Merry Christmas!
I know its late, but I didn't really have a opportunity to post on Christmas.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas!
I know its late, but I didn't really have a opportunity to post on Christmas.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter
Here is a little clip I put together in support of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter.
Please check out their site here
Click here for better quality
Please check out their site here
Click here for better quality
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
The Truth: Hitler & the Church
There have been baseless accusations that have been aimed at the Church for her supposed actions during the second world war.
These accusations have been getting on my nerves as of late, so I've decided to get to the bottom of them.
They are like most arguments against the Church; they come from distorted facts and a lack of knowledge.
Please read the suggested books at the bottom of this article for more information.
Hitler's Christianity
Some say that Hitler was a Catholic until the day he died. This is a mere assumption, Hitler was simply raised in a Catholic family - a hardly practicing one.
Martin Luther was a born a Catholic, but he certainly did not practice the Catholic faith when he fell away from the true Church.
Just as Luther, Hitler rejected the Church when he grew older; the only difference is that Hitler rejected Christianity all together.
He(Hitler) can be quoted describing himself as a 'complete pagan'
Here are some more interesting quotes by Adolf Hitler; taken from the book Hitler's Secret Conversations: 1941-1944:
27th February, 1942, midday:
It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold its demise." (p 278)
14th October, 1941, midday:
The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity [is] the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)
Hitler's Hate for the Catholics
Besides Jews Hitler killed about 2-3 million Catholics. 25% of the Polish clergy also were killed.
Among these was the great polish martyr St. Maximilian Kolbe who was sent to Auschwitz and murdered with carbolic acid.
Hitler's Excommunication
Some People say that the Church did not excommunicate Hitler and thus committed a grievous error.
The problem with this argument is that it is a mere assumption.
It is not known whether or not the Church 'formally' excommunicated Hitler, but it is known that Hitler, by his own sins, was automatically excommunicated ipso facto under canon law.
Another interesting point is that the conference of German bishops excommunicated all Nazis in 1930. And in the 1932 elections forbade Catholics to vote for a Nazi.
This hardly seems like the Church supporting Hitler...
Hitler and Pope Pius XII
Many accuse Pope Pius XII of collaborating with Hitler and the Nazis during WW2. Again these are simply baseless non-facts.
Here is the truth of Pope Pius XII and how he helped Catholic as well as Jews escape the ruthless hand of the Nazis.
In 1937, Pope Pius XI, Pope Pius XII predecessor, issued a papal encyclical condemning racism. When asked who was responsible, Pope Pius XI replied: “Thank him, he has done everything” while pointing to his secretary of state, Pope Pius XII, then Eugenio Pacelli.
After reading Hitler's Mein Kampf, Pacelli called Hitler 'obsessed' and stated that he was a 'new manifestation' of the Anti-Christ.
Sounds like a real supporter of the Nazi cause.
As papal nuncio in Germany, Pacelli criticized the Nazis 40 times before 1929.
As secretary, he did sign an agreement with Hitler’s Germany in 1933 but he later stated that he had to do so or it would mean the “virtual elimination of the Catholic Church” in Germany.
In 1934, he protested the Nazis’ closing some 200 Catholic publications, taking over Church schools and forcing Catholics to join the Hitler Youth.
In 1935, he told 325,000 pilgrims at Lourdes that the “church will never come to terms with Nazis as long as they persist in their racial philosophy.”
Throughout 1936 and thereafter, his Vatican Radio broadcast against these racial laws.
On Jan. 9, 1939, Pacelli told the world’s archbishops that their governments should accept Jews trying to escape Germany.
When he became pope, Pecelli's first papal encyclical defining human nature, stating that it(human nature) is "neither gentile nor Jew."
On Oct. 28, 1939, the New York Times explained: “Pope condemns dictators, treaty violators, racism.”
On Jan. 23, 1940, "Vatican denounces atrocities in Poland; Germans called even worse than Russians.”
On March 14, 1940, “Pope is emphatic about just peace: Jewish rights defended.”
In 1940, Pius sent a secret letter telling bishops to help those suffering from racism, reminding them racism is “incompatible with the teachings of the Catholic Church.”
This pope hardly seems to be supporting the cause of Hitler...
Conclusion
As a conclusion I would like to cite a famous quote from ArchBishop Fulton J. Sheen:
“In this country you could not find a hundred people who hate the Catholic Church, but you can find uncounted millions who hate what they mistakenly believe the Church to be.”
