There is much controversy over apparitions these days. It seems that every time you turn around there is someone "seeing" Jesus, or the Blessed Virgin Mary. Many of these "apparitions" are not true. These include Mejugorje, Bayside & Necedah. However, there are some that have been, after rigorous investigation, declared 'worthy of belief' by the Catholic Church. These include Guadalupe, Lourdes, Fatima and Akita. There are, of course, several others that are approved, as well as numerous others that are not. How can one tell that an 'apparition' (or other mystical phenomenon) is from God? The most obvious sign is OBEDIENCE to the local bishop in the matter. If the local bishop tells the "seer" to desist from spreading the messages that he or she is receiving, and does so, this is a sign that the 'seer' is willing to obey God, and does not consi- der him or herself to be the final judge as to whether the 'apparit- ions' are real. He or she is aware that it is possible that deception by the devil is taking place, and leaves it for the bishop to decide. Also, if the local bishop declares that 'apparition' is not a super- natural phenomenon, or that it is not from God, the 'seer' immediate- ly tries to avoid them, refrains from promoting them, and tries to lead a good life regardless. These are signs that the 'seer' is hum- ble, and is not caught up in pride and ambition. If it is in the end proven that they are from God, then these actions go a long way in proving that. If it is proven they are not, the 'seers' obedience and leading a good life would tend to show they were probably not from the devil. Apparitions are given to certain people to serve as a reminder to us about our duties to God; to remind us to pray, sacrifice, and gener- ally to lead a good life, obeying God's Commandments, doing their daily duty. Even unapproved apparitions have been the means by which great sinn- ers have been converted, but that point alone does not prove that a given apparition is true. Medjugorje is a prime example. Many people have converted because of it, but the "seers" themselves have admitted that they have lied on several occasions. And some of the messages, which claim that certain priests are innocent of disobedience to the local bishop, when in fact they are not, and the apparent "approval" of modern(ist) "ecumenism" by the "Gospa", prove that Medjugorje is a fake. We do not need "apparitions" in order to lead a good life, that is what the Catholic Church is for. But we should remember they are gifts from God, and treat them as such.
In the Church today, there are many people who are involved with the "charismatic movement." This movement is not good. It is a heretical pseudo-religion which fully originated from Protestantism. The foun dess of this movement fully admit they went to Protestants to be pray- ed over to "receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit." The founders of this movement wrote a book about their experiences forming and pro- moting this movement. Many "charismatics" will say that the Pope "approves" of this move- ment. It is true that he has said that some good has come out of it, but he has also warned of the dangers in it. That does not constitute "approval." And so what if the Pope did "approve" it? I would ask: "Did he do so with his Apostolic Authority, or was it his personal opinion?" There is a BIG difference. If he declared it to be truly good with his Apostolic Authority, then fine, I would accept that, but if it was merely his own personal opinion, then that means little. The Pope is not infallible in his personal opinions, any more than anyone else. He is infallible only when he speaks 'ex cathedra', and intends to declare a dogma on faith or morals to be believed by the entire Catholic Church. To find out the truth of the "charismatic movement", please read the articles at: members.tripod.com/~SAlbert/index-9.html This page can be reached by clicking the link in the Catholic Links section on my main page.
This section is for saying what I have to say about these topics: Holy Communion in the hand - This is an all too common practice in the Church today. There is a lot made out of the "permission" to receive either on the tongue or in the hand. However, most people couldn't name the document in which it was given if their lives depended on it. Many people claim that this practice was mandated by Vatican II, but it is nowhere mentioned in the Council documents. Some claim it was a common practice in the early Church, but to my knowledge, it has never been proven to have been practiced by the the entire Latin Rite, or in any one of the Eastern rites as a whole, nor to have been a universal practice of the entire Catholic Church. In fact, when it was brought before a Pope or a Council, it was ALWAYS con- demned as an abuse. Some people claim that since it was an ancient practice, there is no reason not to do it now. But they are unaware that Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical Mediator Dei (On the Sacred Liturgy), called it an ERROR to want to return to a practice simply because it was ancient. The truth of the matter is that the practice was started in the 1500's by the Protestants, who did it to proclaim their disbelief in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. After all, to them, it is just bread, so why shouldn't it be received in the hand? Then, in the 1960's, some "Catholics" in the Netherlands, and some other European countries started doing it, in total disobedi- ence to the Pope. When the case was brought to Rome, Pope Paul VI polled the bishops of the world, asking if the practice should be adopted more widely. The majority of bishops voted against it. The Pope then issued the document MEMORIALE DOMINI in which he sta- ted that he polled the bishops, the majority were against it, and that the traditional way of receiving on the tongue was to be main- tained. However, he did something that is very curious. He allowed the practice to continue in the places in which it had already star- ted. But he DID NOT give permission for it to be done in other pla- ces. But, in other places it was done, and instead of condemning the disobedience, he supposedly allowed the bishop's conference's of the various countries to petition the Holy See for permission. It was never denied, even in countries, such as the United States, where it was begun by liberals who thought (and think) that they know what is best for the layman in the pew. These liberals, even before it was possible to obtain "permission" were doing it out of disobedience to the Pope. This is the where Communion in the hand came from. It came from disobedience to the Pope. It is NOT a good thing. Before V II, and even up to 1975, it was taught that it was a sacrilege for a layman to touch the Consecrated Host (except in certain necessary cases). Then all of a sudden, it becomes a good thing? Much is made out of "Papal permission" for the practice, but think about it. When has something that has almost always been considered wrong ever bec- ome suddenly right? If a parent gives a command to a child, and the child disobeys, and the parent says, "Oh, that's ok", what sort of message does that child receive? That it is ok to disobey his par- ent, because, after all, no punishment will take place. Does that make the child's disobedience right (moral)? No, it does not. And so it is with Holy Communion in the hand. If something is good, it will bear good fruit. Yet, in the U. S., it is said that about 70% of Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. Does that sound good? "Eucharistic ministers" - This is another thing that many people don't seem to realize is rooted in a bad thing. In the past, during times of great persecution, such as in the early Church, that laymen did reserve the Holy Eucharist at home, to give them the spiritual strength they needed. And also because, they never knew if they were going to die the next day, or if their priest would be around the next day. However, we are not in a time of massive persecution like in the early Church. So there is no real necessity for laymen to be doing what priests were ordained to do. Many clain there is a shortage of priests. In some places, there are indeed few priests. However, that is no excuse. In fact the priest "shortage" was artificially created. It is a fact, that bef- ore V II, there were sufficient numbers of priests in most areas of the world to serve the laity, but after V II, and the incredible confusion that came after it, many priests left the priesthood, for one reason or another. There are fewer priests today than there were 30-35 years ago. In the U.S. dioceses, with a couple of exceptions, there is a lack of vocations. However, in the Traditional Orders, those that follow the Traditional Latin Mass (1962 Missal) there are so many vocations that men who want to be priests have to be turned away for lack of space in the seminaries to train them. A prime example of this is the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). But in the dioceses that do not have the FSSP, or other Traditional Orders, they have a distinct lack of vocations. Standing vs. kneeling - Today most people stand to receive Holy Commu- nion instead of kneeling. This is partly due to the altar rails hav- ing been removed from most parish churches. Kneeling is the ultimate sign of reverence paid to God, so we really should kneel when we re- ceive Holy Communion. In fact, there is no reason, aside from phys- ical diability, for standing for Holy Communion. Latin Tridentine Mass vs. "New Ordo" Mass - This is a topic that is majorly controversial. There have been many books written on this, but there are a few things to consider. According to the best sour- ces I have read, it is a fact that Pope Paul VI in fact did offici- ally promulgate the "New Ordo" Mass, and as such, the "New Ordo" in it's officially promulgated LATIN version is a VALID Mass. The rea- son for this is something called indefectibility. The Pope cannot officially promulgate something which is heretical. However, that doesn't mean that the TRANSLATION from the Latin is protected from error. So, it is entirely possible that a VERNACULAR translation of the "new Mass" could contain heresy. Papal infallibility and approval - There are many people who seem to believe that if