Living “De fide”Catholic

Living “De fide” Catholic

By: Rodney Ford

Preface

This age has seen the coming of a King, a suffering servant who came to undo the evils of a sinister dragon who rules this world through unseen forces and spirits.

Long ago in a simple land, of simple and humble people, a child was born of a woman in a small village called Bethlehem. This child was destined to be King, but first he would have to suffer and endure many hardships and afflictions. We must start at the beginning, further back, at the beginning of the age.

It all began with the creator, Yahweh who spoke into existence the world and all the creatures that live in the world. The Creator said, “let there be” and his word came into being. The world was created and all that was in it; the earth, vegetation, creatures, and man himself was brought to be by the very word of Yahweh God. This God was the God of all; of men and of angels. Angels were celestial beings created to serve God. For in the beginning Yahweh said, “let there be light, and there was light.” This very light, which is refered to, was the angels. But Lucifer (meaning: morning star) one of the greatest angels of heaven rebelled against God and convinced a third of the angels to turn against God. This rebellion was seen in heaven as the first war; from which God cast Lucifer and his angels down to earth from heaven. Lucifer became known as Satan or the devil, and inhabits the world trying to controls those of this age through lies and deception. He is also known as the prince of the power of the air.

Yahweh God also decided to create man from the soil of the ground and blew the breath of life into his nostrils, and man became a living being. God placed this man in the midst of a garden, called Eden, to cultivate it and care for it. This first man was named Adam.

Then Yahweh God commanded Adam, “You are free to eat of all the trees of the garden. Except for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you are not to eat of it; for the day you eat of it, you are doomed to die.”

The man Adam gave names to all the cattle, all the birds of heaven, and all the wild animals. But no helper was found suitable for Adam. God said, “It is not right that the man should be alone. I shall make him a helper.” So Yahweh made the man fall into a deep sleep. And while he was asleep, he took one of his ribs and closed the flesh up again. Yahweh fashioned the rib into a woman, and brought her to the man Adam that she might be his wife.

The man and the woman were in a state of innocence, they were naked but felt no shame before each other.

Now the sinister Satan could take many forms and disguises in this world. So he came one day, in the form a snake, to the woman and tempted her with the fruit of the tree which God had forbid them to eat, and she did eat. And her husband also ate-they were doomed. After this they were ashamed and their eyes were opened; seeing that they were truly naked. So they hid themselves from the LORD God of heaven and earth.

The Lord God said to Satan, who took the form of a snake, “Accursed are you of all the animals wild and tame! On your belly you will go and on dust will feed as long as you live.”(Genesis 3:14) The Lord God put enmity between the women and Satan, and between his offspring and her offspring. That is why it is said,

“They will bruise your head, And you will strike their heel.”(Genesis 3:15b)

The offspring of the woman who was named Eve, because she would be the mother of all living, were the righteous people who the Lord God chose from the foundations of the world to be his. They would be in constant battle or contention with the offspring of the devil, who through the sovereign will of God and their own free will were passed over by the grace of God because of their disobedience.

History of this age reveals sin as literally a broken relationship with God, our father, and we as his family members have broken that relationship. These broken bonds can be traced back to the first union of man and woman; Adam and Eve turned from their trust in the one who made them by eating the forbidden fruit. It is not just the breaking of rules, but like rebellious children who want to go their own way, we’ve all turned away from God at many times during our lives. (Scott Hahn, “A Father Who Keeps His Promises”p.77)

We live in a world of fear, shame, anger, murder, pain, depression, isolation, alienation and death. A dark world controlled by an evil prince the devil. But the Lord God had a plan to overcome this enemy-the devil. He was to call a family, a tribe, a nation, a people to himself. We are that people;” a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” (1 Peter 2:9)

When we choose to follow the Kingdom of God, we align ourselves not only with the offspring of that woman in the garden-Eve. But there is another woman who gave birth to a child, and by her humble obedience to Yahweh, became the mother of God’s son, a man that would become known as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The God/man: Jesus Christ.

The man Jesus Christ, born to a virgin, Mary, who became the Mother of God. How can this be? A person that is both God and man. Jesus was to be the savior of the world. He was born to live, a suffering servant, and die as a substitute for many. God the Father came down to us in the form and person of his son Jesus.

Since the fall from grace of Adam and Eve in the garden, the human race has been under a curse. This curse of original sin, that is passed down from generation to generation, is in fact the absence of the grace of God.

Jesus lived the perfect sinless life, and died a sacrificial death on a Roman cross that we might be saved from God’s wrath. Jesus taught that through the act of baptism (ritual washing) and a heart-felt trust in him we may be saved. This Baptism seals us as children of his Kingdom and imparts God’s grace to us. As children of the King we follow him by faith, and work out our faith with fear and trembling by preforming good works (acts of love) toward our fellow man, and are there by justified. Ultimately we will be glorified and reunited with God in heaven. Before then we are commanded to persevere until the end; serving our Lord in this age as Christian soldiers.

The Lord did not leave us without weapons. By the Church and his divine revelation-the Bible, he has given us an arsenal of truth and guidance for the living out of faith and morals. We are told to “Put on the whole armor of God that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against authorities, against cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. “(Ephesians 6:11,12) He has given us armor: the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the readiness of the gospel of peace, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the spirit (the word of God). With these weapons we are commanded to pray always in the spirit, keeping alert with all perseverance, making supplications for all the saints. (Ephesians 6:13-18)

In the histories of the twelve tribes of Israel, Joachim was an extremely rich man. He always brought a double offering to the Lord telling himself, “My offering for all the people is from my surplus and my own offering to the Lord God is for forgiveness, to atone for my sins. Joachim and his wife Anna were not able to conceive a child. Anna lamented that she was childless. They both were extremely frustrated and prayed for the Lord to bless them. As Anna was praying an angel appeared before her saying, ”Anna, Anna, the Lord God has heard your prayer. You will conceive and give birth and your child will be spoken of everywhere people live.” And the wife’s pregnancy came to term, after nine months, Anna gave birth to a girl and gave her the name Mary. Day by day, the child grew stronger. (Infancy gospel of James)

This Mary would become the new Eve, and where Eve had been disobedient she would be obedient; where Eve had lead all humanity into sin, Mary by her humble submission to God would be the vessel by which the savior of the world came into this world to live and walk among us.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came for testimony, to bear witness to the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light.

