Mel Gibson is screening early cuts of his film, The Passion, confidentially to selected audiences, most recently in Washington, D.C., for a select group of columnists and politicians. One of those who viewed the early cut in D.C., Deal Hudson of Crisis, wrote as follows about it, confirming the reports about its impact from others who previously saw the cuts in Los Angeles and Colorado. By the way, it appears from a recent report that the film may be released earlier than previously announced: on Ash Wednesday, February 25, rather than Easter, April 11.
From an aesthetic standpoint, the film is beautiful. Its visual narrative carries traces of the long tradition of Christian art, from the very earliest Christian styles and medieval iconography up to pre-Raphaelite images. As for the casting, it's fabulous: the faces of the actors carry the movie. Only two are even moderately well-known stars, Jim Caviezel as Jesus and Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene. Both are powerful in their roles, but the face of Maia Morgenstern, playing the role of Mary, the mother of God, will stay with you the rest of your life. She makes you forget you're watching a movie.
The music -- a combination of Middle-Eastern sounds and Hebrew chanting -- is well-chosen and adds to the visual drama unfolding before you. Composed by Jack Lenz, the music becomes part of the dialogue itself. Many people were concerned that the movie was filmed entirely in Aramaic and Latin, one of Gibson's appeals to historical accuracy (there are a few English subtitles). Instead of being a hindrance, though, it actually enhances the film. Within the first 10 minutes, you become accustomed to the sounds, and then the realization hits you: you're hearing the words of Jesus, Pilate, and his disciples as they were originally spoken [except for the use of the much later ecclesiastical instead of the contemporary classical Latin pronunciation]. There aren't any hackneyed performances of the English lines, so there's a freshness to the words that we often miss. And Aramaic is a guttural language, one that punctuates the drama of the film perfectly.
Gibson's Passion is also profoundly Catholic. The Marian imagery and Eucharistic themes permeate the entire movie.... I came away from the film with a sense that our faith had been revitalized. Make no mistake: this movie will convert and uplift hearts. Once you've seen it, you'll never again take for granted the words: "He suffered, died, and was buried."
One would hope that Gibson's inspired choice to film in the actual ancient languages without extensive subtitles will give further impetus to the growing movement to return to the ancient languages in the Sacred Liturgy and to their study generally. The ignorance of the post-modern world about ancient languages and sources is despicable. What even the previous generation and all the generations before it took for granted as the basis of of Western society, the post-modern world is abysmally ignorant of, a situation that leads to our world becoming "dumb and dumber."
By way of an example, a rather silly article was recently published by Newsmax's Lev Navrozov, reviewed in these Commentaries from the Mailbox earlier, attempting to give some "politically correct" spin to the historical background of Gibson's film. Yet the writer admits that he knows none of the primary languages involved (Latin, Greek, Semitic), nor has he read any of the primary sources, but relies on secondary materials, such as the Encyclopaedia Brittanica for his history. Shades of grammar-school children copying out of the encyclopaedia for their papers!
It seems that yet another presbyter has gotten into trouble introducing the Latin Mass (in this case, not the Traditional Latin Mass) into his parish. According to a New York Times article of June 27, which contains a number of errors, one Fr. Perricone, reassigned to an Orange, New Jersey, parish, attempted to introduce fragments of a Latin Mass into the parish.
Although the article itself doesn't make the distinction, from other information in the article, it appears that this is not the Traditional Latin Mass, but probably fragments of the Novus Ordo service in Latin. The article mentions that the formula for distribution of communion the presbyter uses is Corpus Christi. That ambiguous and untraditional formula was introduced after Vatican II. It is ambiguous because the New Order maintains that it refers not to the Blessed Sacrament (which they putatively don't have any longer), but to the congregation, known as the "body of Christ" in the Protestantized New Theology.
The Times also errs by stating that presbyter Perricone is "known nationally as leading proponent of the centuries-old Latin Mass." This kind of statement is typical of the inaccurate "journalism" so often in evidence today. It appears from the article that presbyter Perricone is not proposing the "centuries-old Latin Mass," but only a stripped-down version of the Novus Ordo service clothed partially in Latin, perhaps something like the bastardized charismatic version seen on the EWTN cable channel.
Moreover, presbyter Perricone can hardly be considered the leading proponent. Not far from Orange, New Jersey, is the Westbury, Long Island, headquarters of Fr. Gommar DePauw, who, of all people, has the right to consider himself the "leading proponent." Fr. DePauw says the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively and has done so since 1964, when the first changes of Vatican II came in and he resigned his position as Professor of Canon Law at the nation's primatial seminary. In that year, he founded the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, which was, at the time, the only traditional organization of any note in existence. Since 1964, Fr. DePauw has never backed down to any compromise in the Mass, the Sacraments, and the Faith. God grant us more DePauws!
The idiocy of a vocal group of Novus Ordinarians to even a small bit of their traditional Faith, if one can call it even that, is demonstrated by the statement of one ignoramus who yells, "My grandfather put his sweat and blood in his church, and his money." Well, by what Mass does this bedeviled individual think that his grandfather worshipped his God? Certainly not the unCatholic Novus Ordo service!
I come back to my characterization about the post-modern era as "dumb and dumber." These people are truly bedeviled about the true Faith. As St. Paul so aptly put it, since they sought not the truth, God allowed their minds to be darkened.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
How do we know for sure that the Traditional Latin Mass is the way Our Lord desires that we worship Him? Over thousands of years hasn't the Mass been changed? Is the Latin rite the same as the Apostles celebrated it? Is the Novus Ordo really not a Catholic Mass? I am truly very confused. Are we not to follow the pope into the New Order?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The Mass that we now call the Traditional Latin Mass in all its essentials was passed on by St. Peter, the first pope, to the Church. The Apostles themselves, according to St. Ambrose, worked at its elaboration. It reached its complete perfection with Popes St. Damasus (fourth century) and St. Gregory the Great (sixth century). The Sacred Canon of the Roman Mass was essentially set by the second century. Few changes were made in the essence of the Mass after the fourth century, mostly by the addition (not subtraction or changing) of psalms and prayers.
As the great liturgical scholar, Fr. Adrian Fortescue, wrote that the Traditional Latin Mass is "the most venerable in all Christendom, with a history of unbroken use far longer than that of any Eastern rite, there being no doubt that the essential parts of the Mass are of Apostolic origin." It is the Apostolic Mass of the Roman See, which was circulated universally around the world and canonized dogmatically. (There are a few Apostolic Eastern rites, but these are generally limited to local geographical areas and have relatively small numbers of adherents.)
Even the pope has no power to change Apostolic Tradition or the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in any essential way, much less to replace it by a "New Order" of Mass. This principle is confirmed by the dogmatic council Vatican I, as well as many popes, councils, and doctors of the Church, among them Pope Innocent III, who pronounced as follows:
By thus separating himself apart, and with obstinacy, from the observance of the universal customs and rites of the Church, the Pope could fall into schism. The conclusion is sound and the premises are not in doubt, since just as the Pope can fall into heresy, so also he can disobey and transgress with obstinacy that which has been established for the common order of the Church. Thus it is that [Pope] Innocent [III] states (De Consuetudine) that it is necessary to obey a Pope in all things as long as he does not himself go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the hurch, he ought not to be obeyed.... (Iohannes de Turrecremata, Summa de Ecclesia [1489])
In no case, however, can the unCatholic, unApostolic, sacrilegious, blasphemous, and putatively invalid Novus Ordo service fulfil any ecclesiastical obligation. You might as well fulfil your ecclesiastical obligation by attending the Methodist church down the street, which is probably has a service at least a lot more reverent than the Novus Ordo service! Obviously, attending a Methodist service for this purpose would be ridiculous for any true Catholic, just as ridiculous as attending the Novus Ordo "mess."
Newsmax reports that Mel Gibson has a distributor to put his blockbuster film The Passion into theaters around the country: 20th Century Fox, which has a first-look option and right of refusal. As a result, The Passion right now is a 20th Century Fox film. Executives from that studio and others have now seen The Passion, and 20th Century Fox is "rumored to be very interested in distributing the film."
So, when the emotionally charged film, which portrays the final 12 hours of Christ's ordeal, premiers next Easter, it shouldn't have any problems showing up in your neighborhood theater.
What do you think of Lev Navrozov's Newsmax column of July 25, in which he makes the following statements:
My recent three columns are concerned with anti-Semitism, provoked, in particular, by the "big lie" that Christ was crucified by "the Jews" and not by the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate in strict accordance with Roman law. First of all, several readers had never heard that under Roman law Christ was a criminal, subject to crucifixion. They ask me to give them a reference / citation supporting this statement. There is no need to go to a special library and read the relevant texts. The fact has been recorded in reference books, ... my Brittanica.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Navrozov admits, in essence, that he has no substantiation for his opinion, except for his own and some secondary sources (isn't it school kids who copy blindly out of the encyclopedia?). There is no indication in his article that he has read even one primary source or that he knows anything about Rome, Roman law, or the Latin language in which it was written. On the contrary, the evidence is diametrically opposed to Navrozov. It seems that it is rather he who attempts to tell a "big lie," from a background of ignorance, in some crusade for "political correctness."
St. John, an eyewitness after all, records three times in his Gospel a fact of Roman law: that Pilate, the Roman magistrate in charge, found no causa against Christ. The Douay-Rheims version translates this -- somewhat confusingly to the modern ear -- as "cause." In reality, the meaning of causa in this context is a "case at law."
