Traditionis Custodes Part 2: Analysis and commentary of Paragraphs 5-8

Hello everyone, 

This post is the second part of my analysis/commentary of the actual articles in the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes. The second half is articles 5 to 8.

“ Art. 5. Priests who already celebrate according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan Bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.” 

Well at least some hope is contained in the paragraph. I’m of mixed blessings though. The negative is that a cruel and heartless bishop can just suspend any existing EF saying priest’s faculties immediately. Also this is a grandfathering clause so that, in the geriatric minds of Francis and his cohort all the old priests who are saying the Latin Mass will die. 

But … there are positives to this. First, with political forethought, it’s an obvious compromise for the faithful attached to the EF and the priests saying it. 

Second, it holds those priests accountable to the bishop and they know whom they are, also allowing the bishop to make sure that if they are granting faculties they know what they are doing. Finally, should priests be priming their lay faithful towards schism with the Holy Father and the regular Church, or blasting off his mouth on the RMT blogs, he can revoke that faculty at will, combined with the other articles of TC, allowing only those priests faithful to the Church to promote the EF. 

Thirdly, unforeseen, I don’t think that Francis and his cohort of middle of Vatican II heyday ordained bishops thought the following: that a number of the younger priests will outlast not only his lifespan and papacy but also those who succeed him. If the younger crop hold the force and outlast, by the time they are of the old folks near the end of their vocations coming from the John Paul II and Benedict XVI generations of ordained priests, they will lead seminaries and become bishops to the Church. These generations of ordinands will assume power in multiple places in the Church, which could make things more friendly for those in the EF … if Satan or those above them do not corrupt them first. 

Finally, as is being observed immediately on the Internet blogs, both radically misrepresenting Traditionalists and borderline, bishops are already granting faculties to allow the EF to continue in those diocese to priests already holding offerings. 

“Art. 6. Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.”

This paragraph is relevant to the EF communities such as FSSP, ICKSP, Canons New Jerusalem, Institute Bon Pasteur (aka Good Shepherd,) etc. Basically their existence and governance falls under a different dicastery of the Vatican so they are not entirely under the same governance of the bishop as diocesan priests are and have some layer of protection against wayward bishops, unlike diocesan priests who have little to no protection against their bishops if they want a place to sleep and eat. 

That being said it does NOT protect them entirely. If said bishop decides to kick them out of a diocese, for whatever reason, that society must go and it will take a lot to fight and bring them back in. But in the short run, as long as these societies are not morphing into the SSPX, the bishop will likely let them stay and will not touch them. Do not worry Virginia, there will likely still be the FSSP in your diocese (that is … if you have them.) 

Even more encouraging, so as not to lose devoted faithful to the SSPX who have a schismatic attitude/mindset despite their eccleastical/legal status, if these canonically legitimate orders/societies exist in a diocese with SSPX, most bishops will keep them to discourage self-schism amongst the faithful. 

“ Art. 7. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, for matters of their particular competence, exercise the authority of the Holy See with respect to the observance of these provisions.”

This mostly pairs with article 6. It also restates what is known within the Church that Latin Mass related matters became under the CDWDS after the Pope in 20xx declared that the Ecclesia Dei commission was not to stand alone anymore, signifying an end to serious negotiation to bring the SSPX back into the Church. 

“ Art. 8. Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated …. Everything that I have declared in this Apostolic Letter in the form of Motu Proprio, I order to be observed in all its parts, anything else to the contrary notwithstanding, even if worthy of particular mention, and I establish that it be promulgated by way of publication in “L’Osservatore Romano”, entering immediately in force and, subsequently, that it be published in the official Commentary of the Holy See, Acta Apostolicae Sedis.“

 

In short, Summorum Pontificum is now abrogated and TC is in force. Also because Francis knows that the Radicals Misrepresenting Traditionalism will use and abuse Church laws to disobey  Pope Francis, he “crossed the T’s and dotted the I’s” not only in his authoritative language but by promulgating it in the official publications and legal/eccleastical records and/or books. Thus there is no question it is in force and active. 

Overall, it is clear that this document was meant to give bishops more control over the Latin Mass in what is an increasingly out of control situation that threatens the Church and the souls of the faithful. While it is not every soul that attends the Latin Mass, unfortunately there are enough voices, societies etc. That have adopted the RMT element, and attitudes of anti-Church, Anti-Francis, and anti-Novus Ordo mentality, one that is clearly expressed in the Social and Internet media being purported by these voices. Also, especially in the USA as evidenced in former President Trump’s endorsement of disgraced and ever increasingly schismatic Archbishop Vigano leading up to the 2020 election, the Latin Mass and the RMT elements became further entwined with far-right politics, elevating the situation outside the realm of the Catholic Church to one of theo-political importance. 

Now, does it give too much power to them? I agree and it’s clear that Francis doesn’t care about wayward bishops abusing their power, because the bigger spiritual threat is Radicals misrepresenting Traditonalism in his mind. There could have been better solutions to the problem or a tweaking of TC could have been the best tool to combat the situation. 

Also, Pope Francis is swatting harmless houseflies of the laity in a way, by targeting mainly the clergy who can celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in that form. Most of the social media that attacks the Novus Ordo, the Holy Father and the Church is being controlled by laity. He should have also added clauses to bring punishment to those organizations and/or individuals guilty of promoting radical Traditonalism and corrupting the younger faithful in their physical presence attending the Mass. I would roughly guess that 2/3 of the Radically Traditonalist social media is laity controlled. Pope Francis took the analogy of a shotgun to the problem scattering bullets all over the target and even missing it altogether. He needed a “sniper rifle” approach to tackle this problem instead of a broad granting of power and restriction. 

If personally, we’re I Pope, in a separate Motu Proprio or as part of TC, I would have established a punitive trial process whereby cases of abusive bishops/chaplains/pastors could be submitted by laity alone or jointly with good priests to curb clericalism and spiritual abuse of TC. 

Regardless, quod scripsi, scripsi. 

Now that I have gone through the actual document, my third and final post is going to be my worst …. As in the bluntest, and most curt I've ever written, regarding my personal experience and thoughts on TC and why it was badly needed, especially in the Archdiocese of Toronto. 

Unfortunately what has happened to both my good friends and I, has exactly been the caricature of the RMT that Francis sees, and thus why such control is needed and exactly what Francis sees. 

Pax, Julian. 

Traditionis Custodes Part 1: Analysis and commentary of Paragraphs 1-4 Including sub-paragraphs

Hello everyone,

As promised I will comment on the new restrictive Motu Proprio, Traditionis Custodes, issued by Pope Francis regarding the Latin Mass in the Church, immediately acting. 

My first post, part 1. will be a literal dissection, covering simply the act itself of the first half of the document, paragraphs 1 to 4 of the 8 articles and their sub-articles.

There is a lot of ground to cover here, 8 articles in all, but I’ll look at each one and offer general Church commentary at the end.

 

“ Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. “

Pope Francis is reiterating that the current liturgy of the Roman Rite 3rd edition post Vatican II IS the regular form of the Mass for the Roman Rite, the dominant rite in the Church and in the World. This was always so even with Summorum Pontificum. Sadly he has to state this again because some people think that the Novus Ordo/Ordinary Form is a “bastard rite.” Notice he didn’t say that the EF was abrogated and/or are banned. 

“ Art. 2. It belongs to the diocesan bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church entrusted to him, [5] to regulate the liturgical celebrations of his diocese. [6] Therefore, it is his exclusive competence to authorize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in his diocese, according to the guidelines of the Apostolic See.”  

