There has been a great deal of outrage expressed, and rightly so, over the manner in which the Blessed Sacrament was distributed at the Papal Mass in Manila yesterday.
As shown in the video below, the sacred Host, after initially being placed in the hands of people on the outside edge of the densely packed crowd by a priest, was then passed along from person to person.
Eventually, as the number of consecrated Hosts presumably began to dwindle, people can be seen in the video passing fragments of the Host to one another.
Scandals of this nature, wherein the sacred Host is treated profanely, aren’t all that unusual at large outdoor celebrations of Holy Mass. The use of disposable plastic cups as ciboria at World Youth Day in Rio comes to mind. (See Catholic Family News.)
News outlets are reporting that some six million people were present for the Papal Mass in Manila, causing many to wonder just how, logistically speaking, the distribution of Holy Communion should take place in such circumstances.
The answer is simple; it shouldn’t.
Is that to say that no attempt should have been made to distribute Communion to the millions of people clambering for the Eucharist yesterday; sending them away having not received?
Certainly that would have been better than what actually did take place.
Even so, how best to handle the distribution of Holy Communion in such cases is the wrong question to ask; what we really need to consider is whether or not such Masses should be celebrated in the first place.
Again, the answer is simple; they shouldn’t.
While the mega papal liturgies drawing hundreds of thousands, and even millions, of faithful have become somewhat commonplace in recent decades, they’re not only entirely unnecessary; they actually cause great harm even beyond the obvious.
How so?
By obscuring the reality of what the Mass is; its purpose, and its benefits.
Look, it is perfectly understandable for Catholics to desire to be in the presence of the Successor of St. Peter, to lays eyes upon him and to hear him speak in person.
That said, Holy Mass celebrated by the pope, while perhaps an occasion of noteworthy solemnity (even though the sacred signs all-too-often say otherwise), is of no more “value” than the Mass that is offered by the local parish priest.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying that a Mass is a Mass is a Mass.
For instance, the celebration of the Usus Antiquior that was celebrated at St. Alphonsus in Baltimore yesterday where I had the great privilege of assisting was head and shoulders of more benefit than that spectacle in Manila. For the present discussion, however, we’ll largely set aside the great disparity between the benefits derived from the traditional Mass versus the Novus Ordo.
That having been said…
In all cases, Jesus Christ is the true high Priest of the Mass; it is He who makes the offering, and it is He who is the propitiatory Sacrifice that is offered to the Father in reparation for our sins. This is the case whether it’s the pope or Fr. Joe at the altar.
This is a truth lost on many in our day, and it’s not a mystery why.
The Novus Ordo Missae as it is commonly celebrated (even by the popes) is such that the personal attributes of the celebrant have a tremendous impact on the faithful; their experience of the Mass and the manner of believing derived therefrom.
For example, if Father is reverent and pious, the Mass is experienced in one way; if he is lackluster and casual; the experience is altogether different.
In other words, the Novus Ordo, with the priest’s nearly every word spoken aloud, almost always while facing the people, his every gesture on display, is inherently performance driven.
Add to this the fact that the Bishop of Rome, from the time of John Paul II on forward, has been viewed (and all-too-pleased to behave) more like a Holy Roman Rock Star than the Vicar of Christ, and the papal Mass has taken on the appearance of being as much dramaturgical as liturgical; even to the point of obscuring the Holy Sacrifice.
The solution?
Put an end to the outdoor Papal Mega-Mass altogether.
For starters, the pope need not behave as a globetrotting religious ambassador such as we’ve grown accustomed. If he simply stayed put more often, the problem under discussion would become less relevant.
In lieu of that, if the Holy Father wishes to address the faithful of a given place at some large venue capable of accommodating hundreds of thousands or millions of people, great; gather the people, deliver an address, and impart an Apostolic blessing.
As for the liturgy; the pope should celebrate Holy Mass in a fittingly sacred place (e.g., the local cathedral, or some other church building of note), offering special intentions for the people of that nation if he so wishes.
