Unity
of Worship
XXXXXXX
Why Real
Catholics Dare Not
‘Worship’ With Any Non-
Catholic or False ‘catholics’,
Pretending It ‘Pleases’ God;
Nor May a Pope
‘Change’
This Law, or the Ignorant
Remain Ever ‘Guiltless’
XXXXXXX
“Whosoever
revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not
God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the
Son. If ANY man come to you,
and bring NOT this doctrine, receive him NOT into the house, NOR say
to him, ‘God speed you.’” (2 John 1:9-10 DRC. All
emphases or annotations added, in this or other scriptural quotations in this
article unless noted otherwise.)
COMPOSED
& EDITED FEBRUARY 2019.
XXXXXXX
+++ 1. The Ad
evitanda scandala Myth +++
During our dark, wicked & confused times, there
are many people who call themselves Catholic and yet think, say --- or assume
without actually thinking about it --- that it’s never wrong to
worship religiously --- as if in some sort of religious ‘union
with’ --- together with those who are obviously NOT Roman Catholic Whole & Entire. Or, leastwise, that
Our Creator cares ‘not a whit’ who His Own worship with…
and, nevertheless, in spite of
these non-Catholics or false ‘catholics’, purposefully
in completely culpable ignorance (as is in all likelihood),
worshipping that which, in totality, amounts to FALSE gods, having little to do with OUR ALL TRUE GOD.
We’ve addressed this issue in the long article
Should You Go to a CMRI Mass or Take Part in the
Worship of Other Traditionalists?
So… why tackle the subject again?
Because that long article is too long for
most people nowadays.
Plus, I’m a nobody
and obscure. I thus put forth this short
article, which tackles this single
point, and is very candid and very plain for anyone of adequate intelligence, who cares enough about the Saving Truth to
get it right, please God, and save one’s soul. In doing so, humanly
speaking, we slightly increase the odds that someone takes a look.
That said, broadly put, there are
two ‘justifications’ for interreligious worship.
If calling yourself ‘catholic’ yet a
post-Vatican II Novus Ordoist, then you say it’s ‘charitable’
to do so, precisely what Our
Creator wants, at least after
Vatican II… it remaining rather mysterious
why God thought the opposite prior
to Vatican II. Such persons usually assume anyone calling his or herself ‘christian’ is actually this, no ifs, ands or buts. Doesn’t matter
that he or she is not even a
true Novus Ordoist, let alone Catholic. If liberal
enough, such persons think any
religion is ‘okay’. God ‘loves’ anybody forever
regardless of religion and never sends anyone to hell,
period.
If calling yourself Catholic yet either a TNO (Traditional Novus Ordoist) who is additionally a so-called
‘sedevacantist’ (although the
far better term is ‘interregnumist’), or else truly a Catholic
who thinks he or she must get
the Sacraments --- especially the Holy Eucharist --- no matter what, that God would never permit the Eucharist to be unavailable to us, then such persons usually assume it never matters who you go to.
Provided you think their ‘eucharist’ is real (read: valid, theologically speaking), it’s totally irrelevant to Our Creator where you get It from, or with whom you get It.
Again, period. Oversimplified?
Somewhat. But I’ve gotta keep this short.
I am not addressing the first category of
post-Vatican II Novus Ordoists thinking antipopes are ‘popes’. It
is simply not yet worth my time to make this effort, and, in my
experience, pretty much useless. They don’t want to know the
Saving Truth, and God is punishing them with spiritual blindness for their
terrible sins of unbelief & immorality. (Although,
heads up, we have addressed them elsewhere on The Epistemologic Works website,
albeit not at hugely great length or with a thoroughly systematic approach.)
It is the second category of people we are writing
this explanation for. Any better expectations there?
Not much. Interregnumist TNOs are fairly stubbornly blind, too, whereas real
Catholics --- what few still exist on earth right now during the Great Apostasy
--- are often very bewildered, massively frightened of the horror we face
without the majority of the Church’s Sacraments to assist us, and,
sometimes, just completely belligerent & unhinged, turning into Catholic
fundamentalists (CFs).
So why bother? Interregnumist TNOs, if a miracle
happens, are likeliest of all Novus Ordoists to convert to a real Roman
Catholicism and then act like they care what God & His Singular Church
command regarding who we religiously worship with. Meanwhile, real Roman
Catholics in the Church Militant are my spiritual siblings & fellow
soldiers, desperately needing someone to help them understand what
they’re up against, where their religious enemies are deceitful &
wrong, and what to do to save their souls, considering the hideous power and
tremendous odds that are against us.
This is therefore an act of mercy, a
‘spiritual alms’, if you will. Savvy?
I’m realistic. Without Heaven’s Blessing
& Help, there’s nearly no chance anyone’s going to pay
attention, comprehend or cooperate. I am no one important in this world,
I’m an extremely bad Catholic, and I have no ecclesial & priestly
jurisdiction. Why, then, am I attempting this? Because I
must. My heart inside me bursts if I try to stay quiet. My mind reels
and bowels ache when I see evil everywhere, even inside myself. I write, as
apologist or catechist, to assist myself, to aid fellow Catholics or those
close to being Catholic, and, however improbable, to help those worldlings who
are willing to think. Above all, I write to do oblation to Our Uncreated
Creator, the Triune God of the Catholic Church, striving to honor Him & His
Son’s Immaculate Mother, Mary.
Hence far, both He & She have allowed me to do
this, wretched tool that I am.
But back to the poor, confused & wandering
interregnumist TNOs or real Roman Catholics. There are many arguments…
or, leastwise, many variations of arguments… they will use to
‘justify’ themselves in carelessly or knowingly
worshipping with those who are non-Catholic or false
‘catholics’. Ultimately, though, if persistent or pushed far
enough, they will resort to Pope Martin V’s Ad evitanda scandala and the ‘Great Schism of the West’
as their primary means of claiming it’s okay to do this. And so, prithee,
whatever in the world might these two things be? That is, if you care.
The Great Schism of the West was only barely a
‘schism’ in the deepest sense of the word. Nevertheless, scandalous
schism it was in spite of the strange circumstances. It was NOT a schism over infallible dogma
& morality. No Catholics split
from other Catholics because they at first thought them not Catholic. Rather, it was a schism over who was really
the pope. That’s right. Troublesome cardinals --- who are responsible for
the election of new & rightful bishops of Rome --- caused immense
confusion, pain, strife, acrimony & division over which of two men (and even three separate claimants at
one point!) was really the true Roman Bishop. No one accused any of
these claimants of not being truly & wholly Catholic or, for that matter
and to my knowledge, of not being one who is a valid candidate for legal
election as the pope. Nor did any sensible Catholic accuse other
Catholics, who disagreed about which man was pope, of not being true
Catholics (although, granted, some fools
got ‘fundamentalist’ and accused them of becoming non-Catholic as a
result of a ‘total’ schism…). Comprehend?
This was confusion over and dispute about the arcane
rules of papal election.
