Friday, February 16, 2024

Divine Mercy loathes tepidity, lukewarmness

‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold— I am about to spit you out of my mouth’. Revelation 3:15-16 For the ninth day, Christ asked Saint Faustina to pray for the sake of all the souls who have become lukewarm in their belief. She recorded the following words of Our Lord in her diary: “Today bring to Me the Souls who have become Lukewarm, and immerse them in the abyss of My mercy. These souls wound My Heart most painfully. My soul suffered the most dreadful loathing in the Garden of Olives because of lukewarm souls. They were the reason I cried out: ‘Father, take this cup away from Me, if it be Your will.’ For them, the last hope of salvation is to run to My mercy.” Divine Mercy Novena Taken from: https://www.thedivinemercy.org/articles/when-lukewarm-soul-reheated When a Lukewarm Soul is Reheated MAY 07 2019 David Van Sise, a recovering lukewarm soul, knows all about that particular character flaw that keeps some souls from stepping out in faith. He knows, for instance, what Jesus told St. Faustina about lukewarm souls - that "My soul suffered the most dreadful loathing in the Garden of Olives because of lukewarm souls" (Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska, 1228). And how does the Lord define lukewarm souls? As "souls who thwart My efforts" (Diary, 1682). Thwarting Jesus' efforts certainly was never David's intention. But in retrospect, a spiritually lukewarm David Van Sise meant that, among other things, Jesus' Divine Mercy message wasn't reaching certain hardened criminals in a New Jersey maximum security federal prison. That's no longer the case. David, an insurance industry executive from East Windsor, New Jersey, now engages in prison ministry, each week going cell to cell helping the greatest of sinners come to know of God's love for them. His own lukewarm faith began heating up in 2014 when he discovered a Marian Press pamphlet explaining the Divine Mercy Chaplet. "It spoke to my heart," said David. "I said to my wife, Chrystyna, 'This St. Faustina - she has a Diary, too.' Chrystyna said, 'I know,' and she pulled it out and handed it to me. I just kept reading and reading the Diary. I'm still reading it." He felt the call to learn every-thing he could about Divine Mercy. Eventually, he learned of the National Shrine of The Divine Mercy. He and Chrystyna visited. During Mass, he felt the Lord speak to his heart, telling him to come to the Shrine on the first Sunday of every month and to bring people with him. He's been doing that ever since. "I went from being a lukewarm Catholic, raised in the faith, but I didn't live my faith," he said. "I lived as if I wasn't worthy of God's love. But then I read the Diary and came to know that God's mercy is for everybody - the greater the sinner, the greater the right I have to His mercy (see Diary, 723). I realized He never turned His back to me. He was waiting for me with His arms stretched." During the Church's extraordinary Jubilee Year of Mercy three years ago, David vowed to obey the command Jesus gave to the world through St. Faustina when He said, "I demand from you deeds of mercy, which are to arise out of love for Me" (Diary, 742). He decided to spend the year engaging in each of the works of mercy. But when he got to "Visit the imprisoned," he seized up. "That's just not for me," he concluded. But he eventually went to a workshop led by prison ministers and felt called to help out. Now he looks forward to his weekly prison visits. Each week, in the prison's toughest section, he goes cell to cell and offers himself as a merciful presence and listening ear. He offers the inmates materials on Divine Mercy and Our Lady. He offers to pray for them. "I make the Sign of the Cross, and I do my best to ask the Lord to speak through me and give me the words that are going to bring some light to them," David says. "And many times afterwards they're like, 'Wow, man. Thanks a lot. That was really good.'" Why does he choose to minister to an inmate population whom society has declared the worst of the worst? "What I see is that they thirst for something," David says. "They have an emptiness in their hearts, and many of them have spent their whole lives filling that with drugs, alcohol, pornography, and other vices, and there's never been an opportunity for them to put anything good inside that emptiness." He has witnessed conversions. Mostly, he's witnessed inmates finding comfort in the simple fact that someone cares and that Jesus never gives up on us.

