The New Mass does not give grace

 

We must always judge the claims people make, according to our Traditional Catholic Principles.  As one example: it is a core, unshakable Traditional Catholic Principle that Vatican II is a bad tree which can only bear bad fruit.  . 

 

In his war against Our Lord, the devil has endless false arguments which seek to deceive Catholics that bad fruit is really good fruit.  One such Satanic attempt to deceive Catholics is the following superficial “argument” that falsely concludes that the new mass gives Grace:

 

  The new mass is a Mass.

 

  The Mass gives Grace.

 

  Therefore, the new mass gives Grace.

 

Our Catholic Common Sense (judging according to Traditional Catholic Principles) causes us to know immediately that the hand of Satan is in this “argument”, because the new mass is a bad fruit of a bad tree.  No bad fruit is good and something evil cannot be a source of Grace.  Our Catholic Common Sense immediately “smells” the work of Satan, even if a Traditional Catholic leader or an “angel of light”[1] were to insist otherwise.

 

We know that the new mass always offends God and is inherently evil.[2]  God never uses something inherently evil as a source of Grace.  (However, when a person is ignorant and witnesses evil, God might use that particular time and place as the occasion to give His Grace, to help that person see the evil and make changes in his life.)

 

Further, if every mass gave Grace, then all evil (but valid) masses would give Grace.  This cannot be!  This would mean all (valid) masses of heretics and schismatics give Grace and thus, are good because they (supposedly) sanctify souls! 

 

We would also be forced to conclude that the (valid) masses of Satanists give Grace and are good, even though they are designed and conducted to mock our Lord and offend him as greatly as possible through the gravest possible sacrileges.  Our Catholic Common Sense knows immediately that this is Satan’s “argument” and that it must be false to say all valid masses give Grace.

 

That argument (above) no more proves the new mass gives Grace, than does the following (false) “argument” prove that all prayer pleases God:

 

  The Pharisee’s prayer[3] is a prayer.

 

  Prayer pleases God.

 

  Therefore, the Pharisee’s prayer pleases God.

 

Through our Catholic Common Sense, we know immediately that this argument is false, and Our Lord told us that God did not hear the Pharisee’s prayer.

 

The devil knows we have Catholic Common Sense and that this “argument” won’t fool us if we judge (and reject) this argument according to our Traditional Catholic Principles.

 

For this reason, the devil has additional “layers” of false arguments so that he can attempt to deceive by a subsequent “layer” of argument any persons who had managed to remain undeceived by his earlier fallacy.  His next “layer” of false argument involves presenting his fallacious “reasoning”, adding something like “Archbishop Lefebvre said this” or “St. Pius X taught this”.

 

A striking (and unfortunate) example of this type of demonic “argument”, is the one which currently deceives Bishop Williamson (and, tragically, which he is spreading).

 

Bishop Williamson used to say the new mass is inherently evil and no one should ever attend it.[4]  He now says that the Council of Trent’s infallible teaching shows that the new mass gives Grace.  Here are Bishop Williamson’s recent words:

 

I’m sure you ask yourselves: “What kind of world are my children going to have to grow up in? How are they going to keep the Faith?”  Very good question.  By prayer and Charity and by frequenting the sacraments, so long as they are still available, so long as it’s at all still possible to reach the sacraments.  And some Novus – I’ve got into quite a lot of controversy for saying this, but it’s true – there is no question that some Novus Ordo Masses are valid.[5]  And if they’re valid, then it’s defined by the Council of Trent that grace passes, “ex opere operato”, is the strict phrase.[6]

 

However much this superficial invocation of the Council of Trent deceives Bishop Williamson himself, the fact remains that our Catholic Common Sense immediately “smells the rat” despite mention of Trent.  Despite Traditional-sounding buzzwords, we know that the new mass is evil and cannot be a source of Grace.

 

To unmask this false argument, let us look more closely than Bishop Williamson did (in the conference quoted above), at his claim that the Council of Trent shows that the new mass gives Grace.

