by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 9, 2012
Protestants and Catholics alike have a serious problem
By the Morris Family (reprinted with permission)
Protestants have a serious problem, and so do we as Catholics. We have had many discussions about the Protestant concept of Christianity. We have difficulty understanding the logic of Protestantism. During years of formal Catholic education, we were taught a straightforward educational method involving logic and historical perspective and not to base religious decisions on emotions. Protestants seem to have a generic view of Christianity. Historical perspective seems to have not been taught to most Protestants as it was in our education background. Their view is most solely based on reading the Protestant Bible. Many religious decisions seem to be based on emotions. Even the most conservative Protestants don’t seem to realize that Protestantism is a form of liberalism that was instituted by liberals. Since achieving salvation is the most important objective of our lives, we feel it most important to discuss this issue. Therefore, we want to review some history and apply some logical conclusions.
Our Lord and Savior preached the Gospel and established His Church on earth between 30 A.D. and 33 A.D. During His Public Life He established Christianity nurturing it in the hands of His Apostles. He appointed Saint Peter as the head of His Church when He pronounced, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” (St. Matthew 16:17-19) The Apostles were given the responsibility to teach what He had taught them to the entire world. (St. Matthew 28:18)
In 1350 A.D., nearly 200 years before Martin Luther, John Wyclif, a Catholic priest, advanced one of the currently fashionable non-Catholic/anti-Catholic ideas. Father John Wyclif taught that the Bible alone is the sufficient rule of Faith. Supporting belief in an inward and practical religion, he denied the divinely established authority of the pope and bishops of the Church; he also denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, and wrote against the Sacrament of Penance (Confession) and the Doctrine of Indulgences. Eighteen of his propositions were condemned by Pope Gregory XI. Father John Hus, a Catholic priest from Bohemia, (now Czechoslovakia) preached the teachings of Wyclif, circa 1400 A.D. Both Wyclif and Hus were convicted of heresy and their teachings were condemned at the Council of Constance in 1415 A.D. Hus, still living at that time, was formally excommunicated from the Catholic Church. In effect, these two priests gave impetus to the formation of a new religion which would operate in opposition to the Catholic Church. So, the question has to be asked. Does this new man-made religion receive approval in Heaven when it acts in opposition to the Catholic Church? If not, then it is totally illegitimate, spiritually worthless, devoid of grace, and entirely displeasing to Almighty God. (And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”)
Martin Luther, a Catholic Augustinian monk and Doctor of Divinity, well known for his lectures on the Bible, became upset about what he considered abuses or unfairness in the distribution of indulgences. In 1517, he posted his ninety-five theses on the front door of All Saints Catholic Church in Wittenberg, Germany, which was a Catholic Country then. Posting notices on the door of a church or other public buildings was the common practice of announcing one’s views at that time. These theses, written in Latin, listed what he considered to be abuses. These were eventually translated into German and then into other languages and distributed throughout Europe with the help of the new invention, the printing press. Following two years of lengthy discourses with the pope, and his refusal to obey the papal bull, which he publicly burned, he was formally excommunicated from the Catholic Church. He then published articles denying the supremacy of the pope and monastic vows and, in 1522, with that, he formally started his own religion, the Lutheran Church. In 1525, he attempted marriage with a former nun, Katherine Von Bora, by whom he fathered six children. He completed the writing of his own bible by 1534. He had several politically influential friends, many of whom were German princes, who sided with him and supported him in his religious errors. With this political base support, the new religion of Lutheranism spread throughout Germany. His new religion with its new customized bible, now majorly different from the Catholic Religion, has taken many of its tenets from the excommunicated Father Wyclif’s and Father Hus’s religion and becomes the basis for most future denominations of Protestantism. So, the question has to be asked. Does this new man-made religion receive approval in Heaven when it acts in opposition to the Catholic Church? If not, then it is totally illegitimate, spiritually worthless, devoid of grace, and entirely displeasing to Almighty God. (And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”)
In 1527, Henry VIII, the Catholic king of Catholic England, grew tired of his wife, Catherine of Aragon, because she did not bear him a son, and because he was attracted to her personal maid, Anne Boleyn. He petitioned Pope Clement VII to grant an annulment of his marriage. The pope refused, because this is against the law of God and His Church. In 1529, he dismissed his Lord Chancellor, Cardinal Wolsey, who, as a cardinal, was the representative of the pope in England. He appointed Sir Thomas More, educated at Oxford University, as his new Lord Chancellor. Thomas More resigned in 1532, because of the king’s argument with the pope. In 1533, Henry secretly “married” Anne and then appointed Thomas Cranmer as Archbishop of Canterbury. Cranmer formulated new church laws which permitted the formal “marriage” of Henry to Anne. In 1534, the Parliament, under the direction of the king, passed laws which enacted the formal break with the Roman Catholic Church and declared Henry VIII the supreme head of The Church of England. Thomas More was asked to sign the document and to recognize the “marriage” between Henry and Anne. He would not do so, and was beheaded in the same year. We now know him as Saint Thomas More, patron of attorneys. By 1539, the government completed the seizure of all church property. Thousands of Catholic priests, bishops and laymen were murdered. Cranmer proceeded to formulate the new religion of England. He wrote the Book of Common Prayer replacing the Roman Missal used in the Mass, and wrote his own version of the bible, replacing the Catholic Bible. Under the reign of King James I, the bible was rewritten into English verse, following Archbishop Cranmer’s interpretation, between 1603-1611 by scholars at Oxford and Cambridge, all of whom were now solidly non-Catholic. This new version is called The King James Version. To illustrate the incorrectness of the original King James Version, centuries later, the English Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881), a convert from Judaism to the Church of England, said, with regard to these non-Catholic translations: “We find abundant errors reducing the text to nonsense or blasphemy, making the scriptures contemptible to the multitude who come to pray and not to scoff.” Modern non-Catholic translators have sided with Disraeli. Thirty-six thousand changes in the revised King James Version have been made. Many of these changes corrected obvious distortions. Unbiased scholars of the sixteenth century detected these distortions without any hesitation. Ordinary people, however, lacking the ability to read the Hebrew and Greek texts, easily fell into the mistaken opinions aimed at them by dishonest and incompetent translators. These actions in England created the establishment of another new religion that would be known as Anglicanism, the Anglican Church in England and the Episcopalian Church in the United States. So, the question has to be asked. Does this new man-made religion, its new laws and decrees, receive approval in Heaven when it acts in opposition to the Catholic Church? If not, then it is totally illegitimate, spiritually worthless, devoid of grace, and entirely displeasing to Almighty God. (And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”)
These examples above represent only two of the first denominations of Protestantism. They lead the way for the many future denominations to follow. John Wesley, 1703-1791, following his ordination in the Church of England, headed for the Georgia Colony in America. His mission was to minister to the settlers and Indians. He also hoped a stint in the wilderness would help him sort out his own confused religious beliefs. He preached a personal form of religion based on individual Faith and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Georgia was a disaster for Wesley. He alienated the Indians with his starchy high churchmanship. He lost credibility with the settlers by getting into an awkward romantic entanglement with the niece of the chief magistrate of Savannah. Later, he formed what is known today as the Methodist Church. These are just a few examples of men who decided that they had a reason to start their own church. Real reforms had taken place in the Catholic Church, but they took place within the Church. Saint Francis of Assisi was one of those many reformers. Reforms were definitely needed in the Church at times. There were abuses involving indulgences. These and other abuses were settled within the Church at various Church Councils. The Council of Trent settled abuses, including those concerning indulgences, at the time of the Protestant “Reformation” in the 16th century. The Council of Trent spent 25 sessions deliberating between 1545 and 1563.
Protestant reformers, who were originally in the Catholic Church, however left the Catholic Church and worked outside of it, forming their own new religions, writing their own versions of the bible, selecting some tenets of Christianity while rejecting others, selecting some sacraments, while rejecting others, most eliminating the priesthood and any form of religious sacrifice. The protestant emphasis on a personal relationship with God based on personal faith led to the same relationship with the Bible. Each individual has his or her own relationship with God and in turn would interpret the Bible based on his or her own personal individual viewpoint. This all leads to personal rationalization and self-justification. By engaging in this practice, each individual, in effect, creates a new god unto themselves. God created us in His own image and likeness. Protestants, and the various Protestant sects, create unto themselves new gods unto their own image and likeness. The differences between Protestantism and Catholicism are substantial. They are different religions. They embrace opposing doctrines and teachings regarding the form of religious adoration or worship, the Sacrifice of the Mass versus a prayer service, the sacraments, the priesthood, who is authorized to go forth to preach the gospel, female ministers (1 Tim 2:11-14)(1 Cor., 14:34) penance involving confession, mortification, the indissolubility of marriage, marriage after divorce, how one receives Grace, how one receives forgiveness, how one achieves salvation, the virginity of Mary or her perpetual virginity, whether Jesus had brothers and sisters and so on. There are no gray areas in Catholicism. There is no doubt.
Everything is clear-cut and straightforward. Protestantism offers only gray areas and a massive amount of disunity and doubt. “He that is not with me is against me: He that gathereth not with me, scattereth.” (Saint Matthew, 12:30) One of the favorite biblical verses for Protestants is John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, as to give his only-begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.” A great deal of misinterpretation is applied to this verse. The problem basically gets down to the definition of the word “believe”. Saying, ”Yea, yea, Lord, I believe.” does not lead to instant salvation, but many Protestants say, “I believe, so I am now saved.” Belief involves more than words. What sense is there is saying that one believes, but then insists on not belonging to the Church that Christ founded, by belonging to a man-made religion that opposes the Church that Christ founded? What kind of belief is that? It is belief in a mere mortal man, not in Christ. “Not everyone that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (St. Matthew, 7;21)
In Catholic teaching we are forbidden to attend a Protestant service for the purpose of worshiping God. This would be considered a mortal sin against the First Commandment. This was ingrained into our Catholic education. When we grew up and our parents handed down the teachings of our religion, we were taught that going to a Protestant service would be a sacrilege, a grievous sin against the Holy Ghost, against the First Commandment, which is, “I am the Lord, Thy God, Thou shalt not have strange gods before thee.” We studied the Baltimore Catechism. This and the majority of Catholic teaching is contained there (www.baltimore-cathechism.com).
Q. 1148. How do we offer God false worship? A. We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.
Q. 1149. Why must we serve God in the form of religion He has instituted and in no other? A. We must serve God in the form of religion He has instituted and in no other, because heaven is not a right, but a promised reward, a free gift of God, which we must merit in the manner He directs and pleases.
So, therefore, worshiping in a Protestant church would be worshiping another god, or offering incense to a false idol, or at the very least, offering false worship, all of which, or any of which are serious offenses against the First Commandment. And, now we are advised to go worship with Protestants as a form of ecumenism? Recently, we sent out a question about a recent form of “ecumenism” being practiced in local “Catholic” churches. We asked former Catholic associates why it is that they invite Protestant ministers, including female ones, and Protestant bishops to stand in their sanctuaries to pray in public in front of their congregations. We asked that since these people are not legitimate ministers of Christianity, is that not quite misleading and an erroneous action. We mentioned a senior family member’s letter about that subject and about worshiping in Protestant buildings.. We received some responses explaining that since Protestants have been baptized, they are fellow Christians and are our brothers in the Church. We were taught this about Protestant children as that pertained to their reception of Baptism, but we were taught that that all ended when they reached the age of discretion at 14. The most detailed response was from a “Senior Priest” in the Diocese. He writes, ”… with due respect to your late and beloved mother, she is wrong in criticizing two popes, several cardinal archbishops and the rest of the teaching Magisterium of the Church for their departing at Vatican II from the post-Reformation ban of worshipping with other Christians. The word “ecumenism” means gathering in one ‘oikos’ – Greek for house – as brother and sister Christians. It does not mean converting them. In fact it would be an unchristian insult to them if we were to attempt to convert them under the guise of worshipping with them. Popes have so worshipped with Protestants and Orthodox often since Vatican II.” This individual lists his credentials: 1. Ordained priest in Rome, December, 1968; 2. Doctorate in sacred theology (Gregorian Pontifical University, Rome); 3. Forty years in pastoral ministry; 4.Thirteen years theology professor in three…. Catholic universities; 5 Twenty-nine years social justice columnist in the…. (The Diocesan newspaper); 6. Seven years director of diocesan Institute for Religious Studies.”
This is one of the popular heresies of this new religion. It is called False Ecumenism. In our Catholic education, we were taught that Catholic Ecumenism is to invite those outside the Catholic Church to come to Mass to pray and observe. They were invited to our house (“oikos”). We were never taught, nor did we ever dream of going to a Protestant or Jewish building of worship for the sake of participation. That would be sacrilege. This heresy of False Ecumenism, in addition to many other reversals in this church, such as the new Protestant service which has removed all reference to the Holy Ghost, Saturday/Sunday Sabbath, thousands of annulments per year; in effect, the elimination of the indissolubility of marriage, changes in matter and form of the sacraments, the changing of the words of consecration, communion in the hand, instant canonization of the departed in the new “Christian Burial Rite”, an implicit denial of the existence of Purgatory, and so on and so on, lead us to believe that this, too, is yet another religion, a new Protestant denomination, definitely totally different from the Catholic Faith in which we were reared. It became a new religion formed by men in opposition to the teachings and Tradition of the Catholic Church with the formal signing of the Vatican II Documents on December 8, 1965. “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.” (St. Paul to the Galations, 1:8)
A subject such as this is very difficult and challenging to propose. Most are born into their given current religious affiliation and because of family loyalty are faithful to it as if it were solid truth. Actually, Protestants are born into or convert into a religion founded 1500 years after the founding of Christianity by Christ. Their Protestant religion is merely 500 years old, one that is based on religions founded by men in the sixteenth century. Those founders, Luther, Cranmer, Calvin, Wesley and many others, represent the real heritage of their religion, even if their particular church was founded just a few years ago. They believe that they are followers of Christianity because the world says they are and because some of the principles they follow are Christian. In fact, they are only partial Christians, part time Christians, imitation Christians, or pretend Christians, since their religions accept only certain tenets of Christianity, but reject many others. They do not realize that their religions are not approved in heaven, or that their ministers have no authority to preach; that they have no Apostolicity.
They do not realize that their worship is not approved in Heaven, but is actually displeasing to Almighty God. “We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.” (Baltimore Catechism, Answer to Question 1148.) They think that they belong to a religion founded by Christ, but it was founded by scoundrels and murderers, heretics all, who rebelled from the real Christian religion to start their own religion and their own new church. What a heritage! Because of misleading information, they carry with them many misconceptions based on information received through erroneous indoctrination. This advice that we offer is often met with personal umbrage and resistance. Personal pride is wounded and family honor is at stake. Many have belonged to their particular church for many years. It is the center of their social life. This social entanglement becomes a prevailing trap. Too often emotionalism guides their decisions. Few have the spiritual disposition to listen, study and pray upon this advice. They are spiritually blinded. We have talked with many in these situations.
I, too, was in this situation myself. My parents spent two years trying to educate me about the religious error into which I had fallen. I was a leader in my parish, the Liturgy Committee Chairman, a commentator, a lay distributor, the trainer of the commentators and a diocesan fund raiser. They sent me materials weekly in order to point out the errors and the Protestant, non-Catholic leaning of this new religion. Once it finally dawned on me that they were right, I left immediately.
Our recommendation is to stay away from any religious organization that was not actually founded by Christ Himself. They all lead to trouble and confusion. None have the approval of Heaven. This includes the many so-called Traditional Catholic groups such as The Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), The Society of Saint Pius V (SSPV), ORMC, and so on. None of these operate with legitimate jurisdiction. Any organization that is outside of the traditional ecclesiastical hierarchical structure will lead to trouble. One’s nostalgic euphoria may be soothed there, but spiritual benefit is absent. Stay home, listen to Gregorian Chant, and pray to the Holy Ghost that you may receive the strength to remain faithful and receive the gift of eternal salvation. If you pray for and seek Truth, He will lead you to it by making you part of the Catholic Church through your desire to do so. Study the Baltimore Catechism (www.baltimore-cathechism.com). Do not knock on any rectory door of what is known by the world as a Catholic Church. They are no longer Catholic, but have descended into a new protestant denomination. Seek out a faithful Traditional Catholic for guidance. Be very careful! Protestantism is one of the most devious traps the Devil has ever set. He has many other traps prepared for those seeking Truth. Pray and be strong. If you do this, you will finally have a real, holy, spiritually peaceful Christmas season pleasing to Almighty God and a very bright future.
Sincerely,
The family of Dolores Rose Morris, A Traditional Catholic Family, seeking to save souls http://www.patrickpollock.com/101heresiesofbenedictxvitract2.html
The Catholic Religion Proved by the Protestant Bible: http://www.whoistheantichrist.org/catholic-reg.html
Traditional Catholic Adoration employing the Sacrifice of the Mass: Traditional Catholic Latin Mass, Easter Sunday, 1941
I have the video. Fulton J. Sheen commentating http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6AOvStZS64
Traditional Roman Catholic Mass, Feast of the Sacred Heart http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enWiFcsBqIE
by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 15, 2012
© Copyright 2009, T. Stanfill Benns (All emphasis within quotes is the author’s unless indicated otherwise.)
Introduction
As discussed in Part I, “Neglected Aspects of Church Membership,” (https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/free-content/reference-links/2-the-church/the-laity-and-neglected-aspects-of-church-membership/) Catholics today have regrettably and in many cases unintentionally excluded themselves from membership in the Church, as the Church Herself defines and teaches in Her doctrine concerning such membership. We must irrevocably accept the Church’s definitions in these matters, as taught by the Vatican Council: “For the doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be any recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding,” (DZ 1800).
As explained in Part I, Traditionalists are not members of the Mystical Body in its most narrow and accepted sense, anyway. But this does not mean that they cannot save their souls. It simply means that they must work much harder to understand their situation and to rectify it in order to satisfy Church teaching in this regard. Many will complain that those during the Western Schism were not required to do anything but follow their respective antipopes. As demonstrated in several other pieces on this site, the situation during the Western Schism was far from analogous to our own, although others have pretended that the situation today and that experienced from 1378-1418 were generally the same. If Traditionalists had proceeded to follow different rival claimants to the papacy, they might have a point. But this is not what happened. Instead they follow men never created by the Church nor approved by Her, and basically have attempted to do what Msgr. Van Noort has described: “Any man, then, who boasts of apostolic succession but is not united to the Roman pontiff, may indeed actually possess the power of orders; he may even by purely physical succession occupy a chair formerly occupied by an apostle – at least he could do so, but he would not be a genuine successor of the apostles in their pastoral office. He would be a usurper.”
Msgr. Van Noort continues: “A moral body, despite the fact that it constantly undergoes change and renovation in its personnel, remains numerically the same moral body so long as it retains the same social structure and the same authority…Please note the word, ‘numerically’ the same society. A mere specific likeness would never satisfy the requirement of apostolicity. Just for the sake of argument — even though it cannot actually happen — let us conjure up some church which would bear a merely specific likeness to Christ’s Church; a church which would be like it in all respects except numerical identity. Imagine, now, that the Church planted by the apostles has perished utterly. Imagine — whether you make it the year 600, 1500, or 3000 — that all its members have deserted. Imagine, furthermore, that out of this totally crumpled society a fresh and vigorous society springs up and then, after a time, is remodeled perfectly to meet the blueprints of the ancient but now perished apostolic structure. Such a process would never yield a church that was genuinely apostolic, that is, numerically one and the same society which actually existed under the apostles’ personal rule. There would be a brand new society, studiously copied from a model long since extinct. The new church might be a decent imitation. It might be a caricature. One thing it definitely would not be is apostolic,” (“De ecclesia Christi”).
