Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

Mortifying Our Passions and Desires Helps Us Much More Than Choosing to Perform Unusual Voluntary Penances

Here is how St. John of the Cross, Mystical Doctor of the Church, counsels us:

One must greatly lament the ignorance of certain men, who burden themselves with extraordinary penances and with many other voluntary practices, and think that this practice or that one will suffice to bring them to the union with Divine Wisdom. But such will not be the case if they endeavor not diligently to mortify their desires. If they were careful to bestow half of that labor on this, they would profit more in a month than they profit by all the other practices in many years.

For, just as it is necessary to till the earth if it is to bear fruit, and unless it be tilled it bears nothing but weeds, so likewise is mortification of the desires necessary if the soul is to profit. Without this mortification, I make bold to say, the soul no more achieves progress on the road to perfection and to the knowledge of God of itself, however many efforts it might make, than the seed grows when it is cast upon untilled ground. Wherefore the darkness and rudeness of the soul will not be taken from it until the desires be quenched. For these desires are like cataracts, or like motes in the eye, which obstruct the sight until they be taken away.

Ascent Of Mount Carmel, St. John of the Cross, Bk.1, ch.8, §4.

The Blessing of a True, Catholic Liberal Education – Part X

Catholic Candle note: Below is part 10 of our exploration of the best type of education – which is a true Catholic Liberal Education. Do not confuse this education with many university programs called “liberal arts” but which are full of fluff, falsehood, and aimless so-called “cultural enrichment” courses and “humanities”.

A liberal education also does not refer to liberalism, nor is a true liberal education an indoctrination into that error of liberalism or political correctness. In fact, a true Catholic Liberal Education is the best antidote to the errors of liberalism.

As context for this tenth part of this article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier nine parts:

Previously, in part 1 of this article,1 we examined the problems we see in modern education:

  • Modern colleges do not improve the quality of their students’ minds (and their thinking ability) much or at all.


  • Most “education” is merely job training, fluff courses, and/or leftist indoctrination.


  • The students are trained to sound like someone in their field but they do more memorizing and little thinking.


  • Grade “inflation” and degree “inflation” are rampant. Grades and academic degrees do not mean much anymore.

In part 2 of this article,2 we examined, in general, what education is. We considered the human soul and the perfection of its highest faculty (i.e., its highest power) – which is the intellect – and which is immaterial (i.e., incorporeal). We saw that our intellects are perfected through knowing eternal, unchangeable truths and the causes of things.

In part 3 of this article,3 after having seen what true education is, we examined the question who should perfect his intellect.

In part 4 of this article,4 having seen that modern universities do not provide a true education, we consider whether there is ever a good reason for men or women to attend them.

In part 5 of this article,5 having seen that women and girls should pursue a True Catholic Liberal Education – just as men and boys should, too – we then considered what the best environment is in which women and girls should do this.

In part 6 of this article, we addressed the objection that, having seen the great value of a true Catholic Liberal Education, we should be afraid that the great blessing of this education would be a danger to our souls because it might foster in us the vice of pride.6

In part 7 of this article, we considered more fully the difference between the education which is appropriate for a free man as contrasted to the education which is appropriate for a slave.7

In part 8 of this article, we considered further how the truth perfects our minds. This shows us that we must really know the truth, not merely believe true opinions.8

In part 9 of this article, we considered more-specifically what studies (sciences) belong in a Catholic Liberal Education.9

Below, in part 10, we explore the motive and the goal of a true Catholic Liberal Education.


What Are the Motive and the Goal of a True Catholic Liberal Education?

A Catholic Liberal Education Begins in Wonder and Aims at Wisdom

Part 10

In an earlier part of this article10, we saw that the seven liberal arts are important studies by means of which we should begin our study of the highest sciences – which are philosophy and theology.

We saw that the liberal arts are not the only parts of liberal education or even the most important parts, but they are the key beginning of it. They develop our thinking and help make our minds disciplined, vigorous, and animated by wonder, so that we will not only desire, but also have the means to can acquire knowledge and wisdom, especially the highest truths, which are again, those of philosophy and theology.

Here is the motive and goal of the education that all of us should seek, each according to his circumstances:

A true, Catholic Liberal Education
begins in wonder and aims at wisdom
.

Let us “unpack” that statement by first looking at what we mean by wonder and then let us consider what wisdom is.


What is Wonder?

Wonder is the proper human motive for true education. Wonder involves two things simultaneously: ignorance and knowledge (in different respects).  Man finds himself wondering because, at the same time, he both knows something and also doesn’t know everything. 

Let us contrast wonder with mere curiosity.  Wonder implies that a person knows a group of facts (i.e., truths) and, knowing these facts, he seeks an explanation of them – viz., their causes.  Wonder involves a certain delight and joy, a sort of fascination with the way things are. But at the same time, the person has a certain lack of comfort because he is aware of his own lack of knowledge. So he asks why things are the way they are.  Wonder implies that a person has a certain confidence that the world around him is ultimately explainable.  When a person is animated by wonder, he goes through his day, week, or month, seeing additional intellectual connections between various things. He goes through life seeing more aspects of the world around him which are interesting and for which he seeks explanations.

By contrast, a person motivated by curiosity is more interested in questions concerning how.  When a person is motivated by curiosity, he is not so interested in questions concerning why – and is not so motivated to seek to know why something is true and what its causes are.  Rather, curiosity leads a person to focus on seeking to do something and desiring to see if his idea will “work” to achieve a useful practical result or even merely a sensational spectacle. A curious man ultimately seeks power.11  He is more concerned to see how certain generalizations work or how they apply to varying circumstances.  In contrast to a person who wonders, a person motivated by curiosity assumes the validity of a principle, in order to see how effectively this principle can be harnessed to exploit a given situation in order to achieve a particular useful result.

This is not to say that the methods of verification in experimental science may not very well be an instrument of wonder of a high order, but when those instruments are employed not in order to understand the truths of Nature, but in order to find what works, then curiosity and not wonder is the immediate motive.

So the man who wonders at the lightning he sees in the sky is considering questions such as what causes lightning and what is the nature of lightning.  But the man who sees the lightning and seeks to protect his house from being struck by lightning is curious rather than wondering.  He asks himself things such as, if he places a metal pole on his roof, will that protect his house?

The proper satisfaction of a man who wonders is knowledge of the causes of things around us, e.g., what is lightning and what causes it.  By contrast, the proper satisfaction of a curious man is seeing that his idea works successfully, e.g., the

lightning rod protected his house from a lightning strike. 12

Curiosity and the practical improvements engendered by it are generally not evil13 and are sometimes even necessary. But they are much lower than the possession of universal, eternal truth. Such curiosity is lower than wonder in a way similar to food for the body being lower than food for the mind. This is because wonder leads to the perfection of our intellect; curiosity leads to perfection of the practical circumstances of our life. The perfection of our intellect is much greater and nobler!

So a man who sees and wonders is spurred on to learn the causes of the things around him because they are interesting and the world around him is explainable by reason. Those causes are worthy of investigation for the sake of the truth because Nature is worthy of investigation (and even more worthy is the First Cause of Nature, Who is God).  By contrast, curiosity spurs a man to solve a problem which improves the practical aspects of his life or otherwise helps him, e.g., have a safer home.

Thus, a liberal education begins in wonder, not in curiosity. By contrast (for example), building a better mousetrap begins in curiosity, not in wonder.

So a Catholic Liberal Education begins with wonder and involves the seeking of the truth which is the knowledge of the causes of things. This true education aims at wisdom (as we stated above).

But what is wisdom? Let us next consider that question.


First, Let Us Remember that Wisdom is a Priceless Treasure!

First, let us reflect that wisdom is one of the most important blessings from God. “All wisdom is from the Lord God”.14

Wisdom is incomparably better than fame, prestige, power, riches, pleasures, or comfort. As the Book of Wisdom declares:

I preferred her [viz., wisdom] before kingdoms and thrones, and esteemed riches nothing in comparison of her. Neither did I compare unto her any precious stone: for all gold in comparison of her, is as a little sand, and silver in respect to her shall be counted as clay.15

In fact:

Wisdom is better than all the most precious things: and whatsoever may be desired cannot be compared to it.16

And:

She [i.e., wisdom] is an infinite treasure to men! 17

Therefore, we should pursue wisdom above all of these things. As the wise man teaches us in the Book of Proverbs:

Get wisdom, because it is better than gold.18


What is Wisdom?

St. Thomas Aquinas explains to us (following Aristotle’s teaching) that:

Wisdom is a knowledge of causes.19

This definition fits perfectly with what we saw above about wonder. That is, seeking the true knowledge which is offered in a Catholic Liberal Education begins in wonder. As we saw above, true wonder (as contrasted to mere curiosity) motivates us to seek to understand the things that are, and to know their causes.


The Wisdom We Discuss Here (and Which We Seek) is Wisdom Simply Speaking, not Wisdom in a Restricted Sense

In this present article, we are considering the nature of wisdom simply, that is, unqualifiedly. Let us contrast this unqualified wisdom to what we could call “wisdom” as that word is used in a narrow or restricted sense.

In a qualified sense – i.e., in some way – we could call something “wisdom” which is the knowledge of causes pertaining to a narrow field or pursuit, such as carpentry (or one of the other manual arts). A man could be called a “wise carpenter” because he has the knowledge of the causes of his art. For example, a “wise carpenter” might reject the use of a particular beam (i.e., plank) which is full of knots because he knows that such a beam would not possess the strength it should have because those knots weaken it.

Such a carpenter is not wise absolutely speaking (unqualifiedly) but is wise in a certain, limited respect (viz., regarding his particular field), because he knows the causes which affect his own special art.

But in this present article, we are considering the wisdom by which we would call a man “wise” without qualification, as opposed to calling him “wise” only in a certain specialized respect (as we would say a “wise carpenter”). In other words, in this article we are examining what wisdom is absolutely, because of which we would call a man “wise” without adding any qualification such as “carpenter”.

This distinction is similar to the difference between a man being called “good” without qualification (because he possesses great virtue) as contrasted to a person being called “good” qualifiedly, such as being a “good plumber” or a “good assassin”. Being a “good assassin” refers to the person possessing a high degree of the assassin’s skill for killing people. We do not call this assassin “good” without qualification (but we could call him “good” in this certain respect).

Likewise, calling a man “wise” with respect to carpentry is not the same as calling him “wise” without qualification. So in this article, we examine the nature of wisdom as it gives a general excellence to a person and because of which he would be called “wise” as a person (and not in a qualified sense such as wise as a carpenter).


There Are Two Kinds of Wisdom Simply Speaking

There are two kinds of wisdom simply speaking. They are speculative20 wisdom and practical wisdom. Both of them are the knowledge of causes, but in different ways. They reflect the two kinds of causes that every person should know. Each of these kinds of wisdom causes a person to be called “wise” without qualification:

  • Because of speculative wisdom, a person is called wise as the knower of the deep causes of things, especially the First Cause of all things; and


  • Because of practical wisdom, a person is called wise as a doer, acting well in light of his final end.

Both kinds of wise men we call “wise” simply speaking, without limiting this adjective by a qualifying word such as “carpenter”.

Let us briefly look at each of these types of wisdom.


What Is Speculative Wisdom?

Speculative wisdom is wisdom in those matters which concern the highest truths21 which are most worth knowing and which most-greatly perfect our intellects.

But in addition to knowing high truths, we must also know the causes of those high truths; (of course, God is uncaused but is the ultimate Cause of everything else). It is important that, in knowing the highest truths, we also know their causes because we do not know something fully if we do not know its causes.

But there is a difference in causes. Some are lower-level, proximate causes which are themselves caused by higher causes. For example, a dog is one of the causes of its own puppies but God is the higher cause of not only those puppies, but also the parent dogs, as well as all other dogs and creatures.

The most complete and most satisfying knowledge of a thing is to know it with all of its causes, even up to (and especially) the Highest Cause, which is the First and Highest Cause of all creatures. This is God.

St. Paul infallibly teaches us that we can know God by natural reason, as the First Cause of all other things. In other words, looking at creatures, we can see God’s work in them and that God is their cause. Here are St. Paul’s words:

[T]he invisible things of Him [viz., God], from the creatures of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; His eternal power also, and Divinity.22

St. Thomas refers to speculative wisdom when he explains (following Aristotle’s teaching) that “it belongs to wisdom to consider the Highest Cause.”23

This knowledge of things with their highest causes is the deepest and fullest way to know things and is speculative wisdom.

The science which treats of the first causes (including naturally knowable truths about God Himself, such as His existence and some of His perfections) in the light of the natural capacity of human reason is called metaphysics – which is a type of speculative wisdom – as this wisdom is attainable by the power of human reason. The science which studies God in the higher light of what He has revealed about Himself is also called speculative wisdom, but it is wisdom as attainable by the greater light of the Catholic Faith. Thus, Catholic theology is the highest wisdom and is the principal satisfaction of wonder on this side of the grave.


What Is Practical Wisdom?

The other kind of wisdom is called practical wisdom and is also called prudence. It is one of the four Cardinal Virtues. It is also a Gift of the Holy Ghost, as well as an infused moral virtue (infused into the souls of those who are in the state of Sanctifying Grace).

Practical wisdom is concerned with right reason as it applies to our active life. This wisdom regulates the passions and appetites which move us. Practical wisdom does this by ordering all of our actions (and our life) to our Final End. This Final End is also called the Final Cause of our actions because our end (that is, the goal) is the ultimate cause (reason) why we do what we do.

For example, suppose that a man has an urgent need to travel to an adjoining city immediately. He might go into his bedroom, for the sake of getting his car keys. His obtaining his keys is for the sake of driving his car, which is for the sake of going to the gas station, which is for the sake of filling his empty gas tank, which is for the sake of being able to drive to that adjoining city without running out of gas, all for the sake of making the urgent journey. The Final Cause (the ultimate reason) for each of those activities was in order to arrive in the adjoining city. In other words, finally, the cause of all of those activities was the arriving there. By contrast, if the man stopped to read a novel, the Final Cause of that pastime would not be the urgent trip to the adjoining city.

Likewise, any part of our life which does not promote our Final Cause, is vain. Anything we do which will not help us to achieve the goal for which we have been created (and for which are on earth) is ultimately foolishness that we will regret. That is why one way in which practical wisdom can be summed up is as follows:

It is Practical Wisdom (Prudence) to live every minute of our lives in the way that, at our Judgment, we will want to have lived.

Here is how St. Ignatius of Loyola teaches this practical wisdom:

Man is created to praise, reverence, and serve God Our Lord, and by this means to save his soul. All other things on the face of the earth are created for man to help him fulfill the end for which he is created. From this it follows that man is to use these things to the extent that they will help him to attain his end. Likewise, he must rid himself of them insofar as they prevent him from attaining it.

Therefore, we must make ourselves indifferent to all created things, insofar as it is left to the choice of our free will and is not forbidden. Acting accordingly, for our part, we should not prefer health to sickness, riches to poverty, honor to dishonor, a long life to a short one, and so in all things we should desire and choose only those things which will best help us attain the end for which we are created.24

St. Paul urged his flock to live according to practical wisdom when he taught them that they should:

Walk with wisdom towards them that are without.25

St. Paul is teaching us that (practical) wisdom should guide our actions, i.e., our “walk”.

