Bishop Michael Martin considers himself wiser than Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI

The National Catholic Register is reporting that:

"Controversy in a North Carolina diocese has broadened beyond traditional Latin Mass restrictions after it was revealed that the local bishop had also planned to ban the use of Latin, altar rails, and other traditional practices in all diocesan liturgies — a development with implications far beyond the Tar Heel State.

Bishop Michael Martin of Charlotte proposed the restrictions in a leaked draft of new liturgical norms, which was first made public by the blog Rorate Caeli on May 28 and confirmed by the Register. Bishop Martin wrote that the purpose of the new norms, which also included barring ad orientem worship and traditional prayers at the foot of the altar, including the St. Michael Prayer, were made with the intention of “purifying and unifying the celebration of the Mass” in the diocese. 

The bishop also wrote that the proposed norms are called for by Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Second Vatican Council’s pastoral constitution on the liturgy, a perspective that has been widely challenged in reactions to the document."

Bishop Martin is either supremely ignorant on this matter or he is a contemptible liar. Readers of this Blog know full well that I do not sugar coat the facts. This in keeping with the teaching of Saint Francis de Sales that the wolf is always called the wolf.

Now with regard to the Bishop's nonsense:

In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."

And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."

To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."

This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition.

Perhaps instead of appealing to some vague bullshit "spirit of Vatican II," Bishop Martin should sit down and actually READ the Conciliar documents.

Is that really too much to ask? If the Bishop cannot do his one job, perhaps it's time for him to step down.

Francis wants to ban the Latin Mass outright

 Lifesite News is reporting:

"Several 'credible' sources informed a traditional Catholic media outlet that the Vatican is planning to issue a document 'banning' the Traditional Latin Mass, and a source informed LifeSiteNews that this will likely occur on July 16.

'An attempt is being made to implement, as soon as possible, a Vatican document with a stringent, radical, and final solution banning the Traditional Latin Mass,' reported Rorate Caeli on Monday, which attributed the news to 'the most credible sources, in different continents,' including from 'circles close to' Cardinal Arthur Roche, the prefect for the Dicastery for Divine Worship."

Have you ever encountered a priest, Bishop or layman who impugned the Latin Mass? Is such an attitude even Catholic? In a word, no. In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."

And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."

To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."

This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition.

It has long been known that the Devil hates Latin See here.

Who then will the Vatican be serving through such a move? Christ or Antichrist?

Such a move is sure to create schism and drive many traditional Catholics out of the Church, perhaps to the Orthodox Church.

Again, who will this serve. Who will benefit from creating such division in the Church?

You know the answer.

Related reading here: The Case for the Latin Mass

Facebook is banning this post as "spam" while asserting that it goes against "community standards."

Interesting no?

Cardinal Cupich: Liar

Pro-LGBT Cardinal Cupich is asserting that Saint Pope John Paul II would have supported Francis's crackdown on the Traditional Latin Mass. See here.

What to make of this load of bovine scatology?

The facts:

In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."

And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."

To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.

Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."

This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition. While we should thank God for those positive developments in the liturgy over the past 40 years (and contrary to what some "traditionalists" would have you believe there have been many), still, we must not foster an atmosphere of hostility toward those who prefer the Latin Mass. As Pope Benedict XVI has been teaching for so many years now, there is no "pre-Vatican II Church" and "Post-Vatican II Church." There is one Church with a continued Tradition and a richness of expression.

I am one of those Catholics who has always hoped and prayed for a "Reform of the Reform." As one of the few Catholics who has spent a considerable amount of time actually reading and studying the 16 documents of Vatican II, I look forward to that day when the teaching of the Council is actually followed. In both letter and spirit.

Is Francis showing respect for  "the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition"?

The answer is obvious.  Cardinal Cupich, you are a liar.

Francis' notion of what constitutes charity has been thoroughly refuted...

Francis is at it again, building walls and creating chaos within the Church.  This time he's saying: “…This rigidity [the solid Catholic Faith of young traditional Catholics who prefer the Latin Mass] always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”

Wrong. This liberal notion charity has already been thoroughly refuted.

