No Miracle At All to Deny, Debunk, and Deconstruct the Miraculous

Although I should have recognized the true state of Holy Mother Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal decades before I did see it, I stayed within the conciliar structures in the honest but mistaken belief that I was being “faithful” to the Catholic Church. All I can say is that I was too dense, too proud, and too stupid to see the obvious and to act accordingly.

This having been noted, however, those years of suffering through “homilies” during the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical abomination before I became an “indulterer” in the 1990s exposed me to every boilerplate Modernist heresy imaginable.

Indeed, there was a presbyter who substituted as teacher for Archbishop John Francis Whealon on Hartford, Connecticut (he was a true bishop), in the Spring 1984 Semester at Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut, while Whealon was recovering from a colectomy that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ did not actually perform a real miracle as recorded in each of the four Gospels when He multiplied the loaves and fishes as the “real miracle” was that the large numbers of people gathered to hear Our Lord preach were inspired to share what they had with others. The presbyter said this in a course on the New Testament. As I was already in trouble for calling out another presbyter for denying that Eucharistic piety was the mind of the Catholic Church, I simply remained quiet as my face, according to the late “Father” Joseph Dietz, who was a seminarian at the time, turned “beat red.”

However, that was only one time out of scores that I heard the same blasphemous heresy from the mouth of conciliar presbyter between 1974 and 1994. I cannot even begin to provide you with the actual number of times that I heard this heresy uttered at Novus Ordo travesties, but this heresy has become such a standard of conciliar preaching that it has been repeated by the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio on June 3, 2013, and again by Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, on June 30, 2025, the Commemoration of Saint Paul the Apostle:

Good morning! Last Thursday we celebrated the Feast of Corpus Christi, which, in Italy and in other countries has been moved to this Sunday. It is the Feast of the Eucharist, the sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ.

The Gospel presents to us the account of the miracle of the Multiplication of the Loaves (Lk 9:11-17); I would like to reflect on one aspect of it that never fails to impress me and makes me think. We are on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, daylight is fading. Jesus is concerned for the people who have spent so many hours with him: there are thousands of them and they are hungry. What should he do? The disciples also pose the problem and tell Jesus: “send the crowd away” so that they can go and find provisions in the villages close by. But Jesus says: “You give them something to eat” (v. 13). The disciples are discomfited and answer him: “we have no more than five loaves and two fish”, as if to say, barely enough for ourselves.

Jesus well knows what to do, but he wishes to involve his disciples, he wants to teach them. The disciples’ attitude is the human one that seeks the most realistic solution which does not create too many problems: dismiss the crowd, they say, let each person organize himself as best he can, moreover you have already done so much for them: you have preached, you have healed the sick.... Send the crowd away!

Jesus’ outlook is very different; it is dictated by his union with the Father and his compassion for the people, that mercifulness of Jesus for us all. Jesus senses our problems, he senses our weaknesses, he senses our needs. Looking at those five loaves, Jesus thinks: this is Providence! From this small amount, God can make it suffice for everyone. Jesus trusts in the heavenly Father without reserve; he knows that for him everything is possible. Thus he tells his disciples to have the people sit down in groups of 50 — this is not merely coincidental, for it means that they are no longer a crowd but become communities nourished by God’s bread. Jesus then takes those loaves and fish, looks up to heaven, recites the blessing — the reference to the Eucharist is clear — and breaks them and gives them to the disciples who distribute them... and the loaves and fish do not run out, they do not run out! This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication it is a sharing, inspired by faith and prayer. Everyone eats and some is left over: it is the sign of Jesus, the Bread of God for humanity.

The disciples witnessed the message but failed to understand it. Like the crowd they are swept up by enthusiasm for what has occurred. Once again they follow human logic rather than God’s, which is that of service, love and faith. The Feast of Corpus Christi asks us to convert to faith in Providence, so that we may share the little we are and have, and never to withdraw into ourselves. Let us ask our Mother Mary to help us in this conversion, in order to follow truly and more closely the Jesus whom we adore in the Eucharist. So may it be. (Angelus, 2 June 2013.)

The Church encourages all initiatives to put an end to the outrage of hunger in the world, making her own the sentiments of her Lord, Jesus, who, as the Gospels narrate, when he saw a great multitude coming to him to hear his word, was concerned first of all to feed them, and for this purpose asked the disciples to take charge of the problem, abundantly blessing the efforts they made (cf. Jn 6:1-13). However, when we read the account of what is commonly called the “multiplication of the loaves” (cf. Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:12-17; Jn 6:1-13), we realize that the real miracle performed by Christ was to show that the key to overcoming hunger lies in sharing rather than in greedily hoarding. This is something we may have forgotten today because, although some significant steps have been taken, global food security continues to deteriorate, making it increasingly unlikely that the “Zero Hunger” goal of the 2030 Agenda will be achieved. This means that we are far from fulfilling the mandate that gave rise to this intergovernmental institution in 1945.  (Message of the Holy Father to Participants in the 44th Session of the FAO Conference 30 June 2025.)

Obviously, we know that Our Lord’s multiplication of the loaves and fishes actually happened as it was miraculous and had absolutely nothing to do prophetically with physical hunger, no less the anti-population goals of the 2030 Global Reset agenda, but to fulfill our spiritual hunger for the Holy Eucharist and thus for the entirety of the Holy Faith.

As I have pointed out on other occasions, the conciliar revolutionaries are rationalists who do believe in the supernatural. There is no difference between what the vulgar caricature of a Modernist named Jorge Mario Bergoglio said on June 3, 2013, and what the more refined and “cultured” Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV said on June 30, 2013, to a meeting of absolute rationalists.

It should be recalled in this regard that Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI described himself once as a "rationalist," that is, a person who believes that it is necessary to reason things out on his own in light of alleged new verities (new truths) that man encounters as "progress" takes him to newer visions of himself and the world around him over the course of time.

Rationalism is of the essence of the Protestant Revolution as it was only logical for men, having rejected the teaching authority of the true Church that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ founded upon the rock of Peter, the Pope, to trust in their own "abilities" to interpret Sacred Scripture by explaining it anew with "insights" of their very own.

