Padre Pío's Love for the Holy Angels

Brothers and Sisters: Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus’ Name.

Concurrent with our continuing thread on and about Angels (and demons) I want to share with you an excerpt about Padre Pío’s devotion for the Holy Angels. Enjoy.

---

The word angel

is derived from the ancient Greek word aggelos which means messenger. The angels are God's instruments or messengers whom he uses to communicate his will. References to the celestial or non-corporal beings better known as angels, are mentioned more than 100 times in the Old Testament and more than 150 times in the New Testament. From the first book of Genesis to the last book of Revelation, scriptures speak of the existence of angels.

In the book of Genesis, the three men who appear to Abraham are angels who have taken human form (Genesis 18:2). An angel of the Lord appeared to Moses (Exodus 3:2) in order to lead the Israelites from captivity in Egypt to the Promised Land. The birth of Jesus was foretold by angels (Luke 2:14). An angel ministered to Jesus when he was tempted in the desert (Matthew 4:11) and an angel comforted him in his Agony in the Garden (Luke 22:43). An angel rolled back the stone at the empty tomb of Jesus (Matthew 28:5) and the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead was announced by an angel. In the book of Acts, God sent an angel to free the Apostle Peter after he was jailed by King Herod (Acts 12:7).

Among the angels that are mentioned in Holy Scripture, St. Michael the Archangel is described as "one of the chief princes" and the leader of the heavenly hosts. His name means, "One who is like God." St. Michael has been honored and invoked as patron and protector of the Church since the time of the Apostles. The Greek Fathers of the Church placed St. Michael over all the other angels as "prince of the Seraphim."

In an address to American pilgrims on October 3, 1958, Pope Pius XII spoke eloquently of the holy angels and said, "The angels are glorious, pure and splendid. They have been given to us as companions along the way of life. They have the task of watching over you all, so that you do not stray away from Christ, your Lord."

Pope John Paul II emphasized the important role of angels when he gave six General Audiences in Rome from July 9 to August 20, 1986 entitled "Angels Participate in the History of Salvation." In his catechesis on the holy angels, Pope John Paul II expressed the hope that all people would come to the realization of the reality of angels. In January of 2009, Pope Benedict XVI stated, "In the face of the challenges of our times and the tribulations which every individual experiences in his life, it is salutary to recall the powerful help and solicitous guidance of the holy angels who work together for the benefit of us all."

Among the angelic beings, the role of the guardian angel is one of great importance. The Church teaches that the special work of the guardian angel is to guide an individual on his journey toward God and to protect him from harm during his earthly pilgrimage. The Church celebrates the feast of the Guardian Angels each year on October 2.

Padre Pio had an especially tender love and devotion for his guardian angel. From the time that he was five years old, he was able to see and converse with his guardian angel. In his childlike simplicity, he assumed that everyone had the same experience. Enjoying an intimate friendship with his angel, Padre Pio referred to him as the "companion of my childhood." The loving relationship continued throughout Padre Pio's life. For Padre Pio, his angel was his support, his protector, his teacher, his brother, and his friend. At times, Padre Pio's guardian angel acted as his secretary as well as his heavenly "postman" carrying messages to his spiritual children.

Padre Pio's guardian angel awakened him in the morning, and together they would join in prayer and praise to God. Padre Pio wrote to Father Agostino:

"Again at night when I close my eyes, the veil is lifted and I see Paradise open up before me; and gladdened by this vision I sleep with a smile of sweet beatitude on my lips and a perfectly tranquil countenance, waiting for the little companion of my childhood to come to waken me, so that we may sing together the morning praises to the Beloved of our hearts." (Letters 1)

Please, continue reading here.

A prayer in time of darkness

O Christ Jesus,
when all is darkness
and we feel our weakness and helplessness,
give us the sense of Your presence,
Your love, and Your strength.
Help us to have perfect trust
in Your protecting love
and strengthening power,
so that nothing may frighten or worry us,
for, living close to You,
we shall see Your hand,
Your purpose, Your will through all things.

