Saint Thomas Aquinas

Saturday, October 21, 2017

Edward Feser Answers the Defenders of Pope Francis Concerning Death Penalty

If you are interested in Pope Francis' latest debacle on his statements concerning the death penalty, I suggest you read this article by Edward Feser. I also recommend you pick up his new book on Capital Punishment. Enjoy!


Wednesday, October 11, 2017

Francis' "New Things": Death Penalty Now Inhumane? Pius XII a Promoter of Inhumane Acts?


 Lets translate the current Catechism into modernistic Francis language everyone can understand, it should have said "the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the inhumane measures of the death penalty."
Today pope Francis has announced his method of spreading confusion across the Church like wildfire. Francis communicates to us something that has never been a part of preaching the Gospel. He said,
"It is not enough to find a new language in which to articulate our perennial faith; it is also urgent, in the light of the new challenges and prospects facing humanity, that the Church be able to express the “new things” of Christ’s Gospel, that, albeit present in the word of God, have not yet come to light.  This is the treasury of “things old and new” of which Jesus spoke when he invited his disciples to teach the newness that he had brought, without forsaking the old (cf. Mt 13:52)." 
Francis has now invented his own Gospel. He says it is not enough to ensure we are preaching the perennial faith with sufficient language to meet our time, but that now we must express, "new things"! Now we are supposed to be finding things in the Word of God that we have never heard of? Did Jesus speak of this in Matthew 13:52?  I think not. Lets look at the passage.
He said unto them: Therefore every scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven, is like to a man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.
Jesus here according to Saint Thomas is speaking about the sacred teaching itself which Jesus was communicating to his followers which he also calls scribes. Why was he calling them scribes? Because they would be similar to the scribes of old, they would teach the Gospel instead of the old law. They can discuss the the kingdom of God and Sacred teaching, wherein things new and old are contained. "Behold I send you prophets, and wise men and scribes." Dan 12:10 They are also called scribes because they are Christ's secretaries. Jesus taught them in parables so they would see the fulfillment of the Old Law in the New. Thomas says according to Gregory, the old things refer to all those things which are attributed to sin, and the new to those things which are attributed to the grace of Christ and eternal life. (Taken from St Thomas' Commentary on Matthew)

How on earth does this refer to "new things" that we have never heard of over the past 2000 years the Church has been preaching the Gospel? Francis is simply inventing new teaching. As we all know, Divine Revelation closed with the death of the last apostle. We can only delve deeper into the existing, perennial teaching that we have been given at the outset. So yes, it is enough to articulate our perennial faith to the world, because like God it is the same today and forever.

Then Francis then drops one of his "new things" on us. He invents a new teaching out of thin air! Brace yourselves!
I would like now to bring up a subject that ought to find in the Catechism of the Catholic Church a more adequate and coherent treatment in the light of these expressed aims.  I am speaking of the death penalty.  This issue cannot be reduced to a mere résumé of traditional teaching without taking into account not only the doctrine as it has developed in the teaching of recent Popes, but also the change in the awareness of the Christian people which rejects an attitude of complacency before a punishment deeply injurious of human dignity. It must be clearly stated that the death penalty is an inhumane measure that, regardless of how it is carried out, abases human dignity.  It is per se contrary to the Gospel, because it entails the willful suppression of a human life that never ceases to be sacred in the eyes of its Creator and of which – ultimately – only God is the true judge and guarantor. 
So the "new thing" is now condemning 2000 years of Christian teaching which teaches that the death penalty is a legitimate form of punishment. What Francis is really saying is that the Church taught and upheld an act which was contrary to human dignity, contrary to the Gospel, and he is the one who is going to correct it. If it goes against the Gospel, then the Catholic Church has been teaching something contrary to the Gospel for 2000 years! We all know this is an impossibility. Better yet, he is calling Pope Pius XII and many other popes monsters who were promoting heinous acts against human dignity! His predecessors were promoting an act as being a legitimate form of punishment that was really contrary to the Gospel! Is Pope Pius XII so far removed from our advanced society that he did not realize this? If you think so I have ocean front property to sell you in Kansas. Do we see what this kind of thinking leads us? This is modernism at its finest! He is claiming that this is a development. Does he know the definition of development? Development means the teaching is the same, we just understand it more fully. Development is not that we overturn the teaching and then label it a development.

Everyone who came before Francis was wrong, and he is right. This is the leitmotif of his papal occupation. Francis knows better than all the popes who came before him. Francis knows the "new things" that no one else ever knew! Almost sounds like the Gnostics no? As for me, the Church teaching is what it is. For now the Catechism teaches, "Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty..." Guess what, if the act was contrary to the Gospel, this could never have been said in the Catechism! Lets translate this into modernistic Francis language everyone can understand, it should have said "the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the inhumane measures of the death penalty."  I feel ashamed for anyone who falls for this "new thing." Do you think we are idiots? As you can tell I am a bit miffed at this whole debacle.


