Monday, December 8, 2025

The Sufferings Of Our Lord And The Virtue Of Charity

 

To My Readers: This week, John Gregory writes about the Passion of Our Lord and the supreme importance of the virtue of charity. Please pray for John and his family; he has been sick. Feel free to comment as usual. If you have  a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week.

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

The Sufferings of Our Lord and the Virtue of Charity

By John Gregory

Then 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; the third day he shall rise again (St. Luke 18: 31, 33).

 

“SUFFERED UNDER PONTIUS PILATE, WAS CRUCIFIED, DEAD, AND BURIED”

 

IMPORTANCE OF THIS ARTICLE

 

How necessary is a knowledge of this Article, and how assiduous the pastor should be in stirring up in the minds of the faithful the frequent recollection of our Lord’s Passion, we learn from the Apostle when he says that he knows nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified. (1 Corinthians 2: 2) The pastor, therefore, should exercise the greatest care and pains in giving a thorough explanation of this subject, in order that the faithful, being moved by the remembrance of so great a benefit, may give themselves entirely to the contemplation of the goodness and love of God towards us.

 

First Part of this Article:

“Suffered Under Pontius Pilate, was Crucified”

 

The first part of this Article proposes for our belief that when Pontius Pilate governed the province of Judea, under Tiberius Caesar, Christ the Lord was nailed to a cross.  Having been seized, mocked, outraged and tortured in various forms, He was finally crucified.

 

“Suffered”

 

It cannot be a matter of doubt that His soul, as to its inferior part, was sensible of these torments; for as He really assumed human nature, it is a necessary consequence that He really, and in His soul, experienced a most acute sense of pain.  Hence these words of the Saviour: My soul is sorrowful even unto death. (Matthew 26: 38; Mark 14: 34) Although human nature was united to the Divine Person, He felt the bitterness of His Passion as acutely as if no such union had existed, because in the one Person of Jesus Christ were preserved the properties of both natures, human and divine; and therefore what was passible and mortal remained passible and mortal; while what was impassible and immortal, that is, His Divine Nature, continued impassible and immortal. (COT p. 50 – 51)

 

Patience and Joy under Continued Affliction

 

We must remember that if by prayers and supplications we are not delivered from evil, we should endure our afflictions with patience, convinced that it is the will of God that we should so endure them.  If, therefore, God hear not our prayers, we are not to yield to feelings of peevishness or discontent; we must submit in all things to the divine will and pleasure, regarding as useful and salutary to us that which happens in accordance with the will of God, not that which is agreeable to our own wishes.

 

During our mortal career we should be prepared to meet every kind of affliction and calamity, not only with patience, but even with joy.  For it is written: All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution; (2 Timothy 3: 12) and again: Through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God; (Acts 14: 21) and further: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so enter into his glory? (Luke 24: 26) A servant should not be greater than his master; and Saint Bernard says: “Delicate members do not become a head crowned with thorns.”  The glorious example of Urias challenges our imitation.  When urged by David to remain at home, he replied: The ark of God, and Isreal, and Juda, dwell in tents; and shall I go into my house? (2 Kings 11: 11)

 

If to prayer we bring with us these reflections and these dispositions, although surrounded by menaces and encompassed by evils on every side, we shall, like the three children who passed unhurt amidst the flames, be preserved uninjured; or at least, like the Machabees, we shall bear up against adverse fortune with firmness and fortitude.

 

In the midst of contumelies and tortures we should imitate the blessed Apostles, who, after they had been scourged, rejoiced exceedingly that they were accounted worthy to suffer reproach for Christ Jesus. (Acts 5: 4) Filled with such sentiments, we shall sing in transports of joy: Princes have persecuted me without cause; and my heart hath been in awe of thy words; I will rejoice at thy words, as one that hath found great spoil. (Psalm 118: 161)

 

THE VIRTUE OF CHARITY

 

Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely: . . . is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil, . . . beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. (1 Corinthians 13: 4 – 8)

 

Who can behold the riches of God’s goodness and love, which He lavishes on us, and not love Him?  Hence the exordium and the conclusion used by God in Scripture when giving His commands: I, the Lord. (Catechism Of Trent [COT] p. 368)

 

PRAYER INCREASES CHARITY

 

In recognizing God as the author of every blessing and of every good, we are led to cling to Him with the most devoted love.  And as those who cherish a mutual affection become more ardently attached by frequent interviews and conversations, so the oftener the soul prays devoutly and implores the divine mercy, thus holding converse with God, the more exquisite is the sense of delight which she experiences in each prayer, and the more ardently is she inflamed to love and adore him. (COT p. 482)

 

ENEMIES AND THOSE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH

 

The Lord has also commanded us, to pray for those that persecute and calumniate us. (Matthew 5: 44) The practice of praying for those who are not within the pale of the Church, is, as we know on the authority of Saint Augustine, of Apostolic origin.  We pray that the faith may be made known to infidels; that idolaters may be rescued from the error of their impiety; that the Jews, emerging from the darkness with which they are encompassed, may arrive at the light of truth; that heretics, returning to soundness of mind, may be instructed in the Catholic faith; and that schismatics may be united in the bond of true charity and may return to the communion of their holy mother, the Church, from which they have separated. 

