to comment, please open your gmail account, use my email address, FaceBook, Twitter or Messenger. Scroll down for comments. Thank you.
St Catherine of Siena, Doctor of the Church, was mystically married to Jesus Christ our Lord in a ceremony commemorated by the customary wedding ring.
Well, not so customary as all that - and this I suspect is what my correspondent Leo Leitch is on about; legend says St Catherine's wedding ring was crafted from her mystical Spouse's foreskin, severed of course at His Presentation in the Temple for the traditional Jewish circumcision.
Leo wants to know what I think of that.
For a start, mystical nuptials between Christ and the virgin saints are not as rare as you might think. If you narrow it down to virgin stigmatics (saints who receive the Wounds of Christ), three out of four have been granted mystical marriage, signifying the very high degree of their mystical union with Christ, and accordingly with His sufferings.
According to one scholar, seventy-seven saints have been united in marriage with Christ, and I know that one such marriage, with the Italian mystic and Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta - a marriage attended and assisted by St Catherine of Siena - occurred as recently as the 20th century.
What do I think of the foreskin-as-ring idea? Well, since you asked (or Leo did), as Catherine herself put it in a letter to a nun, "He has espoused you - you and everyone else - and not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his own flesh. Look at the tender little child who … when he was circumcised, gave up just so much flesh as to make a tiny circlet of a ring!"
Admittedly, to our crass, vulgar, pagan 21st century ears that sounds crazy. But I submit that it's the 21st century that's deranged, and this 14th-century saint can teach those of us who want to stay sane that whole-hearted imitation of Christ in His suffering is the way to do it.
Saturday, 18 May 2019
Friday, 17 May 2019
TROUBLED HEARTS, LOCKED CHURCHES
At St Patrick's Napier today, the Gospel was one Father said he knew off by heart, having proclaimed its "many dwelling places" to comfort innumerable mourners at innumerable Requiems.
"Do not let your hearts be troubled," said Father. He quoted St John (14:1-6) with a rare assurance and absolute sincerity. His lovely homily was taken to heart, I'd like to think, by the small congregation - and it would have gone down just as well a few streets away, at St John's Anglican.
But when I returned half an hour or so after Mass to pray - in the church, not the chapel, on the principle that the church is the right place to pray to the Blessed Sacrament, not an adjacent chapel - I found that although the chapel was open, the church was locked. And I remembered my 'big' daughter explaining that locking is now the policy. Because vandalism is now the problem.
With a Sunday congregation the size of St Patrick's, isn't it possible to roster parishioners on half-hour stints during the day to protect their church and the incredible Treasure within? Imagine the result! No vandalism, and huge spiritual growth for parishioners and parish - especially if everyone began or ended their stint with St Therese's Prayer for Priests.
It may sound like a Jolly Good Idea, (I've just been reading a Famous Five book to a nine-year-old) but is there the will to do it? Parishioners and even priests being human, they have to know what's in it for them: they have to know that with our Eucharistic Lord, He who alone is "the way, the truth and the life", they can become divine.
A sermon pointing out that it is only Our Lord in the Eucharist who can make us divine is one which will never be preached at St John's Anglican. It's up to our Catholic priests to preach it, "in season and out of season", this pontificate of Pope Francis being no exception.
Our Eucharistic Jesus is the only "way" to making men priests and the rest of us saints.
Wednesday, 15 May 2019
"GOD INFLICTS SOME POPES ON THE CHURCH"
to comment please open your gmail account, use my email address, FaceBook, Twitter or Messenger. Scroll down for comments. Thank you.
"Dio alcuni papi
li dona,altri li tollera,
altri ancora li infligge"
"God gives some popes to the Church,
God tolerates some popes in the Church,
God inflicts some popes on the Church" - San Vincenzo di Lerins
I thought it might be an opportune moment to quote this, from St Vincent of Lerins, a Gallic monk of the fifth century.
I mention it in case any of our bishops were thinking Pope Francis must be beyond reproach - or even investigation - merely by virtue of his election to the papacy.
"Dio alcuni papi
li dona,altri li tollera,
altri ancora li infligge"
"God gives some popes to the Church,
God tolerates some popes in the Church,
God inflicts some popes on the Church" - San Vincenzo di Lerins
I thought it might be an opportune moment to quote this, from St Vincent of Lerins, a Gallic monk of the fifth century.