Following St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that prudence, i.e., practical wisdom, “judges of human acts by Divine things, and directs human acts according to Divine rules.”26

We see that practical wisdom should cause us to order our lives fearing the Lord so that we can live a life obeying Him and living in His friendship. Here is one way in which the Book of Proverbs teaches this truth:

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.27

As we saw in an earlier part of our current investigation of The Blessings of a True Catholic Liberal Education,28 we should study the truths of Ethics and Politics to attain this practical wisdom.


Both Types of Wisdom Have the Same Ultimate Object: God

We see, by looking at both speculative wisdom and practical wisdom, that God is the beginning and end. That is, both kinds of wisdom ultimately are knowledge of God but in different aspects.

Speculative wisdom starts with all of the various truths around us and traces them back to their First Cause, Who is God. By contrast, through Ethics and Politics, practical wisdom considers our Final End (Who is God) as the reason and guiding principle for all of our actions and makes sure that all of our actions are for the sake of Him, Who is our Last End and our Final Cause (to use the proper philosophical term).

Thus, we see more fully the literal truth of what Our Lord says in the Apocalypse:

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.29

Our Lord is the Beginning and First Cause of all that exists; He is the End and Highest Principle to which all of our actions and our lives should conform.

So in all of the studies of a true education, God is the ultimate subject of study – as the First Beginning (the First Cause) of the speculative sciences, and as the Last End of the practical sciences of Ethics and true Political Science.


This Lifetime Pursuit of Wisdom Is The Life of a Free Man

Now through the efforts of a lifetime of study, a man can more fully acquire deeper and broader wisdom. But such precious wisdom nonetheless is indeed the work of a lifetime.

However, this man’s whole “journey” – even the earlier part – should be characterized by the pursuit of this great good, and this work of his entire life is rightly called philosophy – which means the love of wisdom. For every study such a man undertakes is for the sake of wisdom.

And insofar as he lives for wisdom, his whole life is devoted to that which in itself makes life worth living. Thus, he is not a slave but a free man. Accordingly, only the kind of education which introduces a man to the philosophical life is properly named liberal.


Conclusions of this Present Part of the Article (viz., Part 10)

A true, Catholic Liberal Education begins in wonder and aims at wisdom. God made us to wonder at the world around us and to perfect our minds seeking the causes of things. This is speculative wisdom. He instilled this healthy sense of wonder in us precisely so that we would seek Him, the Cause of causes.

Practical wisdom is acting according to our final end (i.e., goal), which is the Final Cause of all of our actions (i.e., the ultimate reason why we act).

Both types of wisdom ultimately lead back to God, the First Cause and Last End (that is, the Final Cause).


Looking Ahead

We seek wisdom through perfecting our highest faculty – viz., our intellect – with the highest truths. But there are many authors of many books written on the subjects which are studied in a Catholic Liberal Education. Which ones are best to use in these studies?


To Be Continued …

6 Part 6 of this article can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/01/26/3129/

11 In this article, we are treating “scientific curiosity” which motivates inventing useful machines, experimenting to achieve quicker results or more efficient, successful processes and methods, etc. These investigations are generally not evil in themselves but are a lower, practical goal, as compared to the truth about the causes of things.

But the word “curiosity” is also used to mean something sinful and lower than the “scientific curiosity” discussed here. This lower curiosity is the useless and idle desire to know about people or things that do not concern one’s self. This is also called “nosiness” and refers to things such as the desire to know one’s neighbor’s private affairs, or seeking to discover the gossipy details of the private lives of celebrities. Such idle curiosity, which is a sin, is not the type of curiosity which is contrasted with wonder in this article.

12 Of course, there is nothing to prevent a man from having both wonder and curiosity about the same subject. So, by wonder, a man could want to know the causes of lightning; and by curiosity, also want to harvest its power, protect himself from it, etc. Or, curiosity could eventually cause wonder, or we suppose, wonder could degrade into mere curiosity.

13 However, some developments caused by curiosity can be evil, such as many aspects of bio-engineering, stem-cell research, vaccines developed using the bodies of murdered babies, etc.

14 Ecclesiasticus, 1:1.

15 Book of Wisdom, 7:8-9.

16 Book of Proverbs, 8:11.

17 Book of Proverbs, 7:14.

18 Book of Proverbs, 16:16.

19 St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Bk 1, Ch 2.

20 The word “speculative” comes from the Latin word, “speculari”, meaning “to observe”. The word “speculative” here refers to matters which are studied and learned because of their intrinsic value and without seeking practical application leading to action.

This is the original meaning of the word and is very different from the modern usage of the word “speculative” which means “doubtful or based on conjecture”.

21 Here is one way that St. Thomas Aquinas, Greatest Doctor of the Church, explains this point:

Man’s good [unqualifiedly] consists in the knowledge of truth; yet man’s sovereign [i.e., chief] good consists, not in the knowledge of any truth whatever, but in the perfect knowledge of the sovereign truth [i.e., God], as the Philosopher [Aristotle] states (Ethic. x, 7, 8).

Summa, IIa IIae Q. 167. A1, ad 1 (bracketed words added for clarity).

22 Romans, 1:19-20 (bracketed content added to show context).

23 Summa, IIa IIae, Q.45, a.1, Respondeo.

24 Principle and Foundation of the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius.

25 Colossians, 4:5.

26 Summa, IIa IIae, Q.45 a.3, respondeo.

27 Book of Proverbs, 9:10.

28 For a fuller explanation of the importance of studying true Ethics and Politics, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/06/10/the-blessing-of-a-true-catholic-liberal-education-part-ix/

29 Apocalypse, 1:8 (emphasis added).

Lesson #60 About the Temperaments – Part XXV – The Devil Attempts to Destroy Our Prayer-Life.

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article below is Part XXIV of the study of the temperaments, starting with the Choleric temperament. Here are links to the first twenty-three parts:

  1. Part I: Beginning our study of the choleric temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

  2. Part II: A general overview of the weaknesses of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

  3. Part III: A consideration of the pride of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

  4. Part IV: A general discussion of anger as a passion – in order to establish a foundation for studying anger in the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/lesson-39-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-iv/

  5. Part V: Concerning the motivations for anger: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/lesson-40-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-v/

  6. Part VI: Concerning what anger does to the body: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/lesson-41-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vi/

  7. Part VII: Explaining when anger is sinful: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vii/

  8. Part VIII: Explaining how being slighted provokes anger: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-viii/

  9. Part IX: Explaining how anger turns into the sin of holding a grudge: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/lesson-44-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-ix/

  10. Part X: Recommendations to help cholerics to overcome pride: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/lesson-45-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-x/

  11. Part XI: Explaining how a person sins by not using his reason: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/lesson-46-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xi/

  12. Part XII: Explaining some reasons why a choleric does not use his reason properly: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/lesson-47-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xii/

  13. Part XIII: Explaining why the choleric fears to use his reason well: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/lesson-48-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiii/

  14. Part XIV: Explaining generally how Satan targets our fallen and weakened intellects: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/lesson-49-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiv/

  1. Part XV: Explaining the passions in general, to lay the foundation for our consideration of the passion of fear: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/10/26/3050/

  1. Part XVI: Explaining fear as a passion: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/11/25/lesson-51-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvi/

  1. Part XVII: Explaining how fear works in the soul and influences all of the temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/12/29/lesson-52-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvii/

  1. Part XVIII: Explaining how pain and death are objects of fear for persons of any temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/01/26/lesson-53-temperaments-choleric-temperament-pain-and-death-are-objects-of-fearf-any-temperament/

  1. Part XIX: Explaining in what way sin is an object of fear for all temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/02/26/lesson-54-temperaments-choleric-temperament-whether-sin-is-an-object-of-fear-for-all-temperaments/

  2. Part XX: Explaining the causes of fear – applying to all temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/03/31/marys-school-of-sanctity-3/

  3. Part XXI: Explaining the effects of fear in all temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/04/26/about-the-temperaments-part-xxi-explaining-the-effects-of-fear-in-all-temperaments/

  4. Part XXII: Explaining how to order our loves so we can use the passion of fear properly, and how the devil attempts to prevent this ordering: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/05/28/about-the-temperaments-part-xxii-how-to-order-our-loves-so-we-can-use-the-passion-of-fear-properly/

  5. Part XXIII: Explanation of sloth in order to analyze this snare of Satan and to combat him: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/06/26/about-the-temperaments-part-xxiii-explanation-of-sloth-in-order-to-analyze-this-snare-of-satan/


  6. Part XXIV: Explaining more about how the devil tries to draw us away from reasoning and from the things of God: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/07/29/about-the-temperaments-part-xiv-how-the-devil-draws-us-away-from-reasoning-and-the-things-of-god/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #60 About the Temperaments – Part XXV –
The Devil Attempts to Destroy Our Prayer-Life.
How Should We Counterattack?

The Importance of Fostering a Strong Prayer Life

On many occasions, Our Lord emphasizes of the importance of prayer. He tells us to (1) persevere in prayer;1 (2) be humble in prayer;2 and to (3) trust in God saying, “And all things whatsoever you shall ask in prayer, believing, you shall receive.”3

He assures us that His heavenly Father cares about us. He taught His Apostles The Lord’s Prayer, viz. The Our Father, which includes all of these aspects. In fact, The Lord’s Prayer is the perfect prayer4 and is meant to be said with humble submission to God’s will and a desire to receive our intellectual and spiritual daily bread.

Furthermore, Our Lord instructed His Apostles (and us) to pray always. Our Lord said, “Watch ye, therefore, praying at all times, that you may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that are to come, and to stand before the Son of man” 5, and “Pray, lest you enter into temptation”.6

Since prayer is the lifting of the heart and mind to God,7 we fulfill this precept of Our Lord when we live in the presence of God and keep Him in our minds as we try to please Him in all of our thoughts and actions.


The Four Temperaments and How They Typically Affect the Soul’s Spiritual Life

As we saw in our last lesson,8 it is important to know ourselves so we can better use our inclinations to make spiritual progress and to avoid spiritual harm. This is one of the many reasons why it is crucial to discover our own particular temperament. But a person might say, “I do not know what temperament I have.” It is a major goal of this present study of the four temperaments that we will all gain a deeper understanding of the temperaments and discover our own temperament (if we have not already identified it). However, for the present, we list below some general characteristics and spiritual tendencies of persons with a predominance of one of the four temperaments:

A Choleric Tends to:

  • Be extremely high strung;

  • Be very excitable and prone to become agitated;

  • Have lots of nervous energy;

  • Allow his thoughts to race “a mile per minute” and thus he has a tendency to be superficial in his thinking. He needs to force himself to slow down and to deliberate carefully, especially to consider what is most pleasing to God. He has to force himself to relax and be calm; and

  • Be undaunted by anything and tends to be overconfident; this makes it difficult for him to cultivate a deep trust in God and also a healthy mistrust of himself.

A Sanguine Tends to:

  • Predominantly use his imagination;

  • Love beauty, especially in art and religious pictures;

  • Be easily distracted and must strive to stay focused; and

  • Be a shallower thinker and must make efforts to form the habit of probing deeper into a subject.

A Melancholic Tends to:

  • Use lots of considerations to analyze truths and to draw many conclusions;

  • Be a deeper thinker and be attracted to prayer;

  • Be prone to scruples; and

  • Be prone to worry and to a lack trust in God’s Providence; he has to make efforts to look for hope in difficulties.

A Phlegmatic Tends to:

  • Lack energy;

  • Have a hard time motivating himself, as well as feeling and showing enthusiasm;

  • Be a slow and methodical thinker; and

  • Have a difficult time observing the movements of his soul because impressions need to be repeated many times before they leave a mark.

We can see from this short list of the spiritual tendencies of each temperament that some temperaments are more prone to reflection and prayer, while others are more prone to spiritual laziness. But we must remember that no temperament is immune from the traps of the devil! WE MUST NOT FORGET that the devil’s pull to sloth can affect ALL souls although some souls fall into this trap more easily than others do. No one should disdain those souls who fall more easily into this snare. Instead, we should foster pity if we find that prayer is easier for us than for some souls who find it almost impossible to focus and pray!

We must all be on our guard. In this lesson we will look at the Life of St. Teresa of Avila and find some striking snares that Satan used on her. We will see Satan’s subtle temptations to lure her soul away from prayer. We will see how well she endured these temptations and see the ones for which she fell.

By looking at her experience we will be able to see how it is paramount for us to study ourselves and to be on high alert for anything that is detrimental to our prayer life.

Four Aspects Regarding the Spiritual Life of St. Teresa of Avila

In our present consideration of prayer and the devil’s tricks, we will consider four aspects of the life of St. Teresa of Avila:

  1. Her need to read a book in order to try to pray;

  2. Her need to see a picture in order to pray;

  3. Her description of her sloth; and

  4. Her temptation to give up mental prayer in her meditations because she was not humble and sinless enough to pray.

With the help of William Thomas Walsh, one of her biographers, and using the Rules for the Discernment of Spirits of St. Ignatius of Loyola,9 we will be able to make the necessary connections between these four aspects in St. Teresa’s prayer life. Indeed, we will see how Satan was pulling her soul one way into one form of pride and then in another direction to drag her into a different form of pride.

Mr. Walsh explains how St. Teresa was vain, was caught up in worldly friendships, and was not willing to abandon herself completely to God.10 Furthermore, although she was careful to not commit any mortal sins, she was not cautious about venial sin and did not give up occasions of sin. We will see how these things led to her downfall.

Since St. Teresa was trying to avoid mortal sin, Satan tempted her with false reasoning in a different way. As St. Ignatius explains in his Rules for the Discernment of Spirits, this is a typical tactic of the devil.11 The devil certainly did not want her to succeed in having a prayer life, so he deceived her to be disappointed that she needed to use a book to occupy her mind and needed to use a picture to touch her heart in order to move herself to make acts of love for God. Her disappointment in herself and her discouragement about her problems praying were temptations to pride.


Regarding the Need to Use a Book

She thought it was impossible for her to practice mental prayer without a book, and so she says,

Reading is of great service towards procuring recollection in anyone who proceeds in this way [viz., the way of prayer]; and it is even necessary for him, however little it may be that he reads, if only as a substitute for the mental prayer which is beyond his reach.12

And again,

My soul was as much afraid to pray without one [viz., a book], as if it had to fight against a host [i.e., an army]. With a book to help me — it was like a companion, and a shield whereon to receive the blows of many thoughts – I found comfort; for it was not usual with me to be in aridity: but I always was so when I had no book; for my soul was disturbed, and my thoughts wandered at once. With one, [viz., a book] I began to collect my thoughts, and, using it as a decoy, kept my soul in peace, very frequently by merely opening a book – there was no necessity for more. Sometimes, I read but little; at other times, much – according as our Lord had pity on me.13

Regarding Her Need to See a Picture

She expresses her disappointment in her poor imagination as follows:

God never endowed me with the gift of making reflections with the understanding, or with that of using the imagination to any good purpose; my imagination is so sluggish, that even if I would think of our Lord’s Humanity, or picture It to myself, as I used to labor to picture It, I never could do it.14

My understanding was so dull, that I could never represent in the imagination either heavenly or high things in any form whatever until our Lord placed them before me in another way.15

And again,

I was so little able to put things before myself by the help of my understanding, that, unless I saw a thing with my eyes, my imagination was of no use whatever. I could not do as others do, who can put matters before themselves so as to become recollected thereby. I was able to think of Christ only as man. But so it was; and I never could form any image of Him to myself, though I read much of His beauty, and looked at pictures of Him. I was like one who is blind, or in the dark, who, though speaking to a person present, and feeling his presence, because he knows for certain that he is present – I mean, that he understands him to be present, and believes it – yet does not see him. It was thus with me when I used to think of our Lord. This is why I was so fond of images.16

During this period of her life, Satan deluded her to such an extent that she really thought that some people just could not engage in mental prayer. She thought that such people simply did not have the ability although they otherwise had normal abilities and use of their minds. She explained in her autobiography that she thought that she and some other people simply could not engage in mental prayer.

