A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!
Showing posts with label Summorum Pontificum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Summorum Pontificum. Show all posts

Saturday 17 July 2021

On the matter of the Motu Proprio there is one thing you can do, tomorrow. THERE IS A MASS FOR YOU - GET TO IT!

Dear Friends,

The Bishop of Rome has taken the advice of some bishops, most probably Italy's and abrogated Summorum Pontificum using that very word. A word that was used by our Pope, Benedict XVI when he stated quite rightly that the Missal of 1570/1962 was "never abrogated." 

That Missal was and can never be abrogated. Let us remember, at this time, the words of Holy Gamaliel:

33 When they heard this they were enraged and wanted to kill them. 34 But a Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel a teacher of the law, held in honour by all the people, stood up and ordered the men to be put outside for a while. 35 And he said to them, “Men of Israel, take care what you do with these men. 36 For before these days Theudas arose, giving himself out to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him; but he was slain and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. 37 After him Judas the Galilean arose in the days of the census and drew away some of the people after him; he also perished, and all who followed him were scattered. 38 So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this undertaking is of men, it will fail; 39 but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!”

The men who did this are evil and they are stupid. It is not judgemental to state it, to call them out or to proclaim loudly that "if they do not repent and recant and make amends, then Hell awaits them for this one act alone!"

Go to the traditional Mass in our diocesan parishes or to the SSPX. Go and show all of our episcopal leaders that we will not be moved.

Keep your powder dry and pray.

If you are in Toronto. here is what you do. 

The provincial government has now lifted specific occupancy limitations and has indicated that occupancy is dictated by "social distancing." I'm sure Susan from the Parish Council will be enforcing this vigoursly.

As Susan does not attend the traditional Latin Mass this is where you should go.

St. Vincent de Paul at 9:30 A.M.

Holy Family at 11:00 A.M.

St. Patrick's Schomberg at 11:00 A.M.

St. Lawrence the Martyr at 1:00 P.M.

If so inclined.

The Society of St. Pius X

Church of the Transfiguration at 8:00 A.M. and 10:00 A.M.

Cathedral of the Transfiguration in Markham at 5:00 P.M. NO PRE-REGISTRATION!

KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON!




Friday 16 July 2021

Jorge Bergoglio - an abuser, a cruel and vindictive father. a bully and a brute and there is charity in truth!

Jorge Bergoglio, you, who call yourself the Bishop or Rome. You are an abuser, a cruel and vindictive father who cares not about the lost sheep and poor little souls whom you profess to in your cry of the "peripheries." I call you out, my brother in Christ. I call you out now, at this moment.

Repent.

Repent of your evil act.

If you die not having repented of this evil juridical action and to repair the damage I can have no doubt that Our Lord Jesus Christ will spit you out and send you to the deepest pit of Hell, itself.

Repent, Jorge. 

He awaits.

 


As much as Summorum Pontificum was an act of the Holy Spirit for the good and the peace of the Church and faithful, this work by Bergoglio is of Satan and it is proven in the opening line.

Even its very title mocks the faithful - "Traditiones Custodes."

In its very first sentence it mocks, God the HOLY SPIRIT as it charges that God can change His Mind, that He can act in charity one day and in hatred and disdain the next. It claims the power of the HOLY SPIRIT to destroy what the HOLY SPIRIT created.


The HOLY SPIRIT cannot contradict HIMSELF any more than when Our Blessed LORD asked rhetorically, "can Satan cast out Satan?”

It is blasphemy.

It is from the pits of Hell.

Make no mistake. This is an evil document. It was promulgated by evil men. Lest you call me "judgemental" and attack me for this, you need to use some logic. Nothing in this document is good. It does not build up. It tears down and causes distress to millions of faithful adherents to the Catholic Faith. It is cruel and the man who issued it, is cruel.

It is the death rattle, not just of the man whose name it bears but of a regime. They will not win this, they cannot win this. They have set themselves against God.


This is not 1965, let alone 1969. I am not my parents and I am not my grandparents and neither are you, dear reader.

APOSTOLIC LETTER
ISSUED "MOTU PROPRIO"
BY THE SUPREME PONTIFF

FRANCIS

“TRADITIONIS CUSTODES”

ON THE USE OF THE ROMAN LITURGY PRIOR TO THE REFORM OF 1970

Guardians of the tradition, the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome constitute the visible principle and foundation of the unity of their particular Churches.[1] Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the Gospel and by means of the celebration of the Eucharist, they govern the particular Churches entrusted to them.[2]

In order to promote the concord and unity of the Church, with paternal solicitude towards those who in any region adhere to liturgical forms antecedent to the reform willed by the Vatican Council II, my Venerable Predecessors, Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, granted and regulated the faculty to use the Roman Missal edited by John XXIII in 1962.[3] In this way they intended “to facilitate the ecclesial communion of those Catholics who feel attached to some earlier liturgical forms” and not to others.[4]

In line with the initiative of my Venerable Predecessor Benedict XVI to invite the bishops to assess the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum three years after its publication, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith carried out a detailed consultation of the bishops in 2020. The results have been carefully considered in the light of experience that has matured during these years.

At this time, having considered the wishes expressed by the episcopate and having heard the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I now desire, with this Apostolic Letter, to press on ever more in the constant search for ecclesial communion. Therefore, I have considered it appropriate to establish the following:

Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.

Art. 2. It belongs to the diocesan bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church entrusted to him,[5] to regulate the liturgical celebrations of his diocese.[6] Therefore, it is his exclusive competence to authorize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in his diocese, according to the guidelines of the Apostolic See.

Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970:

§ 1. is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs;

§ 2. is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes);

§ 3. to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962.[7] In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences;

§ 4. to appoint a priest who, as delegate of the bishop, is entrusted with these celebrations and with the pastoral care of these groups of the faithful. This priest should be suited for this responsibility, skilled in the use of the Missale Romanum antecedent to the reform of 1970, possess a knowledge of the Latin language sufficient for a thorough comprehension of the rubrics and liturgical texts, and be animated by a lively pastoral charity and by a sense of ecclesial communion. This priest should have at heart not only the correct celebration of the liturgy, but also the pastoral and spiritual care of the faithful;

§ 5. to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them;

§ 6. to take care not to authorize the establishment of new groups.

