Condemned Gestures, Words, and Actions Always Have Consequences

I had the privilege in the Fall of 1984 of compiling a name index for an anthology of his articles that were published under the title of Women Priests and Other Fantasies, finding time for this while I was teaching three courses as an adjunct professor in the Department of Government and Politics at Saint John's University in Jamaica, Queens, New York. Although I had spent a year living in the same residence, Saint Philip's Hall, at Holy Apostles Seminary as Father Miceli in the 1983-1984 academic year, and got to know him very well during that time, I was very impressed with the careful nature of his good Catholic scholarship in the book he asked me to index. This scholarship was also evident in his other books, including his doctoral dissertation at Fordham University, Ascent to Being, and The Gods of Atheism, The Antichrist, The Roots of Violence and his last book, a collection of retreat talks, Rendezvous with God.

Father Miceli, who entered the New Orleans Province of the Society of Jesus in 1936 at the age of twenty-one and was ordained to the Holy Priesthood in 1949, was, though, a boy from the South Bronx to the core of his pugnacious being. He was a street-fighter without peer. He loved to tear heretics to shreds with his incisive intelligence and his sharp, biting wit. One of his favorite ways of referring to a Catholic who dissent from the Sacred Deposit of Faith was by saying, "He [or she] is a disaaaaassta!"

To wit, pun completely intended, Father Miceli was eating a tuna fish salad sandwich in the refectory of Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut, in September of 1983. I was seated at the table with him along with two seminarians, Michael Scott and Anthony Mary Dandry, who were installed as presbyters for the Diocese of Metuchen in 1987 and 1989, respectively (both now deceased).

Also at the table was a woman who was taking theology courses at the seminary for "theological fulfillment" just "in case" God the Holy Ghost "changed His mind" about ordaining women to the priesthood. Father Miceli patiently gave one learned explanation after another to this woman to show her about the ontological impossibility of ordaining women to the priesthood. Finally, however, Father Miceli, having reached the point of total intellectual exasperation, just shook his head in disbelief and spoke while chewing his tuna fish salad sandwich, "Lady, you're crazy!" He then smiled broadly, being very pleased with himself, and looked from side to side for approvals of satisfaction from the rest of us, which he, quite of course, received.

Well, “women priests” are no longer the stuff of fantasies in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Like everything else in the false conciliar sect, today’s forbidden practice is tomorrow’s “innovation” that is approved by the conciliar officials in the Vatican after decades of disobedience has accustomed the “people” to a feature that has no precedent in the history of the Catholic Church. The same will be true one day of “women priests.”

Conciliarism has opened up a veritable Pandora's Box of relentless change and innovation that has robbed millions upon millions of Catholics of their sensus Catholicus and bewildered and confused those who do have something left of that sensus Catholicus. Protestations against the nonadmissability of women to the priesthood ring rather hollow when one considers the fact that women can touch what is purported to be the Sacred Species with their own hands as they distribute Holy Communion to the faithful in their roles as "extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist." Women can proclaim the Word of God as lectors. They can lead "priestless" "Communion services." They can serve as administrators of parishes, having the responsibility, given to them by their "ordinaries," to supervise the work of "priests," thereby further emasculating the notion of the priesthood as an imaging of the Chief Priest and Victim of every Mass.

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, building on the fact that there are women serving as chancellors of the Catholic dioceses that are now in the hands of the conciliar revolutionaries, has even appointed women to serve in major roles in Vatican dicasteries, including as prefects of three of them:

Sister Alessandra Smerilli, an Italian nun who has until now served as secretary of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, has been appointed prefect of this Vatican group by Leo XIV. Her appointment takes effect September 1, 2026, the Holy See Press Office announced today.

She succeeds Canadian Cardinal Michael Czerny, who will turn 80 on July 18.

The 51-year-old Salesian of Don Bosco is the third woman to head a dicastery of the Roman Curia. Cardinal Fabio Baggio, currently the dicastery’s number three, has also been appointed pro-prefect with effect September 1.

Cardinal Fabio Baggio will have special responsibility for the Laudato si' Higher Education Centre. And Monsignor Jozef Barlaš was appointed as Secretary of the dicastery.

Sr. Alessandra joins two other women who are also prefects of Vatican dicasteries. There are 16 Vatican dicasteries.

Earlier this month, Pope Leo XIV appointed Mexican-American María Montserrat Alvarado the new Prefect of the Dicastery for Communication.

And Italian nun Simona Brambilla, former superior general of the Missionary Sisters of the Consolata, was the first woman to be appointed a prefect of a dicastery of the Roman Curia. Named in January 2025, she is the head of the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. (Nun to lead Vatican group, 3rd woman heading a dicastery.)

Moreover, Prevost/Leo’s formal recognition as the “archbishop” of Canterbury as he linked her to the first actual archbishop fourteen centuries ago, Saint Augustine of Canterbury, and the warm welcome he gave her in the Vatican three months ago was also an implicit admission of both the validity of Anglican orders and of the liceity of Mullally’s own false “ordination” and “consecration.” Prevost/Leo’s words and actions in Mullally’s presence have given advocates of women’s ordination within the conciliar sect hope what has been conceded to Mullally will serve as the basis for a precedent they can use. There are even some within the counterfeit church of conciliarism who think that legal measures can be undertaken to force the conciliar revolutionaries’ hands in this matter:

The reception in April of Sarah Mullally, Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of the Anglican Church, by Leo XIV took place amidst a climate of astonishment, even hope, fueled by the contrast in situations. In France, this event was linked to the Church's renewed appeal to pray for vocations, an invitation that implicitly reaffirmed a call reserved for men only for the priesthood.

This concurrence raises a persistent question, already old but revived today: how to understand, in the current context, the maintenance of this institutionalized exclusion? Can it still be perceived as legitimate, at a time when societal and ecclesiastical developments are increasingly questioning the foundations of such distinctions?

This tension is no longer abstract. It has crystallized into a clear institutional practice: the practice of recruiting only boys and excluding women from ordination. This practice is explicitly based on a criterion of sex. It denies women access to the positions that concentrate the three structuring powers of the Church—governing, teaching, and sanctifying—while reserving them for men. In positive law, such a differentiation corresponds to the very definition of direct discrimination: an explicit, general distinction, without the possibility of an equivalent alternative.

French law prohibits discrimination based on sex. European law enshrines equality between women and men as a fundamental principle. International law requires states to combat discrimination, including when it is rooted in social or institutional norms.

A form of immunity

At first glance, the legal classification seems fairly straightforward. However, it encounters a major obstacle: freedom of religion. European case law recognizes broad institutional autonomy for religious communities, including the right to define their internal rules and the conditions for accessing religious positions. The European Court of Human Rights consistently protects this autonomy, holding that the State cannot interfere in the internal organization of religious groups or in the appointment of their ministers.

This results in a form of immunity: once a rule is linked to the "religious core" of an institution, judicial review becomes minimal. But is this autonomy absolute? Nothing requires it. European Union law introduces a crucial requirement: differences in treatment based on religious beliefs must meet strict criteria—they must be essential, legitimate, and justified—and be subject to effective judicial review.

