Newsletter #104

Dear Friends and Benefactors, 

Corpus Christi and the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus are two grand Feasts in this month of June. Since we are in a huge spiritual battle to try to keep and spread the True Catholic Faith – concerning the Feast of Corpus Christi, (1) we will examine how the new liturgy ideas were in effect long before Vatican II, e.g., that of “active participation”. Next, concerning the Feast of the Most Sacred Heart, we will examine (2) the Holy Shroud of Turin, and (3) how the LGBTQ agenda opposes the Sacred Heart.

1. “ACTIVE PARTICIPATION”

When one studies the history of the Liturgical Movement, the reformers from Benedictine monk Dom Lambert Beauduin to Vatican II went to great lengths to make the faithful believe that the clergy are not the only members of the Church with a right to perform the liturgy. According to their “new theology,” as Dr. C. Byrne explains, responsibility for enacting the Church’s worship is entrusted to all the People of God by virtue of their common Baptism. And that is fundamentally why “active participation” of ALL the laity became their watchword.

THE REVOLUTION FROM ABOVE

Pius XII greatly aided this new direction by officially endorsing lay “active participation” as part of what he called a “liturgical apostolate” (Mediator Dei § 109) ‒ a direction replicated and developed by Paul VI in the Constitution on the Liturgy.

This consideration will help us to realize how revolutionary was Pope Pius XII’s policy of enacting legislation to enable all the members of the congregation to take a direct and active part in the Church’s rites. Tucked away in his new Ordo of Holy Week (1956) were rubrical instructions that specifically required their “active participation” in the ceremonies.
Fr. Frederick McManus, a major figure in the reform, made the following statement as soon as the new Holy Week Ordo was issued:

“The rubrics of the Ordo refer constantly to the responses to be made by the members of the congregation and to their activity in the carrying out of the holy liturgy. This is of course a notable departure from the rubrical norms of the Roman Missal”.

He went on to explain that the “active participation” of the congregation is “made a matter of rubrical law and incorporated into the very text of the new liturgical book.”

But in the Roman Rite before the Liturgical Movement, there had never been any official rubrics assigned by the Church for the laity. The Missal of Pope Saint Pius V (1570) contained rubrics for the priest and his ministers to perform the sacred ceremonies, but none for the people in the pews. And this position was enshrined in the ‘1917 Code of Canon Law’.

As a canon lawyer, Fr. McManus would have realized the contradictory nature of Pius XII’s innovation and its full significance for the Liturgical Movement’s goals. The primary characteristic of this breakthrough was the profound challenge it posed to the foundations of the ordained priesthood, which set the clergy apart from the laity, and gave them the exclusive right to perform the Church’s official liturgy.
The new rubrical law was based on the premise that lay people were entitled to a role as “actors” in the liturgy, with an officially recognized right to active involvement in the external rites alongside the clergy. It was a reversal of Canon 1256 of the ‘1917 Code of Canon Law’, which reiterated the traditional position that the Church’s public worship is a function of its legitimately appointed clergy. The wall separating the ordained from the non-ordained was now breached.

The introduction of rubrical laws into the Missal to legitimize the responses of the congregation and “their activity in the carrying out of the holy liturgy” was, as Fr. McManus observed, an unprecedented step. No Pope, least of all Saint Pius X, had ever done anything like it before. Whereas previous editions of the Missal gave instructions only to the server, deacon or choir to give certain responses to the priest, the new rubrics included the whole congregation in this function.
This decision was certainly problematic in expressing as a rule of law something that had previously been considered illegitimate. The rubrics of the Missal were, by their very nature, laws requiring obedience from those who were responsible for performing the Church’s liturgy. They were never intended for the laity. Fr. Adrian Fortescue pointed out in 1920 that “lay people in the body of the church … enjoy a natural liberty,” and that the liturgical rubrics apply only to “those who assist more officially, the server, clergy, others in choir, and so on.”

Such a remarkable departure from tradition surely calls for a consideration of its legal and constitutional basis. We need to be clear whether it was a just law promoting the Common Good, and in what way it can be said to reflect the constitution of the Church. This had been defined by Pope Saint Pius X as “inherently (“vi et natura sua”) an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of persons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful.”

