Lesson #53: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – Pain and Death Are Objects of Fear for Persons of Any Temperament

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article below is part eighteen of the study of the Choleric temperament. Here are links to the first seventeen 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/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #53 About the Temperaments Part XVIII – Explaining how Pain and Death Are Objects of Fear for Persons of Any Temperament


Note: When referring to a person with a choleric temperament in this article we simply will refer to him as a choleric.

In our last lesson we saw how St. Thomas sets forth the way in which fear works in the soul. We saw that there are three appetitive powers in the soul and how each of these powers is used for the general purpose of pursuing something good (or what appears to be good) and avoiding something evil (or what appears to be evil).

Now let us consider the evil that St. Thomas calls an evil of nature viz., things that cause pain and/or death and also why it is that man fears these.

St. Thomas quotes the great Philosopher Aristotle, who teaches that “fear is caused by the imagination of a future evil which is either corruptive or painful.1

St. Thomas Explains What It Means for Something to be an Evil of Nature

St. Thomas teaches that, just as a painful evil is that which is contrary to the will, so similarly a corruptive evil is that which is contrary to nature. This latter evil is properly described as “an evil of nature” because it is opposed to our nature. Just as evil is the absence of a good that something should have, so likewise an evil of nature is the absence of a good that belongs to nature. In this we see that an evil of nature can be the object of fear because it is the absence of something good which belongs to nature.

The evil of nature can arise from either a natural cause or a non-natural cause:

  • When it comes from a natural cause it is called an evil of nature not only from the deprivation of a good of nature, but also because this evil is an effect of nature, such as natural death and other like defects.

  • The evil of nature can arise from a non-natural cause, such as violent death inflicted by an assailant.

In either case the evil of nature is feared to a certain extent, and to a certain extent it is not feared.

For since fear arises from the imagination of future evil, as Aristotle explains,2 whatever removes our imagining of this future evil, removes the fear also. Moreover, if we reflect, we see that there are two ways that a future evil might not be feared – either because it is not considered as an evil or because it is not considered as future:

  1. Because it is remote and far off: for, on account of such distance, a thing is considered as though it were not to be. Hence we either do not fear it, or fear it but little; for, as Aristotle teaches3, we do not fear things that are very far off. This explains why so many people, e.g., most young people, do not fear death or think about it. They know that they will die but death appears to them to be far off so they do not think about it or fear it.

  2. A future evil is considered as though it is present (not future) and thus, as being inevitable and not escapable. As an example of this, Aristotle teaches4 that those who are already on the scaffold, are not afraid because they are on the very point of a death from which there is no escape. This is because, in order that a man be afraid, there must be some hope of escape for him. If there is no hope of escape, the man has sorrow but not fear.

Consequently, evil of nature is not feared if it be not apprehended as something in the future. But if the evil of nature (that is corruptive) be understood as being near at hand, and yet with some hope of escape, then it will be feared.5

Some Further Considerations from St. Thomas

St. Thomas adds that sometimes the evil of nature is an effect of nature and the man cannot avoid it. However, he might try to delay that evil as long as possible. Thus, a man might seek advice and consider how he can defer death and avoid it as long as possible. However, when death does not seem to be near at hand, one does not fear it or consider how to avoid it.

Death and other defects of nature are the effects of the human nature that we have in common. Yet the individual nature rebels against them as far as it can. Accordingly, from the inclination of nature there arises pain and sorrow for such like evils, when present. There arises fear when these evils are imagined in the foreseeable future.6

Further reflection: Of course, it is appropriate to fear death especially in the aspect that with death, we will face our Divine Judge and have to render an account of our lives. This is especially true when we are ill-prepared to obtain a favorable judgment from Him. But, if we focus our efforts on pleasing God and living a just life, then we will be able to foster a filial fear of God and not merely the servile fear of facing God’s just punishments.

A Preview …

In our next lesson, we will continue our study of the objects of fear. We will discuss St. Thomas’s explanation of the next aspect of fear, viz., Whether the Evil of Sin Is an Object of Fear. In that discussion St. Thomas makes the important distinction between pain and sorrow on one hand and fear on the other hand. At that point, we will be able to make some practical applications for the spiritual life.

1 Taken from Summa Ia-IIae Q.42 a. 2 Whether Evil of Nature Is an Object of Fear? Respondeo.

2 Aristotle’s Treatise on Rhetoric, Bk. 2; ch.5 #1382a21.


3 Aristotle’s Treatise on Rhetoric Bk. 2: ch.5, #1382a21.

4 Aristotle’s Treatise on Rhetoric Bk. 2: ch.5, Bk 2. Ch. 5 #1383a5.

5 Summa, Ia IIae, Q.42, a.2, Respondeo, Whether Evil of Nature Is an Object of Fear?

6 Summa, Ia IIae, Q.42, a.2, Reply, ad 2 & 3, Whether Evil of Nature Is an Object of Fear?

We Must Pray for the Pope, Especially at Mass!

Catholic Candle note: Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.

Below is the sixteenth article in a series which covers specific aspects of the error of sedevacantism. As context for this sixteenth article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier fifteen articles:

In the first article, we saw that we cannot know whether the pope (or anyone else) is a formal heretic (rather than a material heretic only) – and thus whether he is outside the true Catholic Church based simply on his persistent, public teaching of a heretical opinion.1

Then, in the second article, we saw that we must not judge a man to be a formal heretic if he professes to be Catholic and says he believes what a Catholic must believe now, in order to be Catholic now. When a person professes a heretical opinion, we must judge him in the most favorable light (if we judge him at all). So, we must avoid the sin of rash judgment and we must not judge negatively the interior culpability of the pope and the 1.4 billion2 people who profess to be Catholic. We must not judge they are not “real” Catholics if they tell us that they are Catholics. Instead, we should count them as Catholics who are very confused or are uninformed.3

Thus, we must judge the conciliar popes to have been material heretics, not formal heretics (if we judge them at all), and that each was pope in his turn until his death (or abdication). Regarding any of the world’s 1.4 billion self-described Catholics who hold heresy, we must judge them to be material heretics only (if we judge them at all), unless they themselves tell us that they know they don’t qualify to be Catholics.4

In the third article, we examined briefly the important difference between persons in authority who fulfill their duty to judge those under their charge in the external forum, as contrasted to a sedevacantist or anyone else except God who judges the interior culpability of other persons and (rashly) judges them to be formal heretics.5

In the fourth article, we saw that it does not help us to protect ourselves better from a conciliar pope’s heresy, to declare that we know he is not the pope and is not a Catholic.6

In the fifth article, we saw that it is possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy and in fact, popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history.7 We looked especially at the cases of Pope John XXII and Pope Nicholas I, who both taught explicit heresy while pope and nonetheless continued to be the pope. Pope John XXII also taught the same explicit heresy before he became the pope.

In the sixth article, we saw that the Church infallibly assures us that we will have a pope at all times until the end of the world, except during very short interregnums between papal reigns, during which the Church is in the process of electing a new pope and during which the Church’s unified government continues to function.8 In this sixth article, we saw that we are not presently in an interregnum (even though the sedevacantists absurdly claim we are in a many-decades-long interregnum).

In the seventh article of this series, we saw that the Catholic Church is a visible Body and remains visible to all. The Catholic Church has a visible monarchical government and the pope is visible to all. Thus, we know we have a pope and that the one who is pope is visible (known) to all as the pope.9

In the eighth article, we saw that the necessary visibility of the Catholic Church and the pope, requires as a corollary that the one who virtually all Catholics see (i.e., believe) is the pope must be the pope, since the pope must be visible to all.10

In the ninth article, we addressed the superficial claim of sedevacantists (addressed to Catholics) saying that “if you think we have a pope, then you have to obey him in whatever he tells you to do”. We examined the true Catholic virtue of obedience and saw that we must not obey the commands of even a real superior like our pope, if/when he commands us to do something evil.11

In the tenth article, we saw more deeply what schism is and how sedevacantism is inherently schism.12

In the eleventh article of this series, we saw more deeply how we should respond to a pope (or other superior) who does harm – viz., we should recognize his authority but resist the evil of his words or deeds.13

In the twelfth article of this series, we saw how we ordinary Catholic laymen can know what the Catholic Truth is and how we can know when the pope (or anyone) is promoting heresy or other error.14

In the thirteenth article of this series, we saw the falsehood of a related sedevacantist error (or “half-truth”), claiming that we have no pope because the conciliar popes had doubtful consecrations and/or ordinations.15

In the fourteenth article of this series, we considered another way to see that sedevacantism is wrong and sinful, viz., because it is the sin of revolution.16

In the fifteenth article of this series, we saw that even though Pope Leo XIV is objectively a very bad pope, all Catholics are in communion with him, since this is an essential condition of being Catholic and not schismatic.

Further, some sedevacantists (and a smaller number of other confused persons) make a related false argument directed against Catholics. They say that we must not pray for the pope in the Canon of the Mass because doing so would mean that we adopt his errors.

Traditional Catholics who have never heard of this error, might be tempted to think the error is so “far-fetched” that a non-sedevacantist could never really think it was wrong to pray for the pope at Mass. However, tragically, some persons have been fooled by the claim that praying for the pope in the Canon of the Mass somehow means that we adopt his errors. In fact, one non-sedevacantist priest in Canada was fooled into not praying for the pope in the Canon of the Mass and subsequently succumbed to the error of sedevacantism.

Below, we address the question whether praying for the pope in the Canon of the Mass indicates that we adopt the pope’s errors.

We Must Pray for the Pope, Especially at Mass!17


An examination of the erroneous argument claiming that we should not insert the pope’s name in the Canon of the Mass


It is our duty to pray for others. When we pray the Mass, this is an especially perfect time to do this, since it is the infinitely meritorious sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Further, every pope has the frighteningly grave responsibility for the souls of everyone in the world, especially for Catholics. Thus, we should continually pray for the pope, and most especially when we pray the Mass. (Of course, in our current times, where most faithful and informed Catholics do not have access to an uncompromising priest, these prayers for the pope should be offered while sanctifying the Sunday without a priest.)18


In a previous article (#15) we saw that we Catholics are in communion with the pope – whether he is good or bad – and we are also in communion with all other Catholics – whether they are good or bad.


The devil knows the importance of praying for the pope and greatly fears this, especially the efficacious intercession for him at a non-compromised Mass. Satan knows that if God reforms the pope through prayers offered for him, this reformed pope could spiritually transform (the human element of) the Church. Thus, the devil uses every lie and trick he has to discourage prayer for the pope, especially in the Canon of the True Traditional Mass.


One trick the devil uses, is to make priests and people afraid to pray for the pope when they pray the Canon of the Mass, fearing that somehow mentioning the pope’s name in the Canon causes us to affirm we agree with the pope’s errors.19


For a priest not to pray for the pope during the Canon of the Mass is objectively a sin (since he is required to do so), even if no one ever knew the priest made this sinful omission.20


This objective sin is increased if people do find out that the priest does not pray for the pope at Mass, because this omission is an objective sin of scandal, since all priests (and all Catholics) have a solemn duty to pray for the hierarchy, especially the pope.


Also, this scandal is gravely aggravated if anyone is led to conclude that the priest is a sedevacantist (because such a priest – like the sedevacantists – does not pray for the pope).



The Text of the Prayer for the Pope at the Beginning of the Canon of the Mass


Latin English


Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Jesum Christum Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus ac petimus uti accepta habeas, et benedicas haec dona, haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata; in primis quae tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta catholica; quam pacificare, custodire, adunare, et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum: una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro N., et Antistite nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis, atque catholicae et aostolicae fidei cultoribus.

Therefore, most gracious Father, we humbly beg of Thee and entreat Thee through Jesus Christ Thy Son, Our Lord. Hold acceptable and bless + these gifts, these + offerings, these + holy and unspotted oblations which, in the first place, we offer Thee for Thy Holy Catholic Church. Grant her peace and protection, unity and guidance throughout the world, together with Thy servant [name], our Pope, and [name], our Bishop; and all Orthodox believers who cherish the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.


Memento, Domine, famulorum, famularumque tuarum N. et N. et omnium circumstantium, quorum tibi fides cognita est, et nota devotio, pro quibus tibi offerimus. vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium laudis pro se, suisque omnibus, pro redemptione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis, et incolumitis suae; tibique reddunt vota sua aeterno Deo, vivo et vero.


Remember, O Lord, Thy servants and handmaids, [name] and [name], and all here present, whose faith and devotion are known to Thee. On whose behalf we offer to Thee, or who themselves offer to Thee this sacrifice of praise for themselves, families and friends, for the good of their souls, for their hope of salvation and deliverance from all harm, and who offer their homage to Thee, eternal, living and true God.

(Emphasis added.)



Una cum Papa nostro Leone


When we pray in the Canon of the Mass: “una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro, [name]”, this phrase is part of the same sentence in which we offer the oblation for the Church because we offer this oblation for the Church and also (i.e., together) for the pope (and the bishop, etc.).


Some people mistakenly think “together with” means that we declare we are together in mind with the pope in whatever he teaches. In other words, such a false claim asserts that putting the pope’s name in the Canon declares we are united (“together”) with the pope in whatever he believes. There are six reasons why this is false:


  1. In this prayer, the pope is mentioned in the middle of a longer “list”. The prayer offers the oblation for the Church, then there is mention of the pope, then the bishop, then all Catholics and finally in the next prayer, we recall the people near and dear to us “on whose behalf we offer” this same oblation. This list has a clear order. We pray for the Church, then those governing the Church, then all members of the Church and lastly, those near and dear to us whether or not our loved ones are Catholics.

    This grouping and the whole progression of thought shows that the reference to the pope and bishop is our prayer for them and is offering the oblation for them. It is unreasonable to understand this prayer as a declaration of solidarity: viz., as if the prayer were to state that we offer this oblation for the Church, then we declare we believe whatever the pope and others believe, and lastly we offer the oblation for those people dear to us.


If we were to wrongly assume (as this false claim does) that we break up the series of persons for whom we offer up the oblation, in order to declare sameness in beliefs with the pope, why wouldn’t we declare that we believe what the
Church teaches, rather than only the pope? Whatever the holy and infallible Catholic Church teaches, we must always believe because it is always true. By contrast, we believe what the pope teaches only when he teaches what the Church teaches. (Any errors that the pope teaches are not the teaching of the Church nor are they worthy of belief.21) Plainly, it is wrong to think this prayer of the Canon unites us to whatever the pope teaches.

The Canon is the perfect time to pray for the pope, when we mention him immediately after we pray for the Church. Because the Canon of the Mass is perfect, we would expect the perfection of the Canon to include both the prayer for the Church and for the pope. This is a further reason to understand the prayer this way.

  1. That the oblation is offered for all of these listed persons is further shown by this prayer (in the Canon) where it says the offering is made for the Church “in the first place”, and then proceeds to mention the pope, bishop, all Catholics and lastly those near and dear to us. This prayer’s phrase “in primis” (i.e., “in the first place”) shows that the offering will also then be made for others, the pope being the very next one listed.