Suggested for Reading:
Gajewski, Karol Jozef. “Nazi Policy and the Catholic Church.” Inside the Vatican (November 1999).
The Myth of Hitler’s Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews from the Nazis, by Rabbi David G. Dalin
These accusations have been getting on my nerves as of late, so I've decided to get to the bottom of them.
They are like most arguments against the Church; they come from distorted facts and a lack of knowledge.
Please read the suggested books at the bottom of this article for more information.
Hitler's Christianity
Some say that Hitler was a Catholic until the day he died. This is a mere assumption, Hitler was simply raised in a Catholic family - a hardly practicing one.
Martin Luther was a born a Catholic, but he certainly did not practice the Catholic faith when he fell away from the true Church.
Just as Luther, Hitler rejected the Church when he grew older; the only difference is that Hitler rejected Christianity all together.
He(Hitler) can be quoted describing himself as a 'complete pagan'
Here are some more interesting quotes by Adolf Hitler; taken from the book Hitler's Secret Conversations: 1941-1944:
27th February, 1942, midday:
It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold its demise." (p 278)
14th October, 1941, midday:
The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity [is] the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)
Hitler's Hate for the Catholics
Besides Jews Hitler killed about 2-3 million Catholics. 25% of the Polish clergy also were killed.
Among these was the great polish martyr St. Maximilian Kolbe who was sent to Auschwitz and murdered with carbolic acid.
Hitler's Excommunication
Some People say that the Church did not excommunicate Hitler and thus committed a grievous error.
The problem with this argument is that it is a mere assumption.
It is not known whether or not the Church 'formally' excommunicated Hitler, but it is known that Hitler, by his own sins, was automatically excommunicated ipso facto under canon law.
Another interesting point is that the conference of German bishops excommunicated all Nazis in 1930. And in the 1932 elections forbade Catholics to vote for a Nazi.
This hardly seems like the Church supporting Hitler...
Hitler and Pope Pius XII
Many accuse Pope Pius XII of collaborating with Hitler and the Nazis during WW2. Again these are simply baseless non-facts.
Here is the truth of Pope Pius XII and how he helped Catholic as well as Jews escape the ruthless hand of the Nazis.
In 1937, Pope Pius XI, Pope Pius XII predecessor, issued a papal encyclical condemning racism. When asked who was responsible, Pope Pius XI replied: “Thank him, he has done everything” while pointing to his secretary of state, Pope Pius XII, then Eugenio Pacelli.
After reading Hitler's Mein Kampf, Pacelli called Hitler 'obsessed' and stated that he was a 'new manifestation' of the Anti-Christ.
Sounds like a real supporter of the Nazi cause.
As papal nuncio in Germany, Pacelli criticized the Nazis 40 times before 1929.
As secretary, he did sign an agreement with Hitler’s Germany in 1933 but he later stated that he had to do so or it would mean the “virtual elimination of the Catholic Church” in Germany.
In 1934, he protested the Nazis’ closing some 200 Catholic publications, taking over Church schools and forcing Catholics to join the Hitler Youth.
In 1935, he told 325,000 pilgrims at Lourdes that the “church will never come to terms with Nazis as long as they persist in their racial philosophy.”
Throughout 1936 and thereafter, his Vatican Radio broadcast against these racial laws.
On Jan. 9, 1939, Pacelli told the world’s archbishops that their governments should accept Jews trying to escape Germany.
When he became pope, Pecelli's first papal encyclical defining human nature, stating that it(human nature) is "neither gentile nor Jew."
On Oct. 28, 1939, the New York Times explained: “Pope condemns dictators, treaty violators, racism.”
On Jan. 23, 1940, "Vatican denounces atrocities in Poland; Germans called even worse than Russians.”
On March 14, 1940, “Pope is emphatic about just peace: Jewish rights defended.”
In 1940, Pius sent a secret letter telling bishops to help those suffering from racism, reminding them racism is “incompatible with the teachings of the Catholic Church.”
This pope hardly seems to be supporting the cause of Hitler...
Conclusion
As a conclusion I would like to cite a famous quote from ArchBishop Fulton J. Sheen:
“In this country you could not find a hundred people who hate the Catholic Church, but you can find uncounted millions who hate what they mistakenly believe the Church to be.”
Suggested for Reading:
Gajewski, Karol Jozef. “Nazi Policy and the Catholic Church.” Inside the Vatican (November 1999).
