He's always insisted that the songs were 'out there' and he just copied them down. He has also asserted that his songs are in line with Scripture. To emphasise this, upon his official conversion to Christianity, he no longer sang the line in Masters of War, "even Jesus would not forgive what you do", recognising that there were no limits from His own side, to Jesus' Mercy. I once came across a blog, poignantly belonging to a man deceased by the time I found it, where he declared Dylan as the greatest Christian poet of the last fifty years. He was, God rest him, sufficiently grounded to qualify his statement by adding that the competition wasn't too strong. Still, that doesn't imply that Dylan isn't a very good one indeed, one who has the insight to write, for example, that he pays in Blood, but not his own. It is comical to read the alternative explanations to such lyrics by those Dylan fans who do not understand, or refuse to be seen to understand, their meaning. The broadest consensus is that Dylan has taken to becoming a violent man in his old age! They interpret the song as meaning that Dylan, or his character in the song, somehow pays his way by murdering other people, or some such nonsense. Anything but the obvious truth.
Huh? It would seem that the trouble today is that nothing IS in order......the result of following so much thinking like this now for decades!! We are certainly seeing the result of so much sin when nature itself, at its best when operating in the order designated by God, rebels with the effects people are now feeling from earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, record setting disasters and the rest. I sometimes wonder if he really understands what he is saying himself. Prayers nonetheless for unity, from the top. A bit ironic that the position of the Vicar of Christ might be effected by "the Peter Principle"!! Pope Francis: Clericalism Began with the Apostles ROME — Christians must embrace the “imbalance” of the gospel rather than trying to put everything in order, Pope Francis said Thursday, which leads to a “dictatorship of functionalism.” It is an error to try to “fix” things and impose order on the world or the Church, the pope told participants in a diocesan assembly in Rome, adding that it is a “temptation” to think we can “reorganize the city, reorganize the diocese, put everything in order.” Having everything in order converts the Church into a “museum,” Francis said, which would mean “taming things, taming young people, taming people’s hearts, taming families” and making everything “perfect.” “But this would be the greatest sin of worldliness and of the anti-evangelical worldly spirit,” he said. “We have heard about the imbalances of the city, the imbalance of young people, the elderly, families … The imbalance of relations with children,” the pope said. “Today we have been called to embrace the imbalance.” “We cannot do anything good or evangelical if we are afraid of imbalance,” he said. “We must grasp the imbalance in our hands: this is what the Lord tells us, because the Gospel — I believe you understand me — is an ‘unbalanced’ doctrine. Take the Beatitudes: they deserve the Nobel Prize for imbalance!” The apostles did not get this, Francis suggested, because they had fallen into the clericalism of right thinking and a desire for order and balance. Drawing inspiration from the miracle of the loaves and fishes as recounted in Saint Matthew’s gospel, the pope said that the twelve Apostles “became nervous” as it grew late and sought “a way to ‘reorganize’ things,” approaching Jesus and asking him to send the crowds away to find something to eat, because they were in a deserted place. “This is the illusion of the balance of ‘Church’ people,” he said, “and I believe that clericalism began there: ‘Send the people away, let them go, and we will eat what we have.’” “Perhaps that is where clericalism began, which is a beautiful ‘balance,’ to organize things,” he said. We do not need “a beautiful, functionalized diocese,” he said, where “clericalism and functionalism” reign. The pope says he knows of a diocese that has more employees than the Vatican, and “that diocese is getting further away from Jesus Christ because it worships ‘harmony,’ harmony not of beauty, but of functionalist worldliness.” “And in these cases we have fallen into the dictatorship of functionalism,” he said. “It is a new ideological colonization that tries to convince us that the Gospel is a wisdom, it is a doctrine, but it is not an announcement, it is not a kerygma.” “We need the Holy Spirit,” he continued, “and the Holy Spirit gives the table a kick, knocks it over and starts over from scratch,” he said.