The problem was really with her will as she saw later on. We will treat mental prayer later in this lesson.

Regarding Her Dread of Prayer – Her Sloth

Satan deluded her, moving her to a great dread and fear of prayer. These quickly led her to sloth – i.e., a distaste for the things of God and the loss of charity in the soul.

St. Ignatius of Loyola teaches us that Satan studies the soul in order to detect its weaknesses and then he attacks at those weak spots.17 This includes Satan pushing someone further in a bad direction in which he is already leaning. St. Teresa wrote,

I failed in my duty to God, because I was not leaning on the strong pillar of prayer. I passed nearly twenty years on this stormy sea, falling and rising, but rising to no good purpose, seeing that I went and fell again. My life was one of perfection;18 but it was so mean, that I scarcely made any account whatever of venial sins; and though of mortal sins I was afraid, I was not so afraid of them as I ought to have been, because I did not avoid the perilous occasions of them. I may say that it was the most painful life that can be imagined, because I had no sweetness in God, and no pleasure in the world.19

And again,

When I was in the midst of the pleasures of the world, the remembrance of what I owed to God made me sad; and when I was praying to God, my worldly affections disturbed me. This is so painful a struggle, that I know not how I could have borne it for a month, let alone for so many years.20

Later, speaking from the perspective of her better understanding of these matters after her conversion, she says,

I do not understand what there can be to make them afraid, who are afraid, to begin mental prayer, nor do I know what it is they dread. The devil does well to bring this fear upon us, that he may really hurt us. By putting me in fear, he can make me cease from thinking of my offences against God, of the great debt I owe Him, of the existence of heaven and hell, and of the great sorrows and trials He underwent for me …. I was more occupied with the wish to see the end of the time I had appointed for myself to spend in prayer, and in watching the hour-glass, than with other thoughts that were good. If a sharp penance had been laid upon me, I know of none that I would not very often have willingly undertaken, rather than prepare myself for prayer by self-recollection. And certainly the violence with which Satan assailed me was so irresistible, or my evil habits were so strong, that I did not betake myself to prayer; and the sadness I felt on entering the oratory was so great, that it required all the courage I had to force myself in.21

We can see by these quotes how the Father of lies attacks souls with great violence so he can dissuade them from practicing mental prayer. In these passages one must keep in mind that St. Teresa of Avila was primarily afflicted in her soul because she was not willing to give up worldly friendships. These are the occasions of sin to which she refers.

There were two occasions in which the Lord brought her to tears of compunction as she was beginning to convert and to change her life. Unfortunately, she viewed those tears as womanly weakness and tried to disregard them. She was choleric-sanguine in temperament and did not appreciate those precious tears as she ought to have done. In a future lesson we will come back to the dangers choleric women face when dealing with their feminine nature.

Regarding Her Temptation to Give Up Mental Prayer Because She Was Not Humble and Sinless Enough

The next form of pride Satan tempted her with was to have her believe that she would overcome her sinful tendencies without Divine aid.

She tells us,

I do not think I ever escaped so great a danger as this device of Satan, which he would have imposed upon me in the disguise of humility. He filled me with such thoughts as these: How could I make my prayer, who was so wicked, and yet had received so many mercies? It was enough for me to recite the [Divine] Office, as all others did; but as I did not do that much well, how could I desire to do more? I was not reverential enough, and made too little of the mercies of God. There was no harm in these thoughts and feelings in themselves; but to act upon them, that was an exceedingly great wickedness. Blessed be Thou, O Lord; for Thou camest to my help. This seems to me to be in principle the temptation of Judas, only that Satan did not dare to tempt me so openly. But he might have led me, little by little, as he led Judas to the same pit of destruction.22

A little later in her recounting of this horrific temptation, St. Teresa adds:

I do not think I ever gave up my purpose of resuming my prayer; but I was waiting to be very free from sin first.

Oh, how deluded I was in this expectation! The devil would have held it out before me till the Day of Judgment, that he might then take me with him to hell. Then, when I applied myself to prayer and to spiritual reading, – whereby I might perceive these truths, and the evil nature of the way I was walking, and was often importunate with our Lord in tears, – I was so wicked, that it availed me nothing; when I gave that up, and wasted my time in amusing myself, in great danger of falling into sin, and with scanty helps, – and I may venture to say no help at all, unless it was a help to my ruin, –what could I expect but that of which I have spoken?

I believe that a certain Dominican friar, a most learned man, has greatly merited in the eyes of God; for it was he who roused me from this slumber. He made me – I think I said so before – go to Communion once a fortnight, and be less given to evil; I began to be converted, though I did not cease to offend our Lord all at once; however, as I had not lost my way, I walked on in it, though slowly, falling and rising again; and he who does not cease to walk and press onwards, arrives at last, even if late. To lose one’s way is – so it seems to me – nothing else but the giving up of prayer. God, of His mercy, keeps us from this!23

We can see how insidiously clever Satan is when we consider St. Teresa’s temptations. We see how the devil had earlier lured St. Teresa into the worldly vanities into which she fell. Then because her conscience was pricking her, the devil “took her in the opposite direction” by preying upon her sensitive conscience and trying to drive her into scruples (which is another form of pride). The devil’s motive was to do anything he could to have her give up prayer because that would surely be her downfall.

The devil’s attacks on St. Teresa are interesting and instructive for us concerning the devil’s use of this same tactic especially targeting Catholics – because the damnation of a Catholic is a much greater victory for Satan (as compared to the damnation of a person outside of the Church) and such damnation mocks God’s greater goodness toward Catholics.

An Important Note about Mental Prayer. What is Mental Prayer?

Mental prayer, like all prayer, is lifting the heart and mind to God.24 This speaking to God is making an act of our will. It can be telling Him that we love Him. Our words to God do not have to be elaborate. We simply can tell Him what we are thinking. It is not that He doesn’t already know this, but He wants us to desire to tell Him. He wants us to cooperate with Him in the work of our salvation.

Thus, mental prayer is dependent upon our actions. It is important to keep in mind that St. Teresa really had the human ability to collect her thoughts and say something to God. She explains how she was fooled by the fear (with which Satan deluded her) of trying to gather her thoughts and simply to open her heart to speak to God. She was simply resisting God’s call to give Him her whole heart. Once she was willing to abandon her heart to God, her friendship with Him grew to a beautiful mystical marriage.25

St. Teresa herself has this to say as a lesson we should learn from her experience:

One must humbly ask himself to consider (1) what the world is; (2) what he owes to God; (3) the great sufferings of God for him; (4) his own scanty service in return; and (5) the reward God reserves for those who love Him.

If one considers these things then, he learns how to defend himself against his own thoughts and against the occasions and perils of sin.26

We should be grateful to God for allowing us to have knowledge of the wonderful lives of the saints in order to learn how they cooperated with God in their salvation. God is marvelous in His Providence and His sculpting of souls. What a great inspiration for us all!

A Preview…

We want to learn, as did St. Teresa of Avila and the other saints, the fruits of avoiding worldliness. In our next lesson we will look further into how we can know ourselves better in order to help us to avoid worldliness, so that we can foster and preserve a solid prayer life and to grow in friendship with God.

1 For help and encouragement to persevering in prayer, read this short article: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/05/01/be-assured-your-prayers-are-always-answered-so-persevere/

2 “The prayer of him that humbleth himself, shall pierce the clouds”. Ecclesiasticus, 35:21.

3 St. Matthew’s Gospel, 21:22.

4

For a greater appreciation of The Our Father and for help learning to pray it more perfectly, read this short article: https://catholiccandle.org/2022/09/22/if-you-want-to-say-the-most-effective-prayer-say-the-our-father/

5 St. Luke’s Gospel, 21:36.

6 St. Luke’s Gospel, 22:40.

7 To better understand the essence of prayer, read this short article: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/10/cc-in-brief-essence-of-prayer/

10 For example, see, St. Teresa of Avila, by William Thomas Walsh, Bruce Publishing Co., Milwaukee, ©1943, pages 75, 84-85.

11 St. Ignatius explains:

In the persons who are going on intensely cleansing themselves from their sins and rising from good to better in the service of God our Lord, each spirit uses a method contrary to the one he used in the first Rule, for then it is the way of the evil spirit to bite, sadden and put obstacles, disquieting with false reasons, that one may not go on; and it is proper to the good [spirit] to give courage and strength, consolations, tears, inspirations and quiet, easing, and putting away all obstacles, that one may go on in well doing.

Rule #2 of the Rules for the Discernment of Spirits Week One of the Spiritual Exercises.

12 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 4, ¶12.

13 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 4, ¶13.

14 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 4, ¶10.

15 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 9, ¶6.

16 Taken from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 9, ¶7.

17 St. Ignatius explains:

The enemy’s behavior is like that of a military leader who wishes to conquer and plunder the object of his desires. Just as the commander of an army pitches his camp, studies the strengths and defenses of a fortress, and then attacks it on its weakest side, in like manner, the enemy of our human nature studies from all sides our theological, cardinal, and moral virtues. Wherever he finds us weakest and most in need regarding our eternal salvation, he attacks and tries to take us by storm.

Rule #14, of the Rules for the Discernment of Spirits Week One of the Spiritual Exercises.

18 St. Teresa is not saying here that she was perfect. When she says “my life was one of perfection” she refers to the fact that she was bound by the vows in the religious life. This life is called the “life of perfection” because this life has perfection as its goal and because this life is ordered more directly to lead a person to becoming perfect, as compared to the life of a layman. Here is how St. Thomas explains this distinction:

One is said to be in the state of perfection, not through having the act of perfect love, but through binding himself in perpetuity and with a certain solemnity to those things that pertain to perfection. Moreover, it happens that some persons bind themselves to that which they do not keep [viz., unfaithful religious], and some fulfil that to which they have not bound themselves [viz., spiritual laymen], as in the case of the two sons (Matthew 21:28-30), one of whom when his father said: “Work in my vineyard,” answered: “I will not,” and “afterwards . . . he went,” while the other “answering said: I go . . . and he went not.” Wherefore nothing hinders some from being perfect without being in the state of perfection, and some in the state of perfection without being perfect.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.184, a.4, Respondeo (bracketed words added for clarity).

19 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 8, ¶1 [bold and italic added for emphasis].

20 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 8, ¶2.

21 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 8, ¶10.

22 Quoted from the Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 19, ¶16, [emphasis added; bracketed word added for clarity].

23 Quoted from The Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 19, the end of ¶17, & ¶¶ 18-19 [bold and italic added for emphasis].

24 For a further explanation of mental prayer including meditation, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/09/03/lesson-2-meditation-how-why/

25 Concerning this mystical marriage of the soul with Christ, to which all souls in the state of grace are called, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2019/06/20/our-souls-should-be-docile-brides-of-christ/

26 Quoted from The Autobiography of St. Teresa of Avila, Ch. 4, ¶11.

Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

God Sends to Us Life’s Blows and Disappointments for Our Own Good

St. Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church, invokes the teaching of Pope St. Gregory the Great, Doctor of the Church, about the Crosses that God sends for our own good:

Constant temporal success is a sure sign of
eternal damnation.

St. Anthony of Padua, Sermon for the 6th Sunday after Pentecost, quoting Pope St. Gregory the Great, from his work entitled de Moralis, XXVI, 18:35.

The 2026 SSPX Consecrations Do Not Change the Fact that…The SSPX is Still Liberal!

Most of the Catholic world has heard the news that the SSPX consecrated four new bishops on July 1st, 2026, in Econe, Switzerland.

We at Catholic Candle are concerned that even many Catholics who consider themselves Traditional and have tried not to compromise, may perhaps be confused or even deceived by these new consecrations. Some people might argue thus: “After all, does not the Catholic world desperately need more Traditional Catholic bishops? There is a great shortage of bishops who are Latin-Mass and non-liberal. At least these consecrations were a wonderful thing!” Indeed, the “conservative” media, the friends of the “new” SSPX (such as LifeSiteNews) are ablaze with stories and coverage supporting the consecrations.

Further, some might even take a stronger position, something like this: “Rome is clearly even more evil and modernist today than it was in 1988 under Pope John Paul II. So these new consecrations are not only justified, but they are a sure sign that the SSPX has given up its decades of past liberalism, has given up trying to make a practical deal with modernist unconverted Rome, and has regained the no-nonsense attitude of Archbishop Lefebvre near the end of his life. Since this is the case, maybe we should consider attending the SSPX again.”

Below is a two-part article which will show these above conclusions to be great mistakes. Here is a summary:

PART ONE We will begin with a brief reminder of the critical lessons Archbishop Lefebvre learned in dealing with conciliar Rome and the modernist popes, and his resulting militant but charitable mindset and convictions.

PART TWO: Then we will contrast Archbishop Lefebvre’s wise approach in the final years of his life with the behavior and words of the “new” SSPX leaders beginning after Archbishop Lefebvre died, and continuing to the present. We will see that the SSPX’s serious liberalism continues up to the present time (2026).

CONCLUSION: Thus the “new” SSPX is still a liberal organization. Those who have remained in the “new” SSPX until now, over 14 years since the scandals became plain to see (in 2012), are condoning and supporting the SSPX liberalism. But consecrating new bishops in 2026 (who are themselves liberal) on behalf of a liberal organization – far from helping – only makes that liberal organization more likely to continue, and to continue to attack Genuine Catholic Tradition. Thus the 2026 consecrations themselves are the acts of liberals promoting their own liberal group. Nobody should think the SSPX has “turned around” just because there are new bishops. Much less should anyone think it is safe to return to the SSPX.

(In a future article, Catholic Candle will show that the SSPX has for years been continually eroding the central argument and justification for its own continued existence: the state of necessity and supplied jurisdiction. The issue of this erosion is important, and closely related to this present article.)

