Thursday, October 13, 2016

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.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him.

This is said by way of anticipation, lest Nicodemus should object, “If thou art the Son of God, how will God suffer Thee to be suspended and exalted upon the cross?”

Christ meets this by implying that God will permit it in order to show forth His burning love to men, which was typified by the serpent of brass, which is called in Hebrew saraph, which means fiery, and setting on fire. So S. Chrysostom and Theophylact.


Observe that every word of Christ in this sentence has a great and special emphasis, in order to magnify to the utmost the love of God. For (i.) He says, So, with such vehemence, such excess of love. 2. Not a king, or an angel, loved, but God. 3. Loved, i e., first and as it were gratuitously; without merit, yea, even without desire on our part. 4. The world, His enemy, and under the sentence of damnation. 5. Gave not another man, not a. angel, not another world, but His Son; and that not an adopted Son, but His own Son; and again not one Son of many, but His only Son, His Only Begotten Son. 6. He did not sell, or lend, but gave freely; and not to a kingdom and triumphs, but to death and the Cross. 7. Christ did not do it for Himself, to gain any advantage for Himself, but that He, the Creator, might give life to us His creatures by His own death, that by His humility He might exalt us, that by His emptying Himself He might heap upon us eternal glory, and an infinite weight of wealth and goodness. This is the love of God towards man, which the Apostle celebrates (Titus iii. 5).


You may say, it would have been greater love if God the Father had given Himself for us, and taken our flesh, than that He sent His Son. For he gives more who gives himself than he who sends another.


But I reply that this is true of those who are of a different essence, but not of God: for the Father and the Son have the same Divine Essence, and are consubstantial. Wherefore the Father, in giving us His Son, with Him gave us His own Essence, than which nothing greater can exist, or be given. This gift of the Father was therefore the greatest possible, and infinite. So S. Cyril on this passage.

You may further urge, God gave not His own Person, but His Essence only: and that He would have given more if He had given His Person also. I answer by denying the conclusion. 1. Because Person is God is in reality the same as Essence; for it adds nothing to His Essence except relatively, and the idea of distinction from the other Persons: also because the Person of the Son is as worthy a the Person of the Father. For all the three Divine Persons are co-equal in all things, as the Athanasian Creed saith. Besides, the Father in giving the Person of His Son, gave us also His own Person, as well as the Person of the Holy Ghost. Because the Father is in the Son, and both are in the Holy Ghost. And again the Son is in the Father, and the Holy Ghost in the Father and the Son, of which I will speak more fully on chapter xiv. 10.

Moreover S. Thomas (3 part, qu. 3) gives several reasons why God the Father gave not proximately His own Person, but the Person of His Son; or why the Son alone took upon Him our flesh. Among which the primary is, because the Father willed to adopt us and our nature, and to make us His sons, and so heirs. For He made His Son to be our brother, that by Him we might become sons of God, and so heirs, as Christ here intimates.


Ver. 17.—For God sent not, &c. He confirms and intensifies the assertion of the infinite love of God to men, as proved by Christ’s being crucified. For God might justly have sent His Son into the world to destroy it for its great wickedness. For this was what His justice demanded, but the infinite love of God overcame justice in that it bestowed the highest blessing upon the world, which deserved the utmost extremity of punishment, in giving it salvation through Him.


Observe: the expression judge the world, as it is in the Vulgate, means to condemn, and destroy it in hell. It is opposed to the word saved. Hence S. Augustine observes that this was the end of Christ’s Incarnation, that all men might be saved, and that He earnestly desired and willed this. Wherefore it is of themselves, through their own fault, and not Christ’s, that many of them will be damned.


1 Cor. 1
30 But of him you are in Christ Jesus, who is made to us wisdom from God, *and justice, and sanctification, and redemption:

31 That, as it is written: *He that glorieth, may glory in the Lord.

This righteousness, say our modern innovators, is imputed, because it is ours, not substantially and inherently, but is merely the external righteousness of Christ imputed to us; before God we seem righteous. But I reply: If this be true, then in the same way the active redemption wrought by Christ, which S. Paul here joins with righteousness, will be imputed to us, and consequently we shell be redeemers of ourselves, which is absurd. In the second place, wisdom is infused into us, and so is faith, and so therefore is righteousness; for the Apostle classes together the righteousness and wisdom of Christ as both alike ours. I say, then, with Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm, Ambrose, and S. Thomas, that the sense of this passage is this: Christ is made unto us the author and cause of real Christian wisdom, redemption, sanctification, and righteousness.

