| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 387 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 384 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
The Editor of The Recusan...
Forum: Introduction to the Resistance
Last Post: Stone
3 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 29
|
Feast of the Miraculous M...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
4 hours ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 1,428
|
Pope Francis says Synod’s...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:59 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 57
|
If We Want to Promote the...
Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:54 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 59
|
Fr. Ruiz: Renewal of the ...
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:44 AM
» Replies: 16
» Views: 1,440
|
Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Last ...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-25-2024, 06:38 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 54
|
The Simulacrum: The False...
Forum: Sedevacantism
Last Post: Stone
11-25-2024, 06:36 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 72
|
Interview with the Editor...
Forum: The Recusant
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 07:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 165
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 09:03 AM
» Replies: 37
» Views: 4,078
|
Last Sunday after Penteco...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-24-2024, 08:57 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 11,668
|
|
|
| St. Alphonsus Liguori: Daily Meditations for the Second Week of Lent |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-06-2023, 08:28 AM - Forum: Lent
- Replies (6)
|
 |
Every sin produces blindness; and as sin increases, so does the sinner's blindness increase. Therefore do we see relapsing sinners lose all light, and go from sin to sin, without even thinking of amendment. The very habit of committing sin, says St. Augustine, prevents sinners from perceiving the evil they do, and so they live as if they no longer believed in God, in Heaven, or in eternity.
I.
The wicked man, when he is come into the depths of sins, contemneth. (Prov. xviii. 3). One of the greatest ills which the sin of Adam brought upon us was the evil inclination to sin. This made the Apostle weep when he found himself compelled by concupiscence towards those very sins which he abhorred: I see another law in my members . . . captivating me in the law of sin. (Rom. vii. 23). Therefore is it so difficult for us, infected as we are by this concupiscence, and with so many enemies urging us to evil, to arrive sinless at our heavenly country. Now such being our frailty, I ask, what would you say of a voyager who, having to cross the sea in a great storm, and in a frail barque, would load it in such a manner as would be sufficient to sink it even were there no storm and the vessel strong? What would you predict as to the life of that man? Now, we may say the same of the habitual sinner, who, having to pass the sea of this life--a stormy sea in which so many are lost--in a frail and shattered barque, such as is our flesh to which we are united, still burdens it with habitual sins. Such a one can hardly be saved, because a bad habit blinds the understanding, hardens the heart, and thus renders him obstinate to the last. In the first place, a bad habit produces blindness. And why indeed, do the Saints always beg for light from God, trembling lest they should become the worst sinners in the world? Because they know that if for a moment they lose that light, there is no enormity they may not commit. How is it that so many Christians have lived obstinately in sin until at last they have damned themselves? Their own malice blinded them. (Wis. ii. 21). Sin deprived them of sight, and thus they were lost. Every sin produces blindness; and as sin increases, so does the blindness increase. God is our light; as much, therefore, as the soul withdraws from God, so much the more blind does she become: His bones shall be filled with the vices of his youth. (Job xx. 11). As in a vessel full of earth the light of the sun cannot penetrate, so in a heart full of vices Divine light cannot enter. Therefore do we see certain relapsed sinners lose all light, and proceed from sin to sin, without any more even thinking of amendment: The wicked walk round about. (Ps. xi. 9). Having fallen into that dark pit, the unhappy wretches can do nothing but sin; they speak only of sin; they think only of sin; and hardly perceive at last what harm there is in sin. The very habit of committing sin, says St. Augustine, prevents sinners from perceiving the evil they do. So that they live as if they no longer believed in God, in Heaven, in hell, or in eternity.
My God, Thou hast conferred signal blessings upon me, favouring me above others; and I have signally offended Thee by outraging Thee more than any other person that I know. O sorrowful Heart of my Redeemer, afflicted and tormented on the Cross by the sight of my sins, give me, through Thy merits, a lively sense of my offences, and sorrow for them. Ah, my Jesus, I am full of vices; but Thou art omnipotent, Thou canst easily fill my soul with Thy holy love. In Thee, then, I trust; Thou Who art infinite goodness and infinite mercy. I repent, O my Sovereign Good, of having offended Thee. Oh, that I had rather died, and had ever caused Thee any displeasure!
II.
That sin which at first struck the sinner with terror, now, through bad habit, no longer causes horror: Make them as stubble before the wind. (Ps. lxxxii. 14). Behold, says St. Gregory, with what ease a straw is stirred by the slightest wind; thus also you will see one who before he fell, resisted, at least for some time, and combated temptation, when the bad habit is contracted fall instantly at every temptation, and on every occasion of sin that presents itself. And why? Because the bad habit has deprived him of light. St. Anselm says that the devil acts with some sinners like one who holds a bird tied by a string; he allows it to fly, but, when he chooses, he drags it to the earth again. So is it, says the Saint, with habitual sinners: "Entangled by a bad habit, they are held bound by the enemy; and though flying, they are cast down into the same vices." Some, adds St. Bernardine of Sienna, continue to sin, even without occasion. You will see an habitual sinner without occasion indulging in bad thoughts, without pleasure, and almost without will, drawn forcibly on by bad habit. As St. John Chrysostom observes, "Habit is a merciless thing; it forces men, sometimes even against; their will, to the commission of unlawful acts." Yes because, according to St. Augustine, "When no resistance is made to a habit, it becomes a necessity. And, as St. Bernardine adds: "Habit is changed into nature." Hence, as it is necessary for a man to breathe so to habitual sinners, who have made themselves slaves of sin, it appears almost necessary that they must sin. I have used the expression slaves; there are servants who serve for pay, but slaves serve by force and without pay; to this do some poor wretches come, who at last sin without pleasure.
The wicked man, when he is come to the depth of sin: contemneth. (Prov. xviii. 3). St. Chrysostom explains this of the habitual sinner, who, plunged into that pit of darkness, despises corrections, sermons, censures, help, God--despises all, and becomes like the vulture, which, rather than leave the dead body, allows itself to be killed upon it. Father Recupito relates, that a criminal on his way to execution raised his eyes, beheld a young girl and consented to a bad thought. Father Gisolfo also relates that a blasphemer, likewise condemned to death uttered a blasphemy as he was thrown off the ladder. St. Bernard goes so far as to say that it is of no use praying for habitual sinners, but we must weep for them as lost. How can they, indeed, avoid the precipice which they no longer see? It requires a miracle of grace. These unhappy beings will open their eyes in hell, when it will be of no avail to open them, unless it be to weep the more bitterly over their folly.
O my Jesus, I have forgotten Thee; but Thou hast not forgotten me; I perceive it by the light Thou now givest me. Since, then, Thou givest me light, give me likewise strength to be faithful to Thee. I promise Thee rather to die a thousand times than ever again to turn my back on Thee. But all my hopes are in Thine assistance: In thee, O Lord, have I hoped; let me not be confounded forever. I hope in Thee, my Jesus, never again to find myself entangled in iniquity and deprived of Thy grace. To thee, also, do I turn, O Mary, my blessed Lady: "In thee, O Lady, have I hoped; let me not be confounded for ever." O my hope, I trust by thy intercession that I may never again find myself at enmity with thy Son. Ah, beg of Him rather to let me die than that He should abandon me to this greatest of misfortunes.
Spiritual Reading
INTERIOR MORTIFICATION
Even works of piety must be always undertaken with a spirit of detachment; so that whenever our efforts are unsuccessful we shall not be disturbed, and when our exercises of devotion are prohibited by a Superior we shall give them up with cheerfulness. Self-attachment of every kind hinders a perfect union with God. We must therefore seriously and firmly resolve to mortify our passions, and not to submit to be their slaves. External as well as interior mortification is necessary for perfection: but with this difference, that the former should be practised with discretion; the latter without discretion, and with fervour. What does it profit us to mortify the body, while the passions of the heart are indulged? "Of what use is it," says St. Jerome, "to reduce the body by abstinence, if the soul is swelled with pride?--or to abstain from wine, and to be inebriated with hatred?" It is useless to chastise the body by fasting, while pride inflates the heart to such a degree, that we cannot bear a word of contempt or the refusal of a request. In vain do we abstain from wine while the soul is intoxicated with anger against all who thwart our designs or oppose our inclinations. No wonder, then, that St. Bernard deplored the miserable state of him who wears the external garb of humility, and at the same time inwardly cherishes his passions. "Such people," says the Saint, "are not divested of their vices: they only cover them by the outward sign of penance."
By attention to the mortification of self-love, we shall become Saints in a short time, and without the risk of injury to health; for since God is the only witness of interior acts, they will not expose us to the danger of being puffed up with pride. Oh! what treasures of virtue and of merits are laid up by stifling in their very birth those little inordinate desires and affections, those bickerings, those suggestions of curiosity, those bursts of wit and humour, and all similar effects of self-love! When you are contradicted, give up your opinion with cheerfulness, unless the glory of God require that you maintain it. When feelings of self-esteem spring up in your heart, make a sacrifice of them to Jesus Christ. If you receive a letter, restrain your curiosity, and abstain from opening it for some time. If you desire to read the termination of an interesting narrative, lay aside the book, and defer the reading of it to another time. When you feel inclined to mirth, to pull a flower, or to look at any object, suppress these inclinations for the love of Jesus Christ, and deprive yourself for His sake of the pleasure of indulging in them. A thousand acts of this kind may be performed in the day. St. Leonard of Port Maurice relates that a servant of God performed eight acts of mortification in eating an egg, and that it was afterwards revealed to her that, as the reward of her self-denial, eight degrees of grace and as many degrees of glory were bestowed upon her. It is also related of St. Dositheus, that by a similar mortification of the interior, he arrived in a short time at a high degree of perfection. Though unable, in consequence of bodily infirmities, to fast or to discharge the other duties of the Religious Community, he attained so perfect a union with God, that the other monks, struck with wonder at his sublime sanctity, asked him what exercises of virtue he performed. "The exercise," replied the Saint, "to which I have principally attended is the mortification of all self-love."
Evening Meditation
REFLECTIONS AND AFFECTIONS ON THE PASSION OF JESUS CHRIST
I.
When it was day, the Jews conduct Jesus to Pilate, to make him condemn Him to death; but Pilate declares Him to be innocent: I find no cause in this man. (Luke xxiii. 4). And to free himself from the importunities of the Jews, who pressed on him, seeking the death of the Saviour, he sends Him to Herod. It greatly pleased Herod to see Jesus Christ brought before him, hoping that in his presence, in order to deliver Himself from death, He would have worked one of those miracles of which he had heard; wherefore Herod asked Him many questions. But Jesus, because He did not wish to be delivered from death, and because that wicked one was not worthy of His answers, was silent, and answered him not. Then the proud king, with his court, offered Him many insults, and making them cover Him with a white robe, as if declaring Him to be an ignorant and stupid fellow, sent Him back to Pilate: But Herod with his soldiers despised him, and mocked him, putting on him a white robe, and sent him back to Pilate. (Luke xxiii. 11). Cardinal Hugo in his Commentary says, "Mocking Him as if a fool, he clothed Him with a white robe." And St. Bonaventure, "He despised Him as if impotent, because He worked no miracle; as if ignorant, because He answered him not a word; as if idiotic, because He did not defend Himself."
O Eternal Wisdom! O Divine Word! This one other ignominy was wanting to Thee, that Thou shouldst be treated as a fool bereft of sense. So greatly does our salvation weigh on Thee, that through love of us Thou willest not only to be reviled, but to be satiated with revilings; as Jeremias had already prophesied of Thee: He shall give his cheek to him that striketh him; he shall be filled with reproaches. (Lam. iii. 30). And how couldst Thou bear such love to men, from whom Thou hast received nothing but ingratitude and slights? Alas, that I should be one of these who have outraged Thee worse than Herod. Ah, my Jesus, chastise me not, like Herod, by depriving me of Thy voice. Herod did not recognise Thee for what Thou art! I confess Thee to be my God: Herod loved Thee not; I love Thee more than myself. Deny me not, I beseech Thee, deny me not the voice of Thy inspiration, as I have deserved by the offences I have committed against Thee. Tell me what Thou wilt have of me, for, by Thy grace, I am ready to do all that Thou wilt.
II.
When Jesus had been led back to Pilate, the governor inquired of the people whom they wished to have released at the Passover, Jesus or Barabbas, a murderer. But the people cried out, Not this man, but Barabbas. Then said Pilate, What, then, shall I do with Jesus? They answered, Let him be crucified. But what evil hath this innocent One done? replied Pilate: What evil hath he done? They repeated: Let him be crucified. And even up to this time, O God, the greater part of mankind continue to say, "Not this Man, but Barabbas"; preferring to Jesus Christ some pleasure of sense, some point of honour, some outbreak of wounded pride.
Ah, my Lord, well knowest Thou that at one time I did Thee the same injury when I preferred my accursed tastes to Thee. My Jesus, pardon me, for I repent of the past, and from henceforth I prefer Thee before everything. I esteem Thee, I love Thee more than any good; and am willing a thousand times to die rather than forsake Thee. Give me holy perseverance, give me Thy love.
|
|
|
| Our Lady of Nazareth - March 6th |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-06-2023, 07:49 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- Replies (1)
|
|
March 6: Our Lady of Nazareth, Pierre Noire, Portugal (1150)
![[Image: xOurLadyofNazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.x61W2miJZP.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xOurLadyofNazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.x61W2miJZP.webp)
The Abbot Orsini wrote: “This image was honored at Nazareth in the time of the apostles, if we may believe a writing which was found, by a hunter, attached to this image, in the year 1150.”
The Shrine of Our Lady of Nazareth, known in Portugal as Nossa Senhora da Nazare, is found in the village of Nazare on the Atlantic coast in Portugal. Indeed, the village is named after this miraculous statue of the Blessed Mother and the Christ Child that was brought to the area many centuries ago. According to tradition, this miraculous image was carved by the hands of Saint Joseph, the foster-father of Christ, while in the very presence of the Infant Jesus and the Mother of God. Later, the faces and hands of the images were painted by Saint Luke the Evangelist. This remarkable image is still preserved in a church where it can be viewed by anyone, and the story surrounding it is a fascinating one.
It is known that the statue of Our Lady of Nazareth came from the Holy Land where it was one of the oldest images ever venerated by Christians. It was saved from destruction at the hands of the iconoclasts sometime early in the 5th century by a monk named Ciriaco, who gave the statue to Saint Jerome. Saint Jerome later gave it to Saint Augustine in Africa, to protect the statue by removing it from the Holy Land. Saint Augustine then gave it into the safekeeping of the monastery of Cauliniana, near Merida, a monastery on the Iberian Peninsula.
Our Lady of Nazareth
When the Arabs invaded the Iberian Peninsula in the year 711, King Roderic met them with his Visigothic army at the battle of Guadalete, where he was soundly defeated.
It is a fact of history that the body of Roderic was never found upon the field of battle, although his horse was found, and it is often assumed by historians that Roderic died that day when he lost his kingdom. According to this legend, however, Roderic was not killed, but survived the battle and disguised himself as a beggar as he travelled north. Alone and unknown, he made his way to the monastery of Cauliniana where he sought shelter for the night. Going to confession, he of necessity revealed his true identity to the friar, Frei Romano. As it turned out, the monks were preparing to leave the monastery in advance of the Arabs, and so Frei Romano asked the king if he could accompany him in his travels. Roderic agreed, and the friar took with him the statue of Our Lady of Nazareth and the relics of Saint Bras and Saint Bartholomew.
They traveled together until they arrived at a place later named Monte de Saint Bartolomeu in November of the year 714. They made for themselves a hermitage with the friar living in a small cave at the edge of a cliff that overlooked the sea. He placed the image in a niche among the stones upon a pedestal of simple rocks. Roderic went a little ways off by himself to a hill where he also began to live the life of a hermit. After a year, though, King Roderic left the hermitage, and nothing else is said of him in this legend. One wonders if he ever learned of his kinsman Pelayo, who had retreated into the mountains and continued to heroically defy the invaders.
Before his death, Frei Romano hid the image in his small cave, where it remained undisturbed for some centuries until it was discovered by shepherds, who came there to venerate the statue. Inside that little, ancient sanctuary they had found the renowned and sacred image of Our Lady of Nazareth. Carved of wood, it was unlike any other statue of the Madonna they had ever seen, for it depicts the Blessed Virgin breastfeeding her Divine Child while seated upon a simple bench. When miracles began to frequently occur, it became a major pilgrimage center.
Then, in the early morning of September 14th in the year 1182, the mayor of Porto de Mos, Dom Fuas Roupinho, was hunting on his land when he observed a deer. Chasing it up a steep slope on horseback that misty morning, the fog became heavier all of a sudden. The deer, later suspected to be the devil in the guise of a deer, jumped off the edge of the hilltop into the empty void. Despite his efforts to stop his horse, the spirited mount was determined to follow after the deer. Helpless to save himself, the rider suddenly recognized that he was near the sacred grotto where he would often come to pray. Fuas Roupinho cried out to the Blessed Virgin, praying aloud: “Our Lady, Help Me!”
The horse stopped immediately, as if he were digging his hooves into the rocky cliff above the void. Suspended in an unnatural manner at the edge of the cliff, Fuas Rouphinho knew the drop to be over 100 meters, and surely would mean his death if he had fallen. He was then able to back slowly away from the edge, looking down to see the evidence of the impossible and unimaginable - for there in the hard stone was the imprint of one of his horse’s hooves. One of those marks can still be seen in the native rock.
Faus Rouphinho dismounted and went to the grotto to pray and give thanks, subsequently causing a chapel ‘Capela da Memoria,’ or ‘The Chapel of Remembrance,’ to be built very near the spot where his life had been miraculously saved. When the masons he had hired took apart the primitive altar in the cave, they found an ivory box of sorts that contained the relics of Saint Bras and Saint Bartholomew. There was also an ancient scroll that they carefully removed.
Opening the scroll, they found that it explained the history of the statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary and her Divine Child, now known as Our Lady of Nazareth, as outlined above.
The church Santuario de Nossa Senhora da Nazare was later built on the hilltop overlooking Nazare by King Ferdinand I of Portugal in the year 1377. Its construction was necessary due to the large number of pilgrims who continued to come to venerate the image. Over the years it was often rebuilt, or had additions made, especially in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. The profusely decorated and gilded apse displays the statue of Nossa Senhora da Nazare in a lighted niche above the main altar, flanked by twisted columns.
The first King of Portugal, Don Afonso Henriques, as well as the chief nobles of his court, were among the early pilgrims to the shrine. Many notable figures came to visit Our Lady of Nazareth throughout history, including Vasco de Gama, who came as a pilgrim before setting out for India, and Pedro Alvares Cabral, who later discovered Brazil. St Francis Xavier, the Apostle of the East, went on pilgrimage to Our Lady of Nazareth before later leaving for Goa.
According to a plaque placed in the chapel in 1623, the image was carved by Saint Joseph in Galilee when Jesus was a baby. Some decades later St Luke the Evangelist painted the faces and hands of the images. It remained in Nazareth until brought by the Greek monk Ciriaco to the Iberian Peninsula. It is believed to be one of the oldest images venerated by Christians.
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre 1984: Sedevacantism and Liberalism |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-05-2023, 10:48 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism
- No Replies
|
|
Archbishop Lefebvre: Sedevacantism and Liberalism
Spiritual Conference, Econe, 1984
Translation by Tradidi
Translator's Note: Captions added
Emphasis: The Catacombs
Same Erroneous Principle, Two Erroneous Solutions
This is more of a conference than a course, because if it were a course, we would have to give several courses and I would need a little more time than I had in order to prepare in detail the courses on a subject that is vast and which of course has very important practical consequences. Ecône's history is sufficiently enameled with events that are consequences of the situation in which the Church finds herself today, a situation which obviously poses a problem, and this problem is certainly unique. It’s the same problem that arises for those who leave us saying that we don’t obey the Pope, as well as for those who leave us because they say that there is no Pope. They both start from the same principle, which is that the Pope cannot [err] in a universal way, in other words, that in his universal acts he cannot err and that he cannot bind the Church in a way that is not in conformity with faith and morals.
So that's the stated principle. Therefore some people say:
Quote:Good. There’s the principle. It’s firmly established by Tradition, by theologians, by the doctrine of the Church. Now the Pope publishes acts that are harmful to the Church in the area of faith and morals. So he's not the pope, since he can't do that. So if he's not the pope, we no longer have a pope. That's not difficult [to understand]. So we are free from all the principles that link us to Rome, and so on... We are independent...
Ok, that's one solution. And then there are others who say:
Quote:No, it is not possible for the Pope to give us something that is harmful to the Church, in faith and morals, [not even] indirectly or implicitly. Now the Pope is the Pope. So we have to accept what the Pope gives us. And so everything that comes from Rome is good. It's essentially good. There may well be some incidents, some blunders, some little things that are not very good, but it’s still good. The Mass is good. You cannot say that the Mass is bad. It may well be extrinsically evil, because of some extrinsic things, but it does not have a bad principle. The very principles of the Mass are not affected. They are inviolable, since it was the Pope who gave them. The Pope cannot do anything against faith and morals when he speaks to the universal Church, therefore essentially all acts that come from the Holy See are good, so [the new] Canon Law is good. There may be little phrases that we could change, little details, okay, but basically it is good because they cannot give us bad things. End of story, all is clear.
And you, you are contesting [the new] Canon Law, you are contesting the [new] Mass, you are contesting the ecumenical bible, you are contesting everything that comes from Rome in a severe way. Therefore you are in disobedience and we will leave you. We prefer to be obedient.
So they go away and they return to obedience, in other words, [obedience] to liberalism, to progressivism, to the destruction of the Church, to the new Mass, to the new code of canon law...
Erroneous Principle
So what are you going to do? In my opinion, these solutions seem to suffer from too much simplicity. They just pose their principle like that, but they don't study it thoroughly. Such a principle like this one regarding the infallibility of the Church in disciplinary matters and in liturgical matters is nevertheless a principle that comes to us from Tradition. It has not been explicitly stated as such by Our Lord, at least not as explicitly as in Revelation, as the infallibility in faith and morals, which clearly is the direct object of infallibility, so there are no problems there. But there is also an indirect object of infallibility, an object as a complement to infallibility, which is exactly what dogmatic facts are for example. Dogmatic facts that are theological conclusions, these dogmatic facts, the disciplinary and cultural questions of the Church, are therefore the indirect object, which support the primary object that is the object of faith and morals, and which are implied precisely to the extent that faith and morals are also implied in these facts, in their theological conclusions, in dogmatic facts on disciplinary and cultural matters.
Direct vs Indirect Object of Infallibility
So, to identify these, we have the Tradition of the Church, the theologians, the popes in their Encyclicals and in the way they published their decrees concerning these various subjects. So it was concluded, theologians in general concluded, that when the Pope makes a decree for the universal Church and which dealt with the liturgy, with the general discipline of the Church, that the Pope cannot err, that the Pope is infallible.
But if we study things closely, we can nevertheless see that this infallibility, the infallibility in this area, is less absolute than in the primary object which is faith and morals directly.
And so there may be exceptions, there may be cases where the Pope, either by his mode of expression or by his personal affirmations about what he decrees, clearly shows that he does not intend to use his infallibility.
I think it is necessary that we read not just one page on law and infallibility in that well known book of Xavier da Silveira. Indeed, on this subject he draws a general conclusion, i.e. that the Church is infallible in terms of discipline and liturgy. But the thesis does not in any way assert that the law must be as perfect as possible, nor that it should implicitly contain all doctrine on the matter to which it refers, but only deals with the non-existence, in that which the law prescribes, of any implicit or explicit error in faith and morals.
This is the general conclusion of his study of Tradition. But then he rightly adds: it's a thesis to consider in its nuances.
A Thesis to Consider in It's Nuances
As we have seen, the thesis according to which the disciplinary and liturgical decrees promulgated for the universal Church are always guaranteed of infallibility, seems to receive the total support of Tradition.
However, before we continue to ask ourselves whether there are any contrary testimonies in Tradition, it seems that we can and must doubt that the thesis of infallibility in disciplinary and liturgical decrees has the magnitude that some theologians think they can attribute to it.
All right, you have to complete [reading], you don’t just read one sentence, you have to read everything. So a little further on he brings this up again.
Before considering the concrete case of the Novus Ordo, we will restate the principles set out so far and clearly state the matter of the question.
First, we have seen that, in general, neo-Scholastic textbooks consider as theologically certain the thesis that the universal laws of the Church, including liturgical laws, engage infallibility. Secondly, we then showed that this thesis has, or seems to have, a solid support in Tradition.
Thirdly, we pointed out that, despite the testimony of Tradition which has been alleged, there are also serious reasons, both doctrinal and historical for us, to doubt that universal laws always and necessarily imply the infallibility of the Church.
We noticed that this doubt has a support in Tradition because in many documents there are hesitations, restrictive expressions, about the thesis of infallibility in disciplinary and liturgical matters.
There is this danger, you see, of always taking certain truths that need to be explained and interpreted by the conditions under which the principles are developed, and of then denying these conditions, of denying, I would say, the historical conditions of the application of these principles and of thinking only of the principles in themselves, and of drawing conclusions without any concern for the historical conditions in which we find ourselves.
A Liberal Spirit is Incapable of Binding
However, there is one thing that caused us to be here, that is the cause of our resistance, and that is the fact that we’ve had three Liberal popes. What do you want me to do about it? It's not my fault! You may say: “Oh! You exaggerate, that's not true, that's not possible!” I wish I was exaggerating, but we have Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II, and they are liberals. They have a liberal spirit.
What is a Liberal spirit? It is a mind that is in complete confusion, in total confusion... They are not clear-minded. They don't want to define things. They don't want to see with clarity. It is a spirit that rejects theological clarity, the clarity of principles, the logic of principles. It bothers them because, for them, on the one hand, they would like to be absolutely in conformity with this clarity of the Church's faith, historical, and of all time. Such is an established truth that doesn’t change any more, applying for always, accepted for good. They would like to be able to say that. But on the other hand, they do not want to contradict modern ideas, ideas of evolution and ideas of the modern world, backed by this Masonic spirit that does not want dogmas, that does not want definite truth. “There are no definite truths, either natural or supernatural truths. It's always changing. We're still looking for the truth. Everybody's looking for the truth. We will never reach the truth, but we must always be in search of the truth. So in order to please the world, we must accept that also in the Church there is no definitive, absolutely definitive truth; there is always a more or less way to interpret this or that... There is no definitive truth.” So they are terribly confused and contradictory minds that are in constant incoherence.
So how do you want minds like these to promulgate acts which they themselves consider final and which oblige all the faithful to adhere to in a definitive way? They cannot do things like that. That is why they have always had restrictions in their comments, their letters, their formal communications, either in a consistory or in a public meeting. It seems to me, I haven't had time to find the document, that Pope John Paul II, on the occasion of the publication of the new Canon Law, in alluding to this the Law, said: “It's an essay, it's a stage, this Canon Law”. Again: evolution!
Prime Example: Bugnini
All the liturgy has been given as evolutionary, as susceptible to creativity, as susceptible to further evolution... It is enough to read the principles of our friend Bugnini, in his book that you now have in the library, La Reforma liturgica, by Annibale Bugnini, a huge posthumous book, but which was directed by Msgr. Bugnini himself. So I invite you to read on page 50: Actiora principia, the principles that have been those of liturgical reform, the great principles, the principle of principles, which have given the direction of the new liturgy. I assure you, this is really instructive. It is necessary to read these things so that we know what the thinking of those who were the legislators was. After all, who was the legislator for the [new] liturgy? Clearly it's Bugnini. Bugnini was the author of the new liturgy.
As Cardinal Chicognagi said: “he can go to the Holy Father and make him sign whatever he wants, whenever he wants.” Well, yes, because the Holy Father had complete confidence in Bugnini. How, why, I don't know all this, but it is a fact, he had complete confidence with the liturgy. He put him in charge of the liturgical commission. He even gathered [them] under his authority, practically as secretary for the Congregation for Divine Worship, and the Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments which he abolished and reunited with the Congregation for Divine Worship. Therefore he was all-powerful on Worship and Sacraments, this Msgr. Bugnini. The Pope trusted him completely. He is the author of this normative mass. And he didn't hide this, he said it himself. He told us, the Superiors General gathered together, when he was explaining his normative Mass to us. So what are this man’s principles?
Liturgy and theology form prayers. In them, through sensible signs, the sanctification of man is signified and realized, and thus implemented, by the mystical Body of Christ, leader and member (attention!) leader and member, the totality of public worship!
See immediately the idea: there are no longer only priests, not just the hierarchy, offering worship to which the faithful join themselves. No: “implemented, by the Mystical Body of Christ, leader and member, the totality of public worship.”
In the fourth paragraph: Manifestations of the Church:
Quote:In the liturgical celebration, when all the people of God gather to participate fully and actively in the same action, around the same altar, united in prayer, the greatest manifestation of the Church is realized.
See this idea is always: the people of God, the worship rendered to God, the participation of the whole Mystical Body, priest and faithful, and everyone, leader and members.
Quote:And because it is a ‘sacrament of unity’, the liturgical actions belong to the whole body of the Church. This is why such community celebration must always be preferred to individual celebration.
That's Protestantism! Luther couldn't have said it better! It's the same thing. This is the death of private masses. It's all over!
Quote:In it the nature of the Church must appear, communal and hierarchical. All participate, but each one fulfills his or her responsibility according to the ministry received [so everyone has received a ministry!] ..and the liturgical rules. The path opened by the Council is intended [listen carefully!] is intended to radically change the face of the traditional liturgical assemblies in which customarily the liturgical service is carried out almost exclusively by the clergy. The people too often attend as strangers and silent spectators.
These are Bugnini's ideas. They’re false, they’re based on a lie, a historical lie, and a real lie. To say that these faithful who were there for centuries before Bugnini ever existed, that they participated in the Mass in a silent way and as strangers, all those people who sanctified themselves through the Mass, all these Christian families who are sanctified by the Holy Mass and by all the liturgical services! As if it were necessary for these people to shout or to clap their hands and express their sensitive participation in order to participate in the Mass! That spiritual participation is not much more important than external participation! Is it not precisely spiritual participation that is the true participation of the faithful? This work of education must make it clear that the liturgy is an action of all the people of God.
You see, this is a serious mistake. There's a heresy underneath it. Underneath it... I’m not saying that it is formally heretical, I’m saying that underneath it there’s a heresy. It is [the claim] that the priesthood of the faithful and the priesthood of priests is the same, that everyone is a priest and that all the people of God must offer the sacrifice of mass. This is the same mistake we find in the new Canon Law.
So, when you see these things, when you read these things, you say to yourself that there is something wrong with the Church. What do you want me to do about it? I'm not the one who's making this up. There's something not quite right, something that’s wrong.
So then, what did the Church do for twenty centuries? What does the Church think of herself? What idea does she have of herself? And yes, they said it, and they repeated it over and over again during the Council: “the Church must now become conscious of what she is, of the new vision she must have... of the new conception she must have of herself!” What must we think of these Fathers of the Church, these bishops, these theologians who said such things?
So... [they say that] a long work of education will have to make it clear that the liturgy is an action of God's people and the consequences will not only be liturgical, but will have a beneficial effect on the development of the sense of the Church and the birth of the various ministries at the service of the community. Various ministries that are now given to the laity... This is why each one has his ministry because each one exercises his priesthood.
No More "Rigid Uniformity"
Fifth paragraph: Unity in substance and not rigid uniformity.
Obviously, the rigid uniformity, that's aimed at us! Unity in substance, you'll see what kind of unity in substance!
We must recognize that this principle represents a real break with the past. For centuries the Church has wanted that in the Roman rite worship happens with perfect uniformity. The two liturgical reforms - at least they were clear! They did not deceive people, like [today] when many bishops say: "But there have been other reforms in the Church. This is not the first reform, this Vatican reform. There was that of St. Pius V, and there was the Gregorian reform in the 8th century"... - these two liturgical reforms, that of the 8th century and that of the 16th century, had precisely this purpose (this perfect uniformity). The six liturgical books published in the typical edition from 1568 to 1614 were for four centuries the Church's prayer code, which no one was allowed to add to or take away from.
In 1587, Sixtus V established the Sacred Congregation of Rites as the supreme organ for the conservation of sacred rites. (Not for the change of sacred rites: for the conservation of sacred rites). And the seven volumes that gather about 5,000 decrees from this Dicastery up to the present day bear witness to the scrupulous care with which that supreme authority defended the law of the unique form of prayer for the whole Church.
5000 decrees!
Nevertheless, he [Bugnini] decided that today the social, religious and cultural conditions have changed so much. That people are in the process of developing and opening up to the light of the Gospel, that they strongly feel the need not to abandon what constitutes an authentic expression of their own soul and a heritage often still untouched – as a matter of fact!... - linked to deeply rooted usage and customs.
With five or six sentences, the whole past is sent packing, and Bugnini invents his normative Mass and the whole liturgy is overturned, and it is necessary to adapt the liturgical language to all peoples, to suppress the liturgical language... It is frightening!
A New Definition of Tradition
We see once more these principles on the subject of untainted tradition and legitimate progress, in chapter six:
Quote:It has been written that true Tradition, in great things, is not to redo what many others have done, but to find the spirit that caused things to be done [in one way] and in a completely different way in different times.
Like this, we can do anything! It is enough to find the spirit of Tradition, which would do things completely differently in other times! This is what he calls Tradition!
Recovering the spirit, a work of research - sure! It is a question of revision, natural spontaneity, study, meditation, prayer. To rediscover the spirit and make it speak to the rite the language of our own time, so that today's man can understand that language, which once used to be mysterious and sacred..
With that, it's all over, we can do whatever we want! That is the spirit in which these Liberals talk and act. So he [Bugnini] practically imposed his reform on Paul VI. Why do I say “imposed”? Because Paul VI himself criticized it. He criticized Bugnini's reform. He criticized, in particular and publicly, the absence of the exorcism [prayers] in baptism. He said "I don't know why the exorcisms of baptism were removed.” And, secondly, he also expressed regrets about the change of the Offertory in Mass.
Abnormal Times
From John XXIII onwards, we can say that we are no longer in a normal time of the Church. We no longer have normal popes, popes who have this clear vision of principles, of faith, of Tradition, of their duty... of their duty, which Pope Pius IX said about the First Vatican Council, the duty of “non proponere doctrinam novam neque ex cogitare revelationes, sed revelata exponere et custodire.” [For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.] And the popes have always condemned the comparison that could be made between human science and the science of faith. It's not the same thing. As much as human science can evolve and progress, the science of faith progresses only in its definition, in its expression, but not in its substance. Because revelation was completed after the death of the last apostle and it is then the role of the Church to define, from the death of the last apostle to our time, to define what is in revelation, that is all. And keep revelation, keep the deposit.
Yet, this is one idea that these liberal popes, and all these liberals do not have, this permanence of revelation, this immutability of revelation, [instead] they always talk about progress, the adaptation of mankind to modern things...
So if these popes give us something, the acts they give us are not given... I conclude that these acts which come to us from Rome, which come to us from those popes who, once again, are surrounded - for it is Rome which is occupied by liberalism, it is not only the Pope who is liberal. He is surrounded by people even more liberal than himself. So there is a whole group in Rome now, which did not exist in the past, and which cannot give us laws in the same way the popes used to give us before, because they no longer have the true Catholic spirit on this subject. They do not have a clearly Catholic conception of infallibility, the immutability of dogma, the permanence of Tradition, the permanence of Revelation, or even, I would say, doctrinal obedience. With all that pluralism they always talk about, and then this religious indifference, see, this tendency to want to make almost part of the Church all those who make some reference to Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Blurred Lines
So the limits of the Church become blurred. They no longer have a clear definition of the Church. Everything becomes blurred. We don't know where it ends anymore. As Cardinal Weismann, whose letter was read to you, said, there are no longer limits to the Church.
So all these notions that they have, you see, prevent them from defining acts with exactly the same conditions and the same approach as the popes did in former times. It seems to me that is clear. And that is why we are all in an unbelievable confusion.
So if we want to reason with the same logical principles of yesteryear, principles, I’d say, that have always been used, a principle like “the Pope cannot give us anything contrary to faith and morals, not even implicitly, in liturgical acts and disciplinary matters”, then we must choose:
- Either there is something bad in what they gave us, and so they are not popes.
- Or they are popes and therefore we must obey, and that’s it. There is no intermediate situation.
But that's not true. That is not true. We are faced with a new situation in the Church because of the introduction of this liberal and modernist spirit into the higher levels of the Church. That is a fact. No one can deny that. The modernists and liberals have no conception of the Church, nor of infallibility, nor of the obligation of infallibility, nor of faith itself, of the immutability of faith, which is that of the Church, which is that of the Church herself.
Essentially Incoherent
So if we ask them each question in particular, they will say “oh yes, oh yes, we believe like the Church does..”, but in reality, no, they don't act like they have that faith. And this is typical for the Liberal, as defined by Cardinal Bio: “The Liberal Catholic is essentially incoherent.” What does incoherence mean? Well, he says one thing, but he does the opposite. He says one thing, but in practice he has other principles. So he is in a continuous inconsistency.
That's what causes these popes to be double-faced in a way. This was said very explicitly of Paul VI, but it may as well be said of John Paul II. Double-faced. So at certain times, [they have a] Catholic face: “But of course, look there, the Pope is traditional, he does this, he does that..” But then a little later we see the other face, with his ecumenism, with religious freedom, with human rights and all that..
So how do we reconcile all this? This is why Pope Pius IX dared to say that the Church's worst enemies were liberal Catholics. He’s very harsh on them, this Pope Pius IX. You will find this in the quotations, in Fr. Roussel’s little book on Liberal Catholicism. There are many quotes from Pope Pius IX about Catholics, quotes that are not found in the official acts of Pius IX. He evidently took them from Roman documents, but regardless, they’re all from Pope Pius IX, but these are documents that one can't find, that one can hardly find anywhere else. He is very hard on Liberal Catholics. And we must understand - while not saying that they are all excommunicated, that they are all heretical, no... he could have said that, Pope Pius IX, but he did not say that “all liberal Catholics are heretics, all liberal Catholics are excommunicated.” No! [Neither did he say that] “they are the worst enemies of the Church, therefore he should excommunicate them anyway and say that they are schismatic” No, for the exact reason that they are always borderline, sometimes they affirm their Catholic faith, and later on they destroy the Catholic faith with their actions. They share common ground with the enemies of the Church... There's nothing worse than that! This is the worst misfortune that can befall the Church, this kind of continuous betrayal, continuous back and forth...
Pope Honorius
So we find ourselves in historical circumstances like these. What can we do about it?
When Pope Honorius was condemned, he was condemned as Pope. And yet, the Council of Constantinople – I believe it was Pope Leo II, although I’m not sure - condemned Pope Honorius for favoring heresy. He didn’t say “he favored heresy, so he was no longer the Pope.” No. And neither did he say "since he was the pope, you had to obey him and accept what he said.” No, because he condemned him! So what did [Catholics] have to do then? Well, one had to admit that Pope Honorius was the Pope, but one did not have to follow him because he favoured heresy!
Isn't that the conclusion then? That seems to me the normal conclusion. Well, we're in that situation. One day these popes will be condemned by their successors. One day the truth will return. It is not possible, this error which is truly at the base of the whole [new] liturgy, the principles of the [new] liturgy and the principles of [new] Canon Law, that the Church is defined by all the people of God who participate in the priesthood of Our Lord, and that each one, according to his ministry, fulfills his duties in the Church... This is the confusion of the Church! The confusion of the priesthood!
They Say One Thing, They Do the Opposite
So they say “but look here, in the Council..”, and so they speak of the Council, so the Council says explicitly that “there is an essential difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the priesthood of priests.” This is explicitly stated in the Council, in the Constitution of the Church. But beware, continue reading the Church's document and you will see that in the following pages it is total confusion. They mix everything, the priesthood of priests and the priesthood of the faithful. That is what's inconceivable, you see!
In the document of religious freedom, you will find it stated that “this doctrine changes nothing of traditional doctrine.” So you will say to me that “therefore this scheme is in conformity with the traditional doctrine since it is explicitly stated in the decree..” Ok, but in the whole decree, everything is contrary to traditional doctrine! That's how it is! We can’t fault them like that: “What did you say? That Canon Law, the definition of the Church, the priesthood of priests, the priesthood of the faithful is mixed, and there are no more distinctions?... But take the clerics [for example]... There are still clerics, and clerics are always well defined in the new Canon Law, and they do say that the priesthood of the faithful is different from that of clerics.” Yes, they do say that, and they can tell us that if we object to them, but in practice they will act, both in the liturgy and in the whole of Canon Law, they will act as if there is no distinction. That is what is scary.
The munus docendi [duty to teach], the munus sanctificandi [duty to sanctify] is now given to the people of God, and not only to priests! But regardless, it was Our Lord who said to the apostles "go and teach”. The munus docendi, there is indeed the Ecclesia docens and the Ecclesia dicens. All the same, there is this distinction, which has always been there in the Church, until now. So now, no, it's over, it's all Ecclesia docens, since the munus docendi is clearly in Canon Law, it's given to all the people of God! So where's the Ecclesia dicens? She disappeared...
Munus Docendi, Santificandi, Regendi
So, in this article of the Osservatore Romano, of 17 March 1984 you will find this: “The role of the laity in the new law.” Incredible, incredible!
It is with the same contempt that they treat the past, the same contempt as Bugnini who said: “They were passively present, the faithful at Mass, etc.” Here it is the same thing:
Quote:The new Law poses problems for canonical doctrine and raises questions, fundamental problems on what the constitution of the Church is, in the determination of which, in the recent past, the legal figure of the laity “appariera assai sfumata” - I don't know if you guess, the term itself is very... like a kind of... who will translate it for me? there, the Italians... - the legal figure of the layman appeared rather vaporous... sfumata... as a smoke... even non-existent....
The laity were therefore non-existent in Canon Law. But all Canon Law has been made for the faithful! All that was said for priests was to sanctify the faithful! So, because there were not more pages on the laity than on priests and the hierarchy of the Church, so then “the laity were fuzzy and practically non-existent.” That's unbelievable!
So really, they can imagine that for twenty centuries the Church has made rules, the Church has had a Law, the Church has promulgated a magnificent Canon Law, promulgated by the Holy Pope Pius X, and all the rest, and then the laity, the faithful did not exist! When did you ever read such things? In the Osservatore Romano, in the official journal of Rome, of the Church!
So now, on the contrary, the new Canon Law is in the context of an image of the Church – at that time, it was still the image of the Church, and seemed to uniquely coincide with that of the hierarchy. – ..
As if the Church consisted only in the hierarchy! In a way, this is somewhat true, according to the definition of the Church that Pope Pius X gave: "The Church is composed of clergy and lay people, and the clergy are responsible for sanctifying the laity, teaching and directing them". It is true that powers and duties are given to the clergy. The good God wanted it so, for the sanctification of the laity, for the spiritual uplifting of the laity, and not for the pleasure of the clergy itself. That's clear, so that's perfectly normal.
Then there is only one thing that bothers them a little bit, in the total assimilation of the laity and the clergy, so for the munus docendi, the parents teach their children and everyone teaches... So everybody teaches, not only the clergy, but also the laity! For the munus sanctificandi, and well now the laity give communion, even lay people can preach eventually, so there is also the munus, both docendi and sanctificandi.
And finally, munus regendi [duty to shepherd], it's a little more complicated for them to give that! They don't really want to share power with the laity... He says so explicitly:
Quote:For munus regendi, it's a little more difficult. “Si pensi solo a fare un exempio”, as an example obviously there are things that are not yet quite adapted in Canon Law... “al delicato problema dei repororti a ordine sacro e munus regendi in relatione ad ad eventutuello titolarita di uffici comportanti di potesta juridictione della parte dei laïci”.
So there’s a difficulty here. It is a bit complicated to think that we could give the laity power of jurisdiction. But finally, that too will come... They'll find a solution!
Judging in Exceptional Context
See, I think that's where our whole problem lies. We live in an exceptional time. We cannot judge everything that is done in the Church according to normal times. We find ourselves in an exceptional situation, it is also necessary to interpret the principles that should govern our ecclesiastical superiors. These principles, we must see them in the minds of those who live today, those principles that were so clear in the past, so simple, that no one was discussing them, that we did not have the opportunity to discuss them, they fail, I would say, in the minds of the Liberals, in the minds, as I explained to you, that have no clarity of vision... It changes the situation. We are in a situation of unbelievable confusion. So let's not draw mathematical conclusions like that, without considering these circumstances. Because then we make mistakes:
- Either we endorse the revolution in the Church, and participate in the destruction of the Church, and we leave with the progressives
- Or we leave the Church completely and find ourselves where? Who with? What with? How would we be linked to the apostles, how connected to the origins of the Church? Gone... and how long is this going to last? So if the last three conclaves should no longer be considered valid, as those in America say who have consecrated their own bishops, and if then there is no longer a Pope, and if are no more cardinals either.. ? We don't see how we could once more obtain a legitimate pope... No! That's a complete mess!
So it seems to me that we must stay on this course of common sense, and of the direction which also agrees with the good sense of the faithful, the sense of faith of the faithful, who in 90% of the cases follow the orientations of the Society and would not understand either one or the other.
They don't want to go over to the progressives and then go to the new Mass and accept all the changes. That, they don't accept at all, saying that if anyone is so inclined, let them go then, but we don't want to. We remain as we are now, we want to keep Tradition. But neither do we want to separate ourselves completely from the Pope, [saying] "There is no longer a pope, there is no longer anything, there is no more authority, we don't know to whom we are attached, there is no more Rome, there is no more Catholic Church". That [solution] doesn’t work either. They are lost too, they feel lost, they are disoriented.
Sensus Fidei
So they keep this sense of faith, the sense that Providence gives to the good faithful and to today’s good priests, [this sense] to keep the faith, to stay put, to keep their attachment to Rome as well and to remain faithful to the apostolicity, to the visibility of the Church, which are essential things, even if they do not follow the Popes when they favour heresy, as Pope Honorius did. He's been convicted. Those who would have followed Pope Honorius at that time would have been mistaken since he was condemned afterwards.
So then, I believe that we would be misled in actually following the Popes in what they are doing... but they will probably also one day be condemned by the ecclesiastical authority.
God Does Not Bless Liars
I would like to insist on those things. It is difficult, I recognize that this is a truly painful situation, but it is unfortunate to see our confreres acting, I would say, so lightly and certainly those American confreres who have left us with a disloyalty that is inconceivable and beyond imagination: deceiving us right up to the moment of their priesthood, to sign commitments, to promise to remain faithful to the Society, to promise me obedience when I ordain them... and 48 hours later, saying goodbye and then leaving us [saying] “I don't know you anymore!” I think that these priests live in a state of continual mortal sin! It's not possible, you can't renounce your word like that, at that point, for such sacred things as ordination! To steal the ordination in a way, by a continuous lie, by continuous disloyalty, until the last minute, until the very moment of ordination, to say "yes" to the question "do you accept obedience?", and 48 hours later, to leave. It is not possible! In front of God, that's not possible! That's such a lie! God cannot allow things like that and bless such situations! That's not possible!
|
|
|
|
| The Penitential Psalms in the Liturgy of Lent |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-04-2023, 10:34 AM - Forum: Lent
- Replies (1)
|
|
The Penitential Psalms in the Liturgy of Lent
NLM | March 3, 2023
In his Life of St Augustine, St Possidius of Calama writes that in his final illness, the great doctor “had ordered the Psalms of David, those very few which concern penance, be written out; and lying on his bed … read the four of them (from the pages) attached to the wall, and wept copiously and continuously.” (chapter 31) He does not say which four these were, but we may safely assume that Psalm 50, often known by its first word in Latin, “Miserere”, was included among them, long recognized as the penitential psalm par excellence.
![[Image: funeral-of-st-augustine-1465.jpg]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xl1qgz72Sq4/WMMMo68ufNI/AAAAAAAALGM/5qQkNsSao44gmU1rYuMEhMZ2kg8_bCa1QCLcB/s400/funeral-of-st-augustine-1465.jpg)
The Funeral of St Augustine, by Benozzo Gozzoli, 1465, in the church of St Augustine in San Geminiano, Italy.
In the following century, Cassiodorus (ca 485-585), in his massive Exposition of the Psalms, refers in many places to the Penitential Psalms as a group, and when commenting on the first of them, Psalm 6, lists the others, according to the traditional numbering of the Septuagint: 31, 37, 50, 101, 129 and 142. (The list is given twice more, in the comments on Psalms 50 and 142.) At the conclusion of this section, he states that these seven are especially worthy of attention, since they “are given to the human race as an appropriate medicine, from which we receive a most salutary cleansing of our souls, revive from our sins, and by mourning, come to eternal joy.” As he explains each one individually, he often relates it in some way to one or more of the other six, as for example Psalm 142, which is placed last in the group “because these psalms begin from afflictions, and end in joys, lest anyone despair of that forgiveness which he knows has been set forth in these prayers.”
Cassiodorus takes it for granted that his reader know this tradition, and therefore we may safely assume it was already part of the Church’s prayer by his time; his influence was very strong in the Middle Ages, and we may also assume that his writing did much to solidify its place in the liturgy. They were added to a variety of rites, such as the dedication of a Church according to the Roman Pontifical; in the traditional ordination rite, the bishop enjoins those who receive tonsure and the minor orders “to say one time the seven Penitential Psalms, with the Litany (of the Saints) and the versicles and prayers (that follow).”
![[Image: 02%2BSan%2BGallen%2Bms.jpg]](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mgxN_lDLdT0/WMMPdgd_QFI/AAAAAAAALGY/VdBE6ErpAkADDSjRv02qSBULmtNmpbqCQCLcB/s400/02%2BSan%2BGallen%2Bms.jpg)
One of the oldest manuscripts of Cassiodorus’ Exposition of the Psalms, from the library of the Swiss monastery of San Gallen. (Cod. Sang. 200, 950-75 A.D.)
Of course, they are particularly prominent in the liturgy of Lent. The customary of the Papal court known as the Ordinal of Innocent III (1198-1216) prescribes that they be said after Lauds every ferial day of Lent, together with the Litany of the Saints. To these were added the fifteen Gradual Psalms (119-133) before Matins, and the Office of the Dead, a burden which unquestionably increased the temptation to add more Saints to the calendar, since these supplementary Offices were routinely omitted on feast days. The Breviary of St Pius V distributed them over the days of the week, so that the Office of the Dead would be said on the first ferial day of each week of Lent, the Gradual Psalms on Wednesdays and the Penitentials on Fridays, if the Office was of the feria. This remained in force until the reform of St Pius X, in which all mandatory recitation of them in the Office was abolished; the Gradual and Penitential Psalms are not included as specific groups in the post-Conciliar Liturgy of the Hours.
The Use of Rome, with characteristic simplicity, simply recites the Psalms as a group with a single antiphon, based on the words of Tobias 3, 3-4: “Ne reminiscaris Domine delicta nostra, vel parentum nostrorum: neque vindictam sumas de peccatis nostris. – Remember not, Lord, our offenses, nor those of our forefathers, nor take Thou vengeance upon our sins.” In other Uses, the antiphon was followed by a series of versicles like those sung with the Litany of the Saints, and various prayers; this custom was highly developed in German-speaking lands, less so elsewhere. At Augsburg, for example, each day of the week had a different collect to conclude the recitation of the Penitential Psalms; the prayer for Monday was as follows.
“Deus, qui confitentium tibi corda purificas, et accusantes se ab omni vinculo iniquitatis absolvis: da indulgentiam reis, et medicinam tribue vulneratis; ut percepta remissione omnium peccatorum, in sacramentis tuis sincera deinceps devotione permaneamus, et nullum redemptionis æternæ sustineamus detrimentum.
O God, who purify the hearts of those that confess to Thee, and release from every bond those that accuse themselves, grant forgiveness to the guilty, and bring healing to the wounded, so that, having received the remission of all sins, we may henceforth abide in Thy sacraments with true devotion, and suffer no detriment to eternal salvation.”
![[Image: 04%2BLivre%2Bd%2527heures%2Bde%2BLouis%2...olles.jpeg]](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_0x46dCn4A4/WMMUhZA9SSI/AAAAAAAALGw/upBsEaDFNK8oJ3Q2YebY1N3GbhRFXZEVACLcB/s400/04%2BLivre%2Bd%2527heures%2Bde%2BLouis%2Bde%2BRoncherolles.jpeg)
The beginning of the Penitential Psalms in the Book of Hours of Louis de Roncherolles, end of the 5th or beginning of the 16th century. (Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal, Ms-1191 réserve, Bibliothèque nationale de France)
At Salzburg, the intentions for reciting the Penitential Psalms were summed up in the following prayer, attested in a few other breviaries and books of hours.
Quote:“Suscipere digneris, omnipotens Deus, hos septem psalmos consecratos, quos ego indignus et peccator decantavi in honore nominis tui, et beatissimæ Genitricis tuæ Virginis Mariæ, in honore sanctorum Angelorum, Prophetarum, Patriarcharum, in honore sanctorum Apostolorum, in honore sanctorum Martyrum, Confessorum, Virginum et Viduarum, et sanctorum Innocentum, in honore omnium Sanctorum, pro me misero famulo tuo N., pro cunctis consanguineis meis, pro omnibus amicis et inimicis meis, pro omnibus his qui mihi bona et mala fecerunt, vivis et defunctis: concede, Domine Jesu Christe, ut hi psalmi proficiant nobis ad salutem et veram pænitentiam agendam, et vitam æternam consequendam.
Deign thou to receive, almighty God, these seven holy psalms, which I, though unworthy and a sinner, have sung unto the honor of Thy name, and of Thy most blessed Mother the Virgin Mary, to the honor of the holy Angels, Prophets and Patriarchs, to the honor of the holy Apostles, to the honor of the holy Martyrs, Confessors, Virgins and Widows, and the Holy Innocents, to the honor of all the Saints, for myself Thy wretched servant, for all my relatives, for all my friends and enemies, for all those who have done me good and ill, both living and dead; grant, o Lord Jesus Christ, that these Psalms may profit us unto salvation and the doing of true penance, the obtaining of eternal life.”
The Penitential Psalms were also generally used at the beginning of Lent, at the ceremony by which the public penitents were symbolically expelled from the church, and again on Holy Thursday, when they were brought back in. These ceremonies were particularly elaborate in the Use of Sarum, but similar rites were observed in a great many other places. After Sext of Ash Wednesday, a sermon was given; a priest in red cope, accompanied by deacon, subdeacon and the usual minor ministers, then prostrated before the altar, while the choir said the seven penitential psalms. At the end of these were said a series of versicles and prayers, most of which refer directly to the public penitents.
Quote:“Dómine Deus noster, qui offensióne nostra non vínceris, sed satisfactione placaris: réspice, quæsumus, super hos fámulos tuos, qui se tibi gráviter peccasse confitémur: tuum est enim absolutiónem críminum dare, et veniam præstáre peccántibus, qui dixisti pænitentiam te malle peccatóris quam mortem. Concéde ergo, Dómine, his fámulis tuis, ut tibi pænitentiæ excubias celebrant; et correctis áctibus suis, conferri sibi a te sempiterna gaudia gratulentur.
Lord our God, who are not overcome by our offense, but appeased by satisfaction; look we beseech Thee, upon these Thy servants, who confess that they have gravely sinned against Thee; for it is Thine to give absolution of crimes, and grant forgiveness to those who sin, even Thou who said that Thou wishest the repentance of sinners, rather than their death. Grant therefore, o Lord, to these Thy servants, that they may keep the watches of penance, and by correcting their deeds, rejoice that eternal joys are given them of Thee.”
The ashes were then blessed, followed by a procession, which, as I noted in an article last week, was a normal part of the Ash Wednesday ceremonies in the Middle Ages. The Sarum Processional specifies that a cross was not used, but an “ash-colored banner” was carried instead at the head of the procession. At the door, the penitents were taken by the hand, and led out of the church, while the following responsory was sung, reprising an ancient theme of meditation on the Fall of Man in the readings of Genesis in Septuagesima.
![[Image: 03%2BSarum%2BProcessional.png]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ur-m4wmQAl4/WMMRFTgwMjI/AAAAAAAALGk/y2cxh9BpVKE0XzjL-luGP6bvKQZP_RFJACLcB/s400/03%2BSarum%2BProcessional.png)
An illustration from a Sarum Processional of the Ash Wednesday procession; the captions reads “The station on the day of ashes, when the bishop expels the penitents.” The ash-colored banner is seen up top. Reproduced in a modern edition by WG Henderson, 1882. (This would seem to be one of the inspirations for Fr Fortescue’s famous little illustrations in the Ceremonies of the Roman Rite.)
R. Behold, Adam is become like one of us, knowing good and evil; see ye lest he take of the tree of life, and live forever. V. The Cherubim, and the flaming, turning sword, to guard the way to the tree of life. See ye…
On Holy Thursday, when the penitents were brought back into the church, usually referred to as their “reconciliation”, the process was reversed, again by a priest in a red cope, accompanied by the various grades of ministers and the ash-colored banner. This ceremony deserves its own post, which I shall do on Holy Thursday; suffice it therefore to note here that the penitential Psalms are said again before the final absolution is imparted.
|
|
|
|
| France green-lights biometric medical ID |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-04-2023, 08:24 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
France green-lights biometric medical ID
Upcoming centralization.
![[Image: france-digi-id.jpg]](https://reclaimthenet.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/france-digi-id.jpg)
reclaimthenet.org | March 3, 2023
French data protection agency CNIL has greenlit the use of facial biometrics for the verification of users of the country’s upcoming digital health card, the Carte Vitale.
According to a report by French news outlet The Connexion, CNIL claims that facial recognition will make the health card app more “secure.” However, facial recognition on the Carte Vitale app will only be used until the country’s upcoming national digital ID, the France Identite, is available.
France Identite will replace or complement traditional physical identity cards.
Carte Vitale is aimed at replacing physical health cards. Last fall, the app was trialed in several regions. During the trial, users verified their identities using selfies.
To access health services, users in the trial scanned their digital health cards using a QR code or NFC (near-field communication) technology.
Aside from approving the use of facial recognition in Carte Vitale, CNIL has also approved its wide rollout. The government plans to make the health app available to all health-insured people living in France by the end of 2025.
|
|
|
|
| EPA Head Admits Kids Should Be Nowhere Near East Palestine Water |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-04-2023, 08:21 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
EPA Head Admits Kids Should Be Nowhere Near East Palestine Water
ZH [sligltly adapted] | MAR 03, 2023
The aftermath of the freight train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, persists, with residents and rail workers reporting illnesses and the Biden administration facing criticism regarding an inadequate federal response. The 38-car derailment occurred one month ago and resulted in the release of vinyl chloride into the air via a controlled burn, and questions swirl about why testing for dioxins wasn't conducted immediately after the derailment.
Earlier this week, EPA Administrator Michael Regan visited East Palestine. He addressed reporters about the ongoing situation. Journalist Nick Sorter asked the commissioner:
"Mr. Commissioner, let me ask you really quick, would you allow your children to touch the water? We've seen the rainbow sheen, we've seen all of these chemicals popping up from the bottom of the streams that these kids used to play in. Would you allow your kids anywhere close to these streams right now?"
Regan's response:
"I would not. I'm a father of a 9-year-old. I think we have to all agree we wish this accident didn't occur, but the accident occurred and as a result some of our creeks and streams have pollution in them."
Here's the video:
On Thursday, environmental activist Erin Brockovich returned to East Palestine for the second time in less than a week. She met with people experiencing health issues after last month's train derailment.
"I have been on a lot of environmental situations, and I have never seen anything in my life be so mismanaged ever," Brockovich said.
During last night's public meeting, about 200 residents showed up in the high school auditorium. Frustration quickly erupted when EPA regional administrator Debra Shore told residents:
"EPA monitors have not detected any volatile organic compounds above levels of health concerns in the community that are attributable to the train derailment."
The situation worsened when Norfolk Southern CEO Alan Shaw was a no-show again to the public meeting. Instead, Darrell Wilson, an official with Norfolk Southern, attended the meeting. He told concerned residents:
"We're ready to start tomorrow morning at 6 a.m. … That is not our decision to make. We are no longer in control of the site.
"We're going to do the right thing. We're going to do the right thing. We're going to clean up the site. We're going to clean up the site."
While Wilson was speaking, a woman in the crowd yelled:
"You should have done it right the first time."
Another woman told local news WKBN that she experiences headaches inside her home and cannot sell her property due to fears that the next owner's children may develop cancer. Other residents shared a similar story.
Despite residents and workers in the town getting sick and animals dying at surrounding state parks, the EPA only decided on Thursday to enforce Norfolk Southern to test the area for dioxins.
It is possible that both the EPA and Norfolk Southern understand the dissipation of dioxins over time, which could be the reason behind the one-month delay in testing for dioxins.
In an op-ed on The Guardian, Stephen Lester, a toxicologist and the science director of the Center for Health, Environment & Justice, a project of the People's Action Institute, wrote, "Here's the real reason the EPA doesn't want to test for toxins in East Palestine."
Quote:The decision to release and burn five tanker cars of vinyl chloride and other chemicals at the site of a 38-car derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, just over three weeks ago unleashed a gigantic cloud full of particulates that enveloped surrounding neighborhoods and farms in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
It is well documented that burning chlorinated chemicals like vinyl chloride will generate dioxins. "Dioxin" is the name given to a group of persistent, very toxic chemicals that share similar chemical structures. The most toxic form of dioxin is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin or TCDD. TCDD is more commonly recognized as the toxic contaminant found in Agent Orange and at Love Canal, New York and Times Beach, Missouri, both sites of two of the most tragic environmental catastrophes in US history.
Dioxin is not deliberately manufactured. It is the unintended byproduct of industrial processes that use or burn chlorine. It is also produced when chemicals such as vinyl chloride are burned such as occurred in East Palestine.
The organization I work for, the Center for Health, Environment & Justice, has worked with communities affected by dioxins for over 40 years. We have seen the impact of exposure to dioxins in communities from Love Canal and Times Beach to Pensacola, Florida. And now, we are asking, why isn't EPA testing for dioxins in East Palestine, Ohio? Are dioxins present in the soil downwind from the site of the accident?
At a townhall meeting in East Palestine last week, people talked about what it was like when the black cloud reached their property. One person who lived 15 miles away described burned ash material from the fire that settled on her property. Another who lived 3 miles away described how the black cloud completely smothered his property. Repeatedly people asked: was it safe for my kids to play in the yard? Is it safe to grow a garden? What is going to happen to my farm animals?
These are important questions that deserve to be answered. Today there are no clear answers. Why? Because no one has done any testing for dioxins anywhere in East Palestine. No one. And, it seems, that the EPA is uninterested in testing for dioxins, behaving as though dioxin is no big deal.
This makes no sense. Testing for dioxin, a highly toxic substance, should have been one of the first things to look for, especially in the air once the decision was made to burn the vinyl chloride. There is no question that dioxins were formed in the vinyl chloride fire. They would have formed on the particulate matter – the black soot – in the cloud that was so clearly visible at the time of the burn. Now, the question is how much is in the soil where people live in and around East Palestine. Without testing, no one will know and the people who live there will remain in the dark, uncertain about their fate.
This is important because of the adverse health effects associated with exposure to dioxins. Exposure to dioxins can cause cancer, reproductive damage, developmental problems, type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease, infertility in adults, impairment of the immune system and skin lesions.
The EPA is very familiar with dioxins. For more than 25 years, the agency evaluated and assessed the risks posed by exposure to dioxins. They published multiple draft reports on the health effects caused by exposure to dioxins. They published an inventory of dioxin sources and devoted an enormous amount of time to studying dioxins. The agency knows this chemical very well.
So why is EPA unwilling to test for dioxins in the soil? My guess is because they know they will find it. And if they find it, they'll have to address the many questions people are asking. It will not be easy to interpret the results of the testing for dioxins in soil, but to avoid testing is irresponsible. The EPA's mission is to protect human health and the environment. Clearly the situation in East Palestine is the place where EPA should follow its mission and do right by the people who live in this town. EPA must test the soil in East Palestine for dioxins.
The people who live there need to know so they can make informed decisions about their future.
|
|
|
|
| US Treasury Introduces CBDC Working Group, Discusses Potential Routes For Digital Dollar |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-03-2023, 02:04 PM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
US Treasury Introduces CBDC Working Group, Discusses Potential Routes For Digital Dollar
ZH | MAR 03, 2023
Authored by 'BTCCasey' via BitcoinMagazine.com,
The Treasury’s statements explore the potential forms and implementations of an American CBDC...
The U.S. Department of the Treasury has released comments from Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Nellie Liang on the “Next Steps to the Future of Money and Payments,” addressing CBDCs and the approach the American government is taking to their potential implementation.
The original Treasury report released in September 2022 described the formation of a CBDC working group that would advance work on a CBDC. Liang’s remarks confirmed the formation of that group.
Quote:“One of the central tasks for the CBDC Working Group is to complement the Fed’s work by considering the implications of a U.S. CBDC for policy objectives for which a broader Administration perspective is helpful,” Liang said.
“To give you a sense of how we are pursuing this work, I will describe our approach to thinking about CBDC options, the policy questions we are attempting to answer, and the kinds of recommendations we hope to develop.”
Highlights from this description include a look at the potential forms that a CBDC could take, the potential for a separate retail and wholesale CBDC and the possible core features of the CBDC.
Also discussed is the idea that a “potential U.S. CBDC, if one were created, would best serve the United States by being ‘intermediated,’ meaning that the private sector would offer accounts or digital wallets to facilitate the management of CBDC holdings and payments. In terms of technology, a retail CBDC might involve a different architecture compared to a CBDC that is intended solely for wholesale use.”
In his piece for Bitcoin Magazine, Mark Goodwin described how Bitcoiners may have “spent so much time looking for CBDCs, we missed the private-entity stablecoin monster right in front of our eyes.”
The Treasury’s released remarks suggest that a CBDC may well come on the backs of private entities, with major incentives to participate. The United States has gotten serious in regards to its consideration of a CBDC. And all this just as legislation has been introduced by Republican lawmakers that would “prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a CBDC directly to anyone.”
Although this bill may not have much of a chance of passing, notable is the specific angle of preventing a Federal CBDC, potentially leaving free those “intermediated” by private parties.
The remarks also described how a CBDC is one of many directions for the government to take, another being real time payment systems. The Federal Reserve, according to Liang, “has indicated that it expects to launch the FedNow Service this year, which will be designed to allow for near-instantaneous retail payments on a 24x7x365 basis, using an existing form of central bank money (i.e., central bank reserves) as an interbank settlement asset.”
This would differ from a CBDC in that it would utilize an existing form of central bank money versus the new form a CBDC would introduce, in addition to a potential new set of payment rails.
Regardless of the path that the Treasury takes, new payment systems are seemingly on the horizon for the United States.
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Lefebvre: The Maccabees Connection |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-02-2023, 07:43 PM - Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
- No Replies
|
|
May the precious few remaining faithful 'sons' of Archbishop Lefebvre remain so and not 'go the other way' of the Conciliar Church:
Macchabees 1:22
We will not hearken to the words of king Antiochus, neither will we sacrifice, and transgress the commandments of our law, to go another way.
Macchabees 1:49-64
49 Now the days drew near that Mathathias should die, and he said to his sons: Now hath pride and chastisement gotten strength, and the time of destruction, and the wrath of indignation: 50 Now therefore, O my sons, be ye zealous for the law, and give your lives for the covenant of your fathers.
51 And call to remembrance the works of the fathers, which they have done in their generations: and you shall receive great glory, and an everlasting name. 52 Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was reputed to him unto justice? 53 Joseph in the time of his distress kept the commandment, and he was made lord of Egypt. 54 Phinees our father, by being fervent in the zeal of God, received the covenant of an everlasting priesthood. 55 Jesus, whilst he fulfilled the word, was made ruler in Israel.
56 Caleb, for bearing witness before the congregation, received an inheritance. 57 David by his mercy obtained the throne of an everlasting kingdom. 58 Elias, while he was full of zeal for the law, was taken up into heaven. 59 Ananias and Azarias and Misael by believing, were delivered out of the flame. 60 Daniel in his innocency was delivered out of the mouth of the lions.
61 And thus consider through all generations: that none that trust in him fail in strength. 62 And fear not the words of a sinful man, for his glory is dung, and worms: 63 Today he is lifted up, and tomorrow he shall not be found, because he is returned into his earth; and his thought is come to nothing. 64 You therefore, my sons, take courage, and behave manfully in the law: for by it you shall be glorious.
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis claims Vatican II is a central theme to his pontificate |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-02-2023, 08:01 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope claims Vatican II was ‘renewal’ of the Church ‘in tune with the signs of the times’
Pope Francis argued that Vatican II ‘rejuvenates the Church’ despite evidence suggesting the opposite.
![[Image: Pope-Francis-1-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pope-Francis-1-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis greets the crowd at a general audience in February 2023.
Screenshot/Facebook
Mar 1, 2023
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) – In a recently published interview Pope Francis praised the Second Vatican Council as an event which “rejuvenate[d] the Church” to be “more in tune with the signs of the times.”
The Pontiff made his comments in a December interview with Catholic Belgian weekly “Tertio” along with the French language “Dimanche,” marking the second interview he has granted to Tertio. Vatican News published an abbreviated English translation of the interview, with a more complete translation in Italian.
Answering questions about how Vatican II is a central theme to his pontificate, Francis began by saying that “I am so committed to the Council because that event was actually a visit of God to His Church.”
He continued: “The Council was one of those things that God brings about in history through holy men.”
Francis expanded upon his bold claim by stating that Vatican II was a “renewal” and a rejuvenation of the Catholic Church.
“The Council did not only involve a renewal of the Church,” he said. “It was not only a matter of renewal, but also a challenge to make the Church more and more alive.”
Citing not only a “renewal” of the Church, Francis argued that the Council “rejuvenates the Church,” turning it into a “mother always moving forward.”
Echoing a recurring talking point made by those arguing for “updating” Church teaching in light of modern thought, Pope Francis claimed that “the Council opened the door to greater maturity, more in tune with the signs of the times.”
READ: The differences between traditional baptism and the new rite matter: here’s why
Tertio noted that in order to implement and represent the Second Vatican Council, the Synod on Synodality is necessary – a point which Francis agreed with. Praising the development of the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops by Paul VI, Francis stated that this was necessary because Paul VI believed “the Western Church had almost lost its synodal dimension.”
According to the Pope, the 2019 Synod on the Amazon presented a “maturation” in the role of women in the Church, after which bishops reportedly asked for a synod to be held on priesthood and then synodality. “Evidently it was a shared theme that all the bishops felt it was time to address,” he said.
“We come from afar, now we are here and we have to move forward. This is what we do through the current Synod process, and the two synods on synodality will help us clarify the meaning and method of decision-making in the Church.”
Misrepresenting St. Vincent of Lerins
As has become a regular occurrence, in making his arguments Pope Francis referenced the 5th century theologian St. Vincent of Lerins, whose famous Canon has been increasingly used as the basis for modern arguments proposing “development” in doctrine.
Quoting from St. Vincent, Francis argued that “starting from the root, we always continue to grow.”
Quote:The Council took such a step forward, without cutting off the root, because you cannot do that if you want to produce fruit. The Council is the voice of the Church for our time, and we are now in the first century of putting it into practice.
Francis has previously employed these phrases from St. Vincent to justify theological arguments appearing to defend contraception.
However, St. Vincent of Lerins did not advocate for a rejection of Church teaching – despite the manner in which his words are commonly used today – but rather he stated that as an individual’s physical body grows in accordance with the Divinely ordained plan, so must any development of Church doctrine follow the same law of progress.
The saint wrote that such a process should “be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterate, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and, so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.”
But the saint was in fact very clear in his opposition to novel doctrine which had no grounding in the Church’s Tradition. In instances where confusion abounds within the Church, due to a part having “cut itself off from the communion of the universal faith,” St. Vincent presents clear teaching on the Catholic response:
Quote:What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his [a Catholic’s] care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.
Theologian: Vatican II’s errors must be ‘anathematized’
While Pope Francis and many modern theologians issue praise for the Council, its benefits have also long been disputed by Catholics.
A recent debate was respired in 2020, due to an intervention by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò. Weighing in on the topic, liturgist and theologian Peter Kwasniewski wrote of the Council that “it must be remembered with shame and repentance as a moment in which the hierarchy of the Church, to varying degrees, surrendered to a more subtle (and therefore more dangerous) form of worldliness.”
“Moreover,” he continued, “the errors contained in the documents, as well as the many errors commonly attributed to the Council or prompted by it, must be drawn into a syllabus and anathematized by a future pope or council so that the controverted matters may be laid to rest, as former councils have wisely and charitably done in regard to the errors of their times.”
A recent analysis published by French historian Guillaume Cuchet examined the “collapse of practice among Catholics in France.” While notably reluctant to conjecture, Cuchet argued that “there must have been an event behind a phenomenon of this magnitude, at least to provoke it. My hypothesis is that it was the Second Vatican Council.”
Evidence certainly points to a seismic shift in the Catholic Church following the Council. Whilst 75% of U.S. Catholics attended Mass weekly in 1955, that figure had dropped to 50% by the mid 1990s and had further dropped to 39% by 2014-2017. A 2015 study then found a considerably large portion, 76% of Catholics, did not believe it was sinful to use contraceptives, whilst 39% did not believe homosexual behavior was sinful.
A 2014 study found that Catholicism in the U.S. had experienced the greatest loss of numbers, more than any other religion.
Church historian Michael Davies recounts the findings of Kenneth Jones on the post-Conciliar rapid decline in the number of priests, ordination, seminarians, religious and Catholic schools. Whilst there were 58,000 priests in 1965 in America, there were only 45,000 in 2002 despite the population growth: there were also 1,575 ordinations in 1965 with only 450 in 2002.
|
|
|
|
| Pope eliminates housing subsidy for cardinals |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-02-2023, 07:53 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Pope eliminates housing subsidy for cardinals, citing ‘commitments’ to ‘universal Church and the needy’
Pope Francis has issued yet another document appearing to centralize control of the Vatican's finances and remove the accommodation allowance previously granted to the cardinals.
![[Image: francis-epiphany-810x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/francis-epiphany-810x500.jpeg)
Pope Francis attends a Mass for the feast of the Epiphany at St. Peter's Basilica on January 06, 2023
Mar 1, 2023
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) –– Authorized by Pope Francis, the Vatican’s Secretariat for Economy has overturned the accommodation allowances granted to cardinals and Vatican curial officials, meaning that they will have to now pay the considerably expensive standard asking prices of the property.
Issued in a rescript, the new directives were the result of a private meeting Pope Francis held with the newly appointed Prefect for the Secretariat for the Economy, Dr. Maximino Caballero Ledo, on February 13. The rescript was reported first by Italian Catholic blog Messa in Latino, with Vatican News and Reuters subsequently publicizing some of its contents one day later.
The rescript was placed in the San Damaso Courtyard, reportedly without any fanfare, for officials in the Vatican to see.
The rescript affects cardinals, along with heads of Vatican dicasteries, their presidents, secretaries, undersecretaries, executives and their equivalents. Additionally affected are members of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota.
Citing the “growing commitments” of the Holy See to the “universal Church and the needy,” Francis called upon all those affected “to make an extraordinary sacrifice.”
Thus, effectively immediately, the free or reduced rate accommodation offered to the cardinals and upper-level curial officials named in the rescript is revoked. This applies to individuals residing in any property owned by the curia or any entity governed by the Holy See’s statutes outlined in the Council for the Economy.
The Domus Sancta Marthae – the hotel used by Pope Francis instead of the Papal apartments in the Apostolic Palace – is also included under the changes, since it functions as a guest house for those visiting the Vatican.
Under the rescript, all the property shall be offered at a charge it would be to those who “are without assignments of any kind in the Holy See and in the Vatican City State.”
Francis granted that any accommodation agreements already in place would remain so until their expiration, at which point the new rules would take effect. However, for any arrangements for free or reduced accommodation submitted after December 31, 2022, the Pope ruled that they should be dealt with under the terms of the new rescript.
Any exceptions to the document are to be handled by the Pope directly, the rescript states.
It is unclear exactly how the property will be valued by the Holy See and at what price it will be offered to the cardinals and curial officials. The area surrounding the Vatican is one of the most expensive in the city, with a regular-sized apartment of around 60 m² costing a minimum of €500,000 and rising swiftly to upward of €1 million.
Yet the Vatican’s property is much older and has never before been rented to those with no Vatican connection, thus making the precise value unknown.
Additionally, while many of the Vatican-owned properties are used by active curial cardinals and officials, they are also home to retired cardinals.
Cardinals are widely understood by Vatican observers to receive around €5,000 per month. Just under two years ago, Pope Francis reduced the salaries of cardinals by 10%, and those of department heads and secretaries by 8%. Priests and religious had their wages cut by 3%.
Explaining this move at the time, Francis cited the Vatican’s flailing finances – a situation he said had been made worse by the COVID-19 restrictions.
There has been a considerable amount of news regarding the Vatican’s finances in recent weeks, much of which appears to be centralizing power and money in the Vatican away from those who had previously enjoyed the use of the Holy See’s assets.
Only last week, Francis issued a motu proprio regulating the Holy See’s ownership of assets, stipulating that any assets acquired by the Roman Curia or connected institutions are “ecclesiastical public property” and thus owned directly by the Holy See.
The Pontiff noted that no “institution or entity” could lay claim to “private and exclusive ownership or titling” of any of the Holy See’s assets, since the institution must “always” act “in the name, on behalf of and for the purposes of the Holy See as a whole, understood as a unitary moral person, only representing it where required and permitted in the civil orders.”
That motu proprio, Il diritto nativo, came after the Vatican was revealed to have accepted the gift of a convent from a group of nuns who were eager to save the property, only to then order them to leave days later. The historic monastery was assessed to be worth €50-60 million and of great prominence for the order.
Prior to that was a December 6 motu proprio from the Pontiff, accompanied by a new law issued by the Governorate of the Vatican City State, both of which became effective on December 8.
The two texts enacted more control over the financial governance of certain entities within the Holy See but excluded the “Institutions” of the Roman Curia. Under the December law, Vatican’s Secretariat for the Economy retained wide-reaching financial oversight of all such entities, and also consult with the relevant curial office on matters relating to the entity’s financial budget approval.
The Vatican’s finances have been plagued with scandal for decades, and the late Cardinal George Pell’s attempted reform of the Holy See’s finances are widely believed to have faced strong opposition, notably from former number two in the Secretariat of State, Cardinal Angelo Becciu, opposition that has even been linked to the allegations of sexual abuse made against Pell.
Meanwhile, the Vatican’s former auditor general, Libero Milone, is suing the Holy See, arguing that he and his deputy were unlawfully fired after Becciu unjustly accused them of spying and embezzlement in June 2017, accusations that, they argue, stemmed from their audit, which uncovered widespread corruption within the hierarchy of the Holy See.
|
|
|
|
| Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-02-2023, 07:41 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses
gloria.tv | March 1, 2023
Effective immediately, parish churches in the diocese are prohibited from celebrating the Latin Mass in accordance with the “Missale Romanum” of 1962, according to a statement from the diocese. “In light of the rescript, which the Vatican sent last week, the celebration of the Usus Antiquior is currently on hold in parish churches,” the diocese noted in a statement.
“In light of the rescript, which the Vatican sent last week, the celebration of the Usus Antiquior [Traditional Latin Mass] is currently on hold in parish churches in the Albany Diocese,” the diocese noted in a statement provided to CNA. “As we explore various possibilities, the Usus Antiquior can continue at Our Lady of Martyrs Shrine in Auriesville, which is not a parish church in the diocese.”
Holy Family Parish in Little Falls, which offered the Latin Mass at noon on Sundays and at 8 a.m. on Wednesdays, cannot celebrate the ancient form of the Mass for the time being. St. Ann’s Church in Fort Ann, which offered the Latin Mass on certain weekdays, was also informed it can no longer celebrate this form of the Mass.
At this time, the only church within the diocese that can offer the Latin Mass in accordance with the Missale Romanum of 1962 is the Our Lady of Martyrs Shrine in Auriesville.
Bishop Scharfenberger was promoted to the episcopate and appointed Bishop of Albany by Francis.
- Albany, NY diocese bans Latin Masses - The Catholic Thing
|
|
|
|
| 10 myths told by Covid experts — now debunked |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-01-2023, 01:54 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
10 myths told by Covid experts — now debunked
In the past few weeks, reports published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during Covid.
news.com.au | February 28, 2023
In the past few weeks, a series of analyses published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during Covid:
Much of the time, they were wrong — the New York Post reports.
To be clear, public health officials were not wrong for making recommendations based on what was known at the time. That’s understandable. You go with the data you have.
No, they were wrong because they refused to change their directives in the face of new evidence. When a study did not support their policies, they dismissed them and censored opposing opinions.
At the same time, the Centre for Disease Control weaponised research itself but putting out their own flawed studies in their own non-peer reviewed medical journal, MMWR.
In the final analysis, public health officials actively propagated misinformation that ruined lives and forever damaged public trust in the medical profession. Here are 10 ways they misled us:
Misinformation #1: Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity
A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary Covid vaccine series.
In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.
Since the Athenian plague of 430 B.C., it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if reinfected. That was also the observation of nearly every practising physician during the first 18 months of the Covid pandemic.
Most Americans were fired for not having the Covid vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralised the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognise.
Misinformation #2: Masks prevent Covid transmission
Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of evidence in medicine. And one published last month by a highly-respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on Covid transmission.
When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomised controlled studies.
But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomised studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence. If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have channelled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.
Misinformation #3: School closures reduce Covid transmission
The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates. Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted Spain and Sweden.
Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection
Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle. They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates. A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite. We now know that myocarditis is six to 28-times more common after the Covid vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males. Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a Covid vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had Covid.
Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster
Boosters reduced hospitalisation in older, high-risk Americans. But the evidence was never there that they lower Covid mortality in young healthy people. That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish their data on hospitalisation rates among boosted Americans under 50, when they published the same rates for those over 50.
Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense, that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.
Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates
President Biden and other officials demanded unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired. They demanded that soldiers be dishonourably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis. The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false. But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day. A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major U.S. cities had no impact on vaccination rates. They also had no impact on Covid transmission rates.
Misinformation #7: Covid originating from the Wuhan Lab is a conspiracy theory
Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic. Dr Francis Collins, head of the NIH, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab. Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic. According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Drs Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials. The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.
Misinformation #8: It was important to get the 2nd vaccine dose 3 or 4 weeks after the 1st dose
Data was clear in the Spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complications rates and increase immunity. Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.
Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is “crystal clear”
Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice. To date, there has never been a randomised controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine. In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine. It would have also spared many children myocarditis
Misinformation #10: One in five people get long Covid
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of Covid infections can result in long Covid. But a U.K. study found that only 3% of Covid patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?
It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well. Calling these cases long Covid is the medicalisation of ordinary life.
What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials, is that there has been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong. Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”
Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism. Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.
At minimum, CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to Covid vaccines, clearly stating what is now known. A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.
|
|
|
|
| What's going on at the KY camp? |
|
Posted by: Catholic01 - 03-01-2023, 11:05 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- Replies (2)
|
 |
Email i received:
We are trying to reach out to Faithful who are looking for the Traditional Sacraments and holding the Faith without compromise. Our goal is to get them in touch with the Priests here and make it possible for them to receive the Sacraments they need. Currently there are five priests under Bishop Pfeiffer who are traveling the United States and Canada administering the Traditional Sacraments.
Please give me a call/text at [omitted].
God Bless,
-Sister Theresa of the Child Jesus
------------
"Which five priests are under your bishop and what is his lineage?"
----------
Bishop Pfeiffer was Consecrated two years ago by Bishop Webster and his lineage is from the Thuc Line.
The Priests are Fr. Pancras, Fr. Poisson, Fr. Croisette, Fr. Cooke, and Fr. Parker. Fr. Pancras and Fr. Poisson have been with the us for five years. Fr. Croisette, Fr. Cooke, and Fr. Parker were ordained by Bishop Pfeiffer.
Here is a link to a video explaining more about the Seminary here and why it exists [omitted]
God Bless,
-Sister Theresa of the Child Jesus
----------
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: Capture.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/gkCs8LD8/Capture.png)
![[Image: xNazareCliff.jpg.pagespeed.ic.bGZQYgWeib.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xNazareCliff.jpg.pagespeed.ic.bGZQYgWeib.webp)
![[Image: xfuas.jpg.pagespeed.ic.l_mo_hDdKq.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xfuas.jpg.pagespeed.ic.l_mo_hDdKq.webp)
![[Image: xNuestra-Sra-de-Nazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.XVLof5nDKv.webp]](https://www.roman-catholic-saints.com/images/xNuestra-Sra-de-Nazare.jpg.pagespeed.ic.XVLof5nDKv.webp)