 

Many examples prove that prayers for such as these are very efficacious when offered from the heart.  Instances occur every day in which God rescues individuals of e every condition of life from the powers of darkness, and transfers them into the kingdom of His Beloved Son, from vessels of wrath making them vessels of mercy.  That the prayers of the pious have very great influence in bringing about this result no one can reasonably doubt. (COT p. 389 – 390)

 

FRATERNAL CHARITY

 

In order, however, that our prayers may have this power of obtaining all things from God, we must forget injuries, cherish sentiments of good will, and practice kindness towards our neighbor. (COT p. 496)

 

“God listens willingly to the Christian who prays not only for himself but for others; because to pray for ourselves is an inspiration of nature; but to pray for others is an inspiration of grace; necessity compels us to pray for ourselves, whereas fraternal charity calls on us to pray for others.  That prayer which is inspired by fraternal charity is more agreeable to God than that which is dictated by necessity.” (Saint Chrysostom)

 

In connection with the important subject of salutary prayer, the pastor should be careful to remind and exhort all the faithful of every age, condition and rank, never to forget the bonds of universal brotherhood that bind them, and consequently ever to treat each other as friends and brothers, and never to seek arrogantly to raise themselves above their neighbors.

 

Though there are in the Church of God various gradations of office, yet this diversity of dignity and position in no way destroys the bond of fraternal union; just as in the human body the various uses and different functions of our organs in no way cause this or that part of the body to lose the name or office of an organ of the body. (COT p. 509)

 

FROM A COMPANION TO THE SUMMA

 

Sharing the Divine Life

 

The unquestionably accepted axion, “friendship is rare,” would be a terrible indictment of the human race, if it were true.  But of course it is not.  Friendship is not nearly so rare as is appreciation of it.  These gloomy axioms furnish us with fine excuses when we run short of material for self pity, especially at times when our mouth is watering for a dreary session with ourselves.  Friendship is not rare among human beings because unselfishness is not rare among them; and unselfish love is the one fundamental for true friendship that might be come at with difficulty.

 

The nature of friendship

 

Surely the amateur burglar, striking up an acquaintance with an expert in his line, cannot be said to have true friendship.  He hopes to get something out of it, at least some expertness in burglary.  The girl who is an official fascinator, looking out for material comfort for the future, is certainly not a true friend of her men friends.  Neither of these is true friendship because neither of them is based on unselfish love.

 

Mutual benevolent love, on a common ground

 

Unselfish love means no more than the constant, effective desire to do good to another.  Briefly, it means that we have identified ourselves with another; his will is our will so that his good is our good, his happiness our happiness.  But unselfish love is not necessarily a guarantee of friendship, it is not the whole story.  The charming girl student may feel ever so kindly towards her professor of Ancient History and still fail resoundingly whenever he has anything to do with her examinations.  For friendship there must also be a common ground upon which two can walk; a requirement not at all difficult to meet.  We have common ground enough with men and women about us: we also worry about bills at the first of the month, we too are thrilled at football games; we have our secret, unrealized hopes, our sorrows, sacrifices, little triumphs.  In any one of these fields we can meet countless other men and women.  The difficulty is, can we meet them unselfishly?  Can we see in them our other selves?  Can we attain to that mutual, benevolent, unselfish love on this common ground and so be assured of real friendship?

 

The friendship of men: Its strength

 

Friendship would certainly seem to be worth having.  It means, at the very least, that through it we live, not one narrow life, rather we live two lives. A door is thrown open and we are admitted to regions that are proper to God alone, for by friendship we stroll into the soul of another.  It offers us completion for our incomplete, lonely human hearts, a fulfillment that is sought by every man from the beginning of his existence.  If friendship brought no more than this to a man, it might quite reasonably be foregone. An unlimited amount of cosmetics will not beautify an ugly face; it will merely hide its ugliness; nor will a football suit change the puny physique of a man. These additions are extrinsic to the face and the physique; and it is always true that only the intrinsic additions to man really perfect him.  In other words, the important thing about friendship is what it does to the individuals involved.  It brings out the best in every man, rather paradoxically it is true, by making him forget himself.  It opens up to him possibilities of sacrifice that he has formerly associated with heroism, with the sublime in the efforts of man.  Understand, now, by friendship is meant all human love: whether between man and man, woman and woman, man and woman—indeed all human love that escapes the taint of selfishness.

