The Fruits of the Mass: Are all valid Masses equal?

(From December 2012 issue of Catholic Family News)

The Fruits of the Mass

Are all valid Masses equal?

By Robert J. Siscoe

Traditional Catholics realize that the Traditional Mass is superior to the new Mass, but how do we answer those who claim that all valid Masses are equal? They rightly point out that any valid Mass is a renewal of the Sacrifice of the Cross, which is of infinite value, and then conclude by saying that as long as a Mass is valid it, too, is of infinite worth, and hence equally efficacious for those who participate. They might concede that a scandalously celebrated Mass will have a negative effect on the subjective disposition of those present, which may then lessen the amount of grace they receive, but then insist that neither liturgical abuses, nor an unworthy priest, nor watered down prayers or profane music, per se, will lessen the efficacy of the Mass or the fruit to be derived from it.

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Value


When considering the efficacy of the Mass, we must distinguish between the intrinsic value and the extrinsic value. The intrinsic value refers to the Sacrifice itself. Since the Mass is essentially identical to the Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary, which was itself of infinite worth, the intrinsic value of any Mass is infinite. In Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, we read:

“The intrinsic value of the Mass, that is, its peculiar dignity and efficacious power of itself (in actu primo), is infinite, on account of the infinite dignity of the Sacrificial Gift, and of the Primary Sacrificial Priest”. (Pg. 414)

With respect to the extrinsic value of the Mass, we must a make a distinction between the extrinsic value in relation to God to whom it is offered, and the extrinsic value in relation to man for whom it is offered. Since God is an infinite being, capable of receiving an infinite act, the adoration and thanksgiving offered to God by the Sacrifice is itself infinite. (1) But since man is a finite creature who is incapable of receiving infinite effects, the effects of the Mass in relation to man – which are referred to as “the fruits of the Mass” - are limited. In his magnificent book, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Fr. Gihr states that the external value of the Mass in relation to God is indeed infinite, and then adds:

“But the case is different when the Eucharistic Sacrifice is considered in its relation to man. From this point of view it aims at procuring our salvation and sanctification, and is, consequently, a means of grace, or rather a source of grace, bringing us the riches of heavenly blessings. (…) The fruits which the Sacrifice of the Mass obtains for us from God are only finite, that is, restricted to a certain number and determining measure… The Sacrifice of the Mass, therefore, with respect to man can have only a restricted efficacy, and in its fruits is capable of only limited application.” (2)

The same author goes on to explain that the limited efficacy “does not lie in the essence or value of the Sacrifice, since it possesses infinite power for producing every effect”. Rather, “the final and decisive reason for the more or less plentiful application of the sacrificial graces is the will of Christ, in other words, is to be sought in the positive ordinance of God”. (3) While the Mass itself is an infinite source of grace, when it comes to “the distribution of His gifts, God requires our cooperation”. (Gihr)

The Fruits of the Mass


The fruit that an individual derives from a particular Mass is not based solely on their personal piety and devotion, which is only one factor that determines the amount of grace they receive. There are other factors as well that have a bearing on the efficacy of a particular Mass, such as the holiness of the priest, the external glory given to God by the ritual, and even the general holiness of the Church in its members. These external factors affect the amount of grace a person receives, in such a way, that the devout hearing of one mass can derive greater fruits than an equally devout hearing of another mass.

The Holiness of the Church


One factor determining the efficacy of the Mass is the general holiness of the Church in its members at a given time, including the bishops and reigning pope. Regarding this point, the Catholic Encyclopedia says “the greatness and extent of this ecclesiastical service is dependent on the greater or less holiness of the reigning pope, the bishops, and the clergy throughout the world, and for this reason in times of ecclesiastical decay and laxity of morals (especially at the papal court and among the episcopate) the fruits of the Mass, resulting from the sacrificial activity of the Church, might under certain circumstances easily be very small”.

On the same point, Fr. Gihr wrote: “But since the holiness of the Church consists in the sanctity of her members, it is not always and invariably the same, but greater at one period than another; therefore, the Sacrifice of the Church is also at one time in a greater, at another in a lesser degree pleasing to God and beneficial to man”. (4)

Since this factor is based on the moral condition of the Church as a whole, it will have an equal effect on all Masses offered at a given time in history. The next several factors, however, are based on specific circumstances which have a direct effect on the efficacy of individual Masses.

The Priest

St. Thomas teaches that the fruits to be derived from a particular Mass are based, in part, on the holiness of the priest celebrant who intercedes for the faithful, “and in this respect there is no doubt but that the Mass of the better priest is the more fruitful”. (III, Q 82, A.6)

A Mass celebrated irreverently by an unworthy priest, or worse still, by one who violates the rubrics, will be less efficacious, and therefore produce fewer fruits than a one celebrated by a holy priest who says Mass with devotion and follows the rubrics with precision. Hence, as Fr. Gehr notes, “the faithful are thus guided by sound instinct when they prefer to have Mass celebrated for their intentions by an upright and holy priest, rather than by an unworthy one…”. (5) St. Bonaventure said “it is more profitable to hear the Mass of a good priest than of an indifferent one”.

Cardinal Bona (d. 1674) explained it this way: “The more holy and pleasing to God a priest is, the more acceptable are his prayers and oblations; and the greater his devotion, the greater the benefit to be derived from his Mass. For just as other good works performed by a pious man gain merit in proportion to the zeal and devotion with which they are performed, so Holy Mass is more or less profitable both to the priest who says it and to the persons for whom it is said, according as it is celebrated with more or less fervor”.

