Image: The miracles of St. Francis Xavier (see full image here), by Peter Paul Rubens
Two good friends, fellow parishioners, are having coffee and donuts after High Mass one Sunday.
Maximilian: I really enjoyed Father’s homily today. His explanation of the parable of the mustard seed and the yeast in the dough hit the nail on the head.
Roberto: I thought so, too. It was neat when he said it’s not just the kingdom of God that can be compared to a seed or yeast, but Christ Himself, who came into our world as a tiny baby in a manger, grew up in the middle of nowhere, and died as a convicted criminal—in the world’s eyes, this is all contemptibly small. His way of gathering disciplines, His itinerant preaching, it was all like that seed, seemingly insignificant but now grown over the ages into a tree that stretches across the world.
Max: He had that quote from Ratzinger, too—that Jesus not only preaches, inaugurates, and rules the kingdom of God, but He is the Kingdom, “in person.” And when we receive Him in Holy Communion, then His own words are perfectly fulfilled: “The kingdom of God is within you.”
Berto: And then he said the same is true for individual Catholics: we should be those seeds that mature into great bushes to give protection and rest to others who are weary and searching. We should be like a yeast rolled into the dough of our society, lifting it up to God.
Max: Right around that spot, he said something terribly important. Let me see if I can remember how he put it. “You know, modern Catholics are not very good at spreading the Faith. In centuries past, we had missionaries who went from one end of the earth to the other, planting the standard of the Cross, preaching the Gospel, suffering and dying for it, bringing countless souls into the Church. Why are we so timid, so unwilling to stick our necks out? Why do we hide our light under a bushel, content to keep our faith a private affair? Jesus said the kingdom begins like a mustard seed, but it’s not supposed to remain there. It should grow, branch out, and get huge, changing the lives of many. The dough is supposed to rise and become delicious, nourishing bread.”
Berto: And he went on to say that this doesn’t seem to be happening much anymore. The Church is missionary by nature, but many live as though it’s enough to be a believer, and never think of speaking a word of invitation to anyone else around them who isn’t already going to church. In this way we are not growing and leavening as we should. Why aren’t RCIA classes packed, standing room only? Why isn’t the Easter Vigil everywhere full of baptisms, confirmations, and first communions?”
Max: This is something I’ve been puzzling over for many years.
Berto: Have you gotten anywhere in your thinking? Why is evangelization practically non-existent among Catholics?
Max: Well, I’m sure there are many reasons, but I can think of at least three major ones. The first is maybe the most obvious. We—I’m speaking of people in the modern West—we have completely bought into the error of the Enlightenment that religion is a private affair and that we should not “bother” anyone else about their faith or lack of faith in God. It’s “between a man and his Maker.” It’s just a matter of individual conscience. This comes from the fundamental error of thinking that man is not a social animal, as if his happiness, even his salvation, is purely individualistic. We’re all atoms floating in the void, and besides, we can’t know for sure if anything we’re thinking is objectively true. So we keep our big ideas to ourselves and muddle along as best we can, acting selfishly or altruistically depending on what seems to suit the need of the hour. It’s a depressing picture of human beings and their life together. It certainly doesn’t recognize that man is inherently relational and religious, and that he must find his fulfillment in communal worship of the true God.
Berto: If religion is just a private affair and you can’t even know for sure whether you’re right or not, why would you go out of your way to talk it up with neighbors, acquaintances, coworkers? You might “offend their sensibilities,” as people say.
Max: A second issue is this. Thanks to the unholy “spirit of Vatican II,” we have drunk the Kool Aid of universalism: everyone, or nearly everyone, will be saved. God is so merciful that He either sends no one to hell, or you have to work really hard to send yourself to hell—you’ve got to want it badly. So, basically, there’s no urgency to spread the Faith, because we just assume that most people are good willed and heading in the right direction.
Berto: Your point is proved by the auto-canonization that occurs at practically every Novus Ordo funeral. Looking back on my youth, I can’t think of a funeral I went to where we didn’t just hear about how great the deceased person was and how “he’s now in a better place” and “we’ll all get to see him again in heaven,” etc. The Vatican doesn’t need to simplify the process of canonization any further; all you need to do is die and you’re in!
Max: Right. It was the same where I grew up. I can’t recall a single funeral where we focused our attention on praying for the repose of the soul of the departed. That was what struck me most about the traditional Requiem Mass when I first attended it. For all intents and purposes, it ignores the faithful who are there, so intense is its focus on the fate of the departed soul.
Berto: What you’re saying is perfectly summed up in the “Dies irae.”
Max: Now that’s a prayer that makes you want to get on your knees and stay there a while! But let’s get back to universalism. For the Church Fathers, the default assumption is that man is lost without faith in Christ, without His grace.
Berto: You don’t have to wait until the Church Fathers. It’s already all there in St. Paul, clear as day. Did you catch that last line of today’s Epistle? Something about “turning from idols to serve the living and true God, and waiting for His Son from heaven, Jesus, Who hath delivered us from the wrath to come”?
Max: Whereas in recent decades, the default assumption is that man is automatically saved unless he massively blows it.
Berto: In fact, if we start to “disturb” people about Christ and His Church and their need for faith, grace, the sacraments, and so on, we risk unsettling them and diverting them from the path on which God was already leading them home.
Max: Our intervention might even cause them to lose their salvation by explicitly rejecting Christ, whereas before they were “implicitly” accepting Him! We can’t do that, right?
Berto: Have you noticed how this mentality goes hand in hand with forgetting about the rights of God and His just claims on us?
Max: Not to mention His ire towards those who do not respond to His call! The Bible—in both Testaments—is full of talk about divine wrath upon sinners. The old liturgy is the same way. To judge from the Novus Ordo and from typical Catholic homilies, and especially funerals, you’d never know anything about this stuff.
Berto: As if God had just decided to give up some of His attributes as too old-fashioned—
Max: —or more to the point, as if some of His spokesmen made the decision for Him. It’s bad PR to be talking about vengeance, retribution, punishment, eternal death, hellfire, and so forth. As we were just saying a moment ago, no one really deserves these things, which makes several hundred verses of Scripture superfluous verbiage.
Berto: It’s hard to believe that people who claim to be Christians, let alone Catholics, can fall for such lunacy. I suppose it comes of no longer believing in original sin and actual sin.
Max: What do you mean?
Berto: I only mean that if human beings are born in sin and prone to sin, “children of wrath” who are bound to be displeasing to God, then we urgently need God’s help to turn our lives around and start living for Him, as we were created to do. We have to be rescued, and Christ is the only Savior. If we don’t have all the marvelous aids the Church provides, especially the sacraments, we are goners.
Max: That’s exactly what all the old catechisms said. That’s what the old liturgy conveys, too. In the past few years I’ve come to see more and more how the Catholic Faith—in its consoling truths and its hard truths—is deeply woven into every aspect of the traditional Roman rite, and how it’s as if the new liturgy is embarrassed or ashamed or scared to tell the truth, and suppresses it, glosses it over, handles it with kid gloves, or whatever. You just don’t get the same doctrine, and it makes a huge difference in one’s spiritual life.
Berto: We are so fortunate to have the traditional liturgy here at our parish! I tell you, it has pounded into me the reality of God’s holiness, the gravity of sin, and the real priorities of life.
Max: I know what you’re talking about. As a Catholic growing up in a typical parish, I never even dreamed of wanting to become a “saint.” That kind of talk would have made me laugh, if anyone had ever said it. Now, I get it. I see that this is it, the whole adventure of life, the meaning of it all.
Berto: And, as the pastor has introduced over the years Sunday Vespers, Confession in the old rite, Nuptial Masses and Requiem Masses, all of it, I found myself falling in love with my faith. Can you imagine? It used to be going through the motions, or more focused on seeing my friends—I like seeing my friends, don’t get me wrong—but God is really at the center of everything. Traditional Catholicism makes you feel it, see it, hear it.
Max: You even smell it when those acolytes get going with the incense!
Berto: But we are getting a bit sidetracked. You spoke about three reasons for the lameness of Catholic evangelization. What’s the third?
Max: It’s simply this. There has been and still is so much doctrinal and moral confusion in the postconciliar Church that it is becoming more and more difficult for people, whether on the inside or on the outside, to know what the Church actually teaches and how we are supposed to live it day to day. How can you preach a Gospel when you doubt or downplay or quarrel over half of what it says? How can you preach a consistent message if you’re constantly tinkering with your catechism or your liturgy?
Berto: Sadly, you’re right. Ask a sampling of Catholics about the Real Presence or whether the Mass is a sacrifice. Ask them if contraception’s okay, or abortion. You’ll get all sorts of incoherent, contradictory answers.
Max: How can anyone with half a brain take Catholicism seriously when it permits today what it outlawed yesterday, or vice versa? When it denigrates today what it proudly hailed in the past, and promotes ideas and practices that would have churned the stomachs of countless saints? When it now treats as intolerable the pious beliefs and customs that Catholics used to follow, sometimes for a thousand years or more?
Berto: I hear what you’re saying, but we have to recognize, don’t we, that all this stuff is not Catholicism—it is only the mental fever and fog of the people running the show, and that’s not the same thing at all.
Max: No, of course not, but I’m talking about the popular perception of confusion—of a Church running around in circles to play catch-up with the contemporary world. Think of all the feminism, the environmentalism and globalism and what not. The advocacy of the United Nations. The Vatican’s invitations to pro-abortion and pro-euthanasia speakers. It goes on and on. No wonder even those who want to be faithful Catholics are getting totally confused. At the end of the day, it looks increasingly as if you can believe anything you want and still call yourself a Catholic.
Berto: That’s not entirely true. You’re not allowed to be traditional—that’s beyond the pale. But everything else is fair game.
Max: Ah, well, such is life in the Church today. But anyway, regardless of whose fault the confusion is, how far back we trace it, how much the Council is responsible, etc., the practical effect is clear. As St. Paul said: “If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” No one rallies to a confused army, no one marches to an irregular drummer. It’s as if Catholicism is a “process,” morphing with the world around it, instead of a firm foundation we can build on.
Berto: I’d agree with that. (pauses) But I wonder…
Max: About what?
Berto: Your three reasons are very much to the point, but I think we need to bring in a fourth one as well.
Max: Which is…?
Berto: Let’s say we do convince someone to listen to us, and we get them to see that Catholicism is a consistent belief system that gives meaning to life. What are we inviting them to, once they decided to check us out? We are spoiled at this parish with the High Mass, the beautiful sacred music, the orthodox preaching, the altar server guild, and so on, but frankly, this is one in a thousand, a diamond in a heap of coals.
Max: You’re saying, if we overcome the other factors, there’s still all the byproducts of the liturgical revolution to deal with—the abuses and novelties in the Mass, the banality of the music, the ugliness of so many churches…
Berto: Right. And these are a formidable obstacle to people searching for the one true religion. Surely this religion, above all, should be characterized by the beauty and splendor of its worship, an atmosphere of mystery and prayer, an intense conviction of supernatural realities. This is why the traditional worship of the Church used to be the cause of so many conversions. It was the living and breathing animal, compared to which all other religions were like shadows or cartoon sketches.
Max: Indeed, though it pains me to say it, the new Catholic worship itself is like a shadow or a cartoon of the old.
Berto: At least the old worship is still attracting converts in a place like this.
Max: Thanks be to God for that.
Berto: But you know how it is: the entire infrastructure is against us. We can’t help looking like extremists to the outside world, and to our fellow Catholics, because everyone else is so far gone in the other direction. They call us “rigid fundamentalists” and things like that…
Max: And I think one could connect a related point to yours: there is almost nothing demanding about being a Catholic nowadays. Fasting is mostly gone; abstinence is no longer required; the precepts of the Church are unknown or ignored; sexual discipline is passed over glibly. How is anyone looking for a tried-and-true way of life—the “people of good will” we are supposed to be spreading the Faith to—supposed to buy into this charade? Almost all of the false religions demand more. Catholicism used to demand of us everything—and it promised us everything. It gave meaning to one’s entire life. It permeated the day, the week, the month, the year, with signs of the sacred. It asked us to sacrifice good things for even better things. It offered us a narrow path to holiness and heaven, in the company of Our Lord, Our Lady, and a host of saints. Where is all that now?
Berto: Sure, we try to live it among ourselves as best we can, and we know it’s the truth, but it is not the institutional norm any more—indeed, the all-too-human institution largely rejects it.
Max: No wonder Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the West. It takes God and religion seriously.
Berto: And we will have to do that too, if we ever expect to be mustard seeds or leaven again. It goes back to what we heard Father preach about on the last Sunday of October: we have to make Christ King of everything—our hearts, souls, and minds, our families, our cities and nations.
Max: Dare I say, of our Church, too?
Berto: That goes without saying.