Now here is where the start of the new laws took place. This is NOT out of thin air. The footnotes are key here. However, one who understands hierarchy in the Church, would NOT be surprised. The Pope, as per Pastor Aeternus aka Vatican I, in chapter 3 paragraph 2 states: “ 2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world. “ Discipline clearly extends to the Liturgy of the Mass. He alone is the prime governor of all major matters in the Church. 

Also Pope Pius XII in Mediator Dei says …. “ 44. Since, therefore, it is the priest chiefly who performs the sacred liturgy in the name of the Church, its organization, regulation and details cannot but be subject to Church authority... 57. The Church has further used her right of control over liturgical observance to protect the purity of divine worship against abuse from dangerous and imprudent innovations introduced by private individuals and particular churches... 58. It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification.[50] Bishops, for their part, have the right and duty carefully to watch over the exact observance of the prescriptions of the sacred canons respecting divine worship.[51] Private individuals, therefore, even though they be clerics, may not be left to decide for themselves in these holy and venerable matters, involving as they do the religious life of Christian society along with the exercise of the priesthood of Jesus Christ and worship of God; ….  no private person has any authority to regulate external practices of this kind, which are intimately bound up with Church discipline and with the order, unity and concord of the Mystical Body and frequently even with the integrity of Catholic faith itself.“

Dare I say it, these prior documents of importance in the Church of the Vatican I council AND prior to Vatican II makes it abundantly clear: the Pope is the final say on matters liturgical and even to protect the liturgy from abuse from ANY and ALL individuals who dare abuse it as a weapon or an instrument of corruption which sadly both priests and laity have done. Whether it’s via the Internet or actual liturgy on the ground, layperson or clergy, it’s clear that what Pope Francis has done IS within his power and acting as Head of the Church on earth as per these pre-Vatican II documents. 

As for the Bishops, they are the ordinary judges, and actors, and even “officers” of a diocese that are responsible not only in upholding the Teachings of the Church but also govern Liturgical matters. As our government cannot uphold civil and criminal laws without judges and ordinary police officers to enforce it, that is an analogue to what the bishops are. They are the Pope’s “middle managers” as it is who are to carry out said instructions in ecclesiastical law, including liturgy. 

But …. This is the start of now granting direct control to the bishops …. which is a “mixed bag” of sorts. On the one hand, lazy bishops MUST now control the distribution of the EF in the diocese. As this is such a divisive issue in the Church it now MUST be addressed. They cannot sit back and let it just happen. In a positive way they can now root/weed out the vile and rebellious clergy and lay leaders who have poisoned the Latin Mass and led to T.C. being promulgated. HOWEVER … not all dioceses are blessed with a laissez-faire bishop. Sadly and truly, especially in the USA, numerous dioceses have now had notices to their priests/parishes and while I am awaiting names, after this past Sunday (cause with COVID parishes are booking mass slots) those EF masses are stopped …. Gone …. hence liberal or EF hating bishops are able to abuse their power to kill the Latin Mass, and are doing so. 

And unfortunately Francis’ mindset is geared on only the few bad apples spoiling the bunch while the regular good souls are to suffer and clericalist bishops are allowed to be cruel to those good souls attach to the EF. This is the expression “using a sledgehammer to swat a fly” when a fly swatter would have been reasonable. 

“ Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970:

§ 1. is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs;”

Now this is where I say good show Francis! Too many clergy and lay leaders exist, despite being more of a minority, who are poisoning from other laity and clergy, especially youth under 40, with radical Traditonalist garbage! Even Pope Benedict Emeritus XVI made it clear to respect both the EF and OF in Article 1 of SP. If these groups or at the very least the leaders (both clergy and laymen down to little Timmy the torchbearer, though little Timmy is just parroting what his parents, friends, older adults and priests are teaching him,) are becoming weapons of schism, that Latin Mass is truly a weapon against the Church, the Holy Father, and the eternal salvation of the souls within. 

Even sadder, this has morphed into a hideous monster with former President Donald Trump applauding now disgraced (in terms of credibility) Archbishop Vigano in the USA, prior to the 2020 election, adding right wing political extremism to the radical Traditonalism of Latin Massers who idolized Vigano. 

In short thank God the Church via Francis has given bishops greater ability to protect younger lay faithful from these evil leaders. 

However …. That being said, what if a bishop’s outlook is liberal to the extreme? Will he not allow even the modest “The Latin mass draws me closer with tradition, symbolism …” etc should he be conducting a witch-hunt in his eccleastical “kangaroo court,” looking for any reason to cancel a Latin Mass or a priest? Abuse of power and clericalism, the very things Francis abhors, now can be used against honest lay faithful and priests attached or doing the EF.

“ § 2. is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes);”

Now this is where I find His Holiness’ restriction to be somewhat cruel to the faithful and good priests who do/attend the Latin Mass. Mr Liberal bishop will see  this and say, YES! Now i can kick those scumbags out of my diocesan parishes and give them nothing! No altar, no liturgical items or vestments, no mass. Sadly there will be bishops who will take this to the extreme and force the faithful out of ANY place with an altar. And in more rural dioceses, there may be no legitimate Catholic chapels OR monasteries/Nun’s convents to have the EF. So where does Fr Latin Mass do the Mass? Someone’s kitchen table? A Garage? A log in a forest (Ironically speaking this HAS been done before in Canada with the Novus Ordo by Jesuits associated with the centre in Guelph, ON. See here.) Actually it could be said reverently outdoors, see here at The New Liturgical Movement website [personal edit: in an ironic silver lining looks like he will be increasing business and the demand for personal/portable carry altars like these ones!]

Not only does this denigrate the faithful attending the mass, but this is only possible IF the group/priest has their/his own liturgicals and/or vestments. Further this will drive these faithful underground and separate them from the regular Church which is the OPPOSITE of what T.C. and it’s accompanying letter implies. And where else will they go?The SSPX! This will further make the faithful hate the Church, Francis, and the ordinary Form Mass/liturgy and oh yeah, likely damn them to self-schism and eternal hellfire, taking their families too if they have kids and raise them in that environment. Not to mention these Good traditionalists (and bad ones too) will not be giving their hard-earned coin back into the coffers of the Catholic Church and the poor. 

Is there any good here in this subsection? Yes. Reasonable bishops who take the time to evaluate this situation, and/or do not have a plethora of groups can control the dispersion of the Latin Mass, and/or, if said infrastructure (with or without EF specific chaplain) is in place, they can simply let what is established remain, and improve or create the infrastructure to what was once loosely based single offerings/groups here and there …. While adhering to subsection 1. 

“ § 3. to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962. [7] In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences;”

OK …. This is a little much to peer at for this layman. Now, likely by “Eucharistic celebrations” this refers to the Mass (re: EF liturgy.) My guess of the basic interpretation, is that the bishop controls which feast days in the Latin Mass Calendar the said designated locations/sites/ offerings can have the Latin Mass. Unfortunately it seems that the bishop interpreting the clause will determine how often the Latin Mass gets said in a particular diocese. This could be anything from only 1st class feast days at the least, to daily and Sunday obligation Masses including Christmas and the Triduum if the Bishop is lenient or sympathetic to an already established community. 