The Ritual


Another factor determining the efficacy of a Mass is the degree of external glory it gives to God. In this respect, not all Rites are equal; neither does a low Mass have the same efficacy as a High Mass. On this point, Fr. Gihr says:

“The Church not only offers the Sacrifice, but she moreover unites with its offering various prayers and ceremonies. The sacrificial rites are carried out in the name of the Church and, therefore, powerfully move God to impart His favors and extend His bounty to the living and the dead. By reason of the variety of the formulas of the Mass, the impetratory efficacy of the Sacrifice can be increased… also the nature of the prayers of the Mass and even of its whole rite exerts accordingly an influence upon the measure and nature of the fruits of the Sacrifice. From what has been said there follow several interesting consequences. Among others, that, on the part of the Church, a High Mass solemnly celebrated has greater value and efficacy than merely a low Mass. (…) At a Solemn High Mass the external display is richer and more brilliant than at a low Mass; for at a solemn celebration the Church, in order to elevate the dignity of the Sacrifice, manifests greater pomp, and God is more glorified thereby. (…) This grander and more solemn celebration of the Sacrifice is more acceptable to God and, therefore, more calculated to prevail upon Him to grant us, in His mercy, the favors we implore; - that is, to impart greater efficacy to the petitions and supplications of the Church.” (6)

If “the nature of the prayers of the Mass and even its whole rite” have an effect on the fruits of the Mass, it does not bode well for the Novus Ordo, which, to use the words of Cardinal Ottaviani, “represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent” and “has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants”. (7)

Even the decora has an effect on the efficacy of a particular Mass: “If we use objects that do not fit the majesty and the exalted nature of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we can actually detract from the extrinsic merit. Ugly things please God less, and thus merit less”. (8)

Conclusion


On Calvary, our Lord offered His Passion and Death to the Father in order to merit our salvation. At the Mass, He offers Himself to the Father and applies the fruits of His Passion to us. But as we have seen, the fruits of the Mass are finite in their application, and contingent on many factors. The holiness of the priest, and the manner in which he says the Mass, will affect the fruits of the Mass. The greater the solemnity and grandeur of the Mass, the greater will be the graces God pours out on those who assist. When we consider the liturgical shipwreck that is the Novus Ordo Missae, and the scandalous manner in which the Mass is often celebrated, is there any wonder why the Church is in the condition it is today?
Let us recall the strange and even ominous words used by Paul VI when he introduced the new Mass to the world in November of 1969. He wrote:

“We ask you to turn your minds once more to the liturgical innovation of the new Rite of the Mass. This new Rite will be introduced into our celebration of the holy Sacrifice starting from Sunday next which is the first of Advent… a change in a venerable tradition that has gone on for centuries. This is something that affects our hereditary religious patrimony, which seemed to enjoy the privilege of being untouchable and settled. … This change will affect the ceremonies of the Mass. We shall become aware, perhaps with some feeling of annoyance, that the ceremonies at the altar are no longer being carried out with the same words and gestures to which we were accustomed… We must prepare for this many-sided inconvenience. It is the kind of upset caused by every novelty that breaks in on our habits. We shall notice that pious persons are disturbed most, because they have their own respectable way of hearing Mass, and they will feel shaken out of their usual thoughts and obliged to follow those of others. Even priests may feel some annoyance in this respect. … we must prepare ourselves. This novelty is no small thing. We should not let ourselves be surprised by the nature, or even the nuisance, of its exterior forms. … We will lose a great part of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual thing, the Gregorian chant. We have reason indeed for regret, reason almost for bewilderment”. (9)

Is it any surprise that a Mass described by the Pope who published it as “a many-sided inconvenience” and “nuisance”, which would cause “the feeling of annoyance”, “regret”, and “bewilderment”, would have a greatly diminished external value, and end in disaster for the Church - something that even Cardinal Ratzinger was forced to admit? In his book Milestones, which was published in 1997, he wrote: “I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing today is to a large extent due to the disintegration of the liturgy.”

Many clear thinking people foresaw, from the outset, the disaster that would result from the Protestantized new Mass. In the Critical Study of the new Mass, signed by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, they wrote: “To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries was both the sign and pledge of unity of worship, and to replace it with another which cannot but be a sign of division by virtue of the countless liberties implicitly authorized, and which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic religion is, we feel in conscience bound to proclaim, an incalculable error”. They further wrote: “It has always been the case that when a law meant for the good of subjects proves to be on the contrary harmful, those subjects have the right, nay the duty of asking with filial trust for the abrogation of that law”.

Whatever the true motive was for Paul VI publishing the new Mass, and illicitly and unjustly suppressing the true Mass, let us do our duty and request that Pope Benedict XVI abandon the “reform of the reform”, and instead set in motion the abrogation the reform.

Footnotes:
1) Ibid
2) Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, pg 137-138
3) Ibid pg. 138-139
4) Ibid pg. 144
5) Ibid pg. 143
6) Ibid pg 144-145
7) Ottaviani Intervention
8) The Merits of a Mass, Fr. Ripperger, FSSP
9) Pope Paul VI, General Audience, November 26, 1969)

Dignitatis Humanae

Dignitatis Humanae

True and False Notions of Human Dignity

 

By Robert J. Siscoe

 

On August 15, 1910, Pope St. Pius X issued the encyclical Notre Charge Apostolique, in which he condemned the errors of the Sillon.  The Sillon was a movement in France that promoted a form of social modernism (1), which sought to rebuild society on Masonic and Enlightenment principles incompatible with the Catholic Faith.

 

One of the fundamental errors of the Sillon was a false notion of human dignity, which flowed from an equally false notion of human liberty.  Pius X wrote: “The Sillon has a praise-worthy concern for human dignity, but it understands human dignity in the manner of some philosophers, of whom the Church does not at all feel proud. The first condition of that dignity is liberty, but viewed in the sense that, except in religious matters, each man is autonomous.”