PART ONE: Archbishop Lefebvre Learned Lessons and Gained Wisdom

In any father-son relationship, it would be very difficult and painful for the son to see his father do and say evil and deranged things. Yet it would be very unlikely that a 16-year old son would suddenly “move out of his father’s home” the first time his father comes home stone-cold drunk and starts throwing furniture around. Rather, the loving son would likely retain hope through even more of such episodes and dangers, not only defending himself each time, but trying over and over again to help his father to see clearly afterwards. Things would likely continue this way until the son’s very life was threatened, and/or that son’s hope and trust in the father’s recovery all but disappeared. At that point, the son would realize – for his own sake – that he must remove himself from the practical control of the father by placing physical distance between them. Moving out would, of course, not mean the son thinks that his father no longer has any authority over him. Rather, the son moves out simply because he sees he must not allow that dangerous father to put him (the son) in practical danger by allowing him to misuse his authority through evil actions, commands, and bad examples.

The case of Archbishop Lefebvre and the conciliar popes is similar to this illustration, but is incomparably more serious. With the drunk father, it was just the son, and just his bodily life in danger. But with the conciliar popes, it is the entire human element of the Church put in danger, and not merely bodily, but put in danger of losing their immortal souls for all eternity. For at least the drunk father never sat down and insisted his son also get drunk and sin. But that is just what modernist Rome has done to the human element of the Church for 60+ years, attempting to make Catholics accept the heretical documents of Vatican II,1 the new mass, and all the other rotten fruits of Vatican II.

During the Second Vatican Council and all through the 1970s and 1980s, Archbishop Lefebvre was amazed at the innumerable and shocking scandals of the modernist popes (most notably Popes Paul VI and John Paul II). These popes were methodically implementing what Vatican II taught. Archbishop Lefebvre saw that these popes were clearly “stone-cold drunk” (as it were) with modernism, and that they demanded that the entire Church believe the same things. Archbishop Lefebvre tried in true charity for many years to help these popes (and modernist Roman clergy) and to protect the true Traditional Catholic Faith. He met numerous times with them and wrote many letters, hoping they would come to see reason and clear Traditional Catholic doctrine.

A Critical Turning Point for Archbishop Lefebvre

But – and here is the key point: eventually, he came to the firm conclusion that, just as was true of Pope Paul VI before him, Pope John Paul II and his staff also were completely unreceptive to the truth. Instead, they were firmly and hopelessly committed not only to the heretical and deadly documents of Vatican II, but also to the destruction of virtually all that is good and holy in the Church.

Traditional Catholics could never over-emphasize the importance of this “ah-ha!” moment – this tremendous grace in which Archbishop Lefebvre saw that he should never again work with Rome until it converts. The entire Church (including each of us) has been the beneficiary of his discovery and subsequent resolve. He summed up his more guarded, wiser mindset in a number of interviews. First, let’s consider the interview given shortly after the 1988 consecrations, including these famous words which we would all do well to memorize:

Interviewer: What do you think of a possible re-opening of the dialogue with Rome?

Archbishop Lefebvre: We [Rome and I] do not have the same outlook on a reconciliation. Cardinal Ratzinger sees it as reducing us, bringing us back to Vatican II. We see it as a return of Rome to Tradition. We don’t agree; it is a dialogue of death. I can’t speak much of the future, mine is behind me, but if I live a little while, supposing that Rome calls for a renewed dialogue, then, I will put conditions. I shall not accept being in the position where I was put during the [early 1988] dialogue. No more. I will place the discussion at the doctrinal level [saying the following to the pope, if he asks the SSPX to return to talks]: “Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you? Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these Popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti-Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors, it is useless to talk! As long as you do not accept the correction of the Council, in consideration of the doctrine of these Popes, your predecessors, no dialogue is possible. It is useless.” Thus, the positions will be clear. … What opposes us is doctrine; it is clear.”2

A few notes on the above quote:

  • Archbishop Lefebvre did not make this decision merely because he was “tired of these talks” or from some other personal motive of inconvenience or temporal concern. Rather, he did so because he realized that it is deadly, when dealing with a smooth-talking and tricky enemy, to continue “rubbing elbows” and engaging in dialogue. We must remember that just about any of us would be quite nervous and unable to think clearly if we ourselves were sitting in the office of the most powerful man on earth, the Vicar of Christ (yes, even the destroyer-popes), surrounded by the top Vatican officials. Our filial fear of our father would be present.

    On top of that, these Roman diplomats are very experienced with words and pressure techniques. For proof of how dangerous it is to talk with the modernist Romans, consider this: During the talks, Rome at one point even convinced Archbishop Lefebvre himself to put his signature on a deadly practical agreement which would have proven a death-warrant for the SSPX and all of Catholic Tradition.3 Through a great grace no doubt, he quickly realized his grave mistake, and rescinded his agreement the next day.

  • In the quote above, Archbishop Lefebvre used the conciliar-invented and nonsensical phrase “full communion”. He did so not because he really thought there exists such a distinction as “full” and “partial” communion with the Church (he explicitly denied that many times). Instead, he quotes that phrase to the Romans as a sort of tongue-in-cheek technique, using the conciliar popes’ own terminology against them (to help them, not to hurt them).

The same point is drawn out even more explicitly in another interview Archbishop Lefebvre gave a few months later:

  • They have to stop with their ecumenism; they have to bring back the true meaning of the Mass, restore the true definition of the Church, bring back the Catholic meaning of collegiality, and so on. I expect from them a Catholic, and not a liberal, definition of religious liberty. They must accept the encyclical Quas Primas on Christ the King, and the Syllabus [of Pope Pius IX]. They must accept all this, because this is, from now on, the condition determining all new discussions between us and them.”4

  • If ever there were a willingness from Rome to resume discussions, this time, I will be the one to set down the conditions. As Cardinal Oddi said, ‘Archbishop Lefebvre is in a strong position.’”5

One might object: “Good heavens, Your Excellency, how in the world is Rome ever going to convert if we Catholics refuse to talk with them and convince them of their errors?” Archbishop Lefebvre certainly did not accept this naïve reasoning (which he knew some of his priests held). In an interview, he reminded us all of the important truth that, “It is not the subjects that make the superiors, but the superiors who make the subjects.”6 Besides, he came to realize that modernism is such a fatal disease that Rome could only be converted by Our Lord’s power and grace obtained by the intercession of Our Lady. Besides, Rome already had all the documents it needed at its fingertips, all the persuasion given in the countless previous meetings and letters from Archbishop Lefebvre himself. Clearly no human means worked in his attempts to convert his superior, the pope.

Archbishop Lefebvre followed up with more interviews and statements, emphasizing how bad it would be to “make a deal” with modernist Rome, stating:

  • It is dangerous to put oneself into the hands of the conciliar bishops and Modernist Rome. It is the greatest danger threatening our people. If we have struggled for twenty years to avoid the conciliar errors, it was not in order, now, to put ourselves into the hands of those professing these errors.7

  • It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this conciliar church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith.”8

  • The See of Peter and the posts of authority in Rome are being occupied by anti-Christs.9

  • We must no longer engage in dialogue with the Roman authorities. They only want to bring us back to the [Vatican II] Council; we must have no dealings with them.10

Take good note how Archbishop Lefebvre does not shrink from using the strongest of terms such as ‘antichrist’. This is to teach us just how dangerous modernist Rome is, as well as to show the Romans themselves true charity by telling them the great danger they are in. Keep this in mind when we consider the “new” SSPX’s words below.

Archbishop Lefebvre’s Reaction to the (Supposed) 1988 “Excommunications”

In June 1988, Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four new bishops for the SSPX. Pope John Paul II, claiming Archbishop Lefebvre’s act was disobedient and schismatic, almost instantly “excommunicated” Archbishop Lefebvre as well as the other bishops who were involved in the consecrations. It is not the intention of this article to dispel the myth that there was any validity to the purported excommunications. There are many good articles which prove conclusively that Pope John Paul II’s action was unjust, invalid, and of no effect.11

For our purposes here, let us focus on how Archbishop Lefebvre reacted to the fictitious excommunications. Keeping this in mind will help us to assess the current situation of the “new” SSPX. Here are Archbishop Lefebvre’s words:

  • We are convinced that all these accusations of which we are the object, all these penalties of which we are the object, are null, absolutely null!We take no account of them at all.”12

  • In July, 1988 – one month after the consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre paraphrased Rome’s words and his response to Rome: “‘[Rome:] Since you don’t want to come with us, we excommunicate you.’ [Archbishop Lefebvre:] ‘Very well. Thank you. We prefer to be excommunicated. We do not want to participate in this shocking work in the Church that has been carried out in the last 20 years.’”13

  • Archbishop Lefebvre knew the “excommunications” came from a pope acting on behalf of a new church (the conciliar church) and new religion (the conciliar religion), which were born during Vatican II. Here is his explanation: “But the Church [acting] against her past and her Tradition is not the Catholic Church; this is why being excommunicated by a liberal, ecumenical, and revolutionary Church is a matter of indifference to us.14

But it was not just Archbishop Lefebvre who alone had this spirit and correct thinking. All the top leadership of the SSPX worldwide also saw the truth and had the correct militant Catholic attitude at that time. In a 1988 letter to Cardinal Gantin, Fr. Franz Schmidberger (the Superior General of the SSPX) and all the District Superiors, Seminary Rectors, and Superiors of Autonomous Houses of the SSPX worldwide all asked Rome to also be “excommunicated” alongside Archbishop Lefebvre and the newly-consecrated bishops, so little did these SSPX leaders care about such an apparent “stain”. They wanted to help souls to see how evil Rome was, to show the unanimity of the top SSPX leadership, and most importantly, to show Catholics what they should do if the shepherd turns into a wolf. Here is what they wrote to Rome:

[W]e have never wished to belong to this system which calls itself the Conciliar Church, and defines itself with the Novus Ordo Missæ, an ecumenism which leads to indifferentism and the laicization of all society. Yes, we have no part, nullam partem habemus, with the pantheon of the religions of Assisi; our own excommunication by a decree of Your Eminence or of another Roman Congregation would only be the irrefutable proof of this. We ask for nothing better than to be declared out of communion with this adulterous spirit which has been blowing in the Church for the last 25 years; we ask for nothing better than to be declared outside of this impious communion of the ungodly. We believe in the One God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, and we will always remain faithful to His unique Spouse, the One Holy Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church … To be therefore publicly associated with the sanction [i.e., “excommunications”] which strikes the six15 Catholic bishops, defenders of the faith in its integrity and totality, would be for us [i.e., the other top SSPX leadership] a mark of honor and a sign of orthodoxy before the faithful.16

While Archbishop Lefebvre was alive, the (old and good) SSPX was at its height. This was especially glorious in the 1980s and 1990s. There was a worldwide and consistent fighting spirit across the SSPX.17 Its media outlets, pulpits, magazines, books, and nascent websites consistently lit up in reaction to the scandals of Rome and the popes, exposing error, and teaching the opposing truths. It was a beautiful time most of us perhaps took for granted.

Archbishop Lefebvre died in March, 1991, just a few years after providing the Church four new bishops in what he called “Operation Survival”.

Let us recall critical truths here, to prepare for PART TWO of this article:

  • Until his dying breath, Archbishop Lefebvre never once spoke with regret of the consecrations;

  • Nor did he express any fear of the supposed excommunications. Rather, he spoke about them with disdain.

  • Nor did he take back his words that he would never again deal with Rome until Rome converted.

Conclusion of PART ONE: Archbishop Lefebvre’s actions and words were a critical guidepost for us all, showing his fellow Catholics these critical lessons of how to act and think in this crisis:

  1. Be confident that it is we, not Rome, that has Catholic Tradition.

  2. We should not fear or be pressured into compromise in response to the “scare tactics” from Rome or one’s own local conciliar “bishop”;

  3. And perhaps the most important practical lesson: It is hopeless, vain, and dangerous to “talk” with superiors who do not want to profess the Catholic Truth. They will “convert” us to their errors, rather than we converting them.

Keep these truths in mind as we now assess the “new” SSPX in 2026.

PART TWO: The SSPX after Archbishop Lefebvre

In the above review, we saw that:

  1. Archbishop Lefebvre learned the critical lesson that there should be no dialogue about a practical agreement with unconverted Rome;

  2. He completely disregarded Rome’s unjust punishments; and

  3. He had no intention whatsoever of placing the (then-good) SSPX into the hands of unconverted Rome.

That review was necessary in order to correctly analyze the modern-day SSPX, including the July, 2026 consecrations.

But just talking about 1988 and Archbishop Lefebvre is not enough to be able to assess the situation of the current-day SSPX. We must undertake a mini-review of what happened to the SSPX beginning after Archbishop Lefebvre died, and continuing to the present day. Sadly, the old SSPX under its new leadership almost immediately commenced the 20+ year series of scandals which transformed it into the “new” SSPX we see today.

Various Eras of SSPX Liberalism and Decay

1991 to 2012:

An important event took place in 1994: Bishop Bernard Fellay was elected Superior General, succeeding Fr. Franz Schmidberger. This was an immediate bad sign, for the Archbishop had not thought electing an SSPX bishop as superior of the SSPX was necessary, and in fact, in the 1988 consecrations, he avoided doing this.18

But more importantly, the SSPX’s former zeal quickly began to fade. Soon after Bp. Fellay was elected, the SSPX leaders quietly abandoned the wisdom of their founder and began secret talks with Rome with the specific intention of making a practical agreement with modernist, unconverted Rome.19

Beginning almost imperceivably, the SSPX’s media outlets and pulpits soon became more and more quiet and less militant about the errors of Vatican II, the conciliar Revolution, and the popes’ scandals.

This softening was no accident: the SSPX was doing two things:

  1. It was positioning itself to be less offensive and more “loyal” to the pope. The “new” SSPX hoped to please modernist Rome so that the SSPX could obtain a practical agreement with Rome. It is awkward and uncomfortable to attack Rome while engaging in “dialogue” seeking favors from it.

  2. It was painting those same modernist popes in a better light in order to weaken the resistance of some of its own priests and laymen to making a deal with Rome.

In 2006, Bishop Fellay was re-elected as Superior General for another twelve years – and this would virtually ensure the death of the “old” SSPX, as we will now see.

2012 to 2018:

These seven years produced a Mount Everest-sized heap of shocking scandals. For our purposes here, we will give a brief history and just mention a few of those scandals.

In the summer of 2012, the world suddenly learned about some of the fruits of Bishop Fellay’s years of secret maneuverings and betrayals – which had hitherto been known only to those directly involved. In what is perhaps the biggest SSPX scandal ever, Bishop Fellay gave Pope Benedict a shocking proposal (the “2012 Doctrinal Declaration”). In this document, Bp. Fellay asked Rome to grant the SSPX certain gifts. One of these was that Rome would “lift the 1988 excommunications.” This was a scandal in itself (remember the first part of this article) as is evident from Archbishop Lefebvre and all of the SSPX leadership (at the time) considering it a badge of honor to be “excommunicated” from the conciliar church. Heretofore, Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX superiors in 1988 never considered those “excommunications” as real, and they certainly never asked for them to be rescinded. But in 2012, Bishop Fellay promised that, if Rome would “lift the excommunications”, then the SSPX would agree to officially accept the documents of Vatican II as reconcilable with Tradition (which was truly an impossibility), and to accept the new mass and the new Canon “law” as legitimate (which was impossible because evil things such as these could never be legitimate).