 Above: Pope Pius XII now according to Francis a monster who promoted inhumane acts against human dignity!

Even in the case of the death penalty the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. Rather public authority limits itself to depriving the offender of the good of life in expiation for his guilt, after he, through his crime, deprived himself of his own right to life. 
(Pius XII, Address to the First International Congress of Histopathology
of the Nervous System, 14 September 1952, XIV, 328)


Thursday, September 28, 2017

Amoris Laetitia Now Trying to Hijack Thomism?

This is a great laugh. Sorry this is now getting ridiculous. Pope Francis, who clearly has no idea what Thomsitic theology is, is now claiming that his troubled document, Amoris Laetitia is a Thomistic document. You can't make this stuff up! He says, "...some maintain that there is no Catholic morality underlying Amoris Laetitia, or at least, no sure morality. I want to repeat clearly that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomist, the morality of the great Thomas. You can speak of it with a great theologian, one of the best today and one of the most mature, Cardinal Schönborn." As we also know, Schönborn is no Thomist either, as for his theological maturity, well....

I Don't Think So!


This is another case of the emperor's new clothes. This is now going to be the mantra going forward for everything the modernists are going to try and push on us. Say it over and over again and everyone will believe it. All I read are Thomistic theology books, I know what the basics of Thomistic morality are, and I can say with complete confidence, that Amoris concerning Pope Francis' accompanying teaching encouraging Communion for the divorced and remarried is not Thomistic. In fact, has he ever read the Summa? The answer is clear as day if he were to actually read it. What does Thomas himself say about receiving communion if a person be known publicly to be in serious sin? He says, "A distinction must be made among sinners: some are secret; others are notorious, either from evidence of the fact, as public usurers, or public robbers, or from being denounced as evil men by some ecclesiastical or civil tribunal. Therefore Holy Communion ought not to be given to open sinners when they ask for it." This obviously refers to most of the divorced and remarried since they are publicly known to be living and having relations with someone other than their spouse. Therefore in these cases they should be denied Holy Communion.

What about a case where someone is in serious sin and no one knows about it except the priest? Should the priest give a divorced and remarried person who just moved from across the country Communion, if he is the only one who knows they are living in sin? Thomas says yes if the sin be absolutely private, although the priest should warn them and their parishioners openly that these types of sinners should not receive it because it would be a detriment to their souls. Notice, Thomas never encourages someone in serious sin to receive Holy Communion. He says, "But if they be not open sinners, but occult, the Holy Communion should not be denied them if they ask for it. For since every Christian, from the fact that he is baptized, is admitted to the Lord's table, he may not be robbed of his right, except from some open cause. Hence on 1 Corinthians 5:11, "If he who is called a brother among you," etc., Augustine's gloss remarks: "We cannot inhibit any person from Communion, except he has openly confessed, or has been named and convicted by some ecclesiastical or lay tribunal." Nevertheless a priest who has knowledge of the crime can privately warn the secret sinner, or warn all openly in public, from approaching the Lord's table, until they have repented of their sins and have been reconciled to the Church; because after repentance and reconciliation, Communion must not be refused even to public sinners, especially in the hour of death.... it is worse for the secret sinner to sin mortally in taking the body of Christ," So if the person is not resolved to quit committing the sin, they should not receive Our Lord Thomas makes this clear, yet if it is absolutely private, to their own detriment they could receive it.

So the Pope Francis is wrong any way you go here concerning a person having relations with someone other than his or her spouse with no firm purpose of amendment. He is out of his mind if he is going to claim Thomas as his moral support for encouraging unrepentant sinners to approach the the Lord's Table. The Church's age old teaching that someone who is having marital relations with someone they are not married to, should not receive Holy Communion, is Thomistic and stands as the teaching of the Church. To think that he is now going to try and pass this confusing mess off as Thomistic and hi-jack Thomistic theology is really upsetting to say the least. For those who actually want to read what Thomas has to say on the matter should go here and read it. Question 80, Article 6.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

The Silence of Pope Francis and its Implications: Three Sacraments Profaned

In this supreme moment of need of the Church, the one who should speak will fall silent!” Prophesy from Our Lady of Good Success, Quito, Ecuador



A couple of years ago I had the privilege of visiting the Conceptionist Convent in Quito, Ecuador where the apparitions of Our Lady of Good Success appeared to Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres. It was a life changing experience seeing the body of Mother Mariana and participating in the procession carrying Our Lady of Good Success. It was also very enlightening to speak to the local Catholics who are very involved with the convent and are very familiar with the prophesies of Our Lady of Good Success. I was able to sit down at the local coffee shop and chat about these apparitions. One of the discussions was on the prophesy of the "one" who should speak and will fall silent.