1. By way of satisfaction and meritoriously; and this is what the Apostle specially has in his mind here: because Christ paid man’s debt with the most precious price of His own Blood, and so made sanctification for man, and merited for us righteousness, wisdom, and sanctification. In this way He was made for us righteousness, because the righteousness, i.e., the satisfaction of Christ, is ours, just as much as if we had ourselves made satisfaction to God. And hence it is that theologians teach that the satisfaction of Christ is applied to us in justification through the Sacraments, as if naturally first, and that then as a natural consequence our sins are forgiven through that satisfaction, and grace is infused. This condemns the error of Peter Abélard, in which he is followed by the Socinians, who teach that Christ was the teacher of the world, not its redeemer—nay more, that He was sent by the Father to give to man an example of perfect virtue, but not to free him from sin or to redeem him. S. Bernard refutes this in Ep. 190, to Pope Innocent, where he says: “Christ is the end of the law to every one that believeth. In short, S. Paul says that He was made to us righteousness by God the Father. Is not then that righteousness mine which was made for me? If my guilt is brought against me, why am I not given the benefit of my righteousness? And indeed what is given me is safer than what is innate. For this has whereof it may glory, but not before God. But the former, since it is effectual to salvation, has no ground of glorying, except in the Lord. ‘For if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up my head,’ says Job, lest the answer come, ‘What hast thou that thou didst not receive? But if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hast not received it?’ This is the righteousness of man in the blood of his Redeemer, which Abélard, that man of perdition, scoffs and sneers at, and so tries to empty of its force, that he holds and argues that all that the Lord of Glory did in emptying Himself . . . in suffering indignities . . . is to be reduced to this, that it was all done that He might by His life and teaching give to man a rule of life, and by His suffering and death set up a goal of charity.” Abélard’s argument was fallacious and frivolous: the devil, he said, had no right over man; therefore man needed no liberator. The premiss is doubtless true when understood of lawful right, but not of usurped right, under which man through sin by his own free will had submitted himself to the power of the devil, of sin, and of hell.


2. By way of example; because the righteousness of Christ is the most perfect example, to which all our righteousness ought to be conformed. In this sense S. Paul’s meaning is, Christ is an example and mirror of righteousness.


3. Efficiently; because Christ effects and produces this righteousness in us through His Sacraments, and because He teaches the Saints true wisdom and understanding; as, e.g., how to live a good and Christian life, by what road to attain to heaven, and how we must strive after bliss.


4. As our end; because Christ Himself and His glory are the end of our righteousness and sanctification. S. Bernard, in his 22nd Sermon on the Canticles, deals with these four, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, redemption, symbolically. In the first place, he adapts them to the four works of Christ. He says, “Christ was made for us wisdom in His preaching, righteousness in the forgiveness of our sins, sanctification in the life that He spent with sinners, redemption in the sufferings that He bore for sinners.” And again further on he says, “Christ was made for us by God wisdom by teaching prudence, righteousness by forgiving our trespasses, sanctification by the example He set of temperance and of chaste life, redemption by the example He left of patience and of fortitude in dying. Where, I ask, is true wisdom, except in the teaching of Christ? Whence comes true righteousness but from the mercy of Christ? Where is there true temperance but in the life of Christ? Where true fortitude save in the Passion of Christ?” 


In the second place, S. Bernard naturally adapts these four to the four virtues, prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude, which Christ imparts to us. He goes in to say: “Only those, then, who have been imbued with His doctrine are to be called prudent; only those, who by His mercy have obtained forgiveness of their sins, are to be called righteous; only those are to be called temperate who strive to imitate His life; only those are to be called brave who bravely bear adversity and show patience like His. In vain surely does any one strive to acquire virtues, if he thinks that they are to be obtained from any other source but the Lord of virtues, whose teaching is the school of prudence, whose mercy the working of righteousness, whose life the mirror of temperance, whose death the pattern of fortitude.” 


