My Pronoun Is ‘Legion.’ Satan and the Nashville Church Massacre


In a powerful forthcoming commentary, Mark Judge refers to womanhood as “God’s masterpiece.” There are countless ways in which this is true. We can most fruitfully consider them by thinking first about the Blessed Virgin, Jesus’ mother. And then about our own mothers, sisters, daughters, and wives. Consider their courage, self-sacrifice, wisdom and compassion … the crosses they bear and blessings they bring.

But I know Satan’s masterpiece. That is, the thing he made to ape, attack, and pervert God’s Creation, which he hates. As an arrogant, lofty spirit, he loathes our bodies. As a sexless, loveless rationalist, he’s revolted by reproduction. As a metaphysical terrorist, he’s addicted to rebellion. So the Enemy who strives to destroy us (as proxies for a God he cannot harm) fixes his steely gaze on our soft and vulnerable parts — our hearts and loins and wombs.

I mostly don’t mean that the Enemy tempts us to sins of the flesh. That’s true, and it’s quite serious. But as C.S. Lewis observed in The Screwtape Letters, the Accuser isn’t satisfied just trying to damn people by luring them to have sex too soon or too randomly. That’s rookie stuff for him, too easily repented. No, the goal instead is to comprehensively pervert, twist, and turn against God Himself the very structure of His creation. To turn us not just into disobedient children, but little demons ourselves — consumed as Satan is with loathing, revulsion and rebellion aimed at God’s exquisite handiwork.

We saw it outside what used to be my favorite late night spot in Dallas, Buzzbrews Restaurant in Lakewood, some months ago. Under new ownership, the place started hosting “all ages” drag queen brunches. That means, in plain English: “Bad parents, come bring your kids to be groomed by men dressed as strippers and prostitutes!” Such fun for all. When Christians announced a plan to pray and sing outside, the organizers of the drag event invited … Antifa, to show up in masks wielding AR-15s, to terrorize the Christians. The message was clear.

These activists hate us because they hate Creation and God, whom they hate because they’re possessed.

I absolutely don’t mean to condemn the typical victims of Transgender madness, which is a mental illness morphed by ideology into a Gnostic grudge against God. The Stream has featured detailed, sympathetic stories of “de-transitioners,” of people whose emotional problems were misdiagnosed and mistreated by deluded or greedy doctors. To those people we owe only mercy, kindness, and welcome. As the Gettys put it in their exquisite song, “O Church Arise”:

With shield of faith and belt of truthWe’ll stand against the devil’s liesAn army bold whose battle-cry is LoveReaching out to those in darkness
Our call to war to love the captive soulBut to rage against the captorAnd with the sword that makes the wounded wholeWe will fight with faith and valour

But the high priests of this new cult of Cybele — the Mediterranean goddess who demanded self-castration — are servants of our Enemy. And that’s how they see us. No wonder that we’ve endured the first act of violence aimed at Christians by Transgenderists, in the monstrous Nashville school shooting — unleashed just days after Tennessee passed a law protecting children from Transgender grooming. That’s no coincidence, as we’d probably know for sure if the authorities ever released the testosterone-juiced transgender mass killer’s “manifesto.” (Spoiler: They won’t.)

It won’t be the last attack. They’ve promised that. What else do you think it means when we’re awaiting the Trans Day of Vengeance?

Not The Bee reported on an eruption of calls by Trans activists for more violence against Christians. The courageous Terry Schilling called things out as they are:

Read the rest:

Katie Hobbs’ press secretary out after inciting murder of conservatives

Josselyn Berry, AZ’s dem Gov’s mouth that roared, gets sacked

Posted by seeingredaz March 30, 2023

Within hours of the horrific murders of three young school children and three adults who worked at a Nashville Christian school, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs’ spokesperson Josselyn Berry, posted an offensive tweet (captured by the AZ Freedom Caucus). Berry noted that the shooter was a transgender female to male and that incited hatred against her/him…making a mockery of the senseless slaughter of innocents.

