Vatican permits Anglican ‘Mass’ at St. John Lateran Cathedral in Rome

[Stone]

Dear friends, I haven't found too many places reporting this so please forgive the sedevacantist sourcing. I have slightly adapted the article to removed sedevacantist references (such as removing quotes from the titles of various bishops and popes, etc.).

Vatican permits Anglican ‘Mass’ at St. John Lateran Cathedral in Rome

Mr. Jonathan Baker leads an Anglican ‘Mass’ in St. John’s Cathedral, Rome

NOW [adapted, some hyperlinks removed] | April 19, 2023

As we noted in our last post, ideas have consequences.

News reached us this morning that a group of clerics of the so-called Church of England, led by ‘Bishop’ Jonathan Baker of Fulham (associated with the diocese of London), performed the Anglican worship service (which they call ‘Mass’, in imitation of Catholicism) at the Basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome, east of Vatican City.

The official Facebook page of St Philip the Apostle, South Tottenham, posted a number of photos on Apr. 18, 2023 (see here).

The Basilica of St. John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Pope. Its full name is “Archbasilica Cathedral of the Most Holy Savior and of Saints John the Baptist and John the Evangelist in the Lateran”. This cathedral, and not St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, is where the episcopal chair of the Roman Pontiff is located, the real cathedra of the Pope. The historic church building can be traced back to the fourth century.

So this is where Anglican clerics just offered ‘Mass’, with the permission of the ‘Holy See’ of Jorge Bergoglio, as noted by the administrator of the Facebook page in reply to a commenter: “the Holy See are [sic] very gracious to let us use their church”.

Some people might be wondering what the big deal is. Quite simply, the big deal is that an Anglican Mass is:

• invalid, as its priests and bishops are not validly ordained, according to the solemn judgment of Pope Leo XIII
  
• the formal and heretical worship of a false religion, created by King Henry VIII
  

To use a church building that was consecrated for true Christian worship by the only true religion, for the false worship of a man-made heretical sect, is a sacrilege of staggering proportions. This holds true very specifically also for the altar on which the pseudo-Mass was offered, assuming it is a traditional altar consecrated by a valid Catholic Pope or bishop (which it may not be).

Some will point out that St. John Lateran has long been desecrated de facto through the sacrilegious worship of the Vatican II religion, specifically the Novus Ordo Missae (‘New Mass’), and that is very true. However, this latest occurrence adds another level of wickedness to it all, inasmuch as the Vatican II religion does what it does under the label of Catholicism, whereas permitting Anglican worship is to explicitly allow non-Catholic worship as non-Catholic.

As regards the invalidity of Anglican holy orders, in 1896 Pope Leo XIII issued a definitive judgment that is probably infallible:

Then, considering that this matter, although already decided, had been by certain persons for whatever reason recalled into discussion, and that thence it might follow that a pernicious error would be fostered in the minds of many who might suppose that they possessed the Sacrament and effects of Orders, where these are nowise to be found, it seemed good to Us in the Lord to pronounce our judgment.

Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.

(Pope Leo XIII, Apostolic Constitution Apostolicae Curae, nn. 35-36; underlining added.)

Though the Vatican web site has somehow not seen fit to publish the ecumenical joy stopper Apostolicae Curae on its own web site in any language other than Latin, even official Novus Ordo teaching affirms the decree of Pope Leo XIII:

With regard to those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed, the following examples can be given: the legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the canonizations of saints (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations.

(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio Fidei, n. 11)

At the same time, of course, the basis for a “re-evaluation” of Pope Leo XIII’s verdict on Anglican orders was already laid in 1979, when a joint Anglican-NovusOrdo commission discovered a “new context” in which to discuss the matter.

The false Novus Ordo hierarchy knows that it cannot simply overturn Pope Leo’s declaration from one day to the next. Therefore, they proceed more subtly and establish gradual acceptance of Anglican orders in the practical order while leaving the doctrine theoretically untouched for the time being. This is accomplished by repeatedly making token ecumenical gestures that imply or suggest an acceptance of validity. In this manner, approval of Anglican orders is slowly enshrined in the minds of the people. When the moment comes for the revolution to be made on the doctrinal level, the minds of the people will already have been sufficiently conditioned to accept the new teaching, and resistance will be minimal.

There is, then, real method to the madness — the madness of saying one thing while doing another. For the time being, Francis is more interested in a practical revolution than a theoretical one. In his view, the theoretical will follow the practical anyway, and takes precedence over it. This kind of “theological existentialism” can be considered an application of the principle he enunciated in his 2013 exhortation Evangelii Gaudium: “Realities are greater than ideas” (n. 233).

Thus, we can view the Anglican ‘Mass’ in St. John Lateran as simply the latest in an ongoing history of gradually making Anglican orders and sacraments acceptable to Catholics (or those who mean to be Catholics). There are sundry instances where Francis, or one of his predecessors of infelicitous memory, did something similar to advance the cause of ecumenism at the expense of Catholic truth.

For instance, in 2017, Pope Francis claimed that it is perfectly fine for Catholics to attend an Anglican ‘Mass’ if there is no Catholic Mass available:

Francis’ Double Standard: Traditional Latin Mass forbidden, but Anglican Service is fine

Keep in mind that Anglican ‘Masses’, even according to Novus Ordo theology, are invalid!