Ver. 31.—That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. He is quoting not the words but the sense of Jeremiah ix. 23. So Ambrose, Theophylact, Anselm, St, Thomas. In Jeremiah the passage runs: “Thus saith the Lord, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches, but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth Me.” This it is to glory in the Lord. Jeremiah is speaking of liberation from the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and from the slaughter of the Chaldeans, which were then threatening the Jews. In other words, then, he says: The Jews glory in counsels of their wise men, in the strength of their soldiers, in the riches of Jerusalem, as though these would make them secure against the Chaldeans; but they err, for their true glory is to know and understand God, that is, His Providence, an that it is He alone who worketh mercy, and mercifully sets free whom He will, and not the wisdom, might, or riches of man. 


Moreover, He alone inflicts just punishment on whom He will, and no wise, mighty, or rich man can set free from this—even as, O Jews, He will inflict it on you, and will bring it to pass, that death (that is, the Chaldeans, shall bring death upon you) shall climb up into your houses, though your windows, and slay all your little ones.

The Apostles rightly adapts this passage to those who were calling others, or who had been called to Christianity, that no one may attribute the grace of Christ to himself, his virtues, or the gifts of nature, but only to Christ, and consequently his tacit exhortation is: “Do not, O Corinthians, glory in yourselves, or in Paul, or in Apollos, your teachers, but in the Lord alone.” For this is what in the beginning he proposed to prove, and therefore all that is here said must be referred to it. Anselm says: “That man glories in the Lord only who knows that it is not of himself, but of Him, not only that he is, but also that it is well with him.” Again that glories in the Lord who, if he has anything which makes him pleasing to God, holds that he has received it, not because of his own wisdom, power, good works, talent, or merits, but merely through the grace of God. Thirdly, he who in all that he does seeks not his own glory, but that of the Lord.

S. Bernard wrote a noteworthy sermon on these words of the Apostle; see also Sermon 25 on Canticles. He says: “Moreover, the whole glorying of the Saints is within and not without, that is, not in the flower of grass, or the mouth of the vulgar, but in the Lord; for God alone is the sole judge of their conscience, Him alone they desire to please, and to please Him is their only real and chief glory.” And Sermon 13 on Canticles: “Brothers, let none of you desire to be praised in this life. For whatever favour you gain for yourselves here which you do not refer to Him, you steal from Him. For whence, thou dust that perishest, whence comes thy glory?” And in his Sentences: “The Apostles knew that glory properly belongs to the Creator, and not to the creature. But he also knew that the rational creature so seeks after glory that it can scarcely or perhaps never overcome this desire, just because it was made in the image of the Creator. Therefore he gave the most wholesome advice when he said: ‘Since you cannot be persuaded not to glory, let him that glorieth glory in the Lord.’” Let us, too, say in company with the Psalmist, “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy name give the praise,” and with the four and twenty elders who cast their crowns before the throne, “Blessing and honour and glory and power be unto Him that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb for ever and ever” (Rev. v. 13).

+++++++++++++++++++


Text from Douay and commentary, of course, from Cornelius a Lapide.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Ol' Mick has gone far off the path Our Triune God has lovingly prepared for him and he has busied his own self with captious controversies and has applied his very limited intellectual ability to matters of grave and great concern- such as, Is Pope Franciscus the Pope?


Ol' Mick says, yes, he is the Pope. Period. Ol' Mick apologies to all that he has repeatedly said otherwise in here and at other blogs/sites.


Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa.


Ol' Mick is supposed to be concerned with Salvation and Sanctification and even though he has always known the answer to every single problem in the One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church is for each member to maintain order in his own bailiwick and become a Saint, Ol' Mick long ago left the path of perfection prepared for him by Our Loving Saviour and he fell into the chaos where he has been flummoxed and floundering, angry, combative, sarcastic, churlish, rebarbative, and caustic.

Is that the way to Sanctification?  It is the way Ol' Mick has chosen up until the very last few days when Jesus sent the Holy Ghost upon Ol' Mick to lift him out of the sewer and to place him on the right path.


Will Ol' Mick stay on it?  He will try but it is highly unlikely because I specialise in failure.







Dies Irae/Day of Wrath

   DIES irae, dies illa,
   solvet saeculum in favilla,
   teste David cum Sibylla.