We have an obligation to study and understand these things that the Church has always taught concerning Herself, especially since it is our duty as Catholics to accept and believe all She teaches precisely as She teaches it. Msgr, Van Noort’s words are not merely his opinion; they are repeated in one way or another in every theological work on the Church written in modern times. Since Traditionalists have failed to understand the idea of apostolicity and the necessity of the papacy for the Church’s very existence, they are required to study these subjects at length to correct these false beliefs. As Peter Michaels says in This Perverse Generation, (Sheed and Ward, 1949): “Good will is not held in a vacuum and ignorance is often culpably sinful. If all Catholics have a moral duty to understand their faith at their level of secular education, few of us are going to be saved…Pope Pius XI said: ‘In our day and age, unenlightened heroism is not enough.’ How much longer are we Catholics going to pretend that if our hearts are in the right place, we can safely continue to live in an intellectual void?”
We do not live in the same world that those experiencing the Western Schism inhabited. The Catholics of that age did not have all the teachings later emanating from the Church on the possibility of a false pope reigning as a true pontiff (Pope Paul IV’s bull, Cum ex…) or St. Robert Bellarmine’s teachings on heretics, occult heretics, Church membership and an imperfect council. They were not bound by Pius II’s decree “Execrabilis,” the Church’s condemnations of Gallicanism and Freemasonry, or the infallible decrees of the Vatican Council. They did not have the very notable advantage of the 1917 Code of Canon Law and all the many excellent infallible decrees of Pope Pius IX through Pope Pius XII. As St. Luke tells us in the Gospels, “To whom much is given, much is expected.” We have the entire maturity of all the Church’s teaching for over 1900 years to guide us, especially those from the Vatican Council. We forget the warning of Pope Pius XII in 1940, who, in speaking on the papacy, ended with the following prophetic statement: “This teaching of Peter…will continue, unchanged, for all time…The Primacy of Peter will last forever… ‘Peter will live in his successors…[and] speak forever from his chair. Now here is the great warning — We have already mentioned it — which St. Peter addressed to the Christians of his own day. ‘There were also false prophets among the (chosen) people even as there shall be among you lying teachers…You, therefore, knowing these things before: take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness,” (an address to newlyweds, Jan. 17, 1940).
Further testimony on Church membership
Saints and theologians through the ages have opined on exactly who is joined to the Mystical Body and how they are joined to it. It is clear from their teaching that what Rev. Fenton presents differs little from what has been taught in the past.
“Every man validly baptized is a member of Christ’s Mystical Body, is a member of the Church. Now it may well happen that adverse external circumstances may prevent a man’s character as an incorporated member of the Church being recognized, and the absence of such recognition may involve the juridical denial of all that it involves. In the eyes of men he may appear to have broken the bond uniting him to the Church, and yet, because of the supernatural faith, and the persistent loving life of grace, whereby he seeks in all things to do the will of God, his union with the Church really continues: spiritually he remains a member of the Church, he belongs to the body of the Church. He may, all the time, through error, be giving his external adhesion to a religious society which cannot be part of the Church. But at heart, by internal and implicit allegiance, he may be a faithful member of the Church. Evidently, if the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ, then to be outside the Mystical Body is to be outside the Church, and since there is no salvation outside the Mystical Body, there is no salvation outside the Church. But, as we have seen, a man’s juridical situation is not necessarily his situation before God,” (“The Mystical Body of Christ.” Taken from The Teaching of the Catholic Church,” by Can. George D. Smith, D.D., Ph.D., Vol. II; 1959, first printing 1927.)
Rev. Stanislaus Grabowski, in his examination of St. Augustine’s idea of the Church, gives the term Mystical Body in its fullest definition, according to the teachings of the Saint. He summarizes that definition as follows:
“1. In the widest sense, as encompassing all who attain salvation…The body of Christ embraces… the just of the Old Testament [as well as those of the New], since…they were already united to Him who was to come.
“2. In a narrower sense, the Church of the future or the celestial body of Christ may be identified with His body here on earth, since the Church upon earth has as its aim the attainment of the heavenly Church.
“3. In the strictest sense, the body of Christ in the works of St. Augustine is coincident with the visible Catholics or juridical Church. It is only in the latter that the body of Christ is fully realized, according to all of the constituent elements,” (The Church, pp. 69-70.)
We may not satisfy the strictest and fullest realization of the Mystical Body, but we fall somewhere between 2 and 3 in satisfying Grabowski’s requirements. This is why, as so many Traditionalists keep repeating, the Church today is “eclipsed.”
“24. But if anyone unhappily falls and his obstinacy has not made him unworthy of the communion with the faithful, let him be received with great love…and eager charity…For as the Bishop of Hippo [St. Augustine] remarks. ‘As long as a member still forms part of the body there is no reason to despair of its cure; once it has been cut off, it can be neither cured nor healed.’”
Who is and is not a member of the Mystical Body was debated at length over the centuries. In his The Church (1957), Rev. Stanley Grabowski tells us: “With regard to heretics and schismatics, [St. Augustine] allows for cases in which individuals are outside the Church in good faith.” Mortal or “death-bringing” sins, “deprive the soul of its spiritual life…Through the commission of such sins, one is deprived of grace, of charity and the Holy Ghost…Venial sins, on the other hand, do not…kill the spiritual life of the soul, ” and this is in line with what Pope Pius XII says above. “Augustine views the habitation of the Holy Spirit in a two-fold way: first, as a personal inhabitation of each just individual; and, secondly, as a personal inhabitation of the corporate Church, composed of all individuals who form the Mystical Body of Christ…If this two-fold habitation of the Holy Ghost, viz., that of the individual and that of the mystical body is ignored, the sinful person who is without the individual indwelling of the Holy Ghost will be removed from the corporate indwelling of the Holy Ghost [and] detached from the mystical Body of Christ.”
However to lose either the individual OR the corporate indwelling singly results only in retaining a nominal attachment to the Mystical Body, but an attachment nevertheless. As Grabowski observes, “It is more advantageous to be attached to the body of Christ as a distorted or dead member than to be severed completely as heretics and schismatic’s are.” Grabowski notes that while St. Augustine hold as inculpable those who are outside the Church in good faith, “they must be somehow associated with the Holy Ghost and the Church.” But he also states that, “There is no explicit statement of St. Augustine to the effect that individuals outside the Church possess the Holy Ghost as an inhabiting Divine Person.” Treating of the same subject, St. Robert Bellarmine stresses the juridic Church as the best expression of the Mystical Body, yet both Msgr. Myers and Grabowski agree that this strong reaction to the errors of the Reformation unfairly obscured the idea of the mystical inner life of the Church and Her intimate relationship with Christ, the Head.
Concerning membership, St. Robert writes: “The body is the external profession of faith and the communion of Sacraments. From this it follows that some are of the soul and body of the Church, and consequently are united to Christ internally and externally; these belong most fully to the Church… Others are of the soul and not the body, as the catechumens or excommunicated, if they have faith and charity. Finally, some are of the body and not the soul, as he who has no internal virtue, and nevertheless they profess faith by hope or some temporal fear and communicate in Sacraments under the leader of [legitimate] pastors…” St. Bellarmine explains: “For although [Pope] Liberius was not a heretic, nevertheless he was considered one, on account of the peace he made with the Arians, and by that presumption the pontificate could rightly [merito] be taken from him: for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple [simpliciter], and condemn him as a heretic.” It is up to the Church to make the final decision, and until then we are not wrong in condemning them as heretics. Still, some may be guiltless. Unknown to us, Christ still may secretly consider them as members of His Mystical Body.
Being joined to the Church by desire
In expounding on the definitions found in the infallible encyclicals Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis, and also in the teachings of St. Robert Bellarmine, Msgr. J. C. Fenton continues to elaborate on the conditions under which one may obtain salvation according to the definition of Baptism of desire found in “Mystici Corporis” and in the authoritative letter to Rev. Leonard Feeney, Supreme Haec Sacra. He emphasizes that the teachings concerning the standing of those united to the Church by desire must be thoroughly examined and “accurately analyzed.” Because those who are united to the Church by desire must be in some way “‘within’ the Catholic Church in a status other than that of a member,” it was important to Rev. Fenton to demonstrate exactly how this is so, and to explain precisely the conditions required in order to determine if such conditions were met in certain cases. In studying this doctrine promulgated by Pope Pius XII, Msgr. Fenton begins by explaining the primary factor that determines Church membership:
“The true Church of Jesus Christ, which is His one supernatural kingdom and His Mystical Body in this world, is the religious organization which accepts [the true] Pope ….as its visible head in this world. The theologian who claims that every baptized person is in some way a member of the Church cannot be speaking seriously, if he has any understanding of the meaning of the term ‘member’ as it is used with reference to the Catholic Church. He should realize that the Mystical Body of Christ in this world is not a social unit made up of Catholics and members of heretical and schismatic groups.”
This of course excludes members of those groups who may possess Baptism of desire; Fenton simply means to distinguish from membership in that merely “pneumotological” Church condemned by Pope Pius XII and actual membership in the true Church.
Comments:
Contrary to the contentions of the Feeneyites, water Baptism alone is not the sole determination of who will be saved. Rev. Fenton explains why: the real measure of membership in the true Church is the acceptance of the Roman Pontiff. As Fenton says, “Every baptized person should be, and would be, if the unifying force of his baptismal character were not thwarted by some personal and external but not necessarily sinful act, a member of the Catholic Church.” He emphasizes that, “It is absolutely imperative for the well being of contemporary theology that the situation of [members of the Church by desire only] be accurately analyzed.” Fenton then proceeds to provide this analysis.
“(1) The divinity of His visible Church, the Roman Catholic Church, [can be verified only] by our refusal to modify the Catholic teaching and dogma to the effect that this visible society is the one and only kingdom of God on earth according to the economy of the New Testament…The outward or bodily bond of union, joining men to Our Lord and to each other in His Church, is made up of the baptismal profession of the true faith, the communion of the sacraments, and subjection to legitimate ecclesiastical pastors, and ultimately, of course, to the one Vicar of Christ on earth, the Roman Pontiff.”
Comments:
First it should be noted that here Fenton anticipates the case of those Catholics who have placed themselves outside the Church, even if only materially hence not sinfully. Then in (1), we see the how those imposters ruling for 50 years in the Novus Ordo church have stripped the Church of the Divine content of Her message and replaced it with their own secular humanist outlook. Traditionalist clerics have behaved in a similar manner by attempting to appoint themselves as the successor of the Apostles, invoking the same extraordinary mission jurisdiction claimed by the Protestants and ignoring the need for “numerical identity.” Conclavist “popes” have done the same, by either announcing that they were mystically appointed, or hoodwinking others into “appointing” them, others who lacked any ability to ever convey the prerequisites for receiving Divine jurisdiction. Rob the Church of Her Divinity and there can be no bond of unity; without lawful pastors and without a true pope there can be only a non-Catholic sect. Illicit Sacraments, and even the Sacrament of Baptism, received under the auspices of the NO or the Traditionalists, do not convey grace, so there is no bond there. Depending on the manner of its administration, baptism also received from those not possessing jurisdiction may be valid but illicit. The graces it was meant to convey cannot be “activated,” St. Augustine says, (Rev. Stanislaus Grabowski, The Church, 1957) until errors of the sect administering Baptism are renounced. Therefore we cannot comprise the Church as defined by St. Robert Bellarmine.
If there had been a true pope we would have gone to him. There was no certainly valid pope; all these men were usurpers. We went instead to what we believed were true priests and bishops. When we realized they lacked jurisdiction, which only a true pope could provide, some of us then went to or elected what we believed to be a true pope, when we became aware the Church could not exist without one. We left these men when we realized they could not be valid and/or licit either. Does this prove only material heresy? Pope Paul IV says that those leaving a false pope, no matter how long they had remained with him, would not incur any censures. And yet Pope Paul IV was speaking about one who appears to all to be a legitimately elected pope, accepted by all as such; not one who was irregularly elected. This would apply to the Vatican II antipopes. But it is not certain that those adhering to one irregularly elected would avoid these censures if they could or should have known such an election was irregular. This would need to be decided by the Church. Once the error is realized, the adhesion to a non-Catholic sect constitutes at least material heresy, since those departing recognize they have erred.
Then there are the censures incurred for belonging to false sects. Most of the laity who later became Trads started out by accepting the V2 popes. When they left the V2 popes, they did not incur censure. It was when they followed those calling themselves Traditional priests not acting under any pope that they became at least material heretics, by implicitly denying the necessity of apostolicity and the papacy, (the very things that constitute Church membership). At the very least, the more educated among the faithful should have studied the faith and realized these men could not continue the apostolic line without being in communion with and directed by a true pope. From the very definition of the Church itself, realized and understood by most Traditionalists at the time, and from the teachings laid down by the Vatican Council, it should have been abundantly clear that without a true pope these men could not function. It might have been a different story had bishops left the Church rather than sign Vatican II documents, and immediately begun some sort of effort to gather and convince their fellow bishops; or if they had possessed at least some pretension to jurisdiction. But this was not the case. They signed Vatican II documents, they had no jurisdiction and they immediately established non-Catholic sects. They therefore ipso facto expelled themselves from the true Church.
Rev. Fenton quotes St. Robert Bellarmine’s definition of the Church, adopted as the preferred definition by theologians ever since that time:
(2) “… ‘the assemblage (coetus) of men, bound together (colligatus) by the profession of the same Christian faith and by the communion of the same sacraments, under the rule of legitimate pastors, and especially of the one Vicar of Christ on earth, the Roman Pontiff.’ Certainly the Mystici Corporis Christi statement about membership in the Church is quite in line with the teaching of the De ecclesia militante. According to Pope Pius XII, four factors alone are necessary in order that a man be counted as a member of the true Church. These are (1) the reception of baptism, and thus the possession of the baptismal character, (2) the profession of the true faith, which is, of course, the faith of the Catholic Church, (3) the fact that a person has not cut himself away from the structure or the fabric of the ‘Body,’ which is, of course, the Church itself, and (4) the fact that a person has not been expelled from the membership of the Church by competent ecclesiastical authority.”
Comments:
Most Traditionalists today were baptized before Pope Pius XII’s death in 1958. Infants cannot profess the true faith, but Fenton later explains that their entrance on the baptismal register constitutes evidence that they at least possess the external bonds of union with the Church. Traditionalist sacraments are most likely invalid and at best illicit. The Sacrament of Penance is certainly invalid; hence these Sacraments convey no grace. So this condition cannot exist; no one receiving invalid/illicit sacraments receive them in the manner intended by the Church in this definition. Nor are those Traditionalist pastors conveying these sacraments lawful themselves and certainly they are not in communion with a true Roman Pontiff. The most necessary and best known doctrines of the Church — the papacy and divinely instituted orders — were ignored or severely minimized by Traditional “priests” and “bishops.” They were misrepresented to accommodate remaining faithful exiting from V2. The one thing that should have been clear to pre-V2 Catholics was the absolute necessity of the papacy. It had been abundantly clear since the Vatican Council and even long before. Yet this is the very doctrine they failed to keep. And finally, expulsion from the Church by competent ecclesiastical authority is not necessary if there is an ipso facto excommunication attached to a particular law.
As Rev. Benedict Pfaller observes, Can. 646 demands that in order for a religious to be admitted to an institute, he/she must certainly be a Catholic. This is considered a conditio sine qua non. Rev. Pfaller further observes that, “A religious who ceases to be a Catholic, who bids farewell to the Catholic Church, is rightly considered as legitimately dismissed from the religious institute…A public apostate from the Catholic faith is one who publicly renounces the Catholic Church. Thus the religious would renounce the Catholic faith in passing over to a non-Christian group such as Buddhism, Mohammedanism, some well-defined cult of paganism, Judaism, etc.; or in joining a Protestant, heretical, non-Catholic Christian sect or a schismatic church; or in joining any professedly and manifestly anti-Catholic group, such as a league of Freethinkers, or, finally, in openly denying even one article of the Catholic faith…On July 30, 1934, a response of the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code…state(d) that the declaration of fact is not necessary in order that a religious be considered as ipso facto legitimately dismissed…The religious must be considered dismissed even before the declaration of the fact takes place,” (Ipso Facto Dismissal of Religious, Catholic University of America Canon Law dissertation, 1948, Volume 34, Number 7, page 743-4, April 1934; emph. in bold is mine). Any law decided by this official Commission, according to Can. 17, and given in the form of law “has the same force as the law itself.” Can. 672 relates that a religious may return to the cloister after a three-year demonstration of amendment, unless the cloister refuses to receive him or her.
(3) “Very definitely a person would cut himself off from the structure of the ecclesiastical Body if he entered into a state of public heresy or apostasy. But that condition had already been taken care of in the naming of the second of the factors which the Mystici Corporis Christi lists as requisite for membership in the true Church. Very definitely the ‘cutting away’ mentioned in the third point of this statement might involve entrance into the state of schism.”
Comments:
As for heresy, one certainly becomes a member of the Church by receiving valid if illicit baptism (as in Protestant, NO and Traditional sects), but loses membership at least materially by remaining in an NO or Traditionalist sect after the age of 14 or once any doubt sets in. We have professed at least what we believe to be the true faith, but not under the teaching authority of the Church. We have not been formally expelled (ferendae sententiae, #3 above), but expelled juridically (ipso facto, #4 above), since excommunication for heresy is a penalty attached to the law itself and is incurred automatically. Neither material or formal heretics are members of the Church. According to Rev Adolphe Tanquerey, whose textbooks were used to instruct seminarians worldwide: “All theologians teach that publicly known heretics, that is those who belong to a heterodox sect through public profession, or those who refuse the infallible teaching of the authority of the Church, are excluded from the body of the Church, even if their heresy is only material heresy,” (Manual of Dogmatic Theology, Vol. II; translated 1959).
(4) “…a person remains a part or a member of this supernatural kingdom of God on earth as long as he retains these external bonds of unity, even if he should reject, not only charity, but even faith and hope themselves…. If he possesses some of the requisites for membership, but not all of them, then a man is not a member and should not be designated as such,”(Fenton).
Comments:
So even if it could be said that Traditionalists possessed some of the four factors Msgr. Fenton cites from Pope Pius XII for membership in the Church, it is immaterial; if they lack only one they cannot be members. There are items in the profession of faith some Traditionalists deny, and as stated above, none of the other bonds even exist. So if a person openly rejects faith, without the existence of these external bonds, there is no possibility they can belong to the Mystical Body. This totally discredits the various Traditional “bishops and priests” who claim that Bp. Thuc, and consequently themselves, could be material heretics and still claim Church membership and jurisdiction. As Can. 188 no. 4 teaches, clerics who are apostates, heretics and schismatics lose all jurisdiction and become the equivalent of laymen. This Canon does not distinguish between material heresy and formal heresy, and now we know why: they are treated the same in the law. As the rule of law reads, where the law itself does not distinguish, neither should we distinguish.
Earlier, Fenton commented in another article, “[Cardinal] Franzelin popularized the process of distinguishing between material and formal heresy in treating of conditions for membership in the Church. He thereby did a definite disservice to the cause of theology,” (“The Status of St. Robert Bellarmine’s Teaching About the Membership of occult heretics in the Catholic Church,” AER, March 1950). Elsewhere Fenton points out that such a teaching could scarcely be a matter of opinion among theologians, since it is taught by Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey, whose works were used in seminaries worldwide, as well a host of other theologians. As shown above, both material and formal heresy exclude Catholics from membership in the Church. Again we see that Fenton fully understood the seriousness of these errors in theology and their unfortunate consequences.
In the March 1950 article, he explains what he means in (4) above when he says: “…a person remains a part or a member of this supernatural kingdom of God on earth as long as he retains these external bonds of unity, even if he should reject, not only charity, but even faith and hope themselves…” Here he is referring to occult heresy, which, in the common opinion of theologians, does not exclude one from the Church. And yet in the 1950 article, Fenton writes, this would be true only if an occult heretic maintained the external bonds of unity, professing “the Christian faith, the communion or reception of the sacraments, under the direction of legitimate ecclesiastical pastors, and ultimately, under the leadership of the Roman Pontiff.” So today, not even occult heretics could be counted as members of the Church if they did not correspond with all these other conditions.
