|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 (NEW 12th Annual Edition - 2007). For detailed information, click on the Official Traditional Catholic Directory department, provided to the TRADITIO Network by the National Registry of Traditional Latin Masses.|
If you wish to support the TRADITIO Network's Apostolate, 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 "TRADITIO" in the Payment For field. Using PayPal reduces our administrative burden considerably, but if need to use a paper check, see FAQ01: How Can I Help the TRADITIO Network's Apostolate?
"Action is always more meaningful than words," retorted Colm O'Gorman, representing victims of Irish Newchurch sex crimes (yes, folks, the Great Sex & Embezzlement Scandal involves not only Newchurch in the United States, but Newchurch all over the world). O'Gorman charged that Benedict-Ratzinger had not responded to the findings in the Ferns report, which accused Newvatican of failing in its responsibilities in relation to sex crimes against children perpetrated by its presbyters. "As the supreme head of the Catholic Church, only Pope Benedict can act to put in place a mandatory child protection policy underpinned by [New]church law right across the Catholic world. That he has failed to do so highlights the continuing failure of the [New]vatican to address this issue in any meaningful sense," he said.
O'Gorman was speaking about the lack of action on the part of Benedict-Ratzinger at what happened in the Ferns, Ireland, Newchurch diocese over a 40-year period. The 271-page report of the Ferns inquiry, chaired by retired Supreme Court judge Frank Murphy, was published a year ago. It identified more than 100 allegations of sex crimes committed against children by 26 presbyters operating under the aegis of the diocese. It severely criticised the way complaints against priests had been handled by the Newchurch authorities, particularly by the former bishops of Ferns, Donal Herlihy and Brendan Comiskey, who resigned in the furor. [Source: The Irish Times]
Archbishop Fulton Sheen (1895-1979) was well known for his many books, radio and television appearances, and popular preaching. While teaching at the Catholic University of America for nearly 25 years and dealing with students, he noted with deep concern what was happening in Catholic education and the fact that many young people were losing the faith since Vatican II (1962-1965). His warning on higher education, given around 1967, was as prophetic as it was startling:
You are better off going to a state school where you will have the chance to fight for your faith, than going to a modern Catholic university where you will have the new watered-down, modernist version of the faith spoon-fed to your unsuspecting minds, so that you will be apt to lose your faith.
For further information on Archbishop Sheen's warning, see Official Traditional Catholic Directory in the section "Homeschooling."
Sheen's warning is certainly true not only of the smaller colleges that were formerly Catholic, but of the most prestigious Newchurch universities. Notre Dame, for example, now regularly sponsors pornographic plays that depict Our Lord Jesus Christ as a pervert. Objections from outraged "conservative" alumni are met with a deaf ear from the university's president.
Another case in point is Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. Georgetown has already been the site of anti-Catholic scandals, such as Newcardinal Theodore McCarrick praying a year ago at a convocation to the prophet Mohammed. Now it is becoming clear why McCarrick was praying to Mohammed rather than Christ. Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal has donated $20,000,000 to the university, for which bribe the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown has been renamed Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. McCarrick certainly understands money. The bribe was a wonderful retirement gift!
The Center's leaders say that the money will be used to put on workshops regarding Islam, fostering exchanges with the Muslim world, addressing U.S. policy towards the Muslim world, working on the relationship of Islam and Arab culture, addressing Muslim citizenship and civil liberties, and developing exchange programs for students from the Muslim world. The "Christian" part of the center's projects at the university is conspicuous by its absence in its published plans for its ten-year future. Even Christian evangelical groups have been told to leave the campus and not list Georgetown University as a site for operations in the future.
The Center now features a number of pro-Muslim statements and articles, with little reference to any Christian statements or understandings. It has even co-sponsored events with CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association for Palestine, identified by two former FBI counterterrorism chiefs as a "front group" for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Several CAIR leaders have been convicted on terrorism-related charges. Faculty members also are being interviewed by al-Jazeera, a network with sources in many terrorist camps.
It appears that rich Mohammedans are trying to buy off American secular universities as well. The Saudi prince, who controls tens of billions of dollars in investments in Morgan Stanley, Fairmont Hotels & Resorts, Deutsche Bank, Apple Computer, Hewlett-Packard, Kodak, The Walt Disney Company, and ebay, has also given a similar $20,000,000 million gift to Harvard, which sponsors a Harvard Law School Islamic Legal Studies Program, and the Islamic Finance Project, which looks at the legal and sharia [Mohammedan law] points of view. [Source: World News Daily]
The rumor about some kind of additional "indult" for the Modernized Mass of 1962, which may have been planted by Newvatican itself to garner public opposition, has gotten Newchurch bishops all over the world to vow "Not in my diocese!"
So ticked off is Jean-Pierre Ricard, Newchurch Cardinal of Bordeaux and President of the French Bishops Conference, that he flew to Rome during the week of October 22, 2006, to meet with Newvatican officials. He met also with Benedict-Ratzinger in a private audience on October 26. He had already published in his archdiocsesan newspaper his opposition to any "indult" and objected to the establishment in his archdiocese of an "indult" group, composed of five priests expelled from the Society of St. Pius X for modernist activities. [Source: CWN]
Traditional priests are reminded that the Feast of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King, is to be celebrated on the last Sunday of October, not the last Sunday of November, as the Novus Ordo and the Protestants do. In 1925 Pope Pius IX specifically placed this feast on the last Sunday of October to combat Reformation Day, which the Protestants celebrate on this day.
Traditional priests should be aware that the text Pope Pius IX decreed to be recited before the Most Blessed Sacrament Exposed on this day and in conjunction with the chanting of the Litany of the Sacred Heart has been bowdlerized in the Modernized "1962" editions of the Enchiridion Precum. Therefore, in obedience to the pope's decree, the following sentences should follow "unum ovile et unus pastor" [one flock and one shepherd]:
Rex esto eorum omnium, qui in tenebris idolatriae aut islamismi adhuc versantur, eosque in lumen regnumque tuum vindicare ne renuas. Respice denique misericordiae oculis illius gentis filios, quae tamdiu populus electus fuit: et Sanguis, qui olim super eos invocatus est, nunc in illos quoque redemptionis vitaeque lavacrum descendat.
[Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry of or Islamism, and refuse not to draw them all into the light and kingdom of God. Turn thine eyes of mercy toward the children of that race once Thy chosen people. Of old they called down upon themselves the blood of the Saviour; may It now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life.]
If your priest does not include these words, you are at a "compromised" site that does not follow fully traditional practice. You would be advised to start looking for a fully Traditional Latin Mass site, since there are probably a number of other "compromises" with the New Order being injected at the site as well.
Do you ever get the feeling that Newchurch and Newpope haven't got a clue about Catholicism -- or sure don't have the guts to practice it? Now it seems that Canada's most outspoken opponent in favor of abortion and homosexuality, Raymond Gravel, has announced his candidacy for Canada's federal parliament from a Montreal suburb.
Gravel, a former male prostitute who was admitted into the Newchurch as a presbyter (you wonder why we don't call these New Order people "priests"?!), says that he has sought permission to run for the nomination from his Newchurch bishop, Gilles Lussier. The bishop's spokesman said that "no decision has yet been made," in spite of the fact that according to New Order canon law, a presbyter is not supposed to run for office
Benedict-Ratzinger, who is still smarting from the unprecedented criticism of his usually lock-step "conservative" Newchurchers for failing to shut down the "pink" Newchurch seminaries, had no immediate reaction. Now you understand why the TRADITIO Network has consistently claimed that there is essentially no statutory law in Newchurch; rather, "the bishop is the law" (not even the pope). Let's face it: Newchurch makes up its pseudo-"Catholicism" as it goes along.
Even though traditional Catholics recognize the invalidity of the Novus Ordo service and the fact that the Newchurchers are deluding themselves into munching cookies and swilling grape juice instead of the Corpus Christi, nevertheless it is amusing to take note of all the problems that the Newchurch has caused for itself in serving party (sorry: "banquet" food on its TV table (sorry: "altar").
When you have a party, you have a lot of cups and plates to clean up. Up till now, the Novus Ordo allowed "extraordinary ministers" -- you know, those mostly women, fewer men dressed in party clothes that take over the presbyter's role at the table -- were allowed by "indult" since 2002 to wash the dishes. Now Newvatican has cancelled the "indult." But don't count on it to cancel the heart of the problem: the "extraordinary ministers" concocted by the New Order.
Apparently, this is going to make passing around the "cup" with grape juice "pastorally problematic," since Newchurch does not usually have enough presbyters, deacons, or "instituted acolytes" to wash all the dishes if everyone is going to have a drink. Intinction, a method of dipping the cookie directly into the grape juice, used by the Eastern Schismatic and Protestant sects, is being advised against too because of the "health risks" associated with scores of mouths slobbering over the wet mass, "especially in the coming flu season." [Source: CNS]
It took Newchurch forty years to recognize what the Roman Church has understood for longer than a millennium about the Protestant hue and cry for the "cup." The Roman Church has given Holy Communion only under the species of Bread, partly to counteract the heretical error that Christ is not received whole and entire under either species, partly to prevent the spilling of the Most Precious Blood, partly to reflect an increasing reverence for the Most Precious Blood, and partly to distribute Holy Communion in an orderly way to the large numbers of Catholics who attended Mass in the West, even daily Mass.
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 "Communion under One Species."
While I deeply respect the call for a return to more traditional Catholicism, I wonder what makes the Vatican II Council any different from any previous council in regard to official church teachings. If the Vatican II Council gathered the Church leaders from all over the world together, and doctrine, dogma, and traditions were discussed and debated just as at every other council, why would the Holy Ghost not be present and guiding this council as it was every other great council? It seems to me that if the "Church" is the pillar and foundation of truth, then the Holy Ghost is always present and guiding the decisions and decrees that stem from any gathering.
The Fathers Reply.
That statement is more redolent of Protestant theology than Catholic, where men gathering together can trump God, as it were. As the Protestants say, such gatherings can (and have) accept divorce and homosexuality, admit priestesses and bishopesses, and so forth. But what is the Catholic teaching on the matter? The canonical situation is well summarized by one theologian as follows:
Practical decisions of churchmen, even the highest authorities, the pope, bishops, and priests, are something quite different [from that of de fide statements of truth, to which we owe assent of belief]. We do not say, for example, that a command of a pope or decision of a pope to call a council is true or not. We can say that it is wise or not ... it is inopportune or not.... And we Catholics are never obliged to believe that a given command, or given decision of anyone, including the pope, is necessarily that of the Holy Ghost.
There is a kind of papolatry [attribution to the pope of divine powers, which he does not have] going around. It acts as if no matter what comes out of Rome, it must have been inspired by the Holy Ghost. This line of thinking holds, for example, that if Vatican II was called, it means that the Holy Ghost wanted to call it. But this is not necessarily the case.
Convoking Vatican II was a personal decision of Pope John XXIII. He may have thought God was telling him to call it, but who knows? He has no special charism that guarantees he would recognize such a decision as coming from the Holy with theological certitude.
We can say that the Pope has the power to call a council. We can say that the authorities in the Church can call upon the Holy Ghost to guarantee, in a very narrow set of cases, that what comes from this council is de fide. And nothing in Vatican II was pronounced de fide.... To call a council is a practical decision of the pope. A person may piously believe that God inspired it. But no one can say that this is an object of faith.
Neither did Pope John XXIII, who convoked the council, authorize the council to treat dogma nor did Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the documents of the council, intend them to be part of the essential Magisterium of the Church. Both explicitly stated the council to be pastoral, not dogmatic, in nature, and therefore not part of the essential Magisterium of the Church.
There will be no infallible definitions. All that was done by former Councils. That is enough. --Pope John XXIII (Gaudet Mater Ecclesia, October 11, 1962)
The magisterium of the Church did not wish to pronounce itself under the form of extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements. --Pope Paul VI, discourse closing Vatican II, December 7, 1965
What conclusion, therefore, can be drawn about the authority of Vatican II? That, according to the two popes of the Council, it was merely pastoral in nature and is not to be accorded the authority of the essential Magisterium of the Church. In holding that understanding, Catholics are simply obeying the words of the two popes themselves. Vatican II, therefore, as a pastoral council, has no dogmatic force and can be held to be imprudent or even in error, with no compromise to one's Catholic faith. Several Church councils in the past have been condemned by the popes (e.g., that of Pistoia, which passed items similar to Vatican II).
The Council never did openly declare any of its teaching as binding on the Church. Never in the history of the Catholic Church had a Council taken such pains to declare that it was not teaching infallibly. The pope who summoned the Council and the pope who promulgated its decrees made it clear that Vatican II was a pastoral, not a dogmatic Council. Catholics are, therefore, within their rights to reject the novelties of Vatican II, which are out of step with Sacred Tradition and the previous continuous Magisterium [official teaching] of the Church.
In fact, it is canonically possible for a future pope to annul the outcome of the Council, as it was merely a pastoral council. The Council of Ephesus in 449, which was regularly called and attended by all the East and by legates from Pope St. Leo the Great, was annulled by that pope's subsequent opposition to it and branded the "Robber's Council" (Latrocinium).
For further information, see the TRADITIO Network's What Is the Authority of Vatican II?
Thanks for your comments on the "indult." You have a valid point: if Benedict-Ratzinger really had the nerve (or wanted) to advance the "Indult" Mass, why release rumours about it? Remember what happened with the seminary document? It was rumoured that a tough document was planned, so Cardinal George of Chicago flew off to Rome to threaten NewChurch with rebellion. The result of George's intervention was catastrophe, and presbyter Richard McBride, that outright heretic, marched off to Detroit to proclaim that this new pope was not so bad after all.
When concessions were being planned to allow a universal jurisdiction for the "Indult" Mass, it was Newcardinal Lustiger who had a temper fit and then flew off to Newrome to threaten Newpope with schism. And, as you Fathers have already mentioned, when the cardinalatial commission of 1986 proposed liberating the Traditional Latin Mass, it was stopped after Northern European bishops threatened revolt. As for the 1984 "indult," it was almost completely ignored until 1988, when the Motu proprio advanced it as a way to shut down SSPX and other independent Traditional Latin Masses. This has not worked, though, because God had other plans!
Some have argued that it was Newvatican itself that started the rumors of a fabled "universal indult" in order to stimulate open opposition to it. Newvatican tried the same ruse with respect to the so-called Catechismus Catholicae Ecclesiae, the New Order catechism released in the early 1990s, but only after Newvatican revved up opposition to traditional teaching, so that the catechism could be more easily revised with Modernistic doctrine.
If that was the point of dredging up this "universal indult" nonsense again, it appears that the Newvatican opponents to it have achieved their goal. Five Newchurch bishops and thirty presbyters in France, in an open letter, have made known their opposition to the concept. They have "expressed grave concern about making this concession to ultra-conservatives who reject the reforms of the Second Vatican Council."
Newchurch bishop Robert Le Gall, of Tolouse, told the Catholic daily La Croix that the reintroduction of Latin could cause friction between those who remain staunchly behind the reforms of Vatican II. "This could create grave difficulties, especially for those who have remained loyal to Vatican II," he said. [Source: Reuters]
There you have the truth. The loyalty of traditional Catholics to the true Faith have always been despised by those who have remained loyal to the New Order Sect of Vatican II. The New Order and traditional Catholicism can't mix, any more than oil and vinegar. Anyone who thinks that they can is just blinding himself to the laws of religion.
If there is any truth to the rumors about the "universal indult," we may yet see a replay of what happened in 1984 when John Paul II refused to publish the finding of his own cardinalatial commission that the Traditional Latin Mass could never be legally suppressed. When the liberalist Northern European bishops got wind of that finding, they flew to Rome to threaten JPII that if he published the finding, they would go into open schism from Newrome. Consequently, JPII never published the finding.
For further information, see ECCLESIA.TXT: Ecclesia Dei -- Before and After the "Indult" in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics).
While the Newchurch cat's away, the presbyters will play. In this case, Newchurch Cardinal Francis George, of Chicago, was no sooner in Newpope's den than one of his presbyters, one of his pastors in fact, stole $200,000. While George was gone, Pastor Mark Sorvillo, a Newchurch presbyter for 28 years, was charged with stealing more than $190,000 from St. Margaret Mary parish on the Far North Side of Chicago. As it is, the Newparish is struggling to keep the doors of its school open. Authorities accused Sorvillo of using secret money-market accounts and credit cards to embezzle money from the Newparish.
Although George is inaccurately held to be a "conservative," he express no outrage that one of his presbyters would steal money from his parishioners. George demanded no restitution. He sat on his hands playing footsie with Newpope, saying only, "I hope the truth will come out and that the parish will receive back whatever might have been taken from it." What remarkable faith this Newcardinal has! Apparently, he thinks that some Newchurch angel is going to come from heaven to return the stolen money! [Source: Chicago Tribune]
George said that the pope was worried about the state of the church in the United States. Duh! Attendance at the Novus Ordo service has plummeted to a mere 15%. Presbyters are raping children and pillaging parish accounts at an alarming rate. Newchurch bishops have turned their seminaries into "gay" brothels of which Caligula would be proud! And Benedict-Ratzinger won't lift a finger to do anything about it. Probably he is more concerned that the money pipeline from the United States to Newvatican is not flowing at full bore.
The SSPX Prior of Toulouse, France, Patrick de la Rocque, has publicly expressed himself favorable to abandoning the Traditional Latin Mass in favor of a Novus Ordo service refabricated with "traditional" elements proposed by Benedict-Ratzinger. In September 2005, just after the Beheading meeting of August 29, 2005, this SSPX official wrote to SSPX priests to offer as a solution to the problem of "liturgical unity" between Newchurchers and traditional Catholics Ratzinger's proposal of June 23, 2003, to replace Hannibal Bugnini's fabricated Novus Ordo service with a newly-fabricated Novus Ordo/traditional hybrid.
de la Rocque also publicly advocated a "reform of the reform," embraced by such New Order groups as Adoremus, to create a bastardized Novus Ordo service by joining parts of the Modernized Mass of 1962 with it. Since 1995 Ratzinger has backed this idea to corrupt the "Indult" Mass in an effort to win over the Anglican Protestants and the "Radical Orthodoxy" movement.
So, far from being anything like a "traditional" pope, Benedict-Ratzinger is again revealed as a Modernist who simply thinks that he can do a better job of fabricating a "New Mess" than Hannibal Bugnini. Moreover, it is clear that the "Indult" Mass is moving away from being even the Modernized Mass of 1962 to becoming a modified Novus Ordo service, which Newvatican is starting to sell as the "Latin Mass," an ambiguous term that does not mean the Traditional Latin Mass. Already, most of the "Indult" Masses in the United States are reported to be hybrids of the Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service with the Modernized Mass of 1962.
I would like to inform the TRADITIO Network that members and clergy of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) who reject Superior General Bernard Fellay's posture of a sell-out to Newrome, have begun circulating a petition addressed to the SSPX's three other bishops, who have expressed their own disagreement with Fellay sellout activities. We do not fell that Fellay is representing our interests, the interest of the SSPX, or the interests of the Traditional Catholic Movement as a whole.
To Your Excellencies Bishops
Tissier de Mallerais
Alphonso de Galarreta
From your humble flocks:
We, the undersigned, beg of you to oppose any further communication with Modernist Rome and to fight against any internal forces within the Society of St. Pius X, if such forces exist, that may now or in the future seek to make an agreement with Modernist Rome. We beg you to remember and hold fast to your assurances of the past, claiming that it would be wrong to have anything to do with Rome until such time as it has returned to the Faith, voided Vatican II, and rejected the Novus Ordo.
We the undersigned beg Your Excellencies to make your rejection of any further communication or agreement with Rome clear with a public statement. We implore that you maintain and uphold the words of your consecrating Bishop, Archbishop Lefebvre, who in his last years stated repeatedly that there was no further need to communicate with Rome and that nothing short of a complete return to the Faith by Rome would be sufficient for any manner of agreement.
We beg that you will forgive our presumption in addressing you in this manner and that you understand that it is only with great fear and urgency that we do so.
In Christo et Maria,
The Traditional Catholics of the World
I simply cannot fathom why Bishop Fellay is so naive, sleeping with the Newchurch enemy.
Were it not for the imminent threat of a huge split within the SSPX if it goes that way, I'm sure that this would have already happened. I know for a fact that the priest of the SSPX in [city suppressed to protect him from retribution by Fellay] will leave if the SSPX signs on, and I know that there will be others also. That is a simple matter of probability.
What does Fellay hope to gain? If, and only if, what the press releases seem to be saying is true, it then becomes suspected, with all the cloak and dagger games Fellay is playing, that there may have been something offered to him.
Could he be playing Judas with the True Faith? Is there another "30 pieces of silver?" As I tell my customers at work: "Sight unseen, anything is possible." Still, I don't want to assume arbitrarily that Fellay is up to no good, but the situation leaves me very suspicious.
If one believes the propaganda, the New Order is "tolerant" and "forgiving" and "charitable," while it is traditional Catholics and Fundamental Protestants who are "intolerant" and "unforgiving" and "uncharitable." And in the liberalist morality, the worst crime is not murder or child rape or embezzling millions of dollars. It is some politically-defined "anti-Semitic" quality. Like "racist," "anti-Semitic" has become a term devoid of specific meaning, but is stretched to tag anyone hated by the liberalists.
A case in point. Hollywood liberalist Joan Rivers, aka Joan Molinsky, dropped her comedy mask to flare up against the noted traditional Catholic producer-director-actor Gibson, who was interviewed the week of October 16, 2006, on the Good Morning America television program. She says that Mel Gibson deserves death for the anti-Semitic remarks he made during his July drunk-driving arrest. "He is an anti-Semitic son of a bitch. He should (expletive) die!" she declared during an interview with Celebrity Week. [Source: Newsmax]
This is the same Joan Rivers who, in a published interview, claimed that her husband, Edgar Rosenberg, had "tried to drive her insane." In the interview she also called her former boss at the Fox Network "Barry (expletive) Diller." She is a frequent guest on the Howard Stern program, which revels in profanity. It seems that Mrs. Rosenberg has an habitual filthy mouth in public and is hardly in a position to be criticizing another, who flew off the handle once in private.
Mel Gibson murdered no one. He raped no one. He had an extra glass of wine, which barely put him over the tight California drunk-driving limit, and he mouthed off against his detractors in private. Even a tad drunk, Gibson has more class than the liberalists like Joan Rivers!
If (and that's a big if) Benedict-Ratzinger plays into the "indult" nonsense, an October 20 Wall Street Journal article reports that the greater New York metropolitan area will pay it no need. A presbyter at one Newchurch parish in Manhattan said that he and his parish council were not interested in having more "old Masses" [sic] celebrated there. A parochial vicar in Long Island nearly chortled at the suggestion that any additional "Indult" Masses would be allowed in the Newchurch diocese that he serves.
Let's face it. The powers-that-be in Newchurch are embarrassed or downright hostile to traditional practices, which they fear as a threat to reverse what they call the Modernist liturgical "progress" of the past four decades. Anyone who thinks that another "indult" under the control of the Newchurch of the New Order is going to do anything other than bamboozle indultarians to come under the veil of the New Order is kidding himself!
The latest Newchurch crazy has seen Christ in a "Holy Buritto." Valencia Phillips claimed to see an image of His face burned onto its tortilla wrapping that she had cooked for dinner. She promptly stored the "Holy Burrito" inside a plastic food container, resting it on a bed of cotton balls. [Source: CBS News]
The Real Miracle is Our Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament, to be found in any traditional church. Of course, this is the only miracle that the Newchurchers don't recognize. The Newchurchers better watch out what is being put into their grape juice: LSD?!
The TRADITIO Network has been informed that on October 20, 2006, at 22:40 PDT, Fr. Eugene Heidt died. As we previously reported, he had been ill for some time, having suffered a stroke in September 2003 after back surgery.
As confused as is the situation with the "Third Secret of Fatima," so is the contents of the letter from Newcardinal Hoyos, the President of Newvatican's "Indult" Committe, which the SSPX's Superior General, Bernard Fellay, has been hiding since June 2006. Fellay admits that the letter exists and "could be made public." Notice, he does not stay that it will be made public.
This letter is supposed to include the "canonical package" proposal of Newrome to him. He stated to journalists here in Paris, in a private meeting on October 13, 2006, that the canonical structure that Benedict-Ratzinger is offering to him is "much better than anything that has ever been proposed up to now, and even much better that the solution given to the Good Shepherd Institute." He was broadly smiling and satisfied when saying this.
Yet, the ever Janus-faced Fellay on October 14 was telling a different story in a public address essentially to SSPX clery and members. He said at the public address that an agreement with Newrome is "impossible" and "suicide." He did not mention the letter from Hoyos. Fellay has kept the contents of this letter secret from the clergy and laity of the SSPX at large, and may continue to do so while he engages private negotiations with Newrome. It is reported here that SSPX Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta expressed to at least one source that "he is very concerned" and that the three other bishops are reject Fellay's ecclesiastical games with Newrome.
On French radio October 12, Fellay claimed that "he had no relationship with Newrome since his meeting with Cardinal Hoyos on November 15." But Fellay, in the private meeting on October 13, did admit to receiving a communication from Hoyos, which is in the nature of a follow-up to their meeting late in 2005. Fellay also said privately to the journalists that Newrome had been ready to launch the process in April 2006, but decided to postpone and wait. Obviously, there has been communication, even though Fellay denies a "relationship."
In this, Fellay is reminiscent of U.S. President Bill Clinton, who played word games and lied under oath, claiming that "it depends on what the meaning of the word is is." Archbishop Lefebvre made public his letters from Newrome. Fellay apparently doesn't trust his fellow SSPX bishops, his clergy, and his laity. Thus, his motives have become increasingly discredited among his own clergy and laity.
On October 15, 2006, speaking to the French newspaper Le Figaro, and in other statements, Bernard Fellay, in addition to the statements previously reported on the TRADITIO Network, made some revealing comments about the possible restructuring of the SSPX in a more Newrome-friendly mode. Originally, there was talk of becoming a New Order "Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint Savior," but that mode has virtually collapsed in Campos (Rio de Janeiro), Brazil, under Newrome's puppet bishop Fernando Rifan, where the once traditional priests of Bishop Antonio de Castro Meyer have essentially gone New Order.
In Paris Fellay gave out a new vision of the Society of St. Pius X becoming "an independent group within the Church," while it continued to advocate rolling back Vatican II reforms. "We would be a bit like the Chinese [Communist] Patriotic National Church, in the Church without really being there," he explained. "There could be a relationship between [New]Rome and us, but it would not yet be a juridical relationship."
Fellay seems to be taking further steps toward the bizarre. First of all, one has to wonder what his definition of "Church" is. Is it the Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ and defined to us by public revelation, that is, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition? Is he part of that Church, wherever it may exist in these troubled times? Or does Fellay think, like Gertrude Stein, that "there is no there there"?
Fellay's statement that the SSPX should pattern itself after the Patriotic National Church of Communist China is shocking. The PNC is a servant of the Communist regime which publicly kills even Newchurch presbyters and nuns as a matter of policy. Even at that, up until about ten years ago, at least it maintained the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments, but has since abandoned those to convert to the New Order after Newrome made contacts with it. The SSPX seems to be going in the same direction after Newrome's contacts with it. It's just proof of the old adage: "Lie down with dogs; get up with fleas."
At one of the most critical times in the history of the Church, after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre, it is becoming clearer and clearer every day that the SSPX has at its helm a fou of confused Catholicism. Yet this is the dictator that a majority of the SSPX Electors last June chose to lead them for 24 years. God help them!
I have attended Mass at a Society of St. Pius X chapel for over ten years, and I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone with any degree of intelligence would want to "reconcile" with Newrome. In recent years, Newrome has had nothing to offer but heretic popes, corrupt cardinals and bishops, and paedophile presbyters.
When the SSPX's former First Assistant Superior General, Franz Schmidberger, visited our parish earlier this year to explain the so-called negotiations with Newrome, parishioners were given evasive answers when they asked pointed questions. And, to add insult to injury, their questions were edited out of the audio tapes that were made of the conference and sold the following week.
I cannot help but feel that Bernard Fellay will very soon become "Judas Iscariot" Fellay because of his blatant failure to inform the entire Society of St. X in a written statement of just what his intentions are in a "reconciliation" with Newrome, and his reasons for pursuing this entire matter in the first place. His conflicting statements and evasive manner are more suitable to the actions of a politician than they are to a supposedly Catholic bishop, who in his position has been entrusted with the Deposit of the Faith. I cannot, therefore, in good conscience take part in his one million rosary "crusade." Am I wrong in taking this position?
The Fathers Reply
We think not. To turn the Most Holy Rosary of Our Blessed Lady into some kind ecclesiastical shell-game is not only detestable; it is sacrilege. Moreover, your revelation that the tapes and transcripts issued by the Society are edited is a revelation that should silence the Fellayites, who are always claiming that Fellay is always an innocent victim of gossip, rumor, and misinterpretation. It seems that Fellay is himself the direct source of the gossip, rumor, and misinterpretation.
Pity poor Newpope. His much-heralded November 28-December 1, 2006, "religious mission" to Turkey, the modern country in which New Rome, also known as Constantinopolis in ancient times, but now as Istanbul, is busted. The government of Turkey has announced that he will not be received as a "religious leader," let alone as pope, but merely as a "foreign head of state." As merely the head of a small 43-hectare plot of land ceded to him by the Fascist leader Benito Mussolini, which got its name from the temple to Apollo there, in which the pagan priest pronounced oracles known as vaticinia.
I was listening to a radio station that had a Lutheran Sunday service on. At first I thought that it was a Novus Ordo service. It was almost word for word the same: all the same songs, all the same doings and practices. It was amazing. This experience really brought home to me the fact that the New Order is now just another Protestant sect. I would never have had the problem if the Traditional Latin Mass were broadcast!
I am the only Catholic at work, but I remember some of the Novus Ordo songs. If I inadvertently start singing one, my Protestant coworkers immediately recognize it and sing along. But if I sing the Kyrie Eleison, they have no clue and look as if I were from the Dark Ages!
Sometimes Newvatican gets it right -- even when it doesn't realize it!
JPII, known as the "Clown" pope from his affinity to "Clown" Messes, has now been turned into the "Cartoon" pope in a DVD called John Paul II, the Friend of Humanity, unveiled at a news conference on October 17, 2006, and its producers hope it will be a big hit for the coming Christmas season. It was drawn by J.L. Lopez-Guardia, a Spanish cartoonist, who works under the pseudonym Cavin Cooper.
And what is behind the cartoon? Devotion? Of course, not. Money. Newvatican's production company hopes to market in 30 countries and eight languages before Christmas. Apparently, even Newvatican isn't Catholic enough to focus on Christ and the Mass at Christmas.
It seems that the SSPX's Superior General Bernard Fellay is either the Great Deceiver, or he is so befuddled that he can't honestly remember what he says from one day to the next. As one participant in the July 2006 SSPX Chapter meeting said about him, "he is mad or bad, cruel and duplicitous."
On October 12, 2006, in an ultra-conservative Paris radio-station interview, Fellay indicated that any "universal indult," in which the Modernized Mass of 1962 is merely an "extraordinary rite," would not meet what the SSPX had demanded as a prerequisite to discuss any agreement with NewRome "because an extraordinary rite is not an ordinary rite." He indicated in the interview that the principles of Newchurch are the principles of Vatican II, which are the principles of the Modernist Revolution and must be rejected before negotiating any agreement with Newrome.
But, on October 15, 2006, speaking to the French newspaper Le Figaro, and in other statements, Fellay spun 180 degrees in indicating that such an act would be a "grand gesture" meeting one of his demands. Not only that, but it is said Fellay is finally going to send a "letter of support" for the pope. Some claim that Fellay's intent was misinterpreted in this interview, but the fact of the matter is that his history shows deliberate ambiguity on his position. He is trying to please two factions of the SSPX: the "conservatives," who stay with the principles of Archbishop Lefebvre and his opposition to the New Order, and the "liberalists" (Fellayites), who display an attitude of accommodation and sellout to Newrome.
What would lead someone to support a pope who has been subpoenaed in two U.S. federal court cases as complicit in the cover-up of sex crimes by his presbyters and bishops? What would lead someone to support a pope who is so bereft of theological knowledge that he can't make up his mind on such basic issues as whether the Mohammedans are infidels, whether the Jews should look for a new Messias, and whether Original Sin exists?
Well, Bernard, which is it? Are you for a sellout to Newrome or against it? Your members deserve an honest answer. Are you simply a Great Deceiver, bamboozling your own members with contradictory statements so that you can feather your own purple nest? Or is the growing schism among your own members and the attacks on you by your own clergy and members and by the traditional media affecting your sense?
The TRADITIO Network is in the fortunate position of being the first, over a year ago, to have predicted just this kind of Fellayite duplicity. Maybe the SSPXers should be praying a million Rosaries for a new Superior General -- one who, if he wants to sell out to Newrome and spit on the grave of Archbishop Lefebvre -- at least would have the honesty to tell his members straight. But as long as he uses ambiguous Vatican II-speak and continues to play ecclesiastical games with Newrome, everything he says and does is grossly suspect.
Not only are presbyters stealing collections right and left, but Newchurch bishops as well. Newrome is now reeling this week from a scandal in which Patrick O'Donoghue, Newchurch bishop of Lancaster, England, confessed to fencing nearly $20,000,000 from Newchurch collections over the last 15 years!
So deep has the scandal become that Newvatican has taken an unprecedented step: it has demanded an audit of every diocese in the United Kingdom. Well, it's about time. Benedict-Ratzinger's administration in less than two years has let hundreds of millions of dollars be stolen by Newchurch presbyters and bishops and hasn't lifted a finger.
This latest scandal shows that Benedict-Ratzinger and his administration is more concerned about money than the rape of children. Newpope has yet to launch a worldwide investigation into the thousands of rapes committed against Newchurch children by his Newchurch presbyters and bishops. One-seventh of the children, according to a Church-funded study, have been under nine years of age. But when money is involved, hey, Newchurch is right there with its hand out.
Did Our Lord thinking of such a corrupt pope as Benedict-Ratzinger when he proclaimed:
But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 21:21/DRV)
In the United States the "indult" Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), hastily created by Newrome in 1988 in panic at Archbishop Lefebvre's consecration of four bishops for the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), has been quarantined since 2000 in Denton, Nebraska, under the censorious eye of Fabian Bruskewitz, Newchurch bishop of Lincoln.
Now here in France, Philippe Barbarin, Newchurch cardinal of Lyon, France, at the beginning of October 2006 took back all of the churches that he had given to the FSSP in Lyon. Barbarin had the locks of the churches changed so that the priests found locked doors when they came to offer their "Indult" Mass. He also closed the FSSP seminary in Lyon. Barbarin then condescended to receive Fr. John Berg, Superior General of the FSSP, but Berg was powerless to do anything about the fait accompli and was abandoned by Newrome, which always recognizes the local bishop's power as superseding its own. Such is the limitation of an "indult."
The FSSP has been expelled from three or four other sites in France, and the Newchurch bishops involved have appropriated their bank accounts. The bishops, irate at Newvatican's creation of yet another "indult" group, the Good Shepherd Institute, for five expelled SSPX priests, have decided to take matters into their own hands to "manage the traditionalist [sic] issue." They are rejecting the "indult" Institute and dismantling the FSSP churches in their dioceses in an effort to protect the hegemony of Vatican II and the New Order.
The Newchurch bishops' opposition to the "indult" is growing, and their numbers are increasing. It appears now clear that the "indult" groups have never been accepted by Newchurch, but have only been tolerated to lure the SSPX into the New Order. Benedict-Ratzinger can issue as many "indults" as he wants, but the Newchurch bishops are never going to accept them. Even the unfounded rumors of yet another "universal indult" are simply driving the bishops to suppress "indult" groups in their dioceses once and for all.
The hostility of Newchurch to any form of traditional Catholicism seems belatedly to have led Bernard Fellay, the liberalist leader of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), to do an about-face and start to distance himself from Newrome. If only he had listened to the TRADITIO Network's advice in the latter half of 2005, he could have avoided precipitating a very real division now permanently established in the Society between pro-sellouts and anti-sellouts to Newrome.
We are a small traditional church and wonder whether there are any Gregorian chant recordings that will guide us in building a small Gregorian choir. What we have seen so far are recordings from large monasteries, which is not what we are looking for.
The Fathers Reply.
For Gregorian chant recorded live, we recommend the new St. John Schola for Gregorian Chant series, A Traditional Chapel Sings Gregorian Chant, which so far includes four volumes, with more to come:
Volume I: Christmas Matins of the Divine Office (An Abridgement)
Volume II: First Mass of Christmas
Volume III: Fourth Sunday after Epiphany
Volume IV: Pentecost
Although there are many recordings made in recording studios, or sometimes in larger churches or monasteries with professional or dedicated choirs, there are few, if any, recordings made by the average small lay choir, chanting what can actually be attempted in the smaller churches, chapels, and oratories, to which the Sacred Chant can be a great addition in the traditional Roman liturgy, not as mere secular performance, but in the actual religious setting for which it was composed, the Traditional Latin Mass and Divine Office of the classical Roman Rite.
The St. John Schola has also produced supporting music sheets and booklets, which can be downloaded free of charge, to accompany the recordings and aid small choirs in using Gregorian chant for the traditional liturgy.
For further information, see the TRADITIO Network's Gregorian Chant department.
Benedict-Ratzinger may not be very Catholic, but he loves Zionists! On October 12, 2006, he welcomed and blessed a delegation from the Zionist Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai B'rith (Sons of the Jewish Covenant). You may remember that this was the group of Zionists that called The Passion of the Christ, a Gospel-based film depicting the Passion of Christ on Good Friday, "hate speech." Why aren't we surprised that Benedict-Ratzinger has publicly written that Jesus Christ is not the Messias for the Jews; they can wait for another. Is the pope Catholic?
Even the Newchurch hierarchy admits that New Order presbyters are not priests, but are mere "independent contractors" to the Newchurch. Edward Egan, Newchurch cardinal of New York, swore under oath in a court of law that "a bishop has no control over these priests [presbyters], who were all acting as independent contractors, solely employed to perform clerical duties and serving in their capacity with no direct controls from the chancery."
Egan is under subpoena for his role in the sex crimes that went on under his administration of the Bridgeport, Connecticut, Newchurch diocese. If he were serious about this preposterous contention, why didn't he fire his "independent contractors" for cause instead of abetting their crimes? That's what would happen to independent contractors in business. And, by the way, if the Newchurch bishops are so incompetent, why aren't they being fired?
Let's face it. These Newchurch hierarchs, up to and including Newpope, don't have a Catholic moral bone in their bodies. The Roman Catholics of earlier times would have chucked them into the Tiber and rid the Church of them. Unfortunately, modern Newchurchers don't have the guts that their predecessors did.
If the Newchurchers don't believe the TRADITIO Network, now they will have to dispute the Washington Post to deny our extensive reports about the "cookies" handed out at the Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service.
Actually, the Post has done us one better. It reports that pizzas are being handed as Novus Ordo "communion." In an expose dated October 13, 2006, the Post reported that "Pizza" Masses [sic], in which pizzas, rather than wafers, are being "consecrated in a bid to attract young people."
For further information, see the TRADITIO Network's Novus Ordo Service Photo Gallery.
I have just a brief comment or two on the recent rumours regarding a liberalisation of the Modernized Mass of 1962. First of all, as we all know, Newchurch canon law has always admitted that the Novus Ordo service can be celebrated freely by every presbyter in Latin, with all the smells and bells and the Roman "Canon" (sans the real Consecration formula). But where can one find such services? They are few in number, and that number has not increased in twenty years. Twenty years!
I know of a "conservative" presbyter in Vancouver who celebrated one of these Freemasonic liturgies in Latin. He invited a special few guests and then locked and barred the doors, terrified that even this would get him banished to a parish at the North Pole. Another presbyter in Texas was removed because he performed the Novus Ordo service in Latin. So much for "rights" under Newchurch canon law. If these New Order presbyters are afraid even to consider the Novus Ordo service in Latin, what on earth makes anyone think that many of them will celebrate a "liberalised" "Indult" Mass in Latin?
In 1984, the Vatican announced the original "indult" and, as a result of it, between 1984 and 1988, only nine bishops out of more than two thousand allowed it in the Western Hemisphere. Those nine mostly imposed ludicrous conditions on its celebration as well. A "universal indult," or even a universal recognition that a right to the 1962 Mass in Latin has never been abrogated, will do little for anyone.
Minimally, a jurisdiction would be needed, with a "universal" personal bishop. Even then, that personal bishop would have no real property on which to celebrate his "Indult" Masses and would have to go hat in hand for decades to the local bishops to seek their permission to use their buildings for his Masses. (Wait a minute! Didn't the Fraternity of St. Peter already do just that with the most meagre results?) On top of this, Newvatican has issued a seminary document that makes the "pinking" of the seminaries official policy. Newvatican might as well have issued a document making it illicit for normal men to apply!
Lastly, what has Benedict-Ratzinger done since his election? JPII, for all his faults, appointed more bishops on his deathbed every week than this one does in a month. 110 Newchurch bishoprics stand empty because Newpope has failed to make appointments. He is merely allowing the same old crowd of unCatholic prelates to run the show and stay in power -- on and on and on.
So, let the rumour mill continue.
The Fathers Reply.
As one indultarian told the press: "I'll believe it when I see it, because I can't tell you how many times there have been exact days when this 'universal indult' was supposed to be issued." Even the rumors indicate that any "universal indult," if ever issued, will contain a "cancellation policy," which will provide that diocesan Newchurch bishops can forbid it in their dioceses. And, of course, they will, just as they have done since 1984.
Even the indultarians are starting to have doubts about this "universal indult" ruse. Not only have such rumors been circulating since 1984(!), but recently there has been a spate of articles in Catholic publications rejecting the validity of ordinations according to the Novus Ordo Ordinal of 1968, which immediately preceded the imposition of the Novus Ordo service by Newchurch in 1969.
So, even with a "universal indult" (which is tainted with the odor of heresy, in that it would implicitly deny the canons of the Dogmatic Canons of the Council of Trent and the implementing Papal Bull Quo Primum concerning the Mass), the indultarians would arguably still be eating a cookie, as the "Indult" Mass would be performed by a Novus Ordo presbyter, not a Catholic priest.
However, we have the sense that Newchurch will gin up more invalid Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan services in Latin as a way to offset any moves toward the "Indult" Mass. Most Newchurchers are so ignorant that they can't tell the difference any more between an "Indult" Mass and a Novus Ordo Latin service. One hears the term "Latin Mass" used more and more -- not "Traditional Latin Mass." The term "Latin Mass" is ambiguous and will be used more and more for the Novus Ordo service in Latin or hybrid 1962/Novus Ordo services in Latin.
A case in point. A few weeks ago the Newchurch EWTN Cable Network broadcast what looked like an "Indult" Mass from St. John Cantius in Chicago. The altar was oriented ad Deum. The presbyter wore beautiful gold vestments. The service was in Latin, but what was he saying? Why, he was using Hannibal Bugnini's fabricated Eucharistic Prayer II! The beauty of the Latin language could not conceal the invalidity of this service. But how many of the Chicago Indultarians were totally fooled by this fiasco?
Actually, it was a double fiasco since the music used was Mozart's Coronation Mass. It is an undeniable historical fact that Mozart wrote this Mass not for the New Order of Vatican II, but for the Traditional Latin Mass. Yet so deceitful are these Newchurch bishops and presbyters that they apparently had no scruples about pulling the wool over their Indultarians' eyes! What makes anyone think that any new "indult" will be any different?