 

While friendship is a great comfort, it is not to be pictured in terms of dim lights, quiet corners and intimate whispers.  Rather it scans wide horizons with deep wisdom and is a source of enormous strength.  It shows us, for example, the stupidity of gloomy sacrifice; it tears away the veil of mystery from the cheerfulness, even eagerness, of love’s embrace of hardships.  Perhaps when we say that friendship is rare, we are really apologizing for ourselves, explaining that we are not strong.  At least, as soon as we make self basic, we have begun to corrupt sacrifice and coddle cowardice; we have begun to tear out something from the depths  of the human heart; for men have always looked, perhaps at times only wistfully, to sacrifice as the fullest expression of a generous heart.

 

Its frailty

 

For all its strength, comfort, sublimity, human friendship has about it the frail delicacy of old lace.  It is frail because its truth can never be clearly seen but must always be taken on faith, and because its task of surrender can never be fully accomplished. In a word, human friendship is never a rugged thing because of our inability to share our inner self.  The closest we come to sharing the truth of friendship is in our clumsy symbols of it; perhaps the closest we come to accomplishing its task is in the physical generation of children.  In neither case can we give ourselves utterly to another.  Fundamentally, the reason is obvious: we cannot give ourselves away utterly because we do not belong completely to ourselves. (A Companion of the Summa, p. 55 – 57)

 

FROM A TOUR OF THE SUMMA

 

The Virtue of Charity

 

1. Charity as a supernatural virtue is the friendship of man and God.  On God’s part, it is love, benevolence, and communication of benefits and graces; on man’s part charity involves devotion and service to God.  It was in charity that our Lord said to his apostles (John 15: 15): “I will not now call you servants . . . but friends.”

 

2. Charity is in a person as a determinate, supernatural, habitual power, added to the natural power of the soul, which inclines the will to act with ease and delight in the exercise of loving friendship with God.

 

3. Saint Augustine says: “Charity is a virtue which, when our affections are perfectly ordered, unites us to God; for it is by charity that we love him.”

 

4. Charity is not a general virtue, nor an overlapping of virtues; it is a special virtue in its own nature; it is on a level with the other theological virtues (faith and hope), and is distinct from these virtues.

 

5. And charity is one virtue, it is not divided into different species or essential kinds.

 

6. Charity is the most excellent of all virtues.  Faith knows truth about God; hope aspires to good in God; charity attains God himself simply, and not as having something to gain from him.

 

7. All true virtue directs a man to God, his ultimate good, his last end.  Hence, charity, which embraces the ultimate good simply, must be in the soul that has any true and living virtue.  No true supernatural virtue is possible without charity.

 

8. Charity therefore directs the acts of all the other virtues, making these serve to get man onward to his last end.  And thus charity gives to these virtues their determinate being as effective instruments.  Thus charity is said to be the “form” of the other virtues.

 

The Subject of Charity

 

1. Charity as a supernatural virtue resides in man’s soul, specifically, it resides in the appetitive part of man’s soul, that is, in man’s will.  For the object towards which the will tends is the good, and charity is the virtue which, above all others, tends to and actually embraces the ultimate good of man.  Charity lays hold on God himself.

 

2. This charity is not in us by our nature; it is supernatural. Hence, we cannot acquire charity by our natural powers.  Charity is in us by divine infusion, by in-pouring.  Saint Paul (Romans 5: 5) says: “The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who is given to us.”

 

3. Our natural gifts and capacities have no part in determining the quantity, so to speak, of charity in us.  For (John 3: 8), “the Spirit breatheth where he will”; and (1 Corinthians 12: 11), “all these things one and the same Spirit worketh, dividing to everyone according as he will.” Thus the measure of charity is not our capacity, but the will of God.

 

4. Charity can increase in us while we are in this life, on the way to God; that is, while we are wayfarers. If charity did not increase, we could make no progress along the way to God.

 

5. Charity increases not by having new elements added to it, but by growing more intense.

 

6. Not every act of charity increases the virtue of charity.  It is possible that an act of charity, done imperfectly, should mean no increase at all in the person who performs the act.  But each act of charity, rightly performed, leads to another, and ultimately to a favor of action which increases charity.

 

7. Charity may go on increasing and increasing; it is not possible to fix limits to this increase while earthly life endures.

 

8. A perfection of charity (which in no way marks a stay of limit to its increase) is found in those who give their whole hearts habitually to God, not thinking or desiring anything contrary to his love.

 

9. We may distinguish three steps or degrees in charity; it has its beginning, its progress, and its (nonlimiting) perfection.

 

10. Charity cannot decrease.  It is altogether lost by mortal sin, but it cannot be merely lessened in the soul.  Human friendship may grow weak and be diminished through the negligence of friends and their forgetfulness.  But charity is divine friendship; it depends on God, the infinitely perfect friend, who never grows negligent or forgetful; hence, charity does not decrease.  However, to neglect acts of charity and to commit venial sins, may be to dispose ourselves to lose charity entirely through mortal sin; only in this extrinsic way may charity be said to suffer decrease.