the Pope says or does something, it is automatically infallible and that there is no possibility that the Pope can ever err no matter what. But the truth is, the Pope is infallible ONLY when he is defining a dogma that pertains to FAITH or MORALS. Out- side of these 2 cases, he is as subject to error as anyone else. However, if a Pope, in an official document makes a decision about some theological point with the intent that it be the final word on the topic, then that is also protected from error, and the topic of debate is to be considered no longer open to debate among theolog- ians. This was made clear by Pope Pius XII in his Encyclical "Humani Generis" (The exact quote is near the top of this page.) One example of this is Pope John Paul II's declaration on "women priests" in Or- dinatio Sacerdotalis. There was a big debate when the Sacred Congre- gation for the Doctrine of the Faith was asked if that was infall- ible and the SCDF said yes. Every liberal came out of the woodwork to claim it wasn't infallible, so it was still possible that women may in the future be ordained. WRONG!!! The Pope obviously intended to declare once and for all where the Church stood on the topic, so CASE CLOSED. Anyone who tells you he is a Catholic, and says that women should be ordained, is in fact not a Catholic. Now, what about when the Pope "approves" of certain things, such as "altar girls"? NEVER in the history of the Church have girls or women been allowed to serve at the altar, except in cases where men were not available. Until the early 1990's. We are told that the Pope approves of this. When was the last time you saw the document that the Pope signed stating that he in fact did approve of "altar girls"? Read the book Iota Unum by Romano Amerio for proof that on at least one occasion, a very important document was signed by Pope Paul VI which contained heresy, and how a few months later this document was withdrawn and re-written. Also, read the endings of Papal documents, most of them will say something like: Given in Rome, such and such a date, on such and such a Feast day, etc. and then have the Pope's name and/or signature. All this proves is that the Pope is at the most aware that the document was written. But it does not prove that he actu- ally read the document before signing it. So a given document may only carry the authority of the Congregation which issued it, and not FULL PAPAL AUTHORITY. Thus, the Pope may not necessarily have "approved" of something that we are told he did. Now, some will say, "If the Pope didn't approve of_____, then why is it going on?" Well, look at Holy Communion in the hand for one example. There are many people who don't care what the Pope says, they are going to do what they want. Read the POST Vatican II documents, particularly those which pertain to the Mass, and the things which were never done be- fore in the Church (as universal practice). Look at the endings of documents. Then look at the ending of 1997's "On Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Ministry of the Priest". That document ends like this: "The Supreme Pontiff, in Audience of the 13 of August 1997 approved IN FORMA SPECIFICA (my emphasis) this present Instruction and ordered its promulgation." To the best of my knowledge, this the only document that came out after Vatican II that ended like this. What does this mean? It means that the Pope is very much aware of what that docu- ment said, and ordered its promulgation with FULL PAPAL AUTHORITY. So, anyone who doesn't follow that document is not obeying the Pope. And it proves that the Pope actually did approve that document, so it MUST be obeyed totally. "Traditional", "Conservative", "Liberal" Catholics - First of all, there is no such thing as any of these. One is either a Catholic, or one is not. A Catholic is one who believes in ALL that the Catholic Church teaches, is united to the Pope, and obeys all LEGITIMATE Church authority. This doesn't mean blind obedience to everything that comes from the Vatican or from a Bishop. Unfortunately, it is necessary to have discernment about things that come out of the Vat- can today. But that is the way it is. Everything must be judged according to how the Church has ALWAYS taught something. It is the Church's responsibility to interpret Tradition and Scripture. But today many things are said and done that have always been considered to be wrong. "Ecumenism" as it is practiced today is one example. In years past, it was well known that to attend and to participate in a Protestant service was a MORTAL SIN. In truth, it still is. But that isn't what many priests, bishops and even the Pope are teaching by their example. Today, it is a common sight to see the Pope particip- ating in non-Catholic services or ceremonies. Many bishops in this country allow their cathedrals to be used for the "ordinations" of Protestant "bishops" and "clergy." This is WRONG. The 1st Command- ment of God is "Thou shalt not have strange gods before Me", and this commandment forbids participating in non-Catholic services. So, claiming "The Pope does it, so it must be all right", doesn't save you from commiting a MORTAL SIN. RCIA - This is the modern-day "Catechism class." In most parishes, it is not designed to teach a prospective convert the real Catholic Faith, but a Protestantized version of it. In essence, many people who go through this are in fact still Protestant, no matter what is claimed. There are some parishes where it is done well, and those who go through it come out Catholic, but they are very few. Most RCIA programs will teach you how it's supposedly "OK" to use birth control, and some people even claim that Pope Paul VI said that it was "OK" to use it if one felt, after prayerful discernment, that one couldn't live without it. That is total baloney! First of all, Pope Paul VI never said such a thing; second, if he had, he would be denying that God does not command us to do the impossible. God will give us the grace to do what He commands, if we ask for it. "Renew" and "Renew 2000" - These are programs allegedly designed to help people grow in their Faith. In reality, these programs were designed to destroy their Faith. These programs are set up so people can meet in small groups, study the Bible, and in theory, learn more about it. In fact, what happens is people are allowed to express their opinion about anything having to do with the Catholic Faith, and be affirmed that their "opinion" is "OK", even if it is in total contradiction to what the Church teaches. If you value your Faith, it's best to avoid these. "Sede-vacantism" - This is the belief that there is no current valid reigning Pope, and that Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, and Pope John Paul II were (are) anti-popes. Many of these people claim that Pope Pius XII was the last valid Pope, and that the Church is still under him. One problem with that: He's been dead for over 40 years! Once a Pope dies, his reign is ended, period! The only thing that survives is his writings, proclamations, decisions, and teach- ings. Whatever a Pope proclaims as part of the Magisterium of course remains in effect. Outside of that, things are subject to change. I can understand how and why some people come to the conclusion that the See of Peter is vacant. Let's face it. There are many things go- ing on that are not in conformity with what the Catholic Church has ALWAYS taught. Even the Pope, by his example, is basically saying the Catholic Church is just another church which can lead to salvation. He may not SAY it words, but by going to non-Catholic churches and participating in non-Catholic services, and not telling the Protest- ants and Jews that they MUST become Catholic and accept Jesus Christ and ALL that Christ teaches through His Church in order to be saved, he is in fact promoting the idea that there is some sort of "univer- sal salvation", that everyone will be saved, no matter what religion they follow. And that is WRONG. Many sede-vacantists become so be- cause of all the changes in the Mass, the Sacraments, etc., and since they don't believe in the changes, they reject the Popes after Pius XII. The thing is, while most of the changes are not good, that does not give anyone the right to declare a 'vacancy' in the Holy See. We are not the judges of the Popes. We can see that some of their decis- ions are not good, but it is not for anyone of us to declare that the Pope is a 'heretic' or 'schismatic'. Furthermore, if the Popes after Pius XII were (are) not valid, then who is the Pope? Some have this theory that Cardinal Siri was in fact elected Pope. Then why didn't he declare that he was? And why was he not crowned Pope? In the ent- ire history of the Church, there has never been a time that there was not a valid Pope. There were times when the time between elections were fairly long (a couple years in one case), but there has always been a visible, universally known successor to the See of Peter. If the post Vatican II popes were (are) not valid, then Christ and His Church have failed. Christ told His Apostles that He would be with them until the consummation of the world, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church. So, either the post V2 popes were (are) valid, or Christ was a liar. One or the other. Another point I'd like to make. The Cardinal Camarlengo is the one who, in the interim between Papal elections, runs the Church. So, if the sede-vacantist theory is to make any sense at all, they should be proclaiming that the Cardinal Camarlengo of Pope Pius XII was the Pope after he died. But none of them, to my knowledge, ever have. TO BE CONTINUED.............
