Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 01

From the Editor’s Desk

By Michael J. Matt

ByChartres Pilgrimage 2014 the grace of God, The Remnant Tours will organize the U. S.

chapter of Our Lady of Guadalupe on Notre-Dame de Chretiente’s Pentecost Pilgrimage from Paris to Chartres, France for the 23rd consecutive time. The dates of the 3-day, 70-mile walk from Paris to Chartres are June 7 thru June 9, 2014. However, The Remnant will again be hosting a separate pilgrimage around the event, beginning on June 4 and returning to the States on June 16.

We will visit the South of France, with special emphasis on a pilgrimage to Lourdes. Final arrangements have not yet been made but, with Lourdes as the center piece, we hope to visit La Rochelle, Toulouse and Pau.

The reason for our visit to Lourdes should be obvious. It is one of the most important pilgrimage destinations in the world, after the Holy Land and the Eternal City. It is also one of the most beautiful Marian shrines on the face of the earth, nestled high in the Pyrenees Mountains. We will visit the home of St. Bernadette, of course, bathe in the miraculous waters, and offer the Traditional Latin Mass in the basilica every day.

Toulouse holds great significance for Catholics, as well, as it is the final resting place of St. Thomas Aquinas.

The saint`s remains were placed in the Church of the Jacobins in Toulouse in

~ Editor's Desk/ Page 2

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 01

"I Who am Your Mother"

Our Lady of Guadalupe

By Andrew J. Clarendon Editor’s Note: At the recent Angelus Press Conference in Kansas City, Professor Andrew Clarendon presented a keynote address which not unlike his masterful presentation on Pope Pius XII at last year’s Conference, provided brilliant and inspiring analysis that enables us to better understand where we stand in history’s context. Many thanks to Professor Clarendon for allowing us to publish a transcript of his powerful address, and may Our Lady of Guadalupe—who many centuries ago claimed this land as her own, thus tearing it from the cloven clutches of the Serpent—be with us now as the satanic darkness of old returns to the shores of the new world. MJM

History

is a tricky subject. It is an attempt to find trends and patterns in the sometimes chaotic drama of past human events to help us in the present, although it remains true that "human kind / Cannot bear very much reality"

1

and that the same lessons have to be taught over and over. From Saint Paul and Saint Augustine to Dostoevsky and T. S. Eliot many have pointed out how perilous the gift of free will is. In spite of or perhaps because of fallen human will, though, history is really a description of events that involve the plan of Divine Providence, the mysterious entrance of the eternal into time that makes moments in time eternally redeemed. It usually takes many years, even centuries, to really appreciate the ramifications, but there are events that, with our limited human vision, we can say are an extraordinary intervention

1 T. S. Eliot, "Burnt Norton" in Four Quartets (New York: A Harvest Book, Harcourt Brace & Company, 1971), 42-43.

by Providence to further the merciful aims of the Trinity. Such an occasion is the series of apparitions of Our Lady from December 9 to December 12, 1531 beginning on the hill of Tepeyac north of Tenochtitlán, today’s Mexico City. Like everything else in history, in addition to immeasurable eternal consequences, what happened in this particular time and place happened in the midst of a historical context and is a part of a particular pattern of events. So, before discussing the apparitions, I’d like to begin this evening by providing some of this context.

~ Guadalupe/ Page 8

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 01

The Beatification of Monsignor Vladimir Ghika: Priest and Martyr

...Monsignor

Ghika

By Louise Gherasim

The

"Nothing is more precious than being jailed for Jesus Christ."

TheWorlds,

my husband, who passed away on February 26, 2013, spoke of his friendship with this great man during those horrendous days and nights, in one of the worst of Romania’s cruel Communist prisons.

"Here was a man who gave himself completely to God’s service…The great love of his life was to do good for the suffering humanity."

Both the Mgr. and my husband were originally from the same part of Romania, Bucovina. So a strong bond of friendship grew between them. They last few weeks have seen much written regarding the Beatification of Mgr. Ghika, as well as his life story. This Romanian priest who shared the same cell in the Jilava prison as my beloved husband, Dr. Teodor Gherasim, was a

most remarkable man.

In his autobiography,

Astride 2

~

Beatification/

Page

5

Mons. Vladimir Ghika

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 02

From the Editor's Desk...

C P

1369, and our 50 American pilgrims will venerate the Angelic Doctor’s remains.

The Remnant pilgrimages are Catholic immersion programs designed to reintroduce pilgrims to Catholic history, culture and spirituality. As in years past, the pilgrimage will be guided by outstanding historians, writers, apologists, and priests. Having already signed up Father Gregory Pendergraft, FSSP, as chaplain, Dr. John Rao as resident historian and James Bogle as guide and quintessential Catholic storyteller, there are a few other Catholic leaders we are courting in the hopes of providing another uniquely Catholic and anti-revisionist historical pilgrimage.

Remnant Tours also strives to provide comfortable lodging, good food and drink and various entertainments that aid our pilgrims in seeing, breathing, and living Christendom as much as possible in a Christophobic day and age—always with the Traditional Latin Mass at the heart of everything.

The cost of this event, including airfare, will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $3000, and we are currently accepting non-refundable $400 down payments.

The Pilgrimage to Chartres is not for the faint of heart. Walking 70 miles over the course of 3 days is not easy, even for the young and fit. But our friends at Notre-Dame de Chretiente do a superb job in providing transportation (for the walking wounded) in the afternoons, plenty of medical and first aid assistance, along with the organizational measures required to safely usher 10,000 Catholics from Notre-Dame in Paris to Notre-Dame in Chartres.

The late, great Michael Davies, with whom I had the pleasure of walking to Chartres many times, used to describe the Chartres Pilgrimage as the "most important annual event in the Catholic Church today." I wholeheartedly agree, of course, which is why it has been my honor to lead the U.S. chapter for over twenty years. For more information or to reserve your place, send inquiries (or down payments) to: The Remnant Tours PO Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025 The Lefebvre Documentary

Last night my older children and I sat down to watch the new documentary on Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre being promoted by our friends at Angelus Press. We were happy to discover that the AP promotional blurb is spot on: "For the first time ever, the life of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre is available in a feature-length documentary film.

This professional documentary examines the entirety of the Archbishop’s life: From his childhood in France to his seminary days in Rome, and from Rome to the missions, all the way through his role as Apostolic Delegate, Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers, the Conciliar period, and finally, his great work of Catholic Tradition: the Society of St. Pius X. Drawing heavily on new interviews conducted with his family, friends, priests who worked with him in Africa, as well as many who knew him, this telling of Archbishop Lefebvre’s life is like no other."

This is no exaggeration. Having lived through the last years of the Archbishop’s storied career, the second half of the documentary was not unlike a brilliantly-produced home movie. It brought it all back—the early days of the troubles, what Archbishop Lefebvre had famously called the "French Revolution of the Catholic Church", Vatican II and its unholy aftermath, the introduction of the New Mass, the wild days of aggiornamento and, of course, the men who risked everything in a heroic attempt to keep the Church Catholic. With video and audio of many of the Archbishop’s addresses, I was reminded anew of just how holy, prophetic, fearless, humble, charitable and quintessentially Catholic the man was. As he spoke and I listened, hazily remembering the kind face as it had looked down on me long ago when I’d received the Sacrament of Confirmation from the Archbishop’s hand, it struck me how jaded I’ve become—the result of battle fatigue, no doubt, and yet something the great Archbishop seemed to keep at bay.

The famous smile, the soft-spoken, gentle way, the insistence that all is in God’s hands. No posing, no theatrics, no self-promotion. Just Catholic.

The documentary transports the viewer back to Africa and the staggering accomplishments of a truly great missionary priest, whose work continues to bear fruit in the lives of African Catholics (many of whom are interviewed in the film) to this day. The viewer can’t help but be struck by the fact that the man had already become one of the most extraordinary churchmen of his day, long before most of us had ever heard of him. He is famous for what he did in the last years of his life, but long before that it is no wonder Pius XII made him Apostolic Delegate for West Africa, causing him to emerge as the premier bishop of the Dark Continent; nor is it any wonder that he was named Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers. This was a man on fire for the faith, a missionary extraordinaire, who by all accounts was filled with palpable zeal for the salvation of souls, the rights of Christ the King, and the defense of the Catholic Church.

The documentary offers many interviews of Novus Ordo priests who to this day recall the great man who had dedicated his entire life to building Christendom in Africa one soul, one church, one seminary, one religious house, and one diocese one at time. He quite literally transformed the Church in Africa.

It should surprise no one, then, given his background that a few years later, the bishop who had stood fearless before the roaring lions of paganism in Africa would stand equally fearless before the traitors, liberals and revolutionaries who'd infiltrated the Catholic Church.

Because he refused to swap the old Faith for their new ideas, his brothers in the episcopate (with a few notable and courageous exceptions) plotted against him, hissing phony anathemas and finally expelling him from the Church he’d served more loyally than any of them. His crime? A refusal to go along with the spirit of the age.

"I have never changed. I have preached and done what the Church has always taught. I have never changed what the Church said in the Council of Trent and at the First Vatican Council. So who has changed? It is the enemy, as Pope St.

Pius X said, the enemy who is working within the Church because he wants the Church to be finished with her tradition." (Archbishop Lefebvre, Homily, Venice, April 7, 1980) …It was late, and it was a school night.

My 15-year-old son, Walter, transfixed by the man whose life was unfolding in vivid color and dramatic black-andwhite on the screen before him, observed through the darkness of the family living room that which millions had somehow overlooked in the wild frenzy of revolution at the time: "Dad," he said, "I don’t get it. He was right…and he was obviously a saint. Why didn’t anybody realize that?"

Indeed! It doesn’t matter where you stand vis-à-vis the Society of St. Pius X and its irregular canonical standing.

If you want to know what happened to your Church, if you want your children to know what happened—watch this documentary. It is not a work of SSPX propaganda, if you will. It is a straightforward video record of what happened, and as such can be shown to anyone, anywhere, who is interested in knowing more about what the Church used to look like, what a missionary really is, and how Vatican II changed everything.