Rationalism is, of course, at the very foundation of the so-called "Age of Reason" or "Enlightenment" that spawned so many variations of what are, when all of the complexities and intricacies are stripped away, the same naturalist theme: that God, if He exists at all, has revealed nothing definitively binding upon all men at all times and that it is therefore necessary for men to "rethink" basic presuppositions in order to "discover" the meaning of life and ways of improving man's lot here on earth.

Modernism has its proximate antecedent roots in the rationalism of the Protestant Revolution, replete with all of its own complex variations that mutations, and the rationalism of the "Enlightenment" that led to reign of the "rights of man" in the place of the the rights of the Social Reign of Christ the King.

Although not described by Pope Pius IX as Modernism, the rationalism he condemned in his first encyclical letter, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846, is one of the essential building-blocks of Modernism as defined, analyzed and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

5. In order to easily mislead the people into making errors, deceiving particularly the imprudent and the inexperienced, they pretend that they alone know the ways to prosperity. They claim for themselves without hesitation the name of "philosophers." They feel as if philosophy, which is wholly concerned with the search for truth in nature, ought to reject those truths which God Himself, the supreme and merciful creator of nature, has deigned to make plain to men as a special gift. With these truths, mankind can gain true happiness and salvation. So, by means of an obviously ridiculous and extremely specious kind of argumentation, these enemies never stop invoking the power and excellence of human reason; they raise it up against the most holy faith of Christ, and they blather with great foolhardiness that this faith is opposed to human reason.

6. Without doubt, nothing more insane than such a doctrine, nothing more impious or more opposed to reason itself could be devised. For although faith is above reason, no real disagreement or opposition can ever be found between them; this is because both of them come from the same greatest source of unchanging and eternal truth, God. They give such reciprocal help to each other that true reason shows, maintains and protects the truth of the faith, while faith frees reason from all errors and wondrously enlightens, strengthens and perfects reason with the knowledge of divine matters.

7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of divine revelation, with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the doctrine of human progress into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the highest praise, as if religion itself were not of God but the work of men, or a philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means. The charge which Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his own time "who brought forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical Christianity"[2] can very aptly apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion was not invented by human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one can quite easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority of God who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected by human reason. In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation. Having done this, one would be definitely convinced that God has spoken and therefore would show Him rational obedience, as the Apostle very wisely teaches.[3] For who can possibly not know that all faith should be given to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement with reason itself to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived?  (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)

Rationalism is opposed to rationality. That is, rationalism, trusting in man's ability to "figure everything out for himself," leads to skepticism of the past and skepticism of most supernatural truths that rationalists believe can only be accepted if they are made "accessible" to "modern men" by adapting their expression to the exigencies of a given period in history, and an essential part of rationalism in the supernatural is to deny most, if not all, of Our Blessed Lord’s miracles, which is why the deist named Thomas Jefferson removed all of His miracles, including His Resurrection from the dead on Easter Sunday, from his, Jefferson’s translation of the New Testament.

The denial of the miracles of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is one of the fundamental cornerstones of Modernism, which is why Lamentabili Sane, issued under the authority of Pope Saint Pius X on September 1, 1907, just seven days before Pascendi Dominici Gregis, condemned the Modernist error that Saint John the Evangelist exaggerated Our Lord’s miracles as recorded in his Gospel:

17. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word lncarnate. (Lamentabili Sane, September 1, 1907.)

Pope Saint Pius X himself directly discussed how Modernism must deny the supernatural, including the miraculous:

6. We have proceeded sufficiently far, Venerable Brethren, to have before us enough, and more than enough, to enable us to see what are the relations which Modernists establish between faith and science — including, as they are wont to do under that name, history. And in the first place it is to be held that the object-matter of the one is quite extraneous to and separate from the object-matter of the other. For faith occupies itself solely with something which science declares to be for it unknowable. Hence each has a separate scope assigned to it: science is entirely concerned with phenomena, into which faith does not at all enter; faith, on the contrary, concerns itself with the divine, which is entirely unknown to science. Thus it is contended that there can never be any dissension between faith and science, for if each keeps on its own ground they can never meet and therefore never can be in contradiction. And if it be objected that in the visible world there are some things which appertain to faith, such as the human life of Christ, the Modernists reply by denying this. For though such things come within the category of phenomena, still in as far as they are lived by faith and in the way already described have been by faith transfigured and disfigured, they have been removed from the world of sense and transferred into material for the divine. Hence should it be further asked whether Christ has wrought real miracles, and made real prophecies, whether He rose truly from the dead and ascended into Heaven, the answer of agnostic science will be in the negative and the answer of faith in the affirmative yet there will not be, on that account, any conflict between them. For it will be denied by the philosopher as a philosopher speaking to philosophers and considering Christ only in historical reality; and it will be affirmed by the believer as a believer speaking to believers and considering the life of Christ as lived again by the faith and in the faith. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

This is reminiscent of what the aforementioned Archbishop John Francis Whealon said at the end of the course of the New Testament after he returned from the colectomy as he told the seminarians present to “forget all this stuff” he (and his replacement) taught in the course and, instead “just peach the Gospel.” The Modernists are always seeking to cast doubt upon the entirety of Divine Revelation (Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition), which is precisely what many Modernists, have done with respect to the Gospel accounts of Our Lord’s miraculous multiplication of loaves and fishes.

There is no Patristic evidence for the Modernists’ denial of Our Lord’s multiplication of the loaves and fishes and, quite indeed, Saint Thomas Aquinas’s commentaries on the Gospels not only provides Patristic support for the actual miracles but profound insights into why Our Lord performed them in his commentary on the account provided by Saint Matthew:

Chrys.: It is a proof of the faith of these multitudes that they endured hunger in waiting for the Lord even till evening; to which purpose it follows, “And when it was evening, his disciples came unto him, saying, This is a desert place, and the time is now past.”