“The governor does not condone violence in any form,” according to a statement from Hobbs’ office. “This administration holds mutual respect at the forefront of how we engage with one another. The post by the press secretary is not reflective of the values of the administration.”

After blasting Berry without mentioning her name, Hobbs gave her the cover of saying she “resigned,” though it was immediately clear that Berry’s hours were numbered and her future prospects are slim.

News of the provocative tweet spread quickly, in wide-ranging publications, including the UK’s Daily Mail, and Detroit’s Free Press, to the New York Post. Ultimately, Twitter removed the post, with a notice saying that Berry had violated the platform’s rules. Prior to her short-time job with Hobbs, Josselyn Berry was affiliated with the leftist Arizona Advocacy Network, which has recently folded, closing its door in 2022.

We hear Starbucks has been hiring.

Russia, Mary, War, Peace, Fatima, and YOU

Join me and enroll in Dr. Mazza’s Easter mini-course… only $99.

RUSSIA: War & Peace (& Fatima)

RUSSIA & MARY: War & Peace

“Beauty will Save the World…”

Immaculate Heart of Mary, World War III, Ukraine, China, Fatima, the Catholic Church, Russian Orthodoxy,  Putin, Solzhenitsyn, KGB, Lenin, Stalin, Dostoevsky, Tsar Nicholas II, Napoleon, Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, Andre Rublev, Archbishop Sheen, and more!

Mini Course: Sundays April 16, 23, 30, May 7

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” (1 Peter 2:9)

Why has God chosen Russia as the instrument for Punishment and Peace? An in-depth look at a “Chosen People.” What is its connection to Jesus & Mary? Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow? $99 Choose “Mini -course” and Enroll Today!

Live Classes start Sunday April 16th at 6pm Pacific and will run approximately 70-80 minutes. Q&A will follow for 10 minutes or more for those who can stay. I will suggest readings. No tests. No pressure. Content: Ages 13 and up. Recorded video link will be sent afterwards so you can watch on your own time!


Q: Mark, everyone knows we can’t judge the internal forum, so how can you argue Pope Benedict’s intent in rendering his resignation?

A: While it is impossible to know or judge his intent DIRECTLY, we most certainly can and should examine the EXTERNAL MANIFESTATION of the act which he attempted to execute in the Declaratio.

Can. 332§2. “If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone.”

After he manifestly did NOT resign his office in the Declaratio, the external manifestation that unfolded in the sad spring of 2013 included things like his Fisherman’s Ring was not destroyed, he kept “Pope” in his title, he kept the form of address “His Holiness,” he continued to wear the white cassock, and live inside the Vatican, giving his Apostolic Blessing. Don’t be gaslighted. Pope Benedict obviously still considered himself in some way papal, which means he was in substantial error about the thing he was resigning.

Can. 188. “A resignation made out of grave fear that is inflicted unjustly or out of malice, substantial error, or simony is invalid by the law itself.”

In fact, since the external manifestation points so obviously to substantial error, this manifest evidentiary proofset counts more than Pope Benedict’s own denials. It is claimed that Benedict said at various times that his act was made with completely free will, and any notion of a failed abdication is “absurd.” But since our charge is substantial error as it relates to the essential nature of the act, and further to the nature of the papacy itself, the mind of Pope Benedict, far from being the arbiter of reality, is actually the thing that is on trial here! Not his personal motivation, mind you, but rather the objective facts of what he did or didn’t do. What is clear in the Declaratio is that he intended to resign something… the words suggest resigning the active ministry, and remember he explicitly did NOT resign the office. Then two weeks went by whilst he explained to everyone how HIS resignation wasn’t going to MANIFEST like any other resignation in history.

Nothing to see here…

All of this and more is artfully explained in Chapter Two of Dr. Mazza’s new book, The Third Secret of Fatima and the Synodal Church, Volume I: Pope Benedict’s Resignation, which you should acquire forthwith.