Saturday, February 10, 2024

Immaculate Conception made visible at Lourdes

We read at: https://militia-immaculatae.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Lourdes_Booklet_EN.pdf …. In 1914, as a clerical student Saint Maximilian was miraculously cured by means of water from Lourdes. To have lost his right thumb could have prevented him from receiving priestly orders. His miraculous cure was a visible sign of Mary’s care of his priestly vocation. During his life Saint Maximilian Kolbe visited Lourdes only once. It was on the 30th of January 1930, before undertaking his mission to the Far East. In Lourdes Saint Maximilian celebrated the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the Basilica, he prayed the rosary in the Grotto, he drank the miraculous water and he sank his finger in the water, he kissed the rock in the Grotto and he commended his prayers to Mary. Summarising his visit to Lourdes, he stressed the experience of a great love of His "Mamusia (Mammy)", as he fondly called the Immaculata. The apparitions in Lourdes had a special place in the Marian treaty begun by Father Maximilian (which he never completed). The Saint gave a description of the apparitions. However, most of all, St. Maximilian discussed the meaning of the name 'Immaculate Conception': "The Immaculate Conception — this privilege must be particularly dear to her if, at Lourdes, this is how she herself wanted to be called: I am the Immaculate Conception. These words must indicate accurately and in the most essential manner who she is." "'Immaculate Conception' — these words came out of the mouth of the Immaculata herself. Therefore, they must indicate accurately and in the most essential manner who she is. Who are you, O Immaculate Conception? Not God, for He has no beginning; not an angel, created directly out of nothing; not Adam, formed with the mud of the earth; not Eve, taken from Adam; and not even the Incarnate Word, who existed from eternity and is 'conceived' rather than a 'conception'. Prior to conception, the children of Eve did not exist, so they may be better called 'conception'. Yet you differ from them also, for they are conceptions contaminated by original sin, while you are the only Immaculate Conception." Also, in Lourdes, the Immaculata did not define herself as 'Conceived without sin', but, as St. Bernadette herself recounts: "At that moment the Lady was standing above the wild rose bush in the same way in which she is depicted on the Miraculous Medal. Upon my third question her face took on an expression of gravity and at the same time of profound humility… Joining the palms of her hands as if in prayer, she lifted them up to her chest… turned her gaze toward Heaven… then, slowly opening her hands and bowing to me, she said in a voice in which you could notice a slight tremor: 'Que soy era Immaculada Councepsiou!' (I am the Immaculate Conception!')". The whole meaning of the life, sufferings and death of Saint Maximilian was to underline the answer given by the Most Holy Virgin Mary to Bernadette, when she asked the Lady to reveal her name. Saint Maximilian had a desire to live by that answer as well as to feed others with it. Countless times and without rest Saint Maximilian repeated: "The Most Holy Mother, asked by Bernadette what her name was, replied: 'I am the Immaculate Conception'. This is a definition of the Immaculata." In her apparition at Lourdes, in 1858, the Mother of God held in her arms the rosary, and through Bernadette, recommended to us the recital of the Rosary. We can conclude, therefore, that the prayer of the Rosary makes the Immaculata happy. St. Maximilian Maria Kolbe Mugenzai no Sono, before October 1933 Father C.B. Daly The Meaning of Lourdes While Lourdes and its apparitions add nothing to the Church's dogmas, they do deepen our appreciation of her teachings and enliven our response to them. The need for prayer and penance, an awareness of Jesus truly present in the Eucharist, the duty of fraternal charity — all this has ever been part of Christian life. At Lourdes, however, we are confronted with these things anew. Mary there shows us their importance as a mother would, by making them more actual, one might even say tangible. By bringing us face to face with human weakness and misery in the pilgrims who come to that shrine, she pleads that we make prayer and penance, love of Jesus and charity for others the very fabric of our daily existence. It is here that she lets us see the significance of her Immaculate Conception and know the extent of her Co-redemption. The first privilege kept her free from sin and therefore empowered her to love both God and man perfectly. The other gave her the responsibility to aid us, her children, in working towards that same freedom and attaining that same love. Mary's concern at Lourdes is, then, to help us bear witness to the realities that lie hidden in the truths of faith. Lourdes and Revelation In investigating the meaning of Lourdes, one has to begin by eliminating some mistaken hypotheses. We know, for example, from general theological principles, that Lourdes cannot be intended to teach us any new truth about Mary or about the divine plan of salvation. No apparition or private revelation, however approved by the Church, could reveal to us any new truth of faith or morals, or add any truth to what is to be believed by Catholic faith. Pope Benedict XIV, as Cardinal Lambertini, in his classic work on "The Beatification and Canonization of the Servants of God", says, speaking of private revelations: Such an ecclesiastical approbation is nothing else than a permission to publish (a narrative) after mature examination, in view of the instruction and utility of the faithful... The assent of Catholic Faith to revelations thus approved is not merely not obligatory, but is not possible; (such revelations) demand only an assent of human credence in conformance with the rules of human prudence which represents them as probable and piously credible. …. Jean Guitton, speaking of mariophanies and places of Marian pilgrimage, has well said: The veneration of the faithful is not directed to the place itself, but to the mystery that is conceived to be connected with the place... It may happen that the seer of the vision is canonized; if so, it is not for his visions alone, but for the heroic virtues of his life... Suppose the worst: imagine facts come to light which throw serious doubt on the genuineness of the vision... That would take nothing at all from the truths this particular vision represented. These would not depend on any new vision; the Church already possessed them in her deposit of faith. Nor would it detract from the graces received where the vision occurred. These statements only repeat fundamental theses of the theology of faith and of revelation. In their light it is evident that it is only with qualifications that we can speak of Lourdes as having been intended by God as a miraculous confirmation of the truth of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception defined four years earlier by Pope Pius IX. This is indeed a very natural way to speak and it contains important truth. The episcopal document whereby Mgr. Laurence in 1862 gave official ecclesiastical recognition to the apparition already pointed out that, by appearing at Lourdes, and calling for a sanctuary to be built there, Our Lady seemed herself to have wished "to consecrate by a monument the infallible pronouncement of the successor of St. Peter." The popes themselves have spoken in this way. Pope St. Pius X, in his encyclical for the fiftieth anniversary of the Definition of 1854, wrote: Pope Pius IX had hardly defined as of Catholic faith the truth that Mary was from her conception exempt from sin, when there began at Lourdes the marvellous manifestations of Our Lady. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical for the centenary of Lourdes recalled a statement from his earlier encyclical, Fulgens Corona, that the Blessed Virgin Mary herself wished, it would seem, to confirm by a marvellous event the definition which her Son’s Vicar on earth had a short time before proclaimed. However, the Pope in the same centenary encyclical noted that The infallible word of the Roman Pontiff, authentic interpreter of revealed truth, needed no heavenly confirmation in order to command the belief of the faithful. But yet, he continued: With what emotion and what gratitude the Christian people and its pastors received from the lips of Bernadette the reply coming from Heaven, "I am the Immaculate Conception." These words of Pope Pius XII are the most accurate expression of the matter. In one sense Lourdes cannot confirm the truth of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, because we are more sure of the truth of the dogma than we are of the reality of the apparitions. For the former we have divine authority; for the latter we have strictly only human credibility. Yet, in the concrete case, these distinctions seem somewhat academic and unreal. Lourdes does not add any new ground of objective certitude to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception; but it does confirm our personal apprehension of that truth. Perhaps we might use Newman's formula, and say that Lourdes helps to change our attitude towards the dogma from a notional into a real assent. Mary's mission at Lourdes was not to reveal new truths, but to give us a deeper realization of the truths revealed by her Son once and for all time, the truths she kept while on earth and pondered in her heart. It is, therefore, theologically inexact and inadvisable to speak of Lourdes and the other great Marian manifestations of modern times as marking a new and Marian epoch in the economy of redemption. Preachers sometimes speak of this as the Age of Mary and develop their theme by suggesting that God first sent His Son to draw mankind to His love; and when men refused to come to His Son, He in the last times sends them Mary. Frequently implicated with this theme is another and probably more serious aberration which crept into certain mariological expressions and images since the sixteenth century. This trend of thought would have it that, as between Jesus and Mary, Mary provides the pity and the pleas to Jesus for mercy, and Jesus the rigour of divine justice and wrath towards sinners. Such language and imagery are, of course, devotional rather than theological, and it is perhaps unfair to assess them by rigorous theological criteria. Rightly interpreted, the apparitions at Lourdes and a century of Lourdes devotion stand opposed to these aberrant concepts and constitute a recall to the traditional and true theology of Our Lady. "I am the Immaculate Conception" It is natural to look for some centre of unity amid the diversity of facts and words associated with Lourdes. There can be no doubt that this centre was provided by Our Lady herself when on the 25th of March 1858 she at last spoke the word that all had been waiting, praying and hoping for. She spoke her name. She said: "I am the Immaculate Conception." Nothing more surely attests to the doctrinal soundness and the supernatural origin of the apparitions than these words. Bernadette did not know what they meant. Her cousin, Jeanne Vedere, who had the story directly from Bernadette at the time, describes how Bernadette had to repeat the words over and over again on her way to tell them to the Curé for fear of forgetting them; and that when M. Peyramale asked her what the words meant, she confessed that she did not know. This apparition was always the climax of Bernadette's narration of the events of Massabielle. She accompanied her narration with a re-enactment of the gestures of Our Lady as she spoke the words. Our Lady had had her hands joined, with the Rosary hanging from her right arm. In response to Bernadette's thricerepeated appeal to her to declare her name she smiled, then extended her arms downwards in the attitude of the Virgin of the Miraculous Medal, so that the Rosary slipped towards her wrist; then joined her hands again upon her breast and with eyes raised towards Heaven, spoke with indescribable humility and tenderness the words, "I am the Immaculate Conception." Bernadette's repetition of these gestures and words made an unforgettable impression on all who witnessed it. The sculptor, M. Fabisch, who had already executed the statuary of La Salette, and was chosen to make the first statue of Our Lady of Lourdes, came in 1863 to hear from Bernadette herself the description of the Lady of her visions. He asked her to describe the scene of the Lady's self-revelation. He later wrote: The girl stood up with perfect simplicity. She joined her hands and raised her eyes towards Heaven... But neither Fra Angelico, nor Perugino, nor Raphael has ever created anything so gentle, and at the same time so profound as the look of that little girl... I shall never forget, as long as I live, the beauty of that expression. There is no doubt, then, that the sixteenth apparition, and Our Lady's words on that occasion, are the heart of Lourdes and the key to its whole meaning. Bernadette herself, who deplored the fact that too many people skim over the surface of things, remarked: "I would like to see emphasis placed on the apparition in which the Blessed Virgin declared her identity." Everything in the story of Lourdes is related to and made meaningful by the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The grammar of Our Lady's words is strange and cannot be accidental. The authenticity of the words has been questioned on theological grounds: how could Our Lady be her Immaculate Conception? But the construction surely invites juxtaposition with two sentences from the New Testament. The first is that in which St. Paul says of Our Lord: "Him who knew no sin (God) hath made sin for us, that we might be made the justice of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21). The second is that in which Our Lady herself says, "Behold the handmaid of the Lord"; in other words, "I am the slave of the Lord; I am nothing but the fulfiller of His will." St. Paul says that God made Christ sin, that we might be made the justice of God in Christ. But in Mary and in her alone the divine plan of redemption is already and fully and finally realized. Through Christ, her Son, she is already made "the justice of God." She is the justice of God accomplished. She is the Immaculate Conception, in whom through Christ sin is totally defeated. Christ was made sin that she might be sinless. Christ was made sin for us; she is made "anti-sin" in order that she may be the model of the sinlessness that we, poor sinners, must painfully, penitentially labour to achieve in Christ. But Mary's sinlessness is not merely a state which she passively receives. It is also a total, dedicated disposition of will which she actively lives and is. In this sense also she is her Immaculate Conception; that is to say, she is the justice of God; she is the complete fulfiller of all the justice of His just will. "I am the Immaculate Conception" was Our Lady's repetition, on the Feast of the Annunciation, 1858, of the words she spoke at the Annunciation itself: "I am the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to Thy word."