 

11. Once we have charity, we have with it no guarantee that, during this life, we shall not lose it.  The charity of the blessed in heaven (comprehensors) cannot be lost; the charity of men on earth (wayfarers) can be lost.

 

12. Charity is lost by mortal sin.  For whoever has charity is deserving of eternal life; a man who commits mortal sin is deserving of eternal death, that is, of everlasting punishment.  It is therefore impossible for a person to have charity and, at the same time, to be in the state of mortal sin.  One mortal sin drives out charity.

 

The Object of Charity

 

1. The object of charity, that towards which the act of charity is directed, is God, and our fellowmen in God. Says Saint John (1 John 4: 21): “This commandment we have from God, that he who loveth God love also his brother.”

 

2. Charity is love and friendship.  We have charity when we love God and neighbor, and wish for our neighbor the good of God’s friendship.  Thus, out of charity, we love charity itself.

 

3. We cannot wish to creatures less than man, that is, to irrational creatures, the “fellowship of everlasting happiness.” There we cannot love such creatures out of charity.

 

4. We are to love ourselves out of true charity.  For our love of ourselves is the standard of the sort of love we must have for others.  Says Holy Scripture (Leviticus 19: 18): “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

 

5. Even our body is to be loved out of charity, for it is God’s creature to be used by reason in man’s service of God.  “Saint Paul says (Romans 6: 13): “Present . . . your members as instruments of justice unto God.”  We are not, however, to love the disorder of bodily tendencies which are the result in us of the primal fall.

 

6. We are to love our neighbor out of charity, even if he be a sinner.  We must hate sin, yet we must love the person who sins, wishing him repentance, pardon, and eternal life, for God’s sake.

 

7. Sinners do not love themselves truly.  They love only an apparent good in themselves, and they love external and creatural goods as things worth having for their own sake. And thus sinners miss the goal of charity which is endless happiness in God.  Sinners, therefore, do not love themselves, for, as Holy Writ tells us (Psalm 10): “He that loveth iniquity, hateth his own soul.”

 

8. We have the direct command of our Lord that we are to love our enemies.  In Saint Matthew (5: 44) we read: “Love your enemies do good to them that hate you: pray for them that persecute and calumniate you.”

 

9. We must, therefore, love our enemies in general, and we must also be ready, if God wills to put opportunity in our way, to show them, as individuals, the signs and offices of love.

 

10. We are to love God’s angels out of charity, for we hope to share with them “the fellowship of everlasting happiness”; this expectation is an element in the friendship called charity.

 

11. The fallen angels, that is, the demons in hell, cannot share the “fellowship of everlasting happiness,” and therefore they are outside the scope of charity.

 

12. Saint Augustine says: “There are four things to be loved: one is above us, God; another is ourselves; a third is near us, our neighbor, a fourth is below us, our body.

 

The Order of Charity

 

1. There is an order in charity, and God is the principle of that order.  God is to be loved out of charity, before all others.  The other beings that are to be loved out of charity are, so to speak, lined up in their proper places, subordinate to God.

 

2. Charity is active friendship and love.  It is therefore something more than good will, which is the condition and the beginning of friendship.

 

3. God is loved out of charity for his own sake, not on account of anything other than himself.  Yet in one way we can love God out of charity, and still have something else in view, as when we love God for the favors we receive or expect, but in such a way that these very favors are loved because they dispose us to love God the more.

 

4. Even in this life, in which we are wayfarers, we can have an immediate love of God, that is, love without a medium between lover and beloved.  We know God through the medium of created things; love moves the other way, for we love God first and then love created things for the love of God.

 

5. We can love God wholly according to our own creatural wholeness, but not according to the infinite wholeness of God.  For we are finite, and cannot compass infinity.

 

6. We need no test or mode or measure in our love for God.  Saint Augustine says we need only go on measurelessly loving God.

 

7. It is, in itself, more meritorious to love a friend than to love an enemy, just as it is worse to hate a friend than to hate an enemy.  But, considering that the love of a friend is likely to be less purely the effect of love of God, and also considering the distaste and difficulty that one must overcome to love an enemy, we see that it can be more meritorious to love an enemy than to love a friend.

 

8. To love God is more meritorious than to love one’s neighbor.  Indeed, to love one’s neighbor is a meritorious act only when we live him for the sake of God. (A Tour of the Summa, p. 201- 206)

 

Conclusion

Hopefully we have gained some idea on what the theological virtue of charity it.  It is a virtue which we receive from God and is directed towards Him.  The theological virtue of charity is absolutely necessary for salvation.  Charity is linked with, and impossible to obtain, apart from the theological virtues of faith and hope.  It is the love of friendship with God and must follow from or be infused with the theological virtues of faith and hope.  Selflessness is a quality of charity.  The loving of God above all things, and your neighbor as yourself for love of God.  True love seeks the good of the other, ahead of one’s own worldly needs.  It wills the genuine and especially the eternal good of the other.   Charity denies oneself for the salvation of the other when the opportunity arises.  It seeks not “what can I get out of this friendship” but “how can I help my friend”.  It is not a “me first”, but rather an “after you”.  It is also the love of one’s soul above the love of the body.  That is the stuff martyrs are made of. 