In other words, Pilate says three times that there is no legal charge that can be preferred against Christ under Roman law. Note that St. John, a Jew who probably didn't know that much about Roman law himself, at least apparently reported what Pilate said while he was standing nearby. St. John does, however, know Jewish law. Notice how, in the relevant passages reproduced below, he contrasts the lack of a case under Roman law with Christ's alleged violation of the Jewish law. Nos legem habemus -- we have a law. In other words, Christ is ultimately condemned because of his alleged violation of Jewish law, not Roman law.
The Scribes and Pharisees are quite insidious. They are "out to get Christ" and will even stoop to suborning witnesses to get some legal pretence for exterminating Him (very much in the way the Novus Ordo ecclesiastics today do not hesitate to stoop to lies and deceit to crush any opposition to their New Order and its insidious "mess.")
John 18:38: Iterum [Pilatus] exivit ad Iudaeos et dicit eis: Ego nullam invenio in eo causam.
John 19:4-7: Exiit iterum Pilatus foras et dicit eis: Ecce adduco vobis eum foras ut cognoscatis quia in eo nullam causam invenio.... Cum ergo vidissent eum pontifices et ministri clamabant dicentes: Crucifige crucifige. Dicit eis Pilatus: Accipite eum vos et crucifigite. Ego enim non invenio in eo causam. Responderunt ei Iudaei: Nos legem habemus et secundum legem debet mori quia Filium Dei se fecit.
18:38 Pilate ... went out again to the Jews and saith to them: I find no cause in him.
John 19:4-7: Pilate therefore went forth again and saith to them: Behold, I bring him forth unto you, that you may know that I find no cause in him.... When the chief priests, therefore, and the servants had seen him, they cried out, saying: Crucify him, Crucify him. Pilate saith to them: Take him you, and crucify him: for I find no cause in him. The Jews answered him: We have a law; and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.
Does this mean that all the Jews of the time were party to deicide? No. Many of them were ignorant -- even Christ admitted that fact from His cross ("Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" Luke 23:34/DRV). Even some of the Scribes and Pharisees may have been ignorant. It does seem, however, that others, like Caiphas, went about their activities with a guilty malice; there may have been Jews in the crowd who were similarly motivated by malice, not ignorant conviction.
Certainly, there were Jews at the time who were horrified at what was going on. The Blessed Virgin Mary and the Apostles, Martha, Lazarus, Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus, others of the Sanhedrin, and common Jews who strewed palm branches before Christ at his triumph entry into Jerusalem. All the more is this true of Jews of later times.
Pope Pius XI expressed the charitable hope of the Catholic faith in the matter of the Jews quite beautifully in his Act of the Consecration of the Human Race, contrasting the situation "of old" and the present need for all to turn to belief in the Messias, Jew and Gentile alike:
Respice denique misericordiae oculis illius gentis filios, quae tamdiu populus electus fuit: et Sanguis, qui olim super eos invocatus est, nunc in illos quoque redemptionis vitaeque lavacrum descendat.
Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of that race, once Thy chosen people. Of old, they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may It now descend upon them as a laver of redemption and of life.
We have been informed of a response that a Catholic, sick of the sacrilege of the New Order service, received from one of the Novus Ordo presbyters on the Novus Ordo sect's cable channel (EWTN):
Q. ...When I got inside, I was so happy to hear the hymns I used to know when I was little (not this new modern garbage with drums and guitar, which are at almost every other church in my driving area here in Florida). People were dressed in suits and ties, and ladies were in dresses and not mid-riff tank tops and shorts.... This little church even had regular statues of Our Blessed Mother, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and St. Joseph, and not grotesque wooden or brass modern interpretations that are also in most other churches around here....
A. It is not right for you to attend regularly a Mass celebrated by a SSPX priest insofar as that group has separated itself from Rome. This is unfortunate in all cases. Try to shop around the area for the least offensive Novus Ordo Mass [sic] which you might enjoy. I am sure there must be such available in your area.
First, as to the errors of fact in this reply:
But what is certainly most notable in the answer is the presbyter's admission that the Novus Ordo service is offensive, and that the inquirer should seek the least offensive version available among all the offensive versions! Also of note is that the presbyter's criterion for finding a Mass is "enjoyment"! Does anyone have any doubt that the New Order and its "messes" are totally perverse and not to be countenanced by any true Catholic?
And, by the way, that rescript of the New Vatican admits that the Ecclesia Dei Commission has no real power:
This Pontifical Commission does not have the authority to coerce bishops to provide for the celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal.
So, don't waste your time waiting for this paper-tiger commission to do anything to promote the Traditional Latin Mass. It's already had 15 years already, and the situation in many ways is worse than when it started.
The New Order is a gangrene that has gone much too far beyond the point that antibiotics within the system will work. The New Order sect must be hacked off from the Roman Catholic Church like the diseased limb that it is.
Mel Gibson is as shrewd as an Odysseus. He is screening his two-hour Easter 2004 film, The Passion, which graphically portrays the crucifixion, to select audiences, most recently in Washington, D.C. He ignored the radical Jewish Anti-Defamation League personnel who have been like barking curs around his ankles, demanding prior review and script authority to "Politically Correctify" it. He shrewdly paid a brief visit to the headquarters building of the National Council of Catholic Bishops, but did not speak to any bishops there. Previously, he had threatened a lawsuit against the NCCB because staff members allegedly stole an early version of the script and defamed him.
The July 21 confidential screening at the Motion Picture Association of America included columnists included Matt Drudge, Peggy Noonan, Cal Thomas, and Kate O'Beirne; conservative essayist Michael Novak; President Bush's rejected nominee for Labor Secretary, Linda Chavez; staff director Mark Rodgers of the Senate Republican Conference; former Republican House member Mark Siljander (MI); and White House staffer David Kuo, deputy director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives; and MPAA President Jack Valenti.
The ADL has made it clear that it condemns any portrayal of the Christian Gospels, which are Gibson's source. The ADL asks: "Will the final version of The Passion continue to portray Jews as blood-thirsty, sadistic, and money-hungry enemies of Jesus? Will it correct the unambiguous depiction of Jews as the ones responsible for the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus?"
Meanwhile Christians ask: "Well, didn't many of the Jewish leaders of the time, particularly the Pharisees, do just that? Don't the secular authors of the time, one of whom was a Jew himself, confirm that fact? Wasn't the closest eyewitness/author, St. John the Apostle, a Jew?" Sure, the Romans of the time played their part, and undoubtedly others did as well, but it seems that radical Jewish organizations like the ADL are trying by force to rewrite ancient history. If they don't like Gibson's portrayal, let them make their own film, and may the more best film win!
And what was the reaction of the invited viewers? "When the lights came up, many in the audience were in tears. Some were sobbing." "Heartbreaking." "A tremendous depiction of evil." "A compelling piece of art." (The Washington Post)
Matt Drudge in an interview with Pat Buchanan, said:
This is the ultimate film. It's magical. Best picture I have seen in quite some time, and even people like Jack Valenti were in the audience in tears at this screening. There was about 30 of us. It depicts a clash between Jesus and those who crucified him, and speaking as a Jew, I thought it was a magical film that showed the perils of life on earth.... Those of us, every single person in there, and I'm not talking about tears, I'm talking total tears. It is something Mel Gibson stood back at the end and took questions for about an hour, and he is -- he told me he's tired of Hollywood. That this is it. He's going to do it. He's going to do it his way, and this film, I tell you, is magic. It's a miracle. It's a miracle. (MS-NBC)
The New Order Church keeps saying that the Novus Ordo service is just fine, except for the occasional minor abuse. It completely fails, of course, to acknowledge the invalidity of form, matter, and/or intention that is persistent with such services, admitted even by the Vatican, and the extreme forms that it takes in parishes across the United States and the world: the Ballet Mess, the Basketball Mess, the Clown Mess, the Coffee Mess, the Cookie Mess, the Elvis Mess, the Fruit Mess, the Gay Mess, the Gingerbread Mess, the Mariachi Mess, the Picnic Mess, the Priestess Mess, the Rock Mess, the Servette Mess, and all the rest that have been documented here.
So now the New Order liturgiacs at the New Vatican have come up with their corrective measures:
That's it! These trivial regulations are going to correct the invalid form, matter, and/or intention? Ridiculous, of course. No mention is made of the fact that lay ministers are an unCatholic sacrilege or that the proper reverence (as prescribed in the Bible) for receiving of (real) Communion is the bending of the knee.
Undoubtedly, the regulations for the Novus Ordo service that will be issued at the end of this year, after last Maundy Thursday's vapid encyclical, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, will be just as trivial. No, entering a Novus Ordo service is reminiscent of the warning inscribed on the gateway to Hell, as written by the Tertiary Dante Alighieri in his Inferno:
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch' entrate.
Abandon every hope, ye that enter.
Contrary to the assumptions of some, when popes besmirch their holy office, the tradition of the Catholic Church has not been for the faithful to remain "obediently" quiet and thus share the guilt by their silence, but rather to speak out, even harshly, against the pope. St. Augustine, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Gertrude, as well as other Saints, did so.
Another example is the 1513 satire written by the great Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus, who, with his great friend, St. Thomas More, was the leading light of the world at the time. Erasmus was given the royal treatment by the pope when he visited Rome in his forties. Yet, he was scandalized by the actions of Pope Julius II and wrote a stinging satire against the pope entitled Julius Excluded from Heaven. A few excerpts will give the flavor of the directness with which the scholar wrote. His condemnations were shared by many Catholics of the time, even St. Thomas More.