  2. That this reference to the pope (and bishop) is a prayer for him (rather than joining in his ideas), is shown by what the pope and bishops themselves say when they offer Mass. As the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia explains:


A diocesan bishop in saying Mass changes the form “et Antistite nostro N.” into “et me indigno servo tuo” [
i.e., “and me thy unworthy servant”]. The pope naturally uses these words instead of “una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro N.”, and omits the clause about the bishop.22


In other words, the pope and bishop pray for themselves and offer the oblation for themselves. They plainly are not saying that they unite with themselves and believe whatever they themselves believe. As they pray for themselves in the Canon, likewise we pray for them in the same place, by inserting their names (and we are not declaring that we believe whatever they teach).

  1. This groundless fear (viz., the fear of adding the pope’s name in the Canon) also ignores Church history. From the earliest days of the Church, the Canon of the Mass has included a prayer interceding for the Church, the pope, the bishop and Catholics generally, as well as (in some earlier manuscripts) also intercession for the emperor and for the priest celebrating the Mass.23 The prayer was worded in various ways but always had this same intercessory meaning. That same meaning continues in the wording of the traditional missal we use.


By contrast, throughout the history of the Mass, in all the various formulations of the prayers in early manuscripts, the Mass has never included a declaration of solidarity in belief with the pope, as is baselessly feared by those who fear to include the pope’s name in the Canon.


  1. There have been popes at different times of Church history who had problems in word or deed. If each person were supposed to decide whether to withdraw the pope’s name from the Canon of the Mass and not pray for him, this would create chaos. To take only two examples:


  1. Pope Innocent VIII (1484 -1492) had illegitimate children whom he publicly acknowledged.24 Pope Innocent VIII was so shameless that while his own illegitimate son was at the papal court and in the immediate papal circle, this son “paraded the streets at night … forced his way into the houses of citizens for evil purposes” and similarly led a life of avarice and debauchery.25

Should Catholics have not prayed for Pope Innocent VIII in the Canon of the Mass under the theory that the pope’s open shamelessness was equivalent to showing that the virtue of purity is optional and therefore this pope was unworthy of prayers in the Canon of the Mass?


  1. Pope Nicholas I taught the heresy “that baptism was valid, whether administered in the name of the three Persons or in the name of Christ only.”26 Should each person at the time have decided if Pope Nicholas’ heresy meant he should be cut off from the prayers he greatly needed?


How great a division it would sow among Catholics if this wedge of discord and chaos were permitted to exist among the faithful! This would mean that faithful Catholics would shun priests who refused to pray for the pope during the Canon and confused Catholics would refuse priests who prayed for the pope in the Canon.



  1. The pre-Vatican II commentators unanimously explain this passage of the Canon as a prayer (intercession) for the pope, not a declaration of united belief with the pope. Here is a small sample of such commentaries:


  • The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia explains: “The priest prays first for the Church, then for the pope and diocesan ordinary by name.”27


  • The book entitled The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass explains: “[We have] a special and express offering and prayer for the Pope and for the chief pastor of the diocese in which the holy Mass is celebrated. … It is proper that, throughout the entire Church, the Pope should be prayed for and the Sacrifice be offered for him …”.28


  • The book entitled The Mass, A Study of the Roman Liturgy explains: “The Intercession (from “in primis”) … begins by praying for the Church, Pope, bishop and the faithful.”29


  • The commentator in The St. Andrew’s Daily Missal notes at the Canon’s “in primis” that the priest “prays for the living heads and members of the Church Militant”.30

Conclusion: for all six reasons, it is plain that we insert the pope’s name in the Canon in order to pray for him (not to declare we believe whatever he believes). The pope is the only one on earth who can authoritatively reform the (human element of the) Church. Although we reject the pope’s errors, we must pray for him unceasingly (especially when praying the Mass), that he reverses his own course and leads souls back to the traditions of the Church.



The Devil Uses a Second False Reason to Eliminate Prayers for the Pope at Mass


Some Catholics plainly see that this prayer in the Canon is a prayer for the pope (not a declaration that we believe whatever he believes). Yet they do not pray for the pope at Mass. Their reason for this is that they are troubled by the scruple that somehow it is a sin to pray for a bad pope in the Canon of the Mass because this prayer is the Church’s public prayer, and that it would be a scandal to pray for any bad man (including a bad pope) in the Church’s public prayer. (These misguided people think it is fine to pray for a bad pope in private prayer, but not the Church’s public prayer.)


But this scruple ignores Common Sense, Church history, and Ecclesiastic Tradition.


First, common sense: our prayers for anyone beg God’s help for the person. Those prayers don’t show the person is perfect but are asking God to change and perfect him. So it is the most natural thing for loyal sons of the Church to pray publicly for bad leaders, especially when praying the Mass.


Second, Church history: through many hundreds of years, it was the practice of good priests, bishops and laymen to publicly pray in the Canon of the Mass, for the emperor – not only for a good emperor but for whoever was the emperor, good or bad. Similarly, when we pray the Mass, our prayers for the pope are not conditioned on the spiritual condition of his soul.


Third, Ecclesiastical Tradition: the prayers of Good Friday (going back almost 1800 years31) not only pray for the pope (for any pope, whether good or bad) but also publicly pray for the worst of men: heretics, schismatics, Jews, and pagans, who are inherently bad because they oppose Our Lord and His Church.



Conclusion


It is plain that, however much evil the pope is doing, we should pray hard for him, including public prayers and especially at Mass. Let us unite in fervent prayer for the pope – especially when praying the Mass – that God change his heart and enlighten his mind.

2 The Vatican estimates that the number of Catholics worldwide is about 1.375 billion. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2023-10/fides-catholic-church-statistics-world-mission-sunday.html


7 Read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/


8 Read this article here that the Catholic Church’s unified government always continues, even during an interregnum: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

9 Read this article showing that The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible, and Will Always Have a Pope Who is Visible to All, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/the-catholic-church-will-always-be-visible-with-a-pope/


10 Read this article: The Man Whom the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, IS the Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/the-man-whom-the-whole-church-accepts-as-pope-is-the-pope/

11 Read this article examining false obedience, entitled, The False “Obedience” of Cowardly and Weak Catholics, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/the-false-obedience-of-cowardly-and-weak-catholics/


12 Read this article showing that Sedevacantism is Inherently Schism, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/sedevacantism-is-inherently-schism/


13 Our Catholic Duty: Resist the Harm Done by a Bad Pope But (Of Course) Recognize His Authority: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/our-catholic-duty-resist-the-harm-done-by-a-bad-pope-but-of-course-recognize-his-authority/


14 Judging the Pope’s Words & Deeds According to Catholic Tradition: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/judging-the-popes-words-deeds-according-to-catholic-tradition/

15

A Man Need Not Be Consecrated a Bishop or Ordained a Priest to Be a Valid Pope — An Explanation How the Catholic Church Continues to Possess A Full Hierarchy even in these Times of Great Apostasy: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/a-man-need-not-be-consecrated-a-bishop-or-ordained-a-priest-to-be-a-valid-pope/

17 Of course, in our current times, where most faithful and informed Catholics do not have access to an uncompromising priest, these prayers for the pope should be offered while sanctifying the Sunday without a priest.

18 We at Catholic Candle don’t know of any uncompromising priest or group, although that does not mean that there is not one (we just don’t know about him). https://catholiccandle.org/2021/07/02/the-reckless-claim-that-there-are-no-good-priests-left/


We recommend that you do what we do: we sanctify the Sunday at home. https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/sanctifying-sunday-no-mass.html


Even if we don’t "feel" content with our feelings, nonetheless with our will and intellect (the important faculties) we should be perfectly content without the Mass and Sacraments when they are not available without compromise. 

https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/complete-contentment-without-the-mass-when-it-is-not-available-without-compromise.html


Our times are times of great blessings! We hold that this is a glorious time to be Catholic and to live for Christ the King! https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/it-is-a-blessing-to-live-during-this-great-apostasy.html


We must continually guard ourselves against having a “go along” mentality. https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/we-must-neither-follow-bad-catholics-nor-rashly-judge-them


We must have hope because God is in charge and everything that happens that is truly out of our control is God’s Will for us. We keep in the front of our memory that all things “work together unto the good, for those who love God”.  Romans, 8:28. 

https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/hope-during-the-current-great-apostasy


19 Although no sedevacantists pray for our pope at Mass (because they deny he is pope), even some sedevacantists correctly understand that putting the pope’s name in the Canon is praying for him, not declaring that we believe and adopt whatever errors he teaches.

20 We don’t judge the interior, subjective culpability of such a priest or anyone else who holds this error. See, the Catholic Candle article against the sin of rash judgment: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

21 Previously, we saw (in the fifth article of this series) that it is possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy and in fact, popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history. Read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/

We looked especially at the cases of Pope John XXII and Pope Nicholas I, who both taught explicit heresy while pope and nonetheless continued to be the pope. Pope John XXII also taught the same explicit heresy before he became the pope.



22 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, article Canon of the Mass, vol. 3, p.262.

23 See, e.g., The Mass, A Study of the Roman Liturgy, by Adrian Fortescue, Longmans, Green & Co., London, © 1930, pp. 153 & 157 & Ch. III (entitled The Origin of the Roman Mass).

24 Popes Through The Ages, by Joseph Brusher, Van Nostrand ,Princeton, N.J., ©1959, article under Pope Innocent VIII, available here: https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/popes-through-the-ages-13701



25 History of the Popes, Ludwig Pastor, edited by Frederick Ignatius Antrobus, Vol. 5 p.354. This quote comes from a 28 volume set written between 1886 and 1930. The volumes of the English translation contain no copyright dates.

26 Cardinal Henry Newman’s treatise On The True Notion of Papal Infallibility. Cardinal Newman cites this example quoting St. Robert Bellarmine in De Rom. Pont., iv. 12.

27 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, article Canon of the Mass, vol. 3, article Canon of the Mass, p.262.


28 Rev. Dr. Nicholas Gihr, Herder, St. Louis, 1941, pp. 596-97.

29 The Mass, A Study of the Roman Liturgy, by Adrian Fortescue, Longmans, Green & Co., London, © 1930, p.329 (parenthetical comment in original).

30 The St. Andrew’s Daily Missal, Dom Gaspar Lefebvre, O.S.B., Lohmann © 1945, p.972.

31 The Mass of the Roman Rite, Josef Jungmann, Benzinger Brothers, New York, 1955, English Edition, translator Francis Brunner C.SS.R., Volume I pp. 481-2.

The Crosses that God Sends Us are Very Precious and Highly Desirable!

Our life on earth is a “vale of tears”. We know this. In the Hail Holy Queen prayer (the Salve Regina), we pray, addressing our Dear Mother Mary: “to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears”.

So, we must expect Crosses.

  • In fact, we must expect God to send us Crosses every day.


  • Not only that, we must not simply tolerate the Crosses that are being placed on our shoulder but we must actively grasp those Crosses that God sends to us.

Here is one way Our Lord teaches us this truth:

If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.1

So, Crosses are inevitable. However, Crosses are truly a great gift from God and are more precious than we can fully understand! As we will see below, God sends Crosses to us for our benefit and to help us. We should rejoice in this help!

In St. John’s Gospel, Our Lord gives the parable of the vine, the husbandman, and the branches. Here are Our Lord’s words:

I am the true vine; and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in Me, that beareth not fruit, He will take away. And every one that beareth fruit, He will purge it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now you are clean by reason of the word, which I have spoken to you. Abide in Me, and I in you.

As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in Me. I am the vine; you the branches: he that abideth in Me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing.

If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up, and cast him into the fire, and he burneth. If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you shall ask whatever you will, and it shall be done unto you. In this is My Father glorified; that you bring forth very much fruit, and become My disciples.2

Commenting on this parable, St. Thomas Aquinas, Greatest Doctor of the Church,3 explains how Our Lord helps the good branches. Here are St. Thomas’ words:

[God’s] interest in the good branches is to help them so they can bear more fruit. So, He says, “Every branch that bears fruit [My Father] prunes, that it may bear more fruit.4

St. Thomas then explains what this pruning of the branches is:

Considering the literal sense, we see that a natural vine with branches that have many [i.e., superfluous] shoots bears less fruit, because the sap is spread out through all the shoots. Thus, the vinedresser prunes away the superfluous shoots so that the vine can bear more fruit.

It is the same with us. For if we are well-disposed and united to God, yet diffuse our love over many [i.e., superfluous] things, our virtue becomes weak and we become less able to do good. This is why, in order that we may bear fruit, God will frequently remove such obstacles [viz., our diffuse loves] and prune us by sending troubles and temptations, which make us stronger.

Accordingly, [Our Lord] says that [the Father] prunes, even though a person may be clean, for in this life no one is so clean that he does not need to be cleansed more and more: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 Jn 1:8). And [the Father] does this so that [we] may bear more fruit, that is, grow in virtue, so that the more pruned or cleansed, the more fruitful a person is: “Let the just still be justified, and the holy still be sanctified” [Apoc. 22:11]; “The Gospel is bearing fruit and growing” (Col. 1:6); “They go from strength to [greater] strength” (Ps. 84:7).5

So, we see with our intellect that we should be grateful with our will, for the Crosses that God sends because He sends Crosses to help us. We should thank God with our whole heart (i.e., our will) even if we don’t “feel” grateful with our emotions.

These Crosses are precious and are an essential help to us that we may more abundantly bear the fruit of virtue.6

St. John Chrysostom, Doctor of the Church, teaches us the value of crosses in these words:

If God were to grant you the gift of raising the dead, He would be giving you much less than when He permits you to suffer.  In fact, with the gift of miracles He makes you His debtor, but with sufferings He makes Himself your debtor.7


Conclusion

So let us be grateful for our Crosses and earnestly thank God for each one as soon as He sends it!

Let us carry our Crosses willingly and even joyfully, knowing that they are precious and are God’s helps so that we grow in virtue!

1 St. Luke’s Gospel, 9:23.

2 Ch.15, vv. 1-8, (emphasis added).

3 Read this article: Why Faithful and Informed Catholics Especially Follow the Doctors of the Church and Most Especially St. Thomas Aquinas, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2017/12/16/why-faithful-catholics-follow-the-doctors-of-the-church/


4 St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. John’s Gospel, Ch.15, #1985 (emphasis added).

5

St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. John’s Gospel, Ch.15, #1985 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to show the context).

6

Read this article: Strategies for Lightening the Crosses You Now Have, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/04/01/77/


7 Spiritual Diary, p.82, St. Paul’s Editions, Boston, MA, ©1962.

Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

Our Life on Earth is Warfare!
We Must Fight Tirelessly for Christ the King!

Nothing is so incongruous in a Christian, and nothing so foreign to his character, as to seek ease and rest. To be engrossed in the present life is foreign to our profession and enlistment [as Soldiers of Christ]. Thy Master was crucified, and dost thou seek ease? Thy Master was pierced with nails, and dost thou live delicately? Do these things become a noble soldier?