(5) “Now it must be understood that the Church militant of the New Testament, as a supernatural entity, is not to be judged by ordinary human standards. Concretely, a man may pertain to this society or in some way or other be ‘within’ it other than by membership in its ranks… Far more involved is the case of that person who is not a member of the Catholic Church, but who is ‘within’ the Church in such a way as to enjoy the life of sanctifying grace. It is absolutely imperative for the well being of contemporary theology that the situation of this individual be accurately analyzed. According to the mechanics of the English language, one who is not ‘outside of’ some physical or social entity must be said to be, in some way or other, “within” it. Hence it must be said that any non-member of the Catholic Church who has the remission of sins, which is to say the gift of sanctifying grace, or who dies in the state of grace so as to attain eternal salvation, must be or have died in some way ‘within’ the Catholic Church in a status other than that of a member… The man who has a sincere votum or desiderium, enlightened by faith and animated by charity, to enter the true Church of Jesus Christ is thus one who actually intends to work for the objective of the Church. And a man’s intention to work for the glory of God through the salvation of souls in according to God the supernatural service of acknowledgement due to Him because of His supreme excellence and our complete dependence on Him is an intention of worshipping God. It is a religious intention which is manifested to God Himself in the act of prayer.”
Comments:
Many Catholics today sincerely desire to remain within the Church, but find themselves prevented from being able to attain this membership because they have implicitly denied the papacy and apostolicity by adhering to a Traditionalist sect. Even though they believed themselves to be within the true Church, they have become at least material heretics, providing they are truly invincibly ignorant. They may be actively attempting to spread what they sincerely believe to be the faith, to alert others to the crisis in the Church. Or, having realized their errors, they may be earnestly trying to prevent others from being deceived and to undo the damage they may have done as Traditionalists or Conclavists. This expresses their desire to amend and do penance for past errors. They may not be able to be members per se, but they can do all the Church requires them to do to return to true membership whenever this becomes possible. And they need not fear that they are able to obtain salvation if they are sincere and do not return to their errors or fall into new ones.
If we consider the barque of St. Peter as an actual ship, these “non-member members” would be those who have escaped pirate ships and are clamoring to be rescued, or who have fallen off St. Peter’s barque into enemy waters and wish to be pulled once again onto its deck. The Church has sent out the lifeboats for those escaping the enemy ships, and has lowered the ladders or cast out the lifelines for the one’s who have fallen into shark infested, heretical waters. Some of these refugees have even managed to ascend to the fantail, or ledge off the back of the ship. They may be on the outside or topside of the barque itself and have not been conducted to a berth below deck, or been entered into the ship’s rosters. But their sincere desire is to be within the barque, and the Church’s sincere desire is to take them on board. If the Church clearly states that these refugees, given the proper dispositions, can be saved, then we are to believe they can be saved; we cannot doubt it. As the Holy Office authoritatively states: “This dogma must be understood in that same sense in which the Church Herself understands it. For it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church…Therefore let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after ‘Rome has spoken,’ they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith,” (Suprema Haec Sacra, 1949, Canon Law Digest, Vol. 3).
Rev. Fenton writes: “This Holy Office letter, the Suprema haec sacra [is] one of the most important doctrinal statements which appeared during the reign of the late and beloved Sovereign Pontiff. This document set forth clearly and in detail, and as the authentic teaching of the Holy See, the explanation of the dogma on the necessity of the Catholic Church for the attainment of eternal salvation which had long been presented as common teaching in the theological teaching on the Church itself. The elements of the exposition contained in the Suprema haec sacra had, of course, long since been presented to the faithful in previous authoritative statements of the Church’s magisterium,” (and as such required an irrevocable assent). So here Fenton explains that the Church affirmed the dogma concerning outside the Church there is no salvation, while at the same time explaining that this is the ORDINARY means of salvation. But in certain cases, not in any general way, including the case of invincible ignorance where an implicit desire suffices, men can be saved in an EXTRAORDINARY way without being actual members of the Church. This can be accomplished however, only in one way.
Rev. Fenton continues from this article: “The strictly doctrinal portion of the Suprema haec sacra ends with this essential teaching: “But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: ‘For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him’ (Hebrews, 11: 6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): ‘Faith is the beginning of man’s salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children,’” (DZ 801). Rev. Fenton further explains the nature of this animated charity below.
Clearly, then, Msgr. Fenton believed the Suprema Haec Sacra to be a declaration of the ordinary magisterium. And as this document itself states, no one can claim that by this letter from the Holy See Pope Pius XII was in any way prefiguring the teachings of Vatican II that all men can be saved because they have an innate inclination to believe in a divine being (whether it be God, Allah or Buddha!). These men do not believe that the God of the Catholic faith exists, and they do not possess supernatural faith. Suprema Haec Sacra reminds us that Pius XII, in Mystici Corporis, reproves those who “exclude from eternal salvation all those united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion,” (DZ 1641, 1677). Pius XII does not guarantee their salvation, either, for he reminds Catholics that those in invincible ignorance “cannot be certain of their salvation,” (Mystici Corporis). This is far from the heresies taught by the false Vatican II council and its subsequent antipopes; for this council and these men maintained that even without animated charity, all infidels and others are properly disposed to and can obtain salvation. Rev. Fenton explains below the true nature of this “desire…animated by perfect charity,” and it is not something that these infidels could routinely or easily possess.
Furthermore, as Rev. Francis J. Connell points out in the November 1950 issue of AER, (“Theological Content of Humani Generis”), this false attitude, later expressed in V2 documents is consistent with the “false irenics” condemned in Humani Generis. Pope Pius XII wrote in this encyclical: “Let them not think, by indulging in false ‘irenics’ that the dissident and erring can be happily brought back to the bosom of the Church if the whole truth found in the Church is not sincerely taught to all without corruption or diminution.” Rev. Connell comments: “To express properly the necessary means of salvation, one must state that relation to the visible Catholic Church, at least by implicit desire, is a requisite condition.” This means that in not only must the person who would be saved by baptism of desire have some vague idea of a supreme being, but that person must identify this being as the God of the true Church on earth and long to be united with this Church. But how does the Church normally determine the identity of Her members?
In yet another article, Msgr. Fenton also tells us how Catholics were determined to be true members of the Church in the 1950s. In his “The Parish Census List and Membership in the True Church,” (AER, April 1950), he states the following: “St. Robert Bellarmine [held], in effect, that an accurate parish or diocesan census…list(s) all and only the real members of the true Church within the area covered by the census…The men [and women] who could be listed in a parish census are the ones whom the world, and for that matter the Catholics themselves, must recognize as the Catholic Church, the company over which the Roman Pontiff presides.” This was the manner of determination of membership then. The names of many older Traditionalists appear as baptized infants on these lists prior to the election of Angelo Roncalli. Baptism formally enrolled them as members of the Church duly recorded in these historical lists. Just as this was a way to determine membership, and to determine we were once members, there also is a way to determine membership by desire. This will be explained below.
(6) “The men and women who have a salutary votum or desiderium of entering the Church are ‘within’ it insofar as they are working and fighting within it for the attainment of the objectives of Jesus Christ. Yet they are definitely not parts or members of this society…Thus it is apparent that the man who is not a member or a part of the Church, but who has a salvific intention or desire to enter it and to remain within it, is actually praying and working along with the Church for the objectives of Jesus Christ. In this way he is truly ‘within’ the Church. And, since the work of the Church is accomplished in the face of serious and never-ending opposition, the non-member of the Church who has a salvific intention to join it is actually fighting for Our Lord ‘within’ His company. He is actually serving God with his whole mind and his whole heart, and thus he is joined to the Church even in his status as a non-member of this society.
“Although the Church is the only social unit on earth working for the objectives of Jesus Christ, there are individuals who, through the power of God’s grace, work for that same objective without being in any way members of the Church. These are the individuals who are ‘within’ the Catholic Church by a salutary votum or desiderium. This votum or desiderium is salutary only when it is enlightened by true supernatural faith and motivated by true charity, and, obviously, only when it is impossible for the individual to be ‘within’ the Church as a member. The individuals who are ‘within’ the Church only by a salutary votum or desiderium pray and work, against fierce opposition, for the accomplishment of the purposes of the Incarnation.”
Comments:
For those who claim we are not allowed to defend the faith in these writings or to speak out publicly in its defense, here is the definitive answer. Not only is such defense of the Faith necessary to remain within the Church by desire, it is necessary to those wishing to make amends for past errors in this regard. Here also is the answer to those who insist that Catholic homealoners cannot be saved without receiving sacraments from the Traditionalists; or placing themselves under “obedience” to a “true pope” lacking apostolic succession. According to the opinions of seven notable theologians, in withdrawing from the “obedience” of these false popes, no schism is involved, provided that one has a serious reason and offers serious proofs for doing so. Vermeersch-Cruesen, Reiffenstuel, Schmalzgrueber, Ferraris, Vechiotti and Szal state: “There is no schism involved…if one refuses obedience [to a pope] inasmuch as one suspects the person of the Pope or the validity of his election…” (The Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, Rev. Ignatius J. Szal, A.B., J.C.L.). The reasons and proofs having been duly provided, the opinions of these approved theologians fulfills the provisions of Can. 20 and establishes certitude according to Church teaching.
These theologians agree that one need only suspect that the man claiming to be Pope is irregular in some way or invalidly elected (Can. 2200). The opinion of these men also constitutes the juridical certainty in way of evidence required by Dom Charles Augustine under Can. 430. What Szal presents, then, is a solidly probable opinion, one which establishes certitude, and according to the laws and teachings of the Church it may be followed at will. Consequently, no one may accuse those following their conscience in this matter of being in schism, since they are following a truly probable opinion. “If our conscience tells us that a certain line of action is the right one, and that it is incumbent upon us to carry it out, even though that line carries us straight from the Pope, if we do not do it we shall suffer damnation…The Catholic theory of conscience is that a man has a right before God to preserve that conscience inviolate,” (A Catholic Cabinet of Information, Rev. Peter C. Yorke, 1899; by various authors). It should be noted here, however, that he who follows an erroneous conscience is guilty if his ignorance is vincible, that is, if he has not used due diligence in gathering and presenting his proofs. Also it must be emphasized here that the use of conscience described by Szal is peculiar to our own times and should be used with discretion. No one may ever judge the doctrines of the Church or the Roman Pontiff, when it is clear that he has been validly and indisputably elected and accepted by the faithful. But neither can one ever choose to obey a mere man who is contradicting Catholic teaching over God.
If what Revs. Szal and Yorke state applies to the circumstances where there are rival claimants to the papacy, all the more reason it should apply to the so-called Traditionalist clergy not in communion with the Roman Pontiff. So why is it that those observing their faith at home should be belittled and painted as heretics, schismatics, lame Catholics (if Catholics at all) and “theological troublemakers” by these upstanding clerics and self-appointed leaders? They are only obeying the dictates of conscience, which must be followed under pain of mortal sin, and for this they are condemned.
Implicit and explicit desire
Other proofs on this board unquestionably demonstrate that Traditionalists must leave those groups administering illicit Sacraments sacrilegiously and Penance invalidly. These unlawful pastors have no right to command the faithful, or to interfere with dictates of conscience which command the individual to avoid their services and their ministrations. Without the reception of valid and licit sacraments from certainly lawful pastors, and most importantly, unless those pastors are in communion with a canonically elected Roman Pontiff, they cannot possess the four marks and they cannot claim membership in the Church. Can they be saved? Yes, but not as Church members; only as members by desire. They have the advantage, not always shared by others in the same dilemma, of at least having received valid baptism. They wish to gain readmittance, not actual admittance. There are steps they can take to gain practical if not actual readmission as members, so they are closer to membership than those lacking valid baptism. And many recognize the absolute need for a true head, even if they know that it is impossible without truly valid and licit hierarchy to elect one.
Some may object that this applies to those who are Protestant perhaps, or who, and believe in the true God and in Jesus Christ but have never been baptized. But this is not what Pope Pius XII teaches and Rev. Fenton considers. Both specifically mention those who have somehow forfeited membership in the Church as being outside her walls. They exclude as members those not united to the Roman Pontiff and those who do not follow legitimate pastors and participate in the same Sacraments. They describe our situation even though they could not have anticipated it precisely. This can be demonstrated syllogistically below:
1. Many Catholics today have separated themselves from the Church by at least material heresy or schism; they no longer are members. Nor can they return to the Church unless they are able to be validly and licitly abjured and absolved from their heresy or schism.
2. And yet they long to be members, (many) work for the glory of God to the best of their knowledge, they possess faith in God and pray to Him regularly.
3. Therefore they are members in desire because it is impossible to be absolved and abjured of their heresy, and they have fulfilled all the other conditions laid down by Pope Pius XII for such membership.
Now some will object that this is true even of certain Traditionalists who have never left their priests and bishops, but there is a problem here: they must long to be members and do all in their power to fulfill these conditions above for membership. It is very difficult for them to do this, just as many moral theologians explain that it is difficult for Protestants and others, if they a) already believe they are members of the Church and possess the four marks as, in the present case, many Traditionalists do; b) believe that they receive both valid and licit Sacraments from valid and licit priests and c) do not realize that in embracing Traditionalism, they thereby must reject the necessity of apostolicity and the papacy. You cannot desire to belong to something when you already believe that you are a member.
As Pope Pius XII said: “For even though by an unconscious desire and longing they have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body and the Redeemer, they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church…The Holy Ghost refuses to dwell through sanctifying grace in members wholly cut off from the Body, (Mystici Corporis). Suprema Haec Sacra also teaches that that “No one who knows that the Church has been divinely established by Christ, and nevertheless, refuses to be a subject of the Church or refuses to obey the Roman Pontiff, the vicar of Christ on earth, can be saved,” and this applies to the decrees of the Roman Pontiffs even if there is no visible head. Because so many Traditionalists are baptized and have accepted the Church as a Divine society, then, it would seem that the greater majority must profess an explicit desire to be readmitted to the Church, since an implicit desire is necessarily limited to those who either cannot know or cannot properly understand this divine truth. This is not to say that there will not be some Traditionalists who can yet have an implicit desire, but in this author’s opinion they will be in the minority. It is God alone, however, who judges the souls of men. And He alone knows who belongs to His Church by desire. Those who believe that the Church is a Divine society must decide if they wish to believe their cleric of choice or the teachings of the Church. And those wishing to claim invincible ignorance must meet certain criteria. Most important among these is the relentless search for the truth.
Criteria for invincible ignorance
Bp. Hay in his work The Sincere Christian sets down the requirements for the existence of invincible ignorance: “For one to be in invincible ignorance it is required that he be sincerely resolved to embrace the truth wherever he may find it and whatever it may cost him. For if he be not fully resolved to follow the will of God, wherever it shall appear to him, in all things necessary to salvation; if on the contrary, he be so disposed that he would rather neglect his duty and hazard his soul than correct an ill custom, or disoblige his friends, or expose himself to some temporal loss or disadvantage…Such a disposition must be highly displeasing to God and an ignorance arising from it can never excuse him before his Creator…(all emphasis in bold and quotes throughout this work is the author’s unless stated otherwise). “He must sincerely use his best endeavors to know his duty, and particularly that he recommend that matter earnestly to Almighty God, and pray for light and direction.
“For whatever desire he may pretend of knowing the truth, if he does not use the proper means for finding it, it is manifest that his ignorance is not invincible but voluntary; for ignorance is only invincible when one has a sincere desire to know the truth with a full resolution to embrace it, but either has no possible means of knowing it or, after using his best endeavors to know it, yet cannot find it.” (Nor does a formal doubt excuse, for all are expected to resolve such doubts.) “A person brought up in a false faith, which the Scripture calls sects of perdition, doctrines of devils, perverse things, lies and hypocrisy; and who has heard of the true Church of Christ, which condemns all these sects, and sees the divisions and dissensions which they constantly have among themselves, has always before his eyes the most cogent reasons to doubt of the way he is in.” And this is as true of Traditionalist sects as it is of the Protestant sects that preceded them. Notice that Bp. Hay says the only excuse for being ignorant of the truth is if it cannot be FOUND or it is impossible to LOOK for it. Neither is the case today for Traditionalists, who have access to the Internet, libraries, and Catholics books with which to educate themselves.
Although they did not intend to separate themselves from the Church, Traditionalists failed to undertake the necessary study that would have prevented them from following illicit pastors not in communion with the true Pope. In doing so they adhered to a false sect, just as Luther, Calvin and others likewise adhered. Mystici Corporis and Humani Generis were easily available as was Pope Pius IX’s teaching on the four marks. But these they passed through the filter of their “priests,” and so the true meaning of the words of these Popes were ignored. It is not surprising that brain-weary and shell-shocked Traditionalists wanted only to check their brains in with an “expert” and practice the externals of their religion after exiting the Novus Ordo. While Pope St. Pius X taught in Pascendi Dominici Gregis that it must not be said that the number of external devotions should be reduced, he also teaches that to believe the Sacraments are to be sought as the result of “inner impulses and necessities” is heretical. This describes the plea of many Traditionalists who claim they must have them because “they need the graces,” or must be permitted to receive them in order to strengthen their faith. Pope St. Pius X points out that this is contrary to the teaching of the Council of Trent which states: “If anyone says that these Sacraments are instituted solely to foster the faith, let him be anathema.” Traditionalists may not believe the Sacraments solely foster faith, but many come uncomfortably close to this heresy in practice.
What the Church says Traditionalists must do to be saved
We have seen in “Material Heresy and Schism” that once a Catholic has defected from the faith, the only way to regain membership in the true Church is to first abjure one’s heresy in the presence of the proper authorities, then obtain absolution from a priest possessing jurisdiction to hear confessions. The abjuration must be made before a valid and licit bishop and as has been noted elsewhere, such bishops cannot be located. Without absolution, canonists and theologians commonly teach, there can be no return to the Church. This constitutes the very condition Msgr. Fenton describes as the deciding factor in whether such individuals are within the Church — it must be impossible for them to be saved in any other way. Just as in Baptism by blood and desire, membership in the Church by this same desire for those outside Her pale, owing to extraordinary circumstances, is assured by the Church providing the one who desires such membership a) possesses supernatural faith and animated charity; b) desires to actually belong to the visible Church of Christ; c) adheres strictly, to the best of his ability to all that the Vicars of Christ through Pope Pius XII have taught and d) does all the Church additionally requires in such circumstances. This includes, but is not limited to:
(1) departure from and the severing of all ties with Traditionalists and other non-Catholic sects, (Can. 1325, also Can. 2248: “Absolution cannot be denied whenever the offender ceases to be obstinate, as declared in Can. 2242,” );
(2) public disavowal of heresy or schism publicly stated or publicly seen to be endorsed and the willingness to be absolved from censure by a valid and licit priest or bishop, able to so absolve, should the opportunity arise, (Can. 2248);
(3) profession of faith before two certainly Catholic witnesses, with emphasis on the particular errors held, (required by the Church under the necessity of abjuration and routinely required for acceptance into the Church from heresy and schism, as many papal documents demonstrate, this is also mentioned as necessary by Revs. Woywod-Smith under Can. 2314);
(4) fraternal correction of Traditionalist faithful, clerics and other leaders, (Canons 1935, 2223, 2259);
(5) performance of some self-assigned penance, such as recital of specified prayers, fasting, pilgrimages and other works of piety, almsgiving, or a retreat or spiritual exercises (as suggested under Canons 2312 and 2248, but these are not obligatory);
(6) complete avoidance of any groups or individuals which espouse or support such heresy or schism for at least three years — afterwards one could answer questions on faith but not pray with them or frequent their services, (Can. 672 §1);
(7) strict and irrevocable adherence to all infallible papal and conciliar decrees, and a firm and sincere assent to non-infallible decrees and those demanding obedience to Canon Law. Only by this strict adherence today, in the absence of a true pope, can Catholics visibly demonstrate that they believe in the primacy and obey its teachings, (Canons 1324, 2317).
