Protestant Attends Mass While Catholics Watch Online – Legacy of Lockdown …

Comment: 

There’s no mistaking the sincerity of the young Protestant Evangelical in the above video.  He very accurately summarises the differences between the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) and the novus ordo (NO). 

One mistake which he makes – a very common mistake – is to think that “the Church” is not “one”.   He misunderstands the difference between the break-up of Christendom thanks to Martin Luther et al, who left the Church, with the Church itself upon which Christ bequeathed unity from the beginning: “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (John 17:21)  Here Christ was bestowing unity on His Church – it was not some future goal. 

However, this is, as I say, a very common misconception.  Catholics make the same mistake, so we have to cut the young man some slack on this. 

Where there is absolutely NO slack to be cut, is for those Catholics who have not returned to attending Mass since the disgraceful Government ban was lifted, but are choosing instead to stay at home and watch Mass online.  I’d heard concerns expressed that this would happen and I could see the temptation but it didn’t occur to me for a second that any Catholic accustomed to attending the TLM would fall prey to such temptation.   I’ve now heard of at least three such cases – and I remain incredulous. 

Watching Mass online does not fulfil the Sunday Mass obligation.  The notices and announcements in churches at the time of the lockdown stated clearly that “there is a temporary dispensation from the Sunday obligation” – that is, the obligation was temporarily lifted [due to the Government ban].  That ban is no longer in place.  Neither is the dispensation from attending Mass in person.  We are once again obliged to attend Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation. 

So, what does this readiness to skip Mass for the comfort of watching it online tell us?  Well, with this willingness to miss Mass,  remember, is a willingness to live without the benefit of the Sacraments – no confession, no absolution, no Holy Communion.  What kind of Catholic life is that?  Answer:  it’s not.  

If you have any thoughts on this phenomenon please share them in the comments below, but do not name names.  Suffice that we try to work out what is  going on here – are these “Lockdown Legacy Catholics” staying away from church out of a [human but faithless] fear of “the virus”, or is the virus merely an excuse to re-structure life in such a way that God’s law does not interfere too much with their secular lives? Were they always Catholics of weak Faith, or what…  What’s the mentality – I’m genuinely puzzled.  Over to thee…   

And don’t forget to pray for the young Protestant man in the video – he appears to be very open to the grace of God, so it would be wonderful if he were to embrace the gift of the Faith.  Our Lady,  Help of Christians, pray for him!   

Scots Priest Challenges Bishops’ Response To Lockdown & Covid-19 Restrictions

On this, the Feast of St Michael, The Archangel, Defender of the Church & The Faithful, a priest of the Archdiocese of Glasgow – Father Stephen Dunn – speaks out against the closure of churches during lockdown, and the ongoing government restrictions being enforced in Catholic churches…

                        St Michael, Archangel,                           defend us in the day of battle…

An Open Letter…

Dear Members of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church in Scotland,

“Then he said, Son of man, remember everything I say to you, listen closely, and go to your  exiled country men and talk to them.  Tell them, ‘The Lord says this whether they listen or not.’”   – Eziekiel, 2, 10-11. (Office of Readings, Monday, week 24)

“This is My Son the Beloved with whom I am well pleased. Listen to Him!’ – Mathew, Mark & Luke’s gospel.

This morning I was deeply saddened and angered when I saw people having to be denied entry to one of our Catholic churches in our Archdiocese of Glasgow because there were 50 people already in, and in obedience to Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, and the guidelines issued by the Archdiocese and the Bishops Conference of Scotland, this procedure had to be carried out.  I was subsequently told that a man, his wife and his child, having travelled 15 miles were turned away a couple of weeks ago, again because 50 were already in.

ENOUGH  of  this  suppression, intimidation!  

This is disgraceful, shocking.  “Could you not spend one hour with me?”  No you can’t,  because Philip Tartaglia and the Scottish Bishops conference says no – only 50 are allowed in;  we are going to be obedient to government guidelines and not allow any more than 50 people in.

Obedient to a Government which advocates  Adultery, Abortion, Sodomy, and Transgenderism?  Please tell me one of those that is pleasing to God? 

Why are the Bishops of Scotland being obedient to such law makers? Being obedient to laws/directives made by a fascist, Communist government which drove fear into people and makes them act in fear, a government which you are obeying!  Our Lady warned at Fatima, Russia will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church.  I am aware that is not unique to Scotland, but as a priest ordained 26 years ago for Glasgow in Scotland I am going to focus my criticism/argument  there.

One of these persecutions of the Church is happening now.   The government, in its freedom removal and fear laws, said churches were to be shut, God’s people were not to gather at His house and celebrate/receive  the Sacraments, the primary means of the Salvation of their souls.  Bishop,  are you of God or of the world?

This  intimidation is happening before your very eyes and you happily go along with it.  Is this good shepherding?

Never  in the history of  Mother Church, has she been subject to the laws of the State.   The Church is not and never has been subject to the State; this is clear in all Encyclicals regarding the relationship between Church and State issued by the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. It is frightening that Bishops have compromised this clear teaching by their obedience to the State,  to the point where Sacraments, the primary means of  salvation, are being denied even to the dying. Shocking.

And  do not dare tell me that this is because of Covid 19, a disease which has a recovery rate of 99.79%! Yes a fatality rate of 1 in 500.  A disease, which 42 studies showed  by 39 – 3, that if treated promptly  and with the correct and proper dosage,  of  hydroxychloroquine, full  recovery increases by 33 – 50% ! 

See the facts  for yourselves! – this is not a study but a review of 42 studies!

For the purpose of the points/criticisms I make, I shall quote Truth given by Our Lord in the 4 gospels, showing how these present actions are against His will, contradict His will. I will also refer to other Scripture quotes and the lives of the saints.

From the start our Bishops closed our churches, the dwelling place of Jesus Christ in the most Blessed Sacrament.

Holy Water was removed from our fonts with which we bless ourselves on entering Jesus’ house, reminding ourselves of the covenant God made with us at Baptism – “Unless you are born of water and the Holy Spirit you shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven” – John 3. 

Is God going to use Holy Water to pass disease to faithful followers of His son who remind themselves of His covenant?

The weekend before we entered national lockdown on Monday 23rd March the Bishops closed our churches, denying access. “Come to me all you who labour and are overburdened, and I will give you rest. Shoulder my yoke and learn from me,  for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls!”-  Matt 11.

When the sheep were frightened and scared of the Covid wolf, you shepherds denied them entry to be with their Master, He through whom they were created, their Saviour, in His Real Presence, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Sorry to say it, but I say directly, this is Shocking, Disgraceful.

Consider the prayer taught by the Angel to the little children at Fatima –

My God I believe, I adore, I hope and I love You. I beg pardon for those who do not believe, do not Adore, do not hope and do not love you. Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, I adore you profoundly and I offer you the most precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, truly present in all the Tabernacles of the World in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges and indifference with which He Himself is offended. And through His Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of you the conversion of poor sinners. Amen

You, Bishops of Scotland, you denied adoration, you are the ones who presently cause the outrages, sacrileges and indifference with which He Himself is offended, by denying the sheep time in the Real Presence of Jesus.  And at a time when they need it most.

You may reply:  But they might have had Covid,  brought it  and passed it resulting in an outbreak which would have resulted  through their coming to Church!

Is the Father going to allow His Son’s house to be the centre of disease and the passing of disease when the sheep come to His Son to find peace for their souls!  No. 

 When the Son of Man comes will He find any faith on earth?”  – Luke 18.  With such chief shepherds as we have, sorry Lord Jesus, it looks very unlikely.

What guidance and example do the saints give us, actions  that  will please the Father?

 St Augustine, Bishop and Doctor of our Holy Catholic Church,  says regarding shepherds i.e., Bishops and we priests who have advocated and followed the above practices; said on Monday, week 24, Office of Readings:

“So let us see how the Word of God, that flatters no one, addresses the shepherds who are feeding themselves not the sheep. ‘You take the milk, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fatlings; but you do not feed my sheep. The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the crippled you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought; any strong one you have killed; and my sheep are scattered because there is no shepherd.” 

Not only did you close churches and stop people from spending time in the Real Presence, you stopped funerals denying the grieving time at the Lord’s  altar,  to pray for their loved ones:  “All I ask of you is that you remember me at the Altar of God” – St Monica.

In hospitals where people were dying,  they were denied access to priests, and so to the Sacraments, the primary means of the salvation of their souls,  the Forgiveness of Sin, Absolution for their Souls, which would have placed their souls in a state of Grace,  so helping them to remove the fear of death, helping them to find peace in Jesus’ mercy… 

As the Compendium Catechism of the Catholic Church, written by Pope Benedict XVI,  says:

How are sins remitted? (#200)

The first and chief sacrament for the forgiveness of sins is Baptism.  For those sins committed after Baptism, Christ instituted the Sacrament of Reconciliation or Penance through which a baptised person is reconciled with God and with the Church.

Why does the Church have the power to forgive sins? (#201)

The Church has the mission and the power to forgive sins because Christ Himself has conferred it upon her: “Receive the Holy Ghost, if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” – John 20

This mission of yours, this duty as shepherds, you neglected, by not making sure a priest was available to the dying in a time of great fear.

“But he could have caught Covid and might have died!”  I hear you reply.

Will the Father  allow disease to pass to a Priest/s, with whom Jesus has shared His priesthood, as he tries to worthily celebrate the Sacraments, the primary  means of Salvation, to sick and dying souls?   Have you any faith, trust in Jesus who has shared His priesthood with you? He whom St Paul tells us in his letter to the Philippians: “If our life in Christ means anything to you” (it should be the centre of our priesthood) “if love can persuade you at all, or the Holy Spirit that we have in common, or any tenderness and sympathy, then be united in your convictions and united in your love, with a common purpose and mind.” 

That common purpose and mind must be to follow the actions and teaching of Christ – was He scared to touch the lepers?  In the Gospel Jesus tells us of the son who said “yes”, he would go to his father’s vineyard and work but never went. On being installed Bishops, you promised to go and look after the Lord’s flock, but you have gone to the world instead, listened to its instructions and imposed them on the people, failing to implement Jesus’ teaching and ways.

Lives/example of the saints –

St Robert Bellarmine, Bishop and Doctor of the Church, feast 17th Sept,- During the time of great disease, at the time of the Reformation, the plague which ravaged Europe, he went about cleansing  and dressing the wounds of those infected by the plague;  what hand sanitizer was he using? Please tell me if you know – I better get some!

St Mother Teresa served the poor looking after them, dressing their wounds, helping them in their illness. What age did she live to?  87!  How many followed her, joined her order, she who trusted herself completely to the service of God and her neighbour. “By its fruits shall you know the tree.”  

If we are truly trying to be shepherds through the priesthood Christ has shared with us, these are the examples we should look to, copy and so trust in the power of Christ, as we try to do the will of the Father through the prompting of the Holy Ghost,  and without fear.

And finally to the Mass and how it has been changed by you Bishops.

Mass, the celebration of Christ’s offering on the Cross for the forgiveness of our sins, the institution of the Most Holy Eucharist, where we hear the Word of God to help us guide our actions to show our belief in Jesus Christ, our Saviour.

You shut our churches, denying people the Mass, the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ: “I tell you most solemnly, if  you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood you will not have life within you.” – John 6:53.

You stopped the sheep from receiving the Lord in Holy Communion at the time when they needed Him most.  Instead of doing what Christ instructed you did what the Government instructed: 

Do not get close to each other. Priests, keep people apart, distancing them from each other, no singing, the liturgy must be celebrated in a very basic way. You must make the faithful wear masks,  despite the  fact that the WHO admitted to the BBC that its June 2020 mask policy update was due not to new evidence, but “political lobbying”. – D Cohen, BBC Medical Correspondent     Yet, the people are  hindered in their ability to speak, to enter God’s Presence, showing their facial individuality, how God created them.  Disgraceful.

On 3rd September, in the Tridentine calendar, we celebrated the feast of St Pius X, great pastor of the flock, who realised the full value of the liturgy as the prayer of the Church that is pleasing to the Father.  You hinder such celebration in your clear obedience to the world.  Why?

One cannot help but think that if the Lord Jesus came into such churches, He would tear down your tape, cast aside your sanitizer bottles and masks and say My Father’s house shall be called a house of prayer, but you have turned it into a worldly den  which follows practices of the world and the flesh! Be gone!  – Matt,  21.

Priests have to sanitize hands before giving out communion – as Philip Tartaglia said to me in a letter instructing me to follow guidelines, or else!  People should leave the church after receiving Holy Communion; they should not remain/return to benches. People are to be denied time in the Real Presence of their  Saviour, He who sacrificed Himself for the forgiveness of their sins, their Lord and Master.  This directly contravenes the example of the saints of the Church who in their lives show the importance of spending time in the presence of Jesus, having  just received Him.

“The Bishops of Scotland have agreed to suspend the choice of distributing and receiving Holy Communion on the tongue during the current pandemic for reasons of infection control. This is not an attempt to change liturgical laws. It is a reasonable temporary measure to adopt in this pandemic.” – letter  sent by email to me from Philip Tartaglia, 20th August 2020.

You Bishops have no right, no such power  to remove people’s choice to receive Holy Communion on the tongue!

It is for people to choose, not you to dictate things contrary to the teaching and rules of Mother Church.

Is Jesus, who is using the priest, with whom He has shared His priesthood, going to pass disease through their giving of Holy Communion? Again I quote, When the Son of Man comes will He find any faith on earth?” 

According to Scripture in the Office of Readings of the last few weeks, the Lord asks of His shepherds, on numerous occasions, through the Prophets, and very precisely here: “When the upright man renounces his integrity to do evil and I set a trap for him, he too shall die for his sin and the integrity he practised will no longer be remembered; but I will hold you responsible for his death.” –  Ezekiel  2:20

By publishing this letter, as a priest who is struggling in the present situation, I truly believe I am acting in obedience to God’s will, pleasing the Father and following the prompting of the Holy Ghost by giving clarity through Christ’s words, not mine. I believe that by my quotes from the Gospels, I have declared myself for Jesus in the presence of men as Jesus commands and, I believe, a true shepherd should.  (Matt, 10:32)

To you, the people of the Body of Christ in Scotland, the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church I ask your prayers, especially before the altar of God. I am a sinner with faults and failings, some say many faults and failings.  Many will assure you “that you definitely won’t see a halo over  Dunn’s head!”  However, even with such weakness and faults,  I believe that I have a duty  to make this letter available to you, in obedience to God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, to address grave failings and incorrect directives from our Scottish Bishops.

To those whom I accuse, I say reflect, realise what Christ wishes of we Shepherds, and like the Prodigal Son, come back to the Father – remembering that Christ tells us, ”There will be more rejoicing in heaven over one repentant sinner than ninety-nine good men who are in no need of repentance.” – Luke, 15.

And as individuals,  let  none of us forget:  “Remember dear Christian:   You have but one soul to save, One God to love and to serve, one Eternity to expect, Death will come soon, Judgement will follow, And then, Heaven or Hell for all Eternity!”  (St Teresa of Avila).

Yes, we priests have many souls to save, and because more has been entrusted to us in priesthood, the greater our Judgement!

God Bless you all, and may we all be united in Christ Jesus to carry out His will.

Christ’s brother in priesthood,

Fr Stephen Dunn
Priest of 26 years of the Archdiocese of Glasgow.
stephen.dunn@rcag.org.uk 

Comment:

Father Stephen Dunn has honoured Catholic Truth by permitting us to publish the above letter.  We thank him for this, and I have already assured him that our readers and bloggers will be praying for him.  It takes courage for any priest to speak out in this way. 

Father Dunn regularly offers the Traditional Latin Mass.  He learned the Mass on publication of Summorum Pontificum, and at that time his main reason for wanting to learn the old Mass was because his father, Dr John Dunn RIP, a supporter of Catholic Truth from the beginning of our publication, had stipulated that his funeral Mass must be offered in the Traditional rite.  Father has come to fully appreciate the old rite, especially in its reverence, and he now offers it as often as possible.

Please express your support for Father in the comments below, and remember to pray for him because, as we know, while dissenting priests are protected and promoted in the Church at this time of apostasy, loyal priests who preach and defend the Faith are, sadly, more often than not punished at some level – we have all been following such cases, most notably, recently, the case of the American priest, Father James Altman.  

USA: Use of Executive Power to Declare Health Emergency has its Limits – Lawyer

Comment:  

The lawyer in the above video won, impressively, when he represented priests and rabbis in court, challenging the lockdown rules in New York which militated against places of worship…

As for Scotland – do we have any lawyers who are concerned at the way our personal and religious liberty is being eroded?  As we face the continual introduction of fresh rules and regulations, with a further lockdown always hanging over our heads, do we have any legal recourse to challenge the removal of our personal freedom?  Should we simply accept the fact that we cannot invite people into our home or visit the homes of our relatives and friends? Should the Government really be able to issue such orders?  Restrict the number of people who may gather for a chat?

And what about our religious liberty… In the event of another full-blown lockdown, with a repeated ban on attending church, do we have any clergy who might pursue a case to challenge the State’s interference in Church matters?  

The New York case, as Chris Ferrara points out, was not brought by diocesan clergy/bishops, but by traditional priests, so that means, in Scotland, that either the priests of the Society of St Peter (FSSP) or the priests of the Society of St Pius X (FSSPX) are in the frame.  There are not a lot of them, to be fair, so it seems unlikely that either of those groups will be plaintiffs in court any time soon.  And, of course, as we know, the diocesan bishops are very keen to keep the churches under the thumb of the Government.  So, they’re never going to institute a legal challenge.  In any case, is it desirable?  Or should we all just accept our lot, and offer up the injustice?   Share your thoughts…   

Archbishop Viganò: Don’t Leave the Church – Stay and Fight the Modernists! 

This new statement is important, inasmuch as in recent days, both Father Thomas Weinandy, as well as Father Raymond de Souza, spread the suspicion that the Italian prelate might be “schismatic,” thus intending to leave the Catholic Church. This suspicion had arisen because of Viganò’s critique of the Second Vatican Council and its detrimental effects on the life of the faith in the Church. For example, de Souza’s article is entitled: “Is Archbishop Viganò’s Rejection of the Second Vatican Council Promoting Schism?” And Weinandy stated: “My concern is that, in his radical reading of the Council, the archbishop is spawning his own schism.”

In an August 22 article published by the traditional Catholic newspaper Catholic Family News, Kokx had asked Viganò a set of questions with regard to what faithful laity can do in the midst of this Church crisis that is going back to the Council. 

Kokx suggested Viganò needs to give more advice to laity and priests on what to do next: “He’s certainly diagnosed the problem, but what are his solutions, if any? What, in other words, is it that he believes Catholics in the 21st century should do in response to the crisis?”

Archbishop Viganò’s response as published on September 1 by Catholic Family News (see full text below) is clear: it is not the faithful Catholics who oppose the changing of the faith, but those who perpetrate these changes that ought to be questioned. He writes that we need to discuss “the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them.”

If people who hold heterodox views are in positions of authority in the Church, he continues, “It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.”

In addition and on a practical level, the Italian prelate gives us advice on how to live and grow in the faith, working on our sanctification and remaining in the state of “sanctifying grace.” But at the same time, we are to assist and “comfort” good priests and bishops, seeking out reverent Masses. 

“Faithful laity have the right and the duty to find priests, communities, and institutes that are faithful to the perennial Magisterium,” Viganò explains. “And may they know how to accompany the laudable celebration of the liturgy in the Ancient Rite with adherence to sound doctrine and morals, without any subsidence on the front of the Council.”

Finally, Archbishop Viganò also praises the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), which has defended the traditional faith for decades now. They “deserve recognition” for their work of preserving the Catholic faith, he says, and adds that he considers Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of this Society, to be a “confessor of the Faith.”

Here we might remember that just recently, a cardinal stated that Lefebvre will one day be declared a “Doctor of the Church” and that he was “prophetic.”

Let us close with Viganò’s last words of his response to Kokx’s questions:

“The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother. The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.”

Below is the full statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, reprinted with permission:

Disclaimer: The following positions adopted and advice offered by Archbishop Viganò do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews and are presented only for your information.

Dear Mr. Kokx,

I read with lively interest your article “Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is Right about Vatican II, But What Does He Think Catholic Should Do Now?” which was published by Catholic Family News on August 22 (here). I am happy to respond to your questions, which address matters that are very important for the faithful.

You ask: “What would ‘separating’ from the Conciliar Church look like in Archbishop Viganò’s opinion?” I respond to you with another question: “What does it mean to separate from the Catholic Church according to the supporters of the Council?” While it is clear that no admixture is possible with those who propose adulterated doctrines of the conciliar ideological manifesto, it should be noted that the simple fact of being baptized and of being living members of the Church of Christ does not imply adherence to the conciliar team; this is true above all for the simple faithful and also for secular and regular clerics who, for various reasons, sincerely consider themselves Catholics and recognize the Hierarchy.

Instead, what needs to be clarified is the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them. It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.

Once this point has been clarified, it is evident that it is not the traditional faithful – that is, true Catholics, in the words of Saint Pius X – that must abandon the Church in which they have the full right to remain and from which it would be unfortunate to separate; but rather the Modernists who usurp the Catholic name, precisely because it is only the bureaucratic element that permits them not to be considered on a par with any heretical sect. This claim of theirs serves in fact to prevent them from ending up among the hundreds of heretical movements that over the course of the centuries have believed to be able to reform the Church at their own pleasure, placing their pride ahead of humbly guarding the teaching of Our Lord. But just as it is not possible to claim citizenship in a homeland in which one does not know its language, law, faith and tradition; so it is impossible that those who do not share the faith, morals, liturgy, and discipline of the Catholic Church can arrogate to themselves the right to remain within her and even to ascend the levels of the hierarchy.

The situation is certainly more complex for clerics, who depend hierarchically on their bishop or religious superior, but who at the same time have the right to remain Catholic and be able to celebrate according to the Catholic Rite. On the one hand laity have more freedom of movement in choosing the community to which they turn for Mass, the Sacraments, and religious instruction, but less autonomy because of the fact that they still have to depend on a priest; on the other hand, clerics have less freedom of movement, since they are incardinated in a diocese or order and are subject to ecclesiastical authority, but they have more autonomy because of the fact that they can legitimately decide to celebrate the Mass and administer the Sacraments in the Tridentine Rite and to preach in conformity with sound doctrine. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reaffirmed that faithful and priests have the inalienable right – which cannot be denied – to avail themselves of the liturgy that more perfectly expresses their Catholic Faith. But this right must be used today not only and not so much to preserve the extraordinary form of the rite, but to testify to adherence to the depositum fidei that finds perfect correspondence only in the Ancient Rite.

I daily receive heartfelt letters from priests and religious who are marginalized or transferred or ostracized because of their fidelity to the Church: the temptation to find an ubi consistam [a place to stand] far from the clamor of the Innovators is strong, but we ought to take an example from the persecutions that many saints have undergone, including Saint Athanasius, who offers us a model of how to behave in the face of widespread heresy and persecuting fury. As my venerable brother Bishop Athanasius Schneider has many times recalled, the Arianism that afflicted the Church at the time of the Holy Doctor of Alexandria in Egypt was so widespread among the bishops that it leaves one almost to believe that Catholic orthodoxy had completely disappeared. But it was thanks to the fidelity and heroic testimony of the few bishops who remained faithful that the Church knew how to get back up again. Without this testimony, Arianism would not have been defeated; without our testimony today, Modernism and the globalist apostasy of this pontificate will not be defeated.

It is therefore not a question of working from within the Church or outside it: the winemakers are called to work in the Lord’s Vineyard, and it is there that they must remain even at the cost of their lives; the pastors are called to pastor the Lord’s Flock, to keep the ravenous wolves at bay and to drive away the mercenaries who are not concerned with the salvation of the sheep and lambs.

This hidden and often silent work has been carried out by the Society of Saint Pius X, which deserves recognition for not having allowed the flame of Tradition to be extinguished at a moment in which celebrating the ancient Mass was considered subversive and a reason for excommunication. Its priests have been a healthy thorn in the side for a hierarchy that has seen in them an unacceptable point of comparison for the faithful, a constant reproach for the betrayal committed against the people of God, an inadmissible alternative to the new conciliar path. And if their fidelity made disobedience to the pope inevitable with the episcopal consecrations, thanks to them the Society was able to protect herself from the furious attack of the Innovators and by its very existence it allowed the possibility of the liberalization of the Ancient Rite, which until then was prohibited. Its presence also allowed the contradictions and errors of the conciliar sect to emerge, always winking at heretics and idolaters but implacably rigid and intolerant towards Catholic Truth.

I consider Archbishop Lefebvre an exemplary confessor of the Faith, and I think that by now it is obvious that his denunciation of the Council and the modernist apostasy is more relevant than ever. It should not be forgotten that the persecution to which Archbishop Lefebvre was subjected by the Holy See and the world episcopate served above all as a deterrent for Catholics who were refractory toward the conciliar revolution.

I also agree with the observation of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais about the co-presence of two entities in Rome: the Church of Christ has been occupied and eclipsed by the modernist conciliar structure, which has established itself in the same hierarchy and uses the authority of its ministers to prevail over the Spouse of Christ and our Mother.

The Church of Christ – which not only subsists in the Catholic Church, but is exclusively the Catholic Church – is only obscured and eclipsed by a strange extravagant Church established in Rome, according to the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich. It coexists, like wheat with the tare, in the Roman Curia, in dioceses, in parishes. We cannot judge our pastors for their intentions, nor suppose that all of them are corrupt in faith and morals; on the contrary, we can hope that many of them, hitherto intimidated and silent, will understand, as confusion and apostasy continue to spread, the deception to which they have been subjected and will finally shake off their slumber. There are many laity who are raising their voice; others will necessarily follow, together with good priests, certainly present in every diocese. This awakening of the Church militant – I would dare to call it almost a resurrection – is necessary, urgent and inevitable: no son tolerates his mother being outraged by the servants, or his father being tyrannized by the administrators of his goods. The Lord offers us, in these painful situations, the possibility of being His allies in fighting this holy battle under His banner: the King Who is victorious over error and death permits us to share the honor of triumphal victory and the eternal reward that derives from it, after having endured and suffered with Him.

But in order to deserve the immortal glory of Heaven we are called to rediscover – in an emasculated age devoid of values such as honor, faithfulness to one’s word, and heroism – a fundamental aspect of the faith of every baptized person: the Christian life is a militia, and with the Sacrament of Confirmation we are called to be soldiers of Christ, under whose insignia we must fight. Of course, in most cases it is essentially a spiritual battle, but over the course of history we have seen how often, faced with the violation of the sovereign rights of God and the liberty of the Church, it was also necessary to take up arms: we are taught this by the strenuous resistance to repel the Islamic invasions in Lepanto and on the outskirts of Vienna, the persecution of the Cristeros in Mexico, of the Catholics in Spain, and even today by the cruel war against Christians throughout the world. Never as today can we understand the theological hatred coming from the enemies of God, inspired by Satan. The attack on everything that recalls the Cross of Christ – on Virtue, on the Good and the Beautiful, on purity – must spur us to get up, in a leap of pride, in order to claim our right not only not to be persecuted by our external enemies but also and above all to have strong and courageous pastors, holy and God-fearing, who will do exactly what their predecessors have done for centuries: preach the Gospel of Christ, convert individuals and nations, and expand the Kingdom of the living and true God throughout the world.

We are all called to make an act of Fortitude – a forgotten cardinal virtue, which not by chance in Greek recalls virile strength, ἀνδρεία – in knowing how to resist the Modernists: a resistance that is rooted in Charity and Truth, which are attributes of God.

If you only celebrate the Tridentine Mass and preach sound doctrine without ever mentioning the Council, what can they ever do to you? Throw you out of your churches, perhaps, and then what? No one can ever prevent you from renewing the Holy Sacrifice, even if it is on a makeshift altar in a cellar or an attic, as the refractory priests did during the French Revolution, or as happens still today in China. And if they try to distance you, resist: canon law serves to guarantee the government of the Church in the pursuit of its primary purposes, not to demolish it. Let’s stop fearing that the fault of the schism lies with those who denounce it, and not, instead, with those who carry it out: the ones who are schismatics and heretics are those who wound and crucify the Mystical Body of Christ, not those who defend it by denouncing the executioners!

The laity can expect their ministers to behave as such, preferring those who prove that they are not contaminated by present errors. If a Mass becomes an occasion of torture for the faithful, if they are forced to assist at sacrileges or to support heresies and ramblings unworthy of the House of the Lord, it is a thousand times preferable to go to a church where the priest celebrates the Holy Sacrifice worthily, in the rite given to us by Tradition, with preaching in conformity with sound doctrine. When parish priests and bishops realize that the Christian people demand the Bread of Faith, and not the stones and scorpions of the neo-church, they will lay aside their fears and comply with the legitimate requests of the faithful. The others, true mercenaries, will show themselves for what they are and will be able to gather around them only those who share their errors and perversions. They will be extinguished by themselves: the Lord dries up the swamp and makes the land on which brambles grow arid; he extinguishes vocations in corrupt seminaries and in convents rebellious to the Rule.

The lay faithful today have a sacred task: to comfort good priests and good bishops, gathering like sheep around their shepherds. Give them hospitality, help them, console them in their trials. Create community in which murmuring and division do not predominate, but rather fraternal charity in the bond of Faith. And since in the order established by God – κόσμος – subjects owe obedience to authority and cannot do otherwise than resist it when it abuses its power, no fault will be attributed to them for the infidelity of their leaders, on whom rests the very serious responsibility for the way in which they exercise the vicarious power which has been given to them. We must not rebel, but oppose; we must not be pleased with the errors of our pastors, but pray for them and admonish them respectfully; we must not question their authority but the way in which they use it.

I am certain, with a certainty that comes to me from Faith, that the Lord will not fail to reward our fidelity, after having punished us for the faults of the men of the Church, granting us holy priests, holy bishops, holy cardinals, and above all a holy Pope. But these saints will arise from our families, from our communities, from our churches: families, communities, and churches in which the grace of God must be cultivated with constant prayer, with the frequenting of Holy Mass and the Sacraments, with the offering of sacrifices and penances that the Communion of Saints permits us to offer to the Divine Majesty in order to expiate our sins and those of our brethren, including those who exercise authority. The laity have a fundamental role in this, guarding the Faith within their families, in such a way that our young people who are educated in love and in the fear of God may one day be responsible fathers and mothers, but also worthy ministers of the Lord, His heralds in the male and female religious orders, and His apostles in civil society.

The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
September 1, 2020               

Source               

Comments invited…                                    

3 September: Feast of St Pius X: Greatest Pope of 20 Century – “Miracle Saint”…

The light that shone in the Church during eleven years of pontificate was extinguished on August 20, 1914. Pope Pius X fell sick on the Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady (Aug. 15) and received extreme unction and Holy Viaticum before dying. He was buried August 23, and his tomb immediately became the object of a popular devotion. 

Santo Subito

Pope Pius X’s reputation of sanctity was immediate. This was undoubtedly due to his qualities as a “miracle-saint” but also on account of the respect he inspired by his supernatural bearing. A number of cardinals, archbishops, bishops, vicars and prefects apostolic, pious societies, groups of Catholic Action, Catholic universities, and many of the faithful quickly wrote expressing their desire to see Pius X proclaimed a saint without delay. Thus in a letter dated September 24, 1916, Msgr. Leo, Bishop of Nicotera and Tropea, speaks of “a great saint and a great pope.”

The flood of pilgrims was such that the Vatican crypt could no longer contain them all. As a result, Cardinal Merry del Val, archpriest of St. Peter’s Basilica, had a small metal cross set into the floor of the basilica so that the faithful might kneel down directly above the tomb. The cross bore the inscription Pius Papa X.

Cardinal Merry del Val, the former Secretary of State of Pope Pius X celebrated Holy Mass near the tomb on the 20th of every month, until February 20, 1930, when he did so for the last time–six days before his own death.   Click here to read more…

Comment: 

Do you agree with the Pope’s claim about weak Catholics?   Can there be any doubt?  Is there anything, in particular, in the above article which provides insights into the greatness of Pius X?  Share your thoughts…

Catholic Church: Why the Scandalous Compliance in Covid-19 “Crisis”?

One of the most shocking aspects of the Covid-19 lockdown, with its serious restrictions on personal freedoms, both civil and religious, is the way in which the Church has co-operated – from the Pope down. No questions asked, simply uncritical obedience, of the kind not even expected of religious men and women in monasteries.  The language of docility is writ large on Catholic diocesan, and even traditional, websites.

Priests are embracing the Government restrictions, even as we are “permitted” to return to Mass.   Thus we see limits on the numbers allowed to attend, the use of hand sanitizers, etc. 

The traditional Fraternity of St Peter (FSSP) – certainly in Edinburgh – is going along, hook, line and sinker, with Government policy: everyone but the priest  has to wear a face mask, Mass will be shorter, people must book for Mass because only 40 permitted etc.  Click here to read the entire scandalous nonsense.  Informed Catholics are increasingly scandalised at the co-operation (for which read “complicity) of Churchmen in this fabricated crisis…

Email…

One reader emailed as follows a day or so ago…

…Anyway, my question relates to the ‘official’ line taken by the SSPX in regard to the crisis in general.  An acquaintance has stated that  they were told ‘…it’s not a persecution, nothing to do with Fatima and the general advice was to just do what the Govt says and wait for everything to go back to normal…’.  Now, do the SSPX honestly and truly believe that?  Surely not.  No-one else seems to, so why should they.  Do their sermons ever mention anything along these lines, and is anything said in general conversations with the faithful; assuming they do actually talk to people.  I don’t know anyone attending a Society Mass Centre at present so I can’t ask anyone else.

In another email, a reader commented that her Society priest rubbished the idea of any connection with Fatima, opined that it was irresponsible to promote that idea and that queuing at supermarkets was no big deal – a small inconvenience.  Maybe for him with nothing much to do but out here in the big wide world it is anything but a minor inconvenience.  And yet another Catholic, who watched the SSPX live-stream Masses in America, was shocked to see the priest dipping his fingers into water after giving each Host to parishioners at Holy Communion time.  What?!**   

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

However, there is no official statement that I can find on the SSPX UK website, although I was delighted to read the following heartening comment from the District Superior, Fr Robert Brucciani in his editorial in the District magazine, Ite Missa Est, July-August edition –  Heartening, in that it shows that Fr Brucciani is certainly aware of the sinister nature of this contrived crisis…

 

 

Father Robert Brucciani writes…

My dear brethren, There is a collective sense that the world is on the cusp of dramatic change. Already, the Covid-19 crisis and recent civil unrest in  many countries – both bearing hallmarks of sinister orchestration – have been the occasion of mass social conditioning and a dramatic encroachment upon religious and civil rights.

Regrettably, it seems that more of the same is to follow. The mainstream media are creating expectation with expressions like “the new normal”, economic meltdown is imminent, and the World Economic Forum – an organisation for the minions of the New World Order – have launched an initiative called “The Great Reset” which seems to augur the imposition of more direct individual control, ecologism, and the culture of death upon the entire planet.

Meanwhile, God is ignored in all this upheaval and men of good will are finding themselves being manoeuvred into making a choice between supporting the “new normal” of the cultural Marxists or face social and economic exclusion.

Our hope should not fail, however, for the evil that is visiting upon us is the occasion of great heroism on the part of those who stand firm in the Catholic faith… End of Extract – read entire Editorial here

Thus, with such clear thinking on the political – and evil – nature of the Covid-19 “crisis”, it is incomprehensible to Catholics aware of the very real crisis in the Church, that the SSPX should appear to accept, at any level, Government restrictions on our religious freedom, choosing to blame the diocesan Bishops for the closure of churches and continuing restrictions on the practice of the Faith.   We need to see concrete evidence of the “great heroism” of which Fr Brucciani speaks.  Don’t we all need to risk falling foul of the Government by refusing to keep the rules which are leading us into the “new normal”?   Or would that be to lack the virtue of prudence?   I wonder what St Thomas More would advise? 

The SSPX does not have to obey the local Bishops on this, that’s for sure. They can’t blame the Bishops.  So, the question remains, why do they? And why is there no dissent among the best of the diocesan clergy – I heard from another reader that the “traditional” parish in the north of Glasgow, is permitting only 50 people to attend Sunday Masses.  

With talk of a second wave (to be followed by a third and fourth wave…) there is clearly not going to be any end to this fake crisis.  Somebody in the Church is going to have to make the first move and say “We will not serve!”    Why can’t it be the Society of St Pius X, established precisely because its Founder could not, in conscience, accept the new normal concocted at Vatican II: “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 your 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.’ (Archbishop Lefebvre: Open Letter to Confused Catholics, p.163).

Comments invited…

 

Excommunication: Archbishop Lefebvre & Bishop Pat Buckley… Spot the Difference!

As promised in our July Newsletter – which you can download from our website here –  we are launching a brief discussion on the matter of two prominent 20th century excommunications: that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Founder of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) and Bishop Pat Buckley…  A brief overview of each situation follows: 

Archbishop Lefebvre…

From the SSPX website…

Following the repeated requests of several young men seeking a traditional priestly formation, Archbishop Lefebvre opened a new seminary in Econe, Switzerland. The local ordinary, Bishop Francois Charriere, gave his blessing for this work, and on November 1, 1970 the Priestly Society of St. Pius X was born with the approval of the Church.

A brief account of the history of the SSPX can be read here. One detail, however, should be added to that general account, as it pertains primarily to Archbishop Lefebvre’s involvement in the Coetus Internationalis Patrum. During the Second Vatican Council, an important friendship developed between Marcel Lefebvre and Antonio de Castro Mayer, bishop of Campos (Brazil). These two shared ideas at the various Coetus functions and kept in contact long after the close of the council. They both refused to implement the modernist teachings of Vatican II and in 1983 jointly authored an open letter to the pope lamenting the numerous errors which seemed to infect Rome. When Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four new bishops in 1988, Bishop de Castro Mayer assisted as co-consecrator.  To read more, click here

From The Remnant website…

Sadly, in the current catastrophe that is the Post-Conciliar Church, some blinded men, instead of joining the fight against the heresy, apostasy, and de facto schism around us, insist on melodramatically condemning, with the most condescending and arrogant invective, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Although any excommunication that was previously levied against the living bishops of the SSPX has long since been remitted, some hardened Neo-Catholics insist that Abp. Lefebvre himself remains perpetually excommunicated, one Neo-Catholic priest even going so far as to presume his damnation. Thus the same Neo-Catholics who tell us that the Church’s perennial teachings on religious liberty, ecumenism, and collegiality are confined to past times and changeable, treat a 1988 letter from a pope as if its infallibility ranked somewhere between Dogma and Holy Writ.

The 1988 letter I am referring to, of course, is John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei adflictaTwenty-six years later, Neo-Catholics cling to this letter as it represents, in their minds anyway, the one infallible document that ensures Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre can never be rehabilitated or declared a Saint in the future. As usual, the irony of the Neo-Catholics, on the one hand preaching the Mass of Pius V is changeable at the whim of future popes, while on the other hand preaching John Paul II’s excommunication is certainly valid and binding for all time, escapes them entirely.  To read the entire article on The Remnant website, click here

Bishop Pat Buckley…

Google Father or Bishop Pat Buckley and the description “rebel priest” comes up… Here, in his own words, is why he was dismissed from his parish

 

Later, Fr Buckley was consecrated a bishop, as reported in the Irish Times: 

“The rebel cleric, Bishop Pat Buckley, has excommunicated himself from the Catholic Church by being consecrated as a bishop, a Hierarchy spokesman has said.

The church spokesman said the ordination of Bishop Buckley by the Tridentine bishop, Dr Michael Cox, was “valid but unlawful” (under Canon law).”  To read rest of this report click  here

Comment: 

The adjective often used to describe both bishops is “rebel”.  Archbishop Lefebvre is well known for his work to preserve Catholic Tradition against the innovations following Vatican II, while Bishop Buckley is well known for his dissent from Catholic teachings, such as the prohibition on divorce and remarriage.  Archbishop Lefebvre fought to keep the Church within Catholic Tradition, while Bishop Buckley seeks to achieve changes in the Church which will meet the perceived needs of contemporary Catholics living in a “liberal” society.  

So, check out the headline – IS there any difference between the two excommunications?   

Why Question Only Vatican II And Not Trent Or Vatican I? Archbishop Viganò…

Below, extracts from a June 2020 interview about Vatican II with Archbishop Vigano – From Catholic Culture

Archbishop Vigano: I do not think that it is necessary to demonstrate that the Council represents a problem: the simple fact that we are raising this question about Vatican II and not about Trent or Vatican I seems to me to confirm a fact that is obvious and recognized by everyone. In reality, even those who defend the Council with swords drawn find themselves doing so apart from all the other previous ecumenical councils, of which not even one was ever said to be a pastoral council. And note that they call it “the Council” par excellence, as if it was the one and only council in the entire history of the Church, or at least considering it as an unicum whether because of the formulation of its doctrine or for the authority of its magisterium. It is a council that, differently from all those that preceded it, called itself a pastoral council, declaring that it did not want to propose any new doctrine, but which in fact created a distinction between before and after, between a dogmatic council and a pastoral council, between unequivocal canons and empty talk, between anathema sit and winking at the world…

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

You ask me: “How were all the Council fathers deceived?” I reply by drawing on my experience of those years and the words of my brothers with whom I engaged in discussion at that time. No one could have imagined that right in the heart of the ecclesial body there were hostile forces so powerful and organized that they could succeed in rejecting the perfectly orthodox preparatory schemas that had been prepared by Cardinals and Prelates with a reliable fidelity to the Church, replacing them with a bundle of cleverly disguised errors behind long-winded and deliberately equivocal speeches.

No one could have believed that, right under the vaults of the Vatican Basilica, the estates-general could be convoked that would decree the abdication of the Catholic Church and the inauguration of the Revolution…

The Council Fathers were the object of a sensational deception, of a fraud that was cleverly perpetrated by having recourse to the most subtle means: they found themselves in the minority in the linguistic groups, excluded from meetings convened at the last moment, pressured into giving their placet by making them believe that the Holy Father wanted it. And what the innovators did not succeed in obtaining in the Conciliar Aula, they achieved in the Commissions and Committees, thanks also to the activism of theologians and periti who were accredited and acclaimed by a powerful media machine. There is a vast array of studies and documents that testify to this systematic malicious mens [mentality] of some of the Council Fathers on the one hand, and the naïve optimism or carelessness of other well-intentioned Council Fathers on the other. The activity of the Coetus Internationalis Patrum [opposing the innovators] could do little or nothing, when the violations of the rules by the progressives were ratified at the Sacred Table itself [by the Pope].  Click here to read entire interview

Comments invited…   

SSPX: Church Militant Guilty of Peddling Sleaze – Catholic Truth


       

Michael Voris, Church Militant

Editor, Catholic Truth, writes…

Our blogger, Athanasius, has now studied the recent articles about the SSPX published by the American organisation known as Church Militant (CM), which were brought to our attention recently. 

To describe those articles as “sleaze” is an understatement, by any standards. Their most recent piece can be read here but we warn readers that there are descriptions of graphic sexual deviancy published therein, and so, since Athanasius’s article below is perfectly understandable without the need to read the CM articles, we do not recommend visiting the link; we supply it only in the interests of necessary documentation for those who require to see the writings at source. 

A Response to the Church Militant Reports on Former SSPX Priests Accused of Homosexual Abuse…

Having read the sexual abuse trilogy produced by Church Militant against the SSPX, one question above all remains to be answered: Has this been a noble cause for justice or an exercise in vengeance?

The first step to answering this question is to ask another… Given that this handful of accused homosexual abuser priests are no longer in the SSPX, and given the new, very strict guidelines that all religious communities are obliged to follow concerning child safety, is there anything constructive to be gained from this trilogy?

The answer is clearly and emphatically no;   there are no young men or children presently at risk in the SSPX and no predators presently at large within its priestly structure of 500 – 600 clerics. Hence, it seems more likely that this is a set of historical accounts written up with a view to doing more harm than good.

I think anyone with a knowledge of Church Militant’s very deep seated hatred for the SSPX over many years will be hard pushed to imagine that justice was ever the motive here, bearing in mind that Michael Voris is himself a former sexual pervert who, unjustly in my opinion, was forced to admit as much in public before others revealed his past sins with a view to discrediting him.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Founder, SSPX

I mention this because it seems strange to me that a man who had himself suffered such injustice would be so ready to reveal the sins, or perceived sins, of SSPX superiors, not even sparing the holy memory of the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre.

That superiors within the SSPX may have failed in the past to adequately address predator priest issues is sadly all too familiar in the Church. How many times have we heard of superiors failing to take appropriate action against abusers for fear of scandalising the faithful, or simply because they were negligent due to incredulity, failing to believe what the victims’ parents themselves were apparently failing to believe from their own children’s accounts? Sadly, it is a very common theme.

Whatever the reason for past failures in the SSPX, scandalous as they are, it is fairly certain that the superiors themselves were not sexually deviant men intent on enabling abusive priests. At worst they were irresponsible, perhaps even criminally so, God alone knows. No one will escape the divine justice, that’s for sure, although, thankfully, God judges by intent and not by perception.

Speaking of which, I am fairly sure that Church Militant did not intend by its graphic revelations to enable paedophiles, as I suspect its detailed descriptions may well do. I am no psychiatrist but it seems to me that such deviants may be drawn like magnets to stories revealing graphic accounts of child sexual abuse, if only to pleasure their sick minds with whatever images the Church Militant accounts conjure up for them.

Has anyone thought about this? Do these people not realise that the Church has a very good reason for referring simply to impure acts rather than detailing those acts in a graphic way? But then I suppose when the end is vengeance you really have to be graphic enough in detail to elicit an emotional response from readers, even if some happen to be deviants whose emotional response is altogether different from that which was intended! Graphic details of child sexual abuse are for courts of law, not for public platforms where anyone can read them and be incited to offend.

Worse still is the possibility that weaker souls could be lost to the faith as a result of such revelations, as happened en masse in Ireland when the secular media reported its stories on clerical abuse and the failures of superiors, demanding severe and immediate punishment for all who failed.


I wonder if the authors at Church Militant have considered that if just one immortal soul is lost as a result of the utterly depressing and demoralising stories they have published, stories that will result in no natural or supernatural good whatsoever, then there is every possibility that they themselves may lose their souls as a result.

Had children still been at risk in the SSPX then there would have been every good reason for Church Militant to highlight the fact, but that’s not the case and they know it.

So what is the motive? Well, given that Our Lord suffered the ultimate injustice in this world, even to the point of being betrayed by one of His own, the motive is clearly not justice in the Catholic sense that teaches us that divine justice is unavoidable, infallible and far stricter. No, this is vengeance, a desire to do harm to a priestly fraternity which, while it has suffered its share of “filth in the Church”, to quote Pope Benedict XVI, is nevertheless in general a good and holy institution founded by God through His servant Archbishop Lefebvre in a time of great crisis in the Church.

If it were not for the SSPX there would be no Traditional Mass in the Church today, no Traditional priesthood, no Traditional doctrine, all would have been swept aside by now. Had Church Militant included this vital objective observation, along with a balancing reminder that the greater majority of SSPX priests are good and holy priests, then I might have been inclined to believe that the intention is to serve some form of natural justice. But no, it is a biased piece of sleaze reporting that benefits no one other than bitter people and perhaps the aforementioned paedophiles who may enjoy, if such is the word, the filth CM has printed for their deviant pleasure.

That natural justice for genuine victims of clerical abuse within the SSPX or anywhere else may yet be possible, is for the proper legal authorities to assess, for they, not Church Militant, are solely empowered to investigate and report in such criminal matters.

In the meantime, anticipating the response of Church Militant and anyone foolish enough to trust its motives, I lay down the following challenge:

Show me one good to come from this sleaze story that will truly benefit victims, the Church or any individual soul, naturally or supernaturally, which could be said to equate with true Catholic justice.

That’s all I ask, just one concrete proof that this was about true Catholic justice and not the secular worldly parody of justice that convicts without trial and demands public humiliation for all who are perceived to have failed in their duty to protect.  The author of the above article is Martin Blackshaw, who lives in Scotland  –  aka our blogger, Athanasius. 

Comment:

 The traditional calendar, names today, Friday 8th May, as the Feast of the Apparition of St Michael the Archangel. Our editorial comment on this subject concludes, therefore, with the recitation of the prayer to  St Michael, which we suggest be offered for Michael Voris and his team, i.e. all those involved in the work of his organisation, Church Militant…

Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in the day of battle.
Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of he Devil;
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray,
And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Hosts,
by the power of God, cast down into Hell, Satan, and all wicked spirits,
Who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

 

Priest on Scandal of Denying The One True Religion: Outstanding Interview

Comment: 

Fr David Sherry is an Irish priest of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) who served in Scotland for a year before he was re-assigned to Canada.  We have very happy memories of him in Glasgow – indeed, one of my Great-Nephews received his First Holy Communion from Fr Sherry, with a photograph on their fridge as a permanent reminder! 

Topics for discussion in the above lengthy interview with Fr Sherry of the SSPX, include: 

1. What is the SSPX
2. Who was [Archbishop] Lefebvre
3. Was he guilty of a schismatic act when he ordained 4 bishops or was it necessary due to a state of emergency?
4. Does the Vatican allow Catholics to attend SSPX masses to fulfil their Sunday obligation?
5. Is the status of the SSPX currently canonically irregular or schismatic?
6. Will there be an agreement with the Vatican soon, in your estimation?
7. What are some of the problems with Vatican II?
8. What are your thoughts on the Pachamama ceremony in the Vatican Gardens?
9. Is the Novus Ordo valid?
10. What should a Catholic do if an SSPX chapel is not available near them?

Share your thoughts on Father’s very clear explanation of the work of the Society in the context of the current unprecedented crisis in the Church.  What possible reason can anyone offer for continuing to avoid the SSPX Masses/Sacraments in this worsening time of trial within the Church? 

For more conferences, visit the St Peter’s Hamburg blog