Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 249
» Latest member: bshaughnessy@ymail.com
» Forum threads: 5,938
» Forum posts: 11,246

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 117 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 114 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Yandex

Latest Threads
Cardinal Marx: ‘Global, s...
Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:58 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 44
Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Fifth...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons May 2024
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:34 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 42
Bp. Williamson promoting ...
Forum: True vs. False Resistance
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:53 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 460
Sixth Week after Easter [...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:54 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 13,927
Fifth Week after Easter [...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
05-05-2024, 08:03 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 11,867
Fifth Sunday after Easter
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
05-05-2024, 08:02 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 8,561
Humility of Heart by Fr. ...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
05-05-2024, 06:38 AM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 568
Pope Francis hints at new...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
05-05-2024, 06:25 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 91
Holy Mass in Pennsylvania...
Forum: May 2024
Last Post: Stone
05-04-2024, 07:11 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 77
Fr. Altamira 2016: Concer...
Forum: True vs. False Resistance
Last Post: Stone
05-04-2024, 07:03 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 180

 
  A few interesting posts on 'Crisis Gardening'
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 12:53 PM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

A few examples - for your consideration:







Print this item

  Pope envisions world and church that’s open, inclusive, all about ‘we’
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 09:54 AM - Forum: Pope Francis - No Replies

Pope envisions world and church that’s open, inclusive, all about ‘we’
A message for World Day of Migrants and Refugees in September emphasized universality and 'human fraternity' rather than salvation of souls.


May 6, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) -- Pope Francis published his message for the 107th World Day of Migrants and Refugees to be celebrated September 26, inviting the world to move “towards an ever greater we.”

He presented his thoughts as a program in response to the “health crisis,” calling on Catholics and people of good will to reject the temptation to “plunge even more deeply into feverish consumerism and new forms of egotistic self-preservation.”

However, this appeal for a life that would be less materialistic operates in the way of G.K. Chesterton’s “old Christian virtues gone mad,” transposing a personal call to holiness and to center oneself on God and eternity to a political message where the sovereign rights and duties of nations toward their own are portrayed as selfish and unjust.

In his message, the Pope describes God's plan for humanity, referring to Genesis, as a march toward an open world.

Quote:“God created us male and female, different yet complementary, in order to form a ‘we’ destined to become ever more numerous in the succession of generations. God created us in his image, in the image of his own triune being, a communion in diversity,” the Pope recalled. But in subsequent comments, he added, “When, in disobedience we turned away from God, he in his mercy wished to offer us a path of reconciliation, not as individuals but as a people, a ‘we,' meant to embrace the entire human family, without exception: ‘See, the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them; they will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them.'”

This is a transparent reference to a recent leitmotif in papal declarations: “No one is saved alone, we can only be saved together,” as he wrote in Fratelli Tutti. He has recently stated that this is the “lesson” of the “recent pandemic:” being saved together would be the only way to obtain “peace, prosperity, security and happiness.”

This is a horizontal vision of salvation: an oversight at best and a contradiction at worst of this truth: Redemption and eternal salvation are offered to people individually. Christ suffered and died on the Cross for each of us, for you and for me, giving the last drop of His Precious Blood so that you, and I, can personally gain access to eternal life, which we do not deserve and are incapable of obtaining alone, that is, without the merits of His Passion, and on the condition that we personally accept and respond to His grace.

In his message, the Pope expressed a different “dream:”

Quote:“The truth however is that we are all in the same boat and called to work together so that there will be no more walls that separate us, no longer others, but only a single ‘we,' encompassing all of humanity. Thus I would like to use this World Day to address a twofold appeal, first to the Catholic faithful and then all the men and women of our world, to advance together towards an ever wider ‘we.'”

It is a utopia, and like all utopias, it is dangerous.

The idea of universal fraternity without common belief in the one, true God is also a distortion of Catholicisma distortion that freemasonry, with its rejection of any kind of dogma, has preached for a long time.

It is a dangerous and misleading utopia when the Pope makes it the condition for access to a “Church that is more and more catholic,” or universal. This amounts to confusing the plane of “human fraternity” on the material level, and that of incorporation into Christ through baptism and the practice of the faith in order to be among the elect in the afterlife. The fact that the Chuch is “universal” does not mean that some do not reach heaven because they refuse salvation. Such confusion fundamentally conveys the idea that all are saved, that none can be damned.

How would Pope Francis like us to make his dream come true?

Quote:“The Catholic faithful are called to work together, each in the midst of his or her own community, to make the Church become ever more inclusive as she carries out the mission entrusted to the Apostles by Jesus Christ: ‘As you go, proclaim the good news, The kingdom of heaven has come near. Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment’”.

Besides the fact that the word “inclusive” is politically correct newspeak, with its “anti-racist” overtones and their ideological thrust, it should be noted that it makes the Church the agent of inclusion, whereas it is in the first instance the person who asks for baptism, faith, and the grace of becoming a child of God, which the Church then provides by communicating grace from the treasure entrusted to her by Christ.

Fortunately, the Pope added, 
Quote:“In our day, the Church is called to go out into the streets of every existential periphery in order to heal wounds and to seek out the straying, without prejudice or fear, without proselytizing, but ready to widen her tent to embrace everyone. Among those dwelling in those existential peripheries, we find many migrants and refugees, displaced persons and victims of trafficking, to whom the Lord wants his love to be manifested and his salvation preached.”

Leaving the jab at “proselytizing” aside, it is comforting to hear that the Pope wants to see Christ’s salvation proclaimed to migrants.
However, the question remains, given the context: What exactly is this “salvation” that is being proclaimed?

The pope continues:

Quote:“Our societies will have a ‘colorful’ future, enriched by diversity and by cultural exchanges. Consequently, we must even now learn to live together in harmony and peace. (…) This is the ideal of the new Jerusalem (cf. Is 60; Rev 21:3), where all peoples are united in peace and harmony, celebrating the goodness of God and the wonders of creation. To achieve this ideal, however, we must make every effort to break down the walls that separate us and, in acknowledging our profound interconnection, build bridges that foster a culture of encounter. Today’s migration movements offer an opportunity for us to overcome our fears and let ourselves be enriched by the diversity of each person’s gifts. Then, if we so desire, we can transform borders into privileged places of encounter, where the miracle of an ever wider 'we' can come about.”

At a time when ethnic clan wars, violence and insecurity are rife in countries such as France, this vision clearly puts the responsibility for a more peaceful, nay, a possibly ideal world on the shoulders of those whose countries are being profoundly changed by the influx of people who do not share their history, what is left of their patriotism, their way of life and their faith, particularly the Christian faith. Wanting to defend one’s history and identity in the face of these risks is clearly being qualified as un-Catholic by the Pope. All this is coupled, in his conclusion, with an eco-political message rather than a call to conversion in view of eternal salvation:

Quote:“I invite all men and women in our world to make good use of the gifts that the Lord has entrusted to us to preserve and make his creation even more beautiful. ‘A nobleman went to a distant country to get royal power for himself and then return. He summoned 10 of his slaves, and gave them ten pounds, and said to them, 'Do business with these until I come back’ (Lk 19:12-13).

"The Lord will also demand of us an account of our work! In order to ensure the proper care of our common home, we must become a ‘we’ that is ever wider and more co-responsible, in the profound conviction that whatever good is done in our world is done for present and future generations. Ours must be a personal and collective commitment that cares for all our brothers and sisters who continue to suffer, even as we work towards a more sustainable, balanced and inclusive development.

"A commitment that makes no distinction between natives and foreigners, between residents and guests, since it is a matter of a treasure we hold in common, from whose care and benefits no one should be excluded.”

The confusion between the spiritual and the temporal, the virtuous and the ecological appears to be here to stay.


[Emphasis mine.]

Print this item

  The Liturgical Movement: How the Traditional Roman Rite, over One Thousand Years Old, was Destroyed
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 07:46 AM - Forum: In Defense of Tradition - Replies (1)

Taken from The Remnant Archives


The Liturgical Movement: How the Traditional Roman Rite, over One Thousand Years Old, was Destroyed
by Michael Davies


During the first session of the Second Vatican Council, in the debate on the Liturgy Constitution, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani asked: “Are these Fathers planning a revolution?” The Cardinal was old and partly blind. He spoke from the heart without a text about a subject which moved him deeply, and continued:
Quote:Are we seeking to stir up wonder, or perhaps scandal among the Christian people, by introducing changes in so venerable a rite, that has been approved for so many centuries and is now so familiar? The rite of Holy Mass should not be treated as if it were a piece of cloth to be refashioned according to the whim of each generation.

So concerned was he at the revolutionary potential of the Constitution, and having no prepared text, the elderly Cardinal exceeded the ten-minute time limit for speeches. At a signal from Cardinal Alfrink, who was presiding at the session, a technician switched off the microphone, and Cardinal Ottaviani stumbled back to his seat in humiliation.[1]

The Council Fathers clapped with glee, and the journalists to whose dictatorship Father Louis Bouyer claimed the Council had surrendered itself, were even more gleeful when they wrote their reports that night and when they wrote their books at the end of the session. When we laugh, we do not think, and, had they not been laughing, at least some of the bishops might have wondered whether, perhaps, Cardinal Ottaviani had a point.

He did indeed!

A liturgical revolution had been planned, one which very few of the 3000 bishops present in St. Peter’s would have endorsed had they suspected its true nature. The revolution had been planned before the Council, and its manifesto was the preparatory schema on the liturgy, the draft document for which the bishops would vote after discussing and amending it. The document can properly be termed the Bugnini Manifesto, as it was primarily the work of Vincentian priest, Father Annibale Bugnini. He managed to secure its approval shortly before being dismissed by Pope John XXIII from his post as secretary of the Liturgical Preparatory Commission and from his chair at the Lateran University.[2]

Bugnini’s allies on the Conciliar Liturgy Constitution, who had worked with him on preparing the schema, now had the task of securing its acceptance by the bishops without any substantial alterations. They did so with a degree of success that certainly exceeded the hopes of their wildest dreams.[3] They presumed that the bishops would be a bunch of useful idiots, men who preferred to laugh rather than think. “It was all good fun,” wrote Archbishop R. J. Dwyer, one of the most erudite of the American bishops.

Quote:“And when the vote came round, like wise Sir Joseph Porter, KCM, ‘We always voted at our parties’ call; we never thought of thinking for ourselves at all.’ That way you can save yourself a whole world of trouble.”[4]

The late Msgr. Klaus Gamber was described by Cardinal Ratzinger as "the one scholar who, among the army of pseudo-liturgists, truly represents the liturgical thinking of the centre of the Church." As regards the attitude the Council Fathers would have taken to the changes that have been foisted upon us in the name of Vatican II, he informs us in his book The Reform of the Roman Liturgy that: “One statement we can make with certainty is that the new Ordo of the Mass that has now emerged would not have been endorsed by the majority of the Council Fathers.”[5]

Why then did these bishops endorse the Liturgy Constitution? Archbishop Lefebvre has given us the answer: "There were time bombs in the Council."[6]

These "time bombs" were, of course, the ambiguous passages inserted in the official documents by the liberal periti or experts. The answer to Cardinal Ottaviani’s question as to whether the Council Fathers were planning a revolution is that most of the Fathers, the 3000 bishops, most certainly were not, but that some of the most influential periti, the experts who accompanied the bishops to Rome, were definitely planning a revolution. It is not exaggerating in any way to claim that these liberal periti hijacked Pope John’s Council, a fact which I have documented in great detail in my book on Vatican II.[7]

Douglas Woodruff, one of England's outstanding Catholic scholars, was editor of The Tablet during the Council. In one of his reports on the Council, he remarks:
Quote:"For in a sense this Council has been the Council of the periti, silent in the aula but so effective in the commissions and at bishops' ears.”[8]

This is an exceptionally perceptive comment, and it would be hard to improve on "the Council of the periti" as a one-phrase description of Vatican II. Bishop Lucey of Cork and Ross (Ireland) testified that the periti were more powerful than most bishops, even though they had no vote, "because they had the ear of Cardinal or the head of a national group of bishops, and they were influential in the drafting of Council documents. The expert . . . is the person with power.”[9]

The manner in which the liberal periti laid the foundations for their revolution during the first session of the Council was spelled out in precise detail by Cardinal John Heenan of Westminster (England):
Quote:The subject most fully debated was liturgical reform. It might be more accurate to say that the bishops were under the impression that the liturgy had been fully discussed. In retrospect it is clear that they were given the opportunity of discussing only general principles. Subsequent changes were more radical than those intended by Pope John and the bishops who passed the decree on the liturgy. His sermon at the end of the first session shows that Pope John did not suspect what was being planned by the liturgical experts.

God forbid, warned Cardinal Heenan, that the periti should take control of the commissions established after the Council to interpret it for the world. But this is precisely what happened.

The liberals had constructed the Liturgy Constitution as a weapon with which to initiate a revolution, and the Council Fathers had placed this weapon in the hands of the revolutionaries who had forged it. Archbishop R. J. Dwyer observed, with the benefit of hindsight, that the great mistake of the Council Fathers was
Quote:"to allow the implementation of the Constitution to fall into the hands of men who were either unscrupulous or incompetent. This is the so-called ‘Liturgical Establishment,’ a Sacred Cow which acts more like a white elephant as it tramples the shards of a shattered liturgy with ponderous abandon."[10]

What the experts had been planning was made clear on 24 October 1967 in the Sistine Chapel, when what was described as the Missa Normativa was celebrated before the Synod of Bishops by Father Annibale Bugnini himself, its chief architect. Incredible as it may seem, he had been appointed secretary of the post-Vatican II Liturgy Commission and thus had the power to orchestrate the composition of the new rite of Mass which he had envisaged in the schema he had prepared before his dismissal by John XXIII, and which had been passed virtually unchanged by the Council Fathers.

Why Pope Paul VI appointed the man who had been dismissed by his predecessor to this key position is a mystery which will probably never be answered. Less than half the bishops present voted in favor of the Missa Normativa, but they were ignored with the arrogance which was to become the most evident characteristic of the liturgical establishment to which the Council Fathers had been naive enough to entrust the implementation of the Liturgy Constitution.

The Missa Normativa was imposed on Catholics of the Roman Rite in 1969 as the Novus Ordo Missae, with a few changes, the most important of which was the restoration of the Roman Canon on the explicit instructions of Pope Paul VI. Readers of The Remnant will be familiar with its format and its deficiencies, which are documented in great detail in my book Pope Paul’s New Mass. It is the fruit of the Bugnini schema, and also the great merit of the book under review, which makes it clear that the Bugnini schema was the fruit of the liturgical movement, the true history of which is now available for us in English for the very first time in the book The Liturgical Movement—Guéranger to Beauduin to Bugnini by Fr. D. Bonneterre.

As most Catholics know very little about the liturgical movement, most of what they read in Father Bonneterre’s book will come as a complete surprise. Those who know anything of its history will be aware that it was endorsed by the pre-Vatican II popes and may be surprised at the strength of Father Bonneterre’s criticism and his insistence that it is the font and origin of the liturgical anarchy which is emptying our churches today. The inescapable conclusion of his book is that the movement, like Vatican II, was hijacked by liberals.

One does not need to be a liturgical scholar to know that Dom Prosper Guéranger was the greatest of all liturgists, and his principles and his work were fully endorsed by St. Pius X. They can be considered the founders of the liturgical movement. Does the linking of their names to that of Archbishop Bugnini via Dom Beauduin in the title of this book imply that they must bear some responsibility for the post-conciliar reform, which Monsignor Gamber has summed up in one devastating sentence: 
Quote:At this critical juncture, the traditional Roman rite, more than one thousand years old, has been destroyed.”[11]

Father Bonneterre refutes this suggestion in the introduction to his book and also makes clear his purpose in writing it:
Quote:The relationship suggested by such a title may seem rather bold to our reader, but it is not we who see a link between the author of the Institutions Liturgiques (Dom Guéranger) and the "gravedigger of the Mass" (Annibale Bugnini). It is the Roman authorities themselves. In fact, Pope Paul VI wrote to the Abbot of Solesmes on January 20, 1975, "I acknowledge the solidity and influence of the work of Dom Guéranger in whom the Liturgical Movement of today salutes its originator."

Already the Foreword of the Institutio Generalis of the New Missal claimed that contemporary reforms were the continuation of the work of St. Pius X. The conclusion of the Foreword claims that "Vatican II brought to completion all the efforts to bring the faithful closer to the Liturgy, efforts undertaken throughout the last four centuries, and especially in recent times, thanks to the liturgical zeal shown by St. Pius X and his successors." Thus, and we can give an infinite number of examples, the most advanced liturgists and the "Conciliar Church" herself claim that there is continuity, and even a "homogeneous development," in the Liturgical Movement between Dom Guéranger, or even St. Pius X, and Annibale Bugnini.

Quote:That is a deception that we cannot accept! That is why we have written this book on the Liturgical Movement. We will endeavour to show the way in which the movement was diverted from its course. Certainly, historically Dom Guéranger and St. Pius X are truly at the origin of the Liturgical Movement, but it is false and pernicious to claim that this movement, at least in its contemporary forms, is derived from their thought; worse still that it is the continuation of their work. To expound this thesis, we must study the history of the Liturgical Movement, acknowledge its magnificent fruits, but also establish from external evidence the early deviations of this grandiose enterprise which could have brought so much to the Church.