Now enjoy another fact-filled essay from 2014…

Now even the “Corriere” and Messori have discovered that there are two Popes. Repeating what we had written three months ago, but pretending not to know the consequences (“they hide their hand after throwing the stone”)

By Antonio Socci
Libero, May 29, 2014


Yesterday a page written by Messori in the “Corriere della Sera” (with the title: “Here is why we truly have two Popes”) disclosed a sensational revelation: Benedict XVI, in renouncing his mandate by using certain expressions, left: “only his power of government and command over the Church.”
Nevertheless he maintains” the munus, the papal office” which “is irrevocable”. He renounced only “its concrete exercise.” Which means that the Church would really have “two Popes” – a diarchy.
This revelation is truly sensational. It is a shame that it was already made and commented upon – many times, with plenty of argumentation – three months ago, here in the columns of “Libero” (four installments of my inquiry, starting on February 9).
Three months later, Messori and the “Corriere” presented all of it as if it were their own scoop (taking as a pretext one of the essays by a canon lawyer which came out recently), without referring to everything that had happened between February and March.
Indeed, my inquiry into the demission of the Pope, a year after the renunciation, caused a great row: and the “Swiss Guards” of Vatican Insider- La Stampa” immediately protested, scandalized.
On February 14, the most zealous of them, Andrea Tornielli, after the first three installments of my enquiry, excommunicated it with these textual and surreal words:

“(a year after the demission) we have read many comments and analyses. Some – I must confess – reading them made me shudder – the idea almost of a diarchy is outlined, and even the notion that the “true” Pope is still Ratzinger. And unfortunately I am not referring only to the galaxy of prophecy followers – or of the false, apocalyptic prophecies – but also to writers, whose positions, nobody would have been able to imagine a year ago. Not to mention the many, who sensing they are no longer as “confirmed” in their vision, cultural battles, pastoral strategies, patterns of thought and their presence everywhere as “first of the class ” – instead of a healthy examination of conscience, end up by being nostalgic and oppose – more or less subtly – the magisterium of Benedict to that of Francis.”

Will Tornielli shudder also this time because of Messori’s article? Last February, such was the horror of the Vatican journalist, investing himself in the role of tutor in the public order of ideas, that he felt it his duty to bother even poor Benedict XVI in order to ask him to deny or confirm my theses – despite knowing well that he had chosen the cloister.
The “Pope Emeritus” obviously could not evade this petulant request, otherwise who knows what insinuations would have been made. Neither could he talk about what he had remained silent about until then. So he gave a fantastic answer…
“La Stampa” displayed – as a worldwide scoop, launched all over the globe – that strange note by Pope Ratzinger wherein –as the Turin newspaper reported – he denied my argumentation. In a particular way – according to Tornielli – Ratzinger denied being “ Pope number two – he is not part of a “diarchy.”
In reality, that note was not at all about a diarchy. Primarily his note however, contained a single piece of real news: it was in an enigmatic, exquisite response given by the Pope Emeritus, which by itself, should have made the “insiders” jump up onto their chairs!
Having to explain why he had kept the title of “Pope Emeritus”, the name “His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI and the white cassock, Ratzinger wrote verbatim: “at the moment of my renunciation there were no other clothes available.”
“La Stampa-Vatican Insider” thought such a surreal answer sounded just right. They were not even aware of the Pope’s sensational irony and how he had elegantly eluded them.
It is obvious in fact, that such an answer meant that the Pope could not or did not want to speak nor explain the reasons for that choice.
You do not need much to understand it, since the renunciation had also been decided a year before and was announced twenty days prior to it becoming official. Therefore, it is impossible that “at the time of the renunciation” there were no “other clothes” available.
Anyway, nobody could believe that one would remain Pope for [purely] sartorial reasons…
In fact, two days after, February 28, the trusted Don Georg Gänswein, Ratinger’s secretary, in an interview to “Avvenire” gave the real answer which Benedict could not or did not want to give in person. Here is how Don Georg explained why he had kept the title of Pope Emeritus: “He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”
Anyone can understand that this statement is of exceptional importance: it means that Ratzinger dresses like a Pope because “he is” Pope.
So Tornielli, who became the fireman that extinguished a fire I caused, ended up involuntarily setting off a bigger one. It was increasingly evident that Benedict XVI did not resign from the Petrine Ministry, but only it from its “active exercise.”
If and how this is possible and what it implies is a completely unresolved question, above all theologically.
In fact, last April 7, Sandro Magister, the most authoritative and reliable of Vatican journalists, on his very well-known internet site, recalled my inquiry and the “answer” given by “Vatican Insider” saying that – in his judgment – it did not respond the questions I had raised.
The TV had broadcast news of the controversy along with the Pope’s extraordinary note; even the “Corriere della Sera” had (although with a superficial and arrogant article).
It is surprising that of all this, in the page of yesterday’s “Corriere”, there was not even the slightest mention.
What is particularly surprising however, is that Messori concludes his article with an (apparently) ingenuous hymn about the beauty of having two Popes “in the enclosure of Peter”. An enclosure – explains Messori enthusiastically – that is not only geographic, but also a theological “place.”
Evidently Messori does not remember his interview of a year ago, precisely with Andrea Tornielli, who never appeared to be enthusiastic about the fact that Ratzinger remained Pope Emeritus. In that interview – spurred by Tornielli’s questions – Messori said he was very perplexed at the fact that Benedict had decided to stay in the Vatican.
And he said it very brusquely:

“What had surprised me at the time was the decision by Benedict XVI to stay “within the enclosure of St. Peter’s”[…] I always remember this motto from the Savoia House: ‘Here we rule one at a time.’ The idea that one can construe being on the outside is that the emeritus may in some way, despite himself, influence his successor.”

Yesterday Messori wrote something that seems to be the exact opposite:

“Would the Church then for the first time, truly have two Popes, one reigning and one emeritus? It appears that this was the will of Joseph Ratzinger himself, with the renunciation of active service only, and that it was “a solemn act of his magisterium” […]If it truly is so, so much the better for the Church: it is a gift that they are near each other even physically – one who directs and teaches and one who prays and suffers for everyone, but most of all to sustain his confrere in his everyday pontifical office.”

Is everything just fine then? Is everybody happy? It is exactly the opposite. Messori in fact, as an “insider” – cannot ignore that this situation – as he outlines it – does not have any theological nor canonical foundation.
Through the Divine Constitution of the Church, in reality only one can be the Pope. And if it is as Messori says – Benedict XVI “did not intend to renounce the pontifical munus” which “is irrevocable” what kind of demission is his?
Messori knows well that his entire article induces one to ask a dramatic question (who is the Pope?), but he avoids carefully formulating it, allowing the reader to pose it. Why? Is this article a signal that many are posing it in Church circles?

Toward a Holy Passiontide: Crack that whip!

How’s your Lent? Keep falling short? Now is the time to double down. Go back to your promises and make them count for the next two weeks. Offer your sufferings and cooperate with those graces. God will reward you!

“Jesus, eternal God, became mortal man in order to mediate our redemption, to form a new people that would be His Mystical Self, and to bring all men into an eternal union with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There can be no living of Christ without living the price of mediation for souls. That price may vary, from mere fidelity in the performance of monotonous duty, to bearing with loneliness and misunderstanding, or even to suffering violence and death. Sin continues, and therefore suffering for sin must continue. Since Christians share Christ’s priesthood through Baptism and Confirmation, His passion becomes their passion, for an “eternal inheritance.””

INTROIT(Ps. 42:1-2) Do me justice, O God, and fight against a faithless people; from the deceitful and impious man rescue me. For You, O God, are my strength. Ps. 42:3. Send forth Your light and Your truth; they shall lead me on and bring me to Your holy mountain, to Your dwelling place. 

COLLECT: O Almighty God, look with mercy upon Your family. Guide and guard us in body and soul by Your bounteous grace and protection.

GRADUAL (Ps. 142:9, 10; 17:48-49) Rescue me from my enemies, O Lord. Teach me to do Your will. O Lord, who preserved me from the wrathful nations, You will exalt me above my adversaries,You will rescue me from the man of violence.

TRACT (Ps. 128:1-4) Often they have fought against me from my youth.
Let Israel now say, “Often have they fought against me from my youth.
Yet they could not prevail over me. The wicked have furrowed my back.
They have continued their iniquity, but the Lord, who is just, will humble the pride of the sinners.”

One year ago today, another botched Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

It goes without saying that it needs to be done by a true pope, but it was botched even beyond that. Why is it so hard to get it right? Folks, this is one of the chief mysteries of our age, and we continue to suffer through it. Communism has come to the West, the Church has been infiltrated to the top, and the Third Secret of Fatima is unfolding before our eyes. Do penance.

The Consecration of Russia Was Invalid

False hopes are more dangerous than fears.
– J. R. R. Tolkien

As tensions escalate between Russia and the United States over war in Ukraine, heated opinion among traditional Catholics is split fairly evenly on whether the latest Fatima Consecration finally fulfilled the request proclaimed by Our Lady in 1917, and again in 1929.

The only way to answer this question definitively is to 1) compare what happened on March 25, 2022, to 2) the requirements heaven has outlined for over a century.

So firstly, what did Francis do? He consecrated the Church and the world with a special mention of Russia (and Ukraine). And many bishops joined him.

Secondly, what have Our Lady and Our Lord actually asked for?

On June 13, 1929, Mary reappeared to Lucia Dos Santos, now a nun in a Spanish convent, telling her:

The moment has come when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. So numerous are the souls which the justice of God condemns for sins committed against Me, that I come to ask for reparation. Sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray.

One prominent discrepancy we can see straight away between what happened, and what was requested, is that the Consecration of 2022 included the Church and the world (and Ukraine)—not Russia exclusively.

What does heaven think about this? Miraculously, we actually have an answer.

In the Fall of 1940, Poland and France had been devastated by Nazi forces and Britain agonized under the Blitz – week after week of German bombardment. Attempts to persuade Pope Pius XII to consecrate Russia were to no avail, perhaps because he feared offending Stalin, a staunch ally of Hitler at that moment. It was Russia, in fact, that had supplied the oil, the rubber, and the steel that fed the Nazi war machine.

Sister Lucia’s superiors instructed her to write to the Pope herself and to “adjust” the message of Fatima to fit the current situation. As Sister Lucia writes, on October 22, 1940:

I received a letter from Father J. B. G. and the Bishop of Gurza telling me to write to His Holiness… With this purpose in view, I spent two hours on my knees before Our Lord exposed in the Blessed Sacrament: ‘Pray for the Holy Father, sacrifice yourself so that his courage does not succumb under the bitterness that oppresses him. The tribulation will continue and augment. I will punish the nations for their crimes by war, famine and persecution of My Church and this will weigh especially upon My Vicar on earth. His Holiness will obtain an abbreviation of these days of tribulation [World War II] if he takes heed of My wishes by proclaiming the Act of Consecration of the whole world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with a special mention of Russia.’”[1]

Against all odds, exactly two years later Pius XII did just that. In a lengthy address over Vatican Radio, Pius prayed:

To You, to Your Immaculate Heart, We as common father of the great Christian family, as Vicar of Him to Whom was given all power in Heaven and earth, and from Whom we receive the charge of so many souls redeemed by His Precious Blood and which people the whole earth; to You, to Your Immaculate Heart in this tragic hour of human history, we confide, we consecrate, we deliver, not only Holy Church, the Mystical Body of Your Jesus which bleeds and suffers in so many parts and is in so much tribulation, but also the whole world, torn by mortal discord, burning in the fires of hate, victim of its own iniquity…

To peoples separated by error and discord, namely, those who profess to You singular devotion where there was no house that did not display Your holy icon, today hidden perhaps until better days, give them peace, and lead them again to the only flock of Christ under the true and only Shepherd!

