Rorate Caeli

The Mass ends with the Last Gospel...
Oops, no, sorry, we mean The Last Surah

From French daily Ouest-France, on its July 19 edition, as reported by La Porte Latine:

"Cardinal Philippe Barbarin, Archbishop of Lyon, Primate of the Gauls, will take part on Sunday, July 24, in the 11 o'clock mass of the 57th Islamic-Christian pilgrimage of Le Vieux-Marché. Presided by Bishop Denis Mouteel, bishop of Saint-Brieuc et Tréguier, this celebration will take place in the chapel of the Seven Saints [Le Vieux-Marché, Côtes-d'Armor, Brittany]. It will be followed by the reading of the 18th Surah of the Koran, at the Stiffel fountain, 600 m away. This text evokes the legend of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus, which is also told in a gwerz [Breton folk song]." [This is an image of the actual event.]



[Appendix:] Thanks to reader Rodrigo in the comments for being attentive to the first words of Surah 18 (naturally, chanted in the appropriate liturgical language at the event). Not every word of the Koran is a clear repudiation of Christian dogma, but these undoubtedly are:

In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. All praise belongs to Allah Who has sent down the Book to His servant and has not put therein any crookedness. He has made it a guardian, that it may give warning of a grievous chastisement from Him, and that it may give the believers who do good deeds the glad tidings that they shall have a good reward, wherein they shall abide for ever; and that it may warn those who say, ‘Allah has taken unto Himself a son.’ No knowledge have they thereof, nor had their fathers. Grievous is the word that comes from their mouths. They speak naught but a lie.

41 comments:

LeonG said...

Utterly symbolic of the masonically-orientated french episcopate who love cultural diversity and false religion as much as they detest Roman Catholic Tradition. Evidence abounds of their stated public preferences for mosques and temples rather than support any presbyter who may want to say the TLM. Those who do the latter are very, very few and very, very far between.

Anonymous said...

The French Church and bishops are very sick, it has been since the evil French revolution, only since Vatican 2 has it truly been coming to an end. How very sad France was once called the "eldest daughter" of the Church, look how far it has come. Pray for the return of The Traditional Latin Mass, the F.S.S.P, S.S.P.X. and The Institute of Christ the King for only the TRUE MASS can save France and the Holy Roman Church.

rodrigo said...

Is this a joke? Have the mitred clowns taking part in this outrage even bothered to read the text of Surah 18 in translation? For those unaware, this is how the surah opens (vv.1-6):

In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. All praise belongs to Allah Who has sent down the Book to His servant and has not put therein any crookedness. He has made it a guardian, that it may give warning of a grievous chastisement from Him, and that it may give the believers who do good deeds the glad tidings that they shall have a good reward, wherein they shall abide for ever; and that it may warn those who say, ‘Allah has taken unto Himself a son.’ No knowledge have they thereof, nor had their fathers. Grievous is the word that comes from their mouths. They speak naught but a lie.

Timothy Mulligan said...

Abomination of desolation.

Jack said...

The Seven Sleepers of Ephesus (whose names escape me at the moment) are saints of the Church and are particularly commemorated on the Byzantine Calendars. I don't know about the other Eastern Churches.

They were found in a cave and came to life during a dispute about the Resurrection--then fell back asleep.

Sorry I can't relate the entire story here.

Why don't they read the story from an authorized collection of Lives of the Saints, such as Migne or the Prologue or Synaxarion if it is wished to honor them?

Knight of Malta said...

Only five percent of Catholics go to Sunday mass; any wonder?

Bernonensis said...

Far be it from me to defend the lies of the pagans, but God truly has not "taken unto Himself" a son; He is the Son, just as He is the Father and the Holy Ghost, and this from before time began. In this particular instance, Mohammed's book of nonsense is correct, and as orthodox Christians we reject and despise the Adoptionist heresy. Of course, the true God is not identical with the evil spirit that Muslims worship.

Anonymous said...

The Europeans deserve everything that is coming to them. God does not sleep and he is not forever mocked. The Europeans were given the gift of being the seat of Christendom. In their pride and stupidity they threw it away.

Jason

Anonymous said...

"The Europeans were given the gift of being the seat of Christendom. In their pride and stupidity they threw it away."

You are right Jason, We deserve everything that is coming to us. We are betraying Our Lord right, left and centre. I am sick at heart when I see churchmen involved in these shams. It would seem to me that they no longer have any faith in Our Saviour. They are no longer truly Catholic.