(8) In addition, Catholic laity should do all in their power to end the crisis in the Church by whatever means are necessary, including speaking out publicly on this matter and, where allowed by Church teaching, in assuming the duties of the hierarchy. They also should actively continue to study the faith in order to determine if there is any stone left unturned that might lead to the discovery of valid and licit bishops and priests, (Pope Pius XII’s condemnation of those who cooperated in Card. Mindszenty’s arrest and imprisonment; Pius XII’s address on “The Mission of Catholic Women,” Sept. 29, 1957, The Pope Speaks).
These points are supported by the following teaching of Pope Pius XII: “According to the principles of Catholic doctrine, conversion must be the result…of an interior adherence of the soul to the truths taught by the Catholic Church. It is for this reason that the Catholic Church does not admit to Her communion adult persons who apply either for the first time or for readmission, except on condition that they be fully aware of the meaning and consequences of the step which they wish to take,” (Can. 2314, Canon Law Digest, Vol. 3, AAS 38-391). And while some might say that (8) above is simply an option or opinion, this is not what Pope Pius XII teaches concerning those who posses only Baptism of desire. In Mystici Corporis he taught: “For even though by an unconscious desire and longing they have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body and the Redeemer, they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church. Therefore, may they enter into Catholic unity…May they together run with us to the one Head.”
While a material sort of unity may be possible, this is not a possibility the Church seems to have considered. Therefore, there is much that Catholics must do to compensate for the fact that they are not fully members of the Mystical Body. We have no Sacrifice or Sacraments and lack the abundant graces these bring. But we lack them because we cannot receive them from any but valid and licit clergy in communion with a true pope. And what we lack, Pope Pius XII teaches in his Mystici Corporis, Christ as Head of the Mystical Body will supply. We may be home alone, but this “position” is not a DESTINATION for those leaving Traditional clergy; it should be merely a “holding pattern” until those maintaining this position sufficiently attain to the “animated charity” required for membership in the Church by desire. Yet how is one to know that a Catholic has a true desire to be a member, and therefore can be saved?
The exercise of animated charity
Rev. Fenton, based on comments in Mystici Corporis tells us: “The man who has a sincere votum or desiderium, enlightened by faith and animated by charity, to enter the true Church of Jesus Christ is thus one who actually intends to work for the objective of the Church…[whose] intention [is] to work for the glory of God through the salvation of souls in according to God the supernatural service of acknowledgement due to Him.” In some way then, this cooperation is necessary, not only for salvation but in order to achieve a sort of “unity by desire,” insofar as we are able to do so without a Roman Pontiff. Like those during the Western Schism, we must weep and sigh, ceaselessly seeking ways to resolve the present crisis and to understand our obligations, imploring others to help us in this effort. After first engaging in an effort to develop and increase interior devotion, Catholics should then resolve to engage in the “mutual cooperation” desired by Pope Pius XII — by diligently working in the lay apostolate and in Catholic Action, in meaningful and productive ways, to restore the Church. Msgr. Fenton takes this directly from Mystici Corporis, where Pope Pius XII states:
87. “No less far from the truth is the dangerous error of those who endeavor to deduce from the mysterious union of us all with Christ a certain unhealthy quietism. They would attribute the whole spiritual life of Christians and their progress in virtue exclusively to the action of the divine Spirit, setting aside and neglecting the collaboration which is due from us. No one of course can deny that the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ is the one source of whatever supernatural power enters into the Church and its members. For ‘the Lord will give grace and glory’ as the Psalmist says. But that men should persevere constantly in their good works, that they should advance eagerly in grace and virtue, that they should strive earnestly to reach the heights of Christian perfection and at the same time to the best of their power should stimulate others to attain the same goal, — all this the heavenly Spirit does not will to effect unless they contribute their daily share of zealous activity. ‘For divine favors are conferred not on those who sleep, but on those who watch,’ as St. Ambrose says. For if in our mortal body the members are strengthened and grow through continued exercise, much more truly can this be said of the social Body of Jesus Christ in which each individual member retains his own personal freedom, responsibility, and principles of conduct. For that reason he who said: ‘I live, now not I, but Christ liveth in me.’ did not at the same time hesitate to assert: “His (God’s) grace in men has not been void, but I have labored more abundantly than all they: yet not 1, but the grace of God within me.’”
At present then, those remaining in Trad sects — and even those staying at home who believe nothing more is required of them than to separate themselves — are engaging in a sort of semi-Quietism, if not in Quietism proper. Many became Traditionalists in the first place to remedy feelings of social and spiritual inadequacy; to appear normal and be seen to possess all those same things that others in the world today point to as necessary for a normal existence. This is not to say that they did not also believe entirely that the true Church existed in those remaining priests and bishops offering the Tridentine Mass and the true rite of the Sacraments. But they remained attached to the movement and reluctant to leave it for the previous reasons mentioned. It was the only way they understood to express opposition to the NO and to be recognized as that Church which existed at the death of Pope Pius XII. Eventually a younger generation remained in these movements for the sake of their parents and as a sort of comfort zone. They were even less aware of the need for study and of the problems surrounding apostolic succession and the lack of a true pope. In addition they lacked the outrage and horror of their parents who had seen the havoc created by Vatican II and the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae.
Without this critical background and any sense of urgency or obligation, these younger Traditionalists simply fell into a well-worn groove and enjoyed their complacency. Yet if parents point the way and even re-educate their adult children, there is hope that those things presented here can be properly explained and understood. “We must submit ourselves with childlike docility to the teachings of faith…We submit our judgment not only to the truths of faith, but to the directions of the Holy See…We must study before all else not what is pleasing but what is profitable…In order to discipline the mind we must study what is most necessary, with the desire to know and love the truth and to live by it…As St. Augustine tells us, knowledge should be put to the service of love: ‘Let knowledge be used in order to erect the structure of charity,’” (Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey, The Spiritual Life.) Animated charity requires a foundation, and St. Augustine has just identified it. The laborers who came to the vineyard all received the same pay, regardless of how long they labored for the one who hired them. We must not only pray, but watch, or study, as St. Ambrose says above. It is not how late in the day one arrives to begin this arduous task; it is the arrival and the labor itself that truly matters.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Dec 1, 2022 | New Blog
Prayer Intention for the Month of December:
“For you are bought with a great price… you are a purchased people… Offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”
Remember
First Friday and Saturday this week
+St. Eligius+
As we enter the season of Advent, we should meditate on the fact that nearly 2,000 years ago God the Father sent us the inestimable gift of His only-begotten Son on ChristMass day — Truth and love Himself. Born in a crude stable in Bethlehem illuminated by a brilliant star, this light of the world was destined to dispel the darkness of paganism, a darkness that is now engulfing us once again. Our Lord and His Blessed Mother warned us many times of this impending disaster, through various saints and holy people. Holy Scripture itself predicts a time like no other when Truth will be cast to the ground (Dan. 8:12). Those captured in the nets of the operation of error today have forsaken that precious first gift of ChristMass — Truth — to believe lies, lies that others tell them and which they tell themselves. What may prevent some of them from admitting they have erred is the great fear that they have been excommunicated for involvement in a non-Catholic sect and, in the case of Traditionalists, and are guilty of innumerable sacrileges for attending masses and receiving the sacraments from men not certainly ordained.
While no one can deny that technically we are all material heretics for our participation in these sects, those given the grace to see their errors can at least depart from them, denounce them, and spend the rest of their lives doing penance and amending any evil done. God tells us many times in both the Old and New Testaments that if we shall only return to Him and convert, He will forgive us and return to us. Although grave sacrileges may have been committed in some cases, most of those availing themselves of Thuc and Lefebvre pseudo-clergy were victims of fraud according to Can. 104 and if they leave these sects, this would work to their favor according to Canon Law. The specifics of this topic are discussed at length here: https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/begin-the-probationary-period/Below we will see why no one should believe they are ever beyond God’s forgiveness nor ever despair of His mercy. For this is the very age when the Divine mercy has been extended to the least of God’s creatures – those of us who have been deceived by these destructive sects and now keep the faith at home.
Why God has chosen us despite our many sins
In his work The Way of Divine Love, by H. Monier Vinard, S.J., chronicling the messages received from Our Lord by the victim soul Sr. Josefa Menendez, we learn something of why God may have chosen us to live in these times. Many have characterized the emphasis on the Divine mercy by certain theologians, beginning in the 19th century, as a manifestation of liberalism. Yet we believe it must now be seen through new eyes. No one could have known then that the juridic Church would be taken from us, that we would be forced to live without Christ’s Vicar all these many years. Not even the Catholics of France or Japan left without clergy in the 17th and 18th centuries experienced such a devastating loss, for at least they could be assured a true pope yet existed despite their sufferings. These teachings on Divine mercy and love were the legacy Our Lord and His Blessed Mother left us as a consolation in these times. And we are the ones the servants in the parable of the wedding feast were sent out to gather up on the highways, both good and bad, for the others were not worthy (Matt. 22).
In the introduction to Fr. Monier’s book on Sr. Josefa, we read words that echo what was just written in our two previous blogs on higher education. “His ways are not our ways nor his thoughts our thoughts. And that there may be no doubt that the communications come from Him and no other, He chooses weak instruments — humanly speaking, unfitted for the task in view — so His strength shines forth in their infirmity. He did not choose the learned and the great in the world’s eyes to found His Church; St. Paul expressly tells us otherwise. The rapid spread of Christianity could have been attributed to their talents and prestige, but He chose the poor and the ignorant and of these he made vessels of election. And that the greatness of their mission might not dazzle them and lead to vainglory, He again and again reminded them of their nothingness, their innate misery and their weakness. His gifts are only secure when bestowed on the truly humble of heart.
“His Providence has always worked in this way; His glory is manifest in man’s nothingness. ‘If I had been able to find a creature more miserable than you,’ he said to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, ‘I should have chosen her.’ And Sr. Josefa repeatedly heard the same declaration: ‘If I could have found a more wretched creature, I should have chosen her for My special love and through her reveal the longings of My heart. But I have not found one and so I have chosen you.’ Soon after we hear Him say: ‘I have selected you as one utterly useless and destitute that none may attribute to any but Myself what I say, ask and do’ … Our Lord’s aim was never to set her as an example to be imitated. He did not speak so much to her in order to draw down upon her the admiring gaze of the world. She was a voice; nothing more. She existed for the message, the message should not exist for her. Christ our Lord willed that she should be a mere nothing. He never drew her out of her littleness. In fact he continually and purposely laid stress on her nothingness and that even when He showed himself with the greatest radiance.
“To be a victim necessarily implies immolation and as a rule atonement for another. Although strictly speaking one can offer oneself as a victim to give God joy and glory by voluntary sacrifice, yet for the most part God lead souls by that path only when He intends them to act as mediators. They have to suffer and expiate for those for whom their immolation will be profitable either by drawing down graces or forgiveness on them, or by acting as a cloak to cover their sins in the face of divine justice. It stands to reason that no one will, on his own initiative, take such a role on himself. Divine consent is required before a soul dares to intervene between God and his creature. There would be no value in such an offering if God refused to hear the prayer. He himself chooses these persons and because they are free, He asks them for their voluntary cooperation.
“Those who accept put themselves at His mercy and He then makes use of them as by sovereign right. Assimilated and transformed into Christ, the victim soul expresses the sentiments of Christ Jesus to God the Father and to Christ himself. Her attitude is one of humiliation, penance and expiation, sentiments which ought to animate the souls she represents. And because of this identification with Christ, the victim soul shares in his dolorous Passion and undergoes, to a greater or lesser degree and in various but generally superhuman ways, the torments and agonies that were His. The Passion of Christ being our sole salvation, if we are to be purified and saved, we must, of necessity, come into contact with the blood shed by the Lamb. The great cry of the dying Christ is a pressing invitation to the whole human race to hasten to the Saviour’s fountains from which all graces flow.
“This contact with Christ’s blood is immediately secured by souls that answer His appeal. Others, and alas there are many, voluntarily keep aloof. It is these things that Christ will seek to reach through other souls whom He makes use of as a channel of His mercies. They are the most fruitful of all the branches of the mystic vine loaded with the sap flowing from Christ Himself and completely won with Him, by their solidarity with the sinner they stand liable for his sins; so being one with Him and one with Christ in them and by them, grace is communicated. They are victim souls.
“How intimate must be their identification with the Crucified if they are to carry out their part of the contract fully! Full union with Him is implied whilst He on His part imprints on their souls, hearts and bodies the living image of His sorrowful Passion. All His sufferings are renewed in them: they will be contradicted persecuted, humbled, scourged and crucified and what man fails to inflict that God himself will supply by mysterious pains [and] agonies, which will make of them living crucifixes. They are thus co-redeemers in the full sense of the word. Love for their neighbor urges them on; their mission is different from that of others.
“For whereas God is pleased to allow those other souls of whom He spoke to remain in contemplation of Him, giving glory to His infinite perfections, by their love it is otherwise with victim souls. When they contemplate Him, He unveils the immensity of His love for souls and the grief with which the loss of sinners fills Him. The sight of this breaks their hearts, and their longing to console Christ is not satisfied with mere words of love; it stirs up their zeal. At whatever price they will win souls to Him, and He kindles this zeal still more. It is the love of the Sacred Heart itself communicated to them with which they loved sinners, love which gives them a superhuman endurance well described by Josefa’s own words.” And yet neither Sr. Josefa, nor even St. Margaret Mary Alocoque, were the first heralds of this tender devotion to Jesus’ Sacred Heart.
St. Gertrude the Great
“The secrets of the divine heart of Jesus have been called the treasure which is reserved for latter times. But with regard to his spouse it seems our Divine Saviour could not wait the time decreed by his infinite wisdom for the revelation of his Sacred Heart to the world at large… He made [St. Gertrude] the herald of His grace and abounding devotion which not until four centuries later was given to the world. He once told St. Gertrude: ‘I wish these revelations to be for later ages; the evidence of my love to draw souls to My heart.’ It was further revealed that this Heart is an altar upon which the sacrifices of the faithful, the homage of the elect and the worship of the angels are offered and on which Jesus the Eternal High Priest offers Himself in sacrifice.” Once Saint John the Divine appeared to Saint Gertrude and she asked him if the beating of Jesus’ heart, which so rejoiced her soul, also rejoiced his when he reposed on Jesus breast during the Last Supper. Saint John replied: “Yes, I heard them and my soul was penetrated with their sweetness, even to its very center.” Saint Gertrude then asked: “Why then hast thou spoken so little in thy gospel of the loving secrets of the heart of Jesus?” Saint John replied: “My mission was to write of the eternal word. But the language of the blissful pulsations of the Sacred Heart is reserved for latter times that the time-worn world, grown cold in the love of God, may be warmed up by hearing of such mysteries.”
“Once in answer to an inquiry on the part of St. Gertrude’s the Savior replied: ‘It would be most advantageous for mankind to know and bear constantly in mind that I, the Son of the Virgin Mary, remain ever in the presence of my Heavenly Father to whom I offer Myself continually for their salvation. Whenever through human frailty they sin in their heart, I present My most pure heart to the Eternal Father in atonement. Whenever they offend Him by their evil deeds, I show Him my transpierced hands. Thus in what way soever they sin against Him, the wrath of my Eternal Father is appeased by My merit so that they will obtain a ready pardon if they will only repent of their sins. I therefore desire that my elect, whenever they obtain pardon for their sins, offer Me their gratitude for having given them so easy a means of reconciliation” (St. Gertrude the Great, Herald of Divine Love, Benedictine publication reprinted by TAN Books).
St. Margaret Mary Alacoque
“The art of becoming holy is precisely in being able to reach the ultimate goal of life by travelling the long and bitter path of suffering.” And St. Margaret Mary Alacoque knew great suffering in her life. She suffered from ill health beginning in her childhood, various internal trials and many times she was persecuted by the demons. She also suffered intensely on the Thursdays and Fridays of the week preceding the First Friday devotions she was given by Our Lord. In his very first appearance to her, Christ made it clear that he was not pleased with humanity and how He planned to punish sinners.
“Thus she recounts the first apparition of the Redeemer, who was preparing her for subsequent revelations: “As soon as I went to pray, Jesus presented Himself to me covered with sores, asking me to look at the gash on his sacred Side: a bottomless pit dug by an enormous arrow of love…. This is the abode of all those who love Him…. But since the entrance is small, in order to enter one must become small and strip oneself of everything.” Pointing at His wounds, Jesus spoke these harsh words: “Behold at what state my chosen people have reduced me to, they whom I had destined to appease justice, but instead secretly persecute me! If they do not repent, I will punish them severely. Having preserved my just ones, I will immolate all others to the fury of my wrath.” And this message was given to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in the 1600s!
St. Gemma Galgani
Our Lord told another victim soul, St. Gemma Galgani, who died in 1903: “What ingratitude and wickedness there is in the world! Sinners continue to live obstinately in their sins. My Father will bear with them no longer. The depraved have no strength to overcome their sins. The afflicted fall into confusion and despair. The fervent become tepid. The ministers of my sanctuary (and here Jesus was silent and only after some minutes continued) … I have entrusted to them the great work of continuing the Redemption … (again Jesus was silent). My Father will tolerate them no longer. He has continually given them light and strength and they instead? These whom I have always held in predilection, whom I have always regarded as the apple of my eye, continually I have received from creatures only ingratitude and every day their indifference increases… I have need of souls who will give Me consolation in the place of the many who give Me sorrow. I am in need of victims, strong victims, in order to appease the just wrath of my father… Speak of My desire to the Holy Father, tell him a great chastisement is threatening and that I have need of victims; that my Heavenly Father is exceedingly wrath… These are my words and the last warning that I shall give” (Gemma of Lucca, Benedict Williamson, 1932).
Sr. Josefa Menendez
“Obedience… binds me to all legitimate authority in which I see Thee and through whom Thou speakest to me and makes known to me Thy will. But love must go further still. I must not only obey all authority but listen to the interior voice to which I am sometimes deaf because I find it too costly to follow its behests or transmit what it tells me to transmit… No Lord,
“I will obey for love of Thee and will ask for no reasons, nor will I hesitate or complain, for it is not my will but Thine that must henceforth live in me and all I do must be for Thee…” Jesus told Josefa: “I will make it known that my work rests on nothingness and misery — such is the first link in the chain of love that I have prepared for souls from all eternity. I will use you to show that I love misery, littleness and absolute nothingness. I will reveal to souls the excess of my love and how far I will go in forgiveness and how even their faults will be used by Me with blind indulgence — yes, write — with blind indulgence. I see the very depths of souls. I see how they would please, console and glorify me… What does their helplessness matter? Cannot I supply all these deficiencies? I will show how My heart uses their very weaknesses to give life to many souls that have lost it.” And in this same work by Fr. Vinard, Our Lord also tells Sr. Josefa: “It is not sin that most grievously wounds My heart,” He said, “but what rends and lacerates it is that after sin, men do not take refuge in It once more.”
Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, before ascending to the papal throne, said of Sr. Josefa’s writings: “I have no doubt whatever that the publication of these pages filled as they are with the great love which His grace inspired in His very humble servant Maria Josefa Menendez will be agreeable to his Sacred Heart. May they efficaciously contribute to develop in many souls a confidence ever more complete and loving and the infinite mercy of this Divine Heart towards poor sinners such as we all are.” In the conclusion to Sr. Josefa’s work, Rev. Fr. Charmot, S.J., writes: “Ah! Who would not love with a measureless love Him who has so loved mankind? How could any religious of the Sacred Heart fail to engrave on her heart the great words written large in letters of fire in the message: devotion to the Sacred Heart, charity, kindness, confidence, abandonment, total gift of self, humility, compassion, reparation, the salvation of souls and the mediation of Mary.” And are not these the very sentiments expressed in the Prayer Society statement on the Home page of this site?