Even though the above reference to Russia was oblique, Our Lord, true to his word, accepted the 1942 Consecration and hastened the end of World War II. Within days, the Allies celebrated their first victory over the Nazis at the Battle of El Alemain in Egypt. And over the next three months the Russians definitively broke the German war effort by their grueling victory at Stalingrad. Two and a half years later the war ended, Germany was defeated.

The lesson for us, however, is that an act of Consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, with a special (oblique) mention of Russia, did not fulfill Our Lady of Fatima’s request. Russia did NOT convert to Catholicism. Rather, she spread her Marxist errors to millions in China, North Korea, North Vietnam and all of Eastern Europe! The world did not experience Mary’s promised period of peace, or the Triumph of Her Immaculate Heart.

Even after Our Lord accepted Pope Pius XII’s consecration and shortened the war, Sr. Lucia still kept promulgating the Consecration of Russia as Our Lady of Fatima originally asked.

On July 15, 1946, in an interview with William Thomas Walsh at the end of the book Our Lady of Fatima (1947), pg. 226, Sister Lucia declared:

What Our Lady wants is for the Holy Father and all the Bishops to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, in a special ceremony. If this consecration is made, the Blessed Virgin will convert Russia and peace will reign in the world. Otherwise, Russia will spread her errors throughout the world.

Professor Walsh reports: “Lucy made it plain that Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of the world to Her Immaculate Heart. What She demanded specifically was the consecration of Russia.”

Sr. Lucia in a letter to Walsh in 1947:

The Holy Father has already consecrated Russia, including it in the consecration of the world, but it has not been done in the form indicated by Our Lady: I do not know whether Our Lady accepts it, done this way, as complying with her promises.

In the book, Vision of Fatima, (1948), page 80; Father Thomas McGlynn interviewed Sister Lucy in 1947 and she was emphatic at correcting consecration of the world to read consecration of Russia. “No!,” Sister Lucy said. “Not the world! Russia, Russia!”

“Do you think that Our Lady’s request has been complied with?” asked Fr. McGlynn’s translator.

“As Our Lady made it, no,” she answered. “Whether Our Lady accepted the consecration made in 1942, as fulfilling her wish, I do not know.”

The same answer was given to the Dutch Monforte Father Huberto Iongen, in his interviews of 3 and 4 February 1946. Having asked her the question: “Did not (Our Lady) speak of the Consecration of the world?” her response was “No.”

In the book Il Pellegrinaggio Della Meraviglie, published under the auspices of the Italian Episcopate (Rome 1960, page 440) a little-known revelation of Our Lady of Fatima to Sister Lucy is recounted.

The Virgin Mary appeared to Sister Lucy in May 1952 and said:

Make it known to the Holy Father that I am always awaiting the Consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart. Without the Consecration, Russia will not be able to convert, nor will the world have peace.

Because the consecration of Russia on March 25, 2022 was merely a consecration which followed the form of Pius XII, and we know that Our Lady asked for a further consecration of Russia after Pius XII, we cannot have any reasonable hope that this new consecration was valid according to heaven.

[1] Father Antonio Maria, S.J. FatimaDocumentos, (Porto, 1976), p. 467.

Edmund J. Mazza, PhD

Dr. EDMUND J. MAZZA offers online courses in Church and World History at Dr. Mazza is the author of The Scholastics and the Jews: Coexistence, Conversion and the Medieval Origins of Tolerance from Angelico Press.  Dr. Mazza is former Full Professor of History at Azusa Pacific University in Los Angeles where he taught for 14 years.

