Vatican Two Fathers Holiest Catholic Ever.

ABS and The Bride were eating some delicious roasted lamb at Maggie Jones's in Kensington, England when he was introduced to and spoke with Lady Felicity Birtwhistle, the daughter of Tilly and Cecil Cripplekick, the rich couple which owns several farms in and around the Tri-Cities of Dorset; dairy farms in the lovely little villages of Puddletown, Tolpuddle, and Affpuddle and she said, The authors of the Lil' Licit Liturgy were a bunch of poofters, right?

Well, Lady Birtwhistle, maybe so, but the then Pope at the time publicly stated that the Fathers of that captious council were the holiest Catholics ever.

Text of Pope Paul VI’s Address Closing Council’s Second Session

Following is the council press office translation of the Latin address delivered Dec. 4 (1963) by Pope Paul VI at the closing meeting of the second session of the ecumenical council.

 We have now reached the end of the second session of this great ecumenical council.

You have already been long absent from your Sees, in which the sacred ministry requires your presence, your guidance and your zealous pastoral labors. Your work here has been heavy, and assiduous and protracted by reason of the ceremonies, studies and meetings of this period of the council.

And now we have just entered upon the sacred season of Advent which prepares us to celebrate worthily the memory of the blessed Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, that yearly recurring feast which never loses its solemnity and wonder and holiness. During this important and absorbing commemoration of the ineffable mystery of the Incarnate Word of God, none of us should be occupied with other thoughts, however elevated or holy they may be. None of us should be detained in any other See, however great and venerable, but each of us should celebrate the liturgical mysteries in that place where Providence has entrusted to us His church, His community and His priestly pastoral duty.

We must, therefore, interrupt for a second time the course of this great synod; we must once again bid each other farewell and go our separate ways after these happy days of momentous brotherly conference.

But we must first thank God for the blessings that He has bestowed during this session and by its means, nor can we withhold our thanks from any of those who have taken part in the session and have had some positive part in its successful functioning. We thank especially the presidency of the Council, the moderators, the secretariat and also the commissions and the periti, the representatives of press and television, those who have fitted out this basilica, and those who have offered hospitality and assistance to the Fathers of the council.

And we thank in a particular way those Fathers who have been good enough to contribute toward the great expense that the organization of this great event requires, or have with fraternal charity come to the aid of their more needy brothers, or have assisted the Church in her enormous needs and come to the help of the victims of recent disasters.

Before concluding our labors, it would be fitting to sum up and to consider together the course of the session and its results. But to do that would make this address too long, nor indeed could it be done adequately since so many aspects of this council belong to the domain of grace and the inner kingdom of the soul into which it is not always easy to enter, and since so many of the council’s results have not yet come to maturity, but are as grains of wheat cast into the furrows, awaiting their effective and fruitful development, which will be granted only in the future through new mysterious manifestations of the divine goodness.

Nevertheless, lest we seem to leave this holy council hall without gratitude for the blessings of God, from whom this council has here taken its origin, we will remind ourselves above all that some of the goals that the council set itself to achieve have already been at least partially reached.

The Church wished to grow in her consciousness and understanding of herself. See how, on the very level of her pastors and teachers, she has begun a profound meditation on that mystery from which she draws her origin and form. The meditation is not finished, but the very difficulty of concluding it reminds us of the depth and breadth of this doctrine, and stimulates each of us to strive to understand and to express the doctrine in a way which, on the one hand, cannot fail to lead our minds, and certainly those of the faithful who are attentively following our labors, to Christ Himself from whom all gifts come to us and to whom we wish to return all, “reconciling everything in Him” (Col. 1, 20).

On the other hand, our efforts cannot fail to increase both our happiness in being personally called to form part of this holy Mystical Body of Christ, and our mutual charity, the principle and law of the life of the Church.

Let us rejoice, my brothers, for when was the Church ever so aware of herself, so in love with Christ, so blessed, so united, so willing to imitate Him, so ready to fulfill His mission? 

https://vaticaniiat50.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/text-of-pope-paul-vis-address-closing-councils-second-session/

We are all protestants now

One of the great blessings of Democracy is that it gives us psychotic rulers like, Richard Nixon, who, presuming to speak for all Americans, famously said, We are all Keynesians now.