The Myth of Hitler’s Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews from the Nazis, by Rabbi David G. Dalin
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Credo - Nicene Creed
I think this is becoming a hobby of mine :D
Here is the Nicene Creed as said in the Latin Mass
Click here for better quality
Here is the Nicene Creed as said in the Latin Mass
Click here for better quality
Monday, December 3, 2007
The Eucharist - Continued
For My Flesh is true food, and My Blood is true drink.
Here is a common argument made against the Eucharist:
Christ is only speaking metaphorically when He said, "this is My Body, this is My Blood", because when He said in John 10:9,"I am the door" or in John 15:1,"I am the true vine", He was only speaking metaphorically
There are some real problems with this argument.
In my previous treatise on the Eucharist (here) I stated that Christ used very graphic words like "trogo" (to gnaw). In Greek there are two word for "eat": the word phago and the word trogo. Phago means merely to eat. Like when I tell you to eat your vegetables. The word trogo literally means to "chew" or to "gnaw". Would I say to you, "gnaw your vegetables"?
If Christ was only speaking metaphorically then He would have used the phago not the word trogo.
The point is that there is no real link between John 10:9, John 15:1 and John 6:35. In John 10:9 and John 15:1 it would make sense for Christ to speak as He did. But it would not make sense if, in John 10:9, Christ was speaking metaphorically. He took His statement far beyond mere metaphorical-ism into to shear reality using strong words and forceful statements.
The brunt of the Protestant argument rests in the ending verse of John chapter 6. John 6:63: "It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." Protestants say that Christ is saying that eating flesh is to no avail.
If we take this point of view and look at John 6 in full view we would come up with this:
Christ says to His apostles, "Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood, if you do not then you will have no life within you. But whoever eats My Flesh will have eternal life."
Then He Says, "Do what I have commanded you, but its really a waste of time and it is to little avail."
The above seems totally absurd, but in truth it is exactly what the Protestants are saying.
The truth is that mans flesh doesn't avail, but the Flesh of Christ does. If it did not why would He become incarnate?
I'll write more on this very important issue later.
Here is a common argument made against the Eucharist:
Christ is only speaking metaphorically when He said, "this is My Body, this is My Blood", because when He said in John 10:9,"I am the door" or in John 15:1,"I am the true vine", He was only speaking metaphorically
There are some real problems with this argument.
In my previous treatise on the Eucharist (here) I stated that Christ used very graphic words like "trogo" (to gnaw). In Greek there are two word for "eat": the word phago and the word trogo. Phago means merely to eat. Like when I tell you to eat your vegetables. The word trogo literally means to "chew" or to "gnaw". Would I say to you, "gnaw your vegetables"?
If Christ was only speaking metaphorically then He would have used the phago not the word trogo.
The point is that there is no real link between John 10:9, John 15:1 and John 6:35. In John 10:9 and John 15:1 it would make sense for Christ to speak as He did. But it would not make sense if, in John 10:9, Christ was speaking metaphorically. He took His statement far beyond mere metaphorical-ism into to shear reality using strong words and forceful statements.
The brunt of the Protestant argument rests in the ending verse of John chapter 6. John 6:63: "It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." Protestants say that Christ is saying that eating flesh is to no avail.
If we take this point of view and look at John 6 in full view we would come up with this:
Christ says to His apostles, "Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood, if you do not then you will have no life within you. But whoever eats My Flesh will have eternal life."
Then He Says, "Do what I have commanded you, but its really a waste of time and it is to little avail."
The above seems totally absurd, but in truth it is exactly what the Protestants are saying.
The truth is that mans flesh doesn't avail, but the Flesh of Christ does. If it did not why would He become incarnate?
I'll write more on this very important issue later.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
The Eucharist
Do This in Remembrance of Me.
A Protestant told me recently that, when Christ said, "do this in remembrance of Me", He must have meant that the Eucharist was only a symbol.
A further look at Scripture will prove that this Sacrament is not just 'in remembrance', but that it is truly the true Body and Blood of Christ.
First, let's go through John chapter 6. John 6:49, "Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; (50), this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die."
Here Jesus tells us that if we eat the bread of which He speaks we shall have eternal life, but He hasn't said what this bread is, yet.
Let return to John 6.
Verse 51, "I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
Christ states that the 'bread' is His 'flesh'. Whoever eat His flesh will have eternal life.
Moving on to verse 52, "The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat? (60)Then many of his disciples who were listening said, "This saying is hard; who can accept it?"
If the Eucharist was merely a symbol or remembrance of Christ why would this teaching be so hard to accept, why would some people start to leave Him? If we look at it in the literal sense, that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, then we can see how the Jews had such hard time accepting this teaching.
