Now, within the movement are sub-groups of people that are not afraid to bring their faith into the public square, including a few Catholics. One of these, of which I have mentioned in the past, is Davis Aurini. Mr. Aurini has recently come across some concerning aspects within the movement, namely the deification of Kek and Pepe the Frog. So without further adu:
do1
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
The Alt Right: Kek Worship
It has been my intention for a while to write a little on the Alt-Right since the media has pinned them as bigots, xenophobes and racists. I don't necessarily disagree with this take; however, like any movement there are good and bad parts to it that need to be appreciated and condemned respectively.
Now, within the movement are sub-groups of people that are not afraid to bring their faith into the public square, including a few Catholics. One of these, of which I have mentioned in the past, is Davis Aurini. Mr. Aurini has recently come across some concerning aspects within the movement, namely the deification of Kek and Pepe the Frog. So without further adu:
Now, within the movement are sub-groups of people that are not afraid to bring their faith into the public square, including a few Catholics. One of these, of which I have mentioned in the past, is Davis Aurini. Mr. Aurini has recently come across some concerning aspects within the movement, namely the deification of Kek and Pepe the Frog. So without further adu:
Friday, September 23, 2016
The effect of Calvanism on America - Dr. John Rao
Another video for your consideration on Calvinism's impact on the American culture and myth:
+JMJ+
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Some great talks on creation by the Kolbe Center
For a very long time I considered evolution and Big Bang theory to be a matter of truth. I would laugh alongside Peter Kreeft when he would mock creationists. Sadly, but in a joyful manner, I find myself taking the position that Genesis was in-fact a historical text and the evolution and big bang theories are nothing more than a joke. I don't say this flippantly, but only after long consideration from studies on physical evidence and the unanimous teaching of the Church Fathers.
There is so much to be known:
There is so much to be known:
+JMJ+
Friday, September 16, 2016
KTMT: Bishop to bishop letters are magisterial just because... lol
As I have stated in the past I will reserve my takes on the current papacy; however, there is something to be said about how poorly catechised trads and neo catholics are.
First, lets be clear, all these statements carry about as much authority and binding influence as a glazed donuts do to the appetite of a boulder... absolutely none. Personal letters from a bishop to a bishop or to a person do not constitute magisterial teaching, no matter how frustrating. To say otherwise would necessarily lead to Pope Liberius' ambiguous letter to his fellow bishop constituting formal teaching, which we deny as Catholics in accordance with the formal teaching from Vatican Council One.
Yes he said the gates of hell would not prevail, this does not mean that a Pope cannot hold to an erroneous take, such would be a personal sin because the proposed teaching would be a novelty, thus when subjected to the ordinary magestarium, as all teachings are, would violate one if not more of the marks of the church and could be ignored as a novelty by the faithful.
Francis is the Pope, I have no reason nor pride to believe anything else at this point. Is he a great or a bad Pope? History will decide that... I am personally not giddy but if we do more complaining than praying for Peter in the midst of this storm nothing will be fixed any time soon.
Remember that modernists be they bishops or laymen, formal or material, have no interest in formally changing doctrine. They are either consciously or unconsciously aware of the old adage, "Lex Orendi, Lex Credendi". If the practices are changed, an end around can be had to effectively change teachings without formally submitting such. Which is one of the reasons why Bugnini, who asked that the ancient rite be abrogated, was denied permission to formally abrogate the Rite of St. Gregory, but was allowed to do informal restrictions, effectively abrogating its use until really Benedict released Summorum Pontificum.
So, end game... this is not the end. An Irish Paper, even a Vatican paper... dare I say an encyclical or ecumenical council that proposes and even seems to bind the faithful to a novelty is nothing more than one bad night at a hotel in relation to eternity as Teresa of Avila would say. Its not worth getting hot and heavy about. The Church doesnt fall under this or that Pope, Rome is not the seat of the Anti-Christ yet, though its entirely frustrating. If you approach the Popes comments as binding and play them off that leads to the confusion seen below. So, be level headed. Pray, hope and dont worry. Its not like this is catching God by surprise. Its that simple
When St. John Bosco had his vision of the Barque of Peter out in the midst of the storm it presumes that Peter took his ship out in the midst of the storm to begin with, the solution is to keep our sights on the Eucharist and Our Lady, offer up the sufferings and be grateful for the trials to grow in and merit from.
Ferrara makes it pretty clear below
First, lets be clear, all these statements carry about as much authority and binding influence as a glazed donuts do to the appetite of a boulder... absolutely none. Personal letters from a bishop to a bishop or to a person do not constitute magisterial teaching, no matter how frustrating. To say otherwise would necessarily lead to Pope Liberius' ambiguous letter to his fellow bishop constituting formal teaching, which we deny as Catholics in accordance with the formal teaching from Vatican Council One.
