Rorate Caeli

Traditional Diaconal Ordinations at the Lateran


J.P.Sonnen of Orbis Catholicus took several pictures (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13) of the Diaconal Ordinations of Seminarians of the Institute of the Good Shepherd (IBP), which took place yesterday, at the Basilica of Most Holy Savior in Rome (Saints John the Baptist and John the Evangelist in the Lateran), Mother and head of all the Churches in the City and in the World: Terribilis est locus iste: hic domus Dei est, et porta cæli!

In the picture above, Father Philippe Laguérie, Superior General of the Institute, and Archbishop Luigi de Magistris.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Abbe Laguérie has also said that the GSI will accept the New Good Friday Prayer as stated here

Anonymous said...

The good Abbe has no choice but to accept the new Good Friday prayers for the conversion of the Jews. The change in the prayers is an exercise by the highest authority in the Church of the universal and immediate jurisdiction of the Vicar of Christ. To do otherwise is treason against Christ Himself. The case is the same for those who use the old Holy Week rites (pre-'56).

Anonymous said...

anonymous said...
... To do otherwise is treason against Christ Himself. The case is the same for those who use the old Holy Week rites (pre-'56).

Dear Anonymous,

I wonder if you have the same opinion of the modernists who foisted the Novus Ordo and the "reforms" of Vatican II on an unsuspecting faithful?

Anonymous said...

"I wonder if you have the same opinion of the modernists who foisted the Novus Ordo and the "reforms" of Vatican II on an unsuspecting faithful?"

No I do not, I have the opinion of Bl. Pius IX and the first Vatican Council which stated that the Pope has Universal and immediate jurisdiction over all Christians. The popes never took form us the Traditional rite of the Latin Church, as our present Holy Father has clearly stated in his Motu Proprio, but he has definitively changed the prayers for the Jews on Good Friday. I do not like the changes, but I do not hold the keys to heaven. What I declare bound on earth does not even stay bound on earth let alone heaven, but with the Pope it is a different story is it not.

I ask you--do you believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and to hear him is to hear Christ himself? Do you believe that we are bound to obey all that he commands except for sin?

The new prayer for the Jews is not sinful, it does not contradict the traditional teaching of the Church, we know what the prayer means because we know the mind of the author of the Prayer--H.H. Benedic XVI. What possible excuse can anyone have to disobey the Pope on this issue--there is none.

Anonymous said...

Someone who seems to think the Pope does not merely represent God but is a god wrote:

"I ask you--do you believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and to hear him is to hear Christ himself? Do you believe that we are bound to obey all that he commands except for sin?"

I ask you: If the pope were to tell you to eat brussels sprouts 3x a day, would you be bound to do so? After all, it would not be sinful to do so, only VERY dull for your palette.

Unsquared Circle

Jordan Potter said...

Unsquared said: I ask you: If the pope were to tell you to eat brussels sprouts 3x a day, would you be bound to do so? After all, it would not be sinful to do so, only VERY dull for your palette.

That's a red herring -- and a pretty lame one at that -- as the Pope has never and would never issue any such command. It has nothing to do with faith, morals, or the discipline of the Church, so it falls outside the Pope's authority. The Church's liturgy, however, does fall under the Pope's jurisdiction. Just because the Pope has no authority to micromanage the individual diets of the faithful, and has never and would never do that, does not mean he lacks the authority to reform the prayers of the liturgy.

To accept the teaching of Vatican I and Mediator Dei does not mean that one seems to think the Pope is a god (save in the biblical sense -- as the Psalmist said, quoting God, "I have said you are gods, but you shall all die like mine.")

Jordan Potter said...

Arrggh! Typos!

"die like MEN," not "mine."

schoolman said...

Abbe Laguérie has also said that the GSI will accept the New Good Friday Prayer as stated here:
http://blog.institutdubonpasteur.org/spip.php?article94
=========================

I hope New Catholic will post a translation of this analysis. This is the true Catholic response and an indication of the future of GSI and all true traditionalists.

Anonymous said...

anonymous said...

No I do not, I have the opinion of Bl. Pius IX and the first Vatican Council which stated that the Pope has Universal and immediate jurisdiction over all Christians. The popes never took form us the Traditional rite of the Latin Church, as our present Holy Father has clearly stated in his Motu Proprio...

Dear anonymous:
Seems you are confused. Conciliar Popes Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II (all of unhappy memory) forbade the use of the Tridentine Mass. (Except in very limited cases according to the 1988 indult=special permission.) Let's get our head out of the sand! You can't have it both ways. And now we have Benedict XVI contradicting his predecessors. Oh, how typical of modern "Churchmen."

Jordan Potter said...

The Anonymous of 24 February 2008 17:14 said: Conciliar Popes Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II (all of unhappy memory) forbade the use of the Tridentine Mass. (Except in very limited cases according to the 1988 indult=special permission.)

First of all, they're not just of unhappy memory, but also of happy memory.

Secondly, neither John Paul I, who reigned for but one month, nor John Paul II issued orders or decrees forbidding the pre-Vatican II Missal. Also, Paul VI approved the first indult for the continued use of the 1962 Missal, and John Paul II issued an even wider indult. Granting permission for something is not the same thing as forbidding something. None of those Popes abrogated or completely suppressed the pre-Vatican II Mass -- all allowed it under certain conditions.

You can't have it both ways.

Why not? Isn't it possible to forbid something in most cases while allowing something in some cases.

And now we have Benedict XVI contradicting his predecessors.

Hey, it happens. Popes aren't infallible in each and every thing they say and do.

Oh, how typical of modern "Churchmen."

It's also typical of pre-modern "Churchmen" (not sure why you're using scarequotes, unless perhaps you're some kind of sedevacantist).

24 February, 2008 17:14

Ottaviani said...

Jordan Potter: Also, Paul VI approved the first indult for the continued use of the 1962 Missal

If you are referring to the "Agatha Christi" indult given to England, then you are factually wrong. The indult wasn't even kind enough to specify the 1962 Missal but the 1965 Missal.

Most priests who were allowed to make use of the indult however, ignored this and used the 1962 usage or even earlier (which according to the second anonymous is a sin that could be comparable to heresy or abortion).

Anonymous said...

Somebody's modernist sacred cow has been gored!
Tsk! Tsk!

Jordan Potter said...

If you are referring to the "Agatha Christi" indult given to England, then you are factually wrong. The indult wasn't even kind enough to specify the 1962 Missal but the 1965 Missal.

I stand (well, sit) corrected. It is arguable whether or not the 1965 Missal could be called "the Tridentine Mass." Usally when traditonalists or purported traditonalists say "Tridentine Mass," they mean the 1962 Missal or some earlier editio typica -- which are, of course, not exactly the Mass that came from the Council of Trent, though they are a good deal closer to it than the post-Vatican II Missals.

Anyway, the most one could say is that Paul VI forbade the "Tridentine Mass" (depending on which missal is being referred to), so the earlier anonymous is still factually, and probably doctrinally, in correct.

Most priests who were allowed to make use of the indult however, ignored this and used the 1962 usage or even earlier (which according to the second anonymous is a sin that could be comparable to heresy or abortion).

No, it's not a sin comparable to heresy or abortion, but still, objectively it would be a sin to use earlier, abrogated editions of the Roman Missal without permission. Subjectively, of course, that may not be the case.

Some anonymous person said: Somebody's modernist sacred cow has been gored!
Tsk! Tsk!


It's unclear what you're talking about, but if you're accusing me of being a modernist, then I can only laugh at your ignorance and presumption.

Anonymous said...

The 'Agatha Christie' indult did neither specified 1962 nor 1965 but the 1967 rite. As a poster commented most people, including the LMS at that time, effectively ignored the details and used older forms of the rite.

The pre-1956 Holy Week rites were certainly used by a substantial minority of priests in the UK rite through to the NO and beyond. The Rector of the English College in Rome rejected the new Holy Week rites for the remaining two years he was in Rome and, significantly, the old rite was used at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem until 1995. Even now the Paul VI rite is used at the old times.

Anonymous said...

Terribilis profecto erat locus iste! I was there, and it was a shambles!! No one in the sanctuary had any real idea what they were doing at any point. Bon Pasteur was given a golden opportunity to show the world the glory of the traditional rite in one of its most beautiful moments, the ordinations ritual, and they threw it away with a shamefully ill-prepared farce! What version of the Good Friday prayer for the Jews they use is irrelevant if they do as badly as they did this.

Jordan Potter said...

Okay, I just learned something new -- I didn't know there was a 1967 Missal.

Anonymous said...

Mr Potter,the 1971 indult specified the 1962 missal with the reforms of Inter Oecumenici(1965)and Tres abhinc annos (1967). At that time with various translations appearing liturgical books were not dissimilar to loose-leaf binders.

Ottaviani said...

I stand (well, sit) corrected. It is arguable whether or not the 1965 Missal could be called "the Tridentine Mass."

The 1965 Missal cannot be called the Tridentine Mass as the ordinary of the mass, differs significantly from the 1962 Missal or earlier editions. It is not regarded as the Tridentine Mass by Rome either, hence why the 1965 Missal does not carry "Quo Primum" in the front pages.

Anonymous said...

"Someone who seems to think the Pope does not merely represent God but is a god wrote:

"I ask you--do you believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and to hear him is to hear Christ himself? Do you believe that we are bound to obey all that he commands except for sin?"

I ask you: If the pope were to tell you to eat brussels sprouts 3x a day, would you be bound to do so? After all, it would not be sinful to do so, only VERY dull for your palette.

Unsquared Circle"

This is a example of strange comment from someone who has chosen to worship a god of SSPX

Anonymous said...

Did Christ say the muslims pray to the same God we do?

Anonymous said...

"This is a example of strange comment from someone who has chosen to worship a god of SSPX"

The SSPX's God is the Catholic God, the One, True God. I neither belong to nor attend Mass at the chapels of the SSPX (due to distance), but I must say that having had the first part of my youth in the Church before the Deluge, the SSPX are the only Catholic clergy I have encountered who reliably and constantly sound like the Catholic clergy I grew up with. I can't say that for the popes of the Council, nor for the vast majority of bishops and priests of the regular Church. Just name one NO bishop that ALWAYS sounds Catholic. Can't do it. The NO Church is a melange of truth and falsehood, and its spokesmen always seem to speak equivocally. I don't find that in the Gospel. I didn't find it in my parish growing up. I don't think I can be bound to accept it now.

"Unsquared Circle" Respecting but certainly not worshipping the SSPX.

Anonymous said...

"The good Abbe has no choice but to accept the new Good Friday prayers for the conversion of the Jews. The change in the prayers is an exercise by the highest authority in the Church of the universal and immediate jurisdiction of the Vicar of Christ. To do otherwise is treason against Christ Himself. The case is the same for those who use the old Holy Week rites (pre-'56)."

Rend your hearts, not your garments, and spare us the histrionics. There has never been complete liturgical uniformity, not even in Rome. One imagines the pope might be glad that those using the older books are doing that rather than use the heterodox books he himself uses.

Anonymous said...

More pictures here:
http://cccsp.free.fr/docus/20080223_ordinations.htm

Anonymous said...

I see there was an act of 'treason' at the Pantheon by a diverse group of treachers wearing pre-1962 vestments for Lent on one of the blogs linked to this site:

http://orbiscatholicus.blogspot.com/