Better not wait to get off the tracks until the train is five feet away! |
Perhaps discussing the rumoured nuke to be dropped on the TLM on the third anniversary of Traditionis Custodes (July 16th) is premature. Why not wait and see and just be silent and let the chips fall where they may? After all, isn't the best course to live in the present moment? That's certainly one approach, and I won't argue with those who choose it.
On the other hand, there is something to be said for taking measures when a disaster is likely to happen. You don't wait until the hurricane is upon you to board up the windows. You don't wait until the train is five feet away before you get off the tracks. An article at OnePeter5 recommends that Catholics get ready, especially considering the accuracy of previous "rumors" reported by Rorate Caeli. Their track record is excellent. So let's check out the article by Carina Benton:
...it would behoove Traditional Catholics to familiarize themselves with four key issues so that they can be spiritually, psychologically, and intellectually prepped for what comes next.
Firstly, a crucial point made in OnePeterFive’s roundtable discussion last week [worth watching!] – and one that I’ve previously argued – is that the continued persecution of the Tridentine liturgy is not really about liturgy at all. It’s about theology. This is a war on doctrine, not a squabble over the use of Latin, altar rails and ad orientem worship. [To fight a problem, it's important to know exactly what it is. Archbishop Lefebvre saw clearly that the NO affected the priesthood and watered down the sacrificial nature of our faith. The change to the liturgy was not a tweak, but a wrecking ball.] The Traditional Rite fosters rightly-ordered worship and doctrinal orthodoxy, which renders it incompatible with the “who-am-I-to-judge? relativism” and the “any-road-up-the-mountain ecumenism” of Modernist revolutionaries. At a sociopolitical level, it also puts Traditional Catholicism at odds with the Climate Agenda wealth redistribution scheme, sexual nihilism, and open borders chaos which Pope Francis and many senior prelates are helping promote.
Another important observation that came out of the roundtable conversation was the increasing “ghettoization” of the Traditional Latin Mass, and the risk of normalizing the treatment of Latin Mass attendees as second-tier Catholics. With the release of Traditionis Custodes in July 2021, the Vatican trolled traditional Catholics with possibly the most cynically named papal document in the history of the Church. There’s nothing about this document that acted in any way as a “custodian of tradition.” It was a wrecking ball.You don’t have to go centuries back to Pope St. Pius V’s enshrinement of the liturgy in Quo Primum to identify the contradiction.Only four years earlier, Benedict XVI was crystal clear in his motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum. He expressly provided that “in parishes where a group of the faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition stably exists, the parish priest should willingly accede to their requests to celebrate Holy Mass according to the rite of the 1962 Roman Missal” and that if such a group “has not been granted its requests by the parish priest, it should inform the diocesan bishop [who] is earnestly requested to satisfy their desire.”
And yet during the very next papacy, there was a total 180 on the pastoral efforts made by Benedict who had acted not simply out of charity or a desire for unity, but precisely because the “the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is … to be … duly honored for its venerable and ancient usage.” Not even the most belligerent of popesplainers can rationalize how the Vatican went from revering the Tridentine rite under Benedict, to literally prohibiting the advertising of Latin Mass times in parish bulletins under Pope Francis....
"Absurdity" is the right word. Add to it "vindictiveness" and "cruelty." I have never seen so many Catholics subjected to mean-spirited vitriol than I have since the COVID debacle when bishops closed our churches and denied Catholics the right to receive on the tongue, a canonical right! But let's go on:
This feeds into the third issue, the framework of “limited obedience” as taught in perennial Catholic catechesis, and elaborated on by Aaron Seng in his excellent piece in Crisis Magazine. Seng explains that Catholics are not morally obliged to follow “any order that undermines or contradicts right reason, natural or positive divine law, or the received doctrine, morals, and rites of the Church.” [So -- can we stop with the lies and slander against Catholics who refuse to bow down and worship the gods of modernism!] Quoting the Catechism of Trent, he points out that should the commands of pastors be “wicked or unjust, they should not be obeyed, since in such a case they rule not according to their rightful authority, but according to injustice and perversity.”
"Injustice and perversity" describe the pope's legacy as he draws ever closer to the exit. What will he find on the other side of the door? The lady (Mary) or the tiger (the prowling lion named Lucifer)?
And now the last point from the article:
This brings me to the final issue, namely the potential impact on Traditional communities. As always under the present pontificate, confusion and ambiguity are the order of the day. In 2022, Pope Francis signed a decree confirming the continued existence of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP). Yesterday, the Institute of Christ the King (ICKSP) announced that they had been received in private audience with Pope Francis, who apparently “insisted that [the ICKSP] continue to serve the Church according to [their] own, proper charism, in the spirit of unity and communion …”
Yet on Sunday, the Superior of The Society of Missionaries of Divine Mercy, a French community of priests devoted to the Roman Rite, from the diocese of Fréjus-Toulon and in good standing with their bishop, announced that the ordinations of five seminarians have been blocked “due to the possibility for future priests to celebrate in the old rite.” All other ordinations, which the Vatican exceptionally suspended in 2022, just prior to ordering an apostolic visitation of Bishop Dominique Rey, have now resumed.