 

The Council of Trent truly states that Sacraments are instrumental causes of Grace (“ex opere operato”).  See, session VII, canon VIII.  The Council of Trent distinguishes (on the one hand) the seven Sacraments – which cause Grace – from other good works and prayers (on the other hand) through which we obtain Grace, which are not themselves causes of Grace.  Reciting a Hail Mary is not a direct cause of Grace.  Rather, it is a pious occasion which disposes us and prompts God to give Grace – but not through that prayer as a cause.

 

However, although Catholics know that the Sacraments cause Grace, it is against Catholic Teaching and Catholic Common Sense to wrongly jump to the conclusion that every valid Sacrament gives Grace, as Bishop Williamson asserts.  In other words, although the Sacraments are causes of grace, this does not mean that there aren’t obstacles which sometimes serve to prevent a valid Sacrament from giving Grace. 

 

Bishop Williamson’s superficial “reasoning” misses three key distinctions: 

 

1.    No “Grace passes” (to use Bishop Williamson’s expression) to a person receiving the Holy Eucharist in mortal sin, even when the Host is validly consecrated;

 

2.    No “Grace passes” when the Holy Eucharist is validly consecrated by a heretic or schismatic; and

 

3.    No “Grace passes” when the Holy Eucharist is validly consecrated but the rite of the Mass is sinful.

 

Below we examine these distinctions which show the falsehood of Bishop Williamson’s rash, overly broad claim that every time there is a valid Sacrament, “Grace passes” (i.e., is given).

 

 

1.       No “Grace Passes” to a Person in Mortal Sin Even When the Holy

          Eucharist is Validly Consecrated.

 

When Bishop Williamson says that, if a Sacrament is “valid, then it’s defined by the Council of Trent that grace passes”, he distorts the Council of Trent and makes a false, overly broad “rule” that a valid Sacrament always gives Grace.  If his rule were correct, then to receive the Holy Eucharist in mortal sin would give Grace.  But such Communion is a mortal sin of sacrilege, not a source of Grace.  Thus, Bishop Williamson’s rule is false (because it is overly broad) that every valid Sacrament gives Grace.

 

 

2.       No “Grace Passes” When the Holy Eucharist is Validly Consecrated

          by a Heretic.

 

Bishop Williamson’s second crucial omission is failing to consider valid Sacraments performed by heretics and schismatics.  Such (valid) Sacraments are mortal sins and God does not give His Grace through those Sacraments.  Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains this important truth:

 

[S]ome have contended that heretics, schismatics, and the excommunicate, who are outside the pale of the Church, cannot perform this Sacrament [viz., the Holy Eucharist]. But herein they are deceived, because, as Augustine says (Contra Parmen. ii), “it is one thing to lack something utterly, and another to have it improperly”; and in like fashion, “it is one thing not to bestow, and quite another to bestow, but not rightly.” … [S]ince the consecration of the Eucharist is an act which follows the power of order, such persons as are separated from the Church by heresy, schism, or excommunication, can indeed consecrate the Eucharist, which on being consecrated by them contains Christ’s true body and blood; but they act wrongly, and sin by doing so; and in consequence they do not receive the fruit of the sacrifice [viz., Grace]….

 

Summa, III, Q.82, a.7, Respondeo

 

This is a second reason Bishop Williamson is plainly wrong in his superficial misuse of the Council of Trent to support his assertion that “Grace passes” with every valid Sacrament. 

 

For any reader interested in further enumerations of the Catholic teaching that no “Grace passes” when valid Sacraments are given by heretics, see the teaching of St. Augustine, Pope Gregory XVI, St. Fulgentius, St. Bonaventure and St. Jerome, quoted (with citations) in Lumen Gentium Annotated, by Quanta Cura Press, pp. 117, 135 & 138, © 2013, available at: scribd.com/doc/158994906 (free) & at Amazon.com (sold at cost).

 

Concluding this section: Plainly, our Catholic Common Sense is confirmed by the teachings of the Catholic Faith, viz., even if a particular evil mass were valid, it is false and rash to judge that this mass gives Grace (as Bishop Williamson asserts).  This truth applies to all heretics and adherents to any false religions, including the new conciliar religion.[7]

 

 

3.       No “Grace Passes” When the Holy Eucharist is Validly Consecrated

          But the Rite of the Mass is Sinful.