Yes he said the gates of hell would not prevail, this does not mean that a Pope cannot hold to an erroneous take, such would be a personal sin because the proposed teaching would be a novelty, thus when subjected to the ordinary magestarium, as all teachings are, would violate one if not more of the marks of the church and could be ignored as a novelty by the faithful.
Francis is the Pope, I have no reason nor pride to believe anything else at this point. Is he a great or a bad Pope? History will decide that... I am personally not giddy but if we do more complaining than praying for Peter in the midst of this storm nothing will be fixed any time soon.
Remember that modernists be they bishops or laymen, formal or material, have no interest in formally changing doctrine. They are either consciously or unconsciously aware of the old adage, "Lex Orendi, Lex Credendi". If the practices are changed, an end around can be had to effectively change teachings without formally submitting such. Which is one of the reasons why Bugnini, who asked that the ancient rite be abrogated, was denied permission to formally abrogate the Rite of St. Gregory, but was allowed to do informal restrictions, effectively abrogating its use until really Benedict released Summorum Pontificum.
So, end game... this is not the end. An Irish Paper, even a Vatican paper... dare I say an encyclical or ecumenical council that proposes and even seems to bind the faithful to a novelty is nothing more than one bad night at a hotel in relation to eternity as Teresa of Avila would say. Its not worth getting hot and heavy about. The Church doesnt fall under this or that Pope, Rome is not the seat of the Anti-Christ yet, though its entirely frustrating. If you approach the Popes comments as binding and play them off that leads to the confusion seen below. So, be level headed. Pray, hope and dont worry. Its not like this is catching God by surprise. Its that simple
When St. John Bosco had his vision of the Barque of Peter out in the midst of the storm it presumes that Peter took his ship out in the midst of the storm to begin with, the solution is to keep our sights on the Eucharist and Our Lady, offer up the sufferings and be grateful for the trials to grow in and merit from.
Ferrara makes it pretty clear below
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
The world-famous International Pilgrim Virgin Statue of Fatima is coming to St. Stans
The tour of the world-famous International Pilgrim Virgin Statue of Fatima is a nation-wide call to prayer and penance for peace in our nation and conversion of hearts. That’s because prayer is more powerful than any army on earth. Our Lady promised, “in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.” The tour and your prayers will create an outpouring of grace to allow Our Lady of Fatima to claim her dominion over our country through her Immaculate Heart.
On October 24, 1952, Pope Pius XII blessed the statue and imparted a special blessing on the work of the Fatima Pilgrim Tours. Throughout the subsequent decades, John Haffert traveled worldwide with the statue, organizing peace tours. The most famous peace tour occurred on October 16, 1992 when six bishops descended on Red Square in Moscow carrying the Pilgrim Virgin Statue. It was crowned at midnight in front of Lenin’s tomb.
The statue has visited more than 100 countries, including Russia and China, bringing the great message of salvation and hope, “the peace plan from Heaven,” to countless millions of people. Many miracles and signal graces have been reported wherever the statue has traveled. On September 1, 2014, the custody and mission of this world-famous statue was placed under the auspice of The World Apostolate of Fatima, USA – “Our Lady’s Blue Army,” and continues her journeys throughout the world with its principal statue custodian Patrick L. Sabat.
----------------------------------------------------
About the St. Stan's visit from the Apostolate of Our Lady of Good Success
"The schedule is still being worked on, but you can count on this statue arriving on Oct 6th around 10 AM and staying at our parish until Oct 7th, Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, after 8 AM Mass. We are hoping that we will have a GREAT turn out for these events on those 2 days! Please pray your rosaries this month for a GREAT success with this wonderful event!
Hoping to have 2 Masses on Oct 6th, benediction,and a night time procession after the evening Mass and before All Night Vigil - we will really need people to stand guard and watch one hour with Our Lord and Our Lady on this night! Let's work together for a beautiful 22 hours with Our Lady of Fatima as I believe she has chosen all of us to help her rekindle this beautiful devotion to Her Immaculate Heart during this 100 anniversary celebration in the Milwaukee area! As she said: "In the End my Immaculate Heart will triumph" May she first triumph over our own hearts! She is counting on all of us!"
Monday, September 12, 2016
A short note on Fr. Ripperger and Bishop Konderla
PLEASE PRAY FOR THE BISHOP AND DO NOT CALL OR WRITE HIM LETTERS. HE IS NOT A BAD BISHOP, BUT AS I HAVE BEEN TOLD IS A WONDERFUL PRIEST WHO NEEDS PRAYERS, SO PRAY, HOPE AND DONT WORRY. ITS IN GODS HANDS, LISTEN TO FR. RIPP'S PLEA AND CONCERN YOURSELF ONLY WITH PRAYER. THANK YOU!
There is a huge temptation for many out there to show anger at the present situation. Please, please keep yourself from falling in the trap of not observing piety and humility. If you are a consistent listener of Father's talks you will note that his love of obedience is always on his mind.