St. John Chrysostom, Doctor of the Church, quoted from his sermon #13 on Philippians, 3:18-21 (bracketed words added to show the context).

Are You in Desolation, “Stuck in a Rut” Making No Spiritual Progress?

What Can I Do When My Spiritual Life Feels Dry and Boring, and I Feel Like I Am Only “Going Through the Motions” of Practicing My Faith?


This condition is a description of a classic case of spiritual desolation. Here is how the great spiritual master, St. Ignatius of Loyola, defines this desolation:


I call desolation everything contrary to the consolation explained in the third rule, such as darkness of soul, disturbance in it, movement to things low and earthly, the unquiet of different agitations and temptations, moving to lack of confidence, without hope, without love, when one finds oneself all lazy, tepid, sad, and as if separated from his Creator and Lord. Because, as consolation is contrary to desolation, in the same way the thoughts which come from consolation are contrary to the thoughts which come from desolation.1


Although God can (and sometimes does) give desolation in order to test even a very holy soul, the most usual reason for desolation is because of the person’s sins and his negligence in his spiritual duties.

Here is St. Ignatius’ advice for the person in desolation:

Although in desolation we ought not to change our good resolutions, it is very helpful to intensify our good efforts against the temptations that come during desolation, by insisting more on prayer, meditation, on much examination, and more penance.2

We can do this – viz., intensify our good efforts – even when we are in desolation! And God will help us!


How Can I Make Spiritual Progress?

So how does one advance in the spiritual life? Well, there are a lot of very important parts of this program. And we should strongly desire to make great efforts to attain spiritual progress. Our future happiness is determined by this progress in the spiritual life. The greater a person’s future holiness is, the greater will be his future happiness.

The secret of holiness is a person’s generosity with God. If a person asks himself: “What do I need to do to avoid sin and hell?”, that is a stingy goal! Looking at things that way, the spiritual life is a burden and most people fail (and go to Hell) because they aim so low and the result is even lower.

The spiritual life is Divine Friendship3 and so we should seek to be generous with our Divine Friend. We don’t have to feel generous but nonetheless we should resolve with our will to be generous.

How many times has a parent done what he should do (such as take care of a sick child in the middle of the night), not because of feelings, but because of a will to do good! That is how our love and friendship with Christ should be – generous and willed by us regardless of feelings.

Remember, sin is an offense against our Divine Friend Whom we should never want to offend! Therefore, we must avoid occasions of sin, including persons who make it more likely that we will sin. We humans easily fool ourselves and have many excuses to continue to expose ourselves to our past occasions of sin. We must be unshakably firm in avoiding bad companions and other occasions of sin.

We should associate with persons who will influence us with greater generosity toward our Divine Friend! We should avoid persons who influence us toward greater ease, less sacrifice, and less generosity with Christ our Lord. Even if such people do not explicitly lead us into sin, their influence on us is “in the wrong direction” and that fact makes them bad for us.

We must pray more4 – much more – every day – especially when we are in desolation. We should especially pray the rosary5 – ideally all 15 decades every day. We should implement a daily meditation.6

We must avoid bad music. We should not watch TV, movies or use the internet for entertainment. We should avoid most things on the internet, especially “social media”.7 Even aside from the many sins involved, these weaken us and make the spiritual life (and prayer) distasteful to us.

We should avoid “smart” phone use as much as we can. If we must use a “smart” phone, we should use it only for necessary tasks. We should not scroll or shop on our phone as a form of “recreation”.

We should study our Catholic Faith every day. We should do some spiritual reading every day without fail, e.g., a chapter from the Imitation of Christ.

Do some extra penances every day. A generous amount! Three really good ones are to take totally-cold showers, don’t eat in-between meals, and abstain from junk food, desserts and alcohol, especially outside of social occasions and when we are alone.8

Again, Dear Reader, we can do this! God will help!

1 Quoted from Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, Rule #4 for the Discernment of Spirits, First Week.

2 Quoted from Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, Rule #6 for the Discernment of Spirits, First Week.

3 This all-important love of God is Divine Friendship. Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, explains this truth:


It is written (John 15:15): “I will not now call you servants . . . but My friends.” Now this was said to them by reason of nothing else than charity. Therefore, charity is friendship. …


According to the Philosopher (Ethic. viii, 2,3), not every love has the character of friendship, but that love which is together with benevolence, when, to wit, we love someone so as to wish good to him. If, however, we do not wish good to what we love, but wish its good for ourselves, (thus we are said to love wine, or a horse, or the like), it is love not of friendship, but of a kind of concupiscence [i.e., the seeking of the pleasures of the senses]. For it would be absurd to speak of having friendship for wine or for a horse.


Yet, neither does well-wishing suffice for friendship, for a certain mutual love is requisite, since friendship is between friend and friend: and this well-wishing is founded on some kind of communication.


Accordingly, since there is a communication between man and God, inasmuch as He communicates His happiness to us, some kind of friendship must needs be based on this same communication, of which it is written (1 Corinthians 1:9): “God is faithful: by Whom you are called unto the fellowship of His Son.” The love which is based on this communication, is charity: wherefore it is evident that charity is the friendship of man for God.


Summa, IIa IIae, Q.23, a.1, sed contra and respondeo (emphasis added).



4 Here is a brief explanation about what prayer is essentially: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/10/cc-in-brief-essence-of-prayer/

5 Read this article about how to properly pray the rosary: https://catholiccandle.org/2019/12/23/the-rosary-how-why/

6 Here is a brief explanation about how to do a meditation and why it is important to mediate: https://catholiccandle.org/2021/09/03/lesson-2-meditation-how-why/

7 Read this article, especially the section about social media: https://catholiccandle.org/2023/12/12/the-connection-between-virtue-and-happiness-part-2/

There are many noxious effects of “social media”. It is very unwholesome, is unsocial, and fosters the antithesis of real, deep friendship (especially a profound friendship with God – which is our reason for living).


Beyond the very obvious mortal sins which are virtually everywhere on the internet, e.g., sins against the holy virtue of purity, additionally the sins of worldliness, superficiality, immodesty, time-wasting, and many other types of sin are endemic and pervasive there. This is evident to faithful and informed Catholics whose goal is to live every day the way that, at their judgment they would want to have lived.


Of course, there are countless mainstream studies also, which discover what faithful and informed Catholics already know, viz., that “social media” makes a person unhappier and more isolated. Here are just a few of those mainstream studies:







Lastly, the Government and Big Tech use “social media” (and many other activities on the internet) to spy on us and to amass huge dossiers on us for their future commercial exploitation and political use against us. Here is a small sampling of articles on this subject:








8 Read this article about the ideal penance of not eating for pleasure when you are alone: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/the-spiritual-benefits-of-not-consuming-sweets-and-junkfood-when-you-are-alone


Lesson #52: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat Part XVII

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article below is part seventeen of the study of the Choleric temperament. The first sixteen parts can be found here:

  1. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #36: About the Temperaments – Beginning our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Part I: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

  2. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #37: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament– Part II: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

  3. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #38: About the Temperaments – Continuing our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part III: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

  4. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #39: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – That Temperament’s Spiritual Combat – Part IV: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/lesson-39-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-iv/

  5. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #40: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part V: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/lesson-40-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-v/

  6. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #41: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament: a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat — Part VI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/lesson-41-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vi/

  7. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #42: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part VII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vii/

  8. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #43: About the Temperaments –Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament — Their Spiritual Combat Part VIII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-viii/

  9. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #44: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat, Part IX: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/lesson-44-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-ix/

  10. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #45: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part X: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/lesson-45-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-x/

  11. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #46: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat – Part XI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/lesson-46-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xi/

  12. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #47: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part XII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/lesson-47-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xii/

  13. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #48: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XIII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/lesson-48-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiii/

  14. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #49: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XIV: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/lesson-49-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiv/

  1. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #50: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XV: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/10/26/3050/

  1. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #51: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat Part XVI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/11/25/lesson-51-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvi/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #52 – About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XVII: the Objects of Fear1


Note: In this article, when referring to a person with a choleric temperament, we will simply refer to him as a “choleric”.

Now that we have examined the types of fear,2 let’s now consider with St. Thomas the object of fear – which logically comes next. The object of fear is simply what we fear. But there is a lot to be said about this!

Humans of all temperaments are afflicted with fear. All of us have felt fear. But have we ever stopped to ponder deeply what it is that we fear? Again we have the blessing of St. Thomas’ guidance when answering this question.

St. Thomas probes all subjects deeply and takes each one to its foundation, so when inquiring about the object of fear he begins by asking the question, Whether the Object of Fear is Good or Evil?

As always, St. Thomas examines this question humbly and methodically. He does not assume that the great thinkers who preceded him cannot help him with the inquiry. As with other inquiries, St. Thomas searches what the Fathers and Doctors of the Church teach on this question.

First, he informs us that St. John Damascene, Doctor of the Church, teaches that, “Fear is of a future evil.”3


St. Thomas explains how fear works in the soul

St. Thomas explains that fear is a movement of the appetitive power. By “appetitive power”, he means the power of the soul by which it desires.

There are three types of appetitive powers:

  • The natural appetite – which seeks what is suitable according to nature. An example of this is a tree naturally seeking the sunlight and so a tree which is always in the deep shade of other trees will grow sideways in order to obtain un-shaded sunlight;

  • The sensitive appetite – which seeks what is desirable in relation to the power of sensation of a man’s (or other animal’s) soul. One example of a sensitive appetite is an animal’s hunger for food; and

  • The intellectual (or rational) appetite – otherwise known as the will. This appetite desires the good known by the intellect in a way analogous to the sensitive appetite desiring the good which is sensed by man or another animal.

St. Thomas explains what is involved with this appetitive movement in the soul. Here are his words:

It belongs to this [viz., appetitive] power to:

  • Pursue the good. Consequently, whatever movement of the appetitive power that implies pursuit, has some good for its object; and

  • Avoid the evil. Consequently, whatever movement implies avoidance, has, for its object, some evil.

However, fear can regard good also, in so far as referable to evil. This can be in two ways.

  1. Inasmuch as an evil causes privation of a good. A thing is evil from the very fact that the evil thing is a privation of some good. Wherefore, since evil is shunned because it is evil, it follows that evil is shunned because it deprives a person of a good that one pursues through love. St. Augustine explains that there is no cause for fear except the loss of a good that we love; and

  2. Good can be related to evil as its cause in a way: viz., in so far as some good can, by its power, bring harm to another good that we love. And so, fear regards things in two ways, namely,

  1. The evil from which it shrinks; and

  1. That good which by its power can inflict that evil [on us]. In this way God is feared by man [although God is All-Good], inasmuch as He can inflict punishment, spiritual or corporal. In this way, too, we fear the power of man; especially when the power of the man has been thwarted, or when the power of the man is unjust because then that power is more likely to do us harm.

In like manner one fears a person who is over him or that has the power to do him harm. Thus, a man fears another who knows him to be guilty of a crime, lest he reveal the crime to others.4

Therefore, we can see that the passion of fear is a good thing when it is used properly – when we fear the appropriate things, e.g., when we fear sin or anything that displeases God, and when we fear something else which is truly harmful and so this fear can help us to avoid the evil. By contrast, when we fear inordinately, that is, irrationally in any way, then we are not using fear as God intended.

We must remember that God created the passions in us and they are good. But we must use fear (and the other passions) correctly because fear (and all things created by God) can be abused, resulting in sin and chaos in our lives.

If we reflect well, we see that there are many things that we are accustomed to fear. But we must learn to distinguish – by using our reason – exactly what is appropriate for us to fear and what is not.


A Preview …

In our next lesson we will continue our study of the objects of fear. We will discuss what St. Thomas calls the evil of nature viz., things that cause pain and/or death, and how it is that man fears these. We will also make some practical considerations concerning how we should handle our fears.

1 Fear influences all temperaments but not in the same way. Later, when we study the other temperaments, we will draw upon the teaching of St. Thomas about fear which we now set out in the context of the choleric temperament.

2 See Lesson #51, found here: Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #51: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat Part XVI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/11/25/lesson-51-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xvi/

3 Taken from St. John Damascene, De Fide Orthodox ii,12, as quoted in the Summa, Ia IIae, Q.42, a.1, Whether the Object of Fear is Good or Evil?

4 Taken from Summa Ia-IIae Q. 42 a. 1 Whether the Object of Fear is Good or Evil? Respondeo [Bracketed words added for clarity.]

The Comfort of the Catholic Faith and God’s Care During Our Perilous Times

Catholic Candle note: This article below was written by one of Catholic Candle’s more senior editors, who has a wealth of experience and wisdom.


The Comfort and Security of the True Catholic Faith and God’s Providential Care, Living During Our Perilous Times

It’s a pretty scary world out there.

Nuclear war, cancer, street crime, heart attacks, the steady decline of public morals, the decaying of educational standards, the subversion of the human element of the Church … there are so many other things that could be added to this catalogue of perils in our modern life.  

If one chose to dwell on what could happen to us at any time, he might be paralyzed and unwilling to even get out of bed in the morning.  And to carry this a step further, he may then wonder how he could possibly survive the dangers that threaten to prevent his death from being a happy and holy death – which would be the ultimate tragedy for him.

That is, and should be our biggest concern: whether we have the fortitude to make it safely through the “minefield” of our life on earth to the safe harbor of heaven.

Some time ago, I found the answer.  Not that it was unique to me.  Undoubtedly many of you have long known what it is:

Nothing that happens to me today can hurt me because God allowed it to happen.1 And if the God who loves me allows it, then it must be for my good.2

How can we argue with that?  This is comforting and reassuring, especially when we lose a job, get unhappy news from the doctor, are deceived by a friend or relative, suffer a financial loss, or experience any other of the wide variety of the travails of this life. 

Of course, this trust in God pertains to all things – including all evils – which are out of our control, as shown by the few examples listed above: (e.g., nuclear war, cancer, street crime). It should “go without saying” that we should not rashly suppose that God will protect us from all of the consequences of our own sins and the decisions which we make without seeking His will.

For example, it would be folly to get drunk and, because of this, to miss work and be fired from our job, on the excuse that “Nothing that happens to me today can hurt me because God allowed it to happen.” Rather, we are speaking of the complete trust we should have in God regarding what happens to us beyond our control and through no culpability on our own part.3


Conclusion


Let us have complete security and confidence in Divine Providence!4 He will take perfect care of our needs, both spiritual and temporal!

1 Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains this important truth:


It is impossible to trust too much in the Divine assistance.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.17, a.5, ad 2 (emphasis added; capitalization added).


2 As St. Paul teaches us: “All things work together unto the good, for those who love God”. Romans, 8:28.

3 For an explanation of the crucial difference between the Theological Virtue of Hope and the vice of presumption, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-the-new-sspx-teaches-the-vice-of-presumption-as-if-it-were-the-virtue-of-hope

All Catholics are in Communion with the Pope

Catholic Candle note: Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.

Awhile back, a reader forwarded to us a question (below) which he found posted on a sedevacantist website. The question (which was directed to non-sedevacantists) troubled him. He asked how Catholics should respond to this question. We answer below, but change the name (Pope Francis) to reflect the current pope (Pope Leo XIV).