And one of the great blessings of the old protestant revolution and modern ecumenism is that protestant exegesis (eisegesis in their most egregious errors) has sown exegetical errors that are coming to fruition as darnel in the rhetorical wheat of sermons we Christian Catholics hear in the Lil' Licit Liturgy.

Within the past year, has heard two Catholic Priests sermonise about the Pearl of Great Price in Matthew 13 (one of the four most popular Gospels) and is so doing mislearn poor Pat and Pam Pew Dweller that the Pearl of Great Price is them.

Yikes.

Where to begin? Well, let's begin with the King James Version of Matthew 13 (Yes, Matthew DID write BEFORE Mark and he wrote his Gospel in Hebrew, so there) which has the exquisite collection of words that Jesus spoke in the original Queen's English he used; (old joke).

 45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls:

 46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.

Ok, Scofield Reference Bible, what sayeth ye protestants was the meaning of this Parable that Jesus taught?

The true Church, "one body" formed by the Holy Spirit 1 Corinthians 12:12 1 Corinthians 12:13 . As Israel is the hid treasure, so the Church is the pearl of great cost. Covering the same period of time as the mysteries of the kingdom, is the mystery of the Church ; Romans 16:25 Romans 16:26 ; Ephesians 3:3-10 ; Ephesians 5:32 . Of the true Church a pearl is a perfect symbol:

(1) A pearl is one, a perfect symbol of unity 1 Corinthians 10:17 ; 1 Corinthians 12:12 1 Corinthians 12:13 ; Ephesians 4:4-6 .

(2) a pearl is formed by the accretion, and that not mechanically, but vitally, through a living one, as Christ adds to the Church Acts 2:41 Acts 2:47 ; 5:14 ; 11:24 ; Ephesians 2:21 ; Colossians 2:19 .

(3) Christ, having given Himself for the pearl, is now preparing it for presentation to Himself Ephesians 5:25-27 . The kingdom is not the Church, but the true children of the kingdom during the fulfilment of these mysteries, baptized by one Spirit into one body 1 Corinthians 12:121 Corinthians 12:13 compose the true Church, the pearl.

Got it Scofield. Protestants think that Man is the Pearl of Great Price

OK, Catholic Church. What sayeth ye in the Traditional explication of this memorable Parable; Are we the Pearl of Great Price or is it someone else - like, perhaps, a Divine Person, Jesus?

Take it away Douai:

45 Again the kingdom of heaven is like to a merchant seeking good pearls.
46. Who when he had found one pearl of great price, went his way, and sold all that he had, and bought it.

Cornelius a Lapide Commentary on Scripture

The kingdom of Heaven is like, &c. For he who knows that a treasure is lying hid in any place, and buys the place, becomes the master of the treasure, and is not bound to point it out to the former owner, but may use his knowledge for his own advantage by buying the field for as much as it is worth by common estimation; with which the hid treasure has nothing to do.

Which when a man has found. The Greek has the Aorist, εύρὼν.

Observe: Christ, in the preceding four parables (namely, of the Sower, of the Seed, of the Grain of Mustard, and of Leaven) has declared the nature, power, and efficacy of the Gospel; now, in the two following parables, of the Treasure, and of the Pearl, He declares its price, how great it is, that all things are deservedly counted as loss in comparison of it. So SS. Chrysostom, Hilary, and others. In a similar way, Wisdom is spoken of by Solomon in the Proverbs (viii. 11, 19): “For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it . . . My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.”

Literally. By this treasure S. Jerome understands Christ Himself; and S. Augustine, Holy Scripture. (Quest. in Matt. q. 13). “For when anyone has attained partly to the understanding of it, he feels great mysteries lie hid in it, and he sells all he has, and buys it; that is, by despising things temporal, he procures rest for himself, that he may be rich in the knowledge of God.”