By Saint Ignatius of Loyola

Bishop of Pittsburgh takes firm stand against the Obama Administration

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you. I wish to share with you this essay by the Bishop of Pittsburgh, PA, H.E. David A. Zubik. It brought tears to my eyes when I read it. I applaud this courageous bishop for taking such a strong stance in the face of tyranny.

---

‘To Hell With You’
By Bishop David A. Zubik

It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States, “To Hell with you!” There is no other way to put it.

In early August, the Department for Health and Human Services in the Obama administration released guidelines as part of the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The guidelines mandated that by Summer 2012 all individual and group health insurance plans, including self-insured plans, cover all FDA-approved contraception, sterilization procedures and pharmaceuticals that even result in abortion.

A million things are wrong with this: equating pregnancy with disease; mandating that every employer pay for contraception procedures including alleged contraceptives that are actually abortion-inducing drugs; forcing American citizens to chose between violating their consciences or providing health care services; mandating such coverage on every individual woman without allowing her to even choose not to have it; forcing every person to pay for that coverage no matter the dictates of their conscience.

Let’s be blunt. This whole process of mandating these guidelines undermines the democratic process itself. In this instance, the mandate declares pregnancy a disease, forces a culture of contraception and abortion on society, all while completely bypassing the legislative process.

This is government by fiat that attacks the rights of everyone – not only Catholics; not only people of all religion. At no other time in memory or history has there been such a governmental intrusion on freedom not only with regard to religion, but even across-the-board with all citizens. It forces every employer to subsidize an ideology or pay a penalty while searching for alternatives to health care coverage. It undermines the whole concept and hope for health care reform by inextricably linking it to the zealotry of pro-abortion bureaucrats.

For our Church this mandate would apply in virtually every instance where the Catholic Church serves as an employer. The mandate would require the Catholic Church as an employer to violate its fundamental beliefs concerning human life and human dignity by forcing Catholic entities to provide contraceptive, sterilization coverage and even pharmaceuticals that result in abortion.

There was a so-called “religious exemption” to the mandate, but it was so narrowly drawn that, as critics charged, Jesus Christ and his Apostles would not fit the exemption. The so-called exemption would only apply to the vast array of Catholic institutions where the following applied:

•Only Catholics are employed;
•The primary purpose of the institution or service provided is the direct instruction in Catholic belief;
•The only persons served by the institution are those that share Catholic religious tenets. (Try to fit this in with our local Catholic Charities that serve 80,000 every year without discrimination according to faith. It would be impossible!)

Practically speaking under the proposed mandate there would be no “religious exemption” for Catholic hospitals universities, colleges, nursing homes and numerous Catholic social service agencies such as Catholic Charities. It could easily be determined that the “religious exemption” would not apply as well to Catholic high schools, elementary schools and Catholic parishes since many employ non-Catholics and serve both students and, through social outreach, many who do not share Catholic religious beliefs. Such a narrow “religious exemption” is simply unprecedented in federal law.

Last September I asked you to protest those guidelines to Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department for Health and Human Services, and contact your political leadership in the federal government. I asked that you request that this flawed mandate be withdrawn because of its unprecedented interference in the religious liberty and freedom of conscience of the Catholic community, and our basic democratic process.

You did. And you were joined by Catholics throughout the country (and many others as well) who raised their voices against the mandate, raised their voices against a meaningless religious exemption.

On January 20, 2012, the Obama administration answered you and me. The response was very simple: “To Hell with You.”

Kathleen Sebelius announced that the mandate would not be withdrawn and the religious exemption would not be expanded. Instead, she stated that nonprofit groups – which include the Catholic Church – will get a year “to adapt to this new rule.” She simply dismissed Catholic concerns as standing in the way of allegedly respecting the health concerns and choices of women.

Could Catholics be insulted any more, suggesting that we have no concern for women’s health issues? The Catholic Church and the Catholic people have erected health care facilities that are recognized worldwide for their compassionate care for everyone regardless of their creed, their economic circumstances and, most certainly, their gender. In so many parts of the globe – the United States included – the Church is health care.

Kathleen Sebelius and through her, the Obama administration, have said “To Hell with You” to the Catholic faithful of the United States.

