Author Topic: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?  (Read 3589 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Neil Obstat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18173
  • Reputation: +8255/-635
  • Gender: Male
Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2018, 05:38:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I just want to say "THANKYOU " FOR ENLIGHTENING ME on this subject. There's much food for thought. i'm going to do some more research on this situation myself. Thanks again for the input !
    .
    What a wonderful response!
    I had no idea this would happen. Now here is a man with interest, humility, and a desire to learn!
    .
    But you might find it a serious challenge to get reliable materials to study.
    The Summa of St. Thomas is a good reference but it's not organized to be a textbook for learning about things like this.
    And the language / structure is a bit challenging until you get accustomed to it.
    Perhaps Matthew can recommend a reference work that is used in seminary classes for the basics in philosophy.
    .
    In the meantime, you can contemplate the translation of the Latin sequence Lauda Sion Salvatorem to get a better feel for this topic.
    .
    http://catholicism.org/lauda-sion-salvatorem.html
    .
    Lauda Sion Salvatorem is a sequence prescribed for the Roman Catholic Mass of Corpus Christi. It was written by St. Thomas Aquinas around 1264, at the request of Pope Urban IV for the new Mass of this Feast, along with Pange lingua, Sacris solemniis, Adoro te devote, and Verbum supernum prodiens, which are used in the Divine Office. The hymn tells of the institution of the Eucharist and clearly expresses the Catholic belief in transubstantiation. As with St. Thomas’ other three Eucharistic hymns, the last few stanzas are often used alone, in this case, the Ecce panis Angelorum.

    Lauda Sion is one of only five medieval Sequences which were preserved in the Missale Romanum published in 1570 following the Council of Trent (1545–63). Before Trent many feasts had their own sequences.[1] It is still sung today, though its use is optional in the post-Vatican II Ordinary form. The Gregorian melody is borrowed from the 11c sequence Laetabundi iubilemus attributed to Adam de Saint-Victor.
    All of the above is taken from WikiPedia. Now for YouTube…
    The chant version (as St. Thomas wrote it), sung by the Benedictine Monks of the Abbey of St. Maurice & St. Maur: (...)
    .
    http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Hymni/LaudaSion.html
    .
    When Pope Urban IV (1261-1264) first established the Feast of Corpus Christi, he requested St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) to compose hymns for it. This is one of the five beautiful hymns Aquinas composed in honor of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. In addition to Lauda Sion, St. Thomas wrote Adoro Te Devote, Pange Lingua, Sacris Sollemnis and Verbum Supernum. Lauda Sion is the Sequence before the Gospel on Corpus Christi. The last two verses comprise the well known Bone pastor, panis vere.

