Edit: here's a google translation with some editing. Adalantela Fe is the website which the late Bishop Livieres continued his important work after being thrown out of his diocese for no substantial reason.
[Adalantela Fe] Recently the Bishop of the Diocese of Oruro, Bolivia, Monsignor Cristobal Bialasik, in his usual Sunday celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass this Sunday August 16, has said that in the diocesan Church entrusted to him, he will not continue to give the consecrated Host -- Body of the Lord -- in the hands of the faithful (i.e., those who are not priests).
The prelate rightly undermines the administration of the Eucharist in this way, as he himself said, it has been noticed lately that some people do not consume the Host upon receipt, and want to carry it out of the church for purposes unknown.
The jealous priests of old wanted to be sure that those who received the Host were known parishioners, to avoid profanity, as there were Jews and members of other groups and ideologies who attended Masses to profane the Body of Jesus, throwing Him to the floor, spitting and trampling on Him.
As we are reminded by Msgr. Athanasius Schneider, the practice we now know of Communion in the hand was born in the seventeenth century among the Calvinists, who did not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. "Not even Luther would have done it," said the bishop, "In fact, until relatively recently, Lutherans were kneeling communicants and on the tongue, and even today some do this still in Scandinavia".
St. Thomas Aquinas, in his great Summa Theologica, confirms and explains:
"The administration of the Body of Christ is for the priest for three reasons.
"First, because he consecrates in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His Body at the (Last) Supper, so also He gave it to others to be shared with them. Accordingly, as the consecration of the Body of Christ is for the priest, also its distribution corresponds to him.
"Second, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, therefore it corresponds to him to offer the people's gifts to God. Thus it is for the people he distributes the consecrated gifts.
"Third, because of reverence for this Sacrament, nothing touches it but what is consecrated as the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands touch this sacrament. Therefore, it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance if it had fallen on the ground or also some other emergency." 1
Because of the loss of the sense of sin, warned by Pope Pius XII, today many faithful have lost faith in the Eucharist, in which Jesus is present with his Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity as well, as communicants receive Holy Communion and attend Mass, it is clear what degree of faith there is in the Real Presence.
The most serious desecrations are accomplished by the administration or reception of the sacraments, or in the case of the Holy Eucharist, by debasing it in celebration, that is in mortal sin, hence a deliberate and remarkable irreverence towards the celebration of the Holy Eucharist is the worst sacrilege.
I well remember one Sunday in Chile, where a pastoral worker was visiting a rural parish. Once in town, we attended Mass. The pastor -- a good and holy priest -- had a visible disability that certainly not let him move. At the time of communion, the nun who was acting minister of communion held the chalice in one hand, while in the other she began to administer them. In approach to receive the Body of the Lord, it seemed, he started the Hosts, and in doing so not so small fragments fell to the floor, which the religious seemed not to notice. After the Mass, two outsiders, without asking permission, quickly went to kneel before the many visible pieces scattered, and moistening their fingers consumed them.
Similar events are often repeated and in many countries there have been groups of lay people whose sole responsibility is to collect fragments of the consecrated Hosts that have fallen after giving communion in the hand. 2
Too numerous to mention are all the desecrations against Jesus in the Eucharist, but let us note the following:
Receive Communion with serious sins on the soul, without having confessed before a priest.
Eucharist is received in a posture of sitting and standing.
After Holy Communion few remain in intimate worship of Jesus and almost all leave immediately after Mass.
During Communion and after they then they sit, and are often talking.
The songs, manner of dress, talk and general behavior of the people, does not differ much from what happens in other meetings.
Chants and instruments used, clapping hands, give the Mass a sense of carnival more than a religious function.
The forgetfulness of Jesus present in the Tabernacle by the faithful and even many consecrated persons, is almost complete.
The Prince of Theology states: "Both the wicked and the good eat this celestial food, but with ends how opposite. Here is life and there is death the same yet issuing to each in difference infinite." 3
Germán Mazuelo-Leytón
1 AQUINO, TOMÁS, Summa Teológica, III, Q. 82, Art. 13.
2 MAZUELO-LEYTÓN, GERMÁN, El diablo no tiene rodillas, http://infocatolica.com/blog/contracorr.php/1304080215-el-diablo-no-tiene-rodillas
3 AQUINO, TOMÁS, Secuencia de la fiesta de Corpus Christi.
From Adelante de Fe with some revision of a google translation.
Showing posts with label South America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South America. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
Friday, July 10, 2015
Pope's Speech in Quito Contaminated by Masonic Propaganda
 |
| Pope Francis in Parque del Bicentenario in Quito: "Which Liturgical Color is that?" Asks Secretum meum mihi |
(Quito) The Spanish writer and former chief editor of the daily newspaper La Gaceta , Eduardo García Serrano, views the preaching of Argentine Pope Francis in Quito as a "victim" of the "black legend". In German-speaking lands, one would speak of historical falsification, which sometimes has legal repercussions.
Pope Francis spoke in Parque del Bicentenario of Quito on the independence of America. "Although Pope Francis is Argentine he is Latin American," in Quito he is said to have "forgotten or ignored" that "Catholic Spain freed the Indians of Latin America with the Gospel and not the Masonic-oligarchic independence movement of the 19th century," wrote Eduardo García Serrano. "It was the Catholic Spain, which struggled to establish laws for the Indies' against the enslavement of the Indians and recognized them as equals among equals."
"It is thanks to Spain, if the church today has an Argentine pope," said the well-known journalist.
Through his address, the Pope had shown "that he is a victim of the black legend with his understanding of Spain and the discovery and evangelization of America." Moreover, he had also shown that his "view of historical development which led to the independence of the Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America, has been contaminated by Masonic propaganda."
Masonic Creoles Wanted Independence From Spain Against the Will of the Indigenous Peoples
Simon Bolivar and San Martín (right) Agreed on 26 July 1822 in Guayaquil, to take military action against Spain in South America
"It was precisely the Masonic Creoles who were at the head of the anti-Spanish independence movement that was against the will of the indigenous peoples, because the indigenous people saw with good reason the best guarantee of their liberties against the Creole elite in belonging to Spain. This centuries-old paradox has been found in the heretical theology of liberation in its most recent expression that praises indigenism as an engine of the independence of Hispanic America by Christ in the appearance of Che Guevara and priests of the leisure and adventure outfit brand of Coronel Tapiocca," said Eduardo García Serrano ,
Pope Francis began his sermon in the Parque del Bicentenario with the words:
"I imagine those modest words of Jesus at the Last Supper as a loud cry before this Mass - we face the common front! - In this Mass, which we celebrate in the Bicentenario Park, the Park of the bicentenary of that declaration of the Independence of Latin America. That was a declaration which emerged from the consciousness of the lack of freedom, oppression and plunder, the subjection to, 'the accidental utility of those in power '( Evangelii Gaudium 213). "
In these few sentences is included the "whole cultural and historical gibberish" of the last 200 years, said Eduardo García Serrano. The Pope emphasized the defense of indigenous people against the oligarchs, but also the falsification of history according to the oligarchs. The first Masonic Lodge was founded in 1812 in Buenos Aires and immediately looked towards "independence" from Spain.
"The Argentine Pope seems to ignore that Spain has evangelized the Americas and that it is thanks to this Catholic Spain, which was not only bleeding in the Netherlands and Germany, as his predecessor Benedict XVI. recognized, that the catholicity was not entirely supplanted by the Protestant Reformation of Northern Europe. Spain defended the territorial and spiritual universality of the Catholic Church as the only true religion," said Eduardo García Serrano.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: InfoVaticana / Wikicommons
Image: InfoVaticana / Wikicommons
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
State Council of Colombia Abolitions Abortion Decree -- No Law Exists
(Bogota) The State Council of Colombia has repealed the government decree, with which the killing of unborn children by abortion had been done with impunity. By the Decree 4444 of 2006, the President allowed infanticide in exceptional cases, which had been addressed by the Constitutional Court in a judgment of the same year: in the risk to the mother's life, and in malformation of the fetus, during pregnancy due to rape. Already in 2009 the decree was suspended.The State Council did not address the decision of the Constitutional Court for decriminalization of abortion in exceptional cases. That he would not. But he lifted the presidential decree on the grounds that to solve the issue a properly concluded gekommenes state law is indispensable.
Only when a law exists, may the Government dissolve them with corresponding decrees, the State Council said.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi Bild: InfoCatolica
Link to Katholisches...
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Another Critique of Liberation Theology
Not so Liberating: The Twilight of Liberation Theology
by Dr. Samuel Gregg Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 02:02 PM
It went almost unnoticed, but on December 5th, Benedict XVI articulated one of the most stinging rebukes that has ever been made by a pope of a particular theological school. Addressing a group of Brazilian bishops, Benedict followed some mild comments about Catholic education with some very sharp and deeply critical remarks about liberation theology and its effects upon the Catholic Church.
Apart from stressing how certain liberation theologians drew heavily upon Marxist concepts, the pope also described these ideas as “deceitful.” This is very strong language for a pope. But Benedict then underscored the damage that liberation theology did to the Catholic Church. “The more or less visible consequences,” he told the bishops, “of that approach - characterised by rebellion, division, dissent, offence and anarchy - still linger today, producing great suffering and a serious loss of vital energies in your diocesan communities.”
Today, even some of liberation theology’s most outspoken advocates freely admit that it has collapsed, including in Latin America. Once considered avant-garde, it is now generally confined to clergy and laity of a certain age who wield ever-decreasing influence within the Church. Nonetheless, Benedict XVI clearly believes it’s worth underscoring just how much harm it inflicted upon the Catholic Church.
For a start, there’s little question that liberation theology was a disaster for Catholic evangelization. There’s a saying in Latin America which sums this up: “The Church opted for the poor, and the poor opted for the Pentecostals.”
In short, while many Catholic clergy were preaching class-war, many of those on whose behalf the war was presumably being waged decided that they weren’t so interested in Marx or listening to a language of hate. They simply wanted to learn about Jesus Christ and his love for all people (regardless of economic status). They found this in many evangelical communities.
A second major impact was upon the formation of Catholic clergy in parts of Latin America. Instead of being immersed in the fullness of the Catholic faith’s intellectual richness, many Catholic seminarians in the 1970s and 1980s read Marx’s Das Capital and refused to peruse such “bourgeois” literature such Augustine’s City of God or Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae.
Again, this undermined the Church’s ability to witness to Christ in Latin America, not least because some clergy reduced Christ to the status of a heroic-but-less-than-divine urban guerrilla and weren’t especially interested in explaining Catholicism’s tenets to their flocks.
Then there has been the effect upon the Church’s ability to engage the new Latin American economic world which emerged as the region opened itself to markets in the 1990s. Certainly much of this liberalization was poorly executed and marred by corruption. Nonetheless, as the Economist recently reported, countries like Brazil - once liberation theology’s epicenter - are emerging as global economic players and taking millions out of poverty in the process. The smartest thing that Brazil’s left-wing President Lula da Silva ever did was to not dismantle most of his predecessor’s economic reforms.
Unfortunately, one legacy of liberation theology is some Catholic clergy’s inability to relate to people working in the business world. Ironically, business executives are far more likely to be practicing their Catholicism than many other Latin Americans. Yet liberation theology has left a residue of distrust of business leaders among some Catholic clergy - and vice-versa. Distrust is no basis for engagement, let alone evangelization.
The good news is that the Church in Latin America is more than halfway along the road to recovery. Anyone who talks to younger priests and seminarians in Latin America today quickly learns that they have absorbed the devastating critiques of liberation theology produced by the then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in the 1980s. If anything, they tend to regard liberation theologians such as the ex-priest Leonardo Boff as heretical irrelevancies.
Indeed figures such as Boff must be dismayed that the Catholic Church has emerged as the most outspoken opponent of populist-leftists such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. As Michael Novak observed in Will it Liberate? (1986), liberation theologians were notoriously vague when it came to practical policy proposals. But if any group embodies the liberationists’ economic agenda, it is surely the populist-left who are currently providing us with case studies of how to drive economies into the ground faster than you can say “Fidel Castro.”
As time passes, liberation theology is well on its way to being consigned to the long list of Christian heterodoxies, ranging from Arianism to Hans-Küngism. But as Benedict XVI understands, ideas matter - including incoherent and destructive ideas such as liberation theology. Until the Catholic Church addresses the legacy of this defunct ideology - to give liberation theology its proper designation - its ability to speak to the Latin America of the future will be greatly impaired.
Dr. Samuel Gregg is Director of Research at the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is the author of Economic Thinking for the Theologically Minded (University Press of America, 2001) and On Ordered Liberty: A Treatise on the Free Society (Lexington Books, 2003).