The Lord purposing to feed them waits to be asked, as always not stepping forward first to do miracles, but when called upon. None out of the crowd approached Him, both because they stood in great awe of Him, and because in their zeal of love they did not feel their hunger. But even the disciples do not come and say, Give them to eat; for the disciples were as yet in an imperfect condition; but they say, “This is a desert place.” So that what was proverbial among the Jews to express a miracle, as it is said, “Can he spread a table in the wilderness?” [Ps 78:19] this also He shews among his other works.

For this cause also He leads them out into the desert, that the miracle might be clear of all suspicion, and that none might suppose that any thing was supplied towards the feast from any neighbouring town. But though the place be desert, yet is He there who feeds the world; and though the hour is, as they say, past, yet He who now commanded was not subjected to hours. And though the Lord had gone before His disciples in healing many sick, yet they were so imperfect that they could not judge what He would do concerning food for them, wherefore they add, “Send the multitude away, that they may go into the towns, and buy themselves food.” Observe the wisdom of the Master; He says not straightway to them, ‘I will give them to eat;’ for they would not easily have received this, but, “Jesus said to them, They need not depart, Give ye them to eat.”

Jerome: Wherein He calls the Apostles to breaking of bread, that the greatness of the miracle might be more evident by their testimony that they had none.

Aug., De Cons. Ev., ii, 46: It may perplex some how, if the Lord, according to the relation of John, asked Philip whence bread was to be found for them, that can be true which Matthew here relates, that the disciples first prayed the Lord to send the multitudes away, that they might buy food from the nearest towns. Suppose then that after these words the Lord looked upon the multitude and said what John relates, but Matthew and the others have omitted. And by such cases as this none ought to be perplexed, when one of the Evangelists relates what the rest have omitted.

Chrys.: Yet not even by these words were the disciples set right, but speak yet to Him as to man; “They answered unto Him, We have here but five loaves and two fishes.” From this we learn the philosophy of the disciples, how far they despised food; they were twelve in number, yet they had but five loaves and two fishes; for things of the body were contemned by them, they were altogether possessed by spiritual things. But because the disciples were yet attracted to earth, the Lord begins to introduce the things that were of Himself; “He saith unto them, Bring them hither to me.”

Wherefore does He not create out of nothing the bread to feed the multitude with? That He might put to silence the mouth of Marcion and Manichaeus, who take away from God His creatures, [margin note: i.e. deny that God created the visible world] and by His deeds might teach that all things that are seen are His works and creation, and that it is He that has given us the fruits of the earth, who said in the beginning, “Let the earth bring forth the green herb;” [Gen 1:11] for this is no less a deed than that. For of five loaves to make so many loaves, and fishes like manner, is no less a thing than to bring fruits from the earth, reptiles and other living things from the waters; which shewed Him to be Lord both of land and sea.

By the example of the disciples also we ought to be taught, that though we should have but little, we ought to give that to such as have need. For they when bid to bring their five loaves say not, Whence shall we satisfy our own hunger? but immediately obey; “And He commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took they five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven blessed them, and brake.”

Why did He look to heaven and bless? For it should be believed concerning Him that He is from the Father, and that He is equal with the Father. His equality He shews when He does all things with power. That He is from the Father He shews by referring to Him whatsoever He does, and calling upon Him on all occasions.

To prove these two things therefore, He works His miracles at times with power, at other times with prayer. It should be considered also that in lesser things He looks to heaven, but in greater He does all with power. When He forgave sins, raised the dead, stilled the sea, opened the secrets of the heart, opened the eyes of him that was born blind, which were works only of God, He is not seen to pray; but when He multiplies the loaves, a work less than any of these, He looks up to heaven, that you may learn that even in little things He has no power but from His Father.

And at the same time He teaches us not to touch our food, until we have returned thanks to Him who gives it us. For this reason also He looks up to heaven, because His disciples had examples of many other miracles, but none of this.

Jerome: While the Lord breaks there is a sowing of food; for had the loaves been whole and not broken into fragments, and thus divided into a manifold harvest, they could not have fed so great a multitude. The multitude receives the food from the Lord through the Apostles; as it follows, “And he gave the loaves to hie disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.”

Chrys.: In doing which He not only honoured them, but would that upon this miracle they should not be unbelieving, nor forget it when it was past, seeing their own hands had borne witness to it. Therefore also He suffers the multitudes first to feel the sense of hunger, and His disciples to come to Him, and to ask Him, and He took the loaves at their hands, that they might have many testimonies of that which was done, and many things to remind them of the miracle.

From this that He gave them, nothing more than bread and fish, and that He set this equally before all, He taught them moderation, frugality, and that charity by which they should have all things in common. This He also taught them in the place, in making them sit down upon the grass; for He sought not to feed the body only, but to instruct the mind.

But the bread and fish multiplied in the disciples’ hands; whence it follows, “And they did all eat, and were filled.”

But the miracle ended not here; for He caused to abound not only whole loaves, but fragments also; to shew that the first loaves were not so much as what was left, and that they who were not present might learn what had been done, and that none might think that what had been done was a phantasy; “And they took up fragments that were left, twelve baskets full.”

Jerome: Each of the Apostles fills his basket of the fragments left by his Saviour, that these fragments might witness that they were true loaves that were multiplied.

Chrys.: For this reason also He caused twelve baskets to remain over and above, that Judas might bear his basket. He took up the fragments, and gave them to the disciples and not to the multitudes, who were yet more imperfectly trained than the disciples.

Jerome: To the number of loaves, five, the number of the men that ate is apportioned, five thousand; “And the number of them that had eaten was about five thousand men, besides women and children.”

Chrys.: This was to the very great credit of the people, that the women and the men stood up when these remnants still remained.

Hilary: But the Lord answered, “They have no need to go,” shewing that those whom He heals have no need of the food of mercenary doctrine, and have no necessity to return to Judaea to buy food; and He commands the Apostles that they give them food. Did He not know then that there was nothing to give them?

