The Third Secret and a Pope's Heroic Decision

“In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church begins at the top.”
- Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, Papal theologian for 40 years to five popes

Benedict's resignation (actually, it was an abdication) wasn't surprising - but the timing was. He formally announced his renunciation of the papacy on Sunday, February 11, the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes. He made the announcement just a few days before Lent began on Ash Wednesday and in a year proclaimed "The Year of Faith." In effect, the Pope Emeritus gave the Church and the world a 17 day notice. So why did he make the decision to abdicate now?

First of all, with the exception of Benedict's remarks enroute to Fatima in May 2013, the Huffington Post highlights that the idea of resignation had long been on Benedict’s mind.

Benedict, as I keep repeating (because it should be repeated) already knew the Third Secret of Fatima when he became the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. Let us also consider that Sr. Lucia said that the Third Secret “is in the Gospels and the Apocalypse. Read them!” Lucia – who as a 10 year old little girl had seen Hell – was so terrified of the Third Secret that she, always so obedient, could not make herself submit it to paper when her bishop finally commanded her to do so in October, 1943. (Think for a moment. What could be worse than actually seeing the demons of Hell and the souls of the damned?) This the bishop did only because Lucia had become very ill, and it was feared she would die. Because Lucia continued to struggle in writing the Third Secret, Our Lady personally intervened in January 1944 to tell her that it had to be done, and then somehow assisted her in writing it.

So how does the Third Secret Vision that was released in the June, 2000 A.D. line up with what is revealed in the Gospels and the Apocalypse?  Simply stated - it doesn’t. There is something missing – and Benedict XVI, Pope Emeritus, knows what.

In fact, Benedict XVI knew the Third Secret as far back at 1984 (if not longer, since in his 1984 interview he never did indicate when he read it).  Let’s consider what he, as Cardinal Ratzinger, said at the time, in an interview with Vittorio Messori - which took place after Pope John Paul II made a second “entrustment” to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in March of that year.

Mr. Messori asked Cardinal Ratzinger why the Third Secret had not been made public. Mr. Messori said the Cardinal "dryly" replied, answering: “Because, according to the judgment of the Popes, it adds nothing to what a Christian must know from Revelation – i.e., a radical call for conversion; the absolute importance of history; the dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian and therefore the world. And also the importance of the last times…But the things contained in this Third Secret correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions, beginning with the Fatima apparitions in their known contents. Conversion and penance are essential to salvation.” (All emphasis mine.)

Please - hold it right there. Read those words above very, very carefully. Where are any of those “themes” seen in the Third Secret Vision (released in 2000 A.D.) - themes that were specifically stated by Cardinal Ratzinger in 1984 A.D.?

---What in the Vision conveys anything about “the last times”?

---What are the specific dangers that threaten the faith, the life of the Christian, and therefore the world?

---If the Third Secret adds nothing to Divine Revelation (which it could not do since Divine Revelation, aka “the Deposit of Faith,” ended with the death of St. John the Evangelist), then how exactly does it “correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions, beginning with the Fatima apparitions in their known contents”?

---Where does Scripture foretell the death of a bishop dressed in white, or the death of a Holy Father (if they are one and the same man)? All of the early popes were martyred, it is true, but Our Lady of Fatima was not showing a vision of the past.

---Does Scripture prophesy the death of this particular man as well as Catholics from all walks of life? If so, has this era now reached all of Chapter 12 of the Apocalypse?

---Does Scripture foretell the two angels who gather the blood of the martyrs and sprinkle it on the souls of those who are still making their way to God, as is seen in the Third Secret Vision? Where?

---What other Marian apparitions (after Fatima and approved by the Church as true) reveal any of these things? We know that Akita, Japan is one – Cardinal Ratzinger said that the message of Fatima and of Akita are essentially the same.  But in 1984, Cardinal Ratzinger said that the Third Secret is also to be found in “many other Marian apparitions.” Which ones? Are they Church-approved apparitions or ones still under investigation?

He also said the Third Secret is found in other Marian apparitions but --- “beginning with the Fatima apparitions in their known contents.” That means Fatima was the first to say and/or show something other Marian apparitions did not. That means Fatima is unique among all true Marian apparitions before 1917. How so?

“…in their known contents.” That’s an unusual way to phrase it. The “known” contents of the Third Secret.  Known to whom? In 1984, the Third Secret Vision had not been released to the public; hence, the reason for Mr. Messori’s questions. Were there “unknown” contents to the Third Secret that Cardinal Ratzinger didn’t yet know? If so, it seems that by 1984, he already read the actual words of Our Lady that accompany the Vision but which were never publicized. It had to be the Text, because Cardinal Ratzinger’s explanation of the Third Secret reveals six themes which the Vision does not.

It’s clear that Benedict XVI has long known the entire contents of the Third Secret. But when the Text was suppressed in 2000, and he became Pope in 2005, Benedict may have been in a true quandary. To release the Text after certain Vatican people denied it, after he “went along” (for whatever reasons), and after avoiding any real discussion over the other, ongoing debate about the collegial consecration of Russia, it would (admittedly) be a great humiliation to publicly explain everything.

But the Pope did do something highly important  (in relation to Fatima) when he said on May 13, 2010 that the Third Secret is spoken. It obviously had been on his mind for a long time, as was his resignation/abdication.

The Third Secret, like the first two, is actually made up of two parts. If we were to outline the Great Secret (which Sr. Lucia herself said given in three distinct parts), we have a sum total of six points. (More on that in a bit.) Recalling that Pope John Paul II said that “the message of Fatima places an obligation on the Church,” and that Pope Benedict XVI said that “We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete,” below I will quote a healthy-sized excerpt from one of my earlier articles, The Six Themes of the Third Secret of Fatima.   

I promise you, in light of Benedict’s resignation, the upcoming papal election, and the consideration of whether Papa Ratzinger might be “the bishop dressed in white” (described in the Third Secret), the following information will also have us pondering whether the next pope – who will literally inherit a mess – is the one who will make a positive step to fulfill the requests of Our Lady of Fatima. Now, onto the article excerpt I mentioned:

The Third Secret
and Its Two Parts
In fact, when the Pope said the Third Secret is spoken and shown, his words correlate with other proofs that this last Secret is comprised of two parts. To cite only one example, this essay will momentarily turn to what was said decades ago by Fr. Joseph Schweigel. This priest, upon his return from an important mission given to him by Pope Pius II to question Sr. Lucia about unfulfilled parts of the Fatima Message (the Third Secret, the consecration of Russia, etc.),was momentarily questioned by a curious colleague about the Third Secret.

Fr. Schweigel responded in the following manner:
“I cannot reveal anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically – although I can say nothing – would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.” 

The colleague pressed a little further, asking, “The present Pope or the next one?” However, as the interrogator himself attested in a written letter, “To this question, Fr. Schweigel made no reply.”

Only a few years later, Fr. Schweigel would also say that the Third Secret “seems to suppose a victorious, triumphant, but difficult and heroic decision” of a Pope’s.  In considering the purpose of Fr. Schweigel’s  papally-directed mission in questioning Sr. Lucia and in light of the tragic circumstances in which the Church Militant finds itself today, one can reasonably presume that, sometime in the future, a Pope will make a “difficult and heroic decision” under circumstances in which he faces vehement, if not physically violent, opposition to his unique prerogatives in his office as Vicar of Christ when he decides to comply with at least one, if not all, of Our Lady’s unfulfilled requests at Fatima.

Since Our Lady still awaits three particular actions to be made by the Pope and the bishops of the Catholic Church, it appears that Fr. Schweigel’s description of a “victorious, triumphant, but difficult and heroic decision,” made by the present Pope or a future one, lends further insight into Our Lady’s promise, “In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph.”

Fourth Horseman of the Apocalypse: What Say You?




The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, in the order in which they are mentioned in Chapter 6:
1) the white horse ("...he that sat upon him had a bow,
and there was a crown given him,
 and he went forth conquering that he might conquer")
 2) the red horse ("...and to him that sat thereon,
it was given that he should take peace from the earth, , and they should kill one another,
and a great sword was given to him),
3) the black horse ("...and he that sat on him had a pair of scales in his hands")
 4) the pale horse (coincidentally depicted as a  luminescent green horse...
"...and he that sat upon him, his name was Death, and hell followed him.
And power was given to him over the four parts of the earth,
to kill with a sword,
with famine,
and with death,
and with the beasts of the earth.")

