We might say to our participants at the outset of what will be a long period of daily news developments around the death of JPII and subsequent events that raw press stories from Rome can never be accepted at face value. First of all, Newvatican lies in its own interest. Secondly, press reports are written by people who know very little about Catholicism and the Church. That is why, for an informed viewpoint, one must rely on analytical sources of long experience, like TRADITIO.
We saw the "Year of the Three Popes" -- the death of Paul VI, the election of John Paul I, the death of John Paul I, and the election of John Paul II. We saw the death of John XXIII and of Pius XII. We have been Catholic from the beginning -- not converted, not reverted --, but rock-solid traditional Roman Catholic, with the emphasis on Roman.
Thus, we will fill in for you the gaps that others leave out and correct the ignorant statements that you will hear from the raw press. Moreover, we will screen out the propaganda of the Church of the New Order and tell it "like it is." As our participants know, for over ten years now, TRADITIO, the Dean of Traditional Roman Catholic Internet Sites, has told it to you straight and independent. Some people don't like our directness and independence (but they continue to read us!).
To them we say, if you want pabulum fit for children, read the secular press or go Newchurch sites. Read the here-today-gone-tomorrow sites that have no background in Catholicism, let alone traditional Catholicism. There are plenty of them that will spin the line of the counterfeit Church of Love or Church of the New Springtime until you can't wait to return to the honesty of TRADITIO.
In little over a week, the evidence is already accumulating that Benedict XVI is bound and determined to outdo his predecessor in Modernism. The latest indication is that his coat of arms violates significant traditional principles of past papal coat of arms. The pope's coat of arms is important because this is the way the popes have traditionally told the world what they are about, not so much in words, but in symbols. One of our German correspondents has provided us with an advance look.
First of all, notice the modernistic tone to its style. It is reminiscent of a commercial logo, not the rich heraldic tradition of the papacy. But the most significant statement of the new arms is obvious. What is it missing when you compare it to its predecessor's? Why, the papal tiara, of course, replaced by a mere bishop's mitre! Not only is Benedict-Ratzinger the third post-conciliar pope not to be crowned as pope (or to take the traditional papal oath, so far as we know), but he has even removed its symbolism from his coat of arms.
What is the important statement being made here? The arms obviously say to us: "I don't want to be regarded as having the full power of the papacy, but am just a bishop at heart." The gold key on the right is supposed to represent the papal power in heaven, and the silver key on the left, the spiritual authority of the papacy on earth, but the cord that has traditionally united the two is missing, replaced at the bottom by a pallium with three black crosses, which the last three popes have accepted in place of the tiara. There is nothing particularly extraordinary about the pallium; most archbishops have one as a symbol of their authority.
For at least the past eight centuries, popes have had their own personal coats of arms in addition to the symbols of the Apostolic See. While each papal shield is unique, the elements surrounding it had more or less remained the same for centuries -- until Benedict-Ratzinger. The other symbols come from his coat of arms as archbishop, based on ancient German symbols: a large gold shell, a brown-faced Moor with red lips, crown, and collar; and a brown bear loaded with a pack on his back.
The overall statement seems to be one of the Vatican II notion of "collegiality," that the pope is the same as all the other bishops, except that he is a kind of primus inter pares. He seems again to be going his predecessor one better down the path of Ut Unum Sint of 1995, in which his predecessor showed himself open to configuring a Newpapacy. Again, those disaffected Novus Ordinarians, semi-traditionalists, and indultarians who were hoping for the pope to take charge and right the Church have been foiled once again.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I, along with two other traditional Catholics, went to a meeting of one of the Newchurch committees. We pretty much knew what to expect, but any time we defended Sacred Tradition (no altar servettes, no "communion" in the hand, use of Latin, etc.), we were shouted down and treated like second-class citizens. Someone went so far as to say that we were "out of date" because we rely on the Baltimore Catechism -- and that it was invalid! I bowed out like a gentleman and swore never to return. It was a total dry martyrdom for us.
All I have to say is that the Modernist, unCatholic, sacrilegious, Novus Ordo types do not at all resemble the Church started by Jesus Christ Himself. Why can't they say up front that they want more Messes (instead of Masses), want to put the Real Presence of Christ away so It can't be venerated and adored, want to start an American Church, and want to destroy the Faith that was taught by the Holy Apostles and popes for the greater part of 2000 years?
These wolves in sheep's clothing pretend to lead the flock to a "New Pentecost," but they are really leading them to Perdition. They may have fooled and duped the others, but they haven't fooled me or the two others.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
When disaffected Novus Ordinarians and semi-traditionalists and indultarians claim that traditional Catholics should "work within the system," this is the situation that occurs. Of course, the "system" they are talking about is not Roman Catholicism, but a "New Order." So, traditional Catholics are working within the true Church, not Newchurch.
Post-Vatican II Neo-Modernism is different in style from post-Vatican I Modernism. Modernism attempted to argue the logic of its position. After a while, it came to realize that it was losing the argument on an open playing-field and so took another tack. Now Neo-modernism simply wants to (ab)use what power remains in the institution, in which it really doesn't believe, to force its Modernist programme as widely as possible.
Your experience indicates why the "indult" approach or the "negotiated" approach with the New Order simply won't work. The New Order and true Catholicism are two different things. Moreover, the New Order doesn't want to recognize true Catholicism. It's on its own "power trip" directly away from Catholicism to a New Order. Once the Neo-modernists have had their way with Newchurch and sucked out its power to push their programme, they will abandon Newchurch to die, just as they did with the Anglican Church.
While disaffected Novus Ordinarians and semi-traditionalists play with "indults," bending the knee to immoral Newchurch bishops and Newvatican that have stolen their Mass from them, there has always been a simple way to right this condition, which these people have ignored up to now -- the power of the purse-strings.
While the 80,000,000 American Newchurchers make up only 6% of Newchurch's membership worldwide, their financial contributions make up as much as a third of Newvatican's annual fund-raising. But things are changing. Because of Newchurch's Sex-Embezzlement Scandal, contributions have markedly fallen off, and almost $1,000,000,000 has been paid out from American Newchurch coffers in legal judgments.
American Newchurchers donated some $20,000,000 per annum in recent years to Newvatican's general revenues and added $20,000,000 more to Peter's Pence of a total $55,800,000 contributed worldwide in 2003. Newvatican's finances have already swung from the black into the red in the 1980s. Last year, for example, Newvatican reported a deficit of $11,800,000 million for 2003, the last year for which information was available. Closing that deficit won't be easy. The biggest problem facing Newchurch is its inability to raise money. Here's where the power of the purse-strings come in. [MSNBC]
The present state of the Church is not "God's fault." It is our fault. If these Novus Ordinarians, semi-traditionalists, and indultarians really wanted the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments back, they have the power. Stop funding the New Order and make their stoppage public. A 1990 Gallup Poll indicated that about 75% of the Novus Ordinarians wanted the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively or sometimes. Can you imagine how quickly Newrome would restore the true Mass and Sacraments if 75% of American contributions were cut off?! (For further details, click on Polls & Statistics.)
The idea was first floated by Fr. Gommar DePauw in the 1960s. He printed slips of paper to put in the collection plate: "No Mass, no money." But the Catholic crowd at the time was too slothful to take action to nip the New Order in the bud. Now they are paying the price for their sloth, but the worm is turning. Some Novus Ordinarians in Los Angeles are starting a campaign to cut off funding from America's arch-heretic cardinal, Mahony. Novus Ordinarians in Phoenix told Newvatican that if their felon-bishop O'Brien were not removed, they wouldn't contribute a dime. Within 24 hours a reticent Newvatican sacked O'Brien.
So, restoring the true Mass and Sacraments is in people's hands, as it has always been. The Romans of earlier centuries took direct action when the clergy became corrupt. They ran the scoundrels out of town. They threw Pope Formosus (891-896) into the Tiber River. Too bad we of the present day aren't so gutsy as those "Roman" Catholics!
TRADITIO recently reported that the UK Guardian revealed the direct involvement of Card. Ratzinger in covering up sex crimes by a May 2001 confidential letter sent under his signature to the bishops. The letter was being interpreted as a "clear obstruction of justice," designed to prevent the allegations from being investigated by police.
KPRC-Houston reports that because of the revelation of his letter, the pope has been added as a named defendant in a lawsuit introduced in a Houston court by three plaintiffs who claim crimes against them when they were 11, 12, and 13. "We believe, actually, that the current pope, when he was head of the congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, actually was actively involved in that conspiracy," the plaintiffs' attorney told the court.
One of the things that we have learned about the modus operandi of Newchurch is that it will itself float "rumors" in order to see what the response of the clergy and the laity will be. This allows Newvatican to release test balloons and then to deny the rumors if the balloons fall. The more vigorous the denial, the more likely the "rumor" is to be true.
This was the technique used with the so-called New Order Catholic Catechism of the early 1990s. A vernacular draft was published before the official Latin version had even been prepared. In effect, the readership of this edition were guinea-pigs, and Newvatican actually revised doctrine in the "catechism" on the basis of public feedback. Now there's a first!
Rome is now abuzz with rumors that have been vigorously denied; therefore, they are the more likely to be true. The rumors indicate that Benedict-Ratzinger is preparing to issue four new documents, including one approving the Novus Ordo communion cookie for "divorced and civilly remarried Catholics." The Modernists, especially those in Germany and Northern Europe, have been drooling for this to happen. Of course, if it occurs, it will be just another sign that Newchurch is not Catholic and that Newpope is not "traditional," not even "conservative." Our Lord, as reported in all four Gospels, condemns this notion.
Reports in the Italian media claim that whoever is appointed as Ratzinger's successor at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the New Order will inherit four documents ready to be issued. Three are products of pure Modernistic thought. One document concerns the Novus Ordo communion cookie for the "innocent party" (how in the world would one even define such a concept!) in the case of "divorced and civilly remarried Catholics," traditionally bringing automatic excommunication. Two other documents on oecumenism would commit the pope to the search for Christian unity and would express the divinity of Christ in a mode acceptable to other Christian confessions (a rebirth of the Arian heresy perhaps?). A fourth would raise the retirement age for bishops from 75 to 80.
One Newvatican official seemed to admit to the possible truth of the reports when he said, "While it is possible that other Vatican offices might be thinking about such documents, even if that were the case, nothing is close to publication." [NCR]
The possibility that such Modernistic documents could come out of the Benedict-Ratzinger papacy are given all the more credibility by the fact that, at his first Novus Ordo service as pope, Benedict gave the communion cookie in the hand to two cardinals. This is the man who said in 1988 of traditional Catholicism: "It is inadmissible; one cannot accept that there be in the Church groups of Catholics who do not follow the general [Vatican II] way of thinking of the bishops of the world."
SSPX had better listen to such words. Our prediction is that Superior Fellay will be drawn back into "negotiations" by Benedict, only to be led on another wild-goose chase. We don't doubt that, as Benedict is a very shrewd fox of the Vatican II persuasion, he will probably had out a few Sweet Tarts to soften the semi-traditional side to silence them, but in the end the result will be just as vain as the 1988 "Indult." But truly traditional Catholics are hard-headed Roman realists, not starry-eyed dreamers of Oz.
The new pontificate is hardly a week old, and the UK Guardian has placed Benedict-Ratzinger right in the center of the Sex-Embezzlement Scandal. It seems that Card. Ratzinger in May 2001 sent a confidential letter to the bishops, in which he ordered bishops to keep allegations of sex-abuse secret by holding evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was personally signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The letter is being interpreted as a "clear obstruction of justice," designed to prevent the allegations from being investigated by police.
Ratzinger threatened the bishops that as "cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret," bishops breaching the secret would be subject to excommunication. Of course, in the period since Vatican II, the only bishop purportedly "excommunicated" was one whose only "fault" was to stand by his episcopal oath to maintain the Roman Catholic Faith. Post-Vatican II bishop-criminals have never been excommunicated, nor were the cardinals who breached their confidentiality oath after the recent conclave.
TRADITIO has consistently maintained that Newvatican was an accessory after the fact in the Sex-Embezzlement Scandal or, worse, an accomplice. The late pope never lifted a finger to defrock the abusing-thieving-criminal bishops that he appointed (like Weakland of Milwaukee and O'Brien of Phoenix). This new evidence indicates that not only did the late pope try to cover up the evidence (as it is hard to imagine that he would not have been informed by his close partner of such a sweeping change to Vatican procedure) but also the new pope shared with him responsibility in the matter.
These men appear to be popes in name only. They are like fathers who know that their children are flagrant drug addicts, lying, cheating, and stealing to get their illegal stash, but who never lift a finger to put a stop to the criminal behavior, instead praising their character! TRADITIO is waiting for a true pope to stand up before the world in indignation, proclaiming, "No bishops of mine will scandalize the Church of Christ. These men are stripped of all privileges, reduced to the lay state, and consigned to a monastery to do penance for the rest of their lives. May God have mercy on their souls."
The So-Called "Bent" CrucifixIn another indication that he will follow the Modernistic course of his post-Vatican II predecessors, Benedict-Ratzinger continued to use the so-called "Bent Crucifix" instead of the traditional papal crosier, or pastoral staff.
Since the pontificate of Paul VI, the post-conciliar popes have used a staff topped by an image that is not a traditional crucifix. Some claim that this is modeled after the "Bent Crucifix," which has satanic associations. It consists of a bent, or broken, cross with a distorted figure of the Christ. The traditional crucifix, on the other hand, is not bent, and the representation of the Christ is a full figure without any kind of distortion or disfiguration. Others maintain that this crucifix follows a rough sketch made by St. John of the Cross from a vision. True, there is some resemblance, but the cross is different, and the perspective, which is the significant factor in St. John's representation, is entirely different.
Even so, what is the point? The question, as always with post-Vatican II changes, is what is why change? Why all of a sudden would the post-conciliar popes reject the traditional papal crosier, representing their pastoral office, a symbol that goes back to Sacred Scripture and the earliest art found in Roman catacombs, to take up a symbol that has confused and scandalized many of the Catholic faithful?