Therefore, a central question emerges: is being a man an essential professional requirement for exercising an orderly ministry?

A differentiation that is difficult to justify

The legal answer is far from straightforward. An essential requirement presupposes an objective link to the function performed. However, the criterion of sex, applied absolutely and without exception, defies any demonstration of functional necessity. It rests on doctrinal justification, not on a verifiable professional requirement.

Accepting such a requirement would amount to considering biological affiliation as a professional qualification in itself. Such a position directly contradicts the contemporary foundations of non-discrimination law.

It must therefore be stated clearly: the exclusion of women from ordained ministry constitutes, from the perspective of general non-discrimination law, a differentiation that is difficult to justify. It establishes a hierarchy among the faithful based on sex. It deprives women of access to positions of power and representation. It structurally limits their opportunities for engagement and contributes to the perpetuation of gender stereotypes incompatible with the requirements of equality and dignity.

Derogations incompatible with the universality of rights

Its continued existence can only be legally justified by an expansive interpretation of freedom of religion, leading to the neutralization of the principle of non-discrimination in the religious sphere. It is precisely this neutralization that must now be questioned.

Freedom of religion cannot be conceived as a right to escape the general law of fundamental rights. It must be reconciled with the other principles that structure the legal order, foremost among which is equality between the sexes.

The legal route, admittedly, will not produce immediate effects. The courts remain cautious when it comes to the core doctrines of religions. But it constitutes an essential lever: it highlights contradictions, weakens justifications, and contributes to a gradual redefinition of normative balances.

Because the issue goes far beyond the case of the Catholic Church. It raises a fundamental question for contemporary democratic societies: to what extent can we, in the name of pluralism, allow exceptions to the principle of equality? And at what point do these exceptions become incompatible with the universality of fundamental rights?

Positive law does not yet provide a fully satisfactory answer. But it contains within it the potential for evolution. Ultimately, one thing is certain: equality between women and men is intended to apply to all social spaces – including those that claim religious autonomy. ("Equality between women and men is intended to apply to all social spaces, including religious ones".)

To refresh your memories, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV treated a fellow lay person, Sarah Mullally, as the legitimate “archbishop” of Canterbury and thus the spiritual head of the heretical and schismatic Anglican sect (see Pachamama Bob Prevost and Sarah Mullally, part one, and Pachamama Bob Prevost and Sarah Mullally, part two), and it was six month before this meeting that the false "pontiff" established a special "ecumenical chair" in the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Wallls for the supreme head of the "Church of England," King Charles III (Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV Does Not Believe That the Doctrines of the Catholic Church Are Permanent and Immutable).

Obviously, women’s ordination, which is an absolute ontological impossibility within the Catholic Church, is a matter of Divine Revelation, not of “equal” or “legal rights.”

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the New Adam, came to undo the effects of the sin of the first Adam, the progenitor, who was a male. Only men can be progenitors. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the progenitor of our redemption. He chose twelve males to be His Apostles. Many women were His disciples. They were not present at the Last Supper as Our Lord, Who is both God and Man and thus has complete knowledge of everything and was not "culture bound" as some egalitarians wishing to find an "out" for women's "ordination" insist, ordained the twelve Apostles, including the traitor Judas Iscariot (whom now retired pastor of one conciliar church in the Diocese of Rockville Centre has placed in Heaven), knowing full well what He was doing. Our Lord broke every Pharisaical norm imaginable (associating with women, Samaritans and public sinners; curing and plucking grain on the Sabbath). Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the New Adam Who wrought our Redemption on the wood of the Holy Cross to pay back with His own Most Precious Blood the debt of human sin that was owed to Him in His Infinity as God, ordained twelve men to serve as the progenitors of the ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross as they offered Holy Mass acting in His very Person (in persona Christi).

As the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen noted, if anyone was worthy to say "Hoc est enim Corpus Meum" and "Hic est enim Calix Sanguinis Mei, Hic est enim Calix Sánguinis mei, novi et ætérni testaménti; mystérium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundétur in remissiónem peccatórum" it was Our Lady as from whom else did Our Divine Redeemer obtain the Body and Blood with which He redeemed us on the wood of the Cross and which we receive in Holy Communion? Although the Venerable Mary of Agreda relates that Our Lady was in another room in the Cenacle at the Last Supper and was brought Holy Communion by an angel, she was not with Our Lord and the twelve Apostles as He instituted the  Holy Priesthood and the Holy Eucharist for our sanctification and salvation. There are different roles for men and women in the Order of Creation (Order of Nature) and there are different roles for men and women in the Order of Redemption (Order of Grace).

It is no diminution of the dignity of women to point this out.

Was Our Lady "offended" by the fact that she, the fairest flower of our race who had the privilege of Incarnating the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, was not ordained to the Holy Priesthood:? Of course not. No other woman has any "right" to be "offended" at her nonadmissibility to Holy Orders as this is the Holy Will of God Himself, Who acts in accord with the very nature of things as He has created them.

Despite the reaffirmation of the nonadmissibility of women to the priesthood that was made by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II iin 1994 and was reiterated in 2010 by means of an addition to the conciliar code of canon law at the direction of the since-retired Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, the simple fact of the matter is that many, although not all, of those who promote the ontological absurdity of women's "ordination" to the conciliar priesthood are permitted to remain in "good standing" in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

The late "Bishop" Emil Aloysius Wcela, who had been an auxiliary "bishop" in the theological and liturgical cesspool known as the Diocese of Rockville Centre, was permitted to be "consecrated" to the conciliar "episcopate on December 13, 1988, even though he was fully and openly on record in support of women's ordination to the conciliar priesthood. There are many other examples of this.

Indeed, the equally late and very much disgraced former "bishop" of the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois, Daniel Leo Ryan, permitted an article in support of women's ordination to appear his rag of a diocesan newspaper in 1996, prompting him to lash out at The Wanderer, which he disparaged as a “low circulation” periodical, because it ran an article, written by Catholic writing under the name of “Thomas More,” criticizing him for doing so. This prompted me to write “So Much Concern for So Little Circulation” in The Wanderer to mock both him and his shallow arguments. (That was thirty years ago? Unbelievable.)

The push for women’s ordination within the conciliar sect has been percolating sub rosa ever since the end of the “Second” Vatican Council in 1965, although those who wanted this were careful to chip away at various taboos (women serving at the altar, women lectors, women extraordinary ministers of what purports to be the Holy Communion), sometimes in direct defiance of unambiguous directives from the conciliar Vatican to the contrary.

For example, I had asked Dr. John Page, the Executive Director of the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (I.C.E.L.) from 1980 to 2002, when interviewing him in his offices in Washington, District of Columbia, for The Wanderer in 1993 if any of the scores of "experts" listed as ICEL's advisors supported ordination of women to the priesthood. He gave a vague answer, saying only that it was his job and that of I.C.E.L. to "push the liturgy into the Twenty-first Century." That answer was not a denial of the presence of perhaps even large number of ICEL "advisors" who supported women's ordination to the conciliar presbyterate, something that many theologians in the conciliar structures have long contended is only a "matter of time."