And on a personal note, let me say this: It is no exaggeration to say that this documentary made me want to become a better Catholic. His life (and this film) is just that inspiring. I am proud to offer The Remnant’s unconditional and full endorsement of perhaps the most important Catholic documentary ever produced. For more information please visit www.lefebvrethemovie.org The Michael Voris/Mark Shea Debate

On October 8, 2013 it was my pleasure to moderate a debate between Church Militant TV host, Michael Voris, and Catholic apologist and author, Mark Shea. The debate was hosted by the Argument of the Month (AOTM)—the highly successful men’s club based here in St. Paul and headed up by my friend and ally, Kent Wuchterl.

The event attracted a record crowd of some 600 Catholic men, due to the rather unique format, two able Catholic spokesmen, famous for opposing each other’s tactics, and a controversial resolution on the crisis in the Church.

Remnant TV cameras were on hand in order to produce some promotional video clips of the event. Those clips are featured in the first episode of Season Two of The Remnant Underground, as well as an in-depth and candid discussion with Mr. Wuchterl about the debate and its fallout. The program is available online at http://www.youtube.

com/watch?v=aCcGJ3Tr2oU Hats off to Mr. Voris and Mr. Shea for a spirited debate on an issue impacting us all. Who won? It depends on your point of view and your understanding of the crisis in the Church. Although I tried to maintain some objectivity as moderator, I found myself in Mr.

Voris’ corner, of course, since I share his belief that the present crisis in the Church is unprecedented. In that sense, I would have to say that he emerged as the stronger contender. Mr. Shea, on the other hand, who is not a traditionalist, was nevertheless a worthy adversary and a good sport, and I'm confident that the debate resulted in 600 men thinking more deeply about their faith, the universal apostasy in the Church and their duty as Catholic men. In that sense, this was a major success for everyone involved, regardless of who won on points.

I encourage our readers to visit the AOTM website and to support this worthy initiative in prayer and in spirit (www.AOTMclub.com ). Catholics are waking up, perhaps not in great numbers yet, and the AOTM is proof positive that all is not lost. Deo Gratias! v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 03

The Remnant Speaks

( Letters to the Editor: The Remnant Speaks P.O. Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025. Editor@RemnantNewspaper.com) Please Remember Him in Your Prayers

Dear Remnant Readers: Please pray for Dick Bettencourt of Hanford, CA who passed away on August 31, 2013. He read The Remnant for many years. Thank you, Sylvia Bettencourt

Catholic Persecution under the Third Reich in Germany

Editor, The Remnant : Thank you for your inspiring speech at the Fatima Conference in Niagara Falls http://www. youtube.com/watch?v=KAPyfNiXRYU, I watched it on YouTube and it was well worth the time! I would like to thank you especially for pointing out the persecution of our Holy Mother the Church here in Germany during the Third Reich—a chapter all but forgotten in Church history. Greetings in Christ from your ancestors’ country, Konstantin Germany Thanks to Bishop Fellay

Editor, The Remnant : I would like to thank His Grace, Bishop Bernard Fellay of the SSPX, for his remarks of October 13 regarding the increasingly troubling statements of Pope Francis. His Grace’s recognition that there is a ".maj.or fight".

ahead was particularly reassuring. The relative silence from the Society over the past six months of this papacy has been deafening. I was starting to wonder if the Society was just going to sit this one out, or worse, exchange silence for canonical recognition. I’m glad to see that this does not seem to be the case. In God’s grace, the restoration continues!

Vincent LaVigna, J.D., M.A. Austin, TX

On Pope Francis

Editor, The Remnant: I want to thank James Cunningham for his letter appearing in the Sept 15 edition of The Remnant. I breathed a sigh of relief when I found out I was not the only one with reservations about Pope Francis, or "Casual Frank" as he is known in some circles. While I consider him to be a devoted priest on the parish level, in this day and age I worry about his leadership abilities. Many sing his accolades for his outreach to other religions but that’s one of the things that scares me. I feel that our faith has been constantly diluted since the mid-1960s.

Admittedly my views are probably not popular; I am a Tea Party conservative and a Traditional Latin Mass Catholic, so I probably have more enemies than Carter has pills. St.

Francis is one of my favorite saints; his compassion for his fellowmen and spirituality earned him canonization but I wouldn’t have wanted to see him as pope either.

Under Francis’s leadership I see us returning the dark days immediately following Vatican II that emptied our seminaries and convents and sent millions of Catholics running to Protestant religions. We all know many former Catholics who no longer see any difference between the mainstream Catholic church and Protestant sects.

My biggest concern is the future of the Tridentine Mass. When Francis was first elected Pope I saw that no Latin Masses were being offered in the entire Buenos Aries diocese. I’ve also read that although a number of priests approached him to gain permission to offer the Latin Mass they were denied. Like James Cunningham, I hope it’s just a bad dream, but something tells me otherwise. After seeing this coming I set up a website that is basically an information center regarding the Tridentine Mass— Mass schedules, a streaming daily live Tridentine Mass from the FSSP in Florida, traditional RSS feeds, and other Catholic links and sources, also a social network that traditional Catholics can join: http://www.tridentinecatholic.com Hopefully this site can help provide a little sanctuary during these troubling times. We all know our Church will endure but how much damage will we see this time.

Al Schroeder Jr. Elgin, Illinois The Remnant is Wrong Again!

Editor, The Remnant : I am disappointed in your choice of graphic in the article "Annulment: A Euphemism for Catholic Divorce?." In the picture, you depict a man at the wedding altar crossing his fingers, as though it is the man who typically desires to evade the results of his wedding vows.

I believe that your organization is honest, and upright, and does not seek to spin its articles, but the photo is shorthand for all of the garbage that feminism has been spewing out these many years. The fact is that over two thirds of marriage end due to instigation of the woman. The courts destroy families, and the ability of the father to raise, support, or even see his children due to the lies and machinations of the ex-wife. Look to your own article. Who is depicted as the one seeking to avoid

Se

N A C

ww

nullity? In only one case do you show a man filing for annulment; the other five of your examples show men fighting to keep their family together and staying truthful to their vows. Truly, Shame On You. If you would be a real counterforce to the culture, you would not let such calumny, real or implied, reinforce the cultural narrative that has made divorce acceptable, easy, and so destructive of the family.

Paul Andersen East Greenbush, New York Pilgrim Seeking Partners

Dear Remnant Readers: My name is Margaret Walsh and I am the oldest of six, traditionally raised children. I was introduced to the Traditional Latin Mass early in my life and fell in love with its beauty and reverence and was fortunate enough to have a Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter’s priest be the celebrant. I currently attend Thomas Aquinas College where I heard about the Chartres Pilgrimage through another student here. I never thought I would be able to go on a pilgrimage such as this, as I am a student with no funds, but I am hopeful that now this may be possible.

Having grown up with the Traditional Latin Mass, I am aware of the excellence of this form of the mass, and hence am eager to support it. In going on this pilgrimage, I would be bearing witness to my belief of the greater beauty and reverence of the Traditional Latin Mass, while joining with others of the same mind in a journey of prayer, fasting and penance.

Music has also been a big influence in my life, and though it may not be possible to sing in the cathedrals, I am still very eager to see the exquisite beauty of the cathedrals and at least imagine how wonderful they are when filled with the sound of sacred music.

However, my main intention for going would be to support the cause of the Traditional Latin Mass, as I hold this to be an important part of the life of the faithful. Included in my prayers during the pilgrimage would be my donors, who made this pilgrimage possible for me, my parents, and my godchild, who is my younger sister.

I am a strong advocate of the Traditional Latin Mass, and would like to support your efforts in campaigning for the Traditional Latin Mass through penance, prayer, and this pilgrimage. As I am a student, I do not have the funds necessary to make this holy journey, thus I ask for your charity to help me make this pilgrimage possible.

Margaret Walsh Thomas Aquinas College

Remnant Tours’ Youth Fund PO Box 1117 Forest Lake, MN 55025

Young pilgrims will walk the pilgrimage in the name of their sponsors. As in years past, the names of sponsors and their special intentions will also be carried to Chartres and read aloud each day on the Pilgrimage. The dates of the 2013 Remnant Pilgrimage are June 4 thru June 16, 2014. MJM

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 03

Is It Time to Renew Your Remnant Subscription?

*********************ALL FOR ADC 64240

030711 NOV 13 S98 P3 John Doe

1945 Main Street Anywhere, USA 55443

Please check your renewal date on the front page mailing label (see sample label above). If the second line reads NOV. 13 then your renewal date is November of 2013. If you send your renewal payment right away you’ll save us the costs of billing you. If all of our subscribers were to do this we’d save thousands of dollars per year.

Please Renew Right Now!

www.RemnantNewspaper.com

651-204-0145 The Remnant, PO Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 04

WANTED:

Persons in central North America willing to share knowledge via on-site lecture and discussion within the larger context of building toward a Catholic state by the 22nd century.

Free copy of Jean Oussett’s "Action" provided.

BACKGROUND: There are not enough resources to absorb the multifarious attacks of The Hydra in countless never-winnable defensive maneuverings. Thus, a concrete offensive, but limited in scope to that of available resources.

Some topics thus far: lecture "Planetary geography and its cosmological implications" (free, if distance & scheduling permits); books: Fernand Crombette’s "Essay of the Divine Geography", "If the World Only Knew"; also recommended, "The Framework of a Christian State".

Contact: Greg Groebner 20887 Nature Ave, Clements, MN 56224 Tele: 612-326-6555 email: Covadonga2092@MassSurvival.

org; http://www.MassSurvival.org/ ProjectCovadonga/Books.mht

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 04

Pope Francis and the Magnificent Rosary

By Stephanie Haupt

My husband and I have only recently begun to attend Latin Mass regularly.

For the past few weeks my husband has expressed his desire to have the family pray the Rosary every night. I full heartedly agreed with the suggestion, but emphasized that I wanted to understand the meaning better before we started.

I wasn’t interested in participating in something just for the sake of doing it.