Below is the fifteenth article in a series which covers specific aspects of the error of sedevacantism. As context for this fifteenth article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier fourteen articles:

In the first article, we saw that we cannot know whether the pope (or anyone else) is a formal heretic (rather than a material heretic only) – and thus whether he is outside the true Catholic Church based simply on his persistent, public teaching of a heretical opinion.1

Then, in the second article, we saw that we must not judge a man to be a formal heretic if he professes to be Catholic and says he believes what a Catholic must believe now, in order to be Catholic now. When a person professes a heretical opinion, we must judge him in the most favorable light (if we judge him at all). So, we must avoid the sin of rash judgment and we must not judge negatively the interior culpability of the pope and the 1.4 billion2 people who profess to be Catholic. We must not judge they are not “real” Catholics if they tell us that they are Catholics. Instead, we should count them as Catholics who are very confused or are uninformed.3

Thus, we must judge the conciliar popes to have been material heretics, not formal heretics (if we judge them at all), and that each was pope in his turn until his death (or abdication). Regarding any of the world’s 1.4 billion self-described Catholics who hold heresy, we must judge them to be material heretics only (if we judge them at all), unless they themselves tell us that they know they don’t qualify to be Catholics.4

In the third article, we examined briefly the important difference between persons in authority who fulfill their duty to judge those under their charge in the external forum, as contrasted to a sedevacantist or anyone else except God who judges the interior culpability of other persons and (rashly) judges them to be formal heretics.5

In the fourth article, we saw that it does not help us to protect ourselves better from a conciliar pope’s heresy, to declare that we know he is not the pope and is not a Catholic.6

In the fifth article, we saw that it is possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy and in fact, popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history.7 We looked especially at the cases of Pope John XXII and Pope Nicholas I, who both taught explicit heresy while pope and nonetheless continued to be the pope. Pope John XXII also taught the same explicit heresy before he became the pope.

In the sixth article, we saw that the Church infallibly assures us that we will have a pope at all times until the end of the world, except during very short interregnums between papal reigns, during which the Church is in the process of electing a new pope and during which the Church’s unified government continues to function.8 In this sixth article, we saw that we are not presently in an interregnum (even though the sedevacantists absurdly claim we are in a many-decades-long interregnum).

In the seventh article of this series, we saw that the Catholic Church is a visible Body and remains visible to all. The Catholic Church has a visible monarchical government and the pope is visible to all. Thus, we know we have a pope and that the one who is pope is visible (known) to all as the pope.9

In the eighth article, we saw that the necessary visibility of the Catholic Church and the pope, requires as a corollary that the one who virtually all Catholics see (i.e., believe) is the pope must be the pope, since the pope must be visible to all.10

In the ninth article, we addressed the superficial “argument” of sedevacantists (addressed to Catholics) saying that “if you think we have a pope, then you have to obey him in whatever he tells you to do”. We examined the true Catholic virtue of obedience and saw that we must not obey the commands of even a real superior like our pope, if/when he commands us to do something evil.11

In the tenth article, we saw more deeply what schism is and how sedevacantism is inherently schism.12

In the eleventh article of this series, we saw more deeply how we should respond to a pope (or other superior) who does harm – viz., we should recognize his authority as pope but resist the evil of his words or deeds.13

In the twelfth article of this series, we saw how we ordinary Catholic laymen can know what the Catholic Truth is and how we can know when the pope (or anyone) is promoting error.14

In the thirteenth article of this series, we saw the falsehood of a related sedevacantist error (or “half-truth”), claiming that we have no pope because the conciliar popes had doubtful consecrations and/or ordinations.15

In the fourteenth article of this series, we considered another way to see that sedevacantism is wrong and sinful, viz., because it is the sin of revolution.16

In the fifteenth article of this series, we address a question which arises because we see that Leo XIV is Pope:

Does that mean we are in communion with him?

Below, we address that question.

All Catholics are in Communion with the Pope

Sedevacantists attempt to show that their own Catholicism is “exalted and pure” by saying that they are not, and would never be, connected with that man (who is our pope) because his words and deeds are often so problematic, scandalous, and heterodox.

So these sedevacantists attempt to pressure Catholics into becoming schismatics (like themselves), by urging those Catholics: “Don’t be in communion with that man (viz., the pope)!”, suggesting that somehow it is un-Catholic to be in communion with a bad pope.

So the question arises: Are we Catholics really in communion with the pope, even when he is a bad, scandalous pope or teaches heresy? In this article, we examine that question.


Answering a Sedevacantist Question

The sedevacantists’ question:

Are you in communion with “Pope” Leo and his religion?

Catholic Candle note: the quotation marks (around the word “Pope”) are in the sedevacantists’ original question, indicating they don’t believe he is a real pope. Again, though, the sedevacantists’ original question said “Francis” not “Leo”.

The sedevacantists’ question is deceptively-framed in two ways

  1. We interpret the question’s reference to his religion, as a reference to the new conciliar religion (not Catholicism). Through this reference, the question sneaks in the assumption that Pope Leo has a single religion and it is not Catholicism. This sedevacantist ploy tricks an unwary Catholic into conceding this falsehood and participating in the sedevacantists’ rash judgment.17

  2. The question is compound; that is, it is really two questions in one. Thus, it is deceptive (either intentionally or carelessly). The question seeks a single “yes or no” answer, but either answer would be false (see below our two-part, short answer).


Beware of sedevacantist traps for the unwary!


Two-part, short answer to the sedevacantists’ question

  • Part one: All Catholics are in communion with Pope Leo.

However …

  • Part two: No faithful and informed Catholics are members of (i.e., in communion with) the conciliar church (which is a false religion).


Summary of our full explanation below

  1. Although Pope Leo does much evil, he is truly the pope and a member (as well as the head) of the Catholic Church.

  2. To save our souls, we must be members of the Catholic Church.

  3. Because all Catholics are joint members of the Catholic Church along with Pope Leo, all Catholics are in communion with him and with each other.

  4. Although Catholics are joint members of the Catholic Church along with Pope Leo, this does not also make us members of whatever other groups he belongs to, including the conciliar church.

Below, we discuss each of these four points.

  1. Although Pope Leo does much evil, he is truly the pope and a member of the Catholic Church.

As we have seen in past Catholic Candle articles, the Catholic Church infallibly teaches that we will always have a pope and we are not in a 67-year papal interregnum (as most sedevacantists pretend).18 (An interregnum is a period during which the papal throne is briefly vacant between the death (or abdication) of one pope and the election of a new pope).

Presently, our pope is Pope Leo XIV because he is visible to all (as a pope must be)19 and because virtually all Catholics accept him as pope (as is true of every pope).20

Pope Leo is a bad pope and a bad father.21 We must oppose the evil he does22 but must avoid the sedevacantists’ (objective) mortal sins of rashly judging his interior culpability and of denying that he is the pope or is even Catholic.23

This is like a child who has a bad father denying the paternal relationship. That would be wrong. Instead, if the father is bad, then the child must still recognize the paternal relationship and his father’s authority but also refuse to be led astray if his father attempts to cause him to sin.


  1. To save our souls, we must belong to the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that Outside the Church there is no Salvation.24 Thus, to save our souls, it is absolutely necessary that we are members of the Catholic Church.

  1. Because all Catholics are joint members of the Catholic Church, with Pope Leo, we are in communion with him.

“Communion” is the mutual connection between members of the Catholic Church.25

All Catholics are in communion with the pope and with each other because we are all mutually connected as members of the Church under one head, the pope. Id.26

A person can only belong to the Catholic Church by being in communion with all Catholics, under one head, viz., the reigning pope.27 Without being in communion with the pope and all other Catholics, a man is in schism and is outside the Catholic Church.28

  1. Although Catholics are joint members of the Catholic Church with Pope Leo, this does not make us members of whatever other groups he belongs to, including the conciliar church.

Everyone is a member of many groups. For example, at the same time, a person can be:

  • a son in one group (a particular family);

  • a father in another group (a different family);

  • an employee in another group (his corporate employer);

  • a coach in another group (a sports team);

  • a parishioner in another group (a parish);

  • a member of a civic orchestra group;

  • a member (i.e., resident) of his state or province;

  • a member (i.e., citizen) of his country;

  • a member of volunteer civic or religious organization;

  • perhaps a member of the true Catholic Church;

  • perhaps a member of the conciliar church or some other false religion29; and

  • perhaps a member of the Freemasons.

Pope Leo, like everyone else, is a member of many groups. Because we are members of the Catholic Church with Pope Leo and acknowledge that he is pope, this does not make us members of any other group to which he belongs. So, for example, we do not become Americans, Peruvians, Chicagoans, Augustinians, or White Sox fans, merely because he is a member of those groups. Similarly, we are not members of (in communion with) the conciliar church30 simply because he is.31


Conclusion

All Catholics are in communion with Pope Leo because we are members of the Church which he governs as pope. Every Catholic is also in communion with all other Catholics, including mainstream “new mass” Catholics.

Our joint membership with Pope Leo XIV in the Catholic Church does not make us joint members (with Pope Leo) of the conciliar church.


To be continued …


Catholic Candle Addendum:

There is No Such Thing as “Partial Communion” with the Catholic Church

From the above article, we see that all persons who are members of Christ’s Mystical Body are Catholics and only they can go to heaven, since There is No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.

We see from the above article that all Catholics are in communion with all other Catholics and with the Pope, since this is what it means to be Catholic and not be a schismatic.

As St. Thomas teaches:

Now the unity of the Church consists in two things; namely, in the mutual connection or communion of the members of the Church, and again in the subordination of all the members of the Church to the one head, according to Col. 2:18, 19: “Puffed up by the sense of his flesh, and not holding the Head, from which the whole body, by joints and bands, being supplied with nourishment and compacted, groweth unto the increase of God.” Now this Head is Christ Himself, Whose viceregent in the Church is the Sovereign Pontiff. Wherefore schismatics are those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his supremacy.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.39, a.1, respondeo (emphasis added).

Noah’s Ark is a figure of the Catholic Church, since all persons outside the Ark perished – just as all persons outside the Catholic Church perish and do not go to heaven. Just as no persons were “partially” in Noah’s Ark, likewise there are no persons who are partially in Christ’s Mystical Body or in “partial communion” with the Catholic Church.

The conciliar church promotes the heresy that a person can be in “partial communion” with the Catholic Church. Vatican II promotes this heresy in many places, for example:

For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Without doubt, the differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. … But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in baptism are incorporated into Christ.

Unitatis Redintegratio, §3, (emphasis added).

But there is no partial communion with the Church! “Whosoever … is not united with the Body is no member thereof, neither is he in communion with Christ its Head.” Pius XI, Mortalium Animos Jan. 6, 1928, §15.


Conclusion

Thus, we see that the same dogma that teaches us that all Catholics are in communion with the pope, also shows us that the conciliar church teaches heresy when it teaches that persons in heretical sects can be in “partial communion” with Christ and His Mystical Body.

2 The Vatican estimates that the number of Catholics worldwide is about 1.375 billion. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2023-10/fides-catholic-church-statistics-world-mission-sunday.html


7 Read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/


8 Read this article here that the Catholic Church’s unified government always continues, even during an interregnum: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

9 Read this article showing that The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible, and Will Always Have a Pope Who is Visible to All, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/the-catholic-church-will-always-be-visible-with-a-pope/


10 Read this article: The Man Whom the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, IS the Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/the-man-whom-the-whole-church-accepts-as-pope-is-the-pope/

11 Read this article examining false obedience, entitled, The False “Obedience” of Cowardly and Weak Catholics, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/the-false-obedience-of-cowardly-and-weak-catholics/


12 Read this article showing that Sedevacantism is Inherently Schism, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/sedevacantism-is-inherently-schism/


13 Our Catholic Duty: Resist the Harm Done by a Bad Pope But (Of Course) Recognize His Authority: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/our-catholic-duty-resist-the-harm-done-by-a-bad-pope-but-of-course-recognize-his-authority/


14 Judging the Pope’s Words & Deeds According to Catholic Tradition: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/judging-the-popes-words-deeds-according-to-catholic-tradition/

15

A Man Need Not Be Consecrated a Bishop or Ordained a Priest to Be a Valid Pope — An Explanation How the Catholic Church Continues to Possess A Full Hierarchy even in these Times of Great Apostasy: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/a-man-need-not-be-consecrated-a-bishop-or-ordained-a-priest-to-be-a-valid-pope/

16 Sedevacantism is Un-Catholic Because it is Revolutionary: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/10/26/sedevacantism-is-un-catholic-because-it-is-revolutionary/

17 Sedevacantism’s main error is rash judgment, viz., confusing these two things:

  • our duty to judge a pope’s (or anyone’s) objective error on a matter of Faith (i.e., material heresy); and

  • our duty not to judge that person’s subjective, interior culpability for his error (which would be rash judgment).

Sedevacantists rashly presume that the pope believes some error or heresy which he knows is incompatible with being Catholic now and so he “knows” he is not Catholic but he “won’t admit it”. Concerning the sedevacantists’ error of rash judgment, read the full explanation here:

and

18 Read this article here, showing that the Catholic Church’s unified government always continues, even during an interregnum: The Catholic Church Will Always Have a Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/the-catholic-church-will-always-have-a-pope/

19 Read this article showing that The Catholic Church Will Always be Visible, and Will Always Have a Pope Who is Visible to All, which can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/the-catholic-church-will-always-be-visible-with-a-pope/


20 Read this article: The Man Whom the Whole Church Accepts as Pope, IS the Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/the-man-whom-the-whole-church-accepts-as-pope-is-the-pope/

21 See, for example, this article: The Blessed Virgin Mary Is the Mediatrix of All Graces – Defending Catholic Doctrine and Our Lady’s Honor Against Pope Leo XIV and the Conciliar Barbarians: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/11/25/the-blessed-virgin-mary-is-the-mediatrix-of-all-graces/


22 Our Catholic Duty: Resist the Harm Done by a Bad Pope But (Of Course) Recognize His Authority: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/our-catholic-duty-resist-the-harm-done-by-a-bad-pope-but-of-course-recognize-his-authority/


23 Sedevacantism’s main error is rash judgment, viz., confusing these two things:

  • our duty to judge a pope’s (or anyone’s) objective error on a matter of Faith (i.e., material heresy); and

  • our duty not to judge that person’s subjective, interior culpability for his error (which would be rash judgment).

Sedevacantists rashly presume that the pope believes something (viz., an error) which he knows is incompatible with being Catholic now. Concerning the sedevacantists’ error or rash judgment, read the full explanation here:

and

24 Here is how Pope Boniface VIII infallibly declares this dogma:

With Faith urging us, we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is neither salvation, nor remission of sin.

Unam Sanctam, 1302, Denz. 468.

For more information and more of the Church’s declarations of this dogma, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/williamson-bishop-williamson-promotes-vatican-ii-heresy-that-people-can-be-saved-outside-the-catholic-church.html

25This article (linked immediately above) discusses Vatican II’s and Bishop Richard Williamson’s heresy denying that there is No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church. This is one of very many heresies of Vatican II and of Bishop Williamson.

Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas admirably explains this truth:

Accordingly, schismatics properly so called are those who, willfully and intentionally separate themselves from the unity of the Church; for this is the chief unity, and the particular unity of several individuals among themselves is subordinate to the unity of the Church, even as the mutual adaptation of each member of a natural body is subordinate to the unity of the whole body. Now the unity of the Church consists in two things; namely, in the mutual connection or communion of the members of the Church, and again in the subordination of all the members of the Church to the one head, according to Col. 2:18, 19: “Puffed up by the sense of his flesh, and not holding the Head, from which the whole body, by joints and bands, being supplied with nourishment and compacted, groweth unto the increase of God.” Now this Head is Christ Himself, Whose viceregent in the Church is the Sovereign Pontiff. Wherefore schismatics are those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his supremacy.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.39, a.1, respondeo (emphasis added).

26 In other words, “communion” is the union which binds together the members of the Church. Here is how Addis & Arnold explain this meaning of “communion”, in their very large, 1884 Catholic Dictionary:

Communion of Saints is mentioned in the ninth article of the Apostle’s Creed, where it is added, according to the Roman Catechism [i.e., the Council of Trent Catechism], as an explanation of the foregoing words, “I believe in the holy Catholic Church.” The communion of saints consists in the union which binds together the members of the Church on earth, and connects the Church on earth with the Church suffering in Purgatory and the triumphant in heaven.

(1) The faithful on earth have communion with each other because they partake of the same sacraments, are under one head, and assist each other by their prayers and good works.

A Catholic Dictionary, Addis & Arnold, The Catholic Publication Society, New York, 1884, under the entry, Communion of Saints (bracketed words and emphasis added).

27 Here is how Pope Boniface VIII declares this truth:

We declare, state, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

Bull Unam Sanctam.

Here is how Pope Pius IX declares this truth:

There is only one true, holy, Catholic Church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church. There is only one See founded in Peter by the word of the Lord, outside of which we cannot find either true faith or eternal salvation. He who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church.

Singulari Quidem, §4 (emphasis added).

28 Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas admirably explains this truth:

Schismatics are those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his supremacy.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.39, a.1, respondeo.

All Catholics have a duty to recognize that the current pope has authority over us. Even though we frequently cannot do what the pope commands us or hold what he teaches, we must “acknowledge his supremacy”, as St. Thomas teaches we must (in the quote above).

We must do what the pope commands us to do and believe what he teaches, when we can do so in good conscience. Thus, for example, if Pope Leo XIV commanded Catholics to recite at least five decades of the rosary each day, under pain of sin, we would be bound in conscience to do this, under pain of sin.

29 An objection could be made here that a Catholic cannot (at the same time) also be a member of a false religion or of the freemasons. A faithful and informed Catholic knows that being a Catholic is incompatible with belonging to these groups. However, in our time of ecumenism and religious ignorance, much is scandalously permitted that is evil. Catholics are allowed to largely do what they want to do and might not know the truth or might do what they want to despite it being sinful. Do they know better? God will judge. Even though this dual membership (viz., in the Catholic Church and in some false “church” or freemasonic lodge) is an objective mortal sin, we must not judge the sins on their hearts.


It would be the sin of rash judgment for us to decide the subjective culpability of a particular person who tries to, at the same time, be a member of the Catholic Church and also be a member of an anti-Catholic group. Thus, for example, we do not make the determination that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was no longer a Catholic (although he professed to be Catholic) based on the fact that he was also a freemason at the same time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart

30

The conciliar church is not merely a mindset or a set of opinions, but is a real, organized group of persons. Read the full explanation here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-faithful-and-informed-catholics-reject-even-the-concept-of-recognition-by-modernist-rome.html

31 Of course, it would objectively be a mortal sin for a Catholic to join a false religion. However, suppose a very confused Catholic thinks the Catholic Church allows this dual membership (in the Catholic religion and also some other religion). Suppose also he believes he continues to fulfill all conditions for being Catholic. We should not rashly judge that we know he is not Catholic and that if he dies as he is, we would be certain he will go to hell (as would be true if we knew he were not Catholic). Giving him (and everyone else) the benefit of the doubt, we suppose he could possibly be inculpably ignorant and God will judge this, not us.

Words to Live By – From Catholic Tradition

If We Wish to Choose Christ,
Then We Must Wish to Receive the Hatred of the World

A person refuses to be in the Mystical Body of Christ if he does not wish to receive, along with Christ our Head, the hatred of the world. We ought to patiently receive the hatred of the world out of the love for Christ. For it is necessary for the world to hate us because we resolve to reject what the world loves.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Greatest Doctor of the Church, Quoting St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, in the Catena Aurea on St. John’s Gospel, ch.15, §5.

Lesson #51: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat Part XVI

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note: The article below is part sixteen of the study of the Choleric temperament. The first fifteen parts can be found here:

  1. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #36: About the Temperaments – Beginning our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Part I: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/08/27/lesson-35-about-the-temperaments-the-choleric-temperament/

  2. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #37: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament– Part II: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/lesson-37-about-the-temperaments-continuation-of-the-choleric-temperament/

  3. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #38: About the Temperaments – Continuing our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part III:: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/lesson-38-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat/

  4. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #39: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – That Temperament’s Spiritual Combat – Part IV: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/11/26/lesson-39-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-iv/

  5. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #40: Temperaments – Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat – Part V: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/12/30/lesson-40-temperaments-choleric-temperament-their-spiritual-combat-part-v/

  6. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #41: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament: a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat — Part VI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/lesson-41-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vi/

  7. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #42: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – a Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part VII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/02/21/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-vii/

  8. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #43: About the Temperaments –Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament — Their Spiritual Combat Part VIII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/03/27/lesson-42-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-viii/

  9. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #44: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – Their Spiritual Combat, Part IX: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/04/23/lesson-44-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-ix/

  10. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #45: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part X: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/05/20/lesson-45-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-x/

  11. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #46: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat – Part XI: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/06/28/lesson-46-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xi/

  12. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #47: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat – Part XII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/lesson-47-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xii/

  13. Mary’s School of Sanctity – Lesson #48: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XIII: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/08/29/lesson-48-temperaments-choleric-temperament-a-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiii/

  14. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #49: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XIV: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/09/24/lesson-49-temperaments-choleric-temperament-the-cholerics-spiritual-combat-part-xiv/

  1. Mary’s School of Sanctity — Lesson #50: About the Temperaments – Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament – The Choleric’s Spiritual Combat Part XV: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/10/26/3050/

Mary’s School of Sanctity

Lesson #51: About the Temperaments –
Continuing Our Study of the Choleric Temperament –
The Cholerics’ Spiritual Combat Part XVI

Note: When referring to a person with a choleric temperament in this article, we simply will call him a choleric.

In our last lesson we explained the basics about the passions and how they work in the soul. With this preparation finished, we now begin our look at the passion of fear in particular.

Using St. Thomas Aquinas as Our Guide

Because St. Thomas is so thorough in his treatment of everything, he is called the Doctor Communis, that is, the Common Doctor of the Church, because he is the one, most of all, to guide and instruct us in anything.1 We will let St. Thomas, greatest Doctor of the Church, be our guide in our study. It is very valuable to look at St. Thomas’s explanation because he shows us so clearly how we are affected by our passions – in this case, by fear.

Where do we begin?

First, after showing that fear is indeed a passion in the soul (as we saw in our last lesson), St. Thomas then addresses two important questions, “Whether Fear is a Special Passion?” and “Whether There is a Natural Fear?

To the first question he answers simply that, yes, fear is a special passion – and explains why this is true. Here are his words:

The passions of the soul derive their species2 from their objects; hence, that is a special passion which has a special object. However, fear has a special object, as hope has. For just as the object of hope is a future good, difficult but possible to obtain, so the object of fear is a future evil, difficult and irresistible. Consequently, fear is a special passion of the soul.3

To the second question (Whether There is a Natural Fear), St. Thomas begins by having us first understand what he means by the word “natural” in this context. Summarizing St. Thomas, movements can be called natural in two ways:

  1. A movement is said to be natural simply speaking when the movement occurs without the involvement of the senses or the intellect. Some examples of this are the movement of fire which naturally inclines upward, the movement of a stone which tends to fall downward, and nutritive powers of animals and plants which tend to growth and life.

  2. A movement is also said to be natural when nature inclines in a certain direction but man (or a different animal) does not move invariably. Such movement involves the senses or the intellect. St. Thomas remarks, “In this way, even the acts of the apprehensive power, such as understanding, feeling, and remembering, as well as the movements of the animal appetite, are sometimes said to be natural.”4

In this quote St. Thomas is acknowledging the fact that animals and man both have an animal nature. However, St. Thomas makes an important distinction that, for irrational animals, God put in them the ability to act in an ordered, reasonable way, and this is called instinct. By contrast, God created man to want the good and created man to use his reason to seek the good. Nevertheless, man is able to delude himself about what is good and in this way, St. Thomas tells us, that man is able to pursue the apparent good instead of the true good. So, for example, a tired student is able to pursue the apparent good of sleeping longer in the morning instead of the true good of attending class.

In a future article, we will discuss man’s ability to deceive himself. We will discuss this later, as we proceed with our study of the temperaments in general and in our focus on how fear affects each of the temperaments.

With these basic concepts in mind, let us now turn to St. Thomas’ division of the types of fear and apply them to the temperaments with a special focus on how fear hinders the intellectual life of the soul.

The Types of Fear

St. Thomas divides fear into six kinds. Here are his words:

Fear regards a future evil which surpasses the power of him who fears, so that it is irresistible. However, man’s evil, like his good, may be considered either in his action or in external things.

In his action, he has a twofold evil to fear.

1. First, there is the toil that burdens his nature: and hence arises laziness, as when he shrinks from work for fear of too much toil.

  1. Second, there is the disgrace which damages him in the opinion of others. And thus:

    1. If disgrace is feared in a deed that is yet to be done, there is shamefacedness;

    2. If, however, it be in a deed already done, there is shame.

On the other hand, the evil that consists in external things may surpass man’s faculty of resistance in three ways.

  1. First by reason of magnitude; when, that is to say, a man considers some great evil the outcome of which he is unable to gauge; and then there is amazement.

  2. Second, by reason of its being unwonted;5 because, to wit, some unwonted evil arises before us, and on that account is great in our estimation. And then there is stupor, which is caused by the representation of something unwonted.

  3. Third, by reason of its being unforeseen; thus, future misfortunes are feared, and fear of this kind is called anxiety.6

Some Considerations Regarding the Kinds of Fear Listed and Some Practical Applications

When St. Thomas is speaking of laziness here, he is referring to a man recoiling from the “toil of external work.” This pertains to a person who fears excessive toil. Anyone of any temperament could have this fear. This kind of person does not want to work but rather seeks to have fun or be idle. Of course, there are degrees of this kind of fear. In the worst case scenario, this fear prevents someone from being able to function in society and in his life. This displeases God very much.

We will discuss the various aspects of fear as we proceed with our investigation. In our study of the temperaments, one crucial thing to remember is that, in all of the difficulties people face, God expects man to use his reason to deal with all of his dilemmas. Indeed, when a person uses his reason properly – including when he forces himself to step back to consider his situation – then there is no problem that he cannot solve the way God wishes.

Shamefacedness is the fear of a base action.7 In other words, one anticipates that if he were to act in a low or base manner, he would bring embarrassment upon himself. If one uses shamefacedness properly, he would avoid doing bad deeds.

On the other hand, as St. Thomas explained above, when one does not think ahead concerning the consequences of an action, he is not using shamefacedness and is “leaping” into a bad deed. Then afterwards, he has the shame of having done the disgraceful deed. St. Thomas tells us here that shame is a kind of fear because a person fears that the past deed will be the occasion of future reproach or disgrace.

The amazement and stupor that St. Thomas is speaking about here are in regard to evil. Here are his words.

Not every amazement and stupor are species of fear, but that amazement which is caused by a great evil, and that stupor which arises from an unwonted evil. Or else we may say that, just as laziness shrinks from the toil of external work, so amazement and stupor shrink from the difficulty of considering a great and unwonted thing, whether good or evil: so that amazement and stupor stand in relation to the act of the intellect, as laziness does to external work.8

Here we find how St. Thomas aptly describes the fear of intellectual effort that affects so many people of all temperaments. We had discussed how the choleric who has bad will does not make the necessary efforts to think. One reason for this is because he does not want to take the time necessary to do a good job (by thinking carefully). Yet, the underlying cause is his fear of the mental toil. If he were to build the habit of thinking carefully, then he would no longer fear the effort required. As we will see in future articles, it is not only cholerics that fear intellectual efforts.

The devil certainly does not want anyone to enjoy using his highest faculty, viz., his intellect. Thus, the devil has been tempting man from the time of Adam’s fall until now, to believe that thinking is too hard. Of course, we must counteract this wretched falsehood of the devil and do everything we can to promote careful thinking in ourselves and in others and foster the further development of our minds.

One more consequence of the devil dissuading a person from thinking deeply and carefully about high truths is that he misses a valuable opportunity for humility through considering how ignorant he is, and comparing the little he knows to all the high and wonderful truths that there are to learn. God and His creation are marvelous and should fill us with a sense of awe! We could never learn enough to completely satisfy our natural thirst for knowledge! Therefore, thinking well promotes humility because we can better assess our limitations objectively. This is one reason why Satan does not want humans to think!

Anxiety is the last type of fear mentioned above. This fear certainly wreaks havoc on many fronts in our lives. Countless examples could be found of things that cause man anxiety. There is so much talk of stress in our lives but we rarely consider how our trusting dependence on God is a key remedy to all stress.9 This anxiety also has a direct connection to the concept of thinking deeply (discussed above). When one thinks carefully, he can be more objective in assessing his circumstances and is therefore less prone to anxiety and worry.

Something to Keep in Mind

So as we said in our last lesson, the passions are not bad in themselves. However, they must be used properly. Here we can see that fear in itself is a very important passion and when used well, it helps the moral life, and hence the spiritual life of a man.

A Preview… In our next lesson we will begin considering the Objects of Fear and will apply our understanding of fear to the temperaments.

1 Read this article explaining why faithful and informed Catholics follow Saint Thomas Aquinas more than anyone else: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/why-faithful-and-informed-catholics-especially-follow-the-doctors-of-the-church

2 Note: by “species” of passion, St. Thomas means the kinds of passions.

3 Summa, Ia IIae, Q.41, a.2, Respondeo.

4 Cf., Summa, Ia IIae, Q.41, a.3.

5 Unwonted: being out of the ordinary : rare, unusual. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unwonted

6 Taken from the Summa, Ia IIae, Q.41, a.4, Whether the Species of Fear Are Suitably Assigned?, Respondeo, (emphasis added; bracketed words added to show the context).

7

This is St. John Damascene’s definition taken from the Summa, IIa IIae, Q.144, a.1, Respondeo.