But there was a complete series of types to be set forth; for as yet it was not given the Apostles to make and minister the heavenly bread, the flood of eternal life; and their answer thus belongs to the chain of spiritual interpretation; they were as yet confined to the five loaves, that is, the five books of the Law, and the two fishes, that is, the preaching of the Prophets and of John.

Hilary: These therefore the Apostles first set forth, because they were yet in these things; and from these things the preaching of the Gospel grows to its more abundant strength and virtue. Then the people is commanded to sit down upon the grass, as no longer lying upon the ground, but resting upon the Law, each one reposing upon the fruit of his own works as upon the grass of the earth.

Jerome: Or, they are bid to lie down on the grass, and that, according to another Evangelist, by fifties and by hundreds, that after they have trampled upon their flesh, and have subjugated the pleasures of the world as dried grass under them, then by the presence [ed. note: Vallarsi reads paenitentiam, Jerome has borrowed the interpretation from Origen who refers to the year of jubilee; and the Glossa ordinaria on this verse is, “The rest of the Jubilee is here contained under the mystery of the number fifty; for fifty twice taken makes a hundred; because we must first rest from evil actions, that the soul may afterwards more fully repose in meditation.”] of the number fifty, they ascend to the eminent perfection of a hundred.

He looks up to heaven to teach us that our eyes are to be directed thither. The Law with the Prophets is broken, and in the midst of them are brought forward mysteries, that whereas they partook not of it whole, when broken into pieces it may be food for the multitude of the Gentiles.

Hilary: Then the loaves are given to the Apostles, because through them the gifts of divine grace were to be rendered. And the number of them that did eat is found to be the same as that of those who should believe; for we find in the book of Acts that out of the vast number of the people of Israel, five thousand men believed.

Jerome: There partook five thousand who had reached maturity; for women and children, the weaker sex, and the tender age, were unworthy of number; thus in the book of Numbe

That which the multitude leave is taken up by the disciples, because the more secret mysteries which cannot be comprehended by the uninstructed, are not to be treated with neglect, but are to be diligently sought out by the twelve Apostles (who are represented by the twelve baskets) and their successors. For by baskets servile offices are performed, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the strong. The five thousand for the five senses of the body are they who in a secular condition know how to use rightly things without. (St. Thomas Aquinas: Catena Aurea - Gospel of Matthew - Christian Classics Ethereal Library.)

Our Lord’s miraculous multiplication loaves was, of course, a prefiguring of the Holy Eucharist and of the fact that He is present in every fragment of a consecrated Host, which is why priests must gather up all the fragments on the corporal after he distributes Holy Communion and to be diligent in inspecting and, if necessary, cleaning out the ciboria as well so as to protect against any accidental irreverence in the treatment of the Sacred Species.

Saint Thomas Aquinas discoursed in his commentary about the even more beautifully about the theological meaning of the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves as recorded by Saint John the Evangelist:

This is the second Passover the Evangelist has mentioned. However, our Lord did not go to Jerusalem this time, as the law commanded. The reason for this being that Christ was both God and man: as man he was subject to the law, but as God he was above the law. So, he observed the law on certain occasions to show that he was a man, but he also disregarded the law at other times to show that he was God. Further, by not going he indicated that the ceremonies of the law would end gradually and in a short time.

847 Then he considers the miracle itself (v 5). First, why it was needed. Secondly, its accomplishment. We can see the need for this miracle from our Lord’s question to his disciple, and the disciple’s answer. First, our Lord’s question is given; and then the answer of his disciple (v 7). He does three things about the first. First, the occasion for the question is given; secondly, we have the-question itself (v 5b); thirdly, we are told why Christ asked this question (v 6).

848 The occasion for Christ’s question was his sight of the crowd coming to him. Hence he says, Then, when Jesus, on the mountain with his disciples, i.e., with those who were more perfect, lifted his eyes and saw that a great multitude had come to him. Here we should note two things about Christ. First, his maturity: for he is not distracted by what does not concern him, but is appropriately concerned with his disciples. He is not like those spoken of in Proverbs (30:13): “A generation whose eyes are proud.” And, “A man’s dress, and laughter, and his walk, show what he is” (Sir 19:27). Secondly, we should note that Christ did not sit there with his disciples out of laziness; he was looking right at them, teaching them carefully and attracting their hearts to himself: “Then he lifted his eyes to his disciples” (Lk 6:20). Thus we read: Then, when Jesus lifted his eyes. In the mystical sense, our Lord’s eyes are his spiritual gifts; and he lifts his eyes on the elect, i.e., looks at them with compassion, when he mercifully grants these gifts to them: This is what the Psalm asks for: “Look upon me, O Lord, and have mercy on me” (Ps 85:16).

849 Our Lord’s question concerns the feeding of the crowd; so he said to Philip: Where shall we buy bread that these may eat? He assumes one thing and asks about another. He assumes their poverty, because they did not have food to offer this great crowd; and he asks how they might obtain it, saying, Where shall we buy bread that these may eat?

Here we should note that every teacher is obliged to possess the means of feeding spiritually the people who come to him. And since no man possesses of himself the resources to feed them, he must acquire them elsewhere by his labor, study, and persistent prayer: “Hurry, you who have no money, and acquire without cost wine and milk” (Is 55:1). And there follows: “Why do you spend your money,” i.e., your eloquence, “for what is not bread,” i.e., not the true wisdom which refreshes—“Wisdom will feed him with the bread of life and understanding” (Si 15:5)—“and why do you work for what does not satisfy you,” i.e., by learning things that drain you instead of filling you?

850 Our Lord’s intention is given when he says, He said this, however, to test him. Here the Evangelist raises one difficutly in answering another. For we could wonder, why our Lord asked Philip what to do, as though our Lord himself did not know. The Evangelist settles this when he says, for he knew what he would do. But it seems that the Evangelist raises another difficulty when he says, to test him. For to test is to try out; and this seems to imply ignorance.

I answer that one can test another in various ways in order to try him out. One man tests another in order to learn; the devil tests a man in order to ensnare him: “Your enemy, the devil, as a roaring lion, goes about seeking whom he can devour” (1 Pt 5:8). But Christ (and God) does not test us in order to learn, because he sees into our hearts; nor in order to ensnare us, for as we read in James (1:13): “God does not test [i.e., tempt] anyone.” But he does test us that others might learn something from the one tested. This is the way God tested Abraham: “God tested Abraham” (Gn 22:1); and then it says (v 12): “Now I know that you fear God,” i.e., I have made it known that you fear the Lord. He tests Philip in the same way: so that those who hear his answer might be very certain about the miracle to come.

851 Now we have the answer of the disciples. First, the answer of Philip; then that of Andrew (v 8).

852 With respect to the first, note that Philip was slower in learning than the others, and so he asks our Lord more questions: “Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us” (below 14:8). Here, according to the literal sense, Andrew is better disposed than Philip, for Philip does not seem to have any understanding or anticipation of the corning miracle. And so he suggests that money is the way by which they could feed all the people, saying: Two hundred denarii worth of bread would not suffice for each to have a little bit. And since we do not have that much, we cannot feed them. Here we see the poverty of Christ, for he did not even have two hundred denarii.

853 Andrew, however, seems to sense that a miracle is going to take place. Perhaps he recalled the miracle performed by Elisha with the barley loaves, when he fed a hundred men with twenty loaves (2 Kgs 4:42). And so he says, There is a boy here who has five barley loaves. Still, he did not suspect that Christ was going to perform a greater miracle than Elisha: for he thought that fewer loaves would be miraculously produced from fewer, and more from a larger number. But in truth, he who does not need any material to work with could feed a crowd as easily with few or many loaves. So Andrew continues: but what are these for so many? As if to say: Even if you increased them in the measure that Elisha did, it still would not be enough.

854 In the mystical sense, widsom is a symbol for spiritual refreshment. One kind of wisdom was taught by Christ, the true wisdom: “Christ is the power of God, and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24). Before Christ came, there were two other teachings or doctrines: one was the human teachings of the philosophers; the other was the teachings found in the written law. Philip mentions the first of these when he speaks of buying: Two hundred denarii worth of bread would not suffice, for human wisdom must be acquired. Now the number one hundred implies perfection. Thus two hundred suggests the twofold perfection necessary for this wisdom: for there Ire two ways one arrives at the perfection of human wisdom, by experience and by contemplation. So he says, Two hundred denarii worth of bread would not suffice, because no matter what human reason can experience and contemplate of the truth, it is not enough to completely satisfy our desire for wisdom: “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man in his strength, nor the rich man in his riches. But let him who glories glory in this: that he knows and understands me” (Jer 9:23). For the wisdom of no philosopher has been so great that it could keep men from error; rather, the philosophers have led many into error.

It is Andrew who mentions the second kind of teaching [thai of the law]. He does not want to buy other bread, but to feed the crowd with the loaves of bread they had, that is, those contained in the law. And so he was better disposed than Philip. So he says: There is a boy here who has five barley loaves. This boy can symbolize Moses, because of the imperfection found in the state of the law: “The law brought nothing to perfection” (Heb 7:19); or the Jewish people, who were serving under the elements of this world (Gal 4:3).

This boy had five loaves, that is, the teaching of the law: either because this teaching was contained in the five books of Moses, “The law was given through Moses” (above 1:17); or because it was given to men absorbed in sensible things, which are made known through the five senses. These loaves were of barley because the law was given in such a way that what was life-giving in it was concealed under physical signs: for the kernel in barley is covered with a very firm husk. Or, the loaves were of barley because the Jewish people had not yet been rubbed free of carnal desire, but it still covered their hearts like a husk: for in the Old Testament they outwardly experienced hardships because of their ceremonial observances: “A yoke, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Acts 15:10). Further, the Jews were engrossed in material things and did not understand the spiritual meaning of the law: “A veil is over their hearts” (2 Cor 3:15).

The two fishes, which gave a pleasant flavor to the bread, indicate the teachings of the Psalms and the prophets. Thus the old law not only had five loaves, i.e., the five books of Moses, but also two fishes, that is, the Psalms and the prophets. So the Old Testament writings are divided into these three: “The things written about me in the law of Moses, and in the prophets and in the Psalms” (Lk 24:44). Or, according to Augustine, the two fishes signify the priests and kings who ruled the Jews; and they prefigured Christ, who was the true king and priest.

But what are these for so many? for they could not bring man to a complete knowledge of the truth: for although God was known in Judea, the Gentiles did not know him.

855 Next (v 10), the miracle is presented. First, we see the people arranged; secondly, the miracle itself; and thirdly, the gathering of the leftovers. He does two things about the first. First, he shows Christ directing the disciples to have the people recline; secondly, why this was appropriate; and thirdly, he tells us the number of people present.

856 Our Lord told his disciples to arrange the people so that they could eat; thus Jesus says, Make the people recline, i.e, to eat. For as mentioned before, in former times people took their meals lying on couches; consequently, it was the custom to say of those who sat down to eat that they were reclining. In the mystical sense, this indicates that rest which is necessary for the perfection of wisdom. Again, the people are prepared by the disciples because it is through the disciples that the knowledge of the truth has come to us: “Let the mountains receive peace for the people” (Ps 71:3).

857 The character of the place shows why it was convenient that they recline, for There was much grass in the place. This is the literal meaning. In the mystical sense, grass indicates the flesh: “All flesh is grass” (Is 40:6). In this sense it can refer to two things. First, to the teachings of the Old Testament, which were given to a people resting in things of the flesh and wise according to the flesh: “If you are willing, and listen to me, you will eat the good things of the land” (Is 1:19); “The posterity of Jacob dwells in a land of grain, wine and oil” (Dt 33:28). Or, it can refer to one who perceives true wisdom, which cannot be attained without first abandoning the things of the flesh: “Do not imitate this world” (Rom 12:2).

858 There was a. great number of people; thus he says, the men reclined, in number about five thousand. The Evangelist counted only the men, according to the custom in the law, for as mentioned in Numbers (1:3), Moses counted the people who were twenty years and older, without including the women. The Evangelist does the same, because only men can be completely instructed: “We speak wisdom to those who are mature” (1 Cor 2:6); “Solid food is for the mature” (Heb 5:14).

859 Then (v 11), the Evangelist presents the feeding of the crowd. First, we see the attitude of Christ; secondly, the food used; thirldy, that the people were satisfied. As to the attitude of Jesus, both his humility and his giving of thanks are mentioned.

860 We see his humility because he took the bread and gave it to the people. Now although in this miracle Christ could have fed the people with bread created from nothing, he chose to do so by multiplying bread that already existed. He did this, first, to show that sensible things do not come from the devil, as the Manichean error maintains. For if this were so, our Lord would not have used sensible things to praise God, especially since “The Son of God appeared to destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn 3:8). He did it, secondly, to show that they are also wrong in claiming that the teachings of the Old Testament are not from God but from the devil. Thus, to show that the doctrine of the New Testament is none other than that which was prefigured and contained in the teachings of the Old Testament, he multiplied bread that already existed, implying by this that he is the one who fulfills the law and brings it to perfection: “I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it,” as we read in Matthew (5:17).

861 We see that he gave thanks, when he had given thanks. He did this to show that whatever he had, he had from another, that is, from his Father. This is an example for us to do the same. More particularly, he gave thanks to teach us that we should thank God when we begin a meal: “Nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim 4:4); “The poor will eat and be satisfied; and they will praise the Lord” (Ps 21:27). Again, he gave thanks to teach us that he was not praying for himself, but for the people who were there, for he had to convince them that he had come from God. Accordingly, he prays before he works this miracle before them, in order to show them that he is not acting against God, but according to God’s will.

We read in Mark (6:41) that Christ had the apostles distribute the bread to the people. It says here that he distributed it because in a way he himself does what he does by means of others. In the mystical sense, both statements are true: for Christ alone refreshes from within, and others, as his ministers, refresh from without.

862 Their food was bread and fish, about which enough has been said above.

Finally, those who ate were completely satisfied, because they took as much as they wanted. For Christ is the only one who feeds an empty soul and fills a hungry soul with good things: “I will be satisfied when your glory appears” (Ps 16:15). Others perform miracles through having grace in a partial manner; Christ, on the other hand, does so with unlimited power, since he does all things superabundantly. Hence it says that the people had their fill.

863 Now we see the leftovers collected (v 12). First, Christ gives the order; secondly, his disciples obey.

864 The Evangelist says that after the people had eaten their fill, Christ said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that are left over. This was not pretentious display on our Lord’s part; he did it to show that the miracle he accomplished was not imaginary, since the collected leftovers kept for some time and provided food for others. Again, he wanted to impress this miracle more firmly on the hearts of his disciples, whom he had carry the leftovers: for most of all he wanted to teach his disciples, who were destined to be the teachers of the entire world.

865 His disciples obeyed him faithfully; hence he says, They therefore gathered and filled twelve baskets with the leftovers. Here we should note that the amount of food that remained was not left to chance, but was according to plan: for as much as Christ willed was left over, no more and no less. This is shown by the fact that the basket of each apostle was filled. Now a basket is reserved for the work of peasants. Therefore, the twelve baskets signify the twelve apostles and those who imitate them, who, although they are looked down upon in this present life, are nevertheless filled with the riches of spiritual sacraments. There are twelve because they were to preach the faith of the Holy Trinity to the four parts of the world. (Commentary on Chapter Six of the Gospel according to Saint John.)

Modernists such as the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his successor in the presidential seat of conciliar apostasy, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, do not even think in these terms as they are naturalists at heart who are, it would seem, incapable of accepting miracles as such (see, for example, the Novus Ordo Watch analysis of Prevost/Leo’s denial that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ actually cured the man born deaf and mute at Leo XIV Denies Another Miracle, Says Christ Invited the Deaf-Mute to Choose to Speak Again!).

Pseudo-scholars of Sacred Scripture have denied almost everything from God’s creation of Adam from the dust of the earth and Eve from his side—if, course, Adam and Eve even existed as many Modernists contend, to Original Sin, to the parting of the Red Sea, which even Dr. Warren Carroll, the founder of Christendom College and who, though an apologist for the “Second” Vatican Council and for the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo abomination, was no Modernist, claimed was a natural phenomenon, to Our Lord’s consciousness of His Sacred Divinity from the first moment of His Incarnation, to almost all His recorded miracles, up to and including His Resurrection. This denial of the veracity of the Gospels as they have been interpreted by Holy Mother Church for over 1900 years can never come from the authority of the Catholic Church

Fittingly, Saint Augustine of Hippo’s reflection on Our Lord’s miraculous multiplication of the loves and fishes is contained in a set of readings read at Matins on Laetare Sunday each other, and his reflection is quite at odds with that of the lay Augustinian from the South Side of Chicago, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV:

The miracles which our Lord Jesus Christ did were the very works of God, and they enlighten the mind of man by mean of things which are seen, that he may know more of God. God is Himself of such a Substance as eye cannot see, and the miracles, by the which He ruleth the whole world continually, and satisfieth the need of everything that He hath made, are by use become so common, that scarce any will vouchsafe to see that there are wonderful and amazing works of God in every grain of seed of grass. According to His mercy He kept some works to be done in their due season, but out of the common course and order of nature, that men might see them and be astonished, not because they are greater, but because they are rarer than those which they lightly esteem, since they see them day by day.

Or it is a greater miracle to govern the whole universe, than to satisfy five thousand men with five loaves of bread; and yet no man marvelleth at it. At the feeding of the five thousand, men marvel, not because it is a greater miracle than the other, but because it is rarer. For Who is He Who now feedeth the whole world, but He Who, from a little grain that is sown, maketh the fulness of the harvest? God worketh in both cases in one and the same manner. He Who of the sowing maketh to come the harvest, is He Who of the five barley loaves in His Hands made bread to feed five thousand men; for Christ's are the Hands which are able to do both the one and the other. He Who multiplieth the grains of corn multiplied the loaves, only not by committing them to the earth whereof He is the Maker.

This miracle, then, is brought to bear upon our bodies, that our souls may thereby be quickened; shown to our eyes, to give food to our understanding; that, through His works which we see, we may marvel at that God Whom we cannot see, and, being roused up to believe, and purified by believing, we may long to see Him, yea, may know by things which are seen Him Who is Unseen. Nor yet sufficeth it for us to see only this meaning in Christ's miracles. Let us ask of the miracles themselves what they have to tell us concerning Christ for, soothly, they have a tongue of their own, if only we will understand it. For, because Christ is the Word of God, therefore the work of the Word is a Word for us. (Saint Augustine of Hippo, as found in Matins, Divine Office, Laetare Sunday.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s reflection on this Laetare Sunday also emphasized the fact that the Divine Redeemer, Who has died for our sins and has risen from the dead, now feeds the whole world with Himself, the true Manna come down from Heaven:

We are now come to the explanation of another name given to the fourth Sunday of Lent, which was suggested by the Gospel of the day. We find this Sunday called in several ancient documents, the Sunday of the five loaves. The miracle alluded to in this title not only forms an essential portion of the Church’s instruction during Lent, but it is also an additional element of to-day’s joy. We forget for an instant the coming Passion of the Son of God, to give our attention to the greatest of the benefits He has bestowed upon us; for under the figure of these loaves multiplied by the power of Jesus, our faith sees that Bread which came down from heaven, and giveth life to the world. ‘The Pasch,’ says our Evangelist, ‘was near at hand’; and, in a few days, Our Lord will say to us: ‘With desire I have desired to at this Pasch with you.’ Before leaving this world to go to His Father, Jesus desires to feed the multitude that follows Him; and in order to [do] this, He displays His omnipotence. Well may we admire that creative power, which feeds five thousand men with five loaves and two fishes, and in such wise that even after all have partaken of the feast as much as they would, there remain fragments enough to fill twelve baskets. Such a miracle is, indeed, an evident proof of Jesus’ mission; but He intends it as a preparation for something more wonderful; He intends it as a figure and a pledge of what He is soon to do, not merely once or twice, but every day, even to the end of time; not only for five thousand men, but for the countless multitude of believers. Think of the millions, who, this very year, are to partake of the banquet of the Pasch; and yet, He whom we have seen born in Bethlehem (the house of bread) is to be the nourishment of all these guests; neither will the divine Bread fail. We are to feast as did our fathers before us; and the generations that are to follow us, shall be invited, as we now are, to come and taste how sweet is the Lord.

But observe, it is in a desert place, as we learn from St. Matthew, that Jesus feeds these men, who represent us as Christians. They have quitted the bustle and noise of cities in order to follow Him. So anxious are they to hear His words, that they neither hunger nor fatigue; and their courage is rewarded. A little recompense will crown our labours, our fasting and abstinence, which are now half over. Let us, then, rejoice, and spend this day with the light-heartedness of the pilgrims who are near the end of their journey. The happy moment is advancing, when our soul, united and filled with her God, will look back with pleasure on the fatigues of the body, which, together with our heart’s compunction, have merited for her a place at the divine banquet.

The primitive Church proposed this miracle of the multiplication of the loaves as a symbol of the Eucharist, the Bread that never fails. We find it frequently represented in the paintings of the catacombs and on the bas-reliefs of the ancient Christian tombs. The fishes, too, were given together with the loaves, are represented on these venerable monuments of our faith; for the early Christians considered the fish to be the symbol of Christ, because the word ‘fish’ in Greek is made up of five letters, which are the initials of these words: Jesus Christ, Son (of) God, Saviour.

In the Greek Church this is the last day of the week called, as we have already noticed, Mesonestios. Breaking though her rule of never admitting a saint’s feast during Lent, she keeps this mid-Lent Sunday in honour of the celebrated abbot of the monastery of Mount Sinai, St. John Climacus, who lived in the sixth century. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B,, The Liturgical Year: Volume V--Lent, pp. 316-318.)

Let us, then, rejoice! We are children, not of Sina, but of Jersualem. Our mother, the holy Church, is not a bond-woman, but free; and it is unto freedom that she has brought us up. Israel served God in fear; his heart was ever tending to idolatry, and could be kept to duty only by the heavy yoke of chastisement. More happy than he, we serve God through love; our yoke is sweet, and our burden light! We are not citizens of the earth; we are but pilgrims passing through it to our true country, the Jerusalem which is above. We leave the earthly Jerusalem to the Jew, who minds only terrestrial things, is disappointed with Jesus, and is plotting how to crucify Him. We also have too long been groveling in the goods of the world; we have been slaves to sin; and he more the chains of our bondage weighed upon us, the more the chains of our bondage weighed upon us, the more we talked our being free. Now is the favourable time; now are the days of salvation; we have obeyed the Church’s call, and have entered into the practice and spirit of Lent. Sin seems to us now, to be the heaviest of yokes; the flesh, a dangerous burden; the world, a merciless tyrant. We begin to breathe the fresh air of holy liberty, and the hope of our speedy deliverance fills us with transports of joy. Let us, with all possible affection, thank our divine Liberator, who delivers us from the bondage of Agar, emancipates us from the law of fear, and making us His new people, opens to us the gates of the heavenly Jerusalem, at the price of His Blood.

The Gradual expresses the joy felt by the Gentiles, when invited to enter the house of the Lord, which has now become their own. The Tract shows God protected His Church, the new Jerusalem, which is not to be conquered and destroyed as was that first one. This holy city communicates her own stability and security to them that are in her, for the Lord watches over both the mother and the children. Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume V--Lent, pp. 320-321.)

Holy Mother Church is indeed stable, and she provides security, not ceaseless change and uncertainty, to her children. The conciliar “popes” have been agents of Antichrist who have dared to put into question revealed truths and replace them with fables in a manner described by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

The Modernists completely invert the parts, and of them may be applied the words which another of Our predecessors Gregory IX, addressed to some theologians of his time: “Some among you, puffed up like bladders with the spirit of vanity strive by profane novelties to cross the boundaries fixed by the Fathers, twisting the meaning of the sacred text…to the philosophical teaching of the rationalists, not for the profit of their hearer but to make a show of science…these men, led away by various and strange doctrines, turn the head into the tail and force the queen to serve the handmaid.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

As we pray as many Rosaries as possible every day our lives, may Our Lady help us in this month of August, the month of her own Immaculate Heart, to remain ever steadfast in our commitment to the truth while remaining ever reliant upon maternal intercession and protection now, and at the hour of our death.

Our Lady of the Snows, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar, pray for us.

Saint Stephen the Protomartyr, pray for us.

Appendix

Father Francis X. Weninger on the Finding of the Body of Saint Stephen the Protomartyr

After St Stephen, the First Martyr, had been stoned to death by the Jews for having uncontestably proved that Christ, Whom they had Crucified, was the true Messiah, some pious men, filled with deep sorrow, buried him with all due reverence. Foremost among these was St Gamaliel, who had formerly been a rabbi and later a disciple of St Paul. He arranged everything, so that the body of St Stephen was carried, during the night, by some Christians, from the spot in which it lay, to his country-seat, which was a few miles from Jerusalem.

“In the course of time and in consequence of the persecution of the Christians in Juda, the location of his tomb was forgotten, until it pleased the Almighty to reveal it, in the time of the Emperor Honorius. There lived, at that period, in the place where St Stephen was buried, a Priest of the Church of Jerusalem, named Lucian. St Gamaliel appeared to this holy man in his sleep and disclosed to him where the bodies of St Stephen, St Nicodemus, his son St Abibon and his own body, were lying, telling him, at the same time, to inform St John, Bishop of Jerusalem, of this fact and to say that it was the will of God that he should exhume them for the benefit of many men. Lucian awakening and fearing it was but a dream, or perhaps even a delusion from Satan, did not tell the Bishop but humbly prayed to God that, if it were a revelation from on high, He would grant him a repetition of the vision. To this effect, Lucian continued in prayer and fasting for eight days, when Gamaliel again appeared to him and repeated all he had said before.

Lucian did not yet obey but, to be more certain, fasted and prayed eight days more. St Gamaliel appeared to him for the third time and, with a severe countenance, reproving him for not believing his words, commanded him to make the Bishop acquainted with the facts immediately, in order that the faithful might no longer be deprived of the benefits which they would obtain by the intercession of St Stephen and the other Saints.

After this third apparition, Lucian could no longer doubt and, betaking himself to the Bishop of Jerusalem, he communicated to him all that had happened. The joy of the holy Bishop was exceedingly great. He called the Bishops and Priests of the neighbouring Churches and, accompanied by them and a great number of Christians, he went to the place indicated and had the satisfaction of finding four coffins, on which were engraven the names of the Saints abovementioned – St Stephen, St Nicodemus, St Abibon, St.Gamaliel. When the coffins were reverently opened, there issued from them a fragrance as if the place had been filled with blooming flowers.

More than seventy persons, some of whom were sick and others possessed by evil spirits, were instantly restored to health, or relieved of their torments, upon touching the Sacred Relics, especially those of St Stephen. The body of the Protomartyr was carried with great solemnity to Jerusalem, and deposited in the Church of Sion, the oldest and largest Church in that City.

During the reign of Theodosius the Younger, it was transported to Constantinople, and thence to Rome in the reign of Pope Pelagius I. The rearkable discovery of the relics of St Stephen and the miracles, which had been wrought at their touch, were soon known all over the Christian world. The heretics, who, at that time persecuted the Church, were ashamed and the faithful strengthened in the True Faith and animated in their veneration for the Protomartyr.

All Countries and Cities applied for portions of the Relics and many were favoured with them, to the great benefit of the people. Many received only some of the earth in which the holy body had rested; others, a piece of linen which had touched his coffin but, by the pious use of them, as many miracles were wrought as by the relics themselves.

In St Augustine, we have an indisputable witness of this, as he lived at the time of the discovery. Among other things, he tells us, in the twenty second book of the “City of God,” of many great miracles wrought, in his presence, by these relics, in the city of Hippo, of which he was bishop, as also in adjacent Countries. A few of these we will here relate.

A blind woman’s sight was immediately restored, by touching her eyes with a flower, which, at her request, had been laid on the Relics of St Stephen. Lucillus, a Bishop, was cured of a dangerous fistula by devoutly carrying the Sacred Relics. Eucharius, a Priest, arose again to life, when they placed upon his corpse, a tunic which had rested on St Stephen’s body. Two men suffering with gout were cured by the same. A lad who was killed by being run over by a carriage, was not only restored to life, but his broken limbs were healed. A nun who had died, retuned to life and health, when her habit was laid upon her, ,after it had touched the Sacred Relics. Eleusinus placed the corpse of his child upon the spot where the Relics of the Saint had rested, and immediately, the child lived again. Upon the head of Marial, a hardened Jew, his brother-in-law–a Christian–laid a flower, which had been on the Altar near the Relics and the next day the Jew requested to be Baptised. Two sisters, who were afflicted with epilepsy, were instantly cured by these relics. Many other miracles are narrated by St Augustine and he concludes with these words: “If I alone were to relate what I know of the miraculous cures performed by St Stephen at Calama and in its neighbourhood, I should have to write many books and yet, not be able to collect all of them!”

What does a non-Catholic think or say on reading or hearing these and many other things which the holy Fathers have written of the Sacred Relics? He rejects all these histories and accuses St Augustine and other great teachers, of falsehood and superstition. But, if he believes even one of these miracles, how can he, according to the doctrines of his religion, condemn the veneration of Relics and the invocation of the Saints!?” (Father Francis X. Weninger, S.J., Original, Short and Practical Sermons for Every Feast of the Liturgical Year: Three Sermons for Every Feast, published originally by C. J. H. Lowen, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1882.)