There is a huge temptation for many out there to show anger at the present situation. Please, please keep yourself from falling in the trap of not observing piety and humility. If you are a consistent listener of Father's talks you will note that his love of obedience is always on his mind.
Remember that it is not your job to start a fight. This did not catch God off guard, he has permitted it for a reason and in both humility and obedience Fr. Ripperger and his Order have humbled themselves in Holy Obedience.
Pray for your Bishops, pray for your priests!
If I have not been clear do not make the situation worse by calling up the diocese, prayer for the Bishop and Father are needed not anger. It is in Gods hands either way, dont insert yourself
If I have not been clear do not make the situation worse by calling up the diocese, prayer for the Bishop and Father are needed not anger. It is in Gods hands either way, dont insert yourself
Friday, September 9, 2016
Great Catholic statesmen of the 20th century
We all know about FDR, Churchhill, Stalin and off course Hitler. But, how little we know about the other statesmen, statesmen that were Catholic and lived their faith.
This video addresses some of such men. Hopefully in the future I will write more on each
Éamon de Valera - Ireland
Charles de Gaulle - France
Francisco Franco - Spain
Karl von Habsburg - Austria-Hungry
This video addresses some of such men. Hopefully in the future I will write more on each
Éamon de Valera - Ireland
Charles de Gaulle - France
Francisco Franco - Spain
Karl von Habsburg - Austria-Hungry
+JMJ+
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
The meaning behind the sacrificial elements of Bread and Wine
The following excerpt was taken from Nicholas Gihr's fantastic work "The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass":
The grain of wheat, which is the fat of the land, and the grape, which ripens in the sun, in a manner contain the marrow and blood of the earth, are also intended mainly to renew man's substance and to refresh his blood, and are, therefore, the chief means for the nourishment of his life. Nowhere do these grow wild, but in all places they thrive only by man's careful and laborious cultivation; and when he has harvested the ears and gathered in the grapes, it is still by renewed labor that he must prepare them for food and drink. If, therefore, on the one hand, bread and wine are gifts of God, they are, on the other, products of man; the sweat of his brow cleaves to them, before they are changed into his flesh and blood. Hence they are eminently suited as gifts of man to God; in presenting them we offer to God our fatigue and labor, and in the offering of these gifts we bring to God, so to speak, our flesh and blood, our body and life. Therefore, before our Lord can give and leave us His Flesh and Blood as a sacrifice, we must offer to Him bread and wine, in that we separate and withdraw these articles from the ordinary wants of life, and reserve and sanctify them for Him for His Sacrifice. Consequently, in ancient times the Church permitted the faithful in general to bring bread and wine to the house of God and to place them on the altar, and the priest accepted them as well for the Sacrifice as for his daily support. " : Ears of wheat and bunches of grapes are the most noble and most valuable products of the vegetable world; they compose, so to speak, the flesh and blood of the earth. These "firstlings of God's creatures and gifts" 2 represent, therefore, nature in her entirety, which is in a manner offered to God in the oblations of bread and wine, obtained one from the ears of wheat, the other from the grapes. The offering of bread and wine then symbolizes also the donation of man himself and of his life; for bread and wine are the most excellent means of nourishment, that serve to support and strengthen corporal life.
Therefore, the Psalmist says (Ps. 103, 14 15): "The Lord bringeth bread out of the earth for the service of men, and wine that it may cheer the heart of man." Thus the gifts of bread and wine serve symbolically to represent the offering to God of all created things, as required of man. In the bread and wine, man offers himself and all that he is. It may then be inferred that the separate species of bread and wine are suited to represent the separation of the Blood from the Body of Christ, the painful death of Christ, Christ's bloody sacrifice on the Cross.
The Church requires that the matter used for the Consecration be not only valid and as far as possible genuine, but, moreover,
that it be permissible and as far as possible perfect. The bread
destined for the sacrificial action must have been made of pure
wheaten flour, that has been mixed with natural water and baked in
the fire; and that the bread be pure, whole and fresh. The sacrificial wine of the vine must have been pressed from ripe grapes,
fully fermented, not soured, nor settled, nor artificially composed;
as to the color and taste, it may be red or white, strong or light,
naturally sweet or tart. With regard to the color, it is to be re-
marked that, although red wine symbolizes more perfectly than the
white the Blood of Christ, still white wine is to be preferred, because
in its use at the altar cleanliness can more easily be observed.
Another prescription respecting the sacrificial elements is that the
bread is required to be unleavened and the wine to be mixed with a
little water. The use of unleavened bread and the mixing of wine
with water have a higher meaning, and are, therefore, strictly pre-
scribed by the Church; although they are not required for the valid-
ity, yet they are absolutely required for the lawfulness of the
Consecration.
The bread should be unleavened. This is a strict ordinance of the Church for the priests of the Latin rite, while on the united Greeks it is as strictly enjoined, according to an old custom, to consecrate only in leavened bread. In the East the Armenians and Syro-.Maronites (like the Latins) use un- leavened bread.