8 Taken from the Summa, Ia IIae, Q.41, a.4, Whether the Species of Fear Are Suitably Assigned?, ad 4.

The Blessed Virgin Mary Is the Mediatrix of All Graces

Catholic Candle note: The article below pertains to one of the many scandalous errors that Pope Leo XIV has promoted, to date, during his short reign. However, a reader would be mistaken to assume that Pope Leo XIV’s grave errors somehow mean that he is not the pope.

Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist.

Here is what St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church, teaches concerning our duty to recognize and respect the authority of a superior – such as the pope – even when he is very bad:

Even should the life of any superior be so notoriously wicked as to admit of no excuse or dissimulation, nevertheless, for God’s sake, Who is the source of all power, we are bound to honor such a one, not on account of his personal merits, which are non-existent, but because of the divine ordination and the dignity of his office.1

However, even while recognizing the pope’s authority and our duty to obey him when we are able, we know we must resist the evil he says and does. Read more about this principle here: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/07/24/our-catholic-duty-resist-the-harm-done-by-a-bad-pope-but-of-course-recognize-his-authority/

To learn more about why sedevacantism is wrong and why it is schism, read Sedevacantism: Material or Formal Schism, which is available:

Defending Catholic Doctrine and Our Lady’s Honor
Against Pope Leo XIV and the Conciliar Barbarians

The Catholic Church originally set the feast of Our Lady, Mediatrix of All Graces, on May 31 of each year. In the 1962 Missal (which is inferior to the Missals preceding it), this feast of Our Lady was moved to May 8 by the liturgical barbarian, Annibale Bugnini.


The Conciliar Church Minimizes Our Lady

One of the hallmarks of the ongoing, evil, conciliar revolution is the continual efforts to minimize the honor of the Glorious Mother of God.

For example, Vatican II admonishes us to beware of being excessive in our praise for Our Lady. Here are the council’s words in one place:

[The council] exhorts theologians and preachers of the divine word to abstain zealously both from all gross exaggerations as well as from petty narrow-mindedness in considering the singular dignity of the Mother of God.2

This type of admonishment is sprinkled throughout the council’s documents. Such warnings are not strictly and literally false, because we should always avoid being “excessive” in any way, since anything “excessive” is always bad and unreasonable. However, the council’s admonishment here is a message to people to be less devoted to our Lady and to not emphasize her greatness.

This message is similar to warning people to “avoid excessive trust” in the honesty of a particular man whenever that man’s name is mentioned. That warning would clearly indicate to people that they should trust this man less. Likewise, the conciliar warnings to “zealously” (!) avoid “excessive” devotion to Our Lady tell people to be less devoted to her.

Woe to these men (and all) who insult Our Lord by dishonoring His Mother in this way! Pope St. Pius X condemned this type of false (so-called) “zeal” for Our Lord – which Vatican II promoted – and which is an excuse to minimize the honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Here are Pope St. Pius X’s words:

Wretched and unhappy are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother!3

These conciliar warnings caused true devotion to Mary to plummet and any remaining devotion to her tends to be more shallow and to have a more emotional, less doctrinal foundation. One indication that devotion to her has grown cold, is the fact that true devotion to Mary always comes with an intolerance of heresy, since our Lady crushes heresy. By contrast, intolerance of heresy is almost non-existent in the conciliar church.


Why Does the Conciliar Church Minimize Our Lady?

One reason that the conciliar church minimizes Our Lady is because the conciliar churchmen are ecumenical fanatics. They minimize the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary because that truth irritates the protestants and others who are outside the ark of salvation – which is the Catholic Church. The protestants ignore Our Lady and they vociferously object to the Catholic truth that all of the blessings of God come through the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Thus, Vatican II and the conciliar churchmen minimize the Glorious Mother of God in order to please the enemies of God.

The post-conciliar popes (each in his turn) minimized Our Lady – Pope Francis more than the earlier post-Vatican II popes. Following Pope Francis, Pope Leo XIV continues on that evil conciliar path of minimizing Our Lady’s honor.

Pope Leo XIV Minimizes Our Lady in His Document Entitled Mater Populi Fidelis

Pope Leo XIV is a man of the conciliar revolution and a man of Vatican II. On October 7, 2025, he approved of a new document, Mater Populi Fidelis, which he issued through the Dicastery For The Doctrine of the Faith.

Like Vatican II itself, he warns us that devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary can distract us from her Son. Here are his words:

[A]ny gaze directed at her that distracts us from Christ or that places her on the same level as the Son of God would fall outside the dynamic proper to an authentically Marian faith.4

So, just like Vatican II itself, Pope Leo XIV warns us to beware of zeal for the honor Our Lady because it could detract from the honor of her Son. He unreasonably warns us that gazing at Our Lady can reduce her Son’s honor. Woe to Pope Leo XIV! He shows himself to fall within Pope St. Pius X’s apt description – “wretched and unhappy” – referring to those who minimize Our Lady’s honor.

Of course, the truth is that it virtually never happens that someone is “excessively” devoted to Our Lady! Instead, the opposite is true. We live in a time of gross disregard for the Blessed Virgin Mary. The remedy for the ills of our time is greater devotion to Our Lady.


Mater Populi Fidelis: a Document Which is Wordy, Ambiguous, and Heretical

Pope Leo XIV’s Mater Populi Fidelis is about 19,000 words and largely cautions the reader to be careful not to praise Our Lady too much or to exaggerate her greatness – as if what Catholics need to hear right now is “Beware of excessively praising Mary!”5

This lengthy document (Mater Populi) is wordy, frequently ambiguous, and contains heresy.6 Its thrust is to minimize the importance of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and devotion to her.

The evils of Mater Populi are too many to cover in a single article. The focus of the present article is the denial of Our Lady’s prerogative and her honor as being the Mediatrix of All Graces.

In this article, we will start by examining the meaning of this title of Our Lady and then review the Catholic Church’s doctrine that Our Lady is truly the Mediatrix of All Graces. After that, we will examine Pope Leo XIV’s evil teachings which are the opposite of this Catholic Dogma.


What Does It mean for Our Lady to Be the Mediatrix of All Graces?

First of all, what is a mediatrix? A mediatrix is a female mediator. Just as we use feminine pronouns for women and girls and male pronouns for men and boys, likewise we use sex-specific suffixes to indicate the gender of a person who has a certain role. For example, a man who delivers food to the tables in a restaurant is called a “waiter” and a woman who does this is called a “waitress”. This “-ress” (or “ess”) ending feminizes the word. There are countless words with such feminized endings, e.g., empress and shepherdess.

A similar Latinized feminine ending to words is “-trix” (instead of “-tress”). Thus:

  • a female executor of a person’s will (and estate) is called an “executrix”.7

  • likewise, Our Lady is called the “Mediatrix of all Graces”.

Ok. So a “Mediatrix” is a Female Mediator. But What Does It Mean for Our Lady to be the Mediatrix of All Graces?

A mediator:

  • is one who helps to resolve a dispute;8

  • occupies a middle position between two parties in disagreement;9 and

  • is a conciliator, an intermediary, a peacemaker, an intercessor.10

So Our Lady is our peacemaker with her Son arising out of mankind’s great offenses against Him. Making peace is accomplished through Sanctifying Grace, as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches:

Sanctifying Grace is given chiefly in order that man’s soul may be united to God by charity.11

This charity is friendship with God and reconciles us with God.12 So Our Lady reconciles us with her Son through Sanctifying Grace.

So Our Lady’s title “Mediatrix of all Graces” refers to her being our help reconciling us with her Son. It is her unique role (and privilege) to assist her Son in distributing to sinners all the graces of His Salvific Act of redemption. By distributing her Son’s graces to men, she is aiding her Son by reconciling mankind to Him.

Our Lady’s assistance to her Son in His work of the sanctification of souls is analogous to a nurse playing a uniquely important role in helping a physician by distributing for him the necessary medicine to his patients. Our Lady uniquely aids her Son although she is not Divine (and although she herself depends on redemption by her Son), just as the nurse is not a physician but can be a unique aid in his work.


Couldn’t God Have Distributed His Graces to Mankind Without Mary?

God could indeed have distributed His graces to mankind without Mary’s aid. This is like the physician (in the example above, who uses the nurse’s help to distribute the medicine) would be capable of distributing the medicine himself. The fact that Our Lady distributes all of the graces of God does not mean that God could not have accomplished this work differently. However, God chose this way to do His work of sanctification because it is the best way.

Reflect on this: God caused the universe to be the best possible one for His own greater honor and glory.13 As the Holy Ghost teaches in the Book of Proverbs: “The Lord hath made all things for Himself”. Proverbs, 16:4. No other motive (other than His own glory) would be worthy of Him.

God could have caused the universe to be different than it is. Two ways God could have caused the universe to be different are: 1) to not redeem man at all, after his fall; or, 2) after He redeemed man, to not use the help of the Blessed Virgin Mary in distributing the graces which He merited for the redemption of man. However, God did redeem man and He did use the help of the Blessed Virgin Mary in distributing the graces necessary for salvation, because this is the perfect way for God to save the elect and God does all things in the best possible way.14

So, as shown below, the Blessed Virgin Mary IS the Mediatrix of All Graces. The reason for this is because God chose the best way to sanctify man and to save the elect. This is like the fact that God chose to redeem man by dying on the cross not because there was no other way for God to accomplish salvation, but because this was the best, most perfect way.

Here is how St. Louis Marie Grignon de Montfort explains the perfection of God’s plan in making Mary the Mediatrix of All Graces:

God the Holy Ghost entrusted his wondrous gifts to Mary, His faithful spouse, and chose her as the dispenser of all He possesses, so that she distributes all His gifts and graces to whom she wills, as much as she wills, how she wills and when she wills. No heavenly gift is given to men which does not pass through her virginal hands. Such indeed is the will of God, who has decreed that we should have all things through Mary, so that, making herself poor and lowly, and hiding herself in the depths of nothingness during her whole life, she might be enriched, exalted and honored by almighty God. Such are the views of the Church and the early Fathers.15

St. Louis continues:

God in these times wishes his Blessed Mother to be more known, loved and honored than she has ever been. This will certainly come about if the elect, by the grace and light of the Holy Ghost, adopt the interior and perfect practice of the devotion which I shall later unfold. Then, they will clearly see that beautiful Star of the Sea, as much as Faith allows. Under her guidance they will perceive the splendors of this Queen and will consecrate themselves entirely to her service as subjects and slaves of love. They will experience her motherly kindness and affection for her children. They will love her tenderly and will appreciate how full of compassion she is and how much they stand in need of her help. In all circumstances they will have recourse to her as their advocate and mediatrix with Jesus Christ. They will see clearly that she is the safest, easiest, shortest and most perfect way of approaching Jesus and will surrender themselves to her, body and soul, without reserve in order to belong entirely to Jesus. …

All this is taken from St. Bernard and St. Bonaventure. According to them, we have three steps to take in order to reach God. The first, nearest to us and most suited to our capacity, is Mary; the second is Jesus Christ; the third is God the Father. To go to Jesus, we should go to Mary, our mediatrix of intercession. To go to God the Father, we must go to Jesus, our Mediator of redemption.16

Thus, we see that Mary being the Mediatrix of All Graces means that she assists her Son and is our help and our go-between with her Son, not because it was the only way that Our Lord could save souls but because it was the best way and was the way He willed to accomplish this work.

It is Infallible Catholic Doctrine that Mary Is the Mediatrix of All Graces

Mary being Mediatrix of All Graces is an excellent example of a Catholic dogma which was never defined by the Extraordinary Magisterium of the Church but which has always been infallibly taught by the consistent teaching of the Church’s Ordinary Magisterium.

But before we get to some of the principal teachings of this dogma, let us recall some important truths of the catechism concerning the difference between the Church’s infallible Ordinary Magisterium, as compared to the Church’s Extraordinary Magisterium:

  • All that God has divinely revealed to man is called Divine Revelation.

  • Divine Revelation has two founts (i.e., sources): Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

  • Since God is its Author, all that is contained in Divine Revelation is certain, true, and is part of the Catholic Faith.

  • The Catholic Church is the guardian and sole interpreter of Divine Revelation, and teaches the Faithful all the contents of Divine Revelation. This teaching authority is called Her Magisterium.

  • God has given the Church the gift of infallibility – the gift of being unable to err when authoritatively teaching the whole Church anything about Faith or morals.

  • All of these truths which she teaches infallibly are called dogmas (i.e., doctrines).

  • She can teach dogmas to the Faithful using either Her extraordinary infallible Magisterium or Her ordinary infallible Magisterium. Both the ordinary and extraordinary magisterial methods faithfully transmit dogmas to the Faithful without error.


  • The easier method to understand, and the one most Catholics are familiar with, is the extraordinary Magisterium. A declaration of the Church’s extraordinary Magisterium is a single declaration which includes the conditions which show that this single declaration itself is infallible.


  • By contrast, the Church’s ordinary Magisterium is not infallible in virtue of one particular declaration. But it is the chain of teachings by Church authorities which show that the same truth was always taught and held by the Church and for this reason it is included in the body of the truths of the Faith because it was always taught and held by the Church since the time of the apostles.


Having now recalled what it means that a truth is taught by the infallible Ordinary Magisterium of the Church, let us now read a sampling of the most important (among countless other) occasions on which the Catholic Church has taught the dogma that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

We start with some of the many occasions on which the Church taught this doctrine shortly before the Vatican II revolution in the human element of the Church. Then, after these more recent occasions, we will proceed to set forth some of the countless occasions on which this doctrine was taught throughout Church history.

Pope Pius XII – (reigned 1939-1958)

In his encyclical Mediator Dei, Pope Pius XII emphasizes the universality of Mary’s role as dispenser of grace, saying:

She gives us her Son and with Him all the help we need, for God ‘wished us to have everything through Mary’.17

Pope Pius XII declared that the Blessed Virgin Mary is the “the Mediatrix of peace”,18 showing not only that she is mediatrix, but also that her mediation pertains to grace, which is the source of our peace with God (as shown above).

