As the Church awaits the post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation wherein one may reasonably expect Pope Francis to lay out a pathway for unrepentant public adulterers (and perhaps even active homosexuals) to receive Holy Communion, it occurs to me that collectively we may not be taking the matter quite seriously enough.
Sure, many lament that such a scenario, if indeed it is to unfold, would be a magnificent offense against Our Blessed Lord, and even some among the neo-conservatives are beginning to acknowledge that Pope Francis is unilaterally responsible.
What often appears missing, however, is a sense of holy fear.
To describe what I have in mind, I’ll share a true story.
More than a decade ago, when out of town on a business trip, I went to Mass (Novus Ordo) at a nearby parish.
At Communion time, I approached the priest (standing, of course), who then presented the Eucharist, not by elevating the Host as expected, but by holding it up to an area just above my belt buckle. It was obvious to me (as I later confirmed in speaking with him) that his intent was to coax me into receiving in the hand; something I’ve never done.
Overlooking his none-too-subtle gesture, I proceeded as usual; with hands folded, I closed my eyes, said “Amen,” opened my mouth and awaited the Blessed Sacrament.
At this, an inordinate amount of time passed… It was probably less than 10 seconds, but it felt like a lifetime.
At last, the priest let out a loud sigh of exasperation and literally shoved the Eucharist in my mouth, forcefully. In hindsight, it is clear to me that the encounter was nothing less than diabolical.
When I returned to my place and dropped to my knees to pray, my entire body was shaking uncontrollably.
I grew up in a fairly rough environment. I don’t scare easily, even when such would be useful, but at that moment; for a reason I didn’t yet fully understand, I was absolutely terrified. I never experienced anything so intense either before or since.
Trying unsuccessfully to still myself, I prayed, “Blessed Mother, what is happening?”
Then it occurred to me; I was in the presence of the Lord’s almighty wrath.
The closest thing I could relate it to are those times as a kid when my little brother was about to feel the full weight of our father’s heavy hand for something he had done wrong. Even though I wasn’t the one in trouble; just being in the presence of that anger was scary nonetheless.
That overwhelming sense of awe, experienced some fifteen years ago when a simple parish priest provoked the Lord’s fury by failing to reverently safeguard the Eucharist during an unfortunate encounter with a stranger, is precisely what I mean by “holy fear.”
This is what we should contemplate at the thought of Pope Francis possibly creating pathways to Holy Communion for those improperly disposed; thereby setting in motion what will amount to systematic irreverence for the Blessed Sacrament throughout the world, to say nothing of the harm such would bring to poor souls.
I can imagine that some might feel compelled to point to the Communion in-the-hand indult as having effectively accomplished the same, but truly there is no precedent for the present situation.
To bring into focus just how gravely serious the Almighty takes this particular matter, we do well to recall what took place in the Garden of Eden immediately after the Fall:
And the Lord said: Behold Adam is become as one of us, knowing good and evil: now therefore lest perhaps he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever. And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the earth from which he was taken. And he cast out Adam: and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubim, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Gen 3:22-24)
If God saw fit to prevent the improperly disposed Adam and Eve from partaking of the Tree of Life, for their own good, even to the point of placing Cherubic sentinels in their way and a flaming sword in their path, how can we fail to tremble at the thought of what is unfolding right before our very eyes at this moment?
This abominable practice was allowed (from what I have read) to accommodate those that were already receiving by hand —–in DISOBEDIENCE. I think they are trying to do this with other things—maybe the purpose of the Synod.
“thereby setting in motion what will amount to systematic irreverence for the Blessed Sacrament throughout the world,”
I think the Holy Father accomplished that already with the new canon code on the process of annulment. What he is going to do (let’s pray God would have mercy on his Church not allow it) would be instituting Church wide, universal abomination of desolation.
Let us hope,and pray,that The Holy Ghost prevents this evil man from causing any more damage to holy Mother church.God Bless.
Yes, it is the formal, official, institutionalising of systematic, public sacrilege across the Church. An outright attack on Our Lord and Saviour in the Blessed Sacrament, marriage- both natural and sacramental, the sacrament of Confession, the sacred duty of the priesthood, and public Faith and morality, generally.
