Rorate Caeli

The Reformation: Moneygrubbing and Mayhem - 470 years

In late February and early March, 1536, the houses of the English Parliament passed the measure which would become the Act for the Dissolution of the Lesser Monasteries, 1536. The visitation ordered by king Henry VIII in 1535 (the year of the martyrdom of Saints Thomas More and John Fisher) had defined with great precision, with the evil efficiency which characterized Thomas Cromwell, the property and all belongings of all religious houses in the realm.

March 1, 1536 was the date in which all belongings of the "lesser monasteries", that is, "every such monastery, priory, or other religious house, not having ... above the ... yearly value [yearly income] of two hundred pounds" automatically became personal royal property. His Majesty received "all and singular the manors, lands, tenements, rents, services, reversions, tithes, pensions, portions, churches, chapels, advowsons, patronages, rights, entries, conditions, and all other interests and hereditaments to the same monasteries, abbeys, and priories, or to any of them appertaining or belonging". The act made clear that "all and singular premises, with all their rights, profits, jurisdictions, and commodities" belonged to "the king ... and to his heirs and assigns for ever, to do and use therewith his and their own wills, to the pleasure of Almighty God, and to the honour and profit of this realm." (text of the Act here)

The great English expropriation was about to begin -- and so many in the higher classes were eager to be the beneficiaries of the property transferrals. The Suppression, which would be completed in 1539, also meant the destruction of the Catholic culture which had given birth to England:

The destruction of books was almost incredibly enormous. Bale describes the use of them by bookbinders and by grocers and merchants for the packing of their goods. Maskell calculates the loss of liturgical books alone to have approached the total of a quarter of a million. An eye-witness describes the leaves of Duns Scotus as blown about by the wind even in the courts of Oxford, and their use for sporting and other purposes. Libraries that had been collected through centuries, such as those of Christ Church and St. Albans, both classical and theological, vanished in a moment. ... A second destruction was that of the homes of study which the religious houses, especially those of the Benedictines, provided for all who leaned that way. (source)

One wonders if there is any way to "calculate the loss of liturgical books", which was enormous, after the demolition of the traditional Breviary and rites of Sacraments of the Latin Church in the 1968-1973 period... The spirit of destruction and rupture in the West has always been marked by a hatred of the Church and of her most solemn and ancient traditions, in recent times as well as 470 years ago.


  1. Your point is well taken even if the comparison is a little far fetched.

  2. Not exactly a comparison, though, just... a thought which came to mind...

  3. The destruction of the Catholic Churches and monasteries in England didn't destroy entirely the Catholic faith. There were of course pockets of the faithful where the priests, at the risk of their lives, kept the faith going.

    Catholics were promised by Our Lord that the gates of hell (that is the tongues of heretics) would not prevail which is why as long as there is at least one true priest left the Catholic faith will remain.

    Of course we know that the majority of the bishops and priests gave in to the demonic whims of Henry VIII, just as the majority of them gave into john xxiii and paul vi destructive changes.

    To go along with that destruction they changed the mass into an invalid and destructive service, just as paul vi officially changed the mass in 1969.

    Isn't this EXACTLY what has happened since 1957? Bugnini (the architect of the new mass) could be a parallel to bishop cranmer(1549).

    Granted the few true Catholic priests left are not being hunted down but I can tell you from first hand experience that the Catholic priest, whose mass I attend, was villified by the novus ordo church (where he was "ordained") and by the sspx (where he was conditionally ordained). He was eventually kicked out of the sspx for preaching the dogma of EENS and for a while had no place to live.

    This is the state of the Catholic faith today. There are few pockets of faith left but the majority of so called Catholics have left the true faith by their actions (or inactions).

    How anyone can call the novus ordo religion Catholic is beyond me, just as anyone could have called Henry VIII churches Catholic.


  4. "for or a while (the priest with no bishop) had no place to live."

    Awww... how moving...

    Why not go the whole hog and say, "Foxes have their dens and the birds of the air have their nests, but the sons of True, True, Tradition have not where to lay their heads"?

    It's a shame no one had a priest-hole for him!

    "How anyone can call the novus ordo religion Catholic is beyond me"

    Yes, it is, isn't it?

    Somehow, I seem to remember St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher going to their deaths because they refused to renounce the POPE... Oh, but I forgot, there IS no Pope, just an impostor in Rome....

    Walks like a Pope, quacks like a Pope, lives in the right Palace, elected by the Cardinals. But appearances deceive, I guess! ;-)

    (Now don't get mad. If you can call my faith 'the novus ordo religion' and say it's not Catholic, I think I should get the chance to tease back!)

  5. Jeff,

    "Why not go the whole hog and say, "Foxes have their dens and the birds of the air have their nests, but the sons of True, True, Tradition have not where to lay their heads"?"

    Now your getting it! And I thought you were just slow.... :o)

    Seriously, it's important you realize that the real enemy is those who attack the faith under the guise of shephards.

    But I would revise your statement of walking and quacking like a pope. It's walking and quacking like a public and manifest heretic.

    For instance if I were to public state the following:

    “Does it not sometimes happen that the firm belief of the followers of the non-Christian religions – a belief that is also an effect of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body…” ,

    my words would indict me a public enemy of God since the Church has taught that:
    Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate.”

    But it shouldn't surprise you that the person who said the heretical statement I mentioned above was none other that john paul ii in his "Redemptor Hominis".

    You see, Jesus has warned us that the antichrist would deceive, if possible, even the elect. This is happening before our very eyes.

    We need to WAKE UP! before it's too late.


    Antipope John Paul II,

  6. Yes, he did promise that the gates of Hell shall not prevail; that's why he wouldn't leave us without a Pope or hierarchy for forty years....

  7. Look, Tradosaurus, I have been tolerating your comments, but "antipope John Paul II" is unacceptable. Please, keep visiting us, but calm down -- this is not a sedevacantist blog.

  8. New Catholic:

    I think the JPII comment was posted accidentally. It comes after Tradosaurus' "signature" and is followed by a floating comma.

    In any case, Tradosaurus is okay by me at least, though you're the boss here and I defer to you. He's harmless...we have nothing to fear from sedevacantists. Error may have no rights, but it's often better to let people talk and leech it slowly out of their systems. After all, that's the Spirit of Vatican Two! ;-)

  9. Jeff is correct. I was cutting and pasting a discussion I had in a similar forum and forgot to cut out the "Antipope John Paul II" part.

    I know how that upsets the conciliarists! :o)

    However, I find it interesting that Archbishop Lefebvre did everything but call jpii an AP!

    But lets listen how Lefebvre referred to Ratzinger:

    From Econe on January 29, 1986, he wrote in a letter to Jean Madiran:

    Rome is no longer Catholic Rome. The prophecies of Our Lady of La Salette and of Leo XIII in his exorcism [of 1903] are coming true.... Cardinal Ratzinger tries one more time hard to dogmatize Vatican II. We are dealing with persons with no notion of the Truth. We shall consequently be more and more forced to act by considering this new conciliar Church as not being Catholic any more.
    We can no longer, without failing gravely to tell the truth and in charity, allow those who listen to us or who read us to believe that the pope is irreproachable, that he is full of wishes to return to Tradition, and that it is only his entourage that is guilty...."

    Hmmmm.... sounds fairly close to being a sedevacantist to me....



Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.


(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!