I don't know how we are going to get out from under all of this. Italy, despite many problems and examples of similar events, still loves Our Lady, despite the Council's plans to minimise Her role. (I'm still indignant about that!) She is visible here everywhere. There is still Catholic Identity here. We do processions and such. Where I live, the rosary is recited every evening during the month of May at the various "little Altar- Chapels" dotted all over the town. This despite a considerable Muslim presence.

Italy's hope is with Her. The Great Mother Of God. The rest of Europe seems to have abandoned Her.

Barbara.

Barbara

Anonymous said...

pray for my former diocese, this is so sad.
Brittany was one of the last Catholic Bastion from whom the Chouans fought the Revolution. The Mohammedans were stopped at Tours and did not invade us, now the clergy bring them willingly in our proud celtic sanctuaries.
Sad day for Brittany, and St Brioc!

Gratias said...

France relished its Revolution led by Freemasons against the Catholic Church already. Les Enfants de la Patrie decapitated untold thousands of priests, nuns and even Lavoisier. Charlemagne stopped the Muslim Enemies but they forgot him. Now Catholic bishops honor the same Muslim enemy and their Masonic friends. That French Catholics, with their empty churches, would want to promote their own Muslim Enemies is a death-wish. The Koran is, according to Salman Rushdie, a set of Satanic Verses. Salman Rushdie has survived after telling the tale, so French bishops should not be so timorous. Maybe the French draw their energy from their manliness against Hitler in WWII. Shame on them and on France for turning on their Catholic ancestors.

LeonG said...

Knight of Malta

It is only 3.5% [of those who think they are Catholic still or less than two-thirds of thre population] in France with many construing "regularly" as once a month.

ome modern catholics argue with me that their church is near to full on Sunday. Indeed, but that was achieved by closing other churches; reducing the number of Masses on Sunday from 3 or 4 to one and by making that time more convenient for all attendees - 10.30. Some places run Saturday evening so that everyone who goes can have a church free Sunday. All this alleviates the chronic & exacerbating shortage of presbyers.

Knight of Malta said...

LeonG, 3.5, interesting; didn't know it was that low, but it doesn't surprise me at all. Does anyone remember that it is a mortal sin to skip one's Sunday Obligation if they have the ability to go?

+Lefebvre speaks of the "adulterous union" of the Church and the Revolution caused by Vatican II:

"The adulterous union of the Church and the Revolution is cemented by 'dialogue'. Our Lord said 'God, teach all nations and convert them'. He did not say 'Hold dialogue with them but don't to to convert them'. Truth and error are incompatible; to dialogue with error is to put God and the devil on the same footing." [Open Letter112]

Where as the Revolution infected a country, Vatican II has infected the entire Church. Is it hard to see this infection?

The fact that France is down to 3.5, with millions of souls lost forever, and Vatican II at least partially--if not mostly--to blame for those losses, can one say that Vatican II created a new "Springtime" for the Church?

Anonymous said...

"The Europeans deserve everything that is coming to them."

No. Sadly, everything that is coming to them will not fall upon those who threw away their faith and their civilization; they will die comfortably in their beds, and the suffering will fall upon their children and grandchildren instead.

Anonymous said...

Interestingly the Primate of the Gauls, often classified with the more "conservatives" in the corrupt frankish Episcopate is also attending this ghoulish event.

Anonymous said...

We need somehow to combine this Surah with the fat butterfly stole of the previous thread here, worn by the polyester sanctuary hag who wears it. The two demand combination.

What these NewChurch heretics really want, of course, is to pray this nonsense with the infidels. Their problem is that the infidels in question don't want to pray with them; they only want to bomb them. Now the Freemasonic Church of the Brave New World has entered into its final stage, known as the suicide apostolate. Question: how can one 'be Church' when one cannot even be.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Bernonensis:

This is a semantic matter only here: the Muslims are clearly referring to us. The Athanasian Creed, which is de fide, says that the Son is 'eternally begotten' and that the Holy Ghost is 'eternally proceeding'. Somehow, Christ is the Son of the Father but we cannot know exactly how this is. The Blessed Trinity is a revealed mystery.

The mystery in this case is why Christians would pray a passage from the unholy Qu'ran, particuarly one that is meant to disparage the true Faith. We know the answer: those involved are not true Christians, let alone Catholics.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

We must now face the fact that rescue of Christendom is humanly impossible. That means that we must rely on prayer more, almost entirely now. The Church is facing the end in most of Europe and in Canada. There is still some life in her in Protestant America, of all places. But she is under constant attack there.

places. The Philippines may be an exception, since the Faith has long been rotted in the culture there. Not so for India or the Congo.