Ironically about a month ago, we found a very old copy of the book "The Secret of the Rosary" by St. Louis de Montfort at a thrift store. Last night after I had gotten all of our kids to sleep, for whatever reason, I decided I was going to sit down and read the book. I sat down on the couch next to my laptop and thought I’d just quick check my email and maybe this paper’s webpage before starting the book. When I came to the page and saw a new Remnant Forum video had been posted about "praying versus prayers", I figured I'd watch to see what the latest news on Pope Francis was.

I was shocked to read and hear about his comments from his homily earlier that day about prayers. Among other things, he stated, "It’s one thing to pray, and another thing to say prayers...These do not pray, they abandon the faith and become disciples of a moralistic, casuistry ideology, without Jesus."

Those are clearly loaded words.

As I tried to digest the news, I remembered the book I had brought out.

I opened it, began to read, and within the first four pages saw that every single word printed went against everything Pope Francis had just preached. In Montfort’s introduction he says, "Therefore let all men, the learned and the ignorant, the just and the sinners, the great and the small praise and honor Jesus and Mary, night and day, by saying the Most Holy Rosary." He discusses how there is no limit to the power of the Rosary and through his own experience and others he had seen it successfully help sinners.

Montfort begins the book with the history of the Rosary, which is not only incredibly informative for those who don’t know (like myself), but it is also an awe inspiring story. The Rosary in the form we use today was received by Saint Dominic in the early 13th century by the Holy Mother herself. He was instructed to use it to convert sinners and preached it intensely throughout the rest of his life. However, it was quickly forgotten and dismissed until the 15th century after the plague. The Lord, and at another date the Holy Mother, came to Blessed Alan de la Roche and instructed him to once again begin the practice of praying the Rosary and preaching it again.

The book continues with explanations, stories, and methods to the Rosary.

It truly is an extraordinary book. It emphasizes over and over again the importance of prayer, "The Holy Rosary is the root and the storehouse of countless blessings." The book in its entirety does nothing but contradict the statements from Pope Francis. Reciting prayers and saying the Rosary are ways to strengthen our faith, not diminish it. In fact Montfort says, "Even if you suffer from dryness of soul, boredom and interior discouragement, never give up the least little bit of your Rosary – for this would be a sure sign of pride and faithlessness."

What I found extremely interesting were his discussions of evil attempting to pull people away from prayers, "then of course there is the devil who never tires of trying to distract us and keep us from praying". He gives the example of praying the Rosary, "When we have finished, he whispers to us: 'What you have just said is worthless...It’s only a waste of time to pray without paying attention to what you’re saying.’ By tricks of this kind the devil gets us to give up the Rosary altogether or hardly say it at all...or else change to some other devotion." I don’t want to make any implications, but it is exceedingly difficult to hide the parallels between the words hypothetically given here and pieces of the speech given by the Holy Father last week.

It is hard to not question Pope Francis when he spoke of praying in his homily. Of course it is in no one’s best interest to recite prayers without concentrating on what they’re saying, or to go through the motions with prayers. Perhaps in those instances it would indeed be more beneficial for the person to simply have a private discussion with the Lord.

However to insist that the recitation of prayers in general is falling to ideology is not only extreme, but goes against what the Church has taught us in the past. "When the Rosary is well said it gives Jesus and Mary more glory and it is more meritorious for the soul than any other prayer," Montfort writes. And he gives more than enough proof and examples to convince any nonbeliever.

As many other traditionalists are experiencing right now, it is incredibly disheartening to hear all of the latest views and speeches given by Pope Francis. To attempt to live the way we have been taught, and others have lived for hundreds of years before us, and then to be told we are fixating on the wrong things or falling to ideology through our prayers is difficult; especially since we are living in the wake of the positive strides towards traditionalism from Pope Benedict XVI. However, our solace is knowledge of the truth and hope that in time others will discover it as well.

As Montfort so powerfully proclaimed, "Now at last you must wake up, and if you want to live and die without sin, at least mortal sin, pray unceasingly; say your Rosary every day." v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 05

The Beatification of Monsignor Vladimir Ghika

C P

shared hours of prayer, meditation, and even food. The Mgr. insisted that Teodor, who was in his early twenties, should partake of his meager portion of bread: "You are young; you have more chances in surviving the Communist hell and tell the world about our ordeals. I know I’m going to die here, so my food is not as necessary for sustenance," he would often tell Teodor.

This saintly man died in his sleep at 80 years of age, following one of the many episodes of bestial torture, as he lay on the cold damp ground near my beloved husband in 1954, after two years of torment.

Our son Gabriel, writing on the internet shortly after the Beatification Ceremony, about this beautiful friendship, was privileged to receive an answer from the great, great niece of Mgr. Ghika. She wrote: "I heard a lot in the family about the story of your father, how he had been supported during detention. I can put a name now on this person who made a lot for Mgr. Ghika’s memory."

Here she was referring to the many letters sent to the Vatican and other church dignitaries by my husband, Teodor, commending the saintly man.

Who was the Priest-Martyr, Vladimir Ghika?

From the National Catholic Register, we learn that this Romanian priest descended from French and Romanian nobility. He was born on Christmas Day 1873 in Constantinople, where his father was the Romanian ambassador to the Ottoman Court. He was baptized into the Orthodox faith of his parents.

His education included medicine, art, botany, and political science in the schools of France. Later, he was drawn to theology and to Rome, where he converted to Catholicism at the age of 29. He spoke 22 languages and on the advice of his friend Pope Pius X, he became a lay missionary.

Returning to his country, Romania, he created a foundation for Catholic charity works. He established the first free medical clinic in Bucharest and the country's first ambulance service.

During WWI, he travelled to many dangerous places attending the wounded and refugees, as well as, victims of cholera.

He was 49 years old when he was ordained in Paris in 1923. He then spent the next seven years ministering to the poor in the most dangerous part of that city, Villejuif.

In 1939, at the outbreak of WWII, he returned to Romania as the first priest with Papal approval to celebrate both the Latin Catholic Mass and the Byzantinerite Liturgy, used by the Byzantine Catholic Church.

As WWII ended, the Russians occupied Romania. His family urged him to leave the country under Soviet occupation, but his response was: "If God wants me here, then here I remain."

In 1952, the KGB from Romania called Securitatea, arrested him and every other Catholic bishop and priest in Romania, particularly of the Byzantine-Catholic denomination, now deemed "illegal". In the notorious prison known as Jilava, he was brutally beaten, starved and attacked by police dogs. Over 80 times he was tortured with electric shocks and strangulation, as the interrogators were trying unsuccessfully to force him to invent various "anti-proletarian" charges on innocent individuals, priests and parishioners. Eventually, he lost his eyesight and hearing as a result of this brutality.

Nearing death, the saintly priest was heard to say, "Nothing is more precious than being jailed for Jesus Christ."

In closing this brief account of the life and death of this saintly man, I would like to recognize Victor Gaetan of the Catholic Register, who has provided us with some of this valuable information.

About the author:

Mrs. Louise Gherasim is a native of Ireland. She spent 35 years in classroom teaching everything from art, music, history, to English language and literature. She is an accomplished author, with an elegant literary style. She wrote 12 books for all ages, on Ireland and Romania. Books authored by the late Dr. Teodor Gherasim, include Astride 2 Worlds and Ancient Dictators, Modern Tyrants. More information is available on the link below: http://www.bestbitesbuys.com/ldpress.html

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 05

Obamacare: Organized Crime at Tax-Payer Expense

D M

is the proposed healthcare

Obamacare

reform requiring the mandatory purchase of dirty insurance to help advance Obama’s pro-death agenda. The reform can best be described as "murder of the unborn and elderly at tax-payers expense," since the money will be used to fund abortion and euthanasia, as well as other criminal causes such as sodomy and RFID implantation which are intimately tied with the culture of death.

Should Obamacare roll as planned, the authorized killing of patients will not be limited just to infants and elderly persons, but to anyone that the medical profession deems should be terminated at their discretion. The design of Obamacare is to place the knife and scalpel in the hands of the government where "big brother" decides the kind of treatment or mistreatment you get, or whether you even qualify to live.

Under Obamacare pregnancy will now be classed an "illness" that needs to be "cured" through lethal procedures that the parents of young girls won’t even need to be notified of.

I R O A R R R R RR R R R R J H R O R RR R S SMS C R D S A R R A S RR R R R R TR R O R O R R WR U WUO R A N O R R A S TRR R RR R R R B RR R G S R W R R R R R R R I R L HR R R R R R R R R US C H R R R TR S C R O o u necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of ul T C H R HR C R

R CR R R R T CP Thou shalt not steal! Thou shalt not commit adultery! Thou shalt not murder! B R A CR R RR A R R RR U R SRR S R O U O R S R U O R R TR RR A R R R R v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 06

When Skittles Was A Game

B S C P

Itwas midsummer, and we were at Greenfield Village, my grandson and I. We go so often we call it simply the Village—as opposed to the Museum, which is just down the road. Greenfield Village is a national treasure, established by Henry Ford, in Dearborn, Michigan.

It is said that Mr. Ford wanted children to learn history by experiencing it, so he built a place where old things seem new, and what has long been gone, reappears.

It’s no reproduction. The things are really old.

There are historic buildings— Ford’s own birthplace, a seventeenth century windmill, and a one-room schoolhouse. There’s a town hall and a doctor's office, a covered bridge, and a hundred year old Merry-Go-Round. The calliope plays Take Me Out to the Ballgame, and School Days, School Days, Dear Old Golden Rule Days. Bordered by a brick wall on one side, railroad tracks on another, and a wetland forest as a backdrop, the Village belongs to another world.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not idyllic. I’m not fooling myself. There are slave quarters, too—a reminder of a sad and unjust time in our history—and there is no Catholic Church to be found. Farming was hard work, and it’s hot in the glass blowing shop. Candle making is no picnic. The wax can burn little fingers. This is Earth, after all.

Nevertheless, a sense of goodness prevails. It is a simple place.

Buildings are people-sized.

Nothing moves too fast. There is the peace of order and quiet and wrongs made right. It’s so different from the way things are now, where confusion reigns and corruption goes unnoticed, where hopelessness suffocates cities and everything seems twisted. Nobody sings much anymore.

I go to the Village to visit our country’s past. And I bring my grandson so he can know how things once were in America. He can eat salmagundi and corn muffins at a trestle table at the Eagle Tavern, an inn that was once a stopover for stagecoaches.

