Buy the 2006 Traditional Directory.
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 the TRADITIO Network, 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 the TRADITIO Network, and their intentions are specially commemorated at Traditional Latin Masses offered. Indicate in the Message section of your payment "For TRADITIO Network." For other methods, see FAQ01: How Do I Help to Offset Expenses? |
In addition to all the other craziness that has affected the Jesuit Order since the time of Vatican II (like "liberation theology," in which they armed themselves and joined Communist groups in Latin America), Newjesuits are leading the introduction of dance into the invalid Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service. (No wonder Fr. Malachi Martin asked Pope Paul VI to release him from the Jesuit Order and release him to the secular priesthood him!)
A Jesuit dance ensemble from Boston College regularly performs at Canadian services and provides instruction in matters pertaining to "liturgical dance," which is condemned even by Newvatican (unless you are an African or the like -- talk about discrimination!). Now an Indian Jesuit by the name of Saju George is introducing a pagan Hindu temple dance into the Novus Ordo services across Canada.
The Newjesuits have been particularly active in Canada, where the Novus Ordo service is generally worse than in the neighboring United States -- if that were possible!) and have support from "Catholic" colleges, such as St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick, where the President, Michael Higgins, wrote that he was "surprised, if not in fact dismayed, that the pastor was unwilling to have such a dance performed on 'his' altar." In the great charity for which Newchurch is known (this is biting satire, folks), this Newchurch "educator" called the pastor in writing: "egregiously stupid and artistically illiterate" for trying to maintain a semblance of decorum at the Novus Ordo service. [Source: Toronto Star]
Those who access Newvatican's web site need to be very careful, not only doctrinally, but also technologically. The internet security company Sophos, which publishes each quarter a list of the world's "Dirty Dozen" spam sites, claims to have identified at least one computer with a Vatican City internet address that is being used as a spam-sending "zombie."
The vast majority of spam is relayed by "zombie" (also known as "botnet") computers, according to Sophos. The machines are usually hijacked by Trojan horses, worms, and viruses under the outside control of internet hackers. The practice provides spam messages with what appear to be legitimate internet IP addresses, making them harder to detect.
Those who have accessed Newvatican's web site are advised to clear their browser's memory cache, disc caches, and temporary internet files directory; install all operating-system critical updates pending; turn on their firewall; and run thorough virus and spyware scans in order to avoid being infected. [The Age]
Dear Fathers:
I just thought that you'd like to know what we students in "Catholic" high schools have to put up with. At. St. X. High School in the Northern California area, there is a "tradition" that every year the Virgin Mary statue is stolen. Many of the students are dismayed at this practice, but our presbyter-principal condones this behavior. Those students who have questioned this mockery of the Blessed Virgin Mary are advised to "loosen up." Earlier in the school year the presbyter-principal refused to discipline a student who popped open a canned drink during a Novus Ordo service in the gym, causing the celebrant to stop the service.
Dear Fathers:
Flipping through the channels on June 26, I noticed that the Charismatic EWTN Cable Network's service today was some East Indian rite, probably one of the Syriac rites. EWTN's charismatic nuns were replaced by Indian laymen and women behind the grille of the cloister -- isn't this a violation of the cloister? -- and recorded music was piped in. The service was celebrated in a foreign language, probably ancient Syriac (even Mel Gibson gave a few subtitles for the Aramean in his Passion of the Christ! That charismatic presbyter who once performed the Novus Ordo service in Hebrew was standing at one end of the altar looking perplexed.
Given the New Order line that the liturgy is supposed to be in the vernacular so that everybody can supposedly understand it, I wonder how EWTN justifies broadcasting this service? I pitied the poor guy who arrived late and was caught by the EWTN camera genuflecting with the most puzzled look on his face. "Did I come to the wrong place?," he must have been thinking. Yes, sir, you certainly did!
Just a quick note for TRADITIO Network readers. Reports, yet to be confirmed conclusively, are circulating here in Europe that Franz Schmidberger, former First Assistant to SSPX Superior General Bernard Fellay, will be appointed as the new Superior for the German District of the SSPX. He would replace Fr. Pflueger, who was elected on July 11 to replace Schmidberger as First Assistant of the SSPX and will join the SSPX headquarters at Menzingen permanently.
According to the reports, Schmidberger will leave Menzingen to take up residence outside Stuttgart. It is thought that Schmidberger will now be pulling fewer strings behind the scene, but that remains to be seen.
It's bad enough that the invalid Novus Ordo cookie is given away free, but in the Philippines you have to pay for it!
So widespread has the practice become, apparently, that the Newchurch Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales, of Manila, had had to warn his presbyters in a circular not to demand fees before giving the sacrament to public schoolchildren. Not only is such a practice sacrilege, but it is illegal as well. The Philippine Department of Education prohibits collecting money from public-school students. [Manila Standard]
Too bad some of the parents of those Manila schoolchildren didn't sue Newchurch for not getting what they paid for!
Dear Fathers:
I would point out that not all guitar music is profane. You must remember that the vihuela, the forerunner of modern gut-string classical guitar, was the instrument of the Royal Court of Spain. The vihuela and classical guitar is an appropriate continuo for non-secular polyphonic music. I will concede that all electric guitar and steel-string guitar music in general is not appropriate, and the crass folk music played at a typical "NO mass" (I still get a laugh out of that very appropriate acronym) is not only totally devoid of any artistic merit, but can even be hazardous to the faith.
The Fathers Reply.
Obviously, we're talking about the modern guitar. However, its predecessors were considered profane (meaning not suitable for liturgical purposes), except perhaps in the limited context of a continuo for period compositions (e.g., Vivaldi). The piano has its important uses too, but it is a profane instrument, not appropriate for a liturgical context. Interestingly, Newchurch, in contravention of Sacred Music tradition and Church strictures, has introduced both the guitar and the piano into the Novus Ordo service.
Dear Fathers:
My Newchurcher father informed me that he gave the "homily" at the Saturday and Sunday Messes at his parish, and he is preparing homilies for the future. He made a specific comment that he was relaying words from the Holy Spirit! It thus seems certain he is really no longer a Catholic at all, but a full-blown Protestant. I can grasp the thoroughly Protestant actor-posing-as-a-preacher-for-applause-and-attention condition, and I understand the great problem of presuming upon the credibility of the Holy Ghost, but can you please provide me with the reason why a layman is prohibited from offering a "homily"?
The Fathers Reply.
A sermon is a teaching function of the Church and is therefore restricted to the clergy sacramentally ordained for this purpose. In the Protestant sects, there are no Holy Orders, so any Tom, Dick, or Harry can prattle on. Of course, as you indicate, this was not a Catholic service. Catholic services have a sermon; the New Order sect has a "homily."
The way that you quote him as talking, your father seems to have become one of those "Charismatics," who derive from a particular branch of Protestantism. For further information, see FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics) in the section "Charismatic Movement."
Dear Fathers:
My grandparents, who were raised in the Detroit area, talk often about the late Fr. Coughlin. They enjoyed his radio broadcasts very much when they were growing up. However, I have heard a lot of bad things about Father Coughlin from people who claim that he was the first "radio hate monger." Of course, I know that this probably just means he wasn't politically correct. Would you please give us your perspective?
The Fathers Reply.
As you suspected, there's a lot of historical revisionism by post Vatican II liberalists, who resent anyone who challenges their Modernist beliefs. In the 1930s Fr. Coughlin was a highly-respected orator, particularly against the virulent atheistic Communism of his time (and of our time, though many seem to forget that Communist China today numbers over one billion citizens in a government that publicly executes Christians). Fr. Coughlin was known a champion of the common man and attacked capitalism, communism, socialism, and dictatorship. He was not a friend of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt's elitism, and his orations were powerful enough to force Roosevelt to change his politics in this area.
Roosevelt was not as popular then as people are led to think now. Most of Roosevelt's reputation in the minds of the current day pertains to his conduct of the Second World War. But from 1933 to 1941, Roosevelt was quite unpopular in many circles. The United States was isolationist, while he was interventionist (though he kept that pretty close to the vest). He and his wife, Eleanor, were not infrequently associated with left-leaning causes and policies. In conservative circles, Roosevelt was called "that pinko," that is, socialist.
Eleanor Roosevelt, though she was quite interested in the condition of the Jews and Negroes, who were part of the underclass in the United States at that time, was bigoted against Catholics, who were the subject of much hatred and bigotry, and a prime target of the Ku Klux Klan. According to historian John Cooney, Cardinal Spellman's biographer, for example, Mrs. Roosevelt "half-believed stories about papist plots, and she adhered to some of the bigoted propaganda against Catholics that had been part of her upbringing. For all her sophistication and intolerance of most forms of prejudice, she was wary of Catholics."
Fr. Coughlin was, as it were, Bishop Fulton Sheen's mentor. Fr. Coughlin was highly popular; his weekly radio sermons in the 1930s were listened to by an audience of 45,000,000, when the U.S. population was only 130,000,000. What Bishop Sheen later became for television in the late 1940s and 1950s, Fr. Coughlin was for radio in the 1930s. Sheen, by the way, was also a virulent anti-Communist, as was Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church at that time.
It is too bad that we don't have a Fr. Coughlin now. We desperately need one. He spoke out directly and vigorously against the evils of his time without pussyfooting. Now, unfortunately, all Newchurch seems to produce is wimps, from the top on down, full of Vatican-II speak, political correctness, and pure pusillanimity. Fr. Coughlin was a straight-shooter, whether you agreed with him or not. That is why the present-day liberalists hate him so much.
As previously reported on the TRADITIO Network, Una Voce has fallen on hard times. Like so many "indult" organizations, when it started out in 1967, three years after Fr. Gommar DePauw founded the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, it demanded the Traditional Latin Mass and condemned the Novus Ordo service, but, as the years went by, it gradually softened that position to accepting any crumb of the Modernized Mass of 1962 that Newchurch would give them. On July 14-16 another "indult" organization, the Latin Liturgy Association, held a national convention. Actually, "indult organization" is a misnomer for the LLA, as since 1975 the LLA has advocated the Latin Novus Ordo service or the 1962 Modernized Mass indiscriminately.
The problem with organizations like Una Voce and LLA is that the fail to demand their Catholic right. Every Catholic has the right, even the obligation (excepting the less than 1% of Eastern-rite Catholics), to worship at the true Mass, the Traditional Latin Mass. Like the Negroes who refused to sit in the back of the bus any longer and claimed equality as a right, these indultarians should be screaming to high heaven to get their right to the Traditional Latin Mass back.
Instead, like the starving Oliver Twist, they whine to their Newchurch masters, "Please, sir, I want some more" and settle for whatever scrap they can get, sycophantically doing obeisance to corrupt Newchurch bishops who would just as soon rape them as given them their Catholic right. They remind us of the words of the woman of Canaan in Scripture, who spoke of eating "the crumbs that fall from the table of their masters" (Matthew 15:27/DRV).
More than that, in their sycophancy to the New Order, the "indult" organizations have bought the Newchurch line. At least these people know that under the terms of the "indult," they have to accept publicity the validity of the invalid Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo service and the validity of Vatican II. Said one LLA member, Ted Corver, to the press: "Mass in the vernacular is a great teaching tool." Well, Ted, first of all, the vernacular service is not a "Mass"; moreover, it has confused so many Newchurchers about Catholic teaching that after 35 years of the New Order, even the Newchurch Catechists' Convention had to admit that catechesis has gone down the dump.
Even the founder of the Latin Liturgy Association, James Hitchcock, admitted to the press that "he and his family usually attend their home [Newchurch] parish.... 'I believe one should support one's [Newchurch] parish, so we only occasionally go to [the "indult" Mass].'" So, even the LLA's founder has turned from the Catholic Church to worship at the altar of the New Order. He predicts, moreover, that most Newchurch temples will start to throw a Latin phrase or two into the Novus Ordo service (undoubtedly for Newchurch to suppress growing criticism of the Novus Ordo service). Said Scott Calta, Secretary-Treasurer of the LLA: "We don't oppose Mass in the vernacular."
So, good Catholics, beware the "indult" sell-out. It seems that in semi-traditional Catholic circles these days, sell-out to the "indult," whether by groups like Una Voce or LLA, or by the SSPX, is the talk of the day. Why? It was Bishop Williamson of the SSPX who, for our money, put his finger on the cause when he said that traditional Catholics are getting tired of fighting. The Modernists know this, and play upon it.
But what does our Catholic Faith teach us? That we must hang in until the bitter end for what is right. At any time in the first four centuries of the Church, the Roman Catholics could have given in to Caesar. After all, he wasn't asking much: just a pinch of incense. Every Newchurcher we know would willing give that pinch of incense to Caesar today, and justify their doing so.
Yet 11,000,000 of our Roman Catholic predecessors laid down their lives rather than making even that trivial compromise to their Faith. Most of the names of those Caesars can't even be remembered, whereas the names of the Roman Martyrs ring out at every true Mass celebrated today: John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicity, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all those 11,000,000 martyrs, whose blood, so said the Church historian Tertullian, was the seed of the Church.
Dear Fathers:
What is meant by the term "last rites"? Is it simply the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, or is there more to it?
The Fathers Reply.
The Last Rites include a number of rites: not only the Sacrament of Extreme Unction (which Newchurch no longer has, having substituted for it a mere Blessing of the Sick) but also Holy Viaticum and the Apostolic Blessing with Plenary Indulgence, and usually Confession. In addition, there may be the Order of Commending the Soul, with its Psalms, Prayers, and Gospel.
Dear Fathers:
Have you heard that a new Italian cathedral in honor of Padre Pio is being built as a Masonic temple?
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, we have heard of it. (There isn't much that we haven't heard of!) What is being referred to is a Newchurch cathedral being built at San Giovanni Rotondo, where Padre Pio resided, which is thought to have Masonic elements. Of course, there is no surprise in this. We have always said that the New Order is "Protestant-Masonic-Pagan." The Chief Architect of the Novus Ordo liturgy, Hannibal Bugnini, was a Freemason, after all.
Padre Pio, of course, had nothing to do with the Novus Ordo liturgy of 1969. He died before it came in, and he refused even to say the transitional "Masses" leading up to it. For further information about his opposition, see FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics) in the section "Padre Pio."
A document was purportedly issued by the Masonic P2 Lodge in Italy just before Vatican II (March 1962). Whether this an authentic Masonic document or not, it conviently summarizes exactly what the New Order did starting at Vatican II to suppress the Roman Catholic Church. We summarize its list of items here.
Those Newchurchers sure know how to pick 'em! The Ignatius Press conglomerate has been a constant embarrassment to "conservative" Newchurchers. Its founder, one Joseph Fessio, a Jesuit presbyter, started a "conservative" college at the University of San Francisco until he was booted out by the Jesuit authorities and told to report for duty as assistant chaplain at a Southern-California hospital.
This presbyter, who had for years has dumped on traditional Catholics for not "obeying" (you know that old line), decided that when it came time for him to obey, he would refuse, instead flying off to Florida to found another college! (You may remember it: it's the one previously reported on TRADITIO as building a modernistic chapel that rivals the new oecumenical church of Fatima for ghastliness.) The presbyter also leads an organization that is fully comfortable with the invalid Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo service. He just wants "a reform of the [Vatican II] reform" (as if yet another "translation" would make any difference) and dumps on traditional Catholics for wanting the valid Traditional Catholic Mass.
Now it seems that Ignatius has been pushing the recordings of a Welsh pop star named Charlotte Church, described as "having the voice of an angel." Ignatius apparently misjudged the popper turned blasphemer. The pilot for The Charlotte Church Show was recorded before a live audience on July 12 in London. During the show Charlotte Church, as hostess, dressed as drug-using nun, smashed open a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary revealing a hidden can of cider, and spoke about worshipping St. Fortified Wine. The popper pretended to hallucinate while consuming communion wafers branded with Ecstasy smiley faces and denigrated her Pope Benedict XVI as a "Nazi."
Ignatius's customers were outraged, so Ignatius was forced to pull her products from its catalog. But is there really any surprise here? "If you lie with dogs, you get fleas," as the old saying goes. The late JPII was a great afficionado of rock music and put his cathedra in the midst of a rock concert. He said that he liked Church music all right, but he liked rock better. After 26 years of this type of conciliar papacy, no wonder Newchurch has no "sacred" music. It used to be that we mocked the hippie-tune Kumbaya, so favored in Newchurch. Now it's gotten far worse!
"Bishop W.:
"The city of M. has seen unfortunate controversy over the years surrounding our chapel where the Traditional Latin Mass has been offered uninterruptedly for the last twelve years. Once again, the bulletin from your parish down the street attacked our chapel as "not a true Roman Catholic Church" and asked readers to warn newcomers who go here that the chapel "is not in union with Rome nor with our diocese."
"This is code talk. It means that our independent traditional Catholic chapel, as well as the rest of traditional Catholics throughout the world, do not belong to the "Good Old Boys Club" that has used $1,500,000,000 of the hard-earned money of generations of Catholics to pay off sex-crime victims in the United States. This means that our traditional chapel does not belong to the inner circle of today's presbyters and prelates whose lifestyle in no way resembles the great Catholic priests and bishops of an especially glorious Catholic tradition in the United States.
"I am referring to our heroic North American Martyrs and the other brave priests who brought the Faith to the Indians of this country, the ethnic priests from all over Europe who accompanied the immigrants of the 1800s, the brave chaplains of two World Wars, and faithful parish priests across America who always honored their Oath against Modernism and who lived for the glory of Eternal Rome.
"What is the true meaning of "communion with Rome" according to Catholic teaching? Rome is the Eternal Rome of Sts. Peter and Paul, the Rome that leads the Catholic faithful to do the will of Our Lord Jesus Christ as defined in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. It is the Deposit of Faith taught by the Church and twenty centuries of dogmatic councils. To this Rome, all men, including popes, cardinals, bishops, priests, and laypeople, are subject. Catholics have the duty of being in communion with this Rome, just as the pope himself must be in communion with his over 260 predecessors in the Catholic and Apostolic Church. Our chapel congregation and all other Traditional Catholics are in union with Eternal Rome.
"Traditional Catholics lament the bitter fruits of Vatican II and reject Protestantism, Modernism, and the aberrations imposed by the new ecclesiology of this pastoral council. They reject the efforts of false ecumenism or communion with other sects at any cost. They reject the crippled, and certainly defective, Mass of Paul VI and the illicit suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass canonized for all time by the dogmatic Council of Trent and Pope St. Pius V's Bull Quo Primum. They reject the practices of communion in the hand, elimination of the altar rail, the hidden or non-existent tabernacle, the "sign of good fellowship" during the "eucharistic prayer" -- all of which violate the spirit of reverence required at Holy Mass and undermine faith in the True Presence of Christ in the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar.
"They reject general absolution, profligate annulments, a supper table rather than an altar, emphasis on the narrative rather than the sacrificial nature of the Mass, emphasis on the community rather than Christ Crucified. They reject the emasculation of the priesthood through the proliferation of unwarranted use of the priesthood of the laity, which is a Protestant concept. They reject the exclusion of Saints from the Mass and the inclusion of banners, blues singers, banjo players, hootenanny music, concelebrations, and all other obscene humiliations, Modernist insults, and reformist innovations heaped upon the Church in the last forty years.
"This is the "communion with Rome" referenced by the unfortunate announcement in the bulletin from your parish down the street. This is what the Good Old Boys Club of the Vatican II Church means by "Rome." We do not serve this ape of the Catholic Church that Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen predicted when he said:
He [Satan] will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ.... But the twentieth century will join the counterchurch (Fulton J. Sheen, Communism and the Conscience of the West, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1948, pp. 24-25).
"For those confused by all this doubletalk of the Vatican II Church and who seek rather the True Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the salvation of their souls, for those who are tired of "presiders," memorial tables, eucharistic ministresses, and the New-Age Novus Ordo religion and who seek rather to know, love and serve God and to hold fast to Tradition and the Catholic Faith of their ancestors: Welcome to our traditional Catholic chapel!"
The TRADITIO Network has been informed that Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy passed away the night of July 19, 2006, in Arkansas, where he was being treated for bone cancer. A traditional Requiem Mass will take place on Monday, July 24, 2006, with interment the following day.
He wrote many works on Traditional Catholicism, including many articles and three important books on authentic Catholic Tradition:
In March 2006 Dr. Coomaraswamy was interviewed on the Coast to Coast syndicated radio program by Art Bell concerning the current state of the Catholic Church. He contended that the Catholic Church has veered away from its Tradition and has been suffering because of it. For example, he discussed the fact that the New Order service doesn't use the words that Christ specified for consecrating the Host and is a type of "false mass," part of an agenda to create a one-world religion.
Dr. Coomaraswamy ended his work, The Problems with the New Mass by quoting the words of St. Basil the Great, who was fighting a takeover by heretics of the Catholic Church of his time. St. Basil's words, written in the year 376, resound through the ages as if they had been written for today's crisis in the Church. The Great Saint's words contradict the belief that the devastation of the post Vatican II period is something radically different in the Church. This has all happened before!
Religious people keep silence, but every blaspheming tongue is let loose. Sacred things are profaned; those of the laity who are sound in faith avoid the places of worship, as schools of impiety, and raise their hands in solitude with groans and tears to the Lord in heaven (Epistula 242).... Matters have come to this pass: the people have left their houses of prayer and assembled in the deserts. To this they submit because they will have no part of the wicked Arian leaven (Epistula 242).... Only one offense is now vigorously punished, an accurate observance of our fathers' traditions.... Joy and spiritual cheerfulness are no more; our feasts are turned into mourning; our houses of prayer are shut up; our altars are deprived of spiritual worship (Epistulae 243).
In more ways than one, July 11 was a hot day in Econe, Switzerland, where the duodecennial SSPX General Chapter Meeting was held. The SSPX electors were sweating in their cassocks in humid temperatures exceeding 30 degrees Celsius. The balloting dragged on through the day, not as in 1994, when Bernard Fellay was elected to replace Franz Schmidberger before the end of the morning. The re-election of Fellay this time was hard to get, and the opposition was violent.
Reports from inside the "conclave" reveal that at a minimum two bishops, Tissier de Mallerais and Williamson, opposed the sellout strongly, and Fellay does not have enough power to get rid of them. The internal opposition to the sellout is now becoming public, and these bishops are now publicly associated with that opposition. There are other reports that even the newly-elected First Assistant Superior, Niklaus Pflueger, is now opposed to a sellout.
Fellay might, it is said, for the time being try to maintain the status quo and not sign the sellout, instead continuing his contradictory speeches until the now torn Society can settle down. Fellay is said to be deciding which policy to adopt. The coming next weeks will be key.
Dear Fathers:
Thank you for this wonderful Apostolate that you provide. Also, thank you for your information and Commentaries on the current SSPX situation. I am a parishioner at an SSPX chapel, and without turning to your network, I would be totally in the dark concerning the "wheeling and dealing" that has been going on between the SSPX and Newchurch.
My question is as follows. If Bishop Fellay is foolish enough to take Newvatican's bait and take the deal, which would surely destroy the SSPX (as per Newvatican's wishes) and cause a schism within the Society, what would happen to the SSPX property and financial holdings? Would they be turned over to Newchurch? Although this is a minor issue compared to the potential loss of souls, I am very curious whether the faithful of the SSPX would have to begin footing the bill for Newchurch's mafia-like network.
The Fathers Reply.
Newvatican would likely claim, after any "reconciliation," that the SSPX assets are part of Newchurch. The "Campos-style" type of sellout would place the SSPX (with the proposed working name, the "Administration of the Holy Savior") in the position of an "Apostolic Administration." Well, that means that Benedict-Ratzinger, or whoever is the pope at the time, has direct administration of the SSPX, its property, and its money. Remember that Benedict-Ratzinger isn't going to remain pope for much longer. The money could eventually come under the control of a Pope Kaspar or a Pope Martini. These are just some of many unknowns that make any "deal" with Newvatican so imprudent, to say the least.
Who knows? Under U.S. law, the Newchurch diocesan bishops could claim that the Society's money and property in their diocese is under their control. Many of them have already made this argument in state and federal courts in other cases. It's not a pretty picture. The SSPXers would be in the same position, then, as the Newchurch parishes, trying to defend their ownership.
Like the Newchurchers, SSPXers may see all the chapels and liturgical accoutrements that they had funded falling into the hands of the Modernists of Newchurch. They might see their statues sold off to adorn bars and pubs, their marble altars turned into butcher blocks, and their chalices turned into planters, just as has happened with any number of Newchurch locations. The legal controversy could go on for many years. There is no public indication by Fellay and the SSPX liberalist faction have given much thought to these consequences of a sellout.
As to a schism within the SSPX itself, the last time a schism occurred in the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), when the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV) broke off in 1983 to form a more traditional organization, the matter lingered in the courts for years. Things got very nasty indeed.
As we have cautioned before, SSPXers make sure that their donations are going into a local fund that is administered by their own local Board of Trustees for their chapel, not to the SSPX or Newchurch corporation. In case of "all Hell breaking loose" in an SSPX sellout, they had better be sure that they are the ones having the freedom of action to control their money and property, not some hand reaching over from Menzingen or Newchurch to pillage their local pockets.