Wow…the audacity of that priest to do that is sickening. I attended novus ordo masses for my entire life prior to about 3 years ago and I can thankfully say that something like that has never happened to me. I seriously got upset just reading your account of what happened.
I was shaking just reading your account of what happened.
The Lord’s Almighty wrath is upon us. The heavenly signs are at hand.
—–
“Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in array.” (Song of Solomon 6:10)
——-
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2127-apocalypse-now-another-great-sign-rises-in-the-heavens
“And he cast out Adam: and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubim, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. ”
Seems to me from St. Paul: “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.” (1 Cor 11:27) and fact that Judas may have rec’d communion Jesus may have instituted a new policy.
http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=366355&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=
On the other hand, one reason I am a sede is because I don’t believe the N.O. mass or priesthood is valid (i.e.no consecration taking place). It could be God did this because of the heresies of VC2 or it could be that like the prodigal son the N.O. just decided to squander their inheritance and threw the mass (and all the other sacraments) away themselves. Look at the protestants: if you receive a host at an Anglican or Lutheran rite on your tongue does that it make it the Body and Blood of Christ? Why did priest try to force you to take in the hand–to disrespect Body and Blood of Christ, or because he didn’t believe was the REAL presence? If he didn’t believe it was truly Body and Blood of Christ, then was it validly consecrated? Still think God’s wrath could be provoked regardless, but also think you could be shaking to realize how evil (or obstinately mistaken and bent on forcing their mistakes on others) some priests are (and at that most sacred time when you are receiving your savior and they are supposedly feeding His sheep).
Maybe if Andy Cuomo (and my own niece and xx,000 annulments a year for 40 years–“But the U.S. figure is down sharply from the 72,308 cases introduced in the United States in 1990, as are figures for requests worldwide.” We can’t all be Kennedys: Annulment petitions plummet among U.S. Catholics) and Mo Rocca (and I don’t know how many sodomites in diocesan sodomite friendly parishes–4 in your own Baltimore participated in the Sodomite “pride” parade) weren’t already receiving communion I could understand your trying to draw a line in the sand here. Unfortunately, this is what Catholic children are exposed to when their parents send them w/the parish CYA to World Youth Day from your own Baltimore (see last sentence about her trembling because she might be denied communion as a practicing sodomite):
“Lauren and I attend a parish that we love in Baltimore. We feel very welcomed as a couple there, and never have to worry about being turned away from Communion or any of that other lame stuff. Here at World Youth Day, I have felt a little bit more nervous about that other lame stuff. We have been donning loads of rainbow attire, after all: rainbow sashes, rainbow pins, rainbow stickers, etc. Since I make a point of not attending churches in the U.S. where this might be a possibility, receiving communion at the masses we attended this week felt like a big deal to me.
“We attended mass on Wednesday and on Friday of this week, and I am happy to report that all who went up for communion were able to receive. But standing in line to receive (especially on Wednesday), I have never felt so nervous in a communion line. It was a powerful spiritual experience for me. ”
http://www.equally-blessed.org/blogs/receiving-communion-world-youth-day
If you click on “Blogs” above the title of the article, you can read the whole long story how these “27 year old” youth used CATHOLIC WYD as a vehicle to spread their sodomite ideology.
What we have allowed to exist in pockets is taking over the whole body. The end will come suddenly and their will be an end, but why what Francis is doing now should provoke it anymore than what has gone for the past 40 years or why this should wake any of those who have not woken up til now I don’t know.
These thugs preach mercy and lead souls into sing and sacrilege. Wait until they see what it waiting them when they die. It sure as “hell” won’t be the same mercy they preached.
If the pope could hear, in other words, if he ‘had ears to hear’ this would not be happening…he wouldn’t be indifferent to the beauty and truth of Christ. He would be incapable of bending too far. His heart would begin to break, and he would stop. Christ tells us that his sheep know him, and hear him.
It’s so obvious that he does not hear. Does pope Francis think that he isn’t harming souls when he considers allowing them to receive Christ unworthily? Does he think he is offending our Lord? He does not. Instead, he is trying to be sensitive to the pain of these people and he wants them to feel included. If he could hear and believe our Lord’s words, he would see that being ‘pastoral’ isn’t going to win people over to the truth. If he could hear, he would be telling people to take part in the sacrament of reconciliation. He would tell them to engage in the process of annulment.