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Some "indultarians" and "conservatives" have been calling for traditional Catholics to "withhold judgment or criticism" on the new pope. Is this realistic?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
No, it isn't. It's the same old tune that these groups have sung since 1988. It is what we call the "Michael Davies Syndrome." Michael Davies, who in his early works wrote hard-hitting books on the fallacy of Vatican II, the New Theology, and the New "Mass" was very deftly co-opted by Ratzinger & Co. He became president of an semi-traditional organization called Una Voce and was wined and dined by Ratzinger & Co. in Rome. Davies substantially succumbed to the Newvatican politics. He even went so far as to revise all his major works to make them more acceptable to his Newchurch bosses by making them less critical of Vatican II, the New Theology, and the New "Mass."
If we take off the rose-colored glasses and look hardheadedly at the results, Davies basically accomplished nothing. The Newvatican politicians talked up a storm with him for the better part of a decade, and nothing really came of it. In fact, toward the end, he began to lose points. After he left the presidency because of health problems, he wrote a few opinion pieces in which he seemed to realize that he had been taken in and that really nothing had been accomplished.
One of our correspondents stated that we would know the mettle of Benedict-Ratzinger by whether he chose to be crowned pope and take the papal oath, which his predecessor did not. Well, we now know the answer to that one. He was not crowed with the papal tiara. On April 24, he was merely "installed," "im-palled," as it were, with the pallium proper to metropolitans. There is no indication that he will take the traditional papal oath taken by popes of the last 1500 years or so. So much for a "traditional" papacy.
We believe that he has already been given his chance. If he were going to be like a Pope St. Pius V or Pope St. Pius X, he would already have made his commitment to traditional Catholicism clear from the first. To do anything else is simply to play politics with Christ's Church. In his Primum Nuntium, or First Announcement, in which the popes have usually indicated to the cardinals the broad outline of their programme, he simply reinforced the fact that he is a Modernist dedicated to Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. He said so himself, very clearly.
Is he a likeable sort? Sure. We have to like someone who is an accomplished pianist and prefers Beethoven and Mozart (though we would have preferred Bach!) to the rock music that JPII hawked. Someone who is actually fluent in speaking, reading, and writing the ageless Latin of our civilization and of our Faith. Someone who, by all accounts, is a very gentlemanly person. But those are his qualities as a human being, not as pope. JPII was personally liked by many, since he too had some winning personal qualities. But perhaps it was those very personal qualities that made him such a bad pope.
What the Church needs again is a Pope St. Pius X. It doesn't need a populist, telegenic pope. Rather, the Church needs a pope reminiscent of Cicero's oderint dum metuant. A pope who will fight the politicians of the Church. A pope who will make every effort possible to root out the heresy of Neo-Modernism from the Church wherever he finds it. A pope who will defrock deviant and embezzling bishops and send them to do penance in a monastery for the rest of their lives. Someone who will not just talk about the "abuses" of the New Order service, but make plans to do away with it and restore the true Mass and Sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church, so that the Novus Ordinarians will no longer have to wonder whether they received valid Sacraments.
Is this the announced Benedict-Ratzinger programme? No. We predict that he will make a few "adjustments" that will please the indultarian/conservatives, but he will also take steps that will please the Novus Ordinarian Modernists. He is a superb Newvatican politician and will play both sides against the middle. That has been the political game of the popes since Vatican II: divide et impera.
Half measures just aren't good enough. What the Church needs is a full-throated commitment of its pope to the True Faith. Not even a "Universal Indult" is satisfactory, because that simply reflects an approach of: "Give me what I want, and the rest of the Church can go to H---." An "indult" is an evanescent "privilege" only, one that can be yaked at any time, one that allows the New Theology, New Morality, and New Mess and Sakraments to continue unfettered to lead the Novus Ordinarians away from the Faith while semi-traditional Catholics get a bone thrown from the Novus Ordo table.
No "indult" is necessary. Pope St. Pius V gave priests and faithful all the authority they need to reject the Novus Ordo service. What is needed is guts, the guts of the martyrs to stand up for Christ against Church officials, even popes, when necessary. What greater example do we need than that of Sacred Scripture, which tells us that when Peter I taught error in the early Church, St. Paul "withstood him to his face because he was to be blamed [Galatians 2:17 et seq.] That is what traditional Catholics must do: stand up to error, no matter from what source. And if anyone questions you for doing so, let your cry be "Galatians 2:17!"
It is a traditional Catholic who has brought back Latin to the airwaves of the British Broadcasting Corporation. Actor-Director-Producer Mel Gibson, an outspoken independent traditional Catholic, and his film, partially in Latin, The Passion of the Christ, has been credited with the BBC broadcast, entirely in Latin, of readings from Pliny the Elder's (A.D. 23/24-79) Naturalis Historia.
Pliny the Elder's nephew, who goes by the name in English of Pliny the Younger (61-112), is better known to Christians, as Pliny the Younger served as an imperial legate to the province of Bithynia-Pontus under the emperor Trajan. In that capacity, Pliny wrote a letter to the emperor, requesting clarification on his policy for dealing with those denounced as Christians. Trajan's rescript, indicating a balanced and just policy that is a credit to famed Roman justice, is extant, as well as the original letter, and is a monument of the history of early Christianity.
For many years, news broadcasts in Latin have emanated to the world from shortwave radio station Nuntii Latini.
Newchurch Archbishop Paul Marcinkus, one of the most notorious figures in the history of Newvatican, is alive and well, absconded just outside of Phoenix. Marcinkus was president of the Vatican Bank from 1971 to 1989.
And who hid him? First of all, the late pope JPII, whose reign was riddled with scandal. It is becoming more and more clear that JPII was far from a "saint," but actually suborned sex crimes, embezzlement from the Church, and possibly even murder, certainly by his silence if not by aiding and abetting the crimes himself.
In the mid 1980s, Italian authorities tried to arrest Archbishop Marcinkus in connection with a stunning array of crimes, including assassination financing, arms smuggling, and trafficking in stolen gold, counterfeit currencies and radioactive materials. Italian authorities also wanted to talk to Marcinkus regarding what he knew about numerous murders. Through the late 1970s and early 1980s, almost every key player involved in schemes with Marcinkus ended up dead. A journalist investigating Marcinkus, the Vatican Bank, and their ties to the mob also was murdered at the time.
But JPII engaged in obstruction of justice by preventing the Italian police from interviewing or arresting Marcinkus. JPII personallly sheltered Marcinkus in the Vatican City State, protecting him for seven years with Vatican City's sovereign immunity, an immunity granted to the Vatican in 1929 by Dictator Benito Mussolini. What did Marcinkus know that JPII was so afraid of becoming public knowledge? Hmmm.
Now the 80-year-old Marcinkus performs the Novus Ordo service at churches within the Diocese of Phoenix, with the full knowledge of now ex-Newchurch Bishop Thomas O'Brien, as investigators around the world continue to fight Marcinkus' Vatican immunity. Italian prosecutors have wanted to pursue new legal avenues to finally force Marcinkus to tell what he knows about the Vatican Bank's links to mob money during the 1970s and 1980s.
Marcinkus still has a Vatican State diplomatic passport, which gives him the same immunity as when he was hiding behind the gates of the Vatican. No cops, let alone plaintiffs' attorneys, can even approach him. "Marcinkus is a crook, a criminal, a man who in the normal world would have served a long prison sentence for his part in a whole array of financial crimes," says British author David Yallop, who wrote about Marcinkus' myriad scandals in his famous 1984 book In God's Name. "What saved him from justice? The Vatican."
Ex-Bishop O'Brien, of the Phoenix Newchurch Diocese, had no problem harboring men even the nation's most notoriously unconscionable cardinal found abhorrent. Why not? O'Brien himself killed a man in a hit-and-run incident and tried to conceal the crime, of which he was convicted. And JPII and Newvatican wanted him to remain as bishop, until the Phoenix Novus Ordo leaders rose up and told the Apostolic Delegate in Washington, D.C., to tell the pope in no uncertain terms that if O'Brien stayed, he could kiss collections and "Mass" attendance good-bye. So "Killer" O'Brien went, under Newvatican's protests.
Testimony by known Mafiosi in the last decade has continually linked Marcinkus to money-laundering of Mafia cash and other illicit moneys through the Vatican Bank. "Marcinkus is the key to so many things," Carlo Calvi said. "But nobody can get to him." And Archbishop Marcinkus is fine with that. And ex- Bishop O'Brien was fine with that. And JPII was fine with that. So much "moral authority" doing nothing moral in this case.
Another issue about which Marcinkus has never spoken was the death of John Paul I. In the early stages of his 33 days as pope, John Paul I, Albino Luciani, promised a thorough investigation of the growing scandal involving Marcinkus and the Vatican Bank. John Paul I wanted Marcinkus removed immediately from his position with the Vatican Bank. But days before that was to happen, John Paul I died in his bed from what was officially described as an accidental overdose of medication. The pope's body was embalmed that same day, a bizarre breach of protocol that also meant no autopsy could be performed to determine if poison might have been the cause of death. John Paul I's death was the most fortuitous death in Marcinkus' career. Marcinkus kept his position with the Vatican Bank until he was run out of Italy a decade later.
Meanwhile, Marcinkus poses as a fully-initiated member of the Modernist "Church of Love" to Phoenixians, who do not know of his past. He is a Jekyll-and-Hide character, typical of Newchurch, which poses as "loving" and "Catholic," while it harbors rapists and murderers. Such is the Church left us by JPII. No wonder Newchurch is going to rush him through as a "Presto saint" without a full investigation! [Phoenix New Times]
If you want to see into the future of Newchurch, just look at what is happening to the Anglican (Episcopalian) Church. Newchurch follows its course. In the 19th century, John Henry Newman, then an Anglican presbyter, tried to reconcile Anglicanism with Catholicism. Although he was one of the most brilliant minds of his century, he couldn't. So he left Anglicanism and became Catholic. Later in that century, Pope Leo XIII published his historic bull, Apostolicae Curae, which declared that Anglican Orders, and consequently the Anglican "Mass," were invalid because their intention had changed from the Catholic one.
It took about fifty more years, but the Newchurch of Vatican II followed the same course. It changed its Mass into a Protestant service, which Episcopalian communities are now using, as documented on TRADITIO previously. It no longer has a valid Mass, because its intention has been changed. It uses a table not an altar, it places cookies into people's hands, it drops crumbs onto the floor, it has become a snack instead of a sacrifice. Wrong intention, invalid Mass. That's what Catholic theology says. That's what Pope Leo said.
And don't think that the Novus Ordinarians don't know the reality. Recent polls have shown that fewer than 1 in 4 Novus Ordinarians believe that the "bread" is anything more than a cookie. They are Protestants. Martin Luther would have welcomed them with open arms. And look at the folderol caused by the appearance of a Novus Ordo cookie for sale on eBay. Some poor fool actually spent $2000 to buy a cookie to "save it from sacrilege." It is the sacrilege. Why should anyone pay any more attention to it than to common bread, since at the pope's own "Mass" the leftover cookies were thrown into burlap bags and purportedly tossed into the Hudson River.
So what path are the Episcopalians treading now, which will soon be trodden by the Novus Ordinarians? Six Episcopalian priests have been warned on April 17 that their continuous opposition to the ordination in Connecticut of their first openly homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson, would mean their dismissal as pastors of their parishes, and eventually even to their being defrocked. This sentence has been imposed by their bishop, Andrew Smith, of Connecticut.
Let's look at the history of the Episcopalians First, they became accustomed to married priests, then to priestesses, then to bishopesses; now they have to get accustomed to openly homosexual bishops. It is the normal orbit, always farther and farther away, of those who defiantly depart from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Tradition. Sounds just like Newchurch, doesn't it? There is some clamor now among the Liberalist Novus Ordinarians for a married clergy. Next will come priestesses, then bishopesses, then a "gay" hierarchy.
Aren't you glad that you're a traditional Catholic and have nothing to do with Newchurch?! Amen.
John Paul II did finally admit that Vatican II, far from bringing a new "springtime" to the Church, instead produced an alarming exodus of Catholics from the Church. In his 1994 book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, he wrote:
Did the Council open the doors widely to bring people into the Church, or did it rather provoke the flight of faithful? The second part of this alternative, the flight of the faithful, is what corresponds substantially to the reality, especially if one looks at the Church in Western Europe.
Those who recently praised JPII's papacy to the skies must have been living in fairyland. The pope knew full well that the "springtime" of Vatican II had turned into a wintertime. In his last years, he frequently complained that the European Union would not even refer to God in its new constitution and that attendance at the Novus Ordo service had fallen to below 5% in most Western European countries (it is about 15% in the United States, as compared to 80% in 1958).
The new pope sings the same song. He laments the virtual destruction of the Church in Western Europe, but he was one of the engineers that brought the about. Remember that Benedict-Ratzinger was personally present as a peritus at Vatican II and personally put forward the "we all worship the same god" heresy. It is poetic justice that Benedict will inherit from JPII just the ruined Newchurch that he helped make with the late pope.
Newchurch is in the midst of a frigid wintertime. The Novus Ordo service is moribund; few attend it. The hierarchy is sinking in public scandal. Benedict's Modernism will just dig the grave that much deeper in the coming years. Newchurch still has to sink further before The Restoration. Just be patient, folks. This is going to take a while.
Much hoopla was made in the press about the solemn oath that the cardinals swore, when they entered the conclave, before God and the world, with their hand on the Holy Gospels, to maintain silence under seal about anything that happened during deliberations in the Sistine Chapel to choose a new pope. Ratzinger, as Dean of the College, led the swearing in himself, which was broadcast over live television. One by one, the cardinals filed up to an Evangelarium and placed their right hand upon it while they swore, in Latin: "We promise and swear not to break the secrecy of this conclave in any way..."