Among the Greeks it appears that leavened sacrificial bread, from the most ancient times, was exclusively or at least generally used. The historic question has not as yet been solved, what kind of bread the Western Church used for the Sacrifice during the first ten centuries. Three different views prevail regarding it among Catholic theologians since the seventeenth century, when the controversy was most animated. P. Sirmond S. J. ft 1651) in his Disquisitio de azymo, sem- perne in usu altaris fuerit apud Latinos defended the assertion (in its universality at any rate exaggerated and incorrect), that the Western Church in the middle of the ninth century consecrated exclusively leavened bread. Christopher Lupus O. S. Aug. (f 1681) first opposed this opinion. But as its chief opponent Mabillon O. S. B. (f 1707) came forth, who principally in his Dissertatio de pane eucharistico azymo ac fermentato defended the diametrically opposite opinion, namely, that in the West the constant and general use of unleavened sacrificial bread had prevailed (among the Apostles only, he admits the partial use of leavened bread). Cardinal Bona O. Cist, (f 1674) takes a middle view, employing the inconclusive arguments used by both opponents, to make it probable, that the Roman Church until late in are equally valid matter of the Sacrifice: the one as well as the other has its peculiar mystical signification. Yet there are more numerous and better reasons for the usage prevalent in the Latin Church; hence the rite of the latter is to be preferred. These reasons are principally the following :
a) The example of Christ at the institution of the Eucharist. The Saviour kept "on the first day of unleavened bread" the Pasch with His disciples therefore, at the time in which the Jews, according to the ordinance of the law, were obliged to have nothing leavened in the house or to partake of it. Consequently, it is generally admitted that Christ consecrated unleavened bread. Although the words of the Lord to His Apostles and their successors commanding them to do the same as He had done at the Last Supper, may not have been a formal command to consecrate unleavened bread, still it is evident that in so grave and sacred a matter the example of Christ should not easily be departed from. To depart from it, the Church has not the slightest reason; on the contrary, she has every reason to retain the use of unleavened bread after the example of Christ, since in many respects the unleavened merits a preference to the leavened bread.
b) The unleavened bread symbolizes very appropriately the Eucharistic Victim and the Eucharistic Food of the soul. The leaven penetrates and soon leavens the entire mass of flour in which it is mixed, changing it into savory bread; from this point of view the Saviour (Matt. 13, 33) calls the Divine Truth and Grace a heavenly leaven that transforms mankind. Otherwise leaven is usually employed in an evil sense. Namely, it displaces the flour in its working, that is, in its fermentation works decomposition or decay; therefore, it serves as a figure of the unclean, the perverse and the corrupted. Unleavened bread, on the contrary, which has undergone no such process of fermentation, is a symbol of purity and cleanliness. Accordingly, only unleavened bread can appropriately indicate the superhuman holiness and purity of the Eucharistic Victim, as well as the incomparable purity and incorruption of the Eucharistic Food of the soul.
c) Inasmuch as unleavened bread calls to our mind, how un- speakably pure and bright the transfigured Body of Christ is, at the same time it also reminds us of the purity of heart and body with which we should approach the Table of the Lord and receive the Food of Angels. According to the counsel of the Apostle (i Cor. 5, 7-8) we must purge out the old leaven of sin and passion, of wicked- ness and wantonness, that we may be "a new paste, as we are un- leavened" and be enabled, when thus sanctified, to partake of the immaculate Flesh of the Eucharistic Victim. These thoughts are beautifully expressed in the Paschal Hymn which says: "Christ is our paschal sacrifice, while for unleavened bread we need but heart sincere and purpose true" (pura puris mentibus sinceritatis azyma}.
b) To the sacrificial wine a small quantity of natural water
must be added, according to Apostolic ordinance and the strict discipline of the Church. As this commingling is a holy ceremony, it
must take place at the altar before the Oblation and be made in the
chalice itself. Even a drop answers the purpose. It is, moreover,
advisable and always safe to pour but a little water into the chalice,
that the wine be not too much weakened and thus perhaps be
spoiled. This mixture is so important and, therefore, so strictly
prescribed, that it would never be allowed for a priest to begin the
Holy Sacrifice, if he foresaw that no water could be procured. Profoundly significant are the reasons that favor the fitness of this
ecclesiastical ordinance and practice.
a) The example of the Savior. That the Lord at the institution of the Eucharist consecrated wine mixed with water, is beyond a doubt. And in favor of this is the circumstance, that the addition of water to the wine at the Paschal meal was a permanent and universally practiced custom from which the Lord surely did not depart. The ancient liturgies and holy Fathers are unanimous in asserting that the Savior mingled the Eucharistic chalice with water. Thus from the time of the Apostles the Church has every- where and at all times faithfully followed after the example of her Divine Master, and has ever consecrated only wine mixed with water. She regarded it, as St. Cyprian writes in his letter to Caeci- lius, as proper that at the mixing and offering of the chalice of the Lord, she should observe the true tradition thereof, in order that at His glorious and triumphant return He may find us adhering strictly to that whereunto He had exhorted us, observing what He had taught and doing what He had done.