Even though Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II had reiterated the impossibility of the ordination of women to what is purported to be the Catholic priesthood, the expectations created by egalitarianism and feminism encouraged by the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service helped to prepare the way for ever newer “changes” on the level of universal praxis in the conciliar world after years of acts of disobedience that went unpunished by one conciliar “pope” after another.

The late Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who cleaved to the Jacobin/Girondist view of the conciliar revolution throughout his wretched career, ended any pretense that there was any token “opposition” inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River to “unapproved” practices that he believed were tearing down the “walls of exclusion” that had theretofore thus prevented women from what he believed was their rightful place in the leadership of liturgy and church administration. In other words, the Argentine Apostate wanted to place women over men, thus inverting the very order of Creation (Nature) and Redemption (Grace) signified by Our Lady’s humble fiat to the will of God the Father at the Annunciation that untied the knot of Eve’s prideful disobedience to God when she ate from the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is showing himself to be fully supportive of these revolutionary developments

Conciliarism has thus resulted in creating expectations that lead people into believing that ontological absurdities are possible even though its own officialdom does not see how this has occurred. Moreover, the exigencies of false ecumenism have been such that those in false religions believe that they have a mission from God Himself to "push" what they believe to be the "Catholic" Church further and further in the direction of the "enlightenment" represented by the most revolutionary strains of modern though, strains that reject the subordination of women even to Our Lord Himself (which is what the chapel veil signifies) and emphasizes the strict equality of all men at all times in all circumstances in order to appease the insatiable pride of those who do not accept the simple fact that each of us, whether a man or a woman, must conform our lives at all times to the Mind of God Himself as He has discharged It exclusively in the Catholic Church that He founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. Such a due submission of men and women to the authority of the Catholic Church is opposed to the spirit of the "enlightenment," which rejects the Social and Personal Kingship of Jesus Christ over nations and over individual human beings, a spirit which exults in the unabashed "freedoms of speech, of press, and of religion" that permit error to be spread and souls to be confused by all manner of insidious poisons.

Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio had the temerity to claim the priesthood is but a mere "function" that is not in the "realm" of "dignity" and holiness."

Pope Pius XII's Mediator Dei refuted Bergoglio's reduction of the Holy Priesthood to but a mere function and not one that is separate and distinct from that of the common priesthood shared by each baptized Catholic:

83. For there are today, Venerable Brethren, those who, approximating to errors long since condemned[82] teach that in the New Testament by the word "priesthood" is meant only that priesthood which applies to all who have been baptized; and hold that the command by which Christ gave power to His apostles at the Last Supper to do what He Himself had done, applies directly to the entire Christian Church, and that thence, and thence only, arises the hierarchical priesthood. Hence they assert that the people are possessed of a true priestly power, while the priest only acts in virtue of an office committed to him by the community. Wherefore, they look on the eucharistic sacrifice as a "concelebration," in the literal meaning of that term, and consider it more fitting that priests should "concelebrate" with the people present than that they should offer the sacrifice privately when the people are absent.

84. It is superfluous to explain how captious errors of this sort completely contradict the truths which we have just stated above, when treating of the place of the priest in the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. But we deem it necessary to recall that the priest acts for the people only because he represents Jesus Christ, who is Head of all His members and offers Himself in their stead. Hence, he goes to the altar as the minister of Christ, inferior to Christ but superior to the people.[83] The people, on the other hand, since they in no sense represent the divine Redeemer and are not mediator between themselves and God, can in no way possess the sacerdotal power. (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947.)

That is pretty clear, is it not?

The priest his superior to the people by the virtue of the indelible seal that was impressed upon His immortal soul at his ordination when he his soul was conformed to the Priesthood and Victimhood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for all eternity. He is to be treated with dignity and respect as befits the ineffable powers given unto him to utter mere words over the mere elements of the earth, thus calling down Christ the King from Heaven!

The conciliar concept of a mere sacramental functionary whose "function" possesses no inherent dignity, or holiness blasphemes Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself Who instituted His Holy Priesthood at the Last Supper with His own royal dignity, holiness and power.

There are plenty within the conciliar sect today who believe that ordained priest merely "administers the Eucharist” and some of these egalitarians even so far as to omit that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave power to priests to remit or to retain sins:

22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.  23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. (John 20: 22-23.)

Pope Pius XI, writing in Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935, explained at great length: the power to remit sins:

20. But among all these powers of the priest over the Mystical Body of Christ for the benefit of the faithful, there is one of which the simple mention made above will not content Us. This is that power which, as St. John Chrysostom says: "God gave neither to Angels nor Archangels" -- the power to remit sins. "Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain they are retained"; a tremendous power, so peculiar to God that even human pride could not make the mind conceive that it could be given to man. "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" And, when we see it exercised by a mere man there is reason to ask ourselves, not, indeed, with pharisaical scandal, but with reverent surprise at such a dignity: "Who is this that forgiveth sins also?" But it is so: the God-Man who possessed the "power on earth to forgive sins" willed to hand it on to His priests; to relieve, in His divine generosity and mercy, the need of moral purification which is rooted in the human heart.

21. What a comfort to the guilty, when, stung with remorse and repenting of his sins, he hears the word of the priest who says to him in God's name: "I absolve thee from thy sins!" These words fall, it is true, from the lips of one who, in his turn, must needs beg the same absolution from another priest. This does not debase the merciful gift; but makes it, rather, appear greater; since beyond the weak creature is seen more clearly the hand of God through whose power is wrought this wonder. As an illustrious layman has written, treating with rare competence of spiritual things: ". . . when a priest, groaning in spirit at his own unworthiness and at the loftiness of his office, places his consecrated hands upon our heads; when, humiliated at finding himself the dispenser of the Blood of the Covenant; each time amazed as he pronounces the words that give life; when a sinner has absolved a sinner; we, who rise from our knees before him, feel we have done nothing debasing. . . We have been at the feet of a man who represented Jesus Christ, . . . we have been there to receive the dignity of free men and of sons of God."

22. These august powers are conferred upon the priest in a special Sacrament designed to this end: they are not merely passing or temporary in the priest, but are stable and perpetual, united as they are with the indelible character imprinted on his soul whereby he becomes "a priest forever"; whereby he becomes like unto Him in whose eternal priesthood he has been made a sharer. Even the most lamentable downfall, which, through human frailty, is possible to a priest, can never blot out from his soul the priestly character. But along with this character and these powers, the priest through the Sacrament of Orders receives new and special grace with special helps. Thereby, if only he will loyally further, by his free and personal cooperation, the divinely powerful action of the grace itself, he will be able worthily to fulfill all the duties, however arduous, of his lofty calling. He will not be overborne, but will be able to bear the tremendous responsibilities inherent to his priestly duty; responsibilities which have made fearful even the stoutest champions of the Christian priesthood, men like St. John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory the Great, St. Charles and many others. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935.)