Art. 4. Priests ordained after the publication of the present Motu Proprio, who wish to celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962, should submit a formal request to the diocesan Bishop who shall consult the Apostolic See before granting this authorization.

Art. 5. Priests who already celebrate according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan Bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.

Art. 6. Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.

Art. 7. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, for matters of their particular competence, exercise the authority of the Holy See with respect to the observance of these provisions.

Art. 8. Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated.

Everything that I have declared in this Apostolic Letter in the form of Motu Proprio, I order to be observed in all its parts, anything else to the contrary notwithstanding, even if worthy of particular mention, and I establish that it be promulgated by way of publication in “L’Osservatore Romano”, entering immediately in force and, subsequently, that it be published in the official Commentary of the Holy See, Acta Apostolicae Sedis.

Given at Rome, at Saint John Lateran, on 16 July 2021, the liturgical Memorial of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, in the ninth year of Our Pontificate.

FRANCIS

________________________

[1] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church “Lumen Gentium”, 21 november 1964, n. 23 AAS 57 (1965) 27.

[2] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church “Lumen Gentium”, 21 november 1964, n. 27: AAS 57 (1965) 32; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree concerning the pastoral office of bishops in the Church “Christus Dominus”, 28 october 1965, n. 11: AAS 58 (1966) 677-678; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 833.

[3] Cfr John Paul II, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “Ecclesia Dei”, 2 july 1988: AAS 80 (1988) 1495-1498; Benedict XVI, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, 7 july 2007: AAS 99 (2007) 777-781; Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “Ecclesiae unitatem”, 2 july 2009: AAS 101 (2009) 710-711.

[4] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “Ecclesia Dei”, 2 july 1988, n. 5: AAS 80 (1988) 1498.

[5] Cfr Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Costitution on the sacred liturgy “Sacrosanctum Concilium”, 4 december 1963, n. 41: AAS 56 (1964) 111; Caeremoniale Episcoporum, n. 9; Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament, Instruction on certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist “Redemptionis Sacramentum”, 25 march 2004, nn. 19-25: AAS 96 (2004) 555-557.

[6] Cfr CIC, can. 375, § 1; can. 392.

[7] Cfr Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decree “Quo magis” approving seven Eucharistic Prefaces for the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, 22 february 2020, and Decree “Cum sanctissima” on the liturgical celebration in honour of Saints in the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite, 22 february 2020: L’Osservatore Romano, 26 march 2020, p. 6.

[01014-EN.01] [Original text: Italian]




Wednesday 30 June 2021

THE ENEMIES OF SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM WANT WAR - Paix Liturgique. AND THEY WILL GET IT! - Vox Cantoris

A warning to Bergoglio, Parolin, Ouellette, Roche and the rest of these effetes, hirelings and Christ-hating demonic episcopal scum. If you want war, you will get war. 

This is not 1969. This is not even 1965. We are not our parents.

Forewarned is forearmed!

There is no going back.

Paix Liturgique France

Our 805 letter published on June 28, 2021 

THE ENEMIES OF SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM WANT WAR

"You are going to have a new Motu proprio in the coming days or weeks," Bishop Minnerath, Archbishop of Dijon, told the faithful of the traditional Mass who came to demonstrate their displeasure in front of the bishopric on June 26. But even before the publication of this text, if it is well published, the testimonies on the intentions of the enemies of the previous motu proprio, that of Benedict XVI multiply: 

Thus, Cardinal Parolin, Secretary of State, said before a group of cardinals: "We must put an end to this Mass forever!" Bishop Roche, the new Prefect of the Congregation of Divine Worship, explained with a laugh to seminary officials in Rome and members of the Curia, all English-speaking: "Summorum Pontificum is practically dead! We will give power back to the bishops on this point, but especially not to the conservative bishops." 

It should also be noted that Bishop Minnerath, who opened hostilities against the traditional community of Dijon, is a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and therefore finds himself every month in Rome, immersed in the circles of the Curia that prepared the offensive against Summorum Pontificum. 

Benedict XVI's motu proprio Summorum Pontificum of 2007 was a compromise that ingeniously established a coexistence between the Mass of Paul VI and the Tridentine Mass, in other words, it is true, between water and fire. The fact remains that the peace achieved has been widely acclaimed by the Christian people, whether or not they attend the old Mass, as all our surveys have shown. 

It is known, since the Pope spoke about it at the Conference of Bishops of Italy on Pentecost Monday, that the new text will reduce the possibility of diocesan priests to celebrate traditional Mass. In addition, measures should be taken to lead the priests of the Ecclesia Dei institutes to also celebrate the new Mass and to bring both this new Mass and the conciliar magisterium into the training given in the seminaries of these communities. 

Proponents of liturgical reform have become aware of the importance of the traditional world 

The exasperation, which animates the supporters of liturgical reform in the face of the opposition they have met from the beginning, has been revived with the arrival of Pope Francis. It continues to grow as time passes and the pontificate logically moves towards its completion: we must put an end as soon as possible to this opposition to the Council to which Pope Benedict XVI had given a space of liturgical freedom. 

The offensive was led by a pressure group in the Curia and among the Italian bishops who worked to make roman decision-makers understand that the two masses in attendance, the traditional mass and the new mass, represented two incompatible doctrinal states: that of Vatican II and that of before Vatican II. The great idea of Andrea Grillo, professor of liturgy at the Roman University of St. Anselm, is that Summorum Pontificum has introduced an aberrant state of "liturgical exception", which puts the traditional liturgy and the new liturgy on an equal footing, which is monstrous and unbearable*. 

In addition, these hardline conciliars have come to understand that the traditional world, with its priests, its faithful, its works, its schools, which they affected to consider as marginal and despicable, represents in reality a significant weight, especially as the conciliar world for its part is becoming exhausted and is increasingly fading. 