•To Hell with your religious beliefs,
•To Hell with your religious liberty,
•To Hell with your freedom of conscience.

We’ll give you a year, they are saying, and then you have to knuckle under. As Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops responded, “in effect, the president is saying that we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.”

As I wrote to you last September, with this mandate the democratic process is being ignored while we are being ordered to ignore our religious beliefs. And we are being told not only to violate our beliefs, but to pay directly for that violation; to subsidize the imposition of a contraceptive and abortion culture on every person in the United States.

It is time to go back to work. They have given us a year to adapt to this rule. We can’t! We simply cannot!

Write to the president.

Write to Secretary Sebelius.

Write to our Senators.

Write to those in Congress.

Use the PA Catholic Advocacy Network to send an email message, too.

I have included the addresses in a box accompanying this article. Here’s what you can write:


"Dear (Representative):

“In early August, the Department for Health and Human Services released guidelines that would force Catholic institutions to subsidize through their health care plans contraception, sterilization procedures and pharmaceuticals that even result in abortion.

“It was announced on January 20thby Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department for Health and Human Services, that this mandate is affirmed and that non-profit institutions, including the Catholic Church, have one year to adapt to the mandate.

“This is a direct threat to the religious liberty of Catholics, freedom of conscience and the social service ministry of the Catholic Church. The so-called ‘religious exemption’ in the mandate is no exemption at all as it would require any Catholic institution (that serves non-Catholics or employs non-Catholics) to violate Catholic belief, discontinue to provide health care, or close its doors.

“I ask that you do all possible to rescind the ‘Preventive Service Mandate’ as an unprecedented federal interference in the right of Catholics to serve their community without violating their fundamental moral beliefs.”

This mandate can be changed by Congressional pressure. The only way that action will happen is if you and I take action.

Let them know that you and I will not allow ourselves to be pushed around (or worse yet) be dismissed because of our Catholic faith.

Let them know that you and I will not allow our religious freedom to be compromised.

Let them know that you and I will not allow our religious liberty to be rescinded.

Nobody, not even the president of the United States or anyone who represents him, has the right to say to you and to me as U.S. citizens, as Catholics, or as both: “To Hell with You.”

The president and our elected leaders need to hear from you and me and to listen to us NOW.

And if NOT now, HOW can we get the president to listen to us???

Video: Iranian documentary fans the flames of regime's fanatic messianism

Brethren: Peace and Good to you in Christ Our Lord.

In March 2011, the Iranian regime produced this propaganda documentary which I found very interesting. It is about 30 minutes long. The captions appear to have been added by Reza Kahlili, an Iranian dissident now residing in the U.S.


Commentary. First, let me address the form. The sensationalistic tone of the video reminded me of The World Today broadcasts by the late Protestant minister Jack Van Impe - who by the way, was is friendly to the Catholic Church. I do appreciate the friendship and he did takes a lot of flak for it from the anti-Romish crowd in American Protestantism, but still I find these attempts at rousing the masses for action too close to demagoguery, at least where Christians are concerned. Evidently, officials of the Iranian version of Shi'ism have no such qualms. To them is only natural due to their long history of playing the underdog in the Islamic world.

Now to substance. Are they serious? Yes, they are. This how the Iranian officialdom sees itself and their national destiny in the world. I find these attempts at influencing their population through inflammatory propaganda as even more disturbing than those of Goebbels in Nazi Germany and almost as evil as those seen in North Korea, where the personality cult of its leader ranks as a religion unto itself.

I find this Iranian propaganda video disturbing and reprehensible precisely because it glorifies a decisive, bloody war against non-Islamic countries in the name of "God" and of just religion.

Much can be said about fallen man's natural inclination to bend faith in the service of death and suffering and we have not been immune to that infection ourselves, as history shows. But we still haven't learned our lessons.

That Islam (in both its Sunni and Shi'a versions) is a false religion is without question for Christians. I'm sure that they think the same about us - and about each other. That we don't have to kill each other due to the difference is a lesson that we Christians have learned because the Gospel, and the Lord's Gospel, compels us to it. There's no such safeguard in Islam and its abscense is acute and strident in Iran's official Shi'a interpretation.

