Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 01

The Heresy of "Discernment"

By Christopher A. Ferrara

Purely from the standpoint of ecclesiastical history, the Bergoglian pontificate is a fascinating anomaly.

Never before has the Church witnessed a Pope fanatically devoted to the overthrow in practice of universally applicable, exceptionless negative precepts of the natural moral law, beginning with Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery.

It is easy enough to show that the rest of this pontificate is merely a continuation of the trajectory established during and after the Second Vatican Council, which provided the decisive opening for the neo-Modernist uprising that has convulsed the Church ever since. As I have noted on these pages before, Pope Bergoglio’s rampant ecumenism, his disdain for liturgical tradition, his demagogic attacks on "rigorists," his religious indifferentism, his pursuit of endless, fruitless "dialogue" with the Church’s implacable foes, and his preoccupation with social and political issues beyond the purview of the Magisterium differ from the line of immediate predecessors, if at all, only in intensity.

But as I also noted on that occasion (may the reader forgive me for quoting myself): [T]here is one truly substantial difference between Francis and the other conciliar Popes, that being his astounding, relentless attempt to subvert, in the name of "mercy," the Church’s teaching and sacramental discipline concerning marriage, family and sexual morality generally. It is Francis alone—dismissing the contrary

~ See 'Discernment'/ Page 5

The Heresy of "Discernment"

C. Ferrara/ Continued from Page 1

teaching even of his two immediate predecessors—who has launched the "final battle" of which Sister Lucia of Fatima, speaking in light of the Third Secret, warned Cardinal Caffarra... It is here, with Francis, that we encounter something really new and terrifying, even in the midst of what Cardinal Ratzinger admitted is a "continuing process of decay" since the Council.

This new and terrifying Bergoglian innovation reduces to single subversive pseudo-doctrine, which now joins the others (e.g. "dialogue," "ecumenism," "collegiality") that have proliferated in the Church since the Council. Like the other pseudo-doctrines, it in turn is reducible to a single operative word with immense but never openly explicated consequences: "discernment."

Having plucked the word from its context in John Paul II’s Familiaris consortio, n. 84—which reaffirms the Church’s constant teaching that public adulterers in "second marriages" cannot be absolved or admitted to Holy Communion without an amendment of life—Bergoglio has, with the promulgation of Amoris Laetitia (AL), broadened its meaning into a practical framework for the introduction of situation ethics into the Church’s moral theology and praxis, thereby flatly contradicting John Paul.

But Bergoglio’s—one must say it— mendacious abuse of his predecessor’s terminology allows him to claim "continuity" with the very Pope whose teaching he seeks to negate.

Whereas John Paul II spoke of "discernment" in the context of dealing pastorally with those who, on account of their divorce and remarriage, cannot be admitted to the sacraments but are in differing degrees of fault respecting their situation, Bergoglio twists the concept into a pastoral program precisely for their admission to the sacraments while continuing to engage in adulterous sexual relations. With his letter to the bishops of Buenos Aires, confirming that they are correct in interpreting AL to allow precisely for this outcome—under the illusory restriction of "more complex circumstances"—Bergoglio has left no reasonable doubt of his intention.

Hence the Four Cardinals Letter and the dubia it presents in a direct challenge to Bergoglio’s attack on the moral order.

For as the cardinals recognize, AL involves much more than "a practical question regarding the divorced and civilly remarried," but also "questions [that] touch on fundamental issues of the Christian life."

The full implications of "discernment" are set forth with artful ambiguity in ¶¶ 303-304 of AL: Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits,

while yet not fully the objective ideal. In any event, let us recall that this discernment is dynamic; it must remain ever open to new stages of growth and to new decisions which can enable the ideal to be more fully realized.

It is reductive simply to consider whether or not an individual’s actions correspond to a general law or rule, because that is not enough to discern and ensure full fidelity to God in the concrete life of a human being.

For the first time in Church history, a Pope dares to propose that a negative precept of the natural law is merely "a general rule or law" representing merely an "objective ideal" for human conduct, and that fidelity to God is not inconsistent with disobedience to the precept—e.g. Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery—given the "concrete complexity of one’s limits" and the "concrete life" of each individual as "discerned" by a local pastor or bishop.

In short, for the first time in Church history, a Pope advocates the pastoral practice of situation ethics: What is adultery for John may not be adultery for Sarah; it all depends on the "complexity" of their respective "limits," which must be "discerned" in each particular situation.

Accordingly, the four cardinals wish Francis to answer Yes or No to the following question, among the five they have presented to him: After the publication of the Postsynodal Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris Laetitia" (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n.

79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?

Bergoglio’s silence in the face of this question is a thunderclap that will echo in history until the end of time. He cannot answer the question because the answer, if given honestly, would condemn him as a heretic. Bergoglio really does think, and wishes the Church to think, that moral laws are merely rules from which one can be exempted based upon circumstances. This is just another way of saying that he really does not believe there is any such thing as mortal sin—at least when it comes to sexual behavior. For him, there are only variously excusable departures from "the general rule" and the "objective ideal." Seen Bergoglio’s way, the negative precepts of the natural law would become benchmarks, not divine commands admitting of no exceptions.

They would cease to have the character of true and binding law. The prohibitory Commandments would be obrogated, if not entirely abrogated, by a Bergoglian gloss on the Gospel.

As he continues to attempt to hide his nefarious scheme behind a wall of silence while his subordinates attempt to implement it, Bergoglio’s coconspirators confirm the object of the conspiracy. One example suffices—that of his closest Jesuit confidant, Antonio Spadaro. As Spadaro revealed during a Q & A with Religion News Service: He realizes that the problem at the core of "Amoris Laetitia" is not a dogmatic problem. Which it’s not – it’s not a dogmatic problem.

The problem is that the church must learn to apply the practice of discernment better and more deeply and not just apply rules in the same way for everyone. The church must be attentive to people’s lives, to their journey of faith and to the way in which God works in each person.

So a pastor can’t be a pastor by applying general rules to individual people. The church has to grow in discernment. That would be also one of the most important topics of the next synod….

I don’t know if they [the four cardinals] are critics of the discernment. I just know that the pope has said that life is not black and white. It is gray. There are a lot of nuances, and we have to discern nuances.

This is the meaning of the Incarnation – the Lord took flesh, which means we are involved with real humanity, which is never fixed or too clear. So the pastor has to get into the real dynamic of human life. This is the message of mercy.

Discernment and mercy are the two big pillars of this pontificate.

There we have it from the Pope’s "mouthpiece" (a description Spadaro denies even as he performs the function). According to Bergoglio "the church must learn" from him—for the first time in 2,000 years! —that she cannot "apply rules in the same way for everyone," that a priest "can’t be a pastor by applying general rules to individual people" and that "life is not black and white. It is gray." That is, the Church must learn to practice situation ethics, applying the negative precepts of the natural law differently to different people based on "discernment" of their circumstances.

With rhetoric about as subtle as the blandishments of a used car salesman, Spadaro dares to root Bergoglio’s error in the Incarnation, risibly asserting that God Incarnate represents a humanity "that is never fixed or too clear," meaning that the application of Christ’s moral teaching is "never too fixed or clear." Bergoglio relies on this ecclesiastical con man, replete with Twitter account, to dupe the faithful into accepting blasphemy and moral relativism as a teaching of the authentic Magisterium.

What is this but yet another revival of the Gnostic heresy that has arisen in one form or another throughout Church history? It is the Gnosticism of the Pharisees, who claimed special knowledge— "discernment," at it were—concerning the application of God’s law to "complex circumstances" such as divorce and purported remarriage. The Pope who ceaselessly condemns Pharisaism—on the part of those who defend our Lord’s teaching against the Pharisees’ toleration of divorce—turns out to be the leader of a Neo-Pharisaic movement. The adepts of this movement purport to "discern," based on their superior insight, which adulterers, which cohabiters, indeed which practitioners of sodomy in "homosexual unions," are in the state of grace and may be allowed to receive the Holy Eucharist, and which of these objective sinners, on the other hand, must continue to be denied the Sacrament. But what are the criteria for this "discernment"?

There are none. There is only the gnosis of the discerner, who is in the know.

The new age of "discernment" has been revealed—so the neo-Pharisees tell us—by a "God of surprises" very much like the God who never failed to tell the Pharisees exactly what they wanted to hear. It is the God of the keepers of the ever-evolving gnosis, who always know better than the simple faithful what God requires "today," denouncing their orthodox Catholic opposition as "rigorists" and accusing them of being exactly what they themselves are.

As Bishop Athanasius Schneider has observed of these neo-Pharisees (without naming their leader), they try to legitimize their infidelity to Christ’s word by means of arguments such as "pastoral need", "mercy", "openness to the Holy Spirit". Moreover, they have no fear and no scruples to pervert in a Gnostic manner the real meaning of these words labeling at the same time those who oppose them and defend the immutable Divine commandment and the true nonhuman tradition as rigid, scrupulous or traditionalist. During the great Arian crisis in the 4th century the defenders of the Divinity of the Son of God were labeled "intransigent" and "traditionalist" as well.

Continued Next Page

Bergoglio confers with a chief co-conspirator

"Discernment"

Continued from Page 5

The "God of surprises" is simply the God of the silent apostasy, of that time when the people "will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables (2 Tim 4:3-4)." And the author of these fables, as always, is man masquerading as God.

But who could have imagined that the chief fabulist would sit on the Chair of Peter? Who could have foreseen that there would one day be a Pope who observes a stony silence—broken only by petty invective against his questioners—when asked if he really intends to bring about the collapse of the moral order? Who could have thought that a Pope would relentlessly engage in threatening to end the Church’s salvific mission by having her consent to be nothing more than yet another religious organization that has died the death of the sexual Zeitgeist?

In an article on the rising Catholic opposition to his insane designs, Bergoglio is reported to have admitted to the members of his inner circle that "It is not to excluded that I will be remembered in history as the one who split the Church." With Bergoglio, by his own admission, we are confronted with a possible realization of the hypothetical scenario of a schismatic Pope as discussed by the great Suarez and other theologians, or at least a Pope who is the cause of schism. There is certainly no sign that Bergoglio wishes to avoid the schism he is already provoking, or that he has any intention of changing the course that would earn him that shameful place in history. He seems, rather, to be proud of the effect he is having on the Church, a testament to the power of his vainglorious "vision" or "dream" of a "Church of Mercy" he actually seems to think did not exist before his arrival from the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, which he left in shambles. (Is it some ironic heavenly twist that Bergoglio has the same number of syllables and rhymes perfectly with orgoglio, the Italian word for pride?) Cardinal Walter Brandmuller, one of the four presenters of the dubia, has rightly and courageously declared that "Whoever thinks that persistent adultery and the reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism." The man from Argentina may well succeed in being the Pope who split the Church, although not even a Pope can defeat her. Should it happen, the Church will recover from the Bergoglian Schism as the Holy Ghost infallibly secures the promises of Christ through the intercession of the Mediatrix of All Graces.

But this much must be said of Pope Bergoglio lest we unjustly attribute to his predecessors his own unique contribution to the post-conciliar crisis: No document of the Council, nor any Pope since then, has so much as intimated a practical elimination of the distinction between right and wrong in the natural moral law that is written on the heart of every man. In propagating the heresy of "discernment," Jose Mario Bergoglio stands alone among all the Roman Pontiffs. Alone in the singularity of his disgrace. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Snakes on a Plane

By Anthony Mazzone

"Christianity would not have enemies if it were not an enemy to their vices."

- J. Massillon (1663-1742)

The Rossinian Moment

Unless I really know what I’m talking about, I prefer to keep my mouth shut.

That’s enough to keep me quiet most of the time, but lately I’ve been further reduced to an almost Carthusian-like silence. That’s because I’m constantly finding myself in the midst of a Rossinian moment. Let me explain.

Most have at least heard of the Italian composer Giochino Rossini (1792- 1868), or of his opera The Barber of Seville. Probably everyone would recognize his theme, William Tell Overture. Rossini seems to have been something of an epicure, not given to hard work if he could avoid it. He was certainly among those people for whom payment in advance removes all incentive to performance. The story goes that an impresario who had been foolish enough to pay ahead of time for a new opera finally had no other option than to shut the composer up in his villa on meager rations. Within 24 hours the overture to Otello was delivered from the window, signed by a chastened

~ See Snakes on a Plane/ Page 6

Snakes on a Plane

A. Mazzone/ Continued from Page 1 composer, " senza macheroni"! I’m only thinking of this because there comes a time in many of Rossini’s operas when the characters stop what they are doing, look around in amazement, and pronounce themselves absolutely flabbergasted by some new discovery or twist in the plot. Traditional Catholics know exactly how this is. In these absurd times, when girls can be altar boys and prelates can be potty-mouthed, when free speech is banned from college campuses, it feels like we are all stuck in a never-ending state of stupefaction: Rossinian moments.

I’m sure each of us could produce endless examples, but allow me just one. The other day I was looking at a rack of CD’s in the back of a nearby parish church. One of these is an introduction to the Theology of the Body, extolled on the cover as the "revolutionary theological work of Pope John Paul II." You got that right: the word "revolutionary" is actually used as a term of praise by a Catholic firm that otherwise takes pride in its orthodoxy.

What’s going on here? The idea of a theology being "revolutionary" should make any Catholic head for the hills.

After all, it wasn’t long ago that certain prelates were praised "for the purity of their doctrine." Today that would stand as nothing less than an indictment, an indication of "rigidity" if not mental illness.

The Catholic Church is the safe Inn to which our Lord the Good Samaritan has carried wounded humanity. But it continues in a state of accelerating decomposition. To Traditionalists, at least, it’s obvious that this crisis is not limited to liturgy or even governance, but is a deeper one of purpose and identity. Unfortunately, the faithful members of the Church, too, are further divided into tribes: mainstream Novus Ordo, Reformers of the Reform, traditionalists who hold to the 1962 Roman Missal and those who hold to the 1920 Roman Missal with or without the changes in the 1950’s. Can’t we just pray together? Hell’s bells, we can no longer even say the rosary together.