There is a significant problem, of course, with the divorced and remarried, especially if they do not have their first marriage annulled. The pope wants to relieve their pain, if indeed they do feel the pain.
He’s misunderstood his place, it seems. He thinks his compassion is making him more holy, perhaps; more just. But pope Francis has forgotten where his compassion has come from, and that is his catholic upbringing and formation. It is Christ who makes us more compassionate, and we are shaped by Him when we hear Him and honor Him.
The divorced and remarried don’t go to mass because they haven’t bothered with the annulment; they feel excluded because they can’t take communion. How realistic is it that these people will live together as brother and sister, as the church says they should, when they have children together? Not very.
Pope Francis says the church should not drive such a hard line, probably, on these couples and their families. The challenge goes beyond them, down to their children. The argument is a good one, that the church should embrace them regardless of their adulterous second marriages. They would feel welcome in the church–but would they? Wouldn’t they feel, deep in their souls, their catholic upbringing, which knows well what God wants?
How can you change our Lord’s words? We can’t. It is all we have. If we think we can, it would be only the start of a long ending. But again, if Pope Francis could hear…
What about the spouse who knows their marriage is valid? Should that spouse just go along with the vatican 2 annulment process even when they know full well that their marriage was valid? If a vatican 2 (false religion) anullment is granted what does that actually mean? You are giving credence to an annulment process that is carried out by the vatican 2 minions of a man (jorge bergoglio) who you attack. That makes zero sense Miss Bee….if “pope” francis is in error then common sense dictates that all of those who adhere to his idiocy are also in error.
Louie writes: “[W]e do well to recall what took place in the Garden of Eden immediately after the Fall”.
Perhaps one is right to perceive that a “sense of holy fear” is missing when one bears in mind, for example, that George Pell, Bergoglio’s “Cardinal Adviser”, and often touted as a white knight of the Church, has spoken of Adam and Eve in the following terms (during a television debate with Richard Dawkins):
“GEORGE PELL: Well, Adam and Eve are terms – what do they mean: life and earth. It’s like every man. That’s a beautiful, sophisticated, mythological account…. it is a very sophisticated mythology….
[MODERATOR]: But it isn’t a literal truth. You shouldn’t see it in any way as being an historical or literal truth?
GEORGE PELL: It’s certainly not a scientific truth and it’s a religious story told for religious purposes….
RICHARD DAWKINS: Well, I’m curious to know if Adam and Eve never existed where did original sin come from?
(extract from the transcript, with emphases added).
At times like this, it is always worth considering, as Jorge Bergoglio appears to do, “What does the Pope ask of us?”.
Well, if he does not already know, Bergoglio may be interested to learn that the Pope (in this case, Pius XII), has the following to say on this subject, in Humani Generis, #38:
“In a particular way must be deplored a certain too free interpretation of the historical books of the Old Testament…. [T]he first eleven chapters of Genesis, although properly speaking not conforming to the historical method used by the best Greek and Latin writers or by competent authors of our time, do nevertheless pertain to history in a true sense, which however must be further studied and determined by exegetes”.
Video from 32mins as above post
http://youtu.be/tD1QHO_AVZA
I personally think Francis is merely putting ink on paper what was already a widely established practice in the NO Church – i.e. giving communion to public adulterers, those outside the Catholic Church etc
–
I don’t really think much will change with Francis’ post-Sin-Nodal exhortation. Unfaithful/apostate clerics will continue to hand out communion to public sinners as before (Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, etc ad nauseam), and the few remaining faithful priests remaining in the NO structure will ignore Francis’ sinister and evil commands. The Burkes and Schneiders of the NO Church are not going to follow Bergoglio into apostasy.
–
What the post-conciliar pontiffs may have said regarding the rules for the reception of the Eucharist (Wojtyla, Ratzinger) doesn’t matter that much – when push comes to shove what counts ultimately is their actions which speak a million times louder than any words they may have said in that respect:
It was pope “St” JP II who de facto institutionalized communion in the hand (a practice which HE himself carried out), and sacrilege of communion on a colossal scale via the raucous and hippie-like World Youth Day extravaganzas.