Cardinal Burke: Christians and Muslims Do Not Worship The Same God https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michae...&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=sumome_share
Exorcist: Temptation — Not Possession — Is the Most Significant Demonic Activity An exorcist since 1994, Dominican Father Francois Dermine serves in the Italian Archdiocese of Ancona-Osimo. Catholic News Agency VATICAN CITY — Though dramatic representations of demonic possessions, as seen in Hollywood, can make them appear to be the primary method of the devil, one Dominican priest and exorcist has warned that the greater and more common threat to a person’s salvation is the temptation to sin. “The most common manifestation of the demonic is temptation, which is much more significant than possession,” Dominican Father Francois Dermine told CNA May 10. An exorcist for more than 25 years, he explained that possession is not a spiritual threat in the same way temptation is, and that a person who has been possessed by the devil may still make “extraordinary spiritual progress” and could even one day be a saint. This is because demonic possession of a person’s body occurs without that person’s knowledge or consent. The possession in and of itself does not make the victim morally blameworthy. “We must not undervalue the significance of temptation. It’s not as spectacular as possession, but it’s far more dangerous [to the soul],” Father Dermine said. “To resist temptation is simple,” he encouraged, although it might not always be easy. “You must avoid the occasions of temptation, of course, and you must have a Christian and spiritual life. You must pray, you must try to behave correctly, and to love the people you meet every day and the people with whom you live.” Father Dermine said the next most common form of demonic activity is oppression. Sometimes, people can have many problems, often of a health, business or family nature, which cannot be explained by natural causes. If the cause is deemed to be demonic oppression, these problems are called “preternatural” and may require the assistance of an exorcist. “This is the most common extraordinary action of the devil,” Father Dermine said, while temptation is considered an “ordinary” demonic action. Father Dermine warned that people should not immediately conclude that physical problems or suffering are a result of demonic oppression because they are most often explainable by natural causes. If someone has visited a doctor, or a psychologist if applicable, and no natural explanation could be found, then they may visit an exorcist. “When a person comes and asks for a blessing for a specific problem, the first thing an exorcist must ask is: Did you see the doctor?” the priest said. Father Dermine, who is French Canadian, has lived in Italy since shortly before his priestly ordination in 1979. An exorcist since 1994, he serves in the Italian Archdiocese of Ancona-Osimo. He spoke about the life of an exorcist during the 14th course on exorcism and prayers of liberation, which is organized by the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum university and GRIS (The Socio-Religious Information and Research Group). The weeklong course, which ended May 10, does not train new exorcists, but is intended to provide a general formation to priests and laypeople on what exorcism is and related topics. Father Dermine said that many of the laypeople attending the course are there at the request of their bishop, so they can learn how to better support and assist priests at exorcisms. Father Dermine told CNA that his lecture would address some of the common mistakes exorcists make, one of which is to confuse preternatural (demonic) manifestations for supernatural charisms, which come from God. “It’s a very important difference,” he said. “We have a human nature and cannot know things without learning through our senses.” “God created us to operate in a certain way. If you have extra-sensorial perceptions, and things like this, and they are not meant to help or to provoke a spiritual result, then they cannot come from God,” he warned. People with these perceptions are often described as “mediums” in secular culture. These types of preternatural sensations or manifestations can be “a cause of many problems” for people, so they will need some help from an exorcist, Father Dermine said. The priest noted that there is a cultural value to holding a course on exorcisms for priests and select laypeople, and this is because the topic is often mysterious, so the desire to understand it is important. “Most of the people who come here, they come here because they have an intention not to become exorcists, necessarily, but to understand.” http://www.ncregister.com/daily-new...sion-is-the-most-significant-demonic-activity
Listening to Fr Rippinger about detachment -- He says we need to be detached from the 'state' of the Church, which is in a big mess!! Focus has to be on God - He is the Lord of history. When we go through the chastisement any attachment we have we will be brutalised in the process - any attachment to anything created will be a cause of pain. He encourages us to master the virtue of mortification -- willingly embrace the crosses that God sends us. It is hard to develop the virtue of mortification -- but developing a virtue brings it's own reward. A period of chastisement = a period of pain! Saints suffer well.
I only see one 'imbalanced' person here. This pope pretends to be the humblest ever, but is possessed of an arrogance so extraordinary that he claims greater knowledge and insight than any man before him, a knowledge so great that it enables him to understand Christ better than those privileged to live and act with him. Neither is he deriving any of this from the accumulated thought and prayer of succeeding generations of thinkers. This is all his own work, I've certainly never come across any theological tendency that remotely resembles this morass of confusion. It is all his own work, seemingly straight off the top of his head. He is not trained in theology and I know of no works by him of theology or apologia, but he is effectively and condescendingly dismissing the men who initially, and for all bar one, at the cost of their lives, brought Christianity to every corner of the then known world. Ultimately, he is a complete snob, unable to accept that men who were mainly uneducated fishermen achieved such greatness. He is far more comfortable, it appears, in the company of atheist intellectuals and those modern, 'enlightened' heroes who murder babies with bicycle pumps. Of course, the Apostles were nervous at the crowds needing to be fed. Only a fool would criticise men for their ante facto inability to foresee one of the greatest miracles known to mankind. They were faced with a problem. Without benefit of hindsight, it would have been madness for them to anticipate the miracle that Christ was about to perform. Of course, hindsight is the foresight of the small-minded. Does he believe, or does he not, that the Holy Spirit is One with the Father and the Son. He seems to think the Holy Spirit some kind of rebellious, disruptive person, rather than one of the Persons of the Trinity. He seems to have a concept that the Spirit is a separate being in His own right, which is not Christianity, but polytheism. The Holy Spirit is of One Will with the Father and the Son, just as Our Lord proclaimed He was of One Will with the Father. It is inconceivable that the Holy Spirit is some kind of saboteur, disrupting the Order and Balance which are part of the very Being of our Trinitarian God. Of course, there is a rebel...
Vatican: Both Jesus and Buddha Promoted ‘the Dignity of Women’ “Both Buddhism and Christianity have taught that women and men are equal in dignity, and both have played an important role in the advancement of women,” said the Vatican’s department of interreligious dialogue in a letter released Saturday. In its message titled “Buddhists and Christians: Promoting the Dignity and Equal Rights of Women and Girls,” the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue offered its “warm greetings and prayerful good wishes” for the celebration of the Buddhist feast of Vesakh. “The teachings of Jesus and the Buddha promote the dignity of women,” the text states, adding that “Buddhist and Christian women have made significant contributions to our religious traditions and to society as a whole.” The message also denounces widespread mistreatment of women and girls around the world, underscoring the need to put a stop to all such abuse, while also warning against the errors of gender theory. “In our day, violence against women and young girls is a global problem, affecting as much as a third of the world’s female population,” the letter states. “Women and young girls are especially vulnerable to human trafficking and modern slavery, and these forms of brutality negatively and often irreversibly affect their health.” The text — signed by Bishop Miguel Ángel Ayuso Guixot — also highlighted the need for extending educational efforts aimed at women around the world as well as equal pay and equal rights in other areas. To counter such injustices, it reads, “it is vital to provide young women and girls access to education, to guarantee them equal pay for equal work, to ensure the recognition of their inheritance and property rights, to overcome their under-representation in politics, government and decision-making, to address the issue of dowries, and so forth.” In the area of interreligious dialogue itself, the letter states, “more women need to have a place at the table, where they are still outnumbered by men.” For their part, those in authority and positions of leadership “have a special responsibility to encourage their followers to uphold the dignity of women and young girls, and to defend their fundamental human rights. “We are likewise called to alert our brothers and sisters to the dangers inherent within gender ideology, which denies the differences and the reciprocity of men and women,” the letter warns. The message also underscores the importance of protecting “the institution of marriage, motherhood and family life” while promoting the dignity and equality of women and young girls. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...sus-and-buddha-promoted-the-dignity-of-women/
The Hive Wins Until they all stand before God. May 13, 2019 https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-the-hive-wins [ The Vortex video here; watch at the link above] TRANSCRIPT So all the data is in, the reports all written, the arguments all made and the final document issued and proclaimed. Disgraced Cdl. Donald Wuerl — the lying, cheating former archbishop of Washington, D.C. — has won. Last summer, as he sat for an interview with the lying, plagiarizing, homosexualist priest Fr. Thomas Rosica at the Knights of Columbus annual soiree/gala, he first downplayed the bombshell news of Theodore McCarrick's evil. Then, in full lack of shamefacedness, he had the gall to propose that the solution to the evil that was becoming public lies with the bishops. It was clear from that statement and interview that the old guard of homosexual men and their lies who seized control of the Church back in the 1970s would win the day. Last Thursday, Pope Francis handed them the laurel wreath of victory and published a document that indeed says the bishops will investigate themselves. You can just hear the champagne corks popping in bishops' residences all over the country right now. Rock on, back to normal — hey Bob, get back on Grindr and let the boys know party at the mansion tonight. But this cannot be too much of a surprise. The Pope had already indicated in the run-up to the dog and pony show sex summit in February that the laity would be kept far away from this crisis. Nope, the bishops will fix everything, he said, seemingly forgetting — or ignoring — that it was the bishops who created the crisis — and more than one crisis at that. By way of quick review, when the McCarrick news broke last June, the narrative and the practice of homosexuality and abuse cover-up by the bishops began to break down somewhat. Then in August, Abp. Viganò released the first of a series of nuclear bombs, confirming what many, many already knew, that the highest reaches of the hierarchy were dominated by active homosexual men — and he named names. These men, he charged, had created, and in some cases contributed to, the environment by which a man like McCarrick could advance. And he accused Pope Francis directly of being part of the problem, a problem he termed as a "homosexual current" in the Church. A current that has allowed the establishment of homosexuality among the clergy as the norm is no longer a subculture, but actually the dominant culture. And this was true at every level of the Church — seminaries, chanceries, everywhere. Faced with the one-two punch of McCarrick then Viganò, the U.S. bishops began fumbling about trying to come up with a response. The suggestions were all over the map as no real consensus emerged. In the meantime, men like Wuerl were denying it was any kind of crisis. Likewise, Chicago's Cdl. Cupich was trying to force the media's attention away from the story by giving on-camera interviews saying one assinine thing after another — notably, that we were not going to go down this "rabbit hole" because we had to talk about the environment instead, and of course, labeling concerned Catholics enemies of the Pope because they hated "Latinos," which of course, Francis is not. He's three-quarters Italian. But after his initial stumbles coming out of the gate, Cupich and Wuerl took full control and brought their brother bishops to heel. In the fall, Cdl. Daniel DiNardo, president of the U.S. bishops, went to Rome and met with the Pope with a few ideas to address the situation, namely that the laity play a pivotal role in investigations. Francis politely told DiNardo and his small entourage to drop dead and showed them the door — no laity involvement, period. Then in November, at the bishop's annual meeting, about 15 seconds into the proceedings, as the bishops had nestled into to discuss possible solutions, a letter came from the Pope saying, "Forget everything you are talking about. Stop. Shut up. I'll decide how to handle all this at a sex summit I'm calling for February." You could hear the shock in the silence in the room. First, DiNardo, their president, was shot down. And now the entire body had been told to drop it. So much for synods and "decentralization" of the Church, huh? As an aside, the Feds need to pay attention to this little fact, this is an organized, centralized syndicate that takes its orders from a central command. At that November bishops' meeting in Baltimore, as the gasps subsided, none other than Pope Francis waterboy Blase Cupich jumped up and seized the microphone. Completely usurping parliamentary rules, and not to mention the authority of Cdl. DiNardo, he ordered — not too strong a word — he ordered the bishops that all this discussion was over and Rome would settle it. He followed his orders from the homohive in the Vatican and got the can kicked down the road to the dog and pony show of last February, which resulted in this document we now have. So what's the upshot of the document? Simple, nothing of substance has changed. When bishops are abusing their authority, covering up sexual assaults of seminarians, for example, that matter will be investigated by the metropolitan bishop of the cover-up bishop. How would this have played out in the past? Well, McCarrick was the metropolitan in his area. Heck, if some sexually abusive or cover-up bishop has been reported to him, he wouldn't have investigated him. He would have hopped in bed with him and then promoted him. Joseph Bernardin was the metropolitan of Chicago. Anyone think that kingpin of the homosexual hive would have done anything about an accused bishop, besides set up a date with him? This is disgusting, a complete betrayal of the faithful. This motu proprio isn't worth the paper it's printed on. All over the Church, the gay bishops and their boyfriends, the homoclerics, the pastors with their live-in boyfriends in the rectories, the religious houses swarming with homosexual men, everywhere, they are partying it up tonight. So a few thoughts have come up over the nearly past year since all of this became public. Pope Francis needs to resign. The Feds need to launch a full and complete nationwide RICO probe. For the past six or seven years, Church Militant was, sadly, right all along. Wuerl and Cupich are McCarrick clones, and their continued presence means the homohive is still in full control. The choice of whoever got D.C. — which we now know is Wilton Gregory — would reveal if there was any real reform even being considered. The February sex summit was nothing else than a giant PR scam controlled by the homohive, and the international media pretty much fell for it. The laity need to wake up, rise up and organize a massive grassroots resistance against the modernists and homosexual hive in the hierarchy. Given how its all played out, anyone want to disagree with any of these statements?
Dubia Were Answered [by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in his April essay] Elizabeth A. Mitchell | Saturday, May 11, 2019 | https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2019/05/11/the-dubia-were-answered/ Perhaps it was because Notre-Dame de Paris was burning. Perhaps it was because the best place to hide something from view is in plain sight. Or perhaps it was because we look for power in wind, earthquake, and fire, but miss the “still small voice” of God when He passes by. (1 Kgs 19:11-13) Whatever the reason, the world watched, read, and missed the answers to the dubia proposed by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in his April essay, “The Church and the Scandal of Sexual Abuse.” In offering a three-part response to the crisis in the Church, he indirectly answers the five dubia that Cardinals Brandmüller, Caffarra, Meisner, and Burke presented years ago to Pope Francis. The pope emeritus fulfilled a duty that Pope Francis has not, namely, to maintain the bishops and all the faithful in the unity of the Church’s constant teaching on faith and morals. What did the pope emeritus say? He gives the Church and the world an unequivocal No, Yes, Yes, Yes, and Yes. Five questions, five answers: Dubium One: It is asked whether, following the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person “more uxorio” (in a marital way) without fulfilling the conditions provided for by “Familiaris Consortio” n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by “Reconciliatio et Paenitentia” n. 34 and “Sacramentum Caritatis” n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live “more uxorio”? Benedict’s response: No. “We run the risk of becoming masters of faith instead of being renewed and mastered by the Faith. Let us consider this with regard to a central issue, the celebration of Holy Eucharist. Our handling of the Eucharist can only arouse concern. . . .What predominates is not a new reverence for the presence of Christ’s death and resurrection, but a way of dealing with Him that destroys the greatness of the Mystery. . . .The Eucharist is devalued into a mere ceremonial gesture when it is taken for granted that courtesy requires Him to be offered at family celebrations or on occasions such as weddings and funerals to all those invited for family reasons. . . .It is rather obvious that we do not need another Church in our own design. Rather, what is required first and foremost is the renewal of the Faith in the Reality of Jesus Christ given to us in the Blessed Sacrament. . . .And we must do all we can to protect the gift of the Holy Eucharist from abuse.” Dubium Two: After the publication of the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions? Benedict’s response: Yes. “Pope John Paul II, who knew very well the situation of moral theology and followed it closely, commissioned work on an encyclical that would set these things right again. . . .It was published under the title Veritatis splendor. . .and did indeed include the determination that there were actions that can never become good. . . .He knew that he must leave no doubt about the fact that the moral calculus involved in balancing goods must respect a final limit.” * Dubium Three: After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)? Benedict’s response: Yes. “A society without God – a society that does not know Him and treats Him as non-existent – is a society that loses its measure. . . .Western society is a society in which God is absent in the public sphere and has nothing left to offer it. And that is why it is a society in which the measure of humanity is increasingly lost. At individual points it becomes suddenly apparent that what is evil and destroys man has become a matter of course.” Dubium Four: After the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”? Benedict’s response: Yes. “There are goods that are never subject to trade-offs. There are values which must never be abandoned for a greater value and even surpass the preservation of physical life. . . .God is (about) more than mere physical survival. A life that would be bought by the denial of God, a life that is based on a final lie, is a non-life.” Dubium Five: After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object? Benedict’s response: Yes. “The crisis of morality. . .was chiefly the hypothesis that morality was to be exclusively determined by the purposes of human action that prevailed. . . .Consequently, there