 

Even when a Sacrament is valid, the Council of Trent nonetheless infallibly declares it is a mortal sin to omit the Catholic rites surrounding that Sacraments’ Matter and Form.  Here are the Council’s words:

 

If anyone saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted … let him be anathema.

 

Session VII, canon XIII.[8]

 

Thus, the Council of Trent verifies our Catholic Common Sense that a valid sacrament can be a mortal sin (and thus, not give Grace), because of omissions from (or additions to) the Catholic sacramental rite.  This is precisely the case of the new mass, which changes the Catholic rite surrounding the Sacrament’s Matter and Form so that it is inherently a mortal sin of sacrilege and thus, cannot cause Grace (even if we were to suppose the consecration were valid).

 

Let us pray for Bishop Williamson that he correct his grave errors promoting the new mass.  He has done great good in the past and it is possible for him to still do great good in the future.

 

 

 

 



[1]           “But though … an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.”   Galatians, 1:8.  St. Paul further explains that this “angel of light” is the devil: “Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light.”  II Cor. 11:14.

 

[2]           http://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/attendance-at-new-mass.html

[3]           “The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself:  ‘O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, as also is this publican.  I fast twice in a week:  I give tithes of all that I possess.’”  St. Luke, 18:11-12.

 

[5]           Bishop Williamson here supposes that if a new mass were to have a valid consecration, this would automatically mean that the new mass is a valid mass.  For purposes of this article, we leave aside – but do not grant – this unsupported assumption. 

 

Church law treats the Mass’s Offertory as one of the three main parts of the Mass without attending which, a Catholic has not attended Mass.  Thus, even if a person were to assume that a new mass’s consecration were valid, this does not allow us to conclude that such a new mass would be a valid mass as such, since the conciliar “offertory” is so radically different and might properly be called the very antithesis of the Catholic Offertory.  Thus, even if a person were to suppose that a new mass were to have a valid consecration, this is not enough to show that it is a valid mass because the new mass contains an “anti-Offertory”.

Also, Bishop Williamson here implicitly makes the unsupported assumption that some conciliar ordinations and consecrations are known to be valid – which is a necessary assumption to support his supposition that some new masses have definitely valid consecrations.  But the truth is that the validity of all conciliar “ordinations” and “consecrations” is inherently doubtful.  For a thorough explanation of this, see:

 

  http://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/new-ordination-doubtful.html

 

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGd2RRcTFSY29EYzg/view

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGZVF5cmFvMGdZM0U/view

 

[6]           May 20, 2016 conference available here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGcr24n8fJo begin at minute 22:00 (emphasis added).

[7]           We reject the new mass and all other aspects of new conciliar religion, just as we reject all aspects of all other false religions.  Although we reject their objective errors, we do not judge other persons’ subjective culpability for holding those grave errors.

 

For a thorough explanation of our Catholic duty to judge objective errors but not judge other persons’ subjective culpability, see the discussion of the moral sin of rash judgment here: http://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-5

[8]           For a thorough treatment of the evil of changing the Catholic rite of the Mass and thereby causing a valid Mass to be a mortal sin, not a source of Grace, see Summa Theologiae Moralis, vol. III, De Sacramentis, H. Noldin, S.J., p.245 et seq., Oeniponte, 1920.

Why is the indult Mass accepted by the compromising “trads”?

The answer, I believe, is that most people don’t realize the damage caused by the indult Mass, or they falsely believe the indult Mass is better than no Mass at all, (i.e., they must have a Mass).  Or it is easier to accept the indult Mass to go along to get along.  By attending the indult Mass a person implicitly shows that he accepts the new mass because the indult is only allowed under this condition.

Attending an indult Mass gives bad example, as does approval of the indult Mass by the N-SSPX, Bishop Williamson’s group, and other compromise groups.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre stated in a letter of Mar. 18, 1989, to Father Daniel Couture, “These Masses are scams which lead the faithful to compromise their principles!  Many have already abandoned them.”

