No Need To Write A Book On Life

At one point I thought it would be useful to write a book on living life but today I realize that people far more talented and resourceful have already done it.  I am glad I had not attempted it, not only because I would have failed at it, but also because it would have been an exercise in futility since everyone will live his/her life in the way he/she sees fit because of Free Will and not because someone uttered some words, whether such words are from earthly sages or Christ Himself.

Having said that, I now contradict myself and say this (in futility):  Life is about becoming invisible yourself and transparent like a piece of glass so others see a bit of Christ through you. [1]


[1] These words were inspired by Sainte Jean-Marie Baptiste Vianney [2] who said:

 "If we had faith, we would see God hidden in the priest like a light behind glass, like wine mixed with water."  See http://www.how-to-pray-the-rosary-everyday.com/saint-john-marie-vianney-quotes.html#priesthood

[2] Pronunciation by  spl0uf at http://www.forvo.com/word/jean-marie_baptiste_vianney/#fr

On Charity And Love By Two Saints

For Thérèse de Lisieux, born January 2, 1873, it was not enough that she devoted her entire life to Christ as a Carmelite nun beginning at the tender age of 15 on April 9, 1888. [1]  She desired martyrdom, not just one kind of martyrdom -- she wanted to have them all, to be scourged and crucified, to be flayed like St. Bartholomew, to be plunged into boiling oil like St. John [2] (even though he was unharmed).  Since this was not possible, she asked, "O my Jesus! what is your answer to all my follies?" [3]

Her answer came during her meditation when she opened the Epistles of St. Paul to find it.  There she read that "all cannot be apostles, prophets, doctors, etc., that the Church is composed of different members, and that the eye cannot be the hand at one and the same time." [4] Emphasis original.  That answer did not satisfy her.  She continued reading and a subsequent sentence "consoled" her:  "'Yet strive after THE BETTER GIFTS, and I point out to you a yet more excellent way.'  And the Apostle explain[ed] how all the most PERFECT gifts are nothing without LOVE.  That Charity is the EXCELLENT WAY that leads most surely to God." [5] Emphasis original.  Then Saint Thérèse concluded: "I understood that LOVE, COMPRISED ALL VOCATIONS, THAT LOVE WAS EVERYTHING, THAT IT EMBRACED ALL TIMES AND PLACES....IN A WORD, THAT IT WAS ETERNAL!" [6] Emphasis original.

About 648 years earlier was born another saint, Saint Thomas Aquinas, "circa 1225," [7] who had this to say on charity and love [8]:  

  I am the Good Shepherd. Surely it is fitting that Christ should be a shepherd, for just as a flock is guided and fed by a shepherd so the faithful are fed by Christ with spiritual food and with his own body and blood. The Apostle said: You were once like sheep without a shepherd, but now you have returned to the guardian and ruler of your souls. The prophet has said: As a shepherd he pastures his flock.

  Christ said that the shepherd enters through the gate and that he is himself the gate as well as the shepherd. Then it is necessary that he enter through himself. By so doing, he reveals himself, and through himself he knows the Father. But we enter through him because through him we find happiness.

  Take heed: no one else is the gate but Christ. Others reflect his light, but no one else is the true light. John the Baptist was not the light, but he bore witness to the light. It is said of Christ, however: He was the true light that enlightens every man. For this reason no one says that he is the gate; this title is Christ’s own. However, he has made others shepherds and given that office to his members; for Peter was a shepherd, and so were the other apostles and all good bishops after them. Scripture says: I shall give you shepherds according to my own heart. Although the bishops of the Church, who are her sons, are all shepherds, nevertheless Christ refers only to one person in saying: I am the Good Shepherd, because he wants to emphasise the virtue of charity. Thus, no one can be a good shepherd unless he is one with Christ in charity. Through this we become members of the true shepherd.

  The duty of a good shepherd is charity; therefore Christ said: The good shepherd gives his life for his sheep. Know the difference between a good and a bad shepherd: the good shepherd cares for the welfare of his flock, but the bad shepherd cares only for his own welfare.

  The Good Shepherd does not demand that shepherds lay down their lives for a real flock of sheep. But every spiritual shepherd must endure the loss of his bodily life for the salvation of the flock, since the spiritual good of the flock is more important than the bodily life of the shepherd, when danger threatens the salvation of the flock. This is why the Lord says: The good shepherd lays down his life, that is, his physical life, for his sheep; this he does because of his authority and love. Both, in fact, are required: that they should be ruled by him, and that he should love them. The first without the second is not enough.

No wonder they are saints but we, all of us, are not far from being saintly, if we simply take time to meditate on the true meaning of the Passion which, in short, is God's immense love for all of us sinners.  Therefore, the clearest path that is shown to us by God, by Christ and by His and our Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the path to take to return to God, is love, our unconditional love for God.



[1] Thérèse, de Lisieux, Saint.  Story of a Soul The Autobiography of Saint Thérèse of Lisieux . 3rd Edition. Translated by John Clarke, O.C.D.  Washington D.C.:  Washington Province of Discalced Carmelites, Inc., 1996, p.7.
[2] Ibid., 193.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid., 193-4.
[5] Ibid., 194.
[6] Ibid. Everything in this quotation, including the four-dot suspension point  "...." is original.
[7] St. Thomas Aquinas. [Internet]. 2013. The Biography Channel website. Available from: http://www.biography.com/people/st-thomas-aquinas-9187231 [Accessed 28 Aug 2013].
[8]  Office Of Readings. Tuesday, August 27, 2013. Second Reading.  An exposition on John by Saint Thomas Aquinas.  The remnant of Israel shall be led to pasture. [Internet]. 2013. Universalis website. Available from http://universalis.com/20130826/readings.htm [Accessed 28 Aug 2013].  NOTE: This particular passage may not be available on the Universalis' website at a later date since the readings are updated periodically with the recent replacing the past.

The Religious Vows

The vows of the religious scare me because I know I could never live up to them if ever I had sworn to abide by them.  It has always been my philosophy that one ought not to take those vows unless one adheres to them without exception, no matter how difficult, no matter the intensity of the temptations. [1] 

Further to my point, I have read today in Canto V of The Divine Comedy, The Paradiso by Dante, the words of Beatrice [2]:

"Of all creation's bounty realized,
God's greatest gift, the gift in which mankind
is most like Him, the gift by Him most prized,

is the freedom He bestowed upon the will.
All His intelligent creatures, and they alone,
were so endowed, and so endowed are still.

From this your reasoning should make evident
the value of the vow, if it is so joined
that God gives His consent when you consent.

When, therefore, God and man have sealed the pact,
the man divests himself of that great treasure
of which I speak--and by his own free act,

What can you offer, then, to make amends?
How can you make good use of what is His?
Would you employ extortion to good ends?

..."

What that means, as explained by translator John Ciardi, follows:

"THE SANCTITY OF HOLY VOWS.  Dante has asked if a man may not, by other good works, make amends for an unfulfilled vow.  Beatrice replies that God's greatest gift to man is his free will, and that a vow is a direct compact with God wherein man, of his free will, offers that freedom back to God.  Once God accepts, the man's will is no longer free for it has been given to God.  How then is a man free to will what is good, his will and freedom now belonging to God?  To assert a free will that is no longer his is to seek to embezzle his way to the good." [3]

[1]  I am spiritually weak and lack the requisite unwavering commitment to holiness which each and every religious ought to have.  Therefore, I have never taken those vows and probably never will.  Because of this fact, I am sad for myself, a sadness only my Free Will can cure.  This is one of the heavy crosses I bear.  I choose to bear this heavy cross because the heavier cross of hypocrisy I would not be able to bear.
[2] Alighieri, Dante. The Divine Comedy. The Paradiso, Canto V, page 632. Trans. John Ciardi. New York: New American Library, 2003.
[3] Alighieri, Dante. The Divine Comedy. The Paradiso, Notes, page 635. Trans. John Ciardi. New York: New American Library, 2003.