Link to original...
by Dr. Samuel Gregg Tue, Dec 29, 2009, 02:02 PM
It went almost unnoticed, but on December 5th, Benedict XVI articulated one of the most stinging rebukes that has ever been made by a pope of a particular theological school. Addressing a group of Brazilian bishops, Benedict followed some mild comments about Catholic education with some very sharp and deeply critical remarks about liberation theology and its effects upon the Catholic Church.
Apart from stressing how certain liberation theologians drew heavily upon Marxist concepts, the pope also described these ideas as “deceitful.” This is very strong language for a pope. But Benedict then underscored the damage that liberation theology did to the Catholic Church. “The more or less visible consequences,” he told the bishops, “of that approach - characterised by rebellion, division, dissent, offence and anarchy - still linger today, producing great suffering and a serious loss of vital energies in your diocesan communities.”
Today, even some of liberation theology’s most outspoken advocates freely admit that it has collapsed, including in Latin America. Once considered avant-garde, it is now generally confined to clergy and laity of a certain age who wield ever-decreasing influence within the Church. Nonetheless, Benedict XVI clearly believes it’s worth underscoring just how much harm it inflicted upon the Catholic Church.
For a start, there’s little question that liberation theology was a disaster for Catholic evangelization. There’s a saying in Latin America which sums this up: “The Church opted for the poor, and the poor opted for the Pentecostals.”
In short, while many Catholic clergy were preaching class-war, many of those on whose behalf the war was presumably being waged decided that they weren’t so interested in Marx or listening to a language of hate. They simply wanted to learn about Jesus Christ and his love for all people (regardless of economic status). They found this in many evangelical communities.
A second major impact was upon the formation of Catholic clergy in parts of Latin America. Instead of being immersed in the fullness of the Catholic faith’s intellectual richness, many Catholic seminarians in the 1970s and 1980s read Marx’s Das Capital and refused to peruse such “bourgeois” literature such Augustine’s City of God or Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae.
Again, this undermined the Church’s ability to witness to Christ in Latin America, not least because some clergy reduced Christ to the status of a heroic-but-less-than-divine urban guerrilla and weren’t especially interested in explaining Catholicism’s tenets to their flocks.
Then there has been the effect upon the Church’s ability to engage the new Latin American economic world which emerged as the region opened itself to markets in the 1990s. Certainly much of this liberalization was poorly executed and marred by corruption. Nonetheless, as the Economist recently reported, countries like Brazil - once liberation theology’s epicenter - are emerging as global economic players and taking millions out of poverty in the process. The smartest thing that Brazil’s left-wing President Lula da Silva ever did was to not dismantle most of his predecessor’s economic reforms.
Unfortunately, one legacy of liberation theology is some Catholic clergy’s inability to relate to people working in the business world. Ironically, business executives are far more likely to be practicing their Catholicism than many other Latin Americans. Yet liberation theology has left a residue of distrust of business leaders among some Catholic clergy - and vice-versa. Distrust is no basis for engagement, let alone evangelization.
The good news is that the Church in Latin America is more than halfway along the road to recovery. Anyone who talks to younger priests and seminarians in Latin America today quickly learns that they have absorbed the devastating critiques of liberation theology produced by the then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in the 1980s. If anything, they tend to regard liberation theologians such as the ex-priest Leonardo Boff as heretical irrelevancies.
Indeed figures such as Boff must be dismayed that the Catholic Church has emerged as the most outspoken opponent of populist-leftists such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. As Michael Novak observed in Will it Liberate? (1986), liberation theologians were notoriously vague when it came to practical policy proposals. But if any group embodies the liberationists’ economic agenda, it is surely the populist-left who are currently providing us with case studies of how to drive economies into the ground faster than you can say “Fidel Castro.”
As time passes, liberation theology is well on its way to being consigned to the long list of Christian heterodoxies, ranging from Arianism to Hans-Küngism. But as Benedict XVI understands, ideas matter - including incoherent and destructive ideas such as liberation theology. Until the Catholic Church addresses the legacy of this defunct ideology - to give liberation theology its proper designation - its ability to speak to the Latin America of the future will be greatly impaired.
Dr. Samuel Gregg is Director of Research at the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is the author of Economic Thinking for the Theologically Minded (University Press of America, 2001) and On Ordered Liberty: A Treatise on the Free Society (Lexington Books, 2003).
Link to original...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)