Now, the sentence about the readings in the vernacular? This was not thought out well. You ABSOLUTELY cannot perform ANY liturgy of any rite in the Church without reading the prescribed parts. Now if an option is permitted in any liturgy by the Church (e.g. the utterly lazy options in Scripture in the Novus Ordo to shorten them, choice of Eucharistic Prayers, choice of response to “the mystery of Faith” …) that’s fine, but in the Latin Mass there is NO option. The readings MUST be read in Latin. Not only would it be a distraction to have English readings of Scripture ONLY vs the Latin of the rest of the Mass, how would one apply the tones of chanting to reading English Scripture in the Missa Cantata and Higher? Obviously what must be done NOT to invalidate the Liturgy is to say the reading in Latin first as prescribed and then say the English translation after the Gospel (and Incensing post-Gospel in higher levels). 

Sadly this could lead to liturgical policemen for dioceses reporting to their liberal bishops and allow them to wield TC as a weapon to shut it down, lacking any common sense. Stupidity at its finest and somehow I doubt Pope Francis would be that stupid to make something like this. I smell another member of the Curia in this with no understanding of the Latin Mass. 

“ § 4. to appoint a priest who, as delegate of the bishop, is entrusted with these celebrations and with the pastoral care of these groups of the faithful. This priest should be suited for this responsibility, skilled in the use of the Missale Romanum antecedent to the reform of 1970, possess a knowledge of the Latin language sufficient for a thorough comprehension of the rubrics and liturgical texts, and be animated by a lively pastoral charity and by a sense of ecclesial communion. This priest should have at heart not only the correct celebration of the liturgy, but also the pastoral and spiritual care of the faithful;”

Ok right here there is a error, but its an understandable gaffe. There WAS an intermittent revision to the Missale Romanum from 1965-1969. It was close to what the Anglican Ordinate have for their liturgy with Latin and some shortening of prayers (eg Prayers at the foot of the altar reduced,) so this is factually incorrect. However, Francis and the Curia members involved in TC either forgot this or dismiss the MR 1.0 Novus Ordo liturgy as a forgotten footnote because for the majority of their lifespan they dealt with the MR 2.0 revision from 1970-2011. 

Now this chunk in terms of the law should be divided into two parts, the first part being about competency of the priest. YES, exactly a priest should be competent in carrying out the Tridentine Liturgy/Latin Mass. Between many additional/different actions the priest does vs Novus Ordo Mass, how to properly say the Latin, understanding the old rite calendar and differences (eg liturgical colours, levels of feasts, periods of calendar …) they can’t just wing this form of the Mass or gasp! Ad lib it as has been sadly done on many occasions in the Novus Ordo by Fr Prideful and Pompous. I have no question here. Of course HOW to become competent in the Latin Mass …. That’s up to the priest himself. My recommendation would be to take formal courses held by the FSSP/ICKSP etc. As there would be written records, receipts/payments, maybe a nice certificate etc. to have evidence of competency and training. 

However said training will likely be out of the priests’ pockets or donations as after this anti-Traditonalist document, there is NO damn way most bishops will support the training of a priest in the EF financially or spiritually, unless that bishops hand is forced by Rome to make even one paltry offering for a presence of faithful who want it in their diocese (though likely the case would be more to NOT lose the faithful to the SSPX.) 

Now the second part, is highly prevalent. It’s not just correct liturgy, but it’s about the right ATTITUDE and INTENTION as well as proper care of the faithful. I am in full support of this. Should one read the accompanying letter to TC it’s clear that priests and others in their communities were leading the faithful to attack the Church, Pope Francis, the Novus Ordo/Vernacular liturgy etc. If the priest is schismatic in mind and heart and corrupting mentally and spiritually the “sheep” he must “shepherd” he is doing Satan’s work and turning people against the Communal Body of Christ! Also from a Mass perspective a priest to offer the Mass validly must use proper matter, conduct proper form (according to the liturgical books,) AND have proper INTENTION for the Mass. If HE is in a schismatic, anti-Francis/Pope or Anti-Vatican II mindset, he has made the Mass invalid and Null. And sadly THIS sickness and poisoning of the laity and clergy, manifested in vile outward behaviour amongst Trads themselves, one’s Catholic neighbours and non-Catholics (eg extreme insistence on EENS/No salvation outside the Church) is exactly why this paragraph is needed. 

On a small practical note, it seems that an EF chaplain setup is being promoted via this paragraph and it does usually work well. It also parallels other special minority provisions in the Church (eg Charismatic groups, Anglican Ordinate, …) that KEEP people attached while nourishing them spiritually in a specific way or accustomed to their culture/past spiritual background/unique way to speak to their souls.

§ 5. to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them;

This I say is simple prudence. An analogy would be a company or business. The goal of the company or business is to make profit via conducting business which includes the sale of goods. If a company is costing more to run and/or using more money than it is making on its service/products it must either stop its wastage, cut its costs, or fire employees to continue to remain aloft. It’s budget it entirely dependent on the product it sells or the business it conducts, and the old economic principle of supply and demand. 

While an imperfect analogy it’s basic concepts ALSO apply to worship in the church. It’s main goal is to SERVE people. Now, while there is much that can be argued about the poor implementation of the Novus Ordo Mass, especially after the 1970/MR 2nd revision combined with post-conciliar liturgy documents, regardless bishop MUST be prudent (not just as a personal virtue) in how they are to serve the faithful best and WITNESS to those outside the Church, with the liturgy/worship as a primary means. So at its base level, a bishop has to determine whether it should use its limited resources (eg its parishes and priests) to hold Latin Mass, based on the demand in their diocese. 

More so, one of the very reasons Francis did this was because of the Anti-Church, Anti-Novus Ordo, Anti-Papal attacks and attitudes of a number of these wayward movements. Is everyone like this in the TLM? NO! However a sizeable number of clergy and even lay people (with or without accompanying tabloid blogs and websites eg RorHATE Caeli) clearly presented enough of a concern to Francis that this clause got inserted. It’s good that this coincides with Sub-clause 4 as those “renegade” environments and priests who have made the Latin Mass a weapon and corrupted the lay faithful (especially the youth!) deserve to be shut down. 

However my caveat, is again, Liberal or EF hating bishops abusing their power to wipe it out completely with little to no recourse or appeal to counter the bishops’ clericalism and abuse of power. 

§ 6. to take care not to authorize the establishment of new groups.

The bad: It’s plain as day. Pope Francis does NOT want the Latin Mass to grow exponentially. 

The good: This does NOT 100% ban new groups or communities from forming, or the bishops to bring in the FSSP/ICKSP/Institute Bon Pasteur (or of the Good Shepherd)/Canons of New Jerusalem into an existing diocese if they have a parish for them to inhabit. 

Stay tuned for part two of my analysis of the paragraphs of Traditionis Custodes, and then, my personal opinions and advice about the need for TC related to the Archdiocese of Toronto and my experience dealing with the Latin Mass in this diocese. 

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin. 

Radicals Misrepresenting Traditionalists and Their Infection Within the Body Of Christ: 1 Peter 5 and My Brother in Christ

UPDATE as of 22/01/18 - Finally with a uncommon day off of work, I can update this story. The Vatican HAS spoken on this matter. This article in the National Catholic Register (affiliated with EWTN), a credible source, reports on the matter. Turns out that Ms. Ploumen got the award as part of a delegation with her country of the Netherlands, and it was a matter of political protocol between visitation of one entourage of state with another. 