Some Catholics will insist on publicly reciting the Luminous Mysteries because they are new, while others resist for basically the same reason.

Switching realms, it sometimes looks as if Christians have lost every battle in the sphere of public life and morality. Oh, if we only had one more Republican Congressman, one more conservative Supreme Court Justice, we will be able to turn things around! I’m sorry, but what ails us as a country simply isn’t curable by politics. The political scientist Harold Lasswell has defined politics as being about "who gets what, when, how." While this is not an Aristotlelian definition, I think it is true.

The point I am making is that you are not alone in feeling you are riding a roller coaster in Bizzaro World.

Things have been wrong for so long that we are forgetting what is normal.

It is not normal for laymen to parse the spontaneous utterances of a Pope to divine their implications, much as Roman augurs read the flights of birds.

It is not normal that the liturgy is, among Catholics, not an expression of unity but a constant cause of strife and division.

Dioceses that had been lost to the Muslim conquests or had otherwise ceased to be functional have long been characterized as being in partibus infidelium, "in the realm of the unbelievers." We are all living in partibus infidelium now. We can’t escape the fact that any contemporary defender of the mos maiorum ("the way of the ancestors") is by definition a heretic regarding the naturalistic dogmas of the day.

Some Thoughts of Consolation

Liberals to the right of us, Socialists to the left of us, Modernists all around us: into the valley of post-Christian apocalypse we ride. With madness feeding on craziness how do we speak to one another of sanity? How do we maintain harmony of soul? Regain the stability of order that provides ballast through the tribulations of life?

What did the saints, who lived in roughly similar times, do? Boethius for example, was a late Roman statesman and philosopher who was unjustly imprisoned and later executed by King Theodoric the Great. He didn’t spend his time in prison lamenting his lot but wrote the Consolation of Philosophy, where he tells us: "Your anchors are holding firm and they permit you both comfort in the present, and hope in the future."

Thomas More, imprisoned in the Tower, wrote a Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation, wherein he serenely suggests "The ordinary arts we practice every day at home are of more importance to the soul than their simplicity might suggest." St. Paul, far from fretting during his imprisonment in Rome, wrote the Books of Colossians, Philemon, Ephesians, and Philippians to encourage and hearten nascent groups of Christians.

I am in a country," wrote St. Francis Xavier from Japan to his brethren in Europe, "Where I am in want of all the conveniences of life. But nevertheless, I feel so much interior consolation, that there is danger of my losing my sight through weeping with joy."

Let’s remind ourselves that God, from all eternity, has chosen precisely this moment in history for each one of us to be alive. There is nothing arbitrary in this. Now it’s our turn to respond to the demands of our time as the saints taught us to do: by remaining stubborn rosarycounters and rigid restorationists, and doing so not only with hope but with high spirits.

"You must not abandon the ship in a storm because you cannot control the winds.... What you cannot turn to good, you must at least make as little bad as you can." -St. Thomas More This puts me in mind of the Western Rebellion that Michael Davies wrote about some years ago. Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, completed the first Book of Common Prayer at the end of 1548. The Act of Uniformity of 1549 mandated its use, while the Chantries Act, among other things, denounced "vain opinions of purgatory and masses." The response was a massive armed uprising that began in Cornwall and spread to the rest of the West. The Cornishmen took up arms to "keep the old and ancient religion as

Continued Next Page

Christ Triumphant over Sin and Death, PP Rubens, 1615-22

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Happy New Year:

An End-of-the-Year Remnant Update

By Michael J. Matt

I’d like to wish The Remnant’s friends and allies all around the world a happy and holy 2017, filled with God grace and many blessings. I know I’m not alone in sensing that we may be in for a bumpy ride this next year. Things don’t look good, which, come to think of it, may be the biggest understatement of 2016.

On the other hand, dire predictions of calamity and apocalyptic happenings seemed to ring in every New Year I can remember. On New Year’s Eve 1972, for example—the so-called "Jacinta’s year"—we were told to brace for the dreaded Three Days of Darkness. Board up your windows, keep plenty of blessed candles handy, and, whatever you do, don’t look at the demon parade going on outside. I guess we’re still waiting for those Three Days of Darkness… unless, of course, they’re already here.

It’s no simple task these days to tell the difference between demons on parade and public high-schoolers on holiday, God help them all.

Anyway, back to the predictions.

So then it was 1980, when one interpretation of the timetable of Msgr.

Benson’s ‘Lord of the World’ said we could all expect to go up in a Julian Felsenburgh puff of smoke before December 31, 1981. And when that didn’t happen there was an immediate shift of focus to 1984— George Orwell,

~ See Editor's Desk/ Page 2

Happy New Year

M. Matt/ Continued from Page 1

Oceania rising, nuclear and mutually assured destruction for all and for all a goodnight. Made sense, but nothing actually happened.

So we began gearing up for Y2K, when our precarious existence was sure to turn into a cyber-Hiroshima from which none of us would survive to see New Year’s Day 2001. As luck would have it, the countdown of 1999 ended peacefully and we all moved on, gradually turning our attention to Sr. Lucia of Fatima, convinced that the chastisement suggested in the warnings of Fatima would manifest itself before the seer died. But, again, nothing—Sr. Lucia went to her eternal reward and we got up the next day and went back to work.

2017! Yep, that when it’s all coming down. That’s got to be the one!

Complete with plenty of Fatima implications, a possible Garabandal sidebar, and a world already blowing itself up, however, I suppose it’s possible we might just miss the 2017 chastisement altogether, what with all the death and destruction at which we have become so proficient. Who needs a divine chastisement when we’ve become so adept at chastising ourselves? Come to think of it, isn’t the chastisement more or less already here—the handiwork of that terrifying beast known as Modern Man, who told God to go to Hell. We even told Him we’d rule ourselves—thank you very much! —neither needing nor tolerating any assist from Him. Maybe that is the chastisement—being left to our own devices, at war with our own God, hell-bent on the suicide of our own civilization. Could there be greater chastisement than life without God -- and thus without either meaning or purpose?

The good news? That chastisement is manmade, thank God, and bound to fall apart eventually. And there is some indication of that beginning to happen.

The daughter of Beelzebub, for instance, lost her race for the White House after millions of rosaries were prayed for God’s intervention. "Thought you’d never ask," said God. And He worked the miracle -- we’re not bracing for the inauguration of President Hillary Rodham Clinton. Thank you, God!

The Traditional Latin Mass is not only back, but it’s spreading like holy wildfire all over the world. Thank you, God!

We have priests, bishops and cardinals taking a long overdue stand against the Modernist takeover of our Church, personified by arguably the most liberal Pope in history. Thank you, God!

We have kept the Faith. We are a movement of young families and many, many children. The future literally belongs to us so long as the atheists and the secularists insist on aborting and contracepting their future. Thank you, God!

There are plenty of reasons for hope this New Year’s Eve. In fact, maybe instead of trying to predict the chastisement we should just acknowledge that it’s been running its course for quite some time, and that now it’s time for us to prepare for the post-chastisement Catholic restoration.

Too optimistic? Not at all! God is still in charge, and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is coming.

A Case in Point

On December 12, 2016, Raymond Cardinal Burke announced that all official Masses at the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in La Crosse, Wisconsin, would be celebrated "ad orientem" -that is, with the priest facing liturgical east and Our Lord in the tabernacle, rather than the congregation.

We have obtained a copy of the official Press Release from the Shrine:

His Eminence, Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, Founder of the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe, has announced that the Holy Mass at the Shrine will now regularly be offered with the priest facing the East or ad orientem. While individual priests, on pilgrimage to the Shrine, wishing to offer the Holy Mass facing the congregation or versus populum, may certainly do so, in accord with current Church discipline, the regular celebrations of the Holy Mass at the Shrine will be ad orientem.

In his homilies for both the Third Sunday of Advent and the Solemnity of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Cardinal Burke offered a catechesis regarding the orientation of the priest and people during the offering of the Sacrifice of the Mass. He explained that the priest at the head of the congregation will, with the congregation, turn toward the Lord during the prayers and, above all, during the Eucharistic Prayer, in order to render more visible our recognition that it is Our Lord Himself Who inspires our prayer and Who acts during the Eucharistic Prayer to make sacramentally present His Sacrifice on Calvary for our eternal salvation. We all turn to Him; we all look to Him.

He further explained that the practice of the priest facing the congregation, which developed during the years after the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, was not in fact a discipline ordered by the Council. He observed that, while it may have seemed helpful at the time, it now seems fitting and indeed important to return to the ancient practice by which the union of the priest who offers the Sacrifice of the Mass, in the person of Christ, and the congregation is visible to us all and inspires in us a more ready recognition of Christ in our midst, as He is most fully and perfectly present in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

Quoting Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, he explained that the teaching of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council on the Sacred Liturgy does not speak of a change in the ancient discipline according to which "during the Rite of Penance, the singing of the Gloria, the orations and the Eucharistic Prayer, all, priests and faithful, should turn together towards the East, to express their desire to participate in the work of worship and of redemption accomplished by Christ."

He explained that, returning to the ancient practice of the Church, we all face the East, we all face the Lord, during Sacred Worship. It is not a question of the priest turning his back to the faithful but rather directing himself, with the faithful, to Christ Who makes sacramentally present His Sacrifice for our eternal salvation. He expressed the hope that, purifying and enriching the liturgical practice at the Shrine, we will be one with Our Lady of Guadalupe in giving witness to the all-merciful love of God present, in a most extraordinary manner, in the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

He also explained that facing our Lord in Sacred Worship gives form to our daily living. In everything that we think and say and do, we are to turn to the Lord. Each day, we devote ourselves anew to the conversion of our lives to Christ. We live, intently engaged in the life of the world, but always with our eyes fixed on heaven, on our true destiny and the final destiny of the world. We are called to worship and serve God. We are called to make Christ, not ourselves, the center of our lives, so that we truly serve God, directing our minds and hearts more and more toward Him with fidelity, generosity and obedience.

It goes without saying that we at The Remnant offer our unconditional support of the Cardinal’s decision to take this step, always mindful of the fact that just as the liturgical revolution unfolded in stages, so too the liturgical restoration will take time and must start somewhere.

Would we prefer that every Mass at the Shrine from now on would be -- by order of Cardinal Burke -- the Traditional Latin Mass? Of course!

But in the meantime, and as my father of used to say: "When the liturgical restoration does, in God’s good time, become a happy reality, I would not have my fellow Catholics subjected to what we traditionalists went through in 1969 -- a traumatic transformation of the liturgy that did violence to the faith of so many. The restoration will not happen overnight and it must include careful instruction on the fundamental purpose of the Mass so that the people will understand and will be able to overcome what amounts to, essentially, a mass brainwashing operation on the part of liturgical revolutionaries."

Well, it seems to me that this is precisely what Cardinal Burke is initiating both in La Crosse and throughout the world, with his well-documented willingness to offer high-profile Traditional Latin Masses—a signal of support for sacred Tradition that takes great courage on his part and could not possibly be more irksome to many inside the Vatican.

What may seem to some traditionalists as mere "token baby steps" are, in fact, sending a message to Modernists everywhere that the foundations of their revolution are far from secure.

In this case, Cardinal Robert Sarah has called for the restoration of the liturgical tradition of ad orientem, the attack on which was the Revolution’s first order of business in the process of reorienting the entire point and purpose of the Mass from God-centered to Mancentered. And though the endgame for us is the full and complete restoration of the Traditional Latin Mass, we are more than happy to do our part to encourage priests everywhere to follow Cardinal Burke’s lead and to adapt themselves to the recommendations of the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments without delay.

There is no longer any reason why any priest should be prohibited from announcing next Sunday that, from now on, all Masses will be offered ad orientem in accord with the dictates of holy Tradition and the wishes of Cardinal Sarah. God bless Cardinal Burke for setting the much-needed example. Now let’s spread the word.

It’s time for all priests to return to ad orientem without delay. ■

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from the Michael J. Matt Family

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 03

The Remnant Speaks

Letters to the Editor: The Remnant Speaks P.O. Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025 ~ Editor@RemnantNewspaper.com Another Ray of Hope for Trump

Editor, The Remnant: I just read your article in the November 20th issue about Kellyanne Conway. Here's another hopeful sign: Donald Trump's chief advisor and campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway is a Catholic mother of four, who stays home to make breakfast every morning for her kids and then goes to Mass. She's a daily communicant! She took Donald Trump to meet Father George Rutler, Anglican convert priest and pastor of the Church of Our Savior in Mahattan, who blessed our next president, just before his election.

Dipper Giles Reno, NV

Thanks, Remnant!

Editor, The Remnant: Thank you, Mr.

Matt, for your end-of-the-year update, the kind words for your audience, and most of all for the priceless work you all are doing for the One True Church of Jesus Christ. But for the Remnant, I probably would still be slogging through the neo-Catholic wilderness feeling like I was the only one wondering where the real Church went. God bless all of you at the Remnant and all here on the Remnant website!

Frank Magill Internet

The Chilean Revolution and the Hidden Hand of Freemasonry

Editor, The Remnant: Thanks for The Remnant’s Dec. 5 story concerning Michael Lambie’s heroic part in militantly opposing the 19701973 Marxian takeover of the government of Chile in South America ("A Catholic Hero Flies His Last Mission"---RIP). This is of historical importance since it further exposes the Cuban connection of the evil Castro brothers, who were virtually "hugged" by Pope Francis in his recent unfortunate visit to Marxist Cuba.

Could beatification of "Karl Marxthe- Revolutionary" be the next bloody insult to traditional Christianity? Pause here for meditation on the millions of political murders perpetrated in the name of Marxism, and of its Utopian "New Order".

The Remnant article did not note its author--perhaps a Lambie family member, who may have still more to add to this struggle against these "liberation revolutionaries". It should be noted that the 1970’s were alive with anti-Catholic bigotry and hatred of the Church, and such still with us on all sides and levels of "New Order" Globalism.