I mention it in case any of our bishops were thinking Pope Francis must be beyond reproach - or even investigation - merely by virtue of his election to the papacy.
Friday, 10 May 2019
PRIESTS AND BISHOPS AFRAID OF "PERSECUTION"
to comment please open your gmail account, use my email address, Facebook Messenger or Twitter.
Scroll down for comments. Thank you.
Dear Bishop Charles
You will have read the Open Letter from over 80 international theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics addressed to you, as one of the bishops of the world, asking that you investigate their allegation against Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy.
By now you must also have noted that 1500 signatures have been added to that letter, and you will have received messages from the Catholic faithful of the Palmerston North Diocese, asking you to join with your fellow bishops to investigate the alleged heresies.
You will know too that this is the third significant instance of influential voices within the Church questioning the ambiguities, doubt and confusion that characterise this pontificate.
The accusation of heresy from such well-respected sources may be labelled extreme and the signatories 'extremist', but clearly demonstrates that 'extreme' is now the level of frustration, dismay and even anger registered by so many lay faithful - and priests and bishops who, like some spoken by Bishop Athanasius Schneider in response to the preceding papal controversies, are afraid of "persecution".
But bishops surely have a duty to God and their people to convey to the Holy Father, in the spirit of filial correction which animated St Paul in his admonition to our first Pope, the sense of horror felt at what looks to be a deconstruction of the Church, symbolized so dramatically by the collapse of the spire and roof of that symbol of "The First Daughter of the Church", the cathedral of Notre Dame, so recently.
Some Catholics have called Pope Francis reckless and wayward. But a Maori friend of mine who is very close to God says, "I just don't know about Pope Francis. He worries me. He's a crafty fox."
I believe she's much nearer the mark; the Holy Father is not 'reckless and wayward', but very deliberate and focused. Especially in sealing the Abu Dhabi declaration which submits Christians and Muslims to the core principles of freemasonry by prostrating himself - the world representative of Christ the King! - at the feet of Sudanese political leaders, he appears to advance the establishment of a 'World Church' of liberty, equality, fraternity and the religious indifferentism condemned by Pope Leo XIII.
Religious indifferentism will not secure the salvation of souls which must be the first concern of the Papacy and also, I know, of yours, Bishop Charles.
The support of the world, the secular media, of lukewarm Catholics, or even the Catholic press, will be no support at all for anyone - much less a successor of St Peter -when he stands before Christ.
Scroll down for comments. Thank you.
Dear Bishop Charles
You will have read the Open Letter from over 80 international theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics addressed to you, as one of the bishops of the world, asking that you investigate their allegation against Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy.
By now you must also have noted that 1500 signatures have been added to that letter, and you will have received messages from the Catholic faithful of the Palmerston North Diocese, asking you to join with your fellow bishops to investigate the alleged heresies.
You will know too that this is the third significant instance of influential voices within the Church questioning the ambiguities, doubt and confusion that characterise this pontificate.
The accusation of heresy from such well-respected sources may be labelled extreme and the signatories 'extremist', but clearly demonstrates that 'extreme' is now the level of frustration, dismay and even anger registered by so many lay faithful - and priests and bishops who, like some spoken by Bishop Athanasius Schneider in response to the preceding papal controversies, are afraid of "persecution".
But bishops surely have a duty to God and their people to convey to the Holy Father, in the spirit of filial correction which animated St Paul in his admonition to our first Pope, the sense of horror felt at what looks to be a deconstruction of the Church, symbolized so dramatically by the collapse of the spire and roof of that symbol of "The First Daughter of the Church", the cathedral of Notre Dame, so recently.
Some Catholics have called Pope Francis reckless and wayward. But a Maori friend of mine who is very close to God says, "I just don't know about Pope Francis. He worries me. He's a crafty fox."
I believe she's much nearer the mark; the Holy Father is not 'reckless and wayward', but very deliberate and focused. Especially in sealing the Abu Dhabi declaration which submits Christians and Muslims to the core principles of freemasonry by prostrating himself - the world representative of Christ the King! - at the feet of Sudanese political leaders, he appears to advance the establishment of a 'World Church' of liberty, equality, fraternity and the religious indifferentism condemned by Pope Leo XIII.