The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not. He came to his own home, and his own people received him not. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only son from the Father. (John bore witness to him, and cried, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me.’ “) And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.”(John 1:1-18 RSV)

The testimony of John the Baptist was of the God/Man Jesus Christ. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”( John 1:1, RSV) Here we see Jesus as he was before he entered time, the pre-incarnate Christ, the Word.

The Son of Man walks onto the world stage in the introduction of John’s Gospel. This is the good news written to the whole world about a savior sent from God to save his elect people of God. Christ said of him,” Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he”(Matthew 11:11 RSV)

Introduction

The state of the Catholic Church today is in such a weak position in relation to what it once was. After Vatican II, it no longer had a spirit of confidence of teaching because it began to make concessions with the world. The modernist philosophy infected the Church so deeply that now we have a Church so compromised and full of confusion, that it is hard to know where the world stops and the Church begins. We, the Church should become a sign of contradiction to the world, but sadly we have allowed the world to influence us in a way that looks to novelty instead of dogma, and to experience instead of orthodoxy.

[Source: The Church Must Again Become a Sign of Contradiction]

This crisis in the Church is greater than that of the Arian crisis. And I would rather be counted with Lefebvre or others who have stood for truth, than just go along to get along. Unity for the sake of truth is no unity at all. We all have to answer to Jesus in the end, and my love for him exceeds that for a corrupt organization.

I am done with this corrupt councilar sect, and I think God is done as well! Not to consider a small remnant that God preserves; like the SSPX and others. We are told in scripture to test all things and hold to that which is good. I therefore will hold to God’s Word and the dogmas of the true Church, for the Novus Ordo religion is corrupt; and this includes the Cardinals , Bishops, and Popes. These men have Lorded their authority over Christians for too long! “So Jesus declared, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those in authority over them call themselves benefactors. But you shall not be like them. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who leads like the one who serves.…”(Luke 22:25) These men are as the Nicolaitans of scripture, which it says our Lord also hates.(Rev. 2:6) Instead of leaving so many to wander in darkness with a false assurance, they should pertain to saving souls and not their clerical carrier.

My position goes deeper than the change from Latin to the vernacular; into the very ecclesiology of the Church. It may safely be said that the continuity of a society is broken when a radical change in the principles it embodies is introduced. In the case of a Church, such a change in its hierarchical constitution and in its professed faith suffices to make it a different Church from what it was before.

My journey began four years ago. After 20 plus years as a Protestant, I converted to the Catholic Church. I witnessed so many shameful things in this so called church, that I was grieved in my heart to say the least. Most of the priests are so progressive or liberal, that I don’t even think they get it. Now, I do not even consider it orthodox, but some kind of sect.

Only God can judge against the abuses of these powerful leaders of the Church which have turned away from the true dogmas of the Church to the doctrines of demons and the traditions of men. Our only hope is to turn back to Tradition.

Chapter 1

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus

(Outside the Church is no salvation)

To know God and to be justified in His sight is the age old struggle of sinful man reaching out into the abyss of wonder that is the life of faith.

The search for God begins, not with man, but in the mind of God who initiates the relationship with man by His general revelation; through the natural creation that He uses as a preparative means to His initial grace, or actual grace, that he imparts to those He has elected before the foundations of the world in His divine sovereignty. General revelation is just one means God uses; as scripture says, “The heavens declare the glory of God.” (Psalm 19:1)

God also has given us the gift of His primary means of grace, which is the special revelation of the Divine Word of God: the Bible. “The grass withers, the flower fades; but the Word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8) Also, together, with the tradition of the Church, God has delivered to us the complete “deposit of the faith.”

Justification is the act of cleansing us from our sins, and to communicate to us the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ and Baptism. It detaches man from sin. Justification has been merited for us by the passion of Christ. Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) teaches us that “Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God.”(CCC 1996)

Eternal life is supernatural and depends entirely on God’s gracious initiative. However, “we cannot put God in a box”, as they say, so it is God who has the prerogative to work outside the parameters of what we understand as the sacramental system (extrasacramentally).

“Concerning this doctrine the Pope of Vatican I, Pius IX, spoke on two different occasions. In an allocution on December 9, 1854 he said:

“we must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge; we must also, on the other hand, recognize with certainty that those who are invincible in ignorance of the true religion are not guilty for this in the eyes of the Lord. And who would presume to mark out the limits of this ignorance according to the character and diversity of peoples, countries, minds, and the rest?”

Again, in his encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore of August 10, 1863 addressed to the Italian bishops, he said:

“It is known to us and you that those who are invincibly ignorant of our most holy religion, but who observe carefully the natural law, and the precepts graven by God upon the hearts of all men, and who being disposed to obey God lead an honest and upright life, may, aided by the light of divine grace, attain to eternal life; for God who sees clearly, searches and knows the heart, the disposition, the thoughts and intentions of each, in his supreme mercy and goodness by no means permits that anyone suffer eternal punishment, who has not of his own free will fallen into sin.”(Outside the Church There is No Salvation, EWTN.com)

For an example let us look to scripture where we find in Romans 2:14-15

“For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature those things which are of the

law, such persons, not having the law, are a law unto themselves.

For they reveal the work of the law written in their hearts, while their conscience renders testimony about them, and their thoughts within themselves also accuse or even defend them.” (CPDV)

This is the most convincing evidence. For the Apostle Paul, himself, allows for God’s mercy to work outside the parameters of the known, established Church; Seeing that Gentiles can also be saved, who do not have any knowledge of the law, and yet if they do what their conscience tells them is right, they are either accused or excused by their own conscience. Paul goes on to say in verse 16, “on that day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”

Also, John 15:22

“If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.” (RSV)

In the context of this verse, Jesus is talking about the world’s hatred toward him and those who choose to follow him. But we can also see an implicit meaning in what he says about those who he came and spoke to not being under as great a judgement as those who have heard; we who have the knowledge of the truth, are under a greater judgement, and have no excuse. But if we follow the logic of this argument, we see those who are ignorant of the Gospel, are said to not have sin.

