To James the Greater he assigned Spain, as the Lord Himself had already manifested personally to the Apostle. He set out on his journey on the 20th of August of the year 35 and was accompanied by eight presbyter disciples belonging to the official 72, namely Elpidius and the seven Apostolic Missionaries.
He reminded John that his mission was to care for the Most Holy Virgin Mary and to accompany Her where She went. After the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, John as we know preached in Asia Minor and other places until his exile to the island of Patmos, whence he was taken up to the Planet of Mary.
He commanded Andrew to evangelize eastern Europe, namely the Ukraine, Rumania, Hungary, Bulgaria, European Turkey, Yugoslavia, Albania and finally Grecce. Andrew left the Cenacle for that mission on the 22nd of September of the year 35.
Philip was sent to Asia Minor. The date of his departure was the 15th of September of the year 35.
Bartholomew was assigned to Persia and Armenia. He set out on his journey on the 21st of September of the year 35.
He assigned Matthew to Ethiopia. The date of his departure was the 16th of September of the year 35.
Thomas was appointed to India. He left on the 29th of September of the year 35.
James the Less remained at Jerusalem as the bishop of that diocese, Pope Peter being the Patriarch of the city.
He entrusted Judas Thaddaeus with the evangelization of southern Mesopotamia, today Iraq. His departure from the Cenacle was on the 17th of September of the year 35.
Simon the Cananean was assigned Egypt. He left on the 23rd of September of the year 35.
To Matthias he entrusted the evangelization of what is today Saudi Arabia, and likewise that of other bordering regions. The departure date was the 26th of September of the year 35.
Peter moreover directed that each missionary Apostle be accompanied by several disciples; these did not belong to the official 72, except for Elpidius and the seven Apostolic Missionaries who accompanied James the Greater.
Though this was the distribution of the territories in which the Apostles were to evangelize, in practice their mission was not limited only to the allocation made by Peter, since in time they extended their field of apostolate in keeping with the opportunities they had and according to the inspirations they received from God. The Mystical Doctor of Agreda adds, as we interpret, that when Peter finished speaking, the Holy Ghost manifested Himself to them with a mighty clap of thunder and singular brightness, and Christ’s voice was heard to say: «Let each accept his assignation», at which the different Apostles, prostrate on the ground, rendered unanimous acceptance. At this submission to the divine will they were very specially strengthened for the difficult mission entrusted to them, which would be filled with danger, labour and fatigue, though they would not lack special charisms. Before leaving for their respective destinations, the Apostles once again visited the places sanctified by the Passion and Death of the Lord, and then took their leave of His Most Holy Mother, receiving Her counsel and blessing. After the nine Apostles sent to evangelize had departed for their different missions on the abovementioned dates, Pope Peter, accompanied by the Apostle John, took to making a visit of the Christian communities in Palestine and adjacent regions, to strengthen them in the Faith. On the occasion of this visit Peter consecrated bishop many of the disciple presbyters, and also conferred the presbyterate on many of the disciple deacons; both groups belonged to the 72 official disciples.
29. It behoves us, however, to give some details of James the Greater’s labours in Spain. Accompanied by Elpidius and the seven Apostolic Missionaries, on the 20th of August of the year 35 James left the Cenacle of Jerusalem for the port of Jaffa, by present-day Tel-Aviv, availing himself of the joumey to preach the Gospel through that part of Palestine. Then they embarked at Jaffa for the journey to Spain, and after coming to the Spanish south coast navigated the Guadalquivir to reach the river port of Seville on the 12th of October of that year 35, when they began to spread the seed of the Gospel through that city. During his stay in Seville, James was visited several times by the Queen of the Apostles, Who at the same time was still to be seen in the Cenacle of Jerusalem. First to be converted in Seville by the Apostle’s preaching was a Sevillian sculptor whose workshop was located between Puebla and Coria del Rio, and who was baptized receiving the name Pius. After converting Pius, in Seville the Apostle James also converted Severus who was from Utrera (Seville province), next Fermin a native of Pamplona (Navarre province), and then Theodorus, born in Padron (Corunna province). These four converts and the eight disciples who had come with him from Jerusalem accompanied James in his travels throughout Spain. The second city he visited was Cordoba. The Apostle then went to Granada, where he had to bear serious persecutions from the Jewish communities there. But in these sufferings he was comforted by a visit that the Most Holy Virgin Mary made to him in that city on the 2nd of January 36, at the place now known as Sacromonte, where She miraculously left the impress of Her most pure footprint. At this place of apparition James consecrated bishops the eight disciples who had come with him from Jerusalem, and conferred the diaconate, presbyterate and episcopate on the four he had converted in Seville. In his evangelizing labours the Apostle James covered the greater part of the Iberian Peninsula, formed of Spain and Portugal, and was on many further occasions encouraged by appearances of the Most Holy Virgin Mary. But it was in Zaragoza that the Queen of Heaven appeared more solemnly to the Apostle, on the 2nd of January of the year 40; given that, besides comforting him in his tribulations due to the difficulty of the apostolate, She made him the grand promise that the Faith of Christ would triumph in Spain, in which nation it would always perdure; and at the same time She commanded him there to erect, on the banks of the Ebro, a temple in Her honour. The twelve who accompanied James were present at that apparition. After the Virgin’s apparition, in Zaragoza James assigned to the twelve bishops accompanying him their respective dioceses: to Elpidius, Toledo; to Abenadar Ctesiphon, Vergi (Almeria province); to Torquatus, Guadix (Granada province); to Secundus, Avila; to Indaletius, Pechina (Almeria province); to Cecilius, Granada; to Esichius, Cadiz; to Euphrasius, Andujar (Jaen province); to Pius, Seville; to Severus, Utrera (Seville province); to Fermin, Pamplona (Navarre province); and to Theodorus, Padron (Corunna province). Pius, who had in Zaragoza seen the image of the Virgin of the Pillar brought by the angels upon the column, made a reproduction of it in Seville, and under that title proclaimed Her Patron of the City, erecting in Her honour a chapel, which was the first Sevillian cathedral; and from then on the Virgin of the Pillar was always Patroness of Seville. We gave some other details of the Most Holy Virgin’s visit to Zaragoza in the previous chapter when we spoke of the column at which Our Lord Jesus Christ was scourged. But it is well to make clear that, as far as concerns these last times, the Most Holy Virgin’s promise to the Apostle Saint James that the Faith of Christ would always exist in Spain is at present fulfilled in the Sacred Place of El Palmar de Troya, See of the true Church, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Palmarian, governed by His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII. This is proof of the very singular predilection the Most High continues to have for Spain, since from El Palmar she continues her mission of upholding the Faith in these chaotic times of universal apostasy. We see how in El Palmar de Troya, Divine Providence prepared as bulwark of the Catholic Faith the invincible column of the Lentisco, where the Holy Face of Jesus and the image of Our Crowned Mother of El Palmar preside, in view of the spiritual ruin of the Pillar of Zaragoza, now converted into an instrument of propagation of the heresies of the Rornan Church. Hence the Most Holy Virgin’s promise to the Apostle James is fulfilled, as far as concerns these last times, in the Sacred Place of El Palmar de Troya.