Well, it now appears that some German cardinals couldn't keep their mouths shut and are now in line for the prescribed penalty of excommunication. Will Benedict-Ratzinger enforce their solemn oath and excommunicate them? Don't bet on it! Excommunication is reserved for archbishops who keep their episcopal oath not to change the Catholic Tradition that has been handed down to them. But what an opportunity for the new pope to show that he takes oaths to God seriously by publicly penalizing the oath-breakers.
Associated Press reports that within hours after the conclave, some German cardinals violated their solemn oath and are now subject to excommunication by its terms. Joachim Cardinal Meisner, the Archbishop of Cologne, violated his oath by telling reporters that the new Benedict XVI was elected on the fourth ballot, the first of the afternoon session. He added that Ratzinger got more than the required two-thirds support.
Meisner and three other German cardinals spent about 45 minutes answering questions about the conclave and didn't seem worried about violating their solemn oath of silence. Georg Cardinal Maximilian Sterzinsky, the Archbishop of Berlin, apparently realized that the cardinals had violated their oaths, when he finally intervened to cut off the perjury by saying, "We've already said enough."
So, once again, Newvatican, even in its most solemn moments, will be shown to be a joke yet again, and Benedict-Ratzinger will be shown to be just as much a paper-tiger as JPII, who said nothing and did nothing while his bishops and cardinals violated their solemn oaths and proceed to rape, steal, and even murder the faithful, both physically and spiritually.
Well, folks, if you were waiting for Benedict-Ratzinger to announce the end of the "experiment of Vatican II," you're going to have a cold winter. Typically, the first announcement, or Primum Nuntium, of a pope to his cardinals after his election indicates the focus of his papacy. Did he choose to focus on the devastation to the Catholic Faith wrought by the unCatholic Novus Ordo service and sacraments? No. Did he choose to focus on the watering-down of Catholic doctrine to the "we all worship the same god" mentality? No. Did he announce a zero-tolerance policy for cardinal and bishop embezzlers, perverts, and murderers? No. Instead, he is going to continue -- and even outdo the same unCatholic actions that stained the papacy of his predecessor!
What did he choose to focus on, then? Don't let his elegant Latin speech, Gratia copiosa, which he delivered to the Newchurch cardinals gathered in the Sistine Chapel on April 20 for the first Novus Ordo service he celebrated since his election. Now, if this man were really traditional, as the Fraternity of St. Peter, Una Voce, and the other "Indultarians" maintain, what a signal he would have sent by celebrating a Traditional Latin Pontifical Mass. So much for a return to the traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments.
Benedict-Ratzinger has proclaimed in his First Announcement that he is Modernist through and through, a lover of Vatican II, of the Novus Ordo, and of oecumenism.
Benedict Wants to Outdo JPII in False Oecumenism. The new pope said he wanted to continue dialogum apertum sincerumque ["an open and sincere dialogue"] with other religions, particularly Jews and Mohammedans, and would do everything in his power to improve the oecumenical cause. Oh, brother. "Dialogue." Isn't that the same post-conciliar code-word that got Newchurch into the situation it is in now, with new "ordinations," new religious, new schools hitting pretty close to rock bottom? So much for a return to traditional Catholic doctrine under Benedict-Ratzinger
Benedict Stands Four-square Behind What Pope Paul VI Called the Council "of Satan." The new pope said that he hoped new generations would draw on the work of the Second Vatican Council. Nos quoque ... firmam certamque voluntatem declarare volumus Concilii Vaticani Secundi continuandi exsecutionem ["I too ... want to affirm with decisive willingness to follow in the commitment of carrying out the Second Vatican Council"]. So much for a return to traditional Catholic Tradition.
Benedict Will Continue to Back the Perverted World Youth Day. Already the new pope is planning to attend the World Youth Day festival in Cologne in August. World Youth Day, started by the "Rock Star Pope," JPII, has been compared to the drug- and sex-infested Woodstock 1969. Surely, the most sacrilegious behavior has been engaged in on the part of the youth participants at this biennial "happening," which has been documented here by eyewitnesses. So much for a return to traditional morals.
In light of these errancies, it was disquieting, to say the least, to see the current leader of the Society of St. Pius X join in the mindless chorus. Archbishop Lefebvre was almost taken in, as he honestly admitted to us, when he got into the clutches of Ratzinger & Co. And the Archbishop was a man most experienced in the wiles of curial politics both before and after Vatican II, a much more astute man than his current successor, who, in an April 19 Communique, wrote: Il y voit une lueur d'espérance. He says lueur?! One would expect a lot more circumspection than that, given the fact that it has taken only one day for Benedict-Ratzinger to be exposed once again for the Modernist he has always been.
Who was the last Pope Benedict? It was the man who followed Pope St. Pius X. Pius X was the courageous anti-Modernistic pope who took strong action to root out the heresy of Modernism particularly from the clergy and seminaries.
When Pius X died in 1914, he was succeeded by Benedict XV. Benedict wrote an early piece against Modernism, then never spoke of it again. In effect, he washed away all the good work that Pius X had accomplished. The resurgence of neo-Modernism at Vatican II could well be laid at the feet of Benedict XV.
So now we have Benedict XVI. Hmmm.
The color of the smoke was uncertain as usual, but the bells rang at 16:04 UTC (18:04 Rome time) indicating that after four ballots over two days the cardinals had elected a new pope. Only Pope Pius XII was elected more swiftly in modern times.
It was a cloudy and gloomy day in Rome. Maybe the heavens were telling us something. Those who were at Rome on June 29, 1972, for the ninth anniversary of Paul VI's coronation could not help but be reminded of that pope's shocking words, after he disowned the Vatican II Council, which he had come to believe was the product of Satan's deceit:
We have the impression that through some cracks in the wall the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: it is doubt, uncertainty, questioning, dissatisfaction, confrontation.... We thought that after the [Vatican II] Council a day of sunshine would have dawned for the history of the Church. What dawned, instead, was a day of clouds and storms, of darkness, of searching and uncertainties.
At approximately 18:40 UTC, the Cardinal Proto-Deacon, Jorge Arturo Medina Estévez, proclaimed from the loggia overlooking the Piazza di San Pietro.
Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum. Habemus papam. Eminentissimum ac Reverendissimum Dominum, Dominum Josephum, Sanctae Catholicae Ecclesiae Cardinalem Ratzinger, qui sibi nomen imposuit Benedictum Decimum Sextum.
What do we know about Ratzinger? Quite a bit, and much of it has been commented upon in detail over more than ten years here on TRADITIO. Those who want to do further research can use the TRADITIO Search Engine in the Commentaries from the Mailbox department. Also, our columnist Patricius Anthony wrote an article on Ratzinger just last year, Cardinal Ratzinger on the Decline of Europe, which is well worth rereading at this time.
What is clear is that at heart this man is a Modernist, though he has cleverly created a conservative persona to make himself more acceptable to an instinctively conservative Church. Yet the truth slips out from time to time.
In fact, the first draft of the constitution stated: "The Church of Christ is [est] the Catholic Church." A German Protestant, Pastor Schmidt, an Observer who took part in the Council, made the written proposal that the crystal-clear word est be replaced by the ambiguous substitit in. Schmidt gave the proposal to Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, who was at the time the peritus of Cardinal Frings, of Cologne. Fr. Ratzinger in turn gave the proposal to Cardinal Frings, who presented it before the Council, and the ambiguous words subsistit in were incorporated into the constitution. This change, engineered personally Ratzinger, has led directly to the Modernist "We all worship the same god" error.
Moreover, this is the man who has said: "The Christian faith must give up its claim to truth" (Zenit Press Service, March 6, 2002) and "One cannot speak of the superiority of one culture over another" [La Repubblica, October 4, 2001].
Eucharistic devotion such as is noted in the silent visit by the devout in church must not be thought of as a conversation with God. This would assume that God was present there locally and in a confined way. To justify such an assertion shows a lack of understanding of the Christological mysteries of the very concept of God. This is repugnant to the serious thinking of the man who knows about the omnipresence of God. To go to church on the ground that one can visit God, Who is present, there is a senseless act which the modern man rightfully rejects.
Now, who are these people that Ratzinger says "lack understanding of the Christological mysteries"? Let's start with the principal theologian of the Church, St. Thomas Aquinas, who wrote not only theological works, but even mystical poetry on the subject of the Holy Eucharist. Let's add every Doctor of the Church, every theologian, every pope. This statement: "To go to church on the ground that one can visit God is a senseless act which modern man rightfully rejects" places Ratzinger four-square against traditional Catholicism and places him in some outer darkness.
Moreover, this is a ploy that Ratzinger has pulled in the past. He will publish his radical Modernistic opinions in scholarly journals published not in Latin, so that the world can read them, or even in a widely spoken European language, but in his native German, which significantly narrows the audience.
So it appears that Ratzinger is no big advocate of the Traditional Latin Mass and views sacrilege toward the purported Blessed Sacrament (really just a Novus Ordo cookie) as just matter of "fussiness." Shades of JPII having extra "cookies" from his New York service stuffed into burlap bags and purportedly thrown into the Hudson River!
The important thing to remember is that Ratzinger is not a friend of the Traditional Catholic Movement. Sure, he'll drop a few crumbs in that direction, but he's a dyed-in-the-wool proponent of the New Order. It's clear that Ratzinger is a crafty Modernist, who will urge the Novus Ordinarians, with perhaps more subtlety than the late pope, to participate in the cult of "modern man" in the Church of the New Order. And don't you forget it!
What will the impact of Ratzinger as pope be upon the Traditional Catholic Movement? The "conservative" Novus Ordinarians and the "Indultarians" will lap up this man. They are so hard up for any recognition that they will take the few little scraps that he will throw them and praise him to the skies. But even the late Michael Davies in the last months of his life, although he had previously been a rhapsodist for Ratzinger, when he got away from the Newvatican environment, figured out the Modernist tendencies of Ratzinger. It just remains to see whether the SSPX leadership will be courageous in maintaining the Roman Catholic Faith or will fall for the wiles of "that fox," as Christ called Herod.
It remains to be seen how long Benedict-Ratzinger lasts. He has just turned 78 and looked quite frail at the late pope's funeral. His singing voice lacked strength, certainly as compared to John XXIII, who, when he was elected at age 77, was still able to belt out the chant of the Angelus and the Blessing Urbi et Orbi. He is the oldest pope elected since Clement XII in 1730.
The press has certainly been making a lot of the "security" of the conclave, supposedly locked cum clave. Just another Newvatican myth. JPII, in his career of destroying virtually every Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church (remember, this was the msn who presumed to add five more mysteries to the Most Holy Rosary -- now there's a "Marian" priest for you!), also fiddled with the conclave. He introduced significant changes -- some say invalidating changes -- into the traditional conclave processes.
One of these was the breaking of the seal of the conclave. The cardinals used to be housed in Spartan temporary accommodations adjoining the Sistine Chapel. Now they are housed in a virtual hotel, the Domus Sanctae Marthae, and they are allowed to stroll in the open in the gardens. Unless the Camerarius has locked the sky and the air, forget security.
Now it has been reported that all the "anti-bugging" devices that Newvatican has installed don't work infallibly. In an embarrassing episode for Newvatican, 40 reporters were invited into the chapel for a tour. Newvatican's "security experts" challenged them to test the security themselves by attempting to use their cell phones in the chapel. A number of the reporters could pick up signals with their phones, and at least one reporter was able to make a call. The episode raised questions about Newvatican's technical expertise and whether this conclave is going to be just another Newvatican joke. [News Telegraph]
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I read a report that JPII's seal ring was not destroyed until a week after his death. I was under the impression that the ring was to be destroyed as soon as the pope was determined to be dead, in order to prevent false pronouncements, etc., from being issued under the dead pontiff's seal. Is my understanding correct, and if so, why the wait?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
The questionable JPII procedure provides that the dead pope's seal ring not be destroyed until the second or later cardinalatial commission meeting after the pope's death. The traditional procedure was that the Camerarius immediately destroyed the dead pope's ring and seal. The reason for this provision is obvious. False documents could be sealed after the pope's death by one who had possession of the ring and seal. In a Newvatican that has been racked with fraud already, this is just another opening for more fraud.
In reading the JPII "revised" procedure (don't these post-conciliar popes ever stop "revising" every Tradition the Church has?) -- and this is a point totally missed by the press and commentators -- the power of the Camerarius, Eduardo Cardinal Martinez Somalo, of Spain, was greatly reduced. We find the responsibilities are given instead to the cardinals as a whole or to an individual who, in the past, had had only a ceremonial role: the Dean of the College. And guess who that is: Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Hmmm. Was the fix in?
An evangelical Christian talk-show host who entertained a caller's question about whether the late JPII would go to heaven has been fired. Marty Minto, 39, a senior pastor with three years' experience as host on WORD-FM in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as well as stints in three other cities, was told that he was alienating listeners.
Minto fielded a question from a caller who asked whether the pope would go to heaven. Many evangelical Christians believe that someone must be a "born-again" believer to enter heaven. Minto, who is also senior pastor of the 100-member Turning Point Community Church, said he told the caller that whether someone was born-again was personal and "between an individual and the Creator."
Well, Pastor Minto, you might be surprised to learn that a lot of Catholics are questioning the very same thing. Of course, there has been a total media blackout on the question, but Church history would lead one to believe that quite a number of the 260-odd popes are in the Inferno, and most of the rest in the Purgatorio. On the other hand, there have been only two recognized pope-saints in the past 700 years!
Two of the supposed "leaders" in the conclave, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and Dionigi Cardinal Tettamanzi, have distressing connections with Opus Dei. This cult anticipated and developed 30 years before Vatican II a revolutionary, new, secular theology of the laity, and accepted the principle of pluralism and indifferentism: a Novus Ordo Seclorum.
In 1982 John Paul II created this group as a "personal prelature." Suspiciously, this act occurred in the same year that the wealthy sect allegedly had transferred almost $1,000,000,000 into the Vatican Bank, bailing it out of an embarrassing bankruptcy. In a second maneuver that raised eyebrows, the pope placed the founder of Opus Dei on the "fast track" for Newchurch sainthood, accelerating an often centuries-long waiting-period for canonization to a mere twenty years.