   Day of wrath and doom impending,
   David’s word with Sibyl’s blending,
   Heaven and earth in ashes ending.

   Quantus tremor est futurus,
   quando iudex est venturus,
   cuncta stricte discussurus!

   O what fear man’s bosom rendeth,
   When from heaven the Judge descendeth,
   On whose sentence all dependeth.

   Tuba mirum spargens sonum
   per sepulcra regionum,
   coget omnes ante thronum.

   Wondrous sound the trumpet flingeth,
   Through earth’s sepulchers it ringeth,
   All before the throne it bringeth.

   Mors stupebit et natura,
   cum resurget creatura,
   iudicanti responsura.

   Death is struck, and nature quaking,
   All creation is awaking,
   To its Judge an answer making.

   Liber scriptus proferetur,
   in quo totum continetur,
   unde mundus iudicetur.

   Lo, the book exactly worded,
   Wherein all hath been recorded,
   Thence shall judgment be awarded.

   Iudex ergo cum sedebit,
   quidquid latet apparebit:
   nil inultum remanebit.

   When the Judge His seat attaineth,
   And each hidden deed arraigneth,
   Nothing unavenged remaineth.

   Quid sum miser tunc dicturus?
   quem patronum rogaturus?
   cum vix iustus sit securus.

   What shall I, frail man, be pleading?
   Who for me be interceding
   When the just are mercy needing?

   Rex tremendae maiestatis,
   qui salvandos salvas gratis,
   salva me, fons pietatis.

   King of majesty tremendous,
   Who dost free salvation send us,
   Fount of pity, then befriend us.

   Recordare Iesu pie,
   quod sum causa tuae viae:
   ne me perdas illa die.

   Think, kind Jesus, my salvation
   Caused Thy wondrous Incarnation,
   Leave me not to reprobation.
   
   Quarens me, sedisti lassus:
   redemisti crucem passus:
   tantus labor non sit cassus.

   Faint and weary Thou hast sought me,
   On the Cross of suffering bought me,
   Shall such grace be vainly brought me?

   Iuste iudex ultionis,
   donum fac remissionis,
   ante diem rationis.

   Righteous Judge, for sin’s pollution
   Grant Thy gift of absolution,
   Ere that day of retribution.

   Ingemisco, tamquam reus:
   culpa rubet vultus meus:
   supplicanti parce Deus.

   Guilty now I pour my moaning,
   All my shame with anguish owning,
   Spare, O God, Thy suppliant groaning.

   Qui Mariam absolvisti,
   et latronem exaudisti,
   mihi quoque spem dedisti.

   Through the sinful woman shriven,
   Through the dying thief forgiven,
   Thou to me a hope hast given.

   Preces meae non sunt dignae:
   sed tu bonus fac benigne,
   ne perenni cremer igne.

   Worthless are my prayers and sighing,
   Yet, good Lord, in grace complying,
   Rescue me from fires undying.

   Inter oves locum praesta,
   et ab haedis me sequestra,
   statuens in parte dextera.

   With Thy sheep a place provide me,
   From the goats afar divide me,
   To Thy right hand do Thou guide me.

   Confutatis maledictis,
   flammis acribus addictis.
   voca me cum benedictis.

   When the wicked are confounded,
   Doomed to flames of woe unbounded,
   Call me with Thy Saints surrounded.

   Oro supplex et acclinis,
   cor contritum quasi cinis:
   gere curam mei finis.

   Low I kneel with heart’s submission,
   See, like ashes, my contrition,
   Help me in my last condition.

   Lacrimosa dies illa,
   qua resurget ex favilla.
   iudicandus homo reus:
   huic ergo parce Deus.

   Ah! That day of tears and mourning,
   From the dust of earth returning,
   Man for judgment must prepare him,
   Spare, O God, in mercy spare him.

   Pie Iesu Domine,
   dona eis requiem. Amen.

   Lord, all-pitying, Jesus blest,
   Grant them Thine eternal rest.  Amen.



Tuesday, October 11, 2016

There is only one Holocaust and it has nothing to do with World War Two




The Holocaust was the Pluperfect Salvific Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary in which His burning love substituted for the material fire of the Old Testament holocausts, all of which sacrifices were instituted to prepare the once chosen people to accept the Messias as their Saviour.