 

The false notion of liberty and human dignity, which was advocated by the Sillon, was later expanded to include freedom of religion, in such a way that man’s dignity was said to bring with it the right to violate the First Commandment by professing any religion or none, as well as the right to express religious beliefs in the public forum, with no distinction being made between the true religion revealed by God, and “sects of perdition” (2 Peter 2:1) founded by men that St. Paul refers to as “lying teachers”.  We see this false notion of human dignity expressed in the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, which states:

 

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights…. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”

 

Today, this false notion of human dignity has infected many within the Church, including high ranking prelates in Rome, who not only proclaim that men have a right to profess a false religion, but go further by encouraging them to do so.  Rather than preaching the saving truth in charity and warning them of the damnable errors they are entangled in, these misguided prelates encourage members of false religions to be faithful in carrying out their religious practices. This madness is due, in large part, to a false notion of human dignity. 

 

In order to sort out the confusion over this subject, we will distinguish between natural and supernatural dignity in the domain of being, and natural and supernatural dignity in the realm of acting.  We will then consider the false notion of human dignity, which proclaims for man the right to do that which God forbids.

 

The Realm of Being

 

On the ontological level – in the realm of being – man possesses the natural dignity of having been created in the image of God, that is, with a rational intellect and free will.  St. Augustine said: "Man's excellence consists in the fact that God made him to His own image by giving him an intellectual soul which raises him above the beasts of the field" (Gen. ad lit. vi, 12).

 

The rational intellect confers upon man natural liberty, or free will, (2) which is “the faculty of choosing means fitted for the end proposed.” (3)  Since only rational or intellectual creatures possess freedom of choice, man is the only material being that possesses the dignity of liberty.  “Liberty” wrote Leo XIII, “the highest of natural endowments, being the portion only of intellectual or rational natures, confers on man this dignity - that he is ‘in the hand of his counsel’ (Ecclus.15:14) - and has power over his actions.” (4) 

 

Man’s intellect enables him to know God and His law, while his natural liberty enables him to freely obey God’s law.   But due to original sin, man’s natural dignity has been corrupted, and consequently “darkness has spread over the mind, and the will has been inclined to evil”. (5) The result is that man’s intellect, which was made for truth, often errs in its judgment of truth; while his will, which was made for the true good, often errs by desiring and choosing a false good.  As a result of original sin, men are born into this world separated from God and inclined to evil, “under the power of the devil and death,” (6) and are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph 2:3).  Consequently, the man who dies with his natural dignity alone, even if such dignity has not been further corrupted by actual sin, will “immediately descend into hell.” (7)

 

Supernatural Dignity

 

In order for a man to obtain the supernatural end for which he was created - namely, the beatific vision of God in heaven - he must possess a dignity infinitely superior to that which he has by nature.   For man to enter into eternal life he must possess the supernatural dignity of sanctifying grace, which elevates his soul to the supernatural level through the infusion of Divine Life, thereby making him a “partaker of the Divine Nature,” (2 Peter 1:4) a “new creature” (2 Cor. 5:17) and an adopted child of God (Eph 1:5).  This supernatural dignity is absolutely necessary for salvation. 

 

For man to possess sanctifying grace, he must also possess, in the realm of being, the habit of supernatural faith, which is a divinely infused virtue that perfects the intellect and enables man to believe, by faith, the revealed truths necessary for salvation.  If a single revealed truth is knowingly rejected, the habit of faith is lost entirely (8) and since without the Catholic Faith it is impossible to please God (9), one who denies a single article of Faith cannot possess sanctifying grace – the supernatural dignity necessary for salvation. 

 

The false notion of human dignity, in the domain of being, denies that man has been corrupted by original sin and claims the man is essentially good by nature.  It claims that man possesses a divine principle as part of his nature, and is in the process of evolving into God.  Human life, as such, is said to be “sacred”; therefore whatever offends or harms Man is considered as an offense against God – at least what becoming a God.

 

The Realm of Acting

 

Man’s rational intellect and free will confer upon him moral obligations that do not apply to irrational creatures: man is morally bound to follow the Eternal Law, accept the truths God has revealed, and willingly obey them. 

 

Man’s liberty is not an end in itself, but rather a means to the rational attainment of an end.  The proper object of the will is “that good only which is in conformity with right reason” (Libertas). And since it is contrary to right reason for an intelligent being to turn away from the end for which it was created, man’s natural liberty (free will) must be exercised within the moral boundaries established by God, which are intended to direct man to the supernatural end for which he was created.  If man acts contrary to right reason, he is guilty of sin and thereby abuses his liberty.  Man’s moral liberty, which is the power to choose means that lead him to his proper end, is ordered to and limited by its object, and therefore subject to and restricted by the Revealed Law of God. 

 

When man uses his liberty within the boundaries of God’s law for the rational attainment of the end for which he was created, the greatest good can be achieved; but when he abuses his natural liberty by disobeying God’s law, he thereby turns away from his end, falls into sin, and the greatest evil results.   Hence in the realm of acting, by the use man makes of his inborn dignity, the highest good or the greatest evil can result, as Pope Leo XIII explains:

 

“But the manner in which such dignity is exercised is of the greatest moment, inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the greatest evil alike depend. Man, indeed, is free to obey his reason, to seek moral good, and to strive unswervingly after his last end. Yet he is free also to turn aside to all other things; and, in pursuing the empty semblance of good, to disturb rightful order and to fall headlong into the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen” (Libertas).

 

The true dignity of man consist, not in doing what he pleases, but in doing what he ought; for only by doing what he ought will he attain the supernatural end for which he was created, and obtain the ultimate happiness for which he yearns.

 

Perfection of Our Dignity

 

The object of the intellect is truth, and the object of the will is the true good.  Therefore, the intellect is brought to perfection by adhering to the truth, and corrupted by adhering to error; while the will is perfected by choosing the true good, and corrupted by choosing a false and merely apparent good.