It is important to note the fact that the Liturgical Movement did indeed bring forth magnificent fruits, though rarely so in English-speaking countries. Father Bonneterre insists that his book is not intended to be purely negative:
Quote:Far from being negative, such a study enables us to discern what we must reject and what we must carefully conserve of the Liturgical Movement. It is vitally important that above all we who work for the maintenance of Catholic Liturgy become the heirs and successors of the work of Dom Guéranger and St. Pius X. We make the wishes of St. Pius X our own.

Father Bonneterre endorses the definition of the Liturgical Movement given by Dom Oliver Rousseau, OSB, as “the renewal of fervour for the liturgy among the clergy and the faithful.” This year marks the 100th anniversary of the election of St. Pius X. Traditional Catholics everywhere should be preparing appropriate celebrations. Father Bonneterre writes:
Quote:In 1903 the person who was to give the movement a definite impetus had just ascended to the See of Peter—St. Pius X. Gifted with an immense pastoral experience, this saintly pope suffered terribly from the decadence of liturgical life. But he knew that a trend for renewal was developing, and he decided to do his utmost to ensure that it bring forth good fruits. That is why on November 22, 1903, he published his famous motu proprio “tra le Sollecitudini” restoring Gregorian chant. In this document he inserted the vital sentence which went on to play a determining role in the evolution of the Liturgical Movement:
Quote:Our keen desire being that the true Christian spirit may once more flourish, cost what it may, and be maintained among all the faithful.... We deem it necessary to provide before aught else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for no other object than that of acquiring this spirit from its primary and indispensable source, which is the active participation in the most holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church. (Tra le Sollecitudini, November 22,1903.)

For St. Pius X as for Dom Guéranger, writes Father Bonneterre, “the liturgy is essentially theocentric; it is for the worship of God rather than for the teaching of the faithful. Nevertheless, this great pastor underlined an important aspect of the liturgy: it is educative of the true Christian spirit. But let us stress that this function of the liturgy is only secondary.” The tragedy of the liturgical movement was that it would make this secondary aspect of the liturgy the primary aspect, as is made manifest today in any typical parish celebration of the New Mass. Father Bonneterre has nothing but praise for initial stages of the movement: “Born of Dom Guéranger's genius and the indomitable energy of St. Pius X, the movement at this time brought magnificent fruits of spiritual renewal.”

If there is a villain of the book he is Dom Lambert Beauduin, but Father Bonneterre has no hesitation in paying tribute to the great contribution that he made to the movement in its early years:
The merit of having understood all that could be learned from the teaching of St. Pius X falls to Dom Lambert Beauduin (1873-1960). Alas, this monk was unable to maintain throughout his life this hierarchy of the ends of the liturgy, i.e., worship first, teaching second, as we shall see in the course of this study, but let us not anticipate.

Dom Lambert Beauduin at first was a priest of the diocese of Liege, a "workers' missionary" under Pope Leo XIII. In 1906, at the age of thirty-three, he entered the Abbey of Mont Cesar, which had been founded by the monks of Maredsous at Louvain a few years earlier (1899). Because of his previous activity among the secular clergy, his mind had become habitually occupied by the problems of the apostolate and pastoral work, and so he viewed the liturgy in light of his habitual preoccupations. Very speedily he "discovered" in the liturgy, following St. Pius X, a wonderful method for forming the faithful in the Christian life. In 1909 he launched a Liturgical Movement at Mont Cesar which was an immediate success.

It is important to set the Liturgical Movement within the context of the Modernist crisis which is documented in my book Partisans of Error. Father Bonneterre writes:
Quote:Crushed by St. Pius X, the Modernists understood that they could not penetrate the Church by theology, that is, by a clear exposé of their doctrines. They had recourse to the Marxist notion of praxis, having understood that the Church could become modernist through action, especially through the sacred action of the liturgy. Revolutions always use the living energies of the organism itself, taking control of them little by little and finally using them to destroy the body under attack. It is the well-known process of the Trojan horse.

The Liturgical Movement of Dom Guéranger, of St. Pius X, and of the Belgian monasteries, in origin at any rate, was a considerable force in the Church, a prodigious means of spiritual rejuvenation which, moreover, brought forth good fruits. The Liturgical Movement was thus the ideal Trojan horse for the modernist revolution. It was easy for all the revolutionaries to hide themselves in the belly of such a large carcass. Before Mediator Dei, who among the Catholic hierarchy was concerned about liturgy? What vigilance was applied to detecting this particularly subtle form of practical Modernism?

It was from the 1920's onward that it became clear that the Liturgical Movement had been diverted from its original admirable aims:
Quote:Dom Beauduin first of all favored in an exaggerated way the teaching and preaching aspect of the liturgy, and then conceived the idea of making it serve the "Ecumenical Movement" to which he was devoted body and soul. Dom Parsch tied the movement to Biblical renewal. Dom Casel made it the vehicle of a fanatical antiquarianism and of a completely personal conception of the "Christian mystery." These first revolutionaries were largely overtaken by the generation of the new liturgists of the various preconciliar liturgical commissions.

This new generation is described by Father Bonneterre as the “young wolves.” In any revolution it is almost routine for the first moderate revolutionaries to be replaced or even eradicated by more radical revolutionaries, as was the case with the Russian Revolution when the Mensheviks (majority) were ousted by the Bolsheviks (minority).

Faced by this excessive acceleration of the movement, Dom Beaudin was frightened... We witness here the first phenomena of “permanent excesses,” a feature of all revolutions: yesterday’s managers are overtaken by today’s agitators, the first revolutionaries are overtaken by today’s agitators.

Just as nothing could prevent the rise to power of the Bolsheviks, nothing could prevent the triumph of the young wolves:
Quote:After the Second World War, the movement became a force that nothing could stop. Protected from on high by eminent prelates, the new liturgists took control little by little of the Commission for Reform of the Liturgy founded by Pius XII, and influenced the reforms devised by this Commission at the end of the pontificate of Pius XII and at the beginning of that of John XXIII. Already masters, thanks to the Pope, of the preconciliar liturgical commission, the new liturgists got the Fathers of the Council to accept a self-contradictory and ambiguous document, the constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Lercaro and Fr. Bugnini, themselves very active members of the Italian Liturgical Movement, directed the efforts of the Consilium which culminated in the promulgation of the New Mass.

How could Pope Pius XII, the Pastor Angelicus, the most scholarly Pope of the century, and one whose orthodoxy could not possibly be questioned, have allowed the young wolves of the liturgical movement to consolidate their power during his pontificate? Father Bonneterre makes it clear that this saintly pontiff was well-aware of the subversive elements within the Liturgical Movement. In His Encyclical Mediator Dei, perhaps the most sublime exposition of the true nature of the Mass ever to be written, Pope Pius wrote:
Quote:“We observe that certain people are too fond of novelty and go astray from the oaths of sound doctrine and prudence.... They sully this sacred cause with errors, errors which affect the Catholic faith and ascetical teaching.”

Father Bonneterre insists that, alas:
Quote:Pope Pius XII did not know the true position of the Liturgical Movement. Its most dangerous leaders were being supported and protected by the highest dignitaries of the Church. How could the Pope have suspected that the "experts" who were so highly praised by Cardinals Bea and Lercaro were in fact the most dangerous enemies of the Church?

He laments the fact that: “Thus Pius XII gave the most inopportune encouragement to the congress at Assisi:
Quote:The Liturgical Movement is like an indication of the plans of divine providence for the present time, like the wind of the Holy Ghost blowing through the Church, bringing men closer to the mysteries of the faith and the treasures of grace, which flow from the active participation of the faithful in the life of the liturgy.”

Father Bonneterre comments:
Quote:“This declaration could have been true and timely before 1920; in 1956 it was no longer so. In the intervening years, the Liturgical Movement had denied its origins and abandoned the principles laid down by Dom Guéranger and St. Pius X.”

The most influential of the new liturgists, the great architect of the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution, was Father Annibale Bugnini. Father Bonneterre recounts a visit by Father Bugnini to a liturgical convention held at Thieulin near Chartres at which forty religious superiors and seminary rectors were present, making clear the extent of the influence of the liturgical Bolsheviks on the Church establishment in France. He cites a Father Duployé as stating:
Quote:Some days before the reunion at Thieulin, I had a visit from an Italian Lazarist, Fr. Bugnini, who had asked me to obtain an invitation for him. The Father listened very attentively, without saying a word, for four days. During our return journey to Paris, as the train was passing along the Swiss Lake at Versailles, he said to me: "I admire what you are doing, but the greatest service I can render you is never to say a word in Rome about all that I have just heard."

Father Bonneterre comments:
Quote:This revealing text shows us one of the first appearances of the "gravedigger of the Mass," a revolutionary more clever than the others, he who killed the Catholic liturgy before disappearing from the official scene. So it was at this date that the "Counter-Church" completely pervaded the Liturgical Movement. Until then it had been occupied by the modernist and ecumenical forces: after the war it was rotten enough for Freemasonry to take direct control of the reins: Satan got into the Trojan Horse.

The reference to Freemasonry is based on the fact that in 1975 Pope Paul VI removed Bugnini, an Archbishop by then, from his position as Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, dissolved the entire Congregation, and in 1976 exiled him as Nuncio to Iran. Pope Paul did this because he had been given documentation which convinced him that the Archbishop was a freemason. Bugnini denied that he was a mason, but accepted that he was dismissed because the Pope believed him to be a member of the Brotherhood. All the relevant documentation is contained in Chapter 24 of my book Pope Paul’s New Mass.

Father Bonneterre explains that:
Quote:Although the reforms of Pius XII had given some satisfaction to the leaders of the Movement, the implacable orthodoxy that the Pope had maintained throughout had not been to their taste. New and more daring reforms were called for, and they needed a pope who understood the problem of ecumenism and who was a wholehearted supporter of the Movement.

He claims that “The news of the death of the Angelic Pastor was received with almost delirious joy by the deviated Liturgical Movement.” The aged Dom Lambert Beauduin had not the least doubt as to the cardinal he hoped would be elected, and confided his hopes to Father Bouyer:
Quote:If they elect Roncalli," he said "all will be saved. He will be capable of calling a Council and canonizing ecumenism..." Silence fell; then, with a return of his old mischievousness, he said with flashing eyes, "I believe we have a good chance. Most of the cardinals are not sure what to do. They are capable of voting for him

Father Bonneterre comments:
Quote:To consecrate ecumenism, yes, indeed, but also to consecrate the Liturgical Movement, such would be the task of the long-awaited Council. For more than forty years the new liturgists had been spreading their errors, they had succeeded in influencing a considerable portion of the Catholic hierarchy, and they had won some encouraging reforms from the Holy See. All this patient underground work was about to bear fruit. The liturgical revolutionaries took advantage of the Constitution on the Liturgy to get their ideas accepted. Then, when they were appointed members of the Consilium, they only had to draw the extreme conclusions from the principles of Vatican II.

Father Bonneterre insists that:
Quote:This new rite carries on in its turn all the errors which have come forth since the beginning of the deviations of the "Movement." This rite is ecumenical, antiquarian, community-based, democratic, and almost totally desacralized; it also echoes the theological deviations of the modernists and the Protestants: toning down the sense of the Real Presence and diminution of the ministerial role of the priesthood, of the sacrificial character of the Mass, and especially of its propitiatory character. The Eucharist becomes much more a communal love feast than the renewal of the Sacrifice of the Cross.

It is thus with the New Mass that the Liturgical Movement which had started so well ended so badly. The 1959 liturgy of the Protestant Taizé community is printed as an appendix to the book, and shows some disturbing similarities to the New Mass. Father Bonneterre does not, however, refer to the alarming correspondence of the changes, principally omissions, made to the Order of Mass in the Missal of St. Pius V in the concoction of the order of Mass in the 1970 Missal and the almost identical omissions from the Sarum Missal made by Thomas Cranmer in concocting his 1549 Communion Service. These are documented in great detail in my book Pope Paul’s New Mass. Nor does he refer to the equally alarming correspondence between the liturgical principles permeating the Mass of Paul VI and those of the pseudo-synod of Pistoia condemned as pernicious by Pope Pius VI in his encyclical Auctorem Fidei of 1794.

I would also say that, in places, Father Bonneterre seems to presume that the rite of Mass concocted by Father Bugnini’s Consilium represents what the leading members of the Liturgical Movement were aiming at. This might be true in the case of the “young wolves” who took over the movement, but is certainly not true of priests such as Beauduin, Casel, Parsch, or Bouyer. The principal aim of these men was to use the existing liturgy to achieve their pastoral aims, and not to impose a radical reform which made the liturgy that they knew, loved, and celebrated daily unrecognizable.

In fairness to Father Bonneterre he does state that the leading figures of the original movement were frightened by the thinking of the young wolves. I have quoted him to this effect in this review. It would have been useful had he quoted the reaction of a priest such as Father Louis Bouyer, whom he cites quite often, to the actual reform that has been foisted upon us. He stated in 1969 that
Quote:"We must speak plainly: there is practically no liturgy worthy of the name today in the Catholic Church"[12]; and

"Perhaps in no other area is there a greater distance (and even formal opposition) between what the Council worked out and what we actually have”[13]; and that, in practice,

“those who took it upon themselves to apply [?] the Council’s directives on this point have turned their backs deliberately on what Beauduin, Casel, and Pius Parsch had set out to do, and to which I had tried vainly to add some small contribution of my own.”[14]

In 1975, Father Bouyer stated:
Quote:"The Catholic liturgy has been overthrown under the pretext of rendering it more acceptable to the secularised masses, but in reality to conform it with the buffooneries that the religious orders were induced to impose, whether they liked it or not, upon the other clergy. We do not have to wait for the results: a sudden decline in religious practice, varying between twenty and forty per cent among those who were practising Catholics.... Those who were not have not displayed a trace of interest in this pseudo-missionary liturgy, particularly the young whom they had deluded themselves into thinking that they would win over with their clowning.[15]

The value of Father Bonneterre’s book would have been enhanced considerably had he been asked to adapt and update it by researching the wealth of documentation published since he wrote it in 1980, the most important item in this respect being the posthumous memoirs or Archbishop Bugnini, which provide the most valuable source available for researching the actual concoction of Pope Paul’s New Mass.[16] There are frequent references in this book to figures included in that of Father Bonneterre, and to many of the experts who are not. One of these, Father Joseph Gelineau, is described by Archbishop Bugnini as one of the "great masters of the international liturgical world".[17] This “great master tells us, with commendable honesty, but no a trace of regret:
Quote:Let those who like myself have known and sung a Latin-Gregorian High Mass remember it if they can. Let them compare it with the Mass that we now have. Not only the words, the melodies, and some of the gestures are different. To tell the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists (le rite romain tel que nous l'avons connu n'existe plus). It has been destroyed (il est détruit).” [18]

Despite these reservations, The Liturgical Movement—Guéranger to Beauduin to Bugnini is a book which, like Msgr. Gamber’s Reform of the Roman Rite, no Catholic can afford to be without if he wishes to understand the post-Vatican II liturgical revolution. It is profusely illustrated and has an excellent index.

[Emphasis mine.]


[1] M. Davies, Pope John’s Council (PJC), p. 93
[2] M. Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass (PPNM), p. 499.
[3] PPNM, p. 500.
[4] PJC, pp. 92-93.
[5] K. Gamber, The Reform of the Roman Liturgy (RRL), K. Gamber ( Harrison, N.Y.,1993), p. 61.
[6] Marcel Lefebvre, Un Leveque Parle (Paris 1974), p. 196.
[7] PJC, Chapter 5.
[8] The Tablet, 27 November 1965, p. 1318.
[9] Catholic Standard (Dublin), 17 October 1973.
[10] The Tidings, 9 July 1971.
[11] RRL, p. 99.
[12] L. Bouyer, The Decomposition of Catholicism (London, 1970), p. 99. Referred to as DC in subsequent notes.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Religieux et clercs contre Dieu (Paris, 1975), p. 12.
[16] A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy: 1948-1975 (Collegeville, Minnesota, 1990).
[17] Bugnini, p. 221.
[18] J. Gelineau, Demain la liturgie (Paris, 1976), pp. 9-10.

Print this item

  Cardinal, bishops, priests ask Pope to stop schism of Catholic Church in Germany
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 06:33 AM - Forum: Pope Francis - No Replies

Cardinal, bishops, priests ask Pope to stop schism of Catholic Church in Germany
The Church in Germany is 'daily tending' towards 'declared schism and heresy.'

May 6, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A cardinal, two bishops, and a dozen priests are asking Pope Francis to intervene to stop the Catholic church in Germany from going into “schism” by continuing on its heretical Synodal Path and thereby separating itself from the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church founded by Christ.

“The German Synodal Path, initiated in 2019, has been, during the past two years, fertile ground for the planning and subsequent homogenization of ideas and theories that are blatantly contrary to the immutable and perennial Magisterium of the Holy Catholic Church, founded by the Divine Savior on the solid rock of the Apostles,” the appeal states.

