovations! “Know this also,” says the same apostle, “that in the last days, shall come on dangerous times, for men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, – lovers of pleasure more than of God; having an appearance indeed of godliness but denying the power thereof; now these avoid, for of this rot are they – who resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith,” 2 Tim. iii. 1.  St. Peter also is very strong upon this head, when he says, “There shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, (damnable heresies, as the Protestant translation has it) bringing upon themselves swift destruction – whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their destruction slumbereth not, “ 2 Pet. ii. 1.  St. Paul also to the Romans saith, “Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who cause dissensions and offences, contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and to avoid them; for they that are such serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly,” Rom. xvi. 17; and in his epistle to Titus, he says, “A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid; knowing that he that is such an one is subverted, and sinneth, being commanded by his own judgment,” Tit. ii.10.

Again, to Timothy he saith, “If any man teacheth otherwise, and consent not to the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to that doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but sick about questions and strifes of words – corrupted in mind, and destitute of the truth,” 1Tim. vi.3.  St. John also speaks to the same purpose, saying “Whatsoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God – If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house, and say not to him, God speed you;  for he that saith to him, God speed you, communicate with his wicked works, “ 2 John 1:9-11.   Could anything more efficacious have been said, than these oracles of the Holy Ghost, to excite in the hearts of the faithful the strongest aversion against even the smallest deviation from the doctrine they had received?  Could anything more firmly establish the sacred principle of tradition? [our emphasis in bold]

Third, But to settle this principle upon the most solid footing, besides, what is above, these sacred writers pronounce a dreadful curse upon, and deliver over to Satan, all those who shall dare to alter or corrupt the faith once delivered to the saints, though but in one single article.

Thus when some false brethren, in St. Paul’s absence, had persuaded the Galatians, that it was necessary to join circumcision with the gospel, he wrote his epistle to them on purpose to correct this delusion; and though it was but an error in one point, and that in everything else they adhered to his doctrine; yet he calls it a “removing from the grace of Christ – and a perverting the gospel of Christ,” Gal. i. 6, 7.  And then he adds, “but though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you, besides that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed; as we said before, so I say now again, If any one preach to you a gospel beside that which you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal. i.8.

So also he mentions two heretics of his own time, who erred only in one point, and says, “Their speech spreadeth like a canker, of whom are Hymeneus and Philetus, who have erred from the truth, saying that the resurrection is past already, and have subverted the faith of some,” 2 Tim. ii. 17.  But he had told his disciples before in what manner he had dealt with Hymeneus and Alexander, who “had made shipwreck of their faith; “ “ whom I have delivered to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme, “    1 Tim. i. 20.   Nothing surely could more effectually imprint in the minds of the faithful, the firmest attachment to the truths of the gospel, than this judgment of the apostle, or more excite their attention and solicitude, to preserve these sacred truths whole and undefiled, and to deliver them entire and uncorrupted to their posterity.

Posted in Keeping the dogma of the Faith | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Truth about “St. Cyril” and Communion in the Hand

Posted on October 26, 2011 by Fiat

From Rorate Caeli, with minute modifications for greater clarity:

St. Cyril of Jerusalem and Communion in the hand

 Regarding the matter of so-called “Communion in the hand,” [Una Fides] presents an article by the Rev. Father. Giuseppe Pace, S.D.B., published in the magazine Chiesa Viva of January 1990 (Civiltà, Brescia.) [Translation by Rorate contributor Francesca Romana.]

The acorn is a potential oak tree; the oak tree is an acorn that has come to perfection. For the oak to return to being an acorn, presuming that it could do so without dying, would be a regression.  It is for this reason the Mediator Dei of Pope Pius XII condemned liturgical antiquarianism as anti-liturgical with these words: “Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation. (no.63) (…) This way of thinking and acting [gave way] to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the “deposit of faith” committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn. (no.64)

The pseudo – liturgists who are desolating the Church in the name of the Second Vatican Council are prey to such morbid antiquarian obsessions; pseudo-liturgists, who, at times reach the point of obligating their subjects with exhortations and instances that violate the few remaining wholesome laws that still survive, and which, they, themselves, have formally promulgated or confirmed.