Opus Deistas are part of the New Order Church. Opus Dei is a chameleon organization, being liberal or conservative, whichever benefits its agenda. Juan Estruch in his book Saints and Schemers described this as "dual ethics." It is a characteristic of the Modernism that infects Newchurch.
The cult has estimated assets worth $2.8 billion worldwide and $344.4 million in the United States. It has such a reputation that critics usually prefer to speak anonymously, citing fear of retribution. "They're very, very powerful.... They're so powerful it frightens people," said a presbyter in Rome who has regular contact with Opus Dei. Critics say the group deliberately sets out to recruit elites: politicians, executives, journalists, lawyers and, of course, senior churchmen. [Newsday]
In effect, Opus Deistas are the new Jesuits -- and we all know how off the rails the Modernistic, Liberationist Jesuits have gone!
By 1059 Nicholas II withdrew the papal elections from the Italian noble families. Henceforth, the pope was to be chosen by the cardinal-bishops. This provision removed the election from lay suffrage, of which the secular princes had taken an unfair advantage. Pope Nicholas was not breaking with long-standing tradition because the cardinals are the Roman clergy, who by the unbroken tradition of the Church, elect the pope. His decree also required that the candidate be, if possible, a Roman cleric and that the Roman clergy and the Roman people be permitted only the privilege of assenting to the election.
Cardinal-Bishops, the seven cardinals living in Rome, are bishops over seven small dioceses adjoining that of Rome. Cardinal-Priests, usually ordained Bishops or Archbishops, are given titles to one of the major churches of Rome. Cardinal-Deacons are assigned to a church of Rome, called their "deaconry," by title. It makes no difference whether a cardinal of the Roman Church has a diocese in another part of the world or actually resides in Rome. His title, given to him by the pope, legally makes him part of the Roman clergy.
Since 1059, the cardinals have had the sole responsibility of choosing the pope. Although these "princes of the Church" are free to elect any baptized male, the last time a non-cardinal was elevated to the papacy was 1378. Even the oath the cardinals take at the outset of the conclave anticipates that they will choose one of their own.
The word conclavecomes from the Latin cum clave, "with a key." The practice of locking the cardinals up arose during several protracted papal elections in the 13th century. In 1243, the Senate and people of Rome broke a year-and-a-half deadlock by locking the cardinals up until they finally elected a new pope. In 1271, the cardinals were not only locked up, but were put on a diet of bread and water until they could agree.
The pope chosen in 1271, Gregory X, formalized these Spartan measures as conclaves. Despite his efforts, 29 subsequent conclaves lasted more than a month. No conclave since 1831 has lasted more than four days; the one in 1978, at which John Paul II was elected, went two days and eight ballots.
In 1179, Alexander III sagaciously ruled that henceforth a pope could be elected only by a two-thirds majority of the cardinals. Although conclaves have grown shorter in modern times, JPII purported to change this millennial requirement to make a simple majority sufficient to elect a pope, if no one gets the traditional two-thirds majority after about 30 rounds of voting. Some have argued that the change goes so essentially to the core of the papal election that if such a rule were actually implemented, it would invalidate the election. Possibly illegal and invalidating, this rule provides for the election of a candidate that does not have overwhelming support from the college.
Paul VI had already purported to introduce a similar unprecedented innovation by depriving cardinals aged 80 and above, when the pope dies, of their vote in the conclave. Again, some have argued that such an untraditional rule invalidates the papal elections. Possibly illegal and invalidating, the rule deprives the conclave of the most experienced and knowledgeable cardinals.
JPII also purported to change yet another millennial practice. Traditionally, there have been three methods of election: per acclamationem seu inspirationem, per compromissum, and per scrutinum. JPII purported to abolish the first two methods, that is, by acclamation or inspiration (so much for the Holy Ghost at these things!) and by compromise, that is, the delegation to a committee of electing the pope.
After a Mass of the Holy Ghost is celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica (unfortunately, since 1978 Mass is not celebrated, but instead the Novus Ordo service is performed), the cardinals go in solemn procession to the Sistine Chapel. There the Dean of the College reads the oath of secrecy, to which each must individually subscribe. The cardinals enter a guarded annex of the Sistine Chapel, the Domus Sanctae Marthae, for the election process. Each cardinal swears an oath to protect the secrecy of the election. Breaking the oath carries a penalty of immediate excommunication. Locked within the walls, the cardinals are sequestered from any contact with the outside world. Entrances are sealed and curtains closed. The area is screened for bugging devices.
On the first day, there is to be, at most, only one ballot in the afternoon, but thereafter, there are four ballots daily: two in the morning and two in the afternoon. Each cardinal writes the name of his choice ("in handwriting that cannot be identified as his") on a rectangular piece of paper with the words Eligo in Summum Pontificem at the top. The paper is folded twice and placed in a receptacle at the altar, while the elector says aloud: Testor Christum Dominum, qui me iudicaturus est, me eum eligere, quem secundum Deum iudico eligi debere.
The election is conducted by secret written ballots counted by the Camerarius and his three assistants, known as scrutati, or scruitineers (tellers) in Latin. Two ballots are taken each morning and two each afternoon until a successful vote is completed. The Cameriarius and the three scrutati count the ballots. After each voting session, the ballots are burned. If the vote is inconclusive, a chemical substance is added to the paper to produce black smoke. Billowing from the roof of the Vatican Palace, the smoke is a message to the crowds watching in the Piazza di San Pietro below that the Church is still without a pope.
If no one has been chosen after three days, there is a pause of up to one day for prayer, "informal discussion among the voters," and a brief spiritual exhortation by the senior Cardinal-Deacon. After the pause, voting continues for another seven ballots, followed by another pause, seven more ballots, and so on, until there have been up to 34 ballots extending over ten or twelve days. At this point in the conclave, JPII's disputed innovation in the conclave comes into play. The Camerarius is to invite the cardinals to "express an opinion about the manner of proceeding," and the election will then go forward as the majority decides. Even so, the requirement of a majority vote cannot be waived. A vote on the two candidates who got the most votes in the previous round may be held.
When the college eventually reaches the final decision, each cardinal lowers the purple canopy over his chair, leaving only the elected candidate's canopy. The final ballots are burned and their white smoke signals a successful election. In 2005, the ringing of bells has been added.
When a candidate is elected, the Dean of the College of Cardinals, currently Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, asks: Acceptasne electionem de te canonice factam in Summum Pontificem? If the candidate answers, Accepto, he becomes Bishop of Rome immediately and is acknowledged by each of the cardinals in the adoratio.
The Dean then asks: Quomodo vis vocari? The candidate, now pope, answers: Vocabor [N.], specifying the name by which he will be called. The custom of changing one's name on election to the papacy is generally considered to date from the time of Sergius IV (1009-1012). Before his time, several popes had changed their names. After his time, this became a regular practice, with few exceptions; e.g., Adrian VI and Marcellus II.
The Cardinal Proto-Deacon of the College then steps out onto the balcony of the Vatican, shouting: Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum. Habemus papam. Eminentissimum ac Reverendissimum Dominum, Dominum [N.], Sanctae Catholicae Ecclesiae Cardinalem [N.], qui sibi nomen imposuit [N.]. The new pontiff then appears to impart the blessing Urbi et Orbi.
The evidence has now become uncontrovertible: JPII gave the Novus Ordo "cookie" to heretics in his private chapel. Newvatican, in its usual mendacious way, denied the fact at the time, but now the truth will appear in a new papal biography by Garry O'Connor, Universal Father, based on a 90-minute interview with Cherie Blair, the Prime Minister's wife, a Novus Ordinarian. On March 20, 2003, Blair had a meeting with the pope to discuss the Iraq War.
At 8 a.m., so O'Connor's account goes, the Blairs arrived at JPII's private chapel for the Novus Ordo service. This was not even a Novus Ordo Latin service, such as people may have seen on television from St. Peter's Basilica. JPII said much of the service in English.
JPII even permitted Blair, a heretic because of his formal membership in the Church of England, founded by King Henry VIII, to read the Novus Ordo "first reading." O'Connor then reports that "the pope gave the family communion [the 'cookie'], while the other celebrants gave communion to the rest of the congregation."
The late traditional Primate of Great Britian, Basil Cardinal Hume (who was, by the way, the source of the information that Pope John XXIII objected to the direction in which Vatican II was going and cried, "Stop the Council! Stop the Council!" on his deathbed) had specifically told Blair, who routinely took the cookie when he accompanied his family to the Novus Ordo service in London, that this was not appropriate for a non-Catholic, and Blair had accordingly stopped.
On March 21, 2003, however, the Catholic Herald claimed that the JPII had personally given Tony Blair the Novus Ordo "cookie" -- the first time in history that an heretical British prime minister had received it from the hands of a pope. The story was followed by such a flurry of denials from Newvatican, knowing that the pope had committed apparent sacrilege, that the newspaper was forced to withdraw the claim in its next issue.
Yet the story was perfectly true, as O'Connor discovered from several sources, including the papal chamberlain's office. He glossed over it in his book "out of respect for the family," he says, but The Telegraph independently verified the story. Ironically, only two weeks after Tony Blair took the Novus Ordo cookie from the JPII, the Roman Curia slapped the pope in the face for his apparent outrageous sacrilege, and reissued tough guidelines against giving the cookie to non-Catholics. [UK Telegraph]
O'Connor says that this hypocrisy was typical of JPII. "His instinct in these situations was always to say yes, and he often had to be restrained by officials." Thus, JPII is reminiscent of Paul VI, who never seemed to have the courage to say NO! to Hannibal Bugnini, the Architect of the New Order. Thus, he sold the Roman Catholic Faith down the river and make the Church of the New Order devoid of grace, allowing it to fall into the rankest sin.
Because of his stardom, Novus Ordinarians have been trying to raise their status by association with Mel Gibson. The first phony story they circulated was that Gibson was doing a film on Fatima and Sr. Lucia. He publicly denied that on radio. Now they are saying that he is doing a film on JPII and had a camera crew at the funeral. When an investigative television program contacted Gibson's representatives for confirmation, they had a one word reply: "False."
These Novus Ordinarians are something else. Don't they realize after all the folderol about The Passion of the Christ that Gibson is a dyed-in-the-wool traditional Catholic, who rejects the "Indult Mass" and publicly describes himself as a "pre-Vatican II Catholic," probably having serious doubts about whether JPII was a true pope. His father, Hutton Gibson, certainly does. [Extra and other sources.]
As just another example of how ignorant the press is about religion these days, NewsMax falsely stated that "Gibson is a member of the Society of Pius X." Gibson is not a member of the SSPX. He has very carefully stayed away from any organizations and has remained an independent traditional Catholic. If NewsMax had done the research, it wouldn't have committed this error. Gibson has been very public about his stance.
The official time given was Saturday, April 2, at 19:37 UTC (17:37 at Rome). But now there are reports that Newchurch officials were desperately trying to make his death coincide with "Divine Mercy" Sunday, on April 3 in 2005. Zenit, for example, a press service that is associated with Newchurch, has given the date of April 1.
"Divine Mercy" Sunday is a Newchurch concoction, phonied up loosely on the alleged diary of a Polish nun, who died in 1938. The devotion was suppressed, and the book of her diary was placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum [Index of Forbidden Books]. This decision was upheld by Pope John XXIII in 1958/59. For further details, click on How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Practices in the article Divine Mercy.
Already on Friday, however, certain press agencies were carrying an "unofficial" Newvatican report that JPII died on that day, a very traditional day, the First Friday of the month, associated with the traditional devotion to the Sacred Heart, associated with St. John Eudes and St. Margaret Mary and too many popes to number. For example, one news station broke in with a special report on Friday. The reporter stated: "The Pope is dead. The Pope is dead. He has flat lined." EWTN was also announcing on Friday that the pope was dead.
Those unofficial reports were later denied by Newvatican. The reports indicate that Newvatican officials could not delay the announcement of the death any longer, so finally came out on April 2. Since April 2 is not April 3, so the report goes, Newvatican officials came up with the old "Jewish Argument," that is, that the day does not start just after midnight, as in Christian countries, but at sunset the day before, in this case Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. This is the same argument that is used to justify the Novus Ordo Saturday-for-Sunday "Golf" Mess.
In reality, it has been reported that the reason for the delay in the announcement is that "considerable work had to be done to make the body (the face in particular) presentable due to the agony of the pope's final sufferings. It was also necessary to 'transfer' the date of death in order to accommodate episcopal appointments which the pope was not able to make during his final agony." You may remember that while the pope was unconscious with septicemia and congestive heart failure, the press was announcing that he was feeling better and had signed episcopal appointments. If such is the case, the documents were falsified, and these appointments were not validly made. Now we know why the Fishermen's Ring, or Pescatorio, was not immediately destroyed in accordance with tradition.
Of course, it really doesn't make any difference on what day JPII died, but for those who are inordinately superstitious about these things, Newvatican plays upon such superstitions. As TRADITIO participants know, we don't go for all this unCatholic necromancy, trying to connect purely natural events, such as eclipses, with some "divine message." To this known vapidity of all too many people in the modern age, the exploiters certainly play up. Witness all the silliness about Dan Brown's book of pure fiction, The DaVinci Code, or the new six-part miniseries that is running on NBC titled Revelations, featuring fictional "apparitions" and "miracles," very loosely based upon the last book of the New Testament, the Apocalypse of St. John, also known as Revelations.
But if we were to play this game, what would we make of the fact that the fabled pope of Newchurch may have died on April Fool's Day?!
While many news sources simply repeat the secular press and the Modernist New Order press mantras, TRADITIO uses its wide variety of news sources and internal contacts, together with its unique analysis based on some forty years of observation, to dig deeply for you into the real stories. Here is some of the news that nobody else will tell you in quite the same way.
When you are analyzing the beliefs of Newchurch, forget the documents. They're used only for propaganda purposes and often are contradictory. Look at actions.
