Creating Ever More "Traditions" That Come From Hell
by Thomas A. Droleskey
I am tired. I lack a great deal of what the ancients would have called physical strength and endurance. This is, quite of course, accepted with joy and gratitude as coming from the loving and merciful hand of God Himself, mindful that physical discomfort is but a small way to make at least some modest amount of reparation four my sins and those of the whole world as I offer Him the debility of the present moment through through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Thus it is that I want to preface yet another brief article by inserting the following passages from an article written three months ago now. Why I am doing this? Because I do not have the physical strength to write this all again and because I realize that people can forget what they read. There is really no need to rewrite things that I have written so many times before. I want to repeat the passages below only as a preface to a few comments concerning the conciliar Vatican's recent outburst of effusive praise for the Protestant syncretist, "Brother" Roger Schutz, who was murdered by one of his devoted followers on August 16, 2005, at the so-called "Taize Ecumenical Community" that he founded with fellow Protestant syncretist, Max Thurian.
Why is this important? Oh, well, those who have a modicum of intellectual honesty will see once again that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has no concern whatsoever about the integrity of the Catholic Faith, that he is not a "restorer of Tradition," that, indeed, he is an apostate who blasphemes God regularly (have I made that point enough?) and thinks nothing of virtually canonizing a non-Catholic such as Schutz by stating after "Frere Roger's" death that he "had attained eternal joy." I can assure you that it was not the true God of Divine Revelation who "revealed" this to Ratzinger/Benedict, a man who believes that such dogmatic pronouncements as those promulgated by Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence, including Cantate Domino on February 4, 1442, no longer bind us because they were conditioned by the historical circumstances in which they were formulated. This, too, of course, is blasphemy against the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, Who inspired the Fathers of Holy Mother Church's true councils to express doctrine in clear and precise terms that He helped to direct.
This is what I wrote ninety-four days ago:
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is an apostate. He is a betrayer of Christ the King and the Catholic Faith. He is a mortal enemy of the souls redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. How any Catholic can at this late date consider this man a member of the Catholic Church who is faithful to the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord has entrusted exclusively to His Mystical Bride without any shadow of change or obscurity is a great mystery.
Yes, of course, I have written this several times in recent articles. Thanks for noticing--and remembering.
It is important, as I see it to keep emphasizing this point as so many traditionally-minded Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism (as I was for decades) want to bury their heads in the sand and/or engage in gross acts of intellectual dishonesty, sometimes contradicting previous, critical writings about Ratzinger/Benedict that have been suppressed or removed from public view, even though the false "pontiff" continues to deny the Catholic Faith (see Ratzinger's War Against Catholicism and
Apologizing to Everyone Save For God Himself). Examples of this willful blindness or intellectual dishonesty abound (see
For the sake of those who are new to the site or don't know where to find specific references, perhaps it is useful once more to quote from Pope Leo XIII's Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, to demonstrate that one who knowingly defects from the Faith on even one point is no longer a member of the Catholic Church in good standing:
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).
It is my conviction that the case against the orthodoxy Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his conciliar predecessors has been made abundantly clear.
Here are just a few quick reminders.
The Nature of Dogmatic Truth
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes in a concept of dogmatic truth that has, at long last (!), been "discovered" after being in hiding for nearly two millennia, namely, that "there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. He has held this dogmatically condemned and philosophically absurd belief throughout the course of his nearly fifty-nine years as a priest. The man fell from the Faith long, long ago, decades before his apparent 'election" on April 20, 2005:
Father Joseph Ratzinger, 1971: "In theses 10-12, the difficult problem of the relationship between language and thought is debated, which in post-conciliar discussions was the immediate departure point of the dispute.
The identity of the Christian substance as such, the Christian 'thing' was not directly ... censured, but it was pointed out that no formula, no matter how valid and indispensable it may have been in its time, can fully express the thought mentioned in it and declare it unequivocally forever, since language is constantly in movement and the content of its meaning changes. (Fr. Ratzinger: Dogmatic formulas must always change.)
Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, 1990: The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms - perhaps for the first time with this clarity - that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.