Watch the video and let us pray for the conversion of the Iranian people to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I also pray, and I'm not afraid to say it, for the bloodless fall of the Iranian regime and a new dawn of peace, justice, and tolerance in that troubled country.

How did God test the angels?

Brethren, Peace and Good to all of you in Jesus our Lord and Savior.

I’m about to tackle the issue of the testing of the angels by God mentioned by Fr. Fortea a few posts ago, and to search for Scriptural clues about it, and reflect on the consequences of the failure by some of the angels to rise to the test.

Why does God test his creatures?

Speaking about this test is difficult because the Scriptural data is sparse and can only be surmised by what’s explicitly stated in Scripture by secondary reasoning.

We know from Scripture that God tests his rational creatures:

• God tested Adam and Eve (Genesis 3)



• He tested Abraham (Genesis 22)



• And he also tested Job.

Fr. Jack Peterson, of the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia (USA) said it well in this piece he wrote on The Catholic Herald:

The truth is that God is not afraid to test our faith and our love for Him. It is important to realize that the test flows from His love for us. God tests our faith sometimes for our good and the good of others. The test makes our faith real and personal. Love is not truly love until it has been tested in fire. Faith is not really faith until it has been tested as well. The test purifies our faith of selfishness and pride; it deepens our radical trust in His goodness and divine providence. The test prepares us for other crosses that we will face down the road in our roles as believer, parent, priest/consecrated or lay leader…

…St. Paul, who knew a thing or two about being tested, teaches us something that is very comforting about God’s work in our lives. St. Paul reminds us that God never tests us beyond our ability. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul states: “God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (1 Cor 10:13). Sometimes it is only by God’s grace that we can endure certain trials and crosses. Sometimes it seems like we can’t hang on any more, especially if we rely only on our own powers, and we are tempted to give up. We should take courage in the knowledge that God will always provide. He will always offer us the grace needed to “endure it.”

It follows also that the Lord will never test us for our perdition in mind, but to strengthen our faith. Via the analogy of faith we can provisionally state the following:

Human beings are rational creatures bearing God’s image,

therefore God tested them;


Angels are also rational creatures bearing God’s image,


therefore God tested them too.

The failure of the test entails a failure of both human and angelic character, as both the man and the angels who sinned responded to the test with a reaffirmation of their own autonomous wills over and against the holiness of God. At that moment, sin entered both the human and angelic nature, as explained by Fr. Fortea before.

The nature of the test given to the angels

The Church, in her official teaching, has been very circumspect about the nature of the test of the angels. Let us start with the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I highlighted the portion of interest:

II. THE FALL OF THE ANGELS

391 Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy.²⁶⁶ Scripture and the Church's Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called "Satan" or the "devil".²⁶⁷ The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel, made by God: "The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing."²⁶⁸

392 Scripture speaks of a sin of these angels.²⁶⁹ This "fall" consists in the free choice of these created spirits, who radically and irrevocably rejected God and his reign. We find a reflection of that rebellion in the tempter's words to our first parents: "You will be like God."²⁷⁰ The devil "has sinned from the beginning"; he is "a liar and the father of lies".²⁷¹

393 It is the irrevocable character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels' sin unforgivable. "There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death."²⁷²

394 Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls "a murderer from the beginning", who would even try to divert Jesus from the mission received from his Father.²⁷³ "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil."²⁷⁴ In its consequences the gravest of these works was the mendacious seduction that led man to disobey God.

395 The power of Satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. He is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God's reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Christ Jesus, and although his action may cause grave injuries - of a spiritual nature and, indirectly, even of a physical nature - to each man and to society, the action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but "we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him."²⁷⁵

Following official Church teaching, Fr. Fortea himself does not speculate about the nature of the test itself, limiting himself to explain the fact and the need of the angels’ primeval test, without speaking about what the test may have been.