30. It is time now to speak of the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, afterwards the apostle Paul, an episode which Saint Luke relates three times in the Acts of the Apostles: in chapter IX, according as was told him by the Apostle himself, in chapter XXII, as the Evangelist heard it when Paul spoke to the Jews in Jerusalem and in chapter XXVI, from what Paul told Saint Luke after the Apostle’s appearance before King Agrippa. But let us give some details of Paul’s life previous to his conversion, taking as our basis, amongst other sources, the Acts of the Apostles. In chapter XXII of the sacred Book, Saint Luke gives us Paul’s words when he spoke to the Jews in Jerusalem: «I am a Jew, born at Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the truth ofthe Law of the fathers, zealous for the Law, as also all you are this day» (Acts XXII, 3). In chapter XXVI, in his defence before King Agrippa Saint Paul says: «And the life indeed I led in Jerusalem among my own nation from the start of my youth, all the Jews do know: having known me, from my beginnings (if they will give testimony), that according to the most sure sect of our religion, I lived a pharisee» (Acts XXVI, 4-5). Paul, a descendant of the Tribe of Benjamin, was born in the year 4 of the Christian era at Tarsus in Cilicia, in the south of present-day Asian Turkey. His parents were natives of Galilee. At the age of 15, after his preliminary studies in the town of his birth, he was taken to Jerusalem by his father to complete his education in the Law, becoming a pupil of the most famous school of the time, directed by the Sanhedrist Gamaliel, later a disciple of the Lord. Saul lived in Jerusalem until the year 28 of the Christian era, when he returned to Tarsus at the age of 24. The Apostle, always so outspoken in his narratives, nevertheless makes no mention of having known Jesus personally before He appeared to him on the road to Damascus. On the one hand - knowing the Apostle’s passionate temperament, and above all the humble confession that in his writings he makes of his past life - if he had personally seen or heard Jesus Christ it is certain that at some stage Paul would have said so, in order to stress the more his former perverse attitude towards Christianity and the irresistible power of grace that obtained his conversion. On the other hand, in the Epistles themselves and in some biographies of him, it is seen that despite his intense apostolic life Paul suffered from poor health; and even from some physical defects, for example bowleggedness and very short stature. This Holy Council teaches that in the year 28, when Saul was returning to Tarsus from Jerusalem after concluding his studies, he suddenly fell from his horse and seriously injured his legs; and his physical activity was greatly reduced for six years, and restricted to life at home. Hence we see how the learned Saul, whose training in Judaism would have won him high posts in the synagogues and fame and prestige in the then academic city of Tarsus and even a place in the Sanhedrin, during his convalescence at home devoted himself to teaching the Law of Moses to the youth of the city, combining that office with the craft of tent-making that, as follows from the Acts of the Apostles (Acts XVIII, 3), he was familiar with. In this way God preserved him from becoming tainted by the corruption, the hypocrisy and the duplicity of the perverse levitical hierarchs, that would have led Paul to fall into the same irreparable obstinacy as theirs. During Christ’s Public Life, Saul in Tarsus received somewhat ambiguous reports of His teachings and miracles, but did not attach much importance to it all, deeming that it was a case of yet one more sectarian who would fall of his own accord. About the year 34, Saul had almost recovered from the physical affliction that had impeded all normal activity. Though on medical advice he should still not have gone to Jerusalem, he did so in November of the year 34, availing himself of the feast of the Dedication, for he was deeply disturbed by the alarimng reports that reached Tarsus of the Death of Christ, His Resurrection, and the Pentecost upon the Apostles, with the consequent progress of Christianity that Saul, given his fanatical adherence to Judaism, deemed an implacable enemy of the Law of Moses. That is why Saul, until his conversion, had a completely false concept of Christ, as he himself says in thc First Letter to Timothy: «Who before was a blasphemer and a persecutor and contumelious. But I obtained mercy of God, because I did it out of ignorance in unbelief» (I Tim. I, 13); since also, when converted, he would say of himself in his discourse to Agrippa: «And I indeed did formerly think that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. Which also I did at Jerusalem» (Acts XXVI, 9-10a). In other words Saul, completely convinced that Judaism was the truth, persecuted the Christians, taking them to be destructive of the Law of Moses, and therefore believing that with his attitude he was serving God. But the ignorance in unbelief of which Saul speaks, though no pretence, could have been overcome had it not been for his fanaticism, rashness and indiscreet zeal. In this sense his ignorance was partly blameworthy and cause of his combating Christ’s Church until his conversion was wrought.
31. The revelations of Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda contain a mysterious passage that it is well to clarify. The Mystical Doctor says that Lucifer tried to induce Saul to attempt single-handed to take the life of all the Apostles and to do likewise with Mary Most Holy. But she adds that Saul felt great horror at the thought of killing the Most Blessed Lady, «because, having seen Her so composed and constant in the labours and Passion of Christ, She seemed to him a great Lady and worthy of veneration, and thus he had some compassion for Her sorrows and afflictions, which all knew She had suffered in very high degree. Hence he gave no admittance to the inhuman suggestions of the demon against Mary Most Holy. This compassion for Her labours hastened not a little the conversion of Saul». In the light of this passage we teach that Annas and Caiphas, thoroughly alarmed at the spread of Christianity in Jerusalem and other places, began to realize that it was all due to the intervention of the Mother of Jesus. Although the two High Priests, during the Passion of Christ, did not even attempt to lay hands on His Most Blessed Mother, this was because the satanic fury of both was centred mainly on the Son of God; and they thought that after his Death His followers would scatter and His work would thus be destroyed. That is why, when the two iniquitous High Priests saw that after Christ’s Death the Christians multiplied ever more, they then centred their diabolical plans against Mary Most Holy, for they knew that because of Her, Christianity made ever greater progress. But despite all this, because of a mysterious and irresistible fear, they dared not act directly against the Mother of Jesus but had recourse to Saul, for they hoped that because of his fanaticism and intrepidity he would not scruple to put an end to Her Whom the Christians acknowledged as their Mother, and by Whom they were exceedingly strengthened and protected. Notwithstanding his impetuous and decisive nature, Saul restrained his initial impulse in order to consider the case with the required prudence. If on the one hand he thought that to do away with the Mother of Jesus would completely undo the work of Christianity, on the other hand he inwardly felt something very strange that held him back from such a crime. It came to pass that in December of the year 35, When nine of the Apostles had already left to preach the Gospel throughout the world, on a day that found Saul deeply concerned at the Sanhedrin’s perverse plans against the Most Holy Virgin Mary, during the night he had a dream about the mystery of Calvary in which, to the right of a Man ignominiously crucified and dead, he saw His afflicted Mother, upon Whom he specially fixed his attention. Saul was so moved by the contemplation of that deeply sorrowing and at the same time patient and composed Woman, that he completely refrained from executing the Sanhedrin’s plans against so worthy a Lady, for thus must be interpreted the passage from the Mystic of Agreda. We add that, to free himself from the pressure which Annas and Caiphas continually placed on him to do away with the Most Holy Virgin Mary, Saul determined to abandon Jerusalem as soon as possible and to continue his furious persecution of the Christians elsewhere. That was the main reason for his heading to Damascus, on the road to which he was to be converted when, at the Divine Mother’s request, Christ appeared to him. Hence we see that because of his compassion for the Most Holy Virgin Mary, Saul obtained mercy from Her Divine Son. From the revelations of Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda we select the following teaching, duly interpreted. The Mystic says that since Mary Most Holy besought Her Divine Son for Saul’s conversion as remedy for the terrible persecution of the Christians, the Lord answered Her: `My Mother, how shall My justice be satisfied if in My mercy I show clemency to Saul when he deserves My just indignation and punishment for his unbelief and evil-doing, giving heart to My enemies in order to destroy My Church and blot My Name from the earth?’ The Mystical Doctor adds that the Most Holy Virgin Mary, as solicitous Advocate of sinners, appealed before the selfsame tribunal of the Most Righteous Onlybegotten of God, pleading the infinite sufferings of Her Divine Son on Calvary and Her own sufferings at the foot of the Cross in favour of Saul’s conversion. During this plea on Saul’s behalf, the fire of charity in Her became so ardent that it would have sufficed to consume Her natural life if the Lord Himself had not preserved Her by His divine power. And as Her Son could not resist the force of the maternal love that wounded His Mother’s Immaculate Heart, He consoled Her, yielding to Her prayers saying: `My Mother, chosen among all creatures, let Your will be done without delay. I will do with Saul all that You ask, and will so change him that from here onwards he will be a defender of the Church he persecutes, and a preacher of My Name and glory. I will now reduce him to My grace and friendship’. This most beautiful and mysterious colloquy between the benevolent Jesus and His solicitous Mother took place at the Cenacle of Jerusalem on the 22nd of January of the year 36, the day Saul left the palace of the perfidious High Priests to set out for Damascus.
32. Saul of Tarsus’ conversion is related, as we said, in chapters IX (3-11), XXII (6-11) and XXVI (12-18) of the Acts of the Apostles, sacred texts that complement one another. As we have seen, during all of the year 35 the Christians of Jerusalem lived under the threats and persecutions of the Sanhedrin, whose instrument was Saul. Though Saul was to leave the city to avoid having to make an attempt on the Most Holy Virgin Mary’s life, not on that account did he desist in his implacable persecution of the Christians, as is expressed, as we interpret, in the following verses of the Acts of the Apostles: «And Saul, as yet breathing out threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the High Priest and asked of him letters to the synagogues of Damascus: that whoever he found professing the faith of Christ, men and women, he might bring bound to Jerusalem» (Acts IX, 1-2); furthermore, in chapter XXII Saul says of himself that he «persecuted this way unto death, binding and delivering into prison both men and women, as the High Priest bears me witness and all the ancients. From whom also receiving letters to my fellow Jews, I went to Damascus, that I might bring the followers of Christ bound from thence to Jerusalem to be punished» (Acts XXII, 4-5). And in chapter XXVI, mention is also made of the plenary powers given to Saul by the Sanhedrin to act against the Christians, for Paul says of himself: «Whereupon, when I was going to Damascus with authority and commission of the Chief Priest...» (Acts XXVI, 12). As is seen in the sacred texts, after speaking of his persecution of the Christians in Jerusalem, Saul says that he bore documents from the Sanhedrin accrediting him before the Jewish authorities in Damascus, for them in turn to secure from King Aretas’ representative in that city permission to persecute the Christians there, and as well to bring captive to Jerusalem those that had fled thence some time before on the occasion of Saul’s persecution. Coordinating the three chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, we narrate, according to our interpretation, the episode of Saul’s conversion. On Friday the 25th of January of the year 36, when Saul, on the road to Damascus, was in the neighbourhood of the village of El Kockab, some 12 km. from that city, at 12 o’clock midday he was startled by a great clap of thunder and a flash of lightning, and saw in the heavens an inmense light whose brilliance far outshone the sun, and which suddenly enveloped him and those accompanying him, so frightening them - the horses included - that all were hurled to the ground. At the very moment the intrepid persecutor found himself on the ground he heard a voice «in the Hebrew tongue» (Acts XXVI, 14) «saying to him: Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?» (Acts IX, 4), which should be understood as having been in Hebrew Aramaic and that he, lifting up his eyes to where the voice came from saw only the heavenly light, wherefore he asked: «Who are You, Lord?» (Acts IX, 5a). After Saul’s question, Christ in majesty and glory appeared to him and answered: «I am Jesus of Nazareth, Whom you persecute» (Acts XXII, 8b), «it is hard for you to resist the might of My power» (Acts IX, 5b). By these last words Jesus gave Saul to understand that: (a) his resolution to destroy the Church was futile, since she is imperishable; (b) He offered him sufficient grace to know the Gospel truth and to be able to correspond through sincere conversion; (c) he was called to a lofty mission in the Church he was persecuting, a vocation he should accept since his eternal salvation depended on it. The words of Christ so deeply penetrated Saul’s heart that he freely accepted the grace offered to him, firmly believing that Jesus was the Onlybegotten of God. Wherefore, with perfect sorrow for his sins he interiorly besought pardon for them, there now being conferred on him Sanctifying Grace when in his soul he received Mary’s Drop of Blood; he was then lost in beatific vision, confirmed in the Faith and allowed to fathom many divine mysteries. This vision of the essence of the Trinity lasted three seconds, though when ended Saul still saw Jesus in majestic apparition. That was when «he, trembling and astonished, said: Lord, what will You have me do?» (Acts IX, 6). For Saul’s most prompt and generous correspondence, the Good Master revealed to him more explicitly the mystery of his vocation in the Church, as is seen in the sacred text: «But rise up and stand upon your feet: for to this end have I appeared to you, that I may make you a minister and a witness of those things which you have seen and of those things wherein I will appear to you, delivering you from the people and from the nations unto which now I send you: to open their eyes, that they may be converted from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness for their sins and a lot among the saints, by the faith that is in Me» (Acts XXVI, 16-18). As we interpret, Christ told Saul to arise now a new man, prepared to serve Him and to defend His holy cause, for that is the meaning of the words: «But rise up and stand upon your feet», and that He had appeared to him on the road to Damascus to make him His Minister, and in order that he should be a witness of the mysteries he had seen now in that apparition, and of those he was to be shown in future apparitions; and moreover, that by the grace of conversion He had withdrawn him from the apostasy of the Jewish People and preserved him from the paganism of the Gentiles; and that He, Christ, now sent him both to the Jewish People and to the Gentiles so that, reproving them for the error of their ways, they might obtain conversion, forgiveness for their sins and eternal salvation. As Saul was still prostrate on the ground while listening to these words, when the Lord finished speaking He said: «Arise and go into the city (of Damascus); and there it shall be told you what you must do» (Acts IX, 7); Saul thereby understanding that he must put himself in the hands of the Church’s ministers and submit to her Supreme Authority. Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda very correctly says, as we interpret, that at the moment of his conversion Saul was made aware that this grace had come to him partly through the prayers said for him by Saint Stephen at his martyrdom, and particularly through the intercession of the Most Holy Virgin Mary, Who through Her prayers had hastened the happy moment; and, moreover, that from then on Saul was ever grateful for so motherly a concern, and was filled with intimate affection and veneration for the great Queen of Heaven.