In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church's anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time. (Joseph Ratzinger, "Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation," published with the title "Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia," in L'Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6; Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete.)
"Pope" Benedict XVI: "It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within.
"On the other hand, not so permanent are the practical forms that depend on the historical situation and are therefore subject to change. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005.)
All I try to do on this site is to use simple logic and clear-headed, Scholastic reasoning point out things that are otherwise pretty obvious. In this instance, of course, for Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI to be correct it would be necessary for the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, to have "hidden" the "knowledge" that earlier papal teachings and magisterial pronouncements contain "contingent elements" that can be changed according to the different historical circumstances in which men find themselves at different times. This is blasphemy as it has been precisely God the Holy Ghost Who has directed our true popes and the Fathers of our dogmatic councils to make dogmatic pronouncements with in the manner that He has directed them to use.
One has to stand on his head and whistle Dixie backwards to try to make Ratzinger/Benedict's conform to any semblance of the Catholic teaching below that exposes him as one who has indeed defected from the Catholic Faith on this single point alone:
For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward
- not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
- but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.
The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.
Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .
3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.
And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.
But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1.)
It doesn't get any clearer. The contrast is stark. There is no need to try to "reconcile" the philosophical absurdity of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI with the Catholic Faith. It is impossible to do so.
One more example will suffice before I turn, if ever so briefly, to Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's latest elegy of praise for a lifelong adherent of the Talmud, who the false "pontiff" believes was led along the "right path" during the time of the Nazi persecution of the Jews in Rome during World War II, one other contrast between what is believed and proclaimed by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and the teaching of the Catholic Church:
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI: "We all know there are numerous models of unity and you know that the Catholic Church also has as her goal the full visible unity of the disciples of Christ, as defined by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its various Documents (cf. Lumen Gentium, nn. 8, 13; Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.). This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world.
On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one's own faith history. Absolutely not!
It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity: in my Homily for the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul on 29 June last, I insisted that full unity and true catholicity in the original sense of the word go together. As a necessary condition for the achievement of this coexistence, the commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed; it must constantly grow and mature. (Ecumenical meeting at the Archbishopric of Cologne English)
This is, of course, not the teaching of the Catholic Church:
"It is for this reason that so many who do not share 'the communion and the truth of the Catholic Church' must make use of the occasion of the Council, by the means of the Catholic Church, which received in Her bosom their ancestors, proposes [further] demonstration of profound unity and of firm vital force; hear the requirements [demands] of her heart, they must engage themselves to leave this state that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation. She does not hesitate to raise to the Lord of mercy most fervent prayers to tear down of the walls of division, to dissipate the haze of errors, and lead them back within holy Mother Church, where their Ancestors found salutary pastures of life; where, in an exclusive way, is conserved and transmitted whole the doctrine of Jesus Christ and wherein is dispensed the mysteries of heavenly grace.
"It is therefore by force of the right of Our supreme Apostolic ministry, entrusted to us by the same Christ the Lord, which, having to carry out with [supreme] participation all the duties of the good Shepherd and to follow and embrace with paternal love all the men of the world, we send this Letter of Ours to all the Christians from whom We are separated, with which we exhort them warmly and beseech them with insistence to hasten to return to the one fold of Christ; we desire in fact from the depths of the heart their salvation in Christ Jesus, and we fear having to render an account one day to Him, Our Judge, if, through some possibility, we have not pointed out and prepared the way for them to attain eternal salvation. In all Our prayers and supplications, with thankfulness, day and night we never omit to ask for them, with humble insistence, from the eternal Shepherd of souls the abundance of goods and heavenly graces. And since, if also, we fulfill in the earth the office of vicar, with all our heart we await with open arms the return of the wayward sons to the Catholic Church, in order to receive them with infinite fondness into the house of the Heavenly Father and to enrich them with its inexhaustible treasures. By our greatest wish for the return to the truth and the communion with the Catholic Church, upon which depends not only the salvation of all of them, but above all also of the whole Christian society: the entire world in fact cannot enjoy true peace if it is not of one fold and one shepherd." (Pope Pius IX, Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.)
