Vol 10 Issue 26 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
July 1, 2017 ~ Feast of the Precious Blood of Jesus
1. Is the Chair of Peter Vacant? An Argument for Sedevacantism
2. Fourth Sunday after Pentecost
3. Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
4. Family and Marriage
5. Articles and notices
The Feast of the Visitation, which is celebrated Sunday, is a perfect example of that charity which should be found among our women. It is the complete gift of oneself, both to that of accepting the children God gives as also the support of one another in that acceptance. This is sometimes really hard to find in a society where women work and the children are found to be a hindrance to their careers. Yes, it is true that many children are shipped off to care centers like dogs to a kennel or steers to a corral—not recognizing that this actually severs the tie between the mother and the child—so they can be free. But no one ever accounts for the psychological effect these care centers have on children other than that it frees of the woman to be a worker for the state—it would not be politically correct to undertake the research for it would show the harm done and why so many children, being neglected, are not able to form proper relationships but only see themselves as living for themselves and not for the other, which is a consequence of not forming a bond that is lasting and therefore the evil the state is causing.
What do we see in the visitation? A new mother, having just conceived, going to share her experience of motherhood with another mother—and, in helping the other mother, obtaining the experience and support of what it means to be a mother. This time spent there shows that Mary is totally dedicated to the office of being a mother and it shows why also God chose her to be the mother of His only begotten Son. John the Baptist, formed both bodily and psychologically by his parents is fit to carry out the role that God had predestined for him: to announce the coming of the Christ and prepare His way. Our Lord Jesus Christ is also protected, formed and instructed by Mary and His Foster Father, Saint Joseph to be able to advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men. (Cf. Luke 2:52) The relationships that John the Baptist and the Christ had with their mothers was a lasting relationship because these mothers understood their first responsibility was their child. Catholics meditate upon this mystery in the Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary and it would be beneficial for our mothers to see the blessing God gave them in their children which will be for their sanctification and for our fathers to never insist their wives work but rather realize they, as men, must be able to provide for the family. Employers, as the reading on the family below states, must be able to provide a father of a family a living wage—opposing the state that would deny the father this by so-called equality. Today we have so many young men not working because of state intervention in the name of this false equality.
As always, enjoy the readings and commentaries provided for your benefit. —The Editor
Is the Chair of Peter Vacant?
An Argument for Sedevacantism
by Rev. Courtney Edward Krier
Second Contradiction: The Infallibility of the Pope, to believe or not to believe?
Further, what Pius XII had recently declared, in Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947:
The Church is without question a living organism, and as an organism, in respect of the sacred liturgy also, she grows, matures, develops, adapts and accommodates herself to temporal needs and circumstances, provided only that the integrity of her doctrine be safeguarded. This notwithstanding, the temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics, deserve severe reproof. It has pained Us grievously to note, Venerable Brethren, that such innovations are actually being introduced, not merely in minor details but in matters of major importance as well. We instance, in point of fact, those who make use of the vernacular in the celebration of the august eucharistic sacrifice; those who transfer certain feast-days—which have been appointed and established after mature deliberation—to other dates; those, finally, who delete from the prayerbooks approved for public use the sacred texts of the Old Testament, deeming them little suited and inopportune for modern times.
The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth. In spite of this, the use of the mother tongue in connection with several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people. But the Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission. It is forbidden, therefore, to take any action whatever of this nature without having requested and obtained such consent, since the sacred liturgy, as We have said, is entirely subject to the discretion and approval of the Holy See.
61. The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world. [Cf. Matt. 28:20.] They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of man.
Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer’s body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See.
Clearly no sincere Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church, under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for souls, because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas. No more can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of the Church to revert to prescriptions based on the earliest sources of canon law. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.