Friday, February 2, 2024

“Sacred Heart of Jesus, burning with love of us, inflame our hearts with love of Thee”

by Damien F. Mackey “May we stand within the fire Of your Sacred Heart, and raise To our God in joyful choir All creation’s song of praise”. James P. McAuley Professor James P. McAuley, the author of this great hymn to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, biblically symbolised in this stanza by king Nebuchednezzar’s Fiery Furnace (Daniel 3:8-38), was my teacher of English around 1970, when I was doing a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of Tasmania. I recall that professor McAuley was an extremely rigorous teacher, invariably returning one’s essays covered with his red inked, highly-critical comments. For more, see my article: MEMORIES OF AUSTRALIAN POET, PROFESSOR JAMES P. MCAULEY (5) Memories of Australian poet, professor James P. McAuley | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu His mystical hymn (Jesus, in Your Heart We Find, Gather Australia, 464) reads in full: Jesus, in your heart we find Love of the Father and mankind. These two loves to us impart – Divine love in a human heart. May we stand within the fire Of your Sacred Heart, and raise To our God in joyful choir All creation’s song of praise. In our hearts from roots of pride Deadly growths of evil flower; But from Jesus’ wounded side Streams the sacramental power. To the depths within your heart Draw us with divine desire, Hide us, heal us, and impart Your own love’s transforming fire. The fiercely anti-Communist James McAuley, who was born in Sydney (Australia) in 1917 (my father William was born in Tasmania that very same year), moved to Hobart (Tasmania) in 1960, where his large family stayed for a time with our large family, in Lenah Valley. This fact never gets mentioned in any of the biographies of the professor that I have read. However, I certainly recall the cramped accommodation endured at the time, and some of the incidents associated with it all. The McAuley family became prominent musically (even including drums in the choir) in our local parish church, appropriately Sacred Heart, in New Town. Here is one brief biography of “James McAuley (1917 - 1976)”: https://www.poetrylibrary.edu.au/poets/mcauley-james James McAuley was born in Lakemba, in the western suburbs of Sydney, in 1917, the son of grazier and real estate speculator, Patrick McAuley, and his wife Mary (née Judge). He spent most of his childhood at Homebush, where the family moved after his father’s retirement, and attended Homebush Public School. Displaying early literary and musical talents, McAuley was sent to the selective public school Fort Street Boys High School, where he became school captain and won prizes for his writing; a number of his earliest poems appeared in the school magazine, The Fortian. In 1935 he matriculated to the University of Sydney, where he studied English and philosophy. At university he continued to hone his poetic craft, contributing poems to the student magazine Hermes, where he also became one of the editors. After graduating with a B.A. (Hons) in 1938, he went on to complete an M.A., writing a thesis on the influence of symbolism in English, French and German literature. From the late 1930s he supported himself in various tutoring and teaching positions, and in 1942 took up a teacher’s scholarship, completed a Diploma of Education and was appointed to Newcastle Boys Junior High School. In June 1942 he married a fellow teacher, Norma Elizabeth Abernethy. In January 1943, McAuley was called up for national service in the Militia, and quickly transferred to the Australian Imperial Force. In January 1944 he was commissioned in the Melbourne-based Army Directorate of Civil Affairs, where he renewed his association with another Fort Street graduate, Harold Stewart. While working at the Army Directorate in 1944, McAuley and Stewart concocted the ‘Ern Malley’ hoax, intending to expose what they saw as a lack of meaning in modernist literature and art. The target of the hoax was Max Harris, the Adelaide-based editor of Angry Penguins magazine and champion of literary modernism. When Harris took the bait and published the poems of ‘Ern Malley,’ Stewart and McAuley were (eventually) revealed as the actual authors, and admitted having concocted a fictitious identity for ‘Ern’ and using partly random composition methods to produce the poems. While the hoax did cause significant embarrassment to Harris—and has been seen by some as inhibiting the development of literary modernism in Australia—the poems of ‘Ern Malley’ have remained in print and continue to be a subject of significant critical debate: a consequence Stewart and McAuley surely did not intend. In 1946, McAuley published his first collection of poetry (in his own name), Under Aldebaran. After the war, McAuley became a lecturer at the Australian School of Pacific Administration, first in Canberra then Sydney, a position he retained until 1959. While at the School he became deeply interested in the then Australian administered Territory of Papua and New Guinea, and was profoundly influenced by the Roman Catholic missionary archbishop Alain Marie Guynot de Boismenu (1870–1953). In 1952, McAuley converted to Catholicism, which would henceforth have a defining influence on his intellectual life. Immersing himself in Cold War politics, he became associated with the radical Catholic ideologue B.A. Santamaria, and was instrumental in the anti-Communist agitation that split the Labor movement and resulted in formation of the Democratic Labor Party in the mid-1950s. In 1955, he joined the Australian branch of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, a conservative, anti-Communist organisation, funded in part by the CIA, and became editor of its journal, Quadrant. McAuley’s reputation as a poet was furthered with the publication of his second collection, A Vision of Ceremony, in 1956, and his credentials as a conservative public intellectual were bolstered by the publication of a collection of critical essays, The End of Modernity: Essays on Literature, Art and Culture (1959). In 1960 McAuley and his family moved to Hobart, where he took up a position at the University of Tasmania, and the following year he was appointed to the chair of English at the University. Despite his academic duties he continued to write and publish poetry, including his epic poem Captain Quiros (1964), and the collection Surprises of the Sun (1969), which included a poem sequence ‘On the Western Line,’ based on McAuley’s childhood experiences in the Western suburbs of Sydney. During the 1960s he also published a number of critical works, including a monograph on the work of Christopher Brennan (1963), a general introduction to poetics, A Primer of English Versification (1966), and a book-length study of Australian poetry entitled The Personal Element in Australian Poetry (1970). He did not abandon his interest in politics, publishing and organising in support of Australian involvement in the Vietnam War. In 1970, McAuley was diagnosed with bowel cancer. After recovering from the illness, he devoted increased time and energy to ensuring his literary legacy. His Collected Poems appeared in 1971, and was a joint winner of the Grace Leven Prize in that year. In 1975, he published a second collection of his essays, The Grammar of the Real: Selected Prose, 1959–1974, and a collection of his critical work on Australian poetry, A Map of Australian Verse: The Twentieth Century. Two collections of his later poetry appeared in 1976: Time Given: Poems 1970–1976, and Music Late at Night: Poems 1970–1973. Early in 1976, McAuley was diagnosed with liver cancer; he died on 15 October that year, in Hobart. His posthumous publications included the poetry collection, ‘A World of its Own’ (1977), a collection of his writing edited by his long-time friend Leonie Kramer (James McAuley: Poetry, Essays and Personal Commentary, UQP, 1988), and a revised volume of his Collected Poems (1994). A significant and often controversial figure in the Australian post-War literary landscape, McAuley’s achievement as a poet has in recent years often been overshadowed by debates over his role as a right-wing intellectual. While unquestionably seen as a major Australian poet in his own time, it is a lasting irony that critical interest in McAuley’s work since his death has been largely eclipsed by the interest in his short-lived creation ‘Ern Malley.’ [End of quote] It is rumoured that McAuley, when told that he would need to have part of his colon removed, and ever the grammarian, quipped: “Better a semi-colon than a full stop!” The Fiery Heart of Jesus Catholics, particularly, like to see in king Nebuchednezzar’s Fiery Furnace, in which the three youths sang their hymns of praise to God the Creator, a symbol of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. For, those who choose to live mystically within the fiery Heart of Jesus are not harmed, but, instead, are filled with inexpressible joy and an exuberant praise of God. There is a saying that we must either burn within the Heart of Jesus, or we burn outside of It. The latter is a most harmful and unpleasant burning. And it can be fully realised in Hell. Stephen Beale has written an article (2018) for the purpose of “Explaining the strange symbolism of the Sacred Heart”: https://aleteia.org/2018/06/08/explaining-the-strange-symbolism-of-the-sacred-heart/ What do the flames, light, arrows, and crown of thorns mean? The Sacred Heart is among the most familiar and moving of Catholic devotional images. But its symbolism can also be strange. As we mark the Feast of the Sacred Heart early this month, here is a look at the explanation behind some of the features of the Sacred Heart. The flames. The Sacred Heart most obviously brings to mind the Passion of Christ on the cross. There is the crown of thorns, the cross, usually atop the heart, and the wound from the spear that pierced His side. But why is the Sacred Heart always shown as if it’s on fire? That certainly did not happen at the crucifixion. There are three reasons behind this. First, we have to remember that Christ’s self-offering on the cross was the one-time perfect consummation of all the sacrifices of the Old Testament. This necessarily includes burnt offerings, which were the highest form of sacrifices in ancient Israel, according to The Jewish Encyclopedia. An early form of such sacrifices was what Abraham set out to do with Isaac, hence the wood he had his son collect beforehand. Second, fire is always associated with the essence of divinity in the Old Testament. Think back to the burning bush that spoke to Moses, the cloud of fire that settled on Sinai, and the flames from above that consumed the sacrifice of Elijah. This explanation fits with the gospel account of the crucifixion, in which the piercing of Christ’s side revealed His heart at the same time that the curtain of the temple was torn, unveiling the holy of holies where God was present. Finally, the image of fire associated with heart represents Christ’s passionate love for us. One 19th-century French devotional card has these words arched above the Sacred Heart—Voilà ce Cœur qui a tant aimé les hommes, which roughly translates to: “Here is the heart that loved men so much.” One traditional exclamation is, “Sacred Heart of Jesus, burning with love of us, inflame our hearts with love of Thee.” We see this actually happen in the gospels, where the disciples on the road to Emmaus realized that their hearts had been “burning” after their encounter with Jesus. …. The rays of light. Look closer at the image of the Sacred Heart. There is something else framing it besides the flames. They are rays of light. In John 8:12, Christ declares that He is the “light of the world.” In Revelation 21:23, we are told that in the new Jerusalem at the end of times there will be no light from the sun or moon because the Lamb of God—that is, Jesus—will be its source of light. Light, like fire, is a symbol of divinity. Think of the Transfiguration and the blinding light that Paul experienced on the road to Damascus. As the light of the world, Christ is also the one who “enlightens” us, revealing God to us. The Sacred Heart constitutes the climax of divine self-revelation, showing us the depths of God’s love for us. …. The arrows. The crown of thorns and the spear make sense. But sometimes the Sacred Heart is also depicted with arrows. Again, that’s not something we find in the gospels. One explanation is that the arrow represents sin. This is reportedly what our Lord Himself said in a private revelation to St. Mary of St. Peter. (See here for more.) The arrow could also draw upon an ancient Roman metaphor for love, which, according to ancient myth, occurred when the god Cupid shot an arrow through the hearts of lovers (as this author points out). The crown of thorns. Unlike the arrows, the crown of thorns is reported in the gospels. But in traditional images it encircles the Sacred Heart, whereas in Scripture the crown was fixed to Jesus’ head. One traditional account offers this interpretation, describing those who are devoted to it: “They saw the crown transferred from His head to His heart; they felt that its sharp points had always pierced there; they understood that the Passion was the crucifixion of a heart” (The Heart of the Gospel: Traits of the Sacred Heart by Francis Patrick Donnelly, published in 1911 by the Apostleship of Prayer). In other words, wrapping the crown around the heart emphasizes the fact that Christ felt His wounds to the depths of His heart. Moreover, after the resurrection, the crown of thorns becomes a crown of victory. Donnelly hints at this as well: “From the weapons of His enemy, from cross and crown and opened Heart, our conquering leader fashioned a trophy which was the best testimony of His love.” In ancient gladiatorial contests, the victor was crowned. In the Revelation 19:12, Christ wears “many crowns” and believers who are victorious over sin and Satan will receive the “crown of life” (Revelation 2:10). Finally, according to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, the seventeenth French nun who helped start the devotion, the points of the thorns are the many individual sins of people, pricking the heart of Jesus. As she put it in a letter, recounting the personal vision she had received, “I saw this divine Heart as on a throne of flames, more brilliant than the sun and transparent as crystal. It had Its adorable wound and was encircled with a crown of thorns, which signified the pricks our sins caused Him.” The cross. Like the thorns, the cross is both rooted in the gospels but also displayed in a way that does not follow them in every detail. There is almost an inversion of the crucifixion. In the gospels, Christ hung on the cross, His heart correspondingly dwarfed by its beams. But in images of the Sacred Heart, it is now enlarged and the cross has shrunk. Moreover, rather than the heart being nailed to the cross, the cross now seems ‘planted’ in the heart—as St. Margaret Mary Alacoque put it—if to say to us that the entire reality of the crucifixion derives its meaning from and—cannot be understood apart from—the heart of Jesus. As Donnelly wrote, “The Heart [is] … forever supporting the weight of a Cross.” Truly, it is the heart of Jesus that makes the cross meaningful for us today.

