The Catholic Church Devolving into National Language Churches

We're living Salvation History, Amici, and it ain't easy. 

Particularly being in Judah with Ahaz as a king.

That's where we're at now. We're the True Church as Judah was the true remnant of Israel, and we (with the Orthodoxies: Eastern and "Oriental" and the Eastern Liturgy Churches in Communion with Rome) are full inheritors of the Covenants, especially the Seventh one, the New Covenant, the Holy Eucharist. But we have Ahaz as a king. We've Manasseh, we've a new Amon. 

 And while we prayerfully await a Hezekiah or a Josiah, a restitutor orbis, we're watching the kingdom fall to pieces. (Or to metaphor it in another way, we're coming to the end of our Babylonian Exile, which was what Vat II did to us Traditional Catholics: exile us to the far Euphrates.)

Whether our Peronist Caudillo is actually pope or not, he's in the driver's seat and he's shifting into ever higher gears as we near the cliff. Long, involved arguments are going on as to whether Bergoglio is a valid pope, and whether Ratzinger resigned validly, etc. In a sense, it doesn't matter what he does or who he is. This was all set in motion when the Vat2 Fathers voted their first vote, when they overthrew the Council's managers Ol' Roncalli had installed and inserted their Modernists revolutionaries. 

This is especially true when, in the "Animus" of Vatican II, they went to the vernacular. There's really no escaping a total Church break up now into constituent language-based Churches. No. Escape. That's happened before, too. First with the Copts and Syrians before the Muslims came, then with the Greeks in 1054. That's also really what the Protestant Revolution was: a language-based breakup. (As well as being the Northern Kingdom of Israel breaking off of Judah. The parallels are fascinating and striking.)

So, here we are. All those groanings and creakings you hear, all the shudders and thuds and reverberations, are the Barque of Peter breaking up on the rocks. Of course, the Good News is there'll be one Church out of the plethora of flotsam and jetsam that has the ancient Traditional Mass and it'll keep the Latin for everything else -- theology, music, etc., as well. The "nationalist-language Churches" nightmare won't affect it at all, and all will be able to see that. In comparison to the cacophonous horde of snarling combatant national Churches, this TLM-based Church will be clearly the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

And it will be a "Reconquista Church", too, I think, slowly but surely bringing back a lot of otherwise fallen-away Catholics. Maybe even a few of these "bottom-line" stone-hearted bishops, as well. The Holy Spirit can do anything.

Beáti qui hábitant in domo tua, Dómini, in sæcula sæcúlorum laudábunt te. (The Gradual from the Feast of the Holy Family.)

An Préachán

Isaiah 7:14 and the new translation of "virgin" in that passage to "young woman"

In a David Goldman (Spengler) post at PJ Media, I entered the following comment when some remarks were made that Isaiah 7:14 really should be translated to "a young woman" and not "a virgin." Somehow, the next day, my post had vanished. I re-enetered it. 

Here it is:

Hope you don't mind me wishing you (and everyone) a Happy St. David's Day, Mr. Goldman (well, it's past that now, here in Hungary; times flies).

Re: Isaiah 7:14 referring to "a young woman".

This reminds me of the scholar(s?) who pointed out about a "needle" as in Mark 10:25 / Matthew 19:24 really meant a narrow city gate. Apparently narrow city gates were sometimes called "needles".

Maybe. But of course, that trashes the scene's meaning completely. You can get a camel through a narrow city gate; you may have to unload its baggage, but it is doable. Yet in the passages, the disciples are "astonished" (surprised/shocked/concerned), and say, "Then who can be saved?" That reaction indicates Yehoshu'a (Joshua/Jesus) meant "needle" as in the sewing implement.

Or again, in the Gospel of John, chapter 6, "Yahweh is salvation" ("Yehoshu'a") says a profound and bizarre shocker: one must eat His Body and drink His Blood or one doesn't have (eternal) life within one -- Protestants assert He was speaking metaphorically. Maybe so. But of course in the scene, this shocking statement leads to most of His followers decamping from Him forthwith. Yet He didn't run after them, yelling, "Hey, I was speaking metaphorically!" He just let 'em vote with their feet.

Same again with the "young woman" and not a "virgin" translation of Isaiah 7:14. Maybe. But the context is high drama: Enemies of Judah have allied with Ephraim, northern Israelites! And together the new allies are boasting how they're going to shred Judah to pieces! And the people of Judah are quaking in great fear, indeed.

Isaiah is thus reading ol' Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Juda, the riot act because Isaiah had just told Ahaz the invasion would fail and Ahaz needed to ask the Lord for a sign for that but Ahaz responded, "Nope, I won't but the Lord to the test." That did it. Ahaz's comment "triggered" Isaiah to unleash on the king. And this is where the birth of Immanuel is prophesied and were this Immanuel (עִמָּנוּאֵל 'Immanu'el) meaning "God is with us" to be merely to be born of a young woman, well, so what?

It's kinda of a pointless note to make. Most babies then were born of young women. Most babies are born of young women now, I should guess, around the world. Hardly a surprise statement or something to assert in such a tense "Game of Thrones" situation.

So maybe that's the right translation: "young woman", but considering the context, and the nature of the prophecy: "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign!" -- That's what we Irish would call a "right gobsmackin'".

Considering all that, I have me doubts.

Have a grand weekend!

An Préacháin