could no longer be anything that constituted an absolute good, any more than anything fundamentally evil; (there could be) only relative value judgements. There no longer was the (absolute good), but only the relatively better, contingent on the moment and on circumstances. . . .But there is a minimum set of morals which is indissolubly linked to the foundational principle of faith and which must be defended if faith is not to be reduced to a theory but rather to be recognized in its claim to concrete life. All this makes apparent just how fundamentally the authority of the Church in matters of morality is called into question. Those who deny the Church a final teaching competence in this area force her to remain silent precisely where the boundary between truth and lies is at stake.” Benedict’s response ends the deafening silence with regard to the fundamental questions of faith addressed by the dubia. He answers them, clearly and unequivocally. He knows the hour is late. Benedict warns us that “the very faith of the Church” is being called into question. “It is very important to oppose the lies and half-truths of the devil with the whole truth: Yes, there is sin in the Church and evil. But even today there is the Holy Church, which is indestructible. . . .Today God also has His witnesses (martyres) in the world. We just have to be vigilant to see and hear them.” *Photo: Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (with Archbishop Georg Gänswein) [Photo: Andrew Medichini/Associated Press]
Laurence England, a popular and intelligent English traditional blogger, says that he has come to the conclusion that Francis is not the Pope. An interesting read: https://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedm...o-now-that-were-all-saying-what-were.html?m=1
In the long run, if the tactics of the Church are for bishops to investigate themselves, I think this will turn out to be a monumental error. It will seem to a hostile secular sector to be nothing other than an attempt to cover-up and whitewash their iniquities. And not only the secularists-to most of us becoming aware of the facts, this seems to be exactly what it is.
An encouraging line I came across today, from AN Whitehead: "The instability of evil is the morality of the universe".
I just noticed that EWTN is televising "The Bible and the Virgin Mary" beginning tomorrow, May 14th. I'm sure they are showing it in celebration of the month of May, the month of Our Lady. I just posted about this series (see above) and I thought that those who are interested in watching it would want to know that it is available beginning tomorrow. The first episode, lesson 1, will be shown on EWTN tomorrow at 6am EDT and each of the 12 episodes will be shown at 6am EDT Monday through Saturday until the last episode, lesson 12, is shown on Monday, May 27th. http://www.ewtn.com/multimedia/weekly-schedules.asp https://stpaulcenter.com/product/the-bible-and-the-virgin-mary-videos/
This really makes very difficult reading. I wish I had all the answers but I do not. In fact as time goes on and we go on and on into this time of Huge Trial I begin to wonder if I have any answers at all. But this not having any answers thing reminds me of something else in the past ; another time when I no longer had any answers. That was in the Dark Night of the Soul. Before I entered it I had the answer to just about any question under the sun. After a short time in the night I found I had no answers at all. It was so Dark all I had was to cling to Christ and His Church. This is a time of huge , huge Trial, a Dark Night of Nights. Perhaps to some extent we are called to rest on the Pillow of not having answers for a while. However long it takes. This is very far from easy. In fact it is the Crux of the Trial. But one thing cheers me up like a little light in the Dark. I am only a very,very humble layperson. Not a priest or Bishop or Cardinal or some Great Theologian or Scholar. Not only do I not have any Authority; I have no Power whatsoever but the power of Prayer. But when you turn to Mary ,Mother of the Church that is all the Power she had...and look what she did with it. There would have been no Church without her. So I suppose I will have to rest on my Hard Pillow of no answers and wait for Christ to save us. ..as Padre Pio said, to pray, hope and not worry. I wish I could say more, but at the moment the more I read the more confused I become. I am not the least ashamed to admit it.