“Concerned about this sad situation, we Pastors of the Catholic Church and faithful laity committed to the defense of the Truth of the Faith, ask the Holy Father to take the necessary measures to put an end to these drifts of the German Synodal Path and, if necessary, to apply the appropriate canonical sanctions against the promoters of this tremendous deviation from both doctrine and communion with the Keys of Peter,” it adds.

The May 5 appeal is signed by Bishop Emeritus of Hong Kong Cardinal Joseph Zen, Kazakhstan Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Switzerland Bishop Marian Eleganti, 12 priests, including U.S. canon lawyer Fr. Gerald Murray, and more than 50 other laymen and women in the fields of law, teaching, and health. The appeal first appeared on Marco Tosatti’s blog Stilum Curiae.

The appeal lays out the main errors being promoted by the Synodal Path, largely involving a departure from the Church’s teaching on marriage and sexual morality.

“The errors being spread include the declared attack on the Priesthood, both by means of the effort to abolish ecclesiastical celibacy as well as imposing the ordination of women, and also the declared attack on Marriage, intentionally attacking the indissoluble union between a man and a woman and imposing and equating sodomitic unions with the love that Our Lord Jesus Christ has elevated to the dignity of a Sacrament,” the appeal states.

The signers of the appeal point out that the Synodal Path has departed from the Church’s teaching, as stated by the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that the “matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring.”

As evidence of this departure from Church teaching on marriage, the appeal signers point to the fact that hundreds of German clergy, with support from various bishops, are planning to bless homosexual couples on May 10 in defiance of the Church’s ban on such blessings that was reiterated in March by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). In its March 15 declaration, the CDF made it clear that “it is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage (i.e., outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open in itself to the transmission of life), as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex,” stating that God “does not and cannot bless sin.”

The signers of the appeal note that the Synodal Path along with events such as blessings for homosexual couples makes it clear that the Church in Germany is “daily tending” towards “declared schism and heresy.” Schism is defined in Canon Law as the “refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” The appeal signers point out that clergy who bless homosexual couples incur “excommunication latae sententiae” on themselves for their actions.

Fr. Gero Weishaupt, a canon lawyer and a tribunal judge of the Diocese of Cologne, told kath.net in a May 3 interview — which was translated into English by Catholic World Report — that bishops who permit blessings for homosexual couples to be performed in their dioceses, or who encourage them, or who even merely tolerate such blessings engage in an act of outright “disobedience to the Pope” for which there are immediate “canonical consequences.”

“With this disobedience, the bishop breaks the oath of fidelity that he swore when he took office. Besides this promise of fidelity to the Pope, the bishop promises thereby to protect the unity of the Universal Church and hence to make every effort ‘to preserve pure and unchanged the faith that has been handed down by the Apostles.’ Therefore he is ‘obliged to promote the common order of the whole Church and therefore to insist that all ecclesiastical laws be obeyed,’” Weishaupt said.

“The disobedience manifested by the refusal to carry out the papal responsum [that banned blessing for homosexuals] therefore disrupts unity with the Pope. It is a schismatic act, of course with an underlying heresy, inasmuch as the blessing of homosexual relationships expresses at the very least the view that besides marriage between a man and a woman there can be other relationships ordered to sexual union,” he added.

Such disobedience results in the bishop’s “excommunication automatically, as a latae sententiae penalty, i.e. it occurs as soon as a bishop publicly supports the blessing of homosexual unions, by that very fact.”

“Such a latae sententiae penalty would have to be declared by the Pope through a decree, after an admonition, so that it could take effect canonically in the external forum,” he added.

Priests who perform such blessings are also automatically excommunicated, said Weishaupt. If dissenting bishops refuse to carry out their duty by excommunicating such a priest, the laity must bring their complaint to the Apostolic Nuncio, or directly to the Pope, or to a Roman dicastery, such as the Congregation for the Faith, or the Congregation for Bishops, or the Congregation for Clergy, he added.

The signers of the appeal to the Pope conclude with a call for Catholics around the world to make May 10 a day of “prayer and reparation for all the offenses and sacrilegious actions committed by the deviant Pastors of the German Church.”

They ask laity to pray the Litany of the Sacred Heart on that day and to offer their Communions in reparation for sin. They ask priests to offer the Holy Mass on that day specifically for the remission of sins.

Print this item

  Digital Dollar Project to launch five U.S. central bank digital currency pilots
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 06:28 AM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

Digital Dollar Project to launch five U.S. central bank digital currency pilots

Reuters | May 33, 2021


The U.S. nonprofit Digital Dollar Project said on Monday it will launch five pilot programs over the next 12 months to test the potential uses of a U.S. central bank digital currency, the first effort of its kind in the United States.

The private-sector pilots initially will be funded by Accenture Plc (ACN.N) and involve financial firms, retailers and NGOs, among others. The aim is to generate data that could help U.S. policymakers develop a digital dollar.

A partnership between Accenture and the Digital Dollar Foundation, the Digital Dollar Project was created last year to promote research into a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC).

"There are conferences and papers coming out every week around the world on CBDCs based on data from other countries," said Christopher Giancarlo, former chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and co-founder of the Digital Dollar Foundation.

"What there is not, is any real data and testing from the United States to inform that debate. We're seeking to generate that real-world data," Giancarlo added.

CBDCs are the digital equivalent of banknotes and coins, giving holders a direct digital claim on the central bank and allowing them to make instant electronic payments.

While debit cards or payment apps are a form of digital cash, those transactions are created by commercial banks based on money central banks credit to those banks' accounts. They are not fully government-backed, can take days to settle, and often incur fees. Cryptocurrencies, meanwhile, are controlled by private actors.

Central banks around the world, including in China and Europe, are revving up CBDC projects to fend off threats from cryptocurrencies and improve payment systems.

As guardian of the world’s most widely used currency, the U.S. Federal Reserve is moving more cautiously. It is working with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to build a technology platform for a hypothetical digital dollar, but chair Jerome Powell said last week that it is “far more important” to get a digital dollar right than it is to be fast.

Giancarlo said Powell was correct to be cautious but that as China pushes ahead, the United States must drive a discussion on incorporating U.S. values such as privacy and freedom of commerce and speech into the development of CBDCs.

"It's vital that the U.S. asserts leadership as it has in previous technological innovations," Giancarlo added.

A digital dollar could also boost financial inclusion in the United States, where transaction fees impede the access of many Americans to mainstream financial services, Giancarlo said.

The pilot programs, three of which will launch in the next two months, will complement the Fed's MIT project by generating data on the functional, sociological, business uses, benefits and other facets, of a digital dollar. The data is due to be released publicly.

Accenture has worked on a number of CBDC projects including in Canada, Singapore and France.

David Treat, a senior managing director at Accenture, said CBDCs would exist alongside other forms of physical and electronic money, rather than replace them.

“It’s not a panacea for all money,” Treat said. “We will be using physical cash and coin for some time.”

Print this item

  Pfizer plans to file for full FDA approval of Covid vaccine at the end of May 2021
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 06:23 AM - Forum: COVID Vaccines - No Replies

Pfizer plans to file for full FDA approval of Covid vaccine at the end of this month


CNBC | May 4, 2021


Pfizer said Tuesday it plans to file for full U.S. approval of its Covid-19 vaccine with German drugmaker BioNTech at the end of this month. If the FDA signs off, the company will be able to market the shot directly to consumers.

In its earnings report, Pfizer said first-quarter sales of its Covid-19 vaccine was $3.5 billion, roughly 24% of its revenue for the quarter. Its profit and revenue beat Wall Street’s expectations.

Here’s how Pfizer did compared with what Wall Street expected, according to average estimates compiled by Refinitiv:

Adjusted EPS: 93 cents per share vs. 77 cents expected
Revenue: $14.58 billion vs. $13.51 billion expected

The company now expects full-year sales of $26 billion from the vaccine, up from its previous forecast of about $15 billion. It expects an adjusted pretax profit in the high 20% range of revenue for the vaccine.

Shares of Pfizer rose 1.3% in premarket trading.

“Based on what we’ve seen, we believe that a durable demand for our Covid-19 vaccine, similar to that of the flu vaccines, is a likely outcome,” Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told investors on an earnings call.

Revenue from Pfizer’s oncology, internal medicine, hospital and rare disease units rose by double digits during the quarter, according to the earnings report. The company’s inflammation and immunology unit generated about $1 billion in sales, a 9% increase from a year earlier.

Pfizer reported double-digit growth in sales for many of its cancer drugs, including Inlyta, Bosulif and Lorbrena.

The company received U.S. authorization of its Covid vaccine in late December. Since then, Pfizer has distributed millions of doses to the U.S., with the goal of delivering 300 million doses by the end of July.

During an earnings call, Bourla addressed a recent slow down in the pace of vaccinations in the U.S.

He said it is “normal” as more people get vaccinated and the people leftover are those reluctant to get the shots. He expects an increase in vaccinations once the FDA authorizes the shots for kids ages 12 to 15, which is expected to happen this month.

Usually, it takes the Food and Drug Administration nearly a year or longer to determine whether a drug is safe and effective for use in the general public. Due to the once-in-a-century pandemic, which has killed nearly 600,000 people in the United States, the FDA permitted the use of the shots under an Emergency Use Authorization.

The authorization grants conditional approval based on two months of data. It’s not the same as a Biologic License Application, which requires six months of data and secures full approval.

The company also said it expects to apply for an EUA for a booster shot that could protect against Covid variants during the second half of July, according to a slide presentation that accompanied the company’s earnings release. It expects to apply for authorization for its vaccine for use in toddlers and younger children in September and infants in November.

It also expects vaccine safety data for pregnant women in late July.

On April 1, Pfizer and BioNTech announced that new data from their clinical trial showed their two-dose vaccine was safe and more than 91% effective six months after the second dose. At the time, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said the new data positions the companies “to submit a Biologics License Application to the U.S. FDA.”

If the vaccine is fully approved, it sets the stage for Pfizer and BioNTech to begin advertising the shots directly to consumers and change its pricing. It also allows the shot to stay on the market once the pandemic is over and the U.S. is no longer considered in an “emergency.”

Print this item

  May 7th - St. Stanislaus
Posted by: Stone - 05-07-2021, 06:18 AM - Forum: May - No Replies

May 7 – St Stanislaus, Bishop and Martyr
Taken from The Liturgical Year by Dom Prosper Gueranger (1841-1875)

[Image: 4-2.jpg?w=427&ssl=1]


The 11th Century—the Century of contest between the Priests of the Church and Barbarism—deputes today another Martyr to our Risen Jesus. It is Stanislaus, loved by noble Poland as one of her chief protectors. He was slain at the Altar by a Christian Prince whom he had reproved for his crimes. The blood of the courageous Pontiff was mingles, and in the same sacrifice, with that of our Redeemer. What an invincible energy there is in these Lambs whom Jesus has sent amidst the wolves! They seem to be changes, all at once, into Lions, like Jesus himself was, at his Resurrection. There is not a Century that has not had its Martyrs: some for the Faith, others for the unity of the Church, others for her Liberty, others for Justice, others for Charity, and others, like our great Saint of today, for the maintenance of Morals. The 19th Century, too, has had its Martyrs; scarcely a year elapses without our hearing of some that have been added to the bright list in the far East; and who knows but what there will be Martyrs even in Europe before the remaining thirty years have transpired? At the commencement of last Century, there was little probability of its providing such an abundant harvest of Martyrdom as it did. Of one thing we are quite sure: whatever persecutions may arise, the Spirit of Fortitude will not be wanting to the Champions of Truth. Martyrdom is one of the Church’s characteristics, and it has never failed her. The Apostles who are clinging to Jesus during these days preceding his Ascension drank the Chalice which he drank; and only yesterday, we were honoring the favorite disciple’s martyrdom—yes, even he had to tread the path prepared for all.

Holy Church tells us, in the account we now subjoin, how the saintly Bishop of Cracow was offered the glorious Chalice, and how courageously he accepted it.

Quote:Stanislaus was born at Cracow in Poland. His parents (who were of a noble family), after being thirty years without children, obtained him from God by prayer. He gave promise, even from his infancy, of future sanctity. While young, he applied hard to study, and made great progress in Canon Law and Theology. After the death of his parents, he wished to embrace the monastic life, and therefore distributed his rich fortune among the poor. But divine Providence willing otherwise, he was made a Canon and Preacher of the Cathedral of Cracow, by Bishop Lampert, whose successor he afterwards became. In the duties thus imposed upon him, he shone in every pastoral virtue, especially in that of charity to the poor.

Boleslaus was the then King of Poland. The Saint incurred his grave displeasure for having publicly reprimanded his notorious immorality. Wherefore in a solemn meeting of the grandees of his kingdom, the King summoned him to appear in judgment, to answer the accusation of his having appropriated to himself some land purchased in the name of his Cathedral. The bishop not being able to produce the deeds of sale, and the witnesses being afraid to speak the truth, he promised to bring before the court within three days the seller of the land, by name Peter, who had died three years previously. His proposition excited laughter, but was accepted. For three days did the man of God apply himself to fasting and prayer; and, on the day appointed, after offering up the sacrifice of the Mass, he commanded Peter to rise from his grave, who, there and then, returned to life, and followed the Bishop to the King’s tribunal. There, to the bewilderment of the King and the audience, he gave his testimony regarding the sale of the land, and the price duly paid him by the Bishop. This done, he again slept in the Lord.

After several times admonishing Boleslaus, but all to no purpose, Stanislaus separated him from communion with the Faithful. Maddened with anger, the King sent soldiers into the Church, that they might put the holy Bishop to death. They thrice endeavored to do so, but were, each time, repelled by the hidden power of God. The impious King himself then went; and finding the Priest of God offering the unspotted Victim at the Altar, he beheaded him with his own hand. The corpse was then cut in pieces and thrown into a field; but it was miraculously defended from wild beasts by eagles. During the night, the Canons of Cracow, aided by a heavenly light, collected the scattered members, and having placed them in their natural position, they found that they were immediately joined to each other, so as that not a single mark of a wound was traceable. God manifested the sanctity of his servant by many other miracles, which occurred after his death, and which induced Pope Innocent the Fourth to proceed to his Canonization.

Thou wast powerful in word and work, O Stanislaus! and our Lord rewarded thee with a Martyr’s crown. From thy throne of glory, cast a look of pity upon us; obtain for us from God that gift of fortitude, which was so prominent in thee, and which we so much need in order to surmount the obstacles which impede our progress. Our Risen Lord must have no cowards among his soldiers. The Kingdom, into which he is about to enter—he took it by assault; and he tells us plainly that if we would follow him thither, we must prepare to use violence. Brave soldier of the living God! get us brave hearts. We need them for our combat—whether that be one of open violence for the Faith or Unity of the Church, or one which is to be fought with the invisible enemies of our salvation. Thou wast indeed a good shepherd, for the presence of the world neither made thee flee nor fear—ask our Heavenly Father to send us Shepherds like thee. Succor Holy Church, for she has to contend with enemies in every part of the world. Convert her persecutors, as thou convertedst Boleslaus; he was thy murderer, but thy Martyrdom won mercy for him. Remember thy dear Poland, which honors thee with such fervent devotion. Break the iron yoke that has so long crushed her. Yes—it is time for her to regain her rank among nations. During the severe trials, which her sins have drawn down upon her, she has maintained the sacred link of Catholic Faith and Unity; she has been patient and faithful; as our Risen Jesus to have pity on her, and reward her patience and fidelity. May he mercifully grant her a share in his Resurrection—that day will be one of joy for the whole Christian world, and a new Canticle will be sung throughout the earth, to the Lord our God.

Print this item

  In new interview, Abp. Viganò discusses Vatican II, decline of Marian devotion, and the NO Mass
Posted by: Stone - 05-06-2021, 07:21 PM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò - No Replies

In new interview, Abp. Viganò discusses Vatican II, decline of Marian devotion, and the Novus Ordo Mass
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò credits Our Lady with the 'gift' of his 'conversion.' He says, 'what unites heretics of all times is their intolerance of the cult
reserved for the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Marian doctrine it presupposes and of which it is the liturgical expression.'


[Image: vigano_cic_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg]


May 6, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In a new interview, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has once more returned to the topic of the Second Vatican Council, the loss of Marian devotion followed by that Council, as well as the deficiencies of the Novus Ordo Mass.

Speaking with the Italian website Radio Spada – this is the second installment of two parts of an interview (here part one) – the Italian prelate sees a satanic involvement in the decline of devotions to Our Lady after the Council and explains that “the gift of my ‘conversion’ – of my becoming aware of the conciliar deception and the present apostasy – became possible thanks to my constant devotion towards the Blessed Mother, which I have never ceased to have.” Describing how Our Lady has been undermined – even denied in her role as Co-Redemptrix – Archbishop Viganò points out that “what unites heretics of all times is their intolerance of the cult reserved for the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Marian doctrine it presupposes and of which it is the liturgical expression.”

For him, there is no doubt that the Holy Trinity “is pleased to share the work of Redemption with Our Lady,” to whom so many special gifts had been granted, including her immaculate conception and her perpetual virginity.