Besides this historical reason there are also mystical and sym- bolical reasons.
6) The wine destined to be changed into the Blood of Christ is mixed with water at the altar, that by these two elements the blood and water which flowed, on the Cross, from the wound in the side of Christ may be represented. The piercing and opening of the Heart of Jesus, with the stream of blood and water issuing there from, is a wonderful event and, at the same time, one full of mystical meaning, which should in a very special manner engage the attention of men; for the Evangelist, in speaking of it, mentions this passage of the Prophet: "They shall look on him whom they have pierced" (John 19, 37; Zach. 12, 10). For this occurrence proves not only the truth and reality of the sacrificial death of Christ, but it, moreover, involves a profound symbolism; for the stream of blood and water which proceeded from the wounded Heart of Jesus symbolizes all the graces and blessings that flow to us from the passion and death of Christ. The water, namely, symbolizes Baptism, which is the laver of purification and regeneration; the blood signifies the Eucharist, the fountain of reconciliation and strength unto life eternal. But since Baptism is the beginning, the Eucharist, the end and complement of the remaining sacraments, they are all included in these two principal ones. The outpouring of blood and water from the pierced side of the Redeemer, therefore, symbolically expresses that all the sacraments have their origin in His sacrificial death, that is, that they derive from it their power and plenitude of grace. But the Church is the only lawful possessor and administrator of the sacraments, by virtue of which she in her members is ever undergoing purification and sanctification, enlivened and fructified: hence the holy Fathers behold in the pierced Heart of Jesus also the divine origin of the Church. They say that from the opened side and breast of the second Adam, while slumbering in death, the new Eve, that is, the Church, was formed and came forth. 2 In the Office of the Sacred Lance and Nails it is said: "Thou, O Lance, hast opened to the world the life-giving side, whence came forth the holy Church." Thus from the pierced Heart of Jesus, that is, from the stream of blood and water proceeding therefrom, the pure, immaculate Church was born, and thence the inexhaustible fountain of her graces originated. The rite of the mixing of wine and water in the chalice can and should remind us of these mysteries.
c) The commingling of wine and water in the chalice refers also to that intimate, mystical relationship existing between Christ and His Church. 3 Under this meaning, the noble, precious element of the wine, considered as to its qualities and effects, as well viewed as to the approaching consecration into the Blood of Christ, is taken as a symbol of the God-Man; while the running, flowing water is a speaking figure of unstable, perishable man. "The waters which thou sawest," said the Angel to John, "are peoples and nations" (Apoc. 17, 15). Like wave on wave nations, one oil the other, press upon the stream of time; like billows chasing and rolling on one another, and lost in the deep, generations of men rise, one on another, to sink again in turn into the grave of eternity. The drops of water which have been poured into the chalice no longer exist of themselves, but they are diffused in and incorporated into the wine, partaking of its qualities. Similar is the union of the faithful with Christ: by virtue of this union a change takes place in them and they are made partakers of the divine nature, that is, by sanctifying grace they are made children of God, and by the bestowal of heavenly glory they become heirs of God. For from the Head, Jesus Christ, who is filled with all the treasures of the divinity, the unction of grace flows down to His members, descending even to the hem and extremity of the garment of the Church (Ps. 132, 2), so that she becomes wholly penetrated with the precious flow of heavenly gifts. We are to understand by the commingling of wine and water before the Oblation, first of all, the sacrificial Communion between Christ and the Church, that is, this ceremony is intended to place before our eyes that Christ as the Head, in union with the Church, as His mystical body, offers sacrifice and is offered in sacrifice at the celebration of Mass. Hereby, at the same time, is indicated that unspeakably intimate and exalted relation, which is realized and perfected between the children of the Church and our Redeemer by the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Eucharist. This is that supernatural espousal of which the Apostle wrote to the Chris- tians of Corinth: "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you a chaste virgin to Christ" (2 Cor. u, 2). It commences here below in sanctifying grace and is consummated above in eternal glory.