In Erasmus's satire, Pope Julius II, on dying, arrives in heaven expecting a glorious welcome, but St. Peter demands that he, like any other heaven-bound soul, justify his entrance. The pope is furious, insisting that his rank demands immediate admission. When St. Peter demurs, Julius threatens to make war on him just as he did on earth. His impotent fulminations achieve nothing, and the pope is excluded from heaven.
Pope: I'm seething with anger. I'll bang on the doors. Hey! Hey! Someone open this door at once! What's the matter? No one here! What's keeping the doorman? Snoring, I suppose, good and drunk.
St. Peter:: It's a good thing our gate is as solid as rock or he'd have broken the doors down, whoever he is. This must be some giant or paladin some wrecker of cities [the pope was known for his military attacks against Catholic cities]. Immortal God! It smells like a sewer round here! I won't open the door directly, but I'll peep through the bars of this window and find out what kind of monster it is. Who are you? What do you want?
Pope: I want you to open the doors, and quickly; if you did your job properly, you'd have come out to meet me -- with a solemn procession of angels, too.
St. Peter: He's domineering enough anyway! But first of all, tell me who you are.
Pope: As if you can't see that for yourself.
St. Peter: See for myself? Well, I can see a strange spectacle, or perhaps I should say monster, unlike anything I've ever seen before.
Pope: But I imagine that unless you're quite blind you recognize this key, and, unless you've completely forgotten your alphabet, I'm sure you recognize these two letters, P.M. [Pontifex Maximus, Supreme Pontiff].
St. Peter: How well your words reveal the holiness of your thoughts! But in any case, I've been watching you closely all this time, and I can see plenty of evidence of impiety, but none of saintliness. What, for instance, is the purpose of that strange escort of yours, so unlike a pope's? You've brought twenty thousand men with you, but not one of the whole mob even looks like a Christian to me. They seem to be the worst dregs of humanity, all stinking of brothels, booze, and gunpowder. I'd say they were a gang of hired thugs, or rather goblins of Tartarus plucked up from hell to wage war on heaven. And the more closely I look at you yourself, the less I can see any trace of an apostle. I'm ashamed to say, and sorry to see, that your whole body is disfigured by the marks of monstrous and abominable appetites [the pope had contracted syphilis], not to mention that even now you're all belches and that you stink of boozing and hangovers and look as if you've just thrown up. Your whole body is in such a state that I should guess that it's been wasted, withered, and rotted less by old age and illness than by drink.
Recently there have been several exposés on the Modernist approach of the Novus Ordo papal master of ceremonies, Bp. Piero Marini, 61. Why should we expect that any papal solemnity or dignity should be preserved from this man, who began as the personal secretary of Abp. Hannibal Bugnini, the Freemason Arch-architect of the Novus Ordo service?
The criteria of his work, Marini says in a interview with La Civiltà Cattolica are two: "a work of cleaning of the encrustations that were superimposed over the centuries, and inculturation." In other words, dump Tradition and replace it with pagan rites of local areas.
Marini has eliminated authentic treasures such as Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony. By his decision the Sistine Chapel Choir has been reduced to a shadow of its former glory. What should be the finest Gregorian and sacred polyphonic choir in the world now sounds no better than a high-school choir -- often not even as good as that!
From the Vatican II Modernist notion that local rites, often of pagan origin, should be injected into the Novus Ordo service, Marini has introduced pagan music and dance. He even destroyed the solemnity of the ceremonial opening of the Holy Door in 2000 by having brilliantly-costumed Asians dance around the pope.
Marini did make an interesting comparison between the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo service.
Traditional Latin Mass. "The role of the master of ceremonies consisted in applying a series of defined norms which could not be changed."
Novus Ordo Service. "Today one cannot organize a celebration without first having thought: who is celebrating, what is being celebrated, where is it being celebrated. The celebration is the point toward which converge diverse and reciprocally coordinated elements under the guide of that spirit of adaptation that is the soul of post-conciliar reform. Thus it's a matter of foreseeing and planning the celebration with a view toward the result one wants to obtain. For example, one can't think of a liturgical action without taking account of the space in which it will take place, the hymns that will be performed. Everything that is thought out and predisposed in view of a celebration can be considered real and proper direction. One finds oneself acting, in a certain way, upon a stage. Liturgy is also a show."
So, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass has become, in the New Order, a "show," a "performance," all motivated by that nondescript spirit (certainly not the Holy Spirit) of "adaptation that is the soul of the post-conciliar reform."
Well, there you have it all laid out. The supposed Pontiff of the Roman Church has been reduced to a bit player in a sideshow, a puppet controlled by a Modernist puppeteer who surrounds the pope with burlesque dancers and profane music.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
On July 18, in Louisville, Kentucky, Francis Cardinal Arinze spoke on devotion to the "Eucharist" and addressed some of the abuses that occur at Novus Ordo services. This is the same Arinze that a year or so ago laughed along with the audience at a radio talk-show over the Catholic dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. He should laugh because he is of the New Order sect. He should not be taken seriously by true Catholics.
At any rate, when it came to talk of the "1962 Missal," he spoke of those who wanted to see a return to that Mass (let alone a really traditional Mass using the pre-1956 Missal). What I found interesting is what he went on to say. He implied that the New Vatican bureaucrats are receiving more and more requests for the Traditional Latin Mass, but they are puzzled why people are requesting the true Mass. Aren't we in what the pope laughably calls the New Pentecost of the Vatican II? Arinze said that he thought people are requesting the Traditional Latin Mass because of abuses at the Novus Ordo services. When the New Vatican stops these abuses, the cardinal expects that there will no longer be many requests for the Traditional Latin Mass.
I don't think that the New Vatican bureaucrats understand the problem with the Novus Ordo service at all, which, as one priest said, was conceived by evil men, with an evil intent, to accomplish an evil purpose. They seem to think that that the Novus Ordo mess is good, but just being abused.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
You're right. The New Vatican, which is substantially populated by the New Order sect, is clueless. It is as if they are trying to force the New Coke on everyone by a multi-billion-dollar ad campaign, when most people really want the Classic Coke. Since they have been deceived by their own advertising, they can't understand why anyone would want the Classic Coke. They are then shocked when New Coke has to be pulled, and Classic Coke restored!
Arinze, after all, is in the forefront of New Order Modernism. He is President of the New Vatican's Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. He is also frequently named as a papabile (a possible pope), so watch out!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
It seems that the Pope for the first time has actually praised one of his pre-Vatican II predecessors, when he usually spends his time apologizing for them. Do you think that he is beginning to realize that he should instead be apologizing to Catholics for his own pontificate, or is it just another one of his political maneuvers to please the conservatives and keep them in conformity with the New Order religion?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The little eulogy issued from Castel Gandolfo on July 20, in which John Paul II praised his predecessor Pope Leo XIII on the centenary of his death, noting that his 1891 encyclical Rerum Novarum "marked the beginning of the modern social doctrine of the Church," is one of a number of such a common occurrences, in which the reigning pope recognizes these centennials. It indicates no rejection of the New Order.
Notice that the thing most emphasized here is Rerum Novarum, which is a very "sociological" encyclical. No mention is made of Leo XIII's placing of the Universal Church under the patronage of St. Joseph or of his personal composition of the prayer to St. Michael and his command for it to be said after Mass.
St. Michael the Archangel, the Prince of the Angelic Hosts, Leo XIII regarded to be the final vanquisher of Satan divina virtute, by the power of God, as the pope held the Church to be under a grave attack from Satan. It is notable that the pope commanded that the Church pray to St. Michael, acting under the power of God, for its final protection and for victory over Satan, not to the Blessed Virgin Mary for this particular purpose. St. Michael's role in this regard is clearly defined in Sacred Scripture, not once, but three times (Daniel 10:21, 12:1, Apocalypse 12:7).
Is it coincidence that the New Order sect began in the very year (1964) that the Leonine Prayers after Mass were abrogated by that New Order? Is it coincidence that less than ten years later, Paul VI said that Vatican II had introduced the "smoke of Satan" around the altar? Even those who like to allude to Fatima frequently forget that the focus of that apparition was not the Blessed Virgin Mary, but rather the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, as evidenced by the adoration of the Holy Angels, particularly St. Michael the Archangel. It is only within that context that the Virgin makes any sense. Surely she appeared not for herself, but to encourage devotion to Her Divine Son, particularly through the Holy Sacrifice of the true Mass, His Passion and Death, and His Most Precious Body and Blood.
It has been clear for some time that New Order sect's churches are not intended to be "the house of God." Now a Belgian New Order presbyter has confirmed that fact. "A church is not the house of God," said Marc Scheerens, of Jette. "It is the house of everyone, fashion designers included."
This latter reference alluded to the fashion show Scheerens allowed to take place in his church, Holy Mary of Lourdes, featuring scantily clad models designed by the pope's countryman, Arkadius Weremczuk. Not only were the fashions exhibited in the church immodest, but they were blasphemous as well: including see-through blouses with embroidered crucifixes and small tops featuring portraits of the Savior.
Scheerens admitted that he was deliberately "challenging the last taboo of nudity in church." Belgian New Order Godfried Cardinal Danneels has yet to take any action, saying, in part: "A priest [sic] is free to do in his church what he likes." (Ananova)
Shades of the "Nude" Mess previously reported in the TRADITIO Commentaries, in which a Novus Ordo presbyter in the Vatican Secretariat of State, just a few doors down from the pope, celebrates a "Nude" Mess as, he says, God created him.
"God wants gay priests in the Church of England," the Anglican communion's first openly homosexual bishop has claimed. Canon Gene Robinson, 53, who will today be confirmed as the Bishop of New Hampshire in the United States, told The Telegraph that God was paving the way for the acceptance of homosexuals within the Church just has he had done with women.
There is no doubt in my mind that the New Order sect, which has followed the liberalist Protestants in everything else, in not too many years will ordain priestesses and open homosexuals, just as the Anglican and Episcopalian Church has. There are, by the way, traditionalists in these denominations as well, who have broken away from the "mainstream" liberalist synods to form traditional synods that eschew the worst perversions of the Christian faith.
Obviously, these sects, whether Protestant or New Order, can no longer be called Bible-believing. Here is what St. Paul said about this matter:
Wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness: to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator.... For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections..., working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient [proper]. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them (Romans 1:24-32/DRV).
Dear Fr. Moderator:
In a previous Commentary, in response to some extremists, you wrote:
The center of our Roman Catholic Faith is Our Lord Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, True God and True Man -- not the Blessed Virgin Mary. Granted that she is the most sublime of God's creatures, endowed with many unique graces by God, but she is in the end a creature, not a goddess. If we go down the slippery slope from veneration to worship of a creature, we are falling into the grave sin of idolatry, the sin that the Jews committed in worshipping the Golden Calf instead of Almighty God, and the Protestants' charge against Catholics as idolaters would be true. Anyone who was catechized before Vatican II had that truth drummed into him. Our Blessed Lady would be horrified, not pleased, at such worship, as she always humbled herself to the worship of her Divine Son. So let's be careful to keep everything in its proper relationship as taught in the Roman Catholic Faith.
In light of this and all I have read about Fatimism (a term not referring to a balanced private devotion, but a catch-all term for extremist devotions of all kinds), it is hard to know what is authentically Catholic and what is extremist. I have even heard people say that Mary is the dispenser of all graces now and that devotion to Mary shows. These people don't even talk about the Holy Mass and Our Lord, but only Mary. Even the Fatimists don't talk about St. Michael, and he is specifically mentioned in Scripture and was present at Fatima! At this point, I am totally confused. Could you give some sane guidelines?
Fr. Moderator Replies
In this modern era of confusion, as in all such eras, it is quite common that the proper balance of religious belief becomes tipped askew. It is as if we have few at the balance point of a teeter-totter, but many way up in the air and many way down on the ground, which represent the two extremes of too much and too little.
What I wrote is a succinct and accurate expression of bedrock Roman Catholic teaching. There is an error, called Fatimism, that pushes the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary beyond what is truly Catholic, just as there is an error, called Papolatry, that pushes the role of the pope beyond what was defined dogmatically at Vatican I.
One who is truly Roman Catholic cannot find the center of that Faith anywhere else than in Our Lord Jesus Christ. Everything else is subordinate to that. No Father or Doctor of the Church, from St. Augustine through St. Thomas through St. Louis de Montfort, would deny that statement; otherwise, they would be the heretics we know they are not.
The Catholic Faith cannot be hung on some popular extremism of a confused time. It must be founded solidly on the Deposit of Faith, that is, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, which were given to us by Christ. Everything else, to the degree that it is Catholic, must support that Deposit of Faith, not take away from it, change it, or substitute for it. Any traditional doctrinal text of pre-Vatican II vintage will clearly agree with that basic truth of our Faith.
So, seek the balance-point of the Roman Catholic Faith, with the Deposit of Faith as your guide. Stay close to Scripture, stay close to Tradition, as St. Paul said. Stay close to the authentic interpretations of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, as handed down in the magisterium of the Church, and you will not go wrong.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Over the last five years (1998-2003):
As a friend of mine once said, "If this is springtime, give me winter!" Now, not coincidentally, those independent traditional organizations that celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass do well. The pope knows that wherever traditional Catholicism thrives, so do vocations. Yet the pope continually appoints rotten bishops to fill the void left by other rotten bishops, so how serious is the pope, really, about his "New Springtime"?
Pope Paul VI died and came to the gates of heaven. "I've come to take my place in heaven," he said to St. Peter. Having looked through the book of life, St. Peter replied; "I'm sorry, your name is not herein." Paul VI broke out in a cold sweat. "But...ask the Son of God! After all, I was His vicar." After consultation, St. Peter returned: "Sorry, the Lord Jesus does not know anyone by the name of Paul VI." "But, but," cried out Paul VI in desperation, "ask God the Holy Ghost. He will know who I am, for, after all, I am the pope of the great Second Vatican Council, and He presided thereat. He will certainly know who I am!" Shrugging his shoulders, St. Peter was heard asking the Holy Ghost, "Someone by the name of Paul VI says you would know him since you presided at some council -- Vatican II, he claims." After a little silence, a voice came back, "I wasn't invited." (SSPX-S.A.)
St. Joan of Arc "Catholic" Church in Minneapolis takes pride in presenting the "Gym" Mess, the latest in our documentation of the travesty of the New Order "messes." It is described as "a joyful and creative liturgy designed by and for families with Gospel-centered messages geared toward children." One can only guess how the Gospel is perverted to meet the New Order standards of "creativity." Of course, this is not a "Mass." It is a mess. It is a counterfeit. It is a sacrilege. It is a scandal.
Now let us hear the truly Catholic position about this nonsense:
For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:3-4/DRV)
The New Order is just what St. Paul says: a fable, a lie. One can have nothing to do with it at peril of one's Roman Catholic Faith.
Other "Messes" previously documented here:
The SSPX and some other traditional priests use the "reformed" calendar and rubrics up to 1962. Aren't these changes tainted with the work of the Arch-Architect of the New Order, Hannibal Bugnini?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The Novus Ordo service arose de novo in 1969, whereas the 1962 Missal is substantially the traditional Missal, with some rubrical and calendrical changes introduced by a committee on which Bugnini sat. Thus, it would be fair to say that the changes were "tainted." Included in these changes were the untenable changes to the most ancient rites of Holy Week and the tampering with the Sacred Roman Canon.
Even Abp. Lefebvre, founder of the SSPX, had many reservations about the 1962 Missal. However, he went with it (with certain exceptions) since at that time it seemed to be the Missal that traditional Catholics were settling on. If he had lived to the present day, he might well have changed his opinion, since more and more traditional priests are abandoning the 1962 Missal and going back to a version before the 1956 and 1960 changes were made.
A trailer for The Passion has been released by Icon Productions, although the film has not yet been cut, and a distributor has not been found. The tentative release date is Easter 2004. The trailer is available at The Movie Box and requires the QuickTime video plug-in at the Release 6 level. The trailer is 3.8 megabytes, so it will take about 12 minutes to download on a 50,000 b/s modem line.
The trailer indicates a film as stunning as I thought it would be. No wonder the modern Pharisees and the Novus Ordo bishops are so worried about the film. From the looks of the trailer, it is going to tell a vividly graphic story of just what it took to redeem mankind. It will show just how real sin is, and what its true price is. This is no Novus Ordo milquetoast presentation or Pharisaic politically-correct presentation.
St. Paul wrote: "And almost all things, according to the law, are cleansed with blood: and without shedding of blood there is no remission" (Hebrews 9:22/DRV). The trailer indicates that there will be much blood shown, shed in the remission of the sins of man. The driving of the nail is excruciating, though, in the manner of the Greek epic poet Homer, Gibson chooses to turn away from the final stroke.
Gibson is right. This film will speak for itself. Language is hardly necessary. In the trailer, there are only two words spoken, in Latin: Ecce homo (John 19:5/DRV). I have only one quibble. For some reason, Gibson has apparently chosen to use the ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation instead of the classical Latin pronunciation, which would have been used at the time (at this time Pilate would have used a hard cc, not a soft one).
There is music in the trailer. It seems to be representative of the best of classical film music such as that written by Bernard Hermann, Miklos Rosa, and John Williams, based on primarily the late Romantic classical composers, like Tchaikovsky and Wagner.
I can well understand why those who have seen private previews of this trailer on the screen would leave, as one reviewer did, breaking down in her car and saying mea maxima culpa. And this is exactly what Gibson has said that he is aiming for.
One of the most reprehensible aspects of the current papacy is the attempt of the incumbent to turn that papacy into some kind of personality cult, devoid of any real Catholic belief. Thus, we have the bizarre situation of so many proclaiming, "We love JP2; we ignore Catholicism." The secular world is becoming a pagan one, even a godless one. Now the fruits of this perverted papacy are beginning to flower, just as stink plant looks pretty at first, but then exudes its noxious and offensive odor.
According to a July 14 article in the Los Angeles Times, in the once-Catholic Czech Republic: "The appeal of Pope John Paul II has declined: in 1990, 300,000 Czechs attended the pope's Mass; fewer than 100,000 turned out seven years later."
The Novus Ordo is not working. If the pope presumes to substitute his "personality" for Christ's doctrine, for Apostolic Tradition, for the immemorial sacred liturgy, he is bound for a fall that will take large parts of the Church with him. Oh, sure, as St. Paul wisely said, novelties will tickle some people for a while, but then they want the tried-and-true back.
Many correspondents ask me: when will the real Church be restored? That question is premature. We haven't even started paying the price for suborning, even passively, the New Order. We have seen how the bishops have been infected with criminality ever since Vatican II. We have seen how the seminaries have not been teaching Catholicism, but immorality. We have seen how the clergy have left their vocations to become bureaucrats and presiders. We have seen even death mocked with grisly, pagan rites. Now we see the wholesale abandonment of the Faith in countries once Catholic.
All because of a "pastoral council," which failed to pastor the Catholic Faith. All because of two popes who sold out their office for the thirty pieces of silver of the New Order Religion. But we Catholics are responsible too.
How many Catholics accepted a Counterfeit Service instead of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, saying that they were only "obeying" the bishop? How many Catholics allowed their beautiful churches to be trashed into the form of Masonic meeting halls, saying that they were only "obeying" the bishop? How many Catholics stood by twiddling their thumbs while the New Order presbyters told them there wasn't any Hell, there wasn't any Purgatory, there wasn't any sin, while "canonizing" perverted dress designers and transvestites, three-time divorcees, and all the other New Order saints?
Let's face it. We didn't stand up for Christ. We didn't stand up for His Apostles. We didn't stand up for our Roman Catholic Faith. Instead, we played with "indults" and "negotiations" and "compromises." Would St. Paul have stood for that? Would St. Augustine have stood for that? Would Pope St. Pius X have stood for that? Of course not. And they did not. They decried the weak popes, decried heretic bishops. Pity that we didn't do that in 1964 and cut off the New Order before it got started. If we don't do that even now, the New Order Religion will succeed in turning once-Catholic countries into the godless states in which Czechoslovakia now finds itself:
People don't know about God anymore. They don't know what Christmas is about. They are lost in art galleries when they see paintings of Jesus Christ.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
How would you recommend confronting the Novus Ordo bishops and their lack of a "call for acts of reparation" after the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on anti-sodomy laws? One would think they could be shamed into doing something Catholic, but is it worth the effort? I wouldn't be surprised if a large majority of them agree with the ruling!
Fr. Moderator Replies.
I would take a different perspective. I see this as primarily a matter of the secular realm, where you laypeople are the ones that have the responsibility. Why do not laypeople, who by a vast majority reject these perversions, come down on their legislators? Are the laity and the citizenry getting lazy, hiding in the bushes while looking wrongly to the clergy to fight their secular battles for them?
Believe me, if 60,000,000 citizens came down on the Congress, they would get action! Do you speak out against such perversions with your friends and co-workers? Do you incite them to take secular action? Nixon's "silent majority" just won't wash any longer because those advocating evil are screaming at the top of their lungs. As Edmund Burke said: "For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing." We are seeing the truth of that statement in our own times. It does no good to wait for 300 "bishops" to say something, when 60,000,000 Catholics, as well as the many others who agree with them, can scream the roof off the U.S. Congress!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Certainly we as loyal and traditional Roman Catholics must disassociate ourselves from Novus Ordo presbyters and bishops. As St. Paul and St. Ignatius of Antioch said, "with such persons do not even eat." But it seems the pope is the one we should be praying for the hardest. I feel that a big part of the solution is to sacrifice and offer up our mortifications for the pope. Maybe we can fight the demons that have him in their bondage and free his mind so that he can once again act correctly and return to the Traditional Latin Mass, Sacraments, and Faith. Am I on the right track, Father? I'm still new to traditional Catholicism as a convert from Protestantism then a revert from Novus Ordoism.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Sure, pray for the pope, that he may regain a strong Catholic Faith and the courage to carry it through. However, we are prohibited by the teaching of the Church, and explicitly the teaching of the greatest Fathers and Doctors of the Church, from associating with anything having the odor of heresy, as the New Order does, and certainly with any unCatholic "service."
But are we relying too much on a pope to correct the problems in the Church? Is this attitude a kind of latent papolatry (pope-worship)? Perhaps we should pray more fervently for the restoration of the Roman Catholic Faith in the hearts of once faithful people away from the errors of the New Order. If they return from their straying into what is Modernistic and unCatholic, who the pope is shouldn't make that much difference. He will have an easy job of guarding the Deposit of Faith, as the faithful will be properly orthodox (in right belief) and orthopractic (in right worship), all in union with Our Lord Jesus Christ.
One of the most disgusting results of the Novus Ordo is the gruesome and pagan way in which its funerals are held. The traditional Latin Requiem Mass and Final Absolution are a dignified end to a Christian life. The judgment of the soul is left in God's hands, not man's. Prayers are offered not only for the repose of the soul of the deceased, but also for the living, who will eventually follow.
In death, the peasant and the king are equal. Those who were privileged to observe the traditional Catholic funeral of President John Kennedy, were struck by its poignant directness. The closed coffin could have been that of any Catholic. The dignity of the traditional Latin Requiem Mass spoke for man and God. No eulogy was given, nor should one have been given.
As Catholics, we believe that only God knows the interior soul. The greatest man in an exterior sense can be the greatest sinner in the interior sense. Regrettably, this condition seems to have existed in the case of the late President. If florid eulogies had been given within the context of his Requiem Mass, the scandal caused would have been flagrant.
So, Catholics do not have eulogies at funeral services. It is too late for that. The matter is in God's hands. The common belief of the Church is that the rare soul may merit heaven directly, but that most faithful Catholics will need to work out their temporal punishment in Purgatory. There is always the possibility that the soul has already earned eternal damnation in Hell. We do not know. We pray for the soul in the hope that, if it is in Purgatory, our prayers and mortifications may merit it a shortening of the time there.
One funeral director recalls a funeral in which eulogist after eulogist said glowing things about the man who died, leading an exasperated audience member to stand up and say, "Let's stop joking. We all know that he was a no-good S.O.B.!" The room went silent, and the presbyter hastily concluded the Novus Ordo service.
Today, the disgusting Novus Ordo has turned Christians funerals into a travesty, an embarrassment, a scandal. It is not uncommon for dead bodies to be exposed in church -- never a Catholic practice. Outside of the pollution caused in the holy place, we are, in a way, anonymous in death. In Fremont, California, things went so far as to expose a transvestite, made up cosmetically as he lived, while a Novus Ordo funeral was celebrated.
One funeral director, commenting on the unCatholic practice of introducing eulogies into Novus Ordo funerals commented: "It's like karaoke." He pointed to the Novus Ordo funeral of the late entertainer and congressman Sony Bono -- who had, what was it?, four wives, and yet received a Novus Ordo funeral -- who was eulogized by his "divorced" wife, the entertainer Cher.
Another serious problem arises in these times when a traditional Catholic is forced into a Novus Ordo funeral. The shame and sorrow of traditional Catholic relatives, forced into such a travesty, is palpable, and yet because of the confusion caused by a death, particularly one that is improvisa et subitanea, in the words of the Litany of the Saints, arrangements often are taken out of the hands of the traditional Catholic relatives and put into the hands of "friends" and executors who think "Catholic" means "Novus Ordo."
Every traditional Catholic should have his funeral instructions prepared for the inevitable contingency. Not to do so would be spiritually injurious and irresponsible. For "Instructions for a Traditional Funeral," click on FAQ10: How Do you Explain These Traditional Beliefs?.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I understand that the Ecclesia Dei Commission once again has "spun" its position about the Masses of the SSPX in a new form letter. Apparently, the "negotiations" have gone nowhere, so the Commission is again out to "get" the SSPX and the Traditional Latin Mass.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The new form letter contradicts the previous answer given by the commission. Do these New Vatican bureaucrats even know what they're doing? No!. But the bigger question is: why do Catholics even worry about being in "good" with the New Order? The New Order is not Catholic, and no attention should be paid to it and its bureaucrats.
Catholics have the right and obligation to assist at the Traditional Latin Mass, whether any Novus Ordo bishop agrees or disagrees. This is a matter of Sacred Tradition and Catholic Dogma, and no pettyfogging New Order officials, of whatever rank, can change that. Period. Oh, sure, they'd like you to believe they can, but they really want nothing better than to turn their backs on St. Peter, St. Paul, and the Great Fathers and Popes of the Catholic and Apostolic Church.
To be constantly writing the New Vatican about these matters is a travesty. We all know in our hearts and souls that the New Order is a Counterfeit Church, a Great Facade. Get some guts, people! Take responsibility for your Roman Catholic Faith. Leave the unCatholic New Order to its own destruction and move on without recriminations to a committed traditional Roman Catholicism.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I spoke personally with the Secretary of the Novus Ordo Bishop of Houston, a certain presbyter, of whom I asked why Fr. Zigrang was removed from his parish for saying the Traditional Latin Mass. He told me that my facts were all wrong and that since I don't live in Houston, I didn't know what I was talking about. I then asked him why the bishop is so afraid of the Traditional Latin Mass, why one priest saying the Traditional Latin Mass causes so much fear in the bishop. He would not answer that question, so I posed it to him again, and a third time, but all he kept saying was that I had my facts wrong, but he didn't indicate what the facts actually were, in his opinion.
We kept going round and round on this subject, and his spin was amazing. The New Order makes you think that there is something wrong with you in your own mind. I found it to be quiet disturbing and frankly downright scary. Once again, Father, you were right: one cannot negotiate with the New Order. Sad to say, but they lie and spin and try to trick you. They do, however, seem to buckle under pressure when pushed against a wall. They have no answer to give when asked about the Traditional Latin Mass.
I've come to a heartfelt conclusion that the New Order Church is not the Roman Catholic Church as we knew it, but an altogether New Religion. We must fight this false and evil New Faith and never negotiate with its mouthpieces.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The New Order apparatus uses well-known Communist techniques of mind-control. It does not debate theological points with logic. If you disagree with it, it will issue a personal attack: you are psychologically defective, you should be committed. This is the technique the Houston diocese used with Fr. Zigrang, by calling his father and saying that he needed mental treatment. It is a very powerful tool: the Communists were very successful with it, as we know.
The way to deal with it is to throw it back like a bboomerang onto the Novus Ordo bureaucrats. Call them what they are: a New Order, not Catholic. A Counterfeit Church. A Great Facade, devoid of any valid Mass and Sacraments. This drives them crazy. They want to marginalize you, but instead you must marginalize them. That is what St. Paul did with the Modernists of his time. We can do no less.
Moreover, it is very effective, because they think that they are in a power position and don't expect back-talk, but false obeisance. That is why Gov. Keating drove Card. Mahony and the bishops crazy. He called them just what they were: "a Mafia, a criminal organization, not my Church". No one before had had the guts to lay it on the table like that publicly. And yet he was right on the mark -- and everyone knows it. That is why the Novus Ordo bishops are so defensive and hostile.
A July 7, 2003, Zenit report quotes John Paul II as saying that "next to the column of the institution of the Church, there is another column, which is the charismatic column. In fact, the whole history of the Church speaks to us of this power of the Spirit, whose novelties have come in charismatic form."
"Another column" besides the Church? "Novelties in charismatic form"? Doesn't this sound like heresy? We are taught that Christ founded the Roman Catholic Church, not some "charismatic column" where the deluded speak "in tongues" and lift their hands to heaven like pagan dancers. As to "novelties," the Church has condemned them from the beginning, starting with St. Paul, and most recently by Vatican Oecumenical Council I. No wonder the Church is in such trouble. It's been relegated by the New Order to the side while it grows a "charismatic column" like a suffocating serpent. But what do we really know about so-called "Charismaticism"?
Charismaticism is a particularly virulent modern-day mania infecting the Church of the New Order, which has its roots deep in heresy. In the late 17th century, the beginnings of Charismaticism can already be seen as a derivative of the Protestant heresy. It is reminiscent of the modern Protestant Evangelicals, who talk about a "personal experience of Christ," by which they refer to an over-emotionalized, highly-personalized attitude that overrides true belief.
The roots of modern-day Charismaticism (Pentecostalism) go back to 1901 when a group of Methodists at a Topeka, Kansas, prayer meeting began "experiencing the spirit." The emotional prayer style soon spread throughout the Assemblies of God, as well as other small Protestant denominations. A typical charismatic prayer meeting includes music, singing or praying in tongues, healing sessions, prophesying, and body prayer.
The phenomenon caught on nationwide among Novus Ordinarians who were searching for new ways of praying during the first flurry of Vatican II changes. The movement names Vatican II as the starting point, crediting a prayer by Pope John XXIII to the Holy Ghost to "renew Thy wonders in our day as by a new Pentecost." The Charismatic Movement in the American Catholic Church traces its beginnings to a "spirit-filled" graduate student and faculty retreat at Duquesne University in 1967. Protestant Pentecostal prayer forms such as speaking in tongues (glossalalia) and being "baptized in the Holy Ghost" took hold.
Known initially as "Catholic Pentecostalism," the movement was renamed to reflect the various spiritual "gifts" (charismata), purportedly given by the Holy Ghost to individuals. The movement is closely associated with the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD, which was perfectly traditional before Vatican II, but afterwards was corrupted), Taize, "oecumenism," Marriage Encounter, the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA), Renew, Focolare, and Cursillo.
RCIA is the New Order's "Christian Initiation of Adults," replacing the traditional Sacrament of Baptism. It is full of an amalgam of naturalism, environmentalism, a bit of voodoo, wicca (a simplified version of Satanic witchcraft for mass consumption), and some Protestant traits all mixed together, but absent is genuine Catholicism.
Renew is a program of deconstruction of the Church, in which the idea of a priest offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is being scuttled. Committees decide what prayers to say and what their approach to sin is, if any. Renew has been piped into schools and parishes, so that it has blanketed the New Order Church in the United States and abroad. Having a veneer of just enough Catholic-sounding phraseology to deceive the unwary, Renew has changed Catholics without their even knowing that they are being changed.
Moreover, Renew appears to be a front group for the extremist Call to Action group, which advocates the reinventing and re-founding of the Church with an entirely different structure and doctrine. It advocates the worship of a feminist/environmentalist Goddess Earth, priestesses, Church-approved homosexuality, Church-approved abortions, and witchcraft-based enneagrams, introduced through lay-led "liturgies" that take place in private homes, much like the Marxist home "cells" of the 1950s. It has also become associated with extremist social causes and liberalistic political programs.
This Charismatic Movement is far from true Catholicism. It represents an almost complete abandonment of even nominally Catholic practices, beliefs, and modes of discourse. Charismaticism is based on the erroneous notion that emotional experience always accompanies the conferral of grace, whereas the Catholic doctrine is that the only sensible indication of the conferral of grace is the Sacramental sign itself.
Charismatics see no reason to exclude non-Catholics or even non-Christians from the chance to experience the "charismata," the extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Ghost, which helped to spread the Faith during the early Church, but disappeared after the Apostolic Age, when the Church had established itself and had no further use or need of the charismata. Such manifestations had specific purposes, such as to spread the Gospel to hearers of different languages, or to prove the credibility or holiness of an apostolic speaker. In fact, one of the aims of the Charismatic Movement is to unite various Protestant movements with Novus Ordinarians under the banner of "signs and wonders."
Charismaticism is intimately connected with the error of "Fatimism," which finds a new basis of faith in private revelations, prophecies, visions, "signs and wonders." So far does this sometimes go that there are "Charismatic Catholics" who still continue to practice witchcraft and idol worship. All this is, of course, heretical and of Satan, as St. Paul tells us:
And then that wicked one shall be revealed: whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: him Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power and signs and lying wonders: And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish: because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying (2 Thessalonians 2:8-11/DRV).
Charismaticism bears a frightening relation to several heresies condemned by the Church: Gnosticism, Messalianism, Montanism, and Nominalism." St. Vincent Ferrer rightly condemns such this type of error as unCatholic and spiritually deadly:
The soul that attaches itself to these false consolations falls into very dangerous errors, for God justly permits the devil to have power to augment in it these kinds of spiritual tastes, to repeat them frequently, and to inspire it with sentiments that are false, dangerous, and full of illusions, but which the misguided soul imagines to be true. Alas! How many souls have been seduced by these deceitful consolations? The majority of raptures and ecstasies, or, to call them by their proper name, frenzies of these forerunners of Antichrist spring from this cause.
As TRADITIO has maintained from the outset, it looks as if that planted story, with no substantiation, about a "universal indult" being contemplated were a chimaera. The Novus Ordo weekly, National Catholic Reporter, in a July 3 article, indicates that the document, now in draft, supposed to be issued late in the year by two New Vatican congregations on Novus Ordo liturgical practice to follow up the recent encyclical, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, "can be reported with confidence ... [to] contain no reference to wider permission for celebration of the pre-Vatican II Mass, the so-called 'Tridentine rite.'" NCR reports that "the forthcoming document is not likely to effect that discipline.... It's just not there."
TRADITIO has maintained that such an "indult" would be no good for the traditional cause, since it would be a ruse, as the Novus Ordo bishops would continue to have de-facto control, as they do now, and such "indult" Masses, more and more of which are becoming "pseudo-indult" Masses (with admixture of the Novus Ordo service), would be conducted within the spiritually-lethal environment of the unCatholic New Order.
TRADITIO has secured a copy of the July 1 letter that threatened Fr. Zigrang with expulsion from his pastorate for his "crime" of deciding to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively at his parish. In the letter, the bishop makes no bones about the fact that in the Novus Ordo Church, only the Novus Ordo service is permitted:
Since that date [November 30, 1969, the effective date for the implementation of the Novus Ordo], every celebration of the Eucharist [note: the Nouvs Ordo bishop does not use the term Mass] must conform to the General Instruction of the revised Roman Missal, with exceptions to be granted by the diocesan Bishop in accord with the decree Ecclesia Dei. I have made an exception to allow you to offer a private Tridentine Mass in the rectory for your own spiritual needs.
Gee, thanks, bishop. Hide that "Tridentine" Mass away in the rectory and forbid anyone but the priest to be present. Just another example of how the Novus Ordo Church of Hate treats people, in hypocrisy to its proclamation that it is the "Church of Love." The Novus Ordo bishop goes on to give Fr. Z a "fraternal admonition" to stop saying the Traditional Latin Mass -- a "fraternal admonition" with the threat that if he doesn't stop, he will be banished from his pastorate. With "brothers" like that, who needs enemies?!
The Novus Ordo bishop charges Fr. Zigrang with "grave disobedience" and "threatening the unity of the [Novus Ordo] Church" for obeying the perpetual decrees of the dogmatic Council of Trent, Pope St. Pius V, and every pope since then up to and including John XXIII. Well, it appears that Fr. Z stuck to his guns and his is now banished. Note, however, that this Novus Ordo bishop is apparently afraid of Fr. Zigrang If a lone priest of some 20,000 in the United States can "threaten the unity of the [Novus Ordo] Church," the New Order must exist on very thin ice indeed!
This is a case in point why the Novus Ordo apparatus, from prelates on down, cannot be trusted. Trust must be earned by one's words and actions. All the Novus Ordo apparatus has shown is that it speaks out of both sides of its mouth, and when push comes to shove, it will destroy souls lawlessly and mercilessly. One would be mad to "negotiate" with such people or to go on bended knee for more "indults," when the first ones have proven to be a ruse and a travesty.