Exactly who is invited to attend that liturgy is a matter that can be discussed, but in any event, a papal Mass with a limited number of people in a truly sacred place is clearly a move in the right direction.
Local parishes could choose to celebrate the liturgy at the same hour as the Papal Mass as an expression of solidarity with the pope, but even this would be largely superfluous. What really matters is that every celebration of Holy Mass is carried out in a truly sacred place, and under the conditions necessary to allow for reverence when distributing and receiving Holy Communion.
If they’re going to continue having these Woodstock masses, they shouldn’t distribute Holy Communion. If anything, it would be a way to teach the faithful of the inestimable value of Holy Mass apart from receiving Communion; that you do not need to receive Holy Communion to fully participate in the Mass anymore than you need to buy a T-Shirt in order to fully participate in a Peter Frampton concert.
There is no other explanation except that the belief in the Real Presence is absolutely gone from the post-conciliar church. To believe otherwise is even more horrible. They believe and don’t care! Either way, the post-conciliar church can no longer be considered the Holy Roman Catholic Church as founded by Christ Himself! These desecrations occur at EVERY New Order Mass. It is the devil-friendly “mass”. Stay away!!!!
I have a question perhaps a good apologist can answer for me ? John 6:53-56 is very explicit in that we must eat and drink the Eucharist vs Trent which says if anyone says that the Eucharist must be received under both species it would be heresy? This was a question posed to a Priest (I think he was Novus Ordo) to which he replied Trent was in error !!! Please help I would like to have an answer should anyone point this out to me?
In my parish, the Novus Ordo Mass features both species. In the same parish, the TLM features only the wafer.
Dear ock,
I am not an apologist by any sense of the word. However, if the Holy Eucharist is in fact living Flesh (as Catholics believe), the consecrated Sacred Host is not only the Living Flesh of Christ, but also His Precious Blood. Flesh without blood is not living. That is why Eucharistic miracles (in may cases) are manifested by the Sacred Host shedding the Blood of Christ. It is not necessary to receive Our Lord under both species. Offering the consecrated wine (Blood) may very well be a great source of profanity since It can be easily spilled. I hope this was helpful. I’m sure there are others who could also help you understand this most wonderful Mystery of our faith. How could the world possibly believe in the Real Presence when this Pope and other post-conciliar Popes are not horrified by the abomination which has been the “norm” after Vatican II. Lord, have mercy!!
I cannot look at any more of the rampant wickedness coming from the Holy See. The Blessed Sacrament ought not to be given in such terrible situation. These sacrileges were easily foreseeable and easily preventable. There is no excuse for allowing a single instance of manifest sacrilege at a papal Mass. Reparation. Reparation. Reparation.
Thanks my2cents, but Im still stuck ? John 6:54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you “EAT” the flesh of the Son of man, “AND DRINK” his blood… etc. Also why would Trent make it heresy for anyone who would say the Eucharist should be received under both species?
Maybe it would come under “binding and loosening” ?
I hope this answers your questions:
–
http://www.audiosancto.org/inc/BC3/bc3-22.html
–
Check this out. It isn’t satire any more!
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/a-cnn/item/1369-turbo-new-evangelization-now-here
–“Dear all,
The present norms (from 1973)”Immensae Caritatis.” include these lines:
–The norms are to insure that reverence and protection are given to the Most Blessed Sacrament. …“It is not licit for the faithful to take by themselves and, still less, to hand from one another the sacred host or chalice.”
==========
Like most places, the Philipines seem to be no stranger to Eucharistic abuse and lack of instruction about it, as the following letter posted online from a somewhat puzzled mother, to her Philippine Bishops Conference, illustrates : May 8, 2010
“I sometimes attend Mass in a Catholic university in Quezon City, and my attention has always been caught by the way that Holy Communion is not administered by the priest celebrant, but rather taken by the faithful communicants from the ciborium which is just left on the altar..often
the chalice is left beside it, so that the communicants may receive the Eucharist under both species, either by dipping a host in the consecrated wine or by simply sipping from the chalice.