The Miracle Of Prayer

Prayers lead to miracles. [1], [2]  When praying for help, pray with unyielding faith, complete humility, maximum hope and no expectation.  Remember always to say prayers of gratitude.  Miracles do not just happen; they require time and energy, divine time and energy.  But too often miracles are taken for granted because of Sin, the same Sin Adam and Eve committed, believing all they had were theirs even though everything they had came from God.


[1] Pray the prayers of the Rosary, prayers on http://universalis.com/, and one's own prayers of love for God, His Son, Jesus Christ, Whose Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the Holy Spirit with thoughts that express your deepest and most vulnerable love that you generally do not express to anyone else.
[2] One can pray while walking or waiting in traffic, but probably not a good idea to do so while the car is in motion.  Yesterday I was trying to memorize the Apostle's Creed in Latin while driving when I got impatient with the cab driver in front of me [3] and in the middle of recalling the words of the prayer in Latin I cussed him out in English.  Cussing anyone one out in the middle of a prayer cannot be good.  To make the matter worse, I used the name God in an expression, "Oh My God," because I was shocked to realize what I had just done.  Using God in an expression means saying the name of God in vain (I learned that recently) because that would be calling for God's attention without any intention to address God.  Of course I tried to make up for it immediately.  Perhaps it was a miracle that I did not rear-end the cab -- that would be rather ironic.  On second thought, perhaps it was but certainly not in the way I would expect it to happpen.  By cussing, all my senses were awakened from the semi-hypnotic state of memorization and sharpened.
[3] It was frustrating enough not being to say the prayer smoothly while wondering if I had all the words right, then I had to refocus because the driver in front was driving like he was running out of gas, literally and figuratively, far slower than the normal flow of traffic.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Perfection Is Not Democratic

Perfection requires no compromise.  Since democracy is a child of compromise, it does not come into being in perfection.  Since God is perfect and has made all things perfect [1], there is no occasion for conflict and no need for compromise.

Obviously the eternal and inalterable truth that God is perfect did not go over well with Lucifer who left God to become Satan, the enemy of God.  Nor does it go over well with earth's secularists who think they are smarter than God, who by creating a God-less and loveless society based on democracy and passing laws mandating the redistribution of wealth, allowing abortions and permitting unbridled access to all information think that they can achieve equality that would lead to justice and peace, something that God has failed to achieve.  They cannot be more wrong just as Lucifer was wrong and like Lucifer, they would go the way of the Fallen Angel to Hell. [2], [3]


[1] Did God make a mistake in creating an imperfect couple in Adam and Eve?  No.  Adam and Eve were given Free Choice and Free Choice is perfection.  It was Adam and Eve who made the wrong choice to go on a path that led them away from God, and it was the Son of God, Jesus and His Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary who showed us the path back to God by making the right choices that are perfect in every way, that conform without exception to God's every desire.
[2] The prayer of Fatima will most benefit these souls.  There are many versions of this prayer.  The ones I like are:  Oh my Jesus, save us from the fires of Hell, lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who have most need of Your mercy, and "O mi Jesu, dimitte nobis debita nostra, libera nos ab igne inferni, conduc in caelum omnes animas, praesertim illas quae maxime indigent misericordia tua."  See comment by EUSTACHIUS at http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=5237  They desperately need this prayer to diminish Satan's insidious influence and liberate them from its inexorable grip.
[3] This provides an opening to a discourse in running the world based on the teachings of Christ, a discourse that is beyond the scope of this blog, even though the conclusion is simple: Love one another.

Does God Exist And Does It Even Matter?

Whether God exists is not a question to be pondered in this millennium.  God exists with the second part of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit Who facilitated the birth of the third part of the Holy Trinity, Jesus Christ, from the virgin womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of Christ.

If there is doubt, one can refer to the many, many apparitions, some with healings and others with warnings, of the Blessed Virgin Mary around the world [1], of which only a handful were deemed supernatural by the Vatican, many not.  For the non-believer, that does not matter but the non-believers are not what is troubling me at this writing.

At this writing I fear for those who know, for a fact, that God is real, that Christ died for the remission of sins and that the Blessed Virgin Mary has been trying to save every single soul from eternal damnation by her continual appearances and warnings but who, for one reason/excuse or another relegate God to an afterthought, show indifference to Christ's Passion and consider the Virgin Mary's apparitions as forgettable and her warnings as dismissable. [2]

I also fear for us who do not know what exactly to do that could save our own souls and help save the souls of others.

For now, the only thing I know how to and can do is to pray for myself and others.  Perhaps that is enough, if each and everyone one of us on this planet pray everyday, many times a day for the forgiveness of our sins as we truly forgive those who have sinned against us. Perhaps that is asking for a lot because for so many God is totally irrelevant next to Satan's gifts of power and/or wealth.  The hearts of these people are pitifully depraved and the prayer of Fatima will most benefit them. [3]



[1] http://www.marianapparitions.org/apparitions/history
[2] It is not a good idea to disregard the apparitions of the Virgin Mary, whether or not approved by the Vatican.  Read about the most recent well-known apparition was in Kibeho, Rawanda here:  http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/kibeho_rwanda/index.html and here:  http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/messages/kibeho_messages.html
[3] There are many versions of this but mine are:  On my Jesus, forgive us our sins, especially those who have most need of Your mercy, or O mi Jesu, dimitte nobis debita nostra, libera nos ab igne inferni, conduc in caelum omnes animas, praesertim illas quae maxime indigent misericordia tua. 

Feast Of The Assumption Of The Blessed Virgin Mary - 2012 Homily

Quote verbatin below is the August 15, 2012, homily of Pope Benedict XVI, on The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary [1]:

HOLY MASS ON THE SOLEMNITY

OF THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

St Thomas of Villanova Parish, Castel Gandolfo

Wednesday, 15 August 2012

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

On 1 November 1950, Venerable Pope Pius XII proclaimed as Dogma that the Virgin Mary “having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory”. This truth of faith was known by Tradition, was affirmed by the Fathers of the Church, and was a particularly important aspect in the veneration of the Mother of Christ. Precisely this devotional element, so to speak, was the driving force behind the formulation of this Dogma. The Dogma appears as an act of praise and exaltation of the Holy Virgin. It also emerges from the text of the Apostolic Constitution, where it affirms that the Dogma is proclaimed for “the honour of her Son... for the increase of the glory of that same august Mother, and for the joy and exultation of the entire Church”. What was already celebrated in the veneration and devotion of the People of God as the highest and most permanent glorification of Mary was thus expressed in the form of a dogmas; the act of the proclamation of the Assumption was presented almost as a liturgy of faith. And in the Gospel which we have just heard, Mary herself prophetically pronounces a few words that orientate us in this perspective. She says: “For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed” (Lk 1:48). It is a prophecy for the whole history of the Church. These words of the Magnificat, recorded by St Luke, indicate that praising the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, intimately united to Christ her Son, regards the Church of all ages and of all places. The fact that the Evangelist noted these words presupposes that the glorification of Mary was already present in the time of St Luke and he considered it to be a duty and a commitment of the Christian community for all generations. Mary’s words tell us that it is a duty of the Church to remember the greatness of Our Lady for the faith. This Solemnity is an invitation to praise God, and to look upon the greatness of Our Lady, for we know who God is in the faces of those who belong to him.

But why is Mary glorified by her Assumption into Heaven? St Luke, as we have heard, sees the roots of the exaltation and praise of Mary in Elizabeth’s words: “Blessed is she who believed” (Lk 1:45). And the Magnificat, this canticle to God, alive and active in history is a hymn of faith and love, which springs from the heart of the Virgin.

She lived with exemplary fidelity and kept in the inmost depths of her heart the words of God to his people, the promises he made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, making them the content of her prayer: the Word of God in the Magnificat became the word of Mary, the lamp for her journey, thus preparing her to receive even in her womb the Word of God made flesh. Today’s Gospel passage recalls this presence of God in history and in the unfolding of events; in particular, there is a reference to the Second Book of Samuel Chapter Six (6:1-15), in which David moves the Holy Ark of the Covenant. The comparison is clear to the Evangelist: Mary expecting the birth of her Son Jesus is the Holy Ark that contains the presence of God, a presence that is a source of consolation, of total joy. John, in fact, leaps in Elizabeth’s womb, just as David danced before the Ark. Mary is the “visit” of God that creates joy. Zechariah, in his song of praise says explicitly: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people” (Lk 1:68). The house of Zechariah experienced the visit of God by the unexpected birth of John the Baptist, but above all by the presence of Mary, who bore within her womb the Son of God.

