| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 162 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 159 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
Video: Miracles of the Br...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Deus Vult
10 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 45
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Our ...
Forum: July 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 10:10 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 84
|
Feast of Our Lady of Mt. ...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:21 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 21,108
|
Louis Veuillot: The Liber...
Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
Last Post: Stone
07-15-2025, 08:13 AM
» Replies: 37
» Views: 7,468
|
Convicted Child Porn Prie...
Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
Last Post: Stone
07-15-2025, 08:08 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 95
|
Pope Leo XIV Appoints Pro...
Forum: Pope Leo XIV
Last Post: Stone
07-15-2025, 07:58 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 64
|
Which is Novus Ordo, whic...
Forum: New Rite Sacraments
Last Post: Stone
07-15-2025, 07:00 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 100
|
Fr. Ruiz Sermons: 2025 07...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons July 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
07-14-2025, 10:20 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 101
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Fift...
Forum: July 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
07-14-2025, 10:16 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 183
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
07-13-2025, 06:39 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 12,077
|
|
|
| Pachamama idol reappears at Mass with Latin American bishops for Synod on Synodality |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-14-2023, 06:31 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
 |
Pachamama idol reappears at Mass with Latin American bishops for Synod on Synodality
Bishop Pedro Jubinville emphasized listening 'to the land, the flora, the water,' and the 'cry of the earth' in a homily while the pagan idol was promimently displayed on the altar.
![[Image: Pachamama-810x500.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Pachamama-810x500.png)
Facebook
Mar 13, 2023
BRASILIA, Brazil (LifeSiteNews) — The statue of the Pachamama made its appearance in Brazil at a Mass for the Regional Assemblies of Latin America and the Caribbean during the continental-stage meetings of the Synod on Synodality. Photos shows several bishops concelebrating the Mass with the pagan idol prominently featured in the sanctuary in front of the ambo.
The Diocese of San José de Mayo posted the photo on Facebook, celebrating the event.
In a homily given at the closing Mass of the Regional Assembly, which took place from March 6 to March 10 in Brasilia, Bishop Pedro Jubinville, vice president of the Paraguayan Episcopal Conference, with the pantheistic language of cultic nature religions — such as those in which the Incan idol of the Pachamama, “mother earth,” is worshiped — emphasized listening “to the land, the flora, the water,” and the “cry of the earth.”
“Synodality makes us listen not only to the ecclesial organization but also to the land, the flora, the water, also to the peoples, the communities,” Jubinville said. “A great effort of ‘mapping’ is being prepared that is not only a collection of data but an exercise of listening to what the territory tells us, a ritual of belonging and thanksgiving for the concrete land where we are.”
These rituals, the bishop insisted, are a way of “celebrating a belonging to land, which is a space that is always human,” affirming that “these networks can give us clues to respond to the great call of Laudato Sí and the cry of the earth.”
Unsurprisingly, together with the emergence of the Pachamama, the inclusion of LGBT ideology and those who live according to such lifestyles also made the agenda for the assembly.
Sister Eliane Cordeiro, president of the Conference of Religious of Brazil (CRB), insisted that synodality includes “the spirituality of welcome and itinerancy, where there is room for everyone.”
“When we enlarge, as the prophet Isaiah asks us, we widen to embrace, so that everyone may fit in this tent,” she said. As might be expected, this meant for Cordeiro that the Church needed to do more to include women, married priests, LGBTQIA+, and indigenous peoples.
Expressing apparent disdain for the priesthood, the divinely established ecclesiastical hierarchy, and cloistered religious life, she said, “The most contrary to Jesus’ plan is the cloister in a hierarchical and clerical Church. When we talk about widening the tent, we are saying that in the Church of Jesus it is necessary to accommodate everyone.”
While the attempt to push the ordination of women to the priesthood, the acceptance of LGBT ideology, and the globalist climate change agenda has marked the Synod on Synodality from the beginning and has its patrons at the highest levels of the Church in Rome, the reappearance of the Pachamama idol has brought the synodal proceedings full circle.
As was widely reported at the time, in October 2019, just prior to the opening of the Amazon Synod in Rome, a pagan ceremony took place in the Vatican Gardens in which Pachamama idols were worshipped with dancing, prayers, prostrations, and incense as Pope Francis and other top-ranking prelates looked on. The October 4 ritual, captured on video, shows Pope Francis blessing the pagan statue before receiving it as a gift.
The idols were subsequently carried in procession, set in a place of prominence during the Synodal proceedings, and placed at several altars in the Church of Santa Maria in Transpotina near St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome before being thrown into the Tiber River in a celebrated act of Catholic defiance of the scandalous honoring of the pagan fertility goddess.
Shortly after the Amazon Synod, German Bishop Erwin Kräutler commented on the controversy surrounding the presence of the Pachamama statutes at the ceremonies in the Vatican. The German Catholic newspaper Die Tagespost reported on his words and quoted him as saying that the Pachamama statues were a “form of expression of the indigenous people,” which could be “integrated into our liturgy.”
However, Fr. Mitch Pacwa, SJ, the host of EWTN’s “Scripture and Tradition” show, denounced the honor shown the Pachamama statues as idolatrous. “The introduction of the Pachamama into the Synod on the Amazon is something that is a major scandal,” he said. “We are forbidden to have idols. We are forbidden to worship other gods.”
|
|
|
| Pope Francis: "Celibacy is a temporary prescription" in the western church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-11-2023, 07:30 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
“The Church is for everyone”, said Pope Francis on his 10th anniversary as leader of Catholicism
In an in-depth interview with Infobae, the Supreme Pontiff referred to the possibility of a regime change in Venezuela and the “mental imbalance” of Daniel Ortega.
He also spoke about drug trafficking in Latin America, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the possible reconsideration of celibacy and his daily life
Infobae.com [computer translated from the Spanish] | 10 Mar, 2023
Interview with Pope Francis - His view on global affairs
The mere entrance of Pope Francis into the meeting room of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, in the Vatican, refutes all speculation about his health: he walks with a normal, even brisk gait. He will later talk about the circumstances that forced him to use a wheelchair until recently, with the same nonchalant manner with which he will address all the topics presented to him in this interview, without dodging any.
From Russia’s criminal invasion of Ukraine to celibacy and divorce.
From the “uncouth dictatorships” in Latin America to death and the possibility of seeing it coming.
Also the resistance he faced when promoting change in the church, his habit of handwriting, market capitalism, his desire to visit Argentina despite the difficulties. About everything.
He has served 10 years as Pope but believes that he has not changed in essence. In fact, he still has the same attitude as always, the Buenos Aires Spanish idioms, the slightly candid humor. Francis looks at the team of Infobae that has set up the cameras and smiles: perhaps the sight of Argentine faces makes him feel closer to home, soothes that nostalgia of wandering —so he says— through the streets of Buenos Aires.
To his right there is a reproduction of Our Lady Undoer of Knots, a painting by Johann Schmidtner from 1700, which Francis, when he was Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the eighties, discovered while completing his PhD dissertation in Germany. He fell in love with its emblem — an angel hands her a ribbon full of knots, which becomes undone as it passes through her hands— and introduced her in Argentina.
It is not a traditional virgin; it does not represent a manifestation of Mary, like the Virgin of the Pillar, the Virgin of Fatima or the Guadalupana. A priest asked Schmidtner to paint an image to hearten a couple of friends who were about to split up. And to her Francis entrusted himself when the covid-19 pandemic began: an inspiration to face hard times with hope. Before the interview, he briefly gazed at the picture.
—It’s now ten years since the day you were appointed Pope. I would like to know if you have any memories of that day. What comes to your mind first?
—Several times I wanted to remember what happened then. I didn’t really realize what was going to take place. “What, didn’t you have a vote?” Yes, many of us there had votes, but in the conclave there is this “deposit vote”. Sometimes you don’t know who to vote for and so you wait a bit, and give [your vote] to someone you know will not be elected, and see how things go. It is the way the Holy Spirit leads you, isn’t it?
In the morning, at noon, I came here, I was relaxed, some people made jokes as I was passing, which I did not understand. Even when I entered the dining room, some bishops from central Europe said to me “Come here, Eminence, what can you tell us about Latin America?”. They tested me. I had seen it before. As I was leaving the dining room, a cardinal comes running from the back and says “Just a moment, please, is it true that you had a lung removed?”. I told him “No, I had the right upper lobe removed, because I had cysts”. “Oh, and when was that?” And I said “In 1957″. And he said “These last-minute ploys…” and then turned away. In that moment it dawned on me. That’s when I realized there was a campaign for and against [me]. I left, I took a nap, calmed.
Another exciting memory is that when I arrived —and this is what the psychologists would call the dishonest unconscious mind—, before entering the Sistine [Chapel], I ran into cardinal Ravasi, and we started walking through the big hall in front of the Sistine [Chapel]. And I told him, “Do you know that for my sapiental classes I work —I worked, now I don’t teach anymore— with your books?”. And I began to explain, and we began to talk about sapiential books, and we drifted away until we heard a shout, “Are you coming or not? Because I am closing the door”. Unconsciously you do not want to go inside. But those are matters you can’t control.
—Was it very different from the 2005 election?
—No. No, no. The dynamics are the same, the dynamics are the same. This one went through one more round of vote. [In] the 2005 [election, he] was elected on the first ballot in the afternoon. [In] this one, on the second in the afternoon. The first one already showed the trend.
And here I want to pay tribute to a great friend, cardinal [Claudio] Hummes, who was sitting behind me and in the first round of vote came closer to say “Do not be afraid, this is how the Holy Spirit works”. I get emotional because he passed away not long ago, and I loved him dearly. And when I was elected in the second ballot —I got two thirds and the counting was still going on— he stood up, hugged me and told me “Do not forget the poor”. This is moving. A great guy, Hummes, a great man. A great man. He passed away a few months ago. Silent [man], but he led the way. Well, the poor, you know, St Francis. Francis, that’s it. So, when cardinal [Giovanni Battista] Re asked me “What will your name be?”, I said Francis. Period.
—Holy Father, can I ask you if you found out —I guess you did— those who were campaigning against you at that time?
—No.
—No.
—No, honestly no. I do not know if there was a counter-campaign. I don’t know. Obviously, there were others who voted for other people. It is true that in the end it was almost… I wouldn’t say unanimous, but quite big. In the end it was a massive vote. But against, no, I could not think of anyone. And [if] I turn to imagine it I run the risk of committing libel, so I’d rather not. [Laughs.]
—I have read El pastor [The Shepherd], the book by Sergio Rubin and the Italian journalist Francesca Ambrogetti, and it says that God always forgives, and that you forgive a lot but you do not forget those who offended you or defamed you. And perhaps I imagined, or I assumed that it was referring to…
—No, not at all. No. It didn’t occur to me to think about who didn’t vote for me. It really didn’t occur to me. I did not vote for myself, that’s for sure. But about the others, I don’t know.
—Many people who have known you for years sometimes tell me that you look much happier since you are Pope. Do you feel the same way?
—I have always been happy with my ministry, even in the tough moments, difficult moments, which I went through, because I had to solve quite thorny matters, o help to solve them, but nobody could take away my inner peace. That happiness. You can tell that people now look at me more but I have always been like this, I do not think I have changed here. Perhaps I feel a little nostalgic for Buenos Aires, because I can’t wander around like I did in Buenos Aires. But I wouldn’t be able to measure the quietness, the peacefulness, the inner joy I have. For me it has always been the same.
“Not valid” marriages and the reevaluation of celibacy
Of all the gates to enter the Vatican City, the Perugino Gate is the closest to Domus Sanctae Marthae, where Francis, dressed in white and wearing black shoes, greeted Infobae. It is a gate confusing to tourists: it is renowned for its location in the walls of the ancient city, for the frescoes by Pietro Perugino that give it its name and for being a pathway to St Peter’s Basilica, but it operates as a private entrance.
Interview with Pope Francis - The reason why he didn't visit Argentina
The reason why is simple: Francis chose not to live in the Apostolic Palace, the official residence of the popes, but in Sanctae Marthae. That is to say, that cobblestone protrusion of the Via della Stazione Vaticana, which ends at a gray and inconspicuous gate, is the entrance to the Supreme Pontiff’s home.
Francis decided to make this move in search of a simpler lifestyle, as he stated. It was not the only change, not even the most relevant, of a papacy probably defined by promoting new ideas for the Catholic Church.
—You travelled to Brazil in 2013 and on you way back a Brazilian TV journalist asked you about the gay lobby, and you said “I am not the one [to talk about it]”. First you denied that there was a gay lobby, you said it could be part of different lobbies, but [then] you said “I am not the one to judge anyone”. Sexual choice or preference aside, someone who has complied with the rest of the Church mandates, would be fit to receive communion? Or let me rephrase: would you administer communion to this person?
—What I said… I have said three things regarding people with homosexual tendencies. One in Brazil, the one you cite, and this is the way I said it: “If a person of homosexual tendency is honest and seeks God, who I am to judge?” On a trip back from Ireland I said —I was asked and I said—: “I ask parents, if they have a son or a daughter with homosexual tendencies, to keep them at home, not to cast them away as a punishment. Attend to them”. The third [one] was in an interview with the Associated Press in which I talked about criminalization. Criminalization is a serious problem. About thirty countries have criminalized this in one way or another. And almost ten [have] death penalty. Almost ten.
Those were the three times I spoke publicly about the subject. Jesus provided the greatest answer: everybody. All of them. Everybody comes inside. The snobbish don’t want to assist to the banquet? Go there, to the crossroads, and summon everyone: the good, the bad, the old, the young, the kids. All of them. The church is for everyone. And each one settles their stance before the Lord with the strength they have. This is a church of sinners. I do not know where the church of saints is; here, we are all sinners. And who am I to judge a person, if they have good will? If they belong to the devil’s gang, well, let’s defend them a little bit. But nowadays we focus a lot on this problem. I think we must resort to the essence of the Gospel. Jesus invites everyone and each one settles their relationship with God as they can or as they want. Sometimes you want but you cannot, but the Lord always awaits.
—I have friends of my generation that are on their so-called second administration, their second marriage, and they are very happy. They married too young or maybe it didn’t work well. And they have children, and maybe they send them to Catholic schools, or Catholics universities. And many times, they have doubted about being fit to receive communion. Could you help me understand?
—Yes. We cannot narrow down a human situation to a preceptive one. Pope Benedict —who knew about these matters and was a great theologian, he did not fiddle in theology, he was knowledgeable— he said three times, once in Alto Adige, another time in Piamonte and the third one in Rome, that a great number of marriages in the church are not valid due to a lack of faith. And look, sometimes you go to a wedding and it seems to be more a social gathering than a sacrament. In other words, they get married, yes, [but] when these young people say forever, who knows what they mean by forever. While the good vibes last, I don’t know. And Benedict said that because of that lack of consciousness a great number are not valid. You have to take that into account. A very wise lady once told me: “You priests are very smart. To be ordained priests you have to spend six, seven years in the Seminary. In contrast, we, to marry, which is for life —because a priest can leave the Church, while for us is a life deal—, we are fixed with four lectures”. Very wise. That is why we always speak of a catechumenate towards marriage and the first years of marriage.
I come back to this, so as not to fall under the discipline of communion, [for] people that the marriage is invalid. Maybe they cannot prove it, and that is where the bishop’s conscience comes in. I advise separated couples to approach their bishop, to go and submit their situation to him.
—I said that it was the last [question] regarding theological matters or church matters, and I was wrong, I did not lie to you. But nowadays there is some talk, and I do not know the numbers, that there are not a lot of vocation. Or maybe there is, but it is not voiced. But regardless of that, if celibacy was not mandatory —not that celibacy disappears but if it were not mandatory— do you suppose that the possibility of priests with the faculty to be married, as is the case in other churches, might help to encourage more people to join the priesthood?
"The church is for everyone", Pope Francis underscored. "And each one settles their stance before the Lord with the strength they have".
—I do not think so. In fact there are married priests in the Catholic church, the whole eastern ritual has marriage. The whole eastern ritual. Here in the Curia we have one —just today I came across him— who has his wife, his son, [and he] comes [here]. In the western church, celibacy is a temporary prescription, I do not know if it is settled in one way or another, but it is temporary in this sense, it is not perpetual like priestly ordination, which is forever, whether you like it or not. Whether you leave [the church] or not is a different matter, but it is forever. Celibacy, on the other hand, is a discipline...
—In other words, it could be reconsidered.
—Yes. Yes. In fact everyone in the eastern church is married. Or those who want to. They make a choice. Before being ordained, the opt to marry or to be celibate.
Resistance against the papacy of Francis
The Catholic church of the future will carry the imprint of Francis. We already see some of that: the austerity of his former office as archbishop of Buenos Aires has infused the Vatican atmosphere, and some of the traditional circles have lost privileges. In the industrious balance that defines this work, the Pope has achieved an important triumph facing the coming times: he has appointed half of the cardinals who are currently electors.
However, it is known that his papacy is not a smooth experience. He has been criticized since March 13, 2013, the day he was elected and promised to open wide the doors of Catholicism to let in all those who wish to join the community. Some of those criticisms have been constructive and others not so much, he differentiates. To talk about both, he slightly accommodates himself in the armchair and lightly touches the metallic crucifix over his chest.
—Holy Father, did you sense at the beginning —I don’t know if know— any resistance, from the church or from the bishops in Rome, to some of the ideas or changes you promoted?
—Resistance, as [Sandro] Pertini, that great Italian president, said… He always talked about resistance. And I called him the chufi-chufi, the [device] that heats the water with a resistor… Resistance is a sort of ever-present self-defense stance in the face of anything new, anything at all. I would be suspicious of decisions without any resistance. Of that I would be suspicious. There may be some obvious [decisions], but if they don’t meet any resistance the thing was too oiled, it doesn’t work. Resistance is very normal. I would be suspicious of a Congress, for instance, where they do not fight each other. Without a diversity of views. That they resist themes of the Executive and vote against them. A passive Congress is not a Congress, it is an elementary school, or even less.
—I am going to read verbatim because it seems to me that each word is strong, and this was said by Julian Herranz, who I believe is the oldest cardinal in the Vatican.
—A great guy.
—He has been here, in the Vatican, for about sixty years. And he said, word by word: “I have worked for six popes and all of them have been criticized. Of the six pontiffs, maybe the devil has been merciless with two, Paul VI and Francis. Always to divide the church and hinder the spread of the Gospel”. How do you feel about it?
—Herranz is an experienced man. Herranz is a medical doctor, then he joined the Opus Dei, he was ordained a priest. He is ninety-two years old. Just the other day he wrote me a very nice letter. I am very close to Herranz, very friendly. Very close friend. I did not know he had ever said this. I cannot judge if it true or not. But sometimes there is resistance but of the wrong kind. Not the right kind. Because the right resistance is that if I have a good project, let’s take a look, let it be discussed. The wrong resistance is when you discuss over here and [then] you go in the back looking for betrayal as well. But either I am naïve or I don’t care about that.
The [resistance] that existed has been solved. And if there is one, it is in a corner, hiding, and those who support it talk about it. [When those get us] On the verge of schism, that is the bad thing. For example, the story of the American bishop [some believe Francis is here referring to Archbishop [font=-apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, "San Francisco", "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, Cantarell, Oxygen-Sans, "Nimbus Sans L", "Liberation Sans", Verdana, "Lucida Grande", "DejaVu Sans", "Bitstream Vera Sans", Tahoma, system-ui, sans-serif, "Apple Color Emoji", "Segoe UI Emoji", "Segoe UI Symbol"]Viganò[/font], though he is Italian - The Catacombs], one that is over there, who was a nuncio. You can’t tell if this man is Catholic or not, he’s just on the edge Those mismanaged resistances, right? From the beginning there was resistance in the church. When St Paul tells “and I confronted Peter and I told him that he was a devious guy, that he did not talk much”… Devious is a word as if he were two-faced, right? “And why did he pretend with the Jews that he did not eat meat, and with us he did? I confronted him”. That is not resistance: that helps the government. When they criticize me head-on, I am grateful for it. Sometimes I don’t like it, but I am grateful.
—Has a cardinal told you not to do so many interviews?
—Yes, one.
—One.
—How do you know this?
—Well, it’s my job [laughs]. It’s my job.
—One, two months ago.
The daily life of the Pope
In the hour he spent with Infobae, the Pope not only shared his profound ideas and definitions. He also revealed his habits, the small repeated actions that weave each day, including his mannerisms such as his aversion to cell phones. But even when he talks about these lesser details, mere colorful facts of life, his religious passion shines through.
He seems to be happy doing what he does. At 86 years of age, there is nothing left of the chemistry technician who thought about the possibility of studying medicine. Compared to himself 10 years ago, the Francis of 2023 comes out on top: he looks more mature, serene and balanced. And his mental quickness still sets the pace of his conversation.
—I am going to ask you something —don’t take this the wrong way— about your daily life. I see you walking just fine, but a few months ago I spotted you in pictures in a wheelchair. Could you tell us what happened?
—It was a somewhat strange thing. My tendons were hurting due to inflammation, it seems, and I was walking poorly. And that improper gait broke a small bone in my knee. My doctor told me “You need surgery”. I said “Again? It requires anesthesia, and six hours of procedure”. A year and some months ago… And the anesthesia takes two or three years to wear off. The effects. “No, but it is local”, he tells me. “What, are you going to pour some distilled water in there?” So I said no. And the physiotherapist told me “No, this can be healed with magnetotherapy, laser and a little physiotherapy”. And he succeeded in getting the bone to weld. Now I’m going through rehabilitation for all that, that is to say, stretching the tendons, the muscles. The bone is fine. That’s what happened.
—How many hours a day do you sleep?
—Six. From 10 a 4. After lunch, a half hour.
—A nap.
—Yes, half an hour.
—In the book El pastor you mentioned that you haven’t watched TV since 1990. May I ask why?
—Yes, July 15th, 1990. I was with the community, watching TV, and some stuff came up that is not good for your heart. Not sinful stuff, but those relativisms that gradually weaken the heart. I stood up because I didn’t like it, and I left. I was very disquiet, I do not know why I left if it wasn’t a big deal. The following day —that was July 15th at night—, the following day, during the mass for Our Lady of Mount Carmel, I felt I did not have to watch [TV], period. I said “Enough” and made this promise. It’s not a completely immovable matter. For instance, when a president takes office, when I was in Argentina and one of them took office, I watched TV. When that planed crashed at Aeroparque [LAPA flight 3142, in August 1999] I also watched TV. I allow myself a few little things but short, short. In general, however, I do not watch [TV], not at all. I do not watch [TV].
[i]—When the Argentine National Team played in the World Cup did you watch it?
—I did not, I was in a meeting, here, with six Alitalia pilots and their wives. I was at a meeting here. At some point I left to get something and when I came back, one of them told me “They’re winning 3 to 0″, o 2 to 0, or 3 to 1, I don’t remember. And that’s fine, I said, but that left me thinking about something, that I allow myself to say with no offense because I am Argentine as well, but it somehow [reflects] a bit our idiosyncrasy.
In both matches, the one against the Netherlands and the finale, they start winning 2 to 0, 3 to 1; ah, the Argentines are all happy; we move to the second half and they end up winning both by a penalty kick. By chance. We Argentines are like that: we start everything with enthusiasm and we have the habit —I don’t know, at least I have it— of leaving things halfway through. And we kind of give up before time, or we win before time. In the positive or in the negative. It’s hard for us to get to the final shape of things. This is my thinking based on these two objective facts.
—You told me earlier that you missed wandering around Buenos Aires city. What else, if anything, do you miss about Argentina?
—That is essential because it kept me in touch with the people all the time, and that is true diversity. Things that remain in my mind and that sometimes changed my ways. When I had to take the bus that ran past the Devoto Penitentiary —I had to go to a parish in [the neighborhood called] Devoto—, this happened to me several times: I was waiting in line and almost all of the people waiting were mothers. Almost all of them were mothers. So, I always thought about the mother of an inmate: what that woman feels, what that son feels. And that fostered within me a certain closeness to the detainees. Every year for Holy Thursday I go to a prison to wash feet.
And by the way, I want to say something that I found out here. The male prison wardens are very good here. They are very good. But the women are better. A female warden, I don’t know how she does it, but she has an ability to manage, an ability to be close [to the inmates]. You feel a different atmosphere in a prison run by a woman than in one run by a man. Although the men’s prison is doing very well.
For example, just the other day I had six inmates from a prison in a province of Italy that wanted to visit me, and they came with the warden, and a judge and a policeman were with them. Here, six inmates were in a meeting with me. So, the male warden was very good. But the female warden is much better because, I don’t know, it’s the motherliness, it’s the way… I have some stories about this, of course. Every Holy Thursday I go there, so I see great diversity.
—Many more women are working at the Vatican.
—Yes. And that’s necessary. Male chauvinism is bad. And sometimes celibacy can lead to machismo. A priest who doesn’t know how to work with women is lacking something. He is not mature. The Vatican was very sexist. But it’s part of the culture, it’s nobody’s fault. It was always done that way. Today more [women] work [here]. For instance, the Council of Economy is made up of six cardinals and six laypeople. The laypeople are all men, of course. It was necessary to renew and I appointed one man and five women. This is how things changed. We had to appoint a deputy governor in the Vatican. The governor is the cardinal, he is 80 and... No, he is 78 or so. Cardinal [Fernando] Berges, a Spaniard, very capable. He had been secretary to Msgr [Eduardo] Pironio. A very experienced man. And instead of appointing a male deputy governor, I appointed a female deputy governor. And he feels a lot more supported because they deliver; women deliver, and they do it well.
On one occasion I was visited by a head of government of the highest level, a mother and a professional, a professional who later entered politics and is doing well. And I asked her how she had managed to solve a very tough conflict in her district. Nobody had been able to solve it, and she managed to do it. The answer was this, I think it can help a lot, she is a woman. She looked at me, silence. “As we moms do”. What she meant, I don’t know, but “as we moms do” settled the matter. Women have a different method. Their sense of time, of awaiting, of patience, is unlike men’s. This does not diminish men, they are different. And they have to complement each other.
—Is it true that you don’t have a cell phone?
—I have never had one.
—Never.
—When they made me a bishop they gave me one, in 1994, 1992, which at that time was [like] a shoe. It was like that. I said “I will never use this”. “Well, make a phone call”. There, next to the person who gave it to me, I called my sister: “How are you doing?”. Bang, I hung up. I gave it back to him. And never again.
And that grants me great freedom. Because I keep track of everything. You have my number and call, and I call you later. That is to say, for mi is not an inconvenience. Of course, I admit that my secretaries have cell phones.
—That means you don’t check out Twitter, Instagram, Facebook.
—No, not that world.
—But somebody tells you about it.
—Yes, yes, I am up to date. And I write by hand.
—Wait, what?
—When I was a student in Germany, I bought a typewriter in one of those Angebot [garage sale] the German have, for 45 marks. On Fridays, they get rid of as much as they can. I became fond of it, a one-line memory [typewriter]. I brought it with me to Buenos Aires and I used it until I came here, and that’s where it stayed. And then I took up [writing] by hand.
—How do you send emails?
—What do you mean?
—An email, how do you send an email.
—By hand.
—But to pass it to someone.
—And I give it to the secretary, and he sends it. Yes, everything by hand. You may have seen how I handle some of them. Note that I don’t want to say this is better than the other, no. It is a limitation I have, let’s say an impairment.
—When was the last time you took a vacation?
—In 1975. Let’s see, I’m getting confused here. Yes. Isabel was overthrown in 1976, right?
—Yes, on March 24th.
—There was talk about a military coup coming in 1976, and in 1975, in Mar del Plata, with the community… the community had a place in Mar del Plata, and I was there with the community. In 1976 I said “look, there’s talk of a coup, I do not want to leave this alone”, I was [a] provincial [minister] at that time. “So go back”. Besides I was getting ready to move the provincial Curia to San Miguel. And precisely on that day, March 24th, the moving took place. I stayed at home. And thus, I got a taste for a different kind of vacation. Reading more, listening to music, praying more, getting more rest. And in the end, I liked that style. And it is what I always do.
—Holy Father, do you pray at a particular time? In your room, at the chapel? Where do you pray?
—In the morning I celebrate mass right away, if I don’t have mass outside. That is, at six o’clock am I hold mass. Before that, I pray a little bit and after that too, right? I get up at four o’clock, at five o’clock I am already praying, there, in my room. At 5:50 I go to the chapel and there I celebrate mass. Generally alone or with a priest who comes and keeps me company, and that helps me: when there is another priest, I get more help, don’t I? And then I start my day.
Definitions and political views
Many skills are needed to be a Pope, but perhaps one of the job requirements is the most noticeable: you have to know how to wear three different hats. When speaking with Francis, sometimes you hear the pastor, sometimes you hear the voice of the Supreme Pontiff and sometimes you hear a Head of State.
This also reveals the range of subjects that concern him: one day he has to say something sensitive about death and the next day he has to discuss the criminal Russian invasion of Ukraine. In his conversation with Infobae he dealt with these issues, refuted the preconceptions that portray him as an anti-capitalist and condemned -almost always in a diplomatic, cautious tone- all dictatorial populisms.
—I am going to read you four very short statements you made, and you tell me if I arranged them correctly and if I understand them correctly. “I am not condemning capitalism”, “I am not against the market”, “In no way it is wrong to create wealth for the benefit of all”, “That who generates jobs should be recognized”. Is that correct?
—Correct.
—Why some media or some figures see you as someone who maybe is not in favor of capitalism?
—They have ideological biases and label people before listening to them. Listen to them, then speak. The biggest step in capitalism was taken by St John Paul II who spoke of social market economy. Market capitalism. He nuanced it as something licit, not bad in itself. The opposite would be the depersonalizing communism. Both are depersonalizing, but a social market economy —that little word, social, that St John Paul II chose— I think is the one that matches the ideas of the church. Later on, much progress was made. But that definition drew attention at its time.
—Next question deals with something that every human being knows it is going to happen, and we never know when, which is death. Are you, the highest authority in the church, afraid to die?
—No. I know it will come. Once, when I thought there could be a risk, I prepared myself, when I had to undergo a surgery that was risky. But I asked the Lord not to take me when I was not conscious, not in that way. [To] Let me at least see it coming. They say that the fear of death is rare, that the fear is to see death coming. So I had to see it coming to understand the end.
—Luis Novaresio, an Argentine journalist that carries out very intimate interviews, always asks the same final question. He says: “We die, and then what?” What do you think happens next?
—A very bright light, a huge happiness. A grand encounter, on the path of encountering God. Some diehards out there think that… or maybe they do not see that path. But I believe that God waits and assists until the very last moment. There is a very beautiful medieval capital in the cathedral of Vézelay, I don’t know if it is from the 10th or 11th century, in the South of France, Vézelay. The capital is very beautiful. On one side there is Judas hanging and the devil pulling him down. On the other side is the good shepherd dragging him away with an ironic smile. That is the drama: who wins in the end. And this one wins. Always.
—I’m going to take you to harsher topics, international topics, and here I think the question is no longer for the pastor but for the Head of State, who will be able to answer me the best he can. But knowing you I imagine your enormous concern for what begun a little more than a year ago, so close from here, which is the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the amount of war crimes that are being committed. The bombing of the civilian population in Ukraine has been impressive. I know that at the beginning, or before the beginning, of the Russian invasion, your diplomacy made calls, efforts... Do you talk to [Volodimir] Zelenski, have you ever talked to [Vladimir] Putin during this period?
—Not during this period. I spoke with the Russian ambassador, a very honorable person, excellent [person]. And I was there once, he came here several times. He is an excellent person. I received a very correct reply from [Sergei] Lavrov to my request to go to visit Putin, that yes, of course, but later on. But I did not [talk to] Putin after the war [broke]. Before that, he came here three times. He is an educated person, very educated.
—Do you foresee a solution in the short term?
—Everybody is working on this. Everybody is working. [Narendra] Modi may do something, I don’t know. I am aware that a number of leaders are making progress. There is an Israeli group that is moving well. But we don’t know how it can end up. Working for peace... I would like to highlight one point about the war.
This war is very painful for us because it happens next to us, but the world has always been at war. At least for the last century. We forget Yemen, for example. The children of Yemen. We forget about the Rohingya, Myanmar, all that war drama. We forget about Goma, in northern Congo, and Rwanda. Of course, since this war takes place in a nearby neighborhood, we are already close to it. That’s why it catches our attention. But we do not stop waging war.
A serious person, an academic, a very serious professor, told me once: “Look, if we didn’t manufacture weapons for one year, we would end hunger in the world”. The weapon industry is impressive. Four years ago, I think, a shipment of weapons bound for Yemen arrived in Genoa from another country in Europe, on a fairly small ship, not very large, in order to be transferred to a larger ship that was going to Yemen. And the dockworkers didn’t want to load it. A gesture. But it’s nothing. The weapon industry is impressive. Well, I was told this: when an empire feels weak, it needs a war to get stronger. And also, a war to sell the weapons it possesses and to test new weapons. Someone says —I don’t know if it’s true— that some weapons for the II World War were tested in the Spanish Civil War. But there is always something of the order of testing new weapons.
I think the world has always been at war. We have been at war for a century, if we do not to go back further. From 1914 to 1919 there was one; 1939 to 1945, another one. And this one. But one after the other. On the 60th anniversary, I think it was, of the Normandy Landings, all the heads of government got together to pay tribute, and they made me look at the pictures. But we often forget that there were 30,000 young men left on the beach. I think of the mother who receives the letter: “Madam, we congratulate you and I have the honor to inform you that your son is a hero”. But her son is no more. Every November 2nd I celebrate mass in a cemetery. Once I went to the Anzio Cemetery, which is the famous American landing here, near Rome. American cemetery. I was scanning the graves: nineteen, twenty, twenty-two years old. That’s war.
On a trip to Romania and Slovakia, I had to drive through several villages because they couldn’t use a helicopter and because that was the way. And the people knew at what time we were passing, because they know these things on the radio right away. And in the villages they were waiting outside, in front of the houses, to say hello. Kids, young people, young couples, everybody. But among the old ones, there were only old women. And where are the old men? They are not here. They were left behind in the war of 39/45.
—My last three questions concern Latin America. The UN Bachelet Report mentions rapes, electric shocks, political prisoners, enforced disappearance of people. Perhaps it reminded me of the dark night Argentina went through during the military dictatorship, but forty years later. Do you foresee any hope that the Venezuelan regime can be modified?
—I think so. I think so because the historical circumstances are going to force them to change the type of dialogue they have. I think so. In other words, I never close the doors to possible solutions. On the contrary, I encourage it.
—The second one is about Nicaragua. At first it seemed that they targeted only the opposition or those who thought differently; in fact they have just sent 222 opponents into exile. But I can also see a really fierce attack against the Catholic church. They have expelled the nuncio, now they are banning Holy Week processions. And [there’s] this remark by the president about the bishops, the priests, the popes being a mob. What do you think about this?
—With great respect, I have no other choice but to think that the person in power [Daniel Ortega] is mentally unbalanced. We have an incarcerated bishop there, a very responsible man, a very capable man. He wanted to testify and did not accept exile. This is something that is out of line with what we are currently experiencing; it is like bringing back the 1917 communist dictatorship, or the 1935 Hitlerite dictatorship, bringing those back… They are a type of crass dictatorships. Or, to use a nice Argentinean expression, guarangas. Uncouth.
—The last one regarding Latin America is about drug trafficking. It has taken over states, it has penetrated governments from Mexico down to the South. Argentina is going through a horrible experience in Rosario, and perhaps in other areas where there is not so much coverage or publicity. Several trends of thought view decriminalization or legalization of drug use as a possible solution —and I say possible because I am not familiar. Do you believe that?
—No, I don’t think so in principle. To tell you the truth, I have not delved into that matter. But to me it seems like... I am offering a crass example, hand in hand, right? Like the son who beats his mother and well, to remedy the problem we are going to change the whip, so that it is not so harmful, and we are going to give him a softer whip. These is about destruction. The problem of drugs is the destruction of the person, of the mind. You destroy yourself. It is self-destruction.
—My last two questions. The first one is just human: if you ever cry and, if so, when was the last time you remember crying.
—Yes, from time to time I cry in secret. Once I was in public and I couldn’t hold back the tears, it was because of the war. I was making a speech and this came out of me and I couldn’t repress it. But in secret. Let the psychiatrists do the interpretation [laughs], I don’t analyze myself. Sometimes I express myself in this way, alone.
—I watched the soccer finale. I am not living in Argentina, I am living in the US, but I expressly traveled to Argentina because I wanted to see, would Argentina win, the celebrations. And it was a marvelous moment of catharsis for a long-suffering society. When I talk with friends, sometimes I hear —and many people say so— that something similar could happen if Pope Francis visits Argentina. Have you thought about it? Have you dreamt about it? Do we have that chance?
—I have thought about it. I have. It was planned for December 1917. First we would go to Chile and then to Argentina and Uruguay. That was the plan. But what happened? That [Michelle] Bachelet was leaving office and the elections would take place precisely at that time. So we had to switch Chile to December and then we would be going to Argentina and Uruguay in January. In January no one stays home [it’s the summer vacation in the south], right? So we changed the schedule and we did Chile and Perú. And Argentina and Uruguay were left for a later moment. And that later moment we are still waiting for, the circumstances. In other words, there is no refusal to go, no, not at all. The trip was planned. I am open to the opportunity.
—What would that depend on?
—Thousands of factors. Thousands of factors.
—Can I ask you for two or three?
—First, the willingness to have me go. I think that is there. Second, the socio-political situation. Sometimes the visit of a pope can be exploited, anywhere. It should not be used in favor of one sector or the other, right?
—It could happen after an election.
—It could happen. After an election, it certainly could. That is why in electoral times we do not travel through countries, to avoid our presence being exploited by the ruling party for reelection or something like that, right? I want to go to Argentina. I want to. But…
—Would you venture to offer a range, how long could it be?
—No. I don’t know because these things are set up there. But it was certainly planned. And if we didn’t go it was because of the month, you know?
—First and foremost, I am grateful for the time you have given me.
—Thank you for the patience to listen to a priest. Please pray for me.
—Thank you very much.
—[Pray] in favor, not against, ok?
[/i]
|
|
|
|
| German Synod approves same-sex "Blessing" |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-11-2023, 07:10 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- Replies (2)
|
|
German Synod Approves Homosex "Blessing"
gloria.tv | March 10, 2023
The German Synod approved on March 10 a document entitled “Blessings for Couples Who Love Each Other” including homosexuals and adulterers.
Only nine bishops voted against openly contradicting truth and Holy Scripture. 38 bishops voted in favour and 11 abstained. If the latter had voted "no", they would have blocked the "abomination" (Bible, Catechism).
The bishops' voting against the text did not impress. Eichstätt Bishop Gregor Hanke announced that he would vote against because such "blessings" draw a parallel between homosex relationships and marriage - as if this were the real problem.
Regensburg Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer justified his no vote by saying that he was “not sure” that a blessing was the way "to respect homosexuals."
The German bishops will now work on a ceremony for homosex blessing and officially begin this abuse in March 2026. In reality, this mockery of God is already being practiced and a priest who opposes it will be sidelined.
The Antwerpen homosexualist Johan Bonny, Belgium, participated “spontaneously” as a guest speaker. He said that the Flemish bishops went to Rome in November 2022 and talked about their homosex "blessing" with Francis. He said neither yes nor no to the homosex "blessing" but called this “your pastoral domain in your country” - while brutally forbidding Mass.
Francis only requested to remain united [in sin]. He asked Bonny twice, “Are you all going this way together?” Bonny replied “Yes." Homosexual acts are a mortal sin that leads to eternal damnation.
|
|
|
|
| Farmers Fear Contamination At Start of Growing Season Near Train Derailment |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-11-2023, 07:06 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
Farmers Fear Contamination At Start of Growing Season Near Train Derailment
![[Image: APTOPIX_Train_Derailment_Ohio_2303565327...k=xyZRKwX7]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/APTOPIX_Train_Derailment_Ohio_23035653276274-700x420.jpg?itok=xyZRKwX7)
Portions of a Norfolk and Southern freight train that derailed on Feb. 3 in East Palestine, Ohio, were still on fire at mid-day, on Feb. 4, 2023. (Gene J. Puskar/AP)
ZH | MAR 10, 2023
Authored by Beth Berlje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
With spring planting just around the corner, Ohio and Pennsylvania farmers near the Norfolk Southern train derailment are worried about the effect spilled chemicals will have on their crops and livestock.
In a joint letter on Wednesday, Senators Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) asked Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Thomas Vilsack and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Michael Regan to address the concerns of farmers and agricultural producers in the affected areas around East Palestine, Ohio, and Darlington Township, Pennsylvania.
The letter asks the USDA and EPA to send resources to the region to help farmers test soils, plant tissue, and livestock to determine their safety and marketability.
It also asks for a review of what disaster assistance could be offered to farmers.
So far, the letter says, no agency has provided clear guidance to farmers about the safety of their crops and livestock and whether they will be able to safely sell them.
“Farmers in the region are already reporting receiving requests to cancel orders due to health concerns,” the letter said. “Farmers and food producers in East Palestine and Darlington Township need assistance in responding to this manmade disaster.”
Despite testing results, the letter said, some consumers will still be apprehensive and refuse to purchase agricultural products from the region because of the contamination. That is why farmers have specifically asked for disaster assistance.
“Senators Casey and Fetterman have worked tirelessly to support Pennsylvanians and Ohioans impacted by this disaster in the short term, namely advocating for resources and holding Norfolk Southern accountable for the harm the derailment has inflicted, in addition to working to prevent similar disasters from happening in the future,” a press release about the letter said. [...]
Questions for Norfolk Southern
Another letter was sent to Alan Shaw, president and CEO of Norfolk Southern Corporation. It was signed by Fetterman, Casey, Brown, and U.S. Representatives Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), and J. D. Vance (R-Ohio).
In it, they asked the following questions:
- How does the company plan to assist individuals or municipalities with short-term water needs? What will be done in the long-term if water sources are contaminated by the hazardous materials that leaked out of tanker cars or that were created during the explosion and subsequent fires?
- What is the company’s plan to reimburse local farmers if their crops, soil, or livestock are found to be injured, killed, contaminated, or in any way rendered less valuable by the derailment or its effects?
- How will the company determine the amount of direct financial compensation it will provide to municipalities affected by this derailment, including East Palestine, Ohio, and Darlington Township, Pennsylvania?
- What steps will the company take to make information regarding reimbursements and financial assistance available to local residents, organizations, businesses, and relevant public officials? Following the emergency phase of the clean-up, what subsurface remediation activities are anticipated being needed and what is the anticipated length of time required for those activities?
- What are the company’s plans for remediation and disposal of impacted soils? Will any of the materials need to be transported off-site for treatment and disposal? And how will the company ensure communities are protected along the transportation route?
- Since the adoption of Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR), how has Norfolk Southern’s staffing changed? Can you confirm that Norfolk Southern’s workforce has reduced by approximately 40 percent due to PSR? Further, please provide data on the size of the Norfolk Southern workforce that conducts inspections of trains since adoption of PSR.
- How much has Norfolk Southern expended on stock buybacks and dividends in the past 10 years? And during that period how much has Norfolk Southern expended on maintenance and repair of infrastructure and rolling stock?
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre 1988: Stupefied by the Lack of Resistance |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-10-2023, 08:07 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences
- No Replies
|
|
Archbishop Lefebvre: Stupefied by the Lack of Resistance
Spiritual Conference, Econe, 8 October, 1988
Adapted from here
What would the Archbishop think about the current betrayal of the SSPX, and especially about the lack of resistance against those who are actively trying to place the SSPX under the authority of Conciliar and modernist authorities? The following spiritual conference the Archbishop gave in 1988 gives us the answer in no uncertain terms: "lamentable", "stupefied", "really sad"..
And so we must also pray for all those who are hesitating or who are troubled in the current situation!
For us, there is no problem, as we are always in the framework of the Society, in the framework of the Church of all time, in fidelity to the Church of all time. But there certainly are [problems] for those who, as for example the monks of Le Barroux or the nuns of Le Barroux, many who are anguished or who are struggling to make a decision.
I also think of all those people in parishes who are hesitating. There is the case of the Guitton parish, and, I don’t know if it’s true, of Marly, of Port-Marly. So, for a certain number of people, they are wondering what they should do, whether they should leave the parish, to leave, to resist, to try to change the priest, whatever, it’s proving a real problem for them.
I don’t know for sure, but there’s a rumor it’s the same in Versaillles. I must admit that I doubt this a little bit because of two letters Canon Porta wrote me after the consecrations, assuring me of his fidelity. I’d be very, very surprised if it is true. There, that would cause some problems for all those who go to Notre-Dame-des-Armées, which is quite an important group. Will these questions and hesitations also arise for Wagram? It’s not certain. There may well be some hesitations in this area too.
So really, we must pray for all those faithful who are faced with difficult problems, even though no doubt most of them are with us, follow us and have no intention at all of leaving the Society. But faced with priests who are kind of abandoning them, and who are encouraging them to put themselves under the modernist authority of bishops, this is quite serious, obviously, and this poses a serious problem.
So if we have the opportunity either to correspond or to have contact with people who are in this situation, let us not be afraid to help them make courageous and firm decisions : we must remain in the Church of all time. There’s no question of us wavering.
No doubt you’ve all read the article in ‘Si Si No No’, which luckily was translated for ‘Courier De Rome’, which shows quite well that it is not just since today we’ve had to make these choices. It’s not just since the consecrations. It is since the Council! This article, ‘Neither Schismatic, Nor Excommunicated’ is in my opinion quite well written. In fact, this evening I received a letter from the Dom Putti’s nuns who take care of the publication of ‘Si Si No No’, in which they told me that this same article was fortunately a real big success. They gave me the example of a person of the village of Gênes who asked them for 1500 copies, which he all distibruted. I think it was written in a most admirable way, if you ask me. It really summarizes our position right from the start. It justified our position from the start right up to and including the consecrations, giving the reasons for the consecrations and resolving the difficulties one may have on this subject. It’s admirable and I find this a really extraordinary article.
So when they said at the start, effectively, Catholics are torn apart, it is really like that of course. This is how they put it:
Quote:Thus, to take a few examples, he has to choose between St. Pius X's encyclical Pascendi which condemns modernism and the present openly modernist ecclesiastical orientation. He has to choose between the monitum from the Holy Office in 1962, condemning the works of the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin and the present ecclesiastical trend, which does not hesitate to quote these works, even in papal speeches. He has to choose between the already defined invalidity of Anglican ordinations and the present-day ecclesiastical orientation in pursuance of which, in 1982, a Roman pontiff, for the first time, took part in an Anglican rite in the Canterbury Cathedral and jointly blessed the crowd with the lay primate of this heretical and schismatic sect. He has to choose between the ex cathedra condemnation of Martin Luther and the present ecclesiastical trend which, "celebrating" the 5th centenary of the birth of the German heretic, declared in a letter signed by His Holiness, John Paul II, that today, thanks to the "common researches made by Catholic and Protestant scholars ...has appeared the deep religiosity of Luther."
And a little further..
Quote:He has to choose between the historical truth of the Gospels and the present ecclesiastical orientation. He has to choose between the Holy Scripture which declares the Jews unbelievers "by hatred of God," according to the Gospel, and the present ecclesiastical orientation which, in the speech of the first pope to visit the synagogue in Rome, discovers in the Jews, still unbelievers, "the elder brothers" of ignorant Catholics.
And so, I think that is exactly how it is, one must choose. There’s nothing else to do. We must choose the faith of all time. That is why I think, as in the declaration I had the opportunity to make after the first visit of these Belgian prelates who came in 1974, on the 11 November, and as in the declaration I had to make on the 21 November, saying : “We choose eternal Rome. We don’t want modernist Rome. We don’t want the new Rome, which is modernist.” That is what I said!
So, for us this poses no problem, I’d say because we find ourselves in a framework that allows us to do that [i.e. make these choices]. But among all these poor faithful who are pulled to the left and to the right, there are some who are truly troubled, it’s really serious!
It is sad to think that all these monks and nuns who went back to Le Barroux or to the Benedictines went back precisely because they made this choice. They did not return to modernist monasteries, who are under the Conciliar Church, who are under this modernist Church. They expressly chose Le Barroux in order to remain with Tradition, to remain with the Faith of all time. And now, they put them under the authority of the Conciliar Church. So we are really stupefied to think that, despite the things they surely see, and despite what they surely know, no.. they stay! They don’t make this decision to move on or to found another monastery, or to demand the resignation of Dom Gérard so he can be replaced, no, nothing.. they just obey.
That was also the case with Fontgombault, where Dom Roy has accepted the new mass. It was the case with Dom Augustin, who also accepted the new mass. And on it goes.. with Randol, and Jouques, the Benedictines of Jouques, these Benedictines who are very close to Tournaye. And it is lamentable to see with what ease a monastery that was with Tradition is placed under the authority of Conciliar and modernist authorities. And the whole world is quiet. It’s a pity and really sad to see this.
As for us, we rejoice when we see such clear articles as the one in ‘Courier De Rome’, which can really open the eyes of the faithful and give them the courage to resist and to persevere.
Likewise it is with the declaration which the good Father Thomas Aquinas made. Truly, his declaration is included in the little journal which our Swiss colleagues have started. Well, the statement is there and I note especially what it says here, and which is very clear:
Quote:We don’t follow Msgr. de Castro Meyer or Msgr. Lefebvre as ringleaders. We follow the Catholic Church. And at this moment, these two confessors are the only bishops who are against the auto demolition of the Church. It is not possible for us to disassociate ourselves from them. And so it is now as it was in the fourth century during the time of Arianism, when it was a sign of orthodoxy to be in communion with Athanasius.
That is very true. He is right, it shows the reason for the choice he made. Fortunately, there are at least a few monks who managed to escape the clutches of the Conciliar Church.
Then of course there are those who, like Dom Gérard and his Sisters, says:
Quote:But we haven’t changed in any way, there is no change with us. We continue the same office, the same liturgy, the same laws. What change is there in us ? Why are you disturbed ? There is no reason, we continue as we always have. We just continue under a different authority.
There is the danger! This other authority really exists. And she has already made herself felt. It is enough to look up in this same journal the declaration of the Archbishop of Lyons. That much is clear, when he concludes:
Quote:Let’s help one another along this road, to remain firmly attached to the second Vatican Council, to the whole Council, which is part of the Traditions of the Church. Let us carry on our apostolic work with full confidence. Let us give our best to announce the gospel, that is the essential part. That is the objective of our diocesan Synod, whose preparation will start in October.
The diocesan Synod, which will regulate the relations between the diocese and the monastery! And what will be the guidelines that will be given at that point in time ? That’s something we will have to find out. It’s all well to say that nothing has changed, but let’s wait a little bit.
So, we did not have to wait long for the decisions they took, for example those in regard to Fr. Bissig and Fr. Baumann. You know, they both used to be.., one was rector of a seminary and the other vice-rector. They were professors for a good number of years. They have taken our seminarians, they gathered them up, they guard them and they look out for them. We should believe they are not as bad as that? And then, in this seminary that is to be erected, how is this going to work in this seminary that, in principle, is supposed to remain with Tradition ? This seminary will need to make a pilgrimage to Igraspa, which is right on the border between Austria and Germany. And during this pilgrimage they will only celebrate the new mass, completely submitted to the bishop of Augsburg, and the professors and rector of the seminary will be diocesan priests, instead of Fr. Bisig and Fr. Baumann, who themselves will have to attend [the seminary] for a year and then pass an exam with the bishop in order to take up their assignment, if they get one at all! Can they not see this coming? This is exactly the stranglehold, not just on the formation, a formation which will be given by priests who are clearly Conciliar, of the Conciliar Church, but also on the liturgy. They will be forced to submit to the new liturgy. What will these seminarians do then? Will they accept all that, just like that ? Incredible ! They won’t say : “O, nothing has changed, nothing has changed..” So wherever possible, the Conciliar Church will immediately subject them to obedience to the Conciliar Church.
Obviously, with Dom Gérard it seems to be more difficult, more delicate. They don’t want to move too fast, because they know that if they went a little too hard and too fast, maybe they would cause the monastery to go back, and that would mean a step backwards. So they proceed skilfully, gently, a little bit at a time. What will probably happen, is that they will tell you:
Quote:“You must accept that the priests who will come on retreat with you, the diocesan priests, that they will be allowed to say the new mass, obviously, because they are used to the new mass. There’s no question about that. Then, when these diocesan priests present themselves to you for communion in the hand, we’ll permit them to receive communion in the hand in all the diocesan parishes. We don’t see why, now that you are part of the diocese and now that you share in the pastoral work, why you should be able to refuse communion in the hand to these diocesans who present themselves to you."
What will they do then, at that point, these monks of Le Barroux? Well, they will probably do what Dom Augustin did, accept. They now give communion in the hand at Dom Augustin’s. That’s how it is, there’s nothing they can do about it. This transfer of authority, that’s what’s grave, that’s what makes this really serious. It is not enough to say: “we haven’t changed on a practical level”. It’s this transfer [of authority] which is very serious because the intention of these authorities is to destroy Tradition. It is clear, the destruction of Tradition. We can’t do that. "Everyone must submit", this is what Cardinal Ratzinger very clearly said in an interview with the Frankfurt paper. He said: “It is inadmissible that there are Catholics who don’t submit to the thoughts of the whole of the episcopate.” That much is clear.
So let us pray for these brave people who need to make some decisions, that they may be firm and that they keep the faith.
|
|
|
|
| UK Parliament passes buffer zone bill prohibiting silent prayer outside abortion facilities |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-10-2023, 07:36 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
UK Parliament passes buffer zone bill prohibiting silent prayer outside abortion facilities
'Parliament’s introduction of censorship zones across the country today will mean that many more innocent people like Isabel Vaughan-Spruce will be unjustly criminalized for their silent thoughts, or for peacefully offering leaflets about charitable help available to women who might want to hear about other options,' ADF UK legal counsel Jeremiah Igunnubole said.
Thu Mar 9, 2023 -
WESTMINSTER, England (Alliance Defending Freedom) — Members of Britain’s Parliament have approved the introduction of censorship zones (also known as “buffer zones”) outside of abortion facilities across England and Wales.
Clause 11 (formerly Clause 9 then Clause 10) of the Public Order Bill could criminalize any form of “influence” outside of abortion facilities – including in the form of silent prayer.
READ: Kentucky court rules ‘buffer zone’ outside abortion clinic violates First Amendment
An amendment to permit silent prayer and consensual conversations within the censorship zones was proposed by Andrew Lewer MP, but failed to pass after a vote of 116 to 299.
“Today’s vote marks a watershed moment for fundamental rights and freedoms in our country. Parliament had an opportunity to reject the criminalization of free thought, which is an absolute right, and embrace individual liberty for all. Instead, Parliament chose to endorse censorship and criminalize peaceful activities such as silent prayer and consensual conversation,” said Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK, the legal organisation working to promote fundamental freedoms.
He continued:
Today it’s abortion. Tomorrow it could be another contested matter of political debate. The principle remains that the government should never be able to punish anyone for prayer, let alone silent prayer, and peaceful and consensual conversation. Thankfully, where the clause initially called for a prison sentence for those convicted of engaging in these peaceful activities near abortion facilities, the penalty now has been reduced to a fine. Nevertheless, it is extremely regrettable that Parliament, which exists to protect and champion the rights of the electorate, has taken a clear stance against fundamental freedoms, opening the door for nationwide thought-crime prosecution.
READ: 40 Days for Life sues New York county for ‘buffer zone’ law suppressing pro-life speech
Concerns about criminalizing thought
The vote comes despite the most recent government review (2018) finding that censorship zones would be an unnecessary and “disproportionate” restriction on rights, given that harassment is already criminalized under existing legislation, and instances of harassment outside abortion facilities were found to be “rare.”
Most frequently, according to the review, volunteers pray, or offer leaflets about help services available to women who would be interested in alternatives to abortion.
According to BBC polling last year, almost 1 in 5 women who have abortions do so against their will.
Arrests for silently praying
The move comes the day after news that charitable volunteer Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested for the second time for praying silently, in her mind, near an abortion facility in Birmingham, where local authorities have implemented a “buffer zone” via a Public Spaces Protection Order.
The arrest, which was attended by six police officers, comes only weeks after Vaughan-Spruce was found “not guilty” for the same activity by the Birmingham Magistrates’ Court. She had been criminally charged in December on the basis that her silent, imperceptible prayers amounted to “intimidation.”
The prosecution was not able to present any evidence to the court to substantiate the “thought-crime,” and Vaughan-Spruce’s name was cleared, along with Father Sean Gough, who was similarly charged and acquitted.
“Only three weeks ago, the Court made clear that my silent prayers were not a crime. And yet, again, I have been arrested and treated like a criminal for having the exact same thoughts in my head, in the same location. The ambiguity of laws that limit free expression and thought – even in peaceful, consensual conversation or in silent, internal prayer – leads to abject confusion, to the detriment of our essential fundamental rights. Nobody should be criminalised for their thoughts,” said Vaughan-Spruce.
“Parliament’s introduction of censorship zones across the country today will mean that many more innocent people like Isabel Vaughan-Spruce will be unjustly criminalized for their silent thoughts, or for peacefully offering leaflets about charitable help available to women who might want to hear about other options. In the name of choice, these zones actually eliminate the options available to women. A free society should never prohibit the peaceful exchange of information,” commented Igunnubole.
READ: UK abortion facility ‘bubble zone’ prohibits pro-lifers from praying and making the Sign of the Cross
MPs raise concerns
Speaking in Parliament, Conservative MP Andrew Lewer (Northampton South) backed his proposed amendment to protect silent prayer and consensual conversation. He condemned harassment against women in every circumstance, but made clear that such actions are “a world away” from the police being able to detain people and question them for praying silently.
“Police shouldn’t be asking ‘What are you thinking about?!’” said Lewer.
“Censorship of this sort is a notoriously slippery slope. It might not be your thoughts that are criminalised today, but I think we should all be careful not to open the door to that tomorrow about some other opinions that people may hold about something else,” the MP continued.
Sir John Hayes, Member for South Holland and The Deepings, emphasized that this amendment should not be seen as an opportunity to debate abortion, but was a matter of protecting free speech. “This is about freedom – it’s not about the purpose of freedom or the location of it. It’s about the ability to think, and speak, and pray freely,” he explained.
Danny Kruger, MP for Devizes in Wiltshire, cautioned other Members that “we are making a momentous step, we are crossing an enormous river. When we criminalize prayer… or indeed consensual conversations… we are doing something of enormous significance.” He ended his remarks with the question, “What are we doing, by saying that people should not be allowed to pray, quietly, on their own?”
Nick Fletcher, MP for Don Valley, reminded the chamber that women “might actually want somebody to turn to… And if somebody is being coerced… to have a forced abortion, that [volunteer] could be somebody… who is actually there to help.”
Sir Edward Leigh, MP for Gainsborough, expressed his views on Vaughan-Spruce’s arrest before making a comparison with George Orwell’s 1984:
There was nothing [Vaughan-Spruce] was obviously doing which was harassment or in any way objectionable. The police officer had to actually go into her mind… this is what surely is quite dangerous.
Reprinted with permission from the Alliance Defending Freedom.
|
|
|
|
| Sorrowful Heart of Mary Newsletter - Lent 2023 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-10-2023, 07:14 AM - Forum: Sorrowful Heart of Mary
- No Replies
|
|
Lent 2023
To The Last-Standing-Flank of the Holy Church Militant,
This quote is from Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s last testament to his priests, Spiritual Journey, p. 13, Angelus Press [English Edition], 1991:
“Vatican II’s desire to integrate into the Church, non-Catholics ‘such as they are’, is a scandalous and adulterous desire. The Secretariat for the Unity of Christians by favoring the granting of mutual concessions - dialogue - leads to the destruction of the Catholic Faith, the destruction of the Catholic Priesthood, and the elimination of the power of Peter and the bishops. The missionary spirit of the apostles, the martyrs and the saints is eliminated! For as long as this Secretariat keeps the false Ecumenism as its orientation and Roman ecclesiastical authorities approve it, we can affirm that they remain in open, official rupture with all the past of the Church and with its official Magisterium. It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith!”
What here goes for priests, goes also for bishops and the faithful. As one believes (doctrine), so one acts (morals). Doctrine influences morals. Morals follow doctrine. For example, Billy won’t tell lies (morals) because he believes (doctrine) in the Ten Commandments of God.
But if the doctrine is false, the morals will necessarily be twisted. Luther rejected Holy Orders and celibate clergy, so he broke his vows as a priest and married an ex-nun who broke her vows to God.
So the doctrinal heresies and errors of Vatican Council II necessarily lead to bad morals! Abp. Lefebvre understood this well, which is why he fought like a tiger to defend the true doctrine, because he saw the moral consequences that would follow on the errors of, e.g. Religious Liberty, which are: contraception, abortion, pornography, legalized drugs, euthanasia, rotten public schools, etc., etc.
How farsighted he was, when we now see the horrors coming out of Modernist Rome! Recently, the Associated Press Agency commented: “(Francis) called on Catholic bishops … to welcome LGBTQ people into the Church. Bishops need to undergo a process of change to recognize the dignity of everyone.” That’s the new trend! The whole world has seen the images of Pope Francis in Rome openly receiving homosexual couples with embraces and smiles, encouraging them in their vice. Indeed, a scandal to the whole world! He has, like all his predecessors following the “spirit of Vatican II,” failed to punish, defrock and remove clergy found guilty of these crimes.
Can this really be happening? Modernist Rome is now plunging further and further into the pit of another Sodom and Gomorrah and Pope Francis is requiring the bishops to conform to his degenerate direction. This is a crime against God and His Commandments and any honest Catholic out there, must also separate himself from this Church of Apostasy. Rather than showing these poor souls the evil of their ways and seeking their conversion, which is the way of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Conciliar Rome now approves their wicked ways and supports the LGBTQ people on their road to Hell. It is indeed, what Our Lady of LaSalette warned about a “clergy polluted with impurity.”
On the other hand, how often Sacred Scripture warns against these vices of unrepentant sinners, who publicly flaunt and boast proudly of their debauchery! Here’s the mind of God:
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination … Every soul that shall commit any of these abominations, shall perish from the midst of his people” (Leviticus 18:22,29).
“If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them” (Lev. 20:13).
“And the Lord said: The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is multiplied, and their sin is become exceedingly grievous … And the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. And He destroyed these cities, and all the country about, all the inhabitants of the cities, and all things that spring from the earth” (Genesis 18:20; 19:24, 25).
“For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools … wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonor their own bodies among themselves … Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator (the New Mass!), who is blessed forever. Amen … For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men, working that which is filthy … God delivered them up to a reprobate sense…” (Romans 1:22-28).
“Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind (i.e., LGBTQ and the like), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God!" (I Corinthians 6:9,10).
In the light of this, it is no surprise that the Popes of Vatican II: who received the mark of the goddess Shiva (John Paul II); gathered all religions at Assisi to get “together to pray” and face Mecca in a Mosque while praying with Muslims (Benedict XVI); who received the Devil “Pachamama” into St. Peter’s and planted a tree in its honor (Francis) are being blinded and plagued with vices of Sodom & Gomorrah! It is a clear punishment for their “Vatican II religion” and the Man-centered New Mass! It contaminates the entire Conciliar Church!
Pope Francis demands that the bishops, in the name of “dignity”, approve all sexual perversions, including “Q” - perversions related to sadomasochism, necrophilia or sexual homicidal manias. If the Conciliar bishops don’t fall in line and approve LGBTQ perversions, then they will be removed from office. So, he calls for their “conversion” which is, in fact, the last step of apostasy, the thirtieth piece of silver in the betrayal of Christ the King, the New Age anti-Church. It is the logical conclusion of Vatican II, the New Mass and the New Code of Canon Law! Yes, bad morals do flow from bad doctrine!
This is why Abp. Lefebvre treated the Second Vatican Council as St. Polycarpe (who personally knew St. John the Evangelist) treated Marcion the heretic, who denied the Human Nature in Christ. Once, when they encountered each other in the streets of Rome around 150 A.D., Marcion asked whether he recognized him, St. Polycarpe replied: “Yes, I recognize the one who is the firstborn of Satan.” Truly, all Catholics faithful to Tradition can admit the same thing regarding the Revolutionary Council and New Mass! Hence, the Archbishop’s well-known phrase: “I accuse the Council!”
It was the great Apostle of Charity, St. John, who warned early Catholics against the false charity of welcoming unrepentant LGBTQ people into the Church: “Receive them not into your home (church), nor say to him, God speed you. For he that saith unto him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works!” [In other words, “whoever welcomes them has a share in their wicked activities!”].
When Abp. Lefebvre said we must separate ourselves from this Conciliar Church, he was chiefly standing against the new doctrines of Religious Liberty, Ecumenism, Collegiality, the New Code, the New Mass & sacraments. Consequently, those hellish doctrines have spawned their infernal “morals”, namely, every immorality!
The answer then, as always, is to restore Catholic Tradition with no compromise, obey the Immaculate Heart of Mary and fight for Her triumph! The Divine Heart of Jesus wants His victory to come through Her’s! Come, O Queen of the Holy Rosary, come reign over us with thy Divine Son! At last, “...Only She can help you! (Fatima).
In Christ the King,
Fr. David Hewko
|
|
|
|
| Ignatian Retreats 2023 - US |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-08-2023, 04:27 PM - Forum: Event Schedule
- Replies (4)
|
|
IGNATIAN RETREATS 2023
Fr. Hewko is planning again to hold Ignatian Retreats (a week for the men and a week for the women) this year. The dates are as follows:
- Women’s Retreat will be Monday, June 26th (beginning at 12:30 PM) through Saturday, July 1st (ending after lunch).
- Men’s Retreat will be Monday, July 3rd (beginning at 12:30 PM) through Saturday, July 8th (ending after lunch).
The venue will be the same as last year - at the Red Rock Guest Ranch in Soldier, Kansas, USA.
More details to follow.
May many graces flow from these powerful retreats!
Please contact Mr. Tim Cline at sspxmariancorps@gmail.com or 770-820-6476 with any questions.
*Fr. Hewko is also asking for generous souls to assist with the cooking for any portion of time during those two weeks!
|
|
|
|
| Steubenville bishop bans Latin Mass at Franciscan University, effective immediately |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-08-2023, 08:23 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Steubenville bishop bans Latin Mass at Franciscan University, effective immediately
gloria.tv | March 8, 2023
Students, faculty, staff, and others who attend the Traditional Latin Mass at Franciscan University will need to venture off campus to worship in the more ancient form of the Mass following their bishop’s decision to ban the campus’ monthly celebration.
Bishop Jeffrey Monforton of the Diocese of Steubenville, Ohio, ordered an immediate end to the Latin Mass on Franciscan University’s campus.
“The Diocese of Steubenville is seeking to meet the pastoral needs of the faithful in accord with the norms, including the recent rescript, issued by the Holy See,” a spokesman for the diocese told CNA.
“The Mass at Franciscan has been [canceled],” the spokesperson said. “The bishop is seeking a dispensation for the Mass at St. Peter’s, where the weekly Latin Mass has been held for years.”
The Latin Mass will still be offered weekly at St. Peter’s Church in Steubenville, which is a parish church about a mile from campus. The parish offers the Latin Mass weekly, which includes a High Mass usually once per month, on the first Sunday. Even though the campus’ Latin Mass is canceled, the Latin Mass at St. Peter will be allowed to continue while the bishop seeks a formal dispensation from the Vatican for that church.
Although the diocese claims the decision is related to an order issued by the Vatican, the Vatican order only appears to put new restrictions on Latin Masses offered in parish churches and does not appear to force bishops to restrict the Latin Mass in non-parish churches or chapels, such as the chapel used by students at Franciscan University to celebrate the Latin Mass. It’s unclear how the Vatican order is related to the bishop’s new rules.
University tried to save the Latin Mass
The bishop made this decision despite the university’s efforts to retain its ability to offer the Latin Mass. However, the university is currently working to provide shuttles to St. Peter’s Church once per month for students who wish to attend.
“While I would prefer to continue offering the option of a Traditional Latin Mass on campus, I am grateful our students still have relatively convenient access with St. Peter’s Church so close by,” Father Dave Pivonka, the president of Franciscan University, wrote in an email sent to students, staff, and faculty at the university on Monday.
Pivonka said in his email that he had spoken with the bishop in an effort to keep a Latin Mass on campus.
“I spoke with [Bishop Monforton] multiple times hoping we could work out a way to continue offering the Traditional Latin Mass at Franciscan University for the many students, faculty, and staff with a special love for this ancient form of the sacred liturgy,” Pivonka wrote in the email. “Bishop Monforton remains convinced, however, that this decision is best for our diocese in light of Pope Francis’ 2021 motu proprio Traditionis custodes.”
Pivonka told students, faculty, and staff that he reached out to the Latin Mass club on campus, Juventutem-Franciscan, on March 2 to discuss the bishop’s decision. He said he wanted to “let our students know of the care and concern for them felt by all the friars.” He said he was “extremely edified by this gathering and the time we shared together” and that “everyone there committed to continue to pray for peace as well as for Bishop Monforton and everyone involved.”
The university has not issued an official statement
Thomas Crowe, who volunteers to train altar servers for the Traditional Latin Mass at the university, told CNA that, when the Vatican order came out, he initially believed “there shouldn’t be any effect of the [Traditional Latin Mass] on campus.” Crowe is not an employee of the university, nor is he a spokesperson on behalf of the university.
The order in question is a Feb. 21 rescript, which is a formal clarification from the Vatican, issued by Cardinal Arthur Roche, who serves as the prefect for the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
The rescript clarified Pope Francis’ motu proprio Traditionis custodes, which the pope issued on July 16, 2021. In Traditionis custodes, the pontiff ordered bishops to designate one or more locations for the celebration of the Latin Mass but stipulated that those locations not be in parish churches.
Because many parishes already had thriving Latin Mass communities, numerous bishops offered dispensations, which allowed those parishes to continue offering the Latin Mass. The recent rescript, however, clarified that all dispensations require Vatican approval and ordered bishops who had already offered dispensations to inform the dicastery, which will evaluate each dispensation on an individual basis.
A popular Mass on campus
Crowe told CNA that the campus Latin Mass has been very popular, with “easily 250 [people] at each of them this semester.” He said “the chapel’s been packed and it’s mostly students.” He added that “the university was always supportive” and would “make sure we had what we needed, make sure we had time for practice” when training altar servers for the Latin Mass.
“The opportunity for the students, especially students who had never attended the [Traditional Latin Mass] previously, the opportunity was tremendous,” Crowe said.
|
|
|
|
| St. Alphonsus Liguori: Daily Meditations for the Second Week of Lent |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-06-2023, 08:28 AM - Forum: Lent
- Replies (7)
|
|
Every sin produces blindness; and as sin increases, so does the sinner's blindness increase. Therefore do we see relapsing sinners lose all light, and go from sin to sin, without even thinking of amendment. The very habit of committing sin, says St. Augustine, prevents sinners from perceiving the evil they do, and so they live as if they no longer believed in God, in Heaven, or in eternity.
I.
The wicked man, when he is come into the depths of sins, contemneth. (Prov. xviii. 3). One of the greatest ills which the sin of Adam brought upon us was the evil inclination to sin. This made the Apostle weep when he found himself compelled by concupiscence towards those very sins which he abhorred: I see another law in my members . . . captivating me in the law of sin. (Rom. vii. 23). Therefore is it so difficult for us, infected as we are by this concupiscence, and with so many enemies urging us to evil, to arrive sinless at our heavenly country. Now such being our frailty, I ask, what would you say of a voyager who, having to cross the sea in a great storm, and in a frail barque, would load it in such a manner as would be sufficient to sink it even were there no storm and the vessel strong? What would you predict as to the life of that man? Now, we may say the same of the habitual sinner, who, having to pass the sea of this life--a stormy sea in which so many are lost--in a frail and shattered barque, such as is our flesh to which we are united, still burdens it with habitual sins. Such a one can hardly be saved, because a bad habit blinds the understanding, hardens the heart, and thus renders him obstinate to the last. In the first place, a bad habit produces blindness. And why indeed, do the Saints always beg for light from God, trembling lest they should become the worst sinners in the world? Because they know that if for a moment they lose that light, there is no enormity they may not commit. How is it that so many Christians have lived obstinately in sin until at last they have damned themselves? Their own malice blinded them. (Wis. ii. 21). Sin deprived them of sight, and thus they were lost. Every sin produces blindness; and as sin increases, so does the blindness increase. God is our light; as much, therefore, as the soul withdraws from God, so much the more blind does she become: His bones shall be filled with the vices of his youth. (Job xx. 11). As in a vessel full of earth the light of the sun cannot penetrate, so in a heart full of vices Divine light cannot enter. Therefore do we see certain relapsed sinners lose all light, and proceed from sin to sin, without any more even thinking of amendment: The wicked walk round about. (Ps. xi. 9). Having fallen into that dark pit, the unhappy wretches can do nothing but sin; they speak only of sin; they think only of sin; and hardly perceive at last what harm there is in sin. The very habit of committing sin, says St. Augustine, prevents sinners from perceiving the evil they do. So that they live as if they no longer believed in God, in Heaven, in hell, or in eternity.
My God, Thou hast conferred signal blessings upon me, favouring me above others; and I have signally offended Thee by outraging Thee more than any other person that I know. O sorrowful Heart of my Redeemer, afflicted and tormented on the Cross by the sight of my sins, give me, through Thy merits, a lively sense of my offences, and sorrow for them. Ah, my Jesus, I am full of vices; but Thou art omnipotent, Thou canst easily fill my soul with Thy holy love. In Thee, then, I trust; Thou Who art infinite goodness and infinite mercy. I repent, O my Sovereign Good, of having offended Thee. Oh, that I had rather died, and had ever caused Thee any displeasure!
II.
That sin which at first struck the sinner with terror, now, through bad habit, no longer causes horror: Make them as stubble before the wind. (Ps. lxxxii. 14). Behold, says St. Gregory, with what ease a straw is stirred by the slightest wind; thus also you will see one who before he fell, resisted, at least for some time, and combated temptation, when the bad habit is contracted fall instantly at every temptation, and on every occasion of sin that presents itself. And why? Because the bad habit has deprived him of light. St. Anselm says that the devil acts with some sinners like one who holds a bird tied by a string; he allows it to fly, but, when he chooses, he drags it to the earth again. So is it, says the Saint, with habitual sinners: "Entangled by a bad habit, they are held bound by the enemy; and though flying, they are cast down into the same vices." Some, adds St. Bernardine of Sienna, continue to sin, even without occasion. You will see an habitual sinner without occasion indulging in bad thoughts, without pleasure, and almost without will, drawn forcibly on by bad habit. As St. John Chrysostom observes, "Habit is a merciless thing; it forces men, sometimes even against; their will, to the commission of unlawful acts." Yes because, according to St. Augustine, "When no resistance is made to a habit, it becomes a necessity. And, as St. Bernardine adds: "Habit is changed into nature." Hence, as it is necessary for a man to breathe so to habitual sinners, who have made themselves slaves of sin, it appears almost necessary that they must sin. I have used the expression slaves; there are servants who serve for pay, but slaves serve by force and without pay; to this do some poor wretches come, who at last sin without pleasure.
The wicked man, when he is come to the depth of sin: contemneth. (Prov. xviii. 3). St. Chrysostom explains this of the habitual sinner, who, plunged into that pit of darkness, despises corrections, sermons, censures, help, God--despises all, and becomes like the vulture, which, rather than leave the dead body, allows itself to be killed upon it. Father Recupito relates, that a criminal on his way to execution raised his eyes, beheld a young girl and consented to a bad thought. Father Gisolfo also relates that a blasphemer, likewise condemned to death uttered a blasphemy as he was thrown off the ladder. St. Bernard goes so far as to say that it is of no use praying for habitual sinners, but we must weep for them as lost. How can they, indeed, avoid the precipice which they no longer see? It requires a miracle of grace. These unhappy beings will open their eyes in hell, when it will be of no avail to open them, unless it be to weep the more bitterly over their folly.
O my Jesus, I have forgotten Thee; but Thou hast not forgotten me; I perceive it by the light Thou now givest me. Since, then, Thou givest me light, give me likewise strength to be faithful to Thee. I promise Thee rather to die a thousand times than ever again to turn my back on Thee. But all my hopes are in Thine assistance: In thee, O Lord, have I hoped; let me not be confounded forever. I hope in Thee, my Jesus, never again to find myself entangled in iniquity and deprived of Thy grace. To thee, also, do I turn, O Mary, my blessed Lady: "In thee, O Lady, have I hoped; let me not be confounded for ever." O my hope, I trust by thy intercession that I may never again find myself at enmity with thy Son. Ah, beg of Him rather to let me die than that He should abandon me to this greatest of misfortunes.
Spiritual Reading
INTERIOR MORTIFICATION
Even works of piety must be always undertaken with a spirit of detachment; so that whenever our efforts are unsuccessful we shall not be disturbed, and when our exercises of devotion are prohibited by a Superior we shall give them up with cheerfulness. Self-attachment of every kind hinders a perfect union with God. We must therefore seriously and firmly resolve to mortify our passions, and not to submit to be their slaves. External as well as interior mortification is necessary for perfection: but with this difference, that the former should be practised with discretion; the latter without discretion, and with fervour. What does it profit us to mortify the body, while the passions of the heart are indulged? "Of what use is it," says St. Jerome, "to reduce the body by abstinence, if the soul is swelled with pride?--or to abstain from wine, and to be inebriated with hatred?" It is useless to chastise the body by fasting, while pride inflates the heart to such a degree, that we cannot bear a word of contempt or the refusal of a request. In vain do we abstain from wine while the soul is intoxicated with anger against all who thwart our designs or oppose our inclinations. No wonder, then, that St. Bernard deplored the miserable state of him who wears the external garb of humility, and at the same time inwardly cherishes his passions. "Such people," says the Saint, "are not divested of their vices: they only cover them by the outward sign of penance."
By attention to the mortification of self-love, we shall become Saints in a short time, and without the risk of injury to health; for since God is the only witness of interior acts, they will not expose us to the danger of being puffed up with pride. Oh! what treasures of virtue and of merits are laid up by stifling in their very birth those little inordinate desires and affections, those bickerings, those suggestions of curiosity, those bursts of wit and humour, and all similar effects of self-love! When you are contradicted, give up your opinion with cheerfulness, unless the glory of God require that you maintain it. When feelings of self-esteem spring up in your heart, make a sacrifice of them to Jesus Christ. If you receive a letter, restrain your curiosity, and abstain from opening it for some time. If you desire to read the termination of an interesting narrative, lay aside the book, and defer the reading of it to another time. When you feel inclined to mirth, to pull a flower, or to look at any object, suppress these inclinations for the love of Jesus Christ, and deprive yourself for His sake of the pleasure of indulging in them. A thousand acts of this kind may be performed in the day. St. Leonard of Port Maurice relates that a servant of God performed eight acts of mortification in eating an egg, and that it was afterwards revealed to her that, as the reward of her self-denial, eight degrees of grace and as many degrees of glory were bestowed upon her. It is also related of St. Dositheus, that by a similar mortification of the interior, he arrived in a short time at a high degree of perfection. Though unable, in consequence of bodily infirmities, to fast or to discharge the other duties of the Religious Community, he attained so perfect a union with God, that the other monks, struck with wonder at his sublime sanctity, asked him what exercises of virtue he performed. "The exercise," replied the Saint, "to which I have principally attended is the mortification of all self-love."
Evening Meditation
REFLECTIONS AND AFFECTIONS ON THE PASSION OF JESUS CHRIST
I.
When it was day, the Jews conduct Jesus to Pilate, to make him condemn Him to death; but Pilate declares Him to be innocent: I find no cause in this man. (Luke xxiii. 4). And to free himself from the importunities of the Jews, who pressed on him, seeking the death of the Saviour, he sends Him to Herod. It greatly pleased Herod to see Jesus Christ brought before him, hoping that in his presence, in order to deliver Himself from death, He would have worked one of those miracles of which he had heard; wherefore Herod asked Him many questions. But Jesus, because He did not wish to be delivered from death, and because that wicked one was not worthy of His answers, was silent, and answered him not. Then the proud king, with his court, offered Him many insults, and making them cover Him with a white robe, as if declaring Him to be an ignorant and stupid fellow, sent Him back to Pilate: But Herod with his soldiers despised him, and mocked him, putting on him a white robe, and sent him back to Pilate. (Luke xxiii. 11). Cardinal Hugo in his Commentary says, "Mocking Him as if a fool, he clothed Him with a white robe." And St. Bonaventure, "He despised Him as if impotent, because He worked no miracle; as if ignorant, because He answered him not a word; as if idiotic, because He did not defend Himself."
O Eternal Wisdom! O Divine Word! This one other ignominy was wanting to Thee, that Thou shouldst be treated as a fool bereft of sense. So greatly does our salvation weigh on Thee, that through love of us Thou willest not only to be reviled, but to be satiated with revilings; as Jeremias had already prophesied of Thee: He shall give his cheek to him that striketh him; he shall be filled with reproaches. (Lam. iii. 30). And how couldst Thou bear such love to men, from whom Thou hast received nothing but ingratitude and slights? Alas, that I should be one of these who have outraged Thee worse than Herod. Ah, my Jesus, chastise me not, like Herod, by depriving me of Thy voice. Herod did not recognise Thee for what Thou art! I confess Thee to be my God: Herod loved Thee not; I love Thee more than myself. Deny me not, I beseech Thee, deny me not the voice of Thy inspiration, as I have deserved by the offences I have committed against Thee. Tell me what Thou wilt have of me, for, by Thy grace, I am ready to do all that Thou wilt.
II.
When Jesus had been led back to Pilate, the governor inquired of the people whom they wished to have released at the Passover, Jesus or Barabbas, a murderer. But the people cried out, Not this man, but Barabbas. Then said Pilate, What, then, shall I do with Jesus? They answered, Let him be crucified. But what evil hath this innocent One done? replied Pilate: What evil hath he done? They repeated: Let him be crucified. And even up to this time, O God, the greater part of mankind continue to say, "Not this Man, but Barabbas"; preferring to Jesus Christ some pleasure of sense, some point of honour, some outbreak of wounded pride.
Ah, my Lord, well knowest Thou that at one time I did Thee the same injury when I preferred my accursed tastes to Thee. My Jesus, pardon me, for I repent of the past, and from henceforth I prefer Thee before everything. I esteem Thee, I love Thee more than any good; and am willing a thousand times to die rather than forsake Thee. Give me holy perseverance, give me Thy love.
|
|
|
|
| Our Lady of Nazareth - March 6th |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-06-2023, 07:49 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- Replies (1)
|
|
March 6: Our Lady of Nazareth, Pierre Noire, Portugal (1150)
![[Image: xOurLadyofNazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.x61W2miJZP.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xOurLadyofNazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.x61W2miJZP.webp)
The Abbot Orsini wrote: “This image was honored at Nazareth in the time of the apostles, if we may believe a writing which was found, by a hunter, attached to this image, in the year 1150.”
The Shrine of Our Lady of Nazareth, known in Portugal as Nossa Senhora da Nazare, is found in the village of Nazare on the Atlantic coast in Portugal. Indeed, the village is named after this miraculous statue of the Blessed Mother and the Christ Child that was brought to the area many centuries ago. According to tradition, this miraculous image was carved by the hands of Saint Joseph, the foster-father of Christ, while in the very presence of the Infant Jesus and the Mother of God. Later, the faces and hands of the images were painted by Saint Luke the Evangelist. This remarkable image is still preserved in a church where it can be viewed by anyone, and the story surrounding it is a fascinating one.
It is known that the statue of Our Lady of Nazareth came from the Holy Land where it was one of the oldest images ever venerated by Christians. It was saved from destruction at the hands of the iconoclasts sometime early in the 5th century by a monk named Ciriaco, who gave the statue to Saint Jerome. Saint Jerome later gave it to Saint Augustine in Africa, to protect the statue by removing it from the Holy Land. Saint Augustine then gave it into the safekeeping of the monastery of Cauliniana, near Merida, a monastery on the Iberian Peninsula.
Our Lady of Nazareth
When the Arabs invaded the Iberian Peninsula in the year 711, King Roderic met them with his Visigothic army at the battle of Guadalete, where he was soundly defeated.
It is a fact of history that the body of Roderic was never found upon the field of battle, although his horse was found, and it is often assumed by historians that Roderic died that day when he lost his kingdom. According to this legend, however, Roderic was not killed, but survived the battle and disguised himself as a beggar as he travelled north. Alone and unknown, he made his way to the monastery of Cauliniana where he sought shelter for the night. Going to confession, he of necessity revealed his true identity to the friar, Frei Romano. As it turned out, the monks were preparing to leave the monastery in advance of the Arabs, and so Frei Romano asked the king if he could accompany him in his travels. Roderic agreed, and the friar took with him the statue of Our Lady of Nazareth and the relics of Saint Bras and Saint Bartholomew.
They traveled together until they arrived at a place later named Monte de Saint Bartolomeu in November of the year 714. They made for themselves a hermitage with the friar living in a small cave at the edge of a cliff that overlooked the sea. He placed the image in a niche among the stones upon a pedestal of simple rocks. Roderic went a little ways off by himself to a hill where he also began to live the life of a hermit. After a year, though, King Roderic left the hermitage, and nothing else is said of him in this legend. One wonders if he ever learned of his kinsman Pelayo, who had retreated into the mountains and continued to heroically defy the invaders.
Before his death, Frei Romano hid the image in his small cave, where it remained undisturbed for some centuries until it was discovered by shepherds, who came there to venerate the statue. Inside that little, ancient sanctuary they had found the renowned and sacred image of Our Lady of Nazareth. Carved of wood, it was unlike any other statue of the Madonna they had ever seen, for it depicts the Blessed Virgin breastfeeding her Divine Child while seated upon a simple bench. When miracles began to frequently occur, it became a major pilgrimage center.
Then, in the early morning of September 14th in the year 1182, the mayor of Porto de Mos, Dom Fuas Roupinho, was hunting on his land when he observed a deer. Chasing it up a steep slope on horseback that misty morning, the fog became heavier all of a sudden. The deer, later suspected to be the devil in the guise of a deer, jumped off the edge of the hilltop into the empty void. Despite his efforts to stop his horse, the spirited mount was determined to follow after the deer. Helpless to save himself, the rider suddenly recognized that he was near the sacred grotto where he would often come to pray. Fuas Roupinho cried out to the Blessed Virgin, praying aloud: “Our Lady, Help Me!”
The horse stopped immediately, as if he were digging his hooves into the rocky cliff above the void. Suspended in an unnatural manner at the edge of the cliff, Fuas Rouphinho knew the drop to be over 100 meters, and surely would mean his death if he had fallen. He was then able to back slowly away from the edge, looking down to see the evidence of the impossible and unimaginable - for there in the hard stone was the imprint of one of his horse’s hooves. One of those marks can still be seen in the native rock.
Faus Rouphinho dismounted and went to the grotto to pray and give thanks, subsequently causing a chapel ‘Capela da Memoria,’ or ‘The Chapel of Remembrance,’ to be built very near the spot where his life had been miraculously saved. When the masons he had hired took apart the primitive altar in the cave, they found an ivory box of sorts that contained the relics of Saint Bras and Saint Bartholomew. There was also an ancient scroll that they carefully removed.
Opening the scroll, they found that it explained the history of the statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary and her Divine Child, now known as Our Lady of Nazareth, as outlined above.
The church Santuario de Nossa Senhora da Nazare was later built on the hilltop overlooking Nazare by King Ferdinand I of Portugal in the year 1377. Its construction was necessary due to the large number of pilgrims who continued to come to venerate the image. Over the years it was often rebuilt, or had additions made, especially in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. The profusely decorated and gilded apse displays the statue of Nossa Senhora da Nazare in a lighted niche above the main altar, flanked by twisted columns.
The first King of Portugal, Don Afonso Henriques, as well as the chief nobles of his court, were among the early pilgrims to the shrine. Many notable figures came to visit Our Lady of Nazareth throughout history, including Vasco de Gama, who came as a pilgrim before setting out for India, and Pedro Alvares Cabral, who later discovered Brazil. St Francis Xavier, the Apostle of the East, went on pilgrimage to Our Lady of Nazareth before later leaving for Goa.
According to a plaque placed in the chapel in 1623, the image was carved by Saint Joseph in Galilee when Jesus was a baby. Some decades later St Luke the Evangelist painted the faces and hands of the images. It remained in Nazareth until brought by the Greek monk Ciriaco to the Iberian Peninsula. It is believed to be one of the oldest images venerated by Christians.
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre 1984: Sedevacantism and Liberalism |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-05-2023, 10:48 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism
- No Replies
|
|
Archbishop Lefebvre: Sedevacantism and Liberalism
Spiritual Conference, Econe, 1984
Translation by Tradidi
Translator's Note: Captions added
Emphasis: The Catacombs
Same Erroneous Principle, Two Erroneous Solutions
This is more of a conference than a course, because if it were a course, we would have to give several courses and I would need a little more time than I had in order to prepare in detail the courses on a subject that is vast and which of course has very important practical consequences. Ecône's history is sufficiently enameled with events that are consequences of the situation in which the Church finds herself today, a situation which obviously poses a problem, and this problem is certainly unique. It’s the same problem that arises for those who leave us saying that we don’t obey the Pope, as well as for those who leave us because they say that there is no Pope. They both start from the same principle, which is that the Pope cannot [err] in a universal way, in other words, that in his universal acts he cannot err and that he cannot bind the Church in a way that is not in conformity with faith and morals.
So that's the stated principle. Therefore some people say:
Quote:Good. There’s the principle. It’s firmly established by Tradition, by theologians, by the doctrine of the Church. Now the Pope publishes acts that are harmful to the Church in the area of faith and morals. So he's not the pope, since he can't do that. So if he's not the pope, we no longer have a pope. That's not difficult [to understand]. So we are free from all the principles that link us to Rome, and so on... We are independent...
Ok, that's one solution. And then there are others who say:
Quote:No, it is not possible for the Pope to give us something that is harmful to the Church, in faith and morals, [not even] indirectly or implicitly. Now the Pope is the Pope. So we have to accept what the Pope gives us. And so everything that comes from Rome is good. It's essentially good. There may well be some incidents, some blunders, some little things that are not very good, but it’s still good. The Mass is good. You cannot say that the Mass is bad. It may well be extrinsically evil, because of some extrinsic things, but it does not have a bad principle. The very principles of the Mass are not affected. They are inviolable, since it was the Pope who gave them. The Pope cannot do anything against faith and morals when he speaks to the universal Church, therefore essentially all acts that come from the Holy See are good, so [the new] Canon Law is good. There may be little phrases that we could change, little details, okay, but basically it is good because they cannot give us bad things. End of story, all is clear.
And you, you are contesting [the new] Canon Law, you are contesting the [new] Mass, you are contesting the ecumenical bible, you are contesting everything that comes from Rome in a severe way. Therefore you are in disobedience and we will leave you. We prefer to be obedient.
So they go away and they return to obedience, in other words, [obedience] to liberalism, to progressivism, to the destruction of the Church, to the new Mass, to the new code of canon law...
Erroneous Principle
So what are you going to do? In my opinion, these solutions seem to suffer from too much simplicity. They just pose their principle like that, but they don't study it thoroughly. Such a principle like this one regarding the infallibility of the Church in disciplinary matters and in liturgical matters is nevertheless a principle that comes to us from Tradition. It has not been explicitly stated as such by Our Lord, at least not as explicitly as in Revelation, as the infallibility in faith and morals, which clearly is the direct object of infallibility, so there are no problems there. But there is also an indirect object of infallibility, an object as a complement to infallibility, which is exactly what dogmatic facts are for example. Dogmatic facts that are theological conclusions, these dogmatic facts, the disciplinary and cultural questions of the Church, are therefore the indirect object, which support the primary object that is the object of faith and morals, and which are implied precisely to the extent that faith and morals are also implied in these facts, in their theological conclusions, in dogmatic facts on disciplinary and cultural matters.
Direct vs Indirect Object of Infallibility
So, to identify these, we have the Tradition of the Church, the theologians, the popes in their Encyclicals and in the way they published their decrees concerning these various subjects. So it was concluded, theologians in general concluded, that when the Pope makes a decree for the universal Church and which dealt with the liturgy, with the general discipline of the Church, that the Pope cannot err, that the Pope is infallible.
But if we study things closely, we can nevertheless see that this infallibility, the infallibility in this area, is less absolute than in the primary object which is faith and morals directly.
And so there may be exceptions, there may be cases where the Pope, either by his mode of expression or by his personal affirmations about what he decrees, clearly shows that he does not intend to use his infallibility.
I think it is necessary that we read not just one page on law and infallibility in that well known book of Xavier da Silveira. Indeed, on this subject he draws a general conclusion, i.e. that the Church is infallible in terms of discipline and liturgy. But the thesis does not in any way assert that the law must be as perfect as possible, nor that it should implicitly contain all doctrine on the matter to which it refers, but only deals with the non-existence, in that which the law prescribes, of any implicit or explicit error in faith and morals.
This is the general conclusion of his study of Tradition. But then he rightly adds: it's a thesis to consider in its nuances.
A Thesis to Consider in It's Nuances
As we have seen, the thesis according to which the disciplinary and liturgical decrees promulgated for the universal Church are always guaranteed of infallibility, seems to receive the total support of Tradition.
However, before we continue to ask ourselves whether there are any contrary testimonies in Tradition, it seems that we can and must doubt that the thesis of infallibility in disciplinary and liturgical decrees has the magnitude that some theologians think they can attribute to it.
All right, you have to complete [reading], you don’t just read one sentence, you have to read everything. So a little further on he brings this up again.
Before considering the concrete case of the Novus Ordo, we will restate the principles set out so far and clearly state the matter of the question.
First, we have seen that, in general, neo-Scholastic textbooks consider as theologically certain the thesis that the universal laws of the Church, including liturgical laws, engage infallibility. Secondly, we then showed that this thesis has, or seems to have, a solid support in Tradition.
Thirdly, we pointed out that, despite the testimony of Tradition which has been alleged, there are also serious reasons, both doctrinal and historical for us, to doubt that universal laws always and necessarily imply the infallibility of the Church.
We noticed that this doubt has a support in Tradition because in many documents there are hesitations, restrictive expressions, about the thesis of infallibility in disciplinary and liturgical matters.
There is this danger, you see, of always taking certain truths that need to be explained and interpreted by the conditions under which the principles are developed, and of then denying these conditions, of denying, I would say, the historical conditions of the application of these principles and of thinking only of the principles in themselves, and of drawing conclusions without any concern for the historical conditions in which we find ourselves.
A Liberal Spirit is Incapable of Binding
However, there is one thing that caused us to be here, that is the cause of our resistance, and that is the fact that we’ve had three Liberal popes. What do you want me to do about it? It's not my fault! You may say: “Oh! You exaggerate, that's not true, that's not possible!” I wish I was exaggerating, but we have Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II, and they are liberals. They have a liberal spirit.
What is a Liberal spirit? It is a mind that is in complete confusion, in total confusion... They are not clear-minded. They don't want to define things. They don't want to see with clarity. It is a spirit that rejects theological clarity, the clarity of principles, the logic of principles. It bothers them because, for them, on the one hand, they would like to be absolutely in conformity with this clarity of the Church's faith, historical, and of all time. Such is an established truth that doesn’t change any more, applying for always, accepted for good. They would like to be able to say that. But on the other hand, they do not want to contradict modern ideas, ideas of evolution and ideas of the modern world, backed by this Masonic spirit that does not want dogmas, that does not want definite truth. “There are no definite truths, either natural or supernatural truths. It's always changing. We're still looking for the truth. Everybody's looking for the truth. We will never reach the truth, but we must always be in search of the truth. So in order to please the world, we must accept that also in the Church there is no definitive, absolutely definitive truth; there is always a more or less way to interpret this or that... There is no definitive truth.” So they are terribly confused and contradictory minds that are in constant incoherence.
So how do you want minds like these to promulgate acts which they themselves consider final and which oblige all the faithful to adhere to in a definitive way? They cannot do things like that. That is why they have always had restrictions in their comments, their letters, their formal communications, either in a consistory or in a public meeting. It seems to me, I haven't had time to find the document, that Pope John Paul II, on the occasion of the publication of the new Canon Law, in alluding to this the Law, said: “It's an essay, it's a stage, this Canon Law”. Again: evolution!
Prime Example: Bugnini
All the liturgy has been given as evolutionary, as susceptible to creativity, as susceptible to further evolution... It is enough to read the principles of our friend Bugnini, in his book that you now have in the library, La Reforma liturgica, by Annibale Bugnini, a huge posthumous book, but which was directed by Msgr. Bugnini himself. So I invite you to read on page 50: Actiora principia, the principles that have been those of liturgical reform, the great principles, the principle of principles, which have given the direction of the new liturgy. I assure you, this is really instructive. It is necessary to read these things so that we know what the thinking of those who were the legislators was. After all, who was the legislator for the [new] liturgy? Clearly it's Bugnini. Bugnini was the author of the new liturgy.
As Cardinal Chicognagi said: “he can go to the Holy Father and make him sign whatever he wants, whenever he wants.” Well, yes, because the Holy Father had complete confidence in Bugnini. How, why, I don't know all this, but it is a fact, he had complete confidence with the liturgy. He put him in charge of the liturgical commission. He even gathered [them] under his authority, practically as secretary for the Congregation for Divine Worship, and the Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments which he abolished and reunited with the Congregation for Divine Worship. Therefore he was all-powerful on Worship and Sacraments, this Msgr. Bugnini. The Pope trusted him completely. He is the author of this normative mass. And he didn't hide this, he said it himself. He told us, the Superiors General gathered together, when he was explaining his normative Mass to us. So what are this man’s principles?
Liturgy and theology form prayers. In them, through sensible signs, the sanctification of man is signified and realized, and thus implemented, by the mystical Body of Christ, leader and member (attention!) leader and member, the totality of public worship!
See immediately the idea: there are no longer only priests, not just the hierarchy, offering worship to which the faithful join themselves. No: “implemented, by the Mystical Body of Christ, leader and member, the totality of public worship.”
In the fourth paragraph: Manifestations of the Church:
Quote:In the liturgical celebration, when all the people of God gather to participate fully and actively in the same action, around the same altar, united in prayer, the greatest manifestation of the Church is realized.
See this idea is always: the people of God, the worship rendered to God, the participation of the whole Mystical Body, priest and faithful, and everyone, leader and members.
Quote:And because it is a ‘sacrament of unity’, the liturgical actions belong to the whole body of the Church. This is why such community celebration must always be preferred to individual celebration.
That's Protestantism! Luther couldn't have said it better! It's the same thing. This is the death of private masses. It's all over!
Quote:In it the nature of the Church must appear, communal and hierarchical. All participate, but each one fulfills his or her responsibility according to the ministry received [so everyone has received a ministry!] ..and the liturgical rules. The path opened by the Council is intended [listen carefully!] is intended to radically change the face of the traditional liturgical assemblies in which customarily the liturgical service is carried out almost exclusively by the clergy. The people too often attend as strangers and silent spectators.
These are Bugnini's ideas. They’re false, they’re based on a lie, a historical lie, and a real lie. To say that these faithful who were there for centuries before Bugnini ever existed, that they participated in the Mass in a silent way and as strangers, all those people who sanctified themselves through the Mass, all these Christian families who are sanctified by the Holy Mass and by all the liturgical services! As if it were necessary for these people to shout or to clap their hands and express their sensitive participation in order to participate in the Mass! That spiritual participation is not much more important than external participation! Is it not precisely spiritual participation that is the true participation of the faithful? This work of education must make it clear that the liturgy is an action of all the people of God.
You see, this is a serious mistake. There's a heresy underneath it. Underneath it... I’m not saying that it is formally heretical, I’m saying that underneath it there’s a heresy. It is [the claim] that the priesthood of the faithful and the priesthood of priests is the same, that everyone is a priest and that all the people of God must offer the sacrifice of mass. This is the same mistake we find in the new Canon Law.
So, when you see these things, when you read these things, you say to yourself that there is something wrong with the Church. What do you want me to do about it? I'm not the one who's making this up. There's something not quite right, something that’s wrong.
So then, what did the Church do for twenty centuries? What does the Church think of herself? What idea does she have of herself? And yes, they said it, and they repeated it over and over again during the Council: “the Church must now become conscious of what she is, of the new vision she must have... of the new conception she must have of herself!” What must we think of these Fathers of the Church, these bishops, these theologians who said such things?
So... [they say that] a long work of education will have to make it clear that the liturgy is an action of God's people and the consequences will not only be liturgical, but will have a beneficial effect on the development of the sense of the Church and the birth of the various ministries at the service of the community. Various ministries that are now given to the laity... This is why each one has his ministry because each one exercises his priesthood.
No More "Rigid Uniformity"
Fifth paragraph: Unity in substance and not rigid uniformity.
Obviously, the rigid uniformity, that's aimed at us! Unity in substance, you'll see what kind of unity in substance!
We must recognize that this principle represents a real break with the past. For centuries the Church has wanted that in the Roman rite worship happens with perfect uniformity. The two liturgical reforms - at least they were clear! They did not deceive people, like [today] when many bishops say: "But there have been other reforms in the Church. This is not the first reform, this Vatican reform. There was that of St. Pius V, and there was the Gregorian reform in the 8th century"... - these two liturgical reforms, that of the 8th century and that of the 16th century, had precisely this purpose (this perfect uniformity). The six liturgical books published in the typical edition from 1568 to 1614 were for four centuries the Church's prayer code, which no one was allowed to add to or take away from.
In 1587, Sixtus V established the Sacred Congregation of Rites as the supreme organ for the conservation of sacred rites. (Not for the change of sacred rites: for the conservation of sacred rites). And the seven volumes that gather about 5,000 decrees from this Dicastery up to the present day bear witness to the scrupulous care with which that supreme authority defended the law of the unique form of prayer for the whole Church.
5000 decrees!
Nevertheless, he [Bugnini] decided that today the social, religious and cultural conditions have changed so much. That people are in the process of developing and opening up to the light of the Gospel, that they strongly feel the need not to abandon what constitutes an authentic expression of their own soul and a heritage often still untouched – as a matter of fact!... - linked to deeply rooted usage and customs.
With five or six sentences, the whole past is sent packing, and Bugnini invents his normative Mass and the whole liturgy is overturned, and it is necessary to adapt the liturgical language to all peoples, to suppress the liturgical language... It is frightening!
A New Definition of Tradition
We see once more these principles on the subject of untainted tradition and legitimate progress, in chapter six:
Quote:It has been written that true Tradition, in great things, is not to redo what many others have done, but to find the spirit that caused things to be done [in one way] and in a completely different way in different times.
Like this, we can do anything! It is enough to find the spirit of Tradition, which would do things completely differently in other times! This is what he calls Tradition!
Recovering the spirit, a work of research - sure! It is a question of revision, natural spontaneity, study, meditation, prayer. To rediscover the spirit and make it speak to the rite the language of our own time, so that today's man can understand that language, which once used to be mysterious and sacred..
With that, it's all over, we can do whatever we want! That is the spirit in which these Liberals talk and act. So he [Bugnini] practically imposed his reform on Paul VI. Why do I say “imposed”? Because Paul VI himself criticized it. He criticized Bugnini's reform. He criticized, in particular and publicly, the absence of the exorcism [prayers] in baptism. He said "I don't know why the exorcisms of baptism were removed.” And, secondly, he also expressed regrets about the change of the Offertory in Mass.
Abnormal Times
From John XXIII onwards, we can say that we are no longer in a normal time of the Church. We no longer have normal popes, popes who have this clear vision of principles, of faith, of Tradition, of their duty... of their duty, which Pope Pius IX said about the First Vatican Council, the duty of “non proponere doctrinam novam neque ex cogitare revelationes, sed revelata exponere et custodire.” [For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.] And the popes have always condemned the comparison that could be made between human science and the science of faith. It's not the same thing. As much as human science can evolve and progress, the science of faith progresses only in its definition, in its expression, but not in its substance. Because revelation was completed after the death of the last apostle and it is then the role of the Church to define, from the death of the last apostle to our time, to define what is in revelation, that is all. And keep revelation, keep the deposit.
Yet, this is one idea that these liberal popes, and all these liberals do not have, this permanence of revelation, this immutability of revelation, [instead] they always talk about progress, the adaptation of mankind to modern things...
So if these popes give us something, the acts they give us are not given... I conclude that these acts which come to us from Rome, which come to us from those popes who, once again, are surrounded - for it is Rome which is occupied by liberalism, it is not only the Pope who is liberal. He is surrounded by people even more liberal than himself. So there is a whole group in Rome now, which did not exist in the past, and which cannot give us laws in the same way the popes used to give us before, because they no longer have the true Catholic spirit on this subject. They do not have a clearly Catholic conception of infallibility, the immutability of dogma, the permanence of Tradition, the permanence of Revelation, or even, I would say, doctrinal obedience. With all that pluralism they always talk about, and then this religious indifference, see, this tendency to want to make almost part of the Church all those who make some reference to Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Blurred Lines
So the limits of the Church become blurred. They no longer have a clear definition of the Church. Everything becomes blurred. We don't know where it ends anymore. As Cardinal Weismann, whose letter was read to you, said, there are no longer limits to the Church.
So all these notions that they have, you see, prevent them from defining acts with exactly the same conditions and the same approach as the popes did in former times. It seems to me that is clear. And that is why we are all in an unbelievable confusion.
So if we want to reason with the same logical principles of yesteryear, principles, I’d say, that have always been used, a principle like “the Pope cannot give us anything contrary to faith and morals, not even implicitly, in liturgical acts and disciplinary matters”, then we must choose:
- Either there is something bad in what they gave us, and so they are not popes.
- Or they are popes and therefore we must obey, and that’s it. There is no intermediate situation.
But that's not true. That is not true. We are faced with a new situation in the Church because of the introduction of this liberal and modernist spirit into the higher levels of the Church. That is a fact. No one can deny that. The modernists and liberals have no conception of the Church, nor of infallibility, nor of the obligation of infallibility, nor of faith itself, of the immutability of faith, which is that of the Church, which is that of the Church herself.
Essentially Incoherent
So if we ask them each question in particular, they will say “oh yes, oh yes, we believe like the Church does..”, but in reality, no, they don't act like they have that faith. And this is typical for the Liberal, as defined by Cardinal Bio: “The Liberal Catholic is essentially incoherent.” What does incoherence mean? Well, he says one thing, but he does the opposite. He says one thing, but in practice he has other principles. So he is in a continuous inconsistency.
That's what causes these popes to be double-faced in a way. This was said very explicitly of Paul VI, but it may as well be said of John Paul II. Double-faced. So at certain times, [they have a] Catholic face: “But of course, look there, the Pope is traditional, he does this, he does that..” But then a little later we see the other face, with his ecumenism, with religious freedom, with human rights and all that..
So how do we reconcile all this? This is why Pope Pius IX dared to say that the Church's worst enemies were liberal Catholics. He’s very harsh on them, this Pope Pius IX. You will find this in the quotations, in Fr. Roussel’s little book on Liberal Catholicism. There are many quotes from Pope Pius IX about Catholics, quotes that are not found in the official acts of Pius IX. He evidently took them from Roman documents, but regardless, they’re all from Pope Pius IX, but these are documents that one can't find, that one can hardly find anywhere else. He is very hard on Liberal Catholics. And we must understand - while not saying that they are all excommunicated, that they are all heretical, no... he could have said that, Pope Pius IX, but he did not say that “all liberal Catholics are heretics, all liberal Catholics are excommunicated.” No! [Neither did he say that] “they are the worst enemies of the Church, therefore he should excommunicate them anyway and say that they are schismatic” No, for the exact reason that they are always borderline, sometimes they affirm their Catholic faith, and later on they destroy the Catholic faith with their actions. They share common ground with the enemies of the Church... There's nothing worse than that! This is the worst misfortune that can befall the Church, this kind of continuous betrayal, continuous back and forth...
Pope Honorius
So we find ourselves in historical circumstances like these. What can we do about it?
When Pope Honorius was condemned, he was condemned as Pope. And yet, the Council of Constantinople – I believe it was Pope Leo II, although I’m not sure - condemned Pope Honorius for favoring heresy. He didn’t say “he favored heresy, so he was no longer the Pope.” No. And neither did he say "since he was the pope, you had to obey him and accept what he said.” No, because he condemned him! So what did [Catholics] have to do then? Well, one had to admit that Pope Honorius was the Pope, but one did not have to follow him because he favoured heresy!
Isn't that the conclusion then? That seems to me the normal conclusion. Well, we're in that situation. One day these popes will be condemned by their successors. One day the truth will return. It is not possible, this error which is truly at the base of the whole [new] liturgy, the principles of the [new] liturgy and the principles of [new] Canon Law, that the Church is defined by all the people of God who participate in the priesthood of Our Lord, and that each one, according to his ministry, fulfills his duties in the Church... This is the confusion of the Church! The confusion of the priesthood!
They Say One Thing, They Do the Opposite
So they say “but look here, in the Council..”, and so they speak of the Council, so the Council says explicitly that “there is an essential difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the priesthood of priests.” This is explicitly stated in the Council, in the Constitution of the Church. But beware, continue reading the Church's document and you will see that in the following pages it is total confusion. They mix everything, the priesthood of priests and the priesthood of the faithful. That is what's inconceivable, you see!
In the document of religious freedom, you will find it stated that “this doctrine changes nothing of traditional doctrine.” So you will say to me that “therefore this scheme is in conformity with the traditional doctrine since it is explicitly stated in the decree..” Ok, but in the whole decree, everything is contrary to traditional doctrine! That's how it is! We can’t fault them like that: “What did you say? That Canon Law, the definition of the Church, the priesthood of priests, the priesthood of the faithful is mixed, and there are no more distinctions?... But take the clerics [for example]... There are still clerics, and clerics are always well defined in the new Canon Law, and they do say that the priesthood of the faithful is different from that of clerics.” Yes, they do say that, and they can tell us that if we object to them, but in practice they will act, both in the liturgy and in the whole of Canon Law, they will act as if there is no distinction. That is what is scary.
The munus docendi [duty to teach], the munus sanctificandi [duty to sanctify] is now given to the people of God, and not only to priests! But regardless, it was Our Lord who said to the apostles "go and teach”. The munus docendi, there is indeed the Ecclesia docens and the Ecclesia dicens. All the same, there is this distinction, which has always been there in the Church, until now. So now, no, it's over, it's all Ecclesia docens, since the munus docendi is clearly in Canon Law, it's given to all the people of God! So where's the Ecclesia dicens? She disappeared...
Munus Docendi, Santificandi, Regendi
So, in this article of the Osservatore Romano, of 17 March 1984 you will find this: “The role of the laity in the new law.” Incredible, incredible!
It is with the same contempt that they treat the past, the same contempt as Bugnini who said: “They were passively present, the faithful at Mass, etc.” Here it is the same thing:
Quote:The new Law poses problems for canonical doctrine and raises questions, fundamental problems on what the constitution of the Church is, in the determination of which, in the recent past, the legal figure of the laity “appariera assai sfumata” - I don't know if you guess, the term itself is very... like a kind of... who will translate it for me? there, the Italians... - the legal figure of the layman appeared rather vaporous... sfumata... as a smoke... even non-existent....
The laity were therefore non-existent in Canon Law. But all Canon Law has been made for the faithful! All that was said for priests was to sanctify the faithful! So, because there were not more pages on the laity than on priests and the hierarchy of the Church, so then “the laity were fuzzy and practically non-existent.” That's unbelievable!
So really, they can imagine that for twenty centuries the Church has made rules, the Church has had a Law, the Church has promulgated a magnificent Canon Law, promulgated by the Holy Pope Pius X, and all the rest, and then the laity, the faithful did not exist! When did you ever read such things? In the Osservatore Romano, in the official journal of Rome, of the Church!
So now, on the contrary, the new Canon Law is in the context of an image of the Church – at that time, it was still the image of the Church, and seemed to uniquely coincide with that of the hierarchy. – ..
As if the Church consisted only in the hierarchy! In a way, this is somewhat true, according to the definition of the Church that Pope Pius X gave: "The Church is composed of clergy and lay people, and the clergy are responsible for sanctifying the laity, teaching and directing them". It is true that powers and duties are given to the clergy. The good God wanted it so, for the sanctification of the laity, for the spiritual uplifting of the laity, and not for the pleasure of the clergy itself. That's clear, so that's perfectly normal.
Then there is only one thing that bothers them a little bit, in the total assimilation of the laity and the clergy, so for the munus docendi, the parents teach their children and everyone teaches... So everybody teaches, not only the clergy, but also the laity! For the munus sanctificandi, and well now the laity give communion, even lay people can preach eventually, so there is also the munus, both docendi and sanctificandi.
And finally, munus regendi [duty to shepherd], it's a little more complicated for them to give that! They don't really want to share power with the laity... He says so explicitly:
Quote:For munus regendi, it's a little more difficult. “Si pensi solo a fare un exempio”, as an example obviously there are things that are not yet quite adapted in Canon Law... “al delicato problema dei repororti a ordine sacro e munus regendi in relatione ad ad eventutuello titolarita di uffici comportanti di potesta juridictione della parte dei laïci”.
So there’s a difficulty here. It is a bit complicated to think that we could give the laity power of jurisdiction. But finally, that too will come... They'll find a solution!
Judging in Exceptional Context
See, I think that's where our whole problem lies. We live in an exceptional time. We cannot judge everything that is done in the Church according to normal times. We find ourselves in an exceptional situation, it is also necessary to interpret the principles that should govern our ecclesiastical superiors. These principles, we must see them in the minds of those who live today, those principles that were so clear in the past, so simple, that no one was discussing them, that we did not have the opportunity to discuss them, they fail, I would say, in the minds of the Liberals, in the minds, as I explained to you, that have no clarity of vision... It changes the situation. We are in a situation of unbelievable confusion. So let's not draw mathematical conclusions like that, without considering these circumstances. Because then we make mistakes:
- Either we endorse the revolution in the Church, and participate in the destruction of the Church, and we leave with the progressives
- Or we leave the Church completely and find ourselves where? Who with? What with? How would we be linked to the apostles, how connected to the origins of the Church? Gone... and how long is this going to last? So if the last three conclaves should no longer be considered valid, as those in America say who have consecrated their own bishops, and if then there is no longer a Pope, and if are no more cardinals either.. ? We don't see how we could once more obtain a legitimate pope... No! That's a complete mess!
So it seems to me that we must stay on this course of common sense, and of the direction which also agrees with the good sense of the faithful, the sense of faith of the faithful, who in 90% of the cases follow the orientations of the Society and would not understand either one or the other.
They don't want to go over to the progressives and then go to the new Mass and accept all the changes. That, they don't accept at all, saying that if anyone is so inclined, let them go then, but we don't want to. We remain as we are now, we want to keep Tradition. But neither do we want to separate ourselves completely from the Pope, [saying] "There is no longer a pope, there is no longer anything, there is no more authority, we don't know to whom we are attached, there is no more Rome, there is no more Catholic Church". That [solution] doesn’t work either. They are lost too, they feel lost, they are disoriented.
Sensus Fidei
So they keep this sense of faith, the sense that Providence gives to the good faithful and to today’s good priests, [this sense] to keep the faith, to stay put, to keep their attachment to Rome as well and to remain faithful to the apostolicity, to the visibility of the Church, which are essential things, even if they do not follow the Popes when they favour heresy, as Pope Honorius did. He's been convicted. Those who would have followed Pope Honorius at that time would have been mistaken since he was condemned afterwards.
So then, I believe that we would be misled in actually following the Popes in what they are doing... but they will probably also one day be condemned by the ecclesiastical authority.
God Does Not Bless Liars
I would like to insist on those things. It is difficult, I recognize that this is a truly painful situation, but it is unfortunate to see our confreres acting, I would say, so lightly and certainly those American confreres who have left us with a disloyalty that is inconceivable and beyond imagination: deceiving us right up to the moment of their priesthood, to sign commitments, to promise to remain faithful to the Society, to promise me obedience when I ordain them... and 48 hours later, saying goodbye and then leaving us [saying] “I don't know you anymore!” I think that these priests live in a state of continual mortal sin! It's not possible, you can't renounce your word like that, at that point, for such sacred things as ordination! To steal the ordination in a way, by a continuous lie, by continuous disloyalty, until the last minute, until the very moment of ordination, to say "yes" to the question "do you accept obedience?", and 48 hours later, to leave. It is not possible! In front of God, that's not possible! That's such a lie! God cannot allow things like that and bless such situations! That's not possible!
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: HNOMNZXOSRGQ7NLB2MBXQ5R3II.jpg]](https://www.infobae.com/new-resizer/e0gAJ38YfHVm-8Wut2OPqPCccUg=/992x558/filters:format(webp):quality(85)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/infobae/HNOMNZXOSRGQ7NLB2MBXQ5R3II.jpg)
![[Image: mother-of-sorrows-holding-Christ-s-body.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/9MZCK0P9/mother-of-sorrows-holding-Christ-s-body.jpg)
![[Image: Capture.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/gkCs8LD8/Capture.png)
![[Image: xNazareCliff.jpg.pagespeed.ic.bGZQYgWeib.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xNazareCliff.jpg.pagespeed.ic.bGZQYgWeib.webp)
![[Image: xfuas.jpg.pagespeed.ic.l_mo_hDdKq.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xfuas.jpg.pagespeed.ic.l_mo_hDdKq.webp)
![[Image: xNuestra-Sra-de-Nazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.XVLof5nDKv.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xNuestra-Sra-de-Nazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.XVLof5nDKv.webp)