Is the average Roman Catholic, apart from the
aforesaid cardinals responsible for selecting a new pope, expected to know the
intricate rules for valid & legal election? Absolutely
not. Ergo, is any real sin being committed by such Roman Catholics, when
they disagreed about the identity of the pope, as long as they both could not,
and ought not, have any responsibility for knowing arcane papal election rules,
let alone having no responsibility for actually electing the next pope? Plainly
not! Such confused Catholics may have gone on to commit other kinds of sins in
relation to this debacle --- sins of uncharitable behavior & accusations,
though this can be debatable depending on the different persons and precise
situations they faced --- but nobody could be faulted of initial guilt in the
matter, aside from at least some of the
aforementioned troublesome cardinals, who started this fiasco in the first
place; disgruntled cardinals, sadly finding themselves disenchanted with their
first & rightful choice, then pretending they could select another man as
‘pope’, this terrible sin of theirs causing the vexing confusion.
Got it? This is what Catholics then, from AD 1378 to
1417, endured. This is what engendered the division & acrimony. Realizing
how hideous it was… horrible sins, consequences & conflicts flowing
out of it… the cardinals finally took sensible action, unitedly, some 37
years later, the schism ended by the year 1417 noted above, 39 years
altogether. Their solution was necessarily complicated yet correct, and the man
everybody could eventually agree upon, electing him, was Pope Martin V.
Martin V then faced many difficult problems. One of
them was the enduring grudges, suspicions & antipathy formed by some
Catholics against other Catholics due to lengthy division & disagreement
over who was the pope. This involved bishops, priests, monks, nuns, laity ---
even saints. Yes, you read correctly. Canonized saints, or beatified souls,
were themselves at odds over who was the true pope during this --- up till then
--- very unprecedented dilemma. It wasn’t going to be easy overcoming
these suspicions or vengeful feelings. This is what Martin V began to try to
solve with his later much misunderstood document, Ad evitanda scandala. It was most definitely NOT any ludicrous attempt to overturn ancient ecclesiastical law
regarding notorious & pertinacious heretics or schismatics against the
Roman Catholic Church.
Understand? Good. In Martin V’s document,
which is quite short, he doesn’t even mention heretics or schismatics
specifically. He speaks only of ecclesiastical ‘censure’,
‘sentence’ or ‘interdict’. This is because previous
men, whether the true pope or not, had issued several such censures, sentences
or interdicts during the 39 year Great Schism of the West. Many, many
Catholics, then, upon the conclusion of this hideous confusion, were still
confused & upset about who they ought to worship with and who they ought
not to worship with. Pope Martin V’s solution, howsoever poorly he may or
may not have worded it, was to as much as say, “Listen, my spiritual
children. It is no longer something you should worry about. Even if the real
popes during the 39 year fiasco actually did issue censures, sentences or
interdicts against certain territories, cities, realms, or other Catholics in
the midst of this troubled time of four decades, we’re assuring you that
--- unless the Hierarchy states clearly that someone is indeed an individual in
the Catholic Church needing to be avoided when it comes to things concerning
Catholicity or Christendom --- you may stop worrying and simply go, together
with anyone who is Catholic, to worship. To avoid scandals (the literal translation of the text’s first three Latin words
and hence its title), we as pope do guarantee that this is alright.
We need unity now as Catholics, not further schism.”
Comprehend? Ad
evitanda scandala was for real Catholics,
NOT non-Catholics.
Later canon law (especially
the last authoritative body of rules governing the Church’s Latin Rite
members, the so-called ‘1917 Code of Canon Law’) does get a bit
careless in prescribing who a real Roman Catholic may worship with and who he
or she may not. This is ultimately immaterial. The 1917 Code of Canon Law still
states adequately & clearly enough which people… despite appearing to
be actual Catholics previously… become automatically excommunicated (‘latae sententiae’ in Latin) for those who behave
notoriously & pertinaciously as heretics, schismatics or apostates in what
is known as the ‘external forum’. That is to say, clear as day for
any true Catholic of adequate intelligence to know, with moral certainty, that
so-and-so is not actually
Catholic. Don’t believe me? Then read
Automatic Excommunications (‘Latae Sententiae’):
Why Canon Law Automatically Excommunicates Notoriously & Pertinaciously
Heretical or Schismatic Members of the Catholic Church Without Formal Action
or Declarations from Her Leaders, and Why This Principle Applies from Highest
Pope to Lowliest Layperson from the Most Ancient of Times.
If truly Catholic or in the process of converting to
Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire, then, dare you to doubt, you are morally obligated to read this
other short article proving what I have just said. Meanwhile, if truly Catholic and of, at a bare
minimum, adequate
intelligence, then there’s only so
long you can be ignorant about this matter and not be guilty for not
performing due diligence in
understanding God & His Church’s Law. Automatic excommunications are automatic for a reason. And they do NOT require bishops making formal declarations for the automatic
excommunication to actually occur… otherwise,
what is the point of them being automatic? Get it?
It’s wonderful when Catholic bishops are there, and do act, to make the
automatic excommunication absolutely clear to everyone in the
Yet necessary for the automatic
excommunication to take place? No,
because it’s automatic. And if automatic,
totally pointless if a real Catholic can’t eventually know,
with due diligence, who’s truly Catholic and who’s not.
Were that the case, then the Roman
Catholic Church should never set up automatic excommunications to begin with!!!
Do you see? This is the point
of automatic excommunications. Given that apostasy, heresy or schism are notorious & pertinacious, then any
real member of Christ’s Catholic Body, with adequate intelligence, can recognize such people.
Getting it now? If automatic excommunications are never eventually recognized by purported
members of God’s
Because they don’t care. They’re
bad or fake. Do you care, my dear reader?
Then here’s your chance to figure it out and
prove that you do really care.
Ad evitanda
scandala was never meant
to teach real Catholics it’s ‘okay’
to worship together with those who are obviously not Catholic. It was to reassure & heal Catholics after
the Schism of the West, to get them to reunite and stop worrying about the
fiasco that had just ended. It was a way to wipe the slate clean, so to speak,
forgiving one another, as true Catholics in fellowship. It had nothing to do,
and cannot at all have anything to do, with saying it’s mysteriously
& inexplicably ‘okay’ now for Roman Catholics to knowingly worship with people
who are plainly, religiously & most unquestionably outside the Very Visible & Roman Catholic Body of
Christ.
Call yourself Catholic? And are you the real thing? Truly?
Honestly…?
Then please take this seriously lest you suffer
God’s Wrath forever.
+++ 2. The Point of Religious Unity
+++
& Religious Separation
Our Creator is All
Holy.
If you really do fathom this simple yet profound
point, then you needn’t read further. Notwithstanding, perhaps you wish
to peruse something that is edifying? Sadly, I am no great saint. I can only
put into my words what God’s
Utterly, entirely, no defect, not lacking a single
attribute of perfection.