The prelate, moreover, discusses the problem of the Second Vatican Council and the fact that “the conciliar Church was embracing the liturgical and doctrinal positions of Protestantism.” Part of that Protestantization of the Church after Vatican II can be seen in the diminishment of the Marian devotions. States the archbishop:

Quote:The decline of Marian devotion after the Council is only the latest expression, and I would say the most aberrant and scandalous, of the aversion of Satan towards the Queen of Heaven. It is one of the signs that that assembly did not come from God, just as those who dare even to question the titles and merits of the Most Holy Virgin do not come from God. On the other hand, what son would allow his own mother to be put down in order to please his father’s enemies? And how much more serious is this abject complicity with heretics and pagans when the honor of the Mother of God and our Mother is at stake?

As can be seen here, Archbishop Viganò goes so far as to conclude that a council that led to the undermining of the Blessed Mother could surely not “come from God.”

He also makes another strong statement: in his eyes, the Novus Ordo Mass should one day be abolished. He first discusses the problem of having two forms of the Latin Rite – the “ordinary” and the “extraordinary” form – and says that it is

Quote:at least difficult to maintain that the Mystical Body can raise up liturgical prayer – which is an official, solemn, and public action – to Her Head with a double voice: this two-fold nature can signify duplicity and is repugnant to the simplicity and linearity of Catholic Truth, just as it is repugnant to God, whose Word is Eternal and is the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity.

In his view, “Christ cannot address the Father with a perfect voice – which the Innovators call the ‘Extraordinary Form’ – and at the same time with an imperfect voice, winking at the enemies of God, in an ‘Ordinary Form.’”

In light of these strong criticisms of the Novus Ordo Mass, Archbishop Viganò explains that at this point, he believes that the current situation has to be accepted for a certain time, “as a transitory phase,” in which the traditional Liturgy can continue to spread, thereby “doing much good to souls, in view of a necessary return to the One Catholic Rite and to the indispensable abolition of its conciliar version.” That is to say, Viganò thinks that the Novus Ordo Mass needs to be abolished at some point in history. He states:

Quote:Let us not forget that in the Liturgy the Church addresses herself to the Majesty of God, not to men; the baptized, living members of the Church, unite together in liturgical prayer by means of the Sacred Ministers, who are “pontiffs” between them and the Most Holy Trinity. To make the liturgy into a sort of anthropocentric event is most alien to the Catholic spirit.



Second Interview of Radio Spada with Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò


Your Excellency, we are happy to “complete” our interview with you, which we began in March on the occasion of the presentation of the new book Neo-Vatican Gallery by Marco Tosatti, along with your preface (in addition to the English translation, the book has also been published in Italian and Spanish). First of all, let’s observe that that first conversation went all over the world in just a few weeks; it was translated into many languages and opened a lively debate. There was widespread interest and attention; here and there a few minor criticisms – above all on the theme of “Benedict XVI” – but not very consistent on the theological level: the polemic mainly concerned the theme you raised in relation to a certain Hegelian influence on the thought of Ratzinger. Have you been aware of this aspect of the discussion? If you like, this interview could be an occasion for you to reply; otherwise, we can proceed with the rest.

We will divide today’s conversation into several parts, which we will outline here for the benefit of our readers, in order to assist their understanding: first, the present role of the English-speaking world in defense of the Tradition, then the Marian question, next the liturgical question, and finally a section on ecumenism.

Let’s begin then with the theme of the English-speaking world, to which Marco Tosatti’s new book is addressed. Historically, opposition to conciliar ideology “spoke a lot of French” (also because of the leadership role of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre), but today one notices a significant expansion of this front among those who speak English, in particular in the United States. Moreover, the famous “Agatha Christie Indult” should not be forgotten, even though that operation had obvious limitations, as a sign that was not insignificant for its time (the early 1970s). Because of your diplomatic postings, and in particular your role as Apostolic Nuncio to Washington, you have been familiar with the English-speaking world for decades. So, what do you think about this evolution? What could it be due to? What prospects do you see in this sense?

Quote:Abp. Viganò: I imagine that the reason that the opposition to the conciliar ideology initially primarily “spoke French” – to use your expression – was due to the fact that in those years France could boast of intellectuals of a certain depth, both laymen as well as clergy, for whom the very close connection between social and ecclesial events was evident. Let’s not forget that France was faced with bitter social conflicts in 1968 and a form of ultra-progressivism that was perhaps less widespread in Italy, above all outside the larger cities. In France there was a greater perception of the revolution that was underway in a nation of deep Catholic tradition that had already experienced the persecutions and effects of anti-clerical governments.

In England, where the minority Catholic presence had always had to confront Anglicanism, the evidence that the conciliar Church was embracing the liturgical and doctrinal positions of Protestantism led to both a firm and united response by the faithful as well as many non-Catholics, who considered the surrender of the Holy See to the secularizing mentality of modern society to be incomprehensible. The so-called “Agatha Christie Indult” revealed the dismay of many intellectuals over the decision to cancel the traditional liturgy, which was the element that distinguished Catholics from Anglicans. It seemed like a repudiation of centuries of heroic resistance of Catholics in the face of religious persecution. The healthy ecumenism of the pre-conciliar era had favored a constant stream of Anglicans returning to the womb of the Catholic Church, but in the Seventies, especially after the liturgical reform, this stream dried up, and “conversions” began moving instead towards the Eastern Churches. According to the heterodox conciliar theses, it was thought that even those who wished or desired with a sincere heart to re-enter the One Fold under the One Shepherd should instead be left in schism and heresy.

In Italy, the seat of the Papacy, which was politically led by the Christian Democratic Party, there was a much more marginal response to the conciliar revolution, perhaps due to the fact that Catholicism did not seem to be at risk of extinction.

The revival in the United States is more recent and is the result of the delay with which American Catholics saw the faith and the liturgy being threatened in everyday life. In the 1950s the American Church was growing rapidly, thanks to the far-sighted action of Pius XII and the apostolate of many excellent Prelates, among whom we cannot fail to recall Archbishop Fulton Sheen. The enthusiasm of a relatively young nation, the innumerable conversions, and the “freshness” of Catholicism in the United States probably delayed the exterior manifestation of the crisis, which however had already begun in the Jesuit universities and in the progressivist circles from which Biden, Kerry, Pelosi and other “Catholic” politicians emerged (here).

Themes connected to Catholic morality like respect for life were also supported by Presidents who were not Catholic, with the applause of the Episcopate and the faithful. It is only recently that the rift between the grassroots and the highest levels has become more perceptible, both in society as well as in the Church: on the one hand with Presidents who are fervently pro-abortion – beginning with Bill Clinton – and on the other hand with Bishops who are much closer to the demands of European progressivism that is now widespread not only in France and England but also in Italy and other nations of strong Catholic tradition like Spain, Portugal, and Ireland. This rift has revealed the great distance that separates citizens from their politicians as well as the faithful from their Bishops. It is normal – and I would even say praiseworthy and providential – that in the face of betrayal by the political class and the Hierarchy there has been a re-awakening of consciences, which saw President Trump as a defender of the traditional values of the American people in whom Catholics too could place their trust. The electoral fraud of last November 3 has conversely strengthened the pactum sceleris between the deep state and the deep church, bringing a self-styled “Catholic President” to the White House who is completely subservient to globalist ideology and the plans of the New World Order, with the determined support of Bishops, intellectuals and the ultra-progressive Catholic media. The management of the pseudo-pandemic in the United States has revealed the true face of the deep church, opening the eyes of many of the faithful and making them understand the complicity that exists between the advocates of the Great Reset. When the real outcome of the Presidential election is finally revealed and new elections can be held that are not marred by interference and manipulation, Biden will also drag the American deep church along with him, giving new impetus to the social commitment of Catholics, especially among those of them who do not intend to accept adulterations of the Faith, Morals, and Liturgy of the Church.


Never before as in this period has the theme of Marian devotion been so widely talked about. The “debate” – let’s call it that – over the titles of the Blessed Virgin opened up after Bergoglio once again made comments minimizing the weight of Mary’s role as Co-Redemptrix. In order to defend the prerogatives of Mary, we recently sent to press the “Libro d’Oro di Maria Santissima [The Golden Book of Mary Most Holy].” We do not believe that Catholicism can exist without Mary; moreover, we believe that it is impossible not to identify the cause of the anti-Marian assault that we are presently experiencing in the Council and in those who managed the post-council. On the one hand using real pick-axes – both direct and indirect – through public speeches and “documents” – on the other hand allowing a neo-apparitionist sentimentality to float that appears to be the negation of the true veneration of Mary. Let’s not forget that with John Paul II on the Throne of Peter and Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, unacceptable operations in this sense were carried out – in the name of ecumenism and with the alternating plates typical of the dynamic revolution.[1] To cite just two small examples: 

1. In 1996, during the 12th International Mariological Congress in Częstochowa, a group of theologians – including three Eastern “Orthodox,” an Anglican, and a Lutheran – published a declaration against the dogma of the Co-Redemption. In a perfect dialogical-indifferentist style – and this is the main point of the matter – the titles of Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate were defined as “ambiguous,” and the text was published in L’Osservatore Romano

2. By temporarily setting aside the disastrous consequences of the “Reformation” to Marian devotion, and as if one could love Mary even as one separates her from the Mystical Body of Christ, obscuring her role as “Triumphatrix over all heresies,” John Paul II stated in the General Audience of 12 November 1997: “Luther’s writings, for example, show love and veneration for Mary, extolled as a model of every virtue: he upholds the sublime holiness of the Mother of God and at times affirms the privilege of the Immaculate Conception, sharing with other Reformers belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity.”[2] 

In your personal experience, how did you experience the “conciliar” decline of Marian devotion? As a prelate, what can you tell us about what you have seen in relation to this theme during your long years of service in Italy and abroad? Did the Blessed Virgin Mary play a role in your “decision of conscience” with respect to the crisis in the Church?

Quote:Abp. Viganò: What unites heretics of all times is their intolerance of the cult reserved for the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Marian doctrine it presupposes and of which it is the liturgical expression. Moreover, this is not surprising: Satan sees in the Mother of God she who in Her Son has crushed the head of the Ancient Serpent, she who in the course of History has defeated the assaults of Hell against the Church and who at the end of time will achieve the final victory over the Antichrist and Satan.

The Most Holy Trinity is pleased to share the work of Redemption with Our Lady, to Whom it has granted privileges that no creature has ever even been able to conceive of, the first of which is having preserved Her from original sin and having preserved her Virginity intact before, during, and after the birth of the Savior. In Mary, the New Eve, Satan sees the creature who triumphs over him, making reparation for the temptation and fall of Eve: this is why She is Co-Redemptrix, in union with Christ the New Adam.

Filial devotion to the Blessed Mother is very difficult to eradicate among the Christian people: even after the Protestant pseudo-reform and after the Anglican schism, devotion to the Virgin survived, to the point of requiring particular efforts to erase it: it is difficult to rip out love for the heavenly Mother from the hearts of the simple when it is so spontaneous, natural, and comforting. I think of the cases of heretics who returned to the womb of the Church thanks to devotion to Mary Most Holy, even if only because of one Hail Mary that their mother had taught them to say as little children. And this devotion is simple, humble, sweet, confident, and most pure; it does not decrease in those who are ignorant of the lofty peaks of theological doctrine, because it sees us as children and Her as Mother, beyond everything else, recognizing Her as the Savioress [Salvatrice], the Merciful One, the Advocate, to whom we always have recourse, despite all of our faults, even when it frightens us to raise our gaze towards Her Divine Son whom we have offended. “Behold Your Mother” (Jn 19:26-27).

This is why Satan hates “the Lady,” as he calls Her during exorcisms: he knows all too well that the power of Jesus Christ not only is not in the least obscured by His Mother but rather it is exalted by Her, because while Satan’s pride has sunk Him into Hell, Her humility has exalted Her above all creatures, allowing Her to carry in Her womb the Son of God whose Incarnation, in which he assumed a human body, Lucifer could not tolerate.

The decline of Marian devotion after the Council is only the latest expression, and I would say the most aberrant and scandalous, of the aversion of Satan towards the Queen of Heaven. It is one of the signs that that assembly did not come from God, just as those who dare even to question the titles and merits of the Most Holy Virgin do not come from God. On the other hand, what son would allow his own mother to be put down in order to please his father’s enemies? And how much more serious is this abject complicity with heretics and pagans when the honor of the Mother of God and our Mother is at stake? The Beloved of the Trinity, She has been chosen by God the Father as His Daughter, by God the Son as His Mother, and by God the Holy Spirit as His Spouse.

I believe that the gift of my “conversion” – of my becoming aware of the conciliar deception and the present apostasy – became possible thanks to my constant devotion towards the Blessed Mother, which I have never ceased to have. I carry the vivid memory of the recitation of the Holy Rosary ever since I was a child, when during the Allied bombardment – in April 1944 – my mother carried me into the air-raid shelter under our house in Varese and held me close to her as she invoked the protection of the Madonna, whose image was illuminated by a small lamp. The blessed “Crown” of Our Lady [the Rosary] has always animated my prayer.

It will be the Holy Virgin, with Her heel, who will crush the infernal idols that infest and profane the Church of Her Son; She is the one who will restore the regal Crown to Her Son, ousted by His own Ministers; She is the one who supports and protects the Good in this hour of darkness; She is the one who implores the graces of conversion and repentance for sinners.


The liturgical theme is also relevant. Today it seems to us that one the most difficult battles is explaining to the faithful the profound difference that exists between the Mass of all time and the one that resulted from the neomodernist-conciliar revolution. Not only because of the theology that underlies it, but also because of the history itself of the “Mass of Paul VI.” Very few Catholics are aware of the fact that that reform was done with the help of a commission in which well-known Protestant exponents took part, with the outcome that we now see, that is, an ecumenical rite. Unfortunately today there is no lack of a climate of “substantial indifferentism” in liturgical matters, which is also the child of the contradictory contents of Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum,” as we mentioned in the previous conversation.[3] Also dealing with the theme of the Mass, in one of your essays on the website of your friend Dr. M. Guarini on 9 June 2020, you stated: “When in the course of history heresies have spread, the Church has always intervened promptly to condemn them, as happened at the time of the Synod of Pistoia of 1786, which was in some way anticipatory of Vatican II.” Can you expand on this reflection? Referring to the Bull Auctorem Fidei, what elements can be highlighted in relation to the present situation? What can be done to make the facts that are implicated in this paragraph manifest to the greatest number of people?

Quote:Abp. Viganò: I agree with you on the fact that it is at least difficult to maintain that the Mystical Body can raise up liturgical prayer – which is an official, solemn, and public action – to Her Head  with a double voice: this two-fold nature can signify duplicity and is repugnant to the simplicity and linearity of Catholic Truth, just as it is repugnant to God, whose Word is Eternal and is the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. Christ cannot address the Father with a perfect voice – which the Innovators call the “Extraordinary Form” – and at the same time with an imperfect voice, winking at the enemies of God, in an “Ordinary Form.”

On the other hand, the same infelicitous expression “Ordinary Form” betrays the awareness of an “ordinariness” that in common language indicates something that is not special, something taken for granted, of little value, or of a low level: to say that a person is “ordinary” certainly does not sound like a compliment. I believe therefore that this situation must be accepted and tolerated as a transitory phase, in which certainly the traditional Liturgy has a way to return and spread itself, doing much good to souls, in view of a necessary return to the One Catholic Rite and to the indispensable abolition of its conciliar version. Let us not forget that in the Liturgy the Church addresses herself to the Majesty of God, not to men; the baptized, living members of the Church, unite together in liturgical prayer by means of the Sacred Ministers, who are “pontiffs” between them and the Most Holy Trinity. To make the liturgy into a sort of anthropocentric event is most alien to the Catholic spirit.

My reference to the Synod of Pistoia is due to the significant re-proposal of the errors condemned by the Bull Auctorem Fidei in the conciliar texts and even more so in the so-called “magisterium” of the post-council. I say significant because, just as in God the Truth is co-essential, so also lies and errors are the mark of Satan, who repeats his cry of rebellion down the centuries, always attacking the Truth that he hates with an inextinguishable hatred. From Arius to Loisy, from Luther to Fr. Martin, S.J.LGBTQ, the one who inspires it is always the same. For this reason the Church always condemns error and always affirms the same Truth, for this reason the heretics always re-propose the same errors. There is nothing new with respect to the infidelity of the people of Israel with the golden calf or the abomination of Assisi, the Pachamama, and Astana.


Almost as a final taking stock of what has been said so far, it is difficult not to enter more specifically into the theme of ecumenism that, as is noted also in the preceding questions, is closely tied with all of the aspects of the crisis we are witnessing. Present in a full-blown manner at least since the encounters of Paul VI with Athenagoras and the kiss on the foot of the “Orthodox” Melito, gradually triumphant in the various Assisi meetings in 1986 (John Paul II) and 2011 (Benedict XVI) up to the Abu Dhabi document and the pagan effigy brought into Saint Peter’s Basilica during the Amazon Synod, this indifferentist path is directly condemned – in theory and praxis – by innumerable pontifical documents (Pius XI’s Mortalium Animos, Pius X’s Pascendi and Pius IX’s Syllabus apply to everyone). Repugnant not only to the supernatural light of Faith but first of all to the natural light of reason since it is illogical, false, and perverse, it [ecumenism] has resurrected once more to flourish thanks to the open connivance of the so-called “progressives” and, unfortunately, of not a few “conservatives.” In your experience, and in particular in the different missions that you carried out on various continents, have you  found – at least privately – that there is some awareness of the Episcopate on this issue? That is: behind their public “prudence” does there exist among the Clergy some who at least when the microphones are off recognize the gravity of this apostasy? If so, does this awareness seem to have grown over the years with the worsening of the acts performed?