This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the “deposit of faith” committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn. [Cf. Pius VI, Constitution Auctorem fidei, August 28, 1794, nn. 31-34, 39, 62, 66, 69-74.] For perverse designs and ventures of this sort tend to paralyze and weaken that process of sanctification by which the sacred liturgy directs the sons of adoption to their Heavenly Father of their souls’ salvation. (Pars. 59-64)
It was fresh in the memory what Pius XII, in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, again repeats of Pius X’s and Pius XI’s condemnations of Modernism and false ecumenism:
Another danger is perceived which is all the more serious because it is more concealed beneath the mask of virtue. There are many who, deploring disagreement among men and intellectual confusion, through an imprudent zeal for souls, are urged by a great and ardent desire to do away with the barrier that divides good and honest men; these advocate an “eirenism” according to which, by setting aside the questions which divide men, they aim not only at joining forces to repel the attacks of atheism, but also at reconciling things opposed to one another in the field of dogma. And as in former times some questioned whether the traditional apologetics of the Church did not constitute an obstacle rather than a help to the winning of souls for Christ, so today some are presumptive enough to question seriously whether theology and theological methods, such as with the approval of ecclesiastical authority are found in our schools, should not only be perfected, but also completely reformed, in order to promote the more efficacious propagation of the kingdom of Christ everywhere throughout the world among men of every culture and religious opinion.
Now if these only aimed at adapting ecclesiastical teaching and methods to modern conditions and requirements, through the introduction of some new explanations, there would be scarcely any reason for alarm. But some through enthusiasm for an imprudent “eirenism” seem to consider as an obstacle to the restoration of fraternal union, things founded on the laws and principles given by Christ and likewise on institutions founded by Him, or which are the defense and support of the integrity of the faith, and the removal of which would bring about the union of all, but only to their destruction. (Pars. 11-12)
The Magisterium is guided by the Holy Ghost, the charism that preserves the Church from teaching error and guarantees the Pope to speak infallibly when teaching the Catholic Church in matters of faith and morals. When the Faith was loyally defended by Catholic Cardinals and bishops they were ignored completely or even rebuffed by Angelo Roncalli, such as the incidence related when, in opposition to Bishop William Duschak asking for something completely unacceptable to a Catholic, that is, a “Mass”, a Missa Orbis, agreeable to non-Catholics that was “Christ’s own words” and “closely with the Last Supper” –which he never historically witnessed!—in which even Protestants could be invited and understand and where the priest faced the people saying everything in the vernacular and in response, on November 7, 1962, Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer of Campos, Brazil, spoke, pointing to the sacred, the unequivocal, and perpetuity of the Mass, Wiltgen writes of Roncalli’s rebuttal:
Bishop Mayer’s remarks contrasted greatly with remarks made on the same day by Pope John at a public audience granted after he had watched the morning meeting of the Council on closed-circuit television. Explaining the activities of the Council Fathers, the Pope said: “The business at hand is not to make a careful study of some old museum or of some school of thought from the past. No doubt this can be helpful—just as a visit to ancient monuments can be helpful—but it is not enough. We live to advance, appreciating at the same time whatever the past has to offer us in the line of experience. But we must move ever further onward along the road which Our Lord has opened up before us.” And. to make sure that there should be no misunderstanding as to his meaning, he added, “The Christian life is not a collection of ancient customs.” (op. cit. p. 40.)
Of course, Angelo Roncalli initiated the call for change as Wiltgen continues:
On the previous Sunday, both by action and by word, he had expressed himself in favor of the vernacular. It was the fourth anniversary of his coronation, and the faithful of Rome as well as the Council Fathers were present at a celebration in St. Peter’s. Speaking in Latin to the Council Fathers, the Pope said: “This should be the common language used by prelates of the Universal Church when communicating with the Apostolic See, and it should be regularly used at Council meetings.” After greeting them in Latin, he said, he would switch to Italian, “especially since it can be more easily understood by very many of those present that is, by the people, who have come together here in great numbers to honor the anniversary in the pontificate of their Pastor and Father.” This was the very same argument that the missionary bishops had been using for the introduction of the vernacular in the Mass. (Ibid., p 40-41)
And though it was proposed as for “pastoral” benefits, it was a suggestion that did not even have any significance for Duschak, because when Asked whether his proposal originated with the people whom he served, he answered, “No, I think they would oppose it, just as many bishops oppose it. But if it could be put into practice, I think they would accept it.”(Ibid. p. 39) Where, then, did it originate? And why force it on his flock?