IN TWO MINDS

Pius XII stated in Mediator Dei § 93 that the action of the liturgy was the privilege only of the priest, and that the faithful participate by uniting their hearts with his intentions. Thus he upheld the immemorial practice of the Roman Rite in which the priest performed the visible, external rite, while the faithful present joined their prayers mentally with the actions of the priest, and offered spiritual sacrifices.

But in §105 of the same document, he rendered this teaching incoherent by conferring on the members of the congregation the right to become directly involved in the liturgical action “in an external way.”

THE LICENSING OF DISORDER

The problem, therefore, with the new legislation was that it was constructed on ambivalence. The role of the priest in the Mass was no longer “fixed” but relativized by being shared on an active level with the people. IT INTRODUCED THE SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY INTO THE CHURCH YEARS BEFORE VATICAN II. One cannot interfere with the basic order observed for centuries in the Church without inviting harmful collateral consequences.
There is something unreal and unacceptable from a Catholic point of view about this development on account of the insuperable ontological and doctrinal problems it poses. For priests and faithful of the Roman Rite, there was the danger that it would distort their perception of the hierarchical nature of the Church and engender confusion in their minds about the distinction between ordination and simple baptism.

And that is precisely the position in which the post-conciliar Church finds itself with the whole People of God jointly celebrating the Mass and Sacraments by reason of their “common priesthood.” Vatican II’s Constitution on the Liturgy (§ 31), developing the principle started by Pius XII, stipulated that when the liturgical books were revised, they “must carefully attend to the provision of rubrics also for the people’s parts.”

One does not need to be an expert in liturgiology to see the likely effect this would have on a Catholic understanding of the Mass and the priesthood. It would undermine the very notion of exclusivity at the heart of the ordained priesthood: it is, after all, the Mass that makes the priest and gives him his identity.

When the General Instruction of the Novus Ordo was produced in 1969, Cardinal Ottaviani noted its “obsessive references to the communal character of the Mass,” adding that “the role attributed to the faithful is autonomous, absolute – and hence completely false,” and that “the people themselves appear to be invested with autonomous priestly powers.”

PIUS XII AS AN AGENT OF CHANGE

In Pope Pius XII’s detailed Instruction De Musica Sacra (1958) – which reads like a handbook for inserting lay participation in almost every nook and cranny of the liturgy – we see the beginnings of the so-called “community Mass” called for by the reformers.

Henceforth, the emphasis would increasingly be placed on communal responses by the whole congregation speaking aloud, which would make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to continue in their time-honored custom of individually-chosen silent prayers. It would, in other words, spell the end of the so-called “silent Mass” beloved of the people. There is plenty of evidence to indicate that for Beauduin and many in the Liturgical Movement this was a desirable outcome.
Few understood at the time that the novelty of including the laity in the rubrics of the Missal would create a paradigm shift in the liturgy that would require across-the-board new thinking in almost every aspect of it. Where this reform was heading was towards the progressivist concept of the liturgy enshrined in the Novus Ordo when “active participation” would become incumbent on all the laity as their duty and responsibility.

It was at the behest of the reformers that Pius XII began a process that had the gravest possible implications for future changes in the liturgy. His innovative rubrics for the laity were incorporated into the 1962 Missal by John XXIII, and were followed immediately by a never-ending succession of desacralizing reforms, each one decreasing the role of the priest celebrant while greatly promoting the “active participation” of the laity.

It was the beginning of a new, relativized situation in the Church where the accepted distinctions between clergy and laity in the liturgy no longer applied.