If you attend the indult, you get a Faith-destroying sermon.  Who can believe a priest trained in Modernist schools and seminary for his whole life would give a Faith-strengthening sermon?  Not a chance.  This puts your Faith in jeopardy.  It’s all a plan to liberalize the faithful to accept the conciliar church.  It is offered as a “treat” but is actually a “trick.”

Archbishop Lefebvre understood that the enemies of Christ’s Kingship occupying Rome would not blush at using this Most Sacred Gift of God, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, in order to lure the resisting Catholics into the conciliar church.[1]  So, his warnings ring true for all the congregations and clergy who compromise (in any way!) with Vatican II, the new mass, the new Code of Canon Law, the new Profession of Faith and other conciliar changes!  Archbishop Lefebvre initiated a Catholic Resistance; we simply must continue resisting modernist Rome, “until we have a perfectly Catholic successor of Peter.”  (Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Four Bishops of SSPX, Aug. 20, 1987.)

To improve relations with Rome, the N-SSPX publicly thanked Rome for a (false) “freeing” of the Mass, (the July 2007 motu proprio), which can be used only by a priest who accepts the new mass.  Because of this and many other N-SSPX compromises, including unnecessary sacramental indults (for confession and marriage), uncompromising traditional Catholics should not attend N-SSPX Masses or support the N-SSPX.

By attending the indult Mass wherever it is offered, or by supporting the groups who approve attending it (e.g., the N-SSPX and Bishop Williamson’s group), you put your Faith in jeopardy.

Further, former Pope Benedict XVI wrote:

The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria [i.e., the Latin Tridentine Mass] must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass [i.e., the conciliar mass] or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria.[2]

I believe attendance at the indult Mass would be down if the priest saying the indult would start out by explaining each time that “If you are attending this Latin Mass under the Motu Proprio, you acknowledge that you accept the new mass.  If not, please leave and don’t come back.”

Not only did the N-SSPX thank Rome for the (false) "freeing" the Mass, they explicitly accept 95% of VC II.  Yet, many still overlook this, believing God will understand.  He is certainly merciful, but He is also just.

Below are other reasons for staying far away from the indult.  Would you attend the indult Mass offered by a priest who also offers a Black Mass?  If not, then why accept a priest who offers the sacrilegious new Mass?  The new mass is inherently harmful to souls and to the Catholic Faith.  Thus, it is a sacrilege because it fits the definition of sacrilege: viz., the “irreverent treatment of the sacred.”[3]

If a person attends an indult Mass in a church that is also used for the new mass, then he willingly uses for worship a place which is also set aside for the commission of sacrilege.  A place used for sacrilege is far more unfitting for Divine worship than a “neutral” place, like a rented meeting hall. 

Thus, when traditional Catholics compromise by choosing an indult Mass, they accept the conciliar hierarchy’s bait and they presume they will be strong enough and wise enough to discern and reject the accompanying conciliar poison.

 

That is the exact excuse friends of ours made to us in the late 1960s, when we left our local diocese parish in order to remain traditional Catholics.  They felt we should stay to fight on the inside and help the parish reject liberalism.  However, absolutely none who stayed on the inside remained faithful to the Catholic Faith.  None.

The question arises as to whether or not the indult Mass gives grace.  Although we know that God gives grace to whomever He pleases, whenever He pleases, He does not give grace because we offend Him (as we would offend Him by attending an indult Mass).

In conclusion, Archbishop Lefebvre called the indult Mass a scam, i.e., “a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation; to deceive and defraud.”[4]  He also stated in his Aug. 29, 1987, letter to the four new bishops of the SSPX that Rome permitted the indult Mass “in order to lure the resisting Catholics into the conciliar church!” 

So, let’s heed the faith-saving advice of Archbishop Lefebvre and stay completely away from all indult Masses and all compromise groups accepting indult Masses, like the N-SSPX.



