As a Traditionalist Catholic, I'm used to receiving sharp criticism, and oftentimes boorish remarks. I'm sure many of you can relate, as Our Lord said, "Blessed are thou when they shall revile thee, and persecute thee, and speak all that is evil against thee, untruly, for My sake" (St. Matthew 5:11). I felt especially blessed when reading a scathing attack on the Faith by the owner of the website "tridentines.com." I have read critiques of Traditionalism that are both intelligent and charitable (e.g., Vatican II sect apologist "Fr." Brian Harrison); that are charitable but not intelligent (e.g., SSPX); and that are neither charitable nor intelligent (e.g., David L. Gray). The owner of Tridentines (whom I will call by that appellation) falls squarely into the last category.
The website is a series of rash and appallingly ignorant attacks upon Church teaching, as well as unsubstantiated assertions against some clergy that are clearly calumnious. Last week, when I wrote on the false doctrine of the "Millennial Rule of Christ," he sent my Twitter account a tweet claiming "Traditionalist Catholicism is a millennialist movement. Read more on Marianism and the Fatima Cult:" He links to two articles on his site that are culpably ignorant and blasphemous attacks on the Most Holy Mother of God. Since I will not remain silent when the Immaculate Mother of God's dignity is attacked, this post will expose Tridentines for the falsehoods it disseminates. (N.B. There are too many falsehoods and unsubstantiated claims for a single post. I have pointed out just some of them---Introibo).
Tridentines chooses to remain anonymous, like me, which is fine. A brief look at the site will show a person who has it out for the CMRI. He also does not like Traditionalist Catholicism, and expresses his disbelief in Christianity thus:
Scholarship since the 1990s has undermined much of Christianity in general (e.g. forgeries, 4th century imperial connections, powers of the clergy, oppression of women/heretics/natives), and this has led me to questioning Christianity entirely. Leaving the CMRI to join another group is misguided. (See tridentines.com; Emphasis mine). Ostensibly, we are dealing with someone who had a bad experience with the CMRI, and has now rejected (or willingly called into doubt) belief in Christ Himself. He also buys into the "Christianity has oppressed women, natives, etc," when in fact, the Church liberated them to the greatest extent. That can be a post in itself another time. Suffice it to say, we are dealing with a bitter person with an axe to grind.
It's True Because I Said So
There are a number of serious and gratuitous assertions backed up only by the owner's ipse dixit. Here are some examples:
- Traditionalist Catholicism attracts a high number of men with personality disorders (NIMH page). Most of the abuse happens within marriages and is hidden behind closed doors. The priests enable this abuse by using concepts such as, "husband is head of the household", "marital debt", and "daily duties." According to whom do a high number of Traditionalist men have personality disorders? The link to the National Institute of Mental Health merely defines what personality disorders are and makes no mention of Traditionalists. If most of the alleged "abuse" happens behind closed doors, how would Tridentines know about it? Anecdotal evidence? How many anecdotes? Priests "enable abuse" by teaching Church doctrine? Pathetic.
- They cherry pick papal teachings of the past and only present evidence that fits their conclusions. The church has changed core beliefs prior to Vatican II, for example: condemning lending money at interest (usury) as mortal sin, condemning heliocentrism as heresy in the 17th century, creating "seven sacraments no more no less" at the University of Paris in the 12th century, & removing the Epiclesis from the Latin Mass in earlier centuries. This has been covered by the concept of "development of doctrine" which is no more than an excuse to make changes at will. These are recycled standard Protestant objections disproven many times over. Usury was (and is) a sin when money was/is an exchange for articles of consumption. With the rise of capitalism, money is not a mere fungible; it is a commodity necessary for the production of wealth and thereby acquires a new function, not susceptible to being free of interest. (See theologian Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology, , 1:321-326). Heliocentrism was never condemned. For a full explanation see my post: introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2021/05/heliocentric-heresy.html. Seven sacraments were created in the 12th century? Can someone explain why the Eastern Schismatics who broke off in 1054 held the exact same dogma of seven sacraments, not more or less? The epiclesis is a non-issue as it does not affect validity, and the pope can change the Mass; but the Novus Bogus is not a "mass" at all.
- Rather than being appointed or elected, sedevacantist bishops appoint themselves and hand pick their successors. There is no outside influence on their power. Who picks the Vatican II sect bishops? What "outside influence" is there on Bergoglio?
- Traditionalist Catholicism is based on an intentionally selective reading of history in order to create a church that fits their political & religious preferences. According to what source? What facts prove this (once more) gratuitous assertion?
Whacky Criticism of Traditionalist Sites
- Novus Ordo Watch—(Mario Derksen). Massive CMRI propaganda outlet. Walls of text published daily with an incredible amount of cherry picking & misinformation. His website is an echo chamber. NOW is the greatest Traditionalist website in existence. It's been demonstrated Tridentines knows nothing of the matters on which he pontificates. With his claims about usury, heliocentrism, alleged "mental illness" of most Traditionalist men, etc., he wouldn't know misinformation if it bit him on his buttocks.
- Daily Catholic— (terrible looking website) original creators are dead, it's now maintained by an elderly woman. What does a website's appearance (subjective) have to do with its truth and accuracy which are objective? Mr. and Mrs. Michael Cain (Michael was one of the nicest men I had ever known) worked very hard on that site, full of wonderful and edifying content. Not that it matters, but Tridentines will not be getting any awards for "Best Looking Website of 2023."
- Catholic Family Podcast—(YouTube) run by the Davis family (Fr. Philip was listed as CMRI priest at City of Mary until Aug/Sept 2022). One of the top CMRI contemporary propaganda outlets. Mr. Kevin Davis and his family are wonderful people doing God's work in spreading the truth of the Faith. There is no "propaganda" here.
Tridentines has a lack of charity, scholarship, integrity, and even common sense. These attributes should now be apparent. I will move on to the main issue of this post.
The Attack on the Immaculate Mother of God
Tridentines exhibits one of the hallmarks of yellow journalism posing as "scholarship:" first, find something that agrees with your point of view; then publish it without checking for veracity and getting multiple lines of evidence to back it up. The two articles on his website to which he sent me the direct links, come from a single source: Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial Movements . Not exactly the "gold standard of research." The articles taken from these books are rife with factual and theological errors. Each will be listed and examined below.
The Fatima Cult by Victor Balaban
The word "cult" can have a good meaning, as in the "cult of veneration" due to saints and the "cult of worship" due to God alone. It comes from the Latin cultus, meaning care or adoration. Here, it is used in the pejorative sense of a particular religious group centered around some unusual belief, generally transient in duration, and frequently featuring some exotic leader and rituals. This article is the least offensive of the two. I will take just a couple of quotes to show some glaring errors.
- In the 1950s the belief arose that the Third Secret was going to be made public in 1960. When this did not happen, a variety of scenarios were proposed as to why Pope Paul VI was unable to make the secret known. In 1960, it was Roncalli (John XXIII) who read the secret and refused to let it be made public. There is even speculation he destroyed the written secret, so Montini (Paul VI) perhaps didn't have anything to make known in 1963.
- The 1960s and 1970s saw a drop in the number of reported apparitions and in the popularity of lay devotions to Fatima. There are many reasons for this, but a major part was changing views within the church. During the Second Vatican Council in 1961-63, it was clear that many church officials and theologians felt that popular devotions to Mary were being overemphasized. Pope John XXIII, who called the council, even said “the Madonna is not pleased when she is placed up above her son.” There were no credible reports of apparitions at Fatima in the 1960s and 1970s. The Second Vatican Council took place from October 11, 1962 to December 8, 1965, not 1961-63. I wouldn't doubt Roncalli would say something like what is quoted, but there is no source cited.
It should also be noted that the author used quotes around Our Lady, thereby questioning if she appeared, or if anything like this could happen at all.
Marianism by Victor Balaban
- The Marian worldview is fundamentally a millenarian one, believing in the Millennium of Christian prophecy and the coming of an ideal society through a radical change. What has developed is a transnational, transhistorical apocalyptic ideology, meaning that the Virgin’s messages at apparition sites all over the world are believed by devotees to provide a single extended warning, given in different times and different places, of how the apocalypse will happen. Where does Balaban get such ideas? There are no decrees by the One True Church, or the Vatican II sect, which teaches "the Millennium of Christian Prophesy" (whatever that means), nor do apparitions provide a "single warning" on "how the apocalypse will happen."
- Thus the Virgin’s famous “Third Secret” from Fatima, Portugal, in 1917, her prediction of a permanent sign in the sky from Garabandal, Spain, in 1961, and the warnings from Medjugorje, Yugoslavia, in the 1980s are all considered to be part of the same ongoing warning. The message is simple. God and Jesus are angry because mankind is so sinful, and Mary, in her infinite mercy is interceding, holding back her son’s arm, to give humanity one last chance. Here, the author mixes LaSalette, Fatima, and the decidedly FALSE apparitions of Garabandal, and Medjugorje. Interestingly, Tridentines published this even though he should know that Garabandal and Medjugorje both took place after 1958 and cannot have Church approval, if you are a sede, whom he attacks.
As to implicitly citing LaSalette (when he mentions an "Antipope" at one point), this "well-researched" article fails to omit the censuring of its secret by the Vatican:
"THE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE DECREE CONCERNING THE COMMONLY CALLED "SECRET OF LA SALETTE."
It has come to the attention of this Supreme Congregation that certain ones are not lacking, even from among the ecclesiastic assemblage who, responses and decisions of this Holy Congregation itself having been disregarded, do proceed to discuss and examine through books, small works and articles edited in periodicals, whether signed or without a name, concerning the so-called Secret of La Salette, its diverse forms and its relevance to present and future times; and, this not only without permission of the Ordinaries, but, also against their ban. So that these abuses which oppose true piety and greatly wound ecclesiastical authority might be curbed, the same Sacred Congregation orders all the faithful of any region not to discuss or investigate under any pretext, neither through books, or little works or articles, whether signed or unsigned, or in any other way of any kind, about the mentioned subject. Whoever, indeed, violates this precept of the Holy Office, if they are priests, are deprived of all dignity and suspended by the local ordinary from hearing sacramental confessions and from offering Mass: and, if they are lay people, they are not permitted to the sacraments until they repent. Moreover, let people be subject to the sanctions given both by Pope Leo XIII through the Constitution of the offices and responsibilities against those who publish books dealing with religious things without legitimate permission of superiors and by Urban VIII through the decree "Sanctissimus Dominus Noster" given on 13th March 1625 against those who publish asserted revelations without the permission of ordinaries. However, this decree does not forbid devotion towards the Blessed Virgin under the title of Reconciliatrix commonly of La Salette.
Given at Rome on 21st December, 1915.
Aloisius Castellano, S. R. and U. I. Notary." (Emphasis mine).
Finally, the article ends with this mish-mosh:
It is usually presumed that the beginning of the End of Times will be preceded by chastisements to mankind; and various world events, such as earthquakes, violence, AIDS, and legalized abortion are often cited as examples of these chastisements. This period of chastisement is often the focus of elaborate conspiracy theories involving an evil Antipope as well as the rise of the Antichrist. Then there will be a permanent sign in the sky, which will herald the next stage, the Warning. The Warning, sometimes called a “correction of conscience” is a time when all human activity will stop, and people will be forced to see all their sins, and the impacts of all their sins on others. This judgment will allow people one last chance to repent and be baptized. Sometime after this there will be Three Days of Darkness, followed by disasters where those who do not believe will be taken to hell, while a Remnant will be saved. This is followed by the Second Coming of Christ, which will usher in the Millennium, with its attendant thousand years of peace.
Neither the Church nor the Vatican II sect teach this nonsense. Could some misguided individuals believe something like this? Absolutely. That doesn't make it Church teaching or indicative of Marian devotion. Most of this scenario comes from phony Garabandal; the Millennial Rule of Christ was never taught, since it is heresy; and the Three Days of Darkness was from a private revelation totally separate from any Marian apparition. The primary error is exalting private revelations (or conflating them) with Church teaching. The next section will deal with this problem, and examine the alleged Three Days of Darkness which has no place in Marian apparitions, nor does it even make sense. I will repeat things I've written prior on my blog that deserve repeating.