Pope Pius XI also wrote of the inherent dignity and holiness of the priesthood, which is why a priest must remember his sacerdotal dignity and strive for a greater holiness of life than that of the lay faithful:

31. Most sublime, then, Venerable Brethren, is the dignity of the priesthood. Even the falling away of the few unworthy in the priesthood, however deplorable and distressing it may be, cannot dim the splendor of so lofty a dignity. Much less can the unworthiness of a few cause the worth and merit of so many to be overlooked; and how many have been, and are, in the priesthood, preeminent in holiness, in learning, in works of zeal, nay, even in martyrdom.

32. Nor must it be forgotten that personal unworthiness does not hinder the efficacy of a priest's ministry. For the unworthiness of the minister does not make void the Sacraments he administers; since the Sacraments derive their efficacy from the Blood of Christ, independently of the sanctity of the instrument, or, as scholastic language expresses it, the Sacraments work their effect ex opere operato.

33. Nevertheless, it is quite true that so holy an office demands holiness in him who holds it. A priest should have a loftiness of spirit, a purity of heart and a sanctity of life befitting the solemnity and holiness of the office he holds. For this, as We have said, makes the priest a mediator between God and man; a mediator in the place, and by the command of Him who is "the one mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ." The priest must, therefore, approach as close as possible to the perfection of Him whose vicar he is, and render himself ever more and more pleasing to God, by the sanctity of his life and of his deeds; because more than the scent of incense, or the beauty of churches and altars, God loves and accepts holiness. "They who are the intermediaries between God and His people," says St. Thomas, "must bear a good conscience before God, and a good name among men." On the contrary, whosoever handles and administers holy things, while blameworthy in his life, profanes them and is guilty of sacrilege: "They who are not holy ought not to handle holy things."

34. For this reason even in the Old Testament God commanded His priests and levites: "Let them therefore be holy because I am also holy: the Lord who sanctify them." In his canticle for the dedication of the temple, Solomon the Wise made this same request to the Lord in favor of the sons of Aaron: "Let Thy priests be clothed with justice: and let Thy saints rejoice." So, Venerable Brethren, may we not ask with St. Robert Bellarmine: "If so great uprightness, holiness and lively devotion was required of priests who offered sheep and oxen, and praised God for the moral blessings; what, I ask, is required of those priests who sacrifice the Divine Lamb and give thanks for eternal blessings?" "A great dignity," exclaims St. Lawrence Justinian, "but great too is the responsibility; placed high in the eyes of men they must also be lifted up to the peak of virtue before the eye of Him who seeth all; otherwise their elevation will be not to their merit but to their damnation."

35. And surely every reason We have urged in showing the dignity of the Catholic priesthood does but reinforce its obligation of singular holiness; for as the Angelic Doctor teaches: "To fulfill the duties of Holy Orders, common goodness does not suffice; but excelling goodness is required; that they who receive Orders and are thereby higher in rank than the people, may also be higher in holiness." The Eucharistic Sacrifice in which the Immaculate Victim who taketh away the sins of the world is immolated, requires in a special way that the priest, by a holy and spotless life, should make himself as far as he can, less unworthy of God, to whom he daily offers that adorable Victim, the very Word of God incarnate for love of us. Agnoscite quod agitis, imitamini quod tractatis, "realize what you are doing, and imitate what you handle," says the Church through the Bishop to the deacons as they are about to be consecrated priests. The priest is also the almoner of God's graces of which the Sacraments are the channels; how grave a reproach would it be, for one who dispenses these most precious graces were he himself without them, or were he even to esteem them lightly and guard them with little care. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935.)

This all began with Father Martin Luther. It ends with Antichrist himself. The conciliar revolutionaries are just “middlemen,” if you will, to serve as a very important bridge until then.

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s  meeting with Sarah Mullally, therefore, once again demonstrated that the leaders of the conciliar revolution have committed themselves to further denigrating the essential differences between men and women that exist in the Order of Nature (Creation) and the Order of Redemption (Grace), differences which even the Mother of God herself respected as she submitted herself duly to the authority of Saint Joseph, her Most Chaste Spouse and the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the Faithful, and as she received the very Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in Holy Communion from the episcopal hands of Saint John the Evangelist.

We must not lose heart in these difficult times. It is essential for us to maintain the true Catholic Faith in the underground no matter what anyone may think of us for doing so, and we can only do this with the help of Our Lady, she who is the very Blessed Mother of God, and of her Most Chaste Spouse, our Good Saint Joseph, who is the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the Faithful.

May our daily fidelity to praying as many Rosaries as our state-in-life permit, especially during this season of Lent, as we pray the Litany of Loreto in her honor and that of Saint Joseph in this, his month of March, help us to imitate the total self-abnegation of Saints John of God and Frances of Rome so that we can, despite our sins and failings, plant the seeds for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the flowering once again of the true Catholic Faith in the hearts, minds and souls of everyone on the face of the earth.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Appendix

Dom Prosper Gueranger on the Feast of Saint Mary Magdalene

Three Saints,” said our Lord to Saint Bridget of Sweden, “have been more pleasing to me than all others: Mary my mother, John the Baptist, and Mary Magdalene.” The Fathers tell us that Magdalene is a type of the Gentile Church called from the depth of sin to perfect holiness. And indeed, better than any other, she personifies both the wanderings and the love of the human race espoused by the Word of God. Like the most illustrious characters of the law of grace, she has her anti-type in past ages. Let us follow the history of this great penitent as traced by unanimous tradition: Magdalene’s glory will not be thereby diminished.

When, before all ages, God decreed to manifest His glory, He willed to reign over a world drawn from nothing. And as His goodness was equal to His power, He would have the triumph of supreme love to be the law of that kingdom which the Gospel likens to a king who made a marriage for his son (Matthew xxii. 2). Passing over the pure intelligences whose nine choirs are filled with divine light, the immortal Son of the King of ages looked down to the extreme limits of creation. There He beheld human nature, made indeed to know God, but acquiring that knowledge laboriously. Its weakness would better show His divine condescension: with it, then, He chose to contract his alliance.

Man is flesh and blood: so the Son of God would be made Flesh. He would not have Angels, but men for His brothers. He, that in Heaven is the Splendour of His Father, and on Earth the most beautiful of the sons of men would draw the human race with the cords of Adam (Osee xi. 4). In the very act of creation He sealed his espousals by raising man to the supernatural state of grace and placing him in the Paradise of expectation. Alas! The human race knew not how to await her Bridegroom even in the shades of Eden. Cast out of the garden of delights, she prostituted to vain idols in their groves what was left her of her glory. For she had much beauty still, the gift of her Spouse, though she had profaned it: “You were perfect through my beauty, which I had put on you, says the Lord God” (Ezechiel xvi. 14).

God would not suffer His love to be defeated. Leaving humanity at large to walk in the ways of folly, He chose out a single people, sprung from a holy stock, to be the guardian of His promises. Coming forth from Egypt and from the midst of a barbarous nation, this people was consecrated to God and became His inheritance. In the person of Balaam, the ancient Bride saw Israel pass through the desert, and filled with admiration at the glory of the Lord dwelling with him in his tent, her heart for a moment beat with bridal love. “I will see Him,” she cried in her transport, “but not now: I will behold Him, but not near” (Numbers xxiv. 17). From those wild heights from which the Spouse would one day call her, she hailed the Star that was to rise out of Jacob, and predicted the ruin of the Hebrew people who had supplanted her for a time.

Too soon was this sublime ecstasy followed by still more culpable wanderings! “How long will you be dissolute in deliciousness, O wandering daughter? Know and see that it is an evil and a bitter thing for you to have left the Lord your God” (Jeremias xxxi. 22; ii. 19). But the ages are passing, the night will soon be over, and the day-star will arise, the sign of the Bridegroom gathering the nations. Let Him lead you into the wilderness and there He will speak to your heart. Your rival knows not how to be a queen. The alliance of Sinai has produced but a slave. The Bridegroom still waits for his Bride.

At length the hour came: bending the heavens, “he was made sin” (2 Corinthians v. 21) for sinful men. And hidden under the servile garb of mortals, He sat down to table in the house of the proud Pharisee. The haughty Synagogue who would neither fast with John nor rejoice with Christ, was now to see God justifying the delays of His merciful love. “Let us not, like Pharisees,” says Saint Ambrose, “despise the counsels of God. The sons of Wisdom are singing: listen to their voices, attend to their dances. It is the hour of the nuptials. Thus sang the Prophet when he said: ‘Come from Libanus, my spouse, come from Libanus.’”

“And behold a woman that was in the city, a sinner, when she knew that He sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment. And standing behind at His feet, she began to wash His feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head, and kissed His feet, and anointed them with the ointment.” “Who is this woman?” “Without doubt it is the Church,” answers Saint Peter Chrysologus, “the Church, weighed down and stained with sins committed in the city of this world. At the news that Christ has appeared in Judea, that He is to be seen at the banquet of the Pasch where He bestows His mysteries and reveals the divine Sacrament, and makes known the secret of salvation: suddenly she darts forward. Despising the endeavours of the Scribes to prevent her entrance, she confronts the princes of the Synagogue! Burning with desire she penetrates into the Sanctuary where she finds Him whom she seeks betrayed by Jewish perfidy even at the banquet of love. Not the passion, nor the Cross, nor the tomb can check her faith, or prevent her from bringing her perfumes to Christ.”

Who but the Church knows the secret of this perfume? asks Paulinus of Nola with Ambrose of Milan: the Church, whose numberless flowers have all aromas; the Church, who exhales before God a thousand sweet odours aroused by the breath of the Holy Spirit, viz., the virtues of nations and the prayers of the Saints. Mingling the perfume of her conversion with her tears of repentance, she anoints the feet of her Lord, honouring in them His Humanity. Her faith by which she is justified grows equally with her love: soon the Head of the Spouse, that is, His Divinity, receives from her the homage of the full measure of pure and precious spikenard, to wit, consummate holiness, whose heroism goes so far as to break the vessel of mortal flesh by the martyrdom of love, if not by that of tortures.

Arrived at the height of the mystery, she forgets not even there those sacred feet, whose contact delivered her from the seven devils representing all vices: for to the heart of the Bride, as in the bosom of the Father, her Lord is still both God and Man. The Jew, who would not own Christ either for head or foundation, found no fragrant oil for His head, nor even water for His feet. She, on the contrary, pours her priceless perfume over both. And while the sweet odour of her perfect faith fills the Earth, now become by the victory of that faith the house of the Lord, she continues to wipe her Master’s feet with her beautiful hair, i.e., her countless good works and her ceaseless prayer. The growth of this mystical hair requires all her care here on Earth. And in Heaven its abundance and beauty will call forth the praise of Him who jealously counts, without losing one, all the works of His Church. Then from her own head, as from that of her Spouse, will the fragrant unction of the Holy Spirit overflow even to the skirt of her garment.

You despise, O Pharisee, the poor woman weeping with love at the feet of your divine Guest whom you know not. But “I would rather,” cries the solitary of Nola, “be bound up in her hair at the feet of Christ, than be seated with you near Christ, yet without Him.” Happy sinner to be, both in her life of sin and that of grace, the figure of the Church, even so far as to have been foreseen and announced by the Prophets. For such is the teaching of Saint Jerome and Saint Cyril of Alexandria, while Venerable Bede, gathering up, according to his wont, the traditions of his predecessors, does not hesitate to assert that “what Magdalene once did, remains the type of what the whole Church does, and of what every perfect soul must ever do.”

We can well understand the predilection of the Man-God for this soul, whose repentance from such a depth of misery manifested so fully, from the outset, the success of His mission, the defeat of Satan and the triumph of Divine love. While Israel was expecting from the Messiah nothing but perishable goods, when the very Apostles, including John the beloved, were looking for honours and first places, she was the first to come to Jesus for Himself alone, and not for His gifts. Eager only for pardon and love, she chose for her portion those sacred feet wearied in the search after the wandering sheep: here was the blessed altar on which she offered to her Divine Deliverer as many holocausts of herself, says Saint Gregory, as she had had vain objects of complacency. Henceforth her goods and her person were at the disposal of Jesus. The rest of her life was to be spent sitting at His feet, contemplating the mysteries of His life, gathering up His every word, following His footsteps as He preached the Kingdom of God.

How swiftly, in the light of her humble confidence, did she outstrip the Synagogue and the very just themselves! The Pharisee might be indignant, her sister might complain, the Apostles might murmur: Mary held her peace, but Jesus spoke for her as if His Sacred Heart were hurt by the least word said against her. At the death of Lazarus the Master had to call her from the mysterious repose in which even then she was seated. Her presence at the tomb was of more avail than the whole college of Apostles and the crowd of Jews. One word from her, though already said by Martha who had arrived first, was more powerful than all the words of the latter. Her tears made the Man-God weep and drew from Him that groan which he uttered before recalling the dead man to life — that divine trouble of a God overcome by His creature. Oh truly, for others as well as for herself, for the world as well as for God, “Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken from her” (Luke x. 42).

In all that we have said, we have but linked together the testimonies of a veneration universally consistent. But the homage of all the Doctors together cannot compare with the honour which the Church pays to the humble Magdalene when she applies to the Queen of heaven on her glorious Assumption Day the Gospel words first uttered in praise of the justified sinner. Albert the Great assures us that, in the world of grace as well as in the material creation, God has made two great lights, to wit two Maries, the Mother of our Lord, and the sister of Lazarus: the greater, which is the Blessed Virgin, to rule the day of innocence: the lesser, which is Mary the penitent beneath the feet of that glorious Virgin, to rule the night by enlightening repentant sinners. As the moon by its phases points out the feast days on earth, so Magdalene in Heaven gives the signal of joy to the Angels of God over one sinner doing penance. Does she not also share with the Immaculate One the name of Mary, Star of the sea, as the Churches of Gaul sang in the Middle Ages, recalling how, though one was a Queen and the other a handmaid, both were causes of joy to the Church: the one being the Gate of salvation, the other the messenger of the Resurrection?

On that great Easter day, Magdalene, like a morning star, announced the rising of the Sun of Justice, who was never more to set. “Woman,” said Jesus to her, “why do you weep?” “You are not mistaken.” He seemed to say, “It is, indeed, the Divine Gardener speaking to you, the same that planted Eden in the beginning. But now dry your tears. In this new garden, whose centre is an empty tomb, Paradise is restored. The Angels no longer close the entrance. Here is the Tree of Life which has borne fruit these three days past. This Fruit, which you, O woman, are eager, as of "old, to seize and taste, belongs to you now by right: for you are no longer Eve but Mary. If you are bidden not to touch It yet, it is because, as you would not heretofore taste the fruit of death yourself alone, you may not now enjoy the fruit of Life till you bring back Him that was first lost through you.”

Thus by the wisdom and mercy of our God, woman is raised to a greater dignity than before the Fall. Magdalene, to whom woman is indebted for this glorious revenge, has hence obtained in the Church’s litanies the place of honour above even the virgins, as John the Baptist precedes the whole army of the Saints on account of his privilege of being the first witness to our salvation. The testimony of the penitent completes that of the Precursor: on the word of John the Church recognised the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world. On the word of Magdalene she hails the Spouse triumphant over death. And, judging that by this last testimony, Catholic belief is put in full possession of the entire cycle of mysteries. She today intones the immortal symbol, which she deemed premature for the feast of Zachary’s son. 

[Dom Prosper Gueranger’s Prayer to Saint Mary Magdalene]:

O Mary, how great did you appear before Heaven at that solemn moment when, before the world knew aught of the triumph of life, our Emmanuel the conqueror said to you: “Go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God” (John xx. 17). You represented us Gentiles who were not to obtain possession of our Lord by faith till after His Ascension into Heaven. These brethren, to whom the Man-God sent you, were doubtless those privileged men whom He had called to know Him during His mortal life, and to whom you, O apostle of the Apostles, had to announce the mystery of the Pasch. And yet, in His loving mercy, the Divine Master intended to show Himself that same day to many of them, and both you and they were soon to be witnesses of his triumphant Ascension. Is it not evident that your mission, O Magdalene, though addressed to the immediate disciples of our Lord, was to extend much further both in space and time? As He entered into his glory, the Conqueror of death already beheld these brethren filling the whole Earth. It is of them he had said in the Psalm: “I will declare your name to my brethren: in the midst of the Church will I praise you, in the midst of a people that will be born which the Lord has made” (Psalms xxi. 23, 32). It is of them and of us, the generation to come, to whom the Lord was to be declared, that He said to you: Go to my brethren and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God. You came, and you came continually, fulfilling your mission towards the disciples, and saying to them: “I have seen the Lord, and these things He said to me” (Luke xx. 18).

You came, O Mary, when our West beheld you, treading the rocks of Provence with your apostolic feet whose beauty Cyril of Alexandria admires. There seven times a day, raised on Angels’ wings towards the Spouse, you pointed out more eloquently than any speech could do, the way He took, the way the Church must follow by her desires, until she is reunited with Him forever. You proved that the apostolate in its highest reach does not depend on words. In Heaven the Seraphim, and Cherubim, and Thrones gaze unceasingly on the Eternal Trinity without so much as glancing at this world of nothingness, and nevertheless, it is through them that pass the strength, and light, and love which the heavenly messengers in the lower hierarchies distribute to us on Earth. Thus, O Magdalene, though you cling ever to the sacred feet which are now not denied to your love, and your life is unreservedly absorbed with Christ in God, you seem more than any other to be always saying to us: “If you be risen with Christ, seek the things that are above where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God. Mind the things that are above, not the things that are upon the Earth” (1 Corinthians iii. 1, 2). 

O you, whose choice, so highly approved by our Lord, has revealed to the world the better part, obtain that that portion may be ever appreciated in the Church as the better, viz., that divine contemplation which begins here on Earth the life of Heaven, and which in its fruitful repose is the source of all the graces spread by the active ministry throughout the world. Death itself does not take away that portion, but assures its possession forever, and makes it blossom into the full, direct vision. May he that has received it from the gratuitous goodness of God never strive to dispossess himself of it! “Happy house,” says the devout Saint Bernard, “blessed assembly, where Martha complains of Mary! But how indignant we should be if Mary were jealous of Martha! And Saint Jude tells us the awful judgeent of the Angels who kept not their principality, the familiar friends of God who forsook their own habitation (Jude 6). Keep up in religious families established by their fathers on heights that touch the clouds the sense of their inborn nobility: they are not made for the dust and noise of the plain, and did they come down to it, they would injure both the Church and themselves. By remaining what they are, they do not, any more than you, O Magdalene, become indifferent to the lost sheep, but they take the surest of all means for purifying the Earth and drawing souls to God.

From your church at Vezelay you looked down one day upon a vast multitude eagerly receiving the cross: they were about to undertake that immortal Crusade not the least glory of which is to have supernaturalised the sentiments of honour in the hearts of those Christian warriors armed for the defence of the holy Sepulchre. A similar lesson was given to the world at the beginning of [the nineteenth] century: Napoleon, intoxicated with power, would raise to himself and his army a Temple of glory. Before the building was completed he was swept away, and the temple was dedicated to you. O Mary, bless this last homage of your beloved France, whose people and princes have always surrounded with deepest veneration your hallowed retreat at Sainte Baume, and your church at Saint Maximin, where rest your precious relics. In return, teach them and teach us all, that the only true and lasting glory is to follow with you in His ascensions Him who once sent you to us, saying: “Go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God!” (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of Saint Mary Magdalene, July 22.)

Appendix B

Saint Augustine of Hippo's Homily about Saint Mary Magdalene as Found in Matins, Divine Office

Ye have listened carefully to the Gospel while it was being read, so that the thing told hath, as it were, passed before the eyes of your heart. Ye have seen in your mind's eye, albeit not with bodily sight, the Lord Jesus Christ sitting down to meat in the Pharisee's house, and not refusing when He is bidden of him. Ye have seen also an infamous woman of the city, one of utterly bad character, a sinner, thrusting herself in an uninvited guest, to the banquet where her Healer was sitting, and seeking health at His hands with godly shamelessness; thrusting herself in eager for mercy, as though eager for the feast. She knew under what a disease she laboured, and she knew that He unto Whom she came was mighty to cure it.

