Sermon: “Poor Quality Catholicism” – A Traditional Priest Hits Home… 

A reader in England alerted me to this sermon, available online, so thank you, John. 

Fr Sebastian Wall SSPX

Father Sebastian Wall (pictured left) is a priest of the Society of St Pius X;  he is the Society Prior in Scotland, serving the SSPX churches in Glasgow and Edinburgh but he also supplies at the Gateshead church fairly regularly.  Click on the image, or click the link below, to hear him preach a hard-hitting sermon in which he offers some specific examples of “poor quality Catholicism” – I saw myself in there.  Maybe you will, as well (not see ME, cheeky! You know what I mean…)  Share your thoughts – what part of this excellent sermon hit home with you

To hear the sermon, click here

Ad Tuendam Fidem, Ad Tuendam Fidem… Wherefore Art Thou ? 

JOHN PAUL II
Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio
AD TUENDAM FIDEM,
by which certain norms are inserted
into the Code of Canon Law
and into the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches

PROTECT THE FAITH of the Catholic Church against errors arising from certain members of the Christian faithful, especially from among those dedicated to the various disciplines of sacred theology, we, whose principal duty is to confirm the brethren in the faith (Lk 22:32), consider it absolutely necessary to add to the existing texts of the Code of Canon Law and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, new norms which expressly impose the obligation of upholding truths proposed in a definitive way by the Magisterium of the Church, and which also establish related canonical sanctions.

1.From the first centuries to the present day, the Church has professed the truths of her faith in Christ and the mystery of his redemption. These truths were subsequently gathered into the Symbols of the faith, today known and proclaimed in common by the faithful in the solemn and festive celebration of Mass as the Apostles’ Creed or the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.

This same Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed is contained in the Profession of faith developed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,(1) which must be made by specific members of the faithful when they receive an office, that is directly or indirectly related to deeper investigation into the truths of faith and morals, or is united to a particular power in the governance of the Church.(2)

2. The Profession of faith, which appropriately begins with the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, contains three propositions or paragraphs intended to describe the truths of the Catholic faith, which the Church, in the course of time and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit “who will teach the whole truth” (Jn 16:13), has ever more deeply explored and will continue to explore.(3)

The first paragraph states: “With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church either by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.”(4) This paragraph appropriately confirms and is provided for in the Church’s universal legislation, in canon 750 of the Code of Canon Law(5) and canon 598 of the Code of the Canons of the Eastern Churches.(6)

The third paragraph states: “Moreover I adhere with submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.”(7) This paragraph has its corresponding legislative expression in canon 752 of the Code of Canon Law(8) and canon 599 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.(9)

3. The second paragraph, however, which states “I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals,”(10) has no corresponding canon in the Codes of the Catholic Church. This second paragraph of the Profession of faith is of utmost importance since it refers to truths that are necessarily connected to divine revelation. These truths, in the investigation of Catholic doctrine, illustrate the Divine Spirit’s particular inspiration for the Church’s deeper understanding of a truth concerning faith and morals, with which they are connected either for historical reasons or by a logical relationship.

4. Moved therefore by this need, and after careful deliberation, we have decided to overcome this lacuna in the universal law in the following way:

A) Canon 750 of the Code of Canon Law will now consist of two paragraphs; the first will present the text of the existing canon; the second will contain a new text. Thus, canon 750, in its complete form, will read:

Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Canon 1371, n. 1 of the Code of Canon Law, consequently, will receive an appropriate reference to canon 750 § 2, so that it will now read:

Canon 1371 – The following are to be punished with a just penalty:

a person who, apart from the case mentioned in canon 1364 § 1, teaches a doctrine condemned by the Roman Pontiff, or by an Ecumenical Council, or obstinately rejects the teachings mentioned in canon 750 § 2 or in canon 752 and, when warned by the Apostolic See or by the Ordinary, does not retract;

a person who in any other way does not obey the lawful command or prohibition of the Apostolic See or the Ordinary or Superior and, after being warned, persists in disobedience.

B) Canon 598 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches will now have two paragraphs: the first will present the text of the existing canon and the second will contain a new text. Thus canon 598, in its complete form, will read as follows:

Canon 598 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All Christian faithful are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.

§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Canon 1436 § 2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, consequently, will receive an appropriate reference to canon 598 § 2, so that it will now read:

Canon 1436 – § 1. Whoever denies a truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or who calls into doubt, or who totally repudiates the Christian faith, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished as a heretic or an apostate with a major excommunication; a cleric moreover can be punished with other penalties, not excluding deposition.
§ 2. In addition to these cases, whoever obstinately rejects a teaching that the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising the authentic Magisterium, have set forth to be held definitively, or who affirms what they have condemned as erroneous, and does not retract after having been legitimately warned, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.