It was Cardinal Ratzinger himself who gave communion in the hand to a non-Catholic – Br Schutz, the founder of the syncretist Taize communion, during JP II’s de facto “santo subito” ceremony for the deceased Wojtyla.
–
It was both of these popes who appointed bishops throughout the world who de facto institutionalized a universal policy of access for the reception of communion – regardless of their ability to receive the Eucharist.
–
My point being, is that I don’t think there is really anything new under the sun here. Bergoglio is merely putting pen on paper for what has already been a widely practiced norm in the NO Church these past +30 years.
–
Hence, why (apparently) not a lot of Catholics are trembling at the latest Bergoglian outrage.
If anything, to me it seems like there has been comparatively little outrage for Bergoglio’s new “divorce-ment” procedures.
Pope Leo XIII December 25, 1888 ON RIGHT ORDERING OF CHRISTIAN LIFE VIII: Exeunte Iam Anno – “When the mind has thus been poisoned, at the same time the moral character becomes deeply and essentially corrupted; and such a state can only be cured with the utmost difficulty in this class of men, because on the one hand wrong opinions vitiate their judgment of what is right, and on the other the light of Christian faith, which is the principle and basis of all justice, is extinguished. In this way We daily see the numerous ills which afflict all classes of men. These poisonous doctrines have utterly corrupted both public and private life; rationalism, materialism, atheism, have begotten socialism, communism, nihilism; evil principles which it was not only fitting should have sprung from such parentage but were its necessary offspring. In truth, if the Catholic religion is wilfully rejected, whose divine origin is made clear by such unmistakable signs, what reason is there why every form of religion should not be rejected, not upheld, by such criteria of truth? If the soul is one with the body, and if therefore no hope of a happy eternity remains when the body dies, what reason is there for men to undertake toil and suffering here in subjecting the appetites to right reason?”
–
Leo XIII XII: Satis Cognitum “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition.” Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos.
–
The Catholics of the 50s and 60’s were ‘Adam and Eve’. The conclave of ’58 was the serpent slithering about St Peter’s. Eve was the council Fathers and Adam was and continues to be the cuckolded colluder singing ‘we have a pope’, even though both have been exited from the Catholic Church.
–
I wouldn’t waste my time trembling before the antics of a false Church. If one is going to work out their salvation ‘in fear and trembling’ at least bother to conform to Christ and His Bride.
Kudos, Mr. V. As persuasive as it is powerful
Thanks for that.
Even if one allows for the pressure of a live debate, three years have passed since that program was first broadcast. Is there any word yet on the setting up of a “Cardinal Pell Foundation for the Synthesis of Faith and Reason on the Subject of Original Sin”?
Yes. This truth you speak is hard to read. However, here’s something St. Augustine wrote:
–
“You are beset by trials, are you, and shaken by all the things in this world that offend you, even though you have taken your stand on God’s gracious promises? But even these troubles can do you no harm. Their limits have been imposed on them by the Lord, because the sea is his. This world is the sea, but God made the sea too, and its waves can rage only as far as the shore, which he has assigned to it as its boundary. There is no temptation to which the Lord has not set a limit. Let temptations come, then; let troubles come; you are being finely wrought by them, not wrecked.”
–
We are not swamped and we will not be swamped. Reality is hard to bear and we struggle with our anger and frustration. Somehow, sometime the evil will reach the boundary but will not go over.
I remember during the 60s a priest philosophy professor stated that at one time the people waited on line to confess to the priest, but today the priest waits for the “confessee”. With the loss of weekly confession, the pressure was on for going to communion. Back then, as embarrassing as it might have beeen, if we were in sin, we would hold back from communion until absolution was obtained. I notice today that everyone goes up to communion. Though I would be ecstatic to think all are worthy, practically, I have my doubts. So we have lost that “holy fear” and immense reverence in understanding what we do by approaching communion. This new document will say nothing beyond the final synod summary. The radicals have already won by those few passages unfortunately passed by the 2/3 majority of the synod fathers. We are at the edge of the cliff of schism already. The last thing the pope needs is formal widespread schism at this time. The connivance of the document opens the door by the internal forum wide enough to let through for those who presented it, all they wanted. Heresy will not be spread so much by proclamation but by action. As is always the case…actions speak louder than words.