Thursday, February 1, 2024

Predicted Fatima Light of 1938 – red like the sky was all in flames

We read at: https://www.thedivinemercy.org/articles/strange-and-unknown-light 'A STRANGE AND UNKNOWN LIGHT' JAN 07 2019 On Jan. 25, 1938, fear struck the hearts of millions around the world. A bizarre phenomenon lit up the sky across Europe and could even be seen as far west as Bermuda. Many thought the world was ending. The next day, the newspapers were calling it an aurora borealis. But others remembered what Our Lady of Fatima had told the three shepherd children on July 13, 1917. She said, "When you see a night illuminated by an unknown light, know that it is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its crimes by means of war, famine and persecution of the Church and the Holy Father." Less than a month later, Hitler marched his army into Austria, and in September, he invaded Poland. It's unclear whether or not St. Faustina saw this light, but in a Diary entry dated Jan. 25, 1938, she wrote, "I saw the anger of God hanging heavy over Poland. And now I see that if God were to visit our country with the greatest chastisements, that would still be great mercy because, for such grave transgressions, He could punish us with eternal annihilation" (1533). Herman Carvalho of Clinton Corners, New York, didn't know much about Our Lady of Fatima or the mercy of God when he was just 7 years old. But living in a remote village in Portugal, he indeed witnessed this astonishing sight. At dusk, he was outside playing near his mother who was doing chores. He wandered toward an iron gate leading to the road when he noticed something in the northern part of the sky. "What I saw I can never forget because it was so real," he said. "Far away as far as my eyes could see, I saw something coming up from the ground. It went up to the sky and was going up. But then I didn't look anymore and I started to play." Herman didn't think to tell anyone what he had seen. About a half an hour later, while the Carvalhos ate dinner together, they heard people outside crying. "We went to the terrace, and we were going to ask the people why they were crying," he said. Looking out over the surrounding olive trees to the other end of the landscape, they saw the sky burn a vibrant red. "It was as red as red can be ... like in flames," he said. The rest of the sky was completely dark. "I remember my father saying, 'If this falls on top of us, we all die,'" he said. "It was scary, and I never saw that again in my life." As little Herman shook from fright, his mother took him to her bedroom to calm him down. She told him to look at a picture of Our Lady of Fatima that she had hanging in her room. She told him to pray. "I believe it very much because I never forgot. I've told numerous people what happened that it's true," he said. "It was unbelievable."

