The past week has been buzzing with rumors to the effect that Leo XIV has instructed the Dicastery for Divine Worship to issue “extensions” on the TLM whenever bishops ask for them.
"The answer is simple: such Catholics [who reject various dogmatic teachings] and their Masses do not pose any threat at all to the homosexuals and modernists..."
It's not that they don't pose any threat, it's that they are precisely the desired fruit of the new normal ortho-heterodoxy that the homo-modernists have brought to dominance in the official, institutional Church. More importantly, even the by-intent-orthodox Catholics who accept the authentic ordinary and universal magisterium of the Church are entirely complaisant, from a muddle-headed sense of piety, to the ascendant homo-modernist hierarchy. It is they -- the TOB people, the JPII Catholics, the hermeneutic of continuity people, the daily massers, the Rosary prayers -- who conceivably could and yet do not pose any threat to the corrupt. They may be 'orthodox' but are they virtuous? I sympathize with Kierkegaard in thinking this state of affairs is a more or less inevitable epiphenomenon of the crowd (against which TLM people too must be ever on guard). My suggestion, perhaps we need to be more synodal at a grassroots level, as in, have the fortitude to openly dissent from the lies and corruption, e.g., like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOgkj_eNZzM&list=PL9NOpoX7urstQeL7vggxy-itcXZNVn-pB
Make no mistake about it. The world is your enemy if you are a Christian. None of the apostles had a cozy life or death. If you are a comfortable Christian, you had better think again. This is warfare and the enemy is the world.
"Sodomodernist", a perfect term to bring a degree of understanding to my rattling thoughts & angst. And the final sentence the perfect solution. Many thanks.
There is a long and complicated theological conversation going back centuries about the extent to which a pope can be in error and still remain pope. Partly it hinges on what kind of heretic he is, how explicit, how pertinacious; partly it hinges on whether there is any mechanism by which he can be recognized as such and deposed or declared deposed. The weeds are very thick on this.
In fact, I edited an anthology of the best current analysis of these issues, called "Ultramontanism and Tradition," featuring Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke • Bishop Athanasius Schneider • Phillip Campbell • Stuart Chessman • Charles A. Coulombe • Roberto de Mattei • Edward Feser • Timothy S. Flanders • Rémi Fontaine • A Friar of the Order of Preachers • Matt Gaspers • Jeremy Holmes • John P. Joy • Robert W. Keim • John Lamont • Sebastian Morello • Martin Mosebach • Clemens Victor Oldendorf • Thomas Pink • Enrico Roccagiachini • Eric Sammons • Joseph Shaw • Henry Sire • Thomas Sternberg • Darrick Taylor • José A. Ureta.
I will definitely get to your book in due course. But the simple answer is: he's still the pope and we owe him, our bishops, our priests allegiance/obedience, except in anything they say or order that is contrary to the Deposit of Faith, which is just about everything..... ?
Germany, hemorrhaging donations, relies on the forced (or denounce religion altogether) tax of the state through redistribution. That’s a distinction without a difference from the NGO system which exploded under the Biden administration (2.3 Billion and counting.) That’s been completely eliminated and now what? The bishops, in an urgent state of panic, don’t engage in synodal dialogue with ACTUAL pew sitters, no. They decide to admonish and shame to the glee of the secular punditry and marginal Catholic clergy and “cafeteria”
I will read. But the silent voices of which I speak is of the congregation. Not the learned theologians like yourself but the from the people of the pews not the pulpit or lecture halls.
"Now, that is a minimum for human nature. Just as we can survive on bread and water and a bit of sleep in a cave...." More like in a Gulag, where we're tortured every day, especially Sunday.
If what you say is true then the eventual elimination of the TLM is a foregone conclusion via attrition. At what point is schism a viable answer? Why wait for the inevitable to occur? Did not Christ take a whip to the moneychangers plying thier trade in the temple to drive them out? Why as true believers should we maintain the status quo in public and practice the true faith in private. Silence my friend is complicity.
I have written over and over again that the TLM must be maintained, including by priests who go independent for a time (and with the intention of regularization once orthodox shepherds return). See especially:
Extraordinary beautiful exemplarilry expressed.
Thank you Dr. Kwasniewski.
"The answer is simple: such Catholics [who reject various dogmatic teachings] and their Masses do not pose any threat at all to the homosexuals and modernists..."