Faith, in part, is the knowing of God, hope is hoping for the eternal reward.  Most Protestants, if pressed on the issue, will nod their heads in agreement, that we must love God for salvation to be possible, but immediately thereafter teach faith alone.  Please pray for Protestants of good will that they seek and find the Truth; and pray for the Protestants of bad will that they become good willed before they die, so in eternity we may rejoice with them forever as authentic Christians that will be filled with love for the true God, the true Faith, themselves, and the Catholics and the Catholic Faith they formerly despised, forever. 

Monday, December 1, 2025

Contending For The Faith---Part 46

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:
  • The existence and attributes of God
  • The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
  • The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
  • The truth of Catholic moral teaching
  • The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 
In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone had suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

Beware Charles Coulombe 
There's a new internet platform for the R&R, "Pelican Plus." It has the usual cast of characters with their half-baked theology, wrong premises, and false conclusions (See pelicanplus.com). The "Founding Collaborators," as they call themselves, come replete with titles: Dr. Peter Kwasniewski "Tradition & Sanity" (more like "Novelty and Schizophrenia"); Kennedy Hall "Mere Tradition"("Mere Ramblings"); Timothy Flanders "The Meaning of Catholic" ("..is the Opposite of What he Thinks");Dr. Edward Schaefer "The Collegium" ("Kindergarten Katholic"); Nicholas Cavazos "The Traditional Thomist" ("...For Those Who Don't Know Philosophy"); and Dan Sevigny "Restoring Christian Culture Initiative" ("Not With Vatican II You Won't").

It's sad as what passes for "Traditional Catholicism." Novus Ordo Watch made this insightful remark on "X:" 
Some Semi-Traditionalists are putting together a new internet platform called 'Pelican Plus'. It will feature content from some familiar recognize-and-resist gatekeepers (and others): Kwasniewski, Flanders, Hall, Cavazos. https://pelicanplus.com They are declaring their stuff "content you can trust", of course, but that is not terribly meaningful. Furthermore, although they acknowledge the Vatican II Church's hierarchy to be the legitimate Roman Catholic authority having the care of souls, you can bet your bottom dollar that they will not make the content on Pelican+ dependent on the prior approval of any 'Catholic bishop' who's currently in charge of the diocese where they reside or a diocese or territory where the content is hosted. (Emphasis mine).

To me this platform was nothing very newsworthy until I saw Pelican Plus make the following announcement on X:
We’re thrilled to welcome Charles A. Coulombe (@RCCoulombe) to Pelican+!

A celebrated author, historian, and storyteller, Charles has spent decades writing, lecturing, and exploring the intersections of faith, culture, and history. From Oxford debates to royal palaces, his life has been anything but ordinary.

Now, Charles is bringing his unmistakable voice to something new at Pelican+. A bit of chaos, perfectly under control. (Posted on 11/13/25). 

Charles Coulombe's life has definitely been "anything but Catholic." Coulombe has been deeply involved in the occult (he claims to have repented of that) and remains a Feeneyite heretic (to his credit he is not a follower of Fred and Bobby). He also denigrates the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, the surest sign of one who has broken with the Catholic Faith. 

This post will expose Coulombe and it will be apparent why any "Traditional Catholic" platform that sponsors him is not "Catholic" and should be avoided.

Charles Coulombe: Involved with the Occult
Between 1987 and 1999, Coulombe wrote no less than seven articles for the occultist magazine entitled Gnosis Magazine.  Although it is no longer published, there is access to back issues, and the content is pure evil.  The editors, Richard Smoley and Jay Kinney, wrote a book entitled Hidden Wisdom. Here is how it is described:

The co-editors of Gnosis magazine explore the many esoteric traditions that Western culture has to offer. While terms from Eastern spiritual practices such as zen, mantra, and karma have become part of our daily lexicon, the traditions of Western spirituality have been largely unexplored by people searching for non-mainstream routes to spiritual experience. But for those who identify with Western culture, Western religious traditions have their own wisdom teachings that are more suitable to their needs and expectations. Many of those searching for alternative religions are not even aware that Western civilization has always had its own traditions, which are often hidden. In this fascinating introduction to non-mainstream Western spirituality, the coeditors of Gnosis magazine--today's leading journal of mystical spirituality--guide you through the teachings of Jung and Gurdjieff, the Kabbalah, neo-paganism, shamanism, alchemy, Sufism, and more. Explaining the history and practice of each tradition and describing its important figures, the authors present the ideas, strengths, and weaknesses of each tradition and offer a wealth of resources for those interested in pursuing these paths further.