Hence this desire to bring the Summorum Pontificum galaxy into the common law. Undoubtedly what concerns the traditional liturgy and its specialized actors, the priests of the Ecclesia Dei communities, will now be the domain of competence of the Congregation for Divine Worship, which is by its function in charge of the new liturgy. The extraordinary form will therefore be subordinate to the ordinary law of the ordinary form. This could be very expensive, for example, if the authorization to celebrate in extraordinary form were conditional on participation at regular intervals in the new liturgy, or on the use of the calendar of the ordinary form, or the new lectionary. All at the discretion of the diocesan bishops, to whom the management of this "tolerance" would be entrusted, the Congregation for Divine Worship always giving them reason against the priests, the faithful and the Ecclesia Dei communities. The conservative bishops, as Bishop Roche implies, were under surveillance. 

Doves and falcons 

However, the present pontificate, that of a pope who is already 84 years old, seems to be entering a difficult phase. Opposition to his liberal line has always been very strong among conservatives and traditionalists. But in addition, he is now meeting with discontent from a number of those who have supported him until now. 

More than a grumbling, a declared hostility. The historian Alberto Melloni, director of the John XXIII Foundation, also known as the Bologna School, is a major intellectual in progressive Italian Catholicism. On June 14, in the largest left-wing daily, La Repubblica, to which he regularly gives articles, he published a solemn warning to the Pope entitled "Il giugno neo della Chiesa", The Black June of the Church (an allusion to what left-wing historians call "The Black Week of the Council", this week when the most serious crisis took place in the course of Vatican II). Melloni lists Francis' bad practices against figures who were nevertheless close to him, of whom he made enemies: the way in which he refused by a letter made public the resignation of German Cardinal Marx; the confirmation of the dismissal of Enzo Bianchi, Melloni's great friend, because of "serious problems in the exercise of authority" from the ultra-ecumenical monastery of Bose; the visit of a commissioner, ordered against the Congregation for the Clergy after the resignation of Cardinal Stella, 80, one of the pillars of the Bergoglian pontificate; the economic control launched against the services of the Vicariate of Rome of Cardinal De Donatis; the search launched to feed the charges deemed too weak against Cardinal Becciu, accused of economic embezzlement in London when he was Deputy of the Secretary of State. Melloni concludes: either Francis is surrounded by advisers who are bullies, or he has remained the authoritarianist he was when he led the Society of Jesus in Argentina. Let the Pope beware: "He is preparing for a storm!" 

Part of the "left" is therefore seeking to free itself from a chaotic mode of government. It is not surprising, therefore, that some prelates, who are not very friendly to the ancient liturgy, give Francis advice of caution: this is really not the time to open a new liturgical war today. They join Cardinal Ladaria, "on the right", who has put the brakes on this issue. 

In doing so, these doves stand out from the hawks of the Secretary of State and the Congregation of Divine Worship. The hawks seem to prevail: "We must end this Mass forever!" (Cardinal Parolin); "Summorum Pontificum is practically dead!" (Bishop Roche). 

The front of refusal is preparing 

A front of refusal is being prepared, as predicted by the noise raised by the revelation of the fiddling of Summorum Pontificum,and relayed by the great Italian press. Are we heading towards a return to the situation of the 70s, when the new missal of Paul VI was promulgated? With this difference that the Roman institution and the national episcopate are today infinitely weaker. 

In Dijon the priests of the diocese and the faithful who still attend the churches do not understand the policy of the archbishop, illegible for them. This is obviously what the reaction of the entire Christian people will be, with the exception of the most progressive areas: misunderstanding. Why reopen old wounds? Why advocate ecumenism ad extra,but refuse it ad intra? Why show so little mercy? 

And this in a context of dramatic reduction of Catholicism. Andrea Riccardi, main character of the Community of Sant'Egidio, who is the complete opposite of a conservative, in a recent book, where he considers the fire of Notre-Dame de Paris as a parable, deals with the announced social disappearance of the Church: La Chiesa brucia. Crise e futuro del cristianesimo (Tempi nuovi, 2021), The Church burns. Crisis and future of Christianity. He analyses country by country, in Europe, the collapse of Catholicism. In the conclusion, he of course shows an obligatory hope on the theme "the crisis is not decline", but he has previously launched, he too, launched a number of small murderous sentences: "many Catholics have gone from enthusiasm for Bergoglio to disillusionment", "the solution will not come from a reform". And then also this observation: "Traditionalism is a reality of some importance in the Church, both in the organization and in the means". 

Catholics attached to the traditional Mass are promised extermination: "We must put an end to this Mass forever!" (Cardinal Parolin); "Summorum Pontificum is practically dead!" (Bishop Roche). Traditional Catholics will experience difficult times if Roman benevolence, more or less followed by episcopal benevolence, is torn apart. But do we believe that they will let themselves be done? It may well be that, in the trial of strength that is being prepared, it is the guardians of the liturgy of the Council who have the most to lose. 

-------------------------

 * For example, Andrea Grillo: "Il peccato dell'Ecclesia Dei si chiama Summorum Pontificum", The sin of Ecclesia Dei is called Summorum Pontificum, on the Munerawebsite, http://www.cittadellaeditrice.com/munera/il-peccato-dellecclesia-dei-si-chiama-summorum-pontificum/

Paix Liturgique France

Saturday 12 June 2021

On the rumours of an attack on Summorum Pontificum and the battle cry from Archbishop Viganò

With all of the unconstitutional acts of Doug Ford and his toady, Thomas Cardinal Collins, there has been no attention paid by this writer to the matter of the substantial rumours that Bergoglio is about to take an action of some sort against Summorum Pontificum. I see many losing their minds over this, I too am disturbed by the prospect of another fight. If that fight comes, you can be assured that this writer will confront it here and in Toronto itself. 

In the meantime, I issue this warning to any priest or bishop who attempts to restrict our rights. This is not 1965, nor is it 1970 and we are not our parents nor our grandparents.

In the meantime, there is this:


Considerations
on the feared modification of the motu proprio
Summorum Pontificum

On the occasion of the Philosophy Symposium dedicated to the memory of Msgr. Antonio Livi which was held in Venice on May 30 (here), I tried to identify the elements that constantly recur throughout history in the work of deception of the Evil One. In my examination (here), I focused on the fraud of the pandemic, showing how the reasons given to justify illegitimate coercive measures and no less illegitimate limitations of natural freedoms were in reality prophasis, that is, pretexts: ostensible reasons that are actually intended to conceal a malicious intent and a criminal design. The publication of Anthony Fauci’s emails (here) and the impossibility of censoring the ever more numerous voices of dissent with respect to the mainstream narrative have confirmed my analysis and allow us to hope for a blatant defeat of the supporters of the Great Reset. 

In that address, you may recall, I dwelt on that fact that the Second Vatican Council was also in a certain way a Great Reset for the ecclesial body, like other historical events planned and designed in order to revolutionize the social body. Also in this case, the excuses given to legitimize liturgical reform, ecumenism, and the parliamentarization of the authority of the Sacred Pastors were not founded on good faith but on deceit and lies, in such a way so as to make us believe that we were renouncing things that were unquestionably good – the Apostolic Mass, the uniqueness of the Church as the means of salvation, the immutability of the Magisterium and the Authority of the Hierarchy – for the sake of a higher good. But as we know, not only did this higher good not come about (nor could it have), but in fact the true intent of the Council manifested itself in all its disruptive subversive value: churches were emptied, seminaries deserted, convents abandoned, authority discredited and perverted into tyranny for the sake of the wicked Pastors or rendered ineffective for the good ones. And we also know that the purpose of this reset, this devastating revolution, was from the very beginning iniquitous and malicious, despite being clothed in noble intentions in order to convince the faithful and the clergy to obey. 

In 2007 Benedict XVI restored full citizenship to the venerable Tridentine liturgy, giving back to it the legitimacy that had been abusively denied it for fifty years. In his Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum he declared: 

It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy. […]  For such a celebration with either Missal, the priest needs no permission from the Apostolic See or from his own Ordinary (here). 

In reality the letter of the Motu Proprio and the implementing documents associated with it was never completely applied, and the cÅ“tus fidelium who today celebrate in the Apostolic Rite continue to have to go to their Bishop to ask permission, essentially still abiding by the dictate of the Indult of the preceding Motu Proprio of John Paul II Ecclesia Dei. The just honor in which the traditional liturgy ought to be held was tempered by its being placed on an equal level with the liturgy of the post-conciliar reform, with the former being defined as the “extraordinary form” and the latter as the “ordinary form,” as if the Bride of the Lamb could have two voices – one fully Catholic and another equivocally ecumenical – with which to speak at one moment to the Divine Majesty and at the next to the assembly of the faithful. But there is also no doubt that the liberalization of the Tridentine Mass has done much good, nourishing the spirituality of millions of people and bringing many souls closer to the Faith who, in the sterility of the reformed rite, have not found any incentive either for conversion or even less for spiritual growth. 

Last year, displaying the typical behavior of the Innovators, the Holy See sent a questionnaire to the dioceses of the world in which they were asked to provide information about the implementation of Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio (here). The way in which the questions were written betrayed, once again, a second purpose, and the responses that were sent to Rome were supposed to create a basis of apparent legitimacy for imposing limitations on the Motu Proprio, if not its total abrogation. Certainly, if the author of Summorum Pontificum were still seated on the Throne, this questionnaire would have allowed the Pontiff to remind the Bishops that no priest needs to ask for permission to celebrate Mass in the ancient rite, nor may a priest be removed from ministry for doing so. But the real intention of those who wanted to consult the Ordinaries does not seem to reside in the salus animarum so much as in theological hatred against a rite that expresses with adamantine clarity the immutable Faith of the Holy Church, and which for this reason is alien to the conciliar ecclesiology, to its liturgy, and to the doctrine it presupposes and conveys. There is nothing more opposed to the so-called magisterium of Vatican II than the Tridentine liturgy: every prayer, every pericope – as liturgists would say – constitutes an affront to the delicate ears of the Innovators, every ceremony is an offense to their eyes. 

Simply tolerating that there are Catholics who want to drink from the sacred sources of that rite sounds like a defeat for them, one that is bearable only if it is limited to little groups of nostalgic elderly people or eccentric aesthetes. But if the “extraordinary form” – which is such in the ordinary sense of the word – becomes the norm for thousands of families, young people, and ordinary people who consciously choose it, then it becomes a stone of scandal and must be relentlessly opposed, limited, and abolished, since there must be no counter to the reformed liturgy, no alternative to the squalor of the conciliar rites – just as there can be no voice of dissent or argued refutation against the mainstream narrative, and just as effective treatments cannot be adopted in the face of the side effects of an experimental vaccine because they would demonstrate the latter’s uselessness. 

Nor can we be surprised: those who do not come from God are intolerant of everything that even remotely recalls an era in which the Catholic Church was governed by Catholic pastors and not by unfaithful pastors who abuse their authority; an era in which the Faith was preached in its integrity to the nations and not adulterated in order to please the world; an era in which those who hungered and thirsted for Truth were nourished and refreshed by a liturgy that was earthly in form but divine in substance. And if all that until yesterday was holy and good is now condemned and made an object of scorn, then allowing any trace of it to remain is inadmissible and constitutes an intolerable affront. Because the Tridentine Mass touches chords of the soul that the Montinian rite does not even begin to approach. 

Obviously, those who maneuver behind the scenes in the Vatican to eliminate the Catholic Mass see decades of work compromised in the Motu Proprio, they see a threat against the possession of so many souls whom today they keep subjugated and their tyrannical hold over the ecclesial body weakened. The same priests and bishops who, like me, have rediscovered that inestimable treasure of faith and spirituality – or which by the grace of God they have never abandoned, despite the ferocious persecution of the post-council – are not disposed to renounce it, having found in it the soul of their Priesthood and the nourishment of their supernatural life. And it is disturbing, as well as scandalous, that in the face of the good that the Tridentine Mass brings to the Church, there are those who want to ban it or limit its celebration on the basis of specious reasons. 