This Michael Lambie story awakened me to another Chilean episode in its struggle against godless Communism, during the half-century "Cold War" (1946-1991).

This Chilean incident occurred in my own neighborhood near the "Embassy Row" in Northwest Washington, D.C.

(Sheridan Circle), Sep. 21, 1976. A Chilean embassy car coming into Sheridan Circle was suddenly hit by a remote-control bomb, which killed an important passenger, former Chilean ambassador Orlando Letelier, a "Leftist" opponent of Chilean President, General Agusto Pinochet, who had overthrown the Socialist (Marxistoriented) junta of Salvador Allende in 1973. A virtual refugee, Letelier was in hiding from Gen. Pinochet, while busily working against his regime.

Active in Santiago, Chile, was the DINA, Chilean National Intelligence Directorate. With so many doubleagents at work in this revolutionary episode, it seems difficult to sort out the various "agent-provocateurs". At the time my private sympathy was with President-General Pinochet, as the "good-guy". And after absorbing the facts given in The Remnant article, I still favor Gen. Pinochet. There are doubtless thousands of heroes in this story, one being Michael Lambie.

During all of the actual commotion of this Chilean revolution, the hidden hand of Freemasonry is evident in South America, always in support of Lucifer.

Of religious interest concerning revolutionary events of 1970-2000 in Chile, a dominant figure was the Archbishop of Santiago and Primate of Chile, Cardinal Jose-Maria Caro (died 1958), a traditionalist orthodox Catholic prelate who wrote a most important tome against Judeo-Masonry, "The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled", revealing its Satanic core. Cardinal Caro put his finger on what was a cause of political instability in all of Latin America, now seen in the destructive issue of "Liberation Theology" and its political "Liberation" off-shoots. This is still very much alive all over South America, with Cuba and Venezuela most visible victims of the underlying Masonic "Alta Vendita" conspiracy. Masonic "agentprovocateurs" create a crisis, and then exploit its opportunity. Simon Bolivar is the supposed "liberator" of South and Central America. "Liberating" from what? Spanish Catholicism?

Promotion of revolution created an anti-Catholic, anti-Spanish vacuum, which was quickly filled by the ready-made antidote of Freemasonry. Unfortunately, too many Chileans of the twentieth century disregarded their real native hero, Cardinal Caro, a faithful servant of Christ-the-King. This fertile land of the Andes needs men of Faith.

Robert Dahl Maryland

The Elephant in the Sanctuary

Editor, The Remnant: Many thanks to Fr. John A. Hardon and his Sunday classes at Domino’s Farms in Ann Arbor Michigan. Father Hardon declared that the purpose of his classes was to re-teach the Faith. Father also said in the late 90’s that all priests needed to be retrained due to the degenerated state of Catholic seminaries since Vatican II. After many classes and Q and A’s, things became clearer. Father usually took the time to answer everyone’s queries after class. As you can imagine, there were many questions regarding liturgy. Not surprisingly, the topic of valid consecrations came up repeatedly, so Father devoted a specific teaching for that subject. He took the time to delineate validity and illicit elements inherent in the new Mass. We learned that illicit things don’t necessarily constitute a fatal breach to the consecration itself. The sacrament can be confected despite some illicit elements, e.g. ambiguous Eucharistic prayers, chanting false mysteries of faith, female servers etc. Father broke down what is absolutely necessary to the act of consecration. He taught his students the minimum of what is required in order to have the miracle of Christ’s real presence present on the altar. Unleavened wheat, wine, required words: "This is my body"," This is my blood" and the intention by the celebrating priest to confect the sacrament. Having the benefit of this knowledge actually caused us to walk out of a couple of "Catholic" Masses where, knowingly or not, the priest took license with essentials.

So our senses are our assurance; sight, hearing and taste verify valid matter and the proper words. But, intention is of another matter altogether. We can only go by decorum. If the priest’s actions and gestures are casual or just plain sloppy, one can only wonder about his actual "intention". A serious lack of solemnity should raise questions. Was the consecration valid? We’re not mind readers. We do know for certain that an elephant ritually makes an appearance during the post-consecration response to the Mystery of Faith proclamation. Chanted are words… Let us proclaim "the Mystery of Faith". Then the congregation trumpets: "When we drink this cup and eat this bread we proclaim your death Lord Jesus until you come again…", or: " Christ has died Christ has risen, Christ will come again…" Neither of these responses are proper to "THE Mystery of Faith", yet the people joyfully sing these prepared responses that just don’t make sense. Okay, so, Christ has died, Christ has risen (past tense), Christ will come again (future tense), all serve as camouflage blocking what took place before our eyes and ears in the present. Which of these words can the truth be in? His death, resurrection or return? Surprise! None of the above.

Is this why Christ refers to us as a sheep? Catholic sheeple all chant these false mantras hundreds of thousands of times across the globe every day. Is this

Continued On Page 4

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 04

Letters to the Editor Continued...

not the quintessential embodiment of the term Dumbed Down? Maybe if the proclamation was actually trumpeted through the trunk of an elephant people would get the joke being played on them every week. Our senses could protect us if we just had ears to actually hear the words found in such blatantly false responsorial statements. Could such chanting lead to a spiritual death? The words contradict what just took place on the table/altar. What will it take before people suspect that maybe, the real truth, the Mystery of Faith is being deliberately subverted?

As bad as teaching fairy tales to seminary students are prepared statements that mislead between a mystery of faith and "The Mystery of Faith". Yet some in the know still attend Masses containing such sophistry. Even those who really don’t know, will have serious culpability for not investing any time in order to find out, vincible ignorance. Most Catholics in the pews either don’t or won’t, rather than can’t, use critical thinking skills in order to understand. Will it be fatal for those that know, but continue simply because of mundane things like in following?

- The drive is too far - The time is not convenient -They will stand out from old acquaintances at the Novus Ordo - Their children are involved in sports on Sunday - Their children in involved in local parish activities - They don’t want to disrupt family harmony - Peer Pressure, e.g. Catholic school teachers or other diocesan employees How many have family members that frequent modern Masses because of any in the above? If all the people we know who deep down do know better, devoted themselves to proper liturgy there would be a dramatic increase in attendance at indult Masses, Fraternity Masses, Pius X Masses or Institute of Christ the King Masses. People that know the difference need to be reminded that with knowledge comes grave responsibility. "To whom much is given much is expected." Most of us can easier forgive those steeped in their weekly cognitive dissidence than brook delinquents hiding from the truth. Oh, but if only all those that simply choose to ignore the elephant had the trait most attributed to its image, memory.

Remember this? "This is the Challis of my blood of the new and eternal testament: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH. Which will be shed for you and for many for the remission of sins..."

William Price

Seeking Pilgrimage Partners

Dear Remnant Readers: Peace be with you! My name is Ron McCann. I’m the second oldest of a family of ten kids. Together, we have grown into a tightknit family in a small town in protestant Arkansas. We have been blest to attend the traditional Mass since I was ten and doubly blest that the FSSP has supplied our small community with strong priests. I have been homeschooled until attending Thomas Aquinas College in California where I have just finished the first semester of my junior year.

In addition to the studies at TAC, I serve the traditional Mass, participate in prolife works, and am a member of the Legion of Mary. These activities, as good as they are, do not help one’s spiritual life in the same way that a pilgrimage does.

I want to attend the pilgrimage chiefly for the penance that is intrinsic to it.

Beyond that, I expect that the people that I will speak to and the places that I will go will have a lasting effect on my spiritual life. In my better moments, however, I try to be mindful that it isn’t all about myself and the changes that I want to see in my life. On the long road from Paris to Chartres, I fearfully hope to get caught up in something so much greater than myself. The shrines, saints, and spires of the cathedrals that I hope to visit point to this greater something. They point to the Catholic Church of the past and they remind everyone how present the past is today.

By experiencing the Communion of Saints in this way, I wish to unite my life more firmly to the whole Mystical Body of Christ. As a student, my funds are limited. With my savings, I plan on covering travel costs to the best of my ability. Thank you for your support and prayers for me. I will be sure to keep all those in connection to the Remnant and their intentions in my prayers.

Dear Remnant Readers: My name is Dominic McFadden. I am 17 years old and I have 10 siblings. I am a senior enrolled in Seton home study. My three older siblings have gone on the pilgrimage to Chartres and have had lifechanging experiences. They have come back with great appreciation and deeper insight into their Catholic faith. My older brother, John, for example, who went on the pilgrimage, fell in love with the Latin Mass and is now a Benedictine monk in a monastery that only says the Latin Mass.

I especially want to make this trip in order to see for myself the beautiful sights and churches of holy Christendom, that I have heard so much about from my siblings. And most importantly, I hope to be deepened in my understanding of the Catholic Faith through making a pilgrimage to the places where the Catholic faith was once so alive.

I hope to attend Christendom College in the fall, and it would be so faithstrengthening to be able to pilgrimage to the places that I will be learning so much about during my college years. In the end I think that that this pilgrimage will do wonders for my spiritual life. Please consider supporting me on this journey of Faith, I will assuredly be praying for you every step of the way.

In Christ,

Dominic McFadden (with Brother John) Pax et Caritas Christi,

Ron McCann

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 04

The Land Where Jesus Walked…

By Maxine Moore, Ph.D.

WELCOME TO BETHLEHEM

On the map, the Green Line marks the original 1949 boundary after the war between Israel and its neighbors.

It cordoned off what was called the "West Bank" (of the River Jordan).

The solid red lines are where a 25-foot high concrete barricade was built in the early days of the 21st century. The dotted red and purple lines are where wall construction is continuing.

The Separation Barrier includes razor wire, electric fencing, eight-foot trenches, electronic ground sensors, thermal and video cameras, and unmanned surveillance aircraft.

It was distressing to learn that, when completed, the 460 mile "apartheid" wall is expected to insure the exodus of at least half of the West Bank Palestinians (But without money, where can they go?). The wall cuts through heavily populated areas, such that families have been separated, thousands of acres of farming land and water sources have been confiscated, and students and workers encounter all sorts of problems and delays at road blockades. Merchants, who have not lost business due to banned access to their stores, must have all their merchandise controlled and taxed by Israeli authorities at checkpoints. Tourists and pilgrims cannot stay in Bethlehem, but must return to Israeli areas in the same day.

Walls and war and hatred. Many moons ago when I was teaching English at an American university in Beirut, my morning commutes on lovely umbrellapined roads with upscale Tuscanstyle apartments on the dreamy-blue Mediterranean, also skirted the walls of a grim prison-like zone. It was explained to me that the Sabra and Shatila "camps" were the "answer" of Lebanese authorities to the problem of Moslem Palestinians who had come as poor refugees from Israel and (unlike Christian Palestinians) never allowed citizenship. In 1982 when Israel was at war with the PLO in Lebanon and

Continued on Page 14

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 07

Continued...

Sursum Corda

their forefathers before them had done…" In their list of demands, the leaders of the rebellion stated: "We will have our old service of Matins, Mass, Evensong and Procession in Latin, not in English, as it was done before." They wished their priest to revert to "his old popish attire and sayeth Mass and all such services as in times past accustomed." The rebellion was eventually crushed by a brutality I pray we will never witness in our own country.

"Tradition does not mean a dead town; it does not mean that the living are dead but that the dead are alive. It means that it still matters what Penn did two hundred years ago or what Franklin did a hundred years ago; I never could feel in New York that it mattered what anybody did an hour ago." -G.K. Chesterton

People sometimes wonder why the prodigious St Anthony of Padua, Doctor of the Church and Hammer of Heretics, is now most commonly invoked to find lost objects. Well, as an addled friend of mine sometimes says, "It’s not brain science." Anyone who has misplaced a purse or lost an heirloom is aware that losing something of value is not a trivial matter. Our Lord in Luke 15 tells us that when the shepherd finds his lost sheep he joyfully puts it on his shoulders, then he calls his neighbors together and says, "Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep." Later we hear of the woman who had ten silver coins. She immediately searches for the one that had been lost: "And when she finds it, she likewise calls her friends together and says, "Rejoice with me; I have found my lost coin." The Prodigal’s father embraces his newly returned son and declares, "Let’s have a feast and celebrate."

So I suggest we have reason to rejoice now, for a great treasure that was for all practical purposes lost has been found.

This treasure is simply the Gregorian Roman liturgy, the most ancient of all rites, which had been handed down virtually without molestation until the present time. This most sublime cultural treasure of the West, the channel of grace to generations, was nearly obliterated by a Church hierarchy which ruthlessly brought all its might and authority to bear against it. Make no mistake: it was a close thing for a while, a true near-death experience.

However, a small group of clergy and laity (whom we now identify as traditionalists), refused to allow the Traditional Latin Mass to die. Because of them, our Roman Missal, Pontifical, Breviary and all the venerable Roman liturgical books did not become extinct, and with the help of God will not only survive but outlast whatever it is that passes for Western liturgy these days.

It would have seemed inconceivable only a short time ago, but now there are over thirty institutes of various types dedicated to the traditional liturgy. There are a small number of personal parishes that use only the traditional liturgy, and increasing numbers of priests being trained to celebrate it. This is not meant to imply that we should be complacent when told: "You got your old Mass now, so shaddup." No, that’s not enough. It will not be "enough" until the traditional Roman liturgy is installed in every Latin Rite Church in the world, along with the rest of the liturgical books, functioning within a society that acknowledges the sovereignty of Christ as King.

Here is something else to be happy about: as Father Time marches on, Vatican Council II is rapidly fading in the rear view mirror along with love beads and psychedelic rock. With its roots in the revolutionary atmosphere of the 1960’s it has become totally outdated, simply not responsive to the problems of the Church today. The documents retain a sort of paradigmatic presence, an incantatory value both to progressives and neo-Catholics who invoke them for essentially the same purpose: a harbinger for a springtime that never comes or a talisman to conjure a blissful future that is always out of reach. Well, no matter how thin you slice it, it’s still baloney.