But now let us ask ourselves: how does the Assumption of Mary help our journey? The first answer is: in the Assumption we see that in God there is room for man, God himself is the house with many rooms of which Jesus speaks (cf. Jn 14:2); God is man’s home, in God there is God’s space. And Mary, by uniting herself, united to God, does not distance herself from us. She does not go to an unknown galaxy, but whoever approaches God comes closer, for God is close to us all; and Mary, united to God, shares in the presence of God, is so close to us, to each one of us.

There is a beautiful passage from St Gregory the Great on St Benedict that we can apply to Mary too. St Gregory the Great says that the heart of St Benedict expanded so much that all creation could enter it. This is even truer of Mary: Mary, totally united to God, has a heart so big that all creation can enter this heart, and the ex-votos in every part of the earth show it. Mary is close, she can hear us, she can help us, she is close to everyone of us. In God there is room for man and God is close, and Mary, united to God, is very close; she has a heart as great as the heart of God.

But there is also another aspect: in God not only is there room for man; in man there is room for God. This too we see in Mary, the Holy Ark who bears the presence of God. In us there is space for God and this presence of God in us, so important for bringing light to the world with all its sadness, with its problems. This presence is realized in the faith: in the faith we open the doors of our existence so that God may enter us, so that God can be the power that gives life and a path to our existence. In us there is room, let us open ourselves like Mary opened herself, saying: “Let your will be done, I am the servant of the Lord”. By opening ourselves to God, we lose nothing. On the contrary, our life becomes rich and great.

And so, faith and hope and love are combined. Today there is much discussion on a better world to be awaited: it would be our hope. If and when this better world comes, we do not know, I do not know. What is certain is that a world which distances itself from God does not become better but worse. Only God’s presence can guarantee a good world. Let us leave it at that.

One thing, one hope is certain: God expects us, waits for us, we do not go out into a void, we are expected. God is expecting us and on going to that other world we find the goodness of the Mother, we find our loved ones, we find eternal Love. God is waiting for us: this is our great joy and the great hope that is born from this Feast. Mary visits us, and she is the joy of our life and joy is hope.

What is there to say then? A great heart, the presence of God in the world, room for God within us and room for us in God, hope, being expected: this is the symphony of this Feast, the instruction that meditating on this Solemnity gives us. Mary is the dawn and the splendour of the Church triumphant; she is the consolation and the hope of people still on the journey, it says in today’s Preface.

Let us entrust ourselves to her Motherly intercession, that she may obtain that he strengthen our faith in eternal life; may she help us to live the best way the time that God has given us with hope. May it be a Christian hope, that is not only nostalgia for Heaven, but a living and active desire for God who is here in the world, a desire for God that makes us tireless pilgrims, nourishing in us the courage and the power of faith, which at the same time is the courage and the power of love. Amen.



© Copyright 2012 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

[1] The link for this page is at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20120815_assunzione_en.html  
I believe that the Assumption of The Blessed Virgin Mary, a divine truth founded on faith is a necessary conclusion following another divine truth founded on faith, the Immaculate Conception, because The Blessed Virgin Mary was undefiled by Adam's original sin, argued eloquently by John Dun Scotus at http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/marian/scotus&immac.htm, or at http://lemomentdepaix.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-immaculate-conception.html .  Accordingly, the Blessed Virgin Mary is described as "sanctissima, inviolata, intemerata, pulcherrima," or "most holy, inviolate, undefiled, most beautiful."  See comment by GreenWhiteBlue on 13th June 2007 at http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=535471.  My Salve Regina prayer at http://lemomentdepaix.blogspot.com/2013/08/salve-regina-hail-holy-queen.html
includes these words.

Pray The Rosary With Monsignor Guido Marini

Monsignor Guido Marini, the Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations at the Vatican under Pope Benedict XVI and the current one prayed the rosary with the College of Cardinals before the recent conclave that propelled Jorge Bergolio to the very top of the Catholic Church.  See the video at http://www.catholictv.com/Cardinals-Prayer-Service.aspx 

UPDATE (5/19/14): The link immediately above does not work anymore.  The same video can now be seen at:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ9kxk_RlmI

I like the Monsignor.  He has a kind smile [1] but he is also very serious about presenting the liturgy the way that he believes that it ought to be presented, with respect, dignity and solemnity.  He is so attentive, so obedient, so careful in looking after the successor of Peter without judgment.  What a saint!

I hope that this pope will leave his post quickly by resigning or dying or as a result of any one of many natural causes so that Monsignor Guido Marini to Cardinal could be the next pope [2].

[1] See images at https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox&hs=R8p&rls=com.yahoo:en-US:official&q=monsignor%20guido%20marini%20images&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.50723672,d.cGE,pv.xjs.s.en_US.kOth2ObowFc.O&biw=1280&bih=636&noj=1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=jy4LUomwGoOsyAHBwYDYDQ
[2] Perhaps one of the changes that would take place in the Catholic Church would be to find the holiest among men to be the successor of Peter, whether or not he is a Cardinal, a Monsignor, a monk or a fisherman.

Ave Maria By Franz Schubert

Ave Maria sung in German on You Tube - 13,400,341 views and counting at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQVz6vuNq7s

O Sanctissima!

"O Sanctissima" uploaded by John Root [1] Heavenly!
"O Sanctissima" by Libera [2], [3] - Hauntingly Beautiful!
Angel Voices by Libera [4]
Libera Music Videos [5]


[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-5W0_kWhSk  The lyrics are under the Show more tab:

"O Sanctissima, O Piissima
Dulcis Virgo Maria
Mater amata, Intemerata
Ora, Ora Pro Nobis

Tota pulchra es, O Maria
Et macula non est in te
Mater amata intemerata
Ora, ora pro nobis

Sicut lilium inter spinas
Sic Maria inter filias
Mater amata intemerata
Ora ora pro nobis

In miseria, in angustia
Ora Virgo pro nobis
Pro nobis ora in mortis hora
Ora, ora pro nobis

Tu solatium et refugium
Virgo Mater Maria
Quidquid optamus per te speramus
Ora, ora pro nobis"

[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLMdHue0HLk
[3] Comment under [1] by Jacob McCrumb:

"O sanctissima,  O piissima, // O most holy, O most tender,
dulcis virgo Maria // sweet virgin Mary
Ora, ora, ora, pro nobis // pray, pray, pray, for us
Virgo respice, Mater adspice // O virgin care for, O mother behold
audi nos, O Maria // hear us, O Mary
Jubilate Cherubim // Cherubim sing out joyfully
Exsultate Seraphim // Seraphim exalt (praise)
Consonante perpitim // singing together perpitim (not sure)
Salve, salve Regina // Hail, hail O Queen
O sanctissima, O piissima, (See first stanza)
dulcis virgo Maria
Ora, ora, ora pro nobis
Sancta Maria Mater Dei (some combination of these words are repeated, they mean Holy Mary Mother of God)
Jubilate Cherubim (See above)
Exsultate Seraphim
Consonante perpitim
Salve, salve Regina
Ora // Pray"

[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQggfs3Y3E8
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6qE6QEqFl8&list=PL4FE9A0EE9863AE84

The Possessors Of Absolute Truths

There are two kinds of absolute truths: worldly truths and other-worldly truths.

God, the Father, Jesus, the Son and the Holy Spirit, Mary, the Virgin Mother of Christ, the angels and the most holy saints, possess both truths [1] and we possess our own worldly truths [2].  We cannot re-write our worldly truths that time has cemented.  Time recalls every moment of every truth, but we have dominion over our truths that time has yet to see and record.  In other words, we have total control over the formation of such truths [3].  The epic struggle between God and Satan for our souls rages on continuously in this formative stage -- our every next moment of truth.  Throughout this life-long battle, unyielding faith in the Lord is our weapon and prayers become our shield.  Be conscious of every moment that passes: it is permanent and eternal if Satan wins.