But the majority of Messias-Deniers, then and now, rejected/reject Jesus as the Messias and one of the consequences of that denial is their once true religion has devolved into anthropomorphic racial supremacism to such an extent that they have substituted their own sufferings in place of the Salvific Sacrifice of Jesus Christ and, to add spiritual insult to material injury, the One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church has aided and abetted this superstitious supersessionism with the sad result that if the reader were to ask any of his Catholic friends - "What is the holocaust?" - 99.999% of them would respond with the answer guaranteed to please the Messias-Deniers while the 0.001% of Catholics answering correctly - "The Holocaust was the pluperfect Salvific Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary and it is also the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass" - would be looked upon as atavistic anti semites.

Let's leave aside the Church's politically inspired prudential choice in this matter and focus on the Messias-Deniers and their captious claim.

Let's do something a little different here when it comes to opposing the Messias-Deniers and their supersessionism of the One True Holocaust. Let's accept that their claims of what happened to them, and them alone, during the second world war can be called a holocaust and let's base our response to that claim upon italicised excerpts from "The Sacrifice of the Mass" by Rev. Herbert Lucas, S.J. 

http://tinyurl.com/h63udnn

If the Messias-Deniers are correct that the world war two war crimes committed against them - and them alone - was a holocaust then that idea has these inescapable and insane consequences that they must accept:

...the idea which lies at the root of all sacrifice is that of an offering, of an offering which affords a means of access to God, of an offering which is in some sense vicarious, as symbolical of the self-oblation of the offerer 

If the sufferings of the Jews was a holocaust; then the Nazis were sacrificing Jews as a means to access God and their sacrifice was the Jews self-oblation.

 It might be a simple—albeit most solemn—acknowledgment of the supreme dominion of God ; and this would seem to have been the true inward significance of the holocaust or whole-burnt offering. Or it might be in the nature of a thank-offering or peace offering, terms which sufficiently explain themselves. Or again it might have for its specific purpose the removal of an obstacle in the form of a sin or trespass, which impeded the approach of the offender to God ; in which case the sacrifice would be in the strict sense propitiatory.

If the sufferings of the Jews was a holocaust, then The Nazis were killing the Jews as a peace offering to God or they were killing Jews as a way to have their sins forgiven and all of the Jews they killed were killed as an act of propitiation.

Morbidly Insane, but this is what the Messias-Deniers are insisting upon, so, let's continue:

That in the holocaust or whole-bumt offering the entire victim was consumed by fire on the altar is sufficiently indicated by the terms employed in the Septuagint and in the Vulgate and English versions, Catholic and Anglican. It is less clearly implied in the original Hebrew word Wan, which means a " sending-up " or "causing to ascend.

If the sufferings of the Jews was a holocaust, The Nazis were sacrificing the Jews on an altar. 

Now in a sentence which has been embodied in one of the prayers in the Roman Missal (the Secreta of the Seventh Sunday after Pentecost), St. Leo tells us that in His one sacrifice Our Lord has united and consummated the ancient rites with all their diversities. And indeed it is easy to see that His offering of Himself was a holocaust by reason of its completeness ; a propitiatory offering for sin by reason of its atoning efficacy and purpose, and finally a peace-offering whereby the atonement was not only made but sealed by a sacrificial meal. 

Ok, stay with me for this insanity is about to go galactic in its profound and monumental insipidity: 

Now in a sentence which has been embodied in one of the prayers in the Roman Missal (the Secreta of the Seventh Sunday after Pentecost), St. Leo tells us that in His one sacrifice Our Lord has united and consummated the ancient rites with all their diversities. And indeed it is easy to see that His offering of Himself was a holocaust by reason of its completeness ; a propitiatory offering for sin by reason of its atoning efficacy and purpose, and finally a peace-offering whereby the atonement was not only made but sealed by a sacrificial meal. 

The Jews are telling the world what happened to them was a holocaust and insisting the world obey them and use the word holocaust to describe what is clearly not a holocaust and so let's just set aside the principle of non-contradiction and re-read that paragraph and understand what are the consequences of that insane idea.