Personally, this was a political and institutional screw-up on the part of the Vatican STATE and likely, that of the Secretary of State in the Vatican. In addition, I cannot speak in the defense of Pope Francis' (possibly?) calumnious allegations in his recent jaunt in Chile, in defense of a South American Bishop buddy of his, which could be true if he has internal knowledge from witnesses/investigations, but is indefensible both as a head of state and as Vicar of Christ of the Catholic Church. Let me state that such statements in Chile had NOTHING to do with the defense or teaching of Faith or Morals as the Church`s earthly head, but rather a gross injustice of a grotesquely immoral action, and the failing of the Institutional Church at large (e.g. clergy, buildings/institution, heretics, liberal liars.) The beliefs and truths of the Church are still exactly those, regardless of what sinners do ministry and are ordained, and there are still thousands of decent Catholics around the world, living within it and adhering to the faith, despite the failings of its human, yet apostolic leader, who was born into this world in sinful flesh, with a will marred by concupiscence (inclination to be tempted to sin,) just like you and I.  

Back to the awarding to Ms. Ploumen, this act does NOT have any direct trace to Pope Francis, who doesn't care for pomp and circumstance. I stand by what I wrote on how RMT tabloid junkets smearing gossip of the Devil, such as 1 Peter 5 with Skojec and The Lepanto Institute under Hitchborn, commit grievous sin against the Church, the Magisterium, the Pope, and the Body of Christ, poisoning the minds and souls like my brother Knight, who without people like myself or knowledgable priests, have little to no defense against such filth disguised as "fighting for the faith." I have proven as such with a "Traditional Encyclical", Mystici Corporis Christi, though that has even not convinced some radical traditionalists to see the Satanic evil committed by RMT bodies and websites. 

Radicals Misrepresenting Traditionalists and Their Infection Within the Body Of Christ: 1 Peter 5 and My Brother in Christ

Hello everyone,

Happy new year to all my viewers and any curious onlookers.

For those who have actually viewed my site in past, you may have dismissed my warnings and my cautions against the infiltration of Radical Traditionalism and in the life of the Latin Mass in the Roman Catholic Church, as well as ordinary life of the Body of Christ, that is every single baptized Catholic under the church. Other prelates, or priests, who have given some attention to this increasingly warring factions in the church, have warned people to stay away from this faction such as reigning Canadian prelate, ++Marc Oullett, in his recent speech on Amoris Laetitia to my Conference of Canadian Catholic Bishops' Plenary meeting.

However prelates today simply do not understand the power this faction yields, particularly against those who are more deeply invested in their faith including at the parish level. They are not the type to present their works to their bishops for Nihil Obstat and Impriaturs for their works, and contain deep mistrust and antipathy towards the hierarchy of the Church, including its Magisterium. Further, prelates do NOT understand that this NOT something contained to those with possible mental/spiritual deficiencies, or even the Latin Mass. Even worse, such "fake news" or "literature" (to use the term loosely,) does tend to travel in said circles, and should NOT become a staple of media for such participants, especially the youth!. If you do NOT believe me, please reread my reflection on 10 Years of Summorum Pontificum, to see the effect it has had on one particular, "yute" under "deeper, darker concerns..." .

Examples of websites from this faction I mentioned, are: LifeSiteNews with its totally anti-Francis and anti-modern Church bias (of whom it views today's Pontificate and the modern "Church" as anti-family and life due to corrupt clergy and laity), Rorate Caeli which the very moment Francis was elected called him, "The Horror," and new to the gang in the last few years, a site I will be looking at in this post, is 1 Peter 5 (1P5), helmed or with heavy contributions from the ever increasingly, cycnical layman named Steve Skojec, whose works have been rapidly deteriorating into hatred for the Church and the Magisterium. Sadly, 1P5's motto is "Rebuilding Catholic Culture. Restoring Catholic Tradition."

Being a Catholic apologist (that is, a defender of the Catholic Church,) one loyal to Christ's church, and Him as Holy King, including His Magisterium and the Pope, I must post upon something that has happened to me today to illustrate just how powerful the radical traditionalist faction is growing, and now in infiltrating the normal life of those of the body of Christ in the every day parish life, sadly to their own understandable ignorance, yet attacking them whom have no meaningful defense.

What's going on here?
This morning, I received a message on Facebook(TM) from my fellow brother Knight, in my local Knight's Council, with an article from a website called 1 Peter 5 (I will not link to such Radical Misrepresenting Traditionalist (herein, RMT) garbage.). The article in question, from 1P5, is titled, "Pope Francis Awards Architect of Safe-Abortion Fund with Pontifical Honour." Below is a screenshot of the Facebook message, with his image and name edited out to protect his identity:

Being a pro-life advocate, and a good Catholic family man and my brother Knight, I can see why he would send something out to his friends, as it would be confusing for him. My wife informed me that he is such, so it now makes sense why this would end up in my Facebook Messenger today.

The summary of the article is (besides the usual hatred and venom laced notes,) is that, supposedly, Pope Francis, who is a ``spiritual head`` of sorts, of the Pontifical Equestrian Order of St. Gregory the Great which has been around since 1831, has given a prestigious award and entry into said order of the title of ``Commander,`` to Lilianne Ploumen, former Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation in the Netherlands. If one dares read the article, she has a laundry list of grievous offences against the dignity of life against her, meticulously compiled by Hitchborn in the 1P5 article. The article itself even questions just what Lilianne is receiving this award for, as it is supposed to be given for service to the Catholic Church.

The Dubious Article

Taking apart the article, first, I look at the author, Michael Hichborn, who heads the theo-politically "conservative" racket online called "The Lepanto Institute." When one does a general, cursory examination of Lepanto, one can see that the tone of the authors, the articles presented, and their stance towards the current pontificate and Church IS exactly the same as Skojec and 1P5, though Lepanto does cover areas politically/culturally that tie into the Church, though are not specific to it. Seeing who the author is and their sites' works, already, we have a bias present in the article: RMT type! The article originated from the Lepanto site, written by Michael. "Birds of a feather flock together they say."

Further, is there ANY supporting evidence, such as other videos on YouTube from legitimate or alternative sources, such as the official Vatican News sites like vaticannews.va or the Vatican's website with an announcement of the awarding? NONE. The only video being circulated is the ones on the sites such as 1P5 are reporting such news, as well as the article/reporting of the "incident." While there is no general website for the Pontifical order, none of the main Catholic news sites are reporting any of this. Hence, there must be doubt as to the legitimacy of the claim. Could the mainstream Catholic sites and the Vatican be so biased as to "media scrub" something like this under the radar? Possibly, but with no alternative evidence from them, one cannot attach legitimacy to this media hit piece to give it validity that said event is/has happened, nor to the claims of the article that Pope Francis is directly responsible.

Moreso, why would Pope Francis, just simply abuse a Papal award and give it to a known abortion and anti-culture/life advocate intentionally? He is NOT stupid. If anything, an argument can be made that if we were to stoop to the lowest level, believe in the very facts that enemies of the Holy Father are touting in their "literature" (loosely used) that: leading up to his Papacy he was a politician of sorts back in Argentina, formed in some sort of Machiavellian philosophy (e.g. upcoming "The Dictator Pope" and another e-novel by some pseudonamed author ...) then it backfires in their faces and actually PROVES Jorge Maria Bergoglio, as the Pope, is clearly a SMART man, who would know of online spies or enemies, and wouldn't be so bold with the Internet watching as to stupidly make a bold statement in giving a Papal award to a known anti-life and anti-family advocate. It would be a disaster from a PR standpoint, and only increase division and doubt in the church, including in his followers, the lay Faithful. This would also backfire in his enemies faces because this is NOT his supposed usual tactic of subtle undermining of the Church via pastoral practice/his underlings. Why would he be so bold, NOW? It makes absolutely no sense at all to the average person with some intelligence and is Catholic.