[1] Knowing such truths does not necessarily mean knowing the timing of these truths.  Only God knows when any such truth would be realized.
[2] We do not possess other-worldly truths.  Only by the grace of God are we allowed to know a little, the rest we have to accept on faith.
[3] Free Choice is not affected by the existence of our own worldy truths.  Recall an analogy where the father places a plate of ice-cream and a plate of vegetables in front of his young son.  Even though the son can choose freely, the father knows beforehand he will choose ice-cream over vegetables.  Taking this analogy one step further, a question arises.  Are we ever able to surprise our father some day by choosing vegetables over ice-cream?  One day, when we know what is good for us, when we are able to overcome the sweetness of tantalizing temptations, we could surprise him, just as we could surprise our heavenly Father. 

A Final Observation - World Youth Day 2013 - Pope's Slum Trip

I thought the pope's trip to Brazil was history and would never be mentioned again.  I was wrong.  Yesterday I was watching Mass on TV and in his sermon, the priest talked about the pope's visit to Varginha.  Varginha is a slum north of Rio de Janeiro [1].  As soon as the priest mentioned the pope and his slum trip, I tuned out.  I had not the least bit of interest what followed even though he has been one of my favorite priests who says Mass on EWTN.

I think he was preaching something the pope said about the poor and poverty, as if the pope practiced what was preached.  People, this pope is a hypocrite, and those who believe him have succumbed under his devilish powers and are tainted by his hypocrisy.

If this pope were a true Francis, after Francis of Assisi, the saint, then he would have stayed in Varginha his entire time in Brazil, but he did not.  He stayed "at the Residência do Sumaré (Sumaré Residence) during his trip to Brazil. The residence was where Blessed John Paul II stayed during his two visits to Brazil in 1980 and 1997. It’s a quiet place, away from the rush of the city. Besides Pope Francis, the residence [also hosted] the whole papal entourage, which [included] about 40 people." [2]  That does not sound like a place that Francis of Assisi would have accepted, not to mention the food that he and his companions were served.  One can safely assume that the residence is not a run-down shack in the middle of the slums where the poor people live and die and that the food they were served was not slum food.

A papal entourage of about 40 people.  Was this a vacation for royalty?  Allow me to suggest the venue for the next World Youth Day: Republic of Niger (République du Niger) in Sub-Saharan Africa, and let us see how big the papal entourage would be when they realize that their accommodations would be tents in the baking desert heat surrounded by abject poverty.  They should plan to spend 40 days there.  I would bet that most would have accepted Satan's first temptation to get them to the Ritz Carlton at Place Vendôme in Paris on the first flight out within the first 40 hours.

Again, the creature waded into the crowd.  He is a fearless martyr.  Right.  Read this: "Less than 24 hours before the Argentine-born pontiff’s scheduled arrival, the neighborhood in an area of about 36,000 people was still getting spiffed up; new cement walls were being poured and state workers were laying electrical cables. Military police were out in full force..." [3] [Emphasis Added]


[1] http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-pope-francis-brazilian-slum-20130725,0,6398331.story
[2] http://www.rio2013.com/en/news/details/1945/pope-francis-brazil-schedule
[3] http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-pope-francis-brazilian-slum-20130725,0,6398331.story

Love, Defined By Thérèse de Lisieux

Thérèse de Lisieux [1] said that "in order that Love be fully satisfied, it is necessary that It lower Itself, and that It lower Itself to nothingness and transform this nothingness into fire." [2] Emphasis original.

I cannot imagine know how Love can be better described than that.


[1] Listen to how the saint's name is pronounced here:  http://www.forvo.com/word/th%C3%A9r%C3%A8se_de_lisieux/   Alternatively, here: http://translate.google.com/#auto/en/th%C3%A9r%C3%A8se%20de%20lisieux
[2]  Thérèse, de Lisieux, Saint.  Story of a Soul The Autobiography of Saint Thérèse of Lisieux . 3rd Edition. Translated by John Clarke, O.C.D.  Washington D.C.:  Washington Province of Discalced Carmelites, Inc., 1996, p.195.

Salve Regina - Hail Holy Queen

The following is the Hail Holy Queen prayer in Latin:

Salve Regína, Mater misericórdiae. Vita, dulcédo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamámus éxsules filii Evae. Ad te suspirámus, geméntes et flentes in hac lacrimárum valle. Eia ergo, advocáta nostra, illos tuos misericórdes óculos ad nos convérte. Et Iesum, benedíctum fructum ventris tui, nobis post hoc exsílium osténde. O clemens, O pia, O dulcis Virgo Maria.  Amen. [1]

Being me who is seldom satisfied with what is normally excellent and accepted as excellent, I would like to add after "O dulcis" a comma, a space and these words:  "O sanctissima, inviolata, intemerata, O pulcherrima" before Virgo Maria. [2]

So this is my version:

Salve Regína, Mater misericórdiae. Vita, dulcédo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamámus éxsules filii Evae. Ad te suspirámus, geméntes et flentes in hac lacrimárum valle. Eia ergo, advocáta nostra, illos tuos misericórdes óculos ad nos convérte. Et Iesum, benedíctum fructum ventris tui, nobis post hoc exsílium osténde. O clemens, O pia, O dulcis, O sanctissima, inviolata, intemerata, O pulcherrima Virgo Maria.  Amen.

[1] The best Latin pronunciation I have found for prayers in Latin on You-Tube is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM5dDgTn4w4.  The Hail Holy Queen prayer, Salve Regina, starts at about 2:27.
[2] GreenWhiteBlue of New York, a person who commented on these words on June 13, 2007, said, "I am assuming that this is a text referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The four adjectives mean 'most holy, inviolate, undefiled, most beautiful.'" See http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=535471  Whoever you are, GreenWhiteBlue of New York, thank you for sharing your knowledge so generously, edifying whoever who thirsts for it.  God Bless.

The Immaculate Conception

After watching "The Life of Blessed John Duns Scotus" on EWTN, I found an article on the Blessed John Duns Scotus on the internet:  http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/marian/scotus&immac.htm  Its entirety, with bibliography and footnotes, is quoted verbatim below:

JOHN DUNS SCOTUS AND HIS DEFENCE

OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION


Noel Muscat OFM

            Blessed John Duns Scotus (1265/66 – 8th November 1308), besides being known as the «Subtle Doctor»,  is also referred to as the «Marian Doctor».  It was he who presented a systematic theology of the Marian privilege of the Immaculate Conception, which the Catholic Church officially proclaimed as a Dogma of Faith in the Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of Pope Pius IX (8th December 1854), of which we are this year celebrating the 150th anniversary.

            The theological doctrine of John Duns Scotus regarding the Immaculate Conception is found in Volume XX of the Lectura in Librum Tertium Sententiarum, in the third distincio, first quaestio, which has the title Utrum Beata Virgo fuerit concepta in peccato originali (Regarding whether the Blessed Virgin was conceived in original sin).  We now have a critical edition of this quaestio, published by the International Scotistic Commission of the Friars Minor, working at the Pontificium Athenaeum Antonianum in Rome. [1]  Our aim is that of providing a simple presentation of the main arguments which the Subtle Doctor proposes as a defence of this unique privilege of the Virgin Mary.