Nevertheless, other recognized theologians have indeed attempted to reach some likely conclusion by analogical reasoning. These theologians were the Scottish Franciscan Blessed John Duns Scotus (c. 1265-1308) and the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Suárez (1548-1617). The Catholic Encyclopedia summarizes the teachings of these theologians regarding the nature of the angelic test, some of which I highlighted because I thought specially relevant to our discussion:

Although nothing definite can be known as to the precise nature of the probation of the angels and the manner in which many of them fell, many theologians have conjectured, with some show of probability, that the mystery of the Divine Incarnation was revealed to them, that they saw that a nature lower than their own was to be hypostatically united to the Person of God the Son, and that all the hierarchy of heaven must bow in adoration before the majesty of the Incarnate Word; and this, it is supposed, was the occasion of the pride of Lucifer (cf. Suarez, De Angelis, lib. VII, xiii). As might be expected, the advocates of this view seek support in certain passages of Scripture, notably in the words of the Psalmist as they are cited in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore Him" (Hebrews 1:6; Psalm 96:7). And if the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse may be taken to refer, at least in a secondary sense, to the original fall of the angels, it may seem somewhat significant that it opens with the vision of the Woman and her Child. But this interpretation is by no means certain, for the text in Hebrews 1, may be referred to the second coming of Christ, and much the same may be said of the passage in the Apocalypse.

It would seem that this account of the trial of the angels is more in accordance with what is known as the Scotist doctrine on the motives of the Incarnation than with the Thomist view, that the Incarnation was occasioned by the sin of our first parents. For since the sin itself was committed at the instigation of Satan, it presupposes the fall of the angels. How, then, could Satan's probation consist in the fore-knowledge of that which would, ex hypothesi, only come to pass in the event of his fall? In the same way it would seem that the aforesaid theory is incompatible with another opinion held by some old theologians, to wit, that men were created to fill up the gaps in the ranks of the angels. For this again supposes that if no angels had sinned no men would have been made, and in consequence there would have been no union of the Divine Person with a nature lower than the angels.

As might be expected from the attention they had bestowed on the question of the intellectual powers of the angels, the medieval theologians had much to say on the time of their probation. The angelic mind was conceived of as acting instantaneously, not, like the mind of man, passing by discursive reasoning from premises to conclusions. It was pure intelligence as distinguished from reason. Hence it would seem that there was no need of any extended trial. And in fact we find St. Thomas and Scotus discussing the question whether the whole course might not have been accomplished in the first instant in which the angels were created. The Angelic Doctor argues that the Fall could not have taken place in the first instant. And it certainly seems that if the creature came into being in the very act of sinning the sin itself might be said to come from the Creator. But this argument, together with many others, is answered with his accustomed acuteness by Scotus, who maintains the abstract possibility of sin in the first instant. But whether possible or not, it is agreed that this is not what actually happened. For the authority of the passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel, which were generally accepted as referring to the fall of Lucifer, might well suffice to show that for at least one instant he had existed in a state of innocence and brightness. To modern readers the notion that the sin was committed in the second instant of creation may seem scarcely less incredible than the possibility of a fall in the very first. But this may be partly due to the fact that we are really thinking of human modes of knowledge, and fail to take into account the Scholastic conception of angelic cognition. For a being who was capable of seeing many things at once, a single instant might be equivalent to the longer period needed by slowly-moving mortals.

This dispute, as to the time taken by the probation and fall of Satan, has a purely speculative interest. But the corresponding question as to the rapidity of the sentence and punishment is in some ways a more important matter. There can indeed be no doubt that Satan and his rebel angels were very speedily punished for their rebellion. This would seem to be sufficiently indicated in some of the texts which are understood to refer to the fall of the angels. It might be inferred, moreover, from the swiftness with which punishment followed on the offense in the case of our first parents, although man's mind moves more slowly than that of the angels, and he had more excuse in his own weakness and in the power of his tempter. It was partly for this reason, indeed, that man found mercy, whereas there was no redemption for the angels. For, as St. Peter says, "God spared not the angels that sinned" (2 Peter 2:4). This, it may be observed, is asserted universally, indicating that all who fell suffered punishment. For these and other reasons theologians very commonly teach that the doom and punishment followed in the next instant after the offense, and many go so far as to say there was no possibility of repentance. But here it will be well to bear in mind the distinction drawn between revealed doctrine, which comes with authority, and theological speculation, which to a great extent rests on reasoning. No one who is really familiar with the medieval masters, with their wide differences, their independence, their bold speculation, is likely to confuse the two together. But in these days there is some danger that we may lose sight of the distinction.