 

Now, just as the human intellect has the two-fold function of reasoning and understanding, so too the human will (man’s liberty) has the two-fold function of desiring and choosing. (10) But the will, which is the faculty of choice, is incapable of distinguishing a true good from a merely apparent good.  Therefore, the will must be directed in its choice by the intellect, which judges what is truly good, and directs the will thereto. (11)

 

As a result of the Fall, man’s will has been weakened and his intellect darkened.  The result is that the will tends to choose, not according to the judgment of reason, but according to the disordered desires of concupiscence; and the darkening of the intellect results in man’s reason often being mistaken in its judgment.  When this happens, even if the will follows the judgment of reason, rather than the desires of the lower nature, the false judgment will misdirect the will in its choice, and both will fall into corruption.  Pope Leo XIII said: “If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption” (Immortale Dei).  

 

To rectify this defect and provide man with the necessary knowledge to lead him to his supernatural end, God revealed the Divine Law, which perfects the intellect by filling it with truth (both natural and supernatural), so that it can direct the will to the true good. 

 

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Principles of Right Action

 

In addition to the revealed law of God, there are intrinsic and extrinsic principles that serve to perfect the intellect and will in their respective acts.  The intrinsic principles are virtuous habits, both natural and supernatural, which enlighten the mind to the truth (both speculative and practical) and direct the will to the good.  Natural virtues are habits acquired by man, while supernatural virtues are habits infused into the soul by God, and further developed by man.  These virtues perfect man by enlightening his mind to the truth and strengthening his will to choose the good. (12)

 

The extrinsic principles of right action are law and Divine Grace.  Law is a dictate of practical reason promulgated by one in a position of authority, the purpose of which is to guide man to his proper end by forbidding what God forbids and encouraging what God commands.  “Law is the guide of man’s actions”, wrote Leo XIII; “it turns him toward the good by its rewards, and deters him from evil by its punishments” (Libertas).    The written law rectifies the potential defect in the intellect by presenting it with the truth, while the sanctions attached to the law serves to impel the will to choose the true good.  Authority, which is a moral force impelling man to the good, also serves as an extrinsic help for right action. (Romans 13:1-5)  But the most excellent of the extrinsic helps is Divine Grace, which is a supernatural act of God that perfects the mind by enlightening it to the truth, and simultaneously moves the will to the true good.

 

These intrinsic and extrinsic principles help to rectify the potential defect in the intellect and will, and thereby safeguard the true dignity of man.

 

To conclude this point, the true dignity of man, in the realm of acting, consists in embracing the truth revealed by God (which perfects the intellect) and obeying God’s law, which leads man to the end for which he was created.

 

Supernatural Dignity in the Realm of Acting

 

When man possesses the supernatural dignity of sanctifying grace in his soul, he also possesses supernatural charity in the will, for “the virtue of charity has its foundation in grace, as a property in an essence.” (13)  The virtue of Charity perfects the will and serves as a supernatural principle that enables man to love God above all things, his neighbor as himself for the love of God, and perform meritorious acts worthy of a supernatural reward.  Without supernatural Charity in the will, man’s good deeds are considered “dead works”, and therefore cannot merit an eternal reward. “All works that are generically good” wrote St. Thomas, “are said to be dead, if they be done without Charity, inasmuch as they fail to proceed from the principle of [supernatural] life.”  (14)

 

False Notion of Human Dignity

 

Now that we have covered the true notion of human dignity, we will consider the false notion as it pertains to the realm of acting.  The erroneous notion of human dignity that is so widespread today is base based on Naturalism, and flows from the Masonic notion of “liberty”, which is embraced and promoted by the adherents of Liberalism.  This error essentially maintains that, since man is by nature free (in the realm of being), he should be free to do as he pleases (in the realm of acting), as long as he does not physically harm another man. (15)  It considers human liberty as an end in itself, rather than a means to an end.  It denies the moral boundaries for our liberty, and ends by equating liberty with license.

 

The false notion of human dignity ignores the Divine Law (which perfects man’s intellect), and claims that human reason is the sole principle and judge of truth.  Human reason is considered absolutely sovereign and therefore subject to no external authority.  It is independent of its object (truth), and therefore has a right to create its own “truth”.  In his encyclical against the Sillon, Pope St. Pius X referred to this as “intellectual emancipation in the name of human dignity.”

 

Man’s “dignity” requires that he be faithful to his own “truth” and not degrade himself by adhering to the truth of another – including that which has been revealed by Almighty God “who can neither deceive nor be deceived”.  Any truth imposed on man by an external source is said to be “tyranny over the mind of men” (16) and therefore contrary to his dignity.  For a Liberal, the idea of Divine Revelation being imposed by an external authority is an absolute horror.  “To believe in a revealed Religion, imposed by an exterior authority over human reason”, wrote Fr. Roussel, “is without doubt very humiliating for the liberal, and therefore, profoundly immoral.  It is a crime of high treason and a sacrilege.” (17)   

 

Therefore, in order to preserve man’s “dignity”, the preaching of the Gospel must be replaced by dialogue, and all forms of proselytism rejected.

 

The adherents of the false notion of human dignity oppose, what they call, “indifferentism”, but they understand indifferentism in such a way that each man must remain faithful to his own “truth” (whatever that may be); and since religion itself is considered nothing but an external expression of each man’s “truth”, it follows that forbidding someone from freely practicing their peculiar religion is an affront to his dignity – an intolerable crime for anyone who respects the dignity of man.   

 

Toleration for error is, therefore, the cardinal virtue for a Liberal, since for him the intellect is not brought to perfection by adhering to the truth revealed by God, as from an external source, but by being faithful to his own “truth”, regardless of how far his “truth” has deviated from reality.  The one crime that will not be tolerated is the “intolerance” of the Catholic who maintains that his religion alone is true.  Such a person is said to be guilty of the high crime of triumphalism, since he considers “his” truth to be superior to that of another.   This attitude is simply unbearable for the Liberal and his false notion of “the dignity of man”.