‘Unknown Light’ of 1938

“The intensity of this extraordinary celestial spectacle, its splendid brightness, its enormous extent, its extreme rarity at this intensity especially in our regions, and even more so in this season of the year, seemed worthy to us of being pointed out to the Society immediately”. Astronomical Society of France Fatima 13th July, 1917: ‘When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church’. The following eye-witness accounts of what pilots flying in the air at the time were to describe as “a shimmering curtain of fire” - including those accounts written up in the Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of France and Monthly Review of Astronomy of 1938 - reveal the apparently unprecedented nature of this terrifying doomsday phenomenon http://motheofgod.com/threads/aurora-borealis-of-1938.4360/ 1. Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of France and Monthly Review of Astronomy, Meteorology and Globular Physics”, in the year 1938. An aurora borealis of exceptional beauty was visible in France and in almost all the countries of Europe, from the evening of Tuesday, January 25, 1938, to the morning of Wednesday, the 26th. In Switzerland, in England as well as in the regions of the West, Southwest and Southeast, right down to Provence, and even further south, in Italy and Portugal, in Sicily and Gibraltar, and even in North Africa, the phenomenon showed an exceptional intensity for these latitudes... The atmosphere had been cloudy and there had even been a slight drizzle around dusk. The sun had been invisible all day. But now, more than two hours after sunset, the clouds are dispelled. The northeast, northern and northwest horizons light up as though dawn were going to break all over again. For practical purposes it is dawn... but a nocturnal dawn, with a strange light; it is the aurora borealis. A pale, beautiful, greenish-blue light envelops the sky from northeast to northwest. Gradually, up above the sky turns fiery red and an irregular red arch appears. A sort of cloud tinged with purple condenses in the northeast and moves over towards the northwest, as if propelled by a mysterious breath. It folds over, undulates, dilates, vanishes and then reappears, while immense rays, whose colour passes from blood-red to orange-red to yellow, rise up to the zenith of the sky, enveloping the stars. The spectacle is enchanting and varied, animated with luminous palpitations, with extinctions and recrudescences. In the streets there is panic. “Paris is on fire!” In several villages of the province firemen are mobilized...» «An immense blood-red glow was extending over the sky...» The review then gives a great number of statements from its correspondents, both from France and from foreign countries. Here are some significant excerpts: At the observatory of pic du Midi: «This remarkable aurora was the first ever observed from the station of pic du Midi. It constitutes a rare phenomenon for this latitude... The first impression was of a gigantic conflagration...» At La Chapelle-Saint-Laud, in Maine-et-Loire, the teacher kept this description given by one of his students, aged ten: «Yesterday evening there was a great red cloud; it was like a sheet of blood, then the cloud grew larger, forming great red threads, which kept going up, and below that, white threads, like chalk lines. In Oise, Mr. Henri Blain - at first believed that it was the grim reflection of a vast inferno... Many of the villagers, struck by the anomaly and intensity of the phenomenon, observed somewhat nervously from the window sills of their houses... These red glows were visible, then disappeared, and later on reappeared after a more or less lengthy period of time... These luminous manifestations sometimes went up very high in the sky, and in colour and luminosity they were absolutely comparable to the very vivid reflections of a violent, nearby inferno... The intensity of this extraordinary celestial spectacle, its splendid brightness, its enormous extent, its extreme rarity at this intensity especially in our regions, and even more so in this season of the year, seemed worthy to us of being pointed out to the Society immediately. In Picardie: «At a quarter past five, noticed in the north-northwesterly direction a red glow which first attributed as being the result of a far-off inferno... Ten minutes later, the great purple spot was extending above our heads right up to Orion; other smaller and paler ones formed and disappeared in their turn. A few moments later, the blazing sky was being reflected in our faces; my wife, who was admiring the phenomenon at my side, appeared to me in a red reflection which seemed to me unreal. At a quarter to eight, the red glow reached its maximum intensity, almost the whole sky seemed to be on fire. A second drapery was quickly lit up, its luminosity was such that could tell the time on my watch. The spectacle was extraordinary. A brave peasant who had come near me to ask for news believed very seriously that it was announcing the end of the world!... The cocks, undoubtedly fooled by this unusual aurora, began crowing as though it were sunrise! At the minor seminary of Caen, the students contemplated from their dorm a great red sheet, through which a few stars could be seen. A witness from Vaucluse employs the same expression: «I was surprised to notice a great red sheet in the sky. For a moment it resembled a fire to me somewhere in the surrounding area, whose glowing light was reflected in the clouds… I observed that during the whole duration of the phenomenon the dogs in the village and surrounding area began barking and howling. They did not stop until about half past ten. In North Africa this aurora borealis was so intense that an admiral whose ships were cruising near the coast ordered a destroyer to turn towards the left, towards the northwest, for he too believed that a fire was in the distance. Another witness reports: This aurora was visible in almost all of Tunisia. It is a very rare phenomenon in our region since a similar one has not been recorded since 1891... In general it looked like a vast red or rose coloured glow, more or less streaked with white... The natives, who were very frightened, saw in it a warning of the divine wrath; the Europeans believed it was a huge, distant fire. The descriptions coming from various points in Tunisia always come back to the same expressions, which reveals that the phenomenon had an astonishing uniformity: «the sky turning red, a large reddish band which at first resembled a fire...», the «blazing sky», «a general blaze in the sky, the colour of a red brick, etc. The phenomenon was visible in all of North Africa. In England: a witness spoke of moving pleats of a red velour coloured curtain. The curtain was drawn and filled the whole space. In Switzerland: a spring-like day had preceded the unprecedented, unforgettable phenomenon.» The astronomical review gave some reports originating from Czechoslovakia and Romania: Very frequent but brief conflagrations inflamed the sky right up to its zenith. It seemed that the fiery arch in the sky had come very low. In Italy: A phenomenon extremely rare in our country.» It was visible at Pontevedra in Spain, In Portugal: Yesterday, for the first time in my life I observed a magnificent aurora borealis, a phenomenon very rare over here, which nobody can remember having seen for fifty years. At Lisbon and in all Portugal this phenomenon occasioned as much attention as surprise. Almost all the spectators believed that the sky was being lighted up by an enormous fire; and I myself believed the same thing at first. The apparition lasted almost two hours, from ten o’clock until midnight... Its colour was a more or less intense red. In the United States, «this aurora was spectacular... Early in the evening my attention was drawn to the east by an enormous conflagration. Over a wide area the sky was alight with a red glow and I believed at first that a great fire was devouring Hampton Beach. The aurora was also observed in Canada. The astronomer, Carl Stromer, reports that one of his correspondents in Norway, at the station of Njuke Mountain (Tuddal), signalled to him that he had heard noises «while the aurora was at its height and the sky seemed to be an ocean of flames... The observer and his assistant heard a curious sound coming from above them... which lasted about ten minutes, rose to a maximum and then vanished, following the fluctuations of the aurora’s intensity. This sound, which resembled the crackle of burning grass, was perceived in the same region, in the Tuddal valley, by Mr. Oysteim Reisjaa. Everything was perfectly calm on the mountain, and nothing could explain the production of this noise, neither the wind, which was not blowing, nor the telegraph lines, nor motors. Above the observatories, from all sides, there was not a murmur in the forest. January 26 issue of Le Petit Dauphinois Grenoble, January 25. – An atmospheric phenomenon of exceptional intensity was noticed this evening between seven-thirty and ten-thirty on the entire range of the Alps. This phenomenon manifested itself by an immense luminous trail which seemed to come from the sun, to unfold, fan-shaped, right up to its zenith. The breadth of the spectacle observed was such that the blazing sky resembled the brilliance of dawn. The people were astonished at first, then admired this celestial manifestation, which is rarely seen in these latitudes; then, as the phenomenon prolonged itself, they grew disturbed. Some curious scenes – especially in our countryside – were witnessed as the horizon remained purple. A thousand controversies swirled around this strange vision, which was believed to be a vast fire in the mountains, or gigantic military manoeuvres with searchlights; it was even believed – and this was the almost unanimous and not the least interesting observation – that the sun was going to rise... Now according to the first news we obtained from qualified professors, teachers of meteorology, it was a splendid aurora borealis, the most beautiful one to manifest itself in western Europe for centuries... From the city itself the phenomenon was not very well perceived. But as soon as one left the suburbs, even without thinking of looking out over Grenoble, in the north a gigantic blazecould be perceived. At Le Petit Dauphinois all the telephone lines were jammed by our correspondents – even the most distant ones – who informed us of the celestial manifestation. At eight o’clock, this animation which was continually increasing changed on certain points into a real terror. This next article also broaches the subject and provides some useful explanations http://www.fatima.org/essentials/whatucando/prophecyourtime.asp Understanding Prophecies for Our Time Saint Augustine said that we must pray as though everything depends on God and work as though everything depends on us. Thus, in addition to prayer, each of us has an obligation to act. Before one can take the appropriate action, however, one must be informed – about the Faith and about the prophecies God sends to guide us. St. Thomas tells us that God sends prophets to every generation, not to give us new doctrine, but to remind us what we must do to save our souls. …. Saint Paul tells us: "Extinguish not the spirit. Despise not prophecies. But prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thes. 5:19-21). God sends prophets to set a straying world back on the right path, and we must not despise the prophecy that God has sent to us through His prophets. Our Lady of Fatima gave us prophecies for our time: prophecies that are being fulfilled before our very eyes. For example, Our Lady predicted that if people did not amend their lives, a terrible war would begin during the reign of Pius XI. In addition to warning people to amend their lives and ask pardon for their sins, Our Lady offered a marvelous way to prevent the punishment of war: the solemn Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. … people amend their lives … and World War II and the series of wars that followed it have resulted (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Kuwait, etc.). And more wars continue now and into the future – all because we ignore Our Lady of Fatima’s requests. Some critics, including Father Edouard Dhanis, have argued that Sister Lucy’s prophecy that the "great war" would begin during the reign of Pius XI was incorrect. They make this claim because, as they say, the Second World War "began" with the German invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939 – as is widely and erroneously believed – when Pius XII, not Pius XI, was Pope. Pius XI died on February 10, 1939, and Pius XII was installed as Bishop of Rome on March 12, 1939. Sister Lucy, however, has maintained that World War II, in truth, began during the reign of Pius XI. "The annexation of Austria was the occasion for it," she explained. The invasion of Austria (in March 1938), the annexation of Czechoslovakia, the formation of military alliances and the decision to invade Poland were the beginnings of the war, though war had not yet been officially declared. All of these events occurred during the pontificate of Pope Pius XI. Furthermore, the "night illumined by an unknown light," which Our Lady said would signal the coming of the "great war", occurred during the night of January 25-26, 1938. On that night a bright red light, likened to the blaze of a gigantic fire, filled the evening sky, and was seen across Europe and even in parts of North America and North Africa. It was determined to be a most extraordinary aurora borealis. Sister Lucy expressed reservations on this, but wrote in her third memoir on August 31, 1941 that no matter what cause the light could be attributed to, "God made use of this to make me understand that His justice was about to strike the guilty nations…" During the same night that the great sign appeared in the sky, in Moscow’s Lubianka prison a man by the name of Kristian Rakovsky was being interrogated by Josef Stalin’s chief interrogator. During the interrogation Rakovsky revealed Germany’s plan to dominate Europe. He proposed that the Soviet Union join Germany in an invasion of Poland, which would lead to Europe’s retaliation against Germany and not the Soviet Union. According to Rakovsky’s plan, France and England would wear each other out, after which the Soviet Union would turn on Germany and collect the spoils of the war. This fateful interview began at the same time the unknown light in the sky was beginning to fade. It resulted in the Soviet Union’s instigation of and participation in the war, and Rakovsky’s plan was carried out to the great benefit of the Soviet Union. Again, this decisive step toward World War II occurred during the reign of Pope Pius XI. 1 …. Notes: 1. For a text of the Rakovsky interview, see Manifold, Deirdre, Firinne Publications, Galway, Ireland, 1993, pp. 26-52. Towards World Government: New World Order