The local Board of Trustees could then rent any local chapel property to the SSPX at $1 a month to provide the Mass. If the SSPX then sold out to Newrome, the local Board of Trustees could give the SSPX a month's notice and then cancel the rental agreement. This arrangement leaves the control of local chapel assets locally, where they should be under the present conditions in the Church: outside the ultimate control of the SSPX or Newchurch corporation.
There are a lot of Newchurchers who now wish that they had segregated their money and property in the same way that the parishioners of St. Stanislaus Kosta, of St. Louis, Missouri, were prudent enough to do. As a result, they have been able to keep their church and $11,000,000 in assets from the clutches of Newchurch archbishop Raymond "Bully" Burke, who wanted to confiscate everything of theirs to pay of for sex crimes. Now they are able to take independent action from corporate masters who wish to bleed them dry.
SSPXers still have some time left, but not too much, to learn from the mistakes of the past, to make sure that their donations are made payable to a local fund managed by their own Board of Trustees, not to a Menzingen or Newrome corporation.
Dear Fathers:
The greatest danger in the SSPX situation is that, under a Novus Ordo "Apostolic Administration," Newchurch would baby-step the Mass from 1962 (which is already a compromise with the fully Traditional Latin Mass) to 1965 to 1970 in Latin to the Novus Ordo service in the vernacular with koom-buy-ah for music. This would likely be done slowly and together with an infiltration of the Society's priesthood by diocesan "indult" types.
That is why a sellout to Newchurch would be lunacy. Newchurch has just approved a seminary document that officially ensures the destruction of what remains of its priesthood [really not a priesthood at all, but a presbyterate]. The New Order is not the Roman Catholic Church and does not have the Catholic Faith, although some who co-operate with it might still be Catholics owing to invincible ignorance. Judging from what else we have seen, I might call it invincible stupidity as well.
The Fathers Reply.
You point about the destruction of the Mass under a sold-out SSPX is well taken when you look at what has happened to the "Indult" Mass, which started as the 1962 Modernized Mass of Pope John XXIII and is now in most locations becoming some kind of hybrid between that Mass and the Novus Ordo service.
The second point that you raise is never spoken of. In any sellout deal, how would the SSPX (or rather its proposed working name, the "Administration of the Holy Savior") interact with the "indult" groups, when there is quite a bit of antipathy between the SSPX and those groups now. Fellay and the SSPX liberalist faction is apparently angling toward being the one and only "Newchurch-approved" group, under which the current "indult" groups would be subsumed and controlled. If anyone believes that arrangement will work, he must be a denizen of the Land of Oz!
We used to be shocked at these stories, but now it is clear how evil Newchurch has become in the clutches of the Modernist New Order, and it is becoming harder and harder to deny that, as a Roman archbishop, Vatican insider Fr. Malachi Martin, and others have claimed, there is evidence of satanism in Newchurch.
As the TRADITIO Network previously reported, Toledo Presbyter Gerald Robinson was convicted of murder on May 11. He is believed to be the first U.S. presbyter to be convicted of murdering a Newchurch nun, Margaret Ann Pahl. During his trial evidence was produced that the murder had satanic connections.
But there's more to the story. When a photograph of the presbyter appeared on television when he was arrested, a Toledo woman screamed: "He's the one!" She told reporters: "I recognized him the minute I [saw] him on TV." She accused the Newchurch presbyter of torturing and raping her in satanic rituals when she was a child. Now police are investigating how deep the satanic cult in the Diocese of Toledo extends. Already a lawsuit names Toledo bishop Leonard Paul Blair and Presbyter Gerald Mazuchowski.
Newchurch Presbyter Mazuchowski admitted in a newspaper article that he was part of an informal group called Sisters of Assumed Mary. Now it is being stated that Presbyter (now Felon) Robinson, Newchurcher Gerald Mazuchowski, and other "clergy cohorts" dressed as nuns and used women's nicknames during "elaborate, ritualistic ceremonies" in the basement of St. Adalbert's Newchurch parish.
The victim, now in her early 40s, claims that the presbyters and their Newchurch cohorts began to rape her in 1968, after the New Order took over after Vatican II, when she was 5 years old, and continued to do so until she was 12. In addition, the victim says that the presbyters cut her with a knife as a sacrifice to Satan, killed a rabbit, and made her drink its blood, while they drew an upside-down cross on her stomach.
Newchurch bishop Leonard Paul Blair has failed to address the seriousness of these charges. Rather, like all the Newchurch bishops, Blair has tried to hide under the technicality of a "statue of limitations." It is not at all certain that Blair's ploy will succeed. The court is now hearing a motion to quash the bishop since the case may be "unique in the legal landscape because the defendants actively disguised themselves as nuns and used aliases." Thus, the victim did not know her abusers at the time, which made it impossible for her to file a suit against the perpetrators earlier. [Source: Toledo Blade]
A local source has reported to the TRADITIO Network that these crimes went on for over twenty years with a large group of Newchurch presbyters. Several women who do not know each other have separately made the same claims of suffering group satanic ritual abuse and torture in Newchurch parishes and seeing infants and babies murdered in satanic rituals. The case was put on hold only while Presbyter Robinson was convicted for murder. Now the investigation is proceeding full speed ahead.
Here we go again. Newchurch is not a religion; it is a secular political party. Its bishops don't talk religion -- at least not the Catholic religion -- but use their fancy hats to play politics.
The Philippine Department of Justice is investigating six Newchurch bishops for treason, in that they allegedly attempted with a Philippine senator to overthrow the government of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in the so-called "Oakwood Mutiny" of July 2003.
Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales said, "No one is above the law." [Source: Sun Star]
There has been a story going around in traditional circles for many years called the "Siri Theory." This story has it that Cardinal Giuseppe Siri, Archbishop of Genoa, was elected in the conclave of 1958, but was intimidated from accepting the papacy because the Modernists wouldn't have it (he was supposedly too anti-Modernist).
Frankly, we haven't given the theory much credence, as the story has a number of holes in it, and there wasn't even one single story, but a number of variations. It came in a lot of variations. It seems that our skepticism was well founded, since in recent months it seems that new evidence has undermined the "documentation" on which some based the story.
Recently, an additional wrinkle has come up. Supposedly, in a taped interview that has come to light in which Fr. Malachi Martin, a Vatican insider who was active in Rome at that time, claimed that Siri had been elected at the conclaves of both 1958 (which elected John XXIII) and 1963 (which elected Paul VI), but declined election (for reasons that are varied in various versions of the story). Thus, Fr. Martin's version would indicate the contrary of the Siri Theory, that in fact John XXIII and Paul VI were legally elected. Moreover, Fr. Martin acted in a way that indicated he believed these to be legal popes: he served John XXIII on various missions, and he applied to Paul VI for secularization from the Jesuit Order.
We have looked askance at "fantastic" explanations of the present-day condition of the Church. The Siri Theory, extreme Fatimism, Apparitionism, and all the rest that have taken possession of so many minds today appear to us to be efforts by confused people to assuage themselves with comforting "supernatural" explanations for the condition of the Church, in which they themselves consequently bear no responsibility, whereas Catholic theology and Church history provide all the explanation and guidance needed.
You see, the Church has been in trouble for most of its existence. Although there have been some excellent popes, there have been some real ringers. One was excommunicated, one was deposed, forty of them were suspected of personal heresy, and there were periods in which pope after pope was morally "bad." In one period, the vast majority of bishops were heretics, and the pope was wrapped in the odor of heresy. In many periods, bishops have been venal, avaricious, and duplicitous. It would probably correct to say from the standpoint of Church history that the Church has had more "bad" periods than "good."
What seems to skew the opinion of so many Catholics ignorant of the history of their Faith is that the period some of them knew, the post World War II period until Vatican II, was one of the best periods of the Faith, which, with some exceptions, was growing with vigor and health. That post-war period, just as in the western economy and culture, was a high point in the history of the Church, not the norm. It was as if the Catholic world had reached the peak of a roller-coaster, only to begin one of its most precipitous declines.
Yet through of this, the Church of Christ did survive. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass went on, the Sacraments went on, Catholic doctrine and morality were studied and preached. Courageous Saints stood up to evils in the Church and even in the popes. These are the great names that still ring in our ears today: Athanasius, Augustine, Basil, Cyril, Martin, and others. Eventually, after several decades, or even centuries, the Church returned to a better condition, "bad" popes were ejected, and better ones were elected.
Thus, Christ's promise that His Church would be indefectible was kept, not by some "fantastic" magic, as it were, but by the grace He inspired in the hearts of courageous Catholics who fought for His Church. John Henry Cardinal Newman, in his monumental study, The Arians of the Fourth Century, concluded that what eventually brought the Church out of the heretical depths of the fourth century was not emperor or pope or bishops (most of whom were the heretics!), but the Catholic Faith in the hearts of the people, which never failed.
That is what is missing in the equation of our time. Where are those courageous Catholics who fight for Christ's Church? Yes, there are a few: Marcel Lefebvre and fully traditional Catholics who place Christ above "party," who reject unCatholic doctrine and practice, whether hawked by peasant or pope. And God does reward these faithful with his true Mass and Sacraments, divine doctrine, and morality.
But all too many in our time are willing to compromise with or sell out to a Newchurch that is not Catholic. Oh, yes, they have all kinds of fancy, legal-sounding arguments that supposedly justify them in doing so, but it is simply not Catholic to "obey" false Masses, false Sacraments, false doctrines, and false morals. The Saints knew this; that is why they spoke out -- publicly and strongly. One Saint called the pope a "murderer of souls." Another took a public oath that he would never obey the sitting pope until that pope recanted his errors. A group of eminent cardinals told yet another pope that he was preaching heresy and forced him to recant. None of these faithful went hat in hand to "negotiate" with error.
Good Catholics, we hear that those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it. We all need to stand up for God and His Church more -- and reject those who would compromise with Newchurch. For, in the end, they will be left with a vast wasteland: no Mass, no Sacraments, no doctrine, no morality. If you have any doubt of that, look at the wasteland of those who cling to supposed "indults" of and "compromises" with the New Order. Surely, they have forgotten the Roman historian Tacitus's prophetic words: Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant [Where they make a wasteland, they call it peace] (Agricola 30).
Dear Fathers:
After seeing TRADITIO's recent coverage of the "Indult" Mass in Hong Kong, I was really amazed that our little Traditional Mass in the corner of a fourth-floor tiny school chapel in the most unnoticeable spot in our 7,000,000-population city was known by anyone outside our little gathering of thirty people. I would like to tell you some more about this "Indult" Mass and how it is totally unmilitant as regards to restoring traditional Catholicism; how it is, from start to end, a Mass with people of modern mentality and designed to please the modern-minded.
We arrange the pews after they have been messed up by the Newchurchers, with whom we share the chapel. Every time they put away our pews to accommodate their "table" pattern, where they sit on carpets on the floor to "break the bread" and "share the chalice." Before every Traditional Mass we have to set up the pews again and put up the moveable communion rails. So we are just other animals in the zoo, like the gozillas sharing the same cage with the monkeys. That is the extent of Newchurch generosity. We had to bear it.
Once the cardinal (then bishop) was saying a Mass for us, and his assistant brought in a weird, modernistic chasuble for the bishop. I told him that this was weird and that we should use the other one we have always used. He said: "If you behave like this anymore, you will be another Lefebvre!" We had to bear it.
About the allegience to the New Mess, etc., you are right: the diocesan chancellor asked us to swear to Vatican II and the Novus Ordo before our first traditional Mass back in 2000. We had to bear it.
How can a Church claiming the continuity of the truths that it teaches water down, falsify, and obliviate its past? We are Chinese by nature, traditional, revering people. I just can't understand that. I quit the Novus Ordo service gradually until a year ago, and then completely got out of it. I have to bear it no more.
I don't go to the Hong Kong "Indult" Mass any more. I go to another traditional Mass. You Americans, who have the Traditional Latin Mass every week or every day, treasure it and thank God for it because many corners of the world are deprived of it.
My message is: not all Chinese people are cafeteria-type Modernists. At least I am not compromising. Yes, the majority of indultarians here are just Newchurchers and are against the traditional faith (as opposed to the traditional externals), but not all Chinese Catholics are so.
Most advocates of the "indult" are ignorant of a big gotcha! in the terms of the "indult." Under the terms of the 1984 "indult" Quattuor abhinc annos, which were incorporated into the later 1988 "indult" Ecclesia Dei, "Indult" Masses can be permitted only on condition:
That it be made publicly clear beyond all ambiguity that such priests and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call into question the legitimacy and doctrine exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.
So, by their presence at "Indult" Masses, the indultarians are telling the world that the invalid Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Mess is legitimate and doctrinally correct, just as good as, if not better than, the Traditional Latin Mass -- or at least the Modernized Mass of 1962. (For further information, see ECCLESIA: "Ecclesia Dei" -- Before and After the "Indult" in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics).
The bitterness of this condition has recently been tasted by the indultarians of Hong Kong. Newchurch cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun has put off their request to extend the use of the Modernized Mass of 1962 beyond the occasional offering. As an example of how the "Indult Mass" is straying farther from traditional Catholicism, the Hong Kongians' "Tridentine" Mass Association wants Zen to "approve the Saturday liturgy as an anticipated Sunday Mass." In other words, the indultarians want to go Novus Ordo with a Saturday Mass, which is certainly by no stretch of the imagination "traditional"!
Zen affirmed that liturgical reform and inculturation as defined by Vatican Council II remains the norm. He said that the diocese would continue to "permit, but not encourage" Catholics to attend the "Indult" Mass. Zen's "permission" was granted only on the explicit condition that the indultarians express their support of the legitimacy of Vatican II's Novus Ordo.
Zen also cited problems with regarding a 3 p.m. service as an "anticipated" Sunday service. This time wouldn't even satisfy the Jews, who don't start counting to count the day until sunset of the day before. Zen has refused to "permit" an "Indult" Mass every week. The Modernized Mass of 1962 is "permitted" only at designated times and places, led by Novus Ordo presbyters designated by the cardinal.
Another member of the "Tridentine" Mass Association, one Newsalesian Brother Carlos Cheung Sum-yui, said that the indultarians have no problem with the "liturgical reforms of Vatican Council II." "No Catholic in Hong Kong doubts the legitimacy of liturgical reform and inculturation. It is also impossible to turn back to the old rite," he said, also stating that many of the Association members are flagrant double-dippers, going to both the "Indult" Mass and the Novus Ordo Protestantized service. [Asian News]
It is just this kind of Chinese-cafeteria Modernism that will nullify any return of the Traditional Latin Mass to Newchurch. It is clear since 1984 and 1988 that the "indult," far from restoring the Traditional Latin Mass, has in less than twenty years metamorphosed that Mass into a tertium quid, the "Indult" Mass, a bastard of the New Order.Now here's one you don't often hear about. The Newchurch bishops of Great Britain are rebelling against their Cardinal Primate. The bishops are hopping mad that Murphy-O'Connor has refused to sack his Director of Public Affairs and main Policy Advisor, who had a series of public affairs, one of which led to his girlfriend having an abortion.
The Director of Public Affairs, aptly named, was accused by the bishops of "heinous hypocrisy." He is also accused of getting a second woman pregnant, whose baby died too, in a miscarriage. [London Times]
Michael Fay projected the right facade for a Newchurch presbyter in the Bridgeport, Connecticut, diocese. He was a social liberal, beloved to Newchurch liberals. For an "advocate of the poor," he lived a gilded lifestyle, including a black-tie bash that he threw for himself at the Pierre Hotel, one of the premier hotels in New York, in May 2003. Then there was the half-million-dollar vacation condominium in Florida and the luxury apartment in New York, the expensive luggage, jewelry, designer clothes, and expensive coifing.
Parishioners at his former parish said that he urged them to "show compassion to the needy," and they obliged by putting $10,000 or more a week into the church's collection baskets. What Presbyter Fay did not tell his parishioners was that "the needy" were himself! Presbyter Fay typically kept donations to the church in his desk drawer instead of promptly depositing them in the church's bank account and made it difficult to track how the funds were used.
Bishop William Lori sat on his hands, as is the wont of all Newchurch bishops to do when their presbyters embezzle from the Church. Lori had violated diocesan policy by failing to audit the parish's finances for more than five years. Frustrated, the Newparish bookkeeper asked two private detectives to review records that she had copied. The detectives consequently documented at least $200,000 in personal spending by Fay from Church funds. In May 2006 the investigators took their findings to the Darien police. Now, FBI agents are investigating the case. [New York Times]
Fay earned a degree from St. Mary's Seminary in Baltimore in 1977, the same seminary that Fr. Gommar A. DePauw left in 1963 to found the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, indicating that there was corruption in the seminary. His charges were later proven true.
Good Catholics, here we have more evidence of how Newchurch is rotten to the core. Newchurch bishops allow their presbyters to embezzle church funds with no consequences, until courageous laypeople take matters into their own hands. More and more Catholics are beginning to wonder whether these New Order bishops are valid. Whether they're valid or not, they're certainly incompetent, grossly negligent, and malfeasant. The Newchurchers should do what the Catholics of Rome used to do with bad bishops: run them out of town!
Dear Fathers:
I was surprised to read in one of your recent Commentaries that "Tridentine" is an incorrect designation for the Traditional Latin Mass. Is your objection to this term based upon the fact that the Council of Trent merely codified the Mass which had been in existence much longer?
The Fathers Reply.
It is Newchurch that uses the term "Tridentine" Mass because then it can talk about other "Masses," like the "Mass of Paul VI." Traditionally, there is essentially only one Roman Mass. Catholics before Vatican II never went around saying, "Are you going to the Tridentine Mass today?" Also, Newchurch uses the term "Tridentine" to imply that the Council of Trent made up this Mass, so why couldn't the Council of Vatican II make up it own Mass too, so their argument goes?
As any traditional Catholic should be fully aware by now, the Council of Trent did not devise a "Tridentine" Mass. The Traditional Latin Mass, existing essentially from Apostolic times, and in virtually its current form from around the fourth century (the Sacred Canon from about the second century), was merely canonized by Pope St. Pius V to the Roman form, purging certain local variations introduced in various regions outside Rome. A study of missals existing before 1570 indicates that no essential changes were made in 1570.
The Traditional Latin Mass in all its essentials was passed on by St. Peter, the first pope, to the Church. The Apostles themselves, according to St. Ambrose, worked at its elaboration. It reached its complete perfection with Popes St. Damasus (fourth century) and St. Gregory the Great (sixth century). As the great liturgical scholar Adrian Fortescue stated in 1912: the Traditional Latin Mass is "the most venerable in all Christendom, with a history of unbroken use far longer than that of any Eastern rite, there being no doubt that the essential parts of the Mass are of Apostolic origin." (For further information, see MASSTRAD: The Traditional Latin Mass in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics).
The "Mass of Paul VI," as Newchurch calls it, is a completely different case. More than two-thirds of the Traditional Latin Mass received from the Apostles and Great Fathers was changed. Into the Novus Ordo service was incorporated many new Protestant, Masonic, and Jewish prayers. The Novus Ordo service, invented by the Freemason Hannibal Bugnini, is far worse than the Anglican service that Pope Leo XIII found invalid in 1896!
When Newchurch Archbishop Albert Ranjith was appointed on December 10, 2005, Secretary of Newvatican's Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments Commission under Francis Arinze, some "indult" and SSPX voices hailed him as a "traditionalist," this in spite of the fact that Ranjith had never celebrated even the Modernized Mass of 1962. (For further information about Arinze, see traditional author Patricius Anthony's article ARINZE: Cardinal Arinze's Changing Church in the TRADITIO Network's Features Department.
Now Ranjith's true colors have come out. In a July 13 interview, the Newvatican official started with the usual sop about "abuses" in the Novus Ordo. This is a common talking point for public consumption to make the Newchurchers think that "abuses" in the Novus Ordo are going to be corrected. Of course, they never are, especially in light of the fact that the greatest abuse is the existence of the Novus Ordo rite itself, fabricated by Freemason Hannibal Bugnini.
In the interview, Ranjith stressed that he did not mean to to suggest that the liturgical reforms [sic] of Vatican II had failed. No, according to him, they haven't produced enough fruit! As though Newchurch needed more "fruit" from the poison-tree of Vatican II. He rejected those who, like traditional Catholics, want to abandon innovations in the liturgy, but wish a Mass "of the past," i.e., the Traditional Latin Mass of the Roman Catholic Church.
In a stunning statement that indicates the clear hostility of Newvatican to a complete return of the Traditional Latin Mass, Ranjith said: If Newchurch fails to curb abuses in the Novus Ordo service, "people will attend the Tridentine [sic] Mass, and our churches will be empty." Here, Ranjith clearly indicates that the Traditional Latin Mass (incorrectly called by him "Tridentine") is the enemy of Newchurch: it is "theirs" (traditional Catholics'), not "ours" (Newchurch's).
Of course, Ranjith is right: the Traditional Latin Mass is the enemy of Newchurch and its New Order. The Newchurch bishops understand that; that is why they rarely "permit" it. It is just surprising for a highly-placed Newvatican official to state the point so clearly in public.
Ranjith had just returned from Ghana, where he participated in a workshop about how to inculturate African practices into the Novus Ordo. One African archbishop has called for the use of blood from sacrificed animals in the Novus Ordo service, since "Africans understand this sign better than wine." [Catholic World News]
Dear Fathers:
I've just read your Commentaries about the current state of the Society of St. Pius X, and it's so sad. The way Newrome is going, it is nothing but a broken reed, which is about to fall over as did the Egyptian Pharao (4 Kings 18:21). It seems that history repeats itself. If someone today had the courage to lean on Newrome, it would break. Instead, SSPX, and others for that matter, go hat-in-hand and sell their souls to the broken reed of the New Order.
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, that is the sad truth. The SSPX under Fellay is throwing away all of the progress made by Archbishop Lefebvre. Instead of spending its resources exclusively getting the traditional message out to more and more reachable souls, it is wasting its time in fruitless "negotiations" with, as you call it, the broken reed of the New Order.
Some SSPXers are starting to wonder whether Newrome isn't deliberately wasting the time of the SSPX in ecclesiastical games just so that the SSPX can't raise its voice ever more powerfully and widely in the traditional cause. Instead, its top officials spend their time reacting to Newrome, its periodicals debate whether the New Order is valid or not, its priests' "sermons" are more and more becoming political tracts worthy of a Jesse Jackson.
Just imagine what the SSPX could do if it eschewed the New Order entirely and invested all its time and money in getting out the traditional message. It would be awesome! Instead, the Society under Fellay is merely becoming Newrome's hand-puppet.
The TRADITIO Network seems to have called it. We Europeans are reading in the Italian daily Il Giornale that although Bernard Fellay, SSPX General, stated in a public speech to SSPXers on June 22 at Winona, Minnesota:
We have no idea of any compromise. There is nothing to negotiate. You cannot negotiate the Faith. If we go to Rome, we go not to negotiate -- it is to simply ask these authorities to come back -- that is all.
Fellay has had in his pocket for "several weeks" the exact terms of a proposed sellout pact with Newrome. Il Giornale reported: "The Vatican forwarded several weeks ago [già da diversi settimani] precise propositions to reach peace and the re-entrance of the Lefbvrists into full communion with Rome [sic]." Whether Fellay had the text of this proposed "pact" with Newrome as early as the June 22 speech, he knows. One wonders whether even the forty electors at the recent elections knew. Certainly, the SSPX membership did not.
"All is ready for the agreement between the Holy See and the Fraternity of Saint Pius X, founded by the 'rebel' Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre," reports Il Giornale. And what are the terms of this sellout, according to this conservative daily originally founded by now Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berluscone?
Firstly, according to Il Giornale, for its part, the SSPX would accept the validity of JPII's "excommunications" of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bernard Fellay, Alfonso de Galarreta, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, and Richard Williamson, and Antonio de Castro Mayer, which even eight leading Roman canonists have publicly told JPII was invalid. In return, Newrome will lift the invalid "excommunications."
Secondly, Newrome will float another "indult" for the Modernized Mass of 1962. Almost twenty years have passed since the Ecclesia Dei "indult," and still very few dioceses have even a single "Indult" Mass! The vast majority of the Newchurch bishops don't want it. Those that do have all the authority they need already.
What Newvatican expects from Fellay is that the Society (or what will remain of it) will have to swear allegiance to the New Order and to be co-opted into and answer to that New Order. This has remained a requirement since the first "indult" of 1984, Quattuor abhinc annos.
Researchers on the life and times of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Founder of the Society of St. Pius X, have uncovered an enlightening document that is omitted from the standard biographies. Many today look to the archbishop's uncompromisingly traditional words and to his wisdom for guidance on how to regard the various problems in the Church since Vatican II.
The question is frequently asked about the legitimacy of what are now called the "conciliar" popes, that is, the popes who implemented the Second Vatican Council and its New Order: Paul VI (1963-1978); John Paul I (1978), who is usually omitted since he did virtually nothing, having died a month after his election; John Paul II (1978-2005), and Benedict (2005-). (Some include John XXIII (1958-1963) as well, though he died before Vatican II ended and did not promulgate a single document of the Council.)
What did Archbishop Lefebvre, who personally knew all of these popes, think about this question of legitimacy? The researchers have found a transcript of an address of February 24, 1977, in which the archbishop responded to questions by the seminarians at the SSPX seminary at Econe:
Question of the Seminarian. The ultimate question, then, is: was Pope Paul VI, or is he now, the successor of Peter? If the answer is in the negative (Paul VI was never pope or is no longer pope), our answer will be that of the periods of sede vacante; that would simplify the problem. Certain theologians affirm their reliance on the assertions of theologians of times past, approved by the Church, who have studied the problem of a pope who is heretical or schismatic or who has in practice abandoned his office of Supreme Pastor (le problème du Pape hérétique, schismatique ou abandonnant pratiquement sa charge de Pasteur suprême).
Answer of Archbishop Lefebvre. It is not impossible that this hypothesis would one day be confirmed by the Church (Il n'est pas impossible que cette hypothèse soir un jour confirmée par l'Eglise). For there are some serious arguments for it.... Now, in the environment of the liturgical reform, the doubts over the validity of the Sacraments become month by month more numerous. The new rites contain in themselves serious doubts (Les rites nouveaux eux-mêmes portent en eux des doutes sérieux). Souls are constantly in a situation of danger of death.
Thus, the hypothesis of what is now known as sede-vacantism was an open question for the archbishop. He recognized that eminent theologians of the past (such as St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church) had entertained the hypothesis. As he said, this is indeed a serious question that cannot be rejected out of hand. It is one that requires the most serious, open-minded study by qualified theological scholars who are fully conversant with the arguments as contained in the original Greek and Latin documents. We certainly don't need more uninformed prattle, particularly from lay talking heads who are neither scholars nor or competent in all the original documents and languages.
Dear Fathers:
What do we know about the popes (and other clergy) and their pets?
According to his biographer, Pope Gregory the Great "possessed nothing in the world except a cat, which he carried in his cloak, frequently petting it, as his sole companion." Pope Leo XII had a cat whom he called "Micetto," meaning "little pussy-cat," from the diminutive of the Italian colloquial term "micio," meaning pussy-cat. Even Benedict XVI is said to be a cat-fancier. Cardinal Sforza was said to have paid a small fortune for a parrot that could recite the Apostles Creed." Other popes and cardinals (and certainly other clergy) must have had other pets, including dogs and horses.
The re-election of Bernard Fellay for an unprecedented 24-year term is only part of the story of the SSPX elections. Here is the "inside story" being circulated here in Europe.
Schmidberger was publicly ejected from the post of First Assistant because of international protest. The Fellay liberalist faction remains in control and will continue the sellout process to Newrome, but his faction is weakened. The SSPX liberalist faction has turned its back on the Society's Founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, who stated: "these people [Card. Ratzinger and the adherents of the New Order] have left the Church...; we can not collaborate, it is impossible."
At the July 11 elections, in place of Schmidberger and Bishop Galaretta, two new Assistants were named: Niklaus Pflueger and Alain-Marc Nely. It must be understood that the revised SSPX Statutes provide for a virtual dictatorship by the Superior General. Only the Superior General has a vote. The Assistants counsel him, but have no vote. There is no Executive Committee or Board of Directors that can forcibly restrain the power of the Superior General when he goes off the rails.
Pflueger will be the rubber-stamp for Fellay. He comes from Switzerland, like Fellay. He was most recently District Superior of Germany and is a member of the "German Network," Schmidberger's Newchurch-leaning bund. Schmidberger has disappeared from the spotlight, but he will remain in the shadows and will continue, with his network, to pull the strings. Nevertheless, this removal from the visible First Assistant position is felt by many here to signify that the worldwide protest against Schmidberger has been successful. The three SSPX bishops, most of the priests, and many of the faithful here were upset with Schmidberger.
Nely is Newvatican's candidate. He is French and is known to have more of a diplomatic facade than Schmidberger. He served as District Superior of Italy, so his activities were geographically, and perhaps spiritually, closer to the denizens of Newrome. If, as they say, Benedict-Ratzinger is a rottweiler, Schmidberger is a pit bull. Via reliable sources inside the Vatican, we have heard that Newrome looks on Nely already as a confederate. Newvatican thinks that as a compromiser, like Fellay, he can easily be bent to serve the New Order.
At the end of the day, Fellay is weakened because of a strong and growing opposition to his sellout policy. Schmidberger had to be sacrificed from a visible public role. Fellay will remain publicly alone as King, and Schmidberger will be King-maker behind the scene. The target of eventually selling out Archbishop Lefebvre's organization to Newrome remains, but now the opposition will be stronger than it was one year ago. And this opposition is growing, particularly here in France, by far the largest population within the SSPX (said to have about 75% of the membership).
There is talk here in Europe of a gradual replacement of SSPX officials "not enthusiastic enough" for a sellout to Newrome by members of the liberalist faction, who have contacts and agreements with Newpope's point-man, Commissar Hoyos of the "Ecclesia Dei" Commission. Under the revised SSPX Statutes, Fellay has that absolute power; he is required by the revised SSPX Statutes only to notify the Assistants of his actions. Negotiations with Newrome are expected to restart in September.
There is also talk here of reprisals against the three other bishops, who, although they did not publicly speak out in the clearest terms against Fellay, indicated a singular lack of enthusiasm for his programme. It will go hard on them, and on the SSPX members who want to remain faithful to Archbishop Lefebvre. Fellay is quite shrewd, however. He knows that he has to be careful about his public face because of the growing opposition to him, but behind the scenes he foments a civil war within the Society.
It is believed by many here that Fellay's sellout policy is going to destroy the unity of the SSPX and that he will eventually sell out what remains of the Society to Newchurch -- not right away, but gradually, just as Hannibal Bugnini sold out the Catholic Church to the Novus Ordo not all at once, but gradually during the period 1964 to 1969.
Dear Fathers:
I have to admit that I like Bishop Fellay and disagree with a lot of what you say about him, but whenever there are any developments in the SSPX, I turn first to the TRADITIO Network for commentary that always challenges me. As a matter of fact, it seems that the entire traditional community turns to the TRADITIO Network in the same way because the TRADITIO Commentaries are always the talk of the town! At least you always give lively, independent, knowledgeable commentary together with reasons for your analysis, citing the public words and actions of officials acting in their official capacity -- whether it is my Bishop Fellay or my pope Benedict.
The Fathers Reply.
We are pleased that so many SSPX members like yourself are reading our Commentaries so avidly. So, we hear, does Bishop Fellay and quite a number of those within the SSPX establishment. Whether anyone agrees or disagrees with our analysis is unimportant to us. We are like Plato's muon, the fly whose job it is to sting the horse into action, to get people thinking on their own, to overcome the "cultism" that one encounters too often these days within the Society.
That we are succeeding with so many SSPXers who are avid readers of the TRADITIO Network, whether they agree or disagree with us, tells us that we are hitting the mark. For example, hardly a day after our first commentary on the SSPX elections, one of the SSPX District Superiors was kind enough to devote virtually all of his monthly newsletter to discussing our points. We are most grateful to him for taking our analysis so seriously and for his candor in confirming the accuracy of several of the points that we had raised.
Also, it is well to remember that our sources are primarily European leaders within the SSPX itself, who have been intimidated by the Fellay liberalist faction from speaking out fully in their own names. So here they have a voice too. Since Fellay and the liberalist faction have since the negotiations with Newrome made the SSPX organs their own political mouthpieces (for example, just look at how The Angelus, a formerly varied publication, has changed into a political screed over the last year), in justice the other side should be aired as well.
What are Fellay and the liberalist faction so afraid of? Whenever anyone suggests that everything is not divinely perfect within the Society, instead of reflection and constructive action, they lash out, calumniate, intimidate, and expose confidential records of their clergy and members. But, in the end, the Society does not belong to Fellay. It belongs to its adherents, to those who were attracted by the principles of the Society's eminent founder, to those who have invested their presence and their pocketbooks into it.
We hope that the analysis the independent TRADITIO network provides will help you SSPX members get your own organization in order -- back to an uncompromised traditional Catholicism, back to its roots in the courage of your Archbishop-Founder Marcel Lefebvre. Each SSPXer now has to decide whether he is a Lefebvran or a Fellayite. It is your organization. It will sink or swim because of what you do -- or fail to do. Good luck, Candice.
The Pennsylvania Times Leader has revealed that James Timlin, who served as the Newchurch bishop of Scranton from 1984 to 2003, was personally aware that at least five of his presbyters had been accused of sex crimes, yet left them in their posts where they could commit more crimes. At least 25 presbyters serving in the Scranton Newchurch diocese have been accused of committing sex crimes with 46 minors. Included in that number were two "indult" society presbyters. Indeed, the New Order corrupts everything it touches.
In 1999 Church officials in Minnesota informed Timlin that the head of an "indult" society charted by Timlin and another presbyter had engaged in sex crimes with a student at an "indult" society school. After a lawsuit was setted for $454,550 in 2005, Timlin's successor withdrew the Newchurch diocese's approval for the society to operate there, and the society has since fled to Paraguay, where the local bishop is Opus Dei. The head of another indult society, which is still operating in other Newchurch dioceses, has been imprisoned for the same kind of thing.
Timlin, you may remember, was the Newchurch bishop who gave an "imprimatur" for the Modernized Missale Romanum of 1962. There was only one problem. Timlin was so incompetent in Latin that he broke with all tradition and published the imprimatur in English, the only words of English in the entire Latin liturgical book!
Maybe Newchurchers aren't so clueless after all. It seems that as the "springtime" of Vatican II sinks into a dank winter, Newchurchers are closing up their pocketbooks. Such was the conclusion of a Roundtable on Church Management held June 29, 2006, in Philadelphia, by Foundations and Donors Interested in Catholic Activities, told the National Leadership Roundtable on Church Management, attended by more than 200 top Newchurch leaders.
The Foundation's President reported: "The findings are striking. In the past eight years one archdiocese experienced a 47% decline in unrestricted net assets.... This amounts to a decline of a whopping $16 million a year." The Foundation President said that the wealth of Newchurchers and their capacity to give have grown enormously in the past generation or two, "but with few exceptions the growing superwealth and social position of Catholics [sic] have not meant a commensurate gain in funding Catholic institutional life."
In other words, Newchurchers may finally be getting sick of phony Messes, fouled-up Sacraments, Protestant doctrine being passed off as Catholic, the destruction of traditional church edifices, and especially the morals of Newchurch, which reek worse than a pig-sty.
The TRADITIO Network called it once again. As we previously reported, the fix was in, and Bernard Fellay managed to appoint enough electors to get himself elected on July 11 to a virtual dictatorship over the Society of St. Pius X for 24 years! By this act he turned his back on the example of Archbishop-Founder Marcel Lefebvre, who was prudent enough to step down after only one (already lengthy) 12-year term. By this act, Fellay has merely confirmed that the SSPX liberalist faction intends to retain its autocratic hold on what remains of the Archbishop's original group. Not even St. Francis presumed to control the Franciscans for a quarter of a century!
Unlike the experienced Archbishop, Fellay was hardly out of diapers at age 4 when Vatican II commenced. It only remains to be seen whether internal forces will start disintegrating the SSPX, which already suffered one major schism in 1985 when some of the SSPX's best priests left to form the more traditional Society of St. Pius V. It is no secret that a number of SSPX priests are not happy with the autocratic and "cultish" direction of the Society under Fellay's management and/or with Fellay's recent approaches to become part of the New Order at Rome.
Moreover, SSPX laymen are organizing in France to put a crimp in the plans of the Fellay liberalists. Other reports indicate that numbers of SSPX laymen are quietly looking for alternatives to SSPX sites. Says one: "It is a certainty that if the leadership is a liberal plant intending a sellout, then their move to Newchurch will not be followed by the vast majority of the laity. We simply move back to another Athanasius, like Lefebvre, and other true priests, and keep our support (read money) for the one true Church. This is not a threat; it's faith in action."
One thing is for sure. It promises to be a stormy twelve years for the Society. Anything can happen, and, as always, the TRADITIO Network will be monitoring, analyzing, and reporting on the situation closely for you from its unique perspective of experience and knowledge of Traditional Catholicism for longer than Fellay has been alive!
It seems that Newchurch's Great Sex & Embezzlement Scandal will never end. As a matter of fact, it is worldwide. The New Order corrupts everything it touches.
Now a Polish presbyter has disappeared from the central Polish town of Lowicz -- taking with him the collection box containing several thousand dollars, which the 11,000 parishioners had dutifully donated to a fund to renovate their church.
According to local newspapers the Newchurch presbyter was known to be a gambler and absconded to the United Kingdom to avoid authorities on other crimes. And the clueless Newchurchers didn't even bother to call the police!
Dear Fathers:
Now that the Da Vinci Code film has passed into history, do you think that your analysis was accurate?
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, we are even more confirmed in the soundness of our original judgment. Certain fanatics were trying to make the Da Vinci Code movie out as the worst thing since trans-fatty acids. They even went so far as to organize boycotts against a fiction.
Well, the movie turned out to be a dud. Most reviewers placed it at 1-1/2 stars on a scale of 4. And the fanatics didn't seem to take note of the fact that the movie was arguably pro-Christian, much more so than the book. The protagonist (played by popular Hollywood actor Tom Hanks) consistently argued for the historical Christian position, while the antagonist (played by Ian McKellan) was at the end led away to the looney bin. In fact, it seems that the fanatics gave the movie most of its publicity! Otherwise, it would have died a quick and quiet death.
Now if all those anti-Da Vinci Code fanatics had put their efforts not toward tilting at windmills, but at getting back the True Mass, they would have succeeded. As it is, they only ended up giving publicity to a mediocre film and making their enemy Dan Brown that much richer!
Dear Fathers:
What do you think of that "conservative" presbyter who was told by Newchurch Archbishop Harry Flynn, of Minneapolis-St. Paul, to cancel his web site after it posted objections to the archdiocese's mandatory "child safety" sex program? Flynn removed the presbyter from his duties at a parish and made him assistant chaplain at a rest home. Now some "conservative" Newchurchers are defying the archbishop and want to take copies of a petition to Newvatican's Apostolic Delegate.
The Fathers Reply.
The "conservative" Newchurchers have accepted the New Order. Why should they be surprised when it acts in accordance with its nature? These Newchurchers have made their own bed by accepting the legitimacy of these Newchurch bishops in the first place, including their phony New Mess, New Sacraments, New Theology, and New Morality. Now they have to lie in that bed.
What amuses us is the hypocrisy of the situation. These same people are telling traditional Catholics that we have to "obey" unquestioningly the New Order. Yet when their archbishop does something that they don't like, they say, "We won't obey." Where is their "obedience" to their beloved Newchurch?
Stephen Brady, founder of a Newchurch "conservative" lay organization, really hit the nail on the head here. Don't look to Newpope and Newvatican to clean up this mess, he says. "The Vatican is not likely to reprimand Archbishop Flynn for allowing the parish to do what it is doing. He's accountable to the pope, but we've not seen the pope take action against bishops who are child rapists -- so I doubt he will take any action against Flynn!"
Dear Fathers:
I have been following the TRADITIO Network's reports surrounding the SSPX elections rather closely. Your reports are always insightful and help your readers to assess better the "spin" coming from certain segments of the Traditional Catholic Movement.
I recently received an unsolicited E-mail from an "indult" periodical. Apparently, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is now using this periodical, as well as others, as a means of stemming the tide of potential objections from SSPX parishioners and those otherwise friendly to the SSPX that a sell-out to Newrome is in the works. Why do you think that this "indult" periodical is changing its tune now?
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, we have noticed the same thing, that the "indultarians" and the SSPX are starting to "sing from the same hymnbook," as the Protestants say. It is really quite laughable that the same "indult" periodicals that had despised the SSPX before are cozying up to the Fellay-Schmidberger liberalist faction now that it is cozying up to Newchurch.
Why have these "indult" periodicals changed from their former hatred of the SSPX? That is not hard to figure. The "indult" is perforce a slave to Newchurch and the New Order. Now that the liberalist faction of the SSPX is making schmoozing up to that same Newchurch and the New Order, the "indult" periodicals recognize the Society as a "kindred spirit." In other words, the SSPX is not to be tolerated by these "indult" periodicals if the Society remains traditional, but if the liberalist faction makes noises about going over to Newchurch, the "indult" periodicals will welcome the Society that they formerly hated. It's not too hard to figure out that these "indult" periodicals were never really "traditional" in the first place!
Actually, none of this was supposed to come out. Fellay & Schmidberger were supposed to be able to turn over the Society to Newchurch lock, stock, and barrel with nary a whimper. Remember, it was not Benedict-Ratzinger who approached the SSPX. Superior General Fellay admitted publicly that it was he who requested the August 29, 2005, meeting with Newpope. There was talk then about Newrome "lifting the excommunications" and granting a "universal indult" so that the Society could get on board with the New Order.
But the Fellay & Schmidberger didn't count on the truth getting out. It had planned a battery of propaganda lectures at its Mass sites around the world to get naive SSPXers onto the sellout bandwagon. Thank God, the European press and the TRADITIO Network stood out front to get to SSPXers the real story, so that they could make their own judgment. Finally, so many sources confirmed the plans for a sellout that many SSPXers got their dander up over their leadership trying to deceive them. Moreover, it appears the other three SSPX bishops and some of the District Superiors had been been caught flatfooted about Fellay's plans, as their public statements indicate.
Now, of course, Fellay & Schmidberger are trying to rewrite the history, claiming that they never intended a sellout. But they seem conveniently to ignore Fellay's meeting with Benedict-Ratzinger, requested by Fellay himself. They seem to ignore their own propaganda lectures. As late as June 22, Fellay was rewriting history: "There is no idea, no thought in our heads of making any kind of compromise. It's nonsense. There is nothing to compromise. There is nothing to negotiate; we can not negotiate the Faith." Of course. That's why he volunteered to fly off to Newrome to kiss the toe of Benedict-Ratzinger. That is why SSPX leaders were flying off to points all over the world at Society expense to propagandize their own: not to ask for input, but to tell the SSPXers what they should think.
The duodecennial elections are now upon the Society, and all indications are that the SSPX is going to be stuck for a total of 24 years (!) being led by the same liberalist faction that has mismanaged the Society since the death of its Archbishop-Founder and has tried to engineer a sellout to Newrome. And why the Fellay & Schmidberger liberalist faction not win the elections? The leader of the faction appoints most of the forty electors!
However, the SSPX liberalist faction is going to be disappointed if it thinks that these elections will end the controversy. It can't put the hornets back into the nest it stirred up with its aborted sellout to Newrome. There is too much dissatisfaction within the Society now, too many criticisms of its leadership, too many criticisms of its attempts to deceive its own membership, too many criticisms of its chumminess with Newrome and the New Order. In the next years the SSPX will be undergoing a trial of leadership just as Newchurch is. One can only hope that when the trial is over, there will be a return to solid traditional Catholicism -- in both sects.
Dear Fathers:
Among the various traditional Roman Catholic groups, there seems to be some difference of opinion about which Missal is the correct one to use. While several popes have made revisions to the Missale Romanum, it seems that the 1962 revisions, promulgated by Pope John XXIII, are the most discussed (excluding of course, Paul VI's horror). How does John XXIII's revision differ from its predecessor, and what is the debate over whether the 1962 revision or a predecessor is the correct Missal of the Traditional Latin Mass? Other than the insertion of the name of St. Joseph into the Canon, were there any significant changes that cast doubt on the integrity of the Mass contained in this 1962 Missal?
The Fathers Reply.
Oh, my, yes there were many significant changes! It is the passage of time that gives us insight on historical matters. And what appears to be clear from looking back over the last century is that the groundwork for the Novus Ordo service was laid in advance of Vatican II by extensive changes in the "rubrics" and the ecclesiastical calendar. These changes were engineered under the aegis of the same Hannibal Bugnini who was the Chief Architect of the Novus Ordo Service of 1969.
In 1956, without explicit papal approval, Bugnini introduced extensive changes pertaining to the most ancient and sacred rites of Holy Week. So objectionable were these changes that many countries of Europe simply ignored them. In addition, certain other changes were made that pertained to the traditional ranking of feastdays and to the elimination of the Seasonal Collects, such as those to Implore the Prayers of the Saints and Against the Persecutors of the Church.
In 1960, Bugnini introduced an even more revolutionary set of changes to both the Roman Missal and the Divine Office. These included essentially an abrogation of the traditional ranking of feasts, elimination of Octaves of prayer for the highest feastdays, the elimination of various Saints from the calendar, the elimination of signs of respect to the priesthood by certain incensations at High Mass, etc. So extensive were these 1960 changes that it took 203 pages to list and explain them!
In 1962, the final straw was added before the Second Vatican Council. The Sacred Roman Canon, which the Church believes had been handed down in its essence from St. Peter and was never touched after the Age of the Great Fathers, specifically Pope St. Gregory the Great in A.D. 600, was now modified. In fact, it was modified in just the saw that Pope Pius IX refused to do, stating: "How can I do this? I'm only the pope." So, you see, the "1962 Missal" is the culmination of hundreds of Modernist modifications.
You can be sure that the moral of these Modernist-leaning changes was not lost on the Council Fathers. It created a mindset before the Council that anything could be changed. The Holy Mass had become a plaything of popes and their Modernist advisors. In less than forty years, the Holy Mass had become a plaything not just of popes, but of lay lectors, ministresses, and presbyters serving a New Order.
For further information, see Traditional Latin Mass, Divine Office & Sacraments. See also The Slow and Methodical Destruction of the Traditional Liturgy (detailing the rubrical and calendrical changes made in the Divine Office and Mass in stages from 1950 to 1956 to 1960 to 1962) in the TRADITIO Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics). Further, see The Liturgical Movement. Part I: Its Origins to World War II. Part II: World War II to Vatican II. Part III: Vatican II and Its Aftermath; Triumph and Debacle in the TRADITIO Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics).
The "indult" society known as the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) was shocked to its core in July 2000 when Newrome interfered to fire its Superior General, Fr. Joseph Bisig, who had been constitutionally elected in January 1998 according to the statues that Newrome itself had approved. Fr. Bisig was fired because he had been "too outspoken" against the Novus Ordo service. The FSSP objected, but it was no use: the Novus Ordo reigns supreme at Newvatican.
And who did the dirty deed? Why, that Janus of the "indult," Dario Castrillon-Hoyos. The firing of the traditional Fr. Bisig was one of the first acts of Newchurch Cardinal Hoyos, who had been appointed President of the "indult" Commission "Ecclesia Dei" just two months previous by JPII so that Hoyos could be JPII's hatchet-man to fire Fr. Bisig and teach the FSSP a lesson. Hoyos installed its vassal Arnaud Devillers in place of the constitutionally-elected Fr. Bisig.
Hoyos has subsequently run the "Ecclesia Dei" Commission like a wartime Loyalty Office. He placed the puppet bishop Fernando Rifan over the "indult" Campos group, as Rifan made it clear that, unlike his predecessor Luciano Rangel, he would be happy to celebrate the Novus Ordo service publicly -- and has done so. Now Hoyos is Benedict-Ratzinger's point-man to wrangle the Fellay/Schmidberger liberalist faction of the Society of St. Pius X into the New Order.
On July 7, 2006, John Berg, an FSSP assistant superior, was elected to replace Arnaud Devillers as Superior General. Given the stern censure that the FSSP suffered from Newrome when its elected Superior General, Fr. Bisig, spoke out against the Novus Ordo, we expect Berg not to make any waves, but to put out the Newrome's Novus Ordo line without complaint as Newrome's newest "indult" cat's-paw.
And Berg has a number of scandals to handle, but he will not be able to do so because of Newvatican interference into the FSSP in favor of the Novus Ordo. The FSSP has given Communion in the hand at Providence, Rhode Island, and Vienna, Austria. An FSSP priest, Fr. Bruno LePivain, a friend of the Newvatican-appointed former Superior General, Arnaud Devillers, concelebrated the Novus Ordo service in Rome. The FSSP has been caving in to Ecclesia Dei Commission's encouragement to celebrate the invalid Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service in addition to the Modernized Mass of 1962.
Benedict-Ratzinger visited Spain on July 9-10, but what he saw was not the Catholic Spain of pre-Vatican II, but the Newchurch that he and his cronies engineered at that Council. Although Newpope bewails the "creeping secularization" of Europe now that he is pope, he did everything that he could at Vatican II to secularize the Church under the New Order. What goes around, comes around!
Only 18% of Spanish Newchurchers attend the Novus Ordo service on Sundays (that is the same declining percentage as in the United States), and 50% of Spanish Newchurchers never attend the Sunday service.
The future of Newchurch in Spain is even bleaker. Of those 15-24 years old:
Let us look at the other consequences of the deconstruction of the Catholic Church engineered by Fr. Ratzinger at Vatican II. Since 1975, abortion has been legalized, divorce has been made easier and faster, and homosexuals are allowed to marry and adopt children. 62% of Spaniards in this once most-Catholic country of Europe support gay marriage. Spain now has the highest rate of prostitution in the European Union.
The Janus-faced Newpope, who now wrings his hands about the impotence of Newchurch, formerly endorsed in his book Principles of Catholic Theology (1982) the views of the condemned theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, S.J., who was under suspicion of heresy by the Holy Office. Balthasar's ralling cry was: "The bastions of the Church must be razed."
In 1965 the late Dr. Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, Prime Minister of Portugal, publicly accused Vatican II of having on its agenda the secularization of the world. That has now come to pass in Europe, and certainly in Spain.
We here in Europe have been informed that a sudden change was made by SSPX Superior General Bernard Fellay in the person of the preacher of the Novena/Retreat from July 3 through July 10 after European sources and the TRADITIO Network had circulated the information that Fr. Pierre-Marie had been selected by Felly to preach the pre-election retreat. Fr. Pierre-Marie was the Dominican who had previously been hired by the Fellay-Schmidberger liberalist wing to publish a justification of the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration.
It is said that Fellay & Schmidberger were embarrassed to see their plan exposed publicly in front of the SSPX laity and clergy, so Fr. Pierre-Marie was immediately sent back from Econe, Switzerland, site of the retreat, to Avrille, France. Instead, Fr. Antoine-Marie, of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin from the SSPX's Morgon community in the Beaujolais region of France, is preaching the retreat. After the retreat concludes on July 10, the duodecennial SSPX elections will take place on July 11.
It is widely regarded here that the original selection of Fr. Pierre-Marie was a plan of Franz Schmidberger, the First Assistant and a member of the SSPX liberalist faction, to argue to the forty electors during the retreat the validity of the Novus Ordo rite for consecrating bishops and thus remove the mental barriers of the electors for the re-election of Fellay & Schmidberger, or members of their faction. Being re-elected, the liberalist faction could then proceed with work on an eventual sellout to Newrome.
A new brochure of Pierre-Marie arguing that the new rite for the consecration of bishops is valid is now circulating in France, intended as a refutation of Fr. Anthony Cekada's argument for invalidity, which has been widely circulated in the United States, and now Europe. The reason why this debate is so important is that Benedict-Ratzinger is the first electee to the papal office who was not consecrated as a bishop in the certainly-valid traditional rite, but in the Novus Ordo rite. If he is not a bishop, then he is not the Bishop of Rome, and thus not the pope, so the argument goes.
As TRADITIO has commented in the past, Benedict-Ratzinger and Newchurch Cardinal Dario Hoyos are quite sensitized to this this argument and have therefore asked Fellay to confirm in writing that he believes that Benedict-Ratzinger is a true pope. Whether Fellay has done so as yet is not clear from the reports so far received here.
American writer Mark Twain once wrote: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." If Twain were alive, he'd get a kick out of how Newchurch lies about its membership. It has been reported that Newchurch in the United States had an increase of 1,600,000 "Catholics" last year, for a total of 69,000,000.
Hmmm. Something about that figure doesn't ring true. The 2006 edition of the Kenedy Book simultaneously reports sizable decreases in the number of parishes (below 19,000 for the first time since 1983), presbyters (1,100 fewer from 2005 for a total of about 42,000), First Communions (a stunning drop of 40,000), Catholic marriages (11,000 fewer), and, shockingly, 204,000 fewer young people in either Catholic schools or some sort of religious-education program. Even the office of "Permanent Lay Deacon," engineered by the Modernists at Vatican II, saw a drop.
In some Newchurch sources, you will see weekly Novus Ordo service attendance placed at something like 50% at the same time that dioceses all across the United States are closing churches right and left. That figure is patently ridiculous, as sources such as the Gallup Organization and the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center put the figure at something closer to 15%.
Even the Gallup Poll's numbers were soundly challenged as elevated when Statistician Kirk Hadaway and a research team counted cars in church parking lots over a period of several months. His finding: Americans over-report their actual church attendance by almost twice as much as actual. This is the Big Lie of Vatican II. Far from producing the "springtime" that is commonly alleged by Newchurchers, it brought "the smoke of Satan..., clouds and storms, [and] darkness," as Pope Paul VI was honest enough to admit by June 29, 1972.
Dear Fathers:
Perhaps you could give some insight to a question that has bothered me for a long while with regard to the mention of Buddhism in the Vatican II document Nostra aetate. The said document states: "Again Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination."
Presuming that "supreme illumination," or "the state of perfect liberation," as mentioned, indicates an elevated knowledge of God, how can this equate with the dogmatic teaching from the very lips of Our Divine Savior when He declared that no one can come to the Father except through Him, as the Way, the Truth, and the Life? Buddhists do not believe in, or invoke, Jesus Christ. The section quoted accepts the possibility of a Buddhist achieving through his own efforts what is extremely difficult for the most Catholic of Saints to do.
I cannot help but feel that this particular section alone from Nostra Aetate highlights a very serious error in a document from Vatican II that we are constantly being told was guided by the "Holy Spirit." Am I wrong on this?
The Fathers Reply.
We checked the original Latin text of the passage, thinking that, because of the limitations of the English language, the Latin passage might have been placed in the subjunctive mood as implied indirect discourse, that is, quoting what the Buddhists say without the Vatican II stating it as a fact. But, no, the passage is in the indicative, stating a reality, not in the subjunctive.
What you have highlighted is just one of many passages in Vatican II that does not square with the teaching of the Church. This fact has been covered now in a number of books. It is generally held that Fr. Ratzinger and the other Modernists at the Council injected these "timebombs" into the conciliar documents so that they could be fleshed out and implemented in the most extreme ways after the Council adjourned by the likes of revolutionaries such as Hannibal Bugnini. Indeed, Newchurch has become the bosom-buddy of Buddhism, so that on every pagan feast of Buddhism, some high-ranking Newvatican official sends a letter of congratulation, saying how close the New Order and Buddhist religions are now.
As for the "Holy Spirit," which must be something different from the Holy Ghost, the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, we know that He stayed away from Vatican II, which was neither called by John XXIII nor promulgated by Paul VI as a dogmatic council, and therefore the involvement of anything divine is not applicable. For further information, see FAQ08: What Is the Authority of Vatican II in the TRADITIO Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics).
Perhaps nothing shows how far Newchurch has sunk than the pitiful state of England, once considered the most Catholic country in the world. In fact, the traditional Catholics of England have the distinction of having actually fought for the Traditional Latin Mass.
When the new English Mass became mandatory on June 9, 1549, and the Traditional Latin Mass was abolished, this proved too much for the ordinary faithful, for whom it was the Traditional Latin Mass that mattered, and in many parts of England the faithful took up arms to defend their liturgical heritage, above all in the West of England (Richmond), in what is called the Western Rising in England, or the "Pilgrimage of Grace." This is the only armed rising that has ever taken place specifically in defense of the Traditional Latin Mass, apart from the brief Northern Rising of 1569.
Outnumbered four to one by the royal army, thousands of courageous traditional Catholics perished in battles for their Mass. On January 27, 1550, the leaders of the traditional Catholics were executed at Tyburn, and thus these courageous men passed into eternity as the 105 Tynburn Martyrs.
The English Newchurchers today are paying the price for their contrasting cowardice in failing to stand up against the New Order, as that New Order "faces its biggest crisis since the Reformation." A new 260-page Pastoral Research Center study just released has shown that over three decades, the "Springtime of Vatican II" scorecard in England and Wales is:
In 1966, just after Vatican II, 2,110,000 Englishmen attended the new service. A little less than forty years later, in 2004, that number had been more than halved, to 960,000 in 2004. A report in the Newchurch London Catholic [sic] Times pointed out that if the current trends continue in Newchurch in England and Wales, the New Order will have ceased to exist within 30 more years.
Even a Newchurch spokesman in England, Tom Harwood, admitted in The Future of the Catholic Church in Britain: "The [New]church in Britain is suffering from a terminal decline in membership, irregular commitment among the remnant, and, in the wake of persistent child-abuse scandals, a leadership of bishops and priests that has toppled from its pedestal with a mighty crash."
In the ninth century, Cyril and Methodius, two brothers, evangelized the Slavic world to Roman Catholicism. So far, so good. But then they fell into an error: they composed a liturgy in Slavonic, a vernacular Slavic language. Pope Stephen II condemned this sacrilege and threatened Methodius with anathema if he used Slavonic for the Mass. Later, Pope John VIII proclaimed:
We have also noted that you are celebrating Mass in the barbarian tongue.... That is why we have already forbidden you to do so in our letters addressed to you through Paul, Bishop of Ancona. You must therefore celebrate in either Latin or Greek, as does the Church of God which is spread throughout the earth and in all the nations.
It seems that John VIII was a ninth-century analog of Paul VI. A weak pope in the judgment of ecclesiastical historians like Baronius, John VIII eventually yielded to pressure and allowed the Slavonic service in Moravia. Dom Gueranger, the eminent 19th-century liturgical scholar, who himself is being considered for canonization, laments:
Such examples of weakness on the Chair of Peter are rare, but history records them, and the children of the Church have no interest in dissimulating them, for they know that He who has guaranteed infallibility to the Roman pontiffs in the teaching of the Faith, has not preserved them from all fault in the exercise of the supreme government.
Dom Gueranger points out that if in the short term some assistance was had in the conversion of the Slavs, the use of the vernacular led to serious schism in the long term, as two centuries later occurred the Great Schism, in which the Eastern and Western Churches were rent, and remain essentially so to this day. In fact, two centuries later, Pope St. Gregory VII again suppressed the vernacular rite, perhaps the grave error of Pope John VIII had become too painfully clear to deny.
It is interesting to note that when the Slavs came out of the Soviet catacombs, as it were, when the Soviet Union fell in 1991, the Slavs who were found to have retained the Roman Catholic Faith were those regions that had maintained the Traditional Latin Mass. When Newvatican then tried to force these freed Slavic regions to use the vernacularized Novus Ordo, they resisted vehemently, considering the use of the vernacular in the Mass schismatic and reeking of the odor of heresy, as condemned by the Council of Trent.
Dear Fathers:
I was recently told the following: "You must never judge a priest, even if he molested a thousand children and then murdered them! Rather one should pray and do penance." The justification for what seemed to me to be such a ridiculous statement was supposedly some private revelation to a German nun.
Is this genuine? How should a Catholic who believes that wrong is always wrong no matter who does it and has seen that pretending that nothing is wrong has proven itself disastrous respond to this?
The Fathers Reply.
This is just another example of why "private revelations" have to be treated with extreme caution. Even if they are authentic (and we can never know that for a certainly), they are never part of the doctrine of the Faith. They are not part of Public Revelation, that is, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition; therefore, the Church can say only that there is nothing in them contrary to that Public Revelation.
St. John of the Cross (1542-1591), perhaps the Church's greatest mystic, warned: "The desire for private revelations deprives faith of its purity, develops a dangerous curiosity that becomes a source of illusions, fills the mind with vain fancies, and often proves the want of humility, and of submission to Our Lord, Who, through His public revelation, has given all that is needed for salvation. We must suspect those apparitions that lack dignity or proper reserve, and above all, those that are ridiculous. This last characteristic is a mark of human or diabolical machination. Stay away from visions, apparitions, and miracles as much as you can. Be careful of visions, even when they are authentic."
If a cloistered nun wishes to pray for the errant, that is her office. Those outside the cloister, however, have a moral obligation, by their office, to excise corruption from Holy Mother Church as best they can. There are too many examples from the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, the Saints, and the popes to deny that moral teaching. Even Our Lord publicly spoke out in the most vile terms against the officials of the Church in a way that He never did against the Roman authorities.
Two canonical principles from the Decretales apply here:
A Catholic cannot morally remain silent in the face of rampant corruption in the Church. Certainly he cannot aid and abet such corruption by his presence and his money. That would be a scandal and would lead to the punishing of the innocent, which is a sin that cries out to God for vengeance.
Moreover, one must remember that, if anything, anything, Our Lady could not speaking of New Order presbyters, who are ordained merely to "preside over the assembly," but of true priests, who are ordained to "offer Mass for the living and the dead."
Dear Fathers:
How many of those outside the Catholic Church manifest that they are not Catholics by issuing written statements or making speeches that they are not Catholic? The answer is very few. Most heresy and apostasy is manifested by deed, not word. People manifest their heresy and apostasy by attending the Synagogue or by worshipping at the Mosque or by joining the Protestants in their worship at their churches.
To the contrary, St. Thomas Aquinas teaches: "All ceremonies are professions of faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make profession of his inward faith by deeds as well as by words: and in either profession, if he make a false declaration, he sins mortally" (Summa Theologica, Pars I-II, Q. 103., A. 4).
So, when JPII or Benedict-Ratzinger, along with high-ranking members of the Vatican II sect, attend the Mosque, the Buddhist Temple, the Lutheran Temple and the Synagogue, are they not manifesting the odor of heresy by their deed? When Benedict-Ratzinger entered the Synagogue and took active part in a Jewish worship service on August 19, 2005, was he not manifesting the odor of heresy by his deed?
The Fathers Reply.