Also in 2017, the Vatican permitted Anglican Evensong to be celebrated in St. Peter’s Basilica. In 2014, Francis received a ‘blessing’ from the invalid ‘Archbishop’ of Canterbury, Justin Welby, a mere layman. That same year, the false pope granted his deceased friend Tony Palmer, an Anglican-Evangelical ‘bishop’, to be buried as a Catholic bishop.

In 2018, permission was given for the Coptic Orthodox to offer Mass in the Basilica of St. Paul’s outside the Walls in Rome. Although the Mass was valid, this was a grave offense to God because offered by heretics (the subjective dispositions of the individuals involved are irrelevant to the objective evil that took place).

Given the above, is it terribly surprising that Francis revealed a few years ago that he had once substituted for a friend and led a Lutheran prayer service?

All heretical worship is false worship and is a sin against the First Commandment:

False worship is opposed to the truth of religion (e.g., Old Testament rites which signify that Christ is still to come), or of rites (e.g., Mass by a layman, Mass according to a form disapproved by the Church), or of facts (e.g., fictitious revelations, ecstasies, mysticism, miracles, relies), or of morals (e.g., human sacrifice, praises of God to the accompaniment of lascivious words or music, etc.).

(Rev. John A. McHugh & Charles J. Callan, Moral Theology [New York, NY: Joseph F. Wagner, 1958], n. 2274)

Since heretical worship is always at the very least “opposed to the truth of religion”, it always constitutes false worship. (Whoever thinks this is no big deal may wish to review Jude 11 and Numbers 16 in Holy Scripture, in addition to John 4:24.)

That’s how a Catholic looks at these things, but Catholicism has not been permitted in the Vatican for many decades now. In fact, Bergoglio has said the Church needs Anglicans as Anglicans; and, on another occasion, he claimed that Catholics need Protestants.

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI gave to the English Archlayman of Canterbury a pectoral cross (signifying episcopal authority), something that had also been done by Pope John Paul II in 2003; and in 1966 Pope Paul VI gave his own episcopal ring to the ‘Archbishop’ of Canterbury (see photo here).

Thus it is evident that the gradual acceptance of Anglican ordinations has been going on for quite a while and is by no means unique to Bergoglio, who is merely continuing and advancing the trend. All this is the rotten fruit of the theology of Vatican II, especially regarding the Church (ecclesiology).

On Mar. 25, 1993, Pope John Paul II promulgated the Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism. This lengthy document gives concrete application to the council’s new ecclesiology and legislates:

Catholic churches are consecrated or blessed buildings which have an important theological and liturgical significance for the Catholic community. They are therefore generally [!] reserved for Catholic worship. However, if priests, ministers or communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church do not have a place or the liturgical objects necessary for celebrating worthily their religious ceremonies, the diocesan Bishop may allow them the use of a church or a Catholic building and also lend them what may be necessary for their services. Under similar circumstances, permission may be given to them for interment or for the celebration of services at Catholic cemeteries.

(John Paul II, Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms of Ecumenism, n. 137)

Now, some will object that this explicitly states that Protestants must be lacking a place for their worship as a condition for them being permitted to use a Catholic church. That is indeed true but irrelevant for two reasons: (1) It does not say that that this is the only scenario under which a Protestant service may be conducted in a Catholic church; (2) even if it did say so, since heretical worship is no longer forbidden in Catholic churches in principle but merely by circumstance, the door has been opened to this sacrilege, and now it is merely a question of determining under what precise circumstances it may take place. As if John Paul II admits one set of circumstances, there is no reason why Francis couldn’t admit another.

As we said before, ideas have consequences. On what grounds could anyone argue that it is licit to allow Protestants to use a Catholic church for their worship if they have no other place, but not if, for example, some “spiritual advantage”, such as “furthering the cause of Christian unity”, suggests it (to use typical Vatican II speak)? Surely, offering ‘Mass’ in an ancient Roman cathedral can only help foster fraternity and good mutual relations, which in turn will help promote the unity of all Christians, right?

By the way: According to a news report by Jules Gomes at Church Militant, this ‘Bishop’ Baker who led the Anglican worship in St. John’s yesterday is on record admitting to being an active Freemason. Furthermore, as someone who is ‘remarried’ after civil divorce, he apparently takes the Sixth Commandment as more of a divine suggestion. No wonder Bergoglio loves him [...].

Meanwhile, it has been announced that Pope Francis has gifted a relic of the True Cross to King Charles III to be used in his coronation ceremony on May 6. King Charles is not merely the monarch of the United Kingdom but, in that function, also the official head of the Church of England, which is simply a Protestant sect established by King Henry VIII in the 16th century after Pope Clement VII refused to “accompany” him in his desire to have his valid marriage declared null so he could raise up seed with another woman without being considered a bigamist or an adulterer.

Ladies and gentlemen, all of this chaos we see in Rome makes sense once you stop thinking that Jorge Bergoglio is the Pope of the Catholic Church, or that he intends to promote Catholicism and the good of souls. Once you consider that the man is an impostor, a charlatan, an anti-Catholic agent whose aim is to damage Catholicism in every way possible, to ruin souls eternally, and to humiliate the Church before the world, it all begins to make sense.

It’s time to end the cognitive dissonance.