Quote:Abp. Viganò: The Bishops and priests who love Our Lord know perfectly well that there is an incurable inconsistency between the conciliar doctrine and the revealed Faith. And the mercenaries, mitered or not, who propagate error and make themselves promoters of the revolution also know it perfectly well. But while the mercenaries truly intend to change the Church in order to transform it into a sort of NGO imbued with Masonic principles, the good Pastors do not resign themselves to believing that so many failures represent, not the necessary consequence of precise errors insinuated by Vatican II, but almost an accident along the way that sooner or later will be corrected in some way. This philosophical and psychological error, even before being a theological one, leads them to hold together the matrix of the present crisis along with fidelity to the immutable Magisterium of the Church, in a titanic operation that is destined for failure because it is precisely futile and unnatural.

Allow me to make a comparison. If the doctor finds the symptoms of a specific disease, his diagnosis identifies the pathology and adopts a treatment aimed at eliminating the cause of the symptoms, not merely removing the symptoms; and least of all would he be able to cure the symptoms while refusing to connect them to the disease, because to do so would give temporary relief to his patient but would lead to his death. The same thing happens in public affairs: if a ruler finds an increase in crime due to uncontrolled immigration, he can certainly arrest the criminals, but he will not get any results if he does not stop illegal immigration. Now, if this is obvious in matters of daily life, why should it not apply further in matters that are much more grave, like those that concern the adoration due to the Majesty of God, the honor of the Church, and the salvation of souls?

I think that my Brothers ought to have the humility to recognize the deception into which they have fallen; to identify the doctrinal, moral and liturgical cause at the origin of the crisis; to turn back from the easy path that they have erroneously undertaken, in order to then resume the narrow and bristly path that they have abandoned and which over the centuries has proven to be the only viable path: the way of the Cross, of self-sacrifice, and of heroic testimony to the Truth, that is, to Jesus Christ. When this happens, the attacks of the Devil and his servants against the Church will multiply, as has always happened – “If they have persecuted me, they will persecute you also” (Jn 15:18-27) – but they shall gain Heaven and the palm of victory. Conversely, if they believe they can come to terms with the world and its prince, they will have to answer to God for the souls entrusted to them, and for their own souls as well.

This complacency towards the mentality of the age betrays perhaps a lack of courage and a certain timidity, the exact opposite of what a Catholic, and even more so a minister of God, is meant to be: “The kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent conquer it” (Mt 11:12).


Thank you so much, Your Excellency, for this conversation.



[1] It is not surprising that, following the “revolutionary” script, during this period there were also pronouncements that were “favorable” to Marian devotion, which obviously alternated with opposing practices and were inserted into a general neo-modernist context, producing the results that are now apparent.

[2] General Audience of 12 November 1997.

[3] In particular one notes the passage: “Art 1.  The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite.  The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage.  These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.”

Print this item

  Vatican heavily promotes coronavirus vaccines in ‘Resource Kit for Church Leaders’
Posted by: Stone - 05-06-2021, 07:01 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Spiritual] - No Replies

Vatican heavily promotes coronavirus vaccines in ‘Resource Kit for Church Leaders’
The propaganda document goes to great lengths to justify the use of the shots while making statements that are not totally accurate or that it's not qualified to make.

[Image: Thomas_Wenski_COVID_vaccine_Dec_16_2020_...5_s_c1.jpg]

Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski receives COVID-19 vaccination at St. John's Nursing Center in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Dec. 16, 2020.miamiarch.org


May 5, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) -- The Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, created by Pope Francis in 2016 from the union of four Pontifical Councils, has published a “Resource Kit for Church Leaders” penned by the special Vatican COVID-19 Commission set up on March 20, 2020.

The document devotes a large portion of its 15 pages to promoting COVID-19 vaccines and offers material that could even be used in homilies.

Prefaced by Cardinal Peter Turkson, prefect of the Dicastery, the Resource Kit focuses almost exclusively on “vaccines” and the hope they are purported to bring, without mention of the supernatural meaning of illness, death, the sacraments and being prepared for the hereafter. [NB: Cardinal Turkson has been involved in promoting many anti-Catholic and/or globalist initiatives - see here, here, and here, for examples. - The Catacombs]

Instead, the text focuses on the “rebirth” of society as announced by Pope Francis in Fratelli Tutti, not through redemption from the effects of original sin and our personal sins but by discovering “once for all that we need one another, and that in this way our human family can experience a rebirth, with all its faces, all its hands and all its voices.”

Turkson immediately outlines the path to that rebirth: “A first step in our journey toward a more just, inclusive and equitable world is making COVID-19 vaccines available and accessible to all, as outlined in the December 2019 paper, ‘Vaccine for all: 20 points for a fairer and healthier world,’ published by the Vatican COVID-19 Commission and the Pontifical Academy for Life.”

The words “inclusive and equitable” are directly lifted from many international organizations and major corporations and their pseudo-religious insistence on well-being for all through “diversity” and special attention to “minorities,” from women, non-whites, people with disabilities to “LGBTQI communities.” While the Vatican document does not list these priorities, its adoption of a shared code of expression and its numerous links to the pro-abortion World Health Organization are cause enough for concern.

Sadly if not surprisingly, the “Resource Kit” touted by a Vatican Dicastery contains no recommendation to promote actual early treatment of COVID-19 or to work toward lifting absurd, often contradictory and generally useless sanitary regulations. Nor do its documents promote freeing the elderly, who in many countries are truly “COVID prisoners” in their nursing homes, letting go of life because they are being “protected” from their family and loved ones.

Even on the earthly plane, the Church has something to say about this dehumanization of society – but the words “freedom” and “liberty” do not appear once, not even in connection with the experimental “vaccines” and their links with the crime of abortion.

On the supernatural plane, one could have expected recommendations to priests and Church leaders to act in favor of freedom of worship, but the only “mass” the document mentions is “mass vaccination campaigns” that “it is urgent to implement” quickly.
The COVID-19 Resource Kit is tailored from end to end to present getting the vaccine as an “obligation.”

Skipping straight to the “Sample Social Media Content” toward the end of the kit, priests, families, and Church leaders are encouraged to “help share and amplify the messages about the importance of vaccination, about the responsibility to take the COVID-19 vaccines when clinically possible, and about the need to ensure equitable and fair access to these vaccines for everyone.”

Sample tweets and messages are offered to cut and paste on Twitter and other social media. Like this one: “As individuals we/I have a moral duty to protect others from #COVID19 and a vaccine is the most effective way to achieve this, which we can undergo with a clear conscience to protect not only our own health, but also out of solidarity with the most vulnerable #COVID19vaccine #VaticanCovidCommission @VaticanNews @VaticanIHD @PontAcadLife.”

Or this one: “In the spirit of #Fraternity, we cannot forget the most vulnerable and needy throughout the world. Receiving the vaccine is an act of love @VaticanNews @VaticanIHD #VaticanCovidCommission #COVID19vaccine.”

And here is the one with pro-life overtones: “Since every life is inviolable, nobody must be left out. Vaccines are a means to respect and save the gift of life @VaticanNews @iamCARITAS @VaticanIHD #VaticanCovidCommission #COVID19vaccine.”

The whole thing is in fact a propaganda handbook, at a time when attempts actively to convert non-Catholics to the faith are condemned for proselytism. It even adopts the classical “questions and answers” approach of the Catechisms of yore.

The table of Contents gives the idea:

1. Recent Notes on COVID-19 Vaccines (1 page)
2. Clinical Questions About COVID-19 Vaccines (3 pages)
3. Special Questions for Church Leaders About COVID-19 Vaccines (2 pages)
4. COVID-19 Vaccines: Resources for Homilies and Conversations (3 pages)
5. A Family Guide to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) (2 pages)
6. COVID-19 Vaccines: Social Media Content (1 page)
7. Links to Resources on COVID-19 and Vaccines (1 page)

Interestingly, insofar as the first reflections are about the “morality of some anti-COVID-19 vaccines;” the document proves that the question of abortion-tainted vaccines is in fact high on the list of concerns, even though such a small number of Catholic leaders (as far as can be seen) are calling on the need for moral assessment of the experimental bio-agents that are currently being massively injected into people of all ages, and asking for clear and vocal opposition to the use of aborted fetal cells in the development, testing and production of the shots.

These are the opponents the Dicastery appears to be most worried about. Its first major quote is from the December 21, 2020 note from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith about abortion-tainted vaccines, ending with the statement that “these vaccines are not a legitimation of abortion."

But those words are not mentioned in the Resource Kit. Instead, “At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one’s own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.”

The “Clinical Questions” chapter widely overreaches a Vatican Dicastery’s competencies regarding the assessment of the safety of particular medical devices. It boldly states, without reservation, that “vaccination is a simple, safe and effective way of protecting people against harmful diseases,” and that vaccines “do not cause the disease or put you at risk of its complications” – while acknowledging that “some people cannot get vaccinated due to health conditions or other reasons and are advised not to get certain vaccines” as a reason for “the rest of us” to get vaccinated.

But the biggest lie is perhaps this one: “Every vaccine must go through extensive and rigorous testing to ensure it is safe before it can be introduced in a country. An experimental vaccine is first tested in animals to assess its safety and potential to prevent disease. It is then tested in a number of human clinical trials, which are rigorously reviewed before a vaccine may be introduced into a national immunization programme.”

COVID-19 experimental “vaccines” are anything but tried and tested over a long period of time, so much so that the official trials will not end before 2022 or 2023 in most cases.

The “clinical” chapter then goes on to justify use of the vaccine for non-clinical reasons, such as “part of loving your neighbor” or an “act of charity” of an “act of love” for the vulnerable who cannot receive the vaccine.

When will sexual abstinence outside of marriage and chastity receive the same kind of publicity on the part of Vatican authorities as a means of protecting others from serious sexually transmitted diseases and serving the “common good?”

The document goes on to brush aside questions about the speed at which COVID-19 “vaccines” were developed, and downplaying their side effects. No mention is made of the genetic engineering used to make a totally new kind of “vaccine” and the legitimate doubts that arise about mRNA shots that lead human cells to produce part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus themselves.

The “Clinical” section of the Resource Kit does recognize that it is not known whether the novel “vaccines” protect anyone from transmitting the virus, which makes the preceding statements about “protecting the vulnerable” obsolete, nor whether the protection they afford is “long term.”

But the document adds, “Currently, there is no evidence that existing vaccines or treatments for other diseases (e.g., malaria pills) will protect against COVID-19. To be protected, you need to get one of the authorised COVID-19 vaccines and continue practicing physical distancing and hygiene measures.”

The following section addresses “Special Questions for Church Leaders,” starting with the issue of “fetal cell lines.” This is but a replay of the much-repeated sequences about “duty to protect others from infection” (which the COVID-19 experimental shots certainly do not do), to “protect life and reduce suffering.” But in justifying the use of the shots, the Resource Kit here remains absolutely silent about the duty to make one’s opposition to the use of abortion-tainted vaccine production techniques known and to encourage the development of “ethical” vaccines.

Interestingly, there is another paragraph justifying the qualifications of the Pontifical Academy for Life, a clear indication that Church leaders are facing questions on the issue. So here is was the propaganda is supposed to be answering: “The Academy is a valuable source of objective scientific information made available to the Holy See and a wider public in cooperation with the international scientific and medical community.” From objective scientific information to a form of secular infallibility there is but a step …

In the same chapter, “conspiracy theories” are addressed and ridiculed: “The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a parallel pandemic of misleading and fabricated information. Rumors, in the form of conspiracy theories, including about how the virus can be cured and who is to blame for its spread, are rampant. Like the virus, misinformation can spread quickly. It is also harmful and complicates COVID-19 pandemic response efforts.” So please turn to the World Health Organization and stop “sharing unverified information that comes from dubious sources,” says the Vatican COVID-19 Commission.

If Sunday Mass has any role to play at all – and the Resource Kit clearly does not address freedom of worship – it is to allow homilies to spread the (new improved) Good Word. A special section offers quotations that priests could work into their Sunday sermon.
Pope Francis and bishops from all parts of the world who promote the vaccines are cited in this section, which includes “just” distribution in rich and poor countries alike. The Archbishop of Dublin’s Christmas Day Sermon 2020 receives special mention in its defense of the new vaccinal duty that actually sums them up: “We have a moral responsibility, as scripture reinforces, to seize this new sense of neighborliness and understanding of the realities and suffering others are experiencing as a result of this crisis, and grasp the opportunity to each play our part in building a new and fairer society as one global family.”

Finally, two pages are devoted to ordinary people, “A Family Guide to the Coronavirus.” It is a simplified version of the preceding chapters and aims to explain “why” people should get the vaccine, but also plays on people’s suffering because of the first public response to the pandemic: “A pandemic disrupts social and family life. In order to protect people, countries have taken extreme measures like nationwide lockdowns that have had serious socioeconomic, political, ecological and psychological implications. Vaccines can do a great deal of good to stop the spread of the virus and prepare the ground for physical and socio-political healing. Therefore, receiving the vaccine, once it is available, can be considered an act of social love.”

This deserves to be translated into plain language: “Lockdowns have depressed, impoverished and hurt you. Now it’s up to you to stop this response that was decided upon by the powers that be by accepting the solution they are so altruistically offering to you, and if you don’t, you’ll be responsible for all further depression, pain, deaths and other catastrophes linked to the public health response.”

Or even into a single word: “Blackmail.”

Then comes the refrain about “safety,” “effectiveness,” “continued monitoring,” “rigorous testing” and control by the WHO, which are words to create compliance.

“All of the ingredients in vaccines — as well as the vaccines themselves — are thoroughly tested and monitored to ensure they, and the quantities in which they are used, are safe. Vaccine ingredients listed on labels can look unfamiliar, but we naturally have many of them in the body and in the environment.”

As to the side effects, they are merely mentioned as “mild,” “mild,” and “mild” again. “There have been some reports of mild allergic reactions to specific COVID-19 vaccines.” This is even more ideological than the mainstream press itself dares to be. Or, “Currently, there is no evidence that existing vaccines or treatments for other diseases will protect against COVID-19. To be protected, you need to get one of the authorize COVID-19 vaccines and continue practicing physical distancing and hygiene measures.”

This is the point: Even families who received the vaccine should know that “Continued physical distancing and hygiene measures give you and others the best protection from catching and spreading the virus,” according to the Resource Kit.

So why bother?

Print this item

  May 6th - St. John before the Latin Gate
Posted by: Stone - 05-06-2021, 06:51 AM - Forum: May - Replies (1)

May 6 – St John before the Latin Gate
Taken from The Liturgical Year by Dom Prosper Gueranger (1841-1875)

[Image: st-john-before-the-latin-gate.jpg?resize...C960&ssl=1]


The Beloved Disciple John, whom we saw standing near the Crib of the Babe of Bethlehem, comes before us again today; and this time, he is paying his delighted homage to the glorious Conqueror of death and hell. Like Philip and James, he too is clad in the scarlet robe of Martyrdom. The Month of May, so rich in Saints, was to be graced with the Palm of St. John.

Salome one day presented her two sons to Jesus and, with a mother’s ambition, had asked him to grant them the highest places in his kingdom. The Savior, in his reply, spoke of the Chalice which he himself had to drink, and foretold that these two Disciples would also drink of it. The elder, James the Greater, was the first to give his Master this proof of his love; we shall celebrate his victory when the sun is in Leo; it was today that John, the younger Brother, offered his life in testimony of Jesus’ Divinity.

But the martyrdom of such an Apostle called for a scene worthy the event. Asia Minor, which his zeal had evangelized, was not a sufficiently glorious land for such a combat. Rome—whither Peter had transferred his Chair and where he died on his cross, and where Paul had bowed down his venerable head beneath the sword—Rome alone deserved the honor of seeing the Beloved Disciple march on to Martyrdom, with the dignity and sweetness which are the characteristics of this veteran of the Apostolic College.

Domitian was then Emperor—the tyrant over Rome and the world. Whether it were that John understood this journey of his own free choice, and from a wish to visit the Mother-Church, or that he was led thither bound with chains, in obedience to an imperial edict—John, the august founder of the Seven Churches of Asia Minor, appeared before the Tribunal of pagan Rome. He was convicted of having propagated, in a vast province of the Empire, the worship of a Jew that had been crucified under Pontius Pilate. He was a superstitious and rebellious old man, and it was time to rid Asia of his presence. He was therefore sentenced to an ignominious and cruel death. He had somehow escaped Nero’s power; but he should not elude the vengeance of Cæsar Domitian!