In his Apostolic Exhortation Menti Nostrae, Pope Pius XII declared:

To the Beloved Mother of God, mediatrix of heavenly graces, We entrust the priests of the whole world in order that, through her intercession, God will vouchsafe a generous outpouring of His Spirit which will move all ministers of the altar to holiness and, through their ministry, will spiritually renew the face of the earth.19

Pope Pius XI – (reigned 1922-1939)

When urging the faithful to Eucharistic adoration, Pope Pius XI invokes Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces, in the following words:

Let, therefore, this year the Feast of the Sacred Heart be for the whole Church one of holy rivalry of reparation and supplication. Let the faithful hasten in large numbers to the eucharistic board, hasten to the foot of the altar to adore the Redeemer of the world, under the veils of the Sacrament, that you, Venerable Brethren, will have solemnly exposed that day in all churches, let them pour out to that Merciful Heart that has known all the griefs of the human heart, the fullness of their sorrow, the steadfastness of their faith, the trust of their hope, the ardor of their charity. Let them pray to Him, interposing likewise the powerful patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of all graces, for themselves and for their families, for their country, for the Church; let them pray to Him for the Vicar of Christ on earth and for all the other Pastors, who share with him the dread burden of the spiritual government of souls; let them pray for their brethren who believe, for their brethren who err, for unbelievers, for infidels, even for the enemies of God and the Church, that they may be converted, and let them pray for the whole of poor mankind.20

When promoting devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Pope Pius XI closes with this edifying consideration:

Trusting in her intercession with Christ, who whereas He is the “one mediator of God and men” (1 Timothy ii, 5), chose to make His Mother the advocate of sinners, and the minister and mediatress of grace ….21

Pope Pius XI teaches that Our Lady is the mediatrix of all good that comes to us. Here are his words:

We know, though, that everything comes to us from Almighty God through the hands of Our Lady.22

Pope Benedict XV – (reigned 1914-1922) – (including the authority of St. Dominic)

Pope Benedict XV not only taught that Our Lady makes the decisions and administers [the Latin is “administra et arbitra”] all graces given to mankind, but the pope also taught that St. Dominic knew this same truth too. Here are the pope’s words in an encyclical on St. Dominic:

He [St. Dominic] knew that Mary’s influence with her Divine Son was such that whatever graces He confers on men, it was for her to judge and distribute them.23

(Catholic Candle note: When we read the truth (as here) that it was for Mary to judge what graces to give to men, it “goes without saying” that God gave her the knowledge and wisdom to decide perfectly and that her will was perfectly conformed to His Will.)


Pope St. Pius X (1903-1914) – (including the authority of St. Bernardine of Sienna)

This saintly pope declared that Our Lady merited to be “Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.”24 The word “dispensatrix” here describes the same role as “mediatrix” of all graces.

Because all good comes from Our Lord through Mary, Pope St. Pius X calls her the “Neck” of the Mystical Body of Christ. Here are his words, quoting St. Bernardine of Sienna:

It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received" (John i., 16), "from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head – We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).25

Pope St. Pius X then proceeds to explain in more detail the meaning of Mary being the conduit of all graces from her Son and why this is fitting and is the perfect way for God to accomplish the salvation of the elect:

We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace – a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary surpasses [praestat] all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us de congruo, in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us de condigno,26 and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son – a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).27

Pope Leo XIII (reigned 1878-1903) – (including the authority of St. Bernardine of Sienna)

Pope Leo XIII taught not only that Mary is the distributor of all mercies from God but also that she is the mediatrix between mankind and her Son. Here are the pope’s words:

[B]y the will of God, Mary is the intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies [viz., from Our Lord’s Passion and Death] gathered by God; for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ. Thus, as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother. … Mary is this glorious intermediary; she is the mighty Mother of the Almighty; but – what is still sweeter – she is gentle, extreme in tenderness, of a limitless loving-kindness.28

The pope elaborates on this doctrine, teaching that she is the continual Mediatrix of All Graces because she is holier and more pleasing to God than all angels and saints. Here are his words:

The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace; being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.29

The pope explains that all good comes to us through Mary:

Now may God, “Who in His most merciful Providence gave us this Mediatrix.” and “decreed that all good should come to us by the hands of Mary” (St. Bernard), receive propitiously our common prayers and fulfill our common hopes.30

Adopting the teaching of St. Bernardine of Siena as his own, Pope Leo XIII further teaches that all good comes from God to Christ as Man, and from Christ to His Mother Mary and then from her to us. Here are the pope’s words:

Thus, is confirmed that law of merciful meditation of which We have spoken, and which St. Bernardine of Siena thus expresses: “Every grace granted to man has three degrees in order; for by God it is communicated to Christ [viz., as Man], from Christ it passes to the Virgin, and from the Virgin it descends to us.”31

The pope states that her power is “all but unlimited” and will last forever:

She who was so intimately associated with the mystery of human salvation is just as closely associated with the distribution of the graces which for all time will flow from the Redemption.

The power thus put into her hands is all but unlimited. … Among her many other titles we find her hailed as “our Lady, our Mediatrix,” “the Reparatrix of the whole world,” “the Dispenser of all heavenly gifts.”32

Pope Leo XIII then turns the eyes of his soul to Our Lady and prays:

O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.33

Pope Pius IX (1846-1878)

In 1849, in an encyclical on the Immaculate Conception, Pope Pius IX taught that:

God has committed to Mary the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will, that we obtain everything through Mary.34

Pope Pius IX taught many important truths about the Glorious Mother of God and her mediation for us with her Son. For example:

The Mother of God is the seat of all divine graces and is adorned with all gifts of the Holy Ghost. To them Mary is an almost infinite treasury. … The only one who has become the dwelling place of all the graces of the most Holy Spirit. … [She] stands at the right hand of her only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, she presents our petitions in a most efficacious manner. What she asks, she obtains. Her pleas can never be unheard. … who, is the most powerful Mediatrix and Conciliatrix of the whole world with her only-begotten Son.35


St. Alphonsus de Liguori — Doctor of the Church (1696-1787)

Here is the great Doctor of the Church, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, singing the great glories of the Mother of God:

That Mary was more holy in the first moment of her existence than all the Saints together, is founded on the great office of mediatress of men, with which she was charged from the beginning; and which made it necessary that she should possess a greater treasure of grace from the beginning than all other men together.36

St. Alphonsus explains in what way the Blessed Virgin Mary’s role is necessary, that is, in order for God’s Plan to be perfect:

That it is most useful to have recourse to the intercession of Mary can only be doubted by those who do not have the faith. … [T]he intercession of Mary is even necessary to salvation: we say necessary – not absolutely, but morally. This necessity proceeds from the Will of God Itself, that all graces that He dispenses should pass through the hands of Mary ….37

St. Alphonsus explains further the role of God’s Mother:

We acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the only mediator of justice, as we have stated above, who by His merits obtains for us grace and salvation; but we affirm that Mary is the mediatrix of grace, and although whatever she obtains, she obtains through the merits of Jesus Christ, and because she prays and asks for it in the name of Jesus Christ, yet whatever favors we ask are all obtained through her intercession.38

He [God] takes great complacency [i.e., satisfaction] in seeing His mother honored, and therefore wishes, as St. Bernard says, that all the graces we receive should pass through her hands.39

St. Peter Canisius – Doctor of the Church (1521-1597) – (including the teaching of St. Fulgentius)

Quoting St. Fulgentius with approval, St. Peter Canisius, Doctor of the Church, poetically proclaims that Mary is the ladder of heaven, by which men are saved. Here are his words:

Mary was made the window of heaven because by her, God gave true light unto the world. Mary was made the ladder of heaven because by her, God descended down to earth, that by her also men may ascend unto heaven.40

St. Peter Canisius here poetically teaches, although in other words, that Our Lady is the Neck of the Mystical Body of Christ, through whom her Son’s blessings come to us and through her we go to her Son.

In the Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary (also known as the Litany of Loretto) we pray to her as the Gate of Heaven. This invocation has the same meaning, in different poetic words, as calling her our ladder to heaven and the neck of the Mystical Body of Christ. She is our way of getting to heaven and reaching her Son.

St. Thomas Aquinas – Greatest Doctor of the Church (1225-1274)

St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, teaches that Our Lady has so much grace at her disposal that this grace suffices for the salvation of all men and that she is man’s mediatrix with her Son. Here are his words showing how fully endowed Our Lady is with the graces we need:

As much as regards it [viz., grace] overflowing unto all men. For it is a great thing in any saint, when he has so much of grace that it suffices for the salvation of many; but when one has so much that it would suffice for the salvation of all men of the world, this would be the greatest; and this is in Christ, and in the Blessed Virgin. For in every danger, you can obtain salvation from the glorious Virgin Herself.41

Second, here St. Thomas explains that Our Lady fulfills the role of superintending42 the good things we receive from her Son:

At this physical marriage [viz., at Cana, recounted in St. John’s Gospel, Ch.2] some role in the miracle belongs to the mother of Christ, some to Christ, and some to the disciples. When he [viz., St. John the Evangelist] says, When the wine ran out, he indicates the part of each. The role of Christ’s mother was to superintend the miracle; the role of Christ to perform it; and the disciples were to bear witness to it. As to the first, Christ’s mother assumed the role of a mediatrix. Hence she does two things. First, she intercedes with her Son. In the second place, she instructs the servants. As to the first, two things are mentioned. First, his mother’s intercession; secondly, the answer of her Son.43

St. Bonaventure — Doctor of the Church (1221-1274)

St. Bonaventure urges all mankind to praise the Blessed Virgin Mary in these words:

Exalt her and praise her, all the human race: because the Lord my God has given to thee [viz., the human race] such a mediatrix.44

Speaking directly to Our Lady, St. Bonaventure stated:

Thou art the Mediatrix of God, and the lover of men: the heavenly Illuminatrix of mortal men.45

Lastly, St. Bonaventure declares:

Mary is the most faithful mediatrix of our salvation.46

St. Albert the Great – Doctor of the Church (1200-1280)

St. Albert the Great calls Mary the universal dispenser of all of the goods coming from her Son. Here are his words:

The Blessed Virgin Mary is the Queen of all those things of which God is the Lord. In her is known the singular excellence of the true Sun – without corruption, without diminution, or weakening; in which is expressed the special character [viz., Immaculate] of her conception; who is the universal distributor of all goodness.47

St. Anthony of Padua – Doctor of the Church (1195-1231)

St. Anthony of Padua emphasizes Our Lady’s role as mediatrix making peace between God and man:

The Blessed Virgin Mary, our mediatrix, re-established peace between God and the sinner.48

As shown above, Our Lady makes peace between us and her Son by distributing the graces of her Son in order to make us friends of God and no longer His enemies.

St. Bernard of Clairvaux – Doctor of the Church (1090-1153)

Praying to Our Lady, St. Bernard of Clairvaux implores her help as mediatrix, to reconcile us to her Son:

Let thy boundless charity cover the multitude of our sins, and thy glorious fruitfulness bring us an abundance of mercies. Our Lady, Our Mediatrix, present us to Thy Son. Speak for us to Thy Son.49

St. Bernard teaches that Our Lady has this role in the salvation of the elect because that is the way God wants it – the best way:

It was given to Mary that thou mightest receive through her hands whatever good was destined for thee – through her hands … because it is the will of God that we should have nothing which has not passed through the hands of Mary.50

Further, in his hymn Daily, Daily, Sing to Mary (which St. Bernard composed and which emphasizes the truth that Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces), he teaches that “All our graces flow through MaryAdvocateMediatrix of All GraceHeaven’s blessings she dispensesGate of Heaven …”


St. Germanus of Constantinople – Father of the Church (634-740)

St. Germanus teaches:

For in thee also we have been given a pledge of eternal life, and, through thy going [viz., assumed into heaven], in thee we gain a Mediatrix with God.51

St. Ephrem the Syrian – Doctor of the Church (c. 306-373 A.D.)

St. Ephrem says, addressing the Blessed Virgin Mary : “After the Mediator thou art the mediatrix of the whole world ”.52

St. Ephrem also addresses the Mother of God in these words: “In thee, patroness and mediatrix with God53

St. Irenaeus – Father of the Church (circa 125-202 A.D.)

St. Irenaeus compares the New Eve, (viz., Our Lady), to the First Eve, the wife of Adam, declaring that Our Lady was a cause of the salvation of all of the elect. Here are his words:

As she [viz., Eve] who had Adam as her husband, but was nevertheless a virgin, was disobedient, and thereby became the cause of death to herself and to the whole of mankind, so also Mary, who had a pre-ordained husband, and was still a virgin, by her obedience became a cause of her own salvation and the salvation of the whole human race.54

Our Lord Taught Us by His Own Example That Mary His Mother is the Mediatrix of the Good Coming from Him

St. John the Evangelist recounts how, at the wedding feast at Cana, Our Lord performed His first miracle at the behest of His mother (who interceded for a bridal couple).

And the wine failing, the mother of Jesus saith to him: They have no wine. And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what is that to Me and to thee? My hour is not yet come. His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever He shall say to you, do ye.55

Our Lord does all things perfectly. Here He gives us the perfect example of bestowing His blessings upon people through the intercession (mediation) of His mother. This is how He Wills to bestow His blessings upon us.

As quoted above, commenting on this first of Our Lord’s miracles, St. Thomas teaches that:

The role of Christ’s mother was to superintend the miracle; the role of Christ to perform it; … Christ’s mother assumed the role of a mediatrix. Hence … she intercedes with her Son.56


The Holy Ghost Teaches Us That All Grace Comes Through Mary

In the Book of Ecclesiasticus, it states:

I am the mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope. In me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue.57

The Catholic Church teaches us that these words are prophetically spoken by Our Lady and the Church uses them – putting these words in her mouth – in the Mass for the Feast of Immaculate Heart of Mary.

The Holy Ghost, Who is the Chief author of these words, teaches us that all grace comes through Our Lady, His Spouse. She is “the mother” and in her “is all grace of [her Son Who is] the Way and the Truth” and the Life (as Our Lord describes Himself).58


So We See the Catholic Dogma is that Our Lady is Mediatrix of All Graces. What Does Pope Leo XIV Teach in Mater Populi Fidelis?

Pope Leo is largely proving himself to be “cut out of the same cloth” as Pope Francis, minus some of Pope Francis’s attention-grabbing stunts.

Pope Leo XIV falsely teaches that Our Lady cannot be the “universal dispenser of grace”. Here are his words:

No human person — not even the Apostles or the Blessed Virgin — can act as a universal dispenser of grace. Only God can bestow grace, and he [sic] does so through the humanity of Christ. … any expression about her “mediation” in grace must be understood as a distant analogy to Christ and his [sic] unique mediation.59

Notice that this quote – approved by Pope Leo XIV, who is supposedly so “zealous” for the honor of Christ even to the point that he is supposedly concerned that Our Lady will detract from her Son’s honor – nonetheless fails to accord to Our Lord even the customary honor of capitalizing the pronouns which refer to Him.

Here is another of Pope Leo XIV’s insulting denials of Our Lady’s prerogatives:

In the perfect immediacy between a human being and God in the communication of grace, not even Mary can intervene.60

Pope Leo XIV makes it worse by saying not only is Our Lady not the Mediatrix of All Graces, but she is not the mediatrix of any graces:

Neither friendship with Jesus Christ nor the Trinitarian indwelling can be conceived of as something that comes to us through Mary ….61

Pope Leo XIV says that Mary’s role is reduced to desiring good for us, praying for us. He says:

[W]hat we can say is that Mary desires this good for us and she asks for it, together with us.62

Pope Leo XIV says she accompanies us (using the fad conciliar jargon):

[Mary’s role is that] “she has accompanied [her children] on their way to the
Lord.
63

Pope Leo XIV says that Our Lady encourages us, and helps us to prepare ourselves. Also, Pope Leo says – blasphemously – that Mary even helps us to see that she is not a mediatrix with her Son! Here are the pope’s words:

Mary’s motherhood in the order of grace must be understood as a help in preparing us to receive God’s sanctifying grace. This can be seen in how, on the one hand, her maternal intercession is the expression of that “maternal help” which allows us to recognize Christ as the sole Mediator between God and humanity. On the other hand, her maternal presence in our lives does not preclude various actions from Mary aimed at encouraging us to open our hearts to Christ’s activity in the Holy Spirit. In this way, she helps us — in various ways — to prepare ourselves to receive the life of grace that only the Lord can pour into us. 64

Pope Leo XIV explicitly rejects the chain of mediation between God and man:

[O]ne should avoid any description that would suggest a Neoplatonic-like outpouring of grace by stages, as if God’s grace were descending through various intermediaries (such as Mary).65

Notice Pope Leo’s mockery of Our Lady as Mediatrix, by scoffing that it would be “Neoplatonic-like”.

