Mind you, Traditionis custodes was literally sent out by email from the Holy See to the Apostolic Nuncios to the bishops to the priests, a process of quite a number of hours so that all the middle-men could write cover letters in their own “style.”
So, we might see something by late evening. 3 April 2023 is the standing best hypothesis for the publication of an Apostolic Constitution putting the TLM to death since this was the date of the attempted abrogation of the TLM by Paul VI and also his attempted promulgation of the New Order of Mass.
Although I have written on this previously, tantrum-esque insistence from Rome on God’s death has been evidenced. To recap, following up on Traditionis custodes, Art. 3.2, in his Responsa ad dubia, in the “explanatory note,” Cardinal Arthur Roche writes:
“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.”
Let’s do a syntactical extraction of verbiage dependent on “the celebration of the Eucharist”, just so we’re clear about the core statement, just so you can hear it clearly:
“The exclusion of the parish church is intended to affirm that the celebration of the Eucharist […] is not part of the ordinary life of the parish community.”
Let’s boil that down a bit more:
“The Eucharist […] is not […] the […] life of the parish.”
Get that? If the Living and Incarnate Word of God, Jesus, in His Sacrifice for us is irrelevant to the parish community in one rite, that means that Jesus in His Sacrifice for us is irrelevant to the parish community in all rites, including the Novus Ordo Missae, the New Order of Mass. It’s the same Jesus, right? Jesus said: “I AM THE LIFE.” Take your hand, Thomas, and put it into my side.
But Cardinal Arthur Roche, with Pope Francis, says: “God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed Him.”
Sounds like “The Will to Power” of Friedrich Nietzsche, “Der Wille zur Macht.”
God, fully alive, has answered:
Because many have pointed out the lack of canonical exactitude of both Traditionis custodes and the Responsa ad dubia, Cardinal Arthur Roche has insisted recently in the very first point of his Rescriptumapproved by Pope Francis that physically throwing Jesus off His own Altar consecrated for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and then right out of His own Church is now all canonically legal, because, you know:
“God is dead. He stays dead. And we have killed Him.”
Entrenching. That’s not good. That’s not good at all. The whole world is going to hell and their response is that God is dead?
Look, the biological solution comes to us all:
I want to go to heaven to meet the Risen Lord Jesus and thank Him, the Living God, for His Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, for forgiving me my sin of killing Him.
I want Cardinal Arthur Roche and Pope Francis to be converted to Jesus and thank Jesus in the same way. I have nothing on them. I am the worst sinner. But that means that I can also, with Jesus’ grace, be very thankful. So can they.
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.
“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.
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.
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!
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.
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:
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
Prefect
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.
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).
ARISE! LET US BE GOING! 