Max (after a pause): We’ve made quite a big circuit in this conversation, haven’t we?
Berto: Shall we try to sum it up so we can remember it better?
Max: Sure. The Church, and individual Catholics in it, are supposed to be mustard seeds and leaven in this world. Or, as some prefer to say, “salt and light.” We have a missionary imperative from Christ to convert the world. But there are at least five serious obstacles to evangelizing today, any one of which would already deal a serious blow to the endeavor. First, the privatization of religion. Second, the rejection of original sin and the assumption of universal salvation. Third, the widespread doctrinal and moral confusion in the Church. Fourth, the banality and irreverence of mainstream Catholic worship. Fifth, the utter lack of ascetical demands. When you put all these together, you get Catholics who don’t think they should bother other people about religion, who assume that most people are already fine, who are not even quite sure they know what they believe, have nothing especially attractive to invite people to, and are not living and promoting a way of life that would respond to the needs of any serious searcher.
Berto: So, let me guess at a grand conclusion. You’re saying that all this “New Evangelization” rhetoric is pretty much hot air? And that it can’t possibly work?
Max: Yes, that’s right. It’s premised on the assumption that basically “all is well” inside the Church, and we just need to “invite” and “welcome” people to “share” the love feast with us. As Ratzinger once said, it’s the dead burying the dead and calling it renewal.
Berto: Or to put it more sharply: where there is novelty, there is disease and death; where there is tradition, there is health and new life.
Max: What we actually need is—
Berto: —let me guess again: Old Evangelization.
Max: Spot on. The stuff the saints used to do. The reason they converted the entire world to the Faith once upon a time. That’s what we have to do today: real worship, real doctrine, real morals, real demands. Then the Lord will give us real results. We can’t expect any knights in shining armor to ride in to our aid. We’ve got to do the Lord’s work or no one will. And there’s no time to waste…
Berto: Oh my, look at the time! I have to get going—we’ve got company coming over for dinner and I promised my wife that I’d prepare all the dishes, to give her a break. She’s cooking all week long, and homeschooling all our kids on top of it…
Max: You and your wife are doing the Lord’s work, that’s for sure! God bless you both. Thanks for the good conversation.
Berto: I’ll give you a call later in the week. Pray for me.
Max: Absolutely. And you for me. See you soon.
I really do not think many Catholics understand how much damage to evangelization {see following article…} is done by the almost total lack of discipline by effeminate and cowardly Bishops against the enemies of the Church who continue to use the name “Catholic” to foster the advance of their anti-Catholic agendas.
In common understanding, secularized and godless liberalism IS the “Catholic Church” and it is hard to tell many Protestants otherwise.
And most people don’t want anything to do with it.
RodH, have you ever considered that the reason the Bishops don’t do anything about the enemies of the church is because they are the enemy of the church. This article about the Catechism by JP 2 is almost unbelievable for a Catholic. It seems We have been fooled by the very people we trusted the most. https://novusordowatch.org/2017/11/francis-development-of-doctrine/
Spot on!
Rod, I’m certain you’ve seen this, but perhaps others could benefit. https://tinyurl.com/yaclpn39
Thank you for your steadfastness. Their are so many “converts” from Protestantism for the past 50 years who think they’re Catholic (in good faith — pardon the irony) and who are nothing of the sort. There are so many cradle Catholics in the pews who are no more Catholic than what were those English unfortunates in the pews of Cranmerian and post-Cranmerian England.
Perfect. I could not say it better myself. May God bless your perseverance.
https://casorosendi.wordpress.com/
You are the reason why Catholics are bad at evangelising. How many people have you invited to become a Catholic, or to return to their faith, in the last week? 0? You are the reason. Join the Legion of Mary and start doing door to door evangelisation. Be part of the solution.
I don’t know much about the Legion of Mary but I know I brought a number of Lutherans from my old Sunday school class to the CC when I converted, and all of my adult kids have converted.
But once in, the mess we have found is shockingly unsettling.
CATHOLICS; PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CHURCH ACTUALLY TEACHES AND STANDS FOR!!
I have never even heard of any organization made up of so many people seemingly committed to destroying that organization through rejection of the mission statement, goals and policies of said organization. And then, almost ZERO discipline has been administered by the leadership of the Church and what we have now except in pockets is something that looks like the Episcopalianism.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4891b046dd7dccc54f35b73a58cc9ea850cd61922136caecf51fc580fc03096b.jpg
Thank you.
And google helps as well. 🙂
You’re welcome RodH.
I was a member for many years of this great Catholic Lay organisation that was
way ahead of it’s time.
You will enjoy reading about it’s humble beginnings and apostolic work.
You *were* a member? Why did you stop?
Hi Margaret, I was an active member but “dropped” to auxiliary membership
as a change in work employment prevented me from attending the weekly meeting.
It’s a very disciplined organisation and models itself on the military Roman legion to a
decree plus uses Roman legion terminology to pronounce it’s organisational structure.
Perfectly understandable. Hey, you’re still in the reserves! ????
Indeed!
Using military parlance the auxiliaries provide the ammunition for the
“soldiers” in the frontline through their prayers.
Have you read the story of Fr Aeden McGrath? When he started promoting the Legion in China it spread like wildfire. He was imprisoned by the communists for it. Wonderful story.
Yes, quite amazing and held in great regard.
Alfie Lambe who went to South America and Edel Quinn to Africa are also of great inspiration.
And this is the lady who wrote it: http://www.theresamariemoreau.com/about.html
It is a great story I highly recommend the book “From Navan to China”.
It’s out of print Father.
It’s disciplined to a degree that might reasonably be criticised as inflexible. There are pros and cons.
It is intensely Marian – its spirituality is based on St Louis de Montfort’s “True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary”; so it is not for everyone.
To my mind it’s the most active AND successful Lay Apostolic organisation in the Church today by a long shot.
Unfortunately with the widespread apostasy today there is weak enthusiasm from Clergy to support it’s introduction
or viability if already established in Parishes.
Given that strict obedience at a local Parish level (to the Parish Priest) for any particular action is rightly crucial, it’s effectiveness in some instances is curtailed. (But not all!)
The Total Consecration to Jesus through Mary by St Louis de Montfort is not mandatory for members nor should it be as
this Consecration is very serious and should NOT be entered into lightly.
Great points Barry. I know nothing else which gets Catholics to evangelise week in week out, but most of all it points them towards holiness through the spirituality of St. Louis de Montfort.
My worry about it is that its strict subordination to Church authority (the need for which is strongly emphasised in the Handbook), which is so very admirable in principle, in practice exposes it to the errors that emanate from Church authority, the Papacy and its dicasteries in particular. This was the dilemma Abp Lefebvre had to face – it is not well known that he was in the LoM. So was Cardinal Suenens, who asked Paul VI to permit CITH. As far as I know, every Pope since and including Pius XI has spoken very highly of the Legion. It is well-known that Pope JP2 was a member of it – his very strong Marian devotion was a result of his duscovery of the True Devotion.
That X is in the Legion, is entirely compatible with X’s being a liberal. This is not so much a flaw in the Legion, or in any other Catholic group, as a problem with the sort of thing liberalism is, It’s an attitude or atmosphere, not a set of statements. The atmosphere of liberalism, its cast of mind, is logically prior to the statements it produces. So tackling the statements does not of itself tackle the attitude.
I don’t know what the unrevised Handbook says; I know only what the second edition says.
Subsequent editions of the Handbook have no significant change. I was aware that Cardinal Suenens was a member but pleasantly surprised to hear about Abp. Lefebvre.
Orthodoxy can be likened to a Bird, it strives as it flies from this world of the Flesh and the Devil.
Liberalism like a Dog is grounded in the world sniffing for comfort in the vain hope of discovering enlightenment with it’s nose, and at the same time assuming an air of growth.
We are striving to fly, or we are sniffing the dirt we can’t do both. The “architects of error” would have us believe we can but it’s simply UNNATURAL! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/948554496b9e1eb0f6a71fd7417ce27ee51fb0d5d559e0c189f4e9fbebe9a3b4.jpg
Take a good look at the Scripture quote in Barry’s reply to Rev. Fr. H. It’s in the border around the picture.
This isn’t the Age of Apostasy for nothing.
The follow up to the Age of Aquarius!!
Now you have that song going through my head. ????
Another obstacle to evangelization confected by our brilliant episcopal leaders since the 1960s are the multiple sex (mostly homosex) scandals. Every diocese in the US and most of the rest of the Western world has been struck by the most sordid human behavior imaginable among those in service and the unlawful (and immoral) cover-ups by those supervising them from chanceries. I’ve seen it spectacularly displayed in my own diocese and in the neighboring Archdiocese of Boston over more than a decade. Just yesterday I finished watching the Netflix series The Keepers (Archdiocese of Baltimore) that makes what happened here relatively mild by comparison. It’s all depressing and, I’m sure, off-putting to anyone considering the Catholic Church.
Oh, yes, for sure.
It was about the first thing I investigated during my RCIA training.
“confected” is an interesting word. It suggests “intentional”. And perhaps many of these men intentionally entered seminaries for the purpose of destroying the Catholic Church by their subsequent behaviour. That also has a marxist flavour to it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/50d34f046516ece923355270faf5bd29e284c1e0ae2e8e00881be97552c35282.jpg Legion of Mary Tessera Prayers
These are the requested daily prayers of both active and auxiliary members of the Legion of Mary. These prayers are said by active members at their weekly meeting and are divided up into three parts during the meeting; The Rosary, the Catena and the concluding prayers. The three parts take up about 25 minutes in total and can be said all together by auxilaries.
Opening Prayers
We make the Sign of the Cross saying…
In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Come, O Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of Your faithful, and enkindle in them the fire of Your love.
v. Send forth Your Spirit, O Lord, and they shall be created.
R. And You shall renew the face of the earth.
Let us pray. God our Father, pour out the gifts of Your Holy Spirit on the world.
You sent the Spirit on Your Church to begin the teaching of the gospel:
now let the, Spirit continue to work in the world through the hearts of all who believe.
Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
v. You, O Lord, will open my lips.
R. And my tongue shall announce Your praise.
v. Incline unto my aid, O God.
R. O Lord, make haste to help me.
v. Glory be to the Father, etc.
R. As it was in the beginning, etc.
Then follow five decades of the Rosary with the Hail, Holy Queen.
Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy;
hail, our life, our sweetness and our hope.
To you we cry, poor banished children of Eve,
to you we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.
Turn then, O most gracious advocate, your eyes of mercy towards us,
and after this our exile, show us the blessed fruit of your womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.
v. Pray for us, O holy Mother of God.
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
Let us pray.
O God, Whose only-begotten Son, by His life, death and resurrection,
has purchased for us the rewards of eternal salvation;
grant, we beseech You, that meditating upon these mysteries in the most holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary,
we may imitate what they contain, and obtain what they promise.
Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
v. Most Sacred Heart of Jesus
R. Have mercy on us.
v. Immaculate Heart of Mary
R. Pray for us.
v. St. Joseph
R. Pray for us.
v. St John the Evangelist
R. Pray for us.
v. St. Louis-Marie de Montfort
R. Pray for us.
(We can conclude here by making the Sign of the Cross or continue on as time permits)
In the name of the Father, etc.
The Catena Legionis
Antiphon.
Who is she that comes forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in battle array?
(Make the Sign of the Cross)
v. My soul glorifies the Lord.*
R. My spirit rejoices in God, my Saviour.
v. He looks on His servant in her lowliness;*
henceforth all ages will call me blessed.
R. The Almighty works marvels for me.*
Holy His name!
v. His mercy is from age to age,*
on those who fear Him.
R. He puts forth His arm in strength*
and scatters the proud-hearted.
v. He casts the mighty from their thrones*
and raises the lowly.
R. He fills the starving with good things,*
sends the rich away empty.
v. He protects Israel His servant,*
remembering His mercy,
R. The mercy promised to our fathers,*
to Abraham and his sons for ever.
v. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
R. As it was in the beginning is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
Antiphon. Who is she that comes forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in battle array?
v. O Mary, conceived without sin.
R. Pray for us who have recourse to you.
Let us pray.
O Lord Jesus Christ, our mediator with the Father,
Who has been Pleased to appoint the Most Blessed Virgin, Your mother,
to be our mother also, and our mediatrix with You,
mercifully grant that whoever comes to You seeking Your favours
may rejoice to receive all of them through her. Amen.
Concluding Prayers
(Make the Sign of the Cross)
In the name of the Father, etc.