            Scotus’ Lectura on the Third Book of Sentences of Peter Lombard deals with the mystery of the Incarnation. The Christological basis for Scotus’ theology on the Immaculate Conception is fundamental in order to understand this privilege of the Virgin Mary in its correct theological setting.  Scotus builds a theology centred upon Christ, who is eternally predestined by God the Father to assume human nature in the Incarnation.  According to the Subtle Doctor the Incarnation was not primarily intended to be the condition for the redemption of humanity from sin.  In God’s provident plan, the Incarnation of the Word in the person of Jesus Christ was, first and foremost, the apex of the act of creation by God the Father.  All creation has been fashioned according to the image of the Incarnate Word, and is the result of a pure and free act of love on the part of God.  Creation, in this way, enters in a mysterious but real way into a loving relationship with God as a Trinity of Persons.  Each and every creature, being complete in itself and unique in its essence, is a model of God the Son, who became Incarnate in order to glorify His Father for the beauty of creation.  This vision is a direct result of Franciscan spirituality at its best.  It is true that, in the history redemption, the Incarnation was then orientated toward the salvation of humankind from sin, but this aspect, important though it may be, could not be the only reason for the Incarnation.  Otherwise God would not be seen as the personification of the primacy of the free will, expressed in love which overflows from Him onto His creatures.

            It is in this Christological view of the world and of redemption that Scotus speaks about the Virgin Mary as Mother of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God.  She becomes the embodiment of all perfection in creation, freed from sin and from its effects through the saving power of Jesus Christ, the universal Mediator between God and humankind.  It was fitting that God would choose a Mother for His Son, who would be totally free form any stain of original and actual sin, in order to become a channel of grace to us all.  Having explained in a few words Scotus’ Christological vision of creation and redemption, we can now try to understand how he explains the privilege of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary within this theological context.


Arguments against the privilege of the Immaculate Conception

            Scotus commences his quaestio by presenting arguments from Holy Scripture and the Church Fathers which the theologians of his times were quoting as being contrary to the privilege of the Immaculate Conception.  The first argument is taken from the Letter of Saint Paul to the Romans 5,12: “Sin entered the world through one man, and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race, because everyone has sinned.”  According to the flesh every human person, without any exception, was conceived in original sin, inherited from Adam, the first man.  The only exception to the rule was Jesus Christ.  According to what Saint Augustine states in his Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Levi was generated from Adam according to the flesh, but this was not the case of Christ.  Therefore Jesus Christ did not contract original sin.  All other human beings were born from Adam according to the flesh, including the Virgin Mary. Therefore she also was conceived in original sin. [2]

            Likewise the Fathers of the Church deny Mary the privilege of being Immaculate.  Saint John Damascene states that the Virgin Mary was purified by the Holy Spirit.  This means that she had been conceived in the state of original sin.

            Saint Augustine states that it is beyond doubt that every human person who is conceived out of union between man and woman is born in the state of original sin.  This view of the state of original sin depending upon human generation is then applied to the Virgin Mary, who was conceived in a natural way like every other human person.  Therefore she could not possibly have averted being conceived in the state of original sin.

            In one of his homilies for Christmas, Saint Leo the Great writes that the Lord came into the world to heal all humankind.  This would imply that the Virgin Mary is no exception to the rule.

            Saint Bernard states that Mary could have been sanctified either in the moment of conception or immediately after.  He rules out the possibility of her being sanctified at the moment of conception, since physical union between man and woman cannot coexist with sanctification.  That leaves open the second option, of her being sanctified immediately after conception.  But that would imply that she was in the state of original sin at the moment of conception.

            Finally Scotus refers to the liturgical praxis of the Church in his times, which celebrated the feast of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, but not that of her Conception, because Mary was not believed to have been conceived Immaculate.  Scotus is referring to a commentary on the Decretum Gratiani, which mentioned the feast of the Conception which was celebrated particularly in England, but did not encourage it, since it was contrary to the Church’s official teaching. [3]

Arguments in favour of the privilege of the Immaculate Conception

            Theologians during the times of John Duns Scotus were following the Church Fathers who, in the majority of cases, had been unfavourable to the possibility of Mary having been conceived without original sin.  In spite of this, Scotus quotes Saint Augustine, who in De natura et gratia writes: “Where there is a question of sin, in the case of Mary I do not want to comment.” [4]   Saint Anselm, in De conceptu virginali, writes: “It was fitting that the Mother of Christ would have a purity greater than which nobody could think of.” [5]

The presentation of the common opinion regarding Mary’s conception

            The Son of Mary was the Redeemer of all, and with his death he merited the salvation of his Mother and of all humankind.  However, if his Mother had not been conceived in original sin, since she did not commit any actual sin, she could not possibly have needed a Redeemer, since she would have been without sin.  If she would have been conceived without original sin, the doors of heaven would not have been closed to her, and they would not have been opened at the moment of the death of her Son.  From this follows that, if she had died before her Son died on the cross, she could immediately have seen God face to face.

            Scotus is here referring to what famous theologians of his times had been saying.  John de la Rochelle had stated that if the Virgin Mary had not sinned, than she would not have needed redemption.  Since she was redeemed by Christ, then she was conceived in original sin.  Saint Bonaventure, in the Commentary on the Third Book of Sentences, had written that if the Blessed Virgin was free from original sin, then Christ’s redemption would not have had anything to do with her. Now for Christ it was a greater glory to redeem Mary than to redeem the other saints.  In this way, if he did not redeem the Blessed Virgin, he would be deprived of a most noble glory.  Saint Thomas Aquinas, also in his Commentary of the Third Book of Sentences, wrote that Christ did not need to be redeemed, since he is the head of the human race, but all other human persons had to redeemed through him. Now this could not be possible if only one soul could be found which was not infected with original sin. Therefore neither the Blessed Virgin nor any other human person before Christ could have been given this privilege.  In his Summa Theologiae Thomas Aquinas writes that if the Blessed Virgin did not contract original sin, she would not have needed redemption through Christ. Now this would have been out of place, since Christ had to be Saviour of all human persons. [6]

            The body of Mary was conceived in the same manner of the conception of all other human beings.  In this way she also contracted original sin.  Since original sin finds its material cause in the human body, it follows that the body needs to be united with the soul before a human person can receive sanctifying grace.  Now, during the moment in which the soul unites itself with the body, at that very moment it contracts original sin.  Moreover, Mary underwent those sufferings which are the effect of original sin.  She did not accept these sufferings out of her own free will, as Christ did in order to save humanity, but she underwent these sufferings as a consequence of her solidarity with the human race in the state of original sin.

Scotus’ own exposition of the common opinion

            John Scotus begins his defence of the Marian privilege, by presenting his arguments against the common opinion of theologians.  He builds the first argument upon the figure of Christ as the most perfect mediator.

            “Christ was the most perfect mediator.  Therefore he exercised the highest degree of mediation in favour of another person.  Now he could not be a most perfect mediator and could not repair the effects of sin to the highest degree if he did not preserve his Mother from original sin (as we shall prove).  Therefore, since he was the most perfect mediator regarding the person of his Mother, from this it follows that he preserved her from original sin.” [7]

            The key notion to understand Scotus’ theology in this paragraph, as indeed in all his arguments in this question on the Immaculate Conception, is the verb “to preserve”.  Christ preserved his Mother from original sin, according to Scotus.  In other words, the Blessed Virgin Mary, like every other human person, was bound to be conceived in original sin, but she was preserved from it through the merits of her Son.

            Scotus goes on to show that the perfect act of mediation in favour of a person does not only concern that person’s liberation from the guilt of actual sins, but also the liberation from the guilt which is a result of original sin, which he calls culpa contracta (contracted guilt).  In order to prove this he quotes an example given by Saint Anselm in his Cur Deus homo II, c. 16.  A king is offended by a father, and punishes him and all his future sons by sending them into exile.  But the king is drawn to love in a special way one of the sons born to that man, and he would have wanted to preserve him from exile.  So what he does is to forgive that man and his sons from the punishment of exile, but in his anger he does not forgive them their culpa contracta, or acquired guilt.  In order to speak of a perfect act of mediation and forgiveness, that man has to acquire for his son not only the king’s forgiveness of his acquired guilt but also the king’s benevolence.  In the same way, through his death on the cross, Christ merited not only the forgiveness of any sin which his Mother could have committed without the help of grace, but even that of the acquired guilt in which she was to be conceived like every other human being.