... everyone should at least get their heads out of the sand and be prayerfully prepared, whether as bishops, diocesan priests, traditional priests or laypeople, for what this renewed call for perseverance may entail.
So let's sum up the four issues:
- It's not just about liturgy; it's about doctrine!
- The conflict has turned faithful orthodox Catholics into second class members of the Church ridiculed, derided, slandered by a man they call "holy FATHER." He's been relentless in giving his traditional children stones instead of bread.
- Obedience to the pope is not unlimited. He is not a dictator who can tell you to get particular vaccinations or buy an electric car, etc. He must be resisted to his face when he endangers the faith and is wicked and unjust to the flock he is called to shepherd.
- All the signs indicate that the Vatican goal for traditional communities is their ultimate annihilation.
"All that happens is according to His will and it is our duty simply to remain faithful." Exactly so. And it is no sin for the Catholic who doubts the validity of a pope. The sedevacantists will not lose their Catholic Masses nor Catholic Sacraments (and didn't during Covid either). Come see us. It IS about doctrine...most especially the doctrine on the papacy.
ReplyDeleteAs you can see, Debbie, I decided to post this. I agree. In these confusing times "it's no sin for the Catholic who doubts the validity of a pope." It's also no sin for a Catholic who doesn't. But from your other comments, you don't seem to believe that and I don't tolerate browbeating for very long which is why I stopped posting your comments. Those of us who attended the SSPX during COVID didn't lose our Catholic Masses either. Let's leave it at that. We disagree on the interpretation of the papacy. There were many popes who embraced simony during early ages. They may not have articulated any doctrine on it, but they committed the heresy. It's not the first time we've had horrendously bad popes.
ReplyDeleteThank you for allowing my comment Mary Ann. Obviously I believe sedevacantism is the true Catholic position, but what irks me most are those who say sedes are apostates or schismatics. Thanks for not holding to that position.
DeleteAs to simony; it is a sin and immortal, but not heresy.
The times are certainly confusing. As for simony not being a heresy, I think that depends on the inner disposition of the person selling the spiritual thing which, I think, applies to many other sins including those of Pope Francis.
DeleteSt. Thomas Aquinas says this (in part) addressing question 100 on simony:
"I answer that, As stated above (I-II:18:2) an act is evil generically when it bears on undue matter. Now a spiritual thing is undue matter for buying and selling for three reasons. First, because a spiritual thing cannot be appraised at any earthly price, even as it is said concerning wisdom (Proverbs 3:15), 'she is more precious than all riches, and all things that are desired, are not to be compared with her': and for this reason Peter, in condemning the wickedness of Simon in its very source, said (Acts 8:20): 'Keep thy money to thyself to perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.'
"Secondly, because a thing cannot be due matter for sale if the vendor is not the owner thereof, as appears from the authority quoted (Objection 1). Now ecclesiastical superiors are not owners, but dispensers of spiritual things, according to 1 Corinthians 4:1, 'Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the ministers of God.'
Thirdly, because sale is opposed to the source of spiritual things, since they flow from the gratuitous will of God. Wherefore Our Lord said (Matthew 10:8): 'Freely have you received, freely give.'
"Therefore by buying or selling a spiritual thing, a man treats God and divine things with irreverence, and consequently commits a sin of irreligion.
"Reply to Objection 1. Just as religion consists in a kind of protestation of faith, without, sometimes, faith being in one's heart, so too the vices opposed to religion include a certain protestation of unbelief without, sometimes, unbelief being in the mind. Accordingly simony is said to be a 'heresy,' as regards the outward protestation, since by selling a gift of the Holy Ghost a man declares, in a way, that he is the owner of a spiritual gift; and this is heretical. It must, however, be observed that Simon Magus, besides wishing the apostles to sell him a grace of the Holy Ghost for money, said that the world was not created by God, but by some heavenly power, as Isidore states (Etym. viii, 5): and so for this reason simoniacs are reckoned with other heretics, as appears from Augustine's book on heretics....
"Reply to Objection 7. The Pope can be guilty of the vice of simony, like any other man, since the higher a man's position the more grievous is his sin. For although the possessions of the Church belong to him as dispenser in chief, they are not his as master and owner. Therefore, were he to accept money from the income of any church in exchange for a spiritual thing, he would not escape being guilty of the vice of simony. In like manner he might commit simony by accepting from a layman moneys not belonging to the goods of the Church."
