| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 330
» Latest member: HeldHoly
» Forum threads: 8,183
» Forum posts: 14,809
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 477 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 472 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google, Yandex, Susannah
|
|
|
| SSPX: Open Letter to Pope Leo XIV and to the Cardinals of the Holy Church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 1 hour ago - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- Replies (5)
|
 |
Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV and to the Cardinals of the Holy Church
by the SSPX Bishops and Superior General [taken from here]
June 24, 2026
From the SSPX website
Most Holy Father,
Most Reverend Eminences,
On the eve of the Consistory at the end of this month, and just days before the episcopal consecrations scheduled for 1 July in Écône, it seems to us that the time has come for the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X to make a full profession of Catholic Faith, which we wish to place in the hands of Your Holiness and each one of the Cardinals. [“Profession of Catholic Faith of the Society of Saint Pius X to Enlighten Souls in the Face of Modern Errors“]
Today the Church suffers under the pressure of new forces, coming both from within and without, which push her in every possible direction, except – it seems to us – the right one. In the face of such suffering, we cannot remain indifferent.
It is not for the Society of Saint Pius X to indicate the path to follow, but rather for the two-thousand-year Tradition of the Church, faithfully guarded and transmitted by the Apostolic See through the centuries, and which many now regard, in practice, as an outdated reality, subject to perpetual development.
It is in the name of this same Tradition, and in its sole light, that we formulate today this profession of Catholic Faith in response to the chief errors and gravest dangers of our time.
We are convinced that Tradition contains all the remedies for the deepest ills afflicting the Church and the world, for which solutions are sought in vain outside of it. The immutable and integral Faith is the principle, the foundation, and the root of the salvation of souls. This Faith, contained in Tradition and taught by the constant Magisterium, constitutes the true foundation of the unity of the Church and, consequently, the necessary means of establishing union and communion among the members of the Mystical Body of Christ.
Above the changes and vicissitudes of time stands the immutable Tradition, the echo in history of eternal Truth.
We can but hope and implore that this Tradition and the purity of Faith be once again placed at the foundation of the life of the Church, so that from them an authentic regeneration may begin. It is with this intention that we pray with urgency.
We are persuaded that, in the unstable and extremely perilous context that now confronts us, the finest contribution one can offer to the universal Church is that of a sincere and integral profession of Catholic Faith.
We hope that one day this doctrinal text may serve as a basis for an honest discussion with the Holy See, in a spirit of peace, brotherhood, and charity.
The text we submit to you is not the sterile repetition of a group of nostalgics, but the necessary expression, peaceful and resolute, of our Faith.
Non enim possumus aliquid adversus veritatem sed pro veritate.
“For we can do nothing against the truth; but only for the truth.”
And according to the Psalmist, taken up by Saint Paul:
Et nos credimus propter quod et loquimur.
“We also believe, for which cause we speak.”
With thanks for the attention you will deign to give this text, we assure you of our constant prayers, for you and for the universal Church.
Menzingen, 24 June 2026, the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist
Davide Pagliarani
Superior General
+ Alfonso de Galarreta
First Assistant General
Christian Bouchacourt
Second Assistant General
+ Bernard Fellay
First Counsellor General
Former Superior General
Franz Schmidberger
Second Counsellor General
Former Superior General
|
|
|
| Mgr. Louis de Ségur: Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today [1868] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 06-24-2026, 07:23 AM - Forum: Resources Online
- Replies (1)
|
|
[The translation from the French into English as found on the archive.org site appears imperfect at times. Imperfections can be noted in the formatting as well. - The Catacombs]
The Cheapest Book Ever Published!!!
Mr. Donahoe has endeavored for years to furnish books at as cheap rates as the Protestant booksellers, and much lower than the publications of the Catholic publishers. This he has been enabled to do, from the fact that his publications are manufactured in his own buildings, and receive his personal superintendence. It is a mistake, therefore, to say that "Catholics have not cheap books." It may be that other publishers do not issue cheap books, but the charge against our establishment is not correct. And if the "gropers after truth" will give us a call, or send by letter, they will find our books are cheaper than any in the country. We challenge comparison. Remember, we allude to OUR OWN PUBLICATIONS.
