| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 296
» Latest member: m@c
» Forum threads: 6,907
» Forum posts: 12,863
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 336 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 334 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: "Don...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
11 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 33
|
Thursday Night Holy Hour ...
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 10:35 AM
» Replies: 17
» Views: 8,935
|
Scientists working on mRN...
Forum: Health
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 10:23 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 81
|
Bishop Strickland calls o...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:23 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 95
|
Beware the “Conservative ...
Forum: The Catholic Trumpet
Last Post: Stone
04-30-2025, 10:37 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 177
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Cath...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
04-29-2025, 09:21 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 182
|
Louis Veuillot: The Liber...
Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
Last Post: Stone
04-29-2025, 12:09 PM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 322
|
Mark Carney wins Canadian...
Forum: Global News
Last Post: Stone
04-29-2025, 12:01 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 135
|
Francis Was a Faithful So...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
04-29-2025, 12:00 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 137
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: "The...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
04-28-2025, 08:03 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 161
|
|
|
| Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-02-2023, 07:41 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
 |
Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses
gloria.tv | March 1, 2023
Effective immediately, parish churches in the diocese are prohibited from celebrating the Latin Mass in accordance with the “Missale Romanum” of 1962, according to a statement from the diocese. “In light of the rescript, which the Vatican sent last week, the celebration of the Usus Antiquior is currently on hold in parish churches,” the diocese noted in a statement.
“In light of the rescript, which the Vatican sent last week, the celebration of the Usus Antiquior [Traditional Latin Mass] is currently on hold in parish churches in the Albany Diocese,” the diocese noted in a statement provided to CNA. “As we explore various possibilities, the Usus Antiquior can continue at Our Lady of Martyrs Shrine in Auriesville, which is not a parish church in the diocese.”
Holy Family Parish in Little Falls, which offered the Latin Mass at noon on Sundays and at 8 a.m. on Wednesdays, cannot celebrate the ancient form of the Mass for the time being. St. Ann’s Church in Fort Ann, which offered the Latin Mass on certain weekdays, was also informed it can no longer celebrate this form of the Mass.
At this time, the only church within the diocese that can offer the Latin Mass in accordance with the Missale Romanum of 1962 is the Our Lady of Martyrs Shrine in Auriesville.
Bishop Scharfenberger was promoted to the episcopate and appointed Bishop of Albany by Francis.
- Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses - The Catholic Thing
|
|
|
| 10 myths told by Covid experts — now debunked |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-01-2023, 01:54 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
10 myths told by Covid experts — now debunked
In the past few weeks, reports published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during Covid.
news.com.au | February 28, 2023
In the past few weeks, a series of analyses published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during Covid:
Much of the time, they were wrong — the New York Post reports.
To be clear, public health officials were not wrong for making recommendations based on what was known at the time. That’s understandable. You go with the data you have.
No, they were wrong because they refused to change their directives in the face of new evidence. When a study did not support their policies, they dismissed them and censored opposing opinions.
At the same time, the Centre for Disease Control weaponised research itself but putting out their own flawed studies in their own non-peer reviewed medical journal, MMWR.
In the final analysis, public health officials actively propagated misinformation that ruined lives and forever damaged public trust in the medical profession. Here are 10 ways they misled us:
Misinformation #1: Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity
A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary Covid vaccine series.
In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.
Since the Athenian plague of 430 B.C., it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if reinfected. That was also the observation of nearly every practising physician during the first 18 months of the Covid pandemic.
Most Americans were fired for not having the Covid vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralised the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognise.
Misinformation #2: Masks prevent Covid transmission
Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of evidence in medicine. And one published last month by a highly-respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on Covid transmission.
When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomised controlled studies.
But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomised studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence. If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have channelled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.
Misinformation #3: School closures reduce Covid transmission
The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates. Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted Spain and Sweden.
Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle. They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates. A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite. We now know that myocarditis is six to 28-times more common after the Covid vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males. Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a Covid vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had Covid.
Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster
Boosters reduced hospitalisation in older, high-risk Americans. But the evidence was never there that they lower Covid mortality in young healthy people. That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish their data on hospitalisation rates among boosted Americans under 50, when they published the same rates for those over 50.
Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense, that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.
Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates
President Biden and other officials demanded unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired. They demanded that soldiers be dishonourably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis. The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false. But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day. A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates. They also had no impact on Covid transmission rates.
Misinformation #7: Covid originating from the Wuhan Lab is a conspiracy theory
Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic. Dr Francis Collins, head of the NIH, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab. Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic. According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Drs Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials. The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.
Misinformation #8: It was important to get the 2nd vaccine dose 3 or 4 weeks after the 1st dose
Data was clear in the Spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complications rates and increase immunity. Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.
Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is “crystal clear”
Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice. To date, there has never been a randomised controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine. In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine. It would have also spared many children myocarditis
Misinformation #10: One in five people get long Covid
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of Covid infections can result in long Covid. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of Covid patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?
It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long Covid is the medicalisation of ordinary life.
What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials, is that there has been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong. Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”
Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism. Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.
At minimum, CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to Covid vaccines, clearly stating what is now known. A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.
|
|
|
|
| What's going on at the KY camp? |
|
Posted by: Catholic01 - 03-01-2023, 11:05 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- Replies (2)
|
 |
Email i received:
We are trying to reach out to Faithful who are looking for the Traditional Sacraments and holding the Faith without compromise. Our goal is to get them in touch with the Priests here and make it possible for them to receive the Sacraments they need. Currently there are five priests under Bishop Pfeiffer who are traveling the United States and Canada administering the Traditional Sacraments.
Please give me a call/text at [omitted].
God Bless,
-Sister Theresa of the Child Jesus
------------
"Which five priests are under your bishop and what is his lineage?"
----------
Bishop Pfeiffer was Consecrated two years ago by Bishop Webster and his lineage is from the Thuc Line.
The Priests are Fr. Pancras, Fr. Poisson, Fr. Croisette, Fr. Cooke, and Fr. Parker. Fr. Pancras and Fr. Poisson have been with the us for five years. Fr. Croisette, Fr. Cooke, and Fr. Parker were ordained by Bishop Pfeiffer.
Here is a link to a video explaining more about the Seminary here and why it exists [omitted]
God Bless,
-Sister Theresa of the Child Jesus
----------
|
|
|
|
| WEF Globalists boast of their improved tracking |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-01-2023, 06:39 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
Quote:The Canadian Alibaba Group president J. Michael Evans boasts at the World Economic Forum about developing an individual carbon footprint tracker to monitor what you buy, what you eat, and where/how you travel.
That individual carbon footprint tracker, however, most likely won’t apply to corporate jets, yachts, or emissions from homes greater than 5,000 sq ft.
This growing obsession with ‘tracking people’ is worrisome and needs to stop!
|
|
|
|
| Mens Ignatian Retreat - UK |
|
Posted by: Stone - 02-28-2023, 07:57 PM - Forum: Event Schedule
- Replies (1)
|
|
When: 27th May - 1st June
Where: TBC
Who: Fr. David Hewko
Cost: whatever you can afford - financial help is available for those of limited means...
Please save the date in your diary and let us know if you wish to attend: recusantsspx@hotmail.co.uk
A similar retreat for ladies will follow later in the year.
|
|
|
|
| Abp. Viganò: Canceled Benedictine nuns are ‘victims of the ideological fury of the Bergoglians’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 02-28-2023, 11:34 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Abp. Viganò: Canceled Benedictine nuns are ‘victims of the ideological fury of the Bergoglians’
The goal that animates the entire action of this pontificate is of an ideological bent: to normalize religious life
to the new pauperist, migrationist, environmentalist, ecumenical, and synodal paradigm.
Feb 27, 2023
Editor’s note: the following is the full text of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s first intervention on the situation of the Monastery of Maria Tempio dello Spirito Santo in Pienza, Italy, after it was “subjected to harassment and serious abuses by the Holy See in an attempt to remove the nuns from the building assigned to them by the diocese.”
“This particular story is paradigmatic of a deplorable situation extended to the whole universal Church, in which the contemplative life is under fierce attack.”
(LifeSiteNews - emphasis mine) — After the disclosure of conflicting and contradictory news relating to the recent events that have involved the cloistered community of the Benedictine Monastery of Pienza, I consider it my duty as a pastor to intervene to re-establish the truth of the facts, as they are verifiable to those who are not prejudiced and care both about the fate of these religious women, as well as highlighting the attitude of open hostility towards them on the part of ecclesiastical Authority.
This first contribution of mine comes from my direct and personal knowledge of the abbess and the nuns, on whose behalf I intend to speak. In this first part I will analyze the sequence of events. A second essay will consider the content of the Holy See’s measures, framing them in the broader context of Bergoglio’s demolishing action. A third essay will propose some initiatives to be undertaken.
Origins
First of all, it is necessary to start from the birth of the Monastery. Twelve of the thirteen religious who compose it come from the Benedictine community Santa Maria delle Rose of Sant’Angelo in Pontano, belonging to the Piceno Federation.
This monastery in the Italian region of Marche experienced a moment of rebirth when it began to welcome female vocations from the so-called “Neocatechumenal Way” [the Cammino] of Kiko Argüello. It was in fact from the Cammino that our young women entered religion, only to be sent in 2013 by the same leaders of the Neocatechumenal Way to establish a new Benedictine foundation in Holland, in the diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam, with the agreement of Bishop Josef Marianus Punt. The new monastery was approved by the Holy See the following year.
As has already happened in Santa Maria delle Rose and in practically all the communities under Kiko’s control, so too in Holland the autonomy of government of the Monastery was put to the test by the serious and undue interference of the leaders of the Cammino. This parallel Neocatechumenal hierarchy established by Argüello and his “catechists” led the sisters to the decision – taken collegially in chapter – to distance themselves from the Cammino.
After four years, Bishop Punt was forced to remove the Nuns under pressure from Kiko, who threatened to withdraw his Neocatechumenal priests from the diocese, because these priests were actually the only ones on whom the bishop could rely and they constitute a considerable part of his diocesan presbytery. This demonstrates the capacity for interference in the life and governance of the Church on the part of a lay association that has planned its infiltration into the ecclesial body in such a way as to make itself indispensable, so that once it has been accepted in the dioceses it would be able to impose its pastoral line.
At this point the Sisters wanted to return to Italy, to the Monastery of Pontano, but the earthquake of 2016 seriously damaged it and so it was impossible to return.
Obviously, this decision of the nuns, constituting yet another proof of the manipulative action of the leaders of the movement, has created a vacuum around our Benedictines, abandoned to themselves and deprived of any sustenance and support from the leaders of the Cammino.
The nuns seek hospitality in Italy, but the diocesan bishops and monasteries whom they have asked have given them a diffident refusal once they learn of the origin of the community from the ranks of the Neocatechumenal movement. Because of the problems caused in the dioceses and parishes by the Cammino, the Neocatechumenals no longer enjoy the enthusiastic welcome they received in the past, and this mistrust also affects the nuns, who are rejected precisely because of their origin.
Arrival in Italy
This then is the situation of the nuns, who arrive in Italy with the mark of infamy of having escaped the manipulations and heretical indoctrination of the powerful Spanish guru.
Their modernist approach, however, allowed the sisters to find hospitality in Pienza, where, in August 2017, Bishop Stefano Manetti welcomed them, in consideration of the fact that for years the diocese had witnessed the inexorable extinction of contemplative religious life.
Very happy to be able to have a female Benedictine monastery, Manetti temporarily gave them space to live in the summer seminary that was no longer in operation, took care of paying their utilities, and promised the sisters that he would find a suitable structure to become their definitive home, which was necessary for them to be able to canonically erect a monastery sui juris, that is, directly dependent on the Holy See.
Although Manetti did not keep his promise to find a suitable home for the sisters, in February 2019 he still managed to obtain permission from the Holy See for the erection of the Monastery sui juris. This appeared to be a real forcing of Canon Law, which provides as a condition for the erection of a Monastery sui juris that the community must own the building in which it is located. Manetti promised the sisters that he would personally guarantee their stability.
All this took place with the approval of the chapter of the nuns’ Monastery of origin. The process ended in 2019 with the election of the Abbess, Sister Maria Diletta of the Holy Spirit, who received the abbatial blessing from Manetti.
After a few months, Manetti offered them a nine-year loan contract, revocable without any reason, on the condition that the sisters provide for their ordinary and extraordinary expenses, as well as bearing the costs of the renovation and upgrading of the building. The religious were therefore faced with an inadmissible proposal, both because they lacked economic means and also because they were not actually protected for the future.
It is evident that the contradictory and wavering behavior of Manetti was used to force the nuns to leave, without officially expelling them. Why the curia was so interested in reclaiming the summer seminary would soon become clear.
At this point it is appropriate to recall that a Benedictine monastery sui juris, depending exclusively on the Holy See, is not required to join a “Federation,” that is, a group of monasteries that share a specific spiritual and governmental approach.
The Apostolic Constitution Vultum Dei Quærere, promulgated by Bergoglio on June 29, 2016, intervened to modify the practice established by Venerable Pius XII with the Apostolic Constitution Sponsa Christi Ecclesia of 1950.
This was the basis for the Cor Orans Instruction of May 15, 2018, which constituted the application of the new provisions on the suppression and federation of Monasteries. Needless to say, these two documents have as their purpose the demolition of the contemplative life and the progressive re-education of religious sisters, precisely by means of the federations.
Using the inexorable decimation of vocations as an excuse, Cor Orans makes it possible to unite the religious of several monasteries, ensuring that the assets of these monasteries – often consisting of prestigious historic buildings located in magnificent places – are confiscated by the Holy See.
The nuns thus find themselves torn from their spiritual family and sent to new communities, with the obligation of taking “refresher courses,” that is, indoctrination and “reprogramming,” outside the cloister. The more traditional communities are obviously the ones that are the most persecuted.
This clarification is necessary in order to understand how, once they arrived in Italy and were established in a Monastery with their own abbess, the nuns of Pienza showed extreme “flexibility” by making themselves available – although not having the obligation, since they were established in a Monastery sui iuris – to make contact with the existing federations so as to evaluate which of them was most suited to their charism.
The advent of the pandemic interrupted this process, especially after the lockdowns. But the work of devastation of Cor Orans continues inexorably, as evidenced by the undue pressure of the Holy See on the Monastery of Pienza, which, as has been mentioned, is not in the least obliged to join a federation since it is sui juris.
The problem, in fact, was created when Bishop Manetti chose this canonical form, but without guaranteeing its ownership of its own property, which is a condition for a Monastery sui juris. The transfer of Manetti and the appointment of Cardinal Lojudice – a friend of the vicar general and former rector of the seminary – must have led the bishop to try to settle a situation of irregularity before the arrival of his successor. In the decree of erection, Manetti declared:
Quote:In accordance with the canonical legislation in force, I erect in the diocese of Montepulciano-Chiusi-Pienza the Monastery of Benedictine Nuns […] in Pienza with all the privileges and spiritual graces that the other monasteries of the aforementioned Order legitimately enjoy, having provided for all the requests of the universal laws of the Church, especially with regard to the cloister, the sustenance of the nuns and their spiritual assistance. [Emphasis added]
But we know that this was not the case: the property of the Monastery was still owned by the diocese, and the sustenance of the Nuns by the diocese was limited to the payment of utilities. For this reason, the bishop cannot formalize their removal and limits himself to verbally exerting pressure on the sisters to leave.
The Discovery of the Ancient Rite
In 2020, thanks to a priest friend of the Monastery and to some providential meetings with figures linked to the world of tradition, the sisters “discovered” the Tridentine Liturgy, and Manetti applied the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum in their favor, believing that the occasional celebration of the Mass in the ancient rite could help the community to definitively free itself from its Neocatechumenal formation.
The following year he contacted the Benedictine monks of Norcia to help the nuns on this journey. When Traditionis Custodes was promulgated, the bishop instructed some priests of Rome to ensure the Sunday celebration of Mass in the Tridentine rite, provided that it did not become their only liturgical form.
In the meantime, the sisters continued to look throughout Italy for a Monastery to which they could transfer, without success. Historical monasteries that are presently uninhabited are too expensive to live in, or need large amounts of restoration that a small group of nuns would not even remotely be capable of addressing.
On the other hand, the Benedictine communities with few nuns consider it problematic to welcome thirteen sisters, who would represent a sort of revolution for their quiet and regular life. The nuns then asked the bishop to leave them where they are, offering to take care of the payment of the utilities, until then only partially paid by the diocese since it was receiving a substantial reimbursement from the nuns.
The Arrival of the New Bishop
In April 2022 the news came of the transfer of Bishop Manetti to the episcopal chair of Fiesole. This decision of the Holy See led the bishop – perhaps in order to remedy a situation of grave canonical irregularity before the arrival of his successor – to verbally revoke the permission granted to the nuns to be able to avail themselves of the Tridentine Mass. From this moment on, Manetti did not even provide for their spiritual assistance, depriving them of Holy Mass – including Mass in the “ordinary form” – even on Sundays and Holy Days.
And that’s not all: in front of the sisters he declared that he never intended to expel them, but warned them that Don Antonio Canestri – who was still rector of the seminary even though it had been abandoned and converted into a Monastery, and who is also an old friend of the new bishop, Cardinal Lojudice – had every intention of getting them out of the way. Canestri then presented himself at the Monastery, with arrogance and intimidating tones, even to the point of violating the cloister by entering the cells of the Nuns and claiming ownership of the property. Canestri’s intention to make a profit is obvious.
Here is therefore explained, with all the evidence, that the disciplinary actions against the nuns were merely a pretext aimed purely at a financial operation, along the lines of the Monastery of Ravello on the Amalfi Coast. On the other hand, a structure located on a hill overlooking the enchanting Val d’Orcia represents a succulent profit opportunity for the coffers of the Diocese and the Holy See.
Let me be clear: the economic and real estate question is the element that pushes many ecclesiastics to execute Cor Orans for the sole purpose of making money or ingratiating themselves with the Bergoglian court. But the true and deepest goal, the one that animates the entire action of this “pontificate,” is of an ideological bent: to normalize religious life to the new pauperist, migrationist, environmentalist, ecumenical, and synodal paradigm imposed by the junta of the Argentinian.
It is behaving no differently towards the faithful and traditional communities, which have seen the rights that the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum of Benedict XVI granted them in 2007 canceled or drastically reduced with Traditionis Custodes. In essence, it is as if a government incentivized companies to invest in certain sectors, and then as soon as they started to do so it forced them into bankruptcy by canceling or cutting incentives.
Needless to say, such an operation, as well as being cowardly and morally reprehensible, is not the result of inexperience or inability, but of a targeted desire to create as much damage as possible. If we then combine Cor Orans and Traditionis Custodes, the fate is inexorably sealed.
The aversion of Cardinal Lojudice towards the inconvenient sisters was not long in manifesting itself. On the occasion of his taking possession of the Chair of Pienza, the new bishop refused to allow them to receive Communion kneeling, humiliating them before the whole city by making them stand up and receive Communion in the hand, and in the sacristy he rebuked them, telling them that in their Monastery they could do as they wished, but that in public they had to conform to common practice (moreover in violation of liturgical norms, which allow the faithful to kneel and receive the Sacred Host on the tongue).
The Events Preceding the Apostolic Visitation
In September 2022 Lojudice informed the nuns that he wanted to come and visit them, coincidentally precisely in conjunction with their absence from the Monastery. When his secretary was informed that the sisters would not be present since they were going away for a spiritual retreat, he replied that their presence would be necessary because the cardinal’s visit was mainly aimed at making a real estate valuation estimate of the building.
I believe the order of priorities that animates the “pastoral” action of the Bergoglian bishops is evident: first business, then propaganda and photos posing with Roma and immigrants (which alone will have been enough to tickle Bergoglio), and then only if there is time remaining is attention given to the only contemplative community of the diocese.
The Dicastery for Religious acts no differently, engaged as it is in lucrative speculative operations with the sale of real estate, which it does not hesitate to make available by mowing down the few communities that survived the post-conciliar crisis of vocations.
The nuns of Pienza manage to postpone the visit of Lojudice to November 8. But on October 11, without any warning Mother Roberta (who would later turn out to be the visitor) showed up without warning at the door of the Monastery along with the Abbot of Pontida and a third person.
They found no one there, since the nuns were all on retreat in another region, and so this raid also failed. But on November 1 the Abbot of Pontida renewed the offensive, announcing an apostolic visit to the abbess and confirming that the sisters would be present on the following November 3.
The abbess then called Lojudice to find out if he was aware of the apostolic visitation. The cardinal denied knowing anything, but then contradicted himself by admitting that on October 11 he had accompanied the visitators who had presented themselves at the Monastery without announcing themselves. On that occasion the bishop pointed out that he had learned that the nuns had Mass celebrated in the ancient rite and that they had not yet entered any federation.
There are two things to keep in mind. First: the “traditional” conversion of the nuns. Second: their failure to join a Benedictine federation. As already mentioned above, the federations, after Bergoglio’s Cor Orans instruction, are being used as institutions of re-education and indoctrination to the new course of action. The fact that the Monastery of Pienza is sui juris, and therefore not required to federate, unleashed the fury of the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life, at the head of which is Cardinal Braz de Aviz, the one who, to be clear, on the occasion of a meeting with cloistered nuns to present to them the wonders of Cor Orans told them: “Treat your life as adults, not as adulterers!”
The Brazilian cardinal is assisted by the secretary Monsignor José Rodriguez Carballo, who is the main person responsible for the financial collapse of the Order of Friars Minor Franciscans – in whose events the “mysterious” death of two characters appears – of which Carballo had been minister general before being promoted by Bergoglio as secretary of the entire constellation of Orders and Religious Congregations of the Catholic Church.
On the other hand, what better task for a person who has proven corrupt and unable to manage the administration of his order? And what had the Order of Friars Minor invested in, if not in drugs and weapons? Let’s not forget that Carballo is involved both in this scandal and in the persecution, among others, of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, not only because of their conservative position but also for the sake of their conspicuous real estate, which the Holy See has not been able to appropriate only because it was registered to a civil association.
Just in the past few days it has been learned that Bergoglio has decided to expropriate – literally – the assets of ecclesiastical bodies, declaring them “the property of the Holy See as a whole and therefore belonging to its unitary, non-divisible and sovereign patrimony.”
As we can see, the fate of the nuns has slightly anticipated the fate of all the communities. Which means, in simple terms, that from now on – since the Pope is now the legal owner of all the goods of the Church – he can dispose of them independently, not only in order to sell them and make money, but even more importantly so as to have a juridical lever with which to blackmail convents, monasteries, dioceses, seminaries, and other institutes, which previously remained autonomous and free to make their own choices without fear of suffering extortion.
The practice of the Church has always protected the property of the goods of ecclesiastical entities, precisely to guarantee with it that necessary independence of means which is the premise of a free and conscious choice of fidelity to the Apostolic See. Bergoglio’s recent motu proprio – which seems to have been written by Klaus Schwab – reverses this situation, blackmailing religious orders and dioceses, with those modalities of transfer of sovereignty that in temporal issues characterize the coup d’état of the European Union, the WHO, and the World Economic Forum against governments.
I do not know if my Brothers in the episcopate and the superiors of the religious congregations realize what this decision of Bergoglio represents for them and for their independence, since they are now de facto deprived of all authority and reduced to mere officials at the mercy of the diktats of the Vatican.
The Apostolic Visitation
On November 2, 2022, one day before the date of the scheduled meeting, the Abbess of Pienza discovered that the Abbot of Pontida would be arriving shortly – that is, by surprise and with clear intimidating intentions. Any ecclesiastic knows that an apostolic visitation is a delicate event to be managed with great charity and by trying to make it the least traumatic as possible, since it is still an inspection of superiors and is implicitly motivated by serious reasons.
For this reason, it is to be judged, to say the least, imprudent to increase the pressure, with a community of young, cloistered nuns who have already been tried by the vicissitudes they have been exposed to so far, even to the point of presenting himself one day before, as if to take the nuns “by surprise.”
The two visitors, according to well-tested methods, acted with unscrupulousness, making use of duplicity and lies. The interrogations of the sisters were real torture sessions: they tried with every possible method to wear down the sisters psychologically, foment divisions, and take advantage of them to destroy the fabric of the community as well as the psychophysical balance and serenity of the nuns.
Next the Abbot of Pontida, Dom Giordano Rota, arrived at the Monastery. He is also – what a strange coincidence – consultor of the Vatican Dicastery for Religious, and therefore employed by Braz de Aviz and Carballo, who are notoriously corrupt and ultraprogressive. So then, we have: the visitor chosen by Rome, who is a progressive; Mother Roberta, who is a progressive; and the bishop, Cardinal Lojudice, who is a progressive.
All three, ça va sans dire are strictly pro-Bergoglian and aligned with the new course of action. The same goes for the sisters who would accompany them in the inquisitorial action against the poor nuns.
The visitators questioned all the religious, keeping them under pressure for up to an hour and a half. The questions speak for themselves:
“What would you do if you were abbess? What would you change about the community and the abbess? How do you see the future of the community? Why do you have the altar facing the wall? What is behind the recitation of the Pater Noster in Latin? What are those things on the altar [referring to the relics]? Do you know how much money you have? Didn’t you ask yourself why no federation or monastery wanted you? How did you choose who would go to Holland? Don’t you see that the building is not suitable for having the enclosure?”
Intimidating questions, in which we understand not only the preventive measures of the visitors, but also their aversion to the traditional charism as well as their ultimate goal: to have a pretext to close the Monastery and regain possession of the property; a goal that, as we have seen, had long been in the sights of the Vicar General and of Lojudice.
The apostolic visit – which had nothing “apostolic” about it whatsoever – ended on November 5, among other things catching the Visitators red-handed while secretly taking photos of the altar of the chapel – which faces the tabernacle and the cross – and of the products of the nuns offered in the entrance parlor as is done in many religious houses.
Obviously, to keep pressure on the poor religious, the visitators refused to specify either why they were sent by the Dicastery – since there was no serious fact that justified their presence – or to divulge any details of their final evaluation. These are both things that the visitators should have said, if only in the name of the much-vaunted Bergoglian parrhesia.
New intimidation and Incursions
Once this inspection was concluded, the cardinal’s visit scheduled for November 8 was postponed. On November 15, he presented himself with the vicar general, Don Antonio Canestri. As soon as he entered, he inquired if the nuns themselves prepared the jams offered for sale, saying that the mayor of Pienza had received rumors that they bought those jams at the supermarket and then resold them with the label of the Monastery.
To the indignant response of the religious, offended by this gratuitous and unjustified insinuation, the cardinal realized that he was discovered and accused them of being uncooperative and hostile. At this point the nuns asked him if he needed the building, and they were told: “Not for me personally, no.”
It should be emphasized that this insistence on asking questions about the products of the nuns has nothing to do with the apostolic visitation, and that it appears as a specious argument in the absence of valid canonical reasons.
Moreover, resorting to material issues involving the mayor exacerbated the situation by extending it to the civil sphere that until then had no right to intervene. In any case, the religious have not committed any irregularity by offering for sale jams, rosaries, candles, and other products made by them, in order to receive the liberality of their few benefactors and friends, which is necessary for their subsistence.
At noon on February 13, 2023, Don Raffaele Mennitti, the vicar for consecrated life of the Diocese of Montepulciano-Chiusi-Pienza and Don Paolo, Lojudice’s personal secretary, came to the Monastery and delivered a letter in a sealed envelope for each religious, stating that they did not know what the contents of the letter were. In my subsequent intervention I will examine the content of these letters sent by the Holy See to the Monastery.
That same afternoon, at 4 p.m., the two priests returned together with the president of the Piceno federation, Mother Vacca, and the vicar of the federation, Mother Di Marzio, who claimed that they needed to enter so that Vacca could speak with every nun.
At this point the Abbess, Mother Diletta, and all the sisters went out and declared that they did not consent to their intimidating and unannounced break-in. Mother Diletta was then ordered by Mennitti to “obey the Church.” She replied that they should be ashamed to abuse their power in this way and that the nuns were not required to obey iniquitous orders.
Not satisfied with the improvisation, the messengers of the curia and the Dicastery constrained some relatives of the sisters, trying to frighten them and induce them to convince the nuns to submit. Mennitti even took Mother Diletta by the arm, pulling her so that she would listen to him, claiming that their fears were unfounded.
The next day Mother Diletta found that she could not obtain money from the ATM, and she discovered from the bank that her delegation to operate the account of the Monastery has been revoked and replaced with a new one in the name of Mother Vacca.
The account with the miserable resources of the nuns – a mere six thousand euros ($6323) – was therefore in fact seized by authority, depriving the sisters of their very means of subsistence. And thank goodness that the solicitudes of the visitators were of a spiritual nature…
Probably informed of the facts, Manetti called Mother Diletta to put pressure on her, trying to understand if the visit the next day of Lojudice had any hope of success.
On February 16, Mother Vacca sent Mother Diletta a letter on WhatsApp in which she warned her to let her take possession of the Monastery, as ordered in the Dicastery’s communication, which in the meantime has been challenged by the sisters and therefore is considered suspended in its effects. Mother Vacca threatened serious canonical and civil consequences in case of disobedience.
The Recourse to the ‘Secular Arm’
On the morning of February 17, Manetti came to the monastery, along with Don Paolo, the personal secretary of Lojudice, Mother Vacca, the president of the Picena federation, Mother Di Marzio, the vicaress of the federation, Paolo Arcangioli, the marshal of the Pienza Carabinieri, and two other armed officers
The quick-thinking sisters took video footage of this surreal incursion, which even involved the help of the “secular arm.” The sisters’ canon lawyer has rightly noted, among other things, that such a recourse to the Carabinieri constitutes a violation of the norms of the concordat and is unheard of that – for a question that the curia insists on defining as the result of a misunderstanding – there was no hesitation to terrorize the sisters by bringing in the presence of the police.
On February 19, the diocese published its infamous press release, which was picked up and reprinted by Toscana Oggi and La Nazione. This statement, which is full of inaccuracies and omissions, ends with a directive that people should not give any financial support the Monastery. Aqua et igni interdictæ, that is, deprived of any support and help from other citizens as a consequence of the revocation of their citizenship, just as was done in ancient Rome. This is Bergoglio’s “church of mercy.”
And that’s not all: a few days later, the Carabinieri of Pienza called the relatives of the sisters to tell them that they would be summoned in order to gather statements about the Monastery, without making any formal notification. I don’t want to imagine who gave the order, or how the Carabinieri could have lent themselves to this grotesque inquisitory soap opera, even to the point of asking people not to tell anyone that they had called, precisely so as to further frighten the besieged nuns.
From the website of the ANSA news agency one further learns that a formal warning has been given to the Nuns by the Diocese of Montepulciano-Chiusi-Pienza, signed by attorney Alessandro Pasquazi. One wonders under what title this communication was sent to the news agency, since no notification of this warning has to date been presented to the sisters.
This is the latest act, at least for now, of a pièce that is halfway between a grotesque farce and a tragedy, whose actors are divided into victims and perpetrators.
The victims are the thirteen nuns. Victims because of their troubled past, in which they were able to grow spiritually and escape the pressures and obsessive interference of the establishment of the Neocatechumenal Way, thus arriving in Pienza; victims of the bureaucratic mess of Bishop Manetti, who established them as a Monastery sui juris even though they did not own their own property; victims of the desires of unscrupulous ecclesiastics, “guilty” of being a bothersome presence that impeded the economic ecploitation of the building that hosted them; victims of the ideological fury of the Bergoglians due to their drawing closer to the Tradition and their desire not to bow down to modernist indoctrination by denying fidelity to Our Lord and their own charism.
The facts that I have set forth can be verified; they are corroborated by incontestable proofs and confirmed by numerous testimonies. Their concatenation shows the premeditated nature of the attack on the sisters and allows us to guess what were the true purposes of those who attacked them, as well as what the specious excuses are with which they have attempted to draw attention away from the principal element of this entire affair: the absence of any true or justified reasons for proceeding against them.
Inventing new and unfounded accusations along the way will not be able to hide the fact that the apostolic visit is merely the umpteenth attempt – cloaked in an apparent respect for the canonical norms – to strike communities of contemplative life – and even more so if they are of a traditional bent.
In the second part of this essay we will see how these Vatican provisions are completely illegitimate and have no value under canon law.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
26 February 2023
Dominica I in Quadragesima
|
|
|
|
| Academics Call For WWII-Style Rationing Of Food And Fuel To Stop Climate Change |
|
Posted by: Stone - 02-28-2023, 07:35 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Academics Call For WWII-Style Rationing Of Food And Fuel To Stop Climate Change
ZH | FEB 28, 2023
As we have outlined outlined in detail many times in the past, there is little to no concrete evidence supporting the theory that man-made carbon emissions have any relevance whatsoever to weather and climate change. There is no evidence of a "climate crisis" and no evidence that human industry and agriculture makes a negative impact on the Earth's temperatures. There is no evidence that carbon emissions have a causation effect on global warming and no evidence to support "tipping point" theories that assert that a mere 1.5°C increase in temps will lead to environmental catastrophe.
Climate activists relying on a tiny time frame of around 100 years of our planet's weather history as evidence to support their claims while ignoring the millions of years of temperature changes that occurred without human input is alarming and anti-science. In fact, the Earth has been much warmer (and cooler) multiple times in its history that it is today suggests that people have very little influence on the climate in general.
Beyond the lack of scientific evidence in terms of carbon emissions and global warming, there is also the issue of political and social control rooted in climate laws. Right now in Europe the farming industry is facing bureaucratic Armageddon as governmental red tape and climate based taxation are set to make the growing of food impossible for a majority of farmers. UN and EU climate controls are being implemented now and will effectively destroy large portions of the EU economy, and the establishment wants to bring these same policies to the US.
Some people might argue that they are not farmers or captains of industry, so why should they care? The problem is that carbon controls will not be limited to businesses and agriculture; they will one day be present in your home.
A group of academic researchers now argues that in order to stop climate change (which has nothing to do with man-made carbon) every individual will have to accept restrictions on what they can buy, what they can eat and how much fuel and electricity they can use. In a paper titled 'Rationing And Climate Change Mitigation' the group asserts that a rapid reduction of global emissions is needed and that rationing similar to standards enforced during two world wars, and specifically those measures used during WWII, should be enforced again by governments. Only, this time rationing would not be in the name of supporting a war effort but in the name of fighting the phantom of climate catastrophe.
This is not the first time rationing for individuals has been suggested in relation to climate change, though. The World Economic Forum and the UN have long argued in favor of a micro-management approach to carbon controls, using the narrative of "individual carbon footprint tracking." Here, Alibaba president J. Michael Evans boasts at the WEF's Davos conference about "individual carbon footprint tracking" coming soon:
The creation of the climate crisis bogeyman is an obvious ploy for centralized authoritarianism in the name of "the greater good." It's a tiny minority of money elites and political elites fabricating the threat of an impending planet-wide disaster while paying groups of activist scientists billions of dollars to support the false claims. Then, these same elitists offer their own solution, which is to give them even more power to dictate every detail of the lives of average citizens while limiting our access to food, energy and other resources vital to survival (or rebellion).
This is about creating a world in which every individual is required to constantly justify their existence and prove they are worthy to the globalist machine. It is tantamount to emissions based slavery.
|
|
|
|
| The Oath against Modernism vs. the ‘Hermeneutic of Continuity’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 02-28-2023, 07:30 AM - Forum: The Architects of Vatican II
- No Replies
|
|
The Oath against Modernism vs. the ‘Hermeneutic of Continuity’
by John Vennari - 2012
The expression “hermeneutic of continuity” came into vogue with the ascension of Pope Benedict XVI.
On December 22, 2005, in his speech to the Roman Curia, Pope Benedict XVI laid out what would be the program of his pontificate. Usually a Pope will do this in his first encyclical, but informed commentators at the time observed that Pope Benedict appeared to lay out the program for his pontificate in this December 22 address, and not his first encyclical.
In this speech, it is clear that the pivotal principle that would be the program for his pontificate is the Second Vatican Council. (1)
![[Image: P001_Ratz-3.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_m-q/P001_Ratz-3.jpg)
Benedict's ecumenism with schismatics, heretics, Jews and Muslims contradicts the Magisterium prior to the Council
However, says the Pope, there has been a problem with the Council. Too many in the Church, he laments, approach the Council through a “hermeneutic of rupture” and a “hermeneutic of discontinuity” with the past. Thus, Pope Benedict says, many Catholics have approached the Council with an interpretation of rupture with the past.
The proper way to approach the Council, he insists, is through a “hermeneutic of continuity.” His basic claim — and this has always been his claim as Cardinal Ratzinger — is that Vatican II did not constitute a rupture with Tradition, but a legitimate development of it. We can find this legitimate development if we approach the Council through a hermeneutic — an interpretation — of continuity.
This gives the impression to many that Pope Benedict XVI plans a restoration of Tradition in the Church.
But this is not the case. Yes, Pope Benedict issued the Motu Proprio freeing the Tridentine Mass. This was a matter of justice for which he deserves credit, and it is something we could have guessed he would do, even based on his statements as Cardinal Ratzinger.
But the hermeneutic of continuity does not signal a return to Tradition. Rather, it is another attempt, first and foremost, I believe, to save Vatican II.
Vatican II is still his pivotal principle. The so-called “hermeneutic of continuity” approach will give us nothing more than a new synthesis between Tradition and Vatican II — a synthesis between Tradition and Modernism — which is not a legitimate synthesis.
Novel approach
Initially I want to focus on just one aspect that tells us from the beginning that the “hermeneutic of continuity” approach does not signal a true restoration of Tradition. This is the term itself. Pope Benedict does not employ the Traditional terminology for the preservation of Tradition, but has effectively invented a new expression: “hermeneutic of continuity”.
This is because his approach to Tradition is at odds with what the Church taught for 2000 years.
For example, Benedict XVI never says that the answer to the crisis in the Church is to return the admonition of Pope Agatho who said, “Nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”(2)
Pope Benedict never says that the answer to today’s ecclesiastical chaos is to return to the formula contained in the Oath against Modernism, that the Catholic is bound to “sincerely hold that the doctrine of Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same explanation (eodem sensu eademque sententia). Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another, different from the one which the Church held previously.”(3)
He cannot use terminology like this because it conflicts with the new teachings of Vatican II, with the new teachings concerning religious liberty and ecumenism. These new teachings are clearly “different from the one which the Church held previously.”(4)
When Pope St. Pius X was battling to maintain Catholic truth and Tradition, he did not come up with his own original phrase in the Oath Against Modernism. The terminology he employed is the ancient terminology of the Church, found in the writings of the Fathers, and enshrined in infallible dogmatic definitions that a Catholic must believe for salvation.
As far back as the 4th Century, St. Vincent of Lerins explained what constitutes the proper development of Catholic doctrine:
Quote:“But perhaps some will say: Is there to be no progress of religion in the Church? There is, certainly, and very great ... But it must be a progress and not a change. Let, then, the intelligence, science, and wisdom of each and all of individuals and of the whole Church, in all ages and in all times, increase and flourish in abundance; but simply in its own proper kind, that is to say, in one and the same doctrine, one in the same sense, and one in the same judgment.”(5)
St. Vincent of Lerin’s teaching on Tradition was dogmatically and infallibly enshrined in Vatican I. This demonstrates that the exact same teaching on Tradition was maintained in the Church for more than 1400 years. Vatican I teaches in the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius:
Quote:“Hence that meaning (sensus) of the sacred doctrine must always be retained which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and we must never abandon that meaning under the appearance or in the name of a deeper understanding.”
Vatican I’s Dei Filius goes on to say that any authentic development in the understanding of doctrine “must proceed in its own class, in the same dogma, with the same meaning and the same explanation.” This is the same basic wording of St. Vincent of Lerins, unchanged for over 1400 years.
And this, as noted, was the wording Pope St. Pius X employed in his Oath against Modernism, wherein the man taking the Oath swears before God to “sincerely hold that the doctrine of Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same explanation (eodem sensu eademque sententia).”(6)
Pope Benedict XVI never uses terminology like this. Even as Cardinal Ratzinger he never employed such terminology. The sad fact remains that Pope Benedict XVI and most of our modern Church leaders cannot even use traditional terminology when they claim they are trying to maintain Tradition, but come up with new phrases: “Reciprocal integration”(7) or “hermeneutic of continuity.”
The employment of this new phrase, along with his obvious commitment to the novel aspects of Vatican II such as ecumenism (8) and religious liberty, (9) tells us that as much as we would want it to be true, Pope Benedict XVI is not a Pope of Tradition. He will continue with the novel policies of Vatican II. It may not be in the same wildcat manner as his immediate predecessor. It may be a bit more subdued and refined, and perhaps, a bit more Traditional in appearance. Pope Benedict will even attempt more discipline in certain areas, specifically in liturgical matters, than ever did John Paul II.
But in the end — as far as doctrine — it is still Vatican II’s new orientation that will dominate. What we are commanded in Vatican I and the Oath against Modernism to believe the Catholic Faith “in the same meaning and in the same explanation” as the Church always taught, will be neither mentioned nor reinforced.
Thus, no matter how many times we hear the expression “hermeneutic of continuity,” no matter how many times we are told that Vatican II did not constitute a rupture: the fact remains that Vatican II’s new approach to what is called ecumenism and religious liberty — and by extension, Pope Benedict XVI’s approach to what is called ecumenism and religious liberty (10) — is at odds with the traditional Magisterium of the centuries. Here we do not find continuity, but rupture.
Thus, and I say this with respect, I will not be enthused about any report that Pope Benedict XVI wishes a true return to Tradition, until we hear him employ the terminology for Tradition used for 1500 years; until we hear him call for a return to Catholic Faith “in the same meaning and in the same explanation” of what the Church always taught.
1. Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Roman Curia offering them his Christmas Greetings, Thursday, December 22, 2005. Available on Vatican Webpage.
2. Apud Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, n.7.
3. Oath against Modernism, 1910. (emphasis added)
4. For example, the French Bishops made a formal statement in which they abandoned even the intention of fighting for the Social Kingship of Christ. The Bishops of France plainly said in the Dagens Report in 1997: “Without hesitation, we accept, as Catholics, to take place in the present cultural and institutional context, which is especially characterized by the emergence of individualism and by the principle of secularity. We reject any nostalgia for times gone by when the principle of authority seemed to be an unquestionable fact. We do not dream of an impossible return to what used to be called Christendom.” - Apud Fr. Alain Lorins, DICI, 2008: September 27/October 8 edition.
5. Apud Fr. Edward F. Hanahoe, S.A., “Ecclesiology and Ecumenism,” The American Ecclesiastical Review, November 1962, Part II, p. 328. (emphasis added)
6. Dei Filius, Vatican I.
7. The new concepts of “Reciprocal Integration” and “Enrichment of Faith” were key principles of Pope John Paul II. See Fr. Johannes Dörmann, Pope John Paul II’s Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of Religions in Assisi, (Kansas City, Angelus Press, 2003), Part II, Volume 3, pp. 1-38.
8. One of the many examples of Pope Benedict’s new ecumenical approach. On August 19, 2005, Pope Benedict XVI, he conducted an ecumenical meeting in Cologne, Germany. Here he said regarding ecumenism: “... this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not! It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity. ... To this end, dialogue has its own contribution to make.” This statement bears no continuity with what the Popes have taught for 2000 years, that the non-Catholic must convert to Christ’s one true Church for unity and salvation. Apud. Apostolic Journey to Cologne, On the Occasion of the XX World Youth Day. Ecumenical Meeting, Address of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, Cologne — Archbishop’s House: Friday, 19 August 2005. On Vatican webpage here (emphasis added)
9. Fr. Yves Congar openly admitted Vatican II’s new doctrine of Religious Liberty is a rupture with the past. Congar said, “What is new in this teaching in relation to the doctrine of Leo XIII and even of Pius XII … is the determination of the basis peculiar to this liberty, which is sought not in the objective truth of moral or religious good, but in the ontological quality of the human person.” Apud Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, I Accuse the Council (Angelus Press), p. 21.
10. For more examples of Pope Benedict’s novel ecumenical approach, see: “Assisi 2012: Religious Indifferentism on Parade” and “Common Mission and ‘Significant Silence’” (on Pope Benedict’s approach to modern Judaism). (all at www.cfnews.org )
|
|
|
|
| Expanded Pre-1955 Hebdomada Sancta (Holy Week) Book Available |
|
Posted by: Stone - 02-27-2023, 07:45 PM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
New Expanded Edition of Pre-55 Holy Week Congregational Book
![[Image: Screenshot%202023-02-25%20173541.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5Q1iS3GLa1JMpF3Hu7ygpE4NKKgQaV91zApNCOcn6pD3dzIYdpxVqTbGJtaAuN3niM75eSdErelOm3269nG0WlMovXuwoLXBCfGfKVeHYy6OJOV33pwtcbUzBk476VV1tqh9VRqz_EN7fVOqWcbO9cgVNlljcPThHoPabuHPHA4PkY988VQ/s320/Screenshot%202023-02-25%20173541.jpg)
NLM | February 27, 2023
I’m pleased to announce the second revised and expanded edition of Roman-Seraphic Books’ Pre-1955 Hebdomada Sancta (Holy Week) congregational book, containing all the ceremonies and texts, in parallel Latin & English, with spiritual and historical commentary. The book also contains the pre-55 Vigil of Pentecost as well.
The Second Edition now including the full text of the offices of Tenebrae for the Sacred Triduum, alongside other appendices for Stations of the Cross, the Seven Sorrows, and more.
Nearly 400 pages and with full-color illustrations, the book is quite comprehensive yet printed in a font that is easy to read — truly a book that can be used by congregations year after year.
The Second Edition is available from Roman Seraphic Books (www.romanseraphicbooks.com) at a reduced price from last year, down to $24.97 (from $28.97). International shipping options and bulk orders available.
Roman-Seraphic Books aspires, over time, to preserve and spread the traditional (pre-55) liturgical books, as well as the books pertinent to the Franciscan spiritual patrimony.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: Global%20Temp%20History1_3.png?itok=lUQrhutZ]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/Global%20Temp%20History1_3.png?itok=lUQrhutZ)
![[Image: P001_Ratz-4.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/HTimages_m-q/P001_Ratz-4.jpg)
![[Image: Table%20of%20Contents.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihVBYbKMrL8gbK1nBux6qoPM7E3XtWBY-ngf75xY_10vDhz67tcnMFSrtKN6ODV_1CSSJ1SvGSwpcmBXZys-N1RKcuWmsP7-506ZlY23G8XA1pJO3FcBcVk-nF2_TKuvA_6bd9qsXvn7g82mchB8Px_21IuE2xoCTJESkpRXawE_rL2I69xw/w400-h309/Table%20of%20Contents.jpg)
![[Image: First%20two%20pages.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVklsgcdcLWsYigIgqBn9PEXtDchM1dVUvjXvxQxbAQKnD-5WI9Ys3IQ8xok31jDZ8oOZmKQa5guJsfMNT8h2eNpplMQyRk0exSBpfJni9nQZ3AoOHW6vR3Tjx9CHmzrR5TItgmc0pl7ZRnWuzkHarABzPe9CI7y7zxkx-12fZKg_3jnY5xw/w400-h309/First%20two%20pages.jpg)
![[Image: Preview%203.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGlsiHKyiMwpkHQuJYr9oqT9AB4rXK8orY6xRpWByN1DRg4j9a5VASAy7xZydX97Nj8QBkYos0_mgjGxbsJR4oQiCuKzAOc-JCkbRsM5ns_uqrk5LCKisdOY0tapDj4sW14w76UpZpViXgPnJjkXPSpFYCphJoXv2S62gDx5Fqa6rbNA4E2A/w400-h309/Preview%203.jpg)
![[Image: Preview%204%20Devotions.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0mAMhzWcy-D1oo_yNZ1HYx2aqqLoCUjyHzOXRa7dtBpoepqvJ_Gf7Yza9u4_O4R3CmTPEom9vsvFR-xcJofPJG742qI7pu1IuZqTJsZBFT_JukHO9WdcbagCSEP7XfcFi9r5JTRNEHWJMaCi1qD0HmCZSgOrBs0H9mr4VRdV3cvKrhHlLEA/w400-h309/Preview%204%20Devotions.jpg)
![[Image: Preview%205%20Devotions.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhok7SCU92qCMo7FWHrf-y20XRFPeugkDw1BpgOdOpzeS1I95O8YjzAZs9k4fXPKNRV-AeY_rTBAz7QZ0kFHYWQsO9rFAP5O9NmbKugd5f5tRkoYF_Ncgn2xpkeJAPOKpO-7w8HdKrS-ST3o1U5Vwp3xW4XfEpqOC56eNmOmVDMgD7WXQNfGg/w400-h309/Preview%205%20Devotions.jpg)