The Teaching of the Church
In this age of the Great Apostasy, many Traditionalists will (unfortunately) abandon the approved theologians of the Church for private revelations. It is imperative that we learn the Faith, and not what passes for the "Faith" in some quarters. Certain people don't even understand basic terminology. "Public" and "private" revelation do not refer to how many people the revelation was given, but rather whether or not it is part of the Deposit of Faith to which we must assent. The Deposit of Faith, given by Jesus Christ to His One True Church, ended with the death of the last Apostle (St. John) in 100 A.D. That marks the end of public revelation. The Church has authority to make solemn pronouncements on what is contained in this revelation, and the faithful must give assent under pain of mortal sin and expulsion from the Mystical Body by heresy (e.g. It is part of the Deposit of Faith that Christ gave exactly seven (7) sacraments to His Church).
Private revelation is given by God after the close of public revelation to certain individuals (usually saints or people considered to be such). If a private revelation is approved by the Church, it means that it does not contradict matters of Faith and/or morals. It is worthy of belief, but you can deny it outright and not be a heretic. You also commit no sin of disbelief, provided your lack of faith in a particular approved revelation does not stem from disdain of ecclesiastical authority (See theologian Nicolau, Summa Theologiae Sacrae IA, , pgs. 91-92).
While non-approved revelations should be avoided like the plague, even those which are approved can be misunderstood or have the message corrupted since Church approval does not entail any kind of infallible (or even authoritative) teaching. An example is the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima mentioned above. The late "Fr" Gruner made a business out of peddling dire predictions for the world. I have material of his dating back to the late 1980s claiming "we only have a couple of years left" unless the "pope" (John Paul II) consecrates Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. That never happened and more than 25 years have passed without any calamity. Of course this never prevented Mr. Gruner from asking for the largest donation you could give as he shamelessly continued to predict the sky would fall "very shortly."
According to another prediction of Fatima, "Portugal will never lose the Faith." One need only take a look at the present day European country to see that it has rejected the Faith for Vatican II, and has promulgated many evil "laws" such as murdering babies by abortion. There are no more Traditionalists there (in sheer number or proportionately) than in any other neo-pagan State. I do believe Our Lady appeared in Fatima to three children, but I refuse to try and discern "true" from "false" messages, or listen to all the conspiracy theories involved. Holding on to the Faith will save us, not private revelations--especially ones laced with fearful consequences for those who refuse to propagate those messages.
One of the most fearful private revelations involves what is commonly referred to the "Three Days of Darkness" (hereinafter TDD). It is used by "mystical" sedevacantists as the answer to the Great Apostasy. God will use these TDD as a world-wide chastisement and then will bring back a true pope. There are so many versions of TDD it's hard to know how to describe it. I will use the version utilized by 3daysofdarkness.com.
The website states: "The Church does not oblige us to believe in any particular prophecy as a matter of faith [de fide], but we are indeed obliged to believe that prophecies may be made even in our own times, for this is in the Gospel [Evangelium]: the Holy Ghost will speak to many in the Latter Days.
Moreover, when an identical prophecy has been made by widely separated people in time and space, when this particular prophecy was accompanied by other predictions which have already come to pass, and when the holiness of the mystics in question has been recognized by the Church, we would be foolish indeed not to believe that the prophecy must come to pass. Such is the case concerning the Three Days of Darkness. How else could we explain that an illiterate peasant woman of Brittany is describing the very thing that another mystic in, say, Germany or Italy is also describing?"
With the defection of the hierarchy we must be very careful about who speaks for the Holy Ghost. "For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect." (See St. Matt. 24:24). We are foolish to believe anything that is illogical, damaging to the Faith, and not approved by the Church--regardless of whomsoever allegedly said something. Many holy people claimed TDD, especially Blessed Anna- Maria Taigi. It is not unknown, because there was such a plague sent by God upon the Egyptians through Moses. Therefore, say TDD proponents, we must accept it as the truth. The website claims:
"After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St. Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach in the whole world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then, will spread throughout the world. He is the Holy Pontiff, chosen by God to withstand the storm. At the end, he will have the gift of miracles, and his name shall be praised over the whole earth. Whole nations will come back to the Church and the face of the earth will be renewed. Russia, England, and China will come into the Church." (Prophecy of Blessed Anna Maria Taigi [1769-1837 A.D.] who was Beatified by Bendedict XV in 1920.)
There will be "proximate signs": Here are the proximate signs in their probable order of occurrence. This, to be sure, is only my own opinion, and I may be wrong for I am no prophet myself; but, after studying a large number of prophecies, this order appears to me to be the most likely:
1. Flouting of church laws, irreverence and immodesty in church, fall in attendance at church. (These trends were observed in the 1950's, before the true Church was criminally usurped at the Oct 26, 1958 papal conclave.-ED)
2. Lack of charity towards others, heartlessness, indifference, divisions, contentions, godlessness, pride in human knowledge.
3. Breakdown of family life: immorality, adultery, perversion of youth via the media (e.g. homosexuals giving lectures in schools), immodest fashions, people concerned only with eating, drinking, dancing and other pleasures.
4. Civil commotions, contempt for authority, downfall of governments, confusion in high places, corruption, coups d'etat, civil war, revolution. (The first four proximate signs have already come to pass, at least partly; for we are yet to see civil war and revolution in the West. But the sequence of events is not strictly chronological; there is room for some overlapping. Thus, the 5th proximate sign seems to have begun also.)
5. Floods and droughts, crop failures, unusual weather, tornadoes, earthquakes, tidal waves, famines, epidemics, unknown diseases (e.g. new strains of viruses)."
Do you see the problem here? We have someone interpreting private messages with no Magisterial authority. Why should we believe this interpretations of alleged sayings based on alleged revelations? The beatification of Anna-Maria Taigi in no way guarantees any truth in private messages. The "proximate signs" are so broad as to be seen in any era. Note that # 1 goes back to the 1950s; at least 64 years ago. How is that "proximate"? Moreover, this does seem like false Garabandal, but no approved Marian apparition ever stated such.
Next comes "The Warning": "This will take place between the proximate and the immediate signs. It will be a supernatural occurrence.
During the Warning, many will be scared to their wits end, and many will wish to die, but the Warning itself will be completely harmless.
The Warning must be viewed as the last act of mercy from God, a final appeal to mankind to do penance before the three days of darkness and the destruction of three-quarters of the human race. At a time when the murder of unborn babies and the sin of Sodom and Lesbos have become acceptable and "legal", we should not wonder why God is going to punish mankind.
By that time, war and revolution will have already caused a high death-toll, and Communism will be victorious, but all this will be as nothing compared with the death-toll caused by the Three Days."
Next, "The Immediate Sign":
The wind will howl and roar. Lightning and thunderbolts of an unprecedented magnitude will strike the earth. The whole earth will shake, heavenly bodies will be disturbed (this will be the beginning of the Three Days). Every Demon, every evil spirit will be released from hell and allowed to roam the earth. Terrifying apparitions will take place. Many will die from sheer fright. Fire will rain forth from the sky, all large cities will be destroyed, poisonous gases will fill the air, cries and lamentations everywhere. The unbelievers will burn in the open like withered grass. The entire earth will be afflicted; it will look like a huge graveyard.
As soon as you notice (these signs), go indoors, lock all doors and windows, pull down the blinds, stick adhesive paper on vents and around windows and doors. Do not answer calls from outside, do not look at the windows, or you will die on the spot: keep your eyes down to make sure you do not see the windows; the Wrath of God is mighty and no one should attempt to behold it. Light blessed wax candles; nothing else will burn, but the candles will not be extinguished once lit. Nothing will put them out in the houses of the faithful, but they will not burn in the houses of the godless. Sprinkle holy water about the house and especially in the vicinity of doors and windows: the devils fear holy water. Bless yourself with it and anoint your five senses with it: eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hands, feet, and forehead. Keep on hand a sufficient supply of drinking water and, if possible, food also (but you can live without food for three days.) Kneel down and pray incessantly with outstretched arms, or prostrate on the floor. Make acts of contrition, faith, hope, and charity. Above all say the Rosary and meditate on the Sorrowful mysteries.
Some people, especially children, will be taken up to Heaven beforehand to spare them the horror of these days. People caught outdoors will die instantly. Three-quarters of the human race will be exterminated, more men than women. No one will escape the terror of these days.
And the aftermath:
But, when all seems lost and hopeless, then, in the twinkling of an eye, the ordeal will be over: the sun will rise and shine again as in springtime over a purified earth.
Some nations will disappear entirely, and the face of the earth will be changed. There will be no more "Big Business" and huge factories which sap men's souls. Craftsmanship will revive, and assembly lines will give way to the working bench.
People will return to the land, but food will be scarce for about three years. Married women will bear many children, for it will be regarded as a disgrace not to have children, no more "career women" addicted to the "pill". Unmarried females, there will be many, will enter the religious orders and form large congregations of Nuns within the reborn Church. Disease will decrease dramatically, and mental illnesses will be rare, for man will have retrieved his natural environment. It will be an age of faith, true brotherhood between neighbors, civil harmony, peace, and prosperity. The land will yield crops as never before. Police will have little work to do: crime will disappear almost entirely. Mutual trust and honesty will be universal. There will be little work for lawyers, either. All the manpower which is currently taken up by the wickedness of the modern world will be released and available for the production of useful commodities. Thus, prosperity will be very great. This wonderful period will probably last 30 years approximately.
As soon as you see the sun rise again at the end of the Three Days, drop to your knees and give thanks to God.
And of course, "believe it or else":
Be warned, SPREAD THE MESSAGE, but do not fear: it would be an offense to God to show lack of confidence in His protection. Those who spread the message will be protected, but the scoffers, the skeptics, and those who dismiss the message because they are frightened, will not escape the chastisement.
This is the gobbledygook that author Balaban thinks the Blessed Mother revealed, and whom Tridentines cites approvingly. I will never "spread the message" of TDD because (1) no private revelation ever needs to be believed, nor is it ever part of Church teaching, (2) this TDD contradicts Church teaching. Here are the problems:
- Why does Catholicism need to spread if everyone who survives is already Catholic and under a newly crowned pope? The number of Traditionalists is quite few; certainly not 25% of the world's population that will survive.
- Since only blessed candles of wax can be lit, how do you light your candle when the TDD arrive? You would need to keep one lit in your house 24/7 like some ecclesiastical version of militia "preppers." Does God really want us storing food, water and blessed candles?
- It contradicts Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The Bible verses used to support TDD have all been understood by the Church as outside the genre of apocalyptic language. There is nothing in Tradition that speaks of TDD. If the Great Apostasy ends this way (and proponents claim we are definitely in the Great Apostasy of the Book of Revelation), that displaces the Antichrist, False Prophet, and Second Coming of Christ; all matters of public revelation.
Tridentines has been exposed as a sad, bitter person using faux "scholarship" to draw people away from the One True Church. He was probably hurt by some cleric. We should all pray for him that he may return to the True Church. Remember that Christ Himself chose Judas Iscariot, the evil traitor, as one of the Apostles. He showed us evil men will always be in the Church, but the Church will survive as She is Indefectible. The Blessed Virgin Mary never predicted the nonsense attributed to her by Balaban and promoted by Tridentines. It is blasphemous to suggest Mary could predict something contrary to dogma. May her prayers convert her detractors.
Lately I've been watching people who claimed they were Ex sedevacantist "turned Catholic" to see where they are coming from. Jeremiah Bannister comes to mind. In a specific video he talks about how he came to the conclusion of the sedevacantist position early on and how he joined. He then starts describing the groups like the SSPV, CMRI, independants, Home Aloners, "Pope" Michael followers etc. and criticizes all them for not being unified or having an answer as to how to get a true pope. With his host, they compare sedevacantists to Protestants hating on Rome and fighting amongst themselves as if they are all self proclaimed true Catholics when they are really in "schism " and need to repent.ReplyDelete
What he doesn't address or explain is how he thinks the new religion based on the teachings of the Second Vatican Council is the true Catholic religion.
He calls the sedevacantist Protestant when his Vatican II religion says that "all" who are baptized are members of Christ Church even it be impartial and that those not in full communion have "a right" to be called Christian in document called Unitatis Redintegratio.
He doesn't explain how Francis recognizes Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi as good Catholics who are worthy of Holy Communion when they fully support all leftist ideas most notably the right to murder babies.
He doesn't explain why Francis said Martin Luther did not error on justification.
He doesn't explain how the new Mass is not Protestant even though the whole purpose of the table with the priest facing the people comes from Protestantism and how 6 Protestant help compose the Novus Ordo Missae under "St." "Pope" Paul VI.
He doesn't explain how the newer Church buildings look Catholic even thought they many case look worse the Protestant.
He doesn't explain how Eastern Orthodox are now considered sister Churches despite their schism.
He doesn't explain why John Paul II called the Assisi events which took place in 1986 and 2002 a "living catechism" even though communicatio in sacris took place and pagan ceremonies were taken part in by "St." John Paul II
In essence, he doesn't explain why it's reasonable to believe why he "returned" to the Catholic Church when the Church he thinks is the Catholic Church has a litany of reasons to believe it's not Catholic which I could have gone on and on about.
Here is one for the road:
Strange what people think is "Catholic," isn't it? Also, another excellent article you add from Steven Speray!!
these guys hadn't done much research.ReplyDelete
It's one person, and he's done virtually NO research!
David Gray is clearly educated well spoken and intelligent. In my view, he's controlled opposition or frighteningly spiritually dazed & confused. He wants Fr.Ratzinger (he's a Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek) proclaimed "Doctor of the Church."ReplyDelete
He's (David) smarter than what he acts.
God bless -Andrew
I'm not sure about that. He writes drivel. See my post
When I came across this website, I was immediately reminded of another website of a man who had developed a particularly consuming grudge against CMRI and Bp. Pivarunas in particular because of issues around his marriage, leading to the Bishop having a restraining order placed on the man. I wonder if this is the same person?ReplyDelete
I honestly don't know, but you might be right!
1. If somebody is new to traditional Catholicism and or new to a particular traditional Catholic chapel, what are some things that the person can do to help themselves fit in?
2. What can current traditional Catholics and chapel members do to help somebody like the above person fit in?
3. I am NOT a victim of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest, but what do you suggest a person do IF they have sexual abuse by a Catholic priest to report?
Thank you. Anonymous
1. Ask to speak to one of the priests and ask how best to make connections at that Chapel. I'm sure he'd be only too glad to help!
2. If you see someone new, say hello and strike up a conversation outside. Introduce him to other Chapel members.
3. It is a crime both under Canon Law and the civil law. Go to the District Attorney and ask for help in making a criminal report. He will know the proper steps to take. If a Vatican II sect clergyman, report him to the "bishop." If Traditionalist, report him to the bishop, and if he has no bishop, make his arrest known to the public. If charges are time barred by the statute of limitations, consult an attorney in your state for advice on what possible recourse you may take.
I have no toleration for those who hurt children. If it were up to me, they would get the death penalty.
I went to SSPV and after a few masses, I was cornered by about 5 guys, and given the run around on where I was from, who I'd been going to mass. I didn't tell them anything such has been going to Thuc line priests from all over. As I traveled I didn't have a regular parish. I really didn't like this about SSPV. This was in Great Falls, MT.Delete
I agree with your views about the SSPV.Father Martin at Great Falls has a hatred and obsession about the Thuc-line and CMRI.I asked him several times refute Mario Derksons open letter.He said Mr Derkson does not know the facts and is wrong on many points.I wonder what he will do Introibo if in years to come Bp Santay changes things.I am sure he along with Father Jenkins will leave and go independent.I know many SSPV folk who out of town go to Thuc-line chapels.This garbage has to stop.Shame on you Bp Kelly.You have alot to answer for including the breakup of my family members.
Ozson.How many were at the Mass in Great Falls?Delete
Ozson and anon@2:56Delete
How sad. It must be a "Nine" phenomena, where the original nine (minus Fr. Cekada--RIP) enforce the ridiculous "No Thuc policy." The priests who came after them are much different, in my opinion. One such priest said to me, "I'm not here to police where people go to Mass."
Let's pray they change that terrible policy.
1. What do you think about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Do you think that the Israelis are persecuting the Palestinians?
2. What do you think about Pope Pius IX?
3. What do you think about John Henry Newman?
3b. Did Newman really dislike Pius IX?
Thank you. Anonymous
2. he was one of the greatest popes in Church history.
3. He would be a real saint (in my opinion) if we had a true pope.
Have you met Father Martin at Great Falls?He has a relative also a priest.
I agree the CSPV clerics are so nice and sure in their heart they know the policy regarding the Thuc-line clerics and the CMRI is VERY wrong.I am sure it will change in years to come.One of the good SSPV clerics is Father Paul Baumberger.He is so humble,says Mass well and excellent preaching.
Never in all the years of CMRI have they said they were a Old Catholic sect.I don't blame Schuckardt obtaining orders from Bishop Daniel Q Brown.There were no other Bishops here in the USA to obtain valid orders from.Your view Introibo.
How many writings of Cardinal John Henry Newman do you have Introibo?
I never met Fr. Martin S, but I have met his nephew, Fr. Paul S. Fr. Baumberger is one of the best priests you'll find. Schuckardt had many problems, and Brown's lineage has problems concerning validity. Old Catholics are only considered to have maintained validity in certain European countries pre-V2. All this was cleared up with certainly valid Bp. Pivarunas.
I have an anthology of Cd. John Henry Newman's works from the 1940s containing all his writings. In my opinion, his MUST read is "An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine."
We are wondering introibo do the CSPV acceptReplyDelete
young men from the SSPX into their seminary?
Correction-only 3 of the original 9 SSPV priests
don't accept the Thuc-line.The last priest to leave
was Father Zapp back in 1993.
I see no reason the SSPV would not accept SSPX seminarians who embrace sedevacantism. I stand corrected; it was three of the nine!
Hello from Down Under New Zealand IntroiboReplyDelete
Have you written anything on the subject of the Una Cum Masses said by valid priests?
I can't see how bp Sanborn,etc can bind their faithful that to attend such Masses is a mortal sin.There is no true current competent ecclesiatical authority to make this law.Your thoughts please.My family and I have no problem with SSPX Masses.
What books do you suggest both basic and advanced on the subject of epikeia?
Thank you for your great blog
Hello K from NZ,Delete
If you go to the upper left of the page, you'll see a search box (magnifying glass icon). Type in "una cum" and it will yield some good results regarding Introibo's posts on the topic. I've found that the search function on this site seems to work well for researching certain topics. Of course, Introibo may direct you to a particular link he wants you to use. I believe the CMRI also discusses it on their website in an article. As you know, it's a hot topic, and I will definitely leave it to Introibo as to your other questions!
I have three posts on Una Cum:
Seeking Truth is correct on how to find such subjects on this blog! I have no problem with SSPX Masses as long as the priest is valid and you are strong in the faith with no sede option.
I will need to scout out my library, but a good place to start on epikeia would be theologians McHugh and Callan "Moral Theology" in two volumes. It has an excellent analysis of epikeia. Also, any Canon Law commentary by an approved pre-V2 canonist.
Have you written anything about the group in Canada called The Apostles of Infinite Love?Whats your thoughts on this group?
No, I have not written anything, but they are non-Catholics and have strange doctrines. It was founded by a Catholic priest who declared himself "Consecrated a bishop by Christ Himself" and in 1950 declared Christ crowned him "Pope" Clement XV. In 1951, the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office declared him excommunicated, reduced to the lay state, and his "order" uncanonically founded was declared dissolved, and never to be established under any name--this was approved by the true pope, Pius XII.
Since he was a mere priest, all their "orders" are non-existent. They also have "two priesthoods" and "two Masses." There are the "normal" Masses of "priests" who consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, and women "priestesses" who consecrate the Body and Blood of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Blasphemous beyond description.
Have NOTHING to do with them if you value your soul.
Thank you Introibo.Yes,we will have nothing to do with them.Never knew they "ordained" women.Delete
Are you aware that once traditional priest called Father Dan Jones in Colorado got mixed up with them and was made a "bishop"
Have a blessed nite
I'm not aware of a Fr. Dan Jones. Sad that he would become a heretical "bishop" when he had the truth.
New to the sedevacantist position.Just watched a youtube video called The Sacraments of Francis Schuckardt with Father William Jenkins (What Catholics Believe)Can you Introibo and readers watch this and give your comments please.We are confused.Father Jenkins said that CMRI is and always will be schismatic.Thank you and God blessReplyDelete
Very glad you have arrived at the position of sedevacante. I too was new nearly 20 years ago but as time goes on realized that this position is the only correct position to be Catholic because of the heretical beliefs based on the novel teachings of Vatican II and the apostasy from the conciliar "popes."
You will find that many groups are against each other for various reasons. Don't let it bring you down. The Novus Ordo religion is certainly devoid of Catholicism as it was traditionally taught.
As for Fr. Jenkins and the SSPV in general you will find a bias opinion of them which criticizes all who derived their Orders from Archbishop Thuc. They say he was "senile" among other accusations. The CMRI it is true started out bad with Schuckardt, but in the mid 80's all the religious priests abandoned him (for good reasons) because he had many problems. They were all conditionally ordained by Bp. George Musey and reset themselves at the time when they were under Bps. Mckenna, Oravec, etc. Eventually Bp. Pivarunas was consecrated by the Mexican bishop Moises Carmona (in my opinion a holy and courageous man) and have been operating as group whose mission is to carry on Catholicism much like the SSPV, MHT, and SGG apostolates etc.
Fr. Jenkins has his strong beliefs on the matter but is wrong because Archbishop Thuc was not senile and those like Fr. Francis Miller tell his story accurately (He was with him for a couple years before he died).
Lee is 100% correct.
Another traditional priest who knew Bishop Thuc was Father Thomas Fouhy who was the assistant to Bishop Musey.He told us here at Mt St Michaels,Spokane that Bishop Thuc was a nobody's fool and knew the Roman Pontifical backwards.Bishop Thuc lived with Bishop Vezalis before his death in 1984.Bishop Thuc also was present in Baton Rouge,LA in 1983 for a 3 day meeting of traditional priests.He was not senile.Father Jenkins needs to stop talking garbage.
I, too, struggled with this in the past. Fr. Jenkins is a good and holy priest, and certainly his basso speaking voice does not do him harm. However, he is human, and like all humans he can be vulnerable to bias. There were political and financial dealings that I learned about, which I will not get into here, that may have played a factor as well - I certainly have no idea for sure. Please visit www.thucbishops.com where there is both detailed and condensed versions of a defense of the lineage. You can also listen to the debates on youtube between him and Fr. Cekada. There is almost certainly information on the CMRI website as well (sorry, I don't know offhand). Fr. Jenkins's arguments can definitely seem persuasive - but the more you learn about the topic, you will see they have weaknesses. I for one had to take notes at one point, to keep track of false arguments. I took the matter very seriously as our salvation through the sacraments were at stake. It is just an unfortunate we're all in due to this period of sedevacante. God bless you and your discernment.
Lee - as always, thank you for your commentary!
Hello Seeking Truth.ReplyDelete
We too think this is a hot topic regarding the Traditional Movement.Bishop Sanborn cannot bind people to his view on una cum Masses.
Regarding CMRI.We had a very bad experience with a CMRI trained and affiliated priest who is not fit to be one and was worse then anything we had experienced from any other priest.His attitude,etc was very strange.We are happy to be back with the SSPX.
I'm very sorry you had a bad experience with the CMRI priest. Keep in mind it is the CMRI who is on your side regarding the UNA CUM position (at least some degree). It is they (at least some of them, not all) who believe that if circumstances make it impossible, that you are permitted to go to an UNA CUM priest (so long as he is valid) if nothing else is available.
As much as I love the CMRI priests, I do not share their view on that position. I don't agree if Bp. Sanborn "binds peoples" conscience and I understand why people go to the SSPX but I cannot in good conscience pray IN UNION WITH a man I don't believe is pope nor IN UNION WITH a man I don't believe is a valid bishop under that same so called "pope" and it's not because of Bp. Sanborn. In fact, I live about an hour from an SSPX Church and about a little over two hours away from a sede (Catholic) Church and will not have anything to do with the SSPX unless I'm in danger of death and need a confession. I actually stay at home when I cannot get to the other Church further away. Call me stubborn if you like, but it's the principle as to why I will not. The SSPX is schismatic in principle because they refuse submission to the man they call "pope" Francis. It cannot be this way and hence the reason why it is reasonable to hold the sede position.
On the other, hand I don't agree with pretty much all the clergy (except the CMRI and a handful of others) including Bp. Sanborn, etc. who refuse to do the new holy week (feasts of St. Joseph May 1st etc.) which was mandated by Pope Pius XII. Unless you can explain he isn't pope, there is no reason why one shouldn't continue doing it since it was mandated to be done for the whole Church and it has to do with the liturgy. Just sayin'
I am sorry you had a bad experience. I certainly have not met many CMRI priests, and every true priest I have had met has been friendly. Please consider what Lee wrote about the SSPX position. Also, is the priest there even valid with the true ordination rites? Please make sure you try and secure your salvation above all else. I don't mean to minimize any headaches you've received, just to direct your focus. I also say this as one who can get annoyed by people very easily!
Lee, I too can no longer go to SSPXDelete
or local Melkite Liturgy because the fact that the priest states that the Mass is in union with that apostate from Argentina is unacceptable.
Lee, Bp Sanborn absolutely binds people's consciences on that issue. He refuses the sacraments to anyone who doesn't agree with him. This is the problem with turning private judgements into public ones when you have no authority to do so.Delete
Is the SSPX in schism? When you work through what is required to prove that the answer is no.
Bp Sanborn may throw around accusations of objective schism, but he never actually calls them schismatics because he knows the accusation doesn't actually stick. Indeed, he includes them amongst those who hold the Catholic Faith. Am I frustrated with their position on the Crisis in the Church - yes. It only shows how dependent humans are when it comes to cooperating with the grace of God and living by faith. This applies no matter which position we might hold on the crisis. As soon as you put your own opinion or beliefs above what the Church teaches, you've abandoned the rule of faith.
Thank God we are permitted to receive sacraments from undeclared schismatics and heretics, or the situation would be far more dire.
Bp. Sanborn only binds your conscience if you let him bind your conscience. You obviously don't let yourself worry with what he has to say, otherwise you wouldn't permit yourself to do whatever it is your want to do, which he wouldn't approve of. This is how it is with everybody, including myself.
If you want to go to an Una Cum mass thinking you are totally free from any scruples as to worry about it then it matters not what I say nor anyone else including Bp. Sanborn say.
I guess the question I have for you is why do you want to receive sacraments from them? Is it for your sake of receiving the sacraments or is it for the faith's sake that you receive the sacraments?
For me it's for the Faith's (The Catholic Faith) sake that I do it. It's a contradiction to receive sacraments from somebody whom I do not share the same Faith with. It would be a lie to myself and an insult to God to receive Holy Communion in such a position. I would call it common sense but maybe what makes sense to me doesn't make sense for somebody else. I understand Fr. Stepanich's point of view among other nuance positions, but I guess you could say I have a different reason as to why I go to church and it's not merely for the sake of the sacraments but the whole nine yards. I want true ministers who give me true sacraments. It's that simple.
Where can I learn more about the difference, if any, between sedevacantism and sedeprivation?ReplyDelete
Please see my post:
Thank you. God bless you as well.Delete
Introibo and LeeReplyDelete
It breaks my heart when I read the above about a certain cleric above treating people bad.One day they will have to make an account before God for their harm to Souls.There will always be a bad apple in any group.Look at Judas.
The above question:do the CSPV accept men who have attended the SSPX to enter Immaculate Heart seminary.Do you know?
I was told years ago that Francis Schuckardt was kicked out of the Blue Army for being a homosexual.Did you know he died back in 2006 from throat cancer.
Father Paul Baumberger is one of the best priests around.Always listen to his Sunday sermons on What Catholics Believe.
There are many good valid priests in the SSPX.Many are not impressed with Bishop Fellay and his weak twisted mind.We need strong traditional Bishops who stand up and preach the truth.
I see no reason to not admit SSPX seminarians who adopt sedevacantism; and I believe they would do so.
Hello. I am completely ignorant, I warn you in advance because you may think that my question is stupid and I should not ask this. I am not a sedevacantist and I am not familiar with these issues. Suppose there was a real Pope, not a false Pope like Bergoglio. This supposed Pope, as is obvious, does not spread heresy but rather transmits and guards the Catholic Faith, but unfortunately he grows old and suffers from an illness that makes him unstable and commits some heresy -or could do so-. Would he lose his position in the Catholic Church? Would he be deposed? What would happen in that case?ReplyDelete
Sorry to bother and I know what you will think is stupid. I will understand even if this question is not posted.
As I used to tell my students, "The only stupid questions are the ones not asked." Yours is an intelligent question. The Church teaches, “The power of the Roman Pontiff is lost: …(c) By his perpetual insanity or by formal heresy. " (See theologian Prummer "Manuale Iuris Canonci" , pg. 95).
So, if a True Pope were to profess formal heresy, or become insane (which also applies to having no use of reason as in severe dementia--think "Joe Biden") he would fall from office. As to what would happen to him personally (sent to an institution, etc) is unclear as that has never transpired in regards to insanity.
To add on to Introibo's Prummer quote, here are some more teachings:
Udalricus Beste (1946): “Not a few canonists teach that, outside of death and abdication, the pontifical dignity can also be lost by falling into certain insanity, which is legally equivalent to death, as well as through manifest and notorious heresy. In the latter case, a pope would automatically fall from his power, and this indeed without the issuance of any sentence, for the first See [i.e., the See of Peter] is judged by no one. “The reason is that, by falling into heresy, the pope ceases to be a member of the Church. He who is not a member of a society, obviously, cannot be its head. We can find no example of this in history.” (Introductio in Codicem. 3rd ed. Collegeville: St. John’s Abbey Press 1946. Canon 221)
Vermeersch, I. Creusen (1949):”The power of the Roman Pontiff ceases by death, free resignation (which is valid without need for any acceptance, c. 221), certain and unquestionably perpetual insanity, and notorious heresy.
Rev. Francis X Doyle, S.J. explains: “The Church is a visible society with a visible Ruler. If there can be any doubt about who that visible Ruler is, he is not visible, and hence, where there is any doubt about whether a person has been legitimately elected Pope, that doubt must be removed before he can become the visible head of Christ’s Church. Blessed Bellarmine, S.J., says: ‘A doubtful Pope must be considered as not Pope’; and Suarez, S.J., says: ‘At the time of the Council of Constance there were three men claiming to be Pope.... Hence, it could have been that not one of them was the true Pope, and in that case, there was no Pope at all....” The Defense of the Catholic Church, 1927, Fr. Francis X. Doyle, S.J.
Hope this helps as well,
Thank you very much to both.Delete
would this be majority of theologians that think this now? This is pretty clear that we are right. Really, without going into anything else.
Thanks for your post. I didn't know much about TDD, only of it, and that we all needed to lock up and cover all the windows with black garbage bags and whatnot. I've read some of your writing on Garabandal and Medjugorje. When I was younger, Medjugorje seemed to be all the rage in some of our circles. In recent years, after conversion, I have come across materials from various "revelations" and "apostolates". I had no idea that Jesus and Mary were personally contacting so many people, sometimes several times daily. The "messages" I read were usually very vague or generic, sometimes astrologic in nature. What struck me is how Jesus or Mary would spend so much time and effort in contacting these people with trite messages.
You mentioned the ability to increase one's supply of holy water by making sure the new mixture is comprised of at least 50% of the original holy water, so as to never run out. Is there a certain amount of time one must wait, until repeating the process, as in overnight?
I am enjoying some of your book recommendations, and I have no doubt they will make me a better soldier of Christ.
I'm glad you realize Medjugorje for the farce it is, with "daily revelations" for years on end. There is no amount of time that must pass before increasing your supply of Holy Water.
I hope the books I recommended strengthen your faith in these times of Great Apostasy.
We have copies of all the publications,letters,etc from both sides on the Thuc issue since 1981.The writings of Father Jenkins and Bishop Kelly are misleading as they remove certain words,etc from their sources to make their arguments look good which is totally wrong.How can they do that.
We met several folk from New York who attended Mass at the chapel of Bishop Vezalis back in 1983 many times and talked with BishopThuc.He was not senile.Please Father Jenkins and Bishop Kelly admit you are wrong.
I agree with you that the SSPV should abandon their ridiculous "Thuc Bishops" ban. It's causing needless division.
It seems that omission of facts is a common theme in the trad world where priests are trying to convince you of their position. Like Fr Cekada omitting the context of footnote no. 52 in his grain of incense article which reveals that the quote he made actually teaches the opposite of what he claims it does and does not support his view that the Church does not distinguish between declared and undeclared heretics. The quote actually comes from a book targeted at declared heretics in the East. https://tinyurl.com/grainofincense52Delete
Yes, Fr. Cekada did much good, but also was wrong on some issues and tried enforcing them. If you don't like Una Cum, fine, but don't make up "sins" where they don't exist.
Another sad reminder that when the shepherd is struck, the sheep will scatter.
Can you imagine Introibo the about of good if the SSPV/CSPV united with other sede groups.So much more for souls could be done.The pride of Bishop kelly and Father Jenkins is behind this.PaxReplyDelete
Yes, much good would come from the SSPV and CMRI uniting with the other sedes. May we pray for that day to arrive soon!
In my opinion it is best that they all remain apart. The devil has sown serious errors in many groups. Those that hold them may not be pertinacious because they are ignorant of Church teaching. The errors all relate to Apostolic Succession in the Church. If you wish to know what she teaches, here's a recent translation from Mazella's De Religione et Ecclesia: praelectiones scholastico-dogmaticae, 1880 which makes things explicitly clear. https://tinyurl.com/MazellaonApostolicSuccessionDelete
Many sedevacantists are rashly judging valid Catholic clergy in the Eastern Rites as being heretics without looking at individual cases. We know Christ's promised that heretics shall not prevail against the Church. We know the Roman Rites for Holy Orders have been gutted but the Eastern Rites are still valid and their rites of Worship remain theologically intact. Apostolic Succession requires Orders and Legal jurisdiction. With the deaths of Roman Rite office holders consecrated using the Catholic Rite by true Bishops the only place the Church can legally continue is the Eastern Rites. Apostolic Succession can not be broken, for the Church has defected if it does and this is not possible.
There may be some Eastern Rites with valid orders. They were all called into question when their codes were "updated" in 1990 to reflect the heretical views of V2.
The tone of your comment suggests you think the eastern Rites have "legal jurisdiction" while the Traditionalist Bishops do not. How can those who accept V2, Bergoglio, and think the Novus Bogus is valid, "teach" anything with Ordinary Jurisdiction?
It is impossible for the Church to defect, and Apostolic Succession continues even if we don't have the exact explanation in every case. Your citation was translated by Protestant, turned Feeneyite, turned Home Aloner, and now member of the V2 sect, Eric Hoyle. His insistence that theologians who wrote about the Church in ordinary times, must work in extraordinary times is an exercise in futility, like trying to get a square peg in a round hole. That's why he is now in actual union with Bergoglio and eating the Novus Bogus "communion" cracker.
If somebody has contacted a traditional Catholic priest about attending his chapel, and the person hasn't heard from the priest, how long should the person wait after first contacting the priest, before trying again?
Thank you. Anonymous
There is no "rule" regarding this matter. In my opinion, I would wait about ten days to call/attempt contact again.