Larry Dossey, M.D. has said "this book is a treasure. Highly recommended." This book represents a distillation of the research and inquiry that the authors undertook as editors of GNOSIS Magazine.
(See gnosismagazine.com/about_gnosis/hiddenwisdom.html; Emphasis mine). 

Three of the articles he wrote are: 1. "The Esoteric Orthodoxy of Catholicism", on "Appreciating traditional Catholicism from an esoteric perspective"  2. "Portals of Sleep" explaining that "the ancient Celts, dreams were a door to the land of Faerie" and 3. "The Secret Church of John" on "An inquiry into the legend of the 'hidden Church of John - said to exist above and beyond the outer Church."

If all of this sounds disturbing, it should. However, it gets worse. Coulombe participated in Tarot card readings with a "Gnostic bishop," Dr. Hoeller (See vimeo.com/user107247931?fbclid=IwY2xjawKs3ThleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFPQ1o1NkZKZG9mOW93WU5iAR5ePtpm96Z5vFpxawSeJ9vY_Sqgb365Gd5c_4PZTiFHdhRxXVFMfxJ5yvBzSA_aem_fnVu0rsLRQhhyrA_z6vN9Q---for videos with Coulombe). 

Tarot cards are a form of divination. One of the most prevalent evils is that of divination. Divination has existed in all cultures throughout history. Its basic idea involves foretelling the future or accessing occult information by various means. Traditionally, the person who practiced divination was regarded as having supernatural powers. Despite its frequent modern reformulation in psychological or parapsychological terms (e.g., receiving information from “the unconscious” or “higher” mind), historically, divination has always been an attempt to communicate with the supernatural or “divine” realm in order to secure information from the “gods.” Its fundamentally pagan and spiritistic nature has never changed, regardless of how “modern” its practices have become today.

The condemnation of divination comes to us from the passages of the Bible (as rightly interpreted by the Magisterium) and the Church of Her own authority. According to theologian Slater:

On Divination. We here suppose that the devil, a wicked spirit of great intelligence and power, but subject to God, exists and continually interferes in the affairs of men in order to ruin them. This truth belongs to the Catholic Faith and cannot be denied without sin. The sin of divination is committed when the devil is invoked expressly or tacitly in order to discover what is secret and hidden. There is express invocation of the devil when his aid is expressly implored. The devil is tacitly invoked when altogether inadequate means are used to find out what is occult [hidden], means which are not sufficient for the purpose naturally, and which have not been ordained by God for that purpose. The devil is eager to be appealed to in order the more easily to attain his own ends, and anyone who uses such inadequate means  to find out hidden secrets virtually appeals to the devil to help him. A great variety of such means of divination has been in use from the earliest times among all nations; and periods which have witnessed a decay of faith have also witnessed a recrudescence [recurrence] of these superstitions...The devil sometimes takes possession of the body of a human being and manifests what is secret through it; this was called pythonism. The devil had his prophets as God had. In necromancy the devil answers through the dead called to life again...Divination is mortally sinful, for it is a great insult to God to hold intercourse with and seek aid from the devil, His bitter enemy; and besides, it is most dangerous to the parties concerned. He is wont gradually to insinuate himself until he has his victim within his power, and then he works on him his evil will. (See A Manual of Moral Theology, [1925], 1:141-142; Emphasis mine). 

Therefore, let no one say to you that divination (in any form) is "harmless," or "only used as entertainment," or is OK if you believe in God because He protects you (God will never protect someone who deliberately exposes himself to evil through sin). The Bible is very clear as to what God thinks of divination:

Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD; because of these same detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. (Deuteronomy 18:10-12).

Do not practice divination or sorcery. (Leviticus 19:26).

He sacrificed his sons in the fire in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, practiced sorcery, divination and witchcraft, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the LORD, provoking him to anger. (2 Chronicles 33:6).

Then the LORD said to me, "The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds" (Jeremiah 14:14).

 And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain girl, having a pythonical [telling the future] spirit, met us, who brought to her masters much gain by divining. This same following Paul and us, cried out, saying: "These men are the servants of the most high God, who preach unto you the way of salvation." And this she did many days. But Paul being grieved, turned, and said to the spirit: "I command thee, in the name of Jesus Christ, to go out from her." And he went out the same hour. (Acts 16:16-18). 

