Vox Cantoris endorses Veri Catholici and the Libellus of Condemned Errors regarding ‘Amoris Laetitia’

Libellus of Condemnation of the Errors Contained in, presupposed by, or underlying the document ‘Amoris Laetitia’

Mindful of the teaching of Our Most High Lord, Jesus Christ, that our “Yes”, be a “yes” and our “No”, a “no”, and, similarly mindful of the teaching of His Vicar on Earth, Pope Pius VI, of good memory, who taught:

“Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger, under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic Truth is camouflaged”

We the members of Veri Catholici wish to express our loyalty to the faith which we have received from the lips of Christ through the preaching of the Apostles, as handed down in the Catholic Church and fortified by the infallible Magisterium of the Church, in condemning the so called Apostolic Exhortation, “Amoris Laetitia” as a work of deceit and trickery, error and heresy, among which errors we condemn the following:

https://vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/libellus-of-condemned-errors-regarding-amoris-laetitia/

Top Papal advisor to John Paul II warns of cabal undermining the Catholic Church from within!

From the file, "Tell us something we didn't already know" and have been saying for years, now it is being said by an 88 year old Monsignor, Michel Schooyans, a former advisor to Pope John Paul II and friend of Benedict XVI.

From LifeSiteNews, he writes:

The active members of this party have ready access to the media; they frequently appear unmasked. They operate with backing from some of the highest authorities in the Church. The main target of these activists is Christian morality, criticized for having a severity incompatible with the "values" of our time. We must find ways which lead the Church to please, by reconciling its moral teaching with human passions. … Through this network, the neo-casuists will be able to hold sway over the wheels of the Church, influence the choice of candidates for high office, forge alliances which imperil the Church’s very existence.

The whole essay by Monsignor Schooyans can be read here.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/from-casuistry-to-mercy-toward-a-new-art-of-pleasing

Circulate it. Make it known on every social media platform you can. Make sure this cabal knows we're on to them and we will fight them to the death. 

Remember this. They have already lost because Christ has already won.

Father Thomas J. Rosica, CSB: What's that you say about Summorum Pontificum?

According to Father John Zuhlsdorf, Thomas J. Rosica, CSB., sent out the following blurb to his newsies:

"Fr Lombardi notes that Pope Francis made this view clear to Cardinal Sarah during a recent audience, stressing that the ‘Ordinary’ form of the celebration of Mass is the one laid down in the Missal promulgated by Paul VI, while the ‘Extraordinary’ form, permitted in certain specific cases by Pope Benedict XVI, should not be seen as replacing the ‘Ordinary’ form."

Summorum Pontificum provides that any priest, anywhere, any day, at any time can offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the Roman MIssal of 1962, without the permission or approval of the bishop. It is not in "certain specific cases."

Whether by ignorance or intent, Father Rosica is wrong.

Father Thomas J. Rosica, changed the words at the Offertory of the Mass, shown below. It was a violation of the Second Vatican Council's Sacrosanctum Concilium as well as Redemptoris Sacramentum. It seemed to be an "exercise in personal preference or taste" as Cardinal "hindu-gods-ad-orientem" Nichols was referring to in his slapdown of any priest who would dare follow Cardinal Sarah's advice and offer the Holy Sacrifice in the posture it was intended to be and was for 1900 years.

Isn't what is good for one priest good for the other, or is there an exception for Thomas J. Rosica?

The word change begins around 5:17 (Nota Bene: This was prior to corrected translation)

https://youtu.be/pqKJkcptsV8?t=5m17s

What is this hatred for the Church's traditional and timeless liturgy that these men have such a problem with?

I have my theories, what are yours?

Postscript:

Friends, I wrote it yesterday, I will say it again The Novus Ordo liturgy is a dead letter. There is no "reform of the reform." It is dead. Pope Benedict XVI vision has been abrogated. The Missal of Paul VI is an abomination. It is a disgrace. Look at the fruits, look at the culture, look at the faith. Look at your families.

Get out of it. Leave the new rite. Get to the traditional Latin Mass in your diocesan parish, the FSSP, ICK or even the SSPX if you have no other option. Do whatever you need to do to get out of the Novus Ordo and back to the Mass and Faith of your Fathers. Save your soul, S Save your children. Save the Church. Save the liturgy and save the world! There is no hope in Modernism. There is no power to transform and covert in the new bastard rite. It is valid, that is not a debate, it is deficient, it always was and it always will be. 

They destroyed most of the faith through the liturgy, now they wish to finish it off in Amoris Laetitia.

The fish rots from the head first.

O LORD save us. save your people.

Well that was a quick switch - Michael Coren is reported to be relieved

Well they've done it again, the Anglican "Church" of Canada has become ever more irrelevant.  Amidst charges that the vote was not taken fairly they voted again and now they will "bless/marry" sodomites and lesbians.

It's okay Michael, you don't have to leave. 

You can stay there and go to Hell along with the rest of them. 

Canadian Anglicans vote not to "bless" so-called marriages of the same sex - what will Michael Coren do now?
Of course, it is because of bullying that the vote was very, very narrowly defeated.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/programs/metromorning/anglicans-gay-marriage-canada-1.3674706

Hello Michael? Where to now, bro?

Bye the way, Mike, I loved that CBC interview with Wendy Mesley. What will be your next "Epiphany"?

Cardinal Nichols faces "ad orientem" to stand before graven images of pagan hindu gods

The confrontation to Pope Bergoglio's face has begun

In dramatic fashion, the College of Cardinals has been asked by a group of eminent academics and pastors to petition Jorge Bergoglio, Bishop of Rome, to repudiate his heretically laced document, Amoris Laetitia. 

Yet, why are these men not declaring who they are rather than just speak through Dr. Joseph Shaw.What are they afraid of? For this to have the force of credibility, they must come forward, publicly, or reduce this to no more than an internet petition.

Now, Cardinal Caffarra, in an exclusive interview, has spoken out, in forceful interview at OnePeterFive.

http://www.onepeterfive.com/cardinal-caffarra-on-marriage-family-amoris-laetitia-confusion-in-the-church/

Let it begin. 

In support of Cardinal Sarah - #AfricanCardinalsMatter

#AfricanCardinalsMatter

Appeal to College of Cardinals to petition Pope to repudiate Amoris Laetitia

Press Release

7/9/16

A group of Catholic academics and pastors has submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218 living at present.

Describing the exhortation as containing “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with their appeal, a documented list of applicable theological censures specifying “the nature and degree of the errors that could be attributed to Amoris laetitia.”

Among the 45 signatories are Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes, religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope's official advisers, to approach the Holy Father with a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of them to be believed or considered as possibly true.”

“We are not accusing the pope of heresy,” said a spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous propositions in Amoris laetitia can be construed as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional statements would fall under other established theological censures, such as scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.”

The 1983 Code of Canon Law states that “According to the knowledge, competence, and expertise which they possess, they [the Christian faithful] have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful” (CIC, can. 212 §3).

The thirteen-page document quotes nineteen passages in the exhortation which seem to conflict with Catholic doctrines. These doctrines include the real possibility with the grace of God of obeying all the commandments, the fact that certain kinds of act are wrong in all circumstances, the headship of the husband, the superiority of consecrated virginity over the married life, and the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances.  The document also argues that the exhortation undermines the Church's teaching that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics who have made no commitment to continence cannot be admitted to the sacraments while they remain in that state.

The spokesman said, “It is our hope that by seeking from our Holy Father a definitive repudiation of these errors we can help to allay the confusion already brought about by Amoris laetitia among pastors and the lay faithful.  For that confusion can be dispelled effectively only by an unambiguous affirmation of authentic Catholic teaching by the Successor of Peter.”

Dr Joseph Shaw, an Oxford academic and a signatory to the appeal, is acting as spokesman for this group of Catholic scholars and pastors.

The group has set up the email address appealtocardinals@gmail.com to answer press inquiries about the appeal.

Dr Shaw’s personal details can at the following link.

capacity.http://casuistrycentral.blogspot.co.uk/p/about-me.html

His role as signatory and spokesman for the group is as a private person, concerned Catholic, and philosopher, and should not be construed as representative of the institutions for which he serves in an official capacity.

The "ad orientem" fight in the Nervous Disorder, is on! Who will win? -- UPDATE - Not Cardinal Sarah, he's now been thrown under the Vatican bus!

This past week, I decided, in consultation with the Pastor where I have been singing the Ordinary Form on Saturday for the past eight years, to resign. My frustration has been building for a while now. I have come to the conclusion that no matter how faithful the priest, the people are just so distracting and so disrespectful and so utterly stupid, that I could no longer bear it. The actions against Cardinal Sarah now have affirmed my decision.

The contrast between the Novus Ordo in general and the Mass on Sundays two dioceses away where I direct the music in the traditional Rite is like night and day. It has become, for me, simply too much to bear.

Dysfunction of the liturgy is embedded

The inherent dysfunction of the Novus Ordo, is impossible to reform. Priests who have tried to do it have been, and continue to be, persecuted.  Cardinal Sarah is now open to being persecuted already by Federico Lombardi!

I have given it 30 years. I was once denounced publicly from the Ambo on Good Friday by the Pastor of the parish I grew up in for delivering a Good Friday liturgy in accord with the Novus Ordo Roman Missal. He was a priest of the Polish Congregation of St. Michael the Archangel, and even denied my mother's funeral in her parish church because the request was for it to be in Latin, and according to the Novus Ordo! Another, a "baby priest" at 27, wagged his finger after Mass in front of the parishioners at me and said, "I told you never to sing in Latin, I am the priest and you must obey!" To which I responded, "No Father, you told me not to sing that which was not in Catholic Book of Worship II and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops have put it in the hymnbook, perhaps you should take it up with them." Fortunately, that effeminate and rageful clericalist is no longer in Toronto but now in the Archdiocese of Detroit and is a Pastor. Keep him away from you boys, he was once also from the CSMA.

I will give the Novus Ordo, no more of my time. It is a useless exercise. It is a liturgy which was an error and remains so. It was and remains, an abomination. It cannot be reformed, it will not be reformed until the Pope and Bishops find the determination to do it. Nice words from Cardinals are not enough as we have no seen.

"Person" centered worship

It was not from the Holy Spirit. It is simply not possible. It is a cult of man, not of God. It is illogical and blasphemous to think that it could be from the Holy Spirit. 

Look at the fruits!

God knows all things. Sees all things. He knows the future. Father, Son and Holy Spirit know all, see all. This great God could see the damage to souls and the faith that the new order of the Mass has produced. He saw it all. Why would He cause it? He permitted it, to be sure, but the Novus Ordo and the theology that formed it has caused the literal collapse of the faith because it is the point at which most Catholics come together. Why would God debase a liturgy that is meant to worship Him and sanctify us? It is simply not possible that this was from the Holy Spirit, it simply defies logic.

Valid? 

Yes. That is a different matter.

Yet it remains a liturgical abomination, I am convinced of it. After 30 years, of labour, there is no fruit, there are no seeds sprouted, the ground is barren. My time and talents will now be spent exclusively with the traditional Latin Mass. Week by week, we see the fruit, the growth, the faith.

Cardinal Sarah himself has stated that the "faithful are now unfaithful." He also knows why.

I raise the possibility of looking again at the Constitution and at the reform which followed its promulgation because I do not think that we can honestly read even the first article of Sacrosanctum Concilium today and be content that we have achieved its aims. My brothers and sisters, where are the faithful of whom the Council Fathers spoke? Many of the faithful are now unfaithful: they do not come to the liturgy at all. To use the words of Pope Saint John Paul II: many Christians are living in a state of “silent apostasy;” they “live as if God does not exist” (Apostolic Exhortation, Ecclesia in Europa, 28 June 2003, 9). Where is the unity the Council hoped to achieve? We have not yet reached it. Have we made real progress in calling the whole of mankind into the household of the Church? I do not think so. And yet we have done very much to the liturgy!

The Novus Ordo and any reform of the reform is a dead letter. Unless it is put in the Missal and ordered by the Pope, it will not be carried out. It will not be fixed, not by this Pope. Leave it. If you wish to remain Catholic, get yourself to the traditional Mass.

The proof is for all to see

Anthony Spadaro's little tweet is evidence of this. It may also disclose what Francis thinks as Spadaro is a confidant. Cardinal Sarah's recent talk in Rome was just that, talk, and his views, virtually alone.

Spadaro is also wrong. He is not only wrong, he is manipulative. The paragraph in the GIRM appears again at the Pax Vobiscum. Why? Because it is presumed that one is actually, not "FACING THE PEOPLE" or the direction would not be there.

In the original Latin, the GIRM, presuming the priest has just incensed the altar and performed the Lavabo, states:

146. Ad medium altaris deinde reversus, sacerdos, stans versus populum, extendens et iungens manus, populum ad orandum invitat, dicens: Oráte, fratres, etc. Populus surgit et responsionem dat Suscípiat Dominus. Deinde sacerdos, manibus extensis, dicit orationem super oblata. In fine populus acclamat: Amen. 146. Upon returning to the middle of the altar , the priest , facing the people , extending and then joining his hands, invites the people to pray , saying : Pray, brothers and sisters, etc. The people rise and make their response May the Lord accept . Then the Priest, with hands extended , says the Prayer over the offerings. In the end, the people make the acclamation, Amen.

Why would it say, "facing the people" it it were not the norm? It specifically instructs him to face the people thereby presuming that he was not, previously!

Not only Spadaro, but now Cardinal Nichols of Westminster has ordered his priests to ignore the Cardinal's request; saying that is not for priest to “exercise personal preference or taste,” citing GIRM 299. 

Again, like Spadaro, Nichols displays his twisted logic and in fact, discloses his bias.

GIRM 299 states:

The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. The altar should, moreover, be so placed as to be truly the centre toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns. The altar is usually fixed and is dedicated.’”

Note that? 

"Can" not must. 

"Desirable" not mandatory.

Father Z addresses the matter at his blog.

It seems that that this Cardinal Nichols knows how to pray to pagan gods but he won't permit his priests to face the True God?

Is he even Catholic?

The Congregation for the Liturgy and Discipline of the Sacraments has already address this in  Prot. No 2086/00/L

The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has been asked whether the expression in n. 299 of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani constitutes a norm according to which the position of the priest versus absidem [facing the apse] is to be excluded.
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, after mature reflection and in light of liturgical precedents, responds:
Negatively, and in accordance with the following explanation.The explanation includes different elements which must be taken into account. First, the word expedit does not constitute a strict obligation but a suggestion that refers to theconstruction of the altar a pariete sejunctum (detached from the wall). It does not require, for example, that existing altars be pulled away from the wall. The phrase ubi possibile sit (where it is possible) refers to, for example, the topography of the place, the availability of space, the artistic value of the existing altar, the sensibility of the people participating in the celebrations in a particular church, etc.

Benedict XVI wrote in the Spirit of the Liturgy that Mass facing the people was a community "turned inwards on itself." He had the opportunity to order this change. He did not. Now Cardinal Sarah voices the desire and immediately, it is rejected by a prominent Cardinal and a confidant of the Bishop or Rome.

Lombardi contradicts

Just after the announcement that he is being replaced by a layman, professional journalist Greg Burke, Federico Lombardi said:

"There are therefore no new liturgical directives foreseen from next Advent, as some have wrongly inferred from some of the words of Cardinal Sarah, and it is best to avoid using the expression ‘reform of the reform’ when referring to the liturgy, as it's sometimes been a source of misunderstandings.”

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/father-lombardi-cardinal-sarahs-ad-orientem-suggestion-misinterpreted

Exactly padre, they're already there!

How much longer do we need to keep repeating the same thing over and over again whilst expecting a different result? That is insanity!

What will happen in Toronto?

This photo is of then Archbishop and now Cardinal Thomas Collins celebrating a Latin Ordinary Form Mass at the Toronto Oratory, he is celebrating "ad orientem." After the Mass, which I attended, I greeted him downstairs. I kissed his ring and thanked him for what he did at Mass. His response? "I think I should do this in the Cathedral some time."

Yes, he said that to me.

Those writing last week with effervescent enthusiasm were premature. Until Rome orders it and authorises it in writing and prohibits the persecution of priests by bishops for doing it, nothing will change.

Mass facing the people is illogical. It is the single worst problem with the Novus Ordo and it is not even mandated! It is against 1,935 years of liturgical history. It is against the practice of our Jewish forefathers in faith. It points to man, not God. 

The Reform of the Reform of the Novus Ordo is a dead letter. Spadaro and Nicholls prove it.

There is only one option.

Take it.

Vigil of Pentecost, June 7, 2014, Solemn Mass in the Presence of a Greater Prelate

Thomas Cardinal Collins, Archbishop of Toronto together with Diocesan priests and seminarians at St. Lawrence the Martyr Parish in Scarborough, Ontario

U.N and the globalist homosexualist fascist agenda

GENEVA, July 8 (C-Fam) The UN Human Rights Council narrowly adopted a resolution establishing the position of “independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity,” with 22 votes in favor, 19 against, and 6 abstentions.

The independent expert will be the first official focus point for promoting special new LGBT rights at the United Nations. His reports and statements will not be binding and only suggestions for states. Up until recently such a post was thought impossible.

https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/lgbt-agenda-advances-drives-wedge-un-system/

Father Peter Carota - Requiescat in pace

Father Peter Carota has died.

Father Carota has been suffering greatly over the last year and it has been written of on the blog which he started, Traditional Catholic Priest. Since Father's illness, it has been maintained by a friend of his. He passed into eternity at 7:00A.M, today, July 8, 2016.

A few years ago on a trip through parts of Canada, Father Carota stopped one weekend at Kinkora in the Diocese of London. It was a pleasure to meet Father and lunch with him after chanting the Mass in the traditional Rite which he Offered up to God.

May the soul of this priest who Offered the Holy Sacrifice rest in the sweet peace of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Rest well, good Father.

Pray for us and for the whole, wretched world.

O Lord our God, grant your divine protection to those who serve and protect

May the souls of the five police officers assassinated in Dallas rest in the peace of God.

O Almighty and Eternal God, Whose great power and eternal Wisdom embraces the universe, Watch over all police and Law enforcement officers everywhere.

Protect them from harm in the performance of their duty to stop evildoers who commit crime, robbery, riots. murder and violence.

We pray, O Lord, to help them keep our streets and homes safe, day and night.

We commend them to your loving care because their duty for us is dangerous to them.

Grant them strength and courage in their daily assignments. Dearest God and Father, protect your children, these brave men and women.

Grant them your almighty protection, Unite them safely with their families after Duty has ended through Our Lord Jesus Christ your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, God, forever and ever.

Amen.

The blood of these police is on the hands of Barack Hussein Obama. 

He has created a racial crisis in the United States of America. 

He is a divisive, destructive malefactor unworthy of the Office of President.

Barack Hussein Obama is a diabolical narcissist.  

Is Our Lord Jesus Christ not for "indigenous" peoples too? Then where is He in this video?

Nowhere does he mention Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Why is this; do "indigenous" peoples not deserve to be saved?

These videos are sickening and blasphemous. How does the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ sit down to do this and never, ever mention the Holy Name?

http://4christum.blogspot.ca/2016/07/bergoglio-broke-first-commandment.html

Cardinal Schönborn is either mistaken or is a manipulative liar!

According to reports on OnePeter5, Cardinal Schönborn has stated that Amoris Laetitia is "binding doctrine." 

In the actual document, Francis, Bishop of Rome, or someone on his behalf, writes:

Since “time is greater than space”, I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it.

It is then perhaps this paragraph of Francis that Raymond Cardinal Burke has used to state that the document is not magisterial. In fact, Francis says it is not.

In addition to being a liturgical nincompoop, the Cardinal from Vienna is either deluded, mistaken or a liar.

Justin Trudeau disgraces the Office of Prime Minister at the Pride Goeth Before the Fall Parade in Toronto - will legalise anal sodomy for minors!

UPDATED: TRUDEAU PROMISES TO DECRIMINALIZE ANAL SEX FOR 16 YEAR-OLDS!
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/trudeau-promises-to-decriminalize-anal-sex-for-16-year-olds?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com

The man is a Catholic. Pray for him lest he burn in Hell.

Sadly, he has sold his soul.

One wonders if he still has that rosary and if he remembers how to use it.

John Paul Shimek and the National Catholic Register - mocking faithful Catholics and supporting the notion that, "gay is good and godly"

The screed that follows below is from a writer at the National Catholic Register. John Paul Shimek is pictured at the right. 

He enjoys spending his time on Facebook and Twitter mocking faithful Catholics, tradition and the faith in general whilst purporting to be a faithful Catholic and professional journalist He has the temerity to call himself on Twitter, a "catholic theologian." 

John Paul Shimek is as much a theologian as this writer is a Doctor of the Church. What a self-indulgent, narcissist.

He promotes that Holy David and Holy Jonathan were sodomites blest and honoured by God. Not only an outright lie, but a blasphemy. He is also believes that "gay is good and godly" and that traditional or rather, faithful Catholics should be "driven out of the Church.

Who is this effeminate, disgrace for a Catholic journalist? 

Why is he writing in the National Catholic Register?

John Paul Shimek's diatribe could have been written by Thomas J. Rosica, CSB. You can read it below where it is copied, lest you give his work at NCRegister (notice they downplay Catholic) a hit and feed the bear. 

I have provided these two screenshots lifted from Hilary White. If anyone has any others, please forward them to voxcantoris@rogers.com.

Shimek convicts himself. 

So too does the National Catholic Register.

UPDATE: AS REPORTED IN THE COMBOX, THE NCREGISTER HAS DELETED HIS POST.

Should Good Catholics Read Far-Right Catholic Blogs?by John Paul Shimek   

Last weekend, Ines San Martin of Crux reported that Pope Francis “has vowed in a new interview that he won’t be slowed down by resistance from ‘ultra-conservatives’ in the Church who ‘say no to everything,’ insisting, ‘I’m going ahead without looking over my shoulder.’”

Good Catholics everywhere cheered the words of the Holy Father, the Successor of St. Peter.

You see, they readily understood that a handful of far-right ideologues do not get to determine the course of Christ’s Church. It doesn’t matter if those ideologues represent semi-schismatic enclaves or write popular blogs. Christ the Lord has empowered the Church’s Magisterium in communion with the Successor of St. Peter to lead the People of God. Not them.

Nonetheless, sometimes it can be instructive to read these far-right ideologues. Doing so, reveals some things worth noting about the signs of the times; and, taking stock of those things, helps us to perform better the work of the New Evangelization.

Just what do these blogs reveal?

At first brush, it would seem that there has been a shift in the tectonic plates. At the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Francis, only a small minority of ‘radical traditionalists’ teetering on the edge of schism opposed the man ‘from the ends of the earth.’ Middle-of-the-road ‘conservative Catholic’ types withheld judgment about him, biding their time as he got to know his new flock. Since then, the climate has changed and the sands have shifted.

As a variety of far-right or ultra-conservative Catholic writers make clear, now the ‘in thing’ among their number seems to be to ‘distrust and vilify’ the Pope, not to ‘trust and verify’ him. Thus, far-right Catholic writers get their Catholic ‘street cred’ by maligning the Pope as a chief plotter against the faith.

That this is their modus operandi becomes clear after a moment’s inspection of the kind of blogs where they tend to gather on-line. They never seek to read the pontificate of Pope Francis through the lens of charity. Their first instinct is to punch first.

Thus, they eschew charity and ecclesial union, preferring division and animosity. That does not bespeak a Catholic ethos.

This surfaces a second point: The far-right has radicalized. A small number of blogs have sent a direct signal to no doubt well-meaning ‘conservative Catholics’ that it is now open season on Francis. In effect, these blogs have allowed themselves to become little more than sleeper cells of ‘ultra-conservative Catholic’ ideologues, sounding the alarm to arise and take up arms in a bitter civil war where victories are won only by way of resisting the Pope.

Scripture tells us that we will know Christians by their fruits. Yet so often the fruit of reading the blogs of far-right and ultra-conservatives Catholics is anger, not peace, sadness, not joy, and ecclesial division, not unity in Christ’s Spirit. Aren’t these the marks of the Evil One? Certainly, they’re not the traits of spiritually mature Catholics.

Thirdly, all this effectively means their program of radicalization is carried out in an extra-ecclesial context. On the frontlines of this new battle for the soul of Catholicism, self-appointed gate-keepers of Catholic orthodoxy fill the ether in concerted attempts to marginalize the voice of the Church’s duly appointed pastors. Lacking episcopal consecration and any claim to Apostolic succession, they constitute among themselves a sort of ‘parallel magisterium’ that determines for itself the prerogatives of the Pope, the content of authentic Catholic teaching, and the future direction of the Church’s pastoral ministry.

None of that is Catholic. But it might well be deeply Congregationalist.Of course, they carry on their war against the ‘Francis Revolution’ while claiming to launch their missives from the secure tactical ground of established Magisterial teaching. But, ironically, they balk if you point out that they lack the credentials, rank, and profile to command their territory.

Cherry-picking the bishops to whom they adhere, and dividing the Church into political parties, they profess a libertarian ecclesiology that selectively adheres to the Church’s authority when it serves their spiritual preferences. Thus, far-right Catholic agitators entirely side-step serious theological questions about the nature of Catholic tradition, the definition of heresy, the extent of the Church’s canon law, the balance between doctrine and pastoral practice, the prerogatives of the pope, the meaningfulness of ecclesial communion, and the need for continental and lay consultation, opting instead for simplistic political drama.

Instead, they deal in innuendos, slander, and calumny. Those are their trademarks, not respect for the hierarchy of the Church and reverence for the truth.

And so, the fourth point: With their radicalization and de-ecclesialization comes their de-rationalization. They eschew the heavy-lifting of theology in preference for the sensationalism of political theater that finds no place for the common dialogue of parrhesia. Against any kind of synodality characterized by mutual listening, the discernment of spirits, or pastoral accompaniment, they opt for something Pope Francis has termed ‘declarationist nominalism’ – a form of political resistance theater to the ‘culture of encounter’ by way of a monologue in the form of one-dimensional pious platitudes.

When Pope Francis calls for a synodal Church that leaves no one outside the warm embrace of mercy, they envision a new Siege of Masada. They take on the guise of militants, perceiving themselves as the last defenders of Catholicism. Yet their war cries and battle slogans leave them sounding like un-catechized Catholics in great danger of slipping into Protestant forms of thinking.

Let us pray for them even as we continue to pray for His Holiness Pope Francis as he pursues the course the Holy Spirit reveals to him.

Cardinal Sarah calls for "ad orientem" worship and kneeing for Holy Communion. Is it enough?

 

“It is very important that we return as soon as possible to a common orientation, of priests and the faithful turned together in the same direction – eastwards or at least towards the apse – to the Lord who comes.” ... “I ask you to implement this practice wherever possible.”

He said that “prudence” and catechesis would be necessary, but told pastors to have “confidence that this is something good for the Church, something good for our people”.

“Your own pastoral judgement will determine how and when this is possible, but perhaps beginning this on the first Sunday of Advent this year, when we attend ‘the Lord who will come’ and ‘who will not delay’.

With these words, Robert Cardinal Sarah has pushed further the argument for a "reform of the reform" of the modernist liturgy forced upon the Catholic faithful by Paul VI.

What are we to think of this?

First, a suggestion is worthless, except that it may indicate a future command to come and that this is to soften up the troops, so to speak. You can count on objections and vehement fights against it. All we in the English speaking world need to do is to recall the fight over the correct translation of the Latin modernist liturgy into English.

Second, it is not going to save what Pope Benedict XVI called, the "Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite" because it is not enough.

The liturgy forced upon the Church by Paul VI was so far and removed from anything the Council Fathers desired in Sacrosanctum Concilium as to be nothing more than a complete break with the past. The problem with this Novus Ordo Missae is the Novus Ordo Missae. It is fundamentally flawed.

Nothing in the Council called for Mass facing the people and in fact, the ability to face liturgical east is already in the Missal where the priest is directed at the Orate Fratres and the Pax vobiscum, to face the people. This presumes that he is not. The Missal and its Graduale Romanum already provides for Gregorian chant, Latin Ordinary and text, incense, beauty, and so on. Why is it not done?

The ability to reform the reform is already there in every Missal and no priest needs permission to do it.

Fundamentally, turning the priest will fix little without more.

The Offertory of the Mass is nothing more than a minor Talumudic table blessing

Baruch atah Adonai Elohainu melech haolam hamotzli lechem min haaretz.Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who brings forth bread from the earth.

Baruch atah Adonai Elohainu melech haolam borai pri haaitz.Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who creates the fruit of the tree.

It was put in the Mass by Anibale Bugnini after an outrage by Paul VI because there was to be no resemblance of an Offertory in Bugnini's, "Presentation of the Gifts." The priest would receive the bread and wine from a contrived procession, prepare them and then say the "Prayer over the Gifts" leading directly into the Preface. No offertory prayer. No orate fratres. Paul VI demanded an Offertory and this is what we got. A Jewish talmudic table blessing which replaced this:

Accept, O Holy father, Almighty and Eternal God, this spotless host, which I, Your unworthy servant, offer to You, my living and true God, to atone for my numberless sins, offences, and negligences; on behalf of all here present and likewise for all faithful Christians living and dead, that it may profit me and them as a means of salvation to life everlasting. Amen.

O God,  ✠ Who in creating man didst exalt his nature very wonderfully and yet more wonderfully didst establish it anew; by the Mystery signified in the mingling of this water and wine, grant us to have part in the Godhead of Him Who hath deigned to become a partaker of our humanity, Jesus Christ, Thy Son our Lord; Who liveth and reigneth with Thee, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, world without end. Amen.

We offer unto Thee, O Lord, the chalice of salvation, entreating Thy mercy that our offering may ascend with a sweet fragrance in the sight of Thy divine Majesty, for our own salvation, and for that of the whole world. Amen.

Come Thou, the Sanctifier, Almighty and Everlasting God, and bless ✠ this sacrifice which is prepared for the glory of Thy holy Name.

How do you even begin to compare these prayers? Can an ardent defender of the modernist liturgy please explain it?

We are to believe that simply turning the priest around will fix what is wrong?

The problems of the penitential rite options, the Canon (Eucharistic Prayer) options and the actual orations themselves, changed or deleted entirely from the ancient Missal are even greater problems with the liturgy.

Until these options are removed, by order and the I Confess, Offertory and Roman Canon are mandated by law, then there can be no reform.

At the same time, we are to accept that girls and women should still assist at the altar, women should have their feet washed and communion should be given in the hand.

The Cardinal also said that people should return to communion, kneeling.

Has he tried that in a typical parish?

I applaud Cardinal Sarah for this beginning. The reality is, this, the bishops will ignore it and priests who take this on without the leadership of their Ordinary will be pilloried. 

It is a beginning. 

It is not enough.