| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 292 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 289 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
Pius XII’s Fatima vision ...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:55 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 72
|
A Masonic Echo in Dignita...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:13 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 71
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:09 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 182
|
After Fifty Years, Archbi...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:56 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 54
|
Archbishop Viganò: Messag...
Forum: Archbishop Viganò
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:41 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 77
|
Daily pilgrimage to purga...
Forum: For the Souls in Purgatory
Last Post: SAguide
11-04-2024, 07:38 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 4,971
|
Prominent COVID jab criti...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
11-04-2024, 07:58 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 106
|
Twenty-fourth Sunday afte...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 07:17 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 8,113
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 07:10 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 4,936
|
From Fr. Shouppe's 'Purga...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 06:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 100
|
|
|
| Pope Francis changes Opus Dei, says a bishop can no longer lead it |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-23-2022, 04:57 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
 |
Pope Francis changes Opus Dei, says a bishop can no longer lead it
Uncertainty remains among commentators on the motu proprio and whether it is intended as a punitive measure by Pope Francis.
![[Image: Opus-Dei-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Opus-Dei-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis with Monsignor Fernando Ocáriz Braña (L) and Monsignor Mariano Fazio ®,
the Prelate and Auxiliary Vicar of Opus Dei respectively.
Jul 22, 2022
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis has issued a motu proprio stipulating that the personal prelature of Opus Dei will no longer be led by a bishop, saying that “a form of government based more on charism than on hierarchical authority is needed.”
The Pontiff’s motu proprio, entitled “Ad charisma tuendum,” was published by the Holy See July 22, having been approved by Francis July 14, and is due to take effect August 4 by publication in L’Osservatore Romano.
Francis wrote that the motu proprio is centered on his recent reforms of the Roman Curia in Praedicate evangelium, and is “intended to confirm the Prelature of Opus Dei in the authentically charismatic sphere of the Church, specifying its organization in keeping with the witness of the Founder, St. Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, and the teachings of conciliar ecclesiology about personal prelatures.”
‘Government based more on charism than on hierarchical authority’
In a number of changes to Opus Dei’s constitution, which was issued by Pope John Paul II in 1982, Francis announced that it would no longer be led by a bishop, citing the reason that it was to protect the personal prelature’s “specific charism.” He referenced a need for a “form of government based more on charism than on hierarchical authority”:
Quote:With full respect for the nature of the specific charism described by the above-mentioned Apostolic Constitution, it is intended to strengthen the conviction that, for the protection of the peculiar gift of the Spirit, a form of government based more on charism than on hierarchical authority is needed. Therefore, the Prelate will not be honored or insignificant with the episcopal order.
While the prelate leading Opus Dei will no longer be a bishop, Francis nevertheless granted “the use of the title of Supernumerary Apostolic Protonotary with the title of Reverend Monsignor” so that he may use “the insignia corresponding to this title.”
Moved to Dicastery for Clergy
Referencing Praedicate evangelium and Canon Law, Francis announced that the personal prelature of Opus Dei would no longer be under the purview of the Dicastery for Bishops but will now be under the Dicastery for Clergy.
The Dicastery for Clergy is currently led by Cardinal-designate Lazarus You Heung-sik, a Korean prelate currently on the rise in the Bergoglian Vatican, having been appointed to the Dicastery for Bishops on July 13 and to the Congregation for Divine Worship on June 1.
Cardinal Heung-sik has defended synodality as “the very form” of the Church and said that “we need to think out the relation between ordained priesthood and baptismal priesthood to find new forms of ‘ministeriality’ allowing the Church to go out to meet the world” in a “renewed” way of evangelization.
Uncertainty over motu proprio’s intended effect
Opus Dei responded positively to the motu proprio, writing that “[w]ith the progressive maturation and assimilation of the Council’s teachings on the hierarchical and charismatic gifts, it will become increasingly clear that, far from being in opposition to each other, in Opus Dei they are complementary realities.”
Opinions have been divided about the motu proprio’s intended effect upon Opus Dei. Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine observed that “having it not led by a bishop will likely further the pope’s goal of centralization of the Church around the Vatican. Now OD [Opus Dei] will need to contact Rome for any episcopal tasks.”
Quote:The argument was always “If Opus Dei has a bishop, why can’t the Traditional orders like FSSP or ICK have a bishop?” Francis is fearful that groups with a bishop on top have “break-away powers” like Abp. Lefebvre (not that Opus Dei would break away – they are tight with Francis). https://t.co/4TDAC135Br
— Dr Taylor Marshall™️ (@TaylorRMarshall) July 22, 2022
[...] However, not all are of the opinion that the motu proprio is intended as a punitive measure. Indeed, Opus Dei is somewhat different from other groups – particularly traditional orders which have been the recipient of recent papal restrictions – being noted more for its “exaggerated loyalty” to the Pope than for any criticism of him.
In recent years, LifeSiteNews has been constantly reporting on doctrinal and moral irregularities which are present in Opus Dei’s ranks.
In 2017, Monsignor Mariano Fazio, the group’s Vicar General and second in common, accused signatories of the filial correction correcting Pope Francis for his “effectively upheld 7 heretical positions,” of launching an “attack [on] the pope.”
In 2021, the Swiss bishop and member of Opus Dei Bishop Joseph Bonnemain declared he supported same-sex “marriage” and that he has “nothing against” it.
Speaking to LifeSite’s Maike Hickson shortly after, Dr. Gerard van den Aardweg, a Dutch psychologist and expert on questions of homosexuality, rebuked Opus Dei for remaining silent in the face of Pope Francis’ own support of civil unions.
Indeed, Opus Dei expelled Father Jesusmary Missigbètò for his open letters highlighting Pope Francis’ “heresies” and calling Francis to repent. The Pope responded by censoring Fr. Missigbètò and banning him from public ministry.
Dr. van den Aardweg suggested that Opus Dei’s treatment of the priest “seems to indicate that his superiors, very probably in line with the leadership in Rome, reject criticism of the Pope.”
He accused Opus Dei leadership of an “unwillingness to accept justified criticism of the Pope” which “indicates indirect complicity with the destructive course of this Pope with respect to an essential point of morality.”
|
|
|
| Cdl. Gregory restricts Latin Mass, bans traditional sacraments |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-23-2022, 04:48 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Archbishop Lefebvre: “Availing ourselves of the Indult is tantamount to putting ourselves into a state of contradiction because at the same time that Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or Le Barroux Abbey and other groups authorization to say the Mass of All Time, they also require young priests to sign a profession of faith in which the spirit of the Council must be accepted. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is embodied in the New Mass. How is it possible to desire to preserve the Mass of all time while accepting the spirit that destroys this Mass of All Time? It is completely contradictory. One day, very gently, they will oblige those who have been granted the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Time, also to accept the New Mass. And they will tell them that it is simply a matter of squaring themselves with what they have signed, since they signed a statement that they accepted the spirit of the Council and its reforms. You cannot put yourself thus into an unbelievable, irrational contradiction. It is a very uncomfortable situation. This is what has created the difficulty for these groups that have signed it and that currently find themselves in a kind of impasse." (Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990) sspx.org/en/archbishop-lefebvre-indult-mass
Cdl. Gregory restricts Latin Mass, bans traditional sacraments in ‘vindictive, heartless’ decree
Cardinal Gregory issued a six-page decree banning all traditional sacraments apart from the Mass, which is now to be only weekly and in three specific churches in the archdiocese.
![[Image: wilton-gregory-1-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/wilton-gregory-1-810x500.jpg)
Cardinal Wilton Gregory
Archdiocese of Washington/Facebook
Fri Jul 22, 2022
WASHINGTON D.C. (LifeSiteNews [emphasis mine]) — Cardinal Wilton Gregory has placed severe restrictions on the Traditional Mass in his Archdiocese of Washington, limiting the sacred liturgy to three churches, to be celebrated only on Sundays, and completely banning the traditional sacraments.
In a decree issued July 22, Cardinal Wilton Gregory outlined his implementation of Pope Francis’ 2021 restrictions on the Latin Mass as contained in Traditionis custodes. He referenced Francis’ purported desire to “bring about greater unity in the Church through the celebration of the Mass and sacraments according to the 1970 Roman Missal of Pope Paul VI, which was the fruit of the renewal in the liturgy which the Second Vatican Council called for.”
The new rules take effect September 21, 2022 and have been described as among some of the harshest since the promulgation of Traditionis custodes. They are due to be reviewed after three years, prompting some to downplay fears that a new ban on the traditional Mass might be announced next May.
Beginning his roster of restrictions, Gregory ordered that “[a]ll priests, deacons and instituted ministers need to request and receive permission from the Archbishop of Washington” to celebrate the traditional Mass under the 1962 missal. This directive is for both public and private Masses, and applies throughout the archdiocese.
Drawing from Traditionis custodes, Gregory decreed that all clerics who make this request, which must be in writing, are to “explicitly affirm in writing ‘the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs’.”
Furthermore, in a move particularly affecting priests of traditional orders – such as the Fraternity of Saint Peter or the Institute of Christ the King – clergy wishing to say the traditional Mass must “demonstrate an appreciation ‘of the value of concelebration, particularly at the Chrism Mass’.”
Mass limited to Sundays in only three churches
Instead of the current provision of regular Sunday and mid-week Masses in the archdiocese, Gregory decreed that the traditional Mass would take place only on Sundays, and then in three churches only:
- The Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in D.C.
- The chapel at St. John the Evangelist in Forest Glen, Maryland.
- The mission church of St. Dominic in Aquasco, Maryland.
In addition to this, the possibility of celebrating key parts of the Church’s liturgical year with the traditional Mass is ruled out, as Gregory expressly ordered the use of the “liturgical books promulgated by Pope St Paul VI and Saint John Paul II,” the Novus Ordo, to be the only ones used at “Christmas, the Triduum, Easter Sunday, and Pentecost Sunday.”
Critics were swift to point out the instant effect of having to move locations, with Urban Hannon noting that the Franciscan monastery – known for being “liberal” – only seats around 60 people, a number too small even for the usual crowd of children at one of the current Sunday Masses.
Readings in English, no traditional sacraments and ad orientem
Continuing his litany of restrictions, which he claimed were in the interests of “unity,” Gregory ordered that any Mass said in the traditional form must have the Scripture readings (Epistle and Gospel) proclaimed in “the vernacular.”
Even the content of the homily at such Masses has been curtailed by Gregory as he stipulated that it “reflect the norms and directions for preaching indicated by the Second Vatican Council and post-conciliar documents.”
However, the traditional Sunday celebration of the Eucharist is to be the only sacrament using the 1962 liturgical books which is allowed in the archdiocese, under the terms of the decree. Gregory wrote that “[a]ll other sacraments [that is, baptism, confirmation, marriage, etc.] are to celebrated using the liturgical books promulgated by Pope St Paul VI and Saint John Paul II.”
Gregory wrote that these sacraments may be offered in the Latin language.
Furthermore, the cardinal appeared to violate even the rubrics of the Novus Ordo in stipulating that every Novus Ordo Mass was to be celebrated facing the people, unless permission was obtained from the Archbishop of Washington.
Decree is among the ‘most restrictive, vindictive, heartless, and pastorally cruel’
Reactions to the decree have been swift and strong, with Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine criticizing Gregory along with Chicago’s Cardinal Blase Cupich for their respective new restrictions — and rumored forthcoming restrictions — on the traditional Mass.
“Our Lord did not mince words when it came to condemning religious leaders who bind heavy burdens on men’s shoulders,” Sammons said. “We should do likewise: Cardinals Cupich and Gregory are wicked, wicked men.”
Commenting on the decree, liturgical scholar and theologian Dr. Peter Kwasniewski described it as “among the most restrictive, vindictive, heartless, and pastorally cruel.” Describing Gregory’s move as deliberate and unnecessary, Kwasniewski said it “reflects his personal desire to ghettoize and reduce the traditional Catholics.”
In further comments to LifeSite, Kwasniewski expanded upon the impact of the ruling, predicting among the faithful “a new sense of abandonment by the shepherds and a determined zeal to fight for tradition will be born out of these restrictions, one that will bring us right back to the dark days of the 1970s.” [...]
Contrary to Gregory’s written aim of “unity,” the decree will “increase distrust, harm unity, and undermine peace,” said Kwasniewski, all of which “will further estrange the most faithful and generous Catholics from church institutions and give them reason to take their money, their time, [and] their families elsewhere than the mainstream.”
Gregory ‘rejected’ pleas not to restrict the traditional Mass
Writing for the traditional Catholic blog Rorate Caeli, Kenneth Wolfe – a parishioner of over 26 years at the traditional Mass community at the Saint Mary Mother of God parish – described how Gregory “rejected” offers and requests from numerous clergy in the archdiocese not to issue the decree.
“So much for dialogue,” he wrote. “It is almost as if the whole thing was a game, where the cardinal laughed at groveling traditional Catholics while he continued to protect Holy Trinity, the Jesuit parish in Georgetown – a church that relishes its role as a sanctuary of heresy.”
The decree is forcing Wolfe to “say goodbye to my spiritual home,” a church which was the “the epicenter for March for Life TLMs.”
But Kwasniewski has advice for clergy in the wake of the decree, urging that “[n]o priest who understands the inherent rights of venerable and immemorial tradition and his own dignity as a priest within the Church will grovel to ask for an unnecessary ‘permission’ to continue offering the traditional Mass (at least in private), and he will generously offer traditional baptism, confession, marriage, and last rites to any who request them.”
The liturgical scholar described the current situation in the archdiocese as “a summons to guerrilla warfare.”
“If, moreover, any restriction or penalty should be imposed, it will be null and void,” he said. [...]
Gregory has a long list of anti-family, anti-life, and anti-Catholic abuses to his name, and has previously defended giving Holy Communion to pro-abortion Joe Biden in violation of Church teaching.
|
|
|
|
| What the Holy See Didn’t Critique About Germany’s Synodal Way |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-23-2022, 04:29 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
What the Holy See Didn’t Critique About Germany’s Synodal Way
By criticizing the procedure — but not the substance — of the Church in Germany’s push for radical departures from Catholic teaching,
this week’s Vatican statement left deeper concerns unaddressed.
![[Image: 2022072221078_d86b0abb0e3bf9bf65156ca6a3...87942.webp]](https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-ncregister/swp/hv9hms/media/2022072221078_d86b0abb0e3bf9bf65156ca6a3fca1fb96bd908081ba25b1feda0f09ea287942.webp)
From left, the leadership of the German Synodal way: Thomas Söding; Bishop Georg Bätzing, the president of the German Catholic bishops' conference, Irme Stetter-Karp, the new president of the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK) and Bishop Franz-Josef Bode stand for a photo before the opening meeting of the Synodal Way Feb. 3 in Frankfurt.
NCR | July 22, 2022
A clear and decisive rebuke of the German Church’s “Synodal Way” is perhaps needed now more than ever, as the process continues to hurtle toward the point of schism.
The Synodal Way has been exposed as little more than a bald-faced attempt to subvert Church teaching in order to keep with the times — in fact, its leadership has explicitly said as much, describing it as “a conscious statement against the current Catholic catechism” that “still reproaches homosexual activity as sin.” And with the head of the German bishops’ conference publicly expressing his disappointment in Pope Francis over the Holy Father’s reticence to endorse the Synodal Way’s proposals, what’s happening in Germany also threatens to undermine the very concept of synodality that undergirds the Holy Father’s signature initiative, the so-called Synod on Synodality.
But is a “clear and decisive rebuke” what the Holy See delivered yesterday with its brief, unattributed statement on the Synodal Way?
The statement emphasizes that what’s unfolding in Germany “does not have the power to compel bishops and the faithful to adopt new forms of governance and new orientations of doctrine and morals.” The Holy See added that it seemed “necessary to clarify this,” in order to “safeguard the freedom of the People of God and the exercise of the episcopal ministry,” and also warned that the Synodal Way’s attempt to push doctrinal changes at the diocesan level would “constitute a violation of ecclesial communion and a threat to the unity of the Church.”
The statement also included a dramatic excerpt from Pope Francis’ 2019 letter to the German Catholic Church at the start of the Synodal Way: “If particular Churches find themselves separated from the entire ecclesial body, they weaken, rot, and die.”
On some level, then, the statement certainly is a strong rebuke of the Synodal Way, and that’s how it has been characterized in several media accounts.
But it’s important to note what exactly the Holy See is criticizing — and notably, what it is not.
The Holy See’s criticism of the Synodal Way is entirely a procedural critique, not a substantive one. At no point in the text does the Holy See state that the Synodal Way’s signature proposals — including changing Church teaching on homosexuality, marriage, and priestly ordination — are incompatible with the Catholic faith as it has been received, understood, and taught throughout the centuries. These proposals, in and of themselves, are not the issue at hand, according to the Holy See. Instead, the statement attributes the Synodal Way’s schismatic trajectory to a misstep in ecclesial protocol.
As the Holy See wrote, “It would not be permissible to introduce new official structures or doctrines in dioceses before an agreement had been reached at the level of the universal Church.” Pushing these heterodoxical changes ahead unilaterally, and not simply advocating for heterodoxical positions in the first place, is what the Holy See warns “would constitute a violation of ecclesial communion and a threat to the unity of the Church.”
In fact, instead of calling a spade a spade and reupdating the most problematic demands for reform emanating from Germany, the Holy See statement instructs that such proposals should “flow into the synodal process of the Universal Church” — as if there hasn’t already been enough of the Rhine flowing into the Tiber — “in order to contribute to mutual enrichment and to give witness to the unity with which the Body of the Church manifests its fidelity to Christ the Lord.”
Of course, the Holy See could be taking this limited approach as a way to restrain the German Church without pushing it over the edge of outright schism — the same way someone might negotiate with a gunman who’s taken hostages. By telling the Germans their demands are off on procedural grounds instead of involving the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith — the Vatican’s SWAT Team — the Holy See may be hoping that the “Synodal Way” holds off on implementing its radical revisions and joins in with the larger Synod on Synodality, where the blow of rejecting its heterodoxical demands could be softened by pointing out their inconsistency with the wider Church.
But it’s also possible that the Holy See chose not to repudiate the Synodal Way’s heterodoxical demands on doctrinal grounds because it does not view them as inherently problematic, automatic non-starters. In fact, this interpretation aligns with deeper concerns that have been expressed regarding the universal Church’s Synod on Synodality and the way it seems to be approaching doctrinal development — as a secular parliament, where anything goes so long as it follows bureaucratic protocol.
Pope Francis has insisted that synodality is not a matter of treating the Church as some kind of democratic bureaucracy. But when the Holy See is only able to muster up a critique of the German Synodal Way along the lines that it effectively risks violating parliamentary procedure, and encourages its proponents to bring their calls for radical revision to “the synodal process of the Universal Church,” it’s unlikely that concerns about the underlying ecclesiology of the Synod on Synodality will be lessened. True unity in the Church, after all, is not simply a matter of shared procedural timelines or mutual bureaucratic belonging. It requires unity of faith, shared assent to what God has revealed and the Church has authoritatively taught, only possible through Christ’s gift of grace.
But the Synod on Synodality hasn’t emphasized this dimension of ecclesial union. Its organizers have been willing to platform and promote perspectives at odds with established Church teaching. In fact, in a truly shocking instance, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, relator general of the entire Synod, has publicly declared the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is “false” and must undergo a grundrevision. That the Holy See was unwilling to repudiate the German Synodal Path heterodoxical views on doctrinal grounds is unsurprising, considering such a central figure in the Synod on Synodality shares at least some of them, and has yet to be repudiated himself.
Those concerned with Germany’s Synodal Way and — by extension — the Synod on Synodality, may have hoped for a stronger intervention from the Holy See, one that repudiated what’s going on in Germany not just along procedural lines, but doctrinal ones as well.
But given that German-backers of the Synodal Way are already downplaying the Holy See’s intervention, the Vatican may soon feel the need to weigh in with stronger medicine. When and if it does, it will be a moment to not only call out the doctrinal errors in Germany, but to clarify for the Universal Church that there can be no synodality without shared fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic faith.
|
|
|
|
| Dr. Birx Admits She And Fauci Made Up 'The Science' On Lockdowns, Social Distancing |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-22-2022, 06:27 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- Replies (2)
|
|
Dr. Birx Admits She And Fauci Made Up 'The Science' On Lockdowns, Social Distancing
![[Image: birx%202.jpg?itok=kQnIEwk_]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/birx%202.jpg?itok=kQnIEwk_)
ZH | JUL 21, 2022
President Trump's former Covid-19 adviser Dr. Deborah Birx has made several stunning admissions of late - first telling the Daily Mail that Covid-19 "came out of the box ready to infect" when it hit Wuhan, China in 2019 - and that it may have been created by Chinese scientists who were "working on coronavirus vaccines."
But it goes further than that.
As Fox News' Jesse Waters lays out, Birx admitted in her new book that she and Dr. Anthony Fauci were essentially shooting from the hip when it came to national directives such as "two weeks to stop the spread," and social distancing requirements.
According to Waters, Birx "admitted to making things up," adding that she and Fauci "were lying to the president and to the American people about their COVID protocols."
With the first lie; '15 days to stop the spread' - Birx writes "No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of the two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it."
"So that 15 days to slow the spread was just a sneaky way to get their hooks into us, so they could lock us down for longer," Waters opines. "And if you dared to leave your house, Birx told us, the only way to stay safe was to social distance."
To that end, Birx writes that she "I had settled on 10 (feet) knowing that even that was too many, but I figured that ten would at least be palatable for most Americans - high enough to allow for most gatherings of immediate family but not enough for large dinner parties and, critically, large weddings, birthday parties, and other mass social events..."
Watch:
Quote:"Scarf Lady" committed scientific fraud and misled the president and the nation into unnecessary lock-downs and restrictions based on the false presumption that the virus spread among health people (asymptomatic spread) that was disproved by Cao et al Madewell et al. pic.twitter.com/Doeion4tu7
— Peter McCullough, MD MPH (@P_McCulloughMD) July 20, 2022
|
|
|
|
| Abp. Viganò: Catholics have ‘sacred and urgent duty’ to resist Cdl. Cupich’s Latin Mass crackdown |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-21-2022, 03:21 PM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Abp. Viganò: Catholics have ‘sacred and urgent duty’ to resist Cdl. Cupich’s Latin Mass crackdown
Indeed, every baptized person has the right to attend Holy Mass and to be administered the Sacraments in the form that
Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum acknowledged may never be abrogated.
Jul 20, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Blase Cupich, with the bureaucratic authoritarianism that distinguishes the officials of the Bergoglian church, has ordered the Canons of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest who carry out their ministry in the Archdiocese of Chicago to suspend all public functions in the ancient rite beginning at the end of the month of July, revoking the faculties granted to them in accordance with the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.
It is obvious to anyone that this decision is intended to prevent the exercise of a right that no ecclesiastical authority can deny, a fortiori conditioning it on the acceptance of doctrinal and liturgical principles that are in blatant conflict with the immutable Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Indeed, every baptized person has the right to attend Holy Mass and to be administered the Sacraments in the form that Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum acknowledged may never be abrogated. Depriving the faithful of Chicago of their right is a very grave abuse, and the fact that Cupich’s decision is tacitly approved by the Roman Sanhedrin adds to the embezzlements of the Ordinary the confirmation of a broader plan intended to cancel throughout the entire Catholic world the sign of contradiction that is the Apostolic Mass. A sign of contradiction because its very existence is a silent condemnation of decades of doctrinal, moral, and disciplinary deviations.
It is no secret that Bergoglio has a hatred of Tradition, and that he does not miss any occasion to deride and discredit those who want to remain Catholic and are not willing to apostatize from the Faith. Just as well known are his predilections for his collaborators and confidants: they are all united by sodomy, lust for power, and corruption in financial matters. It should therefore be no surprise that one of his pupils – an intrinsic friend of the serial molester McCarrick along with other no less controversial Prelates like Donald Wuerl and Joseph Tobin – returned the favor of his undeserved promotion to the See of Chicago by showing himself to be a loyal executor of his benefactor’s orders. A promotion that – permit me to remind you – I strenuously opposed when I was serving the Holy See as Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, and that today appears even more scandalous after the disturbing revelations made by Church Militant (here and here) regarding Cupich’s involvement in the cover up of evidence related to the sexual crimes of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. And we have also learned that, while Cupich would like to see Bernardin the champion of progressivism canonized (here), there are actually very serious accusations hanging over Bernardin made by one of his abuse victims, accusations which the Congregation of Bishops, the Secretariat of State, and the Archdiocese of Chicago have never followed up on, despite the fact that these accusations mention the profanation of the Blessed Sacrament during a Satanic ritual with minors carried out in 1957 by the young priest Father Joseph Bernardin and his brother priest Father John J. Russell, who was later consecrated as a Bishop and is now deceased.
It is truly difficult, if not completely impossible, to find any justification for the decision of Cupich, who considers the celebration of the Mass of all time to be a sin of injuring the Council, but who strangely enough knows how to be indulgent and understanding towards sodomites, child molesters, abortionists, and profaners of the Eucharistic Species. Cupich pro domo sua. It is Cupich, of course, who, when he was instructed by Bergoglio to preside over the Commission on Sexual Crimes of the American Clergy and was asked about the Memorandum I issued in August 2018, commented with scandalous impudence:
Quote:“The Pope has a bigger agenda: he’s got to get on with other things, talking about the environment and protecting migrants, and carrying on the work of the Church. We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this. . . . Years ago, if a Cardinal had allowed himself to respond like this, the whole world would have come down; but today obviously times have changed. . . . Here we can also allow ourselves a bit of insolence. So much is known that the media will not tear their garments for so little.” (here and here).
You read that correctly: “For so little.” In the secular world, if a manager prevented his subordinates from doing their job and encouraged dishonest and corrupt employees by promoting them and covering up their crimes, he would be fired on the spot and asked to pay millions in compensation for the damage caused to the company’s image. Instead, on the multicolored bandwagon of the lavender mafia protected by Bergoglio, these forms of sordid complicity with evil and ferocious aversion to the Good have become the norm, confirming that moral corruption is the necessary corollary of doctrinal deviation and liturgical license. The crisis of ecclesiastical Authority – beginning from the very top – is undeniable, as confirmed by the creation of Cupich as Cardinal as well as the names of those to be given the red hat at the upcoming Consistory.
If in temporal matters civic rulers who are obedient to the deep state make use of corrupt officials to carry out the silent coup of the “Great Reset,” at the same time on the ecclesial front we see that cardinals and prelates who are no less corrupt and who are obedient to the deep church. With Bergoglio’s placet they are bringing the subversive plan of Vatican II to completion, which is destined to lead to the Religion of Humanity yearned for by Freemasonry.
But if on the one hand it is a duty to denounce and condemn the intolerable abuses of these renegades who have as their goal the destruction of the Church of Christ and the cancellation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, on the other hand it seems to me that it is necessary to reconsider how certain forms of carefree acceptance of Vatican II on the part of the Institute of Christ the King may have wrongly allowed its members to believe that Rome would have looked the other way regarding buckles and capes as long as they did not criticize the Council or the Novus Ordo.
This shows us that – beyond the impromptu ceremonial connotations that are bit too ancien régime (which however are very moderate in Chicago and in general throughout the United States) – it is the Tridentine Mass in itself that is a formidable profession of Faith and an unflinching refutation of the patched-together reformed liturgy, whether it is celebrated by an old parish pastor or a newly ordained priest, regardless of whether he wears a Roman fiddleback or a medieval chasuble. It is that Mass, and the Mass par excellence, celebrated in the one Rite that is truly extraordinary, not because it is occasional but because it is incomparably superior to the Protestantized imitation that is the Montinian rite, which a Curé of Ars would have looked upon with horror.
This Mass, the Mass of the Holy Church, the Mass of the Apostles and Martyrs of all times, our Mass – this is the Mass that truly causes them scandal. It is not Roman birettas and bows that scandalize them; it is not the mozzettas and rochets that scandalize them. The real thing that scandalizes them is the Catholic Mass, and this is what they rail against, with the rage of heretics – the same people who preach “welcoming” and “inclusivity,” which applies to everyone without condition except for good priests and faithful laity. In reality, this ought to be enough to convince us to totally ignore the last dying wheezes of a Hierarchy that is blinded in both intellect and will because it is alien to Grace.
This umpteenth show of strength by Cupich, who is cynical and ruthless towards the faithful even before the Canons of the Institute of Christ the King, can constitute a healthy moment of reflection on the many omissions and equivocations that need to be clarified, especially in the matter of acceptance of the Conciliar mens and the Bergoglian “magisterium.” I trust that the Canons of Christ the King and all of the Ecclesia Dei institutes will be able to see in these days of trial a precious opportunity for purification, courageously witnessing to the necessary coherence between the profession of Faith and its cultic expression in the Mass, and the consequent irreconcilability between these and the doctrinal and liturgical deviations of Vatican II. Because it is not possible to celebrate the Mass of Saint Pius V and at the same time to accept the errors of its enemies.
Cupich knows this very well, and this is why he wants to prevent the celebration of that Mass. He knows how much that Mass is a very powerful exorcism against the servants of the devil, both those who wear miters and those who do not. He knows how immediately that Mass is understandable to anyone for its supernatural sense of the sacred and divine – the mysterium tremendum of Moses before the burning bush – and how that Mass opens the eyes of the faithful, warms their hearts, and enlightens their minds. After decades of unspeakable torments, the faithful are finally able to approach the Majesty of God, to be converted, to change their lives, to educate their children in holiness, and to spread the Faith by their example. What could be more desirable for a Bishop who is truly a Shepherd of the Sheep entrusted to him by the Lord? And what could be more detestable for those who want to see the Sheep be torn to pieces by wolves or fall into the abyss?
The lay faithful, priests, and Bishops have the sacred and urgent duty to rise up against the decisions of these completely discredited characters and to demand, without yielding an inch, that the venerable Tridentine Liturgy remain an inviolable bulwark of doctrine, morality, and spirituality. We must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29), especially when these men have demonstrated by their reprehensible conduct, that they do not love either God or their brothers in the Faith.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
20 July 2022
|
|
|
|
| Vatican warning: Germany's ‘Synodal Way’ poses ‘threat to the unity of the Church’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-21-2022, 02:53 PM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Vatican warning: Germany's ‘Synodal Way’ poses ‘threat to the unity of the Church’
NCR [adapted] | Jul 21, 2022
The Vatican has issued another warning of a new schism from Germany coming out of the “Synodal Way."
“The ‘Synodal Way’ in Germany does not have the power to compel bishops and the faithful to adopt new forms of governance and new orientations of doctrine and morals,” the Vatican said in an official statement published in Italian and German on Thursday.
The Holy See said it seemed “necessary to clarify” this, in order to “safeguard the freedom of the People of God and the exercise of the episcopal ministry."
The Vatican warned: “It would not be permissible to introduce new official structures or doctrines in dioceses before an agreement had been reached at the level of the universal Church, which would constitute a violation of ecclesial communion and a threat to the unity of the Church.”
The “Synodal Way” — Synodaler Weg in German, sometimes translated as “Synodal Path” — is a controversial process initiated by Cardinal Reinhard Marx. Organized by the German Bishops' Conference together with the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), its aim is to discuss four main topics: the way power is exercised in the Church; the priesthood; the role of women, and sexual morality.
Writing about the process, Pope Francis warned of disunity in his letter to German Catholics in 2019.
Cardinal Walter Kasper, a German theologian considered close to Pope Francis, in June 2022 warned that the German process is at risk of “breaking its own neck” if it does not heed the objections raised by a growing number of bishops around the world.
In April, more than 100 cardinals and bishops from around the world released a "fraternal open letter" to Germany's bishops, warning that sweeping changes to Church teaching advocated by the process may lead to schism.
In March, an open letter from the Nordic bishops expressed alarm at the German process, and in February, a strongly-worded letter from the president of Poland’s Catholic bishops' conference raised serious concerns.
The president of the German bishops' conference, Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg, has repeatedly rejected any and all concerns, instead expressing disappointment in Pope Francis in May 2022.
More recently, another organizer of the German process said the “Synodal Way” wanted to change the Church’s teaching on homosexuality by proposing “a conscious statement against the current Catholic catechism."
He pointed to a text which not only contained comments about changing views on homosexuality but also about masturbation, marriage, sexual lust, and other related topics pertinent to Catholic doctrine.
In the statement published Thursday, the Vatican repeated a passage from the pope’s letter published in 2019, wherein Francis had warned — in German — of particular Churches being “separated from the universal Church," adding that in such instances “they would weaken, perish and die.”
The Holy See said proposals from Germany should rather “flow into the synodal process of the universal Church, in order to contribute to mutual enrichment and to give witness to the unity with which the Body of the Church manifests its fidelity to Christ the Lord.”
|
|
|
|
| Pope defends participation in Paris Climate Agreement, says ‘mother earth’ is at ‘breaking point’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-21-2022, 02:48 PM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope defends participation in Paris Climate Agreement, says ‘mother earth’ is at ‘breaking point’
The Pope doubled down on his authorization of the Vatican’s joining of the pro-abortion Paris Agreement,
saying ‘it is necessary for all of us to act decisively.’
![[Image: GettyImages-619459418-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/GettyImages-619459418-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis
Jul 21, 2022
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) – Pope Francis released a message Thursday for the upcoming “World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation,” warning that the planet is “reaching ‘a breaking point’” while describing the prayer event as “an opportunity to cultivate our ecological conversion.”
Notably, the Pope’s message also included a call for the implementation of the pro-abortion, pro-contraception Paris Climate Agreement as he defended his authorisation of the Vatican’s recent joining of the Agreement.
‘Mother Earth’ is issuing a ‘chorus of cries’
Published Thursday, Francis’ message centers on listening to “the voice of creation,” which he said has turned from a “sweet song in praise of our beloved Creator” to “an anguished plea, lamenting our mistreatment of this our common home.”
Describing the international prayer event, which runs from September 1 to October 4 (concluding on the feast of St. Francis of Assisi), the Pontiff said it is “a special time for all Christians to pray and work together to care for our common home,” placing heavy emphasis on the painful “chorus of cries” exclaimed by “our sister, mother earth.”
“Prey to our consumerist excesses, she [‘mother earth’] weeps and implores us to put an end to our abuses and to her destruction,” Francis lamented, personifying the created world in paganistic terms. He also mourned an apparent “tyrannical anthropocentrism” – quoting from his own 2015 ecology-centred encyclical Laudato si’ – by which “predatory economic interests” and the supposed invasion of ancestral lands have wrought the “climate crisis.”
“Listening to these anguished cries, we must repent and modify our lifestyles and destructive systems,” the Pope exhorted, imploring Catholics as “persons of faith” to “the ecological conversion needed to bring about lasting change,” again quoting himself.
The Pope’s message follows comments delivered on July 6, wherein he warned of the “urgent need to reduce the consumption not only of fossil fuels but also of so many superfluous things,” encouraging young people to eat less meat to “help save the environment.” [...]
Defending Vatican’s joining of the Paris Agreement
Later in his message, the Pope turned his attention to his recent formal authorization of the Vatican to join the Paris Climate Agreement, an international contract purportedly aimed at reducing global average temperatures, but which includes as part of its goals the expansion of abortion and contraception, among other population control measures.
READ: Vatican joins Paris Climate Agreement despite inclusion of abortion, population control agendas
Despite the myriad anti-Catholic principles of the Agreement, Francis said that the forthcoming COP27 summit on climate change in Egypt “represents the next opportunity for all to join in promoting the effective implementation of the Paris Agreement.”
“It is necessary for all of us to act decisively. For we are reaching “a breaking point,’” Francis claimed.
Indeed, the Holy Father defended his signing of the Agreement as the Holy See “having generously shouldered its grave responsibilities” regarding the “care of creation.” He suggested that “a covenant between human beings and the environment” should underpin the pro-abortion Agreement.
The text of the Agreement also pays lip service to issues relating to “human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations” together with its climate agenda.
In addition, one of the Sustainable Development Goals sets out to “achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls,” including the following target, to be achieved by 2030: “ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights.” [...]
|
|
|
|
| WEF proposes ‘space bubbles’ to block sun’s ‘rays’ in fight against ‘global warming’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-21-2022, 05:11 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
World Economic Forum proposes ‘space bubbles’ to block sun’s ‘rays’ in fight against ‘global warming’
'By reflecting the sun’s heat away from earth, scientists say cutting out just 1.8% of the sun’s rays would fully reverse global warming,' according to the World Economic Forum's bizarre new video.
![[Image: video-810x500.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/video-810x500.png)
Wed Jul 20, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) — The World Economic Forum posted a video to social media saying scientists are considering launching a “Brazil-sized” raft into space to reflect some of the sun’s rays to counteract so-called global warming.
“MIT scientists say ‘space bubbles’ could help reverse climate change,” opens the recently uploaded video titled “Could a Brazil-sized space raft help reverse global warming?”
“By reflecting the sun’s heat away from earth, scientists say cutting out just 1.8% of the sun’s rays would fully reverse global warming,” continues the video, adding that it may still be “several years before space bubbles might be put to use, making the task of decarbonizing life on Earth no less urgent.”
Explaining how the scientists would blot out the sun’s rays, the video claims that the “bubbles would be manufactured in space by robots” and would “form a ‘raft’ about the size of Brazil.”
“This [raft] would be placed at a Lagrange point, that is, a point in space where the sun and earth’s gravity balance each other out,” the video outlines.
“This would keep the raft fixed in position. This kind of large-scale solution to climate change is called geoengineering,” the globalist group adds.
According to the WEF, several “geoengineering” ideas have already been “proposed” by scientists, including “spraying aerosols into the upper atmosphere” for “churning up tiny bubbles on the ocean’s surface,” all with “the aim of reflecting solar radiation back into space.”
As reported by LifeSiteNews, the WEF is not alone in thinking blocking out the sun is a feasible or wise strategy for tackling so-called climate change.
Tech billionaire Bill Gates has also floated the idea in the past, as well as other radical ideas such as reducing “greenhouse gas emissions” to “zero,” drastically reducing the human consumption of meat, and even using remote-controlled microchip contraceptives.
|
|
|
|
| Fr. Hewko answers a 'frequently asked question' on the issue of Grace and the New Mass |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-20-2022, 11:20 AM - Forum: Rev. Father David Hewko
- Replies (1)
|
|
Fr. Hewko answers a 'frequently asked question' on the issue of Grace and the New Mass
Fr. Hewko has been asked many times over the years to clarify his position warning the faithful and other priests against Bp. Williamson's false teaching that the New Mass gives grace and that it does not necessarily have to be avoided [see here and here for Bp. Williamson's own words on the subject].
As many of you know, this new teaching stirred up quite a bit of confusion, contradicting both what Bp. Williamson himself used to say on the subject and what the SSPX always taught, namely, that the New Mass was "objectively sacrilegious."
While Father Hewko has spoken of this topic many times in sermons and writings since Bp. Williamson began preaching this error in 2015, he understands that over time things are forgotten. Father has asked that his recent response to this issue be published as a help to this often-asked question.
So in an effort to clear the mists of confusion which endangers souls, here is some clarity:
Quote:Firstly, Fr. [...] is wrong in saying I condemned Bp. Williamson and called him a heretic. This never happened. What is true, is I have called his opinions on the New Mass erroneous and dangerous to the Faith, both to priests and faithful.
In no place, that I am aware of, did Abp. Lefebvre ever say "the New Mass nourishes your faith" and "gives grace," as Bp. Williamson did numerous times. I do hold that the theological position of Bp. Williamson is a wrong opinion and I completely submit my opinion to the Church's decision on these matters, when God grants us a good Pope. But until then, I side with Abp. Lefebvre who never hesitated to call the New Mass a "Messe batarde" an "illegitimate Mass" and one that erodes the Faith rather than nourishes it!
Does the New Mass gives grace? Abp. Lefebvre said it is sterile and doesn't pass the grace. A sacrament is defined in the traditional catechism as "an external sign, instituted by Christ, that gives grace." This is presupposing the "sign" is a Catholic sign, and not tampered and modified to give a Protestant and Modernist expression. The New Mass expresses a sign that is no longer Catholic, but Modernist. This is because the New Mass incorporates some Catholic elements, some Protestant elements and some Modernist elements, all combined into one liturgical action. So, taken as a whole, the sign expressed in the New Mass is a Modernist sign, a Modernist Liturgy, one that no longer expressing the Catholic Faith!
Consequently, it can be debated at the theological level if this New Mass, expressing a non-Catholic sign, actually confers grace, even if it be valid at times. It appears Abp. Lefebvre never thought it did. Bp. Williamson holds that if it is valid then it automatically gives grace. Perhaps, one could argue that POTENTIALLY it could give grace (if it's valid), but ACTUALLY it doesn't, in many cases, because of the lack of dispositions necessary. This, because the priest and many attending the New Mass, have a non-Catholic understanding of the Mass, and if it's merely a "symbol of the faith of the community," as is taught by Modernists, then their lack of Faith and proper dispositions, blocks the transfer of grace in their souls. In this case, for many souls, the New Mass doesn't give grace.
As I said, perhaps there's room to debate at the theological level, but at the practical level, it is extremely dangerous for clergy to promote the erroneous opinion that "the New Mass gives grace" because uninformed souls will take this as a green light to attend it and put their Faith in grave danger! Even Abp. Lefebvre said that he believed the New Mass doesn't fulfill the Sunday obligation, precisely because it expresses a different Faith from Tradition. "Lex orandi, lex credendi," as the axiom from St. Vincent Lerins says, "as we pray, so we believe." If we pray as Catholics, we will believe as Catholics; if we pray as Protestants and Modernists, we will believe as Protestants and Modernists!
I have never condemned Bp. Williamson, who I respect and honor as a seminary professor and the bishop of my ordination, but yes, I have publicly warned souls against the erroneous opinions that he promotes because it is contrary to Abp. Lefebvre's position and for the obvious danger such a message presents. As Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, O.F.M. used to put it, "Do you need proof the New Mass doesn't give grace? Look at the catastrophic fruits! There's your proof! As Christ said, 'By their fruits you will know them.'"
After all is said and done, it is ultimately Mother Church who will authoritatively decide on these matters, when she returns to Tradition, and on this point, I'm sure we all agree and eagerly await. What will Mother Church decide when that day comes? How will she judge the New Mass and New sacraments? We shall see. But it is my humble opinion, that it will be a close repetition of her decision on the Anglican orders, which were all declared invalid (and therefore not grace-giving) by Pope Leo XIII in "Apostolicae Curae" in 1896. Why? Because the Anglican adaptations to the Mass and sacrament of Holy Orders expressed a faith different from the Catholic Faith. This alone sufficed to make them invalid. Do not the New Mass changes do the same?
Tribute to Fr. [...] who did publicly oppose Bp. Williamson's opinion on this point, and warned of the great dangers of the New Mass and Indult Masses, and continues heroically taking care of the scattered souls everywhere, in the aftermath of Vatican II.
Tribute to Bishop Williamson, who in spite of promoting some erroneous opinions and signing the petition to remove the "excommunication" that never was, did at least consecrate bishops for Tradition, which the Conciliar-SSPX bishops will never do. Pray they ALL return to the unwavering stand of Abp. Marcel Lefebvre!
The time of the Church's return to Tradition will come. Until then, Abp. Lefebvre was proven right on many other things, I'll take his side on this point as well. "In doctrinal matters defined by the Church, full consent; in matters of custom, respect; in debatable matters of opinion, always charity."
In Christ the King,
Fr. David Hewko
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis to participate in ‘purification’ ritual with Indigenous people during visit to Canada |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-19-2022, 07:10 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis to participate in ‘purification’ ritual with Indigenous people during visit to Canada
A priest of the Archdiocese of Calgary defended the planned 'smudging' as ‘a ritual of purification’ to make the space 'more hospitable' and compared it to the use of sacramentals.
![[Image: pope-in-slovakia-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/pope-in-slovakia-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis in Slovakia
Jul 18, 2022 (LifeSiteNews [adapted]) – During his July visit to Canada, Pope Francis is scheduled to partake in pagan ceremonies with Indigenous peoples.
According to Crux, Father Cristino Bouvette of the Archdiocese of Calgary plans for Pope Francis to participate in a pagan “smudging” ceremony and pray facing all four directions, according to Indigenous traditions.
During the Pope’s visit to Sacred Heart Church of the First Peoples, an elder will process into the church holding a bowl of smoldering cedar, sage, sweetgrass, and tobacco to reportedly purify the church.
“The smudge that is being proposed at Sacred Heart holds a two-fold purpose:
1) To show recognition of the ritual in an observable/public way; and
2) As a ritual of purification in the space itself as a gesture of making the space ‘more hospitable’ to welcome the Holy Father as he arrives,” Bouvette wrote in an email to Crux.
Bouvette acknowledged that “smudging” is not a Catholic tradition but maintained that it is “certainly not contrary to it.”
“For Indigenous Catholics to see the Holy Father welcomed to some place like Sacred Heart Church by having smudged the space first, or facing the four directions to offer his blessing — as simple as those gestures may seem — clearly demonstrates a sensitivity on his part to their traditions which, though outside of any particular Catholic expression of faith, are certainly not contrary to it,” he wrote to Crux.
“Certain ‘pagan’ practices would be ‘sacrilegious’ because they either make a mockery of our faith or dangerously open one up to the spiritual order where one has no control over what enters or attaches,” he admitted. “There are a variety of Indigenous rituals such as this which I have intentionally left off the table from the beginning.”
“In a Catholic context, we could see the ritual of smudging as being akin to the use of certain of our sacramentals which are borne for personal, spiritual purposes, such as wearing the scapular or anointing with the oil of St. Joseph’s Oratory,” he added.
The cedar, sage, sweetgrass, and tobacco are “gifts of the Creator and therefore returned back to the Creator,” he claimed.
“Personal purification or the purification of the space where the smudge is happening are the exclusive purposes of the ritual,” he said, without explaining what people were being purified from or how burning herbs could spiritually purify a person.
“Usually, the person doing the smudging would use a feather or branch to direct the smoke toward participants who use their hands to welcome it as a sign of their desire to cleanse their minds and hearts. However, Bouvette said, at Sacred Heart the elder will smudge the church itself but will not direct the smoke toward the pope,” Crux reported.
In addition to being an Indigenous tradition, the “smudging” ceremony is practiced in witchcraft and wicca.
According to Bouvette, Pope Francis might also pray facing all four directions, which is another Indigenous practice.
“We do not pray ‘to’ the four directions — we pray only to God, the creator,” he clarified, arguing the movement is “similar to the ancient Christian appreciation of directional orientation — like facing East at the altar as we await the second coming of Christ or facing north to proclaim the Gospel in the direction of darkness where the light of the sun does not pass.”
However, the Indigenous tradition is not to pray facing all four directions but rather to pray to each direction, honoring them as deities or gods in themselves.
Bouvette further justified his claim with comments that have no history as Catholic tradition, saying that praying in all directions “serves as a reminder of the omnipresence of the Creator and that all creation belongs to him.”
“Each direction is also aligned with the stages of human life: infants and children to the east; adolescents and young adults to the south; parents and middle-aged to the west; and our elders to the north,” he added.
“In addition to recognizing the dignity of all human life, it also demonstrates a humble submission to the passage of time, following the direction of the sun in the sky, to which we all must submit ourselves if we seek to live in harmony and peace,” Bouvette claimed.
Pachamama scandal
This is not the first time that Francis will have partaken in pagan practices. During the 2019 Amazonian Synod, the pope participated in a ceremony in which Pachamama statues were venerated. Pachamama, whose name literally means “Mother Earth,” is the pagan goddess of fertility who demands child sacrifice. Her cult is still practiced within the Andes of South America,
The idolatry took place in the Vatican Gardens in the presence of Pope Francis during a tree-planting ceremony, in which pagan shamans led participants in a dance around a Pachamama statue, then offered incense, knelt, and bowed down to the ground in homage.
The statue was subsequently carried in procession during a public prayer of the Stations of the Cross in Rome, was given a place of prominence in the official conference hall for the Synod Fathers, and copies were placed on the altars of Santa Maria in Transpontina.
Additionally, in Laudato Si, Francis purported a new environmental paganism by introducing a new category of “sins against the earth” to be introduced into moral theology.
Such “sins” in turn give rise to an apparent need for “environmental conversion” and “reparation to the earth.” Critics say these at best are pious euphemisms for accepting the climate-change propaganda of globalists who include in their abortion and population control agenda; at worst they are an outright pagan divinization of nature.
Pope Francis said in his interview with Télam that Laudato Si was planned to be written for the Paris climate conference, claiming “nature is paying us back” for “slapping” it.
Controversy over upcoming papal visit to Canada
The Pope has described his upcoming visit to Canada as a “penitential pilgrimage.” His recent meetings with Indigenous leaders have been focused primarily around the Church’s involvement in Canada’s nation-wide residential school system in the 19th and 20th centuries, which saw indigenous children unjustly removed from their families, and taken to the schools for the supposed purpose of education and assimilation into the non-indigenous culture.
The schools were largely run by the Catholic Church, although by no means were they exclusively under Catholic care only, as other Christian denominations also ran some of the schools.
The seized children were prevented from speaking their native tongue or from engaging in their cultural practices from home.
Once attendance at the schools became mandatory in the 1920s, children were forcibly removed from their families and parents threatened with prison if they did not comply. Upon arrival at the school, children rarely saw their families, with many disappearing or never seeing their families again.
Catholic author Michael O’Brien, who attended residential schools and presented testimony to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, previously told LifeSiteNews that the chief underlying issue in the residential school saga was the institutional abuse of children by removing them from their families by the state authorities and then taken to the schools, noting the “long-term psychological and social effects of this.”
Furthermore, residential schools were severely underfunded, meaning that children did not receive sufficient medical care. These children often suffered from excessively high rates of tuberculosis. From 1910 through 1920, child mortality rates were consistently high. Additionally, the Department of Indian Affairs often refused to ship home the bodies of children who died at the government-mandated schools, meaning they were frequently buried on site.
In May 2021, media outlets began publishing stories about the alleged discovery of unmarked graves at the former schools. However, more recent investigations in January 2022 found that despite the allegations of “physical genocide” on the part of the Church, no graves have actually been found.
Accusations of murder and genocide have been levied against the Church over its role in the residential schools, particularly since start of the May 2021 media coverage of the alleged unmarked graves. A series of church burnings began across Canada in an apparent attack of retaliation on the Catholic Church. At least five of the vandalized or burned churches were Catholic churches that specifically belong to First Nations communities.
Pope Francis plans to “meet individually with delegations of Canadian indigenous peoples, accompanied by their Bishops, to listen to their testimonies.”
|
|
|
|
| Message by Archbishop Viganò to the Participants of the Procession of Reparation in Reggio Emilia |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-19-2022, 06:11 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Dear friends and foes of Stilum Curiae, we receive and gladly publish Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s message to the participants in procession of reparation in Reggio Emilia. Enjoy reading and good listening.
§§§
MESSAGE to the participants in the procession of reparation of the Blessed Giovanna Scopelli Association
Reggio Emilia -2 July 2022
Dear Faithful, Laudetur lesus Christus – Praised be Jesus Christ!
For those who are participating in this evening’s procession of reparation, and especially for the participants who are less young, it seems almost incredible that in the course of a few decades Italy could have been transformed in such a radical way, cancelling the legacy of Catholicism that made her great and prosperous among nations. We are witnessing a process -apparently irreversible – of apostasy of the Faith; a process which is the opposite of what St. Leo the Great described in celebrating the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, in which he praised the providential role of the Alma Urbe, the beloved City of Rome: having been a teacher of error, Rome became a disciple of the Truth, wrote the great Pontiff. Today we could say, with the dismay of children betrayed by their father, that the Rome of the Martyrs and Saints having been a teacher of Truth, has become a disciple of error. Because the present apostasy, which involves civil and religious authority in a rebellion against God the Creator and Redeemer, did not start from below, but from the top.
Those who govern public affairs as well as the Pastors of the Church show that they are obedient to the anti-gospel of the world, and while refusing to pay due respect to Christ the King and obedience to His holy Will, they bend their knees before the new idols of political correctness and burn incense before the simulacrum of a humanity brutalized by vice and sin. Those who today lead the people in temporal and spiritual things have as their purpose not the common good of citizens and the salvation of the souls of the faithful, but their corruption, their damnation. And the masses, having abandoned the way of honesty, righteousness and holiness, abandon themselves to deception, corruption and infernal revolt against God.
It is not surprising to see the obscene manifestations of “Pride” along the streets of the cities: the public space that the aberrant have conquered in recent decades had been abandoned well before by Catholics, whose clergy considered processions in honor of the Blessed Sacrament, the Blessed Virgin, and Patron Saints as ostentations of “post-Tridentine triumphalism.”
It is not surprising to see the legalization of divorce, abortion, euthanasia, sodomitic unions and all the worst that a deviant and insane humanity is capable: if this has happened, it is because Catholics were told that they could not impose their own vision of the world and of society, and that they would have to coexist, in the name of democracy and freedom, with the enemies of Christ. And it was a deception, because the tolerance that they demanded of the Christian majority of the country is no longer allowed, and everyone must submit to the dictatorship of aligned thought, gender ideology, and LGBTQ doctrine. Don’t you remember? Marriage was not questioned, but we were asked to accept civil unions. And once the interest groups had been given legitimacy, the door was opened to same-sex marriage, adoptions for same-sex couples, surrogate motherhood, postnatal abortion, and euthanasia imposed in some nations even on young people and the poor.
Scelesta turba clamitat: Regnare Christum nolumus, we sing in the hymn Te Saeculorum Principem for the feast of Christ the King. The delirious rabble shouts: We do not want Christ to reign. That infernal cry, inspired by Satan, is perhaps the only honest thing they can say. And it is true: in the social Kingdom of Christ there is no place for vice; there can be no legitimacy for sin nor tolerance for the corruption of young people. Our adversaries know well that the Civitas Dei and the civitas diaboli are enemies, and that any coexistence is not only impossible but unthinkable and absurd, since Christian society is antithetical and irreconcilable with “secular” society.
You have gathered to give public witness to the Faith, with the intention of making reparation for the sacrileges and blasphemies of the scelesta turba against Jesus Christ and His Most Holy Mother. Because in the face of the cruel and obscene hatred of these rebellious souls we must follow the example of the Lord, outraged by His executioners at the same moment that He sacrificed Himself on the Cross for their salvation. It is in fact Christ himself, with His Incarnation, Passion and Death, who first made reparation for the infinite sins of men towards the eternal Father. For only a God could atone for disobedience to God, and only a Man could offer this reparation in the name of mankind. And we too, who are living members of the Mystical Body of Christ which is the Holy Church, can and must make reparation for the offenses and sins of our fellow human beings with the same spirit, the same obedience, and the same trusting abandonment to the Father.
And while we look with sorrow at the multitude of sins erected as a model to be imitated by a society that is against man precisely because it is against God, the duty of Charity requires us to pray for those who have allowed themselves to be seduced by the deception of the Serpent, so that they may convert and repent. The inclusive world they promised you; the supposed freedom to be and do what you want regardless of the Law of the Lord; the license and vice that is celebrated and the virtue that is mocked and discredited – these are all lies, just as the promise, “You will be like gods,” that Satan made to our first parents in the earthly paradise was also a lie.
I address myself to those who are taking part in these manifestations of so-called “gay pride.” No: you will not be like gods; you will be like beasts. You will not have happiness; you will have pain, illness, and death – eternal death. You will not have peace; you will have discord and quarrels and wars. You will not have prosperity; you will have poverty. You will not be free; you will be slaves. And this will happen indefectibly, because the Liar is a murderer from the beginning, and he wants your death, erasing in your eyes the image of God, stealing from you that blessed eternity that he first lost with his own rebellion. Because the first to sin by pride was Lucifer, with his Non serviam – I will not bend; I will not bow to God; I will not recognize Him as my Lord and Creator. How can you hope that he who hates the Author of life can love you who are His creatures? How can you believe that the one who has been condemned to eternal damnation could be capable of promising you that eternal bliss of which he was the first to be forever deprived?
This procession must not be an occasion for confrontation, but rather an opportunity to show the many people deceived by the Evil One that there exists a people who are animated by sentiments of Faith and Charity, a people which with generosity and with a supernatural gaze offers its prayers, fasts, and sacrifices to implore forgiveness for the sins of their brothers. Charity, founded on the immutable Truth of God, is a tremendous weapon against Satan and an infallible instrument to convert the world and bring many souls back to the Lord. Bring them back to the One who shed his blood even for them, out of love – an infinite, irrevocable love, a love that conquers the world, a love that moves mountains, a love that gives meaning to our life and does not frustrate our existence.
When we see the image of the Savior nailed to the Cross and think of the torments he suffered to ransom and redeem us, we cannot remain insensitive, just as the pagans, idolaters, and sinners of past centuries have not remained insensitive. Societies corrupt in intellect and will, given over to the worst vices, and ensnared by false religions have been conquered by that love – indeed: by that Charity – which led the Martyrs, even children, women and the elderly not to react against their executioners, so as not to fail in God’s love. How many have been converted by seeing Christians die with dignity as they are persecuted for their faith! How many have been baptized after witnessing the example of Christians and the simple Truth of the Gospel!
And so let us carry out this reparation. Let us do it with a supernatural spirit, convinced that precisely in the humble following of Christ on the way to Calvary we will be able to lead many souls to Him who today are so far away. And the more we see the unleashing of the powers of Evil, let us persevere all the more in the Good and in the certainty of the victory of Christ, the true and only Light of the world, over the darkness of sin and death.
Let us ask the Holy Spirit with filial trust to infuse His holy Grace into sinners, to touch their hearts, enlighten their minds, and encourage their will. So that those who have hitherto been teachers of error and examples of sin may, through the help and mercy of God and through the intercession of His Most Holy Mother and our Mother, be disciples of truth and an example of virtue. And so may it be.
+ Carlo Maria Vigano, Archbishop
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican by Fr. François Laisney [1988] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-18-2022, 06:03 PM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
- Replies (68)
|
|
From the archives of the 'traditional' SSPX before it became the 'Conciliar' SSPX:
Much has been written by many people on the subject of the consecrations of bishops performed by their Excellencies Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer on June 30, 1988. Many documents were not available in English at that time, which made it difficult for some to understand the reasons for this “Operation Survival” of Tradition.
We have made a great effort to collect all the relevant documents. We present the most complete dossier now available. A few documents have already been published in our special issue of The Angelus in July 19882, but are reprinted here for the sake of continuity in the events. We refer the reader to this issue for other excellent documents such as the Declaration of Bishop de Castro Mayer [included in the second edition], the canonical study of Fr. Rudolf Kaschewsky.
In Part II of this volume we have added a few other documents surrounding the relations between Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican. Unfortunately too many conservative Catholics do not want to face reality, or they dream of a better world than the one we live in. They may be conscious of the errors taught by the bishops in America, but do not want to see their source in Vatican II and their support in Rome. These documents may help them to realize the gravity of the crisis of the Church, and how this crisis is just the application of the false principles of Religious Liberty, Ecumenism and Collegiality introduced at the Second Vatican Council. They will also realize that, unfortunately, in Rome there is the will to abide with these false principles, and to impose them on Dom Gérard and those who want to go with the May 5th Protocol, thus introducing the poison into the apple.
My comments, boldfaced and in a different typestyle, have been added either before or after the text of the documents.
The first impression one receives in reading these documents, other newspapers, commentaries, declarations and private letters, is that the Vatican and Archbishop Lefebvre are not on the same wavelength. Right from the beginning Archbishop Lefebvre takes his stand on Faith: he wants the continuation of the transmission of the Deposit of Faith, in all its entirety and purity; he wants the continuation of the most perfect expression of the Catholic Faith which is in the traditional liturgy, most apt to give the graces needed by the faithful for the salvation of their souls; he did not blind himself, refusing to see the crisis of the Faith in so many souls poisoned by the conciliar reforms. He was convinced that the best service he could render to the Church and to the Pope himself was to fulfil his mission as a successor of the Apostles, transmitting the Faith to the next generation, without giving up under the pressures of the modernists who have infiltrated even the Roman Curia. This is why he asked to provide shepherds, successors of the Apostles, for the continuation of this mission; no request was more legitimate. The faithful could see this at the level of Faith; one wrote to me: “My Catholic sense tells me that Archbishop Lefebvre has done what had to be done in these strange and most serious times in the Church, and that he is not opposed to the Pope, but rather is more united to him than many others; his orthodoxy in doctrine and Liturgy is impeccable, his break is with Modernism...” This was a reaction of the sensus fidei.
On the other hand, many of those who have criticized him based themselves on Church politics. “Could he not have trusted God a little more and tested the agreement at least for a time? Then, if Rome did all the dire things that were predicted, it would have been time enough to risk excommunication.”3
This was not a reaction of Faith, but of Church politics. If there had been a risk of valid excommunication, Archbishop Lefebvre would never have done it; it is only because he was convinced that such an action was necessary from a motive of Faith, for a real necessity for the good of the Church, and therefore legitimate, that he did it. Convinced it was good, he did it publicly, not hiding as others who conferred episcopal consecrations in a completely different context. Those in the Roman Curia who wanted to please both Archbishop Lefebvre and the local bishops were at that level too.
Others, even after more than 20 years of being deceived “in the name of obedience,” still do not realize that “Satan’s masterstroke is to have succeeded in sowing disobedience to all Tradition through obedience.” They have not yet learned by experience what St. Peter, the first Pope, said: “We ought to obey God rather than men.” St. Thomas teaches that obedience is a moral virtue, thus in between a default (disobedience) and an excess (servility); in two simple questions of his Summa Theologica, he masterfully exposes the solution to the dilemma of these souls: IIa IIæ Q.104, A.4: “Should we obey God in everything? Yes.” A.5:
Should the subjects obey their superiors in everything? Sed contra is what is said in the Acts of the Apostles, “we ought to obey God rather than man.” But sometimes the precepts of the prelates (sic) are against God. Therefore one must not obey the prelates in everything….Therefore, one can distinguish three kinds of obedience: one sufficient to salvation, by which one obeys in the things he is obliged to; a second one which is perfect, by which one obeys in all lawful things; a third one that is indiscreet (therefore sinful), by which one obeys even in the unlawful things.
He also teaches that there are many other virtues more important than obedience, such as faith, hope, charity, religion...Some have come to realize that obedience to the local bishop is not a theological virtue, but they still consider that obedience to the pope is a theological virtue (one against which there cannot be an excess). The history of the Church and the lives of the saints show that this is not true. Since the supreme authority has been given by Our Lord to Peter in order to transmit the deposit of Faith, the best obedience to the pope is to do what is necessary for the transmission of the Faith, especially when so many strive to distort this Faith.
I hope that this book will help the reader to strengthen his Faith and fight the good fight as St. Paul, who said at the end of his life:
I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the Faith. As to the rest there is laid up for me a crown of justice which the Lord, the Just Judge, will render me in that day: and not only to me, but to them also that love His coming (II Tim. 4:7‑8).
May the Blessed Virgin Mary, Guardian of the Faith, “terrible as an army in array,” lead us in this good fight, knowing that “he who shall persevere until the end, this one shall be saved” (Mt. 24:13).
Fr. François Laisney
December 8, 1988
Feast of the Immaculate Conception
2. Available from Angelus Press, 2918 Tracy Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64109.
3. The Remnant, Aug. 15, 1988, p.7.
✠ ✠ ✠
Preface to the Second Edition
The fact that the first edition of this book was quickly exhausted manifests the demand for the full documentation regarding one of the most important moments of the 20th century for the Roman Catholic Church, the episcopal consecrations of four Bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer on June 30, 1988.
This second edition adds in the first part some important documents not available at the time of the first edition, though none of these documents are essential. I mainly added the missing documents up to June 30, mostly letters between the Vatican and Archbishop Lefebvre. However I added some comments to the letter of May 6, and to the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei.
I restricted myself to add only two more documents after the Consecrations. First, the article of Fr. Paul Crane; being not in favor of the Consecrations, he cannot be accused of partiality, yet he points out very well one core element of the decision of Archbishop Lefebvre: Courage! Fortitude! Second, a letter from Fr. Bisig showing how the Society of St. Peter positively encourages people to go to the New Mass.
Many more documents could have been added concerning the implementation of the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei, but I think this should be the subject of a whole book. That would be beyond the scope of this one. Suffice to say here that those who had at first questioned the prudence of Archbishop Lefebvre’s decision have now come to see the wisdom of his decision.
It is easier to destroy than to build. Archbishop Lefebvre had been a builder when so many others were either destroying or letting destroy. He could not let the future of the spiritual edifice of so many souls who had kept Tradition or returned to it, in the hands of those destroyers. He had been a good shepherd who took care of the abandoned and wounded souls when so many bad shepherds were either mercenaries or wolves in shepherds’ clothes. He could not let the sheep in the care of these mercenaries or wolves. As a successor of the Apostles, his duty was to provide some good builders, some good shepherds for them; he asked for the Pope’s approval which was given to him theoretically on May 5, 1988, but with no date and no definite candidate to consecrate. When he asked for a concrete date, conciliar Rome screamed that he was breaking the negotiations. Conscious of his duty towards God and towards these souls, he provided these good shepherds. By their fruits you shall know them.
May their work be fruitful through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary for the glory of God and for the salvation of souls.
Fr. François Laisney
June 9, 1994
Feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus
|
|
|
|
| The Abomination of Desolation in Machabees and in the Present |
|
Posted by: Stone - 07-18-2022, 04:25 PM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
The Abomination of Desolation in Machabees and in the Present
Catholics often talk about the "end of the world". This has been so since the very time of Christ on earth. The disciples of Jesus once asked Him, "What shall be the sign of Thy coming and of the consummation (that is, the end) of the world?" (Matt 24:3) Every year in the Liturgy at the end of November, we hear readings at Mass about the end of the world, and the final coming of Christ.
So you see, our talking about the end of the world, although it may be frightening or mysterious, still it is not something unimportant or mistaken or superstitious. Notice that the disciples asked Jesus, not when will be the end, but what sign shall there be of Thy coming, and of the end of the world? For we know from Jesus that the day or the hour of the end is God's secret. But as for the signs of it, Jesus does speak abundantly, especially in the end-of-the-world discourse in the Matthew, Mark and Luke Gospels. We call this discourse eschatology, which means the study of the eschata, which is Greek for the Last Things. These are, in tradition, four things: Death, Judgment, Heaven, and Hell.
![[Image: F007_AntiochEntersSanctuaryr001.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_b-f/F007_AntiochEntersSanctuaryr001.jpg)
Above, the pagan King Antiochus boldly enters the sanctuary. Below, an unfaithful Jew comes to sacrifices to pagan gods at an altar
![[Image: F007_AdoringIdols003.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_b-f/F007_AdoringIdols003.jpg)
One of the most significant signs of the end of the world will be the so-called abomination of desolation. Jesus himself says this in Matthew 24:15. He says that Prophet Daniel predicted the abomination of desolation and he adds, "He that readeth, let him understand."
This means that some of us must read Prophet Daniel, and also books I and 2 of the Machabees at the end of the Old Testament because these books also speak of the abomination actually happening, for example in I Machabees 6, verse 7.
There we read that the conquering faithful Jewish army had re-taken Jerusalem, and they had "thrown down the abomination from the altar" in the temple. These words indicate the abomination was some kind of pagan statue that the pagans and the pagan-minded, unfaithful Jews had set up on the holy Temple altar.
It also suggests what other Bible evidence shows, that the abomination or evil sacrilegious thing is the abolition, the doing away with, of the daily, holy sacrifice on the Temple altar, and the substitution of a false-god statue with some false sacrifice or worship, on the holy altar.
This would be a most grave mortal sin against the First Commandment, which says, "I am the Lord, thy God; thou shalt not have strange gods before me." In I Machabees, we read that the cruel pagan King Antiochus invaded Jerusalem, entered the holy Temple, stole or destroyed all the holy vessels for worship, and forbade the Jews to offer their usual sacrifices, holocausts and atonements. He also killed many of the Jews. So we read in I Mac 1:30 to 60.
Sacrificing upon the altar of the idol
King Antiochus, it is written further, and I quote verse 57, "set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God, and his soldiers built more such altars all around Judea." They also burned the holy books of the law of God, and any Jew found keeping such scriptural books was put to death. Then the writer tells us that "on the 25th day of the month, they sacrificed upon the altar of the idol that was over against the altar of God." (I Mac. 1:62).
I ask you to take note of those expressions: upon the altar and over against the altar. They suggest a practice in most Catholic churches since the 1960's where they still had retained the old high altar for the traditional Latin Mass. They constructed a new altar, usually table-like, and placed it in front of the old one, in the open sanctuary space. Looking at this new altar from the nave, we could say that it is over against the old altar, and is intended, not for the old Latin, Tridentine Mass, but for the new rite, or Novus Ordo Mass in English.
![[Image: F007_NationalCathedral.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_b-f/F007_NationalCathedral.jpg)
The first step was to place a table-altar in front of the old high altar. Later, there would be only the table - often modern and extravagent, below
![[Image: F007_Immaculate_Conception_Bloomfield_Interior.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_b-f/F007_Immaculate_Conception_Bloomfield_Interior.jpg)
This arrangement is still the case in some major churches where the old high altar is a historic work of art, and must not be removed or changed. We see from these remarks the meaning of abomination. It is an evil pagan ceremony or statue or practice that disgracefully replaces the true and holy symbols and ceremonies of the true God. It is sacrilegious, that is, violating a sacred place or thing or person. It is also blasphemous, that is, offensive and contemptuous to God Himself.
The Meaning of Desolation
What then, does desolation mean? We read in 1 Mac 1:39 "(The enemy) defiled the holy place, the (faithful) inhabitants of Jerusalem fled away, and the (Temple) sanctuary was desolate like a wilderness." There we have it: desolation means being desolate, being abandoned by good people, and worse, being abandoned by God and by His grace. In the time of the Machabees, the Jewish people were tiring of their old religion; they were dabbling in paganism, and being attracted or deceived or forced into real apostasy, that is, the rejection of their religious Judaic Faith. They became idolaters, that is, worshippers of idols or false gods.
I hope my reader is patiently attending to all I say, to all these perhaps tedious details. Why pay attention? Because disasters and temptations similar to these which afflicted the Jews in the second century B.C. [Before Christ], could also afflict us Christians in a later period. Are such evils of apostasy and sacrilege affecting the Catholic world today? Does what I tell you of 2nd century B.C. Jerusalem make you think of late 20th century Catholicism?
Are we Catholics under severe political and popular cultural pressure to abandon the good traditional Catholic habits of up to the 1950's under Pope Pius XII? Is all this talk and promotion of ecumenism causing us to water down our Catholic firmness? Do we look benignly on the false and diabolical pagan religions? Do we smile at Islamism, which is so ambivalent and often cruel towards Christians? Do we favor Judaism, which stubbornly refuses, even after 2,000 years of holy Christian evidence, to recognize Jesus as Messiah? Do we encourage those Jewish leaders who keep suggesting the epithet anti-Semitic against Christians? Are the Jews doing this to distract public attention from their own stance, which may be truly anti-Christian?
We must also mention the secular leaders and spokesmen who strive to ban all talk of God from the public scene. They scoff at religious truth as being subjective and irrelevant in the public affairs of peoples. They make some mythical "Man" the be-all and the end-all of real life. They privately laugh at talk of Heaven and Hell, and life after death. All these foregoing pressures, policies and plans in the world around us are a real possible corruption and corrosion to our Catholic Faith. We, and especially our children, are likely to fall into various sins because of them, even if not outright apostasy.
Well, huge numbers of Jews at the time of the Machabees were doing just that. They discarded the laws of God; they took up idolatry and sacrilege in the then-current frenzy of ecumenism toward pagan ways. They were aiding and abetting the abomination of desolation in their midst, though possibly unawares. But it had been foretold by Prophet Daniel around 580 BC. We saw that Jesus credits Daniel for that prophecy.
![[Image: F007_Angel.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_b-f/F007_Angel.jpg)
A angel weeps for the Church: Today we face an abomination of desolation on the altar and in the Church
But Jesus also shows that there will be another abomination of desolation in the end times of the world. There may also have been partial abominations in the past Church History, such as the grievous Arian heresy in the fourth century, or the Protestant revolt in the 16th century. Some scholars think the Jews had a second abomination of desolation in the time of the revolt, 66 to 73 AD. This is not recorded in Scripture. But the abomination at the end times is indeed predicted in Scripture by Jesus Christ Himself, not to mention by St. Paul.
One thing that St. Paul does tell us is that Old Testament disasters and punishments upon the ancient Israelites or Jews were a sign and a lesson not only to them, but also to us Catholics of this new and present age. He writes to the Corinthian Christians about the sins and sufferings of the Israelites in their passage through the Red Sea and the Sinai desert toward the Promised Land. And he adds this comment for us:
"These (marvelous and grievous) things were done (to the Israelites) in a figure of us, that we should not covet evil things as they also coveted ... all these things happened to them in figure: and they are written for our correction, upon whom the end of the world (that is, the last times) are come. Wherefore, he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall ... fly from the service of idols." (1 Cor 10: 6-14).
Fulfillment of the Abomination of Desolation in Our Times
The point for us to remember is the real correlation between Old and New Testaments in God's saving actions. One writer says it thus:
Quote:"Christ is saying, look for a hidden fulfillment or replication of the Old Testament abomination of desolation in these New Testament times. The end-time abomination will not replicate exactly the former one in every respect, but will so substantially resemble the former as to be recognizable to those who are looking with eyes of faith" (E. DeStafinis p. 2).
There is a particular point of resemblance between the Machabees abomination and a similar phenomenon in our own time. I underlined it earlier to you. It is the placing of a new altar upon the old altar of God or sanctuary, and placing it over against the old altar. This was common practice with us Catholics in the 1970's and 1980's. Since then the old altar has been demolished and removed in the great majority of Churches.
Now you know that some theologians maintain that the new Roman Catholic order of Mass is clearly invalid, or may well be so, because of changes in the words of the Consecration of the chalice.
Lesser reasons for concerns are the watering down of the Collect Prayers, the removal of dozens of signs of reverence for the sacramental Body and Blood of the Victim Christ, the near-abolition of the Roman Canon with its rich and emphatic doctrine of Sacrifice, the loss of most of the Offertory prayers, the banishment of Gregorian Chant, and the orientation of the priest toward the people and away from God. Such a diminished and gutted liturgy could well point toward an abomination prompted by some demon sent to misguide the reform committee.
St. Bridget of Sweden, who lived till 1373 and founded the Bridgettine Sisters, was famed for her heavenly messages and prophecies. She predicted in these words, "In the year 1980 the wicked will prevail. They will sacrilegiously profane and defile the churches by erecting in them altars to idols and to anti-Christ whom they will worship and attempt to force others to do the same."
St. Bridget says this will occur in 1980. Now it was December 1, 1974 when Pope Paul made the Novus Ordo Mass mandatory in its final form. But Jesus was probably born in 6 BC according to the best calculations. This would make 1974 become 1980. St Bridget seems to have been right on target.
Another significant point is that the Jews never allowed women to officiate in the Jewish liturgy, and especially not in the Temple. The exception is the second century BC abomination, when, as one major Catholic commentator writes (on 2 Mac 6:4), "Then, they were all over the altar." Just as they are today in most Novus Ordo, progressivist parishes.
High Priests & Popes
[Opinion of Fr. Somerville regarding the Conciliar Popes - what would he say about Popes Benedict XVI and Francis?!]]
There is one final and disturbing correlation between the Machabees abomination and the present. It concerns the High Priests of the Temple.
The last valid high priest at the time of the apostasy was Onias III. He was succeeded invalidly through fraud and bribery by his brother Jason. It is Jason who launched the policy of syncretism, that is, uniting Jewish and Gentile religions. We would today call it ecumenism.
One Catholic commentary says Jason was known as "King Johnny," and wore a "broad brimmed hat". II Macabees says Jason was "an impious wretch and no priest." These points are strikingly echoed in the Catholic high priest after Pope Pius XII, that is, Pope John XXIII.
The next Jewish high priest was Menelaus, also seated by fraud. (2 Mac 4:23-25). Menalaus introduces the obligatory new "sacrifices" (6:7), and under him, Jews are "obliged to sacrifice" (v. 8). In this he resembles the next Pope, Paul VI, who introduced the new obligatory Mass.
The following High Priest is Lysimachus, also brother to Menelaus, and partaker in "many sacrileges" (4:39), the "sacrilegious fellow" being finally killed "beside the treasury", by his enemies. The next Pope, John Paul I, is also said to have been killed, but secretly, because of Vatican financial dealings.
The fourth and last in our series of high priests, is Alcimus, more clever and devious than the rest, who had, it is written, "willfully defiled himself...mingling with the heathens" (2 Mac 14:3). The Douai-Rheims Catholic Bible commentator writes, "For his apostasy here mentioned he was incapable of the High Priesthood." Alcimus was also known as the "the pious one." We reflect that the fourth Pope, John Paul II, has broken all records in fraternizing with pagans and other non-Christians, he is an accomplished actor, and is known as "Mary's Pope."
So ends the comparison between four ancient Jewish High Priests and four modern Catholic Popes. I have tried to do it in a restrained and documented way. If I have spoken falsely of any one, I regret it sincerely, and would welcome a clarification.
This comparison between high-priest and Pope is part of the comparison between the Machabees and present day Church, under the theme of abomination of desolation. Jesus himself predicts this final or end-time abomination, and he says, "He that readeth, let him understand.”
I have been reading much, and striving to understand. I hope that you have all learned to understand a little better this mystery of the final abomination from these present reflections.
All of us traditional Catholics see that the last four Popes, after Pope Pius XII, have to share serious responsibility for the grave troubles afflicting the Catholic Church today. Although many of the 260-plus Popes have become canonized saints for their holiness and heroism, there have been throughout Catholic History a considerable number of truly bad Popes. The last four of these are not the first four.
Holy Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.
(This piece is based extensively on the article of Edward DiStafinis, “The False Worship and the False Popes of the Conciliar Church as prefigured in Machabees”)
|
|
|
|
|