Some don't like TRADITIO calling the Novus Ordo sakrament a "cookie," but that's just what it is, a cookie, lacking in form, matter, and/or intention to make it validly the Corpus Christi, just as Pope Leo XIII discussed in his Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae. Newchurch admits this fact by its actions. At the Novus Ordo "service" during the pope's visit to New York several years ago, the left-over cookies were unceremoniously placed in burlap bags and, some say, tossed into the Hudson River!
Now -- and this is not the first time this has happened -- a "cookie" has been offered for sale on eBay and sold for $2,000.00. The seller, an admitted heretic or pagan, admitted to eating a cookie himself at the papal service at the time (1998), then to going back to get another one, which the presbyter knowingly handed over. This "extra" cookie is the one that has now been sold on eBay.
Some have commented to TRADITIO that maybe there are a lot of counterfeit Messes, but surely the pope's Mess must be valid. Why, then, have the worst examples of what these people would supposedly believe -- and act upon -- as the vilest of sacrileges occurred at papal services -- those papal extravaganzas at horse-racing tracks, sports stadia, and parks?
These cases would be unimaginable sacrilege -- which would never be countenanced traditionally -- if the "cookie" were really the Corpus Christi. Traditional Catholics, fortunately, have nothing to do with the Novus Ordo Mess. No wonder Newchurch is in such a devastating state, graceless, as it is, of the Most Blessed Sacrament. If you think about it, this explains a lot about the fall that Newchurch is suffering.
Because the Church is in a state of sede vacante for who knows how long, the Vatican Post Office issued on April 12 a new postage stamp acknowledging the fact. It is a 0.80 Euro (US $1.04) stamp. Although the style of the stamp is rather modernistic, the stamp bears the image traditionally used during a state of sede vacante, an image of two crossed keys under the ombrellino of the Camerarius.
After the nonsense that followed the death of JPII, in particular the rallying cries for "presto sainthood" and the wild stories of "miracles," I am now finally convinced that I cannot work "from the inside" as I had hoped.
I feel particularly disillusioned now after hearing the accounts of people encouraged by JPII either to leave the faith or remain Jewish. There is a terrible irony in the fact that for most Novus Ordinarians, their faith is seen as no different from any other faith. JPII is seen as "saintly" for his role in pushing this, and "conservative" Novus Ordinarians are eating this all up, while at the same time are worried about (false) "obedience" from true Catholics, traditional Catholics.
I think that "conservative" Novus Ordinarians have become prideful and superstitious -- prideful in feeling superiority in adhering to the Church's teaching on abortion, marriage, etc., and superstitious in promoting things like "apparitions," without being grounded in the Traditional Latin Mass, Divine Office, and Church history.
We received quite a number of inquiries about what a certain piece of music was during the papal funeral. The inquirers couldn't describe it very well, so we were surprised to discover that they were speaking of the chanted Litany of the Saints, which they should have heard a couple of weeks ago in the Holy Saturday liturgy. It seems that the New Order's Kumbaya is wearing thin!
For suggestions on Gregorian chant and sources for it, click on What Sacred Music Recordings Do You Recommend?
No surprise here. JPII did more to destroy the Roman Catholic Church than any pope in the last 16 centuries, and the Novus Ordinarians want to make him a "saint" for it! Well, why not? One web site on the upcoming papal election is taking a "poll" on who should be the next pope. So, the election of a pope has been little more than a Trifecta horserace betting opportunity.
Here's the real scorecard of the JPII pontificate. Of course, these are facts, so you won't hear them on television or in the press, secular or New Order.
The gutted "sainting" process introduced by this JPII, which could very well produce false "saints," could ram him through in a few months -- past the Devil's Advocate (JPII did away with him) -- past the meticulous scrutiny of miracles (JPII did away with most of those) -- past the scrutiny of all his published works -- past the scrutiny of all his acts. No, it's much simpler for Newchurch to rely on a TV poll! By rights this process should take a minimum of fifty years. Even great Saints, like Therese of Lisieaux and Pius X took that long. Joan of Arc took 400 years.
And, oh, will the "miracles" now start coming out of the woodwork. These people will covet a part of the limelight, just as those poor dolts who appear on The Phil Donahue Show, to get punched out by their secret mistresses, or whomever, on national TV. One recalls the "miracle" attributed to Mother Theresa, which even the physicians said was only an amelioration produced by ordinary medical treatment. And, at that, some Newchurch cardinals want to do away with miracles entirely in the "sainting" process. It's too much trouble sometimes to phony one up for Newchurch "saints." For further details, click on How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs in the article Canonizations -- Post-conciliar.
Our Lord Himself warned us that false "miracles" can be used by Satan to deceive: "For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect (Matthew 24:24/DRV). Where is a real exorcist when you need one? It seems that these Novus Ordinarians have been taken over by madness.
Just how bizarre this Novus Ordo "sainting" has become, a fop to popular madness, is shown by what the people in the piazza were shouting on the day of the funeral, according to one news report: Sancta, Sancta, in other words -- make him a Saintess!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
We have all seen the disproportionate attention the media have given the extravaganza of the recent funeral after John Paul II's 26 years of virtual silence on the plight of Catholicism in the modern world. The late pope has been commended on his destructive policies of oecumenism, religious liberty, and support of economic and political centralisation. He has been heavily criticized for showing any signs of orthodoxy, such as his stance on homosexuality, abortion, euthanasia, ordination of priestesses, and celibacy. Is there any possibility that the upcoming conclave will produce a strong, orthodox pope who will engage his authority?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
We think not. The problem is that the papacy as now constituted in Newchurch has no "authority." It has become so watered down by "inculturation," "collegiality," and false "oecumenism," that it can no longer command anything. The late pope couldn't even find the authority to punish the criminals among his own leadership (e.g., Archbishop Remebert Weakland, of Milwaukee; Bishop Thomas O'Brien, of Phoneix). The late pope himself indicated that he was willing to water down even the paper authority of the papacy, in his 1995 Encyclical Ut unum sint. In reality, he already put his gutted view of the papacy into practice.
The Newchurch bishops are such renegades that they would now openly disobey anything the pope said. They already have. When the cardinalatial commission of 1986 determined that the Traditional Latin Mass had not been abrogated, nor could it ever be, and that any priest could say it at any time at any place without "episcopal approval," the German bishops told JPII in no uncertain terms that if he promulgated the commission's findings, Germany and surrounding countries would go into open schism. The pope never promulgated the findings. For further details, click on Ecclesia Dei -- Before and After the Indult.
No, there is no magic, "quickie" solution to the post-conciliar problems in the Church. Why? Because it is not a problem of the pope, but of Catholics. Like the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and Nineve, we haven't learned the lesson that all this is supposed to be teaching us. It is supposed to be making us cling more closely to the true Roman Catholic Faith against all its enemies, including those in the hierarchy. But most "Catholics" have sold out to the New Order. And it is getting worse and worse and worse.
What is needed is not a different pope, but an essential change of mind, what the Scriptures call metanoia. What good is a different pope, if the people still serve false gods and justify the destruction of the Catholic Church's Sacred Liturgy, Sacraments, doctrine, and morality? We can go the way of Sodom and Gomorrah, or we can go the way of Nineve, change our minds, and become Catholic again.
How quickly we forget! We heard the story of Nineve just two weeks ago, in the traditional Prophecies read out on Holy Saturday. If you didn't attend the Sacred Rites on that important day, refresh yourself by reading the third chapter of the Book of Jonas in the Old Testament.
It is up to us, not a pope. And it is clear that most of us have not learned the lesson yet. As the ancient Greeks pithily put it: pathos, mathos -- by suffering one learns. To purge herself, Holy Mother Church needs a lot more learning, thus perforce more suffering, just as gold is tested by the searing flame.
The cardinal given the best odds by Las Vegas to become the next pope is Milan's Dionigi Cardinal Tettamanzi. After the fashion of other sly cardinals, like Ratzinger and Hoyos, who disguise themselves to the press as "conservatives like the pope," Tettamanzi is said by informed sources to be actually a notorious Modernist. He is a dangerous innovator, who, if given a chance, might make John XXIII and Paul VI look like ultra-rightists, and who, if he were to become pope, would usher in yet another Modernist revolution.
Tettamanzi is best known as the main contributor to a book of essays entitled Antropologia cristiana e omossessualita, a typically Modernist offering, which is an overt attempt to "understand" homosexuality from a "new" Christian perspective. Can Newvatican-approved "gay marriage" be far behind?
Like Ratzinger and Hoyos, Tettamanzi is said to have successfully fooled the press into believing that he is a "conservative" because he uses traditional, pious language in an effort to inoculate himself from any suspicion. He is friendly toward that equally deceptive, even dangerous, group, Opus Dei. Physically, like John XXIII, he is rotund and jovial looking, belying the fact that if he were he to become pope, he could be far worse than the previous three post-conciliar popes. [ITV]
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I attend Mass at one of the Society of St. Pius X sites. I have to tell you and your readers that our heads are swirling about what is going on. The SSPX leadership often operates in secrecy. They tell us only what they want us to know.
Recently we were given information from Bishop Fellay, who made a tour. His information puzzled us because he seemed to be correctly taking a hard line toward what Archbishop Lefebvre called Modernist Rome, but by doing that, he contradicted what he was saying just a year or two ago. Now we have gotten information from Fr. Schmidberger of the Society that seems to contradict what we heard from Bishop Fellay just a few months ago. Sometimes we have to wonder who is in charge at the Society. Or maybe the internal rift that existed a year or so ago is still there.
First of all, there have been rumors that Bishop Galarreta is planning to leave the Society. We don't know why or where he would go. Fr. Schmidberger denies the report, but the Society has been known in the past to deny the truth for its own purposes, so we don't know what to believe.
Fr. Schmidberger claimed that substantive talks were going on again to become part of the Novus Ordo organization. Bishop Fellay had denied that substantive talks were going on because Cardinal Hoyos would not agree to allow all priests to say the Traditional Latin Mass at will. The understanding that we Society people have been getting is that some of our bishops are now downplaying the Mass aspect and playing up the removal of their own excommunications. It is starting to seem to us like these bishops are now out for themselves.
Frankly, Father, a number of us Society members are getting afraid again that some of our bishops are going to sell us out to the Novus Ordo people. We don't trust the Novus Ordo people. Just look what happened at Campos in comparison. We are afraid that the fox will lure the chickens into their house and then once we're in, they'll chop us to pieces. Just look at how badly the priests are doing under the "indult" situation.
Our main hope is that we have heard rumors that one of the Society bishops will not deal with the Novus Ordo and will go against the other bishops, if they try to sell the Society out. We're so confused. It's gotten to the point that we can't trust our own leaders to tell us the whole truth and nothing but the truth. We are praying for Archbishop Lefebvre to keep his Society traditional and not sell out to the Novus Ordo people. But we are now looking for other options because we are afraid that we may soon not be able to continue with the Society if it becomes friendly with the Novus Ordo.
I wish the news were better, but I thought that your readers would like to know what some of us have heard and how we feel about it. Thank you for listening.
I caught a snippet of the papal funeral service during the elevation at the Novus Ordo "consecration" of the "cup." It was amazing to me that the celebrant, Newchurch Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, did not genuflect before the elevations (only a quick once after), but cardinals have been genuflecting and kneeling at the bier of JPII all week. One wonders if Ratzinger really felt that he was in the presence of Christ at the "consecration" and during the mass distribution of the "cookie" by an army of Novus Ordo presbyters afterward. Many people, including nuns (!), received the cookie in their filthy hands, ŕ la Novus Ordo.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
It was the same Ratzinger, who broke the solemn rule based on Catholic doctrine that no one gets a eulogy at Mass (well, "service"), not even a pope.
It is a gross presumption for any human being to judge the end of another person. We humans have only very limited sight of the outside. Only God sees the inside. Many people looking externally good may harbor grave sins inside. Take the late President Kennedy (who did not have a eulogy at his traditional Requiem Mass, by the way).
Popes are subject to the most severe judgment of all: "And unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required" (Luke 12:48/DRV). Or, as St. John Chrysostom, put it: "The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops."
And TRADITIO predicts right now that in this Modernist hysteria that has swept up even such a Germanic personality as Ratizinger will very soon produce all sorts of "miracles" so that the Novus Ordo uncritically claims yet another "saint" to add to the Novus Ordo pantheon with the Hindu-tainted Mother Teresa and the avalanche of 481 other "saints" purportedly "canonized" by JPII under very rushed conditions gutted of the usual unquestionable accuracy. This whole process has been so cheapened by the media and popular hysteria that any notion that JPII might be a saint must be shelved for at least 100 years to put enough distance between him and his judges for objectivity.
The funeral for JPII begins Friday with a private traditional ceremony, attended only by high-ranking prelates. The Papal Master of Liturgical Ceremonies, Archbishop Piero Marini, places in the coffin a pouch of monies coined during the pontificate of the dead pope, as well as a metal tube containing a sealed Deed, that is, a short narrative of the life of the pope in Latin. While the coffin is being closed, Psalm 40 is recited: Expectans expectavi Dominum et intendit mihi. Then Archbishop Marini and the dead pope's longtime private secretary, Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz, place a white silk veil over the pope's face before the coffin is closed for the funeral.
The New Order funeral service begins at 08:00 UTC Friday, April 8. The service, to be presided over by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, cardinal deacon of the College of Cardinals, will be performed in red vestments.
During the rite of Final Commendation and Farewell (now isn't that a typically Novus Ordo phrase!), the Sistine choir will chant the Litany of the Saints. One report indicates that the names of saints purportedly canonized by JPII may be added to the traditional list. At that rate, the rites might take well over four hours, since this pope has tried to break the "sainting" record of all his predecessors combined, by adding the grossly-inflated number of 482 names. Since this number was achieved only by violating all the traditional safeguards of his predecessor popes, one can no longer be sure of the factual accuracy of such purported saints because in the foolhardy rush, factual errors might well have been made, bringing about a situation of possible invalidity mentioned by the Church's Principal Theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, ten centuries ago.