Feast of the Annunciation: “By the fire of your charity, by the unction of your humility, you have drawn the Divinity to come within you.”

Divine Intimacy #374, The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary:


Let us try, through the inspired narrative of St. Luke (Gospel:1: 26-38), to enter into the dispositions of Mary’s soul at the time of the Annunciation.

The Angel sent by God finds the Virgin recollected in solitude, and “being come in,” says to her: “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.” At these words, according to the sacred text, Mary is “troubled”; we must not, however, take this phrase to mean real disturbance, which destroys the peace of the spirit; it means rather a profound astonishment at this unusual greeting, an astonishment so great as to cause a kind of fear. This is Mary’s first reaction to the angelical message, a reaction arising from her deep humility, which makes her think this extraordinary eulogy very strange.

Meanwhile, the Angel communicates to her his great message: God wishes her to become the Mother of the Redeemer. Mary had always lived under the continual direction of the Holy Spirit and under His inspiration had made a vow of virginity; therefore, she was convinced that she should remain a virgin and that this was God’s will. But now God lets her know that He has chosen her to be the Mother of His Son, and she, humble handmaid that she is, is ready to adhere to the divine plan. However, she does not yet understand how she can be at the same time a mother and a virgin, and she questions the Angel on this point: “How shall this be done?” The Angel explains: “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee.” Her maternity will be the direct work of the Holy Spirit and will respect her virginity.

The will of God is then entirely clear to Mary, and she, who during her whole life has always been moved by the divine will alone, accepts it immediately, with an entire adherence and a most intense pure love: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it done to me according to Thy word.” The total acceptance is accompanied by a total donation: Mary accepts by offering herself, and she offers herself by giving herself. She offers herself as a servant, or rather, as a slave, if we take the word in the full sense of the Greek text; she gives herself by abandoning herself as a prey to the divine will, accepting by anticipation everything that God may ask of her. Her adherence to Him is both active and passive: Mary wills all that God wills, and she accepts all that He does. Thus Mary appears as the model of a soul completely united to God, fully given up to His divine will.


“Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee! Not only is God the Son with you, to whom you gave your blood, but also God the Holy Spirit, by means of whose operation you conceived, and also God the Father, who generated from all eternity Him whom you conceived. The Father, who gives you His Son, is with you; the Son is with you, who, wishing to accomplish a prodigious mystery, conceals Himself in your maternal bosom without violating your virginal integrity; the Holy Spirit is with you, who, together with the Father and the Son, sanctifies you. God is truly with you” (St. Bernard).

“O Mary, Mary, temple of the Trinity … O Mary, vessel of humility, you were pleasing to the eternal Father, and in His own singular love, He has captivated you and drawn you to Him. By the fire of your charity, by the unction of your humility, you have drawn the Divinity to come within you.

“Did fear disturb you at the Angel’s word, O Mary? It does not seem that it did, although you were astonished. At what, then, were you astonished? At the great goodness of God, when, considering yourself, you knew you were unworthy of so great a grace. You wondered at the sight of your unworthiness, your weakness and at God’s ineffable grace … and thus you showed profound humility. But there also appears today in you, O Mary, the dignity and liberty of man, for before the Word was made incarnate, the Angel was sent to ask your consent. The Son of God did not descend into your bosom before you had consented; He waited at the door of your will which you opened to Him, for although He wanted to come to you, He would never have entered if you had not opened to Him saying: ‘Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it done unto me according to Thy word ….’

“O Mary, my sweet love, you opened to the eternal Divinity the door of your will, and the Word immediately became incarnate within you. By this you teach me that God, who created me without my help, will not save me without it … but knocks at the door of my will and waits for me to open it to Him” (St. Catherine of Siena).

O Mary, by the ineffable mystery which was accomplished in you I beg you to teach me and help me always to open wide the door of my soul to every divine appeal, to every solicitation of grace. At each manifestation of the divine will, may I repeat with you a humble, prompt, “Ecce, fiat!”