  
As one who studies prophecy (both Scriptural and "private"), I couldn't help but wonder when, a few days ago, the image of a green, translucent figure of a horse and its rider showed up on a Euronews broadcast (and supposedly was also shown on MSNBC and CNN).

But what is the cause of this image?

Is it the result of light reflections (causing the image of a horseman - complete with an Egyptian-type head covering, almost like a tall crown, and a horse that doesn't glide, but moves up and down just like a walking horse)?

Is it a holographic hoax?

Or is it a "sign" - the kind we find in the Holy Scriptures?

What say you?

BY THE WAY: After viewing the video, keep scrolling, please!


Also: Comments are welcome, as long as they follow the rules of old-fashioned courtesy!





 
And now...The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, as they are described in The Apocalypse of St. John, Ch. 6: 1-10 (also known as Revelations):


"And I saw that the Lamb had opened one of the seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures, as it were the voice of thunder, saying: Come, and see. [2] And I saw: and behold a white horse, and he that sat on him had a bow, and there was a crown given him, and he went forth conquering that he might conquer. [3] And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature, saying: Come, and see. [4] And there went out another horse that was red: and to him that sat thereon, it was given that he should take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another, and a great sword was given to him. [5] And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature saying: Come, and see. And behold a black horse, and he that sat on him had a pair of scales in his hand."

"[6]And I heard as it were a voice in the midst of the four living creatures, saying: Two pounds of wheat for a penny, and thrice two pounds of barley for a penny, and see thou hurt not the wine and the oil. [7] And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature, saying: Come, and see. [8] And behold a pale horse, and he that sat upon him, his name was Death, and hell followed him. And power was given to him over the four parts of the earth, to kill with sword, with famine, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth. [9] And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. [10] And they cried with a loud voice, saying: How long, O Lord (holy and true) dost thou not judge and revenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" (Apocalypse 6: 1-10)


The White Horse
In The Book of Destiny, Rev. Herman Bernard Kramer explains that the rider of the white horse is given a crown, "which refers decisively to his character. It calls to mind the words of Christ before Pilate: 'Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were GIVEN thee from above.' (Jn. 19:11) Until Christ surrendered Himself into the Roman power, no one could injure Him. The words 'there was given him a crown' also allude to the beast in (Apocalypse) chapter 13, verses 5 and 7, namely, that he can persecute the Church only as long as it is given him to do so. The inference is that the rider on the white horse is an enemy of the Church."


Rev. Kramer also explains that the phrase, "conquering that he might conquer" is "a Hebrewism meaning a state of affairs or continuous action that would go on for a long time." In this writer's opinion, that continuing state of affairs began with the conclusion of High Middle Ages, the rise of humanism and other heresies, which led to the Protestant Revolt at the beginning of the "Modern Age." (Consider, too, the heresy of "nationalism," for which many, like St. Joan of Arc, were martyred.) This "state of affairs" continued with the French Revolt against the altar of God and the Catholic throne, and ultimately brought forth the heresy of modernism, which is now afflicting the Church "from within," as Pope St. Pius X acknowledged (and warned against) in the keen-sighted and prophetic Pascendi Dominici Gregis.


"The use of a bow for a weapon signifies the infliction of wounds on the Church, but not destruction. The sword [however] is the symbol of complete destruction, as is evident in chapter 19: 20 [of the Apocalypse] where it is decreed for the followers of the beast. Although the bow is far-reaching, it can only single out individuals for death." 


My own impression of Fr. Kramer's words, coupled with my continuing study of history, is that the damage inflicted by the bow indicates: 1) the individual martyrs, especially those since the 15th century and 2) the individuals who would accept heresies (a mortal sin in denying the true Christ and His Church, thus bringing death to the soul).


The Red Horse
Fr. Kramer notes that the red horse is a "symbol of war." Now, men have always been at war. What, then, makes this red horse and its rider so different? It is because the rider will take peace from the earth - the entire planet - and he is given "a great sword" to do so. There have, indeed, been great wars in the past. But only the 20th Century can (sadly) claim two world wars. The world is still not enjoying an "era of peace," as Our Lady promised at Fatima, for three reasons:


1)The collegial consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is not yet accomplished.
2) The Five First Saturdays of Reparation have not been promulgated by any pope.
3) There is no world-wide devotion to the Immacuate Heart of Mary (which must be placed next to devotion of Our Lord's Sacred Heart).


Those three things were requests by the Virgin Mary, and lest we forget - Fatima is approved by the Church as "worthy of belief." We can't dismiss Fatima with an airy, "Well, we're not obligated to believe in private revelations." If the Virgin did appear at Fatima - and the Church has judged that She did - how can we ignore Her with the most ridiculous of excuses that "we're not obligated to believe in private revelations"?  And since Our Lady of Fatima was not obeyed, World War II came closely upon the heels of World War I. More wars followed. Every day, we hear of insurrections and revolts. And, although we fear it, every day we expect to hear about "the spark" that will ignite World War III.


Hence, this red horse, with its rider, is a harbinger of universal war.


The Black Horse
Again referring to Rev. Kramer, the black horse "fits the personification of famine. Famine with exorbitant prices for food follows in the wake of war. Food is rationed and weighed during a war. St. John hears a voice from the midst of the four living beings announcing the price of food....It is a 'denarion' for a quart of wheat and the same for three quarts of barley...The common coin for a day's wages was a denarion. And the measure given is in Greek...which is about 1 1/2 lbs. of wheat, or 2 lbs., according to some authorities....Wheat was the food of the rich. Ordinarily twelve such measures could be bought for a denarion. Three times as much barley could be bought for the same coin. Barley was mainly the food of the poor. And so the price fixed for barley made it possible for a hardened laborer to support his family in a time of famine."


Now think about this, for just a moment: A man will have to work a whole day, just to earn enough wheat for one loaf of bread, two at the most. Barley, as Rev. Kramer notes, is the food of the poor. Why is that? Because barley is not very palatable all on its own, and the rich (usually self-indulgent) won't want it. Hence, barley will be more affordable than wheat. Now, if one has a family, what will one choose when, for the same amount of money, one can choose to buy one quart of wheat or three quarts of barley? (While the barley will stretch further, making bread out of pure barley, with no wheat or oats mixed in, is a bit tricky. It would probably have to be a pita-like bread. The same applies to wheat, especially if there is no leavening, but only flour, water, and a little oil with which to make flatbread.)


"Not to harm 'the oil and wine' has been interpreted to mean that God does not desire the utter ruin or extermination of any people that can still be converted, but purifies it by suffering," notes the Rev. Kramer. Perhaps we should also take note that oil and wine are necessary for the sacraments of Baptism (blessed oil, aka "chrism," and holy water), Confirmation (blessed oil) and Extreme Unction (again, blessed oil, in conjunction with Viaticum - Holy Eucharist or a drop of the Precious Blood - if the sick person can physically manage to receive Our Lord in Holy Communion) .


Then there is the consecration of bread and wine, through which a priest's words and actions of consecration there occurs the miracle of Transubstantiation. The Apocalypse foretells that the needed wheat (which must be unleavened) will be scarce and therefore expensive, but the wine needed (for the Holy Liturgy?) will not be so. Perhaps in this prophecy, God is telling us to especially look to the Precious Blood of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.


The Pale Horse
For a reason unfathomable to me, Rev. Kramer says that St. John calls the pale rider "A GREEN HORSE." I must be overlooking something very important, but I can find no apocalyptic reference to a "green horse." That said, here is Rev. Kramer's commentary:


"A horse of so strange a color appears that the Seer calls it 'a GREEN HORSE.' The color suggests to the mind a body decaying with pestilence. Death rides the horse. This personification of death presages utter depopulation or DEATH for this 'FOURTH PART'of the earth. He is to use as his means the four great plagues of mankind enumerated in the prophets, the sword, famine, pestilence and beasts of the earth. The last word, 'death,' stands for pestilence, while the name for the figure stands for 'extermination." The other figures of the second and third scourges [i.e., the 2nd and 3rd horsemen] are at his service; and besides that, he has pestilence and the wild beasts to aid him in his sweeping job of destruction."


So, whether or not the "green rider and horse" seen in the Youtube videos are real or a hoax, let's carefully and prayerfully consider all the unfulfilled prophecies found in the Holy Bible, from Daniel to the Apocalypse.


After all, shouldn't we read and know "the signs of the times"?

No Greater Work: Education in the Modernist Era

“What greater work is there than training the mind and forming the habits of the young?”[1]

St. John Chrysostom’s beautiful observation serves as a reminder that, like all doctrines, those on marriage and education were given by God and received by the Church for the instruction, sanctification, and salvation of the faithful. Yet we who live in the “modernist era” have great challenges set before us.