Also, if Christ was only speaking symbolically why wouldn't He, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood Him correctly.
Lets go back to verse 53,
"Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. (54) Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. (55) For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. (56) Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. (57) Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me."
In verse 54 Christ says that His flesh is TRUE food and His blood is TRUE drink, and if we do not eat and drink of the Son of man we will not, v53, have eternal life. After v53, Jesus uses an even stronger Greek word for "eat"; He switches from using "phago" (which just means "eat") to using "trogo" which means to "gnaw" or "chew".
In Mark 4:34 we see that Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in regards to a question about eternal salvation.
Now, on the question of the word "remembrance" we will, again, go back to the Greek of the Old Testament.
Christ commanded the Apostles to "do this in remembrance of me." Before we come to any conclusions we must look at the Greek word used for the word "remembrance".
The Greek word for remembrance is "anamnēsis". The word anamnēsis is a process by which an abstract idea is moved into the material world. To the Jews, the word, anamnēsis, had sacrificial meaning. In the Greek Old Testament that was used by Christ and the apostles, the word is used to mean memorial sacrifice. For the first meaning, Christ's words indicate the moving of His heavenly body into the material world. And for the second meaning it indicates the sacrificial nature of what He was commanding the apostles to do.
Further look into the Scriptures will reveal that the Eucharist is a very serious and literal matter.
1 Corinthians 11: 27 - 29
"Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself."
St. Paul tells the faithful, in the above verses, that if someone eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily they are in grave sin. If the Eucharist was only symbolic then such grave matter would not be attached to It.
I think it quite clear, from Scripture that the Eucharist is truly the Flesh and Blood of Christ. And if we eat and drink of Him we shall have eternal life, but if we do not, as the Council of Trent states and as Christ says, we shall be in anathema.
A Protestant told me recently that, when Christ said, "do this in remembrance of Me", He must have meant that the Eucharist was only a symbol.
A further look at Scripture will prove that this Sacrament is not just 'in remembrance', but that it is truly the true Body and Blood of Christ.
First, let's go through John chapter 6. John 6:49, "Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; (50), this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die."
Here Jesus tells us that if we eat the bread of which He speaks we shall have eternal life, but He hasn't said what this bread is, yet.
Let return to John 6.
Verse 51, "I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world."
Christ states that the 'bread' is His 'flesh'. Whoever eat His flesh will have eternal life.
Moving on to verse 52, "The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat? (60)Then many of his disciples who were listening said, "This saying is hard; who can accept it?"
If the Eucharist was merely a symbol or remembrance of Christ why would this teaching be so hard to accept, why would some people start to leave Him? If we look at it in the literal sense, that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, then we can see how the Jews had such hard time accepting this teaching.
Also, if Christ was only speaking symbolically why wouldn't He, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood Him correctly.
Lets go back to verse 53,
"Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. (54) Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. (55) For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. (56) Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. (57) Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me."
In verse 54 Christ says that His flesh is TRUE food and His blood is TRUE drink, and if we do not eat and drink of the Son of man we will not, v53, have eternal life. After v53, Jesus uses an even stronger Greek word for "eat"; He switches from using "phago" (which just means "eat") to using "trogo" which means to "gnaw" or "chew".
In Mark 4:34 we see that Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in regards to a question about eternal salvation.
Now, on the question of the word "remembrance" we will, again, go back to the Greek of the Old Testament.
Christ commanded the Apostles to "do this in remembrance of me." Before we come to any conclusions we must look at the Greek word used for the word "remembrance".
The Greek word for remembrance is "anamnēsis". The word anamnēsis is a process by which an abstract idea is moved into the material world. To the Jews, the word, anamnēsis, had sacrificial meaning. In the Greek Old Testament that was used by Christ and the apostles, the word is used to mean memorial sacrifice. For the first meaning, Christ's words indicate the moving of His heavenly body into the material world. And for the second meaning it indicates the sacrificial nature of what He was commanding the apostles to do.
Further look into the Scriptures will reveal that the Eucharist is a very serious and literal matter.
1 Corinthians 11: 27 - 29
"Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself."
St. Paul tells the faithful, in the above verses, that if someone eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily they are in grave sin. If the Eucharist was only symbolic then such grave matter would not be attached to It.
I think it quite clear, from Scripture that the Eucharist is truly the Flesh and Blood of Christ. And if we eat and drink of Him we shall have eternal life, but if we do not, as the Council of Trent states and as Christ says, we shall be in anathema.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