Further, by the scope of his statement (and although presumably unintended by him), Pope Leo XIV seems even to reject that any grace from God “descends” to us through the Human Nature of Christ. Of course, Pope Leo intends by these words (above) to reject the mediation by Our Lady and to specifically reject the three-fold steps from God, to the Man Christ, to His Mother, to us, as traditionally taught by the Catholic Church, for example:

All this is taken from St. Bernard and St. Bonaventure. According to them, we have three steps to take in order to reach God. The first, nearest to us and most suited to our capacity, is Mary; the second is Jesus Christ; the third is God the Father. To go to Jesus, we should go to Mary, our mediatrix of intercession. To go to God the Father, we must go to Jesus, our Mediator of redemption.66

Pope Leo XIV continues, citing and quoting Vatican II, and warns Catholics not “to attribute to her some form of a perfective intervention, perfective instrumentality, or secondary causality in the communication of sanctifying grace 67

The truth, though, is that this secondary causality is exactly what the Church has always infallibly taught about Mary’s role as mediatrix!

Pope Leo XIV denies that Our Lady, is Mediatrix of All Graces, and in this way is God’s tool for our salvation. Here are Pope Leo XIV’s words:

[S]he [viz., Our Lady] does not add anything to Christ’s salvific mediation in the communication of grace, she should not be regarded as the instrumental agent of that free bestowal.68

Further, in the quote below, when denying the dogma of Our Lady, as Mediatrix of All Graces, Pope Leo XIV especially singles out for denial the words of the traditional hymn Hail, Holy Queen Enthroned Above, where the hymn calls Our Lady “The Spring thorough which All Graces Flow”.

Here are Pope Leo’s impious words:

She [viz., Mary] is also frequently portrayed or imagined as a fountain from which all grace flows. If one considers the fact that the Trinitarian indwelling (uncreated grace) and our participation in the divine life (created grace) are inseparable, we cannot think that this mystery depends on a “passage” through Mary’s hands. Such notions elevate Mary so highly that Christ’s own centrality may disappear or, at least, become conditioned.69

Pope Leo XIV’s only “authority” for his denial of the Our Lady, as Mediatrix of All Graces is his fellow conciliar revolutionary and prior conciliar pope, Benedict XVI, before becoming pope:

Cardinal Ratzinger already affirmed that the title “Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces” was not clearly grounded in Revelation.  In line with this conviction, we can recognize the difficulties this title poses, both in terms of theological reflection and spirituality.70

Our Reaction to Pope Leo XIV’s Insults to the Glorious Mother of God

These are wicked words of Pope Leo XIV! These words should make the blood boil of any loyal son of Mary, in a way similar to, but greater than, when a man hears his own earthly mother being ridiculed or insulted.

King St. Louis IX of France advised that attacks on our Holy Catholic Faith are sometimes best answered by deeds:

[N]o man, unless he is a skilled theologian, should debate with Jews.  Instead, when a layman hears the Christian law slandered, he should defend it only with his sword, which he should thrust into the offender’s guts as far as it will go.71

We should respond to Pope Leo XIV’s vile words, not with a sword, but with the spiritual weapon of our Rosaries.

Conclusion

One of the hallmarks of the conciliar revolution is its continual efforts to minimize the Glorious Mother of God. One of the ways we must be counter-revolutionary is by devoting ourselves to her and honoring her at every opportunity, including as the glorious Mediatrix of All Graces!

Truly, Pope St. Pius X’s description – “wretched and unhappy72 – applies well to Pope Leo XIV with his evil program of minimizing the honor of Our Lady.

Let us pray hard for him and to Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces!

1 Quoted from St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Third Sermon for Advent, entitled: On the Three Advents of the Lord and the Seven Pillars which we ought to erect within us.

2 Vatican II’s document, Lumen Gentium, §67 (emphasis added).

To read further about how Vatican II minimized devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, read Lumen Gentium Annotated, by Quanta Cura Press, © 2013, pp.277-301. This book is available at:

3 Pope St. Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1904, #15 (emphasis added).

4 Mater Populi Fidelis, Section 66, approved by Pope Leo XIV on October 7, 2025 (emphasis added). This document can be found here; https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20251104_mater-populi-fidelis_en.html

5 To start with, notice that the title of Pope Leo XIV’s document (Mater Populi Fidelis) already shows he is minimizing the honor of Our Lady. The document’s title does not compliment or praise her. Rather, it compliments “us”, that is, the people! The title translates to “Mother of the faithful people”.

6 We cannot know whether the pope (or anyone else) is a formal heretic (rather than a material heretic only) – and thus whether he is outside the true Catholic Church based simply on his persistent, public teaching of a heretical opinion. Read more about this principle here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/09/26/cc-in-brief-sedevacantist-questions/

Further, we must not judge a man to be a formal heretic if he professes to be Catholic and says he believes what a Catholic must believe now, in order to be Catholic now. When a person professes a heretical opinion, we must judge him in the most favorable light (if we judge him at all). So, we must avoid the sin of rash judgment and we must not judge negatively the interior culpability of the pope and the 1.4 billion people who profess to be Catholic. We must not judge they are not “real” Catholics if they tell us that they are Catholics. Instead, we should count them as Catholics who are very confused or are uninformed.

Thus, we must judge the conciliar popes to have been material heretics, not formal heretics (if we judge them at all), and that each was pope in his turn until his death (or abdication). Regarding any of the world’s 1.4 billion self-described Catholics who hold heresy, we must judge them to be material heretics only (if we judge them at all), unless they themselves tell us that they know they don’t qualify to be Catholics. Read more about this principle here: https://catholiccandle.org/2024/10/24/are-we-allowed-to-decide-that-pope-francis-knows-he-is-not-catholic/

In fact, not only is it possible for a pope to teach (or believe) heresy but popes have taught and believed heresy at various times during Church history and still continued to be pope. To read an analysis of this principle and especially to consider the cases of Pope John XXII and Pope Nicholas I, who both taught explicit heresy while pope and nonetheless continued to be the pope, read this article here: It is Possible for a Pope to Teach Heresy and Remain the Pope?: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/01/27/it-is-possible-for-a-pope-to-teach-heresy-and-remain-the-pope/

11 Summa, IIa IIae, Q.172, a.4, Respondeo.

12 Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, explains this truth:

It is written (John 15:15): “I will not now call you servants . . . but My friends.” Now this was said to them by reason of nothing else than charity. Therefore, charity is friendship. …

According to the Philosopher (Ethic. viii, 2,3) not every love has the character of friendship, but that love which is together with benevolence, when, to wit, we love someone so as to wish good to him. If, however, we do not wish good to what we love, but wish its good for ourselves, (thus we are said to love wine, or a horse, or the like), it is love not of friendship, but of a kind of concupiscence. For it would be absurd to speak of having friendship for wine or for a horse.

Yet neither does well-wishing suffice for friendship, for a certain mutual love is requisite, since friendship is between friend and friend: and this well-wishing is founded on some kind of communication.

Accordingly, since there is a communication between man and God, inasmuch as He communicates His happiness to us, some kind of friendship must needs be based on this same communication, of which it is written (1 Corinthians 1:9): “God is faithful: by Whom you are called unto the fellowship of His Son.” The love which is based on this communication, is charity: wherefore it is evident that charity is the friendship of man for God.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.23, a.1, sed contra and respondeo (emphasis added).

13 Here is how St. Thomas explains this truth:

[E]ach and every creature exists for the perfection of the entire universe. Furthermore, the entire universe, with all its parts, is ordained towards God as its end, inasmuch as it imitates, as it were, and shows forth the Divine goodness, to the glory of God.

Summa, Ia, Q.65., a2, respondeo.

14 Here is St. Thomas’ fuller explanation of this truth:

It is the part of the best agent to produce an effect which is best in its entirety; but this does not mean that He makes every part of the whole the best absolutely, but in proportion to the whole; in the case of an animal, for instance, its goodness would be taken away if every part of it had the dignity of an eye. Thus, therefore, God also made the universe to be best as a whole, according to the mode of a creature; whereas He did not make each single creature best, but one better than another. And therefore, we find it said of each creature, “God saw the light, that it was good” (Genesis, 1:4); and in like manner, each one of the rest. But of all together it is said, “God saw all the things that He had made, and they were very good” (Genesis, 1:31).

Summa, Ia, Q.47, a.2, ad 1 (emphasis added).

15 St Louis Marie de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, No. 25 (emphasis added).

16 St Louis Marie de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, No. 55 & 86 (emphasis added).

17 Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947, (quoting St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church; emphasis added).

18 Ad Caeli Reginam, (On Proclaiming The Queenship Of Mary), October 11, 1954, #51.

19 Apostolic Exhortation, Menti Nostrae, September 23, 1950, #143 (emphasis added).

20 Caritate Christi Compulsi (On the Sacred Heart), Encyclical of Pope Pius XI Promulgated On May 3, 1932, #31 (emphasis added).

21 Pope Pius XI, Miserentissimus Redemptor, (On Reparation To The Sacred Heart), May 8th, 1928, #21 (emphasis added).

22 Pope Pius XI, Ingravescentibus malis, September 29, 1937, #32 (emphasis added).

23 Pope Benedict XV, Fausto Appetente Die (On St. Dominic), June 29, 1921, #11.

24 Pope St. Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1904, #12.

25 Pope St. Pius X, Acta Romani Pontificis, 1904, p.449, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1904, #13 (emphasis added).

26 In other words, the distinction made here is that Our Lord merits the fruits of our redemption through strictly meriting these fruits. Our Lady merits these same fruits from a sort of fittingness, according to God’s Will.


27 Pope St. Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1904, #14 (emphasis added).

28 Pope Leo XIII, Octobri Mensis, September 22, 1891, #4 (emphasis added).

29 Pope Leo XIII, Iucunda Semper Expectatione (On the Rosary), September 8, 1894, #2 (emphasis added).

30 Pope Leo XIII, Iucunda Semper Expectatione (On the Rosary), September 8, 1894, #11 (emphasis added).

31 Pope Leo XIII, Iucunda Semper Expectatione (On the Rosary), September 8, 1894, #5 (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

32 Pope Leo XIII, Adiutricem (On the Rosary), September 5, 1895, ##7-8 (emphasis added).

33 Pope Leo XIII, Adiutricem (On the Rosary), September 5, 1895, #9 (emphasis added).

34 Pope Pius IX, Ubi Primum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1849, #5 (emphasis added).

35 Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus (On the Immaculate Conception), December 8, 1854 (emphasis added).

36 St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary, Discourse II on the Birth of Mary (emphasis added).

37 St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary, Pt.1, ch.5, §1 (emphasis added).

38 St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary, Pt.1, ch.5, §1 (emphasis added).

39 St. Alphonsus de Liguori, sermon for 5th Sunday after Easter, right at the end (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

40 Catechism of Christian Doctrine, Ch.2 on the Angelic Salutation (emphasis added).

41 St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Hail Mary §10 (emphasis added; bracketed words added).

42 “Superintend” means to have or exercise the charge and oversight of. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superintend

43 St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. John’s Gospel, Ch.2, Lecture 1, #344 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to show the context).

44 St. Bonaventure, Canticles in Honor of Mary, A Canticle on the Model of Isaias (XII) (emphasis added).

45 St. Bonaventure, Hymn after the model of the “Te Deum” (emphasis added).

46 Lecture 9 on the Blessed Virgin Mary, as quoted in St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary, Pt.1, ch.5 (emphasis added).

47 Quoted from St. Albert the Great, Questions on the Gospels, Q.29, art.2 (emphasis added).

Here is the original Latin (in which it is clear that the “who” refers to Our Lady, by the feminine pronoun “ipsa”):

Ipsa enim omnium quorum Deus dominus est, domina est. In quo notatur singularis excellentia veri solis, sine corruptione, vel diminutione, vel sui degeneratione : in quo exprim.untur proprietates conceptionis. Ipsa enim est divinarum illuminationum inmediate susceptiva, ipsa omnium bonitatum universaliter distributiva. 

48 Sermon on the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, section 11 (emphasis added).

49 St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermon for the First Sunday of Advent, Quoted from Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers, Vol. 1 (First Sunday of Advent) (emphasis added).

50 St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Third sermon for the vigil of the Nativity of Our Lord, On the Three Days, on the Three Watches, the Three Winds, and the Three Unions (emphasis added).

51 Sermon for the Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady, by Father of the Church, St. Germanus, in Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers, Toal, Vol.4, Regnery & Co., Chicago ©1963, p.421 (emphasis added).

52 Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ott, Roman Catholic Books, Fort Collins, CO, ©1954, Bk. 3 part three, p.211 (emphasis added).

53 Quoted from Mariolatry: New Phasis of an Old Fallacy, by Henry G. Ganss , Notre Dame Press, 1897, ch.18 (emphasis added). (This is a book against the error of minimizing devotion to Our Lady.)

54 St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, ch. 22 (emphasis added).

55 St. John’s Gospel, Ch. 2, vv. 3-5.

56 St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. John’s Gospel, Ch.2, Lecture 1, #344 (emphasis added).

57 Ecclesiasticus 24:24-25 (emphasis added).

58 Our Lord teaches that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. St. John’s Gospel, Ch.14, v.6 (emphasis added).

59 Mater Populi Fidelis, §53 (emphasis added).

60 Mater Populi Fidelis, §54.

61 Mater Populi Fidelis, §54.

62 Mater Populi Fidelis, §54.

63 Mater Populi Fidelis, §66.

64 Mater Populi Fidelis, §46 (emphasis added).

65 Mater Populi Fidelis, §55 (parenthetical words in the original).

66 St Louis Marie de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, No. 55 & 86 (emphasis added).

67 Mater Populi Fidelis, §65 (emphasis added).

68 Mater Populi Fidelis, §65 (emphasis added).

69 Mater Populi Fidelis, §45 (emphasis added).

70 Mater Populi Fidelis, §45.

71 These words of King St. Louis IX are quoted in the biography of St. Louis, written by John of Joinville, a courtier and fellow-crusader, Part I, Ch. 53, page 155, of the 2008 Penguin Classics edition which is called Chronicles of the Crusades, translated by Caroline Smith.

72 Pope St. Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), February 2, 1904, #15.