We fly to your patronage, O holy Mother of God; despise not our prayers in our necessities, but ever deliver us from all dangers, O glorious and blessed Virgin.
v. Mary Immaculate, Mediatrix of all Graces
(or Invocation appropriate to Praesidium)
R. Pray for us.
v. St. Michael and St. Gabriel
R. Pray for us.
v. All you heavenly Powers, Mary’s Legion of Angels
R. Pray for us.
v. St. John the Baptist
R. Pray for us.
v. Saints Peter and Paul
R. Pray for us.
Confer, O Lord, on us, who serve beneath the standard of Mary, that fullness of faith in You and trust in her, to which it is given to conquer the world.Grant us a lively faith, animated by charity, which will enable us to perform all our actions from the motive of pure love of You, and ever to see You and serve You in our neighbor; a faith, firm and immovable as a rock, through which we shall rest tranquil and steadfast amid the crosses, toils and disappointments of life; a courageous faith which will inspire us to undertake and carry out without hesitation great things for your glory and for the salvation of souls; a faith which will be our Legion’s Pillar of Fire – to lead us forth united – to kindle everywhere the fires of divine love – to enlighten those who are in darkness and in the shadow of death – to inflame those who are lukewarm – to bring back life to those who are dead in sin; and which will guide our own feet in the way of peace; so that – the battle of life over – our Legion may reassemble, without the loss of any one, in the kingdom of Your love and glory. Amen.
May the souls of our departed legionaries and the souls of all the faithful departed through the mercy of God rest in peace. Amen.
(Make the Sign of the Cross)
In the name of the Father, etc.
Just noticed that it says “ipsum” and not “ipsa” in the Scripture quote around the picture. Did they change it after VII?
..
I honestly don’t know Margaret and your question raises an interest as to whether there were any
significant changes to the Legion Of Mary and it’s mission post V2 compared to pre V2.
I happily suspect not, but will check it out in due course.
Good catch, Margaret. Looks like this is quoting the Nova Vulgata, which has the “ipsum” reading, not the “ipsa” of St. Jerome. Which makes the Latin completely incongruous with the image, not to mention throwing out how the Church has consistently interpreted that passage for years upon years.
Thanks. ????
“Which makes the Latin completely incongruous with the image, not to mention throwing out how the Church has consistently interpreted that passage for years upon years.”
Completely incongruous with the image? The “Latin police” are out in full force, I find it baffling that people can
criticize and find fault with almost everything.
The Nova Vulgata contains no errors of faith but is not a flawless translation, to say it is completely incrongruous
with the image is wrong and a matter of opinion.
If the council of Trent Vulgate in 1546 was the ultimate expression of Holy Writ, then what was the need to revise it and issue the Sistine Vulgate (1590) and Clementine Vulgate (1592 with subsequent editions)?
“Ipsa”, the form of the word Jerome used, is the feminine form and thus has been interpreted by the Church (in Genesis 3:15 [“she shall crush thy head”]) as a prophecy of Our Lady, even being cited in by Pius IX in Ineffabilis Deus, the document in which he solemnly defined her Immaculate Conception as a dogma of the Faith.
Using “ipsum” may bring the Latin more in line with the Protestant tradition (“it/he shall crush thy head”) and renders countless images of the Virgin crushing the serpent with her heel, such as the vision of St. Catherine Labouré and the Miraculous Medal, incoherent (as there is now no such reference to such an image in the official Latin text of the Church).
Thank you LB236, I am aware of “problems” with the Nova Vulgata
and subtle departure from previous Vulgata and do not favor such.
Now with regard to the Legion Of Mary Tessera Image, the picture
tell’s us in no uncertain terms who it is that crushes the pride of Satan,
and no less in the Legion Prayer.
The image of Our Lady crushing the Evil one is what ordinary people see and absorb and this is what’s essential to appreciate.
Incoherent to lovers of a strict application of Latin ( perhaps an attempt
by our enemies to undermine ) but regardless making NO negative difference to the success of arguably the greatest Lay apostolic organisation in the Catholic Church.
Well noticed. Yes they changed it. Pressure from above. Throughout the handbook though it continually makes reference to Mary as the one who cruses Satan’s head.
WOW. I thought that’s what may have happened. That’s really sad.
If you really think about it (aside from the fact that one shouldn’t tamper with Scripture), it’s more to the glory of God and humiliating to Satan to keep ipsa as part of the verse in the Legion emblem. He knows that God is Almighty but he can’t stand that a woman, a human being, is more exalted than he and crushed his head.
O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee!
There is no greater Human being in the entire history of life itself, that’s past, present, and future life.
The greatest creature ever who is THE Queen of humankind and Mother of the elect bar none.
This August Queen, this Seat Of Wisdom itself ( the baby Jesus sitting on HER lap ) is the only
fully human being who never sinned against Our Father In Heaven.
The Devil tried repeatedly to ruin HER and failed miserably, how great were HER trials, how great
HER humility.
Our Blessed Mother has great great power by The Will Of Our Triune God to support, encourage, and
protect us in this life and only the foolhardy would disregard HER generous Spirit. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/47949dbdb188201c27056234339814562bb1a7f5c86de170eb3db4bb051e57ff.jpg
Beautiful picture, great post.
I have found the best Catholic evangelization to be friendly, committed traditional Catholics; genuinely interested in the welfare of others.
The worst Catholic evangelization is the bony, judgemental finger poked in the face.
The opening remarks of Rev. Fr. H were a little poorly expressed if promoting the Legion Of Mary was
the considered aim.
And I can personally testify that it in no way captures the Legionary Spirit of this tremendous organisation.
Sometimes like Rev. Fr. H we can be having a bad day and express our frustrations in a less than ideal manner.
I am reminded of some advice from the founder of the Legion Of Mary: Frank Duff
I paraphrase but essentially it’s ” be careful to engage people with the humility befitting a Child Of Mary
for what use is it to win the argument and lose the soul ! “
Well said.
Don’t forget TC blogs and websites like the Remnant, 1P5, CFN & http://www.fatima.org! Honestly, my online buddies are literally a God-send.
No, Father. The treason, cowardice, ecumania, simony, sodomy, worldliness, irresponsibility, heresy, disobedience and faithlessness of the clergy has a great deal to do with the mess the Church is now. So don’t imagine you lot can offload the responsibility for your Imitation of Judas Iscariot onto us laity. There are no greater corrupters of the Faithful than deacons, priests, and bishops.
You may be guiltless. If so, well and good. But too many clergy are not.
Hey, I wasn’t singling out the laity! Most priests I know are presbytery priests- it has been years since most of them actually chose to speak to anyone about the faith except for someone who is brought to them. But in all honesty that is what seminary prepares them for, how little evangelisation takes place from seminaries. Our seminarians should be spending their summers doing home to home and street evangelisation, and their rectors should be leading the way.
A priest once told me that NO seminaries simply FORMED priests to be complacent, avoid all controversy {AKA remain silent on unpopular but true doctrines of the Church} and for 20 years or so actively recruited heretics and homosexuals, the latter two now rising in rank to be bishops.
As he put it “Rod, so what do you expect from such men…Defense of the Faith?”
I confess, I had never looked at it that way and felt rather stupid for being incredulous at the pathetic shepherding I see/saw everywhere…
OK, Father. It just seemed as though we laity were getting the blame, when an awful lot of the corruption in the laity comes from those who – for example – allowed the laity to continue with cookies at the Mass (thereby invalidaiting it), despite being told not to allow this by Rome. And it was clergy, not laity, who allowed the Dutch Catechism and other inadequate Catechisms to become current. Just two examples of what I had in mind.
One can argue that the clergy owe their faults to their bad formation while laymen. I don’t wish to deny that. But it doesn’t go the whole way, that is the problem.
I think the structure of the Church makes bad ideas from the top all the more powerful than they need be 🙁
Yes, exactly. You hit the nail squarely on its head! Thank you!
Did you read the dialogue? We can try to understand the problem AS WELL AS be part of the solution to it. But only if we have honesty first about what DOES NOT WORK.
Of course I read the dialogue. The whole weight of the dialogue is analysing all the problems with the theology and practice of the contemporary Catholic Church. All that is true. But the way WE solve it is by speaking to others about the true faith. Almost all the other stuff we are powerless over.
I got your point, Rev Fr H.
I didn’t take it personally…or rather, I did.
Mea culpa…mea culpa.
WE all need to get with it. The Lord is watching.
It isn’t just “somebody else’s” fault.
It’s mine. It’s ours.
I agree with you. This is why I have been teaching young people the Faith for over 20 years, and write about the beauties and glories of our Faith. But sometimes one has to be critical in order to lay bare the reasons why the glitzy “New Evangelization” efforts are usually so ineffective.
Prayer and offering penance for many who have no one to pray for them may be more suited for some given their duties and disposition. I am not so good at “door to door” but thank the Lord some are.
With all due respect Father, until homosexuality is exterminated with a firm pledge by Vatican and all seminaries to do away with this great scourge upon the church upon the priesthood, evangilazation is a merely an appearance for appearance sake. I am sorry to say this, but it is true. This abomination has harmed the good and faithful priest in so many ways. It has destroyed his righteousness to proclaim the Truth
The reason Catholics are bad at evangelizing –
– The majority of them do not actually believe in their faith.
– The majority of them that might believe do not know anything past the basic list of beliefs.
– The majority of them have been raised in school systems that do not teach them general apologetics or critical thinking and basic philosophy.
– The majority of them have been taught the faith mixed with Americanist heresies of Freedom of Religion and Church/State separation.
-The majority of them do not have basic scientific knowledge to counter and demonstrate the falsity of two major scientific hoaxes – Darwinian Evolution & the Copernican Principle – which are the prevailing anti-Christian origins beliefs and views of reality that guide the current world. Rather, these Catholics have adopted these errors as facts and apply them to the Theology of the Church which leads one to the same crazy conclusions of Teilhard de Chardin and all the other modernists who likewise use Darwin and Copernicus as their basis.
– In practice, evangelizing is slowly being seen as something akin to a criminal offence, if not outright criminal in certain countries… and I don’t mean Islamic ones. So there is a natural fear at work.
– Catholics are too busy in their lives to spend time addressing all of the above. If they didn’t spend time in their youth pursuing knowledge about all of the above, they are less likely to have time doing so once they are working adults and have families to look after and increasing taxes to pay for the socialist services that are increasingly being heaped upon them. Hence the importance of parents teaching their children while they are young and not waiting until they are ‘older’ or something.
– Catholics in western countries are conditioned to obey and trust their leaders like blind sheep and leave all the heavy lifting to some government body to look after all their affairs. Naturally they’d rather outsource the evangelizing to some other organization too for which they’ll be happy to shove money into an envelope.
– Catholics are conditioned by some new silly evangelization technique where apparently they need only rely on their own private good works and being good themselves and somehow magically this will automatically run off on others around them. Now certainly all of that does help, but this is like an inverse Lutheran error where we’ve jettisoned faith and kept the works which neither saves, nor does it much impress anyone today where the atheists and the pagans are also quite good at behaving likewise, which even Christ criticized the Jews for. The fact is that we live in a time where the prime error governing the modern world is one of scientism and rationalism. So people expect arguments and logic in order to convert. But you’d better hurry, since the liberal progressives are devolving into a more insane state where apparently intellectual debate and logic are seen as false instruments of the patriarchal white Christian man who invented them solely for the purpose of subjugating the poor, the women, the blacks and the other-sexuals; and also solely in order to keep Trump in power or something… it doesn’t have to make sense, you need only feel that it somehow does and that’s good enough.
Savage, funny, and true.
You make a bunch of really interesting observations.
This one got me because I wasn’t gonna say it…
“Catholics in western countries are conditioned to obey and trust their leaders like blind sheep and leave all the heavy lifting to some government body to look after all their affairs. Naturally they’d rather outsource the evangelizing to some other organization too for which they’ll be happy to shove money into an envelope.”
I am of a mind to think the same cultural tendency has led to the virtual takeover of the Church by Leftist Communists during the last 50 years. Folks do seem to just take it. Those that don’t get accused of being schismatics, “Protestants”, etc. I find the culture of my FSSP parish to be MUCH different than any other parish I’ve visited or attended.
The Church has always taught one has free will. In that sense, one is “free” to not chose God but in the traditional Catholic understanding, “freedom” consists not of having choices but in choosing correctly: If a gasoline engine had consciousness and “chose” to run on kerosene, it wouldn’t be free. If it chose to run on whiskey, it wouldn’t be free, or diesel or whatever. It’s only “free” when it is running on what it’s made for. Thus human freedom consists in choosing God, not self or devil or whatever.
I think one has to talk “freedom of religion” explaining it this way. To try to say no one but Catholics are “free” to have public religion, that since God, who has the right to decide all this, gave the right to practice the true religion to mankind via the Catholic Church solely and that Protestants, Orthodox, non-Christians, have no right to public worship, would get you lynched. (Unless Emperor Theodosius reappears with his legions, of course.) Of course they’re hypocrites. They won’t lynch Muslims for saying the same thing about Islam because A, Islam is not a white, western civ religion, so it gets a pass, and B, Muslims will attack detractors of their prophet.