The only, likely way he would do so, is if he had been misinformed by his subordinates, who would likely have delivered the award to Ms. Ploumen. Being a busy head of the Church/Vatican with little time to himself to do research, not to mention sit down and spend hours cruising blogs and other sites in between Papal Visits, conferences, and we must give the Holy Father the benefit of the doubt, that if he DID award this medal, he was highly misinformed of this woman.

Posting that article, ironically, is violating the Teachings of a Prior Pope LOVED by RMTs, Pope Pius XII

In posting bile like this online, which is meant with purpose to divide those in the Church against the Holy Father and the Magisterium, authors like Hitchborn, and purveyors of their works of similar mindset like Skojec and 1P5, are attacking the Communal AND Mystical Body of Christ in this way, via the Holy Father, and the dissemination of this information to souls like my brother Knight via the Internet. To explain this, I`ll go Traditionalist for a moment and use a ``Trad`` encyclical of a Papal favourite to the Anti-Vatican II RMTs, Pope Pius XII.

Pius XII is a favourite to RMTs, as well as sedevacantists, who believe the Papal seat is vacant, usually stating this Pope was the last 'legitimate one' because all those involved with Vatican II such as Leo XXIII to Francis I today are "modernist Popes." In 1943, Piux XII penned an encyclical called Mystici Corporis Christi, "The Mystical Body of Christ."

To begin, Pius XII speaks once again, as many Popes, Saints, and Church Fathers have many a times, about the Pope's Primacy, and how Christ purposely gave us a visible head of the Church in the Holy Father, to govern the Church and yes, men, for we would absolutely need it as finite creatures:

"  40. But we must not think that He rules only in a hidden [59] or extraordinary manner. On the contrary, our Redeemer also governs His Mystical Body in a visible and normal way through His Vicar on earth. You know, Venerable Brethren, that after He had ruled the "little flock" [60] Himself during His mortal pilgrimage, Christ our Lord, when about to leave this world and return to the Father, entrusted to the Chief of the Apostles the visible government of the entire community He had founded. Since He was all wise He could not leave the body of the Church He had founded as a human society without a visible head. Nor against this may one argue that the primacy of jurisdiction established in the Church gives such a Mystical Body two heads. For Peter in view of his primacy is only Christ's Vicar; so that there is only one chief Head of this Body, namely Christ, who never ceases Himself to guide the Church invisibly, though at the same time He rules it visibly, through him who is His representative on earth. After His glorious Ascension into Heaven this Church rested not on Him alone, but on Peter, too, its visible foundation stone. That Christ and His Vicar constitute one only Head is the solemn teaching of Our predecessor of immortal memory Boniface VIII in the Apostolic Letter Unam Sanctam; [61] and his successors have never ceased to repeat the same. (Mystici Corporis Christi (MCC), 40.)

Pius XII, then also, gives this stinging, yet prominent note about giving lip service to Christ while intently denying fealty to His Holiness, living life in the Church on earth in paragraph 41:

"41. They, therefore, walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the Head of the Church, while not adhering loyally to His Vicar on earth. They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity and left the Mystical Body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed, that those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it. (MCC, 41)

That very quote, should be part of every Catholic Traditionalist's prayers every day, repeated multiple times a day. Now, just what does the above have to do with those as part of the Mystical and/or Communal body of Christ? Christ himself, is directly connected to His Body, the communal/Mystical Body of Christ in the Catholic Church. In fact, he PURPOSELY is intimately tied to it, and he WANTS and DESIRES perfectly to have His Body be a part of His Life and works. Most of all, he NEEDS it to cooperate with Him to achieve said goals. In paragraph 44, Pius XII pens this about the relation of Christ as Head of Church, needing his Body:

``44. Because Christ the Head holds such an eminent position, one must not think that he does not require the help of the Body. What Paul said of the human organism is to be applied likewise to the Mystical Body: "The head cannot say to the feet: I have no need of you."[69] ... every advance of this Mystical Body towards its perfection derives from Christ the Head.[71] Yet this, also, must be held, marvelous though it may seem: Christ has need of His members. First, because the person of Jesus Christ is represented by the Supreme Pontiff, who in turn must call on others to share much of his solicitude lest he be overwhelmed by the burden of his pastoral office, and must be helped daily by the prayers of the Church. Moreover as our Savior does not rule the Church directly in a visible manner, He wills to be helped by the members of His Body in carrying out the work of redemption... He has so willed it for the greater glory of His spotless Spouse...`` (MCC, 44)

Hence, without the works of those members of the Mystical and/or Communal body of Christ, His will cannot be done, and the salvation of souls is abruptly halted. When people like Hitchborn and associated blogging outlets, leave this trash floating in the river of cyberspace, what are they doing?

They are:

1) Attacking the Holy Magisterium of the Church in a public forum, whereby they set themselves up as an alternative magisterium to discern who is right and true in the Church and who is wrong, similar to separated Christian brethen who have their own "Churches" made of individual councils in churches or "Synods."

2) By doing what is said in No. 1, anyone who is looking in from outside the Church, will be appalled that Catholics from within (or those defending Catholic teachings) are "smearing their own Faithful," which they will now consider as they reflect and see the same disgusting behaviour that is possibly being carried out in their own dysfunctional "churches." Talk about being "ecumenical." Does it occur to them that perhaps the Marks of APOSTOLIC authority with the Pope as the supreme Spiritual Vicar on Earth, is a big drawing point for them to consider maybe converting to the Faith? (as a related side note, that is part of why my council's current Grand Knight, a convert, became a Catholic. He saw that within the Church, unlike the opposite in his own prior church, of how individuals or 'councils' of humans, determine approach to moral situations and beliefs.)

3) Furthermore, this directly violates paragraph 40 in MCC, when the attack is directly pointing the finger at the Holy Father or implicating him because it is his "Papacy," when the supposedly evil or doctrine-violating work is directly being done at the hand of a lesser prelate or others who are abusing Francis' name and the Church's name to commit said evils.

4) Even more wicked, by placing these articles in a public forum, to be picked up by said people, this attacks and erodes their Faith, by sowing initial seeds of doubt which will be further cemented with repeated attempts, and then said corrupted lay member or priest then consumes this media, not trusting the messages of (their parish or other) priests, bishops, and the Holy Father, leading to further abandonment of Christ and His Church from within, all the while NOT defecting to another "denomination" or out of the Church altogether. In doing so, Hitchborn et al. also violate paragraph 44 in MCC, because in corrupting that of Christ's faithful in the Church, they thus cut off the Body of Christ from it's head. 

Christ, so willingly dependent on His Mystical and/or Communal body of Christ to carry His work, as in MCC 44, is unable to do so because His body is incapacitated from dissent. Cells, such as individual lay members and clergy, poisoned or mutated into dissenting cancerous cells. The only result of a cancerous body not starved of its cells ... is death. The "death" of the Body of Christ and His Bride, the Church.

A concluding end-note, a Biblical Note on False Teachers.

Should we be surprised that such drivel is being spewed online where anyone with Internet access can attach to such spiritual poison? No. As long as Christ's One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church exists, there will be false prophets, and we all should be aware. Christ Himself, tried to warn us, as well as his Holy Servant, St Paul in his OTHER letter to the first Pope, St. Peter himself, the one 1P5 ignores, 2nd Peter 2 (NRSV CE, 1-3): `

`But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who brought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words; from of old their condemnation has not been idle, and their destruction has not been asleep.``

However, in what I have emphasized in bold and underlined, the destructive power they bring into the sheepfold, has also been acknowledged in Sacred Scripture and how they will do it: It will destroy the love of those for Christ and His Truth from reaching their hearts, and it is done with false words that repel the truth from them. Now, while we cannot control the actions of subordinates under the Holy Father, we nonetheless must be wary of those wielding such lies and power to deter people from expressing that Cardinal Virtue of Faith in Holy Mother Church.