The author of the Encyclopedia’s article added this warning that is also relevant to our discussion, and which this your servant humbly acknowledges:

It is true that, when it fulfils certain definite conditions, the agreement of theologians may serve as a sure testimony to revealed doctrine, and some of their thoughts and even their very words have been adopted by the Church in her definitions of dogma. But at the same time these masters of theological thought freely put forward many more or less plausible opinions, which come to us with reasoning rather than authority, and must needs stand or fall with the arguments by which they are supported. In this way we may find that many of them may agree in holding that the angels who sinned had no possibility of repentance. But it may be that it is a matter of argument, that each one holds it for a reason of his own and denies the validity of the arguments adduced by others.

The sparse nature of the data in Scripture and Tradition may guide our reasons only so far, but even then we can profit from this “extended” kind of teaching extrapolated analogically from the data. We will see the final answers at the end of time. However, as we’ll see later, I believe that there are Scriptural “pointers” validating these provisional conclusions, as well as evidence drawn from the sad history of humanity. In the meantime let’s keep in mind our provisional conclusion:

The primeval test of the angels consisted in this: there were shown the eventual Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity and the angels who rebelled did so, in fact, because they objected to adore God hypostatically united in the person of a being lower than themselves.

This brings us to an unspoken consequence, that the Incarnation of the Word was to take place regardless of the possibility of the Fall of Man, as God’s ultimate, loving union with His creation. This is where the medieval stumbled in what we recognize today as temporal paradoxes and multiple futures, thanks to the advances in relativity and quantum mechanics. Another unspoken consequence seems to be that moral choice “create universes.” But we’ll talk about those speculations later because they primary conclusion we reach, and one that is echoed in Scripture (Colossians 1: 13-20) about Christ:

¹³Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love,

¹⁴In whom we have redemption through his blood, the remission of sins;

¹⁵Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

¹⁶For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him.

¹⁷And he is before all, and by him all things consist.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception explain it better in this video, aptly titled the Test of the Angel. From them you will learn that the incarnation of God was the ultimate purpose of creation.

Evidence of secondary probative value

To this humble theologian, private revelations have a remote, relative, and secondary value. That’s because I’ve studied many private revelations, or the  purported private revelations of some recognized mystics – like those of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich, for instance – and these visions seem to me more like manifestations of a seer’s psyche and his of her understanding of a theological truth or problem, than a direct insight into the reality contemplated. Or, they may have been granted such direct insight but their concepts, words, and resulting story-telling fail to express the reality they contemplated and that’s why many times these narratives are reminiscent of the language of dreams. That’s why the Church warns us about the limits of private revelations.

Nevertheless, with the Church’s warning in mind we proceed with caution to this private revelation allegedly granted to Blessed María de Ágreda (1602-1665) and found in Volume One of The Mystical City of God, the Divine History and Life of the Virgin Mother of God. Whether one agrees that these were in fact special, private revelations or the intuitions of a gifted, highly contemplative mind, I believe her explanation of the nature of the test of the angels is of value and relevant to our discussion. According to Blessed María, the test of the angels was threefold in nature. The highlights are mine:

• For the first test, "they [the angels] received a more explicit intelligence of the being of God, one in substance, triune in person, and they were commanded to adore and reverence Him as their Creator and highest Lord, infinite in His essence and attributes." All obeyed the command, most with perfect charity and joy, but Lucifer obeyed because "the opposite seemed to him impossible," and his pride dimmed the original perfection of his nature. He owed his existence to someone infinitely greater than he. Even so, Lucifer passed the test. He obeyed.