5. We order that everything decreed by us in this Apostolic Letter, given motu proprio, be established and ratified, and we prescribe that the insertions listed above be introduced into the universal legislation of the Catholic Church, that is, into the Code of Canon Law and into the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, all things to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

Given in Rome, at St Peter’s, on 18 May, in the year 1998, the twentieth of our Pontificate.
JOHN PAUL II

Read document at source here, including footnotes. 

 

 

Comment:

Here we have a clear sign that Pope John Paul II wished Canon Law to be enforced against dissenters, heretics and apostates.  The above Motu Proprio spells it out clearly:  reject Catholic truths and you set yourself against the teaching of the Catholic Church – we are, one and all, to avoid any contrary doctrines.  Yet, Pope John Paul II himself did not apply it.  Odd. 

So, what happened?  Why was it never invoked?  Or, did I miss it?  Whatever, is there any offender (or a million) at the present time, to whom, one might think, the penalties might be applied, which Pope John Paul II inserted to strengthen Canon Law against dissenters, heretics and apostates?  Only asking, not least because Ad tuendam fidem seems to have disappeared into thin air, which is why we ask:  Ad tuendam fidem, Ad tuendam fidem… wherefore art thou, Romeo, Ad tuendam fidem ?   

The Winner of the Confused Cardinal Competition is… Cardinal Dolan!

Comment: 

Cardinal Dolan’s confusion is mind-boggling.  It’s beyond belief than any prelate would makes excuses not to publicly excommunicate this man for his shocking legalisation of infanticide and then to say he’s “restless” when faced with the possibility of at least refusing him Communion – which is mandated anyway in Canon Law #915 for “[those] who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin…”

More than one bishop has already invoked this law to prohibit pro-abortion politicians from approaching for Holy Communion – click here to read more.

Overall, while he’s tailor made for show-business, Cardinal Dolan is unimpressive as a prelate of the Catholic Church.  And that is to understate the case by a zillion miles…

If you disagree – which I cannot imagine – tell us;  otherwise share your thoughts on just how long it is likely to take for infanticide (the murder of the new-born infant) to be legalised here in the UK.   

Incredibly, New York’s murderous Governor Andrew Cuomo ordered a number of buildings, including One World Trade Center, to be lit up pink to “celebrate” the passing of the Bill.  This is one very sick mind at work. Please pray for him – and for the very confused Cardinal Dolan.  IS there a more confused cardinal anywhere in the world?  

SSPX Building Up Vs Pulling Down…

From blogger, Gabriel Syme…

Bishop Huonder of the Diocese of Chur (Switzerland) has announced he will spent his retirement with the SSPX. He is 76 and has wished to retire for a while, Pope Francis having already rejected his resignation in 2017. I don’t know a lot about him, beyond the fact he seems quite solid and has previously been “in the wars” with the LGBT and secular movements.
Presumably he will still be able to carry out the functions of a Prelate and so this could be a real boon for the SSPX. Rorate reports that Pope Francis is “well informed” about the Bishop’s choice and personally approves of it.  

Editor writes…

Clearly, those who have spread the falsehood that the SSPX is in schism, are plain wrong – have been all along, of course, but it must be crystal clear, even to the slowest of “liberal” minds, that Pope Francis (of ALL popes!) is hardly likely to approve one of his bishops spending his retirement with a “schismatic” Society of traditional priests and bishops. There’s a limit to embracing “equality”, “diversity” and “tolerance”.  It seems as good a time as ever, then, to reflect on the closing chapter of Archbishop Lefebvre’s Open Letter to Confused Catholics, written just twenty years after the dramatic changes in the Church, in the years following the Second Vatican Council.  

Archbishop Lefebvre writes: Building Up Versus Pulling Down (from Open Letter to Confused Catholics)

Twenty years have gone by and one would have thought that the reactions raised by the Council reforms would have calmed down, that the Catholic people would have buried the religion in which they had been brought up, that the younger ones, not having known it, would have accepted the new one. That, at least, was the wager made by the Modernists. They were not unduly disturbed by the uproar, sure of themselves as they were in the early days. They were less so later on. The frequent and necessary concessions made to the spirit of the world did not produce the expected results. Nobody any longer wanted to be a priest of the new religion and the faithful turned away from their religious practice. The Church which tried to become a Church of the poor became a poor Church, obliged to resort to advertising to collect Peter’s Pence, and to sell off its properties.

During this time those faithful to Tradition drew together in all the Christian lands, and particularly in France, Switzerland, the United States and Latin America.
The fabricator of the new Mass, Mgr. Annibale Bugnini was himself obliged to recognize this world-wide resistance in his posthumous book,21 a resistance which is growing and organizing itself unceasingly and drawing support. No, the “traditionalist” movement is not “slowing-down” as the progressivist journalists write from time to time to reassure themselves. Where else are there as many people at Mass as at St. Nicholas-du-Chardonnet, and also as many Masses, as many Benedicitons of the Blessed Sacrament or as many beautiful ceremonies? The Society of Saint Pius X throughout the world owns seventy houses,22 each with at least one priest, churches like the one in Brussels and the one we have quite recently bought in London, or the one placed at our disposal in Marseilles; also schools, and four seminaries.

Carmelite convents are opening and already forming new communities. Religious communities of men and of women created fifteen or more years ago, who strictly apply the rule of the Orders from which they stem, are overflowing with vocations, and are continuously having to enlarge their premises and construct more buildings. The generosity of the Catholic faithful never ceases to amaze me, particularly in France.

The monasteries are centers of attraction, crowds of people go there often from far away; young people bewildered by the illusory seductions of pleasures and escape in every form, find in them their Road to Damascus. Here is a list of places where they have
kept the true Catholic faith and for that reason draw people: Le Barroux, Flavigny-sur Ozerain, La Haye-aux-Bonshommes, the Benedictines of Alés, the Sisters of Fanjeaux, of Brignolles, of Pontcallec, and communities like that of Father Lecareux…

Travelling a great deal, I see everywhere at work the hand of Christ blessing His Church. In Mexico the ordinary people drove from the churches the reforming clergy who, won over by the so-called liberation theology, wanted to throw out the statues of the saints. “It’s not the statues who are going, it’s you.” Political circumstances have prevented us from opening a priory in Mexico; so faithful priests travel out from a center at El Paso near the frontier in the United States. The descendants of the Cristeros welcome them warmly and offer them their churches. I have administered 2500 confirmations there at the request of the people.

In the United States, young married couples with their numerous children flock to the Society’s priests. In 1982 in that country I ordained the first three priests trained entirely in our seminaries. Groups of traditionalists are on the increase whereas the parishes are declining. Ireland, which has remained refractory towards the novelties, has been subject to the reforms since 1980, altars having been cast into rivers or re-used as building material. Simultaneously, traditionalist groups have formed in Dublin and Belfast. In Brazil, in the diocese of Campos of which I have already spoken, the people have rallied around the priests evicted from their parishes by the new bishop, with processions of 5,000 and 10,000 people taking to the streets.

It is therefore the right road we are following; the proof is there, we recognize the tree by its fruits. What the clergy and the laity have achieved in spite of persecution by the liberal clergy (for, as Louis Veuillot says, “There is nobody more sectarian than a liberal.”) is almost miraculous. Do not let yourself be taken in, dear reader, by the term “traditionalist” which they would have people understand in a bad sense. In a way, it is a pleonasm because I cannot see who can be a Catholic without being a traditionalist. I think I have amply demonstrated in this book that the Church is a tradition. We are a tradition. They also speak of “integrism.” If by that we mean respect for the integrality of dogma, of the catechism, of Christian morality, of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then yes, we are integrists. And I do not see how one can be a Catholic without being an integrist in that sense of the word.

It has also been said that after me, my work will disappear because there will be no bishop to replace me. I am certain of the contrary; I have no worries on that account. I may die tomorrow, but the good Lord answers all problems. Enough bishops will be found in the world to ordain our seminarians: this I know.

Even if at the moment he is keeping quiet, one or another of these bishops will receive from the Holy Ghost the courage needed to arise in his turn. If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church. Our Lord has promised us, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her.

This is why I persist, and if you wish to know the real reason for my persistence, it is this: At the hour of my death, when Our Lord asks me, “What have you done with your episcopate, what have you done with your episcopal and priestly grace?” I do not want to hear from His lips the terrible words, “You have helped to destroy the Church along with the rest of them.”   [Emphasis added]

21 La Riforma Liturgica: Edizioni Liturgiche Rome.
22 At present, in the year 2000, there are 135 priories, 6 seminaries, 75 schools, 3 universities, 3 nursing homes, 4 retreat houses, 4 bishops and 401 priests–ed.

 

Comment: 

I don’t think there can be any doubt in the minds of those who have lived through the years since Vatican II that the SSPX has, indeed, built up (and continues to build up) the Church at this time of crisis.  Thus, it is heartening to read this news of the Swiss diocesan bishop who has chosen to spend his retirement years  in the Society.   Will other bishops follow the example of  Bishop Huonder?

It seems very clear that the Pope is trying to regularise the SSPX in a variety of ways – is there a  local bishop in your neck of the woods who may assist this process?  Why don’t the local bishops invite the Society priests to (“Mass-less”) diocesan events, for example?  Would the Society priests accept? Is there, in your opinion, scope for a sort of informal regularisation within dioceses to help normalise the SSPX situation?  

England: Is Cardinal Nichols “Gay”?

Westminster Cardinal Vincent Nichols celebrated on January 13 in London a Gay Eucharist organized by the club of homosexuals “LGBT Catholics Westminster”.

Cardinal Nichols

Nichols is a repeat offender. Already in May 2015 he presided a Novus Ordo Eucharist for the same group, specifically aimed at homosexuals.

The London Gay Eucharists were initiated in 1999, opposed by Catholics but backed by the anti-Catholic archdiocese.

According to IndCatholicNews.com (January 16), Nichols claimed after Mass that LGBT Catholics Westminster are “an important sign of welcome and inclusion” within his archdiocese as an “identifiable community which is at home within the Church.” In reality, LGBT Catholics Westminster promote homosexual fornication which, according to the Bible cries for vengeance to heaven.

Nichols was always known as heterodox prelate. Nevertheless Benedict XVI appointed him to Westminster, knowing that he would eventually become a Cardinal.  Source

Comment

Now, not to mislead –  I, personally, doubt very much if the Cardinal is actively homosexual, although, of course, I don’t know.  I did meet him some years ago, when I could pass muster in the “slim, glamorous, fashionable etc” category and I recall thinking that he was quite a ladies’ man at that time, but, hey, things have moved on and it’s now clear that the crisis in the Church boils down to the dominance of homosexual priests and bishops. Indeed, not so long ago we read this on a thread about the homosexual scandals within the episcopate and in seminaries: “In light of the explosive report by Archbishop Viganò, it becomes even more apparent that the homosexual cabal operating in the Catholic Church exists at the very highest level and even incriminates Pope Francis himself.”   See Priest’s Open Letter To UK Bishops… 

So, the very least any priest or bishops should be doing at this stage, as the mounting scandals reveal a truly decadent clergy and complicit episcopate, is to distance themselves from appearing to condone this unnatural behaviour, let alone conducting “services” where “blessings” are bestowed on those engaging in it.  And the desire is unconscionable for the “LGBT Catholics Westminster”  to be an “identifiable community which is at home within the Church,”  indicating that there is no need for repentance, no need to turn away from that gravely sinful behaviour. 

Whether or not, then, Cardinal Nichols is “gay”, we are surely entitled to ask the question.  Or, maybe you disagree?  If so, let’s hear a sound theological and biblical justification for the Cardinal’s promotion of homosexuality. Catholic Tradition is rooted in Scripture and the teaching of the Fathers of the Church from the beginning so, here’s the challenge: demonstrate to us, using these primary sources, that the teaching of the Church is wrong, does not reflect God’s natural moral law, and that, therefore, the Cardinal is right (along with all the other LGBT etc prelates) to promote , effectively as a virtue, these “acts of grave depravity” (Catechism of the Catholic Church #2357).  

   

14 January: Feast of St Mungo (Kentigern) Patron Saint of Glasgow… 

Mungo or Kentigern was born in 518. He was the son of Tannoch, a princess of Lothian, who has given her name to St Enoch’s Square in Glasgow, and to Tannochside near Uddingston. Tannoch’s father was a pagan and when she adopted Christianity she was expelled from her home. During her wanderings she was raped, and her father ordered that she be set adrift in an open boat at Aberlady in order that her pregnancy should not bring a slur on the family name. The boat was washed upon the shore at the Christian settlement of Culross and there the infant Kentigern was born. He was christened Kendyern, British for “Great Chief’. (The British form indicates that the ‘g’ should be soft. The hard ‘g’ perhaps arises from the fact that Jocelyn wrote in Latin).

But within the community he was often referred to by the pet name of Myncho, which has become Mungo, and means “little dear”. It is by this name that he is known as the patron saint of Glasgow. Having been ordained priest, Kentigern set out to restore the faith at Glasgow. He crossed the Forth at Alloa and set up his church on the Molendinar Burn, where Glasgow Cathedral now stands at the top of the High Street. He was greatly aided in his work of conversion by the local chieftain Rederich, whose fortress was Dumbarton, the fort of the Britons. Rederich brought over a Bishop from Ireland to consecrate the 25-year-old Kentigern first bishop of Glasgow.

Trouble from the pagans led to the flight of Rederich and Kentigern to the South. They stopped for a short time near Penrith and established a settlement at Crossfield. After a brief sojourn there, Kentigern travelled to Wales where he founded a monastery in the Vale of Ciwyd. Meanwhile Rederich and allies had defeated the pagans near Carlisle and Kentigern was able to return to Scotland in 573. He stopped at Hoddam, by Dumfries, and established missions throughout Galloway, which had been converted 150 years earlier by St Ninian.

After eight years Kentigern returned to Glasgow, where he died in January 603. In 1197, probably as a result of Jocelyn’s writings, a church was built over the tomb, and his church was the beginnings of the present Glasgow Cathedral. In Glasgow he was known better by his pet name of Mungo, but dedications to St Kentigern are common throughout the South of Scotland, in the North of England, and in Wales. Jocelyn’s account informs us that Kentigern met many other saints -St Serf at Culross, Saints David and Asaph in Wales, St Columba in Glasgow.

He also paid several visits to Rome, on the last of which the Pope gave Glasgow the title “Special Daughter of the Church”. St Kentigern was chosen as our patron firstly because of his connection with the old Kingdom of Lothian, his grandfather being Loth who ruled from the fort on Traprain Law near Haddington; and secondly because so many of the pupils here have Glasgow origins. 

The meaning of Glasgow’s coat of arms (pictured above)

Here is the bird that never flew
Here is the tree that never grew
Here is the bell that never rang
Here is the fish that never swam

The Glasgow coat of arms relate to the life and legend of St Mungo. The arms include ‘the tree that never grew’ relating to St Mungo tending a fire in St Serf’s monastery but he fell asleep and some lads who were envious of Mungo’s favoured position with St Serf put out the fire while he slept. When Mungo woke he broke off branches from a frozen hazel tree and by praying over them and lit the fire again, the hazel branches were transformed in to a fully grown tree. The ‘bird that never flew’ is about a robin that had been tamed by St Serf and it had been accidently killed. Mungo prayed over the robin and brought it back to life. The ‘fish that never swam’ is about a ring which a King gave to his wife Langoureth who gave it to her lover a knight who wore it and when the King noticed this took it from him when he was sleeping and threw it in the River Clyde. The King then demanded to see the ring from Langeoreth and she confessed this to Mungo who sent a monk to fish the river and found the lost ring. The bell is attributed to a bell that was reputedly given to Mungo by the Pope.  The motto “Let Glasgow Flourish” is an abbreviation of a statement taken from a sermon given by the saint: “Let Glasgow flourish by the preaching of Thy Word and the praising of Thy Name.” 

St Enoch

Mungo’s mother Thenew is  also known as St Enoch. It is believed St Enoch’s Square in Glasgow City Centre is the site of her burial ground.

For your interest…

For your information…

There is Mass in the SSPX church of St Andrew, Renfrew Street, Glasgow, at 6.30pm on Monday, 14 January, to mark the Feast. 

Happy Feast Day everyone!  

Comments invited… 

Question Time Or The Fiona Bruce & Emily Thornberry Show? Your Verdict…

 

Fiona Bruce’s took over the chair of Question Time for the first time last night, Thursday, 10 January, 2019.  Don’t ask me why, because the BBC bias is nowhere as predictable, but I do try to watch it every week, either live or recorded.  Last night, I watched it broadcast right after the news, and I found it very frustrating viewing, indeed.

There were only two topics:  Brexit and knife crime in London.

Only Melanie Phillips’ contributions on both topics were meaningful, in my view.  Yet, Fiona Bruce allowed her to speak only once on Brexit – notice she is not called on to join in the toing and froing between the other members of the panel when controversy arose – while the Labour politician, Emily Thornberry is given free rein to say what she wanted, as often as she wanted, more or less unchecked. 

I’m also puzzled as to why the Tory politician, James Cleverly MP, appears so frequently on Question Time and other programmes where Brexit is the hot topic.  He is a weak “LEAVER”… oops!”  Just answered my own question.  There’s the reason he’s invited onto these shows and not Jacob Rees-Mogg or Owen Paterson.  

In any event, this thread comes in the wake of the call from the Bishop of Galloway (south of Scotland) to Catholics to become more involved in politics. 

Watching the media bias in matters political, the prevailing (and worsening) political correctness, is there really any point in Catholics becoming more involved in politics – and what, precisely does that mean?  Joining Parties which promote the evils of homosexuality and abortion? 

Finally,  IS it fair to describe last night’s Question Time as the Fiona Bruce & Emily Thornberry Show?  Your verdict, please!