As Catholics, we have duties and obligations and, with them, exist their corresponding rights. To speak of “duties,” “obligations,” and “rights” is not to infer, as some do, matters of cold duty, grim-faced compulsion, or capricious, self-seeking demands. Rather, these duties, obligations and rights are expressions, so to speak, of supernatural charity. This is the virtue summed up by Christ Himself when He spoke of the two Great Commandments: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.” [2]

With this charity to God and to their families, the primary obligation of Catholic parents is raising their children to be good Christians. (On an important, related note, “Church tradition makes clear that the words Christian and Catholic are synonymous.” [3] It is through the family that a child should first learn to “know, love and serve God in this world” [4] in order to be happy with Him in the next.

The Catholic formation and education of children is a parental obligation first to God, because it is He Who blesses a husband and wife with children, either through natural generation or through generous adoption. After all, it is to God Whom the couple promised, when exchanging their sacramental marriage vows, to receive children joyfully and to raise and educate them in the Catholic Faith, so that they may gain eternal life. Secondly, since charity is also directed to our neighbors, and since our closest neighbors are our own spouses and children, one can see why “Charity begins at home.” [5]

All the good which Catholic parents do on behalf of their children should issue from this supernatural charity, simultaneously recalling that with obligations and duties are their corresponding rights. The Church recognizes that these are matters of both natural and divine law, as the few examples below will show:

• Pope Leo XIII: “By nature, parents have a right to the training of their children, but with this added duty: that the education and instruction of the child be in accord with the end for which by God's blessing it was begotten. Therefore it is the duty of parents to make every effort to prevent any invasion of their rights in this matter, and to make absolutely sure that the education of their children remain under their own control in keeping with their Christian duty, and above all to refuse to send them to those schools in which there is danger of imbibing the deadly poison of impiety.” [6]

• Pope Pius XI: “The family therefore holds directly from the Creator the mission and hence the right to educate the offspring, a right inalienable because inseparably joined to the strict obligation, a right anterior to any right whatever of civil society and of the State, and therefore inviolable on the part of any power on earth.” [7]

• Pope Pius XII: “Parents who are earnest and conscious of their educative duties, have a primary right to the education of the children God has given them in the spirit of their Faith, and according to its prescriptions.” [8]

The latter pope also wrote, “The charge laid by God on parents, to provide for the material and spiritual well-being of their offspring and to procure for them a suitable training, imbued with the true spirit of religion, cannot be wrested from them without grave violation of their rights.” [9]

The Times in Which We Live
As the Church goes, so goes the world, as an old maxim states, meaning that what affects the Church affects all societies. The Church and, with her, the family is under particular attack.

Without the Church established by Christ, Our Lord has not His kingdom on earth. Without Christian families (from which spring more families, priests, and religious), there would be no citizens in the kingdom of Christ on earth. This is exactly the situation for which the Church’s enemies strive: to dismantle to its very foundations the eternal Catholic City and destroy its citizens - especially the little ones - in whatever way possible.

Near the end of the 19th century, Pope Leo XIII observed, “The very times in which we live are warning us to seek remedies there where alone they are to be found - namely, by re-establishing in the family circle and throughout the whole range of society the doctrines and practices of the Christian religion.” [10] The truth of this magisterial statement (and others which later shall be addressed) is even more evident in our day.

Successive acts of the traditional Magisterium (both Ordinary and Extraordinary) remind those living within the Catholic City of the Christian principles by which they must live. Simultaneously, the same magisterial acts warn of the rising heresies, their origins, and the various means to resist them.[11] The Catholic City’s repeated “call-to-arms” were made by its stewards, who understood that the obligations and rights of the papal office charged them with its safe-guarding and protection.

“The whole Church is in dissolution,” St. Basil the Great mourned in the 2nd century. [12]It is a great tragedy that the elect of this age can make the same lament. Still, faithful Catholics familiar with salvation history know that ours is not the first era in which heresy has afflicted the human element of the Church - for we can and must make the distinction between the Church herself and individuals within the Church.

While it is true that heresies have always distressed the Church Militant, those living in this age are the most grievously afflicted. Why? The plethora of condemned heresies is now coalesced into what the Church deems as modernism, “the synthesis of all heresies.” [13] 

“The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume,” says Boromir in the movie-version of The Fellowship of the Ring, as he spoke of the evil land of Mordor. A most appropriate observation for those of us who live in the Modern Age, Boromir’s remark reminds us that the very culture in which we live is permeated with the poison of modernism. As popes from Clement XII to Pius XII have declared (and as history proves), the “modern errors” are poisoning souls and societies. The symptoms of this insidious, deadly spiritual disease are everywhere manifest.

One may wonder why, in an essay on Catholic education, the subject of modernism arises. Simply stated, parents and other educators need to know against what they are battling and how to combat it, in order to protect and educate the children. Without even being asked for the exchange, the greater part of recent generations have been denied their birthright and handed a mess of pottage. [14]

Perhaps what is most chilling about the modernist heresy is this: it may be the warning sign of the coming person known as Anti-Christ. Consider that modernism is “the synthesis” of all the previous and lesser heresies, just as the Anti-Christ will be “the synthesis” of all previous and lesser anti-christs in history.

Decades ago, an intriguing observation about “dialog” (as it is called today) and “education without religion” was made by Rev. R. Gerald Culleton, author of The Prophets and Our Times. Fr. Culleton was a Catholic priest who had carefully studied prophecies from Divine Revelation (Tradition and Scripture, both Old Testament and New), prophecies from Fathers of the Church (the Didache and Apostolic Constitutions, 90-100 A.D.), private prophecies from Apocryphal Scriptures of Jewish tradition and other ancient oracles, and prophecies from the Middle Ages and those spanning between the 16th and 20th centuries, with a good number of them uttered by canonized saints, beati, and venerables.

“There will be those who will indulge in fruitless discussions of so-called learned things,” wrote Fr. Culleton, “and by so doing will miss the real truth and the real faith because the things which engage their attention are based on false knowledge instead of the truth. The reason for this, primarily, is the education without religion which will exist in those days, for this education will not really educate but will have as its basis vain works and false ideals. This so-called education will be one of the most effective means used by Satan to prepare the world for Anti-Christ.” [15]

Our Savior, Jesus Christ, calls the Anti-Christ “the son of perdition.” [16] This, “the man of sin, according to both St. John and St. Paul, [i]s a person destined to gather all the evil forces in the world and unite and coordinate them under his dominion for the last desperate attack on the Church of Jesus Christ.” [17]

In foreseeing the Anti-Christ, St. John “outlines the preparation of his [the anti-Christ’s] empire in the first nine chapters [of the Apocalypse] and thereafter its growth to maturity under the personal direction of Anti-Christ and then its destruction. Emperor-worship, idolatry, magic, Judaism, heresy, schism, agnosticism, infidelity, liberalism, atheism, compromise with error or unbelief, persecution of the Church, hypocrisy and other vices are the roots out of which the enormities of Anti-Christ’s reign will grow until they overshadow the world.” [18]

Should we not consider, then, that every one of the ten aforementioned signs is already apparent in these days? Too, St. Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, foretells that the day of the Lord is not to come until the man of sin be revealed: “Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.” [19]

The revolt of which St. Paul speaks is the great falling away, otherwise known as the great apostasy. Pope St. Pius X alluded to both apostasy and the Anti-Christ in his inaugural encyclical, E Supremi (On the Restoration of All Things in Christ):

“For who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is - apostasy from God.” [20]

“When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the ‘Son of Perdition’ of whom the Apostle speaks (2 Thess. 2: 3).” [21]


What to Do?
Pope St. Pius X – a holy pope, a canonized saint whose body is incorruptible - not only assessed the disease, but he gave the antidote: the “‘restoring of all things in Christ’ (Eph. 1:10), so that ‘Christ may be all and in all’ (Col. 2:2).” [22]

“But if our desire to obtain this is to be fulfilled, we must use every means and exert all our energy to bring about the utter disappearance of the enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time - the substitution of man for God; this done, it remains to restore to their ancient place of honor the most holy laws and counsels of the gospel; to proclaim aloud the truths taught by the Church, and her teachings on the sanctity of marriage, on the education and discipline of youth, on the possession and use of property, the duties that men owe to those who rule the State; and lastly to restore equilibrium between the different classes of society according to Christian precept and custom.” [23]

Although the sainted pope clearly laid out for the princes of the Church “the means to be employed in attaining this great end,” [24] the restoring of all things in Christ is still not accomplished. Granted, some advances were made, only to be soon followed by a greater number of retreats and capitulations.