If the sufferings of the Jews was a holocaust, The Messias-Deniers must think the Nazis killing them was a fulfillment of their Old Testament Judaism.

And then, after the Nazi's killed the Jews, they ate them.

Fine, but it is the preposterous insanity of the Messias-Deniers who own that idea and its ineluctable consequences and if y'all want to do what they order - call a holocaust what is clearly not a holocaust - then, have at it, but ol' Mick will never use the word Holocaust to describe the war crimes committed against the Jews.

Let's soldier on in confronting the insanity for it grows increasingly larger:

Hence it is explicitly noted, as an element in the perfection of the sacrifice of Christ, that in this case Priest and Victim were one and the same. And yet even here the idea of substitution was not wanting, for here the all-perfect Victim was self-offered for His people. In the divine tragedy of Calvary it is plain that it was not the act of slaying Our Lord that constituted the sacrifice, but Our Lord's acceptance of the death inflicted on Him.

If the sufferings of the Jews was a holocaust, the Messias-Deniers must think the Jews in the second world war were willing victims and the Jews sacrificed themselves to God via the nazis.

Those are the consequences of the insane idea that what happened in world war two was a holocaust and the Messias-Deniers must accept all of the consequences.

Now, the Messias-Deniers have free will and they can claim whatever they want to claim but are you, dear reader, going to be obedient to them when they insist you call what happened to them a holocaust?

You won't if you retrain a modicum of sanity in your soul for there is only one Holocaust - The Holocaust is the pluperfect Salvific Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary and it is also the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.




Monday, October 10, 2016

There has only ever been one religion

From the great Abbe Gaume (Catechism of Perseverance) his beautiful, homey, and comforting explication of religion:


Q. What is religion?

A. Religion, according to St. Augustine, is the bond which unites man to God; in other words, religion is the society of man with God.

Q. Explain this answer.

A. Between parents and children there exist ties, or natural and sacred relations. In the same manner there exist relations between God, the creator and father of man, and man, who is the creature and child of God. The ties which exist between God and man are even more sacred than those which unite a son to a father.

Q. Why so ?

A. Because we owe more to God than a son owes to his father; God is our creator and our last end, (which cannot be said of our earthly fathers.) From which we must conclude that our obligations to God are much more holy than are the obligations of children to their parents.

Q. What does the word religion signify ?

A. The word religion signifies the tie by excellence or the re-tieing. The tie by excellence, because religion unites us in a supernatural manner to God, who is the most perfect of beings; the retieing, because our Lord, by offering himself up to his father as a victim for us, has re-established the supernatural union which existed between God and man previous to original sin.

Q. Is there any other religion than the religion of Jesus Christ ?

A. No, there is no other religion than the religion of Jesus Christ, because Jesus Christ alone, as both God and man, could expiate sin, reconcile man to God, and re-establish the supernatural tie which united them.

Q. Is the true religion, or religion of Jesus Christ of ancient date?

A. The religion of Jesus Christ is as ancient as the world. For it goes back to the time when the Son of God offered himself to his Father to redeem man, and has always had as the object of its faith and its hope this same Mediator and the same rewards.

Q. Has religion been at all times as fully taught as it is at the present day ?

A. No, religion has not been at all times as fully taught as it is at the present day. But it has not on that account ceased to be the same religion, no more than man, by passing through the difierent stages of life, ceases to be the same man.

Q. What difference is there between the faithful who preceded and those who have come after the Messiah ?

A. The difference is that the ancient just believed in Jesus Christ to come, whilst we believe in Jesus Christ already come. Our faith, our hope, our religion is the same as that of the patriarchs and prophets.

Unity of Religion and of the Church.

Q. What conclusion must we draw from this first part of the Catechism ?

A. From this first part of the Catechism we must draw this conclusion : that religion, whose children we are, goes back to the beginning of the world, and that it has always been one and the same, although not at all times as fully taught as at later periods.

Q. How do you show in a few words that religion has always been one and the same ?

A. Religion has always been one and the same in its Author, who is the Messiah. Whether expected or already come, Jesus Christ has ever been the foundation of religion; eternal salvation was never at any time possible except through him.