– But during a closed retreat conducted by the school and attended by my son, the participants received Holy Communion under both species. The priest celebrant dipped the sacred host in the consecrated wine and laid the host soaked in the Blood of Christ in the open hand of the communicant.
– I would assume that whatever drops of the Blood of Christ would have remained in the palm of the communicant. Are these practices licit?
She was informed they were not.
=========.
-In this recent case involving the Papal Mass, the sad irony is the note found in the Church regulations, that if the faithful, receive inadequate satisfaction from their local Bishop on such an issue, they, can always appeal to the Apostolic See in Rome–as the Pope will be their final advocate.
@ock: In the bible passage you made reference to, Our Lord claims that he is “the bread of life” and the “bread came down from heaven”. You might find it interesting that the physical properties of the image present on the Shroud of Turin have been at least likened to the results of a Maillard reaction. Some hypothesize that the image was, in fact, actually formed by a Maillard reaction. What is a Maillard reaction?:
–
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maillard_reaction
–
In case you didn’t understand, Our Lord claimed to be “the bread of life” and the image some among the faithful venerate as an image of our crucified Lord may have been made by a chemical process that is associated with bread making. I suppose one could interpret this curiosity as the Almighty’s dagger thrust to scientific skeptics who will deny the claims of Our Lord even when they are validated by their own investigations.
Dear Ock,
We’re wondering if you are questioning whether Trent contradicts the Scripture you cited, because St. John used the words eat AND drink, and you assume that means two separate actions are required?.
What the Church teaches about that, is– that in receiving the host only, for example, you ARE eating His body AND drinking his blood; and likewise if you received only from the chalice, you are also eating AND drinking at the same time.
Once you understand that concept, the rest should make more sense to you–That what Trent was condemning as heresy, was the false idea, that the host was only the Body, and the consecrated wine, was only the Blood. and so, to receive both the host and the consecrated wine was necessary every time.
____
Here’s how they put it:
“It should never be construed, therefore, that Communion under the form of bread alone or Communion under the form of wine alone is somehow an incomplete act or that Christ is not fully present to the communicant. The Church’s unchanging teaching from the time of the Fathers through the ages—notably in the ecumenical councils of Lateran IV, Constance, Florence, Trent, and Vatican II—has witnessed to a constant unity of faith in the presence of Christ in both elements.”
AND THIS PART IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND:
-“Even in the earliest days of the Church’s life, when Communion under both species was the norm, there were always instances when the Eucharist was received under only the form of bread or wine. . . . Thus, the Church has always taught the doctrine of concomitance, by which we know that under each species alone, the whole Christ is sacramentally present and we receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. ”
Hope this helps. God Bless you.
@shinypennies: A quick internet search indicates that this was a problem at least as early as 1995:
–
http://www.archdiocesesantafe.org/ABSheehan/ABSMessages/95.5.Eucharist.html
–
Is it any wonder, though, that those who attend the NO mass are unsure about this teaching when they never hear the passage from 1 Corinthians 11: 27 – 29 (reproduced here) read from the pulpit at any mass ever?:
–
“Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.
But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.”
–
But this passage which preaches the real presence of Our Lord, and the necessity of believing in the real presence of Our Lord, was embarrassing to the sola scriptura crowd so it was left out of the lectionary of readings for the mass!
Here are the lectionary indices for anyone so inclined to check up on this sort of thing:
–
http://catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/Index-Weekdays.htm
–
http://catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/Index-Sundays.htm
–
Dear My2cents,
While you may be correct about many people at the papal Mass, even the worst polls don’t show 100% rejection of the teachings or Faith, and we know because of what we witness so regularly that most of what you have written here is simply not true.
that ” the belief in the Real Presence is absolutely gone from the post-conciliar church.. and the post-conciliar church can no longer be considered the Holy Roman Catholic Church as founded by Christ Himself! ” and “these
desecrations occur at EVERY New Order Mass.”
These statements are all false.
We understand why you’d feel upset by watching the video, but that is no reason to speak falsely about folks like us.
Thanks All for the wonderful information!!! and yes Indignus I was keying on “eat and drink” as well as the anathama issued by Trent. The Eucharistic miracle of Lanciano also came to mind. Its to bad the Priest who was debating must have had very bad formation while in seminary & handled the question badly. I found it very depressing just listening to him !!!
@IF: Don’t get angry or upset when I ask you this question. Think about it first. Maybe even pray on it and ask for discernment. You know that this was a massive sacrilege done in full view of the Pope. It is nothing new either for this Pope, or for at least one prior Pope (e.g., similar sacrileges occurred during masses offered by JPII).
–
What is evident here is a total, complete failure in discipline. I admit that rubrics in place should prevent most of these outrages, but not all. Keep in mind that communion in the hand came to be viewed as irreverent and sacrilegious and thus was forbidden. Despite this teaching, though, communion in the hand was foisted on the faithful after VII.
–
http://www.fatima.org/apostolate/newsletters/imhrt/2002/june/ih_jun02pg1.asp
–
Now often those who receive on the tongue are singled out and admonished by ill-informed priests!
–
Knowing what goes on at OTHER NO masses, knowing that enforced rubrics will not solve all problems (e.g., communion in the hand), and knowing that discipline is so lax that it seems nothing will ever be done about it, do you believe that you share any responsibility (however attenuated) for this sorry state of affairs by attending the NO mass, even if it is reverently celebrated in your instance? For example, is it sinful to participate in a regime that may be “good” for a tiny number of people who have good priests and fellow parishioners (like you) but is actually bad for the vast majority of other catholics? Would you be showing more solicitude and empathy by rejecting the whole rotten mess until those in charge instituted rubrics and discipline that prevented these outrages from happening in most instances?
–
I was just reviewing how one can be an accessory to another’s sin and it seems at least four of these may be operative here: (1) by consenting; (2) by partaking; (3) by silence; and (4) by defense of the ill done. Does your culpability rise if there is an alternative available (the TLM) in your area that is not beset by any of these problems? Wouldn’t you be setting a better example to others among the faithful to discontinue attending the NO not because of what you may suffer, but because of what outrages other members of the faithful have to suffer because of irreverent or sacrilegious masses?
Louie writes: “Jesus Christ is the true high Priest of the Mass; it is He who makes the offering, and it is He who is the propitiatory Sacrifice that is offered to the Father in reparation for our sins”.
This should provide a concise riposte to anyone who claims that “there is no Catholic God”.
Dear Cyprian,
We’re wondering why you prefaced your comment to us, as if you expected an , impulsive explosion of vitriol and were trying to head it off? We don’t recall behaving (or feeling) that way towards anyone here. Is that how you’ve taken our past responses? We’re stubborn about truth, and hate sin, but try to understand people who -think they found truth, and want to convince others they are right-including our current Pope. Though we do see it as beating a dead horse at times, when the same argument keeps being brought up without any agreement.
___
We have consistently objected to sweeping generalizations such as the ones made above regarding the N.O., because we know them to be false from personal experience. You may picture us attending one ideal Church tucked away somewhere, which proved to be an exception, but that isn’t the case. And since it so often isn’t, we feel you have no grounds for an overall condemnation of every NO Mass as so “likely” to be sinful and scandalous that it is must now be declared wrong for people who know that scandals happen, to attend one.
You’ve set yourself up as a false Magisterium by declaring that. Ask Cardinal Burke. Our just read what he’s said about the N.O. and how he hopes it will be improved for the sake of all the Faithful for whom it is their only Mass, and has been for so long. He sees it as provided by God for them. You condemn those, like him, who know it’s abuses and still recommend it.