Yet, if we place ourselves in the shoes of the Innovators, we understand how perfectly consistent this is with their distorted vision of the Church, which for them is not a perfect society instituted by God for the salvation of souls but a human society in which an authority that is corrupt and subservient to the elite it favors steers the needs of the masses for vague spirituality, denying the purpose for which Our Lord willed it, and in which the good Pastors are constrained to inaction by bureaucratic shackles which they alone obey. This impasse, this juridical dead end, means that the abuse of authority can be imposed on subjects precisely in virtue of the fact that they recognize the voice of Christ in it, even in the face of evidence of the intrinsic wickedness of the orders that are given, the motivations that determine them, and the individuals who exercise it. On the other hand, even in the civil sphere, during the pandemic, many people obeyed absurd and harmful rules because they were imposed on them by doctors, virologists, and politicians who should have had the health and well-being of citizens at heart; and many did not want to believe, not even in the face of evidence of the criminal design, that they could directly intend the death or illness of millions of people. It is what social psychologists call cognitive dissonance, which induces individuals to take refuge in a comfortable niche of irrationality rather than recognize that they are victims of a colossal fraud and therefore having to react manfully. 

So let us not ask ourselves why – in the face of the multiplication of communities tied to the ancient liturgy, the flowering of vocations almost exclusively in the context of the Motu Proprio, and the increase in the frequent reception of the Sacraments and consistency of Christian life among those who follow it – there is a desire to wickedly trample an inalienable right and hinder the Apostolic Mass: the question is wrong and the answer would be misleading. 

Let us ask ourselves, rather, why notorious heretics and fornicators without morals would tolerate their errors and their deplorable way of life being placed into question by a minority of the faithful and clergy without protectors when they have the power to prevent it. At this point we understand well that this aversion cannot fail to be made explicit precisely by putting an end to the Motu Proprio, abusing a usurped and perverted authority. Even at the time of the Protestant pseudo-Reformation, tolerance towards certain liturgical customs rooted in the people was short-lived, because those devotions to the Virgin Mary, those hymns in Latin, those bells rung at the Elevation – which no longer existed – necessarily had to disappear, since they expressed a Faith that Luther’s followers had denied. And it would be absurd to hope that there could be a peaceful coexistence between the Novus and Vetus Ordo, as well as between the Catholic Mass and the Lutheran Lord’s Supper, given the ontological incompatibility between them. On closer inspection, at least the defeat of the Vetus hoped for by the supporters of the Novus is consistent with their principles, just as the defeat of the Novus by the Vetus should likewise be hoped for. They are mistaken therefore who believe that it is possible to hold together two opposing forms of Catholic worship in the name of a plurality of liturgical expression that is the daughter of the conciliar mentality no more and no less than it is the daughter of the hermeneutic of continuity. 

The modus operandi of the Innovators emerges once again in this operation against the Motu Proprio: first some of the most fanatical opponents of the traditional liturgy call for the abrogation of Summorum Pontificum as a provocation, calling the ancient Mass “divisive.” Then the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asks the Ordinaries to respond to a questionnaire (here), the answers to which are practically pre-packaged (the Bishop’s career depends on the way he goes along with what he reports to the Holy See, because the content of his responses to the questionnaire will also be made known to the Congregation of Bishops). Then, with a nonchalant air, during a closed-door meeting with the members of the Italian Episcopate, Bergoglio says that he is concerned about seminarians “who seem good, but are rigid” (here) and the spread of the traditional liturgy, always reiterating that the conciliar liturgical reform is irreversible. Furthermore, he appoints a bitter enemy of the Vetus Ordo as Prefect of Divine Worship who will be an ally in the application of any future restrictions. Finally, we learn that Cardinals Parolin and Ouellet are among the first to desire this downsizing of the Motu Proprio (here). This obviously leads “conservative” Prelates to come scurrying in defense of the present system of the co-existence of the two forms, ordinary and extraordinary, giving Francis the opportunity to show that he is the prudent moderator of two opposing currents by moving towards “only” a limitation of Summorum Pontificum rather than its total abrogation: which – as we know – was exactly what he was aiming for from the start of his operation. 

Regardless of the final outcome, the deus ex machina of this predictable play is, as always, Bergoglio, who is even ready to take credit for a gesture of clement indulgence towards conservatives as well as unloading the responsibilities for a restrictive application onto the new Prefect, Archbishop Arthur Roche, and his followers. Thus, in the event of a choral protest of the faithful and an unhinged reaction by the Prefect or other Prelates, once again Bergoglio will enjoy the clash between progressives and traditionalists, since he will then have excellent arguments to affirm that the coexistence of the two forms of the Roman Rite causes divisions in the Church and that it is thus more prudent to return to the pax montiniana, that is, the total proscription of the Mass of all time. 

I exhort my Brothers in the Episcopate, Priests, and laity to strenuously defend their right to the Catholic liturgy solemnly sanctioned by the Saint Pius V’s Bull Quo Primum, and by means of it to defend the Holy Church and the Papacy, which have both been exposed to discredit and ridicule by the Pastors themselves. The question of the Motu Proprio is not in the least negotiable, because it reaffirms the legitimacy of a rite that has never been abrogated nor is able to be abrogated. Furthermore, in addition to the certain damage that airing these novelties will cause to souls and to the certain advantage that will come from them to the Devil and his servants, there is also added the indecorous rudeness displayed to Benedict XVI, who is still living, by Bergoglio, who ought to know that the authority the Roman Pontiff exercises over the Church is vicarious and that the power which he holds comes to him from Our Lord Jesus Christ, the One Head of the Mystical Body. Abusing the Apostolic authority and the power of the Holy Keys for a purpose opposed to that for which they were instituted by the Lord represents an unheard-of offense against the Majesty of God, a dishonor for the Church, and a sin for which he will have to answer for to the One whose Vicar he is. And whoever refuses the title of Vicar of Christ knows that by doing so the legitimacy of his authority also fails. 

It is not acceptable for the supreme authority of the Church to allow itself to cancel, in a disturbing operation of cancel culture in a religious key, the inheritance it has received from its Fathers; nor is it permissible to consider as being outside of the Church those who are not prepared to accept the privation of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated in the form that has molded almost two thousand years of Saints. The Church is not an agency in which the marketing office decides to cancel old products from the catalog and propose new ones in their stead according to customer requests. Imposing the liturgical revolution with force on priests and the faithful in the name of obedience to the Council, stripping away from them the very soul of the Christian life and replacing it with a rite that the Freemason Bugnini copied from Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer, was already painful. That abuse, partially healed by Benedict XVI with the Motu Proprio, cannot be repeated in any way now in the presence of elements that are all largely in favor of the liberalization of the ancient liturgy. If one really wanted to help the people of God in this crisis, the reformed liturgy should have been abolished, which in fifty years has caused more damage than Calvinism has done. 

