Deus herbarius

[Bernard]

                                         

[Bernard]

The Sunset of a Papacy. Pope Francis also has his fans against him. By Antonio Socci

What is happening in the Catholic Church? Are we on the verge of an earthquake? There are lots of signs that would induce us to think so, and the article by Alberto Melloni from the columns of “La Repubblica” yesterday, is really quite sensational, revealing, as it does, the severe split on the part of some progressive Catholics from Pope Francis, whom they used to support enthusiastically.

 

Melloni, symbol of the “School of Bologna” and the “progressive wing of the Church – initiates his indictment by highlighting that the German Cardinal Marx, in his recent letter of  resignation, “was in effect asking for the Pope’s resignation”.

 

Marx is the leader of the powerful and affluent German Episcopate, which, through its Synod, seems to want a revolution. The German bishops are historically the supporters of Bergoglio, but their undue haste is not endorsed by him, and now they are plainly disappointed.

 

Melloni then cites other recent episodes, like the Papal Decree limiting to ten years “the mandate  of the leaders and bodies of lay ecclesial movements”. A norm – according to Melloni – that “constricts the rights of the faithful” and “establishes  the liquidation of the leaders presently serving, in the name of an ideologically defined good.”

 

 

 

Moreover, this is about the leaders of the movements, who are very much aligned to the Bergoglian Papacy and who, these past years, have practically faded away: you no longer see their vitality, nor their public appearances (and [therefore] in my view, the decree has some positive aspects).

 

 

Then Melloni criticizes the banishment of Enzo Bianchi from his community, which he in fact retains  “harmful to the ecumenical credibility of the Church”.

 

He then attacks the inspection of the Congregation of the Clergy, ordered by Bergoglio –an “action” Melloni says “that is unprecedented and useless…illustrating what roughness those who have served the Pope loyally are treated with– for example, the retiring Prefect, Cardinal Stella,

 

It should be borne in mind that Cardinal Stella is thought to be one of the strategists in Bergoglio’s election of 2013, therefore this is another serious rupture in the Pontiff’s world.  Melloni criticizes likewise “the audit of the Vicariate of Rome” arranged by Bergoglio, who is charged with giving ‘credence to chatter”.  

 

Melloni is extremely harsh about the entire Cardinal Becciu affair. In his view it is likely that “the indictment is still extremely fragile” and we would want to “avoid  a pointed defense which would send world-wide, a trial of the central government.”

 

Behind these and other episodes, Melloni explains: “some see the excessive influx of coarse advisors; others his authoritarian attitude […..…].  But the increase in such cases, according to the progressive intellectual, “is preparing for a tempest”.

 

It is not the first “missile” raining down on Bergoglio from the clerical left. But now his increasing isolation appears clear: it’s enough to consider the cases listed by Melloni (Cardinal Marx and the German Bishops, the lay ecclesial movements, Enzo Bianchi, Cardinal Becciu, the Vicariate) to realize that they are all figures and worlds supporting him.

 

The Argentine Pope is a complex personality, at times difficult to decipher. Some of his initial  emphases on Jesus  touched deep cords like the need for mercy for modern man, but the Gospel says the Good Shepherd is also the Truth made Flesh and asks for conversion.  

 

In his present solitude, the Pope finds himself having to acknowledge bitterly that his Papacy, for some time now, has been precipitating towards painful failure.

 

Even the historical leader of the Community of St. Egidio, Andrea Riccardi, for whom the Vatican is a second home, published a book entitled: “The Church is burning: the crisis and future of Christianity”, where he envisions an apocalyptic scenario: “the end of Catholicism” and “a world without the Church”.

 

If you consider how Bergoglio was acclaimed at the very beginning by the ecclesiastical world (the dream was: a triumphant “Bergoglio effect” ) you can understand how intense the disillusionment is today.

 

After these past eight years – the Church – has not flourished, but appears annihilated.  Religious life is in a comatose state. The Church’s central government, in the Vatican, is in permanent chaos.  Confusion, even doctrinal, reigns supreme in the entire ecclesial community. The balance of Sunday Mass attendance is devastating and vocations are now in free-fall (among other things, with the collapse of sacramental marriages). The clergy and the bishops seem to have gone adrift.

 

Those who thought that breaking with the great pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI would have assured a bright future, are today disproved.  Those –like Bergoglio -  perhaps with the best intentions –  who were under the illusion that the Church, by immerging itself in the world, could be invigorated, today are witnessing a historical defeat.  

 

On the other hand, the sociologists of religion – like Rodney Stark – had demonstrated this for years (after all, the Gospel says that if salt loses its flavor it becomes unusable).

 

Today the voice of the Church cannot be distinguished from that of the United Nations.  The voice of Peter does not counter the dominant, secular, leftist ideologies;  actually it is often in harmony with them  - and -  with such politicization – generates bewilderment in the faithful and enthusiasm for the all-time enemies of the Church.

 

Apart from rare interventions from Benedict XVI, you no longer hear a Catholic voice directing believers and  all peoples, in continuity with the constant Magisterium of the Church. Never has the Church been so conformist and so irrelevant in the world on questions of enormous importance for all of mankind.

 

They have created a “desert” and called it “revolution”. But every revolution devours its children and now there has been a rupture between Bergoglio and his supporters.

 

The current crisis might induce him into resigning (probably not) or carry on desperately, awaiting the “tempest”  announced by Melloni.

 

In conclusion, there is a third possibility: Pope Francis could acknowledge that the attempt to give a future to the Church by adapting it to a worldly mentality has failed and the right road is that of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. It seems impossibile -  like miracles.  But they can happen.  

 

Today great courage is needed of course to recapture the heroic way of Popes Wojtyla and Ratzinger, because this is a time of persecutions.   Benedict XVI, in his last intervention, affirmed that “the real threat to the Church, and thus for the Petrine Service, comes from the universal dictatorship of ideologies apparently humanistic; contradicting them involves exclusion by the basic consensus of society.”  

 

Ratzinger listed the dogmas of these ideologies, underlining that “today those who oppose them are socially excommunicated….  Modern society” he added “ intends formulating an anti-Christian credo: those who contest it are punished by social excommunication.  Being afraid of this spiritual power of the Anti-Christ is all too natural.”

 

But Francis (besides God) would have Benedict XVI at his side and all the remaining faithful Catholics of the world -  and there are many. In this way the Church could truly help in the freeing and freedoms of people.

 

 Translation: Contributor, Francesca Romana

 

 

RORATE CÆLI: The Sunset of a Papacy. Pope Francis also has his fans against him. By Antonio Socci

RORATE-CAELI.BLOGSPOT.COM

---

  Antonio Socci Libero June 16, 2021 What is happening in the Catholic Church? Are we on the verge of an earthquake? There are lots of s...

 

CONTRO PAPA BERGOGLIO ANCHE I SUOI FAN. UN PONTIFICATO AL TRAMONTO - Lo StranieroLo Straniero

WWW.ANTONIOSOCCI.COM

---

Cosa sta succedendo nella Chiesa Cattolica? Siamo alla vigilia di un terremoto? Molti segnali inducono a pensarlo e quello arrivato ieri dalle colonne di “Repubblica” – a firma di Alberto Melloni – è...

 

[Bernard]

From Summorum Pontificum to Traditionis Custodes, or From the Reserve to the Zoo

What follows is an article giving initial thoughts prepared by the FSSPX.News team. An official statement will be released from the General House of the Society of Saint Pius X in due course.

On July 16, 2021, Pope Francis issued a motu proprio whose title could be a harbinger of hope: Traditionis custodes, “Guardians of Tradition.” Knowing that he is addressing the bishops, one might begin to hope that Tradition will be returned to the Church.

On the contrary, this new motu proprio undertakes an elimination. It illustrates the precariousness of the current magisterium and signals the expiration date of Benedict XVI’s Summorum pontificum, which has not even celebrated its fifteenth anniversary.

Everything, or just about everything in Summorum pontificum, is scattered, abandoned, or destroyed. The purpose, moreover, is clearly stated in the letter which accompanies this liquidation.

The pope lists two principles “on how to proceed in dioceses”:

on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II, and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the 'holy People of God.' 

 

A scheduled extinction

While Francis defends an endangered animal or plant species, he decides and promulgates the extinction of those who are attached to the immemorial rite of the Holy Mass. This species no longer has the right to live: it must disappear. And all means will be used to achieve this result.

And first, there is a strict reduction in freedom. Until now, the locations reserved for the ancient rite had a certain latitude of movement, a bit like reservations. Today we have switched to the zoo regime: cages, narrowly circumscribed and demarcated. Their number is strictly monitored, and once installed, it will be forbidden to provide any more.

The guardians - or should we say the jailers? - are none other than the bishops themselves.

All this is specified in article 3, §2: “The bishop of the diocese… . is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes).”

The internal regulations of these jails are strictly controlled (article 3, §3): “The bishop … is to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962.”

This control extends to the least little detail (ibidem): “In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences.” No question of using Dom Lefebvre’s translation [or the Douay Rheims] or an old lectionary.

Euthanasia is envisioned for the specimens judged unsuitable for palliative care (article 3, §5): “The bishop is … to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them.”

The reserve is abolished as a whole, since the Ecclesia Dei Commission disappears (article 6): “Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.”.

Migrants prohibited

While the pope does not stop caring for all types of migrants, the prisons he installs are strictly forbidden from all intrusion.

To be sure that wildcat reservations are not set up, the pope forbids any extensions of the prison

(article 3, §6): “The bishop (...) will take care not to authorize the constitution of new groups.”

This measure is akin to sterilization: it is forbidden to reproduce and perpetuate these savages of the past who must disappear.

This sterilization also concerns priests who will be ordained in the future (article 4): “Priests ordained after the publication of this Motu proprio, who intend to celebrate with the Missale Romanum of 1962, must make a formal request to the diocesan bishop who will consult the Apostolic See before granting the authorization.”

Regarding priests who already have authorization, they henceforth need a renewal of their “celebratory” pass, which is apparently a temporary visa (article 5): “Priests who already celebrate according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.”

Thus, if it is a question of restraining, reducing, or even destroying groups, the bishops have carte blanche, but if it there is a need to grant authorization, the pope does not trust them: it is necessary to go through Rome.

While dozens of priests, often supported by their bishops, have defied the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith by “blessing” homosexual couples, without any Roman reaction, except a veiled approval by Francis through his message to Fr. Martin, future priests will be closely watched if they are thinking about celebrating according to the Mass of St. Pius V.

Obviously, it is easier to conceal your lack of authority by terrorizing the faithful who will not resist, than to mitigate the German schism, believing there is nothing more urgent than striking this part of the flock.

 

Vaccination against “Lefebvrism”

The great fear of contamination by the Lefebvrist virus is exorcised by the obligatory Vatican II vaccine – from the Moderno laboratory, (article 3, §1):  The bishop “is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs.”

And anything that could be a source of potential infection is eliminated without pity

(article 8): “Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated.”

Carried away by his enthusiasm, the pope almost comes to the point of saying that it is the Old Mass which is a dangerous virus that must be defended against. Thus, in Article 1 he specifies: “The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

If the Novus ordo is the soul expression of lex orandi, how is the Tridentine Mass to be qualified? Is it in a state of liturgical or canonical weightlessness? Does it not even have a right to a place beside the Dominican Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, or the Lyonnais Rite in the Latin Church?

This is what seems to emerge from what the pope says in the letter accompanying the motu proprio. Without seeming to suspect the paralogism he is committing, he writes: “I take comfort in this decision from the fact that, after the Council of Trent, St. Pius V also abrogated all the rites that could not claim a proven antiquity, establishing for the whole Latin Church a single Missale Romanum. For four centuries this Missale Romanum, promulgated by St. Pius V was thus the principal expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite, and functioned to maintain the unity of the Church.”

The logical conclusion which flows from this comparison is that this rite must be maintained. Especially as the bull Quo primum of St. Pius V protects it from all attacks.

This was confirmed by the commission of cardinals convened by John Paul II, who said almost unanimously (8 out of 9) that a bishop could not prevent a priest from celebrating it, after unanimously stating that it had never been forbidden.

And this is what Pope Benedict XVI accepted and endorsed in Summorum pontificum.

But for Francis, the ancient rites maintained by St. Pius V, including the Tridentine Mass, seem to have no unifying value. The new rite alone, with its fifty years of existence, infinite variations, and innumerable abuses, is capable of giving liturgical unity to the Church. The misunderstanding is glaring.

Returning to his idea of eliminating the species, the pope writes to the bishops: “It is up to you to proceed in such a way as to return to a unitary form of celebration, and to determine case by case the reality of the groups which celebrate with this Missale Romanum.”

A law clearly opposed to the common good

The general impression that emerges from these documents – the motu proprio and the accompanying letter from the pope - gives the impression of sectarianism coupled with an overt abuse of power.

The traditional Mass belongs to the most intimate part of the common good in the Church. Restricting it, pushing it into ghettos, and ultimately planning its demise, can have no legitimacy. This law is not a law of the Church, because, as St. Thomas says, a law against the common good is no valid law.

There is also, in the ins and outs, an obvious tinge of the resentment manifested by certain angry proponents of the liturgical reform against the traditional mass. The bankruptcy of this reform is underlined, as in a chiaroscuro, by the success of Tradition and the Tridentine Mass.

That’s why they cannot take it. No doubt imagining that its total disappearance will make the faithful return to churches emptied of the sacred. The magnificent development of this celebration worthy of God only underscores their poverty: it is not the cause of the desertification produced by the new rite.

The fact remains that this motu proprio, which will sooner or later end in the oblivion of the history of the Church, is not good news in itself: it marks an abrupt end in the reappropriation of its Tradition by the Church, and it will delay the end of the crisis which has already been going on for more than sixty years.

As for the Society of Saint Pius X, it appreciates the stance of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, including admiration for his foresight, his prudence, and his faith.

[Bernard]

Like Cruel Scientists Who Torture Dogs, the Democrats Want to Teach Us Learned Helplessness

[Bernard]

 

[Bernard]

Are the religious organizations who operated the residential schools the real culprits, as many suppose? A careful examination shows that supposition to be flawed.

The History of Canada's Residential Schools

https://www.academia.edu/49898663/The_History_of_Canadas_Residential_Schools

[mirko1929]

Тардиционалисти се не сећају каква је ситуација била пре концила (у томе су као ови југоносталгичари рођени након распада СФРЈ). Дођу људи на мису, а поп је измумла себи у браду за 10-15 минута, док народ за то време решава укрштене речи, попуњава пореску документацију и сл. док они мало посвећенији моле круницу како би максимизовали индулгенције. А и да не помињем оне обичаје да уплатиш попу да ти одслужи 5 миса да ти роди њива, или 10 миса да ти смањи време боравка бабе у чистилишту. То је све исправна литургијска свест, и права хришћанска побожност је ли?

[Bernard]

Over the past fortnight, some dozen churches in Canada, many serving indigenous people, were torched. A dozen more, most in non-indigenous contexts, were vandalized. “Burn it all down,” tweeted the director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, to supportive cheers even in the legal community.

The chaos ensued after discovery of the remains of hundreds of indigenous youths, buried near the residential schools in which they were enrolled under a policy backed by the Indian Act of 1876, amendments to which in 1894 and 1920 made attendance at residential or industrial schools compulsory for those who lacked access to day schools. The last of the former, many of which were operated by the Catholic Church, closed its doors in 1996. Over more than a century, about 140,000 children passed through these schools. Upward of four thousand—perhaps as many as ten thousand—passed away while attending them or expired soon afterward.

How could this be? Who is responsible? Are the religious organizations who operated the residential schools the real culprits, as many suppose? A careful examination shows that supposition to be flawed. The tragedy, as we shall see, and the crimes it involved—crimes some are falsely characterizing as genocide—began with government-mandated violation of parental rights, an error gaining currency again today.

Head of B.C. civil liberties group under fire over ‘burn it all down’ tweet | Globalnews.ca

GLOBALNEWS.CA

---

The tweet was in response to a news article about fires that destroyed two Catholic churches in the wake of the discovery of human remains at multiple former residential schools.

 

[Bernard]

Ali bo naše telo preživelo naše možgane?

 

Kljub temu da Evropa predstavlja en del svetovnega prebivalstva, v njej živi kar 30% vseh do sedaj registriranih bolnikov z demenco. In tudi napovedi za prihodnost niso nič kaj spodbudne. Na svetovni ravni naj bi skupno število dementnih, 25 milijonov ljudi, kolikor jih je bilo leta 2000, do leta 2050 bo poskočilo na 65 milijonov! V starosti 80 let, kot nam grozi statistika, pa bo dementen že vsak drug starostnik.

 

Torej, če bomo še naprej uvažali zahodne življenjske sloge, bomo verjetno skupaj z njimi uvozili tipično zahodno statistiko – če dočakamo jutro svojega 80. rojstnega dne, se nam zna zgoditi, ali da sami ne bomo prepoznali osebe ob sebi ali pa da ona ne bo prepoznala nas.

 

 

V prvo skupino vzrokov za propad možganov prištevamo razna pomanjkanja na katera se možgani odzovejo s poškodbami. Da sodijo poškodbe na živčevju in možganih med takšne, ki jih je najtežje sanirati, se danes zavedajo le redki, čeprav je to znanje že dolgo dosegljivo.

 

Že pred skoraj tisoč leti je sv. Hildegarda vedela, da možgani ne smejo biti "na suhem". Zapisala je, da morajo biti "mokri in mastni", da bi lahko normalno delovali, kar je prav neverjetna ugotovitev, če pomislimo, da v tistem času še niso secirali trupel. In današnja znanost lahko te njene ugotovitve le še potrdi – možgani ne morejo delovati, če nimajo dovolj zraka, vode in maščob (esencialne maščobne kisline).

 

Lahko bi rekli, da so možgani predvsem mešanica vode in maščobe. Morda se smešno sliši, ampak dejansko imamo v glavi majonezi podobno snov, ki ji obliko daje le tanka ovojnica, ta pa je prav tako sestavljena predvsem iz maščob in holesterola. Zato so možgani zelo pozorni na to, kako pogosto jih "podmažemo" in s čim.

 

Zmote o maščobah so ogrozile zdravje več generacij. Zdaj plačujemo davek za obdobje, ko so rafinirana olja in hidrogenirane maščobe postali najbolj pogosta oblika maščob v naši prehrani.

 

Vse se je začelo po želji po večjem dobičku. Zakaj bi bile, soja, oljna repica (Brassica napus subsp. napus)  in sončnice le krma, če so lahko (pre)dobro plačano živilo? Tako se je v industriji pojavila nova potreba, na kateri sloni celotna današnja globalizacija – razvoj takšnih maščob, ki bodo imele zelo dolge roke uporabe in se njihove lastnosti ne bodo spreminjale. Začeli so se postopki rafiniranja, homogeniziranja, hidrogeniranja in v zadnjem času še esterificiranja (kar je še hujše od hidrogeniranja) maščob.

[Bernard]

Dejstvo je, da tako obdelane maščobe samo še spominjajo na naravno surovino, iz katere so nastale. Johanna Budwig je menila, da so bolj podobne plastiki kot naravnemu živilu. In tu se začnejo tudi težave za naše možgane, in ne samo za možgane, tudi za želodec, trebušno slinavko, kosti, kri, kožo…….

 

Prva je odkrila kako so ecencialne maščobne kisline zelo pomembne za sleherno celično ovojnico v našem telesu. Brez njih bi bil človek le sod, poln vode. A celične ovojnice niso le vrečka, v kateri nahajajo deli celice. Imajo zelo pomembne naloge, ki zahtevajo veliko inteligence.

 

V ovojnicah se nahajajo receptorji, ki odločajo, ali neka snov sme v celico ali ne. Sposobni so prepoznati kakovostna živila in jim odpreti vrata in enako so sposobni zaznati STRUP ALI VIRUS pred katerimi bodo vrata celice pustili zaprta. Tako prihajajo v celico samo le snovi, ki jih ta potrebuje.

 

A celica seveda potrebuje tudi občasen odvoz smeti, saj ne more snovi le sprejemati. In tudi za to poskrbijo celične ovojnice oziroma receptorji v njih. Receptori so torej neke vrste poslovni menadžerji, ki jih imamo v celičnih ovojnicah.

 

Kvantna fizika je prišla do ugotovitve, ki nam lahko pomaga razumeti, s kakšno inteligenco imamo opravka. Če uživamo kakovostne, hladno stisnjene in nedegenerirane maščobe, uživamo tudi veliko biofotonov, ki so sposobni urejati 100.000 biokemičnih procesov v celicah. Pri močno obdelanih maščobah pa je število biofotonov zelo nizko, skoraj blizu ničli.

 

Zato se v metabolizmu celic začno pojavljati različne napake – celica se ne odpre takrat, ko gre mimo hrana, ali se ne odpre takrat, ko gredo mimo »smetarji«, ALI SE ODPRE TAKRAT KO GRE MIMO VIRUS.

 

Takšne napake sčasoma povzročijo vse več deformacij in tako je najprej v okvari ena celica, potem še druga in tretja, počasi pa je ogroženo že normalno delovanje tkiv in organov.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr. Johanna Budwig Foundation: Her Research

WWW.BUDWIG-STIFTUNG.DE

 

[Bernard]

 

[Bernard]

 

[Bernard]

Nova postsocialistična levica nima več gospodarskega projekta, na njegovo mesto je stopil kulturni projekt »družbenega inženiringa«.

 

Bitke se bijejo na področju bioetike, glede modela družine in vloge vere v javnem življenju, marginalizacija vernikov v razpravah pod pretvezo, da poskušajo vsiliti svoja lastna prepričanja celotni družbi.

 

»Progresizem« nove postsocialistične levice dojema Cerkev kot poslednji branik organiziranega odpora proti svojemu projektu, od tod izhaja njegova naraščajoča težnja k kristofobiji.

 

Če bi bilo treba izbrati en sam pojem s katerim bi povzeli vsebino pogleda na svet, ki ga zagovarja nova postsocialistična levica, bi bil to sigurno samo »relativizem«.

 

Dosledni relativizem bi vsekakor ovrgel tudi samega sebe, saj bi relativiziral tudi svojo lastno vsebino!

 

»Relativizem«, lasten novi levici, pa je v resnici neiskreni relativizem, ki prikriva absolutizacijo nekega zelo konkretnega pogleda na svet in človeka.

 

Domnevna relativizacija vrednot skriva v sebi projekt ničejanskega (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche) prevrednotenja obrnjene lestvice vrednot.

 

Relativizem je oblika epistemološkega pesimizma  - predpostavlja, da resnica ne obstaja ali je nedosegljiva.

Relativistična družba je družba, ki je izgubila zaupanje v razum – zaupanje v sposobnost doseči objektivno resnico na moralnem področju, in, splošneje, na katermkoli področju, ki gre preko meja znanstvene preverljivosti.

 

[Bernard]

The Upside-Down Church

Pope Francis can’t rest until all Catholics are modernists.

 

Pope Francis has often compared the Catholic Church to a “field hospital.” It is an odd analogy in his case, given his penchant for quackery and malpractice. The healthiest patients at his field hospital have their limbs hacked off while the sickest ones receive increased dosages of a medicine that doesn’t work. The pope’s conception of health in the body of Christ is the opposite of his predecessors. They saw the absence of orthodoxy as a cancer in the Church, whereas Pope Francis sees the persistent presence of orthodoxy as the poison.

According to this twisted view, the crisis in the Church derives not from the modernist heresy but from the unwillingness of Catholics to succumb to it. Laboring under this view, he has devoted much of his pontificate to undoing the post–Vatican II conservative retrenchment of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. In complaining about the Church’s reluctance to embrace “modern culture,” he has implicitly criticized those predecessors. Where they viewed the liberal “spirit” of Vatican II with concern, he welcomed it.

At the beginning of his pontificate, he lamented that the progressive promise of Vatican II hadn’t been fulfilled — “very little was done in that direction” — but that he had the “ambition to want to do something.”

The pope embodies the very division that he claims to deplore. He is dividing Catholics at the deepest possible level — from Catholic tradition itself.

The pope’s recent order curtailing the traditional Latin Mass is central to that ambition. He can’t rest until all Catholics have submitted to his modernism. In the past, popes instituted oaths against modern errors. This pope is eager to impose an oath in favor of them. In urging the bishops to marginalize the traditional Latin Mass, the pope reveals the depth of his contempt for Catholic tradition and his desire to cement in place a modernist redefinition of Catholicism.

Pope Benedict XVI used to talk about the theologians at Vatican II who wanted to start a new religion from scratch. He called them anarchic utopians. He said that “after the Second Vatican Council some were convinced that all would be made new, that another Church was being made, that the pre-conciliar Church was finished and we would have another, totally ‘other’ [Church].” That largely sums up the program of his successor. His decree against the traditional Latin Mass is designed to finish off the pre-conciliar Church. It severs any connection between the post–Vatican II Church and the pre–Vatican II Church, thereby allowing the modernists to monopolize the direction of the Church.

In order to take Catholicism out of Catholicism and turn it into an unspiritual and political quasi-religion, the modernists can’t abide any competition from the orthodox. Because the traditional Latin Mass movement was growing, particularly among young people and young priests, the pope had to kill it.

The onerous provisions in the decree will first ghettoize the old Mass, then snuff it out. The Church, already suffering from a vocations crisis, will lose even more vocations, as the decree in effect tells tradition-minded young men that the price of entry into the priesthood now is total submission to the pope’s modernism.

For a religion predicated on tradition, the suppression of tradition makes no sense unless the goal is to change that religion fundamentally. By “unity,” the pope means universal acceptance of that project. He is demanding that all Catholics view uncritically changes that have obviously weakened the faith. If they don’t, they are “divisive.”

The pope, of course, embodies the very division that he claims to deplore. He is dividing Catholics at the deepest possible level — from Catholic tradition itself. A “unity” rooted in heterodoxy is a sham. As the modernist Church stumbles from scandal to scandal, he dares to hold it up as the model of Catholicism to which all must aspire. His latest act of ecclesiastical tyranny is nothing more than an attempt to extract from the most faithful Catholics a pledge of allegiance to that crumbling Church.

The spectacle of a pope disloyal to Catholic tradition issuing loyalty litmus tests is an outrageous one. By disregarding the authority of past popes, Francis erases his own. He is not solving crises but creating them so that his modernist revolution can be fulfilled. In the past, orthodox Catholics defended the pope from enemies of the faith. Now they must defend the faith from a pope who has shown himself repeatedly to be their enemy.

https://spectator.org/latin-mass-pope-francis-upside-down-church/

[Bernard]

L’odio contro la Messa di sempre e la questione dell’obbedienza

                                 

 

L’odio contro la Messa di sempre e la questione dell’obbedienza – Aldo Maria Valli

WWW.ALDOMARIAVALLI.IT

---

Cari amici di Duc in altum, Massimo Viglione ha scritto questo articolo dopo la pubblicazione di Traditionis custodes. Una delle analisi più complete e più lucide che abbiamo letto a commento del...