Mariological Ecclesiology --Ratzinger

Virgen con el Niño: Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (1618-1682)

"Mary is the Church in person..."

The Old Testament
The tradition identifying the Church with a woman reaches far back into the Old Testament, where Israel sees itself as the bride whom God wishes to take into his confidence, to make his own, and to unite to himself in eternal love. That was adopted in the Church, which in fact continues the life of the Old Testament.

Saint Paul
Paul talks about our mother, the Jerusalem on high. He is thus discovering, from within the Jewish tradition, the image of the Church as mother, this motherly city that has given birth to us all and that gives us life and freedom.

The Fathers of the Church
And so the Fathers took up this idea, which also appears in the Apocalypse--the woman arrayed in the sun--and used it to portray the whole holy being of the Church. Although often they had no thought of Mary in doing this, basically the whole of mariological thought is being expounded here along with ecclesiology.

In other words, what the Church is, is made concrete in Mary. And the theological significance of Mary appears in the Church. Both spill over into each other, so to speak: Mary is the Church in person and the Church as a whole embodies what Mary, as a person, anticipates.

Paul Claudel
...Claudel...intuitively rediscovered, in [his] conversion experience [in Notre Dame], the original mother figure and the indivisibility of Mariology and ecclesiology.

The Twentieth Century
In our own century, Hugo Rahner,...a great patristic scholar, has collected and marvelously presented all the patristic texts so as to show that wherever the Fathers are talking about the Church as a woman, then, as it were, Mary also appears--and that a narrowing of Mariology is thereby overcome. Other people have done further work on this. The Second Vatican Council picked this up by linking Mariology and ecclesiology.

I think that in fact this rediscovery of the interchangeability between Mary and the Church, the personification of the Church in Mary and the universal dimension acquired by Mary in the Church, is one of the most important theological rediscoveries of the twentieth century.

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, God and the Word: Believing and Living in Our Time: A Conversation with Peter Seewald (original German edition 2000). San Francisco: Ignatius, 2002, 352-353.

Summa Sermon Notes 14

Here are the Summa references for the EF, Pentecost and Trinity Sunday.

Pentecost

EPISTLE (Acts 2:1-11)

"When the days of Pentecost were accomplished"

   To what feast of the Old Testament did Pentecost succeed? I-II Q.103, a.3

"They were altogether in one place"

   To pray properly, is it proper to meet in a definite place? II-II Q.83, a.4; Q.81, a.3

"And there appeared to them parted tongues"

   The gift of tongues II-II Q.176

   The gifts of the Holy Ghost I-II Q.68

   Why did the Holy Ghost descend in the form of fiery tongues on the apostles? I Q.43, a.7; III Q.39, a.6

   Why the form of fire and tongues? III Q.72, a.2

"And they began to speak with divers tongues"

   How did the apostles speak in everyone's language? III Q.176

   Were the apostles instructed in finer points of foreign languages as they were in their own? III Q.176

   Why did Christ not speak in all languages? III Q.176, a.1

"Because every man heard them speak in His own tongue"

   Were they in speaking one tongue understood by all, or did they speak in several tongues? III Q.176, a.1

GOSPEL (John 14:23-31)

"If any one love Me, he will keep My word"

   In what does charity consist? II-II Q.23

"My Father will love Him"

   The love of God I Q.20

"We will come to Him and make Our abode with Him"

   How the Father and the whole Trinity come to us and make Their abode with us I Q.43, a.4, ad.2

"But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost"

   Is this name fitting for any one divine Person? I Q.36, a.1

   Other names of the Holy Ghost I Q.32; Q.38; Q.39, a.8

"He will teach you all things"

   Since neither the apostles nor the Church know all truth, could this promise be true? I-II Q.106, a.4, ad.2

"My peace I give unto you"

   What is true peace? II-II Q.29, a.2, ad.3

"Let not your heart be troubled nor let it be afraid"

   Fortitude II-II Q.123

   Is fortitude concerned with fears and daring? II-II a.123, a.3

   Is fortitude concerned only with fear of death? II-II a.123, a.4

   Fear opposed to fortitude II-II Q.125

   When is fear a sin, when not? II-II Q.125, a.1

   When is fear a mortal sin? II-II Q.125, a.3

"For the Father is greater than I"

   How can the Father be said to be greater than the Son? I Q.42, a.4, ad.1; a.7, ad.1

   Is Christ subject to the Father? III Q.20, a.1

   Is Christ subject to Himself? III Q.20, a.2

"As the Father hath given Me commandment, so do I"

   As the Son is equal in power to the Father, how can the Father be said to give the Son a commandment? I Q.43, a.6, ad.1

Trinity Sunday

EPISTLE (Romans 11:33-36)

"O the depth of the riches of the wisdom," etc.

   Why does God predestine some and condemn others? I Q.23, a.5, ad.3

   does god in letting one fall, raise up another? I Q.23, a.6, ad.1

"How incomprehensible are His judgments"

   Do those who see God comprehend Him? I Q.12, a.7

   Do those who see God, see everything in Him? I Q.12, a.8

   Can the Trinity of Persons be known by natural reason? I Q.31, a.1

   Is God's existence known per se? I Q.2, a.1

"Who hath first given to Him, and recompense shall be made"

   Is it impossible to merit anything from God? I-II Q.114, a.1, ad.3

"For of Him and my Him"

   The appropriation of term "Father," Son," etc. I Q.39, a.8

GOSPEL (Matthew 28:18-20)

"All power is given to Me in heaven"

   The power of God I Q.25

   The power of Christ III Q.13

   How does the soul of Christ have omnipotence over unchangeable creatures? III Q.13, a.2, ad.1

"Going, therefore, teach"

   Should catechizing precede Baptism? III Q.71, a.1

"All nations"

   The recipients of Baptism III Q.68

"Baptizing them"

   The ministers of the sacrament of Baptism III Q.67

"In the name of the Father," etc.

   Is the above a fitting form of Baptism? III Q.66, a.5

   The names of god I Q.13

   Things pertaining to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost I Q.33; Q.34; Q.35; Q.36

"Teaching them to observe"

   The doctrine of Christ III Q.42

The Covid-19 Real Herd-Immunity Numbers

Half-a-billion people have recovered from Covid-19 and are inoculated. Here's why.

Over 99% of the people who get Covid-19 are barely affected by it (e.g. all children 14 years old and younger, and most people who are under 60), that "they don't even know they have had it." And the duration of the virus in a person who shows no symptoms is one week. It comes, and it goes, leaving him inoculated.

Therefore, with the world-wide total of reported cases over 5 million people, all of whom were presumably made noticeably ill by the virus, that means that at least 495 million people have unwittingly had the virus and have recovered quickly from it without incident and are immune to it, to getting it, to carrying it and to transmitting it. That's half-a-billion people!

That translates to 158 million people in the USA alone (with our 1.6 million reporting), "vaccinated" already! With those types of natural inoculation numbers who needs a vaccine? Take reasonable precautions with the most vulnerable population, and move forward with courage because for every known case there are at least 99 simultaneous inoculations.

Hand sanitizing, yes; social distancing, yes; gloves, perhaps; masks?, no. Masks are ineffective for the general population and are a great deception. All experts know that most people should not wear masks.

There are at least 158 million Americans who absolutely don't need to take any precautions, and that number increases by 99 with every newly reported case of Covid-19 illness. Keep that in mind as the "number of cases" continues thereby to be grossly under-reported. The "reports" of every reported case are ignoring the 99 other unreported recovery cases.

President Donald Trump is right to refuse to wear the mask. Every American should refuse to wear it, in the name of health, intelligence and freedom from coercion.

Summa Sermon Notes 13

Here are the Summa references for the EF, Ascension Day and Sunday after the Ascension.

Ascension Day

EPISTLE (Acts 1:1-11)

"Jesus began to do and to teach"

   Why did He first begin to do and then to teach? III Q.41, a.3, a.1

"To whom He also showed Himself alive... by many proofs"

   Should Christ have proved clearly His resurrection? III Q.55, a.5

   Did Christ's arguments sufficiently prove His resurrection? III Q.5, a.6

"For forty days appearing to them"

   Why did Christ wish for forty days to be here on earth before His ascension? III Q.57, a.1, ad.4

   Did Christ after His resurrection continuously converse with His disciples? III Q.55, a.3

"And eating together with them"

   Why did Christ eat with His disciples? III Q.55. a.3; a.6, ad.1

"For John indeed baptized with water"

   Was grace conferred through John's baptism? III Q.38, a.3
"But you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost"
   When, after Christ's resurrection, were the apostles baptized by the Holy Ghost? III Q.72, a.6, ad.2
"It is not for you to know the times"
   Is the time of the judgment altogether unknown? Suppl. Q.88, a.3
"You shall be witnesses of me in Jerusalem"
   At the time of the apostles was Christ's gospel preached universally? I-II Q.106, a.4, ad.4
"And when He had said these things, while they looked on"
   Why was Christ's ascension rather than His resurrection performed in the presence of His disciples? III Q. 55, a.2, ad.2
"He was raised up"
   Did Christ ascend of His own power? III Q.57, a.3, ad.1
"And a cloud received Him"
   How could a cloud receive Christ? III Q.57, a.4, ad.4
"This Jesus...shall so come as you have seen"
   Did not Christ ascend to remain ever in heaven III Q.57, a.6, ad.3
GOSPEL (Mark 16:14-20)
"Jesus appeared to them"
   How did Jesus appear lastly to the disciples at table, when afterwards they witnessed His ascension? III Q.55, a.3, ad.3
"He upbraided them with their incredulity"
   Did the apostles not firmly believe the resurrection? III Q.55, a.5
"Preach the gospel to every creature"
   Why is man called every creature or a small world? I Q.91, a.1
"But he that believeth not"
   Is belief necessary for salvation? II-II Q.2, a.3
"And these signs shall follow them that believe"
   Is justification a miraculous work? I-II Q.114, a.10
   Why is the grace of miracles given to certain men? II-II Q.178, a.1
   To whom was it fitting to have this grace during Christ's lifetime? III Q.27, a.5, ad.3
   Is the grace of performing miracles given to bad or evil people? II-II Q.178, a.2, ad.3
   Can evil people, preaching false doctrine preform miracles? II-II Q.178, a.2
   Is the gift of miracles given to all the saints? II-II Q.178 a.2, ad.5
   Why did the blessed Mother and John the Baptist not perform miracles? III Q.27, a.5, ad.3
   Why the grace of miracles is attributed to faith II-II Q.178, a.1, ad.5
"They shall lay their hands upon the sick"
   What is this imposition of hands? III Q.84, a.4, ad.1
   Did Christ fittingly ascend into heaven? III Q.57, a.1
   According to what nature did He ascend? III Q.57, a.3
   Did Christ ascend above every spiritual creature? III Q.57, a.3
   Is Christ's ascension the cause of our salvation? III Q.57, a.6
"And sitteth on the right hand of God"
   Since the Father is greater than Christ why does Christ sit on the right and not on the left? III Q.58, a.1, ad.2
   Sitting on the right hand: is it proper to Christ as God or man? III Q.58, aa. 2, 3.
   Is it fitting for some other one to sit at the right hand of God? III Q.58, a.4

Sunday after the Ascension
EPISTLE (1 Peter 4:7-11)
"Be prudent"
   Of what does prudence treat? II-II Q.47, a.2
   Is prudence a virtue? II-II Q.47, a.4
   Among the commandments is there a precept on prudence? II-II Q.46, a.1
   Does prudence exist in the sinner? II-II Q.47, a.13
   Does prudence exist in all who are in state of grace? II-II Q.47, a.14
"In prayers"
   Prayer and devotion II-II Q.82; Q.83
"Have a constant mutual charity among yourselves"
   Does charity extend to one's neighbor? II-II Q.25, a.1
"For charity covereth a multitude of sins"
   Is remission of sin possible without the sacrament of Penance? III Q.84, a.5, ad.2
"Ministering the same one to another"
   Is one who is mentally and morally equipped bound to accept the episcopacy? II-II Q.185, a.1, ad.3; a.2
GOSPEL (John 15:26-27; 16:1-4)
"Whom I will send you from the Father"
   How is one divine Person sent by another? I Q.43, a.1
   Does the Son send the Holy Ghost? I Q.43, a.8
   How does the Holy Ghost send the Son? I Q.43, a.8
"Who preceedeth from the Father"
   Why is the Holy Ghost not called "begotten"? I Q.27, a.4
   Does not the Holy Ghost proceed from the Son? I Q.36, a.2
"They will put you out of the synagogues"
   The power of excommunication Suppl. Q.21
"That whosoever killeth you"
   Is it proper to kill an innocent person for any reason? II-II Q.64, a.6
"And these things they will do to you, because they have not known the Father nor Me"
   What is the cause of martyrdom? II-II Q.124, a.5

Pope Francis Ad Orientem St. JPII Altar Cum Populo

Pastor's Response to Illicit Hand-Communion Mandate

Dear Parishioners and Friends,

As churches begin to open across our country once again for the celebration of public Masses, various Catholic news media and other sources are reporting that some dioceses are forbidding the people to receive Holy Communion on the tongue which, according to Church Liturgical Law is an option and right of the individual. No Bishop or priest has the authority to change universal Church Law and forbid the ordinary way to receive Holy Communion. Communion in the hand is an extraordinary way of receiving and is permitted by way of an indult. Only the Pope has the authority to change universal Church Law. Browsing through a number of diocesan websites I have read in their directives everything from strongly recommending people to receive Communion in the hand to outright forbidding reception on the tongue. This is not a sanction that can be imposed.

The instruction from the Congregation of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments titled Redemptionis sacramentum and dated March 25, 2004 clearly states that each of the faithful "always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue" (n. 92), nor is it licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ's faithful who are not impeded by law from receiving the Holy Eucharist (cf. n. 91).

Why are some dioceses upholding the rights of the faithful to receive Holy Communion on the tongue and others are not? Why are some dioceses ignoring the fact that there are Catholics who wish to receive in the traditional way and others which are giving clear guidelines on how to receive on the tongue during this time of pandemic? Neighboring dioceses are at odds with each other on this. The COVID-19 Coronavirus is the same whether in New York or Alaska, whether in Florida or Michigan. It does not change from diocese to diocese or state to state. Neither should the interpretation of Church Law be changed from diocese to diocese or state to state.

When the pandemic broke out two months ago, a doctor and an immunologist from the State of Oregon were consulted on the spread of the Coronavirus and both agreed that when done properly the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand pose a more or less equal risk. The risk of touching the tongue and passing saliva on to others is obviously a danger, however the chance of touching someone's hand is equally and possibly more probable and it is known that there are more germs on hands than in the mouth. In my 19 years as a priest and the thousands of Holy Communions which I distributed, I can attest that very few times have my fingers come in contact with the tongue or saliva of the communicant as I am extremely careful. The fingers of the priest are purified in the chalice after the distribution of Holy Communion and I do not find it a pleasant thought to drink water where there are traces of another's saliva.

Below is a link to an excellent study recently completed by the Thomistic Institute at the request of bishops. A working group of infectious disease experts, medical professionals, scientists, and Catholic theologians have developed detailed guidance for how Catholic sacraments could be provided in the midst of the current pandemic, in accord with the current standards issued by the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. It insures that the Blessed Sacrament will be respected, which should be the first and foremost concern of a priest as we are dealing with God, and the faithful be kept safe. For example, the study does not recommend the use of gloves for the distribution of Holy Communion but hand sanitizer and that it is possible to distribute on the tongue without unreasonable risk when certain precautions are followed. These guidelines have been approved by the Committee for Divine Worship of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and thus should be followed. This is a fair, well researched and professional document and not the work of a group of individuals who are making decisions on how things should or should not develop based on their opinion or likes.

When we eventually resume public Masses here at our parish we shall be following the detailed guidelines found herein. You will not be refused Holy Communion on the tongue here by any priest as according to Church Liturgical Law it is your right to receive that way! I include a link so that you may read the document for yourselves and be well informed of what is permissible and safe based on the findings of these experts:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/580e5b23579fb3fdc10ab03c/t/5ebb085a563107184e616409/1589315675057/Guidelines+for+Mass+%285.7.2020%29.pdf

In Jesus and Mary,
Fr. X.

"Better to Fall into the Hands of God than the Hands of Men"

Considering the human causes of the present crisis: e.g. the lab invention of the Corona viruses and, the Marshall Law manipulation of the masses, and the total elimination of public worship, in contrast, I think of King David's preference of divine pestilence to human persecution. The worst pestilence in the world is to trust more in men than in God! Put not thy trust in princes!

"Put not your trust in princes: In the children of men, in whom there is no salvation. His spirit shall go forth, and he shall return into his earth: in that day all their thoughts shall perish." Psalm 145 (146): 2-4

Faced with seven years of famine, three months fleeing his enemies or a pestilence lasting three days, David chooses the final punishment, fearing the wrath of man more than the merciful hand of God. After 70,000 people have died in the plague David pleads with God to end the retribution. --Google

"And David arose in the morning, and the word of the Lord came to Gad the prophet and the seer of David, saying: Go, and say to David: Thus saith the Lord: I give thee thy choice of three things, choose one of them which thou wilt, that I may do it to thee.

"And when Gad was come to David, he told him, saying: Either seven years of famine shall come to thee in thy land: or thou shalt flee three months before thy adversaries, and they shall pursue thee: or for three days there shall be a pestilence in thy land. Now therefore deliberate, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

"And David said to Gad: I am in a great strait: but it is better that I should fall into the hands of the Lord (for his mercies are many) than into the hands of men. And the Lord sent a pestilence upon Israel, from the morning unto the time appointed, and there died of the people from Dan to Bersabee seventy thousand men.

"And when the angel of the Lord had stretched out his hand over Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord had pity on the affliction, and said to the angel that slew the people: It is enough: now hold thy hand. And the angel of the Lord was by the thrashingfloor of Areuna the Jebusite. And David said to the Lord, when he saw the angel striking the people: It is I; I am he that have sinned, I have done wickedly: these that are the sheep, what have they done? let thy hand, I beseech thee, be turned against me, and against my father's house."

2 Samuel 24:11-17 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

Patent Lies

If the masks work, why did we shutdown?
If the masks don't work, why are we forced to wear them?

FIRE FAUCI!

N.B. The Swedish Model

Plandemic (Con't)

Here is the statement on the plandemic.com website, created to ensure the availability of "Plandemic" the movie, which is so universally censored and demonized that you have to scroll down to page 7 of google for the official website to finally appear after seven pages of anti-plandemic propaganda. YouTube has censored it already multiple times. 

COMING SUMMER 2020

Prior to the completion of the full-length documentary we'll be releasing a series of vignettes. The first installment features renowned scientist, Judy Mikovits PHD.

https://newtube.app/user/anthony/AwnweSO

Humanity is imprisoned by a killer pandemic. People are being arrested for surfing in the ocean and meditating in nature. Nations are collapsing. Hungry citizens are rioting for food. The media has generated so much confusion and fear that people are begging for salvation in a syringe. Billionaire patent owners are pushing for globally mandated vaccines. Anyone who refuses to be injected with experimental poisons will be prohibited from travel, education and work. No, this is not a synopsis for a new horror movie. This is our current reality.

Let’s back up to address how we got here...

In the early 1900s, America’s first Billionaire, John D. Rockefeller bought a German pharmaceutical company that would later assist Hitler to implement his eugenics-based vision by manufacturing chemicals and poisons for war. Rockefeller wanted to eliminate the competitors of Western medicine, so he submitted a report to Congress declaring that there were too many doctors and medical schools in America, and that all natural healing modalities were unscientific quackery. Rockefeller called for the standardization of medical education, whereby only his organization be allowed to grant medical school licenses in the US. And so began the practice of immune suppressive, synthetic and toxic drugs. Once people had become dependent on this new system and the addictive drugs it provided, the system switched to a paid program, creating lifelong customers for the Rockefellers. Currently, medical error is the third leading cause of death in the US. Rockefeller’s secret weapon to success was the strategy known as, “problem-reaction-solution.” Create a problem, escalate fear, then offer a pre-planned solution. Sound familiar?

Flash forward to 2020...

They named it COVID19. Our leaders of world health predicted millions would die. The National Guard was deployed. Makeshift hospitals were erected to care for a massive overflow of patients. Mass graves were dug. Terrifying news reports had people everywhere seeking shelter to avoid contact. The plan was unfolding with diabolical precision, but the masters of the Pandemic underestimated one thing... the people. Medical professionals and every-day citizens are sharing critical information online. The overlords of big tech have ordered all dissenting voices to be silenced and banned, but they are too late. The slumbering masses are awake and aware that something is not right. Quarantine has provided the missing element: time. Suddenly, our overworked citizenry has ample time to research and investigate for themselves. Once you see, you can’t unsee.

The window of opportunity is open like never before. For the first time in human history, we have the world’s attention. Plandemic will expose the scientific and political elite who run the scam that is our global health system, while laying out a new plan; a plan that allows all of humanity to reconnect with healing forces of nature. 2020 is the code for perfect vision. It is also the year that will go down in history as the moment we finally opened our eyes.

Mascerade Liturgy

My questions to the bishops, who must answer for the current “Masked Show” in divine worship:

Why should I go to church?

To have to register with the parish office beforehand?

In order to have an “apply for an application form” to obtain an approval made out to me for the possibility of participation?

In order to spray my hands with disinfectant?

To be assigned a place at the prescribed distance from my fellow Christians?

To have to hide my face behind a mask?

To abstain from singing as an expression of God's joy and praise?

To be distracted by diverse and curious masks?

To be forbidden to receive the body of Christ, or to be obliged to hand communion to prevent a “contagion” when receiving the body of Christ!?

I don't have to go to church for that! I'd rather stay at home... and praise my God with all my heart!

I should and do want to go to church to worship my Lord, to thank Him and to keep communion with Him.

You, dear bishops who have come up with this, no longer need masks!

You have already removed your masks and are showing your true face!

In preemptive obedience and without alternative you "adapt to this world" and give a miserable proof of faith!

Antiseptic instead of holy water?

One gets the impression that he’s at a masquerade!

A believer

Source: katholisches.info (Plinthos translation)

Doctors in Black: Plandemic

https://newtube.app/user/anthony/AwnweSO

If necessary, go to the link above to the NewTube video, since this story has had some trouble with censorship on YouTube.

FIRE FAUCI!

plandemicmovie.com

Then go to the source of the problem. The problem is much larger than the plandemic, a world in which the dollar and "science" is God. View the most popular Ryan Dawson's uploaded video.

     Public "Education" has become indoctrination and distraction

https://www.bitchute.com/video/akSdcWxn0901/

Catholic Bishops Condemn Covid-19 Alarmism

The statement below, long overdue, should have been given by the Pope Himself, with the consent of all the cardinals, bishops, priests and Catholic faithful of the world. We should declare to the whole world and to each individual politician that our churches will remain open to the faithful and that our ceremonies and administration of the sacraments to the faithful will continue, uninterrupted, and may not be forbidden by anyone; even if we must make some reasonable health precaution modifications in the way that we do it, e.g. more frequent masses and confession times, spacing of people and frequent sterilization of hands and kneelers, etc. We will not close because we cannot close the work of God for His people, which is primarily sacramental.

No one has the authority to prohibit the sacraments to the Catholic faithful who are well disposed and properly request them. That is God's law, established by the Blood of Christ. Every pastor of souls should be willing to give his life in order to rightly dispense the Holy Mysteries of God, at all times and in all places. And the faithful should be willing to take at least some minimal risk, whenever necessary, to properly and opportunely receive the sacraments of God. Everyone should be willing to take at least the same minimal risk for the sacraments that he takes for any other "essential" activity, like buying and consuming a take-out hamburger and a coke.

Man does not live on bread alone. The Body of Christ, the Eucharist, is the True Bread, The Bread of Life.

APPEAL FOR THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD (link)

To Catholics and all people of good will

Veritas liberabit vos. Jn 8:32

In this time of great crisis, we Pastors of the Catholic Church, by virtue of our mandate, consider it our sacred duty to make an Appeal to our Brothers in the Episcopate, to the Clergy, to Religious, to the holy People of God and to all men and women of good will. This Appeal has also been undersigned by intellectuals, doctors, lawyers, journalists and professionals who agree with its content, and may be undersigned by those who wish to make it their own.

The facts have shown that, under the pretext of the Covid-19 epidemic, the inalienable rights of citizens have in many cases been violated and their fundamental freedoms, including the exercise of freedom of worship, expression and movement, have been disproportionately and unjustifiably restricted. Public health must not, and cannot, become an alibi for infringing on the rights of millions of people around the world, let alone for depriving the civil authority of its duty to act wisely for the common good. This is particularly true as growing doubts emerge from several quarters about the actual contagiousness, danger and resistance of the virus. Many authoritative voices in the world of science and medicine confirm that the media’s alarmism about Covid-19 appears to be absolutely unjustified.

We have reason to believe, on the basis of official data on the incidence of the epidemic as related to the number of deaths, that there are powers interested in creating panic among the world’s population with the sole aim of permanently imposing unacceptable forms of restriction on freedoms, of controlling people and of tracking their movements. The imposition of these illiberal measures is a disturbing prelude to the realization of a world government beyond all control.

We also believe that in some situations the containment measures that were adopted, including the closure of shops and businesses, have precipitated a crisis that has brought down entire sectors of the economy. This encourages interference by foreign powers and has serious social and political repercussions. Those with governmental responsibility must stop these forms of social engineering, by taking measures to protect their citizens whom they represent, and in whose interests they have a serious obligation to act. Likewise, let them help the family, the cell of society, by not unreasonably penalizing the weak and elderly, forcing them into a painful separation from their loved ones. The criminalization of personal and social relationships must likewise be judged as an unacceptable part of the plan of those who advocate isolating individuals in order to better manipulate and control them.

We ask the scientific community to be vigilant, so that cures for Covid-19 are offered in honesty for the common good. Every effort must be made to ensure that shady business interests do not influence the choices made by government leaders and international bodies. It is unreasonable to penalize those remedies that have proved to be effective, and are often inexpensive, just because one wishes to give priority to treatments or vaccines that are not as good, but which guarantee pharmaceutical companies far greater profits, and exacerbate public health expenditures. Let us also remember, as Pastors, that for Catholics it is morally unacceptable to develop or use vaccines derived from material from aborted fetuses.

We also ask government leaders to ensure that forms of control over people, whether through tracking systems or any other form of location-finding, are rigorously avoided. The fight against Covid-19, however serious, must not be the pretext for supporting the hidden intentions of supranational bodies that have very strong commercial and political interests in this plan. In particular, citizens must be given the opportunity to refuse these restrictions on personal freedom, without any penalty whatsoever being imposed on those who do not wish to use vaccines, contact tracking or any other similar tool. Let us also consider the blatant contradiction of those who pursue policies of drastic population control and at the same time present themselves as the savior of humanity, without any political or social legitimacy. Finally, the political responsibility of those who represent the people can in no way be left to “experts” who can indeed claim a kind of immunity from prosecution, which is disturbing to say the least.

We strongly urge those in the media to commit themselves to providing accurate information and not penalizing dissent by resorting to forms of censorship, as is happening widely on social media, in the press and on television. Providing accurate information requires that room be given to voices that are not aligned with a single way of thinking. This allows citizens to consciously assess the facts, without being heavily influenced by partisan interventions. A democratic and honest debate is the best antidote to the risk of imposing subtle forms of dictatorship, presumably worse than those our society has seen rise and fall in the recent past.

Finally, as Pastors responsible for the flock of Christ, let us remember that the Church firmly asserts her autonomy to govern, worship, and teach. This autonomy and freedom are an innate right that Our Lord Jesus Christ has given her for the pursuit of her proper ends. For this reason, as Pastors we firmly assert the right to decide autonomously on the celebration of Mass and the Sacraments, just as we claim absolute autonomy in matters falling within our immediate jurisdiction, such as liturgical norms and ways of administering Communion and the Sacraments. The State has no right to interfere, for any reason whatsoever, in the sovereignty of the Church. Ecclesiastical authorities have never refused to collaborate with the State, but such collaboration does not authorize civil authorities to impose any sort of ban or restriction on public worship or the exercise of priestly ministry. The rights of God and of the faithful are the supreme law of the Church, which she neither intends to, nor can, abdicate. We ask that restrictions on the celebration of public ceremonies be removed.

We should like to invite all people of good will not to shirk their duty to cooperate for the common good, each according to his or her own state and possibilities and in a spirit of fraternal charity. The Church desires such cooperation, but this cannot disregard either a respect for natural law or a guarantee of individual freedoms. The civil duties to which citizens are bound imply the State’s recognition of their rights.

We are all called to assess the current situation in a way consistent with the teaching of the Gospel. This means taking a stand: either with Christ or against Christ. Let us not be intimidated or frightened by those who would have us believe that we are a minority: Good is much more widespread and powerful than the world would have us believe. We are fighting against an invisible enemy that seeks to divide citizens, to separate children from their parents, grandchildren from their grandparents, the faithful from their pastors, students from teachers, and customers from vendors. Let us not allow centuries of Christian civilization to be erased under the pretext of a virus, and an odious technological tyranny to be established, in which nameless and faceless people can decide the fate of the world by confining us to a virtual reality. If this is the plan to which the powers of this earth intend to make us yield, know that Jesus Christ, King and Lord of History, has promised that “the gates of Hell shall not prevail” (Mt 16:18).

Let us entrust government leaders and all those who rule over the fate of nations to Almighty God, that He may enlighten and guide them in this time of great crisis. May they remember that, just as the Lord will judge us Pastors for the flock which he has entrusted to us, so will He also judge government leaders for the peoples whom they have the duty to defend and govern.

With faith, let us beseech the Lord to protect the Church and the world. May the Blessed Virgin, Help of Christians, crush the head of the ancient Serpent and defeat the plans of the children of darkness.

8 May 2020

Our Lady of the Rosary of Pompeii

LIST OF SIGNATORIES TO THE APPEAL

PRELATES

Mgr. Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop, Apostolic Nuncio

Cdl Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship

Cdl Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, Prefect emeritus of Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith

Cdl Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, Bishop emeritus of Hong Kong

Cdl Janis Pujats, Archbishop emeritus of Riga

Mgr Luigi Negri, Archbishop emeritus of Ferrara-Comacchio Mgr Joseph Strickland, Bishop of Tyler, Texas......

Truth is Person: J. Ratzinger Solution to Relativism

Only in the human person (defined by the Person of Christ) is the problem of relativism with truth solved. It is in the gift of self, in the experience of love, that man and history make sense. Creation and man are a gift from God, and man realizes himself as such in the surrender of his person for love, of which he is capable by the gift of God that he receives. Man realizes himself by giving himself away (giving away the gift received of his being) because he is the image and likeness of the God Love. In love, in the disinterestedly generous commitment (entrega) of self, is where man in the world, and the whole world, take on their definitive and complete meaning.

This seems to me to be Ratzinger's solution to the problem of a relativism that seeks to support and affirm the particularity of human experience and activity without ever defining what it means to be a man, or why, because it is based only on aspects of reality. The whole of reality is only found in the end of reality which is love, relationship between persons, surrender (entrega)

It is in the person, in love, that the particular and the universal come together, the historical and the eternal.

--Plinthos

Ben Shapiro Quotes on Primacy of Truth

“Freedom of speech and thought matters, especially when it is speech and thought with which we disagree. The moment the majority decides to destroy people for engaging in thought it dislikes, thought crime becomes a reality.”

“Turning a blind eye to evil, however, doesn’t make it disappear. It allows it to grow. And those who allow evil to grow in order to protect their own convenience will be held accountable for the end results of the evil they facilitate.”

“When facts become secondary to emotion, truth dies. And a society that doesn’t value truth cannot survive.”

“If you sacrifice your principles for victory, you don’t end up with victory and you don’t end up with principles.”

“Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

Novus-Ordo Re-Opening Presbyteral Angst

1 Maccabees 2:15-29

Over the past few weeks some of my brother priests have expressed serious concerns about returning to Novus Ordo parish ministry in the present liturgical upheaval. Here I share two relevant emails with my responses. One is from a young parochial vicar and the other of a middle-aged pastor. They are priests of two different and very large north-eastern USA Dioceses.

Young Parochial Vicar (April 24, 2020): The current episode we’re living through has brought to a head something that has been bubbling inside of me for quite some time. In particular, the cessation of Masses where the faithful are present has been an immense relief to me. This is so because since coming to full-time parish life since my ordination five years ago, I have continued to see (as I did as a seminarian in various parishes) some of the worst Eucharistic abuses imaginable. The opportunity to celebrate private Masses, free of so-called Eucharistic ministers etc., has been a welcome change. At this moment, I feel that, when things go back to normal, I cannot go back to the Novus Ordo — that’s how psychologically burnt out I feel from the things I’ve experienced. Despite repeated attempts to change things, almost no one really listens.
I hope you don’t mind me sharing in this personal way and...this isn’t to put pressure on you to respond with advice necessarily, but I had to get this out. I have begun to consider the FSSP or the ICKSP, but haven’t done anything official yet.
So, please pray for me, as I will for you, and hopefully, in our small ways we can restore the Sacred Liturgy in due time.
Peace.
Father X

Plinthos: Good Morning Father X,
Gavisi sunt discipuli!
Of course I agree that the liturgy in our Archdiocese has abuses, which, to my mind, is a symptom of the doctrinal and moral corruption. The traditional groups have their own sets of problems. Father Ripperger has a homily on that which I heard last night.
Holiness is the problem. The key is a spiritual director, knowledgeable and loyal to the teaching of the Church. The Imitation of Christ, by Thomas a Kempis, slow and deliberate, e.g. meditating on one sentence a week (even in Latin), is very helpful for personal sanctification. What we need is to love the Cross.
Give me a call if you like.

Middle-Aged Pastor (May 4, 2020): I am sending the below to a few priests and like your comments on what you think of the whole situation when you have a moment. Stay well and 'oremus pro invicem' in the soon-to-be- post-Coronavirus Church!
I am very concerned and apprehensive of what I am reading from many Dioceses throughout the United States about the reopening of churches for Holy Mass in the next several weeks regarding the reception of Holy Communion. As [my State] has been hit so hard by the Coronavirus I don't believe we will be opening for a while, but I anticipate similar directives once reopening.
In various directives I have read from different diocesan websites, the Bishop/Diocese is making statements such as: "it is STRONGLY RECOMMENDED to receive Holy Communion in the hand" (Tyler, TX) and "Holy Communion is only to be distributed in the hand" (Milwaukee, WI). Some dioceses are requiring the priest to wear latex gloves while distributing and/or to use tweezers (Miami, FL). I believe even the people are being asked to wear latex gloves which means they will receive Holy Communion in latex covered hands (several Dioceses). Even some of the "good" and devout Bishops are saying this.
I find this to be disrespectful to the Blessed Sacrament and am wondering if you have any advice to give concerning this. If this be the case, I would rather the churches not reopen or to celebrate Holy Mass without the distribution of Holy Communion. While I know I am not ready for this, the thought has crossed my mind to join a Religious Congregation which only offers the Traditional Latin Mass so I would not have to be part of this. But I am not even sure if the Traditional Mass parishes located in those dioceses would have to comply to these directives or if they would be exempt.
Father Y

Plinthos: Dear Father Y,
Gavisi sunt discipuli!
I plan to continue distributing communion only directly on the tongue, except if my bishop should directly order me to do otherwise, then I am not sure what I will do.
At the moment of the distribution of holy communion the hands of the traditional priest are the most germless hands in the church (having washed them during the vesting prayers and then during the lavabo rite, and keeping "digits" thereafter). The adept priest does not touch people when he carefully places the communion into their mouths. In the very rare occasion that one of his fingers should happen to touch a communicant, he immediately wipes his finger and continues distributing.
Here is a comprehensive resource that you might find helpful, sent to me by one of my classmates who is a priest of the Arlington Diocese.
https://thomisticinstitute.org/covid-sacraments

Cf. Cardinal Sarah: "The Profanations Must Stop, The Eucharist is Not Negotiable"

Summa Sermon Notes 12

Here are the Summa references for the EF, 4th and 5th Sundays after Easter

4th Sunday after Easter

EPISTLE (James 1:17-21)

"Every best gift"

   Is virtue in us by nature? I-II Q.63, a.1

   Besides the theological virtues are there others infused in us by God? I-II Q.63, a.3

   Can man without grace know truth? I-II Q.109, a.1

"With whom there is not change"

   Is God entirely immutable? I Q.9, a.1

"For of His own will hath He begotten us"

   Is foreknowledge of merit a cause of predestination? I Q.23, a.5

   Does God choose one because of the good preexisting in Him? I Q.23, a.4, ad.2

"But slow to speak"

   What is curiosity about sensitive (worldly) knowledge? II-II Q.167, a.2

   When is diligent inquiry about things praiseworthy or otherwise? II-II Q.167, a.2, ad.3

"For the anger of man worketh not the justice of God"

   How could that happen since in Christ and in the saints there is no anger? III Q.15, a.9, ad.1

   When is anger sinful, when not? II-II Q.158, a.1

   Anger II-II Q.158

"With meekness receive the grafted word"

   What is meekness? Is it clemency? II-II Q.175, a.1

   Meekness and clemency II-II Q.175

GOSPEL (John 16:5-14)

"To Him that sent Me"

   The mission of the divine Persons I Q.43

   How did the Father send the Son? I Q.43, a.1

   Which divine Person is sent by the other? I Q.43, a.8

   Is it proper for the Son to be sent invisibly? I Q.43, a.5

   To  whom is an invisible mission made? I Q.43, a.6

"Sorrow hath filled your heart"

   Do sorrow and pain affect the mental faculties? I-II Q.37, a.1

"But I tell you the truth"

   Is it always praiseworthy to the tell the truth? II-II Q.109, a.1, ad.2, 3

   Truth I Q.16, a.2, ad.2; II-II Q.109

"If I go not"

   Is Christ's ascension the cause of our salvation? III Q.57, a.6

"And when he is come, He will convince the world of sin"

   Is judiciary power fittingly ascribed to Christ? III Q.59, a.1, ad.3

"He will teach you all truth"

   Since the apostles were ignorant of many things, how could He teach them all truth? I-II Q.106, a.4, ad.2; III Q.57, a.6

"Because He shall receive of Mine"

   Does the Holy Ghost proceed from the Son? I Q.36, a.2

5th Sunday after Easter

EPISTLE (James 1:22-27)

"Be ye doers of the word"

   Is theology a practical science? I Q.1, a.1; a.4

   Is faith alone sufficient for salvation? I-II Q.100, a.10; Q. 114, a.4, ad.3; II-II Q.9

"This man shall be blessed"

   Is the observance of the commandments enough for salvation? I-II Q.100, a.10

"Not bridling his tongue"

   Sins of the tongue: reviling II-II Q.72, backbiting Q.73, tale bearing Q.74, derision Q.75, cursing Q.76

"Religion clean...is this: To visit the fatherless"

   Does not religion ordain man to God alone? II-II Q. 81, a.1, ad.1

   Works of mercy and almsdeeds II-II Q.32, a.2

GOSPEL (John 16:23-30)

"If you ask the Father anything"

   Prayer II-II Q.83

   The parts of prayer II-II Q.83, a.17

"He will give it to you"

   What if our prayers are not heard? II-II Q.83, a.15, ad.1

   Conditions of prayer II-II Q.83, a.15, ad.2

"That your joy may be full"

   How can our joy be full, not in this life but only in the next? II-II Q.28, a.3

"These things I have spoken to you in proverbs"

   Why did not Christ clearly explain His doctrine? III Q.42, a.3, ad.3

"I will ask the Father for you"

   How is the Son said to pray to the Father? II-II Q.83, a.10, ad.1; III Q.21, a.1; a.2

"The Father Himself loveth you"

   Is there love in God? I Q.20, a.1

   does God love all equally? I Q.20, a.3

"I came out from God"

   How did the Son come out from the Father? I Q.43, a.5, ad.2

"Thou knowest all things"

   Did the mind of Christ know all thing in the Word? III Q.10, a.2

"And though needest not"

   Did Christ learn anything from men? III Q.12, a.3

Sixteen Principles for Right Thinking --Ratzinger

Joseph Ratzinger, in Introduction to Christianity, proposes sixteen principles for right thinking, which highlight the truth and the essentially relational nature of being a person, affirmed, clarified and promoted most perfectly in Christian faith.

1. Amen, which includes the meanings truth, firmness, firm ground, ground, and furthermore the meanings loyalty, to trust, entrust oneself, take one's stand on something, believe in something; thus faith in God appears as a holding on to God through which man gains a firm hold for his life. Faith is thereby defined as taking up a position, as taking a stand trustfully on the ground of the word of God..."If you do not believe, than you do not abide." "If you do not believe (if you do not hold firm to Yahweh), then you will have no hold" (Isaiah). 39

2. Belief operates on a completely different plane from that of making and "makability." It cannot be "laid out on the table." Essentially, it is entrusting oneself to that which has not been made by oneself and never could be made, and which precisely in this way supports and makes possible all our making...The penetrating "perhaps" which belief whispers in man's ear in every place and in every age does not point to any uncertainty within the realm of practical knowledge; it simply queries the absoluteness of this realm and relativizes it, reminding man that it is only one plane of human existence in general, a plane that can only have the character of something less than final. 40

3. Belief does not belong to the realm of what can be, or has been made, but to the realm of basic questions which man cannot avoid answering and the answer to which can by its nature occur only in one form. Belief...There is a realm which allows no other answer but that of entertaining a belief, and no man can completely avoid this realm. Every man is bound to have some kind of "belief." 41

4. Believe is...a way of taking up a stand in the totality of reality, a way that cannot be reduced to knowledge and is incommensurable by knowledge; it is the bestowal of meaning without which the totality of man would remain homeless, on which man's calculations and actions are based, and without which in the last resort he could not calculate and act, because he can only do this in the context of a meaning that bears him up...Without the word, without meaning, without love he falls into the situation of no-longer-being-able-to-live, even when earthly comfort is present in abundance. 42

5. Meaning that is self-made is in the last analysis no meaning. Meaning, that is, the ground on which our existence as a totality can stand and live, cannot be made but only received. 43

6. To believe as a Christian...means affirming that the meaning which we do not make but can only receive is already granted to us, so that we have only to take it and entrust ourselves to it. 43

7. Christian belief is the option for the view that the receiving precedes the making--[without reducing the value of the making]. 43

8. That what cannot be seen is more real than what can be seen. It is an avowal of the primacy of the invisible as the truly real, which bears us up and hence enables us to face the visible in a calm and relaxed way--knowing that we are responsible before the invisible as the true ground of all things. 43

9. [It] is not a blind surrender to the irrational. On the contrary, it is a movement towards the logos, the ratio, towards meaning and so towards truth itself, for in the final analysis the ground on which man takes his stand cannot possibly be anything else but the truth revealing itself. 44

10. The Christian act of faith intrinsically includes the conviction that the meaningful ground, the logos, on which we take our stand, precisely because it is meaning, is also truth. (The Greek word logos displays in its range of meanings a certain correspondence with the Hebrew root 'mn ["Amen"]: word, meaning, intelligence, truth are all included in its semantic range.) Meaning or sense which was not truth would be non-sense. 45

11. The tool with which man is equipped to deal with the truth of being is not knowledge but understanding: understanding of the meaning to which he has entrusted himself;...only revealing itself in "standing": seizing and grasping as meaning the meaning which man has received as ground...[I]t is a characteristic of understanding that it is continually outstripping our capacity to apprehend and reaching out to a recognition of the way in which we are comprehended. 46-7

12. It is personal! The most fundamental feature of Christian faith or belief is its personal character. Christian faith is more that the option in favour of a spiritual ground to the world; its central formula is not "I believe in something", but "I believe in Thee". It is the encounter with the man Jesus, and in this encounter it experiences that meaning of the world as a person. 47

13. Jesus' life from the Father, in the immediacy and closeness of his association with him in prayer and indeed face to face, he is God's witness;...he is the presence of the eternal itself in this world. In his life, in the unconditional devotion of himself to men, the meaning of the world is present before us; it vouchsafes itself to us as love which loves even me and makes life worth living by this incomprehensible gift of a love free from any threat of fading away or any tinge of egoism. The meaning of the world is the "You", though only the one that is not itself an open question but the ground of all, needing itself no other ground. 48

14. Faith is the finding of a "You" that bears me up and amid all the unfulfilled....unfulfillable...hope of human encounters gives me the promise of an indestructible love which not only longs for eternity but guarantees it. Christian faith lives on the discovery that not only is there such a thing as objective meaning, but this meaning knows me and loves me, I can entrust myself to it like a child that knows all its questions answered in the "You" of its mother. Thus in the last analysis believing, trusting and loving are one, and all the thesis round which belief revolves are only concrete expressions of the all-embracing about-turn, of the assertion "I believe in You"--of the discovery of God in the countenance of the man Jesus of Nazareth.

15. Darkness. "Are you really He?" (John the Baptist's question from prison to Jesus) The believer will repeatedly experience the darkness in which the negation of unbelief surrounds him like a gloomy prison from which there is no escape, and the indifference of the world, which goes its way unchanged as if nothing had happened, seems only to mock his hope. 48

16. We have to pose the question "Are you really He", not only through honesty of thought and because of reason's responsibility but also in accordance with the intrinsic law of love, which wants to know more and more him to whom it has given its "Yes", so as to be able to love him more...in the basic faith confession: "I believe in You, Jesus of Nazareth, as the meaning (logos) of the world and of my life." 49

Introduction to Christianity, Joseph Ratzinger, New York: Herder and Herder, 1970.