John 9:41

“Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains.”(RSV)

Spiritual blindness is being discussed in this passage, and Jesus again implies that if we were blind we would have no guilt. This does not mean that they were free of sinful nature inherited from Adam, but that they would have no guilt for violating specific teaching or commands that they had received. Because the Pharisees thought they had great insight into the law of God and were able to see, they had more guilt than the person who had no knowledge.

And, Acts 10:1-4

“Now there was a certain man in Caesarea, named Cornelius, a centurion of the band, which is called the Italian, a religious man, and one that feared God, with all his house, giving much alms to people, and praying to God always: He saw in a vision manifestly, about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming in to him, and saying to him: Cornelius. And he beholding him, being seized with fear, said: What is it Lord? And he said to him: Thy prayers, and thy alms, have ascended for a memorial in the sight of God.”(Douay Rheims)

“A religious man and one who feared God. He was not a Jew, yet believed in God.—always, that is, frequently praying, and giving alms. In the Rheims Testament we find this note: ’hereby it appeareth, that such works as are done before justification, though they suffice not to salvation, yet are acceptable preparatives for the grace of justification, and such as move God to mercy….though all such preparative works come also of grace. Cornelius religiously observed the law of nature, and the principle points of the Jewish moral law, though he did not profess Judaism. He was an admirable example of virtue before his knowledge of Christianity.” (Haydock’s Catholic Bible Commentary)

Also, in all three of the synoptic Gospels Christ uses this phrase, “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”(Matthew 9:13, Mark 2:17, Luke 5:32) How may we understand this? Did Christ only come to call sinners? No! He came, suffered, and died for the whole world: his sacrifice was sufficient for everyone. So, if we allow, as the Church does, for two senses of interpreting scripture, literal as well as spiritual, then it can be implicitly argued that Jesus was saying, there are some who through their faithful righteous lives will be saved. “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”(James 2:24 RSV) Although, we acknowledge that these preparatory works come only from God’s grace.

The Church fathers also have something to say on this issue.

Justin Martyr

“We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them…. Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live now according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid.” (First Apology 46[A.D. 151]).

So we see that through reason we can find our way to God; this I would also call one of God’s means of grace, leading us to Him. If we are guided by our reason and seek God diligently, this is a type of faith. “And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.” (Hebrews 11:6)

Origen

“There was never a time when God did not want men to be just; he was always concerned about that. Indeed, he always provided beings endowed with reason with occasions for practicing virtue and doing what is right. In every generation the wisdom of God descended into those souls which he found holy and made them to be prophets and friends of God.” (Against Celsus 4:7[A.D. 248]).

In the book of Job we read “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God, and turned away from evil.” This book is one of the oldest in the Bible, and as yet there is no clear belief in the afterlife with its rewards and punishments; still less is there anything coming close to the revelation of the New Testament as in the time of Christ. The book takes its name from a holy man, who is probably of the race of Esau. So, he was not a Hebrew, but an Edomite from the kingdom of Jobab (Genesis 36:33). The time of the Job is most likely during the Egyptian bondage, or the wilderness wanderings. [Hadock’s Catholic Bible Commentary]

If it is said that Job was blameless, upright, and feared God, then how did he obtain his faith? He had no scriptures (direct revelation), he was outside the people of God, the Israelites. No one to preach to him. How? My point of all this is to say that God chose Job by his sovereignty, and then by his general grace drew Job to himself, and finally made him blameless. How? How was he made blameless? In verse 5 we read “Job offered burnt offerings” for his sons and daughters, in case they had sinned. Somehow God imparted this knowledge to Job; whether it was oral tradition or common knowledge passed on from the time of Cain and Able. Regardless, God found a way to impart wisdom into the soul of Job, and justify him.

But let us also look to the Catechism of God’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church:

“Outside the Church there is no salvation”

(CCC 846)-“How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulating positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the head through the Church which is his body:

“Basing itself on scripture and tradition, the council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as though a door. Hense they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.” (Lumen gentium14, Mark 16:16)

(CCC 847)-“This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

“Those who no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who never the less seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it though the dictates of their conscience-those too may achieve eternal salvation.” (Lumen gentium16)

(CCC 848)-“Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.” (Ad gentes7, Hebrews 11:6, 1 Corinthians 9:16)

(CCC 1260)-“Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal Mystery. Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.”

The Necessity for Membership of the Church

Membership of the Church is necessary for all men for salvation(De fide.)

Dr. Ludwig Ott talks on this subject in his “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” This book is a conspectus of all Dogmatic Theology.

“Nevertheless equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord”(D 1647). The last proposition holds out the possibility that people who in point of fact do not belong to the Church can achieve salvation.

The necessity for belonging to the Church is not merely a necessity of precept (necessitas praecepti), but also a necessity of means (nec. Medii), as the comparison with the Ark, the means of salvation from the biblical flood, plainly shows. The necessity of means is, however, not an absolute necessity, but a hypothetical one. In special circumstances, namely, in the case of invincible ignorance or of incapability, actual membership of the Church can be replaced by the desire (votum) for the same. This need not be expressly present (explicite), but can also be included in the moral readiness faithfully to fulfill the will of God (votum implicitum). In this manner also those who are in fact outside the Catholic Church can achieve salvation….That those who, in innocent ignorance, do not know the true Church of Christ, but who are never the less ready to bow to the demands of the Divine Will, will not be cast out, springs from the Divine Justice, and from the doctrine of God’s general will of salvation, which is clearly proved in the scriptures.” [Fundamental of Catholic Dogma, P.312]

“Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (1 Timothy 2:4).

Saint Irenaeus wrote that:

“In the efficacy of the spirit all those have no part, who do not hasten to the Church; rather they, by their evil teaching and their evil deeds, rob themselves of life. For where the Church is, there is also the spirit of God, and where the spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace.” (Adv. Haer. III 24,I).

