GOSPEL (Luke XVIII. 31-43.)

At that time, Jesus took unto him the twelve, and said to them Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things shall be accomplished which were written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man. For he shall be delivered to the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and scourged, and spit upon; and after they have scourged him, they will put him to death; and the third day he shall rise again. And they understood none of these things, and this word was hid from them, and they understood not the things that were said. Now it came to pass, when he drew nigh to Jericho, that a certain blind man sat by the way-side, begging. And when he heard the multitude passing by, he asked what this meant. And they told him that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by. And he cried out, saying: Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me. And they that went before rebuked him, that he should hold his peace. But he cried out much more: Son of David, have mercy on me. And Jesus standing, commanded him to be brought unto him. And when he was come near, he asked him, saying: What wilt thou that I do to thee? But he said: Lord, that I may see. And Jesus said to him: Receive thy sight; thy faith hath made thee whole. And immediately he saw, and followed him, glorifying God: and all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God.

Why did Christ so often foretell His passion to His disciples?

Because He wanted to show how great was His desire to suffer for us, for we speak often of that which we crave; and because He wished His disciples when they should see Him treated as a criminal and martyred, not to think evil of Him, or imagine themselves deceived, but remember that He had foretold all minutely that all happened of His own will.

Did not the disciples understand anything of what He predicted in regard to His future sufferings?

They may, certainly, have well understood He was to suffer, for which reason Peter tried to dissuade Him from it; (Matt. XVI. 22.) but they did not comprehend why or for what He would suffer, or how He would rise again. All this the Holy Ghost gave them to understand, after it had come to pass. (John XIV. 26.) The light of the Holy Ghost is of so much value, that without it even the clearest doctrines of faith are not understood.

Why does Christ so often call Himself the Son of Man?

He wished to show, in the Jewish way of speaking, He was also man, a descendant of Adam, and that we should be humble, and not seek or desire high titles.

Why did the blind man call Christ the Son of David?

Because, like all the Jews, he believed that the Messiah, according to humanity, would be of the house of David, as was promised. (Ps. CXXXI. 11.)

Why did Christ ask the blind man: What wilt thou that I do to thee?

This He asked, not because He was unaware of the blind man's wish, but to enable him the better to prove his faith and hope that through Christ he would receive his sight; and to teach us how willing He is to help us, and how it pleases Him if we confidingly place our wants before Him. We should learn from this blind man, who would not be restrained by the passing crowd in his ardent and reiterated request, not to pay attention, in the work we have commenced, to human respect, or human judgment, but to persevere, and not allow ourselves to be led astray by the world's mockery or contempt. We should also learn to be grateful to God, and faithfully cling to Him, if He has once opened the eyes of our mind, and healed our spiritual blindness, which is far more deplorable than physical blindness, for nothing can be more miserable than not to see and understand God, not to know what is necessary for our salvation, and what is pernicious.

Why is this gospel read on this Sunday?

The Church wishes to remind us of the painful passion and death of Jesus, and to move us by the contemplation of those mysteries to avoid and despise the wicked, heathenish amusements of carnival, sinful pleasures which she has always condemned, because they come from dark paganism, and, to avert the people from them, commands that during the three days of carnival the Blessed Sacrament shall be exposed for public adoration, sermons given, and the faithful exhorted to have recourse at this time to the Sacraments of Penance and the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar, with the reception of which Pope Clement XIII. (Breve, 23. June 1765) connected a plenary indulgence. A true Catholic will conform to the desire of his holy Church, considering the words which St. Augustine spoke, at this time, to the faithful, "The heathens (as also the wordly people of our days) shout songs of love and merriment, but you should delight in the preaching of the word of God; they rush to the dramatic plays, but you should hasten to Church; they are intoxicated, but you should fast and be sober."

PRAYER O most benign Jesus! Who didst so desire to suffer for us, grant, that we may willingly suffer for love of Thee; that we may hate and flee from the detestable pleasures of the world and the flesh, and practice penance and mortification, that by so doing we may merit to be released from our spiritual blindness to love Thee more and more ardently, and finally possess Thee forever.

INSTRUCTION ON LENT Who instituted Lent?

According to the fathers of the Church, Justin and Irenaeus, the fast before Easter was instituted and sanctified by Christ Himself; according to the saints Leo and Jerome, the holy apostles ordained it given by Jesus.

Why has the Church instituted this fast forty days before Easter?

