Monday, November 9, 2020

Defining Desire

 

The year was 1849. His Holiness Pope Pius IX, like all true popes, was interested in the truths of Faith and in making those truths better known and loved. He had a deep devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, and was considering defining the Immaculate Conception as a dogma of Divine and Catholic Faith. To this end, he appointed a special commission of the best theologians at that time to investigate the question more profoundly than had previously been done. The first meeting of the Commission took place on May 8, 1852. At the second meeting (May 19th) and third meeting (June 8th) the Commission concerned itself to expressing the principles involved governing the definability of any doctrine as Catholic dogma. They put forth what is not necessary, and then what is necessary for an ex cathedra definition.  

Recently, I've been reading a collection of  essays written by theologian Fenton from 1944 to 1959, entitled The Church of Christ. Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton (1906-1969) was an outstanding theologian. He was professor of Dogmatic Theology at the Catholic University of America, and from 1944-1963, he was the editor of the professional theological journal, The American Ecclesiastical Review.  He produced no less than six theology books and numerous articles. Ordained in 1930, Fenton received his doctorate degree in Sacred Theology from the Angelicum in Rome the following year. His dissertation was written under the direction of the staunchly anti-Modernist Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. (d. 1964). 

At the Robber Council Vatican II (1962-65), Fenton was a peritus ("theological expert") for Cardinal Ottaviani, the Pro-Prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. He fought the good fight against the Modernists, and afterwards, was shaken to the core. God mercifully called him to Judgement in 1969, as he was trying to grapple with what had taken place. In my opinion, he would have become a sedevacantist had he lived a bit longer. In his diaries written at the Council, he wrote, "If I did not believe God, I would be convinced that the Catholic Church was about to end." It is no surprise that he was a friend of Fr. Gommar DePauw, JCD, my spiritual father and founder of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement. 

This post was written after I read the aforementioned book of Fenton's, containing his theological essay Requisites for an Infallible Pontifical Definition According to the Commission of Pope Pius IX. Theologian Fenton defended the Faith against the detestable heretic, madman, and excommunicated Jesuit Leonard Feeney. Feeney "discovered" that the Church had been wrong in Her perennial teaching on Baptism of Desire (BOD) and Baptism of Blood (BOB). He died a member of the Vatican II sect under Montini in 1978, a man-made religion that teaches universal salvation, thereby proving the sect will welcome all heresies--even contradictory ones---as long as you do not hold the Integral Catholic Faith. 

As I finished the article, I couldn't help but think that the principles of the Church, as articulated by the Commission, show that BOD and BOB could be dogmatically defined if we had a true pope. In this post, I will enumerate each of the principles of the Church as recorded by theologian Fenton, and show how it can apply to BOD/BOB. In so doing, I will once again give the lie to the heretical successors of Feeney (think: Fred and Bobby Dimond, the St. Benedict Center, etc.) who have the temerity to declare BOD and BOB "heresy." (If anyone thinks I'm being unfair or hyperbolic by calling Feeney a "madman," please see my post "A Sickness Of Soul" http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/03/a-sickness-of-soul.html---Introibo).

Four Qualities NOT Needed For A Doctrine To Be Infallibly Defined

1. The fact that their have been conflicting teachings on this subject within the Catholic Church in the past, or the fact that all have not heretofore agreed on this teaching, does not render a doctrine incapable of definition. 

The Commission used the example of the rebaptism controversy as proof of this point. They also pointed out the fact that theologians on opposing sides of an issue habitually express their willingness to abide by a final decision of the Magisterium, thus in the eyes of the Church, expressing their belief that the Magisterium can pronounce and define even in a matter which had been freely debated among the theologians. 

Application to BOD and BOB: Feeneyites are always trying to "prove" BOD and BOB wrong by citing to someone who calls the doctrine into question. For example, Fr. William Jurgens is often cited as an opponent of BOD/BOB because of a text he wrote appearing to call them into question. Therefore, there is no "unanimous consent of theologians." The upshot of his contention is that to be unanimous, every single approved theologian must teach the same thing, and if only one theologian disagrees...well, goodbye to unanimity. Feeneyites have two major problems. First, Jurgens is not an approved theologian or canonist. His doctorate was not in Sacred Theology or Canon Law, but in Ecclesiastical History. Therefore any contention that Jurgens was against BOD or BOB (even if true), is the mere opinion of an historian and not the teaching of an approved theologian or canonist. Second, universal does not mean numerical unanimity, but moral unanimity

Unanimous refers to moral unanimity when we talk about the approved theologians and Fathers of the Church. According to the Maryknoll Catholic Dictionary (1957):

When the Fathers of the Church are morally unanimous in their teaching that a certain doctrine is a part of revelation, or is received by the universal Church, or that the opposite of a doctrine is heretical, then their united testimony is a certain criterion of divine revelation. As the Fathers are not personally infallible, the counter testimony of one or two would not be destructive of the value of the collective testimony; so a moral unanimity only is required. 

2. The fact that even authoritative writers can be cited in opposition to a teaching does not render that teaching incapable of definition.
The members of the Commission claimed that this principle is shown to be valid through the examination of the history of almost any defined dogma. They pointed, in particular, to the example of the Council of Trent, which proclaimed the Church's belief in the absolute immunity of Our Lady from all actual sin and imperfection in the face of previous denial of this truth even on the part of some Fathers and Doctors of the Church. 

