Tag Archives: TLM
Palm Sunday entrance into church like you’ve never seen. Tears of joy.
Filed under Liturgy
Synodality Express: Inviting Cardinal Arthur Roche to debate his own resolution – “Changing Church theology requires TLM restriction”
Have some game, your Eminence! Be not afraid! Let’s do up the debate in front of La disputa del Sacramento (The Disputation of the Sacrament) by Raphael. That would be most appropriate as the Stanze di Raffaello in the Apostolic Palace are entirely secure, and, back in the day, this Stanza della Segnatura was where the Supreme Papal Tribunal met.
Let’s do it in English since English speakers seem to be among the most rebellious of those who love the Traditional Latin Mass.
Let’s have two time-keepers, one from either side. You might want someone loud and forceful such as Cardinal Joseph W. Tobin for your timekeeper, but I think I’ll ask another untitled parish priest in another very small parish who has already been checked out by Vatican security. All good.
We should have two moderators asking the questions, again, one from either side. You might like a smooth-talker like Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, or perhaps someone a bit more brash like Cardinal Robert W. McElroy. For myself, I know a layman with no name recognition who happens to be the best in the world at hunting (within the confines of the law) human and sex-traffickers, and who has, I’m sure, already been vetted by the Holy See’s Intel for all the great work he does. All good.
It’s not like you don’t have a good chance of winning. You have power and prestige and know how to put on a tone to say things are really very serious, though it strikes me that you may not have much looked into the eyes of Mary to ask her just how serious things are with the Sacrifice of the Mass, with her dear Son:
As for me, well, you know me already. You’ve written to me personally investigating my relationship with the TLM. I’m in the smallest, most remote parish perhaps in the world as an otherwise untitled parish priest, truly on the far side of the peripheries. I do have some degrees (SSL, STD), but, alas, nothing from San Anselmo. I was in talks to do my doctorate there with the head of that institute as moderator, but at the last minute I decided that the PIB would be better for my purposes. The point is that right now I’m just another run-of-the-mill priest, but that’s what makes this interesting. It’s the little guy you’re personally hurting. That would be me and those like me. We are interested in the most insignificant people, are we not?
Sure, we could get the great liturgists on the Traditionalist side, those who have read everything and written really so very much indeed. But such debates have already taken place ad nauseam at the old Ecclesia Dei at the one-time CDF, right? A flood of factual information useful in any other era in the history of the Church isn’t quite so useful at this moment. After all, this isn’t about Liturgy, but about your ideology over against the faith of Jesus’ Little Flock. To win, I simply have to show how everything you say mocks Jesus and His Sacrifice, and that God will not be mocked. I’m not saying you do that in your own soul, just that that’s what you objectively present.
I’m sure you also don’t need any experts to use as proxies, since you’re already at the top of the heap liturgically, and this, again, is not about the liturgy, but rather about your ideological insistence that, specifically, the Church’s theology (read: doctrine) is a load of crap, and that everything that holds up that theology like the Traditional Latin Mass is a load of crap. Your words, your Eminence.
Let’s see, how is it that the Church’s theology (read: doctrine) has changed. Is it that for the New Order of Mass:
- Jesus is not divine.
- Jesus is not the Messiah.
- Jesus is not the Suffering Servant.
- There is no such thing as sin.
- There is no such thing as forgiveness of sin.
- Jesus was a fool to stand in our place, Innocent for the guilty so as to have the right in His own justice to have mercy on us.
- The Eucharist is just a piece of bread and the chalice merely contains wine after the consecrations.
- Jesus is merely a symbol.
- And so on and so forth…
I will win for those who believe in Jesus. You will win for those who are, perhaps to no fault of their own, self-absorbed narcissists. Hey! It’s a win-win! Everyone will know where everyone stands. And that’s always good in these times of ambiguity and bullying and bullying with ambiguity. So, nothing to lose for anyone. Let’s do it!
Format? To start, it would surely be good to have fifteen minutes each to present an overview of one’s point of attack. Graphics allowed. You always start, since you’re not the underdog, to say the least.
- You can emphasize “Changing Church theology requires TLM restriction” with “changing” referring to active Hegelian manipulation or diversely to a de facto description of acquiescence to sinful behavior and heretical thought that cannot tolerate Jesus’ Sacrifice, or both, or whatever you think. There are endless anecdotes for either and both together or anything else.
- Meanwhile, I will demonstrate from Traditionis custodes, the responses to dubia, etc., an objective rejection of Jesus and His Sacrifice on the one hand and how the Traditional Latin Mass provides an occasion for reverent thanksgiving to Jesus by the Lord’s Little Flock on the other hand.
After that, the moderators can alternate in providing not speeches, but questions timed to thirty seconds, always going to you first for a five minute response, followed by myself for a five minute response to the question and to you. This can go for as long as you like. Should you interrupt, the time-keepers will bring order back to the debate and provide time for me to respond to your interruption. The fresco of the disputa will remind us both, however, that the outcome is already assured. All good.
Let’s be joyful, your Eminence. Let’s have a debate.
I should warn you, though, your Eminence, any insult you make to Jesus and His Sacrifice is taken as a direct and very personal insult by Immaculate Mary, Jesus’ Virgin Mother. Jesus doesn’t take kindly to His dear Mother getting insulted.
Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis
Does Cardinal Roche channel New Age in New Mass with Hegelian “theology of the Church has changed”
Interview with Cardinal Roche From 10:18 to 11:00.
- “The theology of the Church has changed; whereas before the priest represented, at a distance, all the people, they were channeled through this person who alone was celebrating the Mass: it is not only the priest who celebrates the liturgy but also those who are baptized with him, and that is an enormous statement to make.”
First of all, let’s turn to the “commemoration for the living” from the Roman Canon of the Traditional Latin Mass:
In a quick personal translation of this paragraph from the Traditional Latin Mass:
- “Remember, Lord, your sons and daughters N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them, we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are theirs, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and offering their devotion to you, the eternal God, living and true.”
Let’s see… here’s the official translation of the relevant paragraph from the New Order of Mass:
- “Remember, Lord, your servants N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them, we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and paying their homage to you, the eternal God, living and true.”
Wait… What? That sounds quite familiar. Let’s see… what’s the Latin for the New Order of Mass?
- “Meménto, Dómine, famulórum famularúmque tuarum N. et N. et ómnium circumstántium, quórum tibi fides cógnita est et nota devótio, pro quibus tibi offérimus: vel qui tibi ófferunt hoc sacrifícium laudis, pro se suísque ómnibus: pro redemptióne animárum suárum, pro spe salútis et incolumitátis suæ: tibíque reddunt vota sua ætérno Deo, vivo et vero.”