In Latin America, Catholicism has lost its 'appeal' to the emotionalist Pentecostalists.

Meanwhile, the secular-atheist social engineering continues apace. They are enrolling children in schools in Scandinavia where they are taught that there is no cultural or psychological distinction between males and females. 'Boys and girls' are now called 'children' by the teachers and the gendered pronouns and other wrods have been abandoned or replaced. Homeschooling is illegal in such places, of course. You go to gaol for it.

In America, Catholic hospitals are co-operating in 'emergency contraception' in some places (e.g. Boston), which is code for abortifacience. In other Catholic hospitals, in Caifornia, fœticide is achieved by premature delivery before the child is viable.

In Canadian hospitals, the 'do not resuscitate' euthanasiasts have taken over. In Holland, 'doctors' have become murderers who travel from house to house to kill the elderly. I call them 'death calls' instead of 'house calls'.

More is coming, including a default position in law in some countries so that newborn girls take their mothers' surnames at birth, whereas newborn boys take their fathers'. But I should avoid terms such as 'father' and 'mother'. They are disappearing. I've heard that the C.B.C. reporters are no longer allowed to use the terms 'husband ' and 'wife'. They are all "spouses' and 'partners' now. Gone are the days when 'partner' was a joke term with cowboy overtones as in, 'What are you up to now, partner?'.

I like to ridicule liberals, especially over semantic terminology, but that is useless. They have the media to impose their new anti-philosophy and most clowns in my country want to be 'accepted' by the powers that be. Those powers are directly anti-Christian.

P.K.T.P.

Bernonensis said...

P.K.T.P.,

I can't agree; it is not merely a semantic matter. Although "Allah" (in reality, Mohammed) surely meant to condemn what he thought was the belief of Christians, in this passage he condemned a heresy. I suppose it just shows how incompetent the "Prophet" was; even with Satan's help he couldn't get it right.
It is precisely because the Son is eternally begotten -- because there was never a time when there was not a Divine Son -- that we can't say God "has taken unto himself" a son. To say so would make no sense; there is no God, no "Allah", if we must use that tendentious term, who does not already, at every conceivable moment, subsist as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

rodrigo said...

I'm afraid people are tying themselves in knots over what amounts to a translation issue. The Arabic of verse 4 has been variously rendered as "Allah has taken unto himself a Son", "Allah has begotten a Son", "Allah has chosen a Son", etc. Throughout history, Muslims have understood this to refer to Christians. As this Muslim commentary on Surah 18 points out,

The last chapter [Surah 17] is brought to a close by pointing out the error of attributing a son to the Divine Being, while that very doctrine is denounced at the commencement of this chapter [Surah 18], thereby clearly establishing the connection of the two. The chapter opens with a plain denunciation of the Christian doctrine of the sonship of Jesus, and then refers to the earthly “embellishments” which hinder the Christian nations from accepting the truth; yet, we are told, it was their ancestors who cut off all worldly connections for the sake of their religion.

I look forward to reading of a similar arrangement involving Cardinal Barbarin chanting the Athanasian Creed at his Muslim friends after their Friday prayers.

Anonymous said...

What is quite stunning about this is that it's taking place in Brittany. France is the land of the Blessed Virgin and the Eldest daughter of the Church and Brittany is the most favored by the Blessed Virgin and St Anne. In the coming HORRENDOUS chastisement of France, the only relatively safe haven will be in Brittany. It is said that even the birds from around the country will fly to Brittany for safety.

France was given so many gifts, so many apparitions of our Lady and yet she threw off the Church and rejected the Sacred Heart with joy. Her entrance back into the Sacred Heart will be painful and anything but joyful. Pray for France and read Saint Mary Julie Jahenny if you wish to know more.

Anonymous said...

What sort of idiots are these bishops? The Koran includes all sort of garbage lifted from Nestorian sources.
The reason Moslems honour the sleepers is because everyone from Adam and Eve are boorn Moslems already. Rather other religions lead Moslems astray. Islam has claimed all the old testament and even jesus himself. Islam needs squashing!!!!

New Catholic said...

Bernonensis, this is one of several possible translations from the Arabic (the only "typical") source, but the main meaning is this: that the notion that God has a Son is absurd. That is it. It is undeniably a reference to Christians, who "perverted" the original teaching of God...

Bernonensis said...