For many reasons, the war against modernism is not yet won but, as St. Paul said to the Romans, “Even so…at this present time also, there is a remnant saved according to the election of grace.” [25] Thanks only to the merciful Virgin Mary’s intercession before the throne of God, the Catholic City still stands.

Not long after Pope St. Pius X was called to his eternal reward, Our Lady came to Fatima. There She affirmed the central doctrines of the Catholic Faith, stressing the daily Rosary and sacrifice for the conversion of sinners, and forewarning in “the Great Secret” of future and terrible world events if Her requests were not heeded.

But Our Lady also promised, “In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph” and with it, “an era of peace will be granted to the world.”

What, then, is expected of all Catholics, and is there anything “special” that Catholic parents can do? The same answer to both questions is simpler than one might expect. It will foster the continuing Catholic formation and education of children, teens, and adults, and it infallibly guarantees the salvation of many souls:

• “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle,” as St. Paul taught. [26] Therein is found the definition and the “secret” of Divine Revelation; it is to Tradition and Scripture that we must hold.

• Do everything which the Virgin of Fatima requested. The Fatima apparitions were declared worthy of belief, so it is no small matter to disregard the Queen of the Catholic City. That for which the Virgin asked finds precedent in either Tradition or Scripture: Prayer and sacrifice (specifically, in the form of the daily Rosary), Sacramental Confession and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass offered in reparation for sins (the foundational necessity for the Five First Saturday devotions), meditation on the mysteries of Christ’s life, the wearing of the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, fidelity to daily duty as Catholics and in our states in life, and - finally - consecration (of a nation, but also of individuals).

 • With the children, ask in the daily Rosary intentions that the Holy Father will accept the graces God sends him to fulfill the Virgin’s request that Russia is collegially consecrated to Her Immaculate Heart. Our Lord Himself said to Sr. Lucia, “Pray much for the Holy Father. He will do it, but it will be late.”

 • Consecrate ourselves to the Virgin Mary, according to the method given by St. Louis de Montfort.[27] Do not hesitate to use one’s parental right to place one’s children, regardless of age, under Our Lady’s mantle.

As we keep hope in the promises of Christ, with constant recourse to Him and His Virgin Mother, may we always recall the words of St. Augustine: “The crown of victory is promised only to those who engage in the struggle.” [28]

~+~+~+~
Secrets of the Catholic City is the name of Mrs. Bartold's column, published in Catholic Family News (CFN). "No Greater Work: The Education of the Young in the Modernist Era" was published in CFN's April 2010 issue. All Rights Reserved World-wide by the author.

Marianna Bartold, founder of Keeping It Catholic, is the author of “The Age of Mary” Study Guides, a series of “digitally delivered” Catholic unit studies for homeschooled teens - as well as adults or anyone who wishes to grow closer “to Jesus through Mary.” Her other works include the upcoming digital Return of the King (The Lord of the Rings) Catholic Study Guide. She is the author of the Keeping It Catholic Home Education Guide books (Volumes I and II). Mrs. Bartold was the original homeschool editor of Sursum Corda and the founding publisher of The Catholic Family’s Magnificat! Magazine.
~+~+~+~
Notes
[1] St. John Chrysostom, Hom. 60, in c. 18 Matt.: Ouid maius quam animis moderari, quam adolescentulorum fingere mores? Cited by Pope Pius XI in Divinis Illius Magistri (On Christian Education of Youth, 1929): para. 8.
[2] Mt. 22: 36-40. [Douay-Rheims Bible]
[3] Marianna Bartold, “Christ in the Family: The Christian Education of Youth,” Catholic Family News, Aug. 2009.
[4] Baltimore Catechism and Mass, No. 3, The New Confraternity Edition Revised [Washington, D.C.: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1949]: p. 6.
[5] Quote attributed to Terence (full name, Publius Terentius Afer) in Andria; Roman comic dramatist (185 B.C. - 159 B.C.); Quotations by Author at “The Quotations Page” website [http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Terence/]
[6] Pope Leo XIII, cited by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri (On the Christian Education of Youth, December 29, 1929): para. 35. [Emphasis added]
[7] Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri (On the Christian Education of Youth, December 29, 1929): para. 32. [Emphasis added]
[8] Pope Pius XII, Mit Brennender Sorge (On the Church and the German Reich, March 14, 1937): para. 31. [Emphasis added]
[9] Pope Pius XII, Summi Pontificatus (On the Unity of Society, October 20, 1939): para. 66. [Emphasis added]
[10] Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae (On Christians as Citizens, January 10, 1890): para. 3.
[11] See the papal bull of Pope Clement XII, In Eminenti (On Freemasonry, April 28, 1738); also Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (On Liberalism, August 15, 1832); Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura (On Current Errors, December 8, 1864) and the Syllabus of Errors (December 8, 1864); Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus (On Freemasonry and Naturalism, April 20, 1884); Pope Pius X, E Supremi (On the Restoration of All Things in Christ, October 4, 1904); Lamentabili Sane (Syllabus Condemning the Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907), Pascendi Dominici Gregis (On the Doctrines of the Modernists, September 8, 1907) and Our Apostolic Mandate (On the “Sillion,” August 25, 1910); Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas (On the Feast of Christ the King, December 11, 1925), Mortalium Animos (On Fostering True Religious Unity, January 6, 1928); Divini Redemptoris (On Atheistic Communism, March 19, 1937); and Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (On Certain False Opinions Which Threaten to Undermine Christian Doctrine, August 12, 1950).
[12] St. Basil the Great (ca.330 A.D-ca.379 A.D.), Epistulae, to St. Athanasius (in 371-372 A.D.).
[13] Pope Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis (On the Doctrines of the Modernists, September 8, 1907): para. 39.
[14] Gen. 25: 31-34.
[15] Rev. R. Gerald Culleton, The Prophets and Our Times [Republished in Rockford, IL: TAN Books and Publishers, 1974. Originally published by the author in 1941 and 1943, with Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, November 1941]: p. 25. [Emphasis added]
[16] Jn. 17:12. [Emphasis added]
[17] Rev. Herman Bernard Kramer, The Book of Destiny [Rockford, IL: TAN Books and Publishers, reprinted 1975 from the original 1955 edition, with Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, January 1956): p. 18. [Emphasis added]
[18] Rev. Kramer, Ibid., p. 21. [Emphasis added]
[19] 2 Thess. 2:3. [Emphasis added]
[20] Pope St. Pius X, E Supremi (On the Restoration of All Things in Christ, October 4, 1903): para. 3. [Emphasis added]
[21] Ibid., para. 5. [Emphasis added]
[22] Ibid., para. 4.
[23] Ibid., para. 9. [Emphasis added]
[24] Ibid., para. 10.
[25] Rom. 11:5.
[26] 2 Thess. 2:14. [Emphasis added]
[27] St. Louis de Montfort, True Devotion to Mary, republished in Rockford, IL: TAN Books and Publishers.
[28] St. Augustine (354-430 A.D.), De Agone Christiano, 1:1.

Scandal in the Church: The Judas Factor

It is hard not to have heard "something" about the newest scandals rising within and against the Church, which again calls to mind what I call "The Judas Factor."

Have you ever wondered what went wrong with Judas the Apostle, and why there have always been men of his ilk within the Church? Judas' is a sad story, especially when compared to the love, reparation, and devotion of the great penitent St. Mary Magdalen. (Notice the egg in her hand? It denotes the Resurrection; it is one of her forgotten symbols, since she was the first of the holy women - after the Virgin Mary, of course - to which the risen Lord spoke.)

Despite his many sojourns with Christ, Judas became weary of doing things Our Lord’s way. This one apostle was tired of the endless sacrifices, the exhausting journeys, the throngs of people asking for service, the interrupted sleep.  Even Christ's doctrine had begun to chafe. It had begun to matter little to Judas that Jesus taught all of His apostles and all the people by His example, His doctrine, and His miraculous signs. And still, Jesus did not meet Judas’ personal expectations. It may not have occurred to Judas that perhaps it was he who was supposed to strive and live up to Christ's expectations. 