    LAUDA Sion Salvatorem,
    lauda ducem et pastorem,
    in hymnis et canticis.
    Quantum potes, tantum aude:
    quia maior omni laude,
    nec laudare sufficis.
    ZION, to Thy Savior sing,
    to Thy Shepherd and Thy King!
    Let the air with praises ring!
    All thou canst, proclaim with mirth,
    far higher is His worth
    than the glory words may wing.
    Laudis thema specialis,
    panis vivus et vitalis
    hodie proponitur.
    Quem in sacrae mensa cenae,
    turbae fratrum duodenae
    datum non ambigitur.
    Lo! before our eyes and living
    is the Sacred Bread life-giving,
    theme of canticle and hymn.
    We profess this Bread from heaven
    to the Twelve by Christ was given,
    for our faith rest firm in Him.
    Sit laus plena, sit sonora,
    sit iucunda, sit decora
    mentis iubilatio.
    Dies enim solemnis agitur,
    in qua mensae prima recolitur
    huius institutio.
    Let us form a joyful chorus,
    may our lauds ascend sonorous,
    bursting from each loving breast.
    For we solemnly record
    how the Table of the Lord
    with the Lamb's own gift was blest.
    In hac mensa novi Regis,
    novum Pascha novae legis,
    phase vetus terminat.
    Vetustatem novitas,
    umbram fugat veritas,
    noctem lux eliminat.
    On this altar of the King
    this new Paschal Offering
    brings an end to ancient rite.
    Shadows flee that truth may stay,
    oldness to the new gives way,
    and the night's darkness to the light.
    Quod in coena Christus gessit,
    faciendum hoc expressit
    in sui memoriam.
    Docti sacris institutis,
    panem, vinum in salutis
    consecramus hostiam.
    What at Supper Christ completed
    He ordained to be repeated,
    in His memory Divine.
    Wherefore now, with adoration,
    we, the Host of our salvation,
    consecrate from bread and wine.
    Dogma datur christianis,
    quod in carnem transit panis,
    et vinum in sanguinem.
    Quod non capis, quod non vides,
    animosa firmat fides,
    praeter rerum ordinem.
    Words a nature's course derange,
    that in Flesh the bread may change
    and the wine in Christ's own Blood.
    Does it pass thy comprehending?
    Faith, the law of light transcending,
    leaps to things not understood.
    Sub diversis speciebus,
    signis tantum, et non rebus,
    latent res eximiae.
    Caro cibus, sanguis potus:
    manet tamen Christus totus
    sub utraque specie.
    Here beneath these signs are hidden
    priceless things, to sense forbidden;
    signs, not things, are all we see.
    Flesh from bread, and Blood from wine,
    yet is Christ in either sign,
    all entire confessed to be.
    A sumente non concisus,
    non confractus, non divisus:
    integer accipitur.
    Sumit unus, sumunt mille:
    quantum isti, tantum ille:
    nec sumptus consumitur.
    And whoe'er of Him partakes,
    severs not, nor rends, nor breaks:
    all entire, their Lord receive.
    Whether one or thousand eat,
    all receive the selfsame meat,
    nor do less for others leave.
    Sumunt boni, sumunt mali:
    sorte tamen inaequali,
    vitae vel interitus.
    Mors est malis, vita bonis:
    vide paris sumptionis
    quam sit dispar exitus.
    Both the wicked and the good
    eat of this celestial Food:
    but with ends how opposite!
    With this most substantial Bread,
    unto life or death they're fed,
    in a difference infinite.
    Fracto demum sacramento,
    ne vacilles, sed memento
    tantum esse sub fragmento,
    quantum toto tegitur.
    Nulla rei fit scissura:
    signi tantum fit fractura,
    qua nec status, nec statura
    signati minuitur.
    Nor a single doubt retain,
    when they break the Host in twain,
    but that in each part remain
    what was in the whole before;
    For the outward sign alone
    may some change have undergone,
    while the Signified stays one,
    and the same forevermore.
    Ecce Panis Angelorum,
    factus cibus viatorum:
    vere panis filiorum,
    non mittendus canibus.
    In figuris praesignatur,
    cum Isaac immolatur,
    agnus Paschae deputatur,
    datur manna patribus.
    Hail! Bread of the Angels, broken,
    for us pilgrims food, and token
    of the promise by Christ spoken,
    children's meat, to dogs denied!
    Shown in Isaac's dedication,
    in the Manna's preparation,
    in the Paschal immolation,
    in old types pre-signified.
    Bone pastor, panis vere,
    Iesu, nostri miserere:
    Tu nos pasce, nos tuere,
    Tu nos bona fac videre
    in terra viventium.
    Tu qui cuncta scis et vales,
    qui nos pascis hic mortales:
    tuos ibi commensales,
    coheredes et sodales
    fac sanctorum civium.
    Amen. Alleluia.
    Jesus, Shepherd mild and meek,
    shield the poor, support the weak;
    help all who Thy pardon sue,
    placing all their trust in You:
    fill them with Your healing grace!
    Source of all we have or know,
    feed and lead us here below.
    grant that with Your Saints above,
    sitting at the feast of love
    we may see You face to face.
    Amen. Alleluia.
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8255/-635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #31 on: November 14, 2018, 05:45:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I must also point out:

    Read and pay attention to Neil Obstat's responses to Cosmas in this thread.