The Sacrificial Elements
The grain of wheat, which is the fat of the land, and the grape, which ripens in the sun, in a manner contain the marrow and blood of the earth, are also intended mainly to renew man's substance and to refresh his blood, and are, therefore, the chief means for the nourishment of his life. Nowhere do these grow wild, but in all places they thrive only by man's careful and laborious cultivation; and when he has harvested the ears and gathered in the grapes, it is still by renewed labor that he must prepare them for food and drink. If, therefore, on the one hand, bread and wine are gifts of God, they are, on the other, products of man; the sweat of his brow cleaves to them, before they are changed into his flesh and blood. Hence they are eminently suited as gifts of man to God; in presenting them we offer to God our fatigue and labor, and in the offering of these gifts we bring to God, so to speak, our flesh and blood, our body and life. Therefore, before our Lord can give and leave us His Flesh and Blood as a sacrifice, we must offer to Him bread and wine, in that we separate and withdraw these articles from the ordinary wants of life, and reserve and sanctify them for Him for His Sacrifice. Consequently, in ancient times the Church permitted the faithful in general to bring bread and wine to the house of God and to place them on the altar, and the priest accepted them as well for the Sacrifice as for his daily support. " : Ears of wheat and bunches of grapes are the most noble and most valuable products of the vegetable world; they compose, so to speak, the flesh and blood of the earth. These "firstlings of God's creatures and gifts" 2 represent, therefore, nature in her entirety, which is in a manner offered to God in the oblations of bread and wine, obtained one from the ears of wheat, the other from the grapes. The offering of bread and wine then symbolizes also the donation of man himself and of his life; for bread and wine are the most excellent means of nourishment, that serve to support and strengthen corporal life.
Therefore, the Psalmist says (Ps. 103, 14 15): "The Lord bringeth bread out of the earth for the service of men, and wine that it may cheer the heart of man." Thus the gifts of bread and wine serve symbolically to represent the offering to God of all created things, as required of man. In the bread and wine, man offers himself and all that he is. It may then be inferred that the separate species of bread and wine are suited to represent the separation of the Blood from the Body of Christ, the painful death of Christ, Christ's bloody sacrifice on the Cross.
The Church requires that the matter used for the Consecration be not only valid and as far as possible genuine, but, moreover,
that it be permissible and as far as possible perfect. The bread
destined for the sacrificial action must have been made of pure
wheaten flour, that has been mixed with natural water and baked in
the fire; and that the bread be pure, whole and fresh. The sacrificial wine of the vine must have been pressed from ripe grapes,
fully fermented, not soured, nor settled, nor artificially composed;
as to the color and taste, it may be red or white, strong or light,
naturally sweet or tart. With regard to the color, it is to be re-
marked that, although red wine symbolizes more perfectly than the
white the Blood of Christ, still white wine is to be preferred, because
in its use at the altar cleanliness can more easily be observed.
Another prescription respecting the sacrificial elements is that the
bread is required to be unleavened and the wine to be mixed with a
little water. The use of unleavened bread and the mixing of wine
with water have a higher meaning, and are, therefore, strictly pre-
scribed by the Church; although they are not required for the valid-
ity, yet they are absolutely required for the lawfulness of the
Consecration.The bread should be unleavened. This is a strict ordinance of the Church for the priests of the Latin rite, while on the united Greeks it is as strictly enjoined, according to an old custom, to consecrate only in leavened bread. In the East the Armenians and Syro-.Maronites (like the Latins) use un- leavened bread.
Among the Greeks it appears that leavened sacrificial bread, from the most ancient times, was exclusively or at least generally used. The historic question has not as yet been solved, what kind of bread the Western Church used for the Sacrifice during the first ten centuries. Three different views prevail regarding it among Catholic theologians since the seventeenth century, when the controversy was most animated. P. Sirmond S. J. ft 1651) in his Disquisitio de azymo, sem- perne in usu altaris fuerit apud Latinos defended the assertion (in its universality at any rate exaggerated and incorrect), that the Western Church in the middle of the ninth century consecrated exclusively leavened bread. Christopher Lupus O. S. Aug. (f 1681) first opposed this opinion. But as its chief opponent Mabillon O. S. B. (f 1707) came forth, who principally in his Dissertatio de pane eucharistico azymo ac fermentato defended the diametrically opposite opinion, namely, that in the West the constant and general use of unleavened sacrificial bread had prevailed (among the Apostles only, he admits the partial use of leavened bread). Cardinal Bona O. Cist, (f 1674) takes a middle view, employing the inconclusive arguments used by both opponents, to make it probable, that the Roman Church until late in are equally valid matter of the Sacrifice: the one as well as the other has its peculiar mystical signification. Yet there are more numerous and better reasons for the usage prevalent in the Latin Church; hence the rite of the latter is to be preferred. These reasons are principally the following :
a) The example of Christ at the institution of the Eucharist. The Saviour kept "on the first day of unleavened bread" the Pasch with His disciples therefore, at the time in which the Jews, according to the ordinance of the law, were obliged to have nothing leavened in the house or to partake of it. Consequently, it is generally admitted that Christ consecrated unleavened bread. Although the words of the Lord to His Apostles and their successors commanding them to do the same as He had done at the Last Supper, may not have been a formal command to consecrate unleavened bread, still it is evident that in so grave and sacred a matter the example of Christ should not easily be departed from. To depart from it, the Church has not the slightest reason; on the contrary, she has every reason to retain the use of unleavened bread after the example of Christ, since in many respects the unleavened merits a preference to the leavened bread.