Just some thoughts. FWIW.
RC
The blind cannot lead the blind, a true saying. Most Catholics wouldn’t be considered Catholics one hundred years ago.
Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it GoogleNetJobsViewWorkFromHome……
I think I WILL forgive myself if I don’t “check it out”.
What makes the astronomy of Copernicus a danger ? And what astronomy is to replace it ?
I know some Catholics are geocentrists, but if orthodoxy in faith requires sacrificing almost 500 years of astronomical facts, then the less orthodoxy we have the better. Facts are sacred, and throwing out centuries’ worth of facts because one’s own picture of reality is too narrow to accommodate them is not on. The rest of the Church, including the Magisterium, can work perfectly easily with evolution and post-Ptolemaic astronomy, so what’s the big objection to either ? Fighting the battles of past centuries makes Catholics look anti-scientific and woefully inconsistent – the very devices we use to communicate would have been impossible without the science some people rehard as unChristian.
The astronomy of Copernicus depicts a worldview contrary to Revelation from God and defined heresies by the Church and the Holy Roman Pontiffs.
The astronomy to replace it is a model in line with what the Scriptures and the Church teaches.
We would not be sacrificing 500 years of ‘facts’, we would be freeing scientific disciplines from nonsense masquerading as established ‘facts’ which in reality are modernist philosophical assumptions that are demonstrably false through actual experimentation and observation.
The centuries worth of ‘facts’ have shown an utter failure to prove that the Earth moves through space, and to cover this up atheistic agenda-driven men imposed an ad-hoc superstition upon the world that forced a new mystical form of physics where matter shrinks, mass changes and time dilates to precisely sheer coincidentally just enough to cover up the lack of detection of the Earth’s movement they presumed but couldn’t measure. Not to mention a collection of observational data right up to our present day that indicates a central position of the Earth and completely violates the revered Copernican principle. If you are unaware of all this I strongly strongly recommend that you and everyone else had better keep up with science, because they certainly won’t be teaching this to you or your children in school or on the Discovery Channel.
The Church and Magisterium cannot work with evolution or copernicism because these philosophies begin with assumptions that directly contradicts the Faith, Revealed Truth, the Magisterium all the way back to the Church Fathers who rejected all this and interpreted the Scriptures according to the plain language of Genesis and Geocentrically. Their consensus (what the overwhelming majority of them say, not just one or two of them), is decreed to be infallible by the Dogmatic Council of Trent and no one may interpret anything apart or contrary to what they interpreted from the Scriptures; and it was upon these grounds, and not any scientific arguments, that the Holy inquisitors, St. Robert Bellarmine and the Holy Roman Pontiffs presiding over them, used as justification for the Injunctions and subsequent condemnation of Galileo.
To get into the full consequences of what we have lost by abandoning this teaching and handed over to the secular sciences is too vast to cover in here, but to boil it down to a few things, this shift in cosmological thinking had GRAVE repercussions for mankind, and how we view ourselves, the character of God Himself, whether or not the Catholic Church has authority to teach, whether Popes are the true representatives of God, and is what has led to the decline in culture, the assumption of human beings as not divinely created but randomly generated accidents living on an accidental wandering star of no consequence. It brought in the nihilism that Neitzche foresaw, the brought in the observation of the crisis of mankind’s psychological condition as Jung stated when science destroyed the Church, killed God and set the world adrift into Relativism and therefore into moral relativity.
This ‘battle of a past century’ that you dismiss is precisely what led to the theologies taught by the modernists like Teilhard De Chardin, and what led to the crisis and apostasy we observe today, and for the need for the Vatican Council II, which Cardinal Ratzinger said was a result of the Galileo affair for which the Church needed to reconcile itself to the modern world and change the nature of what the Church is, who the Pope is, and how we interpret Scripture, which many argued could be wrong on scientific and other details, and was only inerrant on matters that pertained to Salvation. But Benedict then noted that in the end, while VII adopted vague notions of these things, and did not exonerate Galileo as some had hoped, that in the end Science never proved the Church wrong and noted rather that the present consensus of Relativity only ends up supporting both views, both which according to Einstein are ultimately unprovable because he believed no physical experiment could ever detect the Earth moving. Pope John Paul II also set up a commission to lift the charges against Galileo. But it seems they told him that he could not and instead he adopted the same consensus opinion that nobody could prove the Church was wrong, but the Church wishes to apologize for any vague mistakes it made or situations it could’ve handled better with regards to scientific controversies of the past.
But we have a whole 500 years of historic and scientific testimony, many right from the mouths of the Church’s own opponents, and every heavyweight from Newton to Albert Einstein admitting that the Geocentric model could not be disproven, and that the only reason it is rejected today is due to philosophical biases – particular ones where the idea of a central Earth strongly indicates intelligent design and is unlikely to occur by chance unless we escape to a fantasy of multiple universes and multiple Earths. And by consequence natural questions need to be asked on the part of Catholics as to whether we must now believe that multiple worlds in multiple dimensions also needed multiple alternate versions of Christ to redeem them, whether He died in multiple ways for multiple reasons and whether there are multiple Catholic Churches with multiple varying doctrines and multiple Vicars. So as you can see, there are consequences to where our belief about our universe lead that inevitably infringe upon our theology. This isn’t new. Giordano Bruno also went around saying the same things and therefore used these ‘facts’ to overthrow the Church and the State and this is why that heretic was rightfully executed at the stake.
And let’s dispense with that nonsensical comparison between speculative abstract areas of science that are only as real as the chalk equations on a chalkboard that try to determine how many angels dance on a pin in multiple universes we can never examine, versus the practical engineering sciences that operate in the real world and give us demonstrable technology based on demonstrable, experimental testable things. It’s a false equivalence. It’d be nice if the scientific world spent more time actually doing operational science like this than wasting time, brain power and billions of dollars looking for nonsense that isn’t there and that they’ve failed to find for over 500 years.
If you’d like to know more, visit websites like the Kolbe Center, or even Protestant ones like Answers in Genesis. And look up the documentary films such as ‘Journey to the Center of the Universe’, ‘The Principle’ and the upcoming ‘The Church Vs. Galileo.’ I’d add links here, but they might go into moderation, but I’m sure a google search will bring them up. Or start with ‘theprinciplemovie’ or ‘gwwdvd’ and add the dot com to the end.
If you met me 5-10 or so years ago and told me what I just told you now, I’d also think you were crazy and backwards and doing harm to the faith. But the truth is that Catholics and mankind as a whole have been gravely misled by the so-called sciences whose only goal was to replace the Church and set themselves up as gods. But it’s now the year 2017 and the shoes on the other foot. The Copernican fable we’ve been indoctrinated with since we were children is all a farce, and science has ultimately vindicated the Church and her Holy Pontiffs and show the world that this could’ve only been so because the Holy Spirit indeed was leading the Church in the 1600s to act as it did to destroy this abominable heresy. How tragic that we are now led by clerics and a Pope who have instead lost faith in the Church and kowtow to every nonsensical anti-Christ anti-life science that now infests her people and destroys her theology.
Copernicanism and Darwinism are major heresies that control this world and whose only purpose is to destroy the credibility of the Papacy, the Church and the Holy Scriptures, and make man who was created in God’s image into nothing more than a beast who is at the whims of an uncaring unpredictable nature whose moral system has no foundation. It is DANGEROUS, and many have lost the faith and fallen into Hell because of it. It must be countered and utterly destroyed with every means at our disposal, particularly intellectually.
Indeed. Pope Paul VI recognised the limitations of the witness of life in his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelisation in the Moderrn World, issued in 1975 when he wrote:
“The Good News proclaimed by the witness of life sooner or later has to be proclaimed by the word of life. There is no true evangelization if the name, the teaching, the life, the promises, the kingdom and the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God are not proclaimed.”
Anybody interested in evangelisation would be recommended to read this document.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_p-vi_exh_19751208_evangelii-nuntiandi.html
“Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind. Love your neighbor as yourself”. “All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commands”. (Matt 22: 36-40
This article summarizes well the first half of the command: “Love the Lord thy God” (first).
This article does not emphasize the second half of the command: “Love thy neighbor as thyself”.
The second half can be the harder part, the messier part, that which requires more personal sacrifice and inner change.
The smelly, needy, self-centered, perhaps godless, profane person facing you, making (unreasonable?) demands or requests of you, is a child of God, perhaps put there in your life by Christ Himself, or His angels. What do you do with him or her?
Evangelization starts with beautiful, awe inspiring liturgy, properly and reverently prayed; a Sacramental faith that translates into holiness that attracts lost sinners.
BUT.
It is also very much involved with that needy person with his hand in your pocket, making personal demands of your earthly treasure and God-given gifts. Sacrificing everything you have and spending yourself completely for others, needy others, is also crucial to saving faith, pleasing to God. We should all end our lives, in some way, like Mother Theresa, wrinkled up, shriveled and spent. With an epic story we can tell our Lord of widows and orphans, the rejects of life, fed by us, and cherished like God Himself; our inner soul much more beautiful than the outer physical shell.(Rev 20:11-13)
I didn’t read the article. I couldn’t face being depressed, yet again, by the horrifying contrast between what the Church has come to, and, what she might have been or might be. The problem is at the top, and until that is faced there is no prospect at all of a change for the better. Rome has wrecked and perverted the missions, and until the Popes deign once more to treat the Great Commission as still in force, they will have a stranglehold on the missions that prevents them ever reviving. And Rome has also decided the Jews, and the Orthodox schismatics are not to be evangelised. Sorry, Jesus, You got that “all nations” thing wrong – the Church says so. The SSPX evangelise, and that is about it. No thanks whatever to Rome, but despite it.
As for “[e]vangelization starts with beautiful, awe inspiring liturgy, properly and reverently prayed; a Sacramental faith that translates into holiness that attracts lost sinners” – that is precisely what the Popes have robbed us of, deliberately, knowingly, freely, of set purpose, for almost 50 years. They neutered the Church – and expected it to bear offspring. So much for the Popes being uniquely well-equipped to govern the Church. Only in Catholicism is blithering incompetence rewarded with elevation to the altar.
Well dont worry, in some ways because very very soon the contrast between true Catholics plus Christians who are ON THEIR WAY to embracing the fullness of the teachings of Catholic truth AND the opposition – nihilists and activist atheists will be SO great that people will have a very real visible choice. Remember those 21 Copts who were beheaded on the beach, there was a non Christian amongst them. When faced with the choice between evil Islamists and the Christians, he replied “I am with them”. That was to choose the Good. That’s God’s glory and victory.
Tell a Protestant or other non-Catholic about JESUS and His teaching as it was and has been handed down in the faith. Invite to Mass {TLM} and see where it goes.
Be ready to answer questions and don’t give up if you don’t know the answer…just make sure to GET the answer if you need it.
About the worst can do is eliminate invincible ignorance….
With the state of the Church today, I have sincerely wondered if I am doing a good deed in eliminating a morally good, Jesus loving, church going protestant’s invincible ignorance.
I understand that.
But one of my priests said something that really grabbed me.
He said that if people really were searching for God and wanted to know something about the Catholic faith it would take them maybe 3 hours to learn everything necessary for salvation and then some with the technology of the internet at their fingertips.
For myself, personally I am repulsed by the culture of Catholicism that I see and that I saw before I converted, but I BELIEVE the tenets of the faith.
I’m staying put in the hold of the Barque of St Peter.
Partly because I know so much about Protestantism!
Me too. I used to be one of “them” a long time ago. Just can’t unlearn what I learned. What is so depressing is that the Pope and heirachy do not seem to have that problem. Just want to scream for help sometimes.(the human kind) Not much alternatives in my area.
Couldn’t agree more, Rod. I don’t take surveys nor do I discuss with any of our fellowship parishioners their view on the Church but let me tell you that I am often agitated after mass. For instance, this past Sunday I knew perhaps 20 of the 1000 at the 11 AM Mass. Now, I don’t know the personal situations of all of the people I will mention (perhaps they are in states of grave) but here’s a list of people I saw present themselves for communion:
1. A man who in the last month closed a long running business under a cloud of legal issues that purportedly stem from exchanging services for….ah….”other” services;
2. A divorced and “remarried” man. The guy is a seemingly faithful Catholic and the end of his marriage was painful. Perhaps he was granted an annulment but, given that he was just civilly married by a JOTP, I doubt it;
3. Best of all, a guy and his “husband” who are in town for Thanksgiving both presented themselves for communion.
I dunno, let’s give these people the benefit of the doubt and say they probably believe, why else would you spend an hour of your time at Mass? Given that fact, even if they gave their own warped ideas of mercy, wouldn’t you, just on the outside chance that MAYBE–and this is going to sound crazy–a Church that is 2000 years old and traces itself back to Christ and his apostles might actually know more about Christ than you? And given that possibility, would it not kind of scare you to gamble on you being a better theologian than say St. Thomas Aquinas or Benedict XVI or Cardinal Sarah?
I think it just shows, sadly, that even the 20% of the faithful who attend mass regularly do not know sh*t from shinola about the faith. Heck, I admit that I do not know anything and I promise that I spend more time than these people do on the faith.
Well, “you’d think”…
But when we have leaders who are expressly positing anti-Catholic doctrine, one must have some sense of, dare I say it…mercy for those who “just don’t know”…
Good grief, we even have a Pope who has spent 4 1/2 years “Gerald Ratnering” the faith! Why would anyone take anything seriously when the leader of the faith runs it down so hard?
Benedict XVI had it right when he gave account why missionary activity has waned. He cited a truth that salvation is possible outside the Church. That truth burgeoned into an untruth since Vat II with overemphasis on mitigation of serious sin, and doubt of an eternal Hell. Certainly a dreadful reality that many like Bishop Barron has hope Hell has been emptied, and the Pontiff stating eternal damnation is inconsistent with the logic of the Gospel. Urgency once prevalent is now complacency. Why bother to practice when salvation is virtually assured, and there’s no hell. AL can be faulted for accelerating the notion that salvation is far more likely than condemnation, due to once again mitigation and the supremacy of conscience over “Rules”. Bishop Barron has been disparagingly called Bishop Barren and worse. Yet the good man has said his mission is to seek the salvation of every soul around him. A problem many faithful Catholics have is our fire has transmuted to anger–understandable being pilloried by the Left, and defensiveness. Greater than knowledge and eloquence is humility, sacrifice, and prayer. We have the means in these virtues to evangelize and perhaps turn the tide of heresy.
I agree that the de facto dumping of EENS certainly has severely damaged the perceived need of Catholics to evangelize. And Benedict XVI has said flatout the dogma of EENS has been abandoned.
That he said this dogma was abandoned after V2 seems like a mere observation for one must look hard and far to find a Catholic that believes it, but that he said the same thing in 1958 and that it was due to our “humanity” seems an heretical statement. Very troubling indeed if we remember that heretics are supposed to be Popes.
Here are his statements on that dogma:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_006_RatzingerSalvation.htm
http://www.hprweb.com/2017/01/the-new-pagans-and-the-church/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-emeritus-benedict-says-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis
Offhand, not counting some folks at my TLM parish, I do not know a single Catholic that affirms the dogma at all, and certainly not in the clear language we find, say, in Cantate Domino.
I attend NO and I believe in EENS. I would also say that there are lots of apologists, including Catholic Answers, who while disavowing EENS at least tell people that it’s a LOT harder to obtain salvation outside the RCC (indeed, it’s hard enough within it). I heard Dr. Anders was use the following analogy “Obtaining salvation outside the Church is like floating in the ocean on a piece of drift wood: sure you might make it to your destination but your left to the tides, swells, sharks, etc. Within the Church you sail the seas in a luxury ocean liner. Why would you take your chances?”. Unfortunately he leaves the door open but at least he depicts it as a struggle to obtain final salvation outside the Church.
One thing I have reflected on is the fact that while so many Churchmen have tried to make it oh so very easy to enter thru a wide gate over a smooth, 4-lane One Way to heaven…so few seem to take them up on it!
THAT is a judgment on the world, not the Churchmen {such Churchmen have their own eternal problems}. Dwell on that; the Pope and the rest of the liberal Lutherans are fawning all over and throwing themselves prostrate at the feet of the drowning world, and the world bobs up and down, fully satisfied with sucking as much seawater into its lungs as fast as it possibly can nevertheless.
The smoother they make that road the fewer there are who trod it.
EENS is a consequence of the Uniqueness of Christ, and is solidly based on Scripture.
If Christ is the One Mediator (1 Tim 2.5)
If salvation is in His Name alone (Acts 4.12)
If He is appointed to be the Judge of all men (Acts 17.31; St Matthew 25.31-46)
If He is the Son of man (Daniel 7.10-14)
If there is to be “one fold and one shepherd” (St John 10.16)
If “with [His] blood [He has] purchased for God men from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev 5)
If He is to reign for ever and ever (Psalm 72)
If “the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand for ever” (Daniel 2.44)
If the homage paid to the Infant Christ in St Matthew 2 is the homage that is to be paid to the Davidic King in Psalm 72.8-11
and so on;
– then the Kingdom of the Messiah must be everlasting, universal, unique, established by God, indestructible, ruled by Christ the King. But the Church is the earthly beginning of this – therefore it cannot avoid having the same character as the Kingdom of which it is the earthy foretaste. Therefore it is one and unrepeatable and unique, the only Church on offer, because Christ is the only Saviour on offer.
Awesome (in both senses of the word)! Your post is going into my favorite 1P5 posts file. ????????
I agree. Now those people I mentioned…..
“We cannot believe that the man next to us, who is an upright, charitable, and good man, will end up going to hell because he is not a practicing Catholic”
That captures very well the iteration of the post-conciliar lunacy. The issue isn’t a matter of being a “practicing Catholic;” the issue is access to the sacraments and sanctifying grace. Without the sacramental life, the Church’s mission activity for 2000 years has been motivated by the knowledge that most of the world is buried in original sin, its effects, and thus being condemned to live in the swamp of innumerable mortal sins as well. Without Her sacraments, there is little reason to be optimistic about the rest of the world. Good Lord, it’s a horrible thought to contemplate – until one reflects how difficult it is to save one’s soul WITH the sacraments.
“it’s a horrible thought to contemplate – until one reflects how difficult it is to save one’s soul WITH the sacraments.”
EXACTLY.
“We cannot believe that the man next to us, who is an upright, charitable, and good man, will end up going to hell because he is not a practicing Catholic.”
I can believe it … because I am that man. I am upright, charitable, and good in a general sense, yet no one who looks at me being upright, charitable, and good will see my secret sins, my hidden thoughts, my omissions, my moments of private betrayal, cruelty, and selfishness, my capitulation to temptations and my flattery of men at the expense of truth. No one will see the sinner in me, except God. I cannot save myself or atone for my evils. But God has told me and all of us plainly:
“Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” – St. Mark 16:15-16
Well said.
That’s just it. WE are ALL “that man”.
Sorry, haven’t heard this term before. EENS in a Catholic context refers to..?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_Ecclesiam_nulla_salus
Outside the Church, no salvation in the English version. A long running source of controversy when pushed to extremes – check out the Feeneyite controversy for a small bit of the story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeneyism
When pushed to extremes as in…Unam Sanctam and Cantate Domino?
The problem with the issue is that the only CLEAR and frankly, coherent assessments of the dogma are those which are now marginalized and considered…”rigid” or “inhuman”.
Here’s an excellent assessment from the perspective of one highly critical of Feeney:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/EXTRECCL.HTM
To close, Pius IX’s Quanto conficiamur moerore simply doesn’t say what the modernists want it to say, namely, that herds and gobs and almost everybody if not absolutely everybody is saved which let’s face it, is almost EXACTLY what the position of most Churchmen has been since V2, at least tacitly, for who can remember any prelate affirming in substance and clarity ANYTHING like what is given us in Cantate Domino or Unam Sanctam?
Fro Pius IX:
“For God. . . will not permit, in accordance with his infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal punishment.”
But that is the POINT: NO ONE is innocent of “voluntary sin” and i the absence of the Sacraments God gave the world through His Church, what means of salvation are there?
We can reach into Lumen Gentium to make us feel good and for support to remove our call to evangelize, but to date, not one person has been declared by the Church to be a Saint who was not a member of the visible Church, though that even now is under attack, if we look at what the Pope is doing with Coptic Christians, Anglican missionaries and…MARTIN LUTHER.
Plainly Unam Sanctam and Cantate Domino are not the last words on the Church’s teaching of the eternal fate of those outside the visible earthly membership of the Church. Quanto conficiamur moerore contains significant qualifications to the bare formula.
No one is innocent of voluntary sin? What about children under the age of reason?
We have a massive problem trying to evangelise at all when the likes of Archbishop Victor Fernandez explicitly believe in universal salvation and Pope Francis himself is obviously very close to that belief, if Sandro Magister got his facts straight in his disturbing article in Oct 2017:
http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2017/10/20/worlds-end-update-the-last-things-according-to-francis/
I suppose we could ask these gentlemen if they propose to disband the Church and abolish their own jobs, because that is the immediate logic of their position. But we would be waiting as long as the authors of the dubia.
“Plainly Unam Sanctam and Cantate Domino are not the last words on the Church’s teaching of the eternal fate of those outside the visible earthly membership of the Church.”
The problem is not that they are the last words on EENS, the problem is that they are so crystal clear in what they teach and more recent documents more or less obliterate them. THAT is the challenge for theologians and clergy and faithful. And all of this mightily impacts evangelization as ex-Pope B16 has recently said quite bluntly. The self-same Father Ratzinger in his 1958 lecture addressed this issue square up and a straightforward reading indicates his own personal denial of the validity of any reading of EENS that would rationally mesh with past interpretations of the dogma. So if the traditional view he describes as such actually WAS {is?} the Church’s position, his denial of it on “humanitarian” grounds implies the affirmation of an heretical position that has all sorts of implications, especially since he goes on to reinforce the position ten years later and then much more recently!
As for the issue involving voluntary sin, the emphasis on that passage of Pius IX does not at all appear to be on children but rather people who live and believe outside the visible Church. And among that crowd, ALL are voluntary sinners.
Personally, I am not quite a Feeneyite, but we must remember that Feeney was never required to recant his position and that his excommunication was not for heresy per se but disobedience.
As you note, it is an issue of grave importance today. I contend that this dogma is at the heart of EVERY doctrinal problem we see today and the Church will not be able to solve the issues present in AL and other vague, ambiguous and confusing documents until we have a sound, coherent, working definition of the dogma. Right now, rather than say it has “changed” {which it is admittedly easy to do} I consider it in flux.
I heard a story from a priest who knew Feeney, or knew people close to him, that his knack of converting young people belonging to rich, upper-class WASP families was what got him in trouble. That is something i can well believe.
RC
I am acquainted with the concept. I hadn’t heard it presented with that particular acronym.
The Latin phrase Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus means: “outside the Church there is no salvation”.
Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, Patron Saint of the Missions. She prayed for conversions.
Yet, Therese only became the “Patron Saint of the Missions” after she received her “second conversion”. (in her own words) This was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in her soul, like a renewal of the promise of Baptism, like a new flowing river of Grace in her soul that gave her so much joy and thirst for prayer. She renewed her commitment to Jesus by saying: I am all yours. Do with me what you will. It was then that she was able to pray for conversions and be so effective because it was no longer ‘Therese’ praying but the Holy Spirit praying in Therese. She prayed with authority, fire and power, love, joy, and produced all the good fruits of the Spirit!
We catholics forgot true prayer which is why we lack effectiveness in mission and evangelization.
St. Paul: “…the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.” (Romans 8:26)
Forgiving the bishops and priests who make evangelization so difficult by contradicting Church teaching in word and deed is so hard. I am very suspicious of these clergy until I see the good words and actions. I think we all need therapy like abused children receive.
Unless you are in a very politically liberal area, talking to a person about becoming Catholic might get you a good cursing out, that is if they keep up with the Pope. Unfortunately, many Catholics also consider all he says to be on a par with Jesus. The Pope and his apologists are the biggest obstacle to evangelization if your conversion pitch is to what used to pass as Catholicism. Good chance of getting those pro-choice, transgender types though. Afraid I’m just not into this “God of surprises ” bit, never was.
What you say is sadly pretty true I’m afraid, but I can tell you there are many out there who will be interested in the MESSAGE the Church has to offer. Protestants on the whole simply do not know WHAT the Church teaches, how consistent the message has been throughout history {even in spite of the internal war and the divergence of many in recent decades} and how BIBLICAL the message is.
You may not make an instant convert, but by engaging Protestants at least, you will open their eyes to what most of them simply do not know.
I mentioned in another thread that I am reading Archbishop Chaput’s “Render Unto Caeser” and he makes a point that illustrates just how good Catholics actually are at evangelizing: several have done a brilliant job of evangelizing the world to the Church, letting the Church know the great “truths” that she must recognize in atheistic secular western culture.
No, we Catholics have been rock star reverse evangelizers.
We might legitimately recognize that (St) Pope John Paul II intended that the “New Evangelization” would be aimed mostly at getting Catholics, not Protestants or non-Christians, to return to doing some of the “old stuff”. Much of this will begin to happen as the 60’s and 70’s era crowd begin to fade. Sad to see it required to wait that long though.