[1]           The Vatican has clearly said that it continues on the course of post-conciliar errors and that these motu proprio (indult) Masses are designed to integrate traditional Catholics into the conciliar church. See, e.g., this article, where the Vatican calls the traditional Mass an “ecumenical bridge” and outlines the plan for using it as a step to blending the new mass and the traditional Mass.  http://www.zenit.org/article-32593?l=englishsee also, http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1101922.htm.

 

Cardinal Mayer (former president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission in charge of indult groups) candidly admitted the conciliar trap: “Sometimes a temporary solution may be necessary, such as allowing them [viz., conservative Catholics] the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass [of Pope St. Pius V].” See, Letter of Cardinal Mayer to Msgr. May, L’Homme Nouveau, March 19, 1989 (emphasis added), quoted at: http://www.sspx.org/motu_proprio/attendance_at_the_indult_vanes.htm

[2]           May 13, 2011 Instruction “Universae Ecclesiae” on the implementation of the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, ¶19 [bracketed words added for clarity].

 

[3]           Summa, IIa IIae, Q. 99, a.1.

 

[4]           Quoted from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scam

Complete Contentment Without the Mass When it is not available without compromise

Catholic Candle note:  In the human element of the Catholic Church, there is now a great crisis in the Faith.  The formerly traditional groups (e.g., the SSPX and the Williamson group) have compromised.  One consequence is that the Mass is usually not available to most faithful and informed Catholics because they refuse to go to a Mass offered by a priest in a compromise group.  

Many Catholics at various times in Church history have had to sanctify Sundays without the Mass, e.g., Japanese Catholics, for 300 years.  We recommend this article to help you do that: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/sanctifying-sunday-no-mass.html

However, the article below shows us that we should not be anxious or think that God has abandoned us when we do not have the Mass and sacraments because we reject compromise.  Rather, this is a glorious time to be a faithful Catholic and this crisis in the Faith is a blessing to strengthen our Faith![1]  As shown in the article below, we should be perfectly content that God placed us in the present time where the uncompromising Mass is rare.

God is our goal.  All other things – even very good things – are important only as means to attain and increase Divine friendship, which is the theological virtue of charity.[2]

The Mass and sacraments are usual (and wonderful) means through which God befriends a soul, infusing charity into the soul.  However, God sometimes chooses to use other means instead, as he has with many Catholics over the last 2000 years.[3] 

We must make ourselves indifferent to any particular means (even very good means) for arriving at our goal (viz., a continually deeper friendship with God).  We must only seek any particular means – including the Mass and sacraments – to the extent God wills us to have them.  No means are helpful to attain friendship with God unless God wants us to use those means in our circumstances.  We should not want any means – even very good means like the Mass – which God does not want us to use in our circumstances.

Here is how St. Ignatius of Loyola explains this truth in the Spiritual Exercises that he received from Our Lady, in the cave of Manresa, Spain, in 1522:

Man is created to praise, reverence, and serve God our Lord, and by this means to save his soul.  And the other things on the face of the earth are created for man that they may help him in prosecuting the end for which he is created.

From this it follows that man is to use them as much as they help him on to his end, and ought to rid himself of them so far as they hinder him as to it.  For this it is necessary to make ourselves indifferent to all created things in all that is allowed to the choice of our free will and is not prohibited to it; so that, on our part, we want not health rather than sickness, riches rather than poverty, honor rather than dishonor, long rather than short life, and so in all the rest; desiring and choosing only what is most conducive for us to the end for which we are created.[4]

But we often fool ourselves that we are doing God’s will, when we are really seeking to do our own will.  For example, we justify attending Mass with a compromise group because “I need my sacraments to grow closer to God”.  We are discontent without the Mass because being without the Mass is not the means we choose for sanctifying our souls.

St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, calls a “childish” to worry about God-given circumstances that keep us from attending Mass or receiving the sacraments.  Here are St. Alphonsus’ words:

How childish the pretense of those who protest they wish for health not to escape suffering, but to serve our Lord better by being able to observe their Rule, to serve the community, go to church, receive Communion, do penance, study, work for souls in the confessional and pulpit!  Devout soul, tell me, why do you desire to do these things?  To please God?[5]

Let us no longer be childish or discontent that we do not have the Mass and sacraments available to us!  We should be perfectly content without them as long as God chooses that we have nowhere to attend Mass without compromise.  In the circumstances in which God has lovingly placed us, it pleases Him that we do not have the Mass and sacraments!  