Although we could not be certain that this is referring to Francis, the prophesy does fit quite well if it is read in context of the rest of the prophesies, which refer to our time, most importantly concerning the assault on marriage and purity. "In those times will be an atmosphere full of the spirit of impurity which, by way of an evil sea run through the streets, squares and public places with an amazing freedom..." As we know there is a great siege upon us throughout the world regarding impurity and a heightened rebellious attitude towards marriage. "As for the Sacrament of Matrimony, which symbolizes the union of Christ with the Church, will be attacked and profaned in every sense of the word."

We have seen this confusion enter into the Church itself and we must examine the primary cause, especially in its escalation over the past few years. It is no secret that since Pope Francis has taken the seat of Peter confusion has escalated to an unprecedented level in the Church concerning marriage. His document Amoris Leatitia and his accompanying public teaching has not only caused mass confusion in the Church, it is spreading the heretical idea that one can with full knowledge remain in serious sin and yet receive Holy Communion. Pope Francis knows the bishops conferences who are doing this, and he has approved this act by a letter to the Argentine bishops. It does not take a scholar to see the error. Many liberal writers and commentators are defending the Francis agenda claiming that those who are opposing it are insignificant, Pharisaical, and rigid conservatives who are not willing to follow the Holy Spirit in updating the Church's teaching. Those who understand this tactic see it for what it is, modernism.

Back to the prophesy. Pope Francis has now been approached six times by clergy and laity charitably asking him to clarify his document and affirm the Church's definitive teaching on the matter. As we know, despite these six petitions we have....silence. Thus the one who should obviously speak is remaining silent, allowing the assault on the Sacraments of Marriage, Confession and the Eucharist to continue. It is important to recognize the avalanche of profanation that comes from this one noxious error, it effects not only the Sacrament of Marriage, but it also trivializes the Sacrament of Confession, being that there is no firm purpose of amendment, and the Eucharist, since it is being received  unworthily. Obviously I have no  idea how all of this is going to play out with Francis in the future. As we know many controversies have arose in the Church over the centuries where popes have been deposed, removed, proclaimed anti-popes years after their occupancy. There have been horrible popes who have been lost under the dust of history. Who knows what the future holds. We are in another unique time in the Church where the "one" who appears to be the one who should be speaking, is remaining silent when asked to uphold the perennial teaching of the Church. In the end we know what the outcome will be, God's truth will triumph. However, it will require of those souls who remain faithful to suffer much. As the one who should speak remains silent, we must prepare to persevere.

"At that time there will be great calamities, physical, public and private. The small number of souls in which the cult of faith and virtue is preserved will undergo cruel and unspeakable suffering, the pair that prolonged martyrdom. Many of them go down to the grave by the violence of suffering and will be counted as martyrs who sacrificed themselves for the Church and for the Fatherland. To free others from the slavery of these heresies, those who have the merciful love of my Most Holy Son will need great strength of will, perseverance, courage, and confidence in God." Our Lady of Good Success

Monday, September 25, 2017

The Correction by Theologians: Amoris Laetitia

Here is the list of the seven heresies that has been addressed to Pope Francis. The entire document can be found on this news clip.

By words, deeds, and omissions, and by passages of the document 'Amoris
laetitia,' Your Holiness has upheld, directly or indirectly, and, with what degree of awareness we do not seek to judge, both by public office and by private act propagated in the Church the following false and heretical propositions:

1. "A justified person has not the strength with God’s grace to carry out the objective demands of the divine law, as though any of the commandments of God are impossible for the justified; or as meaning that God’s grace, when it produces justification in an individual, does not invariably and of its nature produce conversion from all serious sin, or is not sufficient for conversion from all serious sin."

2. "Christians who have obtained a civil divorce from the spouse to whom they are validly married and have contracted a civil marriage with some other person during the lifetime of their spouse, who live 'more uxorio' with their civil partner, and who choose to remain in this state with full knowledge of the nature of their act and full consent of the will to that act, are not necessarily in a state of mortal sin, and can receive sanctifying grace and grow in charity."

3. "A Christian believer can have full knowledge of a divine law and voluntarily choose to break it in a serious matter, but not be in a state of mortal sin as a result of this action."

4. "A person is able, while he obeys a divine prohibition, to sin against God by that very act of obedience."

5. "Conscience can truly and rightly judge that sexual acts between persons who have contracted a civil marriage with each other, although one or both of them is sacramentally married to another person, can sometimes be morally right or requested or even commanded by God."