The point that St. Thomas makes is an important one. We should not look just at words, but deeds as well. The Newchurchers can say whatever they want about being "Catholic," but if they worship and pray together with Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists, the teaching of the Church is that they surround themselves with the odor of heresy. That is true of popes, just as it is with laymen. This "oecumenism" has been consistently condemned by the Church until it was enshrined by the New Order after Vatican II.
As more information begins to leak out about traditional Catholic producer-director Mel Gibson's new film, Apocalypto, being shot in the Yucatan for release on December 8, it is becoming clearer that Gibson sees his new film, set in a Mexican jungle about the collapse of a great civilization, as a metaphor for what is going on in Western Civilization today. Is Gibson trying to tell us that if we don't watch out, Western Civilization, becoming as barbaric as the ancient Mayans, will likewise perish?
As yet Gibson is remaining rather tight-lipped about the epic of a civilization that saw the building of monuments to rival the Egyptian pyramids, but at the same time saw those monuments used for unspeakable barbarities. According to Gibson's Icon Productions company, Apocalypto promises "a heart-stopping mythic action-adventure set against the turbulent end-times of the once-great Mayan civilization." The epic centers on a kidnapped hero's bid to escape a mass sacrifice at one Maya center. But Gibson did say, in a March interview with Time magazine, Gibson himself said, "After what I experienced with The Passion, I frankly don't give a flying [leap] about much of what those critics think." He told Time that he partly views the movie as a political allegory for leadership in our own era.
Gibson is known for a new style of realism in his films. His last production, The Passion of the Christ, (2004) stimulated criticism from non-Christian religions for its unapologetic, literal depiction of the Crucifixion, which gained momentous support from fundamental sects and the general public, but a diffident reaction from Newchurch bishops and laity, who have slipped away from the Christianity much more than the Protestants. As Gibson used for that film two languages of the historical period, Latin and Aramean, for further reality, so Apocalypto uses a modern descendant of the ancient Mayan language.
Gibson has consulted on the film with archaeologist Richard Hansen, head of the Mirador Basin Project in northern Guatemala, a forest reserve home to a number of Maya archaeological sites. The ancient Maya were one of the most developed cultures of Central America before the arrival of Columbus. Like the ancient Egyptians, the Maya, during the non-farming seasons, congregated at ceremonial centers holding monumental pyramids, plazas, and temples. The ancient Maya culture's history lasted for more than 1,000 years, ending around A.D. 850 with the collapse of the use of ceremonial centers in what are now parts of Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico.
Gibson is clearly the deepest producer-director functioning today in Hollywood. His non-mainstream historical vision, nevertheless based on weighty scholarly evidence, is reminiscent of Oliver Stone's films on American political figures. His vision is always stimulating and provokes controversy that makes people think. And given the Catholicism's unparalleled progeny of thinkers, isn't that the most Catholic vision of all?
SSPX Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, who together with Bishops Galarreta and Williamson, is resisting Superior Fellay's liberalist faction, which wants to sell out to Newrome, courageously stood up at the SSPX ordinations at Econe on June 29th and made violent criticisms against the writings of Ratzinger in 1968, shortly after Vatican II. These writings, the bishop said, denied the sacrifice of Our Lord and denied the traditional Catholic doctrines of satisfaction and compensation. The bishop did not pronounce the name of Ratzinger, but spoke about "a theologian of Tübingen" and said that "he would not say more."
The Europeans are interpreting this to mean that Fellay & Schmidberger had put pressure on Bishop Tissier to avoid any public criticism of Benedict-Ratzinger and that the liberalist faction of the SSPX is terrorizing the clergy of the SSPX, including the three bishops. Bishop Tissier went on to say that Newchurch is "organising itself to be without priests" and that Newchurch is a "lay Church." He said that the Newrome is now under the control of Freemasonry.
Meanwhile, SSPX Superior Fellay chose Fr. Pierre-Marie to preach at the novena (July 3-10) preceding the duodecennial elections on July 11 the man whom Schmidberger and what is called his "German Network" had hired to defend the validity of Benedict-Ratzinger's episcopacy in a badly-written series of articles in the SSPX organ, Angelus. I say badly written because this SSPX theologian barely mentioned Pope Pius XII's arguably infallible 1947 decree, Sacramentum ordinis, confirming what is the valid form for Holy Orders.
It appears that the Fellay/Schmidberger faction is trying to influence the forty electors by asking to their agent, the Pierre-Marie, to condition the electors' minds to favor the position of a sell-out to New Rome, turning the SSPX elections into a mere political charade, like just so many secular elections. A confidential political pamphlet arguing for the validity of the Novus Ordo is also being circulated to the electors.
Thus, Fellay displays openly a bias toward Newpope and Newrome, which is unconscionable before the elections. The Europeans are saying that the election is already "rigged" for the Fellay-Schmidberger liberalist faction, after the manner of what your U.S. readers will recognize as a corrupt Tammany Hall scheme!
Reports are circulating here in Europe that in 1982 Schmidberger deceived Archbishop Lefebvre by supposedly telling him that the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration is similar to an Eastern rite. This contention has been completely refuted by Fr. Anthony Cekada, a noted traditional Catholic theologian in the United States, who has written extensive Latin theological monographs for the clergy, as well as in short pamphlets in the vernacular to educate the laity.
Accordingly, Fr. Cekada has come under harsh attack here in France, the center of SSPX membership and activity, by the Fellay/Schmidberger liberalist faction. By this attack, however, Fellay & Schmidberger have stirred up a hornet's next. Fr. Cekada was invited a week ago to speak on an influential French radio station to explain his argument that the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration is theologically invalid and that, therefore, Benedict-Ratzinger, the first not to have been consecrated in the certainly valid traditional rite, would not be Bishop of Rome.
Thieving Newchurch bishops are finally getting hit right between the eyes -- by their own parishioners. No longer is "obedience" to episcopal crime being tolerated in many Newchurch dioceses. Newchurch parishioners are suing their bishops demanding: "Give us our churches and possessions back!"
The latest episcopal target is Leonard "Boss" Blair, Newchurch bishop of Toledo, Ohio. Parishioners of St. James parish, whose ten-month, around-the-clock prayer vigil at the church was put down by Blair in a lock-out, have gone on to Phase II of their resistance to Newchurch. They have sued Blair for control of the parish property and assets, which were appropriated by the bishop after he closed this parish along with sixteen others. "We want to get the building and the property that we and our ancestors have put our time, effort, and money into," proclaimed one parishioner.
This idea, which traditional Catholics have long held, that the artifacts of parishes, including art works, sacred vessels, vestments, stained-glass windows, etc., belong not to the Newchurch bishops, who want to destroy the Faith that generated those artifacts, but to the community that donated them. As the Newchurch bishops have forfeited their custodial rights, the artifacts are rightly in the custody of the congregation, who at least will see that they are not destroyed or sold off to support crime.
The suit claims that the Newchurch diocese has "unlawfully deprived the plaintiffs of the right to access and worship in the church facility." It asks the court to declare that Blair was acting as a trustee of the church property and its parish account and that parishioners are the true owners. The diocese is unlawfully, according to the parishioners, holding some $80,000 of the parish's funds in its own account.
Previously, the Boston archdiocese closed some parishes and then appropriated the assets to pay for sex crimes. Even Newvatican told the Newchurch archbishop there, Sean "Shaft-em" O'Malley, that his actions were illegal under ecclesiastical law. In Spokane, a federal judge held that the Newchurch archbishop there did not own individual parish properties but only held them in trust.
On May 1, 2005, two months before the scheduled closure of St. James, about fifty parishioners began taking turns praying 24/7 inside the wood-frame country church. The parish also filed an appeal with Newvatican, seeking to overrule "Boss" Blair. Newpope's commission, however, stomped with a jackboot upon its Newchurch parishioners' rights and gave the farm to its henchman.
Originally, the archdiocese said that it would not interfere with the parishioners' right of free speech and would not interfere with the parishioners' prayer vigil. But on March 6, "Boss" Blair sent an employee to the parish to drive a septuagenarian Newchurcher out of the church and padlock the building. Said one parishioner, "The aggressive way we were thrown out of the church and the careless handling of our personal property was kind of upsetting to us." Do tell! The Newchurch parishioners have learned the bitter lesson of the Newchurch of Hate: "I don't think the bishop's going to back down for anything," said one insightful parishioner.
Meanwhile, out of necessity, the former parishioners meet weekly at a local Methodist church and have arranged for a priest from the valid, but schismatic, Old Catholic Church to celebrate Mass. [Toledo Blade]
As further proof of how far Newchurch has descended into paganism (as well as Protestantism and Masonism), consider the convent that was opened in Varanasi, a Hindu "holy city," 780 kilometres east of New Delhi, by a Newchurch group of "nuns" called Queen of the Apostles.
The convent boasts statues of Jesus and Mary dressed in Indian attire, which the Newchurch nuns allow the Indians to believe are "god and goddess," as the Indians have many pagan gods and goddesses. Moreover, the Newchurch nuns practice "Arati," the most important and most common pagan Hindu ritual, named from the Sanskrit word aa-rathi, meaning "mischief." It involves the waving of an "Arati plate" around an idol and is generally accompanied by the singing of songs in praise of that idol. The purpose of performing Arati is to ward off from the idol of a pagan deity the effects of the "evil eye."
One of the founding nuns said their Newchurch rituals deliberately resemble Hindu worship, so local people "don't find us different." (Just imagine St. Augustine, an African, becoming a priest of the Egyptian goddess Isis, so that the people didn't find him different!) In addition practicing pagan Arati, the Newchurch nuns hand out Oriental incense sticks.[UCA News]
Americans and Europeans are kept ignorant of how far Newchurch has abandoned the Roman Catholic Faith in other lands, even stooping to the worship of pagan gods. But there are whole papal bodies at Newrome set up to foster this kind of paganism. One can readily picture the 11,000,000 Roman martyrs anathematizing from Heaven the Newchurch "prelates," when those martyrs suffered horribly cruel deaths rather than worshipping, with even one pinch of incense, a pagan god.
Vatican II specifically rejected the Catholic Church's Romanness and adopted the error of "inculturation" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, para. 40), in which "an even more radical [profundior]" deformation of the Catholic liturgy could be perpetrated to "adapt," not to Rome, but to local cultures.
This backward accommodation to paganism was specifically condemned by Pope Benedict XIV, who got word that some missionaries had permitted their converts to practice paganism and had grafted pagan ideas and pagan practices onto Christianity. The pope issued two Papal Bulls on the subject in 1742 and required the missionaries to take an oath that such abuses would not be tolerated in the future. The Bull Omnium sollicitudinum specifically condemned accommodation in India to Hinduism.
So much for the fiction of Newchurch obeying the pope!
Newchurch just won't go all the way to the true Faith, will it? Even the record of its "conservative" popes is a record of wishy-washy, half-way comprises. Sorry, Newpope, only 100% Roman Catholicism with do. You can't leaven the True Faith with your Vatican II Modernism.
The "conservative" Newchurchers are now lauding a concert conducted in the Sistine Chapel, on Saturday, June 24, in which four pieces of the 16th century-polyphonist, Pierluigi da Palestrina, were performed, together with six pieces by a twentieth-century composer. Big deal. Even JPII, more noted for his public approval of and participation at rock concerts than for his knowledge of the music of the Church, invited the late Herbert von Karajan with his Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra and the Vienna Singverein to perform Mozart's "Coronation" Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, on June 30, 1985.
You see, for these Vatican II Modernists, the Church's proper music, which even Vatican II had to admit was the Sacred Chant, is merely a "heritage"; it is not a living practice. It may be admitted to the concert hall, or for an occasional Newchurch shivaree, but it is not the daily music that one hears in the Newchurch temples. In fact, Benedict-Ratzinger, in his remarks before the concert, referred to the need for "updating" Sacred Music. One can only cringe at what he might mean by that!
Even Paul VI, who was Hannibal Bugnini's puppet in going along with the Vatican II Liturgical Deformation, was pope enough to send out to all the Newchurch bishops in 1974 a booklet, known as Iubilate Deo, with basic Latin Gregorian chants that all Catholics everywhere should be able to sing them. Of course, the Newchurch bishops disobeyed the pope in this, as they do in most things. Sure, they claim that they "obey" the pope, but we know that they simply ignore every traditional papal command given after Vatican II.
In fact, here's a parlor trick that you can play on your Newchurch friends. Ask them to say the Pater Noster in Latin. When they can't do it, tell them that they are in violation Vatican II, which says that they should be able to (Sacrosanctum Concilium, para. 54)! As we all know, the New Order is odiferously hypocritical. The Modernist features of the Vatican II documents they'll shove down the Newchurchers' throats as "dogma," but anything traditional, they'll simply ignore.
Return to Commentaries from the Mailbox.