1. From the instant Christ died until the Lance-thrust:

(a) In Christ’s dead Body the Person of Mary was whole and entire in both Her Sacramental presences: the most pure Drop of Blood and the Immaculate Particle of Heart. But only Her Flesh and Blood were directly espoused, with the corresponding concomitances, with Christ’s Flesh and Blood. For, because Christ’s Flesh and Blood were separated from His Most Divine Soul, this latter was not present in the Soul of Mary inside the dead Deific Body; and the Soul of Mary, in turn, was not espoused to the Deific Flesh and Blood of Christ. That is to say, within the dead Deific Body there only existed the Espousal of Mary’s Flesh and Blood with the Flesh and Blood of Christ.

(b) In Mary’s physical Person the dead Deific Drop of Blood, the dead Deific Particle of Heart and the Most Divine Soul continued to be enthroned. So that: (1) Christ’s Blood, and in It His Flesh, were espoused with the Blood and Flesh of Mary, but not with Her Soul. (2) Christ’s Flesh, and in It His Blood, were espoused with the Flesh and Blood of Mary, but not with Her Soul. (3) Since the Most Divine Soul was separated from the Deific Flesh and Blood, It continued to be espoused only with Mary’s Soul.

In other words, within Mary’s Person Christ’s Deific Flesh and Blood remained united to each other, but separated from His Most Divine Soul.

(c) Outside the dead Deific Body of Christ the Divine Souls were espoused, not only within Mary’s Person, but also wherever the Most Divine Soul of Christ was to be found; for example, in heavenly glory, in His descent to the Limbo of the Just, etc. In the Most Divine Soul of Christ in heavenly glory, in Limbo, etc., the Person of Mary was whole and entire in Her Divine Soul, present in the Soul of Christ.

(d) Since the Soul of Christ was not eucharistically present under the sacred species of bread in the ciborium of the Cenacle, only His Deific Flesh and Blood continued to be espoused with the Flesh and Blood of Mary; but not with Her Soul, though also eucharistically present.

(e) Since the Soul of Christ was not eucharistically present under the sacred species of wine in the ciborium of the Cenacle, only His Deific Blood and Flesh continued to be espoused with the Blood and Flesh of Mary; but not with Her Soul, though also eucharistically present.

2. From the Lance-thrust until Christ’s Resurrection:

(a) In Christ’s dead Body the Person of Mary was present whole and entire in the Sacrament of the Immaculate Particle of Heart. But only Her Flesh was espoused with His Flesh; for, owing to the separation one from another of Christ’s Flesh, Blood and Soul, neither His Deific Blood nor His Most Divine Soul - not being within His dead Deific Body - were espoused with the Blood and Soul of Mary there present, which, in turn, were not espoused with His Deific Flesh. In other words, within the dead Deific Body there only existed the Espousal of the Flesh of Mary with the Flesh of Christ.

(b) In Mary’s physical Person only Christ’s Deific Particle of Heart and Most Divine Soul, separated from each other, continued to be enthroned. So that: (1) The Flesh of Christ was espoused with the Flesh of Mary, but not with Her Blood and Soul. (2) Christ’s Soul was espoused with Mary’s Soul, but not with Her Blood and Flesh. Within Mary’s physical Person Christ’s Blood was, then, no longer present, and moreover His Deific Flesh was separated from His Most Divine Soul.

(c) Outside the dead Deific Body of Christ the Divine Souls were espoused, not only within the Person of Mary, but also wherever the Most Divine Soul of Christ was to be found; for example, in heavenly glory, etc. In the Most Divine Soul of Christ, in heavenly glory, etc., the Person of Mary was whole and entire in Her Divine Soul, present in the Soul of Christ.

(d) Since neither Christ’s Blood nor Soul were eucharistically present under the sacred species of bread in the ciborium of the Cenacle, only His Deific Flesh continued to be espoused with the Flesh of Mary; but not with Her Blood and Soul, though also eucharistically present.

(e) Since neither Christ’s Flesh nor Soul were eucharistically present under the sacred species of wine in the ciborium of the Cenacle, only His Deific Blood continued to be espoused with the Blood of Mary; but not with Her Flesh and Soul, though also eucharistically present.