Hahahahahahaha! Those words from the New Order of Mass are absolutely verbatim, to the letter, with the words of the Traditional Latin Mass of the 1962 Roman Missal. So, does that mean that Cardinal Roche is, like, misrepresenting the facts? Maybe he’s having a diabetic episode and isn’t thinking straight.
Even though this is a poor example for him to say that the New Order of Mass and the Traditional Latin Mass have entirely different theologies, his overarching idea is mistaken, that the theology (read doctrine) underlying the Traditional Latin Mass is entirely different from the theology (read doctrine) of the New Order of Mass and, therefore, the Traditional Latin Mass with all of its concomitant theology must be flipped away by the spinning hands of the clock of history.
He’s trying to say that because he and Pope Francis are trashing the Traditional Latin Mass, it is therefore legitimate for he and Pope Francis to trash all the theology (read doctrine) of the Church in Judeo-Catholic religion, from Adam until today and onward.
Truth is One. Truth is Living: Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word of the Father. That Word of the Father is not a lie, a mistake. The Father doesn’t change His mind one fine day in eternity and say that he’s mistaken in speaking that One Word expressing Himself in the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity and must now speak an entirely different Word. No.
Jesus laying down Himself in Sacrifice for us, fulfilling His own justice to have mercy on us, taking our place, Innocent for the guilty, taking on the punishment we deserve so that He can command the Father: Father! Forgive them! is not now worthless and to be tossed away because we say – because we’re better because we live today – that there is no sin, and that therefore no repentance is needed, no forgiveness needs to be provided, and therefore that the Son of the Living God who will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire is therefore a fool for having been tortured to death for us. “That’s all passé. We’re the ones, the only ones! Change the Mass! Change the theology! Change the truth! All is a lie!”
What’s Roche trying to say, that the ordained have no sacramental character different from that of the laity? I mean, who knows what he’s thinking. What I do know is that he thinks and says that the Traditional Latin Mass, you know, the Sacrifice of the Son of the Living God, has nothing to do with the life of the parish community. He’s hitting people over the head with that like any mafioso beating their own to death with a baseball bats. This is way to violent to watch, but truth be told, the insult these guys provide to Jesus’ being tortured to death for all of us is so very much worse:
If anyone is channeling anyone, it’s Cardinal Roche channeling himself. How ugly. How disgusting. How filthy.
In answer to Cardinal Roche’s charge, which is actually about the priest having his back to the people (which is rubrically correct in the New Order of Mass, btw), well, that “back to the people” thing isn’t the case at all. Quite the other way around. The priest is just like everyone else. All are facing the Sacrifice together. The priest and Christ’s faithful. As the Apocalypse says, we will all look on Him whom we have all pierced through. When the priest is simply taking his place with everyone else facing the Sacrifice, his importance disappears. He’s ordained to get himself the hell out of the way of Jesus the One High Priest. When the priest faces the people it is then that he himself becomes important. It all becomes a clown Mass overnight.
So, what kind of narcissism is really going on here?
Oh, and that mention of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel? Here’s the modus operandi of Cardinal Roche and Pope Francis, why they think that with the passing of time the theology of the Church (read doctrine) changes like any dialectical materialism that has nothing to do with God:
But instead, Verbum Domini manet in aeternum. The Word of the Lord remains for ever.
Filed under Liturgy
Apostolic Constitution 3 April 2023? Chrism Mass 4 April 2023?
Don’t blame un-elite me, because you have heard that it was said by actually elite vaticanista journalists that even as the world largely goes to hell assenting to synodality same-sex freak shows, whether on the Vatican’s own Synod website or in Germany or in so many other places right around the world, ubiquitously, it seems that the most important thing for Pope Francis to do, ever, is maybe to possibly perhaps promulgate an Apostolic Constitution on 3 April 2023, Monday of Holy Week, an Apostolic Constitution that will mostly or entirely forbid the offering of the Traditional Latin Mass, and perhaps also force priests to concelebrate at least the Chrism Mass in Holy Week.
Some conjecture the date for the Apostolic Constitution being a month later on the feast of St Pius V or on other insanely sarcastic possible dates. But because of the apparent emphasis on forcing priests to concelebrate, and it being that the concelebration is intensely recommended for the Chrism Mass, and it being that 3 April 1969 was the kind-of-promulgation of Paul VI’s Novus Ordo (but not at all any kind of abrogation of the Traditional Latin Mass), it is 3 April 2023, just prior to the Chrism Mass around the world, that seems to be the probable date.
And, by the way, it is not a conspiracy theory to think that there is Apostolic Constitution coming up. It is quite necessitated by the promise of Pope Francis to undo the Traditional Latin Mass quite completely in his 16 July 2021, Traditionis custodes. And this is entirely within his own projected time-frame. And we have been advised of this umpteen times by authoritative powers-that-be.
For us, in this diocese, the first hypothetical post-Apostolic Constitution Chrism Mass would take place hours later on Tuesday Morning of Holy Week, though I think that if there are to be important changes to the Chrism Mass, our diocese may well cancel the Mass that Tuesday and move it to its traditional Holy Thursday morning time, two days later (not necessarily for reasons of tradition, but so as to revise participation booklets for the priests). Of course, they could stay up all night making photocopies for the priests to use, you know, handing out the already printed booklets before Mass, but then handing out the photocopies of participation-aids just before they are needed during the Chrism Mass itself.
Anyway, I doubt all this because it is simply absurd to have such a juxtaposition in the same document, the trouncing of the Traditional Latin Mass and a mere disciplinary measure regarding concelebration. But because of the intensely rumored insistence that such a juxtaposition is to take place whereby, say, priests not concelebrating but rather merely being “in choir” is ruled out, you know – or else! – because of that, I’m thinking that – Hey! – there may be other things introduced by this Apostolic Constitution for the Chrism Mass itself that will put believing priests into a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation, the kind of bullying ubiquitous in these times of ultra-fake-synodality. It would be a surprise if there wasn’t any baiting-to-get-bullied situation (not in the intention of our diocese, mind you, but that being intended from across the pond).
Just say that there are some specious rewordings in the texts of the Chrism Mass, heretical, sacrilegeous, will a priest, realizing half-way through the Chrism Mass that he’s been forced to concelebrate so as to be a puppet for heresy and sacrilege have the bravery to walk out of whatever Cathedral, cameras rolling, trying not to cause a scene, but making himself look like Judas, who, freshly possessed by Satan, left the Last Supper, going out into the dark? I doubt it. Very, very few would have the gumption to up and leave. Since I’ve done this before in the same kind of forced situation, I have no problem with leaving.