We have been informed that the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights was swamped by messages of criticism from TRADITIO participants, who called the League "anti-Catholic bigots" for failure to condemn the desecration and vandalism of St. Michael's in Farmingville, New York, and for its indication that St. Michael's was "excommunicated" for its traditional Catholicism (it just happens to be an SSPX site).
Well, it seems that we have been heard and can take due satisfaction for having spoken up against what was originally Novus Ordo prejudice against Roman Catholicism. By copy of a form letter sent to a TRADITIO participant in Hawaii, the president of the League has issued a full retraction as follows:
I understand that you are angry with me for not condemning the desecration of St. Michael's. You are right to do so. We made an error, and I take full responsibility. I would also like to say that I never said SSPX was excommunicated. This is not an area I would ever rule on -- this is up to the Vatican.
As I have said before, we traditional Catholics don't know the power we wield in justice. If we had gotten down to it earlier, we could have stopped the New Order Church cold. Unfortunately, we waited too long, and now the removal of this cancer has become a major operation. In every case I know of, both personally and from outside reports, every time a traditional Catholic has stood up to a Novus Ordo bishop against defamation and intimidation against traditional Catholics, the traditional Catholic has won.
The Novus Ordo Archdiocese of Baltimore is the first to implement the New Vatican's latest error in putting out the notion that the Jews don't have to accept Jesus Christ as the Messias. They can look for another.
A new rite of "Baptism" has been engineered that incorporates Jewish elements with "Catholic" ones. And, far from discouraging Catholic marriage with Jews, which is essentially a violation of the Natural Law (because of the danger of perversion of the Faith of the Catholic party, although for good cause in specific cases dispensations have been given for disparity of cult), the archdiocese is encouraging religious relativism.
At that part of the "Baptism" when the Catholic participants renew their baptismal promises, the Jews present are invited to affirm their faith in the Torah publicly with the words: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is Lord alone." Instead of making the Sign of the Cross, they made the Star of David.
According to the Baltimore archdiocese's official organ, Catholic [sic] Review of July 3, Novus Ordo Cardinal Keeler there will not use the name of Jesus Christ in any liturgical ceremony when Jews are present.
One recalls the Jewish Apostles, when Christ confronted them about where their faith lay and asked them pointedly: "Will you also go away? And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life" (John 6:68-69/DRV). That is the Catholic answer. Christ is the only God, the only Messias, the only Truth.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
The pope has authorized a new version of "Bingo," a popular game used for fund raising in the Catholic Church. It is often referred to as the "Eighth Sacrament."
Fr. Moderator Replies.
I should say for the readership that your printed material came with a duly-engineered bingo token. You've outdone me in satire, Father!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
The latest spin from the diocese is that this presbyter pastor, who stopped saying the Novus Ordo service and went exclusively to the Traditional Latin Mass, has been put on "medical leave." The implication is that the presbyter must be mentally ill, or he would not being celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass. Nothing original about that. The Communists have used that tactic for decades. Anyone who doesn't follow the party line must be insane. Send them to Siberia for life.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Indeed, it is an old tactic. Shortly after Vatican II, when nuns were given the "option" to wear their traditional habits or not, there was a noted case of one nun who chose to stay with her traditional habit. Her sisters taunted her mercilessly, but she stuck to her guns. Eventually, they had her committed.
A few years ago there was a case in Boston, in which a presbyter informed the bishop about some morally objectionable activities going on at the seminary where he taught. He thought (foolish man that he was!) that the bishop would take responsible action. Instead, he himself was illegally committed to an asylum until he had a court hearing and was freed by the judge. Some woman purporting to be a psychologist from the diocese signed the commitment papers; it turned out that she had no degree and no authority to do so. The presbyter entered a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the diocese.
These cases simply confirm the fact that the Novus Ordo cannot be negotiated with, compromised with, or even recognized as Catholic (which it is not). There are some conservative Novus Ordinarians around who delude themselves by saying: "If only the bishop knew." "If only the pope knew." They know: they're behind it all!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
On the Feast of Sts. Peter & Paul, June 29, Fr. Zigrang, a presbyter in a southwest diocese and pastor of a church there, announced to his Novus Ordo congregations that there would only be the Traditional Latin Mass, and then he proceeded to offer the Traditional Latin Mass at all the Sunday Masses. Many in the congregation wept for joy at seeing the true Mass after so many years of deprivation. The first Mass of the day was a Missa Cantata with Gregorian Chant.
It is amazing what happened. At each Mass a few in the congregation got angry and left immediately. They had now been steeped in forty years of the heroin of the New Order and couldn't get the devil off their backs. But others wept for joy. At each Mass there was silence! When they were made to form one line at the edge of the sanctuary and kneel and receive Holy Communion on the tongue, there was something incredible. They were filled with awe -- some confusion, of course -- but reverential awe! You could see it in their eyes. I know. I held the Communion plate at two Masses.
I had conflicting emotions Sunday, and still do. Our Lord warns against casting pearls before swine and told the Gentile woman that he could not give what was holy to dogs. Sometimes I almost think (God forgive me) that those statements of Our Lord apply to the Novus Ordo folks with regard to exposing them to the true faith when they are there in party attire, without veils and having had a one-hour token fast. But if you could have seen their eyes. It is such a pity. They have been so deceived. For one fleeting day, they had the Roman Catholic Mass. Next weekend, you can be sure, the Novus Ordo bishop will have a presider from his false religion to reel them back.
And how did it all end for the presbyter? The Novus Ordo bishop called at 9:00 the next morning to order him to vacate his rectory by no later than the next day, and he was suspended for his "crime." But Fr. Zigrang wasn't there. It was his day off -- which he spends visiting the sick. If an abortionist had given a sermon or a priestess had "performed" mess, the bishop wouldn't have bothered, but for celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass -- get out the instruments of torture!
Fr. Zigrang is a canon lawyer, a former seminary instructor, and a former member of the marriage tribunal, who was kicked off the tribunal for being too strict on annulments. His character is said to be beyond reproach, and his journey to the Traditional Roman Catholic Faith has continued steadily as he sought after the truth. He has been a presbyter of that diocese for 25 years, and is said to be a very devout, holy and religious one. Months ago he asked the bishop for a traditional parish and received no response.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
So now we have a case in point why no "indult," universal or otherwise, will have any effect on these renegade Novus Ordo bishops. These Modernists will trample underfoot any attempt to restore the traditional banner of Christ the King.
Gov. Keating's recent remarks about the Novus Ordo bishops being a criminal Mafia are only too telling. Bishops, and even popes, don't have a very good historical track record. The Pius Fifths and Tenths are the exception to the rule, not the rule. Sad, but reality often is. And rose-colored glasses won't rectify the problem. Only standing up to the bullies will. That is what the Allies had to do, after all, but it took a lot of blood before the menace was beaten back.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Recently you posted some comments on liturgical languages, and I found them very convincing. In fact, if there is one proof of the un-Apostolicity of the New Order, it can be found in the linguistic area. Language, by the way, and translation, are major fields upon which theological battles have developed lately.
All of the historical, sacrificial religions have kept to this day their traditional liturgical languages, at least to some extent. See Buddhism and Shintoism, or Tenry-kyo, whose followers outside of Japan are required to recite its most important prayers in Japanese -- the same followers who, by the way, proudly carry a miniature of their sacred book written in Japanese as a pendant!
The three main lines inside the Jewish religion - orthodox, conservative, and reform -- take pride in teaching their children the most basic prayers in Hebrew -- and the entire Hebrew language so that they can read Sacred Scripture in the original tongue.
The New Order, by rejecting (at least in practice) the Latin language heritage, denies the past of Holy Catholic Church, whose teachings were built on that language. This sudden break with the linguistic past cannot but raise strong suspicions that, by rejecting the language that carried official doctrine, the doctrine itself has been challenged, changed, or rejected outright.
Because the New Order plays down the importance of the linguistic factor, it necessarily does not want to have anything to do with the Roman Catholic religion, which has upheld the Latin language through the ages. The New Order cannot but be a post-modern religion, completely detached of major links with the historical Roman Catholic Church. In fact, far from "going back to the sources," the New Order presents itself as a brand new order of things, with little or no connection at all with the true Roman Catholicism.
Fr. Moderator Replies
Indeed, the introduction of the vernacular into the Novus Ordo Church was the Trojan Horse that allowed all the travesties of the New Order to take place. The corruption of the Roman Catholic Faith could not have occurred in Latin, which stands as the guardian of the Deposit of Faith and maintainer of its true meaning. Pope Pius XII was truly prophetic when he said: "The day the Church abandons her universal tongue [Latin] is the day before she returns to the catacombs." Well, folks, the catacombs are here already!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I have just reread Fr. James Wathen's brilliant book on the Novus Ordo, The Great Sacrilege, as recommended in the TRADITIO Library of Files FAQ5: What Traditional Books Do You Recommend?. It is hard to imagine that this book was penned in 1970. I have had the great pleasure to meet the author, and I couldn't have agreed more when he told me that the entire Novus Ordo was nothing more than a modern Sodom and Gomorrah.
Is this what is behind the auto-demolition of the Novus Ordo sect, and does this analogy explain why it is so hard to lead family members and loved ones out of this-soon-to-be destroyed monolith?