Tropologically. S. Gregory, by the treasure, understands heavenly desire. He says: “The treasure being found is hid that it may be preserved, because it is not enough for a man to guard the zeal of his heavenly desire from the wicked spirits, who does not hide the same from the praise of men. In this present life we are, as it were, in a road, by which we are going to our country. Wicked spirits, like robbers, beset our path. He, therefore, who openly carries his treasure in the way desires to be robbed of it.”

Again the kingdom of Heaven, &c.—goodly; Syriac, the best; Arabic, a good gem. He means the faithful ought with as great zeal to provide themselves with the doctrine and life of the Gospel (which is the way and the price of the kingdom of Heaven) as a merchant seeks for pearls, and buys the one of them which is most precious: for otherwise the kingdom, or the Gospel itself, is properly compared to a pearl rather than to a merchant man.

And when he had found, &c. For as this pearl was beyond all price, so is the Gospel. See Pliny on the price of pearls (l. 9, 35), where he says, among other things, that pearls have greater affinity with the sky than with the sea. See what I have said on the Apocalypse xxi. 21, where I have enumerated thirteen properties of pearls.

Symbolically. The precious pearl is Christ, also the Blessed Virgin, also the religious state, also charity: “for charity is a precious pearl, without which nothing can profit thee, whatsoever thou mayst have,” says S. Augustine. For charity is the necklace of Christ. Also a precious pearl is the contemplative life, concerning which Christ said of the Magdalene, “Mary hath chosen the good part.” A pearl is, also, the soul of every man. It is also eternal felicity, as our Salmeron appositely shows (tom. vii. tract. 11); for all these are principal parts of the kingdom of Heaven, i.e., of the doctrine of the Gospel. 

Such, likewise, is humility, even as our Thomas teaches, being taught of God himself (Imitat. Christi. l. 1, c. 2): “If thou wishest profitably to know and to learn anything, love to be unknown, and to be counted as nothing. This is the loftiest and most useful knowledge—truly to know and despise thy self.” This is the most precious Gospel pearl, but its worth is unknown to the proud children of Adam. Such also is the Cross of Christ, and to suffer for Christ. See Hab. chap. iii. 4: “There were horns in His hands; there was His strength hid.” (Vulg.)

The chief and most precious pearl of all, from which all virtues and all the Saints, like pearls are sprung, and from which they derive their beauty and their value, is Christ Himself. For His Deity in His Humanity is as a pearl hid in a shell. It issued forth of the substance of the Virgin, and the dew of the Spirit, most white, through innocence of life. It was exceeding bright through wisdom; round through the possession of all perfection; having the weight of conscience, the smoothness of meekness, the price of blessedness. For says Pliny, “The value of pearls consists in whiteness, size, rotundity, smoothness and weight.” Hear what S. Augustine says, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God: for the Word of the Lord shines with the brightness of truth, and is solid with the firmness of eternity, and is every where alike with the beauty of Divinity: when the shell of the flesh is pierced through, God may be perceived.” 

This pearl of Christ, says our Salmeron, is small by humility, but precious in value. Let us bear it on the head of our mind by way of ornament; on our forehead by confessing the faith; in our ears by obedience to the Law, obedience rendered to God in Himself, and our Superiors; on our necks and breasts by love; on our arms by the exercise of good works; in rings on our hands by the gift of discerning spirits; in our girdles by chastity; on our garments by modesty and holy devotion to eternal life; but we ourselves also may become precious pearls, and by this means may induce others to imitate the most holy life of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Finally Christ is not only a very precious pearl, but He is also the gem of gems. He is a carbuncle, because He is the light of the world. He is an emerald because He delights the angels by the verdure of His grace. He is strong and invincible as a diamond. He produces joy as a sardius. He heals the leprosy of sin as a chrysoprasus. He assists the bringing forth of good works as a spiritual jasper; He sharpens the intellect as a beryl; He has celestial colour and life, as a sapphire; He resists sleep and drunkenness, as an amethyst; and all the infirmities of the mind, as a hyacinth; He sustained the worry of the passions, as a topaz: He is a sardonyx in brightness and splendour; He is a chrysolite in His golden charity. Whence the foundations of the heavenly Jerusalem are laid with these twelve precious stones, which signify the twelve Apostles of Christ.