Look, obviously, what I’m doing here in this post is to proffer hyperbolic provocative rhetorical baiting. This is a reaction to what is, truth be told, baiting done by the Vatican, you know, leaking this and that like a manure spreader round about the world so as to see what the reaction is before actually moving forward with something, giving themselves a chance to tighten the script a bit in answer to any baited objections in advance. Very useful, that. This is the long established modus operandi. It can be quite vicious.
And leaking is not necessarily any kind of indicator of anything to come. For instance, it’s also the longstanding practice of, say, someone in the Secretariat of State to “leak” something to a “friend” (be careful of friends) in, say, the Dicastery for Bishops. But that “leak” is entirely imaginary, and only to that one person, by mistake, after some purposed drinks. If, rumors being rumors, it works its way back to the source of that “leak” in the Secretariat of State, but from someone, say, in Austria or Belgium, well then, you know whether you have a traitor or a good megaphone, depending on whether you want to sack the guy or use him. Moreover, now you know his “friends.”
Is any of this “leaking” sincere in looking for a reaction for the adjustment of any upcoming Apostolic Constitution, or is it just some logistical craft for the purging or promotion of personnel? Whatever. I’ll play along and do my part of the process in taking the bait so as to bait those in the Holy See all the more. My purpose in this “reaction” is to convert those who need it.
So, this is just a mind exercise, a “What if?” or two asking why there is such a juxtaposition in an Apostolic Constitution if that is, in fact, the case: (1) of the kind-of-abrogation of the TLM, and (2) of a strictly disciplinary measure regarding a style of participation at a certain Mass. I mean, the latter reference to concelebration refers to, say, the legislation of penalties for a priest who does not go to the Chrism Mass at all, you know, because maybe he has stress-related-diarrhea on that day and so does not participate. Will he be removed from active ministry? suspended? Laicized?
Here we go with some pre-diarrhea execrations:
There’s been what I consider to be a silly rumor coming from many places regarding a change to the consecrations at Holy Mass. As soon as someone puts up such a rumor it is taken back down. So, it’s extremely doubtful. But then it pops up again and again and again. St Philip Neri usefully speaks of such rumors. Just because they keep popping up doesn’t mean they are true.
Just for the sake of this mind exercise, let’s ask how that might work. I’m guessing that there would be change in the second consecration, that of the Chalice. Here’s the present translation with a possible innovation consonant with the repeated pastórial demands of Pope Francis that have been reiterated with real anger, violence even, on his part. He means what he says. My hypotheses [in bold red in brackets].
- “Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my blood, the blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for
many[all] for the forgiveness of sins [for the repentant and the unrepentant]. Do this in memory of me.”
The word “which” is a qualifier whose associated content must necessarily be consonant with the provenance of the blood, but if the qualification is untrue (for the repentant and the unrepentant), the very consecration is rendered invalid: the provenance of the blood, Jesus, manifestly does NOT offer forgiveness for unrepented sin, and therefore it’s not Jesus’ blood of which we are speaking. There cannot be any true intention to consecrate. That’s the inescapable logic of it. This renders this consecration invalid. The worst thing a priest can do is to consecrate the bread to be the Body of Christ, but then not consecrate the Chalice. This is an unspeakable crime. Nefas est.
Here you go: https://catholicherald.co.uk/pope-francis-rants-against-delinquent-priests-who-withhold-absolution-2/
Pope Francis used bad language spoken with real violence to say that priests who withhold absolution from those who are not repentant for their sins are clericalists, criminals, delinquents, vehicles for evil, unjust, f***ing up the lives of others.
So, that little change to the consecrations is not at all beyond the realm of possibility, is it? I mean, that would absolutely fulfill Daniel’s prophesy that the Daily Sacrifice will come to an end. And to speak of that would be… to be… a dreaded conspiracy theorist! I would say, however, that we are living in times of unprecedented evil.
But – Hey! – that’ll never happen. Pfft. Never. That would be like the Pope establishing the abomination of desolation demon of all demon death idols on the Holy of Holies, on the Altar of Jesus’ Sacrifice in Saint Peter’s Basilica, where it must not be by divine mandate. He ain’t gonna do that with the Pachamama demon thing, right? Never! Not even at the closing Mass for the Amazon Synod on 27 October 2019. Oh, wait…
Anyway, let’s just quietly move on and examine a more plausible innovation, say, with the renewal of one of the many priestly ordination promises that the priests reiterate with the bishop at the Chrism Mass, just the third one. That would be less controversial, right? Here’s the original with my guess of a change in [bold-red], you know, just for a hypothetical mind-exercise for this hypothetical would-be forced concelebration of the Chrism Mass:
- Bishop: Are you resolved to be faithful stewards of the mysteries of God in the Holy Eucharist and the other liturgical rites [exclusively according to the Second Vatican Council and post-Conciliar spirit] and to discharge faithfully [with synodality and accompaniment] the sacred office of teaching, following Christ the Head and Shepherd, not seeking any gain, but moved only by zeal for souls?
- Priests: I am.
Nah. That won’t happen. The priests would choke on their words, aghast, looking at each other in dismay, trying to figure out the word “spirit.” It wouldn’t work. Right?
So, moving on, trying to figure out this strange forcing of concelebration in a hypothetical Apostolic Constitution about a kind-of-abrogation of the Traditional Latin Mass, what if there are enculturation “surprises” such as that pictured up top of this post. That’s a concelebrated Mass for the Synod on Synodality recently. That’s the demon idol Pachamama who has a place in the sanctuary. People are sacrificed to that demon idol to this day. I dunno. Whadaya think? That blanket thing with other rags is draped over the steps, like, really weirdly, inconsistent with the fall of the steps themselves. Am I seeing things? Is that, like, a youth-mannequin stretched out in front of Pachamama under that blanket thing, or… maybe is that actually is a …? Surprise! Once you see it – not difficult – you can’t unsee it.
Nah. That can’t be, not even as a “joke.” Right? But are those tufts, locks of black hair, a couple of feet in front of the demon death idol Pachamama? Surely, at the most, it’s just a youth-mannequin…
I wonder if I should schedule a sick day on Chrism Mass day, you know, because of stress-diarrhea.
Nah. None of this will happen, anywhere, ever. If any of this were to turn out to be true, well, that would cause rebellion to take place in my priestly ministry, and I’m not ready for that [who is?], so…
Begin sarcasm: I’ll just say that that’s crazy! What an idiot I am! I’ll just go and meekly take my place with the other priests and turn out the lights in my mind and heart and soul, not look to the wounds of Jesus, but just fit-it with the others, going along to get along, not stand out, not draw attention to myself like some kind of Judas, because being meek and mild is safe, and nice, and comfortable… [vomit… vomit… vomit…]. End of sarcasm.
If that Apostolic Constitution is published 3 April 2023, and it’s not at all as outrageous as others predict, I’ll also show up for the Chrism Mass in plenty of time, check out the program, make sure there are no innovations, hope there’s no innovations during Mass, no photocopies that we weren’t warned about, go to the meal afterward, get the Holy Oils for the parish (and that’s the point of going), have a good time catching up with priest-friends, do up some plotting, laughing loudly, hear some confessions, maybe go to confession myself. And then make the trip back home, dropping off the Holy Oils at various parishes along the way, as always, happy happy.
The purpose of this mind-exercise is just to say that it’s good to be on guard against all that is not good, all that is not holy. There really are bad and evil things happening right around the world, horrific things against the faith, without precedent, not even in the Sacred Scriptures, and right in the Vatican, right to the top. Yep. At this point, anything can happen.
Calming down some 48 hours later, on Holy Thursday morning, during a quiet moment, maybe I’ll dig up one of those letters of John Paul II to all the priests in the world that he was in the custom of writing on Holy Thursday year after year, letters filled with his devotion for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, for the Most Blessed Sacrament, filled with encouragement for priests, with real love for them. Ah, yes, the good ol’ days. From 2003. And from the hospital 2005.
But the dear Lord has blessed us to be in these days.
It will make for quite the Holy Week if there’s any teeth in that possible 3 April 2023 Apostolic Constitution.
I hope to have the bandwidth on 3 April 2023 to get any Apostolic Constitution by email. I hope not to see therein things which will have me say Non possumus! (We cannot [do this]!) Truth be told: Sine dominico non possumus! (Without That-of-the-Lord [without the Eucharist of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass] we are not able [to live]!). So exclaimed the martyrs of Abitinae on their way to death, what with their witnessing to the Lord’s Love and Truth, His Sacrifice. And so say us all. Non possumus!
Just to say, even if none of what I’ve written here plays out, I think it’s been a useful mind exercise to have written it. The question of the usefulness is this: Could this have been written under any other pontificate in the history of the Church? Manifestly, the answer is No. It could only have been imagined during the pontificate of Pope Francis. I think that says quite a bit, regardless of whether I’ve fallen off my rocker in my old age.
As far as percentages of clown-bishops, blasphemous bishops, sacrilegious bishops, back in the days of the Arian heresy which insisted that Christ was not a divine Person, most all the bishops were violently, murderously anti-Catholic. Just ask Saint Athanasius of Alexandria. Most all the bishops were violently, murderously anti-Catholic. Think about that. We’ve seen all this previously. We’ve seen the wounds of Christ Jesus, also at the hands of his own Apostles, Judas betraying, Peter denying, all the rest running away.
- “You’re a conspiracy theorist, Father Byers!”
Finally, some poetry: If there are bad and evil things in that Apostolic Constitution, I will surely have to schedule some diarrhea for the Chrism Mass, and that won’t be an untruth. It will be the diarrhea of stress, one’s very heart being sprayed out one’s back-end, leaving one eviscerated, helpless, almost in a coma.
Happy, joyful to do that, Jesus. Maranatha! I can’t wait!
hours minutes seconds
Imagined TLM Apostolic Constitution
Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis, The Blah Blah Synod™
Dear Cardinal Arthur Roche, you say that the Sacrifice of Jesus “is not part of the ordinary the life of the parish”?
Cardinal Arthur Roche throwing the Traditionally offered Sacrifice of Jesus (TLM) out of parish churches:
- “The exclusion of the parish church is intended to affirm that the celebration of the Eucharist according to the previous rite, being a concession limited to these groups, is not part of the ordinary life of the parish community.”
In analyzing this, we see that the Jesus’ Sacrifice is inescapably reduced to vacuity, lowered to being a mere political football to kick into the faces of those you are bullying, isn’t that correct, Cardinal Arthur Roche? You disrespect Jesus to make a point, slap Jesus in the face to make a point, push Him down and out to make a point? And what would that point be, Cardinal Arthur Roche, that you’re an unbeliever?
If you spit, Cardinal Arthur Roche, so easily on Jesus in one rite or form of His Sacrifice, you are spitting on Jesus in all rites or forms outside or inside whatever church, are you not? After all, throwing Jesus out and spitting on Him for good measure is all about… throwing Jesus out and spitting on Him for good measure. It’s personal, with Jesus. It’s an affront to Him… and His dear Mother.
I don’t care what form or rite of the Most Holy Sacrifice of Jesus is being offered wherever in the parish by priests of whatever rite or with whatever form, and I don’t care if I know that such a Holy Mass is happening or not. Those logistics are not so important as that the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus has taken place, and that fact, that glorious event, has everything to do with the life of the parish. It cannot be otherwise.
As Saint Pio said:
- “It would be easier for the world to exist without the sun than without the Holy Mass.”
Dear Cardinal Arthur Roche, how could you possibly say that the Sacrifice of Jesus is ever irrelevant?
You are wrong, Cardinal Arthur Roche. Jesus is our life. Without Jesus you are not even a backwardist. You think that Hegelian-Rahnerianism dialectic has you move forward. It just brings you down. Come back to Jesus and go to heaven, your Eminence.
Now, here’s what is not Mass, but just a get-together with young people who love Jesus, who believe that Jesus is entirely relevant to them, that Jesus is their very life, you know, the life of the parish community. Get with Jesus, Cardinal Arthur Roche. He’s waiting for you in the confessional. And, yes, what you have said is objectively a sin and you do need to repent. Jesus’ Holy Sacrifice is always our life.
JESUS YOU ARE MY LIFE!
And you know what JPII did? He started bringing back the TLM. Yep. That’s what JPII did.
Filed under Liturgy
DOJ-FBI’s SPLC Attorney charged as domestic terrorist against police
I dunno. Is this the creep who guided the DOJ’s FBI to profile those who attend the Catholic Latin Mass as domestic terrorists? Is this the guy Chrissie Wray and Merrick Garland whimper and hide behind as they attack Jesus’ Last Supper united with Calvary, as they surveil the Sacramental Confessions of pious children and adults? Wow. How very, very creepy. How disgusting. The DOJ? Pfft. The FBI? Pfft. The SPLC and the DOJ-FBI are trespassed from my parish campuses.
This attack, near Atlanta, just to the south of my own parish… I expect such attacks will begin to take place inside Catholic Churches. After all, the DOJ-FBI has teamed up with the SPLC.
Oh, great. Just great.
Let’s see the most monstrous of all domestic terrorism according to the DOJ-FBI:
TLM smacked down by Rescript 21 Feb 2023 ordered by Pope Francis & Card. Roche
RESCRIPTUM EX AUDIENTIA SS.MI, 21.02.2023
The Holy Father, at the Audience granted on Feb. 20 to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, confirmed the following about the implementation of his Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes of July 16, 2021.
These are dispensations reserved in a special way to the Apostolic See (cf. C.I.C. can. 87 §1):
- the use of a parish church or the erection of a personal parish for the celebration of the Eucharist using the Missale Romanum of 1962 (cf. Traditionis custodes art. 3 §2);
- the granting of license to presbyters ordained after the publication of Motu proprio Traditionis custodes to celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962 (cf. Traditionis custodes art. 4).
As stipulated in Article 7 of Motu proprio Traditionis custodes, the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments exercises the authority of the Holy See in the above-mentioned cases, supervising the observance of the provisions.
Should a diocesan bishop grant dispensations in the two cases mentioned above, he is obliged to inform the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, which will evaluate the individual cases.
Moreover, the Holy Father, confirms – having already expressed his assent in the audience of November 18, 2021 – what was established in the Responsa ad dubia with the attached Explanatory Notes of December 4, 2021.
The Holy Father also ordered that this Rescript be published in L’Osservatore Romano and subsequently in the official commentary of the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
From the Vatican, February 20, 2023
Arthur Card. Roche
Comment: I am told by a great canon lawyer that if a Mission Church is converted to a diocesan shrine of some kind, all is well again.
Filed under Liturgy
Summary of everything wrong about Francis’ trip to Kazakhstan
On September 15, 2022, Francis spoke to the bishops, priests, deacons, religious, seminarians and pastoral workers at the Cathedral in Kazakhstan. Everything he said can be summarized in these three sentences of his:
- “Faith is not a lovely exhibition of artefacts from a distant past or a museum, but an ever-present event, an encounter with Christ that takes place in the here and now of our lives. So we cannot pass it on by simply repeating the same old things, but by communicating the newness of the Gospel. In this way, faith remains alive and has a future. As I like to say, faith is transmitted through the ‘mother tongue’.”
Let’s get into this. The opening bits are all good:
- “Faith is not a lovely exhibition of artefacts from a distant past or a museum, but an ever-present event, an encounter with Christ that takes place in the here and now of our lives. So we cannot pass it on by simply repeating the same old things…”
Right. That would be the heresy of Pelagianism to think that we could, on our own, just repeat articles of the faith, or, say, rubrics in the liturgy. I think we’re all good with that. Otherwise, we could simply loop recordings, say, of the Council of Trent, and think that because of that we have saved ourselves. That would be stupid.
But then he continues and now we know what he really means, which is that Francis does want us to think like Pelagian heretics:
- “…we cannot pass it [the faith] on by simply repeating the same old things, but by communicating the newness of the Gospel. In this way, faith remains alive and has a future. As I like to say, faith is transmitted through the ‘mother tongue’.”
Wow. A number of things here. He’s speaking in such fashion that we are falsely led to believe that the Faith, Sacred Tradition, is communicated necessarily and merely in new world-view contextualizing by human evangelization, indeed, through the “mother tongue”, a jab at the Traditional Latin Mass.
But while this seems to be the case — that we are to hand on the faith, and we are indeed to do all we can humanly speaking to evangelize others — this supposed “handing on” of the faith is instead only done as a favor to the evangelizers, so that they can grow in the charity necessary for any evangelization. The true “handing on” of the faith, the living content of the Traditiones , the ‘things’, if you will, of Sacred Tradition, the articles of faith (as Trent has it), all comes to us by way of the Holy Ghost. Trent has it that what the Apostles do in evangelizing, what we do, is wrought only quasi per manus, almost as if by hand. But the Holy Ghost is the One who actually “hands on” the living faith for us, the Truth, which comes to us with sanctifying grace, and therefore with hope, with Charity. God is love, always in the same way, for all, for each individual, “univocally” as the great Cardinal Siri put it in his most necessary book Gethsemane. This is the indwelling of the Most Holy Trinity.
This is more than any “mother tongue” or any insult to the Traditional Latin Mass can bring about. Cynically attacking the Most Holy Sacrifice of Jesus is not how we’re to go about receiving the faith from the Holy Ghost.
It seems that every chance, it seems every day, multiple times a day, is taken by Francis and his minion Cardinal Roche to demean Sacred Tradition so as to have it dumbed down to have it merely signify that which we do in whatever culture in whatever religion with what savior we imagine or not.
You have heard that it was said that by May 2023, there will be a total ban of the Traditional Latin Mass. It’s already been said that the TLM is no expression whatsoever of the Roman Rite (Traditionis custodes) and has no place whatsoever in the life of any parish (Cardinal Roche).
Filed under Faith, Liturgy, Pope Francis
Saint Francis vs Pope Francis – TLM vs nothing
- Saint Francis of Assisi in times of TLM (Traditional Latin Mass): “Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest.”
- Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, follower of Francis in times of TLM: “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”
Contrast this with Pope Francis in Traditionis custodes, with his inescapable “logic” that the TLM is both illicit and invalid:
- Pope Francis in times of rebellion: Pope Francis says in Traditionis custodes, his “document” smashing down the TLM, that the Novus Ordo (the New Order of Mass) is “the only expression of the lex orandi [Law of Prayer] of the Roman Rite.” That lex orandi is defined in the accompanying letter with the Sacrifice of the Mass, the Last Supper united with Calvary, with what specifically happens with the two Consecrations. There is no expression of that Sacrifice to be found in the TLM, says Pope Francis. In other words, the Sacrifice of Jesus in the TLM is both illicit and invalid because the only expression of the lex orandi, the Sacrifice of Jesus, is to be found with the Novus Ordo. But if one says that the Consecrations in the TLM are invalid, one is also saying that the Consecrations in any rite of Holy Mass are invalid. People have the pretense to say that they are “stunned” when I say that Traditionis custodes is an evil document. I have not changed my mind on that. If one denies Jesus, it is Jesus who will deny him before our Heavenly Father.
- Cardinal Arthur Roche, follower of Pope Francis in times of rebellion: Roche published his Responsa ad dubia, (responses to [contrived] doubts), execrating this: “The exclusion of the parish church [as a venue for the TLM] is intended to affirm that the celebration of the Eucharist according to the previous rite, being a concession limited to these groups, is not part of the ordinary life of the parish community.” Jesus offered to our Heavenly Father in the territory of a parish has nothing to do with the life of the parish? Nothing? But if you say that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is irrelevant in one rite, you say that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is irrelevant in every rite, including the Novus Ordo. I am stunned that anyone would support the assertion under any given circumstances that the Sacrifice of Jesus is NOTHING.
The real reason for all of this attack on Jesus and His Sacrifice?
- Both Pope Francis and his protégé, Cardinal Arthur Roche, are claiming that they can mess around with the lex orandi, the law of prayer, which they themselves define as the Sacrifice of Jesus.
- Both Pope Francis and his protégé, Cardinal Arthur Roche, are claiming that they can mess around with the lex credendi, the law of believing, for the law of praying is the law of believing. They have it that Sacred Tradition, the law of believing, can be manipulated by the Magisterium of the Church, you know, a power thing, so that any divinely provided living faith coming to the soul from the Holy Ghost with sanctifying grace, with divinely provided charity, with divinely provided hope, is NOTHING. For these two ecclesiastics, times so change entirely that world views, perspectives are also so entirely changed that Sacred Tradition (Traditiones in the Council of Trent’s description) is to be defined as merely whatever they say it happens to be in changing times. They don’t discount any truth in any time, but do assert that what they say to be today’s truth is different, even contradictory to yesterday’s truth, but is nevertheless valid, and, indeed, the only truth that is true today. But that means there is no truth in any time ever. God is eternal truth. God is absolute truth. Trent says that the apostles seem to provide for the continuance of the truth as if by hand – tradere – quasi per manus, but do not of themselves do this, for this work of Sacred Tradition is wrought by the Holy Ghost.
- The trashing first of the lex orandi, which action itself trashes the lex credendi, sets up a vicious circle, so that now, the Sacred Liturgy is given over to idol worship, providing then for false belief. Witness Pachamama of Francis, Nian of Cupich, Ganesh sycophancy spreading among priests on the Asian Subcontinent, et alii et cetera. Desecration of the Blessed Sacrament being almost ubiquitous.
This is damnable. It’s gotta stop. It’s gotta stop now. But who will say no to Satan and yes to Jesus?
The time is coming, very soon, in the midst of this great apostasy, when those who could simply grant the provisions in Canon 87 to dispense from disciplinary rules odious to the faithful (thus assisting them to get to heaven) will instead choose to do the power thing because, you know… POWER! Of course, they could also simply ignore Traditionis custodes and the Responsa ad dubia as illegitimate assertions of disciplinary actions and let the Lord’s Little Flock get on their way to heaven.
Imagine the punishment for spitting on Jesus and Mary:
Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis
Traditional Possum-Dropping & Traditionis-custodes-Dropping: Sacred Tradition & TLM
Until some animal rights groups got involved a couple years back, there was a live “possum drop” festival every year just south of the parish, then right close to the parish church. Then it was gone. The possums were treated like royalty in their highly decorated perches with all the food and water and comforts they could possibly want. They were gently lowered from on high. Who knows why? It is what it is. Kind of harmless, especially to the possums.
Any possums now being dropped are toys in the secret of people’s homes. Some traditions don’t die out so quickly. I saw this the other day in one of the parishioner’s homes:
It’s difficult to get rid of human traditions.
But what happens when it’s Sacred Tradition that’s being treated like human tradition?
There’s not only more resistance to what is thought by innovators to be open to change, but that change actually is impossible regardless of what kind of resistance there is, though that resistance will be there, and it will be implacable.
Sacred Tradition is constituted by the articles of faith, the traditiones as the Council of Trent calls them in its first dogmatic decree of 8 April 1546 in its fourth session. That supernatural faith provided by the Holy Spirit is univocal and handed on as if by hand, like handing on a book, but is actually wrought by the Holy Spirit, very personal, with love, providing us hope. The Council mocked those who otherwise thought they could control the very Revelation of God, changing doctrine, changing morals, stripping away truth and love and hope, while thinking themselves to be in complete control. For its mockery, the Council used the phrase quasi per manus, almost as if by hand, so as to say:
- “You think you have God’s Revelation in hand, but you do not. You think you can change doctrine and morals, but you cannot. The handing on of Sacred Tradition is wrought by the direct work of the Holy Spirit. It’s not just tradition, but Sacred Tradition. We’re talking about the unmanipulatable Truth of the Living God. No prestidigitations will be suffered. You do not have control of Sacred Tradition.”
But the innovators will not see that, will not hear that, will not be able to understand that. The innovators will continue to treat the Sacred Revelation of God Himself as a mere possum, which they treat as oh-so-precious, but which they think can ditch any time they want.
Example: The Holy Spirit teaches us all that Jesus taught us. Jesus taught us that at the Last Supper united with Calvary, He recites His Wedding Vows with His Bride the Church, this is my body being given for you in Sacrifice, my blood being poured out for you in Sacrifice, total self-giving, Jesus insisting that this brings us His body, blood, soul and divinity. This has been the teaching of the Church always as it is always the teaching of the Holy Spirit. This is the lex orandi, the law of prayer. This is therefore the lex credendi, the law of believing. This is SACRED TRADITION.
In Traditionis custodes Pope Francis admits that the lex orandi, the law of prayer, is THE TRADITION guaranteed by the custodians of that tradition — though, wait a minute, they are not the Holy Spirit, but mere men — Ooops! The lex orandi is defined in His own accompanying letter as the Sacrifice of Jesus in the Sacrifice of Holy Mass as brought about with the consecrations, say, Hoc est enim corpus meum quod pro vobis TRADETUR. Yep. But Pope Francis says that such a Tradition of Traditions in the Consecrations is not any kind of expression at all of the Latin Rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, of the lex orandi. Wait… What? And then elsewhere he says that it is not the mandate of the custodians of tradition to guard doctrine and morality, the deposit of faith. Wait… What?
Fine. I’ll stay with the Holy Spirit, and the “custodians” can attempt all they want to betray the Holy Spirit. They won’t get far at all. Nowhere. To be a good custodian means not to add to, nor take away from, nor change anything. They can expound upon. How authentic that is has to be seen. But that’s all they can do.