We do not know if the feared restrictions that the Holy See intends to make to the Motu Proprio will affect diocesan priests, or if they will also affect the Institutes whose members celebrate the ancient rite exclusively. I fear, however, as I have already had the occasion to say in the past, that it will be precisely on the latter that the demolishing action of the Innovators will be unleashed, who can perhaps tolerate the ceremonial aspects of the Tridentine liturgy but absolutely do not accept adherence to the doctrinal and ecclesiological structure that they imply, which contrasts sharply with the conciliar deviations that the Innovators want to impose without exception. This is why it is to be feared that these Institutes will be asked to make some form of submission to the conciliar liturgy, for example by making the celebration of the Novus Ordo mandatory at least occasionally, as diocesan priests must already do. In this way, whoever makes use of the Motu Proprio will be constrained not only to an implicit acceptance of the reformed liturgy but also to a public acceptance of the new rite and its doctrinal mens. And whoever celebrates the two forms of the rite will find himself ipso facto discredited above all in his consistency, passing off his liturgical choices as a merely aesthetic – I would say almost choreographic – in fact, depriving him of any sort of critical judgment towards the Montinian Mass and the mens that gives it form: because he will find himself forced to celebrate that Mass. This is a malicious and cunning operation, in which an authority that abuses its power delegitimizes those who oppose it, on the one hand by granting the ancient rite, but on the other hand making it a merely aesthetic question and obligating an insidious bi-ritualism and an even more insidious adherence to two opposing and contrasting doctrinal approaches. But how can a priest be asked to celebrate a venerable and holy rite in which he finds perfect coherence between doctrine, ceremony, and life at one moment, and at the next a falsified rite that winks at heretics and contemptibly keeps silent about what the other proudly proclaims? 

Let us pray, therefore: let us pray that the Divine Majesty, to which we render perfect worship celebrating the venerable ancient rite, will deign to enlighten the Sacred Pastors so that they desist from their purpose and indeed promote the Tridentine Mass for the good of Holy Church and for the glory of the Most Holy Trinity. Let us invoke the Holy Patrons of the Mass – Saint Gregory the Great, Saint Pius V, and Saint Pius X in primis, and all the Saints who over the course of the centuries have celebrated the Holy Sacrifice in the form that has been handed down to us, so that we may faithfully preserve it. May their intercession before the throne of God beg for the preservation of the Mass of all time, thanks to which we are sanctified, strengthened in virtue, and able to resist the attacks of the Evil One. And if ever the sins of the men of the Church should merit for us a punishment so severe as that prophesied by Daniel, let us prepare to descend into the catacombs, offering this trial for the conversion of the Shepherds. 

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop


Monday 27 April 2020

About that CDF survey on Summorum Pontificum ...

You are no doubt familiar with the recent public release of a survey to bishops from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith on the situation and development of Summorum Pontificum. Many are seeing this as an omen of bad things to come and are losing their heads.

I do not share this conspiracy theory. Not that I trust anything coming out of the Vatican, notwithstanding. 

Let me just briefly comment on the Archdiocese of Toronto and three of its suffrage dioceses of Hamilton, London and St. Catharines. There are nearly thirty priests whom I know who on Sundays or other days or at least privately, offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the traditional Rite and I am not referring here to the Society of St. Pius X which operates at least four chapels in Toronto, New Hamburg, Orillia and St. Catharines. In the Diocese of London there are two growing communities in Windsor and St. Thomas. In St. Catharines, the Fraternity of St. Peter and a sprinkling of ad hoc diocesan Masses. In Hamilton, the Mass is every Sunday in Kitchener and Hamilton and less frequent in Brantford. In Toronto proper there are five every Sunday plus at least three other parishes where at least once a week, a priest offers the traditional rite. The Triduum had been held for six years, though the planned one this past March, was of course, cancelled. The Cardinal Archbishop, Thomas Collins, has always been supportive. Many of the Ordinandi of the last decade have offered the Holy Mass according to the traditional Form. This is not going to change and there are, I believe, eight ordinations this year for Toronto. There is no gain for this Archdiocese to attack these communities. 

There is a lot of hysteria in this matter. Don't buy into it.

For more sanity, I refer you to Father Zuhlsdorf.


https://wdtprs.com/2020/04/wherein-fr-z-muses-about-the-survey-sent-to-bishops-about-summorum-pontificum-rant-and-suggestions/


Monday 10 July 2017

The end of Summorum Pontificum?

There are rumours in French Catholic media, that according to a "friend" of the Bishop of Rome, Jorge Bergoglio, once the SSPX is reunited, and if Benedict XVI is dead, he will abolish Summorum Pontificum.

My thoughts.

If this is true, then it is one more reason for the SSPX to say, "no."

They are already Catholic. There is no schism and there never was. So, let's put that silly argument to rest right now.

What I will state is this.

If he does, he is the Son of Satan and the mask will be off.


It is no more simple than that.


Friday 7 July 2017

Happy Summorum Pontificum Day

On this anniversary of Summorum Pontificum, I say thank you to Pope Benedict XVI, ingloriously reigning as Holy Father and Pontiff from his prison in the Vatican garden under the watchful eye of his two-faced, double-agent, Prison Warden, Ganswein, doing the bidding of the great impostor and his band of merry-minions.

I also restate advice to the SSPX. Just say, "No!"

Look, I don't accept much of the bovine excrement in the documents of Vatican II and I despise the manner in which the deficient and unjustified, abomination of a Mass of the Missal of Paul VI, no blessed or saint in my view, is celebrated, when even done well. 

So, ya gonna kick me out, George?

The SSPX is Catholic, always was and, please God, will be.

They need to sign nothing.

If you can come up with any positive developments in the Church and the spread of the faith arising out of the Second Vatican Council, feel free to post a comment on what those might be...

Pfft to a Rome quickly becoming what Jack Chick proffered.

The Whore of Babylon!

Thursday 19 January 2017

David Malloy, Bishop of Rockford declares himself Supreme Pontiff!