To imitate Christ who fasted forty days; to participate in His merits and sufferings; to subject our flesh by voluntary mortification to the spirit, and to mortify our evil desires as did St. Paul; (Col. I. 24.) to enable us to lead a pure life, and thus prepare for the holy festival of Easter, and the reception of the divine Lamb, Jesus: and, finally, to render God satisfaction for our sins, and do penance, as Pope Gregory says, for the sins of one whole year by one short fast, lasting only the tenth part of a year.

Was the fast of Lent observed in early times as in the present?

Yes, but more strictly; for the people of the early ages not only abstained from meat, but also from all that which is connected with it, such as eggs, butter, cheese, etc., even from wine and fish, although this was not the general command of the Church; they fasted all day, and only ate in the evening after vespers, in remembrance of which, vespers are now said before dinner-time, because the Church, as a kind mother, now permits the supper to be changed into a dinner, and also allows something to be taken in the evening, that the body may not be too much weakened, and become unfit for labor.

How much does this ancient custom put to shame the Christians of today who think the fast in our times too severe! "But," asks St. Ambrose, "what sort of Christians are they? Christ, who never sinned fasted for our sins, and we will not fast for our own great and numerous offences?"

How should the holy season of Lent be spent?

As according to the teaching of St. Leo, the main thing in fasting is not that the body be deprived of food, but that the mind at the same time be withdrawn from wickedness, we should endeavor during Lent, not only to be temperate in eating and drinking, but especially to lead a modest life, sanctifying the days by persevering prayer and devoutly attending church.

PRAYER AT THE BEGINNING OF LENT

Almighty God! I unite myself at the beginning of this holy season of penance with the Church militant, endeavoring to make these days of real sorrow for my sins and crucifixion of the sensual man. O Lord Jesus! in union with Thy fasting and passion, I offer Thee my fasting in obedience to the Church, for Thy honor, and in thanksgiving for the many favors I have received, in satisfaction for my sins and the sins of others.

Remember, O man, that thou art dust, and unto dust thou shalt return.

-- The Straight Skinny (remember@man.thatthouartdust), February 21, 2004

Answers

In the current liturgical calendar used by over 99% of "Latin Catholics" in the Catholic Church, there is no celebration of something called "Quinquagesima Sunday." For almost all Catholics, this is an obsolete term, having been removed from the standard Catholic liturgical calendar by Pope Paul VI around 1969.

For the last 30+ years, the "-gesima" Sundays have been celebrated only by:
(1) certain non-Catholic (schismatic) Christians, such as
..... (a) the Society of St. Pius X,
..... (b) the (sedevacantist) Society of St. Pius V, and
..... (c) other quasi-SSPX "independent" groups that disobediently take part in Masses by various pre-1970 rites, without their local bishop's permission; and
(2) that fraction of 1% of Catholics who take part in Masses licitly celebrated according to the 1962 rite and approved by the local bishop.

In view of the fact that the calendar promulgated by Pope Paul VI is used by over 99% of Latin Catholics, the following is the only responsible course of action, to avoid confusion and conflict: All references to feasts, celebrations, etc., at this forum should refer to the papally approved calendar of about 35 years ago, unless a different calendar is explicitly specified.

Therefore, if someone from within that fraction of 1% of Catholics (who follow an older calendar and who attend licit "indult Masses") wishes to speak of one of its feasts, celebrations, etc., then he/she should identify the feast/celebration as coming from a pre-Vatican-II calendar. (Notice that this would be someone "from within" the Catholic Church, not from without her -- by the forum's definition of who is "within," not by his own definition.)

If someone wishes to speak of such a feast/celebration, but he does not attend a licitly celebrated "indult Mass," then that person should reveal that fact, so that all readers will know that the person posting is in one of the de iure or de facto schismatic categories mentioned at (1)-(a)(b)(c), above.

If a person posting about an older calendar fails to make the necessary revelation as to whether or not he is attending only a licitly celebrated "indult Mass," it will be assumed that he is in one of the schismatic categories, and this will be brought to the attention of everyone by an orthodox Catholic -- for the protection of the forum.

I am the "orthodox Catholic" today -- posting this message for the forum's protection.
The previous four paragraphs were posted four weeks ago, in the same originator's thread about "Septuagesima Sunday." That originator, both in the older thread and on this thread, has neglected to reveal the necessary information about the liceity of the Masses he attends, so it is necessary to assume that the person "is in one of the de iure or de facto schismatic categories mentioned at (1)-(a)(b)(c), above."

This "diagnosis" of schism is confirmed by the fact that the opening post of this thread contains the following statements that only a schismatic individual would make -- statements attempting to enforce obsolete disciplinary practices:
Why has the Church instituted this fast forty days before Easter? ... [T]o ... do penance ... for the sins of one whole year by one short fast, lasting only the tenth part of a year [about 40 days]. Was the fast of Lent observed in early times as in the present? Yes, but more strictly; for the people of the early ages not only abstained from meat, but also from all that which is connected with it ... [T]he Church, as a kind mother, now permits the supper to be changed into a dinner, and also allows something to be taken in the evening, that the body may not be too much weakened, and become unfit for labor.

The above wrongly implies that Catholics are now bound to fast and abstain on every day during Lent. Some schismatics (including the poor, misguided originator of this thread) follow this older discipline. But, since 1966, almost 40 years ago ... Catholics of the Latin Church (from birthday 21 through birthday 59) have been bound to fast only on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, and they (from birthday 14 through birthday 59) have been bound to abstain from meat only on each Friday during Lent and on the two aforementioned days of fast. Any additional fasting or abstinence is encouraged, but is voluntary.

-- An orthodox Catholic (The@Real.Truth), February 22, 2004.

The Epistle heard today, Quinquagesima Sunday:

1 Corinthians 13: 1-13

"Brethren, if I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not; dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; is not ambitious; seeketh not her own; is not provoked to anger; thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never falleth away: whether prophecies shall be made void, or tongues shall cease, or knowledge shall be destroyed. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part: but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away the things of a child. We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know even as I am known. And now there remain faith, hope, charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity."

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 22, 2004.

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away the things of a child.

Unfortunately, schismatics (like the person who started the thread) and many who support them still "sp[eak] ... underst[an]d ... [and] th[ink] as a child". Had each of them "bec[o]me a man," he would have "put away the things of a child", such as defiant disobedience of the Holy Father, the pope, such as attending illicitly celebrated Masses. Their childishness often leads them right into heresy as well.

The above reading is from Masses attended today by schismatics and by less than 1% of Latin Catholics. In Masses attended today by all remaining Latin Catholics, including the Vicar of Jesus Christ, Pope John Paul II ... (1) there was no such thing as "the Epistle" -- but rather the First Reading and the Second Reading -- ... (2) "today" was not "Quinquagesima Sunday" -- but rather the Seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time ... and (3) the readings did not include the text quoted above.

-- An orthodox Catholic (The@Real.Truth), February 22, 2004.

We are the blind man at the side of the road. If we have faith, and call out to Christ, He will make us see. Calling out to Christ means that though, it does not mean trusting in rituals to save us. The Jews of Jesus' day had plenty of them, yet the man remained blind. Faith in Jesus saved him, not a rite of mass.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 23, 2004.

3) the readings did not include the text quoted above.

4) It displeased God.

-- jake (j@k.e), February 23, 2004.

God is infinitely pleased with the offering of His Holy Son in Communion with all His faithful. We know it because He has revealed it. He hasn't revealed very much to you, I suspect.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 23, 2004.

Unfortunately, schismatics (like the person who started the thread) and many who support them still "sp[eak] ... underst[an] d ... [and] th[ink] as a child". Had each of them "bec[o]me a man," he would have "put away the things of a child",

Unless you become as little children, you shall not enter the kingdom of Heaven.

-- Isabel (joejoe1REMOVE@msn.com), February 25, 2004.

Unless you become as little children, you shall not enter the kingdom of Heaven.

As orthodox Catholics know, this is an exhortation to be childlike, trusting Holy Mother Church (for example, in her giving us a new liturgical calendar).
Schismatics, by contrast, are not childlike, but childish, unwilling to be obedient and accepting of their Mother Church's (and Holy Father's) decisions.

-- An orthodox Catholic (The@Real.Truth), February 26, 2004.

I also recall ''Being cunning as the serpent and mild as the dove.''

When Jake & Isabel sound off, we see not so much a mild serpent; but the cunning dove? Well-- ? sometimes.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 26, 2004.

unwilling to be obedient and accepting of their Mother Church's (and Holy Father's) decisions.

Insofar as those "decisions" involve: ecumenism, pandering to Jews and oither apostates, more destruction of the Mass, humanism, relativism, secularism, and Modernism....

I am most absolutely unwilling to be obedient. I would sooner die before showing any "obedience" to such errors of modern churchmen.

Including the Pope.

-- jake (j@k.e), February 26, 2004.

.

Got to wonder if Jake's into the sacramental wine again. lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 26, 2004.

(? ? ?)

''--unwilling to be obedient and accepting of their Mother Church's (and Holy Father's) decisions? Looks like Jake doesn't want to have anything to do with Mother Church and Holy Father. (But he's not in schism. No-- not that.)

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 26, 2004.