Rodrigo and New Catholic,

The words at issue are "ittahadha allahu waladan". In Modern Standard Arabic (and bear in mind that MSA is based on the Qur'an as the divinely revealed exemplar of grammar and usage) this would certainly be translated as "Allah has adopted a son"; the root T-H-Dh signifies "to unify, to become one" The usual word for "beget" is from the root W-L-D, as is the word for child, "walad."

But even if we translate it as "Allah has begotten a son", it fails as a condemnation of orthodox Christianity, because it depends on the equivalence of the terms "Allah" (a necessarily single divine person) and the Christian "God" (three eternally subsisting divine Persons).
On the other hand, it does address the beliefs of those who recognize the Father alone as truly divine, and the Son as a divinized creature; the Ebionites and the Arians (two groups from whom Mohammed may have received his misinformation about Christianity) believed this, as did the Adoptionists some years later; the Seventh-Day Adventists believe it in our times.
Notice also the remarks in the commentary on the surah provided in Rodrigo's link: Christianity had its origins in caves? Monkery is an essential part of it? Does this sound like it is based on an accurate knowledge of our faith? No, Mohammed was condemning the heretical Christianity that he knew, and if he and his followers thought his "revelation" applied to all Christians, that's just their ignorance showing.

Jordanes551 said...

Obviously Surah 17-18 were and are intended as a rejection of truth that Jesus is in ANY sense the Son of God, and not merely a condemnation of the Christian heresies from whom Muhammad borrowed so much of his erroneous theology. Just because Muhammad was an ignorant heretic with no understanding of the Catholic Faith doesn't mean he didn't reject the Divine Sonship; and just because Muslims are ignorant of the Catholic Faith doesn't mean they haven't always understood and intended Surah 17-18 as condemnations of the Divine Sonship.

But even if we translate it as "Allah has begotten a son", it fails as a condemnation of orthodox Christianity, because it depends on the equivalence of the terms "Allah" (a necessarily single divine person) and the Christian "God" (three eternally subsisting divine Persons).

That line of argument is too clever. Catholic Arabs have long used "Allah" to refer to the Blessed Trinity. "Allah" is not a necessarily single divine person, but is the Arabic word for "God."

On the other hand, it does address the beliefs of those who recognize the Father alone as truly divine, and the Son as a divinized creature; the Ebionites and the Arians (two groups from whom Mohammed may have received his misinformation about Christianity) believed this, as did the Adoptionists some years later; the Seventh-Day Adventists believe it in our times.

FYI: I think there are SDA splinter groups that still hold that sort of belief, and some of the SDA founders did also, but "the Seventh-Day Adventists" as a denomination/sect do not believe that any more, and haven't for a very long time. They now maintain that Jesus has eternally existed and has always been fully and truly divine.

New Catholic said...

Thank you for your study of the matter, Bernonensis, it is really appreciated. However, as Jordanes appropriately explained, we cannot be too clever here: we are not "comdemning" the sacred book of the Muslims for whatever is contained in it, and we are not making a historical-critical analysis of its contents, but merely ascertaining that, without getting into too many theological details, this passage involves a clearcut rejection of the possibility of Divine Sonship, whatever may be the theological explanation and description of what Christians accept.

I am not scandalized by any of this, I honestly admire when any religious person boldly and peacefully professes his faith, but only by the presence of these bishops, vested, in the official public proclamation of this text.

Anonymous said...

Bernonensis:

I don't read your heresy of adoptionism in the passage. The Father eternally takes unto Himself a Son. God is not bound by time. So the Son is begotten, from God's point of view, in all times but never in a sense that there ever was no Son. God gives us the faculty to receive this truth but not fully to understand it.

It is true that God "has" not taken unto Himself a Son in the sense that this happened in the order of time, for that would mean that there was a time before God the Son was. But I think that you are reading this "has" too restrictedly here. That's why this is indeed a semantic matter. I find it very hard to believe that Muhammad meant to condemn divinde adoptionism. He meant to condemn Christianity.

In the strict sense of the words here in the English translation, which has no standing in Islam, you are correct but your point is really irrelevant. It only means that Muhammad wrote without needed qualification in his attempt to condemn Christianity. That is hardly surprising, since the mystery of the Blessed Trinity, in its entirety, is ultimately behond human comprehension.

P.K.T.P.

Socrates said...

57th pilgrimage? What sort of an event was this at its beginning (I suppose that at this time it had no such traces of indifferentism)?

Bernonensis said...