 

In reality, as we have seen, man’s true dignity is brought about by adhering to the truth revealed by God and following unswervingly after his supernatural end, and is corrupted when he embraces the errors of a false religion, since, as we have seen, “if the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption.” (18)

 

The false notion of human dignity also considers the human will to be sovereign and independent, and therefore the source of its own law.  Accordingly, the will is brought to perfection, not by obeying God’s law and striving after its final end, but in obeying only itself.  Any law that does not proceed from the will of man is said to be a violation of his dignity, as an autonomous and independent being.   Commenting on this point, Pope St. Pius X said:

 

“Finally, at the root of all their fallacies… lie the false hopes of Sillonists on human dignity. According to them, Man will be a man truly worthy of the name only when he has acquired a strong, enlightened, and independent consciousness, able to do without a master, obeying only himself ... Such are the big words by which human pride is exalted, like a dream carrying Man away without light, without guidance, and without help into the realm of illusion in which he will be destroyed by his errors and passions whilst awaiting the glorious day of his full consciousness. And that great day, when will it come? Unless human nature can be changed, which is not within the power of the Sillonists, will that day ever come? Did the Saints who brought human dignity to its highest point, possess that kind of dignity?”

 

According to this notion of human dignity, man should be guided exclusively by his own reason and will, with no reference to the saving truth revealed by God and His Divine Will.  He is subject to no truth, law, or authority, that does not proceed from himself.  The true notion of authority is an insult to those who adhere to this false notion of the “dignity of man”, since it proceeds from an external source and seeks to impose moral obligations on an “independent and sovereign being”.   Authority, therefore, must come from man; it must flow, not from the top down, but from the bottom up, lest man’s dignity be offended by obeying a command he himself did not willingly enact.  Regarding this point, Pius X wrote:

 

“The Sillon does not wish to abolish political authority; on the contrary, it considers it necessary; but it wishes to divide it, or rather to multiply it in such a way that each citizen will become a kind of king. Authority, so they concede, comes from God, but it resides primarily in the people and expresses itself by means of elections or, better still, by selection. However, it still remains in the hands of the people; it does not escape their control. It will be an external authority, yet only in appearance; in fact, it will be internal because it will be an authority assented to…. But Leo XIII absolutely condemned this doctrine in his Encyclical ‘Diuturnum Illud’....”

 

The practical consequence of the false notion of human dignity is that man is his own god, “autonomous and independent”: human reason must be free to think for itself, without reference to God’s revealed truth; liberty is the faculty of doing what he pleases, irrespective of God’s law; external authority is tyranny, and obedience is servitude.  Man must be free to do as he pleases, and any higher law that seeks to hinder his “liberty” is considered to be contrary to his “dignity”.  As Fr. Roussel explains, the false notion of human dignity “manifests an anarchical and deregulated liberty in every domain.  Absolute autonomy of the individual, of his reason and will, the liberty of thought, of conscience and undefined progress even unto the deification of man… all this is plainly ridiculous and absurd.  It merits only disdain from any healthy and realistic mind.” (19)

 

The only acceptable law is one that protects his precious “liberty”, and the “right” to do what he pleases.  His motto is that of Lucifer ‘Non-Serviam’ – I will not serve, and his justification for this crime is his “dignity”. 

 

Fr. Roussell explains that this sin of Liberalism and its false notion of human dignity is “incomparably greater than the sins of the flesh because it destroys the most important and most excellent of all faculties, the intelligence.  It is a truly Satanic sin because it is the only one that he, Satan, could commit and is therefore inspired directly by him.  [It is] a radical and nearly incurable sin.” (20)

 

Conclusion

 

Since the close of Vatican II, the Liberal spirit of the Sillon and their false notion of human dignity have invaded the Church from top to bottom, resulting in the great apostasy that has spread throughout the world.  The false notion of human dignity is the underlying error of false ecumenism and the Assisi style “prayer meetings”, and is serving as the impetus for the establishment of a One World Church.  With this in mind, we will close with the following prophetic words of Pope St. Pius X:

 

 “We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization … has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could ever come) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.” (21)

Footnotes:

1 Fr. Loisy, who was excommunicated by Pius X for promoting Modernism, admitted that the Sillon was a form of social modernism.  He wrote: “Pope Pius X, who pursued all genres of modernism, condemned social modernism by striking against the Sillon.”  In Ubi Arcano Dei , Pius XI condemned social modernism “no less decidedly than…theological modernism.” (#61)

2 Summa, Pt 1, q 83, A 1: “And forasmuch as man is rational is it necessary that man have a free-will.”

3 Libertas

4 Ibid.

5 Singulari Quaden, Pius IX, Denz. 1643

6 Council of Trent, Denz. 793

7 Council of Florence: “the souls of those who depart [this life] in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell….” Denz. 693

8 Summa. Pt II-II, Q. 5, A. 2; Satis Cognitum #9 by Leo XIII

9 Council of Trent, Denz 787; Heb. 11:16

10 Summa, Pt 1, Q 83, A 4

11 See Libertas #5

12 Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, Fr. Fahey. Pg. 154

13 Ibid, Pg. 44

14 Summa, Pt III, Q 89, A 6

15 The Declaration of the Rights of Man states: “Liberty is the power of doing what we will, so long as it does not injure another.”