Tarot cards probably originated in Italy in the 14th century since the earliest known explanation of their usage dates to 1391. The pack of cards, known as the Tarocco, is made up of 22 major enigmas, whose figures represent a synthesis of the mysteries of life; and 56 minor images incorporating 14 figures in four series (gold, clubs, swords and goblets). The 22 major enigmas correspond to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the number of hieroglyphs the ancient Jews used in divination. Each major enigma has an image with a particular meaning, e.g. Enigma I is the Minstrel, which signifies The Being, the spirit and creation; and Enigma XV is the Devil, which signifies magic, eloquence, commerce and mystery. Enigmas I through XI comprise the solar way, which is active, conscious, reflective and autonomous; while enigmas XII through XXII denote the lunar way, which is passive, unconscious, intuitive and possessed. The four series of the 56 minor images have the following significance: gold signifies intellectual activity; clubs, government; swords, military career; and goblets, the "priesthood." Practitioners of Tarot believe that these enigmas, images and series represent the sum of the knowledge of all sciences, particularly astrology, and in the permutations in "dealing the cards" are capable of revealing the future and solving all problems. 

An ex-tarot card reader admitted after she broke away from the practice, “It was after getting rid of them that there were several strange happenings, I began to feel the presence of a spirit, which kept visiting me between May and August. I realized the cards had actually connected me with ‘something,’ as I started to feel a presence which kept coming to me, very often, almost weekly. It came at any time … because I had finally broken the connection, and it was trying to keep it.” (See https://newagedeception.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/danger-of-the-tarot-cards-testimony-of-tina-an-ex-tarot-card-reader/).

 In 2002, a sniper who murdered several people left a tarot death card at the scene of one of his shootings along with the blasphemous message "I am God." The tarot cards were (of course) defended by an occultist. If a serial sniper sought by police left the "death" tarot card found near a shooting scene in Maryland, he or she likely doesn't have much of an understanding of tarot, says a woman who's produced instructional audiotapes on the fortunetelling cards.

"Anybody who knows tarot [knows] the death card is a good card in the deck," said Tori Hartman, writer and narrator of 12 Step Tarot and Learn How to Read the Tarot in an Hour. "It is basically transformation and it tells you that old ways of thinking are transforming." Transforming into something from Hell no doubt. (See https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=89996). 

This is what Charles Coulombe was using. To be fair, Coulombe pledged not to do further public tarot readings after a Vatican II sect "priest" reprimanded him, but his involvement in the occult goes back into at least the 1980s and was more than "experimentation:" his involvement went deep. I cannot help but question how a man who claims erudition and has written books on Catholic topics could get involved with tarot cards and a Gnostic sect. A plea of ignorance must be dismissed. 

Charles Coulombe: Feeneyite Heretic
Coulombe is the author of a book, first published in the 1990s under the pen name Thomas A. Hutchinson, entitled Desire and Deception: How Catholics Stopped Believing. It is now published under his real name. The book is one of the worst I've ever read; Fred and Bobby Dimond seem like top-tier authors compared to Coulombe. 

In summary, the rambling book explains that the Church misunderstood the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus for hundreds of years. This was due to the rejection of Neo-Platonism for Thomism. Apparently, the great Aquinas was responsible for the "heresy" of Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood. The Church was "saved" by the heroic actions of excommunicated Jesuit Leonard Feeney. 

Two aspects will be addressed: 1. Coulombe's attempt to rehabilitate and lionize the heretical monster Leonard Feeney, and 2. his denigration of the Angelic Doctor and Thomism.

A Feeney Sycophant
For a so-called historian, Coulombe is either culpably ignorant or less than honest when holding up Leonard Feeney as an ersatz "savior" of the Church. (Although validly ordained as a Jesuit priest in 1928, Feeney is not to be honored with the title of "Fr." since he was excommunicated a vitandus by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, with approval of Pope Pius XII, in 1953. Likewise, we do not call Martin Luther, a validly ordained Augustinian priest, "Fr. Luther" since his solemn excommunication by Pope Leo X). 

Here's what Coulombe OMITS. Leonard Feeney:
  • was never qualified as a theologian or canonist  
  • was disobedient to his lawful superiors and refused to report to the Holy See during the reign of Pope Pius XII and defend his teachings. He was subsequently excommunicated by Pope Pius XII
  • taught a strange, mixed-up notion of Justification and Salvation which is rejected even by his modern day followers
  • started a "religious order" consisting of married couples with children without ecclesiastical approval and in violation of Canon Law
  • abused the children of those "religious" by raising them communally and depriving them of their mother and father as God intended
  • taught that baptized infants were not somehow in the Mystical Body of Christ and could not be considered "children of Mary"
Leonard Feeney was no "hero," but he was a child abusing lunatic. (For more details see my post: introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/03/a-sickness-of-soul.html).

Contemptuous of Thomism
I'll let the Church speak on behalf of St. Thomas and his philosophy against the mindless rantings of Coulombe.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law:
Canon 1366, section 2.

Professors shall treat studies in rational theology and philosophy and the instruction of students in these disciplines according to the system, teaching, and principles of the Angelic Doctor and hold to them religiously.