It became clearer and clearer that Bishop Fellay had, for many years, had his sights on a deal with Rome at all costs. The whole Traditional world was shocked and many good priests and faithful left the SSPX. In fact, some (but certainly not all) of the SSPX leadership reacted strongly, as shown in a very revealing internal letter leaked to the public in 2012. This letter was written by the other three bishops consecrated in 1988 (Bishops Williamson, Tissier, and Galarreta) to Bishop Fellay. In it, they pleaded with him to stop his destruction and suicide mission of talking with Rome, and instead to follow Archbishop Lefebvre’s wise principle: no practical agreement or talks with modernist, unconverted Rome. Bishop Fellay ruthlessly shut down those three bishops, painting them as sedevacantists and lacking Faith.20 This was the last significant defense of Archbishop Lefebvre’s policy and of Tradition we would ever hear from Bishops Tissier and Galarreta, for they soon afterwards became insignificant “yes men”, rubber-stamping all that Bishop Fellay did and said.

Shocking SSPX scandals continued at an alarming rate, not only from Bp. Fellay but from many district superiors and articles from the SSPX outlets. These scandals are well-documented in various Catholic Candle articles21, but here are a few reminders:

  • The “new” SSPX recast the conciliar revolutionaries and destroyers as being “victims” of Vatican II22 and says that the conciliar barbarians including Pope Francis “abide in the truth”.23

  • The slide continued in countless ways. The “new” SSPX followed the conciliar church by:

    • Calling heretics by the name “Christian”.24

    • Calling those persons who died for their heretical false faith by the name “martyr”.25

    • Declaring that we must continually change.26

    • Contradicting infallible Catholic teaching that the Jews committed Deicide.27

  • The “new” SSPX:

    • Softened its position on the new mass.28

    • Shifted its emphasis from fighting doctrinal errors to instead focus on the Latin Mass “culture”.29

    • Began saying kind and soft things about Vatican II.30

This period of years beginning roughly in 2012 commenced a new direction – a new marketing ploy in which the “new” SSPX continued to have doctrinal articles but those were largely in a liberal direction. Thus, there were a great many statements of the “new” SSPX proving its liberalism. But gradually the “new” SSPX began to avoid doctrinal matters in general because they were too controversial. Instead the “new” SSPX focused on positive, “happy” things such as:

  • Promoting gratitude to its own elderly priests;

  • Promoting its own confirmations, pilgrimages, camps, and (watered-down) retreats;

  • Promoting the beauty of the Mass;

  • Recounting the lives of the saints;

  • Giving a pious thought for each day or explanation of the Gospel;

  • Promoting cultural articles about Catholic art and music; and

  • Discussions – usually from conciliar “conservatives” of political news in the Church.

As explained by Fr. Jergen Wegner, who was then U.S. District Superior of the SSPX:

A final characteristic of the new style is its positivity. Devoid of any aggressive and imposing elements, we are committed to avoiding unnecessary polemics primarily we want to stand out by positive reporting ….31

All such “happy” published material avoids controversy and avoids alienating modernist Rome.

There is so much more SSPX liberalism we could catalogue. For an incomplete but longer catalogue of SSPX liberalism, go to https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/#gsc.tab=0 and click on the SSPX button.

Many priests and laymen who had left the SSPX had all they could do at that time, writing article after article to warn others. The “new” SSPX eventually expelled the last bishop who was speaking out against its liberalism: Bishop Williamson, who, although he could correctly see Bishop Fellay’s errors, could apparently not see the many serious problems of his own – problems which are documented in many Catholic Candle articles.32

2018 – 2026:

On July 11, 2018, during the 4th General Chapter at Écône, Switzerland, Fr. Davide Pagliarani was elected as the new Superior General of the SSPX for a 12-year term (2018–2030). Some faithful did not know that Fr. Pagliarani had for years been Bishop Fellay’s “right hand man” and had been ordained a priest by him. Thus some folks held out the vain hope that there would now be a return to the “old SSPX” since Bp. Fellay was now no longer superior general.

Scandals of the “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani

Why the “new” SSPX perhaps now merely APPEARS more conservative than in past years

One way to categorize scandals is whether they are commissions (things said and done) or omissions (things not said or done). During Bishop Fellay’s 24-year tenure, we saw countless scandals of both kinds, which caused many good priests and faithful to leave the SSPX.

Let us now examine both the commissions and omissions during Fr. Pagliarani’s tenure from 2018 to 2026. This will “put the nail in the coffin” to the myth that the “new” SSPX has “turned around”.

We will begin with the commissions because we want to leave the end of this article to expose the more difficult-to-detect omissions.

1. Scandalous Commissions under Fr. Pagliarani

During Fr. Pagliarani’s tenure (2018 to the present 2026), there perhaps have not been as many commissions. (The Catholic Candle team stopped carefully watching and analyzing the “new” SSPX liberalism at some point around 2017; so we do not have as thorough a list as we would like to provide.) Nevertheless, there have been enough to scandalize faithful and informed Catholics. Catholic Candle posted an article in March of 2025 entitled, 21 Examples of Liberalism in the “New” SSPX.33 The “new” liberal SSPX has never publicly retracted any of this liberalism, as is their duty.34

The “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani has added the following additional scandals:

  1. The SSPX previously taught the truth that the rubella vaccine and other vaccines developed through abortion are always sinful.  By contrast, the “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani now says not only that this same rubella vaccine is justifiable for some people, but also that the COVID “vaccines”, which were also developed through abortion, are also justified.  The SSPX’s new position is wrong, liberal, and contradicts its own prior teaching on vaccines developed through abortion.35 

  2. The “new” SSPX, rather than putting Bishop Fellay somewhere he can do no more damage, has instead retained him in an important role of SSPX leadership – that of First Counsellor General of the SSPX General Council. This shows the continuation of the liberalism that Bp. Fellay promoted.

  1. The “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani has for years now had deals in place with modernist conciliar ‘bishops’ to use diocesan conciliar buildings in which to pray and say Mass. For example, a conciliar “bishop” in Fribourg, Switzerland had granted the “new” SSPX permissions to use certain “sacred” buildings of his diocese, and the “new” SSPX began taking advantage of those permissions as far back as 2019.36 But that same “bishop” withdrew those permissions in July, 2026, in response to the “new” SSPX’s consecrations.37 Multiple Catholic Candle articles have shown that there are many reasons why it is a great evil and scandal to use the buildings of the conciliar Revolution, including that sacrileges regularly take place in those buildings, and the danger to the Faith of those who enter and pray in those buildings.38

  2. The “new” SSPX now promotes the false conciliar “apparition” at Akita, Japan.39

  3. The “new” liberal SSPX promotes conciliar “saints” and the conciliar “canonization” processes, e.g., of Annella Zervas40, an American nun who is currently being promoted in the conciliar church’s processes for “canonization”, and for whom the conciliar church appointed a woman postulator.41

  1. The “new” SSPX, (which Rome has once again declared to be “excommunicated” in 2026), has reacted to Rome’s decree of “excommunication” in a way that was the very opposite of the militant and Catholic way Archbishop Lefebvre did in 1988. We saw in the first part of this article multiple quotes from Archbishop Lefebvre and the top SSPX leaders that they considered the 1988 “excommunications” to be nothing, proclaiming them null and void, even proud to have received them. Further, Archbishop Lefebvre knew that the “excommunication” came not from the Catholic Church, but from the conciliar church: “This is why being excommunicated by a liberal, ecumenical, and revolutionary Church is a matter of indifference to us.”42 By contrast, in July 2026, the “new” SSPX leaders even submitted a canonical appeal to Rome’s decree of excommunication. The “new” SSPX filed this request to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on July 11, 2026, in an attempt to suspend and even stop the (supposed) legal force of Rome’s ruling of excommunication.43 This legalistic approach is a scandal to Catholics:

  • By doing this, the “new” SSPX implicitly denies the existence of the conciliar church, and instead, continues its pattern (for over 10 years) of not distinguishing the Catholic Church from the conciliar church.44

  • By doing this, the “new” SSPX implicitly denies that they are at war with modernist Rome – for enemies at war do not file legal petitions seeking the help of the enemy.

  • Pope John Paul II’s horrific 1983 Code of Canon Law includes many evil precepts.  But the “new” SSPX in this 2026 appeal process quotes and relies upon only the 1983 Code, and does so in perhaps the most official correspondence to date with Rome.45  This informs the world that it is okay to use the terms and rules of the enemy, in order to get what you want. 

  1. The “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani has continued to rely upon and has never rejected the faculties for confessions and marriages it received from Pope Francis under the tenure of Bishop Fellay.

  1. The “new” SSPX under Bp. Fellay began calling the new mass “Holy Mass”.46  Now, under Fr. Pagliarani, the SSPX calls the Traditional Mass by its conciliar name, viz., the “Extraordinary Form” 47 

2. Scandalous Omissions under Fr. Pagliarani

Omissions are by nature harder to recognize than commissions. For example, it is easy to spot the scandal of a priest who says in a sermon that “all religions are good and are willed by God.” Such things are even easier to spot if repeated over and over. (Hopefully, we would not keep coming back week after week to see if the priest did so!)

But the following is a rarer “catch”, for a hypothetical person to exclaim: “I just love Fr. Jones’ sermons – week after week he always talks about St. Thomas Aquinas, virtues, and charity. It is all so beautiful and inspiring. I feel like I am in heaven after I leave Church. (… long pause – grace enters in …) Hmmm…. But come to think of it, he rarely or even never talks about the errors of Vatican II that threaten us all, like Archbishop Lefebvre so frequently did...” This person has correctly recognized a serious omission. This sort of “Aha! moment” is much rarer, again because it is harder to spot omissions in general, but also because most of us are not as vigilant as we should be. All it takes for a person or parish to become liberal is to not regularly hear and be warned about those errors.

Here is another thought experiment. Imagine that “Pope Pius XIII” is elected after Pope Leo XIV dies. Suppose on the good side, Pope Pius XIII commits no modernist scandals, states good general doctrine, and even commands all bishops and priests to allow the Tridentine Mass with no restrictions. In short, suppose he does no commissions to shock even Traditional Catholic sensibilities. But suppose further that this pope says and writes absolutely nothing to explicitly condemn the previous 60+ years that elapsed since Vatican II – no condemnation of the rotten Vatican II documents themselves, no condemnation of the evil novus ordo rite of mass, and no condemnation of the infinitude of scandals of the modernist destroyer-popes that immediately preceded him, and so on. What should we think of this new pope? Is he a good pope? He is not! He is still a bad pope, because he is grossly negligent in his duty. Public scandals and problems must be corrected thoroughly, publicly, and as soon as possible, to avoid the loss of souls.48 Imagine the confusion of Catholics under this pope’s reign: “So what’s the bottom line: Was Vatican II right in all its teachings, or were all the previous popes? Should I go to the new mass or the Tridentine mass? Both are allowed everywhere and are easy to find now.” There would be countless other serious confusions, e.g., about the New vs. the Old Canon Law, and so on.

First omission under Fr. Pagliarani: failure to correct Bishop Fellay’s scandals

Just as in the “Pope Pius XIII” example above, the “new” SSPX has never distanced itself from, or made public retraction / reparation / correction of, any of the shocking scandals of the 24 years in which Bishop Fellay was the superior of the SSPX (1994-2018). These scandals were so numerous and many are so serious that almost any one of them could be enough in God’s eyes for a bishop or superior to lose his soul at his judgment. Yet, we are not aware of even a single SSPX article written since Fr. Pagliarani became superior general that states, “We were wrong about [such-and-such words and actions], and we seriously endangered many souls for years. We unjustly punished good priests and persecuted good faithful. Now we see that [the opposite] is the right thing to do and say”, etc.

Second omission under Fr. Pagliarani: failure to follow Archbishop Lefebvre ’s wisdom

Recall in the first part of this article that Archbishop Lefebvre learned the important lesson to never again “dialogue” with Rome without proof of its conversion, for he realized that nothing but great harm to souls could come out of doing so. The “whole world” knows that Bp. Fellay ignored that wisdom and persistently attempted49 to make a practical deal with unconverted Rome. But many people wrongly think Fr. Pagliarani has completely reversed that policy and returned to Archbishop Lefebvre’s wisdom.

The truth is that at best one might argue that Fr. Pagliarani has merely “suspended” Bp. Fellay’s policy of talks, while leaving the “window open” for Rome to see that “we are ready when you are ready”.

We can see this clearly by analyzing a February 18th, 2026 letter that the “new” SSPX wrote to Rome.50 The historical context of that letter is this:

  1. In 2019, only six months after Fr. Pagliarani took the reins of the “new” SSPX, he reached out to unconverted Rome under Pope Francis, asking for new talks.51 It was he that asked for these talks, not Rome. On the good side, the subject of the letter was clearly to discuss doctrine. (And that makes it better than Bp. Fellay’s maneuverings which were merely to make a practical deal without doctrinal agreement.) But on the bad side, in this letter Fr. Pagliarani follows nothing of the firm decision and wisdom of Archbishop Lefebvre. That is, he omits to ask Rome: “Before we agree to talk, answer me this: Have you converted? Do you accept the truth the pre-Vatican II popes consistently taught?” In any case, Rome did not respond to the “new” SSPX’s request to dialogue.

  2. Seven years passed. No doubt the “new” SSPX was in a serious quandary of its own making. During this time, the “new” SSPX would be reflecting: “We hesitate to offend Rome by consecrations because we want to be accepted into the conciliar church and get lots of favors. But on the other hand, our remaining two bishops are soon going to die and then we’ll be helpless!” They made their decision: on February 2, 2026, the SSPX wrote to Rome (now under Pope Leo XIV) and announced that the “new” SSPX intended to consecrate bishops without a papal mandate.

  3. In response, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, invited SSPX Superior General Fr. Pagliarani to Rome for talks. The SSPX knew well that this Cardinal Fernandez was a modernist who had also written grossly impure books, and is guilty of many other grave scandals.

  4. Nevertheless, the “new” SSPX accepted the invitation, and the meeting took place on February 12, 2026. Once again, the “new” SSPX asked Rome nothing about whether it would accept true Catholic doctrine before talking.

  5. Six days after the meeting, on February 18th, 2026, Fr. Pagliarani wrote a follow-up letter back to Rome. It is that letter we analyze below.

Analysis of the February 18th, 2026, letter of the SSPX to Rome

Instead of reproducing the entire letter, we will provide excerpts. But we encourage all to read the letter in its entirety, at this link: https://fsspx.news/en/news/letter-father-pagliarani-cardinal-fernandez-57309

In that letter, Fr. Pagliarani’s SSPX writes the following:

  • “… This was precisely my intention in 2019, when I suggested a discussion during a calm and peaceful time, without the pressure or threat of possible excommunication, which would have undermined free dialogue—as is, unfortunately, the situation today. … We both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally … [and that] the texts of the [Second Vatican] Council cannot be corrected, nor can the legitimacy of the liturgical reform be challenged

    Note: The SSPX says that both sides know that there is no way to agree doctrinally, yet the SSPX seeks to continue meeting and dialoguing. What could another meeting accomplish except a practical agreement without a doctrinal agreement, to put the SSPX under the direct practical control of modernist Rome?