Q. Has religion been always one and the same in her doctrine ?

A. She has always been one and the same in her doctrine. With respect to God, she has always be-lieved and taught from the beginning of the world, that there is but one only God, infinitely perfect, the Creator and Preserver of all things ; that a Redeemer should save the world, and that the Spirit of the Lord should sanctify us by his grace ; only these truths are more clearly known to Christians than they were to the Jews

Q. What has she always believed and taught concerning man ?

A. Concerning man, religion has always believed and taught that he was created to the likeness of God ; that he is composed of a body, and a soul which is spiritual, free and immortal ; that man is fallen, through his own fault ; that all men are born in a state of sin and degradation ; that they will all rise at the last day, and that there shall be eternal rewards for the just and eternal punishments for the wicked.

Q. With regard to the world, what has she always believed and taught ?

A. With regard to the world, she has always believed and taught that it was created out of nothing ; that it is governed by a God all-powerful, infinitely wise, and infinitely good ; that it will be purified by fire, and then there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.

Q. Has religion been always the same in her morality and in her worship ?

A. Yes. Religion has always been the same in her morality, and in her worship. She has always admitted the same distinction between good and evil; always commended the same virtues and condemned the same vices. In her worship she has never failed to practice the two essential acts of worship, viz: prayer and sacrifice,

Q. And in her object ?

A. Her object has always been to destroy sin in the world, and to lead men to happiness.

Q. In her means ?

A. In her means she has always believed that man has need of grace, whereby to be saved ; she has always taught the manner and furnished the means of obtaining it. Only, the Christian religion, that is to say, religion as taught by our Lord, is more perfect and is richer in graces, than it was before the coming of the Messiah.

Q. Can it be said that the church has always been one and the same ?

A. Yes, it can be said that the church has always been one and the same. In order to protect religion, and to teach it to mankind, an exterior, visible, and perpetual society was necessary; this society is the church. It, therefore, commenced with religion, and has always kept pace with it.

Q. How do you explain this truth 

A. We find the church existing at every period, from the beginning of the world, under the Patriarchs it was restricted, like religion, to the family ; under Moses, it expanded, like religion, into a national state ; and finally, under the gospel, it extended, like religion, to all people, of whom it made but one family.

Q. How do you show that the church, like religion, is the same since Christ as it was before the coming of the Messiah ?

A. The church, since Jesus Christ, is the same as before the coming of the Messiah; first, in its founder, who is God ; and second, in her object, which has always been the preservation and teaching of religion ; she recognizes the same holy books ; she has a tribunal to explain them; a sovereign pontiff, and different orders of the sacred ministers; she has her day of rest, consecrated to the Lord ; she has her grand solemnities and feasts.

A. Since Jesus Christ, as before him, the church has always been attacked, sometimes by strangers,sometimes by her own children ; she has had her great schism, which has separated many of her children from her; but all her afflictions redound to her glory; as formerly, all revolutions of empires, all other events, aided her to attain her end, the establishment of the gospel, so also do they now combine for its preservation and diffusion ; as formerly nothing could destroy her, so now neither hell nor the world shall prevail against her.



Te Deum laudamus: te Dominum confitemur.
Te aeternum Patrem omnis terra veneratur.
Tibi omnes Angeli; tibi caeli et universae Potestates;
Tibi Cherubim et Seraphim incessabili voce proclamant:
Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth.
Pleni sunt caeli et terra majestatis gloriae tuae.
Te gloriosus Apostolorum chorus, Te Prophetarum laudabilis numerus, Te Martyrum candidatus laudat exercitus.
Te per orbem terrarum sancta confitetur Ecclesia, Patrem immensae majestatis: Venerandum tuum verum et unicum Filium; Sanctum quoque Paraclitum Spiritum.
Tu Rex gloriae, Christe. Tu Patris sempiternus es Filius. Tu ad liberandum suscepturus hominem, non horruisti Virginis uterum.
Tu, devicto mortis aculeo, aperuisti credentibus regna caelorum.
Tu ad dexteram Dei sedes, in gloria Patris. Iudex crederis esse venturus.
Te ergo quaesumus, tuis famulis subveni: quos pretioso sanguine redemisti.
Aeterna fac cum sanctis tuis in gloria numerari.
(some add the following)
Salvum fac populum tuum, Domine, et benedic hereditati tuae.
Et rege eos, et extolle illos usque in aeternum.
Per singulos dies benedicimus te; Et laudamus Nomen tuum in saeculum, et in saeculum saeculi. Dignare, Domine, die isto sine peccato nos custodire.
Miserere nostri Domine, miserere nostri. Fiat misericordia tua, Domine, super nos, quemadmodum speravimus in te.
In te, Domine, speravi: non confundar in aeternum.