"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. . . . 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,' not with the intention and the hope that 'the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth' 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," 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.'" (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Not enough? How about testimony from the Mother of God herself?
"Do you think that I do not know that you are the heretic? Realize that your end is at hand. If you do not return to the True Faith, you will be cast into Hell! But if you change your beliefs, I shall protect you before God. Tell people to pray that they may gain the good graces which, God in His mercy has offered to them." (See: If You Do Not Return to the True Faith, You Will Be Cast Into Hell!)
Those who want to see the contrast between the Catholic Faith and conciliarism will do so. Others will not. I have provided abundant evidence that, apart from the two areas reviewed very briefly above, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's embrace and promotion of the "new ecclesiology," religious liberty and separation of Church and State, and his rejection of Scholasticism in favor of the "new theology," whose exponents he quotes in his "encyclical letters" place him well outside of the Catholic Church. All I can do on this site is to provide this information, letting readers judge for themselves so that they can come to the realization that it is impossible for a true Catholic pope to say and do the things that the conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" have said and done.
Got it? I hope so. It's really pretty clear.
What more, therefore, can be said about the conciliar Vatican's continued praise of the very syncretist community, Taize, whose "liturgy" was a prototype of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service? This report from the ultra-revolutionary National Catholic Reporter describes this continuing travesty, which Vaticanologist John L. Allen, Jr., views very favorably, of course:
One of the more intriguing chapters in the history of ecumenical détente has long been the relationship between the Vatican and the Community of Taizé, a joint Protestant and Catholic monastic order in the Burgundy region of France.
Typically speaking, anything that smacks of syncretism is viewed in Rome as toxic, yet Taizé and its late founder, Brother Roger Schutz, who boldly blend Catholic and Protestant devotions and beliefs, have been wrapped in a warm loving embrace.
The latest proof comes just today, as L’Osservatore Romano splashed a tribute to Brother Roger across its front page from Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Secretary of State, on the fifth anniversary of Schutz’s death and the seventieth anniversary of the foundation of Taizé. The Vatican paper also devoted an entire page inside to tributes for Schutz and Taizé from a wide variety of Christian leaders, including the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Such fuss amounts to a high-profile seal of approval, one that the Vatican is usually reluctant to bestow even upon exclusively Catholic movements or religious orders. It’s especially striking given the grumbling about Taizé that has long circulated in more traditionalist Catholic circles.
There was blowback in the blogosphere, for example, when then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger gave communion to Schutz during the funeral Mass of Pope John Paul II in April 2005. (Try a Google search on “Ratzinger” and “Brother Roger,” and you’ll see what I mean.) The problem was that Schutz insisted he had never “converted” from his Reformed Protestant background, but rather “integrated” Catholic beliefs into his faith without breaking fellowship with anyone. For strict constructionists on Catholic identity, that seemed like Schutz was trying to have his cake and eat it too.
Despite the contretemps, Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and his Vatican lieutenants apparently remain unabashed in their enthusiasm for Taizé.
Brother Roger was “a tireless witness to the gospel of peace and reconciliation” and a “pioneer on the difficult journey towards unity among the disciples of Christ,” Bertone wrote in his message addressed to Brother Alois, Schutz’s successor at Taizé, published today at the top of page one in L’Osservatore along with a full-color photo of a smiling Brother Roger.
Pope Benedict wants to express his “spiritual closeness” to Taizé, Bertone wrote, and his “union in prayer.”
In some ways, Bertone referred to Schutz almost as a saint, writing that “now that he has entered into eternal joy, he continues to speak to us.” Bertone also expressed the hope that the Community of Taizé “will continue to live and to radiate its charism, in a special way among the young generations.”
Part of the reason that Benedict and other senior Vatican officials are enamored with Taizé is its appeal to young people, including young Europeans who otherwise seem thoroughly secular in both formation and worldview. L’Osservatore Romano today noted that Taizé annually attracts “hundreds of thousands of people, above all the young, from every confession.”
Two years ago, Cardinal Walter Kasper, who recently stepped down as the Vatican’s top ecumenical official, spoke at length about Brother Roger and Taizé in an interview with L’Osservatore which offers some important context for today's tribute.