Religious indifferentism will not secure the salvation of souls which must be the first concern of the Papacy and also, I know, of yours, Bishop Charles.
The support of the world, the secular media, of lukewarm Catholics, or even the Catholic press, will be no support at all for anyone - much less a successor of St Peter -when he stands before Christ.
In February at the close of summit on clerical sex abuse, Cardinal Reinhold Marx affirmed the need for transparency in dealing with that crisis.
If the hierarchy of the Catholic Church are not once again to be seen as standing idly by while the devil does his work and further fundamentals of the faith are undermined, then transparency - honesty deployed with courage - must be demonstrated now by our bishops.
I am not asking you to criticize the Pope. I'm simply asking you to investigate these charges - which may be found groundless. But as a bishop and shepherd of your flock, you will surely not believe a pope, by virtue of his election, to be beyond correction. We should remember the words of St Vincent di Lerins: God gives some popes to the Church, God tolerates some popes in the Church, God inflicts some Popes on the Church".Your faithful people of Palmerston North request and need your support in what they are experiencing as an affliction.
I humbly ask you, dear Bishop Charles, to join your fellow bishops in investigating these charges.
Julia du Fresne
Julia du Fresne
Wednesday, 8 May 2019
SUNDAY HOMILIES: WHERE LIES THE MEANING, THE MYSTICAL, THE FAITH?
to comment please open your email account, use my email address, Facebook Messenger or Twitter. Scroll down for comments.
Here comes another cry from the heart, this time from Matthew Walton of Palmerston North, who's fed up with "official (Church) newspapers that suppress reasonable debate".
Yes, that means he's had another letter turned down by NZ Catholic. I know the feeling: I decided the same some time ago, and for the same reason.
NZ Catholic, like any newspaper, has a perfect right to bin letters they don't like. I don't envy editor Michael Otto. It can't be easy for a journalist to biff challenging, possibly controversial letters because they don't toe the editorial line.
Who draws that line, and where? NZ Catholic is, after all, a creature of the bishop: it's owned by +Patrick Dunn, President of the NZ Bishops' Conference.
Emeritus Bishop Peter Cullinane underscores the line, perhaps, in the latest issue (May 5) in a whole page devoted to the polarizing Pope Francis effect.
"Why is this?" he asks for openers, and closes, many column inches later, by saying, "The Church's mandate to teach has not changed; the way it teaches has needed to change, based on greater respect for the person and for conscience. Pope Francis' style of leadership invites people to become more fully human and more fully alive through the exercise of personal responsibility".
Well, isn't that nice? Heart-warming, really. There you have it, people. If that's the view of +Cullinane, how many of our bishops will respond to the call from 31 theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics to investigate the charges they make against the Pope of the canonical crime of heresy?
Yet letters to the editor on the previous page give our bishops a hint of resistance to 'becoming more fully human and fully alive' (whatever that may mean). Jim Costello of Punakaiki gets down to tin tacks, asking what others think about "the gradual (some would say surreptitious) removal of kneelers" which makes it difficult (but not impossible) to go down on our knees before our Eucharistic Lord and Saviour at the Consecration.
It would be a courageous, faith-filled and disinterested bishop who would countenance letters in his church newspaper that call into question the faith of his own priests, as Walton does, as follows:
"We Catholics now constantly hear homilies based around a personalised theology.
They are heavily focussed on relationships - with God, Jesus or neighbor, and on 'the Word' (Scripture).
Here comes another cry from the heart, this time from Matthew Walton of Palmerston North, who's fed up with "official (Church) newspapers that suppress reasonable debate".
Yes, that means he's had another letter turned down by NZ Catholic. I know the feeling: I decided the same some time ago, and for the same reason.
NZ Catholic, like any newspaper, has a perfect right to bin letters they don't like. I don't envy editor Michael Otto. It can't be easy for a journalist to biff challenging, possibly controversial letters because they don't toe the editorial line.
Who draws that line, and where? NZ Catholic is, after all, a creature of the bishop: it's owned by +Patrick Dunn, President of the NZ Bishops' Conference.
Emeritus Bishop Peter Cullinane underscores the line, perhaps, in the latest issue (May 5) in a whole page devoted to the polarizing Pope Francis effect.