Six days before the Jewish Pasch, Judas – one of the Twelve Apostles - decided to betray Christ. His resolution sprang from an event at the supper at Bethany, which occurred soon after Christ had resurrected Lazarus. Held at the house of Simon the Leper, [1] it was at this supper that St. Mary Magdalen took “a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.” [2]

As the Gospels relate, St. Mary Magdalen’s act of humility, generosity and homage to Our Lord outraged many at the Bethany supper.[3] She gave her all, thinking only of Christ, and her loving acts (like the odor of sanctity) filled the house with a beautiful scent.  Did anyone other than Christ recognize the charity behind her actions? It seems not. “And they murmured against her.”[4]

Now, among these ‘murmurers’ were some (if not all) of the disciples. [5] According to the Gospel of St. John, it was Judas who brazenly confronted Christ: “Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? Now, he said this, not because he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and having the purse, carried the things that were put therein.” [6]

The Apostles (and perhaps other followers present) witnessed Mary’s act - but they did not understand it. If they had charitably conferred with each other in order to grasp her actions, it would have been one thing. But such is not the case; we know that they committed the sin of rash judgement because St. Matthew records that “they murmured against her.”

Perhaps encouraged by the unkind murmuring, it was Judas who dared to challenge the Lord but only succeeded in exposing himself as “the mouthpiece of discontent, and disguised his ill-humour under a hypocritical semblance of charity. Mercenary, covetous, crafty, coarse, and selfish, his heart had remained impervious to the teachings and the influence of Jesus; all the holiness and love of Jesus had not altered him – he hardened his heart against grace and remained unsubdued by the goodness of God.” [7]

“But Jesus said: Let her alone, why do you molest her? She hath wrought a good work upon Me. For the poor you have always with you: and whensoever you will, you may do them good: but Me you have not always. She hath done what she could: she is come beforehand to anoint My Body for burial. Amen, I say to you, wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she hath done, shall be told for a memorial of her. And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went to the chief priests, to betray Him to them. Who hearing it were glad; and they promised him they would give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently betray Him.” [8]

Initially, Judas became angry because the manner in which Mary bestowed her gift upon Christ left the faithless apostle no way to personally benefit from the penitent's generosity. As St. John said, the man was a thief. [9] Judas was the holder of the purse, which held the donations given by the faithful. It was from this purse that the Apostles gave alms to the poor and also, when absolutely necessary, which they were sometimes compelled to use for their basic necessities of life. It was only after Judas’ betrayal of Christ and his own suicide that the other Apostles realized that Judas had been pilfering the purse.

After his heated outburst of feigned charity at the Bethany supper, Judas - the consummate hypocrite - became even more livid when Jesus took Mary’s part; Judas was also disgusted that Christ defended her action as a good work, only in the next breath to speak of His own burial. How could the Christ castigate him - an Apostle! - and defend a notorious (although penitent) sinner, and a mere woman at that? And to speak of death, again, as Jesus had been doing with increasing frequency - what morbidity!

That was it. Judas had had enough. His association with Jesus was not what he hoped it would be. This Man, thought Judas, cannot be the Messiah, the Son of God. He decided to leave the service of Christ - but not quite yet. It was not enough to abandon Jesus; no, Judas wanted to gain something by it, too. “What will you give me, and I will deliver him to you? But they appointed him thirty pieces of silver.” [10]

The betrayal of Christ may seem like a hasty decision, but Judas had long trifled with grace. For quite some time, Judas may have been going through the motions of an Apostle but, slowly and surely, his interior life degraded. The fact that he was an apostle of Christ did not protect him from the temptations of his selfish inclinations. However, since he was an apostle, he knew the ways of recourse. He chose not to use them.

As for Our Lord, He tried to save Judas’ soul, giving him every opportunity. Jesus, Who reads all hearts and Who does not take away our free will, saw that this unfortunate apostle was bent on following his own course. It is for this reason that after exhausting all efforts, even to the events at the Last Supper, Christ finally said to Judas, “Thou which thou dost, do quickly.” [11]

Judas, once an apostle and friend of Christ’s, chose to follow what he thought was a better way – his way.

Oh, the great mystery of all time – that God Himself became Man, was betrayed by one of His own Apostles, and died on a wooden cross, a pagan-devised execution intended only for the lowest of criminals! Through the actions of one traitorous Apostle, the Savior of the world suffered the most terrible Passion – but we must remember that Jesus allowed it all to happen for His own reasons.

The main cause, however, came down to one serious thing: Sin.

As we near the end of Lent 2010, we are witnessing how “The Judas Factor” once more assails Christ’s Spotless Bride, the Catholic Church. Judases throughout time have oft betrayed Christ, His Church, and her people. Today’s Judases, some of them in the guise of shepherds, have struck in an unprecedented way, harming the sheep and, even worse, the innocent little lambs.

The faithful Catholic must understand that Our Lord knows of all of these scandals. He knew of them at the moment they were perpetrated, and He is angrier than are we. As for Our Lady, is it any wonder that the Weeping Madonna has miraculously manifested so many tears through a great many of her statues, including one of her Fatima Pilgrim Virgin statues (1972-73), and one of her images at Akita, Japan (1973)? God is justly angry, and Our Lady weeps at our stupidity and our blindness.

Although we cannot yet see why, there is a reason why God has not yet struck the guilty. Just as there were many good reasons that the innocent, sinless Christ allowed the betrayal of Judas, an apostle “within” His own circle, God has His reasons for allowing those “within” the Church to betray Him, His Bride and her children.

Yes, the fort is betrayed by them who should have defended it, as the bishop-martyr John Fisher said. That is important to remember, especially when even faithful Catholics speak of “the sins of the Church,” for they speak wrongly and do great disservice to their Mother because the Church herself does not sin; no - only people sin. The mystical Church herself is eternal and faithful to Her Spouse. She is the Bride and never a harlot.

Consider this analogy of the Church of Christ: The Bride's adopted children are precious to her, and she would not ever harm them. They, on the other hand, are sinners and so, depending on whether or not they cooperate with grace, they are capable of either doing great good or great harm. Those who betray their adoptive mother are the Judases, and it they who sully her name and her office as Christ's Bride.

Like Her Divine Spouse, the Church is repeatedly betrayed and undergoes an unjust trial, followed by a Passion. The current plot and ensuing betrayal against the eternal Church may be the worst in history. All of this is brought upon the Church by her faithless children and friends - some of them apostles like Judas - who (for whatever reason: fear of others, pride, covetness, etc.) cooperate with the enemy. Sin buffeted the eternal Christ, and sin buffets the eternal Church. In imitation of Her Divine Spouse, this Bride who is wounded in and by Her Mystical Body is herself without sin.

While we are rightfully scandalized by the many betrayals (of type and number) now coming to light, no amount of Judases will ever induce the true faithful to abandon Christ and His Church. Rather, we stay and defend the eternal Church and her faithful children, of which we hope to number ourselves. 

As citizens of the Catholic City, we are obligated (and with the obligation comes the right) to protect the citadel, safeguard our children, and defend against the rebels, the miscreants and the insane dreamers (as Pope St. Pius X would and did describe such people, in his apostolic mandate on The Sillion).

Just as importantly - we must keep offering prayer (especially the daily Rosary!) and reparation to God for the terrible sins of these same Judases. Simultaneously, we must not forget to daily ask Our Lady to protect and enlighten us, lest in the battle we fall into other snares laid by the devil. 

We should also ask St. Mary Magdalen, the Great Penitent who became the Great Saint, for her intercession as we also remember her example. Even before Christ's Passion, She loved and adored Christ far past the love of the apostles, and she was not afraid to show it when at the house of Simon the Leper. Before the week was completed, it was she who stood with the Virgin Mary and St. John at the Foot of the Cross. As Tradition tells, after the Resurrection Christ first went to His Mother and then to Mary of Magdala in the Garden where His Body had been laid. 

Fight the good fight, but always keep Christ's peace in your heart. That is what was meant by St. Augustine, when he wrote to Felicia, a virgin sorely grieved over the scandals then afflicting the Church:

“I exhort you not to let yourself be too much troubled by scandals, which indeed were foretold precisely so that when they happen we may remember that they were foretold and not be disconcerted. For the Lord Himself foretold them in the Gospel. ‘Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless, woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh.’ (Matt. 18: 7) Thus, there are those who hold the office of shepherds that they may watch over Christ's sheep; and there are those who hold it for the sake of temporal honors and worldly advantages. These two kinds of pastors, always dying and giving place to others, will both be perpetuated in the bosom of the Catholic Church till time ends and the Lord comes to judgment.” [12]

"Pray the Rosary every day and make many sacrifices for the conversion of sinners." (Our Lady of Fatima)
 ~+~+~+~
After Easter Week: More on "The Judas Factor" and the current scandals afflicting the Church.
 ~+~+~+~
Endnotes

1] Jn. 12:3 and Lk. 7:40. The Holy Bible: Douay-Rheims Version [Rockford, IL: TAN Books and Publishers, 1899 edition photographically reproduced].

