I have written before that Pope Pius XII is one of the most unfairly attacked pontiffs, especially among those purporting to be "Traditionalists." His Holiness has been attacked as "soft on Modernism," and his papacy allegedly "led to Vatican II." The charges are unfounded. He was one of the greatest popes in history, as I have always maintained. Years ago, my spiritual father, Fr. Gommar DePauw, JCD, told me that Pope Pius XII was planning a full-scale attack on Modernism. Father said that Pope Pius went to Judgement before it could be carried out. I took his word for it, as he was a truthful priest, but I only had his ipse dixit. Until recently.
The Pacelli archives (Eugene Pacelli being Pius XII's name) were opened in 2020. The German historian Matthias Daufratshofer found drafts of what would have been the most monumental encyclical of modern times. Researchers Sr. Sabine Schratz and Daniele Premoli published the reconstruction of the unpublished text of the encyclical, to be entitled Cultum Regi Regum---"Worship to the King of Kings."
The encyclical was to be a follow-up to the great Humani Generis, promulgated by Pope Pius XII in 1950, and which condemned "... some false opinions threatening to undermine the foundations of Catholic Doctrine." It was drafted by the great Dominican theologian Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange.
Its salient points include:
- Encyclicals usually speak to matters already expounded upon in doctrine; however, should the Pope pass supreme judgment on a disputed matter, it should be considered closed for discussion.
- Divine revelation was given by God as guidance for the Church to exercise Her living teaching authority, not for private deterministic interpretation.
- Some dispute the divine authorship of Scripture in part or in whole and interpret it on the basis of exegesis, looking for hidden meanings, instead of on the Church’s teachings.
- They claim that a new exegesis of the Old Testament would replace literal difficulties with symbolic/spiritual truth.
- Their claims oppose the norms of interpretation explained in previous encyclicals.
- Doubt regarding revealed truths is a result of this way of thinking. (e.g. Creation out of love, God’s eternal foreknowledge of men’s free choices, etc.)
- Angels, essence, the supernatural order, original sin, sin in general, the efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice, and the Real Presence are all debated.
- The necessity and value of the Church and the faith itself is questioned.
- These errors are being pointed out herein because some Catholic theologians are committing them and are hereby censured.
- The Church relies on reason to understand the faith, God’s law, the mysteries, and even the existence of God. Reason comes with training and leads to truth.
- Teaching Authority only covers matters of faith and morals. "New" truth cannot overturn established truth, but it can correct errors.
- Priests must learn philosophy and Aquinas’ method is tried and true.
- Opponents claim that the traditional philosophy used by the Church is adequate for basic instruction but not for practical application, and that all other philosophies, albeit evolving, are ultimately compatible with Catholicism.
- They claim that the Church’s philosophy appeals to intellect and ignores the will and emotions; however, this is clearly and historically false, for the Church teaches that the will can see truth beyond what the intellect can deduce on its own.
- Theodicy and ethics (philosophical sciences) are threatened by these new opinions. Not only are they themselves debased, but so is the protection provided by the Church’s Teaching Authority.
- Discussion of theories not yet proven scientifically but merely hypothesized must follow. Theories can only be considered if they do not oppose Church teaching.
- Human evolution (origin of man from pre-existent and living matter) is up for discussion, but cannot contradict that God is the immediate creator of souls.
- Polygenism (origin from two or more distinct ancestors) is irreconcilable with the doctrine of original sin.
- The first eleven chapters of Genesis may not fit the modern concept of history, but any inclusion of folklore was done under divine inspiration.
- Thus, these are not imaginative myths but expressions of truth. Ancient sacred authors were clearly superior to secular ("profane") authors of the same period.
Hence, while condemning the modern errors, Pope Pius was careful to allow discussion on evolution of the body of humans, and a non-literal interpretation of Genesis in certain instances (which idea was advanced by Pope St. Pius X).
Most importantly, Cultum Regi Regum, was to be promulgated in 1957, to mark the 50th anniversary of Pope St. Pius X's monumental condemnation of Modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis. It was to be called "the Pascendi of modern times." (N.B. This post is based on what I was able to gather from what the researchers [and commenters on that research] have written. Ergo, the information is not complete, and is subject to revision. It is not definitive as of this writing.---Introibo).
What is Known: The Theologians Who Drafted It
On December 29, 1956, a commission of theologians was set up by Pope Pius XII to draft the encyclical. The commission was under the guidance of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, headed by the erudite and saintly Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani. At least five theologians are known:
1. Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange (1877-1964). A professor at the Angelicum, he championed a rigid scholasticism based on the philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas. He correctly held that the Church’s theological definitions were immutable and expressed in timeless, objective, metaphysical categories.
Garrigou-Lagrange was a fierce opponent of the so-called Nouvelle Theologie (New Theology), which was a roll call of the most radical Modernist theologians, such as Henri de Lubac, Jean Danielou, and M. D. Chenu. These theologians held that truth is dynamic; its expression can evolve historically "without changing its essence."
In 1946, things came to a fever pitch when Garrigou-Lagrange published a highly controversial article in the journal Angelicum entitled Where is the New Theology Leading Us? His answer was to the point: "It leads straight to Modernism." Garrigou-Lagrange used his significant influence as a consultor to the Holy Office to urge the pope to act. His efforts culminated in August 1950, when Pope Pius XII promulgated the encyclical Humani Generis, the document having Garrigou-Lagrange as its principal author.
As a result, several New Theology professors (including Henri de Lubac and Yves Congar) were censured and removed from their teaching positions. Some of their publications were censured as well. Garrigou-Lagrange was on the verge of total victory when Roncalli usurped the papal throne and rehabilitated all the censured Modernist theologians, welcoming them to the Robber Council.
2. Abp. Paul Phillippe (1905-1984). A staunch Anti-Modernist, Phillippe was against the Modernists at Vatican II. After the Robber Council, he tried to stop as much damage as he could as Secretary of the Holy Office, now called "The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith."
3. Fr. Sebastian Tromp (1889-1975). Tromp was a brilliant professor of dogmatic theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome from 1929 to 1964. His sharp mind and absolute loyalty to traditional scholasticism earned him the trust of Pope Pius XII. Tromp was the principal draftsman behind Mystici Corporis Christi in 1943; the landmark encyclical which reaffirmed and made manifest the traditional ecclesiology on the nature of the Church as the "Mystical Body of Christ." In it, Tromp strictly equated the Mystical Body of Christ only with the visible Roman Catholic Church; "IS" not "subsists." Tromp is wrongly criticized for allegedly pushing "subsists" in Lumen Gentium at Vatican II, when he was actually trying to prevent an even more heretical wording.
Tromp became the Holy Office's premier orthodox defender of the Faith under Cardinal Ottaviani. He was deeply involved in vetting publications, investigating suspected Modernist tendencies, and enforcing strict Catholic standards across the global Church. Fr. Tromp was the principal author behind several of the original, orthodox schemas presented to the Council Fathers in late 1962. These drafts were written in a scholastic Latin style designed to condemn modern errors and reaffirm existing dogmas.
4. Fr. Marie-Rosaire Gagnebet (1904–1983). Gagnebet was a major French Dominican theologian, historical researcher, and Roman curial advisor. He was Anti-Modernist yet was criticized for some methods used by Modernists. Gagnebet used it, however, not to move past Aquinas, but to restore Thomism to its original 13th-century purity and make it more rigorous.
He helped craft the heretical Lumen Gentium. He thought that by actively helping to write the document, he could ensure that it did not contain actual theological errors or heresy. He was (obviously) wrong and became compromised.
5. Fr. Augustin Bea (1881–1968). A snake-in-the grass if there ever was one. Bea served as a professor and later Rector of the prestigious Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome from 1930 to 1949. He was a master of biblical archaeology and ancient languages. From 1945 until 1958, Bea served as the personal spiritual director and confessor to Pope Pius XII. since he held an intimate position of trust, Bea was able to convince Pope Pius XII that certain clergymen were orthodox (or had been rehabilitated) and were worthy of promotion to the cardinalate or episcopacy. (The pope is not protected by the Holy Ghost in making ecclesiastical appointments). Bea was, by all outward indications, an Anti-Modernist.
Even Fr. DePauw thought so.
As soon as Roncalli came into power as the false "Pope" John XXIII, Bea showed his true colors as an ultra-Modernist. Roncalli wasted no time in making Bea a "Cardinal," and in 1960, Roncalli created the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity with Bea as its head. The purpose of the Secretariat was to promote radical ecumenism as it operated independently of the Holy Office and, therefore, Cardinal Ottavianni could not stop what they did.
Bea raged against the anti-Modernist preparatory schemas. In 1962, Bea stood up on the Council floor and fiercely attacked them, arguing that the texts "lacked charity," a "pastoral spirit," and any understanding of modern biblical research. Bea's forceful opposition helped convince the Council Fathers to reject the curial drafts entirely and pave the way to the Great Apostasy.
During Vatican II, he was a major drafter of the Modernist documents, specifically:
- Unitatis Redintegratio which officially committed the Catholic Church to heretical ecumenism
- Nostra Aetate which lauded paganism, Islam, and denied that the Jews are justly called the Deicide Race
- Dignitatis Humanae which declared all humans have a "right" to religious freedom, a complete repudiation of Church teaching on religious tolerance and the axiom that "error has no rights."
Therefore, of the five theologians we know were on the commission, four were solidly Anti-Modernist at the time (I would argue Garrigou-Lagrange was never compromised as he died in 1964), and only one was a closet Modernist. The encyclical would be a theological masterpiece considering the authors. We must wait for the researchers to publish the exact Latin verbiage.
What We Know of the Encyclical
The draft was dated on August 15, the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in 1958. It was sent to be considered by the full commission on September 27, and Pope Pius XII died twelve days later, on October 9, never having signed it. It went through many revisions so the intended release in 1957 never came to pass. Cultum Regi Regum was to consist of six chapters. Here is the breakdown:
Chapter One: The Nature of Religion
Highlights:
- It forcefully rejects Modernism and "vital immanence" ---the idea that religion does not start with intellectual beliefs or external doctrines. Instead, it begins as a blind, subconscious feeling; often described by Modernists as a "religious sense" or a sentiment of the heart. The encyclical says religion is a virtue, not a feeling or identity
- Religion consists in the adoration owed to God alone ("consistit in cultu latriae")
- Strong condemnation of the failure by individuals and society in not keeping Sunday holy
Chapter Two: Liturgical Worship and Private Devotion
Highlights:
- As if seeing the future, the Novus Bogus type service is firmly rejected. The teaching of Mediator Dei is expanded upon
- Antiquarianism is condemned as is concelebration of Mass except in special or rare circumstances; "One Mass at which one hundred priests assist is not equal in value to one hundred Masses offered separately"
- The priest is not the leader of an assembly the efficacy of whose actions depend upon collective participation of the people
- Private devotions are to be kept and encouraged, especially the Rosary
Chapter Three: Moral Theology
Highlights:
- Natural Law is to be emphasized and subjectivist moral theories rejected
- Condemnation of those who deny or call into doubt that the primary end of marriage is for the procreation and education of children, thereby making the mutual support of the spouses (the secondary end) equal to the primary end
- Consecrated virginity is the highest state and superior to marriage (reaffirming Trent)
- The dangers of materialism are condemned
Chapter Four: The Profession of Faith
Highlights:
- Catholics must boldly profess the One True Faith whole and entire, not partially, and never to compromise even on one point of doctrine
- In regard to false religions, cooperation for the common good is permitted but doctrinal differences may never be set aside for a false notion of "brotherhood" ---"a healthy doctor may work beside a physician with a contagious disease, but closer work requires more vigilance against infection"
- True ecumenism consists in bringing those in false religions into the One True Church, and not in downplaying or failing to mention Catholic truths that offend them
Chapter Five: Authority and Freedom in the Church
Highlights:
- Our religion is "via auctoritatis et obedientiae," a way of authority and obedience
- Theologians have a vital role, however only when united and approved by the Magisterium
- Renewed and more expanded condemnations of the "New Theology" and Modernism
Chapter Six: The Religious Order and The Secular Order
Highlights:
- Quas Primas is reaffirmed; the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ
- Every State must strive to be a Catholic State because every State owes public recognition to the One True Church. A religiously neutral State is against the Will of God and all must strive to make it Catholic
- The views of John Courtney Murray are condemned
- The Social Kingship of Christ is a conclusion about human nature and not nostalgia for old times. Communities cannot organize themselves as if God is irrelevant
(Reference: Journal of Modern and Contemporary Christianity: “L’Enciclica Pascendi dei tempi moderni. Il progetto per l’ultima enciclica di Pio XII (1956-58).” Vol. 3, No. 1 (April 2024).
A Greatly Misunderstood Pontiff
It is apparent that Pope Pius XII was no "Modernist." Much of the charges come from a misunderstanding of Catholic principles. Pius was trying to make Catholicism "combat-ready" against the attacks of the 20th century. As countries became more secularized, it was harder to get time off to attend the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Evening Mass was introduced, and with it the mitigated three hour Eucharistic Fast so all could receive Holy Communion.
The Holy Week reforms are often unjustly criticized as "reductions in prayers." If brevity means "less holy," then what are we to think of Pope St. Pius V? In his reform of the Roman Missal, he removed late medieval "farcings" (interpolated, localized tropes or poetic insertions added into standard chants like the Kyrie and Gloria) and doubtful accretions, while the number of liturgical sequences were reduced down to just four. St. Pius V also removed some localized sanctoral feast days and duplicate saints' celebrations to clear up a crowded calendar. In some dioceses, a Mass could take a very long time. Is the Missal of 1570 somehow "less traditional" or "less holy" since certain prayers and feasts were removed?
Conclusion: A Vindication of a Great Pope
To those who have attacked Pope Pius XII as "soft on Modernism," on being "liberal," on "introducing novelties" in the liturgy, this encyclical that could have been shows a great Pontiff who loved the Catholic Faith and defended the One True Church.
Far from being an "innovator," Pope Pius XII used Catholic principles to meet modern needs while simultaneously defending the One True Church from Her enemies. I can't help but wonder what would have happened (or not happened) had Cultum Regi Regum been promulgated. Could Vatican II have thus been prevented? Only God knows. One thing is now clear: Pope Pius XII was a true pope and therefore he was no Modernist. He had no sympathy for Modernism and was in complete possession of his faculties until the end. Let his critics be silenced. Should the papacy ever be restored, we may see the canonization of Eugene Pacelli as Pope St. Pius XII.

Dear Introibo,
ReplyDeletePlease pray for my mom because she suffers from chest pain due to internal problems.
Regarding Pius XII, his family name Pacelli is associated with peace, especially Italian word for Peace is Pace, which is associated with Pius XII family name. Sadly, he is targeted by anti-Catholics who frame him up for supporting Hitler and his anti-Catholic Holocaust
Ryan,
DeleteBe assured of my prayers for your dear mother. Yes, Pope Pius XII seems to get blamed from all sides for every woe.
God Bless,
---Introibo
I included the portrait of Pius XII to honor his memory as the last true Pope, pending the election of his true successor. I don’t know what great Popes like St. Pius X and Pius XII would have said had they seen Vatican II in action. They might have concluded that modernist usurpers had seized positions of leadership in the Church and set in motion the Great Apostasy foretold by St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians. In any case, that is what we see, even if not everyone sees it the same way we do.
ReplyDeleteSimon
Delete"In any case, that is what we see, even if not everyone sees it the same way we do." Well stated, my friend!
God Bless
---Introibo
Thank you for this. Sorely needed. +JMJ+
ReplyDeletecairsahr_stjoseph
DeleteI thought it was needed too, my friend. It shows the attacks on Pope Pius XII to be unfounded.
God Bless,
---Introibo
I completely disagree with this post and think Pius XII was a total modernist heretic from hell. I reject him fully and all of his modernist changes.
ReplyDelete@anon5:20
DeleteThen he couldn't be pope and you're a Vacancy Pusher like Mike Bizzaro and Richard Ibranyi. Bizzaro has Pope St. Pius X as the last pope (and not a saint as he was canonized by Pope Pius XII whom he rejects), and Ibranyi is back to 1130AD with Pope Honorius II as the last pope.
What "heresy" did Pope Pius XII espouse? He didn't.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Yes, I'm a vacancy pusher if that's what you call it. He was a modernist, which you deny. I don't hate you, Introibo. I just don't agree with you. I don't hate anyone actually.
DeleteDon't feed the trolls.
Delete@anon6:39
DeleteI don't hate you either. So:
1. Who, according to your belief, is the last true pope?
2. What did Pope Pius XII do that constitutes heresy?
---Introibo
El poni albinegro, just post those who agree with you and label as trolls those who disagree with you. By definition, your comment makes you the troll in this instance.
DeleteJust curious, is the Anonymous 7:15, 6:39, and 5:20 poster the same as the one in the previous article who brought up the vaxx and talked about "sede land?"
DeleteNo I am not same poster. Yes I brought up vaxx in last post bc this one reason people cannot think properly. They are on way to transhuman by taking that vaxx and subsequent ones.
DeleteWhy do vacancy pushers like yourselves only promote the names above. I have discovered people who say all popes Leo13 and after not legitimate. Others who give other cut off points. But you all say you know the truth and all others ridiculous, insane, stupid etc. Maybe you all stuck in your way of thinking only?
DeleteSo 5:51 you really are the same poster who I'm thinking of from the previous article that talked about the vaxx and sede land. Why do you post on here all the time about apparitions not being true, the vaxx, and now Pope Pius XII? Who do you get this from and why does it bother you so bad that you are constantly feeling the need to voice your opinion? I've read many things I don't agree with in the past and rarely comment on those kinds of articles. It appears that you have an ax to grind with something. It's just strange to me but then again it's my worthless opinion just like everybody else's.
DeleteI don't post all the time. I said I mentioned vaxx at end of last post. Not sure why you want to analyze me but no one else here? I didn't post anything else on this thread. Whatever. I am enraged by all those I know dropping dead. Sorry you seem immune to it all. If one person reads and doesn't inject another poison into their body, wouldn't that be great? It is this same lackadaisical indifference that allowed V2! Much is a lie! Even in sede land! What do you think of sede priests who have also injected themselves with murdered baby cells and other poisons? Do you trust them? Big news...I do not!
DeleteThere are many false apparitions. Many people remain obsessed and in novus ordo. The spoonfed (BIG BOWLS OF LIES) generation is committing suicide, physically and spiritually. This is partly because no one has basic understanding of the faith.
3:32, On certain subjects you comment all the time. I don't know any trad priests who got the jab or who gets them often. I'm sure some do but you aren't going to change their minds about it any more than you are going to change their mind about private revelations, Pius XII and the like. You can comment all day I suppose and call it "the truth" but everybody does that. Same person, different day.
DeleteThanks for your useless comment. Oh yes, the brainwashed poisoned people are almost transhuman now so go play with them.
DeleteINTROIBO
ReplyDeleteI am not a sede but do read your site from time to time. I gather you are a decent man and would have no toleration for abuse of children and adults.
I find it horrifying that the key note speaker at this years Fatima conference was Father Sim. Are you aware of the harrowing public evidence of extreme spiritual abuse on children by his group. For Bishop Pivarunas to have him there talking demonstrates a profound lack of moral integrity.
*Young children were systematically told by Father Sim and his priests they were directly possessed by Satan and demons creating a state of absolute psychological terror for vulnerable minors into a state of total desperate dependence on Sim and his priests for survival
*A number of children were given prolonged violent exorcisms without a medical review where they were done on children who were physically tied up for hours while the priests scream at them.
*Encouraging self harm. One young girl was told it was okay to inflict pain on herself for her sins which led her to cut her skin with blades while praying that would be pleasing to God.
*Weaponised confessionals. Father Sim and his priests heavily exploited the Sacrament of Penance to groom and manipulate young minds' According to several abuse survivors groups in New Zealand and the Novus Ordo diocese, children were subjected to highly inappropriate hyper - sexualised questioning during confessions. This was accompanied by strict messaging that they could never trust anyone outside the order including their own parents..
There was in the beginning 17 whistle blowers who came forward and filed reports to the NZ Police. As media coverage and investigations intensified, many other survivors and affected families stepped forward while the vast majority quietly confirmed the truth by fleeing the group. 95 percent of their parish chapel group consisting of over 400 people left.
You and your readers should google them on the net and the info is all there.3 monks escaped from his monastery island late at night some months back and another monk has just left. More monks are sure to be leaving.
For Sim to be standing there looking as if butter would not melt in his mouth without shame or guilt but is in fact a disgraced and disgusting individual. Bishop Pivarunas did not treat him as an accused abuser but as a international celebrity.
Very is very disturbing re this priest. I heard his talk this morning and thought it was decent then read this. I personally will have nothing to do with cmri but I still listen to various talks online etc. When they land in my feed.
Delete@anon11:14
DeleteI didn't find the incidents online. Could you please send some links to these allegations? Thank you.
God Bless
---Introibo
Where is the proof of these accusations? People spreading gossip, calumny, and misinformation happens in the “traditional” movement more than I care to count. So called Eyewitnesses might have ulterior motives. Please show the proof before unsubstantiated accusations are made. I’m a Sedevacantist and I only go to The CMRI for sacraments since they certainly do have issues, but all claims must be objective and backed by proof. Calumny is a grave sin.
DeleteI did some quick research. This article seems to be quite exhaustive and objective:
Deletehttps://web.archive.org/web/20231128054102/https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/07/paddy-gower-has-issues-catholic-order-accused-of-abuse-of-power-unauthorised-exorcisms.html
Frankly, I'm not surprised. There is a morbid and exaggerated response of many semi-trads/indult/conservative Novus Ordos who see the devil absolutely everywhere just because the Modernists don't see the devil anywhere. Imprudent questioning in the confessional re-sexual matters is characteristic of ill-trained and inexperienced clergy. That group had been Novus Ordo all the way until very recently with no proper Traditionalist seminary training. This spells trouble.
God Bless,
Joanna
I read the article Joanna. In the article it says the priests were granted permission from the local bishop to do exorcisms, and there was a distinction as to what kind they performed "minor."
DeleteThe people involved sound more cinematic than the descriptions they tell. While it's possibly true that some abuse could have taken place, it's also possible that there is exaggeration from the accusers. It's hard to tell who is telling the truth. We know there are some truly disgusting clergy. We also know there are some truly disgusting lay people. I'm not fully buying it but that is just my opinion because I know what it's like to be falsely accused.
anon 6:21
DeleteI'll let that article speak for itself and wait for Introibo's and other commenters' opinion.
God Bless,
Joanna
"Another way she says leaders became too involved in personal matters was during a confession with Father Anthony Mary
Delete"He asked me very deeply personal questions about my sex life. It made me feel ill. I was disgusted. Made me feel sick, actually."
What did this lady confess? Adultery? Fornication? Unnatural sins? Notice how the article frames the priest as the sicko but doesn't tell what prompted the priest to ask her uncomfortable questions.
St. Veronica Gulianni used to perform severe acts of penance of licking the floor in the form of a cross. Was she crazy? According to modern times and this article of course.
Self harm: "I started cutting my skin" Why would you do that? Lets blame the priest for traumatizing me.
From my point of view, exorcisms don't take place unless requested and approved after examination. The fact that the people involved who were "traumatized" indicates that there was something seriously wrong with them as victims. Did the priests make some mistakes? Maybe, but the article is biased against them.
Now if the priest grabbed a boy's private parts or fondled a woman or did something sacrileges, I would be genuinely disgusted and I would avoid such a person.
I'm not convinced of the above article as being solid proof that the Transalpine Redemptorists are guilty.
The following quote is taken from a pre-Vatican 2 manual for confessors:
Delete"Don't overemphasize sex. A young confessor need not be surprised if he feels a strong curiosity concerning sexual matters and perhaps a special interest in women's confessions. (...)
But it is one thing to feel curiosity, another thing to indulge it. A confessor would make a serious mistake to allow his interest in sex to lead him to ask unnecessary questions or to give uncalled for advice. The traditional rule - "better to say too little than too much" - is a wise one. Do not ask for useless details of sexual sin, and do not permit a penitent to give such details if you can prudently prevent it."
Severe acts pf physical penance, such as those practiced by great Catholic saints, are generally to be admired, not imitated by lay people, especially not by children. Would you encourage your child to hurt himself, saying that God is pleases with such mortification? Or would you rather tell him that God is pleased when he obeys his parents, eats his broccoli without grumbling although he doesn't like it all?
Who approved those exorcisms? The local Novus Ordo "bishop". Modernists aren't exactly paragons of theological expertise.
You say that "the fact that the people involved who were 'traumatized' indicates that there was something seriously wrong with them".
Exorcism is undertaken only after all natural causes have been ruled out. "Something seriously wrong" can be anything from mental instability to a Tourette syndrome.
That's all I'll write on this matter for now unless Introibo says he's OK with this off-topic discussion.
God Bless,
Joanna
Sometimes priests need to ask questions to find out the species and circumstances of the sin. If someone just says they did impure things 5 times since their last confession, that is not enough for a proper confession. The priest needs to know kind and number. People are embarrassed to confess their mortal sins of impurity and don’t want to give the kind and number. Just saying unnatural acts and giving a number is not enough. There should be no graphic detail given, but specific kind, circumstances, number. If priests are asking for minute and graphic details, that would be imprudent. Perhaps gravely imprudent depending on what they are asking and their intention.
DeleteJoanna,
DeleteThank you for the link and I agree with everything you wrote. Please feel free to comment on any topic on any post you like.
God Bless,
---Introibo
I understand your position Joanna but if these people are in fact accusing them with no real proof, it's a serious sin. We have to be extremely careful of this even if they are in the Novus Ordo. We don't know what was asked in confession, we don't really know if the priests told them to cut themselves or if it was something they did themselves either under possession or if at all.
DeleteI know a man who told me personally that if a specific priest comes to his house unannounced he will get his rifle out and tell him to get off his property or he'll call the police all because this traditional priest told him something he didn't want to hear regarding his personal sin.
People can be hateful and play the victim game. This doesn't excuse priests from ever committing faults but one should be careful accusing them. That's all I'm saying. Believe what you want.
Introibo, I notice how quick you are to defend Fr. DePauw in a comment below all because you know him but you aren't as quick with showing benefit of the doubt regarding these priests who are accused. I think that is hypocritical.
@anon6:18
DeleteYou are correct, and I should (and hereby DO) clarify that I agree with Joanna that there is:
"Imprudent questioning in the confessional re-sexual matters is characteristic of ill-trained and inexperienced clergy. That group had been Novus Ordo all the way until very recently with no proper Traditionalist seminary training. This spells trouble."
That being said, you are correct that EVERYONE must be considered innocent until proven guilty--including the Vatican II sect clergy in that article. Would I be surprised if they were guilty? No. Are they guilty? They must be presumed innocent unless the contrary is proven.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Yes, I would be a total hypocrite not to give ALL ACCUSED PEOPLE THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.
I do give them that presumption and clarify my earlier response.
God Bless
---Introibo
Why? If he knew Fr. DePauww personally, certainly he can defend him better. Nobody knew who this Transalpine Redemptorists were until they transitioned to sedevacantism earlier this year.
DeletePersonally, I think we should be wary of them. First we got the rushed ordination of Michael Mary, that shouldn't have happened; now we got this accusations.
They were initially reported by Fr. Héctor Vergara, from Mexico, who quoted the accusations from the SNAP website.
I think the accusations are likely true because who ordains themselves a bishop after mere six months of sedevacantism? Someone who is obsessed with power.
Personally, I think we should try to be stricter with the sede bishops, because we can't afford to experience problems with this types of clerics. If they are guilty of such actions, then they have no part with us.
I believe that the defence made in favor of the Transalpine Redemptorists from the above commenter can improve and agree with Joanna. However, that doesn't mean the accusations are certified truth.
Perhaps if we confront the Transalpines on this issues, they might be able to defend themselves, right?
People should not be accusing people with no hard proof of anything. Comments sections like these can easily become cesspits of gossip, slander and vicious calumny. Many so called “traditionalists” get a disordered pleasure when they commit horrible sins of the tongue. Are people going to read articles on the internet and believe what they hear just because it was corroborated by a few people that might have an axe to grind? This is how reputations are ruined, these accusations shouldn’t even be published in the comments unless there is proof. It creates an unnecessary occasion of sin for people to spread unverified rumors. People really need to spend their time praying and doing virtuous deeds and less commenting about the end of the world, unsubstantiated accusations, etc…I understand there will be disagreements and holding bad clergy accountable is a must when it’s necessary, and we must defend the Faith, but this bickering and pettiness and “did you hear what so and so said/did”. It’s time for people to do some self reflection, including myself. People need to focus on their spiritual life and stop the gossip and calumny. It will ruin your soul.
DeleteYeah, let's just accept this Transalpine Redemptorists as friends of God and the Church because some random person online thinks it's gossip and calumny.
DeleteThis accusations are serious enough to warrant attention, and this is often the only way to have evil clerics exposed - they benefit from silence.
Never said they were innocent. Substantiate the evidence. I’m critical of many “Trad” congregations but when I make my case I use hard evidence, I don’t use articles written by random people and with no proof or credibility. Many wicked people falsely believed the Pharisees had solid facts on their side but they used calumny against Our Lord and look where their slander got them. Don’t bear false witness, when you get the facts show them, otherwise you’ll answer for your calumny.
DeleteInteresting vindication of H. H. Pius XII, dear Introibo.
ReplyDeleteLast year, Fr. Claude Barthe wrote about the discovery of the drafts of this encyclical:
https://www.resnovae.fr/the-last-anti-modern-encyclical/
Our Spanish translation of these article:
https://wwwmileschristi.blogspot.com/2025/12/la-ultima-enciclica-antimodernista-que.html
Miles Christi resistens
DeleteThank you for the links, my friend!
God Bless,
---Introibo
Introibo,
ReplyDeleteThank you for writing this piece. Like you, I have always said that Pope Pius XII was a great pope (as I have commented on this several times on your blog). If we ever get a true pope again, I do believe that he will be completely vindicated. I do not even think that we need a true pope again to vindicate him, for I feel that Pius XII’s record speaks for itself.
“Cultum Regi Regum” puts the final nail in the coffin of the bogus claim that Pius XII was a modernist. He showed in this writing, as well as his previous papal writings, that he was solidly orthodox. He made modern changes to church practice in an ever changing modern world. This does not make him a modernist. This makes him a prudent man. There were many practices that were wisely updated by him. He had every right to do so as the Vicar of Christ. The Holy Ghost protected him via the gifts of infallibility and indefectibility.
The theologians he had consulted on this encyclical were solid, with the exception of Bea. This cannot be held against him for Bea’s modernism was cloaked deeply and kept hidden from virtually everyone. The Catholic Church was heavily infiltrated by the 1950’s and there is no way that any pope could be certain who was solidly Catholic and who appeared Catholic but wasn’t. Pius XII had the fewest cardinal electors in 100 years because he knew the church was heavily infiltrated and after Cardinal Maglione died in 1944, Pius XII assumed the role of Cardinal Secretary of State himself, instead of appointing anyone else to this high ranking position. That is very telling right there.
The various chapters of “Cultum Regi Regum” seem to be a compilation of many solid papal documents. It seems to sum up and reinforce the papal writings of many of his predecessors. Various writings come to mind such as “Mirari Vos,” “Quanta Cura,” “The Syllabus of Errors,” “Qui Pluribus,” “Iam Vos Omnes,” “Satis Cognitum,” “Arcanum Divinae,” “Pascendi Dominici Gregis,” “Lamentabili Sane,” “Vehementer Nos,” “Quas Primas,” “Mortalium Animos,” “Casti Connubii,” and many others.
CONTINUED…
ReplyDeleteIn terms of changes that Pope Pius XII made in his pontificate, there were several changes made by many popes throughout history, and your reference Introibo to the changes made by St. Pius V was a very good one. Pope St. Pius V and Pope St. Pius X would probably be on most traditionalists lists of 2 popes who would be in the top 5 list of the greatest popes ever, yet these men made changes too. The changes that you mentioned that St. Pius V made demonstrate very clearly that brevity does not mean something is less holy any more than antiquarianism must always be preferred when an updated practice is a much more reasonable and logical change that should suit the current times for a variety of reasons. Pius XII understood both of these points very well, as demonstrated from his papacy.
For those who want to play the Bugnini card, it doesn’t hold water. Bugnini had such a minor role in the Pian Holy Week that it is quite ridiculous how much attention that he is given by some traditionalists. Pius XII signed off on this and promulgated it. He has the backing of The Holy Ghost. Case closed! Bugnini did not ever direct any of the meetings that dealt with the Pian Holy Week. It was Fr. Antonelli who primarily oversaw everything. Nowhere in the Roman Rite Church was there any dissent from 1956-1958 over the Pian Holy Week. The changes were universally accepted. Cardinal Stritch called the Pian Holy Week one of the great acts of his pontificate, and many others praised the changes too for now the laity around the world could participate and attend the Holy Week changes far more than they previously could prior to the updates.
The vacancy pushers wish to reject Pius XII for a myriad of reasons. If they want to do this, then they should be consistent. St. Pius X’s reforms to the breviary have some vacancy pushers up in arms, not to mention the fact that he consecrated della Chiesa a bishop and then created him a cardinal. This helped to pave the way for him becoming Benedict XV instead of del Val. Do we remove Pius X as pope? Rampolla was the Secretary of State while Leo XIII was in office. Do we remove Leo XIII as pope? St. Pius V made some massive changes as Introibo mentioned. Do we remove Pius V as pope? How far back do we go? Perhaps if we dig deep enough, we will be able to dig up some real dirt on Clement I, Anacletus, and Linus, and St. Peter will be the first and last pope.
A few days ago, we celebrated the 68th anniversary of the death of Pope Pius XII. As Fr. DePauw knew, we should get behind 10/9/58 as the cutoff point and the date that should unite ALL traditionalists.
-TradWarrior
TradWarrior
DeleteExcellent commentary as usual, my friend!
God Bless,
---Introibo
****Óóóó...Knight-Commander of Justice, Prior, Chaplain
ReplyDeleteMr. Charles Louis Thourot Pichel, OSJ, Sovereign Order of Saint John of Jerusalem
In the 1960’s, the great age of ecumenism, we begin to learn of how this supposedly Catholic religious Order admitted non-Catholics to its ranks. On January 1, 1962, according to a brochure put out by the Shickshinny Convent, the religious affiliations of the members was put at 42% Roman Catholic, 23% Episcopalian, 21% Orthodox, the rest Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists and others. The literature cites this as the fruits of the work of an interdenominational “Ecclesiastical Committee” apparently existing before the time this poll was taken.
... In a telegram to Mr. Pichel dated June 23, 1968, Father De Pauw (a Doctor of Canon Law and former seminary professor) said that:
I have today informed His Holiness Pope Paul VI that, in virtue of the perpetual privileges granted by his predecessors to the Sovereign Order, we have today offered the first public traditional Latin Mass in the Ave Maria Chapel of the Greater New York Priory located in the Catholic Traditionalist Center in Westbury
Father De Pauw signed himself as “Knight-Commander of Justice, Prior, Chaplain.” OSJ literature published in 1968 noted that Father De Pauw was “Coordinator and Dean of the Roman Catholic Section” of the OSJ’s “Ecclesiastical Tribunal” and that the Westbury Chapel was the “Roman Catholic Church of the Order for the Official Investiture of Knights in the Greater New York Priory.” (The Coordinator of the “Old Roman Catholic Section of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal” was listed as “The Rev. Dr. Gerard G. Shelley.”) Other OSJ literature published that same year notes that
From the very beginning, all the speeches and writings of the Rev. Dr. Gommar A. De Pauw established his eagerness and true feeling of the spirit of sane Ecumenism as opposed to insane ecumania in the following words: “The time is overdue when Traditionalist Roman Catholics and conservative Protestants join hands and forces to save whatever is left of Christianity.”
****Well, what about the censor, fear, fear, even the few people discussing would escape you
@Asinine9:27
DeleteYou repeat here the same "Masonic" calumny with OSJ against Fr. DePauw many times refuted. Father was briefly involved in 1967 and immediately left when he realized the scam.
Fr. wrote me a lengthy letter regarding the matter, including some correspondence. The source for the information is....the OSJ themselves! Fr. Cekada cited them but had the decency to point out that Father DePauw left them. The only other person who still defames Fr is Teresa Benns, the Home Aloner "theologian" who had the "conclave" that "elected" David Bawden as "Pope" Michael. (That, in itself, is enough to strip her of ANY credibility). Once more, she cites only the OSJ that was trying to get back at Father.
It reminds me of those R&R that claim Pope Pius IX was a Mason based on the ipse dixit of the Masons.
As to being a "censor"--it is good to censor material that is blasphemous, vile, or just put out there to defame others.
I permitted yours to show that--like you---it lacks all credibility and charity.
I don't know what your problem is---but I'm sure it must be very hard to pronounce.
---Introibo