33. We interrupt our consideration of the Acts of the Apostles with respect to Saul’s conversion in order to make the appropriate clarifications concerning the doctrine of grace, taking into account the following dogmatic Definitions of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII: «It is infallible doctrine that in the order of the economy of grace from Calvary until the implantation of the Messianic Kingdom, efficacious grace is that sufficient grace, of greater or lesser degree, which produces the effect desired by God, in virtue of the free and sovereign acceptance by the recipient; for example the immense grace received by Saint Paul on the road to Damascus»; «it is infallible doctrine that in the order of the economy of grace from Calvary until the implantation of the Messianic Kingdom, inefficacious grace is that sufficient grace, of greater or lesser degree, which does not produce the effect desired by God, in virtue of the free and sovereign rejection by the recipient; for example the immense grace received by Annas, Caiphas and three of the most perverse Chief Priests after Christ’s Resurrection»; for as we know, the glorious risen Christ, at the right hand of the Father, appeared to them all to give them a most special opportunity of conversion, which they also rejected. Sufficient grace is an actual grace of greater or lesser degree, in the sense that God gives to each what he requires in order to be saved: some require less help, others more, and to all is given sufficient to attain to salvation; though for greater correspondence to graces received, a greater superabundance of graces will be given. So that a sufficient grace may produce the effect desired by God, that is, so that it may be an efficacious grace, man’s free and sovereign correspondence is absolutely necessary. Therefore, since God respects human liberty, and man is free to choose salvation or condemnation, a sufficient grace never implies complete or partial limitation of free will; though as we know, since the life of grace increasingly supenaturalizes human acts, it ever better disposes man to follow more readily the path to salvation. Therefore, without man’s free and sovereign cooperation, a sufficient grace does not become an efficacious grace, since it does not produce the effect desired by God; in other words, when man freely and sovereignly rejects a sufficient grace, this for him is an inefficacious grace. Among other examples we cite here that of the thieves St. Dismas and Gestas who died beside Christ on Calvary itself. Both were given sufficient grace for their conversion, and to Gestas in even greater degree, he being less disposed to accept salvation; and despite all, he rejected it. So Saint Dismas, in virtue of his free and sovereign acceptance of the sufficient grace he received, was saved, whereas Gestas, in virtue of his free and sovereign rejection of the sufficient grace he received, was condemned. Hence in Saint Dismas we see an example of sufficient grace become efficacious grace, and in Gestas an example of sufficient grace become inefficacious grace. As to Saul on the road to Damascus, he was there given for his conversion nothing other than sufficient grace in the degree that he required it, which he freely and sovereignly accepted. Though it is true that the sufficient grace given to Saul was accompanied by portentous signs, this was because he needed all those signs in order, freely and willingly, to be converted and accept the divine designs on him, without his free will being for that reason in any way diminished; nor the grace’s being so irresistible as to force him to accept conversion. For we teach, besides, that Saul’s acceptance of God’s will on the road to Damascus was for him an heroic act, since it entailed preaching afterwards in favour of Christianity, openly confronting the Sanhedrin and its henchmen, laying aside his personal pride, suffering loss of prestige before the Jews, as likewise persecution by them and many other hardships. These teachings settle once and for all the doctrinal tendencies, none correct, of the various theological schools concerning efficacious grace.
34. Continuing our narrative of Saint Paul’s conversion, we go on to teach that those accompanying him on the journey to Damascus, though contemplating in astonishment the most luminous radiance that surrounded all of them, neither saw Jesus nor heard His voice directly, as we interpret from the following text: «And they that were with me saw indeed the light: but they heard not the voice of Him that spoke with me» (Acts XXII, 9); that is, they heard not Christ’s own voice; since in another text Saint Luke, referring to the same passage of Saul, says: «The men who went in company with him stood amazed, hearing indeed a voice but seeing no man» (Acts IX, 7); that is to say, that although those with Saul did not hear Christ’s own voice, they did hear from the convert seer’s lips the repetition of what Christ was saying to him; wherefore they all heard the dialogue between Christ and Saul. The apparent contradiction between the two sacred texts is thus clarified. At l2.15p.m. «Saul arose from the ground and when his eyes were opened he saw nothing» (Acts IX, 8a), since the mysterious force of the heavenly light had miraculously blinded him. Those accompanying him took him by the hand to Damascus and led him to an acquaintance of theirs named Judas, who had an inn on the street called Straight. There the sightless Saul remained three days, neither eating nor drinking, plunged in profound reflections, in most lofty prayer and sorrow for his sins. In his penitential retreat, Saul came to have such a sentiment of wretchedness and unworthiness for so great a grace received from the infinite mercy of God, that his sorrow for having persecuted Our Lord Jesus Christ might even have brought his life to an end had he not been greatly comforted by the Divine Mary, Who to that end appeared to the afflicted convert to console him in his dark night and assure him that both Her Divine Son and She had forgiven him. Besides, the most sweet Lady promised Her matemal protection to Saul in the apostolic mission he was to carry out; a mission for which Saul, in view of his human frailty, felt powerless.
35. In verses 10-18 of chapter IX of the Acts of the Apostles, and in verses 12-16 of chapter XXII, as he continues to narrate Saul’s conversion, Saint Luke speaks of the part played by Ananias, one of the 72 official disciples who as bishop had been designated to the mission at Damascus to shepherd the Christian faithful living there. As we see in the sacred texts, Jesus appeared to the disciple so that he should go and search for Saul, who in turn was praying at the inn on Straight street and in vision anticipatedly contemplated Ananias seeking him out and imposing his hands on him to restore his sight; for we teach that in prayer Saul besought to be freed of his blindness as soon as possible in order to labour for Christ’s cause. We see in the sacred text that Ananias, after Christ had dispelled his fears concerning Saul, known to all as a fanatical persecutor, went in search of him «and entered into the house. And laying his hands upon him, he said: Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus has sent me, He that appeared to you in the way as you came, that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it were scales: and he received his sight» (Acts IX, 17-18). After announcing to the new convert the mission he should fulfil in the Church, Ananias exhorted him duly to prepare for it, saying: «And now why do you tarry? Rise up and be baptized and wash away your sins, invoking His Name» (Acts XXII, 16), that is, Christ’s. Saul, who was kneeling before Ananias, «rising up..., was baptized» (Acts IX, 18) then by him; this taking place that very day, Monday the 28th of January of the year 36, as we shall see. We complete the narrative of the sacred text with the following teaching: as we know, through Saul’s perfect contrition when he saw Christ on the road to Damascus, all his sins had been forgiven him, and so had already had them washed away by virtue of his reception of Mary’s Drop of Blood, bearer of Christ’s Blood, which conferred on him the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. Although at the moment of his conversion Saul received in advance the privilege of the grace proper to the Sacrament of Baptism, nonetheless he was still bound to the rite of the Sacrament from the hands of a minister of the Church, in this case Ananias. Wherefore Ananias, though knowing by divine inspiration that Saul’s soul was already cleansed of all fault, obliged him to submit to the rite of the Sacrament, in order that there be manifested officially his entry into the Church, and that his sins had been forgiven - for thus must be interpreted the words «be baptized and wash away your sins» (Acts XXII, 16). We make clear that after the institution of the Sacrament of Baptism by Christ, whoever by a special privilege received in advance, through perfect contrition, the grace proper to the Sacrament, received all that goes with the Sacrament; as, among other possible cases, were those of Dismas, Longinus and Saul. As it was Saul’s express desire to render public testimony of his submission to Christ’s doctrine, of which he was deemed the implacable persecutor, he requested Ananias that the rite of Baptism be performed in the sight of the people of Damascus. To that end they headed for a channel of the river Barada, where not only was Saul baptized receiving the name Paul, but also all those that had been present at the moment of his conversion on the road to Damascus. Ananias then administered the Sacrament of Confirmation to Paul, who received the plenitude of the Holy Ghost or greater operation of the Most Divine Paraclete, as well as certain extraordinary charisms, for thus must be understood the expression, «and be filled with the Holy Ghost» (Acts IX, 17). Ananias then confirmed also those accompanying Paul. It is well to point out that when Paul, according to the transcription of his words made by Saint Luke in verse 12 of chapter XXII, says, «And one Ananias, a man according to the Law, having testimony of all the Jews who dwelt there» (Acts XXII, 12), it indicates that the disciple of Christ was a just and upright man according to the law of God, as was testified by his virtues, acknowledged not only by Christians, but also by the Jews themselves. In verse 19 of chapter IX of the Acts of the Apostles that we are interpreting, after narrating Paul’s baptism we read that «when he had taken meat, he was strengthened» (Acts IX, 19a), which must be understood not merely in the material sense - he not having taken food or drink for three days - but above all in the sense of a spiritual invigoration; for we teach that after Ananias had administered the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation to Paul and his entourage, they all went to the missionary bishop’s cbapel in Damascus, where Ananias celebrated Holy Mass and gave Holy Communion to the neophytes. After Baptism Paul stayed with Ananias a little over three months, listening to his teaching and becoming strengthened by the Sacraments and the good example of the other Christians, for thus must the following verse of the Acts of the Apostles be interpreted: «And he was with the disciples that were at Damascus, for some days» (Acts IX, 19b). We record that on the very day of Paul’s conversion, the Most Holy Virgin Mary made the happy event known to Pope Peter, as we shall see.
36. While hearing the Holy Mass celebrated by Bishop Ananias on the 30th of April 36, Paul was interiorly prompted by the Holy Ghost to retire for a time to the desert and there, in solitude, prepare for his future apostolate. Thus shortly after midday, the Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice having ended, Paul left Damascus on horseback for the desert of Arabia Petrea, entering Palestine and then following the route of the eastern valley of the river Jordan until he reached the place where Christ had been baptized. From there, following the eastern side of the Dead Sea, he headed for the Sinai Peninsula, which he entered at what is now Eilat, then Elat, to the north of the Gulf of Sinai, and then headed for Mount Horeb, where God had appeared to Moses. After arriving there on the 27th of June 36, he fixed his abode in the same cave in which God had appeared to Moses and at a later date to Elias. Paul’s sojourn in the desert lasted three years, and he lived in the most complete austerity, given over to prayer, penance and fasting. At the same time as he thus purified himself of his past sins, his union with Christ became ever more intimate, attaining a lofty degree of mysticism. In the desert Paul was copiously instructed in the truths of the Faith by the Most Divine Master in His many apparitions to him, and by the enlightenment of the Holy Paraclete. As there was no priest within reach, very frequently Christ Himself nourished him with the Holy Eucharist. On the 25th of March 37, third anniversary of the death of Christ, He, nailed to the Cross, appeared to Paul. As Paul manifested his most vehement desire to be crucified with Him, the Master allowed him to participate in His Most Sacred Wounds, piercing by way of mysterious rays, among other parts of Paul’s body, his right side, his hands and his feet, so that Paul ever after invisibly bore the stigmata, as we interpret from his Letter to the Galatians: «I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body» (Gal. VI, 17). Also, on different occasions the Most Holy Virgin Mary appeared to Paul in the desert, to comfort him in his austerities with the sweet balm of Her Divine Maternity, and at the same time to instruct him about Christ, Herself and the Church. Though thanks to the heavenly teaching Paul attained to great doctrinal wisdom, nevertheless some mysteries were not revealed to him directly by Christ and Mary in order that, in due time, he might learn them from Peter himself who, as Head of the Church and Vicar of Jesus Christ, was the sole bearer of papal Infallibility, which is that which guarantees the veracity of all doctrine. During his sojourn in the desert Paul also came to know, by divine revelation, the burial spot of the three Holy Kings Melchor, Gaspar and Balthasar who, after abdicating their respective thrones, lived in solitude on Mount Horeb until their deaths in the year 35 of the Christian era. In his Epistle to the Galatians, Saint Paul speaks of his retreat in the desert when he says: «but I went into Arabia» (Gal. I, 17). He then adds: «and again I returned to Damascus. Then, after three years, I went to Jerusalem to see Peter...» (Gal. I, 17-18), words with which Saint Paul seeks to record that his abode in the desert lasted three years, not counting the time of the journey there and back, nor his stay afterwards in Damascus until his coming to Jerusalem, as we shall see further on.