We praise thee, O God : we acknowledge thee to be the Lord.
All the earth doth worship thee : the Father everlasting.
To thee all Angels cry aloud : the Heavens, and all the Powers therein.
To thee Cherubim and Seraphim : continually do cry,
Holy, Holy, Holy : Lord God of Sabaoth;
Heaven and earth are full of the Majesty :of thy glory.
The glorious company of the Apostles : praise thee.
The goodly fellowship of the Prophets : praise thee.
The noble army of Martyrs : praise thee. The holy Church throughout all the world : doth acknowledge thee The Father : of an infinite Majesty;
Thine honourable, true : and only Son; Also the Holy Ghost : the Comforter.
Thou art the King of Glory : O Christ.
Thou art the everlasting Son : of the Father.
When thou tookest upon thee to deliver man: thou didst not abhor the Virgin's womb.
When thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death : thou didst open the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers.
Thou sittest at the right hand of God : in the glory of the Father. We believe that thou shalt come : to be our Judge. We therefore pray thee, help thy servants : whom thou hast redeemed with thy precious blood.
Make them to be numbered with thy Saints : in glory everlasting.
[added later, mainly from Psalm verses:]
O Lord, save thy people :and bless thine heritage. Govern them : and lift them up for ever. Day by day : we magnify thee; And we worship thy Name : ever world without end. Vouchsafe, O Lord : to keep us this day without sin.
O Lord, have mercy upon us : have mercy upon us. O Lord, let thy mercy lighten upon us :as our trust is in thee. O Lord, in thee have I trusted : let me never be confounded.




Sunday, October 9, 2016

Catholic Tradition. Come what may

But we cannot understand any of this if we do not know exactly what the expression “the righteousness of God” means. There is a danger that people can hear about the righteousness of God but not understand its meaning, so instead of being encouraged they are frightened. St. Augustine had already clearly explained its meaning centuries ago: “The ‘righteousness of God’ is that by which we are made righteous, just as ‘the salvation of God’ [see Ps 3:8] means the salvation by which he saves us.”[2] In other words, the righteousness of God is that by which God makes those who believe in his Son Jesus acceptable to him. It does not enact justice but makes people just
Luther deserves the credit for bringing this truth back when its meaning had been lost over the centuries, at least in Christian preaching, and it is this above all for which Christianity is indebted to the Reformation, whose fifth centenary occurs next year. The reformer later wrote that when he discovered this, “I felt that I was altogether born again and had entered paradise itself through open gates.”[3] 
Luther had Catholic ideas about Justification?

This is simply an insane assertion but that is what Ecumenism has wrought; rot.
Ecumenism is the universal solvent of Tradition

Here is a link to a critical examination of the Catholic-Lutheran joint Declaration on Justification and I link to it because it is both stark and bracing but it must be said that I do not agree with Bishop Sanborn's private judgment about it.

http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=31&catname=10


More often than not, to be a Catholic is to be unaccompanied by the Magisterium; that is, I feel as though I am working alone just like The Killer was working alone, unaccompanied, in performing this song:



Saturday, October 8, 2016

America? It's too late, she's gone

I was born into a Catholic family in the piemonte countryside of Vermont in the late 1940s when America was a protestant god-fearing country that was over 90% white Christian.

Now?  Well, since the 1965 Immigration Act, whites are now, roughly, 65%, and locked in a steady decline for many reasons, not the least of which is an eleven letter word, the definition of which means surrender.

Immigration.

Y'all think Trump will fix immigration so that we will return to a sane policy in which immigrants are only admitted if they share our historical european christian culture and only if they will bring with them virtues and skills rather than vices, diseases, ignorance, and resentment with demands we native Americans change our historical nation to please them.

Hope y'all are right. Me? I don't trust anyone running for POTUS.

America?  It's too late, she's gone.