    Cosmas might have his heart in the right place, but he is mistaken about what "Transubstantiation" means. He is not a theologian, having never attended Seminary or learned Thomistic philosophy (substance and accident), so it's understandable that he is ignorant about this particular theological point. I'm sure he's not alone here.

    I hope that he, and anyone else, reads Neil's posts for a clear and thorough explanation of the matter.

    A small sample of Neil's excellent, theologically sound exposition of the topic:
    .
    Gosh, you makin' me blush.  :-[  Are you really sure it's THAT good?!?
    I mean, I thought it was OKAY, but "excellent theologically sound exposition?"
    I'm honored. But I'll take it. Thank you, Matthew.
    .
    Now I guess I have to try harder so as not to let things slide!!
    .
    Is it too much to ask that the misspelled word in the thread title be corrected? It says transubstansiation. 
    .
    Have to go now, have to move my car before there's a riot out there or whatever..........
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4560
    • Reputation: +3910/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #32 on: November 14, 2018, 06:54:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • .
    I'd like to know what's going on here in other chapels because I know one doctor who says that no amount of gluten is okay.
    .
    He says to be gluten free and to lose the effects due to gluten intolerance you have to remove ALL the gluten from your life.
    The pet food in the house must be gluten free, etc., etc., etc.
    This doctor is a quack.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8255/-635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #33 on: November 14, 2018, 08:35:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    This doctor is a quack.
    .
    Which doctor? 
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4560
    • Reputation: +3910/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #34 on: November 15, 2018, 08:32:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • .
    Which doctor?
    The one doctor you know.


    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3560
    • Reputation: +4170/-320
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #35 on: November 15, 2018, 12:01:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That presumes that such catering to special needs is legitimate. I honestly don't know, not having studied this in a professional manner.
    .
    Well, the general principle is that Catholics (well disposed, of course) have a right to sacraments.  Sacraments are often offered as a "special need," e.g. when a priest travels a hundred miles to give last rites.  Thing is, that happens outside of mass and no one sees it, so it isn't a spectacle.  Another example, again less spectacular, are the elderly who cannot kneel for Holy Communion.  I am tempted to think that catering to "special needs" is not just legitimate, but that priests are generally bound to do so. It should be done, when it can be done, with little spectacle.  But even if it can only be done with "spectacle" it should be done.  Well disposed Catholics, even celiacs, have a right to the sacraments, a right which definitely transcends the sensitivities of those who seek scandal in Holy things.
    .
    I knew some people who were not celicas, but who (I think) were very close to being celiacs.  To my knowledge they did not receive any special Host, nor did they receive a "Chip", but if I recall correctly they had to drink copius amounts of water soon after receiving Holy Communion and even at that it made them quite uncomfortable.  I think.
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline cosmas

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 357
    • Reputation: +208/-116
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #36 on: December 14, 2018, 06:35:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • NEIL OBSTAT,
    I was researching and found this can you explain it to me. Doesn't it mean what it says ? COUNCIL of TRENT, SESSION 13 CANON 4   " If anyone shall say that in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains, together with the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ," Let Him BE ANATHEMA ."

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 511
    • Reputation: +153/-222
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #37 on: December 14, 2018, 08:57:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • NEIL OBSTAT,
    I was researching and found this can you explain it to me. Doesn't it mean what it says ? COUNCIL of TRENT, SESSION 13 CANON 4   " If anyone shall say that in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains, together with the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ," Let Him BE ANATHEMA ."
    The key word here is "substance". A substance is what a thing is, accidents are how a thing is perceived by the senses. In Catholic theology, none of the substance of the bread remains after the consecration. While it looks like bread, in no way can a Catholic say that it "is" bread.
    There were other views on the Eucharist that said Christ's body and blood was present along with the bread. These views rejected transubstantiation, but not always the Real Presence. The Lollards in England (associated with Wycliffe) had a view that is sometimes called "consubstantiation" (both present). Martin Luther had a similar view (though Lutherans say consubstantiation does not reflect exactly what he thought.) There was also a view called "impanation" that viewed the Eucharist as analogous to the Incarnation. The formulation of Trent says these other views are heresy.