Depose Franciscus? Who eats of the Pope dies like a beast.

It is the protestants who succor whatever schism it is they approve and it is the protestants who call the Pope a heretic and that is an ancient protestant tradition.
But, in this execrable epic epoch of epicene ecclesiastical ereption of Tradition, it is the Trad Catholics who have chosen to succor the SSPX Schism and to judge the Pope a heretic.
That is neither Catholic nor Tradition but it is a novelty advanced by the very same men who heretofore have habitually decried novelty.
Catholic Tradition is never conserved or strengthened by aping protestants.
Maybe a little reminder from a Manualist could forestall some of the recent weirdness from Trads which does indeed smack of having arisen from diabolical delusion.
One can Keep the Faith once delivered, Call on The Lord and Wait on the Lord, and not gather at the common grounds for a daily panic picnic.
Trads, more than any other Catholics, are supposed to possess the peace of Christ; they are supposed to know that He is, has always been, and always will be, the Head of His One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church.
He has promised the Holy Roman See will remain faithfully intact until the end of time and, so, don't sweat the small stuff, and a perplexing Pope is small stuff, relatively speaking, in comparison to the promises of Our Creator, Redeemer, Lord, and Saviour.




MY CATHOLIC FAITH

In the castle of Fontainebleu Napoleon forced the Pope to give up the States of the Church, promising an annual income of two million francs. In the same castle Napoleon was himself later forced to sign an abdication and was promised a yearly income of the same amount. When the Pope excommunicated Napoleon, he answered that the words of an old man would not make the arms drop from the hands of his soldiers. In the Russian campaign, because of the intense cold, this actually happened. He kept Pius VII prisoner for five years; he himself was later a prisoner for seven years. Four days after ordering the union of the States of the Church with France, he lost the battles of Aspern and Erlingen.

73. The Gates of Hell

What was the end of the leaders of persecution, schism, and heresy? --Many of the leaders of persecution, schism, and heresy came to a bad end.


1. Of the first persecutors, several died violent deaths. The death of Judas is the type for his imitators. It is related that:Herod, the murderer of the Holy Innocents, died in unspeakable tortures.
   Herod, the murderer of James the Apostle, was devoured by worms.
   
2. Of the persecutors in Rome, Nero was deposed, and in despair stabbed himself.
3. Domitian was assassinated.
   Hadrian became insane.
   Marcus Aurelius, despondent over the ingratitude of his only son, starved himself to death.
   Septimus Severus, whose life had been attempted by his only son, died in despair.
   Decius died miserably in a swamp, during a battle.
   Valerian was flayed alive by the Persians.
   Maxentius was drowned in the Tiber.
   Diocletian died from a loathsome disease.
   Julian the Apostate was struck down by a lance on the field of battle, and died crying: "Galilean, Thou hast conquered!"
4. 
   
5. The case of Napoleon is instructive.
   Drunk with power, Napoleon seized Rome in 1808, declaring himself the "successor of Charlemagne". He banished Cardinals and bishops, and carrying off Pope Pius VII, held him prisoner in Savona. Enemies of the Church exulted: "The Papacy is ended! The Emperor has devoured the Pope!" They forgot the divine promise to Peter: "The gates of hell shall not prevail!"; on that promise was based the ancient saying: "Who eats of the Pope dies like a beast." On the same day that Napoleon died in exile at St. Helena, Pope Pius VII was celebrating his own feast day in Rome.
6. 
   
7. Heretics and schismatics have shared the same fate. Arius burst asunder during a triumphal procession. Voltaire died in despair. The Greek Schismatics fell under the Turkish yoke in 1453, on Pentecost, the feast of that Holy Ghost about whom they had expressed doubts.Truly history has shown the truth of the words of Holy Scripture; "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Heb. 10:31).

Why can no other church except the Catholic Church be the True Church of Christ? --No other church except the Catholic Church can be the True Church of Christ, because no other church possesses the marks of unity, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity.
Truth cannot change; hence the constantly changing doctrines of non-Catholic churches can not be true. They also differ in their government. Some recognize the temporal ruler as their spiritual head. Others have ministers whom they call bishops, deacons, elders. The majority reject such titles.



