by
Thomas A. Droleskey
The surrender of the late Abbot Leonard Giardina's Christ the King Abbey to the counterfeit church of conciliarism is now a fait accompli, an accomplished fact, and it is a fact that is being "celebrated" with great fanfare by conciliar officials as one of the "fruits" of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007, and a "prophetic" sign of the alleged timeliness of Universae Ecclesiae, April 30, 2011 (see As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part one, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part two, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part three and As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part four).
The surrender of Christ the King Abbey in Cullman, Alabama, was engineered by the plotting of Father Sebastian Glentz, O.S.B., who took full advantage of the failing health of Abbot Leonard, who had been suffering from bone cancer without his knowing it until he was near death, to usurp the authority of the abbot and then to undertake a concerted mission to be "reconciled" to the structures of a false church, the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Father Sebastian drove out one priest and two religious sisters from the abbey who were sedevacantists.
Heedless of the fact that over one hundred people, most of them seeking a refuge from the horrors of the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service and from the false doctrines of conciliarism, had uprooted their lives to move to Cullman to be near Christ the King Abbey, Father Sebastian and his confederate, Father Michael, plotted with conciliar officials to turn the abbey over to them upon the death of their founder, who died on January 7, 2011. One of the supreme ironies in the aftermath of this surrender of Christ the King Abbey to the wolves in shepherds' clothing in the conciliar church is that their founder, Father Leonard Giardina, O.S.B., is considered by conciliar officials as a "schismatic," which means that Fathers Sebastian and Michael have posthumously disowned him while attempting to make him a witness in their efforts to be "reconciled" to the false church of conciliarism.
Unconcerned about and uninterested in learning the truth about the Novus Ordo service and the multiple defections from the Faith posed by conciliarism and championed by its "popes" and "bishops" (see Obeying The Commands of a False Church), Fathers Sebastian and Michael
were easy "marks," if you will, for conciliar officials, who had been rebuffed by Abbot Leonard repeatedly over the years as they sought to "regularize" or "reconcile" the abbey to their false church. Fathers Sebastian and Michael have permitted Christ the King Abbey to become a grand laboratory of Ratzinger/Benedict's explicitly stated efforts to "the broaden the horizons" and to "pacify the spirits" of traditionally-minded Catholics who have thus far resisted the conciliar church's "liturgical reform and renewal" and the decrees of the "Second" Vatican Council and the magisterium of the conciliar "popes."
Fathers Sebastian and Michael, who, sadly, were never formed by Abbot Leonard about the problems with the Novus Ordo or the false doctrines and hideous pastoral practices of conciliarism, thus sowing the seeds for the surrender of the abbey, have become poster boys quite willing to bear witness to these words of Ratzinger/Benedict:
Leading men and women to God, to the God Who speaks in the Bible:
this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the
Successor of Peter at the present time. A logical consequence of this is
that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity,
their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility
of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith - ecumenism - is part of the supreme priority.
Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in
seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey
together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of
Light - this is inter-religious dialogue. Whoever proclaims that God is
Love 'to the end' has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to
the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity - this is the
social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the
Encyclical 'Deus caritas est'.
"So if the arduous task of working for faith,
hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always)
the Church's real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of
reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of
extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the
opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must
accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to
meet half-way the brother who 'has something against you' and to seek
reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall
forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents - to the
extent possible - in the great currents shaping social life, and thus
avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can
it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and
narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for
the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the
return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their
interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church
enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole.
Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests,
215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level
institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands
of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the
Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed
their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have
chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements,
they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim Him and,
with Him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives
of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What
would then become of them?
"Certainly, for some time now, and once again on
this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that
community many unpleasant things - arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions,
etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a
number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an
openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to
be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of
the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas?
And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged
in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society
needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown;
which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to
approach them - in this case the Pope - he too loses any right to
tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or
restraint. (Letter
to the Bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the remission of the
excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre, March 10, 2009.)
Fr Federico Lombardi, S.J., Director of the Holy See Press Office: What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the "Motu proprio' Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?
Benedict XVI: Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu
Proprio' is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those
people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar
with it and want to live with this liturgy. They form a small group,
because this presupposes a schooling in Latin, a training in a certain
culture. Yet for these people, to have the love and tolerance to let
them live with this liturgy seems to me a normal requirement of the
faith and pastoral concern of any Bishop of our Church. There is no
opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and
this liturgy.