David Malloy, the Bishop of Rockford has barred his priests from offering the Novus Ordo Missae in the ad orientem posture. The rubrics of the Roman Missal Third Edition are quite clear in the instruction, that the priest, when he says the Orate or the Pax, is "facing the people." It specifically states that in red because it presumes that he is not, facing the people.

Secondly, Mr. Malloy, has banned priests from offering the traditional Roman liturgy without his permission in direct contravention of Summorum Pontificum.


The bishop is a malefactor. He has no authority to do either. He is a disgrace.

While he is at it, maybe he should ban Confession or public recitation of the Rosary?

How much shall we bet that his next move will be to demand his priests give the Blessed Sacrament to adulterers or sodomites who have not repented and have no intention of amendment of life?

Father Z has the details.

Dr. Joseph Shaw of the Latin Mass Society in the U.K. reports at Rorate.

The Bishop is wrong. Only a man with a distorted ecclesiology and a corrupt Catholic heart and mind would diminish the liturgy of the Holy Mass and mock his priests and people in such a manner.

The man is a clericalist and a disgrace. A boil on the Body of Christ.

Let him be anathema. 

He looks rather queer* too, no?


Image result for Most Rev. David J. Malloy

*Queer: strange or odd from a conventional viewpoint; unusually different; singular:
a queer notion of justice.

Tuesday 17 January 2017

Plagues of Egypt: from the Church in Argentina to the Church Universal and Bergoglian attack on the traditional Mass

BREAKING: Earthquakes throughout Italy felt in Rome
http://www.emsc-csem.org/

A few days ago, I came across the Argentine Blog, Sagrada Tradicion, and this blog post from September 19, 2010. It was just three years after Summorum Pontificum and just under three years from the election of the man featured in this important article. We knew early from various news sources on Rorate Caeli of the persecution of the traditional Mass by then Cardinal Bergoglio. In light of concerns recently raised by Sandro Magister, a look back at this story from nearly seven years ago, is important to reveal where we may be going.

If Bishop of Rome Bergoglio attempts to undermine the growth and provision of the traditional Latin Rite of the Mass, it will be his undoing.

Let this be a warning to all of us, and to him.

http://sagradatradicion.blogspot.ca/2010/09/bergoglio-una-plaga-de-egipto-para-la.html


Bergoglio: The Seven Plagues from Egypt for the Argentine Church
Francisco José Fernández de la Cigoña

An Argentine reader, undoubtedly overestimating the strength of the Blog, asks me for help that on my own doing is not going to proceed. And more so, agreeing that Cardinal Bergoglio is the most directly responsible for the current decline of the Church in Argentina.

There is exactly a year, three months and a day -seems to be a criminal conviction- so that the archbishop of Buenos Aires may present the resignation of his archdiocese, or of what remains of it, to the Holy Father. I hope it’s accepted immediately.

And Bergoglio has not only been a calamity for his archiepiscopate, but has extended his evil influence to the whole nation over whose Church prevails for soul’s perdition.

This is the letter of the unknown Argentine friend:


Dear Don Paco Pepe:

I know that you do not have much time, but I have not been able to synthesize more what I want to tell you, I beg you to have the patience to read it until the end:

I have been following your blog for a long time, not remembering very well if I have ever written to you.

Our blog, Catholic Page, is dedicated mainly to provide the audio of the Sunday sermons and some conferences of very good Catholic authors.


But at the same time, I was personally in charge of a Chapel in the Buenos Aires archdiocese (at the request of the previous parish priest), called the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The last four years, with the effort of neighbors, families with many children in general, the chapel that had been closed for 25 years lived the splendor of the traditional liturgy (Novus Ordo in Latin, Gregorian chant, kneeling Communion, etc.). To the point where there was no place for the people who filled the path. Such ceremonies are almost never seen in Buenos Aires. I remember an old woman who said, "How beautiful! It's the same as watching the Pope's Mass on TV." With this you can have an idea of what the Chapel used to be.

The RP Dr. Alfredo Sáenz, SJ celebrated mass regularly. He is one of the most lucid minds of the local and American Catholicism. Author of more than 50 books and international speaker. In a recent trip to Rome where he was one of the experts convened by the Pontifical Council for Culture, which sponsored a Congress on the Church and American Emancipation, he visited Cardinal Cañizares and told him about the "experiment" of the Chapel, for which he received congratulations from both the Cardinal and Mons. Ferrer.

Then more celebrants were added, some four in total, which made it possible for 4 years not to miss the Holy Mass any Sunday or feast of precept, including Holy Week celebrations. 

With this background I want to tell you three episodes.


1 Prohibition of the Tridentine Mass in 2007:

That year, after the publication of the Motu Proprio, we went to the former parish priest, Father Carlos White, to ask him to give place to the Tridentine Mass in our chapel, without canceling the Novus Ordo. He said yes, so that on October 14, 2007, a very solemn Mass was sung. Another was foreseen for the 28th of the same month, but Cardinal Bergoglio (whose plan on the subject didn’t match with this mass), ordered to close it definitively, which was communicated to us by the Parochial Vicar, by the Chaplain of the traditionalists here, by the Pastor and by the Episcopal Vicar of the Zone (always by word). As a result, we had the suspension of the Tridentine Mass in October 2007 until now.


2 Closing of the Sacred Heart Chapel in 2010:

After this outrage, the neighbors decided to remain silent (not to go to Ecclesia Dei) because, knowing the persecutory ways of Bergoglio, we prefer to stay with the Novus Ordo in Latin and as the Church commands, and not risk what we had for the Tridentine Mass. Thus we live in peace for three more years.

But in March 2010 the parish priest changed (Father White left the Archdiocese to the south of Buenos Aires, about 2,000 Km. It is clear that he did not get along well with the Cardinal). The new priest, a man who can be quietly placed within the Third World movement, was not happy with the ways of the chapel and reluctantly tolerated them until, in disagreement with a Corpus Christi procession that had been done for four years and that was not forbidden, interrupted the ceremony and finally closed the chapel, throwing the neighbors and leaving the neighborhood in the hands of the Protestant sects that patrol it.