6. "Moral principles and moral truths contained in divine revelation and in the natural law do not include negative prohibitions that absolutely forbid particular kinds of action, inasmuch as these are always gravely unlawful on account of their object."

7. "Our Lord Jesus Christ wills that the Church abandon her perennial discipline of refusing the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried and of refusing absolution to the divorced and remarried who do not express contrition for their state of life and a firm purpose of amendment with regard to it."


I extend my congratulations and gratitude to the originators of the Correction and I wish to have my name added to the list of those individuals who agree with the content of the Correction and want to be identified with it.
Sincerely and in gratitude,
The Most Reverend Rene Henry Gracida, D.D.
Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Watch EWTN Tonight for Pontifical Latin Mass!


A reminder that EWTN will broadcast live the Pontifical Latin Mass which His Excellency Bishop Joseph Perry will celebrate at the Cathedral Basilica of Ss Peter and Paul in Philadelphia, for the Exaltation of the Holy Cross and the 10th Anniversary of Summorum Pontificum.

You can also watch on EWTN’s website: http://ewtn.com/multimedia/live.asp; the Mass begins at 7pm EDT. It will re-air at 11PM.

Sacred music for the Mass will include Mozart’s Missa Brevis in C-major, (the “Sparrow” Mass), Elgar’s Ecce Sacerdos Magnus, Monteverdi’s Adoramus te, and John Blow’s Salvator Mundi, in addition to the Gregorian chants.


Tuesday, August 29, 2017

What is the Duty of the State in Regard to Religion?

Here is a great summary of the duty of the state in relation to the Church given by a great priest who shall remain anonymous.



Look.. it's perfectly simple...

1. All men have duty to worship the True God.
2. The State is a collection of men
3. Ergo, the State has the duty to provide for the worship the True God.

But...
1. Not all men recognize the True God and therefore don't worship Him.
2. But worship must be both interior and exterior in order to be an act of true worship, and since no one has the ability to coerce another to make an interior act.
3. Ergo, the State cannot coerce men to worship the True God against their will.

Corollary...

1. The State has the duty to provide for the common Good.
2. False worship of false Gods and especially Satanic worship mitigate against the common Good.
3. Ergo, the State has the right to forbid false worship of false Gods especially Satanic worship.

Conclusion....

The State must allow men to worship the True God ergo, the State cannot impinge or make laws regarding the Catholic Church which is the only true Church which gives true worship to the True God.

But, the State cannot force its citizens to engage in worship, ergo, it cannot mandate that all be Catholic or attend Catholic worship services.

However, the State CAN and SHOULD both foster evangelization programs that promote the Catholic Church and forbid the exercise and promulgation of false religions.

Tuesday, August 8, 2017

Happy Feast of St Dominic! Again!

Today in the new calendar is the feast of Saint Dominic, in the old calendar it was on the 4th of August. Saint Dominic is my favorite Saint and he has worked many wonders for me! I had new holy cards made up this year. Happy feast day to all!



Sunday, August 6, 2017

Catholic Art That Inspires Love and Devotion

The Catholic Church has a rich history in artistic achievement throughout the ages. Beginning in the early Church the faithful began crafting art which was aimed at inspiring one to love God and His Church. Over the past 2000 years up until about the sixty years or so ago, we have a witnessed a rich development and inexhaustible wealth of devotional images in Catholic churches across the world. Although being Italian I have an affection for the Italian art in Italy, my personal favorite devotional art, especially when it comes to statuary, is in the Spanish renaissance and baroque style. The realistic and inspiring statuary found in Quito, Ecuador are among the finest I have seen.

When it comes to art however, it is not just an external appreciation of the beauty of the art itself that we should be concerned. Although art can be emotionally moving, it is primarily the internal devotion it inspires in the viewer that is most important. Many Catholic art historians would argue that the iconography of the early Church until about the time of Giotto was the best and most pure representation of sacred art. Thus many would separate iconography as sacred art, and the art following the time of Giotto to be religious art. Although there is some merit to the argument, we must not forget that any art that brings us closer to God and His Church is worthy of being in the sacred space of a Church. Although the later Western art often invokes more emotion from the viewer than iconography, one can still orient themselves beyond the art to the what the art actually represents. This also goes for statuary, which many purists in the Orthodox Church adamantly oppose. I think that well done statuary can bring one closer to the person it represents, as can be seen in the images below.

I was going through my pictures from Quito, Ecuador that I took a couple of years ago during my pilgrimage. I thought I would post some of my favorites. I wish we would see a revival among Catholics today to bring this type of art into our modern churches and replace the lifeless pathetic imagery that wee prevalent today.