On each day [of the Council], the Council Fathers celebrated Mass in
accordance with the ancient rite and, at the same time, they conceived
of a natural development for the liturgy within the whole of this
century, for the liturgy is a living reality that develops but, in its
development, retains its identity.
Thus, there are certainly different accents, but nevertheless [there
remains] a fundamental identity that excludes a contradiction, an
opposition between the renewed liturgy and the previous liturgy.
In any case, I believe that there is an opportunity for the enrichment
of both parties. On the one hand the friends of the old liturgy can and
must know the new saints, the new prefaces of the liturgy, etc....
On the other, the new liturgy places greater emphasis on common
participation, but it is not merely an assembly of a certain community,
but rather always an act of the universal Church in communion with all
believers of all times, and an act of worship. In this sense, it seems
to me that there is a mutual enrichment, and it is clear that the
renewed liturgy is the ordinary liturgy of our time. (Interview of the Holy Father during the flight to France, September 12, 2008.)
Liturgical worship is the supreme expression of priestly and
episcopal life, just as it is of catechetical teaching. Your duty to sanctify
the faithful people, dear Brothers, is indispensable for the growth of the
Church. In the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, I was led to
set out the conditions in which this duty is to be exercised, with regard to the
possibility of using the missal of Blessed John XXIII (1962) in addition to that
of Pope Paul VI (1970). Some fruits of these new arrangements have already been
seen, and I hope that, thanks be to God, the necessary pacification of spirits
is already taking place. I am aware of your difficulties, but I do not doubt
that, within a reasonable time, you can find solutions satisfactory for all,
lest the seamless tunic of Christ be further torn. Everyone has a place in the
Church. Every person, without exception, should be able to feel at home, and
never rejected. God, who loves all men and women and wishes none to be lost,
entrusts us with this mission by appointing us shepherds of his sheep. We can
only thank him for the honour and the trust that he has placed in us. Let us
therefore strive always to be servants of unity! (Meeting with the French Bishops in the Hemicycle
Sainte-Bernadette, Lourdes, 14 September 2008.)
Let me reprise what I wrote two weeks ago now in part one of As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part one:
Ratzinger/Benedict laid out
his agenda very clearly here. He was telling the conciliar "bishops" that
the Society of Saint Pius X is composed of "extremist," "narrow,"
"one-sided" elements that need to be opened up to "broader vistas" such
as those that have been embraced by the priests of the Priestly
Fraternity of Saint Peter and the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest and the
Sisters who left the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen. These
"bishops" must be willing, as he is, to overlook "various faults" in
order to make "every effort to open up broader vistas." In other words,
the members of the Society of Saint Pius X need to be "re-educated" so
that they do not become more "extreme" and "narrow" and "one-sided" than
they have become over the years.
The false "pontiff" wanted the "unhealthy and
distorted elements" in the Society of Saint Pius X be rooted out,
replaced by an acceptance of the Novus Ordo and a spirit of
quietism about any perceived contradictions between
Catholicism and conciliarism. Ratzinger/Benedict was thus pleading
with the
conciliar "bishops" to permit him the chance to make the bishops and
priests and laity of the Society of Saint Pius X full members of the
One
World Church along with "Catholic" Charismatic Renewal, Opus Dei,
Focolare, Cursillo, the Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic
Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of
Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the
Emmanuel
Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and.
among many, many others, the Neocatechumenal Way. This may take time
and
patience. However, it is an "effort" that Ratzinger/Benedict must be
made in the name of "ecumenism," in the name of "tolerance," in the
name
of a "search" for "reconciliation and unity." And, as will be
discussed in part two of this series of articles, this is precisely the
point of the new "instruction" that seeks to "clarify" the
implementation of Summorum Pontificum.
Have we forgotten that Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger told us very directly in Principles of Catholic Theology that traditionalists, whom he disparaged as integralists, could not be resisted strongly enough?
Among the more obvious phenomena of the last years must be counted the
increasing number of integralist groups in which the desire for piety,
for the sense of mystery, is finding satisfaction. We must be on
our guard against minimizing these movements. Without a doubt, they
represent a sectarian zealotry that is the antithesis of Catholicity. We
cannot resist them too firmly. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 389-390)
Only the willfully
delusional and those who believe that it is "too painful" to face
reality will continue to believe that Ratzinger/Benedict does not
believe in this now just as much as he did when he wrote it in 1982,
that Summorum Pontificum, despite its appearance of
"liberating" the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition,
has as its goal the "pacification of "spirits" of traditionally-minded
Catholics so that they will be content to have "the Mass" at all costs,
including that of absolute silence about the sort of offenses to the
honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity that millions
upon millions of Catholics over the cases suffered all manner of torture
and even martyrdom itself rather than even give the appearance of
condoning, no less participating in alongside those of "other faiths.
Fathers Sebastian and Michael care about none of this. They have protested for the past four months that they must be "obedient" while insisting at the same time that the Mass would be same under conciliar control as it had been in the past under Abbot Leonard.
This is false on two counts.
First, there is no Mass being offered at Christ the King Abbey at this time as the priests from Saint John Cantius Church in Chicago, Illinois, who have been sent there are not validly ordained. There is a great irony here: Fathers Sebastian and Michael have agreed to function as "lay brothers" for the time being because conciliar officials must make a determination as to the validity of their priestly ordination at the same time as non-ordained presbyters from the conciliar church are now simulating Holy Mass, thereby denying anyone and everyone going to the recently reopened Christ the King Abbey of the Sacraments! I don't call that "keeping the Mass the same now as it has been in the past" as there is now no Mass at all.
Second, as Fathers Sebastian and Michael have prided themselves for being "obedient" to what they think is the authority of the Catholic Church, how they are going to keep the "Mass the same" in the future when they are ordered to implement the "reform of the reform" that "Cardinal" Koch said was the ultimate end of Summorum Pontificum? Disobey? Not after all of their protestations of how "obedient" they have been in seeking "reconciliation." Or do Fathers Sebastian and Michael think that "Cardinal" Koch was either joking or that he did not speak for Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI when he said the following?
Cardinal Koch said "Summorum Pontificum" is "only the beginning of this new liturgical movement."
"In fact, Pope Benedict knows well that, in the long term, we
cannot stop at a coexistence between the ordinary form and the
extraordinary form of the Roman rite, but that in the future the
church naturally will once again need a common rite," he said.
"However, because a new liturgical reform cannot be decided
theoretically, but requires a process of growth and purification, the pope for the moment is underlining above all that the two forms of the
Roman rite can and should enrich each other," he said. (Benedict's 'reform of the reform' in liturgy to continue, cardinal says.)
Christ the King Abbey in Cullman, Alabama, will be a principal showcase of moving the theoretical "reform of the reform" into the realm of pastoral praxis, and Fathers Sebastian and Michael will go "baa, baa" to the black sheep who have taken them out of the Catholic Church and into a false church, the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
New Darlings of the "Conservative" Catholic Media
Having betrayed the founding principles of Christ the King Abbey and having, at least for the time being, given up their own priesthood as they serve as "lay brothers" while awaiting a judgment from the consistently inconsistent officials in the conciliar Vatican, Fathers Michael and Sebastian are now the newest darlings of the conciliar media, having supplanted, at least for the time being, the Sisters who left the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen nearly four years ago.
Here is how this story of betrayal and usurpation is being spun in the conciliar press:
There was an added joy in the Diocese of Birmingham, Ala., during
Lent and the Easter Octave as the members of the formerly schismatic
Christ the King Monastery in Cullman were reconciled with the Catholic
Church.
After years of discussion between Birmingham’s bishops and the
monastery, on May 1 Bishop Robert Baker received the two remaining
monks’ vows as Benedictine hermits.
The road hasn’t been without its difficulties.
Christ the King Abbey was founded around 1984 by Benedictine Father
Leonard Giardina, formerly a member of the St. Bernard Monastery in
Cullman. In the 1980s he had contact with the Society of Saint Pius X
but ended the association in late 1989, then explored other avenues, but
was never formally linked with the St. Pius X Society.
Bishop Baker describes the schismatic abbey as being sui generis — a community of their own kind.
Now because of the community’s reunion with the Church after
fulfilling all the requirements expressed by Bishop Baker in
consultation with the Vatican, the faithful may have access to worship
at the monastery. This community will continue celebrating Mass in the
Latin Tridentine form, known since Pope Benedict’s 2007 motu propio
letter Summorum Pontificum as the extraordinary form of the Roman rite.