2] Gospel of St. John, Ibid.

3] Mk. 14:4.

4] Mk. 14:5.

5] Matt. 26:8.

6] Jn. 12: 5-6. [Emphasis added]

7] Meditation on the Passion [Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, reprinted February, 1963], p. 35. Compiled from various sources associated with the nuns of the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary, with an Introduction by Rev. Reginald Walsh, O.P. Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, Feb. 23, 1922.

8] Mk. 14: 7-12. [Emphasis added.]

9] Jn. 12: 5-6.

10] Matt. 26:15.

11] Jn. 13: 27.

12] St. Augustine, Epist. 208, 2 and 5. [Emphasis added]

Hilaire Belloc, Red Flags, and Those Catholic Bones

Something Hilaire Belloc wrote about the great heresies brings to mind "Red Flags" - a topic I've not written about for quite some time, but which is addressed at length in my books on Catholic home education (the Keeping It Catholic Home Education Guides).

Originally, the "Red Flag List" was intended to assist Catholic homeschooling parents, who buy their curriculum at conferences or via "educational catalogs." However, "Red Flags" in books, television shows, movies, etc. (as in ad nauseum) abound for Catholics everywhere and in every state of life (single, married, young parent or grandparent, priest or nun). Now, unless we live on a desert island, we must be on guard against "the spirit of the world" which is much worse than "The Blob" (in the old "B" movie), a dangerous and seeping entity that literally consumed everything in its path.

At any rate, the primary reason for constructing the "Red Flag List" was a simple but important one: Dangerous novelties (in the form of books) were quickly becoming the "fashion" in Catholic home education, and the alarm had to be sounded.

The main problem began oh-so-innocently, of course, and for a variety of reasons. It started with allegedly "Christian" books that were, in fact, of heretical origin. Much could be said, and has been, on tolerating a few such sources within the home study curriculum (under certain circumstances), so that issue won't be discussed again in this article.

As time passes, the "novelties" become even worse with "fashionable" resources that present themselves as Catholic, are even "hailed" as Catholic (though they are chock-full of subtle phrases or ambiguous terminology), and are then found in Catholic catalogs (for homeschoolers or of general interest to all Catholics).

The problem continues with "catholicizing" heretical books and implementing new or "resurrected" educational methods (Dewey comes to mind, but there are many other educational 'reformers' to avoid). Too, many people still refuse to believe that educational method is simply the means of bringing a philosophy to life.

It is only because we tolerate such errors that such "novelties" are still with us and grow even stronger as they are thus passed onto the next generation. The basic formula to error, which must be recognized in order to avoid its use (especially in Catholic education), might be expressed this way:

"Novelties" + "Fashions-in-contemporary-thought" = "Errors" (Heresies)

A "Red Flag" is (and always has been) the Catholic instinct alerting us that something we've read or heard or are urged to do is not quite right. We may not yet be able to explain the uneasiness, but it is - to paraphrase Hilaire Belloc - something we know in our Christian bones.

Feelings, of course, cannot be trusted, since they are not the same as the Catholic instinct, that sensei fide that makes us wonder about the why's and wherefore's to the questions arising in our minds. Sensei fide keeps nudging at us to pay attention with our reason, illuminated by Divine Revelation. That "sense of the Faith" is what is meant by a "Red Flag"...and when the instinct is particularly strong, the Red Flag is waving!

As for Hilaire Belloc (and to conclude this purposely brief post), ponder - if you will - this observation from none other than the famous Catholic historian and apologist himself:

"Now against the great heresies, when they acquire the driving power of being the new and fashionable thing, there arises a reaction within the Christian and Catholic mind, which reaction gradually turns the current backward, gets rid of the poison and re-establishes Christian civilization. Such reactions begin, I repeat, obscurely. It is the plain man who gets uncomfortable and says to himself, 'This may be the fashion of the moment,
but I don't like it.' It is the mass of Christian men who feel in their bones that there is something wrong, though they have difficulty in explaining it. The reaction is usually slow and muddled and for a long time not successful. But in the long run with internal heresy it has always succeeded; just as the native health of the human body succeeds in getting
rid of some internal infection."

-Hilaire Belloc, The Great Heresies

Worldwide Rosary Novena: Collegial Consecration Campaign

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Marianna Bartold, Keeping It Catholic Network at keepitcatholic@usa.net

Catholics worldwide are again invited to join in the Collegial Consecration Campaign, initiated last May by Keeping It Catholic (KIC). Our goal is to console and encourage the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, by sending him the names of millions of Catholics who are daily praying the Rosary, making their foremost intention the collegial consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

The first of our next two consecutive 54 Day Rosary Novenas begins this Friday, May 1st (First Friday of the month and the Memorial of St. Joseph the Worker) and concludes on June 23 (Vigil of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist).

To foster the habit of the daily Rosary, a second Novena immediately commences on the very same date, June 23, and ends on August 15 (Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady, a holy day of obligation).

1. If you wish to console and encourage the Holy Father by sending your "Promise of Rosary Prayers," please email keepitcatholic@usa.net with the following information:

---Your first and last name, city and state, and (if you wish) your vocation, position, or degree(s). (Please Note: All such information is held as strictly confidential, but KIC will add your full name, city and state to the “Promise,” which, like our previous Rosary Novena, will be sent to the Holy Father.)

2. Kindly ask others to join us by forwarding this message IN ITS ENTIRETY to every person and organization of good will, including adoration chapels, Catholic newspapers and journals, parish priests, family, friends, fellow parishioners, Catholic homeschool support groups, etc. (Also, please feel free to PRINT this one page message and hand it out to others.)

3. If you have a Catholic website or Blog and wish to help spread word of the Collegial Consecration Campaign, please link to Keeping It Catholic - The Blog! by using the following url: http://keepingitcatholic.blogspot.com/

"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph...the Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and an era of peace will be granted to the world." (Our Lady of Fatima)

[The Collegial Consecration Campaign is sponsored by the Keeping It Catholic Network, 604 S. Main St., Lapeer, MI 48464. Email: keepitcatholic@usa.net + Phone: 810-614-0304]

Viva La Vida - What Does the Song Really Say?

Viva La Vida, by “alternative rock” band Coldplay, is gaining loads of attention these days. One has to admit the musical score is ethereal and surreal, but the haunting lyrics are somewhat of a mystery. Some call Viva la Vida (and other songs on the album, entitled Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends) contradictory. If I may, I would suggest that ambiguous is a more accurate description. Lead singer Chris Martin was quoted as saying just this past spring of 2008, “We're slightly terrified about this record, because we've thrown away all our tricks. The truth is, we tried to find new ones.” Viva la Vida’s theme, however, is clear: Revolution.


The Sum is the Whole of Its Parts
Viva La Vida’s album title, its front cover, the baffling lyrics, and the imagery in the band’s two music videos specifically point to the French Revolution of 1789 and its 'second rising' in 1830. But consider: Why a Spanish title for a song sung in English about the French Revolution - or to clarify, a song about the philosophies that brought the woefully and deceptively misnamed "Enlightenment"? In the end, we have another part as we work together the sum, but it is ambiguous, too.

What is the meaning of Viva La Vida? In Spanish, the word viva means life. The word vida has a few more definitions: life, a lifetime or a life span, a biography of a life, or a livelihood (the way one makes a living). Thus the title Viva La Vida possesses various meanings: “Live the Life,” “Live the Lifetime,” “Live the Way of Life” or “Live the Lifestyle.” It could also suggest the biography of an unnamed individual’s life or the history of a ‘way of life.” Of course, the album’s unusual title about life and death is yet another hint that this song (and others on the album) is definitely about Revolution, which certainly brings “Death and All His Friends.”


The Title.- “Viva la Vida takes its name from a painting by Frida Kahlo, the acclaimed 20th century Mexican artist.” (See Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends ) Objectively speaking, the reference to the female painter Frida Kahlo, while an illuminating clue, is not an inspiring one. Kahlo’s life began three years after the "birth" of the Mexican Revolution - another revolution in which faithful Catholics, priests and laity alike, were pitilessly martyred. However, she publicly stated that she was born in the very year the Revolution began – thus purposely identifying herself with the ideology of Revolution. Due to a congenital birth defect and the life-long effects of a terrible auto accident, her life was full of deep pain, misery and stress. None of these things should be airily dismissed, for they were tragic and deserving of compassion. What is even more tragic is the evidence that Kahlo’s great sufferings did not sanctify her. Instead, she chose to “Live a Way of Life” (and perhaps found a way to end it), which in many points reflected the spiritual and temporal disorder of the ongoing “Revolution.”


The Album’s Front Cover. - While Viva la Vida may take its name from one of Kahlo’s paintings, the album’s front cover is a reproduction of pro-Revolutionary Eugène Delacroix’s 1830 painting, Liberty Leading the People. [For a brief history of the painting and its meaning, please see this entry.] The woman in the painting is the allegorical Marianne, a female personification and a sensible (meaning “understood by one of the five senses”) symbol of the French Revolution. She carries the bright tricolor (red, white and blue) flag of Revolution as she mercilessly steps upon the bodies of the dead. Consider, then, the mammoth hint made by Coldplay in choosing Liberty as Viva La Vida’s album cover, splashing the words across Marianne, and adding small white flecks (rose petals?) that float on the wind. (We'll return to the rose theme later.)


The Videos and the Lyrics:
“Now the Old King is Dead; Long Live the King!” (Viva la Roix!)

Too, Viva La Vida’s first official music video features 'smudged' sections of the Liberty painting, which serves as the band’s predominantly black and red background (although there are splashes of gold or white). At times, the painting moves behind the band like a passing landscape. (If one watches closely, a few figures within it are digitally transformed just before they are gone from sight.) Incidentally, Liberty plays a much more obvious role in the Viva La Vida’s alternative video, in which Chris Martin (the lead singer) carries around a framed copy of this same painting.

Again, the lyrics and the two videos’ mysterious traces are obviously intended to hold a dual-interpretation (in other words, the song is purposefully ambiguous and left up to the individual’s interpretation). The first video has lead singer Martin dressed in a way open to interpretation (the white shirt with the red "V," covered by a jacket, and the thin ropes around his wrists). On the other hand, Viva La Vida’s alternative video leaves little doubt as to who or what the lead singer intends to portray, because Martin is clad as a king.

The Who and the What. - In an exclusive sense, Viva La Vida strongly indicates it is a "collage" of two monarchs: the Catholic, French King Louis XVI (portrait to the left), who in 1793 was martyred at the guillotine, and his much later successor, the “Citizen-King” Louis Philippe (who reigned as “king of the French” from 1830-1848). Louis Philippe was the eldest son of the murdered King Louis XV’s traitorous cousin, the Duke of Orleans (who, after contributing to his cousin's fate by beheading, would later suffer the same fate). Spanning the years 1793-1830, France saw a series of rulers, including two of Louis XVI's relatives (an uncle and a brother), and Napoleon I, self-crowned Emperor. In 1830 (the same year of the Liberty painting), France endured an insurrection, Charles X (brother to the deceased Louis XVI) abdicated the throne and his nephew Louis Philippe took it. (It was also the year in which the Virgin Mary appeared in Paris to St. Catherine Laboure.) During the European Revolts of 1848, France (and many other countries, most of them Catholic) again underwent yet another Revolution. This time, it was Louis Philippe who abdicated (in favor of his grandson). Louise Phillippe then fled to England, where he died two years later, in 1850.

That the “Citizen King” of France died in England may also explain why Coldplay - a British brand – selected him, if not his predecessor, for their Death and All His Friends theme, and that is only if such was their intent. That Louis Philippe died in their home country suggests, however, that it is not necessarily he who is personified in the lyrics, "I sweep the streets alone/Sweep the streets I used to own." (Is it some spirit, either of a person or an idea, that sweeps the streets?)


As for Louis Philippe's predecessor, I do not refer to Charles X, brother of King Louis XVI, for he was not dead when Louis Philippe took the throne. Much less do I mean Louis XVIII (another brother of the deceased king) or Napoleon I, who was an outright usurper of the throne who, in any case, doesn't fit most of the song lyrics. However, those particular lyrics could be personifications of all those rulers - most of them legitimate heirs to the throne, with the exclusion of Napoleon - but to whom do they best apply?

If one is familiar with history, the answer is King Louis XVI, who was in robust health during most of his life. If he and his little son (not to mention Queen Marie Antoinette, who was the youngest daughter of the Emperor and a Hapsburg!) had not been murdered by the Revolutionaries, there is good reason to believe Louis' normal life span would have allowed him the time to right many wrongs, as he was already trying to do. Had he died a natural death, his son the Dauphin (Louis XVII) would have ascended the throne; it would never have passed to the one who was called the “Citizen King.” Thus the line "The Old King is dead; Long live the King!" may be referring to King Louis XVI and his legitimate successors by right of birth, down to Louis Philippe, in contrast to the "new king of the world," which is the spirit behind all Revolution.

Extending this theme to its reasonable conclusion, the song might also be a political vagary about monarchy itself, if not monarchy versus a republic. (After all, a monarchical or a 'republican' government means “Living a Way of Life” – Viva La Vida! - for both the monarchs and the people or the leaders and the people). This possibility only brings forth yet more questions: Is Viva La Vida’s duality an expression of sympathy – an “Ode to the Most Christian Monarch Louis XVI,” as it were - as well as a rather obscure bit of revolutionist poetry in the form of a song, a sentimental “Prose to Louis Philippe”? Is it a protest about the successive tragedies due to the French Revolution - or is it a rallying cry for the continuing Revolt? Or is Coldplay sympathetic to the Revolution’s victims but thinks such deaths are a terrible necessary? Or again, is it some vague sentiment expressing their own confusion about one form of order vs. chaos?

In a broader sense, the first "official" music video Viva La Vida momentarily hints at other manifestations of Revolution. Throughout the initial video, and again at its end, all of the band members are seen in costume. The dress of the first two musicians are cast in deep shadow and therefore difficult to ascertain with certainty, but the third band member is attired in the Union uniform of the Civil War (The War Between the States). That Coldplay chose to symbolize the United States' Civil War as another symbol of Revolution is startling in itself, but it is appropriate if they are implying a statement about republics. In Violet Hill, another song on the same album, the band members dress in the same outfits. Another ambiguous Coldplay song, Violet Hill comes from the soldier’s viewpoint, but what he is really saying is again left to the listener’s point of view.)

Catching Coldplay’s New “Tricks.” - To those who choose to watch both videos, may I first call your attention to the artistic symbolism and themes found within the first one? (I trust the second “alternative” video is a bit clearer in meaning. That is why I will not comment on it for now except to ask – is Martin, as ‘king,’ supposed to be standing at the gates of Petit Trianon?). Also, before sharing both videos with you (links provided within this post, since Youtube has removed the embedding option of the first "official" video), please allow me to identify all the individuals: They are Chris Martin (lead singer) and his band mates Jonny Buckland (guitarist), Guy Berryman (bassist) and Will Champion (drummer). Finally, before viewing either or both of the videos, please be aware that there is a conclusion to this article – found (obviously) at the very end. ;)

In the first video, available at Youtube, please watch for the following:


- The main background colors which come from the Liberty painting – predominantly black and red – are of war, revolt and bloodshed. One will notice that in almost all scenes with Martin, there is a large area of red behind him. The overload of red comes from the tri-color flag seen in the Liberty painting.

- A red V on the side of Martin’s white shirt which seems to be "painted" (it is my understanding that Martin began displaying this red “V” during Coldplay’s live shows on the Viva la Vida tour). Does it symbolize V as in Victory (and whose victory?) or V as in the Vendee, the western region of France peopled mostly by the every-day working-class, all Catholics faithful to ‘altar and throne.’ Almost all of them were brutally murdered - including babies and children - by the “Blues” of the French Revolution.)

- The outline of a bayonet in the background (this comes from the painting Liberty)

- A small white cross in a white cloud (behind and to the right of guitarist Buckland). One does not see a cross in Liberty.

- An arch with a bell, and a close up of a bell being struck. The bell is likely the symbol for both the French Revolution’s and the American Revolution’s cry of “Liberty,” which was redefined in practice to mean “license.” (Yes, there is a difference between liberty and license!) Neither is a bell nor an arch found in Liberty.

- The Revolution’s tri-color emblem on the right arm of lead singer Chris Martin's jacket. It can also be barely seen on the right arm of another band member. The tri-color flag is carried by "Marianne" in the Liberty painting.

- What appear to be thin ropes of leather tied around the lead singer’s wrists. If (and only if) Martin intended to portray the martyred monarch, the thin ropes might represent King Louis XVI’s imprisonment before he was ruthlessly murdered by the Revolutionaries’ ever-thirsty Madame Guillotine. (Moments before he was beheaded, King Louis XVI's hands were bound - after he had already ascended the scaffold. The king at first resisted, for an honorable knight would never "run in terror from the face of death," as Elena Marie Vidal describes the scene in her book, Trianon. But the good and faithful priest accompanying the king urged him to consider it his last humiliation, suffered in union with the Passion of Christ, Who was bound to a pillar before the Scourging. At this holy remembrance, the martyr submitted, saying, "You are right. Nothing less than His example should make me submit to such a degradation.")

- How lead singer Martin somehow seems to be singing toward the heavens, and other times bows his head. In one brief segment, he seems to be stumbling, as though he is standing on uneven ground – or being toppled. In another quick scene, his head hangs and his arms are out, bent down at the elbow - like a limp puppet on a string. Immediately following, his hands are up as if in supplication during the line, “Oh, who would ever want to be king?” At another time, when he is facing to the right, he crosses his hands across his chest - a traditional posture often seen in paintings of saints in communion with God. Near the end of the video, his hands are momentarily placed together as if in prayer. These brief scenes can only bring the pious King Louis XVI to mind; most certainly, they cannot refer to Napoleon or the Citizen King Louis Philippe.

- Other images that look like hearts, scrolls, tubing, and somewhat hazy figures. If the viewer carefully pays attention to the right side of the video, one will eventually see repeated and “muted” images of a red heart. There is even a heart with flames coming from its top (this heart is seen in the close-up of the singer’s palm facing the screen). In Catholic symbolism, this flaming heart represents the Sacred Heart of Jesus, burning with love.

- The cloud interludes. In the 2nd cloud shot, there appears to be a figure standing within it but it is hazy and very muted. In another sequence, this figure (not the cloud) appears in the upper right hand corner, with white rays falling downward.

- A red cross on a white background (in the upper left corner). A red cross on white was undoubtedly a part of the Sacred Heart of Jesus “badge” – to even wear it in the years of the French Revolution meant condemnation by “Death and All His Friends.” The actual badge was a red heart symbol (with a cross on top of it). Unfortunately, the Revolutionaries would eventually employ the image of a heart (without the cross) in their personification of the “new” (anti-Christian) republic of France.

- The video’s very end, in which each of the band members are briefly viewed, representing some aspect of Revolution; the first (the drummer) is all in black, his collar turned up. His right arm also bears a badge, but only bits of red and white can be seen. His arms are down and his hands are crossed over each other. His outfit can barely be seen, but his face turns to the viewer’s left, attracting the viewer’s eye to floating objects drifting by. The second member (the bass player) is seen in a flash but it seems to be the Confederate uniform (U.S. Civil War). The third one (guitarist) is wearing the Union uniform and cap. Last seen is Martin, who reaches out, as if trying not to be pulled away (perhaps by the “wicked and wild wind”) as the small red flecks float adrift.

- The floating red flecks, which seem to be very tiny rose petals. (Consider the opening segment in which a larger rose slowly comes into view). The symbol of a rose is supposed to be a tribute from Coldplay to another British band, Depeche Mode and their song “Enjoy the Silence.” The cover for Depeche Mode's single release (as well as the album Violator in which it was featured) bears a single rose. The rose, in Depeche Mode’s view, is an allusion to the controversial (and rightly so) historical romance, “The Rose of Versailles,” set during the French Revolution. Above and beyond all that, however, the red rose is universally known as the symbol of triumphant love. That the petals of triumphant love (of which the highest form is love of God) are blowing in the wind is a message in itself.

- The rose, as it was symbolically used by these two bands, is purposely intended to direct attention to the history of the French Revolution. [See Enjoy the Silence ] The problem is - do either the songwriters or the listeners know the whole truth of that tragic history, much less the insubordinate philosophies against God that led to it?


Now for the Viva La Vida lyrics:

I used to rule the world/Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sweep alone/Sweep the streets I used to own

I used to roll the dice/Feel the fear in my enemy’s eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing/ “Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!”

One minute I held the key/Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand/Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand

REFRAIN
I hear Jerusalem’s bells a’ringing/Roman Calvary choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword, my shield/My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can’t explain/I know St. Peter will call my name
Never an honor word/But that was when I ruled the world

It was a wicked and wild wind/Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sounds of drums/People couldn’t believe what I had become
Revolutionaries wait/For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string/Oh, who would ever want to be king?

[REFRAIN repeats]


A CLOSER LOOK at the Lyrics: Certainly some (but not all) of the lines suggest King Louis XVI, the Catholic king of France. For example:

In the refrain, "Jerusalem's bells a'ringing" could mean the king - thinking of Our Lord, who died on Golgotha (the place of the skull) in Jerusalem - could foresee his own approaching death by unjust political manuevering.

"Roman Calvary choirs a'singing" might imply soldiers of Christ (the Church Militant) who were praying with and for him, but - even more fittingly - they may suggest angels (St. Michael is often depicted in artwork as a Roman soldier; he is prince of the heavenly host - the 'choirs' of heaven who sing before the throne of God.)

---In the first verse, "Missionaries in a foreign field" bring to mind the many Catholic religious orders of France, which brought the Gospel and the sacraments to other countries.

"For some reason I can't explain/I know St. Peter will call my name" expresses the virtue of the true Christian's hope - and King Louis XVI was a Catholic above all else.

"Never an honest word" is another great mystery, for the words don't make clear who never gave an honest word. The words cannot apply to the martyred King Louis XVI, but they would fit the lies of the Revolutionaries who brought about the death of the king and thousands of others.

---The lines of the next stanza, however, could be personifications of both the good king and his legitimate successors (from the family line). Revolution is indeed a wicked and wild wind; it eventually "let in" the tyrant Napoleon, as well as a descendant of the traitorous ancestor, Citizen King Louis Philippe.

Shattered windows and the sounds of drums denote the crowds who besieged King Louis' palace, attempting to kill him and the Royal Family - but they also apply to Louis Philippe, for there had been many attempts on his life.

Revolutionaries wait/for my head on a silver plate clearly point to Louis XVI, beheaded for anti-religious and political reasons (like St. John the Baptist). King Louis XVI was a scapegoat, a figure-head for all that the Revolutionaries hated, treated with the same contempt and brutality as Christ the King: People couldn't believe what I had become. And so it goes..


Still, the question remains: What does the song Viva La Vida really say? Only Coldplay knows for sure - or do they? Perhaps some Muse inspired Martin (the songwriter, as well as lead singer) with a message he himself cannot fully understand. Otherwise, why the refusal to to outrightly declare the intent? Is the band trying to tell youth that the continuing Revolution is the cause of their plight - or egging them to carry its bloody red banner? Is their seeming sympathy for some former way of life a ruse or the real deal? Or is the song Viva La Vida about Martin's own searching for God in all the wrong places? He has, after all, made confusing remarks about religion, all which indicate the real reason for his lyrical laments.

In the meantime, as we consider the Revolutionaries' cries of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity and what those terms really meant, might we also consider the observations of Yves Dupont, who studied prophesy for at least 30 years, and authored many works, including Catholic Prophecy?

“The Reformation in the 16th century, the so-called Age of Enlightenment in the 18th, and the rise of democracy in the 20th were all predicted and called ‘deadly errors.’ The Enlightenment, as a matter of fact, was described as the beginning of an age of spiritual darkness; this is self-evident today. The rise of popular power [sometimes call 'the Fourth Estate' in the prophecies] was defined as being against the natural order willed by God, and it was said that it would end in chaos, anarchy, and bloodshed. We are fast approaching that stage; there is now throughout the world a general revolt against authority that leaves little doubt to the outcome."

"Thus," he continued, "what the vast majority of people today regard as their most cherished values [were] denounced as errors. It is quite possible that many of us have been so influenced by modern ideas that we may find it difficult to accept what these prophecies say. But this is another question, for the prophecies do not ask for our assent; they simply warn us and describe events which, once they have come to pass, will force our assent. Yes, we are free to reject the prophecies, but we do not possess the right to do so. Freedom is not a right; it is a duty or, more accurately, it is a faculty of our make-up which implies a duty. We possess the faculty to choose between good and evil, between truth and error, between God and Satan...our duty is to choose God, truth and goodness. The modern conception of freedom-is-a-right is a distortion of Catholic truth."

[With special thanks to our son, Stephan, who helped with research for this article. Due to previous formatting problems, this article was updated and revised on November 3, 2008. It was again updated July 31, 2009 to provide the Youtube link to the official video, since the embedding option was removed from Youtube and is no longer available.]