He makes everything out of nothing, and that
includes us, human beings. He made us, too, to look like Him… in His
Image, as it were. This is why He loves us, this is
why we are so very important in this creation, this vast cosmos of ours.
It’s not because we are so very special to begin with, in and of
ourselves. Remember? We would be nothing if God hadn’t spoke
us into existence by His Sovereign & Eternal Will. Unfortunately, Lucifer
the Fallen Angel sinned by rebelling against God. Our Creator made both him
& us all good at the start. But He also tested our first parents,
permitting Lucifer --- the devil --- the opportunity to tempt us. The first
temptation had nothing to do with our flesh directly. It was a spiritual
temptation, a temptation of the soul, heart & mind alone. However, once St.
Eve, our first mother, fell for the devil’s serpentine lie, and her
husband, St. Adam, in accord with her fatal decision, in spite of both her
& him having no excuse not to know better, our flesh became corrupt as
well. This was the Original Sin, something every human being is conceived into
since then, apart from King Jesus & Queen Mary.
Now our bodies, as well as our souls, are corrupt
and stained with sin, primed and ready, as it were, to rebel against the Maker.
And, since every new generation to arise after King Adam & Queen
Eve’s first sin is ignorant to start, then solely one’s parents
teaching their children how to please God is, normally, going to start us off
with understanding of these things. To wit, how to please God
by not sinning and doing good instead. Not that this lets us ‘off
the hook’ if we’re raised without this knowledge. Our Creator still
puts the Law of Natural Reason upon our hearts. We can fight this Law; but
it’s still there.
Adam & Eve’s Rebellion turned dominion of
the earth over to satan. This, along with God’s
Curse upon us & him, is our punishment for that Original Sin. Does it sound
not quite ‘fair’ to you? Well, then, recall that we’re made
out of nothing. Recall, too, that we are conceived into Original
Sin, which is a mortal sin all by itself,
damning us to hell for a neverending eternity. That isn’t our own
personal fault, chosen freely… apart from Ss. Adam & Eve… yet
Our Maker is All Holy and cannot just ‘take us as we are’ in
our state of hideous sin, as if it ‘doesn’t matter’,
or as if He can be with, and ‘mix with’, as it were, us, All Holy mingling with the Terribly Unholy.
Humbly remember, too, that most of us since then, since our conceptions, most
of the time, freely choose to sin --- usually quite often --- disregarding, to some degree at least, the
Law of Natural Reason etched upon our hearts. This makes us even more
reprehensible in Heaven’s Sight. And, finally, realize it is the
Perfectly Holy God Who determines what is true and what is thereby false, and
what is right and what is thereby wrong. And He’s put this on our hearts.
Adequately intelligent of mind, my dear reader?
Then… we’ve no excuse.
We ought to be burning in hell, all of us, the whole
human race, right now.
That we do not… not all
of us, leastwise… is because God is Merciful, in addition to being
All Holy & Just. But do you see the
problem? He made us for Himself. That’s why we look like Him. And He
is not willing that any should perish, i.e., go to hell forever. If we
do, then it’s ultimately our own fault. To some extent or another,
every single one of us, aside from Jesus & Mary, is deserving of eternal
damnation, our suffering there in proportion to how culpable & guilty any particular human being is, failing
God.
God is All Holy. The Holy does not mingle with the profane
& filthy.
That’s what we are. It takes HUMILITY to see it and admit it.
In the meantime, as early Church fathers loved to
note (and I paraphrase), “Oh,
happy fault of Ss. Adam & Eve that it should call forth such a Great
Redemption!” That is, God was not willing that those, Who
He made to bear His Image, should all perish. Yet our sin is, including the
Original Sin into which we are conceived, so mammoth & hideous that it
would have been utterly just had Our Maker put us all into hell forever. Hence why huge debt requires huge payment. Yet the debt
incurred by our sin is eternal damnation. And not one of us could pay this,
remitting the debt, without God’s Help. We either spend the rest of our
immortal existence consciously suffering in the Pool of Fire, wherein hell will
be cast at the end of the world as we know it, or else Our Creator does an even
greater & better thing, taking our evil and ultimately working it for good.
Accordingly, He shows us an Act of Mercy
that is so powerful, so humble and so painful that we must stand in awe of His Charity, His Love, for us.
This is what the Second Person of the Godhead accomplished by being born to His Immaculate Mother, Mary,
becoming one of us, teaching us, when older, His New & Final Covenant --- the Roman Catholic Faith ---
whilst, most amazing of all, consenting to die at our rebellious hands upon the
Cross on the Hill of Golgotha (Calvary,
or ‘Hill of the Skull’), in this way paying the eternal debt of
our sins and redeeming, from the devil, any who would seek His Way of
Catholicism, Whole & Entire,
our sins washed away in the Sacrament
of Baptism, and persevere unto the end, dying as Roman Catholics in the
state of grace. This is the
If
we hear His Roman Catholic
call and obey all His Church infallibly teaches.
Our All Holy Maker cannot mingle indefinitely with
the foul & degraded. This is precisely what any human being is who is not baptized into His Roman
Catholic Body and professing His Roman Catholic Mind, or, if Catholic Whole
& Entire, nevertheless carelessly dies in the state of mortal sin. Are you comprehending, my precious soul?
Catholics have been so careless, and uncaring, about
this Priceless Gift. God has graciously provided so many opportunities for them
to appease His Just Wrath and spiritually please Him by safeguarding this
Singular Religion with utmost diligence, along with time, both in our little
individual lives and over so many centuries since the time of Jesus Christ, to
make satisfaction for our sins that we have committed after our baptisms,
defiling again what He had made whole & clean --- the new birth gained in
Holy Mother Church’s Sacrament of Baptism, the Laver of Regeneration as
ancient Catholics frequently called it. Again and again we have defied Him; or,
remaining Catholic on the outside, nonetheless, caring for this life more than
Life to Come.
This is how we have eventually reached the Great
Apostasy that we endure now.
From God’s Perspective, since more and more
Catholics have so little cared for His Remarkable Gift of Grace, then He
has withdrawn graces and left most human beings blind to their
blindness. Put alternatively, we’ve the Curse of St. Amos the
prophet upon us, left to our wicked & stubborn ways, losing
Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire as punishment for our misdeeds,
till His Wrath is exhausted. This is WHY
the world is increasingly & shockingly wicked. As in the
days of St. Noe [Noah], so today.
The Great Apostasy didn’t happen overnight at
Vatican II in the 1960s. It was most literally centuries in the making. The
Vatican II Pseudo-Council merely allowed it to come out into the open, with no
more pretences for those with eyes to see. Was there
anyone left with eyes to see at that point in time? I’d like to think so.
But I must, too, concede the possibility that there was no one left for awhile.
In any case, just as the Twelve Apostles fled at Jesus’ Arrest,
abandoning Him, so, also, did these bishops abandon us with Vatican II. Resulting in loss of Roman
Catholicity. You savvy?