There is a useful Americanism known as "Plan B." When you think about it, doesn’t that describe salvation history?

God’s original Plan was for mankind to live sinless and without disease of body or soul in the Garden of Eden. But the Fall destroyed that original state of being. It necessitated the implementation of an alternate program, "Plan B," which is redemption through the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This changed everything, even the meaning of virtue and vice. For example, Adam did not have to work, was never intended to weary body and soul for the sake of subsistence. But now a person who avoids work is not a virtuous pre-lapsarian Adam, but simply a bum. Similarly, to call someone a "hard worker" is considered high praise, turning the effects of a curse into a blessing.

Going further, human beings were likewise never meant to sin. So aren’t we all creating our own Plan B whenever we seek mercy through Confession, whenever we respond generously to the needs of others who suffer the effects of the Fall? Endless repetition of the mantra of "mercy" should not harden us to Our Lord’s commission to show benevolence to all living creatures. Of course this is not mercy on the cheap without repentance and rehabilitation. I’m speaking of mercy that arises from the awareness that life itself is hard: hard for all of us in varying degrees. The people we encounter while walking on the street, with whom we interact at the grocery store: we don’t know what burdens these children of God might be bearing. Why not treat everyone with the respect due to their inevitable sufferings, their inherent human dignity? Why pile burdens, even minor ones, upon one another when life on earth itself is quite efficient in doing so? What this means is that at all times we should try to follow the most difficult advice of the Cure of Ars: "Never do anything you cannot offer to God."

Mature Christians know that no happiness here below is lasting or perfect, that ashes settle on all earthly pleasures. But if this is where we stop, we would be wise only as the virtuous pagans were wise; we would dwell in the dreary world of the Stoics who met both fortune and misfortune with equal equanimity rather than in the surprising, multi-colored world of Christianity. The happy fact is that no matter how evil the times, it is possible for the Catholic to live a life of virtue. And because of this there is real felicity to be had even in this fallen world of ours. Aristotle tells us that the attainment of

eudaimonia

(a state of blessed happiness) is inextricably aligned with "virtuous activity in accordance with reason."

There are corollary advantages to this.

Though none of us can avoid the pain of sense or of loss, it is much more bearable if the pain of regret is not added to the mix, if our humble reception and bestowal of mercy softens the hard edges of this vale of tears.

So let’s get it through our heads that the

Te Deum,

the Church’s greatest hymn of praise, is appropriate for every age.

Though we all must suffer, it doesn’t follow that we have to be miserable.

We certainly don’t need to banish the motive of personal happiness from any one of our actions. I cannot go too far in antipathy to the insidious spiritual disease of Jansenism, which too often affects the righteous. Christians are allowed, encouraged, and even enjoined to be happy. Though happiness does not consist entirely in pleasure, neither does it exclude pleasure. Of course this isn’t the superficial, vanishing "good times," the mere satiation of the appetites that the world uses to usurp the reality of pleasure. It is a rational good, based solidly in the recognition of the truth of God as revealed in His creation.

In fact, the obstinate refusal to be happy is an act of the will, and actually a lack of gratitude to God for everything He has given us.

As a graduate student at the University of Illinois, I used to ride the bus to campus.

I often sat next to a semi-retired professor of classics. Once I asked him where he had done his graduate studies. He pulled up a sleeve and showed me the tattoo on his arm: "Auschwitz" he said. Then, without further elaboration, he proceeded to the subject on his mind: would I write a review of a book he and his wife had just written? I agreed before knowing the subject. To my surprise it was not a despairing meditation on suffering or the wickedness of man, but a serene philosophical meditation on the subject of "Happiness."

You Wascically Wabbit!

With the certainty that we will often judge poorly and make mistakes, in the acknowledgement that we have little power except in the limited sphere of our own lives, the best most of us can do in these perplexing times is cooperate with the graces of our state in life, participate as best we can in the Church’s Liturgical Year, and live righteously and happily.

So march onward in the vigorous pursuit of Plan B, you funeral-faced, creedreciting Catholics! Never give up, never settle, and also, if your state in life permits, and so far as God provides –

breed like rabbits

– and understand we can’t go "too far" in the service of Tradition. In fact, I look forward to the time when there is no such thing in the Church as the "Traditionalist Movement." We are not a faction. We just try to do what Catholics have always done, to believe and worship in ways that would have been considered unremarkable at any almost other time. Patient reader, whether you buy into the Benedict Option, become a hermit in the woods, move to a traditionalist stronghold in Idaho, choose life in the big city or the suburbs—whatever is best for you—you will still be living

in partibus infidelium.

Those Rossinian moments will just keep on coming. You are going to continue to wake up every morning to a culture increasingly irrational and decadent, to the sleazy, self-serving behavior of our political and social leaders, to a Church hierarchy that lurches between crackpot social theories and Teilhardian poppycock. But do not be disheartened by verbal snakes on a plane! We are going to win this war.

This is what I believe: the traditional liturgy will be universally restored as the primary liturgical form and norm of our faith; the misbegotten Roman Missal of 1970 will become a historical aberration, a curiosity available only in research libraries. Pontiffs will pass down what they have received, prudently govern the Church, and won’t dare disrupt our piety.

Our prelates will be holy and modest but have iron in their spines.

Now I wouldn’t be surprised if you interject at this point, "Do you really know what you’re talking about? Maybe you should just keep quiet." How can I be so sure? Because I am convinced that this is what Christ our King wants. To adapt an old phrase: "If the King ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy." From the Preface of the Mass on the Feast of the Sovereignty of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Supreme King: He will grant us: "an eternal and universal kingdom, a kingdom of truth and life; a kingdom of holiness and grace, a kingdom of justice, love and peace."

In conclusion, I can leave you with no better advice than that given after every sermon by Msgr. Vincent Giammarino, who was pastor of St. Michael’s Church in Atlantic City in the 1950’s: "My dear good people: Do what you have to do, When you’re supposed to do it, The best way you can do it, For the Love of God. Amen." ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 08

The Holy House of Loreto

The Gift that was Taken Away

by Father Ladis J. Cizik

(This sermon was delivered at a Traditional Latin Holy Sacrifice of the Mass on Saturday, December 10, 2016 on the Feast of the Translation of the Holy House of Loreto.)

In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

During this Holy Season of Advent, Holy Mother Church prepares us to celebrate both the first and second comings of the Messiah, Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ. As we approach the first coming of Jesus Christ at Christmas, we are reminded to keep Christ at the center of the Advent and Christmas Seasons. As it is said: ‘Christ is the Reason for the Season.’ In addition, we are admonished to also be prepared for the second coming of Christ, at the end of time, where He will come to judge the living and the dead. As it is known: ‘Christ has Died, Christ is Risen, Christ will come again.’ Today, we are given a Christ-centered Advent and Christmas gift from Almighty God. Today, we are given the Feast of the Translation of the Holy House of Loreto. The Holy House of Loreto is the home of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph which was transported on the wings of Angels from Nazareth to eventually, Loreto, Italy, where it still stands today. The Holy House of Loreto is made of stone native to the Holy Land. The Holy House has no foundation, since the stone foundation is still in Nazareth. The exact dimensions of the Holy House (thirteen by thirty-one feet) and the exact type of stone used in its construction match the foundation which is still in Nazareth.

The Holy House was lifted from its foundations by Angels and taken away from Nazareth on May 10, 1291 when it was threatened with destruction from Muslim invaders to the Holy land. The home of Jesus, Mary and Joseph was carried across the Mediterranean Sea to the small village of Tersatto in Dalmatia (now Trsat, a suburb of Rijeka, Croatia).

Shepherds in Tersatto were amazed by the sudden and unexpected arrival of this tiny church without a foundation and alerted the local Priest, who prayed to Our Lady for enlightenment. The Mother of God appeared to the weary old Priest, who suffered from crippling arthritis, and proclaimed: "Know that this house is the same in which I was born and brought up. Here, at the Annunciation, I conceived the Creator of all things.

Here, the Word of the Eternal Father became Man. The Altar which was brought with the house was consecrated by Peter, the Prince of the Apostles. This house has now come to your shores by the power of God. And now, in order that you may bear testimony of all these things, be healed. Your unexpected and sudden recovery shall confirm the truth of what I have declared to you."

As the scourge of Islam advanced toward Dalmatia, with Muslims taking over Albania in 1294, the Holy House once more took off on a miraculous flight to avoid desecration at the hand of the infidels. Shepherds in Dalmatia reported seeing the home of Jesus, Mary and Joseph being carried through the sky, across the Adriatic Sea towards Italy, by Angels on December 10, 1294. Hence, December 10th is the day which the Church traditionally celebrates as the "Translation of the Holy House."

Accordingly, today’s Feast on December 10, 2016 is the 722nd Anniversary of that miraculous flight. A grand Basilica was built over the small Holy House, which had landed upon a frequented rough dirt road. Inscribed over the entrance to the Basilica are the words: "Tremble all ye who enter here. This is the holiest place on earth." Indeed, this declaration reflects the awesome reality which is memorialized in an inscription above the ancient traditional main Altar inside of the Holy House: "Hic verbum caro factum est" ("Here the Word was made flesh.").

Note that whenever the Holy House was faced with destruction, God intervened to save it. Today, the Holy House is under attack again by a force more insidious than Islam known as Modernism. In "Pascendi Dominici Gregis" ("on the Doctrine of the Modernists") Pope Saint Pius X says that Modernists are "puffed up like bladders with the spirit of vanity."

Hence, for Modernists, Saint Pius X noted: "the scholarship of a writer is in direct proportion to the recklessness of his attacks on antiquity, and his efforts to undermine tradition…" Pope Saint Pius X continued: "…they destroy as far as they can the pious traditions of the people, and bring into disrespect certain relics highly venerable from their antiquity."

In a booklet published in the 1980’s by the Universal Congregation of the Holy House entitled: "Loreto: The Shrine of the Holy House: Spiritual Guide" by Father Giuseppe Santarelli, he suggests an outrageous Modernistic explanation that instead of Angels, that it was the "Angeli family" that brought the Holy House over on a ship as a part of a "bride’s dowry."

In his 1984 book, "Loreto: its history and art," he posits another novel speculation, what he calls a "pastoral innovation," that the Holy House was reconstructed by the Crusaders who brought its pieces over to Italy on cargo ships. These miracledenying theories, of course, are impious nonsense since no one would construct a stone building without a foundation atop an uneven public roadway.

Always remember my Three R’s of Modernism: Recognize it; Refute it; and Return to Tradition. In the context of this Traditional Latin Mass we thank God for the venerable traditions surrounding the Holy House of Loreto, including its translation to Italy on the wings of Angels, as celebrated from antiquity. To this end, following this Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we will recite the traditional "Litany of Loreto," also known as the "Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary."

The Holy House of Loreto is a gift from God which we commemorate, in a special way, during this Advent Season leading to Christmas. Although Modernists in our midst may mount new attacks upon this gift from antiquity, we pray that it will not be taken away once again. We pray that the gifts of our One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Faith, our pious traditions, and our Catholic belief in miracles, which all form the true foundation of the Holy House of Loreto, will always remain the bedrock of the faithful. In this way, may we be prepared not only to properly celebrate Christ’s first coming at Christmas, but also be prepared for the eternal judgment of the second coming.

So let this sermon now end with the recitation of the traditional prayer most intimately linked to the Holy House. That prayer, constructed upon a foundation of unchanging Catholic Truths, is the ‘ Angelus:’ V. The Angel of the Lord declared unto Mary.

R. And She conceived by the Holy Spirit.

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with Thee, Blessed art Thou amongst women, and Blessed is the Fruit of Thy Womb, Jesus.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

V. Behold the Handmaid of the Lord.

R. Be it done unto Me according to Thy Word.

Hail Mary, full of grace…

V. And the Word was made Flesh. R. And dwelt among us.

Hail Mary, full of grace…

V. Pray for us, O Most Holy Mother of God.

R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

V. Let us pray: Pour forth we beseech Thee, O Lord, Thy grace into our hearts, that we to whom the Incarnation of Christ Thy Son, was made known by the message of an Angel, may by His Passion and Cross, be brought to the glory of His Resurrection, through the same Christ Our Lord. Amen.

In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 09

Catholic Heroes. . .

Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac:

Servant of God and Croatian Patriot

History always balances its accounts.

For years the Communists endeavored to separate Croatian Catholics from the Pope. They used all means to sever Church unity: vain pledges and threats; bribery and murder; trickery and torture.

The focal point in that artificial conglomeration of Yugoslavia and other satellite countries to Moscow - was identical: the communist notion of the state must not allow the existence of any "alien powers" on its territory (not even the Catholic Church). What disturbed the communist dream most were the tight ties of local churches with the Pope in Rome. Enter Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac of Zagreb: a man who railed against the government for interfering in a Church which answered only to Peter’s Successor.

In Tito’s Yugoslavia, that Yugoslavia where communism had a "human face", Archbishop Stepinac was arrested, sentenced during a shameful mock trial, imprisoned and detained until his death—all because his response to those communist efforts was a firm "No!" He said "no" to attractive proposals, and then confirmed his "no" when faced with force.

"My conscience is clear and calm. If you will not give me the right, history will give me that right," he said during that deplorable trial.

It was the victory of history that was witnessed on Saturday, October 3, 1998, when St. Peter’s Successor - that Peter to whom Stepinac remained loyal to the point of martyrdom – beatified the Croatian who had been ready to give his life as witness to the rights of Catholics both in Croatia and abroad.

Aloysius Stepinac came from a peasant family, born in Brezani near Krasic on May 8, 1898. He was the eighth of twelve children, and his mother always prayed that he might one day become a priest. Her spirited boy, however, was prevented from doing so right away.

In 1916 Stepinac was conscripted into the Austro-Hungarian army and fought on the Italian front until he was taken prisoner. In 1919 he was released and returned to civilian life, but put off the priesthood in order to study agriculture at the University of Zagreb. It was not until six years later that Stepinac decided to become a priest and went to Rome to study. He was ordained six years later on October 26, 1930.

He returned to Zagreb in July, 1931, with the degrees of Doctor of Theology and Philosophy, and became secretary to Archbishop Antun Bauer of Zagreb.

Soon afterward he was nominated as coadjutor to the Archbishop. After this nomination, Stepinac stated: "I love my Croatian people and for their benefit I am ready to give everything, as well as I am ready to give everything for the Catholic Church." In response to the many messages of support, Stepinac "was sincerely thankful for all the congratulations," but said that he was not enthusiastic about the appointment because it was too heavy a cross for him. The Lord had an even greater cross in mind, however, and after Bauer’s death on December 7, 1937, Stepinac became the Archbishop of Zagreb. His Bishop’s motto was: In te, Domine, spe-ravi (In you, Lord, I place my trust).

As Archbishop, Stepinac was an extremely outspoken defender of the Catholic Faith. He especially criticized Protestantism, stating in a speech in 1938 that "the Catholic Church was the greatest civilizing force in human history," and railed against those who wanted to deprive the Catholic Church of any influence in public life.

He referred to the Reformation as the "Deformation", and denounced Luther as a false prophet who "demolished the principles of legal authority given by the Lord." He went on to blame Protestantism for the "hell in which human society suffers today," and said that it had opened the road to "anarchy in all forms of human life."

During World War II, he tirelessly dedicated himself to human rights, both civil and religious, primarily in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and then particularly in the Independent State of Croatia. Despite the Nazi occupation he was not afraid to publicly and courageously defend the rights of the persecuted. His door was always open not only to Croatians, but also Jews, Serbs and Slovenes that needed his help.

The Archbishop desired most of all that Croatia remain a country of God.

In May of 1943, he openly criticized the Nazis, and as a result the Germans and Italians demanded that he be removed from office. Pope Pious XII refused, but warned Stepinac that his life was in danger. In July of 1943, the BBC and the Voice of America began to broadcast Stepinac’s sermons to occupied Europe, and the BBC commented on Stepinac’s criticism of the Ustasha regime.

He was a marked man; on May 17, 1945, nine days after the Communists came to power, he was arrested. Two weeks later, however, he was released and carried on as before, until an assassination attempt in November of that year compelled him to cease his pastoral visits outside of Zagreb.

The war itself finally came to an end, but Stepinac’s devotion to Truth and humanity had made powerful enemies.

Early one September morning, as the Archbishop vested for Mass, he was arrested and thrown into prison to await trial. The trial, which began on September 30, 1946, was later determined to have been a shameful fabrication, but at the time its legitimacy was not challenged. He was found guilty of Nazi collaboration, and was convicted on October 11, 1946; sentenced to sixteen years’ imprisonment and the loss of all civil and political rights for five years. From prison he continued to thunder against manipulation of the church by the state. He spent the first five years in the prison of Lepoglava, and in 1951, Tito’s government released him as a precondition for American aid, but confined him to the village of Krasic. Even though he was forbidden by the government to resume his duties, Stepinac was named Cardinal by Pope Pius XII on January 12, 1953. That same year, Stepinac was diagnosed with polycythemia, a rare blood disorder involving the excess of red blood cells, causing him to joke, "I am suffering from an excess of reds."

On February 10, 1960, at the age of 61, Stepinac died of thrombosis. Since the disease was brought on by complications from illnesses endured while in prison for make-believe crimes, many Catholics call him a martyr. On February 13th, he was buried behind the main altar in the cathedral in Zagreb. Pope Pious XII stated, "This Croatian Cardinal was the most important priest of the Catholic Church."

In 1985, his trial prosecutor, Jakov Blazevic, publically admitted that Cardinal Stepinac’s trial was entirely framed, and that Stepinac was tried only because he refused to sever thousandyear- old ties between Croatians and the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal Spelman commented that: "The only thing Cardinal Stepinac is guilty of was his love for God and his homeland."

On October 3, 1998, in Marija Bistrica, Pope John Paul II beatified Cardinal Stepinac, and referred to him as one of the outstanding figures of the Catholic Church. Even Ljubomir Rankovic, Deacon of the Serbian Orthodox Church, supported the beatification: "I, as a person and a priest, wish to express my admiration for this move." There were also prominent members of the Jewish community who testified to the generosity of aid Stepinac provided during the war.

Without a doubt, Blessed Cardinal Aloysius Stepinac is one of the greatest Croatian patriots of the 20th century. ■

Sources:

glas-koncila.hr/index.php?option=com_content& vie w=article& id=119& Itemid=122 croatianhistory.net/etf/stepinac.html wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloysius_Stepinac

The Trial of Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 10

Pope Francis Refuses to Answer the

Dubia

–

What Happens Next?

By John F. Salza, Esq.

A Two-Part Feature

Now that it has been published (on November 14, 2016) that Pope Francis has refused to answer the dubia of the four Cardinals (Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner) issued to him on September 16, 2016 concerning his erroneous and even heretical teachings in Amoris Latitiae, many Catholics are wondering what happens next. Some may be tempted to jump the gun and declare, on their own authority, that Francis’ refusal to answer proves he is a formal heretic and thus has lost his office. Is that true? Does Francis’ refusal to answer the dubia mean he has "judged himself" a formal heretic? Does his refusal prove the element of pertinacity which is required for the crime of heresy and loss of office? No. Not yet. We have a way to go. But the canonical process that could eventually lead to a charge and conviction of the crime of heresy

has indeed begun, and thus, we are no doubt entering into a very tumultuous time for the Church, as we approach the centenary of the Fatima apparitions.

A dubium is an official request for an authoritative and final response from the Holy See on a doctrinal, liturgical or canonical question. Dubia are customarily submitted by bishops to seek a definitive answer on a matter that pertains to the faithful in their diocese and the exercise of their apostolic ministry. It is not an accusation of heresy, and thus a Pope’s refusal to respond to a dubia, as extraordinary as that may be, does not establish the element of pertinacity necessary for the crime of heresy. Even in the secular legal process, one must be charged with a crime before he can be found guilty of it. That goes without saying.

We might recall that John Paul II did not directly respond to Archbishop Lefebvre’s dubia, submitted in October 1985 concerning Vatican II’s erroneous teaching on religious liberty in Dignitatis Humanae, and it took the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a year and a half to issue a response (and which did little more than affirm the council’s teaching). For those who argue that Francis’ three month absence of a response proves his pertinacity and convicts him of heresy (even though the canonical norm for replying actually grants six months), does that mean John Paul II also lost his office after his three months of silence?

What about his six months of silence?

What about his year of silence? Or what about after the Congregation’s tardy response failed to reconcile Dignitatis Humanae’s novel teachings with Quanta Cura and the Syllabus of Errors?

1 These

rhetorical questions underscore that a Pope’s failure to respond to a dubia does not prove him guilty of the canonical crime of heresy. That is because the

1 I have a copy of the CDF’s March 9, 1987 reply which conspicuously fails to reconcile Dignitatis Humanae’s teaching with the perennial teaching of the Church. Furthermore, the Congregation admits the possibility of further study of the problem ("… demeure la possibilité d’une étude ultérieure de ce problème…"). If such matters were left to private judgment, one could have "convicted" of John Paul II for his failure to respond to Archbishop Lefebvre’s dubia.

Church has another means by which the crime of heresy is established: They are ecclesiastical warnings.

The Pope Must Be Formally Warned by Church Authorities Ecclesiastical warnings are issued by the Cardinals (who are the next highest authorities in the Church), which accuse the suspect of heresy and require him to respond with a correction of his errors within six months.

2 This is what Cardinal Burke was referring to in his interview with the National Catholic Register when he said: "There is, in the Tradition of the Church, the practice of correction of the Roman Pontiff. It is something that is clearly quite rare. But if there is no response to these questions, then I would say that it would be a question of taking a formal act of correction of a serious error." If the Pope would fail to respond to these warnings, the Church would presume that the Pope is incorrigible and hardened in his heresy.

As we explain in detail in our book True or False Pope?, the Church’s ability to warn and ultimately judge a Pope for heresy by establishing his pertinacity was taught by Pope Innocent III, Pope Adrian, St. Bellarmine,

3 Francisco

4 Suarez, John of St. Thomas, the famous Decretal Si Papa, and others, and remains the common teaching of the Church’s Doctors and theologians.

Establishing a Pope’s pertinacity is

2 As we read from Fr. Augustine’s commentary on canon law: "If, after the lapse of six months, to be reckoned from the moment the penalty has been contracted, the person suspected of heresy has not amended, he must be regarded as a heretic, amenable to the penalties set forth in canon 2314. Whilst the penalties enumerated under (b) are ferendae sententiae, to be inflicted according to can. 2223, 3, the penalties stated under (c) are a iure and latae sententiae." Augustine, A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, vol. VIII, bk. 5, pp. 288289. Fr. Henry Ayrinhac also notes: "A cleric should receive a second warning, and if this too remained fruitless he should be suspended a divinis. After inflicting these punishments, six months more may be allowed, and if at the end of this time the party suspected of heresy has shown no signs of amendment, he is to be considered as a heretic and punished accordingly."

3 Bellarmine wrote: "Firstly, that a heretical Pope can be judged is expressly held in Can. Si Papa dist. 40, and by Innocent III ( Serm. II de Consec. Pontif.) Furthermore, in the 8th Council, (act. 7) the acts of the Roman Council under Pope Hadrian are recited, in which one finds that Pope Honorius appears to be justly anathematized, because he had been convicted of heresy…" ( De Romano Pontifice, bk. 2, ch. 30).

4 "Let no mortal man presume to accuse the Pope of fault, for, it being incumbent upon him to judge all, he should be judged by no one, unless he is suddenly caught deviating from the faith"( Si Papa Dist 40). Latin found in Brian Tierney, The Crisis of Church and State (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1964), p. 124.

more difficult than judging the matter of heresy (e.g., the teachings), because it involves something that exists within the internal forum (the realm of conscience). If a person does not openly leave the Church, or publicly admit that he knowingly rejects what the Church definitively teaches on faith or morals (neither of which Francis has done), pertinacity would need to be established another way. The other way, according to Divine law and canon law, is by issuing an ecclesiastical warning to the suspect or, as Cardinal Burke described it, a "formal act of correction."

An ecclesiastical warning serves as an effective means for establishing pertinacity, since the response will determine, with a sufficient degree of certitude, whether or not the person who has professed heresy (not a lesser error) is truly pertinacious (he is consciously departing from a dogma of Faith), rather than merely mistaken - which still might be a sin, but not necessarily the sin of heresy. Because pertinacity is itself a necessary element of heresy, it does not suffice that its presence be presumed, especially by Catholics with no ecclesiastical authority; it must be proven, and by the Church’s authorities.

The ecclesiastical warnings accomplish this by removing any chance of innocent ignorance.

This is why St. Robert Bellarmine said that a cleric "shows himself to be manifestly obstinate" in his heresy by virtue of the two warnings. Wrote Bellarmine: "For, in the first place, it is proven with arguments from authority and from reason that the manifest heretic is ipso facto deposed. The argument from authority is based on Saint Paul (Titus, 3:10), who orders that the heretic be avoided after two warnings, that is, after showing himself to be manifestly obstinate…"

5

In his Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to Titus, St. Thomas Aquinas confirms that the admonitions spoken of in Titus 3:10 come from official, ecclesiastical authority, and not from any Catholic in

5 De Romano Pontifice, bk. 2, ch. 30.

the pew. Speaking of a person who has deviated from the Faith, St. Thomas wrote: "Such a person should be warned, and if he does not desist, he should be avoided. And he [the Apostle] says, after the first and second admonition, for that is the way the Church proceeds in excommunicating."

In the Summa, St. Thomas confirms the same point when he notes that "the Church" condemns, not at once, but after the first and second warning, according to the teaching of St. Paul. He wrote: "On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but ‘after the first and second admonition,’ as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death."

6

In a 1909 article published in The American Catholic Quarterly Review,

Fr. Maurice Hassett also confirmed that the admonitions spoken of by St. Paul must come from the proper ecclesiastical authorities: "From the earliest Christian times heresy was universally regarded as the most heinous of sins. The heretic, St. Paul instructs Titus, shall be admonished a first and a second time of the grave character of his offense; if he will not heed, he must be avoided by Christians as a man in evident bad faith, who stands self-condemned - Titus 3:10. (…) Heretics were consequently cut off from all association with the faithful, who must hold no relations with them so long as they obstinately refuse to heed the official remonstrances of the Church authorities."

7

Thus, in order to establish pertinacity (that the heretic is "manifestly obstinate"), canon law requires that the Church issue warnings to a prelate before he is deposed for the crime of heresy.

8 As Bellarmine indicates, this aspect of canon law is founded upon Divine law, as revealed in Scripture ( cf.

Tit. 3:10), and is considered so necessary that even in the extreme case in which a cleric publicly joins a false religion (which Francis has also not done), he must be duly warned by the Church

6 ST, II-II, q. 11, a. 3, sed contra. As we can see, contrary to the teachings of Pope Francis, St. Thomas also affirms the justice of capital punishment to the extent it is in proportion to the severity of the crime (and the death penalty is proportionate to the crime of harming "the salvation of others"). See, for example, ST, II-II, q. 11, a. 3; q. 64, a. 3; Gen. 9:6; Lk 19:27; Rom 13:4.

7 Hassett, "Church and State in the Fourth Century," published in The American Catholic Quarterly Review, vol. 34, January - October, 1909, pp. 301-302.

8 Canon 2314.1-2 says: "All apostates from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: Unless they respect warnings, they are deprived of benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other duty that they have in the Church, they are declared infamous, and [if] clerics, with the warning being repeated, [they are] deposed."

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 11

Continued...

before being degraded.

9 Because the Church has no authority over the Pope, these warnings do not constitute an act of jurisdiction (as they would for other Catholics), but only an act of charity, as

St. Thomas teaches in regard to fraternal correction.