Reading the passage above, this is exactly what these people and their blog sites do: Sow Satan`s division to entice the lay faithful to rebel against the Church and the Holy Father, no different from Satan`s rebellion over God, because they think their false ``truth`` is better than God`s TRUTH expressed through Jesus Christ, his Vicar Pope Francis, and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

With Scripture and MCC via Pius XII, this is exactly WHY we should NOT simply ignore these minority of bloggers, sites, etc. as lost causes to be ignored. Because the very acts they perform, reaches SUCH a broad audience in the Church today, an audience who is either NOT going to Mass, or even worse, an audience who is actually STILL committed to Christ but seeking more spiritual nourishment in our daily lives.

Of those people are the youth, the next generation of Christ`s workers in the vineyard, and of absolute necessity: our future priests who can perform the sacraments, our future religious sisters who aid the Bride of Christ and are joined to her, and our future laymen, who if they trust in the Church still, will marry and have families who will provide the next generation of vocations in the Church.

Further, of those people who are STILL in the Church, are good men like my brother Knight, striving through his daily work and in his marriage to remain faithful to Christ and to his family. Thankfully, I did reply immediately to his text and told him about the situation of the article and 1P5. I told him to consult me about future articles such as that of 1P5, as I am aware of a number of the major players spewing this fake news, and I know firsthand from my online and personal experience, encountering Radical Traditionalism in the Latin Mass environment, what form such spiritual poison comes in.

However, what about others like him, who have no trusted friend or family or spiritual superior to rely upon, or is not aware of apologetics sites, or is perhaps older and not technologically savvy? What defense does a layman or woman like him (or even, our pastors as priests) have to know to counter against such anti-Catholic propoganda that can sever their link to the Magisterium and the Head of the Church in the Pope?

It is for this reason, that we MUST not take lightly, articles like this, that have no legitimate journalistic credibility or supporting evidence from other legitimate sources, as viable and dangerous threats to the faithful in the Body of Christ. We must stand united together in protecting those spiritually vulnerable, or just trying to make their pilgrim journey home to Christ in Heaven, remaining on that treacherous, yet rewarding narrow path. Christ depends on His Earthly Body in us, the Mystical and/or Communal Body of Christ, to defend itself from such foreign invaders, and to expel them as its immune system. In Nomine Christi, Defende!

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin.

OPINION: The Pope and His Audiences on the Mass Re: Pictures At Mass.

Hello Everyone.

Forgive the tardiness, but married life with full time work including 1/5 hrs travel to and fro on the weekdays each way, plus domestic duties and whatnot, gives me such limited time for blogging these days. Still, I wanted to release this regardless as a not-as-once-youngish, but still "Church young" at 34 years old, Latin Mass server and male in the Church.

Back some weeks ago, as part of his new series of Wednesday General Audiences on the Eucharist, Pope Francis has done it again, striking hard at something (finally!) that affects everything at all spheres of the Church, with tie-ins to secular culture: Photos at Mass/social media.

His first general audience in November as part of the series, dealt with the Holy Mass, connected to catechesis on the Eucharist. The link from the Vatican's website is here for the first audience:

http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2017/documents/papa-francesco_20171108
_udienza-generale.html

The Pope's Message

In the audience, the Holy Father states: ".... He does not say: “Lift up your cell phones to take a photo!” No, that’s bad! I tell you, it makes me sad when I am celebrating here in Saint Peter’s Square or in the Basilica to see many cell phones lifted up, not only by the faithful but also by some priests and even bishops! But please! Mass is not a spectacle: it is going to encounter the Passion and Resurrection of the Lord. This is why the priest says: “Lift up our hearts”. What does this mean? Remember: no cell phones."

In terms, of the Pope's take on this, I truly think that he is applying this to the WHOLE CHURCH.  I must start by saying this audience is NOT HYPOCRISY NOR HATE OF THE TLM. Yes, he has given numerous statements in the past in audiences/fervorinos that do not favour those in the Latin Mass/Traditional Catholicism (e.g. the "breeding like rabits" statement, the "rigid" youth in the TLM comment in an interview that was without clarification or a general broad statement that most aren't crazy,) but I do not think that in this instance, our holy father is specifically targeting blogs, such as New Liturgical Movement, or even the Radical Misrepresenting Traditionalist (RMT) blog, Rorate Caeli, with regard to these pictures at Mass.

Because of society being "wired" and the majority of youth and young adults in the world, including older tech-savvy adults , this is a common problem for people in all forms of liturgy in the world, to be attached to their cell phones w/cameras. Furthermore, most developed nations, sadly, share a sense of the notion of "celebrity," which is not limited to music pop-idols and movie actors. Dare I say it, even in Catholic media circles, even some priests and laymen indulge in this notion with the invention of the Internet, on both sides of the spectrum, (Radical) Trad and Liberal. It has even spreads to the Holy Father indirectly and directly, such as the Holy Father doing selfies. Sorry Papa, but selfie taking isn't exactly strengthening the power of your message to the audience of the hostile, anti-Catholic world ... but at least you do not command it AT MASS.

What is clear as day in this Papal audience, is he is trying to convey that main message: The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not an entertainment spectacle or a concert, it IS the highest form of prayer in the world, the re-presentation of Christ's passion, death, and resurrection, with which He freed us from the binding of Adam's Original sin that prevented us the opportunity (not de-facto admittance) to be in paradise with God in Heaven. (You have my full permission to copy/paste this quote, just acknowledge my blog.)  Sadly, phone photos take away from this reverence and make the events more like a concert. The Pope is saying, the Mass is not such a venue.

My Opinion (My Two Canadian Dollars)

Now, while I agree with the Pope's main message in full, I am disagreeing with his outright ban of cell phones/pictures in the Mass for a specific purpose: The promotion of the Sacred Liturgy, especially the Latin Mass in the current theological-political climate of the Church, is VITAL, particularly online and in social media platforms (e.g. Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat) where the young adult generations and younger are gravitating to as part of their lives.

Most, if they were part of the Church, only received a non-reverent, "watered down" Novus Ordo, with variance in quality in terms of homiletics (most being "Jesus loves everyone"/human sentimental garbage, mercy ad nauseam, extreme focus on social justice excluding the rest of the faith) as well as Praise and Worship/childish music that despite the ideas and egos of clergy and music ministers, is NOT the be-all and end all of worship. While I am not partial to a certain Mass being set aside for that and even praise and worship in Eucharistic Adoration (unlike other Radicals Misrepresenting Traditionalism, who hate on their Novus Ordo berthen and desire complete decimation of the Novus Ordo in their minds and hearts, and its "music" and even "Novus Ordo" ministries in the everyday Church,) most youth aren't thinking of heaven and angels and the afterlife when they hear that "Rainbow" song for the hundreth time on Sunday.

Further, might I also add that while it has been 10 years since Summorum Pontificum, and worldwide the number of new holding of the TLM, and priests/seminarians, and even permanent deacons are picking up this noble form, as a whole, there is still a need for HIGHER NUMBERS of Masses, and competent clergy/laymen to instruct even more clergy/lay people in how to carry out the solemn and sacred Latin Mass (though women could assist in areas of expertise such as choir, altar preparation and textiles/vestment creation, and administrative roles in the case of lay organizations e.g. F.I.U.V., local EF/TLM societies.)