Resplendent Child of Pontevedra in Spain

by Damien F. Mackey Today is the 10th of December (2021), on which day, nearly a century ago, Our Lady of the Rosary fulfilled her promise: “I shall come to ask for … the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays of the month”. Five First Saturdays book 1925: Our lady Fulfils Her Promise On the 10th of December, 1925, Our Lady of the Rosary fulfilled her promise of the 13th of July (1917) with regard to the First Saturdays, when She told the three children: “I shall come to ask for … the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays of the month”. Lucia was by then a Dorothean postulant at Pontevedra in Spain. The most holy Virgin appeared to her in her room, and by her side, elevated on a luminous cloud, was a Child. In order perhaps to appreciate Our Lady’s first gesture at this particular, intimate apparition, we must take the reader back to the biblical scene before the throne of king Ahasuerus, at the very moment when Queen Esther had presented herself in all her majesty, unannounced - and not summoned - before the Medo-Persian king. “On the third day, when [Esther] ended her prayer, she took off the garments in which she had worshipped, and arrayed herself in splendid attire. Then, majestically adorned, after invoking the all-seeing God and Saviour, she took her two maids with her, leaning daintily on one, while the other followed carrying her train. She was radiant with perfect beauty, and she looked happy, as if beloved, but her heart was frozen with fear. When she had gone through all the doors, she stood before the king. He was seated on his royal throne, clothed in the full array of his majesty, all covered with gold and precious stones. And he was most terrifying. Lifting his face, flushed with splendour, he looked at her in fierce anger. And the queen faltered, and turned pale and faint, and collapsed upon the head of the maid who went before her. Then God changed the spirit of the king to gentleness, and in alarm he sprang from his throne and took her in his arms until she came to herself. And he comforted her with soothing words, and said to her, ‘What is it Esther? I am your brother. Take courage, you shall not die, for our law applies only to the people. Come near’. Then he raised the golden sceptre and touched it to her neck; and he embraced her, and said, ‘Speak to me’ …. But as she was speaking, she fell fainting. And the king was agitated, and all his servants sought to comfort her’. (Esther 15:1-16). As on all the previous occasions when the Esther chronicle has been quoted in this book in relation to the Fatima story, Catholics who read these inspired words cannot fail to be impressed by how perfectly this Old Testament narrative continues to chime in with the details of its New Testament counterpart. It gives us a clear insight into the truth, alas one not sufficiently stressed and so not sufficiently appreciated, as to how truly Our Blessed Lady is placed between the wrath of God on the one hand, and sinful humanity on the other. Or, as She herself showed us, between the wrath of God and an eternal Hell! As an immediate consequence of this neglect, we have it that in our days, ‘not all His servants seek to comfort Her …’. If this had been the situation in the presence of king Ahausuerus, he would no doubt have interpreted this neglect on the part of some as a slight on the Queen, and therefore as an insult upon himself. By the same token, we must now extend and enlarge this scene, and truly see the holy Catholic Church herself as being placed in that perilous position of mediation between God and humankind, between Divine wrath and an eternity in hell. And within that enlarged panorama we begin to discern how first Lucia, and then ‘all those servants who seek to comfort Her’, have been placed in the rôle originally assumed by Queen Esther on behalf of her people, but truly fulfilled by the Lamb of God and the ‘New Eve’, and extended in time by the holy Catholic Church on behalf of all humankind. There are in fact some distinct similarities between Esther and Sr. Lucia in the more important aspects of their lives. In the first place, both Esther and Lucia were marked out by Heaven for special favour and were raised up by God from obscurity to public prominence, in order to carry out their respective tasks of the utmost importance. But their being in the public eye was a cause of grave anxiety to both Esther and Lucia. Esther wrote about it to Mordecai: “Thou knowest my necessity – that I abhor the sign of my proud position [i.e. the crown], which is upon my head on the days when I appear in public” (Esther 14:16). Lucia, too, underwent grievous misery and mental suffering during the apparitions. For instance, she related that for a period of time after the second apparition, she “lost all enthusiasm for making sacrifices and acts of mortification”, and she was temped to say that she had been lying about the apparitions, “and so put an end to the whole thing” (“Fatima in Lucia’s Own Words”, p. 69). Both Queen Esther and Lucia were prepared to risk death rather than quit the task that God had assigned to them. Esther courageously went with her two maids into the presence of Ahasuerus the Great, who had the power of life and death over them. Lucia and her two cousins prepared themselves to suffer an agonising death in boiling oil at the hands of the sub-prefect, Santos, rather than reveal Our Lady’s secret to him. Ultimately the king, and Santos, each relented. In the case of Queen Esther, she so won over the king that his heart and hers were united thereafter in a common cause against the enemy, who had now become their enemy. This bond, this unity of heart and mind, was sealed by the visible gesture of the king, when he raised the golden sceptre and placed it on the shoulder of his terrified Queen. So when, on the 10th of December, 1925, according to Lucia, “Our Lady rested Her hand on my shoulder”, we may, on the strength of the Esther parallel, take this to mean much more than a simple gesture of maternal reassurance, and see in it the passing on of a royal authority for what was to come next. For, “as She did so”, Lucia continues, “She showed me a heart encircled by thorns, which She was holding in Her other hand. At the same time the Child said: ‘Have compassion on the Heart of your most holy Mother, covered with thorns, with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment, and there is no one to make an act of reparation to remove them’. (“Fatima in Lucia’s Own Words”, p. 195). Next, the Blessed Virgin revealed to Lucia the full program of the Five First Saturdays, as the means by which She was to be consoled for the sins directed against her Immaculate Heart: “Look, my daughter, at My Heart, surrounded with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce Me at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You at least try to console Me and say that I promise to assist at the hour of death, with the graces necessary for salvation, all those who, on the first saturday of five consecutive months, shall confess, receive holy communion, recite five decades of the rosary, and keep me company for fifteen minutes while meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the rosary, with the intention of making reparation to me” (ibid.). This was the long-awaited moment. In the presence of her Divine Son, the Queen of Heaven had at last completely unveiled the second phase of Heaven’s wondrous redemptive Plan for the apocalyptic age: the mystical weapon of the Five First Saturdays. In its components, there is nothing new in this devotion; for essentially it consists of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, sacramental Confession and the holy Rosary, accompanied by meditations on the Mysteries. Thus there is nothing in the devotion with which Catholics should be unfamiliar. It is quite within the reach of all. But what characterises the devotion and makes it perhaps unique, is the purity of intention that is meant to accompany the practice of it. In other words, the Five First Saturdays is a totally unselfish devotion, requiring of those who practice it that they go beyond their own interests, so as to make of themselves an oblation of pure love to Our Blessed Lady. This wonderful first apparition at Pontevedra seems clearly to have its prefiguration in that scene from the Book of Esther that we have just been discussing. The king reached out with his golden sceptre, saying to Esther, “‘Speak to me’. And she said to him, ‘I saw you, my lord, like an angel of God, and my heart was shaken with fear at your glory. For you are wonderful, my lord, and your countenance is full of grace’. But as she was speaking, she fell fainting. And the king was agitated, and all his servants sought to comfort her” (15:12-16). The King of Heaven and earth is there in the Person of the Child Jesus; the Queen of Heaven herself, greatly in distress; the solicitous servants in the person of Lucia, standing in for all those who would take the divine message to heart; and finally there is the mandate to carry the message to the whole world with the authority of the Magisterium. Truly, then, a Catholic would be hard pressed to find a more accurate and better inspired resumé of an old devotion presented under this beautiful new form of Reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. As the Cardinal had said: It is you yourselves who have the remedy in your own hands”. 1926: The Resplendent Child Returns On the 15th of February, 1926, Lucia, now at Tuy in Spain, received a further apparition pertaining to the Five First Saturdays devotion. At this point in time Lucia was in a state of great perplexity as to how she might propagate the devotion. Her confessor had written to her that it was necessary for the vision of the 10th of December to be repeated, “for further happenings to prove its credibility” (ibid., p. 197). And despite the fact that Lucia’s Mother Superior was prepared to propagate the devotion, her confessor had insisted that the latter, on her own, “could do nothing to propagate this devotion” (ibid.). It was at that stage that Sr. Lucia had a further encounter with the Divine Child in the garden. She had also met the Child, “some months earlier”, she says, and, without suspecting who He was, she asked Him if he knew the “Hail Mary”. He said that He did. She then asked Him to say it, but, as He made no attempt to say it by Himself, she said it with Him three times over, at the end of which she again asked Him to say it alone. But as He remained silent and seemed unable to say the “Hail Mary” alone, Lucia asked Him if He knew where the Church of Santa Maria was. To which he replied that He did. Thereupon, Lucia asked Him to go there every day and to say this: “O My heavenly Mother, give me your Child Jesus!” Lucia taught this to Him and then left Him. When the Child returned on the 15th of February, Lucia questioned Him: “Did you ask out heavenly Mother for the Child Jesus?” The Child turned to her and said: “and have you spread through the world what our heavenly mother requested of you?” With that He was transformed into a resplendent Child. Lucia, knowing then that it was Jesus, explained to Him the difficulties that she was experiencing at that stage with her confessor, who had asked for the vision of Pontevedra to be repeated, and who had said that the Mother Superior alone could not effectively promote the devotion. To this, Our Lord replied with these telling words: “It is true that your Superior alone can do nothing, but with My grace she can do all. It is enough that your confessor gives you permission and that your Superior speaks of it, even without people knowing to whom it has been revealed” (Ibid., pp. 196-197). But that was not the only problem that poor Lucia had to clarify with the Divine Child. Her confessor had also suggested in his letter to her that the devotion which she had described to him in honour of the Immaculate Heart of Mary was fairly widespread throughout the world at that time. Were there not many souls who receive Holy Communion on the First Saturdays, in honour of Our Lady and the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary, he argued? Again Our Lord’s reply is highly instructive; for He insists that not just any devotional routine will do. He is very specific about what he wants. Essentially it is obedience that he is after: “It is true, My daughter, that many souls begin the First Saturdays, BUT FEW FINISH THEM, and those who do complete them do so in order to receive the graces that are promised thereby. It would please Me more if they did Five with fervour and with the intention of making reparation to the Heart of your Heavenly Mother, than if they did Fifteen, in a tepid and indifferent manner …” (Ibid., p. 197). We might be surprised to learn that our Divine Lord chose to appear to Sr. Lucia, not as an adult, but as a little Child. But as St. Louis de Montfort had explained in his Love of Eternal Wisdom: “… when the Incarnate and glorious Wisdom appeared to His friends, He appeared to them, not in thunder and lightning, but meekly and gently; not assuming the majesty of a king or of the Lord of Hosts, but with the tenderness of a spouse, the kindness of a friend. Sometimes, He has appeared in the Holy Eucharist, but I cannot remember having read that He ever did so, EXCEPT UNDER THE FORM OF A MEEK AND BEAUTIFUL CHILD”. And so, fittingly, Our Lord appeared to Lucia at Pontevedra and at Tuy in His gentlest possible guise, under the aspect of the “little Lamb” of the Eucharist, to encourage us and to remind us that the devotion that Our Lady of Fatima has named the “Communion of Reparation”, is essentially a Eucharistic-oriented devotion.