She drew near therefore, not unto the Lord's Head, but unto His Feet. She that had so long walked the paths of sin betook her unto the Feet that went about doing good. She first poured forth heart-felt tears, and washed the Lord's Feet with the humble service of her acknowledgment, wiped them with her hair, kissed them, and anointed them. Her silence cried aloud, next in words but in manifested love. The Pharisee, who had desired the Lord Jesus Christ that He would eat with him, belonged to that class of proud men concerning whom the Prophet Isaiah saith people which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. lxv. 5. When therefore he saw how this woman touched the Lord's Feet with her tears, her kisses, her hair, and her ointment, he spake within himself, saying This Man, if He were a Prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is, that toucheth Him; for she is a sinner.

Pharisee, that biddest and scornest the Lord! Thou invitest the Lord to meat, and thou knowest not Him That should have given thee to eat! Whence knowest thou that the Lord knoweth not who and what manner of woman this is, save from this, that she is allowed to draw near unto Him, and that He suffereth her to kiss His Feet, to wipe them, and to anoint them? Ought not an unclean woman to have been permitted to do these things to clean feet? If such a woman had drawn near to the feet of this Pharisee, he would have said to her what Isaiah putteth into the mouth of such Stand by thyself, come not near to me, for I am holier than thou. But she came unto the Lord unclean that she might go away cleansed, sick, that she might go away healed, with confession, that she might go away with thanksgiving. (A Homily by Saint Augustine of Hippo, Matins, Divine Office, July 22.)

Appendix C

Father Francis X. Weninger, S.J., on Saint Mary Magdalen

Mary Magdalen, so highly praised in the Gospel on account of her heroic conversion and fervent love of our Saviour, was born at Bethany, not far from Jerusalem. Her parents, as many authors say, were nobles. She had one brother named Lazarus, and a sister called Martha. When the fortune which her parents had left was divided, the Castle, or as others say, the borough of Magdalum, came into her possession from which she also derived her name. St. Luke writes that before her conversion, she had been a sinner in the city, by which some authors understand that she had been addicted to the horrible vice of impurity; while others say that she had given scandal to the whole city by her splendid garments, frivolous manners, and her unrestrained associations with those of the opposite sex. The same evangelist also says that our Lord Jesus Christ delivered her from seven devils, which words many understand literally, believing that on account of her iniquities, she was possessed by several evil spirits, and like many others, was delivered from them by our Saviour.

The generality of the holy Fathers, however, believe that Martha had persuaded her sister to be present at the instructions of Christ, and although Magdalen at first followed this advice, only out of curiosity or to please her sister, it nevertheless proved to be the first step to her conversion. It is beyond all doubt that, moved by divine grace, she saw her guilt and resolved to do penance without delay; for, on hearing that Christ was eating with Simon, a Pharisee, she immediately repaired thither. She was unwilling to wait for an opportunity to speak with the Saviour alone, and to ask pardon for her sins without others being near. She could not wait so long. The unhappy state into which her soul was plunged, since she had come to the knowledge of her sin, made her impatient. Although foreseeing that her public confession would draw upon her the derision of the Pharisees and others, she heeded not; publicly she had sinned and publicly she would do penance. Hence, regardless of all human opinion, she hastened into the room where Christ was at table, and bitterly weeping, she cast herself at His feet, bathing them with a flood of repentant tears. Having wiped them with her hair, she kissed them reverentially and then opening a vase of alabaster, which she had brought, she anointed them with perfumes. It is not recorded whether, during or before the anointment, she spoke a single word, but her penitent heart was seen in her humble attitude at the Saviour's feet, and the abundance of her tears spoke more eloquently than words could have done. It spoke of her repentance, it humbly asked pardon for her sins.

Christ well comprehended this language; for, turning His eyes upon her, He said these comforting words: "Thy sins are forgiven thee;" and afterwards: "Thy faith has made thee safe; go in peace!" Before saying this, He reproved Simon, the Pharisee, and praised Magdalen, because when Simon saw that Christ allowed Magdalen to bathe His feet with her tears and to kiss them, he said to himself: "This man, if He were a prophet, would surely know who and what manner of woman it is that touches Him; for she is a sinner." Christ knowing the Pharisee's thoughts, said to him: "Simon, I have something to say to thee. A certain creditor had two debtors. One of them owed him five hundred pence, the other fifty. As they, however, could not pay him, he forgave them both; which, therefore, of the two, loveth him most?" "I suppose," replied Simon, "he to whom he forgave most." "Thou has judged rightly," said Christ; and turning to the woman, He said to Simon: "Dost thou see this woman? I entered into thy house; thou gavest me no water for my feet; but she bathed my feet with tears and wiped them with her hair. Thou gavest me no kiss; but she has not ceased to kiss my feet. Therefore I say to thee: Many sins are forgiven her, because she has loved much." Oh! what great consolation must have filled Magdalen's heart, when Christ's own words assured her that her sins were forgiven! She certainly went immediately to announce to her brother and sister the inexpressibly-great mercy which the Saviour had bestowed upon her.

From this moment her heart was wholly changed, and entirely consecrated to Christ. She followed Him everywhere and listened with undivided attention to His instructions. One day Christ lodged at the house of her sister Martha, who was greatly concerned to serve Him well, while Magdalen, sitting at the Lord's feet, listened eagerly to His words. Her sister complaining of her, said to our Saviour: "Lord, dost Thou not care that my sister has left me alone to serve? Speak to her that she help me." The Lord, however, praised Magdalen's zeal, saying: "Martha, Martha, thou art careful, and art troubled about many things. But one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her." These words of the Saviour proved how much pleased He was with Magdalen's eagerness to listen to His holy teaching. He also showed how great His love was to her, when, yielding to her prayers and to Martha's, He raised Lazarus to life. This wonderful event is to be found in the holy Gospel of St. John, Chapter xi., and will be more circumstantially described in the life of St. Lazarus. Here I will relate only the event which occurred six days before the last Easter which our Lord celebrated on earth. Christ came to Bethany, to the house of Simon, the leper, where they had prepared supper for Him. Lazarus, who had shortly before been raised to life, was, with others, sitting at the table. Martha served, and Magdalen brought a costly sweet-scented ointment, and anointed first the head and then the feet of Christ. When Judas murmured against it, saying that they could have sold so costly an ointment and given the money to the poor, Christ again defended Magdalen against the deceitful murmurs of the traitor and of some others, and said: " Why do you trouble this woman? for she has wrought a good work upon me. The poor you have always with you, but me you have not always. Amen I say to you, wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, that also which she has done, shall be told for a memory of her."

Soon after this, when the passion and death of our dear Lord took place, the Gospel tells us that Magdalen, with the divine Mother and other pious women, was present upon Calvary at the Crucifixion of the Saviour. Words are too poor to describe the feelings of grief and tenderness with which she kissed and worshipped the holy body when it was taken from the Cross. Although after the burial, she went to Jerusalem with the other women, she returned to the sepulchre of Christ, with some other women, on the day after the Sabbath. It was their intention again to anoint the holy body of the Saviour with fragrant essences. On the way, they thought of the impediment which the great stone would be which closed the Sepulchre of the Redeemer. They most probably knew nothing of the guard which Pilate had set thereat the request of the High Priest. "Who will remove the stone from the entrance of the Sepulchre?" said they to each other on the way. God had removed this obstruction; for, when they arrived at the Sepulchre, they saw that the stone was rolled away and the Sepulchre was open. They went together into it, but found that the body had disappeared. An angel informed them that He, Whom they looked for, had risen, and commanded them to announce it to His disciples. Soon after, Magdalen was blessed with the appearance of the Lord in the form of a gardener, which is more circumstantially related in the Gospel. There is no doubt that she several times had the grace to see her Divine Master during the forty days He was upon earth. She was also present when He gloriously ascended to heaven; after which He, on Pentecost day, sent the Holy Ghost to His disciples, apostles, and other faithful followers. As long as Magdalen remained at Jerusalem, she was with the Divine Mother and other pious women.