Canon 589, section 1

Religious correctly instructed in lower disciplines shall diligently pursue philosophical studies for at least two years and sacred theology for at least four years, adhering to the teachings of D[om] Thomas according to the norm of Canon 1366, section 2, according to the instructions of the Apostolic See.

Pope Leo XII:

Therefore in this also let us follow the example of the Angelic Doctor, who never gave himself to reading or writing without first begging the blessing of God, who modestly confessed that whatever he knew he had acquired not so much by his own study and labor as by the divine gift. (Aeterni Patris, para. #33).

In the Councils of Lyons, Vienna, Florence, and the Vatican one might almost say that Thomas took part and presided over the deliberations and decrees of the Fathers, contending against the errors of the Greeks, of heretics and rationalists, with invincible force and with the happiest results. (Ibid; para. #22)

Pope St. Pius X:
If the doctrine of any writer or Saint has ever been approved by Us or Our Predecessors with such singular commendation and in such a way that to the commendation were added an invitation and order to propagate and defend it, it may easily be understood that it was commended to the extent that it agreed with the principles of Aquinas or was in no way opposed to them. (See Doctoris Angelici).

In his greatest encyclical against Modernism, the saintly Pontiff recommends Aquinas and his philosophy as an antidote to Modernism:
 In the first place, with regard to studies, We will and ordain that scholastic philosophy be made the basis of the sacred sciences. It goes without saying that if anything is met with among the scholastic doctors which may be regarded as an excess of subtlety, or which is altogether destitute of probability, We have no desire whatever to propose it for the imitation of present generations (Leo XIII. Enc. Aeterni Patris). And let it be clearly understood above all things that the scholastic philosophy We prescribe is that which the Angelic Doctor has bequeathed to us, and We, therefore, declare that all the ordinances of Our Predecessor on this subject continue fully in force, and, as far as may be necessary, We do decree anew, and confirm, and ordain that they be by all strictly observed. In seminaries where they may have been neglected let the Bishops impose them and require their observance, and let this apply also to the Superiors of religious institutions. Further let Professors remember that they cannot set St. Thomas aside, especially in metaphysical questions, without grave detriment. (para. #45; Emphasis mine). 

Pope Pius XII:
In his encyclical condemning "false opinions threatening to undermine the foundations of Catholic doctrine," Humani Generis of 1950, the Pontiff had this to say in paragraphs 31 and 32:

If one considers all this well, he will easily see why the Church demands that future priests be instructed in philosophy "according to the method, doctrine, and principles of the Angelic Doctor," since, as we well know from the experience of centuries, the method of Aquinas is singularly preeminent both of teaching students and for bringing truth to light; his doctrine is in harmony with Divine Revelation, and is most effective both for safeguarding the foundation of the faith and for reaping, safely and usefully, the fruits of sound progress.

How deplorable it is then that this philosophy, received and honored by the Church, is scorned by some, who shamelessly call it outmoded in form and rationalistic, as they say, in its method of thought. They say that this philosophy upholds the erroneous notion that there can be a metaphysic that is absolutely true; whereas in fact, they say, reality, especially transcendent reality, cannot better be expressed than by disparate teachings, which mutually complete each other, although they are in a way mutually opposed. Our traditional philosophy, then, with its clear exposition and solution of questions, its accurate definition of terms, its clear-cut distinctions, can be, they concede, useful as a preparation for scholastic theology, a preparation quite in accord with medieval mentality; but this philosophy hardly offers a method of philosophizing suited to the needs of our modern culture. They allege, finally, that our perennial philosophy is only a philosophy of immutable essences, while the contemporary mind must look to the existence of things and to life, which is ever in flux. While scorning our philosophy, they extol other philosophies of all kinds, ancient and modern, oriental and occidental, by which they seem to imply that any kind of philosophy or theory, with a few additions and corrections if need be, can be reconciled with Catholic dogma. No Catholic can doubt how false this is, especially where there is question of those fictitious theories they call immanentism, or idealism or materialism, whether historic or dialectic, or even existentialism, whether atheistic or simply the type that denies the validity of the reason in the field of metaphysics. (Emphasis mine). 

Conclusion
Charles Coulombe was deeply involved in the occult and cannot claim he was unaware of the Church's teaching on such, having studied Catholicism for many years. Although he claims to have sincerely repented of his occult involvement, he has not forsaken the Feeneyite heresy. He makes a "hero" out of the excommunicated, child-abusing lunatic, Leonard Feeney. He disparages the great St. Thomas Aquinas and his philosophic methodology, claiming against all Church teaching, that it has led to error and even heresy.

Now, an R&R platform, Pelican Plus, has this man writing for them as a "good Catholic." Are these "Founding Collaborators" of the platform ignorant of all this information? If not, why do they allow him to write for them at all? Stay away. The "+" in Pelican Plus is Feeneyism, and the denigration of Aquinas coming from a former occultist.