  • The “new” SSPX frames doctrinal discussions as merely ‘desirable’ and ‘useful’, rather than essential. But we already know that for Archbishop Lefebvre, it became a matter of principle that he would no longer talk with unconverted Rome. Yet the “new” SSPX writes this to Rome: “For the Society’s part, a doctrinal discussion has always been – and remains – desirable and useful.

  • The “new” SSPX pretends that Rome genuinely loves the Truth and the salvation of souls. The “new” SSPX is patronizing and scandalous when it writes: “Indeed, even if we [viz., the SSPX and Rome] do not reach an agreement, fraternal exchanges allow us to better know one another, to refine and deepen our own arguments, and to better understand the spirit and intentions behind our interlocutor’s positions—especially their genuine love for the Truth, for souls, and for the Church. This holds true, at all times, for both parties.”

    Note: Although we would not judge or declare that we know that the conciliar hierarchy consciously hates souls and hates the Church, nonetheless, virtually everything they do attacks souls and attacks the Church. So this claim (viz., love of souls and the Church) is contrary to all objective evidence whatever might be their subjective, interior intent. It is as incongruous as watching a man stab people with a butcher knife and say “we know that he and we can agree on loving people and loving life.”

  • The “new” SSPX is firstly concerned with the welfare of the SSPX, not the Common Good: Fr. Pagliarani writes: “More recently, we have written twice to the Holy Father: first to request an audience, then to clearly and respectfully explain our needs and the real-life situation of the Society.” The “new” SSPX admits here that it writes to Rome to get favors, to get approval, to convince Rome “we are doing good work!”, to get ‘regularized’. All of this is quite different than Archbishop Lefebvre’s language of telling Rome to its face that they do the devil’s work and must convert, so that Rome might then convert the world.

  • The “new” SSPX continues to pretend its own canonical situation is irregular. There is nothing wrong with the SSPX’s canonical status. All of Rome’s past attempts to illegally and unjustly suppress, excommunicate, and silence it are null and void. Archbishop Lefebvre never recognized the validity of Rome’s “punishments”. Yet the “new” SSPX has for years now continued to tell the world (and Rome) that it believes in the validity of the censures, and that is why a deal is so badly needed. The “new” SSPX exhibits this same false concern in this February 18th letter regarding the “excommunications”. It writes: “That is why, over the years, the Sovereign Pontiffs have taken note of this existence [viz., of the SSPX] and, through concrete and significant acts, have recognised the value of the good it [i.e., the SSPX] can accomplish, despite its canonical situation”. And: “It asks nothing else of you – no privileges, nor even canonical regularisation”.

  • The “new” SSPX is craven in its cowardly attempts to defend Our Lady’s honor: Our readers probably know that in 2025, Cardinal Fernandez, with the approval of Pope Leo XIV, blasphemed Our Lady, telling the world to no longer use the glorious titles of Our Lady “Mediatrix of All Graces” and “Co-Redemptrix”. The “new” SSPX closes this February 18, 2026 letter, apologizing to those same modernist Romans as it faintheartedly defends her honor: “I pray for you in particular to the Holy Ghost and – do not take this as a provocation – His Most Holy Spouse, the Mediatrix of all Graces.

Contrast all this with the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre and the “old” SSPX in 1988 after the supposed excommunications. The tone of the entire February 18 letter is fawning and begging. The “new” SSPX lacks the militancy of the old SSPX and Archbishop Lefebvre. That militant spirit is seen in the multiple quotes provided earlier in this article, showing that Archbishop Lefebvre and the entire SSPX leadership took no notice of the “excommunications” and boldly told Rome so. Also, the cringing and soft diplomatic language of the “new” SSPX embodies a great lack of charity to the Romans. By failing to tell the Romans the truth (for fear of offending them and wrecking diplomatic relations), there is less chance of them ever converting and instead, them going to hell.

Conclusion

The “new” SSPX under Fr. Pagliarani might appear (though falsely) to have “turned around” because the scandals are less obvious than those under Bishop Fellay. But careful analysis shows that nothing has really changed. The consecration of new bishops in 2026 does nothing to show that the “new” SSPX has begun to come to its senses and reject its liberalism. Rather, it just gives those four new liberal bishops a greater capacity to promote the SSPX liberalism . The entire situation is very much unlike that of the beautiful 1988 consecrations performed by Archbishop Lefebvre .

Thus, faithful and informed Traditional Catholics should continue to shun the “new” SSPX and continue to pray for its conversion.

1 All of the documents of Vatican II are evil and they contain hundreds of heresies. See, e.g., Vatican II’s promoting religious liberty in contradiction to the infallible teaching of the Church. See, e.g., https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Errors-of-Dignitatis-Humanae.pdf

See also:

2 Archbishop Lefebvre And The Vatican, interview of Archbishop Lefebvre given to Fideliter Magazine, November-December 1988 (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity). This interview is found here: https://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_II/1988-11.htm

3 In early May, 1988, he signed a sort of “truce” and practical agreement with Pope John Paul II (the “May 5th Protocol”). This agreement would have placed the SSPX under the practical control of unconverted Rome, allowing Rome to provide a replacement bishop and set up a sort of official structure for the SSPX within the conciliar church.

4 Interview in Controverses Magazine, 1988 (bracketed words added for clarity).

5 Interview in Controverses Magazine, 1988.

6 The Protocol of Agreement? No! (Fideliter, 1988, emphasis added).

7 Archbishop Lefebvre, Interview, Fideliter, 1989 (emphasis added).

8 Spiritual Journey, by Archbishop Lefebvre, ch.3.

9 Archbishop Lefebvre, Letter to his four future bishops, Aug 29, 1987 (emphasis added).

10 Interview in Controverses Magazine, 1988 (bracketed words added for clarity; emphasis added).

12 Sermon at the Episcopal Consecrations, June 30, 1988 (emphasis added).

13 Fideliter Magazine, issue 65, 1988 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to show context).

14 Words of Archbishop Lefebvre, quoted from The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre by Bishop Bernard Tissier, Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 2004, pp. 547 (emphasis added; bracketed word added for clarity).

15 Besides Archbishop Lefebvre and the four newly-consecrated bishops, this sixth bishop referred to here was Archbishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, bishop of the diocese of Campos, Brazil. He was faithful to Catholic Tradition, was co-consecrator of these new bishops, and died in April, 1991, exactly one month after Archbishop Lefebvre died.

16 Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops from the worldwide SSPX superiors, July 6, 1988 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to show context), published here: https://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/Part_I/1988-07-06.htm

17 In spite of imperfections, some internal scandals, and a great number of defections of priests to the conciliar church, to sedevacantism, and so on.

18 https://sspx.org/en/news/archbishop-lefebvres-apostolic-journey-part-2-58917?utm_source=chatgpt.com and

“Moreover, he carefully avoided consecrating the Superior General of the Society at the time, namely Father Schmidberger, to demonstrate this simple role of auxiliaries to the new bishops, who have no governing power."

SSPX statement quoted here: https://mukwonago.wi.sspx.org/en/news/archbishop-lefebvres-consecrations-sspx-video-lesson-59723?utm_source=chatgpt.com

19 Here is a brief description of the secret meetings between representatives of modernist Rome and the liberalizing leaders of the SSPX after Archbishop Lefebvre’s death: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_for_Reflection_among_Catholics

Here is the lengthy eyewitness account of one of the participants in these dialogues (after Archbishop Lefebvre ’s death) seeking this practical agreement between modernist Rome and the “new” SSPX: https://www.mollat.com/livres/681107/michel-lelong-pour-la-necessaire-reconciliation-le-groupe-de-reflexion-entre-catholiques-grec

We know about these secret dialogues because this (conciliar) participant decided to publish his memoirs. The SSPX would have preferred to keep these dialogues secret because the SSPX leadership correctly understood that Traditional Catholics would be alarmed by these scandalous negotiations.

20 This exchange of letters was made public by an SSPX priest who was alarmed by these compromises of Bishop Fellay.

21 For an incomplete but longer catalogue of SSPX liberalism, go to https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/#gsc.tab=0 and click on the SSPX button.

26

https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-simoulin-challenge-answered (2015). Quoting SSPX leader Fr. Niklaus Pfluger interview published in the SSPX magazine, Der Gerade Weg.

31 Quoted from The Last Word, published in the January/February 2012 Angelus magazine.

32 For an incomplete but lengthy catalogue of the liberalism and errors of Bishop Williamson and his group, go to https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/#gsc.tab=0 and click on the Bishop Williamson button.

35 For an analysis of why it is a mortal sin to use an abortion-tainted vaccine, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/01/01/reject-the-covid-vaccines/

This article also quotes and analyzes the SSPX’s old, traditional position and its more recent liberal position on abortion-tainted vaccines.

40 See, the SSPX Sisters in Browerville describing their pilgrimage to her gravesite. This description is included in their Summer 2026 newsletter.

42 Words of Archbishop Lefebvre, quoted from The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre by Bishop Bernard Tissier, Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 2004, pp. 547.

44 For a brief comparison of the true Catholic Church to the conciliar church, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/10/03/the-devil-v-c-ii-the-conciliar-church/

45 Archbishop Lefebvre signed the May 5th protocol and then rejected it the next day. In this bad protocol, he agreed to “respect” the 1983 Code of Canon Law. The (compromising) Fraternity of St. Peter’s protocol with Rome is worse: it states that the FSSP will “adhere” to the 1983 Code. But here in 2026, with this appeal, the “new” SSPX officially argues from the 1983 code with no disclaimers, as if they, like the Fraternity of St. Peter, fully accepted it, practically speaking.

47 Fr. Pagliarani conference, September 2019, “The Confusion of the Church and the World at the Root of the Crisis”. Here is the quote: “The institutions and the religious communities who habitually celebrate the extraordinary form of the Mass have found true stability in number and life.” (Emphasis added.) http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=4242

49 For example, recall the secret meetings between representatives of modernist Rome and the liberalizing leaders of the SSPX after Archbishop Lefebvre’s death: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_for_Reflection_among_Catholics

Here is the lengthy eyewitness account of one of the participants in these dialogues (after Archbishop Lefebvre ’s death) seeking this practical agreement between modernist Rome and the “new” SSPX: https://www.mollat.com/livres/681107/michel-lelong-pour-la-necessaire-reconciliation-le-groupe-de-reflexion-entre-catholiques-grec

We know about these secret dialogues because this (conciliar) participant decided to publish his memoirs. The SSPX would have preferred to keep these dialogues secret because the SSPX leadership correctly understood that Traditional Catholics would be alarmed by these scandalous negotiations.

50 “Letter from Father Pagliarani to Cardinal Fernández” https://fsspx.org/en/publications/letter-father-pagliarani-cardinal-fernandez-57315

About the Temperaments Part XIV – How the Devil Draws Us Away From Reasoning and the Things of God

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article below is Part XXIV of the study of the temperaments, starting with the Choleric temperament. Here are links to the first twenty-three parts:

  1. Part I: Beginning our Study of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

  2. Part II: A general overview of the weaknesses of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

  3. Part III: A consideration of the pride of the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

  4. Part IV: A general discussion of anger as a passion – in order to establish a foundation for studying anger in the Choleric Temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/lesson-39-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-iv/

  5. Part V: Concerning the motivations for anger: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/lesson-40-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-v/

  6. Part VI: Concerning what anger does to the body: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/lesson-41-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vi/

  7. Part VII: Explaining when anger is sinful: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vii/

  8. Part VIII: Explaining how being slighted provokes anger: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-viii/

  9. Part IX: Explaining how anger turns into the sin of holding a grudge: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/lesson-44-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-ix/

  10. Part X: Recommendations to help cholerics to overcome pride: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/lesson-45-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-x/

  11. Part XI: Explaining how a person sins by not using his reason: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/lesson-46-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xi/

  12. Part XII: Explaining some reasons why a choleric does not use his reason properly: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/lesson-47-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xii/

  13. Part XIII: Explaining why the choleric fears to use his reason well: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/lesson-48-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiii/

  14. Part XIV: Explaining generally how Satan targets our fallen and weakened intellects: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/lesson-49-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiv/

  1. Part XV: Explaining the passions in general, to lay the foundation for our consideration of the passion of fear: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/10/26/3050/

  1. Part XVI: Explaining fear as a passion: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/11/25/lesson-51-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvi/

  1. Part XVII: Explaining how fear works in the soul and influences all of the temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/12/29/lesson-52-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvii/

  1. Part XVIII: Explaining how pain and death are objects of fear for persons of any temperament: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/01/26/lesson-53-temperaments-choleric-temperament-pain-and-death-are-objects-of-fearf-any-temperament/

  1. Part XIX: Explaining in what way sin is an object of fear for all temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/02/26/lesson-54-temperaments-choleric-temperament-whether-sin-is-an-object-of-fear-for-all-temperaments/

  2. Part XX: Explaining the causes of fear – applying to all temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/03/31/marys-school-of-sanctity-3/

  3. Part XXI: Explaining the Effects of Fear in All Temperaments: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/04/26/about-the-temperaments-part-xxi-explaining-the-effects-of-fear-in-all-temperaments/

  4. Part XXII: Explaining How to Order Our Loves So We Can Use the Passion of Fear Properly, and How the Devil Attempts to Prevent this Ordering: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/05/28/about-the-temperaments-part-xxii-how-to-order-our-loves-so-we-can-use-the-passion-of-fear-properly/

  5. Part XXIII: Explanation of Sloth in Order to Analyze This Snare of Satan and to Combat Him: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/06/26/about-the-temperaments-part-xxiii-explanation-of-sloth-in-order-to-analyze-this-snare-of-satan/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #59: About the Temperaments – Part XXIV – Explaining More about How the Devil Tries to Draw Us Away From Reasoning and From the Things of God

Let us begin our investigation about the allurements the devil uses to drag us away from the use of our reason, as well as the great benefit and the enjoyment that come from thinking deeply. Undertaking this study is crucial if we want to form strategies to fight our arch-enemy.

In a recent lesson we considered the beautiful reality of filial love1 (i.e., the love of a son or daughter) and the satisfaction we get when using our reason and especially thinking deeply. Let us look at some initial considerations regarding filial love and careful thinking.

Some Important Considerations about Filial Love

  • Filial love brings satisfaction to the soul;

  • Filial love draws us close to the heart of God and to a deep, meaningful friendship with Him;

  • Filial love helps us to discipline ourselves and to bring order to our souls;

  • Filial love increases the soul’s hunger for God and our desire to have companionship with Him; and

  • Filial love makes our soul more disposed to understand the truths of God.

Mindful of these considerations, we are able to see how important it is to foster this kind of love in our souls.

Some Important Considerations about Using One’s Reason and Thinking Deeply

  • Reasoning (i.e., thinking deeply) strengthens man’s highest faculty, namely, the intellect;

  • Reasoning (i.e., thinking deeply) fosters a love of this faculty;

  • Reasoning (i.e., thinking deeply) helps one to increasingly appreciate God and all truth;

  • Reasoning (i.e., thinking deeply) ignites a burning hunger to know more truth.

Because of these great benefits, Satan makes every effort to distract people from using their intellects.