Symptomatic of all this is the issue of the Rite of Holy Communion. One bishop, in fact, after declaring that the Sacred Species [being] placed on the tongue of the communicant, is still in force at the Traditional Rite, at the same time, also permits Holy Communion to be distributed in little baskets which the faithful pass along to each other; or he, himself, deposits the Sacred Species into the hands (are they always clean?) of the communicant. If you want to convince the faithful that the Most Holy Eucharist is nothing other than (a piece of) ordinary bread, perhaps even blessed as a symbolic meal, one could not imagine a better way to do it than that of sacrilege.

The promoters of Communion in the hand call upon that pseudo-liturgical antiquarianism condemned by Pius XII in apertis verbis.  In fact, they say that it is in this way that you must receive It, because it had been carried out in that manner by the entire Church, both in the East and West from Her beginnings and for a thousand years afterwards.

[What] is most certainly true from the beginnings of the Church, and then for almost two thousand years, is that in preparation for Communion, communicants had to abstain from all food and drink from the night before until the moment of reception. Why don’t those antiquarians restore that Eucharistic fast? This would certainly contribute quite a bit to maintaining awareness in the mind of the communicant the thought of imminent reception of Holy Communion, so that they would dispose themselves better.

Instead, it is most certainly false that, from the Church’s beginnings and for a thousand years afterwards, the entire Church, both East and West, had the practice of placing the Sacred Species in the hands of the faithful. [our emphasis in red]

The pseudo-liturgists love to pull out the following piece from the Mystagogical Catecheses attributed to Saint Cyril of Jerusalem:  «Adiens igitur, ne expansis manuum volis, neque disiunctis digitis accede; sed sinistram velut thronum subiiciens, utpote Regem suscepturæ: et concava manu suscipe corpus Christi, respondens Amen».( When thou goest to receive communion go not with thy wrists extended, nor with thy fingers separated, but placing thy left hand as a throne for thy right, which is to receive so great a King, and in the hollow of the palm receive the body of Christ, saying, Amen.)

They stop, when they arrive at this Amen; however, the Mystagogical Catecheses do not stop there, but continue:

Then, carefully sanctifying the eyes by touching them with the holy Body, partake of it,(…)    “Then, after you have partaken of the Body of Christ, come forward only for the cup of the Blood. Do not stretch out your hands but bow low as if making an act of obeisance and a profound act of veneration. Say ‘Amen’. and sanctify yourself by partaking of Christ’s Blood also. While the moisture is still on your lips, touch them with your hands and sanctify your eyes, your forehead, and all your other sensory organs…Do not cut yourselves off from Communion; nor deprive yourselves of these sacred and spiritual mysteries, not even if you  are defiled by sins).

Who could possibly sustain that a similar rite was more or less the custom of the universal Church for more or less a thousand years? And how to reconcile such a rite, (when even those defiled with sin are admitted to Communion), in accordance with what was certainly the universal custom from the beginnings of the Church which forbade Holy Communion to those who were not holy? «Itaque quicumque manducaverit panem hunc, vel biberit calicem Domini indigne, reus erit corporis et sanguinis Domini. Probet autem seipsum homo: et sic de pane illo edat, et de calice bibat. Qui enim manducat et bibit indigne, indicum, sibi manducat et bibit non diiudicans corpus Domini» [ [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. [29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. (I Corinthians, 11, 27-29, Douay-Rheims)]

The description of such a bizarre Communion Rite, which concludes with the exhortation to receive Holy Communion even if you are defiled by sins, was most certainly not preached by St. Cyril in the Church of Jerusalem, neither would it have been licit whatsoever in any other Church. What we have here is a rite which is a product of the imagination, oscillating between fanaticism and sacrilege, by the author of the Apostolic Constitutions: an anonymous Syrian, a devourer of books, an indefatigable writer who poured into his writings,  indigested and contaminated figments of own imagination. In the book VIII of the aforementioned Apostolic Constitutions, he adds 85 Canons of the Apostles, attributing them to Pope St. Clement, canons that Pope Gelasius I, at the Council of Rome in 494, declared apocryphal: «Liber qui appellatur Canones Apostolorum, apocryfus (P. L., LIX, col. 163). The description of that bizarre rite, even if not always necessarily sacrilegious, became part of the Mystagogical Catechesis through the work of a successor of St. Cyril, who most (scholars) retain was “Bishop John,” a crypto-Arian, influenced by Origen and Pelagius and thus, contested by St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome and St. Augustine.