OMNE GENU FLECTATUR "Every knee shall bend" Phil. 2:10 The Movement of Nations for Kneeling Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Society of the Missionaries of Charity: "God love you for your sincere desire to see Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament better known, more fervently loved, more humbly adored and more faithfully served throughout the worl! I fully support any organ- ization which has this as its aim, and I will be praying for you and all the intentions of The Movement of Nations for Kneeling." Kneeling "officially signifies adoration." (Ceremonial of Bishops, Nos. 68-72 p. 36-37) "One who waits for symbols and promises standing, but the Reality, one receives with love and on one's knees." Pope Saint Pius X "The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers the worship of latria (adoration) to the Sacrament of the Eucharist." (Pope Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei, 1965, n.56) "No one eats of this flesh without having first adored it and not only and not only do we not sin by adoring but we would sin by not adoring." (Ibid., n.55, St. Augustine, In Ts, Ch.98, 9:PL 37, 126) The worship of divine adoration must be given to Christ present in the Eucharist. (Ibid, n.55; Paul VI, Address of June 15, 1978) The mission of this movement is threefold: 1. To restore and bring about increased, more humble and fervent ador- ation, reverence and love for Jesus in the Holy Eucharist through re- ceiving Holy Communion worthily and in the best way possible, while kneeling and on the tongue. (The communicant must of course, always be in a state of grace, having received absolution in the Sacrament of Penance. 2. To promote and defend kneeling at the appropriate times during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, especially during the Consecration. 3. To maintain and renew the venerable practise of genuflecting and kneeling "before the Blessed Sacrament, whether enclosed in a taber- nacle or publicly exposed, as a sign of adoration...This act requires that it be performed in a recollected way. In order that the heart may bow before God in profound reverence, the genuflection must neither be hurried nor careless." (S.C.S.D.W. Inaestimibile Donum, 1980, No. 26, approved by John Paul II) This mission is to be wholeheartedly fulfilled in full communion with official Church guidelines, strong recommendations and intentions of Popes and the Saints, and long-established practise, throughout the Church. The models for perfection are Our Lord Jesus Christ, Mary, Patroness and Mother of this movement, and all the Holy Angels and Saints. The great importance and need for the Church to fulfill this mission is very clear: 1. Explanations from recent literature: "On kneeling in the liturgy - If we attempt to banish or downplay the posture of kneeling we will be doing serious harm to an element inte- gral to Catholic liturgy." Jesus prayed while kneeling. Kneeling was, from Apostolic times, the general custom. In the Old and New Testa- ments it is the posture of the New Covenant, when all fall to adore God-with-us in Christ...the gesture which, as Isaiah had foretold, would greet the coming of God's Kingdom. This posture signifies pro- found adoration. (A. Beards. Homiletic & Pastoral Review. Feb., 1992) "Kneeling and faith in the Eucharist": "Once more, the act of bending the knee before Jesus Christ is not just a relative act, or an act that is based on culture. Rather it transcends culture because it is an act that has scriptural, tradit- ional, and cosmic significance...When Catholics 'worship' by 'bending the knee' in Eucharistic adoration, they strengthen belief in the doc- trine of the Real Presence of Christ In the Eucharist, for themselves and for the entire Church. And when they can and do not, they weaken it...Kneeling,as an act of latria (adoration) of Jesus Christ...test- ifies to all four fundamental doctrines better than the act of stand- ing...if a person deliberately, and with full knowledge, discourages kneeling at the Consecration or genuflection before the Blessed Sacra- ment, he or she is 'anathema'" C.T.(cf.n.878) (Fr. Scanlan, Homiletic & Pastoral Review. Aug.,1994) Receiving Jesus this way is needed and best: 1. It emphasizes the uniqueness of this Holy Food as compared with ordinary food. 2. It emphasizes the uniqueness of the ordained priest touching the Sacred Species. 3.It emphasizes the presence of Christ who is feeding his flock and fosters humility. 4. It gives us a strong sense of identification with past Catholics and Saints who have received on the tongue from time immemorial. 5.It minimizes the danger of the Host being dropped or ignored. Reduces sacrileges/abuses. 6. It fosters a sense of unity in the Liturgy. 7. It reaffirms the fact that Holy Orders is a Sacrament that ordains a man to the priesthood. 8. It expresses complete obedience to the Church.(Challenge, Fr. F. Heuser, p.3-4, June 1992) 2. Other authoritative statements: Pope John Paul II: "I did not revoke what one of my presecessors has said about this...here. my dear priests amd my dear brothers and sist- ers, only Communion on the tongue and kneeling is allowed...I say this to you as your bishop! (Sermom, March 1,1989,SS Nome Di Maria Church) Pope John Paul II, on Communion in the hand: "There is an apostolic letter that the e xistence of this special permission is valid. But I tell you, that I am not in favor of it...neither will I recommend it!" Nov. 1980,Germany (101 Times,Vol.4,No.2,1992,tel.908-689-8792,USA) Mother Teresa of Calcutta "Self-knowledge puts us on our knees and it is very necessary for love." (Total Surrender, p.30) "Further, it is the custom in our Society, and my known wish, that the Sisters receive Holy Communion on the tongue, which to my know- ledge they are doing everywhere." (India,1995) The Church throughout centuries: To preserve and defend reverence, dignity and holiness due to the greatest treasure in the Church, only kneeling, not standing, to receive Holy Communion, always on the ton- gue, was allowed. "This method, 'on the tongue' must be retained." (Pope Paul VI,Memoriale Domini,1969) St. Basil(330-379AD);considered Communion in the hand a "great fault." Council of Rouen(650AD);Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layperson, but only in their mouths. Council of Constantinople(695AD);prohibited the faithful from giving Communion to themselves. St. Thomas Aquinas(1224-74);"Out of reverence towards this Sacrament, nothing touches It but what is consecrated."(Summa,Pt.III,Q.82,Art.3) "When the faithful communicate kneeling, no other sign of reverence toward the Blessed Sacrament is required, since kneeling itself is a sign of adoration." (S.C.S.D.W.,Inaestimibile Donum,1980,No.11) "It should be absolutely clear that all the faithful show this Holy Sacrament the worship of adoration that is due to God Himself, as has always been the practice recognized in the Catholic Church." (Eucharisticum Mysterium,1967,3f) Conference of Catholic Bishops: According to the Novus Ordo, the peo- ple kneel not only during the Consecration, but also "beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic prayer, that is before the Our Father." (U.S. Appendix to the G.I.R.M., No.21) Examples from Scripture: "Every knee shall be bowed to me" (Is 45:23). "As I live, saith the Lord, every knee must bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth" (Phil 2:10) 3. Other Sources: Liturgist: "Have you ever seen anyone receiving Holy Communion in the hand while kneeling? No. The posture of kneeling inclines the person to receive Communion on the tongue! It is the ordained priest's privilege and task to give Holy Communion and to enter the taber- nacle, and he should not abandon or lightly delegate this. We must stop the liturgical abuse of unnecessary extraordinary ministers where we don't need them, under ordinary conditions." (1995, see Immensae Caritatis, S.C.D.W., 1973 Sec I, a.) Through stigmatist Sister Agnes' wound, the nuns were led to abandon Holy Communion in the hand and to receive Jesus on the tongue and kneeling instead. (Akita, Approved by local bishop) President, Women for Faith & Family: "Receiving Holy Communion on the tongue and kneeling down is the traditional and most respectful way. These signs of respect would help us to bring back reverence...to focus on Jesus." "The first step...is to return the tabernacle to its central place of honour over the altar." (1995) Clergy who ask congregations to kneel report: Returning to kneeling is actually reducing reception time by fifty percent in the parish! Worldwide appeal for help to fulfill this mission: 1. It is our great hope and prayer that all religious societies and orders, clergy, and laity will inspire and lead the entire Church, by God's grace, in fulfilling this important mission. We appeal to all to help by prayer, example, and word and to invite everyone to do the same. 2. We invite all clergy and laity to ask and encourage the faithful to receive Holy Communion on the tongue and while kneeling; to come and kneel in a line or semi-circle in front of, along, and around the altar is the best proven and most efficient way, the common practise for centuries throughout the world. 3. We encourage the use and restoration of an elevated step, mat or floor padding, pews or kneelers, or communion rails, where needed. 4. Since this is a matter of ecclesiastical discipline, the practise of receiving Holy Communion in the hand can be rescinded in any dio- cese. 5. We ask all Cardinals, bishops, clergy, religious and lay persons in every nation tp please make, distribute or write for copies of this document. Donations to cover costs are greatfully accepted. Accurate and faithful translations of this flyer are encouraged, available and can be reproduced in other languages to spread this movement to all peoples. We encourage all to establish local chapters and/or informal support networks. Thank you very much. May God bless you, through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, for your diligent and generous response to this appeal to and for the good of the whole Church. Angel's Prayer With the Blessed Sacrament suspended in the air, the angel at Fatima prostrated himself, and recited this prayer: O Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I adore Thee pro- foundly. I offer Thee the most precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divin- ity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles throughout the world, in reparation for all the outrages, sacrileges and indiffer- ence with which He is offended. By the infinite merits of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and the Immaculate heart of Mary, I beg the conver- sion of poor sinners. (Ecclesiastical approval: Fatima, 1930) Verified to be free of theological errors by ecclesiastical authority. (December 11, 1995) OMNE GENU FLECTATUR The Movement of Nations for Kneeling Worldwide Apostolate: P.O. Box 489, Station U, Toronto, ON, Canada M8Z 5Y8