10 Although the Pope is not subject to the positive law of the Church, because these warnings are rooted in Divine Law, and are afforded to lesser clerics in the hope of their amendment, they most certainly are afforded to the Vicar of Christ, both as a matter of justice as well as under the philosophical principle omne majus continet in se minus - "the greater includes the lesser."

In fact, Cajetan says that it is because a Pope is not subject to canon law that ecclesiastical warnings are absolutely necessary for him before being declared a heretic. He explains that because other heretics may automatically incur latae sententiae excommunication (the censure) by operation of canon law11 (to which the Pope is not subject), it is not absolutely necessary for the Church to issue warnings to these before declaring them excommunicated.

12 However,

because the Pope is not subject to the ecclesiastical censure, the teaching of St. Paul to Titus should logically be followed to the letter. In Cajetan’s own words: "The second consequence is that a heretic pope should not be deposed before the admonitions: for he is not excommunicated on account of heresy, but should be excommunicated by being deposed. Therefore, the apostle’s command concerning the double admonition, which need not be observed [to the letter] in the case of others, who are inferiors, on account of the addition of excommunication latae sententiae, which the Church imposes on heretics, should be observed to the letter with him."

13 The renowned eighteenth century theologian, Fr. Pietro Ballerini, who subscribed to Bellarmine’s famous Fifth Opinion on a heretical Pope,

14

explains how the warnings would serve to demonstrate pertinacity for a reigning Pope who publicly professed heresy, as well as who exactly in the Church would be responsible for issuing them, and the effect that they would produce: "Is it not true that, confronted with such a danger to the faith [a Pope teaching heresy], any subject can, by fraternal correction, warn their superior, resist him to his face, refute him and, if necessary,

9 "A cleric must, besides, be degraded if, after having been duly warned, he persists in being a member of such a society (non-Catholic sect). All the offices he may hold become vacant, ipso facto, without any further declaration. This is tacit resignation recognized by law (Canon 188.4) and therefore the vacancy is one de facto et iure (by fact and by law)." Augustine, A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, vol. 8, bk. 5, p. 280 (emphasis added).

10 On whether a man is bound to correct his prelate, St. Thomas teaches: "A subject is not competent to administer to his prelate the correction which is an act of justice through the coercive nature of punishment: but the fraternal correction which is an act of charity is within the competency of everyone in respect of any person towards whom he is bound by charity, provided there be something in that person which requires correction." ST, II-II, q. 33, a. 4.

11 Here we can think of certain Catholic politicians who openly acknowledge and defy Catholic teaching (e.g., abortion) to the world, thereby establishing their pertinacity as notorious by notoriety of fact. As non-clerics, their excommunication may be recognized by the Church without the need for ecclesiastical warning or censure.

12 "Neither is it always demanded in the external forum that there be a warning and a reprimand as described above for somebody to be punished as heretical and pertinacious, and such a requirement is by no means always admitted in practice by the Holy Office" ( De Lugo, disp. XX, sect. IV, n. l57-158, cited in "Essay on Heresy," by Arnaldo da Silveira).

13 De Comparatione Auctoritatis Papae et Concilii, p. 103.

summon him and press him to repent? The Cardinals, who are his counselors, can do this; or the Roman Clergy, or the Roman Synod, if, being met, they judge this opportune. For any person, even a private person, the words of Saint Paul to Titus hold: ‘Avoid the heretic, after a first and second correction, knowing that such a man is perverted and sins, since he is condemned by his own judgment’ (Tit. 3, 10-11). For the person, who, admonished once or twice, does not repent, but continues pertinacious in an opinion contrary to a manifest or defined dogma - not being able, on account of this public pertinacity to be excused, by any means, of heresy properly so called, which requires pertinacity - this person declares himself openly a heretic. He reveals that by his own will he has turned away from the Catholic Faith and the Church, in such a way that now no declaration or sentence of anyone whatsoever is necessary to cut him from the body of the Church. Therefore the Pontiff who after such a solemn and public warning by the Cardinals, by the Roman Clergy or even by the Synod, would remain himself hardened in heresy and openly turn himself away from the Church, would have to be avoided, according to the precept of Saint Paul. So that he might not cause damage to the rest, he would have to have his heresy and contumacy publicly proclaimed, so that all might be able to be equally on guard in relation to him. Thus, the sentence which he had pronounced against himself would be made known to all the Church, making clear that by his own will he had turned away and separated himself from the body of the Church, and that in a certain way he had abdicated the Pontificate…"

15 Thus, before Pope Francis could be considered a public heretic, he

15 De Potestate Ecclesiastica, (Monasterii Westphalorum, Deiters, 1847) ch. 6, sec. 2, pp. 124-125 (emphasis added).

would have to be issued "a first and second correction" (warnings) by "the Cardinals" (or other official Church authority, such as a "Roman Synod"), and would then have to "continue pertinacious in an opinion contrary to a manifest or defined dogma" after at least six months (such as his material heresies that no one is condemned forever or that intrinsically evil acts admit of exceptions). Because these warnings are public and issued by the proper authorities, a refusal to heed them would establish "public pertinacity" which is necessary to convict someone of public (that is, the crime of) heresy. That means we have a way to go with Pope Francis, because the authorities have not even issued the first warning. Not yet.

In the next installment, we will address what happens if the Cardinals issue the requisite warnings to Pope Francis and he still refuses to respond or fails to correct his errors.

To Be Concluded Next Issue

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 11

Lost in the Fifties, Too

Random Notes and Thoughts

By Walter L. Matt (RIP) Written on July 6, 1950 With the Korean situation in mind and, in fact, with all the ominous developments of the past decade and more, I’ve been thinking of those famed poets who, like Virgil, Ovid and others, used to speculate about the five ages of mortality. These five ages, they maintained, are broken down as follows: The first age is the "golden age," which they said was under Saturn, and was without wars or inclination to wars. In that great ‘age’ humanity was really united and men were neither "contentious or clamorous." The next ‘age’ was the "silver age," under Jove, where the spirit of war with its hateful concomitants became the gradually manifest. The third was the "brazen age," where, as Vives wrote in his commentaries, "war hurls all upon heaps, and quaffeth lives and blood," and where there were those "who thought they loved justice, yet their bosoms harbored an eager thirst of wars." The fifth ‘age’ was so-called "iron age," where "mischief goeth beyond bound and limit, and all miseries breaking their prisons assault men’s fortunes" and "open deceit, open hate, open wars, slaughters, vastations, burnings, rapes, and rapines are all open, violent, and common."

And today the sixth age is upon us, the Age of Enlightenment and human progress, the Scientific or Technological Age, where material things have been increased and multiplied without let-up, but where the human spirit, the soul, has been pawned. Today is the Atomic Age, the age of unprecedented world revolution and unrest, the age of mass bombings and rocket projectiles, of infanticide and genocide, the age where the most sacred contracts and covenants no longer are honored because they lack the seal and spirit of God.

Truly, modern enlightenment and progress have not brought us even to the ancients’ "golden age," much less to that tranquil realm of the spirit which is born of Faith!

A married woman wrote to me recently about the Cana Conference. "God knows we need it," she said. "The other day a friend made some shocking statements in favor of birth control. When asked what her confessor had to say about that, she replied: "I don’t tell him. It’s none of his business!"

A top-ranking New York dress designer told reporters last week the reason for her successes as a fashion expert. Said she: "I do not dress the young person, I dress the young body. That is the prime concern!" Interesting to know that bodies, not souls, are being cared for!

And that as far as people are concerned they might as well send stuffed dummies out on the street to represent them!

No wonder even the NEA thinks that half of the native special talent in this country is being wasted in the same way that soil erodes—from neglect. And, we might add, from soul neglect!

Speaking of neglect, modern television is increasingly held responsible for nervous and distraught school children.

In Cleveland, for instance, a high school principal took a recent sample poll of 274 pupils and found that 41 percent of them were handicapped by having TV sets in their homes. According to the poll, 32 percent watched the set more than an hour a day, with the result that scholarship and attendance records were "sub-standard."

One of the explanations, no doubt, for the ever increasing trend toward centralization, paternalism, State Socialism, or whatever you want to call it in this country is the fact that one out of every five Americans is currently living in whole or in part off a Government check! This figure was given last week by Federal statisticians checking to determine how many people currently receive pay, pensions, insurance or relief payments from Federal, State and local government.

Added together, the report shows that 27,404,858 people are receiving Government payments.

The total includes only those actually receiving payments—not dependents who may be supported by them—and it does not include such Federal support to farmers.

The 27,404,858 figure includes present and retired Federal and local servants and military personnel, veterans receiving pension or disability payments, veteran dependents receiving Government pensions, recipients of temporary unemployment compensation insurance, Social Security beneficiaries, those on local relief rolls and recipients of such Federal aids as old-age assistance, aid to dependent children and aid to the blind.

The most expensive item on the list is the Federal and State payrolls.

Total dollars for State payrolls are not available in Washington, but figures show that the cost of the Federal civilian employees in January and February of this year averaged approximately $525,000,000 a month—three and onehalf times as much as the same payrolls cost in pre-war days!

In 1939 the total of Federal civilian employees was 969,000. That jumped to 3,569,000 in 1945, dropped to a "low" of 2,066,000 in 1948 and was back up to the reported 2,111,000 figure as of last April.

Total State payrolls of 3,090,000 in 1939 dropped to a 3,116,000 "low" in 1944 and began a steady post-war climb to the 3,911,000 average for the year 1949.

These figures do not include the number of pensioned local and state employees, a figure not tabulated in Washington.

Also left out are employees of street railway, water and other utilities owned by local governments.

The figures will go higher when the President and Congress finish with the new Social Security bill, which adds 10,000,000 new workers to the 35,000,000 now paying payroll taxes, along with their employers, in order that they may ultimately benefit from retirement checks.

No danger, you say? Strange, that’s what they said in Germany and other Socialist countries too! ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 12

A Warning from Russia. . .

Alexander Dugin: A Werewolf

By Elena Chudinova (Translated for The Remnant by Eugene Girin) Russians sighed in relief when Donald Trump won the presidential election.

In the last decade and a half, Russian society did not experience such an outburst of sympathy for the United States and Americans as it did since November 8th. Only the liberals and the communists do not share the general mood. To the former, Hilary Clinton was the ideal of America, with all that stands behind this destructive persona: democratization tours around the world, further destruction of the family, secularism, and other wicked policies known all too well to be listed again here.

In Russian liberal circles, people feel like the wind was knocked out of them.

And the communists, who are used to peddle and profit from the negative image of America, do not want a thaw in relations between our countries. The rest of Russian society hopes for this thaw and are sympathetic to the expected conservative path of the incoming administration.

The person I seek to warn Remnant readers about is not terribly important in the context of above-mentioned events.

However, as Christians, we need to beware of lies in both large and small contexts. I foresee that our countries may well cooperate in a conservative sense, in the spheres of religion, philosophy, and culture. Unfortunately, up to this point, all American-Russian dialogue was held by liberals from both countries. Everything, including book publishing was an example of liberal destructiveness.

This new conservative-minded cooperation would be a very good thing indeed. Allow me some artistic license. Let us imagine that the United States is putting together a round table discussion on such conservative aims as the religious education of youth, the family as a "little Church", the fight against abortion, and the like. "Hmm...", ponders a high-ranking Russian official, "We must send a delegation... a very serious endeavor... but who would represent us there? It must be someone with both a solidly conservative reputation and advanced degrees..."

The official then thinks of a certain middle-aged, presentable man, with an unruly beard, dressed in a rustic skewcollared shirt. This man is always on the television screens, at the dais of many patriotic meetings, and on the pages of newspapers. "Dugin!" exclaims the high-ranking official with relief. The problem is solved, an ambassador for Russian conservative thought on the international arena is found. Maybe Alexander Dugin will even be sent to the United States through the Russian foreign ministry.

The funny thing is, Dugin will be very happy to go make friends with America.

Maybe he sincerely forgot how in 2008, on the pages of "Profil" magazine, he called for the physical destruction of the "land of heresy", as he designated the United States. He even came up with philosophic and theological bases for his proposal.

Alexander Dugin has a remarkably short memory, so that aspects of his biography that are no longer advantageous, rapidly disappear from it. Fortunately, other people do not have such memory problems. I do not know who exactly (a person who is powerful yet unwise and mendacious) is behind the effort to present Dugin as a leading Russian conservative, patriot, and Orthodox Christian. Nowadays, it is practically impossible to take down this concocted image, but we could at least prevent this lie from being perpetuated in other countries.

The present-day created image of Dugin is a lie. The only true part is that Dugin is a Russian. But he is not a Christian, not a patriot, and not a conservative.

The well-known "beard, rustic shirt, traditionalism" image of Dugin began to circulate since the 2000s. Alexander Dugin himself admitted that his family became religious Russian Orthodox Christians in the end of the 1990s.

And all of the sudden, this far from young neophyte starts teaching Russian Orthodox spirituality from every television screen. A bit too early for a neophyte to preach to others. But in light of other aspects of Dugin’s biography this is not too important.

Also, not of crucial importance is the fact that Professor Dugin, who teaches in the department of sociology at the top university of Russia – Moscow State University – apparently graduated from Novocherkassk Engineering-Melioration Institute after studying there part time.

And even the validity of that rather humble diploma arouses serious doubts.

Since his youth, Alexander Dugin was closely associated with the recently departed Islamic extremist Geydar Dzhemal. They were both members of the "Black Order of the SS" secret society headed by the infamous occultist Yevgeny Golovin, who acted as the "reichsfuhrer".

Below is one of the songs written by Golovin and sung by the young Alexander Dugin and Geydar Dzhemal:

«Let’s drive ahead, young men, with roughness and with violence, For us, a swastika does shine in the night!

And we will live to see your corpses Dance tango in the gas ovens.

Oh, how fresh and wonderful the roses, How sinister the sounds of the Bryansk forest: An SS division embarks on its last voyage onto the Via Dolorosa."

Note the sacrilege in the last line, very typical for Golovin and his disciples.

Dugin also composed poetry, which glorified Himmler and Welteislehre (the World Ice theory of Nazi pseudoscience). About five years ago, these wretched verses were removed from the Internet and, when Dugin was reminded of them during a television interview, he denied ever writing them.

Dugin’s enchantment with Nazi mysticism cannot be explained away as a youthful indiscression. After all, the occult side of the Third Reich is one of the leading interests of Dugin’s life.

Only a few years ago, Dugin, together with Dzhemal, performed an occult ritual on the graveside of their mentor Golovin, this was recorded on video, which is available on the website of the Eurasianist Youth Union, an organization headed by Dugin. Also a few years ago, Dugin, Dzhemal, Maksim Shevchenko (a crypto-Muslim and supporter of extremist Islamic organizations), and other people founded the "Florian Geyer" philosophy club, as in 8th SS Cavalry Division Florian Geyer, the hymn of which Dugin mentioned at the inaugural meeting of the club.

Dugin’s extremely close ties to Dzhemal is worth an in-depth look. After all, Dzhemal was a committed hater of Russia and the Christian world and had ties to such Islamic terrorists as Said Buryatsky, Emir Khattab, Shamil Basaev, and many others. There is much evidence that Dugin lobbies on behalf of Islamic extremism. "The Russian ministry of internal affairs considers it odd that [Chechen leader] Khozh-Ahmed Nukhayev appeared in Moscow in the summer of 2001 to participate in a conference on Eurasianism organized by Alexander Dugin", wrote murdered Russian-American journalist Paul Klebnikov in his book "A Conversation with a Barbarian". The Russian head prosecutor’s office accuses Nukhayev of the murder. However, on Dugin’s Eurasianist website, Nukhayev is still described as a respected "Islamic traditionalist". In the Dugin-Dzhemal duet, Dugin is without a doubt, the follower, while Dzhemal is the leader.

The Eurasianist Youth Union lobbies immigration into Russia from Muslim countries and lavishes exhuberant praise on Genghis Khan, whose "symbol" is on their banner.

People in Russian Orthodox circles are confused why Dugin appears on television channels as a "Russian Orthodox philosopher". His views, from his youth to the present, are a development of the ideas of Aleister Crowley, Rene Guenon, as well as Yevgeny Golovin. There is a well known essay by Dugin, "Put my corpse in the sedges", which glorifies Soviet serial killer Chikatilo and Dyonisian cults. The Eurasianist Youth Union actively preaches communist doctrine and the cult of Stalin and Lenin.

Since the days of his youth, Dugin engaged in vice typical in occult circles.

There are more than a few stories about his homosexual affairs. After all, homosexuality was practiced in the secret society of Yevgeny Golovin.

Without a doubt, rumours are not facts, but let us ask ourselves: What kind of men usually marry lesbians? And here we have an undisputed fact: Dugin’s first marriage was to famous LGBT activist Yevgeniya Debryanskaya.

All of the abovementioned aspects of Dugin’s past and much more, which cannot be covered in the space of one article, are easily accessible. On the Internet, there is a video of a disgusting show, dedicated to the memory of Aleister Crowley. This show, in which Dugin actively participates, includes a nauseating mockery of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Overall, this show has an openly sodomitic character.

Known political scientist and journalist D. Galkovsky as well as philosopher Redzhabek wrote about the true essence of Dugin. I also wrote about Dugin, for the website of a popular political magazine called "Expert".

But it is futile to try to shout down the television. Vast numbers of working people simply have no time to independently research the biographies of media personas. A bearded man with a Russian face, in a traditional Russian dress comes on the screen and pontificates about family values, Russian Orthodox morality, and the love for the Motherland. People listen and nod, they like Dugin.

Simple people who are not interested in politics and are religious on the surface, simply do not know that the real Dugin is an occultist (on the verge of Satanism and perhaps even beyond the verge), Islamophile, a betrayer of the European civilization, a communist, and a pervert.

I am simply issuing a warning: this man is an absolute werewolf. A mendacious and very sneaky one. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 13

Three Score and Ten

By Timothy J Cullen " Our years shall be considered as a spider: the days of our years in them are three score and ten years"

(Psalms: 89: 9-10, Douay Rheims Bible)

The year of our Lord 2016 has drawn to a close. During that year, this writer completed his three score and ten in the vale of tears that we share. God willing, he may have no small number of years remaining, but given the Biblical injunction, a summing up is in order nonetheless.

This writer was born in New York City just short of a year after the conclusion of the Second World War, a time in the West that was truly blessed in many ways for the citizens of the United States of America. It was a time during which an incomparable period of material prosperity for the masses developed.

It was a time of great technological advance that continues unimpeded to this day. Even in a Europe largely destroyed by the dreadful war, material prosperity reemerged. This writer grew up in the USA and lived a large part of his stillyouthful, early and later middle-aged life in Europe and now lives the latter years in South America asking himself: At what price did all this material prosperity come? The answer is discouraging.

The price was and remains the widespread abandonment of what less prosperous but wiser folk understood was the purpose and reward for our pilgrimage in the earthly vale of tears: the promise of eternal reward as promised by Christ, assuming we adhered to His teachings and accepted the God-granted benefits of the Sacraments offered us by His Church.

Ah, His Church, broadly speaking a mere shadow of what it was seventy years ago!

Material prosperity is all well and good, but not at the cost of the loss of the Beatific Vision and an eternity in Hell, or at best a painful passage through Purgatory. How can it be that such a simple fact eludes so many? How can it be that so many are willing to succumb to the temptation of immediate sensual gratification in lieu of an eternity of ecstatic awareness of spiritual bliss beyond imagination? Why have the churches emptied, the Sacraments been profaned to so great an extent, even within the hallowed precincts of God’s Church herself? When full in years, one asks these questions with greater urgency, perhaps more for the sake of one’s posterity than for oneself if one has held fast to the Faith through all these years.

"Our years shall be considered as a spider" sings the psalmist, but what exactly is meant by that? When I first came upon this translation, a literal translation from the Latin, I was puzzled and to a certain extent remain so. I believe what was meant was that our years should be thought of as a spider’s web, a fragile weaving of time intended to trap an understanding of our purpose on this earth. Those who have held fast to the Faith have had that latter question answered by the Church, answered well and expounded well not just in dogma but in the great classic The Four Last Things, both in the version written by Fr. Martin von Cochem in the seventeenth century as well as the better known 1947 work of Fr. Reginal Garrigou Lagrange.

No one among us, not the pope, not any churchman and least of all oneself, knows the moment when our particular web of earthly time will surrender to the elements and our lives draw to a close. Fragile indeed is the web of life, susceptible to breakage in its every moment. The egoistic concerns of daily life are trivial—enormously trivial— when viewed from the perspective of eternity. Christ came to this earth to teach us once and for all how to live our daily lives and more importantly how to prepare ourselves for eternity, tasking His Church and her priests with providing us the means. His teachings are not to be meddled with, certainly not to be subjected to sophistic philosophical speculation that leads the unwary to confusion rather than instruction, least of all with respect to adherence to the only true teachings that treat of eternal reward or condemnation and the means by which the former is obtained and the latter avoided; to do otherwise is to betray the sacred office of the priesthood instituted by God in His Second Person.

This writer remembers when the Church was, well, the Church! The Christmastide papal broadcast of Pius XII was an eagerly awaited affirmation of the Faith as it had existed for nearly two thousand years at the time. Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve was a solemn ceremony filled with Mystery. The new year was no different from the old with respect to the timeless dogma of the Church. Catholics had no doubt about what it meant to be Catholic: how could they when dogma had settled that once and for all? All the answers to perennial questions were at hand; nothing remained to doubt, at least until Vatican II, when open season on certainty was proclaimed.

The termites likely planted within the Church began their corrosive eating away of certainty at that ill-starred Council and continue to corrode the good and true as 2017, A.D. begins. The present Vicar of Christ is very much a man of his times, a man who believes himself capable of correcting Christ, more’s the pity. Tradition is no longer an "option" for the faithful; it’s a necessity for those who wish to attain Paradise.

This writer, now elderly, has grown tired—more to the point, incredulous— with respect to papal pronouncements and if truth be told with all the "theological" philosophizing of the past half-century and more by so-called Catholic theologians. I have completed my allotted three score and ten and now look toward the Four Last Things as my polestar, if you will. Fifty-plus years of theological pap plays no part in my convictions with respect to the final accounting to be made before my judgment comes to pass after my soul leaves this earth; I rely on the dogma of the Church as taught to me and countless millions before the Modernist innovators proposed their novelties; God willing, future generations will do the same.

It was not my original intent to drop the third person ("this writer") narrative, but as the essay began to unfold, I realized that it is eminently personal and therefore only a first person narrative would do. Long ago I learned that the original sin had much to do with hubris, that overweening pride that opens one’s ears to the whispered temptation to believe "You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil" Gen 3:5). Our first parents yielded to the temptation to take upon themselves what was right and proper to God, Who had forbidden them this knowledge, an since their expulsion from Eden, all humankind "knows the death" and all who live must die upon this earth.

During all the history and pre-history of sentient beings, only two were born into this world without sin: the Second Person of God and His blessed Mother.

These two had preternatural knowledge of good and evil, but we do not nor should we ever presume that we do; our knowledge is learned.

Natural Law may be written on our hearts, but the laws, tradition, customs and culture of our Faith and our Church are not: we are taught them, learn them, then (hopefully) practice them. What, then, are we to do if or Church takes it upon herself through the agency of her hierarchy and theologians decide it is right and fitting to try and change these time-honored verities with the frequency and ambiguity of the federal tax code?

One cannot help but wonder if these innovations are made more for the sake of intellectual hubris than for the genuine good of the souls of the faithful. The bizarre pronouncements emanating from the Vatican seem not so much intellectually hubristic as the emotionally excessive outbursts of social workers robed in scarlet and the social worker supremo looking back at his youthful underlining of the yellowed pages of his dog-eared copy of Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation (1971, first outlined in 1968), by 88 year old Notre Dame theology professor Fr. Gustavo Gutiérrez, O.P., long considered the principal figure in the founding of the prohibited movement that derived from this so-called "theology" that gave us the provocative phrase "the preferential option for the poor".

Anyone at all familiar with the relatively recent history of Latin America knows well the dreadful outcome brought about by this messianic and overly emotional approach to religion when preached to a disadvantaged but uneducated people filled with-not-by-any-means-unjustified resentment with respect to their material and social status. Religion, however, is not the avenue down which societal "progressivism" is meant to be steered: the Faith and Doctrine are incorruptible and not to be tampered with, something that should be obvious above all to those charged with defending it.

I live in the home country of Pope Francis and have friends who were on both sides of the dreadful conflict that arose in this country as a result of a revolutionary fervor that was Marxistinspired and should never have spilled over into "theology", a lesson I wish Pope Francis had learned; it appears, however, that during the so-called "Dirty War" suffered by Argentina, the then-Fr. Jorge Bergoglio chose to conceal his now-evident sympathies with the pseudo-theology/ideology of Fr. Gutiérrez and the Brazilian former priest Leonardo Boff for reasons known only to him; he certainly has no hesitation in espousing them now.

I believe these men (primates of the Church though some of them are) to be men who in the final accounting have as their intellectual and/or subjective emotional motto " Non servum", a motto derived from the primordial rebel against God, His initially pure Creation of the human being, the teachings of His Second Person and the workings of His Third Person in our fallen world. I will serve the Faith, but balk at serving the anti-doctrinal innovations offered up by men, though they be clothed as the primates of God’s Church, a Church now subjected to a trial that appears to be intended to separate the wheat from the chaff. I am but a simple sinner still trying to find his way at age seventy, an age when all should have been decided long since, but now in spite of the fullness of years is assailed by doubt not with respect to the Faith but yes with respect to those charged with defending and promoting it. I confess to unease as I go forward in the latter years of my life and a still-greater unease with respect to my posterity and the teachings they may receive.

There is really no "debate" when it comes to the Faith, not even in its more mundane applications. The unlettered poor need evangelization, not politicization. Conformity with Catholic Doctrine long since expressed and taught is their (and our) "highway to Heaven"; "Heaven" was never meant to nor is it possible to somehow "achieve" in what we know is a fallen world with its multitudinous flaws: Heaven is reached by adhering to Doctrine, availing oneself of the Sacraments and facing the Four Last Things in a state of Grace, not by bettering one’s material lot in this vale of tears.

Let whomever chooses to do so view me as backward, retrograde, whatever they may call me and those who believe as I do: I was taught what was right and true, and I will adhere to those beliefs on my deathbed; and I believe you and all should as well! ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 14

The Land Where Jesus Walked…

M. Moore/ Continued fraom Page 4

got control of Beirut, their Maronite Christian allies, called "the Lebanese Forces," entered the camps and massacred everyone!

But nowadays, to the otherwise oblivious tourist and pilgrim, driving to Bethlehem cross-country from the coast is a really lovely experience: the pine-clad modern highway rolls cheerfully through fluffygreen Judean hills and valleys with charming little farms and camping trails winding in the woods along old stone paths dating back to Roman times. Our guide called the entirely re-forested and refurbished region "little Switzerland."

We stopped for a "souvenir" in the limestone-littered valley where Bethlehem-born hero David met Philistine Goliath and killed him with one of those very rocks; not far from there we saw a grassy skull-shaped mound believed to mark the historic site of Goliath’s severed head. Whether or not he was a giant is a matter of debate.

Our guide smilingly told us that, during so many successive centuries of rewrites, evil Goliath only got bigger and bigger!

But isn’t it possible today to see a reallife revival of the same old story?

Suddenly the road turned, and there before us loomed a wide mountain plateau some 2500 feet high and dotted with dreary human dovecotes. On the slopes dropping unceremoniously into a scraggly series of valleys below wandered a few sorry sheep and at least one broken-down shepherd. Such was my first impression of "O little town of Bethlehem." Our guide said its name derives from "Beit Lahm," or "House of Meat"— obviously from the (slaughter of) many lambs once pastured among the profuse silver-leafed olive trees just below the town. Jesus, whom St. John called "Lamb of God," fittingly chose to be born here. So, beyond the singing angels and dazzling star of the first Noel, His future role as both shepherd and sacrifice was clear from the start.

Just outside and below the town, we were stopped at a big checkpoint. The stations were manned by Israeli Defense Forces in full metal jacket. I saw lines of miserable-looking people and cars being held up in the heat for who knows how long, or why. Our driver explained that the standard license plate for cars owned by Israeli citizens (Jews and Arabs) is yellow. Yellow plates are also issued to Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, considered by Israel to be part of its territory.

But license plates for a Palestinian resident of the town of Ramallah, for example, have a white rectangle on the left with the Hebrew letter "R." The number appears on a blue or green background. Similarly, (N)ablus, (B) ethlehem, (H)ebron, and so forth.

Palestinian cars from Gaza have all white plates.

For a Palestinian living in the villages surrounding the town of Ramallah, the "R" is in an orange rectangle.

Jewish settlers living near Ramallah or Bethlehem have yellow Israeli plates. In other words, license plates show one’s race. Thus, were one to find oneself with the "wrong" plate on the "wrong" time or day, one might expect to be greeted by bullets from an M-16 or AK-47.

Americans with an Israeli driver are of course quite safe.

Having served many years in the IDF, our guide and the checkpoint guards knew and saluted one another. We were immediately waved right through, exiting ahead on a winding road up— at last!—to Bethlehem! Our Israeli guide—not permitted to go further— drove to a hotel parking lot and texted his colleague, a Palestinian (Christian) guide, who came to squire us the rest of the way in an appropriately-plated car.

Motoring the hilly streets, we got a good look at "the wall" which has made a ghetto out of Bethlehem.

Apart from titanic tour coaches lumbering with plumes of exhaust fumes towards Manger Square, I thought it was sad and a bit creepy to see so little activity in the streets (pedestrians, people working, people shopping or children at play). Where were they?

En route, our new guide bade us do a bit of shopping at an amazing gift shop.

It was like a Christian Ali-Baba’s cave, replete with everything you can think of, and so much more. In retrospect, I know that we spent too much time and money there, but… whenever would we come this way again? Getting in the taxi, I was approached by a very poor Moslem vendor with strands of beautiful, locallymade amber, mother-of-pearl, and onyx. He obviously would have been grateful for the most nominal of shekels (unlike the Christian "prix-fixe" store we had just exited). So, in a spirit of charity and wonder at the lovely items, I paused to look. Our guide, however, started cursing and screaming at the old man and almost ran him over as we were whisked away in the car! What an example of the hatreds and personal religious "apartheid" existing here even among the Palestinians themselves!

By the time we had parked and were finally walking toward the Church of the Nativity, I hardly felt any glory in the moment…only weary and worn, like the walls of the old edifice itself.

Given the extreme heat, the lateness of our arrival, and the prodigious masses of tourists swarming from triple-parked vans and double-wide coaches, I felt like giving up. At least we had actually made it to the courtyard of Church of the Nativity. From the outside, the church looked like a Crusader fortress that had seen much better days. That is true. In the Middle Ages, we know that Europeans had about a century of success taking back the Holy Land from Islam. It’s obvious that they spent a great deal of their time restructuring and shoring up reclaimed Christian shrines; but I also got the distinct impression that they had no problem recycling those sacred places (like Bethlehem, atop strategic mountains) into formidable citadels, established as symbols of Western temporal [but ironically oh-sotemporary!] authority and power.

As we sat on a stone bench in the sun, too fatigued to advance, too disoriented to retreat, the guide took advantage of our paralysis and talked about the church. He called the small 4-foot stone beams and lintel facing us "the threshold of humility," which required each person, one-by-one, to stoop and bow down. This was but another "remodel," as medieval military (not religious) paranoia mandated that two of the original majestic entrances be sealed, and third shrunk inside and out.

From years of teaching courses on imperial Byzantium [a monarchy known as "East Rome," lasting 1000 years after the collapse of the Western Empire], I was familiar with a lot of what he had to say. For example, it was Emperor Constantine who first and officially decriminalized Christianity in the early 4th century, then founded Constantinople as the great Christian capital of the eastern half of his empire, the only city in the world straddling two continents: Europe and Asia.

Meanwhile, his mother, Empress (St.) Helena of Rome, made an epic and heroic pilgrimage to the Holy Land in hopes of discovering the true sites of Jesus’ earthly life. Her ardent and arduous efforts were ultimately most successful. She bade her son build the first churches over all the sacred places, and brought to Constantinople so many hundreds of miraculous relics that its new basilica was called "little Holy Land" [predecessor of "Hagia Sophia," the Church of the Holy Wisdom].

Back in Bethlehem, much of the Church of the Nativity that we can see dates back to the 6th century when Byzantine Emperor Justinian rebuilt over the previous one. He had the original octagon-shape converted to cruciform.

Damaged floor mosaics were covered by new soil and marble pavement with lofty pink limestone columns, all laid at higher levels. Justinian had the holy altars encased in gold and embellished with breathtaking Byzantine icons.

By this time, we had recovered sufficiently to attempt to rejoin the fray; and after crawling crab-like through the mini-passageway, we finally were able to see for ourselves.The Cedar-of-Lebanon roof was only partially restored for the last time in the 19th-century; but some structures date back much farther.

So dirt gets in and water drips down from holes in the timbers on priceless liturgical art pieces and mosaics. We were shocked to learn that, despite the irony of the Palestinian Authority’s efforts to intervene and mediate, ongoing and long-standing feuds among the three resident custodial clergy (Greek Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, and the Franciscans) block any agreement or common plan to prevent further damage and resolution of these problems. An atmosphere of hostility "taints the holy place," said a Roman Catholic priest.

This most unfortunate stalemate seems like a microcosm of what is generally happening these days with Congress, U.N. negotiations, Middle East peace talks, perhaps the world at large. Folks do not seem to be looking up (at God in heaven), but rather focused on vanity and ownership issues. As least as far as the arguments and fights about the future of this church are concerned, that will surely end soon: the day the ceiling simply falls and all the hotly disputed building parts meld into one common ruin!

Walking forward to the apse of the church, the main body of which "belongs to" the Greek Orthodox, I was awestruck by their magnificent "iconostasis," a solid gold altar screen bezel-set with jewels and embossed with holy images.

It separates the nave from the sanctuary, and no one but Orthodox priests can go near it, and even though there are many empty chairs in the area, angry guards made it very clear that people (waiting in line sometimes hours to go down into the Nativity grotto right below) were forbidden to rest there.

We were quite lucky (blessed) to have a guide who "knew" the Orthodox monk who was directing traffic from behind the altar area into the crypt. We had already bypassed incredible lines of people log-jammed on the right side of the nave; but after just a nominal wait, we were ushered down the very narrow spiral stepping stones and -- at last!-shown the cave where Jesus was born!

At the bottom of the stairway were three shrines: one altar facing east in honor of the Maji, where they might have knelt, one altar facing north marking the place of the real-life Nativity… Having visited the Church of St. Mary Major in Rome, I know that there are honored holy "crib" relics that St.

Helena brought back from Bethlehem.

The silvery-grey olive planks, believed to be from the real manger because of the miracles associated with them, were placed in a windowed silver and golden reliquary below the altar by Constantine when he first built "Mary Major"in the 4th century. Also, should you visit the Cathedral of Cologne, the chapel behind the altar is dedicated to the "Three Kings" and features a glorious sculpted reliquary believed to hold bones of the Maji (brought back to Europe by German Crusaders). The Nativity grotto area is no more than about 40x10 feet. It is covered in marble, but kept dark and close. The only light comes from flickering red oriental lamps which, like the holy site itself, are owned

Continued Next Page

The Land Where Jesus Walked

Continued from Page 14

covetously by the Greek Orthodox, the Armenians, and the Franciscans (Latins). Interestingly, this cave is one of many in the area that sheltered animals, shepherds, or hermits. In Jesus’ time, this particular one would have been on the edge of town, a place for travelers’ pack animals to stay just a little way down the mountain yet still near the hostel or inn.

20th century Franciscan archeologists excavating those grottos found many tombs, indicating that later Christians wanted to be buried next to the holy place where Jesus was born.

As quickly as we were ushered into the crypt, as quickly we were forced to exit. The monks above could be heard shouting for everyone to keep moving, and certain ones planted in the cave itself obnoxiously made sure everyone did.

In a way, it was necessary, as some who were kneeling could have been trampled in the darkness or unable to breathe in the crush. Absolutely—almost, anyway---out of the question to do any real praying or "feel the moment" until well out of there and away. Our guide escorted us through a long passageway into a big, modern, bright—but empty— Franciscan Church connected next door. It was dedicated to St. Catherine, and built so that the Roman Catholic priests could say the Latin Mass for their Faithful in peace. Apparently, the Catholic clerics had had enough of being discriminated against at the old Church or deprived of the right to be at services or be allowed to pass to the Grotto via the Orthodox-owned nave and transept in the Church of the Nativity. So this area is where they have their monastery and say Mass, most significantly Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve!

Furthermore, the Franciscans access the holy grotto by a tunnel from St.

Catherine’s directly to the crypt (once below ground, no hassles, as they "own" part of the altar of the Maji and altar of the star of Bethlehem). How glad we were to be whisked away from Manger Square by our Christian Palestinian guide who delivered us safely to our Israeli IDF guide who duly drove us in the dark, nicely navigating the checkpoints cross-country back to Ashdod on the sea, a late supper and a night of fitful sleep. ■

Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem,

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Sun, 1 Jan 2017 | Cover | Page 15

The Last Word…

Projecting Doubt: Francis Strikes Again

By Father Celatus

On December 21st the Church celebrated the Feast of Saint Thomas the Apostle, the last of the Saints on the liturgical calendar before the Birth of the Savior.

The Gospel reading of the Mass is from Saint John:

And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be to you. Then he saith to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God. Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed.

Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name.

With good reason Thomas was rebuked by the Lord for his lack of faith. Thomas should have believed in the Resurrection for at least two reasons: our Lord Himself foretold the Apostles of his Passion, Death and Resurrection on at least three occasions as they journeyed toward Jerusalem for the last time; the other Apostles who had already seen the Risen Christ had told Thomas of His Resurrection. In effect, the testimony of the Apostles to Thomas represents an early instance of what we call Apostolic Tradition.

To his credit, Thomas did not remain obstinate in his disbelief and he made a remarkable recovery of faith in his confession of Christ: "My Lord and my God!"

But even the short term disbelief of Saint Thomas lasting no more than a week has earned him the nickname Doubting Thomas that continues to be applied to those who doubt something that should be believed. It used to be that being called a Doubting Thomas was not a compliment. But that was before Francis of Rome, who has transformed a failure in faith from something shameful into a veritable virtue.

In his sermon to seminarians shortly before Christmas, Pope Dubius Maximus made these comments:

But the Baptist also suffered in prison – let us say the word – the interior torture of doubt: ‘But maybe I made a mistake? This Messiah is not how I imagined the Messiah would be.’ And he invited his disciples to ask Jesus: ‘But tell us, tell us the truth: are you He who is to come?’ because that doubt made him suffer. ‘Was I mistaken in proclaiming someone who isn’t [who I thought]?’ The suffering, the interior solitude of this man… The great can afford to doubt, and this is beautiful. They are certain of their vocation but each time the Lord makes them see a new street of the journey, they enter into doubt. ‘But this is not orthodox, this is heretical, this is not the Messiah I expected!’ The devil does this work, and some friend also helps, no? This is the greatness of John, a great one, the last of that band of believers that began with Abraham, that one that preaches conversion, that one that does not use half-words to condemn the proud, that one that at the end of his life is allowed to doubt. And this is a good program of Christian life.

Ever wonder why Saint John does not have the nickname Doubting Baptist associated with him? Because unlike Thomas, our Lord did not accuse him of being faithless--and neither has the Church. The idea of a Doubting Baptist is a fabrication of the Modernists, one of whom now occupies the Chair of Saint Peter.

If anyone is a doubter it is Francis of Rome—and not just for the span of a week. Francis appears to be in a perpetual state of doubt and denial, far worse than anything said of Saint Thomas the Apostle. What does another Saint Thomas have to say about obstinate disbelief? According to Saint Thomas Aquinas:

A person who disbelieves [even] one article of faith does not have faith, either formed or unformed.

The reason of this is that the species of every habit depends on the formal aspect of the object, without which the species of the habit cannot remain. Now the formal object of faith is the First Truth, as manifested in Sacred Scripture and the teaching of the Church. Consequently, whoever does not adhere, as to an infallible and Divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the First Truth manifested in Sacred Scripture, has not the habit of faith, but holds the [other articles] of faith by a mode other than faith. If someone holds in his mind a conclusion without knowing how that conclusion is demonstrated, it is manifest that he does not have scientific knowledge, but merely an opinion about it.

So likewise, it is manifest that he who adheres to the teachings of the Church, as to an infallible rule, assents to whatever the Church teaches; otherwise, if, of the things taught by the Church, he holds what he chooses to hold, and rejects what he chooses to reject, he no longer adheres to the teachings of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will.

Hence it is evident that a heretic who obstinately disbelieves [even] one article of faith, is not prepared to follow the teaching of the Church in all things (but if he is not obstinate, he is not a heretic but only erring).

Therefore, it is clear that such a heretic with regard to one article has no faith in the other articles, but only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will.

With every passing day of silence from Francis regarding the five

dubia submitted to him, it becomes increasingly clear that Jorge Bergoglio remains obstinate in his errors and is a heretic. Whether or not the Cardinals will follow through and have Jorge declared a formal heretic and deposed from papal office remains to be seen, but the reality that Francis of Rome is a modernist heretic is now manifestly clear.

How about this for a new nickname, for a modernist heretic undermining the Church: Faithless Francis.

May America be great again with a new president and the Church also with a new pope in the New Year! ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 01/01/2017