Application to BOD and BOB: Even those who are Fathers and Doctors of the Church who could possibly be cited in opposition does not render this doctrine incapable of being defined as dogma, let alone being "proven false."

3. In order that a doctrine be definable, it is not necessary that there should be explicit, or even implicit, testimony to this doctrine in Sacred Scripture, since it is certain and manifest that the scope of Revelation is wider than that of Scripture.
In support of this principle, the Commission appealed to several dogmas including infant baptism, and the Real (and complete) Presence of Our Lord under each of the Eucharistic Species. 

Application to BOD and BOB: Not being explicitly or implicitly mentioned in the Bible has no bearing on it being definable as a dogma. 

4. In order to show that the doctrine to be defined belongs to Sacred Tradition, it is not necessary to adduce a series of Fathers and other witnesses reaching back to Apostolic Times. 
The Commission took note of the fact that the early monuments of Tradition, among them the patristic writings are to be numbered, do not state the entire content of that Divine Teaching which was delivered to the Church by the apostles.

According to the Commission, to deny this fourth principle necessarily entails the denial of at least one of these known truths:

  • Not all of the doctrine entrusted to the Church as the content of Divine Public Revelation was immediately, at the very outset of the Church's life, set down in writing by the Fathers
  • Not all of the ancient monuments of Divine Apostolic Tradition (the writings and inscriptions of the early Christians) have survived until our time, even though Tradition itself has survived and is just as perfectly possessed, guarded, and taught by the infallible Church today as it was in Apostolic Times
  • Although the whole content of Divine Public Revelation has always been guarded and presented infallibly by the Church, it has not always been, in its entirety, distinctly conceived and formally expressed
  • A doctrine proposed as part of the Divine Apostolic Tradition by the One True Church of Jesus Christ at any one period in Her history cannot possibly be in opposition to what has been taught as Divinely Revealed by the Church at an earlier time
  • A doctrine proposed at any time within the Church as a part of Divine Public Revelation must, by reason of the Divine assistance promised and given to the Church, have been taught in the past at least in an implicit manner. Moreover, such a teaching could never have been denied by a majority of the teachers within the Church
Application to BOD and BOB:
Notice the fourth truth above: A doctrine proposed as part of the Divine Apostolic Tradition by the One True Church of Jesus Christ at any one period in Her history cannot possibly be in opposition to what has been taught as Divinely Revealed by the Church at an earlier time. All Feeneyites deny this truth of necessity. If water baptism was the exclusive means to be within the Church and achieve salvation, it was always true since the time the Church was founded. However, that means that the Church defected when BOD and BOB were taught in Her catechisms, by Her theologians, etc. That's why Feeneyites must either become "Vacancy Pushers" like, e.g.,  Richard Ibranyi, who puts the last pope as Honorius II in 1130 AD, or they implicitly deny the dogma that the Church is Indefectible. What good is a Magisterium that can't teach? 

The Feeneyites also talk about the necessity of the universal and constant consent of the Fathers as spoken of at the Vatican Council (1869-1870), yet they once more fail to comprehend its meaning. Here is an example from the Vatican Council: 

The universal and constant tradition of the Church, as seen both in facts and in the teaching of the Fathers, as well as in the manner of acting and speaking adopted by many Councils, some of which were Ecumenical, teaches us that the judgments of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith and morals are irreformable. (See http://www.catholicplanet.org/councils/20-postulatum.htm). 

Protestants jumped all over this by trying to show at least one Father of the Church in disagreement with papal infallibility (therefore "not universal"), or it was not so from antiquity (therefore not constant chronologically). Both the Protestants and Feeneyites get their terms wrong.  According to the eminent theologian of the Vatican Council under Pope Pius IX, Cardinal Franzelin, universality means the consent of the Church at this present time. Only when the present universality (moral unanimity) cannot be confirmed is it necessary to appeal to antiquity, and that appeal is not to show it was always held, but rather if it was ever held by the Church as certain.  (See On Divine Tradition, reprint of 1875, [2016], pgs. 417-423). 

Five Qualities Sufficient For A Doctrine To Be Infallibly Defined
1.  There must be a number of solemn testimonies directly pertinent to the proposition in question.

Application to BOD and BOB:
There is a plethora of testimonies to the teaching of BOD and BOB. Here are but a few:

 St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church (12th century): Letter No.77, Letter to Hugh of St. Victor, On Baptism: “If an adult...wish and seek to be baptized, but is unable to obtain it because death intervenes, then where there is no lack of right faith, devout hope, sincere charity, may God be gracious to me, because I cannot completely despair of salvation for such a one solely on account of water, if it be lacking, and cannot believe that faith will be rendered empty, hope confounded and charity lost, provided only that he is not contemptuous of the water, but as I said merely kept from it by lack of opportunity...
 

Pope Innocent II (12th Century): From his letter "Apostolicam Sedem" to the Bishop of Cremona, "We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the 'priest' whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the Faith of Holy Mother Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joys of the heavenly fatherland. Read [brother] in the eighth book of Augustine's City of God where among other things it is written: 'Baptism is administered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion, but death excludes.' Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the 'priest' mentioned." (Denzinger 388)

The Council of Trent:
Decree on Justification, Session VI, Chapter 4: "And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

Session VII, Concerning the Sacraments in General, Canon 4 : "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that, although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them, through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."

St. Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church:
Moral Theology, Bk. 6, nn. 95-97: "Baptism of blood is the shedding of one's blood, i.e. death, suffered for the faith or for some other Christian virtue. Now this Baptism is comparable to true baptism because, like true Baptism, it remits both guilt and punishment as it were ex opere operato… Hence martyrdom avails also for infants seeing that the Church venerates the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. That is why Suarez rightly teaches that the opposing view is at least temerarious."

Catechism of the Council of Trent
The Sacraments, Baptism: "...should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness."

Pope St. Pius X,  Catechism of Christian Doctrine (aka Catechism of St. Pius X):
17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way? A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.
 
2. A proposition is capable of being defined if there can be found one or many revealed principles containing this proposition. 

The Commission used the example that from the revealed dogma Christ is True God and True Man, it follows He has two wills. 

Application to BOD and BOB:
It has been dogmatically defined at Trent that " "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that, although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them, through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."

Trent also defined: "And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

From the truth that we cannot be saved without the sacraments or the desire of them, it follows that the desire of baptism can be efficacious unto salvation. Feeneyites will say that "or" should be read as "and." For example, "A car cannot run without gasoline or oil." Both are necessities. In adults, baptism must be received with the intention of being baptized ("desire"). 

This is wrong on three counts:
1. The theologians immediately post-Trent did not interpret "or" in that way; and they would know best.
2. The Canon on baptism would be defective because the adult recipient of baptism must also have attrition for his sins, not merely desire to receive the sacrament. Trent could not have been enumerating the conditions for a valid baptism of an adult. Most theologians teach that the basic truths of Faith must also be believed.
3. The Church has interpreted the meaning in Her 1917 Code of Canon Law: Canon 737 states, Baptism, the gateway and foundation of the Sacraments, actually or at least in desire, is necessary for all for salvation...

Trent therefore infallibly defined BOD within the Decree on Justification. It is thus the proper object of a more explicit papal definition. 

3. A proposition is capable of being defined if it shows a necessary connection with dogmas.

Application to BOD and BOB: 
It is of faith that the sacraments are necessary in actuality or the desire for them. Salvation can therefore be achieved by a desire for the sacraments when actual reception is made impossible. This would include Baptism; one of the seven sacraments. Notice also that while desiring Holy Orders does not make a man a priest, it is also (strictly speaking) not necessary for salvation. If the actual reception of Holy Orders were necessary for  salvation, all women would be damned. Of those sacraments necessary unto salvation, God (Who is not bound to give grace only through the sacraments), allows people to be saved by the desire of them. 

4. A proposition may be defined as Catholic dogma if it is preached as a part of Divine Public Revelation in the concordant teaching of the episcopate.

All catechisms and theological works have received the approbation of the episcopate worldwide. 

5. A proposition is capable of definition when it is shown to be a part of Divine Public Revelation by the practice of the Church.

 Canon 1239, section 2 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law states: 

Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as Baptized.
Canonists Abbo and Hannon comment, "The reason for this rule is that they are justly supposed to have met death united to Christ through Baptism of Desire." (See The Sacred Canons, [1951], pg. 493). It is established that the Church is infallible in Her universal disciplinary laws such as the 1917 Code of Canon Law. 

According to theologian Van Noort, "The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church...By the term "general discipline of the Church" are meant those ecclesiastical laws passed for the direction of Christian worship and Christian living." (See Dogmatic Theology, 2: 114-115; Emphasis mine). 

According to theologian Herrmann:
"The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments…. If she [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, she would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible."
(Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1, p. 258). 

Feeneyites will make two objections: (1) The Code is not universal since it only applies to the Latin Rite and not the Eastern Rites, and (2) Canon 1 "proves" it's not universal.

In response to the first objection, it is sheer ignorance of Canon Law. According to the eminent canonist Buscaren: "A general [universal] law is one which is not limited to a particular territory; it is a universal law of the Church. This does not mean it is binding on all Catholics. It may be enacted for a special class of persons, or for certain particular circumstances." (See Canon Law: A Text and Commentary [1951], pg. 27). Therefore, "universality" means "pertaining to all members of a Rite throughout the world," and not just in a particular territory. The 1917 Code is therefore universal.

In response to the second objection, Canon 1 does state that the Code as a general rule does not affect the Oriental Church (i.e., Eastern Rites). However, as Buscaren explains, there are some matters in which it [the 1917 Code] affects also the Oriental Church and Oriental Catholics. He enumerates three categories that apply to all Rites: (1) Canons which express dogmatic truths; (2) Canons which declare Divine Law; and (3) Canons which expressly and explicitly mention the Oriental Rites. (See Ibid, pg. 16). Canon 1239 is an extension of Canon 737 (cited above) in declaring a dogmatic/Divine truth, therefore it applies to all Rites. In addition, all Eastern (Oriental) Rites have their own Canons which mirror both 737 and 1239, making the definitive case that it is a universal disciplinary law no matter how you approach it.

Conclusion
It should be clear that BOD and BOB are not only defined by Trent, but are capable of further explicit elaboration in an ex cathedra papal pronouncement. It is incredible how far away the truth is from the Feeneyite lie that BOD and BOB are "heresy." In order to be saved, one must (a) be within the One True Church and (b) die in the state of sanctifying grace. Leonard Feeney taught that BOD would effectuate justification (confer sanctifying grace) yet you would be damned without water baptism. If you are in the state of grace you are a friend of God and cannot be damned. To assert otherwise is both heretical and illogical.