3. As concerns the teaching given above it is well to emphasize that since Christ’s Flesh, Blood and Soul were separated one from another: (a) Mary’s Blood was espoused with the Blood of Christ, but not with His Deific Flesh and Soul; (b) Mary’s Flesh was espoused with the Flesh of Christ, but not with His Deific Blood and Soul; (e) Mary’s Soul was espoused with the Soul of Christ, but not with His Deific Flesh and Blood.

4. From the transpiercing of the Most Sacred Hearts until Christ’s Resurrection, the following Espousals continued, though separately: Christ’s Blood with Mary’s Blood, Christ’s Flesh with Mary’s Flesh and Christ’s Soul with Mary’s Soul. However, the three Espousals continued to function in the following manner: (a) In Christ’s dead Body - Christ’s Deific Flesh with Mary’s Immaculate Flesh. (b) In Mary’s physical Person - Christ’s Deific Flesh with Mary’s Immaculate Flesh; and Christ’s Most Divine Soul with Mary’s Divine Soul. (c) In Christ’s Most Divine Soul in heavenly glory - Christ’s Most Divine Soul with Mary’s Soul, (d) In the ciborium of the Cenacle, under the sacred species of bread - Christ’s eucharistic Flesh with Mary’s eucharistic Flesh. (e) In the ciborium of the Cenacle, under the sacred species of wine - Christ’s eucharistic Blood with Mary’s eucharistic Blood.

5. Mary’s Mystical Death: In previous pages we spoke of the two phases of Mary’s Spiritual Death at the foot of the Cross. But the Divine Mary also died mystically. The first phase of Mary’s Mystical Death lasted from the Death of Christ until the Lance-thrust. However, let us now consider in more detail the second phase of Her Mystical Death, which lasted from the Lance-thrust until Christ’s Resurrection. Since Christ’s Flesh, Blood and Soul were separated one from another, the Divine Mary mystically shared in those separations: Mary’s Soul was no longer espoused with Christ’s Blood and Flesh; Mary’s Flesh was no longer espoused with Christ’s Soul and Blood; and Mary’s Blood was no longer espoused with Christ’s Soul and Flesh, Hence, at the separation of Christ’s Soul and Flesh, the Espousal of Mary’s Soul with Christ’s Flesh was sundered; at the separation of Christ’s Soul and Blood the Espousal of Mary’s Soul with Christ’s Blood was sundered; and at the separation of Christ’s Flesh and Blood, the Espousal of Mary’s Blood with Christ’s Flesh and of Mary’s Flesh with Christ’s Blood was sundered. But as we know, Christ and Mary continued to be in Divine Espousal: Soul with Soul, Flesh with Flesh, and Blood with Blood. Accordingly, in Christ’s cadaverous Deific Body the Divine Mary was present physically alive and mystically dead. In Mary’s Person the cadaverous Body of Christ and His Most Divine Soul were present, and at the same time as She was alive physically, mystically She was dead. In the Most Divine Soul of Christ in glory, the Divine Mary was present physically alive and mystically dead. In the ciborium of the Cenacle, under the sacred species of bread, as well as the dead Flesh of Christ, the Divine Mary was also present, eucharistically alive and mystically dead. In the ciborium of the Cenacle, under the sacred species of wine, as well as the dead Blood of Christ, the Divine Mary was also present, eucharistically alive and mystically dead. Mary’s Mystical Death meant profound suffering for Her, from which She was freed for the seven seconds of Her glorious spiritual Resurrection; for, though She remained mystically dead, She did not suffer.

6. The presence of the Espousals of Christ and Mary in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart from Christ’s Death until the Lance-thrust: As ministerial priest Saint John the Evangelist mystically shared in the separation of the Most Divine Soul of Christ from His Deific Flesh and Blood. Therefore the espousals of Christ and Mary with the Apostle’s priestly soul, flesh and blood continued as follows:

(A) Through the presence of the Light in form of a Cross or Most Divine Soul of Christ in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Divine Souls continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s soul, but not with his priestly flesh and blood.

(B) Through the presence of Mary’s Drop of Blood, for the Church, in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Blood of Christ and of Mary continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s blood and flesh, but not with his soul.

(C) Through the presence of the Particle of Christ’s Heart, for the Church, in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Flesh of Christ and of Mary continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s flesh and blood, but not with his soul.