"Why is this?" he asks for openers, and closes, many column inches later, by saying, "The Church's mandate to teach has not changed; the way it teaches has needed to change, based on greater respect for the person and for conscience. Pope Francis' style of leadership invites people to become more fully human and more fully alive through the exercise of personal responsibility".
Well, isn't that nice? Heart-warming, really. There you have it, people. If that's the view of +Cullinane, how many of our bishops will respond to the call from 31 theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics to investigate the charges they make against the Pope of the canonical crime of heresy?
Yet letters to the editor on the previous page give our bishops a hint of resistance to 'becoming more fully human and fully alive' (whatever that may mean). Jim Costello of Punakaiki gets down to tin tacks, asking what others think about "the gradual (some would say surreptitious) removal of kneelers" which makes it difficult (but not impossible) to go down on our knees before our Eucharistic Lord and Saviour at the Consecration.
And not just one but three letters object to Cardinal Dew's 'call me John' innovation. The first is from Kathryn A Leslie of Palmerston North, who is "proud to call my priest son "Father".
Why should Otto print these letters and not the one below, from Matthew Walton? Is it because Costello et al are merely questioning clerical M. O., while Walton (who, incidentally, dismisses +Peter's thesis), is challenging our clergy's faith?
It would be a courageous, faith-filled and disinterested bishop who would countenance letters in his church newspaper that call into question the faith of his own priests, as Walton does, as follows:
"We Catholics now constantly hear homilies based around a personalised theology.
They are heavily focussed on relationships - with God, Jesus or neighbor, and on 'the Word' (Scripture).
Daily, there is a distinct absence of teaching on Dogma or
Tradition. It's as if someone has said Dogma/Doctrine is ideological and
Tradition is fundamentalist.
Yet sound Catholic preaching is based on the three pillars of
Gospel, Sacred Tradition and Magisterial or True Doctrine. No way should
Catholic preaching be totally consumed by the social, personal and communal
aspects of Christian Faith.
Nor should a priest's presentation of Scripture be based solely
on human philosophy, psychology and sociology. In all that is spoken, where lies
the meaning, where the mystical element, where the Faith?
Deeper knowledge of God, reverentially given, leads to deeper
love of God, to deeper faith. The Church is a near limitless storehouse of the
knowledge of God.
The absence and neglect of this knowledge shows the presence
of ideological intent."
'Anonymous' says:
'Anonymous' says:
Monday, 6 May 2019
STEALTH, SUBVERSION AND SKULKING IN THE VATICAN
to comment, please open your gmail account, use my email address, Facebook or Twitter. Scroll down for comments. Thank you.
"That makes me really angry, actually."
Such was the first reaction of parishioners after Mass on Sunday, from a convert from Anglicanism, to international charges against the Holy Father, Pope Francis, of the canonical crime of heresy.
Another reaction - from a cradle Catholic - was, "is the Pope infallible?"
No one I spoke to had heard of the open letter released last week by an international group of theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics (67 at the last count) to the Catholic bishops of the world, asking them for an investigation into the alleged "canonical crime of heresy". Seven heresies, to be precise.
It would seem, from the level of engagement at my church, that I should list the alleged heresies. in laymen's terms:
1. God's grace doesn't always provide the strength we need to obey His commandments.
2. Catholics can know something is seriously sinful and do it without necessarily being guilty of mortal sin.
3. Catholics can sin even when obeying a commandment.
4. It's not always sinful for Catholics who are civilly married but still in the eyes of God married to someone else, to have sex; it might even be asked or commanded by God.
5. It's not true that sex outside marriage is sinful.
6. There's no such thing as an act that is always objectively sinful.
7. God wills that we should have different religions, including non-Christian religions.
Now to answer the second question above, of course the Pope is infallible only when he speaks ex cathedra, and Pope Francis has never spoken ex cathedra. So, my friends, relax! You don't have to believe any of these 'heresies'.
Should we be angry that someone (67 someones, actually) is asking bishops to investigate charges of heresy against the Pope?
Well, it's perfectly legit. In fact, Canon Law says the Christian Faithful (aka Catholics) "have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful" (Canon 212).
Two months ago I felt moved to ask a Monsignor if he were aware of a vast body of opinion in the Catholic Church (maybe not represented in his parish and certainly not in mine, where opinions of any kind on these things are conspicuous by their absence) which would support this letter. It's been claimed that there would be more than 67 signatories but many potential backers, like the bishops and cardinals who totally agreed with the Filial Correction of 2017 but refused Bishop Athanasius Schneider's request to sign, are afraid of "persecution".