Imagine someone who's never heard of Judaism or the Bible. One day he reads some reference to Abraham 's sacrifice. Not long after that, he learns the story of the Exodus, and it sticks in his mind that Moses asks Pharaoh permission for his people to go a considerable distance into the desert to offer sacrifice because the Egyptians find the sacrifices of the Hebrews abominable ( Ex. 8:25-27). Then, his curiosity aroused, he thumbs through the Torah and finds this: "The LORD said to Moses, Consecrate to me all the first born; whatever is the first to open the womb among the sons of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine." Further on, in Judges he finds the story of Jephtha and his daughter. Shocked at the obvious conclusion, he starts preaching against the Jews and their horrible practice of human sactifice. Does he intend to condemn Judaism? Yes. Has he actually done so? No.
Now, replace our poor religious nincompoop with Mohammed, Judaism with Christianity, and the rituals of the Law with the doctrine of the Trinity. Does his condemnation of what we do not believe become a condemnation of what we do believe just because he doesn't know what he's talking about? That's all I've been saying.

It's true that Arab Christians use "Allah" for God, but, strange to say, it is not the same word. The Arabic for 'god" is ilah, cognate with the Hebrew eloh. "Allah" is a contraction of al-ilah, "the god". If you look at the passage we've been discussing (verse 4) in the Arabic text (via Rodrigo's link, for which I thank him), you will notice that the second lam of the word has a mark resembling a "3" above it, indicating that the consonant is doubled. Thus, what appears in the Arabic text is not Allah , but Alllah.
I don't think any Christians use that.

And by the way, thank you accusing me of being too clever. That's the best criticism I've received in many a year.

Bernonensis said...

P.K.T.P,

The Arabic verb doesn't have tenses in our sense of the word, but rather two forms, the imperfect (for incomplete actions) and the perfect (for completed actions). The verb in this passage is perfect and most naturally translates into a simple past in English. Really, though, I don't see how the point I am making would be affected if Mohammad had said "Allah is taking", or "will take", or "has been taking a son",
I'm sorry you find my point irrelevant, but irrelevant to what? to whether, as I said above, a criticism of what we don't believe is a criticism of what we do believe if the critic is stupid enough?

Jordanes551 said...

It's true that Arab Christians use "Allah" for God, but, strange to say, it is not the same word. The Arabic for 'god" is ilah, cognate with the Hebrew eloh. "Allah" is a contraction of al-ilah, "the god". If you look at the passage we've been discussing (verse 4) in the Arabic text (via Rodrigo's link, for which I thank him), you will notice that the second lam of the word has a mark resembling a "3" above it, indicating that the consonant is doubled. Thus, what appears in the Arabic text is not Allah , but Alllah.

Perhaps you should contact the Malaysian high court, which recently granted Christians permission to continue to use "Allah" in reference to the Blessed Trinity, or at least inform the Malaysian Muslims who went on a rampage against Christians after their high court issued its ruling.

And by the way, thank you accusing me of being too clever.

Well, to be accurate it's your line of argument that I said was too clever. ;-)

Bernonensis said...

Jordanes,

I'm already doing my small part to instruct the Muslims, and the above discussion is an example of this. When their "revealed" book contains obvious errors we owe it to them to point this out, so they can free themselves from their unthinking acceptance of Muhammad's words. This is why I raise the point about the surah misrepresenting what we believe. If the Qur'an says that we believe something that is in fact not part of our faith, and we just nod and say "Yeah, that's talking about us," then we've just confirmed the Muslims in their unbelief. But if we object that the Qur'an misrepresents our faith, might not at least some Muslims make an effort to learn the truth, and discover that Muhammad's "Allah" is not omniscient? Or is that too much to hope?

Well, you may have been speaking of my argument and not of me, but "by their fruits shall ye know them. B^)

Anonymous said...

To "Anonymous"
30 July, 2011 02:57

This is not suprising at all when you know Britany: this is the most leftist region of France.

rodrigo said...

Bernonensis is right that the Qur'an's errors in describing the Christian doctrines it purports to reject point to the book's falsehood. That said, just as Muslim anti-Trinitarianism is no less ferocious or objectionable despite being misinformed (including Mary in the Trinity), so Surah 18's attack on the divine sonship of Christ does not become fit matter for an episcopally-approved "pilgrimage" just because it is so theologically inept as to fail to attack orthodox doctrine. That Satan should wish Muslims to have a false understanding of the revelation they reject is hardly surprising.