In his classic work Liberalism is a Sin," Fr. Felix Sarda Y Salvany writes:


"Charity is a supernatural virtue which induces us to love God above all things and our neighbors as ourselves for the love of God. Thus after God, we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, and this not in any way, but for the love of God and in obedience to His law. And now what is to love? Amare est velle bonum, replies the philosopher: "To love is to wish good to him whom we love." To whom does charity command us to wish good? To our neighbor, that is to say, not to this or that man only but to everyone. What is that good which true love wishes? First of all supernatural good; then goods of the natural order, which are not incompatible with it. All this is included in the phrase "for the love of God."

It follows, therefore, that we can love our neighbor, when displeasing him, when opposing him, when causing him some material injury and even, on certain occasions, when depriving him of life. All is reduced to this in short: Whether in the instance where we displease, oppose or humiliate him, it is or is not for his own good, or for the good of someone whose rights are superior to his, or simply for the greater service of God.

If it is shown, that in displeasing or offending our neighbor, we act for his good, it is evident that we love him even when opposing or crossing him. The physician cauterizing his patient or cutting off his gangrened limb may none the less love him. When we correct the wicked by restraining or by punishing them none the less do we love them. This is charity and perfect charity. It is often necessary to displease or offend one person, not for his own good, but to deliver another from the evil he is inflicting. It is then an obligation of charity to repel the unjust violence of the aggressor; one may inflict as much injury on the aggressor as is necessary for the defense. Such would be the case should one see a highwayman attacking a traveler. In this instance, to kill, wound, or at least take such measures as to render the aggressor impotent, would be an act of true charity.

The good of all good is the divine good, just as God is for all men the neighbor of all neighbors. In consequence the love due to a man inasmuch as he is our neighbor ought always to be subordinated to that which is due to our common Lord. For His love and in His service we must not hesitate to offend men. The degree of our offense towards men can only be measured by the degree of our obligation to him. Charity is primarily the love of God, secondarily the love of our neighbor for God's sake. To sacrifice the first is to abandon the latter. Therefore to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a true act of charity. Not to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a sin.

Modern Liberalism reverses this order. It imposes a false notion of charity; our neighbor first, and, if at all, God afterwards."

This is why he puts the creature before the Creator.  This is why he condemns traditional Catholics as "rigid" and "sick," even while showing great respect for active sodomites who demand a change in Church teaching, such as Simon Cazal.  See here.

If anyone is sick, it's Francis.  See Romans 1: 25.

The New Paganism is becoming Satanism...

In his work entitled Essays of a Catholic, Hilaire Belloc predicted that, "when the gods of the New Paganism come they will not be merely insufficient, as were the gods of Greece, nor merely false; they will be evil.  One might put it in a sentence, and say that the New Paganism, foolishly expecting satisfaction, will fall, before it knows where it is, into Satanism."

Having succumbed to this New Paganism, many within the Church (priests, religious and laity) have come to resemble the demons they now serve.

Our Lady of Fatima speaks of repentance and conversion, two ideas not at all popular in the "modern Church" today.  Today the psychotherapeutic revolution has replaced the concept of sin with guilt which is to be "cured" through therapy.  Archbishop Fulton Sheen noted that, "Under traditional Christianity [which is fast-disappearing], a man was a theological creature, an adopted son of God and a member of the Mystical Body of Christ; in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries man became a philosophical thing bound to God by some vague ties of creaturehood.  But man today is only a biological phenomenon with no other destiny than that of the worm he crushes under his heel.  Once man loses hold on the primary dogma that man has a moral end, and that his actions, thoughts and words in this life are all registered in the Book of Life, and therefore will one day determine his eternal destiny, sin becomes meaningless.  The modern mind has forgotten the dogma of man, and hence cannot avoid forgetting the morals of man, for one is the corollary of the other.  Deny that God is interested in the behavior of men and you immediately create a society in which man is uninterested in the behavior of his fellow man." (Essay entitled The Sense of Sin).

Today, in centers of learning, Holy Scripture is openly mocked.  Many of our priests and religious have lost their faith and, with a false show of scholarship, openly repudiate God's Holy Word and the Church's Tradition.  Others simply remain silent having succumbed to sins which they can no longer denounce since they practice them in secret.  Having reduced the Gospel message to mere superstition, these children of the Devil are robbing countless youth who need to be nourished "not by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God."  As a result, these poor youth are spiritually starved to death by the lies which proceed from the mouths of Satan's children.  Small wonder so many youth have abandoned the Faith altogether.  

