October 26, 2005

Bishops Magoo

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The near-sighted Mister Magoo could not see but several inches in front of him. His 1906 Buick Roadster was bumping into things constantly. He found himself in the most unusual circumstances. He mistook people for who they were not. In short, Mister Magoo's poor vision had him living in a world of his own creation.

Sadly, most of the world's bishops are as spiritually near-sighted as Mister Magoo, unable to see the plain truth about the situation of the Church in her human elements. Time and time again they keep congratulating themselves as more and more Catholics fall prey either to the allure of the materialistic and hedonistic anti-Catholic culture that has been spawned by the rise of Modernity and the Modern State, founded in a specific and categorical rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King, or to the seemingly endless number of Protestant sects that keep mutating over the course of time. Oh, no, everything must be fine. The Second Vatican Council has ushered in a veritable "springtime of the Church."

There are several examples of this from the headlines of the past few days.

Consider Proposition 2 from the recently concluded Synod of Bishops, which had met to discuss the Eucharist:

Proposition 2

The Liturgical Reform of Vatican II

The Synodal Assembly recalled with gratitude the beneficial influence that the liturgical reform carried out since the Second Vatican Council has had for the life of the Church. It has highlighted the beauty of the Eucharistic action that shines in the liturgical rite. Abuses were verified in the past; they are not even lacking today, although they have diminished greatly. However, such incidents cannot darken the goodness and validity of the reform, which still has riches that are not totally explored; rather, they call for greater care in regard to the "ars celebrandi," which favors "actuosa participatio."

Talk about near-sightedness."Abuses were verified in the past; they are not lacking today, although they have diminished greatly." Surely, they jest Anyone who believes this is wilfully blind to the actual fact of the matter.

Indeed, although I came to embrace the necessity of restoring the Traditional Latin Mass in the early 1990s, albeit at the time under the unjust and illicit premises imposed by the Holy See in direct contradiction of the perpetually binding nature of Quo Primum, I had long fought liturgical abuses in the Novus Ordo Missae. Yes, true, granted, I did not realize that the Novus Ordo Missae was the liturgical abuse. However, I fought numerous battles in parishes and dioceses over the matter of irreverence in the Novus Ordo Missae. Countless were my behind-the-scenes efforts to get a bishop's attention about these abuses when I worked for a year in a chancery office in the late-1980s. Countless were the articles I wrote on the subject for The Wanderer until I realized that the problem was indeed the Novus Ordo Missae and that there was no stopping the abuses it engenders of its very Protestant nature. And I still get heart-wrenching notes from people who have not yet seen the truth that they must flee from the Novus Ordo entirely and worship God at the very Mass He taught the Apostles to offer.

When you think about it, however, the contention that liturgical abuses "have diminished greatly" makes perfect sense. After all, facing the reality that it is indeed the much-heralded "liturgical reform" (revolution) that has emptied the pews of Catholic churches and institutionalized profanity and abject irreverence in the context of the offering of Mass might force the bishops to have laser surgery performed on their spiritual eyesight. They might be forced to realize that the emperor they exalt has no clothes and has undermined the Faith at every turn.

As I note in G.I.R.M. Warfare, the principal body of which was written when I was weaning myself away from assisting at the Novus Ordo Missae during the week, there is no fixed way to offer the Novus Ordo Missae. Its very instability and unpredictability leads people to believe that the articles contained in the Deposit of Faith are fungible and subject to endless change and reinterpretation. A Monsignor Thomas Gallagher, then the pastor of Sacred Heart Church in North Merrick, Long Island, New York, said in a sermon during a Lenten weekday Mass that, "All you have to believe is a few articles in the Creed. The rest is up for grabs." That is an exact quote. And that is the essence of the whole ethos what has been engendered by the "spirit" of the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo Missae.

The spirit of the Novus Ordo Missae stresses the celebratory style of the individual "presider," not the dignity of the priest as the alter Christus whose personality is utterly unimportant in the faithful offering of the Mass in the manner that has been handed down to us from Our Lord Himself. This spirit afflicts even believing Catholic priests ordained in and for the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. So immersed have some of these priests become in the spirit of their own subjective "styles" that they have developed a pathological and irrational hatred for the very Mass that produced the glories of Christendom and that was responsible for their own vocation to the priesthood.

One of these priests, who shall remain nameless, goes so far as to improvise just before the moment of the Consecration of the Host and the Consecration of the wine in the chalice, ad libbing about the sacredness of the moment, conceding, although he does not realize it, that the new Mass itself does not convey that sacredness and that something must be added to remind the faithful what is going on at that moment. This priest, who is enabled by well-meaning people who never call him to task for his innovations and novelties (after all, he is a "conservative," you understand), has been known to use curse words from the pulpit during sermons and has even said the second part of the "Eucharistic Prayer" from the nave of the church, descending from the altar after having brought Our Lord down from Heaven. He condemns those Catholics who want "their Catholicism pure and pristine" while holding himself up as the defender of the Faith. And he is considered to be one of the most "conservative" priests in his diocese. This priest, who does have great zeal for souls and who is willing to hear a confession at any time of the day or the night, does not realize that the Novus Ordo Missae he so exalts has caused him to become the focal point of the Mass rather than the One to Whose Priesthood and Victimhood he was ordained.

The situation is infinitely worse with priests who are dissenters from the Deposit of Faith, which the priest mentioned above is not, and/or who are steeped in perversity and thus must make open war against the Faith from the pulpit or to resort to sacrilegious novelties so as to ingratiate themselves to the people. There are very few instances in which our near-sighted bishops have actually punished any priest for liturgical abuses or for abject heresies presented to the faithful from the pulpit. Oh, no, stern disciplinary measures are meted out only to those Catholics, whether priests or members of the laity, who dare to assert their rights under Quo Primum to assist at the Immemorial Mass of Tradition wherever it is offered by a validly ordained priest who is not a sedevacantist and who adhere completely to the Deposit Faith as it has been handed down to us through the centuries from the Apostles without one taint of compromise with the novelties of the past forty-seven years.

The Diocese of Fargo, for which I worked between September of 1988 and 1989, issued a "warning" to Catholics not to assist at Masses offered by the Society of Saint Pius X. The Most Reverend Victor Balke, the Bishop of Crookston, Minnesota, has done the same. "Guitar Masses? Just fine. "Rock" Masses? Well, if it's good enough for the Pope, why not for a local parish? The Traditional Latin Mass? Heaven forfend. Every effort must be made to "warn" Catholics from having any exposure at all to the Mass that produced Christendom and that best expresses and protects the Deposit of Faith in all of its holy integrity. Politicians who support the killing of children under cover of law must be dealt with gingerly so as not to alienate them from the practice of the Faith. Catholics who simply worship as Catholics of Roman Rite have worshipped for nearly two millennia and who dissent from not one whit of the Deposit of Faith must be treated as "misguided" sheep who are jeopardizing the salvation of their immortal souls.

Unfortunately for Father Joseph Goering, the Chancellor of the Diocese of Fargo, and for Bishop Balke, Quo Primum means what it says:

“Now therefore, in order that all everywhere may adopt and observe what has been delivered to them by the Holy Roman Church, Mother and Mistress of the other churches, it shall be unlawful henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than that of this Missal published by Us; this ordinance to apply to all churches and chapels, with or without care of souls, patriarchal, collegiate and parochial, be they secular or belonging to any religious Order whether of men (including the military Orders) or of women, in which conventual Masses are or ought to be sung aloud in choir or read privately according to the rites and customs of the Roman Church; to apply moreover even if the said churches have been in any way exempted, whether by indult of the Apostolic See, by custom, by privilege, or even by oath or Apostolic confirmation, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them in any other way whatsoever; saving only those in which the practice of saying Mass differently was granted over two hundred years ago simultaneously with the Apostolic See’s institution and confirmation of the church, and those in which there has prevailed a similar custom followed continuously for a period of not less than two hundred years; in which cases We in no wise rescind their prerogatives or customs aforesaid. Nevertheless, if this Missal which We have seen fit to publish be more agreeable to these last, We hereby permit them to celebrate Mass according to this rite, subject to the consent of their bishop or prelate, and of their whole Chapter, all else to the contrary notwithstanding. All other churches aforesaid are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be wholly and entirely rejected; and by this present Constitution, which shall have the force of law in perpetuity, We order and enjoin under pain of Our displeasure that nothing be added to Our newly published Missal, nothing omitted therefrom, and nothing whatsoever altered there in.

“We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator and all other persons of whatsoever ecclesiastical dignity, be they even Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or, possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them by virtue of holy obedience to sing or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herein laid down by Us, and henceforward to discontinue and utterly discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, howsoever ancient, which they have been accustomed to follow, and not to presume in celebrating Mass to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

“Furthermore, by these presents and by virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We give and grant in perpetuity that for the singing or reading of Mass in any church whatsoever this Missal may be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may be freely and lawfully used. Nor shall bishops, administrators, canons, chaplains and other secular priests, or religious of whatsoever Order or by whatsoever title designated, be obliged to celebrate Mass otherwise than enjoined by Us. We likewise order and declare that no one whosoever shall be forced or coerced into altering this Missal; and this present Constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall forever remain valid and have the force of law, notwithstanding previous constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the usage of the churches aforesaid established by very long and even immemorial prescription, saving only usage of more than two hundred years.”

What does perpetuity mean, Father Goering and Bishop Balke? Just for a short time? Only until some liturgical revolutionaries attain ecclesiastical power and then decide to adapt the Catholic Mass to the very profanities that were fought by the likes of Saint Edmund Campion with all of their might? Once again, permits it might be wise to repeat part of the passages from Quo Primum above so as to force Father Goering and Bishop Balke to realize that Father Paul Kimball of the Society of Saint Pius X needs no permission whatsoever to offer the Mass that comes to us from Our Lord Himself.

“Furthermore, by these presents and by virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We give and grant in perpetuity that for the singing or reading of Mass in any church whatsoever this Missal may be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may be freely and lawfully used. Nor shall bishops, administrators, canons, chaplains and other secular priests, or religious of whatsoever Order or by whatsoever title designated, be obliged to celebrate Mass otherwise than enjoined by Us. We likewise order and declare that no one whosoever shall be forced or coerced into altering this Missal; and this present Constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall forever remain valid and have the force of law, notwithstanding previous constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the usage of the churches aforesaid established by very long and even immemorial prescription, saving only usage of more than two hundred years.”

The warfare waged against the Immemorial Mass of Tradition by one diocese after another comes from Hell. It is of the devil himself. The devil knows that the Traditional Latin Mass contains prayers that remind men of their sinfulness and of the fact that it is possible for them to lose their souls to him for all eternity. There are zero such references in the Novus Ordo Missae, as I explain in my analysis of Paragraph 15 of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal in G.I.R.M. Warfare. The men waging war against the Mass offered by Saint Thomas Aquinas and which nourished the Faith of Saint Francis of Assisi and Saint Therese of the Child Jesus may not realize they are doing the bidding of the devil. Their ignorance of the source of their hostility for the Immemorial Mass of Tradition does not make that source any the less demonic and thus so diabolically opposed to what Our Lord Himself taught to be offered by priests as they re-presented his one Sacrifice of the Cross in an unbloody manner. An article of mine from last week, Minds Locked Up, provided a summary of the salient points concerning the necessity of restoring the Traditional Latin Mass and of suppressing the offensive novelty that is the Novus Ordo Missae forever.

Ah, yes, Father Paul Kimball is not in "good standing." A priest from the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, however, remains in good standing after admitting that he went into an "adult book store" and was issued a summons for lewd conduct. He apologized for his "mistake," saying that he had never done anything opposed to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments (he was a bit more explicit than that, I am afraid). He received thunderous ovation from his parishioners, just as the now retired Archbishop of Milwaukee, Rembert G. Weakland, received a thunderous ovation when he apologized for his "relationship" with a one-time seminarian. Both the priest in Worcester, Father James Aquino, pastor of Our Lady of Loretto Church in Worcester, and Archbishop Weakland, who once wrote an op-ed piece in December of 1992 in The New York Times expressing his support of women's ordination, remain Catholics in "good standing." A priest arrested for lewd conduct (Stephen G. Brady, President of Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., says that the police report details conduct, which is more than entering a "book" store, something the Diocese of Worcester is publicly ignoring at the moment) and an archbishop who fomented dissent within his archdiocese remain in good standing while the priests and the faithful of the Society of Saint Pius X are said to be "outside" of the Church.

Some of those who are outside of the Church, namely, Protestants in this instance, are said by some bishops to have worship ceremonies with which Catholics should become familiar.

Upbraiding his spokesman, Peter Howard, Bishop Thomas Sheridan of the Diocese of Colorado Springs, said that Catholics are not prohibited from participating in Protestant "worship" services. Here is the full story from the October 21, 2005, issue of the Colorado Gazette:

Bishop apologizes for aide’s remarks on Protestant service

Colorado Springs’ Catholic bishop has issued an apology after his assistant angered local Catholics by saying they shouldn’t attend services at Protestant churches.

In a letter released Tuesday, Bishop Michael Sheridan, head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, said his executive assistant, Peter Howard, was out of line when he talked to The Gazette for an Oct. 17 story.

Howard told The Gazette that Catholics should not attend Protestant worship services even if they also celebrate Catholic Mass, saying such services could “confuse” some Catholics and that their participation denigrates the Catholic faith.

Howard wrote a column in a similar vein for the Oct. 7 issue of the diocesan newspaper, saying attending Protestant services is contrary to church teaching.

Sheridan wrote that Howard’s comments to The Gazette caused “a great deal of distress and hurt” among Christians and non-Christians — though he believes the hurt was unintentional.

“While Mr. Howard is free to ex- press his opinions as a Catholic layman, it is important that it be known that the interview was done without my knowledge or direction and does not represent my thinking on the subject,” Sheridan wrote. “Nevertheless, I am deeply sorry for any hurt or insult that has been experienced, and I humbly ask that all men and women of good will accept my apology.”

Howard’s comments were significant because some of the diocese’s 130,000-plus Catholics attend both Protestant and Catholic services. New Life Church, Colorado Springs’ largest congregation, is said to attract thousands of Catholics every weekend.

Sheridan’s letter was distributed to people attending the annual Center for Christian-Jewish Dialogue banquet at the Doubletree Hotel World Arena. The diocese received the Dove Award from the center for its work in Jewish-Christian relations.

The letter also was sent to The Gazette.

Sheridan could not be reached for comment Thursday.

His letter did not mention Howard’s Oct. 7 column, titled “Why Not Attend New Life?” In the column, Howard said Catholics should not participate in liturgical Protestant services — i.e. worship services — because of the theological differences between Protestantism and Catholicism.

“Such ‘active participation’ in a Protestant liturgical service, therefore, acts contrary to our faith which professes fundamentally different beliefs in critical ecclesiological and theological areas,” Howard wrote.

Other Catholic leaders disagreed with Howard. The Rev. Karl Useldinger, diocesan chancellor and judicial vicar, says the Catholic church allows — and even encourages — its faithful to participate in other Christian services as long as those other services aren’t replacing Catholic Mass.

Useldinger added that Catholics are “not to take part in another church’s sacraments” such as communion, but are allowed to sing, pray and otherwise participate in Protestant worship.

Michael Ciletti, deacon for St. Francis of Assisi Parish, said Howard was “dead wrong” in his column.

He said he encourages his parishioners to attend and participate in Protestant services so they can learn more about them.

“You should be able to participate in their liturgy in a respectful way,” Ciletti said.

He said he was offended by Howard’s column.

“I think to have a column like that sends the wrong kind of message,” he said. “I think it’s an insult."

The insult, Deacon Ciletti, is being given by you. The insult is being given by Bishop Sheridan and by Father Useldinger. The insults are against Our Lord Himself, as I have demonstrated in a number of recent articles on this site (Defying God Himself Unto Eternity, Not Exactly From The Acts of the Apostles, A Misplaced Zeal for Souls?, Papal Preacher to Pope (Saint Peter): You're Wrong). Insults are given to Our Lord in the Novus Ordo Missae itself, which is so Protestantized as to lead one to ask why it is even necessary for any Catholic to attend a formally Protestant "worship" service.