Speaking prophetically: Their attempts, say, a printed version of Traditionis custodes, will likely give rise to a culture in which that printed version will be dropped from a great height, and we’ll call that tradition “The Traditionis custodes Drop“. And then that will be made illegal by idiots, regardless of how well that hardcopy was treated as precious as it was being ever so gently lowered in all mockery. And then, being forced underground, people will participate in “The Traditionis custodes Drop” only in the secret of their homes. But they will do it. With joy. With mockery befitting the event. And they they will go to their churches in thanksgiving, participating in a public dropping. And they they will assist at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Traditional Latin Mass, the TLM, being more custodians of Sacred Tradition than any of those congratulating themselves to be have ever been. And as all that drops, we raise the Lord on high:
No due process for Fr George on TLM, Covid
I finally got around to looking at my diocesan emails on 26 July 2022. One came in on 22 July 2022 from a criminal defense attorney of many decades, who reprimands me without ever having spoken to me that I recall about two topics:
This is not a prosecutor. This person is simply emphasizing being an attorney of many decades. I don’t know why. And for who knows what reason, this attorney simultaneously copied this first instance communication to me also to some others:
- to my Bishop
- to my Metropolitan Archbishop
- to this attorney’s own Pastor (a Jesuit) whom I can’t recall ever speaking with seriously about anything ever, and that parish is in a city hundreds of miles away
- to a journalist employed by a news organization enjoying global reach, since, it is said, that journalist expressed an interest in writing about the “story.”
This was done in the form of a non-witnessed non-affidavit rife with insults against my Bishop, and with no due process afforded to me whatsoever. As a courtesy to recipients of that email I suggest that there might be more to the story, and another side of the story. Who would’ve thought? I suggest that the veracity of the reprimand from this attorney is proportional to how much due process I was afforded by this attorney, who in so many words speaks of a lifelong commitment to making sure that those innocent until proven guilty had full access to due process rights. The irony is rather incisive: I was afforded no due process whatsoever by this same attorney.
This is all too sad.
- Thomas More: “You threaten like a dockside bully.”
- Thomas Cromwell: “How should I threaten?”
- Thomas More: “Like a Minister of State, with justice.”
- Thomas Cromwell: “Oh, justice is what you’re threatened with.”
- Thomas More: “Then I am not threatened.”
Filed under Coronavirus, Free exercise of religion, Liturgy
Petitions delivered to Secretariat of State of the Holy See: Pro-Life, TLM
Gabbie’s take on Traditionis Custodes
Gabbie’s personal experience with the Traditional Latin Mass: “A deeper love for Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.”
Filed under Eucharist, Liturgy, Pope Francis, Spiritual life
Pope Francis’ auto-da-fé: reject TLM or else
- “LifeSiteNews has learned from Keith Armato, a leading Catholic layman close to the situation, that the archbishop of Chicago had demanded for months now that the Institute [ICKSP] signs a document with five or six points. Among the points they had to sign – each priest individually – was that the Novus Ordo rite is the only true expression of the Roman rite. This formulation stems directly from Pope Francis’ own document Traditionis Custodes, an explanation that makes it clear that the traditional Roman rite has to disappear altogether.”
I mean, I don’t know what any of this even means. Pope Francis celebrated Holy Mass in the Ambrosian Rite of the Latin Rite up in Milan as recently as 2017. There are very many Rites in the Latin Rite. And what about the Congolese Rite, the upcoming Amazonian Rite, etc.?
Oh, I get it. Pope Francis is saying that the particular Roman Rite of the much more comprehensive Latin Rite only has one true expression, which is the Novus Ordo and not at all the Traditional Latin Mass. I see. He surely means that this refers not to validity but to liceity, not to the fact of the Most Holy Sacrifice being offered in the TLM (which always remains true), but only to his modus operandi of holding that the only legally acceptable way of offering Holy Mass in Roman Rite is by adhering to the Sacramentary of Novus Ordo instead of the Missale Romanum of the TLM. I get it.
Oh, but wait! Text without context is pretext, right? Let’s see… Ah yes! Here we go! From Traditionis custodes:
- “Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique [“l’unica espressione”=only, sole] expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”
Oh, but wait! That’s not just a foundational disciplinary statement; that’s about doctrine, the very fact of the Sacrifice of Jesus being offered. Gotta put on the brakes and drill down into this. That “lex orandi” is the law of prayer which is the source and summit of the lex credendi, the law of believing. Is any of this defined for us in the broader context? Yes, indeed! Let’s turn to the accompanying letter of Traditionis custodes addressed to the bishops:
- “Most people understand the motives that prompted St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI to allow the use of the Roman Missal, promulgated by St. Pius V and edited by St. John XXIII in 1962, for the Eucharistic Sacrifice.”
- That’s from paragraph 2 of the letter. It’s clear that Pope Francis admits that John Paul II and Benedict XVI consider the TLM to be a valid manner to offer “the Eucharistic Sacrifice.”
- “Benedict XVI declared ‘the Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and newly edited by Blessed John XXIII, as a extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi‘, granting a ‘more ample possibility for the use of the 1962 Missal’.”
- That’s from paragraph 3 of the letter. It’s clear that Benedict speaks of “expressions” of the “same lex orandi,” which is thus defined by him as the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus.
- “The Motu proprio recognized that, in its own right, ‘the Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite’. The recognition of the Missal promulgated by St. Pius V ‘as an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi‘ did not in any way underrate the liturgical reform, but was decreed with the desire to acknowledge the ‘insistent prayers of these faithful,’ allowing them “to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass according to the editio typica of the Roman Missal promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as the extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church.”
- That’s from paragraph 4 of the letter. Again, it is crystal clear that the lex orandi, the law of prayer, refers to the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus present in any form, in any expression of the Roman Rite, of the Latin Rite.
But Pope Francis, with a slight of hand, you know, some prestidigitations, now has it in Traditionis custodes that the only expression of the law of prayer in the Roman Rite is the Novus Ordo, exclusive of the TLM. But if the law of prayer, literally the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus, is not to be found in any way with the TLM, Pope Francis is now saying that the TLM is an invalid Mass, no Mass at all. Nothing. No Sacrifice. No Sacrament. No Eucharistic Sacrifice. Nothing. It’s in fact an excommunicatable offence, for it is therefore only a simulation of a Mass, a simulation of a Sacrament.
I could never put my name to a document forcing me to deny Jesus in His very Sacrifice for me. Never!
Anyway, all this is why, in the Responsa ad dubia, it is said that the TLM has nothing to do with the life of the parish. Get it? Jesus’ Sacrifice has nothing to do with the life of the parish.
Sure, I might well be thrown out of the priesthood if I were ever to reject being forced to sign such a document, thus signing my ticket to hell if I did that. But I would be joyful in being thrown on the trash heap. Maybe I would finally have time to write about the Immaculate Conception. And in that I would most certainly rejoice. My voice of joy would be heard up to the heavens!
Filed under Eucharist, Liturgy, Pope Francis, Priesthood
Update, it’s Cupich: Imminent persecution from within the Church
UPDATE: Father Z updated his post: https://wdtprs.com/2022/07/action-item-prayer-to-avert-a-serious-act-of-persecution/
So, Cardinal Cupich, the Red Guard, in Chicago is entirely shutting down the Institute of Christ the King in Chicago, you know, because they offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Confession, Last Rites, the Faith.
Did they get due process for their incessant crimes of reciting the Creed?
This is absurd. A precedent of things to come. The Diocese of Charleston, just to the south of me, has also chosen this day to clamp down all the more. I’m guessing there will be many more and that the speed of closing down the TLM will increase: “You’re believers! Guilty!”
This is about logistics. The priests are not themselves cancelled, but all their priestly activity is cancelled. Can they be, will they be welcomed anywhere else in the world? Pope Francis is watching closely. Remember, they say – “Credo…” – and so are guilty of the worst crime in the world. Who could, who would take them? And so it will be for the rest of us.
But maybe if the good priests would just be more like Blase and bribe the demons with blessings for the new year so as to be saved by these demons in the coming year:
Or – Hey! – maybe the good priests should be more like Father Pfleger, and use a Pachamama canoe for the Consecration at Holy Mass.
Or – Hey! – maybe the good priests should STOP saying the Hail Mary and the Saint Michael prayer after Holy Mass. I bet that’s the problem.
Or – Hey! – ….
No. The good priests should just continue being good priests, come what may. The Lord Jesus, Sovereign High Priest, will provide for them, certainly also the privilege of being with Him on the Cross.
Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary…
Filed under Liturgy
7/7/7 15th anniversary Summorum Pontificum
So many good memories, many of them dramatic, in reestablishing the TLM in Lourdes, etc.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not bad and evil. It does not send you to hell in mortal sin for having offered this Mass of the Ages. Priests shouldn’t be cancelled for offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
My liturgical dancing out of the TLM ;-)
For those terribly offended by this analogy, consider:
- When John the Baptist leapt for joy in his mother Elizabeth’s womb as he was sanctified by little Jesus in the womb of Immaculate Mary, this leaping was dancing for joy just as David danced for joy before the Ark of the Covenant. But this time, with John, the Ark is not a box, but Mary who carried God Himself. The preface even in the Novus Ordo speaks of John singing about the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world.
- Commenters on the symbolic meanings of Juan Diego’s Tilma say that the posture, the stance of Mary depicts that she is actually moving, well, dancing, dancing for joy, and she also sings her magnificat, glorifying the Lord.
We recall Guardini’s and Ratzinger’s The Spirit of the Liturgy, at play before the Lord, right?
One is free to enter into the Sacrifice of Praise, following the law by way of the Holy Spirit, which is not freedom to break the commandments, or the rubrics for that matter, but the freedom of the children of God who will joyfully follow the commandments. See Romans 3:31…
- “Do we, then, nullify the law by faith? Certainly not! Instead, we uphold the law.”
So, let me offer a contrast. I have witnessed academic know-nothing professors in seminaries who, thinking themselves to be clever, sophisticated, ever so self-congratulatory, would go out of their way to change words in the Eucharistic Prayer (this all being Novus Ordo) and change all sorts of rubrics at Holy Mass, consistently, purposely, just so as to showcase that Mass is be an occasion by which to turn the sanctuary into a staging of narcissism. They turn the Law of Prayer, the Sacrifice of the Last Supper as united with Calvary, into an instruction to the seminarians about how, when they are priests, they too will be able to kick their parishioners in the face, relativizing to themselves that which is by it’s very nature is to be open to those who desire to be united to that Sacrifice of Jesus, and not privatized by narcissists.
Could it be that those bad and evil trads who say the black of the text and do the red of the rubrics at Holy Mass ever so rigidly, so very entrenched – because they’re all, ALL OF THEM, old meanies, right? – could it be that at least some of them are actually saying the black and doing the red because they have light and joyful hearts, truly joyful in the gift of joy from the Holy Spirit, and are absolutely enjoying the freedom of the children of God, freed because of not being forced to be narcissistic, freed because of being immobilized, nailed down, crucified with the Son of the Living God, dead to themselves so as to live for Jesus, to lead others not to themselves but to Jesus, because He’s the One, the only One?
Yes, that could be. It’s true in some small way with me. I’m so unworthy. But our Lord’s graciousness in having wretched me be His priest makes me all the more joyful. He’s so good and kind, and His Truth is overwhelmingly glorious, awesome, stunning… I don’t have the brain-power-band-width to distract myself about how cleverly I can enculturate my idiocy into what is by rights His Holy Mass so as to relativize the Holy Mass to myself, cheating myself and everyone else in The Lord’s Little Flock. They have a right to His Holy Mass. They don’t need my stupidity. I would feel terribly self-conscience in “creating my own Mass.” I want to be preoccupied not with myself, but with Jesus. He’s the One. He’s the only One.
And there’s this from Taylor. Great! He nails this perfectly. Lol. Well done, Taylor. Well done:
I’M SORRY! I APOLOGIZE! THERE’S LACE IN THAT PICTURE AT THE TOP OF THIS POST! OH NO!
Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis
Consistory 27 August 2022: [Card.] Roach of Divine Worship (anti-TLM); [Card.] McElroy of San Diego (pro-abortion)
The message is that the Traditional Latin Mass is evil, that Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is evil, and that abortion is the sacred sacrament of the pro-aborts that must be reverenced.
- +Archbishop Arthur Roach (b. 1950) is the guy who presented the Responsa ad dubia, saying that Jesus, in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the TLM, has nothing to do with the life of the parish. Nothing. So don’t take note of any of that in parish bulletins, he said. He’s Pope Francis’ hatchet man to wipe the TLM off the face of the earth.
- +Bishop Robert Walter McElroy (b. 1954) has a long history of being militantly pro-abortion. Read through the short article on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._McElroy. Obviously, he was chosen as a public smack-down of Archbishop Cordileone, who recently forbade Nancy Pelosi to receive Holy Communion because of equally strident pro-abortion machinations.
BTW, that picture up top was taken by yours truly. I did the logistics for soon to be Cardinal Burke for that pilgrimage Mass, with myself being the TLM chaplain at Lourdes at the time. I was able to bring back the TLM just about single-handedly to the Sanctuaries after Summorum Pontificum even before it officially came into effect. And I’m pro-life. I guess I’m bad and evil as well. No red hat for me! :-)
Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis, Pro-Life