“Few persons of our generation have incarnated with such transparency the gentle and humble face of Jesus Christ,” Kasper said then, referring to Schutz.“ As a theology professor and then as Bishop of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, I always encouraged young people to stop in Taizé during the summer. I saw how much that time spent close to Brother Roger and the community helped them better to understand and to live the Word of God, in joy and simplicity.”
Kasper argued that Schutz’s expertise lay in “spiritual ecumenism.”
“Rather than the speed of the development of the ecumenical movement, he was aiming at its depth,” Kasper said. “He was convinced that only an ecumenism nourished by the Word of God and the celebration of the Eucharist, by prayer and contemplation, would be able to bring together Christians in the unity wished for by Jesus.”
Kasper strongly defended allowing Brother Roger to receive communion.
As the years passed, the faith of the prior of Taizé was progressively enriched by the patrimony of faith of the Catholic Church,” he said.
“In response, the Catholic Church accepted that he take communion at the Eucharist, as he did every morning in the large church at Taizé,” Kasper said. “Brother Roger received communion several times from the hands of Pope John Paul II, who had become friends with him from the days of the Second Vatican Council, and who was well acquainted with his personal journey with respect to the Catholic Church. There was nothing secret or hidden in the attitude of the Catholic Church, neither at Taizé or in Rome. During the funeral of Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger only repeated what had already been done before him in Saint Peter’s Basilica, at the time of the late pope. There was nothing new or premeditated in the Cardinal’s act.”
Kasper also stressed the strong rapport between Brother Roger and a series of Bishops of Rome, beginning with Pope John XXIII, who once referred to Taizé as “a little springtime.”
“Acting in harmony with the thought of the Bishop of Rome was for [Brother Roger] a kind of compass,” Kasper said. “He never would have undertaken an initiative that he knew was against the opinion or the will of the Bishop of Rome. A similar relationship of trust continues today with Pope Benedict XVI, who spoke very touching words when the founder of Taizé died, and who receives Brother Alois every year in a private audience.”
Overall, Kasper praised Taizé as a “parable of community … that helps to go beyond the rifts of the past and to look towards a future of communion and friendship.” (Another tribute for Taizé from the Vatican.)
So much for Cantate Domino.
So much for Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.
So much for Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 20, 1894.
So much for Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.
So much for Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.
So much for the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Spiritual ecumenism? This falsehood, which was praised by Walter Kasper as he described the demonic "work" of Roger Schutz, was praised by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II at footnote fifty in Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, and has been praised repeatedly by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, including the time that he did so just three days after Schutz's murder, August 19, 2005, as he spoke to Protestant and Orthodox leaders in Cologne, Germany, rejecting quite specifically the "ecumenism of the return" that is utter apostasy as there is no need to "search for unity." All non-Catholics simply need to convert unconditionally to the true Church. That's all.
Ratzinger/Benedict pointed out that the late Abbe Paul Couturier as a practitioner of "spiritual ecumenism." And, yes, it does matter very much that Abbe Paul Couturier was a direct disciple of the pantheist named Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J.:
A third influence on Couturier was Teilhard de Chardin. Both men were scientists, and Teilhard's vision of the unity of creation and humanity expressed in the unity of Christ and the life of the Church appealed both scientifically and spiritually to Couturier. A reasoned consequence for him was that the unity of Christians was the sign for the unity of humanity, and that praying for the sanctification of Jews, Muslims and Hindus, among many others, could not fail but to lead to a new spiritual understanding of God where Christ could at last be recognised and understood. Couturier felt this keenly as he was partly Jewish and had been raised among Muslims in North Africa. It is worth noting that among Couturier's voluminous correspondents were Jews, Muslims, and Hindus, as well as every kind of Christian, all caught up in the Abbé's spirit of prayer, realising the significance and dimensions of prayer for the unity of Christians. Coincidentally, years later Mother Theresa spoke of the considerable number of Muslims who volunteered and worked at her house in Calcutta: 'If you are a Christian, I want to make you a better Christian - if you are a Muslim, I want to make you a better Muslim'. It cannot be denied that what those Muslims were seeing in Mother Theresa was Jesus Christ himself, just as the Abbe attracted so many to prayer across previously unbridgeable divides by his humility, penitence, and joyful charity in the peace of Christ.
