Transcription
While God predestines no one to go to hell, this is found in the Catechism Article 1037. The Council of Florence acknowledges that humans who do not abide by the true faith are lost. The church teaches that at the moment of death, the soul's judgment is immediate. The Councils of Florence and Lyons, and even the Catechism Articles 1022 and 1035, acknowledge this, that is immediately after the soul is judged particularly, it goes to one of three places: heaven, hell, or purgatory.
Most souls go to purgatory, by the way. If you want to know, in the end, at the day of general judgment, when all souls have come back to their bodies, out of the graves to be finally judged all together, how many are saved and how many are lost? What is the percentage? What would you say? If you wanted to know, what would you say?
Well, I can tell you the answer that comes from an approved prophetic work with the seals of approval of the church on it, by a Mexican mystic by the name of Concepción Cabrera de Armida, who's a venerable, and whose spiritual director is also a venerable, servant of God, Archbishop Maria Luis Martinez, Luis Maria Martinez, who wrote the book The Sanctifier. Well, in the book that contains the church's approval, written by this mystic Concepción, popularly known as Conchita, Jesus tells her, "In the end, Satan will not be able to gloat because the vast majority of souls will be saved." These are Jesus' exact words in Spanish to Conchita. In the end, at the general judgment, when everyone is judged and everyone is saved and condemned, the vast majority will be saved, and Satan will acknowledge that he has been defeated.
Now, there are books out there by lay people that say, "Oh, many people will go to hell, the majority will go to." How do they know? Are they almighty God? I'm simply sharing with you what Jesus is telling this mystic. I'm not telling you anything but what I read. Only God knows this number. No one else. And it's because of his great mercy. And Jesus alluded to this when he was addressed by Peter after having told the disciples that only you know, it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven. Peter then said to the Lord, well then what hope is there? And who can be saved? And Jesus said, without God it's impossible, but with God it is possible. So it's through God's mercy that the vast majority will be saved. Due to the prayers of other souls, cloistered nuns, mystics, victim souls, many that deserve damnation will be saved. Including the sufferings of the Virgin Mary, Jesus Christ, Louisa, Catherine Emmerich, uh Faustina, Padre Pio, you know, the list goes on. And many souls whose names we never even heard of that are hidden.
So while God predestines no one to go to hell, and while the soul when it dies goes immediately to heaven, hell, or purgatory, you know, most souls go to purgatory. This has been revealed also in another uh church-approved book entitled An Unpolished Manuscript on Purgatory, where a sister in France in the late 1800s appeared to her sister in the convent on earth whom she had vexed, and she in answer to her question said most souls go straight to purgatory, the second amount go straight to hell, the third amount, the least, go straight to heaven. So what does this mean? It means the majority are saved because if you go to purgatory, you have to go to heaven, you can't go to hell. So if most go to purgatory, then most are saved.
Thanks again for tuning in to Everything Catholic. Now this video is not going to be a compilation, but one long answer from Father Iannuzzi to a question that one of you submitted before. And the question is this: Should we judge others for receiving communion in the hand? Listen to this.
"Should we judge others for receiving communion in the hand? Is it a sacrilege? Is it wrong? Is it not as reverent as receiving it on the tongue?" And I've been asked in the past this question often times and especially when there was the coronavirus outbreak that we now know was manufactured in a lab and that had led several dioceses to administer communion only in the hand and refrain from administering the chalice, the consecrated and precious blood of Jesus Christ so as to minimize exposure to and contagion of this virus which we found out was not necessary because scientific studies have proved that receiving it in the hand or on or um and on the tongue does not increase in any way the cause cause of contracting any virus.
So nonetheless, in answer to this question, I wish to emphasize that the church's practice, okay, the and normative [clears throat] way of properly receiving communion is and will always be on the tongue. This is the normal ordinary church practice. Now, why will it always be like this? Well, number one, because we're not on God's level. We have to bow whether we're Orthodox or genuflect, whether we're Catholic, receiving these valid sacraments. Both churches have their valid sacraments before the good Lord. You know, although in 1977 the Pope granted an indult to the dioceses in the US to permit communion in the hand. Started in 1977. The number of Catholic rites and countries that received the indult are few. These are exceptional times we are witnessing. And the pandemic viral outbreak and church and state lockdowns offered a context within which the church was permitted to regulate this um discipline in the administration and reception of communion while at the same time not diminishing what Pope John Paul II referred to in a um letter he put out to all bishops called Dominicae Cenae. He writes, "We should never diminish the profound reverence and devotion that must accompany communion, reception of communion. It is necessary for all of us who are ministers of the Eucharist to examine carefully our actions at the altar. In particular, the way in which we handle that food and drink which are the body and blood of the Lord our God in our hands, the way in which we distribute holy communion, the way in which we perform the purification. All these actions have a meaning of their own. Naturally, scrupulosity must be avoided, but God preserve us from behaving in a way that lacks respect, from undue hurry, from an impatience that causes scandal."