37. It is well here to cite the following passages of the Acts of the Apostles since, according to our interpretation, we deem them to have taken place during Paul’s sojourn in the desert of Arabia Petrea. The author of the sacred Book says that «the Church had peace throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria: and spread further, walking in the fear of the Lord: and was filled with the consolation of the Holy Ghost» (Acts IX, 31). We teach that with Paul’s conversion the Sanhedrin’s fury against the Christians abated for a while, since it could then no longer count on that intrepid persecutor, who had been the principal instrument of the sanguinary proceedings of the Jewish Church, or Synagogue of Satan. Pope Peter took advantage of that period of calm for his apostolic visit to many of the Christian communities in Palestine. He began that papal journey on the 16th of May 36, namely the day after the celebration of the 2nd anniversary of the apotheotic Pentecost upon the Cenacle. During that apostolic journey, which he made accompanied by some of the disciples of the Cenacle community, Peter did not lose contact with the Holy See at Jerusalem, since he returned there with some frequency, and in a short while continued his journey. Verses 32-35 of chapter IX of the Acts of the Apostles speak of Peter’s visit to the Christian community of Lydda, now Lod, situated between Jerusalem and Jaffa. In Lydda he cured Eneas the paralytic. The miracle, which occurred on the 25th of March 37, that is, somewhat more than 10 months after Peter began his journey, converted many inhabitants of the town, and also of the Mediterranean region of Saron, as we interpret from the above passage of Saint Luke. The sacred author (Acts IX, 36-43) also tells us of Peter’s visit to the town of Joppe or Jaffa, by present day Tel-Aviv, where there was another Christian community with its corresponding church, which the sacred text identifies as `cenacle’. Verse 36 says that «in Joppe there was a certain disciple named Tabitha, that is to say Dorcas. This woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did» (Acts IX, 36), referring here to one of Mary’s disciples, a nun of the Cenacle of Jerusalem, who had been sent to Joppe by the Most Holy Virgin Mary to found and direct a religious community of Carmelite nuns. As we interpret, when the monks or disciples of the Joppe community became aware that Peter was in Lydda, they sent two of the lay faithful «desiring him that he be not slow to come unto them. And Peter rising up went with them. And when he was come, they brought him into the cenacle. And all the widows stood about him, weeping and showing him all the coats and garments which Dorcas had made» (Acts IX, 38b-39). These were poor women whom Tabitha had succoured, and that is why they besought Peter to restore their benefactress to life, a miracle (Acts IX, 40-41) he worked on the 22nd of April that year, producing great fruits of conversion among many of the dwellers of the town. Saint Luke goes on to say that after Tabitha had been resuscitated, Peter «presented her alive to the saints and widows» (Acts IX, 41); that is, to the two religious communities and to the other faithful, among whom were the widows. The sacred text says that Peter «abode many days in Joppe, with one Simon a tanner» (Acts IX, 43). We teach that even though there was a disciple missionary in the town, nevertheless Peter and those accompanying him lodged at the home of Simon, one of the lay faithful, since there was not enough room at the monastery. It was during his stay in Joppe that Peter had the vision of the unclean animals referred to in chapter X of the Acts of the Apostles, and we teach that it occurred on the 13th of May 37, and, besides, that Peter left the next day with Cornelius’ envoys for Caesarea Maritime, which he reached on the 15th of May that year. Concerning the significance of that vision, which as we have already said was related to the mission Peter was to accomplish at the home of the Centurion Cornelius in Caesarea Maritime, a passage contained also in the aforementioned chapter X, we have already spoken amply in chapter XXXI of this Treatise where, when we referred to the Pentecost come upon the Gentiles, we demonstrated very clearly the transcendent importance of that great event, since it was decisive for the official evangelization of the Gentile peoples, in virtue of the promulgation of the apostolic law given for that purpose by Pope Peter. The prodigious Pentecost upon the Gentiles in Cornelius’ home occurred on the 15th of May of that year 37, the third anniversary of the Pentecost at the Cenacle. Peter visited many other missionary communities - the Church expanding as a result - until, bringing his apostolic journey to an end, he returned to the See of Jerusalem on the 1st of November of the same year 37.
38. In chapter XI of the Acts of the Apostles Saint Luke presents us the different reactions of the Christians of Jerusalem when they received news of Peter’s apostolic activity among the Gentiles in Cornelius’ home and of his staying with them: «And the Apostles and brethren, who were in Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him» (Acts XI, 1-2). As we know, while Peter was away travelling, the only two Apostles left at the Cenacle were John and James the Less. John received the news of Peter’s apostolate among the Gentiles in Caesarea Maritime with immense joy, and gave thanks to the Most High, a joy also shared by the majority of the members of both religious communities. But James the Less, as likewise some of the recently converted disciples formerly pertaining to the levitical priesthood and the sect ofthe Pharisees, having not fully overcome their judaizing tendencics in favour of circumcision, maintained some opposition to Peter’s actions and dispositions in favour of the evangelization of the Gentiles, and with their ideas disconcerted others. Therefore when the Pope returned to Jerusalem, James the Less and those disciples sharing his opinions expressed their disagreement with Peter,saying to him: «Why did you visit uncircumcised men and eat with them?» (Acts XI, 3); that is to say: why did you make room for the Gentiles in the evangelical plan of salvation, and enter their homes to preach to and dine with them? thus reproaching Peter those who had not understood his treatment of the Gentiles. As is seen in verses 5-17 inclusive of chapter XI of the Acts of the Apostles, Peter dispelled their doubts by relating the prodigious occurrences that had impelled him to decree the evangelization of the Gentiles: such as the symbolic vision of the unclean animals, the arrival in Joppe of Cornelius’ emissaries requiring, at the Lord’s command, the presence of Peter - and the prodigious Pentecost upon the Gentiles - in Caesarea Maritime. Peter concluded his narration in these words: «If then God gave them the same grace as to us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ: who was I to withstand God?» (Acts XI, 17). Concerning those who had previously resisted, Saint Luke goes on to say that «having heard these things, they held their peace and glorified God, saying: God then also to the Gentiles has given repentance unto the life of grace» (Acts XI, 18).