2003-2004 also marks the 50th Anniversary of the launch of the Week of Prayer in Morocco as an act of charity and prayer among the people of Islam, a significant milestone in the experiences of today as much as then. (The Abbé Paul Couturier and Spiritual Ecumenism)
I will provide other material, drawn from the late Father Didier Bonneterre's The Liturgical Revolution: Roots, Radicals, Results, in an appendix below that proves Taize was a demonic incubator of almost everything to do with conciliarism. There is really little else other to say, especially since I have no physical ability to do so.
Remember, that conciliarism creates "traditions" (including, of course, letters sent by Vatican officials to congratulate Jews and Mohammedans and Hindus and Buddhist on their various "holidays") that are from Hell and lead there. Conciliarism must live in a world of ambiguity, mutability, contradiction, paradox and murkiness. Such is not the simplicity, clarity, certainty and immutability of Catholicism:
As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth. (Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari Nos, May 25, 1834.)
Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)
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. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
We must, of course, continue to remember that this is the time that God has appointed from all eternity for us to be alive. He has work for us to do. Let us do this work with courage and valor as we never count the cost of being humiliated for the sake of defending the integrity of Faith, as we never cease our prayers for the conversion of all people, including those who adhere to the Talmud and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his fellow conciliarists, to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.
Every Rosary we pray will help to plant seeds for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as we beg Our Lady to help us to have the desire to live more and more penitentially each day for the honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Let us continue to participate in
Bishop McKenna's 2010 Rosary Crusade. Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will indeed triumph in the end.
And let us remember to follow Saint Clare's embrace of Lady Poverty and her deep and profound love for Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Clare of Assisi, pray for us.
Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
Material About Taize Ecumenical Community
As found in Father Didier Bonneterre's The Liturgical Revolution: Roots, Radical, Results (Angelus Press, 2002)
The Taize movement began as a project of Roger Louis Schultz-Marasuche [note: the name it is more commonly rendered as Schutz, not Schultz], born in Switzerland in 1915, the son of a Lutheran minister, and now known to the English-speaking world as Roger Schultz or simply "Brother Roger." Schultz was active in the Swiss Student Christian Movement while a seminarian in Switzerland; there he studied monastic life and dreamed of establishing an "ecumenical" monastic community. Popular history holds that Schultz left his native Switzerland after the occupation of northern France by German troops in 1940; the German invasion of France evidently awakened in him a desire to assist war refugees while pursuing his "monastic" aim. Thus, in August, 1940, Schultz moved to the small town of Taize, located between Lyons and Dijon in rural Burgundy, just south of the line dividing occupied from Vichy France. Most of the refugees Schultz received at Taize were those fleeing into Vichy France due to political hardships; many were Jews. When Germany invaded northern France in 1942, Schultz returned to Switzerland, fearing German retribution. In Geneva he was joined by Max Thurian, "theologian" of the Swiss Reformed Church, and Pierre Souveran, an agricultural engineer. The group returned to Taize in 1944, and by 1947 the first "brothers" took "life vows [of] celibacy, community of property, and acceptance of the authority of the community."
According to a 1959 article in Theology Today, the small Taize community quickly became an active element of ecumenical, liturgical, biblical, and evangelical movements in France. Their "twelfth century church, built by Cluny monks, was restored along lines of liturgical reform. Taize quickly established ties with ecumenical movements in French Catholic circles and with the [note: pro-abortion, pro-contraception] World Council of Churches. in Geneva."
Meanwhile, the two co-founders, Schultz and Thurian, had quickly become ecumenical icons in their own right.
Schultz's personal achievements was Taize itself, from its outset a non-confessional "parable of a community" (as he called it) which emphasized life in common over questions of dogma: "In living a common life," he wrote, "have we any other end than to unify men committed to following Christ into a living sign of the unity of the Church?" Just as the true Church of Jesus Christ is His Mystical Body in the world, so too would Taize become the ecumenical movement incarnate: "The ecumenical imperative is fundamental to an understanding of Taize. Representing various church traditions within itself, it is, in effect, a rather advance incarnational witness of ecumenical endeavor". . . .