Okay. Now, um when the church permits communion in the hand in these exceptional times, you know, it is improper for one to claim that it is an absolute sacrilege. This is not correct. Nevertheless, anyone who is not in the state of grace and receives communion either on the tongue or in the hand commits a sacrilege. To better illustrate this point, consider an unusual circumstance of a saint in whose hands Jesus desired to rest on account of her purity and holiness, Saint Faustina Kowalska. She writes in her diary of Divine Mercy entry 160, "The Crusade day, which is the fifth of the month, happened to fall on the first Friday of the month. This was my day for keeping watch before the Lord Jesus. It was my duty to make amends to the Lord for all offenses and acts of disrespect, and to pray that on this day no sacrilege be committed. This day my spirit was set aflame with a special love for the Eucharist. It seemed to me that I was transformed into a blazing fire. When I was about to receive Holy Communion, a second host fell onto the priest's sleeve and I did not know which host I was to receive. After I hesitated for a moment, the priest made an impatient gesture with his hand to tell me I should receive the host. When I took the host he gave me, the other one fell into my hands. The priest went along the altar rail to distribute communion and I held the Lord Jesus in my hands all that time. When the priest approached me again, I raised the host for him to put it put it back into the chalice because when I had first received Jesus, I could not speak before consuming the host. And so could not tell him that the other host had fallen. But while I was holding the host in my hand, I felt such a power of love that for the rest of the day, I could neither eat nor come to my senses. I heard these words from the host, 'I desired to rest in your hands, not only in your heart.' And at that moment I saw the little Jesus. But when the priest approached, I saw once again only the host. Unquote."
So admittedly, Saint Faustina received the Lord in this way, in her hands unintentionally, without offending our Lord. And the Lord on the contrary was pleased by it on account of her purity and holiness. Now, if a person with a dirty soul or improper preparation or dirty hands holds the host that offends our Lord. And yet tradition reveals that communion in the hand, when properly done, was observed from the earliest centuries of Christianity. The 4th-century church father and doctor, for example, Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, instructed those preparing for baptism that upon receiving Holy Communion, the faithful should place one hand on top of the other, palms up, so as to prepare a throne to receive the king.
Now, this does not mean that receiving in the hand is the normal practice of the church. It's not. It's an indult given to the United States bishops in 1977, and then started to spread throughout the Western world. And as I mentioned during this pandemic outbreak, um the concern of bishops over the risk of touching the tongue and passing the saliva on to others was thought to increase the chance of contagion, but this was proven false by a scientific study. A study was made by the Archdiocese of Portland, and it consulted with two physicians, one of which is a specialist in immuno- immunology, which concluded that the chance of touching someone's hand is equally probable in spreading the virus as touching someone's tongue. So, eliminating communion on the tongue in the name of avoiding the spread of the virus is scientifically not sound. These scientists in this Portland study related that one's hands have a greater exposure to germs. One's hands have a greater exposure to germs than one's tongue, and that when properly done, the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand poses a more or less equal risk.
So, having said all this, communion on the tongue remains the norm in the church, for it reduces the chance of abuse, mishandling the host, for example, receiving it with dirty hands, fragments of the host remaining in the hand, you know? But, remember also that in the Latin rite, our Western rite, unlike in the Eastern rite, the host is very compact and reduces chances of residual fragments, but the same cannot be said in the East. They only receive it on the tongue in the East. And they always do by intinction. And let us remember that the church's preference for communion on the tongue and permission of communion in the hand must always be accompanied, always be accompanied, by reverence, devotion, humility, respect, adoration, and decorum befitting our savior. These adjectives come from the 1969 instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Memoriale Domini. And it comes from also the 1980 apostolic letter that I mentioned before by JP2.
So, although the manner of the Eucharistic reception does not necessarily guarantee a life fidelity and loyalty to God's grace, it is certainly a cause for one to reflect upon how the outward manner of reception expresses and fosters our faith in the Eucharist. And I'll conclude with Psalm 81, verse 10. "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt. Open wide your mouth, and I will fill it."
And for the second part of this video is going to be for our revision together. We have learned so much together for the past year, and for me personally, doing it this way helps me to remember what I've learned before. Listen to this.
Virtue is nothing other than a repeated good act. And as a muscle grows and becomes more developed and accustomed to strain and effort through repetition, likewise the virtues. Whereby they acquire, as it were, a second nature in their exercise. So, in the initial years of, let's say, a young boy exercising the virtues, there is an arduous exercise, more notably frequent in that moment than in the boy's adult or mature years, because the more the virtues are exercised throughout the years, the lesser arduous they become. Now, it doesn't mean that once a person arrives, let's say, like Saints John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila, these great mystical doctors, so advanced in the virtues that they no longer need to exercise them. That's not what I'm saying here. What I'm saying is that as the soul progresses, matures in its spiritual journey to union with God's will, the effort in exercising the virtues becomes less arduous. Why? Apart from the analogy of a of a muscle experiencing greater, let's say, lactic acid build-up and fatigue in its initial training than in its later training, God makes us as creatures of habit. You see? This is the way God made us. When he made us in his image and likeness, he made us in such a way that not one isolated act of ours would determine our fate, but rather a series of repeated actions would do so. That's God's mercy.