1. There are hundreds of churches and Christian denominations, each different from the others; they do not possess the mark of unity. They differ in even the essentials of faith. They cannot agree, and keep dividing and subdividing year by year. Their only similarity appears to be their opposition to the Catholic Church.
2. 
   Such churches are multiplying. In the United States there are over two hundred religious bodies. They arise, then pass away, to give place to other denominations. Realizing the great handicap of disunity, efforts have been made by various groups of churches to organize. General councils and conferences of different bodies have been held; but there is no vital result for unity. This is of course because, though agreement may be general concerning matters such as social work, beneficent societies, and the like, no agreement can be found in the essentials of faith and doctrine. This is the result of free interpretation of the Bible, and the repudiation of Peter's successor, Vicar of Christ.
   
   
3. The denominations and their founders are not holy in the same sense or degree as the Catholic Church and its Founder are holy. Many non-Catholics are upright and good because they have retained many doctrines and practices of the Catholic Church.
4. 
   Many founders of non-Catholic churches were far from holy. Luther, the founder of Protestantism was an apostate friar, who married a nun who had left her convent and turned against her vows. During his life he taught contradictory doctrines, some of them immoral. Henry VIII, the founder of Anglicanism, married five women successively, after divorcing his lawful wife; he had two put to death.
   
   No denomination is catholic, or universal. These non-Catholic churches are everywhere, but are different everywhere.
   
   A regional or national Church cannot be the true Church, since it cannot teach all nations, as Christ commanded.
   
   No heretical Christian denomination is apostolic. The Protestant churches are some 1500 years later than the Church founded on the Rock of Peter.
   
   Not even their teachings come down from the Apostles. Their ministers cannot trace their succession from the Apostles. Not one teaches all the doctrines of the Apostles. How then could they be the Church founded by Christ?

What should be the attitude of Catholics towards those who do not belong to the True Church? --Catholics should observe an attitude of understanding towards them, because the majority of those who do not belong to the True Church are in good faith.


1. Catholic teachings are not easy to understand at first sight; many Catholic practices require sacrifice. Towards such a religion there is bound to be prejudice.
2. 
   To be obliged to go to Mass every Sunday under pain of mortal sin; to have to confess to a priest, who is another human being like ourselves; to condemn divorce and birth control; to observe fasts and abstinence;-these are not easy doctrines.
   
   No wonder in looking for relief, man often, however unconsciously, seeks motives for not accepting the Church that commands its members to obey such precepts, to accept such doctrines.
   
   When Our Lord first announced the institution of the Holy Eucharist, many of the disciples said, "This is a hard saying. Who can listen to it?" (John 6:62). And they no longer went with Jesus.
   
   
3. Catholics should above all try to give good example; nothing is more effective in the eyes of non-Catholics than the exemplary lives led by good Catholics.
4. 
   "Behave yourselves honorably among the pagans; that, whereas they slander you as evildoers, they may through observing you by reason of your good works glorify God in the day of visitation" (1 Peter 2:12). Catholics should often pray for the conversion of those outside the Church, praying with the Good Shepherd for only one Fold.
   
   
5. While avoiding useless discussions that generally end in bitter quarrels, Catholics should try to show the beauty, the truth of the Catholic Church.
6. 
   In our friendly discussions with non-Catholics we should not be always on the defensive, but should try to see whether they can trace the origin of the authority of their ministers to the Apostles, whether their church can be proved the True Church by the possession of the four marks. Often our non-Catholic friends criticise the Catholic Church on account of some devotional practices like holy water, candles, etc., as if such practices belonged to the essentials of faith.
   
   
   
   

   
   

Could Jesus become sin?

NO!!!! Jesus could not act or even desire to act against His own will.

SIN. "A word, deed or desire in opposition to the eternal law" (St. Augustine). Sin is a deliberate transgression of a law of God, which identifies the four essentials of every sin. A law is involved, implying that there are physical laws that operate with necessity, and moral laws that can be disregarded by human beings. God is offended, so that the divine dimension is never absent from any sin. Sin is a transgression, since Catholicism holds that grace is resistible and the divine will can be disobeyed. And the transgression is deliberate, which means that a sin is committed whenever a person knows that something is contrary to the law of God and then freely does the action anyway. (Etym. Old English synn, syn, sin; Old High German sunta, suntea, perhaps to Latin sons, guilty.)

Could, then, Jesus have become sin for us as it is so often claimed by protestants and increasingly, Catholics?

Again, No, owing to the Hypostatic Union for to think Jesus could become sin would mean the Hypostatic Union had ceased to exist- an ontological impossibility and a bald-faced absurdity.

 Catholic Bible Study - Duration of the Hypostatic Union

Duration of the Hypostatic Union

1. The Hypostatic union means the union of the human and Divine natures in and under the one person of the Word, so that Christ is true God and true Man. When at the Annunciation the angel had concluded his heavenly message, and when the Blessed Virgin had pronounced the assenting words, "Be it done to me according to thy word" (Luke 1:38), at that moment the Son of God was, through the supernatural activity of the Holy Ghost, conceived in Mary's Womb. The conception of Christ implies three factors: the creation of Christ's human soul; the infusion of that soul into and union with Christ's body which had been fashioned and prepared for its reception by the activity of the Holy Ghost; and, lastly, the assumption of that human nature by the Person of the Word.

These three events were simultaneous: not the slightest fraction of time intervened between them. The human nature of Christ never had its co-natural human personality - there were not two persons in Christ - but as soon as Christ's human nature was constituted by the union of His soul and body, at that very instant it was placed under the dominion of the Person of the Word. The Divine Person, Who contained within Himself in an eminent manner all the perfections of a human personality, communicated to that human nature His own existence and made it intimately His own. Henceforth the Incarnate Word could say in all truth: I walk, I suffer, this is my body.

This doctrine is well expressed by St. Leo the Great and by Pope St. Gregory in his letter to the bishops of Ireland, both of whom say in substance: "The human nature of Christ was not first created and then assumed (by the Person of the Word), but it was created in the very act of being assumed."

As a matter of fact, the Son Whom the Blessed Virgin conceives and to Whom she gives birth, is at the same time represented and declared in the Gospels to be the Son of God: "Behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call His name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High" (Luke 1:31-32). Shortly after the Annunciation Elizabeth, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, saluted Mary as the Mother of God: "And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me" (Luke 1:43)?

2. What, it may be asked, happened to the hypostatic union during the triduum of Christ's death? The Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, which are infallible documents of faith, tell us that after His death Christ descended into hell and that He was buried. These statements presuppose that the Word remained united both to the soul which descended into the limbo of the just and to the body which was buried in the sepulchre. Besides, death could take place without destroying the hypostatic union, for death did not consist in a separation of the humanity from the Divinity but in a separation of the soul from the body. Hence the soul and the body could be separated from each other without being disjoined from the Word.

At this point several interesting questions immediately arise. How could Christ's body in the sepulchre be united to the Word, the Source and Fountain of all life, and yet be dead and lifeless? The solution to this problem lies in a proper understanding of the manner in which God is the Author of life.

The Word, it is true, is the Source of all life in the universe, especially of that of the human soul. As far as the human body is concerned, the Divine disposition by creation is such that the body lives only when united to the soul. Hence although the Word is the Source of all life, it does not vivify the body except through the soul. Since Christ's body in the tomb was separated from the soul - although united to the Word - it was not a living body.

During the Sacred Passion, our Lord shed His blood with great profusion and generous prodigality. The various stages of the Passion and especially of the Way of the Cross constituted a veritable procession of the Precious Blood. The question whether every single drop of Christ's blood, shed during the Passion remained hypostatically united to the Person of the Word during the triduum, was debated during the Middle Ages with great vehemence and vigor between members of the Franciscan and Dominican Orders. The prevailing opinion among theologians today is to the effect that during the triduum of Christ's death, the Person of Christ remained hypostatically united at least with that portion of His Precious Blood which He reassumed at the Resurrection.