    Offline cosmas

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 357
    • Reputation: +208/-116
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #38 on: December 15, 2018, 12:11:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • STANLEY N ,
    My point was getting back to gluten in the bread, the bread and wine are no longer bread and wine after the Consecration. I still don't know why if its been changed the substance ,how can someone have an intolerance to it. Could it possibly be in their mind , Thinking about the Eucharist being made out of Bread ?

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8255/-635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #39 on: December 15, 2018, 02:04:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .

    NEIL OBSTAT,
    I was researching and found this can you explain it to me. Doesn't it mean what it says ? COUNCIL of TRENT, SESSION 13 CANON 4   " If anyone shall say that in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains, together with the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ," Let Him BE ANATHEMA ."

    .
    STANLEY N ,
    My point was getting back to gluten in the bread, the bread and wine are no longer bread and wine after the Consecration. I still don't know why if its been changed the substance ,how can someone have an intolerance to it. Could it possibly be in their mind , Thinking about the Eucharist being made out of Bread ?
    .
    The Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation teaches us that the substance of the host becomes the substance of Our Lord, however, it does not teach us that the look, smell, feel, magnetic field, appearance, density, taste, hardness, alkalinity, radioactivity, weight, color, texture, mass spectrometer readings or chemical potential of the host is any different that what it was before it became the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. If you take a consecrated host, for example, and hold it over a burning candle, you can fully expect it to catch fire. Does that mean that Jesus Christ is inflammable? If the host had gluten in it before the consecration, the host continues to have gluten after the consecration; the only difference is that the gluten has mysteriously become the Real Presence of Jesus, in every way, even though there is nothing we can do with material instruments or our 5 senses to ascertain that Real Presence -- it's a matter of faith.
    .
    To say that the gluten is this part over here, and Jesus is that part over there, and these two parts are together in the same host but separated somehow, is not transubstantiation, it's consubstatiation, which the Lutherans hold, which is why they're heretics (among other reasons too).
    .
    I have no idea whether some people have a gluten intolerance because of how they think about what they eat. Nor do I know if anyone with a gluten intolerance has no physical reaction to consuming a consecrated host with gluten in it. Maybe there is someone like that. If there is anyone who can't tolerate gluten EXCEPT when receiving Holy Communion, then that would be a situation that can't be explained by scientific examination.
    .
    That would be the same science that cannot measure or observe any physical change in the host after it's consecrated.
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18173
    • Reputation: +8255/-635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #40 on: December 15, 2018, 06:54:54 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    At the SSPX chapel in San Antonio, a couple years ago, one man received the Precious Blood during Mass on Sunday. He had some kind of allergy or intolerance. The priest would administer to him from a small chalice kept in the tabernacle.

    It really was quite a spectacle. It's a shame Trad priests don't have more time, to say more Masses for each area per week, so that individuals like this could have their special needs met at a Mass with less attendance.

    That presumes that such catering to special needs is legitimate. I honestly don't know, not having studied this in a professional manner.