It's not that they don't pose any threat, it's that they are precisely the desired fruit of the new normal ortho-heterodoxy that the homo-modernists have brought to dominance in the official, institutional Church. More importantly, even the by-intent-orthodox Catholics who accept the authentic ordinary and universal magisterium of the Church are entirely complaisant, from a muddle-headed sense of piety, to the ascendant homo-modernist hierarchy. It is they -- the TOB people, the JPII Catholics, the hermeneutic of continuity people, the daily massers, the Rosary prayers -- who conceivably could and yet do not pose any threat to the corrupt. They may be 'orthodox' but are they virtuous? I sympathize with Kierkegaard in thinking this state of affairs is a more or less inevitable epiphenomenon of the crowd (against which TLM people too must be ever on guard). My suggestion, perhaps we need to be more synodal at a grassroots level, as in, have the fortitude to openly dissent from the lies and corruption, e.g., like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOgkj_eNZzM&list=PL9NOpoX7urstQeL7vggxy-itcXZNVn-pB
Make no mistake about it. The world is your enemy if you are a Christian. None of the apostles had a cozy life or death. If you are a comfortable Christian, you had better think again. This is warfare and the enemy is the world.
God gives us grace to distinguish between the influences of earth and heaven. It is our duty to distinguish and balance between the two.
"Sodomodernist", a perfect term to bring a degree of understanding to my rattling thoughts & angst. And the final sentence the perfect solution. Many thanks.
You left out how it is anti-Semitic. How the Novus Ordo was promulgated by a false guilt-trip of the holocaust.
Great analysis. Doesn't this make us (who agree with you) sedevacantists? An unbeliever cannot be the pope, cardinal, bishop, priest--right?
No, not at all.
There is a long and complicated theological conversation going back centuries about the extent to which a pope can be in error and still remain pope. Partly it hinges on what kind of heretic he is, how explicit, how pertinacious; partly it hinges on whether there is any mechanism by which he can be recognized as such and deposed or declared deposed. The weeds are very thick on this.
In fact, I edited an anthology of the best current analysis of these issues, called "Ultramontanism and Tradition," featuring Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke • Bishop Athanasius Schneider • Phillip Campbell • Stuart Chessman • Charles A. Coulombe • Roberto de Mattei • Edward Feser • Timothy S. Flanders • Rémi Fontaine • A Friar of the Order of Preachers • Matt Gaspers • Jeremy Holmes • John P. Joy • Robert W. Keim • John Lamont • Sebastian Morello • Martin Mosebach • Clemens Victor Oldendorf • Thomas Pink • Enrico Roccagiachini • Eric Sammons • Joseph Shaw • Henry Sire • Thomas Sternberg • Darrick Taylor • José A. Ureta.
https://osjustipress.com/products/ultramontanism-and-tradition
I will definitely get to your book in due course. But the simple answer is: he's still the pope and we owe him, our bishops, our priests allegiance/obedience, except in anything they say or order that is contrary to the Deposit of Faith, which is just about everything..... ?
Germany, hemorrhaging donations, relies on the forced (or denounce religion altogether) tax of the state through redistribution. That’s a distinction without a difference from the NGO system which exploded under the Biden administration (2.3 Billion and counting.) That’s been completely eliminated and now what? The bishops, in an urgent state of panic, don’t engage in synodal dialogue with ACTUAL pew sitters, no. They decide to admonish and shame to the glee of the secular punditry and marginal Catholic clergy and “cafeteria”
community.
Money is a big factor, Peter, don’t you think?
Yes, of course; but that only suggests we are not dealing with actual believers, but with proud, ambitious, selfish men.
I will read. But the silent voices of which I speak is of the congregation. Not the learned theologians like yourself but the from the people of the pews not the pulpit or lecture halls.
Yes! We need all hands on deck. That's why I write Tradition & Sanity - to educate and mobilize the troops.
"Now, that is a minimum for human nature. Just as we can survive on bread and water and a bit of sleep in a cave...." More like in a Gulag, where we're tortured every day, especially Sunday.
If what you say is true then the eventual elimination of the TLM is a foregone conclusion via attrition. At what point is schism a viable answer? Why wait for the inevitable to occur? Did not Christ take a whip to the moneychangers plying thier trade in the temple to drive them out? Why as true believers should we maintain the status quo in public and practice the true faith in private. Silence my friend is complicity.
I have written over and over again that the TLM must be maintained, including by priests who go independent for a time (and with the intention of regularization once orthodox shepherds return). See especially:
https://www.traditionsanity.com/p/bloodbath-in-tyler-why-and-how-traditional
Once you read this, let me know if you still think that "silence" has been my policy.