Historically, the Catholic Church primarily targeted nations and big communities in her efforts of evangelization. This has resulted in many nations being somewhat christianized — i.e. being influenced by Christianity — but perhaps not in many people having a real personal faith and being in the state of grace. From conversations with neighbours, some of whom are Evangelicals of diverse denominations, my impression is that their approach is far more individualistic, and that this approach fits better with the individualistic mindset of our times.
According to these Evangelicals, their approach is not to take for granted that new visitors to their congregations are Christians, regardless whether these visitors were baptized and had a Christian upbringing or not. They start from the presumption that these visitors are interested unbelievers, not Christians. In a similar manner, the pastors and elders of these congregations don’t take for granted that an outsider who asks for pastoral help is a Christian. This pastor questions him about his faith first, in order to know what kind of person he’s dealing with.
To avoid misunderstanding, these pastors don’t ask their questions in the same manner as a Catholic priest. A priest typically asks general and formal questions like: “are you catholic?”, if he doesn’t know you and you need him for some pastoral or other reason. He doesn’t ask about your personal faith in any detailed manner. However, that’s exactly what these Evangelicals do. They ask questions like: “Do you believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died for your sins on the Cross of Calvary? Do you believe in the resurrection of Christ? Do you believe in the Virgin Birth of Christ? Do you believe in the Inspiration of Scripture?”, And in particular: “DId you personally, consciously, convert to Christ and accept him as your Lord and Saviour?” and from a person’s answers to these questions they decide whether they have “brother” or “sister” Christian before them or not.
They often view a personal conversion experience, something similar as reported by St. Augustine in his Confessions (Book VIII). as essential. Without such a conscious decision they don’t accept you as a Christian believer at all. And this individual approach determines their evangelization efforts, pastoral practice and policies, and the internal discipline of their congregations. And it works.
One of the effects of this individual and faith-centered approach is that “unbelievers” are almost absent in their congregations — for if there were, they would immediately be exposed — and that everone shows up for the Sunday services and other obligatory church activities. In my eyes, they are much like the first generations of Christians in the Roman Empire, before the big watering down of the faith began and the Emperors became “Christians” (but not Christians).
Interesting assessment with many very good points.
However, I would add that what Protestantism has done in its approach is to make “Christianity” a “personal decision” divorced from the authority of any other than oneself, or in some cases, the local “pastor”. So if you SAY you are a “Christian”, you ARE.
This is “decision-based” Christianity, but it is true Christianity?
For example, what of the Sacraments and Sacramental obedience? What of the moral code established by Jesus and for example in specific His condemnation of divorce and remarriage and the age-old condemnation of artificial contraception? What of the need to remain under the visible authority of St Peter?
Such notions are left to the individual interpretation of the Protestant “believer” which leaves one wondering just exactly WHAT they believe IN? Indeed, their entire doctrinal edifice is established on the DENIAL of simple Scripture {2 Peter: 1:20} and worse yet, though they make much of their supposed adherence to and valuing of the Scriptures, they deny them by tossing out into the garbage whole BOOKS of Sacred Scripture used by Jesus, the apostles and the Fathers.
While the details of your post here are largely correct, the thrust of it misses the point that Protestantism, no matter how popular or individually satisfying it is, denies both Scriptural commands and the history of salvation, leaving one to wonder anew about the methods the Catholic Church used in the past, which, by the way, did not exclude personal choice in conversion.
I recognize the difficulties you mention, which are essentially the difficulty of subjectivism. Yet I think that nowadays this difficulty is also part of the Catholic situation.
To me the failure of the modern Catholic approach is that blatant unbelievers and a lot of people who simply don’t know the faith are mistakenly addressed by bishops and priests either as some kind of “implicit” believers or even as “children of God”. You’ll remember for example the conversation of Bishop Barron with the gay interviewer David Rubin. Barron said to him that “the first thing a gay person, like any person, should hear is ‘You’re a beloved child of God'””.
This saying of Bishop Barron to me is exemplary of what is wrong today with Catholic evangelization. It is in fact an abominable lie. An unbeliever, or anyone living in a sinful situation is never a “beloved child of God”. The Apostle Paul would never address the pagans and unbelievers of his day in this manner. He would tell them that they are “children of wrath” and “children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2-3), “enemies of God” (Rom. 5:10).
Additionally, in the context of Catholic evangelization efforts we hear the constant refrain of the “joy of the Gospel” and similar expressions. The Lord Jesus Christ never expressed himself in these terms when he called sinners to repentance. And in his parable of the sower the only ones who “received the word with joy” are the ones who are compared to stoney places. They have no root in themselves and are offended when difficult times come. This is because the process of conversion isn’t really a joyous matter in the beginning. It starts with the sorrows of repentance and conversion of the heart. That is the original story of coming to Christ in true repentance which is so amazingly reiterated in the story of St. Augustine.
The same we see in the message of St. Paul. When he proclaims the Gospel to a new group he usually starts with the announcement of the Judgment to Come, and that nobody is good, &c, &c. Read for example his sermon from Mars’ hill (Acts ch. XVII), where he announces to the Athenians that “He (i.e. God) has appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He has ordained; whereof He has given assurance unto all, in that He has raised him from the dead”.
YES.
My point is only that in Protestantism we have religion embodying the outright denial of God’s commandments and stated plan of salvation {admittedly sometimes based on ignorance}.
But just as you say, the leadership of the CC is almost universally duplicitous in their approach to large numbers of what Father Ratzinger called “pagans” in his ’58 lecture.
I have always chuckled at the term “faithful’ as it extends quite a benefit of the doubt to many who I don’t even think would even describe themselves with the word. It reminds me of when I was an Elder in a Reformed/Calvinist ecclesial group. On one hand, the doctrine of Calvinist election was robustly affirmed. On the other hand everybody present was assumed to be of the elect.
Much of this is human nature of course, but it seems to me our prelates should know better, that is, if they actually believe in things such as the evil found in the presumption of God’s mercy and, well, hell itself.
This article doesn’t arrive at any conclusion, it mentions some problems, but offers no concrete solutions, it doesn’t go to the root of the problem and it avoids discussing the elephant in the room.
Official photograph of the CEO of the Useful Idiot’s International Society: Dumbo macnuts
and I quote ” together we can achieve the indescribable” https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c745cd4f205203a453bdc65be1bcbb09bfa308512c9999ea50171c8c97ae7801.jpg
That’s creepy photoshop rught there.
Photoshop? How cynical, that is a photo of Dumbo macnuts
upon receiving the news of his/her’s election to head the board.
I think it was around march 2017.
The election took place in a carpark outside Vatican city…at night!
1. Not every article can do everything. A critique is one thing; a set of positive proposals is another. OnePeterFive and other such sites are full of positive proposals, including some of my earlier articles.
2. What, in your opinion, is “the root of the problem” and “the elephant in the room”?
3. Can you explain which Catholics are “useful idiots,” and which Benedict says so?
I don’t know about “useful idiots”, but as Father Ratzinger he described most Catholics as “pagans”.
Dear ProfKwasnieswski.
Point 1. Agreed.please find my proposals. In one phrase what is missing in Catholic churches today. Answer: the Real Lating Mass pre Vatican 2. This must be reinstated in every Catholic church. Bringing the real Latin Mass (pre Vatican 2) back to the church will change everything.
2. The root of the problem one answer. Vatican 2 . The elephant in the room is that much of the leadership of the Catholic church are simply not Catholic, and we are doing nothing about it ( this we are useful idiots giving them our money to destroy the catholic church)
3. Useful idiots, sorry it was not Benedict it was Cardinal Pietro Palazzini I made th mistake because his name was the quote above. here the link to an interesting article https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/prohibition-freemasonry-disappeared-canon-law/
Thank you for responding to my questions.
Essentially, then, the solution is to do the opposite of the problems identified in my article:
1) Reject the Enlightenment error that religion is a private affair.
2) Know that we are all sinners in need of salvation and that without the Catholic Faith men will be damned.
3) Know the authentic doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church and spread them.
4) Worship God in the reverent, beautiful ways of tradition.
5) Practice asceticism.
All of this is… “Old Evangelization.”
Prof. Kwasniewski,
I enjoyed your dialogue. However, I share Paul Bays’ frustration, and I do not think that your 5 points address his concerns, because his concerns can only be met by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. No layman can install the TLM as THE proper rite in the Church. No layman can address the problems in VII. No layman can deal with the elephant in the room, the unbelieving hierarchy of the Catholic Church. So, I do appreciate your 5 points, and they will be helpful for those who live very close to excellent TLM communities and who can encourage others to ignore whatever emerges from the Vatican. But this is a drop in the ocean. Laymen cannot control the liturgy, cannot enforce doctrine, cannot correct Pelagian Bishops to reverse the ‘we are all saved’ mentality. There is a problem and it is at the TOP. Maybe your 5 points should be kept; add another point or points (please soon!) on how to deal with the apostasy at the TOP, the hierarchy. Maybe that is his “useful idiots” point. maybe there is a 6th point that can be added to your 5: encourage every traditional Catholic and every interested potential convert to set aside a real, monetary amount, say 5-10% of income, to be given exclusively to traditional groups, traditional prelates, traditional media. And zero fro anything else, except the poor.
I agree. Laity cannot make the changes that are necessary. But God, who holds the hearts of all, can do it, and we must beg Him to do so.
I also agree about your point of tithing to tradition and the poor. At a certain point my wife and I decided that we would not support Novus Ordo groups, because however much they are part of the solution, they are also part of the problem.
“Laity cannot make the changes that are necessary.”
– Yes they can’t, instantly. Or through some officially decree… But then, the lay people are those who world-widely has helped converting many gentiles, for centuries long. And they did that, indeed, rightly through the manner of old, let me say, traditional evangelization. Which you have pretty good described above. Of course there can always come a few points more.
“But God, who holds the hearts of all, can do it, and we must beg Him to do so.”
– And yes again, God can do it.
And because we believe that, and we hope and wish that so badly, we should also believe that our way of living Christian Faith, as the way of the first Christians, and other faithful ones from any other era, – when we are doing it properly, in the ‘old fashion way’, including the ‘old’ but the only good way of traditional evangelizing (which also means proselytizing, and certainly apologetic works too), then we may, passionated by/with our Christian business, be patient in waiting, hardworking in deeds, and persistent in expectancy of the Kingdom of Heaven.
In short: I appreciate your effort to mention these five valuable points of true Evangelization.
I suppose I agree with you too, Ivan, in the sense that the more true we are to Christian life, the closer we are to God, and He will intervene somehow to change the hierarchy. Thanks for your encouragement.
Dear John (Ivan),
when I am reading your post above, I feel real honesty and concern. However, I feel also a bit lack of trust. For example, when you said: “…No layman can address the problems in VII.” – I must disagree with that. Because the opposite is truth. Layman people have it already done. Many times. Addressing the big problems of the VCII and the fruits of it pushed by the present holders of that same false spirit, is by many laymen, mostly partially, through many writings and statements already done. And that continues, luckily. One example for that is Correctio Filialis… It’s another kind of story that there is little or zero willingness by the responsible to hear it, let alone, understand it. Which all together, does not mean, that this kind of ‘addressing of the real problems’ in the Church are unworthy. Exact the opposite is truth.
We just don’t know all God’s thoughts and intentions and plans (let alone the final), but we should nevertheless keep doing our daily works, that every good, devoted Christian, Catholic already must know. What in fact, is not too difficult for a good Catholic, as mentioned above, in the quote from the Book of Rev 14,12.
“Here is the patience of the saints, who keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.”
But then, only once acquired knowledge about ‘what should good Catholic do’ is of course far from enough. Therefore we should pray and beg, and beg and pray, as st. Paul and our ancient forefathers have prayed for Colossians:
“that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will, in all wisdom, and spiritual understanding: That you may walk worthy of God, in all things pleasing; being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God: Strengthened with all might, according to the power of his glory, in all patience and longsuffering with joy,…” (Col 1,9-11)
When we are, by the grace of God, filled with the knowledge of his will, then we should not be of little faith about being fruitful in our good works, and think in the way: “But this is a drop in the ocean.”
We know that only one single drop of blood makes the entire glass of water into red.
We should not be much surprised why the ocean is not already fully colored as we know that it should be, according to His will. It’s exactly our job to make it colored as He wish.
One drop,… plus another,… plus another one…
I believe that main problem, which raise the questions about ‘why such bad evangelizing by Catholics’, must be in the incorrect approach of the good willing and faithful Catholics to that matter. Because, strictly speaking, we cannot evangelize those who are already Christians. Even if they are semi- or neo-christians. And we have, especially in the West (US, EU,..), a lot of those,… and worse than such ‘paper-christians’.
For all of them, as for the TOP, (as you pointed above as the main problem) which is clergy, the officials, where the big number of them are truly apostates (and therefore not even Catholics anymore), we must have a different approach, namely, apologetic works.
Yes, on the TOP we have the big fishes, the biggest problem indeed. But not the only big and difficult problem. There are countless ‘small, little people’, including neo-catholic intellectuals, writers, journalists, but also some monks, sisters, friars, priests,… all those who we never can ‘evangelize’, but who we must ‘beat’, very hard wherever and whenever we can, with all apologetic cannons that we have.
This approach must be applied to such people, the neo-christians, which is actually very similar as approach of us to all other wrong-believers, atheist and gentiles who offend and attack the Catholic Church of our Lord Jesus Christ.
PS. The traditional way of evangelizing works very well in the parts of the world, where people are willing to hear, listen about, and then meet Jesus Christ and accept His salvation trough His Church and Catholic Faith. In Africa it works very well, thanks to our Lord.
There is remarkable progress going on right now, what btw., does not interest at all the whole West including Vatican.
Thanks again, Ivan. I accept your criticism of my lack of trust and will look to it. The distinction you make between neo-catholics and basically non-Christians is interesting. I am not sure that Professor Kwasniewski’s 5 points would go very far with people who are not at all Christian. To me they seem more appropriate medicine for Christians who need to have the essential elements missing in today’s sermons in order to want to become more fully Catholic in belief and practice. I do have great hope for Africa. Where I live, however, there is nothing except a tiny, not entirely healthy, trad community, some neo-catholics, and a vast number of atheists. Vast. In a sense, we would like to save the Church here from self-extinction, so most of our “evangelizing” would have to be with the neo-catholics (I live in Quebec). In dealing with atheists, technically there is only one church you could bring them to if they became interested. I suppose one is better than none. Food for thought. Thanks again.
Thank you for your reply. I definitely accept your 5 priorities. They are really indispensable and each one hits a crucial area. As for the elephant in the room, the hierarchy, as long as they do not slam the door shut on traditional Catholicism, with its TLM and the various flourishing groups, we can throw in the business of tithing and we will win. The numbers speak for themselves and show the way. Keep up the good work.
Many Catholics right now act like the “Jews who seek a sign”.
The problems of today are those solved by what is referred to in 2 Chron 7:14. Do we need a sign or do we need courage and manly faith?
The hierarchy is NOT entirely staffed by heretics.
The problem is that those who are orthodox are simply not acting as men, an not even prophets, but just sort of old-school MEN.
So we hear all this about Fatima and the Calvalry coming to save the day when in reality we need below the Cross of Calvary to save the day. The shifting of the buck to the BVM includes, IMO, a lot of dodgy stuff designed to put off acts of courageous, faith-filled manliness on the next clerical generation so’s to preserve the retirements of the current crop of pathetic cowards.
Interestingly, I think there are a number of clergy in that younger generation who are sick and tired of being labelled faggots and faithless ladder-climbers.
So to those of them who are reading, if any are, let it be known that there are still some men among the laity who care, love the Lord Jesus and are not eager to simply follow the lead of Pope Saladin to spread the cheeks of their wives and daughters to the hordes of frothing Islamists and who are chomping at the bit to claim victory in the name of the Moon God.
The word “allah” just means God. In fact, in Malaysia which has a Muslim government there was a law passed that Bibles were not to use the word “allah” for God. Most inconvenient for the Malaysian Christians! I dont know what the end of that saga was except that a Malaysian Catechist here was hopping mad about it.
Sad, the Church that evangelized the world has forgotten how to do it.
Well said; I’d just modify it a bit. Many have forgotten how to evangelize the world because those who have been at the helm of the Church for 50 years have decided to throw in the Church’s lot with the world.
Absolutely True!!!
As Shakespeare’s Henry V said at Agincourt prior to his tiny little army’s victory against overwhelming French forces in a faraway land, “We few, we happy few”.
My family and I have attended the TLM at a FSSP parish for the past 4 years. I agree with everything written in this article. However, one thing was missed: the fact that those who attend the TLM need to reach out to newcomers and be welcoming. We still sense a tribal mentality among most of the congregation at our parish. There are many who want to keep the parish small (it is growing) and isolated. Unfortunately, they predominate in positions of leadership, even as ushers. My family and I go overboard to reach out to first-timers (it’s so obvious who they are) and welcome them. Without some type of welcome, encouragement and assistance, you lose people, even with the beauty of the TLM. I think this is a huge problem and until it changes this evangelization will not be as successful as it could.
Very interesting!
My experience with our FSSP parish is much different.
It is welcoming and it is exploding in growth.
Interestingly…there is a very large percentage of converts to the Catholic faith there, so maybe that has something to do with it, but even the Cradle Catholics {who for the most part, if you think about it, are converts of a sort themselves to the TLM, few having been raised in it} are welcoming and eager to expand and grow the parish.
Our parish is growing and the new people are much different from the old. That’s a good sign. We still have many people who have attended the TLM for decades and suffered greatly. They still express great anger and resentment despite positive signs of change. I actually think some of them don’t want the change, meaning the new people coming to Mass. But that’s too bad. They are going to lose out. The point still stands – in order to better evangelize, those who attend the TLM need to be friendlier and more welcoming.
Please don’t write them off. Be friendlier and welcoming to them too. It is difficult to trust after so many years of hurt. Be a friend to them, they are fellow travelers struggling to keep up and must also be
prepared to cross into the Promised Land, same as everyone else. Listen to them –
really listen – and say I’m so sorry that happened to you. And pray *with them as well as *for them for healing abd growth so they and we can be fully equipped to do His will.
I think the best takeaway is that we need to be aware of new faces. We need to be prepared for change as new faces and families integrate and change inner social dynamics. We need to look for the newbies, knowing it is easier for them to slip out the side door, and welcome them; bring them in; introduce them around; make it easy to come back.
The comment is relevant to the evangelization topic and is not restricted to this or that Parish. Congrats to those who do well in this area. Fellowship and a welcoming hand is important to newcomers; inquirers; fence sitters.
This is spot on. In our parish though we all come from different parts of the city, or even farther off, so we all want to jump into our cars and get home to eat! Only after High Mass is there a coffee thing afterwards. I find that many newcomers leave right away too so we have to almost stand at the back door and catch them.
So fault on both sides? One other thing – many of us regulars like to stay for a few minutes of thanksgiving after Mass – then we straggle out and chat in the parking lot. Most new people are used to the NO Mass so they run right out after the prayers at the foot of the Altar….and off they go. Then some complain that we don’t welcome them. This is especially a problem in smaller parishes.
To me none of this is important.
I see the folks there and I consider them my allies in the fight. I really don’t care if they do this or that after Mass. Those things are simply not important to me.
I mean, if they started throwing rocks at me when I walked thru the front door or they dragged me out by my collar after Mass and pitched me in the dumpsters behind the Church, that would get my attention, but as for the other stuff, they are fine. They have lives, too, and ways of doing things. I’m sure I don’t do everything the way some think I should, either.
So I just try to look at the bigger picture;
Folks are THERE when the world says watching football or going fishing is more important. They have their kids there and are trying to guide them toward the Lord and the faith. They obviously see the need to be THERE and not at the more local and more “normal” NO parishes.
All that puts them in high regard as far as I am concerned. If they say hello or see ya later that’s great. And interestingly, over time, they DO.
I’m just thrilled to be part of the remnant!
Yes, you are right on! We each have our stations in life, daily duties, etc, that are not the same as anyone else’s.
The main problem is the one point about which parish to send interested enquirers into the Catholic faith. Most are not willing to drive an hour. So I point out some more traditional new Mass, but believing churches. I cannot accompany them there though. So it is strange for them to not have their Catholic contact there with them to show them the ropes and explain things in the church.
Those are good points.
I have the exact same concerns.
And, no matter how “orthodox” is the “accessible” NO parish, I really, deep down in can’t be certain some collection of heresies and sacrilegious habits or customs won’t be foisted on them in overt or ambiguous ways.
Like the young priest who is known for his strong orthodoxy but yet, he has liberal, leftist priests pray Mass while he is on vacation which one might excuse him for as he has no other choices and yet even, one day when I was attending, himself said “If you are having marital problems that you just can’t solve, well, you might just need to get an annulment”. SAY WHAT???????
And this would be the church to bring Catholics and non Catholics home to. Because the Latin Mass parishes I have been to – ICKSP, FSSP, diocesan – take greater care to worship with everything they’ve got (love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength) and love neighbor as self. True, some or even most may not be loud boisterous backslappers, but so what? They still take the faith seriously and live it. They are kind and gentle to each other and newcomers. We all could take a few pointers to step up our game to bring in those from highways and hedges, TLM and NO parishes alike.
In my experience, I completely agree.
Why would anyone want someone to become Catholic considering the state of the Catholic Church and the presence of an unseemly Pope who is in conflict with the teaching of Christ.?
Rod H did and others have too. If one looks at Christ and that He founded the Church upon St. Peter, then it makes it somewhat easier to endure the vicissitudes of the Vatican.
Without platitude an attitude of fortitude in the beatitudes will combat the vicissitudes with exactitude!
You’re a poet and I didn’t know it? ????
I wish to wish the wish you wish to wish, but if you wish the wish the witch wishes, I won’t wish the wish you wish to wish.
Tongue twisters Anonymous
You’re cute.
So people say…… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8eade2c8f3d58e01fbfd1a20a1f6358fda70c296b0ccd227e346673adb3c49de.jpg
Not true!
That picture doesn’t do you justice. ????
You’re right Margaret I forgot the shirt and tie!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d409c42ef357d06366c06da8e8152e82db3469b552a326da95861fdc2e8b7f42.jpg
You still forgot the suit and tie. ????.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bd4521100303b8d6aedae9cdcb769a7604bff75069afb4102dc9a7359602bd6e.jpg
Much nicer.
I wish I could upvote you a thousand times over. Love it! I absolutely love it.
Truth.
But that’s the real challenge. And these times are those were you, I and other among us are called right for that challenge. It would be a bit easer, indeed, if this world has now at least a few countries with very Catholic kings or Tzar’s, or Presidents… But it is, unfortunately, not so.
If we are able to tell all the others (who are as outside, as inside the Church), why we are still a part of the Church, and that we will remain part of the Church despite everything, then we should know that we have a very good qualities and strong material for the convincing others about the only Truth.
We can also leave that work to our Lord and our Heavenly Mother, they are already without any doubt very busy with making converts. But that is our obligation too. The main job of every Christian actually, no matter what, to preach Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to the whole world.
The Church is not pope, not even of all 266 popes together.
The Church is Christ’s Mystical Body. A foretaste of Heaven.
Help Church to reach people, help people to reach Heaven.
No matter what.
Good points Ivan. We should all imitate Christ giving a good example to all and encourage them to do likewise. Inviting folks to formally become Catholics is problematic.
Exactly Michael. We will not let anyone to our talents take from us. Given to us by God the Father Himself. We will not be scared to use them. We will not bury them. We will invest them wisely and faithfully and multiply them. The special skills, particular capabilities, genuine wisdom in combination with, or better to say, based upon our Catholic Faith, is the biggest treasure, are greatest talents, among many people here.
May our good Lord and Savior bless us, protect us and lead us always and everywhere, for His greater glory.
Our Lady of Good Counsel intercede for us.
Actions speak louder than words. The world is melting down in a stew of sin. Faithful Catholics who present Christ through good deeds, clean living, charity to the poor and cheerful fraternity are the best evangelistic tool to attract lost souls, tired of their exhausting immorality.
We have to go back to Basics.
Why are we afraid ? Didn’t John Paul II tell us not to be afraid ? We are proud to be Catholic. We are proud to follow Jesus Christ. We are proud to be…..Catholic.
We have to be Missionaries. We have to go out into the world and preach the Gospel without fear but with Joy. The Joy of the Gospel.
Joseph, I wasn’t really afraid until I realized that if John Paul II was the poster Pope for orthodoxy, the Church was on the brink of falling into an immense abyss; he set the table for the Bergoglio papacy; and we’re now in free-fall.
Catholics Come Home and St Paul Street Evangelization are great ideas – IF you have real Catholic parish to invite people to join you in worship etc. Too many have perfunctory and abuse riddled Masses and clique-y parishioners who don’t exactly draw people in. Pray and fast for our priests, for conversion of sinners and the salvation of souls!
Steve, Is there a way to get rid of the spammer? I don’t care how much google is paying (NOT!) and I resent this “bot” for using my first name. I flagged and blocked the one, but for some reason I am unable to flag and block the second one that popped up. See below under RodH’s comment. The “bot” chose one of the more popular comments to post under.
The article is outstanding. The good professor has hit a grand slam home run with his exchange between parishioners. Yes, these are the problems we face. There are many astute and perceptive comments. The first step is identifying the problem. As for solutions, that is the place where I struggle. Do I invite my Protestant friends into a Church that exists as a remnant?
It seems the Great Apostasy is upon us.