Our Lord denounced the religious leaders of the Jews for doing the same thing - refusing to accept the truth and falsifying His message:

"You are of your father the devil and your will is to do your father's desires.  He was a murderer from the beginning and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies...He who is of God hears the words of God.  The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." (John 8: 34-37).

Do not wait for the call to repentance to come from the clergy (generally speaking).  For many, not all but many, of these no longer hear the Word of God.  Place yourselves in the hands of the Immaculate Mother of God - your Mother.  For the Days of Noah have returned - Matthew 24: 37-41.

Many will scoff at this notion.  But look around you.  What do you see?  Sodomy is being rationalized and even sodomite "marriage."  Abortion continues to take countless millions of innocent children, sacrificed to Moloch.  Contraception is justified and is given to the youth. Crime, terrorism, wars breaking out everywhere.  Not a Civilization of Love but a hellish Civilization of Sin and hatred of God.

God's wrath is approaching.  Those who have ears to hear will heed the Spirit and the emerging Signs of the Times.  Those destined to an eternity in Hell will continue to justify sin and a culture which embraces it.

Related reading here.

Father Joseph Krupp on the role of Francis: Please pass the Kool-Aid

Father Joseph Krupp*, as noted here, does not always understand the pope, but he said he never questions his wisdom.

"If or when he says something that shakes what I am comfortable with, I believe it is my job to assume that I am wrong and take it to prayer," said Krupp of Manitou Beach...I believe it is his job to make me uncomfortable and get me to 'expand my tent pegs.’”

Father Krupp's comments are merely the tip of a very troubling iceberg.  There is a push to indoctrinate Catholics to accept the notion that the Pope's role is that of a cult leader: Whatever he says or does shouldn't even be questioned.  Therefore, if Francis assures us that homosexual "marriage" is compatible with God's Holy Word and Sacred Tradition, we should assume that we are wrong, take the matter to prayer, and give thanks that we have a Pontiff who is "expanding our tent pegs."

That this load of bovine scatology comes from a self-identified "traditional priest" is nothing less than amazing.  I am reminded of those public service ads exhorting teens to just say no to crack.

We have a Deposit of Faith which has been revealed by God and entrusted to a Custodian established by God Himself and endowed with infallible protection against change or error. As Dei Verbum, No. 10 of Vatican II states:

"..the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."

Understand?  This is the clear and unambiguous teaching of the Church. The Pope is not above the Word of God. It is his vocation to serve this Word, teaching ONLY WHAT HAS BEEN HANDED ON AND GUARDING THIS SACRED DEPOSIT FAITHFULLY.

The October Synod is almost upon us.  Last year, Francis asserted that the Church had one year to "mature." One can only shudder at what he meant by such an asinine comment.

Irregardless of what he meant, Father Krupp's position is untenable.  Hold to Tradition.  Persevere in the Faith of our Fathers.  Pray as never before.  For the Devil has entered the Church and is being assisted by ecclesiastical masonry with the goal of pulling down the Church from within.

* Traditional priest?  See here.

Father Peter Carota: Traditional Catholic Love is greater than the Hate of Progressive Catholics

Traditional Catholic Love Is Greater Than The Hate Of Progressive Catholics

By Father Peter Carota 

During Lent we relived the evil actions of the religious authorities of Jesus’ time.  We read from the Bible of their planning and paying for the eradication of Jesus.
As soon as Jesus began His public ministry of forgiving sins, exorcising devils, healing the sick (especially on the Sabbath), and preaching, He evoked the hatred and jealousy of the Jewish Religious leaders (Scribes, Pharisees, Lawyers and Priest).  All His actions were works of love that only brought on Him their hatred.  I would say that there is a constant law even at work today.  That law is this; evil and hypocritical people will always hate good people who do good things.
The religious leaders at the time of Jesus were faithful to all the prescribed religious actions.  But in their hearts, they were far from God.  How else can you explain the beatings, spitting, scourging, ridicule, false accusations and the final infamous scandal of Jesus crucified naked on the cross.
Pontius Pilate tries to free Jesus from them.  He continually pronounced His innocence and knew that it was only out of jealousy that they hated Him.  He also had Him scourged, hoping that this torturous beating would quell their hatred and let Him live.  But nothing could stop the power of the evil in the Jewish Church at that time from taking their hatred out on Jesus.
But their hatred and secret actions to destroy the loving Jesus backfired on them.  Yes they were able to torture Him and killed Him, but Love had the last say over hate.  While Jesus was going through His excruciating death on the cross, He forgave them, out of love, the religious men, who should have loved Him and followed Him.
They used all their religious and political power to kill Jesus.  And they were very successful.  But after they had tortured Him to death, there was no other way to continue to take out their hatred and blood thirsty jealousy on Him.  They could do no more to the silent Lamb before the slaughter.
On Easter, the Love of Jesus triumphs over the hatred of the Jewish religious.  He can die no more.  He now reigns forever.
But as soon as Jesus was gone, they went after his disciples with the same hatred, jealousy, floggings, imprisonments and killing.  But after they tortured them and killed them, His disciples also shared in His resurrection and now reign with Him forever.
So, when we see so many religious leaders in the Church today who hate the 1800+ year old Latin Mass, (the Mass of all Ages), we should not be surprised.  It is exactly as it was at the time of Jesus.  And when we see so many Catholics hating the Holy Latin Mass, hating to kneeling to receive Jesus and hating priests who condemn sin and immodesty, we are only again seeing the exact same reaction of hatred and jealousy that Jesus evoked from the religious people of His time.  When we see so many Catholics behind the scenes trying to get rid of traditional priests and the Latin Mass, we should not be surprised at all.
But, as Jesus triumphed, by going through His passion and death, we also will triumph though all this persecution and hatred.  And just we need to remember how He triumphed.  It was by suffering with loved.  He forgave from the heart and He went on.
Jesus knew what His mission was.  He did not let the passion get in the way of Him completing His Father will.  He thirsted for the souls of sinners, and shed every drop of His blood, out of love for them, to save them.


Let us traditional Catholic remember that, like the Master we follow, we also will have to suffer.  Religious leaders and people of today, will continue to secretly work against us, behind the scenes, in parishes and chanceries.  We will have every form of obstacles imaginable put in our way.  But we will still stay faithful to our mission, at what ever price, to restore Jesus’ Church and to save of souls.  And in the end, love, truth and life will triumph.

Readers of this Blog know full well how I have been attacked, demonized and ostracized for standing up for the Magisterial Teaching of the Church and sound liturgy.  Only a couple of weeks ago, I objected to the carnival atmosphere at Saint Vincent de Paul Parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts and the "pastor" there - Father Francis Roberge - accused me falsely of being threatening.  And because I have opposed so-called "gay marriage," women's ordination and New Age spirituality, I have been labeled "hateful."

I've said it before and I'll say it again: While it is true that everything must be done to help sinners, this cannot include helping them to sin or to remain in sin. Because of human frailty, every sinner deserves both pity and compassion. However, vice and sin must be excluded from this compassion. This because sin can never be the proper object of compassion. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 1).

It is a false compassion which supplies the sinner with the means to remain attached to sin. Such 'compassion' provides an assistance (whether material or moral) which actually enables the sinner to remain firmly attached to his evil ways. By contrast, true compassion leads the sinner away from vice and back to virtue. As Thomas Aquinas explains:

"We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written: 'They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4, citing Jeremiah 15:19).
St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us that the sentiment of compassion only becomes a virtue when it is guided by reason, since "it is essential to human virtue that the movements of the soul should be regulated by reason." (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, c.3). Without such regulation, compassion is merely a passion. A false compassion is a compassion not regulated and tempered by reason and is, therefore, a potentially dangerous inclination. This because it is subject to favoring not only that which is good but also that which is evil (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 3).

An authentic compassion always stems from charity. True compassion is an effect of charity (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.3, ad 3). But it must be remembered that the object of this virtue is God, whose love extends to His creatures. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.3). Therefore, the virtue of compassion seeks to bring God to the one who suffers so that he may thereby participate in the infinite love of God. As St. Augustine explains:

"'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' Now, you love yourself suitably when you love God better than yourself. What, then, you aim at in yourself you must aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may love God with a perfect affection." (St. Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church, No. 49,
Let us remember this as we go forth to do battle against the Progressive Catholics who have been poisoned by the fire of Hell.