A set of slides is circulating around in France, showing how the liberalist faction of the SSPX is abandoning the principles of Archbishop Lefebvre and preparing its members to sign on with Newrome. Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the SSPX, was supposed to present these arguments in a speech at Paris on October 12, 2006, in which he was to intimate that Benedict-Ratzinger was giving the Newchurch ship of state a change of course). But at the last minute Fellay again did a chameleonic flip-flop and took a step back from the Newrome abyss.
Fellay was interviewed on a Paris radio program on that date, where he adopted a more cautious position than he had previously concerning Newrome's actions to capture the SSPX. He declared: "I would not like to be in the place of the new Institute of the Good Shepherd" (the "indult" society that Newrome set up for five expelled SSPX priests). He said that the "exclusive use" of the "Indult" Mass in the Institute does not protect them, because "the Superiors of the Institute cannot forbid their members from performing the Novus Ordo service."
Fellay made a very important statement concerning a so-called "universal indult" for the "Indult" Mass. He said that if Benedict-Ratzinger declares that the "Indult" Mass is merely an "extraordinary rite," this is not what the SSPX had demanded as a prerequisite to discuss any agreement with NewRome "because an extraordinary rite is not an ordinary rite." He said that the principles of Newchurch are the principles of Vatican II, which are the principles of the Modernist Revolution and must be rejected before negotiating any agreement with Newrome. He claimed that he had not had contact with Newrome since his meeting with Newcardinal Hoyos in mid November 2005, but announced that he would have another meeting with Newrome before the end of 2006. What good are prerequisites, then, if Fellay negotiates without their having been met? Many here in France think that it is all a deception.
Thus, Fellay remains centered on continuing to play ecclesiastical games with Newrome. He is retreating farther and farther from Archbishop Lefebvre, and his Rosary bouquet ploy for the "Indult" Mass is being widely criticized here as a "deception."
The "Springtime of Vatican II" continues to turn into a desperately cold winter, as the Newchurch organization, headed by a conciliar pope who can't even seem even to condemn child rape publicly, continues to disintegrate. For those traditional Catholics who have asked, "When is God going to do something about the state of His Church?," you have your answer. He is dismantling it before your eyes.
The Newchurch diocese of Davenport, Iowa, now joins the Newchurch dioceses of Spokane, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and Tucson, Arizona in filing for bankruptcy. Since 2004 Davenport bishop William Franklin already paid out more than $10,500,000 million for the sex crimes of his presbyters, involving dozens of crime complaints, and now his successor, Martin Amos, is facing a new set of lawsuits. Anyone who thinks that the Great Sex & Embezzlement Scandal is over, think again!
The decision to file for bankruptcy now is being driven by a new set of claims aimed at the diocese and Bishop Lawrence Soens, of Sioux City, who has been accused of sex crimes by as many as 15 former students during his tenure as presbyter-principal at a Newchurch high school. 25 other sex-crime suits are pending, with more forthcoming.
The first of three trials involving Soens and the diocese was scheduled to begin on October 23, 2006, but it likely will be dismissed in light of the bankruptcy filing. Was the bankruptcy filing, therefore, a legal ruse to exempt a Newchurch bishop from testify in his own sex-crime case? Would Newchurch destroy itself rather than reveal its crimes? Do bees sting? One lawyer in the case called the bankruptcy filing "an unnecessary step ... with the real purpose being an effort to try to eliminate future responsibility." [Source: Associated Press]
Sex crimes by Newchurch in the United States alone have risen to about $1,500,000,000 and will continue to rise well beyond that figure. Yet Newpope remains silent while his bishops and presbyters continue to rape his people -- in more ways than one!
It seems that the rumor mill is churning up again about the possibility of Benedict-Ratzinger palming off some kind of "universal indult" for the Modernized Mass of 1962. Actually, one speculative source came out with a weasel-worded article, and the rest of the secular and religious press simply repeated it as "gospel." Actually, as the photograph above shows, Benedict-Ratzinger is more likely to give an "indult" for the old Jewish synagogue service in the New Order temples of Newchurch!
But you readers of the TRADITIO Network are well aware that that scenario was already played out during Holy Week of this year when the fabled "indult" was supposed to come out Maundy Thursday, then Easter, then shortly after Easter -- then never. It seems that Newchurch wants to keep the indultarians perpetually in suspense. To keep their bodies in the New Order temples. To keep their shekels clinking in the New Order collection baskets. Moreover, it could well be that, as has happened in the past, Newvatican has planted the story to stir a groundswell of opposition from Newchurch bishops and laity.
Should such a "universal indult" be hoped for by traditional Catholics? Absolutely not! For a number of reasons:
Practically speaking, there can never be any such "universal indult," no matter what Benedict-Ratzinger may do. He has made it clear that his bishops are in charge of Newchurch and that he marches to their orders in accordance with Vatican II's false doctrine of "collegiality." These bishops have all the "indult" they need already. If they wanted to extend the Modernized Mass of 1962, they could do it now. Any "universal indult" is just a paper exercise. If any presbyter claimed to be acting under it, his Newchurch bishop would transfer him out of sight. And the presbyters know it!
But the worst aspect of any such "indult" is that the indultarians will simply be forced one step further to accept the legitimacy of the New Order and its implementation by Newchurch, with the bastardized "Indult" Mass as a mere secondary "option," together with the Balloon Mess, the Beach Mess, the Buddha Mess, the Campfire Mess, the Charismatic Mess, and all the other Messes, such as those documented in the TRADITIO Network's Novus Ordo Service Photo Gallery.
Any true Catholic's response any such "indult" action by Benedict-Ratzinger to quash the Traditional Catholic Movement for the restoration of the true Mass, Sacraments, Theology, and Morality to the Church and to bamboozle the poor indultarians further into the New Order should be: "We answer to a higher authority":
By virtue of Our Apostolic authority We give and grant in perpetuity that for the singing or reading of Mass in any church whatsoever, this [Traditional Latin] Missal may be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may be freely and lawfully used. Nor shall bishops, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious of whatsoever Order or by whatsoever title designated, be obliged to celebrate Mass otherwise than enjoined by Us. We likewise order and declare that no one whosoever shall be forced or coerced into altering this Missal and that this present Constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall for ever remain valid and have the force of law. --Pope St. Pius V
Isn't it the case that the Indultarians of today bear a striking similarity to the Juring priests of the French Revolution? It is my understanding that while the Juring priests seemed well intentioned, they were really spineless in that they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They had to swear allegiance to the Masonic secular government of the French Revolution (1789), just as the Indultarians of today spinelessly are willing to abjure the Catholic Faith and adjure (swear to) the New Order of Newchurch in order to get a deceptive veneer of "tradition."
Aren't we seeing today the French Revolution in a more refined, subtle, and devilish form? Then they killed Catholics; now they mock, ostracize and ignore us. The last thing that Newchurch wants is traditional Catholic martyrs, as that will be the seed that will turbo-charge the resurgence across the world of the true Roman Catholic Faith.
The Fathers Reply.
Yes, Newrome is desperately trying to deceive the Indultarians into selling out to yet another pusillanimous "indult" and remain beholden to the New Order of Newchurch. Meanwhile, Newrome greatly fears the independent priests who stand up boldly to the errors of Newrome with its invalid New "Mass," New Sacraments, New Morality, and New Doctrine. That is why Newrome is also working desperately to get the Society of St. Pius X to sell out to some "indult" (a privilege, not a right) or other, all within the power of the New Order to control, modify, or rescind at will.
Once the Indultarian flies are deceptively lured into the Newchurch black widow's web, then the lethal poison is injected, and spiritual death follows.
On October 9, 2006, Benedict-Ratzinger, in a statement that reminds traditional Catholics of his predecessor's sacrilege of kissing the Koran of the Mohammedans, assured the Infidels of his "personal view of the Koran, for which I have the respect due to the holy book of a great religion." This comment was added in Newvatican's publication of the speech -- which just goes to show how one cannot trust Newvatican publications.
This comment marks the fifth time that Newpope has changed his opinion on the topic. Thank the Lord that the post-Vatican II popes and Newchurch have eschewed infallibility. On September 11, Newpope had quoted, with apparent favor, the stinging criticism of the 14th-century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus, who spoke of the Mohammad's "command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
It is ironic that two days before Newpope's latest pro-Mohammedan comment, the Church traditionally celebrates the Feast of Our Lady of Victory, later renamed the Feast of the Most Holy Rosary. This feastday, placed in the Roman Calendar by Pope St. Pius V, the same pope who canonized for all time the apostolic Traditional Latin Mass, specifically commemorates the defeat of Mohammedans in the Bay of Lepanto (Corinth) on October 7, 1571, saving Europe from a Mohammedan invasion. The Catholic fleet of 209 was greatly outnumbered by the Mohammedan fleet of 300. Yet the Catholic forces defeated the greater numbers, killed the Mohammedan general, Ali Pascha, and freed the 15,000 Catholics who had been enslaved by the Mohammedans to man the galleys.
Pope Pius V did not hesitate to attribute the victory entirely to the intercession of Our Lady of Victory and her Most Holy Rosary. He said: "Neither valor, nor arms, nor leaders, but the Rosary of our Lady gave the victory." In thanksgiving for the victory, the pope ordered the Feast of Our Lady of Victory, later to become known as the Feast of the Most Holy Rosary, to be celebrated on the first Sunday in October. He also inserted into Our Lady's Litany of Loretto the invocation: Auxilium Christianorum, ora pro nobis.
Even if Benedict-Ratzinger seems to be spurning Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary in defeating the Mohammedans, and his predecessor had the temerity purportedly to change its divine form, let traditional Catholics not fail to take advantage of this great weapon that Our Lady has given to us for our own times, in which the true Faith and Christendom itself are under attack by far more than the force that was once repelled with divine assistance at Lepanto.
A French presbyter, Fr. Cambon, who has seen the devastation that the post-Vatican II New Order has brought upon the Catholic Faith in France over the last 45 years, has dared to speak the truth publicly in a BBC interview. He pointed to the plummeting attendance, number of presbyters, nuns, and monks, then stated: "My fear is that the Roman Catholic Church [meaning Newchurch] will disappear altogether in France. That's the path we're on." He expects Newchurch to be essentially dead in France within ten years.
As secularization takes an increasingly firm hold over French society, Newchurch congregations are disappearing, and the country's aging priests are dying. France has already lost more than half the priests it had in the 1960s. The average age of presbyters in France is 68, and half of the remainder died in 2005. One Newchurch presbyter has 40 churches to look after, so abysmally has the New Order failed to attract presbyters. Only 150 seminarians are studying for the New Order presbyterate in all of France. More and more Newchurch baptisms, weddings, and funerals are being conducted by lay ministers.
It would be a virtually impossible task for the remaining Newchurch presbyters, except for the fact that many of New Order village churches have almost no congregation and are visited only once or twice a year. One of the churches, for example, attracted for the Novus Ordo service one elderly man, two elderly women, and three old nuns. In comparison, the churchyards adjacent to these churches are crowded with the tombs of past generations of Catholics. Before Vatican II every one of the forty churches had its own priest.
It is relevant to note that as Newchurch is rapidly dying in France, that country has one of the world's largest growths of traditional Catholicism outside Newchurch. But that is the one path that Newchurch will never take. It would rather die than become Catholic again!
Harry Flynn, Newchurch arcbishop of Mineapolis-St. Paul, has approved "National Coming Out Day" to be celebrated on October, 10, 2006, in his Basilica of St. Mary. The "gay"-advocate group misnamed "Diginity" will celebrate a Novus Ordo Protestant-Masonic-Pagan service in his New Order cathedral/temple at noon on that day.
Anybody who still harbors the fantasy that Newchurch, or Benedict-Ratzinger himself, is against homosexuality is sadly mistaken. Benedict-Ratizinger appointed as his No. 3 man, Czar of Doctrine and Sex Crimes, the former San Francisco Newchurch archbishop William Levada, who flew the "gay" rainbow flag on "Gay" Day in that Baghdad by the Bay.
Benedict-Ratzinger, who has himself come under attack by "conservative" Newchurchers because of his failure to rout homosexuals from the pinko Newchurch seminaries, appointed George Niederauer, a publicly "gay"-friendly archbishop, to replace Levada in San Francisco. The anti-Catholic "gay" advocates in that city publicly effused about how much they loved Niederaur.
Hardly a month after the creation of the "indult" Good Shepherd Institute on September 8, 2006, which Newcardinal Hoyos, President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, and Benedict-Ratzinger, set up to butt heads with the Society of St. Pius X and staffed with five priests expelled by the SSPX, is already running onto the shoals of the New Order, just as was predicted by the TRADITIO Network.
Newcardinal Jean-Pierre Ricard, of Bordeaux, where the "indult" Institute is situated, is already calling the Institute a possible "failed hope." There are already so many controversies in the Bordeaux archdiocese about the Institute that Ricard is writing to Newvatican to demand the "conditions established for the recognition of this Institute." Already on September 15, 2006, the archdiocese's Vicar General, Jean Rouet, publicly accused Hoyos of "disinformation" in the creation of the Institute and called upon Cardinal Ricard to confront Benedict-Ratzinger on the matter. Ricard's recent action is apparently a follow-up to the call of his Vicar General.
Ricard claimed that there were serious concerns about the new "indult" Institute because of the "violence that has characterized relations between the SSPX and the Archdiocese of Bordeaux in the past." He insisted that the Institute must not "reopen questions about the path the Lord has chosen for the [New]church during the last 40 years." In order words, the "indult" priests have been silenced from making any criticizing of the Novus Ordo Service, the New Sacraments, the New Theology, and the New Morality of the New Order now in power in Newchurch. Ricard also implied, in a lightly-veiled threat, that he would not allow the "indult" priests to "have pastoral care for the faithful" and would not allow them to have a church in his archdiocese. [Source: Catholic World News]
As the TRADITIO Network has consistently maintained, the "indult" situation is merely a Newchurch ruse to keep indultarian Newchurchers from abandoning Newchurch entirely for the many other Traditional Latin Mass sites available to them that do not do obeisance to the Newchurch of the New Order. What makes the Good Shepherd Institute situation ironic is that Newcardinal Ricard himself sits on the Ecclesia Dei Commission and yet refuses to let even the hobbled "indult" operate in his own archdiocese. What fear Newchurch and its New Order have for the divine power of the Traditional Latin Mass!
A New York Times article of October 7 has revealed that William Hodgman, head of the Sex-crimes Division of the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office, is investigating Newchurch Cardinal Roger Mahony, known widely as the "Arch-heretic" for his bizarre theological pronouncements, with a view toward criminal prosecution on sex-crime charges. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office is currently prosecuting or investigating cases of sex crimes by Mahony's presbyters, where there are also more than 500 civil suits, some naming Cardinal Mahony personally.
So far, Mahony has talked a tough game to avoid prosecution himself. He even had the chief investigator of the U.S. Conference of Catholic [sic] Bishops, a federal prosecutor and former FBI agent, fired because he was getting too close to the truth. Mahony has consistently refused to turn over to the District Attorney material documents, by which Mahony is violating the directive of the USCCB, which has been consistently shown up as impotent as the Great Sex & Embezzlement Scandal continues.
One of Mahony's former presbyters, Oliver O'Grady, has stated in a documentary, Deliver Us from Evil, that his sex crimes over a period of twenty years were facilitated by Mahony, then Newchurch Bishop of Stockton, California, and now Newchurch Archbishop of Los Angeles. O'Grady stated that Mahony never addressed the criminal accusations against him, but moved him from parish to parish. He maintained that he informed Mahony of his crimes while working as a presbyter in Stockton. O'Grady confessed to abusing boys and girls as young as nine years old and also adult women. In 1993, he was convicted on four counts of "lewd and lascivious" acts with two preteen brothers and served seven years in prison. In a 2004 deposition Mahony stated that "expressing sexual urges toward a nine-year-old would not be automatic cause for removing a priest from duty."
O'Grady's revelations in the documentary, along with documents that the District Attorney obtained from the archdiocese through subpoena, has furnished new evidentiary muscle in determining whether criminal acts were committed in Mahony's handling of sex criminals under his charge.
Is the "Indult" Mass a Traditional Latin Mass or not? Well, it might have been closer in 1988 when the Ecclesia Dei "indult" was first published by JPII in his panic that Archbishop Lefebvre's consecration of four new bishops on June 30, 1988, would assist the Traditional Catholic Movement. But now, in 2006, the answer is turning to the negative.
First of all, the "Indult" Mass is not the fully Traditional Latin Mass, but the Modernized Mass of 1962, which is significantly changed by the handiwork of Hannibal Bugnini, the Chief Architect of the New Order Liturgy. Moreover, the majority of "Indult" Masses celebrated with the mandatory approval of the diocesan Newchurch bishop are now corrupted with a significant admixture of the New Order service.
A case in point is demonstrated by the photograph above. The "Indult" Mass pictured there is not being celebrated on the Lord's Day, Sunday, but on Saturday. The local bishop has perpetrated this scheduling deliberately so that the indultarians are forced to accept a Novus Ordo fraud: the Saturday "Golf" Mass. At this site the same bizarre altar is used to celebrate the invalid Novus Ordo service in Latin and Polish. Probably the indultarians aren't even receiving the Corpus Christi, but the Novus Ordo cookie concocted at one of the other invalid Messes.
Another ruse to beware of is the substitution of a phony "Latin Mass," not a "Traditional Latin Mass." The "Latin Mass" consists of the New Order service performed partly or entirely in Latin. Such services, of course, are just as invalid as they would be if performed in any vernacular language. The best example is the phony service telecast by the EWTN Cable Network. Most of the Newchurchers, who are so abysmally ignorant of the Roman Catholic Faith, are now easily deceived and can no longer distinguish between the true Mass and a phony, between a silk purse and a sow's ear.
You have to pity the poor indultarians, who have had to sell out their Roman Catholic Faith to get a crumb from the Novus Ordo cookie. In the case of the "Indult" Mass pictured above, the presbyter had to pronounce for the local press the complete New Order line: "The essence [of the Traditional Latin Mass and the New Order Service] is the same. It's the holy sacrifice of Christ."
No, it's not Mr. Presbyter! According to Roman Catholic Tradition, the Traditional Latin Mass in all its essentials was passed on by St. Peter, the first pope, to the Church. The Apostles themselves, according to St. Ambrose, worked at its elaboration. It reached its complete perfection with Popes St. Damasus (fourth century) and St. Gregory the Great (sixth century). The New Order service, on the contrary, is the fabrication of the Freemason Hannibal Bugnini, containing in itself patent characteristics of Protestantism, Freemasonism, and even Paganism.
Joseph Symons, who was the Newchurch bishop of the diocese of Palm Beach, Florida, from 1990 to 1998, has now been implicated in the $8,600,000 in thefts previously reported on the TRADITIO Network. Symons was already under a cloud since his resignation on March 8, 2002, after admitting that committed sex crimes against five children.
The Palm Beach Post reports that parishioners had tried for more than a year in the early 1990s to get Symons and his diocesan officials to investigate Presbyter-Pastor Francis Guinan's management of Newparish finances. Symons and his financial officer backed Guinan and told the parishioners to drop the matter. Guinan, then pumped up by Newbishop Symons' corrupt support, ridiculed the parishioners who accused him of theft and banned them from the parish as "cranks" and for "stabbing him in the back." This is a typical tactic of the guilty-as-sin Newchurch of Love: cover-up crime like the Mafia, then turn on their honest parishioners. Guinan was such an icon of the Newchurch presbyterate that he refused to impose the ashes on his parishioners on Ash Wednesday and instead spent the day gambling at the racetrack.
But the parishioners now have the last laugh on Newbishop Symons and his creature, Guinan. A warrant has been issued for Guinan's arrest on charges grand theft, and Newbishop Symons has been exposed to have grossly mismanaged his office as bishop and possibly to have been involved in the criminal aiding and abetting of the thefts by his subordinates. This is just another of many cases in which Newchurch bishops have been shown to have engaged in gross incompetence in their offices, or in several cases to have participated in the crimes themselves.
After learning of the recent charges, a group of parishioners gave the The Palm Beach Post more than 100 pages of their correspondence with Guinan and diocesan officials, along with meeting notes and financial documents. They said that they offered the materials in an effort to show that Newbishop Symons and his diocesan officials knew of their accusations against Guinan, but still chose him in 2003 to run St. Vincent Ferrer, one of the most prominent churches in the five-county Newchurch diocese.
After Newbishop Symons rejected their accusations, the unhappy parishioners wrote to the pope's nunciature in Washington, D.C. The pope and his subordinates ignored them. Those who think writing to Newpope or Newvatican will get them justice are sadly mistaken. Newrome is just as corrupt as the provinces!
Newbishop Simons and Newpope JPII and their subordinates have been exposed as grossly incompetent in this affair. If they had simply checked the publoic records, they would have discovered that Guinan was in cahoots with one William Cartwright, who was found guilty and incarcerated in 1993 for defrauding investors of $2,000,000. Yet Newbishop Symons was so incompetent that his "internal audit" could not discover the missing $8,600,000! The Vicar General of the Newchurch Diocese who conducted the audit, Presbyter Richard Murphy, went so far to vindicate the criminal and turn on the honest parishioners, stating in his report:
I would suggest that this investigation should finalize the concerns and accusations of a small number of parishioners. If it continues, it becomes apparent that this is a witch hunt against Father Guinan which brings us to a very serious situation of the defamation of a person's character.... I have known Father Guinan for about 30 years and he has always been a man of the utmost integrity, an opinion shared by the Bishop and priests [sic] of the Diocese and the vast majority of parishioners in any parish where he has served.
In other words, the Newchurch Vicar General was either an bald-faced liar, or so incompetent in his office and so bad a judge of character that he should be publicly pilloried as an accomplice in the thefts!
Guinan's partner in crime, Presbyter-Pastor John Skehan, was arrested on September 27, 2006, at Palm Beach International Airport on a flight from Ireland, where he reportedly owned property, probably from the stolen funds. Guinan, Skehan's successor as pastor at St. Vincent Ferrar Newparish, has escaped to Australia, probably from the stolen funds, and U.S. authorities are now negotiating for his extradition. A police detective has described both Newchurch Presbyter-Pastors as "professional money-launderers." [Source: Palm Beach Post]
And what will happen to Newpope JPII, Newbishop Richard Symons, Newdiocese Vicar General Richard Murphy? Undoubtedly, they will go scot-free, leaving their subordinates Skehan and Guinan to take the rap for their own incompetence. In the United States this week, Congressman Mark Foley resigned from office because he was found to have sent some "inappropriate" E-mails to Congressional page-boys. This was a pecadillo compared to the incompetence and crimes of Newchurch.
Shouldn't the late JPII be removed from any possibility of being labeled a Newchurch Saint? Shouldn't Newbishop Symons and his #2 lackey, Richard Murphy, be degraded from the episcopate and the priesthood, respectively, and serve the rest of their days secluded in a monastery praying in reparation for their disgraceful sins against their own Newchurch? If Benedict-Ratzinger had the guts to do that, the criminality in Newchurch would be cut off at the knees overnight. But that will never happen since he too has been implicated in cover-up of crimes up to his camauro!
It appears that Newpope is surrounding himself and Newchurch once again with the odor of heresy, as Church theology calls it. He accepts the conclusion of a Newchurch "theological commission" to reject (not infallibly, of course) the concept of Limbo taught by the Church's greatest theologians, among them St. Augustine, the Doctor of Grace, and St. Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic Doctor and the Church's Principal Theologian.
Essentially, the rejection of Limbo carries with it a rejection of the Sacrament of Baptism as salvific. It would be just another step of Newchurch's unCatholic doctrine, carried by Fr. Ratzinger at Vatican II, that the Catholic Church is not the only Church of Christ and consequently the Modernist error of Universal Salvation, that "we all [Catholics, Christians, infidels, and pagans] worship the 'same god,'" and that "all religions are equal."
As one correspondent put it:
NewPope has finally brought the Newchurch Revolution to completion by abolishing the Church's teaching on Limbo. If there is no Limbo, there is no Original Sin; if there is no Original Sin, then there is no need for man's Redemption (now called by Newchurch "the Paschal Mystery"); if there is no need for the Redemption, then man has not committed any sin; if man cannot sin, there is no need for Confession or the Mass as a Propitiatory Sacrifice to appease God for sin. That brings to an end the Catholic religion, and the Newchurch Revolution is complete.
Don't let anyone tell you that Limbo is unimportant. Rejection of the concept denies the Sacrament of Baptism and Original Sin -- and those are de fide dogma that all Catholics must hold or be heretics.
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 "Limbo."
After a hiatus of six years, false "oecumenism" is back in full gear under Benedict-Ratzinger as the mixed Catholic-Orthodox International Mixed Commission for Theological Dialogue began its Ninth Plenary Meeting during the week of September 18, 2006, in Belgrade. The meetings are being hosted by the Serbian Orthodox Patriarch Pavle, co-chaired by Newvatican Cardinal Walter Kasper, the "Oecumenical-friendly Ghost."
On October 2, the Commission advanced the statement that after the schism of the Eastern Orthodox in the 11th century, it became impossible to hold an oecumenical council including all Christian leaders, but "the separated Churches continued to hold 'general' councils, gathering together the bishops of local churches in communion with the See of Rome and the See of Constantinople," respectively.
Surprisingly, it was Newrome that originally advanced the notion that councils after the 11th century schism were not "oecumenical," but merely "general councils of the West." That position is doubly ironic because Benedict-Ratzinger in 2005 doffed one of the traditional titles of the pope, "Patriarch of the West." Thus, Newrome is willing to sell out the dogmatic councils Lateran I-V, Lyons I-II, Vienna, Constance, Basel, Trent, and Vatican I, as well as its own pastoral council Vatican II. Now Newrome itself is stating that Vatican II was not an "oecumenical" council!
Meanwhile, Newrome's sellout to the Schismatic Eastern Orthodox continues with the announcement by Newcardinal Dionigi Tettamanzi that his diocese of Milan will give over St. Anthony'a Church to the Russian Orthodox Church "for occasional use by the Russian Orthodox community until a parish church is turned over" to the Orthodox schismatics permanently. Tettamanzi, who is in Moscow the week of October 1 for visits with schismatic Russian Orthodox leaders, made the announcement during a meeting with Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexei II. [Catholic World News]
The idea that any of the Newchurch bishops are "conservative," let alone "traditional," is malarkey.
Newchurch Archbishop Charlie "Commanche" Chaput was picketed at his "Red Mass" in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, citing his "bare-knuckled opposition" to legislation against Newchurch bishops and presbyters who are sex criminals. Chaput, a flaming advocate for the New Order, has repeatedly denounced advocates of laws against Newchurch sex criminals as "anti-Catholic." Chaput acquired his eponym the "Commanche" bishops because he performed in his Denver cathedral the Novus Ordo "Indian Feather" Mess, which sported Indian feathers and tom-toms.
For further information, see the TRADITIO Network's Novus Ordo Service Photo Gallery.
In 2005 a Philadelphia Grand Jury issued a blistering report on clergy sex crimes and cover-ups in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. That report also urged the General Assembly to pass a comprehensive package of sex crime-related legislation. [Source: Philadelphia Inquirer]
Too often when traditional Catholics hear the latest horror story emanating from the corrupt Newchurch chancery of their town, they cry in unison, "I just can't understand how anyone could still go to these churches, let alone give them any money!"
There are indeed reasons that some continue to frequent the halls of Newchurch and bestow money on Newparishes, although both actions are contrary to human reason. Contrary to what traditional Catholics may think, the Newchurchers, including the "indult" crowd, don't really want the True Faith. After all, the One, True Faith is a dangerous thing. When one seeks Christ with his whole heart, his whole soul, and his whole mind, he runs the risk of finding Him, and nothing of one's life is safe after that!
The Newchurchers who reject Tradition for the "indult" want the feeling of Catholicism, but not the religion itself. They want the liturgical beauty, the music, and maybe even the fine works of the great Catholic writers and apologists. In fine, they want the caché of the Roman religion, but not the Roman Catholic Faith, because they do not wish to change very much in their lives, such as their habits or their way of thinking. Intellectual honesty is in short supply, I'm afraid. (There are those who stumble across the "Indult" Mass by chance after a life in the Novus Ordo, and this happily serves as a springboard to the discovery of the True Faith of all time. I am not speaking of these, but of those who reject Tradition for a false "full communion with [New]church.")
With regard to the dwindling number of people who still frequent the Novus Ordo service, look again at these self-described "Catholics." Their lives march in lock step with the pagan world, and their values, especially their ideas about money and sexual activity, have just enough restraint to keep them from landing in jail. They don't want to return to "the bad old days," as they'll be the first to tell you. They know very well what goes on in their parishes, that their pastor has his eye on the music director and that the sacristan has an unusual fondness for Atlantic City. But the clerics are "nice guys," after all, understanding and "nonjudgmental," who don't scold the people when they fall into sin like the pastors of "the bad old days."
The Newchurchers have made a pact with the devil in supporting their parishes. Even a person who hasn't heard of Tradition can't stay long in a Newchurch parish. He may travel the world looking for Our Lord, but he won't stay in Newchurch. The woes of the Newchurchers should elicit little sympathy from anyone.
Within a week of the passing of Fr. Francis LeBlanc, Rector of the International Shrine of the Sun in El Mirage, Arizona, Fr. Cornelius Gallagher passed away on October 1, 2006, at a Phoenix Hospice. Fr. Gallagher expired while reciting the Rosary with his confessor.
A Requiem Mass and Funeral will be celebrated at Our Lady of Quito Roman Catholic Church in Phoenix by Fr. Terrance Finnegan, an independent traditional Catholic priest, who also celebrated the Funeral Mass of Fr. LeBlanc.
A BBC documentary aired on October 1 has, belatedly, reached the same conclusion that the TRADITIO Network has been publishing for several years now, that Newpope Benedict-Ratzinger "was implicated in the systematic cover-up of child sex-abuse allegations" against Newchurch presbyters.
One error, however, that persists among the secular press, which is abysmally ignorant about Catholicism, is that a certain document, issued under the pontificate of Pope John XXIII, entitled Instructio De modo procedendi in causis de crimine sollicitationis Crimen sollicitudinis, or Crimen sollicitationis, of March 16, 1962, is somehow involved. That specific contention is false and reveals just how untrustworthy secular media are about the Catholic religion. There are even a number of phony "translations" circulating on the internet, compiled from "automatic-translation" machines, which are notoriously incompetent for Latin, let alone modern languages! This document does not deal with sex crimes as such, but about confessional solicitatio. which is a very specific act (cum sacerdos aliquem poenitentem ... ad inhonesta et turpia sollicitare ... temerario ausu habuerit).
What the documentary was absolutely right about is that the Mafia-like sex-crime syndicate in which Newchurch bishops and prebyters are participating is "all controlled by the Vatican, and at the top of the Vatican is the pope, so Joseph Ratzinger was in the middle of this for most of the years." The documentary also found seven presbyters facing child abuse investigations living in and around Vatican City. [Source: Reuters]
The TRADITIO Network has consistently stated that first JPII, then Benedict-Ratzinger, bear the responsibility for their Newchurch bishops' aiding and abetting, and even themselves participating in, the criminal activities. Neither pope ever attempted publicly to decry these crimes and personally exact the most serious penalties for them. The popes have let their bishop-stooges conceal the crimes and give the errant presbyters a slap on the wrist. Obviously, the popes are not serious about the crimes of their underlings. That is why the crimes continue unabated to this day.
I have always thought that the Greek antimensium is not permitted for use at a Catholic Mass. I am finding out now that there is a Roman antimensium and that it is different from the Greek one. Is our traditional Catholic mission permitted to use either one?
The Fathers Reply.
The Greek antimensium is prohibited in the Roman Church. The Roman antimensium is permitted, however. The antimensium is a substitute for an altar stone. In the Greek form, it is a cloth roughly the size of a corporal, on which images and text of the Passion are usually imprinted. The Roman antimensium is a white linen cloth, again roughly the size of a corporal, into which a relic or relics have been sewn. In the Roman Church an antimensium is not a corporal. A corporal is the cloth upon which the Host and Chalice rest and is carried to the altar in the burse. The antimensium goes under this.
For further information, see FAQ05: What Traditional Books Do You Recommend? in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files (FAQs & Traditional Apologetics) for information on the St. Andrew Daily Missal with Vespers for Sundays and Feasts with Kyriale, which is the most complete traditional handmissal and has excellent introductory articles, one of which describes these accoutrements of the altar.
U.S. Newchurch is now faced with its biggest parish theft yet: almost $10,000,000. While Newchurch bishop Gerald Barbarito and his predecessors since Vatican II have been asleep at the switch, two presbyters have been charged by Delray, Florida, authorities with stealing $8,600,000 from Newchurch parishes during the past 40 years. "These guys lived the life they told everyone else not to live -- and they lived it on everyone else's dime," Officer Jeff Messer said. "And one of the seven deadly sins is greed."
Skehan, 79, was arrested September 27, 2006, at Palm Beach International Airport on a flight from Ireland, where he reportedly owned property. He confessed to Detective Thomas Whatley to taking the money. A warrant has been issued for the arrest of Guinan, Skehan's successor as pastor at St. Vincent Ferrer Newparish. "They are professional money-launderers," Detective Whatley said. "They knew how to do it."
The investigation was started on the basis of information to State Attorney Barry Krishcher furnished by a lay parishioner concerned that Bishop Gerald Barbarito and his cronies at the Newchurch diocese of Palm Beach would keep the theft a secret.
Authorities stated that Skehan used his part of the loot to pay for his lover's expenses, to pay off family members, and to pay exorbitant personal expenses. Guinan used his part of the loot to pay for airline trips, hotels, and restaurants in Las Vegas and the Bahamas. He was described by the authorities as a gambler and heavy drinker, who betted heavily at a Miami racetrack. He took the Newparish bookkeeper as a paramour and paid her off generously, as well as paid for her son's school tuition. In 2004 he was convicted on a charge of drunken driving. In 2005 he bought property at St. James Golf Club for nearly half a million dollars.
"The allegations against them involving this grand theft is sinful," Special Agent-in-Charge Amos Rojas said. "These two individuals really betrayed not only their own church and their parishioners but those people that they were really ordained to help and the ones who can't help themselves." [Source: Palm Beach Post]
Yet the Newchurchers, who appear to have been in a coma in the forty years since Vatican II, allow their bishops and presbyters to rob them blind -- and then continue to do obeisance to the thieves who robbed them. It is clear that the New Order is hazardous to your brain!
Reports are circulating in Europe that Fr. Laguerie, the head of the "indult" Good Shepherd Institute in France, which was created in September 2006 by Newvatican for five ex-SSPX priests, is "trying to lure SSPX priests in France, especially those of the liberal hue, into his organization."
It is looking more and more as if Newvatican's creation of this "indult" institute was part of an all-out attack on the SSPX in France by Newcardinal Hoyos, Newpope Benedict-Ratzinger, and a handful of betrayers of the traditional Catholic Faith from the ranks of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). Having lured the SSPX's Fellay & Co. into the web of the New Order, Newvatican is killing its prey like the proverbial black widow. This is exactly the kind of danger against which the TRADITIO Network warned when Fellay & Co. first turned its back on the advice of Archbishop Lefebvre and began "negotiations" with the treacherous New Order.
Newvatican's Schism Game has just been extended to doing an about-face on the schismatic Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, which is the "Catholic" Church in China, recognized by the Communist government, but not the Vatican. Pope Pius XII was so concerned about this sect that he extended canon law to provide for the excommunication to its bishops.
At one time this group maintained the Traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments, but that situation changed as Newvatican started playing up to the Chinese Communist regime, which has publicly murdered clergy and religious before international journalists and has rousted underground Catholics. JPII, the supposed anti-Communist, actually entered into a deal to get Newchurch into China in 1980. Now Newvatican has welcomed the "Patriotic" schismatics into the Newchurch seminary just opened in Beijing. So now the Newchurch Chinese Catholic Bishops' Conference and the Communist Catholic Patriotic Association are in official cahoots.
Does "schism" really exist for Newchurch any longer? No, except for political games. How else can one explain how Newchurch "excommunicates" an archbishop who preserves the traditional Roman Catholic Faith while it leaves alone Chinese Communist bishops posing as "Catholics"? It's all just more Fun and Games at Newvatican. There is nothing "Catholic" about it. Newvatican is simply salivating over the new source of bodies and money that China offers.
Things aren't going so well for the New Order in the United States. In spite of constant propaganda about the "springtime" of Vatican II's New Order, the chill of an early autumn has fallen upon Washington, D.C., where the 300+ Newchurch bishops are headquartered. They always find the money to fly off to Washington twice year to prattle at their bishops' conferences, paid for by their parishioners, but at least 63 of their headquarters employees are expected to be canned in 2008. That is fully one-quarter of the U.S. Newchurch propaganda machine! Things are going so badly for the New Order that 35 programs have already been cut. [Source: CNS]
Why, if the New Order with its phony cookie, dubious (at best) sakruments, Protestant theology, and the morals of farm animals is going so swimmingly has U.S. Newchurch found it necessary to slash 25% of its employees and 16% of its funding? The answer is simple.
Good Catholics, the blush is off the rose. More and more Newchurchers are getting tired of the New Order and are casting it aside like an old hula-hoop. (Of course, unless you are reading the TRADITIO Network and other independent sources, you'd never know it, as you are getting a steady stream of phony propaganda through the "Catholic" and secular press alike.)
Newchurchers are getting tired of a phony vernacularized "liturgy" that seems to them more and more like what they could get a better version of at the Episcopalian or Methodist church down the street. They are getting tired of presbyters whose attention is focused more on their pants than on their minds. They are getting tired of not getting a straight Catholic answer on any point of theology.
Add to that the fact that Newpope is looking more and more like a dilettante aching for retirement and making mistakes in diplomacy that even a junior secretariat official wouldn't make. As a result, Newchurches are being torched around the world, and Newchurchers shot. No wonder the Newchurchers are leaving like lemmings from a sinking ship!
The TRADITIO Network has been informed that Fr. Francis LeBlanc, an independent traditional Catholic priest, who was previously reported here to have suffered a heart a few weeks ago, passed away in his sleep while at hospice.
Over 25 years ago Fr. LeBlanc moved from Canada to Phoenix as a place to retire. In spite of numerous ailments that kept him in a wheelchair most of those 25 years, he continued to pastor Our Lady of the Sun International Shrine in el Mirage, Arizona, which he founded. In 1989 Fr. LeBlanc took over the responsibility of continuing the Catholic Traditionalist Directory, when its long-time compiler, Radko Jansky, fell ill. Fr. LeBlanc renamed the publication to the Directory of Tridentine Latin Masses, whose authorized successor since 1994/1995, when Fr. LeBlanc wished to be relieved of the labor, has been the Official Traditional Catholic Directory, now in its eleventh annual edition.
Recently, Fr. LeBlanc had been the object of a vicious attack by the agents of the Modernist Newchurch diocese of Phoenix, which is one of the most corrupt in the United States. Its last bishop (1882-2003), Thomas O'Brien, is a convicted felon. One can only hope that this attack was not the immediate cause of Fr. LeBlanc's heart attack and death. If it was, it would be just another example of how the Newchurch of Hate operates and the very real suffering that it causes traditional Catholics.
A Requiem Mass is being celebrated on September 28, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. at Our Lady of the Sun International Shrine, 12546 West Peoria Avenue, El Mirage, Arizona. Fr. Paul Andrade will be offering the Requiem Mass. The wake, with recitations of the Rosary, will take place from 9:00 a.m. on Monday, October 2, through 9:45 a.m. on Wednesday, October 4. The Funeral Mass will take place at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, October 4. Following the Funeral Mass, there will be a procession to Via Crucis Cemetery, on the site of Our Lady of the Sun International Shrine, which will include the Veterans' Military Ritual from American Legion Post 29, final prayers, and the traditional Burial Ritual at the grave site, which will be in the citrus grove adjacent to the burial site of Fr. Edward O'Connor, CSsR, another traditional priest, who died on July 19, 2001.
While many "conservatives" have praised Newpope for his supposed support of traditional Catholic morality, the TRADITIO Network has warned that this is just more Newvatican smoke and mirrors. For whereas the moral conclusions of Newchurch may, for the time being, remain apparently the same, the traditional Catholic theological premises to reach the conclusions are being changed to accord to the secularized New Order.
This has already happened in the case of Catholic marriage, in which the personal satisfaction of the parties has been so elevated over the primary purpose of the raising of children that Newchurch has engineered a system of rampant divorce (which it calls "annulment," so as not to appear to violate Our Lord's own words and so as not to disturb Catholic sensitivities). In 1968 there were 338 annulments in the U.S.; in 1991, there were 63,933. Obviously, Newchurch has changed its theology, whatever the pope appears to say.
Then, just as the TRADITIO Network predicted years ago, as soon as Newchurch equated the life of a criminal justly subjected to capital punishment with the life of a foetus in abortion, the anti-abortion movement would collapse. In fact, for all intents and purposes, this issue has fallen off the political agenda. Yes, it gets lip-service, but little else, whereas in past years outraged citizens marched and cajoled their governmental representatives. Then there was the scandal about the Newchurch "gay" seminaries, about which Newpope did essentially nothing and so disappointed the "conservative" Newchurchers that they actually, for the first time we can remember, attacked the pope as not Catholic. Now three Canadian Members of Parliament who identify themselves as "Catholic" have cited Vatican II as the justification for their supporting the change in law identifying homosexual unions as "marriage" in Canada.
Newchurch M.P. Tony Martin stated that his support for "gay" marriage came out of the Second Vatican Council, saying that it was "all about tolerance, openness to the world, and social justice." Newchurch M.P. Charlie Angus stated that it was specifically Catholic [Newchurch] teaching that inspired him to defend "minority rights" in supporting the "gay" marriage law. Newchurch M.P. Joe Comartin concurred: "What my faith taught me was his Christ's love for humanity was an absolute fundamental, in many respects overriding all other considerations." All three of these "Catholic" M.P.'s have been long-time supporters of unlimited abortion on demand as part of their "absolute fundamental" commitment to minority rights. [Source: Life Site News]
What is the point of trying to deny the Novus Ordo cookie to such "Catholic" politicians? Newchurch has lost any such authority as it admonishes Newchurch politicians to allow their religious beliefs to guide their public decisions. Well, Newpope has gotten what he asked for, since these "Catholic" M.P.'s are quoting his Vatican II against him. And remember that it was Ratzinger himself who was a major force in imposing Modernism on Vatican II!
The TRADITIO Network previously reported how California public-school pupils were forced to become Mohammedans for a six-week unit on "diversity," during which they prayed like Mohammedans on prayer-rug and took Mohammedan names.
Now we have a report from Noblesville, Indiana, that third-graders at Our Lady of Grace Catholic [Newchurch] School were forced to become Jews. 44 studied and celebrated Rosh Hashana under two lay teachers. The pupils also celebrate Yom Kippur, Purim, and Hanukkah. And this has been going on for ten years now.
The pupils decorated plates with Jewish designs such as the Star of David, a crown, and a ram's horn. They then used the plates for a Jewish Rosh Hashana meal. To finish the lesson, the students threw crumbs into a small inflatable wading pool to atone for their sins. (How many of them go to Confession?) The pupils were also fed a fairy tale version of the story of Abraham, in which God challenges the faith of Abraham so far as to be willing to kill his son at God's command.
This case, and many others like it, show that true Catholics should not send their children to Newchurch schools. Archbishop Fulton Sheen, the great Catholic orator and educator of the pre-Vatican II period, when confronted with the incursions of the New Order into Catholic education in the late 1960s, pronounced in no uncertain terms:
You are better off going to a state school where you will have the chance to fight for your faith, than going to a modern Catholic university where you will have the new watered-down, modernist version of the faith spoon-fed to your unsuspecting minds, so that you will be apt to lose your faith.
How right Archbishop Sheen was!