Tuesday, January 30, 2024

Sacred Heart of Jesus and the King of France

There is a real parallel between the calamitous rejection by King Louis XIV to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and the effects of the greatly delayed Consecration asked for by Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima. We read at: https://athanasiuscm.org/2014/08/03/devotion-to-the-sacred-heart-a-historical-perspective/ of the terrible calamities for France of not listening to the request of Jesus Christ as manifested to Sister Margaret Mary Alacoque: Devotion to the Sacred Heart: A historical perspective … the message of Our Lady to the Fatima children explicitly included a reference to the Kings of France, who refused to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart, and warned that if the Popes followed their example, terrible wars and destruction would afflict humanity. This centers around the revelations of the Sacred Heart to Margaret Mary Alacoque, beginning in the 1650’s. Now, although devotion to the Sacred Heart certainly preceded St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, Our Lord used her to popularize the devotion. The means he chose to popularize it, however, were not only apostolates, and the first Fridays, but also a king. In 1689, St. Margaret Mary went to Versailles to see King Louis XIV, who at the time was the greatest Monarch in Europe. France had never seemed more glorious, and it was at the cusp of innovating its culture, technology and industry. It had the highest population in Europe (therefore the largest armies), and was undefeated on the battlefield. It had also solidified its Catholic identity, and escaped the Gallicanist heresy (Jansenism was not to come about publicly until 1725). What St. Margaret Mary came to present to Louis XIV was simple: that he consecrate the whole nation of France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and build a chapel so that the Sacred Heart could be adored, and France’s glory would be magnified even more for the Catholic faith. Many of Louis’ advisers warned, however, that if he did it and France suffered at all, it would not only be bad for him, but for religion also (note this point, it ties in with more modern events with Fatima). Moreover, Louis XIV, a well educated monarch who possessed untrammeled power, perhaps wondered why Christ would appear to this uneducated nun of low birth, rather than to him. Pius XI said the same thing when he refused to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart. So, the Rois-Soleil, the Sun King, flat out refused the request from heaven. Previously the very same year, when adjusted for calendar differences, a revolution rocked England. James II, the last Catholic Stuart to sit on the throne, had an event which usually signifies the strength of a royal house, but in this case led to its downfall. It was the birth of his son, James Francis Edward, who was then baptized Catholic. James’ position as the Catholic king of Protestant England was tenuous, but he was a good administrator and at first he was able to maintain his position. For all that, he was a poor leader and not very astute about judging the political climate. The Seclusion Crisis in the last years of the reign of his brother, Charles II, was settled by the latter’s excellent sense of the political wind. He took advantage of the increasingly radical language of the faction that wanted James secluded from the succession on account of being Catholic, and the mood of the populace which was fearful of another civil war. Putting on his royal robes, Charles declared seclusion, and whigism, to be treasonous, and most of the country supported him, being willing to accept a Catholic monarch over a new war. James when on the throne was less impressive than his brother, or than his heirs might have been if they had actually ruled (namely James III and Charles III, aka Bonnie Prince Charlie). The worldly suggest this is because he wasn’t willing to compromise his religion, or because he wasn’t as duplicitous as he might be. The real reason, however, is that he wasn’t very Catholic in practice (his affairs were as famous as his brothers’) and he was a poor leader. He picked his battles very poorly, and alienated his major support base, the Tories, over issues of law, and kept a standing army. Now his brother also had a standing army, with 20,000 Scots that could be called up at any time, but this was necessary on account of the fact that the restored Stuart Monarchy needed support, coming back after a major civil war which ended in their Father’s execution (Charles I). This in itself wouldn’t have raised any more eyebrows than it did for Charles II, except that he filled command positions with Irish Catholics, and he was formally Catholic (whereas Charles II was a secret Catholic who converted on his deathbed). So the Protestants “whigged out” (pun intended), with the old propaganda of a Jesuit conspiracy to take over England and forcibly convert the country. James certainly was trying to liberate Catholicism in England, but he certainly had no program in mind to forcibly return Englishman to the faith. As poor a politician as he was, he was realistic. Nevertheless, at the birth of his son, it was no longer a matter of biding time until James II’s daughter, Mary (a protestant and married William of Orange, the protestant champion of Holland), would reign as queen. Now the Protestants in the government and the London establishment faced the prospect of a long lived Catholic dynasty. So they decided to reach out to William of Orange, offering him the crown if he would invade England and depose James. Historians debate whether at this time William had any interest in the crown or simply wanted James to change his policy from French alliance to a Dutch alliance. Either way, Louis XIV undertook a military campaign in the Holy Roman Empire, and as a result his troops were not available to assist James against the invasion. Thus commenced the so-called “Glorious Revolution”, where the Dutch, with the assistance of several Protestants in the Navy who cleared the channel for them, invaded England, and James, rather than leading his troops, escaped. Historically this is curious. While, on the one hand, James had good reason to fear treachery in the army (as he had seen it in the Navy), he had two things at his disposal. Irish troops who were in positions of authority, and the natural English Xenophobia and loathing for the Dutch (England had fought 3 wars with the Dutch since Cromwell’s time, and though they were seen as co-religionists, it was largely felt that the Dutch had usurped English rights in the new world and the East Indies). If James had lead his army in person, he might have won the day and kept his throne. These might have been graces flowing to him from the consecration of the Sacred Heart, but it was not done. As a side note, St. Claude de la Colombiere, St. Margaret Mary’s confessor, was a preacher in England for James II’s wife, Mary of Modena, and at one point was imprisoned for missionary activity and ministering to Catholics in the north. He was spared execution because of his position in the Duchess of York’s household, but was exiled. James fled England, and William, along with his wife Mary, were made joint monarchs. Now, William was related to the Stuarts, but through Charles and James II’s sister Mary, making the former a nephew of the latter. In the succession, however, he would have had to wait for James Francis Edward (an infant) and both of James daughters, Mary and Anne, to reign before he could have been considered for the succession, and that is if the former all died with no issue. Nevertheless, this is the only time England’s monarchy became elective, with parliament and the new William III and Mary II affirming that James was dead (which he wasn’t) and that he had no heirs (which he did). It was a total usurpation of common law, but it is endemic of the changes that the Glorious Revolution brought to English law. Parliament became supreme in its laws, which meant that the Constitution comprised of a series of parliamentary decisions. For instance, the right to gun ownership for Protestants, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights which was issued at William and Mary’s accession to the throne, was revoked by Parliament in 1998, because Parliament had given the right, and now it could be taken away without any reference to common law or natural law. The Effects of this were at first a minor setback for Louis XIV. He lost a few thousand troops in Ireland at the battle of the Boyne, where James tried to raise support for himself, but all seemed well. He gave James and his family his summer palace of St. Germaine for their court in exile, and busied himself with other matters. Then came Margaret Mary Alacoque and the request to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart. As