In the dining room, there are candles in hurricane lamps, and salt is served in little bowls. The jam is homemade and the corn, home grown. After lunch, my grandson can ride a train pulled by the Torch Lake, the engine that once hauled copper in the Upper Peninsula.

And he can play on the Village Green.

That’s what he was doing the last day we were there. He walked on stilts and tried his hand at the beanbag toss. But what he liked best was Skittles.

There were six or seven boys, all about the same age, who took up the challenge of a game they had never heard of before.

I sat on the grass and watched them play—these boys who had never met, proving themselves in vigorous competition. It was fair and decent, just good, clean fun. I watched the sheer masculinity of it—the skill, the determination, the focus of those boys. They played to win, fiercely and with honor. There was no silly Everybody wins, there are no losers. There was victory, well deserved and acknowledged.

Someone wins, someone loses, and then they played again.

They were boys being boys.

While I was sitting there, daydreaming, thinking about boys and girls and how much has changed in this engineered gender-neutral society of ours, a young woman walked by. One of the Village workers (most likely a college student as many of the summer workers are), she was dressed in the style of the early twentieth century. Her ankle-length dress was pastel, dotted with flowers with a sash around her narrow waist. The fabric was lightweight cotton, probably muslin, and certainly not polyester. A soft, light-colored hat was set at an angle over her dark, upswept hair. She moved with dignity and style and grace.

I marveled at her beauty as she walked among the children.

As I watched, a young man approached her, clad as well in vintage attire--a beige suit, crisp white collar, and straw hat. She stopped, looked up at him, and took his arm. He smiled, and they strolled across the green, talking quietly. Every now and then, I heard her laugh softly.

She was the essence of femininity. She had captured what was lost.

How had she done that? I wondered.

The answer came as quickly as the question had formed in my mind. It was the clothes.

I’m not being simplistic here.

Those clothes changed her, I am sure of it. I wonder if she can maintain the same mystique when she goes back to her jeans or yoga pants. I doubt it.

A moment later, a stark contrast materialized in front of me. A small group of young women, four or five of them, all jostled together, walked by the Skittles game. They were about fifteen years old, visitors, I imagine, dressed in frayed denim shorts and low-cut shirts with trashy words printed across their chests.

Nothing was ironed. Every bulge showed. Their natural loveliness was eclipsed by the ugliness of their clothes. They were unkempt.

Their hair hung loose and tangled. They clomped when they walked, scowling, their shoulders hunched forward.

And then I heard them laugh.

It was more like a shriek, loud and raucous, as they grabbed each other and rushed across the grass. Dear God in Heaven, I thought. Those poor, poor girls.

It’s not their fault. They don’t know any better. No one has taught them. They have no model, not in the movies or the magazines. Not in the schools or in the books. The standards have been destroyed. Girls no longer walk with books on their heads to improve their posture nor learn to sit with their hands folded and their ankles crossed. They don’t know the joy of swirling skirts and lacy cuffs, of matching purses and shoes. Their jewelry is clunky; they don’t wear pearls. Unlike the radical feminists of the sixties and seventies, they don’t disdain ladylike comportment. They just have no idea what it is.

All through their childhood and school years, they’re directed to a cross-role identification. They are taught to emulate boys, compete with boys, and set the same goals as boys. Achievement is according to male standards. Nothing else matters. Forget the soft and gentle things. Don’t let anyone call you girl.

This new paradigm is supposed to enhance their self-esteem and assure them a coveted position in the world of business and government. Like Esau, they've sold their birthright, but the difference between them and Jacob’s brother is, they don’t even know what it was. They get less than pottage.

Marriage and family are supposed to be sidelines now, fit in after work and on the weekend. And that work is different, too. The traditionally feminine professions are spurned. They’re not good enough for the brilliant, upwardly mobile, 4.0 woman. Nursing and teaching are cast aside in favor of engineering, finance, and marketing. The work is brutal, the competition exhausting. That glass ceiling just won’t crack.

The workplace used to be called a man’s world, and even though no one wants to admit it, it still is. Strange as it may sound, and difficult for the young to understand, the old way existed for good reason. It was established to serve the family and, therefore, was of great benefit to the woman and her children. She could draw apart—free to love, to nurture, and to protect. Even her clothes bespoke that purpose, as did her manners. She was expected to be modest, lovely, a bit delicate, refined. And that was a good thing. A very good thing.

For the family to survive, this social structure and the accompanying mores must be restored--not only that, but they need to be encouraged and valued by women. Little does the modern girl know it—because everyone has told her the opposite-- but this structure is the key to satisfaction with her own work.

If she’ll just stop kicking against the goad, it will bring her joy.

But that’s a tough prescription.

Paradoxically, restoring the old

C N P

G V

C

gentle, pretty, lovely, or fragile

in describing women anymore? No, they use words like

hot

order of things would feel like rebellion. For women, who are naturally more accepting and compliant, it’s easier to just get with the program and let nature be damned.

So off they go to put in their forty hours (or fifty, if they want to climb the corporate ladder.) And they soon learn to their surprise that, in addition to talent and competence which women possess in full measure, male traits are necessary for worldly success. It requires a fixed focus, which is difficult for women because many of their responsibilities entail constant interruption—things like sick children, elderly parents, cooking, shopping, teaching, feeding. How they can concentrate on spreadsheets and production predictions when all these other things have to be done? Who’s going to do them?

Who else has the talent and the patience?

Besides, most women are circlemakers, more interested in drawing people together than pushing themselves forward.

Until their femininity is crushed, women are generally not aggressive. (Until now, I guess, when they have been granted a new opportunity—they get to go into combat. They can experience the joy of killing some other woman’s husband or son.

It won’t come easily, but, with enough training, by golly, they can do it. Hoist that M-16, man that tank!) From contact sports to the battlefield, all this is antithetical to womanliness. To appease the rage of a few miserable feminists, society has to be leveled. No distinctions allowed.

Girls are being required to force themselves into a way of thinking and acting that is alien to them, donning their masculinized persona like an ill-fitting coat.

Have you noticed that no one uses the words

or

sexy,

instead, and it makes me sick to my stomach. It’s shameful. (And speaking of shame, why do pregnant women wear those tight knit tops, outlining the contours of their life-swollen womb? That baby is supposed to be protected. Cover up that belly! Let’s have a little modesty here.) Can you see what’s happening?

Can you see the distortion of human nature? Come on now!

We’ve got to stop this before we’re all turned into barbarians. Reject the coarseness of this age. Refuse to march in their parade.

Be done with this travesty.

Here’s what we do. Take back your birthright. It’s not too late.

Don’t let anyone tell you that you don’t want to be a

lady.

Refuse to listen when they say that word is obsolete, those days are gone.

They’re wrong. You’re not one of the guys. Rather, you are given something wonderful. Modern society has obscured it, but it’s there. Unwrap it; behold the gift.

Don’t be afraid to dream dreams of hearth and home, of little children tugging your skirts and a husband who loves you more than life itself. Don’t be afraid to say you want babies, not birth control, and you have no desire to be the director of marketing for a Fortune 500 firm. Go forward.

Press on. Discover who you are and what you are called to be.

It’s a valiant struggle.

Society collapses when women abandon the high position— that much maligned

pedestal—

that assures the continuity of civilization. Somebody’s got to save the culture. Somebody’s got to polish the rough edges.

We need to insist that nature be respected. God created us male and female. He didn’t make a unisex world. We’re not supposed to be the same. Human nature is not androgynous. Let’s have a bit of divinely created diversity here.

If left to themselves, girls will be girls and boys will be boys.

Boys will play Skittles and girls will giggle. Dolls are for girls and trucks are for boys. Don’t mix it up.

For those of you who have been squeezed into a defeminized mold, break free. Start over.

Learn from the girl on the Village Green. Put on a pretty dress, toss the laborer’s pants in the trash, and buy a hat. You’ll feel

d ff

different, I promise you.

It's the first step. See what happens next.

The challenge is ours. Shall we begin? v

R S C P A Glory of the Olive, Burning Faith

The Iron Gate

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 07

Another Argument in Favor of Home-Schooling

Excerpt from The Man Who Got Even With God, by M. Raymond, O.C.S.O.

Education,

to be real, must be synonymous with edification.

Its whole purpose must be to "bring out" and to 'build up' the man that is buried in the boy, and build him up to the gigantic stature of Jesus Christ.

Secular education is not and cannot be education, because a man can never be educated unless he is "brought out" and led to God. The modern public school system, from kindergarten to state university, may teach a man how to make a living but it will never teach him how to make a life, and until man knows how to make a life, he is not educated.

Do understand me; I know that the laboratories of our schools and colleges are wonderlands of marvel and mystery.

It is a good thing to have gone through them; for it is a very good thing to know about physical and chemical changes; but it is much better to know about transubstantiation, for that is higher than any physical or chemical change; that is a miracle. It is a good thing to study biology and go in for physical hygiene, but it is far better to study what biology cannot teach – the birth of our God from a Virgin – and to go in for spiritual hygiene. It is a good thing to have studied the humanities, but it would have been far better to have studied the Divinity. To know the epics and the sagas of literature is a grand thing, but the saga of all sagas is that of the human family; and that is not taught in our learned literary circles, and the greatest of all epics – those of Creation and Redemption – are either unknown or ignored. Secular education teaches about the stars and the planets, and that is a good thing; but it does not teach about "our home beyond the stars" and about the maker of the planets, and that is a very bad thing! For the first without the second might be knowledge, the first with the second is wisdom. Until we aim at this wisdom in all our teachings, we will ever be the "blind leading the blind" – and that combination never has a happy ending.

It is the catechism that is the golden book of the world’s sublimest wisdom; it is the only true dream maker and character builder; for it is the textbook of all textbooks, man's very guide to God.v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 11

Alone With the Alone

By Timothy J Cullen " Nec minus solum, quam cum solus esset" 1 (Cicero: De Officis ; 3:1)

A once well know variation of these words (Nunquam minus solus, quam cum solus) was spoken to Blessed Henry Newman (1801-1890) by Edward Copleston, provost of Oriel College, Oxford, who approached the thenstudent while both were walking alone.

"The event left such an impression on Newman that he recorded it in his spiritual autobiography, the Apologia pro Vita Sua some forty years later."

2

Cicero’s words (ascribed by him to Cato) had been written to describe the Roman Emperor Scipio Africanus (236-183, B.C.), a noted recluse, who rejected being made either Consul for life or dictator and after being elected Censor in 199 B.C. eventually retired to solitude at his country estate where he remained for the rest of his life. Cardinal Newman, a convert to Catholicism, was to experience isolation from family and friends after his conversion, but was to become very active in public life, leading a movement in his native England "for lay people to be at the forefront of any public apologetics: '[Catholics should] make the excuse of this persecution for getting up a great organization, going round the towns giving lectures, or making speeches’."

3

Perhaps such a moment is once again upon Catholics—Traditional Catholics in particular—and it appears there are indications that such is the case.

Nevertheless, there will always be those for whom solitude, silence and contemplation speak with a stronger voice than words of protest, preferring the Word of God to the voices of those who claim to speak on His behalf.

God’s Word perhaps can be better heard in silence than through a bullhorn in the public square, though a bit of broadcasting can never hurt!

As he ages, this writer inclines ever-further to the meditative and contemplative nature that has grown within him to the kind of solidity now shown by the fruit trees he planted some eight years ago, trees now firmly rooted, flowering and, God willing, fruiting an abundant harvest. He sits in the sun on his porch, daily contemplating the miracle of creation that is renewed with the approach of Spring, when God’s Creation renews Its promise of life upon this orb of stone that is the home of fallen humankind. He is "far from the madding crowd" and is content to be so, offering his minim of ideas thanks to the courtesy of the Remnant and its publisher/editor, willing to share them with those who might find them of interest. These ideas are one older man’s point of view, ideas gleaned from an active life gone passive with the passage of time and an ear more attuned (one hopes!) to the "sounds of silence".

1 "Never less alone than when being solitary" (my translation).

2 http://www.newmanfriendsinternational.org/ newman/?p=634 3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Henry_Newman There is no "company" preferable to that of God, whose voice is best heard in silence. His speech is omnipresent for those who bend their inner ears to hear. He often speaks silently, speaks through the revelation of His Creation, "speaking" to His listeners by daily reminders of His glory unfolding before our very eyes, our ears, our simple human senses. Angry words, resentful words have no place in this dialogue. Neither lamentations, criticisms, warnings nor complaints make themselves heard, because all that is truly imperfect is found within ourselves, not in His Creation, save for ourselves who have gone astray. Yes, surely, the pope is flawed, the Church is flawed, but the Faith is not, and those who would keep the Faith know that to do so in silence is to do so before God, Who loves His Creation of which each and every one of us is a part, the one part that we are capable of recognizing without equivocation; the rest is beyond our fallen capacity to comprehend in its totality.

God is All. We are subsumed into God, and with good intention and proper preparation for the Four Last Things, we can complete the consummation so as to enjoy eternity in the state of the Beatific Vision. What God has willed for the world need not concern those who have chosen to leave the world and its tribulations to itself. Once upon a time, the monastic orders of contemplatives provided the means for those so inclined to do so, but in the words of Wordsworth, "the world is too much with us" and this is no longer true as once it was: the world has found its way into the contemplative orders by way of ecclesiastical structure and the cold realities of economic subsistence.

Blessed is the person who depends upon no one but God and one’s own efforts to provide the "daily bread" necessary to remain alive for another day to await God’s call to homecoming.

The Mass has been debased by those whose duty it is to preserve it in its pure form. Christ´s Church is now nearly unrecognizable to those who knew Her only half a century ago. Corruption is rife within Her, much of the clergy and its antics make one ashamed, yet the Faith transcends the Church and Her foibles, which are transitory not eternal.

The Faith from which the Church sprang forth resounds until the end of time, when the Church is subsumed into eternity, an appendage of the Faith that has served Her earthly purpose, a purpose known only to God. God’s Church is a Faith, not a flawed earthly bureaucracy peopled by fallen humans who claim to speak for a Faithful She seems to have chosen to cast aside in the interests of garnering approval of the faithless.

Obedience training works well with dogs, less so with humans gifted by God with reason. Catholics submit to obedience when one’s own conscience dictates that obedience is appropriate, or so believed St. Thomas Aquinas: "Consequently in matters touching the internal movement of the will man is not bound to obey his fellow-man, but God alone."

4 It is well to bear this in mind when the hierarchy of the Church (very possibly intentionally corrupted) dictates pastoral imperatives that on their face contradict nearly two thousand years of tradition to the contrary. The Church is meant to speak for God, but the Church is not God! The Church is composed of fallible, fallen humans touched by Grace but not with either omniscience or omnipotence, qualities possessed only by Her founder, Who has the final word.

Can one alone truly discern God’s design? We are taught that this is not so. But what of a Church that seems to have been co-opted by a malignant and humanly revolutionary force bent upon distorting the design that has been known through the ages? Must one bow down in obedience to such an institution? Must one ignore all that has gone before in favor of a "politically correct" orientation that amounts to a slap in the face to nearly two thousand years of tradition? This writer has his doubts, deep doubts, and prefers to rely upon a long history of teachings rather than jump onboard a Barque of Peter fashioned out of glue and baling wire to float upon the sea of fallen man's fashions. God bless and inspire Pope Francis, in whom he placed much hope, but until such time as he sees a clear course to the polar north of God, prefers to trust in his own comprehension of God’s guidance to salvation. Hubris?

Arrogance? Perhaps so. But until convinced otherwise, one man’s stance in solitude and silence.

Kneel, pray and listen: this writer has no other suggestion.

God alone guides us, though His Church is meant to do so. She has, however, over the course of nearly two millennia, until suddenly, some half a century ago, for reasons unknown, She changed course and left at least a remnant of the Faithful thoroughly

4 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica , II, II-104, Objection 3.

confused as to what God had ordained for those who believed in Him. Could His Church misguide the Faithful?

Dogma denies such a possibility, but everyday observation seems to lend it credence. Strong words, but not without careful consideration. Does one truly believe that a "priest" in a tie-dyed tunic with a dog as an "altar boy" truly has the power to interpret God’s Word to a congregation of near-illiterates who have been propagandized into believing that Christ came to Earth to preach not salvation but social "equality"?

One is all in favor of a more equitable distribution of the goods God bestowed upon His created souls, but not at the price of their eternal salvation: first things first!

Those who believe this to be true are in good conscience compelled to offer their criticisms to the Holy Father and those once upon a time compelled by the Church to obey his dictates, not vote upon them. This writer believes that His Holiness has been chosen by God and those sanctified to elect him to guide the Faithful in a time in which the Church is in clear decline. This writer hopes and prays that the Holy Father’s vision is more clear than his own. But this writer wishes that the pope’s ear is attuned to God, more so than his own, and that God’s message to fallen man not fall upon deaf ears among those who have gone astray, even among those who kneel in silence awaiting the one Voice that speaks the eternal truth.

One who listens alone for the voice of the Alone must await in silence, awaiting for the dictates of He Who decides our final fate. Our Church appears to have other things on Her mind. So be it. Meanwhile, however much one might laud Her pronouncements on behalf of the poor, this writer opts for the admittedly selfish option of salvation within the Church of his youth and the millennia rather than the social worker Church of 2013, A.D.

Alone with the ALONE is far from the worst place to be. God is with us, each and every one: in time, He is also with His Church. It is not for us to determine when that time will be. v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 12

Debating the Relevant Issues…

Catholic

Answers

Attacks "Radical Traditionalists"…Again!

By Peter Crenshaw

Conclusion Neo-Catholic Obsession With SSPX’s Non-Existent "Schism"

Theduo then took a call from the Remnant’s own Chris Ferrara, otherwise known as "Chris in Richmond." As Staples tried to interrupt twice, Chris made clear that the vast majority of Traditionalists are not sedevacantists, and asked further clarification as to what extent the duo considered the SSPX to be "radical traditionalists." Staples then basically asserted the SSPX were all radical traditionalists for various reasons including their 1988 "schismatic act" before thanking Chris for his call and trying to politely usher him out of the door before the commercial break.

Unfortunately for Staples, Coffin didn't get the memo and offered Chris the last word. Chris stated that he thought Staples had exonerated the Society from charges of schism. As Staples exclaimed "Oh no!" in horror in the background, Chris continued. Chris stated that he had a problem with Staples labeling the SSPX as schismatic. To support his case, Chris noted that the Richmond diocesan newspaper recently had to correct their previous description of the SSPX as schismatic. Staples then responded that both on the last broadcast and now again he was saying that the SSPX is not in schism, especially since the lifting of the excommunications. The duo then let Chris go, promising to take up the topic in the next hour.

The next hour began with Coffin lamenting the fact that certain listeners still seemed to think they were attacking all traditionalists, while Staples added that the last caller incorrectly thought they were exonerating the SSPX. Never in this lamentation did the duo realize the confusion might be one of their own making. Regardless, any hope of remedying the confusion was lost as Staples then launched into a discussion of schism.

Staples stated that there was much confusion over whether the SSPX was in a state of formal schism after their bishops were excommunicated in 1988.

Staples then correctly pointed out that the case of the SSPX is distinguishable from the Orthodox schism as the Orthodox bishops had formal sees whereas Archbishop Lefebvre did not. Although Staples stated canonists "disagreed" as to whether the SSPX was in schism in 1988, Staples thought they were all "splitting hairs."

Staples then astonishingly asserted that in his opinion, the SSPX was in formal schism from the consecrations in 1988 all the way up to the remitting of the excommunications of the SSPX bishops in 2009. Staples justified this incorrect private opinion by quoting paragraph 2089 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church , which defines schism as "the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

Thus, Staples incredibly took it upon himself to divine a private interpretation of a Catechism paragraph in order to determine that an entire Society of priests were in "formal schism" for over two decades.

Of course this private opinion of Staples is wrong and provably so. In 2005, well before the excommunications of the SSPX bishops were remitted in 2009, the head of Ecclesia Dei , Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, stated the following in an interview with the highly respected 30 Days magazine:

Your Eminence, what was the nature of the audience granted by the Pope to the Superior General of the Saint Pius X Fraternity?

DARÍOCASTRILLÓN HOYOS: The audience is part of a process that began with a very important intervention by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, who signed a protocol of agreement with Monsignor Lefebvre before the latter decided to proceed to the episcopal consecrations of 1988.

Monsignor Lefebvre did not back off… CASTRILLÓN HOYOS: Unfortunately Monsignor Lefebvre went ahead with the consecration and hence the situation of separation came about, even if it was not a formal schism. (Emphasis added)

1

Thus, the "formal schism" question regarding the Society has been closed for at least eight years. Per the head of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, the very Commission set up by John Paul II to have competence over these matters in 1988, the episcopal consecrations of

1 http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-20051130-hoyos-30days.htm

Archbishop Lefebvre did not create a formal schism. If Staples still disagrees, he is putting his private interpretation above that of the Church, something he accuses "radical traditionalists" of doing incessantly.

Staples then stated that Catholics can technically attend Society Masses, though if they continue they may be in danger of "imbibing" a "schismatic attitude" (as if schism were a disease one could catch). Of course, it is not clear how one can "imbibe" an attitude of separation from the Roman Pontiff at Society chapels when the Society accepts Pope Francis as the Roman Pontiff and prays for him at every Mass.

Furthermore, Neo-Catholics are often the ones who refuse communion with fellow Catholics who attend Society chapels and not the other way around.

Mike in Mobile then called in, still asking the duo to clarify whether he was a traditionalist or a "radical traditionalist." It should have been clear to the duo by now that they were causing even more confusion than their first broadcast. Staples told Mike to call his local diocese to ask whether a particular chapel was "in union with the Church" in order to tell whether radical traditionalist lurked therein. Thus, by this logic, if Mike ever visited Frank’s parish in Tucson he could be assured it is a parish in "full communion" with the Church. In addition, if Mike were, God forbid, ever inclined to move in with his girlfriend, he could rest assured that he’d still be able to distribute Holy Communion with Frank.

Novelty as Disciplinary Law of the Church Next, Michael in San Diego called.

Michael pointed out that Pius V’s bull Quo Primum forbade any changes to the Mass. Staples then reverted to the "Mass is completely changeable according to the whims of the pope" argument addressed extensively in my previous article responding to the first broadcast.

One difference is that this time Staples compared the Fourth Lateran Council prohibiting new religious orders to Quo Primum’s prohibiting substantive changes to the Traditional Mass. This is like comparing apples to oranges.

The prohibition on new religious orders found in the Fourth Lateran Council is clearly listed among other purely disciplinary acts and was obviously meant to be temporary in nature. The same cannot be said of Quo Primum.

2

Staples then quoted from Pius IX and Leo XIII (and claimed to possess twenty similar quotes) to prove what traditional Catholics already believe: that the Pope has authority in disciplinary matters and not just matters of faith and morals. In the quotes Staples cited, Pius IX and Leo XIII were reinforcing this teaching against the liberals of their day who were furiously trying to concoct novel doctrines and practices in every area of the Faith not nailed down by dogma.

The underlying assumption of Pius IX, Leo XIII and indeed all popes before

2 See PC A vs. PP

C N P

C

The Translation Tragedy Revisited

In addition to

Quo Primum,

Michael also claimed that the mistranslation of

Vatican II, was that the pope was strictly bound to pass on the Catholic Faith he received as well as the received rites and ceremonies that expressed such Faith.

Thus the pope acted as a bulwark against novelty. It is no surprise then that Pius IX and Leo XIII would act to remind liberal Catholics that they are bound by papal decrees and acts meant to preserve the Faith.

Today the tragedy is that the innovators are inside the Church Herself.

In recent times, novel practices have been permitted through legislation, in many cases not even by the pope but by Vatican congregations and bishops’ conferences, that serve to undermine Catholic belief. On occasion, when the innovators are able to get papal allowance for their novel disciplinary practices, they then have the audacity to claim that the admonitions of pre-Conciliar popes meant to guard against novelty somehow divinely protect their own novelties from any dissent or criticism. Neo-Catholics then repeat these pre-Conciliar papal admonitions against traditionalists ad nauseam, having unwittingly "imbibed" the liberal premise. Thus, the delighted innovators now have conservative apologists giving their destructive novelties cover, all the while attacking defenders of Tradition as "radical" on Catholic radio shows.

pro multis as "for all", along with other changes to the consecration formula of the New Mass, invalidated it. Staples basically said that "the Church" says the translation is valid, therefore it is.

Even so, is it not apparent to Staples, or any other objective observer, that when the words of Christ Himself are changed in the Mass, not even by a pope, but by a committee of translators without a word of explanation or good reason to the Faithful, in direct violation of the command of Pope Pius V, that good Catholics may begin to develop questions and even doubts about that translation’s validity?

There is proof that many good Catholics did have such doubts. Since the first English translation was approved, Vatican congregations have been forced on two occasions (1974 and 2006) to issue statements assuring the faithful that the consecration of the New Mass in English is valid.

3 This, in and of itself, is an astonishing indictment of the translation. When in the history of the Church have the faithful had reason to doubt the validity of a Mass which uses mistranslations allowed by the Vatican?

Thus, the validity of the English Mass Catholics attended for almost forty years was not assured by 2,000 years of Catholic Tradition and the words of Christ, but rather by the authority of a bureaucratic wing of the legislating Church.

3 http://www.adoremus.org/Arinze_ProMultis.html

Neo-Catholic Revisionist History

Michael then stated that the intent of New Mass architect Archbishop Annibale Bugnini was to reduce the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to a memorial supper and that, "Paul VI had six Protestants formulating the New Order Mass." Staples then made the incredible claim that, "there were no Protestants that had input on the liturgy" before attempting to compare their presence to the presence of Protestants at the Council of Trent. Staples’ defense fails for two reasons.

First, it is beyond dispute that there were six Protestant ministers who were invited to be present at Bugnini’s "Concilium" during its creation of the Novus Ordo Mass. Though officially referred to as "observers," Michael Davies demonstrates in his book, I am With You Always, that the six Protestant ministers did have an active consultation role in the formation of the New Mass and were by no means merely passive observers.

4

Second, lest we forget, the Council of Trent was called primarily to resolve controversies regarding the new doctrines of Martin Luther and John Calvin, many of which had not yet been infallibly condemned. Martin Luther had previously declared that he submitted his ideas to the judgment of a future Council. As the controversies were causing a large fracture of the faithful, it was hoped that a Council could still make formal binding and infallible decisions that both sides could agree to follow. In this context, it was an understandable move to allow those proposing the new doctrines to at least have a hearing at a Council whose eventual decisions the Church expected them to adhere to. However, by the time Trent was finally called, the time in which Protestants would have obeyed a Council had largely passed. In fact, very few Protestants at the time took the pope up on his magnanimous offer, as they were already hopelessly wed to their errors.

In contrast, by the time of Bugnini’s "Concilium", Protestantism had already been condemned as a heresy for four centuries. The obvious intention of having six Protestant ministers involved in the creation of the New Mass was to gather their opinion as to which areas of the Traditional Mass they had problems with and what wording in the New Mass could they accept. The results of this consultation’s effects on the New Mass are obvious. Its creation even inspired one of those six Protestant ministers, Max Thurian, to observe "… With the New Liturgy, non-Catholic communities will be able to celebrate the Lord’s Supper with the same prayers of the Catholic Church." Similarly, M. G. Siegvalt, Protestant Professor of Dogmatic Theology at Strasbourg noted, "…nothing in the renewed Mass

4 Michael Davies, I Am With You Always: The Divine Constitution and Indefectibility of the Catholic Church , 1997.

5 need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant."

Staples then went on to mention that the word sacrifice is used in the New Mass. Although this is true, the problem is that when the word sacrifice is used in the New Mass it can almost always be interpreted to mean a sacrifice of praise, a sacrifice of thanksgiving or some other type of sacrifice besides a propitiatory sacrifice. This was done for ecumenical reasons as Protestants explicitly reject the notion that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice.

6

Coffin then interjected to recommend an anti-traditional book to Michael called, The Pope, The Council, and the Mass .

7 Staples then went on to praise its authors James Likoudis and Kenneth Whitehead. Unfortunately, for Staples and Coffin, the authors of this book were obstinately wrong regarding the very two issues on which Staples previously admitted traditionalists were right. The 2006 version of Likoudis and Whitehead’s book obstinately defended the mistranslation of pro multis as "for all", even stating that "some scripture scholars believe that 'for all' might even be a more faithful translation of the original sense of scripture."

8 In addition, the book defended the proposition that the Traditional Mass was indeed abrogated and forbidden, stating: "the celebration of the Tridentine Mass is forbidden except where ecclesiastical law specifically allows it."

9

Absolute Obedience Required

Next up was David from New Jersey.

David said that the duo made it seem as if the SSPX just didn’t want to follow the pope. In reality, David explained that Archbishop Lefebvre felt he had to disobey the pope out of conscience as the things he was asking him to do were against the Faith. Staples then amazingly compared the sincere rationale of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, a man who was made Apostolic Delegate to French Africa by Pius XII, who was appointed to the Preparatory Committee of Vatican II by John XXIII, and who was elected Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers in 1962, to the rationale of "Martin Luther" and "every schismatic in the history of the Church."

Although granting that he could not judge Abp. Lefebvre’s conscience or soul, Staples went on to say that what the Archbishop did was "objectively gravely sinful." Of course by stating it this way, Staples is clearly assuming

5 http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Sacraments/Masswhy- the-Traditional.htm 6 Trent, Session XXII, Chapter II: "…the holy council teaches that this [the Mass] is truly propitiatory and has this effect, that if we, contrite and penitent, with sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence, draw nigh to God, we obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid… For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits of that bloody sacrifice, it is well understood, are received most abundantly through this unbloody one, so far is the latter from derogating in any way from the former."

7 Chris Ferrara points out some of the errors in this book in his excellent article Turning Point from 2007: http:// www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2007-0715turning_point.htm 8 As quoted by Chris Ferrara at: http://www.

remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2009-0831-ferraracatholic_ tradition_vindicated.htm

9 Id.

that Abp. Lefebvre had no morally justifiable reasons to disobey the normal course of affairs by which a bishop gets permission from the pope to consecrate.

If the Archbishop did have such reasons, then his consecrations would not be sinful at all. However, Staples has apparently never considered such a possibility.

To the Neo-Catholic mind there is never a justifiable reason to disobey any ordinance, disciplinary law, or decree issued by competent Church authority and to do so is always gravely sinful. Thus any possible rationale one would have to do such a thing is simply considered the ravings of a schismatic.

Yet are bishops, superiors, and popes always infallible in their orders, decrees, and ecclesiastical judgments? Consider:

The trial for sorcery started in Rouen against Joan was iniquitous.

And yet it assembled the entire Establishment of the official Church.

One hundred and twenty men took part in it, including a Cardinal, a prince of the Church, a great number of bishops, dozens of canons, sixty doctors in Canon Law or Theology, ten abbots, ten representatives of the University of Paris, the brightest part of ecclesiastical science in the heart of Christendom… …Joan was condemned to death.

The sentence of excommunication is read to her with the solemn form that the representatives of the Church conferred upon it. She climbs up the steps of the platform where was located the fire that was to consume her, officially condemned by the Holy Inquisition whose guardians indicated to her in the verdict, with the hypocrisy that was to be expected, that they sincerely thought that she, Joan, should have "preferred to remain faithfully and constantly in the communion, as well as in the unity of the Catholic Church and of the Roman Pontiff." On her was placed a headgear on which the points of condemnation, that her detractors repeated unceasingly, were written: "heretic, schismatic, relapser"… …A quarter-century after her death, the cause of the heroine of Orleans was revisited and the Church rehabilitated her officially. Until then, the number of those who believed that it was forbidden to judge the verdicts of the representatives of the ecclesiastical Institution was large.

Pius XII celebrated this dignified end of a French heroine who was to one day obtain on earth, as she had in heaven, the crown of saints: "In the silence, the words of a martyr faithful to her vocation resonate, filled with faith in the Church, to which she appealed by invoking the sweetest name of Jesus, her only consolation.

Through the flames that rise up, she stares at the Cross, certain that she will one day obtain justice." 10 11

C N P

10 http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/01/600-joan-of-arcii- danger-of-ill.html 11 http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/01/600-joan-of-arciii- persecution-by.html

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 14

Catholic Answers

C P

Staples then unfortunately continued unabated in this vein to the point where he compared the actions of the SSPX to that of rabid feminist Catholics picketing for women priests. Then, a few minutes later, Staples strangely denied that he made any such comparison and kindly preached that we should indeed make "distinctions" between the SSPX and women priest supporters. One clear distinction that Staples failed to make is that those Catholics who defy infallible teaching on women’s ordination, such as members of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), are still in "full communion" with the Church according to Staples, yet the Traditional priests of the SSPX, who deny not one Catholic dogma, are not.

Vatican II is Infallible…. Except When it’s Not Travis from Anaheim then rang in asking what level of authority Vatican II possesses. Staples then correctly pointed out that when John XXIII called the Council he stated that it was to be pastoral and would not make condemnations. Of course, Staples immediately gutted the words of John XXIII by stating Vatican II was also dogmatic because two documents of Vatican II are called "Dogmatic Constitutions."

Regardless of the title "Dogmatic Constitution," however, neither of these Council documents declared any new dogma. Thus, Staples is in effect saying that a Council that declared no dogma was somehow dogmatic. Apparently one of the advantages of Neo-Catholicism is that the principle of non-contradiction is optional.

Staples then went on to state that although there were no infallible declarations in Vatican II (aka no new dogmas) and no anathemas, this doesn’t mean that nothing in it is infallible or that adherence to the Council is optional. Staples then stated that Vatican II is, at the very least, on the level of the ordinary Magisterium and demands our assent.

Traditionalists agree, of course, that wherever Vatican II restated infallible Catholic teaching, it is infallible.

However, Neo-Catholics and even some traditionalists have a bad habit of referring to any act of the Vatican, Pope, or every part of a Council as part of the "ordinary Magisterium." This is not the case.

In contrast to the Extraordinary Magisterium whereby the pope declares infallible ex cathedra dogma, the term "ordinary Magisterium" should instead be more properly called the "ordinary and universal Magisterium." This latter Magisterium is also infallible because it consists of what was everywhere and always believed by Catholics. In other words, the "ordinary and universal Magisterium" is Tradition.

In contrast, there also exists an "authentic Magisterium." The authentic Magisterium consists in papal statements, encyclicals, etc. that genuinely come from the Church and that are normally authoritative. However, the authentic Magisterium is not infallible and is therefore liable to error.

Since Vatican II deliberately chose not to invoke the infallibility of the Extraordinary Magisterium, only the texts of the Council documents that are in accordance with the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church (Tradition) are infallible. Thus, if there are any novel teachings in the Council, even though they came from a legitimate and thus "authentic" source, they are not protected by infallibility and thus can be in error. This understanding of Catholic authority is well laid out by Dom Paul Nau, O.S.B. (Solemnes) in An Essay on the Authority of the Teachings of the Sovereign Pontiff written in 1956.

12

As further evidence of this proposition, even Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, Emeritus of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, stated in May of 2012 that two of the most controversial documents of Vatican II for traditionalists, Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae , "…do not have a binding doctrinal content."

13

The Tragedy of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate

Miles in Arizona then called in, bringing up the tragic injustice that the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI) are now suffering at the hands of the Vatican.

Miles correctly pointed out that the FFI

12 Dom Paul Nau, O.S.B. (Solesmes), "An Essay on the Authority of the Teachings of the Sovereign Pontiff" (July 1956), available in the book, Pope or Church? Essays on the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium, translated by Arthur E. Slater, (Angelus Press, 1998).

13 http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/05/cardbrandmuller- nostra-aetate-and.html

are currently being forbidden to say the Traditional Mass unless given specific permission. This, of course, is in direct violation of Summorum Pontificum , which recognizes the right of each Catholic priest to say the Traditional Mass.

Instead of recognizing this obvious fact, Staples cited a National Catholic Register story entitled, "Francis Has Not Contradicted Benedict’s Reforms Says the Franciscans of the Immaculate."

14

What Staples did not point out, is that this article was based on the word of two Friars, neither one of whom had any authority to speak on behalf of the order, and both of whom were part of the progressive contingent within the order protesting against the use of the Traditional Mass.

15 16 The FFI even released an official statement following news reports like the Register’s, stating that "the only official spokesman of our Institute, especially in this very delicate situation, remains our Procurator General, Fr. Alessandro Apollonio."

17

Despite this fact, the Register story, still to this day, inaccurately states that Father Alfonso Bruno is an FFI spokesman.

In contrast to the two unauthorized spokesmen of the FFI, highly respected Catholic historian Dr. Roberto de Mattei did see this prohibition of the Traditional Mass, purportedly approved by Pope Francis, as a direct contradiction to Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum .

So much so, that Mattei urged the Friars to ignore it because it is an unjust law.

18

14 http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/no-rejection-ofbenedict- in-franciscans-of-the-immaculate-decree-say-leader 15 http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2013/08/romefranciscans-of-immaculate-seem-to.html 16 http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/08/for-recordfranciscan- friars-of.html 17 http://www.immacolata.com/index.php/en/35-apostolato/ fi-news/230-vatican-insider-response 18 http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2013/08/lex-dubianon-obligat-against-unjust.html

True Obedience is the Solution

I would like to conclude by quoting the words of Dr. Mattei addressing the situation of the FFI. These words go beyond the FFI situation to the very heart of the conflict between Neo-Catholicism and true Catholicism: the issue of obedience. Here Mattei gives a true understanding of Catholic obedience, free from all Neo-Catholic spin to the contrary. My hope is that as many Neo-Catholics as possible read these words. In doing so, I hope they free themselves from the self-defeating ideology of Neo-Catholicism that protects and preserves novelty through a false notion of obedience, while attacking adherence to the Church’s own Tradition as disobedience:

…Today there is a purely legalistic and formalistic conception which tends to see the law as a mere instrument in the hands of those who have power (Don Arturo Cattaneo, 2011). According to the legal positivism, which has infiltrated into the Church, what is considered correct is issued by the authority... The law is only seen as the will of the rulers and not the reflection of the divine law, according to which God is creator and foundation of every law. He is the living and eternal law, the absolute principle of any law (jus divinum, ed.

Juan Ignacio Arrieta, 2010).

For this reason, in a conflict between human and divine law, God and not the people is to be obeyed (Acts 5:29). Obedience is owed to superiors because they represent the authority of God, and they represent it, because they keep the divine law and apply it. St. Thomas Aquinas affirms that it is better to fall into excommunication and exile to foreign lands where the earthly arm of the Church does not reach, than to obey an unjust command: ille debits potius excommunicatione, sustinere (...) vel in alias regiones remotas fugere (Summa Theologiae, Suppl, q. 45, a 4, 3 Upper)… The resistance to unlawful commands is sometimes a duty to God and to our neighbor…The Franciscans of the Immaculate had obtained from Benedict XVI the extraordinary goods of the so-called "Tridentine" Mass, accepted and celebrated again today by thousands of priests lawfully throughout the world. There is no better way to express their gratitude to Benedict XVI and at the same time to express their protest against the injustice done to them, than to continue to celebrate in the serenity of a clear conscience, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the traditional Roman Rite. No law can force their conscience. Maybe only few will do this, but compliance to prevent greater evil, will not help to avert the storm that goes beyond their Order and the Church.

19 v

19 P (Some minor grammatical corrections, which did not change the meaning of the text, were made to the cited translation for the sake of readability.)

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 15

Neo-Caths In Wonderland

By Chris Jackson

"If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?"

...Alice in Wonderland

Things

are now getting so bizarre in the post-Conciliar epoch that one must literally pinch oneself to make certain what one sees is real. Never before have Catholic journalists become so detached from reality that they can present events as the opposite of what your senses tell you. What is even more bizarre is that otherwise rational Catholics, instead of challenging these journalists’ writings, often ends up substituting the journalist’s fantasy for reality.

Case in point; a recent article in the Vatican Insider titled, "Francis Unfiltered." This article could, in all seriousness, be copied word for word and used as a satire. The article is actually so jaw-dropping, I encourage you to read it to prove I am not making it up.

However, please do not drink anything while doing so, unless you want to end up cleaning it off your monitor.

In case you’ve been under a rock for the past year, you have noticed that Francis has been an absolute PR nightmare, constantly giving off-the-cuff commentaries without thinking anything through. This has caused equally constant headaches in the Vatican Press Office as the Vatican Press Secretary has had to continually qualify Francis’ remarks. In addition, the progressive media and liberal Catholics are having an absolute field day taking quote after quote from the Pope and waxing poetic about the sheer number of left-wing things that are possible under his pontificate. The media is currently discussing everything from women Cardinals, to Communion for the divorced and remarried, to the Church rethinking its "judgmental" stance on homosexual acts. In other words, Francis’ constant unscripted speaking has caused unprecedented pandemonium and chaos in the Catholic world.

Despite this being the harsh cold reality, when one enters the world of the Vatican Insider one is transported to a far different place. As one opens its pages, one can feel the gentle breeze blowing. A glance to the right reveals a rainbow bridge; while to the left unicorns are merrily at play. Straight ahead is the Candy Cane Forest, beyond which lives the Muffin Man and H.R. Pufnstuf. Ahhhh...

one can just smell the Springtime!

Yes, according to the Vatican Insider , Pope Francis has actually made a significant and important breakthrough!

Indeed, the pope has actually overcome the entire media through the ingenious tactic of saying whatever he wants, whenever he wants. This allows... get this…the pope to speak directly to the people in a crystal clear and direct manner that has no need of pesky media filters!

Thus, the media is a complete non-factor. Yes, you heard it here first. Sorry, media. Try as you might, your efforts to obscure and twist Pope Francis’ words have amounted to absolutely nothing. For, as we all know, we can simply look up exactly what Francis said on the internet for ourselves! Thus, there is not even a shred of a chance that anyone takes the Pope’s words the wrong way.

Unfortunately, as one finally looks up from the Vatican Insider article, he is cruelly transported back to the real world. A world where one can't even find transcripts of the Pope’s homilies because the Vatican website only produces summaries (so it can presumably control and edit Francis’ spontaneity). A world where an entire transcript is actually published between an atheist journalist and the pope on the Vatican’s own website, but yet that transcript is called into question by Neo-Catholic sources. And finally, and most importantly, a world where precisely none of this matters as nearly everyone on planet earth is (shockingly only to the Vatican Insider) reading and relying on media reports to know what the pope is saying. Thus confusion reigns.

And if the Vatican Insider has any doubts about this confusion, I encourage their writers to visit Jimmy Akin’s column over at the National Catholic Register.

There, Jimmy’s keyboard is literally smoking with action as he is constantly having to correct so-called misinterpretations of every off the cuff statement the Pope makes. Recent Akin articles include: Is Pope Francis about to "rip up" the Vatican constitution?

Did Pope Francis just say that evangelization is "nonsense"?

Did Pope Francis say atheists don’t need to believe in God to be saved?

Is Pope Francis about to eliminate celibacy?

What should we make of Pope Francis bowing when greeting people?

As for me, I will continue to live in the often-depressing land of post-conciliar reality. While it is a mess, at least the laws of logic and non-contradiction still apply and it is a lot more predictable. As Dorothy once said after a long strange trip to Oz, "there's no place like home." v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 15

A Remnant Film Review…

Archbishop Lefebvre: A Documentary

By Tess Mullins

It's difficult to think of appropriate praise for the milestone documentary of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s life without using clichés such as, "Riveting!" "Two enthusiastic thumbs up!" "The season's best film!" The standard film-review lingo is insufficient to describe two hours within which the viewer witnesses the birth of the Traditional Catholic movement, the life support of the Church during a critical illness. No matter which "branch" of traditionalism you subscribe to, you owe gratitude to His Excellency. True, without his efforts the Latin Mass might have survived in small, scattered pockets, but the worldwide presence which exists today was obviously made possible by his clear vision and unflagging devotion to the Church.

His simple desire was to transmit what he had received, but unprecedented obstacles were flung in his path. Most of us are already familiar with the story of his struggles, but the tale is forcibly brought to life in the documentary with an impressive degree of professionalism. It deftly navigates through interviews of those who knew Marcel Lefebvre most intimately—his siblings and the priests and laity who were with him throughout his career.

Their testimonies offer an in-depth narrative of the Archbishop’s formative years, his call to the religious life, and his subsequent assignments as a priest of the Church.

Live recordings of the man himself defending his position in front of large audiences provide a uniquely compelling experience. We hear from his own lips the motives and logic behind rejecting the Council and founding a priestly society. As one who is too young to have met the Archbishop, I was struck by his touching candor and objectivity.

I am not the only young person to have been affected.

One of the film's greatest accomplishments, in my opinion, is its ability to bring to life the bishop and his mission, and the medium of film renders the story more relevant for younger generations. It will of course have a special meaning to those who knew him personally.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, for example, professes to be deeply moved every time he watches it.

It is the chronicle of a life which greatly impacted the recent history of the Church and a tasteful, heartfelt tribute to a good man. Even the musical score is welldone. French, with English subtitles. A must-see film for all ages! Four stars! v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Tue, 15 Oct 2013 | Cover | Page 16

The Last Word…

The Pope and the President

By Father Celatus

Howlong should a honeymoon last? The word itself suggests a month long period, though in reality the average length of a typical honeymoon for newlyweds is about a week. But the word is also applied by analogy to the realm of politics, referring to the period in which a newly elected politician is in favor with his constituents. As with newlyweds, so with politicians, the length of honeymoons can vary widely.

In the case of Barak Obama, going back to his first term of office, there really never was a honeymoon period of favor for him with many Americans, given his campaign platform and stated intentions. In the words of a popular radio personality, "I hope he fails," referring to the Obama agenda to fundamentally change America. Would that he had failed and never had a second term to continue a path of destruction!

Might we not say the same about newly chosen popes, that is, there often is a honeymoon period of favor?

In the case of Pope Francis, a prelate relatively unknown to the faithful prior to his election, while much of the world instantly fell in love with the new Pope, traditionalists were more cautious in their accolades. As it turns out, that caution was well founded, and a honeymoon for Pope Francis is now over with many.

One of the strongest recent criticisms comes from Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the Society of St. Pius X: "The situation of the Church is a real disaster and the present Pope is making it 10,000 times worse." Up until this point traditionalists have been rather retrained in their reactions to the Pope; but for the good of the Church it’s now time to put the honeymoon behind us and put on the proverbial—spiritual—gloves.

Truth be told, many American traditionalist Catholics may feel cheated not only out of both a presidential and papal honeymoon but quite frankly it feels as though we currently have neither a pope nor a president at all.

This observation is not intended to be a declaration of Sedevacantism but the words and actions of both men in two powerful positions are utterly foreign to our constitutional and ecclesiastical traditions.

There are, in fact, some eerie similarities between this Pope and this President, including their mysterious origins. With regard to Barak Obama, a lingering issue which has never been resolved to the satisfaction of many is his birthplace and citizenship. For someone who has nothing to hide, this man certainly went to great lengths to evade the issues and vilify anyone as a Birther who dared to question his origins.

Oddly enough, there is mystery surrounding the origins of the current pontificate as well, most notably in the nearly unprecedented abdication of the previous Pope, in the wake of Vatileaks and in the midst of rumors. What if Pope Benedict was coerced into abdication, lacking free will; would his abdication be valid and would a simultaneous successor be possible? What shall we call those who dare to raise the question: Abdicators ?

But of much more concern than issues of origin are the ongoing words and actions of this Pope and this President and their detrimental effect upon the Church and this Nation. It is undeniably manifest now that the actions of Barak Obama are often contrary to the Constitution upon which the Nation is founded and the agenda of this President is very often antagonistic towards traditional principles of American society. Far worse, this man has shown deep hostility towards true religion, basic morality and good Christians.

So, too, so many of the sound bites and spontaneous remarks of Pope Francis are at best ambiguous and sometimes seem even incompatible with what has been divinely revealed in Sacred Scripture and

Sacred Tradition. Examples abound but one will suffice: the Pope claims that we obsess about matters such as abortion and homosexuality and then later states that the two greatest evils in the world are unemployed youth and lonely seniors. Never mind that sins of murder and sodomy cry out to Heaven for vengeance. A final point of comparison between the Pope and the President regards the phenomenon that both are widely regarded as untouchable when it comes to criticism, and not merely by reason of their offices. Because of the fact that Barak Obama is black—not to mention white as well—legitimate criticisms of policies are quickly labeled as "racist."

With regard to Pope Francis, who was nearly instantly declared to be humble, any criticism of his words and actions is regarded as arrogance and an attack upon his person.

But even abstracting from all these curious comparisons—coincidental as they may be—the overarching concern should be what the ultimate consequences will be of these two men in their respective positions, if they continue down the path they have thus far chosen.

God knows and we can only speculate but the future for both the United States and the Catholic Church does not look bright.

There is no promise of divine protection for a worldly power so the complete collapse and demise of constitutional America is certainly within the realm of possibility. And while the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church, the vision of Fatima indicates that a terrible tribulation of mayhem and martyrdom are y et to be fulfilled.

Which brings us to a final point. It was announced by the Vatican that on the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima this year, as part of the celebration of the Year of Faith, the Pope would consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

This was not the first time that the world was consecrated to the Immaculate Heart but many traditionalists, who rightly maintain that the request of our Lady for the consecration of Russia has never been fulfilled, held out hope that finally a pope would be obedient to our Blessed Mother. As we now know, the consecration was generic and therefore incapable of producing the effect that has been promised: the conversion of Russia and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Our Holy Father has shown himself to be a non-conformist and unconventional in so many ways; wouldn't it have been grand if he had shown himself unconventional in this most urgent matter: the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Alas, no such luck. v

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2013 Remnant Press 10/15/2013