To Bishop Baker’s knowledge, this is one of the first such schismatic groups in the United States to be formally reunited.
“It is somewhat unique as an effort at reconciliation,” he explained.
“The discussions leading to this reconciliation were very delicate and
complex and took place over a number of years with both Bishop
(emeritus) David Foley, my predecessor, and myself, aided by a canon
lawyer who had worked for the Vatican, Msgr. Anthony La Femina.”
“We had much prayer and good will on both sides going into this
effort,” Bishop Baker reflected. “We all listened to the Holy Spirit,
and now we are seeing the fruits of our efforts.”
For one, attendance at the traditional Latin Mass celebrated daily at
the monastery has nearly tripled, according to one of the Canons
Regular of St. John Cantius who were invited by Bishop Baker to help
with the transition. The Cullman church is in the country, yet now 20 or
more faithful attend the daily 7am Mass.
“In the short time we’ve been there, as word of mouth spreads, we’re
getting more and more,” finds Father James Isaacson of the Canons
Regular, who celebrates the Masses for the monks and the people coming
to the monastery chapel.
Along with two Canons Regular brothers, he was sent by Father C.
Frank Phillips, pastor of St. John Cantius in Chicago, at the request of
Bishop Baker, to help the monastery seeking readmission to the Church
until something permanent could be established.
“You see how the Holy Spirit works in the life of the Church,” Father
Phillips said. “Ten or 20 years ago we wouldn’t be having this
conversation. Thanks to the generosity of the Holy Father and of the
bishops in obedience to the Holy Father, many people are reconciled in
the faith.”
Brother Sebastian Glentz and Brother Michael ¬Sauntner are the two
monks who reconciled with the Church. Both have been at Christ the King
over 20 years and for a period of time were functioning as priests.
However, since there is a question about the validity of their
ordination, they do not presently function as priests and have taken the
title of “Brother” as canonical hermits of the diocese.
Ongoing visits to the abbey began with Bishop Foley and then
continued with Bishop Baker. In December 2010, seeing the divisions
within the community, Abbot Leonard gave Brother Sebastian permission to
contact Msgr. La Femina about reconciling with the authority of the
Church.
Over the years the abbey grew to a maximum of 11 monks and five
sisters. Both sedevacantists and those who believe in valid papal
succession were part of the community or among those attending services
at the monastery. Sedevacantists believe papal succession stopped after
Pius XII’s 1958 death or after John XXIII’s 1963 death.
“Abbot Leonard was never a sedevacantist,” Brother Sebastian Glentz
explained. “We did not discuss the issue; we prayed about it. Behind the
scenes, our community was divided.”
By December 2010 three of six monks had left: two unreconciled
sedevacantists and one who chose to reconcile with the Church on his
own. There also were three sisters. All three left, one to reconcile
with Rome.
Although the monastery is in the Bible Belt and not a hub of
sedevacantist activity, most of the 60 to 100-plus people attending the
later of the two Sunday Masses were of sedevacantist mindset.
As the abbot approached death, the increasing divisions motivated
Brothers Sebastian and Michael to seek reconciliation. But any
reconciliation was put on hold because of a sudden decline in his health
and his subsequent death in January 2011.
In early March, the two remaining monks closed the church to the
public, placing a statement about their intended reconciliation in their
last bulletin.
Bishop Baker makes special note of “the humility and cooperation of these two men.”
Father Phillips gives both monks great credit for living out the vow
of obedience and also the great humility they have displayed in
submitting themselves to the local bishop.
“In an age when everyone wants to do what they want, here is an
actual example of an obedient servant, of knowing and living the
humility of the saints themselves in making this type of decision,” said
Father Phillips, who also pointed to the gracious permission given the
Canons by Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George to help in Alabama.
“That all ties to the idea you can’t do anything by yourself, but
everyone is subject to higher authority. We were then able to help
Bishop Baker,” he said.
“None of this is by chance. It’s by the promptings of the Holy
Spirit,” he added. “You can boil it down very simply: not my will;
thine.”
The Vatican requested as a condition of their reconciliation that the
two monks return to the canonical status they had before receiving
their ordination.
They chose to be accepted as canonical hermits under the canon
governing hermits in the Code of Canon Law, while the Holy See examines
the validity of their ordinations.
Msgr. La Femina, who was an official of the Roman Curia for 26 years,
began visiting the abbey with Bishop Baker two years ago. He noted the
big step these two men took. He added, “We are praying now that the
sedevacantist congregation returns.”
The monks hope the Vatican eventually recognizes the ordinations, but
they are prepared to fully accept whatever the Vatican decides.
Brother Sebastian explained that he and Brother Michael’s “whole
Lenten season was a real Lent” because they had to cease functioning as
priests as they came under Rome.
“But because of obedience it makes it easier,” he said, looking to
the example of Padre Pio. “Not that we are any way near Padre Pio, but
he was told not to say public Mass or hear confessions, and he obeyed.
We look upon our obedience as the obedience he gave the Church.”
Charles Rumore, president of the chapter in the Birmingham Diocese of
Una Voce, a lay association promoting the traditional Latin Mass, sees
further good growing from this reconciliation. “This is a huge deal
because this is tangible fruit of the tree of Summorum Pontificum,” he said, referring to Pope Benedict’s letter “On the Use of the Roman Liturgy Prior to the Reform of 1970.”
There are only two churches in the diocese that weekly celebrate the
extraordinary form of the Mass, necessitating long drives for some. Now
the reunited monastery church makes a third.
Rumore expressed thanks to Bishop Baker in this regard. “This humble
bishop has responded in an authentic and generous way to Pope Benedict’s
document to re-establish our connection to the traditional liturgy and
has removed some of the obstacles.”
He also sees this reconciliation as tangible proof of the point Pope Benedict made in the May 13 instruction Universae Ecclesiae on the application of Summorum Pontificum.
“What this does is set an example for others to return, whether they be lay or religious,” Rumore said.
In fact, the Pope’s moves on the liturgy had a constructive bearing on this reconciliation.
“We could see he’s trying to put a sense of the sacred back into the
faith of the people,” Brother Sebastian said. “We know that will not
happen overnight. We hope our coming over will assist in that.”
In fact, Brother Sebastian said he hopes this move will inspire
others to consider reconciliation. The monastery has already received
some inquiries.
Bishop Baker points to the providential timing of the monks’ return:
They entered the Church in the season of Lent and on Divine Mercy Sunday
received their vows — “in the reconciliation pattern of Lent and Mercy
Sunday.”
Brother Sebastian sees the same significance. In fact, if Divine
Mercy Sunday hadn’t fallen on May 1, the day would be the feast of St.
Joseph the Worker, to whom the monks are very devoted.
He noted that that Sunday’s Gospel tells of Our Lord giving the power
to forgive sins, and “it was very significant with us coming back into
the Church, going to confession.”
Since it was also the first day of the month of the Blessed Mother,
Brother Michael crowned the Blessed Mother at the end of Mass.
“All of it had to be done on that day without electricity because of
the tornado,” Brother Sebastian noted. “But after the ceremony was over
and Mass over, our power came back on.”
Surely it was heaven lighting up with joy.
This news story is a work of positivism sprinkled with half-truths and distortions of fact. Although a detailed dissection of the claims made by "Brother" Sebastian in the news story cited above will await a different time because of my own time constraints, there are two important points that need to be made before elaborating on what I believe is going to be the real purpose of Christ the King Abbey now that it is under conciliar control.
Simply Rewriting History
First, Father Sebastian claimed that Abbot Leonard Giardina was not a sedevacantist. Different people have given different accounts of Father Abbot's position over the the years. Here are a few observations on Father Sebastian's claim.
While it is tragically true that Abbot Leonard Giardina did not take a public position about the state of the true Church, it was known that Bishop Robert Fidelis McKenna, O.P., the pastor and cofounder of Our Lady of the Rosary Chapel in Monroe, Connecticut, did require Abbot Leonard to assure him that the men he, Bishop McKenna, ordained to the priesthood for Christ the King Abbey would not offer Holy Mass with the name of the false "pontiff" mentioned in the Canon of the Mass. Abbot Leonard did, truth be told, place the ultimate decision in this regard on the consciences of his priests, thereby creating the confusion that resulted in the surrender of his abbey to the conciliar officials very soon after his death. It is, however, incongruous for him to have agreed with Bishop McKenna's insistence that any man ordained for Christ the King Abbey must refrain from mentioning the name of the false "pontiff" in the Canon of the Mass if he, Abbot Leonard, was not a sedevacantist himself.
Indeed, Abbot Leonard said the following to me when I spoke with him after Holy Mass at the abbey on Saturday, February 10, 2007: "Do you know who will be the hardest on the next pope if ever we get one? Traditional Catholics, that's who!" Although I disagreed with Father Abbot's observation as it is my belief, far from infallible, that the next true pope will come only after a major chastisement, at which point all Catholics will rejoice and submit humbly to his authority, I, for one, took his words to me to mean that he believed that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XI was not a true pope. I believe that that was and remains a very fair construction of his words.
Second, Father Sebastian's claim that Abbot Leonard authorized contacts with conciliar officials to seek "reconciliation" with the conciliar authorities is hard to reconcile with the fact that he, Father Abbot, had stated that he wanted Bishop Jose Antonio Rodriguez of Mexico to provide the Sacraments for Christ the King Abbey. This is what Father Francis Miller, O.F.M., who was very close to Father Abbot and who was very immersed in the sad train of events that unfolded in the latter part of 2010, wrote to me after I sent him the news story from the National Catholic Register:
Fr. Abbot had asked in October
or September 2010 Bishop Jose Antonio Rodriguez to provide sacraments for the
Abbey. This was done in the Refectory in my presence along with the Bishop and
the entire community in attendance. This was a second time for doing this as
it was repeated upon each of his (the Bishop’s visits) I can have an affidavit
signed to this effect and get the witnesses.
Who is Bishop Jose Antonio Rodriguez? Permit Father Francis Miller to explain:
Bishop Rodriguez does not mince words on the Holy See
and the current obstructionist-heretic, better yet: apostate.
In other words, Bishop Rodriguez is a sedevacantist, and Abbot Leonard Giardina, O.S.B., knew this full well. So did Fathers Sebastian and Michael.
Did Abbot Leonard Giardina change his mind between time of Bishop Rodriguez's visit and December of 2010 when Father Sebastian says that he was "authorized" to make contact with the conciliar authorities whose entreaties that he, Father Abbot, had rejected repeatedly in the past? While Father Abbot was gracious to the conciliar officials on the occasions when they arrived unannounced and uninvited, he always made it clear to them that he wanted nothing to do with any kind of "reconciliation." Can Father Sebastian Glentz, O.S.B., provide any written proof to the contrary?
There are other points in the National Catholic Register news story that will be explored in a subsequent article as developments unfold in future weeks. I do promise the few and quite disappearing readers of this site, however, that there will be an additional article within the next few weeks, assuming, that is, that it is within the Providence of God for me to survive until then.
Showcasing the "Reform of the Reform"
For present purposes, though, I want to re-emphasize the point that it appears to me that Christ the King Abbey is being primed by "Monsignor" Anthony La Femina of the Diocese of Charleston, South Carolina, to be a future showcase of the sort of the "reform of the reform" that Kurt "Cardinal" Koch, the President of the "Pontifical" Council for Promoting Christian Unity, said recently was the ultimate "end" of Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae (see As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part four). "Monsignor" La Femina, acting in what he sincerely believes to be the best interests of the Catholic Church, is very devoted to fostering what he believes to be the "true" intention of the "liturgical renewal" desired by the fathers of the "Second" Vatican Council. This is, of course, Ratzinger/Benedict's own goal as he has stated very clearly that there are elements of the "extraordinary form" of the conciliar version of the Roman Rite that can be adopted in the "ordinary form" as features from the latter are incorporated gradually in the former to produce the "reform of the reform" referred to by "Cardinal" Koch recently.
"Monsignor"
Anthony La Femina was one of numerous "conservative" Modernists
(Girondists, shall we say) acknowledged in the author's foreword to a
book entitled Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite: The Eucharist and the Liturgy. The list is a veritable who's who of those
desiring to "get the Novus Ordo right."