How better to promote the Holy Mass, in the Extraordinary Form, than with pictures on social/media, the internet. As the expression says, "a picture is worth a 1000 words," and to the majority of people, they would not be repulsed, but actually drawn in by what is going on at the altar. When one sees images such as the solemn Latin Mass with the numerous servers on their knees at the consecration, and 3 sacred ministers at the altar, does not that invoke an image of angels all around our Lord as King? Now, tie that in with the fact that our youth are "glued" to their internet phones and social media, and you can see that pictures, taken in proper parts of the Mass and posted, IS actually a form of evangelization to youth, and even an indirect invitation to say "Come, see what our Faith is about ... come, and experience eternal salvation, and Heaven on Earth ... Come ..." Might I also add that for all of Pope Francis' talk about getting dirty with the sheep, making "Hagan Lio" and going out to the peripheries, those youth and adults struggling with their faith and lives, and/or have departed from the Church but are around social media, ARE PART OF THE PERIPHERIES! 

Conclusion

So, if I must counter the Holy Father, then I counter him on this point by saying in summary: I get it. Yes the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is NOT an entertainment venue and we should not be taking constant pictures and idolizing the Holy Father as a pop star. However, one cannot "throw out the baby with the bathwater" in regards to the promotion of our faith, when many of our lost youth and even adults, who are trapped in the "world of the net," are not going to daily Mass and/or have anyone, even their parents, guiding them remotely, in anyway to the life of the Church. Further, because there is still a need for an increase in the Latin Mass, with the institutional Church including Pope Francis, PURPOSELY NOT promoting the Latin Mass and/or ignoring it in the Life/Culture of the Church (alongside a pure hatred of pre-Vatican II anything by the 65'-late 80's ordained generation of clergy,) it is being left up to the lay body and future/current younger clergy to promote and expand the Latin Mass, and the taking of photography and public promotion of it on the web is a necessary tool for advancing the TLM itself, and evangelizing to those who desire that deeper faith in Christ in the liturgy of the Holy Mass.

And that is my two Canadian dollars on this issue. Unless he makes this audience a part of the Acta of the Church to bind it as Magisterial, I'm sticking to my guns here.

Pax, Julian.

P. S. Love this gem in the audience: "... “But what are you saying, that the Lord is dull?” — “No, no. Not the Mass, the priests” — “Ah, may the priests convert, but it is the Lord who is there!” Do you understand? Do not forget it. “Participating in Mass is living again the redemptive passion and death of Our Lord.” Notice that for all the venom that RMTs spew at our Holy Father, he DID NOT in that sentence consider the Mass a "meal," the usual thing that is said by priests and laity thanks to shoddy post-Vatican II catechesis.

He even did it before in 2014 (see the reference earlier in the same paragraph I took this snippet from in the link above.) Please read the full address for other gems including Martyrdom for the sake of the Holy Mass, the definition of "Eucharist" etc.

Dangerous Tides A Swimming? Pope Francis' Mission Of Mercy and the SSPX: Silver Lining or Pandora's Box Part II?

Hello Everyone,

Now begins part II, whereby after last evening's post here, I will give you my reasoning for why Pope Francis should NOT allow the SSPX into Holy Mother Church in their current state.

We Should Not Let Them In .... Without Diligent Re-Education and Monitoring ...

Fine, yes without them the Latin Mass may have faded from existence as they were the biggest publically known "presence" for the EF in the Church, and yes, they are at least on paper not being lie-berals and such, but the real problem is their disobedient and anti-Church of Post Vatican II stance (including the Holy Father, Francis I himself.)

If Francis does let them in unchecked, I can forsee much division and they will act contrary to the Pope's wishes of ecumenism and reconciliation, causing more division and the falling away of the devout, orthodox faithful. I mean such in the following ways (word of warning: drug abuse analogies to be used to illustrate the problem. No intentional offense to people valiantly fighting the addiction of drugs/alcohol):

1. Abuse of Mercy, the Parable of the Just Judge and the Lower Lord - Do you remember in Scripture when Christ is speaking about the merciful judge and the ungrateful slave? Here's a little refresher, from the NRSV Catholic translation used in Canada:

"The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant
23 “For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. 24 When he began the reckoning, one who owed him ten thousand talents[c] was brought to him; 25 and, as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. 26 So the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ 27 And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt. 28 But that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii;[d] and seizing him by the throat, he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’ 29 Then his fellow slave fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ 30 But he refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he would pay the debt. 31 When his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. 32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 Should you not have had mercy on your fellow slave, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he would pay his entire debt. 35 So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister[e] from your heart.”

While the whole servants and kings thing isn't happening in a literal sense, this does relate to the SSPX. Allowing the SSPX, whose mentality has hardened into one of anti-Papacy, anti-Church, and even at times Protestant nature, is akin to treating a person for alcohol/drug abuse, and then letting them lose in society without serious outpatient monitoring and teaching them HOW to live post-treatment. How many times have we seen this happen with our modern celebrities (e.g. Lindsay Lohan) where they then just relapse into the same drug-addicted, partying lifestyle that put them in physical, emotional, and spiritual harm from before? As for those who do not partake in modern media/entertainment, when those people do come back and relapse, they lash out in their addicition-based rage against their family due to being drug addicted all those years, or still on the drugs.

Yes, giving the person mercy is good, but like the Samaritan woman, she was told to "sin no more." Unchecked, the SSPX would be given free reign to bash the Church and the Novus Ordo Mass, all the while offering sacraments only in the Extraordinary Form, and teaching things wrong or with a damaging spirit as they normally would. Like the drug addict without outpatient care, they would still, yet with licence, lash out at: the Pope, Novus Ordo Masses like the videos mentioned in Part I, Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo only, etc. while attesting the EF as the only form of salvation in the Latin Rite. They wouldn't be able to be contested because Pope Francis "approved" them back into canonization with the Church. Mind you they could always be re-suppressed, like the Jesuits, but in this modern technological age, they would elicit a firestorm of revenge, disobedience, and division in the Church and carry our a malicious campaign to tear Her apart after said re-suppression. They would take numerous souls with them in their campaign.

It would be best .... no ... there MUST be a strict restructuring process like the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. Here I applaud Pope Francis and those in charge of the restructuring, because without the swift correction of those malices brought about by the "EF only/SSPX "mindset" crowd in the community, they would have mentally and spiritually poisoned the novitiates, and these priests would carry out that poisonous mindset by infecting the laity who attend their Masses within their reach ... despite being canonically valid in the Church.

In addition, other young people who are more naieve or have started their journey of becoming Orthodox/Catholic Traditionalism and/or including the Latin Mass, may not have the ability to discern spiritually those in their company who are more rigid (and sinful) in their practice and thoughts of  "Traditionalism." If the SSPX Latin Masses were "OK" now to attend, and have made the Latin Mass their preferred, if not sole form of attendance in the Latin Rite, these debilitating influences in that young man or woman's life, combined with attendance at the SSPX chapels, will cause the young soul to be completely lost to the anti-Church mindset disguised as Radical Traditionalism. They would likely NEVER enter through the doors of another regular parish again, with (possible) rare exceptions for family events, that is, if the SSPX priest of the chapel does not corrupt the individual by preaching/saying that any Novus Ordo Mass puts the soul in occasion of sin. Under the same corruption or in their "happy land," that person's friends (and family, if they follow their relative,) will only support them in the hardening of their hearts, encouraging them to reject anyone, clergy or laity, who are not of their ilk or are "heterodox/heretics" according to the Radical Traditionalist and their SSPX clergy.