When I converted out of nowhere in the middle of Los
Angeles to the Religion of Catholicism, having been raised as Protestant &
Modernist, taught to hate or ridicule God’s One True Faith, I found
myself almost all alone. Still, I was at least able to talk with several people
over the course of a few years who remembered how Catholics behaved just prior
to Vatican II, in the 1920s, ’30s, ’40s & ’50s. They were
not necessarily Catholic themselves; still, I gleaned lots of information from
them.
Whatever did I learn? How awful
‘catholics’ were during these decades.
They were careless, dismissive, mocking, rebellious
& wayward. Priests & bishops, monks & nuns, were lax, petty,
riddled with sins, pharisaical, more concerned with the positions of comfort,
prestige & wealth that they could attain than anything to do with a real
holiness or real charity for their poor, lost & wandering flocks. All were
afflicted with a vertiginous spirit of diabolical disorientation. Spiritually
drunken sots, feet akimbo, ground caving in, immortal souls plunging to the
heart of hell.
The point is, this is the very opposite of an All Holy Triune Catholic God.
Any surprise, then, spiritually drunk as our
‘catholic’ forebears became, that they’d lose all respect
& concern --- all piety ---
for the True God, True Religion, and This True God & True Religion’s
House & Home… to wit, the Holy Sanctuaries of Roman
Catholicism? Not at all. These Sanctuaries are consecrated. I.e., dedicated solely to the Triune
God of the Catholic Church, His Holy Body. There should be nothing there, in His Presence,
visibly opposed to him. What Catholics carry in their hearts, secretly &
invisibly, is beyond our normal human power to prevent, if mortally sinful yet
private, hidden & unconfessed. But non-Catholics?
Or Catholics in public scandal, impenitent, void of visible
remorse for their terrible crimes? That is entirely different.
Such unholy souls have nothing to do with the All Holy God & His All Holy House. They don’t belong there! Period.
That a nobody like me has to even point this out,
informing those who suppose themselves ‘learned’ is a measure of
our blindness, deformity & rebellion. Would the everyday person take hateful
enemies or deadly criminals into his or her home, under the pretense
of having a ‘pleasant’ social get-together? Would you or another pretend
the excrement-befouled wino is welcome into your house without
initially cleaning up and being presentable, not spreading filth & disease?
Obviously. The physical is
allegory for spiritual. God made it this way.
He also gave most of us adequately intelligent minds
to understand.
Thus, if you don’t understand, it’s for
lack of trying, or demonic.
Whichever, the All Holy is not to
mingle with the All Unholy.
The two do not go together!!! The non-Catholic must first become Catholic Whole &
Entire, receiving the Sacrament of Baptism, to enter a Sanctuary rightly. At the very least, as in
ancient times, if a serious ‘inquirer’,
you would be allowed to sit in the Sanctuary a short time at the beginning of Mass, before dismissal to ask questions
and learn more. If catechumens, they would be permitted to stay a little longer at the start of
Mass, yet still dismissed prior
to the Consecration of the Most Holy Eucharist and Its Administration.
Meanwhile, if publicly & provably Catholic,
but publicly in a scandalous mortal
sin, impenitent, then you must first
receive the Sacrament of Penance, making a good & adequate confession, and, as required,
adequate satisfaction. During
ancient times, terrible apostates did strict
penance for ten years straight, separated
at Mass from everyone else, till, proving
their sincerity & remorse, they were finally
rejoined sacramentally to the
Ecclesial Body of Christ, Visibly & Openly. Comprehend?
Catholics of recent centuries --- at least since the
late 1800s into the 20th century, culminating with the Vatican II
Pseudo-Council --- have been shockingly lax,
lazy, impious, blithe & oblivious toward the All Holy and what It requires. They have only repulsed & angered God, to Whom they were supposed to belong and about Whom they were
supposed to care, exhausting His Mercy and their time to do penance. They did
not. And they have left a mess for
real Catholics to clean up, when the Great Apostasy ends, rivaling the spiritual ignorance & religious
carelessness confronted by Ss. Esdras & Nehemias in the wake of the
Babylonian Exile, when Israelites eventually returned, suffering 70 years of
captivity in a pagan land for their
ugly apostasy, these men teaching their descendants how to be good
& decent Catholics once again. It was gargantuan,
the impiety & sin of ignorance, from
lack of catechism, appalling.
The same task
faces us today, whoever is left who is truly a Roman Catholic.
We must drive home the following Sacred Truth
intrepidly & unflinchingly:
The Terribly & Knowably Unholy does NOT belong inside the All Holy!
+++ 3. The Modern Doorkeeper or ‘Porter’
Fantasy +++
The Priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church has always
been achieved, if called & permitted, by men first ascending through the
‘sub-clerical’ orders, of which there are six. In ancient
times, this amounted to real duties, for a certain period of time, till
you proved, by your excellent service and carrying out of your
duties, that you were worthy to then be elevated to a following
‘sub-order’. The ascending titles, up to seven, are: porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte,
subdeacon, deacon & priest. The first four were called ‘minor
orders’. The next three are ‘major orders’, yet the
first two of the major orders do not constitute an actual & whole Sacrament of Order. Priesthood alone
amounts to actual & visible membership in the Catholic Church’s clergy,
with true & full ineffable ‘mark’ of Holy Orders.
Theologians have debated whether or not being made a ‘bishop’ is
distinct in a significant way from priesthood. God’s Roman Catholic
Church hasn’t ever solemnly & explicitly defined this clearly.
Howsoever, what is not debatable is that Roman Catholic bishops
are priests, too. Furthermore, that it is both a permissible &
logical theological opinion, till now, concerning the Catholic episcopacy (read: being an actual Catholic bishop),
that it’s primarily a question of primacy and not order.
That is to say, indeed there exists a
completely distinct ritual for consecrating the bishop --- as
opposed to ordaining a candidate to the priesthood ---
notwithstanding, the most rudimentary of distinctions discernible between
priest & bishop is that the latter governs, in addition to purely
priestly functions, whilst a former carries out the duties peculiar to
God’s Roman Catholic priesthood, empowering them to do so via the
Church’s Sacrament of Orders. Whether or not a man consecrated as
a bishop is assigned actual jurisdiction, it is the unique characteristic of
his position as a bishop that he alone, normally, can ordain another man as a priest, and that, normally, he alone
administers the Sacrament of
Confirmation to those under his jurisdiction, or authorized, by
governing bishop, ecclesially speaking, to administer the Sacrament of
Confirmation to Catholics.
Following this so far? Excellent.
If confused, don’t fret. You’ll figure it out.
So why is this
important? Why make a fuss of it and explain it carefully?
I’m glad you asked. Or, er, as I’m fond
of saying, that I asked for you.
Hopefully, you’re coming along for the ride.
If so, then listen up:
The ‘minor orders’ --- porter, lector, exorcist & acolyte
--- were not just mere ‘perfunctory’ steps that a man made, or went
through, in order to (no pun intended)
become a priest in God’s Singularly Roman Catholic Church. They were
quite real positions, with very real duties, originally, that a man had to
perform with excellence, sincerity & virtue, proving himself worthy of the
next step. Which then leads us to ask one very simple
question --- “So what is a ‘porter’?” More
commonly translated as the word ‘doorkeeper’ or
‘doorman’ in the last few centuries, nevertheless, what does this
crucial & initial position, as part of the ‘minor orders’ --- first of seven steps to, at last, full &
real priesthood --- amount to? Here is where a modernist fantasy dominates.
A human being who is truly Catholic… or calls one’s self
‘catholic’… might sincerely believe this position to be nigh
well ‘symbolic’ or ‘perfunctory’… yet this is
simply delusional. That is, uninformed fantasy. Or, if you will, after-the-fact
reasoning. I.e., imagined explanations they don’t
understand correctly, or don’t know to begin with, actual reality in
ancient times. Rather iffy about this? Don’t feel too bad. Most
folks really don’t comprehend correctly. They either don’t study
ancient writings to know facts, or else don’t interpret these facts
correctly to form a full & right knowledge. Wherefore?
Because they ‘assume’ beforehand that they know what they
don’t really know. Porters? I.e.,
doorkeepers? They presume, without knowing any better in these times,
what porters really are. They think, without knowing any better, that a
porter is simply a ‘symbolic’ but ‘impractical’ position,
merely a ‘stepping stone’ to eventual elevation to the priesthood.
They don’t know better because, one, they have not ever
studied the matter carefully; and, two, because even if they’ve
studied the matter in serious detail, they’ve not ‘connected
the dots’ and interpreted it correctly, thereby interpreting the data fully
& rightly. They are truly
ignorant to a certain degree.
Distressing? Yes, to some degree. A
serious problem? Only when stubborn.
Accordingly, only when they assume, blithely, they
‘couldn’t’ be wrong.
But let us get blunt. Where do they go wrong about
‘porters’? Either, one,
that ‘doorkeepers’ were always & ever merely a
‘perfunctory’ position without
any real function or duties; or, two,
that ‘doorkeepers’ were merely & rather uselessly a
‘title’ which never performed real, serious & imperative duties on behalf of the Church,
duties which, performed excellently, not only were practical but proved
themselves as a worthy man suited for the higher orders, culminating in,
eventually, the priesthood… if
showing themselves worthy of the position, truly called by God to this immense
responsibility. Understanding a little bit now? Grasping why this
transcends a mere ‘symbolism’?
I don’t pretend to know everything there is to
know about the position of ‘porter’.
To wit, there are tens of thousands of pages of
early Church father writings. You can’t just ‘skim’ through
these copious pages and pretend to ‘understand’ everything
perfectly. It takes time, thought & serious effort to comprehend what they
were saying. But I do say that I’ve an essential comprehension. I dare to
say this because I really am a true Catholic (however poorly so) and I really do grasp the essential purpose of
Christ’s Catholic Body and His Catholic Faith. Knowing these infallible
basics, it is NOT impossible to
fathom, with moral certitude, what his Body’s various positions are for,
and what they are meant to accomplish. Consequently, porters
or doorkeepers? Were they merely
‘greeters’, like Walmart employees stationed at the entrances of
their (usually) very big stores to greet shoppers, or check carts & bags as
shoppers exit, making sure nobody is shoplifting?
Most certainly not. Nor were
porters merely there to prevent ‘theft’ of holy things.
Like, for instance, golden chalices or golden
patens, or the Holy Eucharist Itself, kept reserved in the
‘Tabernacle’ of the Holy Sanctuary, in which consecrated place the
Holy Eucharist is both confected and kept reserved in the Holy &
Consecrated Sanctuary of the Roman Catholic Church. We do not dispute that
porters were used around the clock, at all hours to keep the holy things of
This is why
there were ‘porters’ or ‘doorkeepers’ to begin with.
Examine it.
What is the definition of ‘porter’ in
its first sense? “1. a doorman or
gatekeeper…” And ‘doorman’?
“…a man whose work is opening the door of a building for those who
enter or leave….” Meanwhile, ‘gatekeeper’? “…a person
in charge of a gate to control passage through it…” (Quotes from Webster’s New World Dictionary of the
American Language, 2nd College Edition, as by printed by The
World Publishing Co. in
A ‘porter’ is still current in British
English. In either American or British English it is equivalent to a
‘doorman’ or a ‘gatekeeper’. The ‘doorman’
is responsible for opening a door for those who enter or leave, whist a ‘gatekeeper’ is in charge of controlling
passage through the entrance. Additionally, ‘porter’ or
‘doorman’ is responsible for the screening of visitors and,
resultantly, provides security services on top of this. Now you put two
& two together. While a first sub-clerical or minor order position may have
entailed other duties as well (such as
the ringing of bells, greeting kindly all Roman Catholics that are
identifiable, permissible and in good standing, etc.), what, pray thee, is
the purpose of opening the door whilst controlling the passage and
providing screening & security
services if, at least, not alerting
those who can come at a moment’s notice
in order to control & secure
the entrance against those
who have no business entering
since they’re not
Catholic or, if truly Roman Catholic, in scandalously & morally hideous standing? And why
would ecclesial translators choose to translate --- bishops approving
it --- Holy Mother Church’s ancient term for the position as
English’s ‘porter’ if, in fact, the word
‘porter’ is not an accurate, descriptive & properly
equivalent word in meaning? Why not
instead, if none of this is pertinent, simply swing the holy Sanctuary’s
doors wide open and allow anybody at all, willy nilly,
to enter with no questions asked?
Are you comprehending? And do you see
the simple, ironclad logic? Not so?
Alright, then. What’s your logical &
factual explanation? Nonplussed?
Then please be humble enough to admit you
mayn’t really know.
+++ 4. When Real Love Necessarily Gets
‘Tough’ +++
I care about you, dearest soul. That’s why
I’m explaining this. I am not, though, Our Almighty Creator. As a result,
I can’t ‘make’ you believe it. Nor is it my responsibility. It’s yours. Don’t like that?
My sincere condolences.
I didn’t, however, cause you to be born into this world. I
therefore cannot take responsibility for what you believe or so belligerently
refuse to believe. That’s your choice… not mine. End of sentence.
In the meantime, note the scriptural quote at the
beginning of this short article.
From 2 John, one of
Repulsed? Offended? Outraged? Then you’re not Roman Catholic in either
case. I.e., regardless of whether you claim to be Catholic or not, you’re
most certainly not Roman
Catholic if you reject the ‘no
Salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church’ dogma in its original,
ancient, correct, narrow, strict, perpetual & unchanging sense. Infallible dogmas are infallible dogmas for a reason
--- they’re both definitely true
without a doubt; wholly necessary to know, believe & profess for the
eternal salvation of our your immortal soul; and irreformable,
unable to be ‘changed’ in meaning later on as styles or tastes
shift.
Comprehending this fully, willingly & zealously?
Please do. Real Catholics do not --- and cannot --- pick & choose which
infallible dogmas they want to believe and which ones they don’t want to
believe. Real Catholicism is an entire package. You either profess all of it or have none of it. 99% of the
infallible dogmas of Catholicism… whilst rejecting a mere single
infallible dogma (which includes changing
the unchanging meaning of this dogma to something you like better, but
which isn’t true!)… doesn’t
cut it. Never has.
St. John the Evangelist’s second scriptural
letter --- he wrote a gospel, two other letters, and an apocalypse, too --- is
significant for another reason as well, apart from the fact that it drives home
the principle of religious separation from those who are not truly
Catholic and are not religiously united with you, assuming you
yourself are actually Catholic. Oh, mind you, we’re not advocating being unsociable, nasty, cruel, stand-offish
or otherwise unjust toward those who are not
real Catholics. We’re simply stating the truth --- that in no way
can real Catholics think, pretend or act like they’re ‘religiously
united’ with any person not actually Catholic (and obviously so, not something that is unforeseen or not possible to
ever know!), or, knowing that you, as a real Catholic, are not
religiously united with them, but think or pretend that it’s
‘okay’ to get the sacraments from or together with them. But
what is this additional reason for 2 John’s significance?
We present the whole passage once more to make sure
you remember:
“Whosoever revolteth [revolts,
that is, rebels against what God tells us to religiously believe as the Saving
Truth] and continueth [continues]
not in the doctrine [read: Jesus’ Roman Catholic Religion Whole, Entire &
Undefiled] of Christ hath [has] not God [God doesn’t claim you as His Own and you don’t belong to
Him]. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same [this kind of person] hath both the Father and the Son. If ANY man come to you, and bring NOT this doctrine [Roman Catholicism Whole & Entire!],
receive him NOT into the house
[don’t you dare treat this person
as if you two, religiously speaking, are wholly united and are worshipping the
very same thing together], NOR
say to him, ‘God speed you [don’t
bless such persons in a way appearing like both of you are truly religiously
united].’” (2 John
1:9-10 DRC)
We trust that the thrust of the scriptural passage
is plain. There are many other biblical verses we could quote to demonstrate
the same point; this one, however, is particularly blatant and particularly
incisive, especially coming from the Beloved Disciple, he who so many call the
‘Apostle of Love’. Notice, nonetheless, where it warns
“…receive him not into the
house…”? Most Catholics, if they even bother reading Sacred
Scripture and see this passage, interpret “house” to mean
‘the house that you, as a Catholic, live in’… and
that’s it. Accurate and believable? It’s
entirely acceptable. You can as a Catholic take it this way and that’s
alright. Howsoever, recollect what I’ve remarked elsewhere. Sacred
Scripture is inspired by God, Who is Infinite & Vast, and it is fully
possible that He is intending, in any particular passage, two or more meanings at the same time. In other words, that more than one interpretation can
be true simultaneously. So my
point is absolutely NOT either / or.
It is very possibly both / and. Which is to say…?
+++ 5. God’s House +++
That “house” is easily & justifiably
interpretable as ‘God’s Sanctuary’.
And in New Testament times… the era of Roman
Catholicism, after Jesus Christ’s Advent as the God-Man upon the
earth… what is God’s Sanctuary? Right. A Roman Catholic
Sanctuary. Any place of worship, as approved by a bishop with full
jurisdiction and consecrated by him as a building sanctified unto the Triune
God of Catholicism as a place where He ‘dwells’, His Manifest
Presence there in a Eucharistic Host under mere appearance as
‘bread’ and ‘wine’. Getting it now? The Holy Ghost
through St. John is arguably (and
undeniably, when we understand Christ’s Catholic Body correctly and apply
Her Laws appropriately) saying that nobody, who isn’t Catholic, or a
Catholic publicly in good standing, is to be allowed entrance into the Abode of
the Holy. Why? Because Catholics are so ‘cruel’?
Don’t be a silly billy. Or, at least, don’t act way less
intelligent than you really are. The explanation is stark. Can and should the All Holy mingle with the Unholy? NO!!!!!!!! Sorry to be so
‘emotional’ or ‘emphatic’. Don’t intend to
‘overwhelm’ or ‘antagonize’ you. Just that, quite
honestly, I care way more about what Our Creator thinks about me than what you,
the dearest reader, think of infinitesimal me. Like St. Phinees in the Old Testament,
I am zealous for Our All Holy God’s Immeasurable Holiness &
Reputation. I am appalled at the carelessness of God’s earthly ecclesial
shepherds in most recent centuries at NOT
guarding God’s Sanctuary with utmost earnestness & security, and I am
appalled at Catholics today… what few they be during the Great
Apostasy… having so little understanding of, and regard for, defending
God’s House’s Sanctity & Security against those who have no
real business entering there and defiling it with their unholy presence or deeds. Too much for
you? I ask quietly, “Who do
you love more… this world and its opinions, or the Opinion of Our
Almighty & All Holy Maker?” The point is the point --- and true.
A Catholic Sanctuary is God’s ‘House’. Ergo, ought we as real
Catholics to receive the non-Catholic or publicly iniquitous Catholic ---
iniquitous in a public, mortal way --- blithely into God’s House?
The rejoinder is simple, rational, rock solid &
irrefutable… NOT AT ALL!!!!!!!!
Mind you, we’re not arguing intellectually, at this point, over the precise
duty of ‘porters’. We’re merely noting an irrefutable fact --- that the
All Holy God’s All Holy Sanctuary cannot be left unguarded and thus anyone at all, whether Catholic or not,
whether openly & publicly holy or not, free to enter as they wish, helter skelter.
Don’t get this? Yet
adequately intelligent? Then perhaps you’re a rebel.
Do get this? Yet really don’t like it? Then,
mayhap, you’re wicked.
Insulted? I am sorry. I don’t want to insult
you. I just want Truth. And if you choose religious falsehood --- dangerously
contemporary and spiritually deadly spiritual lies --- then I am compelled to
say what might offend you in order to save even one soul from an everlastingly
damnable lie and to please my Uncreated Creator… Whose Opinion is, I am
forced to say, FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO ME
THAN YOURS. I want to be at full peace with you if possible, and I want to
be nice & charitable toward you… yet not at the expense of my
immortal soul, or at the risk of eternal damnation of this most precious of
things that I have. What do you want?
The merely earthly & temporal? Well, then, dear
reader, that’s where you and I must part ways. I
hope you reconsider. Please do! I want you with me, in Heaven Forever, as my
fellow Roman Catholic. But to do that, you’ve got to hold God’s
Opinion as more important
than yours, or mine, or anyone else’s.