Max Thurian (1921-1996), a Reformed Church pastor born in Geneva, was known as the "theologian of Taize," and was for many years a member of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches. Under its auspices he edited the influential (in ecumenical circles) volume Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, in conjunction with which was developed the infamous "Lima Liturgy" of 1982.
For those in the Catholic hierarchy evidently intent on abandoning the concept of ecumenism as renunciation of error and return to the Catholic fold, Taize, Schultz, and Thurian became living examples of the kind of Christian reconciliation allegedly possible. During one of several audiences with Schultz, Pope John XXIII responded to a reference to Taize by saying, "Ah, Taize, that little springtime!" In spite of the fact that Thurian personally asked Pope Pius XII not to define the Assumption, both he and Schultz were invited to the Second Vatican Council, where, according to Schultz, they had numerous private meetings with the Council fathers, to "study the evolution of the texts, write up notes, and give our point of view when asked." it is well known that Thurian participated in the Consilium which revised the Roman rite; speaking of the Consilium's ecumenical fruit, he later declared, "It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics."
Roman fascination with the Taize experiment was not, however, reciprocated by a corresponding interest in the Roman religion by the Taize founders. In 1975 Roger Schultz asked of Rome, that a reconciliation come about without requiring non-Catholics to repudiate their origins. Even with truly...catholic communion in view, repudiation goes against love." And Max Thurian expressed similar sentiments in 1976, asserting that "if a Protestant has the conviction that the Catholic Church, following the Second Vatican Council, rediscovered conformity with the apostolic church, he can then consider himself to be a member of that Church without, however, renouncing his adherence to another ecclesial community.
In spite of such indifferentism, the Holy Father [the late Pope John Paul II] deigned to grace Taize with his presence on October 5, 1986, effectively inscribing his name on a long list of admiring visitors, including three Archbishops of Canterbury, Orthodox metropolitans, the fourteen Lutheran bishops of Sweden, and countless pastors from all over the world. Thurian received Holy Orders in a semi-secret ceremony conducted by the former Archbishop of Naples, Cardinal Ursi, and was later invited by John Paul II to join the International Theological Commission, and yet, according to the Taize community "no abjuration of [his] Protestant religion took place [!]"
It is even admitted by some Catholics that the change in Rome's attitude toward ecumenism was directly inspired by the work of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches, through which Thurian accomplish so much of his ecumenical work in the 1980's: "...the Roman Catholic church changed her understanding of what we now call the ecumenical enterprise. . . Let me say that this huge change of Roman Catholic mentality is certainly in great part due to the high quality of the world done by the World Council of Churches, and especially Faith and Order."
Such a change of mentality was no doubt welcomed by the Taize founders, and in some fashion accepted by Pope John Paul II. Thurian once suggested that "unity today in the churches exists as we renounce all our divisive ways, only holding to the fundamental faith which saves and joins us." In 1986 the Pope congratulated the members of the Taize community for "desiring to be [them]selves a "parable of community," [that] will help all whom [they] meet to be faithful to their denominational ties, the fruit of their education and their choice in conscience."
After the death of John XXIII, his brother, Giuseppe Roncalli, visit Taize. During his visit, Roncalli remarked to his grandson, "It was my brother the Pope who began what will come out of Taize." (Father Didier Bonneterre, The Liturgical Movement: Roots, Radicals, Results. Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 2002. pp. 97-101.)
Thomas A. Droleskey After word: My good and very few readers, the late Father Bonneterre, who was a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X prior to his death in an automobile accident in Europe a few years ago, summarized the essence of conciliarism as he described the ethos of the Taize Ecumenical Community that is still being praised by the conciliar Vatican. And the false spirit of the Taize Ecumenical Community is the spirit of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, which is just another proof, for those who want to see the truth, that is, rather than bury their heads in the sands as they live as virtual "high church" Anglicans who don't have to "bother" themselves with inconvenient facts that might cause them to change their lives and to be hated by others for embracing the truth no matter the cost to them personally, that he is not a member of the Catholic Church and that he is not a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter.
A Brief Update
Whatever it is that has been sapping my physical strength, the fact of the matter is that I simply do not have the strength to write at length as I have in the past. I thank you yet again for your patience during this time of decreased production. I am sorry.
As noted in the Donations letter that I posted on August 6, 2010, the Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, there is only so much that various machines and tests can "see." Even two competent, professional, experienced and well-trained medical experts can disagree with the results such things as X-Rays and Ultrasounds and CT Scans. The mystery of the human being, which was willed into existence by a pure act of the Infinite Intelligence of God, continues to baffle physicians and other scientists.
With all of the complex machinery and sophisticated testing now available, you see, experts still cannot explain why such a thing as a "liver hemangioma" forms or what it is, except to say that it is benign and interferes in no way with the functioning of one's liver. The only thing that such experts know for certain is that such a condition causes upper right side abdominal pain. Medical experts and biologists still have yet to figure out the meaning of the human appendix, right? Yes, there is much that medical science will never be able to explain or fully understand. Such is the infinity of the knowledge of God and our finite capacity to grasp even a minute portion of the wonders of His creative work wrought in His Special Creation of the human being.
All of the testing that has been done on me in recent weeks, therefore, seems to indicate the presence of two liver hemangiomas, although my family physician has had me send the compact disks containing the images from the ultrasounds and CT scans to another radiologist for his own professional evaluation to make sure, there is still as of yet no explanation for the horrible lower left side abdominal pain and the fever, especially at night, that fells me so low and makes me incapable of doing much work after eight o'clock in the evening. This is why the colonoscopy has been rescheduled from September 13, 2010, to this coming Monday, August 16, 2010, the Feast of Saint Joachim, the father of Our Lady and the husband of Good Saint Anne.
The CT scan showed that while I had had diverticular disease in the past, I do not have it at the present time. This means that there is yet another source for the lower left side abdominal pain and other attendant symptoms. A report on blood samples drawn on July 30, 2010, does not indicate anything that would point to the presence of any type of malignancy. Deo gratias!
As there are several acute or chronic gastrointestinal conditions that could be causing the current problems, which have gone on for some time and which I have dismissed as being insignificant until they were too pronounced to be dismissed, the colonoscopy should be able to diagnose the precise problem and thus to give my gastroenterologist, who is being very good to me, an opportunity to recommend a course of treatment. (Yes, the possibility of a kidney stone that went undetected by the ultrasounds and CT scans was considered. Another test was done. There are no kidney stones.)
Although quite a nuisance and a bit humanly frustrating since I have been used to "producing" at such a rapid rate over the years, I accept the current difficulties, which I full well realize are far less significant and painful than what many of you might be experiencing in your own families and perhaps even in your own lives, as coming from the loving hand of God for His greater honor and glory and for my own sanctification I gladly accept these difficulties as part of God's merciful plan to permit me, a terrible sinner, to pay back perhaps a very small part of what I owe to Him in satisfaction of the debt that I have incurred as a result of my many sins of omission and commission over the course of nearly six decades of life. It is thus with great, great joy and gratitude that I offer up the nuisances of the present moment to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary in reparation for my sins and those of the whole world.
I will try to write two more articles before the Feast of the Assumption of Our Lady into Heaven. In light of the fact that I will be "out of commission" for most of that feast day and a few days thereafter, I will highlight some older articles on Sunday, August 15, 2010, at which point this site is going to go pretty dormant for a few days. I will not be posting any further updates about this matter until that time.
We continue to offer our thanks to those who assisted us so generously in making possible the original round of testing as well as those exorbitantly expensive CT scans. We continue to thank one and all for your prayers. And I continue to thank my readers for not bombarding me with e-mails of one sort or another, including well-meaning "suggestions," as I do not have the time or the strength to respond to such e-mails and we are being well advised by competent medical experts who are being very good to us.
Let us continue to give all to Our Lord, Christ the King, through Mary our Immaculate Queen, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!