Nevertheless, as there might be some soul out there viewing this site for the first time, let me once again advert to Pope Pius XI's Mortalium Animos to explain how Bishop Sheridan and Father Useldinger and Deacon Ciletti are in direct conflict with Pope Pius XI (as is, obviously, the whole ethos of the Second Vatican Council):

This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite alien to the one Church of Christ. Shall We suffer, what would indeed be iniquitous, the truth, and a truth divinely revealed, to be made a subject for compromise? For here there is question of defending revealed truth. Jesus Christ sent His Apostles into the whole world in order that they might permeate all nations with the Gospel faith, and, lest they should err, He willed beforehand that they should be taught by the Holy Ghost:[15] has then this doctrine of the Apostles completely vanished away, or sometimes been obscured, in the Church, whose ruler and defense is God Himself? If our Redeemer plainly said that His Gospel was to continue not only during the times of the Apostles, but also till future ages, is it possible that the object of faith should in the process of time become so obscure and uncertain, that it would be necessary to-day to tolerate opinions which are even incompatible one with another? If this were true, we should have to confess that the coming of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, and the perpetual indwelling of the same Spirit in the Church, and the very preaching of Jesus Christ, have several centuries ago, lost all their efficacy and use, to affirm which would be blasphemy. But the Only-begotten Son of God, when He commanded His representatives to teach all nations, obliged all men to give credence to whatever was made known to them by "witnesses preordained by God,"[16] and also confirmed His command with this sanction: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned."[17] These two commands of Christ, which must be fulfilled, the one, namely, to teach, and the other to believe, cannot even be understood, unless the Church proposes a complete and easily understood teaching, and is immune when it thus teaches from all danger of erring. In this matter, those also turn aside from the right path, who think that the deposit of truth such laborious trouble, and with such lengthy study and discussion, that a man's life would hardly suffice to find and take possession of it; as if the most merciful God had spoken through the prophets and His Only-begotten Son merely in order that a few, and those stricken in years, should learn what He had revealed through them, and not that He might inculcate a doctrine of faith and morals, by which man should be guided through the whole course of his moral life.

9. These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you."[18] For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. Who then can conceive a Christian Federation, the members of which retain each his own opinions and private judgment, even in matters which concern the object of faith, even though they be repugnant to the opinions of the rest? And in what manner, We ask, can men who follow contrary opinions, belong to one and the same Federation of the faithful? For example, those who affirm, and those who deny that sacred Tradition is a true fount of divine Revelation; those who hold that an ecclesiastical hierarchy, made up of bishops, priests and ministers, has been divinely constituted, and those who assert that it has been brought in little by little in accordance with the conditions of the time; those who adore Christ really present in the Most Holy Eucharist through that marvelous conversion of the bread and wine, which is called transubstantiation, and those who affirm that Christ is present only by faith or by the signification and virtue of the Sacrament; those who in the Eucharist recognize the nature both of a sacrament and of a sacrifice, and those who say that it is nothing more than the memorial or commemoration of the Lord's Supper; those who believe it to be good and useful to invoke by prayer the Saints reigning with Christ, especially Mary the Mother of God, and to venerate their images, and those who urge that such a veneration is not to be made use of, for it is contrary to the honor due to Jesus Christ, "the one mediator of God and men."[19] How so great a variety of opinions can make the way clear to effect the unity of the Church We know not; that unity can only arise from one teaching authority, one law of belief and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from this it is an easy step to the neglect of religion or indifferentism and to modernism, as they call it. Those, who are unhappily infected with these errors, hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, it agrees with the varying necessities of time and place and with the varying tendencies of the mind, since it is not contained in immutable revelation, but is capable of being accommodated to human life. Besides this, in connection with things which must be believed, it is nowise licit to use that distinction which some have seen fit to introduce between those articles of faith which are fundamental and those which are not fundamental, as they say, as if the former are to be accepted by all, while the latter may be left to the free assent of the faithful: for the supernatural virtue of faith has a formal cause, namely the authority of God revealing, and this is patient of no such distinction. For this reason it is that all who are truly Christ's believe, for example, the Conception of the Mother of God without stain of original sin with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the August Trinity, and the Incarnation of our Lord just as they do the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, according to the sense in which it was defined by the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican. Are these truths not equally certain, or not equally to be believed, because the Church has solemnly sanctioned and defined them, some in one age and some in another, even in those times immediately before our own? Has not God revealed them all? For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no newly invented matter is brought in, nor is anything new added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained in the deposit of Revelation, divinely handed down to the Church: only those which are made clear which perhaps may still seem obscure to some, or that which some have previously called into question is declared to be of faith.

10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly."[20] The same holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could believe that "this unity in the Church which arises from a divine foundation, and which is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be rent and torn asunder by the force of contrary wills."[21] For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is one,[22] compacted and fitly joined together,[23] it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.[24]

11. Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and the reformers, obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Alas their children left the home of their fathers, but it did not fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them therefore return to their common Father, who, forgetting the insults previously heaped on the Apostolic See, will receive them in the most loving fashion. For if, as they continually state, they long to be united with Us and ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, "the Mother and mistress of all Christ's faithful"?[25] Let them hear Lactantius crying out: "The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this the house of Faith, this the temple of God: if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. Let none delude himself with obstinate wrangling. For life and salvation are here concerned, which will be lost and entirely destroyed, unless their interests are carefully and assiduously kept in mind."[26]

12. Let, therefore, the separated children draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to that See, We repeat, which is "the root and womb whence the Church of God springs,"[27] not with the intention and the hope that "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth"[28] will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its teaching and government. Would that it were Our happy lot to do that which so many of Our predecessors could not, to embrace with fatherly affection those children, whose unhappy separation from Us We now bewail. Would that God our Savior, "Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth,"[29] would hear us when We humbly beg that He would deign to recall all who stray to the unity of the Church! In this most important undertaking We ask and wish that others should ask the prayers of Blessed Mary the Virgin, Mother of divine grace, victorious over all heresies and Help of Christians, that She may implore for Us the speedy coming of the much hoped-for day, when all men shall hear the voice of Her divine Son, and shall be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."[30]

13. You, Venerable Brethren, understand how much this question is in Our mind, and We desire that Our children should also know, not only those who belong to the Catholic community, but also those who are separated from Us: if these latter humbly beg light from heaven, there is no doubt but that they will recognize the one true Church of Jesus Christ and will, at last, enter it, being united with us in perfect charity. While awaiting this event, and as a pledge of Our paternal good will, We impart most lovingly to you, Venerable Brethren, and to your clergy and people, the apostolic benediction.

Well, Bishop Sheridan, do you agree or disagree with Pope Pius XI?

Well, Deacon Ciletti, was Pope Pius XI right or wrong?

Well, Father Useldinger, where do you disagree with Pope Pius XI?

Each of you owes Mr. Peter Howard an apology. He was only being faithful to the Received Teaching of the Divine Redeemer Himself. That's all.

As if all of the preceding was not enough to demonstrate the near-sightedness of our bishops, consider the fact that devil worship in the Russian Federated Republic, a land where over three million babies are killed under cover of law by surgical abortion alone each and every year, is on the rise. A report on WorldNetDaily.com, posted on October 24, 2005, stated that devil worship is "flourishing" in Russia. Still believe that Russia has been "converted" as a result of a proper consecration of that country to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart? In this instance, you see, the Holy Father himself plays the role of Mister Magoo, refusing to do precisely and only that which Our Lady said had to be done in order to curry favor with the Russian Orthodox, which he does in many and varied ways, including carrying on his predecessor's policy of warning Catholics not to "proselytize" the Russian Orthodox. (See The Conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith for more commentary on this enduring scandal).

In the midst of all of these near-sighted, delusional words and actions emanating from our bishops and priests, we need to remind ourselves, as always, that our own sins are very much responsible for the darkness into which the hierarchy of the Church has descended in the past five decades. We must do our part to live penitentially, to pray ceaselessly, to renew our total consecration to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart regularly, making sure to pray the Rosary every single day and to pray without fail for the proper consecration of Russia to that Heart, out of which was formed the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the fountain of Divine Mercy.

These are the times that God has known from all eternity that we would be alive. The graces He won for us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood are as sufficient now for us to deal with the difficulties of our moment as they were for the Apostles nearly two millennia go. We must keep Our Lady company at the foot of the Cross as the Sacrifice offered by her Divine Son is re-presented in an unbloody manner by priests in the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, eschewing any and all contact whatsoever with novelties that corrupt the Faith and can just as easily return us to a state of spiritual near-sightedness. Our Lady will come to our aid. We must rely upon her completely as we hold high her Divine Son's Cross in our own daily lives and attempt to plant the seeds for the restoration of Tradition in the Church and Christendom in the world.

Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady, Help of Christians, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Pope Saint Evaristus, pray for us.

Pope Saint Pius X, pray for us.

Pope Saint Pius V, pray for us.

Saint Philomena, pray for us.

Mister Magoo's 1906 Buick Roadster. It might be a good vehicle for some of our bishops, no?

























© Copyright 2005, Christ or Chaos, Inc. All rights reserved.