The Pope was to confirm the brethren in the Faith. Angelo Roncalli questioned the Faith. But Catholics were not to question the Pope in matters of Faith and morals, they were to follow him. Despite the fact that Roncalli did not release the third Secret of Fatima in 1960 after reading it in August of 1959 as stated in the diary of John XXIII, 17 August 1959 [“Audiences: Father Philippe, Commissary of the Holy Office, who brought me the letter containing the third part of the secrets of Fatima. I intend to read it with my Confessor”. (cf. The Message of Fatima, Retrieved May 20, 2016.http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html] Faithful Catholics were beginning to gather to pray the family Rosary or as groups as a spiritual warfare against the complete spiritual vacuum being created as the true Faith left Rome. Many began to start studying their faith to understand how what they believed yesterday was no longer to be believed today as the Newspapers began carrying stories of what the Bishops and priests were saying at the Council. Can a pope contradict a pope in matters of faith and morals if both are infallible? Does one follow what Pius XII and all the Popes prior taught or the novelties of Angelo Roncalli?
(To be continued)
The Ecclesiastical Year (1880)
FOURTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST
The Introit of the Mass is: The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the protector of my life: of whom shall I be afraid? My enemies that trouble me have themselves been weakened and have fallen. If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. (Ps. xxvi. 1-3.) Glory be to the Father, etc.
PRAYER OF THE CHURCH. Grant, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that both the course of the world may be peaceably ordered for us by Thy governance, and that Thy Church may rejoice in tranquil devotion. Through etc.
EPISTLE (Rom. viii. 18-23). Brethren, The sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared
to the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us. For the expectation of the creature waiteth for the revelation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly; but by reason of him that made it subject, in hope: because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that every creature groaneth, and travaileth in pain, even till now. And not only it, but ourselves also, who have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body: in Jesus Christ our Lord.
INSTRUCTION. There is no greater consolation under crosses and afflictions, no more powerful support in the adversities of a pious and virtuous life, than the thought that all sufferings are as nothing when compared with the coming glory of heaven, and that by a slight and momentary suffering in this life is obtained a superabundant happiness in the next. (ii Cor. iv. 17.) Thus St. Augustine says: “Were we daily to suffer all torments, even for a short time the pains of hell, in order to see Christ and be numbered among His saints, would it not be worth all this misery to obtain so great a good, so great a glory?”
ASPIRATION Ah Lord, when shall we be delivered from the miserable bondage of this life, and participate in that indescribable glory which Thou hast prepared for Thy children, where free from the misery and many temptations of this life, they enjoy eternal bliss. Enable us to see more and more into the misery of this life that we may thus be urged to strive for freedom and glory in Thy kingdom. Amen.
GOSPEL (Luke v. 1-11.) At that time, When the multitude pressed upon Jesus, to hear the word of God, he stood by the lake of Genesareth. And he saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets; and going up into one of the ships that was Simon’s, he desired him to draw back a little from the land. And sitting, he taught the multitudes out of the ship. Now when he had ceased to speak, he said to Simon: Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught. And Simon, answering, said to him: Master, we have labored all the night, and have taken nothing, but at thy word I will let down the net. And when they had done this, they enclosed a very great multitude of fishes: and their net broke. And they beckoned to their partners that were in the other ship, that they should come and help them. And they came and filled both the ships, so that they were almost sinking. Which when Simon Peter saw, he fell down at Jesus’s knees, saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord. For he was wholly astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of fishes which they had taken; and so were also James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were Simon’s Partners. And Jesus with to Simon: Fear not: from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And having brought their ships to land, leaving all things, they followed him.
What are we to learn from the people who came to Christ to hear the word of God?
We should listen with great zeal to the word of God, because from it man receives the life of the soul, (Matt. iv. 4.) and eternal happiness. (Luke xi. 28.)
Why did Christ teach from Peter’s ship?
By this He showed that the true doctrine is preached only from that Church of which Peter is the head, (John. xxi. 15.) which is here represented by his ship. Amid storms of persecution Jesus has preserved and will preserve this ship, His Church, until the end of time. (Matt. xvi. 18). Peter still guides the bark in the unbroken line of his successors, and Jesus still teaches from this ship the same doctrine through the bishops and priests, as His cooperators, with whom He has promised to remain to the end of the world. Matt. xxvii. 20.)
Why was it that Peter and his assistants took in such a draught of fishes after they had labored all night in vain?
Because at first they trusted in themselves, and did not throw out their nets in the name of the Lord, relying on His blessing and assistance. “This example,” says St. Ambrose, “proves how vain and fruitless is presumptuous confidence, an
[Message clipped] View entire message