Skip to main content

Damsel of the Faith: St. Paul & Council of Trent vs. "Fruits of Amoris Laetitia... new religion that the Modernists have fashioned has its own set of rules. Do as you please, without regard for God and His Laws. Man is god"

“Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.” [- St. Paul]

False mercy. Disregard for the sanctity of the Blessed Sacrament. Lack of catechesis on the sin of adultery and it’s consequences upon society, namely, the breakdown and disintegration of the family. Sacrilege upon sacrilege. All of these are the true fruits of Amoris Laetitia.

[...]

“If it is not becoming for anyone to approach any of the sacred functions except solemnly, certainly, the more the holiness and the divinity of this heavenly sacrament is understood by a Christian, the more diligently ought he to take heed lest he approach to receive it without great reverence and holiness, especially when we read in the Apostle those words full of terror: ‘He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the body of the Lord’ (1 Cor. 11:29). Therefore, the precept, ‘Let a man prove himself’ (1 Cor. 11:28), must be recalled to mind by him who wishes to communicate. Now ecclesiastical usage declares that this examination is necessary, that no one conscious of mortal sin, however contrite he may seem to himself, should approach the Holy Eucharist without a previous sacramental confession. This, the holy Synod has decreed, is always to be observed by all Christians, even by those priests on whom by their office it may be incumbent to celebrate, provided the recourses of a confessor be not lacking to them. But if in an urgent necessity a priest should celebrate without previous confession, let him confess as soon as possible.”  ~Council of Trent

This new religion that the Modernists have fashioned has its own set of rules.  Do as you please, without regard for God and His Laws.  Man is god.  Comfort and esteem is king. The Blessed Sacrament is an award to be given to anyone and everyone, a cookie, a candy, a prize, not the God of the Universe who created and sustains us.  When these things are considered, it’s quite frightening how deep the crisis has gotten and what the Pope is actually promoting to the Church as its current teaching in these statements.

And many Bishops follow the will of the Pope: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/10/archbishop-of-granada-adopts-buenos.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Additionally, Marriage is disgraced since adultery is implicitly approved, by approval of those in that state of sin to receive Holy Communion.  Excuses are found to permit adulterers to Holy Communion.  It used to be that those who wished to return to the practice of the Faith had to leave their sinful situation and amend their life.

Time to take a stand and defend the Blessed Sacrament, even from a Pope who knows not what he does.  If you don’t, you are a disgrace to the Church and to those Martyrs who died protecting the Blessed Sacrament from evil, especially St. Tarcisius, who I am fond of. Because of the magnitude of this crisis, we should strive for greater heroism and courage than even them.  To whom much has been given – the Faith and the knowledge of the truth of it – much will be required.

As an impetus remember this – In the Church of 2016, Catholics have to amend their state of being Catholic and get with the program of sacrilege and “solidarity,” while Our Lord is continuously scourged in His Mystical Body and in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

~Damsel of the Faith [https://damselofthefaith.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/adultery-and-holy-communion/]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...