I’ve been off Catholic sites for some time. It had become demoralizing. I recently put my toe back in the water, however, after reading breathless headlines about a developing rift between Bp Vigano and SSPX, further isolating this hero of the Catholic Faith …
ReplyDeleteHard for me to imagine, so I looked into it, just a bit; went to the SSPX site source for fresh info. As expected, theirs was a perfectly calm and reasonable position - expressing implicit/explicit agreement on everything *except* his stance on the Francis as Pope - “down that dark and perilous path we cannot go”.
I’ve had their position explained by multiple Priests to my satisfaction: which is that as a matter of Catholic law, they are satisfied Benedict fully resigned, rendering the need for a Conclave, and Francis is thus duly elected, legal occupant of St Peter’s Seat. And also, that the Papacy is a disaster (as you say). And, let not your heart be troubled. And, remain within the Constant Magisterium and the Sacraments.
I may (and do) disagree with their conclusions about the current Papal occupant situation. I’ve explained my position. They duly note position, accept it as a personal opinion and merely ask me not to spread dissension within the chapel.
So … like the soldier who disagrees with his commanding officer (hierarchy) about a ludicrous and fatal order to abandon a trench and attack a fortified position it is *not* my job not to determine orders’ wisdom and efficacy, (speak, yes; usurp, no) but rather only orders’ legality and legitimacy within the legal framework that governs my life as a soldier.
Just so, as a Catholic, is the process that elected Francis legal, legitimate? My view? No. But I also accept as legitimate the authority and the logic of reason in reference to sources my priests and Society reference in Canon Law and Sacred Tradition *FAR* beyond my possible comprehension to reach a different conclusion. So I submit to their spiritual authority over me and mine in this matter. They don’t compel me to spiritually assent with their conclusions *in this matter*, nor do I compel them to comply with mine.
Trust me - they are well aware of the crisis at hand. They are heroes in the spiritual battlefield.
Aqua, I always appreciate your calm, rational, charitable approach to things. God bless you for being a source of reason and respectful commentary. I'm grateful whenever you leave a comment.
ReplyDeleteAmen.
DeleteThere is a reason I only read and comment here (at least for now): it also is a calm, rational, reasonable place. God bless you and yours amidst the crisis.
Except it's not as easy as a casual 'submission to their spiritual authority', is it? The pesky truth gets in the way every time. Is he the Pope or not? Is our attempt to worship the good, the true and the beautiful in a way most good, most true and most beautiful not spoiled, stained, rendered an ugly lie, when the two words, "Pope Francis" come out of the priest's mouth at the altar?
DeleteI suggest you read about the book "Bad Shepherds: The Dark Years in Which the Faithful Thrived While Bishops Did the Devil's Work". I'll just name one bad shepherd although there are many from which to choose. John XII is described in the Catholic encyclopedia as "a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a brothel, and the moral corruption in Rome became the subject of general odium." I imagine the priests praying Mass then had a similar problem as those today, but the most sinful among us, even popes, have most need of our prayers at Mass.
DeleteAnonymous said: “ Is he the Pope or not?”
DeleteThe SSPX position is that as a matter of Roman Catholic law, yes he is. And they have good reasons to back it up, satisfactory to me in the many fair hearings I’ve given them to explain their position … the Catholic position, as a matter of law.
I personally disagree. But I accept their logic and rationale as reasonable, learned, based in Canon Law and Sacred Tradition.
What I’ve found is that the topic and debate over Who Is The Pope!? sucks the air out of the spiritual room and Christ is, once again, forgotten. It became increasingly demoralizing to me - “why am I a Catholic again”? People close to me are now Sede and rarely serve at Mass; relationships fracturing; anger increasing. “Oh, I remember why I’m Catholic - it’s Christ, and I find Him in His holy Tabernacle on the holy altar of Calvary.
I’m done with such debates. I have an opinion. My Priests’ authority, however, is dispositive. The Priesthood will answer for their use of authority. I will answer for how I use my freedom of a well-formed conscience and obedience to authority - rightly ordered ultimately under Christ the King.
It is Christ I worship - Holy Trinity one God. If the Papal situation is getting in the way of me finding my Lord and my God … I will look through the Papacy to find Jesus, who made me for Himself.
There is another option for the Faithful wishing to adhere to doctrinally sound (and beautiful, and reverent) ancient liturgy. There are more than 2,000 parishes in the US with that liturgy which is under zero threat from being suppressed by any bishop. It can be found in the Antiochian, Russian, Greek, Serbian and Orthodox Church of America, among others. All bishops therein are in the line of Apostolic Succession and the same seven Sacraments in Catholic parishes are available there. I am a former FSSP attendee now an Orthodox catechumen. Looking deeper into history than Cardinal Newman did, and you will discover it was Rome who split from the New Testament Church beginning with the heretical imposition of the Filioque.
ReplyDelete