A little Sunday book burning after Mass

24 Comments

1. lofstrr says:

   15 March 2010 at 11:27 AM

   Former? Sounds like someone is trying to be more Catholic than Abp. Lefebvre. Of course, it had to happen sooner or later. One-upmanship, the game that never ends. :)
2. pelerin says:

   15 March 2010 at 11:33 AM

   I don’t have much Italian but I was interested in one of the comments which if I understood correctly said ‘Burning a book is a violent act and how much more so when it is written by a Pope. What message is it sending to the faithful?’ What message indeed?

   If the priest is now ‘former SSPX’ what is he now?
3. peregrinPF says:

   15 March 2010 at 11:37 AM

   I used Google to translate it. Unfortunately, I expect we will see a lot more of this (both expulsions & burnings) as unification talks progress.
4. Arnobius of Sicca says:

   15 March 2010 at 11:48 AM

   Makes me think of Luther and the burning of the Papal Bull. While claiming to be defenders of the true faith, I find it ironic that they seem very much like other Cafeteria Catholics.

   It is interesting how these groups all make themselves the judge of what is legitimate and what is not instead of submitting to the Magisterium.
5. Cavaliere says:

   15 March 2010 at 12:16 PM

   It is interesting how these groups all make themselves the judge of what is legitimate and what is not instead of submitting to the Magisterium.

   Before indicting all these “groups’ a more careful reading of the post will show that this priest is a former member of the SSPX. Nor do I think it is fair to suggest as a previous post did that Abp. Lefebvre was trying “to be more Catholic” than anyone else. I think he was just trying to be the same priest and Bishop he always was when almost the whole Church had turned upside down. Not that he was completely innocent but he faced a Church that at the time that was in full swing of eradicating anything that was traditional.
6. Francis says:

   15 March 2010 at 1:18 PM

   If we use legal terminology- the inability of the Popes Paul VI and successors to preserve the Tradition of the Church reveal a state of “constitutional failure” deeply ingrained in the institution of a supreme, infaillible papacy. The interests of the Roman Pontiffs have for so long been concurrently temporal and spiritual, that both were seen as the aspects of the same “mandate”, that the declaration of 1870 appears to me to be confirmation that the Pope is indeed a beast- certainly not THE beast of the Apocalypse, but rather Hobbes’ Leviathan (the last section of his book would need some revising) with christian trappings. Ever since the Marozia/Sergius III saga the Papacy had been in a state of constitutional failure towards the Church of Rome and the other churches over which it exercised its jurisdiction.

   Well, call me a moron, or what not. But a Political History of the Papacy is a much needed
   work to prove that Catholic Orthodoxy can be well maintained without a vicar of Christ whose feet we are to kiss and to whom we must submit as to Christ, as we have the Holy Ghost, as promised by Our Lord Himself. That during the first 10 centuries or so, Rome was not superannus, but primus, enjoying the highest appellate jurisdiction in Christendom (now don’t bandy words: it’s not because modern courts having such jurisdiction are called “supreme” that, &c), in virtue not of “super hanc petram” ( who can seriously maintain that line of argument anymore) but rather of seniority,the fact that the city contained the tombs and relics of the two Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and that of many, many martyrs.

   This is only my personal opinion. Forgive me if i offend any but well i’m only a moron. a silly gallican moron attached to Tradition- never mind.
7. brotherjuniper says:

   15 March 2010 at 1:44 PM

   Appalling if not entirely unpredictable, Fr. Abrahamowicz is a sedevacantist and believes that the Chair of St. Peter is vacant. Since he is not in obedience to the Supreme Pontiff, he can do whatever he wants with papal documents that do not apply to him and his particular position. Burning the Vatican II Documents is a way for him to declare his independence and tell people, “Oh well, I don’t have to follow this dreck anymore than anybody else.”

   Essentially, Fr. Abrahamowicz’s perspective is true for other sedevacantist clergy. One of my favorite parish priests on the other side of the fence once said that Vatican I is the only Vatican council. In this way, he also rejected Vatican II as being the product of modernists and other members of the conciliar church.
8. Nathan says:

   15 March 2010 at 2:08 PM

   I glanced at the entry, saw that the priest had “burned a volume of the books of Vatican II.” I thought immediately, “Oh, he made a CD.” [LOL!] I must need some more coffee.

   In Christ,
9. JonM says:

   15 March 2010 at 2:24 PM

   The priest is clearly wrong in doing this.

   With that said, it is a great lesson in what happens when unnecessary disciplinary changes are made: people reject them and some blast off into deep space.

   I remember one morning the (OF) Gospel was Christ warning to those who might scatter the sheep. Often liberals use this against traditionally minded Catholics, but really we only have to look at what they did at the Council and what has happened to the flock.

   VII didn’t teach heresy, but that’s not an impressive benchmark to meet. I mean, when the head of Catholic Hospitals is a nun who refuses to wear a habit and endorses abortion while Mass attendance is around 18% amongst Catholics, perhaps 3/4s of whom support birth control…

   …And in addition to the above joys, various counter Churches, sedevacanists, etc…

   Houston we have a problem! Where’s that Springtime!?
10. meunke says:

    15 March 2010 at 3:07 PM

    “Former SSPX priest Fr. Florian Abrahamowicz, after a Mass in Treviso, Italy, burned a volume of the documents of Vatican II.”

    – well, it a crazy world, it’s nice to see that some things never really change, it seems.

    Perhaps he thought he wasn’t getting enough attention, like a child that will act out in order to get attention from his parents.
11. RichardT says:

    15 March 2010 at 3:13 PM

    Is it on YouTube yet?
12. theloveofwisdome says:

    15 March 2010 at 7:13 PM

    Hence, this is why this priest was expelled from the SSPX. He was expelled close to one year ago for being a schismatically minded nut-job. Folks, this is NOT typical of the mentality of the SSPX.
13. Arnobius of Sicca says:

    15 March 2010 at 8:04 PM

    @Cavaliere

    I never claimed he was a member of the SSPX. However, my point still stands. Groups who place themselves in a position to judge the Magisterium when it exercises ordinary or extraordinary teaching authority are nothing more than Cafeteria Catholics.

    Consider Humani Generis #20:
    20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth me”;[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians.
14. catholicmidwest says:

    15 March 2010 at 9:11 PM

    I’m just surprised it took this long for somebody to get around to it.

    [Not that I’d do it, mind you. I just figured it had already been done somewhere, somehow by now.]
15. Athanasius says:

    15 March 2010 at 10:09 PM

    I’m all for book burning, in fact the catechism of St. Pius X advocates burning Protestant bibles because of their heretical footnotes (could this apply to the NAB?). Nevertheless, whatever reservations about the prudential wisdom of a council one has should never leave one to burn the documents of a council of the Church. Catholics who had serious misgivings about the Three Chapters, including Pope St. Gregory the Great, did not burn the documents of that council which were correct in what they taught, they just ignored the whole thing. Those like the priest in question can only do this by rejecting the Church and the fact that the Pope, whatever his failings, is the perpetual principle of Unity in the Church.

    One does better to take advantage of the graces offered through the Traditional Mass to get closer to Jesus Christ, empty himself out of the spirit of the world that cannot give life, and frankly ignore Vatican II if it is that problematic rather than to get into this kind of activity. I’ve not known the peace that I have in the last three years since I stopped caring what Vatican II said and paid attention to the perennial wisdom of the Church.
16. patrick_f says:

    16 March 2010 at 12:05 AM

    Whenever you go to one extreme or another you cease to be truly catholic. For me following the faith is about balance. You need both the old and the new. When you abandon one for the other you lose something of your Catholicity.

    There is good in Vatican II…the bad is the interpretation.
17. Andrew says:

    16 March 2010 at 9:30 AM

    I wonder if he actually burned a book containing the actual Conciliar Documents or was it just some vernacular translation? I coudn’t tell from the photo, but I suspect, by the look of it, that it was a translation: perhaps he didn’t like how it was translated? I know I don’t.
18. Cavaliere says:

    16 March 2010 at 10:37 AM

    I never claimed he was a member of the SSPX. However, my point still stands. Groups who place themselves in a position to judge the Magisterium when it exercises ordinary or extraordinary teaching authority are nothing more than Cafeteria Catholics.

    Arnobius, then I’m not sure what relevance your statement has to this particular post then and the confusion that can be created from it. This was the action of an individual and your post could lead others to think that this action involved groups like the SSPX.

    As to the document Humani Generis you raise a good point for discussion but not here as I don’t want to take this “down the rabbit hole.”
19. RichardT says:

    16 March 2010 at 6:08 PM

    Patrick F, didn’t Chesterton say something like that? All heresies are merely a proper aspect of Catholicism taken to extremes, without the balancing aspects.
20. Maltese says:

    16 March 2010 at 8:42 PM

    *I’ve not known the peace that I have in the last three years since I stopped caring what Vatican II said and paid attention to the perennial wisdom of the Church.*

    I agree with you there, but I must say my own copy of the documents of Vatican II is pretty well underlined and footnoted by my own hand. When people furl stuff at me, saying, “…but Vatican II taught that…” I like to be able to throw it back at them. I once had a Msgr. who told me that it was heresy to deny ANYTHING written in the documents of VII! First, except for repeated dogma (from PRIOR Church teaching), there is nothing dogmatic at all which is novel in the documents of VII. In fact, even the modernists ignored Sacrosanctum Concilium’s command to keep the primacy of Latin and Gregorian Chant! And now we have this:

    http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12140&comments=1#readcomments

    Although the new missale might be an improvement over the 1970s version, it is still a far cry from the rite built upon since the time of Christ: the Traditional Latin Mass! I think the photo of a 1970s looking communion table instead of the traditional picture of the crucified Christ says it all: The novus ordo emphasizes the communal over the Sacrificial. That is why only 30% of Catholics now believe in the true presence. Now contrast with this photo from the frontispiece:

    http://www.olmcc.org/Images/missale_canon.jpg

    The vetus ordo, by contrast, IS the Unbloody Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ. As even the Bishop in the first article points out: Lex orandi, lex credendi.

    (Btw., as an aside, were you aware that America Magazine gave it’s most recent Edmund Campion prize to Rowan Williams! You just can’t make this stuff up; they call it “Martyrial Ecumenism”! You may ask why I occasionally read America? Well, simply, because it makes me laugh!)
21. Geoffrey says:

    16 March 2010 at 9:00 PM

    “The vetus ordo, by contrast, IS the Unbloody Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    As is the “Novus Ordo”, even if it does not quite look like it is.
22. Manrique Zabala de Arizona says:

    17 March 2010 at 3:17 AM

    For a little humor, what would a California Hippy say?

    “Dude, like whatever: he should have recycled the book if he didn’t like it” ;)
23. Agnes of Prague says:

    17 March 2010 at 9:10 PM

    Translation of article:

    Fr. Floriano Abrahamowicz is still making himself talked about. The Lefebvrian [sic] priest, after his shock-statements about the Nazi gas chambers (“I know they had them for disinfecting, but not whether they actually killed anyone there”), has carried out another deed destined to raise polemics. In a chapel at Paese, in the company of a group of faithful who have followed him after his expulsion from the SSPX, he read the Anti-Modernist Oath and then, at the end of Mass, threw into the flames the text of the Second Vatican Council. An act without precedent, which, according to the priest–already suspended from the Catholic Church–would have been approved by a certain Catholic bishop, whose name has not been revealed. Among the contested points of the council: relations with other religious confessions.

    Fr. Floriano lives between Treviso and Verona. A year ago he called the Second Vatican council a “sewer.” For this the SSPX expelled him. The priest’s reply: you have been contaminated with modernity. Two months later, on the occasion of the visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the Roman synagogue a group of integrists had promoted a “Holy Mass of reparation” in St Peter’s church at Verona. Fr. Abrahamowicz was called to offer it. Another Rosary of reparation was recited by Fr. Floriano in December for the statue of “La madre di Dio” completely nude, displayed inside the monastery of the Stimmatini [prob. ‘Stigmatines’?] Two months earlier, the priest who was once very close to Lega Nord celebrated the anniversary of the battle of Lepanto, in which the Venetian fleet bettered the Turkish ships.
24. cl00bie says:

    19 March 2010 at 4:06 PM

    I guess I’ll just have to go out and burn my “Gather” hymnal now. ;)

Comments are closed.