__
You seem to envision the collapse of what you call the N.O. Church, resulting from your efforts to remove all support from it So people like Burke and us frustrate your goals, understandably, because you can’t convince us we’re sinfully negligence or ignorant. It’s not going to happen while the evidence proves you wrong.
-And for now, we can only say we think it’s wrong and harmful to souls, for you to be urging people to choose to protest the inferiority of the N.O., –by their absence-especially when that often would mean their not worshipping God in Church on Sunday and depriving themselves of the Eucharist. .
– No anger here, just wondering why you expect the same approach to evoke a different response? If it because of the Papal Masses, we agree with Louie, they shouldn’t happen. Too many people to facilitate. Let’s protest and keep praying the Pope sees the point, but not use it as an excuse to create a worse situation for souls elsewhere.
-People in the pews in a parish Church can learn and be corrected when they are lax, by a priest who cares enough to set things up to avoid that, and preach to them about it. We’ve seen that happen many times. but if folks like you who can easily spot abuses are not there to observe them or talk to the priest about them, you can’t help improve things, except by prayer-which we also recommend doing unceasingly. . If it’s too upsetting or you only have serious abuse where you are, we understand the difficulty, and maybe your circumstances require other action. Just don’t demand everyone else do as you feel you must. We honestly don’t think Our Lord wishes that.
Dear ock,
Thanks for asking the questions, and persisting. You’ve probably just helped clarify these understandably confusing ideas for others who will read here as well.
Dear IF,
Putting aside the sensibilities of those in attendance, we must question the behavior of Pope Francis (and also JP2&B16) who held these mega-Masses. If they do, in fact, believe in the Real Presence, how is it possible to allow this horrendous desecration? Why are they not publicly begging Our Lord’s forgiveness? No, they just leave bidding farewell proud of the numbers they have drawn to this event. Why are no safeguards put in place, knowing that the Sacred Host will be trampled upon and the Precious Blood spilled on clothing and on the ground- (especially during typhoon conditions!!!!)
We, the faithful, have NO choice but to believe these Papacies and the Hierarchy just don’t care. Do you have another explanation?
A friend of mine attended World Youth Day in Denver (JP2) many years ago (20?) and was horrified to see the Holy Eucharist desecrated beyond imagination. Why was nothing done to prevent this at future events? Personally, I find it difficult to attend any N.O. Mass because of “Eucharistic Ministers”, communion in the hand, lack of reverence etc.
Perhaps, I just don’t have a strong stomach!
I think this might come under the umbrella where we Catholics don’t only use the Bible as our guide. We can see what Our Lord Jesus said, then reflect on the 2000 years of Sacred Tradition – which has built on His words. If Trent says something that helps to build the Faith in the Real Presence, and takes us down a path of increased reverence while teaching something – that’s good enough for me.
—-
Look to Tradition as well as reading the Bible.
Sorry – I also meant to say that the Church often makes decisions (like receiving only under one species) in response to an abuse. It’s very much safer even in a parish setting to receive the Sacred Host, instead of offering The Precious Blood to all and sundry.
Check out Michael Davies 5 part series of talks on the destruction of the Holy Mass after Henry VIII’s death. You can find it on Keeping The Faith’s site.
—-
The Protestant Revolution in England – Part 1 of 5 – Its Beginnings (sorry doesn’t want to link for some reason)
—
What’s described in the CFN ‘satire’ was planned and executed in stages in England – almost exactly the same.
—-
Funny how we can’t seem to back off a position that has proved to be bad in practice. How does the pope come to his senses and tell his adoring fans that he’s going to stay home, and not bring these sensations to them again?
—-
That’s when we’ll see real rupture in our Church! Kinda like weaning off crack! Not nice at all until you’re clean.
—
How did the world continue to revolve in Leo XIII’s time when he was a prisoner in the Vatican?
Dear My2cents,
We are definitely on the same page about the outrages, including the focus on all the Pope who have failed the Church for so long in this way, not only allowing these things to go on, but creating the “impossible” circumstances by calling for such assemblies and saying Masses there. The answers to your (assume rhetorical) questions are discussed almost continually here on Louie’s blog and others like it all over the net. They are legion, from what we’ve seen. Bottom line, we still call him our Pope until such time as God or the Church Hierarchy who represents God, removes him. Yes, in more ways a bad Pope than a good one, too. So what can we do? #1. Reparatory acts and prayers.
#2. Proclaim our outrage, just as we did about the Satanic Masses in Oklahoma. #3 Write /Email the Pope, with the video link. Keep talking about it to people, teaching them what they don’t know. Go to a N.O. Mass and offer up what happens there, giving all an example of how to receive with reverence, and stopping into the Sacristy to chat a minute with the priest about any concerns–without hostility. Nobody reacts to a charging bear by sticking around to listen.
And BTW, just want you to know, though we strongly objected to what you said in #2 above, we greatly admired your explanation to ock about the Real Presence under #3. . Beautiful.
God Bless. 🙂 🙂
Dumb_ox, thanks for that link. I’d read snatches of that interview but just now have read the whole thing.
—-
I have to say I’m horrified. When we read these words of poor Francis we can see he truly believes what he says. How deep the disconnect is between reality, human nature, and supernatural life.
—-
I don’t believe poor Francis is evil. I think he is a useful tool of Satan, but he’s just a dupe, not an evil man. Will he spread evil? Yes. Will he lose his soul, because he’s supposed to seek truth as a rational being? We’ll have to leave him to God’s Mercy.
—-
Glory be to the Father, and to The Son, and to The Holy Ghost…and please God for Thy Glory, convert poor Francis.
Gotta say this here and it’s not quite off topic as it has to do with poor Francis’ ‘little talks’ on the plane.
—-
Poor Francis apparently said it’s irresponsible for couples to ‘be like rabbits’ and have many children. Now we know this is a horrible thing to say, but I’d like to touch on what he further said: that there are ‘natural’ ways to stop being like rabbits. This is my paraphrase obviously.
—-
Please, please somebody tell me that poor Francis is not advocation NFP to limit family size. Please, please tell me that he is a faithful Catholic who would be open to a family of any size if that was God’s will, and the mother’s health would not be TRULY compromised.
—-
Please tell me that we are not at the END of our hope that poor Francis has a shred of faith left in God’s Providence.
Dear Barbara,
We agree. And the dupe involves his belief that the REAL Jesus acts and feels and thinks just like HE does IN EVERY WAY. The world is buying it, too, unfortunately, in their desperation for something to adore
-The Church tells him he is supposed to represent Jesus to them. And instead of realizing that calls for a certain amount of detachment so he is not turned into a false idol, he sees it as something to encourage. (He seems needy for crowds, too.) So it’s mostly about emotions–which explains why when
-his pilot urged him to leave early due to the approaching storm, he refused and insisted they stay for the Mass there, and outdoors where all the people were.
-After the Mass, sure enough the winds gusted, and a 27 year old Catholic relief worker died at the hospital 2 hours later, after a giant speaker-assembly was blown down on top of her.. Her father told the Pope the following Sunday, that he had asked God why He took his only daughter, but ended up rejoicing because he realized she died serving the Church, so her death was meaningful. Pope Francis was said to be awed by his faith..
___
It’s all so insane. And will he learn from that? We doubt he’ll see it as anything but Satan trying to stop God’s work, even though his plans left over 6 million people -including 2,000 traffic cops in diapers, soaked in the rain as well, hungry and risking high winds, so they could have the immense pleasure of seeing and hearing him comfort their losses from the last Typhoon all. while the Eucharist got desecrated millions of times over before his watchful eyes..
___
The Rock-star attitude JPII started is obviously growing . We looked online to see if they’ve started making statues of him yet, and found this:- which we’ve posted a few other places too–: Celebrating him giving away the “red shoes” to a homeless man. Maybe next year baby Jesus in the Major will get a new face?
http://www.sculpturebytps.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/23.jpg
Dear Barbara,
God help us, -now we’re limited to three children by the Pope’s wisdom and whatever our pastor thinks about it. He does think he’s the voice of God.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/20/pope-says-3-children-per-family-is-about-right-catholics-dont-need-to-breed-like-rabbits/
=====
Are you really sure you hope he doesn’t mean NFP seeing as how the only other options he could be implying would be artificial contraception or sterilization? .
======
–”I believe that three children per family, from what the experts say, is the key number for sustaining the population. The key word here is responsible parenthood and each person works out how to exercise this with the help of their pastor. … Sorry, some people think that in order to be good Catholics we have to breed like rabbits, right?”….
p.s. Next step Tax those inconsiderate enough not to share the world’s good more equally.
NEW WORLD ORDER, HERE WE COME;
The “Georgia Guidestones” ten new “commandments” for humanity—
in Sanskrit, Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Babylonian Cuneiform, and Classical Greek—which reads, “Let these be Guidestones to an Age of Reason.”
—
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely—improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule Passion—Faith—Tradition—and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth—beauty—love—seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth—Leave room for nature—Leave room for nature.
____
Looks like his plan, doesn’t it?
Sorry, this particular quote hits way too close to our home to ignore:
“He referenced a woman he met several months ago who was pregnant with her eighth child after going through seven Cesarean sections.
“That is an irresponsibility!” he said,
saying she might argue that she should trust in God. “But God gives you methods to be responsible.”
(Then he went on to make it clear he was talking about NFP.)
========
From the Prophecy of St. Francis :
7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER.”
I’ve learned to freeze at the terms “airplane interview” and “off the cuff.”
So now his field of expertise has expanded from economics and ecology to obstetrics. Impressive.
Dear LGD,
You have to wonder how his two unwanted siblings are gonna’ feel when they hear about this….
https://nbclatino.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/bergogliofamily.jpg?w=640&h=480&crop=1
And let us not be weary in well doing:for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
Galatians 6:9
Our Lord said: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; fear him rather who can destroy both body and soul in hell”.
The “experts” state that three children is the optimal number. Experts in what field? It’s those danged anonymous experts again.
IF, what I mean is that with poor Francis giving two big thumbs up to NFP in order to ‘limit families to 3 children’ we will have the terrible consequence of Catholics using NFP for very worldly reasons. And this with the pope’s permission!
—-
Way back in the mid 1800’s the pope wrote to a French bishop who had asked him about the NFP of the day (fertile/infertile times have been known for 1000s of years). The pope responded in the affirmative: but only so that the greater sin of onanism might be stopped and only in specific cases. (I’ll try to find some links)
—-
In other words there was a concession and not a permission for all.
—-
We have to ask ourselves a different sort of question.
—-
What is it about modern man that requires limiting families? Take for example a family in 1200 who has baby after baby until the woman’s natural fertility is stopped with menopause. What did they do? Did they all starve? Were they all miserable? Did all husbands demand their conjugal rights even in the face of ill health of the wife?
—-
We have learned to see modern man as somehow different in kind from ‘man in the old days’. This is nonsense. The things that differentiate us from them is our attitude, our passions, and our values and goals in life.
I want to cry “Oh Dear God, what have we done to deserve this?” Then I remember.
@ LeGrandDerangement #12
Who are the experts? Take a look at the Vatican’s best- buddies at the U.N,
who only want to save mother earth from the self-absorbed, breeding-like- rabbits Catholics, and others who want large families.
Wow,, did they just have a good day or what?
=======
U.N. Population Division policy brief opening statement:
“….population growth rates have been declining globally, largely as a result of expanded basic education and health care. That trend is projected to lead to a stable world population in the middle of the twenty-first century… The current decline in population growth rates must be further promoted through national and international policies….
============
–United Nations Population Fund- State of the World Population Report. 2009
1) “Each birth results not only in the emissions attributable to that person in his or her lifetime, but also the emissions of all his or her descendants. Hence, the EMISSION SAVINGS FROM INTENDED OR PLANNED BIRTHS multiply with time.”
2) “No human is genuinely “carbon neutral,” especially when all greenhouse gases are figured into the equation.
THEREFORE EVERYONE IS A PART OF THE PROBLEM, SO EVERYONE MUST BE PART OF THE SOLUTION IN SOME WAY.
3) “STRONG FAMILY PLANNING PROGAMMES ARE IN THE INTEREST OF ALL COUNTRIES for greenhouse-gas concerns as well as for broader welfare concerns.”
=============
—Professor of Biology -U of Texas at Austin Pianka -prominent advocate of radical human population control.
–Article: “What nobody wants to hear, but everyone needs to know”
–, First, and foremost, we must get out of denial and recognize that Earth simply cannot support many billions of people.*This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage.
*I do not bear any ill will toward humanity. However, I am convinced that the world WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/al-gore-agenda-21-and-population-control
=======
IN SUM: The lie is being spread that the planet cannot sustain us. We’re too backward, even after all this time of “evolving” our brains, to figure out how to provide enough food and clean water for all these humans to survive.. And every breath we take pollutes the environment (carbon footprints)
___.
— God said “increase and multiply and subdue the earth?”
No, this is not a problem for Biblical mythology, –it’s a scientific matter, and another way for Pope Francis to help the poor, –by getting his Church onboard with the latest New Age thinking.
— Just hold on a bit longer and you’ll understand how the Holy Spirit is leading us to the New World –You remember in the prophecy of the Apocalypse where it says John saw A New Heaven and a New Earth. coming DOWN to us from on high?. well… the Pope was doing theology on his knees again, when it came to him. to write this encyclical…….
Below are quotes (from Rorate) that poor Francis said in his recent trip. Note he says children are wonderful, and a gift, and that we must be open to life. But just as he has done since day one, not long after he admonishes us to limit our families. Have I gone mad?
—-
“The family is also threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life. (but didn’t he foster spread of this threat at the Synod?)
“I think of Blessed Paul VI. At a time when the problem of population growth was being raised, he had the courage to defend openness to life in families. He knew the difficulties that are there in every family, and so in his Encyclical he was very merciful towards particular cases, and he asked confessors to be very merciful and understanding in dealing with particular cases. But he also had a broader vision: HE LOOKED AT THE PEOPLES OF THE EARTH AND HE SAW THIS THREAT OF FAMILIES BEING DESTROYED FOR LACK OF CHILDREN. Paul VI was courageous; he was a good pastor and he warned his flock of the wolves who were coming. From his place in heaven, may he bless this evening!
—-
Can anyone really think this man has the capacity for rational thought?
‘Put an end to the outdoor Papal Mega-Mass altogether.’
–
No, no, no! The solution is much deeper than that. Get rid of the Novus Ordo in it’s entirety. Why is it, that there is no such thing as a Papal Mega Tridentine Mass? Or that there is no such thing as Puppet Tridentine Mass? The Papal Mega-Mass is just a symptom of the deeper rot, and targeting the symptom will not strike the cancer itself. There is a reason why even the at the time when it was ‘reverent’ that the Novus Ordo was condemned, because the barrier against Heresy was gone and it was Protestantised.
Could you picture what would happen if he met J.S. Bach and his 22 children?
Dear Barbara,
We were just kidding, but you didn’t waste your time, because these things affect a lot of people.
Dear Barbara,
Think Mundabor: TMAHICH.
“Prof” Pianka believes the world needs to lose populations as quickly as possible, does he? When these left-wing pencil-necks start talking about drastic population reduction, my internal thermostat takes another plunge. And I share Barbara’s bemusement about Pope Francis’ “ideological colonization” remarks. I recall some high-level colonizing at the Synod.
Dear Christopher,
I couldn’t agree with you more.
Yes, such manifest, wholly avoidable sacrilege against Our Lord, Jesus Christ in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, would never be permitted at the authentic Holy Mass of the Ages.