The cypress coffin will then be borne by twelve pallbearers through the Door of the Dead down the steps of St. Peter to the Confession below the high altar, where many popes have been buried, including St. Peter. Here the coffin is closed with red bands and sealed with both the papal and Vatican seals. The coffin is placed in a second coffin of zinc, and within a third of walnut. The threefold encoffination is meant to slow down the process of decomposition. This outside casket bears the name in Latin of the pope and his papal coat of arms. This private part of the service is witnessed only by top Vatican prelates. The Camerarius, Eduardo Cardinal Martinez Somalo, performs the rite, concluding with the words: Requiem aeternam dona ei, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei. Then the hymn Salve Regina is sung. [Associated Press.]
It is sad that JPII will not even have the benefit of a real funeral Mass, except for the Traditional Latin Requiems that some traditional Catholic priests have offered for him out of charity. But, then, he lived New Order and passes into eternity marked with the sign of the New Order. In his 15 pages of reflections, read to the cardinals on April 6, he did not request a Traditional Latin Funeral Mass, so, to the end, he was determined to remain not the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, but the Pope of the New Order.
In order to give the one-sided media propaganda coming from Newvatican some balance, we provide here "the other side of the story."
Bernard Cardinal Law, who resigned in disgrace as archbishop of Boston over his personal role in the sex-embezzlement scandal, has been given yet another role of honor. After having been disgraced in Boston, Newvatican gave him a plum, that of being Arch-priest of St. Mary Major Basilica, with a fancy apartment and an expense account. Now, Newvatican has given him a role of honor in the mourning for JPII by designating him to preside over one of the Novus Ordo services celebrated in the pope's memory during the novendiales.
Novus Ordinarians in his former archdiocese immediately protested. One said: "It certainly shows and puts a spotlight on the lack of accountability in the Catholic Church, that the most visible bishop in the clergy sexual abuse crisis has been given these honorary opportunities." Another said: "It rubs salt into the already deep wounds of victims and it allows the best-documented complicit bishop to exploit the pope's death for his own selfish purposes."
Many Boston Catholics had already been upset about the pope's decision to appoint him to the basilica. The post is highly visible; the church is one of four basilicas under direct Vatican jurisdiction. [Associated Press]
JPII's scandalous behavior with respect to Judaism is well known. He prayed in the Roman Synagogue with the Jews for the coming of the Messias. He allowed his doctrinal chief, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, to publish in a papal publication in an approving way the opinion that the Jews could wait for another Messias, a completely heretical notion, which goes against the Catholic Faith and the clear teaching of the Scriptures.
Now we hear that JPII gave a bar-mitzvah boy a menorah and told him to "live out his Jewish heritage to the full" (part of that heritage being the rejection of the Messias). Cardinal Kaspar the Oecumenical Ghost also sent a letter that was "read out in my Orthodox shul," said the boy's father, "on the occasion of my son's recent bar mitzvah, and the rabbi read it as if it were from a rabbi. [CNN]
In 1965, when JPII was still the Bishop of Krakow, he discussed the heresy-tainted Vatican II notion known as "inculturation" with a friend, saying: "Certainly, we will preserve the basic elements, the bread, the wine, but all else will be changed according to local traditions: words, gestures, colors, vestments, chants, architecture, decor." [Quoted from Mon Ami: Karol Wojtyla, written by Malinski and published in France in 1980, p. 220.]
Such a statement associates JPII directly with the Modernist notion. Thus, it should come as no surprise that after the Freemason Hannibal Bugnini, JPII was the individual most responsible for the destruction of the true Mass of the Roman Catholic Church.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
It is truly sickening to see the gross presumption of so many news agencies, none of them Catholic, having a field day in "sainting" the pope. I wanted to provide you and the almost two million TRADITIO participants with some information regarding the Church of the New Springtime and so-called Catholics who care nothing about the Tradition of the Church. All of the following newspaper front-page headlines are from April 4, 2005:
Toronto Sun "World Weeps For 'Saint' " Washington Post "Requiem For 'The Great' " The Wichita Eagle "Serenity Of The Saints" Cleveland Plain-Dealer "Pope Is Called 'The Great'" Philadelphia Daily News "The Greatest Pope" Ottawa Sun "Died With The Serenity Of The Saints" Vancouver Province "John Paul Praised As 'Center Of Civilization of Love'" Dublin Irish Independent "John Paul The Great" London Daily Mirror "John Paul The Great"
The CINO's (Catholics in Name Only) will eat all of this up. These are the same "Catholics" who, according to the latest Associated Press poll, would like to see the next pope desert the Roman Catholic Faith by allowing priests to marry and admitting priestesses.
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Thank God that canonizations are not invariably infallible. So the Principal Theologian of the Church tells us St. Thomas Aquinas. Newchurch has so tampered with the traditionally careful process that used to prevent a "klinker" from slipping through (JPII did away with the Devil's Advocate, did away with most of the miracles, did away with the lengthy time-periods for investigation, etc.) that post-conciliar canonizations can no longer be accepted at face value. For further details, click on FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Beliefs: Canonizations, Post-Conciliar.
The starting date of the conclave to elect the next pope has now been announced as Monday, April 18. This is going to be a long haul, folks. We'll have to keep our noses tightly pinched to get through it!
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Can you tell me what this article entitled "Boost for Superstitious: Sun to Darken on Day of Pope's Funeral: Last Eclipse until 2012" means? What kind of sign is it? Good or bad, what is God saying to us?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Nothing. The article captures the sense well. Only superstitious people will try to make something of it. The problem with trying to "interpret" natural events is that you can make anything of them you wish. Is the Catholic Church in eclipse? Is the Modernist doctrine that JPII pushed now going to go into eclipse? Is the world eclipsed at the death of JPII? Did JPII teach only part of the Catholic Faith (since the solar eclipse is partial)? Was JPII only half a pope? Use your own imagination. We're sure that you can come up with many more.
Moreover, this is not the last partial eclipse of the sun. Such eclipses usually happen a few times a year at various places in the world. It just so happens that this is the last one visible from the continental U.S. until May 20, 2012. Yet, at that, it is not so phenomenal. In most parts of the United States, only a small percentage of the sun's disc will be eclipsed. The greatest coverage, at that only 50%, will be observable in only the southernmost part of the United States, the Florida Keys. There will be no eclipse visible in California, the Rocky Mountain States, and the Northeast, including New York.
If God is trying to tell us something, He certainly isn't working very hard! In fact, another partial solar eclipse will occur on October 3, visible throughout Europe. Moreover, the April 8 eclipse begins at 18:54 UTC, which is over ten hours after the beginning of the papal funeral.
Like good Catholics, we eschew superstition, but as long as we're playing this game, let us mention those so-called "Prophecies of Malachy" (referring to a mediaeval Irish monk, not the Old Testament prophet), a list of 112 short Latin phrases purporting to describe each of the popes beginning with Pope Celestine II (elected in 1143) and concluding with a future pope described in the prophecy as Petrus Romanus, whose pontificate will end in the destruction of the city of Rome and the Last Judgment.
In these "prophecies," the pope associated with JPII was described as "de labore solis." There was a partial solar eclipse on May 18, 1920, when Karol Woytla was born. So, we'll put on our Nostradamus hat and play at interpreting things in the following way. Our Lady of La Salette remarked that in the future "the Church will be in eclipse." Karol Woytla was born in darkness and died in darkness. His reign engineered the eclipse of the Roman Catholic Church. Even his papacy was only a partial one, since he did not perform that dogmatic task that was assigned to him by Vatican Council I:
For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Apostles.
All this just goes to show that we Moderns are just as superstitious as the Ancients. One remembers in this connection the story that the ancient Greek historian Herodotus tells of King Croesus of Lydia (546 B.C.), who asked the god Apollo's oracle at Delphi whether he should invade Persian territory. The reply from the oracle was that if he did invade Persia, a mighty empire would be destroyed. Croesus, thinking he would be victorious, invaded, but it was his own empire that fell to the Persians and was subsequently destroyed. Let that be a lesson to the superstitious!
To add to the expected travesty that this interregnum is bringing the world, let's add the gambling that is going on. According to press reports, the upcoming papal election has been cheapened so far that Las Vegas is taking bets on the identity of the new pope, the name he will choose, his country of origin, and other facets. According to these reports, the lead horse is Tettamanzi, and the lead moniker is John Paul III.
Those of us who have been holding out for the post-Vatican II papacy are going to have our position harder and harder challenged as this "process" goes on under the control of Newchurch. The procedures for the papal election had remained virtually unchanged for a thousand years, so prudent have been their provisions. The post-conciliar popes changed all that. They introduced such serious changes into the traditional process, just as they did in the long-standing process for the canonization of Saints, that many are questioning their legitimacy, even validity.
One example. In 1179, Alexander III ruled that a pope could be elected only by a two-thirds majority of the cardinals. This was a most prudent provision, ensuring that the new pope would have the backing of the vast majority of the cardinals. In 1996 JPII did away with that. After only 21 votes (6 days), the two-thirds requirement is reduced to a simple majority. What's the rush? If a valid election requires a week, a month, even several months, so be it. God is certainly in no hurry!
Another example. The College of Cardinals is supposed to include the most experienced prelates. But just when a member has the most experience, he is cut out of the election. In 1970 Paul VI did that when he deprived cardinals older than eighty years of their right to elect the pope and even to participate in the conclave. When this provision went into effect on January 1, 1971, twenty-five cardinals lost their electoral and conclave rights. The number now is around fifty. This smacks of Franklin Roosevelt's court-packing machinations of the 1930s.
Even the late pope conducted himself often -- we think because of his theatrical background -- like a rock-star figure and sought the limelight of the international press, already much of the general public is asking for another rock-star pope. So be prepared for John Paul George Ringo I!
TRADITIO TIP. If you want to see a visual presentation of what the process of a traditional papal conclave looks like, the 1968 film, Shoes of the Fisherman quite faithfully depicts it. Five years previous, the conclave that elected Paul VI was held. For further details, click on FAQ12: What Films Do You Recommend for Traditional Catholics.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
Who is the most conservative cardinal candidate for the papacy? Who are your top three, and why?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
We refuse to play this game. Frankly, we find it sick. This is not a horse race. This is supposed to be a process, conducted under solemn oath [Testor Christum Dominum, qui iudicaturus est, me eum eligere quem secundum Deum iudico eligi debere], to elect a true pope. Unfortunately, all the Newchurch cardinals are dedicated to the New Order. Whoever the new pope may be, "conservative" or "liberal," he will still be pushing a phony Mess, phony sacraments, and non-Catholic Faith and Morals.
The institutional Church has yet to hit rock bottom, but it's getting closer. Church history tells us that a corrupted Church must hit bottom before it can be restored. So it was in the 12th century, for example, when St. Francis and St. Dominic came on the scene.
Dear Fr. Moderator:
I have read that some two billion entertainment-starved people are set to watch the funeral while world leaders fly in from their busy schedules to make the scene, man.
Apparently this is the big event of the year. There is simply no perspective. It is all disproportionate. The knaves descend like so many locusts, and the fools eat it like cake.
Look, the man presided over the Church while it went into a total free-fall. He refused to restore the Traditional Mass while tinkering with the fringes to make "katholicizm" more palatable to non-Catholics. Perhaps that's why so many world leaders dig him. He was in favor of most "social justice" causes. He even helped put an end to "Kommi Rooshah." But, as a descendant of St. Peter, his job was a simple one: to make more and better Catholics. And as anyone can plainly see, in this he was an abject failure. And that is the truth.
I'm reminded of the old saying that Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
May our Lord have mercy on the soul of John Paul II and us all.
We traditional Catholics have started a maelstrom! Have you noticed how our movement is circulating even to many non-Catholic religions?
There are the traditional Episcopalians, who are on the verge of leaving the Mother Church of England because a U.S. Episcopalian bishop ordained and openly "gay" bishop who is living publicly with his sodomite.
Now traditional Jews are speaking out (sometimes they call themselves "observant.") These are Jews who are at least trying to follow the Mosaic Law. Just as most of those billion or so enumerated by Newchurch as "Catholics" are not Catholics, but members of the New Order Religion, most of those who call themselves Jews are really at best "cultural Jews," or really Zionists, that is, people who make no real effort to follow the Mosaic Law, but simply identify themselves with the politics of Modern Israel. A recent survey showed that only about 17% of those who identify themselves as Jews actually practice any Judaism.
In commenting upon the Terri Schiavo case, traditional Jewish Rabbi Avi Shafran wrote in Jewish World Review:
And that distinction [between the personal opinion of individual Jews and traditional Jewish belief and teaching] is all the more vital in light of something that is occurring with increasing and disturbing frequency: the active misrepresentation, even by ostensible representatives of the Jewish community, of Judaism's teachings on vital issues. Whether through the portrayal of the Torah's attitude toward homosexual relations as flexible; or of its position on intermarriage as tentative; or of its stance on killing the unborn as benign, political correctness in Jewish clothing abounds, and it does violence to the integrity of all Jews' religious heritage.
Reflecting on my fleeting telephone acquaintances makes me want to plead with all the Jewish clergy, columnists, organizations, and pundits who have strong feelings about social issues: Advocate to your hearts' content. Make whatever case you see fit for whatever you feel is the wisest public policy. But please don't mischaracterize our mutual religious tradition. Have the courage, whatever your personal convictions, to show respect for the timeless Torah to which all we Jews are heir.
Sounds just like Novus Ordo "Catholics," doesn't it?
We have finally gotten through a weekend of the most silly malarkey about the deceased pope that could be imagined. The whole matter, which should be surrounded with the most solemn approach, has been cheapened like one of the circus side-shows that Newvatican has staged of late as part of the pope's public audiences.
Where the liberalist press finds these incompetent "talking heads" and "commentators," we can only imagine. On the one hand, we have had paraded before us those who want to make a pope who had dangerously toyed with one heresy after another into a hocus-pocus saint -- and "the Great" to boot! Our vote is for John Paul the Small.
On the other hand, we have had a procession of anti-Catholic bigots, including athiests, lesbians, and "married presbyters" paraded across the television set hawking "gay" presbyters, "gay" marriage, married presbyters, and all the other unCatholic notions that the lunatics of the New Order have constantly been engineering to destroy the Church.
Frankly, we couldn't watch more than five minutes before shutting the boob tube off. From reports, about the only person that seemed to have any voice of reason was former U.S. presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan, who was viciously screamed down on one of the ever-present "talk shows" by two anti-Catholic bigots.
With constant stories making the upcoming papal elections into a sleazy back-room cabal, this 265th transition is far more prurient than the "Year of the Three Popes" (1978) and the death of Pope John XXIII (1963).
We suggest that, to keep your sanity, you imbibe very little of the tube on this one. Remember that by watching these charades, you are according authority to "talking heads" who know nothing about Catholicism. Most of them are athiests, agnostics, or at best "lite" Newchurch personnel.
Yes, Virginia, Newvatican is truly like the circuses they put on. It remains only to find out who the next clown is going to be and put us out of our misery.
One independent traditional Catholic bishop has spoken out in a way that balances the virtual apotheosis of John Paul II by the liberalist press and Newchurch officials. His statement includes the following food for thought, which is much more Catholic than anything that you will hear from the "talking heads."
He has this day passed to his own personal judgment. This day he stands before the Divine Tribunal and must make an accounting of his life and ministry.
I am content in knowing that it is not for me to know [that judgment]; it is not for anyone to know. There are those who have already canonized him, a grave error; and there are those who have consigned him to the flames, another grave error. Rather, the true Catholic prays that God will have mercy on his soul.
This is also a time publicly and clearly to condemn those who clamor "Antichrist" and "Perousia": these false prophets of doom and gloom have again been proven wrong. The nonsense of declaring him the Antichrist and declaring that we are in the end times has been proven completely false.
Remember the Public Broadcasting System series entitled Connections? The host would connect the most disparate discoveries across the millennia. Sometimes the connections were quite unexpected. But in the Newchurch sex-embezzlement scandal, they're quite predictable.
Case in point. Newchurch Monsignor Dale Fusek, a former top official in the Phoenix (Arizona) Newchurch Diocese has resigned amid allegations of sexual crimes. Now here starts the trail of connections.
And of what organization was Fushek the co-founder? Why, none other than that despicable "Life Teen" program, which involves teenagers in the most sacrilegious Novus Ordo "Messes" and who knows what else.
And who pushes the Life Teen program, which undermines true religion among the youth? Why, none other than that Novus Ordo Cable Television Network EWTN.
And who was the bishop in power at the time the alleged crimes were going on? Why, none other than that former Newchurch Bishop of Phoenix, Thomas O' Brien, who was recently convicted of hit-and-run for killing a man, running away, and then trying to cover up his crime.
And who was O'Brien's top aide? Why, none other that Fusek. So we have come full circle in that corrupt Church of the New Order. [Associated Press]
We've said it before, and we'll say it again. The Church of the New Order breeds imbeciles.
According to a CNN poll, 67% of 254 American Novus Ordinarians believe that John Paul II was the best pope the Church has ever had!
Now let's look behind the poll. These are the same Novus Ordinarians who couldn't identify St. Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas or St. Dominic. Do you think that there's a prayer of a chance that they know of Pope Gregory the Great or Pope Leo the Great? Not to speak of Pope St. Pius V or Pope St. Pius X. We thought not.
Who cares what imbeciles think? Yet Modernism would rank every opinion equal to every other. Democracy of the truth. You'd have a better chance at getting the truth if you rolled the dice at Las Vegas!
The body of Pope John Paul II was borne into St. Peter's Basilica for lying in state today, four days before the funeral exequies and entombment in the grotto of the Confession below the high altar, as set by the cardinalatial consistory. Twelve pallbearers, flanked by Swiss Guards in red-plumed helmets, carried the body on a crimson platform through the Bronze Door into the Piazza di San Pietro.
The procession, to the backdrop of clergy chanting the Litany of the Saints, emerged from the Sala Clementina in the Apostolic Palace, where John Paul II had lain in state since Sunday, the day after his death at 84 from septicemia and cardiopulmonary collapse. His body lay in state there Sunday, for prelates, ambassadors, other dignitaries, and members of the papal household. The procession emerged through the Bronze Door of St. Peter's Basilica. Before the procession, the Camerarius, Eduardo Cardinal Martinez Somalo, prayed and blessed the body with holy water.
At least sixty members of the College of Cardinals accompanied the procession, along with bishops and other prelates. The pallbearers paused at the top of the stairs and turned the pope's body to face the crowd briefly before entering. The Camerarius intoned the prescribed prayers in Latin before the public viewing. The body lies in state, dressed in red vestments and a white bishop's miter, his head resting on a stack of gold pillows. A rosary was wound around his hands, and a crozier was tucked under his left forearm. A Swiss Guard stood on either side as diplomats, politicians, and clergy paid their respects at his feet. The body appeared to have been touched up or embalmed overnight. Chief Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said John Paul II would "almost surely" be buried in the tomb where Pope John XXIII lay before he was brought up onto the main floor of the basilica in 2000.
In the meetings Monday in the Bologna Hall of the Apostolic Palace, the cardinals took the oath of secrecy, as prescribed in the process modified by John Paul II in 1996, and made their decisions on the funeral rites. The funeral is being held on the latest day provided under Vatican law. John Paul will be buried immediately after the 08:00 UTC service. Meanwhile, the entrances to St. Peter's Basilica are draped in black bunting, an ancient tradition to indicate mourning.
John Paul II was 58 when he was elected in 1978 as the first non-Italian pope in 455 years. He reigned longer than all but two of his predecessors. He has appointed all but three of the 117 cardinals entitled to attend the conclave to elect the next pope, all but three of whom were appointed by JPII. [Associated Press and other sources]
Don't let the rather traditional rites deceive you. Newvatican officials did not refrain from their heresy-tainted vocabulary. Angelo Cardinal Sodano, one of the reputed papabili preached: "For a quarter century, he brought the Gospel of Christian hope to all the piazzas of the world, teaching all of us that our death is nothing but the passage toward the homeland in the sky. This remark implies grave presumption and the heresy of universal salvation, the same heresy that was inserted into the very words of consecration of the invalid Novus Ordo service. What would Sodano say about all the popes who are likely to be Purgatory -- or Hell?
Sodano also took up the chant (not Gregorian!) of those who are already trying to deify this man, calling him "John Paul the Great." To compare this man to such true "Greats" as Pope St. Gregory I and Pope St. Leo I is ludicrous.
Some TRADITIO participants have asked about the embalming of popes. It is true that the embalming of popes has been traditionally prohibited. However, in recent years, that prohibition has been hedged around. There was a rather difficult situation with Pius XII, when there were (probably for the first time) hot lights for cameras surrounding the bier. Over the few days that the body lay in state, there was visible decomposition. The body turned black, and the nose fell off. Paul VI was only lightly embalmed before his body was put on full display in St. Peter's Basilica during Rome's hot summer, but after two days the body began to decay visibly and had to be injected with more formaldehyde.
If Newvatican won't admit its violations, Associated Press will. In an April 3 article it revealed that members of the Signoracci family have been called in to "preserve the remains" of John XXIII in 1963, Paul VI in 1978, and John Paul I in 1978.
Originally, Newvatican denied that the body John XXIII was embalmed. When his body was displayed before being moved from the grotto up onto the main floor of St. Peter's Basilica in 2000, many people cried, "It's a miracle: he's incorrupt," thinking that he had not been embalmed. But then Signoracci fessed up and said that it was no miracle at all. In fact, John XXIII's body had been given the full treatment; Signoracci had worked on the body all night. Even when the embalmer admitted the truth, however, Newvatican would not admit the truth. Caught with its cassocks down again!
One reason that the Vatican is reluctant to embalm a body is the matter of sainthood. Already Pope John Paul II is being touted for future canonization, and often the body of a candidate for sainthood is exhumed. If the body is found "incorruptible" -- with no noticeable decomposition -- it is sometimes taken as evidence that the person was indeed a Saint. (However, there can be perfectly natural explanations for such occurrences as well.) Embalming the body of a potential Saint might interfere with a judgment about sainthood.
The Camerarius prepares for the pope's burial and the traditional novendiales, the nine days of mourning, which was accorded to Roman citizens from antiquity. So, in death, the pope becomes like any ancient Roman. The exequies are carried out in accordance with the Ordo Exsequiarum Romani Pontificis.
The Camerarius and certain other cardinals now:
Traditionally, the penitentiaries, or priest-confessors of Saint Peter's Basilica, dress the pope in his formal papal vestments for his burial. Two veils of white silk are placed over his face and hands. The pope's body lies in state in St. Peter's Basilica in the Clementine Chapel, which was begun by Michelangelo and completed by Giacomo Della Porta for the Jubilee in 1600.
The Vatican has announced that Johannes Paulus II died at 19:37 UTC this evening. Requiescat in pace. The Roman Catholic Church is now officially in a state of sede vacante, meaning in Latin "the [Apostolic] See being vacant." Certain changes now go into effect in the traditional Sacred Liturgy. The name of the pope is now omitted from the Divine Office, the Holy Mass, and the public Litanies. Historically, states of sede vacante have persisted up to years, although that will probably not be the case on this occasion, although some say that the papacy has been vacant since the Roman schism of 1964.
On November 29, 1268, when Pope Clement IV (1265-1268) died, there began the longest period of interregnum or vacancy of the papal office in the history of the Catholic Church. The cardinals at that time would have assembled in conclave in the city of Viterbo, but through the intrigues of Carol d'Anglio, King of Naples, discord was sown among the members of the Sacred College, and the prospect of any election grew more and more remote. After almost three years, the mayor of Viterbo enclosed the cardinals in a palace, allowing them only strict living rations, until a decision would be made which would give to the Church its visible head. At last, on September 1, 1271, 33 months after the vacancy occurred, Pope Gregory X was elected to the Chair of Peter.
During this long period of vacancy of the Apostolic See, vacancies also occurred in many dioceses through the world. In order that the priests and faithful be not left without a spiritual shepherd, bishops were elected and consecrated to fill the vacant sees without any papal approval. It was understood that this was an emergency situation, and, as St. Thomas Aquinas had stated: "Necessitatem legem non habet" (Summa Theologica, IIIa, Qu. 80, A. 8; III Suppl., Qu. 8, A. 6). There were accomplished during this time twenty-one known elections and consecrations in various countries. The most important aspect of this historical precedent is that all these consecrations of bishops were ratified by Pope Gregory X, who consequently affirmed the lawfulness of such consecrations, even though no pope had approved of them in advance.
Other lengthy periods of sede vacante have included:
To paraphrase President Nixon, all Catholics are sede-vacantists now. No problem. It has happened 264 times before in the history of the Church, and the Church has always survived.
Saturday has arrived in Rome. The pope still lingers at death's door, but already we have the first of what will be many Newchurch officials playing God and apotheosizing JPII. "This evening or this night, Christ opens the door to the pope," Archbishop Angelo Comastri, vicar general for Vatican City, told a crowd at St. Peter's Square.
Let us state once again the Catholic doctrine that no one -- no cardinal, no bishop, no priest, no layman -- can state whether any individual (except for validly canonized saints) is in Heaven, Purgatory, or Hell. Newchurch has adopted white vestments for its funerals and teaches, de facto, the heresy of universal salvation.
When JPII passes, he may very well be consigned not to Christ, but to Satan. After all, the Great Doctor of the Church, St. John Chrysostom, taught: "The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of rotten bishops." If that is true of mere bishops, it is even truer of the Bishops of Rome. Of the 260-odd popes in the history of the Church, one might well conclude that not an insignificant number inhabit the Lower Regions. Dante Alighieri, a Tertiary of the Order of St. Francis, who wrote one of the most influential books showing popes in Hell and whose work was praised by several popes, certainly thought so.
The Church has always believed that, in the common parlance, "the higher they are, the lower they fall." Popes are higher, therefore the most subject to fall. That is why the Church prays so much for them. JPII might have been a "nice guy," but that is not the criterion for admission to Heaven. Christ Himself was not a "nice guy" in the modern parlance. He talked about using the sword, He called the Church leaders of his time "hypocrites," He refused to see His mother and relatives on one occasion because He had more important things to do.
Under this pope the state of the Church has fallen to its lowest spiritual ebb, at least in many, many centuries. The vast majority of Novus Ordinarians have no Mass. The Sacraments have been corrupted, in many cases to invalidity. The morality of the clergy is a cesspool. Many of the bishops of the Church are thieves, liars, embezzlers, and fornicators. Their sins cry to Heaven for vengeance.
Attendance at the counterfeit service is down to 5% in most European countries, hardly 15% in the United States. Great religious orders such as the Dominicans, Franciscans, Salesians, etc., may well be defunct by the next generation, so few are their postulants. Newchurch seminarians are down in single digits. And this pope was the head of it all -- not just for a few years, like other popes, for 26 long years!
Will Pope St. Pius V, who canonized the Mass of St. Peter, welcome such a successor, who destroyed that Mass? Will Pope St. Pius X, who routed the heresy of Modernism from the Church, welcome such a successor, who established Modernism once again in the Church? Will JPII's pain and suffering be sufficient to wipe away from himself all temporal (or eternal) punishment? No human being can say. No one should be so presumptuous as to say, as then he would be playing God and sinning gravely against the First Commandment.
There are some unofficial reports this hour that the Church has entered a state of Sede Vacante with the death of the pope. Then there are the official denials. This is a common situation when a pope is dying, exacerbated by the 24/7 electronic news climate that has grown even since the accession of this pope. Also, the official determination must be made of the papal death before any public announcement can be made.
The head of the Sacred College of Cardinals, the Camerarius (Italian, Camerlengo), a term coming from the Latin meaning chamberlain, verifies the death. The Camerarius since 1993 has been Eduardo Cardinal Martinez Somalo. Standing over the deceased, he strikes the forehead of the pontiff thrice with a small silver hammer anciently used for the purpose and thrice calls him by his name in Latin, the baptismal name that was pronounced by the priest those 84 years ago: Carole. Carole. Carole. After this, having heard no response, he proclaims the formula: Vere Papa mortuus est.
If he receives no response, he announces the death and smashes with a hammer the Pescatorio, or Fisherman's ring, a gold signet ring with the name of the Pontiff engraved in Latin around the circumference and the figure of Saint Peter casting his net from a fisherman's boat engraved in the center. This ring, more than any other single item, signifies the Papal authority. Its destruction by the Camerarius signifies that, for the time being, there is no such authority. The Camerarius also destroys the leaden papal seals, with which official Papal Bulls are sealed in wax (the term bull in fact comes from the Latin word bulla, meaning seal. The use of a seal ring is an ancient custom in Rome and was used by the Roman emperors starting with Augustus. In this way, no documents can be falsified with the pontiff's seal.
Then the Camerarius closes the bronze doors of St. Peter's Basilica and orders the great bell of St. Peter's Basilica to toll the death-knell. Thence all the bells throughout the Eternal City take up the death-knell.
Newvatican continues to deceive the public. What sane person could believe the following report from today's wire services: "VATICAN CITY - Pope John Paul II suffered heart failure and was in 'very grave' condition today, but he was lucid and spent the morning celebrating Mass."
Celebrating Mass (they meant the Protestant-Masonic Novus Ordo service, of course)! The man is suffering systemic shock from septicemia. He is in renal failure. He is receiving highly-potent antibiotics. His heart is going into congestive failure. He is in severe respiratory compromise. He has a fever of around 40 degrees Celsius. He has lost 20 kilograms in just the last few weeks. He's lying flat on his back in a Vatican infirmary. And he celebrated Mass this morning, they say. The press must truly think that the public is an idiot!
Moreover, Newvatican has announced that JPII has today appointed 17 new bishops and archbishops and accepted the resignation of six others today. And who moved his hand across the paper? Historically, the last weeks, days, and hours of a papacy have involved a number of shenanigans. It was the same with the Roman emperors. It is said that Caligula, after suffocating Tiberius with a pillow, stole the signet ring off his finger and announced that Tiberius had appointed him the next emperor!
This Newchurch bishop fights back! Fred Henry, of Calgary, claims that he is the victim of an attempt to muzzle him. Not only did he preach against "gay marriage," but said that he'd consider excommunicating Prime Minister Paul Martin over his government's plan to legalize "gay marriage." Henry's letter finishes by stating that the "state must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good."
Canada is not like the United States. It has recently deprived its citizens of free speech. Now Canadians, including clergy, have to weigh every word they utter so that it doesn't "offend" someone. What's next in Canada? Human-rights hearings when a murder is called a murderer?
The controversial bill will be voted on in less than two weeks in the Canadian parliament. "I think I'm owed an apology for putting me through this rigmarole of harassment and intimidation and attempt to silence me," Henry said. Good for you, Henry. Would that the American bishops had your guts!
The gay-lesbian complainants took umbrage about the fact that, according to Catholic teaching, Henry grouped homosexuality with adultery, prostitution, and pornography as forces that "undermine the foundations of the family." Well, don't they? It seems that the gay-lesbians have fallen into human-rights violations themselves. They have engaged in hate speech, Henry says, when they called him a "fascist."
When asked to "apologize," Henry refused. "I stand by the letter, I wouldn't change one comma, one iota of that letter." [Calgary Herald]
Dear Fr. Moderator:
A relative has invited me to the blessing of his "gay" relationship to be conducted in a Protestant church by a Protestant minister. My relative is a non-practicing Catholic, and his paramour, I think, attends a Novus Ordo church. I rashly said that I would attend, not wishing to offend. Would it be sinful to attend such a service (without participating in any Protestant religious worship and not agreeing with "gay marriage")?
Fr. Moderator Replies.
Certainly you know the answer to your question! Yes, it was rash and would be gravely sinful. Why, if you don't agree with "gay marriage" would you to go a "gay marriage"?! You should not worry so much about "not offending" people. Our Lord was not worried about offending people. He told the truth and let the chips fall where they might.
You should be polite, but direct. "I'm sorry. I believe what you're doing to be immoral and cannot lend my presence to it." By playing into this immorality, you would be helping others to commit grave sin. After all, the disapproval of relatives and society for immoral action is one of the ways that such action is discouraged from spreading.
Terri Schiavo has been murdered. This courageous woman fought her murderers for 14 days. Now everyone can get back to his daily business.
One of those who lent support to the family, in a charitable and discreet way, was traditional Catholic producer-director-actor Mel Gibson. In a radio interview with Sean Hannity within 24 hours of her death, Gibson did not pull any punches about the grave sickness in society that led to the murder of this innocent woman.
It was clear that Gibson was weighing his words carefully for a national radio audience, but his traditional Catholicism shone through. Twice he publicly criticized Newchurch Bishop Robert Lynch of St. Petersburg for doing nothing in the Schiavo case (remember that the Schindler-Schiavos are Novus Ordinarians, and Lynch is their bishop), but instead fleeing the country. Gibson refused to call him "Catholic." Instead, he simply referred to the Novus Ordinarians as a "faith community." That charge was too hot for Hannity, presumably a Novus Ordinarian himself, to handle -- he glossed right over it.
The Florida Catholic Bishops' conference had stated plainly that Schiavo's means of receiving food and water did not constitute "extraordinary" means of preserving her life, but was a simple requirement of ordinary care. You Novus Ordinarians need to be very careful about this. It may be that JPII will shortly be in the same situation. Are you going to starve him to death too?
Lynch never raised his voice like a Jeremias to condemn those who would starve to death an innocent woman. Instead, he was concerned about the estrangement of the husband from the parents, albeit husband Michael Schiavo abandoned his wife and took up adulterous liaisons with two mistresses, with whom he sired two illegitimate children and campaigned to end Terri's life by starving her to death. Lynch likewise took no action when the philandering husband refused to allow his wife visits from a Novus Ordo presbyter and to receive the Novus Ordo sakraments. If you wish to express your outrage to Lynch and call him the fraud of a bishop he is, you can E-mail the Least Reverend Lynch.
Now the picture starts to fill in on this fraud of a bishop. In 2002 he was charged by his diocesan spokesman with "sexual harrassment." Lynch hand-picked his diocesan lawyer, Joe DiVito, to investigate. Naturally, DiVito blew off the charge as "unfounded." (Thousands of deflowered Catholic youth and their parents now understand how that works in the Church of the New Order.)
Lynch is also the man who ran Jesus Christ out of town. As of September 1, 2000, this Newchurch bishop of St. Petersburg "ordered the cessation of the regular exposition of the Blessed Sacrament for adoration by the faithful." (Of course, we know that it is the Novus Ordo cookie, not the Blessed Sacrament, but the poor Novus Ordinarians are too daft to understand that.) Lynch shut down all chapels of perpetual "eucharistic" adoration and exposing the "eucharistic cookie" solemnly for adoration.
No wonder Terri Schiavo was treated in such a godless way. Her Newchurch bishop is godless. If the poor woman had been given the therapy that several physicians, including a nominee for a Nobel-prize for restoring just such individuals, said would restore her, she might have realized that Lynch was a fraud and become a traditional Catholic.
The latest information, revealed by Mel Gibson on national radio, is that Lynch has become so hated in the diocese for his involvement by inaction in the murder of Terri Schiavo that he has fled the United States and is hiding out abroad until the controversy dies down. You Novus Ordinarians of St. Petersburg ought to act like the gutsy Romans of the early Church, seek him out, and throw him into the nearest river to thrash for his very life. And don't give him any food! Let him drink salt water, as Our Lord had to drink vinegar. If you tolerate such a fraud as your bishop, you can't complain to God about the loss of your Church and your faith.
It is the fantasy of Novus Ordo "conservatives" that a new pope can "fix" all the problems in the Church. That he can "fix" the theology, "fix" the service, "fix" the morality.
Dream on! Vatican II and its popes have gutted the papacy, which has now been turned into a mere "oecumenical" phantasm. One recalls that in the history of the papacy, when elections were hotly contested by rival factions in the ninth century, Pope Stephen had the body of Pope Formosus, his second-to-last predecessor, dug up from his grave, vested in papal robes, seated on a throne, formally placed on trial before the Roman Synod, and then unceremoniously thrown into the Tiber River. So much for showing "respect" to errant popes! (As long as we are delving into papal history here, remember that Boniface VI, Stephen's immediate predecessor, was an excommunicated priest. So, there is hope for those traditional bishops yet!)
Even if some candidate of the caliber of a Pope St. Pius X were to accede, as anyone who knows how organizations work can attest, his inferiors would nix any traditional moves. This is already what is happening since Vatican II. Even the pretended "abuses" in the Novus Ordo service that JPII supposedly wants to fix can't be fixed because the bishops and cardinals don't want to fix them. So, they block, just as the Democrats in the U.S. Congress block conservative judicial appointees.
It is becoming clearer and clear that the way to restore fully the true Church is to destroy the New Order. It can't be "fixed." One recalls the great Cato, a traditionalist in the Roman senate, much in the minority there, who ended every one of his speeches with the famous words: "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam." Day after day, speech after speech, these words rang in the ears of the Roman senators. Finally, Cato, the minority traditionalist, prevailed. Rome did destroy Carthage to dust.
So that those Novus Ordo "conservatives" won't be so sanguine about the post-conciliar papacy "fixing" anything, here is the programme announced by a leading papal candidate, Oscar Andres Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga, of Honduras, for the next papacy. "When the Sacred College of Cardinals names me pope, I'm gonna shake things up," Maradiaga said. "And I'm not just talking about giving the popemobile a new coat of paint. I'm talking about big moves...." And what are these moves? [Canadian Free Press]
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of Maradiaga is the fact that he was never ordained as a priest, but only as a presbyter, in 1970 in the Novus Ordo. Therefore, many of the tens of millions of traditional Catholics around the world will not accept him as a priest, let alone as Bishop of Rome (or does he really want to be Bishop of Barcelona?), and therefore not pope. What a sticky wicket that is going to be for the Society of St. Pius X!
Yes, the New Order must be completely abandoned destroyed. Just as Rome destroyed Carthage and sowed its fields with salt so that it could never rise again. This time in the Church is not one for "negotiations," "compromises," and "indults." It is a time for war, a time to fight the good fight like a St. Paul.
Doesn't it get tiresome when so many supposedly "Catholic" leaders talk about "life" and against the "culture of death," but are nowhere to be found when the time comes to act up for principle? Now we have the case of Terri Schiavo, a woman legally innocent of any crime and having a right to life. Let us look for those spokesmen "for life" to see where they stand.
JPII, supposedly the "Life Pope," although he found the ability to write several self-focused letters to be read during Holy Week and Easter, has not picked up the pen to weigh in on Terri Schiavo's life. Then we have JPII's supposed Doctrinal Czar, Ratzinger, who has remained silent. And now the officials that should be most involved: the U.S. [Newchurch] Bishops Conference. Aren't they great "pro-lifers"? They meet twice a year on trivia. Where is the special meeting on life? Where are the officers? Where is the Great "Conservative" God Bruskewitz? Fighting at Pinellas Park, Florida? Not on your life!
Every one of them has run away, just like the apostles (bishops) at the taking of Our Lord in the Garden of Gethsemani. They have been put to shame by the President and the Congress, who, in a rather miraculous way, came together on this issue, both Democrats and Republicans, and passed a bill that that the lawless federal courts simply ignored.
It was the clear intent of Congress that the Schiavo case be addressed de novo, that is, starting from scratch, not relying on the bias of the Florida state court judge. But the federal courts have violated the law and refuse to consider rather strong evidence that the philandering husband, who has gone on to have two mistresses and two illegitimate children, might have a financial interest in killing his wife.
While Newchurch bishops, including the Novus Ordo conservative's Bishop-God Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska, have done nothing to prevent the cruel death of Schiavo by starvation and dehydration (condemned from the grave by Pope Pius XII), to make everyone feel good, neo-Nazi doctors are shooting Schiavo full of morphine.
In all truth, however, we have to commend one man of the cloth. He is not Newchurch; he is not Catholic. He is not one that you would expect, not one that you probably even like much: Jesse Jackson. Schiavo's parents, who are getting no support from their Newchurch clergy, invited Rev. Jesse Jackson, who prayed with the parents and joined conservatives in calling for state lawmakers to order her feeding tube reinserted. Jackson's arrival was greeted by some applause and cries of "This is about civil rights!" Indeed it is. A civil right enshrined in our Declaration of Independence: life.
Can you hear a Newchurch bishop saying the following? "I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips," Jackson said. "This is a moral issue and it transcends politics and family disputes." We can't.
Jackson swung into action and telephoned Black legislators in a last-ditch effort to bring back a bill that would prohibit severely brain-damaged patients from being denied food and water if they didn't express their wishes in writing. Meanwhile, JPII sits watching television and writes Dear John letters to his fan club.
Moreover, Jackson had the guts to approach the twice-adulterous husband for permission to visit the dying woman and was refused. So this Bad Thief denies a human being's right to clergy in her dying hours.
Admittedly, Jackson is not a great favorite of ours. He too has been caught in adultery. He too has an illegitimate child. He pushes self-serving political causes. But the truth is the truth. In this case, Jackson had acted for life over murder while Newchurch bishops have sat on their hands (even though Schiavo's parents are Newchurch).
The Church of the New Order has once again been exposed as a counterfeit. It can in no way be justified -- not its leaders, not its Mess, not its Sakruments, not its Doktrine. It should be totally ignored and left to die the death of abandonment that it supports for Terri Schiavo.
Return to Commentaries from the Mailbox.