    I do know that we had a parishioner who was gluten intolerant, but she never got to receive Communion. Not from a gluten free or low-gluten host, and not from the chalice. This was under Bp. Zendejas.
    .
    According to one approach aimed at eliminating the effects of gluten for those who have intolerance issues with gluten, a priest who offers them gluten-free Holy Communion would have to not only use a separate ciborium for the gluten-free host(s), he would also have to wash his hands before touching it. He would have to observe such caution before Mass during preparation, such that placing any gluten-containing hosts in one ciborium then going to the gluten-free host(s) to place them he would have to wash his hands first. Likewise, he would need to use a separate cloth for cleaning the gluten-free ciborium since particles of gluten could be transferred from the cloth if it had been used already on a gluten-containing ciborium. Etc...
    .
    I'm not so sure about the "spectacle" aspect. There are other irregularities that affect everyone much more than an extra trip for the priest to the tabernacle and back. What about the ceremony of abjuration of error for schismatics converting to Roman Catholicism? The candidate comes to the communion rail, generally immediately before Mass with the entire congregation in attendance, and kneels there while the priest stands before him reading aloud the text that the candidate repeats one phrase at a time for everyone to hear. That's no big deal.
    .
    What about the community recitation of the St. Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort's Total Consecration to Mary? The priest kneels before the altar like in the Leonine Prayers after Low Mass (which are likewise no big deal) and leads the congregation in the complete form, which takes about 2 minutes to recite. That's no big deal.
    .
    What about the May Crowning ceremony, where a young girl from the congregation is designated to place the crown of roses on Our Lady's head, while the people sing a hymn, usually "Mary We Crown Thee with Blossoms Today..." That's no big deal.
    .
    So where do you come up with the priest taking an extra 30 seconds to walk to the tabernacle for gluten-free host(s) and back, being a "spectacle?"
    He has to do that every time he runs out of hosts anyway, for Masses with large numbers of recipients. Is that "really quite a spectacle" too?
    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline cosmas

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 357
    • Reputation: +208/-116
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #41 on: December 19, 2018, 11:15:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does anyone know if celiac persons have been tested after receiving the Consecrated Host ?

    Online Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18903
    • Reputation: +10405/-4917
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #42 on: December 19, 2018, 11:40:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • .
    Well, the general principle is that Catholics (well disposed, of course) have a right to sacraments.  Sacraments are often offered as a "special need," e.g. when a priest travels a hundred miles to give last rites.  Thing is, that happens outside of mass and no one sees it, so it isn't a spectacle.  Another example, again less spectacular, are the elderly who cannot kneel for Holy Communion.  I am tempted to think that catering to "special needs" is not just legitimate, but that priests are generally bound to do so. It should be done, when it can be done, with little spectacle.  But even if it can only be done with "spectacle" it should be done.  Well disposed Catholics, even celiacs, have a right to the sacraments, a right which definitely transcends the sensitivities of those who seek scandal in Holy things.
    .
    I knew some people who were not celicas, but who (I think) were very close to being celiacs.  To my knowledge they did not receive any special Host, nor did they receive a "Chip", but if I recall correctly they had to drink copius amounts of water soon after receiving Holy Communion and even at that it made them quite uncomfortable.  I think.

    I agree.  There are other issues people might have that would warrant special consideration, such as a disabled person who can't make it up to the Communion rail.  For them, the priest could move out into the church to administer Holy Communion instead of having them go up the the rail.  Certainly there are some people with gluten intolerance who exaggerate the effects, but there are some (celiacs come to mind) who cannot tolerate even a tiny amount.  I would consider low-gluten or gluten-free hosts to be questionable matter, so I would think that administration of the wine species would be the preferred approach ... using a spoon similar to that used by the Eastern Rites.  This would hold the Mass up maybe one or two minutes ... less than an old lady going into the Sacristy to ask Father to grieve for her dead cat.

    Online Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18903
    • Reputation: +10405/-4917
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #43 on: December 19, 2018, 11:42:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • My wife cannot tolerate gluten in significant amounts, but she receives Holy Communion in the normal way (that small amount doesn't bother her).  I believe that gluten intolerance came from the genetically-butchered modern wheat have today.  At one point, we made banana bread using Emmer (the ancient variety of wheat that was in use during Our Lord's time), and my wife had zero reaction after consuming a significant amount.

    I personally believe that we should make hosts from one of these ancient grains rather than the modern Frankenstein wheat.

    Offline dymphnaw

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 85
    • Reputation: +46/-50
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Does SSPX still believe in TRANSUBSTANSIATION ?
    « Reply #44 on: January 11, 2019, 03:26:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  

    Why was this a spectacle? There is a lady at my church who will suffer vomiting and diarrhea if she consumes wheat. Father has her come up after the rest of us finish Communion and receive from the chalice. Between praying and all the people moving back to their pews it's only rare that I even notice her. 

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16