Fr. Demaris
We may be victim souls of a sort by default only, for it would be almost impossible for us to even approach their holiness and we cannot be certain by way of direction from our superiors that Our Lord has even called us. Frustrated by the ingratitude of men, He has withdrawn from us all earthly support in order to force us to turn our gaze on Him alone. Jesus’ aching Heart and outstretched arms beg us to recognize Him as the sole source of truth and love. We are obligated today to choose the path that we have chosen – obligated by His laws and those of the Church, obligated, most importantly, as a matter of faith and fidelity to Him and the teachings of His Vicars. One can scarcely be credited with choosing something out of the ordinary when that very thing is strictly owed and is essential as a condition of membership in the Church.
Yet no one can deny that God has left it to our free will to accept this state of affairs as His holy will and keep our faith at home, if we wish to save our souls and avoid offending Him even more. It is an all or nothing invitation, a true calling. And no one can deny that Pope Pius XII commanded us to assume the role of the hierarchy, within certain limits, in their absence; this too, is a definite calling. Who could ever dictate to us, then, the extent of our generosity or the depth of our longing for union with Christ in His Passion, a Passion we now have been invited to share with Him if we are to be members of His Mystical Body? No one can limit our protestations of love or forbid us to limit our acts of sorrow for sin and reparation for those sins. No one can shame us into cooperating in sin by following pseudo-clerics. Fr. Demaris, in his work They Have Taken Away My Lord, written two centuries ago for those deprived of priests and Sacraments in France, tells us: “
“Abraham obeyed in immolating his son, and in not immolating him, but his obedience was greater when he took the sword in his hand than when he returned it to its scabbard.
We are obedient in going to Communion, but in holding ourselves from the sacrifice we are immolating ourselves. Quenched of the thirst of justice and depriving ourselves of the Blood of the Lamb which alone can slake it, we sacrifice our own life as much as it is in us to do. The sacrifice of Abraham was for an instant, an angel stopped the knife; ours is daily, renewing itself every day, every time that we adore with submission the Hand of God that drives us away from His altars, and this sacrifice is voluntary. It is to be advantageously deprived of the Eucharist, to raise the standard of the Cross for the cause of Christ and the glory of His Church… Let not the love of the Eucharist drive us away from the Cross… I seem to hear the Savior saying to us:
“Do not be afraid to be separated from My table for the confession of My Name: it is a grace I give you, which is very rare. Repair by this humiliating deprivation that glorifies Me, all the Communions which dishonor me… Feel this grace. You can do nothing for Me and I put into your hands a means of doing what I have done for you, and to return to Me with magnificence, that which I have given you that is the greatest. I have given you My Body, and you give it back to Me, since you are separated from it in My service. You give back to the truth what you have received from My love. I could not have given you anything greater. Your gratitude matches by that, the grace I have given you — the greatness of the gift I made to you. Console yourselves if I do not call upon you to pour out your blood like the martyrs, there is Mine to make up for it. Every time that you are prevented from drinking it, I will regard it the same as if you had spilled yours; and Mine is far more precious.”
This ChristMass season, heed the words of these wise saints and holy people. Consecrate yourselves to the Sacred Heart, pining away for the love of sinners, and to Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Make reparation for your sins and those of your loved ones. Abandon your own will and unite it with God’s will for us in these times, — to be deprived of Mass and Sacraments that Scripture might be fulfilled. Pray for the virtues of humility, compassion, charity, kindness and confidence in God. And most importantly, make that gift of self to God to return to Him the love He sent us that ChristMass Day. A wonderful booklet for offering this gift was written by Fr. John Nicholas Grou S.J., who was forced to leave France for England during the French Revolution (and this can be ordered here: https://www.amazon.com/Gift-Self-John-Nicholas-Grou/dp/1930278829). Fr. Grou wrote at approximately the same time that Fr. Demaris wrote his little treatise, the late 1700s, and very likely wrote his work in response to the spiritual woes of those times.
As you kneel at the manger this ChristMass, kneel there with your heart and soul in your hands, and offer it to the Christ Child in union with the living Sacrifice He came to earth to offer for us.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Jan 17, 2022 | New Blog
+St. Peter’s Chair at Rome+
© Copyright 2022, T. Stanfill Benns (All emphasis within quotes added by the author)
Introduction
The purpose of this blog is to further clarify and address some reprehensible and dangerous teachings still circulating on the Internet, errors that have existed now for quite some time. These false teachings have been addressed in past blogs but not as specifically as they should have been. Therefore, it is my intention here to try and address them all, although this is going to be a pretty lengthy blog.
I have been quite alarmed, as I am sure you all have, at the steady progress made by the powers that be to conclude their plans for the absolute annihilation of Christianity and their final push to introduce a new world order and religion. The only way these monsters will truly conquer us is to destroy our precious faith and they are using every means available to do this. Sadly this includes employing even those who appear to be with us when they are actually against us and who stealthily spread false teaching without us even realizing it. At this time more than any other time in history, true Catholics need to unite in their prayers and hold firmly to the Deposit of Faith, yet it is being attacked in a manner that could split them apart. This can only be a work of the Devil and we must earnestly pray that such efforts be understood for the satanic attacks they truly are.
One of the primary reasons such attacks have been so successful in the past is that people have forgotten how to think properly and use their reasoning abilities in the manner taught by the Church. For this reason, it becomes easy to mislead and confuse them. I am posting here a link that is not specifically Catholic, but which does adequately explain the necessity of using logic (taught by the Church as scholastic philosophy) to avoid the traps laid by those claiming falsely to be true authorities or who are trying to lead others to accept such authorities. I encourage everyone to look through the article and follow the links it provides, especially those regarding incentive and motive — https://effectiviology.com/false-authority/
Below we will list the truths of faith which continue to be attacked both publicly and through email and phone correspondence. It is crucial that all who wish to hold fast to the truths of faith thoroughly understand the nature of these errors and denounce them, if they wish to remain Catholic and weather the frightful storm that is soon to descend upon us.
An overview of heresies at issue
The link provided above should help readers to better determine the legitimacy of those posing as authorities, but they are still going to face difficulty sorting out whether what such people are saying is actually in agreement with Catholic truth. For either they fail to produce sufficient proofs from the magisterium to support their case or they present such proofs in such a convoluted manner that the reader is overwhelmed. Often these “proofs” proceed from a series of false premises that force the reader to dive down rabbit hole after rabbit hole. It is almost impossible to test their initial assumptions without considerable prior knowledge and study, something many do not have time for and cannot always conduct on their own. This is a major problem among Traditionalists and even certain supporters of the homealone position. Those trying to assist others in better understanding their faith have an obligation to at least attempt to explain things in a way they can be understood, although given the difficulty of the subject matter such explanations often must be long and involved.
But an important distinction must be made between simply inferring that something is true when it actually cannot be proven to be true and in the outright denial of truths of faith. One is the holding of a false and illogical opinion, the other is error or heresy, depending on the classification assigned to it by the Church. The heresies to be dealt with here are the nature and constitution of the Church, which have been used most frequently to discredit those choosing to pray at home. These include: the pope’s primacy of jurisdiction over the entire Church; the necessity of canonical election for papal validity, the nature of the power of jurisdiction held by the bishops and the intent of the Church in teaching that Christ would be with Her until the consummation, the denial of Pope Pius XII’s definition in Mystici Corporis Christi that while bishops do receive their power to rule directly from our Lord, they may validly exercise it only through the Roman Pontiff, and the current role of the laity in the Church.
Before addressing these heresies, we will begin with defining terms to be used.
Definitions
Logic is known to the Catholic as the Scholastic method taught by St. Thomas Aquinas and scholastic debate ordinarily begins with definitions. “Nominal definitions are used chiefly at the beginning of a disputation to indicate what is the subject under dispute. If the word has only one definite meaning, that is to be adhered to… Real definition is an explanation not merely of the term, but the thing signified by it” (A.C. Cotter, S.J.’s ABC of Scholastic Philosophy, 1945).
Church — St. Robert Bellarmine:
“The one and true Church is the assembly of men, bound together by the profession of the same Christian faith, and by the communion of the same sacraments, under the rule of LEGITIMATE pastors, and in particular of the one Vicar of Christ on earth, the Roman Pontiff” (De Controversiis Christianae Fidei, vol. II, Naples, 1857. p. 74).
Pope Pius XII — (Mystici Corporis Christi): “Now since its Founder willed this social body of Christ to be visible, the cooperation of all its members must also be externally manifest through their profession of the same faith and their sharing the same sacred rites, through participation in the same Sacrifice, and the practical observance of the same laws. Above all, it is absolutely necessary that the Supreme Head, that is, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, be visible to the eyes of all.”
“The faithful, and more precisely the laity are stationed in the front ranks of the life of the Church, and through them the Church is the living principle of society. Consequently, they must have an ever-clearer consciousness, not only of belonging to the Church, but of BEING THE CHURCH, that is, of being the community of the faithful on earth under the guidance of their common leader, the Pope, and the bishops in communion with him. THEY ARE the Church…” (Pope Pius XII, Feb. 20, 1946, to the newly made cardinals).
(See also definition of Mystical Body)
Hierarchy
Addis and Arnold, A Catholic Dictionary: “When the hierarchy is spoken of, what is meant is the organization of ranks and orders in the Christian Church. In a wide and loose sense when the whole Catholic Church is considered as existing in the midst of heretics, schismatics and the heathen even the laity may be considered as a forming a portion of the hierarchy. With this agrees the expression of Saint Peter calling the general body of Christians in the countries to which he is sending his epistle “a kingly priesthood and a holy nation.”… there is a hierarchy of divine right consisting under the primacy of Saint Peter and his successors… of bishops, priests and deacons. There is also a hierarchy by ecclesiastical right or a hierarchy of order… There is also the hierarchy of jurisdiction which consists of the administrative and judicial authorities under the supreme pastorate of the Holy See who are charged with the maintenance of the purity of the faith and union among Christians with the conservation of discipline etc.” (Also found in the work, Cabinet of Catholic Information, 1904, under Hierarchy).
The New Catholic Dictionary — Conde B. Pallen, Ph.D., LL.D. John J. Wynne, S.J., S.T.D.
“Sacred rule or government; hence the totality of sacred ministers in the Church, of distinct and various grades, in which the lower is subordinate to and yields obedience to the higher. Since one is constituted a member of the hierarchy by ordination the sacred ministers of the ecclesiastical hierarchy are by orders and office essentially distinct from the laity. In the Church we distinguish a two-fold hierarchy, one of orders, the other of jurisdiction.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia — https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07322c.htm
Catechism of the Council of Trent — (Subhead, The Internal Priesthood, under Orders):
“All the faithful are said to be priests once they have been washed in the saving waters of baptism. Especially is this name given to the just who have the spirit of God and who by the help of divine grace had been made living members of the great high priest Jesus Christ. For enlightened by faith which is inflamed by charity, they offer up spiritual sacrifices to God on the altar of their hearts. Among such sacrifices must be reckoned every good and virtuous action done for the glory of God. Hence we read in the Apocalypse 1: 5,6: ‘Christ has washed us from our sins in His own blood and has made us a kingdom and priests to God and His Father.’ In like manner was it said by the Prince of the Apostles: ‘Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood offering up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ’ (I Peter 2:5); while the apostle exhorts us ‘to present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy pleasing unto God, your reasonable service’ (Rom. 12:1). And long before this David had said, ‘A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit a contrite and humble heart O God thou wilt not despise’ (Ps. 1:19). All this clearly regards the internal priesthood.”
They Have Taken Away My Lord — Fr. Demaris — Nothing better explains the quote above from the Trent catechism than this precious work, available at https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/?s=They+Have+Taken+Away+My+Lord
Pope Pius XII — “This initiative of the lay apostolate is perfectly justified even without a prior explicit ‘mission’ from the hierarchy… Personal initiative plays a great role in protecting the faith and Catholic life, especially in countries where contacts with the hierarchy are difficult or practically impossible. In such circumstances, the Christians upon whom this task falls must, with God’s grace, assume all their responsibilities. It is clear however that, even so, nothing can be undertaken against the explicit or implicit will of the Church or contrary in any way to the rules of faith or morals, or to ecclesiastical discipline” (The Mission of the Catholic Woman, Sept. 29, 1957).
Juridical
Relating to the administration of the law or the office or function of a judge (in Catholic terms, the pope and bishops; Websters 7th Collegiate)
Mystical Body
Pope Pius XII — (Mystici Corporis Christi: “If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ — which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church — we shall find nothing more noble, more sublime, or more divine than the expression “the Mystical Body of Christ” — an expression which springs from and is, as it were, the fair flowering of the repeated teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the Holy Fathers.”
The Mystical Christ, (Rev. John C. Gruden, S.T.L., 1938) — “Bishop Myers clarifies this difference between the Church and moral bodies in the words: ‘What makes Christ’s Mystical Body so very different from any moral body of men is the character of the union existing between Christ and the members. It is not a mere external union; it is not a mere moral union, it is a union which, as realized in Christ’s Church, is at once external and moral, but also in that primarily internal and supernatural. It is the supernatural union of the sanctified soul with Christ and with all other sanctified souls in Christ. The term Mystical Body is used to convey the idea that the Church is not merely a social organization, but an organism, a communion, a body: the living spiritual or supernatural body of Christ.
“The term mystical or mystic calls attention to the fact that in mere natural or moral bodies the relationship between the members and their head and the relationship between the members one to another is moral only or juridical, whereas the relationship between Christ and the members of the Church, members of His body, is quasi-physical and organic. The bonds that unite Christians to Christ and to one another are organic, physical, sacramental, although supernatural and invisible. The Church is not only ‘a complicated but smoothly functioning administrative machine’ it is more than that; Christians and Christ form a body of a special kind, neither physical nor moral, which lives and grows by a vital force descending from the head Jesus Christ to the members. ‘Christ the head, in His members’ says Bishop Myers ‘constitute a unique entity which is designed by a unique name: the Mystical Body of Christ.’”
Magisterium (Continual)
“This office was communicated to the Church formally by Christ when he said: “Going, therefore teach ye all nations” (Matt., 28). The Church exercises this teaching power infallibly in matters of faith and morals in virtue of the promise of divine assistance given her by Christ: “And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” (Matt., 28). This command to teach and this promise of special assistance were given to the apostles only. Therefore the actual holders of the teaching office in the Church are the Pope and the bishops as the successors of Saint Peter and the other apostles. The Pope and the bishops constitute the magisterium of the church for the ecclesia doscens, the teaching Church” (The New Catholic Dictionary — Conde B. Pallen, Ph.D., LL.D. John J. Wynne, S.J., S.T.D.)
Fallacies of logic
The numbered items below are taken from Rev. Bernard Wuellner, S. J., Summary of Scholastic Principles, 1956. They prove that the arguments advanced regarding the allegations made against this author are false and that they actually constitute the heresies mentioned above.
- Every judgment must be based on evidence. No argument or conclusion contrary to the evident facts is valid.
Comment 1: In articles posted to this website, I have frequently stated that the juridic Church has ceased to exist, composed of actual clerical bodies governing and ministering to the faithful). This statement has been styled as heretical, yet is a proven fact, acknowledged even by some Traditionalists, that the Church no longer exists as She once existed. I have always maintained that She has ceased to exist in every way Catholics once knew Her to exist, including the loss of all jurisdiction and the inability of the Church now to even provide a head for itself. The proofs I present regarding the inability of the Church to posit a papal election now are incontrovertible, resting as they do on infallible papal documents which cannot be contradicted. Consider the following undeniable facts that demonstrate the Church no longer exists juridically on this earth:
- The papal see is held by a series of usurpers and no man was elected pope to counter their reign; they reign unopposed. This has never happened before in the history of the Church.
- The usurpers confiscated and desecrated all the churches, took over all Church properties and institutions, changed all the Sacraments, abolished the Latin Mass, changed Canon Laws.
- They pretended to change infallible Church teaching and succeeded in imposing it on those who were once Catholic.
- They imposed on the faithful false ministers not possessing apostolic succession.
- They made it impossible for any of those who were truly Catholic to avail themselves of the Mass or Sacraments or any of the services and emoluments previously available to Catholics without denying the Catholic faith.
- The laws in existence prior to their usurpation and which yet remain in existence state that no one may be elected pope unless he is a) elected by cardinals who are certainly Catholic; b) who elect a qualified candidate who is certainly Catholic; c) by a 2/3 plus one majority and d) within the allotted time frame.
- The election of John 23 violated all these laws and deprived the college of cardinals of their right to vote (Can. 2391 §1)
- Pope Pius XII’s infallible election law Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis forbids anyone to change this law in any way, and if such an attempt is made it is null and void.
Given these established facts demonstrated as truths on this website for years — which have never been refuted nor can be refuted — it would be contrary to right reason to say that that the juridic Church has NOT ceased to exist. If all the Church ever was meant to be was contained in that juridic constitution, then it could be said that She has ceased to exist entirely. But we have the Church’s own teaching that She will never cease to exist and Christ’s promise that He will always be with Her until the very end. As Rev. E. Sylvester Berry writes in his The Church of Christ, “It is evident that the Apostolic Succession cannot fail in the Apostolic See so long as the Church Herself continues to exist.” And Rev. Berry, Henry Cardinal Manning, Cardinal Pie, Hilaire Belloc, St. Victorinus, St. Francis de Sales and others believe that for a time the Church WILL cease to exist, during the reign of Antichrist, but commentators do not agree on the length of his reign. Yet the Church will emerge from these trials triumphant.
And while the Church currently lacks a visible head, She is ruled by Christ from Heaven, She possesses the Deposit of Faith in all the readily available papal documents in book stores and on the Internet and She has access to nearly all the teachings of the Doctors, the Early Fathers and the saints. She is one and apostolic in Her belief in these doctrines and their origin, particularly the Primacy of the Holy See; She is holy in Her doctrines, also in keeping the faith to the best of Her ability and obedience to the laws of God and His Church; She is universal in her existence in most of the nations, scattered as She is. Therefore it can be said She is in material possession, at least, of the marks and attributes. Opponents deny the possibility of this material existence because they deny the fact that the juridic Church can cease to exist, believing it is the only true expression of Christ’s Church. For this reason they attempt to bind pray-at-home Catholics to the belief that their pseudo-bishops are true bishops, or that bishops exist “somewhere.” But while the existence of the Church as the Mystical Body is a dogma, they cannot support this claim regarding the bishops.
Comment 2: Please provide proof that the juridic Church, as She was constituted by Christ, with St. Peter and his successors visibly governing, can exist without the Roman Pontiff. Do these people expect me to believe them over the very bishop who called for the convocation of the Vatican Council defining papal infallibility and supremacy? This bishop, later named a cardinal, Henry Cardinal Manning, wrote in his The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Christ:
“St. Avitus: ‘If the Pope of the City (i.e., Rome) be called into doubt, it is no bishop, but the Episcopate at once which will be seen to waver’ (p. xi). The event may come to pass that… our Divine Lord… may deliver over His Vicar upon earth, as He delivered Himself, and that the providential support of the temporal power of the Holy See may be withdrawn when its work is done… when the whole number of those whom He hath chosen to eternal life is filled up. It may be that when that is done, and when the times of Antichrist are come, that He will give over His Vicar upon earth, and His Mystical Body at large, [for a time]”. Manning goes on to explain that even before the pope is taken away, the Church’s influence in the world would be much diminished. Then he writes, “The Son of God shall permit, for a time, the powers of evil to prevail. That He will permit it for a time stands in the book of prophecy. But the imperishable Church of God… will live on still through the fires of the times of Antichrist,” (pgs. 55-57; 139).
So do these objectors also wish to accuse Cardinal Manning of heresy? They will contradict a very learned and esteemed cardinal and Scriptural prophecy?! Is it not clear from this statement that the Church can exist in her lay members in the absence of the Roman Pontiff since Cardinal Manning tells us that not only will the POPE be taken away, but “…the Mystical Body at large,” which can be seen to mean the hierarchy as well. This agrees with all Cardinal Manning says below regarding the bishops.
In his The Pastoral Office (1883, London) Manning writes: “Bishops who are assumed by the authority of the Vicar of Christ are legitimate and true Bishops, true pastors whom the Holy Ghost has placed to rule the Church of God. This Divine order is expressed in the Preface of the Holy Mass on the Feasts of the Apostles, in which we pray that the Eternal Pastor may not forsake His flock, but keep it always, by His blessed Apostles, with a continual protection that it may be governed by the same rulers whom He had bestowed upon it as pastors and vicars of Himself” (p. 37). (And why would we pray this if it could never happen?!!!)
“Every reader already well understands that the Bishops, in howsoever great a number they may be assembled, can never form the body, or represent the Episcopal College, if they have not at their head S. Peter in his successor… The episcopal body is not headless (acefalo); but, by the institution of Jesus Christ Himself, has a head in the person of the Roman Pontiff. A body without a head is not that (body) to which Jesus Christ, gave the Episcopate full and sovereign. He conferred it on the College of the Apostles, INCLUDING SAINT PETER, who was made superior to all the Apostles. The Episcopate, which is one and indivisible, is such precisely by reason of the connection of the bishops among themselves, and of their submission to one sole Bishop, who is universal and sovereign. Therefore the full, universal, and sovereign power of governing the Church is the Episcopate, full and sovereign, which exists in the person of S. Peter and of each of his successors, and in the whole Apostolic College united to S. Peter, and in the whole body of the Bishops united to the Pope…” (p. 26-27).
In this same work, Manning quotes from the theologians:
Ballerini
“Peter and his successors possess this twofold plenitude independently of the Apostles and their successors, and can exercise this supreme office alone; but the Apostles could not, and their successors cannot, exercise their office without Peter and his successors.
“Jurisdiction as distinct from the power of Order, if it have no subject on whom to unfold itself, is barren, and lacks all use and exercise. Hence the designation and assigning of subjects, or of a region or diocese in which the episcopal right (episcopate jus, or jurisdiction) may be exercised, is necessary for actual jurisdiction: and he who assigns to Bishops their subjects and dioceses-gives also to them the use and exercise of their jurisdiction…”
Devoti, (writing under the supervision of the future Pope Pius VII):
“But if we consider the Bishops singly, as the rulers of particular Churches, they have received no jurisdiction immediately from Christ. All such jurisdiction arises immediately from the Church, which distributes dioceses, in which each Bishop singly is to exercise jurisdiction, and assigns to him certain subjects whom he is to govern. But it may even be granted and conceded that the jurisdiction, not only of the whole College of Bishops, but even of each singly, proceeds immediately from God Himself. For to the fountain we must return.
“A distinction is to be drawn between the jurisdiction itself and the act and use of it in exercise. The jurisdiction, indeed, may be derived immediately from God; but all act and use of it is from the Church, which gives the use of it (i.e. the right of using it) to each Bishop, when it assigns to him his subjects, on whom he may exercise this jurisdiction, which is itself of Divine right; but so long as it has no subjects it remains an otiose jurisdiction.”
Bolgeni
“He shows that there is an influx of the primacy of Peter in the whole Episcopate; for without him no Bishop can be elected, confirmed, or consecrated; and when consecrated, he receives from the successor of Peter the diocese and flock within which to rule the Church. In this sense it is strictly true that all comes through Peter; even the power of Order, which is given immediately by God in the Sacrament of Consecration, comes through Peter as the channel through which the consecration is given. This influx of the head in the members of the Episcopate he abundantly proves by the words of S. Optatus, S. Augustine, S. Leo, and many more.
“A body without a head is not that (body) to which Jesus Christ gave the Episcopate full and sovereign. He conferred it on the College of the Apostles, including S. Peter, who was made superior to all the other Apostles. The Episcopate, which is one and indivisible, is such precisely by reason of the connection of the bishops among themselves, and of their submission to one sole Bishop, who is universal and sovereign. Therefore the full, universal, and sovereign power of governing the Church is the Episcopate, full and sovereign, which exists in the person of S. Peter and of each of his successors, and in the whole Apostolic College united to S. Peter, and in the whole body of the bishops united to the Pope.”
Manning then adds: “I mention again, lest it should seem to be forgotten, that although these powers were given to all the Apostles, yet the supreme pastoral, office or primacy was given to Peter alone; so that even the Apostles were numbered in his flock.”
How is the above any different in content than the teaching of Pope Pius IX that without the pope there can be no Church and no Catholic society? Or the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas that “In order that the Church exist, there must be one person at the head of the whole Christian people” (Summa Contra Gentiles, Vol. IV, pg. 76). Is it not perfectly clear that Manning and Pope Pius IX were professing the same teaching, that they were well acquainted with each other and with St. Thomas? These disingenuous critics are not accusing me of heresy but those who I provide as sources for my conclusions!
The fact that they attest that such bishops must and do exist and can now constitute the Church without Her Supreme Head favors the Gallicanist heresy and also denies the infallible declaration of Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis, which reads: “Bishops must be considered as the more illustrious members of the Universal Church… Yet in exercising this office they are not altogether independent, but are subordinate to the lawful authority of the Roman Pontiff, although enjoying the ordinary power of jurisdiction which they receive directly from the same Supreme Pontiff.” Papal and conciliar decrees must be cited stating specifically that the juridic Church can be said to visibly exist in the bishops alone minus her Supreme Head.
Pope John XXII condemned the errors of the heretic Marsilius of Padua for holding that: “St. Peter received no more authority than the other Apostles, …that Christ gave no head to His Church and appointed no one as His vicar here below — all which is contrary to the Apostolic and evangelic truth. These …lying men say that all priests, be they popes, archbishops, or simple priests are possessed of equal authority and equal jurisdiction, by the institution of Christ” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Marsilius of Padua). In saying that these bishops can constitute the Church without one of them being a true pope, isn’t this implicitly stating that they are equal in power and authority to Christ’s vicar? Heresy may be either implicit or explicit, according to Can. 1325. One either believes that the Pope is necessary for the Church to exist or not.
And consider the following, also condemned as a heresy: “The apostles and faithful priests of the Lord strenuously in necessities ruled the Church unto salvation before the office of the pope was introduced; thus they would be doing even to the day of judgment were the pope utterly lacking” (DZ 655, heresy of John Hus condemned by the Council of Constance). Isn’t this uncomfortably close as well to what these critics are maintaining? And moreover, in stating that it is blasphemous or heretical, as they do, to hold that a true pope can no longer be elected, what are we to think of the clear teaching that: “Likewise, whether he believes that the Pope canonically elected who lived for a time after having expressed his own name is the successor of the blessed Peter having supreme authority in the Church of God,” (DZ 570d, in different wording but the same meaning, proposed for belief to the Armenians; as stated here, DZ 674, proposed for belief to the Wycliffe and Hussite heretics at the Council of Constance).
And in Canon 219: “the Roman pontiff legitimately elected obtains from the moment he accepts the election the full power of supreme jurisdiction by divine right.” And in Canon 147, which reads: “An ecclesiastical office cannot be validly obtained without canonical appointment. By canonical appointment is understood the conferring of any ecclesiastical office by the competent ecclesiastical authority in harmony with the sacred canons.” In an authentic interpretation of this canon, the Holy Office decreed that this is a binding precept per the Council of Trent and entered it into the Acta Apostolica Sedis. Papal elections are governed under Can. 160 in the 1917 Code. No bishops unable to be investigated and determined legitimate by the Holy See could ever be considered competent electors! Only faithful bishops consecrated under Pope Pius XII could possibly have elected a pope, and they long ago expired. So where are the PROOFS that all laws and teachings of the popes and councils on the necessity of canonical election can be contravened in our current situation?
- In doubt, facts cannot be presumed, but must be proved.
Comment: These accusers are presuming such bishops exist; they cannot and have not proven it. So where are they and what good are they, even if they do exist? According to Can. 331, bishops must be at least 30 years old at the time of their appointment. Even if Pope Pius XII approved the appointment of a number of 30-year-old bishops in 1958, which he did not, those bishops today would now be 94 years old and that was the minimum age for episcopal appointment; the average age was more likely 40 to 50 years old. We are being told we must believe that these 94 to 105-year-old bishops still exist and can, without communion with the Roman Pontiff, constitute the true Church today. We are being asked to believe this not knowing if it could be proven they are who they say they are. We are being asked to believe they would have universal jurisdiction over us which only the cardinals and a true pope possess. We are being asked to assume this even though in 2019, in the whole world, there was just one single bishop — an Archbishop Emeritus — then alive who was appointed by Pius XII. (http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/sordb2.html) and he was a Novus Ordo bishop! We are being asked to believe highly improbable facts that no one can establish to arrive at the truth. But this is logic, this is sanity, this is Catholic teaching? I think not.
So what if there are “secret” bishops ordained as infants who exist behind the Iron Curtain? We have considered just such a possibility. (See https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/uniate-extraordinary-faculties-do-not-provide-jurisdiction/, subhead A Matter of Infallible Teaching, for Cardinal Manning’s explanation of this and a consideration of the known facts). Let us jump through the hoops proposed by the Church to determine if such men could be considered true bishops. If still alive, they would be quite elderly; it was 1939 when Pope Pius XI sent bishops behind the Iron Curtain to perform these consecrations. And even then, Montini is reported to have revealed their identities to the Soviet authorities who later went in and murdered them! Would they be certainly mentally competent at such an advanced age? Can it actually be proven they are the same individuals that they claim to be? Can any documents not suspect of forgery be produced to verify their claims? We certainly could not trust anything coming from Rome! Can they prove their mission with miracles, as St. Francis de Sales requires in his Catholic Controversy?
Enough of this nonsense. Just as the situation we find ourselves in today, we would have serious doubt regarding their validity. No one but a canonically elected pope could ever decide if such men were true bishops. And following the teaching of Bd. Pope Innocent XI and the unanimous opinion of the theologians, as pointed out in the link in the above paragraph, they are doubtful bishops and would have no jurisdiction over us whatsoever. So how would they ever be considered to constitute the true Church of Christ when to be true successors of the Apostles they need to unquestionably possess both orders AND jurisdiction? (See https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/free-content/reference-links/1-what-constitutes-the-papacy/apostolic-succession-are-schismatic-clergy-and-laymen/).
As one reader phrased it: Who cares if they exist? Who would want to trust such puling, cowardly bishops who for decades have thrown the sheep Our Lord commanded them to feed and protect to the wolves?! And PUHLEASE, do not insult the saintly popes, cardinals and bishops who gave their lives for the faith by pretending that just because certain bishops did not attend Vatican 2, they can be considered true bishops. They remained SILENT in this awful betrayal of the Church, and they were our SHEPHERDS. Read Can.1325 and weep. They were commanded by the Church to elect a true pope for us even if it meant endangering their lives and they failed in their duty to lay down their lives for Christ’s sheep. Their duty to have elected is a fact based on the teaching of St. Robert Bellarmine, established long ago in my first book.
In Pope Pius XII’s definition of the Church from Mystici Corporis above, there is no mention of the bishops as part of this visibility but there is every indication that we today could still materially, at least, satisfy this description even in the absence of the hierarchy. Otherwise Christ’s promise to His Church — that He would be with Her unto the consummation — is a lie, and the prophecy that for a time we would be without a true pope — when he who withholdeth is taken out of the way — is false. So how else are we to understand the certain fulfillment of His promise except in those of us who remain? As Our Lord warned us: “I will strike the shepherd and the sheep of the flock will be dispersed” (Matt. 26:31). But we question this Divine truth, that as Cardinal Manning believes, the pope would follow the fate of his Divine Master?
Some of those who comment on Holy Scripture interpret sheep as the Apostles and by way of comparison their successors. Is not this exactly what happened when the bishops apostatized in the 1960s? Rev. Leo Haydock comments that this same passage in Zacharias (“Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand to the little ones,” Zach. 13:7) means that, “Christ takes care of his little flock, and always is one with the Father.” In the Matt. 26:31 version, he notes that “I will strike” means that Christ’s death (and in an accommodated sense, the vacancy of the Holy See) are trials and sufferings “directed by God.” He quotes from Luke 12:32 which reads: “Fear not little flock, for it has pleased your Father to give you a kingdom.” Citing St. Bede, Haydock writes on this verse: “In order to console us in our labors, he commands us to seek only the kingdom of Heaven and promises that the Father will bestow it as a reward upon us.” Why is that not enough for some people? The answer is because it does not fit their pet idea of how God’s will is to be accomplished in these times.
- No inference contrary to the evident facts is true; conjectural opinions are dangerous (and the latter is condemned in Pope Pius XII’s infallible encyclical Humani Generis).
Comment 1: All these objectors can produce is inference regarding my supposed denial that the Church as Christ constituted it yet exists and will last until the consummation. Evident facts show that this is not at all what I have written for many years on my website for those who care to read it. The inference they are asking readers to assume here is that I “teach” that the Church of Christ on earth minus its visible head — the juridic Church — has ceased to exist, and they infer I believe this is all that was ever the Church on earth. But what about the Mystical Body? What about the invisible Head who rules us from Heaven? The interior life of the Church is just as much a living reality as her physical existence, as Bishop Myer states above under definitions and Pope Pius XII taught in Mystici Corporis. And in fact it was the neglect of this interior life that resulted in the false Vatican 2 council and the Traditional movement.
I made it crystal clear in articles written long ago that the Church continues Her existence as the Mystical Body of Christ in the absence of the hierarchy (see the following 2013 articles at https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/free-content/reference-links/2-the-church/the-doctrine-of-the-mystical-body-pt-ii/, https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/free-content/reference-links/7-recent-articles/the-church-has-not-failed-and-cannot-fail/). How can these dishonest people claim that I “teach” that the Church has entirely ceased to exist when I explain it at length from papal and other approved works in these and other articles? All that I have ever done is present what the Church Herself and Her approved theologians teach. What is the purpose of going to the macabre lengths of condemning me in moronic, repeated propositions based on unprovable conjectures that bishops must yet exist, when all this has been available on my website for years? THIS is true insanity, and I might even add, in certain cases, proof of malicious intent.
In Mystici Corporis Christi, Pope Pius XII condemned “popular naturalism, which sees and wills to see in the Church nothing but a juridical and social union… Although the juridical principles, on which the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given to it by Christ and contribute to the attaining of its supernatural end, nevertheless that which lifts the Society of Christians far above the whole natural order is the Spirit of our Redeemer who penetrates and fills every part of the Church’s being and is active within it until the end of time as the source of every grace and every gift and every miraculous power.” Doesn’t that very last sentence explain precisely how Christ is to be with His Church in these times? Isn’t it exactly what is stated above in the definitions section? Traditionalists and others are so caught up in the existence of the actual physical and external properties of the Church, (which in normal times, of course, must always exist and yet exist in reality in Heaven), they cannot fathom this most necessary and exquisitely tender supernatural union. In other words, they deal Christ right out of His own Mystical Body and the supernatural life, which Pope Pius XII DEFINES as the Church in Mystici Corporis above.
They wish to deny the repeated teaching of Holy Scripture and the Holy Fathers of the Church, as defined by the Popes above?! Wake up, people — we don’t live in normal times; we live in the end times and pretending the Church can now come back and change all that with these supposed bishops is wishful thinking. We must deal with REALITY, which the theologians teach can only be attained by applying the rules of logic. “[Logic] is the collection of rules which guide the mind to think correctly in its attainment of truth… Truth, as here understood, means the attainment of knowledge; that is, conformity or agreement of our thoughts with objective reality” (Logic, Joseph B. Walsh, SJ., Fordham Univ., 1940). The truth is, we cannot know for certain how or when the Church will return. We know only that Christ will be with us to the very end and that the Church will eventually triumph. That is something called faith — belief in things unseen.
Pope Pius XII taught that the Church’s indefectibility, though visible, “…is a matter of experience… it remains, nonetheless, a mystery. For it cannot be explained naturally but only by reason of the fact, which is known to us by Divine revelation, that Christ who founded the Church is with Her through every trial to the end of the world” (Dec. 4, 1943 address to Roman Curia). So if it is a mystery, it is something we must simply believe and accept, not question. And it is not something we can know with any certainty. Christ is with us and will always be with us. How is not our concern. The commentators agree only that the Church will triumph — they are undecided regarding whether or not She will enjoy a revival following the death of Antichrist and his system or whether we may expect the consummation and Final Judgment immediately following his death. The Church has never decided this point, although Pope Pius XII taught it cannot be safely taught that the Church will reign on earth with Christ before the Final Judgment. It is taught by a good number of theologians that the triumph of the Church will be the destruction of Antichrist and his system and the renewal of the earth after the consummation, where the saints will then reign with their physical bodies.
The juridic Church as Christ constituted it is likely not coming back, not without an outright miracle anyway. The belief of many regarding this revival after Antichrist’s defeat is fueled primarily by private prophecy, and while Catholics can privately choose to believe this, they cannot beat people over the head with accusations of heresy for not believing it. If certain objectors believe that the laity in these times cannot possibly constitute what is left of the Church since clergy must also exist, they are refusing to accept reality. We did not place ourselves in this position or elevate ourselves to it; we were unlucky enough to find ourselves in it. They are the ones denying that the Church currently exists. The visible bishops they insist on and cannot produce would need to necessarily include a pope, for in order for the Church to exist as Christ’s Mystical Body on earth, as Pope Pius XII states above, “…it is absolutely necessary that the Supreme Head, that is, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, be visible to the eyes of all.”
As we also stated years ago on this website and have restated recently: Canon 1812 tells us that acts issuing from the Roman Pontiff and the Roman Curia during the exercise of their office and entered as proof in ecclesiastical courts “prove the facts asserted,” (Can. 1816), and force the judge to pronounce in favor of the party producing the document, (commentary by Revs. Woywod-Smith). “Proof to the contrary is not admitted against Letters of the Roman Pontiff bearing his signature,” (Abp. Amleto Cicognani, Canon Law, p. 626, ft. note). Documents entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis do not need to be submitted in the original or be an authenticated copy, (Can. 1819). Produce the signed papal statements that the Church can indeed exist with only bishops at Her head minus the pope and that bishops, not regularized or approved by Her, possess the jurisdiction necessary to apostolicity.
Refute the infallible papal election law of Pope Pius XII which teaches that during an interregnum, all is held in abeyance until the election of a true pope. Only the cardinals may make emergency decisions and we have none. Such decisions would have devolved on those faithful bishops consecrated under Pius XII who could have done only one thing: elect a true pope. But that did not happen, and no bishops today presenting some 64 years after the fact are able to resolve this situation without receiving a decision regarding the status of their consecrations from a true pope. The previous election law of Pope St. Pius X that Pius XII rewrote and updated in 1945 changed very little. Why? Because it reflected all the laws of the Church regarding papal elections throughout the centuries. So who is really violating the constant teaching of the Church here?
Comment 2: There also is inference involved concerning the absurd accusation that I “teach” we have only two Sacraments left to us. Again, stick to the facts. It is a proven fact that we cannot avail ourselves of five of the Sacraments today because our Church has ceased to exist juridically. I have carefully gone into all of this on my website. For two of these, Confession and Communion, we have spiritual substitutes. While ignoring the fact that I have repeatedly documented why we cannot receive the five Sacraments in question, some opponents jump to the entirely false and unsubstantiated conclusion that I have denied the existence of the other Sacraments. This is the best demonstration of their inability to reason properly so far. If I tell you that I have seven equally valuable and beautiful classic cars in my oversized garage but that I have a clear title to only two of them, and therefore cannot drive the other five because I cannot register them, does this mean that I am denying the existence of the other five or diminishing their beauty and value? Hardly. After all, someday I might be able to clear all those titles! I think this point alone sufficiently illustrates the irrational thread running through all these accusations.
- The common good demands certitude concerning the validity of acts (Cicognani).