            Scotus therefore states that there cannot be a most perfect mediator and reconciler if he does not acquire the remission of the greatest guilt in favour of the one he is mediating for.  Christ could not have been a perfect mediator if he did not permit that at least the soul of one single person would not have been deprived of rectitude in the fullest sense.  Now the Virgin Mary was innocent to the highest degree.  If her Son had to be her most perfect redeemer and reconcilator, he had to preserve her from original sin.  The Holy Trinity, which could also foresee the merits of the passion of Christ, for this very reason, permitted that the Virgin Mary be preserved from all guilt, whether it resulted from actual sin or from original sin.

Scotus’ arguments regarding the common opinion

            Scotus presents four main arguments regarding the common opinion of theologians on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.  The first argument of the theologians had regarded the fact that, if the Blessed Virgin Mary had not contracted original sin, then she could not possibly have needed redemption from sin.  Scotus, however, responds that the process was the reverse of  what these theologians were stating.  When a person receives abundance of forgiveness through the act of a mediator, that person is all the more in debt towards that mediator and owes to him any privilege that he or she acquires.  Now this is the case of the Virgin Mary, who needed Christ more than all the other human beings.  This was the result of her being preserved from original sin through the merits of the passion of Christ.  Mary was, therefore, redeemed in a nobler manner.  Above all, “it is more noble to forgive one’s guilt by preserving that person from it, than by permitting that same person to fall into guilt and than to remit that person’s guilt.” [8]

            In order to prove this fundamental assertion, Scotus gives an example.  A man sins mortally only once and then God preserves him from other mortal sins.  Another sins mortally more than once, and God forgives him every time he converts to Him.  Now who of the two receives the more perfect forgiveness?  Scotus says that it is the first one, in the sense that God  not only as forgiven him in a more noble way, but has also preserved him from falling into sin in the future. Thus he is more indebted to God.  The same is true in the case of the Virgin Mary being preserved from all sin.

            The second argument of the contrary opinion of theologians had shown that, if the Virgin Mary had been freed from original sin, the gates of heaven would not have been closed for her, and therefore she would have been like Christ in everything.  Scotus, however, shows that the gates of heaven were opened to the Virgin Mary through no merits of her own, but solely through the merits of the passion of Christ.  It was only after Christ had applied the merits of his passion to Mary, that she, like the rest of humankind, could attain to beatific vision.  Therefore Mary also needed the passion of Christ in order for her to enter through the gates of heaven.  The only difference between her and the rest of humankind was that the Virgin Mary was preserved beforehand from all guilt through the merits of the passion of Christ, whereas the rest of the human race was liberated from guilt only after Christ applied to them the merits of his passion through grace which works in an ordinary way through the sacraments.

            Regarding the third argument, which insisted that the human soul is sullied by original sin as soon as it is united to the body, Scotus answers that, in the same moment in which God created the human soul, he could endow it with the grace of sanctification.  Moreover, he could also purify the human body before it would be united with the soul.  This is what happened in the conception of the Son of God in the womb of the Virgin Mary.

            The fourth argument insisted that the effects of sin were to be seen in suffering and want in human nature, and particularly in death.  Now we know that Christ also underwent all these sufferings.  But he did this out of his own free will, in order to take upon himself our sufferings when he saved us.  In the case of the Virgin Mary Scotus says that Christ merited for her to be freed from the guilt of original sin, but that it was not necessary that, as a consequence, she would also be freed of the effects of sin which are still evident in redeemed humanity.  Therefore Christ merited his Mother the greatest perfection regarding the lack of the greatest guilt, but not regarding its effects, which are important for a soul in order to attain the merits of the redemption brought by Christ.

            At this point Scotus arrives at refuting all the arguments which were trying to prove that it was not possible that Mary was conceived without original sin.  But he still needed to prove his assertions.

Scotus’ definite answer and the proofs he presents

            The fundamental question which Scotus had to answer was the following: Was Mary conceived in original sin and then immediately purified from it?  Scotus is wary to leave open all possibilities and answers in a very prudent way:  “I say that it was possible that she (the Virgin Mary) was not conceived in original sin.  It was also possible that she was in the state of original sin for a split second of time and then was in a state of grace for the rest of her life.  Lastly it was possible that she was in a state of original sin for some time and then passed into the state of grace.” [9]

            Regarding the first possibility, which is certainly the most valid one according to Scotus,  the Subtle Doctor states that it was possible that God infuses grace into the soul in the very first instants of its union with the body, and that this grace has the power to purify the body from all stain of sin.

Scotus also admits the second possibility, that is, that the Virgin Mary was in the state of original sin for a split second and then immediately passed into the state of grace.  This was the opinion of Henry of Ghent, who stated that there were two moments in conception, the body which is conceived in original sin, and the soul which is sanctified by grace. [10]  We make a distinction on the intellectual level between these two moments, but in fact, they are as far away from one another as the twinkle of an eye.  After all, God has the power to operate within our category of time or in a simultaneous way. [11]

Regarding the third possibility, in which the human person is conceived in the state of original sin and than is freed from this state through grace, Scotus does not envision any contradiction, since all human beings, in effect, are conceived in the state of original sin and then pass on to a state of grace.  Scotus, however, insists on making an exception to this rule in the case of the Virgin Mary.

Scotus’ solution to the principal arguments of theologians outlined above

            Scotus returns to the authority of the Church Fathers who speak about the fact that the Virgin Mary was sanctified in the womb, but that she could not possibly have been conceived without original sin.  He reminds us that Saint Augustine had asserted that, where it is a question of sin, he would prefer not to comment in the case of the Virgin Mary.  He answers John Damascene, who had stated that the Virgin Mary was purified in her body during conception, telling him that there cannot be purification without the prior sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit.  Saint Leo the Great had stated that all human persons were born as sons of God’s wrath, except Christ.  Scotus reminds him that grace had already preserved the Virgin Mary from God’s wrath when she was conceived without original sin.  All human beings are, in fact, sons and daughters of God’s wrath, and they are reconcilied to God through the merits of the passion of Christ.  The Virgin Mary, however, was preserved from being conceived into God’s wrath because of a special privilege that God the Father gave her, because of the special love He had for his only-begotten Son. [12] Regarding Saint Anselm’s statement that Mary was born into the sin of Adam like all other human pesons, Scotus shows that the true words of Anselm were that the Virgin Mary had been purified of sin and that Christ assumed human nature in a purified mother. [13]   Scotus answers Saint Bernard, who had admitted that there was a split second of a moment during which Mary had contracted original sin when her body was conceived, after which she was immediately sanctified when the soul was infused into her body.  Scotus says that there is only one moment when grace touches the human person, that is, the moment of the union between soul and body.  It was at that initial moment that the Virgin Mary was freed from original sin.  He even states that Saint Bernard had appeared to a certain woman after his death, showing a stain on his foreheard, and telling her that he got that stain because he had stated that the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin.  Scotus reminds that we do not celebrate the conception of a human body, but the conception of a body which is vivified by the infusion of the soul.  It was at this precise moment that the Virgin Mary was conceived without any blemish of original sin. [14]

            The Subtle Doctor reasons truly in a subtle way when he affirms that there is a difference between stating that the soul of the Virgin Mary in the moment of conception did not fall under the influx of grace and stating that the soul of the Virgin Mary was, in itself, conceived without grace. [15]   If Scotus remains open to the possibility that, for a split second, the Virgin Mary could not have been under the power of sanctifying grace, but certainly he does not mean to imply that, even for a split second, the Virgin Mary was cut off from the gift of sanctifying grace.

Conclusion of Scotus’ defence and the Church’s reception of his theology

            Scotus expresses his conclusion to all the arguments he brought forward to defend the privilege of the Immaculate Conception: “We can therefore say that it was possible that the Blessed Virgin was not conceived in original sin.  This assertion does not diminish in any way the universal redemption of her Son, as we have outlined above.  We can furthermore confirm this, since the passion of Christ was immediately and principally ordered to delete original guilt as well as actual guilt, in such a way that all the Trinity, since it had the foresight of the merits of the passion of Christ, applied them to the Virgin and preserved her from all actual sin, and also from all original sin.” [16]

            This theology forms the basis of the Church’s official pronunciation of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, as well as of the theology of the liturgical text of the feast of the Immaculate Conception.