“In view of the stress laid upon the necessity of membership of the Church for salvation it is understandable that the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church is mentioned only hesitantly.” [Fundamental of Catholic Dogma, P.313] “Saint Thomas Aquinas, agreeing with Tradition, teaches the general necessity of the Church for salvation. On the other hand, he concedes that a person may be saved extrasacramentally by baptism of desire and therefore the possibility of salvation without actual membership of the Church by reason of a desire to be a member of the Church.”[Ibid] The holy synod professes that “God, the first principle and last end of all things, can be known with certainty from the created world, by the natural light of human reason” (Romans 1:20). [Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution on our Catholic Faith]

A distinction needs to be made here between dogmatic tolerance and civil tolerance. Dogmatic tolerance is rejected by the Church which would legitimately make all religions of the same value, when it comes to justification; also known as indifferentism. Civil tolerance is propagating the commandment of love of neighbor towards all men, even those in error.

Chapter 2

A Church Without Dogma

The architects of Vatican II, by their modernist philosophy, created a church without dogma. Reckless use of ambiguity and subtly destroyed the Vatican documents and it was to intentionally destroy the faith in the minds of the faithful. “For, by his Incarnation, he, the son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man.”(John Paul II, Redemptor Hominid) This quote from John Paul II is a definite sign of his

humanistic and modernist views. He also said,”The sin of the killing of Christ on the cross has redeemed us.” Or how about, “Christ is in every man.” On January 11, 1989 he said,”…that the part of the creed talking about Christ descending into hell can be interpreted metaphorically.”

“How does a Catholic sin against faith? A Catholic sins against the faith by apostasy, heresy, indifferentism, and by taking part in non-Catholic worship.”(Catechism of Trent, Catechism of Pope St. Pius X, Baltimore Catechism) Canon Law states: It is not permitted at all for faithful to assist in any active manner or have any part in the worship of non-Catholics.( Canon 1258)

False Ecumenism

All of these ,so called, Popes expressed views that showed their religious indifference. As if all roads lead to heaven. This shows also the influence of Masonic false ecumenism. True Catholic dogma does not teach this.

“It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives;”{Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441, ex cathedra}

So why do these Popes continue to contradict this clear teaching of the extraordinary magisterium? Let’s look at some examples:

The kissing of the Qur-an (the “holy” books of the false religion of Islam) by Pope John Paul the Second scandalized thousands in the Catholic Church. Add the public dethroning of Christ: the Assisi blasphemy, where the devotees of every false god known to man were invited to stand alongside Peter. Surely we are witnessing the“Diabolical disorientation of the Church, starting at the top,” of which Our Lady forewarned us at Fatima?[Essay by Don McGovern with acknowledgement to by the Remnant]

This is the contradiction I was talking about, Ecumenism and interfaith dialogue always implies or at least encourages the heresy of Indifferentism, according to which it does not matter what religion one professes, as long as one has good will or shares certain beliefs or“values” in common. Until the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, the Catholic Church always opposed the ecumenical movement and offered as her own alternative the conversion of all non-Catholics to the only true Church, which has been instituted by God as the sole means of salvation.

“One must resist the Pope who openly destroys the Church.”(St. Cajetan) These post-councilor Popes are all modernist who, by their own public material heresy, have put themselves outside the Catholic Church.

Defection of the faith is accomplished by public heresy “Ipso facto” without any declaration. From any ecclesiastical office.(Council of Constance) So, even though Vatican I says,”a Pope cannot be judged by anyone.” The Pope is judged by his own actions. Once heresy is public, then that person ceases to be a member of the Church. [Pope Innocent III] Therefore he ceases to be Pope. This is a “de fide” Catholic teaching of the Church according to St. Robert Bellarmine, all the early Church Fathers taught this through the ordinary Magisterium.

St. Robert Bellarmine,( De Romano Pontifice, II, 30:) “For, in the first place, it is proven with arguments from authority and from reason that the manifest heretic is ‘ipso facto’ deposed. The argument from authority is based on St. Paul (Titus 3:10), who orders that the heretic be avoided after two warnings, that is, after showing himself to be manifestly obstinate – which means before any excommunication or judicial sentence. And this is what St. Jerome writes, adding that the other sinners are excluded from the Church by sentence of excommunication, but the heretics exile themselves and separate themselves by their own act from the body of Christ.”

St. Robert Bellarmine, (De Romano Pontifice, II, 30:) “This principle is most certain. The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope, as Cajetan himself admits (ib. c. 26). The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member; now he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian (lib. 4, epist. 2), St. Athanasius (Scr. 2 cont. Arian.), St. Augustine (lib. De great. Christ. Cap. 20), St. Jerome (contra Lucifer.) and others; therefore the manifest heretic cannot be Pope.

“When foulness invades the whole Church we must return to the Church of the past.”(St. Vincent of Lerins) Pope St. Pius X also wrote the famed Oath Against Modernism which was required to be sworn to by clergy and others in the Church,and sought to warn the faithful before it was too late. Much work was done to extinguish modernist trends of thought within the Church thanks to this most venerable and saintly Pope, and to this day, he remains the most important saint to have ever fought against the poisonous infections of the movement.(https://www.catholicgentlem…

While many devout Catholic people reside in the so called Roman Catholic Church, the Novus Ordo rite is a new religion. Not Catholic! I am not relying on my own personal interpretation, but that of the Church. This does notinclude the blasphemous teachings of the post-councilor Popes. I apologize, but “to be silent before error is to be repulsive to God.”

So this is why today dogma is frowned upon in the Church. Christ is just one among many gods! What a shame. The most painful part is the unwillingness for the laity to see the truth that they have been deceived.

Receiving the Sacraments Validly

“Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and ⇒ can. 861, §2.

2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.”

Canon law states that a Catholic, in a time of emergency, can receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick validly from non-Catholic ministers. If this is so, then the SSPX is even more valid. For their ministers are actually properly ordained priests who are more Catholic than some Novus Ordo(NO) priests I’ve seen. Just because they have not been given the faculties to perform them from Rome, this does not mean the authority to do so cannot come through canon law.

As long as we use caution in regard to the error of indifferentism, which is not likely in an SSPX chapel, for they seem to be more Catholic than the Pope. Also we are told it must be physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister; with the state of the Church such as it is, I question if the NO even has any priest that are still legitimate. This would go back to the changes of Vatican II to the rites of holy orders.

