UPDATE 7 Nov 2021:
HERE Fr. Hunwicke has excellent comments on a perhaps mendacious element of the Roche/Nichols square dance, towit, the claim that Paul VI abrogated the 1962 Missal.
He didn’t. That’s false. He knows this.
When did the Congregation for Divine Worship become the Ministry of Truth?
No, wait. We know that.
If you have not read George Orwell’s 1984, or if you haven’t read it since, say, high school, get a copy – a real book, before it is banned and impossible to buy – and read it. It describes the mind, the world-view, behind much of what we see going on today.
The Ministry of Truth was charged with rewriting, falsifying, history. They found undesirable facts in the records and media and, having rewritten them, they sent the original document down the “memory hole”. The new “fact” becomes the “fact”. At least until the new “fact” is inconvenient. Then the process starts over.
Rather like how the libs in charge of liturgical translation want constant revision of texts to suit current times. Hmmm… who was in charge of ICEL again?
The Ministry wants you to be able to say on one day that 2+2=5 and tomorrow 2+2=7, and then back to 2+2=5. They want you to say that there are five fingers (or lights) when there are truly only four.
If you don’t behave, you get to go to the Ministry of Love. Guess what happens there!
Does the leadership of the Congregation want to change the fact about the 1962 Missale Romanum?
Down the memory hole goes Summorum Pontificum and his magisterium… and the magisterium of John Paul II, which they have been systematically dismantling.
What will happen to priests who do not accept that 2+2=5 and continue to use the 1962 Missale Romanum?
A trip to the Ministry of Mercy?
READ!
1984 by George Orwell
I think many of us have been waiting for the other shoe to drop when it comes to the unusually cruel and unnecessary Traditionis custodes, Francis’ sad legacy document. His Plessy v. Ferguson.
Ironically, these came to me on 5 November, a day for infamous anti-Catholicism in England.
I was sent copies of correspondence between the Archbishop of Westminster, Card. Nichols, and the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship in Rome (which now tragically has competence in matters liturgical for the Vetus Ordo), Archbp. Roche.
It is good for us to know what the Supreme Apparatus is considering for the most severely marginalized group in the Church. Forewarned is forearmed. It is easier to hide flee to the forest, to the Mass stone, and hide your children from harm if you know the riders with the ropes and torches are on their way.
Friends, we prepare for many challenges, if we are smart. We ready our homes for storms and stock up. We save money and make sure our ducks are in a row. We think down the line about how to pay for schooling for children or for a retirement. We make sure that we have replacement parts and tools before we need them. I could multiply examples.
We have to be ready for what they are going to do. If for a hurricane, how not for this storm?
The only way out of this is to endure it.
As you read, do you get a sense of coordination?
It’s as if they had a long talk before anything was put on paper.
UPDATE 7 Nov 2021:
As promised. This seems appropriate for the epistolary dance above.
Another version HERE (from the movie).
And ECCLES is on it. HERE
Loading ...
So sorry for the bigwigs/big hats….the horse has left the barn. There is nothing you can do other than make fools of yourselves by opposing the Will of God.
Pingback: Correspondence with the a hostile Congregation for Divine Worship reveals possible future applications of Traditionis custodes. – Via Nova Media
“As you read, do you get a sense of coordination?
It’s as if they had a long talk before anything was put on paper.”
Yes, and the dates also suggest that. A one-week turn around at the beginning of August seems lightening fast for this Congregation on a multifaceted question with zero urgency.
Wow, thanks a lot, Cardinal Nichols. I can just see concern for your flock oozing out all over.
You know, it’s not so much the bullies I mind, or the people who stand by and let them bully. What I don’t like are the “good kids” who jump in and help the bullies.
A cardinal archbishop could do all sorts of things, but this isn’t the most prudent or the most kind thing to handle TC. And yet he’s doing it the horrible way, willingly. Yay.
A couple years ago I made the decision to have my requiem Mass done by the SSPX in the event something like this were to happen.
I clearly see it was foresight and not paranoia which guided my decision.
In the second-last paragraph, Abp Roche pushes the absolutist line that the liturgy is the plaything of whatever men happen to be Pope and bishops at a given time. He gives me another excuse to link to this wonderful article, which gives us the history of his radical and un-Catholic philosophy: https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-Brian-Novus-Disordo.htm
It appears highly doubtful that any authority on earth can lawfully suppress the TLM, no matter how much these men may huff, puff and bully.
I am unfamiliar with vatican post during the pandemic. However, given that July 28th was a Wednesday, the letter surely didn’t arrive before Friday afternoon and likely not before Monday. Thus the CDW responded in 48 hours. That’s pretty typical for Rome, right? In August?
In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.
(Pope Benedict XVI – Letter accompanying his ‘motu proprio’ Summorum Pontificum.)
It looks like Nichols was a begging the Holy See for a hammer with which he could smash the knuckles of the LMS. The subtext of that section is, “Hey, I’ve got these crazy LMS people rabidly resisting TC… and clearly not on board with Pope Francis’ stated goals therein. Can I have permission to shut them down and/or ban them from our churches?” Roche’s response that the LMS’ interpretation of TC carries no official weight, though a bit hostile, is ultimately little more than a statement of an obvious, undisputed fact.
Today it seems clear as day that Divine Providence was involved in the thwarted ‘regularisation’ of the SSPX that was attempted in 2012. It’s clear that Rome’s intention is to force all of us into the Novus Ordo, sooner or later. The writing is on the wall. We must be prepared to become canonically irregular? And you know what? The Bergoglians use canon law as toilet paper in Rome and elsewhere, so frankly the paperwork doesn’t matter anymore.
“The misinterpretation and promotion of the use of these [antecedent liturgical] texts, after only limited concessions by previous Pontiffs, has been used to encourage a liturgy at variance with Conciliar reform (and which, in fact, was abrogated by Pope Saint Paul VI), and an ecclesiology that is not part of the Church’s Magisterium.”
Ummm…hello? Since when was it abrogated? Can they point to a document saying so?
This is a pretty big claim to be making in a minor document like this, but typical for the post-Marxist critical theory types. If you say it often enough, it just becomes true…
There it is again! SWEAR ALLEGIANCE TO VATICAN II OR ELSE ! Sound familiar? These Despots have not and will not stop Our Beautiful Latin Tridentine Mass!
God grant us more bishops and cardinals whose eyes are opened and hearts are stirred to join the fight and fulfill their vocation.
The sheep are being slaughtered. The wolves are getting fat. It’s long past time to get off the fence and fight for the Church.
N.B. – the lukewarm will be spewed out. May the Holy Ghost light a flame in hearts everywhere. It’s time to heat things up.
The letter is certainly ominous; but other than the English translation issue, did Abp. Roche really give a clear answer on anything?
Rev 20:1-3 & the words of Our Lady of Fatima, “In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph and a period of peace will be granted to the world.”
Tick, tock…
When scanning the internet, mostly Catholic sites, I have found myself saying out loud “Boo! Boo!” when the pope’s picture appears on screen. I am not defending this, I am just being honest. This never happened to me before….not even with Obama, Biden, Pelosi, etc… ad nauseum.
So I remember from the book of St Jude how St Michael did not curse out Satan, but merely said “The Lord rebuke you”.
Now, when I see a picture which used to make me say “Boo!”, I say “Show him your way, Lord. But rebuke him if he does not change his mind….on many things”.
Pingback: Correspondence with the a hostile Congregation for Divine Worship reveals possible future applications of Traditionis custodes. | Fr. Z’s Blog – The Old Roman
I struggle with how to respond to these injustices, other than to pray about them. When most of Padre Pio’s faculties were removed and he was forbidden to appear in public, he was very upset that his followers did not meekly accept the unjust restrictions and he urged them to leave the Bishop alone.
Pingback: MONDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
@L.
One may heroically accept an injustice done to one’s self, rather than defend oneself. “turn the other cheek” and all that. HOWEVER, if an injustice is done to your neighbor, it is neither heroic nor virtuous to stand there dumbly doing nothing if one has the ability to do something prudent. That is cowardness and makes someone complicit in the injustice.
Keep praying, work on becoming more holy, link up with like-minded individuals locally, get involved where you can your local parish structures, pay more attention to what your local bishop is saying instead of those bishops far off.
What to make of Pope Paul’s “Allocution to the Consistory of May 24, 1976”???
It is in the name of Tradition that we ask all our sons and daughters, all the Catholic communities, to celebrate with dignity and fervor the renewed liturgy. The adoption of the new Ordo Missae [order of the Mass] is certainly not left to the free choice of priests or faithful. The instruction of 14 June 1971 has provided for, with the authorization of the Ordinary, the celebration of the Mass in the old form only by aged and infirm priests, who offer the divine Sacrifice sine popolo [without people attending]. The new Ordo was promulgated to take the place of the old, after mature deliberation, following upon the requests of the Second Vatican Council. In no different way did our holy Predecessor Pius V make obligatory the Missal reformed under his authority, following the Council of Tent.
With the same supreme authority that comes from Christ Jesus, we call for the same obedience to all the other liturgical, disciplinary and pastoral reforms which have matured in these years in the implementation of the Council decrees. Any initiative which tries to obstruct them cannot claim the prerogative of rendering a service to the Church; in fact it causes the Church serious damage.
https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/la/speeches/1976/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_19760524_concistoro.html
“I struggle with how to respond to these injustices, other than to pray about them. When most of Padre Pio’s faculties were removed and he was forbidden to appear in public, he was very upset that his followers did not meekly accept the unjust restrictions and he urged them to leave the Bishop alone.”
I am also not very keen in things that PF has said or done but like L said above how are we to respond? Like Padre Pio or with pitchforks? If Pio was wrong in his approach then why was he? In what way was he wrong? If he was right then why all this posturing and gesturing who’s goal is rid us of PF?
I spotted three spelling mistakes and one punctuation error in Archbishop Roche’s letter. It doesn’t inspire confidence in his attention to detail. Why such a mediocre prelate was appointed to such a responsible position is a mystery to me.
“the Ministry of Mercy” *chuckle* Good one.
Roche wrote in his letter; “It needs to be made very clear to them…”
What’s very clear is that the Pachamama Vatican and its Lib princesses (maybe “drunk on the deeds of their harlotry” applies) are gripped by a personality cult opposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ while bullying and harassing the Faithful. Non possumus.
At first I thought that Cardinal Nichols made a terrible tactical mistake in asking Rome to interpret TC, instead of just doing it for his own diocese, (which is, after all, pretty much exactly what TC tells him to do). Then someone above suggests that Nichols expressly wanted Vatican backing to bash the TLM community on the head. That might explain some of it, but it still leaves me puzzled: TC already gives him all the ammunition he needs to bash TLM people in the head, without asking Rome for approval. So, is he REALLY that dumb that he thought he should get confirmation that the pope wants bishops to use TC as a blunt instrument of torture? But if he’s not that dumb, what reason was there to go sniveling to Rome for ANOTHER permission to start bashing heads?
Simon_GNR,
You have put your finger on something curious: didn’t Archbishop Roche and/or Archbishop Viola proofread their letter? The “sense of coordination” makes this all the curiouser: did Archbishops Roche and Viola send Cardinal Archbishop Nichols a draft version – and did he leave their errors intact and unremarked? Is there some ‘Archepiscopology’ analogous to ‘Kremlinology’ that might shed any light on all this? Is the Cardinal allowing the Congregational Archbishops to blunder in public, while cheerfully picking the substantive poisonous fruit of their missive?
Another question I have is this: Is there really no bishop in the world – out of over 2,200 of them, who are willing to state publicly that the pope’s letter accompanying TC, and this here statement by the Ministry of “Truth”, have flat out lies? Or, at least, errors of fact? Or that article 1 of TC constitutes an oxymoron that cannot be granted validity? All these bishops who have rushed to implement TC as a proper act of law seem to have missed that law founded on an oxymoron is problematic as law to begin with.
Definitely a sense of coordination. We need to remember that Archbishop Roche is the Bishop Emeritus of Leeds (a town in England). He was once one of the English & Welsh bishops. Cardinal Nicholls & Archbishop Roche know each other well.
Archbishop Roche is considered a careerist and very ambitious. I believe it’s unusual for the secretary of a congregation (which he once was) to become its prefect. I wonder if his ambitions for a Red Hat will be dashed by Pope Francis’ current policy of doling them out in ways contrary to what was the norm.
Archbishop Roche is also known to be highly intolerant of any form of liturgy pre-dating Vatican II. He’s handed Cardinal Nicholls the means with which to try and destroy the excellent work done the [UK] Latin Mass Society. It would be apt to go over to Fr John Hunwicle’s blog “Fr Hunwicke’s Mutual Enrichment” and read today’s (10/11/21) post “Some Lies To Entertain You”.
Pingback: Cleveland Latin Masses Will Be Reduced - Cleveland TLM Friends
Venerator Sti Lot wrote: “Is there some ‘Archepiscopology’ analogous to ‘Kremlinology’ that might shed any light on all this?”
To partially address your good question: in addition to many concerned Catholic clergy and laity who blog and video on the problematic hierarchy, many countries are keeping an eye (in varying degrees and with varying analytical quality) on this problematic Vatican.
Here are a few links that by no means capture the full dynamic, but provide an indication of activity:
India investigates the charity founded by Mother Teresa after arrests for sex trafficking:
https://www.newsweek.com/mother-teresas-charity-being-investigated-child-trafficking-1027780
The Pachamama Vatican has access to Interpol data:
https://www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Member-countries/Europe/VATICAN-CITY-STATE
The Pachamama Vatican has resources for intelligence and counterintelligence operations. During the Cold War the Vatican on occasion worked with the CIA and other organizations against the Evil Empire. For what it’s worth, the CIA (now controlled by the Biden regime) Vatican Factbook page:
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/holy-see-vatican-city/
“One of the least reported stories of the 2016 election was the way the Clinton campaign used liberal Catholic pressure groups to get out of the vote, with the support of left-leaning members of the US Conference of Bishops and its overwhelmingly Democrat staff. Francis approved…” Linker also mentions the U.S. 2020 election cycle, Cardinal Wilton Gregory’s temper tantrum over Pres. Trump’s visit to the St. John Paul II Shrine, and partisan political statements (including in the problematic October 2020 Fratelli Tutti essay- which is now a “Foundation”) released by the Pachamama Vatican. (Recall the trailer for the sycophantic documentary “Francesco” of October 2020 containing anti-Trump images- the trailer has since been altered.)
https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/11/the-pope-really-doesnt-like-republicans/
Governments and intelligence agencies have skilled people with a moral compass, and remarkable capabilities. That said, governments and intelligence agencies (more specifically: certain elected officials, political appointees and rogue personnel) also and obviously sometimes act recklessly, unethically or immorally. A 2019 attempt at a cyber-influence operation by the Pachamama Vatican:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/source-using-vatican-internet-alters-wikipedia-entry-of-prominent-amazon-synod-critic-taylor-marshall/
See Cardinal Becciu and Cecilia Moragna. One news account from June 2021 of a tangled web:
“Italian police arrested Marogna in Milan on Oct. 13 [2020] based on an international warrant issued by the Vatican via Interpol. She was jailed for two weeks before an Italian court ordered her freed.
“Italy’s highest court ruled that she never should have been arrested since there is no extradition treaty between Italy and the Vatican, and a court needed to evaluate if she could be extradited. In January, in an embarrassing admission that it would likely lose in court, the Vatican formally dropped its extradition request altogether.
“At the time, Vatican prosecutors said a trial against Marogna was “imminent.” But six months later, they have not charged her with any crime.”
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/woman-wanted-vatican-asks-italian-government-intervene-78202170
Ed Pentin of the Register on 14 May 2021: “This high-level Vatican conference with finance ministers from 7 countries and the heads of the IMF, World Bank and African Union wasn’t advertised by the Pontifical Academies and is closed to the press.” [Casina Pio IV and “Dreaming of a Better Restart”].
Then there’s the financial corruption of the Pachamama Vatican and the Cardinal Pell showtrial.
These observations are not comprehensive, merely indicators of various activities.