• In the second test, God informed the angels that He would create beings lower than themselves, men with immortal spiritual souls infused into material bodies formed from the dust of the earth. "In order that they too should love, fear, and reverence God...the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity was to become incarnate and assume their nature, raising it to the hypostatic union and to divine Personality." Then God commanded the angels to acknowledge the incarnate Word of God as both God and man, and to adore Him as God-man, infusing the angels with knowledge that it was both just and reasonable for man to be elevated above them in this way. Most angels were overjoyed that God's love could raise such lowly creatures to such an exalted status, and gratefully obeyed the command. -  But Lucifer, in his pride, rebelled against this command. He argued that, since both angels and men were created beings, it should be an angel -- i.e., himself -- who became incarnate, angels being higher than men. It was beneath the "dignity" of God to so lower Himself by joining the Word of God to such an inferior part of His creation in this way. Lucifer disguised his pride by feigning concern for God's omnipotence. He was able to infect many other angels with this attitude, offering, as a temptation, to make angels masters over men and leading mankind to God.

• The third test cemented this rebellion among the angels. God revealed that His Son would become incarnate man by being born of a woman, just as all men are born of women. The angels were ordered to revere this woman as superior to them -- as "Queen and Mistress of all the creatures," angels and men -- for God was to be clothed with her flesh in her body, making her the Mother of God. Assembling the angels, Lucifer retorted, "Unjust are these commands and injury is done to my greatness; this human nature which Thou, Lord, lookest upon with so much love and which Thou favorest so highly, I will persecute and destroy. To this end I will direct all my power and all my aspirations. And this Woman, Mother of the Word, I will hurl from the position in which Thou has proposed to place her, and at my hands the plan, which Thou settest up, shall come to naught." (Source: Professor Terence Hughes, “The Primeval Struggle”, New Oxford Review (July-August 2009), pp. 42-45, as published in Mr. Phil Blosser’s blog, Musings of a Pertinacious Papist).

Note how Blessed María de Ágreda’s alleged vision captures  the essence of Suarez’s argument expounded before. As the theologians noted, the fallen angels’ sin was ultimate one of pride a pretension to the effect that if God can become man, then an angel can become God.  Yet not in the order of nature – for the even the angels were too intelligence to know the impossibility of becoming God – but indirectly by persuading the lower creation to render unto them the glory and power due to God alone, by “replacing” God in the hearts and minds of the lower created beings, that is, humans.

The war in heaven referred to in Revelation 9 and explained by Fr. Fortea in multiple phases may have consisted on an escalating debate, starting in argument and ending in rebellion about God’s eventual incarnation in the sub-angelic world, the test being one aimed at the angel’s spiritual self-identity, and the election to serve or not to serve God under those inferior circumstances. The consequences of the rebellion have been vast, multifaceted, and clearly evident in the human history.

I am to conclude here because this post is already too long. In a future post, I will discuss the consequences of the primeval rebellion and which Scripture data may support this view of the test of the angels and the failure of the fallen angels to pass the test.

Today we remember the Conversion of St. Paul, Apostle

 

Acts 9: 1 - 22 1 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. 3 Now as he journeyed he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed about him. 4 And he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" 5 And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting; 6 but rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do." 7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 8 Saul arose from the ground; and when his eyes were opened, he could see nothing; so they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank. 10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Anani'as. The Lord said to him in a vision, "Anani'as." And he said, "Here I am, Lord." 11 And the Lord said to him, "Rise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for a man of Tarsus named Saul; for behold, he is praying, 12 and he has seen a man named Anani'as come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight." 13 But Anani'as answered, "Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to thy saints at Jerusalem; 14 and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call upon thy name." 15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16 for I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name." 17 So Anani'as departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized, 19 and took food and was strengthened. For several days he was with the disciples at Damascus. 20 And in the synagogues immediately he proclaimed Jesus, saying, "He is the Son of God." 21 And all who heard him were amazed, and said, "Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called on this name? And he has come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests." 22 But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

Which Church Father am I?

So, I took the quiz, and…

You’re St. Melito of Sardis! You have a great love of history and liturgy. You’re attached to the traditions of the ancients, yet you recognize that the old world — great as it was — is passing away. You are loyal to the customs of your family, though you do not hesitate to call family members to account for their sins. Find out which Church Father you are at The Way of the Fathers!

Close enough.