Sin Depends Upon the Abuse of Reason

Sin occurs when man does not use his reason for the purpose that God intended and when he puts reason’s admonitions aside (viz., his conscience) and consents to evil. Of course, the devil wants people to commit sins. Satan’s goal is the downfall of souls. He seeks sin because he knows that every sin is a step closer to his goal of bringing another soul to damn itself.

Satan strives to weaken man’s power of reasoning and to induce him to abandon the proper use of his reason. The old proverb is true, “If you don’t use it, you lose it.” Hence, when a man begins to reason less, he will soon form the habit of not reasoning well. Then, he will become progressively inclined to not think of the consequences of his actions, which, in turn, leads him to live more and more by his emotions. He will weigh things only based on how he feels, or worse yet, upon the yearnings of his base passions. . Hence, his life will become very unstable, unreasonable, and disorderly. In this way, he will increasingly lead a life of vice (as we will explain next).

Habits Can Be Stronger than Natural Tendencies

We have discussed how, with our fallen human nature, effort is needed to reason well. We weak humans are disinclined to make efforts. But we can develop good habits that can completely overcome those weaknesses and ill-directed tendencies. But for this to occur, we must work against these tendencies and force ourselves to make the effort to think and especially to think carefully.

Habits are formed by repeated actions. Repeated bad actions form a bad habit, i.e., a vice. By contrast, repeated good actions form a good habit, i.e., a virtue. Consequently, it is crucial that we resolutely make every effort to develop patterns of good actions regardless of the “protests” of our passions and without “counting the cost” to our comfort, convenience, and human respect. In this way, we can foster good habits and a life of virtue.

The devil knows these truths about us humans and so he tempts us to give up trying to form good habits. The devil knows that God created an entire spectrum of souls – each soul having its own personal tendencies and inclinations. Thus, what we treat here is the devil’s general plan of action to ruin souls. But he customizes his plan to fit each individual, tailoring his temptations and tantalizing each with a “particular individualized mix” of allurements and fears through which he strives for that individual’s ruin.

Three Things the Devil Does Not Want Us to Know: 1) God;
2) Ourselves; and 3) the Purpose for Which We Were Created.

Knowing God. The devil knows the truths about filial love and deep thinking that we considered above. The devil does not want us to think about God. He does not want us to know God and His Divine attributes. This is because the more we know God, the more we will be drawn to love Him (since He is perfectly loveable) and to unselfishly serve Him. Because the devil hates God as well as us humans, he works against us because he does not want us to have an intimate friendship with God.

Knowing Ourselves. The devil does not want us to know ourselves. True self-knowledge fosters humility and consequently fosters a love of God. Indeed, the devil wants the exact opposite of this. That is, the devil wants us to be full of pride, having an inaccurate and inflated opinion of ourselves, and to hate God. Satan wants us to pamper ourselves and make efforts only to have a life of pleasure, comfort, and honor because these pursuits will lead us to a life of vice – and ultimately to perdition.

Knowing Our End. The devil does not want us to know the purpose of our existence. Knowing our final end will foster a healthy respect for God and fear of the Lord, which in turn, will foster filial love of God. The devil does all he can to distract our thoughts from God. One of the devil’s major strategies is to encourage us to be as selfish as possible. Selfishness leads to a life of wretchedness which naturally will lead to sorrow at the spiritual good of any virtue – which is sloth (as we saw in our last lesson).2 Because sloth makes a soul reluctant to begin doing any good, one does not feel inclined to even begin making any effort to amend himself. The devil can easily convince a soul in this sorry state that, indeed, it cannot change. The devil tells this soul that it simply cannot avoid being the way that it is and that it is useless to try to improve itself.

If We Fail to Know Either God, or Ourselves, or Our End, then the Devil Has Succeeded

The devil knows that all it takes for a soul to be lost is to lose knowledge of even one of these three, although often, when a soul is ignorant of one of these, it is also ignorant of one or both of the others. Thus, the devil wages his attacks on the soul to bring that soul to become ignorant of at least one of these.

God, ourselves, and our End: these three critical areas of knowledge influence everything in our lives because our relationship with God and our neighbor depends on this knowledge. In particular, on these three truths depends our willingness to be generous with God and our neighbor.

Charity is necessary for Divine friendship, and indeed, charity is Divine friendship.3 Further, charity is necessary for salvation.4 So we can readily see how Satan wants charity to grow cold and to die in us. In fact, Satan would never want charity to exist in us at all!

So the devil likes to use the weapon of sloth and to subtly weaken souls to bring them to this vice because sloth is a vice particularly opposed to charity.5 The devil knows that persons of all temperaments have the wounds of Original Sin and so can be steadily drawn to laxity in the moral life.

But where does the devil start in his attempts to wear down the soul? Most commonly, he targets a person’s prayer life because:

Prayer is the lifeblood of the spiritual life.6

Prayer is a tremendous source of strength and spiritual growth in the soul. Prayer fosters 1) our filial love; 2) deep and careful thinking; and 3) the three kinds of necessary knowledge (discussed above). Also, these, in turn, reciprocally foster our prayer life and praying well.

But how do we pray well and counteract the devil’s attacks on our prayer life?

A Preview…

In our next lesson we will analyze the devil’s tactics to destroy our prayer life (and so also, the rest of our spiritual life). In that lesson, we will consider the importance of knowing ourselves and finding effective ways to counteract the devil’s tricks regarding prayer.

2 Read this article: Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #58 – About the Temperaments Part XXIII – Explanation of Sloth in Order to Analyze This Snare of Satan and to Combat Him: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/06/26/about-the-temperaments-part-xxiii-explanation-of-sloth-in-order-to-analyze-this-snare-of-satan/

3 For a further explanation of this truth that charity is Divine Friendship, read this article: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/06/04/sanctifying-grace-companion-charity/


4 Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, teaches this truth, following and quoting St. Augustine:


Whosoever does not possess charity is wicked, because “this gift alone of the Holy Ghost distinguishes the children of the kingdom from the children of perdition”.  


Summa, IIa IIae, Q.178, a.2, sed contra, quoting St. Augustine’s treatise on the Blessed Trinity, De Trinitate, bk.15, ch.18.

5 Here is one way St. Thomas teaches this truth: “Sorrow because of the Divine good about which charity rejoices, belongs to a special vice, which is called sloth.” Summa, IIa IIae, Q.35, a.2, Respondeo.


Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

Beware of Pride Regarding How We View Ourselves!

Esteem not thyself better than others, lest, perhaps, thou be accounted worse in the sight of God, Who knows what is in man.

My Imitation of Christ, by Thomas à Kempis, ©1982, Confraternity of the Precious Blood, 5300 Fort Hamilton Parkway, Brooklyn, N.Y. 11219, Bk.1 ch.7.


The Blessing of a True, Catholic Liberal Education – Part IX

Catholic Candle note: Below is part 9 of our exploration of the best type of education – which is a true Catholic Liberal Education. Do not confuse this education with many university programs called “liberal arts” but which are full of fluff, falsehood, and aimless so-called “cultural enrichment” courses and “humanities”.

A liberal education also does not refer to liberalism, nor is a true liberal education an indoctrination into that error of liberalism or political correctness. In fact, a true Catholic Liberal Education is the best antidote to the errors of liberalism.

As context for this ninth part of this article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier eight parts:

Previously, in part 1 of this article,1 we examined the problems we see in modern education:

  • Modern colleges do not improve the quality of their students’ minds (and their thinking ability) much or at all.


  • Most “education” is merely job training, fluff courses, and/or leftist indoctrination.


  • The students are trained to sound like someone in their field but they do more memorizing and little thinking.


  • Grade “inflation” and degree “inflation” is rampant. Grades and academic degrees do not mean much anymore.

In part 2 of this article,2 we examined, in general, what education is. We considered the human soul and the perfection of its highest faculty (i.e., power) – which is the intellect – and which is immaterial (i.e., incorporeal). We saw that our intellects are perfected through knowing eternal, unchangeable truths and their causes.

In part 3 of this article,3 after having seen what true education is, we examined the question who should perfect his intellect.

In part 4 of this article,4 having seen that modern universities do not provide a true education, we consider whether there is ever any reason for men or women to attend them.

In part 5 of this article,5 having seen that women and girls should pursue a True Catholic Liberal Education – just as men and boys should, too – we then considered what the best environment is in which women and girls should do this.

In part 6 of this article, we addressed the objection that, having seen the great value of a true Catholic Liberal Education, we should be afraid that the great blessing of this education would be a danger to our souls because it might foster in us the vice of pride.6

In part 7 of this article, we considered more fully the difference between the education which is appropriate for a free man as contrasted to the education which is appropriate for a slave.7

In part 8 of this article, we considered further how the truth perfects our minds. This shows us that we must really know the truth, not merely hold true opinions.8

At the end of part 8 of our exploration of a genuine Catholic Liberal Education, the question arose What Studies (Sciences) More-Specifically Belong in a Catholic Liberal Education? Below, in part 9, we explore this issue.


What Studies Belong in a True Catholic Liberal Education?

Part 9

Having seen that a Catholic Liberal Education is truly education and not merely fluff, job training, or indoctrination into leftist ideology, it is time to consider more specifically: What studies belong in a true Catholic Liberal Education? This canon of study has long been set out and perennially followed in Western Civilization (Christendom) by those seeking to perfect their highest faculty (their mind). Below, we outline that canon of study and some of the reasons for it. These are the studies which enable us to appreciate and to love the Life of Truth – which is the life that we should all lead.

So, let us explore an outline of what a true education should be.


We Should Study Theology

Theology is the science of God and the things intimately connected to God. There are two types of theology because there are two ways for men to come to know God. The first way is through God revealing to us truths about Himself, and this is called revealed theology. These revealed truths are found in two founts: Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

The second way to know God is through natural theology, and in this, man uses his reason alone. This latter is the sort of theology the great (non-Catholic) minds such as Aristotle pursued although they did not have the gift of Faith. But Natural Theology is important for those who have the Catholic Faith too. Thus, St. Thomas and other Doctors of the Church delve deeply into Natural Theology and St. Paul commends it too. Romans, 1:20.

Let us say a few words about each of these types of theology.


Revealed Theology

As we saw earlier,9 we should perfect our intellect by knowing the highest truths. Thus, we should especially know and study God and the things intimately connected to God.

We should study revealed theology for these two reasons:

  1. Some of these Divine truths cannot be known except by Divine revelation, e.g., the fact that God is a Trinity.

  2. Revealed theology cannot err because the Catholic Faith is infallible. Revealed truths are the most certain of all knowledge because God is the Author of those truths and directly reveals those truths to us; man is not involved in deriving these truths.

So, we should study revealed theology – which is the study of what God has revealed about Himself and also what He has revealed about things which are closely related to Himself (e.g., the universe, angels, man).


Natural Theology

Besides revealed theology, we should also study Natural Theology, i.e., the truths concerning God (or related to God) which are knowable by the light of natural reason. For example, God’s existence can be proved five ways by unaided reason. Summa, Ia, Q.2 a.3. Likewise, through reason, we can prove that God is wholly simple, He is infinitely powerful, and many other things about God.

Just as the happiness and perfection of the blessed in heaven is the knowing (the contemplation) of God’s essence, i.e., the Beatific Vision, so the knowledge which perfects our mind (our highest faculty) on earth is likewise, most of all, the knowledge of God as deeply as He can be known in this life – both by revelation and by natural reason.


We Should Study Philosophy

Metaphysics

We should study the philosophy called metaphysics because it pertains to the deepest truths we can know by reason. Metaphysics studies Being most broadly and so includes some natural theology. Metaphysics studies and defends the truth that the Good is convertible with Being. That is, they are the same in reality but different in our understanding. This truth explains, for example, how God is understood by us under various aspects which seem separate, such as that He is both good and beautiful in His very Nature even though His Nature is entirely simple.10 This truth also explains, for example, why God loves even the devils insofar as pertains to God’s Own work creating their natures and the good that He placed into their natures.

Metaphysics also defends the truths at the foundation of human learning. For example, metaphysics examines and defends the Principle of Non-Contradiction, viz., that something cannot be and not be at the same time in the same respect. This Principle of Non-Contradiction tells us, e.g., that it would be false to both say that a square is not a triangle and also that a square is a triangle. This principle is crucial and is the basis for knowing all truth and is the firm unshakable foundation upon which rests all of our knowledge.

Revealed theology, natural theology, and metaphysics are three parts of the educational plan for developing and perfecting our minds with a Catholic Liberal Education.


Ethics

Besides revealed theology, natural theology, and metaphysics, a true education should include the science of ethics, which pertains to the proper ordering of our soul and our actions in the moral life, according to reason and according to our Catholic Faith. St. Thomas explains that “The essence (or nature) of human virtue consists in this: that the movements of the soul are regulated by reason”.11

All of our thoughts, words, deeds, and omissions which are properly human and intentional (as contrasted to unreflecting and instinctive) are either good (and so are according to virtue), or are evil and sinful. Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, teaches this truth:

It belongs to the reason to direct; if an action that proceeds from deliberate reason be not directed to the due end, it is, by that fact alone, repugnant to reason, and has the character of evil. But if it be directed to a due end, it is in accord with reason; wherefore it has the character of good. Now it must be either directed or not directed to a due end. Consequently, every human action that proceeds from deliberate reason, if it be considered in the individual, must be good or bad.

If, however, it does not proceed from deliberate reason, but from some act of the imagination, as when a man [“mindlessly”] strokes his beard, or moves his hand or foot, such an action, properly speaking, is not moral or human; since [a moral or a human action] depends on the reason. Hence it will be indifferent, as standing apart from the genus of moral actions.12

A liberal education is the education that a free man should have.13 (“Liberal” comes from the Latin word “liber”, which means free.) Ethics is included in a liberal education because a free man should know how to live well and virtuously and so avoiding the slavery of sin – which is contrary to the life of a free man. As Our Lord told the Jews:

Amen, amen I say unto you, whosoever committeth sin, is the slave of sin.

St. John’s Gospel, 8:34

Thus, we should study True Ethics because:

  • this is a science proper to a free man;


  • it shows us how to live well and live according to reason; and


  • it shows us how to attain our end in life – both our natural end and our supernatural end.

Just as there exists a theology of revelation as well as a natural theology, similarly there is a Catholic ethics as well as a natural ethics. In the science of natural ethics, correct reason (even without the help of the Faith) shows us that the happy life is the life of virtue and the life of truth and reason. The Catholic Ethics which is taught by our Catholic Faith shows us the same thing, but in a manner which is in some ways more elevated to include some supernatural truths of ethics, such as the value of fasting for a supernatural motive.

Because we are one single whole, i.e., one person, our different faculties and parts intimately affect each other. Thus, a disorderly and sinful will prevents us from having the good habits which promote the practice of our devoting ourselves, like we should, to the life of truth. Further, when our mind is darkened, then this prevents us from living the virtuous and happy life that we should.

Thus, the perfection of our minds with the light of the truth goes together with the perfection of our wills with moral virtue. A disorderly intellect harms our will and a disorderly will harms our intellect. Here is how St. John of the Cross, Doctor of the Church, explains the grave effects of error in our mind, upon our will and memory:

When the soul is darkened in the understanding, it is benumbed also in the will, and the memory becomes dull and disordered in its due operation.