b) The unleavened bread symbolizes very appropriately the Eucharistic Victim and the Eucharistic Food of the soul. The leaven penetrates and soon leavens the entire mass of flour in which it is mixed, changing it into savory bread; from this point of view the Saviour (Matt. 13, 33) calls the Divine Truth and Grace a heavenly leaven that transforms mankind. Otherwise leaven is usually employed in an evil sense. Namely, it displaces the flour in its working, that is, in its fermentation works decomposition or decay; therefore, it serves as a figure of the unclean, the perverse and the corrupted. Unleavened bread, on the contrary, which has undergone no such process of fermentation, is a symbol of purity and cleanliness. Accordingly, only unleavened bread can appropriately indicate the superhuman holiness and purity of the Eucharistic Victim, as well as the incomparable purity and incorruption of the Eucharistic Food of the soul.
c) Inasmuch as unleavened bread calls to our mind, how un- speakably pure and bright the transfigured Body of Christ is, at the same time it also reminds us of the purity of heart and body with which we should approach the Table of the Lord and receive the Food of Angels. According to the counsel of the Apostle (i Cor. 5, 7-8) we must purge out the old leaven of sin and passion, of wicked- ness and wantonness, that we may be "a new paste, as we are un- leavened" and be enabled, when thus sanctified, to partake of the immaculate Flesh of the Eucharistic Victim. These thoughts are beautifully expressed in the Paschal Hymn which says: "Christ is our paschal sacrifice, while for unleavened bread we need but heart sincere and purpose true" (pura puris mentibus sinceritatis azyma}.
b) To the sacrificial wine a small quantity of natural water
must be added, according to Apostolic ordinance and the strict discipline of the Church. As this commingling is a holy ceremony, it
must take place at the altar before the Oblation and be made in the
chalice itself. Even a drop answers the purpose. It is, moreover,
advisable and always safe to pour but a little water into the chalice,
that the wine be not too much weakened and thus perhaps be
spoiled. This mixture is so important and, therefore, so strictly
prescribed, that it would never be allowed for a priest to begin the
Holy Sacrifice, if he foresaw that no water could be procured. Profoundly significant are the reasons that favor the fitness of this
ecclesiastical ordinance and practice.
a) The example of the Savior. That the Lord at the institution of the Eucharist consecrated wine mixed with water, is beyond a doubt. And in favor of this is the circumstance, that the addition of water to the wine at the Paschal meal was a permanent and universally practiced custom from which the Lord surely did not depart. The ancient liturgies and holy Fathers are unanimous in asserting that the Savior mingled the Eucharistic chalice with water. Thus from the time of the Apostles the Church has every- where and at all times faithfully followed after the example of her Divine Master, and has ever consecrated only wine mixed with water. She regarded it, as St. Cyprian writes in his letter to Caeci- lius, as proper that at the mixing and offering of the chalice of the Lord, she should observe the true tradition thereof, in order that at His glorious and triumphant return He may find us adhering strictly to that whereunto He had exhorted us, observing what He had taught and doing what He had done.
Besides this historical reason there are also mystical and sym- bolical reasons.
6) The wine destined to be changed into the Blood of Christ is mixed with water at the altar, that by these two elements the blood and water which flowed, on the Cross, from the wound in the side of Christ may be represented. The piercing and opening of the Heart of Jesus, with the stream of blood and water issuing there from, is a wonderful event and, at the same time, one full of mystical meaning, which should in a very special manner engage the attention of men; for the Evangelist, in speaking of it, mentions this passage of the Prophet: "They shall look on him whom they have pierced" (John 19, 37; Zach. 12, 10). For this occurrence proves not only the truth and reality of the sacrificial death of Christ, but it, moreover, involves a profound symbolism; for the stream of blood and water which proceeded from the wounded Heart of Jesus symbolizes all the graces and blessings that flow to us from the passion and death of Christ. The water, namely, symbolizes Baptism, which is the laver of purification and regeneration; the blood signifies the Eucharist, the fountain of reconciliation and strength unto life eternal. But since Baptism is the beginning, the Eucharist, the end and complement of the remaining sacraments, they are all included in these two principal ones. The outpouring of blood and water from the pierced side of the Redeemer, therefore, symbolically expresses that all the sacraments have their origin in His sacrificial death, that is, that they derive from it their power and plenitude of grace. But the Church is the only lawful possessor and administrator of the sacraments, by virtue of which she in her members is ever undergoing purification and sanctification, enlivened and fructified: hence the holy Fathers behold in the pierced Heart of Jesus also the divine origin of the Church. They say that from the opened side and breast of the second Adam, while slumbering in death, the new Eve, that is, the Church, was formed and came forth. 2 In the Office of the Sacred Lance and Nails it is said: "Thou, O Lance, hast opened to the world the life-giving side, whence came forth the holy Church." Thus from the pierced Heart of Jesus, that is, from the stream of blood and water proceeding therefrom, the pure, immaculate Church was born, and thence the inexhaustible fountain of her graces originated. The rite of the mixing of wine and water in the chalice can and should remind us of these mysteries.
c) The commingling of wine and water in the chalice refers also to that intimate, mystical relationship existing between Christ and His Church. 3 Under this meaning, the noble, precious element of the wine, considered as to its qualities and effects, as well viewed as to the approaching consecration into the Blood of Christ, is taken as a symbol of the God-Man; while the running, flowing water is a speaking figure of unstable, perishable man. "The waters which thou sawest," said the Angel to John, "are peoples and nations" (Apoc. 17, 15). Like wave on wave nations, one oil the other, press upon the stream of time; like billows chasing and rolling on one another, and lost in the deep, generations of men rise, one on another, to sink again in turn into the grave of eternity. The drops of water which have been poured into the chalice no longer exist of themselves, but they are diffused in and incorporated into the wine, partaking of its qualities. Similar is the union of the faithful with Christ: by virtue of this union a change takes place in them and they are made partakers of the divine nature, that is, by sanctifying grace they are made children of God, and by the bestowal of heavenly glory they become heirs of God. For from the Head, Jesus Christ, who is filled with all the treasures of the divinity, the unction of grace flows down to His members, descending even to the hem and extremity of the garment of the Church (Ps. 132, 2), so that she becomes wholly penetrated with the precious flow of heavenly gifts. We are to understand by the commingling of wine and water before the Oblation, first of all, the sacrificial Communion between Christ and the Church, that is, this ceremony is intended to place before our eyes that Christ as the Head, in union with the Church, as His mystical body, offers sacrifice and is offered in sacrifice at the celebration of Mass. Hereby, at the same time, is indicated that unspeakably intimate and exalted relation, which is realized and perfected between the children of the Church and our Redeemer by the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Eucharist. This is that supernatural espousal of which the Apostle wrote to the Chris- tians of Corinth: "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you a chaste virgin to Christ" (2 Cor. u, 2). It commences here below in sanctifying grace and is consummated above in eternal glory.
+JMJ+
Friday, September 2, 2016
Liberal Christianity and religious cultural conservatism have a common flaw - Thomas Pink
I saw this the other day and it was just another reminder how me give lip service to the truth, but set up false ideas like American exceptionalism and idea worship truely in place of actual dogma
Christianity is an unconditional allegiance; and it involves membership of a Church which, though she exists in a world of political communities and nations, co-exists with these as contingent realities that are merely passing. Our allegiance as Christians to any of these merely passing realities can only be conditional; and it must be conditional, in particular, on the extent of their respect for Christianity and the mission of the Church.
But then that same Anglicanism wrapped itself up in a passing political and cultural identity, and defended itself in terms only intelligible in the context of that identity.
The particular time or place of one’s youth and childhood is always vividly one’s own. Equally it is irrecoverable, and impossible fully to communicate to others. It is a place to which one can never return, and it cannot provide a common life. But Christianity provides, through the Church, a common life that is eternal – to which one must arrive through a history, but not to remain in that history. This common life appeals to memory but cannot remain locked up in the vividness of a particular remembered past, not that of an individual, or even of a nation.
There is a religiose form of cultural conservatism that ignores this, and that seeks to defend Christianity as, in effect, a local human tradition. It can take Anglican form, and celebrate a national idyll of prayer book and common law, or it can equally well take a more superficially Catholic form, and celebrate Christianity as the essence of a European culture. But this is limiting and presumptuous.
The Christian life is supernatural. It divinises the human. Cultural conservatism parading as religion does the reverse. In this respect it curiously resembles Christianity in overtly liberal form. Like liberal Christianity, cultural nostalgia reduces to the human what should be divine.
You can read the rest HERE
 |
| The talk radio mafia, pushers of the American Civil Religion |
But then that same Anglicanism wrapped itself up in a passing political and cultural identity, and defended itself in terms only intelligible in the context of that identity.
The particular time or place of one’s youth and childhood is always vividly one’s own. Equally it is irrecoverable, and impossible fully to communicate to others. It is a place to which one can never return, and it cannot provide a common life. But Christianity provides, through the Church, a common life that is eternal – to which one must arrive through a history, but not to remain in that history. This common life appeals to memory but cannot remain locked up in the vividness of a particular remembered past, not that of an individual, or even of a nation.
There is a religiose form of cultural conservatism that ignores this, and that seeks to defend Christianity as, in effect, a local human tradition. It can take Anglican form, and celebrate a national idyll of prayer book and common law, or it can equally well take a more superficially Catholic form, and celebrate Christianity as the essence of a European culture. But this is limiting and presumptuous.
The Christian life is supernatural. It divinises the human. Cultural conservatism parading as religion does the reverse. In this respect it curiously resembles Christianity in overtly liberal form. Like liberal Christianity, cultural nostalgia reduces to the human what should be divine.
You can read the rest HERE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)