16 Referring to the imposition of Christian doctrine on men, the Liberal Thomas Jefferson said: “I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

17 Liberalism and Catholicism Pg. 31

18 Immortale Dei

19 Liberalism and Catholicism, Pg 19

20 Ibid. pg 45

21 Notre Charge Apostolique

The Transition of the Blessed Virgin Mary

The Transition of the Blessed Virgin Mary

And a little known privilege she received

By Robert J. Siscoe

 

(Published in the August 2012 issue of Catholic Family News)

On December 8, 1854, in the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, Bl. Pope Pius IX defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.  Many non-Catholics mistakenly believe the Immaculate Conception refers to the virginal conception of Jesus Christ in the womb of His mother.  In reality, the term refers to the conception of the Virgin Mary in the womb of her mother, St. Anne.  Through the merits of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary received the singular privilege of being exempt from the universal law of sin from the moment of her conception.  The dogmatic definition reads as follows:  “the most Blessed Virgin Mary … in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin". 

According to St. Thomas, sin consists in a two-fold element: a turning away from God, and a turning toward creatures.  The formal element of original sin is the privation of original justice, by which the will is turned away from God.  The material element of original sin is concupiscence, whereby the will is turned toward creatures.  St. Thomas wrote: “original sin is concupiscence, materially, but privation of original justice, formally”. (II-II Q83, A3)

At Baptism, the formal element of original sin is removed through the infusion of sanctifying grace and charity into the soul, but the material element remains, and must be combated by reception of the sacraments, self denial and the practice of virtue.   By a singular privilege, the Virgin Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin – not only the formal element (lack of sanctifying grace), but the material element as well.  As such, the Blessed Virgin Mary was free from concupiscence, which impedes the pure and perfect love of God, for she was truly “full of grace” (Luke 1:28).  “It was not fitting”, wrote St. Bernadine of Sienna, “that He, the Son of God, would be born of a Virgin, and take her flesh, were she in the slightest decree stained with original sin”.

This privilege was granted to the Blessed Mother through the merits of her Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who was indeed her Savior (Luke 1:47); but unlike others who are saved by being cleansed from sin through the merits of Christ, the Blessed Mother was saved through His merits by being preserved from sin.  In fulfillment of the prophecy of Gen. 3:15 – “I will put enmity between thee and the woman” – the Blessed Mother was exempted from the universal law of sin that passed onto all men due to the transgression of Adam, the father of the human race.  It was fitting that she, who was destined to crush the head of serpent – “she shall crush thy head” (Gen. 3:15) – should be free from all stain of sin, so that he, whose head she will crush, would never have any place in her.  Referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. John Damascene said “the serpent never had any access to this paradise”.  Her Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, would have it no other way.   

Now, since bodily death is the consequence of sin (Romans 5:12), the question arises:  If the Virgin Mary was exempted from the universal law of sin, would she also be exempt from having to suffer bodily death?

On November 1, 1950, in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII defined, as an article of Faith, that the Blessed Virgin Mary was assumed bodily into heaven at the end of her life.  He wrote: “we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory”.

The question of whether or not the Blessed Mother died before being assumed into heaven was specifically avoided in the definition, since the purpose was only to define the Assumption.  He merely stated that she was assumed into heaven after “having completed the course of her earthly life”.  In the same document, however, the Pope indicates, in numerous places, that the Blessed Mother did die before being assumed into heaven, and he cites multiple sources to support this belief.  For example, he quotes the following from the sacramentary that Pope Adrian I sent to the Emperor Charlemagne: "Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death…”, as well as the Byzantine liturgy, which says:  "God, the King of the universe, has granted you favors that surpass nature. As he kept you a virgin in childbirth, thus he has kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb."  He also quotes St. Alphonsus, who wrote: “Jesus did not wish to have the body of Mary corrupted after death…”, and St. Francis De Sales, who asked: “What son would not bring his mother back to life and would not bring her into paradise after her death if he could?" 

There is a solid tradition, in both the East and West, that the Blessed Mother suffered death before being assumed into heaven.  In the eighth Century, St. John of Damascus (676-749) formulated the tradition of the Church of Jerusalem as follows:

“St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven”. (Catholic Encyclopedia)

In the Mystical City of God, Ven. Mary of Agreda recounts the same events as described above, but adds many more details, including a little-known privilege that was granted to the Blessed Mother.  The events concerning the Transition of the Blessed Mother were revealed to her in detail: She saw Our Lord “descend from heaven on a throne of ineffable glory, accompanied by all the Saints and innumerable angels”.  He spoke to her the following words: “My dearest Mother, whom I have chosen for my dwelling place, the hour is come in which thou art to pass from this life… into the glory of My Father and Mine, where thou shalt possess the throne prepared for thee at my right hand….  And since, by my power and as my Mother, I have caused thee to enter the world free and exempt from sin, therefore also death shall have no right or permission to touch thee at thy exit from this world.  If thou wishest not to pass through it, come with Me now to partake of my glory, which thou hast merited”.  The blessed Mother responded: “My Son and Lord… thou, who art my true God, hast suffered death without being obliged to do so; it is proper that, as I have followed Thee in life, so I follow Thee also in death”.   The Lord approved of this request, and the Blessed Mother pronounced the same words as Our Lord when He expired on the cross – “Into thy hands, O Lord, I commend my Spirit” – then closed her eyes and expired.  In the book The Glories of Mary, St. Alphonsus quotes Bernardine de Bustis as follows: “Mary, by a singular privilege granted to no other Saint, loved, and was always actually loving God, in every moment of her life, with such ardor that, as St. Bernard declares, it required a continued miracle to preserve her life in the midst of such flames” (pg 411). Interestingly, according to Ven. Mary of Agreda, it was the suspension of this miracle that resulted in her death.  It was revealed to her that the Blessed Virgin Mary “died at the moment when the divine power suspended the assistance, which until then had counteracted the sensible ardors of her burning love of God.  As soon as this miraculous assistance was withdrawn, the fire of her love consumed the life-humors of her heart and thus caused the cessation of her earthly existence” (Vol. 4, pgs 625-627). 