The priest’s of the Indult Mass have dissuaded me from going to SSPX, because of their canonical irregularity with Rome. But I see this as little more than a battle over authority with Rome, who dislike the Tridentine Latin Mass(TLM) and seek to destroy all existing tradition in the Church. There is an agenda coming from Rome that is not healthy for true Catholics. This is a war of philosophy; modernists against the true Catholic Tradition of the Church of all time.

Chapter 3

The Mother of God

I. The Mother of God

Mary is truly the Mother of God. As Catholics we profess in the Apostles Creed that Christ, the Son of God, was “born of the Virgin Mary.” In the Nicene Creed we read [He] …”was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary.”

In the Greek Orthodox Church, she is known as the Theotokos or God bearer. Even Elizabeth in Luke (1:42, 43) says, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

If we look to sacred tradition we find the Council of Ephesus (431 A.D.) proclaiming Mary, the Holy Virgin, to be the Mother of God (Theotokos).

Even Saint Irenaeus says, “This Christ who as Logos of the Father was with the Father… was born of a virgin.” St. Ignatius of Antioch says, “For our God Jesus Christ was carried in Mary’s womb according to God’s resolve of salvation.”

“The dogma contains two truths-

Mary is truly a mother, that is, she contributed everything to the formation of the human nature of Christ, that every other mother contributes to the formation of the fruit of her body.

Mary is truly the Mother of God, that is, she conceived and bore the second person of the Divinity, not indeed according to the Divine Nature, but according to the assumed human nature.”(Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p. 196)

II. Immaculate Conception

Mary was conceived without stain of original sin. Pope Pius IX in his Bull “Ineffabilis” promulgated that Mary “was, in the moment of her conception, by the unique gift of grace and privilege of Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the redeemer of mankind, preserved free from all stain of original sin.”(December 8, 1854)

From the Catechism we see the following:

“490 To become the mother of the Savior, Mary “was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role.” The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as “full of grace.” In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace.

491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaims in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.

492 The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is enriched from the first instant of her conception…”

So, we can see in these excerpts from the Catechism that Mary holds a very high place in heaven. Mary’s fullness of grace and her dignity are derived from her “Motherhood of God.”

These would be considered the privileges of the Mother of God, of whom St. Augustine writes, “all men must confess themselves sinners except the Holy Virgin Mary, whom I desire, for the sake of the honor of the Lord, to leave entirely out of the question, when the talk is of sin.”

As the mother of Jesus, the second person of the trinity, Mary transcends the dignity of all other created persons, angels, and men; for the nearer to God a creature is, the greater is it’s dignity. She is actually related by blood to the Son of God through the hypostatic union they share in the human nature of Christ.

Scripture alludes to the Immaculate Conception of Mary in Jeremiah 31:22- “How long will you continue to hesitate, rebellious daughter? The LORD has created a new thing upon the earth: woman encompasses man.” Jerome, for example saw the image as a reference to the infant Jesus in Mary’s womb. Could this “new thing” that was created be Mary? A woman without sin, saved from birh.

St. Thomas Aquinas rejected the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. His difficulty was that he could not yet find a way to reconcile Mary’s freedom from original sin with the universality of original sin(“all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.”-Romans 3:23), and that all men need a savior. A solution was first achieved by the Franciscan theologian William of Ware and his pupil John Duns Scotus. Through the introduction of the concept of praeredemptio (preredemption), he was successful in reconciling Mary’s being free from original sin and her need to be redeemed. [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p.202]

Mary also was free from evil concupiscence and from every personal sin. From her conception she was without all motions of inordinate desire which came into the world for the punishment of sin. It would be incompatible for Mary, with her fullness of grace and perfect purity and immaculate state to be subject to moral imperfection.

According to the Council of Trent in consequence of a special privilege of grace from God, Mary was free from every personal sin during her whole life.

III. Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus Christ. According to the Lateran Synod of 649 A.D. she conceived without seed, of the Holy Spirit, generated without injury( to her virginity), and her virginity continued unimpaired after the birth.

Isaiah 7:14 says,” Therefore the Lord Himself shall give a sign: behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and his name shall be called Emmanuel(God with us).”

Perpetual Virginity was given to Mary by the Fifth General Council at Constantinople (553 A.D.)

IV. The Bodily Assumption of Mary into Heaven

The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries. Even though these are apocryphal they bear witness to the faith of the generation in which they were written despite their legendary clothing. [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p.209]

The dogma of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s (B.V.M.) Assumption shows some historical development over time. St. Gregory of Tours first spoke of these narratives in 594 A.D. The feast of Mary’s entry into heaven are those of Ps. Modestus of Jerusalem (aprox. 700A.D.). Pope Benedict XIV (1740-58) declared the doctrine of the Assumption to be a pious and probable option, but in so doing, did not declare it belonged to the deposit of the faith. In 1849 the first petitions for dogmatization were addressed to the Apostolic See. At the Vatican Council nearly 200 Bishops signed a motion for dogmatization. [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p.210] This did not happen until Pope Pius XII defined it into dogma (November 1, 1950).

“Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death. The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is a singular participation of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.” (CCC 966)

V. The Mediatorship of Mary

1 Timothy 2:5 says, “For there is one God. There is only one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus…” And he is the sole mediator between God and man, by his death on the cross he fully reconciled man with God. But this does not exclude a secondary mediator. There is nothing to prevent others from being called mediators, subordinated to Christ, as they prepare or serve by co-operating in uniting men to God.

Mary is known by the Church Fathers as the “Go-between”(mediatrix). The title Mediatrix has even been received into the liturgy of the Church by the introduction of the Feast of M. Mariae Virginis omnium gratiatum Mediatrics (1921).

1.Mary is Mediatrix of all graces by her co-operation in the Incarnation.Mary is mediatrix of all graces in a double sense :

a.Mary gave the Redeemer, the source of all graces, to the world, and in this way she is the channel of all graces.

b.Since Mary’s Assumption into Heaven no grace is conferred on man without her actual intercessory co-operation.

Mary freely cooperated in the Incarnation by her response to Gabriel when she said, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it done unto me according to thy word.”(Luke 1:38) In the Annunciation, the Incarnation, and the Redemption of mankind by the vicarious atonement of Christ, were all dependent upon her consent. In one moment in history Mary represented all humanity. St. Jerome said, “By a women the whole world was saved”

Mary’s co-operation in the Redemption.