A huge cauldron of boiling oil is prepared in front of the Latin Gate. The sentence orders that the preacher of Christ be plunged into this bath. The hour is come for the second son of Salome to partake of his Master’s Chalice. John’s heart leaps with joy at the thought that he—the most dear to Jesus, and yet the only Apostle that has not suffered death for him—is at least permitted to give him this earnest of his love. After cruelly scourging him, the executioners seize the old man, and throw him into the cauldron; but lo! the boiling liquid has lost all its heat; the Apostle feels no scalding; on the contrary, when they take him out again, he feels all the vigor of his youthful years restored to him. The Prætor’s cruelty is foiled and John, the Martyr in desire, is to be left to the Church for some few years longer. An imperial decree banishes him to the rugged Isle of Patmos, where God reveals to him the future of the Church, even to the end of time.

The Church of Rome, which counts the abode and martyrdom of St. John as one of her most glorious memories, has marked, with a Basilica, the spot where the Apostle bore his noble testimony to the Christian Faith. This Basilica stands near the Latin Gate, and give a title to one of the Cardinals.

In honor of the great Apostle of love, we give the following Sequence, composed by Adam of Saint-Victor.

Sequence

Felix sedes gratiæ,
Summum regem gloriæ
Videns mentis acie
Non repulsa,
Joannem deificat,
Angelis parificat,
Spiritu qui indicat
Cœli summa.

The happy realm of grace (where the King of glory is seen by the soul’s unfettered ken) gives union with his God, and equality with the Angels, to John, whose revelations have made known to men the mysteries of heaven.


Aquæ vivæ salientis
Hic est potus recumbentis
Supra pectus Domini
Hic exfulget miris signis
Hic expugnat vires ignis
Et ferventis olei.

He drank of the living waters that spring up to life eternal, when he leaned on his Lord’s breast. The wonderful miracles he wrought have made him shine as a bright light in the Church. He quenched the heat of the boiling oil.


Mirantur, nimia
Tormenti sævitia,
Quod martyr quis fiat
Et pœnas non sentiat.

Men know that the torments for him are cruel beyond measure; yet do they wonder within themselves, how a man can be a Martyr, and feel no pain?


O martyr, o virgo,
O custos Virginis
Per quam mundo gloria,
Ex quo sunt, in quo sunt,
Per quem sunt omnia,
Per te det suffragia!

O Martyr, O Virgin, O guardian of the Virgin by whom the world received Him who is its glory! pray for us to this Jesus, from whom, and in whom, and by whom, are all things.


O dilecte præ cæteris,
Christum, a quo diligeris,
Interpellans
Et exorans,
Nos ei concilia.

O thou that wast loved above the rest!—by thine intercession and prayers, render propitious unto us the Jesus, by whom thou wast loved.


Tu qui rivus, duc ad fontem,
Tu qui collis, duc ad montem;
Præsta Sponsum
Ad vivendum,
Virgo totus gratia.
Amen.

Lead us to the Fountain, thou that art a stream! Lead us to the Mountain, thou that art a hill! O thou, whom grace made so wholly pure, pray for us that we may see the Beloved.


[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...%3DApi&f=1]


We are delighted to meet thee again, dear Disciple of our risen Jesus! The first time we saw thee was at Bethlehem, where thou wast standing near the Expected of Nations, the promised Savior, who was sweetly sleeping in his Crib. We then thought on all thy glorious titles: Apostle, Evangelist, Prophet, high-soaring Eagle, Virgin, Doctor of Charity, and, above all, Jesus’ Beloved Disciple. Today, we greet thee as Martyr; for if the ardor of thy love quenched the fire prepared for thy torture, thy devotedness to Christ had honestly and willingly accepted the Chalice, of which he spoke to thee in thy younger years. During these days of Paschal Time, which are so rapidly fleeing by, we behold thee ever close to this divine Master, who treats thee with every mark of affection. Who could be surprised at his partiality towards thee? Wast thou not the only one of all the Disciples who stood at the foot of the Cross? Was it not to thee that he gave the care of his Mother, and made her thine? Wast thou not present when his Heart was opened, on the Cross, by a Spear? When, on the morning of the great Sunday, thou repairedst with Peter to the Tomb, wast thou not, by thy faith, the first of all the Disciples to honor Jesus’ Resurrection? Oh, yes! thou hast a right to all the special love wherewith Jesus treats thee—but pray to him, for us, O blessed Apostle!

We ought to love him for all the favors he has bestowed upon us; and yet we are tepid in his love—we humbly confess it. Thou hast taught us to know the Infant Jesus, thou hast described to us the Crucified Jesus; show us now the Risen Jesus, that we may keep close to him during these last few days of his sojourn on earth. And when he has ascended into heaven, get us brave hearts, that, like thee, we may be prepared to drink the Chalice of trials which he has destined for us.

Rome was the scene of thy glorious confession, O holy Apostle! She is most dear to thee; unite, then, with Peter and Paul in protecting her. If the palm of Martyrdom be in thy hand as well as the pen of the Evangelist, remember it was at the Latin Gate that thou obtainedst it. It was in the East thou didst pass the greater part of thy life; but the West claims the honor of counting thee as one of her grandest Martyrs. Bless our Churches, re-animate our Faith, rekindle our Love, and deliver us from the Antichrists, against whom thou warnedst the Faithful of thy own times, and who are causing such ravages among us. Adopted son of Mary! thou art now enjoying the sight of thy Mother’s glory: oh! present to her the prayers we are offering to her during this Month, which is consecrated to her, and obtain for us the petitions which we presume to make to her.

Print this item

  Paul VI’s Contempt for Catholics Who Did Not Want Changes
Posted by: Stone - 05-05-2021, 09:15 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism - No Replies

Paul VI’s Contempt for Catholics Who Did Not Want Changes
by Peter Kwasniewski [Emphasis mine.]
November 25, 2019

[Image: PA-4454158.jpg]

“A little shy one, aren’t you? — but you can’t hide yourself from Active Participation!”


As we approach the melancholy 50th anniversary of the going-into-effect of Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum with the first mandatory celebration of the Novus Ordo Missae on the first Sunday of Advent, November 30, 1969, it is worthwhile to recall how frequently this vexed and vexing pope felt the need to address the “naysayers” of his day who were complaining about the stream of ever-increasing changes to the Roman liturgy implemented throughout the 1960s. Some readers will already be familiar with the astonishing general audiences of March 1965 and November 1969, but few, perhaps, will be aware of other public addresses in which he continued his tirade against the reform’s non-enthusiasts.

Pope Paul had a curious way of speaking, as if a rapturous majority of laity and clergy were rushing to embrace the new form of the Mass with zeal for active participation, like happy citizens of a Communist Workers’ Paradise. Evidence both published and anecdotal, together with an ever-more precipitous decline in church attendance throughout the 1960s and 1970s, suggest that no more than a tiny minority felt the “good vibrations” of the Bugnini Boys. [1] Paul VI’s contempt, therefore, was directed not only at the majority of his coreligionists (which would have been unsaintly enough); it was, in reality, directed against centuries of traditional Catholic practice that, in spite of whatever faults it may have had, kept large numbers attached to the Church and to their Faith, with a piety and seriousness that could rarely be found, and never surpassed, outside of Catholicism. The advice of Louis Bouyer in 1956 had gone unheeded: “We must not try to provide an artificial congregation to take part in an antiquarian liturgy, but rather to prepare the actual congregations of the Church today to take part in the truly traditional liturgy rightly understood.” [2]

In this article, I would like to offer some quotations from Paul VI, courtesy of that enormous doorstopper called Documents on the Liturgy 1963–1979 — a book that would enjoy a more accurate acronym if its title were Documents Undermining Liturgical Life 1963–1979 — that reveal the full amplitude, or better, narrowness, of the pontiff’s mind as to the meaning of participatio actuosa and the flagitious behavior of those who stubbornly resisted the march of progress.

[Image: IMG_5282.JPG]



Address to Italian Bishops, 14 April 1964 (DOL 21)
“The liturgical reform opens up to us a way to reeducate our people in their religion, to purify and revitalize their forms of worship and devotion, to restore dignity, beauty, simplicity, and good taste to our religious ceremonies. Without such inward and outward renewal there can be little hope for any widespread survival of religious living in today’s changed conditions. … remote sacred song, the religious, congregational singing of the people. Remember, if the faithful sing they do not leave the Church; if they do not leave the Church, they keep the faith and live as Christians.”



General Audience, 13 January 1965 (DOL 24)
“Through your [sc., laity’s] own endeavor to put the Constitution on the Liturgy into exact and vital effect you show yourselves to have that understanding of the times which Christ recommended to his first disciples (see Mt 16:4) and which the Church today is in the process of awakening and recognizing in adult Catholics. . . . You show that you understand the new way of religion which the current liturgical reform intends to restore . . . The Church’s solicitude now broadens; today it is changing certain aspects of ritual discipline that are now inadequate and is seekingly boldly but thoughtful to plumb their ecclesial meaning, the demands of community, and the supernatural value of ecclesial worship. To understand this religious program and to enjoy its hoped-for results we must all change our settled way of thinking regarding sacred ceremonies and religious practices as calling for no more than a passive, distracted assistance. We must be fully cognizant of the fact that with the Council a new spiritual pedagogy has been born. That is what is new about the Council and we must not hang back from making ourselves first the pupils and then the masters in this school of prayer now at its inception. It may well happen that the reforms will affect practices both dear to us and still worthy of respect; that the reforms will demand efforts that, at the outset, are a strain. But we must be devout and trusting: the religious and spiritual vista that the Constitution opens up before us is stupendous in its doctrinal profundity and authenticity, in the cogency of its Christian logic, in the purity and richness of its cultural and aesthetic elements, in its response to the character and needs of modern man.”


Address to Pastors and Lenten Preachers, 1 March 1965 (DOL 25)
“Here are some of the issues: to change so many attitudes that in a number of respects are themselves worthy of honor and dearly held; to upset devout and good people by presenting new ways of prayer that they are not going to understand right away; to win over to a personal involvement in communal prayer the many people used to praying — or not praying — in church as they please; to intensify training in prayer and worship in every congregation, that is, to introduce the faithful to new viewpoints, gestures, practices, formularies, and attitudes, amounting to an active part in religion than many are unused to. In a word, the issue is engaging the people of God in the priestly liturgical life. Again, we say that it is a difficult and delicate matter, but adding that it is necessary, obligatory, providential, and renewing. We hope that it will also be satisfying.”


General Audience, 17 March 1965 (DOL 27)
“What do people think about the reform of the liturgy? . . . 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 views because then we would have to show how they reveal a poor understanding of the meaning of religious ceremonial and allow us to glimpse not a true devotion and a true appreciation of the meaning and worth of the Mass, but rather a certain spiritual laziness which is not prepared to make some personal effort of understanding and participation directed to a better understanding and fulfillment of this, the most sacred of religious acts, in which we are invited, or rather obliged, to participate.”

(You couldn’t make this stuff up!)


Homily at Parish in Rome, 27 March 1966 (DOL 33)
The Council has taken the fundamental position that the faithful have to understand what the priest is saying [3] and to share in the liturgy; to be not just passive spectators at Mass but souls alive . . . Look at the altar, placed now for dialogue with the assembly; consider the remarkable sacrifice of Latin, the priceless repository of the Church’s treasure. The repository has been opened up, as the people’s own spoken language now becomes part of their prayer. Lips that have often been still, sealed as it were, now at last begin to move, as the whole assembly can speak its part in the colloquy . . . No longer do we have the sad phenomenon of people being conversant and vocal about every human subject yet silent and apathetic in the house of God. How sublime it is to hear during Mass the communal recitation of the Our Father! In this way the Sunday Mass is not just an obligation but a pleasure, not just fulfilled as a duty, but claimed as a right.”


[Image: e66cf1971e6f3c290fd82376815959c1.jpg]

Quite possibly the most fantastical and least realistic Pope in history


Paul VI was prophetic about contraception, but he was no prophet when it came to liturgy:

General Audience at Castelgandolfo, 13 August 1969 (DOL 45)
Through an intense and prolonged religious movement, the liturgy, crowned, and, as it were, canonized by Vatican II, has gained a new importance, dignity, accessibility, and participation in the consciousness and the spiritual life of the people of God and, we predict, this will continue even more in the future.”


Note how, three years after his complaints in 1966, Paul VI is still harping on the theme of resistance to reform, and the vices it indicates:

General Audience at Castelgandolfo, 20 August 1969 (DOL 46)
A second category, whose ranks have swelled with troubled people after the conciliar reform of the liturgy, includes the suspicious, the criticizers, the malcontents. Disturbed in their devotional practices, these spirits grudgingly resign themselves to the new ways, but make no attempt to understand the reasons for them. They find the new expressions of divine worship unpleasing. They take refuge in their moaning, which takes away their ancient flavor from texts of the past and blocks any taste for what the Church, in this second spring of the liturgy, offers to spirits that are open to the meaning and language of the new rites sanctioned by the wisdom and authority of the postconciliar reform. A not very difficult effort at acceptance and understanding would bring the experience of dignity, simplicity, and newfound antiquity in the new liturgies and would also bring to the sanctuary of each person’s self the consolation and life-giving force of community celebrations. The interior life would yield a greater fullness.”


General Audience, November 26, 1969 (DOL 211)
A new rite of the Mass: a change in a venerable tradition that has gone on for centuries. This is something that affects our hereditary religious patrimony, which seemed to enjoy the privilege of being untouchable and settled. It seemed to bring the prayer of our forefathers and our saints to our lips and to give us the comfort of feeling faithful to our spiritual past, which we kept alive to pass it on to the generations ahead.

“It is at such a moment as this that we get a better understanding of the value of historical tradition and the communion of the saints. This change will affect the ceremonies of the Mass. We shall become aware, perhaps with some feeling of annoyance, that the ceremonies at the altar are no longer being carried out with the same words and gestures to which we were accustomed — perhaps so much accustomed that we no longer took any notice of them. This change also touches the faithful. It is intended to interest each one of those present, to draw them out of their customary personal devotions or their usual torpor.

“We must prepare for this many-sided inconvenience. It is the kind of upset caused by every novelty that breaks in on our habits. We shall notice that pious persons are disturbed most, because they have their own respectable way of hearing Mass, and they will feel shaken out of their usual thoughts and obliged to follow those of others. Even priests may feel some annoyance in this respect. So what is to be done on this special and historical occasion? First of all, we must prepare ourselves. This novelty is no small thing. We should not let ourselves be surprised by the nature, or even the nuisance, of its exterior forms.

“It is Christ’s will, it is the breath of the Holy Spirit which calls the Church to make this change. A prophetic moment is occurring in the mystical body of Christ, which is the Church. This moment is shaking the Church, arousing it, obliging it to renew the mysterious art of its prayer.

“It is here that the greatest newness is going to be noticed, the newness of language. No longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principal language of the Mass. The introduction of the vernacular will certainly be a great sacrifice for those who know the beauty, the power and the expressive sacrality of Latin. We are parting with the speech of the Christian centuries; we are becoming like profane intruders in the literary preserve of sacred utterance. We will lose a great part of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual thing, the Gregorian chant. We have reason indeed for regret, reason almost for bewilderment. What can we put in the place of that language of the angels? We are giving up something of priceless worth. But why? What is more precious than these loftiest of our Church’s values?

The answer will seem banal, prosaic. Yet it is a good answer, because it is human, because it is apostolic. Understanding of prayer is worth more than the silken garments in which it is royally dressed. Participation by the people is worth more — particularly participation by modern people, so fond of plain language which is easily understood and converted into everyday speech.”


General Audience, 3 November 1971 (DOL 53)
The Church praying (Ecclesia orans) has received at the Council its most splendid idealization. We must not forget that regarding the stirring reality of liturgical reform. Great weight, even regarding the spiritual conditions of today’s world, is due to that reform because of its originating, pastoral intent to reawaken prayer among the people of God. This is to be a pure and shared prayer, that is, interior and personal, yet at the same time public and communal. Its meaning is not simply a matter of ritual, pertaining to the sacristy or an arcane and merely liturgical erudition. Prayer is to be a religious affirmation, full of faith and life: an apostolic school for all seekers of the life-giving truth; a spiritual challenge thrown down before an atheistic, pagan, and secularized world.”

From our vantage fifty years later, as we watch the liturgical reform either imploding on itself or being slowly undone by an ever-stronger traditionalist movement, we can benefit from the hindsight of knowing what not to do to one’s precious inheritance, and energetically commit ourselves to doing the opposite. For the great irony is that it is not, and was never, the “new” liturgy that serves as “an apostolic school for all seekers of the life-giving truth; a spiritual challenge thrown down before an atheistic, pagan, and secularized world.” Instead, more and more, we see how aptly this description suits the classical Roman rite, risen as a phoenix from its ashes.

[Image: the%2Bchoice%2Bbefore%2Bus.jpg]

The choice before us: a Roman Missal from 1948, or . . .


NOTES

[1] The Beach Boys’ hit “Good Vibrations” appeared in 1966, the year in between the provisional 1965 missal and the Missa Normativa of 1967.

[2] Life and Liturgy (1956), pp. 14-15, cited by Alcuin Reid in the Introduction to Beauduin’s Liturgy, the Life of the Church.

[3] This claim is, of course, a bald lie on Paul VI’s part, since the Council took no such position, and in fact took a different one. It was a lie he repeated on dozens of occasions.

Print this item

  Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Vatican: Democratic reform? Not; Autocratic
Posted by: Stone - 05-05-2021, 07:33 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò - No Replies

Vatican: Democratic reform? Not; Autocratic.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò [computer translated from the Spanish here]
05/02/2021


In accordance with the umpteenth provision promulgated by the one who, collegially and synodally, governs despotically by motu proprios, the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church may be prosecuted and judged by laity. It is impossible to find reasonable explanations for the extemporaneous decisions Bergoglio, who has infiltrated not just lay in Roman dicasteries and the synod of bishops, or at least religious unordered, on behalf of the synodality, the democratization and gender parity. Nor is it useless to invoke the Code of Canon Law, which the Roman Pontiff can repeal at will. It is useless to deplore the hierarchical subversion that allows a member of the learning Church to judge a member of the teaching Church. Whoever believes that Bergoglian norms and reforms are motivated by right purposes and are aimed at the good of the ecclesial body is over the moon. If you have the intellectual honesty to recognize that the purpose of these innovations is the demolition of the Catholic Church and the tyrannical concentration of power, you will understand their full coherence and effectiveness. Submitting the prelates to a court composed of laity appointed by the main tenant of Santa Marta means subtracting jurisdiction from the pastors to concentrate it on an individual under the guise of democracy, collegiality and participation of the laity in the government of the Church. Here we have a cunning paradox: Bergoglio imposes seemingly democratic reforms contrary to the monarchical constitution of the Church of Christ with the sole purpose of dividing and taking on all the power that he himself claims to want to combat. Through this move, he monopolizes power to punish or absolve whoever he wants, thus guaranteeing the subjection of the courtiers and promoting a curia of flatterers and corrupt bribes.

Omne regnum divisum against se desolabitur: et omnis civitas vel domus divisa against se, non stabit (Mt. 12, 25).

+ Carlo Maria Viganò

Print this item

  May 5th - Pope St. Pius V
Posted by: Stone - 05-05-2021, 06:20 AM - Forum: May - Replies (2)

May 5 – St. Pius the Fifth, Pope
Taken from The Liturgical Year by Dom Prosper Gueranger (1841-1875)

[Image: 1-.jpg?resize=768%2C993&ssl=1]


We have already met with the names of several Pontiffs on the Paschal Calendar. They form a brilliant constellation around our Risen Jesus, who, during the period between his Resurrection and Ascension, gave to Peter, their predecessor, the Keys of the kingdom of heaven. Anicetus, Soter, Cauis, Cletus and Marcellinus, held in their hands the palm of martyrdom: Leo was the only one that did not shed his blood in the cause of his Divine Master. Today, there comes before a holy Pope who governed the Church in these latter times; he is worthy to stand amidst the Easter group of Pontiffs. Like Leo, Pius the Fifth was zealous in combating heresy; like Leo, he saved his people from the Barbarian yoke.

The whole life of Pius the Fifth was a combat. His Pontificate fell during those trouble times when Protestantism was leading whole countries into apostasy. Italy was not a prey that could be taken by violence: artifice was therefore used, in order to undermine the Apostolic See, and thus envelope the whole Christian world in the darkness of heresy. Pius, with untiring devotedness, defended the Peninsula from the danger that threatened her. Even before he was raised to the Papal Throne, he frequently exposed his life by his zeal in opposing the preaching of false doctrines. Like Peter the Martyr, he braved every danger, and was the dread of the emissaries of heresy. Placed upon the Chair of Peter, he kept the innovators in check by fear, he roused the sovereigns of Italy to energy, and, by measures of moderate severity, he drove back beyond the Alps the torrent that would have swept Christianity from Europe, had not the Southern States thus opposed it. From that time forward, Protestantism has never made any further progress: it has been wearing itself out by intestine anarchy of doctrines. We repeat it: this heresy would have laid all Europe waste, had it not been for the vigilance of the Pastor who animated the defenders of Truth to resist it where it already existed, and who set himself as a wall of brass against its invasion in the country where he himself was the Master.

Another enemy taking advantage of the confusion caused in the West by Protestantism, organized an expedition against Europe. Italy was to be its first prey. The Ottoman fleet started from the Bosphorus. Here again, there would have been the ruin of Christendom, but for the energy of the Roman Pontiff, our Saint. He gave the alarm, and called the Christian Princes to arms. Germany and France, torn by domestic factions that had been caused by heresy, turned a deaf ear to the call. Spain alone, together with Venice and the little Papal fleet, answered the Pontiff’s summons. The Cross and Crescent were soon face to face in the Gulf of Lepanto. The prayers of Pius the Fifth decided the victory in favor of the Christians, whose forces were much inferior to those of the Turks. We shall have to return to this important even when we come to the Feast of the Rosary in October. But we cannot omit mentioning today the prediction uttered by the holy Pope on the evening of the great day of October 7th, 1571. The battle between the Christian and Turkish fleets lasted from six o’clock in the morning till late in the afternoon. Towards evening, the Pontiff suddenly looked up towards heaven, and gazed upon it in silence for a few seconds. Then turning to his attendants, he exclaimed, “Let us give thanks to God! The Christians have gained the victory!” The news soon arrived at Rome; and thus, Europe once more owed her salvation to a Pope! The defeat at Lepanto was a blow to the Ottoman Empire from which it has never recovered: its fall dates from that glorious day.

The zeal of this holy Pope for the reformation of Christian morals, his establishing the observance of the laws of discipline prescribed by the Council of Trent, and his publishing the new Breviary and Missal—have made his six years’ Pontificate to be one of the richest periods of the Church’s history. Protestants themselves have frequently expressed their admiration of this vigorous opponent of the so-called Reformation. “I am surprised,” said Bacon, “that the Church of Rome has not yet canonized this man.” Pius the Fifth did not receive this honor till about a hundred and thirty years after his death—so impartial is the Church, when she had to adjudicate this highest of earthly honors even to her most revered Pastors!

Of the many miracles which attested the merits of this holy Pontiff, even during his life, we select the two following. As he was one day crossing the Vatican piazza, which is on the site of the ancient Circus of Nero, he was overcome with a sentiment of enthusiasm for the glory and courage of the Martyrs, who had suffered on that very spot, in the first Persecution. Stooping down, he took up a handful of dust from the hallowed ground, which had been trodden by so many generations of the Christian people since the peace of Constantine. He put the dust into a cloth, which the Ambassador of Poland, who was with him, held out to receive it. When the Ambassador opened the cloth, after returning to his house, he found it all saturated with blood, as fresh as though it had been that moment shed: the dust had disappeared. The faith of the Pontiff had evoked the blood of the Martyrs, which thus gave testimony, against the heretics, that the Roman Church, in the 16th Century, was identically the same as that for which those brave heroes and heroines laid down their lives in the days of Nero.

The heretics attempted, more than once, to destroy a life which baffled all their hopes of perverting the Faith of Italy. By a base and sacrilegious stratagem, aided as it was by an odious treachery, they put a deadly poison on the feet of the Crucifix, which the Saint kept in his Oratory, and which he was frequently seen to kiss with great devotion. In the fervor of prayer, Pious was about to give this mark of love to the image of his Crucified Master—when suddenly the feet of the Crucifix detached themselves from the Cross and eluded the proffered kiss of the venerable old man. The Pontiff at once saw through the plot, whereby his enemies would fain have turned the life-giving Tree into an instrument of death.

In order to encourage the Faithful to follow the sacred Liturgy, we will select another interesting example from the life of this great Saint. When lying on his bed of death, and just before breathing his last, he took a parting look at the Church on earth, which he was leaving for that of Heaven. He wished to address a final prayer for the Flock which he knew was surrounded by danger; he therefore recited, but with a voice that was scarcely audible, the following stanza of the Paschal Hymn: “We beseech thee, O Creator of all things! that, in these days of Paschal joy, thou defend thy people from every assault of death!

[The Stanza recited by the dying Pontiff was, in the Breviary of his time, as follows:

Quæsumus, Auctor omnium,
In hoc Paschali gaudio,
Ab omni mortis impeta
Tuum defende populum.

When the Hymns were corrected under the pontificate of Urban the Eighth, this stanza was totally changed: Ut sis perenne mentibus, &c. The Monastic Breviary has retained the original.]

Let us now read the eulogy of this Saintly Pope of modern times, as given in the Divine Office.

Quote:Pius was born at Bosco, a town in Lombardy, though his parents were the Ghisleri, a noble family at Bologna. He entered the Order of the Friars Preachers, when he was fourteen years of age. He was remarkable for his patience, deep humility, great mortifications, love of prayer and religious discipline, and most ardent zeal for God’s honor. He applied himself to the study of Philosophy and Theology, and with so much success, that, for many years, he taught them in a manner that gained him universal praise. He preached the word of God in many places, and produced much fruit. For a long period, he held with dauntless courage the office of Inquisitor; and, at the risk of his life, preserved many cities from the then prevalent heresy.

Paul the Fourth, who esteemed and loved him on account of his great virtues, made him bishop of Nepi and Sutri, and, two years later, numbered him among the Cardinal Priests of the Roman Church. Having been translated by Pius the Fourth to the Church of Mendovi, in Piedmont, and finding that many abuses had crept in, he made a visitation of the whole diocese. Having put all things in order, he returned to Rome, where he was intrusted with matters of the gravest importance; all of which he transacted with an apostolic impartiality and firmness. At the death of Pius the Fourth, he was, contrary to everyone’s expectations, chosen Pope. With the exception of his outward garb, he changed nothing of his manner of life. The following are the virtues in which he excelled: unremitting zeal for the propagation of the Faith, untiring efforts for the restoration of Ecclesiastical discipline, assiduous vigilance in extirpating error, unfailing charity in relieving the necessities of the poor, and invincible courage in vindicating the rights of the Apostolic See.

A powerful fleet having been equipped, at Lepanto, against Selimus, the emperor of the Turks, who was flushed with the many victories he had gained—the Pontiff won the battle, not so much by arms as by prayers. He, by a divine revelation, knew of the victory the moment it was won, and announced it to his household. Whilst engaged in preparing a new expedition against the Turks, he fell dangerously ill. He suffered the most excruciating pains with exceeding great patience. When his last hour approached, he received the Sacraments, according to the Christian practice, and most calmly breathed forth his soul into God’s hands in the year 1572, and in the sixty-eighth year of his age, after a pontificate of six years, three months, and twenty-four days. His body is honored by the devout veneration of the Faithful; it lies in the Church of Saint Mary Major. Through his intercession, many miracles have been wrought by God; which being authentically proved, he was canonized by Pope Clement the Eleventh.

St. Pius is one of the leading glories of the Dominican Order. We find the following Responsories and Hymns in the Breviary of that Order.

Responsories

℟. Dum novus hic Moyses in colle pansis manibus Deum precabatur, ad Naupactum Amalec Israeli perfidus mari profligatur: ∗ Partaque victoria Pio revelatur. Alleluia.
℟. Whilst this new Moses was praying to God on the mount, with hands extended, the perfidious Amalec, Israel’s foe, was put to flight on the gulf of Lepanto, ∗ And the victory was revealed to Pius. Alleluia.

℣. Dum extendit virgam Rosarii, demerguntur hostes nefarii. ∗ Partaque victoria Pio revelatur. Alleluia.
℣. Whilst he stretched forth the rod of the Rosary, the wicked enemies were drowned in the sea. ∗ And the victory was revealed to Pius. Alleluia.

℟. Ad ceram Agni candidi, a Pio benedicti, captant salutem languidi: resiliunt piroboli: ∗ Sclopos evadunt icti. Alleluia.
℟. The white waxen lambs, that were blessed by Pius, gave health to the sick: the bullets that were fired, rebounded: ∗ They that were shot at, escaped injury. Alleluia.

℣. Dat farinis incrementa, sedat ignium tormenta: tranquillantur maria. ∗ Sclopos evadunt icti. Alleluia.
℣. They multiplied flour, they quenched fire, they calmed the sea. ∗ They that were shot at, escaped injury. Alleluia.

℟. Priscos agones martyrum ostentans Romanorum, ingens edit miraculum: ∗ In turba populorum. Alleluia.
℟. To show the ancient combats of the Martyrs of Rome, he works a great miracle: ∗ Before a crowd of people. Alleluia.

℣. Oratori Christiano dans e campo Vaticano cruentatos pulveres. ∗ In turba populorum. Alleluia.
℣. He gives to a Christian Ambassador some dust impregnated with blood, which he took up from the Vatican ground. ∗ Before a crowd of people.

℟. Christi plantas osculari fixas cruci gestiit; sed pro vita sui chari pedes ista retrahit: ∗ Toxico imbutis dari oscula prohibuit. Alleluia.
℟. He wished to kiss the feet of Christ fastened to the Cross; but the feet withdrew, that the life of Christ’s dear servant might be saved: ∗ They were covered with poison, and would not be kissed. Alleluia.

℣. Absit mihi gloriari, absit oscula venari, nisi in cruce Domini: ∗ Toxico imbutis dari oscula prohibuit. Alleluia.
℣. God forbid that I should glory, God forbid that I should seek to imprint my kisses, save in the Cross of my Lord. ∗ They were covered with poison, and would not be kissed. Alleluia.


[Image: SP-Syllabus-200a04-Lepanto-dankgebed-Pau...C452&ssl=1]


Hymn

Pio beato jubilos
Canora pangant organa:
Ninbosque pellant nubilos
Sacræ diei gaudia.


Let our sweet organs give forth their glad sound in honor of blessed Pius! Let the joys of this sacred day dispel all dismal storms.


Hic Michael certamine
Fregit draconis impetum:
Piique sumpto nomine,
Hostem repressit impium.


His name in baptism is Michael, and he conquered the devil in battle: he took the name of Pius, and repressed the impious foe.


Ecclesiæ perincula
Umbone firmo depulit:
Sectariorum spicula
Mucrone forti messuit.


He was the firm shield against the dangers that attacked the Church: he was the strong sword that mowed down the ranks of the heretics.


Zelosus iste Phinees
Sacris stetit pro mœnibus,
Ut barbaros acinaces
Arceret a fidelibus.


He was the zealous Phinees who stood for the defense of the Holy City, that he might protect the Faithful from the scimitar of the Turks.


Hic disciplinam moribus
Cura revexit sedula:
Et impiis erroribus
Objecit hic repagula.


His strenuous care redisciplined morals; and to impious errors he opposed a barrier of restraint.


Pii talenta largitas
Non vinxit in sudario
Necessitates publicas
Toto juvans ærario.


Pius had too generous a heart to hide his wealth in a napkin; he threw open his whole treasury, that he might relieve the necessities of his people.


Pater benignus pauperum,
Manus habens tornatiles,
Pavit greges famelicos
Effusione munerum.


Kind father of the poor, with his hands ever pouring forth charity, he fed and amply provided for his subjects when suffering famine.


Quæsumus nuctor omnium,
In hoc paschali gaudio,
Ab omni mortis impetu
Tuum defende populum.
Amen. We beseech thee,


O Creator of all things! that, in these days of Paschal joy, thou defend thy people from every assault of death. Amen.



The following Hymn is placed near the tomb of our Saint, in the Church of Saint Mary Major, for the use of those who visit his Shrine.

Hymn

Belli tumultus ingruit,
Cultus Dei contemnitur:
Ultrixque culpam persequens,
Jam pœna terris imminet.


The scourge of war is on us, for the worship of God is despised: the chastisement that avenges guilt is menacing our earth.


Quem nos, in hoc discrimine,
Cœlestium de sedibus
Præsentiorem vindicem
Quam te, Pie, invocabimus?


In this peril, which of the heavenly citizens can we invoke in our defense, better than thee, O Pius?


Nemo, beate Pontifex,
Intensiore robore
Quam tu, superni numinis
Promovit in terris decus;


O blessed Pontiff! no mortal ever labored with such zealous vigor to prompt God’s glory on earth as thou didst;


Ausiave fortioribus
Avertit a cervicibus,
Quod christianis gentibus
Jugum parabant barbari.


No mortal ever struggled, as thou didst, to free Christian lands from the yoke which barbarians were seeking to put upon them.


Majora qui cœ potes,
Tu supplices nunc aspice;
Tu civium discordias
Compesce et iras hostium.


Thy power is greater now that thou art in heaven:—look upon us thy clients! Keep civil discord down, and repel our enemies.


Precante te, pax aurea
Terras revisat, ut Deo
Tuti queamus reddere
Mox lætiora cantica.


May thy prayers bring golden Peace upon the earth; that, being in calm security, we may sing our canticles to God with a gladder heart.


Tibi, beata Trinitas,
Uni Deo sit gloria,
Laus et potestas omnia
Per sæculorum sæcula.
Amen.


To thee, O Blessed Trinity, one God, be glory, praise and power, for ever and ever. Amen.


[Image: z.jpg?resize=683%2C1024&ssl=1]


Pontiff of the living God! thou wast, while on earth, the pillar of iron and wall of brass spoken of by the Prophet. Thine unflinching firmness preserved the flock entrusted to thee from the violence and snares of its many enemies. Far from desponding at the sight of the dangers, thy courage redoubled, just as men raise the embankments higher when they see the torrent swell. By thee was the spread of Heresy checked; by thee was the Mussulman invasion repelled, and the haughty Crescent humbled. God honored thee by choosing thee as the avenger of his glory, and the deliver of the Christian people: receive our thanks, and the homage of our humble praise! By thee were repaired the injuries done to the Church during a period of unusual trial. The true reform—the reform that is wrought by authority—was vigorously applied by thy strong and holy land. To thee is due the restoration of the Divine Service, by the publication of the Books of holy Liturgy. And all these glorious deeds were done in the six short years of thy laborious Pontificate!