Fr. Moderator Replies
As confirmed by recent events, I think that it is fair to say that the New Order is demonstrably evil. It is founded on a post-modern incarnation of the heresy of Modernism that was so strongly condemned by Popes Pius IX, X, XI, and XII.
Like all evil things, weak people are enticed to it and call it good. How often have we heard the worst evils called good: abortion ("a woman's choice"), homosexual acts ("merely a sexual preference"), blasphemy ("freedom of speech"), etc. The way the Novus Ordinarians talk about this evil is quite reminiscent of a fanaticism for other "new orders," such as those promised by Stalin and Hitler. The demonic way the Novus Ordinarians turn against those family and friends who are opposed to it is another clue, as is the propaganda machine that has been constructed to churn out press to laud the effects of the "New Pentecost," just as it putrefies before our very eyes.
But evil institutions contain within them the seeds of their own destruction. Nazism fell, Russian Communism fell. Often people can see the signs of the evil, but do nothing about it. For example, Pope Paul VI clearly saw that the New Order was Satanic and was destroying itself, but he was too weak to stand against it, as Pope St. Pius X did. John Paul II, though trying to put a good face on it, admits clearly (if you read his documents carefully) that the Church is out of control, that the Novus Ordo service is deeply flawed.
Evil movements do not grow up overnight. Nazism germinated for at least ten years and more, the same with Communism, the same with English Protestantism. It usually takes a few decades for the internal evil to percolate to the top, where everyone can see it. That is what we are seeing now, as the New Order crumbles before our eyes, its clergy turning to immorality, its "mass" turning to emptiness, its beliefs disintegrating into nonsense.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
If you were pressed to name your favourite hymn, what might it be and why?
Fr. Moderator Replies:
There are so many -- the Te Deum, the Veni Creator, the Ave Maris Stella, etc. -- but I would probably say the Adoro Te Devote, the Eucharistic hymn by St. Thomas Aquinas. I am not aware of any other hymn that expresses so succinctly and beautifully the essense of the Most Holy Eucharist and the nature of the Redemption.
St. Thomas has in effect minced down thousands of pages of his Summa Theologica into 28 lines of the most beautiful Latin rhymed poetry ever written. The chant setting is wonderful too; there are many recordings of it available. You will find the hymn among the Prayers to Be Said after Communion in the Roman Missal.
The first report I have seen from anyone having actually viewed any of filming indicates what I would have suspected, that Mel Gibson's The Passion is going to be a stunning film. The following report was logged after the writer, Barbara Nicolosi, viewed the rough cuts, without the score or special effects. It is clear that to elicit comments like those below, only a devout traditional Catholic could have produced and directed the film, which is slated for release at Easter of 2004. No wonder the Novus Ordo Bishops and the Jewish ADLers are so afraid of it!
The Passion is a stunning work of art. It is a devout act of worship from Mel and his collaborators -- in the way that Handel's Messiah and Notre Dame were artistic acts of worship in previous times.
Let's get the controversy out of the way right at the top. The film is faithful to the Gospel, particularly St. John. It is no more anti-Semitic than is the Gospel. Having seen the film now, I can only marvel that the attacks [against it by the U.S. Novus Ordo Bishops' staff and the Jewish Anti-Defamation League] are pretty much demonic. Hopefully, the Devil will end up spitefully biting his own tail on this one -- as he does in The Passion by inciting the executioners of Christ, and thus being complicit in his own ultimate defeat.
The Passion is high art. It is the greatest movie about Jesus ever made.... For those of us who love Jesus, The Passion is devastating to watch. It is so good, I almost couldn't stand it. There is one moment on the way of the cross sequence, in which the whole tragedy unfolding devolves into a vicious riot of hatred between Romans and Jews with the Savior on the ground in the middle of it getting it from both sides. It was so frenzied and terrible, I wanted to run from the room. But then, the film again finds Mary, Jesus's Mother, on the sidelines, and her presence gets us through it. Kind of like how Mary's presence helped Jesus get through it, it seemed to me.
The film is lovingly Marian. Mary is perfectly portrayed here. She is contrasted repeatedly with the really super creepy Satan character, who is also a woman (something for the feminist theologians here -- heh heh). The film is strongly Eucharistic. There is a beautiful juxtaposition of images that cuts from the stripping on Calvary to the unwrapping of the bread to be used at the Last Supper. Fabulous stuff.
Every Christian needs to see this film at least once. Just to remember, in our current comfort zones while evil is closing in, the price that was paid for us. On my way home from the screening, I found myself praying in the car, "Jesus, I'm so sorry, I forgot...." How many films have led you to compunction lately? The Passion is a miracle.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I sent the following E-mail to the Catholic League in response to your Commentary on June 18.
Why hasn't an organization that my wife and I had supported been able to find the courage to speak out about the desecration of St. Michael the Archangel Chapel in Farmingville, NY? Is it possible that only the Novus Ordo flavor of Catholicism is recognized and worthy of defense by your organization? If so I suggest it be renamed accordingly.
As you must surely know, there is only one Catholic Church. Below is a little summary of traditional Catholicism. It adequately provides proof that the desecration at St. Michael's most surely should have been decried by your organization.
We are what you once were.
We believe what you once believed.
We worship as you once worshipped.
If you were right then, we are right now.
If we are wrong now, you were wrong then.
Here is the response from the Policy Analyst of the so-called Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. It appears obvious that that the League won't dare say anything to endanger its main source of funding: people who "are in full communion [sic] with Rome."
Thank you very much for contacting us about St. Michael the Archangel. We have contacted the Diocese of Rockville Centre, and its spokesman informed the League that St. Michael the Archangel Church is not at all affiliated with the Roman [sic] Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre.
This is in no way to minimize your legitimate concerns. Our effectiveness in combating anti-Catholic bias, however, depends on maintaining our focus on churches in full communion [sic] with Rome. We must therefore limit our active involvement to those issues that fall within our mission.
Fr. Moderator Replies:
You are right. Traditional Catholics should withdraw their support and membership in this organization. I have. In the past, it has said that it supports all Catholics, but it is obvious that it now should be renamed the "Catholic League for Defending the New Order." If it looks to the corrupt Novus Ordo Diocese of Rockville Center, it has simply become one and the same with the corruption and filth of the New Order. No wonder the League can't stand up for sacrilege against a real church.
As to the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, it has in this incident been exposed as a Novus Ordo tool. I have personally returned my membership notated as below. I urge all of you to click on the organization's feedback page. I would suggest leaving all the contact information blank; you don't want this organization bombarding you with junk mail to join! Just put the following in the Comments box and click Submit:
If we traditional Catholics can't unite when one of our churches is desecrated, and stand firm against such bigoted Novus Ordo organizations who won't speak out against desecration of traditional Roman Catholic churches and chapels, we may as well fold up the tent of the Traditional Roman Catholic Movement.
The "indult" Shivaree Mass at Santa Maria Maggiore on May 25 is hardly over, and already the Novus Ordo spokesmen are criticizing the "indult" Mass, Card. Hoyos, and all the rest. As TRADITIO has constantly said, most of the rumors about the improvement of the "indult" Mass situation are pure puffery. The Novus Ordo establishment hates it and will never allow it to spread within the New Order establishment, by "indult" or any other means.
Now it seems that a Franciscan friar, who was a peritus at Vatican II, has taken on Card. Hoyos and the "indult" crowd in the New Vatican, about the "indult" Mass. It is a matter of some irony that the friar's name, Falsini, means in Italian "Big Liar" and that he hails from Bologna. The friar says that "a Catholic rite of St. Pius V does not exist because that rite, valid before the Council, has been profoundly reformed and underwritten by Pope Paul VI according to the indication of the Vatican II Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium".
First of all, the term "rite of Pius V" that the Novus Ordinarians use is a misnomer, attempting to make it sound as if every pope got his shot at writing a new Mass. There is no "rite of Pius V." That rite is the (traditional) Roman Rite, handed down from St. Peter, through the Great Fathers of the Church. Being the Catholic and Apostolic rite of the Roman Catholic Church, it was formally and dogmatically canonized in perpetuity by the dogmatic Council of Trent and Pope St. Pius V, who certainly did not write it.
It is certainly true that the Novus Ordo, the service written by Paul VI's Freemason and Protestant minions, bears little resemblance to the true Mass. At least two-thirds of it was changed, a little of the old shell being left to deceive Catholics. Every significant aspect of the Catholic and Apostolic Mass of St. Peter was modified. Even concocted new "Eucharistic prayers" were substituted for the Sacred Roman Canon, one of them used by an ancient heretic named Hippolytus, and two of them written by modern heretics.
Friar Falsini maintains that the only legitimate rite is the Novus Ordo service. Moreover, he claims that if anyone should maintain that the Traditional Latin Mass "has the same value" as the Novus Ordo service, "we would be in an unheard of situation that no one would allow. We have the right and duty to forcefully object to these irresponsible statements [of Card. Hoyos].
What are we to conclude? Don't pay any attention to rumors of a "universal indult" (which is of no use whatsoever) or a kinder environment for the Traditional Latin Mass (well, really the Modernized Mass of 1962). Friar Falsini, in spite of his name, is speaking for what the New Vatican really believes and what will be the de facto situation, whatever any documents might say. Documents are not observed in the New Order; they are only for show. If anyone tries even to broaden the so-called "indult," the whole Novus Ordo establishment will rally against it and kill it in practice. And that is probably best, since the Traditional Latin Mass would die when watered in the pot of the New Order, whose soil is deadly.
Return to Commentaries from the Mailbox.