A considerable time after these events, the Christians were cruelly persecuted, and the Jews were determined to suffer Lazarus, the brother of St. Magdalen, no longer in Jerusalem, as he was a living testimony to the divinity of Christ. Hence they placed him, his two sisters, Magdalen and Martha, a servant of theirs, named Marcella, and Maximin, one of the 72 disciples of Christ, in a boat, without rudder, sail, or boatman, took them far from the land into the high sea, and left them, being quite certain that the waves would soon swallow the boat and all its occupants. But God led them safely to France, and they landed at Marseilles amid a crowd of heathens who had come to the shore. This miraculous voyage prepared the hearts of the heathen inhabitants to receive the true Faith. Lazarus, who had been consecrated bishop by the apostles, made his episcopal See in the same city where they had landed. Maximin, as priest, chose the city of Aix as his residence. Martha slowly gathered a great many women around her, and having instructed them in the Christian faith, led a retired, pious, almost a religious life with them, while Magdalen converted a great many by her teachings and her holy life. In the course of time, however, she retired into a desert, far from any habitations of men, and made her abode in the dark cavern of a mountain. There she dwelt during 30 years, leading a most severe life, occupied in praying, contemplating the divine mysteries, and the bitter Passion and death of our Saviour. She repented daily, with floods of tears, of the iniquities of her former days, although she had heard from the lips of Christ that they were forgiven. In one word, her life was much more that of an angel than that of a human being. Hence we may well believe, what many relate of her, that she was frequently visited by angels, who provided her with food and even raised her into heaven to hear the seraphic choir sing the praises of the Most High. Before her death, she was carried by two spirits of light into a little church two miles from her dwelling, where, having received from the hands of St. Maximin the food of the angels, she soon after gave her soul into the keeping of Him Whom she had so fervently loved while upon earth.

The cavern in the mountain where the great penitent so long dwelt, as well as the little church which contains her relics, arc renowned for the many miracles wrought there. The most illustrious, however, was the Saint herself, who from so great a sinner became so great a penitent and so fervent a lover of Christ. The holy fathers can hardly find words of praise enough, not only for her heroic conversion, but also for her generous, faithful, and fervent love towards her Saviour. And who can sufficiently admire the austere penance, lasting for 30 years, which she underwent in the cavern, although she knew that her sins were entirely forgiven?
 

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

I. St. Magdalen is an example of a great sinner, a great and true penitent, and at the same time a great Saint. Consider her life well. She was a great sinner; hence the holy Evangelist calls her "a sinner of the city;" but she nevertheless obtained pardon for her sins and gained salvation. Learn from this that you need not despair, although your iniquities may be great and manifold. You can obtain pardon and gain salvation just as well as Magdalen, if you do true penance as she did. The beginning and the road that led Magdalen to repentance was listening to the word of God. Had she neglected this, who can tell if ever she would have come to the knowledge of her sin, and to repentance? May this teach you how necessary sermons are for sinners. Many remain and die in their iniquities because they neglect attending them. Magdalen displayed unusual greatness of heart, when, conquering herself, she entered the house of a stranger, and in the presence of all those at table with Christ, cast herself at His feet and repentantly acknowledged herself a sinner.

Let it be a lesson to you that a sinner must conquer himself, if he will do true penance and obtain pardon for his evil doings. It needs only one firm resolution to overcome himself, should it be a hard task to confess his iniquities. If he was not ashamed to do evil, why should he be ashamed to confess it? It is not required of him to confess his sins publicly before all men, but only to the priest, who, he knows, dares never reveal a word of what is told to him. If he still thinks it impossible to confess his sins, let him remember that it is incomparably easier than to bear the sufferings of hell. Magdalen begged of Christ nothing but the forgiveness of her sins, while others going to Him asked of Him health for themselves or others. "She alone," says St. Chrysostom, "begged for the health of her soul, for deliverance from sin, and was immediately heard." This should be an example to you, that you should ask nothing of God more frequently, than to forgive your sins, and lead you to everlasting life. This prayer will reach the throne of God much sooner, and be answered by Him much more certainly, than if you request of Him temporal goods, which are often more injurious than wholesome.

II. As soon as Magdalen recognized the gulf into which her sins were precipitating her, she did penance, which she continued until the end of her life, although she was certain that she had obtained pardon. She endeavored to atone for her past offences by following Christ even to His cross, by nourishing a fervent love for Him, by faithfully attending His instructions, by displaying unwearied zeal in converting others. God enlightens you in regard to the misfortune and danger in which you are. You also recognize the necessity to do penance. Oh! do not neglect to tear yourself away from all evil, and do not put off your penance from day to day until death overtakes you. Neither be content with only confessing your sins, but repent of them daily, and practise works of penance as long as your life lasts. Try to expiate, in a measure, the evil deeds of your past life, by great fervor in the service of the Almighty, and by other works of love and charity. Endeavor also to lead others to the feet of your Lord. By following the penitential life of St. Magdalen you may rest assured that you will follow her into eternal bliss. Further, do you not think that Magdalen has oftentimes given humble thanks to God for not having let her die in her sin, but having given her time to do penance? I believe this most certainly; and you have every reason to do the same, since, how long would you be in hell, if you had died in your sin? To whom do you owe thanks for not having died? Oh! to no one else than the infinitely merciful God, to the same God Whom you have so often offended! How do you thank your Saviour for so priceless a grace? " Whom have I to thank," asks St. Augustine, "that the earth has not engulfed me? that heaven has not annihilated me with a thunderbolt? that fire has not burned me to ashes? or that water has not drowned me? Whom have I to thank for it but Lover of my soul! Whose mercy is above all His works." But let me ask you, does God, so inexpressibly kind to you, deserve that you should renew your offences? Oh! what a question! Truly you must be the most ungrateful of all human beings, if you again offend the Almighty, after He has shown such mercy to you. Magdalen acted not thus: but, on the contrary, loved her Saviour with a constant affection; as otherwise, her penance would not have been true. And thus will your penance not be true, not sufficient to save your soul, if you again offend God. "It is a useless penance," says St. Augustine, "if we again tarnish it with new sin. Repentance is idle, if we commit the sin again. To ask pardon for sin committed, and then to sin again, is folly." (Father Francis X. Weninger, S.J., Feast of Saint Mary Magdalen, July 22.)