39. It is now incumbent upon us to clarify the following paragraph of the message given by Our Lord Jesus Christ on the 4th of May 1977 to the then bishop Father Ferdinand, now His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII: «Remember that in the early days of the Church the Prince of the Apostles, Saint Peter, was possessed of a certain patriotic and racist pride, and hindered the preaching of the Gospel to the rest. If the Apostle of the Gentiles, the great Saint Paul, had not arrived, how would Spain have come to know My doctrine? In this matter Saint Peter was in no wise virtuous, rather the contrary. But Saint Paul, who loved the Jewish people as much or more than Saint Peter himself, possessed the very special charism of knowing that to be a Jew was not the important thing...». We teach that in this message the Lord wishes to bring out Peter’s twofold manner of acting: as Pope and as man. Even though it was the divine plan that the Apostles should preach the Gospel first to the Jews in order to give them a fresh opportunity to convert, it was also in the divine plan for that evangelization to embrace the Gentiles without delay, and the decisive impulse to that end should have come from the Pope. Nevertheless Peter held back from doing so on account of his inordinate patriotism towards the Jewish race and nation, for he desired Christianity first to flourish in the Jewish nation for her to be the champion of the faith of the Gospel in other countries. We find a clear proof that at the beginning of his pontificate the first Pope was still influenced by the pharisaical idea that those of the Jewish race could not associate with the Gentiles, in the Acts of the Apostles itself, in the episode of Cornelius, in which, moreover, Peter received the light to evangelize the Gentiles, as has already been expounded in chapter XXXI of this Treatise. Hence the excessive prudence of Pope Peter in decreeing the official opening up of the Gospel to the Gentiles was due to his sentiment of patriotism with overtones of racism, proper rather to Jewish rigorism and therefore not in harmony with the spirit of the Gospel. Peter took some time to extirpate this defective disposition in his nature, for even after his apostolic decree at Cornelius’ home in favour of the evangelization of the Gentiles, and his firm papal defence - narrated in chapter XV of the Acts of the Apostle - of that law in the II Council of Jerusalem, he still retained certain overtones of his Jewish blood, as his stay in Antioch - according to Saint Paul’s account in the Letter to the Galatians (II, 11-14) demonstrates. But this human tendency of Peter inclining him towards judaization was shared by many of the Christians converted from Judaism, whom Peter as Pope had, at the proper time, to correct severely (Acts XI), in order for them unreservedly to accept the divine plan in favour of the evangelization of the Gentiles. Nevertheless Paul, also a Jew by race, and possessed of profound patriotic and religious sentiments, was able, after his conversion to Christianity, wisely to discern that preaching to the Jews could then no longer be an obstacle to the evangelization of the Gentiles, for as he himself said: «THere is no respect of persons with God» (Rom. II, 11). This shows that compared to Peter, Paul had a more open nature, was more cosmopolitan and more docile to grace in matters of patriotic sentiments and ties. Nevertheless Peter, when he sent the Apostles and disciples to the different parts of the world, on account of his pride of race urged them to preach to the Jews, but did not likewise urge them to preach to the Gentiles, and in this sense must it be understood that he impeded the preaching to the Gentiles. In short, Saint Peter it was who decreed the evangelization of the Gentiles, whereas Saint Paul was the principal executor of that decree. Regarding Spain, it was James the Greater who first sowed the seed of the Faith of Christ throughout the nation, especially among the Jews but not excluding the Gentiles, with solid results. But afterwards Saint Paul provided a greater stimulus to the evangelization of Spain by his complete dedication to the Gentiles and by their being very much better disposed to receive the Gospel than the Jews themselves. As the Jews were a minority in Spain, the vast majority of whose inhabitants were Gentiles, the Apostle Paul’s labours took in a very much greater number of converts than did James’, because in the main James had dedicated himself to the Jews, and they were unwilling to embrace Christianity. James, then, in Spain, gave the Jews an opportunity for conversion; nevertheless when Saint Paul arrived, he concerned himself very much more with the Gentiles than with the Jews, knowing already by experience that with the latter he would achieve but little.
40. Until Pope Peter decreed the official evangelization of the Gentiles, the Apostles and disciples, scattered in different parts, devoted themselves almost exclusively to preaching the Gospel to the Jews, as we interpret from chapter XI of the Acts of the Apostles: «Now the others that had been dispersed by the persecution that arose on account of Stephen went as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to none but to the Jews only» (Acts XI, 19); for as we know, many of the Christians in Jerusalem fled the city because of Saul’s persecution. Also, nine of the Apostles and the 72 disciples had been sent by Peter to preach the Gospel outside Jerusalem, since, on the one hand, the persecution was ever more bloody and the labour in the city therefore increasingly difficult, and, on the other, the moment had come for the Gospel to be preached everywhere. But after Peter’s apostolic decree of the year 37 in favour of the evangelization of the Gentiles, preaching to them was ever on the increase, especially from the year 40, due to the apostolic zeal of Paul who was its principal executor. The Acts of the Apostles, after first placing on record, as we have already seen, that at first the preaching of the Gospel was specially to the Jews, go on to show us in verses 20 and 21 of the aforementioned chapter XI how that evangelization later extended to the Gentiles after Peter’s decree. That is why the sacred text, referring rather to the disciples scattered indifferent parts, says: «But some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were entered into Antioch, spoke also to the Greeks, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believing, were converted to the Lord» (Acts XI, 20-21). It is well to indicate that the expression `and Cyrene’ refers to two disciples: to Simon of Cyrene, who because he was black was denominated `Niger’, and who did not belong to the official disciples; and to Lucius, who was indeed one of the 72 disciples. Both, already presbyters, had arrived at Antioch announcing the Gospel also to the Gentiles, here identified by the word `Greeks’ owing to their tongue, The progress in Antioch of Syria of the Faith of Christ referred to in the sacred text was wrought during the years 38 to 40, a matter we shall amplify later on.
41. Returning now to our narrative about Paul, in the light of the Acts of the Apostles we teach that in the desert of Arabia Petrea, once he had expiated his faults, and had become filled the more with divine love and further consolidated in the faith of the Gospel, he was impelled by the Holy Ghost to return to Damascus, where he was to preach tirelessly in defence of Christ. In his Letter to the Galatians Paul himself says that he returned to Damascus from Arabia. In the transcription ofhis words that Saint Luke gives, he also says: «But I preached first to those of Damascus» (Acts XXVI, 20). On the 27th of June 39, Paul, withdrawing from the desert, headed for Damascus along the route from Mount Horeb to Elat, and from there to Kades-Barnea, to Omed and then to Gaza. When in Palestine he went northwards following the coast, passing through Joppe, Caesarea Maritime, whence he headed for Megiddo, then Nazareth, the west of the Sea of Galilee, Caesarea Philippi; and once in Syria, passing through El Kockab where he had been converted, he reached Damascus on the 12th of October of the year 39. During the long journey, Paul - aflame with love for Christ - gave testimony of his faith in the Gospel. When at Damascus, he again presented himself to Bishop Ananias. In the Epistle to the Galatians (I, 17-18) we see that Paul’s sojourn in Damascus was wholly dedicated to spreading the Gospel. From the Acts of the Apostles we know of the intense labour he carried out during the time from his arrival at Damascus, since «immediately he preached Jesus in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God» (Acts IX, 20), to the consequent amazement of many of the Jews hearing him, since they had known him before as a fanatical Jew and implacable persecutor of the Christians. The sacred text goes on to say that, amidst this contrariety, «Saul forced himself so much the more and confounded the Jews who dwelt at Damascus, affirming that He (Jesus) is the Christ. And when many days were passed, the Jews consulted together how to kill him. But their plans were made known to Saul. And they watched the gates also day and night, that they might kill him» (Acts IX, 22-24). As we interpret from the sacred texts, after his return to Damascus Paul ceased not a moment to proclaim in the Jewish synagogues as well as in public places and elsewhere, that Jesus Christ is the true Son of God, besides acknowledging his error of previously having so bitterly persecuted Him. The Jews of Damascus saw that Paul’s fiery sermons drew many to Christianity, with the resultant humiliation this implied for the addicts of Judaism; hence on the 18th of December 39 the principal hierarchs of the synagogue of Damascus gathered in council to approve the death of Paul. They put the plan into effect with the mutual agreement of King Aretas’ Governor in that province, who then posted guards in the city to arrest Paul (2 Cor. XI, 32). Faced with this stratagem Paul was forced into hiding - while awaiting to flee - in keeping with the prudent counsel of Bishop Ananias. But as the gates of Damascus were under continual surveillance, on the 5th of January of the year 40 Paul fled through a window in its walls, from which he was lowered down outside the city by some of the faithful, as we interpret from the sacred text: «But the disciples, taking him in the night, conveyed him away by the wall, letting him down in a basket» (Acts IX, 25); which place is evidenced by a chapel dedicated to Saint Paul, a tradition we confirm.
42. God permitted the Jews to persecute Paul in Damascus so that he depart from the city and make for Jerusalem to lay himself at the feet of the Vicar of Christ, Pope Peter. That is why Paul, once outside Damascus, inwardly felt the impulse on that night of the 5th of January of the year 40 to head for Jerusalem, something which for him meant an act of supreme heroism, for although he would have the great grace of meeting the Pope for the first time, he would have no want of arduous battles with the Sanhedrin whom he had previously served with entire fidelity. Moreover, the intrepid and audacious Paul now felt great shame and timidity at presenting himself before the Christian community of Jerusalem, persecuted by him with so much bloodshed some years back, though he was not unaware that the charity of the Gospel reigned amongst the followers of the Lord. In this torment and distress, the Most Holy Virgin Mary appeared to him on the way to confirm that he ought to go to Jerusalem, but that when he arrived She would no longer be there. Comforted by the Divine Mother’s words, Paul resolutely made his way to Jerusalem, though he visited as pilgrim those places most closely connected with the Saviour’s life; for example the Lake of Tiberias, Nazareth, Cana, Mount Thabor, Bethlehem and also Mount Calvary, entering the holy city by the very gate in the walls through which years before Christ, burdened by the Cross, had left. Thence he made for the Cenacle where, as we shall see, according as he himself says in the Letter to the Galatians, besides Peter, «other of the apostles I saw none, saving James the brother of the Lord» (Gal. I, 19); that is to say Jesus’ cousin, since James the Less was the son of Mary Cleophas, sister of the Most Holy Virgin Mary.
43. We leave for later the events at Jerusalem on Paul’s arrival, in order now to consider the Divine Mary’s journey from Jerusalem to Ephesus, accompanied by the Apostle Saint John and Her two sisters Mary Cleophas and Mary Salome. To do so we take as basis the revelations of Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda. We teach that as the exalted Mother of Jesus was aware of the approaching renewal of persecution of the Church by the Sanhedrin - motivated by the proximate return of Paul to Jerusalem, whose visit would provoke the anger of the High Priests - the deep concern that filled the Divine Mary’s Soul was reflected on Her virginal Countenance; at the same time She felt indescribable joy at the very special strengthening in the Faith that Christians receive by way of persecution, resulting in the Church’s greater consolidation. Even though the Divine Mary most ardently yearned to share the forthcoming afflictions with Her children in Jerusalem, that was not the design of the Most High, Who, to fulfil His Divine Will made use of Saint John, custodian of the Divine Mary by Christ’s conunand. As it was the Apostle who most noticed the spiritual suffering of the Most Holy Virgin Mary, he asked Her the cause and She told him. From that moment John felt moved to take Her far from Jerusalem so as to free Her from the very grave danger in which She might find Herself in the new persecution; at which most tender proposal Mary Most Holy manifested that She would respect his decision if it were also the wish of Pope Peter. For the realization of his lofty plans God had determined the city of Ephesus to be the Divine Mary’s destination on this journey. She was not unaware of this but kept silence so that God might reveal it to John, and She thus practise submission and obedience to the Church’s ministers for an example to posterity. On the 6th of January of the year 40, the Divine Mary, John, Mary Cleofas and Mary Salome, after hwnbly receiving Peter’s blessing, left the Cenacle to venerate first the scenes where the sacred mysteries of the Passion and Death of Christ had unfolded, and then from Calvary itself to set out all four at 12 o’ clock midday for Ephesus. They headed therefore towards Jaffa, beside present-day Tel-Aviv, and from there on the 9th of January took a boat to the port of Ephesus itself, within present-day Turkey in Asia Minor. As the crossing lasted 15 days they reached Ephesus on the 24th of January of the year 40, and they settled there in a modest house belonging to some Christian faithful come some years before from Jerusalem owing to the persecution by Saul. During the Divine Mary’s sojourn in Ephesus great events took place, which we know thanks to the revelations of Saint Mary of Jesus of Agreda, and of which we now mention some according to our interpretation. We teach that after arriving at Ephesus the Most Holy Virgin Mary, with the help of the Apostle John and Her two sisters, carried out an intense apostolic mission; for John, with his sermons and miracles, drew many to faith in Christ, and then sent them to the Divine Mistress and Doctor that She might enlighten and instruct them further in the Faith. The Divine Mary, besides, was a most exemplary model of Christian charity towards the poor, sick and dying, all of whom She maternally attended according to their manifold needs; also freeing numerous possessed souls from the powerful sway Satan had over them. The Mystic of Agreda ponders Mary Most Holy’s mission in Ephesus saying that She drew so many souls to the way of truth and eternal life and worked so many miracles to that end, that not even in many books could they all be written. Among the countless marvels wrought in Ephesus through the intervention of Mary Most Holy, we must mention the destruction of the famous temple of Diana, a great source of paganism and corruption, for therein dwelt a certain number of dissolute women consecrated to Satan by way of worship of the goddess. The worship was widespread in the city and throughout Asia Minor, and its devotees had contributed to the building of that temple then considered to be one of the seven wonders of the world, and to which multitudes of pilgrims flocked. Since the Divine Mary’s presence alone was incompatible with the continuance of that loathsome temple, She entrusted the mission of its destruction to the Archangel Saint Michael, which he carried out in the briefest space of time. Those inside were buried in its ruins, with the exception of nine of the priestesses for whom the Divine Mary had special pity - given their better dispositions - and who became converted to Christianity. Following the destruction of the pagan temple the Apostle John preached more vigorously to draw the Ephesians away from the terrible error that blinded them, demonstrating, besides, that the abominable statue of the goddess they had venerated in the temple had been powerless to prevent its own destruction and that of the edifice dedicated to it. After the destruction of the temple, it was the divine Mary’s desire to found in Ephesus that same year 4O, a Carmelite convent of authentic virgins consecrated to the one true God, in order that chastity might flourish and thus the Most High be given reparation for the immeasurable wickedness committed in the temple of Diana for so many centuries. Forming part of those nuns were the nine converted priestesses abovementioned and miraculously rescued from the ruins of the temple through Mary Most Holy’s intervention. We leave the matter here, to develop it further in due course.