Accordingly the separation of Christ’s Soul from His Deific Flesh and Blood sundered, in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart: the espousal of the Souls of Christ and Mary with the Apostle’s flesh and blood; the espousal of the Blood of Christ and of Mary with the Apostle’s soul; and the espousal of the Flesh of Christ and of Mary with the Apostle’s soul.

Therefore, in Saint John the Evangelist’s mystical priestly heart there continued to be present: (a) the Most Divine Soul of Christ; and separated from It His cadaverous Body espoused with His dead Blood. (b) The Person of Mary, whole and entire, physically alive and mystically dead in the first phase.

As Ministerial Priest, from Christ’s Death until the Lance-thrust, Saint John the Evangelist was physically alive and mystically dead, since he shared in the separation of the Most Divine Soul of Christ from His Deific Flesh and Blood, as also in the first phase of Mary’s Mystical Death.

7. The presence of the Espousals of Christ and Mary in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart from the Lance-thrust until Christ’s Resurrection:

As ministerial priest Saint John the Evangelist also shared mystically in the separation of Christ’s Deific Flesh from His Deific Blood. Therefore the espousals of Christ and Mary with the Apostle’s priestly soul, flesh and blood, continued as follows:

(A) Through the presence of the Light in the form of a Cross or Most Divine Soul of Christ in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Divine Souls continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s soul, but not with his priestly flesh and blood.

(B) Through the presence of Mary’s Drop of Blood, for the Church, in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Blood of Christ and of Mary continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s blood, but not with his priestly soul and flesh.

(C) Through the presence of the Particle of Christ’s Heart, for the Church, in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart, the Flesh of Christ and of Mary continued to be espoused with the Apostle’s flesh, but not with his priestly soul and blood.

Accordingly the separation of Christ’s Soul, Flesh and Blood sundered, in Saint John the Evangelist’s mystical priestly heart: the espousal of the Souls of Christ and Mary with the Apostle’s flesh and blood; the espousal of the Blood of Christ and of Mary with the Apostle’s soul and flesh; and the espousal of the Flesh of Christ and of Mary with the Apostle’s soul and blood.

Therefore, in Saint John the Evangelist’s mystical priestly heart there continued to be present:

(a) The Most Divine Soul of Christ, His cadaverous Deific Body and His dead Deific Blood; but the three elements were separated one from another.

(b) The Person of Mary, whole and entire, physically alive and mystically dead in the second phase

As ministerial Priest, from the Lance-thrust until Christ’s Resurrection, Saint John the Evangelist was physically alive and mystically dead, since he shared in the separation of Christ’s Soul, Flesh and Blood, as also in the second phase of Mary’s Mystical Death.

8. What was said above in sub-sections 6 and 7 about the espousals of Christ and Mary in Saint John’s mystical priestly heart from Christ’s Death until the Lance-thrust and from the Lance-thrust until His glorious Resurrection, applies to the other Apostles, they also being ministerial priests.

It is useful to clarify that, the fact that Saint John was the sole apt minister at the Sacrifice of Calvary, was due to the express disposition of Christ, Who foresaw that the Apostle was the only one able to remain faithful at the foot of the Cross. Despite the fact that the other Apostles were apt ministers because of their priestly ordinations, they did not possess the steadfastness of Saint John to fulfil the mission that was his at the Sacrifice of Calvary. That is why, out of the Eleven, Christ chose Saint John.

9. The presence of the Espousals of Christ and Mary in the faithful in the state of grace: Also, from Christ’s Death until the Lance-thrust and from the Lance-thrust until His glorious Resurrection, the faithful shared in the above-mentioned respective separations of the elements of Christ’s Human Nature in virtue of the presence in their hearts of Mary’s Drop of Blood and of the Particle of Christ’s Heart. But it is appropriate to clarify that though, after Christ’s Death, there remained in the faithful the espousal of the Divine Souls with the soul of each, it was not by any concomitance with Mary’s Drop of Blood or with Christ’s Particle of Heart present in them; for as we know, when Christ died His Most Divine Soul was separated from His Deific Flesh and Blood; and therefore the Soul of Mary was also separated from both the Flesh and the Blood of Christ. Hence after Christ’s Death the permanence of the espousal of the Divine Souls with the souls of the faithful was by virtue of the presence in each heart of the Drop of Mary’s Blood simply as indispensable requirement for the permanence in them of the Espousal of the Divine Souls; and without there being, on that account, any espousal of the Divine Souls either with Christ’s Deific Flesh and Blood or with the flesh and blood of the faithful. Wherefore the whole Church, by participating in the respective separations of the three elements of Christ’s Deific Human Nature, was at the same time alive and mystically dead.

151. On the 6th of June 1990, after the previous point had been approved, at about 9.15 p.m. His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII had the following vision in his cell. He saw the Tabernacle of the Cenacle open, and inside, in the centre, the Most Divine Soul of Christ under the form of a Cross of Most Luminous Fire, situated between the two ciboria reserved there, that which contained the sacred species of bread to the right of the Cross of Fire and that which contained the sacred species of wine to the left. His Holiness explained the vision as follows. When Christ expired, at the same time as His Most Divine Soul left both His Deific Body and the ciboria of the Cenacle, It became present in the Tabernacle of the Cenacle under the form of a Cross of Most Luminous Fire and situated Itself in the middle of the two ciboria without having any contact with the sacred species of bread and wine. In the Cross of Fire he also saw the Soul of Mary, and She whole and entire therein. The presence in the Tabernacle of the Most Divine Soul under the form of a Cross of Fire lasted until Christ rose from the dead.

152. The Palmarian Creed magisterially confesses that from the side of Jesus the Divine Reparator and Redeemer, came forth, cleansed and renewed, the New Church with the Wisdom of the Sacraments. Even though the seven visible Sacraments of Holy Mother Church were instituted by Christ, as already defined, six of them prior to Calvary and one after, namely Confession, nevertheless all were solemnly and officially given to the Mystical Body by the Divine Founder at the very instant that Longinus’ lance transfixed His Deific Side; since from that moment, in which the Church was born and began a life of her own through Priests, Calvary’s most abundant graces are poured out in virtue of Holy Mass and distributed from the Mystical Priestly Heart through each of the Sacraments. In virtue of Christ’s gift of the Sacraments to the Church, she has the power to produce, to confer and to administer them. The Priest then, is the depositary of all graces and their administrator in the name of Christ Who, with the Sacraments, obliged Himself to pour those graces upon the Church necessarily through the Mystical Priestly Heart. Nevertheless Christ’s commitment is accompanied by certain requisites imposed by Him, both for the administrator and for the recipient of the Sacrament, and which affect, as the case may be, the validity of the Sacrament and the reception of the sacramental grace and other graces.

153. We avail ourselves of the opportunity to examine the Sacrament of Matrimony a little more deeply.

To do so it is necessary first to distinguish marriage as a mere natural contract from marriage as a Sacrament, bearing in mind the Apostolic Constitution of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII of the 30th of July 1982.

Natural marriage is that celebrated between unbaptized persons; and also that celebrated between baptized persons who are outside the true Church, as was established in the above mentioned Apostolic Constitution. But marriage as a Sacrament is that proper to the militant faithful of the Mystical Body of Christ. Both in natural marriage validly contracted and in the Sacrament of Matrimony validly contracted, the indissoluble bond between the spouses is produced by the lawful contractual parties themselves when giving their consent in virtue of their being the ministers of their own matrimony.

154. Let us now consider whence there comes to man and to woman the aptness to be able to unite themselves in valid marriage. To do so we must have recourse to the doctrine of the natural priesthood and the common priesthood of the faithful, extensively considered in this Treatise.

(a) When the character of the natural priesthood is impressed by God on each human being at the moment of conception, in virtue of that priesthood both man and woman are constituted apt ministers for uniting themselves, by their own will and consent, in valid natural marriage at some future date.

(b) At the very instant that a human being receives Mary’s Drop of Blood through the Sacrament of Baptism, and the character of the common priesthood is impressed on his soul, at the same time there is effected the espousal of the common priesthood with the natural priesthood. In virtue of that espousal, both baptized man and woman receive, from the Mystical Priestly Heart, the aptness of their ministry for uniting themselves validly, by their own will and consent, in the Sacrament of Marriage at some future date. In other words, by Baptism the ministry of the natural priesthood is raised to the supernatural order, whereby man and woman are thus constituted apt ministers of the Sacrament of their own matrimonial union.

155. But although man and woman, from the moment of Baptism, are apt ministers for the Sacrament of Matrimony, that does not mean they will always be lawful ministers for marriage; since the efficacy of their ministry depends on the peculiar requirements of the Sacrament, as for example the physical development of the contracting parties, the absence of natural and ecclesiastical impediments in them, etc. And as the Sacrament must necessarily be effected in the Mystical Priestly Heart, the efficacy of the ministry of the contracting parties validly to be united indissolubly in marriage comes to them from the Mystical Priestly Heart in virtue of the special increase of Mary’s Drop of Blood in the heart of each, This increase has a twofold purpose: for them to produce the Sacrament efficaciously; and to receive at the same time the sacramental grace. But should, God forbid, one or both contracting parties marry in mortal sin, the reception of Mary’s Drop of Blood by whichever does not possess it is necessary for the efficacy of his or her ministry, and therefore for the creation of the indissoluble marriage bond. The Drop issues from the Mystical Priestly Heart, enters the heart of the contracting party in mortal sin, and immediately after the creation of the indissoluble bond, leaves. It is well to bear in mind that, in the contracting parties, the increase of Mary’s Drop of Blood if possessed, or its reception if not, whereby they efficaciously produce the Sacrament, is effected at the instant of their exchange of consent, with the consequent mutual gift of one to the other. The validity of the Sacrament of Matrimony entails a mystical matrimonial espousal of the contracting parties with Christ and Mary, which espousal is produced by the increase of Mary’s Drop of Blood, or by its reception, as the case may be. This mystical matrimonial espousal is momentary for the spouse or spouses who marry in mortal sin, in which case, as we know, Mary’s Drop of Blood enters the contracting party to render efficacious his or her ministry, and then leaves immediately, all this occurring in an instant. Hence mystical matrimonial espousal with Christ and Mary remains in both spouses if they be in grace, and does not in a spouse in mortal sin. The reception of Mary’s Drop of Blood by the spouse in mortal sin, for the efficacy of his ministry, does not imply his reception of the sacramental grace; but in this case he will receive it through the Sacrament of Confession. Whoever contracts the Sacrament of Matrimony in mortal sin commits a very grave sacrilege, but the marriage is valid.

156. Given then, that the contracting parties are the selfsame ministers of the Sacrament of Marriage, when mutually they accept each other in the presence of the priest as qualified witness, they receive from Christ, through Mary’s Drop of Blood, from the Mystical Priestly Heart, the efficacy of their own ministry to be united as husband and wife in valid canonical marriage. As we know, the bond is not the sacramental grace, for the latter is dependant on the state of grace and upright dispositions of the contracting parties, wherefore it is only received, together with the indissoluble bond, when the ministers fulfil the required conditions. When the spouses are in the state of grace the Sacrament of Matrimony possesses supernatural life. But if one of the partners be in grace and the other be in mortal sin, the Sacrament possesses supernatural life for the former but not for the latter. We do not thereby deny that the indissoluble bond of the Sacrament of Matrimony is of itself supernatural, irrespective of whether or not the spouses are in the state of grace; for the Sacrament of Matrimony is the elevation of the natural marriage contract to the supernatural order. However we clarify that from the Marriage Feast of Cana until the Birth of the Church on Calvary, the aptness and efficacy of the ministry of the Sacrament of Matrimony was received by the contracting parties directly from Christ through Mary.

157. Holy Mother Church’s requirement that, for the Sacrament of Marriage to be valid, it be celebrated in the presence of a Catholic Priest as qualified witness, is not of divine institution; for in the hypothetical event of the Church’s not requiring this observance as a general norm in the future, instances of which have already occurred in history, the contracting parties would still receive the efficacy of their own ministry from the Mystical Priestly Heart. Accordingly, if the contracting parties possess, by reason of their ministry, aptness for marriage, use thereof is subordinate to the Church, for she it is who, in short, when all the requisites for the validity of the Sacrament are fulfilled, renders efficacious that aptness. His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII infallibly defines that: <>. But let it be understood that the priest’s blessing does not pertain to the essence of the Sacrament; for with the blessing he confirms that the indissoluble marriage bond has already been produced.

158. Regarding natural marriage, proper to pagans and apostates, the contracting parties also receive the efficacy of their ministry to be united validly and indissolubly from the Mystical Priestly Heart, but only juridically; since through the character of the natural priesthood in pagans, and the characters of the natural priesthood and of the Sacrament of Baptism in baptized apostates, both groups juridically depend on the authority of the Pope. Hence the power to exercise the natural priesthood comes to every human being, at conception, juridically from the Mystical Priestly Heart. However we make clear that until the Birth of the Church on Calvary, the contracting parties received the aptness and efficacy of the ministry of natural marriage directly from Christ through Mary, according to each historic moment of the Church. In natural marriage husband and wife, respectively, represent Christ and the Church, imperfectly, since they are imperfect ministers of natural marriage.

159. As we know, natural marriage between the unbaptized is raised to the dignity of a Sacrament at the moment the contracting parties receive, at Baptism, Mary’s Drop of Blood. Regarding the other - baptized - apostates, the natural marriage existent between them is raised to the dignity of a Sacrament at the moment they are admitted into the bosom of the Church; and, therefore, even before they receive, through Confession, Mary’s Drop of Blood - by which they receive Sanctifying Grace and their marriage is supernaturally vivified. This Holy Council teaches that the indissoluble marriage bond between a member of the true Church and another outside her, is Sacrament of Marriage for the former and natural marriage for the latter. Therefore, in the event of the apostasy of one of the contracting parties joined in the Sacrament of Matrimony within the true Church, for the apostate the indissoluble marriage bond is reduced to a natural marriage; but for the party that remains within the true Church it continues to be a Sacrament.

160. From the Apostolic Constitution of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII, of the 30th of July 1982, there is gathered the following doctrine: from that day, a member of the Church, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Palmarian who apostatizes for the purpose of marrying an unbaptized or apostate person, specified or unspecified, is not able validly to contract even natural marriage. Hence should such a Palmarian apostate dare to realize any matrimonial ceremony outside the true Church, the marriage will always be invalid and therefore mere concubinage. Accordingly, because of that impediment to marriage deriving from the Apostolic Constitution, whoever has apostatized or whoever apostatizes for the purpose of marrying, whether or not he manifests that purpose, neither has contracted nor will be able to contract a valid marriage outside the Church One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Palmarian: neither with the person whom he might have sought to marry, motive of the Palmarian faithful’s apostasy, nor with any other. In other words, a Palmarian who apostatizes in order to marry is unable to contract a valid natural marriage with any person.

161. It is well to examine the doctrine of sacramental grace a little more. For the reception of this grace in each Sacrament, the validity of the same and the recipient’s good personal dispositions are absolutely necessary. Within the concept of sacramental grace we must distinguish: (1) The sanctifying or ordinary sacramental grace, namely Mary’s Drop of Blood or Christ’s Particle of Heart, as the case may be, received by the subject. If the subject already possesses one or other Singular Sacrament, the grace is an increase of the same. For in the Drop of Blood and in the Particle of Heart, there is received the Holy Ghost, Who is Sanctifying Grace itself. (2) The specific sacramental grace, or properly speaking, the particular divine assistance given to the subject to enable him holily to fulfil both the obligations proper to the Sacrament and the other Christian duties of his state. The supernatural strengthening implied by the specific sacramental grace comes to the subject with the reception of Mary’s Drop of Blood or Christ’s Particle of Heart, or the increase of either as the case may be. (3) Within the concept of sacramental grace we must also take into account actual graces, which are transitory helps that also lead to the attainment of the Sacrament’s ends. These actual graces do not always depend on the good or bad dispositions of the subject, though to a considerable extent they do. Sanctifying sacramental grace, and therefore the specific sacramental grace of each of the Sacraments, is received by the subject by virtue of the Sacrament itself (ex opere operate), irrespective of the good or bad personal dispositions of the minister; though it is necessary that the recipient of the Sacrament possess the conditions indispensable for the reception of the sacramental grace.

162. In regards to the Sacrament of Confession, we should now consider: that at the Birth of the Mystical Body of Christ on Calvary, with the Sacrament of Confession as yet not instituted, the grace of the Sacrament was given to the Church in the person of Saint John, in order for it even then to be dispensed to the militant faithful through the Mystical Priestly Heart. This grace was given to the militant faithful only by means of perfect contrition, until the Sacrament of Penance was instituted - following Christ’s Resurrection - -and later put into practice.