2. THE HOLY SHROUD – INCREASES DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART

A deeper understanding of the physical sufferings that Our Redeemer endured during His Sacred Passion should deepen our love and devotion to His Most Sacred Heart. One way of doing this is studying the Holy Shroud of Turin. As J. Loredo explains, the Holy Shroud of Turin confirms the terrible punishments inflicted on Our Lord Jesus Christ during the Passion with such extraordinary precision that it has even been called the “Fifth Gospel.”
Meditating on the Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ, especially during Lent, has always been an occasion of great spiritual consolation and progress in the interior life. Living in the twenty-first century, we are unfortunately forced to live in the hustle and bustle of a technological society. We find it increasingly difficult to “disconnect,” meditate peacefully and lift our minds to consider divine things.
On the other hand, our upbringing teaches us to minimize the role of reasoning. We are increasingly immersed in what some have called the “civilization of the image.” Thus, we must see things with our eyes to believe them.
A MESSAGE FOR OUR TIMES
Perhaps Divine Providence was thinking of us when deciding to wait for the twentieth century to begin to reveal the mysteries of the most precious relic of Christianity: the Holy Shroud of Turin.
This linen sheet wrapped the lifeless body of Jesus in the tomb. “And Joseph taking the body, wrapped it up in a clean linen cloth. And laid it in his own new monument, which he had hewed out in a rock.” (Matthew 27:59,60).
After several vicissitudes, this sheet ended up in the treasury of the House of Savoy in the mid-fifteenth century, where it was kept first in Chambéry, France, and then in Turin, Italy. The Vatican acquired it only in 1983, and it is now found in the Turin Cathedral.
The sheet measures 14 feet long by 3.5 feet wide. It is woven in a herringbone pattern and hand-spun according to techniques used in Palestine in the first century. In the median longitudinal part, we can see the evanescent double imprint (front and back) of the life-size corpse. The body depicted is a male in his thirties with a beard, long hair and a robust constitution. He was five feet, nine inches tall, with typically Semitic features. From the imprint, we can deduce that the Man of the Shroud was tortured, scourged, crucified and pierced in his side by a lance.
All this is visible to the naked eye and has been known since ancient times. Christian tradition has always considered this sheet an authentic relic and held that the image of the Man of the Shroud is a portrait of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Proof of this tradition, for example, can be seen in several Byzantine icons depicting Christ as the Man of the Shroud. Numerous documents dating back to very remote times speak of the relic’s veneration.
However, the relic had to wait until 1898 for an extraordinary discovery that would forever mark its destiny.
THE SCIENTIFIC CHRONICLE BEGINS
On May 25 of that year, the Turin lawyer Secondo Pia photographed the Shroud for the first time. He was amazed when he developed the first two plates: the photographs revealed that the Shroud image naturally functions as a negative! Why? It was undoubtedly a mystery.
Thus, the scientific ‘adventure’ of the Shroud began. It was soon subjected to systematic study with leading-edge technologies. The more scientists studied it, the more baffled they became. The more they discovered its mysteries, the more they realized they were only scratching the surface. In 1959, the International Center for Sindonology was founded in Turin. Later in 1977, the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) was established, bringing together mainly American scholars.
This is not the place to report on their research. Our focus is concentrated on only one aspect: the Shroud’s striking confirmation of the Gospel narrative of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
THE “FIFTH GOSPEL”
After decades of research, scientists can affirm that the Holy Shroud is even more meticulous in relating, albeit silently, the details of the Passion than the Gospels. STURP Prof. John Heller comments: “The research of the last decades does not contain the slightest information at variance with the narration of the Gospels.”
Consequently, some began to call the Holy Shroud the “Fifth Gospel” or “the Twentieth-century Gospel.”
This “Gospel” is so rich in details that the French surgeon Pierre Barbet, a famous pioneer of medical studies on the Shroud, went as far as to state: “A surgeon studying the Holy Shroud to meditate on the Passion by going through the different stages of Jesus’ martyrdom can follow His sufferings better than relying upon a great preacher or a holy ascetic.”
THE AGONY IN THE GARDEN
“And being in an agony, he prayed the longer. And his sweat became as drops of blood, trickling down upon the ground.” (Luke 22:43,44).
Saint Luke, a doctor, is the only evangelist who describes this episode, which he does with clinical precision. Blood sweating, clinically called hematohidrosis, occurs rarely. It is observed in conditions of great physical weakness accompanied by strong moral shock, emotion and fear, which St. Luke calls “anguish.” There is sudden vasodilation of the subcutaneous capillaries, which break under the sweat glands. Blood mixes with the sweat and seeps out of the pores.
Computer analysis of three-dimensional images of the Man of the Shroud’s face, particularly those of Prof. Giovanni Tamburelli in 1978, shows how, in addition to countless abrasions and small clots, His whole skin surface seems as if soaked in blood. Such a state would be a result of hematohidrosis.
THE SLAP IN ANNAS’ HOUSE
“And when he had said these things, one of the servants standing by, gave Jesus a blow, saying: Answerest thou the high priest so?” (John 18:22).
The Man of the Shroud’s face reveals a large hematoma or mass of clotted blood on the right cheek. His nose is swollen, turned to the right and visibly broken.
The Turin sindonologist Prof. Judica Cordiglia believes this wound was inflicted by a short wooden stick about 2 inches in diameter. The blow caused a profuse nosebleed. Indeed, the Man of the Shroud’s mustache is soaked in blood on the right side, as is His beard.
Modern linguists believe that the term used by Saint John, and normally translated as “slap,” can be interpreted as “beating,” which would reflect the data found in the Holy Shroud.
INJURIES AND WOUNDS
“And they began to salute him: Hail, king of the Jews. And they struck his head with a reed: and they did spit on him. And bowing their knees, they adored him.” (Mark 15:18-19).
The Man of the Shroud shows multiple signs of trauma: swelling on the forehead, browbones, cheekbones, cheeks, lips and nose. The latter is deformed due to the rupture of the dorsal cartilage close to the insertion on the nasal bone, which, however, is intact. Two streams of blood come out of His nose. There are bruises on His face almost everywhere, especially on the right side, which is visibly swollen. His eyebrows are torn, with bones having wounded the skin from the inside. The left cheekbone has several incisions.
Therefore, we deal with a man brutally beaten with sticks, punches and slaps.
THE SCOURGING
“Then therefore, Pilate took Jesus, and scourged him.” (John 19:1)
The Holy Shroud offers us a very complete, precise and horrendous picture of the scourging. We can count more than 120 blows on the Man of the Shroud. They were inflicted by two strong men, one bigger than the other, on both sides of the victim. They were experts, His chest being the only part of the body that shows no signs of flagellation. In fact, strokes by a ‘flagellum’ in the pericardial region could cause the early death of the convict. There is no shortage of injuries to the buttocks, which means that the Man of the Shroud was scourged naked.
It was a Roman scourging since the Jews could not exceed 39 blows by law.
The Shroud also allows us to identify two different instruments used for this torture. One, the ‘flagrum taxillatum’, consisted of three strips, each with two small lead balls, meaning that each blow caused six bruises. The other had metal hooks at the ends. One struck, the other tore.
By studying the imprints, we can even establish Jesus’ position during the scourging: He was bent over a very short column.
THE CROWNING WITH THORNS
“And the soldiers platting a crown of thorns, put it upon his head; and they put on him a purple garment.” (John 19:2)
The Man of the Shroud’s head shows at least fifty small but deep puncture wounds consistent with applying a “helmet” of thorny branches rather than a “crown,” properly speaking. The most conspicuous bloodstains correspond with the head’s veins and arteries.
Two rivulets of blood can be seen to the right of those looking at the image. One falls down the hair towards the shoulder; the other drops almost perpendicularly on the forehead toward the eyebrow. These protrude from a puncture wound that injured the frontal branch of the superficial temporal artery. In fact, this blood has a distinctly arterial character. Toward the middle of the forehead, we see a brief flow of venous blood in the shape of an inverted 3, resulting from a lesion to the frontal vein.
The wounds produced by the crown, or rather the helmet of thorns, descend from the back to the nape, where we see hemorrhagic occurrences that repeat the same pattern as the frontal ones. The thorns, deeply embedded, injured some branches of the occipital artery and deeper veins of the posterior vertebral plexus.
The head is full of blood vessels and nerve endings. The pain caused by the crown of thorns, especially during the carrying of the Cross, was undoubtedly horrible.
THE WAY TO CALVARY
“And bearing his own cross, he went forth to that place which is called Calvary, but in Hebrew Golgotha.” (John 19:17).
The Man of the Shroud’s shoulders display a large bruise at the level of the left shoulder blade and a wound on the right shoulder that can be attributed to carrying the patibulum, that is, the horizontal beam of the Cross. His shoulders appear raised, a position correlated to the transport of the beam.
The imprints also show that the beam slipped over His shoulders, producing severe abrasions.
The images reveal a significant amount of earthy material on the Man of the Shroud’s soles, revealing that He walked barefoot.
THE THREE FALLS
“Jesus falls for the first time… Jesus falls for the second time… Jesus falls for the third time” (Way of the Cross, Stations III, VII and IX)
Although unreported by any Gospel, Catholic piety has always venerated the three falls of Our Lord on the way to Calvary.
The falls are very evident on the Holy Shroud. His knees, especially the left one, are skinned. There are traces of blood and earthy material on the left knee. The nose also appears flayed and with traces of earthy material, which shows that Our Lord fell with His face on the ground. This is explainable because He could not protect Himself with His hands tied to the gallows.
THE CRUCIFIXION
“And when they were come to the place which is called Calvary, they crucified him there; and the robbers, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.” (Luke 23:33)
First, Jesus was stripped. His whole body was torn and covered with a mixture of blood, sweat and dust, which had dried, causing His clothes to stick to the skin. We can imagine the excruciating pain that action caused. In modern hospitals, such an operation is sometimes performed under general anesthesia to avoid the patient’s risk of syncope. Many wounds began to bleed again.
Our Lord was laid on the Cross and nailed to it. His torturers mistook the distance of the lateral holes and thus strongly pulled His right arm to fit until His joints were dislocated. This, too, is visible on the Holy Shroud.
WHERE WERE THE NAILS DRIVEN IN?
The anterior imprint of the Man of the Shroud shows a puncture wound, not in the palm of His hand, as iconographic tradition has it, but in His wrist, corresponding to the so-called Destot space. It is an anatomical passage that easily allows the insertion of a nail without breaking any bone.
The classic view of the nails in His palms is, therefore, excluded. First, the palm would not have supported the body weight. Second, because some metacarpal bones would probably have broken, disproving the prophecy, “The Lord keepeth all their bones, not one of them shall be broken” (Ps 33:21).
The nails injured the median nerve in the hands, causing the thumbs to flex under the palms, which explains their absence on the Shroud imprint.
As for the feet, the right foot left a complete imprint on the Shroud, while the heel and plantar cavity of the left foot can be seen. Therefore, the two feet were crossed; the left was placed in front, and its sole rested on the back of the right foot, which rested directly on the post of the Cross. They were nailed together.
The bloodstains found on the Shroud correspond perfectly to pierced feet resting on the Cross in the manner described above.
Note also that the wounds of the Man of the Shroud’s hands and feet conform to the square shape of the nails used for Roman crucifixions.
THE DEATH
“And Jesus crying out with a loud voice, said: Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. And saying this, he gave up the ghost.” (Luke 23:46).
He hung from the Cross by His arms without support to keep him upright. Contrary to traditional iconography, the Shroud shows no evidence to indicate the use of a footrest on the Cross. Indeed, the footrest was only introduced in Roman crucifixions in the second half of the first century. Thus, Our Lord could no longer breathe normally due to hanging only by His arms.
In such circumstances, spasms, cramps and suffocations begin and worsen until the intake muscles are blocked. Death occurs from a mixture of asphyxia and generalized shock, here also caused by a heart attack and hemopericardium, as we will explain below.
The image of the Shroud shows the chest muscles contracted in a spasmodic way. The diaphragm is raised, and the abdomen has collapsed. These are typical signs of death from respiratory anxiety, asphyxiation and shock.
The bright red color of the bloodstains is due to a high amount of bilirubin, typically found in those who have been severely traumatized just before the blood was shed. The neatness of the Man of the Shroud’s wounds, caused by the rapid drying of the blood, also indicates that He was severely dehydrated.
THE SPEAR OF LONGINUS
“But one of the soldiers with a spear opened his side, and immediately there came out blood and water” (John 19:34).