Included on the list are "Father" Peter Stravinskas, who was once shouted down by that champion of the Faith, Father Salvatore V. Franco, when he said in a speech at a dinner sponsored by Catholics United for the Faith at the Plandome Manor in Plandome, Long Island, New York, in the1990s that most priests did not "know what they were saying" when offering the "Tridentine Mass" before the "Second" Vatican Council, and "Father" George William Rutler, who is the pastor of Our Savior Church on Park Avenue in the Borough of Manhattan of the City of New York, New York. Also listed is "Monsignor" Charles Scicluna is the promoter of Justice in
the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a master spinner in behalf of the "non-responsibility" of the conciliar "pontiff" for the protection and promotion of perverted conciliar clergymen (Of Worldwide Scope and Chastisements Under Which We Must Save Our Souls, part three). "Monsignor" La Femina travels in very rarified circles indeed. It is not a matter of "wild speculation" to conclude that conciliar Rome itself has "big plans" for the impressive facility that is Christ the King Abbey, which is not far from Our Lady of the Angels Monastery in Hanceville, Alabama, which is where Mother Angelica's Poor Clares are located. Oh, yes, conciliar Rome has great plans afoot for Christ the King Abbey. Believe it, my friends. Believe it.
Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite: The Eucharist and the Liturgy, was published by Ignatius Press and promoted by Ratzinger's
fervent student and disciple, Father Joseph Fessio, S.J. It was written
by the then "Monsignor" Peter Elliott.
I met
Monsignor Elliott in 1993 when I was a regular columnist in The Wanderer and he worked under Alfonso "Cardinal" Lopez Trujillo
in the "Pontifical" Council for the Family, which is located in the
Vatican's extraterritorial offices in the Trastevere district of Rome,
adjacent to the beautiful church of Santa Maria in Trastevere. He
represented the Vatican delegation that was under the direction of then Camden "Bishop" James
McHugh at the United Nations meeting on population in Cairo, Egypt, in
1994, and at the infamous Beijing conference in 1995. "Monsignor" Elliott
is no longer "Monsignor" Elliott. He is "Bishop" Peter Elliott, an
auxiliary in his home Archdiocese of Melbourne, Australia. He is very close to George "Cardinal" Pell, the conciliar "archbishop" of Sydney, Australia, who was previously the conciliar "archbishop" of Melbourne.
There is no doubt that the conciliar interest in
Christ the King Abbey has come directly directly from "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei in Rome. And given "Monsignor" La Femina's involvement,
I would dare say that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that
there would be an attempt to
convince Fathers Sebastian and Michael, once the consistently inconsistent officials in the conciliar Vatican decide that they have valid orders, to incorporate various Novus Ordo elements into their liturgies, thus making Christ the King Abbey a premier showcase for the "reform of the reform." Having suffered through the moral and economic disaster that was the scandal-plagued Society of Saint John in Scranton, Pennsylvania, whose community had been viewed by functionaries at the Ecclesia Dei Commission as the laboratory to see "where the liturgy would have moved if the 'polemics' of the 1960s had not occurred," the practitioners of liturgical perestroika in the conciliar church now have yet another venue at which to experiment: Christ the King Abbey in Cullman, Alabama. The "conservative" conciliar revolutionaries, men who want to conserve the revolution at all costs, really believe that the answer to liturgical abuses is to "improve" and
"make right" the liturgical abuse par excellence, the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service itself.
There is little more to add that has not been discussed in various recent articles, including It's A Matter of the Faith, Not of Translations and my four part series on Universae Ecclesiae (As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part one, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part two, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part three and As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part four). Those who want to be "reconciled" to men who deny the nature of dogmatic truth, who disparage Scholasticism, the official philosophy of the Catholic Church, in favor of the condemned precepts of the "new theology, who have blasphemed God by esteeming the symbols of false religions and called places of false worship as "sacred" and engaged in "inter-religious prayer services," who have promoted condemned propositions such as religious liberty and separation of Church and State, should consider these words of the Prophet Zephaniah:
[11] Howl, ye inhabitants of the Morter. All the people of Chanaan is hush, all are cut off that were wrapped up in silver. [12] And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with lamps, and will visit upon the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their hearts: The Lord will not do good, nor will he do evil. [13] And their strength shall become a booty, and their houses as a desert:
and they shall build houses, and shall not dwell in them: and they shall
plant vineyards, and shall not drink the wine of them. [14] The great day of the Lord is near, it is near and exceeding swift: the
voice of the day of the Lord is bitter, the mighty man shall there meet
with tribulation. [15] That day is a day of wrath, a day of tribulation and distress, a day of
calamity and misery, a day of darkness and obscurity, a day of clouds
and whirlwinds,
[16] A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high bulwarks. [17] And I will distress men, and they shall walk like blind men, because
they have sinned against the Lord: and their blood shall be poured out
as earth, and their bodies as dung. [18] Neither shall their silver and their gold be able to deliver them in
the day of the wrath of the Lord: all the land shall be devoured by the
fire of his jealousy, for he shall make even a speedy destruction of all
them that dwell in the land. (Zephaniah 1: 11-18.)