Given the way Pope Francis cashiers his opposition, such fears are hardly groundless. Look at Cardinal Mueller, Cardinal Burke and Archbishop Vigano, where they are now.
This is the third attempt at reining the Pope in. The first was a private letter in 2016, objecting to seeming "heresies" in the Pope's Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. In the second, in 2017, an international group numbering 235 accused him of heresy in suggesting divorced and remarried Catholics could receive Communion, an incident the Washington Post called "shocking".
The Filial Correction accused Pope Francis of modernism, named by Pope Pius X as "the synthesis of all heresies"- in essence the belief cherished by many Catholics, especially ex-Protestants once nurtured by Luther's legacy, that Church doctrine can change over time (which might help explain the anger expressed by the ex-Anglican, above).
2018 was again an off-year for papal heresies, but now for the first time Pope Francis is directly charged with the canonical crime, and the college of bishops are asked to investigate the ambiguities, apparent contradictions and questionable appointments that distinguish this papacy.
It follows that the lay faithful should tell their bishops if they support the letter - or not.
Bishops can't sack a pope, no matter how heretical. But a substantial number of bishops (not necessarily a majority) can announce a heresy, making it "a juridical fact" which means the pope loses his office.
This letter has been challenged, of course, by liberal prelates and the secular media. Reuters rushed to the defence of a Pope who promotes homosexuality, demotes the sacrament of matrimony and like Jacinda Ardern seems to think 'We are One' with Islam and other pagan religions.
Reuters called the letter-writers 'extremists', then revealed their ignorance and bias by stating, "Conservatives say the Roman Catholic Church is the only true one and that members are called to convert others to it."
In that case, all Catholics are 'conservatives' - because it's the Catholic Church herself that teaches this truth. And all Catholics are required to believe it.
Like the previous challenges to this pontificate so far, it could be ignored. Please, no, says the US Catholic publishing giant Ignatius Press, insisting that its authors have high stature, can't be dismissed as extremist, and deserve a response from the Holy See.
Ignatius Press says the letter illustrates pontifical statements "that seem to contradict Church teaching" and deserves a response from the Holy See.
This isn't just conservatives versus liberals. This is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church versus a New World Order, led by technocratic elites and with its own ecumenical 'church', being erected as we speak by stealth, subversion and skulking by population control activists in the Church and the Vatican, and its new globalist friends like climate change, 'sustainable development' (read birth control) and abortion guru Jeffrey Sachs. Sachs, who believes birth control and abortion are the answer to poverty, is now top of the bill at conferences organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
In 1931, before his election, Pope Pius XII prophesied that "a day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the true Faith of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past".
"That makes me really angry, actually."
Such was the first reaction of parishioners after Mass on Sunday, from a convert from Anglicanism, to international charges against the Holy Father, Pope Francis, of the canonical crime of heresy.
Another reaction - from a cradle Catholic - was, "is the Pope infallible?"
No one I spoke to had heard of the open letter released last week by an international group of theologians, philosophers, scholars and academics (67 at the last count) to the Catholic bishops of the world, asking them for an investigation into the alleged "canonical crime of heresy". Seven heresies, to be precise.
It would seem, from the level of engagement at my church, that I should list the alleged heresies. in laymen's terms:
1. God's grace doesn't always provide the strength we need to obey His commandments.
2. Catholics can know something is seriously sinful and do it without necessarily being guilty of mortal sin.
3. Catholics can sin even when obeying a commandment.
4. It's not always sinful for Catholics who are civilly married but still in the eyes of God married to someone else, to have sex; it might even be asked or commanded by God.
5. It's not true that sex outside marriage is sinful.
6. There's no such thing as an act that is always objectively sinful.
7. God wills that we should have different religions, including non-Christian religions.
Now to answer the second question above, of course the Pope is infallible only when he speaks ex cathedra, and Pope Francis has never spoken ex cathedra. So, my friends, relax! You don't have to believe any of these 'heresies'.
Should we be angry that someone (67 someones, actually) is asking bishops to investigate charges of heresy against the Pope?
Well, it's perfectly legit. In fact, Canon Law says the Christian Faithful (aka Catholics) "have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful" (Canon 212).