In the 15th century, under Pius X, some Church documents contained the title: Corredemptrix (Coredemptrix). This term has been misunderstood by some Protestants and lay people as Mary being made equal to Christ. But we must not conceive of the term Coredemptrix in the sense of an equation of efficacy of Mary with the redemptive activity of Christ, the sole Redeemer of humanity. [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p.212] Because she herself was in need of redemption and was indeed redeemed by Christ. She, in principle, could not be both the redeemer and the redeemed. THE AUTHOR OF AN ACT OF MERIT CANNOT BE A RECIPIENT OF THE SAME ACT OF MERIT. (Principium meriti non cadit sub eodem merito) So we see that her act of co-operation in the objective redemption is an indirect, remote co-operation. For she devoted her life to the service of the redeemer, and under the cross, suffered and sacrificed with Him. In the same sense she co-operates in the subjective redemption of mankind.

2.Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her intercession in Heaven.

“According to the view of the older, and of many of the modern, theologians Mary’s intercessory co-operation extends to all graces, which are conferred on mankind, so that no grace accrues to men, without the intercession of Mary. The implication of this is not that we are obliged to beg for all graces through Mary, nor that Mary’s intercession is intrinsically necessary for the application of the grace, but that, according to God’s positive ordinance, the redemptive grace of Christ is conferred on nobody without the actual intercessory co-operation of Mary.” [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p. 213]

Pope Pius X calls Mary “the dispenser of all gifts, which Jesus has acquired for us by His death and His blood” Theologians express scriptural proof by Christ’s words in John 19:26, “Woman behold thy son, son behold thy mother.” In the mere literal sense, this only means that Jesus was committing his mother to John’s care. But in the mystical interpretation we see in John the representation of the whole human race. In him Mary was given as a mother to all the redeemed. Through Mary’s intercession she procures children in need of help, to which are imparted the grace to eternal life.

VI. The Veneration of Mary

Mary the Mother of God, is entitled to the Cult of Hyperdulia.

Theological proof Because of the dignity that she has as the Mother of God, a special veneration is due to Mary. Less than the adoration which is given to the God alone; (cultus latriae) and that which is due the angels and other saints; (cultus Dulia) The special veneration given to Mary is called cultus hyperdulia. Mary should be honored, but the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit should be adored. Nobody should adore Mary.

“The veneration of Mary achieved its richest development in the middle ages. The feast of the Home-Going(Assumption) of Mary, were originally celebrated as feasts of the Lord, came about during Patristic times… Luther was sharply critical of the veneration of Mary, fearing that divine honor would be paid to a creature and that the unique mediatorship of Christ would be prejudiced… Zwingli also acknowledged the Church’s belief in Mary, and held to the veneration of Mary, but rejected the practice of making petition to her… Under the influence of rationalism the religious veneration of Mary deteriorated and sank to the level of regarding her as a sublimely moral model but a merely natural person.” [Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma p.216]

Conclusion

‘In all that we have learned about Mary, I think her motherhood stands out as a continuing grace that is uninterrupted because of the consent she loyally gave at the Assumption and at the cross. When she was taken up into Heaven she did not lay aside this saving office, but by her intercession, continues to bring us to eternal salvation. The Church calls her under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix. ‘ (Lumen gentium 62) “Mary functions as a mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows it’s power.” (CCC 970)

Chapter 4

Sedeprivationism/ Quasi-SedeVacantism

“The Chair of St. Peter at Rome (January 18) — This feast reinforces the unique role of the pope as vicar of Christ, and that as universal pastor, he cannot err when he teaches on matters of faith and morals. How then, are faithful Catholics to explain the appearance that the pope has erred since Vatican II? Here are some of the attempts that have been made over the years. Some of you old timers will no doubt remember them.

– It is the liberal bishops and not the pope who are responsible.

– The council was ambiguous and the wrong interpretation has been given.

– The real pope is being held captive and a look-alike imposter has taken over.

– The pope didn’t speak ex cathedra.

– The council was only a pastoral council.

– Nowadays it seems that it can sometimes happen that the pope teaches error. When he does, we must continue to recognize his authority, but hold fast and resist whatever erroneous teaching or evil commands he may give.

– The pope and bishops have embraced the apostasy of the new religion and have thereby lost their offices. All the seats are empty, including that of the pope and we are today without any hierarchy whatsoever.

We understand that as glaring as some of these errors may seem today, they were the best answers that were available at the time. Only in time and with further reflection, did the error of these answers become apparent. Let us consider today this last error, which many now call sedevacantism (Latin for “the see being vacant”). The popular name for this error is borrowed from the term that is used between the death of one pope and the election of a new one. Good Catholics, who believed the idea that all the seats are vacant, did so only to be faithful to the promise of Christ that the religion any pope would teach the Universal Church would be guaranteed by His own word and the power of the Holy Ghost. However, while defending this one truth of Christ, they unwittingly fell into an error contrary to another teaching of the Church, that the Hierarchy is perpetual, that it will last to the end of time, and that Peter will have perpetual successors. The pope and the Hierarchy cannot simply be gone! Therefore, this explanation must be rejected by Catholics.

The Chair of St Peter at Rome (continued) – This feast reinforces Catholic teaching that Christ has given to Peter and his successors a unique role in the Church as Universal Pastor. In this role as teacher Our Lord has promised that he who hears Peter hears Him. Recognizing this promise, the Church has infallibly taught that Peter and his successors cannot teach error to the Universal Church any more than Christ can. So Christ guarantees that Peter will never teach error and Peter has the special assistance of the Holy Ghost to carry this out.

We have considered the error of sedevacantism, which holds that there is no pope, and that there is no hierarchy. Today let us consider another error, referred to by some as “Recognize and Resist.” In a nutshell, R&R holds that sometimes the pope teaches error or imposes evil or harmful practices or laws.* When he does, we must recognize his authority but resist his erroneous teachings or evil commands. Good Catholics have mistakenly fallen into this error in their attempt to protect the teaching of the Church that the pope must have perpetual successors and that somehow there must always be a hierarchy. The R&R position cannot be held because it ignores the clear teaching of the Church that the pope cannot teach error or impose evil or harmful practices and laws by virtue of the guarantee of Our Lord and the special assistance of the Holy Ghost. If we recognize the pope’s authority to teach and rule the Church in matters of faith and morals, we have no choice but to assent and obey, for not to do so would be to fail to assent to Christ Himself, by Whose authority and in Whose name the pope speaks. So R&R cannot be the answer, and like sedevacantism, it too must be rejected.

(*Some have said that the pope taught error at the time of St. Athanasius, but a closer examination of the facts shows this not to be true.)

Chair of St. Peter at Rome … conclusion) – We have been considering the past few weeks this feast, which reinforces the teaching of the Church that the office of the Chair of St. Peter (Peter and his successors, the popes) is indefectible, that is it is always free from error and must be perpetual. Its teachings are the standard and rule of Faith, despite the worthiness or unworthiness of the successor. In light of this and what we have said before, what is a faithful Catholic to do? Join or re-join the Novus Ordo? By no means! It is a false religion and to do so would be to abandon the Catholic Faith.

We have considered some answers to the question: How is it that the New Order popes have attempted to impose on the Church erroneous teachings and harmful or evil laws or practices? We gave particular attention to two of the most widely-held erroneous explanations: sedevacantism and recognize and resist (R&R). In light of what has been said, the following become apparent:

– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: The pope can teach error sometimes and impose harmful or evil practices and laws on the Universal Church.

– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: There is no hierarchy whatsoever. (It is de fide that the hierarchy must be perpetual.)

– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: We may resist the authority of the pope.

– That since it is obvious that the Vatican II popes have imposed teachings and practices contrary to Faith and morals, it must be concluded that the infallible and indefectible teaching power promised to Peter’s successors is absent.

– It may be held that since the Vatican II popes possess a legal and valid election, they have a certain legal status as popes.

– It may be held that this legal status is sufficient to maintain the succession to Peter and the perpetuity of the hierarchy.

It would appear, then, that the Chair is not totally vacant, nor is it completely full. The new order popes possess some legal aspect as popes but lack the authority to teach and rule on matters of faith and morals. In the face of this situation, the proper response of all faithful Catholics is to believe what Catholics have always believed and to do what Catholics have always done. We cannot go wrong doing that!” (Fr. Ronald Ringrose, St. Athanasius Church Bulletins of Jan. 14, Jan. 21, Jan. 28, 2018; bold print and italics given.)

We must as Catholics believe these truths revealed by Christ and taught as dogma by the Church:

1. We know the things we are to believe from the Catholic Church. It is the pope with the bishops, through whom God speaks to us. (Baltimore Catechism #3 q. 10 also q. 157)

2. The Church (pope & bishops) certainly can never teach us falsehood because the Holy Ghost abides with it forever. (BC #3 q. 445)

3. Infallibility means that the Church (pope & bishops) cannot err when they teach faith and morals. (BC #3 q. 526)

This is all nicely summarized in a Youtube video entitled, “Archbishop Lefebvre Speaks Frankly About the Pope.”

“It is a recorded conference of the Archbishop in which he clearly states that it is impossible for a pope to impose heresy and evil practices on the Church and that he who would do so certainly cannot be pope. Look up these questions in the Baltimore Catechism for yourself and listen to the Archbishop’s own words.”(Fr. Ronald Ringrose, St. Athanasius Church Bulletin of Apr. 29, 2018; italics given)

The person occupying the Apostolic See is no longer formally the pope: He no longer has any divinely assisted Pontifical authority; he however remains materially a pope insofar as he has not been juridically deposed.

Let us suppose that the New Order popes held only materially the Papal office, while not holding formally the chair of Peter. This is the conclusion of Fr. Bernard Lucien in his “Thesis Cassiciacum.” That the occupant of the chair of Peter is not formally Pope.

The Vatican II document “Dignitatis Humanae Personae” writen on Dec 7, 1965 contradicts Catholic teaching on religious liberty and the infallibility of the ordinary and universal Magisterium. This can be demonstrated if we look at the traditional teaching on religious liberty in the encyclical by St. Pope Pius IX, “Quanta cura.”

“For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of “naturalism,” as they call it, dare to teach that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,”2 viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching “liberty of perdition;”3 and that “if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.”….” For they repeat that the “ecclesiastical power is not by divine right distinct from, and independent of, the civil power, and that such distinction and independence cannot be preserved without the civil power’s essential rights being assailed and usurped by the Church.” Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, contend that “without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to concern the Church’s general good and her rights and discipline, so only it does not touch the dogmata of faith and morals.” But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling and guiding the Universal Church.”….”And again do not fail to teach “that the royal power was given not only for the governance of the world, but most of all for the protection of the Church;”11 and that there is nothing which can be of greater advantage and glory to Princes and Kings than if, as another most wise and courageous Predecessor of ours, St. Felix, instructed the Emperor Zeno, they “permit the Catholic Church to practise her laws, and allow no one to oppose her liberty. For it is certain that this mode of conduct is beneficial to their interests, viz., that where there is question concerning the causes of God, they study, according to His appointment, to subject the royal will to Christ’s Priests, not to raise it above theirs.”

In dirrect contradiction to this teaching, Vatican II “Dignitatis Humanae Personae” says,

“On his part, man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activity a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to God, the end and purpose of life. It follows that he is not to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience. Nor, on the other hand, is he to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience, especially in matters religious. The reason is that the exercise of religion, of its very nature, consists before all else in those internal, voluntary and free acts whereby man sets the course of his life directly toward God. No merely human power can either command or prohibit acts of this kind.”

“With regard to lthe contradiction between Vatican II and Quanta cura, one can easily conclude that one or the other teaching must be erronious; and hence that one or the other of these acts promilgated by the Magisterium lacks infallibility.”(Fr. Bernard Lucien, Thesis Cassiciacum)

Chapter 5

The Coummation of Last Things

God judges at all times; but the subject of this article is the last judgement

“Now it is a belief held by the whole Church of the true God, in private confession and also in public profession, that Christ is to come from heaven to judge both the living and the dead, and this is what we call the Last Day, the day of divine judgement–that is, the last period of time; for it is not certain for how many days this judgement will extend.”{St. Augustine, City of God, Book XX, p. 895}

God is at this very moment judging, but there will come a final day of judgement in which we stand before Almighty God in a particular judgement. But, for most of us, death must come first.