To surrender to the enemies of Christ the King and thus of the souls He redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross is quite evil. We must pray for the return of Fathers Sebastian and Michael, usurpers of authority that did not belong to them and persecutors of the just--priest, religious and laity alike--to the true Faith and that they will make a public apology to the priests and religious and members of the lay faithful they have driven out of the refuge from the false religion of conciliarism that had been established by Abbot Leonard Giardina in 1984.
We must, as always, be mindful of the need to pray for our own conversion on a daily basis. Each of us has much for which to make reparation, and only the foolish and the prideful would want the world to think them to be without sin, without any fault, of deserving of "respect" when their abusive behavior is well-known to all except to the very people they see in the mirror each morning. It is sad to see so many people conniving and misrepresenting truth as they rewrite history in order to be "respected" and to maintain their "reputations" within whatever small universe of people they are trying to impress. It is sad for this simple reason: every plot, every lie, every attempt to manipulate and shade the truth, every abuse of another human being will be revealed on the Last Day at the General Judgment of the Living and the Dead. Why all of the furious, manic effort now to "cover" oneself in this life when all is going to be revealed on the Last Day?
Each of us must pray to Our Lady for our hearts to be converted more fully to the tender mercies of the Most Sacred Heart of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as we seek to cling to the fullness of the Catholic Faith without any compromise with any falsehood, whether of conciliarism or naturalism, or with those who promote such falsehoods.
We must be mindful that we deserve castigation, rejection, ridicule, ostracism, poverty, calumny, detraction and all manner of other crosses because of our sins. We must accept each cross that comes our way with perfect equanimity as coming from the loving hand of God, Who wants us to suffer well as His consecrated slaves through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. God has known from all eternity that we would be living in these times of apostasy and betrayal. Rejoice! Rejoice! This is the time in which we are supposed to sanctify and thus to save our souls as members of His Catholic Church. Rejoice! Rejoice!
As I have noted two months ago now, the situation at Christ the King Abbey in Cullman, Alabama, is very similar to other situations, including that of the Transalpine Redemptorists that was the subject of The Cost of "Recognition" Keeps Getting Higher and Higher. It is my completely noninfallible belief, that God is using these sad situations to further chastise us. It is my personal belief that we will keep losing our chapels and traditional refuges until we resolve to be less worldly, to make more sacrifices, to embrace a spirit of voluntary penance in reparation for our sins as the consecrated slaves of Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart Mary our Immaculate Queen, resolving to pray more and more Rosaries each and every day. The conciliar authorities have their eyes on every independent traditionalist chapels, whether staffed by sedevacantists or those in the "resist but recognize" camp, and they will not rest until these independent chapels have been "reconciled" to doctrinal and liturgical revolutions of conciliarism.
We must, of course, continue to pray for the valiant Catholics who have moved to Cullman, Alabama, to receive the true Sacraments there in their noble fight to preserve the mission statement of the late Abbot Leonard Giardina as they seek to defend Catholic truth. We must continue to pray for Fathers Sebastian and Michael now that they have submitted themselves to the spiritual robber barons of conciliarism, asking the good God to open their hearts to the entreaties being made of them by the sheep and by fellow members of the clergy who have their own eternal and temporal good very much in mind.
When all is said and done, though, we must spend more time in prayer before Our Lord's Real Presence, if this is at all possible in your location, and to pledge ourselves to console the good God through His Most Blessed Mother's Holy Rosary. Tomorrow, May 31, 2011, is the Feast of the Queenship of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Let us keep close to our Queen in order to serve our King, Christ the King, with every beat of our hearts, consecrated as they must be to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Remember these words. Remember them well. They will be fulfilled when the the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is made manifest:
"I will reign in spite of all who oppose Me." (words of Our Lord to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, quoted in: The Right Reverend Emile Bougaud. The Life of Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers in 1990, p. 361.)
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