Two months ago I felt moved to ask a Monsignor if he were aware of a vast body of opinion in the Catholic Church (maybe not represented in his parish and certainly not in mine, where opinions of any kind on these things are conspicuous by their absence) which would support this letter. It's been claimed that there would be more than 67 signatories but many potential backers, like the bishops and cardinals who totally agreed with the Filial Correction of 2017 but refused Bishop Athanasius Schneider's request to sign, are afraid of "persecution".
Given the way Pope Francis cashiers his opposition, such fears are hardly groundless. Look at Cardinal Mueller, Cardinal Burke and Archbishop Vigano, where they are now.
This is the third attempt at reining the Pope in. The first was a private letter in 2016, objecting to seeming "heresies" in the Pope's Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. In the second, in 2017, an international group numbering 235 accused him of heresy in suggesting divorced and remarried Catholics could receive Communion, an incident the Washington Post called "shocking".
The Filial Correction accused Pope Francis of modernism, named by Pope Pius X as "the synthesis of all heresies"- in essence the belief cherished by many Catholics, especially ex-Protestants once nurtured by Luther's legacy, that Church doctrine can change over time (which might help explain the anger expressed by the ex-Anglican, above).
2018 was again an off-year for papal heresies, but now for the first time Pope Francis is directly charged with the canonical crime, and the college of bishops are asked to investigate the ambiguities, apparent contradictions and questionable appointments that distinguish this papacy.
It follows that the lay faithful should tell their bishops if they support the letter - or not.
Bishops can't sack a pope, no matter how heretical. But a substantial number of bishops (not necessarily a majority) can announce a heresy, making it "a juridical fact" which means the pope loses his office.
This letter has been challenged, of course, by liberal prelates and the secular media. Reuters rushed to the defence of a Pope who promotes homosexuality, demotes the sacrament of matrimony and like Jacinda Ardern seems to think 'We are One' with Islam and other pagan religions.
Reuters called the letter-writers 'extremists', then revealed their ignorance and bias by stating, "Conservatives say the Roman Catholic Church is the only true one and that members are called to convert others to it."
In that case, all Catholics are 'conservatives' - because it's the Catholic Church herself that teaches this truth. And all Catholics are required to believe it.
Like the previous challenges to this pontificate so far, it could be ignored. Please, no, says the US Catholic publishing giant Ignatius Press, insisting that its authors have high stature, can't be dismissed as extremist, and deserve a response from the Holy See.
Ignatius Press says the letter illustrates pontifical statements "that seem to contradict Church teaching" and deserves a response from the Holy See.
This isn't just conservatives versus liberals. This is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church versus a New World Order, led by technocratic elites and with its own ecumenical 'church', being erected as we speak by stealth, subversion and skulking by population control activists in the Church and the Vatican, and its new globalist friends like climate change, 'sustainable development' (read birth control) and abortion guru Jeffrey Sachs. Sachs, who believes birth control and abortion are the answer to poverty, is now top of the bill at conferences organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
In 1931, before his election, Pope Pius XII prophesied that "a day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the true Faith of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past".
The Third Secret of Fatima, said Cardinal Mario Ciappi, personal papal theologian to John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II, "foretold that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top".
Paul VI echoed this in his famous statement, "The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading … into the highest levels within the Church."
Meanwhile, back at the parish pump, last night's council agenda featured tree pruning in the carpark, a pilgrimage of eight parishioners to the Home of Compassion, and a parish dinner.
And, I'm sure, prayer for our Holy Father and the Church.
Paul VI echoed this in his famous statement, "The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading … into the highest levels within the Church."
Meanwhile, back at the parish pump, last night's council agenda featured tree pruning in the carpark, a pilgrimage of eight parishioners to the Home of Compassion, and a parish dinner.
And, I'm sure, prayer for our Holy Father and the Church.
Thursday, 2 May 2019
ON ISRAEL FOLAU
to comment please use your gmail account, my email address Facebook or Twitter. Scroll down for comments.
“Imagine
getting upset at someone for claiming the God you don’t believe in, that it said in a book you don’t read that unless you repent of the sin you don’t care
about, you will go to a place you don’t think exists.”
If like moi you're just about over the anti-Israel hysteria, you'll enjoy this comment (above) from the Family Coalition (Australia).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)