            The Apostolic Constitution «Ineffabilis Deus», published on 8th December 1854, exactly 150 years ago, by Blessed Pope Pius IX, echoes in a remarkable way Scotus’ own theology regarding the privilege of the Immaculate Conception, in the following solemn proclamation of this Dogma of Catholic faith:

            “To the honour of the holy and undivided Trinity, to the worthiness and splendid beauty of the Virgin Mother of God, to the upholding of the Catholic faith, and to the furthering of the Christian religion, with the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ, with that of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and with Our own authority, we declare, we pronounce and we define the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the very first moments of her Conception, through the singular grace of Almighty God, and through the foresight of the merits of Christ Jesus, Saviour of the human race, was preserved immune from all stains of original sin.  We furthermore declare, pronounce and define that this doctrine has been revealed by God, and therefore has to be strongly and always believed by all the faithful.” [17]

            The same can be said regarding the opening prayer of the Mass of the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary (8th December), which re-echoes Scotus’ theology on this Marian privilege in its ability to render in a succint way the faith of the Church in a liturgical formula:

            “Father, you prepared the Virgin Mary to be the worthy Mother of your Son.  You let her share beforehand in the salvation Christ would bring by his death, and kept her sinless from the first moment of her conception.  Help us by her prayers to live in your presence without sin.” [18]

            John Duns Scotus can be described as a Franciscan theologian who provided the Church with the Christological basis for the doctrine on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, in such a way that it could truly be seen as the result of divine revelation.  His Christ-centred vision of creation and redemption proves that the primacy of God’s love in the mystery of the Incarnation is still at work in the Church and in the world.  The mysterium iniquitatis, or mystery of evil, has been won over by Christ and his Immaculate Mother, whom Saint Francis salutes as the Virgo Ecclesia facta, the “Virgin made Church”.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

A.G. LITTLE., “The Franciscan School at Oxford in the thirteenth century”, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 19 (1926) 803-874.

G.M. ABATE OFM Conv., “La tomba del venerabile Giovanni Duns Scoto, O.Min., nella chiesa di S. Francesco a Colonia.  Note e documenti”, Miscellanea Francescana 45 (1945) 29-79.

C. BALIC OFM, “Duns Scoto, Giovanni”, Enciclopedia Cattolica Italiana 4 (1950), 1982-1990.

C. BALIC OFM, “Il reale contributo di Giovanni Scoto nella questione dell’Immacolata Concezione”, Antonianum 29 (1954) 475-496.

Iohannes Duns Scotus, Doctor Immaculatae Conceptionis, Ed. C. BALIC, Accademia Mariana Internazionale, Roma 1954.

Maria in Mysterio Christi.  Virgo Immaculata, Acts of the International Mariological-Marian Congress, Pontifical Marian Academy, Rome 1954.

C. BALIC OFM, “Ioannes Duns Scotus et historia Immaculatae Conceptionis”, Antonianum 30 (1955) 349-488.

C. BALIC OFM, “Duns Scot, Jean (sa vie, ses oeuvres et sa doctrine espirituelle)”, Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 3 (1957) 1801-1818; Versione italiana di GHINATO A., Vita Minorum 32 (1961) 36-58.108-118.

La Madonna nella Spiritualità Francescana (Quaderni di Spiritualità Francescana, Vol. 5), Assisi 1963.

J.B. CAROL, The absolute primacy and predestination of Jesus and his Virgin Mother, Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago (Illinois) 1981.

P.D. FEHLNER, “St. Francis and Mary Immaculate”, Miscellanea Francescana 82 (1982) 502-519.

W. BEINERT, Il Culto di Maria Oggi.  Teologia – Liturgia – Pastorale, Edizioni Paoline, Roma 1984, 142-158.

A. MATANIC OFM, “La Madonna nell’insegnamento e nell’esperienza spirituale di San Francesco d’Assisi”, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 82 (1989) 425-440.

L. CIGNELLI OFM, La Mariologia di Giovanni Duns Scoto e il suo influsso nella spiritualità francescana.  La vita spirituale nel pensiero di Giovanni Duns Scoto, Assisi, S. Maria degli Angeli 1986.

S. DE FIORES – A. SERRA, “Immacolata”, Nuovo Dizionario di Mariologia,  a cura di S. De Fiores e S. Meo, Edizioni San Paolo, Torino 1986, 611-637.

R. ZAVALLONI OFM – E. MARIANI OFM (a cura di), La Dottrina Mariologica di Giovanni Duns Scoto (Spicilegium Pontificii Athenaei Antoniani), Edizioni Antonianum, Roma 1987.

R. ZAVALLONI OFM, Giovanni Duns Scoto.  Maestro di Vita e Pensiero, Edizioni Francescane Bologna 1992.

A.B. WOLTER OFM – B. O’NEILL OFM, John Duns Scotus Mary’s Architect, Franciscan Press, Quincy University, Quincy, Illinois 1993.

S.M. CECCHIN OFM, Maria Signora Santa e Immacolata nel Pensiero Francescano.  Per una storia del contributo Francescano alla Mariologia, Città del Vaticano 2001.

L. VEUTHEY OFMConv, Dottrina Mariologica.  Maria Immacolata Madre in prospettiva francescana.  Introduzione di Ernesto Piacentini (Leone Veuthey OFMConv, Opera omnia, 19), (Editrice Miscellanea Francescana), Roma 2003.

J. SCHNEIDER OFM, «Virgo Ecclesia Facta». The Presence of Mary in the Crucifix of San Damiano and in the Office of the Passion of St. Francis of Assisi, Translated from the original German edition by the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, New Bedford, MA, 2004.


ENDNOTES

1. DOCTORIS SUBTILIS ET MARIANI B. IOANNIS DUNS SCOTI, Ordinis Fratrum Minorum, Opera Omnia.  Iussu et Auctoritate Rmi. P. Iacobi Bini, totius Ordinis Fratrum Minorum Minister Generalis, studio et cura Commissionis Scotisticae, ad fidem codicum edita.  Vol. XX: Lectura in Librum Tertium Sententiarum: a distinctione prima ad decimam septimam.  Distinctio III, Quaestio I: «Utrum Beata Virgo fuerit concepta in peccato originali», Civitas Vaticana, Typis Vaticanis MMIII, 119-138.  References to this critical edition will be given thus: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., with the relevant page number.

2. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 119: «Circa distinctionem tertiam quaeritur utrum beata Virgo fuerit concepta in peccato originali. Quod sic: Ad Rom. 5: In Adam omnes peccaverunt, - quod non potest esse verum nisi quia omnes fuerunt in Adam secundum rationem seminalem; unde secundum Augustinum X Super Genesim, Levi fuit in Adam secundum rationem seminalem, et non Christus, - et ideo Christus non contraxit peccatum originale.  Omnes igitur qui secundum rationem seminalem fuerunt in Adam, contraxerunt peccatum originale; et sic fuit beata Virgo in Adam; ergo etc».

3. Footnote in: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 120: HUGUCCIO PISANUS, Glossae in Dectrem Gratiani pars 3 d. 3 c. 1 (ed. Venetiis 1591, 1826b): «Nativitas: De festo Conceptionis nihil dicitur [in Decreto], quia celebrandum non est, - sicut in multis regionibus fit, et maxime in Anglia: et haec est ratio, quia in peccatis concepta fuit sicut et ceteri sancti, excepta unica persona Christi».

4. Footnote in: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 121: AUGUSTINUS., De nat. et gratia c. 36 n. 42 (CSEL 60, 263-264; PL 44, 267): «Cum de peccatis agitur, nullam volo de Maria habere quaestionem»; LOMBARDUS, Sent. III d. 3 c. 2 (SB V 33).

5. Footnote in: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 121: ANSELMUS, De conceptu virg. C. 18 (ed. SCHMITT II 159; PL 158, 451): «Decuit ut Mater Christi ea puritate niteret, qua maior nequit intelligi».