On the anterior Shroud imprint, we see a large flow of blood on the left, corresponding to a breach of the skin with the characteristics of a puncture and cut wound. The wound’s margins remained wide and are well delineated, like those inflicted upon a corpse. This wound would be attributable to the thrust of the lance by the Roman soldier. It is a deep wound that perforated the chest wall, explaining the abundance of bloodshed. It was inflicted on a corpse because the dried blood showed its cellular part had separated from the serous component.
This evidence supports a very reliable hypothesis on the ‘causa mortis’ of Our Lord Jesus Christ: a heart attack followed by hemopericardium.
This cause of death can be deduced from a study of the dried blood. It is very dense and shows lumps separated by a halo of serum. This condition is typical of a man who dies due to a large accumulation of blood in the chest area, the so-called hemothorax. Blood accumulation can be explained by the rupture of the heart and the consequent spillage of blood between it and the outer pericardial layer. This blood flow causes excruciating pain, which always corresponds to a cry, after which the individual immediately dies.
Therefore, the lance wound on the crucified man, by then a corpse, would have allowed the shedding of the blood already separated from the serum. A hematological examination reveals that this blood from the right side is “dead” blood, that is, released ‘post mortem’, while the blood on the forehead, wrist, nape and feet soles is “alive,” that is, it was shed when the Man of the Shroud was still alive.
On the other hand, penetrating from the right side to the height of the fifth intercostal space, the lance would never have been able to reach the heart, as the Roman ‘pillum’ did not have a long enough blade.
Death from hemopericardium causes immediate cadaveric rigidity, found precisely in the Man of the Shroud.
THE LAYING IN THE TOMB
“And Nicodemus also came, (he who at the first came to Jesus by night,) bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. They took therefore the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths, with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.” (John 19:39,40)
Everything above shows that the Holy Shroud of Turin wrapped the lifeless body of a crucified man. The presence of aloe and myrrh, substances used in Palestine to bury corpses at the time of Christ, has been identified on the fabric.
According to medical studies, to obtain the blood markers seen on the Holy Shroud, the crucified must have been wrapped in the cloth within two and a half hours after death and remained no more than 40 hours since there are no traces of putrefaction.
THE RESURRECTION
“And on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared. And they found the stone rolled back from the sepulchre. And going in, they found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were astonished in their mind at this, behold, two men stood by them, in shining apparel. And as they were afraid, and bowed down their countenance towards the ground, they said unto them: Why seek you the living with the dead? He is not here, but is risen.” (Luke 24:1-6).
In the dorsal imprint of the Holy Shroud, the dorsal and deltoid muscles appear naturally arched and not flattened, as it should have happened with a body lying on its back on a stone slab. On the other hand, the different spots on the back that would naturally touch the surface are not crushed. There is no bodyweight effect, meaning that when making the imprint on the cloth, the Man of the Shroud floated in the air in a state of levitation without touching the stone.
How was the Shroud imprint made? The scientists respond that “the corpse vaporized as it were, emitting a radiation that would have caused the imprint. … the body was very likely in levitation when producing this radiation.” In scientific terms, that means the corpse became “mechanically transparent” for the burial sheet.
Let us hear from STURP professor Aaron Upinsky: “One of the greatest mysteries of the Shroud is how the corpse never touched the fabric while detaching itself from it. He flew away without altering the fibers in the slightest, without tearing them, and without modifying the already existing bloodstains. That is impossible for a normal body, subject to the laws of nature. A sore-covered corpse could never be taken off a sheet without altering it and leaving no traces. No science denies this decisive fact. It can be explained solely by the ‘dematerialization’ of the body, which flies off the sheet while no longer subject to the laws of nature. That is precisely what Christians call the ‘Resurrection.’”
CONCLUSION
Let us conclude with the words of one Catholic professor: “The Holy Shroud is a permanent miracle. By allowing photography to show His Divine Face, Our Lord made a gesture of mercy, especially for our times. The Holy Shroud is such a marvel, such a proof of the existence of Our Lord, His Resurrection, and everything we believe that the Faithful in every Catholic environment should continuously talk about it.”

3. DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART COMBATS THE LGBTQ MOVEMENT

Devotion to the Most Sacred Heart is one of the best ways, according to the Catholic writer M. Haynes, to combat the LGBTQ movement. The month of June is marked by Holy Mother Church as being devoted to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. However, this holy and beautiful month is also used by the world to promote the ever-increasing influence of LGBTQ ideology, in direct opposition to that most pure love which stems from the Sacred Heart.

DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART
Evidence of the devotion to the Sacred Heart is found in the writings of the Fathers of the Church, such as the ‘Adversus Haereses’ of Saint Iranaeus and the writings of Saints Justin Martyr and John Chrysostom. The devotion to the Sacred Heart further grew out of a devotion to the Five Wounds of Jesus. The public practice of both laity and clergy was so widespread that in 1353, Pope Innocent VI instituted a Mass in honor of the beautiful mystery of the Sacred Heart.
However, Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque is the saint that we most associate with the devotion to the Sacred Heart. Starting in December of 1673, she received a number of visions of Christ who revealed the nature of the devotion and His wish to institute a Feast honoring His Most Sacred Heart. After her death in 1690, the devotion grew in popularity until it was established as a Feast in the whole of France in 1765. Finally, in 1873 the devotion was approved universally by Pope Pius IX, and in 1899 Pope Leo XIII beseeched the bishops of the Church everywhere to celebrate the Feast in their dioceses.
Commenting on the reasons for this devotion, Pope Pius XII mentions that Christ’s Heart is the noblest part of human nature and is hypostatically united to the Person of the Word. Thus, we must pay due reverence to His Heart as we would the Son of God Himself. Moreover, the Pope mentions that “His Heart, more than all the other members of His body, is the natural sign and symbol of his boundless love for the human race.” Just as with any man, the heart is considered the symbol of love for another; the Pope teaches that so also it is with Christ. Therefore, the chief sign of the love of Christ for His Father and man is His Sacred Heart.
With this beating Heart, the symbol of the deepest and most perfect love, Christ loves His Father and wayward man. This boundless love cannot be contained or hidden. His Most Sacred Heart is thus the symbol of this love, as Pope Pius XII teaches. In reverencing this Heart, we reverence Christ and become more united to Him.
LOVING THE SACRED HEART IS BASED ON HUMILITY
Indeed, this devotion is based upon humility. Through reverencing the Sacred Heart, we reverence the purest and most perfect act of true love – Christ’s death on the cross – which was based not on selfishness or sensuality but selfless sacrifice. In loving the Sacred Heart, we love that “source of expiating blood which effaced the sins of the world,” writes Fr. Ewald Bierbaum in his ‘Six Sermons on Devotion to the Sacred Heart’.
The Church thus advocates devotion to this beating Heart, which was pierced on the Cross and pours out His blessings upon us each day. In loving the Sacred Heart, the Church responds to the crucifixion in the most fitting manner possible by loving Him Who loved us to the point of giving His life for us.
‘PRIDE’ MONTH TWISTS THE SACRED HEART DEVOTION
In direct opposition, our liberal establishment proposes that June be given over to the promotion of immoral perversions, as is advocated in the LGBT movement. Indeed, it is no coincidence its activists have hijacked June to celebrate their practices. As with all such Satanic endeavors, the opposing vice, is promoted in a vain attempt to defeat the virtues the Church proposes.
Hence, the LGBTQ movement aptly labels itself and its adopted month as ‘Pride’ in opposition to the humility and self-sacrificial love of the Sacred Heart, which the Church contemplates. Pride, the original cause of man’s downfall in the Garden of Eden, continues to be the vice by which postmodern man relentlessly promotes sin and death.
The mortal sin of sodomy, one of the four which cry out to heaven for vengeance, is centered upon selfishness, lust, sensual desire and a perceived passing “pleasure.” It does not promise life but instead takes it away; “Pride” month does not promote virtue but instead demands unnatural vice. “Pride” month does not offer “freedom,” as its proponents argue, but instead delivers only slavery to sin.
“Pride’s” radical ideology is built upon opposition to natural and spiritual life, a denial of natural reason and reality, and slavery to sin and death. “Pride” month is truly the satanic response to the Church’s devotion to the Sacred Heart. The “Pride” ideology opposes selflessness, purity, zeal for souls and conformity to the Divine Will of the Trinity.
NECESSITY OF DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART
The Sacred Heart devotion is a sure way to win the cold, ‘Proud’ hearts of postmodern man. Love moved God to create man, become incarnate and die on the Cross. Love moved God to give us the Holy Ghost and the great gift of the Holy Eucharist. Love moved God to reveal this devotion to Him so that we might atone for the coldness with which we have treated Him and return His love. He longs for us to return His love to Him.
The ineffable love given by the Sacred Heart completely satisfies our hearts. The empty, barren and fatal ‘love’ offered by the LGBT movement and its ‘Pride’ month brings only mortal sin, frustration and death of the soul.
Instead of focusing on LGBT distortions of love, a devotion to the Sacred Heart allows us to turn to God as the proper end of all endeavors and our highest good. Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary can be the remedy for our postmodern society that hardens its heart by practicing every imaginable vice to the point of blaspheming God and killing the innocent unborn. We desperately need devotion to the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart if we are to have any hope of turning back to God.

Ave Maria!
Father Joseph Poisson 

P.S. If you would like to be added to our subscription list, please reply to the general email below with your phone number, contact information, and what major city you are near as well.
(Ourladyofmtcarmelusa@gmail.com)

Consecration of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel to Immaculate Heart of Mary
http://ourladyofmountcarmelusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Consecration-to-Immaculate-Heart-by-Our-Lady-of-Mt.-Carmel-SSPX-Marian-Corps.pdf

Featured Sermon
Given By His Excellency Bishop Pfeiffer

Consecration of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel to Immaculate Heart of Mary
http://ourladyofmountcarmelusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Consecration-to-Immaculate-Heart-by-Our-Lady-of-Mt.-Carmel-SSPX-Marian-Corps.pdf