3 New request for Tridentine Mass in 2010:

As a means of defending our rights, more than 100 faithful who for four years had attended there, integrating a perfectly formed and stable group, we request by letter the application of the Motu Proprio to the parish priest. He replied that it will not be granted because the Cardinal does not allow it (always by word, they do not write when they misbehave). The Zonal Bishop told me exactly the same thing that the cardinal does not allow them. We then turned to the Cardinal who has not answered us for more than a month, despite the repeated calls we made searching for him.


We are about to appeal to Ecclesia Dei these days.

All these events are detailed in our blog (Except the suspension of the Tridentine Mass of 2007 that we will do shortly). We have even published the audio of the interruption of the ceremony that made the parish priest to scold us.

If something of this comes out on your blog, I think it will be a great pressure to try to have Justice restored in our Archdiocese, where progressivism is devastating the Church.

If you have time watch two videos that we publish of a procession of Christ Rey 2009 to give an idea of what happened here. This will no longer be seen on the streets of Buenos Aires.

I have 52 years and 7 children of my only wife with whom I have been married for more than 22 years.

Dear Paco Pepe, I send you a big hug and await your news. Any clarification you need I will do it with pleasure.

Link of the Procession of Christ the King



Ing. Víctor Chéquer Charán
Buenos Aires
Argentina



Wednesday 11 January 2017

Will Pope Bergoglio undermine Summorum Pontificum?

On his blog, Settimo Cielo, Sandro Magister today reveals some of the machinations and the identities behind the demand by Bergoglio to terminate certain priests in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2017/01/11/a-firing-a-demolition-behold-the-new-curia/?refresh_ce


Magister goes on to confirm a fear that on the target list next for Pope Bergoglio, through his appointments to the Congregation for Divine Liturgy and Discipline of the Sacraments, is Liturgiam Authenticam.


Want some more?

It is believed that he will undermine Summorum Pontificum. 

Let him try.

I guarantee you this, Father Bergoglio, try it and it will be your Waterloo!




Friday 25 November 2016

Pope Bergoglio corrected - Two forms of one Roman Rite does not equate with "exception!"

Pope's are not correct every time they spew happy water from their mouth or pass frankincense. They are not infallible on everything they say. This papolatry has done enormous damage to the Church,

I was personally insulted when the Bishop of Rome made negative references towards the traditional Latin Mass and those who attend it. I find him depressing to the point of nausea. His insults and arrogance is unbefitting of the Vicar of Christ and Bishop of Rome. 


What kind of Pope insults Catholics as this man?


Image result for padre pio mass
St. Pio of Pietrelcina being "rigid' and "hiding something"

Now, none other than the great liturgist, Nicola Bux, throws a polite challenge:


FQ: Don Nicola, is the traditional Roman rite an exception?
Nicola Bux: That's  not what  the Motu Proprio by Pope Benedict XVI says. Rather, one reads explicitly that the two rites have the same dignity. This is what the Pope writes, not me. Therefore, we can not say with the document at hand, that it is an exception, unless one wants to come to a conclusion which is directed against the pope's document.
Read the rest at:
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.ca/2016/11/don-nicola-bux-contradicts-pope-francis.html




Tuesday 25 October 2016

Archbishop of Zagreb bans Cardinal Burke from Offering Holy Mass in the Traditional Rite!

GloriaTV is reporting that the Archbishop of Zagreb, Josip Cardinal Bozanić has barred Raymond Cardinal Burke from offering the Holy Mass according to the traditional rite, what Benedict XVI referred to in Summorum Pontificum as the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. 

https://gloria.tv/article/EgW3Vpp9G8Gw3NhPmPTuBZXcN



On Twitter, Edward Pentin is stating that the "organizers arranged the whole thing without informing" the chancery or archbishop. This may be what he has been told from them.

First, no cardinal, no bishop can ban the offering of Holy Mass according to the traditional rite. However, a bishop does have the right to refuse another bishop entry into his diocese without his permission. At the rank of Cardinal, this is different; Cardinal Burke needs no permission to enter any diocese as he is a, Cardinal. The complication comes in with Zagreb's archbishop also being a Cardinal.

If the organizers did not advise the chancery, that was their mistake. It was imprudent and foolish.

The Archbishop of  Zagreb, however, has acted inappropriately and needlessly created an ugly situation that did not need to happen.

There is a new phrase in Rome, and Cardinal Burke has become a verb.

He was "burked" and now so too, has the Mass.

The Archbishop of Zagreb owes Catholics an explanation and Cardinal Burke, an apology.


Tuesday 19 April 2016

Ten, sorry ELEVEN years ago today, we had a Pope!

Surely, as with the death of Kennedy or 9-11 we remember where we were. As I awaited with a group of Catholic colleagues, at the name Joseph, I knew instantly, and so did they. When Ratzinger was announced two of us raised our fists in the air, "yes!" The others were silent and walked away, grumbling.

All is well. The Papacy of Benedict did much and it did one thing that will go down in history as the great turning point for the restoration of the Church.

It was, without a doubt, an act of the Holy Spirit.


Two words.

Summorum Pontificum.

If history remembers and praises him for nothing else, it will remember him for that.

Thank you, Papa Benedetto!  



Unlike two words, Amoris Laetitia which sets Christ and against the Holy Spirit which is impossible and blasphemous which is proof that it is not magisterial, not infallible, not just and must be denounced and rejected by all.

Monday 7 July 2014

Thank you Papa Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger!

On this blessed day, let us remember seven years ago on July 7, 2007 and what our beloved Pope, Benedict XVI did for us!

Personally, this is what he did for me (below)! This rite was my right and I did not have to beg or grovel before any bishop to be denied it as as I had to do for my mother's funeral, which was denied because they could not be "disturbed" due to the CCCB plenary.  



Thank you Lord for Papa Joseph Ratzinger, may you be consoled and know how much you are loved and missed.


Never again will we allow our "rite" to be taken away.

Never again.

Sunday 9 March 2014

Archbishop Sample's Homily

Did Archbishop Sample let them "dress him up?" as we've been lectured to recently about Benedict XVI? 

There are those who will distort the truth and deny their own history; they proffer a Church that is a rupture with itself. Others, like Archbishop Sample understand the truth.

God bless this Archbishop.