Comment: Can we be certain such bishops exist? No, as explained above. Are we to believe it on a mere conjecture? Pope Pius XII forbids it. I have pointed this out before regarding the Siri “election.” The evident facts from papal decrees and the teachings of the Holy Office, also binding, are proofs that cannot be refuted. If such bishops are to be considered as the hierarchy, it is assumed that at some point those promoting them as the hierarchy would expect them to act as such. But they cannot so act in the absence of the Roman Pontiff; they are not able to elect a pope when their validity and competency is in question. We are facing the same situation with these fictitious bishops that we face at present, and we must behave the same: regarding anything involving eternal salvation and the validity of the sacraments we must take the safer course.
It is outrageous to follow the conclusions proposed in the fallacious reasoning advanced in this matter because it leads us to the very “heresy” I am accused of “teaching.” These so-called Catholics are asking the laity to judge the validity of these bishops and accept them as hierarchy — a usurpation of papal authority condemned in Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, by the Council of Trent and forbidden by Canon Law! So who is really promoting a lay church here? These people clearly have an agenda, they may already have these men waiting in the wings and they may even be prepared to receive orders from them. What else could account for the viciousness of these attacks and the strident denial of such a self-evident truth? For as Cardinal Manning stated above: “EVERY READER already well understands that the bishops, in howsoever great a number they may be assembled, can never form the body, or represent the Episcopal College, if they have not at their head S. Peter in his successor…”
Unless one wishes to accept the Traditionalists or the Novus Ordo as the true Church, there is no argument or conclusion that can contradict the evident facts, as stated above in no. 1: we no longer have a valid hierarchy, the Mass or the Sacraments. However you wish to look at it, the juridic Church is gone. At least one of the early Fathers, St. Victorinus, saw this and commented on Apocalypse Ch. 6:14 as follows: “And the heaven withdrew as a scroll that is rolled up.” For the heaven to be rolled away, that is, that the Church shall be taken away.” And Ch. 15:1: “And I saw another great and wonderful sign, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is completed the indignation of God.” For the wrath of God always strikes the obstinate people with seven plagues, that is, perfectly, as it is said in Leviticus; and these shall be in the last time, when the Church shall have gone out of the midst.” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0712.htm
A final note: Paul 6 as Antichrist
Finally we must address the subject of Paul 6 as Antichrist, an opinion I set forth in my first self-published work in 1990 and have taken considerable heat for ever since. But all that has been said above applies to this topic as well, only in mirror reverse. Opponents present claims they insist must be taken as fact without the required proofs and evidence. In the matter of Antichrist, they attempt to force their readers to believe those things that are only opinions of the Scripture commentators as facts that are written in stone. Granted, some of these are the opinions of the early Fathers, but by no means are they unanimous, meaning that we are not obliged to accept them as certain. Very little at all is certain regarding Antichrist as the commentators all agree. And those things that ARE certain are the very things these objectors reject out of hand. They take completely out of context what has been said on this topic and offer no alternative explanation whatsoever to refute meticulously well-documented facts and events presented on this site about the Man of Sin.
Whatever is not certain in this matter does not bind us to belief; we are free to believe or not. In fact the Scripture commentators, even St. Robert Bellarmine, leave to those living in the time of Antichrist to determine what is meant by the texts which remain obscure: Antichrist’s name, number and mark, as well as other details. (Ryan Grant’s translation of St. Bellarmine on Antichrist, p. 100). Rev. Huchede tells us in his work on Antichrist that “The events connected with the end of the world will alone remove the mystery on which the sacred text is at present enveloped… I leave what is mysterious to be explained by the event.” He even admits that regarding the explanation of these mysteries, even “the greatest theologians and some of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church have failed.” Regarding the teachings of the Fathers, Huchede tells us we may “abandon their opinion with deference,” when it fails to conform to the truth, while accepting what they teach that is not fulfilled as probable. In very little are the Fathers unanimous regarding Holy Scripture, as Pope Pius XII notes in his encyclical on Scripture studies, Divini Afflante Spiritu.
But in my preliminary evaluation, I proceeded not on the opinions of commentators, not even primarily on the Fathers, but on the predictions of the popes. These are three: Pope Paul IV, who remarkably defined the very Scripture verse on the abomination of desolation that fits Antichrist’s advent to a “T”; the long St. Michael’s prayer written by Pope Leo XIII, warning that the abomination had already appeared in the holy place and Pope St. Pius X’s 1903 announcement that he believed Antichrist was already born (Montini was six years old at the time). Then of course there is the unanimous opinion of the Fathers which must be accepted as a rule of faith (DZ 1788) — that Antichrist will cause the Holy Sacrifice to cease. How anyone can deny the fact that Paul 6 caused the Holy Sacrifice to cease is beyond me. That is probably the most telling prophetical fulfillment of all since it is an actual fact that even Traditionalists acknowledge. But these objectors are no respecters of facts. They try to make it appear that just because the Mass ceases it does not mean the hierarchy does not exist. And so they return to their endless circular arguments regarding the non-cessation of the juridical Church.
St. Robert Bellarmine writes in his work on Antichrist that, “In the times of Antichrist ALL PUBLIC OFFICES and divine sacrifices will cease on account of the vehemence of the persecution” (p.134). But we will still have the hierarchy? Once again, I think I will take the opinion of a notable Doctor over that of my opponents. Bishops without an office are not apostolic; they are bishops in name only. Those objecting to my opinion on Antichrist do so because it conflicts with their own ideas of what is to come, or what they have planned. They may not agree with my opinion on Paul 6, but I challenge anyone to be able, at this point in time, to find the conditions necessary to support the fulfillment of the prophecies today. How can the Sacrifice now cease publicly since it no longer exists? Who would be those constituting the Great Revolt (defection of the cardinals and bishops even before Paul 6 reigned)? What large body of Catholics today are left to apostatize? Who and/or what is withholding today when we are without a true pope, and everything is in ruins?
Conclusion
As stated above, it has occurred to me that all this may be a prelude to some attempt to introduce “true bishops” and satisfy the longing of many pray-at-home Catholics for a restoration of what they might be led to believe is the Church. I pray with all my heart this is not the case. We live in very dangerous and perilous times that I believe could soon culminate in the final realization of all the end times prophecies. Rather than destroy what unity exists among us, we need to huddle together to survive the horrific storm about to descend on us all if we wish to keep our faith intact. It is God’s will that at this present time the Sacrifice has ceased, and we have no hierarchy to guide us. Why are we questioning His will? Why are we not accepting all this as a penance for our sins? If and when God decides to send us a true pope and bishops we will know it and there will be no doubt they are who they say they are. Yes, in the past I have said I believed they exist somewhere, but these hopes can no longer be realized after all these years, as explained above, without an outright miracle. Please excuse me if I dismiss all these pestiferous Pharisees in favor of the prophetic words of a truly holy man, Cardinal Louis Pie of Poiters, France:
“The Church, though of course still a visible society, will be increasingly reduced to individual and domestic proportions. She who in Her young days cried out: “The place is strait: give me room wherein to dwell,” will see every inch of Her territory under attack. Surrounded on all sides, as the other centuries have made Her great, so the last will strive to crush Her. And finally the Church on earth will undergo a true defeat: “…and it was given unto him to make war with the saints and to overcome them.” (Apocalypse 13:7). The insolence of evil will be at its peak. Now, in this extremity, what will be the remaining duty of all true Christians, of all men of faith and courage?
“The answer is this: Spurred on to ever greater vigour by the apparent hopelessness of their predicament, they will redouble their ardour in prayer, their energy in works, and their courage in combat so that their every word and work cries out together:
“Oh God, Our Father, who art in Heaven, Hallowed be Thy Name, on earth as it is in Heaven,Thy Kingdom come, on earth as it is in Heaven,Thy Will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven, Sicut in coelo…et in terra!”
“And they shall still be murmuring these words as the earth is snatched from beneath their feet. And just as of old, after a comparable calamity, the Roman Senate and every rank of the state once went forth to greet the conquered consul Varro on his return and to honour him for not despairing of the Republic (“…quod de re publica non desperasset…”), so shall the celestial senate, all the choirs of angels and all the ranks of the Blessed come out to welcome the generous athletes who have continued the combat to the end, hoping against hope itself, “…contra spem in spem…” (Romans 4:17). COME, LORD JESUS!”
by T. Stanfill Benns | Jul 12, 2021 | New Blog
+St. John Gaulbert +
Many have asked if it is possible that we are spending our Purgatory here on earth, given the dire state of affairs we find ourselves in and the absence of the visible Church. St. Thomas Aquinas seems to indicate this might be possible, at least according to St. Vincent Ferrar. But when this was mentioned in a previous blog, some objected that the quote was not convincing and perhaps not even authentic, although it came from a reliable source and is supported by the writings of St. Thomas in his Summa and other works. Some readers fear that the belief we are spending our Purgatory time here will lead to laxity, so advise that such matters are better left alone. That might be the case if so many were not in near despair that they will save their souls. Hope is a precious commodity, and where it can be offered it seems only right and just that it be made available to those struggling to remain Catholic today.
But St. Thomas is not the only one who has opined on the topic of earthly Purgatory, although he is the only one who mentions it in relation to the end times. To refresh everyone’s memory about what he said, we again quote St. Vincent Ferrar who is talking about the fires of the final consummation. “Saint Thomas Aquinas speaks beautifully of this when he says that this last fire, inasmuch as it precedes the Judgment, will act as an instrument of God’s justice. It will also act like natural fire, inasmuch as, in its natural power, it will burn both wicked and good and reduce every human body to ashes. Inasmuch as it acts as an instrument of God’s justice, it will act in different ways with regard to different people. For the wicked will suffer intensely through the action of the fire, but the good in whom nothing is found which must be purged away will feel no pain from the fire, just as the three children felt nothing in the fiery furnace, although the bodies of these others will not be preserved as were those of the three children. And this will come to pass by the divine power, that without pain or suffering their bodies will be resolved into ashes.
“But the good in whom there is some stain to be purged away will feel the pain of this fire, more or less according to the merits of each. But they will be swiftly purged for three reasons. The first reason is that in them little evil is found, for they have been already in great measure purged by the preceding tribulations and persecutions. The second is that the living will voluntarily endure the pain; and suffering willingly endured in this life remits much more quickly than suffering inflicted after death. This is seen in the case of the martyrs, for if, when they came to die, anything worthy of purgation was found, it was cut away by the pruning knife of their sufferings. And the sufferings of the martyrs were short in comparison with the pains of purgatory. The third reason is that the heat of the fire gains in intensity what it loses through the shortness of the time. But in so far as the fire is active after the judgment its power only extends over the damned, since all the bodies of the just will be impassible” (Angel of the Judgment: A Life of Vincent Ferrer, by S.M.C., Ave Maria Press. Chapter 11, pgs. 102-117)
This may be true of those few left on earth when Christ comes a second time, but there are other means of avoiding Purgatory. These are outlined in a little booklet written by Fr. Paul O’Sullivan, How to Avoid Purgatory. He gives a simple method for doing so including the necessity, of course, of avoiding mortal sin and deliberate venial sin (performing an act or entertaining thoughts we know are sinful, although not mortally so); praying to always do God’s Holy Will; mortifying ourselves in small matters and undergoing trials sent with patience and resignation; asking God directly for deliverance from Purgatory every day; resigning ourselves to whatever death God may send us and praying for a holy and happy death; bearing our pains in union with the Passion of Christ; hearing Mass and frequenting the Sacraments (St. John’s Mass and our Act of Contrition, Spiritual Communion) and devotion to the Poor Souls in Purgatory. These means are repeated in the work below but are added to and amplified in a remarkable way that should bring solace to all those who are reading this post.
Perfect Contrition
In a little book entitled Purgatory Surveyed, a French Jesuit priest, Fr. Etienne Binet, writing in the 1600s, explains how those on earth might well be exempted from the fires of Purgatory through certain practices and by the circumstances in which they live. It gives greater force to the argument that the majority of Catholics are saved and can offer hope to many, particularly those in their senior years and soon facing eternity, who feel especially bereft of any consolation in these times. The first of those conditions Fr. Binet lists as applying to us today is to die with “tears in our eyes,” with a contrition so perfect that it washes away every trace of sin, although Fr. Binet admits this is a rare exception, but in these times the Act of Contrition is the only means available to us. For this reason it is of supreme importance that all have a complete understanding of how to attain it. The best work on how to achieve Perfect Contrition can be found on the Internet at https://s3.amazonaws.com/ANF/2011/PDFs/FNL112-Booklet+Final+Layout.pdf
Devotion to the Blessed Mother
Another is a tender devotion to the Blessed Mother, and it is hard to imagine a stay-at-home Catholic that is not so devoted. But it must be a constant and special devotion, offering her prayers, giving alms in her name, constructing a chapel for her, (daily reciting) and promoting devotion to her Rosary, or some other special service. It should be noted here that those who devote themselves to Our Lady of Sorrows, according to a revelation given to St. Bridget of Sweden, are promised peace in their families, consolations in their daily pains and work, answers to all prayers not opposed to the Divine Will, defense when engaging in spiritual battles throughout their lives, and finally, “I will visibly help them at the moment of their death — they will see the face of their Mother. I have obtained this grace from my Divine Son, that those who propagate this devotion to my tears and dolors will be taken directly from this earthly life to eternal happiness, since all their sins will be forgiven and my Son will be their eternal consolation and joy” (St. Bridget). The author of the book Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother (1958) also relates that according to an account found among the acts presented for the beatification of St. Vincent Palloti, “…the evil spirit once declared by the mouth of a possessed person that no one who had practiced devotion to Mary Sorrowful had yet been lost, and that the evil spirit had been commanded by God not to assail with temptations in the hour of death those who had faithfully practiced this devotion.”
A humble patience
Then there is the following, regarding those who suffer a lifetime of miseries on earth with a humble patience: “If God meant to punish His servants in Purgatory in this life, He would not punish them here in a Purgatory of miseries. His goodness is not wont to punish the same fault twice… God, to save His friends from the horrible torments of Purgatory fire, sends them a good store of crosses and afflictions in this world which are nothing so painful; and yet are highly meritorious in His sight, whereas the other are but pure sufferings. Hear St. Chrysostom: ‘The tongue that praises God in the midst of afflictions is not inferior to the tongues of martyrs, and likely they may have both the same reward. If a man praise God and give Him thanks in his sufferings, it is reputed as a kind of martyrdom; and would you have a martyr go to Purgatory…?’ The works of patience, according to St. James are perfect.” Our Lord tells us in Apoc. 3: 19-21: “Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore and do penance. Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock. If any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come into him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To him that shall overcome, I will give to sit with me in my throne: as I also have overcome and am set down with my Father in his throne.”
As Rev. Henry James Coleridge, S.J. wrote in his Prisoners of the King (1889): “The Prophet Malachias (Malachias 3:17) speaks of those who remain faithful to God in the midst of generations who turn from Him, and his words may apply to the souls of which we speak: “A book of remembrance was written before Him for them that fear the Lord, and think upon His Name. And they shall be My special possession, saith the Lord of hosts, in the day that I do judgment.” We also are reminded of the verses found in Apoc. 14: 12-13: “Here is the patience of the saints, who keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. And I heard a voice from heaven, saying to me: Write: Blessed are the dead, who die in the Lord. From henceforth now, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; for their works follow them.”
What greater trial could we have endured on this earth than the loss of the Holy Sacrifice, the Sacraments and the papacy? All else pales in comparison. We lost all opportunity to educate our children in Catholic schools, to be cared for in Catholic hospitals and other institutions, to attend retreats, to make Eucharistic holy hours, to have Masses said for our dearly departed, to participate in processions, to receive spiritual direction and to benefit from the sacramentals — and that is the short list. According to Fr. Binet it would seem contrary to God’s infinite mercy to deprive us of worshipping Him at the heavenly altar who have so often longed to worship him in Catholic churches here on earth, taken from us by the usurpers in Rome. For as Fr. Binet so aptly explains, God will not punish us twice for our faults, especially when what has happened was His express will, in order that the Scriptures be fulfilled. If we accept all of this willingly and with perfect resignation, it cannot but count for exactly such a humble patience.
Then there is also the keen sufferings of those who for many years frequented various Traditional groups, thinking they would eventually find a truly Catholic community. Instead many encountered grave disillusionment, families were split apart, dissensions among the community and its leaders were rife, abuse of various kinds took place and families commonly experienced financial reversals, even bankruptcy. And this only accounts for temporal losses. Those realizing their mistake were shamed and greatly saddened by the sacrileges committed when all along they believed they were receiving true Sacraments. The betrayal by those they believed to be valid and licit Catholic clergy was galling, particularly when it was clear that all the confessions they had made were to a layperson who could not even claim the seal of the confessional. And finally the acceptance of the fact that they would need to keep their faith in the privacy of their homes and were not even able to socialize with other Catholics hit many the hardest. All this is true deprivation, and it is hard to believe that having lacked Catholic friends and relatives on earth, they would not be able to find them in Heaven.
And this is not even taking into consideration what we have already endured and may yet be facing on the civil scale!
Devotion to the Poor Souls and the dying
Those interested in the subject know that wearing their scapular and devotion to the Poor Souls are two means that can eliminate or at least shorten their time in Purgatory. Numerous saintly testimonials exist to verify this. But this is true only if those wearing the scapular and praying for the Poor Souls are in a state of grace in the first place and able to avail themselves of these promises. There are many treatises and books on the Internet available on Purgatory. (One such site is http://www.traditionalcatholic.co/free-catholicbooks/) The work most recommended or made available by Traditionalists for many years, by a Fr. Schouppe, is the most rigorous, and gives little hope of escaping such punishment. Other works are more consoling, without softening the doctrine of Purgatory itself in any way. As Fr. Binet notes and we have mentioned in a previous blog, the saints, including St. Francis de Sales and St. Thomas Aquinas, teach that charity to the suffering souls is superior to any charity to the souls here on earth, for the Poor Souls have no one else to help them. If we may be so bold to say it, it also seems that prayers for the dying might also rank among Fr. Binet’s exemptions, since they are the neediest next to the Poor Souls. A most excellent book on this topic, Devotion to the Dying by Mother Mary Potter, can be found at http://www.catholictradition.org/Classics/holy-souls.htm (This is given only as a reference; no endorsement whatsoever is given to the site. This book also can be purchased from various vendors.)
Frequent confession and Spiritual Communion
Yet another purgatorial exemption is to communicate well and often, also mentioned by Fr. O’Sullivan. While Catholics cannot receive Our Lord physically in Holy Communion, there is reason to believe that in being deprived of the Eucharist yet supplying for it by desire, there is possibly greater merit than receiving it from the hands of a Catholic priest. (See the heading on Spiritual Communion below.) As Rev. Coleridge, S.J. wrote in his previously mentioned work, “Again, we may remember that we have the power of renewing in our own hearts as often as we like the affections and holy acts which prepare for, or accompany, or follow, the actual reception of Communion, making at any time of the day or night, and many times in each, those spiritual communions of which the Saints have been so fond. It cannot be doubted that our Lord, on His part, is always ready to crown these tender and secret acts of love with great graces, renewing and confirming in us the effects of His own Sacramental Presence.” We may communicate only once a day in actually receiving the Body of our Lord, but many times when receiving Him spiritually. And this is productive of “great graces.”! Why do those who condemn these observances not educate themselves?!
Faithful and exact obedience
A final exemption of great note listed by Fr. Binet is that of “a faithful and exact obedience” — to God first, to superiors, the laws and teachings of the Church and even the civil law. Here he gives examples of obedience to God that seemed to endanger the lives of prophets such as Elias in his fiery chariot, Moses in the bottom of the Red Sea and Daniel in the lion’s den. Then there is also Jonas in the belly of the whale, Isaac, ready to be sacrificed by his father Abraham and Susanna, waiting to be stoned. Binet writes, “It is a kind of martyrdom to die for obedience, and without question, Purgatory was not made for martyrs.” He adds that St. Thomas teaches all heroic virtues place the soul in a pure and perfect state, but that “man can give God nothing that is of more value in this miserable life than to consecrate his will and submit it not only to Him but for love of Him.” Gerard, as he lay dying in St. Bernard’s arms, cried out: “I have been carried before God’s high tribunal and have seen the power of obedience; nobody shall ever perish who is truly obedient…” Binet adds: “A soul once purged in the fire of obedience hath no need of being purged again in the fire of Purgatory.” He then says an amazing thing. He tells us that God will refuse nothing to an obedient soul —that if she asks Him to be freed from Purgatory, He will not deny her.
Surely those who have obeyed God’s laws by departing from Traditionalism or the Novus Ordo to avoid communicatio in sacris can hope to at least lay claim to some measure of obedience. And perhaps it would be possible to also cite several of these other precious exemptions above for ourselves, at least in part. Others mentioned by Fr. Binet include angelical purity, a profound humility, to die as a religious, to serve the infected, and apostolic preaching. Those who have preserved virginity or been faithful to their marriage vows; those who at least try to humble themselves, those who defend the faith by word and/or example, who care for those with the Corona virus or other contagious diseases, those who wish to live the lives of religious although they cannot — isn’t all of this worthy at least of partial fulfillment of these exemptions? Both Fr. Binet and the Jesuit priest who translated his work, Fr. Richard Thimelby, lived during the precarious days of the Reformation. Fr. Thimelby is said in the preface to Binet’s work to have been a man of extraordinary piety by his biographers, and he says in the preface to the work he translated that Fr. Binet wrote may other treatises he only wish could also be translated. Fr. Binet ends his work with the following entreaty to his readers:
“It is in your power to make your way [to Heaven] without passing through Purgatory. Believe me, it is no trifling matter but the most important business we have to do in this world, to purchase Heaven… Learn at least by these discourses to have a tender heart for the Poor Souls and to use your uttermost endeavor to go yourself directly into Heaven out of this wicked world. It is the thing I earnestly beg out of God’s infinite mercy for you, and for myself, at the instance of your good prayers. For though I must acknowledge I deserve nothing more than hell-fire, and have reason to take it for a high favour to be sent into Purgatory, to lie there as many months and years as it shall please God; yet I confess ingenuously I have no great mind to either place, but only to heaven, which I beseech God, by the merits of my dear Saviour, and by the Plenary Indulgence of His most infinite mercy, to grant to us all.”
Given all the above, it would seem impossible for one committed to avoiding hell to ever go there if he or she availed themselves of every possible help listed here by these authors. This in spite of the fact that we lack Mass and Sacraments, although we have their spiritual substitutes. Those preying on souls today have made it seem that it will be difficult to save ourselves without their ministrations, but we have from God’s mouth the promises that a contrite heart He will not despise, and obedience is better than sacrifices. Why would we spurn this precious obedience that assures our salvation to please our fellow men and appear to worship God, when in fact we are worshipping idols? The treasury of the Church is rich with the means to save our souls if we but take the time and effort to discover them and put them into practice. Pray God that we are given the graces to do so!
The following is simply a refresher course from the popular work by Bp. Demaris, who reiterates all that was said previously.
Excerpts from Bp. Demaris
For those committed to avoiding at all costs the sacrilegious and idolatrous services of those who are not true members of Christ’s Mystical body or the hierarchy, there is nothing more consoling than the words of Fr. Demaris, a French bishop writing to his flock during the time of the French Revolution (They have Taken Away My Lord). During that time bishops had sworn allegiance and been installed by the French government, and these men were subsequently condemned by Pope Pius VI as not possessing jurisdiction and therefore incapable of transmitting valid Sacraments.
“The Catholic Church and the whole episcopal body has received and respected this judgment of the Holy See…,” we find in Arturo de Montor’s Lives of the Pope under Pope Pius VII. “The Civil Constitution of the Clergy was condemned by the same dogmatic judgment of Pius VI, as containing errors against the deposit of faith… “The decisions of ancient councils were also appealed to. One of these, held in Benevento in 1087 by (Bl.) Pope Victor III, had decreed as follows: ‘The Sacraments of Penance and Communion are to be received only at the hands of a Catholic priest; if none such is to be found, it is better to remain without communion and to receive it invisibly from Our Lord.’” Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Editor James Hastings and others, Vol. IX, 1917, Charles Scribner and Sons, New York; by Georges Volet). De Montor confirms this by stating that Victor III forbade Catholics to receive penance or the Eucharist “at the hands of heretics or simoniacs.”
In a past blog piece on the Petit Eglise, this entire period of history is examined and shown to be a complete vindication of the stay-at-home position, although none will accept this fact and quibble instead that Pope Pius VI’s Charitas proclaiming the condemnation was not dogmatic. This definitely is not the case and was not the opinion of Cardinal Consalvi, who de Montor quotes as follows: “The Catholic Church and the whole episcopal body has received and respected this judgment of the Holy See… The Civil Constitution of the Clergy was condemned by the same dogmatic judgment of Pius VI, as containing errors against the deposit of faith… His Holiness observes that, as his predecessor found it impossible to yield to the request made… it is equally impossible for him to admit to his communion and invest with canonical constitution the constitutionals, who, contrary to the dogmatic decision contained in said briefs, persist in maintaining the error condemned in them, refuse to acknowledge their illegitimate character, and to adhere and submit to the judgment pronounced by the Holy See.”
We find ourselves today in much the same position as the French Catholics, although our situation is much worse because we have no true pope. (However, the French Catholics faced real persecution and death and we do not, as yet.) Therefore the reassuring words below offered by Fr. Demaris will resonate spiritually with those who have withdrawn from anything smacking of false religion. Furthermore, it should convince Catholics that their determination never to dishonor Christ by committing communicatio in sacris will be abundantly rewarded and will merit them the very graces they are accused of neglecting in absence of the true Mass and valid Sacraments. Who to believe then – Traditionalists or the teaching of Popes Pius VI and VII and a missionary bishop?! The choice seems very simple. And as also shown below, there are other reasons to believe that rather than doing a disservice to religion, and actually sinning by avoiding “Mass and Sacraments,” as many have accused us of doing, we instead are acting meritoriously. In fact it is possible that we may indeed not only be able to snatch our souls from the fires of hell but we may be able even to avoid a lengthy Purgatory, as seen above. This by simply bearing our plight without complaint and offering up our sufferings for our own sins and those of others. This is further confirmed by the consoling words of Bp. Demaris:
General comments
“You are frightened, my children, at what you see: all that you hear is frightening, but be consoled that it is the Will of God being accomplished. Your days are numbered; His Providence watches over us. Cherish those men who appear to you as savages. They are the means which Heaven uses in its plans, and like a tempestuous sea, they will not pass the prescribed line against the countering and menacing waves. The stormy turbulence of revolution that strikes right and left, and the sounds that alarm you are the threats of Herod! Let it not deter you from good works, nor change your trust, nor wither the shower of virtues that tie you to Jesus Christ. He is your model. The threats of Herod do not change the course of His Destiny.
“The disciples of Jesus Christ in their fidelity to God are faithful to their country and full of submission and respect for all lawful authority — firm in their principles with a conscience without reproach — adoring the Will of God, they must not coward-like flee persecution. When one loves the Cross, one is fearless to kiss it and even enjoy death. It is necessary for our intimate union with Jesus Christ. It could happen any instant, but it is not always so meritorious or glorious. If God does not call you to it, you shall be like those illustrious confessors, of whom St. Cyprian said, “That without dying by the executioner, they have gained the merits of martyrdom, because they were prepared for it.”
“This consoling truth can only be appreciated by the righteous, and don’t be surprised if in our own time, we see what St. Cyprian saw in his: that most of the faithful succumbed. To love God and fear Him alone, such is the lot of a small number of the elect. It is this love and this fear that makes martyrs by detaching the Faithful from the world and attaching them to God and His Holy Law. To support this love and this fear, in your hearts, watch and pray.
On the absence of the Eucharist and Confession
“It is by Faith that the Faithful are united. In probing this truth, we find that the absence of the Body does not break this unity, since it does not break the ties of Faith, but rather augments it by depriving it of all feeling… This loss deprives you of Sacraments and spiritual consolation. Your piety takes fright, since it sees itself alone. However, through your desolation, never forget that God is your Father, and if He permits your deprivation of the dispensation of the Mysteries, that doesn’t mean that He shuts off the means of His Graces and Mercies. I’m going to offer them to you as the only sources to which you can possibly go for purification. Read what I write with the same intention as I have in writing. Seek nothing but the truth, and our salvation in self-denial, in our love for God and a submission to His Holy Will… If life’s events change the position of the Faithful, the events change our obligations.
“St. Leo said that love of justice contains in itself all Apostolic Authority, and in that he has expressed the belief of the Church… If confession must precede absolution, your conduct here, precedes the graces of holiness and justice which God gives you and is confession public and continuous. “Confession is necessary,” said St. Augustine, “because it embraces the condemnation of sin.” Here, we condemn it in a manner so public and so solemnly, that it is known by all, and this condemnation, which is why we cannot go to a priest, isn’t it more meritorious than an accusation of private sin made in secret? Our example tells the Faithful that there is more evil than one thinks in doing what is being done to us. We do not confess to a priest, but we confess to the Truth, which is the most noble confession, and the most necessary in these circumstances. We do not confess our sins in secret, we confess the Truth in public.
“The Holy Eucharist had for you many joys and advantages when you were able to participate in this Sacrament of love, but now you are deprived of it for being defenders of truth and justice. Your advantages are the same, for who would have dared approach this fearsome table if Jesus Christ had not given us a precept, and if the Church, which desires that we fortify ourselves with this Bread of Life, had not invited us to eat It by the voice of its ministers, who reclothed us with a nuptial dress. All was obedience, but if we compare obedience by that which we are deprived of with that which led us there, it will be easy to judge the merit. Abraham obeyed in immolating his son, and in not immolating him, but his obedience was greater when he took the sword in his hand than when he returned it to its scabbard.
“We are obedient in going to Communion, but in holding ourselves from the sacrifice we are immolating ourselves. Quenched of the thirst of justice and depriving ourselves of the Blood of the Lamb which alone can slake it, we sacrifice our own life as much as it is in us to do. The sacrifice of Abraham was for an instant, an angel stopped the knife; ours is daily, renewing itself every day, every time that we adore with submission the Hand of God that drives us away from His altars, and this sacrifice is voluntary. It is to be advantageously deprived of the Eucharist, to raise the standard of the Cross for the cause of Christ and the glory of His Church… Let not the love of the Eucharist drive us away from the Cross.
“Observe, my children, that Jesus, after having given His Body, found no difficulty in dying for us. There is the action of a Christian in the persecutions, the Cross follows on from the Eucharist. Let not the love of the Eucharist drive us away from the Cross. It is to arise and make glorious advance in the grace of the Gospel, to go out from the Cenacle, to go to Calvary. Yes, I have no fear in saying it. When the storm of the malice of men roars against truth and justice, it is more advantageous to the Faithful to suffer for Christ than to participate in His Body by Communion. I seem to hear the Savior saying to us: “Do not be afraid to be separated from My table for the confession of My Name: it is a grace I give you, which is very rare. Repair by this humiliating deprivation that glorifies Me, all the Communions which dishonor me.
“Feel this grace. You can do nothing for Me and I put into your hands a means of doing what I have done for you, and to return to Me with magnificence, that which I have given you is the greatest. I have given you My Body, and you give it back to Me, since you are separated from it in My service. You give back to the truth what you have received from My love. I could not have given you anything greater. Your gratitude matches by that, the grace I have given you — the greatness of the gift I made to you. Console yourselves if I do not call upon you to pour out your blood like the martyrs, there is Mine to make up for it. Every time that you are prevented from drinking it, I will regard it the same as if you had spilled yours; and Mine is far more precious.” So that is how we find the Eucharist, even during the deprivation of the Eucharist. From another view, who is able to separate us from Christ and His Church in Communion in approaching its altars by faith in a much more efficacious manner since it is spiritual and further from the sense. It is what I call communicating spiritually in uniting oneself with the Faithful who are able to do it in different places on the earth.”
The cessation of the Holy Sacrifice
(Editor’s note: If we recite the Mass of St. John, or say our Mass prayers in the absence of the True Mass; if we offer our very selves on this altar of sacrifice willingly and in a spirit of resignation to God’s will each day as Pope Pius XII enjoins us in his encyclical Mediator Dei, isn’t the Sacrifice still renewed spiritually in a continual way? In his The Mystery of Faith, Vol. I, Rev. de la Taille writes concerning chapters 5-16 of Apocalypse: “It is declared plainly that in the New Jerusalem which is to succeed the Church Militant, there would be neither Temple nor light, except God and the Lamb…Under these sacrificial symbols and metaphors we have an indication of some kind of heavenly and eternal worship,” consisting of Christ’s perpetual immolation eternally offered before the Throne of God.
St. Gregory Nazianzan wrote: “What then? Will they forbid us their altars? Even so, I know of another altar, and the altars we see now are but a figure of it… All the activities ‘round about that altar are spiritual; one ascends to it by contemplation. At this altar I shall stand, upon it I will make immolations pleasing to God, sacrifices, oblations, holocausts, better than those that are offered now…” (Ibid). St. Thomas writes: “The state of the New Law is intermediate between the state of the Old Law…and the state of glory, in which all truth will be fully and perfectly manifested. Then there will be no more sacraments; but now, inasmuch as we see only through a glass darkly, we have to enter into spiritual things through sensible signs.” So either we are being offered a foretaste of life in our Eternal Home, and the Church will eventually be restored; or we are being prepared for the end of the world proper and the commencement of the life to come in a very intimate way.) We continue now with more from Bishop Demaris:
Extreme Unction
“When you look to the future and see yourself on your deathbed, without the last sacrament, without Extreme Unction and without any help on the part of the ministers of the Lord, you see yourself abandoned in the most sad and terrible way. Console yourselves, my children, in the trust you have in God. This tender Father will pour on you His graces, His blessings and His mercies, in these awful moments that you fear, in more abundance than if you were being assisted by his ministers of whom you have been deprived only because you wouldn’t abandon Him Yourself. The abandonment and forsakenness that we fear for ourselves resembles that of the Savior on the Cross when He said to His Father: “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27: 46). Ah! How constructive and consoling are these words! Your pains and abandonment lead you to your glorious destiny in ending your life like Jesus ended His.
“The number of the elect was always small… God only wants those who give themselves to Him entirely. Do not be surprised at the great number who quit. Truth wins, no matter how small the number of those who love and remain attached to Him.” (End of Bishop Demaris quotes)
The saints and Spiritual Communion
St. Alphonsus Liguori writes: “I advise everyone who desires to grow in love for Jesus to communicate in this spiritual manner at least once a day… This devotion is far more salutary than many suppose, while at the same time it is very easy of practice.”
Rev. Mueller relates in his work that St. Catherine of Siena at one point in her life was forbidden to communicate. But her desire to receive Communion was so intense that the smallest particle from the Host, being broken at the altar into three pieces by her confessor, St. Raymund Pennafort, flew from the altar to rest on St. Catherine’s tongue. Our Lord assured St. Raymund that this miracle was a reward for her intense desire to receive Him. A similar miracle occurred in the case of St. Juliana Falconieri, who was unable to communicate because of a gastrointestinal disorder. She begged the priest to lay a veil on her breast, and to place the Blessed Sacrament on it to receive Jesus in a spiritual Communion. This wish was complied with and the Sacred Host disappeared suddenly, to be found no more. Shortly afterwards, St. Juliana died with a smile on her face.
Rev. Mueller tells us: “[Our Lord] displays a similar love toward anyone who has a true desire to be united to Him. As soon as a soul ardently desires to receive Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, He comes to satisfy her desire, not as he did to St. Catherine, under the Sacramental species, but by the way of Spiritual Communion. This devotion is so full of grace and consolation that everyone should know how to practice it… Spiritual Communion, according to St. Thomas, consists in an ardent desire to receive Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament. It is performed by making an act of faith…and then an act of love, and an act of contrition for having offended Him. The soul then invites Him to come and unite Himself to her and make her entirely His own; and lastly she thanks Him as if she had really received Him sacramentally,” [and here Mueller gives the common form of Spiritual Communion].
“Our Lord Himself told St. Jane [Joanna] of the Cross that as often as she communicated spiritually, she received a grace similar to that received from her Sacramental Communions. He also appeared to St. Paula Maresca, foundress of the convent of St. Catherine of Siena at Naples, with two vessels, one of silver and one of gold, and told her that in the golden vessel He preserved her Sacramental Communions and in the silver vessel her spiritual Communions. The Fathers of the Church go so far as to say that one who has a very great desire for Communion, accompanied with great reverence and humility, may sometimes receive even more graces than another who, without these dispositions, should actually receive Our Lord in the Sacramental species; for as the Psalmist says: ‘The Lord hears the desire of the poor and fills their heart with good things.’”
Our Lord told St. Gertrude the Great the following regarding spiritual communion:
On account of an interdict, St. Gertrude the Great was unable to hear Mass. In The Life and Revelations of St. Gertrude, issued by the nuns of her Benedictine convent in Germany, it is written: “[The Saint] addressed God thus: How wilt Thou console us most kind Lord, in our present affliction? He replied: “I will increase My joys in you; for as a spouse entertains himself more familiarly with his bride in the retirement of his house than in public, so will I take My pleasure in your retreat. My love will increase in you, even as a fire which is enclosed burns with great force; and the delight which I will find in you, and the love which you will have for Me, will be like a pent-up ocean, which seems to increase by the impediments placed to its progress, until at last it breaks forth impetuously. ‘But how long will this interdict continue?’ inquired the Saint. The Lord replied: ‘The favours which I promise you will last as long as it does.’
The Perfect Act of Contrition
In his Heaven Open to Souls, Rev. Henry Semple, S. J. shows that a perfect Act of Contrition is a common act. Semple quotes St. Alphonsus Liguori, who attributes the opposite belief, that such an act is not common, to the Jansenists. St. Alphonsus teaches that “the opposite teaching…that Contrition with remiss charity does not justify outside the Sacrament [of Penance] is altogether unsupported by any reason, and is false…It is at variance with all theologians and the common sentiments of the Fathers…It most openly contradicts many testimonies of Scripture and Councils and Holy Fathers,” (“Moral Theology,” Book 6, Treatise 4, n. 442 of St. Alphonsus). Rev. Raymond Kearney writes: “The Sacraments are the usual, not the exclusive channels of grace…Penitents frequently make acts of Perfect Contrition…These facts go to show that while the Church does not always supply jurisdiction as lavishly as some writers would desire, she is ever the Pia Mater Ecclesia,” (“Principles of Delegation,” 1929). In the book Semple references below, Rev. von Den Driesch writes:
“… There is no one who, if he sincerely wishes it, cannot, with the grace of God, make an act of Perfect Contrition. Sorrow is in the will, not in the senses or feelings. All that is needed is that we repent because we love God above everything else; that is all. True it is that perfect contrition has its degrees, but it is nonetheless perfect because it does not reach the intensity and the sublimity of the sorrow of St. Peter, of St. Mary Magdalene, or of St. Aloysius Gonzaga. Such a degree is desirable, but it is by no means necessary. A lesser degree, but, provided it proceeds from the love of God, and not through fear of His punishments is quite sufficient…Often, very often, without even thinking of it, you have Perfect Contrition for your sins. For example, when you hear Mass devoutly or make the Stations of the Cross properly; when you reflect before your crucifix or an image of the Sacred Heart. What is more, every time you say the ‘Our Father’, in the first three petitions you make three acts of perfect charity, each of which is sufficient to cancel every sin from your soul.”
These words are from saintly men and women and must be taken above anything taught by so-called Novus Ordo or Traditionalist clerics. For this was the true Catholic Church, the works of approved authors, not the mewlings of the hirelings we are currently offered. Honor that Church, study its wealth of teachings, listen to the words of the Roman Pontiffs, and pray that God have mercy on the souls of all who are in error today.