6. Footnote in: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 122: IOANNES DE RUPELLA, Quaestiones disp. q. 1 in corp. (cod. Tolosae, bibl. commun. 737, f. 34rb): «Si beata Virgo... non habet reatum peccati, non indiget redemptione... Redempta fuit per Christum, ergo fuit concepta in peccato»; BONAVENTURA., Sent. III d. 3 pars 1 a. 1 q. 2 in corp. (III 68a): «Si ergo beata Virgo caruit originali, videtur quod ad redemptionem Christi non pertineat; sed magna est gloria Christi de sanctis quos redemit; ergo si non redemit beatam Virginem, nobilissima gloria privatur.  Hoc est profanum et impium dicere»; THOMAS, Sent. III d. 3 q. 1 a. 1 qc. 2 in corp. (ed. Parmen. VII 38a): «Christus... hoc singulariter in humano genere habet, ut redemptione non egeat, quia caput nostrum est, sed omnibus convenit redimi per ipsum; hoc autem esse non posset, si alia anima inveniretur quae numquam originali macula fuisset infecta; et ideo nec beatae Virgini nec alicui praeter Christum hoc concessum est»; Quodl. VI q. 5. a. 1 in corp. (XXV 302b); Summa theol. III q. 27 a. 2 in corp. (XI 290a); «[Si beata Virgo non] incurrisset maculam originalis culpae..., non indiguisset redemptione et salute quae est per Christum...; hoc autem est inconveniens quod Christus non sit Salvator omnium hominum».

7. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 123: «Christus fuit perfectissimus mediator, igitur habuit quantum ad aliquam personam summum gradum mediationis; sed non fuisset perfectissimus mediator et reparator nisi Matrem praeservasset a peccato originali (ut probatur); igitur cum ipse fuerit perfectissimus mediator quantum ad personam Matris suae, sequitur quod praeservavit eam a peccato originali».

8. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 126: «Nobilius est remittere alicui culpam ipsum praeservando ne insit, quam permittere offensam inesse et eam postea remittere».

9. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 129: «Sed quid de facto? Fuitne concepta in peccato originali et postea mundata?  Dico quod possibile fuit quod non fuerit concepta in originali; et possibile etiam fuit quod fuerit in originali per unum instans tantum et per totum tempus habitum in gratia; et possibile etiam fuit quod per tempus aliquod fuerit in originali et in ultimo illius in gratia».

10. Footnote in: SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 130: HENRICUS GAND., Quodl. XV q. 13 in corp. (f. 586C-586D): «Fuitne possibile, secundum naturam, Virginem vere... in instanti quo concepta est ‘homo’ ex semine secundum corpus et anima illi est unita, peccatum originale contraxisse et in illo nonnisi per illud instans permansisse?  Et videtur mihi quod hoc bene possibile est... Forma enim corporea humana... in primo instanti suae generationis ex semine habet esse..., et in eodem instanti corpus humanum... habet esse infectum...; in eodem instanti creatur [anima rationalis] in corpore... atque per hoc ab illo maculam peccati originalis contrahit...; et toto tempore praecedente non habebat illam maculam, quia nec habebat esse, - nec in Virgine habuit esse per tempus sequens, ut aestimo congruere dignitati Virginis, sicut et possibile est secundum naturam, ita quod nonnisi in transitu et in instanti fuerit in peccato originali; scilicet peccatum originale in illo instanti simul habuit esse primo et ultimo, sed secundum aliud et aliud signum illius instantis, quia ut erat terminus temporis praeteriti, in illo habebat esse primo..., ut vero illud instans erat initium temporis sequentis, in illo habuit esse ultimo per sequentem impulsionem motus gratiae, velut a superiore in tempore sequente expellentem illam... Sic igitur videtur mihi quod originale in Virgine per solum momentum instantis fuisse potuit... Sed an ita factum sit, Deus novit, - quod nec scio, nec assero; sed rationabile videtur mihi et possibile secundum praedicta factum fuisse».

11. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 133: «Est primum instans in quo Deus incepit gratificare animam: in quo instanti tantum, ponitur fuisse sub culpa et potentia Dei, in cuius potestate est agere in tempore vel instanti».

12. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 134: «Unde omnes alii fuerunt praestituti futuri filii irae, et post purgandi merito passionis Christi; ista autem fuit praestituta fuisse filia irae nisi gratia praevenisset, quam Deus voluit sibi specialiter conferre (propter obsequium quod contulit Filio Dei)».

13. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 135: «Virgo fuit mundata, et de ipsa munda fuit Christus assumptus».

14. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 136: «Dicendum est quod conceptio seminum non est celebranda, sed conceptio animati corporis potest celebrari».

15. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 138: «Eodem modo simul stant quod in illo priore anima beatae Virginis non sit sub gratia et tamen quod semper sit sub gratia, quia ‘ipsam in illo priore non esse sub gratia’ non est aliud quam ipsam secundum se non habere gratiam.  Nunc autem non sequitur ‘ipsa secundum se non habet gratiam, igitur non habet gratiam’».

16. SCOTUS, Lectura III Sent., 138: «Potest igitur dici quod possibile sit beatam Virginem non fuisse conceptam in peccato originali.  Nec hoc derogat universali redemptioni Filii sui, ut supra ostensum est, - et iterum confirmari potest, quia ex quo passio Christi immediatus et principalius ordinatur ad delendum reatum originalem quam actualem, sicut tunc tota Trinitas ex praevisione passionis Christi applicatae Virgini praeservavit eam ab omni actuali, sic et ab omni originali».

17. PIUS IX, Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, in: H. DENZINGER, Enchiridion Symbolorum, 1641: «Ad honorem sanctae et individuae Trinitatis, ac decus et ornamentum Virginis Deiparae, ad exaltationem fidei catholicae, et christianae religionis augmentum, auctoritate Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, beatorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, ac Nostra declaramus, pronuntiamus et definimus doctrinam, quae tenet, beatissimam Virginem Mariam in primo instanti suae Conceptionis fuisse singulari omnipotentis Dei gratia et privilegio, intuitu meritorum Christi Iesu Salvatoris humani generis, ab omni originalis culpae labe praeservatam immunem, esse a Deo revelatam, atque idcirco ab omnibus fidelibus firmiter constanterque credendam».

18. «Deus, qui per Immaculatam Virginis Conceptionem dignum Filium tuum habitaculum praeparasti, quaesumus, ut qui ex morte eiusdem Filii tui praevisa, eam ab omni labe praeservasti; nos quoque mundos eius intercessione, ad te pervenire concedas».

This paper is reproduced with permission.


This paper together with others by Fr. Noel Muscat OFM can be found at The Franciscan Studies Corner on the Maltese Franciscan Province’s web-site www.ofm.org.mt The web site of the Order of Friars Minor is www.ofm.org


This article can be copied and used with full freedom for the service of initial and ongoing formation in the Franciscan family.

This Version: 16th November 2004

Free Will - A Comment

A commercial for a new talk show to be hosted by a man with a Greek last name featured several guests each with a few seconds of sound bite.  The sound bite that caught my complete attention was uttered by a guest with a metal ring around her lower lip.  Her statement was something to the effect that "free-will" should not be viewed from a religious perspective.  I am sure that she had reasons for making the statement, but whatever her reasons were, she could not have been talking about Free Will.

Free Will comes from God, God is central to religion and therefore Free Will is inextricably tied to religion, in particular to Christianity, to Lucifer, and to Adam and Eve.  When anyone says "free-will" cannot be analyzed from a religious perspective, he/she has already by his/her very statement limited the Free Will God has given to each of us, which is the will to think and act freely and in this case, to think of Free Will as a gift from God.  By placing a limit as to what we can or cannot do is definitely not God's idea of Free Will. [1]

[1] What about the Ten Commandments, the teachings of Christ and the warnings by the Virgin Mary during Her many apparitions, do they not limit Free Will?  No.  They are what they are, commandments, teachings and warnings, none of which subtracts from the total and absolute freedom of will God has given us to taunt, disobey or be indifferent to any or all of them.