As St. Alphonsus explains, it would displease God for us to attend Mass or receive the sacraments when God places us in the circumstances He has.   Here are St. Alphonsus’ words in the context of being unable to receive the sacraments because of sickness:

Why then search any further to please God when you are sure God does not wish these prayers, Communions, penances or studies, but he does wish that you suffer patiently this sickness he sends you?  Unite then your sufferings to those of our Lord.[6]

When a priest or group compromises, God does not Will the compromises as such, because they are sins.  However, God does Will the effect on us, viz., that we cannot attend Mass because of those compromises.  Here is the way St. Alphonsus explains this truth:

It is true, when one offends us unjustly, God does not will his sin, nor does he concur in the sinner’s bad will; but God does, in a general way, concur in the material action by which such a one strikes us, robs us or does us an injury, so that God certainly wills the offense we suffer and it comes to us from His hands.  Thus, the Lord told David He would be the author of those things he would suffer at the hands of Absalom: “I will raise up evils against thee out of thy own house, and I will take thy wives before thy face and give them to thy neighbor.”  Hence too, God told the Jews that in punishment for their sins, He would send the Assyrians to plunder them and spread destruction among them: “The Assyrian is the rod and staff of my anger . . . I will send him to take away the spoils.”  “Assyrian wickedness served as God’s scourge for the Hebrews”, is St. Augustine’s comment on this text.  And our Lord Himself told St. Peter that His sacred passion came not so much from man as from His Father: “The chalice which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it?”[7]

Conclusion

It is easy to be glad to be healthy so that we can serve God better.  However, we should be equally glad to be sick, if God sends us sickness.  Thus, e.g., if our doctor tells us we should get a cancer screening test, we should be completely at peace while waiting for the test result.  If the test shows we have cancer, this is merely God showing us the next way He wills us to serve Him (i.e., with cancer).  Why would we want health if God shows us that He does not want it for us now?

Likewise, it is easy to rejoice to serve God through the Mass and sacraments.  However, we should be equally happy and completely content without them if God chooses this for us.  Why would we want the Mass and sacraments when God shows us that He does not want them for us now?

This is a glorious time to be Catholic!  Let us be grateful to God and perfectly content with the circumstances into which He has placed us, including being without the Mass!

Priests, as well as laymen, should have this perfect contentment

Priests also, are susceptible to fear and discontent if they feel alone because of the compromises of other priests.  Like laymen, they often rationalize that they must associate with compromise priests or bishops because they “need” a confessor, or they “need” holy oils and the sacrament of confirmation for their flock.  

This is the same childish pretense that St. Alphonsus condemns in the context of going to church and receiving Communion.  Instead, priests should give an example of a fearless and unshakeable Faith and perfect contentment without the sacraments when it is God’s Will.  That is the lesson they need to teach their flock.


[1]          Read this article about how the present crisis in the Church can help us strengthen our Faith: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/it-is-a-blessing-to-live-during-this-great-apostasy.html

[2]          Charity is inherently Friendship with God.  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.

[3]          For example, God used means other than the Mass and confession for 300 years with the Catholics in Japan, as well as in many other places, e.g., in France during the 1789 Masonic Revolution, and in Ecuador.  Read about these periods in which God sanctified souls without the Mass and confession here: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/sanctifying-sunday-no-mass.html

[4]          Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, beginning of the First Week, Principle and Foundation (emphasis added).

[5]          St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Complete Uniformity to God’s Will, §5 (emphasis added).  This work is available for free here: https://www.ecatholic2000.com/liguori/sal.shtml

[6]          St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Complete Uniformity to God’s Will, §5 (emphasis added).  This work is available for free here: https://www.ecatholic2000.com/liguori/sal.shtml

[7]          St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Complete Uniformity to God’s Will, §2.  This work is available for free here: https://www.ecatholic2000.com/liguori/sal.shtml