In summary, using one of the similar or same arguments poised by the RMTs, this would be the similar with the SSPX, albeit with one major additional problem. Here, I bring into my essay the change to the footwashing rite within the Mass on Holy Thursday. When Pope Francis legalized the foot washing of men and women in the Novus Ordo for Holy Thursday, they decried this as the legalization of disobedience to the Church." However, that change to the rite was disciplinary and did not attack the sacramental validity of a rite and/or form of the Holy Mass, promulgated by a Pope, and also the magisteruim of the Church by employing Pharisaical twists on its teachings and crude, indirect and direct attacks on the mentioned parts of Holy Mother Church. Argue as you will (organic vs. disruptive,) this is entirely NOT the same as legitimizing the SSPX unchecked, who would cause dissent from within Holy Mother Church, with a valid and legal "licence" to do so, an unintended consequence of Pope Francis' mercy.

2. The Katholic Krazies Would Be in Paradise! 
We already have it bad in the Traditional Catholic/Latin Mass scene worldwide. With lay organizations, bloggers, etc. it's clear that these (usually) Latin Mass loving extremists, already exhibit severe hatred for the Church they purport to "love" and "defend." With their calumny, slander, and detraction online and in person, they do not serve Christ and His Church, rather they serve some other master than Him. They make it bad enough for all of us who try to do it the "proper" way, in love with Mother Church, respecting her liturgical rites INCLUDING forms. These people/groups/websites give bishops and priests legitimate excuses to shy away from the Latin Mass, or prevent Ecclesia Dei requests from being fully granted (and I include in this "ghettoization" of the communities that DO get a request granted for a Latin Mass.)  

Already, based on that presence, and how they assault and belittle the Holy Father, the Novus Ordo Mass and its attendees, and the Church herself (just check my archives for postings, like this one as a sample,) these false "heroes" or "leaders" (self-appointed of course with NO actual Church authority) would now have legitimate reason to harden their hearts and souls even more, and even become more extreme with the SSPX's legitimacy. They already express their views publicly, and share in their Church hate.

In fact when I presented commentary similar to this posting on the Southern Orders post of 27/4/2016, save a couple of them, multiple commentators came out with daggers of the Devil against me, or flat out defended the SSPX as if they were not guilty of anything, for violating their golden calf (which is the SSPX,) despite me saying this would be a major mistake of Pope Francis. If anything, it reveals that upholding the First Commandment and going against the SSPX, is a greater "sin" in the RMT's books than defending Pope Francis. The moderator, Fr. Allan McDonald, could have easily dismissed my comment as ``trolling`` according to his policy in the comments section of Blogger, but clearly has NOT replied directly to my comment in chastizement or deleted it, and has allowed what has transpired to remain. If anything, he has allowed the discussion and the stabbing to ensue, possibly to demonstrate their insanity and idolization of the SSPX.

The only thing keeping them from being full radicals in liturgy, aside from their false "faith" is the fact that frequent attendance at SSPX chapels constitutes a possible (and likely self-schismatic) break from Holy Mother Church, the more you attend:

" PCED: "Catholics who frequent the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X do not incur any sin or canonical delict by doing so. However, we further refer you to what we have already stated in #4 above ...." "".... While it is true that participation in the Mass at chapels of the Society of St. Pius X does not of itself constitute "formal adherence to the schism" (cf. Ecclesia Dei 5, c), such adherence can come about over a period of time as one slowly imbibes a schismatic mentality which separates itself from the teaching of the Supreme Pontiff and the entire Catholic Church ...." (Published, PCED private correspondence with layman, and journalist, Brian Mershon for www.renewamerica.com)

If the SSPX were granted canonical validity, making their Masses licit AND VALID, using another drug/alcohol addiction analogy, this would be like giving a (non-medical) marijuana addict crack cocaine! The once user of gateway drugs would likely, (with great probability,) become so addicted and change into an extreme drug abuser! Sadly, based on what was unleashed against me in the post above, and some bloggers' sympathies out there in their incessant postings about the SSPX, the obvious interpretation is they want the perfect excuse to "jump over" and the SSPX is perceived as the "only hope" is saving the Catholic Church, especially liturgically in the Latin Mass.

Whether their reasons are wholly for the liturgy of the Latin Mass, or the whole extremist environment, or just to spite the institutional Church (read, parish pastors, institutions, individual priests, bishops, etc.,) they would get exactly what they want .... which would be catastrophic for their already damaged souls. At the very least, being in valid and licit Latin Masses approved by Holy Mother Church, keeps them in unison with Her, with a chance of salvation and Her mercy. While approving the SSPX outright might restore full abilities and sacramental privilege to the priests who hold those Masses, the environment and the untreated minds and hearts of the SSPX clergy, would make the heart of those mentioned, damaged souls, truly absent to those blessings within the EF Mass.

It would be akin to a beautiful pearl being held in a misshapen ugly clay jar, absent of all light inside. Because the of the ugliness of the clay jar surrounding the pearl, no one would come near the jar and dip their hand into the darkness to get the pearl, and it would lay there forever, forgotten, and never obtained. The blessings and graces possible in the EF Mass, would be that pearl, and the deadly sins of Pride, Anger, Envy, etc. with many additional sins, would be that darkness. The SSPX Masses, despite the Mass itself NEVER being a source of evil in itself, but because of the anti-Church and anti-Pope environment and erroneous teachings from the SSPX priests that would channel all that, would be the ugly misshapen clay jar.

Conclusion
In summary, it is already bad that these RMTs embarass Traditional Catholics or Latin Mass attendees, by associating with licit and valid liturgical environments, groups, or parishes, spewing their hatred of the "N.O Church." Giving the SSPX full approval without harsh disciplinary measures or a thorough clean up like the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, would be giving those radicals what they truly desire in their hearts: A "Church approved" excuse to hate Her and abuse her from within her own house.

Analogy: If you knew your own son or daughter was extremely, verbally and/or physically violent, like the drug abuser mentioned above, and you knew your life was in danger by letting that person in, would you allow that threat to your life in your house? You would not. You would get that person committed to a psychiatric ward or drug rehab facility if possible, to treat them. In the worst case scenario, you would call the police, even if it meant a standoff with a possibility of firearm discharge and the death of your own son/daughter.

This instance, is one occasion, where I pray and hope the Holy Father, does NOT act without consideration, or ``off the cuff`` as it were, to extend his hand fully and give them his version of mercy that he is doing in this current Papacy. If he TRULY wants to be merciful to the souls of both the clergy and attached laity of the SSPX, as well as the current flock still in "good standing" in the Church (at least on paper,) Francis will not reconcile the SSPX, instead of giving them carte-blanche freedom to pilfer and plunder souls from WITHIN Holy Mother Church.

Giving the SSPX the freedom and the personal prelature without HARSH discipline and reorganization, will spell doom for many a good soul wanting more Traditional Catholicism, and a perfect excuse for those ``corrupted`` souls to make themselves further fit for Hell as desired .... it will be the kind of disguised ``Traditionalism,`` which is truly extremism, and neo-Jansenism, leading souls off the narrow path to salvation on the right side of the road instead of the left.

END

Due to the nature of this post, judging by the reaction I received here, in prudence comments will be closed for this posting. 

Pax Tibi Christi, Julian Barkin.