In order still further to afford to our Most Reverend Archbishops and Bishops, the Reverend Clergy, and all who are desirous of circulating our books gratuitously, we have concluded to issue a cheap edition of PLAIN TALK ABOUT THE PROTESTANTISM OF TO-DAY — From the French of Mgr. Ségur.
The book has had an immense sale in France.
The Catholic Telegraph thus alludes to the book: "This is one of the most practically useful publications lately made. Its style of composition and its arrangement are admirably adapted to the use and comprehension of everyone, young and old, learned and unlearned. The Catholic who will carefully read it will have no difficulty in answering any of the many seemingly difficult or silly questions usually propounded by Protestants. And Protestants sincerely disposed to search for the truth, will find in this little volume a good pioneer."
Many similar notices might be added, but the above will suffice.
Reverend Mr. Faye, a Protestant minister at Lyons, publicly complained of the evils caused by this little book. In 1859, before the Assembly of Protestant Bible-carriers held in Geneva, he solemnly avowed that "Protestants can never do any good (?) with those who have read this book." A parson of Poitiers acknowledged the same almost in the same terms; and we know of Catholics who, having incautiously admitted doubts about their faith, became reassured by reading this Plain Talk. The wife of a minister in Paris returned the book to a lady friend with the remark that, "after reading it she could remain a Protestant no longer; she must consult her husband about it."
Not long ago an estimable English lady learned the truth of the Church from this work, became a Catholic, and, on her death-bed, directed that this little book should be laid on her breast in her coffin.
Already two thousand copies of the book have been disposed of — in neat binding, at 60 cents, retail; at wholesale, 45 cents.
NOTE TO THE PUBLISHER
You ask me, dear sir, "what makes me so anxious to publish this work in America?" — Well! I wish to have it published for the sake of Catholic children attending common schools, — of Catholic girls living out in families, — of Catholic boys serving their time, — of all dear and poor friends so often wounded in the affections dearest to their hearts, and whose religion is so often attacked in rude words.
I herewith hope to place in their hands such arms as they can easily use, and will have a telling effect on the enemies of their faith.
Nineteen editions have been published in France, up to 1866, and six hundred thousand copies sold.
The original title of the book is Causeries, — a word of difficult translation; Conversations does not render its precise meaning. Should any of your friends think of a more appropriate title-page, I shall be most thankful for the suggestion.
Reverend Mr. Faye, a Protestant minister at Lyons, has publicly complained of the evils caused by this little book. In 1859, before the Assembly of Protestant Bible-carriers held in Geneva, he solemnly avowed that "Protestants can never do any good (?) with those who have read this book." A parson of Poitiers acknowledged the same almost in the same terms; and we know of Catholics who, having incautiously admitted doubts about their faith, became reassured by reading this plain talk. The wife of a minister in Paris returned the book to a lady friend with the remark that, "after reading it she could remain a Protestant no longer; she must consult her husband about it."
Not long ago an estimable English lady learned the truth of the Church from this work, became a Catholic, and, on her death-bed, directed that this little book should be laid on her breast in her coffin.
God bless the Author!
|
|
|
|
| English Translations Soften Their Originals [Liberalism is a Sin] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 06-22-2026, 04:50 PM - Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching
- No Replies
|
|
English Translations Soften Their Originals
TIA | June 19, 2026
An inconvenient topic that I have not seen raised is that American translations of many Catholic works soften the original militancy in the text. There are many instances I could cite, but here I willl present the case of Fr. Sardá y Salvany’s Liberalism is a Sin.
Recently, I was reading the English edition of this work translated by Conde B. Pallen, an American, and published by TAN Books. I remembered that in the Spanish edition Fr. Salvany affirmed that Catholics can ridicule the enemies of the Church and make personal attacks against them. Reading the English, I had a strong suspicion that the text was softened. So, I went to the original Spanish text and found that actually that change had been made – and other large discrepancies.
I decided to compare the two texts: the published English translation and the original Spanish. The results were appalling.
![[Image: E096_Sar.jpg]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Sar.jpg)
Above, the intransigent Spanish anti-Liberal Felix Sardá y Salvany; below, translator Conde B. Pallen, a product of Georgetown Un. and American Liberalism
![[Image: E096_Pal.jpg]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Pal.jpg)
Examples of the softening & censorship
I compared the 1884 edition of El Liberalismo es Pecado to the 1899 English translation by Pallen, which by the way, is NOT titled Liberalism Is a Sin, which would be the literal translation. The new title of the American edition is simply What Is Liberalism? The difference speaks for itself. ...
Then, the entire Introduction was absent from the English translation. In that Introduction Fr. Salvany began with this radical challenge (my English translation from his Spanish original):
“Do not be alarmed, pious reader, or begin by casting a sour look upon this little book right from the very start. …
"I know … that you are not the only one who feels an invincible repulsion to and horror for such matters [condemning Liberalism]. I am all too well aware that this has become something of a mania, or an ailment that is all but universal.” [bold emphasis added throughout analysis]
Pallen’s translation skipped the Introduction, as well as Chapter I, and the first half of Chapter II of Fr. Salvany's book. He also made no mention in his text or footnotes of his subtractions and additions. Instead, Pallen simply inserted his own Chapter I, which he wrote and has nothing to do with Fr. Salvany’s original words. The actual translation of the book did not begin until page 18!
Is it not dishonest to present the work as authored by Fr. Salvany when its translation has so many blatant subtractions and additions?
Comparing translations
Now, I will present some texts comparing Pallen’s censored translation to the right of my own translation from the original Spanish. The sections that were softened are in red; the sections added by Pallen are in green; the sections of Fr. Salvany’s original text omitted by Pallen are in blue.
In Chapter 23 (Spanish here; Chapter 21 in the English here), Fr. Salvany refuted the liberal accusation that ultramontanes – the counter-revolutionaries of the 19th century – were offending charity in their polemics against the liberals. Below is a comparison of the two translations:
We can clearly see above that the translation by Pallen was much softer than the original Spanish.
Further, Pallen’s translation (on p. 117) of what Fr. Salvany actually said (on p. 90) about ridiculing the opponent is particularly striking. In one instance he omitted a paragraph of Fr. Salvany in which he qualified as scruples to consider lack of charity fight against the liberals:
In Chapter 15, Fr. Salvany strongly insinuated that there are very few – if any – well-intentioned liberals, which he called a "charitable softening of their ugly name." In Pallen's corresponding Chapter 14, that section was omitted, not surprisingly. Pallen also removed what Fr. Salvany said about the horror caused by the word "freethinker," omitted the words "intransigence" and "ultramontane," and added his own writing that again has nothing to do with the original text. The second time the term intransigent appeared, he changed it to irreconcilable. Below is the section in question:
Further on, Fr. Salvany titled his Chapter 21 “On Sound Catholic Intransigence in Opposition to False Liberal Charity,” while Pallen titled the corresponding Chapter 19 “Charity & Liberalism.” Pallen omitted two basic concepts: healthy intransigence, and false charity.
Fr. Salvany started this chapter with: “Intransigent! Intransigence!” Pallen’s version, however, replaced these words with three different words – “Narrow!” “Intolerant!” and “Uncompromising!” In fact, Pallen avoided using the word intransigence throughout his translation. Indeed, a word search for “intransigence” in Pallen’s translation rendered zero results; and yet, Fr. Salvany in the original Spanish used intransigencia 11 times and intransigente(s) four times, for a total of 15 times.
Why on earth, in a translation of a book about Liberalism, was the word intransigence omitted, when the author used the term 15 times? We cannot avoid thinking that Pallen wanted to soften Salvany’s message.
Pallen not only omitted the important word intransigence, but also omitted a section on just war – a weighty Catholic doctrine and a natural consequence of the principle of intransigence. This omission inevitably creates a more pacifist ambience in the text. Incidentally, Progressivism – which hates intransigence against error and evil – has always expressed its hatred of war.
Pallen omitted this radical section on just war, made his own softened summary, and pretended that was sufficient. He also conveniently removed Fr. Salvany’s statement that liberals are “cleverly using charity as a barricade against the truth.” See below:
In Fr. Salvany's Chapter 24, when refuting the liberal accusation that the Pope condemned Catholics who make personal attacks on the enemies of the Church, Pallen omitted this section. In the corresponding Chapter 22 he changed the words of Fr. Salvany, leaving out the section defending the legitimacy of using personal attacks to fight enemies of the Church.
Pallen’s translation of the first part of the phrase was so different from the original that it can no longer be considered a translation, Pallen's words were his own, not those of the Spanish author.
Further, Fr. Salvany’s explanation that the liberals “for their own personal convenience” left out important criterion for understanding the Pope’s words was also omitted by Pallen, and when Salvany insisted there is only one admissible conclusion, Pallen decided to leave that out too:
The last example I wanted to point out is the most shocking. After making an analogy about a captain in war who tells his soldiers not to hurt the enemy too much, Fr. Salvany concluded that this captain could be accused of being a traitor. Pallen omitted this radical statement, and others as well.
Fr. Salvany went on to quote anti-liberal statements by Pope Pius IX, and concluded that his statements “were etched on the brow of Liberalism like a stigma of eternal execration.” Again, this last phrase with the word execration was omitted by Pallen. Below, the comparison:
Reasons for the softening & censorship
Why would Pallen and his publisher make such blatant mistranslations, omissions and additions? My suspicion is that this was done to cater to a vice deeply ingrained in the United States, which is Liberalism or the hatred of militancy.
Protestantism and the errors of the French Revolution have always had a strong Influence in our country. The false principles of free-examination, tolerance toward moral evil, religious indifferentism and freedom of speech seems to have instilled a bad tendency in American Catholics. This tendency is to believe that deep down everyone is good, that error and evil are only caused by misunderstandings, and that therefore we should hate any kind of militancy against error and evil.
This mindset has inspired many American Catholic books, writings and talks that I regularly come across in my study and research. The word “charity” is always used to defend this position. Militancy against error and evil inevitably bursts the bubble of this optimistic ambience since Liberalism walks hand in hand with Progressivism in its insistence on tolerance.
So then, it is ironic that the principal book against Liberalism in the United States was translated by a person deeply influenced by Liberalism.
Posted June 19, 2026
|
|
|
|
| Traditionis Custodes strikes again: Kentucky bishop bans Traditional Latin Mass |
|
Posted by: Stone - 06-22-2026, 04:34 PM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Traditionis Custodes strikes again: Kentucky bishop bans Traditional Latin Mass
The Bishop of Owensboro, Kentucky, William F. Medley, directed Father David Kennedy to cease celebrating Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal.
![[Image: shutterstock_507227950.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/shutterstock_507227950.jpg)
Catholic priest celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass
Thoom/Shutterstock
Jun 22, 2026
OWENSBORO, Kentucky (LifeSiteNews) — The Bishop of Owensboro has ordered a priest to stop celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass, citing instructions previously received from the Holy See.
On May 18, the Bishop of Owensboro, Kentucky, William F. Medley, directed Father David Kennedy, priest of the Immaculate Conception Parish in Earlington, Kentucky, to cease celebrating Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal after June 30, 2026, stating that he cannot satisfy conditions established by the Holy See for the continuation of that permission.
“I have reviewed my correspondence with the Holy See from 2023,” the letter reads. “[That correspondence] indicated: ‘If after this period of time, you wish to renew this permission you will need to send us a further relatio along with your request.”
“This relatio should contain details of the number of participants at these Masses, and it should recount the steps which have been taken to lead the faithful who are attached to the antecedent liturgy towards the celebration of the liturgy according to the liturgical books reformed by decree of the Second Vatican Council and which form the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.’”
“As I am unable to demonstrate that this condition has been met, I have no standing to request an extension of the Holy See’s instruction, and I am directing you to not celebrate the Mass according to the Roman Missal of 1962 after June 30, 2026,” Bishop Medley wrote.
“I know that in some dioceses the faithful who have shown a preference for the Mass celebrated in Latin have accepted the Novus Ordo Mass celebrated in the Latin language,” he continued.
For this reason, Medley also indicated that Fr. Kennedy would be permitted to continue celebrating Mass in the Latin language, but only to according to the new Missal of St. Paul VI. In the same letter, he stated that he would grant the priest “singular permission to offer this Mass ad orientem.”
“As we discussed, I have permitted nearly a year to pass beyond reception of this consent from the Holy See,” he wrote. “I did this in recognition of the death of Pope Francis. I allowed the continuation of the traditional Latin Mass after the election of Pope Leo XIV to see if he would reconsider the matter of the Mass offered in parish churches.”
Bishop Medley added that he ultimately decided to act after what he described as a decision reached during the January Consistory of the College of Cardinals.
“After more than a year, and the January Consistory of the College of Cardinals in which they specifically chose not to review Traditionis custodes, I feel obligated as bishop to act in accord with the direction of the Holy See,” he wrote.
The bishop also addressed potential objections from members of the faithful affected by the decision. He instructed Fr. Kennedy that concerns could be referred directly to him and emphasized that his actions were being taken in obedience to Rome.
“For the faithful who may object to this directive you may certainly refer them to me, but please make clear that I am acting in accord with my promise to the Pope, the Bishop of Rome,” the letter states.
The letter concludes by thanking Fr. Kennedy for his ministry to Catholics who adhere to the traditional liturgy, whom Midley calls a “small and unique community.”
The motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, issued by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, recognized the 1962 Roman Missal as the “extraordinary form” of the Roman Rite and granted every priest the freedom to celebrate it without needing special permission from his bishop. The document framed the traditional liturgy not as a relic of the past but as a living expression of the Church’s worship, capable of enriching the entire Catholic world.
The motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, promulgated by Pope Francis in 2021, reversed this approach. It declared the reformed liturgy of Paul VI to be the “unique expression” of the Roman Rite and placed the celebration of the older form under strict episcopal control, requiring explicit authorization and often restricting its use to non‑parish settings. In practice, the two documents represent opposite ecclesiological visions: one of liturgical pluralism within unity, and one of liturgical uniformity as a condition for ecclesial communion.
The extraordinary consistory held on January 7–8 had included, among the four topics to be addressed, the question of the liturgy. However, during the cardinals’ meeting with the Pope, the topic was not taken up. Instead, Cardinal Arthur Roche — Prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the mastermind behind Traditionis Custodes — circulated among the senior prelates a report on the implementation of Francis’ motu proprio.
The distinction between the Traditional Roman Mass and the post‑conciliar Novus Ordo is far deeper than the use of Latin versus the vernacular. The two forms embody different theological emphases, ritual structures, and liturgical doctrines.
The older rite highlights sacrifice, transcendence, and ritual fixity, expressed through a stable offertory, a single Roman Canon, a predominantly silent and priest‑centered action, and a dense symbolic language. The Novus Ordo, by contrast, reflects a pastoral and didactic orientation: multiple Eucharistic prayers to chose from, expanded lay participation, audible prayers, and a flexibility that allows for significant variation in tone and style. To reduce the contrast to Latin versus the local language is therefore to mislead.
The community of Catholics attached to the traditional liturgy is neither an eccentric minority nor a sociological anomaly. Over the past two decades, it has grown steadily across continents, attracting young families, converts, and vocations at rates disproportionate to its size. Its demographic profile—high Mass attendance, strong catechetical commitment, and above‑average fertility—makes it one of the most dynamic segments of Western Catholicism.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fblogger.googleuserconte...d21cee6725]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fblogger.googleusercontent.com%2Fimg%2Fb%2FR29vZ2xl%2FAVvXsEgqkbKm3kVMDopHuiMav_SnYPOyZmBV_Ys-RncJVPWKfn8uYTH8K5xZq6rFN0bO1ItR76vg1r37uz1UUaPUO7aICexT25TjA0CDNf5bbczRAC4A-fqJuXgGIWVfVc9aVrbmorRCNRDGZTwv6re7_Iv4PC5XSnViUBbz-mY8dGEHHj5QniA6yaQlN6DVYvY%2Fs535%2FMatthew%25205%252020-26.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=39cf9f0ed30ded3fe183c7a3a4298b819c5531c72f2a9db3b0f736d21cee6725)
![[Image: E096_Lib-1.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-1.png)
![[Image: E096_Lib-2.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-2.png)
![[Image: E096_Lib-3.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-3.png)
![[Image: E096_Lib-4.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-4.png)
![[Image: E096_Lib-5.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-5.png)
![[Image: E096_Lib-6.png]](https://traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/E096_Lib-6.png)
