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

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 306
» Latest member: RobertLal
» Forum threads: 7,094
» Forum posts: 13,145

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 416 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 412 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google, RobertLal

Latest Threads
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:22 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 10,668
Fourth Sunday after Pente...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:22 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 17,686
The Lavender Legacy Conti...
Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:19 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 58
Louis Veuillot: The Liber...
Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:13 AM
» Replies: 31
» Views: 5,795
Pius X to Prelates: ‘Prom...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:10 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 28
Retreat Conference: Disce...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 10:29 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 42
Retreat Conference: The F...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 10:23 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 39
Retreat Conference: From ...
Forum: Conferences
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 10:19 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 33
UK Prays! - A Holy Rosary...
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:55 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 10,459
Apologia pro Marcel Lefeb...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:43 AM
» Replies: 23
» Views: 5,994

 
  Opinion: Pope Francis Has Fully Regularized the SSPX
Posted by: Stone - 02-07-2025, 02:09 PM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX - No Replies

Pope Francis Has Fully Regularized the SSPX


Ecce Agnus [slightly adapted and reformatted] | February 6, 2025

As it is said, when one body part confirms identification with the whole, the rest is confirmed.  So too when part of the Constitutional/Doctrinal body of the SSPX confirms Legal/Doctrinal status to the whole, the rest is confirmed.

St. Thomas Aquinas explains the principle:

“The operation of the parts, is through each part, attributed to the whole.” (Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 2)

This was and is true for Mgr. Lefebvre having the reasonable expectation on Nov. 1, 1970 from the local Diocesan Bishop in Fribourg Switzerland Canonically Legalizing, and under the same authority, granted the SSPX to be Canonically erected allowing them to function as a fully Catholic and Traditional organization [1] .

A few years later, modernist Rome applied illicit pressure to destroy and remove that legal perennial status.  Mgr. Lefebvre necessarily and lawfully disobeyed such illegal censures from: being illegal in itself, as with, not being granted its warranted Canonical process, and ignored appeal from the modernist Curators amassing against the Traditional Faith [2] .  Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, as does St. Augustine, that an unjust law is no law at all.

It is here where the world took notice when Mgr. Lefebvre made his famous 1974 Declaration [3] .

Not having the Canonical process to appeal the illegal censures, the SSPX was, and is, still provided for in rightful existence as a Branch of the Perennial Catholic Church [4] ; though Bp. Fellay’s administration tries hard to wash over this reality so to enter the realms of Conciliarism.

And they succeeded.  On April 9, 2015 the new-SSPX had become a new and different Canonical erection as an ASSOCIATION OF DIOCESAN RIGHT within the Conciliar Dioceses of Buenos Aires Argentina [5] .  Enabling thus, after the death of Mgr. Lefebvre, the new-SSPX ’s desired acceptance of neo-Rome’s illegal censure to remove the already once legal status granted in 1970, to a new entity under and within conciliar-Rome.

What many would have expected to come through the front doors, had taken place In Jure through the back doors, and secretly declared from the Conciliar Dioceses of Buenos Aires Argentina, became a simple matter of Canon Law: What is done in Part, is done in Whole.

We will see no matter what the surface motive given for public consumption was; the new-SSPX had placed themselves under the full communion and obedience with the Conciliar sect of Vatican II.

To give credit, this back door is what Fr. Chazal said within the 2012 betrayal believing Bp. Fellay’s administration would use clever piecemeal ways to enter the conciliar church than the front door everyone was expecting.

For public consumption however, the new-SSPX administration placed as a red-herring, a view different for others to see as only a gain from the Argentina state to recognize crossing boarders and Visas [6] .  Yet there is more, a lot more, and quite deceitful not to share in face of the Canonical Document itself, and in reasons of law.  [7] [8] [9]

To appease the Argentinean State is one of Diplomacy.  This was easy to fulfill by the neo-SSPX if wanting to provide a “religious” status given from its 1970 Diocesan decree of legal existence as an institution of the Catholic Church (provided above).  As too, this Diplomacy could have been provided by the conciliar Diocese with a simple “religious” document recognizing the same would have sufficed (as too could be done politically in other ways), WITHOUT need of using Canon 298 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law giving a new existing status, a Judicial person, recognized and provided in an ASSOCIATION OF DIOCESAN RIGHT; which also declares and provides for mutual Doctrinal and Liturgical adherence in all practice of (conciliar) worship and discipline.  But it’s here, in using this Canon 298 to erect OFFICIALLY the new-SSPX into the conciliar-church, is the aim and conciliar existence the liberal new-SSPX wanted, intended, and designed for their secret reconciliation.

It is also important to note the gravity of what Bishop Fellay had done putting in jeopardy the Traditional Catholic missions in Argentina for him to receive his new status as a LEGAL incorporation of the SSPX into and Canonically legal through the conciliar church to be registered as a Religious-Catholic status within the Argentinian government.

As disclosed above, the legal consequence of that act is now an ALL or NOTHING status for the new-SSPX. In other words, the new-SSPX  has been operating in that country of Argentina in status as a civil entity, NOT as a religious or even a Catholic entity; because the conciliar church has always stated to the Argentinian government that the SSPX is NOT Catholic and NOT a part of the [conciliar] catholic church (in schism).

The SSPX Dici had also verified that in their Response:

Quote:“…It is important to know that in Argentina, Catholic religious congregations can only exercise their apostolate within an administrative and juridical framework conditioned by their inscription in the register of the Institutes of Consecrated Life, on the [conciliar church’s] ecclesiastical authority’s recommendation.”

And the U.S District superior validated that also in their Response in referencing and praising the Rorate Caeli article:

Quote:“…The District Superior [Fr. Christian Bouchacourt] therefore went to him [Ed. Pope Francis when he was a Cardinal of Buenos Aires Argentina at that time] to present the problem: there [would have been] an easy solution, and that would be to declare ourselves an independent church (before Civil Law), but we did not want to do it because we are Catholic.”

Which is demonstrated in the legality of the Argentinian government for other religions:

Quote:6) If you access the official website of the Ministry of Religious Affairs of Argentina there is a register of Recognized religions in the country (Protestants, Buddhists, Africanists, etc.) and a Register of Institutes of Consecrated Life in the terms of Law 24483. There is a unique register for the Catholic Church and forms (with instructions) for processing STIs are on the web.

Thus, the SSPX in Argentina is now placed in a situation where they must comply with the modernist Roman Authorities and Argentine Authorities or be forced to leave.

Those who understand the precarious situation of the new-SSPX La Reja seminary, and the rest of the SSPX apostolate in Argentina, understand the risks involved.

And because of this risk, you can see that Bishop Fellay is very comfortable to go into the Conciliar Church for his desired canonical reconciliation; there is no risk for him -it is all apart- of the planned agenda.

As Archbishop Guido Pozzo, the Secretary of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, had said:

Quote:“…We continue working so that full communion and juridical framing of the Society within the Catholic Church may be achieved.”

Sadly explained by the neo-SSPX marketing half-truths makes clever for them a vied appearance for their chapels and public alike to deflect from scrutiny, though real, the process of conciliar-assimilation they do not deny.  Now granted in jurisdiction a Canonical status, accrued from modernist Rome, fully accepted in communion and obedience with the Conciliar Church, with the real gain, in reason to subsist within the Conciliar hierarchy.  The additional granting of piecemeal Universal Jurisdiction within the world will come later; as we will see below.

There it is, under the noses of everyone; breaking the faithful’s trust.  The full Regularization of the new-SSPX was granted In Jure a Canonical Structure in good standing as a branch of the conciliar church having a condition of regular and FULL Canonical status as a public-religious entity within the conciliar-Church.  As the Canonical Decree states:

Quote:Can. 298  §2.  The Christian faithful are to join especially those associations which competent ecclesiastical authority has erected, praised, or commended.

No different in aim from what Mgr. Lefebvre received In Jure from the Diocesan Bishop in Fribourg on Nov. 1, 1970; but differs with intent to serve the Church as the old-SSPX and new-SSPX differs on the faith.

So this ultimate betrayal from the sons of Mgr. Lefebvre’s fidelity to God and the faith in his labored building of the true old-SSPX fortress, had like the Pharisees, turned it into a man made conciliar-SSPX –on April 9, 2015.  Planned back in 2011 by the new-SSPX authorities, as their press release provides, just prior to their other prelude formalities; where one formality was pronounced publicly in the April 15, 2012 Doctrinal Declaration [10] by the official new-SSPX declaring their Doctrinal recognition and acceptance for Vatican II in its tenants of Lex orandi, lex credendi “the law of prayer [is] the law of belief”.

Some may say, how did this come about?  To begin to understand why all of this is happening and at a time that seems to be getting worse with Rome as each year passes; as with the continued erosion of Pope Francis.  Even though we do not know all what is going on behind the scenes, we yet have a strong sense that something is very different from the old-SSPX and today’s new-SSPX.

That difference stems from the one who is at the helm; fundamentally, it is a difference of mindset and an ideological understanding of the Faith.  That is, in the old-SSPX, Archbishop Lefebvre had a Doctrinal mindset.  In the new-SSPX, Bishop Fellay has an Institutional mindset.  There is an obvious difference between them in thought and approach.  In both of their lives, we can see these two differences play out.

In Archbishop Lefebvre’s life and leadership, the Doctrinal expression of the Faith was his standup antidote against Vatican II’s deliberate attacks and onslaught which tried to undercut the very foundation of Catholic Doctrine; while the liberals injected the principles of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity under the disguise of Religious Liberty, Ecumenism, and Collegiality.

The mindset of the old-SSPX under ABL:
  • The old-SSPX sought the integrity of Doctrine; no compromise.  Hence, the battles.
  • The old-SSPX sought the Faith over the Mass.  “Lex orandi, lex credendi”.  The Law of Prayer is the Law of belief.  The other traditional groups that fell had reversed the order and put the Mass over the Faith.
  • The old-SSPX sought conciliar/modernist Rome to convert back to Tradition first; before a practical deal.
  • The old-SSPX placed conditions with conciliar/modernist Rome so as not to be a part of their ecumenical structure; rather, for conciliar Rome to adhere and obey to the perennial Church that binds them to their office and Baptism.  “I will place the discussion at the DOCTRINAL LEVEL: ‘Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you?  Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these Popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti-Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT THE DOCTRINE OF YOUR PREDECESSORS, IT IS USELESS TO TALK!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter, Nov-Dec 1988).”  http://www.therecusant.com/dont-play-with-the-faith
  • Etc…

In Bishop Fellay’s life and leadership, the institutional expression of the Faith is his present standup antidote “against” Vatican II.  Though time had evolved after ABL’s death into Bishop Fellay’s new adaptation of turning the SSPX into this new path, through change for liberal superiors, GREC, and within the neo-teachings at the seminaries, Bishop Fellay’s relations with conciliar Rome over these recent years however do show his interests of the institution as an answer to his “problems”.

The mindset of the New-SSPX under Bishop Fellay:
  • In the n-SSPX we have heard how they find itself [falsely] to be irregular with the conciliar Church and with an impediment in Canon Law; whereby the new-SSPX  has lost its orientation and its identity in this crisis than what Archbishop Lefebvre maintained that they are not “irregular”, the conciliar church is.  ABL thus stayed in a position to work for the Supreme Law of the Church under Her protections “prae oculis habita salute animarum, quae in Ecclesia suprema semper lex esse debet.”  “The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church”.
  • The new-SSPX seeks therefore the need to have “integrity” of their institution to be regularized with a canonical status so as the people in the Novus Ordo structure can see that they are a good guys; a lowering of the standard to please men.
  • The new-SSPX seeks the Mass over the Faith like the FSSP by adopting practical concerns over the Doctrinal concerns.
  • The new-SSPX seeks to integrate themselves in order to convert the Romans from the inside.  However, ABL says, “The inferiors are not above the superiors”; it is a failed attempt before it begins.
  • The new-SSPX seeks, as Bishop Fellay declared at Lille, France, on 7 May 2013, “That one could not ask Roman authorities to condemn the Council and the New Mass, because one cannot ask authorities to lose face.”
  • The new-SSPX, as Fr. Pfluger says, needs to be reconciled sooner rather than later because it will take a long time; possibly decades if the SSPX does not do something with Rome at this time.  The new-SSPX further seeks this attachment with conciliar Rome because, as Fr. Pfluger also said in a public conference in Hattersheim, Germany, that under the current circumstances, the Fraternity’s superior does not “believe it is possible to turn down the Pope’s proposal.” He said that straying from the Pope’s wishes would lead to Sedevacantism.  [11]
  • The new-SSPX said through Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, professor of theology in Ecône, “the institution of the conciliar church IS the Catholic Church.”  The consequences follow with conciliarism over Catholicism.
  • The new-SSPX  seeks unity and obedience before the Faith.
  • The new-SSPX seeks obedience around its Superior General as a first cause of unity; not the Faith, per Fr. Rostand in his Post falls Idaho conference; and, he says also:
  • The new-SSPX ’s direction, “is a matter of prudence; not a matter of doctrine.”  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pnYYTzTQrc
  • The new-SSPX  is now intolerant of any of its priests who still speak of the old-SSPX
  • The new-SSPX metes punishment and banishment for those who get in its way to be institutionally reconciled with conciliar Rome.
  • The new-SSPX seeks to be understood in confusion and ambiguities, like conciliar Rome, rather than to speak straight forward and upright like its founder.
  • Etc…
With some of these above facts brought to light, along with its inconvenient truths, it is easier now to see Bishop Fellay’s institutional understanding of the Faith and the approach he is taking with conciliar Rome as a course (pre-planned) to mark the new “institutional” legal footing for the new-SSPX.

Sadly, we have lived with this leadership betrayal for many years.  Some in sedevacantism would find this as another reason to sling shot to the extreme far right position – there is no pope at all.  But that is for another topic.

Looking back from 2024, it is easy to see this by putting the major events and documents together, through time, the new-SSPX had joined in principle and practice their new RAISON D’ÊTRE after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre March 25, 1991, on the Feast Day of the Annunciation of our Lady.

This view in time, but not inclusive:

Bishop Fellay had secretly created the beginnings of the GREC protocols [12] paving the way since 1997… including the year 2000 SSPX pilgrimage to Rome and providing [false] rosary novenas to the faithful for this end, more than a symbol, for the new-SSPX administration giving to Rome many Doctrinal and regulating compromises with the Conciliar church.

For public consumption, modernist Rome provided the following deception, in conjunction and agreement with the new-SSPX allowing the defamation of the True Mass to be second to the clown “Ordinary” mass of Vatican II, with singing a Te Deum, in order to draw closer to conciliar Rome.  As with, allowing the defamation of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer to be excluded in the “excommunication package” Bishop Fellay received from conciliar Rome; also singing another Te Deum.
  • The [False] lifting of the Latin mass; while declaring the Novus Ordo mass as the only Ordinary Mass, July 2007. [13]

  • Lifting the [false] excommunications from 4 of the 6 bishops, Jan. 2009. [14]
Bishop Fellay followed:
  • Provided a deception also with the SSPX Doctrinal Commission with modernist Rome – ending in nothing, 2009-2011. [15]
  • Emergency meeting for all SSPX heads at the SSPX district house Albano Italy addressing the Vatican’s doctrinal Preamble and formalities toward the acceptance with modernist Rome, (This was the special meeting Bp. Williamson was not invited to attend as a SSPX Bishop), Oct. 2011.  [16]
  • The 2012 Great Reveal.  Two leaked letters: one from the three SSPX Bishops addressing neo-Menzingen’s General Council mindset and pre-emptive deal with Rome,  April 7, 2012 [17]  ; and the General Council’s scandalous reply, April, 14, 2012.  [18]  (Followed over the years by many more leaked internal letters, including from modernist Rome, and many public News Interviews and conferences.)
  • The next day, Bishop Fellay representing the whole of the SSPX publicly compromised on Doctrine and Constitution sending to modern-Rome their Doctrinal Declaration, April 15, 2012 [19]  proclaiming there is an agreement with the beliefs of the conciliarists; and unity is above Doctrine.
  • B. Fellay depressed his plan was reveal, sent a June 2012 letter to Pope Benedict XVI, saying he will overcome the difficulties…give him some more time to effect the new changes.  [20]
  • 2012 SSPX General Chapter Six-Conditions publicly accepts the principle and practice of Vatican II; thereby transferring the treasures of “Tradition” to be under modernist-Rome.  (Here too, Bp. Williamson was not invited to attend as a SSPX bishop), July 2012 [21]
  • Bp. Fellay expelled his opposition ousting Bp. Williamson Oct 2012 [22], and consecutively a large number of SSPX priests and friend priests, along to disassociate from the Dominicans of Avrille France and the Benedictines in Brazil. 
  • By 2014, together over 100 priests expelled.  The new-SSPX continued to remain steadfast in their course with modernist Rome…
Thus, the conciliar-church granted to the new-SSPX some further piecemeal rewards allowing some Universal Jurisdictions within the world, added to, the initial granting of Canonical status – Association of Diocesan Right in Argentina:
  • * SSPX received Canonical Jurisdiction of Association of Diocesan Right, April 2015.[23]
  • Followed by, Bp. Fellay received as a judge at the Rota Romana, the highest appellate tribunal of the Church, thus regularizing his broad authority, and provides for first-instance international Canonical jurisdiction within the whole of the new-SSPX, announced in May 2015.  [24]
  • Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for CONFESSIONS in Dec. 2015.  [25]
  • Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for ORDINATIONS in June 2016.  [26]
  • Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for MARRIAGES in March 2017.  [27]
Do you notice the new-SSPX administration does not talk anymore about regularization by way of first instance; but only by way of (social/political) acceptance and furtherance of (universal) jurisdiction from other diocese?  Now you know why!

So in piecemeal, through the back door, given the new foundational existence of Canonical decree and Jurisdictional ASSOCIATION OF DIOCESAN RIGHT within the Dioceses of Argentina, the Conciliar church had IN JURE recognized in conjunction with the neo-SSPX acceptance as one in communion and obedience with the whole of the Conciliar Vatican II sect.

[1]  https://web.archive.org/web/202105181021...1_sspx.htm

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/202106151008...ressed.htm

[3] https://www.therecusant.com/1974-declaration

[4] https://sspx.org/en/legal-existence-sspx-30977

[5] https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/0...px-as.html

[6] https://sspx.org/en/news/argentina-recog...holic-5758

[7] https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.p...enos-aires

[8] http://brasildogmadafe.blogspot.com/2015...-sspx.html

[9] https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/0...nized.html

[10] https://www.therecusant.com/2012-doctrinal-declaration

[11] http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/05...peaks.html

[12] https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=1345

[13] https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-...ficum.html

[14] https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-...unica.html

[15] https://sspx.org/en/msgr-pozzo-theologic...sion-31089

[16] https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/1...se-of.html

[17] https://www.therecusant.com/2012-3-bishops-letter

[18] https://www.therecusant.com/2012-reply-3-bishops

[19] https://www.therecusant.com/2012-doctrinal-declaration

[20] https://www.therecusant.com/2012-fellay-letter-bxvi

[21] https://www.therecusant.com/six-conditio...al-chapter

[22] https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/s...ks-vatican

[23] https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/0...px-as.html

[24] https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/0...etary.html

[25] https://sspx.org/en/news/pope-francis-ss...licit-6236

[26] https://catholicnewslive.com/story/625214

[27] https://press.vatican.va/content/salasta...0404d.html

Print this item

  Cardinal Parolin likely to oversee next conclave after Pope approves re-elected Dean of Cardinals
Posted by: Stone - 02-07-2025, 12:25 PM - Forum: Pope Francis - No Replies

Cardinal Parolin likely to oversee next conclave after Pope approves re-elected Dean of Cardinals
91-year-old Cardinal Battista Re has been re-elected as Dean of the College of Cardinals, meaning the Vatican's current Secretary of State,
 Cardinal Pietro Parolin, will lead proceedings in a papal conclave if it happens before he turns 80 in 2035.

[Image: Re-Parolin.jpg]

Cardinal Re (L) & Cardinal Parolin ®
Mario Tama/ Adam Berry/Getty Images

Feb 6, 2025
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — The Holy See announced that 91-year-old Cardinal Battista Re has been re-elected as Dean of the College of Cardinals, but what does that mean and what role will it play in a papal conclave?

On February 6, the Holy See Press Office announced that Pope Francis had approved the re-election of Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re and Cardinal Leonardo Sandri as Dean and Vice-Dean of the College of Cardinals respectively. Their approval came on January 7 and January 14 respectively.

Re has served as Dean since January 2020, upon the death of Cardinal Angelo Sodano, who had been Dean from April 2005. Re is a long-serving and influential member of the Roman Curia and had previously been Vice-Dean from January 2017, in addition to chairing the 2013 Papal Conclave.

For his part Sandri has been Vice-Dean since January 2020 and is now aged 81, having also spent a number of decades working in the Roman Curia.

The by-product of this announcement is that Francis has thus ensured that Cardinal Pietro Parolin, currently the Vatican’s Secretary of State, will lead the proceedings in a papal conclave, provided it happens before he turns 80 in 2035.

What is the role of the Dean?

The Dean of the College of Cardinals is considered the “primus inter pares” or the “first among equals.”

The cardinal who is named to this ancient role is elected by brother cardinals who have the rank of cardinal-bishop, and must himself be a cardinal-bishop. A cardinal-bishop is the highest of the three levels of the College of Cardinals, with cardinal-priests and cardinal-deacons following suit.

The principal role of the Dean of the College of Cardinals is to announce the death of the reigning pontiff to all the cardinals and to the Diplomatic Corps attached to the Holy See. He celebrates and preaches at the pope’s funeral and is the de facto public face of the Holy See during the sede vacante period.

The Dean also has responsibility for organizing the conclave that follows the death of the pope. This involves presiding over the “general congregations” that take place before the actual voting of the conclave, along with the conclave itself.

Such a position, whilst very much in the public eye upon the death of a pope, is more honorary for the rest of the time, and the Dean does not hold legal power over his fellow cardinals, though he celebrates funerals for cardinals in Rome.


Cdl. Parolin to organize next conclave

However, Cardinal Re is now aged 91. As such, he is too old to participate in a papal conclave, since no cardinals over 80 are allowed to vote.

With the Argentinian Vice-Dean of the College of Cardinals – Cardinal Sandri – also being over the age limit, this means that the coordinating role of the Dean over the papal conclave upon Pope Francis’ death will fall to the highest ranking cardinal-bishop, namely Cardinal Parolin.

Having turned 70 this past month, Parolin will not age out of the conclave until 2035, and with the health of the 88-year-old Pope Francis becoming increasingly frail, it is highly unlikely that Parolin will be too old to take part in the next conclave.

Thus while Re will likely preside over the Pope’s funeral, it will fall to Parolin to organize the ensuing conclave.

[Image: Cardinal-Re.jpg]

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re incenses Pope Benedict XVI’s coffin, Jan 2023.

The conclave itself is made up of two chief elements, first of which are the “general congregations.”

These are particularly key times for the College of Cardinals to exchange ideas and arguments, as well as for finalizing the procedures for the conclave. With an increasingly diverse College of Cardinals whose members are unfamiliar with each other, it will also be one of the only times for cardinals to learn more about each other.

Cardinals over the age of 80 are allowed to participate in these sessions, in order to offer advice and guidance to the younger members.

Rumors had surfaced in late 2023 that Pope Francis’ favored canonist, Cardinal Gianfranco Ghirlanda SJ, was reworking the rules to exclude cardinals over 80 from the general congregations. However, Ghirlanda subsequently denied it.

After the general congregations comes the more famous aspect of the conclave comprising of the rounds of voting held in the Sistine Chapel. Only the cardinal-electors – those under the age of 80 – take part in this.

While the Dean or his substitute – in this case Parolin at the next conclave – coordinates the conclave, he does not necessarily have responsibility for counting and reading out the tally of votes. According to Pope John Paul II’s 1996 apostolic constitution Universi Dominici gregis, the men who count and check the ballots are themselves chosen by lot. The text states about this aspect:

Quote:The voting process is carried out in three phases. The first phase, which can be called the pre-scrutiny, comprises:

1) the preparation and distribution of the ballot papers by the Masters of Ceremonies, who give at least two or three to each Cardinal elector;

2) the drawing by lot, from among all the Cardinal electors, of three Scrutineers, of three persons charged with collecting the votes of the sick, called for the sake of brevity Infirmarii, and of three Revisers; this drawing is carried out in public by the junior Cardinal Deacon, who draws out nine names, one after another, of those who shall carry out these tasks;

3) if, in the drawing of lots for the Scrutineers, Infirmarii and Revisers, there should come out the names of Cardinal electors who because of infirmity or other reasons are unable to carry out these tasks, the names of others who are not impeded are to be drawn in their place. The first three drawn will act as Scrutineers, the second three as Infirmarii and the last three as Revisers.


An Italian Pope?

Parolin has already been named by many Vaticanistas as papabile for the next conclave. His prominent role as Secretary of State already places him on the shortlist of cardinals deemed likely to be named pope.

Rumors also suggest that cardinals might be interested in electing an Italian in the next conclave, to try and calm the waters of Francis’ turbulent pontificate which has shocked even those who would identify as “liberals.” Having only turned 70 in mid-January, the Italian native Parolin has age and nationality on his side also to win over such support.

[Image: Parolin-getty-2.jpg]

Pope Francis and then-new Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, attend a mass with newly appointed cardinals at St Peter’s Basilica on February 23, 2014 in Vatican City, Vatican.

But his recognition as papabile is not without concern for some, particularly given his pivotal role in the highly-controversial Sino-Vatican deal and his record of being opposed to the traditional Mass.

Hong Kong’s Cardinal Joseph Zen has accused Parolin of intentionally deceiving Francis about the China deal and of having led the “betrayal” of Chinese Catholics.

Parolin’s smooth diplomatic skills have been at the forefront of his role as Secretary of State, and Zen himself praised Parolin for such diplomacy but added that it was not of a sort befitting a Catholic: “I don’t think he has faith. He is just a good diplomat in a very secular, mundane meaning.”

When surrounded by journalist gaggles at various events around Rome, Parolin ensures that he stays to take a handful of questions – most of which are then documented on the Vatican’s news channels – which further aids his attempt to paint an image of public geniality.

Reports have linked Parolin to the Vatican’s moves against the traditional Mass in Traditionis Custodes, and others have attributed to him the comment “we must put an end to this Mass forever!” when speaking about the Latin Mass.

Parolin had been named in 2024 reports as being a key supporter of rumored new restrictions on the Latin Mass, but later denied any such involvement when questioned by this correspondent.

The last cardinal who entered the conclave as Dean and emerged as Pope was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Parolin, as acting Dean during the conclave itself, might have strong odds in his favor, but the old adage recounts that “he who enters the conclave as ‘pope’ emerges as a cardinal.”

Print this item

  Oratory Conference: "Lamentabili Sane" of St. Pius X (continued) February 5, 2025
Posted by: Deus Vult - 02-06-2025, 07:31 PM - Forum: Conferences - No Replies

"Lamentabili Sane" (continued)
February 5, 2025 (NH)


Print this item

  Oratory Conference: "Lamentabili Sane" of St. Pius X (continued) 2/3/25 (NH)
Posted by: Deus Vult - 02-06-2025, 07:16 PM - Forum: Conferences - No Replies

"Lamentabili Sane" of St. Pius X (continued)
February 3, 2025  (NH)


Print this item

  The Catholic Trumpet Video: The Conciliarization of the SSPX
Posted by: Stone - 02-06-2025, 01:26 PM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - Replies (2)

Operation Suicide – The Conciliarization of the SSPX
Part I

In Part I, we cover:
  • Archbishop Lefebvre’s mission—why the SSPX was founded and what it stood for.
  • The warning signs of betrayal—how the seeds of compromise were planted years before 2012.
  • The GREC conspiracy—a secretive effort to bring SSPX under Vatican II’s control.
  • The shift in doctrine—how SSPX leadership prepared its priests and faithful for submission.


Print this item

  Spanish priest could face criminal charges for denying Communion to homosexual politician
Posted by: Stone - 02-06-2025, 09:29 AM - Forum: Global News - No Replies

Spanish priest could face criminal charges for denying Communion to homosexual politician
The openly homosexual mayor of a town in Segovia, Spain, claims he was denied Holy Communion due to his same-sex relationship. 
The Diocese of Segovia insists the decision was in line with Church discipline while the priest stands accused of ‘discrimination.’


Feb 5, 2025
(LifeSiteNews) — A Catholic priest in Spain could face criminal charges for denying the Eucharist to an openly homosexual politician.

“[Denying Communion] is contrary to the Spanish constitution,” socialist Equality Minister Ana Redondo said in an interview in January, the Pillar reports.

She claimed that the Catholic Church “cannot, even if there is no specific law, be subtracted from the constitutional rules, the principle of equality and non-discrimination of Article 14.”

“You can not discriminate against an LGTBI citizen and require him to choose either his faith or his sexual condition,” she added. “This is clearly discriminatory and I hope there will be a [legal] challenge.”

Redondo responded to a statement from the socialist mayor of the small town of Torrecaballeros in the province of Segovia. On January 11, Ruben Garcia wrote on X that his parish priest had denied him Holy Communion because of his public homosexual relationship.

Garcia said he had been denied the Eucharist “because of my sexual condition and living with my partner.”

He accused parts of the Catholic Church in Segovia of “homophobia” and lamented that “to the Church of Segovia, the spring of Francis has not arrived.”

Garcia implied that Pope Francis would disapprove of the denial of the Holy Eucharist in this case, given his past support for the LGBT agenda, including allowing the “blessing” of same-sex couples.

The Pillar reports that another homosexual couple has alleged that they were denied Holy Communion by the same priest, Father Felicien Malanza Munganga, from the Congo.

In a statement published by the Spanish Socialist Worker’s Party (PSOE) on January 12, they asked the incoming bishop of Segovia to “end sexual orientation-based discrimination in the Segovian Church.”

The PSOE hinted at possible legal action, stating that “legislation in our country has typified hate crimes based on sexual orientation and we are convinced that this situation will end at the root, since no one wants to walk down that path.”

The Diocese of Segovia published a statement in response to the PSOE, saying that the priest did not act in a “homophobic and discriminatory way.”

“In compliance with his ministry and following the rules of the universal Church on the reception of Holy Communion, [the priest] was forced to deny Communion of same-sex people who live in a matrimonial way, which can also happen between heterosexual people without a matrimonial bond.”

“This is not homophobia or discrimination, as Communion is not being denied because of the homosexual condition, but to defend the sacred character of the Eucharist,” the statement continues.

The diocese said that Segovia PSOE’s demand is a “defamatory judgment” and an “inadmissible interference in internal matters of the Church, and an attack against religious freedom as guaranteed in the Constitution.”

“Catholics know that, to receive the Eucharist, whether they are homosexuals or heterosexual, some objective conditions of morality are required, and the Church has the authority to deny Communion when they are not followed, especially if it causes a scandal among the faithful, as it happened in the Segovia cases.”

The Catholic Church has always forbidden individuals who are unrepentant of mortal sins to receive Communion, in accordance with the words of St. Paul, who writes in the first letter to the Corinthians: “Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.”

Paragraph 915 of the Code of Canon Law states: “Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”


Spanish church under attack for ‘conversion therapy’

The Church in Spain could face legal persecution due to its apostolic teaching and practice on marriage and the family on other accounts as well.

Spain’s Minister of Equality Redondo also said in the interview that she would meet the Spanish bishop to discuss the issue of seven Spanish dioceses being accused of supporting “conversion therapy” for homosexuals, which is illegal and punishable by a fine in Spain. Many dioceses have denied that charge and said that they merely held talks with people previously engaged in homosexual activities.

Redondo said she expects Spain’s Constitutional Court to “clarify in a ruling to what extent this affects the principle of equality and non-discrimination.”

“There is no law that forbids ecclesiastical rules, but these ecclesiastical rules must be interpreted under the Constitution and under the principle of equality,” she stated.

Print this item

  France: Arson Attacks on Churches Up 30%
Posted by: Stone - 02-06-2025, 08:45 AM - Forum: Anti-Catholic Violence - No Replies

France: Arson Attacks on Churches Up 30%

[Image: d1xo8c3a13qphz5bfctg6yv1097al59stzatfou....85&webp=on]


gloria.tv | February 6, 2025

French police have recorded a "decrease" in the number of anti-Christian attacks last year.

Although they were "down 10%", there were still 770 incidents in 2024, more than two for every day of the year.

For the second year in a row, churches were particularly targeted, write the French media.

Nearly 50 (!) arsons or attempted arsons of Christian places of worship were recorded in 2024.

In 2023 there were 38, an increase of more than 30%. The arson attacks on churches in New Caledonia during the riots were particularly striking.

In mainland France, two fires particularly affected the church last year.

On 2 September, the church of Saint-Omer burned, its roof and steeple completely destroyed by the flames.

On 3 October, the church of Saint-Hilaire-le-Grand in Poitiers suffered two simultaneous fires and damage, with three statues broken and decapitated.

Thefts from churches are also on the rise, with 288 incidents recorded in 2024 compared to 270 the previous year, an increase of 7%.

On average, there are five thefts from churches every week.

Several masses were disrupted last year, especially at Christmas. In Bordeaux, two drunk people interrupted a Christmas mass.

In Saint-Germain-en-Laye, a Muslim shouted 'Alla Akbar' during the service before climbing on the altar and exposing his buttocks to the congregation.

Last year, an attack by a Muslim was foiled thanks to police action. On 5 March 2024, they arrested a 62-year-old man, a member of ISIS, which is officially supported by the West in Syria, who was planning to attack a church.

Print this item

  The Catholic Trumpet Video: The Lay Crusade - Defending Christ the King in a World of Apostasy
Posted by: Stone - 02-05-2025, 10:21 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - No Replies

The Lay Crusade - Defending Christ the King in a World of Apostasy


Print this item

  Fr. Ruiz Sermons: LA AMBIGÜEDAD EN LOS ACTOS TAMBIÉN DESTRUYE LA FE Fiesta de la Purificación
Posted by: Deus Vult - 02-03-2025, 08:24 PM - Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons February 2025 - No Replies

 2025/02/02  Fiesta de la Purificación
LA AMBIGÜEDAD EN LOS ACTOS TAMBIÉN DESTRUYE LA FE

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St. Blaise, Bp. & M. 2/3/25 “Rejoice in His Protection” (NH)
Posted by: Deus Vult - 02-03-2025, 08:03 PM - Forum: February 2025 - No Replies

St. Blaise, Bp. & M. 2/3/25 
“Rejoice in His Protection” (NH)




Audio



Print this item

  Vatican II called for a common date for Easter in the East and West
Posted by: Stone - 02-01-2025, 08:58 AM - Forum: Pope Francis - No Replies

So many errors of Pope Francis are rooted in Vatican II.
From the very liberal America Magazine, The Jesuit Review:


Vatican II called for a common date for Easter in the East and West. Will it ever happen?

[Image: 20230930T0930-SYNOD-ECUMENICAL-VIGIL-176...k=DjrEYSDJ]

Pope Francis meets with Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople in the library of the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican Sept. 30, 2023, ahead of an ecumenical prayer vigil for the Synod of Bishops in St. Peter's Square. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)


America Magazine [Adapted, Emphasis The Catacombs] |January 29, 2025

On Jan. 25, closing out the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, Pope Francis said that the Catholic Church was open to accepting a common date for Easter “that everyone wants.”

“Everyone” in this case refers to the other [non-Catholic/Orthodox] Christian churches. It is a call that, while it may seem groundbreaking, actually goes back to the Second Vatican Council.

In an appendix to Vatican II’s 1963 Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” Pope Paul VI wrote, “the Sacred Council would not object if the feast of Easter were assigned to a particular Sunday of the Gregorian Calendar, provided that those whom it may concern, especially the brethren who are not in communion with the Apostolic See, give their assent.” Essentially, this means that if the other Christian churches can agree on a common date for Easter, the Council would agree to that date—even if it meant changing how the Roman Catholic Church calculated the date of Easter.


Why do we celebrate Easter on different dates?

Since the Council of Nicea in 325, Easter has been celebrated in both the Eastern [Orthodox] and Western [Catholic rite] churches on the Sunday after the “Paschal full moon,” which is essentially the first full moon after the spring equinox—though this is based on historical approximations of when the full moon is, as well as when the equinox falls.

The difference between the dates came about with Pope Gregory XIII’s reform of the calendar, which created the Gregorian calendar that most of the world uses today. Gregory had changed the calendar because the previous calendar—the Julian calendar, established by Julius Caesar—was increasingly out of sync with the movement of the sun, meaning its approximate date for the spring equinox was drifting further and further from the actual equinox.

However, following Gregory’s reform, the Eastern [Orthodox] churches stuck with the Julian calendar for calculating the date of Easter. (There have also been a few reforms to the Julian method of calculating Easter.) As a result, the Eastern and Western dates of Easter can fall as far as four weeks apart.

Of course, the terms “Eastern” and “Western” are imprecise, and there are many exceptions. In general, the Roman Catholic Church, the Protestant churches and Eastern Catholic Churches celebrate Easter on the same date—though some Eastern Catholic Churches follow the Julian calendar for the sake of unity with the Orthodox churches.

Following the Julian calendar are most Eastern Orthodox churches and most Oriental Orthodox churches, though there are exceptions. Complicating matters further is that not all Eastern Christians celebrate Easter on the same date. Because of the diaspora of Eastern Christians in the Western world, some have begun to follow the Western method of calculating Easter—resulting in the funny, if a little absurd, case of the Canadian Ukrainian Catholic bishops sending out an Easter message last year dated both March 31 and May 5.

In 2025, Easter will fall on the same date in the Eastern and Western churches. Pope Francis hopes that this could provide an opportunity for Christians to begin celebrating Easter on the same date going forward.

While Easter has fallen on the same date as recently as 2017, Francis is strengthening the push for a common date for Easter starting this year because of the Jubilee Year 2025. This Jubilee Year has a special focus on Christian unity because it marks the 1,700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea, the first Christian ecumenical council. The pope plans to travel to Nicea, in modern-day Turkey, in May to celebrate the anniversary with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, with whom he has a friendly relationship.


Can Christians agree on a common date?

In “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” the council fathers said they would agree to a common date for Easter provided that the other Christian churches could agree on one. Pope John Paul II later affirmed this, saying that the Catholic Church would acquiesce to a common agreed-upon date, and Francis has repeated it several times as well.

The question is: Can Christians agree on a common date? And how would such an agreement come about?

An agreement would require that not only the Roman Catholic Church, but also the Protestant churches come to an agreement with Eastern churches, which is difficult since many Protestant churches are decentralized in their governance. In the past, the World Council of Churches has made a number of efforts to push toward a common date for Easter among Eastern and Protestant churches, but so far none have led to a resolution.

A key question will be whether Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, who is influential in a number of Orthodox Churches, will be able to come to an agreement over the date of Easter with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I. The two have been in tension over the Russia-Ukraine war for years, and the Ukrainian Catholic Church recently changed the date of Christmas to align with the Western calendar, distancing itself from the Russian Orthodox Church.

It seems likely that the Vatican will do what it can to facilitate dialogue between the different traditions for a common date behind the scenes, since Pope Francis has had his eye on the goal of achieving a common date for Easter in 2025 for years. The Ecumenical Patriarch, who is the de facto leader of many Eastern churches, shares this goal. He told the Orthodox Times last year that it is a “scandal to celebrate separately the unique event of the one Resurrection of the One Lord.”

The patriarch said he is “optimistic, as there is goodwill and willingness on both sides.”

Print this item

  Kolbe Center: Pope Pius XI’s understanding of the Catholic Doctrine of Creation
Posted by: Stone - 02-01-2025, 08:31 AM - Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching - Replies (2)

How Pope Pius XI defended the history of Genesis, special creation of St. Adam
Before becoming Pope Pius XI, Fr. Achille Ratti wrote a theological work supporting Adam’s special creation – an argument he upheld throughout his life, countering growing scientific and theological shifts toward evolution.

[Image: icon-family-tree-Christ.png?w=431&ssl=1]


Jan 30, 2025
LifeSiteNews [Adapted and reformatted - The Catacombs]

Editor’s note
: This article is Part 1 of a four-part study of Pope Pius XI’s understanding of the Catholic doctrine of creation as opposed to the modern scientific proposition of the evolution of mankind. 

(Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation) — One of the wonderful things about the Kolbe apostolate has been the way that members of our leadership team have been inspired to research different topics relevant to our mission, resulting in all kinds of fruitful discoveries.

In recent months, researcher Christian Bergsma has brought to our attention a document that highlights the Church leadership’s vigorous defense of the literal historical truth of the first chapters of Genesis well into the 20th century.

In this article we will focus on a treatise[1] written by the Rev. Achille Ratti, the future Pope Pius XI, toward the end of the 19th century. Though he wrote it before becoming pope, Pius XI defended this work during his pontificate, according to his close friend Cardinal Ernesto Ruffini:
Quote:Our Holy Father, Pope Pius XI, in private audiences, from time to time recalled with pleasure this work of his (“which cost him no little labor”), and reconfirmed his conclusions.[2]


Theological arguments for the special creation of Adam

Dr. Kenneth Miller is typical of Catholic intellectuals who teach our young people that the Fathers and Doctors of the patristic era did not read Genesis as history and that this is a recent, “fundamentalist” misinterpretation, stating:
Quote:Great theologians of the early centuries of the Christian era, like Saint Augustine, did not read Genesis as history. It’s only in the last hundred years, mostly in the United States, that you have people coming up with a radically different view.

As the recipient of the Laetare medal at Notre Dame University in 2014, “the oldest and most prestigious honor given to American Catholics,” according to Notre Dame’s president, Michael O. Garvey, one would think that Dr. Miller would be able back up his claims, but St. Augustine himself made clear that he agreed with the rest of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church that Genesis is written “from beginning to end in the style of history.”

In keeping with this historical interpretation of Genesis, at the beginning of his treatise, the future Pope Pius XI sets forth his plan to demonstrate the direct and immediate creation of the body of St. Adam, first from theology and then from natural science. He asks:

Quote:What is to be held of the first origin of man as regards the body, according to faith and sound theology?

The answer is this: It is clear from divine revelation that the first parents, not only regarding the soul, but also regarding the body, were formed by God himself, not by simple concurrence, but by direct and immediate action, although not creative.

Explaining the phrase, “although not creative,” Christian Bergsma notes:
Quote:Ratti distinguishes the formation of the body as “not creative” in the strict sense that the body was not called into being out of nothing like the soul was, but rather was formed from the material of mud and the rib. St. Thomas Aquinas defines creation in the unequivocal sense as the original emanation of each thing into being from nothing:
Quote:“‘To create is to make something from nothing’… we must consider not only the emanation of a particular being from a particular agent, but also the emanation of all being from the universal cause, which is God; and this emanation we designate by the name of creation … it is impossible that any being should be presupposed before this emanation. For nothing is the same as no being. Therefore as the generation of a man is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘not-man,’ so creation, which is the emanation of all being, is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘nothing.’[3]

However, per Aquinas, the whole man, as a composite of both body and soul, can be said to have been created out of “not-man” in that immediate and simultaneous action, as he was brought from a state of non-being into being in all of his principles:

“Creation does not mean the building up of a composite thing from pre-existing principles; but it means that the ‘composite’ is created so that it is brought into being at the same time with all its principles … for creation is the production of the whole being, and not only matter.”[4]


The literal and obvious sense of Scripture must be believed

Like the Fathers and Doctors before him, the future Pope Pius XI takes as his starting point that the sacred history of Genesis gives a divinely inspired account of the creation of the first human beings in which the literal and obvious sense should be believed unless it would detract from “purity of life or soundness of doctrine.” In the words of St. Augustine:
Quote:In the first place, then, we must show the way to find out whether a phrase is literal or figurative. And the way is certainly as follows: Whatever there is in the Word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be referred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative.[5]

Using these criteria, Christian Bergsma rightly poses and answers a critical question:
Quote:Is the formation of the body from mud impossible to reconcile with purity of life or sound doctrine? Certainly not. Pope Leo XIII likewise cites “the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine – not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires…[6] Does reason or necessity compel us to believe that an all-powerful God could not create a body from mud? Certainly not! Therefore, we ought to take the words literally.


The age of the universe

Having established that the direct and immediate creation of Adam, body and soul, must be believed as, at a minimum, Catholic doctrine, if not, as some authorities believe, Catholic Faith, Ratti addresses the question of the timing of Adam’s creation:

Quote:It remains to say a few things about the antiquity of human origin. Holy Scripture nowhere expressly presents a complete chronology which extends to the creation of Adam; but what it sparsely reports presents no little difficulty, especially if one considers the discrepancies between the Hebrew text and the Septuagint and Samaritan versions; but the Vulgate version follows the Hebrew text.

Even greater and far more numerous discrepancies occur among the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers. Cardinal Meignan counts one hundred and fifty different calculations, none of which can be called reprobate; in fact, Des Vignoles collected more than two hundred different indications of the time from Adam to Christ, the minimum of which he counts as 3,483 years, the maximum as 6,984. It is true that in all the aforesaid calculations, a common foundation was sought in the Holy Scriptures themselves. For, after certain minor difficulties, it was seen that the following numbers of years could be gathered from inspired books.

From Adam to Noah’s flood:

according to the Vulgate and Hebrew text… 1,656

according to the Samaritan text… … … … 1,306

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 2,242

From Noah’s flood to Abraham’s birth:

according to the Vulgate… … … … …292 or 293

according to the Samaritan text… … … … … 942

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 1,183

From Abraham to Christ’s birth:

with hardly a few decades of difference… 2,190

Having said this, it follows that neither Holy Scripture nor Tradition contains a chronology of the human race that is at least completely defined. Here again, it is certainly possible to follow any of the chronologies received here and there in the Church.

This is a remarkable passage – remarkable because we find the future Pope Pius XI defending the common teaching of all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church that the Scriptures provide a basis, though not a precise formula, for calculating universal chronology, when Catholic intellectuals were abandoning this teaching in droves in the name of “science.” As Christian Bergsma observes:

Quote:Though they posited various dates for Christ’s birth, all the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers who mentioned the subject taught a recent creation as a matter of faith in Scripture, in opposition to the old-earth mythologies of the pagans (not, as some have said, simply due to their ancient scientific conceptions). The Church teaches:

“In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. [7]

Even modernist bible scholar M.J. Lagrange had to admit the substantial sensus fidelium on the young earth within the Church over the centuries, regardless of the differing proposed dates. Lagrange found himself arguing that the ancient Fathers had been right to interpret Genesis 1-11 as teaching a young chronology, because the text indeed does teach it, even though it is not true, and that God intentionally used their errant belief in the historicity Genesis 1-11 to bring them to spiritual truths, as they would not have otherwise been able to grasp them if he had explained them at that time in a manner fitting with what we now “know” through science.

This is heresy, because we are bound to hold that whatever Scripture teaches is inerrant, and that such inerrancy extends not just to spiritual truths but also to statements touching history and the natural world[8]. However, in defending this position Lagrange aptly exposed the ridiculous inconsistency of those “concordists” who try to defend one tenet of Scripture (i.e., the universal flood) by denying that another tenet (i.e., the young chronology) was ever upheld by the Church:

“Then came the turn of the philologists. It seemed to them that there would never have been time enough for the formation of languages had the Deluge swallowed up all mankind … but, in point of fact, the arguments of the scientists were only conclusive if biblical chronology were upheld…And so, when the universality of the Deluge was defended by this [concordist] school, they held that biblical chronology was non-existent. They went so far as to foster the delusion that Catholic opinion had never admitted a chronology, because it did not agree as to its limits: as though the differences of opinion, reached as the result of so much painful effort, did not suppose a common groundwork known to all.“[9] (emphasis added)

By the very admission of this preeminent modernist, to believe that the tradition of the Church on the biblical chronology was either non-existent, insubstantial, or due to mistaken exegesis, is delusional, but to accept an old universe is to believe that Scripture teaches falsehood. Therefore, the best option for a pious Catholic is to believe in the young universe – “young” only in relation to the uniformitarian extrapolations of naturalists, and not in relation to any objective chronology of the world.


Part 2 of the series on Pope Pius XI’s study of creation can be found below.

Reprinted with permission from the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation.



References
↑1 De hominis Origine Quoad Corpus, in Msgr. Frederick Sala, Institutiones positive-scholasticæ Theologiæ Dogmaticæ Tomus II: De Deo Uno et Trino – De Deo Creatore (1899), pgs. 197-211. For the original Latin see here. For English and Latin side-by-side, see here.
↑2 Ruffini, The Theory of Evolution Judged by Reason and Faith, trans. Francis O’Hanlon (Joseph F. Wagner, Inc.: New York, 1959), 135–37.
↑3 [St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Part 1, q. 45. art. 1.]
↑4 Ibid, Part 1, q. 45, art. 4.
↑5 St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, Book 3, Ch. 10.
↑6 Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, 15.
↑7 Vatican Council I, ch. 2 On Revelation, 9.
↑8 Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, 19-26.
↑9 Lagrange, Historical Criticism and the Old Testament (1905), Lecture IV, pgs. 134-135).

Print this item

  The Catholic Trumpet Podcasts and YouTube Channel
Posted by: Stone - 02-01-2025, 08:07 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - No Replies

The Catholic Trumpet Podcasts and YouTube Channel

[Image: 42463703-1738184078496-55546940b490f.jpg]



The Catholic Trumpet [adapted and reformatted] | January 31, 2025

About the Podcast

The Catholic Trumpet defends the unchanging Catholic Faith, exposes modernist errors, and proclaims the Kingship of Christ. Rooted in +Archbishop Lefebvre’s theology, we resist Vatican II’s Revolution, the 2012 SSPX betrayal, and the Synagogue of Satan (Apoc. 2:9). Through the Rosary, Marian Consecration, and the uncompromised Latin Mass, we fight for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart and the restoration of Christendom.

Where to Listen

The Catholic Trumpet is now available on Spotify, ensuring our content reaches more Catholics who seek the truth.

We will continue uploading to YouTube and encourage our listeners to subscribe and like for greater reach. However, we will not rely on secular platforms that censor the truth.

Our home is The Catholic Trumpet. All our audio content is now hosted on our new page: Listen to The Catholic Trumpet

We encourage all Catholics to listen, share, and remain steadfast in the Faith. Now is the time for courage. Now is the time to stand for the Kingship of Christ.


No compromise. No retreat.

Vive le Christ Roi! Vive Marie, Reine du Ciel!


-The ☩ Trumpet

Print this item

  Introduction to The Catholic Trumpet
Posted by: Stone - 02-01-2025, 07:52 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - No Replies

The Catacombs would like to recommend a new traditional Catholic Resistance website, The Catholic Trumpet!



From their About page: 

Quote:Who We Are

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, your unwavering source for defending Catholic tradition against the modernist compromises within the SSPX, the Fake "Resistance" and beyond. Our mission is to expose the gradual erosion of the true Faith since Vatican II, documenting every betrayal and deviation from the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. We provide meticulously sourced content from trusted traditional Catholic websites, offering clear warnings for any sources that do not fully align with a true Catholic uncompromising stance.

-The ☩ Trumpet


And from the website's Welcome message:

Quote:Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com

September 2, 2024

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, the uncompromising voice in the defense of Catholic tradition and truth. This platform is dedicated to exposing the modernist compromises and deviations within the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and other similar entities, calling all faithful Catholics to rally against the errors that have infiltrated the Church since Vatican II.

At TheCatholicTrumpet.com, we blow the trumpet on the gradual erosion of the true Faith through false accords, compromises, and the adoption of modernist practices that undermine the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Here, we document and analyze every instance of betrayal, compromise, and contradiction that has taken place within the SSPX, standing firm in the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre's unwavering dedication to the pre-Vatican II Church.

This website is not just a repository of information; it is a clarion call to all traditional Catholics to remain vigilant and steadfast. We provide a wealth of resources, including meticulously sourced documents, critical analyses, and insights into the ongoing battle for the soul of the Church. From the errors propagated by the New Mass to the subtle compromises made in dialogue with modernist Rome, TheCatholicTrumpet.com is your go-to source for the truth.

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to dedicated outlets like TheRecusant.org and TheCatacombs.org, whose hard research and comprehensive sourcing have laid the groundwork for our mission. While we have no official association with these outlets, we are fans of their work and aim to amplify their efforts by providing succinct snippets from their long publications, helping to illuminate the path for those seeking clarity amidst the confusion.

Join us in our mission to restore the true Catholic Faith and resist the tide of modernism. Together, by the grace of Our Lady, we will reclaim the Church and see the reign of Christ the King restored.


-The ☩ Trumpet

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Mother - Feb. 2, 2025
Posted by: Stone - 02-01-2025, 07:45 AM - Forum: February 2025 - No Replies

Feast of Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary - February 2, 2025 

w/ Commemoration of the Fourth Sun. After Epiphany (NH)





Audio

Print this item