I'm not sure there's really a disagreement here. What might be useful is if someone in France could mail a copy of Surah 18, in French translation, to the prelates who took part, with a polite covering letter. Though it seems unlikely, there's a chance they're simply clueless.

Anonymous said...

Which region of France is most leftist is a bit like trying to figure out which region of NYC is the most Yankees crazy. Nevertheless, Brittany does and will enjoy special protection from the Blessed Virgin in the coming chastisement. The Blessed Virgin loves Brittany because it was so fervent in the past and the faith is said to be weaker today but still exist. I observed this in May when I visited.

Poor France, the bad bishops and apostasy is everywhere but it's coming to an end soon.

Bernonensis said...

Rodrigo,

I hope nobody thought I was defending the use of the Qur'an in the Christian liturgy -- or anywhere else!

Frankly, I believe sometimes it would be easier to free Muslims than some "Catholics" from the errors of Islam.

just a simple catholic...... said...

PAX VOBISCUM!!
Pilgrimages are just wonderful occasions for preaching!!!!
Just a suggestion from a simple catholic believer to His EMINENCE the Cardinal.
He should remind the belivers of some basic truths:
1. No salvation without Jesus
He should read the following verse at this "pilgrimage", John 14:6 "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me."
2. From Tradition he should cite St Cyprian and the formulation of Council of Florence Extram Ecclesaim Nullam sallus" "No salvation outside the [Catholic] Church"
3. He should warn the pilgrims of the false prophets.
He should cite:
Matthew 7:15
"Beware of false prophets,who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves"
and Mark 13:22
"there will rise up false Christs and false prophets and they shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce even the elect"
and from 1 John 4:1
"Many false prophets are gone out into the world"
and 2 Peter 2:1
"But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers"
Matthew 24:26
"So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the DESERT,' do not go out.."
4. He should read the ATHANASIAN CREED which deals with the HOLY TRINITY and the Divine and human nature of our Lord
You can find it here:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm
5.He should remind the believers of the Arian Heresy which denied the eternal divine nature of our LORD Jesus and its condemnation

Anonymous said...

Anonymous august 1
"Which region of France (...)"
Erm, not really; anyway this taking place in Britanny this is not surprising at all. By the way the faith is today weaker here in Britanny than in many other parts of France, like say, Paris or the Var. Regards.

Anonymous said...

You can debate split hairs all you like, Marie Julie Jahenny had the visions and has written that though the faith will become less fervent in Brittany, but indeed it will remain and will come back quickly during the chastisement ahead.
The faith has evaporated in France as everywhere but there are pockets of true faithful everywhere, even here in Florida.

In May I drove 6,000 miles around France,Germany,Switzerland, and northern Spain hitting every major appartion of our Lady and every major Cathedral, Basilica, and visited every region of France and I can report that I saw faithful indeed in Brittany. I can also report strong faith (no surprise) in the Vendee department. It was here a saw a French woman kiss the tomb of St. Marie-Louise de Jésus. This made a strong impression on me as nowhere else (I drove clockwise from Paris) had I seen anything approaching this level of faith and I was looking closely. I went with the intention to see for myself the faith in France.

I grew accustomed to, and learned to enjoy the bizarre looks I received as touched my forehead to the stone floor in every Church I visited in the Holy Kingdom of France. It was ironic to be given strange looks as we prayed at the tomb containing the heart of Saint Maximin Giraud by people setting up a rock concert within the La Salette Basilica. I gave them plenty of bizarre looks back and thankfully left before the desecration began.

Another thing that struck me was the relentless propaganda of the cult of JPII. Every holy site in France had the giant pictures of JPII. I always thought real cults around saints start like brush fires from the Holy Spirit, not by a marketing campaign trying to convince people that he is a saint.

Anyway, enough about that. God bless.

Anonymous said...

And not to belabor the point but the Var region? N'importe quoi! I was there too and visited the Ile Saint-Honorat was like a bad V2 nightmare. A nearly 2,000 year old monastery that withstood everything but couldn't hold out against the tide of V2. The Church itself was stripped of statues, relics, artwork, etc. The alter in the middle, n real mess.

What a shame, but we all know the reach Church will be reborn triumphant.

Anonymous said...

You know, I am from Britanny and I really know my region. Britanny is indeed the most leftist region in France and the faith is weaker than in other aeras. Sadly it has the highest rate of suicide and alcoholism in France (and maybe in Europe). And what you say about the Vendée departement is also surprising :D But after all, I just live here, you as a tourist probably know better. God bless.