tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53531630206024133102024-03-18T13:36:37.170-07:00Mary Destroyer of All HeresiesJohn Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-46595186212664562422024-01-27T14:09:00.000-08:002024-02-10T15:59:15.144-08:00Conspiracy of Silence Against Pope Saint Pius X<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">One of the most effective ways to achieve strategic victories in theological debate is to simply ignore an argument.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This omission has succeeded beyond the expectations of most during the last century when the clash between the traditional Catholic philosophy and theology of St. Thomas and the partisans of the <i>nouvelle theologie</i> of <i>Ressourcement </i>struggled for primacy in the Catholic Church's doctrinal presentation.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The most telling evidence of this conspiracy of silence is the complete and total omission of any mention of St. Pius X, the contagion of philosophical and theological Modernism, or any efforts taken to condemn it in the 1992 <a href="https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM" target="_blank">Catechism of the Catholic Church</a> promulgated by the Confraternity of the Doctrine of the Faith under Pope John Paul II. If Pius X had been an inconsequential pontiff, or had little to say about contemporary doctrinal concerns, one might accept the silence as simply the editor's choice. But something else is going on here.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The landmark encyclical </span><i style="font-family: georgia;"><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">Pascendi Dominici gregis</a></i><span style="font-family: georgia;"> promulgated by Pope Pius X on 8 September 1907 left no doubts for the church militant: "</span><span style="font-family: georgia;">the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart" and that they "lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires</span><span style="font-family: georgia;">." </span></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-F4BFCC9KsT-k9molfrl7m4BNQt75CN68pX2v6kSWizJ6S36FGXnbPRePIdl47Cp74JU4UrC9KL5EuJG-ADMwwalLd2-JciaEkbPbYF4llQlamhfBjlMrjxkPW19cW2-2wi1BDYn0eQwo919A4e7I6XJIxImTftFx9BafnkEZ2eIe55ncUnoNrNBhdqvi/s701/CCC%20References%20to%20Popes.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="701" data-original-width="526" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-F4BFCC9KsT-k9molfrl7m4BNQt75CN68pX2v6kSWizJ6S36FGXnbPRePIdl47Cp74JU4UrC9KL5EuJG-ADMwwalLd2-JciaEkbPbYF4llQlamhfBjlMrjxkPW19cW2-2wi1BDYn0eQwo919A4e7I6XJIxImTftFx9BafnkEZ2eIe55ncUnoNrNBhdqvi/s320/CCC%20References%20to%20Popes.jpg" width="240" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Pope John Paul II's Catechism omits any <br />references to the teaching of Pope Pius X</span></td></tr></tbody></table><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Subtitled, "On the Doctrines of the Modernists" it concluded that this convergence of multiple lines of heresy constituted the "rendezvous of all heresies" that "means the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone but of <b>all </b>religion." So dangerous, so threatening, so subversive was this collection of heresies that the Supreme Pontiff required all clergy to <a href="https://www.fisheaters.com/sacrorum.html" target="_blank">swear an oath</a> against it, without which a man could not receive the sacrament of orders (Pope Paul VI abrogated the oath in 1967). </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The Modernists and their sympathizers were driven underground during the pontificate of Pius X following the excommunication of Fr. George Tyrell, S.J. and Fr. Alfred Loisy and the firm administrative actions taken per sections 45-57 of <i>Pascendi</i>. To succeed in advancing their theological agenda, they had to overcome the antidote prescribed by the holy office of Pius X: scholastic philosophy and theology.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">A renewed emphasis on St. Thomas spread throughout the Church's institutions following the condemnation of Modernism which its detractors dubbed 'neo-scholasticism.' This epithet carried with it the implied criticism of what was then called 'manualism' or the learning from textbooks that consolidated sources of original biblical, patristic, and doctrinal material as opposed to treating the 'original' sources which the traditionalists dubbed '<i>ressourcement</i>'. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The war against St. Thomas was waged in two distinct but mutually supporting strategies: (1) the complete dismissal of scholastic philosophy as unworkable for so-called 'modern man'; and (2) the co-opting of scholastic philosophy by synthesizing it with modern philosophies. The former tack was taken by Teilhard de Chardin, Hans Kung, and Josef Ratzinger; the latter by Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac, and Karol Wojtyla. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">It may be helpful at this point to link these historical events to the Council of the Vatican 1869-1870 known now as "Vatican I". The material and physical sciences had become such a juggernaut in the post-1789 world that it threatened to consume and destroy all metaphysics. The claims of the men of science appeared to render much of the supernatural, preternatural, and biblical world-view as untenable to minds 'enlightened' by 'science.' About this, the fathers of Vatican I declared,</span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;">6. If anyone says that</span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;"><blockquote>•<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>the condition of the faithful and those who have not yet attained to the only true faith is alike, so that</blockquote><blockquote>•<span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Catholics may have a just cause for calling in doubt, by suspending their assent, the faith which they have already received from the teaching of the church, until they have completed a scientific demonstration of the credibility and truth of their faith:</blockquote><blockquote>let him be anathema.</blockquote><blockquote>Chapter III, Canons of Vatican I (1869-1870)</blockquote></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Scholastic philosophy begins with cosmology - the science of the created order. The cosmology of St. Thomas, derived principally from the natural philosophy of Aristotle, deals with the universe as it is revealed in the biblical accounts and the consensus of the Fathers. The men of science ridiculed belief in a six-day creation, a literal first man of the slime and first woman from his rib, a universal deluge, the crossing of the Red Sea on dry land, the virgin birth, and the resurrection of Christ. The Modernists siding with science against faith - a practice gaining in momentum since the Church's dogmatic condemnation of Galileo's heliocentric cosmos - felt trapped now by the claims of evolution and the [alleged] untenable foundation of scholastic philosophy. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This tension is explained by Pius X in Pascendi with clarity and specificity:</span></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;">...when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for <b><i>in man</i></b>; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. (Pascendi #7)</span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Thus the requirement for modern philosophy - philosophy not based on the biblical cosmology but man's experience of himself in the world. The subjective philosophies of Des Cartes and Kant refined by the materialist demands of the physical sciences culminated in phenomenology and existentialism, completely obliterating the sure foundation and footing of St. Thomas for religious philosophy.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Which brings us back to St. Pius X, <i>Pascendi gregis</i>, and Modernism. The Pope was less concerned about appealing to modern man captive to the claims of materialist, subjectivist philosophy than about fidelity to the deposit of faith. As Vatican I deliberated:<br /></span></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;">"For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Apostles."</span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This commitment to vouchsafing the deposit included the sure norms of biblical interpretation which were under extreme duress from the partisans of science:</span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;">Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture. </span><span style="font-family: georgia;">In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."</span></blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;">When we see </span><i style="font-family: georgia;">Pascendi</i><span style="font-family: georgia;"> in the light of the Council of the Vatican and trace its teaching, condemnations, definitions, canons, and action plan to that dogmatic ecumenical council, it takes on a weight much heavier than a mere Papal encyclical emphasizing certain points of doctrine, discipline, and liturgy. We may also realize then how irrevocably the condemnation of the super-heresy of Modernism is linked to that council and its infallible decrees. No wonder then the grave need for the partisans of Modernism to ignore both St. Pius X and his contributions to the magisterium of the Church!</span><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">The only way to finally and fully circumvent Vatican I was to convene another ecumenical council that would utterly ignore the condemnations of Modernism linked to it. Indeed, many of the <i>periti</i> or theological advisors to the council's various commissions were in fact men suppressed under the holy office of Pope Pius XII under it's prefect Alfred Cardinal Ottaviani. Pope John XXIII knew this very well when approving their appointment. In an astonishing disciplinary sleight-of-hand, Pope John <a href="https://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/books/Iota_Unum/chp_04.htm#s40" target="_blank">set aside all duties for condemning error at Vatican II</a>. Since the council condemned nothing, defined nothing, and proscribed nothing, it stands as an anomaly among the Church's 21 ecumenical councils and is debated to this very day concerning its actual authority, requirements, and dogmatic value.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">The council itself demonstrates this strategy of ignoring the previous magisteria. The document on ecumenism <a href="https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html" target="_blank"><i>Unitatis redintegratio</i></a> should logically take as it's point of departure the 1928 encyclical <i><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos.html" target="_blank">Mortalium animos</a></i> promulgated by Pope Pius XI which condemned ecumenism. But UR reads as though Pius XI had never existed. The authors of the council's the sixteen documents simply took up where they wished, linked to what they thought advanced their agenda, and ignored the rest. The abruptly discordant tension between <i>Mortalium animos</i> and John Paul II's <i><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint.html" target="_blank">Ut unum sint</a></i> reads like two completely separate and different religions, treating some of the same subject matter but with diametrically opposed conclusions. The same can be said for the document on religious liberty <i><a href="https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html" target="_blank">Dignitatis humanae</a> </i>which utterly ignores the condemnations of it in Pope Gregory XVI's encyclical <i><a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16mirar.htm" target="_blank">Morari vos</a></i>. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">None of these efforts at ignoring the condemnation of Modernism can possibly succeed. Not only is <i>Pascendi</i> dogmatically rooted in Vatican I's infallible teaching, Pope Pius X's remains were exhumed in 1944 and found incorrupt. Pius XII had little choice but to formally recognize the cult of devotion to Giuseppe Sarto and canonized him in 1954. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: georgia;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoOQUEfNliflyalGHzJWAgHnOWwL7wF43pOHXEtnleHW7pH7o7VSAza_NCL9ZljR1lzUCXdQEM0a3g75VrSQc6vPkLKFeX9-yBAN54vHR8APUNNkyNdj3oDG4DYnsd_ldilrACuiehk1qtuvq8Xv_NXIgVhw2_w5HlfmTdCrLL5pkv9Dm7aGiaf7QlBgjs/s1024/Pope+St.+Pius+X%2527s+incorrupt+body-1216253910.jpeg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="633" data-original-width="1024" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoOQUEfNliflyalGHzJWAgHnOWwL7wF43pOHXEtnleHW7pH7o7VSAza_NCL9ZljR1lzUCXdQEM0a3g75VrSQc6vPkLKFeX9-yBAN54vHR8APUNNkyNdj3oDG4DYnsd_ldilrACuiehk1qtuvq8Xv_NXIgVhw2_w5HlfmTdCrLL5pkv9Dm7aGiaf7QlBgjs/s320/Pope+St.+Pius+X%2527s+incorrupt+body-1216253910.jpeg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Rare Footage of Pope St. Pius X's Incorrupt Body</span></td></tr></tbody></table></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre entrusted his priestly fraternity to the patronage of St. Pius X which he founded in Switzerland in 1970 to preserve the traditional priesthood, liturgy, and faith. Beginning with 12 ordinands in 1976, the Society of Saint Pius X has blossomed to more than 700 priests today carrying on the charism of their missionary founder and dedicated to the perseverance of the traditional liturgy, Scholastic theology, and militant opposition to the compendium of all heresies, </span><i style="font-family: georgia;">Modernism</i><span style="font-family: georgia;">. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">In conclusion, the most evil and dangerous threat ever to menace the Catholic Church has been ignored by the efforts of men in fact captive to its errors, whether in part or in full, whether by design or neglect. The 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church - the cornerstone of pedagogical enterprise since the close of the Second Vatican Council - refers to that council over 600 times, quotes Pope John Paul II over 130 times, but never mentions Pope St. Pius X, the crisis caused by theological Modernism, nor the requirement to root Church teaching in Scholastic philosophy and theology. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: georgia;">At least two generations of Catholics have been encultured, educated, and liturgically immersed in a religious milieu devoid of any understanding of the compendium of all heresies that "means the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone but of all religion." But the truth has a way of getting noticed. The conspiracy of silence has the upper hand now, but the silence is being broken by the power of divine inspiration. <br /></span><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></p></div>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-19260028321422279572023-10-01T11:07:00.022-07:002023-10-24T07:41:35.428-07:00Defeating Modernism at the Root Level <p><b>Defeating Modernism</b> requires addressing the root cause. The root cause of Modernism according to St. Pius X is the exaltation of agnostic philosophy over natural and supernatural revelation. Philosophy - the art of reasoning about created things - in this era is based on false ideas about nature. Science is treated today as the faith once was; and where science opposes faith the faith is summarily subjected to it, even within the Church:</p><blockquote><p>...faith occupies itself solely with something which science declares to be unknowable for it. Hence each has a separate field assigned to it: science is entirely concerned with the reality of phenomena, into which faith does not enter at all...</p></blockquote><blockquote><p> ...but it is quite different with regard to faith, which [in the Modernist system] is subject to science... (<a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">Pascendi gregis</a> #16 & 17)</p></blockquote><p>How did this displacement of theology, long regarded as the Queen of sciences occur? When did this happen? I would caution the reader to tread carefully over the next few paragraphs as the ideas expressed there may be both unsettling and for some, impossible.</p><p>As St. Pius X traces in his analysis of the "compendium of all heresies" (Modernism), it is the doctrine of evolution that underpins the agnosticism of the Modernist. Enough ink has been spilt confuting the heresy of so-called theistic evolution; what I propose here is the examination of the seminal theological event that made the theory of evolution inevitable as the dominant cosmological theory even among churchmen.</p><p>Evolution attacks creation. Creation as divine revelation explains it to us simply could not have occurred. Therefore, the Book of Genesis - the sure foundation upon which all Sacred Scripture rests - is either in error or speaks only in poetic and symbolic style. </p><p>The first attack on the divinity of Genesis happened long before Darwin. It occurred in the early 17th century when three Roman Pontiffs (Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII) all condemned Galileo's heliocentric theory as formally heretical. The Church had always held that the earth was at rest in the center of cosmos as the theater of redemption in which God became incarnate of the Virgin Mary. The rest of the heavenly bodies rotated around the earth as Genesis 1,14 reveals. To this, Saint Robert Bellarmine testifies</p><blockquote><p> "Second. I say that, as you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators." (Letter to Foscarini, 1615)</p></blockquote><p>Evolution could not have gotten off the ground - at least as regards the theology of the Church - except first that faith in Genesis had been wounded by the heliocentrists. They - long before the evolutionists - accused the Church of error as regards the interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis. If the Church was wrong about so foundational a matter as the cosmological makeup of the universe, how could she be trusted with the weightier matters of Biblical interpretation?</p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5y8ta9k3rEd6RitGye2MoUVrwM0iJEkAyt9A_2mwZ-IBySC9rA23IqUitBFsETXcq7YzEF9JW0BbjDzpkAOqTN-2UfXBDecC4wszfoe5GRjbVvzvZwyeHwUmL_92n07D7CgrcpJWwCeILkthHI_aLTVx4qQn9Xnwao1ikNdS1NOEsL4O6YX0jlCCGIZXr/s448/Robert_Bellarmine.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="309" data-original-width="448" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5y8ta9k3rEd6RitGye2MoUVrwM0iJEkAyt9A_2mwZ-IBySC9rA23IqUitBFsETXcq7YzEF9JW0BbjDzpkAOqTN-2UfXBDecC4wszfoe5GRjbVvzvZwyeHwUmL_92n07D7CgrcpJWwCeILkthHI_aLTVx4qQn9Xnwao1ikNdS1NOEsL4O6YX0jlCCGIZXr/s320/Robert_Bellarmine.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><p></p><p>However, Saint Robert Bellarmine points out a dogmatic hermeneutic here; where there is common agreement by the Church Fathers, there is no freedom to oppose their interpretation. This decree from Trent is renewed at Vatican I:</p><blockquote><p>"The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said council [Trent] and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical.</p><p>These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their Author, and were as such committed to the Church.</p><p>Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture.</p><p>In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."</p><p>- Decree of the Vatican Council, 1869-1870</p></blockquote><p>Here we face an immovable object; the Church formally forbids interpreting the Word of God against the consensus of the Fathers, which St. Robert says were agreed about the geocentric cosmological model. No Fathers ever considered that the earth rotates around the sun, especially as an insignificant and obscure planet in some remote location in the galaxies. The teaching was so firmly established that three Popes condemned the idea that earth rotates around the sun as heresy. In his 1885 book <a href="https://archive.org/details/roberts-the-pontifical-decrees-against-the-doctrine-of-the-earths-movement" target="_blank">The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of the Earth’s Movement and the Ultramontane Defence of Them</a> Rev. William W. Roberts argues that the Church exercised her charism of infallibility in the condemnations of heliocentrism. These condemnations occurred prior to Vatican I when Papal infallibility was defined, but the condemnations have never been retracted - nor could they be without destroying the integrity of the ecclesiastical magisterium. </p><p>A brief explanation about the science is perhaps helpful. As shocking as it may sound to the reader, there is no proof that the earth rotates the sun, nor is moving at all despite the claims that it is hurtling through space at a rate of 66,000 miles per hour while rotating at a speed of 1,004 miles per hour at the equator. All the experiments conducted to prove the motion of the earth failed. Albert Einstein developed two (opposing) theories of relativity to save the heliocentric system which at the end of the day simply renders the issue a 'tie': all motion is relative according to Einstein, and we cannot know whether the earth moves or the planets and stars do. And now the latest evidence from James Webb's telescope have scientists, astronomers, and cosmologists <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBMRGYKvuHk" rel="nofollow">scrambling for explanations</a> as what they previously held as fact is thrown into chaos. <br /></p><p>They simply do not know all that they say they know and most people have blindly accepted what they say as though it were an article of faith.</p><p>Back to the roots of Modernism: it was this frontal assault by Galileo (utilizing the system distilled from others by Fr. Nicholas Copernicus) on the Church's authoritative interpretation of Genesis that resulted in his censure. Following Galileo others advanced the heliocentric theory each asserting that he found conclusive evidence for it. Finally the Catholic Church permitted the investigation of the heliocentric model in the late 19th century but never formally retracted the condemnations of Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII. The enemies of the Church used the Galileo affair as a battering ram against her as they do to this day. They accuse her of being anti-science, a position that is laughable now as the Church is infected with Modernism from head to foot. Just say the name "Galileo" and watch modern churchmen apologize profusely, back peddle with haste, and explain how we have now "repented" for the "unjust treatment" of Galileo Galilee. </p><p>This idea prevails to the present moment: t<i>he Church was wrong for 18 centuries in her authoritative interpretation of Genesis</i>. The problem with this perception is that it contradicts the twice defined dogma of patristic biblical interpretation; it undermines the authority of previous Supreme Pontiffs who acted uniformly in condemning heliocentrism as heresy; and it opens the door for the Church to be accused on multiple fronts for false teaching based on anti-scientific exegesis. </p><p>Modernism wounds divine and Catholic faith with a malignantly inspired skepticism about the truth of revelation. It attacks the first words of Sacred Scripture in order to topple all that follows. It assumes a role above the science of divinity in order to criticize and ridicule it. But Modernism itself is condemned by the Church in the encyclical <i>Pascendi Domenici gregis</i> promulgated by Pope Pius X in 1907. It may surprise the reader to learn that St. Pius X is not quoted even once in the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II. John Paul II <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13618460-600-vatican-admits-galileo-was-right/" target="_blank">famously apologized</a> for the Galileo affair explaining that "theologians had erred" in concluding that heliocentrism was formal heresy.</p><p>It is easy to be intimidated by Modernists today who reign in the Church Militant as the Arians did in the 4th and 5th centuries. They laugh in your face if you suggest the Catholic Church was right to condemn heliocentrism as heresy. They mock and scoff at the very idea that science could be wrong about anything. Yet until the churchmen - you and I - start to stand up for our faith as the martyr-Saints always have in the face of a world that is under the dominion of the devil, the false beliefs of the world will not only dominate profane thinking but continue to wound the faith of the Catholic Church.</p><p>Evolution must be confuted in our apologetics; but that is all activity above the ground level. To remove the roots of Modernism, we must believe what the Church has always taught and recover the teaching of the holy Fathers as regards our central place in the cosmos. This task is not for the faint of heart or those who desire the esteem of the world. </p><p><br /></p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-78560403857322050422023-01-02T15:08:00.068-08:002024-01-15T14:57:24.728-08:00Benedict XVI: Pope of Evolution<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh50PvupBrek8gfMKheBiW85Y4qmCU71PRSBqwAZvIGZU-NIJhKqWxOkJXqZeyAUPaXLECdOXtfQPQuVyoQ_sl5HMTI3qznHo50y7iAZFHJdyzg7ArrPhRNBMhp29EKea8az3A9AkZlFR9ofO-As7W89smW12nb1Idghe1bE_a3GInclFSNcWEU127sRQ/s458/PapaRatzinger.jpg"><img border="0" data-original-height="458" data-original-width="457" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh50PvupBrek8gfMKheBiW85Y4qmCU71PRSBqwAZvIGZU-NIJhKqWxOkJXqZeyAUPaXLECdOXtfQPQuVyoQ_sl5HMTI3qznHo50y7iAZFHJdyzg7ArrPhRNBMhp29EKea8az3A9AkZlFR9ofO-As7W89smW12nb1Idghe1bE_a3GInclFSNcWEU127sRQ/w199-h200/PapaRatzinger.jpg" width="199" /></a></div><div style="text-align: right;"><br /></div>As the Catholic world mourns the death of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, baptized Josef Aloysius Ratzinger (<i>may he rest in peace</i>), his contributions to the Church and her theology will certainly receive fitting attention. <p></p><p>The late Pope's theology was formed decisively during the inter-war period when foment for <i>Ressourcement</i> theology reached its zenith in Europe. Ressourcement as the French epithet suggests entailed a return to the primary sources of Christian faith - the Scriptures, the Fathers, the early Greek and Latin theologians. </p><p>This movement was a counterreaction to the renewal of Scholastic philosophy and theology of St. Thomas Aquinas. The renewal dubbed 'neo-scholasticism' by its opponents represented a legitimate call for a return to St. Thomas as the best viable option to combat the super-heresy of Modernism. This renewal begun by Pope Leo XIII is laid out in profoundly specific action plans in Pope Pius X's encyclical <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">Pascendi Domenici gregis</a> (On the Doctrines of the Modernists):<br /></p><blockquote><p>In the first place, with regard to studies, We will and ordain that <b>scholastic philosophy</b> be made the basis of the sacred sciences. It goes without saying that if anything is met with among the scholastic doctors which may be regarded as an excess of subtlety, or which is altogether destitute of probability, We have no desire whatever to propose it for the imitation of present generations (Leo XIII. Enc. Aeterni Patris). <b>And let it be clearly understood above all things that the scholastic philosophy We prescribe is that which the Angelic Doctor has bequeathed to us</b>, and We, therefore, declare that all the ordinances of Our Predecessor on this subject continue fully in force, and, as far as may be necessary, <b>We do decree anew, and confirm, and ordain that they be by all strictly observed. </b>In seminaries where they may have been neglected let the Bishops impose them and require their observance, and let this apply also to the Superiors of religious institutions. Further let Professors remember that <b>they cannot set St. Thomas aside, especially in metaphysical questions, without grave detriment</b>. (Pascendi gregis #45)</p></blockquote><p> Reaction to Pope Pius X's encyclical was both strong and divisive; it resulted in the excommunication of some of Modernism's chief luminaries (Fr. George Tyrrell, S.J. and Fr. Alfred Loisy) and drove many of its adepts underground. Chafed by the restrictions of neo-scholasticism, some ventured a way around them by appeal to primary sources which when exegeted carefully could circumvent St. Thomas. The movement aimed to find a way to entertain the modern philosophies that sprang up after the French revolution; philosophies that more adequately reflected the juggernaut of the profane sciences and the progress it purported to hail.</p><p>The immovable object for the innovators was the twice dogmatically defined prohibition on exegeting Scripture against the consensus of the Church Fathers:</p><p></p><blockquote><p>Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture.</p><p>In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."</p><p>-Vatican Council, Chapter II, On Revelation</p></blockquote><p></p><div>Moreover that same ecumenical council established strict rules about the applications of philosophy:<br /><blockquote><div>7. Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false [34].</div><div>8. Furthermore the Church which, together with its apostolic office of teaching, has received the charge of preserving the deposit of faith, has by divine appointment the right and duty of condemning what wrongly passes for knowledge, lest anyone be led astray by philosophy and empty deceit [35].</div><div>9. Hence all faithful Christians are forbidden to defend as the legitimate conclusions of science those opinions which are known to be contrary to the doctrine of faith, particularly if they have been condemned by the Church; and furthermore they are absolutely bound to hold them to be errors which wear the deceptive appearance of truth.</div><div>(Session III, chapter iv)</div></blockquote></div><p>Parenthetically, we may remind the reader that historically and traditionally philosophy encompassed a great deal of subject matter - which included natural sciences, metaphysics, and what we now think of as psychology. The adage in the Church: philosophy is the handmaid of theology.</p><blockquote><p>For in the vast and varied abundance of studies opening before the mind desirous of truth, everybody knows how the old maxim describes theology as so far in front of all others that every science and art should serve it and be to it as handmaidens. (Leo XIII., Lett. ap. In Magna, Dec. 10, 1889).</p></blockquote><p>In his analysis of Modernism, St. Pius X concludes that the primary error in the system flows from its agnostic philosophy, which is condemned in the Council of the Vatican, 1869-1870. Likewise in a similarly urgent encyclical promulgated by Pope Pius XII in 1950, <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html" target="_blank">Humani generis </a>warns that </p><blockquote><p> 6. Such fictitious tenets of <b>evolution</b> which repudiate all that is absolute, firm and immutable, have paved the way for the <b>new erroneous philosophy</b> which, rivaling idealism, immanentism and pragmatism, has assumed the name of existentialism, since it concerns itself only with existence of individual things and neglects all consideration of their immutable essences.</p></blockquote><p>Forty-three years earlier St. Pius X had warned against the disastrous effects of evolutionism in his 1907 encyclical:</p><blockquote><p> To finish with this whole question of faith and its shoots, it remains to be seen, Venerable Brethren, what the Modernists have to say about their development. First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of <b>Evolution</b>. To the <b>laws of evolution everything is subject</b> - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death.</p><p>...Consequently, the formulae too, which we call dogmas, must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic <b>evolution of dogma</b>. An immense collection of sophisms this, that ruins and destroys all religion. Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and as clearly flows from their principles." (Pasc. 36, 13)</p></blockquote><p>The theory of evolution cannot be reconciled with the early chapters of Genesis without doing violence to Sacred Scripture. While this is disputed by many, the cleavage generally falls into opposing camps, one that says scientific theory must submit to the revealed Word of God, the other that claims Scripture must be reinterpreted in order to accommodate scientific theory. The Church has always taught that true science cannot oppose what God has revealed, "who can neither deceive nor be deceived" (Vatican I). </p><p>The Modernists obviously opted for the latter in the borrowing from the protestants a new biblical pseudo-science known alternately as the 'historico-critical' method or form criticism. It is condemned by Pope Leo XIII in <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus.html" target="_blank">Providentissimus Deus</a> and by St. Pius X in Pascendi. </p><p>The great prophet of evolution was in fact a student of the aforementioned Fr. Tyrrell in England. Teilhard de Chardin's <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/teilhard-chardin-vii-architect/" target="_blank">grotesque theology-fiction</a> (epithet ascribed by Etienne Gilson) generated an impressive series of books, tracts, and articles which were suppressed by his own order (Society of Jesus) for their explosive content, forbidding Teilhard to publish or to teach. Yet his ideas caught on rapidly through an underground network of enthusiasts, and for some proposed a promising synthesis of Catholic religion and evolutionary theory. Teilhard's insistence on the primacy of evolution left no room for dissent:<br /></p><blockquote><p>Is evolution a theory, a system or a hypothesis? It is much more: it is a general condition to which all theories, all hypotheses, all systems must bow and which they must satisfy henceforward if they are to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light illuminating all facts, a curve that all lines must follow.</p><p>- Teilhard de Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, p. 130.</p></blockquote><p> Obviously in the face of such ideological absolutism, Scholastic philosophy seemed dusty, irrelevant, and overcome by events. The conviction among the partisans of Ressourcement was so intense that Fr. Josef Ratzinger was impelled to say</p><blockquote><p>I want to emphasize again that I decidedly agree with [Hans] Kung when he makes a clear distinction between Roman theology (taught in the schools of Rome) and the Catholic Faith. To free itself from the constraining fetters of Roman Scholastic Theology represents a duty upon which, in my humble opinion, the possibility of the survival of Catholicism seems to depend.</p><p>(Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, from a chapter in the book Zum Problem Unfehlbarkeit – “The Problem of Infallibility”, a series of essays edited by Karl Rahner and published in 1971)</p></blockquote><p><b>Here the tensions are displayed clearly and openly</b>: For a new and relevant Catholicism to emerge Roman Scholastic theology must be overcome. For Ratzinger, the contestation was existential; the survival of the Catholic faith depended on it.</p><p>Fr. Ratzinger, a native German subscribed to the philosophy of Georg W. F. Hegel. This <a href="https://philosophynow.org/issues/42/Hegel_and_the_Trinity" target="_blank">system</a> applies a theory of evolution known as dialectics, whereby a thesis is opposed by it's antithesis, and from the dialectic struggle between the two, a new synthesis emerges which itself becomes a thesis, and the process continues indefinitely. There is little room in Hegel's system for St. Thomas, and at the risk of a gross oversimplification, Hegel's philosophy may be considered the ontology of <i>becoming</i> as opposed St. Thomas' philosophy of <i>being</i>.<br /><br />The biological-historical theory of evolution proposed by Darwin and embellished with Catholic syntax by Teilhard de Chardin provided a basis for Hegelian philosophy in nature. If evolution were true as the modernists proposed, the entire approach to Catholicism and even the God-Man Christ Jesus required a comprehensive reappraisal, leading the editors of the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et spes) to conclude:<br /></p><p></p><blockquote>"Thus, the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as numerous as can be, calling for efforts of analysis and synthesis." GS #5)</blockquote><p> Fr. Ratzinger remained a convinced evolutionist for his entire life. His <a href="https://www.ncronline.org/news/pope-cites-teilhardian-vision-cosmos-living-host" target="_blank">effusive praise of Teilhard de Chardin</a> culminated in his characterization of Christ's resurrection as a 'mutation' in his <a href="https://thewandererpress.com/catholic/news/our-catholic-faith/easter-vigil-homily-2006-pope-benedict-xvi-what-does-christs-resurrection-mean-for-us/" target="_blank">2006 Easter Sunday sermon</a>. His voluminous writing both as a cleric and a private doctor feature ubiquitous references to Teilhardian concepts such as hominization, complexification, cosmogenesis, and other terminology indigenous to the Jesuit. </p><p>As regards creation, Josef Ratzinger ascribed to the <a href="https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Documentary_hypothesis" target="_blank">documentary hypothesis</a> advanced by the 19th century protestant biblical critics, which proposed that the Scriptures were redacted, edited, compiled by various sources conditioned by their own times and circumstances and are not the work of the authors accredited to them by the Church Fathers.</p><blockquote><p>"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...."<o:p></o:p></p><p>…these words give rise to a certain conflict. They are beautiful and
familiar, <b>but are they also true?</b> Everything seems to speak against it, for
science has long since disposed of the concepts that we have just now heard --
the idea of a world that is completely comprehensible in terms of space and
time, and the idea that creation was built up piece by piece over the course of
seven [or six] days. Instead of this we now face measurements that transcend
all comprehension.<o:p></o:p></p><p>…Do these words, then, count for anything? In fact a theologian said not
long ago that creation has now become an "unreal" concept; that if
one is to be intellectually honest one ought to speak no longer of creation but
rather of "mutation and selection." Are these words true?<o:p></o:p></p><p>There were times when Israel was so preoccupied with the sufferings or the
hopes of its own history, so fastened upon the here and now, that there was
hardly any use in its looking back at creation; indeed, it hardly could. The
moment <b>when creation became a dominant theme occurred during the Babylonian
Exile</b>. It was then that the account that we have just heard -- based, to be
sure, on very ancient traditions -- assumed its present form. Israel had lost
its land and its temple. According to the mentality of the time this was
something incomprehensible, for it meant that the God of Israel was vanquished
-- a God whose people, whose land, and whose worshipers could be snatched away
from him. A God who could not defend his worshipers and his worship was seen to
be, at the time, a weak God. Indeed, he was no God at all; he had abandoned his
divinity. And so, being driven out of their own land and being erased from the
map was for Israel a terrible trial: Has our God been vanquished, and is our
faith void?<o:p></o:p></p><p>
</p><p>Ratzinger, <a href="https://catholicbridge.com/catholic/ratzinger-creationism.php">In the
Beginning</a> (<i>editor's note: the people of Israel were exiled because of centuries of idolatry and grave sins, and only went into captivity after the Lord God had mercifully sent His prophets to forewarn and admonish them to repent</i>)</p></blockquote><p> As regards liturgy, where he is highly regarded by some Traditionalists as being a major force in preserving the integrity of the Missal of St. Pius V, he writes</p><blockquote><p>“The history of the liturgy is constantly growing into an ever-new now, and it must also repeatedly prune back a present that has become the past, so that what is essential can reappear with new vigor. The liturgy needs growth and development as well as purgation and refining and in both cases needs to preserve its identity and that purpose without which it would lose the very reason for its existence. And if that is really the case, then the alternative between ‘traditionalists’ and ‘reformers’ is woefully inadequate to the situation. He who believes that he can only choose between old and new has already traveled a good way along a dead-end street.” </p></blockquote><blockquote><p>(Cardinal Ratzinger – 1994 sermon on the occasion of the retirement of his brother, Monsignor Georg Ratzinger, as choirmaster of Regensburg Cathedral)</p></blockquote><p>In a <a href="https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253202/full-text-of-benedict-xvis-spiritual-testament" target="_blank">2006 letter</a> written during his Papacy, Pope Benedict XVI with his eventual decease in view, sweetly and gently thanks God, his parents, siblings, and other supporters for his lifelong blessings and sundry advantages. The longest paragraph is reserved for his ruminations about science. </p><p>Without analyzing Ratzinger's theological postulations directly, we can at least pause and ask, where does this leave us in reference to Modernism? Is Modernism no longer a threat to Christian revelation? The fact that Josef Ratzinger came to be the Prefect for the Confratenity of the Doctrine of the Faith - in effect, the supreme chief of theological integrity in the Catholic Church - requires us to ask, what then became of Modernism? What is the dogmatic legacy of Pope Benedict XVI? Can the grave warnings issued by St. Pius X and Pope Pius XII in Pascendi and Humani generis be ignored now? Is a philosophy dependent upon evolution now to be considered not only true, but a replacement for St. Thomas' Scholastic philosophy? Is St. Thomas now opposed to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church? Has the philosophy of <i>becoming</i> overtaken the philosophy of <i>being</i>? </p><p>Defenders of the late Pontiff will undoubtedly point to his laudable and and inspiring work of preserving the Traditional Roman liturgy. This is indeed a most profoundly important development for the Church; but we must ask, why did he do it?</p><p>In The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by Msgr. Klaus Gamber, Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) wrote:</p><p></p><blockquote>J. A. Jungmann, one of the truly great liturgists of our time, defined the liturgy of his day, such as it could be understood in the light of historical research, as a "liturgy which is the fruit of development" . . . What happened after the [Second Vatican] Council was something else entirely: in the place of the liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries and replaced it, as in a manufacturing process, with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product (produit banal de l'instant). [Introduction by Cardinal Ratzinger to La Reforme Liturgique en question (Le-Barroux: Editions Sainte-Madeleine), 1992, pp. 7-8.]</blockquote><p>Could the "organic, living process of growth and development over centuries" be in fact a reference to evolution in the mind of Cardinal Ratzinger? Could his contention be with the process of reform (revolution) which disregarded what he esteemed the proper way (evolution)? Could his insistence on subjecting the reforms that proceeded from the Second Vatican Council to a "hermeneutic of continuity" be a reflection of his Hegelian philosophy? Could his primary concern with evolution have driven his moderation of the more radical reforms of the council?</p><p>This essay deliberately avoids any consideration of the man Josef Ratzinger, or his prudential decisions in governing the Catholic Church, many which cheered the heart of this author during his pontificate. The real concern for this essay is the threat Modernism continues to pose to the Catholic Church. If Modernism - absolutely dependent on the theory of evolution - is now enshrined at the highest levels of doctrinal authority in the Church, who were its champions? And how can we claim heroic sanctity and virtue for its supporters? </p><p>As with Modernism and its offshoots addressed by Pope Pius XII in Humani generis, it is philosophy which is determinative for the formulation of errors. And errors about nature are the most serious, for they distort our ability to reason. We will conclude with St. Thomas:</p><blockquote><p>It is absolutely false to maintain, with reference to the truths of our faith, that what we believe regarding the creation is of no consequence, so long as one has an exact conception of God; because an error regarding the nature of creation always gives rise to a false idea concerning God.</p><p>—Thomas Aquinas, "Summa Contra Gentiles"</p><div><br /></div><p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><p></p></blockquote><p></p><div><br /></div><p></p><p><br /></p><p> </p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-7811092403400599372022-07-30T14:31:00.014-07:002022-07-31T17:57:18.103-07:00Why we doubt the consecration of Russia-Ukraine by Pope Francis <p> The consecration of Russia (and an unasked for Ukraine) <a href="https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/250756/vatican-pope-francis-text-for-march-25-consecration-prayer" target="_blank">delivered by Pope Francis on 25 March 2022</a> is of doubtful value for peace in our times. The intention is defective; the objective is oblique; and the animus behind the current Papacy is decisively opposed to what our Lady of Fatima requested.</p><p>Even a casual perusal of the consecration prayer reveals nothing in reference to our Lady of Fatima, nor the purpose of the requested consecration she revealed to Sister Lucia in 1929 for the conversion of Russia. The Pope's prayer asks for<i> peace</i>. Peace is what our Lady promised the world if the consecration was carried out as she requested. What Pope Francis did was to request the fruits of the consecration without performing the requirements of the consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary: ask for the conversion of Russia, lest that nation fill the world (and sadly now, even the Church) with its errors. Failure to do the consecration properly (according to the Fatima redactor, Sister Lucia) would result in Russia spreading its errors (atheistic communism) throughout the world resulting in wars, the annihilation of entire nations, and the persecution of the Church.</p><p>The real reason that heaven cannot accept the consecration is that the men of the Church have chosen their own path to peace in utter disregard for Fatima.</p><p>This began in April of 1963 when Pope John XXIII promulgated the encyclical <i><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/john-xxiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem.html" target="_blank">Pacem in terris</a></i>, subtitled Establishing Universal Peace in Truth, Justice, Charity, and Liberty. The encyclical demonstrated an utterly earthbound, quasi-humanist attempt to instrumentalize the Church as a vehicle for attaining a temporal peace in the world by an appeal to what amounts to the French Revolution's slogan of liberty, equality, and fraternity. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuktDkhnxGemIiR_v7LBzJY88n_aeQGsRVk0UtpUQqfuN-MW1fwKL3HCxTxSOH-NiUnPTtKEHHQQFSKcnq5sc8d6HOQLmlc-nmqdL_R_yo9QWcjVn8rsHeCZrl1uZ7K32IwE9o6IuO3RepiNRc_BCHsPLq-pU0TxORKzmFdhGNShTIL_L99H8u6t4HhA/s385/Pacen%20in%20terris.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="195" data-original-width="385" height="162" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuktDkhnxGemIiR_v7LBzJY88n_aeQGsRVk0UtpUQqfuN-MW1fwKL3HCxTxSOH-NiUnPTtKEHHQQFSKcnq5sc8d6HOQLmlc-nmqdL_R_yo9QWcjVn8rsHeCZrl1uZ7K32IwE9o6IuO3RepiNRc_BCHsPLq-pU0TxORKzmFdhGNShTIL_L99H8u6t4HhA/s320/Pacen%20in%20terris.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>The encyclical was published during the Second Vatican Council which had begun in October 1962 and provided an impetus to it that would inspire many churchmen to pursue peace through merely human means as though the Mother of God had not even appeared in Fatima, or requested the consecration of Russia.</p><p>The Council, seeking rapprochement with the communist sphere of influence then engulfing the eastern hemisphere welcomed observers from the Russian Orthodox Church on the (KGB's) condition that communism - <b><i>the very errors of Russia our Lady warned against</i></b> - would not be condemned. Pope John XXIII agreed to this in the little known <a href="https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a007ht.htm" target="_blank">Pact of Metz</a>, guaranteeing no condemnation of communism at Vatican II. The calculus was this: uniting the Eastern Churches with Rome would strengthen the ties between the free countries and those restricted by atheist communism. This would come not by an act of religion (the requested consecration of our Lady of Fatima) but by human efforts and the new orientation of ecumenism.</p><p>Although nearly 500 council fathers signed a formal petition during the council to condemn communism (as Pope Pius XI did in <i><a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19370319_divini-redemptoris.html" target="_blank">Divini redemptoris</a></i>, 1937), the petition was lost, and no condemnation ever occurred. </p><p>Following the council, Pope Paul VI gave a <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/speeches/1965/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_19651004_united-nations.html" target="_blank">speech</a> at the United Nations on 4 December, 1965 in which he appealed</p><blockquote><p>...this lofty Institution, and it comes from our experience of history... is as an "expert on humanity" [and] we bring this Organization the support and approval of our recent predecessors, that of the Catholic hierarchy, and our own, convinced as we are that this <b>Organization </b>[the United Nations]<b> represents the obligatory path of modern civilization and world peace</b>.</p><p>... People turn to the United Nations as if it were their last hope for peace and harmony. We presume to bring here their tribute of honor and of hope along with our own. That is why this moment is a great one for you too.</p></blockquote><p> Fatima does not even appear to be in the consciousness of the Supreme Pontiff nor of the conciliar fathers although it seems plausible that the best opportunity the Church ever had to perform the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary would have been at the Second Vatican Council where 2,400 prelates were assembled together in the same city, and even in the same room.</p><p>No one championed the council with more vigor and zeal than Pope John Paul II, who hailed it as the event that caused us to see the Church in an "<a href="https://destroyerofheresies.blogspot.com/2020/08/xxx.html" target="_blank">utterly new way, quite unknown previously</a>" (<a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html" target="_blank">Redemptor hominis</a>, March 1979). In fact, John Paul II was so convinced that the Council contained the promise and justification for achieving peace that he convened the spectacle of the <a href="https://jp2online.pl/en/publication/assisi-1986-%E2%80%94-day-of-prayer-for-peace-meeting-of-world-religions;UHVibGljYXRpb246Nzg=" target="_blank">Prayer Meeting of All Religions at Assisi in 1986</a>. The stated purpose of this event was to ask the various deities and luminaries (as well as the Triune God) for peace in the world through the orchestrated cacophony of pluralist religious activity. The event appeared to place the religion of Jesus Christ, God-made-Man on the same level as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and many other religious systems. The common denominator is man in whom the Pope finds the key to true peace and brotherhood. </p><blockquote><p>"Man ... is the primary route that the Church must travel in fulfilling her mission: he is the primary and fundamental way for the Church, the way traced out by Christ himself, the way that leads invariably through the mystery of the Incarnation and the Redemption." (<i>Redemptor hominis</i> #13)</p></blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq7yxaHGx-esq8N-LyN14u-PI8fDQg-GO5h4c-K41jzeWmGSMAiUdtj_YyVfR8UpjBGLDuecY8sYwSLZWQuL6z-otsYOiN08sAVG2KFMaJOXGQhONAQOsVnELrQ8RnzcUTHV4RvO1xf1BO_ar0TQlwxTOZnwmVVCwyFxgJJv3zfp5hEefHHK494ypQ4w/s589/assisi%20jp%202.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="239" data-original-width="589" height="130" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq7yxaHGx-esq8N-LyN14u-PI8fDQg-GO5h4c-K41jzeWmGSMAiUdtj_YyVfR8UpjBGLDuecY8sYwSLZWQuL6z-otsYOiN08sAVG2KFMaJOXGQhONAQOsVnELrQ8RnzcUTHV4RvO1xf1BO_ar0TQlwxTOZnwmVVCwyFxgJJv3zfp5hEefHHK494ypQ4w/s320/assisi%20jp%202.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>About the correlation between Vatican II and Assisi Prayer the Pope said</p><blockquote><p> “The day of Assisi, showing the Catholic Church holding hands with our brothers of other religions, was a visible expression of [the] statements of the Second Vatican Council.” </p><p>Pope John Paul II went on to celebrate the inter-religious prayer meeting at Assisi as a new direction for the future, “The event of Assisi” he said, “can thus be considered as a visible illustration, an exegesis of events, a catechesis intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitments to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and promoted by the Second Vatican Council.”</p><p>Toward the end of the speech, the Pope urged his Cardinals to continue on the same new path, “Keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future.”</p><p>- Pope’s Christmas Address to Roman Curia,” L’Osservatore Romano, January 5, 1987, pp. 6-7.</p></blockquote><p>The event itself - repeated by the same Pope in 2002 - shocked the sensibilities of Catholics and protestants alike with its audacious assertion that all prayer is directed to the one God regardless of the intent of the one praying. John Paul II left no doubt about this assertion:</p><blockquote><p>"It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions.</p><p>In every authentic religious experience, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person.”</p><p>(Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7).</p></blockquote><p>The same Supreme Pontiff who urged the Curia to “keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future” finds a willingness to do just that in successors Pope Benedict XVI who convened a <a href="https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Program-published-for-Assisi-Day-of-Prayer,-2011-21199.html" target="_blank">third Assisi event in 2011</a> and in Pope Francis who participated in a <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/female-indigenous-leader-reveals-pagan-significance-of-tree-planting-ceremony-in-vatican-gardens/" target="_blank">pagan ceremony at the Vatican in 2019</a> and <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-welcomes-controversial-abu-dhabi-document/" target="_blank">signed a document with the Grand Imam of Al Azhar</a> alleging that God wills the existence of all religions. </p><p><b>Which brings us back to Fatima</b>: why would heaven accept the truncated, humanistic prayer of Pope Francis to end the war (without Russia's conversion) in Ukraine when he is inebriated with the spirit of Assisi Prayer himself? Make no mistake; Assisi Prayer is diametrically opposed to the message of Fatima in every way. Assisi prayer is based on a false conception of both man and God; far from requiring anyone's conversion, it offers Papal sanction to the practice of every religion imaginable. Assisi prayer sought peace through the mere human instruments of interreligious dialogue and ecumenical activity. Assisi Prayer is in the final analysis a shockingly impious repudiation of the message of Fatima in preference for man's own ways of attaining peace.</p><blockquote><p>"Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord." [Jeremias 17,5]</p></blockquote><p>How could heaven set aside this monstrous effrontery? How could our Lady of Fatima accept the prayer of Pope Francis for peace when the entire hierarchy with few exceptions has been compromising with Russia's errors for 60 years now? The root of this rejection of Fatima lies in the purpose and orientation of the Second Vatican Council; the council rejected the supernatural means of achieving peace provided by our Lady and chose the arm of flesh - humanistic ecumenism and interreligious dialogue. </p><p>The same tragic exchange occurred in Judea when the Jews chose the way of political insurgency by crying out for the release of the terrorist Barabbas instead of the Prince of Peace, Jesus of Nazareth. Their violent insurgency ended with the death of a million Hebrews in the siege of Jerusalem 66-70 A.D. by the Roman emperor Titus. By choosing the means of mere human efforts and rejecting the sure path promised by the Queen of Heaven, we too are meeting the consequences of our decisions. </p><p>The spirit of Vatican II - identified by Pope John Paul as being fulfilled at the Assisi Prayer events - is diametrically opposed to the spirit of Fatima. They both seek the same end but with dramatically different paths of attainment. Pope Francis asked for an end to the war in Ukraine, but he did not consecrate Russia and Russia alone to the Immaculate Heart of Mary for it's conversion. On top of all our other sins and moral failures, we have added an impious request for the Blessed Virgin Mary to bend her will to that of sinful humanity and grant us peace without conversion.</p><p>That is simply not going to happen.</p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-9660731320729165182022-06-05T15:46:00.008-07:002022-06-05T19:25:56.229-07:00A short theology of climate change<p> The only human behaviors that can affect the weather - known colloquially today as 'climate change' or 'global warming' - are offenses against the Creator when He has explicitly warned against them.</p><p>This essay will not discuss the so-called scientific evidence that usually reaches the conclusion its financiers favor; there simply is no settled science on the issue of weather patterns based on the causality of human behavior. The sample size of a couple hundred years is mathematically too small to consider, especially for those who believe the earth is billions of years old.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3CTrpJ-KXXPZAG8oHZuZfIEcizM9NNSCrMNsZybAx55HleejwE437FMzMV-bXrKQdRavT7eEmMz_vkJZ5dRabQrThPKn1KVL9TrStXrbF0hXvF--YFgxBdJRu-2Oq8GHUf7aQai6pZOJKSURjlCZoAeNDVi3CY7TFcqY95GP7XLVJvVN_M0mYhJTGMA/s553/big%20sun2.JPG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="553" data-original-width="507" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3CTrpJ-KXXPZAG8oHZuZfIEcizM9NNSCrMNsZybAx55HleejwE437FMzMV-bXrKQdRavT7eEmMz_vkJZ5dRabQrThPKn1KVL9TrStXrbF0hXvF--YFgxBdJRu-2Oq8GHUf7aQai6pZOJKSURjlCZoAeNDVi3CY7TFcqY95GP7XLVJvVN_M0mYhJTGMA/s320/big%20sun2.JPG" width="293" /></a></div>Nor is the most basic evidence available in this controversy applied to most debates: the massive size of the sun and its blazing heat compared to the relatively tiny earth. If anyone seriously proposes that bovine flatulence or other carbon-emitting activity directly impacts the energy of the sun, we are not dealing with science but (sadly as is too often the case) science-fiction. <br /><p></p><p>Theologically, there is one caretaker of the cosmos: almighty God, creator of heaven and earth. The traditional theology - never disproven - posits the governance of the universe by the agency of angels. These angels perfectly obey the Creator's every command, and as Sacred Scripture reveals, have power over the earth:</p><blockquote><p>And I heard a great voice out of the temple, saying to the seven angels: Go, and pour out the seven vials of the wrath of God upon the earth. [2] And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth, and there fell a sore and grievous wound upon men, who had the character of the beast; and upon them that adored the image thereof. [3] And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea, and there came blood as it were of a dead man; and every living soul died in the sea. [4] And the third poured out his vial upon the rivers and the fountains of waters; and there was made blood. [5] And I heard the angel of the waters saying: Thou art just, O Lord, who art, and who wast, the Holy One, because thou hast judged these things: [6] For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy. (Apocalypse 16, 1-6)</p></blockquote><p>The great interventions of the Old Testament show us the punishments that afflicted men were not the result of "abusing the environment" but of committing abominable acts that offended the Creator. The <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01007.htm" target="_blank">great Deluge</a> came because of the universality of human wickedness, completely changing the 'environment' forever; the <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01011.htm" target="_blank">multiplication of languages at the Tower of Babel</a> was the divine response to the secular humanism of the day; the scorching <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01019.htm" target="_blank">obliteration of the cities on the Plain of Zeboim</a> - to this day the lowest elevation on earth - came in response to the foul crime of sodomy. The <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/02007.htm" target="_blank">plagues visited upon the Egyptians</a> came not because of wanton excavations of the earth to build the pyramids, but from defying the God of Israel's direct commandments.</p><p>The Biblical record is replete with divine chastisements of floods, earthquakes, droughts, famines, and plagues which came upon men not for offenses committed against the <i>terra firma</i>, but against the will of God. </p><p>Saint Thomas Aquinas treats the divine government in the <a href="http://www.catholictheology.info/summa-theologica/summa-part1.php?t=7" target="_blank">Summa</a>:</p><blockquote><p>5. All things are subject to the divine government, since this is the divine goodness of God himself. The divine goodness is both the first effecting cause and the ultimate final cause (or ultimate goal) of everything. No positive being can exist without the divine goodness, and therefore everything, in particular and in singular as well as in general, is governed by the same divine goodness.</p><p>6. God alone designs the government of the universe, and this is his providence. The design is carried into execution or actual governing operation through use of secondary causes (creatures) as media or means of governing.</p><p>7. Since God is the first and universal cause, nothing in the universe can lie outside the order of his government. When something seems to evade divine government, the very cause of the seeming evasion will be found in the divine government itself. As we saw in our study of divine providence, nothing whatever is outside the divine rule.</p></blockquote><p>What then do we reply to the apologists of the currently popular phrase that man has a stewardship over the earth? If this is so, it would be relatively easy to cite chapter and verse from the record of revelation that provides this explanation. But all we have is this:</p><blockquote><p>And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life. [18] Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the earth. [19] In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return. (Genesis 3, 17-19)</p></blockquote><p>This work of tilling the soil was in fact, a disciplinary punishment for sin. The real justification for any stewardship of the earth comes to Adam and Eve to have dominion over the earth and subdue it:</p><blockquote><p>And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him <b>have dominion</b> over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth. [27] And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. [28] And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and <b>subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.</b> [29] And God said: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat: [30] And to all beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to all that move upon the earth, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done. (Genesis 1, 26-30).</p></blockquote><p>While some may suggest the phrases 'have dominion' and 'subdue it' imply a moral responsibility towards the terrain of the planet itself, this idea is never developed in Catholic theology until the 1970s under the rubric of the Malthusian theory of overpopulation which has yet to materialize.</p><p>The idea that the LORD God created a fragile earth that his creatures could destroy by 'abusing the environment' is unheard of in salvation history. The earth is astonishingly resilient without any interference from man as every volcanic eruption testifies. The same pagan conception of the earth's alleged impotence in providing for all the resources of a multiplying human population fuels the madness that men must galvanize geopolitical action in order to halt the rise of a mythical global warming trend. 'The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof" (Psalm 24, 1). </p><p>No, the traditional theology of ecology is that the entire enterprise belongs to God from beginning to end, and that He reserves the right to marshal the forces of nature to influence human activity. What we are being sold with unbridled hysteria is a purely pagan idea: that an exaggerated regard for the physical environment is the exclusive province of man, and that only man can save himself from being cooked alive by his rapacious treatment of the environment. The solutions proposed for this alleged crisis appear to threaten the environment far more extensively than the production and consumption of fossil fuels: to build a single 1,000 pound battery for a hybrid vehicle <a href="https://usa.streetsblog.org/2021/02/09/lithium-mining-and-the-hidden-environmental-costs-of-evs/" target="_blank">250 tons of earth must be excavated</a> to obtain the precious metals required. Then the problem of environmentally responsible disposal of tens of thousands of these batteries at the end of their shelf-life imposes another threat upon the ground we all depend upon for growing food and water.</p><p>Proof of this new paganism is in the complete and utter disregard for real moral outrages that have historically brought cataclysmic chastisements upon the human race, and yes, the topography: infanticide, promotion of unnatural sexual acts, defilement of temples, perversions of [human] nature, wanton violence, promotion of atheism, etc... These crimes escape the indignation of our climate prophets who see in them the progress of human evolution - <i>another pagan conception</i> - and focus rather on 'carbon credits' and other theoretical threats that our God has never mentioned, nor His prophets. </p><p>What is truly astonishing is how easily Catholics get carried away with this entire pagan superstructure of ecological fragility in the name of a biblical 'stewardship over the earth.' While it is true that the current Pope has promulgated an <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si_en.pdf" target="_blank">encyclical</a> on the environment the theological underpinnings of its thesis are embarrassingly shallow. There is simply no centuries-long tradition of any moral imperative to take God's place as master over the cosmos. Even if one concedes that the biblical record may lend credibility to a stewardship over the natural resources of the earth, that interpretation could not possibly extend to the weather patterns, which is what the priests of the climate change hysteria are worried about most. </p><p>The real crisis we are facing is a crisis of antichristian gullibility. Without the universal acceptance of the natural law that the Creator wrote upon our hearts, men fall for the flimsiest substitutes and theories. Climate change theory is simply the latest in a long line of panhumanist causes that animates the minds of men that have either rejected the natural law (and by extension, the God of nature) or have been inoculated against it by malicious indoctrination. The menu of draconian solutions being proposed by the prophets of the environment comprise a list of self-inflicted disasters waiting to engulf us because we rejected the fear of the Lord. </p><p>Weather patterns which may certainly include natural disasters cannot be credibly attributed to human behaviors; they can with some supernatural interventions be recognized as supranatural applications of the divine prudence. God may punish men for their collective crimes by ecological signs; but He is off the record as ever having assigned the control of weather patterns to the sons of Adam. </p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6uhstLBo4WvpnQ5_pFJqPRnbiXWzXGVJxvUnmrKXgVhxxyw-P4_XAK6X3--uFF4j1hl_xozeOwFJN-slQMEfrwRU4yIdy0ttd6t3NZHAKs4a2UyMLfF_wefoMUrVIV0E6cNADXRgIK81e4Mwhmq9Q4oV6qrCNUcZin8ZZnUETpir3rHZcqvBTN-TECg/s684/noahsark.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="339" data-original-width="684" height="159" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6uhstLBo4WvpnQ5_pFJqPRnbiXWzXGVJxvUnmrKXgVhxxyw-P4_XAK6X3--uFF4j1hl_xozeOwFJN-slQMEfrwRU4yIdy0ttd6t3NZHAKs4a2UyMLfF_wefoMUrVIV0E6cNADXRgIK81e4Mwhmq9Q4oV6qrCNUcZin8ZZnUETpir3rHZcqvBTN-TECg/s320/noahsark.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-6041854653460191462022-01-04T19:46:00.004-08:002022-06-13T19:15:08.272-07:00Full and active participation: capitulation to Modernism<p>Why did the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (<i>Sacrosanctum concilium</i>) promulgated by Pope Paul VI at the Second Vatican Council emphasize "full and active participation" by "all the people" as the number one priority for reforming the liturgy?</p><blockquote><p>In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered <b><i>before all else</i></b>; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work. (SC #14)</p></blockquote><p>This reference is not without precedent; in fact, St. Pius X promulgated a similar clause in his 1903 motu proprio on sacred music <i><a href="https://adoremus.org/1903/11/tra-le-sollecitudini/" target="_blank">Tra le sollecitudini</a></i>:</p><blockquote><p>It being our ardent desire to see the true Christian spirit restored in every respect and preserved by all the faithful, we deem it necessary to provide <b><i>before everything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple</i></b>, in which the faithful assemble for the object of acquiring this spirit from its indispensable fount, which is the active participation in the holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church.</p></blockquote><p>The differences in emphasis are striking; in 1903 it was for the sanctity of the temple. In 1963, it was for "full and active participation of all the people." These differences lay chiefly in the attitude towards the synthesis of all heresies, Modernism, and the reforms inspired by them.</p><p>The purpose of the liturgical reform was to focus on subjective experience after some Churchmen conceded to the rationalist-atheists that God could never be the direct object of science or history. This was especially urgent in lands conquered by the communists. Therefore, stripped of the witness of external signs and even nature itself, they were dependent on subjective experience to justify religion. This Pope John Paul II made the crusade and purpose of his entire life, attempting to synthesize St. Thomas and modern philosophy, primarily under the broad heading of <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/personalism/" target="_blank">personalism</a>. The particular school of personalism Father Karol Wojtyla subscribed to was the <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/" target="_blank">phenomenology</a> of Scheler, Heidegger, and Husserl. He believed that by locating the experience of the divine in man, he could justify the Gospel in a new way not dependent on history, Tradition, or objective authority. Hence, the top priority identified in <i>Sacrosanctum Concilium</i>, “full and active participation” was intended to discretely replace the definition of faith as intellectual assent to that which God has revealed to a subjective experience of the divine. All of this is condemned by St. Pius X in his encyclical On the Doctrines of the Modernists, <i>Pascendi Dominici gregis</i>. A few quotes are provided below:</p><p></p><blockquote><p>Modernists place the foundation of religious philosophy in that doctrine which is usually called Agnosticism. According to this teaching human reason is confined entirely within the field of phenomena, that is to say, to things that are perceptible to the senses, and in the manner in which they are perceptible; it has no right and no power to transgress these limits. Hence it is incapable of lifting itself up to God, and of recognising His existence, even by means of visible things. <b><i>From this it is inferred that God can never be the direct object of science, and that, as regards history, He must not be considered as an historical subject</i></b>. (#6)</p><p>But when Natural theology has been destroyed, the road to revelation closed through the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that <b><i>this explanation will be sought in vain outside man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man</i></b>; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. (#7)</p><p>But let us see how the Modernist conducts his apologetics. The aim he sets before himself is to make the non-believer <b><i>attain that experience of the Catholic religion</i></b> which, <i><b>according to the system</b></i>, is the basis of faith. (#35)</p><p>How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the [first] Vatican Council. We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, <b><i>the way is opened wide for atheism</i></b>. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. <b><i>What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion?</i></b> In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed <b><i>Modernists do not deny but actually admit</i></b>, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that <b><i>all religions are true</i></b>. (#14) </p></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;">If Pope John Paul II did not adopt this very error as the basis for his phenomenology and did not apply these errors in his official doctrinal corpus, how else can we explain quotes like this?</div><blockquote><p></p></blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><p>It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The <b><i>various religions</i></b> arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper <b><i>religious experience</i></b>. Handed on to others, <b><i>this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions</i></b>.</p><p>In every authentic <b><i>religious experience</i></b>, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person.</p></blockquote><blockquote><p>(Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7).</p></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><p></p></blockquote><p>Let's summarize. According to the philosophical agnosticism of the Modernists, God could not be the direct object of science, nor of history. This left churchmen with the only option to locate the divine in human experiences. The error here should be obvious: God is the object of the queen and mistress of all sciences, the science of divinity; He is the object of all history as He is its author and chief actor. To capitulate to the Modern error of agnosticism is to surrender to a false paradigm which the Second Vatican Council refers to as "modern man." This modern man rejects the entire supernatural order; places all the miracles of revelation in the category of myths; and sees in the God-man, Jesus Christ our Lord a mere human figure totally beholden to the requirements of his own epoch as a first century Jewish itinerant preacher. Any capitulation to such paradigmatic nonsense is to open the doors wide for atheism, as St. Pius X solemnly condemns in <i>Pascendi gregis</i>. </p><p>The old liturgy with its reliance on the objectivity of human and divine knowledge, the transcendence of its heavenward gaze and communion with the Triune God and His Saints was totally unsuited for modern man who rejected what he could not experience subjectively in himself. While these efforts to accommodate so-called modern man with a liturgy better suited to the false paradigm of philosophical agnosticism seemed imbued with a certain human empathy, they were and always will be doomed to fail. God <b><i>is</i></b> the primary object of science - all science, the supreme science being theology. God is no less the Lord of all profane sciences as the Creator of the material world; He is no less the object of true history as its originator, consummator and Lord.</p><p>This explains the contemporary preoccupation with 'getting everyone involved' in the Novus Ordo liturgy. The incessant noise, activity, and overutilization of laymen in liturgical functions is all required to foster authentic subjective religious experiences - not only as <i>a</i> way to concretize Catholic faith but the <i>only</i> way, seeing all external revelation and natural theology is excluded, or at least made optional.</p><p>Hence, we have the current campaign of Pope Francis and his Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments to stamp out the old Mass. The old Mass isn't promoting this anthropocentric religion; it isn't focused on man and subjective experiences, but on the transcendent Divinity. The Mass of All Ages gives absolute credibility to the God Who is the direct object of science and history; it mediates supernatural graces through the offering of the Son to the Father in propitiation for the sins of the living and the dead. It is not difficult to surmise why the partisans of the New Theology wanted to obliterate every vestige of Catholic Tradition, especially in liturgy. </p><p>Where does this anthropocentric religion with its focus on human experiences lead us? According to St. Pius X, straight to atheism. And the precipitous and tragic decline in the Western Catholic Church would appear to corroborate this. </p><p>Finally, a clarification of the legitimate role of experience in Catholic religious praxis. As we noted from St. Pius X's motu proprio on sacred music above, the words active participation (Latin: <i>participatio actuosa</i>) should be considered without any negative connotation when we use the philosophy of St. Thomas and not the modern agnostic philosophies. This Scholastic philosophy of St. Thomas was in fact recommended by St. Pius X in <i>Pascendi </i>as a sure bulwark against the collection of heresies converging in Modernism. It fully acknowledges that God is the primary object of both science and history and as such places no exaggerated or strained emphasis on human religious experience. But stripped of Scholastic philosophy's sure foundation and left naked with only subjective experience as a guide, the role of active participation takes on a dangerous urgency which leads eventually to a loss of faith, apostasy, and atheism. </p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjhYhBLtllRjtWrsmt5nfB336ef0lUi68qILTzlFSSmF7Go1zreYmjsCfc6IHNuK53IQwJ1fydYrya0kYyXeYfETnKKi5H1CRdnZy4tpucUHvbXoTSLcFsB3ShjN4052IQzuIHKvZ9X5_a-bcbXZo_Yy8n_AxsHV2Kc8fWbOzgJMJ2kuzZAfmkJhNk4Zg=s700" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="700" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjhYhBLtllRjtWrsmt5nfB336ef0lUi68qILTzlFSSmF7Go1zreYmjsCfc6IHNuK53IQwJ1fydYrya0kYyXeYfETnKKi5H1CRdnZy4tpucUHvbXoTSLcFsB3ShjN4052IQzuIHKvZ9X5_a-bcbXZo_Yy8n_AxsHV2Kc8fWbOzgJMJ2kuzZAfmkJhNk4Zg=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p></p></blockquote><p>These key philosophical differences emerge from different attitudes towards the theories purported by profane science. For St. Thomas, theology is the Queen of sciences; for the modern philosophers, theology is only speculation about subject matter that cannot be finally and certainly known. The first major cleavage between profane science and the Church's magisterium occurred during the novel proposition by Galileo of Copernicus' heliocentric theory. This controversy fatally separated the profane sciences from the science of divinity as the former rejected the latter's conclusions; moreover, this opened wide an entire theater of polemical war against the Church's philosophical moorings which culminated in the super-heresy of Modernism, inasmuch as Modernism is utterly dependent on the theory of evolution. The collection of grotesque errors one may find in the literature of Teilhard de Chardin amply illustrates the bizarre lengths one may extend in order to synthesize Catholic religion with the theories of modern science unmoored from traditional Catholic philosophy.</p><p>For liturgy, the object must ever be the Transcendent Divinity; this object must be regarded as absolute, real, concrete, tangible, and accessible through the mediation of the Catholic Church. No amount of condescension to so-called modern man in new theories of liturgy can ever hope to replace the system of worship which came not from men, but from God. The focus on men and their experiences may have been inspired by a well-intended pathos, but in the end, it redirects men away from the Transcendent Good and toward their own weaknesses. <br /><br />About this, Fr. Johannes Dormann, S.T.D. writes</p><p></p><blockquote><p>A comparison of the principles of knowledge in Cardinal Wojtyla's [Pope John Paul II] New Theology with those of classical theology makes the fundamental differences clearly come to light. In classical theology, God is the material and formal object of theology. In the New Theology of Cardinal Wojtyla, <b><i>the object is man</i></b>. The diametrical opposition is manifest. Through the confusion of nature and grace in the axiom of universal salvation, the traditional "dualism" is entirely eliminated. The traditional distinctions of the natural and supernatural knowledge of God, of natural and supernatural revelation, of natural reason and supernatural faith, of natural and supernatural theology, no longer apply. The virtue of faith, which is constitutive for the process of justification, is no longer required for salvation...</p><p> Quote taken from Pope John Paul II's Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of Religions in Assisi, Part 1, pages 121-123, (c) 1994 by Angelus Press</p></blockquote><p></p><p>The urgency and necessity in preserving the Traditional Roman Rite is not a matter of personal taste, preference, or attachment; it is the divinely provided bulwark against Modernism, as discussed in the <a href="http://www.catholictradition.org/Eucharist/ottaviani.htm" target="_blank">Ottaviani Intervention</a> of 25 September 1969:</p><p></p><blockquote>...the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The canons of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.</blockquote><p></p><p>The experiment of philosophical personalism applied to liturgy has had a 50 year run; there is ample data to make a judgment on the suitability of such reforms and to weigh their impact on the Church. God is and always will be the highest object of any true science, and sound philosophy will always validate this. Every effort to appeal to men who reject the God of history by directing their attention to their own subjective experiences will end up failing in the Church's divinely appointed mission of saving souls through the preaching of the Gospel, of which the most profound proclamation is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.</p><p> </p><p></p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-39175510860466958072021-07-16T19:33:00.011-07:002021-07-18T06:10:01.474-07:00Pope Francis, the motu proprio, and the showdown at Mt. Carmel<p> <span style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">There is a prophetic irony in Pope Francis promulgating his</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"> </span><i style="font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">motu proprio <a href="https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/07/urgent-anti-summorum-motu-proprio.html" style="color: #196ad4;">Traditionis custode</a></i><a href="https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/07/urgent-anti-summorum-motu-proprio.html" style="color: #196ad4; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">s</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"> [</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">on the use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the reform of 1970] on the Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. The standoff between the two 'forms' of the Roman Rite was prefigured in the confrontation between the Prophet Saint Elias and the priests of Ba'al on this very mountain about 2800 years ago.</span></p><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">Mount Carmel was the scene of the biblical duel between the prophets of the pagan deity Ba'al and the Prophet of the LORD God, Elias (cf. <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/11018.htm" style="color: #196ad4;">3rd Kings 18</a>, DRV). The duel took place on Mount Carmel, which is located in the Jezreel Valley in what was then the Northern Kingdom of Israel, comprised of the ten tribes that had renounced their loyalty to the Davidic dynasty and the priesthood of Aaron after the disastrous rule of King Solomon's son, Reheboam. The northern tribes substituted the Davidic line with a series of violent <i>coup de etats</i>, and the Aaronic priests with men unqualified for covenant priesthood. The northern tribes capitulated easily to idolatry, and it was Ba'al, the god of nature they substituted as their object of worship. This period is the backdrop for the Books of the Prophets Osee (Hosea) and Amoz (Amos). <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-5-v-uVuyjANB4xff1ZK_3SaLVaylR8U0e9B187gYIAH8z_5UBHjDLUGm-wiZ0tDSYfGuPI7nvIJYkLQjPWVb6Qb4GMYUI-ptevnYarLYajLor5gOvBGNQWea0PtDnccL7NsEXkOGWnxY/s1536/Pope+Francis.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1536" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-5-v-uVuyjANB4xff1ZK_3SaLVaylR8U0e9B187gYIAH8z_5UBHjDLUGm-wiZ0tDSYfGuPI7nvIJYkLQjPWVb6Qb4GMYUI-ptevnYarLYajLor5gOvBGNQWea0PtDnccL7NsEXkOGWnxY/w320-h213/Pope+Francis.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">Elias was sent to call the northern kingdom back to the LORD, then under the rule of the emasculated Achab, who bent his will to his pagan queen, Jezebel. Elias challenged the priests of Ba'al to a duel: both would offer a sacrifice to their deity, and the God which answered by fire would be recognized as the true. Elias was convinced that he was alone in this cause, but the LORD consoled him with the knowledge that a faithful remnant remained in the northern kingdom. What occurred on Mount Carmel is one of the most dramatic and thrilling episodes of biblical history, as the true worship, while in the minority was vindicated with the power of God displayed from heaven and the priests of Ba'al routed.</div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">In a stunning irony, it is Pope Francis who is pursuing the constriction of the tiny orthodox remnant, and proposing an audacious challenge to them: <b><i>reservations about the Second Vatican Council are tantamount to a rejection of the Holy Ghost</i></b>. Accept the reforms and return to the Pauline liturgy or be guilty of resisting the Spirit of God! (this conclusion is detailed in the <a href="https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2021/07/16/0469/01015.html#ingL" target="_blank">letter</a> that accompanies the motu proprio, 6th paragraph).</div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">Like the naturalist priests of Ba'al, the Vatican is arrogantly asserting a claim that is either the <i>vox Deus</i> or a display of astonishing hubris: was the Second Vatican Council and the reformed liturgy of Pope Paul VI inspired from heaven, or men? For the Pope, the question is settled.</div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">For the Church, the confrontation, like that on Carmel of old, is clearly couched between the ancient forms (the sacrifice offered by Elias according to immemorial tradition going back to Abel) and the new, anthropocentric (man-centered) forms which break with tradition (the Ba'alist natural religion). Could the Pope not have foreseen the prophetic irony of promulgating his motu proprio on the Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel?</div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">And so we have it: as Elias prophesied, "...if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him" (3rd Kings 18, 21). And the Pope throws down the gauntlet: if Vatican II is the work of the Holy Spirit, you sin mortally by resisting its reforms. </div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; font-family: "times new roman", "new york", times, serif; font-size: 16px;">I will not take up the arguments at this time against the sources of inspiration of Vatican II which I have detailed <a href="https://destroyerofheresies.blogspot.com/2018/07/why-second-vatican-council-failed.html" style="color: #196ad4;">elsewhere</a>. Suffice to say, we know the liturgy handed down from antiquity and canonized by Pope St. Pius V <b><i>is</i></b> from heaven.<br /><br /><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cYq614xqnlI" width="320" youtube-src-id="cYq614xqnlI"></iframe></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Carmelite Sisters are executed by French revolutionaries in 1794 for the crime of maintaining their "silly religious traditions" that were against the "unity of the republic."</div><br />John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-28099754515666479382021-05-03T19:23:00.010-07:002021-05-06T19:16:27.763-07:00Martyrs, Mystics, and Missionaries: Casualties of the Second Vatican Council <p> <span style="font-family: arial;">Among the reforms inspired by the Second Vatican Council were sweeping changes to the sacred liturgy, a new orientation towards the unbelieving world, and a new and novel effort to promote a unity with those who confessed Christ but rejected His Church and its divinely appointed government.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">As a consequence of the new liturgy approved by Pope Paul VI in 1969, the Roman Breviary was also reformed. The new Liturgy of the Hours <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/workers-fighters-prime/">excised the office of Prime</a>, and with it, the recitation of the <a href="http://www.boston-catholic-journal.com/roman-martyrology-complete-in-english-for-daily-reflection.htm" target="_blank">Roman Martyrology</a>. For centuries the Martyrology placed </span><span style="font-family: arial;">the heroic witness of the martyrs of the Church </span><span style="font-family: arial;">before the eyes of those bound by holy orders; daily their combats and tumults were rehearsed in the hearing of the clergy, and their glorious victories over their tormentors informed many sermons and counsels. Yet but for the few who have happily discovered this suppressed treasury of inspiration, the Martyrology is not only ignored, it is simply <i>unknown</i>. The impact of this glaring and tragic omission is incalculable (think of the type of sermons we have grown accustomed to since the Novus Ordo was promulgated).</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">But the Council - whether by intent or reckless naivete - not only removed the Martyrology from the sacred liturgy of the Church; it disparaged the traditional contemplative spirituality of the Church as well. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Monasteries and cloisters emptied in the wake of Vatican II which zealously advocated a new partnership with 'modern man' who sought not the purification of prayer, but the social change only attainable by activism. The <a href="https://destroyerofheresies.blogspot.com/2017/09/teilhards-cosmic-christ-not-christ-of.html" target="_blank">New Theology</a> which emphasized subjective experience and the dynamics of societal change goaded churchmen to embrace the spirit of democracy, technological progress, and social justice. In this hubris for activism the appreciation for mysticism and contemplation waned; what good was praying and meditating? How could it move the mountains required by revolution in South America and equality for racial minorities and women in the United States? Who had time for spiritual reading or the Rosary when our cities were on fire and the Vietnam war raged on? No, the old Saints such as John of the Cross or Theresa of Lisieux had to give way to the new activist saints who rather than wasting time with angels, apparitions, and visions were toppling oppressive social structures in the name of a revolutionary Christ who came to bring a new ethical order to this present world. </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlX9zecSDxDbYZlA2ihp_8hgy7SPjNgbyNYTe1DkFSXqhxGzjntAy5w2bPfv2iH3F1aLrvxG9-1qnKA6LMq9wRv-Pt7JrSe5nOoQ90AXtIKgn53pBWYUytWdTnHhdxKaBW7XBxBETkpQba/s800/catholic+social+justice.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="614" data-original-width="800" height="234" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlX9zecSDxDbYZlA2ihp_8hgy7SPjNgbyNYTe1DkFSXqhxGzjntAy5w2bPfv2iH3F1aLrvxG9-1qnKA6LMq9wRv-Pt7JrSe5nOoQ90AXtIKgn53pBWYUytWdTnHhdxKaBW7XBxBETkpQba/w320-h234/catholic+social+justice.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></div><p></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">The Council also introduced a new form of ecumenism which reached its peak during the grotesque display of theological discord which <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/remembering-the-sacrilege-of-assisi-i-thirty-years-later/" target="_blank">occurred at Assisi in 1986</a> under the leadership of the Pope himself. Preaching to convert the unbeliever was out; a new sense of brotherhood that could find common ground between men of all religions - or none at all - in the quest for a temporal peace was in. Pope John Paul II was absolutely persuaded that this "<a href="https://destroyerofheresies.blogspot.com/2020/08/xxx.html">utterly new way</a>" of seeing the Church was in fact, the fulfillment of all Vatican II promised:<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;"></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Two months after the event, in a Christmas speech to his Cardinals published in the Vatican’s L’Osservatore Romano, John Paul said, “The day of Assisi, showing the Catholic Church holding hands with our brothers of other religions, was a visible expression of [the] statements of the Second Vatican Council.” The interfaith event at Assisi was thus described by John Paul II not as a tragic misrepresentation of Vatican II, but as the glorious realization of its teaching.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Pope John Paul II went on to celebrate the inter-religious prayer meeting at Assisi as a new direction for the future, “The event of Assisi” he said, “can thus be considered as a visible illustration, an exegesis of events, a catechesis intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitments to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and promoted by the Second Vatican Council.”</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Toward the end of the speech, the Pope urged his Cardinals to continue on the same new path, “Keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future.” </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">- Pope’s Christmas Address to Roman Curia,” L’Osservatore Romano, January 5, 1987, pp. 6-7.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial;"></span></p><div><span style="font-family: arial;">Why the need then for missionaries? The greatest missionary of the 20th century who was elected Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers - the Church's largest missionary congregation - resigned in 1968 under siege from radical reformers within his own order who clamored for the new reforms, ecumenical activity, and interreligious dialogue advocated by Vatican II. This missionary Bishop was Marcel Lefebvre. Missionary activity in the Catholic Church still lives on in pockets and small communities, but the devastating blow dealt by conciliar ecumenism all but quenched the missionary impulse inspired by Him Who commanded the apostles</span></div><div><blockquote><span style="font-family: arial;">Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature.</span><span style="font-family: arial;"> He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (St. Mark 16, 15-16)</span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial;">We will conclude with the <a href="https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1978/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19781017_primo-radiomessaggio.html" target="_blank">words</a> provided by the man many modern Catholics esteem to be a great Saint of the Church, at the beginning of his pontificate:</span></p><blockquote><p> <span style="font-family: arial;">However, as the Council is not limited to the documents alone, neither is it completed by the ways applying it which were devised in these post-conciliar years. Therefore we rightly consider that we are bound by the primary duty of most diligently furthering the implementation of the decrees and directive norms of that same Universal Synod. This indeed we shall do in a way that is at once prudent and stimulating. We shall strive, in particular, that first of all an appropriate mentality may flourish. Namely, it is necessary that, above all, outlooks must be at one with the Council so that in practice those things may be done that were ordered by it, and that those things which lie hidden in it or—as is usually said—are "implicit" may become explicit in the light of the experiments made since then and the demands of changing circumstances. Briefly, it is necessary that the fertile seeds which the Fathers of the Ecumenical Synod, nourished by the word of God, sowed in good ground (cf. Mt 13: 8, 23)—that is, the important teachings and pastoral deliberations should be brought to maturity in that way which is characteristic of movement and life.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Fifty years later, it is plain what devastation the Council has wreaked upon the Church and even the world it aspired to serve. Martyrdom gave way to temporal happiness and rapprochement with the world; mysticism to activism, and missionary labor to the soft appeasement of ecumenism. Only in the full and absolute commitment to the Church's treasury of Tradition can we recover. </span></p></div>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-44387172877706808082021-04-20T19:09:00.037-07:002021-05-09T19:12:39.571-07:00Our Lady of Fatima, Destroyer of All Heresies<p><b><span style="mso-ansi-language: #1000;">Our Lady is the Destroyer of all
heresies</span></b><span style="mso-ansi-language: #1000;">. St. Pius X called Modernism 'the
compendium of all heresies'. The roots of Modernism are in agnostic philosophy - an
agnosticism supported by the Copernican assertion that the Church was wrong
about her geocentric cosmology. If the Church was wrong about so fundamental and
foundational a matter, she cannot be trusted with the far weightier matters of faith and morals. This was the conclusion of the Church's enemies (and too many of her own sons) when Galileo Galilee advanced the idea of a mobile earth </span>spinning diurnally and orbiting the sun. Yet our Lady of Fatima gave us a miraculous sign to demonstrate once and for all that the Church was not wrong to condemn heliocentrism, but that she had faithfully handed down what she <a href="https://www.scripturecatholic.com/geocentrism/#Tradition_Church_Fathers" target="_blank">received from the Holy Fathers</a>. </p><p>For those unfamiliar with the controversy, it concerns the Church's biblical cosmology. Theologian Paula Haigh (+2015) <a href="https://coelietterrae.blogspot.com/2014/02/history-and-some-historians.html" target="_blank">explains </a></p><p></p><blockquote>The medieval world possessed such a sound foundation in its Geocentric Cosmology. Cosmology, which defines the Structure of the Universe and the fixed centrality of earth, is the necessary essential of the entire body of knowledge we know as the Natural Order. It is this natural order upon which Grace builds the entire edifice of the Supernatural Order of Divine Grace - producing the Elect and those beacons of light for us, the Saints. Any historian who omits in-depth consideration of the relations between the natural sciences and theology, will not give us true or reliable history. It was first Copernicus - and then his popularizer, Galileo, who first cut the umbilical cord binding the natural sciences to Theology - by way of Holy Scripture. Without the guidance of the theologians of the Church, the natural sciences were bound to go astray, and so they did. The end result is precisely what the encyclical Pascendi describes as the subjugation of faith to science - a science falsely so called, (1 Tim. 6:20). This is a crime of the greatest magnitude - the synthesis of all heresies - overturning in men's minds the very hierarchy of reality. </blockquote><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZPd56MAVPXuRVS7tm6LkKilDa3BcCX8lbHtdjGKqyoJN5qC18nDmy_1Sqk4l2Kon7BrxlvngI2AVpl6JWZRPrbG3K6YSqXVxEzf9RJtkuGMHy7Up6Up4NaGsWDt8FfIf5_qFkVHhEh-lh/s1062/Fatima+Madonna.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1062" data-original-width="655" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZPd56MAVPXuRVS7tm6LkKilDa3BcCX8lbHtdjGKqyoJN5qC18nDmy_1Sqk4l2Kon7BrxlvngI2AVpl6JWZRPrbG3K6YSqXVxEzf9RJtkuGMHy7Up6Up4NaGsWDt8FfIf5_qFkVHhEh-lh/s320/Fatima+Madonna.jpg" /></a></div><p>The Church put the
<a href="http://www.ldolphin.org/geocentricity/Roberts.pdf" target="_blank">full weight of her magisterial authority behind the condemnation of heliocentrism</a> as formal heresy. The Church was right. There <a href="https://quotesandreferences.blogspot.com/2016/08/quotes-in-favor-of-geocentrism.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">isn't and there
never was any proof for heliocentrism</a>. The miracle of the sun at Fatima was our
Lady's way of demonstrating that the defeat of Modernism will only be
achieved by recovering the Church's full and plenary power for proclaiming the
complete record of revelation to a world that had been plunged into philosophical futility and meaninglessness. For, if the earth were some insignificant planet cast into a random corner of the universe drifting aimlessly towards oblivion as the modern philosophers postulate, what good was religion? On October 13th, 1917 <a href="https://fatima.org/about/fatima-the-facts/miracle-of-the-sun/" target="_blank">the sun danced</a>; not
the earth, not the cosmos. 70,000 people saw it, to include many atheists. Our
Lady is the Destroyer of All Heresies, and the miracle of the sun is a great
sign for us to believe as the Church had always taught - that we occupy a privileged place in the very center of the cosmos in which God became man in her virginal womb.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/21018.htm" target="_blank">Psalm 18</a>, the sun is depicted as an athlete running the way "from the end of heaven, and his circuit even to the end thereof" to illustrate the movement of the sun around the earth. This Psalm clearly tells the
reader that the 'language' spoken by the heavens is (a) universal; and (b)
understood by all. The plain evidence of the phenomena is that the sun circles
the earth daily. No one has ever observed the earth circling the sun or
spinning on an axis. As if to emphasize how irrefutable and infallible this
phenomena is, the Psalmist then discourses about the perfection of the Law of the
Lord. The entire Psalm moves in perfect motion through four themes:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: left;"><span style="mso-ansi-language: #1000;">(1) The
heavens declare the glory of God.</span></p><p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: left;">(2) The sun
circles the earth.</p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: left;"><span style="mso-ansi-language: #1000;">(3) The Law
of the Lord is perfect.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: left;"><span style="mso-ansi-language: #1000;">(4) Whoever
keeps the just judgments of the Lord will be kept from sin.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>Lest we think this is a simplistic and primitive way of exegeting the divine Word, let us take a Doctor of the Church, St. Robert Bellarmine for our guide:</p><blockquote><p>"Second. I say that, as you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators." (<a href="http://www.historyguide.org/earlymod/foscarini.html" target="_blank">Letter to Foscarini</a>, 1615)</p></blockquote><p>Vatican I (1869-1870) infallibly confirmed the teaching of Trent:</p><blockquote><p>Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which holy mother church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture. In consequence, it is <i>not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed <b>against the unanimous consent of the fathers</b></i>. (emphasis mine) </p></blockquote><p>The philosophy condemned by Pope St. Pius X in the 1907 encyclical <a href="http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">Pascendi gregis</a> (On the Doctrines of the Modernists) is
agnosticism, the belief that man could not know for certain whether there is a God, and that His will is likewise unknowable (this is condemned at <a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum20.htm" target="_blank">Vatican I</a>, ch. i, 3). St. Pius X counted among the chief of the doctrines of the Modernists
the vile and antibiblical idea of evolution. The <a href="http://www.salvemariaregina.info/SalveMariaRegina/SMR-153/Chardin%20and%20New%20Religion.htm" target="_blank">evolution championed by Teilhard de Chardin</a> which has wounded the faith of the Church so deeply to this very day
presumes upon the Church's loss of authority in supposedly interpreting the first chapters
of Genesis incorrectly. If the earth was not created on the first day and the sun, moon and stars on the fourth as lights and signs for the times and seasons to benefit man, which the Church had always taught, then the Church was wrong about the foundational passages of Sacred Scripture. If she was wrong about this, then surely she could be in error about the cosmos being created in six days. Thus the way for Modernism is paved, not by true science, nor by sound philosophy, but by a demonically animated skepticism: "...hath God said...?" (Genesis 3,1)</p><p> This wound was inflicted upon the Church not by Darwin,
but by Nicholas Copernicus, who, like Teilhard was a priest who rejected the
testimony of the Holy Fathers infallibly confirmed by the Council of Trent. In
summary, there is no Darwin and no Teilhard without the monstrous error of
heliocentrism, which three Popes rightly condemned as a formal heresy for its
opposition to the Patristic consensus. </p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqJkLi_ZOpuuYonqFTGYz1OwqTUFRZfhPauw_w10LHxNAeWVrjOH640RjDhQwl0TMzfGSN4CT8GXfFAYscVFuC25vdWFJP4AH32Fw47DNcbQQj_FlSnVSnbvFRHCkyHxzh9oA2rq2temKh/s1024/Our_Lady_Guadalupe.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="645" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqJkLi_ZOpuuYonqFTGYz1OwqTUFRZfhPauw_w10LHxNAeWVrjOH640RjDhQwl0TMzfGSN4CT8GXfFAYscVFuC25vdWFJP4AH32Fw47DNcbQQj_FlSnVSnbvFRHCkyHxzh9oA2rq2temKh/s320/Our_Lady_Guadalupe.jpg" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Our Lady of Guadalupe</span></td></tr></tbody></table>The Mother of God performed another <a href="https://www.archbalt.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/gTHE-STORY-OF-OUR-LADY-OF-GUADALUPE.pdf" target="_blank">miracle in 1531</a> by imprinting her image on the tilma of St. Juan Deigo, a miracle that resulted in an astonishing conversion of no less than six million Aztecs who were at the time in the thrall of the most barbaric forms of idolatry imaginable. In <a href="http://galileowaswrong.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/New-Discoveries-on-the-Tilma.pdf" target="_blank">this image</a>, our Lady is clearly depicted as being clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet as Sacred Scripture reveals (Apoc. 12, 1). In both Scripture and the miraculous icon of Guadalupe, the Mother of Christ is being encompassed by the sun, a symbolic rendering of the sun orbiting the earth, represented by our Lady, the pinnacle of the earth's created order.<p></p><p>No wonder then that of all the signs at her queenly disposal she, the Seat of Wisdom, chooses the dance of the sun at Fatima. This sign unambiguously indicates the movement of the sun, just as the miracle requested by Josue in the Old Testament (cf. Josue 10,13). Perhaps through this sign our Heavenly Queen is showing mankind that all the errors of Russia which were then as now flooding the world could be staunched by her Immaculate Heart; that she who is Mediatrix of all graces could obtain for the Church that glorious defeat of the compendium of all heresies, Modernism. As St. Pius X recognized her in his encyclical on Modernism as the <i>Destroyer of All Heresies</i>, the Blessed Virgin Mary restores that wisdom which had been so long abandoned and rejected by men under the delusion of the heliocentric cosmos which rendered the Church's interpretation of the Word of God to be wrong. If this sign is received in good faith from our Lady of Fatima, the shame of 'persecuting science' with 'faulty biblical exegesis' would be remedied and the Church vindicated in her treatment of the entire Galileo affair, which at present time serves as an embarrassment and a humiliation. <br /></p><p>There is no heresy of Modernism without the doctrine of evolution infecting the human element of the Catholic Church. There are no evolutionary toxins wounding sacred doctrine without the stigma of wrongly interpreting Genesis. And that stigma was first applied not by the adepts of Darwin, but of Copernicus.</p><p>Our Lady is showing us at Fatima that the way
back to orthodoxy (and true militancy) is to recover the correct philosophical
moorings that the Fathers of the Church handed down to us, which is to say, the
earth is stable at the center of the cosmos, and is the theater of redemption
in which God became man in the Virgin's womb. </p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rBIs8cuIwTo" width="320" youtube-src-id="rBIs8cuIwTo"></iframe></div><br /><o:p></o:p><p></p>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-69116732056368964912020-08-19T19:04:00.008-07:002020-10-11T17:37:04.426-07:00The Utterly New Way of the Second Vatican CouncilThe Vatican II document styled <b>Dogmatic Constitution on the Church</b> <a href="https://w2.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html" target="_blank"><i>Lumen gentium</i></a> presents us with a novel vision of the Church as "a sacrament of salvation" and "sign of the unity of mankind." Factor in LG's teaching that "elements of sanctification exist in [non-Catholic] assemblies" and that the "Church of Christ <i>subsists</i> in the Catholic Church", you have an ecclesiology so far from traditional doctrine as to represent an entirely new conception of what it means to be 'Church.' but don't take my word for it, here is Pope John Paul II: <blockquote><div>"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in <b><i>an utterly new way, quite unknown previously</i></b>, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..."
Pope John Paul II, <i><a href="http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html" target="_blank">Redemptor hominis</a></i> </div></blockquote><div>So, LG is establishing ways the Catholic Church is <b><i>related by degree</i></b> to non-Catholic religious bodies first with the 'separated brethren' (another conciliar novelty) but then astonishingly to Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Therefore we have lost the dogma of <i>Extra ecclesia nula salus</i> completely which has given way to an amorphous, invisible 'church' that includes all humanity - and this too, John Paul II teaches with shocking audacity: </div><div></div><blockquote><div>...The opening made by the Second Vatican Council has enabled the Church and all Christians to reach a more complete awareness of the mystery of Christ, "the mystery hidden for ages" in God, to be revealed in time in the Man Jesus Christ, and to be revealed continually in every time. </div><div><br /></div><div>...Accordingly, what is in question here is man in all his truth, in his full magnitude. We are not dealing with the "abstract" man, but the real, "concrete", "historical" man. We are dealing with "each" man, for each one is included in the mystery of the Redemption and with each one Christ has united himself for ever through this mystery. </div><div><br /></div><div>...this is "each" man, "the most concrete" man, "the most real"; this is man in all the fullness of the mystery in which he has become a sharer in Jesus Christ, the mystery in which each one of the four thousand million human beings living on our planet has become a sharer from the moment he is conceived beneath the heart of his mother." </div><div>- Pope John Paul II, <i>Redemptor hominis</i>, 1979</div><div><br /></div><div>"...<b>utterly new way</b>, quite unknown previously..." </div><div>"...to reach a <b>more complete awareness</b> of the mystery of Christ..." </div><div>"...with <b>each one Christ has united himself for ever</b> through this mystery." </div><div>"...this is<b> 'each' man</b> ...in all the fullness of the mystery in which <b>he has become a sharer in Jesus Christ</b>..." </div><div></div></blockquote><div>Astonishing what you see when you isolate the novel phrases. </div><div><br /></div><div>And the result? </div><div><blockquote>"Two months after the event, in a Christmas speech to his Cardinals published in the Vatican’s L’Osservatore Romano, John Paul said, “The day of Assisi, showing the Catholic Church holding hands with our <b>brothers of other religions</b>, was a <b>visible expression of [the] statements of the Second Vatican Council</b>.” The interfaith event at Assisi was thus described by John Paul II not as a tragic misrepresentation of Vatican II, but as the glorious realization of its teaching.
Pope John Paul II went on to celebrate the inter-religious prayer meeting at Assisi as a new direction for the future, “The event of Assisi” he said, “can thus be considered as a visible illustration, an exegesis of events, a catechesis intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitments to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and promoted by the Second Vatican Council.”
Toward the end of the speech, the Pope urged his Cardinals to continue on the same new path, “Keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future.”
</blockquote><blockquote>- Pope’s Christmas Address to Roman Curia,” L’Osservatore Romano, January 5, 1987, pp. 6-7. </blockquote></div><div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbbKnXBS1ErK7ONdsJUaSulrw4F17RqqkN5dLJSYkdD9Hdxdt17kQ7lEB4RxRGaKrcDD0oNgQ7pBfeHDtvHBTHCAaO9kEWFeb_YUFJZfZaCwF_-oX6UeiMAeYLGD2yyVvAyZJI7eZVg_x8/s589/assisi+jp+2.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="239" data-original-width="589" height="191" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbbKnXBS1ErK7ONdsJUaSulrw4F17RqqkN5dLJSYkdD9Hdxdt17kQ7lEB4RxRGaKrcDD0oNgQ7pBfeHDtvHBTHCAaO9kEWFeb_YUFJZfZaCwF_-oX6UeiMAeYLGD2yyVvAyZJI7eZVg_x8/w471-h191/assisi+jp+2.jpg" width="471" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;">John Paul II and various religious leaders, Prayer Meeting of Religions, Assisi, Italy 1986<br /></span></td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /></div>And (get ready for it) for Pope John Paul II, the Holy Spirit is the inspiration behind these false religions! </div><div><blockquote>"It must first be kept in mind that every quest of the human spirit for truth and goodness, and in the last analysis for God, is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, <b>with the help of God’s Spirit</b>, achieved a deeper <b><i>religious experience</i></b>. Handed on to others, <b><i>this experience</i></b> took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions.
In every <b><i>authentic religious experience</i></b>, the most characteristic expression is prayer. Because of the human spirit’s constitutive openness to God’s action of urging it to self-transcendence, we can hold that “every authentic prayer is called forth by the <b><i>Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person</i></b>.” </blockquote><blockquote>(Address to the Members of the Roman Curia, 22 Dec. 1986, n. 11; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 5 Jan. 1987, p. 7). </blockquote></div><div>All this is condemned by St. Pius X in his <a href="http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">encyclical against Modernism</a>: </div><div><blockquote>"How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the Vatican Council. We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, the way is opened wide for atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, <b>given this doctrine of experience</b> united with the other doctrine of symbolism, <b>every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true</b>. What is to prevent such <b><i>experiences</i></b> from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. <b><i>And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone?</i></b> Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true." </blockquote><blockquote><i>Pascendi gregis #14</i></blockquote></div><div><i>Lumen gentium</i> provides the basis for an "...utterly new way" of seeing the Church, "quite unknown previously..." thanks to the Second Vatican Council. John Paul II's vision of a Christ united with each man forever in which each man is already a "sharer in Jesus Christ" easily portends to a Church which is comprised of the entire human race. </div><div><br /></div><div>In this universal church in which each man is united to Christ forever and in which "the Holy Spirit ... is mysteriously present in the heart of every person” there is no need for evangelical preaching, missionary work, or personal conversion. No, what is needed is dialogue between men of all religions in order to discover that consciousness which is being aroused in the Teilhardian march towards Omega Point - the consciousness that we are all already united to the God-Man and only lack the realization of it. This is the inescapable conclusion of the New Theology. This is why the Churches are emptying and the average Catholic is utterly confused as to what his Church teaches and what it means to be saved at all.</div><div><br /></div><div><i>Kyrie Eleison!</i></div>John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-79444460096967162292020-05-13T17:05:00.010-07:002022-05-31T20:09:51.336-07:00More merciful than God?From the <a href="http://www.boston-catholic-journal.com/roman-martrylogy-in-english/roman-martyrology-may-in-english.htm#May_13th" target="_blank">Roman Martyrology</a>:<br />
<br />
<b>This Day, the Thirteenth Day of May </b><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
At Rome, in the time of the emperor Phocas, the dedication of the church of St. Mary of the Martyrs, formerly a temple of all the gods, called Pantheon, which was purified and dedicated by the blessed Pope Boniface IV to the honor of the Blessed Mary ever Virgin, and of all the martyrs.</blockquote>
This consecration of the Basilica dedicated to St. Mary and the Christian Martyrs in a temple formerly dedicated to the adoration of the pagan gods occurred in 609 A.D. It symbolizes the empire of Christ - an empire of martyrdom and charity - overcoming the false religions backed by the state in the first six centuries of the Christian era.<br />
<div>
<br />
In 1986, Pope John Paul II completely reversed this victory by convening his "Prayer Meeting of All Religions" at Assisi, Italy wherein he invited practitioners of all manner of religions to invoke their luminaries under the auspices of the Pope himself.<br />
<br />
He traces this spectacular display reversing all previous Catholic teaching to the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Assisi Prayer is a "visible illustration, an exegesis of the events, a catechesis, intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitment to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and provided by the Second Vatican Council."<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgOsxBiWZ5Jv7DxEmXu5BBTR5AYlr_32VU_IXoN4EKT19P9FzYVZTlY_OBPp4ZMJ7HDToVg-06HreejhPucVhumAMRW33Bw7CO6lui63ckXdkTg6mtbWatOwUuof10FSin_0LD55YVb1dw/s1600/jp2-ecumenicalprayermeetingassisi11986a.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="570" height="162" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgOsxBiWZ5Jv7DxEmXu5BBTR5AYlr_32VU_IXoN4EKT19P9FzYVZTlY_OBPp4ZMJ7HDToVg-06HreejhPucVhumAMRW33Bw7CO6lui63ckXdkTg6mtbWatOwUuof10FSin_0LD55YVb1dw/s200/jp2-ecumenicalprayermeetingassisi11986a.jpg" width="200" /></a>(Christmas address of the Pope to the Cardinals and members of the Curia on 22 December, 1986, L'Osservatore Romano, 5 January 1987, page 7)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Look at Assisi in the light of the Council!"<br />
(Papal address in the General Audience of 22 October, 1986) </blockquote>
One can only tremble at what price the martyrs paid to testify to the One true God, His Only Begotten Son, and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church as the only way of salvation when considering the actions of Pope John Paul II and the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIyRlbhqeTcabv8JZlIACU741HCNCevpAbFZRj1lAaNxpFp8GJrkFjM96weqPwn_kE5dIVg9ETJFBQdf7d0R7lSqp10rk5jdIYmR7bRzERWR5MAjZPxRFdLrorQfoRSj30XdrvqCgtmZ56/s1600/Broken+Crucifix.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="523" data-original-width="760" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIyRlbhqeTcabv8JZlIACU741HCNCevpAbFZRj1lAaNxpFp8GJrkFjM96weqPwn_kE5dIVg9ETJFBQdf7d0R7lSqp10rk5jdIYmR7bRzERWR5MAjZPxRFdLrorQfoRSj30XdrvqCgtmZ56/s320/Broken+Crucifix.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I look at this horrible accident as a parable. This giant crucifix dedicated to John Paul II is bent unnaturally forward as though Christ were straining from the Cross to appeal to man. However two days before his canonization, this <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27145931" target="_blank">giant crucifix collapsed</a> under its weight and unnatural posture killing a young man who had come to admire it. This is a sad parable of the men who believe God is not merciful enough so they must make Him to appear even more merciful (as though that were possible):</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hKNOsBqQyks" width="320" youtube-src-id="hKNOsBqQyks"></iframe></div><br /><br /></div><br />Hence, the manipulation of the mercy of God by men who are deficient in supernatural faith ends up bringing death instead of life by proclaiming a Christ who fails.<br />
<br />
<i><b>A PRAYER FOR PAGAN PEOPLES</b></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>O Lord, have mercy also on the pagan nations of the world, the sad thousands of millions who walk in the darkness of the shadow of the valley of death. Have pity on abandoned sinners, on the malicious, on outcasts, on the fallen and on the depraved. Have mercy on the dying and especially on those who have none to pray for them. With all the fervor of Thy Sacred Heart, my Jesus, pray and beseech Thy Heavenly Father for the conversion of all sinners, and for the perseverance in Thy grace of all the just. Amen.</i><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-90002758744923266332020-03-15T11:17:00.000-07:002020-04-08T12:40:38.591-07:00Vatican II and communism: state of the world today<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">What the USSR and the worldwide communist revolution
were unable to impose by force is being adopted in the West by free association.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">How could this be, when millions of soldiers and sailors
gave their lives to prevent such tyranny and violence from spreading to their
homelands?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The answer is that men love darkness and will not come
to the light so that their sins may be reproved (St. John 3,19-20). The engine
of this evil in the modern age is atheistic communism. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to the three children
in Fatima, Portugal in 1917 prophesying that the Great War (WWI) would soon end
but that a worse war would come if men did not cease offending God. To remedy
this, our Lady <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consecration_of_Russia" target="_blank">prescribed a public act of religion</a> led by the Pope in concert
with all the bishops of the world in which Russia would be consecrated to her
Immaculate Heart. If this were followed, Russia would be converted to the Catholic
faith and peace would follow. If not, Russia would flood the world with her
errors and great devastation would come by wars, persecution of the Church, and
the annihilation of many nations.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh6jSXJ6Lj8lzKeFVW2-7hOC0XHNsgAdF35NCMVmIZ2GO-dcmomJJmS-Q966cgZtI8rL8GH8p9uid1f5vD-VPn4C3GHLkAkIyDr4QXOOkPdrdnIOacYnlRLG99mSKRVIT6nfBGCN0f3YN0/s1600/Our_Lady_Fatima.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><img border="0" data-original-height="512" data-original-width="364" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh6jSXJ6Lj8lzKeFVW2-7hOC0XHNsgAdF35NCMVmIZ2GO-dcmomJJmS-Q966cgZtI8rL8GH8p9uid1f5vD-VPn4C3GHLkAkIyDr4QXOOkPdrdnIOacYnlRLG99mSKRVIT6nfBGCN0f3YN0/s320/Our_Lady_Fatima.jpg" width="227" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Sister Lucia communicated this message in writing to
her confessor, Fr. Gonçalves in 1929 after seeing a vision of the Virgin Mary
in her chapel requesting this consecration again. According to Sr. Lucia, our
Lady had requested this consecration on several occasions, and it occupies a
central theme in the Fatima apparitions.</span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The Russian Orthodox Church was formed after the
Eastern Churches (known today as the Orthodox) had renounced their filial
relationship to the Roman Pontiff (and the depths and concreteness of this submission
is hotly contested by historians from both sides) in 1054 A.D. in what is known
as “the Great Schism.” Aligning with the monarchies of the East, the Orthodox
Churches fractured along political lines and eventually bore the names of their
states (e.g., the Russian Orthodox Church). </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">This separation from Rome and dependence upon the
Eastern states eventually resulted in a Church subordinated to the state which
many accused of aiding the Czars in the oppression of the poor. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Against this
backdrop arose the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 promising the Marxist utopia envisioned
by Lenin and Trotsky. The communist regime that followed was erected upon
atheism and dialectical materialism; early reforms of the government included the destruction
of Churches, systematic arrest and capital punishment of clergy, seizure of all private property by the state, forced collectivism and involuntary population relocations. Abortion on
demand, no-fault divorce and <a href="https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/bolsheviks-targeted-women-and-children-with-antifamily-antimarriage-propaganda/" target="_blank">women’s rights legislation were enacted</a> to bolster the work force in support of the
means of production. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Our Lord taught that a house once delivered from the
demon that returns to its demonic domination suffers a seven-fold increase in
wickedness (<a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/47012.htm" target="_blank">St. Matthew 12,45</a>). He made it clear he was speaking of generations
and not just individuals. This explains the spiritual origin of the USSR's astonishing evils which
vanquished all public free expressions of Christianity and controlled the [puppet]
Russian Orthodox Church for 70 years. A post-Christian society is much more
evil than a pre-Christian society. <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/100-years-of-communismand-100-million-dead-1510011810" target="_blank">Responsible estimates</a> of the human toll of
communist imperialism in the past century are around 100 million lives lost to
communist states and the wars engendered thereby.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">It is without doubt that the most opportune time for
the Pope and all the bishops of the world to consecrate Russia to our Lady’s
Immaculate Heart would have been the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965)
convened by Pope John XXIII and concluded by Pope Paul VI. Here were more than
2000 bishops gathered with the Roman Pontiff and the act could have easily been
done in a short, deliberate ceremony in response to heaven’s request. In fact,
the opposite happened.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">In order to promote ecumenism, one of the council’s
overriding themes, a <a href="https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a007ht.htm" target="_blank">pact was struck</a> in Metz, France between a Roman envoy and
representatives of the KGB-dominated Russian Orthodox Church in August of 1962. As a condition for
Russian Orthodox observers to attend Vatican II, this
agreement stipulated that the council would not condemn communism. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Communism had been condemned by many Popes culminating
in the <a href="http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19370319_divini-redemptoris.html" target="_blank">encyclical</a> <i>Divini Redemptoris</i> in 1937 promulgated by Pope Pius XI:</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The doctrine of modern Communism, which is often
concealed under the most seductive trappings, is in substance based on the
principles of dialectical and historical materialism previously advocated by
Marx, of which the theoricians of bolshevism claim to possess the only genuine
interpretation. According to this doctrine there is in the world only one
reality, matter, the blind forces of which evolve into plant, animal and man.
Even human society is nothing but a phenomenon and form of matter, evolving in
the same way. By a law of inexorable necessity and through a perpetual conflict
of forces, matter moves towards the final synthesis of a classless society. In
such a doctrine, as is evident, there is no room for the idea of God; there is
no difference between matter and spirit, between soul and body; there is
neither survival of the soul after death nor any hope in a future life.
Insisting on the dialectical aspect of their materialism, the Communists claim
that the conflict which carries the world towards its final synthesis can be
accelerated by man. Hence, they endeavor to sharpen the antagonisms which arise
between the various classes of society. Thus, the class struggle with its
consequent violent hate and destruction takes on the aspects of a crusade for
the progress of humanity. On the other hand, all other forces whatever, as long
as they resist such systematic violence, must be annihilated as hostile to the
human race.</span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">A traditionalist faction in the council known as <i>Coetus Internationalis
Patrum</i> circulated a <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-iis-lost-condemnations-of-communism-revealed-to-public-for-first-ti" target="_blank">petition</a> formally requesting the council’s
condemnation of communism which at the time menaced the Church and threatened
half the globe. Led by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the Coetus Fathers obtained
nearly 500 episcopal signatures for their petition which 'disappeared' under the cunning hand
of ecumenical conspirators. At the Second Vatican Council two Popes not only failed to consecrate
Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, they added to their trespass the
unconscionable dismissal of a condemnation of the 'errors of Russia' that were
then flooding the world.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">It was a complete and unprecedented anomaly for Pope John
XXIII to <a href="http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/books/Iota_Unum/chp_04.htm#s40" target="_blank">set aside the magisterial duty to condemn errors</a> at Vatican II. What the
Church leaders did not condemn exposed her faithful to become. The ‘errors of
Russia’ cited by our Lady at Fatima have not only filled the world, they have
saturated the human element of the Church.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">There are almost </span><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/09/catholics-church-contraception-abortion-survey" style="font-size: 12pt;" target="_blank">no differences</a><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> in the percentages of
Catholics and non-Catholics today who contracept, procure abortions, divorce
and remarry, and support sodomy and other perversions. Catholics today support
political factions and causes that the Church has long and often condemned. This
has not been forced down the throat of Catholics at the point of a gun as it
was in communist Russia; it has been willingly imbibed by the faithful accepting
with docility the new, conciliar faith of Vatican II that could not condemn
communism or any other errors. </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><i>But what of Pope John Paul II, ‘destroyer of communism?’</i>
The image of John Paul II the anticommunist is largely a media fabrication that
began in his native Poland:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">While Cardinal Wyszynsky could not get away from
his diocese, because the communist government would not grant him permission,
Archbishop Wojtyla had full freedom to travel abroad without restriction. This
was the common policy of encouraging Wojtyla and destroying the old Cardinal
Wyszynski for his anti-communism.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">It should be noted that from the start, the
figure of John Paul II was built carefully by the press and the media, as
opposed to the Primate of Warsaw, the heroic unyielding anti-Communist Cardinal
Wyszynski. Therefore, an alleged conflict was exaggerated between the two,
Wyszynski as the super-conservative and Wojtyla, instead, as the open
intellectual who loved the company of girls, who went about dressed in shorts,
a true “liberal” and “progressive.” Indeed, Wojtyla really was a liberal
prelate. (<a href="http://www.romancatholicism.org/jpii-quotes.html" target="_blank">Fr. Luigi Villa</a>)</span></span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"> </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Pope John Paul II styled himself apostle of Vatican
II, the council that would not consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart nor
condemn communism. In his <a href="https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1978/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19781017_primo-radiomessaggio.html" target="_blank">first address as Pope</a>, John Paul II encouraged the adoption
of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’:</span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;">However,
as the Council is not limited</span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%;"> to the documents alone,
neither is it completed by the ways applying it which were devised in these
post-conciliar years. Therefore, we rightly consider that we are bound by the
primary duty of most diligently furthering the implementation of the decrees
and directive norms of that same Universal Synod. This indeed we shall do in a
way that is at once prudent and stimulating. We shall strive, in particular,
that first of all an appropriate mentality may flourish. Namely, it is
necessary that, above all, outlooks must be at one with the Council so that in
practice those things may be done that were ordered by it, and that those
things which lie hidden in it or - as is usually said - are
"implicit" may become explicit in the light of the experiments made
since then and the demands of changing circumstances. Briefly, it is necessary
that the fertile seeds which the Fathers of the Ecumenical Synod, nourished by
the word of God, sowed in good ground (cf. Mt 13: 8, 23) - that is, the
important teachings and pastoral deliberations should be brought to maturity in
that way which is characteristic of movement and life.</span></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB798TB0lTE3MfDJSxD_LQbQ3TlbqbRATQj1xIUMwdQiT7vPT7eAgY_xYFwGVhRqc4-Xsx09T9ltGuOmsv1unVj74nau_5d0LnCoYYRoC71fnWJDGA-j5uJKXA5FhqekXkmpSONPTlhc8O/s1600/jp2superstar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><img border="0" data-original-height="527" data-original-width="400" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB798TB0lTE3MfDJSxD_LQbQ3TlbqbRATQj1xIUMwdQiT7vPT7eAgY_xYFwGVhRqc4-Xsx09T9ltGuOmsv1unVj74nau_5d0LnCoYYRoC71fnWJDGA-j5uJKXA5FhqekXkmpSONPTlhc8O/s200/jp2superstar.jpg" width="151" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt;">Finally, it was John Paul II who audaciously cited communist
protest as organic to Catholic doctrine:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">What we refer to as <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">communism</span> has its own history. It is the history of protest in the
face of injustice, as I recalled in the encyclical <i>Laborem Exercens</i> - a protest
on the part of the great world of workers, which then became an ideology. But
this protest has also become part of the teaching of the Church.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> (</span><i>Crossing the
Threshold of Hope</i>, pp 130-131)</span></span></blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The apex of this abominable surrender to communism was
achieved in 2018 when in a secret agreement with the Peoples’ Republic of China
Pope Francis <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/02/02/pope-francis-is-giving-in-to-the-chinese-communist-party/" target="_blank">accepted the communist-appointed ‘bishops’</a> of the Chinese
Patriotic Association as true bishops and betrayed the underground bishops who
had loyally supported Rome and submitted to the Popes for generations under the most
intense duress. Pope Francis ordered the two entities to merge under the head
of the bishops controlled by the communist PRC. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The situation in the US is also untenable. The federal
and state governments <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/24/catholic-church-collects-16-billion-in-us-contract/" target="_blank">fund social welfare programs run by Catholic dioceses</a>
which are primarily instituted by Democratic Party initiatives. This renders most
bishops in the thrall of the Democratic Party and their antichristian platform
which includes open borders; abortion-on-demand until and even after birth; so-called
‘gay marriage’; and now even socialism itself, the ideological forerunner of communism.
How can such bishops speak out against the sins that are sponsored and promoted
by the Democratic Party? Even the few who do are vastly outnumbered by the majority of our own
episcopal <i>soviet</i>, the non-canonical democratic body known as the US Conference of
Catholic Bishops. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzAW42wbAGIWT_ippb13iuAgm1QF4URMf6G8A504RNSeDZk5D1D4MBXioU34Q1KjAGFX-Vy3hymjb1Nq1Q-oQzYoijvm3x09aoPnlktZkHd1QRGR2apWrgXFrIY0hcNoa1VlhWOxApXgIs/s1600/Commie_Pope.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><img border="0" data-original-height="853" data-original-width="1280" height="133" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzAW42wbAGIWT_ippb13iuAgm1QF4URMf6G8A504RNSeDZk5D1D4MBXioU34Q1KjAGFX-Vy3hymjb1Nq1Q-oQzYoijvm3x09aoPnlktZkHd1QRGR2apWrgXFrIY0hcNoa1VlhWOxApXgIs/s200/Commie_Pope.jpg" width="200" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Bolivian President Evo Morales gave Pope Francis a </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">crucifix atop a hammer and sickle, 9 July 2015.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Many Catholics are deceived by those who claim the
consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart has been done by John Paul II. If
it had been done, there would be libraries of books chronicling every detail of
the world-wide, public act of religion performed simultaneously by all the
Bishops in the world in union with the Holy Father. There would be furious
outrage from the Russian Orthodox. Man-made ecumenism as we know it would collapse
at once, along with it all the other synthetic institutional fabrications proceeding
from the Second Vatican Council. Mass conversions of Russian Orthodox priests
to Rome would stun the world. The socialism spread by the USSR all over the
world would collapse. There is simply no way the consecration could have taken
place without an impossible-to-miss spiritual, social and political earthquake
taking place in its wake.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">The Fatima prophecies tell us the consecration will
occur, only that it will be late and that the scourges unleashed by Russian
errors will ravage the world. We are living amid these ravages now. Its toxins
occupy the very air we breathe, the languages we speak, the activities we
perform daily. The only way out is the consecration.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">Until then, we must begin in our own hearts, families,
spheres of influence and Churches to purge ourselves of these diabolical
errors. We must prepare ourselves for that moment when indeed a Roman Pontiff
will obey the Mother of God without conditions or exceptions. The weapon issued
to us by heaven is the daily recitation of the Holy Rosary and reparations for
sin by the Five First Saturdays devotion, but especially the Rosary. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 107%;">All the novelties, innovations, reforms, and
developments springing forth from the Second Vatican Council are infected with
this virus. What the Church leaders failed to condemn they have doomed us to
become. Yet we must take courage and follow the heroic and pious example of our fellow Catholics
in China who, while betrayed by the Pope, have not been betrayed by our heavenly
Lord or His Immaculate Mother. O Immaculate Heart of Mary, conceived without sin,
pray for us who have recourse to thee!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/K8qqZup3Bg4/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/K8qqZup3Bg4?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br /></div>
<br />John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-92099069638670455002019-11-23T16:39:00.001-08:002019-11-23T17:45:53.569-08:00Living Tradition: disastrous fruit of the New TheologyWhen Pope John Paul II promulgated his <i>motu proprio <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei.html" target="_blank">Ecclesia Dei adflicta</a></i> on 2 July, 1988, he claimed that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (SSPX), did not understand the true meaning of Catholic tradition.<br />
<br />
The <i>motu proprio</i>, which means 'written on the Pope's own initiative' reads<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="background-color: white;">The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the </span><span style="background-color: yellow;"><span style="color: red;"><b>living character of Tradition</b></span></span><span style="background-color: white;">, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, "comes from the apostles and </span><span style="background-color: yellow;">progresses in the Church</span><span style="background-color: white;"> with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. </span><span style="background-color: yellow;">It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts</span><span style="background-color: white;">. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth".</span></span></blockquote>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOzhuvOG4GLPgNduunUggk3poOqG-cFaygXsZ63zP3Z0ORpE7RChE5UHSA45Iqyq5ZytQd-A0QAlDKI_Z7IMNCH655hqZoYnrtpCM4D1cvmdIgqyd1JOW1OFub0adKfahVKfuVYjB9891h/s1600/tradidi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="675" data-original-width="900" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjOzhuvOG4GLPgNduunUggk3poOqG-cFaygXsZ63zP3Z0ORpE7RChE5UHSA45Iqyq5ZytQd-A0QAlDKI_Z7IMNCH655hqZoYnrtpCM4D1cvmdIgqyd1JOW1OFub0adKfahVKfuVYjB9891h/s200/tradidi.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Headstone at the grave of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. <br />
It reads, 'what I received, I handed on.'</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The idea that Monsignor Lefebvre, probably the most fruitful missionary bishop of the last century did not understand Catholic tradition is laughable <i>prima facie</i>. Lefebvre served 30 years as a missionary priest, bishop, and Archbishop in French speaking Africa; baptized tens of thousands of converts; ordained hundreds of priests; founded 21 new dioceses and consecrated African bishops for each of them. He founded schools, convents, clinics, and seminaries. If anyone understood the root and germ of Catholic tradition it was Marcel Lefebvre.<br />
<br />
Yet absolutely necessary to the revolution that culminated at the Second Vatican Council was this new understanding of tradition observed through the lens of evolutionary theory:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Thus, the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as numerous as can be, calling for efforts of analysis and synthesis." (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Second Vatican Council)</blockquote>
Therefore, in an 'evolutionary concept of reality', <b><i>that which is newest is always best</i></b>. In the Hegelian system, the dialectic between the thesis [Tradition] and antithesis [the novelties produced by the Nouvelle Theologie] produces a synthesis ['living Tradition'] that becomes the new thesis. This dialectical method will always leave that which is ancient, venerable, immutable, and eternal at a sort of distant reference point for the sake of history. But make no mistake: for those who have accepted Vatican II's theory that "the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one," that which is newer (Vatican II) is better than everything that went before it.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
This idea is of course the engine driving all the partisans of the Nouvelle Theologie of Henri de Lubac, Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, Edward Schillebeeckx, Dominique Marie Chenu, Yves Congar, Hans Urs Von Balthasar, and their coterie of <i>Ressourcement</i> theologians. Modern man would no longer be bound by the requirements impressed upon his conscience by objective reality and external authority; he now possessed new sciences that he believed rendered the Thomistic universe obsolete. This new Modern Man with his superior sciences required a new philosophy with which to approach the articles of divine revelation, and the neoModernist theologians were busy cooking up this very philosophy with the help of the Kantians and Cartesians.<br />
<br />
Baptizing the theory of evolution was task number one for these innovators, and the prophet of their cause was Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. Teilhard's theories were so bizarre that his own order forbade him from either teaching or publishing, a suppression which lasted until his death on Easter Sunday 1955. Teilhard studied in England under another Jesuit, Fr. George Tyrrell, whom St. Pius X excommunicated for the very same theological monstrosities which he named "Modernism" which was the "compendium of all heresies" that "ruins and destroys all religion" (<i>Pascendi gregis</i>, 1908).<br />
<br />
About Modernism, St. Pius X warned,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"To finish with this whole question of faith and its shoots, it remains to be seen, Venerable Brethren, what the Modernists have to say about their development. First of all they lay down the <span style="background-color: yellow;">general principle that in a <b><span style="color: red;">living religion</span></b> everything is subject to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of Evolution</span>. To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
... Consequently, the formulae too, which we call dogmas, must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. An immense collection of sophisms this, that ruins and destroys all religion. Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and as clearly flows from their principles."</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Pope St. Pius X, ON THE DOCTRINES OF THE MODERNISTS</blockquote>
</blockquote>
This living religion which Pope John Paul II co-opted from de Lubac as 'living tradition' need not maintain any meaningful continuity with the capital 'T' Tradition of the Catholic faith:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The advocates of the new theology follow the same current when, with Blondel, they define the truth as the mind's correspondence with infinitely variable and progressive life. And since truth is life and Tradition should transmit the truth, de Lubac concludes at the existence of a living Tradition. According to him, then, the ulterior beliefs of the Church need not necessarily be logically bound to what she has always explicitly believed from the earliest centuries."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Father Dominic Bourmaud, <i>One Hundred Years of Modernism</i>, Angelus Press, 2006, pages 248-249</blockquote>
</blockquote>
(St. Thomas' definition of truth was the mind's correspondence with reality, not life, -<i>editor</i>.)<br />
<br />
The conclusion to all this is obvious: for a religion to be true, it must be alive; and the sign of life is its changeability and 'progress.' The stable cosmos envisioned by the Church Fathers had to give way to the new theories proposed by Copernicus, Newton, Darwin, and Einstein; the bold new scientific theories embraced by the Protestants must find acceptance in the Catholic Church as well. The philosophy and theology of St. Thomas had to be updated or even discarded with its objective realism and adherence to divine authority. What Modern Man needed was a living tradition that would prove to him that Catholics too, were constrained by the theory of evolution and that their religion was true because it too, was changing.<br />
<br />
Now in a striking irony John Paul II himself is victimized by the contemporary adherents of living tradition. His firm commitment to traditional Catholic morality (paradoxically contained in a philosophical system which for him was quite dependent on man's subjective experiences) must now yield to Pope Francis' ethic of accompanying and listening to not only non-Christian religions, but to 'mother earth'! John Paul II's era is now passed; what he explained in <i>Ecclesia Dei</i> about the council is now coming to pass to leave him as history's casualty on the march to Teilhard's Point Omega.<br />
<br />
John Paul II harshly condemned Archbishop Lefebvre for standing firm in what he received and faithfully passed on - the very definition of Catholic Tradition infallibly defined at the first Vatican Council in 1869-1870:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Apostles."</blockquote>
And now, even though canonized in a hasty display of Pontifical hubris, Pope John Paul II's moral doctrine gives way to the latest, newest manifestation of living tradition. The cycle of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis is unending in the elastic world of evolution and perpetual flux. The demands of natural selection can never be contradicted. In fact, philosophical, theological, and moral change is the very signature of 'truth' and progress. Such is the living tradition bequeathed to us by the neoModernists.<br />
<br />
In such an atmosphere where the tyranny of the new must always triumph, wisdom bids her children to stand firm with the maxim of Saint Vincent of Lerins:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all."</blockquote>
This and this only is Tradition. Tradition does not 'live' in any evolutionary sense, and always maintains the same sense and meaning. May God help us to hold fast to the Tradition - Divine, Apostolic, and Ecclesiastical - handed onto to us by the Lord's Apostles, the Fathers, the Doctors, the martyrs, confessors, virgins, Saints, and faithful Pontiffs.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjofxzJuxB0U1EmISifw34HeBSAVZcjgtZgTCf73AuUxwYW2p9i20D4Rk6Ds2FkQX_0tPPKF77bMGzoulmNiYqqgS2YDkp4n4dcE8Y7OBCUm59rt_bhBMLrgcMoQWAARtK46nQ5tQsqXYuK/s1600/St_Vincent_Lerins.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="850" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjofxzJuxB0U1EmISifw34HeBSAVZcjgtZgTCf73AuUxwYW2p9i20D4Rk6Ds2FkQX_0tPPKF77bMGzoulmNiYqqgS2YDkp4n4dcE8Y7OBCUm59rt_bhBMLrgcMoQWAARtK46nQ5tQsqXYuK/s400/St_Vincent_Lerins.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-72313439916236087732019-10-30T18:22:00.000-07:002019-10-30T18:23:38.209-07:00Way to Pachamama paved by John Paul IILong before the Amazon Synod and the <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/six-cardinals-and-bishops-who-condemned-pagan-pachamama-rituals-at-vatican" target="_blank">Pachamama</a>, this canonized Pope made the synod possible:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If you see me traveling the length and breadth of the whole world in my efforts to meet with <b><i>people of all civilizations and religions</i></b>, it is because I have faith in the <b><i>seeds of wisdom</i></b> which the Spirit has planted in the conscience of all these <b><i>various peoples, tribes and clans</i></b>; from these <b><i>hidden grains</i></b> will come the true resource for the future of mankind in <b><i>this world</i></b> of ours." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(John Paul II's speech to youth in Ravenna, May 11, 1986, quoted in Tutte le encicliche dei Sommi Pontefici, ed. dall'Oglio, p.1821). </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUzk9we-Cf1ihBHTMA3xj5GgwRAs-vM5DWIjU4J-cDw8rGYVwjTf8B_EO16MURRPeBGKeTiFahvcrOef0AHmyhHIcRT89-u7Nm0wULF9EFCduLA76uroimkN82wCjRs-EzoiaEsOxyLuBz/s1600/jpiifeather.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="487" data-original-width="715" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUzk9we-Cf1ihBHTMA3xj5GgwRAs-vM5DWIjU4J-cDw8rGYVwjTf8B_EO16MURRPeBGKeTiFahvcrOef0AHmyhHIcRT89-u7Nm0wULF9EFCduLA76uroimkN82wCjRs-EzoiaEsOxyLuBz/s320/jpiifeather.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
</blockquote>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-88276838190673337222019-10-02T18:17:00.000-07:002019-10-02T19:05:20.100-07:00Cardinal Muller's Manifesto of FaithWhile I sincerely applaud both Cardinal Muller and Arcadia Films for this short but potent video, I can only recommend it to those who are outside the Church and are perhaps in doubt about the basics (what the video calls the fundamentals) of Catholic faith.<br />
<br />
I know this will sound super negative and hyper critical, but you simply cannot utilize the sources of the conciliar religion to successfully defend the faith of all ages. No amount of appeals to the CCC, Vatican II, or "Saint John Paul II" can provide the required separation from this generation's submersion into the cesspool of errors ushered in by the Copernican Revolution and sealed at Vatican II.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/vtlQusKMcv0/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vtlQusKMcv0?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
This video is head and shoulders above Bishop Robert Barron's glossy, airbrushed travel brochure "<a href="https://youtu.be/GZ9AIMIz-Jo" target="_blank">Catholicism</a>" but unfortunately draws from the same reference points and will not persuade many other than the already persuaded. It is bound to please conservative Catholics but does not rise to level of divine, apostolic, nor ecclesiastical tradition.<br />
<br />
Cardinal Muller's manifesto reads much like Paul VI's <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_p-vi_motu-proprio_19680630_credo.html" target="_blank">Credo of the People of God</a>: it seems to be saying all the right things but without the supernatural power that ought to accompany such proclamation.<br />
<br />
In summary: using Vatican II to defend the Catholic faith on a polemical level is a fool's errand. It's elastic, amorphous 'pastoral language' is easy to manipulate and even use against divine and Catholic faith. We will follow Cardinals Muller, Burke, Sarah, and their conservative confreres as far as they will take us. Unfortunately that will be short of the distance required to conquer what we are now facing.<br />
<br />
Full video <a href="https://manifestooffaith.com/?fbclid=IwAR10ns4esA3gyVACYPMUeyREP42qruw4sIEk81cMtv4EEPcSDGQkkw1_0GU" target="_blank">here</a>.John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-10815343683140581522019-09-24T17:24:00.002-07:002019-09-24T18:37:54.261-07:00The Ottaviani Intervention at Fifty<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">On the 25th of September 1969 Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci published what is known today as the <a href="https://www.fisheaters.com/ottavianiintervention.html" target="_blank">Ottaviani Intervention</a> in order to persuade Pope Paul VI not to promulgate the <i>Novus Ordo Missae</i>, or new order of mass. The infamously <a href="https://destroyerofheresies.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-hidden-history-of-new-mass.html" target="_blank">'fabricated' liturgy</a> was assembled as a technical production by a committee of liturgists in order to provide a form of worship for Catholic faithful to experience "full and active participation" as recommended by the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on Sacred Liturgy, <i>Sacrosanctum concilium</i>. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">These two princes of the Church acted in good conscience and out of loyalty to the Pope and to the Catholic Church. The summary of their scholarship prepared by a team of pastors and theologians under the direction of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was ominous:</span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">"...the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The canons of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery."</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> Pope Paul referred the study to his Confraternity for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly headed by Cardinal Ottaviani as the Holy Office, which concluded that "the document contained many affirmations that were "<a href="http://www.clerus.org/clerus/dati/2000-12/07-999999/Ch1.pdf" target="_blank">superficial, exaggerated, inexact, emotional and false</a>."</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxuiL0tNTgHFozpnirqrywlUuDFoGfiCxFaBlNVE4yE_rOvR0G938lQOWmZLpexoF2IyTbGWiGaZwo9xpI_7yvNm_hxWrKt7Nn7EsWK-nx-zU-ihOyxuPwV4_u00Ai4gS2Dp3qfD9KkkP6/s1600/AlfredoOttaviani.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1114" data-original-width="730" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxuiL0tNTgHFozpnirqrywlUuDFoGfiCxFaBlNVE4yE_rOvR0G938lQOWmZLpexoF2IyTbGWiGaZwo9xpI_7yvNm_hxWrKt7Nn7EsWK-nx-zU-ihOyxuPwV4_u00Ai4gS2Dp3qfD9KkkP6/s320/AlfredoOttaviani.jpg" width="209" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The intervention thus dismissed quickly disappeared from the limited public view it enjoyed (it was published by Jean Madiran's magazine <i>Itineraires</i> with permission of the authors). The French publication <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=La_Documentation_catholique&action=edit&redlink=1" target="_blank">La Documentation catholique</a></i> ran an article in February of 1970 (vol. 67, pp. 215–216 and 343) featuring an interview with Cardinal Ottaviani in which he seemed to do an abrupt about face regarding the new Mass. The Cardinal, now in his eighties and blind allegedly signed a statement affirming enthusiastic approval of it, which Madiran publicly disputed as fraudulent. In any event, neither Cardinal Bacci, Archbishop Lefebvre, nor any of the other signatories ever distanced themselves from the study.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">On the occasion of a reprint on it's 25th anniversary, Cardinal Alphons Stickler declared</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">"The analysis of the Novus Ordo made by these two Cardinals has lost nothing of its value, nor, unfortunately, of its timeliness . ... The results of the reform are deemed by many today to have been devastating. It was the merit of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to discover very quickly that the modification of the rites resulted in a fundamental change of doctrine.” (November 27, 2004)</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Which brings us to today. What of the Ottaviani Intervention's warnings has <i>not</i> come to pass?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Chapter VIII concludes</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Today, division and schism are officially acknowledged to exist not only outside of but within the Church. Her unity is not only threatened but already tragically compromised. Errors against the Faith are not so much insinuated but rather an inevitable consequence of liturgical abuses and aberrations which have been given equal recognition.</span></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries was both the sign and pledge of unity of worship (and to replace it with another which cannot but be a sign of division by virtue of the countless liberties implicitly authorised, and which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic religion) is, we feel in conscience bound to proclaim, an incalculable error.</span></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">In June 1971 via the new missal's <i>Notification Instructione de Constitutione</i> Pope Paul VI suppressed the Missal of St. Pius V which John XXIII had renewed on the eve of Vatican II. The instruction forbade the public offering of the Traditional Latin Mass except in the case of elderly or infirm priests unable to learn the new rite and only then in solitude - without so much as an altar boy assisting. Pope John Paul II sustained this policy until an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quattuor_abhinc_annos" target="_blank">indult</a> was permitted in 1984 which required the approval of the local bishop. Very few granted it.<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuh69HBO9lgqRozvbh1cq_4BPVORITPGdMSeXurlezofK3vbx6Yr-YYguAn5asoGo4VWF2rQBAU1bTviWGZBgsjrRWBs-OODH7SHKr8i7v4R_s4BPQUbnvu23PRodpBdASOfIRjY1ueTiV/s1600/cardinal+bacci.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="293" data-original-width="250" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuh69HBO9lgqRozvbh1cq_4BPVORITPGdMSeXurlezofK3vbx6Yr-YYguAn5asoGo4VWF2rQBAU1bTviWGZBgsjrRWBs-OODH7SHKr8i7v4R_s4BPQUbnvu23PRodpBdASOfIRjY1ueTiV/s200/cardinal+bacci.jpg" width="170" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Cardinal Antonio Bacci</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The sad state of affairs in the Catholic Church today is an undeniable fact. Cardinal Josef Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) very <a href="https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=196" target="_blank">candidly attributed</a> the source of the crisis to the collapse of the sacred liturgy:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">"I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the <b>collapse of the liturgy</b>, which at times is actually being conceived of <i>etsi Deus non daretur</i>: as though in the liturgy it did not matter any more whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and listens to us.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">But if in the liturgy the communion of faith no longer appears, nor the universal unity of the Church and of her history, nor the mystery of the living Christ, where is it that the Church still appears in her spiritual substance?"</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">I was dismayed by the <b>banning of the old Missal</b>," he [Cardinal Ratzinger] wrote, "seeing that a similar thing had never happened in the entire history of the liturgy...."</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the Ottaviani Intervention should give us pause for sober reflection. We are yet in the thrall of 'experts' who tell us what is best for us dismissing 1900 years of Catholic Tradition to "discern the signs of the times." They tell us that all things are in perpetual evolution (condemned by Pope Pius XII in his encyclical <i><a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html" target="_blank">Humani generis</a></i> in 1950) and that we must evolve with them. Yet this path has been tried and proven to be demonstrably deleterious to Catholic faith.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The Traditional form of the Roman Rite has enjoyed a breathtaking resurgence of vitality and popularity in the past few decades largely due to the persistent efforts of Lefebvre's Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (SSPX). While relentlessly condemned and vehemently opposed with all the weight of canonical approbation, the priests of the society patiently rebuilt the edifice of Catholic Tradition. Today, while still a tiny minority, the Traditional Mass is being juxtaposed with the new Mass of Paul VI by both <a href="https://sggresources.org/products/work-of-human-hands-by-rev-anthony-cekada" target="_blank">theologians</a> and children. The contrasts are stark, leaving some to wonder if the <i>Novus Ordo</i> is in fact the vehicle of a different religion.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Whatever one decides for their own life of piety and devotion, it is abundantly clear that the authors of the Ottaviani Intervention foresaw our time with startling alacrity. Fifty years hence with all the proofs one could desire as evidence, it is difficult to sustain the utility of the Pauline reforms. The "canons of the rite definitively fixed at that time [which] provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery" have been removed for half a century. The result is what Dietrich Von Hildebrand dubbed <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Devastated-Vineyard-Dietrich-Von-Hildebrand/dp/B000717XBG" target="_blank">The Devastated Vineyard</a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br /></blockquote>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-12672196442251941112019-06-05T19:12:00.004-07:002021-08-22T13:37:36.880-07:00A mini-history of orthodox worshipThe first sacrifice was by the LORD God in the garden of Eden to clothe Adam and Eve. They received the ritual of sacrifice directly from Him. Abel continues the Tradition, as did Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.<br />
<br />
The Pasch is divinely revealed to Moses in Egypt and the blood of the Lamb spares the firstborn in Israel from the angel of death - yet only if they carefully and devoutly follow the instructions God gives through Moses.<br />
<br />
Then God reveals to Moses the entire divine liturgy on Mt. Sinai leaving nothing to man's imagination. Every last detail - the dimensions of the tabernacle, its building material, its colors and thread, the way it is to be deployed, carried, sanctified; the altars, tables, furnishings, washings, rituals, ceremonies, priestly garments, step-by-step instructions were all revealed to Moses and received from God directly through the mediation of angels. Yet even so, the penchant for novelty and innovation was so strong in Israel that deviations from the Law of worship inevitably led them to syncretism and finally apostasy. The Old Testament Prophets were sent to call the people of Israel back to the conditions of the covenant God made with them. Through His Prophets He promised a New Covenant different from the old (Jeremias 31,31-35).<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcj_4AEZE1PalNTYmMI2v-TI9Bi2cixjKEn7mjx_bVSZjU-ZFzAWryApG6HmlqvnOnIwOpryEPRDuv6Jhjsq2-zVHCdvZPFxRFonxJUv_RtG_0lEq80geoVYQmm3jZu0EUecSE2orI432J/s1600/tabernacle.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1156" data-original-width="1600" height="230" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcj_4AEZE1PalNTYmMI2v-TI9Bi2cixjKEn7mjx_bVSZjU-ZFzAWryApG6HmlqvnOnIwOpryEPRDuv6Jhjsq2-zVHCdvZPFxRFonxJUv_RtG_0lEq80geoVYQmm3jZu0EUecSE2orI432J/s320/tabernacle.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div>
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">A sacrifice taking place in the tabernacle in the wilderness; </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">the encampments of the Jewish tribes spread out to the horizon. </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Colored lithograph)</span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Christ instituted the Mass of the New and Eternal Covenant at Passover and offered Himself on the Cross during the Passover. The veil in the temple was torn in two when He defeated sin and death by His priestly sacrifice. Thus, St. Paul teaches in his letter to the Hebrews, a "new and living way was made for us through His death" (Hebrews 10,20).<br />
<br />
St. Paul goes on to teach explicitly that the temple ritual is a prefigurement and copy of the heavenly sanctuary. This is pure Catholic theology; it identifies the Mass on earth as but a reflection of the perfect worship the Son offers the Father in heaven (Pius XII, <i>Mediator Dei</i>). The sacrifice offered at the heavenly altar by our great High Priest can never be reformed, altered, or changed.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbP9jki3nziaE87PcAPYd-lMZBqOnhxMd3GOBzAo0Ye9itRQwnAojegibwy9-KwDeAnzyX_NlrBOQwWTPeEnU6V4RICPXXcstxsU-ZYVfxp9ex2-FC_y7CVqFQB3qxZn1_2IFjIizzfjl5/s1600/hanc+igitur.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="548" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbP9jki3nziaE87PcAPYd-lMZBqOnhxMd3GOBzAo0Ye9itRQwnAojegibwy9-KwDeAnzyX_NlrBOQwWTPeEnU6V4RICPXXcstxsU-ZYVfxp9ex2-FC_y7CVqFQB3qxZn1_2IFjIizzfjl5/s320/hanc+igitur.jpg" width="243" /></a></div>
The Latin (Roman Rite) Mass was already standardized during the time of St. Gregory the Great (+604) to the point that the innovation of a single word in the Canon - one word! - inflamed Rome in riots. And it is St. Gregory's Missal that Pope Paul VI <a href="https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19690403_missale-romanum.html" target="_blank">admits is essentially unchanged</a> until his own fabricated, man-made liturgy appears in 1969.<br />
<br />
We can never say that the Novus Ordo is a received rite. If you try, you will disagree even with Paul VI who admits it is not. It is approved, but not received, at least not through organic development.<br />
<br />
The history of the worship of God is one of that which is revealed by God, received by chosen men, distilled through centuries of ecclesiastical Tradition, and devoutly preserved by His faithful servants. The Apostolic Constitution <i>Quo Primum</i> promulgated by Pope St. Pius V is a part of this Sacred Tradition. Strictly speaking, the Novus Ordo Missae is not.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-89756073017222876152019-03-09T10:24:00.004-08:002019-03-09T14:46:05.905-08:00The Myth of the Chaste HomosexualAn untold number of Catholic priests contend that they are homosexual but chaste. Taking St. Thomas Aquinas as our guide, we will see the futility of such a claim and the peril of succumbing to such a premise.<br />
<br />
This claim is primarily an assault on the virtue of chastity. According to the Angelic Doctor<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
1. The word chastity derives from the chastening or rebuking of concupiscence. By such chastening, chastising or curbing, passion is held in control, and is kept in alignment with <b>right reason</b>. Chastity, therefore, is a virtue inasmuch as it steadily tends to keep human conduct under the control of <b>reason</b>.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
2. And chastity is a special virtue for it concerns a special aspect of good, that is, the controlling, the keeping <b>reasonable, of the tendencies of sex</b>. (<i>Summa Theologica</i> 2.B.151)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
St. Paul writing to the Romans condemns sodomy as changing the natural use of sex into that which is against nature (cf. Romans 1,26-27). Therefore, the offense of sodomy is against reason. The person who self-identifies as homosexual has decisively rejected the natural law, and his own ability to reason. Chastity keeps the tendencies of sex in alignment with right reason. It is <i>de fide</i> that there are only two sexes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27)</blockquote>
There is no third category.<br />
<br />
Following St. Paul's analysis of the Fall and its consequences explained in Romans 1,24-32 it is evident that prior to the decision to self-identify as homosexual, there is a deliberate decision to reject the God of nature and exchange the truth for lies (1,25). This occurs in the will informed by an intellect darkened by the rejection of right reason (1,21). The heresy professed by very many today that they are 'born gay' is soundly refuted by Apostolic teaching:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Let no man, when he is tempted, say that he is tempted by God. For God is not a tempter of evils, and he tempteth no man. [14] But every man is tempted by his own concupiscence, being drawn away and allured. [15] Then when concupiscence hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin. But sin, when it is completed, begetteth death.[16] Do not err, therefore, my dearest brethren. (St. James 1,13-16)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
So we see clearly that the decision to self-identify as homosexual is not a simple acceptance of nature nor an agreement with the design of the Creator; it is a willful choice to reject the natural law and the faculties of reason.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtp2Eul-yqYU5Ju47MgycIa54JVmSw-IxTmIzk_leG9_hfpIzHS5-JXx4zkhwneJvnAtzwoCDyOztKB3dmKqBiVEPYVbkTA6nSBm1MMkloDPiocg23pU9T9uIp_vmBI1AMO1byW4gh5fVr/s1600/eight_col_gay_priest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="388" data-original-width="620" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtp2Eul-yqYU5Ju47MgycIa54JVmSw-IxTmIzk_leG9_hfpIzHS5-JXx4zkhwneJvnAtzwoCDyOztKB3dmKqBiVEPYVbkTA6nSBm1MMkloDPiocg23pU9T9uIp_vmBI1AMO1byW4gh5fVr/s320/eight_col_gay_priest.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Father Krysztof Olaf Charamsa (L), with his partner <br />
Edouard. Photo: AFP</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It is also important to acknowledge the term <i>homosexual</i> is itself a neologism of late advent (19th century) without roots in Catholic Tradition. Catholic Tradition does not admit to any anthropological categories besides male and female. When treating this perversion, it is simply referred to as the sin against nature or the unnatural vice. The Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II employs the novel and troublesome terminology of <i>homosexual persons</i> and teaches that they are called to chastity (2359). In it's discussion on chastity, the CCC teaches<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. Sexuality, in which man's belonging to the bodily and biological world is expressed, becomes personal and truly human when it is integrated into the relationship of one person to another, in the complete and lifelong mutual gift of a man and a woman. The virtue of chastity therefore involves the integrity of the person and the integrality of the gift. (2337)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
How then can a "homosexual person" live chastely without integration of his sexuality according the natural order established by the Creator? The answer is that he cannot.<br />
<br />
Abstinence from unnatural sexual acts is not chastity.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
3. Chastity is not the same as the virtue of abstinence. For chastity is concerned with the control of sex pleasures, whereas abstinence is directly concerned with the control of the pleasures of the palate. (St. Thomas Aquinas, <i>Summa Theologica</i>, 2.B.151)</blockquote>
The disordered sexual desire of sodomy can never be an object of chastity. And the mere abstinence from sodomitical acts is not chastity. For a person to practice chastity he must agree with the Creator's order established in nature, witnessed to by the natural law, and follow the truth in his intellect. Man must submit his intellect to the faculty of reason as clearly taught by the witness of nature (Romans 1,20). To self-identify as "homosexual" is a clear and unambiguous rejection of reason.<br />
<br />
By now it should be evident that sodomy is primarily a disease of the mind and the intellect.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"No sin has greater power over the soul than the one of cursed sodomy, which was always detested by all those who lived according to God… Such passion for undue forms borders on madness. This vice disturbs the intellect, breaks an elevated and generous state of soul, drags great thoughts to petty ones, makes [men] pusillanimous and irascible, obstinate and hardened, servilely soft and incapable of anything. Furthermore, the will, being agitated by the insatiable drive for pleasure, <b><i>no longer follows reason</i></b>, but furor…. Someone who lived practicing the vice of sodomy will suffer more pains in Hell than any one else, because this is the worst sin that there is.” (St. Bernardine of Siena, <i>Predica XXXIX, in Le prediche</i>) </blockquote>
</blockquote>
What then is the real reason for maintaining the pretense of 'gay but chaste'? It is presented as a justification for men with no supernatural faith to continue in their careers as professional clerics. They argue that they are chaste and therefore present no imminent threat to the faithful; however, the primary menace to the Church comes not from their <b>acts of sodomy</b> alone but from <b>minds that have rejected reason and the natural law</b>.<br />
<br />
Chastity is required for sanctifying grace to remain in the soul. Chastity requires sexual integrity under the control of right reason. Anyone who has adopted the lie of homosexualist ideology has manifestly rejected right reason and therefore cannot be chaste.<br />
<br />
How many faithful Catholics have succumbed to this lie! And their ignorance is not a justification for sustaining this blight on chastity; Saint Paul writes<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that <b>consent to them that do them</b>. (Romans 1,32)</blockquote>
The danger is not only in the acts of sodomy, nor is it restricted to agreement with them. The danger to the soul is in consenting to sodomy as being a real sexual 'orientation' that as long as not acted on is safe. There is no chastity for the person who self-identifies as homosexual, even if he or she never practices sodomy.<br />
<br />
Is there any hope then for the person who self-identifies as homosexual? The answer is yes as long as the conscience has not been fatally wounded. If the soul is willing to hear the truth and submit to right reason, then the mind can be renewed and the soul saved. Sadly, we know that such conversions are rare and the road of repentance arduous and exceedingly difficult. This is primarily because the intellect has been reordered to follow an entire architecture of falsehood that rejects nature, and in so doing, rejects the God of nature who planted reason in the conscience of men.<br />
<br />
The ugly reality is that the myth of the chaste homosexual is a clever subterfuge employed by wicked clergymen who submitted themselves for holy orders fraudulently. They assert this claim to maintain their status as pastors and priests. But they have no supernatural faith and have rejected nature, reason, and conscience in order to maintain their identity as homosexuals, which in the final analysis is their true priority, even above obedience to God.John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-31201345559094038822018-12-30T16:36:00.001-08:002019-11-23T09:52:23.936-08:00Approved but not received<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>“... recalling it (the liturgy) to greater simplicity of rites, by expressing it in the vernacular language or by uttering it in a loud voice’
as if the present order of the liturgy <b>received and approved </b>by the
Church, had emanated in some part from the forgetfulness of the
principles by which it should be regulated ... (is) rash, offensive to
pious ears, insulting to the Church, favourable to the charges of heretics” </i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>...Auctorem Fidei, Pope Pius VI, 28 August 1794 (D.S. 2633)</i></blockquote>
Below is an exchange I had with a Novus Ordo priest in social media five years ago.<br />
<br />
Father Xxxx: Johnny, here's something I was thinking about today, when you speak of the Novus Ordo as "it is approved but not received*." The argument you seem to be making is that the Latin Mass was received from Jesus or the apostles but not the Novus Ordo. This presumes the Latin Mass exactly as we have it today was celebrated by Jesus, exactly in the same way we have it now. But if this Latin Mass was not celebrated by Jesus exactly as it is structured today, then even this form of the Mass was not exactly "received" from the Jesus and the apostles. A few things or rituals, or symbols, or prayers have been added down the ages. What do you think?<br />
<br />
Me:<br />
1. Approved and received: meaning it is licit (authorized) and passed down in a stable form (received) from antiquity. The Missal of St. Pius V is both, and it is also canonized by the Council of Trent and the Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum (1570). It was NOT a new form of liturgy when St. Pius V canonized it; it was at least as old as Pope St. Gregory the Great (+ 604) and even Pope Paul VI admits this in his Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum (1970) that promulgates the Novus Ordo (new order) Missal.<br />
2. No one has made the claim that the Novus Ordo is received from tradition. It was in the words of Cardinal Ratzinger, "...fabricated liturgy, a banal, technical on-the-spot production... not organically developed from previous forms..." THIS is the difference between the two liturgies. One is handed down in a stable form from antiquity; the other was invented by liturgical scientists in Fr. Bugnini's Consilium.<br />
3. St. Paul says in 1: Cor. 11,23 that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"For I have RECEIVED of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread..."</blockquote>
This tells us in the very early days of the Church the form of the liturgy was already contained in a form received from Christ. It sets the precedent that men do not invent forms of sacred liturgy. If you recall the entire sacrificial system used in Israel, it was all 100% received by Moses from God by direct revelation - nothing was left to the imagination of men. It was a replica of the heavenly rite. Likewise, we are not permitted to invent our own forms of liturgy as though what has been handed down to us from the Apostles is some how deficient.<br />
4. As the Church organically developed the Mass with minor accretions and modifications, it retained its basic structure and character down through the centuries. We are told by Pope Pius XII in Mediator Dei that it is wrong to try to recapture what we imagine the primitive form of the liturgy may have looked like:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"62. Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device."</blockquote>
5. The above is the error of antiquinarianism, AKA archeologism. It is condemned in the same encyclical.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvoQtq6H5_pQsiAM4Si5UaybKcuQ9MB3yzSjrN3sDwRVN8_RTtm5TuTUn44RsRK1ggC8jr_335Z9csM0APeiQ_zQMBxgLeBnW4ExTJ0xP0JWAcQGo_HEyLyYRY8jrbU2UTR68A3IzcgoHx/s1600/Liturgical+abuse.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="226" data-original-width="387" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvoQtq6H5_pQsiAM4Si5UaybKcuQ9MB3yzSjrN3sDwRVN8_RTtm5TuTUn44RsRK1ggC8jr_335Z9csM0APeiQ_zQMBxgLeBnW4ExTJ0xP0JWAcQGo_HEyLyYRY8jrbU2UTR68A3IzcgoHx/s320/Liturgical+abuse.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A priest distributes holy communion during a Papal Mass, 2013.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
6. Lastly, for me, the final straw was the testimony of the Vatican's top exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth, who concluded that the Novus Ordo Rite of Exorcism was useless against the demon. This for me brings the efficacy of the entire NO liturgy into question.<br />
7. The fruits do not lie. In 1960 when all liturgy was in Latin, 3 out of 4 American Catholics assisted at Mass at least weekly. Since the new Mass was implemented and the Latin Mass was suppressed in 1970, the percentage has plunged to a mere 25%. Certainly you as a pastor can appreciate this.<br />
I would add that the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy (CSL) Sacrosanctum concilium from Vatican II never mentions abolition of Latin, tearing out altar rails, removal of tabernacles, spinning altars around to face the people, tossing away of chapel veils for women and girls, communion standing and in the hand, EMHCs, altar girls or the introduction of popular music. It calls for Latin Masses with Gregorian Chant having pride of place in liturgy, which we both know has all but disappeared. So please do not insist that all this liturgical revolution is required by Vatican II. Vatican II was extremely imprecise in its verbiage and essay-style texts, and its elasticity has been stretched to bizarre extremes due to passages like the one below from the CSL:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered BEFORE ALL ELSE; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work."</blockquote>
It is very easy to lift this very poorly worded clause out of the CSL to justify just about any liturgical abuse one can imagine, and indeed, that is exactly what has happened.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We ought to get back the dimension of the sacred in the liturgy. The liturgy is not a festivity; it is not a meeting for the purpose of having a good time. It is of no importance that the parish priest has cudgeled his brains to come up with suggestive ideas or imaginative novelties. The liturgy is what makes the Thrice-Holy God present amongst us; it is the burning bush; it is the Alliance of God with man in Jesus Christ, who has died and risen again. The grandeur of the liturgy does not rest upon the fact that it offers an interesting entertainment, but in rendering tangible the Totally Other, whom we are not capable of summoning. He comes because He wills. In other words, the essential in the liturgy is the mystery, which is realized in the common ritual of the Church; all the rest diminishes it. Men experiment with it in lively fashion, and find themselves deceived, when the mystery is transformed into distraction, when the chief actor in the liturgy is not the Living God but the priest or the liturgical director."<br />
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, 1988</blockquote>
There seems to be a lot of misinformation about the development of liturgy out there...<br />
<br />
* CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Session 7)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-70936583776023043982018-11-24T10:33:00.000-08:002019-08-06T19:15:47.317-07:00The Hidden History of the New MassFew laymen are acquainted with the development of the <i>Novus Ordo</i> Mass they pray and which many – to include this author – for years mistakenly assumed was the same liturgy prayed in antiquity. It isn’t.<br />
<br />
A few facts from history.<br />
<br />
1. In 1960, Pope John XXIII named Fr. Annibale Bugnini Secretary of the Preparatory Commission for Vatican II's document on sacred liturgy. Fr. Bugnini had served in similar roles under Pius XII’s Congregation of Rites and led the reform of the Holy Week liturgy promulgated in 1955 with the decree <i>Maximus Redemptionis</i>.<br />
<br />
2. In 1962 John XXIII removed Bugnini from his position as Consulter to the Sacred Congregation of Rites and Professor of Sacred Liturgy in the Lateran University.<br />
<br />
3. In the same year Pope John XXIII promulgated the 1962 edition of the <i>Missale Romanum</i>. In February of the same year, he promulgated the Apostolic Constitution <i><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/john23/j23veterum.htm" target="_blank">Veterum sapientia</a></i> (on the wisdom of Latin as the universal tongue of the Church). These two promulgations give no indication that radical change of the sacred liturgy was in the mind of Pope John; tragically, <i>Veterum sapientia</i> was overcome by events just a few short months after it’s issuance.<br />
<br />
4. During the 2nd week of the Second Vatican Council, the Rhine Fathers (German and French episcopal conferences) rejected the Pope's <a href="http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/history/historia-ecclesiae/79-history/421-original-vatican-ii-schemas.html" target="_blank">prepared schemata</a> and demanded that the reform of the liturgy be considered as the first item of business. Pope John yielded to their demands and threw away three years worth of prepared schemata. The only prepared schema not rejected by the Rhine Fathers was Bugnini’s draft of <i>Sacrosanctum concilium</i>. It was introduced as the first document for discussion at Vatican II.<br />
<br />
5. According to eyewitness Jean Guitton, Pope John XXIII <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=307852&language=en" target="_blank">cried out on his death</a> bed, "stop the council!" The Pope was laid to rest (and with him, the Council) in June 1963; he had not signed a single document. Pope Paul VI reconvened it in the fall of 1963 and named Bugnini Secretary for the Council's document on sacred liturgy.<br />
<br />
6. The president of the Council’s Preparatory Commission on the on the Liturgy was Cardinal Gaetano Cicognani. In order for the draft to be presented to the full council, his signature was required. Knowing what it would do to the liturgy, Cardinal Cicognani did not want to sign it. According to Fr. Ralph Wiltgen, “an expert of the preconciliar Commission on the liturgy stated that the old Cardinal was on the verge of tears and waved the document saying, ‘They want me to sign this and I don’t know what to do!’ Then he put the text on his desk, took a pen and signed. Four days later he was dead.” (Wiltgen, <i>Rhine Flows into the Tiber</i>)<br />
<br />
7. <i>Sacrosanctum Concilium </i>(Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy) was signed by Pope Paul VI on 4 December 1963. Following its promulgation, a period of wild liturgical experimentation immediately took off in the West. The wide variety of experimentation with the 1962 Missal eventually resulted in a 1965 interim version that allowed the omission of the prayers at the foot of the altar, the last gospel, and the entire Mass to be prayed in the vernacular – contrary to the Council of Trent’s condemnation in <a href="http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch22.htm" target="_blank">Session 22, Canon IX</a>. While nothing in the CSL addressed or even mentioned turning altars around and celebrants facing the people, this experiment spread like wildfire and soon signified the primary emblem of the reforms. Pope Paul VI himself offered Mass in Italian and facing the people in 1965. Soon there were Masses on coffee tables, “folk masses” with guitars and tambourines, and in the US a new hymnal styled “<a href="http://www.ccwatershed.org/blog/2017/aug/14/pdf-download-peoples-mass-book-1964-WLP/" target="_blank">Peoples Mass Book</a>” was published in 1966 featuring pop-folk songs as liturgical accompaniment. All these things occurred well before Pope Paul’s <i>Novus Ordo Missae</i> was promulgated in 1969.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWXn8YVZ5jw2KGlbTfO6BtArz695PY5DlkxTNLJgDp0wGMefOqtUrBihndOXKibuL-Kmvh2bHbfu6v88_JA1dCMlBqlDL4YIy7ugdOkaIyioW3XA2s0aKwCCWuajPW1ENIkOtR2m4Mt4GW/s1600/PaulVIMass02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="521" data-original-width="778" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWXn8YVZ5jw2KGlbTfO6BtArz695PY5DlkxTNLJgDp0wGMefOqtUrBihndOXKibuL-Kmvh2bHbfu6v88_JA1dCMlBqlDL4YIy7ugdOkaIyioW3XA2s0aKwCCWuajPW1ENIkOtR2m4Mt4GW/s320/PaulVIMass02.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pope Paul VI celebrates Mass in Italian facing the people, 1965.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
8. The CSL’s orientation can best be summed up in article 14: "In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this <b>full and</b> <b>active</b> <b>participation by all the people</b> is the aim to be considered <b>before all else</b>; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work." (<i>emphasis mine</i>) The phrase “active participation” became the rallying cry of the reformers who were less concerned about pure doctrine than religious experience. The Latin is rendered <i>participatio actuosa</i> which means “actual participation” and not “active participation.” This played directly into the hands of the subjectivist philosophers who rejected St. Thomas’ scholastic philosophy and sought to locate the divine in man (immanentism) and not in the Traditional method of gospel preaching and through the administration of the sacramental economy.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIKcBF4wHc7_HMus1l1mm5o5KDhkk1113Q8GCQrNy4CpULbksoClOm4lL1UFqBarNvkgIVPUHq6XpMIbUx1wE5dT-2wR5Voq9R6R_oBQJ2prQles0TPqFlJGfub3TucJUF7O0vMNSZcD0u/s1600/versus+populum.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="350" data-original-width="364" height="306" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIKcBF4wHc7_HMus1l1mm5o5KDhkk1113Q8GCQrNy4CpULbksoClOm4lL1UFqBarNvkgIVPUHq6XpMIbUx1wE5dT-2wR5Voq9R6R_oBQJ2prQles0TPqFlJGfub3TucJUF7O0vMNSZcD0u/s320/versus+populum.PNG" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The 1965 interim Missal graphics show the priest behind a table <br />
altar 4 years before the Novus Ordo was promulgated. The <br />
terminology 'liturgy of the Word' and 'liturgy of the Eucharist'<br />
are already in usage.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
9. Bugnini's Commission developed the prototype for a new Mass called the <i>Missa forma normativa</i>. The <a href="http://www.academia.edu/8608589/The_Normative_Mass_of_1967_Its_History_and_Principles_as_Applied_to_the_Liturgy_of_the_Mass_Complete_pre-corrected_Draft_Doct._Diss._SantAnselmo_2012_" target="_blank">prototype</a> was shown to a synod of Roman bishops in 1967 which <a href="http://crc-internet.org/our-doctrine/catholic-counter-reformation/for-the-church/1-new-ordo-missae/" target="_blank">voted to reject it.</a> Bugnini’s reforms were temporarily halted by the unwillingness of the Synod Fathers to accept it’s radical retooling of the 1965 interim missal. Years later, Cardinal Ratzinger would comment,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"What happened after the Council was totally different: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We left the living process of growth and development to enter the realm of fabrication. There was no longer a desire to continue developing and maturing, as the centuries passed and so this was replaced—as if it were a technical production—with a construction, a banal on-the-spot product." (preface to the French edition of The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by Klaus Gamber, 1992)</blockquote>
10. Fr. Louis Bouyer upon his resignation from the liturgical commission chronicled the following account of his intercourse with Pope Paul VI:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Father Louis Bouyer: I wrote to the Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, to tender my resignation as member of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform. The Holy Father sent for me at once (and the following conversation ensued):</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: blue;">Paul VI: Father, you are an unquestionable and unquestioned authority by your deep knowledge of the Church’s liturgy and Tradition, and a specialist in this field. I do not understand why you have sent me your resignation, whilst your presence, is more than precious, it is indispensable!</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Father Bouyer: Most Holy Father, if I am a specialist in this field, I tell you very simply that I resign because I do not agree with the reforms you are imposing! Why do you take no notice of the remarks we send you, and why do you do the opposite?</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: blue;">Paul VI: But I don’t understand: I’m not imposing anything. I have never imposed anything in this field. I have complete trust in your competence and your propositions. It is you who are sending me proposals. When Fr. Bugnini comes to see me, he says: "Here is what the experts are asking for." And as you are an expert in this matter, I accept your judgement.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Father Bouyer: And meanwhile, when we have studied a question, and have chosen what we can propose to you, in conscience, Father Bugnini took our text, and, then said to us that, having consulted you: "The Holy Father wants you to introduce these changes into the liturgy." And since I don’t agree with your propositions, because they break with the Tradition of the Church, then I tender my resignation.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: blue;">Paul VI: But not at all, Father, believe me, Father Bugnini tells me exactly the contrary: I have never refused a single one of your proposals. Father Bugnini came to find me and said: "The experts of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform asked for this and that". And since I am not a liturgical specialist, I tell you again, I have always accepted your judgement. I never said that to Monsignor Bugnini. I was deceived. Father Bugnini deceived me and deceived you.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Father Bouyer: That is, my dear friends, how the liturgical reform was done!</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(<a href="http://www.editionsducerf.fr/html/fiche/fichelivre.asp?n_liv_cerf=10038" target="_blank">Mémoires</a>, posthumous, published 2014 by the Éditions du Cerf)</blockquote>
11. Pope Paul VI disregarded the decision of the 1967 Roman Synod and promulgated the <i>Novus Ordo Missae</i> in April 1969. In the notification Instructione de Constitutione (14 June 1971) Pope Paul VI ordered the practical suppression of the 1962 Missal with one exception: an elderly or infirm priest could continue to offer it in private with no one else present – not even an altar server. In a bizarre and confused <a href="https://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/p6691126.htm" target="_blank">address</a> given on 26 November 1969 he calls his new liturgy a novelty, an inconvenience, an innovation, a cause of upset to the faithful and annoyance to priests, and yet justifies all on the basis of the utilitarian value of vernacular liturgy.<br />
<br />
12. In 1974 Paul VI would remove [then] Archbishop Annibale Bugnini from all positions dealing with liturgy and appointed him as an auxiliary bishop to a diocese in Iran.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB3eOLeZkFjBpf4_4Iw-2viJIWizPX4R_lhVhp_M5d6KSucbslAnWqPEwDBvs55YZOeloTgTOHfYWMgFPe1ldJCBUHQNxKwUPfch0KuVnDvCUzE3dwJIINYbiyPElYHYd-BQWCaa3mBDQB/s1600/Annibale_BUGNINI_image_preview.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="300" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB3eOLeZkFjBpf4_4Iw-2viJIWizPX4R_lhVhp_M5d6KSucbslAnWqPEwDBvs55YZOeloTgTOHfYWMgFPe1ldJCBUHQNxKwUPfch0KuVnDvCUzE3dwJIINYbiyPElYHYd-BQWCaa3mBDQB/s200/Annibale_BUGNINI_image_preview.png" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Archbishop Annibale Bugnini</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
So we may see that the five and a half years between December 1963 and April 1969 were a period of tumult and often gratuitous experimentation with the Roman Rite. Some commentators believe that the <i>Novus Ordo</i> was necessary to stem the abuses of the more extravagant forms of experimentation that were rampant during this period. The desacralization and destruction of the Roman Rite occurred much earlier than April 1969 and it is useful for laymen to understand the hidden history of the new Mass which did not spring up ready made at the time of its promulgation. Pope John XXIII dismissed Annibale Bugnini from having anything to do with liturgical reform for the Church and the Second Vatican Council. Pope Paul VI brought Bugnini back and put him in charge of the reform of the liturgy. Twelve years later, he too would remove Bugnini from having anything to do with the liturgy, but by then the damage was done.<br />
<br />
Fifty years hence, we may conclude that the reform of the liturgy was not something clamored for by the laity, but something devised by an influential minority within the hierarchy. The theological impetus driving reform was identified by St. Pius X in his encyclical <i><a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html" target="_blank">Pascendi gregis</a></i>: modern man would no longer accept God as the direct object of science and history, and therefore men must locate Him in their own subjective experiences. The ancient liturgy with its reliance on the supernatural order, external authority, and objective reality would no longer suffice; modern man would need a liturgy that would facilitate the attainment of religious experiences through “active participation.”<br />
<br />
Thus, as St. Pius X teaches,<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the [first] Vatican Council. We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, the way is opened wide for atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed Modernists do not deny but actually admit, some confusedly, others in the most open manner, that all religions are true." (<i>Pascendi gregis</i> #14)</blockquote>
<br />
<br />John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-64550571059576492722018-09-29T12:23:00.001-07:002018-09-29T12:39:28.494-07:00Conciliar Church perpetually reforms itself to better serve the world<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Pope Paul VI wrote a great deal about the "self-awareness of the church" in his encyclical <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_06081964_ecclesiam.html" target="_blank">Ecclesiam suam</a>. This is personalist philosophy: applying the characteristics of individual persons to the Church Militant as though the mystery of the Church were a single, self-reflecting person:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">I. SELF-AWARENESS</span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">18. We believe that it is a duty of the Church at the present time to strive toward a clearer and deeper awareness of itself and its mission in the world, and of the treasury of truth of which it is heir and custodian. Thus before embarking on the study of any particular problem and before considering what attitude to adopt vis-a-vis the world, the Church must here and now reflect on its own nature, the better to appreciate the divine plan which it is the Church's task to implement. By doing this it will find a more revealing light, new energy and increased joy in the fulfillment of its own mission, and discover better ways of augmenting the effectiveness and fruitfulness of its contacts with the world. For the Church does indeed belong to the world, even though distinguished from it by its own altogether unique characteristics .</span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Pope Paul VI, <i>Ecclesiam suam</i></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> Here, the Pope makes two fundamental assertions:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(1) Self reflection will make the Church more effective in her divinely appointed mission;</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(2) the Church belongs to the world.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">This is the 'spirit of Vatican II' - instead of turning upward to God and the supernatural goods of heaven, we turn inward to reflect on our own experiences (anthropocentrism). And then we belong to the world - an astonishing contradiction of Apostolic teaching:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ..."</span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(Philippians 3:20)</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> Pope Paul VI continues:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">"...We consider it timely and urgent and relevant to the needs of the Church in <b>our day</b>. With a richer understanding of the Mystical Body, we will be enabled to appreciate its theological significance and find in it a great source of spiritual strength. In this way we will notably <b>increase</b> our application to the task of fulfilling our own mission of <b>serving mankind</b>." [emphasis mine]</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Here we may see the council's preoccupations with:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(1) it's own epoch;</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(2) an increase of the Church's effectiveness in her divinely assigned mission;</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">(3) a radically re-oriented mission focus from serving God to serving mankind.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">This is the encyclical [<i>Ecclesiam suam</i>] John Paul II refers to in the opening of his encyclical <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis.html" target="_blank">Redemptor hominis</a>:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrX9TM_bDb7Lkx4BkJTAU7jTohd7uMNFC-l-krdX7tyTCe7tQ6dLdl90qTR3TLUju_sW0HE47hEzaH9QRmffJpLs35umY6dTYb0OkrAh3HzoAJupwVGbTwiMJsVBO3ohzTAnhrd_JRtG4l/s1600/paul+vi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="426" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrX9TM_bDb7Lkx4BkJTAU7jTohd7uMNFC-l-krdX7tyTCe7tQ6dLdl90qTR3TLUju_sW0HE47hEzaH9QRmffJpLs35umY6dTYb0OkrAh3HzoAJupwVGbTwiMJsVBO3ohzTAnhrd_JRtG4l/s320/paul+vi.jpg" width="227" /></a><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..."</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> And how better to serve mankind in this present world than to strive for peace on earth? This is the theme of another encyclical John Paul II refers to in </span><i style="font-family: georgia, "times new roman", serif;">Redemptor hominis</i><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> - </span><a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-xxiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem.html" style="font-family: georgia, "times new roman", serif;" target="_blank">Pacem in Terra</a><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> by John XXIII. Thus, John Paul II could triumphantly declare after the spectacle of praying with the adherents of all religions in Assisi that,</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">“The day of Assisi, showing the Catholic Church holding hands with our brothers of other religions, was a visible expression of [the] statements of the Second Vatican Council.” </span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>The interfaith event at Assisi was thus described by John Paul II not as a tragic misrepresentation of Vatican II, but as the glorious realization of its teaching</b>.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Pope John Paul II went on to celebrate the inter-religious prayer meeting at Assisi as a new direction for the future, </span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">“The event of Assisi” he said, “can thus be considered as a visible illustration, an exegesis of events, a catechesis intelligible to all, of what is presupposed and signified by the commitments to ecumenism and to the inter-religious dialogue which was recommended and promoted by the Second Vatican Council.”</span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Toward the end of the speech, the Pope urged his Cardinals to continue on the same new path, “Keep always alive the spirit of Assisi as a motive of hope for the future.”</span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">- Pope’s Christmas Address to Roman Curia,” L’Osservatore Romano, January 5, 1987, pp. 6-7.</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> These two foci - personalist philosophy and anthropocentric orientation defined the Council and are still the driving philosophical and theological theories behind the Church's official action. Indeed, rather than any chaotic or incoherent pattern since Vatican II, we may observe a remarkable coherence in the sweep of change initiated by John XXIII and continuing to deepen through Francis: The Church sees herself as a human being would see herself and criticizes, amends, and reforms her self thereby; and the Church serves mankind in a greatly expanded mission that may spring from the Gospel proclamation but is in no way restricted to it any longer.</span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-84954666450202888762018-08-14T12:46:00.002-07:002018-08-16T08:09:41.143-07:00The Impossibility of a 'Gay' Catholic Priest<b>Bottom line up front</b>: an ordained man who self-identifies as a sodomite (homosexual/'gay') is probably not even in the faith, regardless of the sacrament of holy orders.<br />
<br />
One of the gravest errors of our day is to treat sodomy like just another sin. Adultery is a mortal sin but it is not against nature. It is natural for men and women to be attracted to each other and nature itself teaches us that the connubial act is the source of human procreation. It is a very serious offense against the law of God, but not against nature itself.<br />
<br />
Sodomy (generic term that also applies to lesbian acts) attacks the moral sense, the conscience, and the faculty of reason. You will see this if you carefully read St. Paul's Letter to the Romans chapter <a href="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/52001.htm" target="_blank">1:24-32</a>. Three times in this passage, it describes God handing men over to their debased mind to destroy themselves.<br />
<br />
When dealing with sodomites, we are not dealing with men who have a healthy, functioning conscience or an intact ability to reason according to the natural law. We are dealing with men who have rejected the natural law, the divine law, and even their own consciences. They are reprobate in most cases, meaning their <a href="http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=4&l=2-#x" target="_blank">consciences are ruined</a>. This is one reason we see so few conversions from this unnatural vice, and why it is very dangerous to engage in religious discussion with such people.<br />
<br />
To the Catholic conscience, the very idea that a Priest could be a sodomite should cause a strong moral reaction - revulsion, disgust, even hatred (of the act and its intrinsic disorder, not the person). Our society is permeated with this sin and therefore we have to a great extent lost our ability to reason, thinking emotionally rather than logically. This is one of the four sins that cry out to heaven for divine vengeance - the wrath of God.<br />
<br />
Dr. Gerard van den Aardweg, a member of the newly formed John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family <a href="https://onepeterfive.com/homosexuality-in-the-church-cardinal-mccarrick-and-the-internal-ecclesial-attack-on-humanae-vitae/" target="_blank">writes</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“It is crucial whether or not a person normalizes his attractions. Doing this, he suppresses his reason and conscience, for the inner perception that homosexual activities are <i>contra naturam</i> is inborn and universal. Starting thus to lie to himself, he must suppress his awareness of the normality of man-woman love and of normal marriage with its fertility, and is forced to cling desperately to rationalizations that justify his choice to see himself as normal, healthy, and morally good. Thus he alienates himself from reality, locks himself up in wishful thinking and, not willing to seek the truth about himself, wants to change the natural feelings and opinions about homosexuality of 98% of mankind which he feels as hostile to him. In reality, it is not society, culture, or religion that persecute him but his own conscience.”</blockquote>
</blockquote>
What we are dealing with here is not simply a sexual disorder. We are dealing with minds that have rejected the natural law - and by implication, the God Who planted that law in their hearts. How then can such a person be in the faith, let alone function in <i>persona Christi </i>as a sacerdotal priest? Who would assume such a person could even be in a state of grace at all, and why would you seek the sacraments at the hands of such a man?<br />
<br />
Let us remember that the wickedness of wayward priests does not negate the flow of grace from the Holy Ghost - it is <i>de fide</i> that the sacraments are efficacious <i>ex opere operato</i> - by virtue of their operation. The ordination of a sodomite truly confers the sacrament of orders - but both that wicked man and his ordinary incur wrath upon wrath every time they perform a sacred function:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
1. A man who receives the sacrament of orders is set to lead others. Therefore, he should be a man of holy and exemplary life. Yet this is a requirement of precept and of propriety; it is not of the essence of the sacrament. Even a sinful man who receives orders is validly ordained, although he does great wrong in accepting ordination.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
2. A candidate for orders should have knowledge adequate for the proper discharge of his sacred duties. He must have a sufficiency of knowledge of the scriptures, and know the doctrines of the faith, and the requirements of Christian morality.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
3. The personal holiness of an ordained man has nothing to do with the sacrament itself; an ordained man does not advance in degree of orders as he advances in personal holiness.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
4. A prelate who knowingly ordains a candidate wholly unworthy of the office he assumed, commits a grave sin, and shows himself an unworthy servant of the Lord.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
5. A man in orders who, apart from necessity, exercises his office while he is in the state of mortal sin, is guilty of another grievous sin every time he performs a sacred function.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Supplement IIIa, 36)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The mere mention of the words "sodomy" and "homosexual" summon unwholesome images to the mind that are unfit for Christian thinking. Traditionally, this sin was not discussed in polite company. Saint Thomas Aquinas, writing about sins against nature, explains: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
However, they are called passions of ignominy because they are not worthy of being named, according to that passage in Ephesians (5:12): ‘For the things that are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of.’ For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature. (Super Epistulas Sancti Pauli Ad Romanum I, 26, pp. 27f)</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjK9VeIpEpxnmMAzgu4ZfZ5C7aA3qBxHilHqhDhLbMKKSak-TRnPmmjW9zpl675jKwnVKYEDq_y-ANlltdU_bUwKQXtwjps2KGay6NGgeg6gQJPKzyEJFIiBrEHsi9lAqZWZ7yIcbfB3AD5/s1600/gay+priest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="956" data-original-width="1300" height="235" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjK9VeIpEpxnmMAzgu4ZfZ5C7aA3qBxHilHqhDhLbMKKSak-TRnPmmjW9zpl675jKwnVKYEDq_y-ANlltdU_bUwKQXtwjps2KGay6NGgeg6gQJPKzyEJFIiBrEHsi9lAqZWZ7yIcbfB3AD5/s320/gay+priest.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
In the ecclesiastical Tradition of the Church, any hint of the perversion was to be acted upon swiftly and decisively: </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Homosexuality is the heaviest sin, which irrevocably and definitely prevents one entering the Priesthood (and of course the Church does not allow any homosexual to be elevated to the priesthood, even if he has stopped the sin for years). Basil the Great considers homosexuality or lesbianism a beastly sin: “Abusers of themselves with mankind and with beasts, as also murderers, wizards, adulterers, and idolaters, are deserving of the same punishment” (Canon 7 of Basil the Great). Saint Gregory of Nyssa characterizes homosexuality as “unnatural” in his 4th Canon. Saint John the Faster observes in his 19th Canon, according to the compilation of The Rudder by Saint Nikodemos the Hagiorite, the following: “A boy who has been ruined by any man cannot come into the holy priesthood. For although on account of his immature age he did not sin himself, yet the vessel of his body was rent and became useless in connection with the sacred priesthood.”<br />
(<a href="http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/blog/2013/07/st-john-chrysostom-on-the-terrible-passion-of-homosexuality/" target="_blank">St. John Chrysostom on the Terrible Passion of Homosexuality</a>)</blockquote>
Another Doctor of the Church affirms the gravity of this unnatural vice saying the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all others," because:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise ... It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things ...<br />
This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to God. She strips her knights of the armor of virtue, exposing them to be pierced by the spears of every vice ... She humiliates her slave in the church and condemns him in court; she defiles him in secret and dishonors him in public; she gnaws at his conscience like a worm and consumes his flesh like fire. ... this unfortunate man (he) is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind's vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundation of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
St. Peter Damian (<a href="http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/articles/damian1.htm" target="_blank">source</a>)</blockquote>
In the ecclesiastical Tradition of the Church, sodomy was not only a sin against nature that cries out to God for vengeance, but was always treated as an ecclesiastical crime punishable by the severest means:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Having determined to do away with everything that may in some way offend the Divine Majesty, we resolve to punish, above all and without indulgence, those things which, by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures or by most grievous examples, are more repugnant to God than any others and raise His wrath: that is, negligence in divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature [sodomy]. For such faults peoples and nations are scourged by God Who, according to His just condemnation, sends catastrophes, wars, famine, and pestilence ... Let the judges know that if, even after this our Constitution, they are negligent in punishing these crimes, they will not only be guilty of them in the divine judgment but also will incur our indignation ... If someone commits that nefarious crime against nature that caused divine wrath to be unleashed against the children of iniquity, he will be given over to the secular arm for punishment [of death]; and if he is a cleric, he will be subject to the same punishment after having been stripped of all his degrees [of ecclesiastical dignity].”<br />
- Pope St. Pius V, Constitution <i>Cum primum</i>, April 1, 1566, in <i>Bullarium Romanum</i> (Rome: Typographia Reverendae Camerae Apostolicae, Mainardi, 1738), vol. 4, chap. 2, p. 284, apud Atila S. Guimaraes, Vatican II, Homosexuality and Pedophilia, TIA, 2004, pp. 19-20</blockquote>
<div>
What about today? In his reforms of the code of canon law, John Paul II decriminalized clerical sodomy:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
The 1917 CIC 2359 § 2 stated:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
‘If [clerics] engage in a delict against the sixth precept of the Decalogue with a minor below the age of sixteen, or engage in adultery, debauchery, bestiality, sodomy, pandering, [or] incest with blood-relatives or affines in the first degree, they are suspended, declared infamous, and are deprived of any office, benefice, dignity, responsibility, if they have such, whatsoever, and in more serious cases, they are to be deposed.’</blockquote>
<div>
<b>THIS CANON WAS DELETED FROM THE 1983 CIC promulgated by John Paul II</b>. The 1962 instruction of the Holy Office (now Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) ...refers to sodomy as <i>crimen pessimum</i> (“the foulest crime”) and directs back to Canon 2359 of the 1917 Code.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So sodomy is now an act of "grave depravity" and "objectively disordered" (CCC #2357-58) but no longer a crime when committed by those under holy orders.<br />
<br />
The infestation of the unnatural vice among clergy reached such saturation under the pontificate of John Paul II that just seven months after his election in 2005, Pope Benedict XVI had the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments issue this <a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html" target="_blank">teaching instruction</a>:</div>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“…this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question[9], cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called "gay culture."<br />
- Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations<br />
with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
What are we to make of all this then? When <a href="https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/half-of-priests-and-bishops-are-gay" target="_blank">some venture to estimate</a> that the percentage of priests so disposed to this mortal sin against nature may be as high as 50%? </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The above quoted instruction breaks the prohibited class into three sub-groups: active sodomites, those with deep-seated tendencies, and those who support the so-called "gay culture." If you count those too timid to openly oppose the sodomite agenda - even inside the Catholic Church - then you will quickly see how few faithful priests remain in active ministry today. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
No one who rejects the natural law in preference for the unnatural vice can be in a state of grace. Its simply impossible. These are the men preaching your homilies, hearing your confessions, and confecting the Holy Eucharist for you (although this also brings grave doubt on the validity of many Masses which require the intention of the priest to do what the Church does). The filth has reached the highest levels in the Church - this is clearly beyond dispute today. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Do such men deserve our support - let's put it bluntly - our money? Corrupt men with debased minds who reject the faith of the Church in order to justify their disordered perversion? You must decide for yourselves and your own households. It is certain that what you are receiving from the preaching and teaching of such men is not divine and Catholic faith.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We will end with the teaching of the first Pope, who far from opting out with "who am I to judge?" thunders down the centuries</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These are fountains without water, and clouds tossed with whirlwinds, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved. For, speaking proud words of vanity, they allure by the desires of fleshly riotousness, those who for a little while escape, such as converse in error: Promising them liberty, whereas they themselves are the slaves of corruption. For by whom a man is overcome, of the same also he is the slave. For if, flying from the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they be again entangled in them and overcome: their latter state is become unto them worse than the former. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than after they have known it, to turn back from that holy commandment which was delivered to them. For, that of the true proverb has happened to them: The dog is returned to his vomit: and, The sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire. (2nd Peter 2:17-22)</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
God gave man reason and the natural law written upon his heart. To depart from it leaves only one possibility: eternal perdition. God help us all.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-1179498121490619812018-08-12T19:37:00.001-07:002019-02-17T15:20:55.536-08:00Are canonizations infallible?The idea that canonizations are infallible is the majority opinion of Catholic theologians; it is neither a dogma nor even a doctrine of the Church; it is a disciplinary tradition, inasmuch as it depends upon the prudential judgment of bishops, and in some cases, the Pope himself.<br />
<br />
The fact that until the 1980s almost no one, ever - over the past 350 years - questioned the infallibility of canonizations is attributable to two factors: (1) the rigorous process put in place by Pope Urban VIII in 1634 which included a comprehensive examination of the candidate's life and doctrine by the Promotor Fidei through the office of "devil's advocate"; and (2) a minimum 50-year 'cooling off' period before a candidate could be declared Blessed due to the excitement and hubris that may surround his/her cult shortly after their decease. In rare cases this 50 year waiting period was waived due to multiple miracles and the exhuming of incorruptible remains 30 years after burial, as in the case of St. Pius X.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxW_niH6dtL_BAk11N6-IT8SK0qRyizo6E8gShnCu4ru37IOseHJfUJ7tFbSh4jyz4qvF3H69UWIF0hyphenhyphenKq_GChEKJR9Bh5mUygNDHgbQYvIyPtXfogt7chfhLnbGDLGvgPC5sQcAvgUZj6/s1600/faux+saints.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="800" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxW_niH6dtL_BAk11N6-IT8SK0qRyizo6E8gShnCu4ru37IOseHJfUJ7tFbSh4jyz4qvF3H69UWIF0hyphenhyphenKq_GChEKJR9Bh5mUygNDHgbQYvIyPtXfogt7chfhLnbGDLGvgPC5sQcAvgUZj6/s320/faux+saints.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
John Paul II gutted the Code of Canon Law established by Pope Benedict XV (actually developed by the Curia of St. Pius X) and abrogated 141 canons that dealt with beatification and canonization. There is no more devil's advocate, only one miracle is required (and the threshold for these modern 'miracles' is remarkably low). The speed, haste, and hubris by which the conciliar Popes have been beatified is unprecedented in Church history.<br />
<br />
Between 1314 and 2014, exactly two Popes were canonized, whose heroic virtue and Papal careers could never be questioned: Sts. Pius V and Pius X. Since John Paul II died in 2005, two Vatican II Popes have been canonized, and another beatified, [ed. note: Paul VI was also canonized in 2018] even though the Church fell into precipitous decline during their pontificates or as a direct result of their prudential decisions.<br />
<br />
Professor Donald S. Prudlo, Associate Professor of Ancient and Medieval History at Jacksonville State University in Alabama and Assistant Professor of Theology and Church History at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College <a href="https://www.crisismagazine.com/2014/are-canonizations-based-on-papal-infallibility" target="_blank">writes</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"As an historian of sainthood, my greatest hesitation with the current process stems from the canonizations done by John Paul II himself. While his laudable intention was to provide models of holiness drawn from all cultures and states in life, he tended to divorce canonization from its original and fundamental purpose. This was to have an official, public, and formal recognition of an existing cult of the Christian faithful, one that had been confirmed by the divine testimony of miracles. Cult precedes canonization; it was not meant to be the other way around. We are in danger then of using canonization as a tool to promote interests and movements, rather than being a recognition and approval of an extant cultus."<br />
- Professor Donald S. Prudlo</blockquote>
<div>
One need not be a Church historian or a theologian to detect what is going on here: the attempt to canonize the "mere pastoral council" known as Vatican II.</div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-54817027322631373232018-07-08T06:37:00.003-07:002019-07-19T15:27:35.499-07:00Why the Second Vatican Council FailedThe Second Vatican Council - a true and valid ecumenical council of the universal Church - failed spectacularly because it was convened on a false premise.<br />
<br />
This premise - that 'modern man' had somehow attained a stature or condition that required an <i>aggiornamento</i> or 'updating' of the Church's methods of communicating that which God has revealed to man - is demonstrably false.<br />
<br />
Two assumptions are provided by the document styled <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html" target="_blank">Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World</a> (<i>Gaudium et spes</i>) that betray this false premise. The first rejects the stability and essences of nature, requiring a new way of reasoning (philosophy) about the natural order:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Thus, the human race has passed from a rather static concept of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one. In consequence there has arisen a new series of problems, a series as numerous as can be, calling for efforts of analysis and synthesis. (GS #5)</blockquote>
This is in effect, a concession to Darwin and Marx. It needs to be mentioned that the Church lacks competence to make such an observation as well - but aside from that, the premise is a rejection of the preconciliar philosophical system required by Pope St. Pius X to combat the super-error of Modernism.<br />
<br />
The second assumption is based on the council's preoccupation with man:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown. (GS #12)</blockquote>
This <i>anthropocentric</i> focus is likewise a concession to modern philosophy which rejects external authority and objective reality. For the Church, only God can be the center and crown of reality. The concord with unbelieving man in this passage should immediately startle the Catholic; what can we have in common with unbelieving man but only the essences and accidents of nature, which for the unbeliever comprise the Marxist dialectical system?<br />
<br />
Which brings us to the Council's most glaring failure of all: it refused to confront 'modern man's' most intimidating foe: global communism. Younger readers may not recall the world before 1990 when the USSR dominated half the planet in a bi-polar security environment. This communist world - erected on the false philosophies of materialism, evolution, and socialism - was deliberately avoided by Pope John XXIII as a subject for the council, even though it menaced the entire human race with its aims of global empire as it ruthlessly persecuted the Church.<br />
<br />
In the little known clandestine agreement referred to as the <a href="https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a007ht.htm" target="_blank">Metz Pact</a>, the Pope's envoy met in August 1962 with delegates from the Russian Orthodox Church to ensure the council would not condemn communism as a condition for the Russians to send observers. Although a <a href="https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2012/12/10/why-did-vatican-ii-ignore-communism/" target="_blank">petition was circulated by nearly 500 council Fathers</a> to draft a statement condemning the scourge of communism, the petition was 'lost' and never reached the point of a vote.<br />
<br />
Ostensibly this pact was struck to support the conciliar aim of ecumenical relations with the Eastern Churches; however, it appears to have set aside the supernatural method required by the Fatima apparitions in preference for mere human means of political rapprochement. And what better opportunity could there have been to consecrate Russia to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart in a public act of religion in concert with all the bishops in the world than at the Second Vatican Council? This general tendency of muting or denuding the supernatural order permeates the Council's sixteen constitutions, decrees, and declarations.<br />
<br />
And that is why the Second Vatican Council failed. It was convened by men and for men; it jettisoned the perennial philosphical framework of St. Thomas Aquinas in favor personalist, subjectivist philosophy; and it refused to confront 'modern man's most pressing concern: communism. The very premise of the council was false; there is no 'modern man' dissociated from the man created by almighty God in the Garden of Eden; the truth of revelation is still external to man and must come to him from without, by the vehicle of preaching (Romans 10,13-15).<br />
<br />
From Dietrich Von Hildebrand's Trojan Horse in the City of God:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxsoddM-_3CAaufHCZ3RcVtZgTujO4DhpXhtc0smagPuRSfTIvctbShnjOcB1J_QNUqRiXxaiuCyZR2uCuCjkfl8qu7Tu8LK3IYXeHJRYdrlriqZddAiyzQoziXu7TiWFDjI5R60dwJztw/s1600/no+modern+man.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="640" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxsoddM-_3CAaufHCZ3RcVtZgTujO4DhpXhtc0smagPuRSfTIvctbShnjOcB1J_QNUqRiXxaiuCyZR2uCuCjkfl8qu7Tu8LK3IYXeHJRYdrlriqZddAiyzQoziXu7TiWFDjI5R60dwJztw/s320/no+modern+man.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5353163020602413310.post-48360056868600458172018-02-11T12:38:00.004-08:002018-02-11T16:19:06.471-08:00"Altar girls" and Democracy in the ChurchHow did the Catholic Church find its way into the radical effeminization of its liturgy, once the most manly and commanding of all Christian liturgies? Travel almost anywhere in the US today and you will find the ubiquitous employment of young women as 'altar girls' (or as I like to say, alter-boys) in <i>Novus Ordo</i> liturgy. Is this a symptom, or a cause of this effeminization?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwP5FLDfmHVHvsmKqPpWD69550bbMTSN3RgG7XFVXK-WxXPks2tbEllNXWgXcaiXmcBr-8UTaSkjfb46K2OsEgWLLyqL3CzMXH7nzZQS__ADnxJfm_uhYxbzvc4KESKSuUB52OO0FIaqAw/s1600/altar+girl.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="516" data-original-width="700" height="235" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwP5FLDfmHVHvsmKqPpWD69550bbMTSN3RgG7XFVXK-WxXPks2tbEllNXWgXcaiXmcBr-8UTaSkjfb46K2OsEgWLLyqL3CzMXH7nzZQS__ADnxJfm_uhYxbzvc4KESKSuUB52OO0FIaqAw/s320/altar+girl.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
At the center of this situation (surprise!) is the Apostle of Vatican II, Pope John Paul II, who early on in his pontificate laid down the law in support of the traditional practice:<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<b><i>INAESTIMABILE DONUM</i></b><br />
<a href="https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2INAES.HTM" target="_blank">Instruction Concerning Worship Of The Eucharistic Mystery</a><br />
James R. Cardinal Knox<br />
Prefect Virgilio Noe Assistant Secretary<br />
Prepared by the Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship<br />
Approved and Confirmed by His Holiness Pope John Paul II 17 April 1980:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
18. There are, of course, various roles that women can perform in the liturgical assembly: these include reading the Word of God and proclaiming the intentions of the Prayer of the Faithful. Women are <b>not</b>, however, permitted to act as <b>altar servers</b>.</blockquote>
John Paul II, <a href="https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1978/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19781017_primo-radiomessaggio.html" target="_blank">Apostle of the Second Vatican Council</a> and the New Consciousness in the Church however, knew that the old days of Papal command and episcopal obedience ended when Pope John XXIII was <a href="http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/books/Iota_Unum/chp_04.htm#s42" target="_blank">overwhelmed at the first session of Vatican II</a> by the demands of the Rhine Fathers. Pope Paul VI similarly took no action at all against openly dissenting episcopal conferences when they refused to teach <i>Humanae vitae</i> after its promulgation in 1968. Democracy having been firmly established in the Church thanks to the theory of collegiality explained in Vatican II's Constitution on the Church <i>Lumen gentium</i>, the US Council of Catholic Bishops easily obtained an <a href="https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm" target="_blank">indult</a> for distributing holy communion in the hand on 29 May, 1969 - contrary to canon law.<br />
<br />
The democratization of the hierarchy could only lead to the democratization of the sacred liturgy, especially under the rubrics of the modular, tailorable <i>Missale Romanum</i> promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969. The <i>Novus Ordo</i> offers the celebrant multiple options, so who can be surprised that it fell prey to the whims of each individual liturgist shortly after it's promulgation?<br />
<br />
It was in fact, democracy that led to the acceptance of 'altar girls.' The reality is, just as with communion-in-the-hand, the abuse - then condemned by canon law - of employing 'altar girls' became a norm later affirmed by the episcopal conferences. So abuses can become new norms in the People's Republic of Catholicism! Capitulating to 'popular demand' Rome proclaimed:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
3) If in some diocese, on the basis of Canon 230 #2, the <b>Bishop permits that, for particular reasons, women may also serve at the altar</b>, this decision must be clearly explained to the faithful, in the light of the above-mentioned norm. It shall also be made clear that the norm is already being widely applied, by the fact that women frequently serve as lectors in the Liturgy and can also be called upon to distribute Holy Communion as Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and to carry out other functions, according to the provisions of the same Canon 230 #3.</blockquote>
<table border="0" style="background-color: white; width: 550px;"><tbody>
<tr><td><b><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif; font-size: xx-small;"><i>VATICAN COMMUNICATION ON FEMALE ALTAR SERVERS</i></span></b></td></tr>
<tr><td><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Congregation for Divine Worship<b>, </b><a href="https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwcomm.htm" target="_blank">15 March 1994</a> </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Anything that originates as an abuse and then later receives official permission should be suspect. Why after two millennia of consistent praxis should this abuse become a permitted norm in the Church? What changed? The Second Vatican Council changed everything, including the Church's self-consciousness:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Entrusting myself fully to the Spirit of truth, therefore, I am entering into the rich inheritance of the recent pontificates. This inheritance has struck deep roots in the awareness of the Church in an utterly new way, quite unknown previously, thanks to the Second Vatican Council..."<br />
Pope John Paul II, <i>Redemptor hominis </i>(1979)</blockquote>
Ah, democracy! The <i>vox populi!</i> The consciousness of the faithful, the new standard for transforming abuses into the <i>Lex Orandi</i> of the Church!<br />
<br />
Pope Benedict XIV, in his Encyclical <i>Allatae Sunt</i>, July 26, 1755, n. 29, writes<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Pope Gelasius (+496) in his ninth letter (chap. 26) to the bishops of Lucania condemned the evil practice which had been introduced of women serving the priest at the celebration of Mass. Since this abuse had spread to the Greeks, Innocent IV strictly forbade it in his letter to the bishop of Tusculum: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Women <b>should not dare to serve at the altar</b>; they should be altogether refused this ministry." We too have forbidden this practice in the same words in Our oft-repeated constitution <i>Etsi Pastoralis</i>, sect. 6, no. 21."</blockquote>
It's obvious that old Papa Gelasius didn't have the advantages of democracy in his benighted epoch. The effeminization of the Church is a direct result of Pope John XXIII's <i>aggiornamento</i> - adapting to fit the so-called modern world and its obsession with human rights and popular democracy. The democracies which now overwhelmingly favor radical feminism and sodomy can only be expected to bring the same into the new democratized Catholic Church.<br />
<br />
I would like to give Saint Pius X the last word:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For in the same way [say the Modernists] as the Church is a vital emanation of the collectivity of consciences, so too authority emanates vitally from the Church itself. Authority therefore, like the Church, has its origin in the religious conscience, and, that being so, is subject to it. Should it disown this dependence it becomes a tyranny. For we are living in an age when the sense of liberty has reached its fullest development, and when the public conscience has in the civil order introduced popular government. Now there are not two consciences in man, any more than there are two lives. It is for <b>the ecclesiastical authority, therefore, to shape itself to democratic forms</b>, unless it wishes to provoke and foment an intestine conflict in the consciences of mankind. The penalty of refusal is disaster. For it is madness to think that the sentiment of liberty, as it is now spread abroad, can surrender. Were it forcibly confined and held in bonds, terrible would be its outburst, sweeping away at once both Church and religion. (<i>Pascendi gregis</i> #23)</blockquote>
Forward!<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="background-color: white; float: left; font-family: times, "times new roman", serif; margin-right: 1em;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWNsgYBb8N8BjDCgRPTrRSIBHF02pPXDPMXDJrOgp69T8amanJy_e4if-bZcydBdrwykJC_b3ybiXxCVerIKNpo_wbqbpB9CuqnOJMjFYTI8Lfo96uNRfIPgTqdMzOLSHx9_dhMy0EHxkE/s1600/peoples+mass+book.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="160" data-original-width="113" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWNsgYBb8N8BjDCgRPTrRSIBHF02pPXDPMXDJrOgp69T8amanJy_e4if-bZcydBdrwykJC_b3ybiXxCVerIKNpo_wbqbpB9CuqnOJMjFYTI8Lfo96uNRfIPgTqdMzOLSHx9_dhMy0EHxkE/s200/peoples+mass+book.jpg" width="141" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px; text-align: center;">The 1966 <i>Peoples' Mass Book</i><br />
with it's creepy graphics and socialist<br />
styled title helped cement the idea of<br />
popular democracy in the American<br />
Catholic Church.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
John Proctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00566131864496685499noreply@blogger.com1