Modern day Feeneyites teach that BOD confers neither justification or salvation. The only way to be within the Church and be in the state of grace is through water baptism. Yet this post has shown the teaching of the Church to be quite different. In my opinion, if we had a true pope, he would precisely define BOD/BOB putting an end to the madness of the Feeneyites once and for all. We can follow the Church, or those who think they know better than the Church

78 comments:

  1. Timely article my friend. I just recently chatted with some feenyites and the Dimonds on a YouTube video. I pointed out to them the argument from Canon Law and the dimonds response was to the effect that I'm also wrong because Pope Saint Pius X also decreed the Summa to be used as the standard for ecclesiastical studies(or something to that effect) and that proves Popes can be wrong in decreeing disciplines since the Summa "denies the Immaculate Conception ". I just couldn't help but laugh since Bobby loves to rip people who constantly bring up St. Thomas for defence of BOD but that was the first thing he went to was St. Thomas lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David,
      Thank you! Fred and Bobby and to un-Catholic jokes. Unfortunately, many get taken in because of the truth of sedevacantism. Luckily, good men like you see through them by the Grace of God!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  2. I learned a lot about sedevacantism by visiting the Dimond website but I am not sharing their mistakes on BOD and BOD. We have to hope that God will give us a real Pope to clarify everything and restore the true Faith.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      Like David above, you're a wise man who sees their errors by the Grace of God. They have fooled a great many people.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Hello Introibo,

    Your article is well thought out and is convincing. However, it would be good for you to defend your position of "implicit" desire, meaning those who have no immediate desire for the Sacrament of Baptism, thus no intent or determination to receive nor the desire for baptism. All the quotes you give supporting BOD speak of those who show or manifest (explicit) a desire for baptism. Implicit desire is allowed for but would be limited to those who have an actual desire for the Sacrament of Baptism but have yet to manifest that desire in word or action to anyone human. I believe St. Alphonsus held this opinion concerning IBOD. That would exclude those who ONLY have a general desire to please God, meaning they have no desire to be baptized, think here of Muslims and Jews who die as Muslims and Jews. Also keep in mind that Muslims and Jews do not worship or believe in the same God as Catholics, so who are they really trying to please?

    Let me know your thoughts.

    God bless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CM7,
      Implicit desire was taught by Pope Pius IX in Quanto Conficiamur Moerore. Paragraph #7 reads,
      There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments."

      Therefore, the non-culpably ignorant, if they cooperate with God's grace, keep the Natural Law, have true sorrow for sin, and respond to God's Call can be brought to faith and grace as Catholics before the moment of death.

      While it's true that Moslems and Jews don't worship the True God, they believe they are in the internal forum. God must have a way to reach them because if ANY Moslem converts, it is because God has reached him while worshiping the false moon "god" Allah. Why can't God reach such a person who never heard of the One True Church?

      What of those in the Vatican II sect? They worship an ordinary piece of bread as God, yet in they are not held guilty of idolatry in the internal forum if they truly believe it to be the Holy Eucharist. BOD is a rare miracle of grace, whereby the Jew or Moslem who believes their God is the true God, and is open to Grace CAN be enlightened before death and die within the Church.

      God can (and Will) save Who He wants, if they are open to His Grace.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo,

      I agree with Pope Pius IX. However, where does he say that a desire for and intent to receive baptism is NOT necessary. He clearly says those people can be enlightened by divine light and grace. What person would then conclude that the need for baptism WOULD NOT be included in that enlightenment? Obviously we will never know who receives such a grace but we know that a desire for baptism, at the minimum is necessary for salvation.

      The Catechism of Trent teaches:

      Dispositions for Baptism

      Intention

      The faithful are also to be instructed in the necessary dispositions for Baptism. In the first place they must desire and intend to receive it; for as in Baptism we all die to sin and resolve to live a new life, it is fit that it be administered to those only who receive it of their own free will and accord; it is to be forced upon none. Hence we learn from holy tradition that it has been the invariable practice to administer Baptism to no individual without previously asking him if he be willing to receive it. This disposition even infants are presumed to have, since the will of the Church, which promises for them, cannot be mistaken. […]

      Delete
    3. CM7,
      BOD and BOB are in complete accord with the Catechism of Trent. Whether or not a person is saved depends on the state of the soul AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH, WHEN THE SOUL LEAVES THE BODY. If the soul is within the Church and in a state of sanctifying grace, Heaven awaits.

      No one knows what happens between a soul and God in the hours, minutes, or even seconds before death. If an invincibly ignorant person follows the Natural Law, seeks to do the Will of God as he understands it, has contrition for his sins, and is open to God's grace---God could, just prior to death, enlighten his mind with the basic truths of faith, move his will to desire baptism (which circumstances make impossible to receive) and remove his sins for which he has contrition, thus infusing sanctifying grace. This would place him within the Church and in the state of grace at the moment of death, saving his soul.

      Thus he would "desire and intend to receive" Baptism.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  4. Introibo

    As always your writings are excellent.How some folk cannot accept BOB and BOD is beyond words.In the end after talking with some,I have had to walk away and pray for them.

    This is off the subject but in the near future,can you do a series on the three states of life.Most Traditional Catholic folk think if you are single you should be married or in a convent.They don't realise that the single state is a vocation.I have even had nasty comments behind my back saying she could be a lesbian.

    Are you single or married?Keep up the fine work

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:13
      Thank you for the kind words my friend. I was thinking of doing a post on the three life vocations (some enumerate them as four; which I do as well). There is the priesthood, religious life (brothers, monks, and nuns), the married vocation and the single vocation.

      I am married, but I was married later than most. I know exactly the kind of ignorance you're up against. It is culpable and crass ignorance at that. When I was in my 30s, I would going skiing for a weekend each winter with my good friend from law school who was also single and a Traditionalist (he is still both by choice). We would sometimes get remarks from other skiers at the ski lodge (since we were not womanizers or married)indicating they perceived us as a sodomite "couple." What we said in response was strong, yet charitable, and they would be careful if they ever spoke to us again.

      That post will indeed be written by January.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Did you meet your future wife at your traditional Chapel?Offer some prayers people for me that I will meet a decent Traditional Catholic man.

      Delete
    3. @anon6:55
      I actually met my wife after Sunday Mass. I had decided to go to an art museum here in NYC. As I was slowly admiring a work of art and not paying attention to where I was walking, I literally bumped into someone. I looked and saw the most beautiful lady I had ever seen! I apologized, she laughed, and we started talking. The conversation lasted 5 hours until closing. I asked if she wanted to have dinner at a restaurant as it was getting late. We had a great time, and she gave me her phone number before she left to go home. Call it crazy, but I knew on our second date the following week, that God had put us together. I proposed to her after 3 months, and we were married just under a year later in the One True Church!

      I will indeed pray that you find a Traditionalist Catholic man to marry. God answers your prayers when you least expect it sometimes. I credit St. Andrew for setting us up. I prayed the St Andrew Novena from November 30th to Christmas, asking God to send me a wife if that was His Holy Will. I met my future wife the following June! Try the same as November 30th isn't too far away.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Introibo,
      Is this the St. Andrew Novena?
      http://traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Prayer/Advent_Novena.html

      God bless,
      Paweł

      God bless,
      Paweł

      Delete
    5. Pawel,
      That's the one!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  5. Introibo.Do you accept the Taylor line from the late Bishop Patrick Taylor as valid?

    There is a priest(?) in Melbourne,FL that he ordained who had been trained and ordained in the Mar Thoma Church which is in full communion with the Anglican sect.I cannot see how this could make you a Traditional Catholic priest.Your views please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:18
      "Bp." Taylor has too many problems with his episcopal lineage to be considered valid, in my opinion. His orders derive from Duarte Costa, and that line accepts Anglican orders as valid. "Bp." Craig Bates, a Duarte Costa "bishop" was an Anglican "priest" consecrated without a valid priestly ordination. It is dubious that a layman can be validly consecrated, so Bates is considered invalid in the practical order.

      You also must not seek ordination outside the Church. He had no problem approaching approaching those who would ordain anyone such as the Old Catholic sect and Eastern Schismatics. I doubt he has the minimum seminary formation required for the presumption of validity even **IF** he were valid.

      Bottom line: Taylor is dubious at best. I'd stay away.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo.The church in Florida is the Chapel of the Holy Family.Google them,they have a website.Their "priest" is Gregory Safreed.So the orders from the Mar Thoma Church are invalid.

      Delete
    3. Also, (I'm a commenter from below), could we accept a simple priest before Vat II, who was then consecrated a sede bishop, reliable?

      Does it fulfill the minimum seminary formation required for the presumption of validity you mentioned?

      Delete
    4. @anon7:25
      Yes. Any priest who completed his training before Vatican II (or up until even 1964) has the minimum necessary training for the presumption of validity.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. Even if they then become bishops? How good was Latin taught in seminaries Would they understand the Latin for Confirmation and Orders? If it's about the Thuc line, there are many simple country priests who then became bishops, unlike learned men like Bp. Guerard des Lauriers

      Delete
    6. @anon9:14
      Seminary training pre-Vatican II would be sufficient to understand and confer Confirmation/Holy Orders using the Pontifical. Canon Law required Bishops to be theologians or canonists or to be of great learning as judged by the Holy See. This was because Bishops are teachers of the Faith. It is not necessary for validity to be consecrated, nor to have the presumption of validity when conferring the Sacraments.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    7. Thank you.
      -9:14

      Delete
    8. I'd gladly attend a Chapel if the Priest/Bishop was ordained/consecrated in trad Rites by trad Rite Bishops before April 4,1969.
      After June 18,1968 most clerics were "ordained" "consecrated" in the doubtful New Rites.
      I've read various 3rd World + Eastern bloc nations kept the trad Rite of Holy Orders until 1970/1971 but these clerics are hit + miss.
      God bless
      -A

      Delete
  6. Hi Introibo.

    Have you ever attended CMRI Massses.What is your view on them?They seem to be growing and opening more and more chapels.

    The sisters who left Mt St Michaels back in 2007 to embrace the false Vatican Two Church have really made no impact and really took no one with them.The total number of sisters including those of Bp Pivarunas based in Iowa now number almost 90.If you add the Daughters of Mary at Roundtop and the sisters of Bishop Sanborn,that is well over 200 sedevacantist nuns.A powerhouse of prayer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking as someone who has attended CMRI since recognizing sede vacante in Holy Week 2019, their chapels are full of many families (oft with 3+ children), and their homilies are rich with Church teaching. Fr. Gregory Drahman was recently reassigned from his prior post to head up the new seminary in Olathe, CO dedicated to religious seminarians. The secular seminarians (in the sense that they're training to be priests who do not take religious vows in the manner of the Benedictines, Franciscans, Dominicans, Redemptorists, etc.) will still be focused at Mater Dei Seminary in Omaha, NE.

      From my understanding, some traditionalists may take issue with the fact that their Holy Week liturgy is based off of the 1955 alterations; however, since they were legitimately promulgated by Pope Pius XII, CMRI (quite logically) accepts them as valid.

      One thing that I was quite intrigued to discover was that CMRI actually has a dedicated mission in Russia (https://cmri.eu/), currently headed by Fr. Alexander Kryssov. CMRI certainly doesn't shy away from reaching as far as they are capable of!

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    2. A Simple Man.Which chapel did you attend?What group were you attending before becoming a sedevacantist.I have much respect for Bp Pivarunas.He has really grown CMRI since the sad days of the Shuckardt era.Father Drahman is a fine priest. Father Kryssov has 12 missions.

      Delete
    3. @anon5:26
      I echo the sentiments of Simple Man. In my opinion, the CMRI is valid an completely Catholic. You're lucky if you have access to one of their Churches/Chapels.

      God Bless,
      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Introibo-Why does the SSPV/CSPV claim they are still a Old Catholic Sect.Bishop Musey made them all take a abjuration of error and reordained their priests.We are sure some of the SSPV folk when out of town go to CMRI Masses or other Thuc-line clergy.

      Delete
    5. Another truly great article Introibo.

      Since we're on the topic of secular priests, if it doesn't bother, may I ask for your thoughts?

      The CSPV claims that according to Canon 111 of Canon Law, "Every cleric must belong either to some diocese or some religious institute, and there shall be no unattached clerics." Hence why they created a congregation because it's necessary.

      I find the claim fascinating. Since we can't create ordinaries through epikeia, but we can create congregations through epikea, should there be no independent sedevacantist priests then, as I think the CSPV implies? That includes those who only attach themselves to the CMRI and not part of it. For example, I'm definitely sure that the mentioned Russian mission is not part of the CMRI technically speaking, only *affiliated*, though it is really under Bp. Pivarunas.

      Delete
    6. @anon7:08
      The SSPV, as much as I love them, are just wrong on that position. They may fear they will lose credibility if they change position on Thuc Bishops. In my opinion, it would make them more credible, not less.

      @anon7:21
      This is a misapplication of epikeia. Congregations are not necessary as to the survival of the Church. Only the pope can approve religious orders and Congregations. They are a simple religious community.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    7. To anon@6:29 PM from 11/9;

      I rotate between Mary Help of Christians in Colo. Springs, Our Lady of the Snow in Wheat Ridge, and Immaculate Conception in Burlington. Been visiting OLS and IC relatively often as of late to give me a reason to be out of the house for a few hours of the day (because working remotely leaves me locked in my dwelling most of the time now).

      As for what group I was attending, I had been attending the FSSP full-time from 2014 until Lent 2019, when I began learning more about the Church's authentic, traditional teaching on the Papacy, the Magisterium, and when obedience is due.

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    8. A Simple Man.Thank you for your info.About how many attend those Chruches and Chapels in CO?

      Do you know or gone to the Masses of Father Eugene Berry in Denver?Were told some folk left to start Our Lady of the Snow?

      Delete
    9. To anon@6:39 PM;

      In terms of parishioner count, it goes from lowers to highest in terms of Burlington, Colo. Springs, and Wheat Ridge. I would estimate around 25-40 families for Immaculate Conception based on Sunday Mass attendance (their chapel is located in a rural farming community, so the relatively small count is understandable). For Mary Help of Christians, I would put the lower bound at 80 families. Our Lady of the Snow is truly the largest one (just based on the seating capacity of the nave); I would put a lower bound of at least 300 families, based on observed Sunday Mass attendance at 7 AM, 9 AM, and 11 AM (again, these are only estimates). At least since I've been attending, there's been an upward trend in parishioner count.

      I visited Fr. Berry's chapel once (Our Lady of Victory, located in Aurora) in 2019 while traveling; although the homily was quite good (as I recall it), there was something unsettling and off-putting about Fr. Berry's demeanor that didn't sit well with me. However, that's merely a matter of personal taste and not a matter of doctrine or validity, so don't let that stop you from visiting OLV.

      That being said, it appears from their website (http://www.olvrc.com/index.html) that no Masses are currently scheduled, so I'm not sure what's going on there at this time.

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
  7. Yes,we too would like your comments on CMRI.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Taylor made the claim he had several lines from the Eastern Orthodox.He has ordained many men like Slupski who had no seminary training.People first do you homework on any priest and if in doubt keep away.I have had many bad experences.Father Cekada wrote an fine article on this subject.God bless

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:47
      You're a wise person!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Bishop Slupski was consecrated by Bishop McKenna. He was ordained in Poland well before Vatican 2. So what “Slupski” are you talking about?

      Delete
    3. Requiescat in Pace Bp.Slupski.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    4. Bp Pivarunas told us that Bp Slupski ordained many married men to the priesthood.Yes,he was ordained in Poland well before Vatican Two.

      Delete
    5. Bp.Carmona ordained a married man,one Gaston-Lopez.
      Bp.Carmona then consecrated
      Bp.Pivarunas.
      These ordinations of Bp.Slupski were done in secret for when the Church is literally forced underground and operating in a clandestine manner.
      No one knows how many were done so it's none of our business.
      Lastly Bp.Slupski's Holy Orders are valid per epikeya.
      God bless
      -Andrew

      Delete
    6. Thanks Andrew for your comment.We did not know about Gaston-Lopez.Who made him a Bishop?

      Where is the evidence that Bp Slupski ordained married men.

      Do you know who has taken over his chapel in Rock Falls,IL?

      Delete
    7. Bp.Olivares from the
      Thuc-Dattessen line consecrated
      Bp.Gaston-Lopez.
      Bp.Thuc ordained/consecrated
      Bp.Dattessen conditionally so that line,though not populous,is valid.

      It's hearsay Bp.Slupski ordained married Men + we aren't allowed to gossip per our Blessed Lord.
      If he did,it was for salvation of Souls in the future.
      The good Bishop is dead,pray for his Soul.
      No,I have zero on Rock Falls + we shouldn't worry about whats going on in Rock Falls.
      Save your Soul and then spread the Gospel.
      If this sounds terse i apologize.
      God bless my mysterious friend.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    8. Bp.Taylor,from what I gathered,had valid Holy Orders.
      Yes it was messy but unless we have to deal with these clerics,we should pray for their
      moral temporal spiritual well being + not worry about them.
      Pray for the Soul of Bp.Taylor as he is Dead.
      God bless
      -Andrew

      Delete
  9. Another outstanding article on the errors of Father Feeney.Wll done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:06
      It's comments like yours that keep me writing!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Was Fr. Feeney literally insane? A literal madman?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon4:04
      After having done extensive research on his life, I must conclude he was (a) literally insane, (b) pure evil, or (c) demon possessed. Please read my post http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2020/03/a-sickness-of-soul.html and you'll understand why.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I would say (b) pure evil.

      Lee

      Delete
    3. In my opinion Fr. Feeney is an example of extremism gone totally awry.
      "In medio stat veritas" (the truth stands in the middle)!!

      JoAnn

      Delete
  11. To my readers,
    Please pray for Joann who regularly comments here. I received word that she is in the hospital, and might have had a mini-stroke. Please pray for her total restoration to health.

    ---Introibo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will do thank you for the heads up.
      -A

      Delete
    2. The Litany of the Sick

      Lord, have mercy on us.
      Lord, have mercy on us.
      Christ, have mercy on us.
      Christ, have mercy on us.
      Lord, have mercy on us.
      Lord, have mercy on us.
      Christ, hear us.
      Christ, graciously hear us.
      God the Father of heaven,
      Have mercy on us. *
      God the Son, Redeemer of the world, *
      God the Holy Ghost, *
      Holy Trinity, one God, *
      Jesus, Who art near to all those who invoke Thee, *
      Jesus, Who through mercy helpest all who confide in Thee, *
      Jesus, Who didst go to seek and cure the sick, *
      Jesus, Who didst stay up the weak and suffering, *
      Jesus, Who dost refresh those who labor and are heavily burdened, * Jesus, Who didst console the stricken hearts, *
      Jesus, Who didst raise the dead unto life, *
      Jesus, Who didst bear all our pains, *
      Be merciful, spare us, O Jesus. Be merciful, hear us, O Jesus. From all evil,
      Deliver us, O Jesus. **
      From all sin, **
      From all diseases and infirmities, **
      From impatience and despondency, **
      From the snares of the devil, **
      From a sudden and unprovided death,
      ** From eternal damnation, **
      Through Thy toils and hardships, **
      Through Thy affliction and tears, **
      Through Thine agony and bloody sweat,
      ** Through Thy holy wounds, **
      Through Thy precious blood, **
      Through Thy Passion and cross,
      ** Through Thy bitter death, **
      Through Thy glorious resurrection,
      ** Through Thy marvellous ascension, **
      In the Day of Judgment, **
      We, poor sinners, beseech Thee, hear us. That Thou wouldst spare us,
      We beseech Thee, hear us. ***
      That Thou wouldst pardon us, ***
      That Thou wouldst bring us to true penance, ***
      That Thou wouldst give us a contrite heart, ***
      That Thou wouldst strengthen us in our weakness, ***
      That Thou wouldst preserve us in patience, ***
      That Thou wouldst relieve our pains, ***
      That Thou wouldst restore us to health of body and soul, *** That Thou wouldst grant us perseverance in good, ***
      That Thou wouldst grant us a happy death, ***
      That Thou wouldst receive our spirit into Thy hands, ***
      That Thou wouldst preserve us from the fire of purgatory, *** That Thou wouldst bring us to the joys of heaven, ***
      Son of God, ***
      Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world, Spare us, O Lord.
      Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world, Graciously hear us, O Lord.
      Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world, Have mercy on us.
      Christ, hear us,
      Christ, graciously hear us.

      Lord, have mercy on us, Christ, have mercy on us. Lord, have mercy on us.
      Our Father (secretly).
      V. And lead us not into temptation, R. But deliver us from evil. Amen. V. Save, O Lord, Thy servants.
      R. Who hope in Thy mercy.
      V. Lord, hear our prayer.
      R. And let our cry come unto Thee.
      Let us Pray:
      O Heavenly Father, have mercy on Thy servant, who is sick. Confirm him [her] in faith, strengthen his [her] hope, fill him [her] with the fire of Thy love. Give him [her] enduring patience, that he [she] may victoriously go through the fight and suffer everything for Thy greater glory and the salvation of his [her] soul. Lessen his [her] pains, forgive him [her] his [her] sins, and bring him [her] to life everlasting. Through Christ, Our Lord. Amen.

      Delete
  12. Introibo,

    I'm a little worried about your state of New York. Apparently the New York Bar passed a mandated Covid Vaccine without religious or personal exemption rights once the vaccine is ready to be distributed. Here is the article https://www.infowars.com/posts/new-york-bar-passed-mandated-covid-vaccine-without-religious-or-personal-exemption-rights/

    I've also seen Gov. Cuomo say he doesn't want to distribute the vaccine until Biden takes over (if the vaccine is ready to distribute before then). Of course Trump still isn't out of the woods and can still win the election even though the media pretends like they can call the election and say that Biden is the president elect when there are all kinds of law suits, re-counts, etc.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,
      That was a Draconian recommendation. It does not have force of law. Will the State Legislature act upon it? God help us.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I'll keep you in my prayers in regards to that. I'm still praying for Trump to win despite all the cheating for creepy sleepy Joe Biden. God help us if all the Democrats take over every branch of government. Otherwise, it won't just be a Baptism of blood but a Confirmation of blood.

      Lee

      Delete
  13. We are pleased to read that you will do a series on the four states of life.Well overdue.

    Do you think it's best to marry someone around your own age.Often men who mary a woman 20 years or more younger,the marriages don't last.It would be like marrying your daughter.Do you agree.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon8:27
      It depends. In some cultures, it is not at all unusual for the man to be significantly older than the woman. I knew a Greek woman married to a man over 20 years her senior. The Church has never declared marriages with big age differences to be avoided, nor has She refused to marry such couples.

      In American culture, a 20 year plus age difference is probably not a good thing, but it needs to be judged on the basis of each couple wanting to get married. My wife is ten years my junior. However, if a 30 year old man married a typical 20 year old woman in the U.S., she would most likely be too immature and the marriage might end up with her leaving.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Correct.Have heard of story of a 50 year old man marrying a 23 year old woman.The marriage did not last.

      Delete
    3. I've noticed within my lifetime a transformation.
      Men + Women where I live are often around the same age.
      In the past 15 yrs or so it's not unusual for the woman to be a year or 2 older than the man and vice versa.
      -A

      Delete
  14. A Simple Man


    Tahnks for the info about Father Eugene Berry.When you went there about how many faithful were there?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does anybody know Fr. Gabriel Lavery CMRI?

      Delete
    2. Anon@8:57 PM - from what I recall, it was somewhere between Burlington and Colo. Springs' in size (as far as the CMRI chapels go).

      Anon@3:28 AM - Beyond the fact that he's currently stationed out of Akron and Sulphur Springs in Ohio, no.

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
  15. Could it be that people are starting to wake up concerning the "Sainthood" of John Paul II? Perhaps also questioning his "Papacy" and that of Benedict and Francis as well?

    https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2020/11/12/pope-francis-theodore-mccarrick-clergy-sex-abuse-eileen-mcnamara

    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      The news about "Uncle Ted" is damning. I always felt something bad about Wojtyla would come out proving him a false saint and thereby making Bergogio a false pope also,since he "canonized" him. Will people finally wake up? Unfortunately, those who think the Vatican II sect to be the Catholic Church will come to believe saints are false and so is the True Church the Counterfeit Sect claims to be.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  16. Thanks to Introibo and all those who prayed for me. I did not have a stroke but was leading up to having one as my blood pressure was very high. Thanks again to all for the prayers!!

    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JoAnn,
      it's great to see you back at Introibo's!
      I'm glad to hear that you're feeling better now; I'll still be keeping you in my prayers.

      May God bless you,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    2. Great to hear you're doing well.
      God bless
      -Andrew

      Delete
    3. Joanna and Andrew,
      Thanks much for the prayers! In these perilous and ungodly times we must stick together! Thanks again!
      JoAnn

      Delete
    4. Welcome back JoAnn!

      Glad you're on the mend.

      Cordially yours,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    5. Anon @4:48 and A Simple Man,

      Anon @4:48 thank you for The Litany of the Sick. A Simple Man thank you for the welcome back. Much appreciative!

      JoAnn

      Delete
    6. JoAnn

      Will have a Mass offered for you.Welcome back

      Delete
    7. Anon @5:06,
      Thank you so much for the Mass! I am so very grateful!

      JoAnn

      Delete
  17. https://novusordowatch.org/2020/11/pope-francis-congratulates-joe-biden/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon12:29
      The False Pope and False President.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  18. Please pray for me, i am feeling dizzy & with headaches every day and i think it is either 1: My computer screen 2: Something worse

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon7:21
      I certainly will pray for you, my friend, but please get yourself checked out by a doctor ASAP. If it is something other than your computer screen, early detection of a problem goes a long way to curing it. I ask my readers to pray for you as well.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Your first name will greatly help if we pray for you.
      God bless
      -Andrew

      Delete