For answers to many questions, consult the Official Traditional Catholic Directory, Listing All Traditional Latin Masses and Traditional Resources for the United States and Canada (11th Annual Edition - 2006). To order the full 147-page paperback edition, click on the button below:
For information about the protocol for sending messages to the Fathers, see Ask the Fathers.
|If you wish to support the work of TRADITIO, click on the box to the left to made a donation easily, securely, and confidentially by bank account or credit card through PayPal. Regular contributors become Benefactors of TRADITIO, and their intentions are specially commemorated at Traditional Latin Masses offered. Indicate in the Message section of your payment "For TRADITIO." For other methods, see FAQ01: How Do I Help to Offset Expenses?|
Pity those poor Newchurchers. Not only do they have to learn a New Order, but every few years a New New Order is fabricated. One Latin version has served for the true Roman Catholic Mass for two millennia, but three major versions of the New Order have appeared within the space of just forty years (1969, 1975, 2000). And then there's the language problem. One Latin version is simple, but it appears that vulgar tongues just doesn't work. No wonder that the calls are growing louder and louder for rescinding Vatican II!
Among the phrases that the Anglophone Newchurch bishops can't agree how to "translate" are Et cum spiritu tuo, Dominus Deus Sabaoth in the Sanctus, and Domine, non sum dignus. The translation of the New New New Order (2000) has already taken six years, and it is estimated that it will take at least two more years. And the minimal texts that the bishops are to vote on this June do not even include the prefaces, solemn blessings, prayers over the people, or elements found in the appendix that also form part of the New New New Order. [CNS]
Perhaps the Newchurch bishops should go back and relearn Latin! At present they certainly seem incompetent in the Roman tongue.
Now that the Da Vinci Code has been released, does it merit all of the hullabaloo from "conservative" Newchurchers?
The Fathers Reply.
"Conservative" Newchurchers are missing the point that this movie is clearly intended as a work a fiction, in which in fact the Christian message is, if anything, subtantiated by literary devices. Leigh Teabing (played by Ian McKellen), who proposes the Christ-Magdalen marriage ends up at the end of the film madly jabbering his crazy notions as the police haul him away to jail. Prof. Robert Langdon (played by Tom Hanks) frequently objects vocally to Teabing's historical fantasies. Teabing is portrayed as a cripple, in a fictional technique called expressionism, to indicate that Teabing's ideas are "crippled."
As we said previously, the Da Vinci Code is a fictional mystery story, which would have gotten relatively little publicity if the "conservative" Newchurchers had kept silent, instead of making themselves look crazier than Teabing. If they want a worthy crusade, let them work to get rid of their sex-criminal bishops and presbyters and to throw out the invalid Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan worship service. With that, they can have success. They certainly won't be successful tilting at fictional windmills!
The Apostolic Deposit of Faith is a broad term. Does it mean Tradition and Scripture? I hear the term "Supreme Magisterium," and it seems to imply that this authority can break with Scripture and Tradition? Is that correct?
The Fathers Reply.
No, that is not correct. The notion that you are describing is technically known as the heresy of "papolatry." The term "Apostolic Deposit of Faith" is not a broad term. It is quite specific: the Public Revelation of Our Lord Jesus Christ, dogmatically defined as consisting of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.
The term "magisterium" is quite specific as well. As dogmatically defined by Vatican I, the magisterium (which refers to the "teaching authority" of the Church; the word does not refer specifically to a person) must accord with that Deposit of Faith and has no authority to innovate up it. If it does so, the teaching of the Church is clear: such innovation is null and void, and the pope involved comes under the odor of heresy.
The "supreme magisterium" may be supreme, but it is not absolute or unconditional, any more than the President of the United States as "supreme commander" can violate the U.S. Constitution, to which he has taken an oath, just as the traditional papal oath taken by a pope, as contained in the Liber Diurnus Romanorum Pontificum, one of the oldest collections of papal texts, privileges, and decrees similarly provides:
I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein. To the contrary, with glowing affection as her truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passed-on good, with my whole strength and utmost effort. To cleanse all that is in contradiction to the canonical order, should such appear. To guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes as if they were the Divine ordinances of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, whose place I take through the Grace of God, whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to the severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I shall confess. I swear to God Almighty and the Savior Jesus Christ that I will keep whatever has been revealed through Christ and His Successors and whatever the first councils and my predecessors have defined and declared. I will keep without sacrifice to itself the discipline and the rite of the Church. I will put outside the Church whoever dares to go against this oath, may it be somebody else or I.
For further information, see POPELIM.TXT: Limitations of Papal Authority to Change Sacred Tradition, From the Writings of Roman Catholic Popes, Councils, Saints, and Theologians in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics).
The Newchurch archdiocese of Melbourne has accepted as "substantially true" a victim's statement that a presbyter took part in Satanic rituals in which a number of people were murdered. The archdiocese's independent sex-crime investigator described the details of the ritualized murders and sexual abuse provided by the victim as "extraordinary, but I have no reason or justification for doubting his credibility."
The murders were brought to light by a childhood victim of repeated sexual and physical attacks of a Satanic nature. The victim, who was a witness to the murders, said that he had decided to speak out following publicity surrounding the recent trial in the United States of Presbyter Gerald Robinson, who was found guilty of the ritualized murder of a nun. The Robinson story was carried on the TRADITIO Network in a previous Commentary from the Mailbox.
The victim gave details of at least three deaths: a young woman, a young man, and a young child, which occurred during Satanic rituals over a number of years. Two victims had their throats cuts, and a third was killed with an axe. The bodies were mutilated and partly dismembered after the killings. In his sworn statement the victim says the victims appeared to have been drugged before being killed. In addition to human beings, the presbyter also killed animals, including cats, during his rituals. In describing the presbyter's Satanic rituals, some of which took place on Newchurch property in Sandringham on the site where the new Sacred Heart Church now stands, the victim stated:
I remember being told loudly and forcibly that God is evil and Satan is good and Satan is more powerful. On another occasion I was told that good is evil and evil is good and that Satan is all powerful and has control over the earth, and that I am evil and that is good. [News Australia]
Catholic parents, if you are concerned about the welfare of your children, you should keep them out of the Newchurch environment. There have been too many confirmed reports around the world that not insignificant numbers of Newchurch presbyters are involved in Satanism. Incredible as it sounds, Satanism in Newchurch is a real threat. Also, you should warn your children against the use of drugs. In addition to all the other reasons against their use, your children should be warned that they might be hauled off to be used as victims in Satanic ritual!
It is not only Catholic theology, the Catholic Mass and Sacraments, and Catholic morality that Newchurch seeks to replace, but Catholic art and music. In addition to all its other unCatholic faults, Newchurch is composed of cultural barbarians, who have no real affinity for the classical Roman culture of their predecessors.
About a decade after the New Order service was imposed on Newchurch, an international meeting of Church musicians admitted that the Novus Ordo had essentially destroyed the composition of Catholic sacred music. Why should an eminent composer such as Beethoven write a Missa Solemnis when the camp song Kumbaya is suited to the Novus Ordo?
Our Catholic predecessors, infused with the true religion, built monuments to their faith like Chartres cathedral, an edifice that some equated to the great pyramids of Egypt. Even in the 19th and early 20th centuries, great neo-Gothic cathedrals were built, such as St. Patrick's in New York City. But no more.
Pictured above is the Novus Ordo temple that will be built in Malta, a crossroads of the Catholic Crusades. It is only in charity that the building can be called even a temple. It looks more like a broken-down sewage-pipe junction. The architect admits that when he designed the building, he had in mind the "turbulence and difficulties being encountered today by the Catholic [sic] Church itself as an institution." [Times of Malta]
Well, on second thought, maybe the temple has caught the essence of Novus Ordo paganism!
When JPII was the first pope ever to approve the construction of an Islamic mosque in supposedly "Catholic" Rome, worldwide objections were sounded. Now, a mosque is proposed for Tuscany, between Florence and Siena, and Italians are again resisting.
Although Italy does not yet recognize Mohammedanism as an official religion, there are more than 500 Islamic centers in the country. Tuscans are objecting to the mayor's gift of land, without local approval, for a new mosque in Colle di Val d'Elsa. The town council had refused calls for a referendum on the mosque's construction. "Those of us who live here are really afraid," said one Tuscan.
If one believed the newspapers, one would think that sex crimes by clergy were a specific failing of the Catholic Church. Of course, we know first of all that Newchurch clergy are not Catholic; rather, they are officers of the Church of the New Order. It is that New Order, which is certainly not restricted to Newchurch, from which the rampant criminality has derived. Rarely is the other side reported: that equal proportions of such crimes are going on in other sects, particularly those that are of the New Order.
Philip Jenkins, in a 2001 Pennsylvania State University study, concludes that such crimes are just as rampant in other in any denomination or organization dealing with children. This conclusion seems to be confirmed in statistics by the Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault, which documents some 500 cases of sex crimes by rabbis and synagogue officials, most of whom are members of the Reform sect of Judaism, the "New Order" sect of Judaism.
A farewell message that the "indult" priest at my Newchurch parish had resigned from the Fraternity of St. Peter to join the New Order full time appeared in the parish bulletin on May 21. The message confirmed the rumors that had been circulating here for months and that neither the individual nor the diocese had the honesty to confirm until three months after the fact!
This is absolutely disgusting. I have had my doubts about this particular priest for some time but this was the last straw. It proves that the "indult" and the FSSP is just another option in the Newchurch cafeteria. I am now seeking out an independent chapel.
The Fathers Reply.
According to the May 21 bulletin of the Holy Rosary Church in Indianapolis, the "indult" priest who was celebrating the Modernized Mass of 1962 at that parish under the auspices of the "indult" Fraternity of St. Peter, has resigned from the Fraternity to become a full-blown member of the New Order. Until his resignation from the FSSP, this "indult" priest had held the record for the longest assignment of any priest of the Fraternity of St. Peter in North America (seven years). In the parish bulletin he wrote:
Some of you have been hearing rumors that I have left the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and joined the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, and I confirm that those rumors are true. My superior, Fr. Arnaud Devillers, FSSP, released me to the archdiocese at my request on February 22....
I have never refused to celebrate the new rite of Mass [sic] when I've been asked to. As far as I am concerned, I was ordained for the service of the entire [New]Church, and not just for those who share my own liturgical preferences. As long as I can celebrate the Mass [sic] with dignity and reverence, in complete fidelity to the directives of the [New]Church, I am happy. The Sacred Liturgy, we must always remember, is not our personal possession. The liturgy is the property of the entire Church, and so must be subject to the Church's regulations.
We can give the now-presbyter credit for honesty. From his pen we learn that any notion that the Fraternity of St. Peter is "exclusively" 1962 (let alone really traditional) is a sham. You can be darn sure, by Jove, that this "indult" celebrant is not the only one in the Fraternity that is "double-dipping" into the invalid Novus Ordo Mess.
And how did this now-presbyter learn the Novus Ordo service? As reports have it, it is being taught at the FSSP seminary at Denton under the tutelage of Fabian "Phony" Bruskewitz, a Newchurch bishop who purports to be "friendly" to the Modernized Mass of 1962, but is equally friendly to Freemasons and Protestant Methodists, whom he invited to conduct their "consecration" of a bishop in his Newchurch cathedral.
What kind of Sacramental theology are they teaching at the FSSP seminaries at Wiegratzbad and Denton?! The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not some matter of "Church regulations." The Traditional Mass "in all its essentials was passed on by St. Peter, the first pope, to the Church. The Apostles themselves, according to St. Ambrose, worked at its elaboration. It reached its complete perfection with Popes St. Damasus (fourth century) and St. Gregory the Great (sixth century).... This Mass is the most venerable in all Christendom, with a history of unbroken use far longer than that of any Eastern rite, there being no doubt that the essential parts of the Mass are of Apostolic origin" (Fortescue).
If the form of the Mass is matter of mere ecclesiastical "regulation," then how does the FSSP explain away the regulation by a Saint-Pope, Pius V, that the Traditional Latin Mass was of obligation "in perpetuity"? Do they fall into the unCatholic notion that one pope can "outtrump" another and change the Catholic and Apostolic Mass to some Protestant-Masonic-Pagan vestige, the flagship "liturgy" of a self-proclaimed "New Order"? Ridiculous!
This "indultarian" is a product of the FSSP seminary, and this is how he has come to look at the New Order: with enthusiastic acceptance. In this he speaks for a large percentage of "indult" clergy. This is what some twenty years of Newchurch's "indult" environment produces: enthusiastic Newchurch clergy.
Just more proof that so-called "Catholic" universities are far from Catholic: the Law School of Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, which proclaims that it is "in the mainstream of American Catholic higher education," has hired Circuit Court Judge George Greer, the judge who thumbed his nose at Congress and the President of the United States to sentence Terri Schiavo to a painful 13-day starvation and dehydration death. Terri's estranged husband used Greer to order Terri's death, even though she showed signs of intellect, and her parents were willing to assume complete responsibility for caring for her.
Greer will serve on the faculty of the inaugural "Journalist Law School" at Loyola, a three-day-long intensive seminar for reporters who write on the government, the courts, and individual court cases. While he's there, Greer will instruct 34 journalists from print and electronic media, including reporters, columnists, producers, and investigative reporters. Several mainstream media outlets are planning to send staff for tutelage from Judge Greer, including CNN, CBS News, ABC News Radio, Bloomberg WNBC, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Philadelphia Daily News and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Terri Schiavo's brother said: "Our family publicly stated for years that Judge Greer has a pro-euthanasia, pro-death bias, which tempered his decisions in my sister's case and caused him to unethically, immorally and illegally ordered her to die. How can any citizens of Florida have confidence that Judge Greer will remain unbiased now that he is on the speaking circuit justifying the killing of an innocent, disabled woman without any proof of her consent?" Schindler said Greer's public speaking "makes a mockery of the entire judicial system" and "certainly shows his bias against the disabled."
Greer's appearance at Loyola is sponsored by the chapters of the American Board of Trial Advocates, which awarded Judge Greer with the Jurist of the Year Award last year for his decision to allow Terri's former husband to take her life.
"Yesterday in France it was the crucifix; today it is the sword. Yesterday there was peace in the vineyards and harvest; today there is war and another kind of harvest, and in the "gathering-in" time, a new kind of soldier is playing his part: the priests, who from the countless corners of the world have come to lay their lives, if need be, at the shrine of the France they love. The cloth habit has given place to the uniform of the tirailleur, the cowl to the steel helmet of the cuirassier. From the quiet places of the world, these once peaceful ministers of God have come, twenty thousand of them." [Crusaders And Cuirassiers: France's Twenty Thousand Fighting Priests, May 15, 1915]
Today, traditional Catholic priests return to the trenches to continue to offer not the invalid Novus Ordo fake, but the Catholic and Apostolic Traditional Latin Mass. Courageously, like the persecuted Christians under Roman dominion, they defy "the powers that be" to remain faithful to their Anti-modernist Oath at ordination, turning hotel rooms, meeting halls, converted houses, and even pagan temples into Houses of God, by necessity, in obedience to the Supreme Canon Law of Catholicism: salus animarum suprema est lex [the salvation of souls is the supreme law].
Who has lost and who has won in the struggle -- the one who keeps the buildings or the one who keeps the Faith? The Faith obviously. That therefore the ordinances which have been preserved in the churches from old time until now may not be lost in our days..., rouse yourselves, brethren..., seeing them now seized upon by aliens. --St. Basil the Great, Father and Doctor of the Church
Your readers should be aware that yoga is a Hindu (pagan) spiritual discipline which attempts to unite one with the divine within oneself and unite one with all of creation through breathing, physical exercises, concentration, etc. The idea that the divine is to be sought for and found within oneself is, of course, occultic. The idea that the divine permeates all of creation -- the idea upon which the practice of yoga is based and toward which it is geared -- is pantheism, reprobated by Vatican I and other councils and teachings of the Church:
The holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church believes and confesses that there is one, true, living God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth... Who, although He is one, singular, altogether simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, must be proclaimed distinct in reality and essence from the world... [Constitutio Dogmatica de Fide Catholic, Sess. III, Cap. i]
God is distinct in reality and essence from His creation. Pantheism teaches that God and the universe are one. It seems that JPII fell into this error (or at least taught ambiguously):
The "first-born of all creation," becoming incarnate in the individual humanity of Christ, unites himself in some way with the entire reality of man, which is also "flesh" -- and in this reality with all "flesh," with the whole of creation [Dominum et Vivificantem, May 18, 1986, para. 50.3]
Thus, not only has Christ united Himself with every man, JPII says, but with the "entire visible and material world." Thus, according to JPII, the grass, trees, rivers, lakes, oceans, etc., were all united with Christ by virtue of the Incarnation. His statements sound remarkably like pantheism and led to a "divinization" of the material world, the "Gaia" belief of the New Agers that the material world lives and has a soul, and to environmental radicalism, in which trees and whales have more rights that human babies.
Since the practice of yoga is based on the idea of union with the divine within oneself and within all of creation, the practice of yoga is therefore an expression of belief in the condemned pantheistic heresy that God and His creation are a single thing. Practicing yoga, therefore, is practicing a false religion and expressing belief in a false god.
The practice of yoga is pagan at best, and occult at worst.... For the first time in history, it is being widely practiced throughout the Western world and America. It is ridiculous that even yogi masters wearing a cross or a Christian symbol deceive people by saying that yoga has nothing to do with Hinduism and say that it is only accepting other cultures. Some have masked yoga with Christian gestures and call it "Christian yoga." Here it is not a question of accepting the culture of other people; it is a question of accepting another religion.
Given the errors of Newchurch in trying to incorporate Protestantism, Masonism, and paganism into its beliefs, rites, and practices, it is no surprise that yoga is rampant in many Newchurch temple-centers. For further information about yoga, see FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs? in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics) in the section "Yoga.")
You've really got to give credit to those classical minds. The Roman satirist Juvenal, who wrote shortly after the death of St. John the Apostle and upon whose style the Fathers base their own Commentaries, hit upon a phrase that has rung true through the centuries: sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes [but who will guard the guards themselves?].
It seems that a presbyter appointed by William Lori, Newchurch bishop of Bridgeport, Connecticut, to monitor crime has now been canned because of his own crimes! In 2002, Fay [!] was the only presbyter appointed by Bishop Lori to the diocese's eleven-member Sexual Misconduct Review Board. Bishop Lori wrote at the inception of the board that its "critical" function would be to "ensure constant vigilance and appropriate outreach to victims." Apparently, Lori wasn't vigilant of his own man!
An outside investigation uncovered evidence that Fay had spent as much as $200,000 on a "lavish lifestyle" with another man, including limousine rides, dinners at famous restaurants, cruises, and jewelry. In other words, the investigator called Presbyter Fay a thief and a pervert.
Is it surprising that last year, Bishop Lori was among the U.S. Newchurch bishops who publicly distanced themselves from a even a watered-down Newvatican document, calling for an end to allowing openly men into the priesthood and seminaries -- as long, that is, as they weren't open in the last three years? Is it surprising that Lori was one of four U.S. bishops named by Newvatican in 2002 as part of its joint U.S.-Vatican sexual abuse commission? No wonder the sex crimes in the U.S. just go on and on! [Associated Press and local sources]
Just more evidence that JPII and his lieutenant Ratzinger doing everything they could through their pro-gay appointees to undercut appropriate punishment for perverted Newchurch presbyters who were (and are) raping Newchurch children, one-seventh of whom are under age nine and younger.
What is even more interesting is that Lori has been a public opponent of traditional Catholicism. So, Lori points an accusing finger at traditional Catholics while he supports perversion and perverted presbyters, and then disobeys his own pope's document. The hypocrisy of Newchurch is almost beyond belief!
Is it a good idea for a Catholic to attend a Baptist college? It looks like so-called Catholic colleges today have degraded into immorality.
The Fathers Reply.
Archbishop Fulton Sheen (1895-1979) was well known for his many books, radio and television appearances, and popular preaching. While teaching at the Catholic University of America for nearly 25 years and dealing with students, he noted with deep concern what was happening in Catholic education and the fact that many young people were losing the faith since Vatican II (1962-1965). His advice on higher education, given around 1967, was as prophetic as it was startling:
You are better off going to a state school where you will have the chance to fight for your faith, than going to a modern Catholic university where you will have the new watered-down, modernist version of the faith spoon-fed to your unsuspecting minds, so that you will be apt to lose your faith.
Needless to say, the situation in 2006 is considerably worse than in 1966. So-called "Catholic" colleges are not Catholic at all. They don't teach Catholicism; they don't practice Catholicism. They should be avoided entirely as being a very real danger to one's Faith. It is hard to imagine that a Baptist college could be worse!
The best choice, when possible, is a conservative liberal arts college. The best major is Classics (Latin and Greek), which, in addition to giving the foundation for all secular and religious study, is usually one of the most conservative departments at any given institution. Institutions associated with the New Order and the "New Mass," even when billed as "conservative," should be particularly avoided, in accordance with the advice of Archbishop Sheen above.
In addition to getting a thorough grounding in the classical languages, other courses that should be emphasized are philosophy (particularly classical and mediaeval philosophy), music (particularly early and classical music), history (particularly ancient and mediaeval history), mathematics and the natural sciences, psychology and the social sciences (one must be careful here in choosing conservative courses), and oratory and rhetoric (sometimes called "Speech"). [From the Official Traditional Catholic Directory, 11th Edition (2006)]
The Fathers occasionally get inquiries about the organization called "The Legionaries of Christ." This is, of course, a New Order organization, but sometimes it implies that it is "traditional." As with all Newchurch organizations, we have urged staying entirely away from it. That warning has now been proven to have especially hit the mark.
Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado, Founder of the Legionaries of Christ in 1941, after ten years of investigation, has been censured. Newvatican sources said that the action amounts to a finding that at least some of the sex-crime accusations against the charismatic 86-year-old Mexican presbyter are well-founded. Sources described the documentation collected by the Newchurch Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as involving the testimony of upwards of 100 accusers. The Congregation has limited Maciel's public activity, such as his capacity to celebrate public Messes, to give lectures or other public presentations, and to give interviews for print or broadcast.
Why has it taken so long for Newvatican to own up to the reality about the sex crimes of Presbyter Maciel and the Legionaries? Well, it turns out that Maciel's biggest supporter was JPII, who warmly praised and repeatedly honored Maciel. The findings tarnish the reputation of JPII, supposedly on the "fast track" to Newchurch sainthood. Moreover, the corruption touches Benedict-Ratzinger, who as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, had halted the case against Maciel in 1999.
Rumors of various sorts have long dogged Maciel. In 1956, he was deprived by Pope Pius XII of his faculties to govern the Legionaries and sent into exile in Madrid while a canonical investigation was carried out. At the time he was accused of autocratic control over seminarians, theft, and drug abuse. In 1959, under Pope John XXIII, he was restored to his functions as superior general. Apparently, these investigations did not go nearly deep enough!
Complaints of sex crimes by Maciel first surfaced in the late 1990s, when nine former members of the Legionaries filed a canonical complaint against Maciel with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, alleging that they had been abused by Maciel as seminarians and young presbyters. Those acts, according to the accusers, dated to a period from 1943 to the early 1960s. Although the Legionaries, and Maciel personally, strenuously denied the charges, Newchurch canon lawyers in Mexico and the Vatican had found the accusations to be credible, but then Cardinal Ratzinger abruptly halted investigation of the charges in 1999.
The nine who originally brought accusations claimed that Maciel "first abused them when they were between the ages of 10 and 16, sometimes telling them he had permission from Pope Pius XII to engage in sexual acts with them in order to gain relief from pain related to an unspecified stomach ailment."
But then a break came in late 2004, when some 100 additional accuserscame forward. In 2005, Maciel declined to stand for re-election as Superior of the Legionaires. Although Newvatican officials became convinced of Maciel's guilt, he was protected under the wing of JPII, whom he accompanied on visits to Mexico in 1979, 1990 and 1993. During the 1993 trip, it was JPII's public tribute to Maciel as an "efficacious guide to youth" that prompted the original nine accusers to come forward.
As late as 2002, when JPII visited Mexico City, Maciel was seated in the front row at a papal Mess at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and was personally greeted by the pope. In a 2004 letter, John Paul II congratulated Maciel for 60 years of "intense, generous and fruitful priestly ministry." The pope said he wanted to join in the "canticle of praise and thanksgiving" for the great things he had accomplished. JPII invited Maciel to dine with him in the Apostolic Palace on several occasions and appointed him as a delegate to three synods of bishops, as well as to the 1992 meeting of the Latin American bishops. [National Catholic Reporter]
Maciel's accusers, who have now been proven right, said that they had tried between 1978 and 1989 to reach JPII about Maciel's predatory sex crimes, but he had turned a deaf ear to them. JPII "the Great" is beginning to look more and more like U.S. President Richard Nixon. Given an honest and thorough investigation of JPII, we have no doubt that it will be proven that the "smoking gun" of the sex-crimes cover-up will found in his hands, often through the agency of his chief lieutenant, Cardinal Ratzinger.
Just as TRADITIO predicted, "conservative" Newchurchers have played right into the Da Vinci Code Trap. They have become victims of the "Passion Effect." The reviews are in: if they had just left it alone, the movie would have been only a modest success. As it is, what Abraham Foxman did to raise Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ from modest status to a mega-blockbuster, the "conservative" Newchurchers, with 200 SSPXers in Paris throwing themselves in for good measure, have now done for the Da Vinci Code: giving it 24/7 publicity that it never would have gotten otherwise.
At its premiere on May 17, opening the annual Cannes Film Festival, the movie was described variously as "grim", "unwieldy," and "plodding." As TRADITIO had described the source book by Dan Brown, the intricacies of the plot would not transfer well to the screen, and the end lacks punch.
Frankly, we look at Dan Brown's book, and the movie based on it, as an allegory, a literary technique. We don't think that Dan Brown ever intended to focus on the "theological" theme that so many literalists have fixated upon. No, we believe that he is using the movie primarily as a critical reflection upon the Newchurch of the present day, and the extent to which the servants of the New Order, represented by Opus Dei, might (and perhaps have) gone to protect their self-interest. In any case, books are often capable of bearing several interpretations. They are, after all, intended to make us think.
Several Newvatican cardinals (associated with the1 Opus Deistas) even called for a boycott of the movie. Apparently, these cardinals were disturbed by the fact that the film co-stars Alfred Molina as a Machiavellian bishop. And we all know that Newchurch bishops are honest, virtuous, and straight as a horseshoe! These cardinals expect us to forget that it was their breed who maintained a stony silence when a literal depiction of Christ's Passion was portrayed in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ was attacked by radical Jewish elements, led by Abraham Foxman, affiliated with the B'nai B'rith. (For further information about the Opus Dei, see FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs? in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics) in the section "Opus Dei.")
I want to bring to the fore a discovery that I made. I had occasion to check a passage from Mortalium animos, Pope Pius XI's Encyclical Letter concerning false oecumenism. For convenience, I had looked up an English translation on the Newvatican web site. But I discovered that the English translation there was not the same as I had remembered reading it.
I then looked up the English translation in a book I had at home from the 1940s. Sure enough, the Newvatican's "current" translation was not worded the same as the 1940s version: every word was switched or rearranged. I then decided to buy the supposedly "official" translation of 1928, put out by the U.S. bishops at that time. It certainly wasn't the same as the one now on the Newvatican web site. I put them side by side and compared every line and every sentence. Very little matched; sometimes there was a different order altogether of paragraphs and sentences.
What were the differences? The new version is very different. Basically, the Newvatican web site's version is softer in manner and language, not as direct and precise on the subject of false oecumenism, but using more doublespeak. The 1928 translation is much easier to read and understand. I think that Newvatican is revising documents by traditional popes "in the light and spirit of Vatican II," because otherwise Newchurch would be seen to be out of step with Roman Catholicism.
The Fathers Reply.
Traduttore, traditor -- a translator is a traitor -- goes the Italian aphorism.
There is no doubt that Newchurch is deliberately "dumbing down" the understanding of the ecclesiastical language of the Roman Catholic Church, Latin, to pull the wool over Newchurchers' eyes. Newchurch has disobeyed its own popes and fails to teach Latin in the seminaries. No wonder that Newchurch presbyters couldn't celebrate an "Indult Mass" even if they wanted to, since Newchurch has never taught them the Catholic language.
One also has to be very careful these days about "reprints" of books. There is a certain publisher of supposed reprints of many traditional books. These are not reprints, however; they are revisions, in which the text is modified to conform to Newchurch errors. One example the "Baltimore Catechism." There are many editions of this supposedly traditional catechism out there that have been bowdlerized to conform to the New Order. (For further information on traditional editions, see FAQ05: What Traditional Catholic Books Do You Recommend? in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics).)
Perhaps the best example of how mistranslation can be used initiate an entirely new system of erroneous theology is Pope St. Pius X's use of the phrase participatio actuosa. Many versions erroneously translate this phrase as "active participation," and the Modernist liturgists use that phrase to justify "dialogue" Masses, the glad-handing of peace, and even ministers and ministresses of the "eucharist" in the "sanctuary." Of course, Pope Pius had no such intention in using the phrase. "Active participation" would be participatio activa in Latin. Actuosa in Latin does not mean "active"; it means "actuated." This is an interior participation of soul, not an exterior participation of body.
There is no doubt that Newchurch is changing doctrine "by translation," and this change is deliberate. Newchurch has done it with the "New Mass," the "New Sacraments," the "New Theology," and the "New Bible." So, if you don't want to be deceived, you'd better brush up on your Latin!
You really have to give the horselaugh to the "conservative" Newchurchers, don't you? In their opinion, the biggest bugaboo today is a work of fiction, the Da Vinci Code, whose film version debuted on May 17. There is even a conservative Newchurch organization out there that is organizing protests.
First of all, these "conservative" Newchurchers are already too late. The 2003 book by Dan Brown has now been read by over 60,000,000 people -- which makes it a mega-blockbuster. Why didn't these Newchurchers organize protests at bookstores in 2003? But the greatest hypocrisy about such protests is their upside-down priorities. The Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service that has been imposed by Newchurch officials on "Catholics" (at least they used to be Catholic) is not a work of fiction. It is a deplorable reality: unCatholic, sacrilegious, irreverent, scandalous, blasphemous, idolatrous, and invalid. Yet these "conservative" Newchurchers organized no great protest about the Novus Ordo Mess, and its inevitable consequences: lawlessness, immorality, and apostasy in Newchurch.
The "conservative" Newchurchers will lose the Da Vinci Code battle. First of all, it is an exceedingly popular work of fiction, including fantasies not only about religion but also about many other subjects. That is the nature of fiction. H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds was such powerful fantasy that when it was broadcast over radio on October 30, 1938, millions of people thought that the Earth was actually being invaded by Martians! Moreover, the movie involves one of the most popular directors in Hollywood, Ron Howard, whom many still associate with his childhood character as Opie on the Andy Griffith Show. The star of the movie is one of the most likeable actors in Hollywood, Tom Hanks, who is associated with such family fare as Splash, Big, and You've Got Mail.
In the end, these "conservative" Newchurchers are only going to make the Da Vinci Code a bigger blockbuster than ever. They will play the same role that Abraham Foxman, associated with the radical Jewish B'nai B'rith, did, whose virulent criticisms of popular star Mel Gibson and his 2004 The Passion of the Christ, made what would otherwise have been a rather modest return into an mega-million-dollar sensation. In this matter, many Protestant sects are acting much more effectively. They are not trying to censor the film. They are using its content to review with their congregations Christian teachings on Christ, Mary Madalene, the crucifixion, and the works of the Apostolic Fathers.
The sad thing is that if the "conservative" Newchurchers had picked the right battle, they would have won the war. If these moralists who are getting so hot and bothered over a work of fiction had done battle with the New Mass, they would have won. Paul VI was arguably a schizophrenic, and if he saw that his Rasputin for the liturgy, Hannibal Bugnini, was being opposed by significant numbers of the laity and the clergy, the pope would have been frightened off.
It is only now that we are learning on what a thin thread the imposition of the New Order hung. If Catholics in the 1960s had just had the guts to stand up to mad ecclesiastics, the thread would have been easily broken. Sadly, Catholics played the role of the pusillanimous disciples in the boat on the sea with Christ, Who chastised them, calling them "of little faith" (Matthew 8:26/DRV).
But it seems to be the nature of "conservative" Newchurchers that they are so bedeviled with moral guilt that rather than standing up for the important things of the Faith, as the Saints did, they can only assuage their consciences for having deserted the true Church by tilting at windmills. As a result, they are left with an invalid Mess, doctrine as corrupt as Martin Luther's, and pervasive immorality among the clergy right on up to the pope.
In what is regarded as a slap in the face to the Church of the New Order and its German pope, a prominent Germanic minister has publicly abjured the heresy of Lutheranism and converted to Catholicism -- not to Newchurch, but to traditional Roman Catholicism.
Lutheran pastor Sten Sandmark, chief priest of the Lutheran church at Oskarshamn, Sweden, declared to the press and television in Sweden and Germany that he had decided to leave the Lutheran Church and "to return" to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Although Pastor Sandmark for ten years had contemplated a return to Catholicism, the Newchurch bishop of Stockholm, Anders Arborelius, discouraged him because "all Christian sister-Churches are already working towards the universal Christ," or, in the words of Newchurch, "all religions are equal."
Pastor Sandmark publicly asserted that the Novus Ordo ritual of the Catholic Church, as well as its contemporary theology, made him hesitate to take the step. "It looked as if I would leave Lutheranism and find it back on the other side of the river", declared the pastor. What he searched for, was the true Catholic Church of all times, the sacred ritual of the ancient Mass, the Latin and the Gregorian chant, the worship of the Blessed Sacrament, the devotion to the Holy Virgin, the Thomist theology.
He also rejected the introduction, in October 2004, of the liturgical marriage of homosexual "couples: in the Lutheran Church, the public deviations of Lutheran bishops (two of the twelve Lutheran bishops of Sweden are women, of whom at least one is known to be lesbian; one of the male bishops got married for the third time, etc.). Of course, Pastor Sandmark was quite aware of the immorality that grips Newchurch, from the pope and bishops on down. [UNEC]
Traditional Catholics could wish that the new suit against the Newchurch Diocese of Toledo, Ohio, were for the last forty years of religious torture inflicted by the New Mess, the New Theology, and the New Morality of Newchurch. Unfortunately, it is not.
It seems that the suit is a follow-up to the conviction of Newchurch presbyter Gerald Robinson for the rape, torture, and ritual murder, tainted with aspects of Satanism, of a nun. But Sister Margaret Ann Pahl was apparently not the only victim of this Newchurch minister. Another woman, as yet unnamed, alleges in the new suit that she was raped and tortured in ritual abuse by Robinson when she was a young girl. It was this woman whose information to the Toledo police reopened the 1980 murder case against Robinson and led to his recent conviction.
County Prosecutor Julia Bates is currently considering filing obstruction of justice charges against the Toledo Newchurch diocese for not turning over documents that the state requested two and a half years ago during its murder investigation of Robinson. So Newchurch is covering up not only sex crimes, but now also murder.
The civil suit alleges that between 1968 and 1975, starting when the woman was five and continuing through age thirteen, Newchurch Presbyter Robinson and others forced her to perform sexual acts and made her drink animal blood, "chanted Satanic verses," and drew an upside down cross on her stomach in rituals held in the basement of St. Adalbert Newchurch parish and in unspecified wooded areas. The Satanic aspects of Robinson's murder of the nun will be tied into the new case.
This new suit concurs with the County Prosecutor that the Diocese of Toldeo, which it is claimed had knowledge of Robinson's alleged offenses and conspired to keep them secret. The Newchurch bishop at the time, James Hoffman, who died in February 2003, signed an agreement in August 2002, in which the diocese promised to "provide the prosecutor with information regarding allegations involving a priest [sic]" and all other employees. But when the County Prosecutor's office asked the current bishop in December 2003 for all of its files on Robinson, Newchurch bishop, Leonard Blair, provided minimal information of only three pages. Later, prosecutors returned to the diocesan office in September 2004, armed with a search warrant, and seized 145 more pages from Robinson's files, which bishop Blair had previously concealed. [Toledo Blade]
Newchurch just keeps getting better and better, doesn't it? The Newchurchers themselves must be demented to have anything to do with supporting and funding such rampant corruption by their attendance and donations.
It is becoming clearer and clearer that Newchurch temples and schools are a mortal danger not only for the soul but also for the body, especially for children. Any prudent Catholic has a moral obligation to stay away from the New Order institutions, let alone from contributing money to sponsor an unCatholic "New Order" that has clear immoral, illegal, and even Satanic connections.
I have been learning lately about this so-called "Theology of the Body." My daughter is attending a private "Catholic" school where they recently went through Christopher West's book about it. She was horrified and angered by both the teacher and the book. As a result I have been going through this book myself and I have found it to be disturbingly sexualized. It seems to elevate both man and the sex act to a divine status, essentially a "sacrament," as the pagans do.
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, this "Theology of the Body" is apparently the New Order's way of getting its camel's nose under the tent to destroy yet another element of traditional Catholic teaching. You really need to get your daughter out of that school. Why pay $10,000 a year to have your child indoctrinated in a false and harmful Faith? You are better off sending her to a public school, which at least doesn't pretend to teach religion. Then you can teach her right religion at home.
Archbishop Fulton Sheen already saw this coming. In 1967, he gave advice that was as prophetic as it was startling:
You are better off going to a state school where you will have the chance to fight for your Faith, than going to a modern Catholic university [really any New Order school] where you will have the new watered-down, modernist version of the faith spoon-fed to your unsuspecting minds, so that you will be apt to lose your faith.
Our mailbox has recently been flooded with appeals for demonstrations and boycotts against the about-to-be released film, the Da Vinci Code, based on the 2003 novel by Dan Brown. Even Newchurch cardinals have jumped on the bandwagon to criticize this film. We take a different view. We think that it is a question of "the lady doth protest too much." We have come to the conclusion that the Da Vinci Code includes legitimate criticism of Newchurch, which is so embarrassing that it is trying to return to the days of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum!
First of all, we must realize that the Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. Good fiction writers have always tried to make their fiction as believable as possible. That is part of the writer's art. Homer's Odyssey is a work of fiction, but for three millennia everybody has taken Odysseus as a real historical character. Homer's fictional art was that good. Bully for Homer. We haven't heard about any demonstrations and boycotts being organized against him!
So Dan Brown has written an extremely believable work of fiction. Maybe we'd rather that he didn't use as a literary trompe d'oeil the fiction of Christ having married Mary Magdalen, but we're grown-ups, aren't we? We know the difference between fiction and fact -- or should. Your kids do. Do you think that they really believe that Donald Duck talks and that Peter Pan flies? Of course not.
We opine that Newvatican is not all that opposed to the Christ-Magdalen fiction. After all, Newvatican has manufactured plenty of religious fictions itself. Newvatican promotes the fiction of a "New Mass" that is neither Catholic nor Apostolic. Newvatican promotes the "oecumenical" fiction that "we all worship the same god," so that Newpope embraces Mohammedans who are killing Christians right and left. Newvatican has promoted the fiction of a New Morality, in which its bishops and presbyters can abuse, rape, and even murder. Can you see Pope St. Pius X remaining silent in a situation where his bishops and priests are raping nine-year-olds and murdering nuns in Satanic rites? By God, no!
No, Newchurch is not really concerned about Christ. It is concerned about the legitimate criticism by Dan Brown, under the guise of fiction, that Newchurch is increasingly coming under the control of a secret society dedicated to the New Order, known as Opus Dei, and is increasingly becoming involved in openly Satanic practices. Shocking, but the reality is hard to deny.
Look at what is going on in Toledo, Ohio. Look at what went on in Dane, Wisconsin. Look at what went on in Albany, New York. Murders of priests and nuns, all of which the police have reported as having Satanic associations. Remember that the traditional priest Fr. Malachi Martin too wrote his insider criticisms of Newchurch under the guise of fiction. He stated publicly that he did so because if he published it as non-fiction, he would be murdered.
Dan Brown is using a technique as old as Homer to make his point. Perhaps we'd better listen to his legitimate point about the corruption of Newchurch rather than trying to restore the Index Librorum Prohibitorum.
When the TRADITIO Network we stood out in front of the issue of the SSPX Liberalist Faction's and Fellay-Schmidberger's moves in late 2005 to sell out the Society to Newrome, we became the focus of the Society's venom. SSPX hitmen and web sites called TRADITIO every name in the book. We were accused of spreading "rumors." We were accused of even telling "lies." SSPX members were threatened with the wrath of God if they so much as clicked on www.traditio.com!
What the Society Liberalist-faction hitmen didn't know was that at the same time we were receiving much greater numbers of messages from SSPX clergy and laity telling us to keep it up. They were disgusted at the autocracy and mismanagement of Fellay-Schmidberger. They were disgusted that the principles of the Society's Archbishop-Founder Marcel Lefebvre were being ignored and rejected. They were disgusted that Society periodicals, like The Angelus, were being turned into mere mouthpieces for political statements by the Liberalist bishops.
Now, owing more to TRADITIO than any other cause, Fellay appears to have done a 180-degree turnabout. We are told by inside sources that he is himself now an avid reader of TRADITIO. And in the last several months he has confirmed the truth of essentially everything that TRADITIO was the only source to report at the beginning. What he previously called "rumors" and "lies" have now miraculously become the "truth." And you don't believe in miracles?
Other sources were talking about a Maundy Thursday motu proprio by Newpope. Not us. It never happened, did it? Just as TRADITIO predicted, while all the other SSPX and "indult" sites were proclaiming it as a "done deal." No, we consistently took a hard-headed, old Roman-style look at the facts and reached a different conclusion. At the beginning TRADITIO was alone. But then more and more sources started to see the validity of our analysis. Now Fellay himself admitted on May 14 at Saint-Nicolas-du-Chardonnet Church in Paris, exactly what TRADITIO had been saying all along:
In that which refers to the intentions of liberating the Ecclesia Dei ecclesiastics from the yoke of the [Newchurch] bishops..., considering the reaction of the bishops of France and of Cardinal Ricard himself, one may believe that this is not for tomorrow. In that which refers to us, it [a solution] is even farther, much farther.
It was all a Newchurch ploy to dissipate the forces of traditional Catholicism into wasting their effort on Newchurch, whereas they should have been about their own business promoting the Roman Catholic Church. Has the SSPX Liberalist Faction now learned its lesson? Or is this just a stratagem of the Fellay-Schmidberger Liberalist Faction to win the July SSPX election? These people have learned so much from the Newrome foxes that we wouldn't put anything past them!
TRADITIO takes just pride in the fact that once again our analysis proved to be dead on, while virtually all others were way off the mark. We are doggedly independent. What you get here is honest, experienced, knowledgeable analysis from over 50 years of observing the Church. We don't cave in because of threats of petty autocrats and poison-pen letters from their misguided gauleiters. We think that we owe you, our 4,000,000 faithful readers exactly this: our honest, informed, unadulterated analysis. Then you trust you to make up your own mind.
Novus Ordo churches are going for "canned" music these days. So bereft of talent are they that they cannot even find someone to play simple hymns on the organ. The Hymnal Plus, a karaoke-like machine with a repertoire of almost 3,000 hymns and psalms, is therefore being used at Novus Ordo churches around the country. The machine plays disco versions of Amazing Grace and a jazzy adaptation of The Lord's My Shepherd and projects lyrics on a big screen.
Of course, this bizarre application of "technology" to the Sacred Liturgy is not Catholic. Essentially, the only proper instrument for Catholic churches is the human voice. It is only the voice that can reflect the soul in text and melody. The pipe organ (electronic versions are "tolerated" if a church cannot afford a pipe organ) began to be used in the early middle ages because it had been associated with royalty (for the "King of Kings") and had the properties of the human voice (a wind chest and vocal "chords").
However, at some seasons, such as de tempore Masses of Advent and Lent, the organ is restricted to accompanying the chant, or is excluded entirely (during the Triduum Sacrum). On more solemn occasions, other instruments besides the organ, if they can be adapted to sacred use (such as violins), may be used with suitable music (e.g., a Mozart Mass). Profane instruments (such as pianos and guitars) are prohibited.
"The use of 'automatic' instruments and machines such as an automatic organ, a phonograph, a radio, a dictaphone, or a tape-recorder, or anything of this kind, is absolutely forbidden in liturgical functions or exercise of piety, performed in the church or outside of it" (Instructio de Musica Sacra et Sacra Liturgia ad Mentem Litterarum Encyclicarum Pii Papae XII "Musicae Sacrae Discipline" et "Mediator Dei", sec. lxxi). As to big-screen projection, "The use of film projectors ... is most strictly forbidden in church for any cause whatever, pious, religious, or charitable" (ibidem, sec. lxxiii).
Recorded music is prohibited in Catholic churches because the liturgy is a personal sacramental experience with God, not some mechanical production. Otherwise, one could just as well "attend" a recorded Mass on a videotape or watch a Mass on television. In Catholic theology, such a recorded production is worthless sacramentally and "does not suffice to fulfil the precept of assisting at Mass" (ibidem, sec. lxxix).`
Declaring that the "true church of Jesus Christ now must prevail," a group of Episcopalians has launched a campaign calling for all their clergy involved in the "consecration" of Gene Robinson, a "gay" bishop living openly with his "lover," to be put on trial by the Church. Lay Episcopalians for the Anglican Communion is asking 37 Episcopalian bishops who opposed Robinson's consecration to file for church-law indictments against Robinson and 42 bishops who consecrated him. The group says that its purpose is to determine the meaning and validity of church law, doctrine and practice, and to punish any bishops who have violated their ordination and consecration vows or committed other "grave offenses." The group is working to stave off spread of the perversion in the Episcopalian Church.
The Episcopal Diocese of California, headquartered in San Francisco, recently voted to elect Mark Andrus, of Alabama, as its next bishop. Andrus endorses ordination of homosexual clergy and same-sex "blessings." A spokesman for Integrity, the national homosexual organization, proclaimed its pleasure with the California election, saying Andrus is a "great champion for equality for [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered] people." Andrus joins George Niederauer, recently appointed by Benedict-Ratzinger as Newchurch Archbishop of San Francisco, in being praised by radical "gay" advocates.
The Episcopal lay group says that liberal bishops recently "have met traditionalists' defense of Scripture with seizure and attempted seizure of churches and dismissal of parish clergy." The group criticizes "revisionists" for "reckless pursuit of a gay agenda that is hostile to Scripture and to the historic order of our church." The lay group argues that rank-and-file Episcopalians back the church's traditional beliefs but have been overwhelmed by "revisionist leaders, their captive seminaries, and their intimidation of priests. "That our beloved Church was hijacked by gay agenda promoters in 2003 must not be confused with the popular will of America's Episcopalians in the pews, who are still theologically in line with the worldwide Anglican Communion," says the group.
The "chasm" in the Church, the group says, is largely between factions of bishops and the "side now in control is deeply influenced by advocates of the radical gay agenda.... The true church of Jesus Christ now must prevail. Failing that, there will be no alternative but the Anglican Communion's jettisoning the revisionist U.S. church and establishing a new traditional American province of the faithful."
Sounds just like Newchurch, doesn't it? Good Catholics, if you want to see what Newchurch is -- a pseudo-religion with invalid Sacraments run by immoral perverts -- just look at what is happening in the Episcopalian Church as its model and examplar, just as it was for the "New Mass." Newchurchers, get out while you still can!
Well, of course they are, as the Church of the New Order cannot be the Roman Catholic Church. The amusing thing is that Burke is widely thought to be one of the most "conservative" U.S. bishops. That notion could not be further from the truth.
No wonder Burke was scuttled out of LaCrosse in 1995 by JPII as a public embarrassment.
In a May 2005 interview, Burke takes the 100% Newchurch line:
No, Burke teaches the false New Order line, that the New Mess is a matter of subjection to Conciliar popes, a "loyalty test" as it were. No, Burke advocates being "more faithful in carrying out the reforms mandated by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council." No, Burke tows the New Order line that "there will have to be a change of hearts for those have claimed that either Pope Paul VI or Pope John Paul II defected from the Catholic faith." He is a slave of the New Order through and through.
In a case that exposed the rarely spoken-of dark side of the New Order, which accumulating evidence indicates is becoming increasingly involved with Satanism, a Novus Ordo presbyter, Gerald Robinson, was found guilty, after just six hours of deliberations, by a jury in Toledo, Ohio. Although Robinson was sentenced to the mandatory term of 15 years to life in prison, he will be eligible for parole after only 15 years.
Presbyter Robinson strangled the 71-year-old nun, Sister Margaret Ann Pahl, almost to death, then stabbed her between 27 and 32 times in the chest and neck with a letter-opener. Her undergarments were pulled down over an ankle. The murder took place on Holy Saturday in the sacristy next door to Mercy Hospital's chapel. Thus, the murder was sacrilege as well. Moreover, this murder-sacrilege was surrounded with the Satanic overtones of a "Black Mass." The nun was stabbed through an altar cloth with the punctures forming an upside-down cross and was "anointed" with a smudge of her blood on the forehead to humiliate her in death.
Although the murder occurred on April 5, 1980, Presbyter Robinson had been able to elude police by lying about his whereabouts. However, in December 2003 an unidentified woman claimed that she had been abused in a ritualistic fashion. Police reopened the case and gave the woman credit for bringing justice for Sister Margaret Ann.
The abused woman said that it was clear to her that there has been a cover-up by the Toledo Newchurch Diocese in dealing with law enforcement investigating the abuse and the murder. "This case embodied far more than a murder, if that's possible. It embodied the culture of cover-up. It's time it's cracked," she said. County Prosecutor Julia Bates indicated that her office might pursue members of the Toledo Newchurch Diocese for indictment on obstruction of justice charges. In a post-verdict written statement, Newchurch bishop Leonard Blair expressed no horror over the Satanic murder perpetrated by one of his diocesan presbyters, nor did he indicate that he would conduct an investigation to route Satanism out of the clergy of the diocese. [Toledo Blade]
Meanwhile, Vatican insider, Fr. Malachi Martin, and even a Newchurch archbishop have revealed that Satanic "Black Masses" are being performed within the walls of Newvatican and elsewhere by Newchurch clergy as high as cardinals. Nor can one forget the apparently Satanic murder in 1998 of Fr. Alfred Kunz, a priest celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass in Dane, Wisconsin. This murder has not been solved. Just think: the New Order that has now sunk at the highest levels to become associated even with Satanism, and it all started with the introduction of vulgar tongues into the Holy Mass!
I was taught that Mary Magdalen had been a prostitute. Lately, I hear many people, who I believe are revisionists, stating that the Bible and the Catholic Church have never stated that she was a prostitute. Can you give me some guidance on this question?
The Fathers Reply.
St. Luke's Gospel (7:37 et seqq.) calls the woman simply a "sinner" (Greek hamartolos, Latin peccatrix,) and the Divine Office calls her simply a "penitent." There is not a complete certainty of who all the Marys are in Scripture, but the Roman Church has tended to identify St. Luke's "sinner" with Mary Magdalen, as an example of the divine forgiveness. The penitent, who was truly sorry for her sins, was allowed to be present at the last hours of Our Lord on the Cross and to be the first witness of the Resurrection: Mary Magdalen.
The Church's belief is enshrined in that magnificent Sequence for the Requiem Mass, the Dies Irae, whose thirteenth stanza reads:
Qui Mariam absolvisti,
Et latronem exaudisti,
Mihi quoque spem dedisti.
[Who absolved Mary (Magdalen),
And harkend to the (good) thief,
To me also you have given hope.]
At work today we had a discussion today about gambling. The subject came up because my son's Catholic school is requesting volunteers to help with their regular bingo game. So, I asked two of my Newchurcher co-workers why a "Catholic" school would organize a bingo game. Both of them answered that gambling is not against the Catholic faith unless we become so addicted that we end up using our family funds (for housing, food, or church contributions) in order to gamble. Is that correct?
The Fathers Reply.
That is true, as far as it goes, but it is all a matter of degree. A bingo game for senior citizens played with pennies for recreation is one thing. Organized bingo games (some of them assisted by agencies of La Cosa Nostra and others being "skimmed" by embezzling Newchurch presbyters) for thousands of dollars of jackpots is another thing in the perspective of Catholic moral teaching.
This kind of gambling is surely not the kind of thing that any Catholic could engage in without significant pangs of conscience. Surely one could find some more wholesome form of recreation than gambling. Surely one could find some more uplifting family activity to spend money on than gambling.
Moreover, there is the question of scandal. Certainly, to support supposed religious activities by gambling games and lotteries causes scandal that can easily be avoided by appealing to more wholesome funding sources.
Like all Newchurch bishops, Tod Brown, of Orange County, California, is a real piece of work. The group called Concerned Catholics [sic] of the Diocese of Orange has sent him a letter asking him why he proudly backs "gay" marriage and has appointed a number of men to positions of authority in the diocese, even though they reject the Catholic teaching on sexual morality.
For example, Brown allowed the diocese's former Director of Liturgy and Evangelization to live openly with his "gay" lover. The pervert-presbyter "very proudly told his relatives that Bishop Brown was aware of his lifestyle, as was Cardinal Mahony." Brown also allowed a "gay" couple to enroll their son at the diocesan school.
The group claims that it has no recourse, that Brown, as all Newchurch bishops, is his own master. Really?! Has the group ever thought about pulling the money plug completely? No money, no sushi chef, no first-class airplane rides, no mansions. Isn't it amazing that these "Concerned Catholics" couldn't think of this simple solution? No, with all the corruption, they just keep bellying up to the Newchurch bar!
The "conservatives" and indultarians really grasp at the straws of the Newchurch establishment, don't they? Just recently they were heralding the appointment of Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith on December 10, 2005, as Secretary of the Congregation for [Novus Ordo] Divine Worship and the Sacraments. They claimed that his actions and statements suggest that he is more "open" to the Modernized Mass of 1962 than some of his predecessors. They claimed that he had acquired a 1962 Missal and has offered the Modernized Mass in his private chapel. They claimed that he is "friendly" to the indultarians and "sympathetic" to their goals. Naturally, this went down well with the indultarians. After all, they swallowed the ploy of the so-called Ecclesia Dei "indult" hook, line, and sinker.
But the god Janus that the New Order worships has two faces. Here is the other face. In a recent issue of the publication of a "conservative" Novus Ordo organization that advocates the "reform of the reform" or "perfection" of the Novus Ordo liturgy, he accepted all of the Novus Ordo fabrications, including some items (such as communion-in-the-hand), that had originated in rejection of Catholic liturgical doctrine. In the article Ranjith notes the "steps forward" that the Novus Ordo has achieved:
Different local cultural elements have been introduced that contribute to the inculturation and indigenization of the liturgy. Among the many innovations in the celebration of the Eucharist, the principal changes were: the Novus Ordo Missae in 1970, the new lectionaries, the exclusive use of the vernacular, the priest standing versus populum (facing the people), the possibility of reception of Communion in the hand, lay participation in the different roles of Holy Mass, and a more incisive integration of local cultural elements, especially with regard to aspects of song, liturgical decor, architecture, sculpture, and painting among others.
In other words, this hope of the indultarians is a full-throated admirer of the invalid, unCatholic Novus Ordo! He is fully in support of the adaptation of the Novus Ordo service to different localities. For example, if you are in Africa, you can use chicken blood instead of wine because one African Newchurch archbishop held that "the natives" understand this better. If you are in India, as Ranjith is, you can introduce Hindu customs into the Novus Ordo.
When will the indultarians understand that all officials of Newchurch worship the Novus Ordo, advocate it, demand it. They might, for the sake of larger collections, permit an occasional Modernized Mass of 1962 here or there, but it is always on an exceptional basis, an "indult" (the use of the term is really inaccurate), and as privilege -- but certainly not as a right. The "official" rite for a Newchurch official is always the invalid Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo service.
Boycott! Boycott! Are these the shouts of Catholics against the New Order Mess and Morals? Heavens no! These are the words of a Newchurch cardinal against the Da Vinci Code movie being released later this month. The latest screamer is Newchurch Francis Cardinal Arinze, head of the Novus Ordo Mess and Sacraments division of the New Order. And when Newchurch gets riled up about something, you can usually bet that it's got something to hide. As is the case with the Da Vinci Code.
There seem to be two things objectionable to Newchurch about this movie. The first has to do with the relationship of Christ and Mary Magdalen. But questions of the Bible and doctrine are not really of so much concern to Newchurch. After all, Newchurch itself has taken steps to eliminate Limbo, Original Sin, capital punishment, and Catholic moral principles. It's the second thing that is so objectionable. The film depicts the Opus Dei organization, so beloved of JPII, in an unfavorable light. As well it might. There is much about that organization that is objectionable. For further information, see FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs? in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics).
"Christians must not just sit back and say it is enough for us to forgive and to forget," Arinze said. "Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical. So it is not I who will tell all Christians what to do but some know legal means which can be taken in order to get the other person to respect the rights of others." Give us a break! This is the same Newchurch cardinal who imposes on Newchurch an invalid Mess and hardly respects the rights of Catholics to have the true Mass. This is the same Newchurch cardinal that says, "forgive and forget," "judge not," when it comes to anything criminal. But when it comes to traditional Catholics, he's ready for the thumbscrews and the rack!
Arinze is a true liturgical criminal. Dan Brown is, after all, only a writer of fiction. He has not destroyed anyone's Mass. He has not invalidated anyone's Sacraments. He has not covered up the vilest of sex crimes. Arinze, however, is part of the Newchurch bureaucracy that has done so. For further information, see Cardinal Arinze's Changing Church by traditional author Patricius Anthony in TRADITIO's Features department.
Traditional Catholics, get your lawsuits ready! It seems that you now have the blessing of a Newchurch cardinal to sue the Hades out of Newchurch parishes for fraud, in just the same way that traditional Anglicans are trying to take their Church back from the Modernist-Liberalists.
Arinze and Newvatican may next be staging a book-burning in St. Peter's Square. After all, if the movie is so objectionable, why doesn't Newchurch try to ban the book upon which it is based? Where is that Index of Prohibited Books when you really need it? Oops, Newchurch did away with it after Vatican II!
Has there been any other time such as this in the Church's history, when the vast majority of Masses being said worldwide are highly suspect, if not outright invalid? Has there ever been such liturgical abuse before throughout the Church, essentially condoned by the majority of the Church hierarchy?
The Fathers Reply.
During the period of the 16th century certainly. At some point the Masses that we now call "Protestant" were considered to be modified Catholic Masses. Now, in the perspective of history, we know these rites to be what they in fact were: invalid services. But many of the people of the time were fooled into thinking that they were Catholic. At first even some Saints, perhaps in a excess of "charity," were deluded, but later saw the reality and condemned the false rites.
After Cranmer changed the English service in the mid sixteenth century, English Catholics even asked Pope Pius V whether they could attend. His answer: Absolutely not! The Lutheran service of the time was very much like the Catholic service, using the traditional Latin in many parts. (Sounds like the Novus Ordo service in Latin today, doesn't it?!)
In the perspective of history, we can see that all these "Catholic" Masses done by the Protestants were frauds, but it was not all that clear to the people of the time because their king (Henry) said so, or their priest (Luther) said so. Remember that until Pope Leo XIII's definitive confirmation in Apostolicae Curae that the Anglican "Mass" was invalid, there were many, including cardinals, who thought that it was valid. For further information, see CURAE: Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae [On the Nullity of Anglican Orders], Given by His Holiness Pope Leo XIII in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics).
A similar thing happened with the popes during the period of the Great Western Schism (1378-1417), when not even the Saints could tell for sure who the "real" pope was of the several claimants. Today, you'll find everything very neatly laid out in almanac tables, but the people of the time couldn't tell the pope from the anti-pope! Just so, today Newchurchers can't tell the real Mass from the invalid Mess. If they lived in the sixteenth century, they would be Anglicans or Lutherans.
My question is about saying the Rosary in Latin. There seems to be this big controversy in our chapel about it being a requirement to pray the Rosary in Latin for extra graces. They say that Latin is the only proper way to pray the Rosary. Is this true?
The Fathers Reply.
It is certainly preferable to do it in Latin, and this practice is highly recommended by St. Francis and St. Alphonsus Liguori, among other Saints. We ourselves have found that the participation of congregations is far greater in Latin than in vulgar tongues. This may sound counter-intuitive to the Modernist mind, but in fact people have to think about what they are saying in Latin, whereas they can simply mouth without much thought some vernacular version. Also, the dignity of the Latin seems to inspire much more devotion and attention to the prayer. Certainly, when the Rosary is being said in public, Latin is much preferable to using the vulgar tongues.
A Newchurch pastor-presbyter in the diocese of Trenton, New Jersey, has admitted to embezzling $2,000,000 from his Newchurch parishioners. At their expense he enjoyed exotic vacations in the Carribean, drove two $47,000 BMWs, purchased season tickets to a sports team, and bought a house, jewelry, and furniture.
The presbyter, who led the parish for 16 years, had set up a secret account in a local bank and deposited church money into it. His multimillion-dollar theft, which extended over a seven-year period, would apparently never have been discovered by Newchurch Bishop John Smith, of Trenton. Rather, parishioners had to blow the whistle. An audit was triggered by anonymous telephone calls and letters to Smith. Otherwise, the pastor-presbyter would have gone on robbing the parish under Smith's nose for another seven years!
Prosecutors plan to recommend that Hughes serve five years in prison after returning the money, paying taxes, and probably being fined. It seems that the courts' gentle treatment of criminal presbyters is over. [Associated Press]
Said one bedeviled Newchurch parishioner, "I liked the guy, and I feel sorry for him. I really felt like he was very good at what he did." Yeah, he was really good at stealing!
Although a study from the formerly Catholic Georgetown University indicates that Newchurchers have become a little less likely (down from 38% to 29% from 2002 to 2005) to give financially to their diocese, the Newchurchers continue to fund their Newchurch bishops' and presbyter's sex crimes against children, one-seventh of whose victims are age 9 and under.
How Newchurchers have the gall to question traditional Catholics when their own backyard is a septic-tank disaster is beyond us. Often we are asked how to reply to one contention or another against traditional Catholics by Newchurchers. Our recommendation is to laugh in their faces and say, "Are you serious?!"
When I went to my parish today to have a Mass said for the Holy Souls in Purgatory, the priest complained that my request was unnecessary because prayers are already said during the Mass. I have read many books, including those that quote St. Augustine and St. Alphonsus Ligouri, that have encouraged Masses for the Holy Souls in Purgatory. Now I'm confused. I love the Holy Souls for the fact that somehow they "kept the faith" and made it through. Having Masses said for them is my little spiritual act of mercy. Are the Masses being wasted? Are the saints outdated?
The Fathers Reply.
For anyone claiming to be "Catholic" and telling you such a thing is scandalous. First of all, realize that your parish church is not a Catholic church. It is a church of the New Order, which rejects much of Catholic belief and practice. Certainly St. Augustine and St. Alphonsus would not recognize it as Catholic. Moreover, you are not even getting a Mass there. It is an invalid and worthless Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo service. So save your money there.
This Newchurch presbyter actually did you a favor by leading you to ask the question and getting the traditional Catholic answer. You should stay clear away from any Newchurch parish and seek out a traditional Catholic site in your area from the Official Traditional Catholic Directory (see above). If you do not have a site locally at this time, see FAQ02: How Do I Submit a Mass Intention? in the TRADITIO Library of Files (Catholic Apologetics).
Good Catholics, if you had any doubt about what the Newchurch of Benedict-Ratzinger stands for, here is yet another indication.
It isn't enough that Newchurch Cardinal Mahony, of Los Angeles, can foster lawless intrusion across the U.S. national border -- and Newpope says nothing. It isn't enough that Cardinal McCarrick, of Washington, D.C., can publicly pray to Allah -- and Newpope says nothing. Now we have the Newchurch bishops of a whole nation, Belgium, turn over their beautiful historic churches to illegal alien Mohammedans to live in and hold prayer services to Allah.
The Belgian bishops have opened their churches to illegal Mohammedan immigrants in order to pressure the Belgian authorities to allow the illegals to stay in the country. They have allowed these Newchurch-approved squatters to display banners in their churches showing the name of Allah. The squatters hold Mohammedan prayer services in their churches. The altar has been moved and the statue of Our Lady covered with a cloth to hide her from the eyes of the infidels. The squatters are actually living in the churches themselves, turning supposedly sacred spaces into game rooms complete with televisions and computers. And the Belgian Newchurch bishops condone this usage and actively support it.
And how do we know that Newvatican is behind this lawlessness and sacrilege? Monsignor Karl-Josef Rauber, Newpope's own Nuncio to Belgium, in the Leftist newspaper De Morgen, came out in support of the occupations of Belgian Novus Ordo churches by illegal immigrants! [Brussels Journal]
We used to say that Newchurch was Protestant and Masonic. Now, we could say that it is Mohammedan. The handwriting on the wall says that within a few decades, the Mohammedans will achieve by illegal immigration and the connivance of the Newchurch bishops and the European Union, what they could not do under Pope St. Pius V: conquer Europe for Allah.
Will the Fathers be providing insight into the FSSP General Chapter this summer? Many of us are interested in getting an inside scoop as to whether or not these priests get a say this time as to who their Superior General is going to be.
The Fathers Reply
The case of the "indult" FSSP is a good example of what happens when a group sells out to Newchurch. You remember how all this got started. Archbishop Lefebvre threw the fear of God into JPII when the Archbishop consecrated four traditional bishops for the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). Up until the last minute, Newvatican did not believe that an archbishop would actually take his episcopal oath seriously. When Archbishop Lefebvre did so, Newvatican panicked and did two things: issued the phony Ecclesia Dei "indult" and acknowledged the just-formed "indult" FSSP group.
Newvatican was never really serious about the FSSP. It was a ploy so that Newvatican would have a kind of puppet group to stand against the SSPX and keep taking in the money of those Newchurchers who then came to be known as "indultarians." Friction between the leaders of the FSSP, who seem actually to have blindly thought that Newvatican was serious, and Newvatican, which viewed the FSSP as a temporary expedient to be jettisoned when the Novus Ordo was firmly ensconced, heated up to the point when, in July 2000, the elected FSSP Superior General, Fr. Joseph Bisig, known as quite traditional, was fired by Cardinal Hoyos for being opposed to the New Mess. Bisig had made statements against the New Order, and that was the one thing that couldn't be tolerated by the Newchurch of the New Order.
Newvatican imposed its own puppet Superior, not elected by the FSSP chapter, Fr. Arnaud Devillers, whose six-year term is expiring this summer. At around the same time, the FSSP seminary in the United States, formerly in Elmhurst, Pennsylvania, was taken over by Fabian "Phony" Bruskewitz, Newchurch Bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska, and moved to Denton, Nebraska. (Bruskewitz, you remember, was the bishop who schmoozed at the Masonic picnic and hosted a Protestant episcopal "consecration" in his cathedral.)
After these incidents the FSSP has been virtually silenced. It is barely growing to new "indult" sites, but maintains its few current U.S. "indult" sites. From an inside source some months ago TRADITIO reported that about one-third of the U.S. seminarians were ready to bolt because of their dissatisfaction with the FSSP's pro-Novus Ordo stance.
Meanwhile, the Fraternity is gradually being weaned over to the Novus Ordo way of doing things. Communion in the hand has been distributed at FSSP Masses in Providence, Rhode Island, and Vienna, Austria. Fr. Bruno LePivain, a friend of Fr. Arnaud Devillers, the U.S. Superior at the time, concelebrated the Novus Ordo Mess in Rome, and when the Superior General, Fr. Bisig, objected, the Ecclesia Dei Commission issued an official Protocol that the FSSP could not forbid its priests from performing the Novus Ordo. In fact, the Commission has been pushing the Fraternity to perform the New Mess in addition to the Modernized Mass of 1962 from the very beginning.
Our prediction is that whoever is elected Superior, the status quo will continue. For all the recent folderol since the election of Newpope, Benedict-Ratzinger is a Modernist through and through. He might loosen things up just a little to add a little Latin "polish" to the now well-tarnished Newchurch, but the New Order is, and has always been, the Order of the Day, and the "indult" will always remain precarious.
Your readers will be interested to know that Una Voce USA has announced the appointment of R. Michael Dunnigan as its new "chairman" (rather than "president") -- the first "chairman" since the organization's founder, the late Prof. Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, held that office.
von Hildebrand must be spinning in his grave at the announcement, because the recent and last president of Una Voce USA was one of his disciples, Dr. John Rao. As TRADITIO previously reported, the board of Una Voce USA unceremoniously dumped Dr. Rao by abolishing the office of presidency, because he was critical of some of the policies of Pope John Paul II and was perceived by the board as a threat to negotiations between Una Voce and similar groups with officials in AmChurch in the United States and NewChurch in Rome.
The new director has "good" Indultarian/NovusOrdinarian credentials and no memory of the thriving Catholic Church before Vatican II. Thus, he would appear to have little difficulty with the status quo of "Indult Masses" in a chapel with limited capacity (such as in convents, hospitals, cemeteries, and mausolea), or in a parishes on the chopping block (such as Holy Trinity Church in Boston), or where a new pastor (sometimes deliberately assigned by a bishop) does not like the Traditional Latin Mass and seeks to destroy it and the community of its supporters (such as in Orange, California).
The Fathers Reply.
Una Voce was a tiger in the 1960s, pushing for retaining the Traditional Latin Mass when Newchurch elements were just beginning to impose the Novus Ordo. Sadly, Una Voce has long ago sold out to Newchurch. The first nail in the coffin was the election Michael Davies as its president in the 1990s. Michael Davies, at first blush, would seem to have been a good choice. After all, he had been a staunch support of Archbishop Lefebvre when the Archbishop founded the Society of St. Pius X, and Davies had written many solidly traditional books against the New Order.
But Davies succumbed to the blandishments of Newrome (including Cardinal Ratzinger at that time) and sold Una Voce out to the New Order. He even revised many of his books to conform to New Order concepts, including a misguided notion of the dogma of indefectibility. When Davies eventually set aside the presidency because of a terminal illness, he looked back on his sellout to Newrome and was honest enough to write a stinging farewell letter, in which he admitted that in all the years of his presidency he had accomplished virtually nothing and that Newrome had connived and cheated him with meretricious words. Newrome, he maintained, had no intention of restoring the Traditional Latin Mass.
Now, having now dumped Dr. Rao, a disciple of von Hildebrand, who was highly regarded by Pope Pius XII and wrote several significant books attacking the New Order, Una Voce has now taken another step toward playing the chicken to Newrome's fox. It is sad to see an organization that once stood for what is Catholic cave in to Newchurch. Rather, Una Voce should have followed the lead of the founder of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, Fr. Gommar DePauw, who, from 1964 to his death in 2005, never deviated from his position that the Novus Ordo is illegal and certainly not Catholic.
In Newchurch the clergy can speak out on secular politics -- if you are a liberal. If you are a Newchurch cardinal, you can support criminal trespass into another country, and Newpope will remain silent. If you are a charismatic radio station claiming to be Catholic, you can pump out unCatholic nonsense, and Newpope will remain silent. If you are a major "Catholic" university, you can broadcast vile, anti-Catholic plays, and Newpope will remain silent. But if you are a conservative presbyter radio commentator, watch out: Benedict-Ratinger will single you out for censure!
In Poland there is a conservative radio station that preaches:
So, Fr. Tadeusz Rydzyk, founder of the Polish Catholic Radio Maria, received a warning from Benedict-Ratzinger to quit engaging in politics. Why is Rydzyk being singled out? The answer appears to be the political nationalism of the last two popes. JPII, a Pole, simply urged restraint. Benedict-Ratzinger, a German, censures. Meanwhile, Benedict-Ratzinger pushes out Newchurch politics of his own over Vatican radio. [Der Spiegel]
Tomasz Krolak, from a Catholic news agency in Poland, writes: "That one pope works for the Poles while another pope serves the Germans has nothing to do with true religious faith." It sure doesn't. When are the popes going to act as Roman again instead of as the successors of warring local barbarian tribes?
It is amazing to us how the indultarians are so ready to sell out to the Newchurch of the New Order in view of its obvious perversity. Perversity comes into the English language directly from Latin and means a complete (per) turnaround (versus); in other words, it means to turn something completely on its head, 180 degrees. Perversity is a fully apt description of the Novus Ordo!
The root of Newchurch is perversity, a complete turnaround of the Catholic Faith, Mass, Sacraments, and morality. Anyone that cannot see this deliberately has his eyes shut! Well, sometimes a picture is worth 1000 words, so we present above a photograph from the Novus Ordo rites of Maundy Thursday at the fully "approved" (by Newchurch, that is) Novus Ordo in Oklahoma City.
In place of the Mandatum, from which this Thursday of Holy Week gets its name, that is, the washing of the men's feet as Christ did the feet of his Apostles at the Last Supper, is yet another Novus Ordo innovation. Wash not men, but women; not women, but girls. Wash hands, not feet. Hey, why not? Anything goes in the Novus Ordo. There are no "rules." Just introduce any crazy untraditional thing and pass around the collection plate to support it, and the Newchurchers will blindly cough up their pence.
Our traditional chapel would like to expand its use of Gregorian chant to accompany Mass and other traditional services. Our choir has the basics, but needs some guidance for how to expand our repertoire. Do you have any recommendations?
The Fathers Reply
Although there are many recordings made in recording studios, or sometimes in larger churches or monasteries with professional or dedicated choirs, there are few, if any, recordings made by the average small lay choir, chanting what can actually be attempted in the smaller churches, chapels, and oratories, to which the Sacred Chant can be a great addition in the traditional Roman liturgy.
However, TRADITIO has been informed that Volume I in a new series, A Traditional Chapel Sings Gregorian Chant by the St. John Schola, has just been released. The St. John Schola is recording a CD series consisting of unedited, live recordings of the type of chant pieces that may be used at traditional churches and chapels. It makes no pretense to being professional, but to what is achievable, with a little work, by the average small lay choir. This series can serve as a practical guide for the wider use of Gregorian chant in the traditional Roman Catholic liturgy.
In addition to the recordings themselves, supporting music sheets and booklets are available to accompany the recordings and aid small choirs in using Gregorian chant for the traditional liturgy. For ordering and descriptive information, see TRADITIO's Traditional Latin Mass, Office, Sacraments & Office department under "Chant."
I noticed that you have listed on May 3 the Solemnity of St. Joseph, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Other places have it listed as May 1. Can you explain the reason for the difference?
The Fathers Reply.
As a result of religious orders such as the Servites, Franciscans, and Dominicans paying to St. Joseph special honor, Pope Sixtus IV (1471-84) granted the Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary a feastday in the Roman Calendar on March 19. From that time devotion to the Saint acquired greater and greater popularity, the dignity of the feast keeping pace with this steady growth. In 1621 Pope Gregory XV decreed it to be a Holyday of Obligation on the calendar of the Universal Church (though not one of the six traditional celebrated as such in the United States).
One festival in the year, however, was not deemed enough to recognize this increasingly important Saint. In 1847, therefore, owing in part to the labors of St. Theresa of Avila, Pope Pius IX, himself singularly devoted to St. Joseph, introduced the Solemnity of St. Joseph and decreed that the Universal Church should celebrate this additional feast annually on the Third Sunday after Easter. In 1870 the pope solemnly declared St. Joseph as Patron of the Universal Church and declared that thenceforth his feast should be celebrated as a Double Feast of the First Class (but without Octave on account of Lent). Because of the increase in devotion to St. Joseph that occurred in the latter half of the 19th century, it became common to dedicate Wednesdays to the Just Patriarch. Therefore, Pope St. Pius X transferred this feast to the third Wednesday after Easter and added an Octave of observance.
It should be noted here that although Pope Pius IX was singularly devoted to this great Saint and elevated devotion to him to an extent previously unequaled, he resisted inserting the Saint's name into the Sacred Canon of Holy Mass, saying humbly, "How can I do that? I am only the pope." Thus, he recognized that not even the pope had the authority to change the early Apostolic Tradition enshrined in the Sacred Canon. In 1962 Pope John XXIII did what his predecessor did not dare to do, thus tainting the "Modernized Mass of 1962."
The new feast of May 1 was of an entirely different provenance. In 1955, in the last years of Pope Pius XII when, as part of the "modernizing" influences in the liturgy that had started in 1948 under Hannibal Bugnini and others and as part of the increasing involvement of the Church in the secular affairs, a new feast of St. Joseph the Workman was introduced. This was not so much to honor St. Joseph as to make a political statement on the "dignity of labor." TRADITIO observes the more traditional calendar of the Church before the modernizing influences started in the mid 1950s.
In this post-modern world, when the traditional teachings of the Church are under attack as perhaps never before, the Roman Catholic faithful can do no better than to turn to St. Joseph, Protector of the Holy Family, and to St. Michael the Archangel, Prince of the Heavenly Host, who Scripture teaches will be, by the Divine power, the ultimate victor over "Satan and the other evil spirits, who roam through the world seeking the ruin of souls."
A teacher recently wrote to a newspaper:
30,000 illegal aliens, speaking 40 different languages, attended Denver schools. Our classrooms suffered thousands of kids functionally illiterate in English with parents functionally illiterate in English and Spanish. The classrooms featured so much incompatible diversity that it created horrific tension, stabbings, and death. Thus, American kids suffered a profoundly dumbed-down educational process. One in five teachers quit or transferred out of those Denver classrooms every nine month cycle during those five years [1999-2004].
It occurred to us that, mutatis mutandis, this is a description of Newchurch. The Church has its "illegal aliens" (Newchurchers). The Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo Service is "performed" in at least 40 different languages. Newchurchers are illiterate in the Roman Catholic Faith. "Diversity" is the Newchurch rule, not the Catholic credal principles of "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic." Newchurch has led to tensions in doctrine, liturgy, and morality, and even to stabbings and death, if the Dane, Michigan, and Albany, New York, cases are such examples. Newchurch has "dumbed down" Catholic doctrine, liturgy, and morality. And presbyters are quitting.
The Neo-modernist revolution of the "Dreadful Decade" of the 1960s corrupted not just the Church, but the State and Family as well. It is hard to think of an historical period when all three of these pillars of society were attacked all at once. Now that we have some forty years' perspective, it becoming clearer and clearer what has happened in the Church and who and what was behind it.
Just so, when you wonder why the U.S. educational system has become a joke over a period of forty years, why the solidarity of family has weakened over a period of forty years, why immorality (homosexuality, bodily mutilation, suicide, abortion, divorce) has increased over a period of forty years, why aliens can illegally invade another country and get paid by that country to do it, why Ex uno plures has replaced E pluribus unum as the national motto. When you wonder all these things, you will generally find their roots in the revolution of the Dreadful Decade. Certainly it did in the Roman Catholic Church, which in the Great Facade of Newchurch is neither Roman nor Catholic.
Here's duplicity of the worst kind. Newchurch Dario Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos is supposed to be Benedict-Ratzinger's right-hand man in getting the Society of St. Pius X into the New Order. He is the President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, which administers the "indult." He was present at the August 29, 2005, "Beheading" meeting between the pope and SSPX Bishop Bernard Fellay. The Fellay has spoken in positive terms of Hoyos. But, as with all Newchurch officials, Hoyos is Janus-faced, as the occasion demands.
The principle of Newchurch is: Bishops rule! Newchurch Ivan Cardinal Dias, Archbishop of Bombay, went ballistic when four seminarians left his Novus Ordo seminary to go to the SSPX seminary instead. Eventually, they went back to the Novus Ordo seminary. In documents made available to the TRADITIO Network, here is how Hoyos described the event in a letter of February 24, 2006, written on the letterhead of the Ecclesia Dei Commission (No. 260/91):
I rejoice with you that they [three of the four seminarians] have responded to the grace to return to the fullness of the Catholic faith and life in India. I am very pleased to know that they have found in Your Eminence a paternal welcome back to the bosom of the Catholic Church.... The testimony of these seminarians gives reason for great concern about the separatist mentality which surrounded them in the [SSPX] seminary in Goulburn and which they finally had the grace to reject.... Their testimony could be a powerful apologetic argument in favour of Catholic unity.
So, what is Hoyos, supposedly the most SSPX-loving cardinal saying:
Just a few months ago, as reported on TRADITIO, shortly after the "Beheading" meeting, Hoyos was singing a much different tune, wasn't he? It is clear that, in reality, no change has occurred in Newvatican's attitude toward traditional Catholicism. Under Benedict-Ratzinger it just has a little more "polish" than Polish!
And what were the traditional ideas that the SSPX seminary taught against:
Now, all that is pretty standard traditional teaching, but what Dias documents in his Official II, dated February 25, 2006, is quite surprising:
They [the four seminarians] were further told [at the SSPX seminary] that the Holy See is vacant and that the validity of the ordinations of bishops and priests after Vatican II, and the Sacraments performed by them, was to be seriously doubted. In fact, the Sacrament of Confirmation was conferred again on the four seminarians conditionally (i.e. if perchance they did not receive it validly before), and if a priest joined the movement, he would have to receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders again conditionally.
It seems that more than just Newvatican is Janus-faced! According to Dias, the same SSPX leadership of Fellay-Schmidberger, which has been so aggressively rooting out of the Society any hint of the sede-vacantist hypothesis, is at the same time teaching that same hypothesis in its seminary! Moreover, the same SSPX leadership, which in its official organ, Angelus, has been carrying for two issues now lengthy theological justifications for the validity of the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration, is teaching that the Orders of all presbyters and bishops of the Novus Ordo are so doubtful as to have to be performed again in the traditional rite!
Is this a case of duplicity among the SSPX leadership, or is it a case of what TRADITIO has claimed in the past: gross mismanagement on the part of Fellay to the extent that one hand in the Society's officialdom doesn't know what the other is doing. It appears that the SSPX his its own seminary scandal!
It appears that more and more cracks are developing in the Fellay-Schmidberger bent towards selling out to Benedict-Ratzinger's Newrome. In an interview previously commented upon in these TRADITIO Commentaries, SSPX's senior bishop, Richard Williamson, expressed grave reservations about such a direction. Now, SSPX Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, who recently published an extensive biography on the SSPX's Archbishop-Founder, Marcel Lefebvre, has come out publicly against such a direction, in the strongest terms yet expressed by an SSPX prelate.
The complete transcript of an April 21, 2006, interview, in which the interviewer's bias toward the liberalist faction is evident, has been made available to the TRADITIO Network. We are pleased to see that Bishop Tissier speaks with the same bluntness of language against the New Order and its latest shenanigans, for which TRADITIO has long been known. We now highlight several points from Bishop Tissier' statements that we consider most salient.
No "Communion" with Newchurch. In the Newchurch press, emphasis is placed upon so-called "communion" with Newrome and Newpope, but not upon communion with Christ and the Church He founded. Newchurch is not particularly concerned with whether its adherents are Catholic in their beliefs, but whether they pledge loyalty to the New Order and its representatives. That is why you have Newchurch cardinals and bishops going around advocating abortion, homosexuality, false religions without a peep of objection from Benedict-Ratzinger. We are pleased to see that Bishop Tissier cuts through all of this false posturing and declares, in language reminiscent of the Archbishop:
The problem is not "communion." That is the stupid idea of these bishops since Vatican II -- there is not a problem of communion; there is a problem of the profession of faith. "Communion" is nothing; it is an invention of the Second Vatican Council. The essential thing is that these people (the bishops) do not have the Catholic Faith. "Communion" does not mean anything to me -- it is a slogan of the Newchurch. The definition of the Newchurch is "communion," but that was never the definition of the Catholic Church.
A Pope without Power. Bishop Tissier describes Benedict-Ratzinger as paralyzed by his adherence to the Vatican II principle of "collegiality," the Newchurch doctrine that, in practical terms, means that the pope has no power of his own, but must be in concurrence with the cardinals and bishops. Says Bishop Tissier of Benedict-Ratzinger:
He wants to rule the Church with the bishops, with the cardinals. He becomes unable to rule the Church. This is evident because he has been the pope for one year, and he has done nothing! Collegiality paralyzes him. Voila, yes, collegiality paralyzes the pope.... He believes it!
Traditional Catholics Must Continue to Fight the Good Fight. Bishop Tissier expresses surprise that the crisis in the Church has lasted so long.
Here we are, 19 years, and it is the same. It is a great disappointment. The crisis lags, and we have to continue to fight. That is the great difficulty -- not for me, but for the faithful especially. The faithful have to be heartened; they must be encouraged not to be fatigued, not to be tired. We must continue to fight.
The idea that a rapid counterrevolution would arise against the New Order appears to us to be quite naive. Anyone knowing Church history for 2000 years knows that periods of crisis in the Church have historically lasted the better part of a century. Moreover, anyone with his eyes open can see how embedded the New Order heresy became in Newchurch and attracted all kinds of Modernists, heretics, and immoral creatures over the last forty years.
Bishop Tissier may well be right, however, in assigning, along with Bishop Williamson, as a principal reason for the Fellay-Schmidberger disposition toward a sellout as arising from fatigue. TRADITIO long ago pointed to the fact that all too many traditional Catholics today are weak in their Faith. They are disappointed there is not some "quick fix" from Heaven. They do not have the faith of the 12,000,000 Roman martyrs who were willing to die for the Catholic Faith, whose blood, as Tertullian puts it, "seeded the Faith." If we want to find a reason why the Church is in a state of crisis, we should not look to God, but to ourselves.
Fellay Does Not Speak for the SSPX Bishops. The interview shines an interesting light upon the SSPX propaganda that those information sources, like TRADITIO, which challenge SSPX Superior General Fellay's tendency towards an accommodation to Newrome and Newpope, are "spreading rumors about a so-called schism within the Society if and when Bishop Fellay were to make a 'deal' with Rome." Bishop Tissier was then asked point blank: "When Bishop Fellay speaks, or makes a statement, can we say that he does so on behalf of the bishops of the Society?" Bishop Tissier, equally bluntly declared:
No. I would say he speaks as the Superior General of the Society. Simply that.
There you have it, dear readers. TRADITIO and a few other information sources, predominantly in France, have been correct from the start, and all this talk about "rumors" by the Fellay-Schmidberger liberalist faction has been just a smoke-screen to conceal that what this faction has falsely called rumors have been, in fact, the truth of the matter.
Ratzinger Has Proclaimed Heresies. Bishop Tissier then makes a pronouncement that would probably shock the SSPX Liberalist Faction in the Society (but not our informed TRADITIO readers), when he says:
This pope has professed heresies in the past! He has professed heresies!.... He has never retracted his errors.... When he was a theologian, he professed heresies; he published a book full of heresies.... He has a book called Introduction to Christianity; it was in 1968. It is a book full of heresies.... This book denies Christ's atonement of sins.... It is worse than Luther, much worse.
He has put up doubts regarding the divinity of Christ, regarding the dogma of the Incarnation.... It is very true. He re-reads, re-interprets all the dogmata of the Church. This is it. This is what he calls the "hermeneutic" in his discourse of December 22, 2005 [this Ratzinger doctrine is also known as "living Tradition," the interpretation of existing Catholic doctrines in a new light].... We must know that he has professed heresies.... I have read Joseph Ratzinger and have read his books. I can assure you that it is true.
Reinterpreting Vatican II in the "Light of Tradition" Rejected. Some indultarians fail to condemn Vatican II itself and instead express the desire to interpret the Council "in the light of Tradition," whatever that means. Fellay has in the past countenanced such a view. Bishop Tissier condemns this faulty notion outright:
You cannot read Vatican II as a Catholic work.... I will say, one day the Church should erase this Council. She will not speak of it anymore. She must forget it. The Church will be wise if she forgets this Council ... as a blank tabula rasa.
Now two of the four SSPX bishops have spoken out against the Fellay-Schmidberger notion of cozying up to Newrome and Newpope. Perhaps that it why, since the SSPX bishops' meeting in early March, Fellay has softened his pro-Newrome tone. But is he sincere, or is he merely trying to soften opposition to the SSPX Liberalist Faction at the July General Chapter, at which Fellay might be elected to an unprecedented 24-term as a virtual General Dictator? Only time will tell.
Fellay & Schmidberger have spread so much false propaganda at their "lectures" around the world to keep the SSPXers in tow to their designs that nothing they do can be taken at face value, but must be analyzed in terms of their liberalist goals and well-established modus operandi.
Here in France there has been published a letter dated August 12, 1998, sent by SSPX Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais from the Society's headquarters to Fr. Pierre-Marie, one of the Dominicans at Avrille, whose series of two articles was recently published in the SSPX's Angelus magazine, in which he argued that the Novus Ordo rite of consecration for bishops is valid, in spite of his knowing since 1998 that Bishop Tissier was doubtful about the new rite. [These articles do not seem to correspond with actual SSPX policy, as the SSPX routinely reordains presbyters originally ordained in the Novus Ordo rite and presumably would reconsecrate bishops originally ordained in that rite.] The question about this rite is crucial, since Benedict is the first pope not to have been consecrated as a bishop in the valid traditional rite. If Ratzinger was not validly consecrated as bishop, he is not validly Bishop of Rome, and therefore not validly pope.
Opposed to the Angelus article, however, Bishop Tissier's letter expressed his doubt about the validity of the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration, introduced in 1969 (Fr. Ratzinger was consecrated Archbishop of Muenchen and Freising [Munich], Germany on May 28, 1977). Bishop Tissier wrote: "J'en conclus à un doute sur la validité des sacres épiscopaux conférés selon le rite de Paul VI" [I have reached a conclusion of doubt on the validity of the validity of the episcopal Orders conferred according to the rite of Paul VI].
As a result of his doubts about the validity of the Novus Ordo rite, Bishop Tissier recommended that Bishop Salvador Lazo of San Fernando, The Philippines, who had in retirement associated himself with the Society of St. Pius X, not be authorized to confer the traditional Sacraments of Confirmation and Holy Orders because they might not be valid, as Lazo too was consecrated in the Novus Ordo rite on February 3, 1970. Bishop Tissier wrote: "La seule solution est de ne pas lui demander de confirmer ni d'ordonner [The only solution is to ask him not to confirm or ordain].
Before writing this letter, Bishop Tissier gave an interview to Fideliter, the SSPX's French periodical, in its May-June issue. In this interview Bishop Tissier indicated that he considers the question of sede-vacantism open. Moreover, he states that Archbishop Lefebvre as well "a laissé la question théologique ouverte" [left the theological question open], quoting the Archbishop as follows:
Je n'exclus pas que ces papes n'aient pas été papes; l'Eglise devra nécessairement se pencher un jour sur leur situation; un prochain pape avec ses cardinaux se prononcera peut-être, jugeant que ces papes n'avaient pas été papes. Mais moi, je préfère les considérer comme papes. [I have not excluded the possibility that these popes (Paul VI and JPII) were not popes; the Church must necessarily reach a conclusion one day on their status; a subsequent pope with his cardinals will perhaps pronounce himself, making a judgment that these popes were not popes. But for me, I prefer to consider them as popes.]
The Newvatican released on April 29, 2006, the statistics on the number of Newchurch presbyters as updated to 2004. Here is the handwriting on the wall for Newchurch:
Only Africa and Asian increased, but the combined number on those two large continents totals less than twice as many as the United States alone (79,481 vs. 42,839). Newvatican called the decline "rather disappointing." Just more evidence that the bloom is off the "Springtime of Vatican II."
Europe will soon be hearing not the triumphant Christian church music of Bach, Mozart, and Handel on the pipe organ, but rather the muezzin's la illahi illa allah, wa muhammed rasula alla from minarets throughout Europe.
A European Union guideline of 2002 from Brussels orders that all electric devices that are put into general use from July 1, 2006, must not contain more than 0.1% of lead, mercury or cadmium. However, organ pipes include up to 50% lead in order to obtain the famous and desired tonality of the aptly-named "King of Instruments," which has accompanied Catholic church music and Gregorian chant from the time of the Holy Roman Emperor Charlesmagne in 800. What's next? Will the Brussels EU bureaucrats allow only the Novus Ordo Mess with profane guitar and rock music?
Don't expect any thunderous affirmations from the Conciliar popes for Roman Catholicism and Western culture. JPII permitted the building of the first mosque ever in Rome. Now, under Benedict-Ratzinger, a giant mosque is being designed to hold 70,000 worshippers beside the 2012 Olympic Games complex in London. St. Peter's Basilica, in comparison, holds only 60,000 worshippers.
"It will be something never seen before in this country," said Abdul Khalique, a senior member of Tablighi Jamaat, a worldwide Islamic missionary group that is proposing the mosque as its new UK headquarters. Tablighi Jamaat has been fingered by the United States FBI as a recruiting ground for the terrorist group, Al-Qaeda, and by British police as associated with the July 7 London bombings. [UNEC]
The TRADITIO Network has been informed that on Fr. Terrence Finnegan, an independent priest at Our Lady of Quito Chapel in Phoenix, suffered a heart attack and congestive heart failure on April 29. Fr. Finnegan is in stable condition at the moment, but will be operated upon. Respice, quaesumus, Domine, animam famuli tui Terentii....
The diocese of Campos, Brazil, with a population of 900,000, of which 836,000 are Catholics (92%), was a unique place. Its bishop, Antonio de Castro Mayer, told the pope "NO! I won't go along with this unCatholic Novus Ordo service." Thus, Mayer never implemented the Novus Ordo in his diocese. When the Vatican forced him to retire at age 77 in 1981, the Traditional Latin Mass was still being celebrated by virtually every priest in every church in Campos. And Newvatican left him alone during the intervening twelve years.
At Vatican II Bishop Mayer had been one of only four bishops who voted Non placet against the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, together with Dom Geraldo de Proenca Sigaud (Jacerzinho), Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, and Antonio Cardinal Bacci. The other 2,147 voted Placet. Bishop Mayer and 250 other prelates were part of the "traditional command" within the Vatican II, the Coetus Internationalis Patrum, formed by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and composed of traditional Fathers who tried to stop the over-powerful influence of the rich and popular Modernist wing directed by Augustin Cardinal Bea. Archbishop Lefebvre gathered together a group of twelve theologians, who wrote under his direction the famous Critical Examination of the Novus Ordo Missae, to which Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani added a preface, and thus the document is commonly known today as the "Ottaviani Intervention."
After the Novus Ordo was announced for implementation in November 1969, Bishop Mayer took a courageous step and wrote to the pope exactly what he thought of this unCatholic service and refused to implement it.
The Novus Ordo Missae [New Order of Mass] shows, by its omissions and by the changes that it has brought to the Ordinary of the Mass, as well as by a good number of the general rules that describe the understanding and nature of the new Missal in its essential points, that it does not express, as it ought to do, the theology of the Holy Sacrifice as established by the Holy Council of Trent in its XXII session....
The changes that prepared the Novus Ordo have not helped to bring about an increase in the Faith and the piety of the faithful. On the contrary, they remain very disturbed, with a confusion that the Novus Ordo has increased, for it has encouraged the idea that nothing is unchangeable in the Holy Church, not even the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Moreover, the Novus Ordo not only fails to inspire fervor, but to the contrary, diminishes the Faith in central truths of the Catholic life, such as the Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament, the reality of the propitiatory Sacrifice, the hierarchical Priesthood.
But Bishop Mayer was not just a man of words. He carried his words into action. Even after his retirement until his death on April 24, 1991, Mayer continued to be the leader of the traditional Catholics in Campos through the independent traditional Society of St. John Vianney (SSJV). His priests were banished from the Novus Ordo churches, ostracized, and physically threatened, but yet they managed to build their own traditional churches, chapels, and missions, and continued their ministry to traditional Catholics.
The SSJV in 2002 was sold out by Mayer's successor, Bishop Luciano Rangel, who had previously been consecrated by the Society of St. Pius X. After the sellout Rangel shortly resigned, and the SSJV is now headed by a Newvatican puppet "indult" bishop, Fernando Rifan, who performs the Novus Ordo Mess and encourages other "indult" priests to do so as well, as reported previously on here TRADITIO. There is some talk of the Society of St. Pius X selling out to this kind of a Novus Ordo "indult" arrangement. Quod Deus avertat!
Is it just possible that Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the SSPX, is beginning to get it? When TRADITIO was the first to step out in front of the issue of his tendency to sell out the SSPX to Newrome and Newpope, and criticized that tendency sharply, Fellay squirmed like a fish caught in Peter's net. Like Peter, he "denied it with an oath."
But now, some months later, Fellay seems to have undergone a Biblical metánoia, a change of mind. Is it sincere, or an election ploy? Our sources in the Society tell us that Fellay is now one of the TRADITIO Network's most dedicated readers. When after several months of TRADITIO's analysis of what was going on in the SSPX, two traditional periodicals agreed with TRADITIO's perspective on the matter, Fellay publicly agreed. Now, in an interview given to the French magazine Famille Cretienne on April 26, Fellay quoted from a previous TRADITIO Commentary: "We need action; words are not the important thing."
Yet, Fellay's metánoia is still not complete. Instead of getting on with his business and starting the next phase of the Traditional Catholic Movement, the Great Traditional Evangelization, he still seems to be all wrapped up with what Benedict-Ratzinger will do. Who cares? Newpope is acting for New Order; he makes no bones about that. Fellay, on the contrary, should be turning his attention entirely to evangelization for the traditional Roman Catholic Faith. The time is now right, as Newchurch continues to sink into the mire, to begin the Great Traditional Evangelization, not to waste time fretting about Newchurch politics.
Notice that all the hoopla about yet another "indult" for the Modernized Mass of 1962 being released last Maundy Thursday has come to nothing. All those ignoscenti "blog" sites were predicting it. TRADITIO didn't. Even if something had been released from Newrome, it would have meant nothing anyway, in practical terms. The Newchurch bishops already have all the power they need to establish 1962 Masses in their dioceses if they want to. They don't.
Fellay also stated in the interview that "opening the doors to the old liturgy would probably be the most fruitful way to resolve the crisis in the Church." TRADITIO begs to differ. First of all, Fellay is not even talking about the Traditional Latin Mass, but the Newchurch-recognized Modernized Mass of 1962, which includes significant "modernizing" changes in rubrics and calendar, to which even Archbishop Lefebvre, Founder of the SSPX, objected. We have seen what Newchurch has done to the 1962 Mass since the 1988 Ecclesia Dei "indult." It has been gradually woven in, to one degree or another, with the invalid Novus Ordo of 1969, so that now some "indult" sites even have altar girls and communion in the hand. Moreover, there is the nagging question of presbyters ordained with the New Ordinal of 1970 offering the Modernized Mass of 1962 Mass at the same time that they are offering the Novus Ordo Mess.
No, forty years of experience since Vatican II have now taught traditional Catholics that it is not only the Mass that was corrupted by Modernism. Newchurch and the Conciliar popes have introduced New Sacraments whose validity is in serious question, a New Theology ("we all worship the same god"; "all religions are equal"; the Jews can wait for their own Messias; Original Sin and Limbo are passe), and a New Morality (soft on sex crimes by presbyters, soft on homosexuality in Novus Ordo seminaries).
Fellay knows this because in the Famille Cretienne interview he admitted that the SSPX and Benedict-Ratzinger "take very different views regarding Vatican II." TRADITIO can be patient. It took Fellay the better part of a year to admit that TRADITIO's warnings about Newrome and Newpope were valid. Maybe, Deo volente, in a few more months he'll come around to a fully traditional Catholicism!
The TRADITIO Network has been informed that on the morning of April 25, 2006, Fr. Karl Pulvermacher, an independent traditional Capuchin, went into cardiac arrest secondary to pneumonia and pleural edema. He is conscious, but in grave condition on life support. Respice, quaesumus, Domine, animam famuli tui Caroli....