Pope Paul VI, General Audience, 17th March, 1965: Description of some initial reactions to Liturgy Reform

‘What do people think about the reform of the liturgy? The replies can be grouped into two categories. First, there are those that give evidence of a degree of confusion and therefore of uneasiness. Until now people were comfortable; they could pray the way they wished; all were quite familiar with the way the Mass proceeded. Now on all sides there are new things, changes, surprises: it has even gone so far as to do away with ringing the Sanctus bell. Then there are all those prayers that no one can any longer find; standing to receive communion; the end of the Mass cut off abruptly after the blessing. Everyone makes the responses; there is much moving about; the prayers and the readings are spoken out loud. In short, there is no more peace, things are understood less than before, and so on.

We shall not criticize these remarks because that would require showing how great a lack of understanding about religious rites they manifest. They do not indicate a true devotion or a genuine perception of the import of the Mass. Rather they betray a certain spiritual laziness, the refusal to make the personal effort toward understanding and participation… We should not think that after a while there can be a return to the former, undisturbed devotion or apathy. No, the new way of doing things will have to be different; it will have to prevent and to shake up the passivity of the people present at Mass. Before, it was enough to assist; now, it is necessary to take part. Before, being there was enough; now, attention and activity are required. Before, everyone could doze or perhaps even chatter; now all must listen and pray.’


Source

If you are Catholic, the Cristeros are your ancestors in the Faith, no matter your nationality, race or social standing. – Anonymous

Quote:Francisco, by the Grace of God and favor of the Apostolic See, Archbishop of Guadalajara.

To the Very Reverend Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral and to the Reverend clergy, secular and regular, and to all the faithful of the archdiocese.

Peace and Benediction in Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Beloved Brethren:

Certain motives of prudence have prevented me from communicating directly with my beloved flock; although, I have not for one moment ceased to watch over its well-being; but now I deem it my duty to direct you a brief message breaking the silence, which was responsible for much anxiety to souls, although this time it was a silence which hard circumstances imposed upon us.

Very well, it is known to everybody that the new political Constitution, while it recognizes many of the rights of the people, having put aside the Catholic Church altogether (under which the majority of the people live; although, they do not all receive our holy religion in its entirety, but are often the victims of modern errors), tries to subjugate and oppress that Church, often condemning her to the point of suppressing her very name.

Are we able to reconcile this with the sacred and inalienable rights of this sacred Institution? And how can Catholics suffer an order of things that obliges them, not only to renounce the most sought gift of heaven, but also to ratify this oppression by their acquiescence?

I found myself obliged to protest, as I did, against the new constitution, as a representative of this portion of the Catholic Church, and made such protest together with the greater part of the Mexican Episcopate, whose letter was formulated in United States on the 24th of February last, as you yourselves, dear beloved, must already know. Their measured words, and convincing reasons, and the declarations which appear in this protest, give you all to understand, in general terms, what ought to be the reasonable interpretation and real spirit of the new legislation, and also what should be your conduct toward it, as Catholics and faithful sons of the Church; they also make known to our enemies that it is not the spirit of sedition or conspiracy which animates the pastors of the Church, the venerable clergy or the faithful themselves.

Be sure, my beloved sons, that the lot of the Spouse of Jesus Christ is not different from that of her Divine Founder: Tribulations, persecutions, shame, blood and martyrdom is her patrimony and her heritage. “The disciple is not better than his Master.” “If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.”

The history of the Church teaches us those things; making us also understand that, as it happened to the Barque of Peter, on Lake Gennesaret – after the tempest, will come calm and tranquility.

And now that we realize the divine warnings, let us not content ourselves with vain laments, but, rather, secure the fruits of our sufferings and purify according to the high designs of the Savior, our souls, by contemplating the indestructible principles of our holy religion, which makes us love virtue and detest vice; also, to walk always in hold dread of God, and to encourage the hope of better times, and the upending goods, which alone we are permitted to covet.

Now is the time to revive within us the true Catholic spirit, and eliminate all compromise with modern errors, condemned by the Church, to separate the straw from the grain; thus, then practically will shine forth the splendor of high Christian virtue, and thus the enemies of the Church will recognize and glorify God and His Christ.

The venerable clergy is invited and exhorted by the present persecution, in a thousand ways, to serve as an example to the common faithful; for they have put their hand to the plow to procure their proper sanctification, which their high state exacts; and the faithful in whatever condition in which they are placed, having the clear and definite voice of the Divine Master, who applies to us His gentle lash, must also give a hand to the work of their own sanctification. If the contrary occur, it is to be feared that we may be abandoned by the Divine Clemency, and that for us there may come the terrible way when the Sun of Justice will be hidden from us forever.

May He illumine our souls and concede us the grace to follow the truth, so that our faith may be revived, and our charity inflamed, and we may resolve anew to serve and love God and the Savior, with all the force of our souls. May the Holy Virgin of Guadalupe be very propitious to us! May we always implore those potent graces, so that we may the better be able to resist, in time of temptation, and tribulation, and, thus, to conserve unblemished our glorious faith and time-honored customs.

I impart to you my paternal benediction, imploring from above all good things upon you.

This pastoral letter is to be read in the usual manner.

Given from one of my parishes, on the 4th day of June, 1917.

+Francisco, Archbishop of Guadalajara.

Pope Francis changes Opus Dei, says a bishop can no longer lead it
Uncertainty remains among commentators on the motu proprio and whether it is intended as a punitive measure by Pope Francis.



Pope Francis with Monsignor Fernando Ocáriz Braña (L) and Monsignor Mariano Fazio ®,
the Prelate and Auxiliary Vicar of Opus Dei respectively.

Quote:With full respect for the nature of the specific charism described by the above-mentioned Apostolic Constitution, it is intended to strengthen the conviction that, for the protection of the peculiar gift of the Spirit, a form of government based more on charism than on hierarchical authority is needed. Therefore, the Prelate will not be honored or insignificant with the episcopal order.

Quote:The argument was always “If Opus Dei has a bishop, why can’t the Traditional orders like FSSP or ICK have a bishop?” Francis is fearful that groups with a bishop on top have “break-away powers” like Abp. Lefebvre (not that Opus Dei would break away – they are tight with Francis). https://t.co/4TDAC135Br

— Dr Taylor Marshall™️ (@TaylorRMarshall) July 22, 2022

Archbishop Lefebvre: “Availing ourselves of the Indult is tantamount to putting ourselves into a state of contradiction because at the same time that Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or Le Barroux Abbey and other groups authorization to say the Mass of All Time, they also require young priests to sign a profession of faith in which the spirit of the Council must be accepted. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is embodied in the New Mass. How is it possible to desire to preserve the Mass of all time while accepting the spirit that destroys this Mass of All Time? It is completely contradictory. One day, very gently, they will oblige those who have been granted the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Time, also to accept the New Mass. And they will tell them that it is simply a matter of squaring themselves with what they have signed, since they signed a statement that they accepted the spirit of the Council and its reforms. You cannot put yourself thus into an unbelievable, irrational contradiction. It is a very uncomfortable situation. This is what has created the difficulty for these groups that have signed it and that currently find themselves in a kind of impasse." (Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990) sspx.org/en/archbishop-lefebvre-indult-mass

Cdl. Gregory restricts Latin Mass, bans traditional sacraments in ‘vindictive, heartless’ decree
Cardinal Gregory issued a six-page decree banning all traditional sacraments apart from the Mass, which is now to be only weekly and in three specific churches in the archdiocese.



Cardinal Wilton Gregory
Archdiocese of Washington/Facebook

• The Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in D.C.
  
• The chapel at St. John the Evangelist in Forest Glen, Maryland.
  
• The mission church of St. Dominic in Aquasco, Maryland.
  

Dr. Birx Admits She And Fauci Made Up 'The Science' On Lockdowns, Social Distancing

Quote:"Scarf Lady" committed scientific fraud and misled the president and the nation into unnecessary lock-downs and restrictions based on the false presumption that the virus spread among health people (asymptomatic spread) that was disproved by Cao et al Madewell et al. pic.twitter.com/Doeion4tu7

— Peter McCullough, MD MPH (@P_McCulloughMD) July 20, 2022

Quote:“The Pope has a bigger agenda: he’s got to get on with other things, talking about the environment and protecting migrants, and carrying on the work of the Church. We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this. . . . Years ago, if a Cardinal had allowed himself to respond like this, the whole world would have come down; but today obviously times have changed. . . . Here we can also allow ourselves a bit of insolence. So much is known that the media will not tear their garments for so little.” (here and here).

Quote:Firstly, Fr. [...] is wrong in saying I condemned Bp. Williamson and called him a heretic. This never happened. What is true, is I have called his opinions on the New Mass erroneous and dangerous to the Faith, both to priests and faithful.

In no place, that I am aware of, did Abp. Lefebvre ever say "the New Mass nourishes your faith" and "gives grace," as Bp. Williamson did numerous times. I do hold that the theological position of Bp. Williamson is a wrong opinion and I completely submit my opinion to the Church's decision on these matters, when God grants us a good Pope. But until then, I side with Abp. Lefebvre who never hesitated to call the New Mass a "Messe batarde" an "illegitimate Mass" and one that erodes the Faith rather than nourishes it!

Does the New Mass gives grace? Abp. Lefebvre said it is sterile and doesn't pass the grace. A sacrament is defined in the traditional catechism as "an external sign, instituted by Christ, that gives grace." This is presupposing the "sign" is a Catholic sign, and not tampered and modified to give a Protestant and Modernist expression. The New Mass expresses a sign that is no longer Catholic, but Modernist. This is because the New Mass incorporates some Catholic elements, some Protestant elements and some Modernist elements, all combined into one liturgical action. So, taken as a whole, the sign expressed in the New Mass is a Modernist sign, a Modernist Liturgy, one that no longer expressing the Catholic Faith!

Consequently, it can be debated at the theological level if this New Mass, expressing a non-Catholic sign, actually confers grace, even if it be valid at times. It appears Abp. Lefebvre never thought it did. Bp. Williamson holds that if it is valid then it automatically gives grace. Perhaps, one could argue that POTENTIALLY it could give grace (if it's valid), but ACTUALLY it doesn't, in many cases, because of the lack of dispositions necessary. This, because the priest and many attending the New Mass, have a non-Catholic understanding of the Mass, and if it's merely a "symbol of the faith of the community," as is taught by Modernists, then their lack of Faith and proper dispositions, blocks the transfer of grace in their souls. In this case, for many souls, the New Mass doesn't give grace.

As I said, perhaps there's room to debate at the theological level, but at the practical level, it is extremely dangerous for clergy to promote the erroneous opinion that "the New Mass gives grace" because uninformed souls will take this as a green light to attend it and put their Faith in grave danger! Even Abp. Lefebvre said that he believed the New Mass doesn't fulfill the Sunday obligation, precisely because it expresses a different Faith from Tradition. "Lex orandi, lex credendi," as the axiom from St. Vincent Lerins says, "as we pray, so we believe." If we pray as Catholics, we will believe as Catholics; if we pray as Protestants and Modernists, we will believe as Protestants and Modernists!

I have never condemned Bp. Williamson, who I respect and honor as a seminary professor and the bishop of my ordination, but yes, I have publicly warned souls against the erroneous opinions that he promotes because it is contrary to Abp. Lefebvre's position and for the obvious danger such a message presents. As Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, O.F.M. used to put it, "Do you need proof the New Mass doesn't give grace? Look at the catastrophic fruits! There's your proof! As Christ said, 'By their fruits you will know them.'"

After all is said and done, it is ultimately Mother Church who will authoritatively decide on these matters, when she returns to Tradition, and on this point, I'm sure we all agree and eagerly await. What will Mother Church decide when that day comes? How will she judge the New Mass and New sacraments? We shall see. But it is my humble opinion, that it will be a close repetition of her decision on the Anglican orders, which were all declared invalid (and therefore not grace-giving) by Pope Leo XIII in "Apostolicae Curae" in 1896. Why? Because the Anglican adaptations to the Mass and sacrament of Holy Orders expressed a faith different from the Catholic Faith. This alone sufficed to make them invalid. Do not the New Mass changes do the same?

Tribute to Fr. [...] who did publicly oppose Bp. Williamson's opinion on this point, and warned of the great dangers of the New Mass and Indult Masses, and continues heroically taking care of the scattered souls everywhere, in the aftermath of Vatican II.

Tribute to Bishop Williamson, who in spite of promoting some erroneous opinions and signing the petition to remove the "excommunication" that never was, did at least consecrate bishops for Tradition, which the Conciliar-SSPX bishops will never do. Pray they ALL return to the unwavering stand of Abp. Marcel Lefebvre!

The time of the Church's return to Tradition will come. Until then, Abp. Lefebvre was proven right on many other things, I'll take his side on this point as well. "In doctrinal matters defined by the Church, full consent; in matters of custom, respect; in debatable matters of opinion, always charity."

In Christ the King,

Fr. David Hewko