Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 296
» Latest member: WilliamBLeby
» Forum threads: 6,878
» Forum posts: 12,821

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 172 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 170 Guest(s)
Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Fr. Hesse: Decline of Cha...
Forum: Add'nl Clergy
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:45 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 79
Keeping the Faith Without...
Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:43 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 79
Easter Sunday
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:52 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 20,119
St. Gregory the Great: Se...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:47 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 6,610
Dom Guéranger: The Histor...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:45 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 4,727
Season of Paschal Tide
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:44 AM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 12,437
Fr. Hewko's: Easter Sunda...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
04-18-2025, 09:33 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 136
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Holy...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
04-18-2025, 07:08 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 204
Archbishop Viganò: Homily...
Forum: Archbishop Viganò
Last Post: Stone
04-18-2025, 06:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 125
Good Friday
Forum: Lent
Last Post: Stone
04-18-2025, 06:14 AM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 27,407

 
  St. John Fisher: Prayer Written in the Tower
Posted by: Stone - 01-02-2025, 09:44 AM - Forum: The Saints - No Replies

Prayer Written in the Tower1
by John Fisher

Reynolds, E. E. Saint John Fisher.
London: Burns & Oates, 1955. 297-299.

[Image: fisher17thc.jpg]

Help me, most loving father, help me with thy mighty grace. Succour me with thy most gracious favour. Rescue me from these manifold perils that I am in, for unless thou wilt of thy infinite goodness relieve me, I am but as a lost creature.

Thy strict commandment is that I should love thee with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind, with all my power. And thus, I know, I do not, but am full far short and wide therefrom; which think I perceive by the other loves that I have had of thy creatures heretofore. For such as I sincerely loved, I loved them so that I seldom did forget them. They were ever in my remembrance and almost continually mine heart was occupied with them and my thought ran ever upon them as well absent as present. Specially when they were absent I much desired to have their presence and to be there where they were, or else my heart were never in any rightful quiety.

But alas, my dear father, I am not in this condition towards thee. For I keep thee not in my remembrance nor bear thee in my thought nor occupy my heart with thee so often as I should, but for every trifle that cometh to my mind I let thee slip and fall out thereof. And for every fantasy that stirreth in my heart I set thee aside, shortly forget thee. I suffer many a trifling thought occupy my soul at liberty, but with thee, my dear father, I have lightly done, and forthwith turn me to, the remembrance of thy creatures and so tarry with thee but a short while, the delight in thy creatures so pulleth and draweth me hither and thither, my wretched desires so blind me. This false world so deceiveth me that I forget thee, which art my most loving father and art so desirous to have my heart and love.

What are thy creatures but creatures made by thee? Thou made me and them of naught and thou far incomparably passeth all them. And what are my desires, when they are set on thy creatures and not in an order to thee, what are they but wretched and sinful affections? And finally what is this world but a miserable exile, full of perils and evils far unlike that glorious country where thou art resident and sheweth thy most excellent Majesty in wonderful glory? There thou art clearly seen to all thy blessed angels and saints of thy most highly triumphant court. They be there ever present before thy blessed face and behold thy Majesty continually face to face.

O my dear father, here should be mine heart, here should be my desire and remembrancy. I should long to have sight of thy most blessed face, I should earnestly desire to see thy country and kingdom, I should ever wish to be there present with thee and thy most glorious court. But this, alas, I do not. And therefore I sorrow at my grievous negligence, I weep for my abominable forgetfulness, I lament my vileness, yea, my very madness, that thus for trifles and vanities forget my most dear and loving father.

Alas, woe is me! What shall I do? Wither may I turn me? To whom shall I resort for help? Where shall I seek for any remedy against the worldly and earthly waywardness of my heart? Whither should I rather go than to my father, to my most loving father, to my most merciful father, to him that of his infinite love and mercy hath given me boldness to call him father? Whose son Jesu my saviour hath taught me thus to call him, and to think verily that he is my father, yea, and a more loving father than is any natural father unto his child.

These are his words speaking unto the natural fathers of this world when ye that are infect with evil can liberally give unto your children good gifts, how much rather your heavenly father shall give a good spirit to them that ask it of him. These works, most gracious father, are the words of thy most dearly beloved son, Jesu, wherein he teaches us that thou art our very father and maketh promise on thy behalf that thou shalt give thine holy spirit unto them that ask thy son or thee studiously.

Thou willest that we should believe him and faithfully trust his words. For thou testified of him that he was thine entirely beloved son and bade us hear him and give a full faith unto his words. Wherefore we may be certain and sure of three things. The first is that thou art our father, the second that thou art a more kind and loving father unto us than are the carnal fathers of this world unto their children. The third, that thou wilt give, to such as devoutly ask it of thee, thy most holy spirit. We may be well assured that for thine inestimable goodness, and for the honour of thy name and everlasting truth thou wilt not disappoint these promises, for as much as they were made by thy most entirely beloved son Christ Jesu whom thou sent into this world to make the truth certain and to confirm the same unto us by the blood which he shed for us on his cross.

O father, then, whither shall I turn in my necessity rather than to thee which have me call thee by this name, a name of much love and tenderness, of much delight and pleasure, a name which stirreth the heart with much hope and constancy and many other delectable affections. And if nothing were told me but only this name, it might suffice to make me steadfastly trust that thou, which hast commanded me to call thee by this name father, will help me and succour me at my need when I sue unto thee; but much rather because my saviour thy son Christ Jesu hath assured me that thou art a more kind and more loving father unto me than was mine own natural father.

This assurance made by the most entirely beloved son should specially move both thee and me. First it should move me to have an hope and a confidence that thou wilt deal with me according to the same promise. Second, it should also move thee to perform this promise effectually and so to show thyself a kind and loving father in this my petition. My petition, most dear father, is agreeable to that same promise made by thy most entirely beloved son my saviour Jesu. I ask none other thing but thy good and holy spirit to be given unto me according to that same promise which he promised.

I know, most gracious father, that thou art here present with me albeit I see thee not. But thou both seest me and hearest me and no secrecy of my heart is hid from thee. Thou hearest that I now ask thine holy spirit and thou knowest that I now pray therefore and that I am very desirous to have the same. Lo! Dear father, with all the enforcement of my heart I beseech thee to give thine holy spirit unto me. Wherefore unless thou wilt disappoint the promise of thy son Jesu thou canst not but give me this holy spirit; so by this means I shall be fully relieved of that misery whereof I complained unto thy goodness at the beginning.

Thy most holy spirit he shall make me to love thee with all my heart, and with all my soul, with all my mind, with all my power, for he is the author of all good love, he is the very furnace of charity and he is the fountain of all gracious affections and godly desires. He is the spiritual fire that kindles in the heart of them where he enters all gracious love; he fills their souls in whom he is received with the abundance of charity; he makes their minds sweetly to burn in all godly desires and gives unto them strength and power courageously to follow all ghostly affections and specially towards thee.

Wherefore, dear father, when thou hast strictly commanded me thus to love thee with all my heart and thus would I right gladly do (but without thy help and without thy holy spirit I cannot perform the same), I beseech thee to shed upon my heart thy most holy spirit by whose gracious presence I may be warmed, heated and kindled with the spiritual fire of charity and with the sweetly burning love of all godly affections, that I may fastly set my heart, soul and mind upon thee and assuredly trust that thou art my very loving father and according to the same trust I may love thee with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind and all my power. Amen.



[AJ Note: 1. Included in Letters and Papers Foreign and Domestic of the Reign of Henry VIII, vol. viii.]

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Circumcision of Our Lord 1/1/25 “You Are Bought at a Great Price!”
Posted by: Deus Vult - 01-01-2025, 06:28 PM - Forum: January 2025 - No Replies

Circumcision of Our Lord 1/1/25
 “You Are Bought at a Great Price!” (AZ)




Audio

Print this item

  Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Sunday w/in the Octave of Christmas - December 29, 2024
Posted by: Stone - 01-01-2025, 10:24 AM - Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons December 2024 - No Replies

2024 12 29 JESÚS LA VERDAD MISMA SIGNO DE CONTRADICCIÓN Dom en la Octava de Navidad


Print this item

  The Catholic Trumpet: The Passion of the Mystical Body
Posted by: Stone - 01-01-2025, 09:58 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - No Replies

The Passion of the Mystical Body

[Image: rs=w:1280]


The Catholic Trumpet [adapted] | December 31, 2024


The Mystical Body and the Passion of Christ

The Catholic Church, as the Mystical Body of Christ, is destined to relive the Passion of her Lord. Just as Christ endured His agony, betrayal, crucifixion, and death before rising in glory, so too must the Church undergo her own Passion. This suffering, foretold by Christ Himself, has unfolded through centuries of persecution, heresy, and modernist infiltration. Yet, the Church’s Resurrection is certain, as promised through the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

This article endeavors to explore the Church’s mystical Passion, paralleling it with Christ’s Passion, using typology and rigorous analysis. Through Scripture, the Church Fathers, and verifiable historical evidence, we seek to expose the betrayal of Vatican II, the errors of modernist popes, and the Synagogue of Satan–Rabbinical Judaism and its Freemasonic agents that orchestrated this Passion.

It is not merely a recounting of history, but a reflection on prophecy in motion—a call to remain faithful, humble, and hopeful amid the trials of our time.


I. The Church’s Agony: The Rise of Modernism and Betrayal Within

The Church’s agony began in the 19th century with the rise of modernism—what Pope St. Pius X called the “synthesis of all heresies.” This movement sought to corrupt the Church’s teachings, planned by the Synagogue of Satan–Rabbinical Judaism and carried out through its agent, Freemasonry.

Pope Leo XIII, in Humanum Genus (1884), explicitly warned:
Quote:“The goal of Freemasonry is to overthrow the entire religious and political order of the world which the Christian teaching has produced, and to replace it with a new state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.”

Pope St. Pius X, in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), condemned modernism as:
Quote:“The synthesis of all heresies… laying the axe to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fibers. Once this is destroyed, they destroy everything.”

These infiltrations were not merely ideological but strategic. The secret societies—Alta Vendita, Freemasonry, and Carbonari—acted as the arms of Rabbinical Judaism to undermine Catholicism from within. The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita explicitly reveals this plan:
Quote:“Our ultimate end is that of Voltaire and of the French Revolution—the destruction forever of Catholicism, and even of the Christian idea… That idea, like ashes, might revive under some new impulse.”

These betrayals mirror Judas’ role in Christ’s Passion, carried out by those closest to Him. The seeds of Vatican II were planted by these movements, initiating the Church’s mystical agony.


II. Vatican II: The Trial of the Mystical Body

Just as Christ stood before the Sanhedrin—the supreme Jewish council tasked with upholding the Law and preserving religious order—He was falsely accused and condemned by the Pharisees. The Sanhedrin, established to defend divine truth, instead became an instrument of betrayal. After condemning Christ, they handed Him over to Pilate, the secular authority, where He was mocked, scourged, and sentenced to death despite Pilate’s declaration of innocence.

In the same way, Vatican II mirrors this trial. The modern Sanhedrin—the Council Fathers—allowed Rabbinical Judaic and Masonic influences to infiltrate their deliberations. By choosing to align with the modern world rather than uphold Christ’s Kingship, they rejected the divine mission of the Church and delivered her into the hands of secularism.

Just as the crowd rejected Christ and demanded Barabbas, Vatican II echoed this tragic cry. By rejecting Christ’s Kingship for worldly power, Vatican II mirrored the crowd’s cry for Barabbas, symbolizing rebellion, false freedoms, and humanism. Barabbas, whose name ironically means “son of the father,” represents the Church’s preference for naturalism and humanism, rejecting the divine Kingship of Christ. As St. Augustine observed:
Quote:“In Barabbas, they chose sin; in Christ, they rejected righteousness.”

The Alta Vendita instructed:
Quote:“Infiltrate the young clergy… Let them become masters of parishes and educators of future priests, until they govern and transform the Church.”

This revolution came to fruition at Vatican II. Its key documents reflect the betrayal:

Dignitatis Humanae: Declared false religious liberty, undermining Christ as the sole King of Nations.

Nostra Aetate: Elevated Rabbinical Judaism and Islam, silencing calls for conversion to the true Faith.

Unitatis Redintegratio: Equated heretical sects with the Church, undermining her unique salvific mission.

This marked the trial of the Mystical Body, where Christ’s Bride was handed over to the secular world, just as He was handed over to Pilate.


III. The Crucifixion of the Mystical Body

Just as Christ was handed over to the Romans by the Pharisees, the Church was handed over to spiritual death by modernist Catholics. While Catholics, as the true Jews of the New Covenant, should have upheld the Faith, many—including some who later repented—signed Vatican II documents or remained silent in the face of its errors. Yet, this betrayal perpetuated the Pharisaic rejection of Christ.

The Alta Vendita instructed infiltrators to feign Catholicism, even blaspheming their own origins to gain trust:
Quote:“Even if your posture is false, remain under a mask. Let some among you become Catholic priests… allow them to curse their Madonna.”

The Novus Ordo Missae (1969), with its Jude and Protestant-inspired revisions, epitomizes the Church’s crucifixion, stripping the Mass of its sacrificial essence. Alongside this, the new rite of episcopal consecration, confirmations, and even baptisms are dubious and doubtful, and now in our age, most likely invalid. Yet, as with Christ’s Passion, Rabbinical Judaism bears responsibility for perpetuating this rejection, invoking the curse of their forefathers: “His blood be upon us and upon our children” (Matthew 27:25).


IV. The Burial: Suppression of Tradition and the Role of the Remnant

The Church entered her burial phase following Vatican II. The suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass, the [promotion of the] Novus Ordo Missae, and the rise of compromised clergy marked this spiritual dormancy. Faithful Catholics were silenced, mirroring the apostles’ despair after Christ’s burial.

Key Moments of Burial:

1. The Indult Mass (1984): A mockery of Tradition, placing severe restrictions on the Mass of the Ages.

2. The 2012 Doctrinal Declaration: Presented by Bishop Fellay, this declaration signaled a grave compromise with modernist Rome, accepting ambiguous formulations and 95% of Vatican II. Despite fierce resistance from faithful priests and laity, it remains unretracted, threatening the integrity of Archbishop Lefebvre’s uncompromising stance.


V. The Role of the Holy Prelate

Our Lady of Good Success foretold a holy prelate who would preserve the priesthood. +Archbishop Lefebvre emerges as the fulfillment of this prophecy. His actions formed the bridge between the Church’s burial and her Resurrection, inspiring a remnant of uncompromised clergy and laity.


VI. The Resurrection: The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart

The Resurrection of the Church will come through the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart. Signs of this Resurrection include:

1. The True Restoration of the Tridentine Mass: Celebrated by uncompromised priests who remain faithful to the Church’s doctrine and liturgy.

2. The Conversion of the Jews (Romans 11:26).

3. The Social Kingship of Christ.

This article attempts to illuminate the Church’s Passion, identifying the Synagogue of Satan and its agents in Judeo-Masonry as the orchestrators of her trials. Yet, as with Christ’s Passion, the Church’s Resurrection is assured. Fidelity to Tradition, consecration to the Immaculate Heart, and trust in God’s promises will guide the remnant through this storm.


“In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph.” – Our Lady of Fatima


No Compromise. No Retreat.



-The☩Trumpet

Print this item

  Holy Mass in Arizona [Phoenix area] - January 1, 2025
Posted by: Stone - 12-31-2024, 07:52 PM - Forum: January 2025 - No Replies

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord Jesus Christ




Date: Wednesday, January 1, 2025


Time: Confessions - 7:30 AM
              Holy Mass - 8:00 AM


Location: 4717 N 48th Dr.
                     Phoenix, AZ 85031


Contact: Myrna 623-695-0278

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Sunday W /In Octave Of Christmas 12/29/24 "Between An Ox & Donkey" (LA) 2nd Mas
Posted by: Deus Vult - 12-30-2024, 07:44 PM - Forum: December 2024 - No Replies

Sunday W /In Octave Of Christmas 12/29/24  [2nd  Mass]
"Between An Ox & Donkey" (LA)

Print this item

  Transcription: Fr. Hewko's Sermon for Feast of St. Stephen 2024 "Liars Detest Truth"
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2024, 06:27 AM - Forum: Rev. Father David Hewko - No Replies

"Liars Detest Truth"
Transcription of Fr. Hewko's Sermon for the Feast of St Stephen, Protomartyr

12/26/24

[Image: rs=w:1280]

Transcript by The Catholic Trumpet [slightly adapted and reformatted] | December 28, 2024

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Amen.

Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who stoned the prophets that I have sent you, and kill those who speak to you, how I would have gathered you under my wings, like a mother hen gathers her chicks, but you would not.”

And Our Lord warns His apostles, “You will preach to the synagogue, you will preach to these Pharisees, you will preach to the whole world, and many will not like it. Many will stone you, crucify you, they will put you to death, thinking they do a service to God.

And today, Mother Church, right after the adoration of the baby Jesus in the crib, the charming Christmas night in Bethlehem, with the Angels singing, and the Shepherds adoring, and the Star appearing to the Three Kings, leading them for 13 days on the journey to find the face of the Savior, of the true Messiah, on this beautiful, charming night, we have the first day after the splash of blood.

Second day, splash of, not physical blood, but he was ready to give it- St. John- tomorrow. Tomorrow's feast is a blessing for wine and beer on a special day. St. John was boiled in oil, he should have sizzled into a french fry, but he didn't. God saved him to write the Apocalypse and to see the visions of the Last Days.

And then we have the Holy Innocents on the 28th. All the blood of those, some say up to 14,000 babies, baby boys, who were slaughtered under Herod's abortion law, abortion policy, post-abortion policy. So, all this blood splashed right after Our Lord Jesus Christ is born to tell us, “This is how they loved Me, they gave their life for Me”, and you and I love Our Lord this much that we would give our life for Him.

And the Church has seen so many martyrs and canonized so many of them, and there's many that are not canonized, many saints and martyrs who are just not known. In China, think of the millions killed in China and under Stalin, and even now going on in the Muslim countries, Catholics being slaughtered in cold blood, whole families just being massacred with machetes, and the news coverage is absolutely silent about it. And the persecution will come to blood again, as Our Lady of Fatima forewarned.

So, let's, I always quote this magnificent sermon of Saint Fulgentius, a holy bishop, speaking of Saint Stephen. Here it is:
Quote:“Yesterday we celebrated the birth in time of our eternal King. Today, the triumph through suffering of His soldier, Saint Stephen. Yesterday Our King, having put on our robe of flesh, came forth from the sanctuary of the Virgin's womb to visit the world. Today, His soldier, Stephen, going forth from the tabernacle of his body, enters Heaven a conqueror.

The one, Our Lord Jesus Christ, retaining the majesty of the everlasting Godhead, girded Himself with the servile cincture of flesh and entered upon the battlefield of this world. The other, Saint Stephen, laying down the garments of this corruptible body, ascended to the palace of Heaven to reign eternally. The one, the Christ Child, descended veiled in the flesh.

The other ascended, laureled in blood. The one ascended amid the stoning of the Jews, because the other, the Christ Child, descended amid the jubilation of angels. Yesterday the holy angels chanted exultantly, ‘Glory to God in the Highest.’ Today, still rejoicing, they take Saint Stephen into their company. Yesterday, the Lord came forth from the womb of the Virgin. Today, His soldier, Saint Stephen, goes forth from the prison house of the flesh.

Yesterday, for our sake, Christ was wrapped in swaddling clothes. Today He clothes Saint Stephen in the robe of immortality. Yesterday a narrow manger held the infant Christ. Today the immensity of heaven receives a triumphant Saint Stephen. Alone the Lord came upon earth that He might raise up the many to Heaven. Our King humbled himself that He might exalt His soldiers. Now let us consider, brethren, the arms with which Saint Stephen girt himself to overcome the cruelty of the Jews and arrive at so blessed a triumph.”

In other words, what weapons did he use to overcome them?

Quote:“Saint Stephen indeed deserved to bear his name, which means, the crowned one, for he had armed himself with the mail, the chain mail of law and conquered through it everywhere. Because of his love for God, he was unshaken before the cruelty of the Jews. Through his love for his neighbor, he interceded even for those who stoned him. Through love, he argued with the erring that they might be corrected. Through love, he prayed for those who stoned him, lest they be punished. Strong with the might of love, he overcame Saul who had compassed his death cruelly and won his persecutor on earth as his comrade in Heaven.”

So by love, Saint Stephen conquered. Those were his weapons. Those were his weapons.Those are the weapons of all the martyrs. They say the truth. They preach the truth.

They get persecuted for it. Look at Saint Athanasius, exiled many times, condemned over five times, excommunicated by Pope Liberius. Look at Archbishop Lefebvre, a white martyr, we could call him, of Catholic tradition, suspended unjustly, excommunicated unjustly, all for what? For preaching the truth, condemning the Vatican II’s  monstrous heresies and errors, and that horrible New Mass, and (he) called the Code of Canon Law full of heresies, which it is. So we can't just accept the Code of Canon Law of 1983 without distinction. Yet that's what happened in 2012 with the leaders of our SSPX.

So they raise their voices because they love, they love the truth, and they want to bring them to the truth. But Rome would not hear it. Rome, like the modern Pharisees, blocked their ears, gnashed their teeth, and came on him (Archbishop Lefebvre) with knives of abuse of their authority by persecuting Catholic tradition. And they changed their tactics under Pope Benedict XVI. They changed their tactic: “Let's not… let's not show our teeth. Let's not show our sharp ears, like Little Red Riding Hood.”

Oh, what nice teeth you have, and what nice ears you have. And it's the wolf dressed as the nice granny. And that's the tactic modernists used to seduce many traditional groups, many traditional priests.

And think of the great fighting priests of Bishop de Castro Mayer. Read The Mouth of the Lion by Dr. David Alan White to get an idea of the greatness of Archbishop de Castro Mayer. And he really built an army of great priests who would defend tradition.

But when he died in 1991, one month after Archbishop Lefebvre, [and] in 2003, they crumbled. They crumbled under a liberal bishop, Bishop Rangel, who wanted to make peace with modernist Rome. And he was seduced by Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger, to lay down their weapons. “You (can) have your Latin Mass, you can preach against modernism.”

Sounds nice, doesn't it? But for Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer, “You make no peace until Rome comes back to tradition and proclaims the Kingship of Christ. No peace.

And that's the same with the Catholic Resistance today. The good priests who are trying to defend the Faith, trying to rebuild, trying to continue “Operation Survival”. Yes, those priests do raise their voice against the modern compromises with the new SSPX of 2012, with the New Mass, the New Sacraments, Vatican II, the [false] Hermeneutics of Continuity, which is just a buzzword for accepting modernism under a mitigated form.

And then accepting point-blank the New Code of Canon Law, we just can't accept this. And our leaders know better, Bishop Fellay and Bishop de la Galaretta, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, may he rest in peace, they all knew better.

They all knew better. And then the later developments in what we call the “fake resistance”, which is exactly what it is, a fake resistance. You can't resist while accepting error.

You can't resist modernism while accepting that the New Mass can still nourish your faith and give grace. And I know there's many arguments that theologians can have over these questions. Does the New Mass, if it's valid, give grace? You're going to have different opposing opinions on this.

But we have to admit it's a dangerous teaching. And Archbishop Lefebvre, who was the best theologian of all, he said it very point-blank and without any mitigation: “The New Mass is sterile. The New Mass does not give grace!

And there's a strong argument from St. Thomas Aquinas for this. And he says he's talking about the Orthodox Schismatics because they have a valid priesthood. They stole the Catholic priesthood. They stole the Catholic sacraments, and they are valid. So the argument that many liberals hold today is, “well, if the mass is valid, if the priests are valid and the bishops are valid, it's good to go to. It's safe. It's no problem at all.”

That's not how the Church thinks because they're not licit. They stole the Sacraments. So St. Thomas Aquinas raises the question, “Do they receive grace at those valid Masses?” And he says, “No, those Masses do not pass grace because they are not united to the head. The branches are not united to the Tree, Jesus Christ. We have to be united to the one holy Roman Catholic Faith to receive the grace through the Mass.” That's his argument. And that's St. Thomas Aquinas. I just bow down to him. And to me, case closed. With Archbishop Lefebvre, case closed.

So yes, you might have your arguing opinions, but it's certainly dangerous, to say the least, to argue that the New Mass so-called Eucharistic Miracles are all true and valid. These are very dangerous teachings because it just causes confusion. And it smears the lines of clarity.

When with Archbishop Lefebvre, he never descended to that level, “Does it give grace to me or not? Does it nourish my faith or not?” No, he said the New Mass attacks the Faith and dogmas of the Faith. It attacks the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist by focusing the real presence from the altar to the people. Hence, The Sign of Peace.

'You have to acknowledge the presence of Jesus in the presence of your neighbor and your brothers and sisters.' And that's the New Mass. It's an attack on the Real Presence. It's an attack on the Sacrifice of Christ on the altar by calling it a meal and diminishing every reference to sacrifice and diminishing all the reverence, genuflections, Signs of the Cross, bows, many of these just obliterated, which really makes the priest lose the faith when he says that New Mass. And then the New Mass attacks the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the propitiatory effect of the Mass for the souls in Purgatory, for example. Nowhere in any New Mass, even the one for the dead, will you find the word “soul” mentioned.

They don't mention “soul” to pray for the soul of the dead. It's been erased by Bugnini. So we have to be really blind not to see the attack of the New Mass, what it is really on our Catholic faith, and to pretend that it can be a means of grace is really insulting to the Catholic truth.

And Archbishop Lefebvre would recall all the people to remember the Martyrs of England, how many martyrs, boys, girls, young, old, priests, families, went to death or imprisonment or heavily fined, which they wouldn't have to have gone through if they just attended one time the Anglican service, which in those days, 1500-1600, you still had valid priests who before said the Tridentine Catholic Mass and now went with Henry VIII's “new religion” and are now saying the new Anglican service. So many of those masses, were still valid because the priests still kept the old consecration form, but (they) adapted to the whole Anglican service. And yes, you had Catholics in a quandary. They could have argued till the moon turns to cheese. They could have argued, “Well, it's valid. I can go to it. I can get grace.” But they didn't.

And you had St. Margaret Clitherow, a heroine of York. She had priests in her house. She was warned, “don't do this. If you get caught, off with your head.” And she had priests come to say Mass in disguise. They said Mass, and someone squealed on her, and she was sentenced to a cruel death. She was pregnant too.

And just the other few weeks ago, I was in England, and we prayed at the spot under the bridge where she was crushed with a door laid over her, over a rock, and then heavy weights put on her until her ribs snapped and penetrated through her skin. And she was suffocated to death and the little baby in her womb. So they wouldn't compromise on error.

And Saint Stephen too, look, he's talking to the Jews. He's telling them, “You uncircumcised bandits, you refuse to hear the truth. You refuse to realize that Moses was speaking of Jesus Christ, that all the prophets were speaking about Jesus Christ. He fulfilled all the prophets. Look at Daniel. Daniel said He would be sacrificed, the Lamb would be sacrificed outside the city of Jerusalem, and that's what you did on Calvary. And you remember John the Baptist pointing him out, there's the Lamb of God. You refuse that Lamb. And remember when Caiaphas and Annas were stabbing the Lamb at 3 p.m. on Good Friday, the Passover day, the earthquake hit, and the temple shook, and the veil of the temple was ripped in half from top to bottom. Don't you remember this?”

And Saint Stephen brought up all the prophecies, and still they blocked their ears and would not hear it. So that's how modernist Rome has treated Catholic tradition, and still is trying to crush tradition. So they won't succeed.

So we have to raise our voice, priests and bishops. We cannot pretend to have peace where there is no peace. Pretend to declare peace when there is war, and a war for the reign of Christ the King, the reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and the triumph of true Catholic doctrine in the dogmas of the Faith. These are the lights that will enlighten the world, and we cannot put these lights under a bushel. So let us in this happiness of Christmas time rejoice with all the angels in receiving Saint Stephen today in Heaven.

Pray for our bishops. Pray that we get a good pope. Pray for all the priests, especially of tradition, that all know better. Pray for all the priests who have compromised and have agreed to be silent, that they snap out of that trance.

Pray for all the priests of the Catholic resistance. Father Ruiz just visited the Oratory last week from Mexico. He spent a week, and he gave a couple great talks on the spirit of liberalism. I encourage you to hear it. They are posted on the Oratory of the Sorrowful Heart of Mary [You Tube channel]. Also, The Catholic Trumpet is a powerful little website, and also, of course, The Catacombs and The Recusant. These are the few anti-liberal Catholic publications that are warning the faithful: “They cannot compromise with error.”

So let's fight on, learning from Saint Stephen that we must love, conquer by love, conquer by charity, forgive those who injure us, pray for them, wish them no evil, hold no grudges, but always hold up the light and be ready to shed our blood for the beautiful Christ Child, who invites us to love Him with all our heart, all our strength, all our mind, all our efforts.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, You who burned with love at the foot of the Christ Child and held Him in Your arms and nursed Him, inflame our hearts to love Our Lord and receive Him today in Communion, and inflame us like gas on a dying fire. Inflame our hearts with the fuel of the love of God, that we may really love Him with all our heart, strength, and capacity.

O Mary Conceived without sin.

O Mary Conceived without sin.

O Mary Conceived without sin.

And for those who do not have recourse to thee especially, all communists and Freemasons and other enemies of Holy Mother Church. Amen.

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Sunday within the Octave of Christmas - December 29, 2024
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2024, 05:09 PM - Forum: December 2024 - No Replies

Sunday within the Octave of Christmas - December 29, 2024 
“Come, Let Us Adore Him!” (CA)




Audio

Print this item

  Bishop Williamson: Against Sedevacantism - December 28, 2024
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2024, 01:44 PM - Forum: Sedevacantism - Replies (1)

As many of you know, there are some very questionable, if not downright erroneous, things Bishop Williamson has taught (cf. Fake Resistance Watch) in the years since 2015. Some of these errors have even been shown to be at variance from the way he previously used to preach and teach (e.g. Bishop Williamson [and the old-SSPX]: The New Mass is Intrinsically Evil).

But whenever the truths of the Faith are correctly preached and taught, they are gratefully repeated here on The Catacombs. On his blog Eleison Comments dated December 28, 2024, Against Sedevacantism, Bishop Williamson clarifies how the Church as dealt with dubious pontificates in the past. 

In essence, he cites multiple instances in Church history where the principle of universal acceptance has been employed by the Church to 'heal at the root' the turbulent times where popes ascended the Throne of Peter under doubtful circumstances. In this matter, it seems that by demonstrating the manner in which the Church has in the past corrected and smoothed over a perhaps questionable papacy, His Excellency has correctly shown how the Church may indeed choose, as She has multiple times in the past, to resolve the confusion surrounding the papacy of Francis. This is an important consideration. To be aware of how the Church has dealt with similar situations, though the evils of our times seem very great in comparison to previous doubtful pontificates, it is a great help to us to know and act as the Church does, and in all serenity.  St. Vincent Lerins hammers away at this point in his Commonitorium, stating over and over words similar to these: 

Quote:Chapter 29. Recapitulation.

[76.] This being the case, it is now time that we should recapitulate, at the close of this second Commonitory, what was said in that and in the preceding.

We said above, that it has always been the custom of Catholics, and still is, to prove the true faith in these two ways; first by the authority of the Divine Canon, and next by the tradition of the Catholic Church. [...]

[77.] We said likewise, that in the Church itself regard must be had to the consentient voice of universality equally with that of antiquity, lest we either be torn from the integrity of unity and carried away to schism, or be precipitated from the religion of antiquity into heretical novelties. We said, further, that in this same ecclesiastical antiquity two points are very carefully and earnestly to be held in view by those who would keep clear of heresy: first, they should ascertain whether any decision has been given in ancient times as to the matter in question by the whole priesthood of the Catholic Church, with the authority of a General Council: and, secondly, if some new question should arise on which no such decision has been given, they should then have recourse to the opinions of the holy Fathers, of those at least, who, each in his own time and place, remaining in the unity of communion and of the faith, were accepted as approved masters; and whatsoever these may be found to have held, with one mind and with one consent, this ought to be accounted the true and Catholic doctrine of the Church, without any doubt or scruple.



AGAINST SEDEVACANTISM
By Bishop Richard Williamson on December 28, 2024
EC# CMXI (911)


How men behave must be by law refined,
But law must follow reality close behind.


The controversy over the resignation by Benedict XVI from the Papacy in February of 2013 continues to feed the argument over the vacancy of the Apostolic See – was that resignation valid or not? If it was valid, then the ensuing election of Pope Francis was not invalidated by Benedict still being in any way the valid Pope. But if Benedict’s resignation was doubtfully valid, then a doubt is left hanging over all Francis’ subsequent papacy, because Benedict only died in 2022 after Francis had acted as Pope for the space of nearly ten years. In the autumn of last year Bishop Athanasius Schneider wrote a most interesting article, accessible on the Internet, giving precious principles on the whole dispute of whether the Apostolic See (Latin “sedes”) is vacant or not.

It may seem an idle dispute, but it is not. The Catholic Church is a worldwide organisation, strictly hierarchical, in which all parish priests depend upon valid diocesan bishops for their valid appointment to parishes, and those bishops depend in turn upon a valid Pope for their valid appointment to their dioceses. For the Church to be able to function, its head must be really existent, clearly identified and universally accepted. Of course several times in Church history the identity of the Pope has been disputed, notably during the Great Western Schism from 1378 to 1417, which saw at its end not just two but three candidates all claiming to be Pope. However, all Catholics knew that more than one Pope was most harmful to the Church, so the Schism lasted only 39 years.

In that dispute, it is precious to observe how the Church judged of the validity of the popes in question. On the one hand Urban VII was duly elected in Rome in the papal conclave of 1378 amid huge pressure and threats, but he was accepted and recognised as Pope by all the cardinals who had elected him. The Church has come to see in him and in his successors the line of true and valid Popes. On the other hand, a few months later, French cardinals counter-elected a Frenchman as Pope Clement VII, who set up the Avignon papacy in Southern France. This line of “Popes” the Church has come to condemn as anti-popes. What is to be observed from this example and several others, especially in the Middle Ages, is that for a Pope to be valid the letter of the law is less important than the absolute need for the Church to have a single, visible, recognised and certain head.

Thus Gregory VI bought his papacy in 1045 for a large sum of money, so that his election was strictly invalid, yet the Church has always recognised him as a valid Pope. In 1294 Pope Celestine V doubtfully resigned and Boniface VIII disputedly succeeded him, yet both events were “healed at the root,” or made valid afterwards, by their being universally accepted by Catholics, clergy and laity. This doctrine of an event, illegal at the time but being made legal afterwards, the Church applies to marriages and to papal elections, under certain conditions. For papal elections those conditions are that the new Pope should be immediately accepted as Pope by the Universal Church. This was surely the case of Pope Francis, when he greeted the crowd from a Vatican balcony overlooking St Peter’s Square just after his papal election, with all the election’s possible canonical faults.

As for the disputed or doubtful resignation of Benedict XVI, opinions may differ, and the Church may decide with Authority what it meant, only after the Church emerges at last from the unprecedented crisis brought about by the splitting of Catholic Authority from Catholic Truth at the Second Vatican Council. However, based on the realistic principles laid out by Bishop Schneider in his article, it does not seem difficult to conclude that that resignation was both doubtful in itself and harmful in practice to the Church.

Doubtful in itself, because God designed His Church as a monarchy, or rule of one, and not as a diarchy, or rule of two. God obviously meant His Vicar, or stand-in, to have at his disposal in Rome a whole aristocracy of officials to help him to rule the worldwide Church, but of that aristocracy he is the undisputed sole king. And harmful in practice, because Benedict’s distinction between “munus” (office) for himself and “ministerium” (ministry or work) for Francis, did not clearly exclude his own continuing to participate in the rule of the Church. However, who did rule the Church from Benedict’s resignation to his death? Not Benedict. And when Benedict died – was there a papal conclave? No. It is Francis who has been Pope, from 2013 until now.


Kyrie eleison.

Print this item

  The Station Churches of the Christmas Season
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2024, 08:34 AM - Forum: The Liturgical Year - Replies (2)

The Station Churches of the Christmas Season
(Part 1)


Gregory DiPippo - NLM [slightly adapted - not all hyperlinks included from original] | December 27, 2024

The Station Churches of Rome are nowadays perhaps thought of as a particular feature of Lent, since that season is the only one that has a station for every day, and the Lenten stations are the only ones which are still kept in Rome itself. However, the Missal of St Pius V, preserving the ancient traditions of the Roman Church, lists stations for several other periods of the liturgical year, such as the Sundays and Ember days of Advent, the pre-Lenten Sundays, and the octaves of both Easter and Pentecost. Prior to the 70-year long removal of the Papacy to Avignon, it was still the custom for the Pope to personally celebrate the principal liturgies at the stations, although one safely assume that this was kept more assiduously by some and less so by others. The following article in three parts will examine the station churches of the Christmas season, from the vigil of Christmas to the feast of the Epiphany.


Christmas Eve and Christmas Day

According to a very ancient custom of the Church of Rome, Christmas Day is celebrated with three Masses: one at midnight, preceded by Matins and followed by Lauds; one at dawn, after the hour of Prime; and a third during the day, to be celebrated, as on all major feasts, after Terce. In the Roman Breviary, we still read a homily of St Gregory the Great (590-604) at Christmas Matins, which begins with the words “Because, by the Lord’s bounty, we are to celebrate Mass three times today…” Like most of the great solemnities, Christmas is also preceded by a vigil day, particularly dedicated to fasting and penance in preparation for the feast. Thus, there are in fact four Masses on the twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth of December.

Of these four Masses, three currently have the same station listed, the great Basilica of Saint Mary Major. This is, of course, the oldest church in the world dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, and the most important of the many Marian churches in Rome. It was built by Pope St Sixtus III (432-440) to honor Her after the third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus had rejected the heresy of Nestorius, and formally defined Her title “Mother of God.” It is the traditional home of the famous icon known as the “Salus Populi Romani – Salvation of the Roman people”, one of the oldest icons in existence. Almost directly above the main altar of the church, the great arch still preserves the original mosaics of Pope Sixtus’ time, depicting events from the life of the Virgin. The Nativity of Christ, however, is not shown among them; it seems that the Annunciation and Epiphany, prominently depicted one above the other on the left side, were felt to contain between them the whole of the Nativity story.

[Image: Santa+Maria+Maggiore.jpg]

Santa Maria Maggiore in an 18th century engraving by Giuseppe Vasi.

It is almost certain that already in St Gregory’s time, on the twenty-fourth of December, the canonical hour of None and the vigil Mass of the Nativity were both celebrated by the Pope and his court in the main basilica of Mary Major, to be followed by solemn First Vespers of Christmas. After a rest of some hours, the Pope and clergy would arise in the early part of the night for Matins, the first Mass of Christmas, and Lauds; thus, the Church kept watch for the Nativity of the Lord alongside the Virgin Mary in the stable at Bethlehem. By the middle of the seventh century, however, a small oratory had been built on the right side of the basilica, called “Sancta Maria ad Praesepe”, that is, Saint Mary at the Crib. This chapel was for many centuries the home of the relics reputed to be those of the Lord’s Crib, first attested in Rome in the reign of Pope Theodore (640-49). From roughly that time, the station of the Midnight Mass was kept in the chapel, while the services properly belonging to the Vigil of Christmas remained in the main basilica.

[Image: St.+Anastasia+of+Sirmium.jpg]

St. Anastasia

The second Mass is kept at the church of St Anastasia, located at the base of the Palatine hill, very close to the site of the great chariot racing stadium of Rome, the Circus Maximus. The standard opinion among liturgical scholars has long been that this was originally not part of the celebration of Christmas at all, but a Mass in honor of the church’s titular Saint, who was martyred during the persecution of Diocletian in the city of Sirmium, the modern Mitrovica in Serbia. (See the article on St Anastasia by J.P. Kirsch in the Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 1.2, col. 1923, and Bl. Ildephonse Schuster’s The Sacramentary, vol. 1, p. 368.) This strikes me as extremely improbable, since her feast is not included in the oldest liturgical books of the Roman Rite. The so-called Leonine Sacramentary gives her name last among a group of seven martyrs whose feast is on December 25th, but there is no mention of her (or any of the others) in any of the nine different Mass formulae for Christmas that follow; she is completely absent from the Gelasian Sacramentary. The lectionary of Wurzburg, the oldest of the Roman Rite (ca. 650 AD) lists the Gospel for the second Mass as Luke 2, 15-20, the account of the shepherds coming to Bethlehem, which continues the Gospel of the first Mass, Luke 2, 1-14. This does not exclude the possibility that the station was chosen because the day was also St Anastasia’s feast; in the later Gregorian Sacramentary, her Mass and that of Christmas are given together, with the proper texts of the martyr first. In the Missal of St Pius V and its late medieval predecessors, she is kept as a commemoration at this second Mass.

The third Mass of Christmas was originally celebrated not at Mary Major, but at Saint Peter’s in the Vatican. This would certainly be because the sheer size of the church, just over 100 meters long, would allow for a greater crowd to attend the most solemn of the three Nativity Masses, that which commemorates the eternal birth of God the Son from God the Eternal Father. St Ambrose tells us in the De Virginibus that his sister Marcellina was veiled as a nun by Pope Liberius in St Peter’s on Christmas Day; it is also known that Pope St Celestine I (422-32) read the decisions of the Council of Ephesus to the faithful on the same occasion. One of the most important events in the history Christendom is also connected with this stational observance; on Christmas Day, 800 A.D., Charlemagne was crowned as the Emperor of Rome by Pope St Leo III, before the celebration of the Mass.

[Image: Sacre+de+Charlemagne.jpg]

The Coronation of Charlemagne, from the Grand Chronique de France, ca. 1455

In about 1140, a canon of St Peter’s Basilica named Benedict records in his account of the ceremonies held in his church, now known as the eleventh Ordo Romanus, that the station of this third Mass was still kept there, but a half a century later, the twelfth Ordo tells us that it is at Mary Major. For most of the Middle Ages, the population of Rome was roughly 20,000 people, living in a city built for a million and a half, and a large church was no longer necessary for the papal Mass of Christmas. Furthermore, for much of the period, the city was ruled by military strongmen, and the Pope, though nominally temporal sovereign of the city, had little or no control over it. For these practical reasons, the station was sometimes kept in the 12th century at Mary Major, which is very much closer than St Peter’s to the Pope’s residence at the Lateran Basilica, and would have been easier and safer for the Papal court to reach. There were in fact several such “double stations” at various periods, and the definitive transfer of this one was probably not made until the later 14th century. The liturgical writer Sicard of Cremona still speaks of the station at St Peter’s in roughly 1200, and explains that “in the Communion of this Mass… ‘All the ends of the earth (have seen the salvation of our God.’); and because the blessed Peter saw this, and confessed it more than the others, as the Father that is in Heaven revealed it to him, therefore the station is at St Peter.”

On the mosaic arch over the altar of Mary Major, the lowest part of the right side depicts the city of Bethlehem, and the left side the city of Jerusalem; this pairing of the two holy cities is a common motif in early Christian art. It is interesting to note that the oratory of the Crib was also frequently called “Sancta Maria in Bethlehem”, and represented, as it were, the city of Christ’s Birth within the Eternal City. For this reason, when the relics of Saint Jerome were moved to Rome from the real Bethlehem, where he died, they were placed once again “in Bethlehem.” In like manner, the church which housed the relics of the True Cross was called “Holy Cross in Jerusalem.” The union of the two holy cities was further shown by the fact that the relics of the Crib of Christ, who was born in this world so that He might die for our sakes, were formerly arranged in the shape of a cross.

[Image: Sacra+culla+S.+Maria+Maggiore.jpg]

The relics of the Lord's Crib in a reliquary of 1830.

This chapel also has a special connection with two of the great Saints of the Counter-reformation. St Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Company of Jesus, celebrated his first Mass on the principal altar of the Crib chapel; so great was his devotion to the Mass that he deemed a full year necessary to prepare himself properly to celebrate it. In the same place, St Cajetan of Thiene, founder of the first order of Clerks Regular, was graced on Christmas Eve with a vision, in which the Blessed Virgin appeared to him and handed him the Infant Jesus to hold. Both of these events are still commemorated by marble plaques near the altar of the now rebuilt Sancta Maria ad Praesepe.

The chapel was severely damaged during the sack of Rome in 1527, and almost entirely rebuilt in the later 16th-century; it is now often called “the other Sistine Chapel” in honor of the Franciscan Pope Sixtus V (1585-90), under whose auspices the rebuilding was carried out. Like many of the Popes of this era, he was not buried at St Peter’s, which was still under construction during his pontificate. The place which he chose for his monument, therefore, was the great chapel of the Crib, placing opposite himself the monument of his now sainted predecessor, Pius V. To this day, their spiritual brothers are still present in the Virgin Mary’s most ancient church; Dominican friars hear confessions in several languages through most of the day, and Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate serve as sacristans and chaplains. The relics of the Crib have long since been moved to the main altar, so that they may be seen more easily by the many pilgrims who come to church each day.

The second part of this article will discuss the Station churches of the feast days within the Christmas Octave.

Print this item

  Just How Different Are the Pre-1955, 1962, and 1969 Calendars Around Christmas and Epiphany?
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2024, 08:24 AM - Forum: In Defense of Tradition - No Replies

Just How Different Are the Pre-1955, 1962, and 1969 Calendars Around Christmas and Epiphany?
(2024 Edition)


[Image: CALENDAR%20-%20Just%20How%20Different%20...ition).jpg]

By Peter Kwasniewski - Rorate Caeli [adapted - not all hyperlinks included from original] | December 27, 2024

More and more Catholics are waking up to the huge differences between the old and new Roman liturgical calendars—the one, a product of two millennia of organic development; the other, brainchild of a 1960s committee. A subcategory of these folks are waking up to the significant differences between the calendar of the pre-1955 Missale Romanum and the one observed with the 1962 Missale Romanum. The chart above compares all three for the period from December 25th to January 19th.

In the period from Christmas to Epiphany, one can see at a glance the variations in logic and emphasis. The old calendars place great emphasis on Christmas, which is commemorated throughout the Octave, with the daily use not only of the Gloria but also of the Creed. Even more, the old calendars place massive emphasis on Epiphany, which is a feastday older than Christmas and of loftier pedigree—although one would never know that from how it was demoted in recent decades, shoved to a nearby Sunday for convenience, and shorn of its octave. In the old calendars, the Most Holy Name of Jesus (an 18th-century addition) is an obligatory Sunday celebration, but in the new, an optional weekday celebration for January 3, which is impeded in 2021.

In terms of the “psychology” of the season, one notes that the more modern feast of the Holy Family is not permitted to “intrude” until the great event of the Nativity in all its facets—including its cluster of special companion saints who, as it were, surround the cradle of the infant King—has been given plenty of room to shine. Our gaze is intently focused on the mystery of the Incarnate Word: Christmas for eight days, the Circumcision when the Redeemer first shed His blood, the Holy Name He was given and by which we are saved, the Epiphany or revelation of God as savior of the Gentiles. Only after this do we turn expressly to the family in which Our Lord grew up, His baptism in the Jordan, His first miracle at Cana (Second Sunday after Epiphany: see my article “Basking in the glow of Epiphany: The wedding feast at Cana”), and the start of His preaching and miracles (subsequent Sundays).

It’s not that Our Lady and St. Joseph are neglected, for they are always present in the readings, prayers, and antiphons, especially those of January 1st. Besides, they have their own major feastdays elsewhere in the liturgical year. It’s a matter, rather, of allowing the central mystery of the Incarnation of the Eternal Son of the Father to “breathe,” to occupy center stage. In the new calendar, on the other hand, there is a bureaucratic breathlessness by which we efficiently rush from one thing to the next, almost as if we’d like to get back to “Ordinary Time” as quickly as possible—and with as little interruption of our workaday schedule as possible.

An attentive study of these three columns indicates how the 1962 calendar is transitional to the new calendar of 1969. For example, the Sunday of the Octave of Christmas, instead of being transferred when it collides with one of the feasts of the great saints of the octave, supplants it; the beautiful contrast between the original day and the octave day of the Holy Innocents is lost (“useless repetition”?); the once-universal proper celebrations of the beloved bishop St. Thomas Becket and of the pivotal Roman pontiff Silvester are stifled. More gravely, the feast of the Circumcision is no longer given that title, but simply called the Octave of Christmas; the Vigil of the Epiphany is gone; the full-scale octave of Epiphany is gone, although the ferias continue to use the Epiphany Mass in a vestigial or placeholding way, which made the later introduction of “Ordinary Time” that much easier.

Although the 1962 calendar of the Pacellian-Roncallian Roman Rite is far superior to the 1969 calendar of the modern rite of Paul VI, the pre-1955 classical Roman Rite is superior to both. As with Holy Week, as with Pentecost, so too with Christmastide: this chart gives us yet another angle from which to see the importance of a principled return to the liturgical books prior to the hasty modernizations and clumsy simplifications of Pius XII and John XXIII. It is the next great step in the ongoing restoration of Catholic tradition. And there is no better time than now to take up the pre-55 rites and calendar: we can see how little we can and should rely on the “guidance” (such as it is) of churchmen who are supposedly in charge but who have announced their intention to liquidate all memory of tradition. (And need I add that the concept of official “permission” has received its coup de grâce in our times?)

Now all we need is a good republication of a pre-55 altar missal . . .

(Originally posted 2021, updated in 2022, now updated for 2024. If anyone sees any errors, please contact me. -PK)

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St. John, Evangelist 12/27/24 - “We Have Believed in Charity”
Posted by: Deus Vult - 12-27-2024, 01:52 PM - Forum: December 2024 - No Replies

St. John, Evangelist 12/27/24 - (Canada)
 “We Have Believed in Charity”


Print this item

  The Most Famous Nativity Scene in the World
Posted by: Stone - 12-27-2024, 08:58 AM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

Print this item

  The Death of Saint Brendan By J.R.R. Tolkien
Posted by: Stone - 12-27-2024, 08:49 AM - Forum: General Commentary - Replies (1)

The Death of Saint Brendan By J.R.R. Tolkien


Print this item

  Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Feast of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ - December 25, 2024
Posted by: Stone - 12-27-2024, 07:20 AM - Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons December 2024 - No Replies

2024 12 25 ACOGER AL NIÑO JESÚS EN NUESTRA ALMA Fiesta de Navidad


Print this item