Had God held us to one isolated act, we would probably all be damned. Why? St. John tells us in the gospel, "Whoever says he is without sin is a liar." Now, this does not mean that no human being has lived a life without sinning because Mary did, St. Joseph did, St. John the Baptist did, and possibly St. Aloysius de Gonzaga did, too. There were uh testimonies in the lives of the saints and hagiography that attest to certain human individuals having arrived at a state of such intimate union with God that deliberate sin had ceased altogether in their lives.
Now, what St. John means when he says in his gospel, "Whoever says that he is a he is without sin is a liar," is this. We are conceived in sin, original sin, and even though baptism takes that original sin away, the inclination to sin remains in us, you see, throughout our journey. This is known in Latin. The Council of Trent states this is known as concupiscence. That is this inclination to drift from God's will without even desiring to do so. It's a law within our spiritual DNA that's wounded. And what is specifically wounded in the spiritual DNA of ours? Well, the intellect. We don't always see the ends of our actions. The will. We don't always act with the ends of our actions fully uh present to us. And our memory. Our recall isn't perfect. That helps inform us >> [gasps] >> of the present. So, these three faculties of the human soul, intellect, memory, and will are impaired at the moment of conception. When we are conceived in original sin. So, we enter this life without personal sin, but with the effects of the original sin of Adam and Eve, of which we are not responsible. The teaching of the church, we do not bear the guilt of Adam and Eve, but we suffer the consequences. But, baptism takes original sin away while leaving the in- inclination to sin within us throughout our pilgrim- pilgrimage.
All right. When we exercise therefore the Christian virtues, we are habitually repeating good acts, even though they may not always be pleasing to our wounded, impaired human nature. This effort of ours, which is more pronounced in the initial years than in the later years of our lives, is due to this resistance within human nature that we are not responsible for, and called original sin and its effects. But, as we mature in life, we learn a regimen that we don't know in the initial years. What is a regimen? It is a schedule we all choose individually to abide by throughout our lives that helps us avoid evil and do good with alacrity. Some people may as part of this regimen adopt the rosary every day. A holy hour. Well, if you're a religious or a priest, the breviary. This is a book that they pray from three to five times a day depending upon whether they're a brother, a deacon, a sister, a priest. Or we may adopt pious or spiritual works of mercy every day such as helping the poor, visiting the sick, visiting the imprisoned, visiting the cemetery, praying for the dead, and so forth. We may also adopt frequenting daily the Eucharist. Receiving holy communion daily or going to confession monthly or bi-monthly. By the way, the code of canon law, which is the church's constitution so to speak, >> [gasps] >> it requires suggests, it doesn't require, it encourages in the commentary that Catholics confess once every two months. All right? Now, that doesn't mean you have to do it less or you have to do it more, but it's a good standard by which to abide. Several pontiffs in recent years including John Paul II, John XXIII, his predecessor, Benedict XVI have confessed weekly. Now, it doesn't mean that they do so because they are sinning weekly. Rather, it keeps them heightened in their awareness and in their spontaneity to God's grace. That is in responding to God's grace. By the way, the sacraments give us graces that we don't receive outside them. We cannot receive sacramental grace without the sacraments. So, these pontiffs would receive the sacrament of communion daily, confession frequently, and so forth. And they would administer these sacraments, too, of course, to others.
Now, these uh and other elements, from prayer to spiritual and corporal works of mercy to frequenting the sacraments, help create in our lives a regimen. Now, why do we need a regimen? Because it keeps us from the occasions of sin. And the occasions of sin lead us away from the exercise of the virtues. It is more arduous for a person to exercise the virtues continuously who does not have a regimen, spiritual regimen, than one who does. One who does not have a spiritual regimen, a daily routine of prayer, works, will eventually fall into sin. Jesus tells this to his mystics. Certain souls that are um not docile to God's grace, fall into sin over and over and over again. Because one, they're not open to God's grace, and even though they are not deliberately, explicitly refusing God's grace, their lack of a spiritual regimen is doing that for them. In other words, they're living a lifestyle contrary to Christ's will. And these individuals will always fall into sin eventually.
Well then, that will be all for the video this time. And as always, thank you so much for taking the time to be here with us. And hopefully, all of you have learned so much from this video. And remember, ever you have any feedback or suggestion, please let us know in the comments below. And from the bottom of my heart, thank you so much for your continuous support, contributions, and prayers. And until the next one, thanks again for watching and may God bless you.