And His House on earth is any Roman Catholic
Sanctuary, where dwells His Manifest Presence Eucharistically. It is also
consecrated, a bishop & his priests making it pure & holy, a fitting
place on earth for God to show Himself under the appearance of bread &
wine. So, right & fitting that the Unholy should dare to enter… and
be allowed to enter… this Most Holy of Places upon earth, where Our Maker
deigns to make His ‘Home’? Can the Holy abide with the Unholy? Ought the Holy be
‘made’ to abide with the Unholy? Of course
not. The very notion is nonsensical and should be
‘unthinkable’ for the thinking. The Catholic thinking, that is. And hence this short article. To get you,
the reader, to think straight. If truly Catholic, or becoming truly
Catholic. Separate the two!
Or do you not understand Who
you claim to serve? If not, please fathom.
+++ 6. And God’s Elect +++
A final observation. At the start of
“The ancient to the lady Elect, and her
children, whom I love in the truth, and not I only, but also all they
that have known the truth [all real Catholics, who know, profess &
love this One True Religion Whole,
Entire & Undefiled], for the sake of the truth which dwelleth [dwells] in us, and shall be with us for
ever.” (2 John 1:1-2 DRC)
Notice that unusual name or title, ‘the Lady
Elect’? Yes, indeed. Curious.
The popular theological opinion for the past few
centuries is that, while it may be a very poetic way to write to a Catholic
‘family’ with this name (Elect)
or a particular church (diocese),
that it’s probably the proper name of a real individual woman named
‘Elect’, renowned for her ‘piety’ and ‘great
charity’, so as to merit a letter, personally, from the last living of
Christ’s Twelve Apostles. Believable? Somewhat. I surely don’t pretend I can
‘prove’ this is false with the evidence I have. Yet provable it is an individual
woman? Not at all. It amounts to conjecture,
NOT certainty. The only thing going
for this opinion is ‘eminence’ of the theological scholars opining
it. Alternative explanation? As a matter of fact, yes.
Yes there is. Orthodox? Indubitably.
Likely? I think so. Shall we have it?
Gladly.
Anyone who reads the Bible thoroughly & closely
notes how often the Holy Ghost through chosen writer refers to Catholics as
God’s ‘elect’. For instance, “And he shall send his
angels with a trumpet, and a great voice: and they shall gather together his elect
from the four winds, from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost
bounds of them.” (Matthew 24:31 DRC) Or, “Put ye
[all of you] on therefore, as the elect
of God, holy, and beloved, the bowels of mercy, benignity, humility, modesty,
patience…” (Colossians 3:12 DRC) Several other examples exist from
New Testament Sacred Scripture, too.
Are you beginning to put the pieces of the puzzle
together, my precious soul?
If God via His Scriptural Composers routinely refers
to God’s Chosen People --- Catholics --- as His ‘elect’, and
His Singular Catholic Church, to which these Chosen belong, as His Bride or
Wife, then to whom do you think ‘the
Lady Elect’ might refer? Faint suspicion starting
to form in your mind? Right… She’s the Roman Catholic
Body of Jesus Christ. Infallibly defined? No. Theologically
acceptable? Without a doubt. To be taken
seriously? In my opinion, yes. Notwithstanding, why
would
And why is the membership of the Triune God of the
Catholic Church called His ‘elect’… why is a true
Roman Catholic ‘elect’? Who
elected us? Who, indeed. The
Almighty, Our Creator, He Who Is All
Holy. Understanding? He is All Holy. We,
if Catholic, truly & wholly, must also be All Holy. Only then may we have the privilege,
the right, to access His All
Holy House, a Roman Catholic Sanctuary, where there is never to be a place for the Unholy --- a non-Catholic person or publicly
scandalous Catholic. This is the primary purpose of the porter or ‘doorkeeper’.
Recall this? Precisely. Lowest rung of seven steps to
full & complete priesthood, the exalted Sacrament of Holy Orders, it is no
titular or merely symbolic position. It carries, necessarily, real & practical
duties. Does this amount to bare ‘protection’
of the ‘valuables’ of the Church? To wit, silver chalice,
golden paten, marble altar, etc. Nonsense. Such
thinking is naïve or biased. Holy items made by human hands, as is derived
from earthly materials, are valuable. Yet the real most valuable thing in the Sanctuary, the True
Treasure, is God Himself in the Eucharist.
The next priceless extravaganza is the Sanctuary
Itself, consecrated & holy to God. And when are religiously costly
things, like anything most vulnerable, most prone to abuse? Absolutely...
whenever Holy Mass occurs,
rightful members of the
Church in good standing
participating. So when does
the porter’s job most matter? When is his
function outstandingly needed? Correct again, my astute peruser.
When he must stand vigilant at the Sanctuary’s door, watching carefully
to identity anyone potentially unrecognizable for the real Roman
Catholic they are supposed to be prior to entrance, or, this person
being a real Roman Catholic, nonetheless, well known, publicly, as an impenitent
& scandalously mortal sinner. Getting it? Do you see and understand, dear reader?
An acquaintance of mine, who I believe to be truly
Catholic, insists that it was the deacons who actually prevented such
illegitimate people from entering, or physically escorted them
back outside from the Sanctuary. This very well could be the truth. I am not
claiming to know for certain. This is because, one, for all my study &
learning, tens of thousands of pages of the early Church fathers exist to be
read, and it is not very light reading. It takes time and careful thought ---
years & years of it. And, two, just as much scholarly writings from those
who are purportedly Catholic, but unquestionably learned, exist to be read as
well. This also takes time and careful thought, not being light reading.
I’ve never yet been able to feel like I can prioritize this particular
branch of study. Ergo, I’m not going to pretend that I ‘know
better’. This gentleman, my acquaintance, is very possibly correct. Yet
guess what? The exact case is irrelevant to this precise point.
We repeat --- the exact case here is irrelevant to
this precise point. Period.
Whether or not the deacons actually prevented
entrance of unworthy persons, the imperative function of the porters was
the same. The porters were the persons who vigilantly watched at the doors to
identify each & every person, daring to enter God’s Sanctuary &
All Holy House, as real Roman Catholics and publicly worthy of
doing so. Performing this duty well, with utmost gravity and excellence, was
the beginning proof of their worthiness to ascend further in the steps toward
actual priesthood. I mean, after all, if you can’t be bothered to protect
the sanctity of God’s Sanctuary --- or do so very incompetently even if
you really do care --- then how in the world are you going to be worthy of the
far more important task of consecrating the Most Holy Eucharist, or hearing the
confessions of sinful Catholics, discerning their hearts and dispensing
absolution & satisfactions? Eh? This is why
the Church began you with porter.
+++ 7. Great Learning, Authority & Eminence Can
+++
Be Fantastic… Yet Even the Simple Can Know the Truth
But someone might say, “How do you know? You haven’t studied it adequately.” Or, “Who in
the world are you? You’re
nobody! I don’t have to pay attention to what you say…” In actuality, I have studied the matter of porters and their ancient duties.
I simply never foolishly claim that I’ve studied it well enough to
pretend ‘expertise’ in the subject. And, yes, you’re right.
I’m nobody. So true! I’ve never pretended otherwise. Rather, it is
a bit routine for me to go out of my way to say the very
same thing about myself --- that
I’m nobody important. I don’t
insist that anyone has to listen to me, and take my words seriously about the
Catholic Religion, because
I’m important. To the contrary… I say
you’d better take what I say seriously in spite of being a nobody --- the message is what’s vitally
important, NOT the messenger!
Get it? If not, I’ve done my best.
But I’ll let you in on a little secret. People
who think themselves Catholic --- whether TNOs who aren’t really Catholic
despite sounding & looking so, or the real deal and of varying degrees of
knowledge about Catholicism or lack thereof --- tend to go gaga over eminent
scholarship, papal documents, curial pronouncements, and so forth and so on. If
anyone bothers reading what I write, then you know, for a fact, that I
don’t despise great learning or knowledge. Far from it! Howsoever, as
I’m fond of saying, you don’t need immense learning, knowledge or
high degrees to be a real Catholic. If so, then people having very little brain
are in big trouble. Only the intellectuals will get into Heaven.
Do I believe this? Of course not! Don’t be a
goofy wog. Intellectualism is a deficit. To salvation, that is. Why? Because pride then dogs your footsteps. And deceit. The
very simple yet good-willed Roman Catholic is far more likely to
make it into Heaven.
Ah, but the secret? All you need is basic but wise
understanding of God. All you need, regarding His One True Faith, is basic but
wise understanding of His Singularly Roman Catholic Body’s Purpose. Once
you have this down, everything else follows. Time and time again have I known
the answer to serious questions about Catholicism and, later learning from
eminent sources the truth about the matter, confirmed what I already figured
out. Why? Because I’m so smart? The opposite, actually. Because I’m
so extremely simple-minded… but good-willed when it comes to Infallible
Truth.
That said, we’ll
throw in one last thing. A thing people of a traditional nature, and claiming
to be Roman Catholic, really do go gaga over. To wit, eminent
scholarship & authoritative yet arcane statements from the
Church’s Hierarchy. Not that I disdain these things. Anyone who reads my writings can know this
is not true! Contrarily, because one is not ‘proven right’
by these sources just because
he or she quotes it. People who are unlearned are no more
reliably aided by such sources than is the everyday person qualified to
run a nuclear reactor just because one glances at a physics book.
Yet the eminent & authoritative quote? We may
peruse the following;
“It should be taught, therefore, that these
orders are seven in number, and that this has been the constant teaching of the
Catholic Church. These orders are those
of porter, lector, exorcist,
acolyte, subdeacon, deacon and priest… After tonsure [a sign of dedication to God’s Holy
Service as a man, whether in the priesthood or in the monastery] it is
customary to advance to the first order, which is that of porter. The function
(of porter) is to guard the keys and doors of the church [sanctuary], and to allow no
one to enter there to whom access has been forbidden.” (The Catechism of the Council of Trent
--- also known as The Roman Catechism,
etc. --- and, while not of infallible nature, continually attested for the past
four centuries, by both academics & clergy within the Catholic Church, as
the next thing to it in authoritative teaching. St. Charles Borromeo edited it
overall, it was ordered to be written by the holy Council of Trent, and
promulgated by Pope St. Pius V. First published in original
Latin in
Notice the “function” bold highlighted
in the quote above? Namely, “…and to allow no one to enter there [the
church, that is to say, a sanctuary] to whom access has been forbidden…”? Naturally.
And who, prithee, is it that “access” to a Roman Catholic Sanctuary
has “been forbidden”? Correct, my intelligent, honest & humble
reader:
People who are not
Catholic or are impenitent & publicly sinful Catholics.
Yet will even this quote convince the inconvincible?
Not a chance. If CF
(Catholic fundamentalist)
, then no amount of eminent or
authoritative quotes is likely to change their minds. CFs are not simply
unlearned, they are also proud & impatient. Too, they really like looking
‘right’ regardless of whether or not their stance is actually
right. Accordingly, truth is never
their highest aim; always ‘winning’ the argument is.
But for a sincere & honest person, truly wanting
to know the truth about this?
Why, this really ought to be enough. Especially for a relatively short article.
So why did I wait until now to bring out this quote?
I’d read it some time ago while studying The Catechism of the Council of Trent meticulously. However,
I’ve also read and written thousands upon thousands of pages regarding
Catholicity since then. It thus was someone just now (as I write!) bringing it
to my attention that has permitted me to cite it, backing up what we’ve
dared to say concerning ‘porters’. Yet, again, why put it here, near the very end of the
article? Because, dear reader, the stubborn are not ever going to
capitulate in spite of such ‘eminent quotes’. And because, my
beloved one, Roman Catholics --- the real kind, even now during the Great
Apostasy! --- need to know, imperatively, how it is never eminent scholarship or authoritative statements
guaranteed solely to lead one
into adequate & correct understanding of Catholicity.
In other words, you needn’t be a brilliant,
learned & eminent scholar or intellectual in order to save one’s soul
as a real & good Roman Catholic. If so, as said before, then only the learned intellectual will make it into
Heaven. But is this the case? Absolutely not.
Our One True Religion is profound enough for an eminent scholar, who is
truly Catholic, to plumb endlessly for wisdom & comprehension.
It’s also simple enough for the average person of adequate
intelligence to know, believe & profess, saving his or her soul. Whichever, knowing, believing &
professing Infallible Catholic Truth is the key.
What we’ve said above concerning sanctuaries
& porters is simple & true.
Anybody should be able to comprehend it, even the
simple-minded.
I know, because I’m a simple-minded man who
loves the truth.
Do you love truth? Then please be simple. And honest.
It really is the best policy --- honestly.
A BRIEF NOTE:
If harboring confusion or skepticism
regarding what this short article has dared to say, particularly concerning
certain canon laws in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, then you are morally
obligated to examine another short letter that dovetails with this article
perfectly and is called
Unity of Worship Redux:
How the 1917 Code of Canon Law Does Not, & Cannot, Vitiate or Change
the Church’s Ancient Teaching re Religious Separation Applied to Ritual
or Worship
. As well as, if still dubious, you are morally obligated
to examine yet another even shorter letter that dovetails perfectly with both
the preceding, called
Unity of Worship
Addendum: How the 1917 Code of Canon Law Simply Is Not, However Someone May
Want to Think Otherwise, Any Act of ‘Infallibility’, the Truly
Infallible Definition of Papal Infallibility at the Vatican Council of the
1800s Proving This
. Both are in the Letters & Admonishments section of
The Epistemologic Works. This is a
matter of eternal life or death. Follow all links provided when
uninformed & disbelieving. Figure it out --- please do so!
+
+ +
Pilate’s
query met:
Note:
if you’ve come
to this webpage directly from a search
engine or other
website, then, when done viewing this webpage
--- and assuming
you wish to view more of this website’s pages ---
please type the
website’s address (as given above right before this
note) into the
address bar at the top of your browser and hit the
‘enter’ button on the keyboard of your computer.
Please go here about use of the writings
on this website.
© 2019 by
Paul Doughton.
All rights
reserved.