we noted, he rejected it firmly out of hand. What did he have to fear after all? The situation in England, however, soon turned into a major headache. William III, as king of England and the Staatholder of Holland, effected an alliance of England, Holland, Sweden, and the Hapsburgs against Louis XIV, in which France suffered its first major defeat. The ink was barely dry on the peace treaty, when a new war raised its head, over the Spanish Succession. Charles II, the last Hapsburg ruler of Spain, was dying with no heir, and his will, ratified by the Cortes, called for Louis XIV’s grandson, the count of Anjou, to ascend the throne of Spain, with the promise that France and Spain would not be united under one crown. The Hapsburgs would not tolerate losing the Spanish possessions from the family, and the Protestants of England and Holland would not tolerate the Bourbons jointly holding France and Spain, along with Spain’s vast new world possessions. All sides threatened war. Again the revelations of Christ to St. Margaret Mary were brought to Louis XIV, promising victory if he would consecrate France to the Sacred Heart. One can imagine that Louis XIV took this a little more seriously after the war of the first coalition, but in the end he refused to do it. Charles II of Spain died, and Louis XIV decided he was in trouble no matter which way he went, so he decided on allowing his grandson to take the Spanish throne, beginning the war of the Spanish succession. Previous to this, James II died and France, Spain and the Pope all recognized his 18 year old son, James Francis Edward, as James III of England (though living in exile at Louis XIV’s palace of Saint Germaine, where an Elderflower liquor was concocted which today we know by the same name!). This made William even angrier, and greased the wheels for a new war. Mary II died tragically young in 1693, and William III died just before the war got started, but Anne, James II’s other protestant daughter and the last protestant Stuart, carried out the war with the aid of good politicians and a gifted general in the person of Lord Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough (Winston Churchill’s ancestor). In a series of astounding victories by Marlborough, the Allied coalition had smashed the French, though they suffered major setbacks in Spain. The war, however, was bloodier and more horrendous than any seen in European history to that point save the Thirty Years war, and can properly be considered a World War, being fought at sea all over the world as well as on the European continent. The war waged on for 12 years, depleting France of resources, population, money and in general devastating the country. The debts from this war were still unpaid when Louis XVI came to the throne two generations later. It was an absolute disaster, and at the end of the war, all the issues over which it was fought came to pass anyway; Philip V (Louis XIV’s grandson) was acknowledged as King of Spain, and both France and Spain promised the crowns of the two countries would not be united in one sovereign. So hundreds of thousands of lives were lost for nothing, livelihoods were destroyed and millions impoverished: for nothing! And the consecration was still not done. Interestingly, while in England it was 1688, on the continent it was already 1689, due to the fact that England was still on the Julian Calendar. 100 years after St. Margaret Mary first brought the request from heaven to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart, the French Revolution began with the assault on the Bastille in 1789. Death, famine, poverty, war, and a revolution which effaced tradition and the faith from the country. What will October 13 [now 2023] bring us? The signs are there to be read, and they’re not good. [End of article] Father Richard Hellman wrote (2019): https://usgraceforce.com/the-sacred-heart-of-jesus-the-first-100-year-warning/ THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS: THE FIRST 100 YEAR WARNING At Rianjo, Spain in August 1931, Our Lord communicated to Sister Lucy [of Fatima] His dissatisfaction with the Pope’s and the Catholic bishops’ failure to obey His command to consecrate Russia. He said: Make it known to My ministers, given that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My requests, they will follow him into misfortune. It is never too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary. In another text Lucy wrote that Our Lord complained to her: They did not wish to heed My request! Like the King of France they will repent of it, and they will do it, but it will be late. Russia will have already spread its errors in the world, provoking wars and persecutions against the Church. The Holy Father will have much to suffer. The reference by Jesus to the King of France’s disobedience and punishment is as follows: On June 17, 1689 the Sacred Heart of Jesus manifested to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque His command to the King of France that the King was to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart. For 100 years to the day the Kings of France delayed, and did not obey. So on June 17, 1789 the King of France was stripped of his legislative authority by the upstart Third Estate, and four years later the soldiers of the French Revolution executed the King of France as if he were a criminal. In 1793 France sent its King, Louis XVI, to the guillotine. He and his predecessors had failed to obey Our Lord’s request that France be consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and thus misfortune had befallen both the King and his country. However, it would not be just France who would inherit this misfortune. It is more than interesting to note that the so-called “Enlightenment Period,” generally known to have occurred from the 1690s to the 1790s, followed very closely to the same 100 year period of the initial request for the consecration of France to the French Revolution (see timeline here). Central to the Enlightenment agenda was the assault on, what they held as, “religious superstition” and its replacement by rational religion, which is most commonly referred to as Deism. Deism is a heresy which holds that God became no more than the supreme intelligence or craftsman who had set the machine that was the world to run according to its own natural and scientifically predictable laws. In other words, God created it and then left it (It is believed that most of our founding fathers were Deists … a heresy which became entrenched around the time of the birth of our nation). As our Lady was appearing in Fatima, it is important to note that in 1917, the same year the Communist Revolution in Russia was unleashed, Pope Benedict XV penned an encyclical entitled, Humani Generis Redemptionem. It would prove to be prophetic. In it he addressed an issue that had to be “looked upon as a matter of the greatest and most momentous concern.” Up until 1917, Western Civilization had begun to drift away from the light of Gospel. The Reformation, the French Revolution and, as mentioned, the Russian Revolution, were highly instrumental in ushering in the era of secularism. Pope Benedict XV could not escape the conclusion that the world was changing. He wrote the following in the same encyclical: “If on the other hand we examine the state of public and private morals, the constitutions and laws of nations, we shall find that there is a general disregard and forgetfulness of the supernatural, a gradual falling away from the strict standard of Christian virtue, and that men are slipping back more and more into the shameful practices of paganism.” From 1917 to 2017, this is exactly what happened. I put it this way: “We removed our supernatural armor and dropped our supernatural weapons and stood naked on the battlefield, and Satan had his way with us.” In other words, we disregarded the power of supernatural grace – being in a state of grace – and we neglected the supernatural weapons of devotions, especially the rosary. Yet, here we are in the days following the 100 year unbinding of Satan. So, what happened? While some argue that the Consecration of Russia was imperfect, it is clear that God has granted some level of pleasure in this Consecration. More importantly, God is witnessing a growing number of His children, once again, don their supernatural armor (believing, once again, in the power of grace) and lay hold of their supernatural weapons. Now, with the power of grace and our weapons in hand, God is “lighting up the battlefield.” Possibly at no other time in history, we are witnessing evil exposed at such an alarming rate. It is clear that we are now in a period of “purification.” God is calling, every one of us, to get in the fight and “clean up this mess.” Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, give us the supernatural strength and courage to accept this call and enter the battle.