1. Death

In the current order of salvation, the origin of death is a punishment for sin. Man, by nature is made to be a mortal being. In the garden of Eden, he was given the gift of immortality. He was punished by God, because of his transgression of the divine commandment, to death.

The Council of Trent teaches in the decree on original sin, that Adam became subject to sin by transgression of the law, that God had previously threatened him with death, and Adam transmitted death to the entire human race. { Denzinger, 788 et seq. cf. D 101,175.}

Scripture tells us, “Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.”(Romans 5:12)

Saint Augustine defended this clear “de fide” teaching of the Church (original sin) against the Pelagians, who denied the original state, and so regarded death as arising from the natural decomposition of the human body alone.

In the instance of the person in a state of grace, death loses the penalty associated with it, and becomes a mere consequence of sin. Our Lord Jesus and his Mother Mary, be cause of their being without original sin, death was neither a punishment or a consequence of sin. But, to them in their human nature, death was a natural one.

All human beings subject to original sin are subject to the law of death. This generality of death is based on scripture, “It is appointed to men once to die.”(Heb. 9:27) The significance of death is that the possibility of conversion ceases, and any reward in the next world is proportional to the merits and demerits of life on earth. The doctrine of the impossibility of justification after death was projected at the First Vatican Council.

2. The Particular Judgement

After death, comes the particular judgement. This takes place by the divine decree of judgement–the eternal fate of the deceased person is decided. The Catholic Church does not teach millenarism as taught by some of the early fathers, “an empire of the Messiah, foretold a long dominion of a thousand years for Christ and the just on earth before the general resurrection, asserted accordingly, that only then will the final beatification take place. The Church also teaches against the various sects that hold to the view of an unconscious state known as soul sleep. Holy scripture implies the teaching by, “This day you shall be with me in paradise.”(Luke 23:43) The belief in a particular judgement was attested to by St. John Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and others.

3. Heaven

The essential bliss of heaven; the souls of the just who are free from all guilt of sin, at the time of death, will enter into heaven. As the creed says, “I believe in life everlasting.”

“And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; and I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away. And he who sat upon the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new. Also he said, “Write this, for these words are trustworthy and true.”(Revelation 20:2-5)

This city is obviously not that of a king who reigns for a thousand years. For it is very clear that every tear, God will wipe away. The words of St. Paul ring true here,” Death, where is your sting? ” Sin is the only sting of death, and without sin, for there will be no sin in heaven. We, who have a saving faith, will behold the Divine Essence face to face, immediately. The condition for achieving of eternal life is the knowledge of God and of Christ.

In addition to essential bliss of heaven, which comes from the beatific vision, there is also an accidental blessedness, that comes from the natural knowledge and love of created things. In being with Christ; reunification with Jesus and the Mother of God, and also the angels and saints. Our reunion with family and former earthly friends adds to this joy of blessedness. Jesus compares the reward for the good works with treasures in Heaven, which cannot be lost.(Mt. 6:20) This is the property of heaven.

Eternity, the bliss of Heaven lasts forever. Pope Benedict XII declared: “The vision and this enjoyment (of the Divine Essence) continues without interruption or diminution of the vision and enjoyment, and will continue until the general judgement and thenceforth for all eternity.”

The degree of perfection of the vision given to the just is proportionate to each persons merit: inequality of reward. Christ promised, “He (the son of man) will render to everyone according to his works”(Mt. 16:27)

4. Hell

The reality of Hell is that souls who die in the condition of personal grievous sin enter Hell. (De fide.) A place of eternal punishment, this place is inhabited by those who rejected God in this life, and died in a state of mortal sin. The Church rejects those sects that teach a annihilation of the godless after death. The Athanasian Creed says: “But those who have done evil will go into eternal fire.”

The nature of punishment in Hell, as conceived by the fathers, depicted by fire, gnashing of teeth, wailing, sorrow and despair. This state shall last for eternity, “smoke from their torments ( of the damned ) shall ascend up for ever and ever.”( Rev. 20:10) ” On the ground of the teaching of Revelation it is to be inferred, that the will of the damned is immovably hardened in evil and is, therefore, inaccessible to any true repentance. The reason is that God refuses all further grace to the damned.”{Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Dr. L. Ott, p. 482}

5. Purgatory

The souls of the just will, in the moment of death, who are burdened with venial sins or temporal punishment, be sent to purgatory. This state of the soul is a place of purification from the penalty of sin. Cleansing fire is a purgation from the temporal punishment due to sin.

Scripture speaks of, ” And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world nor the world to come.” (Mt. 12:32) Also in I Corinthians 3:12, “If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss; yet he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.”

Tradition offers proof in the existence of cleansing fire can be derived from the testimony of the Fathers: St. Cyprian, St Augustine, and St. Thomas. The sanctity of the justice of God is a concept that the punishments of sins still remain to be effected, but the soul in question is united in love with God, then this forbids that they would be cast into hell. Therefore, the intermediate state of purgatory may be assumed, the purpose of which is purification.

6. The Second Coming of Christ

The eschatology of the whole of mankind is tied to the reality of the second coming of Christ. At the end of the world Christ will come again in glory to pronounce judgement. This is the “De fide” teaching of the Church, and can be seen in the Apostle’s creed: “From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.” The Parousia was held by the Thessolonians to be imminent:

” For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.”(1 Thes. 4:15-17)

There are also some signs of his second coming:

a.) The preaching of the Gospel to the whole world.

b.) The conversion of the Jews.

c.) Falling away from the faith.

d.) The appearance of Antichrist.

e.) Severe tribulations.

The time of the second coming is unknown to men. Jesus left the time of his return a secret, known only to his Father. “But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mk. 13:32)

So let us believe, as those of Thessolonica, in the imminent return of Christ. “…to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.” –living moment by moment, Coram Deo, before the face of God.

The End