The Lord was so pleased with this final sacrifice of His mother, in choosing to follow Him in death, that He granted her a new privilege for the benefit of her spiritual children.  The Blessed Mother explained this privilege in the following words spoken to Ven. Mary of Agreda:

“My daughter, besides what thou hast understood and written of my glorious Transition, I wish to inform thee of another privilege, which was conceded to me by my divine son in that hour.  Thou hast already recorded, that the Lord offered me the choice of entering into beatific vision with or without passing through the portals of death. … I chose death freely in order to imitate and follow Him. … Since I had seen my Son and true God die, I would not have satisfied the love I owe Him, if I had refused death, and I would have left a great gap in my conformity to and my imitation of my Lord, the God-man, whereas He wished me to bear a great likeness to Him in His most sacred humanity. … Hence my choosing to die was so pleasing to Him, and my prudent love therein obliged Him to such an extent, that in return, He immediately conceded to me a singular favor for the benefit of the children of the Church…  It was this, that all those devoted to me, who should call upon me at the hour of death, constituting me as their Advocate in memory of my happy Transition and of my desiring to imitate Him in death, shall be under my special protection in that hour, shall have me as a defense against the demons, as a help and protection, and shall be presented by me before the tribunal of His mercy and there experience my intercession.  In consequence the Lord gave me a new power and commission and He promised to confer great helps of His grace for a good death and for a purer life on all those who, in veneration of this mystery of my precious death, should invoke my aid” (ibid. pgs. 629-630).

This privilege, granted to the Blessed Virgin Mary, will be applied to those who call upon her at the hour of death, in memory of her happy Transition, and the death she willed to endure.  One way to remember this privilege, and thereby profit from it, is to form the habit of recalling it when saying the Forth Glorious Mystery of the Rosary (the Assumption).  In addition to offering this decade for the grace of a holy death, we should offer it in honor of the privilege granted to the Blessed Mother, as a result of her holy death, asking for the grace to call upon her at the hour of our death; for “they are certainly saved and reign in heaven for whom the Queen of mercy intercedes”. (Bl. Denis the Carthusian)   

Prayer: Most Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God, my Mother and Advocate.  In honor of thy glorious Transition and the death you willed to endure in imitation of thy Divine Son, and in honor of the privilege you received through your death, I beseech thee, that thou wouldst assist me at the hour of my death, and present me to thy Divine Son, asking that He be merciful to me, as a favor to thee.  And should I, in my final agony, forget to call upon thee, do thou, O Most Blessed Virgin Mary, remember this prayer, and do not forget to intercede for me.  Amen. 

 

The Glorious Patriarch St. Joseph

The Glorious Patriarch St. Joseph

By Robert J. Siscoe

(This article was published in the March 2012 issue of Catholic Family News - cfnews.org)

 On March 19, we celebrate the feast of St. Joseph, foster father of our Lord Jesus Christ and Patron of the Universal Church.  The genealogy of St. Joseph, as recorded in the Gospel of St. Matthew, includes fourteen Patriarchs from Abraham to David, fourteen Kings from David to the transmigration to Babylon; and fourteen princes or chiefs of the people from the time of the transmigration up to the birth of Christ.  St. Joseph was a descendent of King David, through the line of Salatheil and Zorobabel (Mt. 1), who were the rightful heirs of David’s throne.  The genealogy in the Gospel of St. Luke traces our Lord’s royal blood line through the Blessed Mother, from whom he received his human nature (Romans 1:3).  While our Lord received his royal blood from His mother, he was heir to the throne of David through St. Joseph, his father according to the law.  If the Jews, rather than the Romans, governed the Holy Land at the time of our Lord’s birth, it would have been St. Joseph, not Herod, who would have reigned as King of the Jews.  “In the veins of St. Joseph, therefore, flowed the blood of David and Solomon, and of all the noble kings of Judah. If his dynasty had remained on the throne, St. Joseph would have been the heir and would have sat on the throne in his turn. … injustice had expelled his family from the throne to which he had the right. For this he was no less a king, the son of these kings of Judah, the greatest, noblest and richest in the world. Thus in the census records of Bethlehem, St. Joseph was inscribed and recognized by the Roman governor as the heir of David” (St. Peter Julian Eymard). 

As St. Joseph was the rightful heir to the throne of David, so too was his legal son, Our Lord Jesus Christ.  From this we can see that our Lord was not only King of the Jews by Divine Right, but also by right of inheritance which He derived from his legal father, St. Joseph. 

The Angelic Doctor teaches that it is a fundamental law of God, that when he chooses a person for a particular office, he endows him with the graces necessary to acquit him with the dignity and perfection of such office.  Now, St. Joseph held the singular privilege of being the earthly father of the only begotten Son of the Eternal Father.  As such, St. Joseph shared in the Divine Paternity of God the Father, as earthly father of His Divine Son.   In thus considering the role of St. Joseph, we can arrive at an appreciation of the measure of grace congruent with such an exalted position.  Regarding this point, Abbot Rupert wrote “at the same time that God formed the body of His Son from the most pure blood of the Virgin, He infused into the heart of St. Joseph His own paternal love, in order that the latter might be for the Incarnate Word upon earth, what He Himself is to the Uncreated Word in eternity”.  St. Joseph was also chosen to be the spouse of She who was the spouse of the Holy Ghost.  What graces must he have received who was not only a son of the Eternal Father, but the father of the Eternal Son, and the spouse of the spouse of the Holy Ghost?

The following is taken from the revelations of the Blessed Mother to Ven. Mary of Agreda (+1665 AD): “The heavenly Lady was either the instrumental or meritorious cause of the holiness of her spouse, or at least the final object or purpose of this holiness.  For all the vast perfections of his virtues and graces were conferred upon St. Joseph for the purpose of making of him a worthy protector and spouse of Her, whom God selected as His mother.  According to this standard, and according to the love of God for his most holy Mother, is to be measured the holiness of Saint Joseph; and… if there had been in the world a man more perfect and more worthy, the Lord would have chosen this other one for the spouse of His Mother.  Since he was chosen by God, Saint Joseph was no doubt the most perfect man upon earth.  Having created and destined him for such a high end, it is certain that God, in His almighty power, prepared and perfected him in proportion to the exaltedness of his end.” (Mystical City of God).

According to the same author, St. Joseph was 33 years of age when he was espoused to the Virgin Mary. The learned Gerson (d. 1429 AD), one of the most prominent theologians of the Council of Constance, as well as other holy writers, taught that St. Joseph was sanctified in his mother’s womb and freed from the sources of concupiscence.   

On this point, Ven. Mary of Agreda wrote: “He was sanctified in the womb of his mother seven months after his conception, and the leaven of sin was destroyed in him for the whole course of his life, never having felt any impure or disorderly movements. … The Lord hastened in him the use of his reason, perfecting it in his third year, endowing it with new graces and virtues. … At this premature age he already practiced the highest kinds of prayer and contemplation and eagerly engaged in the exercise of the virtues proper to his youth; so that, at the age of seven years or more, St. Joseph was already a perfect man in the use of it, and in holiness.  He was of a kind disposition, loving, affable, sincere, showing inclinations not only holy but angelic, growing in virtue and perfection and advancing toward his espousal with most holy Mary, by an altogether irreproachable life” (Mystical City of God).

 While some apocryphal writings claim St. Joseph was a widower with children from a prior marriage, it is the more common opinion that he was a virgin, which St. Peter Damian affirms so positively that he seems to hold it as an article of faith.

St. Joseph was the spouse of the Blessed Mother, who is the Queen of Heaven.  Now, according to ancient law, whoever espouses a queen becomes king by virtue of his marriage.  From this, St. Leonard of Port Maurice draws the following conclusion: “Mary is the Queen of the Angels and Saints; St. Joseph is the spouse of Mary, therefore, he is also King of the Angels and Saints; and consequently it is allowable to invoke him by this title, notwithstanding that the Church has consecrated the custom of addressing this invocation principally to Jesus Christ”.

The Blessed Mother spoke the following words to Ven. Mary of Agreda, about her beloved spouse St. Joseph: “My daughter, although thou hast described my spouse St. Joseph, as the most noble among the princes and Saints of the heavenly Jerusalem; yet neither canst thou properly manifest his eminent sanctity, nor can any of the mortals know it fully before they arrive at the vision of the Divinity.  Then all of them will be filled with wonder and praise as the Lord will make them capable of understanding… The whole human race has much undervalued the privileges and prerogatives conceded to my blessed spouse, and they know not what his intercession with God is able to do.  I assure thee, my dearest, that he is one of the greatly favored personages in the divine presence and has immense power to stay the arms of divine vengeance  …  From now on, during the rest of thy mortal life, see that thou advance in devotion and in hearty love toward my spouse, and that thou bless the Lord for thus having favored him with such high privileges and for having rejoiced with me so much in the knowledge of all his excellences.  In all thy necessities thou must avail thyself of his intercession” (Mystical City of God, Vol 3., pg 167).

St. Theresa of Avila speaks of her devotion to St. Joseph and the power of his intercession in the following words: "I took for my advocate and lord the glorious Saint Joseph and commended myself earnestly to him… I do not remember even now that I have ever asked anything of him which he has failed to grant. I am astonished at the great favors which God has bestowed on me through this blessed Saint, and at the perils from which He has freed me, both in body and in soul. To other Saints the Lord seems to have given grace to succor us in some of our necessities, but of this glorious Saint my experience is that he succors us in them all, and that the Lord wishes to teach us that as He was Himself subject to him on earth (for, being His guardian and being called His father, he could command Him) just so in Heaven He still does all that he asks. This has also been the experience of other persons whom I have advised to commend themselves to him; and even to-day there are many who have great devotion to him through having newly experienced this truth. (…)  I wish I could persuade everyone to be devoted to this glorious Saint, for I have great experience of the blessings which he can obtain from God. I have never known anyone to be truly devoted to him and render him particular services who did not notably advance in virtue, for he gives very real help to souls who commend themselves to him (…).  I only beg, for the love of God, that anyone who does not believe me will put what I say to the test, and he will see by experience what great advantages come from his commending himself to this glorious patriarch and having devotion to him”.

According to Ven. Mary of Agreda, St. Joseph died at the age of sixty, in the 26^th year of our Lord, while in the holy presence of both Jesus and Mary.  It is the opinion of many pious authors that St. Joseph was one of those who rose from the dead, body and soul, after the resurrection of Jesus (Mt. 27:33), and that he ascended into heaven bodily, fifty days later.  According to St. Francis De Sales “St. Joseph is in heaven body and soul, of this there can be no doubt”. 

The Blessed Mother informed St. Bridget that Holy St. Joseph frequently repeated the words “May heaven grant that I may live so as to accomplish the will of God”.  And she added: “Therefore it is that the glory of St. Joseph is so great”.  As we know from our Lord, what makes one truly great is not whose parent they are, or what lineage they descend from (Mt. 3:9) but rather how well their life conforms to the Will of God (Luke 11:28).  Therefore, let us imitate that in St. Joseph which made him truly great: Let us seek in all things that our life may be in conformity with the Holy Will of God.  And let us not neglect to petition the glorious Saint Joseph in all our needs, putting the following words of the Blessed Mother into practice: “In all thy necessities thou must avail thyself of his intercession”.

 (Note from the author: Some of the information in this article was taken from the book The Divine Favors Granted to St. Joseph, published by TAN.)