How can Leclercq claim that «… we must see in this [in this extravagant rite] an exact representation of the usage of the great Churches of Syria»? He cannot claim this since he is contradicting himself, given that just before he states that it deals with: «…a fantasy liturgy. It does not come from nor is it destined to anything else than to entertain its author; it is not a normal, official, liturgy belonging to a specific Church» (Dictionaire de Archeologie chretienne et de Liturgie, vol. III, part II, col. 2749-2750).

Instead we have concrete evidence of customs that are the opposite, that is, of the practice of placing the Sacred Species on the tongue of the communicant, and of the prohibition of the lay faithful touching the Sacred Species with their hands. Only in cases of grave necessity and in times of persecution, St. Basil assures us, the norms could be derogated, permitting the lay to receive Communion in the hand. (P.G.,XXXII, coll. 483-486).

It is clear we do not intend to review all the testimonies invocated to demonstrate that the custom of placing the Sacred Species on the tongue of lay communicants was in use in antiquity, neither do we intend to indicate something only symptomatic, and what is more, sufficient, to disprove what they assert, that for a thousand years, the universal Church in both East and West, was in the habit of placing the Sacred Species in the hands of the faithful.

Saint Eutichiano, Pope from 275 to 283, so that laypeople would not touch the Sacred Species with their hands, forbade them to take the Blessed Sacrament to the sick: «Nullus præsumat tradere communionem laico vel femminæ ad deferendum infirmo» (Let no-one dare consign Holy Communion to a lay man or woman for them to take to the sick) (P.L.,V, coll.163-168).

Saint Gregory the Great narrates that Saint Agapito, Pope from 535 to 536, during the short months of his pontificate, went to Constantinople and healed a deaf-mute during the act of «ei dominicum Corpus in os mitteret» (placing the Body of the Lord in his mouth). (Dialogues III,3).

This was in the East but also in the West; it is known and unquestionable, that Saint Gregory the Great himself administered Holy Communion to the lay-faithful in that same manner. Even earlier, the Council of Saragozza in 380, had launched excommunication to those who dared to treat the Most Holy Eucharist as if they were in a time of persecution, a time in which even lay-people found themselves out of necessity, touching the Sacred Species with their hands. (SAENZ DE AGUIRRE, Notitia Conciliorum Hispaniæ, Salamanca, 1686, pag. 495).

Undisciplined innovators were not lacking even in antiquity. This induced the ecclesiastical authorities to call them to order. The Council of Rouen did just that, around 650, forbidding the minister of the Eucharist to place the Sacred Species in the hand of lay communicants: «[Presbyter] illud etiam attendat ut eos [fideles] propria manu communicet, nulli autem laico aut fœminæ Eucharistiam in manibus ponat, sed tantum in os eius cum his verbis ponat: “Corpus Domini et sanguis prosit tibi in remissionem peccatorum et ad vitam æternam”. Si quis hæc transgressus fuerit, quia Deum omnipotentem comtemnit, et quantum in ipso est inhonorat, ab altari removeatur» ((The Presbyter) must be mindful also of this: give Holy Communion to the faithful only by your own hand; “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or woman but only in their mouths, with these words: ‘May the Body and Blood of the Lord help you in the remission of your sins and attain eternal life.’ Whosoever will have transgressed these norms, disdain God Almighty and in doing so will have dishonored himself and should be removed from the altar).(P.G., vol. X, coll.1099-1100).

Instead, the Arians, to show that they did not believe in the Divinity of Jesus and who retained that the Eucharist was merely symbolic bread, received Communion standing and touched the Sacred Species with their hands.  It was for no small thing that Saint Athanasius could talk about the Arian apostasy. (P.G., vol. col. 9ss).

We do not deny that lay people had permission to touch the Sacred Species on occasion – in certain particular cases – or even in some particular Churches for a short period of time. But we deny that this, had been the practice in the Church in both East and West for a thousand years. It is even more false to assert that it should still be done in this way now. Besides, in the worship owed to the Most Blessed Sacrament, there has come about wise progress, similar to that which has occurred in the field of dogma (which has nothing whatsoever to do with the modernist theology of the “death of God”).  The above-mentioned liturgical progress, restored universal practice of kneeling in the act of adoration, and thus the use of kneelers;  the practice of covering the balustrade with a white cloth, the use of the paten, now and then a torch-bearer and the practice of at least a quarter of an hour of personal thanksgiving.  Abolishing all of this does not result in increasing the worship owed to God in the Most Holy Eucharist, nor in the sanctification of the faithful, but it is serving the Devil.[Hey ! I didn’t say this, the author,  a priest did.]

When St. Thomas (Summa Theologica,III,q.82,a 3) exposes the reasons that forbade laypeople to touch the Sacred Species, he does not address a rite of recent invention, but  a liturgical practice as old as the Church Herself. Rightly, the Council of Trent could not only claim that it had been the consistent custom for laypeople to receive Communion from the priests, while priests communicated themselves, and that this custom, categorically, goes back to Apostolic times. (Denzinger, 881).  Here is why we find it prescribed in the Catechism of St. Pius X (Questions 642-645).  Now this rule has never been abrogated: in the New Roman Missal, article 117, you read that the communicant tenens patenam sub ore, sacramentum accipit (holding the paten under the mouth receives the Sacrament).

It is difficult to understand how the same promulgators of such wise norm, go about exempting the dioceses one after the other. The simple lay person faced with so much incoherence, cannot help but grow into greater indifference regarding the liturgical and non-liturgical ecclesiastical laws.

Posted in See, I told you so! | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Conclusion of “His Gaze Rests Upon Me.”

Posted on October 26, 2011 by Fiat

The Mass, A Continuation of the Sacrifice of the Cross

By Père Chauvin, S.S. S.

Mary, when contemplating Jesus dying, adored through His abasement God’s justice and mercy.

When assisting at Mass, unite with her sentiments, and with her recognize the malice of sin which has so disfigured the most beautiful among the children of men.  Mary united herself at the same time to the sacrifice of her Son.  She joined her tears to the tears of Jesus, her sufferings to the sufferings of Jesus, the immolation of her life to the immolation of Jesus’ life.  When assisting at Mass take your share in the sorrows of Jesus.  Let your heart be torn with sorrow at the sight of the agony of your Well-Beloved.  Tenderly compassionate the outrages with which He is still daily laden upon His new Calvaries.

It is in this way that souls who have never lost their innocence ought to assist at the drama of the Altar.

Have you had the misfortune of having been a great sinner, or simply of having lost by mortal sin at some fatal period of your life the grace of the Divine Friendship?  Then assist at the Mass in the same dispositions that Magdalen the public sinner of the Gospel, assisted at the death of Jesus.  At Jesus’ feet acknowledge your sins, weep over them at the cause of His death, humble yourself, and open your heart to the floods of grace and pardon that will escape from the Saviour’s Heart.  [Here I thought it most appropriate to append the experience of  a worldly, non-Catholic when attending her first Mass – the Tridentine.  This  woman’s heart had been softened through a severe trial and one Sunday, finding herself  at the mystical Golgotha, Jesus from His Cross gazed upon her. and with that one look, He offered her  the grace of repentance and eternal felicity in His Kingdom.   His gaze had rested upon Irene West who repented and converted to the true Faith.  This account is  found in the same publication. ]

“We went to Mass.  I was not long seated when I began to feel strangely uncomfortable.  I was thoroughly in the grip of the holy and sacred atmosphere, and my whole being seemed first to revolt, then to respond, until I absorbed more of the true spirit of religion than I had know in all my life before.  Then I began to weep, and, oh! I can never express what I felt!  All pride left me; I felt crushed, humiliated and humbled to the very earth.  A panorama of my whole life swept before my eyes.  I realized the nothingness of it all, and the truth seemed to rush upon me with such force that I was beside myself; for I could not possible restrain my weeping, although crying was something I had always despised in others as a sign of weakness.  Well, when I walked out of that door, I felt as if every sacred image in that little church of St. Mary’s by the lake had thrown an elastic streamer around my heart, and that, although I went, I should never again be free, not in the same sense.  I felt that I was being held in captivity, but, once outside, I tried to shake off the feeling.  I knew that I was not, and never should be, as I was when I entered that church.

Next day my friend suggested that we call on one of the priests, and as that one Mass had left an indelible impression on my mind, I assented.”

Continuing with Père Chauvin’s article:

To assist at Jesus’ death, Mary Magdalen infringed the orders of the soldiers, braved all difficulties.  She was present at His last sigh, at His funeral procession, at His sepulture.

Lose all rather than lose the benefit of the Divine Sacrifice, the most efficacious reparation you can make to God for all your past sins.

Are you at this moment still a slave of sin?  Are you enchained in some evil habit gravely culpable?  Come, assist at the mystical death of your good Saviour.  With the Good Thief humbly confess your faults; with the centurion, strike your breast, and make an act of faith in the love of your Redeemer.

Contemplate the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.  His Blood will purify, justify, and sanctify your soul.

Mary, Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament, and my tender Mother, inspire all men to be very faithful every morning at the divine rendezvous of the Eucharistic Calvary.  Inspire the just that they may purify themselves still more.  Inspire the tepid that they may sever their ties with the world and become more fervent.  Above all, inspire poor sinners that their hearts may fall in love with the love of their Saviour, that their eyes may at last know the tears that convert and save.

RESOLUTION:  “…assist at it [Mass] with the same sentiments that the Blessed Virgin had when contemplating Jesus dying on the Cross.”

Posted in See, I told you so! | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

His Gaze Rests Upon Me.

Posted on October 25, 2011 by Fiat

I wonder how many of today’s trendier Blessed Sacrament Fathers would disavow the writings of one of their confreres now long dead, Père Chauvin, whose article I found  in one of their publications dated 1917.   Father presents a meditation still applicable today, and most pertinent to us in these days of diabolical confusion.  God never changes; neither does His Truth.   Let’s take to heart what Father wrote and recall this teaching when at our next Mass:

The Mass, A Continuation of the Sacrifice of the Cross

Père Chauvin, S. S. S.

The Holy Mass is the continuation of the Sacrifice of the Cross.  We may, alas! behold renewed at the foot of this new Calvary the sacrilegious scenes displayed on Golgotha on Good Friday.

Which one am I?

When Jesus was agonizing on the Cross, there might be seen several groups scattered over the plateau and the slopes of Golgotha.  Jesus’ enemies were numerous.  Only a few pious women and some close friends were standing around the Cross.  We again find, alas! at the foot of the altar the same hostile sentiments, the same indifferent and defiant attitude.

First, look at the executioners.  “They are tearing off the Saviour’s garments which are adhering to His blood-covered Flesh.  They are mocking at His nudity and roughly nailing Him to the Cross.  They are drenching Him with vinegar and gall and, under His very eyes, they are jocosely sharing His poor garments among them.”

Pardon, O Divine Saviour, for all these new executioners who come to maltreat Thee even on the Calvary of Thy love!  Grant mercy to all who in the course of ages have violated Thy temples and tabernacles! for all who have sacrilegiously shared the spoils of Thy altars, for all who have cast Thee on the ground, covered Thee with spittle, trodden Thee under foot, insulted Thee with the genuflections of the praetorium…for all who have scourged Thee in their heart by sacrilegious Communions….!

At the foot of the Cross we meet blasphemers, wagging their head and mocking Jesus.

Pardon, O divine Saviour, for all those that pursue Thee to the altar with their blasphemies and arrogant defiance!…

Pardon for all those heretics that twist and pervert the Divine Word, in order to turn it against the Mass !…

Numbers pass by at the foot of the Cross without pausing, satisfied with casting a rapid glance on the Divine Crucified.

These are the indifferent.

Pardon for that new legion of indifferents who deign not even to [disturb] their occupations or their pleasures to assist at the Sacrifice of Calvary continued on the altar!

Lastly, a multitude of Jews remain at a great distance from the Cross, contented with curiously regarding Jesus’ crucifixion and agony.  Others turn their attention to the various actors on the scene.  They exchange extravagant and imbecile remarks with one another, and turn away well-pleased at being able to kill some hours of their time with a spectacle not seen every day.  The  soldiers  find their amusement in playing dice at the very foot of the  gibbet of the Cross.

Pardon, O Divine Saviour, for all who go to Mass as to a public performance!  They neglect all that is passing at the altar, in order to view the externals, the lights, the decorations…. Their heart, perpetually distracted by their own affairs and interests, is far from Thee.

Mary, Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament, and my tender Mother, increase in souls at this moment faith in the Divine Sacrifice of the altar, for if it does not save them, it will be their eternal loss.

To regret not having been on Calvary at the very moment when Our good Saviour expired on the Cross, would be very useless, since we may daily assist at the continuation of His Divine Sacrifice.  In the thought of the Divine Master we too, have our part to play around the Calvary of the altar, for we have to take the place of Mary and the holy personages who assisted Jesus on the Cross.

Up to this day, perhaps we have not understood this holy mission.  Let us ask Jesus at this very moment to enlighten us, to put into our heart every morning when assisting at the Divine Sacrifice, the sentiments that Mary and the holy personages experience at the sight of Jesus suffering and expiring on the Cross.

Behold Mary, the Mother of the Crucified, standing as close as possible to Jesus agonizing. She is, as it were, hanging on His lips to catch the least word, to watch the least movement, the slightest sigh.  It would seem as if her surroundings no longer existed for her.  She has forgotten everything, so absorbed is she in her Jesus.

When assisting at the Holy Sacrifice, do as Mary did, endeavor to free your mind of all other thoughts.  Forget your surroundings, see only Jesus, think of Jesus alone, speak only to Jesus, listen but to Jesus’ moans.

To be continued.

Posted in See, I told you so! | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Continuation of D. Pietro Leone’s TLM vs N.O.

Posted on October 24, 2011 by Fiat

Rorate Caeli continues with that excellent work of Don Pietro Leone which compares the TLM with the Missal of Paul VI.  Please check their site for the full article:

“Respect for the Real Presence is expressed by the many genuflections, the purification of the celebrant’s fingers in the chalice, the avoidance of contact with any profane object before they are purified, the purification of the sacred vessels on the corporal immediately after their use, the use of a pall to protect the chalice, the internal gilding of the vessels, the consecration of the immobile altar, the use of the pietra sacra and relics in the mobile altar and on the mensa when the Mass is said in a sacred place, of three altar-cloths, the reception of Holy Communion and the thanksgiving while kneeling (as opposed to the former standing and the latter sitting),  the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue, the prescriptions in the case of a consecrated host falling to the ground, the prohibition that faithful and mass-servers touch the sacred vessels (see Critical Study IV 2).

“The Reformer Martin Bucer, mentor of Thomas Cranmer, expressed the Protestant consensus as to the Real Presence (to which only Luther did not subscribe in virtue of his doctrine of consubstantiation) in his Censura when he said: “It becomes our duty to abolish from the churches… with all purity of doctrine whatever forms of bread-worship they wish to have employed by the anti-Christs and preserved in the hearts of the simpler kind of people” (MD p. 463).

“In the New Rite the Real Presence is no longer clearly expressed. The words denoting the oblata, in contradistinction to those quoted above (“a pure Victim…” etc. – words accompanied by 5 signs of the Cross) become panem vitae et calicem salutis: the bread of life and the cup of salvation (with no signs of the Cross), or, at another point, panis vitae…potus spiritualis: the bread of life and spiritual drink, which, as the Critical Study states, “could mean anything” (III 3), and suggest a merely spiritual, rather than a substantial presence.

“Moreover, all the signs of respect towards the Real Presence listed above have been abolished. We note particularly the abolition of the genuflections immediately following the consecration of the bread and wine.

In the years subsequent to the promulgation of the New Rite, further signs of respect were no longer enforced or obligatory[3], such as Communion on the tongue distributed by the priest or deacon, kneeling for the consecration, and genuflecting and keeping silent in the church. Instead, Holy Communion is usually received in the hands (a practice which Bucer prescribed explicitly in order to deny belief in the Real Presence (see above), and which became one of the hall-marks of the denial of Catholic eucharistic teaching[4]) and is often distributed moreover not only to standing communicants but also by lay ministers – where the New Rite has “out-Cranmered Cranmer” (MD p. 518)……

The post continues:

“In the Old Rite the sacramental priesthood is clearly distinguished from the laity.

“In the Offertory the priest speaks in the first person singular in the Suscipe Sancte Pater (the offering of the host) and in the other prayers.[8]

“In the Canon, the sacramental priesthood is distinguished from the laity by the words minister or servus in the first case and familia or plebs sancta in the second, and singled out by the phrases qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium… and  nobis quoque peccatoribus (MD p. 345).

“The same distinction is made by the double Confiteor at the beginning of Mass (repeated at the end, depending on circumstances), the first Confiteor of which is said by the priest, the second by the faithful. Here the priest also exercises his priestly ministry in acting as judge, witness, and intercessor, and by imparting the absolution. The priest is differentiated from the people also in the double Holy Communion, in the first of which “the High and Eternal priest and he who acted in His person were fused into the most intimate union” (Critical Study V 2). “

Posted in See, I told you so! | Leave a comment

The Shot Being Heard ’round the World – Latest from El Paso

Posted on October 20, 2011 by Fiat

This is a good example of what it means to belong to the Church Militant.  Catholics unite!

Posted in See, I told you so! | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Don Pietro Leone’s Comparison, “The Roman Rite: Old and New”

Posted on October 20, 2011 by Fiat

Pertinent excerpts from a post at Rorate Caeli:

The Roman Rite: Old and New – II
Catholicism, Protestantism, and the theology of the New Roman Rite

Catholic Dogma on the Blessed Eucharist is set forth definitively in the Council of Trent. The Council declares: “And so this Council teaches the true and genuine doctrine about this venerable and divine sacrament of the Eucharist… The Council forbids all the faithful of Christ henceforth to believe, teach, or preach anything about the most Holy Eucharist that is different from what is explained and defined in the present decree.” [Get it? Not even VII – which was merely a pastoral council –   can teach  differently.] (Session 21, Introduction).

If we ask ourselves how this theology corresponds to the theology of the Old Rite, we must reply that it is identical, since the principal reason for the definition of Eucharistic dogma as for the reform of the Roman rite was to provide “a bastion of the true Faith against Protestant heresies”: a bastion at once dogmatic and liturgical (MD p. 8). In the same vein the Critical Study of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci (September 1969) speaks of “the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent, which, by fixing definitively the “Canons” of the rite, erected an insurmountable barrier against any heresy which might attack the integrity of the mystery.” The identity of the theology of the Old Rite with the dogmas of the Council of Trent is, in fact, a particularly eminent instance of the principle “Lex orandi, lex credendi”[1].

In conclusion then, the Mass is a Sacrifice, the Sacrifice of Christ, because Christ is the victim and priest in the Mass as He is at Calvary. The relation between the Sacrifice of Calvary and the Sacrifice of the Mass is that the Sacrifice of Calvary is made present, recalled, and its fruit applied in the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Posted in See, I told you so! | Tagged , | Leave a comment