Who is more guilty? The priest who has conformed to this evil practice or the “church” that allows it? The wrath of God is aimed at the very top!!!
Yes Its sacrilege and blasphemy against all Seven Sacraments if you analyze it, from a false pope – teaching false doctrine!
1. Holy Sacrifice of the Mass – sacrilege
2. Holy Matrimony – sacrilege
3. Holy Confession – sacrilege
4. Holy Orders – sacrilege
5. Holy Baptism – sacrilege (false instruction)
6. Holy Confirmation – sacrilege (false instruction)
7. Holy Unction – sacrilege
I hope others can see the grave repercussions on each of the Seven Sacraments as I can. Bergoglio has got to go. Plus, think of all his choosing the wrong men to become bishops and cardinals and the IRREPARABLE harm that THAT will cause. Again, he’s got to go – of course at the behest of some Bishops with the moral courage to challenge him. Burke gave us his word. The thirteen cardinals know the score too, don’t think they don’t. The result: a major End-time schism! The grave battle St John Paul the Great said we were nearing.
I, too, had a distressing experience as I presented for Holy Communion at a Catholic Church in Connecticut, while I was visiting a friend.
This occurred the weekend before the 2004 U.S. general (presidential) election. The homily was an unqualified Democrat “get out the vote” rally. Not a word on the readings or the Gospel.
I had recently abandoned receiving Holy Communion in the hand and returned to receiving on the tongue, as I had learned at my First Holy Communion in 1960. I approached the celebrant/pastor/priest for Holy Communion with hands folded. He said, “Body of Christ.” I said, “Amen,” closed my eyes, and put out my tongue.
I became confused when I thought I heard the priest *say something else*. [“No. I’m hearing things!” I thought.] I waited a few seconds. Louder and more firmly, then twice more: “Open your eyes!” When I opened my eyes, he said, “Put out your hand!” I was so startled that I did as I was told. He plunked the Host into my palm, and I walked back to my pew, stunned.
The commercially-prepared insert in the bulletin was all about “social justice.” Protection for the unborn was not mentioned. That explained a lot about the “homily” and my experience receiving Our Lord’s Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity.
From that moment, I determined that I would never receive Holy Communion in the hand again. Now, there is a new campaign afoot to desecrate the Holy Eucharist.
Several weeks ago, I purchased a beautiful mantilla and have been “getting up the nerve” to begin wearing it at the Novus Ordo Mass at our parish. (The “Extraordinary Form” is not offered in our parish … yet.
At the 9:30 Mass this Sunday morning, our RCIA team will be presenting our catechumens and candidates at the foot of the sanctuary stairs for the Rite of Acceptance. As a team member, this will be a perfect opportunity to offer a good example to my fellow parishioners. I’ll begin wearing my mantilla, and I’ll have an extra in my purse in case another lady inquires. I hope someone does!
I’ve had pretty much the same happen to me, but I had a different reaction. Every time I had occasion to attend Mass at this NO Church I made sure I got in the line of this Priest to receive. First of all to ‘give him practice’ because most of the NO priests are accustomed to distributing in the hand, and second of all to make sure he got the drift that I WOULD NOT EVER desecrate Our Lord by taking the precious host in my hand, no matter how much he liked it or didn’t. Guess it’s my passive aggression showing.
The fact that the institutional “catholic” church allows this desecration (and so many others!) proves to me that the NO “church” cannot possibly believe in the Holy Eucharist. If the NO “church” which is PERCEIVED to be the Catholic Church doesn’t believe in the Holy Eucharist, why should anyone else?
I’m not sure what anyone personally believes in the Novus Ordo or elsewhere but I’m sure about this: the clergy are kept on a very tight leash. Obedience is paramount. I would guess that there is a lot of spiritual compartmentalization going on.
Isnt the clown “cardinal” Dolan of NY one of the 13? What could he possibly know the score of? Clown “cardinal” Dolan is now a defender of True Catholicism? Good grief. If he signed anything, then there is something very shady about it.
We believe because God revealed it to us through the Sacred Tradition of His Apostolic Church, through Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium.
Clergy may not employ mental reservations when it comes to acknowledging and worshipping Our Lord and Saviour in the Blessed Sacrament.