Rorate Caeli is reporting some alarming news about the likely next step at the Vatican to eliminate the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) once and for all. OnePeter5 is sounding the warning trumpet by passing on the information. Let all those who love Holy Mother Church and her traditions passed on from the earliest days after the first Pentecost, join in this spiritual war. It isn't just about the TLM, but about all the sacraments gutted and diluted after Vatican II. If you haven't read Dan Graham's book, Lex Orandi, now's the time to do it. See how all seven sacraments received the ax striking at their roots. Dan compares the sacramental rites side by side, a striking contrast illustrating how much we've been robbed. May God help us all to be faithful warriors of the Church Militant fighting for the authentic Catholic faith.
An attempt is being made to implement, as soon as possible, a Vatican document with a stringent, radical, and final solution banning the Traditional Latin Mass. The same ideologues who imposed Traditionis custodes and its implementation, and who are still frustrated with its apparently slow results, especially in the United States and France, want to ban it and shut it down everywhere and immediately. They want to do it while Francis is still in power. They want to make it as wide, final, and irreversible as possible.These rumors come from the most credible sources,* in different continents, and we urge you to take them as seriously as possible, and do what you can in your station, as laity, priests, bishops, cardinals, religious men and women, to prevent the ban from becoming a concrete measure.
Can we stop it from happening? Yes, we can: by prayer, sacrifice, penance — and influence and pressure, of whatever sort we can manage to put forward. The enemy is strong, but our Lord and Lady are mightier.
Okay, Church, let's roll!
Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.
We can also stop it by a collective message back to the Vatican; Blow it out your ass!
ReplyDeleteBergoglio can’t ban the TLM. No one can. The man is a destroyer. He’s also NOT the pope.
Omigoodness...language.... So who is the pope in your opinion?
ReplyDeleteSorry about the language - got carried away. :) I don't think we currently have a pope. I've carefully thought through most of what Ann Barnhardt and Mark D. have said on the topic. I'm not going to repeat it here, but it makes sense to me. We've had other horrible popes in the past, but none of them have attacked the teachings of the church like Bergoglio and his ilk. Others may think differently, and my nod to them is that it's difficult to determine which side to be on this issue.
Delete"...a striking contrast illustrating how much we've been robbed."
ReplyDeleteWho or what has robbed us? The Catholic Church? A true pope?
There are plenty of robber popes in the bad popes club. But I'm not getting into again with you, Debbie. I forgot I banned you when I posted your comment. God allowed other bad popes. Francis is not the only one.
ReplyDeleteIf Jorge was a Stone Cutter,what would he do any differently ? Ans. NOTHING
ReplyDeleteJorge and Theodore McCarrick we’re made Cardinals the same day. Selected and groomed by the same Satanists.
ReplyDeleteMary Ann, I would like to hear your thoughts on whether this will impact the SSPX and/or Ecclesia Dei parishes. It seems the SSPX in recent years is prioritizing communion with Rome and in return given faculties. I hope and pray that they are not under the thumb of Rome and will maintain their independence to once again keep the TLM alive.
ReplyDeleteI don't think there is any fear of that. Have you listened to their Crisis in the Church series?
DeleteLook who and what is persecuted and there you will find holiness in many cases. 80 year old grandmothers and working fathers of 9 who peacefully pray at an abortion mill thrown into prison? The TLM (the most beautiful thing this side of heaven) suppressed and hated? I pray for these persecutors of all people and things holy.
ReplyDelete“ her traditions passed on from the earliest days after the first Pentecost,” I suggest you read A Study of the Roman Liturgy by Adrian Fortesque to understand the development of what we call the Mass. Both forms of the Mass contain elements found in the early days of the Church. Neither is anywhere close as compared to the Divine Liturgy in the East. As for the Lex Orandi book, it’s full of misleading statements. Sure it compares the sacraments before and after V2. But if you want to see what we have lost, look East. The West has separated the sacraments of initiation and they are out of order. The whole idea of participation in the life of the Trinity is lost in the West when the sacraments are made as rites of passage and something to be earned. These petty arguments, anger, etc as a result of the liturgy wars are centuries in the making. The solution is not a return to the TLM solely but a renewal in the understanding of the Christian life. Ironically, V2 called for just that and look and how both extremes of trads and liberals have kept the Church from moving in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the reference. For those interested in following up, Fr. Fortescue's book is available online at https://archive.org/details/massstudyofroman00fort/page/2/mode/2up
ReplyDeleteI'd be interested to hear what you think "the right direction" is and what exactly your "understanding of the Christian life" is. As for Lex Orandi, I think it's excellent. What exactly are the "misleading elements?"
I've begun reading the book and found this quote interesting from Fr. Fortescue's preface to the second edition (1913). "There is no reason to be surprised at the idea that the present Canon is not exactly the original form ; still less is there any controversial capital to be made out of this. After all, every liturgical form was composed by someone at some time. No one now believes that our Mass comes down unaltered from St. Peter. All we need say is that the early Pope who composed it had still earlier material before him ; that he used this material, as he naturally would. He shortened and rearranged the prayers for good reasons. We accept and use the form he gave us with entire respect.... Undoubtedly our Canon, as we have it, is a most beautiful and venerable form. As it stands it may be said, it is said daily by thousands of priests in the plain meaning of the words, with entire devotion. The supposed signs of what I call ''dislocation" affect no one but the student, who may find in them interesting evidences of an early reconstruction. The question is merely one of archaeology. It would be absurd for anyone to be troubled in saying Mass by such a matter as this. Without question, our Canon is one of the very oldest, the most splendid forms of prayer in Christendom. We, whose honour it is to say it daily, repeat these venerable words, fragrant with the associations of centuries, without being at all disturbed by the purely archaeological question, whether Gelasius I, or some other Pope at about that time, did or did not compose the prayers we use by rearranging still older ones."
ReplyDeleteSomehow, I doubt Fr. Fortescue would have appreciated the Bugnini massacre of the Sacred Liturgy, not to mention the other sacraments gutted by his committee.
Fr. Fortesque's opinion would have more weight than mine fore sure. Regardless of what one thinks about Bugnini, the mass and sacraments have the approval of Pope St. Paul VI. The problems we have with the so called traditional movement are rooted in disobedience to the authority of the Church. 1 Sam 15:22 states: " ..to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams."
DeleteBy right direction, simply stated, a fullness of the Catholic faith that has been stifled by the reaction to the Protestant Reformation. We have Church that has been wounded for many centuries, some wounds are self inflicted. This article articulates the centruies old degradation of the moral authority of the Church (https://www.saintdominicsmedia.com/catholic-churchs-loss-moral-authority-donation-constantine/). It didn't just happen after V2 and it's not because of the new mass and sacraments. My understanding of the Christian life is living out the beatitudes as Christ taught in the sermon of the mount.
As for Lex Orandi, the introduction states that the new rites changed doctrine. Cross reference the Catechism of the Catholic Church and you'll find that the doctrine regarding the sacraments has not changed. Are we to believe that a side by side comparison of before and after means that doctrine changed? I don't think so. I don't expect you to agree but I think the trad narrative is faulty and doing more harm to the Church than good. Again, I don't expect you to agree.
Another suggested reading is the Catholic Controversies by St. Frances de Sales and the Pope the Council and the Mass by James Likoudis.
Your right, I don't agree. Obedience, even to the pope, is not absolute, a position you seem to be espousing here. His authority is only legitimate to the degree that he acts in accordance with his head, Jesus Christ. Bishop Schneider addresses this in his compendium of the faith Credo. The faithful have no obligation to obey "a particular teaching or command of his [the pope's] that is manifestly contrary to natural or divine law, or that would harm or undermine the integrity of the Catholic Faith or the sacredness of the liturgy. In such cases, disobedience and resistance to the pope is permissible and sometimes obligatory." #566. There are a number of cases in the history of the Church when popes taught errors that had to be corrected. Pope Honorius I was posthumously condemned as a heretic by the Third Council of Constantinople. #679. There is no indication that I can find that he was deposed or declared a non-pope even though his positions were condemned during his lifetime. When a pope speaks ex cathedra, his teaching is infallible. At other times, his opinions can be just that, his opinions: wise, ignorant, imprudent, and even heretical.
ReplyDeleteOne of my sedevacantist readers (Dibbie) said I'm wrong here because I didn't mention that the ordinary magisterium with the pope, can also be infallible. True. When they uphold the faith and sacred tradition as it's been passed on through the millennia, the pope, in union with the magisterium, are also considered infallible. That doesn't make my statement about the pope's "opinions" wrong, but it clarifies the issue. The pope has never made an ex cathedra statement about abortion, contraception, or women priests, but they are all infallibly impossible of approval.
ReplyDelete