Hear, now, the prayers addressed to thee by the Church Militant, whose destinies were once in thy hands. When dying, thou didst beseech our Risen Jesus to grant her protection against the dangers which were then threatening her: oh! see the state to which licentious error has now reduced almost the whole Christian world! The Church has nothing left to her wherewith to make head against her countless enemies, save the promises of her Divine Founder; all visible support is withdrawn from her; she has been deprived of everything except the merit of suffering and the power of prayer. Unite, O holy Pontiff, thy prayers to hers, and show how unchanged is thy love of the Flock of Christ. Protect, in Rome, the Chair of thy Successor, attacked as it now is by open violence and astute hypocrisy. Princes and Peoples seem to have conspired against God and his Christ—disconcert the schemes of sacrilegious ambition, and the plots of impiety which would fain give the lie to the word of God. Avert, by thine intercession, the scourged which are threatening Europe, that has become ungrateful to the Church, and indifferent to the attempts made against her to whom they owe all they have. Pray that the blind may see, and the wicked be confounded. Pray that the True Faith may enlighten those numberless souls that call error truth, and darkness light.

In the midst of this dark and menacing night, thine eyes, O holy Pontiff, discern them that are the faithful sheep of Christ: bless them, aid them, increase their number. Ingraft them to the venerable Tree which dieth not, that so they may not be drifted by the storm. Get them docility to the Faith and traditions of holy Church; it is their only stay amidst the tide of error, which is now threatening to deluge the whole world. Preserve to the Church the holy Order, in which thou wast trained for the high mission destined for thee; keep up within her that race of men, powerful in work and word, zealous for the Faith and sanctification of souls, of which we read in her Annals, and which has yielded Saints such as thyself. And lastly, O Pius, remember that thou wast once the Father of the Faithful: oh! continue to be so, by thy powerful intercession, till the number of the elect be filled up!

Print this item

  On Innovations in the Church
Posted by: Stone - 05-04-2021, 10:29 AM - Forum: In Defense of Tradition - No Replies

The Angelus - March 1979


On Innovations in the Church
Edited by Dr. Mary Buckalew


The Conciliar Church Speaks:

Paul VI

"Since that time [of St. Gregory the Great] there has grown and spread among the Christian people the liturgical renewal which...seems to show the signs of God's providence in the present time, a salvific action of the Holy Spirit in His Church. This renewal has also shown clearly that the formulas of the Roman Missal ought to be revised and enriched .... updating the Roman Missal for the present-day mentality.

The recent Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, in promulgating the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, established the bases for the general revision of the Roman Missal....

Let us show now, in broad lines, the new composition of the Roman Missal ....

The major innovation concerns the Eucharistic Prayer. It in the Roman Rite, the first part of this Prayer, the Preface, has preserved diverse formulation in the course of the centuries, the second part on the contrary, called 'Canon of the Action,' took on an unchangeable form during the 4th and 5th centuries. . . . we have decided to add three new Canons to this prayer. In this way the different aspects of the mystery of salvation will be emphasized and they will procure richer themes for the thanksgiving. . . .

Concerning the rite of the Mass, 'the rites are to be simplified, while due care is taken to preserve their substance' [II Vatican Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy]. Also to be eliminated are 'elements which, with the passage of time, came to be duplicated, or were added with but little advantage' [ibid.], above all in the rites of offering the bread and wine, and in those of the breaking of the bread and of communion.

Also, 'other elements which have suffered injury through accidents of history are now to be restored to the earlier norm of the holy Fathers' [ibid.]: for example the homily, the 'common prayer' or 'prayer of the faithful,' the penitential rite or act of reconciliation with God and with the brothers, at the beginning of the Mass, where its proper emphasis is restored.

All this is wisely ordered in such a way that there is developed more and more among the faithful a 'hunger for the Word of God,' which, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, leads the people of the New Covenant to the perfect unity of the Church....

In this revision of the Roman Missal, in addition to the three changes mentioned above, namely, the Eucharistic Prayer, the Rite for the Mass and the Biblical Readings, other parts also have been reviewed and considerably modified. . . ."

(Paul VI, Missale Romanum, April 3, 1969.)




Archbishop Annibale Bugnini

". . . [to prepare the reform], theologians, exegetes, liturgists, pastoralists, sociologists, jurists from all over the world set to work, proceeding concurrently among the whole front of the liturgy.

The implementation of [the] first phase [Latin into vernacular] was received everywhere with joy and much hope. The choral response of the faithful took the place of the 'inert, dumb' congregations, from the immense cathedrals to humble country churches. And in the liturgy, now understood, the people saw one of the most evident fruits of the Council.

But this first impact made it even more evident that it could not but be the first step. The new liturgical form, in fact, had left intact the structure of the rites, now seen to be more clearly unsuited to the spiritual requirements of the faithful.

And then the second phase: the reform of the liturgical books....

First Holy Orders (1968), restored under the wise and reliable guidance of D. Bernardo Botte. Then, in 1969, marriage, the baptism of children, funerals. The same year saw the publication of the new arrangement of the readings of Mass, a remarkable monument of scientific research and pastoral sagacity.

In 1970, preceded by the new eucharistic anaphoras, three euchological pearls of great value, there appeared the restored Roman Missal, with the main structures as solid as granite, light in spiritual inspiration, with formulas inspired by the golden age of liturgy, which it closed.

The heart of the liturgy, the renewed Mass was welcomed with joy and enthusiasm, and in a short time it went into practice among the Christian people, to the evident advantage of the community of the faithful.

Sporadically, however, there were some perplexities and uncertainties, which are not completely dispelled today. Here, too, there were conflicting views: some people dreamed of a return to the 'Mass of St. Pius V,' others said that the reforms made in the rite were few in number, disappointing and lacking in bite.

The truth is that neither side had personal experience ... of the unsuspected riches and beauty contained in the new Missal.

The missal was followed by the publication of other rites of the Sacraments and Sacramentals. Then, in 1971, there appeared the four volumes of the 'Liturgy of the Hours,' a marvellous achievement. . . .

It is not necessary to recall individually the other achievements carried out in the 'decade.' Almost the whole field of divine worship has now been renewed.

Nor is it possible to recall the 'connective' work carried out in the same period to prepare, accompany and follow the reform in the various sectors. The Enchiridion Liturgicum, about to be published, gathers 178 documents which marked, at different levels, the stages of the orderly proceeding of this radiant march. Periodically, they were made known and outlines by Notitiae, the monthly which, coming into being as a modest mouthpiece of the reform, is now the organ of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, always awaited with understandable and justifiable eagerness.

Work is proceeding apace everywhere: from the commissions of the great linguistic areas, to the humble workshops of missionary centres. The work is being carried out with touching zeal and love. Missionaries and laymen, diocesan and religious priests, united by the same ideal and urged on by the same 'passion,' are busily engaged in order to give their brothers a liturgy faithful to the sources and beautiful from the literary point of view.

All this marvelous implementation of initiatives is a reliable promise, a secure hope for a more enlightened, and convinced Christianity, and for the burgeoning of a new spring of faith and holiness for the Church....

...the face of prayer has been renewed, has been made 'purer, more genuine, nearer to the sources of truth and grace, more suitable to become the spiritual patrimony of the people of God' (Paul VI)...."

Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, then Secretary of the Congregation of Divine Worship,
"Renewal and Participating ion the Mystery of Christ: Progress Noted Then Years after the Liturgical Constitution,"
L 'Osservatore Romano, February 7, 1974.



The Roman Catholic Church Teaches:

"A great and evidently divine example that should be meditated upon and recalled again and again by every true Catholic is given by those blessed persons who, like the seven-branched candlestick radiating the sevenfold light of the Holy Spirit, manifested to posterity the clearest formula for the way in which the rashness of profane novelty, with all its boastful display of errors, is to be crushed from now on by the authority of sacred tradition. This method, to be sure, is not at all new. It has been an established custom in the Church that the more devout a person is, the more prompt he is to oppose innovations.

"[color=#7101d]I cannot help wondering about such madness in certain people, the dreadful impiety of their blinded minds, their insatiable lust for error that they are not content with the traditional rule of faith [/color]as once and for all received from antiquity, but are driven to seek another novelty daily. They are possessed by a permanent desire to change religion, to add something and to take something away—as though the dogma were not divine, so that it has to be revealed only once. But they take it for a merely human institution, which cannot be perfected except by constant emendations, rather, by constant corrections.

". . . once there is a beginning of mixing the new with the old, foreign ideas with genuine, and profane elements with sacred, this habit will creep in everywhere, without check. At the end, nothing in the Church will be left untouched, unimpaired, unhurt and unstained. Where formerly there was the sanctuary of chaste and uncorrupted truth, there will be a brothel of impious and filthy errors.

"It is, therefore, an indispensable obligation for all Catholics who are eager to prove that they are true sons of Holy Mother Church to adhere to the holy faith of the holy fathers, to preserve it, to die for it, and, on the other hand, to detest the profane novelties of profane men, to dread them, to harass and attack them."

(St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitories, 6, 21, 23. 5th century.)



". . . pride sits in Modernism as in its own house, finding sustenance everywhere in its doctrines and lurking in its every aspect. It is pride which fills Modernists with that self-assurance by which they consider themselves and pose as the rule for all. It is pride which puffs them up with that vainglory which allows them to regard themselves as the sole possessors of knowledge . . . and which . . . leads them to embrace and to devise novelties even of the most absurd kind . . . ."

(St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, 40.)





[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre: 1977 On the Occasion of the Profession of Three Sisters of the SSPX
Posted by: Stone - 05-04-2021, 09:04 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - No Replies

Sermon of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
On the Occasion of the Profession of Three Sisters of the Society of St. Pius X
Low Sunday, 17 April 1977


In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

My dear sisters and my dear brethren:

In a few moments in accordance with the custom of the Church and in accordance with Tradition, we are going to bless these religious habits, these crosses, these medals, these rings, these veils and these crucifixes.

And why all of this? Why these blessings? Why these religious habits? Would it not be preferable to abandon these customs which seem no longer to have any significance in our day? We, therefore, ask the Church in her Tradition: why these blessings? Why these religious habits? Why these religious objects? The Church tells us that it is because these persons who are going to be clothed wish to become religious. We again ask the Church: what is a person who becomes a religious? (For the answer) we open the law of the Church which is called Canon Law. We find in Canon Law that a religious is a person who pronounces the three vows of religion: the vows of obedience, of chastity and of poverty. All of this seems so formal, so strict: what then is a person who pronounces these three vows, and what do these three vows signify?

These three vows signify that the person who consecrates herself as a religious abandons henceforth the pleasures of the flesh, abandons all that money is able to procure for us here on earth, and abandons as well her own will. Obedience is the vow by which the religious abandons her will into the hands of her superior. The vow of chastity is that by which the religious sacrifices the joys of maternity, and the vow of poverty signifies that the religious despises henceforth the things, the goods of this world. She does not wish to profit from all that money legitimately or alas illegitimately can procure for us here on earth. All of this seems to have a rather negative aspect, a penitential aspect, an aspect of austerity of renouncement, abnegation. Is it this alone that truly makes the religious? Is there nothing else, no other more elevated motive other than the simple desire to do penance and to appear in the eyes of the world as a person who despises the world? Is there not a more profound motive to pronounce these vows? Yes - indeed! There is a more profound motive! All the rest would mean nothing, absolutely nothing, if there were not. It is He, He who draws the religious to Himself. You know, there is only one name in heaven and on earth which is able to attract souls to the point that they consecrate themselves to Him. It is Our Lord Jesus Christ! There is the key to the mystery. It is He who has touched the heart of the religious, of priests, all Christians. There is only one name here below which has been given in order to save us, in order to have eternal life; one person alone who has shed His blood in order to save us from our sins: Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Who then is this Person who has the privilege of this power to draw souls to attract hearts in such a manner that those who wish to become religious abandon all that gives joy — apparent joy — here on earth? Who is, therefore, Our Lord Jesus Christ? What has He done for us?

If one glances at history since Our Lord Jesus Christ ascended into heaven one sees the number of martyrs of all ages of all conditions who have given their blood in order to follow Our Lord Jesus Christ because they adored Him, because they loved Him, because they obeyed Him. For His name alone they were ready to shed their blood. So many martyrs! So many nations who, because of their faith, have been massacred: because they believed in Our Lord Jesus Christ! So many vocations! So many monasteries! So many convents which were erected to enclose those who wished to pass their whole life praying, adoring, and serving Our Lord Jesus Christ. What great generosity! What great charity this name alone has raised in the entire world!

In Christian homes the venerated name of Jesus gives the virtues necessary for the family, makes a more Christian home — a home were one respects and honors the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ. So many souls have dedicated their entire life to serving the sick — to serving the Mystical Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ — to serving the suffering in hospitals, in infirmaries, in leper colonies — wherever there are suffering members of the Mystical Body of Our Lord there have been generous souls to minister to these sufferings. Why? Uniquely for those who are suffering? NO! In the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ!

So many souls have devoted their lives to teaching the Faith, the catechism, to the religious education of children, of families. These souls have spent their lives for Catholic education — for Christian education. Why? In order to make Our Lord Jesus Christ known! And today, do not the Epistle and Gospel say the same thing — that is our faith: we believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, we believe, therefore, that He is God Himself. Per quern onmia facta sunt — By whom all things were made — We have been made by Our Lord Jesus Christ. We are creatures of Our Lord Jesus Christ and He shed His blood for us. He came upon earth to sacrifice Himself for us: we then also wish to sacrifice ourselves for Him. Thus, this is religion; this is why one becomes a religious.

My dear sisters, if you are not attached to Our Lord Jesus Christ during your entire life, you have no reason to become religious — none. This is why you are going to receive your religious habit, in order to manifest Our Lord Jesus Christ by your religious habit. This is why you are going to receive your veil, your medal and your crucifix. This is why you are going to be blessed in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

The fathers and mothers of families might say "It certainly is pleasant to be a religious. Without a doubt, one separates oneself from a great number of joys but also from a great number of difficulties. Certainly convents and monasteries must be paradise on earth since it is the Church itself which says Ubi Jesus, ibi paradisum, there where one finds Jesus, one finds paradise. Thus, if Jesus is in religious communities, paradise is there as well."

Without a doubt, this perhaps should be the case. But the good Lord does not permit paradise to exist upon earth. On the contrary! He has promised us the cross. He has promised us sacrifices in religious communities — even monasteries. It would be a serious mistake to believe that we could find on earth a place where we could be as in paradise. Paradise is reserved until after our death.

During the course of our life we must carry our cross. Whatever one may be: Christian spouses, religious, priests — we all must carry our cross. We cannot find Our Lord Jesus Christ here on earth unless we find Him with His cross. If we find Him, He will impose His cross upon us — "Carry thy cross and follow Me". This is what He tells us: "If thou wish to gain eternal life, carry thy cross and follow Me." He did not say "I will give thee happiness upon earth", but rather He told us "Thou shalt have eternal life in heaven but first carry thy cross."

This is why my dear sisters, do not deceive yourselves, you are beginning the way of the cross but a way of the cross, as Our Lord said "My yoke is sweet and my burden light". Borne with Our Lord Jesus Christ in following Him, the cross becomes light. Remember that this cross assimilates us to Our Lord Jesus Christ; it makes us resemble Our Lord Jesus Christ. Remember that by His cross we participate in the redemption of the world. When our blood must flow in carrying this cross, our blood will be mixed with that of Our Lord Jesus Christ and souls will be saved.

All sufferings, the least of the smallest sufferings, are occasions to mix our blood with that of Our Lord for the redemption of the world, for the redemption of our souls. Thus, how good it is to be with Our Lord! This is why the saints and martyrs wished to suffer, they desired the cross.

Remember the words of St. Andrew when seeing the cross to which he was going to be attached — O bona crux! — O good cross! St. Andrew knew that attached to his cross he would resemble even more Our Lord Jesus Christ and that he would ascend to heaven. He knew also that partaking in the sufferings of Our Lord, he would save souls. Thus, perceiving it from afar he cried O bona crux! May you also be able to say everyday of your life when your crosses weigh heavily upon your shoulders O bona crux! They will further unite you to Our Lord Jesus Christ because they will make you understand all of His sufferings.

Moreover, you have as a particular patron the Blessed Virgin Mary: Our Lady of Compassion: Our Lady of Seven Sorrows who had not a single sin, who was immaculate from her conception, who did not commit any sins here on earth: if she merited to suffer with her divine Son in such a way that her heart was pierced with a sword, she who did not deserve these sufferings — shall we who deserve to suffer because of our sins dare not to imitate and resemble the Blessed Virgin Mary?

Ask your holy patron the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady of Compassion, Our Lady of Seven Sorrows, to teach you to suffer with Our Lord Jesus Christ in order that you also will one day share in His glory.

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Print this item