Bruges, Beyreuth, Jerusalem and several other places maintain or at one time claimed to possess true relics of Christ's Precious Blood. If these relics are true, is the blood of Christ which they contain still united to the Person of Christ? Is it consequently deserving of Divine worship? This problem has likewise been the subject of extensive and prolonged discussion. At present the generally accepted doctrine is the following: If these relics are the blood shed by our Lord during His Passion, these particles of Christ's Blood were not reassumed at the Resurrection but permanently separated from Christ's Person; they are not to be worshiped but only venerated like particles of the Holy Cross.

The blood which is said to have flown miraculously from consecrated Hosts or images of Christ is not the blood of Christ at all. Since the Resurrection, Christ is in a glorified state and "dieth now no more." Hence He cannot bleed in a consecrated Host where He is present in the same glorified state.

If a fluid, the chemical ingredients of which are the same as those of human blood, should appear on the consecrated Host, the phenomenon would be a miracle - a didactic miracle teaching us the truth of the Real Presence.

Since the Holy Eucharist was established on the night of Holy Thursday, and since the regular celebration of Mass did not begin until some time after the Resurrection, theologians inquire what would have been the state of our Lord in the Holy Eucharist if the Apostles had consecrated on 1) Good Friday morning, 2) Holy Saturday morning, 3) Easter morning?

1) If the Apostles had consecrated on Good Friday morning, Christ Who at that time was in Himself passible would have been in the Holy Eucharist in an impassible manner. "It is clear," says St. Thomas, "that the very body of Christ which was perceived in its own nature by the disciples was also received in the sacramental species. The body which was perceived in its own nature was not impassible but rather prepared for the Passion. But that which in itself was passible was in an impassible manner in the Sacrament, just as that which in itself was visible existed invisible."

2) Let us suppose now that the Apostles had celebrated the Lord's Supper on Holy Saturday morning. At this time there existed a real separation between the constitutive elements of Christ. The Sacred Host would have contained (in an impassible manner) the bloodless, inanimate Body of Christ as it lay in the tomb. The Chalice would have held only the blood separated from His body duri.ng the Passion and absorbed by the earth. Both the body and the blood would have remained hypostatically united to the Divine Person. Christ's soul, sojourning in limbo, would have remained entirely excluded from the Eucharistic presence.

3.) If the Apostles had consecrated on Easter morning after Christ's Resurrection, Christ would have been in the Holy Eucharist in the same state as He is now - namely, in a glorified state. Christ Who "dieth now no more" has an animate body through whose veins courses His life's blood under the vivifying influence of the soul. Christ is present in each species wholly and entirely - body, blood, soul, humanity and Divinity.

4.) The hypostatic union will continue after the Resurrection for all eternity. The perpetual inseparability of our Lord's two natures is implied in Christ's eternal priesthood. The eternal existence of Christ is taught in the following passage in Hebrews: "Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today, and the same forever" (Hebrews 13:8). That the Apostle in this passage means the God-Man is evidenced by his teaching in regard to Christ's eternal priesthood: "But this (Christ), for that He continueth forever, hath an everlasting priesthood" (Hebrews 7:24). Since the exercise of Christ's priesthood is a theandric act, it necessarily presupposes the hypostatic union; and since Christ's priesthood is to endure forever, the hypostatic union itself will never cease. The exalted celestial priesthood of our Pontiff is not a mere empty title, but a complement of the Sacrifice of the Cross. Christ appears before His Father as the Victim of Calvary and adorned with the qualities of victim. He constantly presents to His Father the merits of His blood shed upon Calvary - everlastingly He is asserting the sacrifice of the Cross in behalf of those whom He redeemed. As St. Ambrose remarks: "He refused to relinquish the wounds which He had received for us, but preferred to take them with Him to Heaven, in order to exhibit them to his Heavenly Father as the purchase price of our liberty." In this way Christ is "always living to make intercession for us (Hebrews 7:25).

http://www.cathtruth.com/catholicbible/hypost.htm