With the divisions present in The Church today, I can see a need right now and certainly increasing in the future whereby the Church clarifies what “the Church” is yet again.
Today we have a reflection of Anglicanism in the Catholic Church.
In addition, and possibly more to the point, if one does a study on latae sententiae excommunications, one will see that certainly a huge fraction of the Church leadership and priests fall under the ban. Very likely some of these folks could have been held close to or been brought back into the fold, but in the absence of any fatherly discipline, they were lost.
While Trent clearly states that both the good and the bad are present i the Church and the doctrine of “ex opere operato” safeguards the Sacraments performed by heretic priests, the sheer numbers of “already excommunicated” clergy along with their teaching has radically altered the public message of the Catholic Church into something it surely WAS NOT in previous centuries.
This is why I say at the core of all doctrinal disputes today the dogma EENS resides.
What is “the Church?”
Rod you are reading my mind! I was just searching here for your earlier post in this thread about EENS with Fr.Ratzinger’s 1958 article from HPR. Thank you so much for posting that. I agree with you – the subject of EENS should be discussed and analysed and explained in our current circumstances which are different to even 1958. It interested me that already Ratzinger could see the large number of pagans within the Church. The discussion he said was taking place about that issue, seemed to me so lame, so non urgent! The question of ….WHERE is the Catholic Church is vital today for every Catholic who is awake. I never baulked with the statement that Christ’s Church subsists in the Catholic Church, but many Catholics did. The question of evangelising and catechising today is something I have been wrestling with because of my work for the Church in that we ‘must not cooperate with evil” and “we may not do evil that some good may result”. And regrettably, the relativism which is being applied to gender dysphoria, trans marriage, the encouragement of people to follow their conscience and decide for themselves whether what they do is good or evil – the lot, is filtering down rather quickly to chanceries and everyone who works in diocesan frameworks. We may not suppress the truth. Ratzinger’s article is a great starting point for the discussion, and i really hope Steve takes us up on it.
Something else. Fr.Ratzinger refers to the pagans in the Church. Peter Kreeft distinguishes between the old pagans who believed in worship of gods and believed their lives to be dependent on pleasing the gods, and the new pagans which are in the Church. The new pagans dont believe in worship but they do believe in rituals of initiation.
There is no longer a need to evangelize with a new religion encompassing all of mankind. “Organized religion” is being destroyed. “A new belief system based on world unity” is being established. Come on now. Read the “handwriting on the wall”. Francis is not a Catholic. Read interpretations of the Third Secret.
I have been at one of these types of parishes, where Evangelization, is the ” name of the game.”
Oh what a thing of beauty it is NOT. Kissy faces to meet you and shake your hand upon entering the church, which continues inside the church, until the priest processes dow the altar to begin Mass. I shall not elaborate further on new evangelization ” man centered” Mass which generally follows.
Oh the ministries are not to be forgotten, with a payroll of over $1,000,000/ year. You name it: there is a ministry for it. Why there is even a ministry now in many parishes for LGBT and book reading seminars in the parish on ” Gay and Catholic”.
Yes, donuts and handshakes are swell. Don’t get me wrong here……everyone wants to feel good and be liked and belonging is a natural instinct. Unfortunately, everyone is belonging to their own sense of self importance, their own sense of grandeur, their own sense of” neediness” from each other. The New and improved evangelization forgot one thing though, in my opinion, : We belong to God, and we must aim at pleasing Him, so we can be with Him for eternity.
Personally, when I hear the term ” evangelization” in a parish these days……….I run.
Well said cs.
And for this:
“Personally, when I hear the term ” evangelization” in a parish these days……….I run.”
Believe me, I am not even using that word for a long time in common conversation with people, especially NO people. I am pushing with word proselytizing and I often enjoy in all that what it brings with saying it, – the PROSELYTISM! What a wonderful, meaningful, valuable, almost holy word it is!
I was a bit harsh. But you know what I mean about certain agendas in this evangelization.
You was not harsh. You must hear me sometime…
How dare you proselytize! It’s nonsense, solemn nonsense. Such is the opinion of Francis.
RCIA canceled this year. No one showed up. Where I live, talking to one about Catholisism when you have a Pope who is an apostate “representing” the Church is likely to get a laugh or a punch in the face. Besides as you say Pope says it’s “solemn nonsense”. Maybe his next Motu Proprio will abolish RCIA and other programs of “solem nonsense”.
Few points…please don’t be harsh in your responses please.
1.) In a minor defense of the laity..haven’t most missionaries been ordained and religious priests, brothers and sisters? Has it ever been the prerogative of the laity to do all the preaching and evangelizing?
2.) Much of the world today has already been ‘evangelized’ at some point in history by the Catholic Church it’s just that the world today says “no”. 99% of the world is informed in one way or another about Christ and the Catholic Church, and yet they say “no”. What else can we do but let them make the choice.
3.) It’s the lapsed Catholics who need to be evangelized. Our own pope needs it more than most.
You are right: The laity are not ‘ordained’ to preach or evangelise. I understood Priests were ordained and given a charism to preach the Faith. But that requires an individual response by the Priest. In defense of the laity, I am angry that true catechesis was largely dismantled certainly since V2 and most people were denied instruction relating to the supernatural side of the Catholic faith, i.e. the Sacraments and the Sacramental life. I think this was deliberately implemented in the cause of ecumenism. Evangelising anyone about the Catholic faith is very difficult today because Catholics are being led by the culture and PF.
“2.)…99% of the world is informed in one way or another about Christ and the Catholic Church, and yet they say “no”. What else can we do but let them make the choice.”
Here you have a good point to begin. Those,- ‘one or another way’, means clearly this,- ‘with one or another purpose’. Which is thus,- totally wrong way to do, even think about ‘knowing Christ and His Church’!
So then, what we can do is constantly trying to explain to people (who will listen) what the Christ’s CATHOLIC CHURCH REALY IS, and in the same time what it is NOT.
This means also to say clearly and loudly that Francischurch is everything but Catholic Church.
And all this means heavily works on and with apologetic matters, and not just ‘evangelizing’.
This situation where we are right now in the midst of it, shows us how important is to know your Catholic Faith.
Most are not in state to say Credo, let alone to proselytize, but what the to expect from men when he should and must defend his Faith, his Church, and his Lord the God.
The pagans seems to be smarter than Catholics! While the God’s Wisdom must be given to us all!
What a weird times we live in. O tempora o mores!
Your point #2 is very much true. The FACT is, all people have rejected God, either definiteively, or at some time in their lives. It is very dangerous to alter the message of the faith “to attract” those who live in denial of God’s plan because in effect, we wind up eviscerating the message to those who really don’t care about God in the first place.
We must never forget that each and every person must come face to face with God; and their own sin, and eliminating “all obstacles” to the faith is to destroy the faith. If you look at Jesus’ ministry, He to the contrary placed obstacle after obstacle in the way of those the Church so often goes out of the way to “market to”.
The teaching of the Eucharist itself is an “obstacle” to the sort of modern “faith”. And in St John Chapter 6 we see just how “successful” Jesus was.
What is a fullblown tragedy is when the faith itself is watered down to vapid platitudes in an attempt to market it to those who just don’t care.
For all Pope Francis’ supposed “anti-Capitalism” he is the world’s greatest pitchman! What he is pitching is so often, unfortunately, a cheap knockoff, “Ronco-like” product that no one wants and those who try it find it doesn’t work.
Families are divided sadly, even before PF arrived on the scene because many are children of “1968” and are iconoclasts and all talk of supernatural realities is met with scorn. My brother in law on one past christmas day went on a rant about how dare anyone teach mortal sin. He went through a Catholic school just like everyone else in the family. Dont ever think that the fact most of your family have followed you into the Catholic Church is less than a singular blessing.many saints have separated from their family to follow Christ, sadly.
Evangelizing …..hmmm
It’s like inviting someone inside a burning building.
Thank you, Dr. Kwasniewski, for yet another piece of brief yet masterfully elegant erudition.
Im protestant,even missionnary in Europe,actually attending thé tradional church for just several monthes. Thé power of thé traditional mass overwhelmed me,i got lots of révélations from thé holy spirit —thé catholic church is thé one founded by thé christ,and thé divine “happiness” of eating thé body of thé christ, becoming one with christ, thé protestants are lutherans,not Christian…….. but i dare not tell m’y change to m’y family,for there is no such true church in asia……. even in Europe,this kind of church is rare. Converting people to thé catholic church of Vatican 2 is actually sending thème to hell for me!!! Pray Day ans night for thé solution…….
I understand where you are coming from and I agree with a lot of what you say but I think the picture being painted is a bit too black and white. Take for example, Marcus Grodi’s programme, “The Journey Home”, in which he interviews people who have come into the Catholic Church from a very wide range of backgrounds. I’ve watched lots of these programmes and I’ve yet to hear any mention of the Traditional Latin Mass as being a factor in their conversion or of the Novus Ordo Mass as being a negative factor. Many of these people have gone on to write books which have, in turn, resulted in conversions. Probably one of the most famous is Scott Hahn. In his conversion story he describes his experience of attending his first Mass. It made a deep impression on him. It was a Novus Ordo Mass. Or Tom Peterson, founder of the ‘Catholics Come Home’ organisation. His work is credited with bringing hundreds of thousands of Catholics back to the Church. He doesn’t mention the Traditional Latin Mass in his book. And I really do wonder if Catholics who attend the Traditional Latin Mass, of whom I am one, are more likely to speak to other people about their faith than people who attend the Novus Ordo Mass.
Hi
God Bless You! 🙂
Name. Arthur Coelho. Resident of Mumbai India, Age 86 yrs. Born and lived as a catholic. I live in a country christians are just 5 percent of the population and this needs to be remembered when reading my thoughts on some subjects.
Catholics are bad at evangelizing because they don’t even know the gospel of Jesus Christ, they only know the gospel of the Roman Catholic Cult. Nothing about Roman Catholicism is Biblical Christianity. False gospel with a false salvation and they dress up in gaiety to put on a show for the unlearned masses who don’t even bring a Bible with them to their cult rituals that are not in scripture at all (I’ve heard catholic argue here “but they read from the bible” as if a few out-of-context verses and stupid latin chants that none of their congregation even understands means anything).
How are they going to fulfill the great commission when they don’t even know it?! How can you preach the gospel when you don’t know it, when you have a false gospel, and when your cult leader “pope” tells Christians to stop evangelizing and to disobey God Almighty? Friendly reminder, it was the Roman cult that tortured and persecuted and murdered millions, sometimes for simply owning a Bible (or maybe they’d cut your tongue out for preaching the gospel). That’s right, just about every Roman Catholic today would’ve been tortured and mutilated and maimed and often martyred for simply owning a Bible or being Christian; yet people will still cling to that clearly-false religious system that has been proven wrong doctrinally, historically, prophetically, and common sensically. Catholics refuse to see, they’re blind. They refuse to hear, they’re deaf. They refuse to understand, they’re fools.
You could debate a Roman Catholic and it always reduces down to their worship of their cult and their church and their pope who they call “father” (and pope means father, and they call their priests father). It’s all blasphemy and the average Catholic cares more about defending their MAN MADE TRADITIONS than actually learning about GOD ALMIGHTY and seeing what God wants regardless of what traditions you were raised in. It always boils down to “but muh roman cult wrote the bible” which is a total lie, then they’ll backpedal to “ok, they didn’t write it but they compiled it” — ignoring the obvious forgery in the vatican and the rest of their fanfiction and gnostic garbage they tried including in Bibles (ignoring again that they would burn you alive with your bible for having one, and people still think this gay pedophile cult is of God — yes, I went there, the vatican is literally full of homosexuals and gay pedophiles). Their priests aren’t even allowed to think for themselves, just parrot bishop twisting of scripture to justify their man-made religion and institution (which is swimming in gold and wealth and riches, so much for “sell all you have and give to the poor”).
God hates Roman Catholicism and Roman Catholics treat their cult as if it were God, they worship their cult and anyone criticizing the unbiblical doctrine and lies of the Roman cult is seen as someone attacking God rather than a false pharisee religious system because their god is their church rather than God Almighty. They don’t even seek to learn if someone is right, just defend their cult like a good programmed NPC idiot. And when push comes to shove, they’d ALL murder me for speaking the truth. Just watch some street preaching videos of people who actually obey God and evangelize and preach the gospel, the catholics ALWAYS hate them with a blinding fury. They also always confuse “Roman Catholicism” for “Roman Catholics”, they take everything personally and refuse to be logical or sensible, and then just defer to the cult leader’s programming any time some resistance is found. Roman Catholics are dumber than atheists who think their ancestors were monkeys and fish.
You can call this post tough love, I doubt this Babylonian Whore website will even publish it or leave it up for too long if comments don’t need moderation before posting.