Ascent of Mount Carmel, Ch.8, §2.

Thus, we see that the correct understanding of ethics is necessary:

  • to achieve our practical ends of happiness both


    • here in the present life;


    • as well as, even more so, in Heaven,

but also

  • to enable us to effectively study and perfect our minds in all intellectual fields because a mind which is not enlightened by the truth:

  • Is an obstacle to avoiding sin; and

  • Results in a man’s weakness of will and dullness of memory that is an obstacle to learning.


Political Philosophy

A true Catholic Liberal Education should include political philosophy. This study of political philosophy to which we refer does not consist in matters such as “crisis management” in “politics” when this is needed by some politician who has been caught engaged in evil conduct which could end his career.

The study of political philosophy also does not involve things like:

  • how a political candidate can persuade voters to vote for him;


  • how to conduct accurate political polls;


  • how to effectively raise funds for a political campaign;


  • how to benefit special interest groups while giving voters the impression of serving them;


  • how to speak as if you agree with diverse voters who disagree with each other; or


  • any other trick to succeed in the business of practical politics.

Man is by nature a political animal, as St. Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle explain.14 This means that man is not only a social animal – viz., one who naturally lives in a group – as bees and ants do also – but he naturally organizes collectively and works with other men, using his reason for this organized, joint work.

So the science15 of politics to which we refer, is the science which examines how political animals (men) should organize and work together performing collective works which are rational and thus are natural to them. That political activity (which is political in this broad sense) is God’s Will for man and involves such cooperation and joint work which shows that God created man to live a higher life than is lived by irrational animals. (The collective activity of irrational animals is by instinct, whereas the organized activity of men is using their own reason.)

Whereas, in the science of ethics, we study the life that each individual man should lead – which is life according to reason and virtue – by contrast, political science is the study of the life that men should live collectivelyviz., the organized joint activity of rational, virtuous men united in society.

This political science investigates how virtuous men should collectively promote the Common Good, suppress evil conduct, and rectify the characters of evil men because the end/goal of collective (political) action is to make society virtuous,16 since this is the happy life.

Thus, the science of politics studies such things as:

  • What law is;


  • Whether the civil law is binding in conscience;


  • Whether revolution is morally permissible;


  • Whether “civil disobedience” is morally permissible;


  • What is the end of political life for the individual man and for society collectively?;


  • What is the life of man in society which promotes man’s good, his perfection, and his happiness both on the natural level and the supernatural level?;


  • What is the virtue of patriotism and how is it subordinate to the virtue of piety and how is it ordered by the virtue of justice?;


  • The proper operation of government according to the rule of subsidiarity;


  • What types of government are permissible; what type of government is best; and


  • How can the ruler best facilitate the formation of virtue in the citizens?

These and many other truths which are studied in the science of politics are of great value in seeing and promoting the True and the Good in society, just as the science of ethics is of great value in seeing and promoting the True and the Good in the individual.

Both of these sciences are grounded in man’s rational nature – there is neither ethics nor politics for brute beasts. Both of these sciences aid the intellectual life by fostering the orderly conditions in which the pursuit of high truth and the achievement of great good can be accomplished.


Philosophy of Nature

Besides these sciences, what else should a free man (or woman) study? He would study the principal works of creation. Here are two reasons for this:

  1. We already saw (above) that natural theology is part of a Catholic Liberal Education. But in the order of natural theology (i.e., studying these highest things known according to reason) our knowledge of Divine things comes through our knowing God as the Cause of His effects and His works in this world. In other words, our study of nature helps us in our study of natural theology, through which we understand God as the Cause of the being and of the operation of natural beings (i.e., creatures).


  2. Further, we study the chief parts of natural science, because God made us to naturally wonder about the world around us and to seek to understand God’s work of creation.

In this study of nature, we should especially study the principles of nature, e.g., things such as:

1) What is time;

2) What is place;

3) What is occurring when one substance is changed into a different substance?;

4) Whether infinite distance is possible (in the universe);

5) What is life and what is the soul, as it is present in plants and animals;

6) How does the human soul differ from the souls of other animals – its rationality and immortality;

7) What is motion; and

8) Whether Nature acts for an end or not.

These truths are much more perfecting to our minds and important to study and to know compared to such narrow topics of nature such as “What is a genetic code?”. Here are three reasons for this:

  1. The foundational truths of our world are greater in themselves than the studies of things that are less foundational;


  2. The foundational truths are more certain and less apt to be overthrown by new theories e.g., about genes; and

  3. Those matters which are less foundational depend for their true understanding upon the knowledge of those foundations underlying them. For example, the truth of the matters studied regarding the genetic code depends on the foundational understanding of what is happening when one substance changes into another.


Mathematics – viz., Geometry, Arithmetic, Music, and Astronomy

A liberal education should include the mathematical sciences. Geometry and other types of mathematics have a unique clarity because the mathematical sciences abstract from aspects of bodies which can obscure universal principles. For example, we can consider what a straight line is as a universal concept and abstracted from the fact that the lines that we see around us (e.g., on the edges of a table at which I am sitting) are slightly crooked or bumpy.

Arithmetic, as a science, is not the working out of particular problems as “532347296 divided by 34”. Rather, arithmetic considers universal truths about all numbers. Questions such as these are considered: “Is it true that any number is either prime or is measured by some prime number?” and “If three numbers are in continued proportion, and the first is square, then is the third one also square?” Considering universal truths about numbers is important. God created two different types of quantities: those like lines, circles, cubes, and other figures (continuous quantities studied in geometry). But He also ordered nature in discrete quantity (studied in arithmetic). Not only does studying arithmetic (as a science) help form the mind to be logical, but doing so is necessary to come to a more complete understanding of the reality of God’s order.

In addition to this unique clarity of the mathematical sciences, there are many aspects of the world around us which are mathematically quantifiable and so the mathematical sciences are tools to further study certain properties of nature insofar as they are quantifiable. For example, we can learn more about the properties of light and sound as they bounce off of a wall, by considering what we learned about angles in the science of geometry.

Music is a science which involves mathematics applied to musical pitches. For example, various musical intervals are characterized by different ratios, such as a musical octave having the ratio of 1:2 in the length of strings and pipes of musical instruments. That is, for example, a piano string which provides a “C” note is half as long as an otherwise-similar piano string which provides the “C” note which is one octave lower. So this string ratio is 1:2.

Likewise, astronomy, which is the study of the heavens, is mathematical in nature, since it involves angles, distances, speeds, etc. of the heavens and the bodies in the heavens. Just as music applies mathematics to sound, astronomy does so to observations of the heavens.


Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric

Logic. Early on in this course of studies, it will help a person to refine his mind by studying logic. This will help him in many ways. For example, it enables him to more carefully and explicitly understand which arguments result in a necessary conclusion, compared to those arguments which result in a conclusion which is merely probable. Further, the science of logic will enable a person to also contrast those arguments which are valid, to fallacious arguments (that conclude falsely).

Grammar. The student should also study the science of grammar because (among other reasons):

  1. Grammar is the liberal art which helps to form logical, true, and clear sentences. Since we think in words and sentences, these must be clear and grammatical in order to be cogent and to reflect nature and reality; and


  2. The process of learning is a discussion with others (as well as in our own mind) and so we must master the art of grammar in order to be clear and articulate in those discussions with others as well.

Rhetoric. Lastly, the discussions we have in our own minds and with others will be more enjoyable and profitable if we have some acquaintance with the art of rhetoric so that we can express ourselves beautifully and persuasively, as well as clearly and cogently.


The Seven Liberal Arts

The study of the seven liberal arts are sometimes thought to be the same as a liberal education. That is not true. Rather the liberal arts are the proper beginning of a liberal education.

Above, we saw that four mathematical sciences have a role in a true Catholic Liberal Education. These are: geometry, arithmetic, music, and astronomy. Traditionally, these four are collectively called the quadrivium of the liberal arts. The word “quadrivium” is a word combining the Latin prefix “quadri” with the Latin word “viae”, which mean the “four paths”.

Above, we reflected on why we should also include logic, grammar, and rhetoric in a liberal education. These three are traditionally called the trivium. The word “trivium” is a word combining the Latin prefix “tri” with the Latin word “viae”, which mean the “three paths”.

These seven intellectual disciplines are the liberal arts. In modern times, the phrase “liberal arts” (as that phrase is now usually used) has come to mean something vague such as “the humanities” or “the studies of the works of man” or “general education.”

But this is not properly what the liberal arts were or are. In the educational tradition of Christendom and the Western World (including the ancient world), the liberal arts referred to seven introductory disciplines which are valuable in themselves but which are also exceedingly helpful for developing the student’s mind to prepare him for studying the very highest subjects – philosophy and theology.

St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest Doctor of the Church, sets out the wise advice of prudent educators – telling us that students should not begin their studies with the highest truths (philosophy and theology), but rather, approach them through studying the liberal arts first.

Here are his words, advising how students should approach the study of great truths:

Concerning how to acquire the treasure of knowledge, choose to enter, not immediately into the ocean [of the knowledge of philosophy and theology] but enter by little streams that flow into the ocean, for difficult things can more easily be reached by means of the easier ones.17

These “little streams” are the seven liberal arts through which we should approach the highest truths of Faith and Reason.


Conclusions of this Article

All of the primary things studied in a true Catholic Liberal Education are works of God, not the works of man.

Above, we saw many important elements of a good Catholic Liberal Education:

  • We should perfect our intellect by knowing the highest truths. Thus, we should especially study and know God and the things most intimately related to God. We should study revealed theology, natural theology, and metaphysics.

  • Besides these highest studies, we saw that we should study the science of ethics, which pertains to the proper ordering of our soul and of our actions in the moral life – according to reason and according to our Catholic Faith. This is important because a liberal education is the education that a free man should have so that he knows how to live well, virtuously, and happily.


  • We also saw that we should study political philosophy, that is, the science of how men should live collectively according to reason and how they should organize and work together performing collective works which are suited to their rational nature.


  • Next we saw that we should study the most important parts of nature especially those which are most at the foundation of all truth about creatures, such questions as what is time, what is motion, what is a soul, what is special about the human soul, what occurs during a change of one substance to another, etc. These creatures, especially the higher ones, manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, Who designed them.


  • Lastly, we should approach the highest truths through the study of the seven liberal arts.


Looking Ahead

Wonder and wisdom are often mentioned in connection with a Catholic Liberal Education. What are wonder and wisdom and what is that connection with a true education?


To Be Continued …

6 Part 6 of this article can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2026/01/26/3129/

10 God being entirely simple means that He is not made up of multiple parts and does not have multiple aspects in His Being.

11 Here is St. Thomas’s words in Latin: “Ratio virtutis humanae consistit in hoc quod motus animi ratione reguletur”. Summa, IIa IIae Q.30 a.3.

12 Summa, Ia IIae, Q.18, a.9, Whether an individual action can be indifferent? (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

Here is the longer quote:

[Pope St. Gregory the Great] says in a sermon (Sermon #6 on the Gospels): “An idle word is one that lacks either the usefulness of rectitude or the motive of just necessity or pious utility.” But an idle word is an evil, because “men . . . shall render an account of it in the day of judgment” (Matthew 12:36): while if it does not lack the motive of just necessity or pious utility, it is good. Therefore, every word is either good or bad. For the same reason every other action is either good or bad. Therefore, no individual action is indifferent.

I answer that, It sometimes happens that an action is indifferent in its species, but considered in the individual it is good or evil. And the reason for this is because a moral action, as stated above (Article 3), derives its goodness not only from its object, whence it takes its species, but also from the circumstances, which are its accidents, as it were; just as something belongs to a man by reason of his individual accidents, which does not belong to him by reason of his species. And every individual action must have some circumstance that makes it good or bad, at least in respect of the intention of the end. For since it belongs to the reason to direct; if an action that proceeds from deliberate reason be not directed to the due end, it is, by that fact alone, repugnant to reason, and has the character of evil. But if it be directed to a due end, it is in accord with reason; wherefore it has the character of good. Now it must be either directed or not directed to a due end. Consequently, every human action that proceeds from deliberate reason, if it be considered in the individual, must be good or bad.

If, however, it does not proceed from deliberate reason, but from some act of the imagination, as when a man strokes his beard, or moves his hand or foot, such an action, properly speaking, is not moral or human, since this depends on the reason. Hence it will be indifferent, as standing apart from the genus of moral actions. …

Reply to Objection 2. … evil, in general, is all that is repugnant to right reason. And in this sense every individual action is either good or bad, as stated above.

Summa, Ia IIae, Q.18, a.9, Whether an individual action can be indifferent?

14 Aristotle’s Politics, §1252b and St. Thomas’ commentary on this passage.

15 On a future occasion, we will compare the term “science” with the term “philosophy”. But for the present, the term “science” can be understood as encompassing philosophy, theology, and any other body of knowledge whose object is eternal truth.

16 St. Thomas Aquinas, On Kingship, Book 1, ch.15.

17 Quoted from Concerning the Proper Approach for Studying (Epistola De Modo Studendi).


Here are the Latin words that he wrote:


Quia quaesisti a me, in Christo mihi carissime Ioannes, qualiter te studere oporteat in thesauro scientiae acquirendo, tale a me tibi traditur consilium: ut per rivulos, non statim in mare, eligas introire, quia per faciliora ad difficiliora oportet devenire.

CC in Brief – The Upcoming SSPX Episcopal Consecrations

Catholic Candle note: Catholic Candle normally examines particular issues thoroughly, at length, using the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas and the other Doctors of the Church. By contrast, our feature CC in Brief, usually gives an extremely short answer to a reader’s question. We invite every reader to submit his own questions.


CC in Brief

The Upcoming SSPX Episcopal Consecrations

Q. Do you have any thoughts on the upcoming SSPX consecrations (any reason to hope for a real return to tradition)?

A. Regarding the upcoming SSPX consecrations, all appearances indicate that
those four episcopal candidates are all SSPX “company men” who will not stand up against the SSPX liberalism – as indicated by their prior years of silence and refusal to stand up against the liberalism in the now-liberal SSPX.  Those four would not have been chosen by the liberal leadership if that leadership sensed even the slightest danger that any of them would turn against the new liberal direction of the SSPX.

However, God is in charge and He can turn their hearts away from their compromises and could make them His excellent tools for great good in the future, if He chooses to use them.  We will see.  But pray for them that they leave their compromises and their liberalism and serve God the way He wants to be served!

Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

A Remedy for Our Sins during our Time of Apostasy

After our baptism, Our Lord has given us other daily remedies. The Lord’s Prayer is our daily purification. Let us say, and let us say with sincerity because it is an alms in itself: “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.” Give alms and all things are clean to you.”

St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, Sermon #261 For the Feast Of The Ascension

Catholic Candle note: It is true at all times of the Church that our sins are remitted through praying the Our Father well. How much more does Divine Providence make the Our Father efficacious for the remission of sins during the present Great Apostasy, when our Loving Heavenly Father has willed to withdraw the Sacraments from faithful and informed Catholics, most of whom do not currently have access to an uncompromising priest!

God has not abandoned us! Rather, He lovingly gives us different efficacious tools to use to help us to save our souls during these apostate times. Read these articles: