Monday, June 11, 2018

Judge A Man By The Reputation Of His Enemies


June 23, 2018, will commemorate the historic 50th anniversary of the first public Mass offered by canonist Fr. Gommar A. DePauw at the Ave Maria Chapel in Westbury, New York. At that time, Fr. DePauw was literally, "the only game in town" when it came to offering the True Mass for Traditionalist Catholics. To be certain, there were other priests who offered the True Mass and kept the Faith, but they did it privately for small groups of the Faithful. The "big names" of Archbishop Lefebvre, Archbishop Thuc, and Bishop Mendez, were not yet around. Bishop de Castro Mayer kept the Faith, but exclusively in his diocese of Campos, Brazil. Only Fr. DePauw was "in your face" and unafraid to take the fight for Truth and Tradition to the general public. He founded the Catholic Traditionalist Movement ("CTM") in 1964, while the damnable Robber Council of Vatican II was in session. Many Traditionalist clerics now admit what was known at the time; without Fr. DePauw and the brave Bishop Blaise Kurz by his side, many of the clergy that claim they were the "saviors" of the faith, wouldn't have come forth as they did.

 Fr. DePauw was in all major media, including (but not limited to), The New York Times, Time Magazine, U.S. News & World Report, WABC-TV, WNBC-TV, WCBS-TV, and on over 100 major radio stations covering most major cities in the United States. Father's radio Mass was begun with his own money he inherited from his father. It began on the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi, October 4, 1970, and was broadcast in over 25 countries. For many, that radio Mass was their only connection to a True Mass offered by a real priest. Truth be told, the man typing these words wouldn't have the True Faith, had I not been converted by Father DePauw 37 years ago.

It's been said that a man is known more by the reputation of his enemies than by the friends he keeps. The aphorism certainly holds true of Father DePauw. Vatican II opened on Father's 44th birthday, October 11, 1962. The young canonist was a peritus (i.e., theological expert) at the Council, and assisted Bishop Kurz, Cardinal Ottaviani, Cardinal Bacci, Cardinal Spellman, and Cardinal Ruffini--among some other notable names who were part of the Anti-Modernist group in Rome. Unfortunately, almost all of them fell victims of Vatican II with few notable exceptions.

One of Fr. DePauw's sworn enemies went to judgement on October 18, 2017-- the detestable apostate priest, Fr. Gehard Albert Baum, known more commonly as Fr. Gregory Baum. Baum was born in 1923 of a Jewish mother and Protestant father in Germany. He immigrated to Canada as a war refugee in 1946. While studying mathematics at McMaster University, a friend gave him a copy of St. Augustine's Confessions. Shortly after this, he became Catholic, and in 1947 he was ordained a priest in the Augustinian Order. His advanced learning prompted a quick route to ordination, but erudition without the True Faith and morals makes for a disgraced and wicked priest.

Baum Attacks Traditional Theology
 Baum was also a peritus at the Council, and aligned himself with the Modernists. He wasted no time under "good 'Pope' John" in showing his true colors. The line in the sand was drawn between the forces of good and evil. Just three months after the Council started, Baum was quoted in the magazine Commonweal as follows:
"The conflict at the Council is not at all between men who try to introduce new insights and modern ways and those who seek to remain faithful to the great tradition of the past. It is rather between those who seek to renew the life of the Church by returning to the most authentic Catholic tradition of all ages and those who seek to consecrate as eternal Catholic wisdom the theology of the manuals of the turn of the century and the anti-modernist emphasis which penetrated them." (See Commonweal, 77, 17 [January 18, 1963], pg. 436). 

The implication was staggering. Baum was telling the world that the theology manuals of the most learned and anti-Modernist clerics being taught in the seminaries (especially since Pope St. Pius X), were not "in the most authentic Catholic tradition of the ages," especially due to the anti-Modernism inherent in them. Some of the greatest minds produced by the Church in theology and Canon Law had to be banished from the seminaries so the work of Modernism could begin in earnest. To be jettisoned were such illustrious names as Van Noort, Tanquerey, Zubizarreta, Herve, Pohle, and many more. 

Fr. DePauw championed these same theologians, whose works he taught as a seminary professor for the Archdiocese of Baltimore. He taught Canon Law, Latin, and Moral Theology. Seminarians could expect to learn from the great Dominican moral theologian Prummer. In Canon Law, Buscaren and Augustine were used to form the future priests. The original Modernists would try and delude people into thinking that teaching like this against their abominable doctrines constituted some "theological excess," the antidote to which was "easing off" of Modernism. The ploy worked well. 

As soon as the saintly Archbishop Francis Keough  of Baltimore died on December 8, 1961, his successor, the loathsome Modernist Lawrence Sheehan removed Fr. DePauw from his position as Dean of Admissions and replaced him with a young priest who was "pastoral" towards those candidates for the priesthood who were attracted to men (perverts). Upon his return from Vatican II, he found himself out of his teaching position, along with the other anti-Modernists installed by Archbishop Keough. By the mid-1970s, Mount St. Mary's Seminary was a cesspool of vice and error, giving Modernists and perverts as "clergy" for the Vatican II sect in Baltimore.

Fr. DePauw knew there could never be any "return" to a more authentic Catholic doctrinal tradition through the abandonment of the common teaching of all the twentieth-century manuals of theology. The infallible Magisterium of the One True Church never abandons the most authentic Catholic tradition because She is Indefectible. The tradition is manifest in the common teaching of the twentieth-century manuals, and in the condemnations of the various Modernist propositions. 

Baum knew that removing those theologians would ignite the revolution needed. As Pope St. Pius X wrote in his encyclical Haerent Animo, " In our own day, alas! it is the contrary that happens all too frequently. Members of the clergy allow their minds to be overcome gradually by the darkness of doubt and turn aside to worldly pursuits; the chief reason for this is that they prefer to read a variety of other works and newspapers, which are full of cunningly propounded errors and corruption, rather than the divine books [theological works] and other pious literature.

Be on your guard, beloved sons; do not trust in your experience and mature years, do not be deluded by the vain hope that you can thus better serve the general good. Do not transgress the limits which are determined by the laws of the Church, nor go beyond what is suggested by prudence and charity towards oneself. Anyone who admits this poison into his soul will rarely escape the disastrous consequences of the evil thus introduced." (para. #3, 1908). 

The Theological Onslaught Continues
Vatican II produced 16 documents; all of them heretical. There were four Constitutions, three Declarations, and nine decrees. Baum was one of the chief architects of Unitatis Redintegratio, the decree on ecumenism. It states in paragraph # 3, "For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them [false sects] as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church." (Emphasis mine). He also helped craft Nostra Aetate, the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions which praises demonic Islam, pagan religions (like Hinduism), and "absolves" the Jews from the sin of Deicide (killing Christ). He even had a hand in the development of Dignitatis Humanae, the Declaration on Religious Freedom, which replaced the true Catholic teaching on religious toleration. As a result, false religions were allowed to proselytize and function in formerly Catholic countries.  Just look at Ireland which has officially sanctioned both sodomite "marriage," and just last month, stripped all legal protections from from innocent unborn babies. 

After Vatican II, Baum was involved with "Liberation theology" which is Marxism cloaked in religious language. He also is linked with "Holocaust theology," which despairs of the Goodness of God. Former Hitler Youth member Ratzinger, will bend over backwards to prove his acceptance of all things Jewish (like Baum who never really stopped being a Jew for all intents and purposes). As "Pope" Benedict XVI, Ratzinger stated, "In a place like this, words fail; in the end, there can only be a dread silence – a silence which is itself a heartfelt cry to God: Why, Lord, did you remain silent? How could you tolerate all this? " (See http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/may/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060528_auschwitz-birkenau.html) I guess Ratzinger never heard of free will and the inclination to evil since the Fall. That's what happens when you abandon the approved theologians pre-Vatican II! 

In the meantime, Fr. DePauw was made out to be a "rebel" or "disobedient" priest. More than once people were told by the invalidly consecrated "bishop" of Long Island, NY, John McGann, that Fr. DePauw was "no longer Catholic," and "excommunicated." To attend his Chapel would make them "excommunicated." Billy Murphy, the apostate from Boston who would become "bishop" of Rockville Centre (the Diocesan name for Long Island) in 2001, was even more hateful. While "gay masses" (sic) took place a mile away at St. Bridget's Church, he would only denounce Fr DePauw. When Father left this world for a better place in 2005, Murphy had the unmitigated gall to show up at the wake! I had the privilege of seeing the President of the Board of Directors refuse him permission to enter. "We don't belong to the same religion," he honestly told him. 

Baum was lionized in the press. When he died last year, many obituaries omitted the fact he left the priesthood in 1978 to "marry" his long time "friend" Shirley Flynn (a divorced ex-nun), and he remained with her until her death in 2007. Since Vatican II he was a strong supporter of sodomites. His autobiography, The Oil Has Not Run Dry: The Story of My Theological Pathway (2017), published just before his death, reveals that Baum himself was a sodomite and attracted to men since his youth. He writes that in 1986 he "fell in love" with another former priest and states "his unwavering love, which has given stability to my life as a theologian, has been a gift from God." (pgs. 114-116). This took place while he was living with his concubine, Shirley Flynn, whom he used to mask his active homosexual liaisons with her consent. Baum chose to keep his homosexuality a secret while appearing to be a faithful priest so he could subvert the Catholic Church. "I did not profess my own homosexuality in public because such an act of honesty would have reduced my influence as a critical theologian." His first homosexual encounter took place in 1963, while Vatican II was underway. It was a hook-up with a sodomite he met in a restaurant, and he found it "exciting."

Baum was the enemy of Fr. DePauw--how glorious for Father!

Enemies and Critics--Then and Now

 The leader of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement was insulted, despised, and calumniated for his unwavering fight "for Truth and Tradition." He fought the good fight and persevered until the end. During his life, he saw the Great Apostasy, and did all he could to stop it. That doesn't prevent his detractors from continuing to misrepresent and calumniate him even today.

The charges most often used against him:
1. He wasn't a sedevacantist. I believe he was since at least 1999, but at the beginning many were confused. Afterwards, he just wanted to believe that the Church was coming back to Her glory. It was hard for him to face what was happening. However, he never "kept people in the Vatican II sect" as "controlled opposition." He told people that the "Concilliar Sect"(as he called it) was NOT Catholic and no one could attend. Why would he not "go public"as a sedevacantist? Many people at the Chapel would have been scandalized and would have fallen into the clutches of the V2 sect's Society of St. Peter (FSSP), or the "Indult" fiasco. I believe he was acting with the best interests of the souls he had cared for in the decades past.

2. He didn't become a bishop and ordain priests. Bishop Kurz, the Bishop-Moderator of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, did indeed ordain two men to the priesthood. One of those priests, Gunther Storch, became a sedevacantist bishop through Archbishop Thuc. Had Bp. Kurz lived longer, who knows how it would have gone. Abp. Lefebvre and the others chose not to stand with Father from the beginning, but came out later and brushed him aside. He didn't trust them, and I understand why. On August 1, 1967 he was offered episcopal consecration at the hands of an "Old Catholic" sect bishop from the Netherlands. (Their orders are valid, and they thought Father was against the Church). Father rejected the offer and rebuked them for denying the One True Church. He informed them he was, and would ever remain, a Catholic priest. "I will remain as a Catholic priest, rather than receive a bishop's miter from heretics."

3. He was involved with Masonry. I put this in the same category as so-called Elvis sightings and alleged encounters with Bigfoot you read about in supermarket tabloids. Someday I will write a separate post on this calumny. For a short time, Father was fooled by some claiming to be a Traditionalist order. They were frauds, but not Masonic. He severed all ties. As a matter of fact, with his own money, he purchased a former Masonic Temple across the street from the Chapel under an alias, and then converted it into an annex for members of the Chapel to use. He also bought the house next door (still unoccupied) when he heard that Planned Parenthood was going to purchase it and turn it into a baby killing factory ("abortuary"). Father built a beautiful Bishop's residence across the street for Bishop Kurz. Unfortunately, the good bishop died before he could move in. It also remains unoccupied, as Father DePauw chose to live in a small one bedroom apartment above the Chapel, in the company of Our Lord directly below him in the tabernacle. He repeatedly denounced Masonry, Communism, and all other evils from the pulpit.  Hardly the actions of a "Mason."  People are given to speak and write without doing the research. One person wrote in the comments of one of my posts that Fr. DePauw was praised by Wojtyla (John Paul II) after Father died, proving he was in cahoots with the Modernist Vatican. I doubt that. Fr. DePauw passed out of this world on May 6, 2005. Wojtyla died 34 days prior on April 2, 2005.

4. He didn't reject Vatican II, he just wanted its "full implementation" and to keep the Traditional Mass along with the Novus Bogus. This is so misunderstood. Let me put things in context. In 2011, the New York State Legislature was debating a bill to legalize sodomite "marriage." A friend of mine was a member of the Legislature, and lead the fight against the bill, which unfortunately became law four years before the abominable U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). When my friend had the floor and was debating the bill, he proposed a novel idea to the Democrats; I'll work with you to draft a Domestic Partnership Bill, that will give homosexual "couples" all the same rights as married people under the law, but we just won't call it "marriage." The Democrats were outraged and demanded he give up the floor as they would never agree to such a thing!

 I asked my friend why he did that instead of condemning sodomites. His answer was brilliant. He told me if he had denounced homosexuals, the media would paint him as a "religious zealot" and "an extremist, homophobic bigot." By offering to give them what they ostensibly wanted ("equality"), without the name of "marriage," their rejection revealed the sodomites' true intention--the destruction of Holy Matrimony as it has been known for centuries through the acceptance of their perversion as both "normal" and under the name "marriage." The media quashed the story realizing they couldn't paint him as an extremist, and they would expose the sodomite agenda.

Likewise, when Father DePauw proposed letting people have the Novus Bogus, as long as priests could continue to offer the true Mass, he exposed the Modernist agenda when they refused. The True Faith and the True Mass cannot co-exist with Modernist theology! He successfully showed the Modernists as not wanting to "update" the Church, but they were on a mission to change Her and destroy Her (if such a thing were possible!).

One of Father's detractors is Theresa Benns, the ersatz female "theologian" who engineered the farmhouse "conclave" consisting of six people who "elected" David Bawden as "Pope" Michael. After telling people to follow this man or be "outside the Church," she rejected him herself and went back to being a Home Aloner. She led people into following an antipope, made Traditionalists look wacky, and now we're supposed to trust her judgment of a real canonist! This charge she brings against Father belies her ignorance of what was done and why. It's another "Monday morning quarterback" who can tell you what the team that lost should have done to win, never having played professional sports and not going through the situation at the time.

Conclusion
Fifty years ago, Father DePauw offered the first public True Mass in defiance of the Vatican II sect posing as the Roman Catholic Church. A man may be judged by the reputation of his enemies. Gregory Baum, was an apostate and pervert, breaking his vows even as he sought to destroy the Church by invalidating the Mass, the sacraments, and corrupting dogmas. He is the quintessential enemy of Father DePauw. When the bishops at Vatican II considered a separate decree on the Blessed Virgin Mary, Baum and the Modernists opposed it. The vote was the closest of the Council with  1,074 bishops in favor of a separate document for the BVM and 1,114 bishops against; a margin of just 40 votes stopped it. Baum was urging the vote against it, while Father DePauw was urging votes in favor.

In the November 1963 edition of The Sign, Baum had this to say: "There is no doubt that Mariology, or the Catholic teaching on Mary, is a tremendous obstacle to the ecumenical movement, because it developed since the Reformation. The two Marian dogmas on the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are obstacles, because they are new and concern a subject not directly connected with our salvation and also because they are the only doctrines defined by the pope alone." So Mariology originated in the 1500s? The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are "new"? (Is that why there was a Mass in honor of Our Lady's Assumption from at least the eighth century?) These were the only doctrines defined by the pope alone? (Ever hear of canonizations or Unam Sanctum?) This was the drivel the Modernists were unleashing upon the Catholics of the world, while Father DePauw named his Traditionalist Chapel "Ave Maria," to honor God's Own Mother.  The fact that people of Baum's ilk, and self-professed "theologians" attack him, is a testament to his Catholic Faith.

As Father DePauw used to say, there were three groups of people around when he lead the Catholic Resistance to the Modernists: those who said it wouldn't be done. Those who said it couldn't be done. And those who said it shouldn't be done. By the grace of God, His humble servant, Father Gommar A. DePauw proved that it would be done, and the Church would continue as She must, despite the worst attacks of his (and the Church's) diabolic enemies. This Sunday, say a prayer for the repose of Father DePauw's truly Catholic soul, the first to stand up against the Modernists. Through him, God has proven that His One True Church may be attacked, but She shall never be conquered. 





44 comments:

  1. May God have given Father Gommar DePauw the good rest and glory of Saints such as St. Paul, St. Methodius, St. Cyril, St. Dominic, St. Vincent Ferrer, St. Ignatius of Loyola and St. Louis de Montfort!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed! We all owe him our gratitude in keeping the True Faith alive during the early and dark days of the Great Apostasy.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  2. Introibo, thank you for this. Do you know the current situation at Ave Maria Chapel and if there have been other priests there since Fr. De Pauw's death? The last article entry on the website seems to have been published 20 years ago, in 1998.
    www.latinmass-ctm.org/chapel/prac.htm

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barbara,

      The Ave Maria Chapel has Fr. John Evangelista, a Benedictine priest ordained in 1962, as the pastor. He never offered the invalid Novus Bogus, and carries on the good work of Fr. DePauw!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Who will say Mass there when Fr. Evangelista is no longer able to?

      Delete
    3. Tom,
      That decision rests with the Board of Directors.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  3. I hold Fr.DePauw in very high regard & also understand how different the World was during the 70's/80's.
    It's very easy to play tomorrow's armchair QB after the game is over.

    Simultaneously,I have petty grievances with all 4 Bishops who consecrated valid priests using the traditional rite for different reasons.
    (Bp.De Castro Meyar co-consecrated once with Bp.Lefevbre and didnt consecrate any valid priests using the Traditional Rite.
    Bp.Thuc was all over the map at times,Bp.Lefevbre was inconsistent,Bp.Mendez was not active until the 1990's.)

    With this said,I am EXTREMELY grateful for Fr.DePauw,Fr.Fenton,Bp.McKenna,
    and Bp's Thuc Lefevbre Mendez & De Castro Meyar..

    Given the astounding massive numbers of VALID Catholic priests and bishops pre-July 1968,only a small handful of Valid Priests and even smaller amount of Valid Bishops kept the true faith, Sacraments,priesthood,and Holy Sacrifice of the Mass alive.

    We should hold our breath and just be thankful to our Blessed Lord he gave us these catholic clerics.

    Without them,I truly believe the great persecution would've began 10-15 yrs ago nor would we have traditional chapels.

    Bp.Frances Slupski,who passed away recently,was also on the receiving side of slander insults and calumny.
    He was ordained in 1961,left the Novus Ordo in the late 60's,and kept the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and valid Sacraments alive in Poland & the U.S.A.
    He was consecrated in 1999 by Bp.McKenna and subsequently gave us more valid Priests and Bishops.
    Bp.Slupski never received the limelight or even good press.
    Yet,like Fr.DePauw,he fought the good fight until his death.

    These are the Men who inspire me and may our Blessed Lord receive them all into his Heavenly Kingdom.
    -Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      Thank you for the insightful comment!
      May Bp Slupski Rest In Peace.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  4. Dear Introibo,

    While you have many many excellent articles on your website, specifically the series on rock music, I believe this is your true calling, to keep the memory of this good and holy priest alive and well, and also that of His Excellency Bishop Kurz. The title of your article is spot on. God bless you for this fine work. If you ever publish a collection of Fr. De Pauw’s talks or sermons, I will be the first to buy it! Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the kind words my friend! The Board of Directors has legal title to all of Fr. DePauw’s sermons, which he always recorded. I remember many of them, but I don’t have direct access. I urge the Board to publish them—I’d be on line to buy it too!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Does the board not want people to hear his sermons? Most priests I know have their sermons recorded and put on the internet for anyone to download for free. It seems that Fr. de Pauw died before this technology was widely used, but I'm sure he would want to do the same if he were still alive, wouldn't he?

      Delete
    3. I believe he would. I don’t agree with all the decisions of the Board, but as there may be special circumstances of which I am unaware, I withhold judgment. I may petition for them in the future.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  5. Interesting how Fr. DePauw chose to avoid entering into formal schism like the Sedevacantists. He walked a fine line because he didn't want to incur latae sententiae excommunication (c.1364.1) and thus was able to remain a champion for tradition even among some in the post-Vatican II church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to be in union with an antipope does not constitute Schism. He did not mention Wojtyla in the Canon since at least 1999, and called him “John Paul II” (no title of “pope”) or “the man in white at the Vatican.” I explained why I believe he never “went public” in this post—and I knew him as my spiritual father, he was like a second father to me.

      To those in the V2 sect who consider him a champion would do well to remember what he said, “Have nothing to do with the Concilliar Establishment or risk your soul if you do.”

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Canon 332.1 sates that when the cardinals in conclave lawfully elect a pope he is pope. Formal schism according to canon 7.51 is withdrawal of submission to the supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him. The definition applies to you and right now you are excommunicated from the Church. Your sedevacantist groups are a tiny fringe and need to reconcile with the Church or you risk your own salvation. Fr. DePauw and Archbishop Lefebvre as well as many others understand canon law.

      Delete
    3. Which is why Father understood: (a) Wojtyla could not be pope and (b) loss of papal office is of DIVINE LAW not Canon Law, for the pope is superior to Canon Law.

      According to Doctor of the Church St. Alphonsus Liguori, "If ever a pope, as a private person, should fall into heresy, he would at once fall from the pontificate." (See Verita della Fede, Pt. III, Ch. VIII, 9-10).

      How is heresy made manifest? According to theologian MacKenzie, "Words are the ordinary, but not the only means of communication. Complete externalization of thought may exist in signs, acts, or omissions." (Delict, pg.35) Let's break it down:

      (a) Words. A dogma may be denied by a contradictory or contrary statement. For example, it is a dogma that "The Roman Catholic Church is the One True Church, outside of which there is no salvation." The contradictory statement negates it--"The Roman Catholic Church is NOT the One True Church, outside of which there is no salvation." A contrary statement is not a direct negation, but it goes against the dogma. Hence, Vatican II was heretical when it stated in Unitatis Redintegratio, para.#3 that Christ uses non-Catholic sects as a "means of salvation." It is heretical because if you can obtain salvation by being a Lutheran, then there is salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church.

      (b) Acts. Think of "Saint" John Paul II kissing the Koran which denies the Trinity and Divinity of Christ. Remember Bergoglio ("Pope" Francis) celebrating Hanukkah with the Jews in 2012 when still a "cardinal."

      (c) Omissions. Think of Bergoglio hiding his crucifix from the Jews and failing to try and convert them.

      Heretics are incapable of keeping or attaining to papal office. In the case of one validly elected pope, should he fall into heresy as a private theologian, he falls from office. In the case of a manifest heretic prior to "election," he fails to attain the office. According to theologian Baldii, "Barred as incapable of being validly elected [pope] are the following: women, children who have not reached the age of reason, those suffering from habitual insanity, the unbaptized, heretics and schismatics..." (See Institutiones Iuris Canonici [1921])

      In summation, Bergoglio could not even have been validly elected (assuming a valid college of cardinals) because he was a heretic prior to his “election.” Canon Law and the decree Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio Of Pope Paul IV (1559) make it abundantly clear. Which is why Father DePauw, a real canonist, knew he had nothing to fear from “the man in white at the Vatican.”

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  6. Fr DePauw had nothing to fear from the man in white in the vatican becuase the man in white in the vatican was not the Pope.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I first started looking for the Latin Mass years ago I remember finding the website of Ave Maria Chapel. It had a beautiful sung Kyrie as soon as you went to the page. I started reading some of the articles on that site and it made me realize how we were robbed of our birthright. From there, I couldnt stop reading about V2 and the NO. I couldnt believe how it couldve happened, so I set out one day to defend the NO and V2 because I still thought it was the Catholic Church. But after several years of constant reading and investigation, I could only come to one painful conclusion. What I thought was the Catholic Church and who I thought were Catholic Popes, were heretics and thus frauds.

      Delete
    2. Tom,
      It is difficult for many when they realize the Truth. Thank God you had the strength of character, with Christ’s grace, to follow that Truth regardless of the consequences.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  7. Introibo - Thanks for sharing your memories of Fr. DePauw. Would love to be able to attend Ave Maria Chapel!! Praying for Fr. DePauw.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      Thank you! Attending Mass at the Ave Maria Chapel is special, as you feel connected to the history of that special oasis of the Catholic Faith. When Fr. DePauw was there, it was incredible. I’ve yet to see another priest offer the Holy Sacrifice with the same reverential awe he had. In the sacristy, Father had a plaque he rescued from a Church in Belgium which had been destroyed by Nazi bombers. He would read it every time before going out to the altar. It read, “Priest of Christ: Offer this Mass as if it were your First Mass, your Last Mass, your Only Mass.” So he did!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  8. Hello Introibo,

    I am having a hard time trying to post my message. I just wanted to say again, that although your articles on rock music are extremely important, I think the most valuable aspect of your blog is your heroic effort to keep alive the memory of Father de Pauw. Thank you! The plaque that Father read before every Mass is beautiful, although I am sorry to say that only the Allies dropped bombs on Belgium, not Germany. God bless you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! I review all comments before posting, and allow almost all
      Comments, with few exceptions (those that contain vulgarity and/or blasphemy). Should someone comment while I’m sleeping at night or in a meeting with a client, I will get to it and respond as soon as possible!

      I’m sorry I wasn’t clear in my comment above.By “bombers” I didn’t mean the Luftwaffe. The Church was being used by members of the Belgian resistance. So that it couldn’t be so used anymore, they blew it up.

      Thank you for pointing that out!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  9. I was looking at the website of this chapel and came across a statement of Fr. De Pauw in which he said that no priest should say Mass at the chapel if he was involved with "schism on the right".

    http://www.latinmass-ctm.org/priest/priest_statement.htm

    Do you know who he had in mind with this strange expression?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Archbishop Lefebvre. In his early days, Fr was not sede and thought the way to go was “Mass resistance.” Every priest offer the True Mass. Then the new rite of ordination came out, times changed, and Fr maintained that Lefebvre had a “Schismatic mentality.” That he did.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Not sure of Fr DePauw's logic in calling Abp Lefebrve "schismatic" while Fr DePauw basically used the same recognize and resist ploy of the SSPX sans the '88 Ordinations.

      Delete
    3. True enough. However, his view evolved over time.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. Every traditional cleric that kept the true Faith,Holy Mass, & Sacraments alive during the 60's/70's didn't have 53 yrs of history & experience with the Novus Ordo apostasy as we do in 2018.
      Nor did they have access to information via the Internet.
      Some of the materials from this era are dated due to the ever evolving modern World collectively succumbing to abomination & heresy on a global scale.

      They lived and learned from harsh experience what we now read about & take for granted as standard history.
      -ANDREW

      Delete
  10. I'm wondering if you could comment: It's interesting that traditionalists priests---I'm speaking of those like Fr. Wathen and Fr. Depauw, who were regularly ordained, never really worked with each other or had much to do with each.

    On a different, but related note, my understanding is that Fr. Depauw wasn't too fond of Msgr Lefebvre, nor of his army of priests; however, if I'm wrong, please do correct me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those independent Traditionalist priests were, for the most part, concentrating on their congregations and not working together. Fr. DePauw would not work with Fr Wathen, because he was a Feeneyite. He was close with Fr Tremonti of Chicago (ordained in 1945), and a few others.

      As to Archbishop Lefebvre, the problem began when he wouldn’t stand with him in 1964, and after Abp Lefebvre refused to help Bishop Kurz, you couldn’t even mention his name without getting an angry look.

      For more on that see my post:
      http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2016/06/a-forgotten-hero.html?m=1

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. I also think that many of those Traditionalist pioneers believed that the Great Apostasy would be resolved soon. When it didn’t they remained mostly by themselves with their congregations.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    3. Introibo,
      Thank you for your reply. I, for one, heard that Fr. Wathen, when the new Mass came about, thought that it would not last; so your point is well taken.

      When Fr. Depauw was alive, who did he use for the Sacrament of Confirmation for his parishioners?

      Also, where did he recommend--if he did at all--that young men go who believed themselves to have a priestly vocation?

      Delete
    4. For Confirmation, Bp. Kurz performed them until shortly before his death in 1973. After the good Bishop left this world for a better place, Father didn’t want to get involved with Abp. Lefebvre for reasons I explained above. Since there were no other bishops around at that time, he said the Chapel would remain without Confirmation and that policy ever remained in effect. He, of course, could confirm someone in danger of death.

      Those who believed they had a vocation, Father asked them to write him a letter and he would discuss their options in private. He would never disclose what those options were to anyone other then young men who actually met with him.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  11. Hi Introibo,

    I've been following the website 23rdstreet.com for a little while. Who is the person who runs that site do you happen to know? Whoever it is, he/she is pounding the Dimond Brothers into the dirt and it is about time imo. That person has totally proved their fraudulent order from the beginning and exposed the Dimonds as liars. For example, on their website they claim their founder Joseph Natale received permission to found his own religious congregation but the owner of that website, who must have a serious bone to pick with the Dimonds, went the extra miles to search our their claims. He proved they are liars. Anyways, if you know who it is I'd be interested in that. Good for that person to stand up to those two because it seems that a lot of people are afraid. They lie and that should be exposed.

    Also, since this post is about Fr. DePauw, did he have any dealings with MHFM or Joseph Natale to your knowledge? Thanks and God bless!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t know who runs the site, and while they have some good material, some is objectionable, which is why I don’t endorse it or recommend it to anyone. They pander to Eastern Schismatics the last few times I visited the site. The part exposing the Dimonds is good, but doesn’t justify the rest.

      Fr DePauw had NO dealings with the Dimonds whatsoever. In a note he wrote to me Fr DePauw declared, “Any so-called ‘theologian’ who denies Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood had better stop calling themselves Catholic.”

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. I have read where the Dimonds real name is Diamond. That they were raised Jewish and changed their name by dropping the “a”. Don’t know how true this is, but it kind of makes sense, considering their beliefs.

      Delete
    3. I don’t follow. They are Feeneyite (not to mention frauds). How does denying BOD and BOB comport with Jewish belief?

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. The Dimonds acting like Pharisees in their beliefs.

      Delete
  12. Anon @7:01 - The author of the website 23rdstreet.com is John C. Pontrello. He was a sede and converted to the Eastern Orthodox.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was right about it’s danger. Thank you for confirming this fact. The EO are a false sect. It’s sad to see Traditionalists get taken in by it.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete