TradNews Roundup

*I'm happy that a computer glitch caused the TradNews Roundup to be delayed, because I can now post this link at the very top. THE TRUTH ABOUT MAXIMILIAN KRAH. And in the spirit of crushing stupid rumors from certain internet forums...

*Here is an extremely revealing Tradition Days' Conference address by Bishop Alfonso de Galarreta, SSPX. In addition to revealing some details about Rome's refusal to grant canonical recognition to the Society of St. Pius X, His Excellency makes clear his support for Bishop Fellay and the General Council; so much for those who think Bishop de Galarreta is in the "Williamson Camp". It is apparent that there isn't the division in the SSPX that some have been fantasizing about.

*It's official: Bishop Richard Williamson has been removed from the SSPX. There's a regular tizzy over this at CathInfo. There are no little conspiracy theories, not the least of which was one that speculated a secret deal has already been struck between Rome and the SSPX. As I've said before, the only people who think there will be a Rome-SSPX deal are the folks over at CathInfo. HOWEVER, maybe there are one or two people in the Vatican too...

*The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei releases this rather positive update on the Rome/SSPX "discussion", which is characterized as a "positive process". In his latest "Eleison Comments", Bishop Williamson speculated that his "exclusion may or may not have been a pre-condition set by Rome for a Rome-SSPX agreement, but in any case it certainly favours one." Given the sudden flowery words of the PCED on the heels of Bishop Williamson's exclusion, I think I might just be inclined to agree with His Excellency. Unlike Bishop Williamson, however, I don't think this is bad.

*Some of my friends have long ago dismissed Cardinal Francis George as a hopeless case, but I've always thought that given his current medical condition (please continue to pray for this Prince of the Church) that he is now in a position to be more truthful than others of equal office. Recently, and I think significantly, Cardinal George re-iterated his dire prediction about secularism and a coming persecution of the Church in America. The recent Synod on the "New Evangelization" (a phrase that is tired and worn out) discussed the obstacle of secularism in the Western world. Cardinal Donald Wuerl upon exiting the synod described secularism as a destructive "tsunami" that wiped away "foundational concepts" such as family, marriage, right and wrong, the common good, and objective order. Maybe it's time to set aside all the hermeneutics and give Tradition a try as an antidote to the ravages of secularism.

*Could it be that our prelates are simply too stubborn to concede the plain and simple fact that on the 50th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council that they are celebrating a catastrophe?

*God's wrath against the Modernists, or just a strange coincidence?

*Obama's dream of a perverted sex paradise where women and girls, at any post-pubescent age, are completely objectified and used solely for male gratification has become a reality in France.

*The truth about contraception:

Thank you!

I'd like to take a moment to thank those who have used the donation button in the side-bar. You have all been very generous, and it is certainly appreciated. This Saturday, I and my family will offer a Rosary for all those who have donated. (Donations are used to secure hardback books that can be transposed to an electronic format, by typing, for the "Collect of the Day" posts.)

Many of you may not know this, but all the texts taken from Guéranger's The Liturgical Year, St. John Vianney's Sermons, and St. Francis de Sales' Introduction to a Devout Life are all typed out by hand from books. Quite often there are typos. I would also like to thank all those readers who are kind enough to send me notification of these typos. Your contribution to this weblog is a very significant one, and so greatly appreciated.

Lastly, I would like to thank my son, who has recently been very instrumental in helping to type out many of these texts. He's not quite as nimble at the keyboard as his old man, but his help has been significant, nonetheless.

Every year I hope to contribute more content to the "Collect of the Day" posts. However, I've been very pressed for time, lately, as there has been a lot going on here in South Bend, so I apologize for not adding as much content over the last few weeks as I would have liked.

Bishop Williamson has been removed from the Society

Rorate Cæli is reporting that Bishop Richard Williamson has been removed from the Society of St. Pius X after "repeated entreaties" by the Society's leadership.

Our prayers are with Bishop Williamson, and also with the leadership of the Society that were forced to take these measures. May God continue to bless the bishops and priests of the Society and their ministry, and may our Blessed Lord's prayer that all be one come to fruition soon in regards to Bishop Williamson.

Incarnation Catholic Church, Tampa, Florida

I'm pleased to announce the next stage in the ever growing presence of the Traditional Latin Mass at Incarnation Catholic Church in Tampa, Florida.

Beginning in the month of November, Fr. Philip Clement will offer the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite twice a month at Incarnation Catholic Church. Beginning on October 28th, Fr. Philip Clement will offer a series of seminars on the Traditional Latin Mass. For more details, please visit this link at Incarnation Catholic Church.  You will find a registration for the seminars at that link, as well as some videos.

In this year of faith, it is critically important that traditionalists waste no opportunity to affect a love for Holy Mother Church, her traditional and authentic liturgical expressions, and traditional devotions and spiritual exercises. Please pray for Fr. Clement as he promotes the Traditional Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in his parish. If you live in the Tampa area, please attend, and please do your part to help promote it. There are many ways to help promote the Traditional Latin Mass in Tampa. For example, Fr. Clement is in need of furnishings for the Mass. God will not be outdone in generosity!

Finally, I would like to once again thank Fr. Clement, and Fr. Suszynski, the pastor of Incarnation Catholic Church, for making the Traditional Latin Mass available for this parish and for the people of the Tampa, Florida area. What a generous and loving heart! May God bless you, and may God bless your ministry!

Traditional Dominican Vespers

Courtesy CFN.

Cardinal Dolan is no Jesus... in fact, Romney got much closer!

In regards to the Al Smith Dinner, for the record, despite all Cardinal Dolan's "what would Jesus do?" rhetoric, Dolan never once challenged President Obama about his HHS (“Contraception”) Mandate, which induces government coercion to force Catholics to act against their consciences and religious beliefs and be a party to another person’s sin, nor did Dolan say a word in contradiction to the Obama administration’s promotion of abortion and homosexual fake marriage, both here and abroad. For his part, Obama never mentioned these things either. Far from showing any kind of repentance or remorse, nothing, certainly, at the level of bathing our Blessed Lord’s feet with his tears, the most evil man to ever be President of the United States instead laughed it up with Cardinal Dolan, the same Cardinal who insists so much upon his own Christ-like-ness, like the two were old friends, even colleagues. There are plenty of pictures floating around the various news outlets demonstrating as much.

I’m searching the Gospels right now, trying find where our Blessed Lord is portrayed as a friend and colleague with the Scribes and Sadducees and Pharisees and Romans and sinners. Is there a place where our Blessed Lord failed to mention “sin no more” or even helped a sinner or Pharisee or Scribe or Sadducee in their endeavors? I’m coming up empty so far, but I might have something here… you know?... the part where Jesus is invited into Pontius Pilate’s pretorium one Friday morning.  Uh, no… there’s not much similarity there, either.

However, there was one man at the Al Smith Dinner that did challenge President Obama over the HHS (“Contraception”) Mandate, and Obama’s abortion position. It wasn't Cardinal Dolan, of course. Was it some Catholic priest or layman who had been invited? Was it someone from Cardinal Dolan’s chancellery? Perhaps it was some Catholic politician or businessman or some other influential Catholic at the Dinner?

NO! It was a Mormon who challenged the President on these things. Ironically, the Mormon church has no official position on abortion and allows for artificial contraception. Yet the only person at this so-called “Catholic” Dinner to challenge Obama on either issue was the Mormon, Mitt Romney. Romney isn’t even 100% pro-life, yet he managed to outdo a crowd of so-called “pro-life” Catholics. Has there ever been a better example of the moral and religious bankruptcy of the modern novus ordo mainstream?

Granted, Romney’s sarcasm and levity concerning such subjects was hardly Christ-like. However, he did manage to get much closer in that regard than Cardinal Dolan and all the other Catholics at the Al Smith Dinner, and that ought to be a wake-up call for all you Catholics sitting on the novus ordo/traditionalist fence. Do you really want to cast your lot with the majority that has sold out the faith to such a point that they are upstaged in Christ-like behavior by a Mormon? Mormons aren’t even Christian!

Cardinal Dolan was wrong when he said this Dinner showed America and the Catholic Church at their best. No, Your Eminence, what this Dinner showed at its best was the American novus ordo mainstream, which is a pathetic caricature of authentic Catholicism.

TradNews Roundup

*Starting on a positive note, our friends at Rorate Cæli report about the Clear Creek ordination, and there's a link there to some really nice images for your edification.

*There's a huge dust-up in the SSPX over rumors and allegations regarding Bishop Williamson either being expelled, or being on the verge of being expelled. And here and here. But then, again, does anyone really know what is going on other than those directly responsible in the Society? Should we even care? I've never really had a soft-spot for Bishop Williamson. While he has said and written things that I find reasonable, sound, and convincing, I've never really bothered to look all that closely into the man and his thought. Knowing what I know, I will take Fr. Pfluger's word for it. (That's a great interview for so many reasons!) Having read the commentary about the Bishop Williamson dust-up over at the forum, CathInfo (which I will not link to as many priests in the SSPX have asked the faithful not to go there), it seems to me that many of Bishop Williamson's supporters are dead set against collegiality, until, however, the alternative becomes inconvenient, then they sound just as collegiate as any novus ordo bishop or liberal theologian (replete with accusations of tyranny and dictatorship!). At any rate, the weight of the SSPX is felt through the priests of the Society who are out in the vineyard, laboring away in the muck and grime, in the trenches, so to speak, and it's probably a good thing I've never really had much to do with the bishops of the Society.

*Fr. Schmidberger, SSPX questions the "use" of Summorum Pontificum now that Archbishop Müller has been appointed to head up the CDF. I'm not so sure I can agree that the motu proprio now has no "good use", especially in relation to the greater traditional community. Müller is definitely a setback, but then again, are traditionalists used to anything less than setbacks?

The Obama Campaign got what it wanted. We will see, come November 7th,
just how much blood is on Cardinal Dolan's hands.

*On the eve of the next great scandal we learn that Cardinal Dolan was torn over his decision to glad hand the most evil man to ever be POTUS. This just goes to show how messed up our modern bishops are. They know what the right thing is, but they just can't seem to make themselves do it. For example, is it "should" or "can't"? Shoulda, woulda, coulda... big deal!

*At any rate, Cardinal Dolan had his big shin-dig... organized by Leftists? What are we supposed to think about the novus ordo mainstream? I find it sickening that Cardinal Dolan equated the Obama-invite to the Incarnation of our Blessed Lord. Was he trying to be funny, or is he really that egotistical? Does he believe that what he did last night holds any resemblance at all to what our Blessed Lord, in His teachings, in His miracles, in His Sacrifice on Calvary? Not once did Dolan demand that Obama stop sinning. Not once did Dolan explicate Catholic teaching regarding contraception or abortion, or how someone can be a party to another's sin. Not once did Dolan overturn some tables and starting beating people with a whip! Really! What would our Blessed Lord say to this? Cardinal Dolan was happy to crack some jokes instead of being the Christ-figure he's billed himself as being. There was absolutely nothing Christ-like about Dolan at this glad-handing event, but his hubris in thinking it was...? Now that speaks volumes about everything that is wrong with the novus ordo mainstream. It appears to be all about hubris and gratuitous self-serving. The only qualification for sainthood anymore is how much a person can contribute to the confusion. It's hard to believe that Dolan or any of his other friends can be billed as humble. Since when is humility marked by abrogating one's responsibilities to his office and to his faith? These church leaders will admit to any number of "mistakes", except, of course, for the mistake of wrecking the Church Militant in the wake of VCII.


*A lot of people have criticized me for my "promotion" of the GOP in the upcoming election. However, I'm not promoting any political Party here at Ars Orandi. Criticizing Obama? OH YEAH! He's a Socialist, and Socialism is the secular arm of Satanism. On the other hand, those in the Romney camp are no bundles of conservative joy, either. Mitt Romney (whose religion has no official position in regards to abortion) and (least it be forgotten, a CATHOLIC) Paul Ryan, believe, apparently, that murdering an innocent human being in the mother's womb ought "to be an option" in cases of... well, does the circumstance really matter? There is no justification! There simply is no good reason to kill an innocent, unborn child.

*However, this is the best we are going to get this election cycle, so I have to agree with Mr. Voris on this one.
*I'm ending this week's TradNews Roundup with this, because we all need good news, and we all need to understand that Tradition is advancing, even among diocesan bishops. Bishop Alexander Sample (a former classmate of mine, by the way, from my Josh days) sermon for the Pontifical Mass of the Call To Holiness Conference. Please listen to this sermon, calmly, prayerfully. The news of this world is news about a passing reality. God is in His heaven.

Year of Faith / Year of Tradition: Introduction

Fifty years ago today the liberal Cardinal Achille Lienart humiliated the good and holy Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani by turning Cardinal Ottaviani's  microphone off during his plea to the bishops to remain faithful to the preparatory documents for the Council. It was on this day, the third day of that Council, that the liberals staged the most devastating Leftist take-over in history.

Fifty years later empty churches, closed parishes and parochial schools, the complete failure of the Church to be a sign of contradiction to a culture, which, as a result, is sunk in materialism, hedonism and depravity, are all signs of the rotten fruits of this Leftist take-over. This crisis in faith has had devastating moral implications. Children have been sexually molested by priests who were protected by their "open minded" Vatican II bishops. Artificial contraception is commonly used by Catholics. Over half of all people who call themselves Catholic support legal protection for abortion. The litany of ills that afflict the modern Church Militant as a result of the liberal changes of the 20th century could go on and on. The Church Militant is marred in a deep and scandalous crisis of faith sparked by the acceptance and ascendancy of Modernism in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. The Mass has been turned in a farcical caricature of Catholic worship, that is little more than a Protestant service. The validity of the Sacrament only serves to make the situation worse, as thousands of unbelievers in practice, who never go to Confession, who deny outright a plethora of de fide teachings, make one sacrilegious Communion after another.

Tradition, though, is on the rise, because God will not abandon His Church forever, and he is calling us, the Remnant of Catholic traditionalists, to be the agents of the Holy Ghost. Begin today to rise from the destruction wrought that day fifty years ago, by heeding the urging of the Holy Ghost to greater holiness, austerity and devotion. By our prayers, virtue and sacrifice, give bold witness to the authentically traditional Catholic alternative to the empty promises of that sad and pathetic generation of Cardinal Lienart, who left the Church Militant in such dire straights.

Criticism of those things that caused the crisis will have its proper place in the battle as this year of faith progresses. However, it is prayer, sacrifice and growth in virtue, with Our Lady's scapular as our shield and her Rosary as our sword, that will make this year of faith the year in which Tradition rises more splendid than ever from the ashes of the post-Vatican II ruin.

For the Lord will not cast off his people: neither will he forsake his own inheritance. (Ps 93. 14)

Moynihan on the Pope and the Traditional Latin Mass

I thought Dr. Moynihan's latest "Report" was an interesting read, and I would like to share it with those of you who visit Ars Orandi. Please click here to read it.

Dr. Moynihan believes that Pope Benedict XVI will offer the Traditional Latin Mass during the "year of faith". I think he couldn't be more wrong. There's simply no indication that the pope has any attention of offering the Old Mass, and I think Moynihan hints at it in his own piece.

Of particular note, I would like to point out Dr. Moynihan's comments regarding the perception of many people that the Traditional Latin Mass is a "standard" of the "ancien regime", which can be understood as the pre-French Revolution, Frankish Catholicism, exemplified by the late Baroque/Rococo period and sentimentalism. I appreciate his thoughts, but Dr. Moynihan really shows his age in this regard. While it is true that Leftists have turned a love for the Traditional Latin Mass and traditional Catholicism into a kind of caricature, the same is not true for traditionalists. The vast majority of traditionalists are either too young to remember the remnants of those who longed for the ancien regime, or are too old to be that foolish. Traditionalists aren't the reactionaries we are so often painted as being; we simply have a zealous love for traditional Catholicism, an ardent love for the entirety of the Catholic faith. Our zeal for the faith is often misconstrued or willfully misrepresented for manipulative purposes as reactionary. We can be sure the only people who regard the Traditional Latin Mass as a "standard" of the ancien regime are those entrenched on the Left.

Many on the Left paint an unflattering picture of traditionalism as merely simplistic, pietistic, unsophisticated and pedestrian, and in doing so often lump a good many saints and brilliant Catholic thinkers from the time of Napoleon all the way through to the advent of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement, into this unfair caricature. Of course, this includes Dom Prosper Guéranger whose work has had to endure no little unfair criticism, if not outright ridicule, from the movers of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement. Rehabilitating the liturgical thinking of Guéranger for Catholics today depends in large measure on freeing his work from the Leftist caricature of the ancien regime he is accused of resurrecting. He needs to be revealed for the brilliantly logical and spiritually insightful man that he was, whose work, far from attempting to prop up a sentimentalism that is now identified with the ancien regime, encapsulated the whole of liturgical history and spirituality, from the Church Fathers all the way down to the Tridentine Reformation.

On a different note, I think this paragraph is very revealing of how Dr. Moynihan's thinking diverges from the vast majority of traditionalists:

And in saying all this, I am not saying there were no aspects of the “way of praying” in the old liturgy which may have been dangerous, in some way, to true Christian maturity. It may be true that, in some ways, as some refromers have argued, the old liturgy tended to foster a type of piety which was simplistic, a “pie in the sky” faith detached from the “here and now” of Christ’s call to act on urgent matters of charity and social justice. In this view, some aspects of the celebration of the old Mass, the incense, the robes, the mystery, casued people so much to focus on “heaven” that they forgot “earth.” I acknowledge that this may have been, and may be, true, and a concern for liturgical reformers who are truly committed to building the Kingdom, here and in time to come.

The problem is, of course, is that if "Christian maturity" means taking our eyes off heaven, then the traditionalist will opt to be childlike. We choose immaturity, along with a simple faith over any Utopian project in this world, doomed for ultimate failure due to the corruption of sin. Justice flows from heavenly justice. How can one be just if one does not focus on where justice comes? The justice of the worldly man is no justice at all!

That Moynihan gives any credit to the notion that we ought, for the sake of "Christian maturity", to shift our focus from heaven, our homeland, to this world is really rather incredible. That Moynihan would give any credence to the thought that it is somehow dangerous to have faith like that of a child seems rather incredible. What does our Blessed Lord have to say?

"Amen, I say to you: Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child, shall not enter into it." (Luke 18:17).

It's pretty obvious that on this score, as on all others, the reformers aren't quite on the same page as Jesus. That much should be obvious to Dr. Moynihan.

TradNews Roundup

*Yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council. Tomorrow is the 50th anniversary of Cardinal Achille Lienart humiliating Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, and thus setting the stage for the greatest and most devastating Leftist take-over in history, the fruits of which are obviously rotten.

*Fr. Kappes has returned safely to the United States. No doubt all of the many prayers for this good priest were very effective in his, and his translator's, safe conduct out of Greece. Of course, now that Father is safe and sound, let me add my snarky commentary on this shocking and sad affair. There should be no doubt that this episode is indicative of the lamentable state of Greece and modern Greek society. This is what happens when an entire generation is reared on government hand-outs; people lose all sense of right and wrong, the only important thing is filthy lucre gained with no effort. Shame on Greece, and shame on the Greeks who think their very existence means the rest of us owe them entitlement after entitlement. It took Socialism only about 50 years to reduce the cradle of western civilization into a pathetic mob of infantile simpletons.

*Yay! No more additional tropes in the novus ordo "Lamb of God", gushes Mr. Jeffrey Tucker over at the Chant Café. Well, good for you, all you novus ordies! The "Reform of the Reform" is moving along so nicely for you! Your Fr. McNiceguy liturgy leader and "presider" will have a little less time to handout Communion to his army of Extraordinary-Buffoons-of-Holy-Communion, but at least you won't have to sit there and endure the same banal string of notes over and over again. And apparently you won't have to worry about the Extraordinary Ministers breaking out into spontaneous dance, either (unless, of course, your local bishop's conference hasn't already enacted particular legislation that has been duly confirmed by the Holy See, because--heh!--nothing in the new order mainstream is written in stone; an abuse today will probably be perfectly fine tomorrow in the world of Vatican logic)! The "Reform of the Reform" is a grand and wondrous thing! Why, perhaps in four to five centuries from now this reforming trend will produce a liturgy that isn't Protestant anymore. Well... maybe that's asking too much. After all, we wouldn't want to move too fast.

*On a more positive note, some true restoration comes to the Diocese of Oakland as it welcomes to its territory a new traditionalist Carmel. Fr. Gregory Eichman, F.S.S.P., his sister and his family mentioned in this article are founding members of the same Traditional Latin Mass Community to which your's truly belongs, the St. Mother Theodore Guérin Traditional Latin Mass Community in the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Indiana. The grace of God works through patient endurance, and often only by great sacrifice. The Eichman family truly is a picture of the generosity, prayer and spirit of sacrifice that is so crucial for the continued growth of traditional Catholic communities, priestly fraternities and congregations. Deo gratias!

*The SSPX boasts of 42 new seminarians in France. As France degenerates into a Socialist hovel, traditionalism continues to grow as a sign of contradiction to the world at large. Opposition from within the Church and from without is serving to try the metal of traditional Catholics, and in many ways the results have been positive. Traditionalist societies, fraternities and religious communities are flowering with vocations to the priesthood and religious life, as is evidenced by the recent ordinations of the Dominicans from Avrille and the Capuchins from Morgan.

*Our friends over at Rorate Cæli are reporting the annual Votive Mass in honor of Blessed Karl of Austria that has been slated for October 27th, and please pray for the priests of the Rorate Cæli Purgatorial Society.

*Rorate Cæli reports on the big rumor. That flyer borders on false advertising: it has a picture of the pope, but clearly announces that the TLM, which was rumored would be offered by the pope himself, will be offered by someone else (though that someone else isn't exactly an unknown prelate). The commentary on this RC post is very interesting. I have never expected Pope Benedict XVI to offer a Traditional Latin Mass.

*The crisis in the Church Militant is blown off by our Catholic leaders, like the completely clueless and mean-spirited Bishop Anthony Taylor, who time after time reveals himself to be ignorant and uncharitable. It is utterly incredible how ignorant Taylor is. How did it happen that village idiots like him are ordained bishops? I think we all know the answer to that.

Obama's #1 Handler: David Axelrod.
He's one of the most powerful men in
the United States, and he is un-elected
and un-vetted. 

*The first and foremost problem with Mr. Obama is that he is a Socialist. An often neglected aspect of Socialism is that inherent to Socialism is the advancement of an agenda that promotes sexual immorality and depravity in order to destroy the family. Obama engenders all the destructive aspects of Socialism, i.e. exalting the power and prerogatives of the State, radical egalitarianism, the nationalization of industry and private enterprise, collectivism, redistrubtion of property, and the promotion of homosexuality and other degenerate behaviors. However, is it Obama we need fear? Here is an interesting treatment of Obama for what he is. There are many things this little treatise gets right, not the least of which is that Obama is essentially a front man, the pretty but dumb face for the hard left Socialists that have financed and propelled Obama's public career. There are, however, some things I think this article gets wrong, not the least of which is the forced and overly simplistic link between Socialism and Islam. If you are going to link Socialism to any one world religion, the more obvious connection would be between Talmudic Judaism and Socialism. At any rate, I don't think the connection is cut and dry. Islam as it exists today, while certainly influenced by, and in many ways a catalyst of, Socialism (as are many world religions), is too multifaceted to fit neatly into O'Connell's triad. Obama is as much a Muslim as he's a Christian. In fact, he's an atheist. That much ought to be obvious by now. At any rate, O'Connell's overall thesis, that it is Obama's handlers we ought to fear, seems  to be a timely and accurate warning. They will become more dangerous, especially if Obama loses.

Christopher Columbus, Catholic Hero

Columbus Landing at Guanahani by John Vanderlyn, 1847

The Demanding and Manly Christ of Our Worship

As the quip goes: The next time you are asked, "What would Jesus do?"; answer: "He would get angry, overturn some tables, and beat a bunch of people with a whip made out of cords."

The emasculation of our society begun with an emasculated vision of our Blessed Lord. There is a place for meditating on the tender love that our Blessed Lord has for His friends and even His enemies and sinners. His Most Sacred Heart overflows with love for us. However, His tender love is, nonetheless, both demanding and manly. He forgave the sinner, but then He bid the sinner "to sin no more"; He prayed for His enemies after they drove nails through His hands and feet, and He expects the same degree of manly courage and endurance from those of us who dare to call ourselves His disciples.

There was on Jesus' part no compromising the Will of His heavenly Father with the selfish and erroneous will of the Jewish leaders who opposed our Blessed Lord's power and authority and teaching. Those Jewish leaders had Him crucified for it, and He knew this would happen, and yet kept His face turned toward Jerusalem, the place of His Passion and tortured Death. He went as a conqueror and as a victim. So must we, when the time comes to face our cross in these terrible and perilous times.

Traditional v. Liberal Catholicism...What is the Score?

Recently I was asked the following:


"I wonder if there is any empirical data to indicate that traditional Catholics know their faith better and have a better formed conscience compared to their contemporary counterparts."

As a catechist, I've worked in both settings.  I was in a liberal parish for several years and as I have noted, I've lived in a very conservative parish.  I can tell you from experience that the more traditional parish promotes thinking whereas the more liberal parish promotes feeling.  Obviously, there is some feeling which goes on in a traditional parish and there is thinking that goes on in a liberal parish, but by and large, the think v. feel mentality is very obvious.  But I am sure that there must be some empirical data to support my position.  I would look to the life of conservative parishes in one's diocese v. liberal parishes and see how the sacraments are being utilized.  I will be doing some research on this in my own diocese and I hope to be able to report back on this in a month or so...for now, though I will expand upon my understanding as I have witnessed it in several different parishes.

Liberal parishes encourage people to believe based upon their personal feelings.  This causes a huge problem, because the subjective reigns supreme and there is very little objective teaching which goes on.  Everything is experiential and personal.  The Church simply doesn't base it's operation that way and what results is a distorted and subjective form of worship and theology based upon the faulty subject.

To contrast, traditional parishes promote thinking based upon objective truths.  This creates an environment whereby the people are not basing things off of their experience and feelings, but rather on teachings which have existed for thousands of years.  They can make those teachings personal, to be sure, but the teachings are not based upon their faulty views.  They are based upon objective truth.

When one learns and applies traditional Catholic thought, the growth is immeasurable.  When one bases their Catholicism on the personal and feelings, he is limited by his own experience.  Of course there are exceptions, but this model holds by and large to be true.

If we are to be authentic in our Catholicism we must not rely on our personal experience to guide our views, because that gives us a limited worldview, but rather we should rely on the objective truth which cannot be limited by personal experience.

So, to answer the question directly, yes...contemporary Catholicism (as you have applied the terms) forms superficial Catholics, because they are limited by their own subjective experiences.  Traditional Catholicism does form a deeper Catholic because he is not limited by his own experience, but rather he is freed by the objective truth to know and understand that which is beyond and outside himself.

Mundabor, as often happens, makes my day

On the lighter side of the subject of Archbishop Müller's interview, Mundabor waxes comedic about Müller's "return to orthodoxy".

The great one writes: "It cannot be anymore. Speaking of the Catholic faith, the Archbishop says 'there will be no compromises here'. An astonishing U-Turn, nicht wahr? Who would have thought that a man in more than odour of heresy would finally decide to defend the Catholic Faith after so much ravaging?"

Thanks, Mundabor. Excellent!

Müller's Wacky Notion of Miracle is a Cover for His Unorthodox Views

In an interview for the EWTN controlled National Catholic Register Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller was asked about those troubling things he wrote in the past about the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and transubstantiation. What he wrote is at best ambiguous. They at best appear to deny that the Virgin Mary remained, physically, a virgin after childbirth, and they at best appear to deny that Christ is present, whole and entire in the Eucharist, to include His most blessed corporality. After attacking his critics, he offered this about miracles in general:

Concerning miracles, we have to remember that the primary object of our faith is the action of God; the secondary object is what God did inclusively in the material dimension. It is not enough to say that miracles are an inexplicable action—something totally exceptional within the material world—that prove God’s existence. Rather, the miracles performed by Jesus reveal that he is our divine Savior who came to heal a world wounded by sin. So, for instance, when Jesus performed a miracle, such as the healing of the sick man, the first aspect to look at is not the mere suspension of the natural order. The first priority is to examine the fact that God has healed this person who needed to be healed; the suspension of the laws of nature are a consequence of this divine intervention. Often, people don’t understand this perspective of the faith.

Traditionally, a miracle has always been understood as an exceptional event wherein the laws of nature, or the proper course of nature, are suspended by an intervening divine power. According to the traditional understanding, the suspension of the laws of nature is not an unintended consequence of the divine intervention, but is something directly willed by God. Miracles do not encompass the whole of the divine activity, but is only a certain kind of divine activity.

God is the efficient cause of all things that exist. He is that external entity by which all things have their being. Thus, God’s action is not always miraculous. Nature runs its course because of God’s action. What’s more, if God were for a single moment to suspend His regard for creation, all of creation, at that very instant, would cease to exist.

This distinction seems to have been lost in Müllers notion of miracles. Archbishop Müller is incorrect when he makes the contention that the primary object of faith, in regards to miracles, is God’s action. Man can, and often does, have faith in God’s action without having witnessed any miracles. It is unlikely, but I don't think it inconceivable that a man could have faith in God’s action without having even heard of miracles. It is also true that a man can lack faith in God’s action after having heard of or, even, after having witnessed a miracle first hand. Some people lack faith, and no manner of miracle will convince them that God is working in the world for whatever purpose.

The reason is that the primary object of faith, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, and this is in regards to any given subject up for discussion, is always God, Himself. Man must have faith in God prior to having faith in God’s action. The man who does not believe in God certainly doesn't believe that God created the world, or that God forgives sins or that God will judge his soul after death. Thus, it stands to reason, that God is the primary object of faith.

Faith, as a theological virtue is granted by God, but there are external motives which move us to believe. These two external motives are prophecy and miracles. With a miracle, God directly wills to suspend the laws of nature, primarily for His own glory, and only secondarily to confirm true doctrine. Scripture tells us that it was Jesus’ miracles that confirmed His authority, not that they were primarily object lessons explicating His teachings, as Müller seems to be saying in his interview. The primary object of faith in regard to Jesus’ miracles was His own glory, as belongs to Him by virtue of Him being God incarnate.

This is why we cannot speak of the suspension of the laws of nature as a secondary consequence of the divine action as does Müller. Rather, the suspension of the natural order is directly willed by Jesus for the primary purpose of revealing His glory, His power, His authority. After all, no man will believe that Jesus Christ is the divine Savior who came to heal a world wounded by sin, unless, of course, he already is convinced of God’s existence, God’s power and majesty, and that Jesus Christ is, indeed, God incarnate. The first thing to be regarded in the miracles of our Blessed Lord is not the many and, albeit fruitful, didactic lessons to be learned in the miracles. The first thing to regard in a miracle is the fact that Jesus Christ is God and, as such, He has the power to do whatever He wills. Thus, it is critically important that we understand that the laws and course of nature really are suspended, otherwise, the miracle is no miracle at all, and Jesus’ authority is unconfirmed.

In order to justify what he wrote in the past about the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, that the laws of nature really weren't suspended in the “material dimension”, Archbishop Müller must subtly craft a new understanding of miracles that focuses instead on didactic lessons rather than the nature of Christ the miracles were intended to reveal. The same is true in regards to the Eucharist. Müller stated that the Eucharist is not Jesus Christ, whole and entire, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, but instead plainly offered the theory of transignification. Now that he is unwilling to take these remarks back, for whatever reason, he is forced to obfuscate in regards to miracles in general, denying the importance of their materiality.

The material nature of a miracle, that Jesus’ miracles really did suspend the laws of nature, should no longer be regarded, the new head of the CDF seems to be saying. What is important, Müller tells us, is the secondary “object of faith”: what is God teaching us? What is God doing for us? The reason we believe in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is because… The reason why we believe in the True Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is because… Müller is more than happy to provide all the “becauses”, and we can be sure that most of the time those “becauses” will sound most orthodox and even pious. However, the obvious consequence of this is that the "becauses" become what is necessary, and belief in the actual miracles becomes optional.

By spouting orthodox and pious “becauses”, Müller subtly suggests that belief in the actual miracle, which is pedestrian, is not necessary for the modern sophisticate. He would have us conveniently ignore the fact that the Church has always taught that we are required to actually believe in the miracles because they are dogmas of the faith. Perhaps he is doing this to make it easier for the modern, secular skeptic to believe.  If that is the case, it is a fruitless endeavor, because skeptics can't believe until they stop being skeptics altogether. Perhaps Archbishop Müller is embarrassed by belief in something as irrational as miracles. Or maybe it is because Müller, himself, really doesn't believe in miracles, or at least not in miracles as traditionally understood as suspensions of the laws of nature in the material world due to divine intervention, for the purpose of revealing God's glory. Müller contends that he has defended the Perpetual Virginity of Mary and transubstantiation in his books. He says he has never denied them. But does he believe them? Does he have faith in those dogmas? Yet again, Müller's words leave more than a little doubt.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary and the Real Presence are both real miracles. The Blessed Virgin Mary really did remain a virgin after childbirth, and that means physically. The bread and wine at Mass cease to be bread and wine at the moment of consecration, and become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, whole and entire as He is in heaven, to include His heavenly corporality, His Resurrected Flesh. These are real miracles because they happened or happen in the material world, wherein God suspends the laws of nature to manifest His glory. I believe that. I'm sure that you, dear reader, believe it too.

And I suspect that Archbishop Müller looks down on us poor garlic eaters for believing something so base and unsophisticated.

However, I will give Archbishop Müller the benefit of the doubt, I suppose. But even if he does believe these dogmas of the Church, what remains sad is that Müller’s obfuscation sacrifices the glory of God for his pride and a feeble attempt to justify his unorthodox remarks.

TradNews Roundup

*Urgent! Please pray for Fr. Kappes!

*Please pray for Rev. Mr. Gregory Bartholomew, FSSP, who will receive Holy Orders tomorrow morning.

*Dominican Rite Mass gets some attention. The most encouraging thing about this news item is the fact that the author points out that the crowd was big, and young. The future does belong to the Traditional Latin Mass and traditionalism. The seeds have been planted, and even if this generation does not enjoy the grand fruits of a complete and true restoration of Tradition, we can be hopeful that future generations definitely will.

*Many traditionalists are complaining that the American bishops haven't spoken out against the Obama administration and the Democratic Party, especially in light of this latest Democratic National Convention that heralded abortion and contraception as their platform's central planks. However, I disagree. Many mainstream bishops have spoken out. The latest is Bishop Paprocki who warns us of intrinsic evils in the Democratic Party's platform. I applaud these efforts, but I'm afraid that as long as the underlying causes for the degradation of our culture, society and government aren't addressed, then bishops like Paprocki aren't going to make much progress. Bishop Paprocki would be better served by restoring the Traditional Latin Mass, traditional Catholicism and working to root out the post Vatican II Modernism that runs rampant through his diocese. Then perhaps his flock will be better suited to recognize intrinsic evils when they see them.

*The novus ordo isn't my rite (all discussion of "form" being set aside for the artificial construct that it is). However, I'm beginning to think it's not even my religion. Whatever happened to the Catholic Church of Thomas à Kempis who wrote, "vanity of vanities, and all is vanity, except to love God and serve Him alone; and this is supreme wisdom - to despise the world, and draw daily nearer the kingdom of heaven"? For that matter what happened to the Catholic Church of St. Paul who wrote, "and be not conformed to this world" (Rom. 12:2)?? Now the novus ordo mainstream bishops tell us we need to be pragmatic, to be worldly? Go along to get along?

*At what point in the stripping of all things Catholic from the mainstream novus ordo Church does it cease to be Catholic? Can you still be considered Catholic, if all that is Catholic about you is that you claim obedience to a bishop and a pope, yet "worship" like a Protestant, think like a secular humanist, and live like a pagan? Can you still be considered Catholic if this outward appearance of obedience to a pope is all you have, but you do absolutely nothing else that is Catholic in practice, or if you don't believe anything that Catholics of previous generations have always believed? There's more to being Catholic than crying out "Pope! Pope!", just as there is more to being a follower of Our Blessed Lord than crying out "Lord! Lord!" (Luke 7:21-23). The SSPX won't settle for this exterior show of obedience that accompanies an interior spirit of apostasy, but it is they who are making unreasonable demands? No it is the Vatican that is being unreasonable! Proof of the illogical unreasonableness of the Vatican: now we have the new head of the CDF insinuating that the innovations of the Second Vatican Council are fundamental to the faith...

Ecclesiastical Arrogance?

*If you can stand to read it, EWTN controlled National Catholic Register has posted the second part of their two part interview of Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller. What strikes me, initially, about Müller is his unmitigated pride. In this interview, instead of clarifying or apologizing for statements that everyone knows are at best ambiguous in regards to transubstantiation and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, he takes the opportunity to pontificate about his elite and sophisticated, nuanced understanding of the faith and the nature of miracles. Does he even think about apologizing if what he wrote in the past might cause scandal or doubt? Nope! Not to mention, Müller makes it quite clear that there is a struggle with the SSPX (he insinuates that the SSPX wants to "negotiate away" the fundamentals of the faith without stipulating which fundamentals, because, of course, they aren't and Müller knows it), but unequivocally states that "there is no struggle between the Holy See" and the LCWR; you know, those women masquerading as Catholics, who spend their time denying the divinity of our Blessed Lord and travelling around the country in a bus claiming to have the definitive understanding of Catholic social doctrine? They are awfully prideful too.

"The saints have not only not boasted of any perfection, but have sought to make known to others what redounded to their own contempt." - from The Dignity and Duties of the Priesthood by St. Alphonsus de Liguori. Should we buy a copy of this book and send it Archbishop Müller?

*The Catholic Herald asks the obvious: Should we be celebrating the Second Vatican Council? Or should we be urgently seeking to fix the damage it did to the Church? As Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice observes, from the clearly visible facts, these last 50 years have been anything but glorious.

*Bishops: Gone Fishing!